Thesis (M. Dev.) --University of Limpopo, 2013

This paper studies the policy changes that have led to the design and early implementation of the land restitution program in Colombia. I use the land reform literature to frame land reform efforts in Colombia within the larger ideological discussion on land reform. The study maps out the roles of the main actors that influenced the actions of government regarding land reform and their role in shaping the present policies affecting land restitution. The paper argues that although the land restitution program provides an opportunity to initiate a peace building process and should be seriously considered as a measure to compensate the victims of the armed conflict, the present rural development model is an impediment to its success. Although, the more progressive coalition was able to achieve the approval of the land restitution program, the success of the program relies entirely on the wider rural development model being currently embraced in the country. The present rural development model puts an emphasis on the exploitation of extractive resources and other mega projects responding to global market demands; while illicit crops continue to provide an easy and profitable livelihood opportunity for many in the countryside. Such development does not support the livelihoods of returnees and thus does not compliment the land restitution program. The success of the land restitution program thus remains in doubt. The reason is that powerful actors support a neoliberal development model that continues to dominate the political agenda.

Doctor Legum - LLD / This research project proposes that the social-obligation norm of ownership should be adopted as the ethic on which land restitution is carried out in South Africa. While there exists a subtle and indirect appreciation of the social-obligation norm in South African constitutional property law, this is veiled by the respect given to the classical liberal conception of ownership which gives more regard to an owner's ius abutendi and subsequently, accepts that owners can do as they please with their property as long as they do not break any law. Of course, South Africa no longer adheres to such a classical liberalist approach to ownership. An adherence to classical liberalist views of ownership has arguably, led to the neglect of arable restituted land. To this effect, the Constitution as well as the Restitution of Land Rights Act 22 of 1994 (RLA) need to clearly and more positively express the social-obligation norm of ownership in order to promote productive and sustainable utilisation of cultivable restituted land. The thesis argues that the current failures of the land restitution programme are linked to the absence of a social-obligation norm in the RLA as well as the negatively framed Property Clause in the South African Constitution. Even the envisaged changes to the land restitution process as outlined in the 2011 Green Paper on Land Reform as well as in the Property Valuation Act, will not solve the current problems of wasteful neglect of land. The thesis therefore suggests that a positive expression and formulation of the social-obligation norm in the RLA as well as in the Property Clause will promote active, sustainable, productive, and optimal utilization of all cultivable land acquired through the country's land restitution process. This will assist with meeting the developmental aspirations for the rural economy as envisaged in chapter six of the National Development Plan 2030. Furthermore, utilising the land productively through the socialobligation norm is an expression of Ubuntu, a key constitutional theme in South Africa. The experiences of Brazil and Germany deserve special analysis. This is because the socialobligation norm occupies a prominent and positive place in the constitutional property law of both these countries. Further, both countries respect private ownership of property as long as the property is utilised in a manner that permits others to flourish and improve the quality of their life.

Land reform in South Africa is premised on land restitution. land redistribution and security of terlllre as its major components. It has the following objectives amongst others, to address the injustices of racially-based land dispossession; inequitable distribution ofland ownership; need for security of tenure for all: need for sustainable use of land: need [or rapid release of land for development: need to record and register all rights in property: and the need to administer public land in an effective manner. Over two decades of the democratic dispensation, lack of proper funding and capacity by government official to expedite the land reform processes deprives the rural communities like the Morebene community the enjoyment of their land rights and proper redress after devastating land dispossession. The research has managed to establish the serious pain and suffering that has been brought by incompetent implementation of six phases of land restitution process by Limpopo RLCC to the commuillty of Morebeoe. Lack of capacity to implement land restitution processes has been found to have been a major setback to lhe Morebene communjty to an extent that their restitution processes were abandoned by the Limpopo RLCC at project execution stage. The community composed of nearly 81% of rhe youth and middle aged people bas been left without jobs and no property rights and development all of which are caused by the lack of expertise from the oHicials of the RLCC. No restitution grants and development gTants were granted to the community and no formal or informal training let alone workshops held in relation to the government"s expectations from the land reform policies and legislation. / Development Studies / M.A. (Development Studies)

Thesis (MPAM.) -- University of Limpopo, 2021 / Globally, land reform has been a burning issue and where it was implemented, it has resulted in both successes and failures. The problems that engulf land reform illustrate that government’s programmes often fail to address the socio-economic conditions of the land claimants. As such, this study undertook to examine government interventions in addressing beneficiaries affected by land restitution in Limpopo province with specific reference to Tshifhefhe community located in Makhado Local Municipality. The study is an examination of governmental interventions in addressing beneficiaries affected by land restitution. The institutional mechanisms used to support land restitutions are considered for discussion. The study focused mainly at the Tshifhefhe community in Limpopo province where the need to restore the land forcibly taken from the community was considered. The restoration is necessary for improvement of their wellbeing, intensification of democracy and emancipation as well as restoration of previously marginalised people. The study adopted a qualitative approach and a case study design. The utilised approach described and explored Tshifhefhe beneficiaries’ perceptions, attitudes, views and feelings about the government’s interventions in their restored land. The findings point to the fact that government has been found to have provided inadequate support in terms of training on land management, marketing and administration of these beneficiaries including the Tshifhefhe restituted land. It is recommended that the government should intervene in the restored land projects by providing capacity building programmes, assessment of failures and successes in other restored land, mentoring, development and implementation of progressive and sustainable land policies and programmes.

