Resource information
This paper examines the challenges of institutional, organisational and policy reform around land in Southern Africa. It analyses the land situation in South Africa, Mozambique and Zimbabwe, and identifies key issues for further research in each of these countries.
Findings include:
there is a convergence of policy in key areas in the region, determining the current approach to land and land reform, which can be attributed to its growing exposure to the forces of globalisation, and with it the influence of the international neo-liberal orthodoxy
this policy convergence is characterised by the privatisation of resources, the retreat by the state from key areas of the economy, the pursuit of foreign direct investment and sweeping deregulation of markets
the drive to reorient economies in the region in line with the new global imperatives is promoted by donor governments and international financial institutions and has been embraced enthusiastically by the ruling parties in Mozambique and South Africa
this discourse also underpins much of current debate in Zimbabwe, where the government is struggling to reconcile its antipathy to structural adjustment with the demands of foreign donors and the pending collapse of key sectors of the economy
in its unalloyed form, the discourse of globalisation resolves the equity-efficiency dichotomy entirely in favour of efficiency and a distinct concept of livelihoods cannot be sustained
a variation on the neo-liberal position promoted wider distribution of land on the basis that this will result in efficiency gains, thus leading to enhanced livelihood opportunities for the rural poor, but this enjoys little support outside academic circles
within the emerging orthodoxy, a number of older discourses, which do not directly challenge the dominant position, live on
the main challenge to the neo-liberal orthodoxy comes from a range of populist discourse, mainly associated with NGOs and church groups with varying degree of support from peasant movements
with a few notable exceptions, popular participation has not been a major feature of land policy in the region in recent years, in terms of either policy formulation or implementation
[adapted from author]
