Policy Brief
July 2009
Policy Brief
A fresh start for rural development and agrarian reform?
Ruth Hall
Abstract
1. Introduction
The new cabinet ushered in after
When
the 2009 national elections features
announced his new cabinet on 10 May
new and renamed ministries. Those
2009, he ushered in a new era for
expected to take the lead in a new
the state’s apparatus charged with
initiative to resuscitate the rural
responding to rural poverty: political
economy are the Ministry of Rural
and bureaucratic responsibilities for
Development
Reform
land reform, fisheries, forestry and
and the Ministry of Agriculture,
agricultural development have been
Forestry and Fisheries. While the
reshuffled, and are now clustered
newfound
into an array of new and renamed
and
Land
priority
placed
on
President
Jacob
Zuma
rural development is welcome, its
ministries and departments.
separation from the dynamic sub-
Zuma presented this reshuffling as
sectors in the rural economy is not.
a sign that his administration will
This brief shows how existing policies
embark on a re-energised initiative
are bifurcated between BEE models
for rural development, in line with
for the better off and welfare for
the ANC’s manifesto for the 2009
the poor. There is now a danger that
national elections which featured
the two ministries will replicate the
‘rural development, food security
dualism of the so-called ‘first’ and
and land reform’ as one of its top five
‘second’ economies – an approach
priorities.
that deepens exclusion from and
This signals a new commitment from
legitimises
the
a party that has historically relied on
economic core, and prevents the
an urban support base of the working
creation of a ‘missing middle’ of
class
successful small producers. What is
de-emphasised, if not quite ignored,
needed instead is rural development
the spatial legacy of apartheid and
that
the concentration of poverty in the
exploitation
restructures
sectors
of
the
in
commercial
agriculture,
forestry
and
unemployed
and
has
rural areas.
and fisheries, and the exploitative class relations (with workers and small producers) on which they are based, and which breaks down the concentration of capital and market power in few hands. Only then can redistributing
land,
forests
and
fishing quotas create new pathways
PLAAS
Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies
School of Government, UWC
for ‘the rural poor’ to participate, and produce, in these sectors in ways that
2. Mix-and-match ministries For the future of the rural areas, the most significant changes in the new cabinet are the separation of land and agriculture, and the introduction of rural development as a ministerial mandate.
create livelihoods and jobs, and set
Responsibilities for land reform and
South Africa on a different and more
for agriculture have always been
appropriate growth path.
held by separate departments. But
1
Policy Brief
July 2009
for the past 13 years these have been
and People with Disability – what one
redistributed land and in the former
joined in one ministry – of Agriculture
might term ‘the ministry for nearly
Bantustans, whose type and scale of
and Land Affairs – headed by Derek
everyone’ – has been established
farming, and therefore whose needs,
Hanekom from 1996 to 1999, by Thoko
to deal with these groups who
might differ substantially. In this view,
Didiza from 1999 to 2006, and by Lulu
predominate among the poor in
the main virtue of this new cabinet
Xingwana from 2006 until the 2009
both urban and rural areas. How all
arrangement is that it ensures that
national elections.
of these institutions and mandates
land reform happens at the margins of
can be harnessed to respond to
mainstream commercial agriculture.
Now, the new-look cabinet places these
responsibilities
ministries:
a
in
Ministry
Development
and
separate of
Land
Rural Reform
(MRDLR) on the one hand, and a Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) on the other. Both are to be headed by former MECs for
rural poverty, unemployment and underdevelopment
remains
very
unclear – but it is likely that the Ministry for Rural Development and Land Reform will need to take the lead in providing some overarching coherence.
On the other hand, the new cabinet has drawn a more critical response from rural people’s organisations and lobby groups. Their main objection is that the core problem facing land reform has not only been its slow pace – just five per cent of commercial
Agriculture: Gugile Nkwinti from the
Are all of these new institutional
farmland has been redistributed in
Eastern Cape, and the Northern Cape’s
arrangements an apt response to the
the past 15 years – but the extremely
Tina Joemat-Pettersson, respectively.
seemingly intractable problems of
poor level of support for new, small
rural underdevelopment and economic
and cash-strapped farmers who have
exclusion?
been settled on this land. Agriculture,
But key decisions about government’s plans for the rural areas are likely to be taken elsewhere. At the heart of the new administration’s thinking on the future of the economy is a heavyweight triumvirate made up of the National Treasury headed by Pravin Gordhan, a Ministry of Economic Development under former unionist Ebrahim Patel, and a National Planning Commission in the Presidency led by Trevor Manuel. It is widely expected that they will tussle not only over state purse strings, but also the central questions of where in the economy to invest, whether
they insist, should be integrated
3. Separating Land Reform from Agriculture Separating
responsibility
with land reform and should be at the
heart
of
rural
development.
