[13] Historically, in many parts of Africa for example, land was not owned by an individual, but rather used by an extended family or a village community.[22] This has translated into a number of development programs that work with governments and civil society organizations to initiate and implement land reforms.Also, conflicting formal and informal land laws can also clog a country's legal system, making it prone to corruption.The equitable distribution of land led to increasing agricultural outputs, high rural purchasing power and social mobility.Others may fear that they will lose out in the economic and political power struggles (especially in under developed countries) that underlie many land reforms.While the economic and social benefits of formalized land rights are often touted, some research suggests that such reforms are either ineffective or may cause further hardship or conflict.If improperly or inadequately implemented, critics worry that such reforms may further disadvantage marginalized groups such as indigenous communities or women.Zimbabwe, again, is a commonly cited example of the perils of such large-scale reforms, whereby land redistribution contributed to economic decline and increased food insecurity in the country.Most all newly independent countries of Eastern and Central Europe implemented land reforms in the aftermath of World War I.