PRESENTATION AND PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF CASES
4.2 THE DESCRIPTION OF CASES
4.2.3 Shemula Citrus Farming
Although South Africa is praised for democratic principles, certain sectors of the society are still oppressed and excluded from participation in significant public affairs. Women and youths are such oppressed sectors of the society (Banda, 2006; Mchakulu and Ezra, 2007). Complex socio-political contexts inhibit participation in the PPP by enfranchised stakeholders. The divergence of values and principles between traditional and democratic systems exacerbated the challenges for the PPP. This case study presents a project description, the PPP procedures and the PPP outcome.
4.2.3.1Description of the Shemula Citrus Farming
In 2004 Golden Frontier Citrus (GFC), in partnership with the Independent Development Cooperation (IDC), proposed citrus farming in Shemula area. Shemula is located on the western part of Phongolo River. This rural settlement of Nyawo Traditional Council falls under Jozini Local Municipality and the uMkhanyakude District Municipality. High levels of illiteracy and a high level of unemployment formed part of the social and economic landscape of the area (Statistics South Africa, 2001). The proposed development involved two phases of 500 hectares each and R55 million in capital investments per phase. Five homesteads occupied land in the project site. The remaining part of the land was used by local people for subsistence farming, livestock grazing and the collection of natural products (Institute of Natural Resources, 2005c).
From the outset, the project model involved the participation of local people in business ownership through a Community Trust and a Workers Trust. Further, the enterprise sought to benefit the local community through job creation and various business
Community Trust 12.5% and GFC 10%. In addition, the IDC intended to sell all its shares to the Workers Trust and Community Trust in the future (Institute of Natural Resources, 2005b). Six hundred job opportunities would be created during the establishment of the farm infrastructure and operations. Local Small, Micro and Macro Enterprise (SMMEs) would be contracted to provide the following service to the citrus farm: tractor hiring; irrigation; weed control; pruning; and the picking of fruit (Institute of Natural Resources, 2005b)
4.2.3.2Public Participation Process for the Shemula Citrus Farming
The proposed Shemula Citrus Farming required environmental authorisation. To meet this requirement the proponent employed the EAP to undertake the EA including the PPP. The EAP notified the IAAPs about the proposed development and the PPP through word of mouth and consultation with the local Induna. In addition, an advertisement was placed in Isolezwe Newspaper, traditional leaders made announcements and local people were invited to public participation meetings.
During the process of public participation, different forms of conflict arose among IAAPs. Rivalry occurred between supporters and non-supporters of the project. Non- project supporters became suspicious about the intention of commercial farming. This group of IAAPs expressed that farmers allegedly treated workers inhumanly and murdered them. Furthermore, there were fears of losing residential and subsistence agricultural land through the forced removals usually associated with spatial development. The local people were also concerned that the proponent visited and surveyed the proposed development site without their knowledge or consent. As a result of these perceptions, some IAAPs became reluctant to participate in the PPP. It emerged that local IAAPs were reluctant to participate in the PPP fearing that the authority would interpret this as acceptance of the proposed development project.
According to all interviewees, the Inkosi supported the project and had assured the proponent that he would coerce the community. This led to further animosity. Some
IAAPs stated that the Inkosi had been bribed by the proponent to impose the proposed development project. The conflict resulted in rumours, threatening the lives of Inkosi and Induna if they took further part in organising community meetings about the proposed development project. Fearing being drawn into further controversy, the local Induna became reluctant to discharge his responsibilities of organising community meetings. The Inkosi also began to become less involved in the project. This created a leadership void and the opportunity for a self-imposed leader emerged to fill the gap and take responsibility for organising community meetings. The self-imposed leader was against the proposed development project. With reference to meetings organised by the self- imposed leader, some interviewees indicated that there was no freedom for disagreement.
The participation by the youth of the area in the PPP was hindered by cultural values. The youth held different perceptions from the elderly people about the value of the proposed development project. The youth supported the proposed citrus farming project because it would create jobs and address problems of unemployment in the area. They perceived that commercial farming, rather than subsistence agriculture, was the best use of the available land. The elderly people argued that the local community have always relied on subsistence agriculture. In the minds of the elderly people, the proposed citrus farming threatened local livelihoods. The differences in perceptions resulted in the elderly people suppressing the youth from participating freely in the PPP. During public meetings and interviews, both youth and elderly people demonstrated great awareness of each other’s perceived status and roles.
The role of women in public meetings was limited. Observations in public meetings indicated that few women, compared to men, attended the public meetings. Also, the public participation minutes showed that fewer women spoke in public meetings compared to men. It is assumed that the limited role of women in the PPP was associated with the gender based discrimination of traditional patriarchal systems.
The power struggle and social inequalities between and among different groups of the community hindered the PPP. The PPP meeting minutes demonstrate that the EAP were
unsuccessful in negotiating with IAAPs to cooperate with the PPP. The lack of progress with the PPP resulted in the proponent deciding to withdraw the proposed development.
The PPP and EA were terminated before they could be completed.