Separating agriculture from both rural for
agriculture and land reform into separate ministries is a surprising move, apparently at odds with the ANC’s manifesto promise to ‘ensure a much stronger link between land and agrarian reform programmes’ (ANC, 2009:9).
development and land reform, then, is to move in the wrong direction. Yet if one considers the track record of the past decade or so, responsibilities for agriculture and land reform have never been effectively integrated, despite being in the same ministry since 1996. None of the three ministers of Agriculture and Land Affairs were able
the rural areas can become a source
There is disagreement on whether it is
to solve this problem while they were
of jobs and growth, and therefore
a good thing or not.
responsible for both departments.
whether or not to retain existing
The separation of the two has been
And land reform has been crippled as
approaches to industrial policy and
welcomed by some in the agricultural
a result.
spatial development.
establishment who, pointing to dips
The blame for the dismal track record
A
to
in output on redistributed farms, see
of production on redistributed farms
the ministries will affect the rural
land reform as a threat to commercial
must fall largely on the national and
areas. Water Affairs and Forestry
farming, which they wish to see
provincial departments of agriculture,
becomes Water and Environment.
insulated from the reform process.
which have simply failed to come to
Environmental Affairs and Tourism
In this view, there are two types
the party. Despite the introduction of
becomes simply Tourism. Provincial
of
and
some agricultural support and funds
and
becomes
subsistence – and the agriculture
for land reform beneficiaries in recent
and
department should be freed up to
years, the agriculture departments
new
focus on commercial farming, rather
have remained biased in favour of
Ministry for Women, Youth, Children
than the new and poorer farmers on
commercial farming and unsupportive
number
Local
Cooperative Traditional
of
other
changes
Government Governance Affairs.
And
a
agriculture
–
commercial
2
Policy Brief
July 2009 the
partnerships (often with the previous
agribusinesses and supermarkets, as
production systems of the poor. Less
owners) through long-term leases or
well as the oligopolistic agro-food
than 1 in 20 land reform beneficiaries
joint ventures to ensure continuity
processors and manufacturers that
have benefited at all from either
of production. But this also involves
have been able to fix prices and raise
Comprehensive Agricultural Support
continuity in other areas: while having
food costs.
Programme (CASP) grants or Micro
a stake in commercial farms, claimants
Agricultural Finance Institutions of
remain in overcrowded conditions in
South Africa (MAFISA) loans. And land
communal areas, reliant on uncertain
alone does not produce livelihoods or
future dividend payments, and usually
development.
no new jobs are created.
The notion of a need for ‘integration’
At the other end of the spectrum,
overriding trends towards capital-
of
the demand for land and farming
intensive
though, fails to capture the scale of the
opportunities
poor,
challenge. It elides the fundamentally
and consolidation of both land and
compounded by the sharp increase in
political tension between promoting
agricultural capital in fewer hands –
food prices over the past 18 months,
business-as-usual
the
trends that are antithetical to rural
has spawned initiatives to support
productive sectors of the economy
development. And neither approach
food production by the poor, often in
(agriculture,
fisheries)
tackles the really contentious work of
the form of ‘starter packs’ of seed and
and restructuring them through a
restructuring the ‘core economy’ in
implements. This response, driven by
thoroughgoing redistribution of assets
recognition that its dynamics generate
provincial departments of agriculture,
and wealth.
poverty and exclusion.
can be characterised as food security
of
smallholder
land
farming
reform
with
and
agriculture,
growth
forestry,
in
by
the
scale – an approach reiterated in the ANC’s manifesto in which it commits
Land and agriculture have been caught up in the contradictions of government programmes that address the problem
with the worst excesses of rural hunger and to deracialise commercial farming (and farmers). But so far, redistributive measures seem peripheral to the
through self-provisioning on a micro
4. Dualism and the ‘missing middle’
It is, of course, important both to deal
to expand food production among the poor, including community schemes to produce food ‘in schools, health
farming,
job
shedding,
Between these poles of food security gardens and big commercial farms is a missing middle: the untapped potential
for
smallholder
farmers
who want to produce for their own consumption
and
for
a
market.
of ‘dualism’ by dealing with each of the
facilities, churches and urban and
Existing approaches have failed to
so-called ‘two economies’ separately.
traditional
create opportunities for such people.
