Many recent arguments for land reform share a central proposition concerning
the relative efficiency of small farm production. This article argues that the
theoretical reasoning underlying this proposition is not coherent, and furthermore
the empirical support for this size–efficiency relationship in Africa is
astonishingly weak. Given the evidence, the continued focus on the efficient,
egalitarian family farm can only be ideologically driven. The poorest rural
people are unlikely to benefit and will probably be harmed by the policies
based on these arguments for land reform. To illustrate this point, the article
considers data from land redistribution programmes, particularly in South
Africa, that suggest not only that the poorest did not acquire land, but also
that they suffered declines in rural wage earning opportunities that are crucial
for their survival.