By Daniel Hayward (Land Portal), Irna Hofman (Research Associate at the University of Oxford), and Kramer Gillin (University of Wisconsin-Madison)
25 March 2022
Tajikistan is the poorest ex-Soviet state, albeit with a reduced poverty headcount over the past ten years. Over half the population reside in the countryside and depend on agriculture for their livelihoods. Though delayed by civil war in the 1990s, major land reforms have been implemented in recent decades, but legacies of Tajikistan’s Soviet history can still be found in aspects of today’s land governance.
Due to the mountainous topography of Tajikistan, only around 6% of total land is arable
Trekking and climbing in Fann Mountains 2013, photo by Oleg Brovko (CC BY-SA 2.0)
Tajikistan is a land-locked country known for its rugged terrain. Mountains cover over 93% of the 140,000 km2 land area. There are great differences in land use patterns and farming structures throughout the country due to extreme diversity in agro-climatic characteristics. Resource use is dominated by two river systems (the Amu Darya/Panj and Syr Darya) and subsidiary rivers that feed water to users in the different valleys1.
Under Soviet rule, the country’s agrarian economy developed significantly, as new areas of land were brought into production, enabled by the construction of large irrigation systems. Large parts of the population were forcibly resettled from highlands to lowlands to satisfy the labour demand for the newly set up state and collective farms, which were, in the lowland valleys, mainly oriented towards cotton production. Since 1991, the year in which Tajikistan became an independent republic, the agricultural sector has gradually decreased in importance, but together with the forestry sector it still represents almost 20 per cent of the country’s GDP2. Over half of the population officially resides in the countryside and depends on farming for their livelihood3. In 2019, the population stood a little over 9.3 million people4.
Independence in 1991 was followed by a violent civil war from 1992-7, which caused substantial loss of life as well as the internal displacement of over 1 million people5. The war also resulted in a significant overhaul of access to landed property, with consequences that mark society until today. Since the end of the conflict, power has been consolidated under a deepening authoritarian regime, headed by president Emomali Rahmon6, which controls the key sectors of the economy, including cotton production.
Economically, Tajikistan was the poorest republic of the USSR, and has retained that status amongst ex-Soviet states. The poverty headcount has substantially decreased over the past ten years, mainly attributable to the substantial increase in outbound labour migration. In 2013 Tajikistan was the most remittance-dependent country in the world, with inflows amounting to 4.1 billion USD (or 49% GDP)7.
Amounts remitted fluctuate, but they form the backbone for most urban and rural households in Tajikistan, allowing people to meet consumption needs, access healthcare and education, and pay for agricultural inputs and other related expenses, especially when seasonal incomes are low.
The context of poor governance and poverty, described above, leads to a stark mismatch in de jure and de facto land tenure regimes for two main reasons. First, those charged with monitoring, adjudicating, and enforcing land laws often lack the capacity—funding, resources, training, and knowledge—to carry out their responsibilities. Second, corruption and extreme concentration of political power in the hands of elites leads to uneven application of written law. These two trends are perhaps the most salient aspects of Tajikistan’s land tenure system to keep in mind.
Land legislation and regulations
Agrarian transformation was set in motion in the early 1990s through distinct processes of privatisation—transferring use rights from the state to non-state entities—and individualisation—the disaggregation to individual households of collectivised land after it has been privatised. The 1992 Law on Land Reform called for the dismantling of large state and collective farms8. The 1992 Law on Dehqon Farms provided rural dwellers the a legal mechanism to obtain inheritable land use rights for land that had previously been part of the Soviet state or collective farms9. The 1994 Constitution affirmed state ownership over land and natural resources10. The Land Code of 1996 then established a guiding legal framework for land 11. It provided rules to protect usage rights and recognised the ability to transfer, mortgage and sub-lease land shares. Arable land and pastures were grouped together as “agricultural land,” making them subject to the same regulatory framework. For example, the vast majority of the country’s dehqon “farmland” is actually pasture.
