The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 175)

غرض

عنوان

The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 175)

المحتوى

159
survey also found that the holdings were highly fragmented as shown in Table 3.9.
Table 3.9 shows that the number of fragments per holding increases as the size of
the holding increases. The average number of fragments per holding was nine.
It has been pointed out that fragmentation prevents the development of
intensive agriculture,'™ especially irrigation and the use of machinery, unless
some cooperative scheme is designed. It has also been found that co-ownership was
a salient feature of Palestinian Arab holdings, and that the number of co-owners
increased as the size of the holdings increased.” Warriner points out that “Co-
ownership is a way of avoiding further subdivision of holdings,”’”° and, as the
population increased, it reflected the shortage of land and inheritance laws.
With the population increase and the European Jewish acquisition of land,
the size of the average Arab holding, of course, decreased. On this aspect, the
Hope-Simpson report states:
There is . . . a progressive diminution in the area of the holdings; in
every village visited there were complaints on this score. Portions of
the holdings have been sold either to pay off debts or to pay the
Government taxes or to obtain the wherewithal to keep the family
alive. The population of the villages is increasing faster than in
Turkish times, owing in large measure to the cessation of
conscription. There is consequently increasing competition for land
and division of holdings among the increased number of members of
the family.’
Warriner, Land and Poverty, 64; Survey I, 278.
Survey I, 276-7.
lWarriner, Land and Poverty, 64.
'7Hope-Simpson Report, 69.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

هو جزء من

The Dispossession of the Peasantry

تاريخ

٢٠٠٦

المنشئ

Riyad Mousa

مجموعات العناصر

Generated Pages Set

Theses رسائل ماجستير ودكتوراه