1.1 Background to, and motivation for, the study: The Working for Water programme (WfW) is a public works programme designed to clear South Africa of water-consuming invasive alien tree and plants, and to replace them with low water consuming indigenous species. This would prevent a loss of more than 4000 million cubic metres water per annum from the hydrological cycle (DWAF, 1998). The economic viability of the programme has been established in the Western Cape and Kwazulu-Natal (van Wilgen, Little, Chapman, Görgens, Willems and Marais, 1997; Gilham and Haynes, 2001), but questioned in the Eastern and Southern Cape (Hosking, du Preez, Campbell, Wooldridge and du Plessis, 2002). Hosking et al. (2002) investigated the economic case for the programme by performing a Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA), based on increased water yield and livestock potential, on six selected sites in the Eastern and Southern Cape, viz. Albany, Kat River, Pot River, Tsitsikamma, Kouga and Port Elizabeth Driftsands.

published_or_final_version / Urban Planning / Master / Master of Science in Urban Planning

The land reform that has unfolded in Zimbabwe since 1980 used different models and had diverse consequences. Since the implementation of the fast tract land reform programme in 2000, Zimbabwe experienced heavy reduction in yield and output at farm level that led to a 70% shortfall in production to meet annual food requirements (Richardson, 2005). The economic crisis in Zimbabwe has been characterized by worsening food insecurity especially in the rural areas where harvests continue to be poor. In the beef sector, Zimbabwe has failed to meet its export quota to the EU. The shortfall in production to meet annual food requirements shows a very grim situation but do not tell us about the performance of resettled farmers who now occupy much of the productive land. The broad objective of the study was to determine and compare the production efficiency of resettled farmers in Zimbabwe across land reform models. In addition, the study determined land use intensity. The study was conducted in the Mashonaland Central Province of Zimbabwe mainly because a wide variety of field crops were grown by resettled farmers. The respondents were stratified into three groups. These were: beneficiaries of land reform before 2000 (resettle scheme), fast track A1 model and fast track A2 model. The three models differ on how they were implemented and supported and this might result in different efficiencies of the models. A total of 245 copies structured questionnaire were administered on the resettled farmers from June to September 2010. Descriptive statistics was applied to the basic characteristics of the sampled households. The effect of model of land reform, gender of the household head, marital status, age of the household head, education, household size, religion, dependence ratio, whether the farmer was fulltime or part-time in farming, experience of the farmers in farming at that environment, total land size owned by the farmers and soil type on revenue per hectare and land use rate were determined using the GLM procedure of SAS (2003). Significance differences between least-square group means were compared using the PDIFF test of SAS (2003). The relationship between Revenue and land utilization was examined using the Pearson‟s correlations analysis. Dependance between response variables that had an effect on either revenue per hectare or land utilization with all the other response variables was tested using the Chi-square test for dependance. To find the effect of arable land used and herd size on revenue per hectare and land use the RSREG Procedure of SAS (2003) was used. Input oriented DEA model under the assumption of constant return to scale was used to estimate efficiency in this study. To identify factors that influence efficiency, a Tobit model censored at zero was selected. The mean land use rate varied significantly (p<0.05) with the land reform model with A2 having highest land use rate of 67%. The A1 and old resettlement households had land use rates of 53% and 46%, respectively. Sex, marital status, age of the household head, education and household size significantly affected land use (P<0.05). Revenue per hectare was not affected by any the factors that were inputted in the model. Results from the DEA approach showed that A2 farmers (large land owners) had an average technical efficiency score of 0.839, while the lowest ranking model (A1) had an average score of 0.618. Small land holders (A1 and the old resettled farmers) are on average less cost-efficient than large land owners, with a score of 0.29 for the former compared with 0.45 for the latter. From the factors that were entered in the Tobit model, age of household head, excellent production knowledge and farmer status affected technical efficiency whereas allocative efficiency was only affected by good production knowledge, farm size, arable land owned and area under cultivation. Factors which affected economic efficiency of the resettled farmers are secondary education, household size, farm size, cultivated area and arable land owned. None of the included socio-economic variables has significant effects on the allocative and economic efficiency of the resettled farmers. Thus, the allocative and economic inefficiencies of the farmers might be accounted for by other natural and environmental factors which were not captured in the model.