While these legal changes marked the first years of a long process of agrarian transformation, the reform process was delayed by the country’s civil war. In the following years, vested elite interests in the agrarian economy continued to stifle farm individualisation. Importantly, reforms from 1991 until today have largely been driven by the international donor community. Initial restructuring was minimal, entailing privatisation without individualisation, where former Soviet collective farms became collective dehqon farms to meet donor expectations on paper with little change perceptible to land users12. The next step is the individualisation of these privatised dehqon farms, a piecemeal process that happens family-by-family as they convert their share of a collective dehqon farm into an individual one. The individualisation phase is still in progress. While statistics do not provide insights into differences among dehqon farms any longer, collective dehqon farms still exist, with land users holding shares of the large farm rather than a certificate for their own individual plot. The on-the-ground differences between owning a share of a collective dehqon farm versus owning your own individual dehqon farm vary dramatically from context to context; shareholders in one village may experience more tenure security and land management autonomy than certificate holders in another part of the country. In some localities, dehqon farms still mimic a collective farm, where the chairman pays out (in-kind) wages to workers13.
In 1998, there was a recovery in gross agricultural production. Since the late 2000s there has been more profound reform in terms of access and control rights14.
The most recent reforms and international donor interventions are focused on further commercialising the farm sector, including support for export potential and the formation of clusters and cooperatives. The state aims to transform the agrarian-based industry into an industrialised agrarian economy and aims to attract private investors to realise this goal.
There is a plethora of agricultural producers in Tajikistan nowadays including corporate enterprises such as limited liability companies, joint stock companies, production and trade cooperatives, and around 200,000 dehqon farms. Notably, most if not all of these producers are merely nominally independent and autonomous; the state continues to intervene in farmers’ decision making and the command economy continues in a disguised form. In particular, greater state control is applied in lowlands compared to mountainous areas of the country; elite stakes in revenues from cotton production in the lowlands is a key reason for continued state intervention15.
In 2013, Tajikistan ratified its first pasture-specific legislation, a response to international donor concerns about land degradation, the possibility of transboundary pasture conflicts, and the increasing fragmentation of pastures that had occurred as an accidental by-product of land individualization reforms that were designed for cultivated land. This “Law on Pastures” was revised in 2019, in part to clarify language about administrative responsibilities and to make the new policy less institutionally onerous. Importantly, the law does not include provisions that prevent the individualization of pasture or the reallocation to small-holders of pasture use rights that have been expropriated by wealthy individuals. While some elements—such as the introduction of “Pasture User Unions”—have taken hold, understanding and implementation of the law is not widespread. Though the “Law on Pastures” is recent, governmental decrees have been issued roughly every ten years since 1993 to allocate use rights for grazing land in one (usually highland) district to another (usually lowland) district to facilitate long-distance transhumance16.
Cotton field during harvesting time. Photo by Irna Hofman, September 2020.
Land tenure classifications
During the Soviet era, 99% of cultivated land in Tajikistan was controlled by state or collective farms. The remaining 1% was allocated to households for subsistence needs, but also enabled households to top up the income earned at the collective or state farm, by selling surplus production17. Every household has the right to a small plot of land (0.15-0.4 hectares). On two occasions during the civil war in 1995 and 1997, the Tajik government allocated additional land to rural households to support their subsistence base (a total of 75,000 ha.). These plots became known as Presidential Land.
Land in Tajikistan, akin to the situation in Uzbekistan, remains owned by the state18. Plots are held under usage rights. Most cropland is within dehqon farms and other enterprises. Land can be held under three forms of usage right19:
- Perpetual use (namely with no fixed term) – including for state and agricultural enterprises, religious organisations, and joint ventures with foreign investors.
- LLimited or fixed-term use – for enterprises or individuals, including foreign actors.
- Life-long heritable tenure – to people or collectives. When inherited, the land must be re-registered20.
The rights holders are also able to sub-lease their parcels to secondary land users for up to twenty years.
Dehqon farms can be held by an individual or comprise a number of farm shareholders, who have, according to law, the right to extract their share in order to establish a separate dehqon farm (as also mentioned above, see also footnote 9). Legal documents for shareholders indicate only the amount of land in their share, not its location. The withdrawing of shares and establishment of smaller scale individual dehqon farms has increasingly taken place since the outbreak of COVID-19, as access to farmland has increased in importance, particularly since small plots provide rural households with a means of subsistence. However, due to a lack of information and power inequalities, farm shareholders often face obstacles to actualise their share.
State Reserve Land and State Forest Land21 are managed by the State Land Committee and State Forest Agency, respectively, but people can obtain fixed-term land use contracts (usually one-year) for these areas. These state lands are typically far from permanent settlements, and they are used as summer pastures by those who obtain contracts for their use. Government decrees (see above) codify allocations of these classes of land to facilitate the maintenance of long-distance transhumance routes that span multiple districts and even provinces.
