UWCScholar :: Browsing by Author "Cousins, Ben"

Browsing by Author "Cousins, Ben"

Now showing 1 - 20 of 51

Access to land and rural poverty in South Africa
(Institute for Poverty Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS), 2012-09) Cousins, Ben
The big picture: some history • Large-scale land dispossession from 1652 into the late 20th century • 1913 and 1936 Land Acts: African majority confined to 13% of country • Forced removals in apartheid years: 2.5 million people (1955 to 1990) • By 1994, 82 million ha of commercial farmland owned by 60,000 white farmers • 13 million black people were crowded into former ‘homelands’ • On private farms, 3 million workers and dependents – poorly paid, lacked basic facilities, no security of tenure • Commercial farming sector heavily subsidised by the state until the mid-1980s • Vibrant African
At the crossroads: Land and agrarian reform in South Africa into the 21st century
(Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape, 1999) Cousins, Ben; Emmett, Natashiá; Campbell, Rosie; Heyns, Stephen
The land sector has always been characterised by lively and public arguments over policy, and some of the central and recurring themes of the previous five years of debate were expected to surface at the conference. One of these is whether or not the ANC has the political will to seek to radically alter agrarian power relations and the distribution of resources that underlies them. The Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) of 1994 called for a wide-ranging and redistributive land reform2, portrayed as the central driving force behind a large scale rural development programme. Since then the effective displacement of the RDP by the Growth, Employment and Redistribution strategy (GEAR) and the derisory budget for land reform since 1994/ 95 (never more than one percent of the total budget) have called this commitment into question. Is government s oft-repeated statement that it intends to eliminate rural poverty (most recently in President Mbeki s state of the nation address of February 2000) only a rhetorical gesture?
At the crossroads: Land and agrarian reform in South Africa into the 21st century
(Institute for Poverty Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS), and National Land Committee (NLC), 2000) Cousins, Ben
These conference proceedings are published at a time of extraordinary fluidity and uncertainty as to the future of the ambitious programmes of land and agrarian reform1 initiated by the first democratic government in 1994. A number of fundamental questions are currently being asked within the sector: What is the future of land and agrarian reform in South Africa in the 21st century? Some observers assert that the African National Congress (ANC) government has effectively jettisoned land reform, without actually announcing this decision to the world at large. If .agrarian questions., including but not limited to questions as to the nature and distribution of land rights, are seen as marginal by those holding state power, then what are the implications for rural people, for land activists, and for the politics of land and agriculture in democratic South Africa? Alternatively, will land and agrarian reform be re-oriented so that its central focus is the fostering of a class of small, medium and largescale black commercial farmers? If so, will government attempt to alleviate rural poverty primarily through welfare programmes and expanded social services rather than through the transfer of productive assets and support for wealth-creating productive activity? If at least some elements of land and agrarian reform continue to be oriented to the needs of the rural poor, what lessons from the first five years need to inform the design and implementation of more effective policies and programmes? These are challenging questions, but important ones to seek answers to. The papers in this collection may assist in such efforts, despite significant shifts in the political context between the early months of 1999, when the papers were written, and March 2000, as these proceedings go to press. The most obvious difference, of course, is the appointment of a new Minister of Agriculture and Land Affairs, Thoko Didiza (formerly Deputy Minister of Agriculture). However, the policy implications of this change in leadership are only just beginning to emerge, with the Minister announcing a major new policy thrust on 11 February 2000
Challenging the stereotypes: small-scale black farmers and private sector support programmes in South Africa
(Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS), University of the Western Cape, 2016) Okunlola, Adetola; Ngubane, Mnqobi; Cousins, Ben; du Toit, Andries
This report represents one of the outputs of a research and social dialogue project undertaken over 18 months. It explores a number of private sector partnerships and projects launched in support of black farmers – some of them highly innovative, others of dubious merit. Hardly a week passes by without news of some new initiative to ‘train’, ‘help’, ‘empower’ or otherwise assist ‘small-scale black farmers’. The findings of this research suggest that many of the current programmes of support on offer from the private sector are built on somewhat shaky foundations. These are often based on problematic assumptions and normative ideas about what constitutes desirable agricultural development, most of them deeply (if not consciously) informed by the experience of fostering a successful large farm sector in South Africa in the past. The problems that many small-scale black farmers experience in their attempts to enter the competitive world of formal value chains suggests that a fundamental re-think is now required.
