Browsing by Author "Cousins, Tessa"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Leaping the fissures: Bridging the gap between paper and real practice in setting up common property institutions in land reform in South Africa
    (Institute for Poverty Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS), 2002) Cousins, Tessa; Hornby, Donna
    New common property institutions (CPIs) were created in South Africa soon after 1994 to enable self-constituted groups of people a choice about how they wished to acquire, hold and manage land. They were to provide rural people with an alternative to individual freehold, tribal administration and other legal group ownership options. This form of CPI, created through the Communal Property Associations (CPA) Act 28 of 1996 (the Act), focused on local constitution making as the mechanism for constituting the group and for realising individual and collective self-determination. However, concerns about the viability of these new institutions were voiced within a month of the publication of the Act (Hornby 1996) and in time became an active discourse that declared them to be failing (LEAP 1999). This paper takes a hard look at the claim that these new common property institutions are failing and argues that there are no meaningful indicators against which assessments of success or failure can be made. It asserts that the tenure security of the group and its members should be the primary purpose of land reform CPIs, because secure tenure is the primary mechanism for reducing risk for vulnerable people and is the universal need of the group. Securing tenure of individual members of CPIs, rests upon the clarity and accessibility of procedures for the assertion and justification of property rights and institutional mechanisms for realising and enforcing these rights. Useful indicators of security then become the degree to which these procedures and mechanisms are known, accessible, equitable, clear, used, socially accepted, transparent and enforced. This in turn requires that CPIs are developed from adaptations of current local practices within a broader environment in which there is legal, institutional and technical coherence and support for this approach. Without an enabling legal, institutional and technical framework, the tenure security of members of CPIs will not be significantly improved. It is political choices that inform whether or not this will take place. The paper begins by analysing what the new CPIs were set up to do and the legal and political framework in which they were created. It goes on to reflect on lessons that the Legal Entity Assessment Project (LEAP) has drawn from assessing the situation of land reform CPIs. Using the focus of tenure security and drawing on lessons from tenure work in Africa, the paper then interrogates in depth how membership has been constituted in land reform CPIs and whether the institutional context in which they have been set up has provided adequate support. It concludes by asserting that community constitutions reflect ambiguous and contradictory definitions of membership without reference to local practices and institutions. The state has not supported CPIs institutionally, or acknowledged the importance of institutional linkages at local level or provided legal, institutional and technical coherence. This creates an indeterminacy that puts tenure for members at risk. The analysis leads to some practical suggestions for field and bureaucratic practices. It proposes that prescriptive requirements are replaced by an approach that enables groups to articulate current procedures and institutions, and uses the suggested indicators to achieve gradual adaptation towards greater equity. A framework such as that offered by the Land Rights Bill is needed to provide support for such an approach and thus broader legal and policy reform is necessary.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Will formalising property rights reduce poverty in South Africa’s ‘second economy’?
    (Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape, 2005) Cousins, Ben; Cousins, Tessa; Hornby, Donna; Kingwill, Rosalie; Royston, Lauren; Smit, Warren
    De Soto’s influential book The mystery of capital offers a simple yet beguiling message: capitalism can be made to work for the poor, through formalising their property rights in houses, land and small businesses. This approach resonates strongly in the South African context, where private property works well for those who inhabit the so-called ‘first economy’. Evidence from South Africa, however, suggests that many of de Soto’s policy prescriptions may be inappropriate for the poorest and most vulnerable in our society, and have negative impacts on their security and well-being. More attention should be paid to supporting existing social practices that have widespread legitimacy. Features of ‘extra-legal’ property regimes provide a key to the solutions: their social embeddedness; the importance of land and housing as assets that help to secure livelihoods; the layered and relative nature of rights; and the flexible character of boundaries. The entire legal and social complex around which notions of ‘formal’ and ‘informal’ property are constituted needs to be interrogated more rigorously.