CHAPTER THREE: TRACING THE DEVELOPMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES IN POST-1994 SOUTH AFRICA
3.3 RURAL AREAS IN POST-1994 SOUTH AFRICA
84 the homeland regions experienced absolute poverty as they had limited access to essential resources to satisfy their basic needs. In addition, Black people suffered from political and economic exclusion and lack of freedom of movement, which deprived them of the freedom to influence their world politically and economically.
Rural poverty and state of rural development in the pre-1994 era are therefore directly linked to the Acts which the colonial and apartheid regimes used to enforce racial segregation. The 1913 Natives Land Act is the major cause of rural poverty as it contributed to the collapse of the reserves’ economy in the 1930s and made it very difficult for many people in rural areas to sustain their livelihoods (Molapo, 1987). The migrant labour system that developed as a result of racial and territorial segregation caused the disintegration of families in rural areas and amplified rural poverty. Furthermore, the consequences of racial and territorial segregation are that, fewer resources were committed to the homeland regions, a situation that resulted in inadequate infrastructure and poor service provision in rural areas. Finally, the non-committal of resources to develop rural infrastructure, as well as the political, economic and social exclusion of Black people in rural areas, undermined rural development and entrenched rural poverty in the homeland regions.
85 The homeland system was unique to South Africa because it was designed to achieve the agenda of racial and territorial segregation, and to accommodate the various African ethnic groups.16 To this end, the Native Administration Act (Act No. 38 of 1927) formed the foundation of how Black populations were to be governed in South Africa during the colonial era. The Act (Act No. 38 of 1927) gave the “Govenor Genral of the Union of South Africa powers to appoint traditional chiefs and headmen who were willing to cooperate with the government in the administration of their areas” (Changuion and Steenkamp, 2012:157). In this regard, traditional authority became entrenched to the extent that it remains part of the characteristics of rural areas in South Africa. The unique situation of rural areas in South Africa is succinctly described in the policy document, The Integrated Sustainable Rural Development of 2000:
“The demographics of rural South Africa reflect past policies and the hurdles impeding efforts of rural people to maintain intact families. The legacy of former homeland system is one of enduring planned and deliberate poverty. Because of the past policies, rural South Africa also has high density population areas and dislocated settlements where people live in abject poverty. Many rural people live in these ghettos isolated from economic opportunities, necessitating high costs of transport for jobs and to accomplish basic tasks of daily life” (ISRDS 2000:7).
The understanding of the concept of rural areas in South Africa became complex in the post- 1994 era because of a change in territorial demarcations. The freedom of movement afforded by multi-racial democracy also resulted in scores of people relocating from the former homelands regions to the periphery of cities and small towns in search of opportunities. The development of this new phenomenon brought confusion to the concept of rural areas to the extent that it became difficult in policy documents whether to classify these new settlements as rural in the traditional sense or not. However, the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, which is the supreme law of the land provides for three spheres of government namely:
national, provincial and local governments (Mokgopo, 2020:107). In terms of the Constitution, the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act (Act No. 27 of 1998) was adopted to give effect to Section 155 of the Constitution which prescribes how the various categories of municipalities are to be established. As a result, the Municipal Demarcation Bpard (MDB) was
16 Rural areas in South Africa are concentrated in the former homeland regions that include: the former Transkei and Ciskei which are now part of the Eastern Cape Province, KwaZulu which is now part of KwaZulu-Natal Province, KwaNdebele and KaNgwane which are now part of Mpumalanga Province, Lebowa, Venda and Gazankulu which are now part of Limpopo Province, Bophuthatswana which is now the North West Province, and Qwaqwa which is part of the Free State Province (Stats, 2003; Presidency, 2009).
86 established in terms of the Act (Act No. 27 of 1998). The MDB is described as a “juristic person, independent, impartial and must perform its function without prejudice, fear or favour”
(Section 3 of Act No. 27 of 1998). The most important function of the MDB is to determine the dermacation of the boundaries of the three categories of municipalities (Category A, B and C) (Jeeva and Cilliers, 2021:84; Mokgopo, 2020:108). According to SALGA (2018:4), the main reason for demarcating the boundaries of municipalities in the post-apartheid era is “to create a more coherent, rational, non-racial and integrated system of municipal government with municipalities encompassing single tax bases”. However, the reality on the ground shows that the majority of people in municipalities that fall under the former homeland regions continue to face similar challenges, such as lack of infrastructure and poor service delivery, as those in the former traditional rural dwellings.
Although the literature on demarcation in South Africa refers to the three spheres of government rather than urban or rural areas, a survey of government documents on rural development in the post-1994 era reveals some inconsistences and confusion in the terminology used to distinguish between rural and urban areas. For example, the 1996 Census, (Stats SA 1996) makes reference to urban and non-urban areas only. Other reports by the CSIR (2007), the Presidency (2009) and Vink and Van Rooyen (2009) use a different terminology as well, with such words as metropolitan (metro) and non-metropolitan used to distinguish between areas depending on the size of the population and the level of economic activities in the area in question. More interestingly, former Bantustans/homelands are used specifically in reference to rural areas without indicating their geographical proximity to cities or urban centres or what category of municipality they fall under. This researcher contends therefore that, in addition to defining rural areas as areas with low populations in the countryside, the aspect of traditional authority should be integrated into the definition of rural areas in South Africa where chiefs and headmen still play a key role in the administration of communal land.
