Henning I

Implications of land reform
on spatial planning and

development in the
Tzaneen Local Municipality
I. Henning
12745634
Dissertation submitted in fulfillment of the requirement for the degree Master

Artium et Scientiae (Planning) at the Potchefstroom Campus of the North-West
University
Supervisor: Prof. C.B Schoeman

Co-supervisor: Dr. T. de Jager
November 2010
Acknowledgements
First and foremost I would like to offer my sincerest gratitude to my co-supervisor, Dr

Theo de Jager, who has selflessly supported me throughout my dissertation. I humbly
attribute the standard of my Masters Degree to his vast knowledge, assistance and
encouragement during the years.
Special appreciation goes out to Cobus Richter for his support, encouragement and
understanding throughout the compilation of this dissertation. You were my sounding
board when necessary and your sound advice when requested is much appreciated.
My deepest gratitude goes out to my family for their love and support throughout my life;
this dissertation is simply impossible without them. Thank you Mom and Dad for your
continued help, advice and encouragement, which has enabled me to fulfil my dream of
obtaining this degree.
Special thanks go out to my boss and work colleagues at CTE Consulting for their
continued support. Especially to Tinus, my friend and colleague, a big thanks for your
assistance and understanding during this period.
To Prof Carel Schoeman, my gratitude goes out to you for the facilitation, revision and
suggestions in the compilation of this dissertation.
Lastly, I am grateful to thank Prof Leon van Rensburg from the Environmental Science
and Management Department for providing the financial means and arrangement of the
editing of this dissertation.
i
Summary and Key Terms
A thorough investigation of legislation involved in the land reform programme was conducted.
This includes the Constitution of South Africa, as well as the legal frameworks that manage the
land reform process. Many of the unintended results are because of misunderstandings. This
study sought to clarify those misunderstandings and confusing language.
The South African land reform process was excellently planned. The process is managed in
three phases, namely land restitution, land redistribution and land tenure. There are some
successes and failures due to the way those programmes were implemented.
In order to implement and manage the land reform programmes and spatial planning on
national, provincial and district level, the following plans were introduced:
National Level: Pro-active Land Acquisition Strategy (PLAS) & Area-based Planning
Provincial Level: Limpopo Growth and Development Strategy (LGDS)
District Level: Mopani Integrated Development Plan
Local Level: Greater Tzaneen Municipality Integrated Development Plan & Spatial
Development Framework
The study area, the Tzaneen Local Municipality, was chosen because it is home to some of the
first land reform projects in South Africa, it is the district with some of the highest intensity of
land claims and it offers a complete menu of land reform programmes in an advanced state on
a small area.
The impact that land reform has had on the spatial development in the Tzaneen Local
Municipality has been studied in more detail. As the study progressed, it was realised that the
impact not only stops at spatial development. The influence was much bigger than that. The
local economy was affected, as were job opportunities, tourism, food security, the retail industry
and even the mining industry. Such an impact is also not restricted to the Tzaneen Local
Municipality.
In order to control the land reform process, the government should involve the private sector in
the land reform process. The moment this happens, the skills and experience locked in the
private sector are transferred to the government for the benefit of all people involved in and
influenced by the land reform process.
ii
Summary and Key Terms
An Integrated Land Reform Action Forum (ILRAF) must be established that manages the land
reform process on national, provincial and local level. This ILRAF has to fulfil much the same
purpose as the former Joint Monitoring Committees (JMCs) accomplished.
The ILRAF must consist of all role-players within the land reform process. These include,
national, provincial and local government officials, commercial farmers, key role-players from
the private sector, farm worker representatives, Agri-SA, professionals such as town and
regional planners and transfer attorneys, farmers’ associations, commercial banks and the
media to ensure transparency.
In order to correct past mistakes and to ensure that the next five years of the land reform
process goes off without a hitch, it is important to involve all role-players and ensure
transparency throughout all decision-making processes.
Key Terms: Land Reform; Agri-village; Area Based Planning; Land Restitution; Land
Redistribution; Land Tenure Reform; Greater Tzaneen Municipality; Willing buyer-willing seller;
Spatial Development Framework; Integrated Development Plan.
iii
Glossary
Glossary
ABP – Area Based Planning
ANC – African National Congress
CBD – Central Business District
CCMA – Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
CD – Chief Director
CDE – Centre for Development and Enterprise
CDW – Community Development Worker
CLaRA – Community Land Rights Act, 1996 (Act 28 of 1996)
CONTRALESA – Congress of Traditional Leaders of South Africa
CPA – Communal Property Association/Communal Partnership Agreements
COMG – Commonage Grant
CRDP – Comprehensive Rural Development Programme
CRLR – Commission of Restitution of Land Rights
DA – Democratic Alliance Party
DG – Director General
DLA – Department of Land Affairs
DLD – District Level Delivery
DLRO – District Land Reform Offices
DoA – Department of Agriculture
DRDLR – Department of Rural Development and Land Reform
EAAB – Estate Agency Affairs Board
ESTA – Extension of Security of Tenure Act, 1997 (Act 62 of 1997)
GDP – Gross Domestic Product
iv
Glossary
GGP – Gross Geographical Product
GNU – Government of National Unity
GTM – Greater Tzaneen Municipality
GTMIDP – Greater Tzaneen Municipality Integrated Development Plan
GTMSDF – Greater Tzaneen Municipality Spatial Development Plan
HH – Households
IDP – Integrated Development Plan
IFSNSP – Integrated Food Security and Nutrition Programme
ILRAF – Integrated Land Reform Action Forum
ISRDP – Integrated Sustainable Rural Development
JMC – Joint Monitoring Committees
LCC – Land Claims Court
LED – Local Economic Development
LESR – Local Economic Strategy Review
LGDS – Limpopo Growth and Development Strategy
LRAD – Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development
LTA – Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act, 1996 (Act 3 of 1996)
MDM – Mopani District Municipality
MEC – Member of Executive Council
MIDP – Mopani Integrated Development Plan
NCOP – National Council of Provinces
NEPAD – New Partnership for Africa’s Development
NGO – Non-Governmental Organisation
PCU – Policy Co-ordination Unit
PLAS – Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy
v
Glossary
PLRO – Provincial Land Reform Office
PSC – Provincial Steering Committee
PTO – Permission to Occupy
RDP – Reconstruction and Development Programme
SACP – South African Communist Party
SADT – South African Development Trust
SAFM – South African Farm Management
SCPA – Sekororo Community Property Association
SDF – Spatial Development Framework
SDI – Spatial Development Initiative
SG – Surveyor General
SLAG – Settlement/Land Acquisition Grant
SLC – Sustainable Livelihood Consultants
SOE – State of Environment
SPLAG – Settlement and Production Land Acquisition Grant
URP – Urban Renewal Program
WBWS – Willing-buyer, willing seller
vi
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
PAGE
Acknowledgements ................................................................................. i
Summary and Key Terms ....................................................................... ii
Glossary ................................................................................................... iv
Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................... 1
1.1 What is land? ..........................................................................................................3

1.2 Land Ownership and Tenure ..................................................................................4
1.3 Tenure ....................................................................................................................5
Chapter 2: The Necessity for Land Reform........................................... 9

2.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................9
2.2 Land – a source for conflict.....................................................................................9
2.3 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................13
Chapter 3: The Land Reform Situation in South Africa ....................... 15
3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................15

3.2 Definition of land reform..........................................................................................16
3.3 The principles of land reform ..................................................................................17
3.4 Principles from which the 3 pillars of land reform originates ...................................18
3.4.1 Freedom Charter ............................................................................................18
3.4.2 The Constitution of South Africa .....................................................................19
3.4.3 The Reconstruction and Development Programme........................................22
3.4.4 Legislation ......................................................................................................23
3.4.5 Land Summit, 2005 ........................................................................................29
3.4.6 ANC Consultative Conference .......................................................................31
3.5 Shortcomings within policies and legislature ..........................................................33
3.6 Willing-buyer and willing-seller principle .................................................................34
3.7 Solution...................................................................................................................38
3.8 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................40
Chapter 4: Land Reform Programmes .................................................. 41
4.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................41

4.2 Restitution Process .................................................................................................43
4.2.1 Introduction to the restitution process.............................................................43
4.2.2 Performances .................................................................................................45
4.2.3 Compensation ................................................................................................51
vii
Table of Contents
4.3 Redistribution Process ............................................................................................54

4.3.1 Delivery in terms of land redistribution ...........................................................56
4.3.2 Issues regarding land redistribution................................................................57
4.3.3 The decrease of challenges through the use of grants...................................59
4.3.3.1 The Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development (LRAD) ..........62
4.3.4 The Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme (CASP) ......................64
4.3.4.1 Challenges in the CASP Framework ..................................................67
4.4 Land Tenure Reform ..............................................................................................67
4.4.1 Issues regarding tenure reform ......................................................................70
4.4.2 Challenges .....................................................................................................75
4.4.3 Performances .................................................................................................76
4.5 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................78
Chapter 5: Land Reform vs. Spatial Planning and Development ....... 80
5.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................80

5.2 State-driven Pro-active Land Acquisition Strategy (PLAS) .....................................82
5.2.1 Legal Framework...........................................................................................82
5.2.2 Corridor approach, agricultural development within nodal areas and
land for housing ............................................................................................83
5.2.3 Financial Mechanisms ...................................................................................84
5.2.4 Re-settlement Models ...................................................................................84
5.3 Area Based Planning (ABP) ...................................................................................85
5.3.1 Area Based Planning Process .......................................................................86
5.3.2 Area Based Land Reform Planning ...............................................................87
5.4 Limpopo Growth and Development Strategy (LGDS) .............................................88
5.4.1 Provincial Development objectives ................................................................88
5.5 Mopani Integrated Development Plan (MIDP) ........................................................89
5.5.1 Geographic location and key features ...........................................................89
5.5.2 Powers and functions of the Mopani District Municipality ..............................90
5.5.3 Local planning context ...................................................................................91
5.5.4 The extent of land claims ..............................................................................92
5.5.5 Economic sector analysis ..............................................................................93
5.5.6 Localised “Spatial Strategic Guidelines” ........................................................94
5.6 Greater Tzaneen Municipality Integrated Development Plan (GTMIDP) ................95
5.6.1 Description of municipal area ........................................................................96
5.6.2 Spatial analysis .............................................................................................97
5.6.3 Spatial constraints .........................................................................................98
5.7 Greater Tzaneen Municipality Spatial Development Framework (GTMSDF)..........101
5.7.1 Agriculture .....................................................................................................101
5.7.2 Settlement patterns and densities .................................................................102
5.7.3 Residential development ...............................................................................103
5.7.4 Spatial objectives and strategies ...................................................................104
5.8 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................107
Chapter 6: The Impact of the Land Reform Programmes on the

Greater Tzaneen Municipality ............................................. 108
6.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................108
viii
Table of Contents
6.2 The effect of land reform in different provinces.......................................................109

6.3 The Limpopo Province ............................................................................................110
6.3.1 Background ....................................................................................................110
6.3.2 Investment ......................................................................................................113
6.3.3 Land reform case studies ...............................................................................114
6.3.3.1 Case study – Morebeng (formerly known as Soekmekaar) .................115
6.3.3.2 Case study – Zebediela Citrus Estate .................................................116
6.3.3.3 The storey of Charles Boys .................................................................119
6.4 Comprehensive rural development programme, Greater Giyani ............................121
6.5 Tzaneen Local Municipality ....................................................................................123
6.5.1 Background ....................................................................................................123
6.5.2 Land reform in the Tzaneen Municipal Area ...................................................126
6.6 Inconsistency in land reform ...................................................................................129
6.7 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................130
Chapter 7: Implications of Land Reform Policies on Spatial

Development ......................................................................... 132
7.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................132
7.2 How land reform influences spatial development ...................................................132
7.3 Conclusion ..............................................................................................................135
Chapter 8: Planning Recommendations ............................................... 137
Chapter 9: Conclusion ............................................................................ 140
Annexure A: Research Process Outline ............................................... 144
Annexure B: Photographs ...................................................................... 145
Annexure C: Maps ................................................................................... 146
Annexure D: Questionnaires .................................................................. 147
References ............................................................................................... 148
List of Figures
Chapter 3
Figure 3.1: Constraints facing land reform ...................................................................17
Figure 3.2: Land reform principles ...............................................................................29
Figure 3.3: Committees that were represented by the Post-settlement committee......31
Figure 3.4: Agri-village principle ..................................................................................40
Chapter 4
ix
Table of Contents
Figure 4.1: Three processes in land reform .................................................................43

Figure 4.2: The main priority areas of CASP ...............................................................65
Chapter 5
Figure 5.1: IDP Strategic themes.................................................................................91
Figure 5.2: Inter-governmental relations ......................................................................92
List of Tables
Chapter 1
Table 1.1: Modes of land ownership and tenure ..........................................................6
Chapter 4
Table 4.1: Settled restitution claims: 1995-31 March 2009 ..........................................50
Table 4.2: Outstanding claims by 31 march 2009........................................................51
Table 4.3: Deliveries according to funding instruments ...............................................57
Table 4.4: Differences between SLAG and LRAD policies ..........................................63
Table 4.5: Acts involved in land tenure reform.............................................................68
Table 4.6: Summary of restitution, redistribution and land tenure aspects ..................77
Chapter 5
Table 5.1: Estimated population, 2006 ........................................................................89
Chapter 6
Table 6.1: Priorities and needs for the Muyexe village ................................................122
Table 6.2: Summary of economic indicators, 2004 ......................................................125
List of Maps
Chapter 6
Map 6.1: Map of South Africa ......................................................................................110
Map 6.2: Map of the Limpopo Province .......................................................................111
Map 6.3: Districts of the Limpopo Province .................................................................123
x
Chapter 1 – Introduction
This study serves to point out that, despite an excellent constitutional framework and
sound legislation governing land reform, the implementation of land reform programmes
has a devastatingly negative impact on development, as well as the spatial planning with
regard to spatial development.
To achieve this, a thorough investigation into the constitutional and legal frameworks for land
reform is necessary, as well as an analysis of the vision, mission, policies, programmes and
intentions of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR – Previously
Department of Land Affairs). A large number of the unintended results of land reform
programmes originate from misunderstandings, confusing language and a lack of consultation
and coordination between role-players. This study will also seek to clarify some of these
misunderstandings and confusing language.
The method of study will entail source-based analysis, covering basic documents as well as
expert opinions from articles and books, combined with interviews with key stakeholders where
basic sources are found to be inadequate. This will be integrated with an empirical study on
land reform projects and in loco inspections of the impact of those projects on development,
especially in the Letaba District of Limpopo, which forms part of the Tzaneen Local Municipality.
A number of questionnaires have been distributed among stakeholders across the spectrum,
beneficiaries of land reform, land owners and farmers. Information from the questionnaires has
been integrated and interpreted in such a way that the identity of the respondents could be
protected in honour of an agreement to such an effect.
The Letaba District was selected because:
- It is home to some of the earliest restitution, redistribution and security of tenure projects
in the country;
- It is the district in South Africa with the highest density of land claims combined with
redistribution and tenure security projects;
- It offers a complete menu of land reform programmes in an advanced state on a small
area;
- The land reform programme in the Letaba district is well recorded and the different
phases of each of the three legs of land reform are documented and published in
-1-
popular publications, academic studies, radio and television broadcasts and

departmental reports; and
- The Tzaneen Local Municipality is situated within the Mopani District Municipality. Due to
the impact of land reform within the whole district municipality, it will not be of scientific
value if the Tzaneen Local Municipality is studied in isolation.
For the purpose of this study, the history of land ownership leading to the distorted current
dispensation, and the need for land reform will be stated from various historical sources,
official documentation and policy statements. In Chapter 2 the origins of current patterns of
ownership and historical dispossession will be covered in order to sketch the prevailing
order and the background to the constitutional and legal framework governing land reform.
Chapter 3 will deal with the principles of land reform as derived from the constitution and
various land reform acts. It will also analyse the vision and objectives for land reform as
formulated by various stakeholders. Already in this chapter some misunderstandings and
confusing language will transpire.
Chapter 4 will serve to analyse the various land reform programmes in the restitution,
redistribution and tenure security pillars of land reform.
Chapter 5 indicates the various plans that government has developed on national,
provincial, district and local level in order to improve spatial development and planning that
are usually affected by land reform.
Interviews and an empirical study on projects in the Letaba district will point to the results of
these programmes and will raise the issues to be analysed in Chapter 6.
Chapter 7 will visit the impact of these land reform programmes on development in terms of
planning, financing, security, growth and the drivers of land reform. It will introduce a critical
instrument to measure the progress of land reform against the objectives of the state, as
well as its implications for investment, growth and development.
Chapter 8 introduces various planning recommendations in order to improve the land

reform programme and to minimise the impact of land reform on spatial development and
planning.
-2-
The study will be summarised with some recommendations on the future roll-out of the
existing land reform programmes in order to minimise its impact on development.
In the pursuit of supporting the theme of this study, a number of related topics in other fields
of study will be touched upon. Although each one of these themes cannot be separated from
the topic of this study, they remain at best related, with some relevance to the focus of this
study, but great care will be taken not to indulge in those themes. Such is the political
dimension of the tension between land reform and development, or the economical
dimension of this topic. The study will be incomplete without references to these
dimensions, but both lie well beyond the scope of this study. Similarly, social security, food
security, safety, environmental impacts and international repercussions as well as the legal
implications are all intertwined with this thesis, but it is not part of this field of study.
Each one of these related topics deserves more in depth research than what is currently
available. It is not the purpose of this study though, which will strictly focus on the impact on
land reform on spatial development issues. Each one of these related topics will only be
mentioned in its relationship and relevance to the purpose of this study.
To serve as basis for this study, it is necessary to clarify certain terminology and define
certain key features of land reform.
1.1 What is land?
The Oxford’s Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, fifth edition (1998), describes land as “the solid
dry part of the earth’s surface, contrasted with sea or water; ground or soil that is used for
farming; rural areas and the rural way of life, as contrasted with cities and towns; property in the
forms of land; an area of land belonging to one person, an estate”
But why do we as people attach so much importance to our land? Apart from the fact that it is a
source of life in terms of supplying most of our food, other factors play a role as well. In Chapter
2 the relevance of land and the ownership of this land for a country’s people, economy and
social infrastructure will be addressed.
Land does not simply refer to something physical. The nature of the right involved in the
ownership of land, called hereditary, is one of the most important aspects when referring to land
-3-
as something people live on. This means that most of the land that people own, no matter in
which country, was passed on from one generation to the next. However, this is mostly the case
with rural land. Urban land, however, has a few factors involved restricting heredity. Those
restrictions are mostly not imposed by law, but by physical factors such as distances from
different work places and economical factors. However, not all rural land was passed from
generation to generation. Some people started farming with no ancestor in the farming sector.
This means that they had to buy land and learn all farming principles.
1.2 Land ownership and tenure
This study mostly focuses on rural land ownership and tenure. The reason for this is that land
reform, in all countries, mostly affects those owning rural land. Therefore it is important to
understand what ownership and tenure of rural land means. What does property mean and
what can you achieve when owning property?
The state has an essential role to play in the legal definition of property rights, as well as in
providing infrastructure used to demarcate and record property rights to enable their cost-
effective enforcement. To secure property rights to land, countries will therefore have to
establish institutions that carry out land administration functions. While private users will
appropriate some of the benefits provided by such institutions, the reliability and
comprehensiveness of the information they provide, their accessibility, legitimacy, integrity and
the trust they command will be critical for granting tangible ownership and tenure security.
(Deininger, 2003:70).
Land administration in municipalities includes all the processes needed in an area to be able to
plan and deliver services in a way that conforms to mandates. In other words, it should assist
with service delivery and cost recovery decisions and projects. When looking at land
administration in this way, land use management is one of the tools that a municipality can use
to achieve coherent administration through regulating what land is used in what ways. It creates
a spatial picture of basic information and regulation that enables land to be administered more
effectively. There needs to be a better understanding of land administration if an effective
change in municipal areas is to be achieved. The conventional understanding of functions of
land administration include things like planning and building controls, land valuation, zoning and
development controls (Hornby, 2006:28).
-4-
Most of these regulations depend on a system of managing land tenure that is centralised and
located at the DLA (Department of Land Affairs). For example, for a municipality to be able to
zone land for land use control or to value land, it needs to know what land is being referred to,
and who owns that land. This information is held at the Surveyor General’s and Deed Offices
(Hornby, 2006:29).
According to Deininger (2003:70), land administration can contribute to the achievement of

broad efficiency and equity goals if a number of preconditions are satisfied:
1. The institutions involved need to have clear mandates and structures that allow them to
function efficiently and free from political pressure.
2. The poor will be first to be left out of sporadic approaches that cover part of the territory
at high cost, and may even lose their rights if non-transparent processes of sporadic
titling are adopted.
3. As a public good, the information on land ownership maintained in the registry needs to
be publicly available and accessible at low cost to minimise the transaction costs for
other users and to allow land and financial markets to operate at minimum costs
There are two main instruments used for land administration. The one is a deeds registry that
handles information on land ownership and transactions and the other a land database, called
the cadastre. It contains the boundaries of parcels as defined by surveys and recorded on maps
and any additional information about these parcels. The cadastre provides the basis for a
number of other functions, such as land use planning, management and disposal of public
lands, land valuation and taxation, provision of other public services, and generation of maps
(Deininger, 2003:70).
1.3 Tenure
Land tenure was born in the common law systems as a concept referring to the legal regime in
which land is owned by an individual, who is said to “hold” the land. The sovereign monarch,
known as The Crown, held land in its own right. All private owners are either its tenants or sub-
tenants. The term “tenure” is used to signify the relationship between tenant and lord, not the
relationship between tenant and land (Wikipedia, 2007).
Historically, in the system of feudalism, the lords who received land directly from the Crown
were called tenants in chief. They doled out portions of their land to lesser tenants in exchange
-5-
for services, who in turn divided it among even lesser tenants. This process – that of granting
subordinate tenancies – is known as subinfeudation. In this way, all individuals except the
monarch were said to hold the land “of” someone else (Wikipedia, 2007).
It was not unusual for reciprocal duties to exist between lord and tenant. There were different
kinds of tenure to fit various kinds of duties that a tenant might owe to a lord. For instance, a
military tenure might require the tenant to supply the lord with a number of armed knights. The
concept of tenure has since evolved into other forms, such as leases and estates (Wikipedia,
2007).
Land is a key asset for the rural and urban poor. It provides a foundation for economic activity
and the functioning of market and non-market institutions in many developing countries.
Understanding the origins of property rights and their evolution over time is important to
appreciate how property rights related to land affect households’ behaviour and can, in turn, be
influenced by government policy. Historically, one reason property rights evolved was to
respond to increased payoffs from investment in more intensive use of land resulting from
population growth or opportunities arising from greater market integration and technical
advances (Deininger, 2003:xvii-xviii).
According to Wikipedia (2007) there are a great variety of modes of land ownership and tenure:
Table 1.1: Modes of land ownership and tenure

An example: most indigenous nations or tribes of North America
had no formal notion of land ownership. When Europeans first
Traditional land tenure
came to North America they simply disregarded traditional land
tenure and seized land.
A system of mutual obligations under which a royal personage
Feudal land ownership
granted a fiefdom in exchange for a claim on service.
Under common law, this is an interest in real property that ends at
Life estate death. The holder has the use of the land for life. No ability to
transfer the interest.
Under common law, this is hereditary, non-transferable ownership
Fee tail
of real property.
Under common law, this is the most complete ownership interest
one can have in real property. The holder can freely sell or transfer
that interest or use it to secure a mortgage. Complicated by the
Fee simple
obligation to pay a property tax in most cases and by the fact that if
the land is mortgaged, there will be a claim on it in the form of a
lien. Most common form of land ownership.
Under both common law and civil law, land may be leased or
Leasehold or rental rented by its owner to another party; a wide range of arrangements
are possible, ranging from very short terms to the 99-year leases.
-6-
Table 1.1: (Continues)

Rights to use as May include such rights as the use of a road or the right to graze
commons one’s animals on commonly owned land.
Under which one has use of agricultural land owned by another
Sharecropping
person in exchange for a share of the resulting crop or livestock.
Allows one to make certain specific uses of land that is owned by
someone else. The most classic easement is right-of-way, but it
Easements
can also include the right to run an electrical power line across
someone else’s land.
Source: Wikipedia – Land Ownership and Tenure, (2007).
There are various forms of collective ownership, which typically take either the form of
membership in a cooperative, or shares in a corporation, which owns the land (typically by fee
simple, but possibly under other arrangements). There are also various hybrids: in many
communist states, government ownership of most agricultural land has combined in various
ways with tenure for farming collectives (Wikipedia, 2007).
In South Africa, communal tenure systems serve social and economic functions for a large
number of citizens. “Communal” means, in most cases, a “mixed tenure regime, comprising
individual, family, sub-group and larger group rights and duties in relation to a variety of natural
resources”. The White Paper on South African Land Policy (1997:33) states that tenure reform
must allow people to choose the tenure system that is most appropriate to their circumstances
and it recognises that communal tenure plays an important part in the livelihoods of the poor.
Communal land emphasises the sharing of resources in addition to private control of residential
space and land cultivation. It is not adverse to private control, but rather emphasises public
access to certain shared resources for private economic survival (Sithole, 2006:31).
Tenure insecurity is due to both recent memory of colonial and apartheid dispossession, and
the current reality of weak property rights and institutional support. These situations create
uncertainty in a political economy context of rapid change and social reconfiguration. Traditional
norms, practices and intuitions provide a familiar and important terrain and base from which to
engage and relate to these realities and changes. The adaptability and negotiability of land
rights acquired in communal tenure also mean that people can trade-off various risk and
opportunity factors at local levels (Ziqubu et al, 2001:3).
According to Deininger (2003:2), access to land and the ability to exchange it with others and to
use it effectively are of great importance for poverty reduction, economic growth and private
sector investment as well as for empowering the poor and ensuring good governance.
Throughout the last decade, there has been an enormous increase in the demand for policy
advice on land. There are two reasons that underlie this phenomenon:
-7-
1. Stakeholders are more aware of the need to complement macro-economic policies with
attention to structural issues if the desired response to greater economic opportunities is
to be forthcoming. Structural characteristics will affect the way in which the benefits of
other policy interventions are distributed among the population and different groups’
activities for long-term investment in physical and human capital.
2. Policymakers now better understand the shortcomings of past approaches to land policy.
According to Ziqubu et al., (2001:6) tenure is secured through:
• The processes through which community members assert their interests and
rights to land
• The basis upon which these are justified
• The institutional processes and mechanisms by which rights are realised
The measures for tenure security are then the degree to which these processes are socially
accepted, known, equitable (or non-discriminatory), clear and consistent, accessible, used,
transparent, and enforced (Ziqubu et al., 2001:6).
-8-
Chapter 2 – The necessity for land reform
Chapter 2 – The necessity for land

reform
2.1 Introduction
A research process outline has been constructed for each chapter of this document in order to
structure all ideas discussed.
The necessity for land reform
Land – a
source of
conflict
• Political issues
• Land value
• Balance
• Physical conflict
• Vague land rights
Conclusion
• Constitution of SA
• Responsibilities
• Legal costs (Land
CCMA)
• Expropriation
2.2 Land – a source for conflict
According to Thwala (2003), land in South Africa is one of the most defining political and
development issues and also perhaps the most intractable. The reason for this is that there is a
continuing racial mal-distribution of land. This will either be resolved through a fundamental
-9-
restructuring of the government’s land reform programme, or it will be resolved by a

fundamental restructuring of property relations by the people themselves. It is the government’s
responsibility to take urgent and immediate action to supply for the needs and demands of the
country’s 19 million black and landless rural people.
It is important to note that the value of land is not interpreted the same by all. In this case more
specifically, the government has a very different view of what land means than, for example, an
economist’s opinion about land and its different uses. The same is applicable for a commercial
farmer and a land claimant. Currently in South Africa great tension exists between the economic
value of land and the social value. Promises have been made by government to people who
expect to receive land, but no promises have been made to the rest of South Africa’s people on
where tomorrow’s food will come from if land reform is not a success.
Balance is the answer to these uncertainties. It is true that in the past some people were treated
unfairly and that righteousness must reign. However, there must always be a balance between
land as a ‘nice to have’ and land as a production medium. In the same sentence it should be
mentioned that there must be a balance between food security and land reform. If all people
receive land because it is a status symbol, or you were previously disadvantaged, but no
production takes place on that given land, South Africa will soon be in a position of being unable
to cater for its citizens’ basic need – that of being fed.
The relationship with land, which includes its access, resources and ownership, frequently
creates tension, expectations and alienation between individuals and social structures. This can
lead to physical conflict, such as damage to property or physical abuse between people.
Conflict over land is not just about an expanse of ground on which things grow, but a deep-
seated attachment to place and identity, exacerbated by economic and other imperatives that
are located in a history of expansion and acquisition (Lewis, 2006:15).
For farm dwellers, their attachment to a particular portion of land is not about how many crops it
sustains per hectare. It is about identification with the vision of its relationship with the past, with
the people who lived and worked on it, and with the spiritual dimension of the landscape.
Understanding land only as a quantifiable economic indicator of worth is a diminishment of its
intrinsic value. It further demeans the dignity of the people for whom this intrinsic value
resonates with their own historical and lived reality at many different and nuanced levels (Lewis,
2006, 15-16).
- 10 -
Although the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and land laws such as ESTA and LTA are supposed to
create frameworks and mechanisms to attend to and resolve such conflict, in reality these are
undetermined. Knowing that there is a constitution and laws that are supposed to protect people
against an abuse of their fundamental human rights, is frustrating if you are unable to actualise
those rights. The judicial process continues to fail rural citizens of South Africa in its inability to
ensure appropriate and necessary access to legal redress, to act against criminal infringements
of fundamental rights, and to affirm and entrench in practice that which is constitutionally
enshrined (Lewis, 2006:16).
Currently in the ESTA Act, there is no definite principal stating the rights and responsibilities of
farm dwellers vis-à-vis that of land owners. There is no regulation as to how many livestock
units a farm dweller may keep, or what the relationship between that number and the carrying
capacity of the grazing is. It also does not state the responsibilities of the farm dweller to meet
or maintain certain conservation or health criteria. For example, both the land owner and the
farm dweller own cattle that graze the land of the land owner. Whose responsibility is it to
vaccinate these cattle? If the land owner vaccinates his cattle, but the farm dweller does not, the
land owner will fight a losing battle. These vague rights do not end with cattle and other
livestock. The same can be applicable to sanitation, services and even security. Somewhere a
line must be drawn and some responsibility must be given to the farm dwellers as well. This will
also help to resolve the power dynamics problem mentioned in the paragraph below.
The potential to resolve conflict between parties is made more difficult when the power
dynamics between those parties are unbalanced – either through access to information or
resources. The need to create safe spaces for all parties to be able to speak openly without
fear, victimisation or retribution, requires skilled intermediaries and the commitment of all parties
in dispute to engage in the discussion process – which is frequently protracted (Lewis,
2006:16).
If there is any dispute between the land owner and the farm dweller, going the legal route is
almost impossible due to the enormous legal cost involved in solving such matters. A
suggestion will be that a land CCMA must be introduced in order to solve all land-related legal
matters. This will be a cheaper option and more land disputes will be solved in a much shorter
time. The fact still stands that government has made promises to the people of this land and
delivery is not always forthcoming – maybe not always possible. This leads to ructions between
different parties that are not always worth the ideological drive and political mileage government
receives with regard to the land reform process.
- 11 -
The Constitution of South Africa (Act 108 of 1996) is the supreme law of South Africa and
therefore also provides the legal framework according to how such difficult land reform
decisions must be made.
Section 3(2) of the Constitutions states that all South African Citizens are:
a) equally entitled to the rights, privileges and benefits of citizenship; and
b) equally subject to the duties and responsibilities of citizenship.
According to Section 25(1-8), dealing with property:

1. “No one may be deprived of property except in terms of law of general application, and
no law may permit arbitrary deprivation of property.
2. Property may be expropriate only in terms of law of general application –
a. for a public purpose or in the public interest; and
b. subject to compensation, the amount of which and the time and manner of
payment of which have either been agreed to by those affected or decided or
approved by a court.
3. The amount of the compensation and the time and manner of payment must be just and
equitable, reflecting an equitable balance between the public interest and the interests of
those affected, having regard to all relevant circumstances, including –
a. the current use of property;
b. the history of the acquisition and the use of property;
c. the market value of the property;
d. the extent of direct state investment and subsidy in the acquisition and beneficial
capital improvement of the property; and
e. the purpose of the expropriation
4. For the purpose of this section –
a. the public interest includes the nation’s commitment to land reform, and to
reforms to bring about equitable access to all of South Africa’s natural resources;
and
b. property is not limited to land
5. The state takes reasonable legislative and other measures, within its available
resources, to foster conditions which enable citizens to gain access to land on an
equitable basis.
6. A person or community whose tenure of land is legally insecure as a result of past
racially discriminatory laws or practises is entitled, to the extent provided by an Act of
Parliament, either to tenure (which is legally secure) or to comparable redress.
- 12 -
7. A person or community disposed of property after 19 June 1913 as a result of past

racially discriminatory laws or practises is entitled, to the extent provided by an Act of
Parliament, to restitution of that property or to equitable redress.
8. No provision of this section may impede the state from taking land, water and
related reform, in order to redress the results of past racial discrimination,
provided that any departure from the provisions of this section is in accordance
with the provisions of section 36(1).”
Section 25(8) of the Constitution of South Africa clearly sates that the government may not
expropriated any land, water and related reform to redress the results of past racial
discrimination. This means that the sounds government make to strike off the willing-buyer,
willing-seller approach, and expropriate the land instead, will be totally opposed to what the
Constitution says and will thus be breaking the law.
The willing-buyer, willing-seller approach is discussed in more detail in Section 3.5 of Chapter 3.
Section 36(1) deals with the limitation of rights.

