<p>The Government of Namibia has been responsible for facilitating the resettlement of destitute and landless people since its independence in 1990. The provision of resettlement is a very contentious issue in Namibia. The bulk of land is still in the hands of minority white communities and foreigners. It is against this background that the study examined the land reform process in Namibia. The objectives of the study was to investigate to what extent the land reform process has been successful in one of Namibia's regions, and what factors are relevant for success, and identify ways to improve the process / to examine the original government objective/policy and how/why it changed over time.</p>

<p>The Government of Namibia has been responsible for facilitating the resettlement of destitute and landless people since its independence in 1990. The provision of resettlement is a very contentious issue in Namibia. The bulk of land is still in the hands of minority white communities and foreigners. It is against this background that the study examined the land reform process in Namibia. The objectives of the study was to investigate to what extent the land reform process has been successful in one of Namibia's regions, and what factors are relevant for success, and identify ways to improve the process / to examine the original government objective/policy and how/why it changed over time.</p>

Masters in Public Administration - MPA / The Government of Namibia has been responsible for facilitating the resettlement of destitute and landless people since its independence in 1990. The provision of resettlement is a very contentious issue in Namibia. The bulk of land is still in the hands of minority white communities and foreigners. It is against this background that the study examined the land reform process in Namibia. The objectives of the study was to investigate to what extent the land reform process has been successful in one of Namibia's regions, and what factors are relevant for success, and identify ways to improve the process; to examine the original government objective/policy and how/why it changed over time. / South Africa

The Ministry of Lands, Resettlement and Rehabilitation of Namibia is responsible for all land issues. The resettlement of landless farmers, of the previous disadvantaged groups, is one of the issues. The Agricultural (Commercial) Land Reform Act (Act 6 of 1995) applies to the commercial land parts of the country. Under this act the government of Namibia has the first option on the purchase of commercial farms when these are offered for sale. These purchased farms will then be used to resettle the landless farmers from the communal areas. These applicants may obtain a long-term lease over the purchased commercial farms. Long-term leases are legally required to be registered in the Deeds Office. A cadastral lease diagram is required for registration. The government, through the Ministry of Lands, Resettlement and Rehabilitation, has bought approximately 130 farms for resettlement purposes. On June 2003 approximately 13 of these resettlement farms were surveyed and cadastral lease diagrams prepared for registration in the Deeds Office. The author argues that many factors have affected the slow progress of the resettlement in Namibia including the time required for the preparation of the cadastral lease diagram. The current field survey techniques, Total Stations or/and GPS, are very reliable, but are slow. The use of digital orthophotos has been shown to shorten the time to prepare the cadastral lease diagrams. The Author further argues that because digital orthophotos are available at the Surveyor-General's Office means, there are no cost implications. The cost of the cadastral lease diagrams by using digital orthophotos is only a third of the cost of using the current field survey techniques. Replacing current survey techniques with digital orthophotos or including the use of digital orthophotos, as a surveying technique would require the revision of the Land Survey Act (Act 33 of 1993) and the Survey Regulations, under section 5 of the said Land Survey Act - Government Notice No. 58 of 2002. / Thesis (M.Env.Dev.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, 2004.