Challenging the stereotypes: Small-scale black farmers and private sector support programmes in South Africa
(Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape, 2016) Okunlola, Adetola; Ngubanei, Mnqob; Cousins, Ben; du Toit, Andries
This report represents one of the outputs of a research and social dialogue project undertaken over 18 months. It was carried out by researchers from the Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS), based at the University of the Western Cape, in collaboration with the Southern Africa Food Lab, based at the University of Stellenbosch, between January 2013 and July 2014. The project focused on the role of the private sector in supporting small-scale black farmers to participate in agricultural value chains. This was not a purely academic research project. Although empirical research formed its backbone, it fed into a broader process of social dialogue and learning, convened by SAFL and facilitated by Reos Partners1. Research insights informed ‘learning journeys’ and ‘innovation labs’ that took place concurrently with the research. In these, field visits and workshop discussions and debates brought together a range of key role-players in the South African food system to explore the challenges and opportunities facing black farmers, and the manner in which these are being responded to by key actors from the private sector. This process is being carried forward by SAFL in a further process of structured innovation. The present report captures the most important insights and lessons from the research component of the initial phases of the project.
Comments on the Green Paper on land reform 2011
(Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape, 2011) du Toit, Andries; Cousins, Ben; Hall, Ruth; Kleinbooi, Karin; Paradza, Gayno; Ukpabi, Obiozo
As we have indicated in our earlier press release, the document released as a Green Paper by the Department Ministry of Rural Development and Land Reform is a great disappointment. The Green Paper is the product of a drafting process taking two and a half years. This has been a secretive process in which the South African public has been kept largely in the dark. The Ministry and its Department have shown themselves to be unwilling to learn from their mistakes, and unwilling to consult with civil society, stakeholders and expert opinion. Instead of providing a Green Paper based on an honest assessment of the past fifteen years of policy implementation, it has refused to learn from experience, both from its own mistakes and successes, and from encouraging innovations that are taking place on the ground, often despite inadequate or misguided state policy. Instead it has produced a vague document that develops general recommendations on the basis of general principles. The result is a Green Paper that fails to answer the key policy questions facing land reform in South Africa.
Commercial farming and agribusiness in South Africa and their changing roles in Africa’s agro-food system
(Institute for Poverty Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS), 2015) Hall, Ruth; Cousins, Ben
Our paper is on commercial farming and agribusiness in South Africa and their changing roles in Africa’s agro-food system, as a response to debates and theoretical propositions about internal agrarian change in BRICS countries and their relations with other middle-income countries and the old hubs of capital. South Africa is of course an outlier among the BRICS group of countries, given its far smaller economy, and was included only in 2010, as the only candidate that could be seen as economically and politically dominant in Africa – though by last year, Nigeria had overtaken South Africa as the largest economy in Africa.
Contested paradigms of ‘viability’ in redistributive land reform: perspectives from southern Africa
(Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape, 2009-06) Cousins, Ben; Scoones, Ian
‘Viability’ is a key term in debates about land reform in southern African and beyond, and is used in relation to both individual projects and programmes. ‘Viability’ connotes ‘successful’ and ‘sustainable’ - but what is meant by viability in relation to land reform, and how have particular conceptions of viability informed state policies and planning approaches? More broadly, how have different notions of viability influenced the politics of land in recent years? This paper interrogates this influential but under-examined notion, reflecting on debates about the viability of land reform – and in particular about the relevance of small- scale, farming-based livelihoods – in southern Africa and more broadly. These questions are not merely of academic interest. How debates are framed and how success is judged has major implications. With arguments for and against redistributive land reform often hinging on the notion of viability, justifications for public expenditure and budget allocations can be offered if programmes and projects are deemed viable. Conversely, portraying redistributive land reform as ‘unviable’ provides a basis for arguments that this is a poor use of public funds. Yet, despite its centrality in debates about land reform, viability is rarely defined, and its precise meaning often remains obscure.
