Agric. Econ. - Czech, 2020, 66(1):46-54 | DOI: 10.17221/120/2019-AGRICECON

Land redistribution and the South African economyOriginal Paper

Julius Mukarati*,1, Itumeleng P. Mongale1, Godswill Makombe2
1 School of Economics and Management, University of Limpopo, Petersburg, South Africa
2 Gordon Institute of Business Science, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

Land redistributive policies can be viewed as effective tools for reducing rural poverty mainly because agriculture continues to be a major source of rural livelihood and a contributor to rural economic growth. For the structural changes and economy-wide impacts, including behavioural changes of rural land distribution, to be assessed and captured through time, a South African Social Accounting Matrix can be used as a database to construct a dynamic computable general equilibrium simulation model to simulate the potential impact on household welfare in South Africa. This study seeks to assess how government redistributive policies may affect household welfare in short- and long-run, focusing on poverty and income distribution in South Africa by applying a dynamic computable general equilibrium microsimulation model. The results showed that rural land distribution increases poor household income through an increase in factor by an average of 0.828. However, for most macroeconomic variables, the impact is negative in the short-run with a gradual increase in the long-run. The results support the claim that rural land distribution coupled with agriculture investment and government support can be effective in improving household welfare.

Keywords: computable general equilibrium; income inequality; micro-simulation; poverty reduction