1. “The rights in the Bill of Rights may be limited only in terms of law of general application
to the extent that the limitation is reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic
society based on human dignity, equity and freedom, taking into account all relevant
factors, including –
a. the nature of the right;
b. the importance of the purpose of the limitation;
c. the nature and extent of the limitation;
d. the relation between the limitation and its purpose; and less restrictive means to
achieve the purpose.”
2.3 Conclusion
Land has always been, and will always be, a source of conflict. For the owner of the land, the
Constitution of South Africa sets out a set of laws that must be obeyed, also when it comes to
rights, privileges and benefits enjoyed by the owner. The value of land is experienced differently
by everyone. This is also true for a farmer and a farm dweller. A farmer sees land as a
productive entity and a dweller sees it as a place to stay and perhaps farm a little piece of land
for own use.
- 13 -
There are still vague rights between a farmer and a farm dweller. Where does a farmer’s
responsibility stop and a farm dweller’s start on the same piece of land? Normally the
relationship between farmer and farm dweller is non-existent and each one wishes the other
would leave.
Another issue is legal costs regarding land reform. A cheaper option for both the farm owner
and the farm dweller is that a land CCMA should be established.
The Constitution sets out a number of laws specifically dealing with the expropriation of land.
The conclusion that can be made is that no land may be expropriated in order to correct
historical racial discrimination. Government saying that land will be expropriated due to the myth
that farmers raise land prices only because government is buying their land is not
acceptable/conducive.
- 14 -
Chapter 3 – The land reform situation in South Africa
Chapter 3 – The land reform situation in

South Africa
3.1 Introduction
The land reform situation

in South Africa
Definition of land reform
Principles of land reform

• Freedom charter
• Constitution of South Africa
• RDP
• Legislation
• Land Summit, 2005
• ANC Consultative Conference,
2007
Shortcomings within
policies and legislature
Willing-buyer, willing-
seller principle
Conclusion
- 15 -
The research outline process above describes the content contained in Chapter 3. Firstly, the
definition of land reform as applicable in South Africa is explained.
The land reform process was formulated by various influences. Those influences are also listed
and described in this chapter. A principle that receives intensive attention at this stage is the
willing-buyer, willing-seller principle. The importance of this principle is described in this chapter
as well as why expropriation is not the way to resolve the current problems.
Lastly, a solution is formulated in order to accommodate the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle

as well as to restrict uncertainties evolving from the land reform process.
3.2 Definition of land reform
According to Adams (1995), the definition of land reform is not easy due to differences in land
types, farming methods, the history of land acquisition, general social and economic conditions,
and political aims. However, definition is important because some supposed land reform
policies are not in fact intended to change the distribution of land ownership and rural power
(Adams, 1995).
Warriner (1969) said land reform was generally accepted to mean: “the redistribution of
property or rights in land for the benefit of the landless, tenants and farm labourers”. This
is a narrow definition, reducing land reform to its simplest element.
DW Bromley (1995:99) describes land reform as the struggle to wrest ownership of land away
from a small class of landlords who employed landless tillers under a variety of institutional
arrangements. Bernstein et al. (2005:6) state that there is a need to redefine land reform to
include the realities of an urbanising, modernising economy; to make it consistent with our
shared vision of where this society is planning to go, and with other crucial dimensions of
government policy; and to ensure that it is a policy area with achievable goals, compatible with
our development constraints.
Past apartheid policies have resulted in an extremely racially-skewed and inequitable

distribution of land, overcrowding and poverty. Until 1991, 80% of the population was prohibited
from owning or leasing land in over 80% of the country. About 3.5 million black South Africans
in urban and rural areas lost their land and rights in property through forced removals.
Constraints facing current land reform measures include: limited areas of arable land; limited
- 16 -
public funds for land purchase; limited skills for the implementation of land reform; and the
difficulty of unscrambling the so-called homelands: areas of land struggle, densely populated,
lacking in services, and often agriculturally marginal (Adams, 1995).
Limited areas
of arable land
Constraints
Limited funds for

land purchase
Limited skills for implementation of

land reform
Difficulty of
unscrambling
homelands
Figure 3.1: Constraints facing land reform

Source: Own construction.
3.3 The principles of land reform
“At present, land reform is geared at balancing the goals of righting past wrongs and assisting
the poorest South Africans with the important aim of creating a class of successful black
commercial farmers, all with a market-oriented policy framework” (Bernstein et al, 2005:8).
Ministers Derek Hanekom, Thoko Didiza, Lulu Xingwala and Gugelu Nkwinti, previous ministers
burdened with land reform, were assigned with the enormous task of driving South Africa’s land
reform programme in an equitable manner (Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs (DALA),
2005).
Land reform is a difficult, complex and expensive process with regard to targets, time frames
and impact on food security. It is also true that the complexity and scale is enormous regarding
the society involved. All this means that very serious consequences may arise from any policy
or programme of land reform than can be portrayed as failing to meet its targets or simply as
taking too long to make an impact. This means that South Africa needs a land reform
programme that is developmentally and politically successful. The outcome must leave the land
- 17 -
reform beneficiaries better off and create an increasing degree of confidence in all stakeholders,
especially investors. This confidence is applicable to both domestic and international situations.
Land issues must be kept under control while historic wrongs are being righted at a steady pace
(Bernstein, 2005:6).
To understand what land reform is, it is important to have a closer look at the term “land reform”
and what exactly the three processes of land are composed of. This entails legislation and
policies involved, procedures followed, persons involved and affected, etc. The land reform
programme is built on three important principles. These principles are derived from:
• Freedom charter
• Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP)
• Legislation
• Land summit, 2005
• ANC Consultative Conference, 2007
It is important to understand that each of these pillars forms an important part of the land reform
process. Each of them will individually be discussed.
3.4 Principles from which the three pillars of land

reform originate
3.4.1 Freedom charter
The Freedom charter was drawn up in 1955 by visionary South Africans. Its vision and truths
still guide South Africans today. The Charter sets out goals and principles that underline our
country’s path to democracy. Its goal is to guide and evaluate the progress and future trajectory
of land and agrarian reform in South Africa. Regarding land reform, the most important
statement within the Charter is: “South Africa belongs to all who live in it, Black or White.”
The last 100 years of the country’s history is based on the fact that land ownership was dictated
by race. This aspect must be addressed to ensure a more even distribution of land. This will
lead to more growth, nation-building and the reconciliation of hope. The goal is to bring about an
equitable dispensation, ensuring that the injustices that occurred in the past will not be
- 18 -
repeated. This means that South Africa with all its land, wealth and future must indeed belong to
all who live in it – Black and White (Ministry for Agriculture and Land Affairs, 2005:3-4).
Most of the people who work and live on the land do not own the land. According to the
Freedom charter, land must be shared among all who work it. Tenure security is a necessity to
address insecurities regarding the utilisation of land. Land reform beneficiaries must be
integrated into a revitalised economy of rural towns and villages. It is the government’s
responsibility to assist land reform beneficiaries with comprehensive agricultural support
(Ministry for Agriculture and Land Affairs, 2005:4).
3.4.2 The Constitution of South Africa
The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996, placed the responsibility on
the government to guide citizens to gain access to land. The Constitution supports the vision of
the Freedom charter and creates the foundation to make the vision a reality (Ministry for
Agriculture and Land Affairs, 2005:5).
The negotiated constitutional settlement on land issues respects property rights, and assures
land owners that South Africa will not end up the way Zimbabwe did. Legal action was taken
against land invasions and a process was followed to reduce legal disputes over land. South
Africa has adopted demand-led and largely market-driven land reform programmes to deal with
these disputes. The willing-buyer, willing-seller principle was adopted in transferring land
ownership from whites to blacks (Bernstein et al, 2005:8). The willing-buyer, willing-seller
principle will be discussed further in Section 3.5 of this chapter.
The proposed amendments to the expropriation act, as recommended by cabinet in 2008,

withdrawn later that year because it was not compatible with the constitution, as well as the
consistent pressure from Land Affairs officials to abandon the willing-seller principle, are the key
generators of tension between land owners and government. The uncertainty created by this
tension, along with extensive media coverage both locally and internationally, has caused a
major expatriation of investment capital and has put development in rural areas in the freezer
box (Farmers Weekly, 7 Aug 09).
The White Paper on South African Land Policies (1997:15-17) highlights some issues regarding
the constitution:
- 19 -
• Allocation of land-related responsibilities

- In terms of the Constitution, all deeds registrations, land surveys and land reform
are the responsibility of the national government.
- The provincial government also has responsibilities regarding land reform. These
responsibilities occur where both national and provincial government are involved
in Schedule 4 of the Constitution. These include: agriculture, environment, soil
conservation, housing, regional planning, and urban and rural development.
- The local government also has a constitutional responsibility to manage land use
and planning.
- Traditional authorities carry out land-related functions in terms of customary law.
- All three government authorities, as well as traditional authorities, have a function
in land administration. However, most legislation dealing with land administration
is assigned to the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform
• Coordinating the functions of the different spheres of government

- Coordination of the different spheres of government is important for two reasons.
The first is because of the constitutional requirement of cooperative government
and the second is to achieve effective government.
- Closer cooperation is therefore necessary between the different spheres of
government on land matters to ensure the successful delivery of service.
Despite the honourable intensions and procedural prescriptions to integrate development

strategies and cooperation between the different tiers of government, in practise very little of
any such interaction materialised. Agriculture, housing, economic development, tourism and
spatial planning were all provincial functions of government by MECs and provincial officials on
the basis of provincial development strategies. Unfortunately all of these functions are somehow
related to land use and rights in land. Land Affairs, however, has been a national function since
1994. This department has unfortunately become notorious for poor communication and a
seeming unwillingness to take part in integrated development planning. The notion that
restitution is a function of higher priority than any other development need has wrecked many
development initiatives
• Responsibility for land reform

- National government is responsible to ensure the restitution of land rights of
those dispossessed by apartheid legislation and a more equitable distribution of
land, and to implement a programme of tenure and land administration reform;
- 20 -
- The provincial government is responsible for the provision of complementary

development support to those participating in the land reform programme;
- Close co-operation between national and provincial government must exist to
ensure that beneficiaries of land reform enjoy services provided by the provinces
as envisaged by Schedule 4 and 5 of the Constitution.
• Deeds and survey

- Surveying is the process in which a piece of land is identified and title deed
records are registered;
- The Surveyor-general’s office examines and approves all cadastral surveys, and
assembles as well as maintains plans showing the relationship of all the various
parcels of land;
- The Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs controls these operations and
ensures that uniform standard surveys and deeds are registered countrywide;
- There is currently a 30-34% discrepancy between the database of the Surveyor
General (SG) and that of the Deeds Office (Christo Roodt – item online).
• Property clause (Section 25)

- Effective land reform requires an appropriate constitutional framework;
- The Constitution seeks to achieve and maintain a balance between the
protection of existing property rights and constitutional guarantees on land
reform;
- The property clause itself provides clear constitutional authority for land reform;
- The equality clause provides clear authority for a programme aimed at achieving
substantive equality;
- The willing-buyer, willing-seller principle is what the government is committed to
regarding land reform. Government’s commitment to this principle is currently
under dispute by Government itself and other stakeholders in land reform.
• Eliminating discrimination in women’s access to land

- Lack of access to land for women is one of the key factors contributing to poverty
in rural areas;
- Discriminatory, customary and social practises are largely responsible for these
inequities;
- Section 9 of the Constitution confers the right to equality before the law and the
right to equal protection and benefit of the law. It further states that equality
“includes the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and freedoms.”
- 21 -
- Specific strategies and procedures must be revised to ensure that women are
able to participate fully in the planning and implementation of the land reform
project.
The constitution created a mandate for the Department of Land Affairs, together with the
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights, to ensure that land is equitably redistributed and
injustices of land dispossessions (dating back to 1913) are effectively addressed. The
Constitution balances both the protection of poverty rights and the imperative for land reform
(South Africa, 2005b).
The Constitution stipulates that the state must implement land reform and bring about equitable
distribution of land. The responsibility of the government is made plain: “thorough and
effective land and agrarian reform is a prerequisite for building equality and growth in the
nation.”
3.4.3 The Reconstruction and Development Programme
According to the RDP a policy framework, 1994: “Land is the most basic need for rural dwellers.
Apartheid policies pushed millions of black South Africans into overcrowded and impoverished
reserves, homelands and townships. In addition, capital intensive agricultural policies led to the
large-scale eviction of farm dwellers from their land and homes. The abolition of the Land Acts
cannot redress inequities in land distribution. Only a tiny minority of black people can afford land
on the free market. A national land reform programme is the central and driving force of a
programme of rural development. Such a programme aims to redress effectively the injustices
of forced removals and the historical denial of access to land. It aims to ensure the security of
tenure for rural dwellers. In implementing the national land reform programme, and through the
provision of support services, the democratic government will build the economy by generating
large-scale employment increasing rural incomes and eliminating overcrowding. The RDP must
implement a fundamental land reform programme. This programme must be demand-driven
and must aim to supply residential and productive land to the poorest section of the rural
population and aspirant farmers. As part of a comprehensive rural development policy it must
encourage the use of land for agricultural, other productive or residential purposes.”
“The land policy must ensure security of tenure for all South Africans, regardless of their system
of land-holding. It must remove all forms of discrimination in woman’s access to land.”
- 22 -
The Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) was designed as a blueprint to turn
the principles of the Constitution into real targets. It was Nelson Mandela’s ANC’s effort to
establish common buy-in into a national goal. One of the main targets for the RDP was to
redistribute 30% of white-owned agricultural land by 2014 (Land Summit, 2005). This target was
described as the ‘collective aim of land reform’ (Bernstein et al, 2005:11).
The inputs of the Constitution and RDP led to a progress in democracy and as a result the task
of revising policies and laws began. The White Paper on South African Land Policy (April 1997)
was established and resulted in an extensive process of public consultation. The document set
out the vision and implementation strategy for South Africa’s land policy, which dealt with both
urban and rural environments, readdressing the injustices caused by apartheid, fostering
national reconciliation and stability, underpinning economic growth, improving household
welfare and alleviating poverty (South Africa, 2005b).
3.4.4 Legislation
Legislation involved in the land reform process includes the following:
• Abolition of Racially Based Land Measures Act, 1991 (Act 108 of 1991)
• Administration of Estates Act, 1965 (Act 66 of 1965)
Administration of Estates Amendment Act, 2002 (Act 47 of 2002)
• Black Authorities Act Repeal Bill
• Black Authorities Act, 1951 (Act no 68 of 1951)
• Black Administration Act, 1927 (Act 38 of 1927)
Repeal of the Black Administration Act and Amendment of Certain Laws Amendment
Act, 2008 (Act 7 of 2008)
• Communal Land Rights Act, 2004 (Act 11 of 2004)
• Communal Property Associations Act, 1996 (Act 28 of 1996)
• Deeds Registries Act, 1937 (Act 47of 1937)
Deeds Registries Amendment Act, 1998 (Act 93 of 1998)
• Extension of Security of Tenure Act, 1997 (Act 62 of 1997)
• Interim Protection of Informal Land Rights Act, 1996 (Act 31 of 1996)
• Land Reform: Provision of Land and Assistance Act, 1993 (Act 126 of 1993), as well as
Provision of Land and Assistance Amendment Act, 2008 (Act 58 of 2008)
• Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act, 1996 (Act 3 of 1996)
• Land Use Management Bill, 2008
- 23 -
• Restitution of Land Rights Act, 1994 (Act 22 of 1994)

Restitution of Land Rights Amendment Bill, 2003
Restitution of Land Rights Amendment Act, 2003 (Act 48 of 2003)
• State Land Disposal Act, 1961 (Act 68 of 1951)
• Transformation of Certain Rural Areas Act, 1998 (Act 94 of 1998)
• Upgrading of Land Tenure Rights Act, 1991 (Act 112 of 1991)
• White Paper on Agriculture, 1995
• White Paper on South African Land Policy, 1997
• White Paper on Land Reform, 1991
Included but not limited to, a few Acts, Bills and White Papers involved in constructing the land
reform process are described.
Communal Land Rights Act, (Act 11 of 2004) (CLaRA)
The purpose of the Communal Land Rights Act (Act 11 of 2004), is to “provide for legal security
of tenure by transferring communal land including KwaZulu-Natal Ingonyama land to
communities, or by awarding comparable redress; to provide for the conduct of land rights
enquiry to determine the transition from old order rights to new order rights; to provide for the
democratic administration of communal land by communities; to provide for Land Rights
Boards; to provide for the cooperative performance of municipal functions on communal land; to
amend or repeal certain laws; and to provide for matters incidental thereto”.
The Communal Land Rights Act, (Act 11 of 2004) applies to:

• State land that is beneficially occupied and State land that
- At any time vested in a government contemplated in the Self-governing
Territories Constitution Act, 1971 (Act no 21 of 1971), before its repeal or of the
former Republic of Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda or Ciskei, or in the South
African Development Trust established by Section 4 of the Development Trust
and Land Act, 1936 (Act 18 of 1936), but not land vested in the former South
African Development Trust and which has been disposed of in terms of the State
Land Disposal Act, 1961 (Act 48 of 1961);
- Was listed in the schedules to the Black Land Act, 1913 (Act 27 of 1913), before
its repeal or the schedule of released areas in terms of the Development Trust
and Land Act 1936 (Act 18 of 1936) before its repeal;
- 24 -
• Land to which the KwaZulu-Natal Ingonyama Trust Act, 1994 (Act 3 KZ of 1994),
applies, to the extent provided for in Chapter 9 of this Act;
• Land acquired by or for a community whether registered in its name or not; and
• Any other land, including land that provides equitable access to land to a community as
contemplated in Section 25(5) of the Constitution.
Communal Property Associations Act, 1996 (Act 28 of 1996)
The purpose of the Communal Property Associations Act, (Act 28 of 1996) is “to enable
communities to form juristic persons, to be known as communal property associations in order
to acquire, hold and manage property on a basis agreed to by members of a community in
terms of a written constitution; and to provide for matters connected therewith”.
Extension of Security of Tenure Act (Act 62 of 1997)
The purpose of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act (Act 62 of 1997) is “to provide for
measures with State assistance to facilitate long-term security of land tenure; to regulate the
conditions of residence on certain land; to regulate the conditions on and circumstances under
which the rights of persons to reside on land may be terminated; and to regulate the conditions
and circumstances under which persons, whose rights of residence have been terminated, may
be evicted from land, and to provide matters connected therewith”.
Land Use Management Bill, 2008
According to the South African Land Use Management Bill, 2008, the Bill’s main purpose is to:
“Provide for a uniform, effective, efficient and integrated regulatory framework in the Republic
for land use and land use management which promotes the public interest; to provide for
directive principles and compulsory norms and standards for land use management in the
Republic; to address the imbalances of the past and ensure that there is equity in land use
management by promoting cooperative governance, socio-economic benefits and the
achievement of land reform objectives; to provide for land use schemes; to establish Land Use
Regulators in all spheres of government and National Land Use Commission; to repeal certain
laws; and to provide for matters connected therewith”.
Section 4(d) of the Land Use Management Bill clearly states that one of the directive principles
of the Bill is “the principle of sustainability to promote the sustainable management and use of
- 25 -
resources, including the creation of synergy between economic, social and environmental
concerns, the protection of natural, environmental and cultural resources in a manner consistent
with the applicable legislation, and the sustainable use of agricultural land”.
Provision of Land and Assistance Amendment Act (Act 58 of 2008)
The Provision of the Land and Assistance Amendment Act’s (Act 58 of 2008) main purpose is
“to amend the Provision of Land and Assistance Act, 2993, so as to state the objects of the Act,
to clarify and extend the application of the provisions on the acquisition, planning, development,
improvement and disposal of property and the provision of financial assistance for land
reform purposes; to provide for the maintenance of property for land reform purposes;
and to provide for matters connected therewith”.
Labour Tenants Act (Act 3 of 1996)
The purpose of the Labour Tenants Act (Act 3 of 1996) is “to provide for security of tenure of
labour tenants and those persons occupying land as a result of their association with labour
tenants; to provide for the acquisition of land and rights in land by labour tenants; and to provide
for the matters connected therewith”.
According to the Labour Tenants Act (Act 3 of 1996), the term ‘labour tenants’ means:
• A person who is residing or has the right to reside on a farm;

• A person who has or has had the right to use cropping or grazing land on the farm, of
another farm of the owner, and in consideration of such right provides or has provided
labour to the owner or lessee; and
• A person whose parent or grandparent resided or resides on a farm and had the use of
cropping or grazing land on such farm or another farm of the owner, and in consideration
of such right provided or provides labour to the owner or lessee of such other farm,
including a person who has been appointed a success to a labour tenant.
Restitution of Land Rights Amendment Act, 2003 (Act 48 of 2003)
The purpose of the Restitution of Land Rights Amendment Act (Act 48 of 2003), is “to amend
the Restitution of Land Rights Act, 1994, so as to empower the Minister of Land Affairs to
purchase, acquire in any other manner or expropriate land, a portion of land or a right in land for
- 26 -
the purpose of the restoration or award of such land, portion of land or right in land to a claimant
or for any other related land reform purpose; and to provide for matters connected therewith”.
White Paper on Agriculture, 1995
The purpose of the White Paper on Agriculture (1995) is to “ensure equitable access to
agriculture to the development of all communities, society at large and the national economy, in
order to enhance income, food security, employment and quality of life in a sustainable
manner”.
This mission can be achieved by recognising the contribution of all farmers and ensuring
equitable access to resources and services and the sustainable utilisation of agricultural
resources, production and marketing. Because the agricultural sector operates in a new general
policy framework, concepts traditionally used in agriculture have changed. By including all
agricultural role-players in the new agricultural paradigm, the content of certain existing
concepts will change (White Paper on Agriculture, 1995).
White Paper on South African Land Policy (1997)
According to the White Paper on South African Land Policy (1997), a land policy acts as a
cornerstone for the reconstruction and development programme. A land policy needs to deal
effectively with:
• the injustices of racially-based land dispossession of the past
• the need for a more equitable distribution of land ownership
• the need for land reform to reduce poverty and contribute to economic growth
• the need to secure tenure for all
• a system of land management that will support sustainable land use patterns and rapid
land release for development
According to the White Paper on South African Land Policy (1997), the following are principles
of the land reform programme:
• Social justice
- Landlessness is the result of dispossession and apartheid. Land is a basic
human need. Government must take active steps to address this issue.
Redistribution must take place to manage the current inequity in South Africa.
- 27 -
• Poverty focus
- The first priority is to give land to the poor who are in need to contribute to
income and food security. Identification is required of marginalised groups,
including women, evicted and existing labour tenants and landless farm workers.
State assistance is necessary for groups unable to enter the land market on their
own.
• Needs-based
- The previous land policies were government-designed and supply-driven. The
result was inappropriate and unpopular programmes resulted. To avoid previous
mistakes, the programmes must respond to expressed needs and ensure that
structures are established to facilitate this.
• Government as facilitator
- The government is concerned that the demands of the neediest cannot be
articulated in an organised way. The reason for this is due to the marginalisation
of the rural and poor and their weak organisation. The government is therefore
committed to facilitate the expression of demand and inform people about
options.
• Flexibility
- Flexible applications of a policy within the framework of national norms and
standards are required. Land reform policies need to be flexible in order to adapt
in the light of experience and demand.
• Participation, accountability and democratic decision-making
- The participation of communities and individuals throughout the land reform
process is vital. Decisions must be taken democratically at local level. The most
important part is that support must be provided.
• Gender equity
- Equitable opportunities must be given to both women and men. Priority must be
given to women applicants.
• Economic viability and environmental sustainability
- All planning and development of land reform projects at local level must ensure
economical viability and environmental sustainability.
- 28 -
Economic viability
and environmental Poverty focus
sustainability
Government
as facilitator
Principles
Gender equity
Social
Flexibility justice Participation,
accountability and
democratic decision-
making
Needs-based
Figure 3.2 Land Reform Principles Outlined

Source: (White Paper on South Africa Land Policy, 1997).
South Africa has attached some issues and challenges to land reform. The Natives Land Act of
1913, the 1936 Native Trust and Land Act, the Group Areas Act of 1950 and other
discriminatory laws have caused economic and political damage. Other factors that also had an
influence include: the consequence of the forced removals under apartheid; and the legacies of
the ‘homelands’ policy of successive National Party governance. Many participants expected it
to modernise the communal tenure system in former homeland areas; strengthen the position of
women; rapidly create a new class of thriving black commercial farmers; and play a major role in
relieving rural poverty (Bernstein et al., 2005:5 & 6).
3.4.5 Land Summit, 2005
At the end of July 2005, over a thousand South Africans from all walks of life gathered at
NASREC outside Johannesburg to deliberate on the trajectory of land and agrarian reform.
Social movement activists, government officials, farmers, business people, people living and
working on commercial farms, landless communities and beneficiaries of land reform, public
representatives and political parties, traditional leaders, academics, donors, religious leaders
- 29 -
and NGOs engaged in frank and robust debate over three days under the banner of the
Summit: “A Partnership to Fast Track Land Reform: A New Trajectory Towards 2014”. The
Summit was also attended by international delegates from Namibia, Brazil, Zimbabwe, Kenya
and other countries who enriched these debates with their own experiences of land and
agrarian reform (South Africa, 2005b).
The Summit assessed how far we have come in meeting the land and agrarian reform ideals of
our people as reflected in the Freedom Charter and the Constitution. The Summit noted the
progress made by our democratic government in the first ten years of democracy. Nevertheless,
one delegate after another said that progress had at best been slow and costly (South Africa,
2005b).
Each of the nine provinces held a provincial summit, the conclusions of which were fed into the
national Land Summit. However, many delegates expressed concern about the extent and
depth of the pre-Summit consultation process (South Africa, 2005b).
The Summit was convened to ensure that all those with an interest in land and agrarian reform
should be able to freely express themselves. Given the diversity of opinion, the range of
interests involved and the intensity of emotions and passion that the land question justifiably
generated, it was unlikely that consensus would be found on each and every issue. Despite
these challenges, every effort was made to reach consensus and failing that, to adopt positions
supported by the overwhelming majority of delegates. The Land Summit and the resolutions
adopted at the Summit were the starting point for what needs to be an ongoing engagement,
with a view to building the widest possible unity in action around the revised programme of land
and agrarian reform (South Africa, 2005b).
After the Land Summit was held, a committee was established in order to bring the decisions
made at the summit into effect. As illustrated in Figure 3.3, the committee was named the ‘Post-
Settlement Committee’ and represented all the committees, consisting of:
1. Legislation Committee
2. Implementation Committee
3. Policy Committee
- 30 -
POST-
SETTLEMENT
COMMITTEE
Legislation Implementation Policy

Committee Committee Committee
Figure 3.3: Committees that were represented by the Post-Settlement Committee

Source: (Own Construction).
Meetings were held in the offices of the Department of Land Affairs (DLA) in Pretoria. All the
Director Generals (DGs) of Department of Land Affairs and Department of Agriculture (DoA)
were chairpersons of the committee. This committee came to an end, because the DLA and
DoA did not arrive for the meetings anymore. This is actually quite ironic because the meetings
were held in their own offices.
3.4.6 ANC Consultative Conference, 2007
The African National Congress’ (ANC) 52nd National Conference was held from16-20 December
2007 at the University of the North in Polokwane.
At the Conference, the following resolutions were made regarding land and agriculture (ANC,
2007):
• The country’s commitment to land reform, restitution, redistribution and access to land
should be taken into account
• The state and mandated entities must exercise their legal right to expropriate property in
the public interest for public purpose. Compensation shall be awarded in accordance
with the constitution, placing special emphasis on equity, redress and social justice. All
legislation pertaining to expropriation must be aligned with the constitution
- 31 -
• The market-driven land reform must be discarded and the willing-buyer, willing-seller
principle must be reviewed in order to accelerate an equitable distribution of land
• Review the adequacy of post-settlement support in all land reform programmes
• The management and control of state land must be under one department
• The allocation of customary land be democratised and should not only be the preserve
of the traditional leader
• The redundant land belonging to SOEs and municipalities be transferred for low cost
housing
With reference to rural development, land reform and agrarian change, the following was noted
(ANC, 2007):
• The Constitution enjoins the state to take action to enable citizens to gain access to land
on an equitable basis, to ensure security of tenure for people and communities and to
realise the restitution of land rights for those dispossessed after 1913
• Current approaches to land reform are not achieving the scale of outcomes required for
the realisation of a better life for rural South Africans. In particular:
- The Government has only succeeded in redistributing 4% of agricultural land
since 1994, while more than 80% of agricultural land remains in the hands of
fewer than 50 000 white farmers and agribusinesses. The willing-seller, willing-
buyer approach to land acquisition has constrained the space and efficiency of
land reform. It is clear from our experience that the market is unable to effectively
alter the patterns of land ownership in favour of an equitable and efficient
distribution of land
- Land reform has not been located within a broader strategy of rural development
or a commitment to supporting smallholder farming on a scale that is able to
improve rural livelihoods. As a result, changes in land ownership have not
realised their full potential to transform social relations, combat rural poverty and
promote rural development
- The lack of popular participation in land reform has limited its impact and has
undermined efforts to accelerate redistribution
- Land reform beneficiaries, as well as new and existing producers in the former
Bantustans, have often failed because of the inadequate provision of extension
services, capital, infrastructure and market access.
• Rural development is constrained by the insecurity of tenure among farm dwellers and
people living in the former Bantustans
- 32 -
• South Africa is water constrained. Water allocation could be a key instrument in rural
development and land reform
In theory, the ANC has considered all aspects of land reform at the conference held in
Polokwane, before any resolutions were accepted. However, most officials do not contribute in
executing or implementing decisions made at the conference.
3.5 Shortcoming within policies and legislature
The following are shortcomings within the White Paper on South African Land Policy (1997), as
well as other policy documents dealing with land reform.
• No conflict settlement
Whenever land is transferred and emotions play a role, there will be some type of
conflict. Usually between the land owners and the people who receive the land. The third
party, which in this case is the state, is also a huge conflict instigator. Promises are
made that cannot be met. However, nowhere is a plan in place that would fulfil all
parties’ wishes.
• No maintenance strategy
As history has proven, people who receive a farm often do not have the capital or the
know-how to maintain the received farm and make improvements. High capital-driven
farms are given to people who do not know how to farm on such a big scale, or who do
not know how to farm altogether. A strategy must be put in place to educate these
people on exactly how a commercial farm should be managed. And more important,
special care must be given to the cultivation of specific vegetation and livestock on each
individual farm.
• No selection criteria
On what criteria are specific farms given to specific land claimants? That is the question
that can be asked. How has it happened that one tribe can claim more than the area
their cattle have grazed? A perfect example is the Mokgoba land claimants who claimed
the whole of the Magoebaskloof area in Tzaneen as well as some farms in the George’s
Valley area, which mainly falls within the Mathunyeng tribe’s jurisdiction area. How was
that allowed?
• No mechanism to prevent self-enrichment, fraud and nepotism
The government has no plan in place to prevent all this from happening and no form of
policing is prepared in order to monitor if this does not happen. A few people have the
- 33 -
sole mandate to drive the whole land reform process. Does this give them the power to
provide for themselves as well?
• No integrated approach
How is it possible that the commercial farmers who have farmed their land for many
years and took a basic piece of land and established it into a profit-driven entity are not
approached in the education process for the new upcoming farmers? A more integrated
approach is necessary for skills and knowledge to be transferred from one person to the
next. This is the only way that the upcoming farmers will make a success of the newly
received farm.
3.6 Willing-buyer, willing-seller principle
Because the willing-buyer, willing seller principle has often been mentioned in this document, it
is important to explain what this principle means, the repercussions of this principle, as well as
the advantages and disadvantages.
The concept of ‘willing-buyer, willing seller’ (WBWS) has dominated the discourse on land
reform in South Africa since 1994. It can be described as one of the defining characteristics of
the programme, distinguishing it from most other land reforms around the world (Lahiff, 2005:1).
The term willing-buyer, willing-seller (WBWS) has some history of usage in South Africa,
particularly around the operation of the Expropriation Act of 1975, under which the price paid for
expropriated property is determined by reference to the price that would be paid for the property
were it to be exchanged between a willing seller and a willing buyer. In this context, WBWS
refers to an imaginary ideal, rather than an actual practice. WBWS entered the discourse
around land reform in South Africa gradually during the period 1993-1996. It was entirely absent
from the ANC’s ‘Ready to govern’ document of 1992, which instead advocated expropriation
and other non-market mechanisms. It was similarly absent form the Reconstruction and
Development Programme of 1994. However, at the time of the White Paper on South African
Land Policy of 1997, a market-based approach, and particularly the concept of WBWS, had
become the cornerstone of government’s land reform policy (Lahiff, 2005:1). According to the
Third Draft Discussion Document of the Department of Land Affairs, (2006:4), “the concept of
the willing buyer, willing seller principle means a completely voluntary transaction between a
buyer and a seller”.
- 34 -
As was stated in the Farmer’s Weekly of 4 August 2008, the minister of agriculture has
repeatedly explained that drastic measures like the Expropriation Bill are necessitated by white
farmers who want too much for their land. A recent study by the Centre for Development
Enterprise showed that agricultural land prices in fact escalated by 1,1% over the past three
years. No-one has told her that her department actually appoints the property assessors and
that land owners have no say in valuations. She does not know that landowners who
immediately accept government’s offer without any queries or conditions, wait an average of 13
months for a transaction to materialise.
Gloomier is the fate of five more willing sellers who queried offers of 20% to 45% below market
value, and with obvious mistakes on the size of developed areas in the valuation report. Or
consider a case of five willing sellers whose land was not valued. Farms in the fertile Harmony
block between Hoedspruit and Tzaneen were valued in May 2007. After numerous fruitless
visits and hundreds of calls and letters to the commission from farmers, lawyers, organised
agriculture and agribusinesses, the commission made offers in July 2008. It was clear that 20%
to 45% had been deducted from the values proposed by the professional assessor. Officials
gradually admitted that it was the manager of quality control (who has no formal training or any
experience in the property market) who took the liberty of making deductions (Farmer’s Weekly,
2008).
The Democratic Alliance (DA) states that it is in favour of a sustainable, equitable and just land
reform programme. However, it rejected most of the recommendations that emanated from the
Land Summit held in 2005 (DA, 2005:4). The following comments were made about the
discussions regarding the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle (DA, 2005:4-5):
• The abandonment of the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle would undermine investor

confidence in rural areas and threaten the stability of the agricultural sector. This would
include emerging farmers who would not be given access to desperately needed
finance, as the security of their collateral, namely the land they own, becomes uncertain.
• The rejection of the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle would be tantamount to an

assault on property rights, which are the cornerstone of a free economy and an open
opportunity society. This would negatively affect the property rights, not only of farm
owners, but also of property owners as a whole, thus discouraging foreign investment
and jeopardising prospects for economic growth.
- 35 -
• The agricultural sector is highly geared, with up to a third of the total value of this sector
held as debt by banks. Abandoning the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle would in
effect destroy the value base of the agricultural sector, and thereby threaten the viability
of the entire rural economy. This would lead to large-scale unemployment and leave an
even greater majority of residents in rural areas stuck in a poverty trap of the
government’s own making.
• By jettisoning a market-orientated approach to land reform, the government would

encourage the development of a “black market” in land transfer, which would, in turn,
lead to price distortions, ultimately making it more difficult for a just and fair land reform
programme to take place. It would also create uncertainty of tenure, considering that in
order to be of value land must be “bankable”, which it can only be if there is security of
tenure. The lack of certainty over tenure would have a direct negative impact on both
current landowners and future landowners as it would limit their ability to access capital.
• If the government were to abandon the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle and embark
on large-scale expropriation, there is a very real possibility that this would undermine the
overall productivity of the agricultural sector. Accelerated and haphazard land reform of
this nature will in all likelihood leave recipients worse off than before and would fail to
ensure that land is used to its full productive capacity. Previous experience has shown
that all too often recipients of land reform are left to fend for themselves, with little or no
support from the state in terms of the provision of the necessary assistance such as
skills transfers and equipment.
Currently the government is looking at abandoning the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle due
to various reasons. One of the acquisitions made is that, because it is an open market system,
the farmers raise the prices of their farms and therefore the government must pay way more
than what the land is worth. This statement is actually highly untrue.
According to de Jager (2007:74), parliament has admitted that 35% less was paid for land in the
redistribution programme with the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle, than in the land claims
process. Why is it then necessary to eliminate the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle? There is
more than enough land available in the market to succeed in land reform. Pam Golding has
more than 5 million hectares of land on its books and the Jigsaw-property group has submitted
even more than that to the Land Affairs Department (now called the Department for Sustainable
- 36 -
Development and Land Reform). If the department was serious about the transfer of land to
black people, why did they not buy the available land?
Another acquisition made is the following: “farmers are free to sell to the highest bidder or buyer
of their choice. Thus, the land owners can actively avoid offering their land for sale for land
reform purposes, say on racist ground, and still dispose of their land on the open market”
(Lahiff, 2005:1).
Now, the question can be asked: Why would a seller avoid selling his land due to racist reasons
in the economic climate of today? When a farmer wants to sell his land, he will sell it to any
person, regardless of the colour of the farmer or the buyer. According to de Jager (2007:75), the
agricultural sector is not profitable enough for farmers to keep clinging to their farms.
In 2006, the minister of the Department of Land Affairs (Department for Sustainable
Development and Land Reform) mentioned the word “expropriation” when speaking about the
replacement of the willing-buyer, willing-seller principle (Farmer’s Weekly, 2006:14).
Expropriation will not be in favour of Clause 25 of the Constitution, which states that
(Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996):
(2) Property may be expropriated only in terms of law of general application –

(a) for a public purpose or in the public interest; and
(b) subject to compensation, the amount of which and the time and manner of payment
of which have either been agreed to by those affected or decided or approved by a
court.
(3) The amount of the compensation and the time and manner of payment must be just and
equitable, reflecting an equitable balance between the public interest and the interests of those
affected, having regards to all relevant circumstances, including –
(a) the current use of the property;
(b) the history of the acquisition and use of the property;
(c) the market value of the property
(d) the extent of direct state investment and subsidy in the acquisition and beneficial
capital improvement of the property; and
(e) the purpose of expropriation
- 37 -
3.7 Solution
Land reform is not just a difficult and expensive procedure, but also a very sensitive process.
The complexity and scale are enormous and the impact on the society involved is absolutely
unthinkable. It does not only affect the new upcoming farmers or the white farmers selling their
land, but all the people living in South Africa and the countries that food are exported to.
Land reform should not be studied in isolation. One of the main aspects influenced by land
reform, other than commercial agriculture, is spatial planning for spatial development in
agricultural driven towns. Spatial planning refers to “the methods used by the public sector to
influence the distribution of people and activities in spaces of various scales. Spatial planning
includes all levels of land use planning, including urban planning, regional planning,
environmental planning and national spatial plans” (Anon, 2009).
As can be seen from the above-mentioned definition, spatial planning refers to planning spaces
where people can establish themselves. It is not only restricted to physical spatial expansion,
but also environmental planning. This means that environmentally sensitive areas must stay
protected, while a town expands its boundaries.
Land reform has a definite impact on food production and spatial development in the rural
areas. This means that very serious consequences may arise from land reform. South Africa is
in need of a land reform programme that is developmentally and politically successful. An
increasing degree of confidence must be stimulated in order for investors to keep investing in
the agricultural sector, as well as in the overall spatial development of South Africa.
The objective is currently to give land to the previously disadvantaged. In turn, food production
and providing adequate housing to the poor have taken a back-seat. Should the focus not rather
be to provide land big enough to grow sustainable domestic feed stock, with adequate housing
and basic services near places of amenities? Thus, the land owner still has a steady income
each month and he will be able to provide food for his family. This will also fall into place with
governments’ commitment to provide housing to the poor. Spatial development of small towns
will increase, because these so called “agri-villages” will be established on the outskirts of the
local towns.
The agricultural village idea will be perfect in order to combine urban planning, regional planning
and the protection of commercial agricultural land.
- 38 -
This initiative will contribute to the tradition of the local black South Africans. Based on historical
patterns, black South Africans were existence farmers. Many have had the opportunity to
become commercial farmers, but chose to be existence farmers instead. New commercial farm
beneficiaries have made a success of the farms received through the land reform process, but
according to studies, the upcoming farmers chose to rather farm on small-scale, for domestic
use, instead of having to carry the responsibility of managing a commercial farming enterprise.
Would land reform’s solution not rather be agricultural-villages in the suburbs of local towns? In
this initiative, each beneficiary receives a three hectare piece of farm land in the outskirts of the
local town. Once the beneficiary can prove that he can make a living and even a profit from
farming on a small scale, he will be able to receive a commercial farm, preferably available on
the free market, where he will be able to prove himself. The agri-village is not as labour
intensive as a large commercial farm and the beneficiary will be able to get to know the market
climate first before he starts producing on a larger scale. Also, with a bit of money in his pocket,
he will be able to afford farming equipment in order to improve his way of farming.
This initiative will ensure that the food security of South Africa will be protected and the land
reform process will be much less an emotional see-saw. Also, it can be an incredible economic
injection for local towns with much more employment opportunities.
- 39 -
Commercial Agriculture
Agri - Village
Tzaneen
CBD
Agri- Village
Agri -
Village
Commercial Agriculture
Figure 3.4: Agri-Village Principle

Source: Own Construction
3.8 Conclusion
Various legislation and principles are involved in the composition of the land reform programme.
Unfortunately, none of them are focused on protecting the spatial development of towns
affected by land reform.
There is a possibility that the “agricultural village” initiative can accelerate the land reform
process in South Africa, while spatial development of the affected towns will be stimulated. All
basic services are available to the agri-village area and the upgrading and extension of services
will be much cheaper than providing those services to a farm located further form the CBD.
Because of the dynamics in a town such as Tzaneen, it is possible that an initiative such as this
will be well embraced by a town such as Tzaneen.
- 40 -
Chapter 4 - Land reform programmes
Chapter 4 – Land reform programmes
4.1 Introduction
The South African Government introduced various programmes and sub-programmes to ensure
the equitable redistribution of land. The aim of these programmes was to redistribute 30% of
prime agricultural land to black emerging farmers by 2014 (DALA, 2005). By December 2004,
government had only delivered an area of up to 4,3 percent of commercial agricultural land to
black people. This figure indicates that the transfer of land, if state land is excluded, is only a
total of 3,4 percent. This results in the government being under a huge amount of pressure to
perform and implies delivery of land on the scheduled date (Bernstein et al., 2005:7).
Restitution
Compensation Performances
process
Land reform
programmes
Redistribution
Land tenure process
Issues Challenges Performances Delivery Issues Grants
- 41 -
The research process outline above indicates the various land reform programmes and how
they relate to each other.
Government never made it clear how progress towards the 30% would be measured and no
measurement instrument has ever been developed. It has never been clear how the 30% would
be defined and this has caused uncertainty and confusion among land owners and other rural
investors. The Agri Land Forum, a discussion Forum of interest groups in the agricultural,
property and industrial sectors, aired its frustration in this regard shortly after the National Land
Summit.
“The Land Summit, held in 2005, was never clear on what land reform is expected to deliver.
The goal of 30% of all land to be transferred to black owners before 2014 was not defined. If it
means that 30% of the surface of our country should belong to black people, will it be measured
per municipal district, including the vast semi-desert areas of the Northern Cape? Or does it
refer to the total number of property title deeds? To adopt government’s approach on a set of
poorly defined goals could have potentially devastating consequences on the economy, and
that spells disaster” (Agri Land Forum, 2006).
By December 2004, a total of 3,5 million hectares of land had been delivered. This is the 4,3
percent of land delivered mentioned above. According to the Department of Land Affairs (DLA),
government had to deliver a further 20,6 million hectares of commercial land to reach the 30%
target by 2014. This meant an average of 2,06 million hectares a year. Over the next five years,
delivery averaged 0,38 million hectares a year, dropping annually (Bernstein et al., 2005:13).
By 2009, only 5% of land had been transferred through the three land reform programmes. This
means that delivery must increase fivefold to meet the 2014 target. According to Bernstein et al.
(2005:13), as stated in different terms, if the current pace is maintained, the 30% target will only
be reached in 54 years’ time. It also means that the Department has to annually deliver the
same results that it had delivered in total over the last 15 years. The shifting of target dates
(probably well into the 2020s) has become unavoidable. A further difficulty is that national and
provincial departments lack the capacity to effectively support land reform beneficiaries.
The above-mentioned delivery statements were made on estimates only, and not on the
complete facts. There is no measuring instrument in place in order to determine exactly how
much land is in black ownership, as race is not indicated on the deeds register. Many land
transactions from white to black have been processed without the involvement and knowledge
of the department and there is no way to trace or measure the contributions private transactions
- 42 -
have made towards the 30% target. For all we know we are maybe way closer to the 30% target
(if assumed that the 30% is based on the number of title deeds), than we realise.
As mentioned in Chapter 3, the land reform process consists of three pillars. In this section a
thorough explanation will follow regarding each of these pillars.
Land Reform
Restitution Redistribution Tenure Reform
Figure 4.1: Three processes in land reform