Land usage rights are registered and documented at district level by the State Committee for Land Management and Geodesy. However, other local and district level authorities also hold substantial power to control access rights as well as land use. These local actors monitor land use. According to the Land Code (Article 37), the state can revoke farmers’ land use rights if authorities observe inappropriate land use (against targeted use and/or leaving agricultural land fallow for more than two years). The terminology in law allows for arbitrary interpretation, resulting in insecure tenure.
Land use trends
Due to the mountainous topography of Tajikistan, only around 6% of total land is arable22. Irrigated arable land is concentrated in river valleys. The southwestern Khatlon region is the country’s primary agricultural region, followed by the northern Sughd region, which is located in the fertile Fergana Valley that is shared with Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan23. Despite a scarcity of arable land, agriculture remains a vital livelihood source, officially employing 53% of the total population, even if it contributes less than 20% of GDP24.Today outbound labour migration is a primary motor of the economy, with which the economy (from the national to the household level) is strongly tied to foreign economies.
Monoculture cotton production dominated Soviet-era agriculture in Tajikistan. Raw cotton functioned as a currency, with (mainly imported) wheat acting as the primary staple of the Tajik diet. There is a lasting legacy of Soviet agriculture. Since 2007 state intervention in farming was officially outlawed (a decree promulgated under pressure of international donors), but the Ministry of Agriculture still drafts yearly production quotas for certain agricultural products, which are then implemented by lower-level state authorities. In the lowlands farmers are still expected to plant cotton on 60-70% of their farmland. While the cotton sector is officially privatised, a few key actors control the sector and suppress farm gate prices. Besides a range of vegetables, pulses and fruits, cereals are also planted on irrigated and rainfed lands. Wheat mostly supplies subsistence needs, but Tajikistan also relies on wheat and flour imports from Kazakhstan to meet consumption needs since domestic production falls short of demand (in preferred quality and required quantity25. Due to a range of interrelated factors, including a lack of control rights, low economic development and low purchasing power, land scarcity, poor markets, persistent poverty, and low productivity, Tajikistan is post-Soviet Central Asia’s most food insecure country.
In the last decade, the national livestock population has rebounded from a post-independence crash to exceed Soviet era numbers, and livestock’s share in Tajikistan’s gross agricultural output is still increasing. Many sources have asserted that Tajikistan suffers from widespread pasture degradation due mostly to overgrazing of pastures near villages. This may be true in some areas, but it is not universal and there is insufficient data to substantiate such national-scale statements. Long-distance transhumance between lowland Tajikistan to summer mountain pastures stopped abruptly with the onset of the civil war in the early 1990s. It gradually resumed in the early 2000s and is now an important facet of Tajikistan’s livestock sector, but only for herds owned by extremely wealthy and powerful individuals based in lowland regions. Smallholders do not participate in these long-distance migrations, and those living in higher altitude areas no longer have access to lowland winter pastures like they did in the Soviet era. Shorter-distance intra-district seasonal migrations are common, however, among small-holders.
Though de jure pasture use rights have been fragmented in most areas because of individualization of dehqon farmland—most of which is pasture—this legal fragmentation has not always resulted in de facto fragmentation of use or access, and the pastures are often used in common because the different pasture areas are too small to be grazed individually. This is especially true where small-holder households pool their livestock into aggregated village or mahalla (neighbourhood) herds. However, wealthy owners of large pastures are more likely to exclude other users or charge grazing fees per head for those who wish to use their land, rendering it very difficult for average families in some areas to access sufficient pasture. There are many cases of legally organized Pasture User Unions who are unable to secure any pasture access rights.
Sheep and goats crossing the street near Langar, Tajikistan, photo by Kondephy (CC BY-SA 4.0)
Forestland, which is sparse and fragmented, takes up a mere 3% of total land in Tajikistan26. The Land Code defines forest reserve lands, with the Forest Code (1993, amended 1999) regulating these areas27. Notably, “State Forest” land is not necessarily forested, but simply land whose management and governance is under the purview of the Forest Agency. 14% of total land is now designated under protected areas, governed under the 2002 Law on Specially Protected Territories. Over the years, deforestation (for firewood and to create grazing areas) has hardly been monitored, giving that formal forest statistics and maps are not seen as reliable.
