In achieving an inclusive and growing agricultural sector as envisaged by the Agricultural Agroprocessing Master Plan (AAMP), an orderly and sustainable land reform is of critical importance.
Especially in terms of agricultural land that is crucial for our country’s food security.
Historical overview
Soon after the first election of 1994, the South African government started to implement an ambitious policy of land reform.
This included a land redistribution programme, aimed at broadening access to land, a land restitution programme to restore land or provide alternative compensation to those dispossessed as a result of racially discriminatory laws and practices since 1913, and a tenure reform programme to secure the rights of farmworkers, farm dwellers and labour tenants living under insecure arrangements on land owned by others, including the state and private landowners.
Government’s early vision of land reform, set out in both the 1996 Green Paper and the 1997 White Paper, emphasised multiple objectives such as addressing dispossession and injustice, creating a more equitable distribution of land, reducing poverty and assisting economic growth, providing security of tenure, establishing sound land administration and contributing to national reconciliation.
Settlement and tenure security in informal settlements and urban areas were also to be supported. The primary beneficiaries of land reform were defined as the victims of land dispossession, farm workers, labour tenants, communal area residents, people living in informal settlements, small-scale farmers, women and youth.
Land reform programmes
Government introduced various programmes to assist with land reform. Between 1994 and 1999 government provided poor households with Settlement and Land Acquisition Grants (SLAG) (R16,0003 per household) to purchase land.
To address land reform’s shortcomings, the government replaced SLAG with the Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development (LRAD) programme, in 2001. Because LRAD required beneficiaries to contribute to the cost of land, it was criticised as shifting policy focus from the poor to the black elite with resources.
LRAD was replaced in 2006 by the Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy (PLAS) as the primary programme for land redistribution. State officials were empowered to buy farms on the open market and allocate them to selected beneficiaries on leasehold tenure.
Progress to date
In a recent question and answer session, the minister of agriculture, land reform and rural development (DALRRD), Thoko Didiza stated her department is the custodian of a total of 10 454 652 hectares of land. 1 289 583 hectares of this are subject to active long-term agricultural leases in the past five years. During the past five years 8 173 hectares were transferred to individuals and businesses, while 104 850 hectares were transferred to communities by her department.
According to figures by the South African government has pumped more than R60 billion into land reform projects since 1994. Despite this investment, the land reform programme has not stimulated development in the targeted rural areas.
In 2020, minister Thoko Didiza also announced that as part of government’s contribution to the land reform programme, 896 farms measuring 700 0000 hectares of underutilised or vacant state land were to be made available to deserving beneficiaries.
A report by the South African government's financial and fiscal commission shows that land reform as a mechanism for agricultural development and job creation has failed. A survey by the commission in Limpopo province, KwaZulu-Natal and the Eastern Cape found that most land reform farms show little or no agricultural activity, the land reform beneficiaries earn little to no income, and most of those beneficiaries seek work on surrounding commercial farms instead of actively farming their own land.
And where farming is taking place on land reform farms, these farms operate below their full agricultural potential and are mainly used for subsistence agriculture. On average, crop production had decreased by 79% since conversion to land reform. In the three provinces surveyed, job losses averaged 84%, with KwaZulu-Natal suffering a 94% loss in jobs.
According to the farmer register recently launched by the DALRRD on farmland occupied by small scale farmers, 69 489 farmers farm on land with permission to occupy rights, 3 424 farmers farm on land redistribution farms,
1 294 farmers farm on land restitution farms and 5 629 on private land. The farm register however does not indicate levels of success or levels of investment either through production or capital expenditure loans.
On commercial farms, however total farming debt increased by 7,5% for the year ended 31 December 2021 and was estimated at R204 841 million, compared to R190 586 million at the end of 2020.
AAMP land reform outcomes
Social partners working on the AAMP reached consensus and agreed that land reform must be rapidly scaled up and improved and that there must be holistic tools and approaches to achieve this outcome.
One of these tools included the establishment of a land and agriculture agency. It envisages that the agency serves as the main structure or model to drive land and natural resource management with all social partners. The department of agriculture, land reform and rural development has initiated the process of establishing the agency and its institutional arrangements.
The agency is expected to coordinate functions and responsibilities within three spheres and among government departments (e.g. DWS, DALRRD and public works, traditional affairs) and the private sector on land donation and identification of strategic land for acquisition and development of the land reform programme.
Land reform must however be executed in the context of Pillar 1 of the AAMP, which explicitly calls for resolving policy ambiguities and creating an investment-friendly environment. Policy considerations such as expropriation without compensation and other ill-considered policies that may water down, weaken or even destroy the principle of ownership as currently enshrined in the National Constitution and replace it possibly with a centralised land lease system under the auspices of government, is an example of such policy ambiguity.
Hence, to create an investment-friendly environment, the AAMP strives to improve efficiency in terms of transfer of land to deserving beneficiaries in line with DALRRD’s beneficiary selection and land allocation policy of 2020. It also seeks to establish partnerships in land acquisition. Furthermore, it strives to transfer PLAS farms and newly acquired state land to deserving beneficiaries and affirms that the state must make available at least 40 000 hectares of state land each year until 2030, in addition to the 700 000 hectares already identified. Long-term leases and title deeds for PLAS farms are also on the cards to improve access to finance for black farmers.
