by Hopewell Radebe – SANF 05 no 65
Experiences shared by representatives from southern Africa at the recent Land Summit in Johannesburg, South Africa, seem to have shaped the gathering’s overwhelming rejection of the notion that land acquisition should continue to be based on the “willing buyer-willing seller” principle.
According to land experts from Zimbabwe, Kenya and Namibia, market-driven land reform was a dismal failure in those countries.
Professor Sam Moyo, executive director of the Harare-based African Institute for Agrarian Studies, warned that South Africa should not be lulled by growing urbanisation into thinking that migration to towns would solve the agrarian reform problem. He said land reform that was vested in the markets instead of the state had failed in southern Africa.
The permanent secretary for land in Namibia, Frans Tseehama, blamed the slow pace of land transfer on Namibia’s reliance on market-driven reform saying his government was left with no option but to expropriate land to address a backlog of over 240,000 outstanding land claims. He said since independence in 1990, their government had settled 1,138 households on 913,488 hectares of land.
The five day Land Summit — which drew to a close on 31 July — was about helping South Africa chart a comprehensive approach to land distribution in a manner that empowers the African majority while creating minimal if not manageable disruptions to commercial agricultural farming currently in white hands only.
The summit ended with delegates united behind a call for immediate state intervention in a manner that advances the country’s constitutionally entrenched right for the previously oppressed masses to a fair and equitable access to land.
As a result, South Africa could see a drastic review of the land reform policies following concerns raised by the government, lobby groups for landless masses and opposition parties about exorbitant prices, skewed foreign ownership and exploitative sellers.
Problems that faced government in speeding up land redistribution, according to South Africa’s Agriculture and Land Affairs Minister Thoko Didiza included:
- The expensive and tardy legal processes;
- Lack of resources on part of government to fast-track the implantation process;
- Lack of integration and collaboration between government departments;
- Markets not redistributing land at a scale, quality, location and price from rich to poor and from whites to blacks;
- Lack of resources, technical skill and capital prevent new farmers from using their land to their full potential;
- The tension between the protection of property rights and obligation on the state to undertake land reform; and
- Regulating evictions are not protecting farm dwellers.
Delegates advised the South African government to look at, among other things, expropriation, capping the price of land, land tax, and the scrapping of restrictions on subdivision. South Africa’s challenges abound also with the urbanisation trends which require that land in largely urbanised provinces such as Gauteng, is needed primarily for development and housing.
“Land reform must not only be about land restitution, but must also be about how we deal with development and growth,” the Gauteng Premier, Mbhazima Shilowa, said.
The summit advised that the country’s Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) of municipalities should include land reform as part of their plan. For this to happen, South Africa must undertake to steer away from the “willing buyer-willing seller” principle in order to increase the pace of land reform, and to make a more efficient and real agrarian settlement, according to Agriculture and Land Affairs Deputy Minister Dirk du Toit.
The country must also look at the regulation of foreign land ownership, and the establishment of local land forums that will identify land need and address it at a local level.
The delegates also called for a comprehensive and timely support package for beneficiaries after the settlements. It has been the region’s experience that support packages come rather late to make a significant difference in people’s lives. The late arrival of development support services often slowed down production of emerging farmers.
While the summit was not expected to establish a concrete programme of action, it was hoped that its recommendations will give the South African government new impetus for the creation of clear, concrete and measurable policies on land reform based on what the stakeholders said.
Since the land distribution remains a concern in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region, South Africa’s reform strategies are likely to be the subject of further discussions within the SADC structures on land distribution.
It is also a matter that is being closely monitored by the African Union which is advocating for orderly processes of governance especially when managing potentially explosive issues such as land distribution in a bid to reverse the negative impact of colonial land dispossessions. (SARDC)
