Via Yglesias; Tyler Cowen points to an interesting bit of research that studied the impact of giving land to former slaves.
After joining the Confederacy in 1861, the Cherokee Nation was forced during post-war negotiations to allow its former slaves to claim and improve any unused land in the Nation’s public domain... I find the racial gap in land ownership, farm size, and investment in long-term capital projects is smaller in the Cherokee Nation than in the southern United States. The advantages Cherokee freedmen experience in these areas translate into smaller racial wealth and income gaps in the Cherokee Nation than in the South. Additionally, the Cherokee freedmen had higher absolute levels of wealth and higher levels of income than southern freedmen. These results together suggest that access to free land had a considerable and positive benefit on former slaves.
Here’s the paper by Melinda Miller. This does seem fairly logical, but this involves policy issues that are still debated today. The issue of land reform comes up fairly regularly, particularly in Latin America. There’s some question as to whether disadvantaged groups, upon being given land, will actually be able to keep the proceeds from it. I wonder if giving land is more effective than giving money. Both can be used as a source of more income, although land at the same time can provide housing and if arable food in as a side benefit while a bank account has to be depleted to provide these things.
Anyways, definitely an area worthy of more study and I’m happy to see that this particular effort at reparations actually worked.
Recent Comments