Traditional leaders have a great influence on development interventions under their jurisdiction and their cooperation in decision making and implementation processes remains an imperative.
Although rural areas in South Africa are historically located in the former homelands regions, it is inaccurate and misleading to confine the term to those regions alone. This is because the transformation of local government after apartheid was guided by two basic points which are:
the re-demarcation of municipal boundaries and removal of the administrative distinction between urban and rural areas. This was done to create inter-linkages between urban centres
87 and the countryside in order to pave the way for greater integration between both. The traditional rural areas that had been historically excluded would benefit from the inter-linkages created between urban centres and the countryside. The re-demarcation exercise in post-1994 South Africa resulted in the distinction between urban areas and rural areas that is based on classification of municipalities. According to Section 155 (1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act No. 108 of 1996), there are three categories of municipalities in South Africa.17
The three categories do not distinguish between rural and urban areas. However, the following table clearly makes the distinction between the different municipalities and the category to which they belong for easy analysis.
Table 4: Classification of Municipalities into Categories for Analysis
Class Characteristics Number of
Municipalities per Category
Metros Category A municipalities 8
Secondary Cities (B1) All local municipalities referred as secondary cities 19 Large towns (B2) All local municipalities with an urban core. There is huge
variation in population sizes amongst these municipalities and they do have a large urban dwelling population.
27
Small towns (B3) They are characterised by a small town as the core urban settlement. Typically, these municipalities have a relatively small population, a significant proportion of which is urban and based in one or more small towns. Rural areas in this category are characterised by the presence of commercial farms, as these local economies are largely agriculturally based. The existence of such important rural areas and agriculture sector explains its inclusion in the analysis of rural municipalities.
108
Mostly rural (B4) These are characterised by the presence of at most one or two small towns in their areas, communal land tenure and villages, scattered groups of dwellings and are typically located in former homelands.
72
17 The municipalities are constitutionally classified as: Category A, which are municipalities with exclusive municipal and legislative authority; Category B, which consist of local municipalities that share municipal executive and legislative powers in its area with category C municipality in whose area it falls, and Category C municipalities that have municipal executive and legislative authority in areas that include more than one municipality (Act No. 108 0f 1996, section 155(1)).
88 Districts (C1) District municipalities that are not water service providers 23
District (C2) District municipalities that are water service providers 21
Source: Stats South Africa (2016) As noted in the Table above, rural areas fall under category B3 and B4. None of the municipalities classified under B3 have any large town as their core as they have small towns and commercial farms that serve as the back-bone of their economies. A significant part of the population in these areas resides in the small towns. A smaller proportion of the population resides in rural areas that are basically located on the farms. The municipalities classified under B4 constitute most of the traditional rural areas that are located in the former homelands. There are a few small towns in these areas that provide minimal economic support and services. The majority of the population under B4 municipalities reside in villages in which traditional leaders still exercise great influence in decision-making processes and development. According to the Local Government Budgets and Expenditure Review (LGER) report (2011), rural municipalities classified under B3 and B4 are concentrated in KwaZulu-Natal, Eastern Cape, Northern Cape and Limpopo provinces respectively. However, a few of the rural municipalities are also found in the Free State, North West, Mpumalanga and the Western Cape provinces.
Although the constitutional classification of municipalities into three categories helps to distinguish between urban and rural municipalities, it does not clarify what constitutes a rural area in the post-apartheid era. However, the DRDLR (2010:4) defines “rurality” as “a way of life, a state of mind and a culture which revolves around land, livestock, cropping and community”. The DRDLR’s definition includes all traditional communal areas, farmlands, peri-urban areas, informal settlements and small towns where people can live from the land (2010). Land is conspicuously central to rural life as a source of livelihood, and a base for developing rural economies. However, its use and value varies for those in the peri-urban settlements and small towns who need it for residential purposes rather than for farming. The definition of “rural” as articulated by the DRDLR (2010) does not address the two issues of communal land tenure and traditional authority which are specific to tradional rural areas.
Other characteristics of rural areas notwithstanding, land tenure and traditional authority clearly distinguish rural areas from urban areas or cities where traditional authority has no relevance and land is privately owned. The demarcation of municipal boundaries and categorisation of municipalities into three (Category A, B and C) is silent on these issues.
89 Although the issue of integration was intended to create beneficiary linkages between urban and rural areas, it made the definition of rural areas more complicated. For example, peri-urban areas and informal settlements are largely the result of rural people migrating to urban areas and big towns in search of economic opportunities. Such informal settlements cannot be classified as rural because their way of life is more urban than rural. As already argued, the use and value of land is different in the peri-urban and informal settlements from the rural areas where land is used for farming and communal purposes. Notwithstanding, a definition and classification of rural areas based on specific characteristics is essential for developing appropriate policies and intervention strategies in order to tackle the problem of rural poverty and rural development in post-apartheid South Africa.