Source: Own construction.
4.2 Restitution process

4.2.1 Introduction to the restitution process
According to the Ministry for Agriculture and Land Affairs (2005:11), the Government’s Land
Restitution Programme is based on the provision in Section 25(7) of the Constitution:
“A person or community dispossessed of property after 19 June 1913 as a result of past racially
discriminatory laws or practises is entitled, to the extent provided by an Act of Parliament, either
to restitution of that property or to equitable redress.”
The restitution programme is governed by the Land Rights Act No 22 of 1994. Through this Act,
land can be restored to claimants or alternative land can be acquired. Financial compensation
can be paid, or other provisions can be made in a development programme. The Land Claims
Commission was instituted to facilitate all restitution claims (Ministry for Agriculture and Land
Affairs (2005:11).
- 43 -
The Commission’s vision is (Ministry for Agriculture and Land Affairs):

• Promotion of equity for victims of dispossession by the state, particularly the landless
and rural poor
• Facilitation of development initiatives by bringing together all stakeholders relevant to
land claims
• Promotion of reconciliation through the restitution process; and
• Contribution towards an equitable redistribution of land rights
The restitution programme was introduced by the Government of National Unity (GNU) in 1994.
The intention of this programme is to address any past injustices caused by racially-based
legislation (DALA, 2005:7). “The restitution policy is guided by the principles of fairness and
justice.” A restitution policy is required so that a broader development interest can be developed
throughout the country. This also means that resources must be used in a responsible manner.
The Reconstruction and Development Programme must support restitution in order to be
successful (White Paper on South African Land Policy, 1997:49-50). According to DALA
(2005:7), this programme was designed to promote national reconciliation, nation-building and
economic development. According to stipulated rules and regulations, a restitution claim is only
valid if:
• The claimant was disposed

- of a right in land
- after 19 June 1913
- due to any past racial discriminatory laws or practices
• No equitable compensation was paid to the claimant
• The claim was lodged no later than 31 December 1998
Government spent a lot of time and money to convince people to lodge their claims according to
the restitution process. It was noticed that only 34 000 claims were lodged by March 1998.
Government decided to extend the lodgement date to 31 December 1998. The number of
claims lodged at the cut-off date of 31 December 1998 counted up to a total of 63 455, including
individual (or family) and community claims, in both urban and rural areas (Ministry of
Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:23-28). According to Lahiff (2007:3), following a major
validation campaign in 2002, the total number of claims in the system was revised to 79 687
and the settlement of claims accelerated dramatically. By August 2006, only 8 107 claims were
still waiting to be settled, of which 6 975 were classified as rural and 1 132 as urban. Land
- 44 -
Affairs Annual Report (2009:30) stated that by the end of 2009 a total of 4 296 claims were still
outstanding.
After the deadline for the lodgement of claims had expired after 31 December 1998, a number
of disgruntled communities and land rights organisations tried to put pressure on government to
re-open the claims procedures to allow for new land claims to be lodged. This transpired inter
alia at the North West Provincial mini land summit. In its report (2005:4) it is argued that the
goal of the restitution policy is to restore land, together with the provision of restitution remedies
to people dispossessed by racial discrimination. The Restitution of Land Rights Act, 22 of 1994
and the Constitution provide a framework for the resolution of land claims against the state. This
aspect has, however, not been communicated and understood by the disadvantaged
communities. The timeframe for the lodged claims was limited to a number of three years,
whereas it took the previous regime 81 years to dispossess other sectors in the South African
communities. As a result, some legitimate claimants were omitted and therefore prevented them
from claiming their rights, or compensation, to their ancestral land (North West Provincial mini
land summit Report, 2005:4).
It is important to note the questions that arise from the argument above. The previous regime
took 81 years to dispossess other sectors in the South African communities. It implies that
restitution should also take 81 years to complete. Ancestral land is not part of the requirements
for restitution. However, the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform has
interpreted it wrongly, with the result that in the northern and eastern provinces, especially in the
Tzaneen area, the notion that black communities were entitled to restoration of ancestral land
without taking the four conditions of the Restitution Act into account, is false. This may lead to
an expansion of the traditional areas or former homelands.
4.2.2 Performances
According to the North West provincial mini land summit report (2005), land reform in South
Africa was intended to promote equity in land ownership throughout the nation, as well as to
alleviate poverty. However, studies by the affiliates of Agri South Africa in the Tzaneen area
have shown that there has been a 94% job loss on farms as a result of land reform.
The first five years of the restitution programme was used to establish policies and procedures
for researching, negotiating and finalising a restitution claim in terms of the Restitution of Land
Rights Act. It is the Commission’s responsibility to facilitate the investigation, verification and
- 45 -
finalisation of the claims. Another task of the Commission is the referral of a claim to the Land
Claims Court for ratification or adjudication (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:11).
By 1998, the Chief Land Claims Commissioner and Regional Commissioners decided to call a
review of the restitution process. The dilemma was that there were a number of policy and
implementation frameworks that hindered the delivery of restitution and they subsequently
needed to be streamlined (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:11).
One of the obstacles that had to be dealt with was the lack of integration of restitution into the
land reform programme as a whole (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:11).
Restitution had to be positioned as preference above the other land reform programmes in
order to avoid a situation where the department was compelled to buy the same farm twice. The
farms La Boheme of Leon Bondisio and Geluksfontein of Mr Johan Green in Trichardtsdal were
sold to land redistribution beneficiaries under the SLAG Programme in 2000 and 2002.
However, in 2003, they were gazetted as part of the Sekororo Land Claim, and both beneficiary
groups were willing sellers simply because they saw an opportunity to make a profit while
farming operations on the two farms collapsed.
Similarly, many commercial land owners became willing sellers to escape from the burden of
large numbers of farm dwellers who exercised land rights in terms of the ESTA legislation on
their farms. They sold their farms to land claimants along with the farm dwellers and thus
transferred the problem to the new land owners, leaving government with the dilemma to strike
a balance between the rights of land claimants and the beneficiaries of their tenure reform
programme.
The lack of integration caused a deficiency in the realisation of development potential as well
as economic empowerment opportunities for claimants (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs
2005:11). Progress with restitution was most commonly measured by counting the number of
claims that had been settled. By this measure, the pace of the programme increased
dramatically from 1999, following the implementation of recommendations from a ministerial
review (Du Toit et al., 1998). This resulted in a shift from a judicial process, in which the Land
Claims Court adjudicated each claim and made restitution orders, to a largely administrative
process in which the CRLR settled claims primarily through negotiation, only referring cases to
the Land Claims Court (LCC) where there were disputes or where claimants contested the type
or level of compensation offered (Hall, 2004:12).
- 46 -
On the down side, it caused endless delays accompanied by vast uncertainty among both land
owners and investors, causing a major outflow of investment capital from the rural areas.
As the restitution process was intended to be finalised in March 2005, the land claims
commission embarked on a comprehensive exercise to the get the outstanding land claims
gazetted in 2004. Without proper research into the validity of these claims, hundreds of land
claims were massified. In the Tzaneen area the Makgoba Tribe originally claimed only six farms,
but 685 properties were gazetted in their favour in 2004. During the five years of delays up to
the transfer of the first farms of willing sellers, the timber, avocado and tourist industries took a
huge economic knock mainly as a result of investment uncertainty and the freezing up of the
property market.
Since 2000, the implementation of the recommendations and reviews has led to a significant
increase in settled claims, although the emphasis has been on the settlement of urban claims
(Gauteng 26%, Eastern Cape 23% and Western Cape 16%). A need to address the more
complex rural claims remained (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:11).
According to Hall (2004:14), another innovation that enabled the commission to speed up the
settlement of claims was the introduction from 2000 of Standard Settlement Offers (SSOs) of
cash compensation for urban claims, usually set at R40 000 per household for former owners
(R50 000 in certain metropolitan areas) and R17 500 per household for former long-term
tenants. Primarily as a result of these two changes in implementation, the number of claims
settled jumped from:
• 41 in 1999 to
• 3 916 in 2000;
• 12 074 in 2001;
• 29 877 in 2002;
• and 46 727 in 2003 (Commission on the Restitution of Land Rights (CRLR) 2003:25).
By the end of August 2004, a cumulative total of 56 650 claims had been settled, resulting in the
transfer of 810 292ha of land (just under 1% of agricultural land in the country) at a cost of
about R1.5 billion (Hall, 2004:14).
By December 2004, a total of 57 257 claims had been settled, which is approximately 70% of
some 80 00 claims submitted by the 1998 deadline. These were mainly urban claims and
- 47 -
represented the simple part of the challenge. Only 812 315 ha of land had been transferred;
equal to just 1% of commercial agricultural land. Government has made good progress
regarding urban land claims. Most of the urban claims were settled with cash instead of land.
Rural claims are far more complex: they tend to involve more people and are therefore more
complicated to resolve. As a result, the settlement of rural claims has progressed more slowly –
about 9 000 rural claims involving millions of people were still outstanding (Bernstein et al.,
2005:11).
As can be seen from the above statement, mostly rural claims have been settled since 1999 to
2004. The problem with this is that the settlement of these claims generates numbers that make
the government’s performance look good on paper, but does not solve the problem of
agricultural land delivery to the previously disadvantaged. By 2009, not a single land claim was
fully and finally settled. In each claim only a number of farms were transferred leaving the rest of
the farms in a state of uncertainty. By transferring some farms in such a claim without proper
investigation into the validity of the claim, government has acknowledged the validity and
created a legitimate expectation among the claimants to receive the rest. Pressurising the rest
of the land owners to surrender their farms would inevitably result in the latter to challenge the
validity in court, which might obstruct the original transfers. This has caught the department
between the devil and the deep blue sea, prohibiting them from either settling the claim or de-
gazetting it.
Most of the significant transfers have been in the semi-arid Northern Cape and towards the
eastern seaboard of the country – particularly Mpumalanga and KwaZulu-Natal. Far smaller
areas have been transferred in the desperately poor provinces of Limpopo and the Eastern
Cape, in the ‘maize triangle’ of the Free State and even less in the commercial agricultural
heartland of the Western Cape and the largely urban province of Gauteng. While rural claims
are not evenly spread across the country, the provincial variation above also reflects uneven
progress in tackling the restoration of land. For example, the Eastern Cape and Limpopo are
two provinces in which there is a large number of rural claims, but relatively little land has been
restored (Hall, 2004:14).
In February 2005, the target date for settling restitution claims was moved from 31 March to 31
December 2005, and later that year to end of the 2007/2008 financial year (a somewhat more
realistic time frame) (Bernstein et al., 2005:12). The department started in 2007 to use 31
December 2008 in its statements as to represent the deadline. After this date also lapsed no
new deadline has formally been established although treasury refers to 2012 as the final date
for which they are prepared to budget for restitution. According to Bernstein et al. (2005:12),
- 48 -
state funding is a very important factor influencing the achievement of this target. In 2004, the
government budget stood at just under R3,5 billion for restitution in the three years up to
2006/2007. In October 2004, the minister of land affairs, Thoko Didiza, indicated that the state
would have to spend significantly more (perhaps as much as R13 billion) to complete the
restitution process. In February 2005, the government pushed up its restitution budget to R9,9
billion for the three years up to 2007/2008. While this is a significant increase, the total still fell to
more than R3 billion short of the minister’s own estimate.
With the constant moving of deadlines because of non-performance, it seems that the
government does not even blink an eye when it comes to moving dates for the finalisation of
land reform. If things continue at the current rate, the land reform programme will only be
completed in 2085. This is according to a report by Ms Frouwien Bosman, the writer of the
report “Grondhervorming: ŉ kontekstuele analise” (Translated: Land Reform: a contextual
analysis). According to this document, the pace of land reform would have to be multiplied by
five in order to reach its target in 2014. Since the process was started in 1994, only 4% of
agricultural land has been granted to black South Africans (Van Aard, 2007:18).
In 2005, The Centre for Development and Entrepreneurship showed that the government still
had to redistribute 20,6 million hectares of land. The pace then was 0, 38 million hectares per
year. One of the major problems pertaining to land redistribution is that almost a quarter of the
Department of Rural Development and Land Reform’s positions are vacant (Van Aard,
2007:18).
The validation campaign indicates that rural claims comprise about 20% of the valid claims
(Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:14). This is, however, not measurable, because
lately no research has been done on this.
The Commission’s focus shifted from urban to rural claims in the 2002/2003 period. An average
rural claim takes 46 months to process and due to time-shortage regarding the land claims
process over-all, the Commission committed to reduce the settlement to one year (Ministry of
Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:14). This never materialised. On the contrary: by 2009 the
average time for the settlement of a claim had risen to 49 months.
By January 2006, the land claims commission was aware of over 79 696 claims that had been
lodged with the Commission nationally. 68 730 claims have been settled, which has benefited
186 862 households. About 1 007 247 hectares with a total land cost of R2,2 billion have been
restored to claimants. On the other hand, more than R2,3 billion has been paid out as financial
- 49 -
compensation to urban claimants. Of the 68 730 claims settled nationally, 18 749 claims are for
land restoration on which development took place in both urban (15 060) and rural (3 689)
areas. About 12% of the claims settled were rural, while 88% were urban. The outstanding
urban claims are prioritised for settlement within the current financial year. The remainder of
rural claims (7 000) were scheduled for settlements over two years ending in March 2008. The
Commission and the Department of Land Affairs has allocated development grants amounting
to R677 million for planning and development of the land delivered to claimants (South African
Government Information, 2006). However, in their 2009 Annual Report, the Department
admitted to not having reached these targets, with more than 60% of those rural claims still
outstanding.
The following cumulative statistics show all land claims settled since 1995 to March 2009. The
most claims were settled in the Eastern Cape (21%), followed by the Western Cape (20%). The
least claims were settled in the Free State (3%), followed by Mpumalanga (4%). Only 4% of
claims have been settled in the Limpopo province.
In August 2009, the written question was asked in Parliament of how many rural land claims
had been settled to date. The shocking answer followed that not one rural land claim had been
settled in full yet. The numbers below only refer to claims where some properties have been
transferred.
Table 4.1 Settled Restitution Claims: 1995-31 March 2009

Province Claims HHs Beneficiaries HA Total award (R)
E Cape 16194 60747 208064 93600 1699,379,847.17
F State 2654 5813 40624 47363 178,996,877.44
Gauteng 13159 15153 70179 9476 828,787,975.68
KZN 14742 68910 409323 610996 5,969,745,666.80
Limpopo 3067 40124 215936 487935 3,193,116,183.58
Mp’langa 2688 48366 223524 389395 4,360,110,339.87
N Cape 3663 18216 97479 471896 1,118,093,456.64
N West 3707 35118 169823 364729 1,878,649,548.63
W Cape 15526 22986 116297 313204 1,124,003,718.53
Total 75400 315433 1551249 2788594 20,350,883,614.34
Source: Pepeteka et al., 2009.
As can be seen from the table below, the following claims are still outstanding; of which
KwaZulu-Natal has the most outstanding claims (38%). 13% of the claims in KwaZulu-Natal
were resolved between 1 April 2008 and 31 March 2009. The Limpopo province has the second
most outstanding claims (17%) and 26% of the claims were settled from 1 April 2008 to 31
- 50 -
March 2009. The province with the least outstanding claims is Gauteng, with a total of only
three claims outstanding.
Table 4.2 Outstanding claims by 31 March 2009

No of No of claims Dismissed Total no of
outstanding settled: 1 April claims: 1 April outstanding
Province
claims at 31 2008 - 31 2008 - 31 claims by 31
March 2008 March 2009 March 2009 March 2009
Eastern Cape 555 33 0 522
Free State 97 15 54 28
Northern Cape 218 18 11 189
Gauteng 0 1 0 3
North West 215 20 0 195
KZN 1740 72 12 1652
Mpumalanga 851 235 17 422
Limpopo 647 139 0 712
Western Cape 599 12 14 573
Total 4949 545 108 4296
Source: Pepeteka et al, 2009.
4.2.3 Compensation
The constitutional right to claim land according to the restitution process does not mean that
every claimant will receive a piece of land, a house or any amount/compensation. The principle
of equity and fairness stipulates that each case must be treated according to certain merits.
Many claimants feel that they should be compensated with the land they were previously
removed from. Others want another form of recognition for their losses and violation of human
rights. The restitution process does not prescribe the outcome of each and every claim, but
provides a framework and opinions that can be used to develop an appropriate solution through
negotiations (White Paper on South African Land Policy, 1997:53).
Restitution can take the following forms:
• the restoration of the land from which claimants were dispossessed
• provision of alternative land
• payment of compensation
• alternative relief
• priority access to state resources that includes the allocation and development of
housing and land
Regarding all the above mentioned, priority must be given to the restoration of land. Any form of
compensation given at the time of forced removal must be taken into consideration when
- 51 -
compensation is provided (White Paper on South African Land Policy, 1997:53). However, in
the Tzaneen area there is no record of any research to establish the discrepancy between
historical compensation that claimants had received and historical market value. In all cases
where beneficiaries claimed to have received less than market-related compensation when
removed from any particular property, they were either rewarded with the whole developed farm
or with financial compensation to the full.
When land is awarded to households, the Land Claims Court may determine certain rights in
order to ensure that all dispossessed members of a community have access to the land. This
takes place on a fair and non-discriminatory basis, which includes women and people whose
rights were not formally recognised (White Paper on South African Land Policy, 1997:53).
Unfortunately, the administrative system allows people who had not been part of the claimant
community as stipulated on the original claim form, to piggy-back on the process and be
included on the register of beneficiaries of land in which they never held rights.
According to the White Paper on South African Land Policy (1997:54), it is the state’s
responsibility to compensate certain successful claimants where restoration or other remedies
are not appropriate. The Constitution deals with such claimants and therefore provides
equitable compensation. The applicable portion of Section 123(4)(a) reads as follows:
“The compensation…shall be… just and equitable taking into account the circumstances which
prevailed at the time of the dispossession and all other factors as may be prescribed by the
(Restitution of Land rights Act, 1994 [such as factors listed in Section 34]), including any
compensation that was paid upon such dispossession.”
Compensation to land owners

Sections 25(2) and 25(3) of the Constitution deal with the compensation of privately owned land
needed for restitution. Section 25 states that “No one may be deprived of property except in
terms of law of general application, and no law my permit arbitrary deprivation of property.”
Section 25(2) states further that “Property may be expropriated only in terms of law of general
application –
a) for a public purpose or in the public interest; and
b) subject to compensation, to the amount of which and the time and manner of payment of
which have either been agreed to by those affected or decided or approved by a court.”
- 52 -
Section 25(3) of the Constitution states that “The amount of the compensation and the time and
manner of payment must be just and equitable, reflecting an equitable balance between the
public interest and the interests of those affected, in regards to all relevant circumstances.”
The issue of compensation to land owners became extremely contentious in the Tzaneen area:
• Since August 2007, the Land Claims Commission had started to offer less than
market value
• By August 2008, the Land Claims Commission was offering only 50-65% of
market value
• Land owners complained that they were intimidated into accepting less than
market value
• The land claims commission justified reduced offers on the basis that the
Constitution allowed for less than market value
The underlying principle is that the owner of the land must not make a profit at the expense of
the public as a result of any special benefits given. It is the Court’s – and not the Department’s -
responsibility to determine what is ‘just and equitable’ compensation. The calculation of what is
‘just and equitable’ must contain the following factors:
• the actual price that was paid by the present owner for the land
• the market value of land, including any improvements made on the land
• the present day market value of the land, excluding improvements
• the contributing value of beneficial improvements made to the property by the owner
since the time of acquisition
• the value of any special benefits that the owner received from the state
The problem is that the impact of the above mentioned on current market value is not
measurable. How do you measure the impact of historical disasters and / or subsidised training
of farers on the current value of the land? The Land claims Commissioner could never explain
how he calculated these other factors to reduce the market-related offer.
More than any other deficiency, the issue of sub-market-related offers had a massive impact on
the spatial development of the Tzaneen area. It caused farmers to refrain from renewing their
citrus and banana orchards, and from developing infrastructure such as pack houses,
processing facilities, irrigation systems and other agricultural assets. This had a knock-on effect
- 53 -
to the Tzaneen business environment where input and service providers to the agricultural
sector suffered declining turnovers.
It even led to the change of land use in some areas especially after the transfer in the Pheeha
claim in Mooketsi where 11 farms were transferred in 2002. The claimants preferred to allocate
portions of the land to individual members of their community for residential settlement and the
Sekororo claim in Trichardtsdal where small portions of the once thriving commercial farms
were allocated to subsistence farmers, simply because they did not have the means to restore
the land to its original agricultural use.
4.3 Redistribution process
The main purpose of the land redistribution programme is to provide land to the poor. This land
is provided for residential and productive purposes in order to improve their livelihoods. The
Redistribution process is not like the restitution process, a rights driven one, based on the
willing-seller principle. The redistribution programme is designed to be flexible and able to
embrace the wide variety of land needs of the eligible applicants. The land redistribution
programme was designed to assist the urban and rural poor, farm workers, labour tenants as
well as emerging farmers. The Land Redistribution Programme was originally designed to assist
eligible individuals to obtain a Settlement/Land Acquisition Grant (SLAG) comparable to urban
housing subsidies. This has proven to be inadequate in acquiring commercial farm land in a
sustainable land, and therefore the Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development (LRAD)
and other redistribution mechanisms such as the Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy (PLAS)
were invented to take the redistribution process forward. (White Paper on South African Land
Policy, 1997:ix).
The redistribution programme was based on a demand-driven and market-based approach. A

grant system was designed to assist all beneficiaries in the programme to purchase land from
willing sellers. The Provision of Land and Assistance Act, 1993 (Act 126 of 1993), assisted the
redistribution programme in the acquisition and land development of land for settlement and
production purposes. Financial grants assisted historically disadvantaged people to acquire
freehold titles in land. The Settlement and Land Acquisition Grant (SLAG) was set at R15 000
per person mainly to conform to the already existing housing subsidy. In 1998, the subsidy was
increased to R16 000 per household (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs, 2005:29).
- 54 -
This can more easily be described as the statutory assistance of all the poor, labour tenants,
farm workers, women and also emerging farmers. The redistribution of land reform is largely
based on the willing-buyer, willing-seller concept. Government will only assist the purchasing of
land, but will not be the buyer or owner of the land (White Paper on South African Land Policy,
1997:36). PLAS changed this. PLAS is based on the principle that government buys the land
from white farmers and rents it to black emerging farmers. According to the White Paper on
South African Land Policy (1997:36), the main purpose of the government will be to assign land
acquisition grants to buyers and to support and finance the process.
The Provision of Land and Assistance Act, 1993 (Act 126 of 1993) provides the main guidelines
used for the redistribution process. It is used for the designation of land for settlement purposes
and provides financial assistance to people acquiring land for productive uses and settlement.
The Act was amended in 1998 and these changes allowed for land to be purchased without
necessarily being designated. It also makes allowance for various other forms of land reform,
for the funding of commonage land acquired by Municipalities and most importantly, it provides
the Minister of Land Affairs with the power to expropriate (Ministry of Agriculture and Land
Affairs, 2005:29).
According to the White Paper on South African Land Policy (1997:ix-x), the Redistribution
Programme will give priority to the following:
• the marginalised and women in need
• projects that can be implemented quickly and effectively
In each of the cases handled throughout the land redistribution programme, it is important to
keep in mind that viability and sustainability must be demonstrated. It is stipulated that
government will ensure that geographical spreading of different projects will take place. This
includes diversity of projects, covering different beneficiary sectors, different land uses and
different tenure arrangements (White Paper on South African Land Policy, 1997:ix-x).
The following aspects are addressed in the Land Redistribution Programme (White Paper on
South African Land Policy, 1997:ix-x):
Land invasions: Government will not give priority to any group or people participating in land
invasions. Government undertakes to work with organised groups.
- 55 -
Overcoming discrimination against women: Discrimination against women is a problem that

has occurred throughout history. The government decided to involve women in the redistribution
process. Government will uphold the provision of the Constitution that outlaws discrimination
against women. This involves the removal of legal restrictions on women’s access to land.
Farm workers: Farm workers entail special attention in the redistribution programme. They are
one of the most apprehensive groups in the population of South Africa. Farm workers as well as
their families are granted subsidies to improve tenure insecurities. The Settlement/Land
Acquisition Grant and LRAD are used for this purpose.
Labour tenants: The objectives of the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act, 3 of 1996 provide for
both the protection of existing rights and make provision for the acquisition of land for labour
tenants who will be able to access the Settlement/Land Acquisition grant.
Partnerships with the private sector: Government will support the private sector, which will
widen the extent and efficiency of the land reform process.
Rural finance: Government will provide financial services for land reform beneficiaries.
4.3.1 Delivery in terms of land redistribution
By March 2009, the redistribution programme had delivered up to 443 600 4886 hectares, which
is 164 459.5114 hectares short of the revised target. A total of 501 projects were finalised and
14 457 beneficiaries were reached through these projects (Land Affairs Annual Report,
2009:33).
All land acquired through the Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy (PLAS) during the 2008/2009
financial year, had been registered in the name of the State. In certain instances the State
provided potential beneficiaries with access to land by means of lease/caretaker agreements
until the land was transferred permanently to suitable beneficiaries. Plans for the disposal of
land to potential beneficiaries are being finalised, where after such land will be transferred to the
beneficiaries in terms of the provisions of the Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development
Grant (LRAD), the Settlement and Production Land Acquisition Grant (SPLAG) and/or the
Commonage Grant (COMG). These grant systems are the principal funding models that are
used under the Land and Tenure Reform Programme (Land Affairs Annual Report, 2009:33).
Performances and deliveries in terms of these funding models can be tabulated as follows:
- 56 -
Table 4.3 Deliveries according to funding instruments

Hectares No of projects No of beneficiaries
LRAD/
PROV Farm
LRAD/COM/ COM/ Indivi- Fe- Yout Disa-
PLAS Total PLAS Total wor-
SLAG/SPLAG SLAG/ duals male h bled
kers
SPLAG
Eastern
14,019.4292 32,603.5142 47,522.9434 26 33 59 772 195 59 153 2
Cape
Free
8,727.3543 55,514.9262 64242.2805 25 73 98 144 53 42 40 0
State
Gauten
0.000 2,554.5806 2,554.5806 0 16 16 44 28 0 9 0
g
KZN 59,528.4999 6,010.7311 65,539.2310 95 20 115 9449 2279 258 1755 91
Limpop
12,208.1997 1,392.3794 14,600.5791 70 3 73 550 93 164 215 6
o
Mpm 15,246.8130 73,025.8538 52,272.6668 17 48 65 1177 402 0 446 0
N-Cape 81,114.9034 44,247.6487 125,362.5521 17 8 25 364 48 232 46 0
NW 6,231.7997 46,636.5600 52,868.3597 14 16 30 238 35 1 27 0
W-Cape 18,637.2954 0.000 18,637.2954 19 0 19 1719 578 993 0 563
Total 216,614.2946 226,986.1940 443,600.4886 283 217 501 14457 3911 1749 2691 663
Source: Land Affairs Annual Report (2009)
The redistribution programme has been hampered by a lack of selection criteria for
beneficiaries. In terms of both the Act and the department’s application guidelines, just about
anyone can qualify to be a beneficiary for land redistribution, irrespective of age, skills, field of
interest or track record. The redistribution programme is not as restrictive on the use or even
exchanging of land as the restitution process is. This programme lends itself to irregularities,
self-enrichment and many unintended results.
4.3.2 Issues regarding redistribution
The White Paper on South African Land Policy (1997:26-27) stipulates some issues regarding
the Land Redistribution Programme:
• The need for land

“Land physically locates people’s sense of being, past and present.” For many, land is only
a symbol for residential purposes, but for other it means much more than that. It is a form of
security that will provide the food that will feed the nation of tomorrow. Another role it plays
is the alleviation of poverty.
- Urban areas
In the apartheid era, many people were prohibited to own land. Restrictions were
implemented that led to backlogs in the access to well-located urban land.
Consequences of these backlogs were land invasions and an uneven pattern of
- 57 -
urban land prices, which caused the poor to live in remote areas. In many of
these informal settlements tenure is insecure, confused and requires clarification.
The rapid rate of urban migration puts enormous pressure on urban land. There
is a need for coordinated policies and strategies to improve speedy land delivery,
management and development. If something is not done soon, land invasions will
continue.
- Land invasions
Landlessness and invasion of land are harsh realities in Southern Africa. Delays
in the release of land, unrealistic expectations and a lack of information have
exacerbated this problem. Urban land invasions have been the result with local
and provincial authorities trying to reverse the problem by means of evictions.
This has only led to ongoing land disputes. In rural areas, eviction of farm
workers and labour tenants resulted in a growth of landless people. Invasions of
public and privately owned land soon followed. State land was also part of this
hard reality of land invasion. The reason for this is that no control and supervision
of state land took place, which created the opportunity for land invasions. The
extraction of rent and selling of this state-owned land are also common. These
land invasions can only be prevented by a dynamic controlling programme.
- Rural areas
In rural areas, the need for land is a very complex aspect. Land is used for a
variety of purposes by a diversity of people. Farm workers need land for the
grazing of stock. New upcoming female farmers are in the spotlight at the
moment, proving that they can also make a success of farming. The
redistribution programme must thus be designed in order to respond to different
needs and circumstances so that it can contribute to economic growth and the
alleviation of poverty.
• The use of municipal commonage

The term ‘commonage’ refers to land owned by a municipality or authority that was
normally acquired through state grants or the church. It differs from other municipal land
because residents have acquired grazing rights on the land or the land was granted
expressly to benefit needy local inhabitants. Municipal commonage provides
opportunities for land reform because it is public land that does not need to be acquired.
It is an existing institution’s responsibility to manage the land. For the government to
address the local economic development and provide an inexpensive land reform
- 58 -
programme, the reallocation of commonage to poor residents is a viable option. A

constraints regarding commonage is the fact that not all local authorities are willing to
assist the poor residents to obtain access to the land.
It is important to communicate information on a regular basis to rural communities. The Strauss

Commission found that the availability of information was a critical barrier to rural development
at all the different levels. The main reason for this is the difficulty to pass on information in the
rural areas, especially in the case of farm workers (White Paper on South African Land Policy,
(1997:38).
The rural poor are among the poorest, not only in South Africa, but in fact all over the world. It is
stated that more than 70% of South Africa’s poor lives in rural areas, whereas more than a
quarter of South Africa’s population are classified as poor (Deininger & May, 2000:3). Giving the
poor assets will promote equity in the country – one of the main aspects Government is trying to
reach. A number of recent papers have argued that a more equitable distribution of wealth can
lead to the promotion of efficiency. This means that when the poor have more assets they will
be able to obtain more credit and better insurance, which in return will help them invest more
effectively. This results in the fact that the country will eventually have an enhanced distribution
of income, health and education, which will lead to overall productivity. The poor will also have
the knowledge to start small businesses of their own by pledging the land against the loans
(Banerjee, 1998:14).
In the redistribution programme (as in the restitution programme), the opposite was more often
true. Some of the severest critics of the land reform programme in South Africa are constantly
pointing out that land reform leaves beneficiaries poorer, mostly because they do not have the
means to maintain a sustainable farming operation on the land. This leads to beneficiaries
leaving urban areas and settlements for their newly acquired farms. Left with less income than
ever before, these beneficiaries then leave the farms after a year or two. They move back to
their towns or settlements of origin and leave the farms abandoned with absentee owners.
4.3.3 The decrease of challenges through the use of grants
According to the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs (2005:29), targets were set by the
Department of Land Affairs to redistribute 30% of land by 2014. They face a number of
challenges before the mentioned target can be reached:
- 59 -
• Deal with the widely differing needs and aspirations of people for the land in both rural
and urban areas.
• Redistribution of land in an equitable and affordable manner
• Contribution to employment, poverty reduction and economic growth
• Addressing the situation of landlessness and homelessness
In the formulation of answers to these challenges, the South African land reform strategy took
the international lessons of land reform into consideration. These include:
• the need for speed

• decentralisation
• economically sustainable production models
• complementary agricultural and support service and infrastructure
• involvement of the non-governmental and private sector
(Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:29).
The programme was designed to be flexible and therefore allow different types of projects, such
as:
• group settlement
• group and individual production
• on-farm and off-farm worker equity schemes
The basic grant was supported by a planning grant to be used by the Department of Land
Affairs to conduct feasibility studies, prepare business plans, do valuations, meet transfer costs
etc. (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:29-30).
According to the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs (2005:30), good progress was made in
the first five years of operation. Unfortunately, some mistakes made by other countries were
repeated. These included:
• lengthy project cycles

• excessive bureaucracy and reliance on outside consultants to formulate project plans
• over-centralisation of the decision-making process
• low levels of complementary support services
- 60 -
Some problems generated in the South African programme were the reluctance of the
Department of Land Affairs and Agriculture to collaborate. Land Affairs provided land, as well as
resources for agricultural capital, inputs and assisting in farm plans. A lack of integration existed
between relevant Government departments, non-governmental service providers, NGOs and
the private sector (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:30).
The Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs (2005:30) stipulated that while the programme was
based on market-assisted approach, the land market itself was not structured. Sub-division
restrictions remained in place, forcing beneficiaries to pool their small grants together and buy
large commercial farms. No official policy existed under which the beneficiaries could own the
acquired farm. Officials promoted the Communal Property Association as the main form of
holder of property rights. As a result, SLAG was characterised as:
• a slow deliverer;
• having a significant number of poorly appraised and supported projects;
• having an emphasis on communal property associations that often resulted in misguided
attempts; and
• having an insufficient impact on beneficiary’s incomes and agricultural production.
SLAG was an absolute disappointment in South Africa. There was not one successful SLAG
project. The MEC of Limpopo repossessed 71 SLAG farms in 2007. If one takes into
consideration the influence on food security because of these mistakes, SLAG was a huge
disaster.
This same issue was reported in the Farmer’s Weekly of 29 December 2006. The following was
said: “We reported on the Limpopo agriculture department deregistering 71 farms bought by
government after showing that production had declined sharply, and on how the state failed to
release its land to black farmers, dashing the dreams of about 200 small-scale farmers aiming
to become commercial producers.” They further reported that “In another noteworthy case,
BOTCH-UP IN Tzaneen saw a farm which was bought for R1,4 million by the government sold
for a mere R110 000 after the beneficiary failed to settle a R27 000 electricity bill”.
On 11 March 2007, Rapport also reported on this issue: “The provincial government has paid
more than R100 million for farms on which 6 500 families were established under the SLAG
Programme. Me. Dikiledi Magadzi, MEC for agriculture in Limpopo, deregistered these farms in
February 2007 because the farms were under-utilised” (Anon, 2007:5).
- 61 -
4.3.3.1 The Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development (LRAD)
In August 2001, the Department of Land Affairs adopted a new sub-programme – the Land
Redistribution for Agricultural Development (LRAD) – which has in theory shifted the emphasis
of redistribution away from settlement and towards sustainable agriculture. LRAD uses a
combination of state grants and commercial loan finance (Bernstein et al., 2005:12). This grant
was developed to assist Municipalities to acquire land for commonage purposes or to extend
current commonage. The grant was mainly used in cases where the R16 000 grant from the
SLAG programme was not sufficient (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:30).
As said by the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs (2005:32), the goal of the LRAD is the
following:
• “to contribute more significantly to agricultural development and to extend the target
group beyond the poor to include emerging black farmers
• The redistribution target was set at 30% of agricultural land to the historically
disadvantaged over a period of 15-20 years”
The LRAD was designed as a joint programme between the Departments of Agriculture and
Government on the three different levels (National, Provincial and District levels).
A few aspects were introduced by the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs (2005:32), which
was an improvement on the SLAG programme:
• Applicants would be able to access LRAD grants on an individual basis
• The grants would be calculated on a sliding scale from R20 000 to R100 000, depending
on the applicant’s own contribution in kind, labour and cash
• Flexible to cover land acquisition, land improvements, infrastructure investments, capital
assets and short-term agricultural inputs
• Increase range by including a wide range of projects
The LRAD programme was also designed to include other institutions in the project
implementation, such as financial institutions. These institutions need to obtain project approval
from the LRAD authorities. These institutions would apply the LRAD eligibility and selection
criteria, and have the authority to approve the LRAD grants (Ministry of Agriculture and Land
Affairs 2005:32).
- 62 -
In order to remain righteous it is important for government to allocate the same resources to all
beneficiaries. This also applies to the level of state support in terms of grants awarded.
Governments must be mindful to recognise the importance of encouraging individual enterprise
and initiative (White Paper on South African Land Policy, 1997:37).
The highest output in terms of the number of hectares delivered was done by the redistribution
programme which has delivered 50% of all land transferred in land reform. The sub-programme
Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development (LRAD), which assisted the redistribution
programme, still takes the lead by having delivered 20% of this figure, despite the fact that it
was only implemented in 2001 (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:30). The LRAD is
easily accessible to those seeking land for survivalist rather than commercial activities.
According to a senior DLA official, the problem remains that as many as 80% of LRAD
beneficiaries may be using their land for subsistence. This raises the question of whether the
LRAD programme is really producing significantly different outcomes from the previous,
discredited SLAG programme. A total of 19 736 new black farmers have reportedly been
resettled through LRAD since its inception (Bernstein et al., 2005:12).
Table 4.4: Differences between SLAG and LRAD policies
SLAG Projects LRAD Projects

A grant amount of only R16 000 Grants of R111 000 - R430 000
per household per individual adult
Own contribution was not required Own contribution is required
SLAG is linked to the housing LRAD grant is de-linked from the
subsidy register housing subsidy register
Grants allocated to households Grants allocated to individuals
Planning grants, 9% of R16 000 Planning grant 15% of the total
LRAD grants
No graduation in grant size Graduated grant sizes
Implementation over-centralised Implementation decentralised
Covered all land reform projects Specific to productive land use
agricultural projects
Land Affairs sole implementing Land Bank also appointed as
agency implementing agency
Source: Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs, 2005.
In the case of urban land redistribution, throughout the country urban areas are struggling with
an increase in homelessness. This problem is far greater than can be solved by provision of
housing at the moment. The problem is further exaggerated by the insecure tenure that has an
impact on many informal settlements in the city areas (White Paper on South African Land
Policy, 1997:43).
- 63 -
The urban land reform programme consists of two elements (White Paper on South African
Land Policy, (1997:43):
• The first is directed to measurements that will result in the alleviation of landlessness
through the provision of land.
• The second is the delivery of secure tenure to people in the places where they currently
are.
4.3.4 The Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme

(CASP)
According to the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs (2005:37) the CASP framework was
developed to complement LRAD. The CASP framework has become a core programme within
the Department of Agriculture.
The aim of CASP, as stipulated by the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs (2005:37):
“…to improve the quality of post settlement support services as well as bridge the policy gap
between land reform and agricultural development.”
Another aspect of CASP is that it targets beneficiaries of land reform and includes other
producers who have acquired land through private means. This can only happen as long as
they are currently engaged in value-adding agricultural enterprises domestically or involved in
export of agricultural products (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:37).
As stated by the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs (2005:37) the main priorities of the
CASP framework, illustrated in figure 4.3, include:
• information and knowledge management
• technical and advisory assistance
• financial support
• training and capacity building
• marketing and business development
• on- and off-farm infrastructure
- 64 -
Agri macro-system
Farm & within consumer
The hungry Household FS business level economic
and vulnerable & subsistence activity environment
Agricultural Support
Info & knowledge
capacity building
Technical & adv
On- & off-farm

business dev.
infrastructure
management
Training and
Marketing &
Regulatory
assistance
services
6 Pillars
Figure 4.2: The main priority areas of CASP

Source: Ministry of Agricultural and Land Affairs, 2005.
According to the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs (2005:38), the CASP programme is
based on the public-private-community cooperation for service delivery concept. The
Department of Agriculture has developed a three-pronged approach in order to implement the
programme. This strategy consists of the following:
• to align all support services to the six priorities mentioned

• to phase in the basic support services related to on- and off-farm infrastructure
• to develop a policy for agricultural financing
The Department of Agriculture has a mandate to employ the farmer support services within the
CASP framework. It is required of the provincial departments to develop a partnership with the
private sector. This partnership is necessary in order to facilitate the implementation of the
- 65 -
framework. A phase-in approach is implemented and additional resources have been made
available to support departments in the implementation of the CASP framework (Ministry of
Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:38).
The Integrated Food Security and Nutrition programme (IFSNSP) forms part of the CASP
programme. Together with the Agricultural Starter Pack Programme, which aims to move
people out of the Food Parcel Scheme by growing their own food, they have accomplished the
following progress (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:38-39):
• In 2003-2004 a total of 36 387 households benefited from the Agricultural Starter Pack
Programme at a cost of R34 million.
• In 2004-2005, 18 575 households benefited from the Agricultural Starter Pack
Programme at a cost of R38 million.
The Department of Agriculture Report (2004/2005:69) stipulates that the starting point of the
CASP programme concentrated on the identification of different types of agricultural support
most needed for improvement of agricultural productivity and efficiency. There was extensively
engaged with the following persons:
• stakeholders
• local government
• farmers
• agro-processors
• national and provincial departments
• consumers
• research and educational institutions
• civil society organisations
Based on the feedback received, the programme concentrated mainly on creating an enabling
environment through the appropriate policy, legislation, norms and standards, technical
guidelines and other services. The progress made in setting these norms and standards has
raised confidence levels within the sectors resulting in improved productivity. This is especially
true for major crops such as maize, sorghum and sunflower. According to the Crop Estimate
Committee’s reports, the production of these crops noticeably improved among commercial
farmers in areas with limited rainfall.
- 66 -
4.3.4.1 Challenges in the CASP framework
The poor performance of the Department of Land Affairs and its clear inability to meet its targets
and time frames can be attributed to a large number of factors. The Department itself believes
that it is challenged to address the following issues (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs
2005:39):
• Land in South Africa is expensive and high market prices could continuously pose a cost
barrier to poor land reform beneficiaries as well as the State. The ability of the willing
buyer to raise finance is problematic. (The willing-buyer, willing-seller principle and all
aspects relating to the principle, were discussed in section 3.5 of Chapter 3.)
• The scarcity of viable commercial agricultural land in South Africa
• Present agricultural commercial land owners are not necessarily willing to sell their land
at below market prices
• The department of Land Affairs has not used its power in an effective way to expropriate
commercial agricultural land where it is needed for land redistribution
• Probably the most important aspect is that in those cases where commercial farmers sell
their land, there are bureaucratic structures that prolong the sale of land resulting in it
not being an attractive option to landowners.
Other stakeholders in land reform, such as corporate businesses, academic and research
institutions and land owners themselves believe to the contrary that the department’s biggest
challenge is the lack of capacity and the incapability of its own officials.
4.4 Land tenure reform
According to Statistics South Africa, the number of commercial farms has decreased from 57
980 in 1993 to 45 818 in 2002. This explains why almost 200 000 farm workers have been
dismissed. In the same time the number of commercial farmers has decreased from 68 647 to
46 027. Agri SA has predicted that there are no more than 40 000 commercial farmers left in
South Africa (Steenkamp, 2007:1).
Several laws were introduced after 1994 to give people (especially farm workers and labour
tenants) security of tenure over houses and land where they work and stay. The most important
of these are the Extended Security of Tenure Act (ESTA), the Communal Land Rights Act
(CLaRA) and PIE. All of these are meant to provide some measure of security of tenure to the
most vulnerable individuals in society: the rural poor.
- 67 -
The following are only a few kinds of tenure that exist (Education and Training Unit, 2008):
• Private ownership
In this case a person or business owns the land or house. You have to register a title
deed to say that the property is legally yours, and you can sell the land or home at any
time and recover monies invested in the property
• Communal ownership
This implies traditional utilisation of land by an ethnic group organised by a tribal
authority, mostly in the former homelands. In the restitution process the law allows for
people to own land or property as a group by forming a communal property association
(CPA)
• Renting
You can rent your home or land as its owner, which could be a private landowner, a
company, a local authority or other institution. There are laws that protect the rights of
people who rent.
The Department of Land Affairs is responsible to extend security of tenure in diverse ways. In
comparison with the other land reform programmes, the tenure reform programme has been the
slowest and most difficult to incorporate. A number of acts have been established to address
security of tenure in certain areas, which include: insecurity of persons/groups in the former
homelands, the ex-South African Development Trust (SADT) areas, former coloured areas,
white commercial farm areas, as well as the peri-urban areas where farm workers and farm
occupiers are mainly found (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs 2005:54):
Table 4.5: Acts involved in the land tenure reform
Act Description
Interim Protection of * Protect people with insecure tenure from
Informal Land Rights Act losing their rights
31 of 1996 * Deals with tribal land under communal tenure
that are registered in the name of the state
* Operates in terms of section 25 (6) of the
Constitution
* Major challenge is the division of communities
Upgrading of Land Tenure * Provides for the upgrading of many forms of

Rights Act, 112 of 1993 Tenure
- 68 -

* Was promulgated on 14 July 2004
Communal Land Rights
Act, 28 of 1996 * Now: Communal Land Rights Act 11 of 2004
(CLARA)
* Communal Property Associations (CPA)
Act 28 of 1996
* Enables communities/groups to acquire,
hold and manage property under a written
Constitution
Labour Tenants Act (LTA) * Provides labour tenants with strong protection
3 of 1996 against unfair eviction
* Gives labour tenants the right to acquire
ownership of land they currently occupy or
suitable alternative land
* Passed in November 1997

Extension of Security of
Tenure Act (ESTA) * Provides tenure security to occupiers who
live on someone else's agricultural land with the
consent
of the owner or person in charge by preventing
unfair evictions
Source: (Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs, 2005).
The tenure reform is a particularly complex process. This process involves the interest in land
and the form these interests should take. More specifically in South Africa, tenure reform must
address difficult problems created in the past. Solutions of these problems may require new
systems of land holding, land rights and forms of ownership, and therefore may have far-
reaching implications. Policies to support tenure reform had to be developed with extreme care.
In order to guarantee this, a two-year period was set aside for consultation on tenure policy, for
the implementation of test cases and for the preparation of legislation (White Paper on South
African Land Policy, 1997:xi).
Many people expect the land reform process to modernise the communal tenure system in
former homeland areas; to strengthen the position of women living in traditional societies; to
rapidly create a new class of flourishing black commercial farmers; and to play a major role in
relieving rural poverty (Bernstein et al, 2005:6).
The Communal Land Rights Act was promulgated in February 2004. Its job is to seek
rationalisation in the extremely complex tenure issues in the former homelands. Under this
- 69 -
legislation, those who are occupying land with a Permission To Occupy (PTO) certificate, or
other traditional occupation certificates, can apply for ownership. This legislation has had a long
and complex period of development and continues to provoke opposition, especially from
traditional leaders who fear that the Act may erode their power-base. Concerns about the
State’s capacity to implement the Act have also been raised (Bernstein et al, 2005:12).
According to the White Paper on South African Land Policy (1997:xi), the principles guiding the
policy development process and programme action are the following:
• tenure reform must move towards rights and away from permits
• tenure reform must build a unitary non-racial system of land rights to all South Africans
• tenure reform must allow people to choose the tenure system that is appropriate to their
circumstances
• all tenure systems must be consistent with the Constitution’s commitment to basic
human rights and equality
• rights-based approach and adjudicatory principle have to be adopted, which recognise
and accommodate de facto vested rights
• new tenure systems and laws should be brought in line with the situation as it exists on
the ground and in practise.
Under the Bill of Rights in the Constitution, the government is grateful to develop a law that
stipulates the types of vested interests in land that were undermined by discriminatory laws and
measures necessary to ensure that such interests in land are legally secure (White Paper on
South African Land Policy, 1997:xii).
4.4.1 Issues regarding tenure reform
According to the White Paper on South African Land Policy (1997:29-33), the following issues
must be dealt with through the land tenure programme:
• The second class status of black land rights

During the so-called apartheid era, Government’s policy stipulated that black people
were not allowed to own land. This regulation was abandoned in the 1990s. The form of
land rights in townships and ex-homelands was generally subservient, permit-based or
‘held in trust’. Land was registered as government property or property of the South
African Development Trust. Administration of this land was chaotic and insufficient. The
result of this unorganised system was that people who had lived for decades on land
- 70 -
found out that they had no legal rights to the land, even if nobody disputed that they
were the rightful owners of the land. Some people have Permission to Occupy
certificates (PTOs), but others do not. The result is legal insecurity and it makes it
difficult for people to protect their land, whether from confiscation or from others coming
to settle among them. Another difficulty is that people who have lived on the land find it
sold by others who claim to own it. Confusion and unnecessary disputes are the result.
In some cases land is registered as state property, and local and provincial authorities
may decide to use it without realising the nature of the underlying ownership. This
results in a power struggle between the different parties claiming to own the land.
The following are problems that occur because of a lack of legally enforceable rights to
land:
- vulnerability to interference or confiscation of rights whether by state or by other
people
- difficulty in securing housing subsidies and other development finance
- no administrative support for the system of land rights that operates in practice,
which in turn contributes to internal breakdowns and administrative chaos giving
rise to abuse of power by officials, some chiefs and powerful elites
- the position of the poor and the vulnerable is exacerbated by the lack of legal
certainty and administrative protections
- unscrupulous individuals take advantage of the lack of enforceable land rights to
bring others onto the land in exchange for money and to bolster their personal
power
• Overcrowding and forced overlapping of land rights

Over 80% of people were squeezed into townships and ex-homeland areas as a result
of racial land laws. Overcrowding, poverty and extreme pressure on the land were the
result. As indigenous tenure systems came under pressure, agricultural land had to be
sacrificed in order to meet basic housing needs. The first priority of tenure reform should
be to relieve overcrowding rather than consolidate it. One of the main problems is that
no tenure system can operate effectively if overcrowding occurs in places where the
programme must be implemented. The problem is further compounded by the fact that
different tenure systems and rights exist on top of each other. People were often forcibly
removed and resettled on land that others had prior rights on. The result is therefore
overlapping rights according to the specific land. In order to restore these rights and
settle all problems, government must make additional land available so that those who
- 71 -
have weaker rights are provided with a viable alternative when land rights are
formalised.
• Traditional and communal tenure
- Underlying rights
Communal systems have been characterised as ‘backward’ and measures were
introduced to privatise and convert communal systems into individual ownership.
Confiscation of land rights were often the result. Problems arose regarding the
fact that some chiefs, ex-homeland officials and politicians involved in the
process took land for personal gain. The legal status of the communal land was
weak and this only led to further dispossession. These interventions did not
acknowledge that communal systems were based on pre-existing joint rights to
land.
- Rights of members under communal systems
Some communal systems do not function democratically and do not uphold the
rights of all members. In some parts of the country the rules and practises of
communal tenure discriminate against women. Some tribal authorities do not
function democratically and operate in ways that undermine the constitutional
basic human rights. Group-based land holdings should not conflict with the basic
human rights. It is Government’s responsibility to ensure this. The challenge is to
find a way in which the procedures governing the exercise of group-based rights
ensure that all rights holders are able to participate effectively in decisions
regarding their joint asset, and that the rules of such systems are consistent with
the principle of equality.
- Internal breakdown with communal systems
Many communal systems are suffering from internal breakdown. The reason for
this is a lack of discipline and individuals disobeying group rules. This normally
occurs as a result of legal uncertainty in respect of the status of the group’s
rights, partly because old authority systems have broken down and nothing
legitimate exists with which to replace them.
In an effort to formalise security of tenure, a much deeper debate has been sparked on the
issue of the place, sustainability and future of the traditional system as such. This debate is
not uncommon in the whole of the sub-Saharan continent. The issue here is that the
traditional system revolves around the power of the tribal chief and traditional authority to
allocate land and grant land rights. By the exercising of this power, traditional leaders
- 72 -
maintain control and command over a specific area, maintaining justice and discipline and
determining opportunities for the subjects. Legislation to promote the security of tenure of
individuals on this land necessarily erodes the power-base of the tribal authority and the
chiefs, resulting in their demise. While the South African government has not taken a clear
stance on how it perceives the future of the system, the Congress of Traditional Leaders of
South Africa (CONTRALESA) has challenged the Constitutionality of the CLaRA legislation
in the Constitutional Court.
Elsewhere in Africa, this debate is being rolled out between the two opposite poles of
Malawi on the left, who decided to abandon the traditional system altogether and Swaziland
on the right, who maintains traditionalism Über All.
• Violence/ Conflict
Many black tenure systems are characterised by widespread violence. This can be because
of overcrowding, desperate land hunger, insecure status of most forms of black land rights,
and the lack of administrative support. Another problem is the invasion of land or land that is
not securely controlled.
• Informal settlements in urban areas

As already mentioned, many South Africans have no other place to stay than the outskirts of
the urban areas. Many of these settlements have existed for years. Unless some sort of
administration and control takes place, these areas are vulnerable to exploitation by
unscrupulous individuals. For this reason, urban tenure upgrading programmes are a
necessary first step to achieve stability.
A perfect example of such illegal occupation was the case of the Modderklip Boerdery (Pty)
Ltd. During the 1990s, because of overcrowding, residents of Daveyton began settling on a
buffer strip of land between Daveyton and the Modderklip farm. This became the Chris Hani
informal settlement. During May 2000, some 400 persons, who had been evicted by the
municipality from Chris Hani, moved onto a portion of the Modderklip farm and erected
approximately 50 shacks. By October 2000, there were about 4000 illegal residential units in
which some 18 000 persons were living. In October 2000, Modderklip launched an
application and an eviction order was issued in April 2001. The order was served on the
occupiers, who were granted two months to vacate, but they failed to comply. It was later
estimated that the people on the 50 hectares of farm property numbered 40 000, of whom a
third were illegal immigrants (Media Statement, 2004).
- 73 -
In a comprehensive legal action that the land owner launched against the state, all courts
from the magistrate’s division to the Constitutional court slammed the state and government
for the poor management of the Modderklip debacle, and ordered the squatters to be
evicted or the farm to be purchased for residential use by the state.
By 2009, the department was still in contempt of court as it had not implemented any of the
options prescribed in the judgement.
• The provision of services and development

The lack of clarity of the status of black land rights often mitigates against service provision
and infrastructural development. The financing of these community schemes rests on the
government’s shoulders. However, government departments and development agencies are
reluctant to finance it when the community does not have legally-secure rights to the land on
which the development takes place. Another problem that occurs regarding these
individually owned plots is that no land has been set aside for schools and other municipal
services. The result to fix these problems is often so complicated, costly and difficult that the
proposed development gets delayed indefinitely.
The Extension of Security of Tenure Act (Act 62 of 1997) was drafted in order to address
problems of insecure tenure and illegal evictions.
• Discrimination against women

Many types of tenure arrangements discriminate against women. The most widely
recognised discrimination is that practised under tribal and communal tenure, which has
already been referred to. Even under private tenure, women are discriminated against in
terms of family law and inheritance provisions.
• Occupants of privately owned land including farm dwellers

Millions of people live in insecure arrangements on land belonging to other people. This is a
major cause of instability in rural areas. Structural reasons forced them to live in these
circumstances. Often no alternative means of survival are available to them. This structural
situation is the result of literally hundreds of land-related, racially discriminatory laws
introduced and enforced under colonialism and apartheid. This is the reason why current
and expected evictions are so terrible. The evicted have no place else to go and suffer
appalling hardship. They find themselves at the mercy of other land owners for refuge. If no
mercy is shown, land invasion is an unavoidable outcome. It is government’s responsibility
- 74 -
to intervene in order to remedy the situation. The Extension of Security of Tenure Bill, 1997
was designed to handle this situation.
The responsibility to provide for this vulnerable segment of the population cannot be
allocated to land owners alone, and tension caused by this issue is mostly the result of
inadequate service delivery by the state. One of the major problems of the ESTA legislation
is that it is restricted to the agricultural sector, while the extent of the problem on state land,
mining land and industrial land seems to be ignored.
4.4.2 Challenges
Tenure reform has different ways of delivering security of tenure. A series of key tasks were
developed in order to assist Government in developing the tenure reform programme. These
are the most important principles (White paper on South African Land Policy, 1997:60-65):
• Develop the mechanisms for ‘upgrading’ de facto vested interests in land into
legally enforceable rights
Adjudicatory principles to assess and quantify current vested interests in land will be
finalised and set out in law. A procedure is being developed in which stakeholders are
involved in a process where concrete solutions are formed. These solutions are
measured against criteria that will determine factors to which extent they adequately and
fairly encompass the rights of all occupants of the land, cost effectiveness and public
interest. If they meet the criteria, government funding in the form of settlement subsidies
and compensation will be made available.
• Protection for occupants of privately owned land

Where informal land rights exist on land that is privately owned, the rights of the current
owners are at issue, and in most instances the upgrading of formal rights in such
situations would amount to the expropriation of the rights of current owners. The farm
workers and other people on privately owned land are at the same time vulnerable to
evictions in terms of old apartheid laws. Tenure reform requires that legislation be
promulgated, which protects the rights and interests of both owners and occupants.
• Forms of ownership
All land that is redistributed, restored or awarded must be registered in the form of
ownership.
- 75 -
• Family-based ownership
Family-based ownership is seen within the context of township houses, informal
settlements, trust towns and some ex-SADT areas that were allocated to individual
families. When the government hands over land to people, they must ensure that all
rights are secured in the process. If these measures are not met, it can lead to family
breakdown and internal eviction under the legislation that provided for the conversion of
leasehold.
• Group based rights

The Community Property Associations Act, 28 of 1996 facilitates this aspect. People
involved have a need for an amendment to allow for internal sub-division and registration
of individual rights to areas with Communal Property Association boundaries. This act
cannot be used for the conversion of pre-existing informal community systems. The
Communal Property Association is too complex to be used in a mass-based conversion
process.
• Rights under communal ownership system

The enquiry process determines which forms of land occupation qualify as rights of
underlying ownership. It must provide legal protection for these rights. It must also
differentiate between rights that are fundamentally group based and those that operate
as individual rights.
• Gender equity in tenure reform

The tenure reform process could intend consequences that will have a negative impact
on the rights of women. To protect these rights of women, the gender implications of all
new measures will have to be assessed and steps taken to avoid certain dangers.
4.4.3 Performances
By December 2004, 171 554 hectares of land had been delivered under the tenure reform
programme. Senior DLA officials believe that ESTA has caused a considerable increase in the
illegal evictions of farm labourers by farmers reluctant to grant them the new rights of tenure.
The department, justice and policy systems lack the personnel and resources to ensure that
ESTA is successfully communicated and enforced. All things considered, tenure reform
continues to be controversial in policy terms, and the legislation has had unfortunate and
unexpected outcomes in commercial farming areas (Bernstein et al., 2005:12). The
development of farm worker housing on commercial farms, which for many decades was the
- 76 -
most important contributor to the effort of securing a shelter for rural families, has virtually
grinded to a halt. The ESTA legislation also severely impacted the beneficiaries of restitution
and redistribution programmes when farm dwellers on land reform farms refused to leave after
the land was transferred, hindering agricultural development by the new landowners. According
to Bernstein et al. (2005:12), tenure insecurity in urban and peri-urban areas may well be a
growing problem on which the government has not yet focussed attention.
Table 4.6: Summary of restitution, redistribution and land tenure aspects
Restitution
- A person/community dispossessed of property after 19 June
1913 as a result of past discriminatory laws or practices
Description - If no equitable compensation was paid
- The claim had to be lodged no later than 13 December
1998
- Land Rights Act
Acts
Reconstruction and Development Programme
- Provision of alternative land
- Payment of compensation
- Alternative relief
Compensation - Access to state resources
- Grants:
- Settlement/Land Acquisition Grant (SLAG)
- National Housing Subsidy
- Claims settled 1995-2009: 75 400
Performances
- Outstanding claims: 4 296
Redistribution
- Provide land to the poor
- Land provided for residential & productive purposes in order to
improve livelihoods
Description - Flexible
- Assist urban and rural poor, labour tenants & emerging farmers
- Land Redistribution Programme
- Willing buyer, willing seller
Acts - Provision of Land & Assistance Act
- Settlement/Land Acquisition Grant (SLAG)
Compensation - Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development (LRAD)
- Comprehensive Agricultural Support Program (CASP)
March 2009: 443 600 4886 ha of land transferred, 501 projects
Performances
finalised and 14 457 beneficiaries benefited
Land tenure
- Laws were introduced after 1994 to give people (especially farm
workers & labour tenants) security of tenure, over houses and
land where they work and stay
- 3 Types of tenure
Description
- Protect labour tenants from eviction and give them the right to
acquire ownership of land that they live on or use
- +/- 19 000 claims have been lodged under the Act
- Slowest and most difficult to incorporate
- 77 -

- Interim Protection of Informal Land Rights Act
- Upgrading of Land Tenure Rights Act
Acts - Communal Land Rights Act
- Labour Tenants Act
- Extension of Security of Tenure Act (ESTA)
- Grants
Compensation - Provision of farm land
- Payment of compensation
- Commercial farms decreased from 57 980 in 1939 to 45 818 in
Performances 2002. In 2002 ± 200 000 farm workers were dismissed and
commercial farmers decreased from 68 647 to 46 027
4.5 Conclusion
One of the most sensitive aspects of land reform is the balance between food production on
commercial farms and the emotional need for land. The failure of land reform has cost South
Africa large amounts of money. South Africa has become a net importer of food. This is not only
land reform’s fault, but it has most certainly played a major role. On the other side are the
previously disadvantaged to whom land has been promised. Not only is there a great degree of
uncertainty regarding the future of the farmers currently farming on claimed land, but the
claimants also have a great deal of uncertainty. Both commercial farmers and claimants must
do future planning and it seems if they will once again be disappointed by government.
The constitutional and legal framework for land reform was carefully planned, as were the
programmes to implement it. When it came to the execution something went terribly wrong and
it is clear that the department lacks the managerial capacity, leadership, expertise and human
capital to turn the well-planned legal framework and programmes into tangible results.
The time framework to implement land reform through its different programmes was planned
incorrectly from the start. Instead of bringing all parties involved to a table to discuss the way
forward, government took land reform in its own hands and tried to transfer farm land from
commercial farmers to upcoming farmers as soon as possible. The government’s mission was
to transport land as quick as possible to brag with figures, not taking into consideration the
emotions of all parties involved, and most importantly, not planning where tomorrow’s food
would come from while upcoming farmers were in the process of learning to take over.
It is widely believed that if the poor are furnished with an asset such as land, or overall wealth
distribution, they will be able to also uplift themselves. According to this belief, the poor will then
- 78 -
be able to obtain the knowledge to start their own businesses. Government is also a firm
believer of this statement, which explains why it so generously and freely gives the poor land,
expecting them to mange the farm in such manner that it is still as productive, or even develop
the farm to a better state than it was, at hand-over.
- 79 -
Chapter 5 - Land Reform vs. Spatial Planning and Development
Chapter 5 – Land reform vs. spatial

planning and development
5.1 Introduction
South Africa has one of the best legal frameworks in terms of constitutional guarantees for land
ownership and the restitution law of 1994. At the National Land Summit in 2005, the
government took a step towards the composition of frameworks in order to resolve land reform
issues and still salvage spatial development in rural towns affected by land reform.
The frameworks that are managed on national level are the Pro-active Land Acquisition
Strategy (PLAS) and Area Based Planning (ABP). Both are regulated by government with
management on national, provincial, district and local levels in order to ensure that these
strategies are implemented and sustainable. Although ABP is a facet of the District Integrated
Development Plan, it is still managed on national level.
The Minister, in her budget speech to parliament on 18 May 2007, stated the following (South
Africa, 2009d):
“We will also introduce Area Based Land Reform Planning. This is a fundamental tool for the
integration and alignment of land reform to the strategic priorities of the Province, municipalities
and other sectors.”
Based on the case study area, on provincial level, the Limpopo Growth and Development
Strategy (LGDS) was developed to ensure spatial growth on provincial level. The LGDS was
developed in order to “advance the growth of the economy in a manner that attracts investment,
create sustainable jobs and ultimately, improve the living conditions of the people of Limpopo”
(South Africa, 2005a:i).
The Mopani Integrated Development Plan (MIDP) was developed on district level to manage
spatial growth and development on district level. Unfortunately, the Mopani Spatial
Development Framework is still in its draft stage and not yet available.
On local level, the Greater Tzaneen Municipality (IDP) and (SDF) were developed to manage
and control spatial development, as well as facilitate land reform in the municipality.
- 80 -
National Government
Pro-active Land Area Based

Acquisition Planning (ABP)
Strategy (PLAS)
Limpopo Government
Limpopo Growth
and Development
Strategy
District Government
Mopani Integrated
Development Plan
(IDP)
Local Government
Greater Tzaneen Greater Tzaneen

Municipality IDP Municipality SDF
- 81 -
5.2 State-driven Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy
At the National Land Summit of 2005, the minister of Land Affairs reaffirmed that one of the
measures that needed to be in place was “to ensure that land and agrarian reform moves to the
new trajectory that will contribute to the higher path of growth, employment and equity by 2014”
is the “introduction of proactive land acquisition by the state for targeted groups in the land
market.” The implementation of the Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy (PLAS) will contribute
to the higher path of growth, employment and equity by 2014 (South Africa, 2006a:4).
According to South Africa (2006a:4), the main advantages of the Proactive Land Acquisition
Strategy are to:
• accelerate the land redistribution process;
• ensure that the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform can acquire land in
the nodal areas and in the identified agricultural corridors and other areas of high
agricultural potential to meet the objectives of Accelerated Shared Growth Initiative
(ASGISA)
• improve the identification and selection of beneficiaries and the planning of land on
which people would be settled; and
• ensure maximum productive use of land acquired.
This approach is primarily pro-poor and based on purchasing advantageous land i.e. either
because of the property’s location, because it is especially amenable to subdivision, because it
is suitable for particular agricultural activities that government would like to promote vis-à-vis
redistribution, and/or because it is an especially good bargain (South Africa, 2006a:5).
5.2.1 Legal framework
The Provision of Land and Assistance Act, Act No 126 of 1993, Section 10(1) (a) gives legal
effect to the proactive acquisition of land:
“The Minister may, from money appropriated by Parliament for this purpose -… (a)
acquire land for the purposes of this Act”.
Section 10 has been delegated to Provincial Chief Directors (CDs) and this gives them the
authority to purchase land without first identifying beneficiaries if it is for the purposes of Act 126
(South Africa, 2006a:5).
- 82 -
Once it has been made farmable, Section 11 of Act 126 can be invoked to dispose of the land. It
is therefore not necessary to process applications through the Provincial State Land Disposal
Committees, because Section 11 of Act 126 affords the Provincial CDs the discretion to sell,
exchange or donate any land acquired in terms of Act 126 for the purpose of Act 126 or if the
land is not required for the purposes of the Act. However, it should be noted that Section 11 is a
partial delegation and the power to impose terms and conditions still vests with the Minister. The
approved terms and conditions will allow Provincial Chief Directors to dispose of land acquired
through Act 126 and it will be a non-negotiable aspect of the Provincial Grant Committee’s
approvals process. In this way all proactive projects, if they comply with the Ministerial terms
and conditions, need not be sent through the state land disposal route (South Africa, 2006a:5).
5.2.2 Corridor approach, agricultural development within

nodal areas and land for housing
The proactive strategy supports the concept of the agricultural development corridors and
should increase economic growth and development of rural towns. The agricultural
development corridors focus on developing agriculture along the major arterial routes (N1, N2
etc), guided by the principle of exploiting agricultural potential in the rural towns scattered along
these routes. By using these models, the proactive strategy is to deliver land; land can be
acquired and used for agricultural purposes through area-based planning and development.
The inception of the Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Programme (ISRDP) and the
Urban Renewal Programme (URP) in 2001 ushered in a renewed focus on a new approach to
integration at a local level in South Africa. Twenty-one nodal areas (both rural and urban) were
identified in order to develop a model that would inform an overall strategy of government
working in a new integrated way to produce results. The proactive strategy is one method of
fostering integrated planning and development in such areas (South Africa, 2006a:8).
The proactive strategy is also aligned with the Department of Housing’s various programmes
linked to the fast tracking of housing delivery. Central to the programme is the acquisition of
well-located land for low-income housing where the Department has committed to make funding
available for land acquisition. The Department together with the Department of Housing will
manage the systems for delivering land for housing (South Africa, 2006a:8).
Proactive land acquisition must be executed within the ambit of local/district level IDP processes
or the area-based planning approach. However, the DLA need not necessarily wait for local
- 83 -
level structures to approach the DLA for land (as is currently the situation), but could actively
assist local level structures to determine land needs, select appropriate beneficiaries and
identify suitable land. Thus municipalities and/or local/district agriculture may actively identify
land and beneficiaries, and then approach the DLA for funding assistance for planning and land
acquisitions. In terms of the District Level Delivery (DLD) process, a proactive land reform
strategy would improve and add to an efficient land delivery process (South Africa, 2006a:9).
5.2.3 Financial mechanisms
The proactive approach would allow the DLA to acquire land in terms of Act 126 [Section10 (a)]
based on the selling price, expropriation or auction price without attaching beneficiaries to such
land. Once beneficiary selection has been finalised, beneficiaries are expected to lease with an
option to purchase and lease fees would also be taken into account once the applicants are
ready to acquire full ownership of the land after being assessed by the Department of
Agriculture (South Africa, 2006a:10).
Once the trial-lease period has expired, the land can be disposed of to the same beneficiaries if
they have been satisfactorily assessed by the Department of Agriculture. A “qualifying grant”
based on the LRAD grant system would be made available to beneficiaries and discounted
against the purchase price. The sale price of the land would have been fixed at acquisition by
the DLA. A further discount of 30% would be offered to all qualifying beneficiaries. If grants and
the discounts are still not enough to reach the purchase prices, then beneficiaries should be
assisted to obtain finance from:
• Commercial financial institutions;
• Development financial institutions such as the Land Bank; or
• MAFISA
5.2.4 Re-settlement models
According to South Africa (2006a:11-12) there are seven re-settlement models through which
the Proactive Land Acquisition strategy can be implemented. These models can be
implemented through mixing and matching various grants and services of the different
government departments e.g. agri-villages and Kibbutz-type development can be implemented
by combining grants and services from DLA (land acquisition), DoA (CASP, agricultural starter
packs and extension), Department of Housing (building the houses) and local government for
municipal services. Each of these models will be integrated into local development strategies:
- 84 -
• Agri-village
• Small holdings
• Settlement and commonage
• Establishing black commercial farmers
• Sustainable human settlements
• Commonage
• Kibbutz-type development
5.3 Area-based planning
The area-based plan is seen as a sector plan of the broader municipal district Integrated
Development Plan (IDP). The idealised description of the Area-Based Plan (ABP) process is
closely aligned to the municipal IDP process (South Africa, 2007a: 3).
The objectives of ANP are:

• to improve the alignment and sustainability of land reform projects;
• to promote sector alignment: agriculture, Local Economic Development, Integrated
Sustainable Human Settlements, tenure security/upgrade linked to the provision of basic
services;
• to promote the objectives of intergovernmental relations with municipalities and sector
departments; and
• to empower communities to participate actively in project formulation and
implementation of land reform projects.
Given these objectives, one of the guiding principles in Area-Based Planning is integration and
alignment with other relevant departments, and involvement of other key interest groups, in
developing a developed centred land and agrarian reform that conforms to inter-sectoral needs
and objectives in ways that provide meaningful development outcomes from communities
involved in land reform programmes (South Africa, 2007a:3).
The emphasis here is not land transfer per se, but rather enabling land transfer to be done
within a context that complements other development processes such as municipal IDPs and
Provincial Growth and Development strategies. In this regard, IDPs should also ensure service
provision for communities living on commercial farms. The national sphere of government must
provide both guidance and adequate funds to municipalities in order to handle these issues
(South Africa, 2007a: 3).
- 85 -
5.3.1 Area-based planning process
According to South Africa (2007a:3), the core area-based planning process comprises five
phases:
1. A situational analysis
2. Vision strategy formulation and conceptualisation of focus areas
3. Project identification and definition of programmes
4. Integration and prioritisation and
5. Approval
These five planning phases are preceded by preparation phases. These phases are identical to
those of the broader districts IDP process.
1. National level
At a national level, ABP will be the responsibility of the national ABP manager within DLA.
The national manager would be assisted by a panel of experts. The national manager will be
required to convene and coordinate a national ABP steering committee. The operations of
the steering committee will be governed by an ABP partnership protocol entered into
between the DLA and core ABP partner departments and agencies. The national steering
committee will report, through the DG of Land Affairs, to the DGs cluster, and in turn to a
relevant inter-ministerial forum (South Africa, 2007a: 5).
2. Provincial level
At provincial level, an ABP manager will be placed with the Provincial Land Reform Office
(PLRO). The provincial manager will be supported by a panel of provincial experts. The ABP
manager is responsible for convening and coordinating a Provincial ABP Steering
Committee (PSC). An implementation protocol will be entered into between DLA and
implementing partners. Such protocols would clarify the objectives of the ABP initiative, set
out the roles of partner agencies as well as structures such as the PSC, and state what the
channels of accountability and communication will be. The District Land Reform Offices
(DLRO) will also engage on an ongoing and formal basis with the provincial IDP forum. The
forum should ideally be involved in the approval of provincial ABPs. The forum also plays an
important role in assisting with provincial growth and development priorities, and ensuring
that adjoining district plans inter-related with one another (South Africa, 2007a: 5).
- 86 -
3. District level
The proposed area-based approach to land reform is driven from the district level. Towards
this end, District Land Reform Offices (DLRO) will be established to undertake ABP and to
drive district land reform implementation. Operationally, responsibility for ABP resides with
the Chief Town and Regional Planner in the District Office, although a great deal of the
planning process itself will be implemented by service providers contracted for that purpose.
Given the ABP is synchronised with the IDP, the IDP steering committee is an important
district-level institution. As part of preparation for the ABP, the DLRO needs to ensure that
the IDP steering committee includes an ABP sub-committee. The DLRO would be
responsible for convening and coordinating this sub-committee. The district council plays an
important role in approving the final area-based plan. It is critical to ensure buy-in from
districts to ABP prior to ABP roll-out. The DLRO reports directly to the PLRO and the
provincial ABP steering committee (South Africa, 2007a: 5-6).
5.3.2 Area-based land reform planning
Area-based plans are proposed as the fundamental tool for the integration and alignment of
land reform with the strategic priorities of the provinces, municipalities and key sectors of
agriculture, Local Economic Development (LED) and Sustainable Human Settlement. The ABP
will be an integral part of the IDP and will serve as a catalyst for land-related developments at a
Municipal level. ABPs will be aligned to the Agricultural, LED, Sustainable Human Settlement,
and other relevant sectors of an IDP. It will enable the Department of Land Affairs and
municipalities to formulate pro-poor strategies that will enable greater access to and
participation in land and agrarian reform initiatives. While the ABPs will be formulated at a
District Level to indicate linkages and opportunities for economies of scale, the ABP will equally
focus on all local municipalities within their respective clusters (South Africa, 2007a:40).
The Area-Based Planning (ABP) is a tool for the sustainable delivery and integration of land and
agrarian reform programmes within the strategic priorities of municipalities (as expressed in
IDPs), national programmes and provincial imperatives (South Africa, 2007a:40).
The ABP is designed to speed up the land reform programme while at the same time providing
for enhanced economic development. It is therefore an important tool in the delivery of key
national policy objectives such as Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative of South Africa
(South Africa, 2007a:40).
- 87 -
The ABP represents a land sector plan that will be the key vehicle for enhanced integrated
planning and a platform for better intergovernmental relations and public participation. The ABP
will facilitate forward planning in areas such as resource mobilisation, service delivery and
proactive land acquisition (South Africa, 2007a:40).
5.4 Limpopo Growth and Development Strategy
The Limpopo Province adopted a Growth and Development Strategy (LGDS) at the stakeholder
summit held on 15 October 2004. The strategy is a culmination of various discussions with
stakeholders from all sectors towards realising the dream of sustainable and integrated
development that seeks to promote economic growth and development, improve the quality of
life of its citizens, raise the institutional efficiency of government, attain regional integration and
enhance innovation (South Africa, 2005a:ii).
The LGDS asserts that smart partnerships are essential among stakeholders in development if
Limpopo is to realise its vision of sustainable and integrated development. It is only through the
collaboration of all stakeholders that the proposed development targets contained in the LGDS
will be achieved and whereby the vast development potential of Limpopo and the region can be
realised. The implementation of the LGDS is handled through seven industrial cluster
committees, the LGDS Advisory Council, Cluster Committees and Policy Co-ordination Unit
(PCU) and the Office of the Premier. And finally, the LGDS makes provision to incorporate the
National Planning Framework and District/Municipal IDPs with provincial development
imperatives (South Africa, 2005a:ii).
5.4.1 Provincial development objectives
Following the outcome of various international, national and provincial programmes and
initiatives such as the World Summit on Sustainable Development, NEPAD, the National Spatial
Development Program, the National Growth Summit, the Integrated Sustainable Rural
Development Strategy, Land Reform and Land Restitution Program, the National Skills
Development Strategy, the National Housing Policy and the policy on free basic services and
the National Crime Prevention Strategy, the province adopted five development objectives for
itself whose performance indicators correspond to those of the Millennium Development Goals.
These objectives are:
• The need to improve the quality of life of the population of Limpopo;

• Growing the economy of the province;
- 88 -
• Attaining regional integration

• Enhancing innovation and competitiveness; and
• Improving the institutional efficiency and effectiveness of government.
5.5 Mopani Integrated Development Plan (IDP)