They have fallen victim to this way of
2009:11).
thinking, and have perpetuated it.
Addressing direct consumption needs
As a result, state policy has become
is an important and overdue response
bifurcated in recent years. On the one
to poverty and hunger but, while
hand, transformation of commercial
it is likely to have popular appeal, it
agriculture is now largely pursued
is ultimately limited. First, without
through
strategic
redistributing land and water for
economic
agriculture, ‘own production’ by the
joint
partnerships
ventures,
and
black
authority
areas’
(ANC,
And the most likely candidates – the approximately 4 million ‘semisubsistence’ and 200 000 small- and medium-scale producers – are in the communal areas of the former Bantustans, which have attracted the least agricultural (and infrastructural) support and investment. A serious approach to food security would
deals
that
poor via starter packs, particularly
but
leave
in urban areas, is unlikely to be at
production
and
the scale required to be a workable
– and ultimately the
solution to food insecurity. Second,
impact on the economy – largely
the poor are to produce – but at the
unchanged.
most
margins rather than in the commercial
evident where land claims on high-
farming heartland. In no way will this
value farmland have been settled,
change who profits from producing
This
increasingly with the proviso that
and selling food, or pose a challenge
assumptions
the claimants neither live on nor
to the large players who dominate
‘development’ that underpin many
farm
the market: the big farmers, the
past government policies, and a bias
empowerment deracialise patterns
ownership of
employment
their
(BEE)
This
land,
has
but
been
enter
into
enable them to produce and market on non-exploitative terms, to bypass (or transform) the mass retail markets in which just four large supermarkets dominate, and to benefit from rising food prices. bifurcation in
emerges conceptions
from of
3
Policy Brief which (and
July 2009 equates
commercialisation
industrialised
production
at
scale) with development – even when this aggravates patterns of economic exclusion. The dualistic thinking that results is evident also in other sectors of the economy on which rural people depend. Look at fisheries, forestry and
the ability to process and sell their
focused on ‘commercialisation’, often
own harvests, are unaffected by the
as part of ambitious (and risky) joint
provision of rights to the poor.
ventures for the production of cash
In the forestry sector, the centrepiece of
transformation
has
been
the
creation of a BEE sector charter, still in the early stages of implementation,
crops like cotton and tobacco which have tended to land marginal farmers in stifling debt. Small to medium producers aiming to produce at a
which aims to force the small handful
level beyond household subsistence
of dominant market players to bring
have been stymied by a ceiling on
In fisheries, the allocation of quotas
black partners on board. So far this has
allocations for subsistence (so-called
has
companies.
brought little benefit either to workers
‘Schedule One’) water use.
Transformation policies have focused
or people living on or near private
Put simply, many of these policies
on increasing BEE shareholding within
and state forests. ‘Empowerment’ in
have aimed to deracialise the ‘first
these, which has been done with
the sector has mostly taken the form
economy’ without transforming it,
some success, as well as allocations of
either of narrow BEE shareholding or
and so entrench the class relations
smaller quotas to black entrepreneurs
externalising risk through converting
that
who, because these were insufficient,
employment
on
estates
marginality – which gets called the
tended to sell these ‘paper quotas’ on
into
insecure)
contracting
‘second economy’. Little attention
to the larger companies. Litigation in
arrangements.
unbundling
has been given to dismantling the
2007 against unfair quotas successfully
of state forests has promoted the
divides between the two and so those
prompted a new focus on small-scale
growth of large companies with BEE
eking out survival on the margins are
or ‘artisanal’ fishers in poor coastal
shareholding,
to
prevented from filling the ‘missing
communities,
allocations
transfer smaller state plantations in
middle’. The stark contrast between
have since been increased. Yet both
communal areas to rural communities
wealth
the quota system and the inability
to be cultivated as ‘woodlots’ are yet to
president Thabo Mbeki once described
to
vessels
be implemented. The one area where
as two economies has in many respects
financial
production by the poor is on the rise
been made even starker by the very
constraints, and also to some extent
is through outgrower schemes where
policies his government pursued. Will
business skills, prevent these small
they produce for and sell to the large
Zuma’s government continue on this
fishers from expanding their scale of
companies like Sappi and Mondi.
path?