Contested resources: Challenges to the governance of natural resources in Southern Africa
(Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape, 2002) Benjaminsen, Tor Arve; Cousins, Ben; Thompson, Lisa; Campbell, Rosie; Heyns, Stephen
In this keynote address I wish to identify some important ideas and conclusions arising out of recent analyses of theory and practice on natural resource management. I use these in a preliminary attempt to argue that the centrality of power and meaning in processes of ‘governing natural resources’ is not sufficiently addressed in the currently favoured approaches of ‘common property theory’. My intention is to provide some food for thought as we consider together the specific cases presented in the symposium. I am personally committed to the intersection of scholarship or theory-building with practical action, including policy. Note that I say ‘intersection’ – I do not wish to conflate the academic work of theory-building with the practical work of applying theory to policy, but I also reject their total separation as neither possible nor desirable. It is the interface of ideas and action which interests me. I am particularly interested in the way certain ideas or approaches make their way into policy design and implementation, often with no attention being paid to their theoretical premises, and how quickly they become accepted as conventional wisdoms. Equally interesting is the question of why some ideas and approaches developed by thinkers and researchers do not make their way into policy debate. Today, I shall discuss some notions that currently dominate the realm of natural resource management so effectively that they exclude others that might be more appropriate guides.
De-agrarianisation, livelihoods diversification and social differentiation in rural Eastern Cape, South Africa
(University of the Western Cape, 2014) Mtero, Farai; Cousins, Ben
This case study of three rural villages in Matatiele district in the Eastern Cape, South Africa examines the extent to which the diversification of rural livelihoods and processes of social differentiation are interconnected. The study combines intensive and extensive research methods to explore livelihoods diversification and social differentiation in the villages of Litichareng, Mutsini and Thaba Chicha. The intensive research consisted of 36 life history interviews, a wealth ranking exercise and a focus group discussion. The extensive research consisted of a survey of 124 households. The study makes use of political economy concepts of class, power and inequality and argues that these concepts enhance the heuristic value of livelihoods approaches which have often been critiqued for under-theorising power and politics. In the contemporary capitalist world, particularly in the global ‘South’, livelihoods have increasingly become diversified as rural households combine agricultural and non-agricultural sources of income for both survival and accumulation purposes, often straddling the rural-urban divide. In the ‘ de-agrarianisation’ thesis, livelihood diversification has been interpreted as entailing a shift from agrarian livelihood systems to non-agrarian modes of existence in the context of increased urbanisation and industrialisation. These kinds of large-scale processes have been unfolding in rural Matatiele, but this study argues that rural households combine both agricultural and non-agricultural sources of income and emphasises the continued importance of agricultural sources of income in rural livelihood systems. De-agrarianisation is cyclical and not unilinear, as some components of farming have remained important and resilient (homestead garden cultivation and livestock production) while other have declined (dry-land cropping in large arable fields).These shifts in agriculture occur against the background of state-sponsored, large-scale agricultural development schemes introduced to commercialise agriculture and reverse de-agrarianisation and fragmentation of rural livelihoods, but which have largely failed to do so. The challenge for scholars is how to characterise rural households, small-scale farmers, or ‘peasants’ in the light of highly diversified livelihood systems and their straddling of the rural and urban divide. This study uses a political economy approach and defines rural households that engage in small-scale agriculture as petty commodity producers in capitalism, combining class places of capital and labour and subject to social differentiation. The study argues that the highly diversified livelihood systems characteristic of rural households reflect a ‘crisis of social reproduction’ as rural households struggle to survive and accumulate. In this study it is argued that rural households are part of growing ‘classes of labour’ within contemporary capitalism.