5.5.1 Geographic location and key features
The Mopani District Municipality is situated in the North-eastern part of the Limpopo Province,
70km from Polokwane (capital of the Limpopo Province). It is bordered in the east by
Mozambique, in the north by Zimbabwe and Vhembe District Municipality, in the south by
Mpumalanga through Ehlanzeni District Municipality and to the west by Capricorn District
Municipality and, in the south-west by Sekhukhune District Municipality. The district spans a
total area of 2 242 183 ha (22 421.83km²), with 15 urban areas (towns and townships), 325
villages (rural settlements) and a total of 106 wards. The Mopani District, by virtue of the Kruger
National Park as a District Management Area, is part of the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park,
the park that combines South Africa, Mozambique and Zimbabwe (Mopani District Municipality,
2008:20).
The reconciled total population of the Mopani District Municipality for 2006 is 1 223 747. The
population for each municipality within Mopani District is presented in the table below. Out of the
district’s population of 1 223 747, 81% reside in rural areas, 14,2% in urban areas and 4,6% on
farms (Mopani District Municipality, 2008:21).
Table 5.1: Estimated population, 2006
Municipality Population Rural Urban Farming

Greater Giyani 276 668 247 585 29 083 0
Greater Tzaneen 442 282 362 453 45 836 33 993
Greater Letaba 260 286 245 523 14 763
Ba-Phalaborwa 137 264 49 633 69 950 17 681
Maruleng 107 247 95 162 2 494 9 591
Mopani/Total 1 223 747 100 0356 162 126 61 265
Source: MDM, (2008:21).
- 89 -
5.5.2 Powers and functions of the Mopani District

Municipality
The powers and functions of the District Municipality in terms of the Provincial Notice No. 309 of
2000, Government Gazette 615 are as follows:
• Integrated development planning for the district municipality as a whole, including

framework for integrated development plans for local municipalities within the area of the
district municipality, taking into account the integrated development plans for those
municipalities;
• Bulk water supply that affects a proportion of municipalities in the district;
• Bulk electricity supply that affects a significant proportion of municipalities in the district;
• Bulk sewerage purification works and main sewerage disposal that affect a significant
proportion of municipalities in the district;
• Solid waste disposal sites serving the area of the district municipality as a whole;
• Municipal roads that form an integral part of road transport system for the area of the
municipality as a whole;
• Regulation of passenger transport
• Municipal airports serving the area of the district municipality as a whole;
• Municipal health services serving the area of the district municipality;
• Promotion of local tourism for the area of the district municipality as a whole;
• The receipt, allocation and, if applicable, distribution of grants made to the district
municipality.
Strategic themes were introduced in the IDP as the focus of strategic process that needs to be
achieved in terms of the vision and mission. In essence, the Mopani District Municipality
identified three strategic themes that will enable them to address and deliver their mandate
(Mopani District Municipality, 2008:9).
- 90 -
Mopani IDP
Economic Social Good

growth & environmental governance &
planning sustainability administration
&
infrastructure
development
Figure 5.1: IDP Strategic Themes

Source: Mopani District Municipality, (2008:9).
5.5.3 Local planning context
At local level, a number of fundamental issues affect the planning processes of the district
municipality. Firstly, as with all other district municipalities, the Mopani District Municipality
(MDM) does not have a distinct area of its own, but shares the same operational area with the
Greater Tzaneen, Greater Letaba, Greater Giyani, Ba-Phalaborwa and Maruleng local
municipalities. These local municipalities are also engaged in integrated development planning
in their own respective municipal areas (Mopani District Municipality, 2008:13).
Secondly, the Mopani District Council has different roles, powers and functions to those of the
local municipalities. Among these is the role of coordinating and supporting service delivery
across the three spheres of government. The district municipality is compelled to involve various
stakeholders in its quest to integrate planning, align programmes and projects and ensure
coordinated service delivery. In order to realise this objective, the district municipality strives
(and is yet) to play its role more effectively and strategically to ensure that various governmental
actors, developmental agencies, the private sector and parastatals harmonise their
developmental work through consensus-seeking dialogue during the IDP-preparation,
implementation and review processes. The district municipality is currently expected to play a
role of pro-active coordination and support to the local municipalities and sector departments
- 91 -
Thirdly, the MDM neighbours a range of other districts that affect delivery within its area of
jurisdiction. This is, in some cases, due to overlapping service delivery areas that do not
correspond with district boundaries and which therefore require inter-district alignment. The IDP
process is useful in this regard, as it provides an arena to forge greater inter-district planning
and implementation. As such, it will also ensure integrated, cost effective and qualitative
delivery of public services (Mopani District Municipality, 2008:14).
The MDM is responsible for facilitating inter-governmental relations within its area of jurisdiction.
In line with the Intergovernmental Relations Framework Act, MDM has taken upon itself the task
to improve intergovernmental engagements, thereby ensuring that proper inter-governmental
planning guides public, private and donor investment in the district (Mopani District Municipality,
2008:18).
Prioritisation
National
Provincial
government
government
Support national
government
priorities and
Implementation
objectives
Resource
allocation Local
government
Figure 5.2: Inter-governmental Relations

Source: Mopani District Municipality, (2008:18).
5.5.4 The extent of land claims

Land ownership is still a contentious problem in the district. A total of 349 land claims have been
received in the district. Of the total number of claims received within the five local municipal
areas, Greater Letaba has by far the majority of these land claims (159) and Greater Giyani the
least (11 land claims). It is, however, not the number of claims as such that is very important,
but the extent of the land claimed as restitution. Approximately 140 189 ha, representing
approximately 46,73% of the total local municipal area of Ba-Phalaborwa, is subject to land
- 92 -
claims. It is followed by Greater Letaba with approximately 91 812 ha, representing 48,55% of
the total area of the municipality, which is subject to land claims. Only approximately 6,28% of
the Grater Giyani Local Municipal area is subject to land claims, representing 18 633ha (Mopani
District Municipality, 2008:28).
In total, approximately 298 000ha (representing 26,85% of the total area of the Mopani District)
is subject to land claims. The extent of land claims in this district and the potential impact it may
have depending on the outcome of investigations is quite substantial and may impact heavily on
the spatial development framework of the district municipality, and specific local municipalities
such as Ba-Phalaborwa and Greater Letaba (Mopani District Municipality, 2008:29).
“On the one hand, land restitution and redistribution processes may result in many
people obtaining access to land, resulting in improved living standards and quality of
life. On the other hand, it could result in large-scale sterilisation of economically
productive land (e.g. high potential agricultural land, mining of certain minerals, nature
conservation areas etc) and consequential loss of job opportunities if not well planned
and managed within the context of spatial development framework that considers all
these factors” (Mopani District Municipality, 2008:29).
5.5.5 Economic sector analysis
The sector that contributed the most to the GDP in the Mopani District is the mining sector
(30%), followed by the general government services sector (17%) and finance and business
services sector (15%). This shows the same trend as in the Limpopo Province where mining is
by far the largest contributor to the GDP. The contribution of agriculture to the GDP has grown
more on provincial and district level than on national level. The mining sector has grown on
national level as well as on district level, while the manufacturing sector has grown slightly less
on regional level (Mopani District Municipality, 2008:31).
The primary sectors, which include the agriculture and mining sectors, have shown positive
growth with regard to GGP contribution to the district. The agricultural sector showed the most
growth in Greater Giyani (9,6%) and a negative growth rate of -0,6% in Ba-Phalaborwa, while
there was growth of between 5% and 6% in the Greater Tzaneen, Greater Letaba and Maruleng
Municipalities. In both Greater Giyani and Ba-Phalaborwa the mining sector indicated a growth
rate of approximately 5%, while there was less growth in the Greater Tzaneen and Maruleng
- 93 -
Municipalities. Greater Letaba was the only municipality with a negative growth rate of -2,6% in
the mining sector (Mopani District Municipality, 2008:31).
Agriculture is the most important economic sector in Greater Tzaneen, Greater Giyani,
Maruleng and Greater Letaba. Citrus fruit such as oranges and grapefruit are produced
commercially and small-scale in the Greater Tzaneen Municipality. The fruit are either exported
out of the district in its raw state or sold for further processing into juices, pulp and dried fruit.
Furthermore, sub-tropical fruit including mangoes, avocadoes and bananas are grown in the
Greater Tzaneen, Maruleng, Greater Letaba and Greater Giyani areas. In Greater Giyani,
bananas are mostly grown within the Middle Letaba Irrigation Scheme. These sub-tropical fruit
are also either sold to outside markets or used for further procession such as juices, atjar, dried
fruit and pulp. The ZZ2 farms that are located in the Greater Letaba Municipality (Mooketsi
area) produce approximately 60% of the tomatoes grown in the country. These tomatoes are
exported or processed into juices, puree, paste etc. (Mopani District Municipality, 2008:32).
5.5.6 Localised “spatial strategic guidelines”
The purpose of designing the localised spatial strategic guidelines is to ensure that national
spatial development principles are applied in a manner related to specific local issues when
strategies are designed and projects are planned. There are a number of factors that need to be
considered when spatial planning is undertaken in the district. Firstly, the apartheid spatial
legacy still characterises the spatial pattern of the district with huge disparities in levels of
service provided to different areas and in terms of economic activity. The spatial legacy also
reflects distance between places of residence and places of work for the majority of the
population in the district. New land development within the district should emphasise an attempt
to minimise the distances between places of residence and work, or when and where possible,
should integrate these uses (Mopani District Municipality, 2008:72).
Secondly, there are currently 394 land claims in the Mopani district. The extent of these claims
in the district and the potential impact they may have depending on the outcome of
investigations is quite substantial and may impact heavily on the Spatial Development
Framework (SDF) of the district municipality, and specifically the Ba-Phalaborwa and Greater
Letaba Municipalities (Mopani District Municipality, 2008:72).
Thirdly, spatial planning at the district and local municipalities needs to take into consideration
principles contained in the Development Facilitation Act, which indicates that land development
should result in security of tenure, provide for the widest possible range of tenure alternatives,
- 94 -
(including individual and communal tenure) and in cases where land development takes the
form of upgrading an existing settlement, not deprive occupants of homes or land. Where it is
necessary for land or homes occupied by them to be utilised for other purposes of their interests
in such land or homes, they should be reasonably accommodated in some other manner
Fourthly, the localised spatial strategic guidelines should take into cognizance the fact that the
Mopani district Municipality is faced with the mushrooming of unplanned settlements because of
illegal occupation of land. It is within this context that the municipality finds it difficult to deliver
services such as water, sanitation and roads to unplanned settlements. No
settlement/occupation of land will be allowed within the district without following a legal
township/settlement establishment process. Land for settlement should be provided at a rate
that meets the demand and housing needs. Land to meet these needs should be identified
according to the guidelines contained in the Provincial Spatial Rational and the District spatial
Development framework (Mopani District Municipality, 2008:72).
New land development should promote the establishment of a range of different types of land
uses. All land development initiatives should also minimise interference with the natural
environment and avoid settlement in places of high risk. The policy framework of the district
municipality should encourage public-private partnerships for land development. Land Use
Management Systems should be developed to manage land use in the district (Mopani District
Municipality, 2008:72).
5.6 Greater Tzaneen Municipality Integrated

Development Plan (IDP)
The Integrated Development Plan (IDP) is a strategic tool that will enable the municipality to
eliminate the fragmented planning and implementation processes of the past and bring together
the different initiatives and resources in order to do more with the minimum resources and
increase synergy. The focus and priority should be the poorest of the poor; where the IDP’s
holistic nature forces us to be people-centred and environmentally sustainable addressing the
following issues (Greater Tzaneen Municipality IDP, 2007:6):
• Basic needs orientation

• Poverty alleviation and gender equity
- 95 -
• Environmental soundness and sustainability

• Promotion of economic growth, income and employment generation
• Involvement of communities, residents and stakeholders
• Sustainability of services, settlement and municipalities
• Spatial principles of integrated, liveable and compact towns and cities and equal
consideration of formal and informal settlements
5.6.1 Description of municipal area
Land ownership in the municipal area is characterised by (Greater Tzaneen Municipality IDP,
2007:11):
• Approximately 66% of the total land area in private ownership, ranging from
smallholdings to extensive farms, used mainly for commercial farming activities;
• Approximately 33% of the total land area in ownership of the State, under custodianship
of six traditional authorities; and
• Land of negligible extent being municipal commonage
The Greater Tzaneen Area has experienced an average economic growth rate of approximately
3,5% per annum, compared to 4,9% for the Lowveld and 6,3% for the Limpopo Province. The
local economy is reasonably well diversified. Apart from the service sector (26%) and
agriculture contributing 21% to GGP, manufacturing (20%), trade and catering (14%) form the
backbone of the Greater Tzaneen economy. This is a healthy base for further growth in the
economy (Greater Tzaneen Municipality IDP, 2007:18).
Two sub-sectors that contribute to the agricultural sector are the commercial and small-scale
sub-sectors. The latter is also referred to as subsistence. The commercial sub-sector in the
Greater Tzaneen Municipality is run on a larger scale, and predominantly by white people. It is
well established contributing significantly to the agricultural sector and the economy. A lot of raw
produce from this sub-sector is transported out of the area for external processing, due to a lack
of processing facilities within the municipal area. The lack thereof hinders the area’s economic
growth as a considerable amount of money is spent on transporting raw goods that eventually
return to the area processed and expensive (Greater Tzaneen Municipality IDP, 2007:19).
- 96 -
5.6.2 Spatial analysis
The purpose of spatial analysis is to ensure that the spatial strategies and land use
management decisions of the municipality are based on an awareness of (Greater Tzaneen
Municipality IDP, 2007:28):
• spatial constraints, problems, opportunities, trends and patterns;
• the necessity for spatial restructuring;
• the need for land reform; and
• the spatial dimension of development issues
The spatial analysis component has strong backward and forward linkages to the rest of the
process and is totally dependent on the accuracy and comprehensiveness of critical data such
as population, population distribution, existing service networks, natural and artificial constraints
(topography, land ownership, etc.), and existing development patterns (Greater Tzaneen
Municipality IDP, 2007:28).
Legislation and policy that currently affect spatial planning and development, include the
following (Greater Tzaneen Municipality IDP, 2007:28):
• Chapter 1 of the Development Facilitation Act, 1995;

• Housing Act, 1997 (Act 107 of 1997);
• Housing White Paper and National Housing Code, March 2000;
• White Paper on Spatial Planning and Land Use Management;
• National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (NEMA);
• Communal Land Rights Act, 2004 (Act 11 of 2004).
It is important that the future spatial planning within Greater Tzaneen Municipality is done in
compliance with, and in support of, mentioned legislation.
The population of the Greater Tzaneen municipal area is concentrated in two clusters of towns
and villages, the first being the Nkowankowa/ Lenyenye cluster, where 253 000 people (51%)
live in 63 towns and villages on 47 778 residential stands, and the second being the Mamitwa
cluster where 98 000 people (20%) live in 34 villages on 17 907 residential stands. It has also
been ascertained that 10 767 households (11, 47%) live in proclaimed towns, while 83 058
households reside in rural villages and/or informal settlements (Greater Tzaneen Municipality
IDP, 2007:30).
- 97 -
Business and industrial development is concentrated in Tzaneen town, where there are 402
retail businesses and industries on 298 stands concentrated in the CBD and industrial areas of
the town. In addition, the town boasts a full complement of financial and banking institutions and
facilities, plus an extended office zone. A total of 37% of all businesses and industries within the
municipality are concentrated in one town on 48,7% of land designated for this purpose (158 ha
out of a total of 324 ha). A further characteristic of especially the business development in
Tzaneen is its sophistication in relation to the rest of the municipal area (extreme variety of
goods and services, variety of choice and competition) (Greater Tzaneen Municipality IDP,
2007:32).
Since 2006, the need for retail shopping centres was evident with applications from three
developers to extend existing malls and construct two additional shopping centres. The demand
was supported by the more than 200% increase in residential development experienced in
Tzaneen town (Greater Tzaneen Municipality IDP, 2007:32).
Industrial development also experienced a boom in 2006 with Council having a waiting list of
more than ten investors intending to invest in the industrial area of Extensions 18 and 40. The
moratorium with effect from 2006 on the selling of industrial land prevented the selling of the
available land to investors, which had a negative effect on industrial development and job
creation (Greater Tzaneen Municipality IDP, 2007:32).
5.6.3 Spatial constraints
The following constraints influence the evolution of a beneficial spatial pattern, thereby
disrupting the balance between economy and environment, and placing a burden on a scarce
resource (Greater Tzaneen Municipality IDP, 2007:35):
• Topography
A large percentage of land area within the municipal area cannot be considered for
urban development due to the mountainous nature of the terrain, although this situation
has other advantages in respect of water catchment areas, tourism value, climate, etc.
Approximately 22% of the municipal area is taken up by inhibiting slopes that occur
mostly along the southern and western perimeters of the municipal area.
- 98 -
• Urban Sprawl
The fragmented and dispersed nature of the urban component of the municipality has
caused inefficient duplications of networks and hinders the creation of a core urban
complex essential for a healthy spatial pattern. Unplanned informal settlements without
access to services complicate the design of an optimal spatial pattern. A further
contributing factor is the continued demarcation of residential stands at villages outside
nodal areas and population concentration points, where provision of services is an
added backlog problem.
• Land ownership
Inaccessibility of land caused by ownership in the name of the State and other related
factors is a serious constraint to the harmonious development of the municipal area. This
situation inhibits township extension and development of business areas. This is
exacerbated by the lack of finance on the part of the municipality to acquire land for
development.
• High potential agricultural land

Large areas of the municipal area are taken up by land with high agricultural potential. It
is imperative that this resource be protected for the economic well-being of the area.
This situation influences the spatial pattern of the municipal area.
• Environmentally sensitive areas, nature areas, greenbelt areas

These essential components to a balanced spatial pattern could also be considered to
be constraints.
• Mining areas
Currently there is competition between the holders of mining rights and surface rights in
certain areas within the municipal area, which places constraints on the pattern, and
would have to be resolved to the detriment / benefit of the parties involved.
The configuration of the municipal area and the existing spatial pattern (topography, population
distribution and sprawl) together with causal factors (land ownership, established land uses) are
impediments to the successful implementation of a development strategy to achieve the four
developmental outcomes proposed in the White Paper on Local Government. Natural
constraints to the spatial pattern, such as steep topography, are fixed, and will continue to exert
- 99 -
influence on spatial development initiatives for as long as the resident population cannot afford
to pay for expensive infrastructural services (Greater Tzaneen Municipality IDP, 2007:36).
The dependence of the local economy on agriculture, and the current location of high potential
agricultural land in relation to existing development and service networks, ensures that this
factor will also influence future development initiatives. The current tendency to "waste" land
(i.e. under-utilisation of land by establishing limited business on large farm portions, providing
extensive residential plots, overprovision of parks) has resulted in considerable sprawl, which
affects the availability of land, a scarce resource, for future development initiatives. Restricted
access to land by the municipality due to inhibitive land cost (privately-owned land) and
statutory deterrents state-owned land under tribal custodianship) would exacerbate attempts by
the Council to orchestrate and encourage the development of a beneficial spatial pattern within
the municipal area (Greater Tzaneen Municipality IDP, 2007:36).
The rapid increase of informal settlements/squatting bears the threat of neutralising

development alternatives currently available to Council by the reduction of land availability and
the problems associated with relocation of communities once they have established. A positive
of informal settlement is that this phenomenon is a clear indication of areas with development
potential, and can be used as one of the indicators during the design of the desired spatial
framework. Environmentally sensitive areas, as essential as they are to creating liveable
environments for communities, also influence the design of a future spatial pattern, in that their
position is fixed. Very often, especially in communities with low income, one cannot afford to
conserve these areas, and neither can one afford not to do so (Greater Tzaneen Municipality
IDP, 2007:36).
The incidence of mining areas within the municipal area, especially in a densely-populated
environment, accentuates the conflict between subterranean and surface rights, especially
where communities do not have a statutory right to the land on which they reside. The
development of a mine could lead to job opportunities and an improved economy, but could
simultaneously negatively influence/disrupt the spatial development pattern, and negate certain
development alternatives (Greater Tzaneen Municipality IDP, 2007:36).
In addition to the above, the severe backlogs in terms of especially infrastructural services,
coupled with the dysfunctional spatial pattern, place severe constraints on the achievement of a
balanced and feasible improvement. The dynamics of eradicating backlogs (especially water
provision through the water scheme system) does not contribute to the solution (Greater
Tzaneen Municipality IDP, 2007:36).
- 100 -
In summary, the following issues threaten the achievement of the spatial development
objectives of the municipality (Greater Tzaneen Municipality IDP, 2007:36):
• Lack of support to areas with inherent development potential;
• Lack of institutional support (human resources, cadastral data, GIS, legal) for
implementation of land use management schemes and contraventions thereof, and
policing of development of state land;
• Application of different legislation to manage/regulate land use development in municipal
area;
• Slow land reform by way of formalisation of villages;
• Indiscriminate settlement squatting;
• Undeveloped land in private ownership within urban concentrations;
• Inadequate access to land for macro- and micro-development;
• Severe backlogs in terms of infrastructural, social and institutional facilities and services;
and
• Bulk infrastructural service provision for extensions in the formal towns.
5.7 Greater Tzaneen Municipality Spatial

Development Framework (SDF)
A Spatial Development Framework is a key component to the successful compilation and

implementation of an Integrated Development Plan (IDP). The purpose of a Spatial
Development Framework (SDF) is to provide guidance with respect to decision-making and
action towards the establishment of integrated and habitable towns. A secondary purpose of the
SDF is to establish a strategic framework for an appropriate land use management system
(Greater Tzaneen Municipality SDF, 2007:1).
5.7.1 Agriculture
Large areas of the municipal area are taken up by land with high agricultural potential. Four
broad types of farming occur within the municipal area, these being (Greater Tzaneen
Municipality SDF, 2007:13):
• timber in the south-western and western parts of the municipality;
• subtropical fruit and citrus production in the western and central parts;
• cattle and game farming in the eastern section of the municipality; and
• dryland cultivation of maize on the outskirts of villages in the rural areas.
- 101 -
The extent of farming units reflects the type of farming activity, in that areas of intensive
production (in the west) have an average extent of between 20 and 100 ha, while many farms in
the east exceed 1 000 ha (Greater Tzaneen Municipality SDF, 2007:13).
High potential agricultural land is situated (Greater Tzaneen Municipality SDF, 2007:14):
• in pockets in the extreme north-west of the municipal area;
• in Georges Valley, roughly midway between Haenertsburg and Tzaneen;
• around Tzaneen within an estimated radius of 10km from the town centre; and
• northward from the Nkowankowa-Letsitele axis as far as the northern boundaries of
Wards 17 and 23, and as a broad fragmented strip between Trichardtsdal and
Leydsdorp.
High potential agricultural land takes up roughly 27% of the land area of the municipality
The commercial farming sector has reached its full potential. Growth is dependent on
improvements in technology. Agriculture in historically disadvantaged communities is largely
confined to subsistence farming. Better utilisation of State land (almost 40% of the land area of
the Greater Tzaneen area of jurisdiction) holds the key to the expansion/growth of the
agricultural sector and the economy. The under-utilised potential of 10 000 - 170 000 hectares
referred to in the Phalaborwa SDI is State land (tribal land) and estates owned by the Province,
one of the latter being situated within the Greater Tzaneen area. Forward linkages to other
sectors, especially manufacturing and trade, represent economic development potential.
5.7.2 Settlement patterns and densities
Tzaneen Town is situated roughly in the centre of the municipal area where the major arterial
routes converge. Although settlement concentration is average by comparison (i.e. in terms of
the total number of residential sites), the town has by far the highest concentration of business,
industrial, social, financial, recreational and infrastructural facilities and services within the
municipal area. The town takes up approximately 849 ha (Greater Tzaneen Municipality SDF,
2007:15).
Nkowankowa, situated approximately 13 km east of Tzaneen and north of the provincial road P
17/3 is the largest proclaimed town within the municipal area (862 ha) with the highest number
of stands (5 250) (Greater Tzaneen Municipality SDF, 2007:15).
- 102 -
Lenyenye, situated 10 km further east of Nkowankowa on the southern side of the same
arterial, extends over roughly 230 ha and has 2 519 stands, which makes it the smallest of the
three major proclaimed towns, but also the most compact in terms of settlement density
Haenertsburg, a small proclaimed town (142 ha), is situated at the western gateway to the
municipality, exhibits a very limited residential component and a low settlement density, but
serves as service node with considerable tourism appeal and potential (Greater Tzaneen
Municipality SDF, 2007:15).
Letsitele, situated nine kilometres east of Nkowankowa and south of the P43/3, is the smallest
of the proclaimed towns, extending over 102 ha with a total of 123 stands, has an unusually
well-developed business area, which is attributed to the fact that the town serves as retail and
social service centre to a large farming community and the resident population of a number of
rural villages within a 10km radius of the town (Greater Tzaneen Municipality SDF, 2007:15).
By far the largest concentration of rural settlements is found in the southern quadrant of the
municipal area, where 69% of the population resides on 67% of the residential stands. Densities
vary from 21 persons per ha to 106 persons per ha with an average of 45 persons/ha (Greater
Tzaneen Municipality SDF, 2007:15).
The second concentration of rural settlements occurs in the northern quadrant of the municipal
area, where 27% of the people reside on 26, 5% of residential stands. Densities vary from 18
persons per ha to 77 persons per ha, the average density calculating to 37 persons per ha
5.7.3 Residential development
A characteristic of current residential development is that it is low density; the average density
being five stands per ha. This is conducive to urban sprawl as a gross rate of 2 000 sq.m per
stand relates to an average net extent of 1 440 sq.m per residential stand. With an average floor
area of residential dwellings calculating to 172 sq.m, this represents a floor area ratio of 0,12
(12% coverage). It can therefore be deduced that residential land, which is a scarce resource, is
generally being grossly under-utilised, as acceptable norms dictate coverage of 50%. Simply
stated, residential stands are currently too big on average, the average floor area of dwellings
- 103 -
dictating that residential erven should extend over 350 sq.m (Greater Tzaneen Municipality
SDF, 2007:20).
Residential densities in the proclaimed areas are higher than in the rural villages, with the
density in Lenyenye calculating to 12 residential units per ha, in Nkowankowa to six residential
units per ha, and in Tzaneen to four units per ha (Greater Tzaneen Municipality SDF, 2007:20).
5.7.4 Spatial objectives and strategies
The Greater Tzaneen Municipality will pursue the following objectives to achieve the desired
spatial form of the municipality (Greater Tzaneen Municipality SDF, 2007:50):
Objective 1: The sustainable utilisation of all land within the municipal area to its fullest
potential and benefit.
Objective 2: The restriction of wastage of land through urban sprawl, degradation of the
natural environment and/or sterilisation of resources.
Objective 3: The concentration of development to derive social and economic benefits for the
community.
Objective 4: The utilisation of existing development and infrastructure capacity.
Objective 5: The promotion of good internal and external accessibility through the optimal use
of existing road networks.
Objective 6: The support of economic growth through the judicious exploitation of natural and
artificial resources.
Objective 7: The promotion of orderly development through timeous preparation and planning.
Objective 8: The manipulation of development to achieve a hierarchal settlement
development pattern.
Objective 9: The promotion of land restitution and reform to achieve equitable access to land
and security of tenure.
Spatial trends could be classified as a perpetuation of the existing situation, deviations being the
following (Greater Tzaneen Municipality SDF, 2007:52):
• accelerated migration of people to those areas in Tzaneen that are perceived to offer
employment and basic services; and
• unplanned, indiscriminate settlement of people especially along arterial routes.
- 104 -
The prevalent spatial pattern can be attributed to the following (Greater Tzaneen Municipality
SDF, 2007:52):
• historic policies and development initiatives;

• economic potential of land;
• land ownership and management;
• culture; and
• topography.
The desired spatial form of the municipality is dependent on the meticulous application of the
following principles (Greater Tzaneen Municipality SDF, 2007:55):
• Sustainable use of land to fullest potential and benefit;

• Minimal wastage of land through sprawl, degradation and sterilisation;
• Concentration of development to the social and economic benefit of the community;
• Utilisation of existing development and infrastructure capacity;
• Good accessibility through well-developed road networks and optimal use of existing
roads;
• Vibrant economy and economic growth through spontaneous growth of economic sector;
• Orderly development;
• Concentrated urban core, intermediate levels of development and hinterland (hierarchy
of towns and settlements);
• Tenure/land reform; and
• Establishment of a framework for cost-effective provision of social and physical
infrastructure.
The formulation of a spatial rationale, and more specifically a macro-spatial plan for the
Limpopo Province and its municipalities requires some statement on the spatial development
objectives that guided the formulation of the macro-spatial plan (hierarchy of settlement)
The most important objectives that guided the formulation of the macro-spatial plan and also
eventually policy and strategy formulation are (Greater Tzaneen Municipality SDF, 2007:56):
• The establishment of an optimal and functional spatial pattern for the district over time.
- 105 -
• The establishment of a hierarchy of settlements (both towns and villages) to provide a

framework for the provision of social facilities and physical infrastructure on a cost
effective basis.
• The development of nodal points in rural areas should receive priority attention in an
attempt to establish sustainable settlements that are able to create jobs for their
residents.
• The establishment of a spatial pattern with a hierarchy of settlements that provides a
sound basis for economic growth to, among others, increase income and employment in
both the formal and informal sectors, in urban as well as rural areas.
• The establishment of an optimal macro-land-use pattern that identifies macro-land-uses
most suited to specific land (e.g. areas for mining, agricultural development, tourism,
trade and industry, residential development).
• The optimum utilisation of available natural resources.
• To promote and implement spatial development initiatives that support security of tenure
in all areas (e.g. a full range of land tenure options should be available).
• Initiation of a process to streamline the existing policy development processes as well as
legislation pertaining to spatial development (including land-use management).
• The successful integration of planning on macro-level (national and provincial) and
micro-level (district and local municipality).
• To provide inputs to an institutional framework that could facilitate the implementation of
the Spatial Rationale (macro-spatial plan with its policy and strategy) by all levels of
government.
The following proposals with spatial and environmental impact have been made in the Spatial
Development Framework (Greater Tzaneen Municipality SDF, 2007:75):
• The conservation of high-potential agricultural land that is a scarce resource and the
backbone of the local economy;
• The protection of environmentally sensitive areas, including the drainage system and
other conservation areas;
• The judicious utilisation of nature areas for commercial tourism;
• The promotion of densification of urban development;
• The concentration of development initiatives and projects in areas with inherent potential
to promote the establishment of a hierarchical settlement pattern;
• The acknowledgement and reservation of potential mining areas;
• The anticipation and pre-emption of indiscriminate settlement/squatting; and
- 106 -
• The acknowledgement of the current settlement pattern and the utilisation of existing
spatial and infrastructural development to further the aims and achieve spatial goals of
the Greater Tzaneen Municipality.
5.8 Conclusion
The government has developed various plans and frameworks in order to assist with spatial
development and planning on national, provincial, district and local level.
In order to maintain the current spatial trends and the development of new innovative ways of
spatial development, it is important to follow these plans and frameworks. These frameworks
are also designed to protect conservation areas within the municipality of Tzaneen, as well as
the sustainable usage of services and other available resources.
These plans were constructed after intense research of the area. The question is whether the
land reform programme, addressing issues such as the influence on spatial development as
addressed in the plans, will have such a huge effect in practice as was predicted in the plan.
Also, were these issues handled according to what was prescribed in the plans? Chapter 6
describes the influence land reform has on the Limpopo Province, as well as on the spatial
development and planning in the Greater Tzaneen Municipality.
In order to make a success of both land reform as well as spatial planning it is important that
these factors should not be seen in isolation. Land reform and the influence it has on spatial
development, including bulk services provision, road upgrades, establishment of business
nodes etc. should be incorporated within the local IDP’s and SDF’s.
The same can be said about the policies regarding land reform. Policies should also focus on
localised areas, because the dynamics of every district municipality differs.
- 107 -
Chapter 6 - The Impact of the Land Reform Programmes on the Greater Tzaneen Area
Chapter 6 – The impact of the land

reform programmes on the Greater
Tzaneen Municipality
6.1 Introduction
The Greater Tzaneen Municipality (GTM) has made some promises in its Integrated
Development Plan (IDP) as well as the Integrated Development Framework (SDF) in order to
manage land reform and still maintain and improve spatial development and planning within the
municipality. In this chapter, the influence of land reform on the Limpopo Province, and more
specifically on the Tzaneen Municipal Area and its surroundings, will be discussed. Photos are
included to state some remarks contained in this chapter. Case studies of farms transported
through land reform are included. Furthermore, the impact on production in the Tzaneen area is
discussed, as well as the influence on local business, property development and the over-all
influence on spatial planning and development.
Limpopo Greater
Province Tzaneen
Municipality
Background Background
Land reform in the GTM

Investment
• Background
• Land transferred
• Spatial development in
GTM
Case studies • Conclusion
Comprehensive rural Inconsistency in

development programme land reform
- 108 -
Above is a research process outline describing how the land reform process fits in with the
Limpopo Province and the Greater Tzaneen Municipality.
The different land reform programmes and their overall influences and performances on
national level were discussed in Chapter 4. On local level, the pace, nature of implementation
and the effects of land reform were directly dependent on the policy frameworks and
administrative procedures that were formed on a national and provincial level.
As was already stated and explained, the land reform process consists of three programmes,
namely the land restitution programme where a community or tribe claim farms. Those claims
are published in the Provincial Gazette in order to legalise the claims. Secondly, in the
redistribution process the beneficiaries receive a grant (SLAG, LRAD, PLAS etc.) from the
government in order to purchase a farm and do the necessary developments. The grants are
received according to the amount of contributions the farm buyer can give. This includes his
own capital, farm implements, labourers etc. If the farm buyer cannot supply anything but his
own labour he needs to form partnerships with other beneficiaries in order to receive a bigger
grant. And thirdly, the land tenure process is when the farm worker is given the opportunity to
receive his own piece of the farm land he works and temporary lives on.
6.2 The effect of land reform in different provinces
The effect land reform has on each province in South Africa varies. The geographical nature,
crop cultivation, demographics, financial management, spatial development schemes, average
farms sizes and markets of all the provinces differ, which is why the impact of land reform in
each province is different.
It is indeed noticeable that the areas where traditionalism occurred are the areas where the
most claims were lodged. Such areas include the eastern parts of Mpumalanga, Limpopo,
eastern parts of the North West Province, KwaZulu-Natal and the old homeland areas.
The most land claims were introduced by communities through the restitution process. This
resulted in group farming activities. The successes relating to group farming were few and even
after 10 years no decent progress was made. The redistribution programme is focussed on
families and has also resulted in family farming. The reason for this is that the more input you
can give as beneficiary, the bigger grant you receive. This actually led to great successes,
- 109 -
which improved the livelihood of people and ensured that people take possession of the land
that was given to them.
It seems that the most successes in the land reform programme occurred in the southern and
western provinces under the land redistribution programme. However, land claims under the
restitution programme made the land redistribution programme almost impossible in the
northern and eastern provinces. The reason for this is that, no land that is under claim can be
used for anything else than farming, and the sole right for the farming privileges are given to the
claimant of that specific land. This is the reason for the so-called successes with land reform in
the southern and western provinces.
6.3 The Limpopo Province

6.3.1 Background
Map 6.1: Map of South Africa

Source: ANC, 2009.
- 110 -
Map 6.2: Map of the Limpopo Province

Source: (Own Construction).
The Limpopo Province is the most northern province of South Africa. The province shares
borders with the Gauteng province (industrial centre of the country) in the south, Mozambique in
the east through the Kruger National Park (a world conservation icon), Zimbabwe in the north
and Botswana in the west. The proximity of the province to Gauteng, the Kruger National Park,
Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Botswana puts the province in a strategic position as a gateway to
Africa and its resources to unleash the economic potential of this great continent (South Africa,
2005a:1).
The province covers an area of 12,46 million hectares and these account for 10,2% of the total
area of the Republic of South Africa. The province is endowed with abundant agricultural
resources and it is one of the country’s prime agricultural regions noted for production of
livestock, fruit and vegetables, cereals and tea (Limpopo Department of Agriculture, 2008).
According to Limpopo Focus (2008), the gross income from all agricultural products in South
Africa in 2005 amounted to R68 298 million constituted as follows:
- 111 -
• Animal products: R31 286 million

