scholarly journals Introduction: Agrarian Change, Rural Poverty and Land Reform in South Africa since 1994

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bridget O'Laughlin ◽  
Henry Bernstein ◽  
Ben Cousins ◽  
Pauline E. Peters
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
Rural Poverty ◽  
Agrarian Change

The Land Question in South Africa: 1913 and Beyond

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cherryl Walker
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
Local Development ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Transition To Democracy ◽  
Agrarian Change ◽  
Political Resistance ◽  
History Of ◽  
Land Question ◽  
White Hegemony

Since 1913, the “land question” in South Africa has revolved around the major inequalities in access to and rights over land between the black majority and the white minority of the population, and how these disparities should best be understood and overcome. The roots of this inequality are commonly traced back to the promulgation of the Natives Land Act in June 1913, which provided the legal framework for the subsequent division of the country into a relatively prosperous white heartland and a cluster of increasingly impoverished black reserves on the periphery. Historians have cautioned against according this legislation undue weight within the much longer history of colonization, capitalist penetration, and agrarian change that has shaped modern South Africa. The spatial divide of white core and black periphery has, however, been central to the political economy of 20th-century South Africa. Beginning in the 1950s, the apartheid government attempted to maintain white hegemony, drive an urban–industrial economy, and deflect political resistance by turning these reserves into the ethnic “homelands” of African people. This involved increasingly repressive policies of urban influx control, population relocation, and the tribalization of local administration in the reserves. Since the transition to democracy in 1994, the post-apartheid state has struggled to develop an effective land reform program that can address the crosscutting demands for land redistribution, local development, and representative government that this history has bequeathed. For many analysts, these ongoing challenges mean that “the land question” remains unresolved; for others it means that the question is itself in need of reformulation. In order to review these developments, a three-part periodization is used to organize the discussion: (1) the segregation era (1910–1948), (2) the apartheid era (1948–1990), and (3) the transition to democracy and the post-apartheid era that began in 1990.

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 Engagement of Beneficiaries in Farm Governance of Restituted Land through the Communal Property Association Model: The Ideal Versus the Reality of Beneficiary Farms in South Africa

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mokoko Piet Sebola ◽  
Malemela Angelinah Mamabolo
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
South African ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
Farm Management ◽  
The South ◽  
African Government ◽  
Communal Property ◽  
Farm Ownership ◽  
Land Restitution ◽  
Communal Property Associations

The purpose of this article is to evaluate the engagement of farm beneficiaries in South Africa in the governance of restituted farms through communal property associations. The South African government has already spent millions of rands on land restitution to correct the imbalance of the past with regard to farm ownership by the African communities. Various methods of farm management to benefit the African society have been proposed, however, with little recorded success. This article argues that the South African post-apartheid government was so overwhelmed by political victory in 1994 that they introduced ambitious land reform policies that were based on ideal thinking rather than on a pragmatic approach to the South African situation. We used qualitative research methods to argue that the engagement of farm beneficiaries in farm management and governance through communal property associations is failing dismally. We conclude that a revisit of the communal property associations model is required in order to strengthen the position of beneficiaries and promote access to land by African communities for future benefit.

scholarly journals The South African Redistribution Imperative: Incongruities in Theory and Practice

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Sue-Mari Viljoen
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
South African ◽  
Theoretical Approach ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
Careful Analysis ◽  
Economic Justice ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
The South ◽  
Slow Pace

Abstract It has partly been assumed that the constitutional obligation to pay compensation for expropriations is to blame for the slow pace at which land has been redistributed in South Africa. However, this assumption requires careful analysis and reflection, with reference to the imperfections of the policies and laws that set out to address landlessness, as well as the underlying theoretical approach to economic justice. This article questions the purpose for which land reform beneficiaries acquire land, with reference to the role that property should ideally fulfil for the landless. The article makes a number of observations to cast light on why the redistribution of land has been alarmingly slow, where inconsistencies and loopholes exist in the programme, and whether expropriations for nil compensation will make any difference in remedying existing failures in the redistribution programme.

Financing the Market-Based Redistribution of Land to Disadvantaged Farmers and Farm Workers in South Africa: Recent Performance of the Land Reform Credit Facility

2000 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 57-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Lyne ◽  
Paul Zille ◽  
Douglas Graham
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
Farm Workers ◽  
First Year ◽  
Private Land ◽  
Mortgage Loans ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Credit Facility ◽  
Flow Problems ◽  
Kwazulu Natal

This paper compares the results of public and private land redistribution in the province of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. It identifies problems that constrain access to the land market, and describes recent efforts to address the liquidity problem associated with mortgage finance. The Land Reform Credit Facility (LRCF) was launched by government in May 1999 to help alleviate cash flow problems on farms purchased by disadvantaged buyers and financed with mortgage loans from commercial banks. The LRCF does not offer subsidies. Rather it offers loans with deferred or graduated repayment schedules to reputable banks and venture capital investors who finance, on similar terms, equity-share projects and land purchased by aspiring farmers. The paper outlines the LRCF experience and considers reasons for its promising start. The loan target of R15 million (US$2.15 million) set for the first year was reached after only eight months.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document