extraction, and limit them to fishing at
With regards to water, reforms to
Back to his new cabinet, then: the
a lower level and delivering what they
separate the ownership of land from
imminent danger is that MAFF will
catch to the established companies for
the ownership of water rights is
focus on these productive sectors
processing. So while reallocation of
yet to be fully thought through or
with a view to stimulating ‘business-
quotas has made some contribution
implemented, and so large farmers
as-usual’ growth, both to respond to
to alleviating poverty, it has only
and agro-industries (as well as mines)
local demand and to develop export
aimed to enable the most marginal
continue to dominate the use of scarce
markets, while MRDLR is saddled with
to subsist and, as in agriculture, the
water resources in rural areas. Once
addressing
real money is made in downstream
trading in water rights gets underway,
reshaping these key sectors in which
activities
water, for instance.
and
favoured
secure
larger
whose
larger
equipment
like
fishing
due
to
processing
(often
timber The
while
provisions
produce
and
exploitation
poverty
rural
that
poverty,
and
former
without
and
as provided for in the Water Act, it is
the poor participate, often in marginal
marketing, where ownership remains
expected that commercial interests
ways – in other words, that the two
highly concentrated. The structure of
– both agricultural and mining –
ministries replicate the dualism of the
the sector is intact: the (deracialising)
will buy up these rights from poor
so-called ‘first’ and ‘second’ economies.
top-end of fishing companies and
communities. Meanwhile, important
MAFF will deal with ‘wealth’ and
processors still dominate the market
initiatives to rehabilitate irrigation in
‘growth’
and, as long as fishing communities
the former Bantustans – such as the
forestry and fisheries while MRDLR will
are prevented from scaling up to
Revitalisation of Smallholder Irrigation
deal with the former Bantustans. This
become independent operators with
Schemes (RESIS) in Limpopo – have
division of labour must be avoided.
for
commercial
farming,
4
Policy Brief
July 2009
5. Rethinking rural development What is needed now is fresh thinking about the future of rural South Africa and a vision which confronts the stillstark divides within the commercial farming heartland of former ‘white RSA’, as well as between it and the ‘Bantustans’ – and aims to transform
with rural development (as well as
The ‘Rural Cluster’ must promote and
land reform) will have to deal with
invest in:
logistical and institutional problems in
• Redistribution of land and water
defining its remit – and it will have to
rights in areas of high demand and
confront the potential for duplication
regions close to urban markets;
with the tasks of other line ministries as it focuses on rural (and agricultural)
• Irrigation
for
horticulture,
land reform, rural job creation, rural
small-scale
including
through
the creation of infrastructure for
infrastructure, rural housing, rural
rainwater harvesting;
both of them. The core challenge
transport, rural education, rural health,
is to enable large numbers of the
and so on. There is no coherent policy
rural poor to participate in economic
to frame rural development, and
activities – to produce, process and
there will inevitably be confusion as
• Fencing for smallholder farmers
market – on beneficial terms in order
this new ministry attempts to delimit
in communal areas, as well as in
to
a coherent boundary to its work and
transport and sorting, packing and
rural
establish sensible and cooperative
storage infrastructure;
poor, not only welfare. This would
relations with other line departments.
enable
employment
self-employment)
for
(including the
reduce rural poverty and create new livelihoods and jobs, but also set South Africa on a different and more appropriate growth path. Taking charge of such an ambitious and all-encompassing plan for the rural areas must be a new ‘Rural Cluster’ that includes the two ministries but also the economic powerhouse of government:
• Agricultural cooperatives for input supply, processing and marketing;
• Fresh produce markets in towns and villages as outlets for producers
Top priority therefore is for a collabo-
of small surpluses of fruit and
rative initiative to develop overarch-
vegetables;
ing rural development policy, which was lacking under the previous admin-
• Affordable, subsidised interest rates
istration, and to place the dynamic
for credit from, and competent
sub-sectors of real wealth in the rural
management in, the Land Bank.
economy at its centre.
These
will
require
support
for
subdivision of larger properties to
the National Planning Commission.
6. What are the policy alternatives?
Unless this happens, MRDLR will be
Core to rural development will be the
relegated to junior status within the
redistribution of both land and water
cabinet
for agriculture, to make possible
to
the
from
particularly in sectors that provide
employment and self-employment, in
highly seasonal patterns of income
particular, and promoting low-input,
and labour demand, and perhaps
small-scale
of
most importantly, a combination of
food for consumption and sale. The
regulation and incentives to counter
The central position that rural develop-
greatest potential for small farmers of
the monopolistic character of food
ment now occupies in the thinking
fresh produce is in the high-potential
of government draws attention to
regions of KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo,
Interventions such as these have the
Mpumalanga and the Western Cape,
potential to support food production
in particular.