Directions for land reform – what might another Green Paper propose? Alternative options and their ideological underpinnings
(2012) Cousins, Ben
International and SA debates: 4 broad approaches & loose coalitions • “Modernist-conservative”/modernisation: support the existing structure of agriculture (capital intensive farming in large units) but deracialise LSCF sector to ease political tensions • “Neo-liberal”/efficiency & equity: remove economic distortions, liberalise markets, redistribute to efficient small farmers, acquire land throughmarket-based land reform • “Welfarist”/poverty alleviation: land and farming as a supplement to employment and grants • “Radical populist”/structural transformation: redistribute wealth & power to rural poor, support diverse land-based livelihoods, expropriate land without compensation
Exporting contradictions: the expansion of South African agrarian capital within Africa
(Taylor & Francis, 2017) Hall, Ruth; Cousins, Ben
Agrarian change in South Africa over the past two decades has seen consolidation of the hegemony of large-scale commercial farming and corporate agribusiness within agro-food systems. Constrained domestic demand and growth opportunities elsewhere have driven both farming and agribusiness capitals to move into other African countries, attempting to reproduce agro-food systems similarly centred on the dominance of large capital. This is evident in five areas: first, the financialization of agriculture and ‘farmland funds’; second, multinational and South African input supply industries; third, large-scale land deals to expand industrial farming systems; fourth, the export of South African companies’ food processing, manufacture, logistics and distribution operations; and fifth, the expanding reach of South African supermarkets and fast food chains. Regional expansion involves South African agrarian capital encountering substantial obstacles to entry, and challenges mounted by competitors in destination markets. Success as a regional hegemon in Africa’s agro-food system is thus far from assured, and even where it does appear to succeed, generates contradictions, and rising social tensions of the kinds experienced in South Africa itself.
Final Report
(GTAC, 2020-03-31) Cousins, Ben; Alcock, Rauri; Aliber, Michael; Geraci, Marisia; Losch, Bruno; Mayson, David; de Satgé, Rick
This study focuses on the potential contribution of redistributive land reform to employment creation. Can land redistribution be undertaken in a manner that also creates jobs, and if so, through which types of land use and farming systems, operating at what scales? What is the potential of small-scale farming, in particular? Despite its many limitations, the study breaks new ground by investigating the potential of small-scale farming for employment generation in specific locations. It highlights the potential for job creation in many commodities produced by small-scale farmers, and recommends a particular focus on extensive livestock and vegetable production.
Imithetho yomhlaba yaseMsinga: The living law of land in Msinga, KwaZulu-Natal
(PLAAS, University of the Western Cape, 2011) Cousins, Ben
This report describes the ‘living law’ of land in one part of Msinga, a deep rural area of KwaZulu-Natal. It presents research findings from the Mchunu and Mthembu tribal areas, where a three-year action-research project was carried out by staff of the Mdukutshani Rural Development Programme. Launched in 2007, at a time when implementation of the Communal Land Rights Act of 2004 (CLRA) appeared imminent, the project aimed to gain a detailed understanding of land tenure in Msinga, facilitate local-level discussion of potential solutions to emerging problems around land rights, provide information on the CLRA to residents and authority structures, and help generate ideas on how local people could engage with the new law. Meetings, interviews and focus groups convened by the project between 2007 and 2009 generated lively discussions and debates on a range of issues and problems related to land tenure in Msinga. Policy-makers need to consider how to convene conversations of this kind, on a large scale, before they launch a new round of tenure reform policy formulation and law making. Our experience suggests that well designed processes are critically important to ensure informed discussion, but also that ordinary rural people, not just their leaders, are more than ready to engage in debates about policies that could have major impacts on their lives.
Imithetho yomhlaba yaseMsinga: The living law of land in Msinga, KwaZulu-Natal
(Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape, 2011) Cousins, Ben; Alcock, Rauri; Dladla, Ngididi; Hornby, Donna; Masondo, Mphethethi; Mbatha, Gugu; Mweli, Makhosi; Alcock, Creina
This report describes the ‘living law’ of land in one part of Msinga, a deep rural area of KwaZulu-Natal. It presents research findings from the Mchunu and Mthembu tribal areas, where a three-year action-research project was carried out by staff of the Mdukutshani Rural Development Programme1. Launched in 2007, at a time when implementation of the Communal Land Rights Act of 2004 (CLRA) appeared imminent, the project aimed to gain a detailed understanding of land tenure in Msinga, facilitate local-level discussion of potential solutions to emerging problems around land rights, provide information on the CLRA to residents and authority structures and help generate ideas on how local people could engage with the new law.
