Abstract

This article offers a critique of the presuppositions of the recommendations put forward in the World Bank's ‘Options for Land Reform and Rural Restructuring in South Africa’ 1993. It examines the documents which informed the proposals; the adequacy of their accounts of the experiences, notably of land reforms in Kenya, on which they draw; the strength of their evidence and arguments, particularly regarding agricultural performance and policies; and the feasibility and purposes of their proposals for land redistribution. It argues that the World Bank proposals rest on misleading intellectual foundations. The World Bank's analyses regarding the relative (in)efficiency of large‐scale farming in South Africa with respect to scale of production, factor productivity and prices are not supported by much of the evidence they cite. Their proposals revived aspects of the thinking behind the Swynnerton and Tomlinson reports of the 1950s. Government programmes to develop black farmers in South Africa in the late 198...

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.