The paper argues that current land reform holds the potential to improve tenure security for the poor in Rwanda. However, the components of the envisaged reform which are necessary for improving access to land in Rwanda are not sufficient to provide the base needed for sustainable livelihoods of poor groups. In viewing the country-specific context of Rwanda, the study questions whether external advice and resulting regulations for improving security of tenure for the poor actually can provide answers to problems of sustainable livelihoods, especially in terms of reducing specific forms of poverty, vulnerability and marginalization. In particular, it is questionable whether current land reform efforts in Rwanda can be expected to be efficient and effective in reducing poverty and promoting sustainable and pro-poor growth.
 
The paper uses secondary data from recent land studies and a specific survey of 70 households to illustrate land issues in Rwanda as they relate to poverty. A conceptual frame is provided to support the argument that access to land is a broader issue than is usually perceived. Beyond access to natural resources, it also encompasses access to credit, technology and modern production conditions. Likewise, land reform cannot be confined to land redistribution alone. It should include agricultural organization and management – in other words, it should encompass agrarian reform.
In illustrating the link between land reform and poverty reduction in Rwanda, the paper shows that land reform can:
 

• aim at a more equitable pattern of land distribution to promote more equitable and possibly higher growth rates and improved security for land users operating under diverse forms of tenure;

• adopt a pluralistic approach that seeks convergence of customary and formal tenure systems to avoid overlapping and conflicting sets of rights;

• assist the poor in gaining access to land and natural resources through activities such as brokering negotiations among local communities, state agencies and the private sector;

• create an enabling policy and legal framework that promotes subsidiary and devolves authority to local and indigenous institutions while ensuring access and transparency in land administration and tribunal/judicial processes;

• strengthen the consultation processes within civil society and make access to official policy and legislative processes easier.

 
The paper further introduces evidence from recent studies and empirical data from our 70-household survey to illustrate that the current reform has limited capacity to address the problems of the poor and vulnerable. It is demonstrated that giving out titles through formalization will not provide a full answer to poverty and livelihood problems. The proposed land consolidation has not been elaborated well enough to prove it can offer a solution to land problems. Agricultural commercialization and professionalization will most likely alienate poor farmers. Gender has not been clearly mainstreamed in the land reform process and land disputes, a major form of insecurity, will not be eliminated by merely enacting a law. Our own survey shows that although there are common problems throughout the country, they manifest themselves differently in different regions of Rwanda. Households in the east have more cattle and relatively more land and are not as poor as in the land-scarce south. Despite application of fertilizers, land in the south provides only minimal income to landowners. There is a strong likelihood that the form and approach of the present land reform will not be effective enough in addressing the enduring problems of the poor, who depend mainly on land for their livelihoods.