Workshop on Land Reform, Land Trusts and StewardshipCo-ordinated by Conservation International and SANBI

20th November - Pretoria

Rick de Satgé

Policy and strategy initiatives◦ DLA’s attempts to integrate environmental

planning into land reform◦ National Settlement & Implementation Support

Strategy◦ Land and Agrarian Reform Project (LARP)

Case sketches◦ Mtakatye (Eastern Cape◦ Schmidtsdrift (Northern Cape)

In 2001 a joint DLA/DANCED project produced Policy and Guidelines on the Integration of Environmental Planning into Land Reform and Land Development

Guidelines highlighted that environmental sustainability (both bio-physical and socio-economic) had not enjoyed adequate attention

Proposed introduction of an Environmental Decision Support Tool as an integral part of project assessment and planning procedures

Guidelines tested in 2005 and the Environmental Evaluation Unit (UCT) developed an Environmental and Sustainability Assessment Tool

Designed to provide an integrated natural resource baseline highlighting environmental opportunities and constraints as a basis for a management and monitoring plan

Guidelines remain unimplemented Institutional fragmentation where natural

resource management is concerned Plethora of legislation administered by

different departments Emphasis on the development of resource

assessment tools and legislative compliance while development and support of local institutions to manage rights and resources neglected

The review of post transfer support to Restitution and Redistribution programmes highlighted:◦ Inadequate budget and prioritisation of this key

function International experience indicates that the cost of

land purchase should amount to between 30% and 40% of total support package

◦ Land reform dominated by quantitative targets (hectares transferred and claims settled) rather than qualitative results

◦ Lack of clarity on the farming systems that should result from land reform

Narrow conception of the scope of support required

Inadequate conceptual and institutional framework for integrated planning and settlement support◦ No clarity about whose responsibility this should

be Poor intergovernmental relations limit the

co-ordination of effective support

Distinguishes between front end services needed by land reform projects◦ Social◦ Institutional◦ Environmental◦ Economic

Back office support to create an enabling environment at local, district, provincial and national scale

Reframing land reform as a joint programme of government, the private sector and civil society - coordinated by DLA in partnership with DoA and located within the District IDP

Drawing on DPLG guidelines for joint programme management gazetted ito IGRFA

Area based planning Developing designated support agencies and

partnerships at District Municipal scale

Elements of the SIS strategy have informed the Land and Agrarian Reform Project (LARP) – a recent DLA/DoA partnership

However it appears that key aspects of the strategy including:◦ Land rights determination and management◦ Dedicated support for CPIs◦ Development of functioning common property

resource management regimes◦ Integrated natural resource managementhave yet to find a home

In our view these are prerequisites for effective stewardship programmes

MtakatyeSchmidtsdrift

Land reform takes place in vastly different institutional settings◦ State owned communal areas◦ Privately owned land which has been

redistributed or restored held by a CPA or a Trust◦ Forestry areas◦ Protected areas◦ Municipal commonage◦ State owned land acquired through PLAS◦ Labour tenants and occupiers on commercial

farms

A communal area on former Transkei Wild Coast

A former betterment area – limited arable land Pockets of declared and ‘chief’s forests’ Most people cultivating homestead gardens

◦ Declining yields and soil fertility Perception that land in the forests more fertile

than home gardens Early 1990’s people invade and clear portions

of declared indigenous forest Increasing pressure on marine resources

particularly shellfish in the intertidal zone

How has government responded?◦ DEAT provided a grant to

a local entrepreneur to develop an indigenous

nursery hire people to clear

invasive aliens replant deforested areas

Current situation unclear

Contested local governance and unsupported land tenure systems can result in de facto ‘open access’◦ Continuing uncertainties about exercise of land rights

management functions The case an ideal zone for ‘participative forest

management’ ito the NFA◦ However low visibility of DWAF Forest Officers in 2006◦ People reluctant to leave cleared areas

Government responses fail to engage with key land and resource tenure issues which underpin sustainable management of the forest resources◦ Commodification of medicinal plants also contributes to

pressure on forest resources

Fragmented responses to multisectoral issues – forests, rangelands, marine resources land and resource tenure

These require an area based joint programme with a clear champion

Currently the approach to stewardship avoids situations where there is institutional confusion or conflict due to high risk of failure

However there is an argument to be made that these situations could become the focus for an integrated stewardship programme

Tswana and Griqua occupants of Schmidtsdrift forcibly removed in 1968

SADF established a training camp Competing land claims settled through negotiation

in 2000 31,829 ha restored to a CPA Restoration characterised by contestation between

Tswana and Griqua claimants, ‘traditionalists’ and ‘modernists’

Some 300 households return to 5 settlement areas◦ 2 declared rural townships◦ 3 spontaneous settlement areas

CPA Constitution fails to determine individual rights, benefits and responsibilities

Alluvial diamond mining commences in 2001 with prospecting rights awarded along the whole river

frontage.

Alluvial diamond mining has massive impact on grazing, cultural and natural assets ◦ In 2003 Government temporarily closed mining

activities of NDC after damage to graves and pollution of environment but it soon resumed

◦ Currently between 200 000-250 000 tonnes of material are processed per month

◦ Contributes spread of prosopis and other invaders◦ Alleged illegal abstraction of water◦ Inadequate rehabilitation

How to give meaning to local stewardship when powerful mining interests ride roughshod over the law and government interventions and monitoring are ineffective?

Prior to removal people were settled in six areas◦ On their return people encouraged to live in two

main settlement areas – majority remain offsite◦ Settlement pattern encourages overgrazing in

areas around settlements Increasing bush encroachment

◦ For several years after settlement there was no investment in grazing camps or water infrastructure

Game relocated to an area which one group of claimants utilised for grazing ◦ Creates conflict over resource use

Phuhlisani appointed in 2008 to clarify membership, rights, address conflict and align plans

Common property resource management depends on decentralised management, agreed boundaries (even if these may be fuzzy) and memberships, effective monitoring, and conflict resolution mechanisms

Clarification of rights  ◦ Access and use rights◦ Management rights◦ Exclusion rights◦ Transfer rights

Clarification of duties and contributions Credible management institutions and compliance

capability Environmental stewardship initiatives require

investment in tenure systems and local institutions◦ Self managing ‘stewardship’

Land reform spans diverse settings◦ Ranges from projects on a small geographic scale

utilised by family members and relatively homogenous and coherent groupings through to large land areas where large and heterogeneous groups have rights

Clearly stewardship initiatives will be easier to implement in confined and stable settings

However developing multisectoral stewardship initiatives which can engage in large and complex settings like Mtakatye and Schmidtsdrift remains a key challenge which to date has not been addressed

www.phuhlisani.com