IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/agreko/348214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Proposing a farm assessment toolkit: evaluating a South African land reform case study

Author

Listed:
  • Verschoor, Aart-Jan
  • Gandidzanwa, Colleta
  • Newby, Terence
  • Collett, Anneliza
  • Venter, Sonja

Abstract

The paper presents a robust, scientific evaluation method to determine the potential viability of a farm, compared to its current performance. The comparison informs recommendations for sustainable farm development. The process entails a stepwise analysis of land suitability, enterprise potential, infrastructure status, operator capacity, inherent limitations and external risks of the farm. An expert panel considers quantitative and qualitative data to establish suitable development measures. Applied to a land reform initiative, ±2000 farms entailing 1.86 million hectares were evaluated, detailing corrective measures for each farm. Roughly 59% of the evaluated farms were potentially commercial, but only 7% performed accordingly. Correlations between farmer capability and farm performance, as well as between infrastructure and performance, were evident, indicating that post-settlement support is vital. As risk and limitation scores increased, farm viability tended to decrease. The tool accurately determined viability based on available resources (natural and physical), resulting in evidence-based policy advice. The evaluation informed land reform policy recommendations, proposing more coordinated support to improve access to services. The tool would also be useful for farmers to reflect on enterprise performance. The visual, sequential nature of the evaluation facilitates sound decision-making. The tool has potential as a valid agricultural development evaluation instrument.

