ABSTRACT
Elsewhere I have argued that African values such as communion and reconciliation require compensating those who have been wronged in ways likely to improve their lives. I have also contended that, when applied to land reform, this principle entails not transferring unjustly acquired land en masse and immediately to dispossessed populations since doing so would foreseeably lead to such things as capital flight and food shortages, which would harm them and the broader society. Oritsegbubemi Anthony Oyowe has recently argued against my claim that land reform should be enacted so as to benefit victims of colonialism while not greatly burdening innocent third parties, instead supporting the return of land to its rightful owners regardless of how the manner in which it were done would affect people’s quality of life. Here I expound Oyowe’s argumentation and respond to it in defense of my initial position, appealing to examples from southern Africa.
