This section provides findings of the study building up to conclusions. The findings and conclusions are aligned with the research objectives, which demonstrate how the analysis accomplished its objectives.
Finding one: 1hh1ha implementation processes and procedures
There are systems in place to guide the implementation of the 1hh1ha projects however, there are challenges identified making it difficult the implement the projects. Most of the challenges emanating from the length of time it takes for a project to be approved by the relevant approval structures which are considered by the participants to be over bureaucratic. However, the 1hh1ha policy framework does not provide any timeframe for each of the processes/steps identified in figure 2.3 of this study. “Most projects overlap to more than one financial year,” some of the participants conceded. “Ideally, a project begins and finish in one financial year to avoid cost escalation,” another participant pointed out. Apart from that is that the different approval
103
structures have to contradict views in matters relating to the projects leading to drag in the implementation of the project.
Conclusion
Based on these findings, it is conclusive that there are challenges hindering the implementation of the projects. Challenges vary from bureaucratic processes, different interpretation of policies and the length of time it takes for a project to receive funding. It is also conclusive that the approval structures make a financial alteration to funding needs which ultimately deter the project path.
Conclusion
In the community structures, it is conclusive that the fading roles of some to the key leaders are challenges as well as the failure to meet by key community leaders due to financial reasons are also deterrents to the projects as stated in matrix 8.
Finding two: Factors that facilitates or hinders social cohesion in 1hh1ha projects
Factors that facilitate social cohesion
The data shows that there are limiting factors which facilitate social cohesion in 1hh1ha projects, the officials of the department rely on the policy frameworks and programme principles as guidance to implement 1hh1ha projects. The fact that some communities where 1hh1ha projects ought to be implemented, already have shared visions and goals, making it easier for the officials to facilitate the processes towards the implementation of the projects. However, trust and cooperation also play a vital role in this.
Conclusion
As illustrated in matrix 7-10, is therefore conclusive that the officials of the Department follow the concepts of the programme as a guiding principle towards the implementation of the projects.
However, officials may have a different interpretation of the concept of the project/programme so as the communities where these project ought to be implemented, however, the different layers of approval structures make interpretation of the concept to have one coherent meaning.
Factors that hinder social cohesion
The farmers raised a number of factors that hinder social cohesion in their communities. It is evident from the data that the communities are highly complex in nature due to their diversity in
104
views and otherwise. Policy problems are in turn a major cause for hindering social cohesion. If policies have too many grey areas, they ought to confuse people or be interpreted differently.
Conclusion
Therefore it is concluded that the problems areas emanate from policy problems where there are grey areas, delays in releasing land for agriculture, development of land restored to people, different interpretation of policies and the widening generational gaps as demonstrated in matrix 11-20.
Finding three: opportunities for improvement of rural development strategy
The government needs to realize the low hanging fruits such as developing land that was restored to the people through the governments’ restitution programme. This is because the land is an issue in South Africa and when there are people who already have land, they could be easily assisted as opposed to people who still need the land for agricultural development.
Government and civil sector society still need to develop advocacy programmes to address issues of rural development. The lack of intervention by government institutions and the private sector in support of rural development initiatives pose a risk in coordinating rural development. It was established that some of the local municipalities where these projects are under did not provide any assistance even though when they were approached by the would-be beneficiaries. It also emerges that the government still uses top-down approaches when in fact bottom-up approach is much needed to address the communities’ current needs as opposed to government priorities.
Rural development needs to be coordinated between the sectors while the communities are also involved in their development.
It also emerged from the data that farmers are battling the effects of climate change to survive in their farming business. However, the farmers are using some methods to sustain their agricultural businesses.
Conclusion
The findings reveal that the government needs to coordinate rural development between public and private sector to address the needs of the people on the ground as revealed in matrix 21-24 of this study. Coordinating rural development requires the application of the Intergovernmental Relations Act (IGR) and public-private partnerships. However, the community must champion their own development rather than government or any of the role players in rural development in the Southern Africa context. It is concluded that the agricultural community are directly affected
105
by climate change and that the government must intervene through financial support to sustain agricultural businesses.
Findings four: recommendations to enhance the existing knowledge and practices in agriculture and rural development
The data shows that the Department needs to benchmark agricultural practises and adapt it to the context of communities it is developing. It also emerges that the use of agricultural experts should be intensified. Data also reveal that the farmers who are assisted in agricultural production are not educated about saving the seeds for future planting.
Data also reveal that the current project funding model does not suit most of the projects and that there are poor project planning and skewed beneficiation.
Conclusion
It is conclusive that there is a need for more research and benchmarking of best agricultural practises from other countries as specified in matrix 25 and 26, however, adapting those practices to communities is even more important. This also relates well with the funding models which also needs a lot of attention to address the people needs.