• Horticultural products: R20 824 million
• Field crops: R16 188 million
Agriculture in Limpopo contributes R1.8 billion to the provincial gross geographical product
(GGP), about 2.5% of the total GGP. This is based on 2002 figures. Livestock (beef, pork,
chicken and eggs) contributes a significant portion of agriculture’s portion to the GGP (Limpopo
Focus, 2008).
The total land area in Limpopo is 11 960ha with farmland making up 88.2%. Potential arable
land constitutes 14% of the total area. Limpopo’s climate is suitable for agricultural production.
There are two parts of the province with rainfall in excess of 1 000mm per annum. The province
is a summer rainfall area that receives its rain between October and March (Limpopo Focus,
2008).
Agriculturally speaking, Limpopo is the food basket of South Africa. Limpopo produces 75% of
South Africa’s mangoes, 65% of its paw-paws, 25% of its citrus, 25% of its litchis, 75% of its
tomatoes, 54% of its macadamia nuts and approximately 60% of its avocadoes. Limpopo is the
second-largest producer of potatoes in the country, accounting for 19% of South Africa’s total
production. The province is also one of the largest producers of guavas, bananas, papayas and
tea in the country. Limpopo is home to the largest cotton fields and biggest ginnery, producing
the highest quality in South Africa. Agriculture has also stimulated the ancillary development of
a growing range of processed products, such as fruit juice and concentrates, dried fruit and
products such as achaar (Limpopo Focus, 2008).
Considerable opportunity exists in the areas of processing and packaging, the export of beef,
pork, chicken and eggs, as well as fruit and vegetables. The province therefore offers
opportunities in the processing and packaging of fruit and vegetables (Limpopo Focus, 2008).
There is also potential for the additional production of sunflowers, soy beans and maize in dry-
land conditions. Soy beans represent a particularly profitable investment opportunity with
substantial quantities being imported. Pre-feasibility studies indicate that peach and almond
production is viable, and investigations into the viability of cassava and bamboo production
have also been conducted (Limpopo Focus, 2008).
- 112 -
The Limpopo Provincial Government is facilitating development of new types of farming and
further value added processing of products as diverse as sugar, essential oils, catfish and
goats. Limpopo has a viable forestry sector with commercial plantations covering 63 000ha and
an annual round wood production of about 680 000m³. Approximately 90 000m³ goes to the
mining sector (as mining timber). The growth of the mining sector in this province is expected to
increase the demand for timber. Game farming has also become a lucrative business and has
surpassed cattle farming in several areas (Limpopo Focus, 2008).
6.3.2 Investment
Large and small farmers in Limpopo are joining the movement to eliminate or reduce chemical
fertilisers and pesticides in the cultivation of their crops through the introduction of organic
farming in the province. Organic farming is emerging as a potentially lucrative new industry in
Limpopo, spurred by buoyant demand for chemical-free products. Through the Limpopo Export
Advisory Committee (LEAC), TIL is placing special emphasis on promoting organic products,
and has already sponsored local farmers to attend major exhibitions in South Africa and in
Germany as observers. The market for organic goods has grown considerably. Woolworths, for
example, says that since it introduced organic produce in 2001, sales of these products have on
average increased by 75% each year (Limpopo Focus, 2008).
The Limpopo Provincial Government is moving to halt the sharp decline in productivity on many
agricultural estates awarded to communities under South Africa’s post-apartheid land reform
and restitution laws. With many communities lacking the skills and resources to sustain large-
scale enterprises, Limpopo’s premier, Sello Moloto, has noted that ‘vast tracts of land are lying
fallow’ (Limpopo Focus, 2008).
The Provincial Government’s response has been to pioneer what has become known as the
‘strategic partnership model’. This enables communities with restituted land and workers on
farms to form partnerships with commercial farmers who are given 10-15 years concession to
operate estates. Strategic partners, who in many cases have turned out to be previous
landowners, are obliged to transfer business, management and farming skills to the new owners
(Limpopo Focus, 2008).
Limpopo is becoming a major export of exotic trees and shrubs. Foreign investors, in
partnership with a community in Vhembe District, have revived a rundown, 250ha tree and
shrub cultivation estate near Thohoyandou with a view to serve landscaping markets in the
- 113 -
Middle East, which is experiencing a boom in property development. The partners will also
serve the South African market and hope to meet much of the demand for landscaping in and
around the 2010 Soccer World Cup sites. In addition, they are establishing a training centre on
the estate, which they also plan to develop as an agri-tourism attraction (Limpopo Focus, 2008).
In 2006, Limpopo started a programme to resuscitate the province’s tea estates. Among the
African countries, the Kenyans are the masters of the tea trade, which is why the Limpopo
Department of Agriculture has linked up with the Kenyans who are assisting in terms of
revitalising tea estates in the province. At the core of this programme are two tea estates,
namely Magwa, in the Eastern Cape and Sapekoe in Limpopo, which takes the form of four
separate estates. Sapekoe Tea Plantation outside Tzaneen is South Africa’s biggest. In 2004 it
was forced to cease production and lay off its workers because of an ongoing land claims
process. More than 4 000 workers lost their jobs. The Magwa and Sapekoe estates were
responsible for about 76% of the black tea produced in South Africa. The revival of Magwa
would create some 2 000 full-time jobs, while resuscitating Sapekoe would establish 5 000
permanent posts (Limpopo Focus, 2008).
6.3.3 Land reform case studies
According to Mr Sello Moloto, former premier of the Limpopo Province, 88% of farms in the
Limpopo province are under claim. This was said at a National Council of Provinces (NCOP),
held in Nkowankowa in 2005. The land claims commissioner raised an objection to this
statement made by Moloto, but this could not be resolved due to the fact that no list of claims in
the province was ever compiled (Limpopo Provincial Government, 2005).
Land Reform in Limpopo has come under close scrutiny from academic, farming and civil
society stakeholders. This can be attributed to several factors, including high proportion of
commercial farmland under claim (approximately 88%), the articulated land requirements of
marginalised and poor communities in the former homeland areas, the seemingly slow pace of
land transfer and, notably, the relatively poor achievement of many land reform initiatives. Key
literature on the land reform process in Limpopo was examined. A number of themes emerged,
including weak community cohesion among land reform beneficiaries, the poor institutional
capacity of Communal Partnership Agreements (CPAs), inadequate support for CPAs, poor
integration of land reform into IDPs, and new development possibilities through strategic
partnerships. A number of gaps in the research were also identified, including the lack of
- 114 -
research on the economics of land reform in Limpopo, on land local economic development,
and on the agricultural environment (Charman et al., 2008).
The land reform process has also proceeded slowly. By 2008 the Department of Land Affairs
(DLA) had returned only 3% of the land area of Limpopo Province. This protracted pace is a
cause of great concern. It has negatively impacted on the agricultural sector; delays have given
rise to uncertainty, thus undermining investment. Although the government has put considerable
resources into creating a black farming class, there are worries that these emerging farmers still
lack the capacity, skills and know-how to be able to farm commercially. Despite these setbacks,
the reform programme has had some success, most notably on the public-private partnerships
between CPAs and strategic business entities (Charman et al., 2008).
The Sustainable Livelihood Consultants (SLC) study concluded that land reform needed to be
seen in both economic and political dimensions. The current approach to land reform, which is
characterised by an increasing supply of services and financial grants, will be difficult to sustain
given the growing demands on state resources to provide direct services (Charman et al. 2008).
6.3.3.1 Case study – Morebeng (formally known as ‘Soekmekaar’)
The ‘Soekmekaar area’ was formerly a reasonably thriving white commercial farming area with
a mixture of field crops, horticulture crops, cattle, and timber. Although the town of Soekmekaar
was founded only in 1924 “…as the rail junction for the Messina, Komatipoort and Polokwane
railway lines” (Aucamp & de Beer, 2007), white farms had been established from the turn of the
century. The agricultural conditions in the area are generally favourable due to its location on
the cusp of the escarpment, which moderates temperatures and assures relatively ample
rainfall (Aliber et al., 2008:2).
While there are no secondary data with which to depict trends in farm employment, interviews
with commercial farmers suggest countervailing processes over the pas 10-15 years. That the
area was plagued with ongoing problems of farm evictions is evident by the fact that the first
ANC attack on a police station was that on Soekmekaar in January 1980. On the one hand, the
diversification into high-value crops means greater demand for permanent workers relative to
seasonal workers, but overall an increase in the wage bill. On the other hand, the transfer of
land through land reform has reduced overall demand for labour on white-owned commercial
farmers, while employment and self-employment on transferred properties is variable according
to the overall performance of the projects (Aliber et al., 2008:3).
- 115 -
Presently, much of the land has been transferred via land reform to black owners, and the
extent of commercial farming in the area is dramatically diminished. One sign of this was the
closing of the NTK shop – the main source of agricultural supplies within 100 kilometres travel
distance – in 2001. Another indicator is an off-hand remark of one of the main companies that
provides agricultural transport in the region (based in Mooketsi, roughly equi-distance between
Morebeng and Tzaneen) to the effect that “…there really aren’t any commercial farmers in
Soekmekaar anymore”. More to the point, however, the primary, project-level data collected in
the course of LaLR establishes that eastern Molemole has experienced a rather typical mix of
land reform projects, from some that are completely moribund, to those that show some sign of
‘success’, at least in terms of maintaining some form of agricultural production (Aliber et al.,
2008:3).
However, it would be rash to conclude that the decline in agriculture in eastern Molemole was a
consequence of land reform. This might be the case, even just partially, but there are
indications that the commercial farming community of eastern Molemole began to decline prior
to and independent of land reform. The most obvious sign was that the NTK shop closed before
a significant share of land had shifted hands through land reform. Secondly, while initially white
commercial farmers banded together to oppose land claims, once one of them realised that it
posed a great opportunity to get out of farming, others quickly followed suit. Remaining white
farmers who were interviewed give the impression that it was not because farmers there were
particularly eager to sell, but rather because government, for some reason, had chosen to focus
on it (Aliber et al., 2008:5).
6.3.3.2 Case study – Zebediela citrus estate
Zebediela citrus estate is the biggest citrus plantation in Southern Africa. It is situated 50km
outside of Potgietersrus in the Limpopo Province (De Villiers et al., 2006:5).
The land was returned to the Bjatladi community on 28 September 2003 following a successful
land claim. The progress from lodging the claim to settlement took about five years to complete.
The land measures 13, 750 ha. The Bjatladi Community Property Association (CPA) holds title
to the land on behalf of the community. The CPA comprises 423 households with some 1 800
beneficiaries. The farm employs about 800 workers in season, with 237 permanent workers (De
Villiers et al., 2006:5).
- 116 -
Zebediela has a long history as a citrus estate and as one of the major exporters of citrus in
South Africa. Before handover it was managed by the Regional Development Corporation under
auspices of the Lebowa government, and most recently management fell to the Limpopo
government. External influences such as the abolishment of farming subsidies, deregulation of
the industry, vandalism, theft, unemployment and severe drought have had a major impact on
operations at Zebediela before and since handover. One of the conditions of handover was that
workers who had been employed previously at Zebediela had to be retained with similar
conditions of service (De Villiers et al., 2006:5).
According to De Villiers et al., (2006:6), the legal structure of the Zebediela Company is as
follows: The CPA, its strategic partner – Henley Farm Properties (Boyes Group) – and the
workers established the Zebediela company to which the land is leased. The company has
three shareholders:
1. The Community Property Association (CPA);
2. The Worker’s Trust; and
3. The Boyes Group
The CPA is not allowed to encumber or dispose of the land. Shareholding in the company is as
follows:
- The CPA holds 30% of the shares with shareholding set to increase annually by 1% up to
35%
- The Worker’s Trust holds 15%
- The strategic partner holds 55%, with shares set to reduce annually by 1% to 50%.
The Zebediela company leases land from the CPA for a period of 15 years at R1 million a year,
after which there will be a review of the arrangement. Zebediela employs the workers and all
commercial activities on the farm fall under the auspices of the company. Zebediela appointed a
managing director, John Boyes, to take up the responsibility of implementing the business plan
as well as for the daily management of the land, marketing, new operations, the training of staff
and matters associated therewith (De Villiers et al., 2006:6).
Although Zebediela has a history as a top exporter of citrus, the farm became derelict and
vandalised over time due to various reasons. After handover of the land to the homeland of
Lebowa in 1973, it made a profit for only three of the following 20 years. By the 1990s the
number of citrus trees had been reduced from 200 000 to 60 000 due to drought,
mismanagement and vandalism. By the time the farm was returned to the CPA, large
investments were required to replace and upgrade equipment (De Villiers et al. 2006:8).
- 117 -
According to De Villiers et al., (2006:11), in 2006 some 850ha were under 210 000 citrus trees.
At its peak Zebediela carried approximately 600 000 trees, but economic circumstances and
subsidies at the time were markedly different and more beneficial than is the case today. It was
envisaged that 30 000 new trees would be added in 2005/06 and that this would place the farm
close to its commercial and environmental capacity (De Villiers et al., 2006:11).
According to a few other resources, the Zebediela citrus estate project was not that successful
as they wanted it to appear.
The Zebediela citrus estate used to be called “the diamond of agricultural projects”, and in 1978
the Reader’s Digest, in its Illustrated Guide to Southern Africa, wrote: “Nearly 400 million
oranges are harvested each year… At the height of the season, about 15 000 cases of oranges
leave Zebediela every day. The fruit comes from more than 565 000 trees irrigated by enough
water to supply a city…” (p.122). The harvest was worth R30 million a year. But after its hand-
over to the Agricultural and Rural Development Corporation of the ruling ANC Government the
estate suffered a loss of R30 million in 2000 and of R35 million in 2001. The press reported that
is was “beyond recovery”. A lemon yield worth R8 million was left to rot because there was no
money to pay staff. In March 2001, ABSA Bank stopped all credit and bounced a pension
cheque of R56 million. The seller farmers had been only too ready to help the new owners, but
their help was rejected (Scarborough, 2004).
According to Stuijt (2004), all is not as it seems. After the magnificent citrus estate was handed
over to the ANC-regime, the 2 260 hectare had actually never produced a profit – yet now it is
being hailed as a major land reform success. It is, in fact, being run by a white-owned company,
which pays out so-called black “equity partners” who “owned the land since 2001”. The minister
of agriculture’s spokesperson claims that “business had started to boom”.
At a meeting held between land claimants and farmers, the latter were told by a claimant that
‘they should hand over their title deeds to the claimants and then you (the farmers) can work for
us’. This seems to be the new trend in claimants’ thinking, most of whom do not want to farm
and cannot farm commercially. Farmers must run the operation while the “owners” rake off a
good portion of the profits. It’s called mentoring, or ‘joint ventures’. The latest idea is
‘leaseback’, where the farm is ‘handed over’ to claimants and leased back to the original farmer
who must now hand over a hefty percentage of his profit to people who have had no input in the
farm’s productivity or profitability. Thus, “the claimants become a sort of landowners’ class,
doing nothing and sharing profits with the managers and workers.” This arrangement will not
- 118 -
suit many farmers who want the full profit for all their work, initiative, skills and heartache (Stuijt,
2004).
The farming of such vast fruit and tea estates is extremely labour-intensive and requires many
years of experience of local conditions, plus marketing and management expertise. Years of
professional agricultural training is an absolute requirement for anyone managing such land
holdings (Stuijt, 2004).
Zebediela is now being run on a 15 year management contract by the (white) Boyes family.
John Boyes, manager of the company, is quoted as being “confident that the 2005 citrus crop
will produce a full harvest and yield 1,2 million cartons of fruit”. This claim was called
‘extravagant’ by other local professional farmers. Summarised: In 1980, there were 600 000
trees in production at Zebediela. In 2004, less than 200 000 trees remained. The rest died, and
were cut up for firewood. The original area under plantation was 2 260 hectares. In 2004, less
than 800 ha were under production. The estate was run at a third of its total proven potential. In
the same time some local professional farmers in the area produced up to 3 000 export cartons
per hectare. Zebediela produced only 375 export cartons per hectare (Stuijt, 2004).
6.3.3.3 The story of Charles Boyes
With the commencement of transferring land through the restitution process in Limpopo,
farmers felt that the land claims commission gave no assistance in the post-settlement of new
farmers. Many willing sellers were prepared to give assistance and act as mentors to the
farmers in order to transfer their knowledge, experience and financial problem-solving skills. A
few models were designed by agricultural businesses, agricultural forums and individual farmers
in order to execute the ideas for the insurance of the agricultural development process. Since
2003, none of these plans and presentations had been approved by the land claims commission
and it was remarkable how the choices of mentors and partners were based on political choices
(de Jager, 2009:98).
It was also notable that the farms with the best agricultural potential, especially in the export
industry, such as citrus, and in industries with high profit mark-up, such as bananas, were
consequently allocated to the same company. The company was South African Farm
Management (SAFM) under the management of a very competent lowveld farmer, Charles
Boyes. Boyes was never involved in organised agriculture. He was a farmer in the Letsitele- and
Hoedspruit vicinity, who also owned a nursery and was involved in other business ventures.
- 119 -
Although he farmed in both districts he mostly isolated himself from the agricultural ranks (de
Jager, 2009:98).
Boyes first came into the radar when one upscale farm after the other was awarded to his
company for partnership. One of the first farms was Zebediela citrus estate. He also received
the Burgershall banana farm to manage, which was described as the heartland of South Africa
in the banana industry. Also in Levubu the best farms were awarded to him. What the farmers
could not understand was that even a willing seller who was awarded the junior champion
farmer of the previous year could not fulfil the requirement to act as mentor or partner to the
beneficiaries on his own farm, while it was awarded to Charles Boyes (de Jager, 2009:98).
Boyes regularly gave donations and sponsorships for state supported affairs such as Heroes’
Day celebrations. According to local ANC leaders, Boyes was an involved member of the party.
His farming monarchy exponentially grew as one land claim after the other was settled in the
Limpopo and Mpumalanga provinces (de Jager, 2009:98).
In the Letsitele Valley, one of the first farms that were transferred through the land claims
process had degraded within two years and ran a risk of completely falling apart. Bad
management, contested financial decisions and absolute incompetence started to show on the
Mamatlola farms. Eventually the land claims commission got hold of a court order that took the
management from the CPA (Communal Property Company) and placed it in the hands of SAFM
(de Jager, 2009:98).
In a short time SAFM transformed the farm in such a way that it was once again productive.
Many of the farmers in the vicinity found this initiative very unpopular because of the uncertainty
of procedures followed when Boyes was introduced as partner of the claimants. Many farmers
in the farming forums hoped that they would receive such an opportunity to get involved with the
beneficiaries (de Jager, 2009:98).
In 2006, the land claimants in Charles Boyes’ projects started complaining about the low profit
margins and reduction in revenues from their farms and partnerships with Boyes. Some of the
claimants accused him of manipulating the markets through his own businesses. These
accusations were noted by the claim groups and resulted in Boyes being welcomed with much
less enthusiasm by the beneficiaries of the restitution projects (de Jager, 2009:99).
SAFM closed in 2008 due to administrative backlogs, and the inability of the land claims
commission. Already in 2007 the delays in settlement of post-settlement subsidies and
- 120 -
payments to other developmental help left Boyes’ projects struggling to stay afloat. Based on
guarantees from the Department of Land affairs, Boyes and SAFM claimed more financing from
ABSA bank in order to maintain the restitution farms he was responsible for. At the end of 2007,
his financial problems were clearly visible on the banana farms in the Letsitele Valley and
Burgershall. As a result, his relationship with land claims partners began to deteriorate (de
Jager, 2009:99).
6.4 Comprehensive Rural Development Programme,

Greater Giyani – Muyexe
The Greater Giyani Project was selected as a pilot project for the implementation of the
Comprehensive Rural Development Programme (CRDP) by the Minister of the Department of
Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR), Mr Gugile Nkwinti.
According to a speech made by President Jacob Zuma on 17 August 2009 at the launch of the
Giyani Pilot Project, the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme is the national
collective strategy in the fight against poverty, hunger, unemployment and lack of development
in the rural areas. Over the medium term government has pledged over R2,6 billion in
conditional grants to provinces. This will be used for agricultural infrastructure, training and
advisory services and marketing, and for upgrading agricultural colleges. One of the
government’s priorities is to ensure that land reform through redistribution and restitution is
more coherently linked to the creation of livelihoods for the poor.
A critical part of the rural development strategy is to stimulate agricultural production with a view
to contribute to food security. In this regard, government will support the provision of agricultural
implements and inputs to support emerging farmers and households nationally. The
government must also make agricultural loans accessible and ensure agricultural extension
services of a high quality. Over the medium term, the aim is to bring about a measurable
increase in agricultural output. To promote food security, government will also work to protect
valuable agricultural land from encroachment by other development. The focus is on
encouraging communities to grow their own food. Therefore, measures will be put in place to
ensure access by poor households to basic foods at affordable prices; and the general
improvement of the logistics of food distribution (Zuma, 2009).
- 121 -
Questionnaires were used to do a profiling and to confirm the exact number of households (HH)
in the Muyexe Village. 300 HH have been profiled through the physical and contact interviews.
CRDP Officials, CDWs and War Room officials had several meetings with the Muyexe
community. In all meetings water was identified as the main need of the community. Other
needs identified included roads, clinics, housing, fencing, playground, post office, Tribal
Authority (facility for the chief), community hall, police station, shopping mall, bed and
breakfasts (tourism opportunities), a library and upgrading dilapidated schools. Pupils from the
primary school were invited to draw pictures on their perception of the village and high school
pupils were invited to write essays on the theme “Muyexe, My Village, what I like and what I do
not like” (Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, 2009:8).
Summary of the final list of priorities & needs for the village of Muyexe:
Table 6.1 Priorities and needs for the Muyexe village
Priorities Needs
Water Business centre
Roads Community hall
Houses Sports centre
Sanitation Library
Fencing for cattle ECS centre
Irrigation Systems for crops Recreational centre
Soil suitability analysis Cell phone network, land lines
Livestock farming analysis Veggie tunnels
Clinic Satellite police station
Eradication of animal diseases Village industry (Economic industries)
Infrastructure for traditional authorities Skills and youth development
Soccer playgrounds Procurement of tractors
Post office
Source: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, (2009:9).
The Muyexe Spatial Plan seeks to spatially locate projects that have been proposed in
response to the identified needs of the community of Muyexe. The principles promoted in the
current legislative framework for spatial development have been adopted to ensure the
maximisation of resources (Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, 2009:9).
- 122 -
6.5 Tzaneen local municipality

6.5.1 Background
Map 6.3: Districts of the Limpopo Province

Source: Own Construction.
The Greater Tzaneen Local municipality is situated within the Mopani District of the Limpopo
Province. Greater Tzaneen Local Municipality, together with Ba-Phalaborwa, Greater Giyani,
Greater Letaba and Maruleng Local Municipalities comprise the Mopani District. The Greater
Tzaneen Local Municipality is situated in the south of the Mopani District along the R72 road,
linking Polokwane with the Phalaborwa Gate of the Kruger National Park. The Greater Tzaneen
Municipality area encompasses the proclaimed towns of Tzaneen, Nkowankowa, Lenyenye,
Letsitele and Haenertsburg. The Phalaborwa Spatial Development Initiative (SDI) transverses
the Greater Tzaneen Municipal area, while one of the major links between Gauteng and the
Kruger National Park also passes through the area (Tzaneen Local Municipality, 2007:5).
The Greater Tzaneen Municipality comprises a land area of approximately 3 240km² and
extends from Haenertsburg in the west, to Rubbervale in the east, south of Modjadjiskloof in the
north and to Trichardtsdal in the south. In addition to the proclaimed towns there are 125 rural
villages, concentrated mainly in the south-east and north-east of the study area. Almost 80% of
households reside in these villages. In addition, a large area of land is in private ownership
(66%), ranging from smallholdings to extensive farms, used mainly for commercial farming
- 123 -
activities. Equally large areas of land are under ownership of the State, under custodianship of
six Traditional Authorities (Approximately 33%) and land of negligible extent is within municipal
commonage (Tzaneen Local Municipality, 2007:6).
According to the Local Economic Strategy Review of Tzaneen (2007:8), The Greater Tzaneen
Municipality area is subdivided into four cluster areas:
• Runnymede: North-east including Letsitele
• Relela: North-west including Tzaneen and Haenertsburg
• Bulalahlo: Central south
• Lesedi: South, including Nkowankowa and Lenyenye
The Tzaneen LESR (2007:8) exhibits the following spatial characteristics of The Greater
Tzaneen municipal area:
• An extensive land area extending over approximately 3 240km²;
• A fragmented formal urban component comprising Tzaneen, Nkowankowa and
Lenyenye, which has developed along a major arterial route;
• Two significant clusters of rural villages, one in the northern, and the other in the
southern quadrant of the municipal area;
• A well-developed network of primary and secondary arterial routes;
• Two service nodes, Haenertsburg and Letsitele, at opposite ends of the municipality;
• A considerable percentage of the land area comprises mountainous terrain (to the west
and south), which precludes urban development
• Large tracts of high-potential agricultural land utilised for intensive/extensive farming;
• Significant areas of land owned by the State under custodianship of Tribal/Traditional
authorities
• Limited accessibility to most villages due to inadequate access roads and internal street
networks
• A cone-shaped land area extending over approximately 80km along its east/west axis,
40km along the western vertical perimeter and 75km along the eastern vertical
perimeter;
• Steep slopes along its western and southern boundaries, which gradually dissipate into
undulating hills in the central areas to virtually flat ground in the eastern parts of the area
of jurisdiction.
• Environmentally sensitive areas largely coincide with steep slopes, which ensure that
these areas are protected from overexploitation. Exceptions include the area
surrounding the Ebenezer Dam and the banks of the Great Letaba River.
- 124 -
The table below offers a short summary of the economic indicators of the agriculture, mining,
manufacturing, wholesale, retail, trade, finance and business services in the municipality and
compares performance to that of the Mopani District.
Table 6.2 Summary of economic indicators, 2004
Indicators Mopani District Greater Tzaneen

AGRICULTURAL
Share of GDP 3.3% 6%
GDP growth per annum (1999-2004) -0.5% 0.3%
GDP contribution to sector in district n/a 48%
Share of employment 25.5% 28.9%
Employment growth per annum (1999-2004) 1.6% 1.3%
Employment contribution to sector in district n/a 46%
MINING
Share of GDP 5.6% 7%
GDP growth per annum (1999-2004) 6.4% 5.6%
MANUFACTURING
Share of GDP 4.7% 7.9%
Employment growth per annum (1999-2004) 2.7% 3%
WHOLESALE, RETAIL & TRADE
Employment growth per annum (1999-2004) 2.5% 2%
FINANCE & BUSINESS SERVICES
Source: Tzaneen Local Municipality, 2007.
From the information in the table above, the statement can be made that Tzaneen’s total
contribution to the GDP is a massive 63.4%. The agricultural sector’s share of employment is
the most, with a total of 28.9%. Agriculture’s GDP contribution to sectors in the district is also
- 125 -
the most with a total of 48%. As can be seen from the mentioned figure, agriculture plays a very
important role in the contribution to GDP, as well as employment.
6.5.2 Land reform in the Tzaneen municipal area
In the Tzaneen district, more than 98% of the farms are under claim. Very few of the farms were
transferred through land reform programmes, such as LRAD and PLAS. Most of the farms that
were transferred through LRAD and PLAS were under claim and this caused huge conflict. The
farm Mafufula is located next to Tzaneen’s industrial area and was transferred through the
PLAS Programme. The Muthunyeng tribe claimed the land first and when they heard what was
happening, they immediately tried to stop the programme. A portion of the farm Lucern was
transferred to the farm workers while it was under claim by the Mathunyeng claimant and was
also listed by the Makgoba tribe.
Success stories concerning land reform were very few and the failures that received the most
attention, both national and international, came mostly from the Tzaneen area.
The Tzaneen local municipality was totally uninvolved in the land reform process, except for a
workshop that was organised by the local municipality in 2007. The people present at the
workshop included commercial agriculture, farm workers, land claimants, NAFU, agricultural
businesses, political parties and the Landless People’s Movement. Unfortunately the speaker of
the municipality (as well as chairman of the workshop) were 2 ½ hours late. This led to huge
uncertainties on the agenda of the workshop, which caused the South African Communist Party
(SACP) and the Landless People’s Movement to be first in line to speak. This disrupted the
workshop and commercial farmers and farm workers walked out. There was never any
feedback on the workshop. The un-involvement of the municipality left a huge gap in the
management of land reform in the district.
The land reform process in the Tzaneen area consisted mostly of restitution and redistribution of
land.
The first farm that was transported in the land reform process was the farm La Boheme in
Trichardtsdal. 360 land beneficiaries, who each received a R16 000 grant through the SLAG-
programme, jointly bought the farm. The problem was that 360 farmers were 359 too many and
soon internal stress between the new land owners caused a previously highly productive farm to
deteriorate into an unproductive piece of land (de Jager, 2009:8).
- 126 -
The farm Geluksfontein soon followed the same route as La Boheme. An estimated total of 60
beneficiaries bought the farm through the SLAG programme, but unfortunately also lost it. This
caused the remaining 26 commercial farmers in Trichardtsdal to rather take up the risk of
managing a land claim on their land than to see other farms go the same way La Boheme and
Geluksfontein went (de Jager, 2009:9).
Land claims became a reality when the first land claim in the area was announced in the
Government Gazette in 2003. The Sekororo tribe claimed the whole of Trichardtsdal’s
remaining farms. In April 2004, the Magoba-tribe claimed 417 farms in Magoebaskloof. This
was a huge shock for the farming community of Tzaneen. At this point land claims became a
reality and not something everybody just speculated about in the Tzaneen area. The 417 farms
that the Magobas claimed were increased to 680 including farms in George’s Valley, Veekraal,
and Letaba Valley, which were claimed by tribes such as the Seralas, Muthunyengs, Molepos,
Mamabolos and various others. In March 2005, the 13 willing Trichardtsdal sellers sold their
land to the Sekororo Community Property Association (SCPA) (de Jager, 2009:13-14).
Land reform’s impact is not restricted to agricultural entities such as commercial farms. The
ripple effect causes various other sectors to also be influenced. These sectors include: over-all
spatial planning and development of the town, financing, security, professional services such as
doctors and attorneys, manufacturing and transport, to name but a few.
A number of questionnaires were distributed among key role-players within the municipality.
These role-players include local business owners, property developers, professional services
and farmers. The reason for these questionnaires is to determine to which extent local spatial
planning and development were influenced as a result of land reform.
The result is as follow: Most property developers seek potential land that is not under claim. The
problem with this is that because 98% of the land within the Greater Tzaneen Municipality is
under claim, to get hold of developable land without a land claim is almost impossible. Thus,
property development in this area is currently at a stand-still. Tzaneen, as well as the other
towns within the Greater Tzaneen Municipality, mostly depends on business from farmers and
farm workers farming and staying on commercial farms in the outskirts of the towns. Local
business owners feel that their businesses are affected in a huge way. Most local commercial
farmers who sold their land through the land claims process moved away from the area. The
same is true for the farm workers who were employed on the farm. This results in the decrease
of buying capacity in the area. People who are mostly affected by this are the local business
owners.
- 127 -
Professional services experience the same result. With fewer people in the area who make use
of professional services, such as town planners, lawyers and doctors, the professional services
sector decreases as well. Commercial farmers feel the pressure as well. The products produced
are usually packaged in pack houses in Tzaneen. But as a result of land reform most of those
businesses have closed down and only a few are left. This causes huge backlogs and an
increase in prices. Many transport companies have also closed their doors.
The questioned role-players all agree on one thing and that is that Tzaneen’s economy is
dependent on the local farmers and if all farms are transported to beneficiaries who are not
educated to farm commercially, Tzaneen will become a ghost town. The Greater Tzaneen
Municipality must improve their management in terms of land reform and spatial development
and not only make promises in their IDP and SDF.
Unfortunately, there is no measuring instrument to determine the progression of the land reform
process. No one knows how many hectares were transported throughout the land reform
programmes. The only indication of hectares transported in the land reform process is those
transported through the restitution process and the LRAD, PLAS and SLAG programmes. Many
hectares have been transported in the free market, but nobody knows how many.
The main difficulty is that race may not be indicated on title deeds, because that will bring us
back to apartheid and mean a whole lot of trouble on its own. Names do not give any indication
of race, so also that is not a reliable form of gathering information. Without the government
knowing how many hectares of land have been exchanged from white to black hands it is
impossible to determine when the government will reach the target of 30%.
In 2008, the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, the Department of
Agriculture, Agri-South Africa, TLU-SA, Agis, the deeds office and the Surveyor General
decided to do an empirical study in order to determine ownership of farms. This initiative was
driven by the CEO-Forum. The conclusion they came to is that private transactions have a
greater success in transporting land from white commercial farmers to new black upcoming
farmers than the state has with their land reform programme. Unfortunately, it seems that the
government does not see this effect as a positive measure. The key in all this is that
government should rather form partnerships with the private sector estate market in their land
reform programme. This will help the government to reach the 30% target much more easily.
According to Bernstein (2008:30), the land market transfers millions of hectares between buyers
and sellers each year, and an increasing proportion of buyers are black. It is estimated that the
- 128 -
true extent of land transferred from white to black owners is now close to 6,8% of commercial
agricultural land. Some 4,7% of agricultural land has been transferred through state
programmes. This means that market transactions have transferred a quantity of land
equivalent to 40% of the land transferred through government’s land reform programmes. This
may be an underestimate. In some areas, black people own far more than 7% of commercial
agricultural land. For instance, CDE’s own research shows that black farmers own 32% of
commercial farmland in the Eastern Cape regions of Elliot and Ugie. Moreover, according to
media reports, black farmers now own between 12-20% of commercial agricultural land in some
districts in the Free State.
In July 2009, the Property Rates Act was implemented. The act stated that each farm owner
must pay rates and taxes on his land. In order for the state to know how much land is owned by
whom, they had to do valuations. These valuations gave a good indication of how much land is
owned by black farm owners.
The actual impact land reform has on spatial development in the Tzaneen area is not
measurable by statistics, but it has an emotional effect that no one can document in its precise
form.
In Annexure B photographs are included, showing what has happened on commercial farms
that were transported to beneficiaries.
Maps are attached as Annexure C, which shows the different land claims in the Tzaneen
vicinity. As can be seen from the maps, almost all farms surrounding the town of Tzaneen are
under claim. This means that spatial development in Tzaneen is almost impossible, because if
land is under claim, the use of such land may not be changed. The land may also not be sold to
any other person than the claimants. Because it is only agricultural land that is claimed, it
means that the land use may not be used for residential purposes.
6.6 Inconsistency in land reform
In Hoedspruit it so happened that people formed an artificial tribe that never existed previously
and had no relations with each other. They claimed five farms on which residential areas and
wildlife estates had already been established. These wildlife estates are very exclusive and
each investor obtains a one hectare stand on which he can establish a residential unit.
Developers of such wildlife estates invested millions of rands to make these schemes viable,
- 129 -
but unfortunately the moment these farms were listed in the government gazette all transactions
were frozen and most developers are now on the brink of bankruptcy. The chance that the land
claims commission will actually buy the land for the claimants is very small and in the process
developers’ time and money are being wasted unnecessarily (de Jager, 2009:6).
Magoebaskloof was claimed as a consolidated area, except for a few properties in the middle of
the area that stand out like a sore finger. For some land owners it is just too accidental that
some of those properties belong to the previous Prime Minister of the Limpopo Province, the
Governor of the Reserve Bank and other senior officials. It is quite unlikely that historical rights
such as pasturage and the collection of wood, which was ostensibly disposed, exclude those
specific properties (de Jager, 2009:7).
In Phalaborwa the Mashishimane tribe mainly claimed game farms. The carrying capacity of the
pasture is one big livestock unit on 10 to 12 hectares of land. This area is behind the foot-and-
mouth disease red line, which means that mostly big-five game farms were established, which
were transported to a value of R8 000 per hectare in August 2006. The claimants insisted on
farming with cattle. The commission thus spent an average of R80 000 to R96 000 to create the
capacity for farming with one cow, which was worth about R4 000. Nobody in the commission or
claimant community understood the financial implication of this and nobody cared (de Jager,
2009:6-7).
In the Mooketsi area the Maupa-tribe’s claim has been dragging on for more than seven years
after it was listed in the government gazette. The reason for this is that the claim is in conflict
with the interests of the Modjadji-tribe and ten others. Agri-Letaba could not succeed in
obtaining a copy of the Modjadji claims and is very sceptical about the second and third
alterations to the claims that were announced in the government gazette at the end of 2008.
Frustrated land owners are unhappy that the land claims commission announced the Maupa
claim in the government gazette without the certainty that there was not more than one claim on
the same property. They have consequently been the victims of administrative incompetence for
more than seven years (de Jager, 2009:7).
6.7 Conclusion
The three legs of land reform, land restitution, land redistribution and land tenure reform’s
influence on the Limpopo Province, and more specifically the Tzaneen Municipality, have been
- 130 -
discussed extensively. So were case studies on land reform performances, as well as

inconsistencies within the land reform programme.
The influence of land reform on the local spatial development in the Tzaneen area was never
documented. The reason for this may be because no one is ready or willing to take
responsibility for this. The other possibility is that the full picture has not been taken into
account. Whatever the reason may be, there is definitely an influence.
Not only farmers whose land is under claim feel a huge matter of uncertainty regarding the
stigma of land reform. Many agricultural businesses have closed doors and many farm workers
who have worked on the farms have lost their jobs. They could do nothing else but move to the
cities, thereby diminishing the buying capacity for Tzaneen. If all people move to the cities, who
remains to build houses for and what reason is there for the town to move its boundaries and
grow? Estate developers see a problematic future for agriculturally driven towns such as
Tzaneen and are not prepared to take the risk of starting new residential or business
developments. The same applies to investors.
Unfortunately, there is no vacant land adjacent to the town for Tzaneen to spatially develop any
further. This implies that since the land reform issue was put into practice, spatial development
in Tzaneen has been minimal.
The overall impact that land reform has on spatial development will be discussed in more detail
in Chapter 7.
- 131 -
Chapter 7 - Implications of Land Reform Policies on Spatial Development
Chapter 7 – Implications of land reform

policies on spatial development
7.1 Introduction
It is important to understand that government has already rectified a large number of past
injustices and some of the unintended results through the rectification programme – land reform
– are not directly the fault of government. However, some mistakes were made and the
outcomes were not always as planned. Unfortunately, most of these mistakes are non-
revertible, which means that it will take years to repair, if ever.
Such an unintended ‘mistake’ is the influence that land reform has had on the spatial
development of all rural towns influenced by land reform. Spatial development is stimulated by
various factors, such as general migration to a town, local business expansion, improvement of
transport systems, tourist attractions, employment opportunities, improvement of basic services,
provision of buying opportunities (shopping centres, entertainment, etc.), agglomeration
benefits, provision of scarce products, land availability and a blooming farming community.
Unfortunately, the land reform process in South Africa negatively influenced all these factors
that are supposed to stimulate growth. The result: no spatial development, or even worse,
people migrate to areas with a much more moderate economic state, leaving the rural towns to
shrink and die.
Some of these mistakes are not measurable, because it was people’s emotions that were
influenced. But luckily most of these errors can be repaired by means of detailed planning and
management on implementation.
7.2 Influences on spatial development
The aspects that are influenced by land reform should not be seen in isolation, because one
small facet has an influence on various others and so, when one is out of balance, it can bring
the whole tower down. All the aspects mentioned apply to the Tzaneen Local Municipality as
well.
The following are unintended results caused by the land reform programme:
- 132 -
• The communal areas/ homelands have increased
The reason for this is that people have claimed farms adjacent to the homeland
boundaries. This is a problematic issue because the Department of Housing’s initiative is
to give adequate housing and services to those in need. This initiative from the DoH has
in some cases already spread to some homeland areas, but they have mostly started in
the outskirts of towns where it is easy to connect to existing services. The local
municipality will have to provide adequate housing and services to these people in the
homeland areas and with most municipalities, especially those located in the smaller
towns, money is a problem. This results in all the municipality’s money and energy being
used for the development of these homeland areas, leading to less money and time to
focus on development of the town and business node itself.
• Destroy commercial agricultural production
If the farms are handed over to the new beneficiaries it has a definite influence on the
commercial production on that farm. The new beneficiaries are not necessarily
commercial farmers from origin and usually do not have the knowledge to farm
commercially. This has a major effect on food security in South Africa. Also, farming is
dependent on natural sources and resources. If for example it is a dry year, food yields
will not be the same as the previous year and the farmers will have to use more of their
own capital to plant crops for the following year’s harvests. This happens all the time and
farmers who are in the business for a few years know to budget for times when harvests
are not that productive. But in the case of new upcoming farmers, they firstly do not have
the capital and secondly, they do not have the experience to plan for less productive
yields.
Unfortunately, if all commercial farms end up in the same way, South Africa has to
import food in order to feed the nation. Also, farmers whose land is under claim do not
make any investments on their land, because they do not know when the actual land
transaction will take place. This sets the new beneficiary already a few steps back when
he eventually receives the farm.
The land claim process is a problem. The commission lacks administrative capacity, as
well as transparency. All this has an adverse impact on the business of farming. Many
farmers whose farms are under claim say they are not making any new investments, and
are cutting back on replant programmes. They are doing the bare minimum to keep on
- 133 -
ticking over. That’s not a good development. And when land claims are finally gazetted,
they can still take years to finalise (Bernstein et al., 2008:6).
• The land reform programme creates existence farming
There is nothing wrong with existence farming, but the problem comes in when
productive commercial farms are converted into farms that only create food for the few
people staying on the farm. That takes products out of the market that could have been
used to feed the whole country, including the people staying on the farm. Also, no
commercial production means no food to sell in food stores. Thus, when stores close
their doors, people have to move to places where food is still freely available.
• Informal housing on fertile agricultural land
In many instances where land reform beneficiaries were not able to make a living on the
received land, they go back to the cities where they came from. What happens now is
that very fertile agricultural land, which many people will pay millions for, is occupied by
illegal squatters. This causes the value of agricultural land to depreciate.
• Beneficiaries are poorer than before they become beneficiaries of the land reform
programme
The beneficiaries move from the city/towns they are currently staying and working to the
farms they received through the land reform process in order to make a living on their
new farm. The problem is that they cannot use their land for collateral to borrow money
in order to do improvements on the farm. They use their own money, but usually it is not
enough to do the necessary improvements. They cannot sell the land or convert the land
use, so all that is left for them to do, is to move back to the city/town and leave the land
as it is.
• Local economy reduced
The rural towns are very dependent on the local farming community and if the farmers
leave, no one is left to do business with. Agricultural businesses close their doors and
soon all practices follow.
- 134 -
• Big farmers become bigger and the smaller farmers leave
Mostly the big farmers are not willing sellers, but smaller farmers see the land reform
process as an opportunity to sell their land and start something new, or to retire. Very
soon it is only the big farmers left in the business, because the big farmers control the
market and prices and the smaller non-willing sellers do not have a choice other than to
sell their land. This happens because it is not possible to survive in a market controlled
only by large-scale farmers.
• No investment in the rural areas
Investors are uncertain about the land reform climate. Most investors have decided to
invest in a more stable business.
• Unemployment
Unemployment is a huge issue in areas influenced by land reform. Most commercial

farmers scale down, because they do not know what the land reform future will bring.
This means retrenchments of farm workers. In the cases where farms are transported in
the land reform process, the beneficial farmers rather use their own workers or try doing
all the farm work between himself and his partners than to re-employ the farm workers.
Also, businesses that usually served the commercial farmers in the area scale down,
which means more retrenchments. Soon, all businesses remotely related to the
agricultural sector close doors, which means more people lose their jobs.
7.3 Conclusion
The question can now be asked, why are these implications not monitored and corrected? Is it
because no one has realised there is a problem, or is it because of the factors the Centre for
Development and Enterprise (CDE) has mentioned in their Research Report no 16? According
to Berstein (2008:21), the following issues are of great concern:
- 135 -
• Capacity in the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform
Over the past three years, the government has begun to admit what informed outsiders
have been saying for a decade or more: “that the greatest impediment to successful
implementation of land reform is the lack of capacity in the Department of Rural
Development and Land Reform”. In November 2006, the Minister of Agriculture and
Land Affairs said there were 1 000 vacancies in the department. Capacity constraints
were limiting delivery, and there was a lack of personnel to manage leases at the
provincial level (Berstein, 2008:21).
• Funding
State funding of land reform is another problematic area, for two main reasons. Firstly,
the DRDLR has recently struggled to spend its budget allocation. In 2006/2007, for
instance, R3,7 billion was eventually spent, adjusted down from a planned R4,8 billion.
Of this reduced amount, approximately R2,27 billion was allocated to restitution, and
R907 million to redistribution. Surveys, mapping and planning received R194 million, and
the remainder was allocated to administration and services (Berstein, 2008:22).
Secondly, even when the DRDLR is able to spend its whole allocation, there is a
mismatch between the size of its budget and the likely cost of meeting its land reform
goals (Berstein, 2008:22).
It is very concerning that land reform not only influences the agricultural sector alone, but has
some sort of effect on every economically driven sector in South Africa. Take for instance the
mining sector, which is supposedly not affected by land reform. If they cannot receive any wood
from the timber industry, they will be unable to mine for minerals. That has an influence on the
price of gold, which in return has an influence on the value of the Rand, etc.
The development of sustainable development indicators will improve the measurement of the
influence of land reform on spatial planning and development. Also, the accountability of
politicians will be determined as well as their monitored.
- 136 -
Chapter 8 - Planning Recommendations
Chapter 8 – Planning recommendations