Thesis (LLM (Public Law))--University of Stellenbosch, 2009. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The 1996 Constitution provides in s 25(7) that individuals and communities who had been dispossessed of rights in land after 19 June 1913, as a result of past discriminatory laws, may claim restitution or equitable redress. The Restitution of Land Rights Act 22 of 1994 reiterates the 1913 cut-off date for restitution claims. The cut-off date appears to preclude pre-1913 land dispossessions. Various reasons are cited for this date, the most obvious being that it reflects the date on which the Black Land Act came into effect. The Richtersveld and Popela decisions of the lower courts appear to confirm the view that historically based land claims for dispossessions that occurred prior to 1913 are excluded from the restitution process. In Australia and Canada restitution orders have been made possible by the judicially crafted doctrine of aboriginal land rights. However, historical restitution claims based on this doctrine are constrained by the assumption that the Crown, in establishing title during colonisation, extinguished all existing titles to land. This would have meant that the indigenous proprietary systems would have been lost irrevocably through colonisation. In seeking to overcome the sovereignty issue, Australian and Canadian courts have distinguished between the loss of sovereignty and the loss of title to land. In this way, the sovereignty of the Crown is left intact while restitution orders are rendered possible. South African courts do not have to grapple with the sovereignty issue since post-apartheid legislation authorises the land restitution process. The appeal decisions in Richtersveld and Popela recognised that some use rights survived the colonial dispossession of ownership. This surviving right was later the subject of a second dispossession under apartheid. By using this construction, which is not unlike the logic of the doctrine of aboriginal title in fragmenting proprietary interests, the second dispossession could then be said to meet the 1913 cut-off date, so that all historically based land claims are not necessarily excluded by the 1913 cut-off date. However, it is still possible that some pre-1913 dispossessions could not be brought under the umbrella of the Richtersveld and Popela construction, and the question whether historically based restitution claims are possible despite the 1913 cut-off date will resurface, especially if the claimants are not accommodated in the government’s land redistribution programme / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die 1996 Grondwet bepaal in a 25(7) dat individue en gemeenskappe wat na 19 Junie 1913 van ‘n reg in grond ontneem is, as gevolg van rasgebaseerde wetgewing en praktyke, geregtig is om herstel van sodanige regte of gelykwaardige vergoeding te eis. Die Wet op Herstel van Grondregte 22 van 1994herhaal die 1913-afsnydatum vir grondeise. Dit lyk dus asof die afsnydatum die ontneming van grond voor 1913 uitsluit. Verskeie redes word vir hierdie datum aangevoer, waarvan die bekendste is dat dit die datum is waarop die Swart Grond Wet in werking getree het. Dit beslissing van die laer howe in beide die Richtersveld- en die Popela-beslissings bevestig blykbaar dat ontneming van grond of regte in grond voor 1913 van die restitusie-proses uitgesluit word. In Australië en Kanada is restitusiebevele moontlik gemaak deur die leerstuk van inheemse grondregte. Historiese restitusie-eise in hierdie jurisdiksies word egter aan bande gelê deur die veronderstelling dat die Kroon, deur die vestiging van titel gedurende kolonialisering, alle vorige titels op die grond uitgewis het. Dit sou beteken dat die inheemsregtelike grondregsisteme onherroeplik verlore geraak het deur kolonialisering. Ten einde die soewereiniteitsprobleem te oorkom het die Australiese en Kanadese howe onderskei tussen die verlies van soewereiniteit en die verlies van titel tot die grond. Op hierdie wyse word die soewereiniteit van die Kroon onaangeraak gelaat terwyl restitusiebevele steeds ‘n moontlikheid is. Suid-Afrikaanse howe het nie nodig gehad om die soewereiniteitskwessie aan te spreek nie omdat post-apartheid wetgewing die herstel van grondregte magtig. Die appélbeslissings in Richtersveld en Popela erken dat sekere gebruiksregte die koloniale ontneming van eiendom oorleef het. Die oorblywende gebruiksregte is later ‘n tweede keer ontneem as gevolg van apartheid. Deur gebruikmaking van hierdie konstruksie, wat dieselfde logika volg as die leerstuk van inheemsregtelike regte en berus op fragmentasie van eiendomsaansprake, kan gesê word dat die tweede ontneming van grond wel binne die 1913-afsnydatum val. Gevolglik sal alle historiese restitusie-eise nie noodwendig deur die 1913- afsnydatum uitgesluit word nie. Dit is steeds moontlik dat sommige pre-1913 ontnemings nooit onder die vaandel van die Richtersveld- en Popela-beslissings gebring sal kan word nie, en die vraag of histories gebaseerde eise moontlik is ongeag die 1913-afsnydatum sal daarom weer opduik, veral indien die grondeisers nie geakkommodeer word in die grondherverdelingsprogram van die staat nie.

