Browsing by Author "Shackleton, Charlie"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Evaluating land and agrarian reform in South Africa : Land use and livelihoods
    (Institute for Poverty Land and Agrarian Studies (PLAAS), 2003) Andrew, Maura; Ainslie, Andrew; Shackleton, Charlie
    This paper addresses how land reform can contribute to enhancing land-based livelihoods. South African agriculture is often characterised as being divided into two types: freehold tenure/ commercial agriculture vs. communal tenure/ subsistence agriculture. Subsistence uses of land are generally viewed as wasteful, destructive and economically unproductive in comparison to commercial production systems. It is not surprising therefore that land redistribution programmes which transfer land to subsistence producers are often viewed with disdain. Such views inform recent land reform policy shifts aimed at enhancing ‘commercial’ agricultural production for the market rather than subsistence production. There is also an emphasis on ‘full-time’ farming on larger portions of land to generate substantial agricultural incomes. These dualistic stereotypes are inappropriate and misleading. This dualism ignores the many cases where small-scale producers in communal areas are currently involved in production for the market (along with self-provisioning) as well as the more numerous historical examples of such involvement. We also challenge the characterisation of subsistence land uses as ‘wasteful, destructive and economically unproductive’. There is considerable evidence that land-based livelihoods have been significantly undervalued. This is not to say that there is no room for improvement. Most poor rural households encounter considerable constraints to production that limit their land-based livelihoods to a survivalist mode.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Land use and rural livelihoods: Have they been enhanced through land reform?
    (Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies, University of the Western Cape, 2003) Andrew, Maura; Shackleton, Charlie; Ainslie, Andrew
    It is often assumed that transferring land to rural households will provide people with valuable assets that can be productively used to enhance their livelihoods. Unfortunately, few rural people or land reform beneficiaries are perceived to be using land produc- tively because they do not engage in significant commercial production for the market. Transferring land to subsistence users is therefore seen as a waste of resources. However, an examination of land use in communal areas and amongst land reform beneficiaries indicates that resource-poor rural people do use land productively and resourcefully, but the constraints to production and participation in agricultural markets they encounter limit their livelihoods to survivalist mode. Land reform can enhance rural livelihoods beyond this survivalist mode if it is integrated into a broader rural development programme aimed at providing subsistence land users with the support they need to overcome the constraints to production, and to connect them to the markets.