Land investments and acquisitions
Economic development in Tajikistan instigated by the state is focussed on large-scale infrastructure projects, such as hydropower, mineral exploration, and road building. In this the state has largely relied on international actors and foreign capital28. A legacy of Soviet-style land management has inhibited sustainable development and economic growth. During Soviet rule, Moscow provided essential commodities, and after 1991, the Tajik economy has remained to rely on agriculture and some industrial sectors, keeping dependencies in place. Since that time the international donor community has been gaining significance, and new “non-traditional donors and lenders” such as Chinese actors more recently joined the stage. At the same time, the majority of ordinary households depend on remittance inflows from abroad.
FDI in the agricultural sector has remained limited, and imports of cereals (wheat), along with agricultural inputs such as seeds and mineral fertilizers, are indispensable. There are increasingly initiatives to spur export of agricultural commodities such as fruits (pulled by donors), which has been mainly oriented towards the Russian market. Domestically, it has been hard for small-scale farms to become and stay profitable, requiring social and political power, and autonomy in production and sales29. The most prominent domestic corporate actors are state enterprises and businesses connected to the political elite30.
Chinese enterprises are one of the few foreign actors investing in the rural economy, and their investment and indirect involvement in Tajikistan’s agricultural sector has increased over the years, starting in the early 2010s. Companies are mainly engaged in cotton production and the crop seed market, and to a limited extent in vegetable production for the domestic market. Elites and state officials are involved in these companies to different extents, either as intermediaries or partners in joint ventures31.
Women’s land rights
According to the 1994 Constitution, women and men are endowed with the same rights to access land in Tajikistan, but in practice women do not enjoy equal rights. In 2001 the state adopted a program to ensure equal rights and opportunities for men and women32,and the Law on State Guarantees of Equal Rights and Opportunities for Men and Women was promulgated in 2005. UNIFEM has been a key driver in this process, together with the national Committee for Women’s and Family Affairs (Women’s Committee). A series of specific gender-focused policies were promulgated in later years33. Nevertheless there are substantial barriers for women to take on leadership roles in the agricultural sector. The percentage of female headed dehqon farms has increased over the last few years; from 11,2% in 2009 to 22,1% in 201934. However, the transfer of land use rights to women is sometimes nominal, as men in state employment are not allowed to own enterprises. In that way, by shifting the registration to the spouse, businesses can continue. At the same time, as a result of male-dominated labour migration, women do make up the majority of agricultural labour35 and farm work is highly gendered. Weeding and harvesting is perceived as typical women’s work, and men undertake the mechanised practices. A 2018 report by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) states that 68.5% of women are employed in the agricultural sector, compared to 41% of men36. While de facto farms are often run by women, de jure, men remain chairmen, and often seek to make decisions from afar.
The end of the Soviet Union implied an end to state-enforced obligation for women to work in the public sphere, and also meant the demise of free childcare. Today, women’s ability and willingness to work outside the home varies considerably, depending on personal considerations and their private situation. The majority of rural labour is informally organised. While this offers flexibility, a more severe downside is the precariousness of social security nets. Casual labourers are often paid piece rate or per labour day, in some cases merely in kind. Informal labour is still often organised by brigades (work units) at local level, mimicking Soviet labour organisations. During the peak of the cotton-picking season, the state also mobilises state officials to work in the fields.
The inheritance of land usage rights is generally handed down on the male side. The main institution governing gender policy is the Committee for Women’s and Family Affairs, established in 1991, but with an increased role since 200637. Committees are found at district-level offices, who can support legal counselling, land registration and dispute resolution involving women38. However, the committee’s actual role and outreach in the villages, and thus role in land governance, is difficult to assess. What is more, claiming redress is sometimes stigmatising, discouraging women to petition for their rights. In general, women are underrepresented in positions of power39, taking only 19% of parliamentary seats in both lower and upper houses, following elections in 201540 .In 2014, female representation in central and local civil service stood at 23.5%.
Land governance innovations
Land tenure ties in with priority areas of international donors, and has been a key aspect of World Bank and USAID projects in the late 2000s in particular. The FAO and the German organisation GIZ (German Corporation for International Cooperation GmbH) play a major role in Tajikistan today by furthering the commercialisation of farming and the setup of clusters. It closely cooperates with the Ministry of Agriculture and has an active role in the Donor Coordination Council on agriculture41.
