107
same site. The organization built meetings halls, administrative buildings, and storehouses as
well as facilitating the acquisition of farm equipment and hand tools. The villages serve as
centers for aid programs (food and clothing distributions and medical assistance). Belas I and
II are also designed to support smallholder interests, particularly in acquiring and maintaining
rights to239land in the vicinity. In 1992, each participant was granted 1 hectare in the
scheme.
In 1992, before the peace accord, villagers included local residents, displaced farmers,
reintegrating refugees, and former state farm workers. Each village was supported through
rural extension agents, who were appointed by the Italian Cooperation. The agent was
responsible for land allocation, though each village had an elected secretary and political
leaders.240 who assisted with determining allotments (the political leader was also charged
with resolving disputes). Local customary authorities became involved in the scheme at the
same time; they, too, influenced political decisions, adjudication, and resource distribution
and management (Myers, West, and Eliseu 1993).
In 1992, the provincial government considered demarcating the villages and the land
belonging to Vanduzi and other state farms as "reserves."' This would protect them from
acquisition since any land demarcated as a reserve would not be surveyed and registered by
DINAGECA. In 1993, the villages had not yet been granted reserve status, and most of the
remaining state-farm land had been granted in concessions or acquired by commercial
interests. (Locality and district officials had earlier assumed that refugees and displaced
families would leave the villages and that the reserve areas would no longer be needed.) 242
When we returned to Belas I and Belas II in July 1993, we discovered that the populations
had not declined. In fact, they had apparently increased. Whereas in 1992 the population for
Belas I was 224 families, in 1993 it was 372 families, an increase of 60 percent. In 1993 we
noticed that mostly local residents (those claiming historical rights in the area24)3 and
reintegrating farmers resided in Belas I, while displaced families lived in Belas II. This
difference is interesting because the land directly contiguous to Belas II has been granted to
a private farmer, Sr. Chongo (area marked "C" on map 16) despite an unofficial policy of
239. Enzo Tromboni, Italian Cooperation, personal communication, August 1992. See also Myers, West,
and Eliseu (1993).
240. In 1992 we noted that, despite these popularly elected representatives, most of the individuals
interviewed in Belas I and II felt that the villages were run by the Italians (Myers, West, and Eliseu 1993).
241. Interviews with the Provincial Director of Agriculture, August 1992; Chief, Manica Provincial Office
of DINAGECA, August 1992. See also Myers, West, and Eliseu (1993).
Demarcation as a reserve does not have legal standing in Mozambique or Manica Province, the application
of this measure being solely dependent on verbal agreements between the villages and DINAGECA to deny
private (nonlocal) farmer requests for occupation and title.
242. Interviews with representative of Vanduzi District Directorate of Agriculture, August 1992; President,
Vanduzi Administrative Post, August 1992; and Vanduzi State Farm Director, August 1992.
243. We do not know if there had been a shift in the population from Belas I to Belas II in the intervening
year. It appears as though some form of selection occurred in the original distribution of plots, and that some
self-selection developed as reintegrating smallholders returned. Hence, more of the formerly displaced were
reintegrating to Belas I. The social relationships within and between these two communities require further
investigation.