Is Undeveloped Land a Wasted Resource? A Debate on Zambia’s Repossession Policy
The government recently issued a public notice announcing inspections of properties in resettlement schemes across the country. This initiative aims to identify undeveloped land and potentially repossess it if owners fail to show why their land remains unused. The policy, which requires land to be developed within 18 months, has sparked a lively debate among property owners, professionals, and the public.
The Government’s Position
According to the government’s statement, all settlers in resettlement schemes must demonstrate why their land has not been developed within the stipulated timeframe. Inspections are being conducted to assess the level of development, with undeveloped land at risk of being repossessed.
Opposing Views: Why Repossession Is Problematic
Critics of this recent statement argue that the repossession of undeveloped land is outdated and economically unrealistic.
Key objections raised include:
- Financial Constraints: Many settlers lack the resources to develop their land due to the current challenging economic conditions. Critics argue that the 18-month development requirement is too harsh and does not account for these hardships.
- Infrastructure Gaps: In some resettlement schemes, essential infrastructure such as roads and utilities has not been provided, making it difficult for settlers to develop their land.
- Investment Potential: Critics see land as a legitimate investment asset and believe individuals should be allowed to hold it as a form of speculative business.
- Transparency Concerns: There is skepticism about how repossessed land will be reallocated, with fears that corruption could undermine fair distribution.
A Different Perspective: Why Repossession May Be Necessary
While critics raise valid points, there is another side to this debate. Land is a finite resource, and as our population grows, the need for housing and development becomes more urgent.
Allowing land to sit idle prevents its productive use, especially when others are willing and able to utilize it. The current regulations often require only minimal development, such as laying a foundation slab, to meet the threshold of development.
From this perspective, the government’s policy ensures that land fulfills its purpose as a resource for shelter and economic growth. However, for repossession to be fair and effective, it must be implemented with full transparency and adherence to legal procedures. This is essential to prevent misuse of the process for corrupt enrichment.
Balancing Accountability and Opportunity
This debate underscores the need for a balanced approach that respects property rights while promoting accountability. To ensure fairness, the government should:
- Provide Infrastructure: Develop resettlement schemes with basic amenities like roads and utilities to enable landowners to fulfill development requirements.
- Enhance Transparency: Clearly outline and publicise criteria for land repossession and reallocation to prevent corruption.
- Engage Stakeholders: Consult property owners and the public to address concerns and build trust in the process.
- Offer Flexibility: Consider extending development timelines in cases where genuine financial or logistical challenges exist.
What Do You Think?
The question remains: Is undeveloped land a wasted resource, or should property owners have the right to hold it indefinitely? Does this policy strike the right balance between promoting development and protecting property rights?
We’d love to hear your thoughts. Share your views in the comments below, and let’s discuss how Zambia can best manage its valuable land resources.
No comment