Land reform: a comparative analysis of the Zimbabwean and South African processes since democratization
| dc.contributor.advisor | Barnard, S. L. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Nyawo, Vongai Zvidenga | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-11-08T10:25:47Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2017-11-08T10:25:47Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2008-05 | |
| dc.description.abstract | English: As a process generally designed to redress colonial imbalances in land resources, address issues of good governance, poverty reduction and promote sustainable economic growth, the phenomenon of redistributing land is not peculiar to Southern Africa. Although implemented with variant methodologies and resultant implications, depending on a country's ideologies and circumstances on the ground, land reform has been previously experienced in various global countries such as Australia, Brazil, Kenya, Nicaragua, Peru, Chile and others. This research is primarily intended to explore how the process of land reform has been handled in two multi-facetedly contiguous Southern African countries, namely Zimbabwe and South Africa. The central contention of the study being that, manifold forces have propelled and hampered land reform in the two countries and that methodologies employed have intentionally and inadvertently provoked a multiplicity of problems and challenges. With a shared experience of colonial conquest, occupation, dispossession, land alienation and the need to re-gain independence through armed resistance, the land issue has always been pivotal to the continuing struggle of both countries. Over the years, prime land would change hands through discriminatory acts like the 1913 Native Land Act and its sequels in South Africa and the Land Husbantry Act in Zimbabwe. Black people would be pushed to impoverished, dry, drought stricken Bantustans, homelands, reserves and tribal trust lands. To regain their freedom and their land, wars were fought and eventually independence granted through negotiated settlement. At the dawn of independence, one of the top priorities for the black led governments was to equitably redistribute land resources. The study amply demonstrates that en route land reform itself has been fraught with all kinds of hurdles emanating from within and from without. From the onset, the negotiated settlements would control free choices of land policies for the nascent black governments. The negotiated constitutions brought with them strings attached, guarantees for the minority and ensured that the legacy of colonialism was maintained. As a result, only politically and financially cheaper approaches to land reform were employed at the expense of the urgency with which reform was needed to reduce poverty, among other needs. In Zimbabwe, in the first decade of independence, land was redistributed through the Willing Seller Willing Buyer mode (WSWB) via the market. Later, the government sought to hasten the land redistribution pace through the LRRPII and the Fast Track Programme with disastrous results. In South Africa, with the objective to restore land rights (restitution), redistribute land and reform tenure, the WSWB approach is still being used. To supplement the WSWB, affirmative action is also engaged which includes reallocating state land, drawing up additional legal reforms, availing state aid programmes and limiting large farms. There has been very limited expropriation of land by the South African government as opposed to Zimbabwe. Lately, Zimbabwe has nationalized all land and issued 99 year leases to farmers. The international community has adversely influenced land policy selection in the two countries under discussion through withdrawal of donations, exerting political pressures using sanctions and calling for regime change. Taking the colonial histories of the two countries as a point of departure, this study seeks to give an appraisal of land reform and to interrogate critically post-independence land reform methodologies and implications thereof. In its overall approach, the research endeavours to trace, state clearly and explicitly, compare, contrast and identify elements of land reform policies to find out their nature and value in order to understand and explain the programme. The research partially concludes that land reform shall go down in the annals of history as a correctional measure that has, arguably, introduced a new complex dimension in Zimbabwean politico-economics as well as influenced Southern Africa and the international world to view the region with fresh, pragmatic eyes. | en_ZA |