Published: January 31, 2020  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Mukarati J, Mongale IP, Makombe G. Land redistribution and the South African economy. Agric. Econ. - Czech. 2020;66(1):46-54. doi: 10.17221/120/2019-AGRICECON.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Ahmed V., O'Donoghue C. (2010): External shocks in a small open economy. Lahore Journal of Economics, 15: 45-90. Go to original source...
    2. Annabi N., Cisse F., Cockburn J., Decaluwe B. (2005): Trade liberalization, growth and poverty in Senegal: a dynamic CGE micro simulation model analysis. CIRPEE Working Paper 05-12. CIRPEE. Go to original source...
    3. Bernstein H. (2013): Commercial agricultural in South Africa since 1994: Natural, simply capitalism: Journal of Agrarian Change, 13: 23-46. Go to original source...
    4. Bhorat H., Kanbur R. (2006): Poverty and Well-Being in PostApatheid South Africa. An Overview of Data, Outcomes and Policy. Pretoria, HSRC Press. Go to original source...
    5. Boccanfuso D., Decaluwe B., Savard L. (2006): Poverty, income distribution and CGE microsimulation modeling: does the functional form of distribution matter? Journal of Economic Inequality, 6: 149-184. Go to original source...
    6. Borras S. (2006): Redistributive land reform in "public" (forest) lands? Lessons from the Philippines and their implications for land reform theory and practice. Progress in Development studies, 6: 123-145. Go to original source...
    7. Boyce J., Rosset P., Stanton E. (2005): Land reform and sustainable development. Working Paper Series No. 98. Amherst, University of Massachusetts.
    8. Chimhowu A. (2006): Tinkering on the Fringes? Redistributive Land Reforms and Chronic Poverty in Southern Africa. CPRC Working Paper No. 58. Chronic Poverty Research Centre. Go to original source...
    9. Chitiga M., Mabugu R., Kandiero T. (2007): A CGE micro simulation analysis of the impact of trade policies on poverty in Zimbabwe. Working Paper Series 2007-15. Pretoria, University of Pretoria.
    10. Ciamarra U.P. (2003): State-led and market-assisted land reforms: History, theory and insight from the Philippines. Paper presented at the V111 Spring Meeting of Young Economists. Leiven, Belgium.
    11. Civardi M., Pansini R.V., Lenti R.T. (2010): Extensions to the multiplier decomposition approach in a SAM framework: An application to Vietnam. Economic Systems Research, 22: 111-128. Go to original source...
    12. Cockburn J., Decaluwe B., Robichaud V. (2004): Trade Liberalization and Poverty: A CGE Analysis of the 1990s Experience. Poverty and Economic Policy Network, TM.
    13. Cockburn J., Corong E., Cororation C. (2010): Integrated computable general equilibrium microsimulation approach. International Journal Microsimulation, 3: 60-71. Go to original source...
    14. Cockburn J., Dissoou Y., Duclos J.Y., Tiberti L. (2011): Economic Studies in Inequality, Social Exclusion and WellBeing. Springer.
    15. de Janvry A. (2002): World poverty and the role of agricultural technology: Direct and indirect effects. Journal of Development Studies, 38: 1-26. Go to original source...
    16. Decaluwe B., Martens A. (1988): CGE modelling and developing countries. A concise empirical survey of 73 application to 26 countries. Journal of Policy Modeling, 10: 4. Go to original source...
    17. Decaluwe B., Dumont J.-C., Savard L. (2000): Measuring poverty and inequality in CGE MODEL. Working Paper 99-20. Quebec, Centre de recherché eneconomie et finance appliqués, Universe Laval.
    18. Deininger K., Binswanger H. (1999): The evolution of the World Bank's land policy principles, experience and future challenges. World Bank Research Observer, 14: 247-76. Go to original source...
    19. Deininger K. (1999): Making negotiated land reform work: Initial experience from Colombia, Brazil, and South Africa. Policy Research Working Paper 2040. Washington, D.C., World Bank. Go to original source...
    20. Deininger K. (2003): Land policies for growth and poverty reduction. World Bank Report.
    21. Deninger K., Lara F., Maertens M., Olinto P. (2000): Redistribution, investment and human capital accumulation: The case of agrar:ian reform in the Philipines. Proceedings World Bank Annual Conference on Developmental Economics, Washington, DC: April 2000.
    22. Department for International Development (DFID) (2003): Growth: Building jobs and prosperity in developing countries. London, DFID.
    23. Dervis K., de Melo J., Robinson S., Dervis K. (1989): General equilibrium models for development policy (English). A World Bank Research Publication. Washington, DC, World Bank.
    24. Du Toit (2005): Trends and policy challenges in the rural economy. South Africa, Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies.
    25. Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) (2004): Poverty in South Africa, extent of access to food and income. HSRC annual Report 2004/2005. Pretoria, HSRC.
    26. Internatinal Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) (2001): The challenge of ending rural poverty. IFAD Rural Poverty Report. London, IFAD.
    27. Keswell M., Carter M.R. (2014): Poverty and land redistribution. Journal of Development Economics, 110: 250-261. Go to original source...
    28. Lahiff E., Cousins B. (2005): Smallholder agriculture and land reform in South Africa. Institute of Development Studies Bulletin, 36: 127-131. Go to original source...
    29. Lahiff E. (2007): State, market or worst of both? Experimenting with market-based land reform in South Africa. Occassional Paper No. 30 - Programme for Land and Agrarian Studies. Republic of South Africa, University of Western Cape.
    30. Lofgren H., Diaz-Bonilla C. (2005): Economy wide simulation of Ethiopia MDG Strategies. Washington, DC, DECPG, World Bank.
    31. Mabugu R. (2001): Short run effects of tariff reform in Zimbabwe: Applied general equilibrium analysis. Journal of African Economies, 10: 174-190. Go to original source...
    32. Marais H. (1998): South Africa: Limits to Change: The Political-Economy of Transition. London, Zed Books.
    33. May J. (2002): Growth, development, poverty and inequality. In: May J. (ed.): Poverty and Inequality in South Africa: Meeting the Challenge. Cape Town, Zed Books.
    34. May S. (2000): The empirical analysis of the China's public capital and the growth of the private-sector. Economic Sciences, 6: 21-26.
    35. Pansini R.V. (2008): Multiplier decomposition, poverty and inequality in income distribution in a SAM framework: The Vietnamese case. MPRA paper 13182. Munich, University Library of Munich.
    36. Pyatt G., Round J. (2006): Multiplier effects and the reduction of Poverty. In: de Janvry A., Kanbur R. (eds): Poverty, Inequality and Development: Essays in Honour of Erik Thorbecke. New York, Springer. Go to original source...
    37. Seekings J., Nattrass N. (2005): Class, Race and Inequality in South Africa. South Africa, Yale University Press. Go to original source...
    38. Statistics SA (2009): International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) 2009 Social Accounting Matrix (SAM). [Dataset]. IFPRI.
    39. Van den Brink R., Thomas G., Binswanger H., Bruce J., Byamugisha F. (2006): Consensus, confusion and controversy: Selected land reform issues in sub-Saharan Africa. Working Paper No 71. Washington, DC, World Bank. Go to original source...
    40. Weiner D., Levin R. (1993): The agrarian question and politics in the new South Africa: Review of African political economy. The Politics of Recontrustion in South Africa, Mozambique and the Horn: 29-45. Go to original source...
    41. World Bank (2003): Inequality in Latin America and the Caribbean. World Bank Latin American and Carribbean Studies. World Bank.
    42. World Bank (2006): Enhancing agricultural innovation: How to go beyond the strengthening of research systems. World Bank Report. World Bank.
    43. Zahir A. (1975): Land Reform in South East Asia. New Delhi, Orient Longman LTD.
    44. Zarin H.A., Bujang A.A. (1994): Theory on land reform: An overview. Buletin Ukur, 5: 9-14.
    45. Zhang Y., Wan G.H. (2004): Liquidity constraint, uncertainty and household consumption in China. Applied Economics, 36: 2221-2229. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content