Thesis (MPA (School of Public Management and Planning))--University of Stellenbosch, 2006. / The focus of this research is on the analysis of Namibian land reform policy. The primary objective is to identify the prevailing values behind the land reform, formulate precise objectives that reflect the inherent values, and analyse the existing options with a view to identifying the delivery mechanism(s) most appropriate to meeting the land reform objectives and to delivering the desired outcomes in a sustainable way. Namibia inherited skewed land ownership. The land reform debate focuses mainly on the redistribution of commercial farms, which are mostly owned by whites, and the tenure reform in the communal areas. The Namibian land reform rests on a tripartite scheme: Resettlement, Affirmative Action Loan Scheme (AALS) and the Development of Communal Areas (DCA). These approaches are governed by a number of policies and laws. Land reform is a very complex and emotion-laden phenomenon with multiple dimensions, which include moral, historical, social, economic, environmental and technical aspects. The land question in Namibia is a race question. While politicians argue publicly that land reform is important to boost the economy and reduce poverty, in reality the focus is on having more black Namibians own more of Namibia’s commercial farmland. This discrepancy between public pronouncements and actual motive may be responsible for the lack of clear objectives for the land reform policy. The analysis of Namibian land reform policy will require formulation of precise objectives. Because Namibia is the driest country south of the Sahara, sustainable management of land is imperative. Finding ways of achieving a politically acceptable racial balance of commercial land ownership and sustainable utilisation of redistributed land within an optimum time span is a challenge. The formulation of Namibian land reform policy was not preceded by any attempt at prior policy analysis. An ad hoc and crisis-management approach prevailed. A policy issue analysis approach has been used in this study. It is based primarily on a literature review augmented with questionnaires and interviews with selected key stakeholders. A stratified sampling technique was applied in the selection of the key stakeholders. The three groups identified were the policy-formulation and implementation group, the commercial farmers and the emerging farmers. VISA, a multi-criteria decision analysis package, was used to analyse and compare the three land reform approaches, while PolicyMaker software was used to analyse political actors and suggest strategies that can enhance the policy’s feasibility. The literature review and questionnaires revealed that the objectives of the land reform policy include correcting the skewed ownership of commercial farmland to reflect the demography of Namibia, alleviating poverty and achieving social and economic equity for all citizens. The programme should be sociologically, economically and environmentally sustainable. Combining all these objectives as criteria for evaluation, VISA demonstrates that the affirmative action loan scheme has the greatest potential for meeting the objectives followed by resettlement and development of communal areas respectively. Using the PolicyMaker software, stakeholders were categorised into supporters, opponents and non-mobilised; opportunities and obstacles were identified and strategies devised to harness opportunities and diffuse opposition. / cmc2010

Thesis (MPhil (Political Science))--University of Stellenbosch, 2009. / This study first discusses, and ultimately compares, the land reform policies of both South Africa and Namibia, with special reference to the respective histories of land ownership. An overview of the two countries’ histories of colonial and segregationist policies are presented to provide the reader with insight into the racially unequal social, economic and political relations within the case studies concerned. The particular focus of this study falls on the legal frameworks and the policy developments of land restitution and the land redistribution policy programmes from the time of the transition to democracy. South Africa’s and Namibia’s policies are compared, highlighting the similarities and differences between the two. South Africa developed a wider land reform policy, which stands on three legs: land restitution, land redistribution and land tenure reform. The first, land restitution, has been prioritised by government and has thus far contributed the most to the progress of land reform. It may also be seen as the beginning of redistribution. Land tenure does not receive much attention in this study, but the land redistribution programme does. Progress to date has overall been slower than expected and other stumbling blocks such as ineffective extension services, bureaucratic ineptitude and ensuring the productive use of land are not focused on. Government recently indicated that it intends, and has also taken some steps, to speed up the lagging process of land reform through an increased use of expropriation. Great criticism against this was voiced by the commercial sector. South Africa is a constitutional democracy and attempts to redress the injustices of the past within a legal framework. Namibia seems to be progressing faster than South Africa in terms of its redistribution policy. One reason for this could be that the targets are more realistically set. It was decided that the restitution of ancestral land will not be followed (therefore, redistribution was not claims-based), but that all previously disadvantaged people will benefit from land redistribution. A land conference was held immediately after independence in 1991. Lately, however, momentum on the pursuit of its land reform policy seems to have subsided. The conclusion of this study indicates that although there are differences in the respective countries’ land reform policies, there are significant similarities. The debate between ‘equity’ and ‘production’ becomes even more important in the midst of world food price increases, a global financial crisis and the ever growing gap between the poor and the rich. More than a decade after the transition to democracy (amidst the chaotic land reform process in Zimbabwe), land and ownership remain a contentious issue in both countries.