Can there be growth with equity : an initial assessment of land reform in South Africa

The authors use evidence from a survey of about 1200 beneficiaries of South African land reform to assess the performance of the initial phase of the land reform program. They find that the program has not lived up to the quantitative goals set, but did successfully target the poor. It has led to a significant number of economically successful projects that already generate sustainable revenues. These projects have involved significantly larger shares of poor people than less viable projects, suggesting that increased access to productive assets could be an important path to poverty reduction. Given the need to develop a diverse and less subsidy-dependent strategy for poverty reduction, suitably adapted land reform could play an important part in restructuring South Africa's rural sector. Much of this potential has yet to be realized. The author's analysis points toward clear lessons about program design: 1) Increase beneficiary awareness and participation. Shift from a centralized, bureaucratic structure designed for land distribution toward seeing program components as part of an integrated vision of rural development. This would strengthen links to other parts of land reform (including tenure reform), make better use of local synergies (including infrastructure such as housing), and encourage rather than stifle local initiative decentralized implementation mechanisms. 2) Integrate land redistribution into a land policy framework that strengthens existing property rights, especially tenure security for residents of communal areas. 3) Ensure transparency, accountability, and the participation of the private sector. These are essential for dispelling fears that land reform is just another means of political favoritism rather than an instrument to transform the rural sector, as is indeed supported by international evidence.Agricultural Knowledge&Information Systems,Environmental Economics&Policies,Municipal Housing and Land,Banks&Banking Reform,Municipal Financial Management,Environmental Economics&Policies,Banks&Banking Reform,Agricultural Knowledge&Information Systems,Municipal Housing and Land,Municipal Financial Management

Poverty and Inequality in the First Decade of South Africa's Democracy: What Can be Learned from Panel Data?

Using a longitudinal survey of South African households over the 1993-2004 period, this paper evaluates changes in income distribution since the end of apartheid. Inequality amongst these households has markedly increased this period as initially better off households consistently improved their economic well-being. Sharp increases in measured poverty over the first half of this period were partially reversed by later improvements for some poor households. Comparisons between actual and "market-generated" income distributions suggest that these improvements were driven in part by government transfer programs. Nonetheless, the chronically poor remain a significant fraction of the total poor, and 60% of those households that were poor in 1993 are still poor in 2004. Analysis of the next generation (that is the now grown children of the original survey households) shows a similar pattern of bifurcation, with one group moving ahead rapidly, and another mired at low living levels.

Sense in Sociability? Social Exclusion and Persistent Poverty in South Africa

Social capital has been identified as an important avenue of upward mobility for poorer people. However, recent theoretical work suggests that in highly polarized societies, the accumulation of social capital is likely to be fragmented and ineffective for people at the bottom of the economic pyramid. In South Africa, apartheid-era policies created such deep, socially embedded inequality producing a self-reinforcing circle of social exclusion and persistent poverty as another of apartheid's legacies. Work to date on post-apartheid income distribution-with its demonstration of increasing inequality and poverty-is consistent with this legacy hypothesis. This paper takes this hypothesis further by using a two-pronged approach that draws on quantitative and qualitative data to explore the role of different types of assets in explaining poverty status. First, novel econometric analysis of poverty and livelihood dynamics is used to test for a poverty trap that would signal the existence of a ceiling to upward mobility for poor people. The analysis finds evidence of such a trap. Secondly, the qualitative data is used to confirm and more deeply probe the reasons behind the patterns of truncated upward mobility, finding accessibility and stability of employment and state pensions as key factors explaining why people remain poor or non-poor. While this analysis finds ample evidence of active social capital and networks, these are more helpful for non-poor households while for the poor they seem to at best help stabilize livelihood at low levels and seem to do little to promote upward mobility. This paper's confirmation of the legacy hypothesis suggests the publicly provided social safety nets that exist in South Africa need to be at least maintained if not strengthened, while state policy needs to take a more aggressive role in assuring that households have access to a minimum bundle of assets and to the markets needed to effectively build on those assets over time.

Social capital and income generation in South Africa, 1993-98

The goal of this paper is to determine the nature of the causal relationship between "social capital," as measured by household membership in formal and informal groups and household welfare in South Africa. Using a recently collected panel data set in South Africa's largest province, we estimate per capita expenditure functions and find a positive and significant impact of household-level social capital. For example, after controlling for fixed effects, social capital has no impact on per capita expenditure in 1993 but positive and significant effects in 1998. We interpret this as reflecting structural changes in the South African economy as it removes the many restrictions that underlay apartheid.Gender ,Women ,Social networks ,Income South Africa ,