Suchergebnisse

Looking back at the century since the promulgation of the Natives Land Act, it could be argued that it shaped the trajectories of most South Africans' lives. It expelled black people from the land into crowded reserves and formed the cornerstone of the migrant labour system through which accumulation of wealth in white-owned mines, farms and factories followed. Far from unravelling this history of dispossession, the land reform process has merely dabbled at its edges while the inequalities it set in place have in some ways been further aggravated since 1994. Four legacies of the Act are identified: the material legacy of poverty and inequality in the divided countryside but also the displaced legacy of urban poverty and inequality; the social and spiritual legacy of division, invisibility and failed reconciliation; and a political legacy of legal pluralism and dualistic governance that denotes zones of tradition or custom, distinct from the rest of the country. In this context, the church needs to reflect, not only on its mixed involvement in dispossession and resistance to it in the past, but also on its role in dismantling the structures of poverty and inequality, social and spiritual division, invisibility and dualistic governance.

The popular term 'land grabbing', while effective as activist terminology, obscures vast differences in the legality, structure and outcomes of commercial land deals and deflects attention from the roles of domestic elites and governments as partners, intermediaries and beneficiaries. This paper summarises initial evidence of the characteristics of recent acquisitions of public lands and land held under customary tenure in Southern Africa, and their distribution across the region. It draws attention to their diverse manifestations – to questions of size, duration and source of the investments; the commodities and business models through which they are implemented; the tenure arrangements and resources accessed; the terms of leases and compensation; the degree of displacement; labour regimes and employment creation; and changes in settlement and infrastructure. The article proposes a schematic analytical framework for distinguishing between different types of land deals and considers the implications for unfolding and future trajectories of agrarian change.

In July 2005, the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs in South Africa hosted a National Land Summit, the most significant public debate on land reform in the past five years. The gathering took place in Johannesburg & was attended by over 1500 delegates including representatives from political parties, government workers, land claimants, NGOs, & farm workers. Preparations for the summit included discussions amongst the newly formed Alliance for Land and Agrarian Reform, & provincial pre-summits. At the summit there was a clear consensus on a shift from the willing buyer, willing seller policy as well as a widespread agreement that the approaches used during the first decade of democracy had been inadequate. It is concluded that although it remains to be seen which of the Summit's resolutions will be taken forward by the government, the overall atmosphere was constructive. References. R. Prince

Land reform is one way in which the 'new' South Africa set out to redress the injustices of apartheid and, by redistributing land to black South Africans, to transform the structural basis of racial inequality. During the first decade of democracy, land reform has fallen far short of both public expectations and official targets. This article describes the progress of the programme and its changing nature. It is argued that a recent shift in land policy, from a focus on the rural poor to 'emerging' black commercial farmers, is consistent with changes in macro-economic policy and reflects shifting class alliances. The programme now appears to pursue a limited deracialisation of the commercial farming areas rather than a process of agrarian restructuring. Most fundamentally, land reform has not yet provided a strategy to overcome agrarian dualism.
This paper draws on research by the author under the aegis of the 'Evaluating Land and Agrarian Reform in South Africa' research programme at the Programme for Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS), University of Western Cape, and in particular the final report of that research, co-authored with Peter Jacobs and Edward Lahiff (Hall, Jacobs and Lahiff, 2003).

The question posed in this article is why do land reform policies aiming at equity regularly result in inequitable outcomes?The question is examined in relation to the new land reform policy in South Africa (DLA, 1997), and with emphasis on the commitment to gender equity contained in this policy. Four points are made. First, planning for development needs to be realistic about the context of social relations within which the programme will take place. Second, policy objectives and criteria should not be contradictory. Third, equity considerations need to permeate all aspects of policy and not be limited to statements of vision and objectives. Fourth, the resource implications of policy should fit within existing resource constraints. These are some of the points of slippage which may result in the sacrifice of equity objectives in practice. The challenge at the level of policy is to anticipate and counteract the likely maldistribution of the benefits of land reform.

The question posed in this article is why do land reform policies aiming at equity regularly result in inequitable outcomes? The question is examined in relation to the new land reform policy in South Africa (DLA, 1997), and with emphasis on the commitment to gender equity contained in this policy. Four points are made. First, planning for development needs to be realistic about the context of social relations within which the programme will take place. Second, policy objectives and criteria should not be contradictory. Third, equity considerations need to permeate all aspects of policy and not be limited to statements of vision and objectives. Fourth, the resource implications of policy should fit within existing resource constraints. These are some of the points of slippage which may result in the sacrifice of equity objectives in practice. The challenge at the level of policy is to anticipate and counteract the likely maldistribution of the benefits of land reform. (ROAPE/DÜI). DLA = Department of Land Affairs