| dc.description.abstract | Afrikaans: Grondhervorming is 'n proses wat ontwerp is om die koloniale wanbalans, wat ontstaan het ten opsigte van grondhulpbronne, reg te stel, kwessies rondom goeie regeringsbestuur te hanteer, armoede te verlig en volhoubare ekonomiese groei te bevorder. As sulks is hierdie verskynsel nie eie aan Suidelike Afrika nie. Alhoewel dit deur middel van verskillende metodiek en gevolglike implikasies gelmplementeer word - afhangende van die betrokke land se ideologiee en omstandighede - is grondhervorming reeds in lande soos Australie, Brasilie, Kenia, Nicaragua, Peru, Chile en ander lande toegepas. Hierdie navorsing is hoofsaaklik gemoeid met 'n ondersoek na die manier waarop die grondhervormingsproses in twee veelfasettige, aangrensende Suidelike Afrika-lande, naamlik Zimbabwe en Suid-Afrika, plaasvind. Die sentrale standpunt van die studie is dat velerlei kragte grondhervorming in die twee lande voortgedryf en ook gestuit het, en dat die metodiek wat in beide gebruik word opsetlik en onbewustelik veelvuldige probleme en uitdagings veroorsaak. Danksy 'n gedeelde ervaring van koloniale onderwerping, okkupasie, onteiening, grondvervreemding en die begeerte om onafhanklikheid deur middel van gewapende verset te herwin, was die grondkwessie nog altyd deurslaggewend in die voortgesette stryd van albei lande. Oor jare het grond van hoe gehalte van eienaars verwissel as gevolg van diskriminerende wette, soos die 1913 Wet op Naturelle-grond en die uitvloeisel daarvan in Suid-Afrika, en die Wet op Landbou in Zimbabwe. Swartmense is geforseer om in arm, droe, droogtegeteisterde Bantoestans, tuislande, reservate en stamgebonde trustgrond te bly. Ten einde hulle vryheid en hulle grond terug te wen, is oorlog gevoer en uiteindelik is onafhanklikheid aan hulle toegestaan deur middel van onderhandelde skikking. Met die aanbreek van onafhanklikheid, was een van die top prioriteite van swart regerings om grondhulpbronne regverdig te herverdeel. Die studie toon duidelik dat grondhervonning gedurende hierdie proses allerlei struikelblokke opgelewer het, wat binne en buite die proses ontstaan het. Uit die staanspoor, het skikkingsooreenkomste die vrye keuse ten opsigte van grondbeleid vir ontluikende swart regerings beheer. Die onderhandelde grondwette het voorwaardes ingesluit, waarborge vir die minderheidsgroep verseker en die nalatenskap van kolonialisme gehandhaaf. Gevolglik is slegs polities en finansieel goedkoper benaderings tot grondhervorming gevolg ten koste van die dringendheid waarvoor hervorming nodig was, naamlik om onder andere armoede te bestry. In die eerste dekade van onafhanklikheid in Zimbabwe is grond via die mark op die Gewillige Verkoper Gewillige Koper-model (GVGK) herverdeel. Later het die regering probeer om die grondhervormingsproses te versnel, deur die LRRPII en die Fast Track-program toe te pas, met rampspoedige gevolge. In Suid-Afrika, waar die herstel van grondregte (restitusie), herverdeling van grond en verbetering van eiendomsreg ten doel gestel word, word die GVGK-benadering steeds gebruik. Ten einde die GVGK aan te vul, word regstellende aksie ook gebruik, wat die hertoekenning van regeringsgrond, die opstel van addisionele regshervorming, die beskikbaarstelling van regeringshulpprogramme en die beperking van groot plase, insluit. Daar was tot dusver beperkte onteiening van grond deur die Suid-Afrikaanse regering, in teenstelling met Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe het onlangs alle grond genasionaliseer en 99-jaar huurkontrakte met boere gesluit. Die intemasionale gemeenskap het grondbeleidseleksie nadelig bei:nvloed in die betrokke twee lande weens onttrekking van skenkings, politieke druk deur middel van sanksies en die oproep om bewindsverandering. Met inagenoming van die koloniale agtergrond van die twee lande, poog hierdie studie om 'n waardering van grondhervorming te doen en om die metodiek en implikasies rondom grondhervorming in die post-onafhanklikheidsera krities te ondersoek. Oorhoofs poog die navorsing om elemente van die grondhervormingsbeleid te identifiseer, duidelik en onomwonde te beskryf, te vergelyk en teenoor mekaar te stel. Dit word gedoen om die aard en waarde daarvan vas te stel en om die program te verstaan en te beskryf. Die navorsing bevind deels dat grondhervorming in die annale van die geskiedenis opgeteken sal wees as 'n korrektiewe maatreel, wat moontlik 'n nuwe, komplekse polities-ekonomiese dimensie aan Zimbabwe verleen het, en wat Suid-Afrika en die intemasionale gemeenskap belnvloed het om die streek uit 'n vars, pragmatiese oogpunt te beskou. | af |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11660/7457 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_ZA |
| dc.publisher | University of the Free State | en_ZA |
| dc.rights.holder | University of the Free State | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Democratization -- Zimbabwe | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Democratization -- South Africa | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Land reform -- Zimbabwe | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Land reform -- South Africa | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | South Africa -- Politics and government, 1960- | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Thesis (Ph.D. (History))--University of the Free State, 2008 | en_ZA |
| dc.title | Land reform: a comparative analysis of the Zimbabwean and South African processes since democratization | en_ZA |
| dc.type | Thesis | en_ZA |