South African agriculture stands at a crossroads. The recently concluded Annual Conference of the Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA) once again illuminated a painful truth: the agricultural sector remains deeply divided, still shaped by the enduring legacy of colonial and apartheid structures.
At the heart of the debate was the uncomfortable but unavoidable issue of duality — the coexistence of two agricultures operating side by side but worlds apart. On one side lies a sophisticated, export-oriented, capital-intensive commercial agriculture that rivals the best in the world. On the other side, a vast and fragmented smallholder and subsistence sector, where millions of black farmers continue to face structural barriers to land, finance, markets, and technology.
During his keynote address, Mooketsa Ramasodi, the Director-General of the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development, captured the urgency of the moment. He acknowledged the duality that continues to define the sector but lamented the scarcity of concrete policy advice and actionable solutions. “We have described the problem many times,” he said in essence, “but we are yet to chart the trajectory that leads us out of it.” He challenged agricultural economists to move beyond analysis and provide solutions that can drive transformation and inclusivity in practice — not just in theory.
Land expropriation risks becoming a smokescreen for elite capture
Dr Sifiso Ntombela, the outgoing AEASA President, was even more forthright. He reminded delegates that the duality is a deliberate outcome of historical policies — designed to privilege a minority while excluding the majority. “We cannot achieve transformation and inclusivity using the same laws that created the duality,” he argued. His call for new legislation — a new policy architecture — resonated deeply across the conference halls.
The Persistence of Structural Inequality
Despite numerous initiatives and master plans, the fundamental structure of South African agriculture has changed little. The Agricultural and Agroprocessing Master Plan (AAMP), for instance, represents an important step forward in uniting government, business, and labour around shared growth targets. Yet, its implementation continues to grapple with a critical dilemma: how to ensure that growth is inclusive rather than extractive.
The Competition Commission’s recent Fresh Produce Market Inquiry provides a sobering illustration. It found that a handful of large agribusinesses dominate the nation’s fruit and vegetable value chains, controlling access to inputs, logistics, and markets. Smallholder producers, many of whom are black, remain locked out of mainstream markets due to stringent quality standards, high transaction costs, and exclusionary contract practices.
Similarly, in the seed sector, AEASA researchers presented evidence of significant market concentration, with multinational corporations holding dominant positions across major crops. While this concentration supports innovation and export competitiveness, it simultaneously marginalises small seed companies and local breeders, limiting the diversity of seed choices available to smallholder farmers. These examples reveal how structural duality is not merely a historical relic — it is being reproduced through contemporary market dynamics.
Land reform, too, continues to illustrate the paradox. Since 1994, only about 10% of agricultural land has been redistributed — far below the 30% target initially set by the government. Many transferred farms remain underutilised, often due to weak post-settlement support, lack of financing, and inadequate extension services. The result is a cycle where land is transferred without the accompanying ecosystem needed for sustained productivity and market participation.
Policy Paralysis and Institutional Inertia
South Africa’s agricultural policy landscape is dense with well-intentioned frameworks — from the National Policy on Comprehensive Producer Development Support (NPCPDS) to various commodity-specific transformation charters. Yet, progress remains sporadic and fragmented.
