At their zenith in the early 1970s, Latin American agrarian reforms benefited approximately 22% of those legally eligible.' For these campesinos the change often involved a major alteration in economic status, usually accomplished at high initial cost to governments. What has happened to agrarian reform beneficiaries since the land-distribution period remains largely unexplored, although the potential exists for useful lessons to emerge that could inform the renewed interest in this process in countries like El Salvador, Nicaragua, and even Brazil. This article analyzes primary economic data from 43 agrarian reform settlements, or asentamientos, in Panama to determine (1) the level and sources of beneficiary incomes (and a comparison to opportunity costs), (2) the relationship of possible independent variables to settlement performance, and (3) the current returns from various collective projects. Focused as it is on the reform sector, this article does not treat the contention of de Janvry that "the impact of the reform on the nonreform sector is another important, often principal, aspect of any reform."2 Agriculture in Panama is characterized by its low productivity. While the sector grew by 5.3% per year during the 1960s, in the 1970s the rate fell to 1.9%. In 1983, real per capita agricultural output was 10% less than in 1970. In 1981, yields of corn, beans, coffee, rice, sugarcane, and cocoa were below Latin American and world averages.3 On-site interviews were conducted in June 1984. The Panamanian reform is convenient to analyze because it is of manageable size. The political climate for interviewing-the interregnum between the election of a new president and his inauguration-was favorable. In 1983, the harvest year analyzed, agriculture had turned upward from depression levels (value added in agriculture was 5% above that in 1982), though the 1984 figure was again negative. This implies that harvest