Land reform failure: Ideas not the issue, delivery is

For years, land reform has struggled due to poor funding and weak delivery. We don’t need new ideas, we need to fix what’s broken and grow what’s already working, says Peter Setou, the CEO of the Vumelana Advisory Fund.

For decades, land reform in South Africa has been seen as a symbol of political intent, a rallying cry for justice, transformation and restitution. However, beyond the political slogans lies a more sobering reality: land reform has not been as successful as it should be, due to a myriad of factors. It is being strangled by under-resourcing, budget constraints and poor delivery mechanisms. In addition, too little attention has been given to enabling the productive use of land.

The recent report of the portfolio committee on land reform and rural development, on the 2025/26 annual performance plans and the budget of the department of land reform and rural development and its entities, reflected that South Africa is sitting on a slow-moving, underfunded and unsustainably structured land reform system. South Africa needs a robust conversation on how to address these challenges sustainably.

The department of agriculture, land reform and rural development (DALRRD) has a land restitution budget of R3.7 billion in 2025/26, a nominal 5% increase from last year, but a real-terms decline of 1.12%. Meanwhile, the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights is expected to settle just 281 land claims this year, down from 288 in 2024/25, and to finalise only 277.

At this rate, it will take 30 years to settle the estimated 5 719 outstanding claims, and that excludes the thousands of newer claims awaiting resolution after the 2014 lodgement window was reopened but later halted by the courts. We therefore need to explore innovative ways of funding land reform, which will require a broader conversation and buy-in from all key stakeholders.

More strikingly, the commission is functioning at just 51.7% of its approved staff capacity, with only 680 posts out of 1 447 filled. These bottlenecks need to be reviewed and addressed if we are to make meaningful progress.

Arguably, to settle all outstanding old-order land claims alone would cost an estimated R129 billion, according to Project Kuyasa – far beyond the Commission’s annual budget. In contrast, the Agricultural Land Holding Account (ALHA), the key trading entity meant to fund land acquisition, will spend just R1.1 billion in 2025/26. That’s a 22% nominal increase from last year, far short of the scale required.

Moreover, lease revenue under ALHA remains below expectations. Without predictable cash inflows or strong post-settlement support for beneficiaries, the sustainability of redistributed land is compromised from the outset.

Land reform and market distortion

There is a perception that land reform distorts the market. This is perhaps the most damaging perception of all, and it flies in the face of how land reform has actually unfolded. Contrary to popular belief, South Africa’s land reform is largely market-based. Programmes like the Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy (PLAS) and the valuer-deneral’s property assessments are designed to ensure that land is acquired at “just and equitable” prices, not according to arbitrary figures.

However, delays in valuation processes, lack of clarity in legislative mandates and bureaucratic inertia continue to hobble delivery. The office of the valuer-deneral, while steadily improving, still faces challenges around measurable targets, skills retention and systemic reform. In 2025/26, it will receive just R149 million – hardly sufficient, given its role in demonstrating the land reform value chain.

A different approach needs to be taken to address the challenges in the country’s land reform programme. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, the partnership-driven approach to land reform must be actively supported and scaled up.

The CPP model

Redistributing land is only one part of the equation; the bigger challenge is ensuring that land is used productively, creates value, and delivers real benefits to communities. This is where Community Private Partnerships (CPPs) have shown real results.

Through the CPP model, Vumelana has shown that a partnership-driven approach to land reform can play a crucial role in unlocking the potential in restituted land.

By aligning the interests of land reform beneficiaries and commercial partners, the CPP model enables the productive use of land with returns shared by the partners. Over the past decade, Vumelana has facilitated in excess of R1 billion in private investment, supported 26 partnerships through the CPP model, positively impacted more than 16 000 households and helped to create or preserve over 2 500 jobs.

This is not a theoretical concept. It is a tried-and-tested model, and it works – but it needs to be scaled up.

Focus should also be placed on institutional support and capacity building for both relevant government departments and for land reform beneficiary communities.

Governance challenges undermine CPAs’ productivity

The department of agriculture, land reform and rural development has acknowledged that many communal property associations (CPAs) continue to face serious governance challenges that undermine their ability to use land productively. These include weak or contested constitutions, unclear rules on membership qualification, poor record-keeping of land rights and the absence of succession planning. These issues are particularly pressing, given the ageing profile of many CPA members.

Effective capacity building within CPAs remains crucial, but progress is constrained by a combination of limited resources, logistical challenges and varying levels of organisational readiness. These constraints are compounded by the diverse socio-economic contexts in which CPAs operate, requiring more tailored and sustained forms of support.

Sustained support and tailored interventions are crucial to effectively address the capacity-building challenges facing CPAs.

Vumelana has developed a Communal Property Institution (CPI) Support Programme in response to these persistent capacity gaps. The CPI Support Programme was designed to strengthen governance and institutional performance among land reform beneficiaries. It recognises the important role that well-governed institutions play in attracting investment, creating employment opportunities and integrating land reform beneficiaries into the broader economy.

Looking ahead, South Africa doesn’t need to reinvent land reform. It needs to address the current blockages in the system, find what works and scale up land reform support programmes that have delivered results.

Peter Setou is the CEO of Vumelana Advisory Fund. 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.