In the early 2010s, a few foreign donors, primarily USAID42, nitiated the set-up of a market in land use rights certificates. Although first pilots started in 2019, an effective market is yet to emerge, as the legal mechanisms to realise the functioning of a market remained absent, and opinions (and expectations) about the setup of and functioning market in land use rights are polarised. At the same time, land use rights regularly and illegally change hands, sometimes at extremely high prices. Formally allowed leasing is also widely practiced, for one or more growing seasons. Foreign actors are able to acquire leaseholds on government-allocated land for up to 50 years43. The heightened importance of land has increasingly triggered disputes in recent years, involving courts, prosecutors, and often the district-level State Committee for Land Management and Geodesy.
Timeline - milestones in land governance
1991 – Independence from Soviet rule
This was followed by a violent civil war from 1992-7
1992 – Promulgation of Law on Land Reform
The law called for the dismantling of large state farms, to be reorganised under individual shares
1992 – Promulgation of Law on Dehkan Farms
The law allowed for farmland usage rights to be heritable, with the 2016 revision permitted the formal registration of dehkan farms, thereby allowing greater legal protection
1994 – New Constitution
The Constitution confirms state ownership over land and natural resources
1996 – Promulgation of the Land Code
The Code established a guiding legal framework for land. Pastureland was given the same status and regulatory framework as arable land, now collectively termed as agricultural land.
2013 – Remittance inflows of 4.1 billion USD
This represents 49% of GDP
2016 – Collective farms take up less than 1% of arable land in Tajikistan
Dehqon farms making up 81% of arable land
2018 – 68.5% of women are employed in the agricultural sector, compared to 41% of men
As stated in an FAO report
Where to go next?
The author's suggestion for further reading.
There are a number of scholars worth consulting to learn more about Tajikistan. Irna Hofman has published on an agrarian transition in the country44,focusing on the political economy of cotton and the impact of Chinese investment in the country’s agricultural sector45. Andreas Mandler researches the governance of agricultural knowledge and agrarian transformation in Tajikistan’s northern Zarafshan valley46. Hafiz Boboyorov published on kinship and Islam in southwest Tajikistan, analysing the role of cotton elites in rural development47. Zvi Lerman focuses on the contribution of land reform towards economic development in the country48. Brent Hierman and Navruz Nekbakhtshoev analyse the decollectivisation process through land reform49. Sarah Robinson and Kramer Gillin explore on-the-ground pasture governance in Tajikistan as well as how the country’s formal pasture governance law compares to that of its neighbours50.Finally, UN Women have provided a report looking through the promotion of women’s rights to land in both Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan51.
References***
[1]USAID. (2011). Property Rights and Resource Governance: Tajikistan (USAID Country Profile). USAID. https://landportal.org/library/resources/landwiserecord1333item1361/property-rights-and-resource-governance-country-profile
[2]TAJSTAT. (2021). Macroeconomic indicators. Agency on Statistics under the President of the Republic of Tajikistan. https://www.stat.tj/en/macroeconomic-indicators
[3] ADB. (2016a). Country Partnership Strategy: Tajikistan—Sector Assessment (Summary): Agriculture and Natural Resources. Asian Development Bank. https://landportal.org/library/resources/country-partnership-strategy-tajikistan-2016%E2%80%932020
Lerman, Z., & Sedik, D. (2008). The economic effects of land reform in Tajikistan. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. https://landportal.org/library/resources/agrisus2016207944/economic-effects-land-reform-central-asia-case-tajikistan
[4] World Bank. (2021). World Bank Open Data. The World Bank: Working for a World Free of Poverty. https://data.worldbank.org/
[5] USAID. (2011). Property Rights and Resource Governance: Tajikistan (USAID Country Profile). USAID. https://landportal.org/library/resources/landwiserecord1333item1361/property-rights-and-resource-governance-country-profile
[6] Bertelsmann Stiftung. (2020). BTI 2020 Country Report Tajikistan. Bertelsmann Stiftung. https://landportal.org/library/resources/bti-2020-country-report-tajikistan
[7] Mustaeva, N., Wyes, H., Mohr, B., & Kayumov, A. (2015). Tajikistan: Country situation assessment. The Regional Environment Center for Central Asia (CAREC). https://landportal.org/library/resources/tajikistan-country-situation-assessment
Shukarov, R., Ergashev, M., Shermatov, K., & Imaralieava, M. (2016). Tajikistan Case Study Policy Brief. CGIAR, ELD. https://landportal.org/library/resources/mel20500117665107/tajikistan-case-study-policy-brief
[8] UN Women. (2012). Land in the Right Hands: Promoting women’s rights to land. UN Women. https://landportal.org/library/resources/landwiserecord2135item2153/land-right-hands-promoting-womens-rights-land
[9] The dehqon farm is the successor to Soviet state and collective farms, established by former farm shareholders who actualised their share. Dehqon farms average considerably in size (ranging from 0.5 ha. to over 100 ha.) in which farm members officially hold a share. The initial law on dehqon farms distinguished private, family and collective dehqon farms, but the differentiation was outlawed in 2016. Dehqon farms are now only differentiated in terms of their legal status: as juridical entity and non-juridical person
[10] USAID. (2011). Property Rights and Resource Governance: Tajikistan (USAID Country Profile). USAID. https://landportal.org/library/resources/landwiserecord1333item1361/property-rights-and-resource-governance-country-profile
[11] ibid
[12] Hofman, I. & Visser, O. (2021). Towards a geography of window dressing and benign neglect: The state, donors and elites in Tajikistan’s trajectories of post-Soviet agrarian change. Land Use Policy, 111.