Introduction: Agrarian change, rural poverty and land reform in South Africa since 1994
(Blackwell Publishing, 2013) Bernstein, Henry; Cousins, Ben; Peters, Pauline E.; O'Laughlin, Bridget
This introduction sketches the context and dynamics of agrarian change, rural poverty and land reform since the end of apartheid in 1994, drawing attention to structural continuities and new elements in the countrysides of South Africa, and of the Southern African region in which South Africa must be located. Two key historical and theoretical reference points help focus attention on some central issues: the ‘classic’ model of dispossession/accumulation in South(ern) Africa, and ‘decentralized despotism’ as the distinctive mode and legacy of colonial governance. In conclusion, we introduce the papers as contributions to answering some central questions which require further research and debate.
Land and agrarian reform in South Africa: A status report, 2002
(Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape, 2002) Turner, Stephen; Cousins, Ben; Lahiff, Edward; Wisbourg, Poul
In 1994, South Africa started a new life as a democratic nation. It faced immense challenges. Multiple economic, social and political transformations were needed to overcome the legacy of colonialism and apartheid. The racially-driven history of the prosperous South African economy had marginalised the black majority from access to resources and productive opportunities, and deprived most of them of the right to build secure homes and livelihoods in the urban areas where the nation s wealth was concentrated.
Land tenure and rural livelihoods in Zambia: case studies of Kamena and St. Joseph
(University of the Western Cape, 2005) Chileshe, Roy Alexander; Cousins, Ben; Lungu, John; Institute for Social Development; Faculty of Arts
This study explores how land and natural resources in rural communities are accessed, used, and managed in livelihoods. In particular it examines first, crop field tenure, and livelihoods in natural resources. Second it explores factors that mediate access, use and control of land and natural resources within village communities. Empirical data are explored from two rural village communities of Kamena and St. Joseph located in the Northern and Copperbelt provinces of Zambia respectively. The study argues first that land and natural resource rights underpin land based livelihood activities of rural people, the most important of which are subsistence and cash crop farming, and the gathering and processing of common property resources. Second the thesis argues that land tenure reform impacts on the rural population as a whole and not just on cash crop farmers, and should thus situate the needs of farmers for secure tenure within the wider context of diverse rural household livelihood strategies. The study concludes that social differences (along the axes of wealth, gender and descent), traditional institutions (uxorilocal or virilocal marriage, polygamy, inheritance and succession) and government policy are central in determining access, use and control of land and natural resources in rural livelihoods. It is submitted that, rather than being replaced, customary land tenure, and traditional land administration structures in rural Zambia should be adapted to current social and economic realities in which individuals and households create their multiple livelihoods. Further, it is concluded that land tenure reform is not a sufficient condition for rural livelihood sustainability. Thus complementary agrarian measures to address the vulnerability context of rural households are recommended.
Livelihoods after land reform in South Africa
(Wiley, 2013) Aliber, Michael; Cousins, Ben
Over the past few decades, Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa have pursued redistributive land reform as a means to address rural poverty. The Livelihoods after Land Reform (LaLR) study was carried out between 2007 and 2009, to understand the livelihood and poverty reduction outcomes of land reform in each of the three countries. The South African component focused on Limpopo province, and investigated land reform processes, trajectories of change and outcomes in thirteen detailed case studies. This paper summarizes some of the main findings from the South African study, and briefly compares them with findings from Namibia and Zimbabwe. The paper argues that a fundamental problem affecting land reform in both South Africa and Namibia is the uncritical application of the Large-Scale Commercial Farming (LSCF) model, which has led to unworkable project design and/or projects that are irrelevant to the circumstances of the rural poor. Nevertheless, some ‘beneficiaries’ have experienced modest improvements in their livelihoods, often through abandoning or amending official project plans.
Livelihoods after land reform: The South African case
(Institute for Poverty Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS), 2012) Aliber, Michael; Maluleke, T; Manenzhe, T; Paradza, Gaynor; Cousins, Ben
SA’s land reform regarded as a failure – economic objectives – the spectre of ‘failed projects’ – changing the racial pattern of land ownership – too slow • No consensus as to why, or what to do • Even so, ambitious if vague promises • Dominant ethos = modernisation “Another focus area [of the Department] will be skills transfer, to promote the transfer of skills from white commercial farmers to black subsistence farmers” (Joemat-Pettersson, 2010)

Browsing by Author "Cousins, Ben"

Results Per Page

Sort Options