Ensuring Food Security into the Future
South Africa's present and future food production and food security needs can be met, if are able to deal with our past and build on it the future envisaged in the Freedom Charter. Land reform is about dealing with our ugly past and trying to build a future for all the people of South Africa.
Nelson Mandela in his wisdom advised us, in particular the previously disadvantaged, that,"Africans must recall the terrible past so that we can deal with it, forgiving where forgiveness is necessary but not forgetting."
We must, as he warned, "change South Africa from a country in which the majority lived with little hope, to one in which they can live and work with dignity, with a sense of self esteem and confidence in the future."
Black South Africans were dispossessed of their land. This left them deskilled as their relation with land was destroyed. Resulting from this dispossession, 82 million hectares of agricultural land is owned by 35000 commercial farmers. The black majority, who constitute at least over 80% of the country's population, own about 10% of productive land. This is both desperate and unacceptable. We must change it and ensure that there is a sense of belonging together and working for common prosperity.
For us to reverse this pattern, commercial farmers must accept that change is necessary. They must participate as architects, rather than victims, of such change. They must contribute towards determining their destiny instead of being passive until change is imposed on them. They must appreciate that black South Africans want to access land and have the desire to be as productive as possible.
We must all accept that, as a result of land dispossession, its consequences and the legacy, Blacks will begin from a small base in land and agricultural development. Their growth into large scale farming is a future outcome, following from a particular development path. Farmers contribute proportionate to their produce, irrespective of the size of the farm. Therefore, the size of the farm cannot be used as an argument to suggest a threat to food production.
Similarly, the proposition that advocates for a consolidation into mega-farms as the only route to follow, also lack objectivity. This argument is most probably applicable to those who already own land. However, the landless continue to yearn and thirst for access. Consolidation for them is a later consideration.
Skills development and mentorship is greatly required at this level. We should quantify the number of graduates who are in the various disciplines of agriculture in different institutions of higher learning. We must quantify the number of diplomats from the agricultural colleges. Then we must monitor their movement.
The Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries must have more agriculture professionals than administrative staff. As with other departments, such as Health and Education, it should seek a balance in the ratio between technical and administrative staff. Agriculture professionals must be jealous of their discipline. This can go a long way in improving the services to farmers and, thereby, improve food production. The beneficiaries will always be projected as failure if land redistribution is not backed by professional support services.
Established farmers should supplement such programmes with mentorship, because theory would never surpass such practical experience. This is necessary even if it means government should fund the mentorship programmes where they are quantifiable.
Lastly, it is important for the emerging farmers not to relegate themselves into mere breeders and producers. They have an interest and contribute to the whole value chain. Stock farmers must take an active interest in feedlots as shareholders. The same should be the case with abattoirs.
Agriculture is an economic sector wherein there are business opportunities. The debate should be expanded beyond farming to include business in agriculture. Such an approach will ensure progress as we see in mining. At the point the Mining Charter was drafted, the industry described it as a threat to investor confidence. Yet, today, 19% of that sector is in black hands. The management structure has changed visibly; with 26.5% in core and critical skills, 21.8 of junior management, 19.2% of middle management, 13.9% of senior management and 11.9% of top management. When an industry that was almost a mini-state in 1994 can be changed, what could stop us from transforming the agricultural as a sector?
Let us commit ourselves. Let us drive change. As it is often said, we must "be the change we want to see".
>> Gwede Mantashe is ANC Secretary General.
This article first appeared in ANC Today, the online newsletter of the African National Congress.
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter
