First agrarian reform The first reform law was implemented in May 17, 1959, which eliminated
latifundios—large scale private ownerships, and granted ownership and titles to workers who previously worked on those lands, and paying rent for land was abolished. The law the regulated the size of farms to and real estate to . Any holdings over these limits were
expropriated by the government and either redistributed to peasants in parcels or held as state-run communes. Four days after the announcement of the law, the owners of the 34 major American sugar mills went to the U.S. embassy to voice their frustrations. On June 3, 1959, the law went into effect. On June 11, the U.S. government issues an official statement of protest, claiming that compensation is too low. Compensation was based on tax estimates from 30 to 40 years ago, thus making estimated values below contemporary values. On the anniversary of the
26th of July, the Cuban government invited peasants who had received new land titles to visit
Havana. Half a million visiting peasants were housed in either private homes or in the gala hall of the Presidential Palace. Agrarian reform caused almost 40% of
arable land to be removed from foreign owners and corporations to the state, which then distributed these lands primarily to farmers and agricultural workers. This arrangement gave small peasant farmers limited autonomy, but it all changed in August 1962 when Castro announced that the small cooperatives would be converted to state farmers. Moreover, in instances where government seizes land from small peasants for public use, the small peasants are entitled to compensations. In the case for Cuba, compensations, though wrote into the reforms, were not guaranteed when land titles were liquidised under the state. The law also stipulated that sugar plantations could not be owned by foreigners. For lands taken over
compensation was offered in the form of Cuban currency bonds to mature in 20 years at 4.5% interest. Bonds were based on land values as assessed for tax purposes. Both of these reforms were carried out for the purpose of increasing production, diversifying crop production, and eliminating
rural poverty.
Second agrarian reform The second agrarian reform solidified the centralisation of state farms and nationalisations of land and other natural resources. The second agrarian reform law was introduced in 1963 to further limit the allowable size of private farms—all property holdings over 67 hectares became nationalised. Thus, these reforms allowed for the state farmlands to dominate the agricultural sector—70 per cent of the arable land was under the state control and the government became the largest employer, while 30 per cent was privately owned. As a result, between 80 and 85 per cent of Cuba's land was expropriated. The centralisation of Cuba's economy through farming had advantages—productions of meat, milk, rice, and sugarcane increased exponentially. However, these advancements fell short in meeting the demands of the populace when it comes to root vegetables and fruits. These supply-demand shortages were a direct result of the economic organisation—private farmers used to be the ones to produce these goods. However, as the state centralised agricultural production, the participation of private farmers decreased. As a result of the state's dominant position in agriculture, the first and second agrarian reforms transformed Cuba's natural resource organisation. First, the reforms abolished the latifundios — Cuba was able to return to pre-colonial way of organising — small farmers, cooperatives style, social and financial services such as the Credit and Services Cooperatives (CSS) developed to support the new way of organising. However, the elimination of one kind of hegemony created another. Although implementing the Soviet model of supply distribution (implementing farming tools and inputs) had positive results in terms of increased the production of large-scale crops such as sugar cane and improved infrastructure, it also led to Cuba's dependence on the Soviet Union. Not only did the biodiversity and environment suffer, but Cuba also grew to be dependent on the Soviet Union for its production and supply inputs, making it vulnerable to external shocks. When the Soviet Bloc collapsed in the 1990s, Cuba had to explore alternative solutions to sustain its production. To fill the gap of production inputs, the state encouraged cooperatives: small farmers using traditional peasant knowledge of production and returning to animal traction, at a lower cost and less damage to the environment. The state implemented the Basic Units of Cooperative Production (UBPCs), which limited the sizes of state farms. ==References==