As global land concentration rises, South Africa’s reform programme faces mounting pressure to deliver. Plaas researcher Nkanyiso Gumede breaks down how Colombian strategies, like restitution with redistribution elements, could help SA clear backlogs and support smallholder farmers.
The International Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ICARRD+20)held in Colombia from 24 to 28 February 2026 had important lessons for South Africa to better implement its land reform programme and benefit the poor and landless people.
The conference emphasised the need for land redistribution, restitution of land, recognition of rights and regulation of land ownership at the realisation of increasing land concentration and commodification of land at the expense of the environment, people’s livelihoods and security.
South Africa battles land inequality, spatial inequality, landlessness and the housing shortage crisis for the poor. In the world, the FAO report on the Status of Land Tenure Governance reveals that there is a high concentration of land ownership in the world, where the top 10% of the largest land holders in the world. They operate on average 56% of the agricultural land.
As that is the context in the world, South Africa’s attempt to transform property relations has delivered much progress. The land reform programme has redistributed only 11% of the 86 million hectares farm land since 1994. The average number of hectares redistributed has also been declining over the years, with both redistribution and restitution being at less than 100 000 hectares per annum as of the 2024/25 financial year, down from 938 278 hectares around the mid-2000s.
To make matters worse, land restitution claims lodged in 1998 have not all been concluded, while the claims lodged between 2014 and 2016, a second lodgment period, have not been touched. All this context necessitates that land redistribution be undertaken with speed and urgency, as Plaas’ current research on land justice shows that the only available option for poor people to access land is land occupations, as the land reform and the housing programme are failing to deliver land and housing at scale and with speed to meet the demand.
Related stories
- New land law seeks balance between rights and reform
- Land reform: New landholders could profit from wildlife
- CPA crisis: Non-compliance drags land reform down
Lesson 1: Restitution with redistribution elements
The first lesson is for South Africa to implement the restitution programme with redistribution elements. In Colombia, the people who are dispossessed or displaced from their land are provided with land acquired by the government, where they do not necessarily have an ancestral claim but have it elsewhere.
The government of Colombia presents them with an option to access that land instead of the land they have a historical claim to. This helps to enable access to land for those who have a historical grievance but are willing to be provided with land elsewhere.
The Presidential Advisory Panel on Agriculture and Land Reform in South Africa made a similar recommendation. Collecting data on who is open to such an option would enable the government to proactively acquire land and release that land to such communities at a much speedier process. This method must not, however, be a replacement for how restitution programmes are implemented, but as an additional available avenue.
Lesson 2: Willingness to subdivide farms where it’s appropriate to do so
The second lesson is the willingness to subdivide farms and allow for mixed farming on the farm. In one farm we visited as part of the academic conference, there was a portion where there was crop production, another portion for animal production, fish production, and processing. There was land under the control of each family, where they had decision-making autonomy on what to produce for their homestead.
There was also the commercial production part, where they produced for markets collectively. This all happened on one farm. They also have access to a market where they sell directly to the consumers for better gains instead of corporate value chains as price takers, often at their loss, as is the case in South Africa.
This, coupled with government-led procurement, could address market access challenges faced by land reform beneficiaries. This not only guarantees household food security but also revives rural economies when they sell directly to consumers at local markets in urban centres, who access food at low prices as farmers use agro-ecological methods of production. It also transforms food systems and ensures shorter value chains that deliver fresh and affordable food to the growing urban population and rural communities.
Lesson 3: Land expropriation must be used as one of many tools to benefit the poor and landless
Land delivery has been slow in South Africa. The declining land reform budget meant less land was acquired and redistributed.
South Africa has multiple land acquisition mechanisms, including purchase, land donations, and expropriation for land reform purposes. All these methods must be pushed so that more land is available to redistribute. In Columbia government expropriates and gives the land to the landless poor.
The lesson is for South Africa to use it, especially in instances where people have occupied land and buildings in urban areas for a long time, they cannot afford to buy their own home, and there is no beneficial use for the owner. Preliminary findings from ongoing Plaas research on land justices show that communities occupy where there is no beneficial use to the owner. This is where the state must intervene through expropriation and enable them access and tenure security.
Priority must be given to the poor and landless from the expropriated land. Expropriation must also deliver land to the smallholder farmers needing more land in urban spaces, farm dwellers, and landless people needing land for different needs, including housing.
Lesson 4: Demonstrable political will through providing a pro-poor vision and investment of more resources
One criticism that has been levelled against the land reform programme is the lack of a pro-poor vision and the lack of political will to deliver on the constitutional obligation of equitable access to land. The conference emphasised a need to shift from such towards strong, demonstrable political will characterised by a clear pro-poor vision and action.
There must be more investment in land reform, with a budget allocation of at least 1% of the total national budget. Investment should also be on a policy shift towards different conceptions of the value of land. The most urgent task for policymakers is to lead a process to elevate the social and ecological value of the land, as in Brazil.
Public land and property must be used to benefit the poor and landless who are the neediest. This should be done through the Equitable Access to Land Bill, expected to be released anytime this year. It must clearly indicate how land beneficiaries should be prioritised, with the poor and landless being the priority.
That is how equitable access to land can be achieved – inclusive land reform.
- Nkanyiso Gumede is a researcher at the Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies (Plaas). The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of Food For Mzansi.
READ NEXT: EC agripreneur turns pineapple waste into sanitary products