In this chapter, a few planning recommendations will be made that will support the efficiency of
the land reform programme and ensure that spatial planning will not be forfeited in the process.
Although recommendations are made, it is not an easy task to implement these proposals.
Government will have to make a mind-shift in terms of who to approach for help. Unfortunately,
in both suggestions made, the private sector plays an integral role in order to accomplish
success. Government will have to realise that to involve the private sector, targets will be
reached much sooner.
The first recommendation is that the government must form coalitions with the private property
market. This will mean that commercial land transported to black beneficiaries in the open
market will have to count towards the 30% target to be reached in 2014. If this happens, part of
the emotional sting will be taken out of the land reform process. As was already mentioned,
much more land has been transported in the open market than government has transported
through its land reform process. Also, if the government recognises the private property market
as a partner, the government can have first opportunity to buy any farm land available on the
open market and transport it to a beneficiary.
The second recommendation is that an integrated body must be formed, such as the former
Joint Monitoring Committees (JMCs). This Integrated Land Reform Action Forum (ILRAF) must
make decisions on national, provincial and local level and must be managed by an economic
body. A person such as Trevor Manuel will make an excellent chairperson for such a forum.
The people that must be involved in the execution and management of the ILRAF are the
following:
• Town- and regional planners who must be involved in all spatial development of towns
influenced by land reform. This will ensure that spatial planning is not diminished in
these towns and future development is still an option.
• Urban designers to ensure that local spatial development still occurs in such a way that
it is aesthetically acceptable.
• All parties that provide civil and electrical engineering services. These include private
sector companies as well as all state-lead engineering services providers. This will
ensure that all future planning will be handled in a holistic manner and future planning
can be made on local level in order to accommodate future spatial development.
- 137 -
• Attorneys involved in the transportation of land. This will ensure that at each meeting an
update will be received of how many hectares of land have been transported and how
many are still on the waiting list. Government will then be up to date on how much land
has been transported and they will know how near/far they are from their 2014 target
• Valuers who valuate land for the land reform process. They will be able to give a full
report on how many hectares of farm land have been valued, what they are valued for
and how many hectares still have to be valued. This will also give the attorneys a bulk
figure for their future planning in transporting land.
• Political leaders involved in the land reform process.
• National Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries as well as the
Provincial Departments of Agriculture
The DoA’s (Department of Agriculture) mission is to lead and support sustainable
agriculture and rural development. The DoA will ensure that commercial agriculture will
not be traded for informal housing being erected on farms received through land reform.
• Department Rural Development and Land Affairs (DRDLR)
The department’s mission is to “facilitate integrated development and social cohesion
through participatory approaches, in partnership with all sectors of society” (DRDLR,
2009b). Because the department plays such a key role in the land reform process, it is
important for them to form part of such a facilitating forum, giving their advice and
sharing their knowledge. Also, to share progress made on the land reform side and how
issues were resolved.
• Department of Human Settlement
The mission of the Department of Human Settlement is “to establish and facilitate a
sustainable process that provides adequate housing for all within the context of
affordability of housing and services and access to social amenities and economic
opportunities” (DoH, 2007). It is important that all departments must work together in
order to make the land reform process a success and to ensure that spatial development
is not restricted in any way. One of the objectives of provincial government is to provide
adequate housing to the poor. It is a bit contradicting if one person receives a farm
through the land reform process and cannot make a success of it, but many people do
not even have a roof over their heads.
• Commercial farmers (both willing and unwilling sellers)
They will be able to provide insight into how current successful, producing commercial
farmers experience the land reform process. It is important that the government should
protect the country’s commercial farmers in order to ensure food security for the future.
They will also be able to advise the government on how to handle complicated
situations.
- 138 -
• Agri-SA
“Agri South Africa is a federal organisation, which promotes on behalf of its members,
the sustainable profitability and stability of commercial agricultural producers and
agribusinesses through its involvement and input on national and international level”
(Agri-SA,2009).
• People involved in agriculture-related businesses, such as NTK.
• Farmer associations, such as the Citrus Growers Association or the Cotton Growers
Association.
• Commercial banks, such as ABSA, Standard Bank and First National Bank.
• Estate Agency Affairs Board (EAAB)
A representative of the EAAB can give valuable information on the property market.
They will also be able to provide information on all agricultural land available on the free
market.
• Local municipalities
It is critical that all local municipalities be involved in the decision-making of land reform.
If they are up to date with where the process is heading, they will be able to budget for
future development.
• Farm workers representatives (unions)
Farm workers are influenced by land reform on a much greater scale than the
government gives credit. They are the people who are unemployed when commercial
farms are transported to new beneficiaries.
• Possible sponsorships
When the government is unable to support new beneficiaries financially, possible
sponsorships can become a party to the land reform process.
• The President of South Africa
It is important that the President of South Africa is up to date on all decision-making
regarding land reform.
• The media
Decisions made on this forum must be communicated to the general public. To ensure
that decisions made at meetings are for the benefit of all involved, transparency is the
key. The media, which includes television, radio, newspapers and magazines, will
ensure that all important issues will be communicated to both the national and
international public.
• People within the local community that acts as a representatives of affected parties
• A representative for upcoming farmers and beneficiaries communities in order to
ensure that their uncertainties and preferences are heard.
- 139 -
Chapter 9 – Conclusion
A research process outline is included in Annexure A.
The research process outline indicates all involvement in the land reform process on national,
provincial, district and local level, as well as the management of spatial development and
planning on all of these levels.
For the broad-spectrum South Africa, the term ‘land’ means more than just a means to make a
living, it brings an emotional connection that determine an individual’s welfare and status in the
community, but more than anything else, it provides the gateway to great expectations.
According to Lewes (2006:15) the relationship with land, which include its access, resources
and ownership, frequently create tensions and alienation between individuals and social
structures. Conflict over land is not just about an expanse of ground on which things grow, but a
deep-seated attachment to place and identity, exacerbated by economic and other imperatives
that are located in a history of expansion and acquisition.
After the Democratic elections in 1994 which introduced a new government to an emotionally
bruised South Africa, the land reform program was launched. South Africa’s land reform
programme consists of 3 pillars, namely:
• Land Restitution;
• Land Redistribution; and
• Land Tenure
These three pillars originate from five principles. These principles are:
• Freedom Charter
• Reconstruction and Development Programme
• Legislation
• Land Summit, 2005
• ANC Consultative Conference, 2007
Each one of these five principles played a role in the composition of the land reform
programme.
- 140 -
The first phase of the land reform program is land restitution. This phase comprises the
lodgement of a land claim on a piece of land. The land claims process is managed by the Land
Rights Act, Act 22 of 1994. This phase is focussed to address “past injustices caused by racially
based legislation” (DALA, 2005:7). According to this law, black people that lost their land after
19 July 1913 under racially inspired laws, without compensation, could claim that land back
from the state. For a successful land claim, the claim must have been lodged at the Department
of Land Affairs (now known as the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform), before
31 December 1998.
The second phase of the land reform program is land redistribution. In this phase the
government assist black people to buy land from white owners. The state provides subsidies or
other types of grants in the form of fixed amounts per person or family, or a percentage of the
total purchase amount of the farm to be bought. The first grant that was introduced was SLAG
(Settlement Land Acquisition Grant) which provided a housing subsidy of R16 000 per
individual. This basic grant was supplemented by additional allowances for planning, facilitating
and the resolvement of differences. The SLAG program has failed and was replaced by the
LRAD (Land Redistribution and Agricultural Development) program. The LRAD programme was
initially managed by the Land Bank, but because of irregularities in the bank, management was
taken over by the provincial offices. The programme was first based on a percentage of 20% of
the land value, but was later on restructured to a maximum grant of R430 000 per individual (de
Jager, 2009:43).
The third leg that land reform focus on is land tenure. This is mostly a product of changing
labour circumstances and the decreasing of commercial farmers in the country. In 1984, there
was a total of 120 000 commercial farmers in the country, but in 2004 this amount has shrunk to
40 000. The Communal Land Rights Act (ClaRA) was promulgated in February 2004. Its job is
to seek rationalisation in the extremely complex tenure issues in the former homelands. Under
this legislation those who are occupying land with a Permission To Occupy (PTO) certificate, or
other traditional occupation certificates, can apply for ownership. This legislation has had a long
and complex period of development and continues to provoke opposition, especially from
traditional leaders who fear that the Act may erode their power-base. Concerns about the
state’s capacity to implement the act have also been raised (Bernstein et al, 2005:12).
The study area, the Tzaneen Local Municipality, is situated within the Limpopo province, one of
nine provinces in South Africa. The Limpopo province is further divided into five districts,
namely:
• Vembe district;
- 141 -
• Mopani district;
• Capricorn district;
• Greater Sekhukhune district; and
• Waterberg district.
Various frameworks and plans were developed on national, provincial, district and local level in
order to ensure that spatial development and planning runs parallel to land reform. These plans
and frameworks are as follow:
• National Level
- Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy (PLAS)
- Area Based Plans (ABP) although ABP’s are developed on national level, in
forms a part of District level Integrated Development Plans (IDPs)
• Provincial Level
- Limpopo Growth and Development Strategy (LGDS)
• District Level
- Mopani Integrated Development Plan (MIDP)
• Local Level
- Greater Tzaneen Municipality Integrated Development Plan (GTMIDP)
- Greater Tzaneen Municipality Spatial Development Framework (GTMSDF)
The Tzaneen Local Municipality is situated within the Mopani District Municipality Area of
jurisdiction, together with the Greater Giyani, Ba-Phalaborwa and Greater Letaba.
Unfortunately, according to the case studies conducted in the Limpopo Province, land reform
successes are few.
There is an immense impact on the spatial development of the Tzaneen Local Municipality
because of the land reform programme. The main reason for this is once a piece of land is
under claim, the land use may not be changed. Tzaneen is an agricultural-driven town,
surrounded by commercial farms. Unfortunately most of the farms surrounding the town are
under claim. This is bad news for spatial development, because Tzaneen cannot expand,
because townships can not be established on agricultural claimed land.
Also, Tzaneen’s buying power is migrating. Land reform causes many uncertainties, which
results in many of the previous white commercial farmers leaving the district. Agricultural-related
businesses such as NTK first closed their doors, and soon many others followed. It is not only
- 142 -
the agriculture-related businesses that are affected. Professional services such as transfer
attorneys, engineering companies, town planners etc. soon follow in their footsteps.
Unfortunately, when it first starts, there is no way of stopping it. With a town such as Tzaneen
where more than 98% of the surrounding farms are under claim it is a huge problem for spatial
development.
The only way in starting to rectify such problems is for the local municipality to step in.
Regrettably, the Tzaneen local municipality was never involved in the whole land reform
process in Tzaneen, so there is little chance for them to intervene in the process to help save
the town’s economy.
The only way to save the economy of local towns in South Africa is to involve the private sector
in the land reform process. All the expertise is situated within the private sector and this will also
help to remove the emotional sting from the land reform process. The first thing government
must consider is to buy agricultural land already available on the open market. According to de
Jager (2007:74), the estate agency Pam Golding has got five million hectares of agricultural
land on their books, and the Jigsaw-group has submitted even more than that to the
Department of Rural Development and Land Reform.
An initiative that can also resolve the huge emotional aspect of land reform is to rather establish
“agricultural villages” in the outskirts of local towns. Connection to bulk services is available and
minimal costs should be paid in order to upgrade and connect to these services. The spatial
development of the towns will be stimulated by these agri-villages en beneficiaries have less of
a responsibility to perform. The land is big enough to make a living and even to make a profit.
When the beneficiary can prove that he is able to produce he can then be upgraded to a bigger
piece of land.
Another recommendation is that an integrated body must be formed such as the former Joint
Monitoring Committees. This Integrated Land Reform Action Forum (ILRAF) must make
decisions on national, provincial and local level and must be managed by an economic body.
- 143 -
ANNEXURE
INEKEH A
[Type your address] y [Type your phone number] y [Type your e-mail address]
- 144 -
The Influence of Land Reform on Spatial Planning and Development in the Greater Tzaneen Municipality
National Level
Definition of LR Principle Shortcomings WBWS principle Solution LR Programs Documentation
Freedom Constitution RDP Legislation ANC CC Restitution Redistribution Tenure PLAS

Charter
ABP
Provincial Level
Impact of LR Programs Documentation Implications on Spatial Development Planning Recommendations
LGDS
District Level
Impact of LR Programs Documentation Implications on Spatial Development
MIDP ABP
Local Level
Impact of LR Programs Documentation Implications on Spatial Development Planning Recommendations
GTM IDP GTM SDF

ANNEXURE
INEKEH B
- 145 -
2004 2008
2004 2008
2004 2008
ANNEXURE
INEKEH C
- 146 -
TZANEEN LAND CLAIMS
0
T
S R36/R81
Molemole T
S
R81
NP353 MIRAGOMA
0
684 LT
7 4
BOOMPLAATS 1
Greater Giyani
0
408 LT OOCHOCK
3
NP331
2
683 LT
SIRULURUL
1
Greater Letaba RUNNYMEDE
0
3 1
427 LT
2
GOEDGELEGEN 0 426 LT
1
566 LT NP332 8
0
6 RADOO
682 LT
0
0
Lerwatlou
RONDEBOSCH
0
2
4
824 LS 2 9
LANGKLOOF
3
1
1 Duiwelskloof Dam
Altenzur Dam
826 LS
1
MEADOWBANK
0
0 3
es
WOMGOLOLO
do
STRANGERS REST
429 LT
e
2
Ko
DIEPKLOOF
0
431 LT
0
DEELKRAAL
0
T
S
1
428 LT
0
1
830 LS 10 R529
442 EDEN
4
RHEBOKFONTEIN 11
GD
412 LT
0
825 LS
2
0
RAMATOELAS KLOOF
1
LT
443 E0WAA
10 26
25
TEVR
10
SWEET HOME
20
2
458 LT
411 LT
38
LT
45
38
1
2
24 24
1
CHG
DRIEFONTEIN WELGEVONDEN 12 7
39
2
WEL
37
35
40
1
10
DEER PARK
22
40
15
0
0
FRIS
1
15
5
41
885 LS 886 LS
6
2 4
16
12
36
14
35
5
26
3
SARAHSDRIFT
19
16
459 LT MAMITWAS KOP
8
0
GROOTBOSCH
0
33
ALIAS
4
0
17
MAMITWAS LOCATION
3
ROSENDAL 447 LT LAPLAND
13
1
0
GROENFONTEIN
462 LT
5
TROOST MIJ
26 0 4 7
615 LT
44
897 LS
0 34 27
444 LT
0
483 LT
32
485 LT
8
43
0
11
889 LS
4 7
WESTFALIA
1
GREY STONES
36
27
2
7 28
29
0
20 9
8
1
0 1
461 LT
4
BRANDBULTFONTEIN
6
469 LT
LANG EN SMAL 9 19
484 LT
2
6 0 2 31
1
KOEKWE 12
15
12
887 LS 446 LT 10 67
31
21
25
3
1 13 11
0
JANETSI
0
11
0 0
3
0 33 6
UITVAL GROND 5 35
DRIEHOEK 468 LT
2
FREDRICKSDAL
0
10 66
9 77
INKONKA
1
888 LS
8
1
7 0 10 0 0
31 22 7
3
487 LT
29
BELVEDERE
463 LT
7
4 21
18
12
2
0
5
4
883 LS
0 5
22
25
488 LT BOSCHHOEK
11
899 LS
11
DOORNFONTEIN
44
0
0
32
35 0 2 24 7 0
GELUKAUF
5
BERGENDAL
4
17
3
30
2
0 4
2
496 LT 500 LT 7
18
9
12
30 14 0
497 LT 11
GRASKRAAL
2
DEESIDE
0 20
9 15
489 LT
0 23 19 24
0
1 10
PAARDEDRIFT
38
DOORNBULT 10 9 503 LT 614 LT
39
41
6
40
10
DUPLEX
27 5 16 6
1
23
KOEKWE
5 5
23
17
6
37
MIELIEKLOOF
0
19
SILVERFONTEIN
4 8
891 LS
0
11 8 5
0
14 9 21 42
70
11
733 LT
6
890 LS
1
21
0
34 167 4 5 16
468 LT
26
0 6 20
505 LT
3
495 LT 2
4
5
4 3
32
43
467 LT
1
BOSCHPOORT
20 1 4
19
3 2 3 2 1
0
2 19 16 8 9
44
7
35
15
STERKLOOP 1 3
18
26
2
1
11 27 5
1
5
VLAKHOEK
15
DWARSFONTEIN
31
492 LT
7
0 39 22 45
28 4223
0
LA MOTTE
15
892 LS
4 18 16 15 1 39
4
0
40 16 2
502 LT HOOGGENOEG
0
37541 LT 41 39 38
6
34
12 34 5 69
35
10
2
5 9
LT H
3
38 0
36
43
3
20 22 23 5 4 36
572 LT
1
24
56
VAN MANEN
1
37
4 7 2
G
15
464 LT
2
47
0
13 LE DAUPHINE
19 21 5 0
0 SC
70
1
3
2
42
K
8
De Marillac Dam
48
41
9
18
49
6
50
68 38
VERGELEGEN GELUKSFONTEIN
44
1 7
ER
HEKPOORT 4
5
0 3
504 LT
19
17
1 55
21
1816 3 67 10
40
79
71
3
16
0 69
32
E
1
31
9 54
493 LT
41
8
1 151413 3
893 LS
3
542 LT
8
4
LEMOENFONTEIN
49 BO
15
22
2
42
66
9
30
68
MODDERHOEK B
12
36
45
43
11
2
0
14
1 56
53
466 LT
1
LT O 44
0 12
7
4
N T
52
0 508 LT
11 55
GRENSHOEK
13
50
1
5 36 2 34
895 LS
28
RIVERSIDE
65
57
17
5
0
50 54
25
12
TE L LABORIE
31 1 29
14
VENTERSHOEK 64
58
9
0
13 46 2
5 SH 17
544 LT
53
11
4 18 4
14
E
12
49
Polokwane ENKELDOORN
0
7 63 47 4 7
59
8 27
48
6
i 1 60
6
52 14
8
894 LS
N 1 CONINGSBY
4 7 13
46
48
0 2
47
lits
62
0
10
45
H
19
2
10
515 LT
0
20
10
49
76
86
ESCATRE
7
0
20
3
A 49
1
51
Po
4
0
13 10 26 23
906 LS
11 62
514 LT
72 83 61
1
5 3 6 3
0
31
SC
H
76
7557 9 21
14
60
Tzaneen Dam 1 24
R TZANEEN
15
61
46 NA
1
61 17
0
35 56 0 22
13
2
21 37
16
C
54 25 2 63
SPITS
0 KLIP
546 LT
0
6
12
3 8
907 LS
50
4
12
8
57
19
2 17 23 22 26
0LS S
3 12 2
15
M
41
UITKYK 11 4 11
58
EL
HT
48 4528 32 21 27
896 LS 24
4 BO0
15
0
55
O
22
538 LT
7 0 20
59
74 33 30 12 5 28
543 LT
40
25
O
1
64
3
23
FREANCLA
73 58 70 10 19 0
16
14
29
14
A
38
2 0 12 5
B
AC
8
42
90 GE
11
18
10
9
2
13
82
6
9 12 30
5
27
ROOIKOPJES
60 14 12
ER S
4
3
570 LT 17
64
3
10
LADYBRAND
2
44 26 31
49
24
15
G
1
15 14 15 16 32
D L
13
N
0
50
39
10
0
TS
12
9
11
0 2 62 15 15
NAGUDE
6
RW T
16 28
PYP KOP
10
55
903 LS
2
123
YAMORNA
81
N 5
10
LA
25
5 3
9
98
7 51
10
72 9 6 38 14
TA
545 LT
16
13 33
17
O 90
19
40 6 15
LA GRATITUDE
38 21 27 40
13
1
105
AA
12
0
18
486 LT 71 52 114 23 17
37
196 26 4
VE 0 L
2
18
140 37
11
43
114 30 22 24 97 16 52 46 34
517 LT
20
W DE HOEK
4 69
10
0 11
STERKLOOP
6
54
11
558 LT
24 9 41
PL T
MIDDELBULT ZENDELINGSHOEK
29
36
9
0
0
28
18
11
45 45
27
1
EL 51
0
7
11
25
8
26
32
30
0
3 1 1 3 66 27 115 0 4 47
TURKSVYGBULT
51 103
91
7
553 LT
67
Dap Naudedam 933 LS
34
42
547 LT
4
27 43 6
IN 8 L
18
0
5
513 LT
44
WINKELHAAK
44
6
10
Rooikoppies Dam SCHIEL33 8
35
5
8
36
DOORNHOEK 95
929 LS
15 3
53
550 LT
14
47
45
3
W
8
JAFFRAY
48 3
44
1 2 8
46
87
10
0 1
TE 52
43
936 LS
41
1
54 LT
0 25
535 LT
52
48
DRIEHOEK 42 43
59
2 59 54 53
13
9
20
37
4
2
652
0
2 2
38
12
Magoebaskloof Dam 27 57 58
13
WATERVAL
39
7
40
93 14
931 LS
24
1 3 4
511 LT
63
34
65
32 1 56
FLEURBAAI 7 35
16
0
55
0
FO
2 86 7 327 3 90 0
1
22
28
27
59 70241
935 LS
3
6
3 4 22
54
52
69
5
27
533 LT
JAGERSFONTEIN
10
6
MIDDELKOP
68
53
49
BELLE OMBRE
13
20
5751 51 48
50
92
RONDEBOSCHJE
6 11 36 4
ZAAGKUIL
8
0
51
0 5 269 266 73 89 20 0 1
12
12 64 5 7
WELTEVREDEN 4 10 8
21
552 LT
16 75 5 93 67 4
6
LUX MUNDI
74
940 LS
0
MOSTERDHOEK
554 LT
2
64
25
4 1 17 7 197 322 103 31 21 23 2
0 4 183104
518 LT
60 80 5 0 3
CALIFORNIA
75
DELHI
934 LS
6 88
12
0 26 77 99 72
61
351 185 18 6 58 26
7
0
EK
33
941 LS 549 LT
63
81
928 LS
9
1 78 96 10 78
BROEDERSTROOMDRIFT
265
29
62
8 18 356 79 40 7 4
40
0
13
90
512 LT 4
92
HOEK VAN HEL GLADSTONE
12
18
35
4 5 6 32
3 264 200 87 11
TARENTAALRAND
2
0 65 91
0
10 16 122 143 3 68
86 72 11
39
0
534 LT
142
1
85
90
65
HTHO
198 70 82 18 0 8
32
0
17
2
9 122301 2
88
0
520 LT
8
524 LT 6
THE PLAINS
ROSSEAUX
83
92
84
66
299
LANGKLOOF
548 LT 527 LT
292 10 64
71 26 41
67
3
364
7 14 15
THIERGARTEN
35
2
29
224 76 99 13
568 LT
PUSELA
0 302 213
6
9 14 3
89
9
828 LT
12
27
86
77 84
69
GRASKOP
2 63 5
30
0 2
943 LS 13 30098 211 291 38 51 100 11
6
5 0
87
1 17
18
1
551 LT
34
31
4 6 25
30
212
8 101
4
12 6
BELLE OMBRE
0
D
11
7
28338279 99 10
0
62
0
2
0
2 70
942 LS 13 37 36 33
71
6
6
34 12
BOSCHOEK
270 28 52 53 8 4
3
10
16
9
11
8 191 2
588 HULP
3
19
3
0 12 14 24
827 LT
39
74
ROOIHOOGTE
531 LT
VLUC
61
MPHOME
555 LT
6 149
12
1 308 15 8
1
46 8
THE PLAINS
1
947 LS
342
LT IE
60
75
13
4
9
15268 50 7
26
39
190 205 205 54 2 26 27 7
CALIFORNIA
259
631 LT
23
45
1
39
59
2 7 1
78
0 194 259 108 Yarmorna Dam
1
HELPMAKAAR
11 13
TE
0 1 14 3
5
5
72
6
LT
5 48
949 LS 69 194 4
8
28
79
108 4849
0 SF
CLOUDLANDS KONINGSKROON
14 33
25
4
0
17
14 152 129 33 22
53
3535
73
195 2 50
2
15 81
944 LS
56 0 55
519 LT
316 63 15 62 5
15
N
272
5
APEX0 584 LT 1754
507 LT
AG
10 333 145
6
43 82
232
76
D
29
58
30
948 LS 946 LS
31
0
21
32
3
LS GE
34
0
47 16
6
49
E
21
28
7 9
53 ON
25 29
27
289
0
33
0
227
77
57
16
344 18 17 60 24 56 83
NOO
16
0
1 274 4
GT
0 34 4 8
5 LE
LEDZEE
16 1
17
0
3
56
17
LA
44 80
5
23
136
16
30
6
19
2
18
45
26
0 228305 2
94 GE
16
LUNSKLIP
22
1
PATATABOSCH
15
1623 290 4 61 55
3
188
137
84
1
19
21
AC
0
0 1 16 165
42
27
59 HOO
3 34 328 57 42
VERGELEGEN EVENROND
280
41
16 54
EP
0
P0
40
591 LT
246
229
20
20
0
28
39
TOMASZOM 559 LT
166 337
38
11
LETABASDRIFT
2 3
85
969 LS
7
37
10
29
1415
176
53
175
IE
955 LS
110
36
31 3
3
0
52
T
167 7 7
35
30
281 4 33 2
230
43
0 17
KOMFONTEIN
182
583 LT
0
13 0 1 39 52
BE
DI
EUREKA
D
0 0 4
6L
585 LT
3
0 7 168
T
34 0 11 2
33
51
0
23
40 32 0
950 LS
12 17 44
7
DIEPKLOOF LETABA ESTATES
32
LS RIF
225
959 LS
5
14
0 58
1
17
16
OI
35
32
31
1 5
36
HAMABOOYA
0
169
526 LT
86
1 10 11
1
7
6
8
31 59 3 45
18
0 10
4
4 5
KOLBOSCH 5922020LT
324 8
47
18 0 3 33 170 9 15
17
24 4
17
6 191
48
0
7
95 RSD
19 9 22
0
564 LT
RO
522 ST
0
Vergelen Dam 15 33
LT
49
2
1
525 LT
46
26
21
961 LS0 576 LT
7 1 22
0
28
50
22
21
8
11 1 Cramer Dam 6
1 1
43
19
0
50
21 35
NOOYENSBOOM
0
Ba-Phalaborwa
5 29
0
SUIKERBOSCHKOPJE
RU
21 3030 4 4
DE
8
ONDERHOEK
0
0
22 29
33
40
27 27
Junction Weir
4
4
2 29 10 0 0 42 8
1
2727 1
THE JUNCTION
5
16
952 LS
10
44
0
BLACK KNOLL HASIVONA
OE
3
4
595 LT
18
41
954 LS
8 13
40
0
0 16
31
2
4 0 3 14
DE KROON
9
2
3
GRYSAPPEL
4
3
39
BR
6
3 3
1
45
Groot Letaba
1
NP334
3
31
5
521 LT
27
9
14
2
2 5 3
4
11
979 LS
28
3
27 7
577 LT 561 LT
4 4 10
LANGUEDOC
26
46
14
14
0
0
1
11 11
RONDEBULT
7
8
598 LT
25
11
47
BLINKWATER 8
FRANSCHHOEK
1 7 10 10
0
66 1
35
15
8
SIVURAHLI
6
0 7 262625 3
980 LS
5
1 21
VERBRANDEHOEK 0 20 11 0
6
21
MAFUFULA LEOBI
77
4
20 19
29
1
12
593 LT
THE NECK
30
9
SUMMER HILL
1 6
31
0
6
88
19 18
32
983 LS 982 LS
0
00
38
20
25
563 LT
22
5
13 12
8 8
13
8 3
560 LT 10
18
29
7
0 5 3 9 1517 1 6
1
10
13
15 1
0
575 LT
151616
14 14
22
582 LT 19
31 19 42
0
12
ROUMEN BURRAH NULLAH

4 17 0
35
2 45
26
KOPJE ALLEEN
5
574 LT
3114
27
0 0
2
0
10 7 18 18
23
12
14
14
1
5
TARANTAL
31
14
28
4
565 LT
21 1
SANDFORD DOWNS
15
12
9
3
11
11
13 1014 LS
20
34
H
590 LT
17 17 50
T T
15 15
VOETPAD KROMDRAAI
8 13
597 LT
17
0
5
16
25
14
15
13
12
13
1016KBOSC
7 2 0
31
62 CA0RA
2 6 11 51 19 6
1
0
34
1019 LS
12 35
1012 LS 1025 LS 9 24 21 16 16 39
578 LT
6
1
11
32
7
0 2 4 23 12
10 22
0
LS
18
4L
9 0 22
0
40
VOETPAD
1 15
35
5 1 23
8 7
31
3 0 26 10 36
7
41
11
19
11
MASHUTTI
3
1012 LS
1
20
31 49
RAA
0 AC
3 11
6
2
4
2
13
VENTERSHOEK
2
9
0
14
3
2
NOVENGILLA
1 20 41
FOREST HILL
1 37 14 3 30
WEG 4
16
1
5
0
RED BANK 601 LT

10
39
6
KLIPSPRUIT
KALBASFONTEIN 1 0
TAMARA 21 33
43
5
1
599 LT 3
B
1
0
581 LT BUT-AN-BEN
5 2 2
2
BASSAN
1
1028 LS APPEL
17
1032 LS
7
10
2
47
11
42
2
600 LT
9 7 0
Thabina Dam 24 44
4
43
562 LT
0
VEEKRAAL
10 13
WATERVAL 1020 LS
43
586 LT
MASIMU
12 4
L
573 LT
1
1 5 2 2 28
IL
3
579 LT
38
2
13
13
2
1 18
1017 LS
2
20
12
0
1031 LS
PAARDEPLAATS
1
9
15
WELTEVREDEN
12
H
15
9 19 17
14
571 LT
3
5
RIETFONTEIN LANGBULT 3
0
9 5
ST LT
3
1821 3 15 37
RUBBERVALE
10
2
1
1024 LS 6
1
8 1
MOHLABAS LOCATION
8 11 0 3
0
1029 LS 580 LT
0 3 0
4
6
623 LT
34 34
S
6
RE 03
0 2 11 4 28
1
5
16
0
WATERVAL
4 1 0
7
17
Stanford Lake 1 28
KLIPFONTEIN 24
2
AA
0
FO 6
TAFELKLIP
6
DIGGERSREST
66 0 14
22 10 4
5
BERLYN
5
3
LT
19 0 9
0
LE
1035 LS 0 13 7 10
2
1038 LS 1034 LS 622 LT MAHUKA

11
4
0
10
567 LT
3 3 31
784 LT
PALMIETFONTEIN
4
33 1 1 8
44
3
1
DA
15
Damara Dam
0
REIZIGERSRUST
3
802 LT 3 3
2
1 1 9
17
1
55
ROOIWATER
4 4 4 1 2
1027 LS
SPL
GOEDEHOOP
3 3 16
1033 LS
GE
OW T
BERGENDAAL
28
3
34 6
0
676
DRIEKOPJES
COTTONDALE
5 6
BLOEMTUIN
5 1 1 8 38 37
VAN ZYLSRUST VULIHVA
670 LT
2
3
1022 LS
7 10
1
0
1
RI T
2
0
0 15 39 18 5
2
RR
7
LUCERNE 620 LT
3
13 0
29
1039 LS
L
1
1023 LS
1
5
1021 LS
17
0
PIGEON HOLE
0
NG L
2 16 36 14
D
35
NA 604
30
673 LT
2
EW
628 LT0
3 0 0
SHIELA
607 LT
0
32
0
4
5
6
1
674 LT
0
2
1
16
THORNDALE
1
BEE
23
RUSTFONTEIN
VI
1
LO 608
14 4
5
1122 LS
0
2
0
2 1
20
3
617 LT IR LT
6 1
1
0
7
22
1037 LS 0
2
1030 LS
KRAAL
12
2
8
EI
2 4
0
4 0 13
MEYERS RUST 2
2
FA 605
2
1
DRIEHOEK 0 LETABA DRIFT
4
12
1
0
1
0 1
3
3 0 19 11 21 1
619 LT
10
DRIEKUIL 3
0
T
1040 LS
7 5
1
0 7
T
S
1
38
5
626 LT 4 VAALPUNT
2
27
R71
LT ON
0
629 LT
0 0 10 24
1
8 3
1036 LS
1
HILLTOP0
0
34
CHEVIOT
2
16
T
S
1 2 5
19
627 LT Molatle
7
UITKYK
17
VLUCHT
9 0 8
1
1
0
0 0 9
2
1102 LS
0
613 LT R529
4
MAMATHOLA
1 1 1 2
F
1 2
1117 LS 3 18 3 2
25 1
7
7
61 ND
2134 9
0
6
16
0 0
5
609 LT
0
Ebenezer Dam
0
CHEVIOT
0
0
2 12
0
6
ONVERWACHT
1
0 29 0
6
0
EHLATINE
0
2
12
1
610 LT
KEULEN
1
BA
33 3
9
1 1
BLOEMHOEK STEVENSRUST
STYLKOP
1
1131 LS
5
WESTWOOD
0
1
13 11 4
0
0
30
MURLE BROOK
0
10
1
14 1
1119 LS
25
0
2 0 9 9
8
1074 LS
20
OI
1104 LS 1
30
0
33 1
3
25
618 LT
88
0
26
630 LT 18 669 LT
3 10 10 10
0
6
1
0
22
TUBB'S HILL 651 LT

0
1
11
0
DANALLAN
0
21 0
4
RO
LETSITELE
0
0
16
2
1110 LS TWEEFONTEIN 4 2 11 11
MONAVEIN
0
15 13
28
27 1 12 12
SEDAN
22 1
1129 LS
13
1
650 LT 22
0
WEIGHTON 5
1
13
MARANDA
0
YORK KINGSTON
9
17
652 LT
1
BLACK FOREST
1
612 LT
0 21
FOREST GLENS 1105 LS
18 14
0
14 2222 17 7 21
0
0 PIENAARSVALLEY 6 7 23 2 7 1616
656 LT
1085 LS
672 LT
0
657 LT
1
3
1077 LS MOIM
1128 LS
1
ALLANDALE
0
24
0
6
PICKFONTEIN 8 6 111
COOMBE BANK
675 LT
4
PARADYS
0
0 2 4 4
9
1078 LS
1
1108 LS
8
1130 LS 649 LT
2
WEE NEUK
1
1 1
654 LT
0
0 14
73
11 1
LITSWALO
GEORGES VALLEY
0
10 3 2
655 LT
0 5 1
00
27
WOLKBERG
0 9
23
632 LT
0
8
0
642 LT
24
73
28 0
4
1
0
RITA
11 1
SCHUINSHOOGTE
2 25
634 LT
2
0
el
30 668 LT
79
1133 LS isit
COBLENTZ
79
LONG VALLEY
Gompies Lower Dam
Le
2
CRAIGHEAD
1 2
UPLANDS 1
BONN
MUCKLE GLEN OR 643 LT
0
666 LT
0
644 LT
0
0
2 0
653 LT
0
671 LT
0
MAMATHOLA LOCATION
0
635 LT
0
34 32 SUNNYSIDE 0 29
1
LEGEND 660 LT
0
3
1
1
BURGERSDORP 28 17
1
THABINA VALLEY 0
1
MARABONA 19 KT 0
1
60
87
DUSSELDORP
4
16
13 KT 16 KT
0 0
0
0
1
FOREST RESERVE
72
5
11
1
22
R36 KT
5
T
S
0
15
14
8 KT YOSEMITE
1
44
9
Makgoba Land Claim