In May 2012, a meeting was held between various stakeholder representatives of the Western Baviaanskloof to discuss the concept of a proposed landowner-enterprise. This concept was put forward in response to a need for collaboration in the midst of economic, environmental and social issues at play in the Baviaanskloof. Owing to the conservation value and rapidly decreasing economic output of the land, a radical shift to sustainable land-use practices was called for by various stakeholders. Suggested as a vehicle to generate income for the local landowners through alternative sustainable land-uses, the proposed enterprise may aid in addressing this shift by use of a bottom-up approach. During the stakeholder meeting, it was requested by the representative landowners that a feasibility assessment be conducted on the concept of the proposed enterprise prior to establishment. As an integral part of this assessment, the researcher took on the task of investigating stakeholder reception to the enterprise by means of a stakeholder analysis. It was decided to limit this to three markets: water, carbon and tourism. The purpose of this research study is twofold, namely to: investigate stakeholder influence and their reception of the proposed enterprise using a stakeholder analysis; and also to identify and advise on the opportunities and constraints relating to stakeholders, thus contributing to determining the feasibility of the proposed enterprise. In achieving the purpose of this study, a systematic stakeholder analysis framework was constructed, based on existing theory. This was necessary because, although stakeholder analysis is commonly practiced, no study was found to provide a theoretically based framework for the purpose of feasibility in the initial stages of enterprise establishment. Thus the contribution of the study is also twofold, namely the practical outcome of determining stakeholder reception for feasibility, and a secondary outcome of constructing a stakeholder analysis framework. The stakeholder analysis framework is based on an interpretation of existing stakeholder theory, with the addition of four "relational indicators" – goals, intentions, relationships, and resources. These four indicators provide a link between theory and practice in gauging the two attributes of stakeholder influence – power and interest. Dealing with a number of stakeholder interests in a unique context, the study takes on a single network case study approach in the paradigm of phenomenology. To suit the complex nature of the study, semi-structured interviews with various stakeholder representatives were conducted, using groups or organisations as units of analysis. Drawing from the stakeholder analysis framework and overall purpose of the study, four research objectives were set. The first was to identify the proposed enterprise's legitimate key external stakeholders, based on the three markets: water, carbon and tourism; the second to describe, categorise and assess relative dyadic influence of the above stakeholders by gauging their power and interest; the third, to determine the stakeholder network influence and probable reception of the proposed enterprise; and the last to advise the landowners on any identified opportunities or constraints stakeholders might pose, and thus to contribute to determining feasibility. In addressing the first objective, 21 stakeholders were identified, 12 of whom were found to be key to the current investigation. These key stakeholders were: Gamtoos Irrigation Board (GIB), LivingLands, R3G, Rhodes Restoration Group, Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism Agency (ECPTA), Department of Water Affairs (DWA), Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan (NMBM), Saaimanshoek, South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), Department of Economic Development, Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEDEAT), Baviaans Tourism, and Baviaans Municipality. In applying the stakeholder analysis framework, ECPTA was categorised as the definitive (most influential) stakeholder to the enterprise, and DEDEAT, SANBI (through Working for Wetlands), Baviaans Tourism, GIB, and NMBM were categorised as pivotal (influential and active). In discerning stakeholder interest in the proposed enterprise, a number of emerging themes were found to affect the projected interest and behaviour of stakeholders, apart from their specified goals. Emerging themes included: tunnel visioning, internal disparity, individual/personality clashes, and misaligned interests. In addition to this, in interpreting stakeholder interest, specific intentions or agendas that might affect the interest shown towards the proposed enterprise were also taken into account. Five predominant intentions of stakeholders were identified as: implementing a stewardship programme, establishing a tourism association, establishing a water users' association, social development, and "the big vision". Findings on the final objective revealed a number of perceived opportunities and constraints relative to the feasibility of the enterprise. Three prime opportunities were identified as: partnerships with definitive and pivotal stakeholders, the possibility of tendering for implementer of the "Working for" programmes, and taking on the role of Tourism Association. The following potential constraints were also emphasised by participants: social aspects such as individuals and personalities, the incompatibility or non-existence of local market structures, and the need for external funding. With regard to stakeholder reception, most of the stakeholders, with the exception of NMBM and Saaimanshoek, responded positively to the idea of the enterprise. Overall, based on participant perceptions, the tourism market was found to be the most feasible the carbon market uncertain and a long-term possibility, and the water market the least feasible.