Robinson, S., Higginbotham, I., Guenther, T., & Germain, A. (2008). Land Reform in Tajikistan: Consequences for Tenure Security, Agricultural Productivity and Land Management Practices. In R. Behnke (Ed.), The Socio-Economic Causes and Consequences of Desertification in Central Asia (pp. 171–203). Springer Netherlands. https://landportal.org/library/resources/isbn-978-1-4020-8544-4/land-reform-tajikistan-consequences-tenure-security
[13] Hofman, I. & Visser, O. (2021). Towards a geography of window dressing and benign neglect: The state, donors and elites in Tajikistan’s trajectories of post-Soviet agrarian change. Land Use Policy, 111.
[14] Ibid
Boboyorov, H. (2013). Collective Identities and Patronage Networks in Southern Tajikistan. Munster: LIT Verlag.
[15] Chemonics International Inc. (2016). Tajikistan Land Reform and Farm Restructuring Project—Final Report. USAID. https://landportal.org/project/2017/10/tajikistan-land-reform-and-farm-restructuring-project
[16] USAID. (2011). Property Rights and Resource Governance: Tajikistan (USAID Country Profile). USAID. https://landportal.org/library/resources/landwiserecord1333item1361/property-rights-and-resource-governance-country-profile
[17] Hierman, B., & Nekbakhtshoev, N. (2014). Whose land is it? Land reform, minorities, and the titular “nation” in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan. Nationalities Papers, 42(2), 336–354. https://landportal.org/library/resources/httpsdoiorg101080009059922013857298/whose-land-it-land-reform-minorities-and
[18] USAID. (2011). Property Rights and Resource Governance: Tajikistan (USAID Country Profile). USAID. https://landportal.org/library/resources/landwiserecord1333item1361/property-rights-and-resource-governance-country-profile
[19] See also Mandler, A. (2019). Agricultural Expertise and Knowledge Practices among Individualized Farm Households in Tajikistan. Dissertation at Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn.
[20] Bann, C., Shukarov, R., Boziev, L., & Rakhmatova, D. (2011). The Economics of Land Degradation for the Agriculture Sector in Tajikistan—A Scoping Study. UNDP-UNEP Poverty Environment Initiative. https://landportal.org/library/resources/economics-land-degradation-agriculture-sector-tajikistan-scoping-study
[21] FAOSTAT. (2021). FAOSTAT database. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/
[22] Bann, C., Shukarov, R., Boziev, L., & Rakhmatova, D. (2011). The Economics of Land Degradation for the Agriculture Sector in Tajikistan—A Scoping Study. UNDP-UNEP Poverty Environment Initiative.
