TRACES IN THE LANDSCAPE: HUNTERS, HERDERS AND FARMERS ON THE CEDARBERG FRONTIER, SOUTH AFRICA, 1725–95

2002 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 431-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
LAURA J. MITCHELL
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Land Use ◽  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Social Structure ◽  
Land Tenure ◽  
Land Claims ◽  
Basic Features ◽  
Colonial Frontier ◽  
Transhumant Pastoralism

Land tenure was at the center of the struggle between settlers and Khoisan on the colonial frontier during the eighteenth century. Different perceptions of land claims and differing patterns of land use prevented the possibility of mutual accommodation. Although pre-colonial hunters and herders co-existed in the Cedarberg region, the introduction of competition from settler pastoralism challenged the survival of both San and Khoikhoi patterns of subsistence. The fight for territory was rooted in competition over specific locations – sites endowed with resources such as permanent water, defensible shelter and ritual significance for the San. Colonial social structure supported settler land claims, eventually enabling successful occupation of a rugged region relatively isolated from the rest of the colony. In the last quarter of the century some Khoisan individuals worked within this system to make land claims of their own. Superior technology and a tightly woven social structure did not alter the basic features of the landscape, so colonists continued to subsist from transhumant pastoralism throughout the century.

Can SPLUMA Play a Role in Transforming Spatial Injustice to Spatial Justice in Housing in South Africa?

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeannie Van Wyk
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Land Use ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
National Development ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Spatial Development ◽  
Land Use Management ◽  
Spatial Justice ◽  
Spatial Environment

Our spatial environment is one of the most important determinants of our well-being and life chances. It relates to schools, opportunities, businesses, recreation and access to public services. Spatial injustice results where discrimination determines that spatial environment. Since Apartheid in South Africa epitomised the notion of spatial injustice, tools and instruments are required to transform spatial injustice into spatial justice. One of these is the employment of principles of spatial justice. While the National Development Plan (NDP) recognised that all spatial development should conform to certain normative principles and should explicitly indicate how the requirements of these should be met, the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act 16 of 2013 (SPLUMA) contains a more concrete principle of spatial justice. It echoes aspects of both the South African land reform programme and global principles of spatial justice. Essentially section 7(a) of SPLUMA entails three components: (1) redressing past spatial imbalances and exclusions; (2) including people and areas previously excluded and (3) upgrading informal areas and settlements. SPLUMA directs municipalities to apply the principle in its spatial development frameworks, land use schemes and, most importantly, in decision-making on development applications. The aim of this article is to determine whether the application of this principle in practice can move beyond the confines of spatial planning and land use management to address the housing issue in South Africa. Central to housing is section 26 of the Constitution, that has received the extensive attention of the Constitutional Court. The court has not hesitated to criticize the continuing existence of spatial injustice, thus contributing to the transformation of spatial injustice to spatial justice. Since planning, housing and land reform are all intertwined not only the role of SPLUMA, but also the NDP and the myriad other policies, programmes and legislation that are attempting to address the situation are examined and tested against the components of the principle of spatial justice in SPLUMA.

LAND REFORM IN SOUTH AFRICA: OBSTINATE SPACIAL DISTORTIONS

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-31
Author(s):  
Manala Shadrack Maake
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Agricultural Production ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
Economic Transformation ◽  
Land Claims ◽  
Tenure Reform ◽  
Land Redistribution ◽  
Reform Programme ◽  
Theoretical Paper

This theoretical paper seeks to make an empirical contribution to the Land Reform discourses. The paper argues that the pace of land redistribution in South Africa is undeniably slow and limits livelihood choices of relatively most intended beneficiaries of land reform programme. The primacy and success of the programme within rural development ought to measured and assessed through ways in which the land reform programmes conforms to and improve the livelihoods, ambitions and goals of the intended beneficiaries without compromising agricultural production and the economy. In addition, paper highlights the slow pace of land reform programme and its implications on socio-economic transformation of South Africa. Subsequently, the paper concludes through demonstrating the need for a radical approach towards land reform without disrupting agricultural production and further to secure support and coordination of spheres of government. The democratic government in South Africa inherited a country which characterized by extreme racial imbalances epitomized through social relations of land and spatial distortions. Non-white South Africans are still feeling the effects of colonial and apartheid legal enactments which sought to segregate ownership of resources on the basis of race in particular. Thus, successive democratic governments have the specific mandate to re-design and improve land reform policies which are targeted to reverse colonially fueled spatial distortions. South Africa’s overall Land Reform programme consists of three key elements and namely are; land redistribution, tenure reform and land restitution. Concomitantly, spatial proponents and researchers have denounced and embraced land reform ideology and its status quo in South Africa. The criticisms overlapped towards both beneficiaries and state due to factors like poor post-settlement support, lack of skills, lack of capital, infighting over land claims and land management.

The Eighteenth-Century Social Order in Surat: A Reply and an Excursus on the Riots of 1788 and 1795

1991 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 321-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lakshmi Subramanian
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Social Structure ◽  
Social Order ◽  
Recent Article ◽  
Alternative Explanation ◽  
Archival Material ◽  
The Social

The Banias of eighteenth-century Surat, whom Michelguglielmo Torri earlier treated with indifference if not innocence, have invited his wrath since they were brought into focus by the publication of my essay on the Banias and the Surat riot of 1795. In his ‘rejoinder’ to my article, he seeks to wish away their existence altogether (to him there was no specific Bania community, the term merely signifying traders of all communities engaged in the profession of brokerage), and seeks to provide what he regards as an ‘alternative’ explanation of the Muslim–Bania riot of 1795. the Muslim-Bania riot of 1795. It shall be my purpose in this reply to show that his alternative explanation is neither an alternative nor even an explanation, and is based on a basic confusion in his mind about the Banias as well as the principal sources of tension in the social structure of Surat. I shall treat two main subjects in this reply to his misdirected criticisms. First, I shall present some original indigenous material as well as European documentation to further clarify the identity, position and role of the Banias, whom Irfan Habib in a recent article has identified as the most important trading group in the trading world of seventeenth and eighteenth-century India. It is also my purpose to show how the social order of Surat operated under stress by presenting some archival material, the existence of which Torri seems to be completely unaware of, on the Parsi-Muslim riot of 1788.

Rubber specialization vs crop diversification: the roles of perceived risks

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 188-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shi Min ◽  
Jikun Huang ◽  
Hermann Waibel
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Land Tenure ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Household Wealth ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
Crop Diversification ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Entry Points ◽  
The Impact

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of farmers’ risk perceptions regarding rubber farming on their land use choices, including rubber specialization and crop diversification. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional survey data of some 600 smallholder rubber farmers in Xishuangbanna in Southwest China is employed. This paper develops a general conceptual framework that incorporates a subjective risk item into a model of farmers’ land use choices, thereby developing four econometric models to estimate the role of risk perceptions, and applies instrumental variables to control for the endogeneity of risk perceptions. Findings The results demonstrate that risk perceptions play an important role in smallholders’ decision-making regarding land use strategies to address potential risks in rubber farming. Smallholders with higher risk perceptions specialize in rubber farming less often and are more likely to diversify their land use, thereby contributing to local environmental conservation in terms of agrobiodiversity. The land use choices of smallholder rubber farmers are also associated with ethnicity, household wealth, off-farm employment, land tenure status, altitude and rubber farming experience. Originality/value This study contributes to a better understanding of the implications of farmers’ risk perceptions and shows entry points for improving the sustainability of rubber-based land use systems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document