Chapter 4 Learning from experience: An overview of the evidence: Reviewing Restitution, LRAD and Commonage from a SIS perspective
3 Restitution
3.10 Provincial consultations
3.10.8 Strategies to improve livelihoods and enterprise support
Seeking individualised solutions within community claims

The Limpopo forum discussed the issue of the impact on livelihoods and the enterprise viability of including large numbers of community members in a claim involving restoration, when many do not really want to return to the land. In some, cases this has been exacerbated by ‘do-it-yourself' beneficiary validation processes which have ‘packed the claim' and which are driven by the perception that the larger the claim, the more likely it is to be prioritised by the CRLR. This has resulted in a number of Restitution cases in the province being challenged in court by people contesting the validity of incorporating more people into ‘the community'.

There was a strong proposal to tighten up on validation processes and distinguish clearly between community members who want to return to the land and those who want alternative compensation.

At an options workshop, identify how many claimants wish to return to the land or receive an alternative form of compensation. The Commission should then compensate those parties directly and only purchase a portion of the farm for those beneficiaries wishing to return.
There would be serious practical challenges with the implementation of this approach but it would ensure that those who remain in the project and wish to return could do so – whilst those claimants who would never actively settle or farm on the land can receive alternative compensation. This could avoid serious conflicts from emerging in the long run.
This would not need a change of legislation, apparently only a change in the Commission's policy. The other impact of such an approach is that it reduces the number of claimants on the project, making it more likely that the remaining claimants will receive benefits from the project.



Engaging more productively with organised agriculture

Three factors related to members of organised agriculture were highlighted:

  • they need to improve their black economic empowerment (BEE) scorecards;
  • they want to access preferential rates of credit; and
  • they need to access international markets.

Viewed in this context, land reform provides a business opportunity to achieve all three of the above objectives. This creates the potential to draw in the expertise and capital base of commercial farmers to support emerging agricultural entrepreneurs.

In a number of forums, it was highlighted that organised agriculture has a broader strategy and is willing to support land reform processes through mentorships and joint venture arrangements. It was argued that commercial agriculture needs to be more effectively engaged as a resource. Ideally, potential joint venture partners and mentors need to be involved in the planning of land reform projects at an early stage.

In the Eastern Cape, it was asserted that the nature of the relationship of commercial farmers in each area should be evaluated on a project-by-project basis.

Balancing accelerated land reform with sustainable projects

The need for accelerated land reform was acknowledged in most forums but there was widespread concern over the increasing numbers of failed projects. Participants called for the business planning and livelihoods assessments to be improved and, in Restitution, for the business plans and grant applications to be streamlined.

Although this may have the effect of slowing the process of the settlement of claims down, it would result in more sustainable projects. Overall, such an approach would limit the number of projects that require expensive and time-consuming crisis interventions and which are seized on as being examples of the state of the land reform programme as a whole.

Aligning budgets and grants across departments

Forums highlighted the importance alignment of budgets and the leveraging of all available grants within and across departments, especially in relation to Restitution. This should involve the timeous release of the discretionary grants as well as the additional Section 42C grants, CASP and any loans that would be feasible, given the community's resources.

The release of these grants needs to form part of the business plan so that with occupation a comprehensive set of resources becomes available for effective implementation.

Making better use of available resources

It was highlighted in a number of forums that there is a variety of resources and expertise which already exists and is geared up to provide mentoring and business advice. The DTI-based Small Enterprise Development Agency was highlighted as such an organisation. It was noted that, while many of these agencies do not currently focus on agricultural enterprise, links should be developed with such agencies in a bid to get them to expand their services.

Ensuring smooth handovers of land and continuity of production

There was discussion in the Western Cape regarding the issue of the lack of interim arrangements in handover processes. While no definite strategies were proposed, except for the introduction of compulsory training for beneficiaries prior to acquisition, there was a call for strategies to be developed to draw in skilled capacity to enable the simultaneous process of acquiring the land and ensuring continued production on the land (where desired), while building the capacity of the new owners and users to manage the land.

Enabling adaptive management and business plan revision

The Western Cape forum noted the dynamic nature of business planning processes and observed that some business plans that are developed and passed by assessment committees are later found to be inadequate or unrealistic. It was noted that one of the key functions of SIS support was to be able to assist communities, groups and farmers to be able to adjust to a dynamic business environment. This also means improving the flexibility of grants so that they can be adjusted to project needs.

Appointing strategic partners through a tender bidding process

All forums agreed that strategic partners can be useful and were indeed important to draw in skilled expertise to ensure successful enterprises. But their inclusion was not seen as uncomplicated. In particular, it was asserted (in Limpopo and Eastern Cape) that their appointment must be transparently done through a tendering process, and community representatives must be involved in the appointment of such partners. Limpopo forum made this proposal:

If during the planning phase it is determined that a strategic partner is needed, the RLCC and agricultural staff will assist the claimant community to appoint a strategic partner through advertising or a call for proposals in the local press. A selection panel consisting of these two officials, officials from the Department for Economic Development, DBSA [Development Bank of Southern Africa] and Trade & Investment Limpopo (parastatal) together with members of the community leadership structure will be created.
The selection panel will evaluate proposals submitted by applicants and determine the best possible partner based on pre-agreed upon criteria. The recommendations from the selection panel will be presented to the community at large for information sharing purposes, clarifications and endorsement.
Thereafter, negotiations begin between the recommended strategic partner and the land-holding entity assisted by the RLCC and agriculture staff. The community is workshopped on the conditions in the shareholders' agreement before the final agreement is signed. There can also be interim agreements entered into with the former landowner or strategic partner during the transfer phase to ensure that the farms are managed in the interim.



Involving commodity organisations

The involvement of commodity organisations in supporting the business side of projects was also highlighted in a number of forums. In KwaZulu-Natal, a representative of Inkezo (a Section 21 company created by the sugar industry to facilitate the transfer of land from white to black farmers) highlighted the integrated web of support that the sugar industry facilitates with emerging black farmers. This includes:

  • mentoring support through the Growers' Association;
  • training using the Agri-SETA and South African Sugar Research Institute facilities;
  • bookkeeping and economic advice (South African Cane Growers' Association);
  • securing access to finance through the banks;
  • obtaining extension support from the PDoA;
  • accessing assured markets through the industry structures;
  • obtaining institutional support; and
  • membership of a farmers' association and related services.

While the experience of the sugar industry is unique because of the structure of the industry (single-channel marketing in particular), similar opportunities may be possible in other industries and the PLRO in KwaZuluNatal is currently negotiating with other industries, such as the citrus industry, to provide a suite of similar services.