The AAMP calls on the private sector, foreign countries, faith-based organisations, academic institutions and non-governmental organisations to voluntary donate private land according to the DALRRD’s land donation policy. Also, the acquisition of land will require a blended finance mechanism and be based on a private-public partnership approach to land identification and procurement. Industries are to advise on the strategic land to procure that is critical to driving inclusive growth.
In terms of promoting land tenure and land rights security, the AAMP envisages the facilitation of the recording of land rights and strengthening of tenure security for farmers in communal areas, farming communities, state land and commercial areas. In addition, the Deed Registries Amendment Bill is being finalised to address the issue of recordation. The aim is to record 100% of communal land rights.
The AAMP also envisages the development of a housing support programme for farmworkers and farming communities. Along with this vision, the implementation of land transfer, land tenure and legislative arrangements to ensure farmworkers and their families’ wellbeing, access to burial sites and family gatherings. And to develop catalytic housing programmes with tenure rights, mechanisms for the provision of affordable housing, protection against illegal eviction, and protection for spouses and dependents where affordable.
Huge emphasis is also placed on the provisioning of post-settlement support to farmers and land reform beneficiaries. However, it states that when land is transferred, it must be ensured that it is adequately managed by implementing CARA legislation, including developing farm management plans, soil management programmes, conservation agriculture promotion and veld management programmes. Compulsory capacity building programmes for beneficiaries to address critical skills/capacity gaps in order to reduce land degradation will also be required.
Land reform challenges
While the AAMP anticipates that land reform be rapidly scaled up, it must address the factors that undermine the success of land reform programmes. The success of land reform projects is dependent on the functionality, effectiveness and viability of the entities that manage land on behalf of beneficiaries.
There are different types of legal entities that hold land on behalf of land reform beneficiaries, such as Communal Property Associations (CPAs), trusts and the DALRRD.
Some beneficiaries of land redistribution have opted for the CPA as their preferred landholding entity. There are currently 1707 CPAs registered with the DALRRD. However, a substantial number of these CPAs are dysfunctional. A study by the CSIR showed that most CPA members are not benefiting from their land due to serious challenges that were identified in relation to the implementation of the act. One of the biggest challenges is the lack of capacity of CPA committee members to execute their functions as required by the act and their constitutions.
Other risks associated with the implementation and management of CPAs that have been identified include non-compliance with provisions of the CPA act, and the absence of sufficient and coherent support from the DALRRD, particularly to ensure the proper establishment, effective functioning and sound conflict management within CPAs.
New land expropriation laws are worrying
Furthermore, land productivity is compromised due to conflict and disputes among members, the emergence of criminal activities (fraud and corruption), CPA land invasions and illegal sale of CPA assets including land.
In term of trusts, the Ingonyama Trust Board (ITB) is responsible for administering three million hectares of land falling under traditional authorities on behalf of the Zulu monarch. For the 2020/21 financial year, financial statements were not submitted for audit within the prescribed period after the end of the financial year, as required by the PFMA. The financial statements submitted for audit were not prepared in accordance with the prescribed financial reporting framework, as required by the PFMA. Also, effective and appropriate steps were not taken to prevent irregular expenditure, amounting to R7.02 million.
Earlier this year, the ITB had submitted its 2022/23 annual performance plan without a budget allocation plan due to a budget deficit. It is not the first time that the ITB has submitted such plans without a budget allocation plan.
In terms of how the DALRRD is managing the land reform process, there is concern with the budget for land reform, which has been decreasing over time. It’s less than 0.4% of the national budget, with less than 0.1% set aside for land redistribution. Moreover, those who do receive redistributed land are made tenants of the state, rather than owners of the land. Out of a total of 10 454 652 hectares of land, only 8 173 hectares were transferred to individuals and businesses during the past five years.
According to experts, paying compensation for land has not been the most serious constraint on land reform in South Africa to date. Other constraints, including increasing evidence of corruption by officials, the diversion of the land reform budget to elites, lack of political will, and lack of training and capacity have proved to be more serious stumbling blocks to land reform.
These are but a few of the challenges experienced with the land reform process. And unless the AAMP find lasting solutions for these risks, the dream of a globally competitive agriculture and agro-processing sector that support market-oriented and inclusive production to develop rural economies, will remain a pipe dream.
Implementing a risk mitigating strategy
From the outset the AAMP must focus on ongoing monitoring and evaluation (M&E). This is critical for a major national programme such as land reform. It is through proper monitoring and evaluation that data can be collected. Major information gaps exist across all aspects of the land reform programme and a good quality system to generate information and reliable statistical information, is of critical importance.
According to the World Bank, a comprehensive and effective M&E system will assist with the following:
Collection of information on all applicants to the program (including those who are refused funding);
Socioeconomic profiling of all beneficiaries entering the programme (to throw light on targeting and to provide a baseline for subsequent livelihood impact assessment);
Information on land transferred (agro-ecological conditions, size, cost);
Consumption, expenditure, and asset data for beneficiary households and an appropriate control group;
Adherence to a standardised process of project planning, implementation, and support (with reporting of all milestones);
Effective centralised management, processing, and reporting of all data emerging from the programme;
Recurring national studies to include systematic panel surveys, case studies, and so forth; and
Structured processes for feeding M&E data into policy making.
The AAMP presents a window of opportunity to realise the vision of an inclusive and growing South African agricultural sector that can compete with the best in the world. This is achievable if all stakeholders commit to ethical, professional and pragmatic collaboration on all fronts.
