The influence of policy on the roles of agriculture in South Africa

Figures & data

Policies relevant to agriculture in South Africa

Spheres	Policies	Targets
Macroeconomic policies	Monetary policy	Inflation targeting
	Fiscal policy	Revenues
		Expenditures
		Management of the budget deficit
		Privatisation
	Trade policy	Tariffs
		Bilateral and regional agreements
		Multilateral agreements
	Labour market policies	Conditions of employment
Agricultural sector policies	Marketing policy	Field crops
		Horticulture
		Livestock
	Land reform	Land restitution
		Land redistribution
		Tenure reform
	Public sector institutions	Agricultural finance
		Research and development
		Provincialisation (including development
		finance insitutions)
Social security policies	Education	Household food security
	Health	Poverty alleviation
	Housing
	Social security

The structural impact of agriculture on poverty and food security

Policies impacting on food security and Poverty	Impact on food security	Impact on poverty
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act No. 108 of 1996	South Africa is among some 20 countries where the right to food is enshrined in the Constitution. Section 27 states that every citizen has the right to access to sufficient food and water and that ‘the state must by legislation and other measures, within its available resources, avail to progressive realisation of the right to sufficient food’	There has seemingly been no impact on poverty, as there is no evidence of improvement for the poor. The lack of a definitive poverty line makes it impossible to determine and monitor the impact of transition over time
Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP)	Social schemes such as feeding schemes; free health for children under 6 years of, age, pregnant and lactating women; child support grants; pensions; food‐for‐work programmes; provincial community food garden projects; land reform; farmer settlement; production loan schemes for small farmers; infrastructure grants for small farmers; and the Presidential tractor mechanisation scheme. Little has changed in rural areas, where inadequate infrastructure increases transaction costs for farmers and constrains further development	Although access to basic services such as health, welfare, water electricity has been broadened and intensified, there is an urban bias in delivery, thus little evidence that poverty has decreased and that households are better off than before
Marketing of Agricultural Products Act, No. 47 of 1996	The NAMC report (ECI, 2002) shows that market deregulation has had little or no impact on household food insecurity and poverty for those who most need assistance. Small and emerging farmers have not benefited from either deregulation of markets or export opportunities. Fluctuating currency and an initial weak rand have led to a rise in food prices. Strengthening of the rand has not translated into reduced market prices for consumers	As for the food security impact
Water Rights and Water Act, No. 36 of 1998	This Act favours small‐scale producers and the provision of 600 kl of free water per household. The intensified provision of on‐site water to previously disadvantaged households and the free delivery of a basic quota have the potential to impact positively on household food security due to possible improved sanitation and food safety	Little impact has been achieved yet
Labour Relations Act, No. 66 of 1995	The introduction of new labour laws and minimum wage rates has seen the reduction of employment in the agricultural sector and increased mechanisation of commercial agriculture. This could spell food insecurity for agricultural labourers and their families	Poverty and unemployment have increased, although for some households, fixing a minimum wage may increase incomes. For many households, however, enforcement of minimum wages will lead to loss of employment
Basic Conditions of Employment Act, No. 75 of 1997
Skills Development Act, No. 97 of 1998
Employment Equity Act, No. 55 of 1998
Integrated Food Security Strategy (2002). The goal is to eradicate hunger and food insecurity by 2015, in line with the World Food Summit Goals of the Food and Agriculture Organisation	Prior to 2002, food security was seen as the nation's ‘Cinderella’. Due to the wide scope of food security there was a lack of agreement among government departments as to how to address the issue. Combined with no clear definition of what food security means, household subsistence was commonly labelled ‘food security’ and denied importance by the government. The latter did not want to be seen to support subsistence agriculture and petty informal activities associated with poverty	The poor are most vulnerable to economic, health and environmental shocks. South Africa lacks effective safety nets to protect and underpin the poor in times of rising prices, natural disasters and health shocks such as/entry HIV/Aids
	Prior to 2002, community garden projects were the focus of provincial food security programmes initiated by the Departments of Agriculture and Health. The NAMC study of the impact of market deregulation (ECI, 2002) identified cash in hand as a key component to improving food security. Driven by preparation for the World Food Summit and World Summit on Sustainable Development, the government has been able to link its strategic initiatives for improving incomes and generating employment to the need to move farm households towards commercialisation of production while underpinning the most vulnerable segments of the population. South Africa lacks a food security monitoring and evaluation system, as well as early warning systems and food aid strategies to cope with disaster. This makes the vulnerable more vulnerable in the wake of shocks
Land reform	The farmer settlement programme settled a large number of households on agricultural land. However, as most did not farm productive land was lost and the food security status of land reform participants worsened. While some households have been given land, land reform has shifted them into geographical positions where they have fewer opportunities for income generation and lack the skills to generate an income from agriculture. Whether households have moved to urban, peri‐urban or rural land reform settlements, the environments lack infrastructural support conducive to access to gainful employment or agricultural production. In fact, urban housing schemes provide plots far too small for even household food production	Land reform has not had a visible positive influence on poverty. Without securing land tenure, there is little possibility of improving rural livelihoods