https://landportal.org/library/resources/economics-land-degradation-agriculture-sector-tajikistan-scoping-study
World Bank. (2009). Agricultural Activities, Water, and Gender in Tajikistan’s Rural Sector: A Social Assessment of Konibodom, Bobojon Ghafurov, and Yovon. World Bank, Government of the Republic of Tajikistan. https://landportal.org/library/resources/handle1098628124/agricultural-activities-water-and-gender-tajikistans-rural-sector
[23] FAO. (2018a). Small Family Farms Country Factsheet: Tajikistan. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. https://landportal.org/library/resources/i8348en10218/small-family-farms-country-factsheet-tajikistan
World Bank. (2021). World Bank Open Data. The World Bank: Working for a World Free of Poverty. https://data.worldbank.org/
[24] Svanidze, M., Götz, L., Djuric, I., & Glauben, T. (2019). Food security and the functioning of wheat markets in Eurasia: A comparative price transmission analysis for the countries of Central Asia and the South Caucasus. Food Security, 11(3), 733–752. https://landportal.org/library/resources/httpsdoiorg101007s12571-019-00933-y/food-security-and-functioning-wheat-markets
[25] FAOSTAT. (2021). FAOSTAT database. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/
[26] USAID. (2011). Property Rights and Resource Governance: Tajikistan (USAID Country Profile). USAID. https://landportal.org/library/resources/landwiserecord1333item1361/property-rights-and-resource-governance-country-profile
[27] Bann, C., Shukarov, R., Boziev, L., & Rakhmatova, D. (2011). The Economics of Land Degradation for the Agriculture Sector in Tajikistan—A Scoping Study. UNDP-UNEP Poverty Environment Initiative. https://landportal.org/library/resources/economics-land-degradation-agriculture-sector-tajikistan-scoping-study
Mustaeva, N., Wyes, H., Mohr, B., & Kayumov, A. (2015). Tajikistan: Country situation assessment. The Regional Environment Center for Central Asia (CAREC). https://landportal.org/library/resources/tajikistan-country-situation-assessment
[28] Bertelsmann Stiftung. (2020). BTI 2020 Country Report Tajikistan. Bertelsmann Stiftung. https://landportal.org/library/resources/bti-2020-country-report-tajikistan
[29] USAID. (2011). Property Rights and Resource Governance: Tajikistan (USAID Country Profile). USAID. https://landportal.org/library/resources/landwiserecord1333item1361/property-rights-and-resource-governance-country-profile
[30] Bertelsmann Stiftung. (2020). BTI 2020 Country Report Tajikistan. Bertelsmann Stiftung. https://landportal.org/library/resources/bti-2020-country-report-tajikistan
[31] Hofman, I. (2016). Politics or profits along the “Silk Road”: What drives Chinese farms in Tajikistan and helps them thrive? Eurasian Geography and Economics, 57(3), 457–481. https://landportal.org/library/resources/httpdxdoiorg1010801538721620161238313/politics-or-profits-along-%E2%80%9Csilk-road%E2%80%9D-what
[32] Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Tajikistan. (2001). State Program "Main directions of state policy on ensuring equal rights and opportunities for men and women in the Republic of Tajikistan for 2001-2010". http://www.adlia.tj/show_doc.fwx?rgn=32883
[33] ADB. (2016b). Tajikistan Country Gender Assessment. Asian Development Bank. https://landportal.org/library/resources/isbn-978-92-9257-505-2-print-978-92-9257-506-9-e-isbn-publication-stock-no
[34] TAJSTAT. (2015). Gender indicators of the production activity of dehqon farms for the years 2009-2014. Dushanbe: Statistical Agency of the Republic of Tajikistan.
[35] ADB. (2016a). Country Partnership Strategy: Tajikistan—Sector Assessment (Summary): Agriculture and Natural Resources. Asian Development Bank. https://landportal.org/library/resources/country-partnership-strategy-tajikistan-2016%E2%80%932020
[36] FAO. (2018a). Small Family Farms Country Factsheet: Tajikistan. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. https://landportal.org/library/resources/i8348en10218/small-family-farms-country-factsheet-tajikistan
[37] ibid
[38] UN Women. (2012). Land in the Right Hands: Promoting women’s rights to land. UN Women. https://landportal.org/library/resources/landwiserecord2135item2153/land-right-hands-promoting-womens-rights-land
[39] ADB (2020). A Study of Women’s Role in Irrigated Agriculture in the Lower Vakhsh River Basin, Tajikistan. Manilla: Asian Development Bank. https://landportal.org/library/resources/isbn-978-92-9262-590-0-print-978-92-9262-591-7-electronic-978-92-9262-592-4-ebook
[40] ADB. (2016a). Country Partnership Strategy: Tajikistan—Sector Assessment (Summary): Agriculture and Natural Resources. Asian Development Bank. https://landportal.org/library/resources/country-partnership-strategy-tajikistan-2016%E2%80%932020
[41] FAO. (2018b). Tajikistan and FAO. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. https://landportal.org/library/resources/faodocrepav025en/tajikistan-and-fao
[42] Hirsch, B. 2018.Tajikistan’s Path to Prosperity Depends on Creating an Accessible, Equitable Market for Land https://www.land-links.org/2018/03/tajikistans-path-to-prosperity-depends-on-creating-an-accessible-equitable-market-for-land/
[43] USAID. (2011). Property Rights and Resource Governance: Tajikistan (USAID Country Profile). USAID. https://landportal.org/library/resources/landwiserecord1333item1361/property-rights-and-resource-governance-country-profile
[44] Hofman, I. & Visser, O. (2021). Towards a geography of window dressing and benign neglect: The state, donors and elites in Tajikistan’s trajectories of post-Soviet agrarian change. Land Use Policy, 111.
