As South Africa commemorates the 66th anniversary of the Sharpeville Massacre on March 21 ― a day celebrated as Human Rights Day ― it is fitting that we should reflect on the progress that has been made to redress the issue of land dispossession.
We need to identify the bottlenecks that are slowing the restoration of dignity to communities that have been victims of forced removals and implement corrective measures to accelerate the success of the land reform programme.
More than three decades after democracy, land reform remains one of South Africa’s most complex and politically polarising subjects. For leftist political formations, land reform provides convenient electioneering ammunition to rally black communities, while detractors of the programme are quick to cite the reports of widespread failures of the programme as motivation for its scrapping.
Sadly, thousands of land beneficiary communities whose claims still hang in limbo find themselves being used as sacrificial lambs on the altar of political expediency.
Having said that, it is important to project a balanced view when one talks about land reform. While there are challenges associated with land reform and its efficacy, it is important to also reflect on the milestones that the programme has reached since its implementation.
The land reform programme has contributed to a greater degree of political stability as it gives ordinary people hope that their plight is being addressed. Most urban claims were dealt with expeditiously through cash payouts, though criticism has been levelled that little attention was paid on how such monies were spent to bring a meaningful positive change to the livelihoods of land reform beneficiaries.
It is noteworthy that some claims have resulted in significant benefits for the beneficiaries of land reform as exemplified in a successful programme piloted by the Vumelana Advisory Fund over the past 14 years, which has proved that collaboration with the private sector can make a huge impact where partnerships are promoted.
Giving the community land without providing post-settlement support is tantamount to setting them up for failure. That support includes interventions such as access to finance and markets, skills development and transfer through a mentorship programme, clear water-usage rights at the point of transfer including other forms of technical support.
Since its inception, Vumelana has supported 26 community projects, attracting more than R1bn in private investments and putting more than 72,000 hectares into productive use. These interventions have benefited more than 16,000 households.
Through these interventions, we have demonstrated that land reform can be changed from the narrative of widespread failure to one of success, where the land reform programme revitalises rural economies, stimulates entrepreneurship and improves the living conditions of these communities.
However, policy formulation and good intentions alone do not translate into a successful land reform programme. We need to clear the restrictions and unlock the latent potential of the land reform programme.
The National Development Plan (NDP) identified agriculture as an economic driver that has the potential to create a million new jobs by 2030. But how do we unlock the ability of the agricultural sector and land reform to achieve this audacious goal?
Expanding irrigated agriculture can go a long way towards enhancing job creation in rural areas. There is evidence that the current 1.5-million hectares under irrigation can be expanded by 500,000 hectares through efficient use of existing water resources.
According to Grain SA, about 1.3-1.5-million hectares of land are irrigated in South Africa, representing about 10% of the total cultivated area. Demonstrating the productive output of irrigation, Grain SA says irrigated land produces more than 30% of South Africa’s crops and 90% of its fruit and wine exports.
Expanding irrigation is an area that needs to be looked into urgently. Intensifying irrigation will also give us room to bring underutilised land in communal areas and in land reform projects into commercial production.
In addition to increasing irrigated land, the success of the land reform programme also requires stable and dependable rural electrification and improvements to existing infrastructure such as roads, which are in a deplorable state.
Equally critical, the importance of providing claimant communities with post-settlement support cannot be over-emphasised. There is ample evidence that land transfer on its own will not transform the lives of claimant communities.
Giving the community land without providing post-settlement support is tantamount to setting them up for failure. That support includes interventions such as access to finance and markets, skills development and transfer through a mentorship programme, clear water-usage rights at the point of transfer including other forms of technical support.
In addition to this, beneficiaries must be supported to ensure there is good governance and sound administration in place. This is key in building public trust and social cohesion within communities. Both communities and prospective investors would like to get an assurance that restored assets are managed responsibly, ethically and in a transparent manner.
We need not reinvent the wheel, but we should provide funding support to players who are already involved in this work and have an impeccable track record.
The state and key stakeholders must commit to providing other forms of support including training and mentorship. We further need to urgently provide tenure security to communal farmers and investigate better ways of financing land reform, including ensuring that new farmers are not saddled with unsustainable debt.
Demand on public resources continues to exceed available resources and this will not change. So all restrictions to affordable finance particularly for people in rural areas must be attended to urgently.
Without all these important ingredients, it is difficult to see how rural economies and land reform can be strengthened to drive meaningful economic and social change.
Government has enacted legislation and policies to address some of the bottlenecks holding back the advancement of the land reform programme. However, the efficacy of these interventions has been marred by several factors that have been identified by a number of studies and reports, such as the Motlanthe Report commissioned by parliament a number of years ago.
It is, however, sad that challenges identified nine years ago through this report have still not been addressed. We must move at once to address these challenges and share positive stories about land reform.
If we are to achieve sustainable land reform, government should dedicate funding to institutional support. We need not reinvent the wheel, but we should provide funding support to players who are already involved in this work and have an impeccable track record.
Project funding remains a key concern. We need to harness the private sector and support partnerships between them and land reform beneficiaries.
Promoting partnerships is the quickest way to get the private sector involved in funding land reform projects. These partnerships must be independently facilitated to ensure objectivity and credibility. Government should fund entities that have been involved in and have a track record in facilitating partnerships.
The success of land reform must be measured by how these restored land parcels have benefited our people through jobs, skills and economic inclusion. We are, unfortunately, miles away from achieving this.
• Peter Setou is CEO of the Vumelana Advisory Fund, a non-profit organisation that works with land reform beneficiaries to help them put their land into productive use
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.