by the poor (facilitating household
Treasury, Economic Development, and
and
within
government’s
agenda; it will be expected to achieve the impossible and will be little more than a latter day Department of Native Affairs, brought back from the apartheid past.
the multidimensional nature of rural people’s livelihoods – a recognition that land reform cannot be entirely
expansion
of
primary
incomes
production
make
possible
smallholder
units,
revamping of agricultural extension services, the resuscitation of targeted subsidies for inputs and implements, public
support
extend
for
into
smallholders value-adding,
processing and marketing.
food security) and at the same time
about agriculture, that people want
Practical interventions are needed to
and need land for a variety of purposes,
support smaller farmers as well as the
engage in ‘accumulation from below’.
and that rural people participate in a
emergence of a ‘missing middle’ of
Poverty reduction and kick-starting
variety of economic activities for their
producers able to market their surplus
a new rural growth path must be
survival. But the new ministry charged
in local – or even national – markets.
compatible, not ‘either-or’ options.
promote rural entrepreneurs who can
5
Policy Brief
July 2009
7. Conclusion The dynamics (and class relations) that produce wealth for some produce poverty and exclusion for others. But this does not mean that we should have policies for the rich and policies for the poor, ministries for the rich
Economy Strategy produced in early
Thanks to Andries du Toit, Barbara
2009, which emphasises the need for
Tapela, Moenieba Isaacs, Ben Cousins,
employment creation ‘from below’
Mafaniso Hara and Karin Kleinbooi
in the rural areas, including through
for comments and suggestions on this
micro-enterprise and self-employment
paper.
in
smallholder
agriculture
and
cooperatives.
and ministries for the poor. High-
The new political priority placed
level coordination will be needed to
on rural development is a great
ensure that the new ministries build
opportunity and new approaches are
an
people’s
urgently needed. Rural development
rights to natural resources, which is
must not be limited to ad hoc and
equitable
regime
of
a precondition for emergence and survival (let alone success) of smalland medium-scale farmers who can and want to produce for themselves and for a market.
localised ‘projects’. A new policy framework must set out an ambitious agenda for structural change in the key rural economic sectors. It must change the ways in which the poor
South Africa has been described as
participate in, own, control, use, and
having ‘two economies’, but it is more
produce in the rural economy, and
accurate to characterise it as having one integrated economy that is unequal, fragmented and segmented.
find new pathways of production and
New
accumulation.
‘Another
The implications are now starting
Ruth Hall is a senior researcher at
to be seriously explored. Breaking
the Institute for Poverty, Land and
this cycle of economic exclusion is
Agrarian
the focus of the Presidency’s Second
University of the Western Cape.
PLAAS
Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies
School of Government, UWC
Studies
(PLAAS)
at
the
book
from
PLAAS:
Countryside:
Policy
Options for Land and Agrarian Reform edited
in by
South
Ruth
Hall
Africa’ can
be
ordered from www.plaas.org.za
Selected references Cousins, Ben. 2007. ‘Agrarian reform and the “two economies”: transforming South Africa’s countryside’ in Lungisile Ntsebeza and Ruth Hall (eds) The Land Question in South Africa: The Challenge of Transformation and Redistribution.
PLAAS engages in research, policy support, post-graduate teaching, training and advisory and evaluation
Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council: 220–245. Hall, Ruth (ed.). 2009. Another Countryside? Policy Options for Land and Agrarian
services in relation to land and
Reform in South Africa. Cape Town: Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian
agrarian reform, community-based
Studies, University of the Western Cape.
natural resource management and rural development.
Isaacs, Moenieba, Mafaniso Hara and Jesper Raakjaer. 2007. ‘Has reforming South Africa’s fisheries contributed to wealth redistribution and poverty alleviation?’ in Ocean and Coastal Management, No. 50: 301–313.
School of Government,
Second Economy Strategy Project. 2009. Second economy strategy: Addressing
University of the Western Cape
inequality and economic marginalisation. A strategic framework. January 2009.
Private Bag X17, Bellville 7535,
The Presidency and Trade and Industry Policy Strategies (TIPS).
Cape Town, South Africa
Tapela, Barbara N. 2008. ‘Livelihoods in the wake of agricultural commercialization
Tel: +27 21 959 3733;
in South Africa’s poverty nodes: insights from small-scale irrigation schemes in
Fax: +27 21 959 3732
Limpopo Province’ in Development Southern Africa, Vol. 25, No. 2. Special issue:
[email protected] www.plaas.org.za
Living on the Margins. June 2008: 181–198.
6