[45] Hofman, I. (2016). Politics or profits along the “Silk Road”: What drives Chinese farms in Tajikistan and helps them thrive? Eurasian Geography and Economics, 57(3), 457–481. https://landportal.org/library/resources/httpdxdoiorg1010801538721620161238313/politics-or-profits-along-%E2%80%9Csilk-road%E2%80%9D-what
Hofman, I. (2021). Migration, crop diversification, and adverse incorporation: Understanding the repertoire of contention in rural Tajikistan. Canadian Journal of Development Studies, 42(3), 499-518.
Hofman, I. (2021). In the interstices of patriarchal order: Spaces of female agency in Chinese-Tajik labour encounters. Made in China. https://landportal.org/library/resources/interstices-patriarchal-order-spaces-female-agency-chinese%E2%80%93tajik-labour-encounters
Hofman, I. & Visser, O. (2021). Towards a geography of window dressing and benign neglect: The state, donors and elites in Tajikistan’s trajectories of post-Soviet agrarian change. Land Use Policy, 111.
[46] Mandler, A. (2019). Agricultural Expertise and Knowledge Practices among Individualized Farm Households in Tajikistan. Dissertation at Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn.
[47] Boboyorov, H. (2013). Collective Identities and Patronage Networks in Southern Tajikistan. Munster: LIT Verlag.
[48] Lerman, Z., & Sedik, D. (2008). The economic effects of land reform in Tajikistan. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. https://landportal.org/library/resources/agrisus2016207944/economic-effects-land-reform-central-asia-case-tajikistan
Lerman, Z., & Wolfgramm, B. (2011). Land use policies and practices for reducing vulnerability in rural Tajikistan. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. https://landportal.org/library/resources/agrisus2016203035/land-use-policies-and-practices-reducing-vulnerability-rural
[49] Hierman, B., & Nekbakhtshoev, N. (2018). Land reform by default: Uncovering patterns of agricultural decollectivization in Tajikistan. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 45(2), 409–430.
https://landportal.org/library/resources/httpsdoiorg1010800306615020161249366/land-reform-default-uncovering-patterns
[50] Robinson, S. & T. Guenther. (2007). Rural livelihoods in three mountainous regions of Tajikistan. Post-Communist Economies, 19(3), 359-378. https://landportal.org/library/resources/issn-1463-1377-printissn-1465-3958-online07030359-20-doi-10108014631370701312352
Robinson, S, & M. Whitton. (2010). Pasture in Gorno-Badakhshan, Tajikistan: Common resource or private property? Pastoralism: Research, Policy, and Practice, 1(2), 198-217. https://landportal.org/library/resources/doi-1033622041-71362010012-issn-2041-7128-print-issn-2041-7136-online/pasture
Robinson, S., C. Jamsranjav, & K. Gillin. (2017). Pastoral property rights in Central Asia: Factors and actors driving the reform agenda. Études Rurales, 200(2), 220-253. https://landportal.org/library/resources/isbn-978-2-7132-2700-4/pastoral-property-rights-central-asia
Gillin, K. (2021). Variability is not uncertainly; mobility is not flexibility: Clarifying concepts in pastoralism studies with evidence from Tajikistan. Pastoralism: Research Policy and Practice, 11(13), 1-18. https://landportal.org/library/resources/variability-not-uncertainty-mobility-not-flexibility-clarifying-concepts
[51]UN Women. (2012). Land in the right hands: Promoting women’s rights to land. UN Women. https://landportal.org/library/resources/landwiserecord2135item2153/land-right-hands-promoting-womens-rights-land