wealth in Mozambique. Admittedly, the terms smallholder and larger commercial interests
require further articulation, which is largely beyond the scope of this paper. 15
There is little social science research in Mozambique that focuses on gender, particularly
women smallholder farmers and their economic relationships within the household. It is
beyond the scope of this paper to review this nascent literature. 16 We recognize that our own
study does not strongly address this set of issues. Nevertheless, we know that a majority of
farmers in Mozambique are women (Casimiro 1994; Weiss and Myers 1994), and when we
discuss smallholder production we are in fact speaking about female producers. When we
conducted interviews we always tried to speak to the women on the farm in a location away
from other family members. Unfortunately, when men were present, women were sometimes
reluctant to speak openly. At the same time, we frequently encountered men who asked their
wives to give their opinions in response to our questions. Where it is important, we have
noted gender-specific responses in our discussion. Ultimately, while competition and struggle
do occur within the household in Mozambique, we do not believe that it is the site of a "battle
zone" between men and women; rather, the household represents a cooperative organization
in which each member struggles to better his/her own life and the welfare of the family.
A case study methodology was employed in this investigation. Information and data for
study were gathered in two phases. First, we reviewed the formal land laws, regulations, and
administrative structures for land acquisition and conflict resolution. We gathered data on land
concessions, population movements, and capital investment in land resources at the central,
provincial, and district levels of government. We interviewed policymakers and administrators
at all three levels as well as academics and other individuals (from private and government
sectors and the donor community) who have a professional interest in or responsibility for
land administration and land policy reform in Mozambique. A comprehensive literature
review was conducted in Maputo before the field investigations were carried out.
The material gathered in the first phase of this research helped us to identify potential
field-research sites to be studied in the second phase. The sites were selected to display a
variety of socio-cultural and economic characteristics. These factors included the following:
15. We also acknowledge that there are other misconceptions regarding smallholders and commercial interests.
For example, it is often assumed that when we speak of smallholders we are talking about black (indigenous)
Mozambicans. Conversely, it is often assumed that commercial interests, particularly during the colonial era and
in the period of structural adjustment, are white and foreign (usually Portuguese). Both positions are erroneous.
There are many white and mixed-race Mozambicans, born in-country, who consider themselves indigenous or
native to Mozambique. Some of these individuals have small holdings and would be considered "smallholders"
as defined above. There are also white Mozambicans who abandoned the country at independence and now wish
to return. At the end of the day, the question becomes: "Who is a Mozambican?" The issue is beyond the scope
of this paper, but from the outset we explicitly state our sensitivity to this highly complex and politically charged
problem. We are cognizant of Mozambique's history, particularly class and racial relations. However, because
of the complexity and development of these relations, we make no assumptions in the postwar period regarding
race and class. To the point: Smallholders may be black or white, just as commercial interests may be black or
white or Mozambican or foreign.
16. Davison (1987, 1988); Arnfred (1988); Berg and Gundersen (1991); Boucher et al. (1993); Isaacman and
Stephen (1980); Urdang (1989); Liberman (1993); Pehrsson (1993); and Casimiro (1994, 1986). See Weiss and
Myers (1994); and Ken Wilson, personal communication, January 1994.