Administration of the land redistribution for Agricultural Development programme in the North West Province of South Africa

Abstract

The current Government of South Africa faces many challenges emanating from the legacy of the policies of the pre-1994 apartheid era and the earlier periods. One of these challenges is the skewed distribution of agricultural land, in favour of White commercial farmers. In 1995, the current democratic government, in an attempt to redress this historical imbalance in terms of ownership of agricultural land, introduced a land policy for South Africa. The policy is anchored to three programmes, namely land restitution, land redistribution and tenure reform. In terms of land redistribution, the Government set a target to redistribute 30% of White-owned agricultural land to historically disadvantaged individuals by March 2014. The land redistribution programme was designed for the state to play a major role in the administration of the programme. The programme was also structured to recognise the complementary roles played by the national Department of Agriculture (DOA) and provincial departments of agriculture, the Department of Land Affairs (DLA) and its Provincial Land Reform Offices (PLROs), the municipalities and the Land Bank, in policy administration. Due to the fact that the Settlement/Land Acquisition Grant (SLAG) programme, by the end of 2000, failed to deliver the number of hectares that would meet the land redistribution target for the remaining years up until March 2014, it was abolished. In its place, the Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development (LRAD) programme was introduced in 2001. It was anticipated by the Government that the LRAD programme will fast track the redistribution of White-owned agricultural land to Black farmers. Because administrative processes are as important as policy outcomes, it is important to examine the administrative aspects impacting on the LRAD programme, given the prominent role played by the state in the administration of the programme. The research thus focused on establishing the extent to which the administration of the LRAD programme enables the Government to achieve its land redistribution goals and objectives. The LRAD programme is not on course to meet the land redistribution target set for 2014. The North West Province in particular has been transferring White-owned agricultural land on an annual basis at an average of 13% of what it should if its target of the 30% of White-owned agricultural land to be redistributed is to be met by March 2014. Among the critical factors impacting on successful administration of the LRAD programme in the North West Province is policy integration. The White Paper on Land Policy (1995) recognises that the success of the land reform programme does not depend only on access to land, but also on the achievement of other instrumental objectives, namely the provision of integrated government policy with respect to support services, infrastructural and other development programmes; and the development of an effective and accessible institutional framework for service delivery, characterised by a strong partnership between national, provincial and local spheres of government. Data was collected through structured interviews from key respondents, namely deputy-directors in the department of Agriculture, Conservation, and Environment (the DACE) and the North West Provincial Land Reform Office (the NWPLRO), as well as from the chief director for the NWPLRO. Methodological, participant and interdisciplinary triangulation was applied during data collection and analysis. There was ineffective integration of policies, programmes, systems, and procedures between the DACE and the NWPLRO, which undermined the administration of the LRAD programme in the North West Province. In addition, the DACE in particular suffered from administrative incapacity. This was in part due to the nature of the governance regime pertaining to LRAD programme administration. This situation was also affected by the administration of the Government policy generally, the most important of which was the intergovernmental relations, which imposed limits in terms of allocation of financial resources. The administrative incapacity also undermined the endeavour to collaborate as far as LRAD programme administration was concerned. This negatively impacted mostly on the planning phase, as a result of shortage of critical personnel. In order to effect effective administration of the LRAD programme, it is recommended as follows: <ul><li> the budget allocation for the LRAD programme should be increased; </li><li> the administrative capacity of the DACE and the NWPLRO should be increased; </li><li> the systems and procedures for administering the LRAD and CASP programmes should be aligned; and</li><li> the alignment of administrative systems and procedures should become one of the integral factors for measuring and rewarding performance of senior public service managers in institutions administering the programme. </li></ul>