東華大學圖書館 |

Understanding Land Reform and the Associated Consequences for Land Use and Livelihoods.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Understanding Land Reform and the Associated Consequences for Land Use and Livelihoods./
作者:	Netshipale, Avhafunani Justice.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2021,
面頁冊數:	167 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-02, Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International83-02B.
標題:	Livestock. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28489644
ISBN:	9798515242923

Understanding Land Reform and the Associated Consequences for Land Use and Livelihoods.
Netshipale, Avhafunani Justice.

Understanding Land Reform and the Associated Consequences for Land Use and Livelihoods. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2021 - 167 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-02, Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Wageningen University and Research, 2021.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

Land reform is important to correct historical injustices in all districts of South Africa, including the Waterberg District Municipality. There is consensus, globally, that there are trade-offs among diverse land reform objectives, namely: social, economic, political and environmental. The general aim of this thesis, therefore, was to understand land reform: the extent to which it meets objectives and the associated consequences for land use and livelihoods. Restitution- Rest, settlement/land acquisition grant- SLAG, land redistribution for agricultural development phase 1- LRAD1 and phase 2- LRAD2, and proactive land acquisition strategy- PLAS, were the five South Africa's land reform farm types. The results show that the socio-economic classes of beneficiaries was determined by synergies between policies and their implementation outcomes. Land uses were diverse in Rest, and less diverse and like previous uses in LRAD1, LRAD2 and PLAS. On-farm livestock and overall on-farm livelihood contributions were high for capital-endowed households in LRAD1, LRAD2 and PLAS, and low for capital-poor households in Rest and SLAG. This suggest that land reform was unable to bridge the inequality gap between capital-poor and capital-endowed households, and livestock influenced on-farm contribution in semi-arid conditions. Crop plus ruminants- CR, horticulture- H, ruminants- R, ruminants plus horticulture- RH and monogastricsM were the five farming systems in land reform farms. These farming systems developed from interactions among the biophysical conditions, land reform policies, socio-economic class of farmers, physical capital endowment of farms, and the type of produce market used. The resultssuggest that land reform policies could influence land use activities by transferring farms of a particular size, and availability of external physical and financial capital support could determine participation of the poor. Strengths and weaknesses of land reform farms were determined by socio-economic class of farmers and the characteristics of land use activities. Use of farms by the poor led to strengths of low opportunity costs for family labour and farms being prioritised by the state for support, and weakness of being dependent on external support as farmers and farms lacked physical and financial capital, compared to farms used by the better-off. Farms where capital-extensive activities were key had strengths of less capital investment requirements and moderate susceptibility to climate, and a weakness of low possibility for partnerships with largescale commercial farmers, compared to farm where capital-intensive activities were key. Overall, our results suggest limited use and limited livelihood contributions of land reform farms. These results arise doubts about the relevancy of land reform, and its future depends on stakeholders advocating for it to ensuring that it is implemented through approaches which pays landowners fairly, that correct people benefit, and that appropriate land uses are adopted.

ISBN: 9798515242923Subjects--Topical Terms:

539534
Livestock.

Understanding Land Reform and the Associated Consequences for Land Use and Livelihoods.
LDR:04245nmm a2200397 4500 001 2351026
005 20221107085235.5
008 241004s2021 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798515242923
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI28489644
035 $a (MiAaPQ)Wageningen580957
035 $a AAI28489644
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Netshipale, Avhafunani Justice. $3 3690565
245 1 0 $a Understanding Land Reform and the Associated Consequences for Land Use and Livelihoods.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2021
300 $a 167 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-02, Section: B.
500 $a Advisor: de Boer, IJM;Oosting, S . J .
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Wageningen University and Research, 2021.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a Land reform is important to correct historical injustices in all districts of South Africa, including the Waterberg District Municipality. There is consensus, globally, that there are trade-offs among diverse land reform objectives, namely: social, economic, political and environmental. The general aim of this thesis, therefore, was to understand land reform: the extent to which it meets objectives and the associated consequences for land use and livelihoods. Restitution- Rest, settlement/land acquisition grant- SLAG, land redistribution for agricultural development phase 1- LRAD1 and phase 2- LRAD2, and proactive land acquisition strategy- PLAS, were the five South Africa's land reform farm types. The results show that the socio-economic classes of beneficiaries was determined by synergies between policies and their implementation outcomes. Land uses were diverse in Rest, and less diverse and like previous uses in LRAD1, LRAD2 and PLAS. On-farm livestock and overall on-farm livelihood contributions were high for capital-endowed households in LRAD1, LRAD2 and PLAS, and low for capital-poor households in Rest and SLAG. This suggest that land reform was unable to bridge the inequality gap between capital-poor and capital-endowed households, and livestock influenced on-farm contribution in semi-arid conditions. Crop plus ruminants- CR, horticulture- H, ruminants- R, ruminants plus horticulture- RH and monogastricsM were the five farming systems in land reform farms. These farming systems developed from interactions among the biophysical conditions, land reform policies, socio-economic class of farmers, physical capital endowment of farms, and the type of produce market used. The resultssuggest that land reform policies could influence land use activities by transferring farms of a particular size, and availability of external physical and financial capital support could determine participation of the poor. Strengths and weaknesses of land reform farms were determined by socio-economic class of farmers and the characteristics of land use activities. Use of farms by the poor led to strengths of low opportunity costs for family labour and farms being prioritised by the state for support, and weakness of being dependent on external support as farmers and farms lacked physical and financial capital, compared to farms used by the better-off. Farms where capital-extensive activities were key had strengths of less capital investment requirements and moderate susceptibility to climate, and a weakness of low possibility for partnerships with largescale commercial farmers, compared to farm where capital-intensive activities were key. Overall, our results suggest limited use and limited livelihood contributions of land reform farms. These results arise doubts about the relevancy of land reform, and its future depends on stakeholders advocating for it to ensuring that it is implemented through approaches which pays landowners fairly, that correct people benefit, and that appropriate land uses are adopted.
590 $a School code: 2157.
650 4 $a Livestock. $3 539534
650 4 $a Agricultural production. $3 3559355
650 4 $a Rural development. $3 533040
650 4 $a Apartheid. $2 fast $3 2076210
650 4 $a Mining. $3 3544442
650 4 $a Colonialism. $3 919746
650 4 $a Horticulture. $3 555447
650 4 $a Tourism. $3 536870
650 4 $a Land purchases. $3 3681766
650 4 $a Agriculture. $3 518588
650 4 $a Farmers. $3 570534
650 4 $a Poverty. $3 540228
650 4 $a Cooperation. $3 594090
650 4 $a Farms. $3 3221144
650 4 $a Systems development. $3 3690566
650 4 $a Households. $3 579926
650 4 $a Variance analysis. $3 3544969
650 4 $a South African studies. $3 3175326
650 4 $a Geography. $3 524010
650 4 $a Area planning & development. $3 3172430
650 4 $a Recreation. $3 535376
650 4 $a Land use planning. $3 2122760
650 4 $a Animal sciences. $3 3174829
650 4 $a Dictionaries. $3 644709
650 4 $a Research methodology. $3 3559994
650 4 $a Participation. $3 1555180
650 4 $a Focus groups. $3 998196
690 $a 0473
690 $a 0475
690 $a 0341
690 $a 0366
690 $a 0471
690 $a 0536
690 $a 0551
690 $a 0814
690 $a 0654
710 2 $a Wageningen University and Research. $3 3557914
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 83-02B.
790 $a 2157
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2021
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28489644