The needs of the land and the needs of the people cannot be separated
Arguments have tended to be over the land, but they are seldom about what it needs to remain healthy and productive
The national conversation about land, always simmering in SA, has come to the boil again. What is often missing is a voice for the unrepresented party — the land. I would like to be that voice. The arguments are always over the land, but seldom about what it needs to remain healthy and productive. The state of the land — its capacity to deliver benefits to people, such as food, water, amenities, cultural meaning and protection from hazards — is not independent of how it is managed. Unlike inert resources such as ore bodies, the rate at which living, renewable natural resources like grass, forests, animal populations and soil are used, greatly influences the amount that is ultimately delivered. They can provide a sustained flow of benefits forever if treated right, or collapse irreversibly if abused. How is this relevant to the political question of who owns the land? There are three points of connection: the tenure system, which determines the rights under which the land is managed;...
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Subscribe now to unlock this article.
Support BusinessLIVE’s award-winning journalism for R129 per month (digital access only).
There’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in SA. Our subscription packages now offer an ad-free experience for readers.
Cancel anytime.
Questions? Email helpdesk@businesslive.co.za or call 0860 52 52 00. Got a subscription voucher? Redeem it now.