This thesis is an ethnographic study of rights restitution as an arrangement that establishes boundaries, and how those boundaries are translated, challenged, and exceeded. Following the guidelines of International Humanitarian Law and its version contained in the Law of Victims and Land Restitution (1448/2011), the Colombian government established a wide network of professionals in charge of registration and reparation for claimants registered as victims of the armed conflict (7,999,963 people in April 2016). In these procedures of recognition and reparation, technologies like forms and protocols become crucial for the mediation of rights restitution. As a starting point, I trace the trajectories of technologies of recognition and reparation across assistance centres, governmental offices and sessions of psychosocial assistance. I am interested in functionaries and applicants’ experiences of forms and protocols, the procedures of recognition and reparation, and the circulation of official numbers as narratives of rights restitution. Drawing on Science and Technology Studies, a central concern of this thesis is to ask what technologies of recognition and reparation assemble. I interrogate the translation of experiences of pain and mobility into numbers and the circulation of those numbers by state representatives. I also explore some of the material forms of organisation developed by registered and unregistered interlocutors, as arrangements beyond the boundaries of state interventions. I describe how some of those alternative orders translate state interventions and enact spaces of material justice. Instead of reproducing the notion of reparation as a cornerstone of rights restitution in transitional justice societies, I suggest that a different sort of Reparation might occur beyond the boundaries of post-conflict statehood and within its intersections with alternative arrangements.

Thesis (M. Dev.) -- University of Limpopo, 2003 / Refer to the document

Thesis (M.Sc. Agriculture (Agricultural Economics)) -- University of Limpopo, 2018 / The Land Restitution Programme was designed to assist farmers through support for infrastructure, marketing, finance and extension services. This initiative was intended to support job creation, food security and support agricultural growth. Nevertheless, poverty and food insecurity have profound implications for health and welfare. However, household dietary diversity score has long been recognized by nutritionists as a key element of high-quality diets. This study examined the effects of the land restitution on households’ food security in Waterberg district. The objectives of this study were to profile households’ socioeconomic/ demographic characteristics, assess the food security status of land restitution beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries, examine the effects of Land Restitution Programme on food security and investigate the challenges faced by smallholder farmers in accessing land and other inputs for agricultural purposes in Waterberg district. Primary data was collected from 110 smallholder farmers using purposive and random sampling techniques. Dietary diversity score was used to assess the food security status of land restitution beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries while logistic regression model was used to examine the effect of Land Restitution Programme on their food security status. The results of dietary diversity score revealed that 70% of the households were food secure while 30% of the households are food insecure. The age of the household head, access to the market and land size were found to be positively significant at 10% level while beneficiary status was found to be positively related to food security status and significant at 5% level. Variables which were found positively significant at 1% level are gender of the household head, off-farm income and access to credit. Problems affecting households differs from lack of access to credit facilities to lack of grazing land. Based on the findings the study recommends prioritisation of women agricultural projects; diversification of income; provision of smallholder credit facilities in rural areas and provision land to farmers so that they increase their production which give them an advantage to become food secure. Key words: Dietary diversity, logit model, food security and Land restitution.

Philosophiae Doctor - PhD / This dissertation focuses on strategic partnership initiatives or ‘inclusive business model’ arrangements initiated between land restitution beneficiaries and private sector interests. It explores to what extent the introduction of strategic partnerships since 2005 reflects a dominant underlying land reform policy narrative premised on the superiority of large-scale commercial farming that contradicts other policy statements emphasizing support for small-scale farming. The effects of a hegemonic notion of “viability” – framed in terms of the large-scale commercial farm model - on partnership initiatives in the large Moletele claim in the Hoedspruit area of Limpopo Province is the primary concern of the study. I adopt a political economy perspective to examine both processes and the range of outcomes of the commercial partnerships established on Moletele land. Informed by this perspective, I explore the strategies pursued by, and the alliances formed between differently positioned actors that are engaged in contestations and negotiations over access to resources within these partnerships, which I conceptualize as “arenas of struggle”. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected and analysed (mixed method approach), by means of a small sample of claimant households and in relation to joint ventures established between claimants and different private sector partners