The second reform stage was to introduce markets in privatized land-use rights. Those households, having started with inefficiently low amounts of croplands in the first phase, increased their holdings over time and vice versa for land-rich users. Market forces tended to favor the “land poor” and those who are well-rooted in rural society, namely male headed households and the better educated. If this process was a poverty-increasing driving force, then it has to be analyzed by the dynamics of rural landlessness (Ravaillon and van de Walle 2008). In other words, is there a poverty increasing landlessness effect?