Suggested Citation

  • Verschoor, Aart-Jan & Gandidzanwa, Colleta & Newby, Terence & Collett, Anneliza & Venter, Sonja, 2023. "Proposing a farm assessment toolkit: evaluating a South African land reform case study," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 62(3-4), December.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:agreko:348214
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.348214
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/348214/files/Proposing%20a%20farm%20assessment%20toolkit%20%20evaluating%20a%20South%20African%20land%20reform%20case%20study.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.348214?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nawab Khan & Ram L. Ray & Ghulam Raza Sargani & Muhammad Ihtisham & Muhammad Khayyam & Sohaib Ismail, 2021. "Current Progress and Future Prospects of Agriculture Technology: Gateway to Sustainable Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-31, April.
    2. Xinshen Diao & Margaret McMillan & Dani Rodrik, 2019. "The Recent Growth Boom in Developing Economies: A Structural-Change Perspective," Springer Books, in: Machiko Nissanke & José Antonio Ocampo (ed.), The Palgrave Handbook of Development Economics, chapter 9, pages 281-334, Springer.
    3. Ludovic Temple & Danielle Barret & Genowefa Blundo Canto & Marie-Hélène Dabat & Agathe Devaux-Spatarakis & Guy Faure & Etienne Hainzelin & Syndhia Mathé & Aurelie Toillier & Bernard Triomphe, 2018. "Assessing impacts of agricultural research for development: A systemic model focusing on outcomes," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 157-170.
    4. Johann Kirsten & Charles Machethe & Talent Ndlovu & Pascalina Lubambo, 2016. "Performance of land reform projects in the North West province of South Africa: Changes over time and possible causes," Development Southern Africa, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 442-458, July.
    5. Liebenberg, Frikkie & Pardey, Philip G. & Kahn, Michael, 2010. "South African Agricultural Research and Development: A Century of Change," Staff Papers 56688, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    6. Siphe Zantsi & Jan C. Greyling, 2021. "Land redistribution in South Africa’s land reform policy: a better way to select beneficiaries," Agrekon, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 60(2), pages 108-127, April.
    7. Place, Frank, 2009. "Land Tenure and Agricultural Productivity in Africa: A Comparative Analysis of the Economics Literature and Recent Policy Strategies and Reforms," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1326-1336, August.
    8. Farai Mtero & Nkanyiso Gumede & Katlego Ramantsima, 2023. "Elite Capture in South Africa’s Land Redistribution: The Convergence of Policy Bias, Corrupt Practices and Class Dynamics," Journal of Southern African Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(1), pages 5-24, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Boubacar, Inoussa & Nene, Gibson, 2024. "Land to the landless: Does the type of approach matter?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    2. Emelia Mphande & Bridget Bwalya Umar & Chibuye Florence Kunda-Wamuwi, 2022. "Gender and Legume Production in a Changing Climate Context: Experiences from Chipata, Eastern Zambia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-17, September.
    3. Ghebru, Hosaena & Girmachew , Fikirte, 2017. "Scrutinizing The Status Quo: Rural Transformation And Land Tenure Security In Nigeria," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 264394, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    4. Lee, Jaebeom & Kim, Jongyun, 2024. "Modification of Hilhorst model for saturated extract electrical conductivity estimation of coir using frequency domain reflectometry sensors – A laboratory study," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 297(C).
    5. Nawab Khan & Ram L. Ray & Hazem S. Kassem & Muhammad Ihtisham & Badar Naseem Siddiqui & Shemei Zhang, 2022. "Can Cooperative Supports and Adoption of Improved Technologies Help Increase Agricultural Income? Evidence from a Recent Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-18, March.
    6. Congdon Fors, Heather & Houngbedji, Kenneth & Lindskog, Annika, 2019. "Land certification and schooling in rural Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 190-208.
    7. Mijiyawa,Abdoul Ganiou & Conde,Lancine, 2020. "Structural Change and Productivity Growth in Guinea," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9341, The World Bank.
    8. Colleta Gandidzanwa & Aart Jan Verschoor & Thabo Sacolo, 2021. "Evaluating Factors Affecting Performance of Land Reform Beneficiaries in South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-15, August.
    9. Giorgia Giovannetti & Elisa Ticci, 2013. "Biofuel Development and Large-Scale Land Deals in Sub-Saharan Africa," Working Papers - Economics wp2013_27.rdf, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
    10. Majiwa, Eucabeth Bosibori Opande & Lee, Boon & Wilson, Clevo, 2015. "Multi-lateral multi-output measurement of productivity: the case of African agriculture," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212769, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Kvartiuk, Vasyl & Herzfeld, Thomas, 2019. "Welfare effects of land market liberalization scenarios in Ukraine: Evidence-based economic perspective," IAMO Discussion Papers 186, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    12. Gottlieb, Charles & Grobovšek, Jan, 2019. "Communal land and agricultural productivity," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 135-152.
    13. Zhang, Shemei & Ma, Jiliang & Zhang, Liu & Sun, Zhanli & Zhao, Zhijun & Khan, Nawab, 2022. "Does adoption of honeybee pollination promote the economic value of kiwifruit farmers? Evidence from China," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 19(14), pages 1-14.
    14. Ali, Daniel Ayalew & Deininger, Klaus & Goldstein, Markus, 2014. "Environmental and gender impacts of land tenure regularization in Africa: Pilot evidence from Rwanda," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 262-275.
    15. repec:ocp:rpecon:rp_05-24 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Roy, Martin, 2019. "Elevating services: Services trade policy, WTO commitments, and their role in economic development and trade integration," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2019-01, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    17. Joachim N. Binam & Frank Place & Arinloye A. Djalal & Antoine Kalinganire, 2017. "Effects of local institutions on the adoption of agroforestry innovations: evidence of farmer managed natural regeneration and its implications for rural livelihoods in the Sahel," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 5(1), pages 1-28, December.
    18. Ngango, Jules & Hong, Seungjee, 2021. "Impacts of land tenure security on yield and technical efficiency of maize farmers in Rwanda," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    19. Gabriel Porcile & Giuliano Toshiro Yajima, 2019. "New Structuralism and the balance-ofpayments constraint," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 7(4), pages 517-536, October.
    20. Diao, Xinshen & Magalhaes, Eduardo & Silver, Jed, 2019. "Cities and rural transformation: A spatial analysis of rural livelihoods in Ghana," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 141-157.
    21. Ho, Hoang-Anh, 2021. "Land tenure and economic development: Evidence from Vietnam," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:agreko:348214. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeasaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.