14
33 2
4
9
70
0
68
0 2626
16 15 12 6 37
ab itsi
11 KT
2727 15
3
16
Ngw
2
8
8
13
38
4
28
00
39
23
19 2929 18
40
SEDAN
23 19 0
46
0
41
42
45
30
7
7
13
1
33
7 67
28
43
6
33
10
2
89
4
44
25
7
30
18 KT
1
MAMATZEERI
47
25
1
5
32 32
5
4
6 2
5
3 51
59
Risenga Land Claim
50
20
31
3
80
31 20 0 49
59
6
22
15 KT
3
GRANUAILE
0
58
8 2
12
21
22
BORDEAUX
7
23 KT LUXEMBURG HARMONY
18
17
21
18
57
0
27
0
8
7
11
10 13
46
48
8
17
74
140 KT
76
21 KT 24 KT
8
10
15
9
9
53
64
1
0
53
5 20
0
12
Mogoboya Land Claim
18
21
00 46 52
14
77
17
22
10
11
16
47
23
10
31
15
11
14
50 48
24
4 25 30
11
26 29
10
9
24 28
14
66
32
24 27
75
33
9
26 49 34
INLESBURG
13 51
35
TOURS 25
12
13
85
6
36
0
12
20 KT
12
0
Kgatle Land Claim 17 KT

65
62
1 9
63
11
1
15
ati
2 Sel
Ga-
21
2
3
Maitjene Land Claim

3
16
93
1
Maruleng HARMONY
1
19
140 KT
Bakgaga Land Claim NP335
18
17
83
94
MAGOBA LAND CLAIM
BOOMPLAATS
408 LT
2
GOEDGELEGEN 0
566 LT
0
0
RONDEBOSCH 2
824 LS
4
2
LANGKLOOF
3
1
Altenzur Dam
826 LS
1
0
0 3
s
oe
ed
2
Ko
DIEPKLOOF
0
830 LS
1
DEELKRAAL
442 EDEN
4
RHEBOKFONTEIN
GD
825 LS 0 412 LT
RAMATOELAS KLOOF
1
LT
443 E0WAA
10
TEVR
10
2
411 LT
LT
2
2
G
DRIEFONTEIN WELGEVONDEN 7
SCH
12
WEL
1
0
0
1
15
885 LS 886 LS
FRI
6
2 4
16
SARAHSDRIFT
0
ALIAS GROOTBOSCH ROSENDAL 447 LT
0
3
0
GROENFONTEIN
TROOST MIJ 897 LS
0
444 LT
0
483 LT
485 LT
8
11
889 LS 1
WESTFALIA
2
7
0
0 1
4
LANG EN SMAL 9 BRANDBULTFONTEIN
484 LT 6 0 2
887 LS 446 LT 1
0
0 0 33
1
0 35
UITVAL GROND 5
DRIEHOEK 888 LS INKONKA 7 31

FREDRICKSDAL 0
9
22
3
BELVEDERE 487 LT 4 21
18
0
883 LS
0 5 25
488 LT
899 LS DOORNFONTEIN
35 0
0
32
0 2 24
GELUKAUF
5
BERGENDAL
4
17
3
30
0 8
2
496 LT
12
30
0 497 LT 11
20
9
489 LT
0 23 19
0
1
PAARDEDRIFT
38
10 9
DOORNBULT
6
10
27 5
5 5
6
37
0
SILVERFONTEIN
4
891 LS 11 8
0
11 14
6
890 LS
1
34 0 167 4 5
3 6
495 LT 2
4
1 4
BOSCHPOORT
2 20 1 3
3 16
2 19
7
35
15
STERKLOOP 1 3
18
26 1
11 27 5 15
28
12
0
892 LS 492 LT 4 DWARSFONTEIN
18 4223
40 16
16 15 15 1
2
37541 LT 41 39 38
10 34
2
5
LT H
24 20 22 23 5 4 36
1
4
G
2 15
0
19 21 5
0 SC
3
2
VERGELEGEN
1 7
ER
1 1816 HEKPOORT 4 0 GELUKSFONTEIN
3
0
3
493 LT
1 151413 3
893 LS
8
542 LT 1
49 BO
2
68
MODDERHOEK B
12
2
0
N T
11
GRENSHOEK 36
5 2 34
895 LS
0
Polokwane
50
8
TE 1 L
31
VENTERSHOEK 9
0
13
544 LT
E
ENKELDOORN
0
7
tsi
8
4
894 LS 0 7
N CONINGSBY
0
H
2
li
0
76
ESCATRE
0
A 9
1
Po
4
0
906 LS 5
SC
R 4
H
7557
14
NP354 TZANEEN
1
61 56
0
35
2
C
54
SPITS
0 KLIP
546 LT
0
6
907 LS
4
8
0LS S
3
M UITKYK
EL
896 LS
4 BO0
55
O
538 LT
7 0
74 33
O 543 LT 73 58
2
70
B
90 GE
2 27
ROOIKOPJES
60
ER S
3
64
LADYBRAND
1
D L
N
0
0 0 2 62
903 LS PYP KOP
N 05
LA
72
545 LT
40 38 6
1
O 9
0
486 LT 71 52
43
W DE HOEK
4 0 69
STERKLOOP MIDDELBULT ZENDELINGSHOEK

0
11
0
1 3 3 1 66 51
Dap Naudedam 933 LS 547 LT TURKSVYGBULT Rooikoppies Dam 553 LT
67
4
WINKELHAAK
1 2
929 LS 936 LS 0 0
550 LT 1
52
DRIEHOEK 2
652
59
Magoebaskloof Dam 2 2 27
1
WATERVAL 931 LS 3
63
65
32 0 0 2
1 86 7
1
27
935 LS
3 3 4
5
RONDEBOSCHJE MIDDELKOP JAGERSFONTEIN 6
ZAAGKUIL
0
0 5 269
WELTEVREDEN 4
552 LT
16
940 LS MOSTERDHOEK LUX MUNDI
0
554 LT
0 4 1 17 7 197
26
934 LS
0 6 351
568 LHOEK
941 LS 549 LT
928 LS
1 265 8
HOEK VAN HEL

4 5 3 264 200
2
0 10
0
0 16 122 143
142
1
9 8 122301
ROSSEAUX
92
299
LANGKLOOF
548 LT
7 2 14
T
0 302
6
27
943 LS GRASKOP 13 30098 211
6
HT
0
551 LT
34
30
4
8 12 99
28338279
0
0
BOSCHOEK 942 LS 13 270 28

3
8 191
588 HULP
0 12 149
ROOIHOOGTE
VLUC
MPHOME
1 6 308
1
947 LS
342
9
15268 190 205 205
631 LT
1
0 2 194
HELPMAKAAR
11
TE
0 6 5
LT
949 LS 69 194 44
8
CLOUDLANDS KONINGSKROON 195 1 152

2
944 LS
316
N
272
10
APEX0 584 LT
AG
333 145
232
D
948 LS 946 LS
0
LS GE
34
0
49
E
289
0
227
344
NOO
16
0
1 274
GT
5 LE
16 1
0
3
17
LA
136
16 0
6
2
0 228305
94 GE
16
LUNSKLIP PATATABOSCH
15
1623 290 4
3
137
16 165
1
0 1
9
59 HOO
3 34 328
VERGELEGEN EVENROND
16 280
EP
P0
591 LT
246
229
0
TOMASZOM
2 166
969 LS
7
1415
176
175
IE
955 LS
110
0
281 167
230
17
0
KOMFONTEIN
182
583 LT
0
13 0 1 39
DI
1
D
0 0 4
6L
585 LT
3
7
0 168
T
33
23
950 LS
12
7
DIEPKLOOF
LS RIF
225
959 LS
14
0
1
17
16
OI
32
1 169
1 10 11
7
6
8
0 31
4
KOLBOSCH 5922020LT 18 0 3 33 324 170

17
24 4
17
0 6
95 RSD
19 9 22
RO 0
Vergelen Dam 15 0
2
1
961 LS0
7 1 28 22
11 8
19
0
50
21 35
NOOYENSBOOM
0
0
SUIKERBOSCHKOPJE 21 4
DE
3030 4
8
ONDERHOEK
0
0
40
27 27
4
2 0
3
29 10 0
2727
16
952 LS
10
1
OE
3
18
954 LS 595 LT
0
0 16
31
2
4 0 3
DE KROON
3
GRYSAPPEL
4
BR
6
3 3
1
3
31
5 27
9
2 5
11
979 LS
577 LT
4 4
14
14
0
0
1
RONDEBULT
7
598 LT
25
11
BLINKWATER 8
FRANSCHHOEK
1
0
66
35
0 7 262625
980 LS
5
1 21
VERBRANDEHOEK 0
6
77 21
4
20 19
1
12
593 LT
SUMMER HILL
1
0
88
19 8 18
983 LS 982 LS
00
0 20
13 8
1
0 5 3 9 1517 1
15 1 10
0
1 151616
582 LT
31
0
ROUMEN BURRAH NULLAH

2 4 17
KOPJE ALLEEN 0 10 3114 0
2
6 7
12
14
1
5
31
4 14 15
SANDFORD DOWNS
12
3
0
11
13 1014 LS
CH
590 LT
T T
VOETPAD KROMDRAAI 12
8
597 LT
13
0
5
7 2
31
11
62 CA0RA
2 6
1
0
34
1025 LS 1019 LS
9
101 KBOS
1012 LS
6
1
11
32
0 10 2 4 22
0
S
4L
9 0
0
VOETPAD
1
35
5
6L
8 7
31
3 0 26
7
41
11
MASHUTTI
3
1012 LS 1
A
0 AC
3
4
9
VENTERSHOEK
0
14
2
1 20
FOREST HILL
1 37
GRA4
16
1
5
0
RED BANK
10
39
6
KALBASFONTEIN 1 KLIPSPRUIT 0
5
599 LT 3
B
0
2
601 LT
581 LT
5
2
1
1028 LS APPEL
17
1032 LS
10
47
11
2
600 LT
9 7
WE
4
43
VEEKRAAL
10
WATERVAL 1020 LS
43
12 4 28
LL
1 5 2 2
3
13
13
2
18
I
1
WELTEVREDEN 9 1017 LS
2
20
12
1031 LS 12
PAARDEPLAATS
1
9
15
H
15
19 17
14
RIETFONTEIN 3
0
9 5
ST LT
3
21 10 3
2
18
1024 LS 6
1
8 11 0 8 3
0
1029 LS 0 3 0 6
623 LT E
0 2 6 11
1
3
4
R 0
2
8
16
WATERVAL
4 1 0
7
17
KLIPFONTEIN Stanford Lake 1

2
9 14
FO 6
TAFELKLIP
6
DIGGERSREST
66 0
22 10
5
3
0 19
0
1035 LS 0
2
1038 LS 1034 LS 622 LT

4
3 3 10 31
PALMIETFONTEIN
4
33 1
1 1 44 15
0
REIZIGERSRUST
3
1 1 2
1
55 4 4
1033 LS 1027 LS GOEDEHOOP
3 3
34
16
BERGENDAAL
28
3
6
0
DRIEKOPJES
5
BLOEMTUIN
5 1 1 8 38 37
1022 LS VAN ZYLSRUST 7 3
1
0
1 15
2
0 39 18
2
13
7
LUCERNE 620 LT
3
29
1039 LS
1
1023 LS
1
5
1021 LS
17
PIGEON HOLE
0
2 16 36 14
35
30
2
628 LT0
3 0 0
SHIELA
32
0
4
5
6
1
0
2
1
16
THORNDALE
1 23
RUSTFONTEIN
1
14 4
5
1122 LS
2
0
N
2
20
617 LT
6 1
1
0
7
22
1037 LS
2
1030 LS
KRAAL
12 8
EI
2 4
0
4 0 13
MEYERS RUST 2
2
6
2
1
DRIEHOEK 0 LETABA DRIFT
4
12
1
0
1
0 1
3
3 0 11 21
619 LT
19
DRIEKUIL 3
0
T
1040 LS
7 5
1
0 1 7
38
5
626 LT 4 VAALPUNT 27
2
LT ON
0
629 LT
0 0 10 24
1
8
1036 LS
1
HILLTOP0
0
34 1 2 19
627 LT
5
16
7
UITKYK
17
VLUCHT
9
1
0 0 9
2
1102 LS
0
4
1 1 1 2
F
1
1117 LS 3 18 3 2
25
7
61 ND
2134
0
16
0 0
0
Ebenezer Dam
0
0
0
2 12
0
6 0 29
ONVERWACHT
6
0
EHLATINE
0
2
12
1
1
BA
9
1 1
BLOEMHOEK STEVENSRUST
STYLKOP
1
WESTWOOD 1131 LS
1
0 13
0
0
30
0
14
1119 LS
25
0
2 0
1074 LS
20
OI
1104 LS
30
0
33 1
3
618 LT
25
26
630 LT
0
1
0
22
1
11
0
DANALLAN
0
21
4
RO
0
16
2
1110 LS TWEEFONTEIN 4
0
15
3
28
27 22 1
1
1129 LS
0
WEIGHTON 5
13
0
17
BLACK FOREST
0
FOREST GLENS 1105 LS
18
0 PIENAARSVALLEY 6 7 23
1085 LS
3
1077 LS 1128 LS
1
ALLANDALE
0
24
0
PICKFONTEIN 4
1078 LS
0
PARADYS 9
1
1108 LS
8
1130 LS
1
0
0 14
GEORGES VALLEY 10
0 5
27
WOLKBERG
0 9
23
632 LT 8
24
28
4
SCHUINSHOOGTE
2 2
634 LT
5
2
1133 LS tel
Gompies Lower Dam isi
1 Le
0
635 LT
1
RISENGA LAND CLAIM
11 3
39
85
534 LT 4
90
18 0 8 65
32
2
88
0
84
524 LT 6
66
527 LT
10 64
67
15 41
35
99 13 1
14 3
89
12
69
2 63 5
30
100 17 11
87
1
18
31
6 4 6 25
LD
7
10
33 62
2
2 70
34
71
8 4 12
10
16
2 9
3
19
3
14 24
74
15 8 61
8
LT IE
60
75
13
4
26 27
CALIFORNIA
23
59
7 1
78
Yarmorna Dam 1 14
72
28
79
4849
0 SF
33
4
0
17
33 22
81
73
56 0 55 5 15
5
507 LT
1754 58
6
82
76
29
30
31
21
32
6
21
28
53 ON
29 57
33
0
77
16
83
0 34
56 80
LEDZEE
17
44 30
18
45
1 55
84
19
AC
42
54
41
40
20
39
559 LT
38
LETABASDRIFT
85
53
37
10 3
36
35
43 2
52
BE
0 11
51
0 17 0 44
LETABA ESTATES
32
31
0
526 LT
86
1
3 45
18
4
47
9
191
48
522 ST
33
LT
49
525 LT
46
26
21
50
22
21
1 Cramer Dam
1 1
43
5 29
RU
22 29
42 Junction Weir
1
THE JUNCTION
44 5
0
HASIVONA
41 0 8 13
40
14
2
39
3
Groot Letaba
45
521 LT
4
27 28 7
26
561 LT
46
11 11
8
6
47
7 10 10
15
SIVURAHLI
6
20
29
30
6 9
31
6
32
38
25
22
5
12
8 8
13
3
560 LT
29
7
1
13
14 14
22
19
19 12 42
35
45
26
27
0
18 18 14
28
9 21 1
11
20
34
17 17 50
15 15
17
16
25
14
15
12
13
0 51 1
24 9 35
21 16 16 39
7
23 12
22 18
15 23
40
36
20
11 2 31
2
3 30
TAMARA 21 33
43
1
2
0 13 Thabina Dam 24
573 LT MASIMU
1
2 38
2
571 LT
3
MOHLABAS LOCATION
4
4
5
24
5
BERLYN
6 10 0
7
MAHUKA
0
802 LT 3 3
17 567 LT
VULIHVA
670 LT
2
0
5
607 LT
T
S R529
KEULEN
33 3
5
4
9 9 1
8
1
88
18 669 LT
6 10 10 10
0 0
1
2
LETSITELE
13
13
11 11
12 12
YORK KINGSTON 22
652 LT
1
14 21
14 2222 17 7 21
656 LT
2 7 1616
0
657 LT
MOIM
6 6 111
0
4 4
1
WEE NEUK
654 LT
11 1
0
655 LT
1
00
0
0
0
0
RITA
11 1
30 668 LT COBLENTZ
UPLANDS 0
1
BONN
666 LT
0
0
653 LT
0
32 SUNNYSIDE 0 29
660 LT
0
1
BURGERSDORP 28 17
1
MARABONA 19 KT 0
DUSSELDORP
16
13 KT 16 KT
0
1
5
11
22
R36 KT
T
S
0
1
15
14
1
3
9
14
33 2
4
9
16 15 6
2626 12
2727 16 15
3
2
8
8
13
38
4
28
00
39
23
19 2929 18
40
SEDAN
23 19 0
0
30
7
7
13
1
33
7
28
6
33
10
2
25
7
30
18 KT
1
25
1
5
32 32
5
4
6 2
5
20
31
3
31 20 0
22
15 KT
3
GRANUAILE
0
8 2
21
22
BORDEAUX
18
7
23 KT
17
21
0 18
27 8
8
10
17
21 KT 15
9
1
0
00
11
10
11
14
50 48
4
11
10
9
24
24
9
26 49
INLESBURG
13
TOURS
12
0
12
20 KT
12
0
1 17 KT ti
Sela
Ga-
2
2
3
3
1
1
MOGOBOYA LAND CLAIM
BURRAH NULLAH
0
35
26
5
574 LT
14
27
7 18 18
TARANTAL
28
15
12
9
11
20
34
590 LT
17 17
15 15
16
25
14
15
13
12
13
6 11 0
5
34 24 21 16 16
578 LT
32
7
4 22 23
22 15
35
1
31
26 10
41
11
19
MASHUTTI 20
13 11
6
4
2
14
3
20 37
FOREST HILL
1 14 3
16
5
10
39
601 LT TAMARA 21
581 LT BUT-AN-BEN
5 2
2
BASSAN
1
17
2
47
0
600 LT
9 7 0 0 13
43
586 LT
MASIMU
28
L
573 LT
1
2
IL 579 LT
2
1 18
12
H
571 LT
3
5
3
LANGBULT
T
3
3 15
S LT
6 1 1
3
580 LT
4
6
RE 03
11 4
8
5
1 0
14
0
O 6
10 4
5
F
0 19 10 0
0
13 6
E
7
2
MAHUKA
L
0
567 LT
31
DA
15
Damara Dam
802 LT 3 3
2
3
4
16
9
17
E
OW
34 6 28
0
38 37
VULIHVA
2
3
15
R T
DG
5
RR 4 LT
13 39 18 0
29
17
0
PIGEON HOLE
16
NG 8 L
36 14
35
A
30
5
W 607 LT
32
N 60
0
IE
1
16
23
14
I
5
4
3
N
RV LT
20
617 LT
1
7
22
L 60
12 0
I
8
EI
13
MEYERS RUST 2
FA 605
12
1
11 21
619 LT
10
T
27
LT ON
8 10 24 3
CHEVIOT
2
16
O
7
9 0 8 1
9
2
613 LT
MAMATHOLA
F
2
25 1
7
61 ND
9
6
5
609 LT
0
CHEVIOT
4
1
EHLATINE 610 LT
BA
33 3
5
1
11 4
MURLE BROOK
10
9 9 1
0
8
OI
618 LT
88
0
18
3 6 10 10 10
TUBB'S HILL 651 LT

0
RO
LETSITELE
0
2 11 11
MONAVEIN 650 LT
13 12 12
1 1 13
1
0
YORK
9
652 LT
1
612 LT
14 21
0
14 2222 17 7 21
656 LT
2 7 1616
0
3
MOIM
8 6 6 111
COOMBE BANK
4
0
2 4 4
0
649 LT
2
WEE NEUK
1
1 1
654 LT
11 1
LITSWALO
0
10 3 2
655 LT
0 5 1
00
0 9
0
8
0
642 LT
0
4
1
0
RITA
11 1
2
it el
30 668 LT
eis
CRAIGHEAD
L 2
LONG VALLEY UPLANDS
MUCKLE GLEN OR 643 LT
0
644 LT
2 0
653 LT
0
MAMATHOLA LOCATION
0
635 LT
0
34 32 SUNNYSIDE 0 29
660 LT
0
1
1
THABINA VALLEY 0
1
MARABONA
1
13 KT 16 KT
0 0
0
FOREST RESERVE
0
1
14
8 KT YOSEMITE 0
0 33 2626
16 15
15
14
11 KT
2727 16
2
23
19 2929
SEDAN
23 19
30
7
1
33
6
33
2
25
7
30
18 KT
1
MAMATZEERI
25
6
5
32 32
4
5
20
31
3
31 20
22
15 KT
3
0
21
22
18
17
21
0 18
27 8
8
17
0
00
11
10
11
10
9
24
24
9
TOURS
12
0
12
1 17 KT
2
2
3
3
1
1
MAITJENE LAND CLAIM
34 34
RUBBERVALE
AAS
28
28 0
BERLYN
LT
9
11
784 LT
8
3
ROOIWATER
4 1 2
SPL
676
COTTONDALE
6
670 LT
10
0
673 LT
0
674 LT
BEE
0
3
2
1
T
S
R529
Molatle
KEULEN
669 LT 0
SEDAN MARANDA
0
672 LT
1
675 LT
73
73
79
79
2
BONN
1
671 LT
0
17
60
DUSSELDORP 87
4
16
0
72
5
11
22
R36 KT
5
T
S
3
44
9
4
9
70
68
6 37 si
12
abit
Ngw
8
8
38
00
39
18
40
46
0
41
42
45
7
7 67
43
10
89
44
47
1
6 2 3 51
59
50
80
0 49
59
6
GRANUAILE
58
8 2
12
23 KT LUXEMBURG HARMONY
57
0
7
10
11
13
46
48
74
140 KT
76
24 KT
8
10
15
9
53
64
1
20
53
5 0
12
18
21
46
14
77
17
22
10
16
47
23
31
15
11
14
50 48
24
4 25 30
26 29
28
14
66
32
27
75
33
49 51 34
13
35
25
13
85
6
36
12
65
62
9
63
11
15
i
Selat
Ga-
16
HARMONY
140 KT 18
17
Maruleng
NP335
BAKGAGA LAND CLAIM
9 21
17 50
51 1 35 6
9
39
12
18
15 23
40
36
20
11 2 31 49
2
NOVENGILLA
30 41
21 33
43
1
42
Thabina Dam 24 44
562 LT
13
2 38
0
37
MOHLABAS LOCATION
28 34 34
28 0
24
BERLYN
0
17 567 LT ROOIWATER
670 LT
0
673 LT 3
2
1
T
S
R529
Molatle
KEULEN
669 LT 0
YORK KINGSTON 22 SEDAN

1
0
656 LT
672 LT
0
111 657 LT
0
1
WEE NEUK
73
11 1
0
655 LT
1
00
0
0
73
0
0
RITA
11 1
30 668 LT
79
COBLENTZ
79
2
BONN
1
0
666 LT
671 LT
0
SUNNYSIDE 0 29
1
660 LT
0
3
BURGERSDORP 28 17
MARABONA 19 KT 0
60
4
16
16 KT 5
0
72
11
5
DUSSELDORP
15
14
1
3
44
9
14 2
4
9
70
68
16 15 6 37 si
2626
2727 16 15
12
abit
Ngw
3
2
8
8
13
38
22 KT
4
28
00
39
23
19 2929 18
40
23 19 0
SEDAN
0
41
42
45
30
7
7
13
1
33
7 67
28
43
6
33
10
2
89
4
44
25
7
30
1
25
1
5
32 32
5
4
6 2
5
3 51
18 KT
50
20
31
3
31 20 0 49
22
8 GRANUAILE 2
12
21
22
BORDEAUX LUXEMBURG
18
7
23 KT
17
21
18
27 8
10
11
13
48
8
17
74
76
21 KT 24 KT
10
15
9
9
1
5 20
0
18
21
00 46
14
17
22
11
16
47
23
10
31
15
11
14
50 48
24
4 25 30
11
26 29
10
9
24 28
32
24 27
75
33
9
26 49 34
INLESBURG
51
13
35
12
6
36
12
20 KT
12
0
9
15
ela ti
2
G a-S
2
16
HARMONY
140 KT
17
Maruleng
NP335
ANNEXURE
INEKEH D
- 147 -
Name and Surname
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
1. Occupation
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
2. Name of current employer/Business
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
3. How many years are you actively involved in the industry?
..........................................................................................................................................
4. Geographical area where the business is mostly practised
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
5. Business in the Tzaneen area as a percentage (%) of your total business
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
6. Did land reform have an influence on the size of your business and if so, what was the
influence?
Business has grown
Business has shrunk
No influence
Comment: ..........................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
7. What is your opinion about future business development in the Tzaneen vicinity?
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
Additional Comments: .......................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................
References
References
ADAMS, M. 1995. Land reform: New seeds on old ground? [Web:] http://www.odi.org.uk
(Date of access: 7 May 2007).
AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS. 2007. ANC 52nd National Conference 2007 – Resolutions,
University of the North, Polokwane, December 16-20 2007.
AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS. 2009. Provincial map of South Africa. [Web:]

www.anc.org.za/images/maps/samap.gif (Date of access: 9 Oct. 2009).
AGRI LAND FORUM. 2006. Media Release. [Web:]

http://www.broederstroomlandclaim.co.za/Media%20release%20%20Agri%20Land%20Forum.
pdf. Date of access: 25 Aug 2009.
AGRI SOUTH AFRICA (AGRI SA). 2009. Home of the South African farmer.
[Web:] http://www.agrisa.co.za/index.htm (Date of access: 12 Nov 2009).
ALIBER, M. & MALULEKE. 2008. The land reform programme and the emerging role of ‘Black
Capital’ in farming: the case of Eastern Molemole Municipality, Limpopo. PLAAS.
ANON. 2006. Land Reform. Farmer’s Weekly: 14, 29 Dec.
ANON. 2007a. Land Tenure. Wikipedia.

[Web:] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_tenure (Date of access: 22 Aug. 2007).
ANON. 2007b. Nuwelinge sukkel om te oorleef. Rapport: 5, 11 Mrt.
ANON. 2008. Limpopo focus: Agriculture in SA’s food basket. Trade and Invest Limpopo.
[Web:] http://www.tradeinvestsa.co.za/news/189706.htm (Date of access: 16 Oct. 2009).
ANON. 2009. Spatial Planning. Wikipedia.

[Web:] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_development. (Date of access: 16 Nov. 2009).
BANERJEE, A.V. 1998. Land Reforms: Prospects and Strategies. Massachusetts University
of Technology, 1,14 p.
- 148 -
References
BERNSTEIN, A., MCCARTHY,J. & DAGUT, S. 2005. Land Reform in South Africa: A 21
century perspective. Research Report no 14.
BERNSTEIN, A., MCCARTHY, J., SHEPPERD, D., DE VILLIERS, R. & VEGTER, I. 2008.
Farmers Voices: Practical perspectives on land reform and agricultural development. Centre for
Development and Enterprise. (CDE). Report no 9. (Feb).
BERNSTEIN, A. 2008. Land Reform in South Africa: Getting back on track. Centre for
Development and Enterprise. Research Report no 16. (May).
BOSMAN, F. 2007. Kontekstuele analise: Grondhervorming. Konsepweergawe 2.
BROMLEY, D.W. 1995. South Africa: where land reform meets land restitution. Land Use
Policy. 40(2):99-103.
CHARMAN, A., PETERSEN, L., CASSIM, F., STEYN, G., MABELA, J., HARTNACK, A. &
MANAVELA, P. 2008. Research Support to the Limpopo Centre for Local Economic
Development. [Web:] http://www.livelihoods.co.za (Date of access: 10 Oct 2009).
CRLR (Commission on the Restitution of Land Rights). 2003. Restitution statistics. [Web:]
http://land.pwv.gov.za/restitution.html (Date of access: 3 May 2007).
DEININGER, K. & MAY, J. 2000. Is there scope for growth with equity: The case of land reform
in South Africa. South Africa.
DEININGER, K. 2003. Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction. A World Bank Policy
Research Report. Washington.
DE JAGER, T. 2007. Amptenare, nie boere, knou hervorming. Landbou Weekblad: 74, 27
Apr.
DE JAGER, T. 2009. Tussen boereplaas en Uhuru: Die storie van grondhervorming in Suid-
Afrika. Manuscript (Unpublished).
DEMOCRATIC ALLIANCE. 2005. Land reform and the willing buyer, willing seller principle.
[Web:] http://www.da.org.za/docs/566/willingbuyerwillingseller_document.pdf (Date of access:
25 Aug 2009).
- 149 -
References
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS (DALA). 2005. Delivery of land and
agrarian reform. Jul.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, CONSERVATION, ENVIRONMENT AND TOURISM,

2005. North West Provincial mini land summit report and land march.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ANNUAL REPORT 2004/2005. Programme 5: Agricultural

Production.
DU TOIT, A., MAKHARI, P., GARNER, H & ROBERTS, A. 1998. Report: Ministerial review of
the Restitution Programme. Unpublished report for the Minister of Agriculture and Land Affairs.
DE VILLIERS, B. & VAN DEN BERG, M. 2006. Land Reform: Trailblazers, Seven Successful
case studies. Konrad-Adenauers-Siftung. Jhb. Mar.
EDUCATION AND TRAINING UNIT (ETU). 2008. Community Organisers Toolbox

[Web:] http://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/index.html (Date of access: 8 Sept 2009).
GREATER TZANEEN MUNICIPALITY. 2004. Spatial Development Framework (SDF).
GREATER TZANEEN MUNICIPALITY. 2007. Integrated Development Plan (IDP).
HALL, R. 2004. Land restitution in South Africa: Rights, development and the restrained state.
Canadian Journal of African Studies, 38(3). (Special issue on ten years of democracy in
southern Africa).
HORNBY, D. 2006. Ways of understanding land administration that help delivery. AFRA
News. Report No 59. (Jan).
KINGSTON, M. 2003. Rawls-v-Nozick: Liberty for all, or just the rich? The Sydney Morning
Herald. (Oct, 9). [Web:] http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/09/1065676093092.html (Date
of access: 24 Aug 2009).
LAHIFF, E. 2005. From ‘willing seller, willing buyer’, to a people-driven land reform. PLAAS:
Policy Brief, Report No 17 (Sept). [Web:] http://www.sarpn.org.za/documents/d0001571/P1906-
PLAAS_Policy-Brief17_Sept2005.pdf. (Date of access: 25 Aug 2009).
- 150 -
References
LAHIFF, E. 2007. Land Redistribution in South Africa: Progress to date. [Web:]

http://www.sarpn.org.za/documents/d0002695/Land_Redistribution_South_Africa.pdf. (Date of
access: 15 Jul 2009).
LEWIS, D. 2006. Land: A contented space. Association for rural advancement. AFRA News
Report no. 60 (May).
LIMPOPO DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 2008. Background. [Web:]

http://www.lda.gov.za/index.php?Entity=Background (Date of access: 16 Oct. 2009).
LIMPOPO PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT. 2005. Moloto: Opening of the National Council of

Provinces. Polity.org.za [Web:] http://www.polity.org.za/article/moloto-opening-of-the-national-
council-of-provinces-31102005-2005-10-31 (Date of access: 10 Oct 2009).
MEDIA STATEMENT. 2004. Modder East Squatters and another v Modderklip Boerdery (Pty)
Ltd; President of the Republic of South Africa and others v Modderklip Boerdery (Pty) Ltd.
Media statement – Case hearing in Supreme court of appeal. (May).
MINISTRY FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS. 2005. A partnership to fast-track land
reform: A new trajectory , forward to 2014. (Land Summit, Jul.).
MOPANI DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY. 2007-2008. Integrated Development Plan (IDP).
OXFORD ADVANCED LEARNER’S DICTIONARY. 1995. Hornby. Oxford University Press.
PEPETEKA, T & TSHILILO, M. 2009. South African land reform: Progress and Challenges.
Power Point Presentation by the Office of Parliament. (Jul,1).
SCARBOROUGH, D. 2004. Land reform in action. Christian Action.

http://www.christianaction.org.za/articles_ca/2004-2-LandReforminAction.htm Date of access:
16 Oct 2009.
SITOLE, P. 2006. Service Delivery, Economic Support & Communal Land: A Feasible Mission.
AFRA News. Report No. 59 (Jan).
SOUTH AFRICA. 1994. Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP): a policy

framework.
- 151 -
References
SOUTH AFRICA. 1995. The White Paper on Agriculture. Department of Land Affairs.
Pretoria: Government Gazette.
SOUTH AFRICA. 1996a. Community Property Associations Act 28 of 1996. Pretoria:

Government Gazette.
SOUTH AFRICA. 1996b. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa as promulgated by the
Constitutional Assembly on 18 December 1996 and as commenced on 4 February 1997.
SOUTH AFRICA. 1996c. Labour Tenants Act 3 of 1996. Pretoria: Government Gazette.
SOUTH AFRICA. 1997a. White Paper on South African Land Policy. Pretoria: Government
Gazette.
SOUTH AFRICA. 1997b. Extension of Security of Tenure Act 62 of 1997. Pretoria:

Government Gazette.
SOUTH AFRICA. 2003. Restitution of Land Rights Amendment Bill. Pretoria: Government
Gazette.
SOUTH AFRICA. 2004. Communal Land Rights Act 11 of 2004. Pretoria: Government
Gazette.
SOUTH AFRICA. 2005a. Limpopo Growth and Development Strategy.
SOUTH AFRICA. 2005b. Ministry for Agriculture and Land Affairs. Land Summit 27-31 Jul.
2005. Johannesburg: Government Printer.
SOUTH AFRICA. 2006a. Implementation plan for the Pro-active Land Acquisition Strategy
(PLAS). Department of Land Affairs. (May). [Web:]
http://land.pwv.gov.za/Documents&Publications/Publications/2008/PLAS%20Framework.odt.
(Date of access: 19 Jun 2009).
SOUTH AFRICA. 2006b. Progress on Restitution land claims. South African Government
Information. (Jan, 27). [Web:] http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2006/06013012451001.htm
(Date of access: 9 Aug. 2009).
- 152 -
References
SOUTH AFRICA. 2006c. Toward the framework for the review of the willing buyer-willing seller
principle. Department of Land Affairs: Third Draft Discussion Document (Sept). [Web:]
http://www.farmersweekly.co.za/data/files/doc/file_4a5e80333631eadca3b83b10a3156acd.doc
(Date of access: 25 Aug 2009).
SOUTH AFRICA. 2007a. Area based land reform planning: A guide for district implementers.
Department of Land Affairs. (Feb).
SOUTH AFRICA. 2007. Department of human settlement.

[Web:] http://www.housing.gov.za/default.htm. (Date of access: 12 Nov 2009).
SOUTH AFRICA. 2008a. Land Use Management Bill. Pretoria: Government Gazette.
SOUTH AFRICA. 2008b. Provision of Land and Assistance Amendment Act 58 of 2008.
Pretoria: Government Gazette.
SOUTH AFRICA. 2009a. Department of rural development and land reform: Annual Report.
[Web:]
http://www.dla.gov.za/publications/formal/annual_report/dla_annual_report_April_08_March_09
%20webt.pdf (Date of access: 20 Aug 2009).
SOUTH AFRICA. 2009b. Department of rural development and land reform.

[Web:] http://www.dla.gov.za/ (Date of access: 12 Nov 2009).
SOUTH AFRICA. 2009c. Department of rural development and land reform. Greater Giyani –
Muyexe. Progress Report. 19 Aug.
SOUTH AFRICA. 2009d. What is Area Based Planning? Department of Rural Development
and Land Reform. [Web:] http://www.agriok.co.za/downloads/crdp.pdf (Date of access: 21
Aug. 2009).
STEENKAMP. 2007. SA stuur af op voedselkrisis af met die beleid. Rapport: 1, 11 Mrt.
STUIJT, A. 2004. South Africa: The “land reform success”. African Crisis.
[Web:] http://ww.africancrisis.co.za/Article.php?ID=2434& (Date of access: 22 Oct. 2009).
- 153 -
References
THWALA, W.D. 2003. Backgrounder: Land and Agrarian Reform in South Africa. Land
Research Action Network. [Web:] http://www.landaction.org/display.php?article=60 (Date of
access: 24 May 2008).
TZANEEN LOCAL MUNICIPALITY. 2007. Local economic development strategy review.

Kayamandi Development Services. Sept.
VAN AARDT. 2007. Grondhervorming so eers in 2058 voltooi. Rapport: 18, 27 Mei.
WARRINER, D. 1969. Land reform in principle and practice. Clarendon Press: Oxford. ISSN:
1356-9228.
ZIQUBU, N., CUSINS, T., & HORNBY, D. 2001. Using local practises and records to secure
individual tenure rights in common property situations. AFRA. (Nov).
ZUMA, J. 2009. Keynotes addressed by President Jacob Zuma at the launch of the
Comprehensive Rural Development Programme at Muyexe Village, Greater Giyani Municipality,
Limpopo. South African Government Information. 17 Aug.
- 154 -

Henning I

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Henning I

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Henning I

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Implications of land reform

on spatial planning and

Dissertation submitted in fulfillment of the requirement for the degree Master

Supervisor: Prof. C.B Schoeman

First and foremost I would like to offer my sincerest gratitude to my co-supervisor, Dr

ANC – African National Congress

CBD – Central Business District

CCMA – Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

CDE – Centre for Development and Enterprise

CDW – Community Development Worker

CLaRA – Community Land Rights Act, 1996 (Act 28 of 1996)

CONTRALESA – Congress of Traditional Leaders of South Africa

CPA – Communal Property Association/Communal Partnership Agreements

COMG – Commonage Grant

CRDP – Comprehensive Rural Development Programme

CRLR – Commission of Restitution of Land Rights

DA – Democratic Alliance Party

DLA – Department of Land Affairs

DLD – District Level Delivery

DLRO – District Land Reform Offices

DoA – Department of Agriculture

DRDLR – Department of Rural Development and Land Reform

EAAB – Estate Agency Affairs Board

ESTA – Extension of Security of Tenure Act, 1997 (Act 62 of 1997)

GDP – Gross Domestic Product

GGP – Gross Geographical Product

GNU – Government of National Unity

GTM – Greater Tzaneen Municipality

GTMIDP – Greater Tzaneen Municipality Integrated Development Plan

GTMSDF – Greater Tzaneen Municipality Spatial Development Plan

IDP – Integrated Development Plan

IFSNSP – Integrated Food Security and Nutrition Programme

ILRAF – Integrated Land Reform Action Forum

ISRDP – Integrated Sustainable Rural Development

JMC – Joint Monitoring Committees

LCC – Land Claims Court

LED – Local Economic Development

LESR – Local Economic Strategy Review

LGDS – Limpopo Growth and Development Strategy

LRAD – Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development

LTA – Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act, 1996 (Act 3 of 1996)

MDM – Mopani District Municipality

MEC – Member of Executive Council

MIDP – Mopani Integrated Development Plan

NCOP – National Council of Provinces

NEPAD – New Partnership for Africa’s Development

NGO – Non-Governmental Organisation

PCU – Policy Co-ordination Unit

PLAS – Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy

PLRO – Provincial Land Reform Office

PSC – Provincial Steering Committee

PTO – Permission to Occupy

RDP – Reconstruction and Development Programme

SACP – South African Communist Party

SADT – South African Development Trust

SAFM – South African Farm Management

SCPA – Sekororo Community Property Association

SDF – Spatial Development Framework

SDI – Spatial Development Initiative