Fenced in: Common property struggles in the management of communal rangelands in central Eastern Cape Province, South Africa

This paper takes as its starting point the assertion that current rangeland management in the central Eastern Cape Province (former Ciskei) of South Africa, is characterised primarily by an ‘open access’ approach. Empirical material drawn from three case-study communities in the region is used to examine the main barriers to management of rangeland as a ‘commons’. The general inability to define and enforce rights to particular grazing resourses in the face of competing claims from ‘outsiders’, as well as inadequate local institutions responsible for rangeland management are highlighted as being of key importance. These are often exacerbated by lack of available grazing land, diffuse user groups and local political and ethnic divisions. Many of these problems have a strong legacy in historical apartheid policies such as forced resettlement and betterment planning. On this basis it is argued that policy should focus on facilitating the emergence of effective, local institutions for rangeland management. Given the limited grazing available to many communities in the region, a critical aspect of this will be finding ways to legitimise current patterns of extensive resource use, which traverse existing ‘community’ boundaries. However, this runs counter to recent legislation, which strongly links community management with legal ownership of land within strict boundaries often defined through fencing. Finding ways to overcome this apparent disjuncture between theory and policy will be vital for the effective management of common pool grazing resources in the region.

Contested institutions? Traditional leaders and land access and control in communal areas of Eastern Cape Province, South Africa

The South African government has endeavoured to strengthen property rights in communal areas and develop civil society institutions for community-led development and natural resource management. However, the effectiveness of this remains unclear as the emergence and operation of civil society institutions in these areas is potentially constrained by the persistence of traditional authorities. Focusing on the former Transkei region of Eastern Cape Province, three case study communities are used examine the extent to which local institutions overlap in issues of land access and control. Within these communities, traditional leaders (chiefs and headmen) continue to exercise complete and sole authority over land allocation and use this to entrench their own positions. However, in the absence of effective state support, traditional authorities have only limited power over how land is used and in enforcing land rights, particularly over communal resources such as rangeland. This diminishes their local legitimacy and encourages some groups to contest their authority by cutting fences, ignoring collective grazing decisions and refusing to pay ‘fees’ levied on them. They are encouraged in such activities by the presence of democratically elected local civil society institutions such as ward councillors and farmers’ organisations, which have broad appeal and are increasingly responsible for much of the agrarian development that takes place, despite having no direct mandate over land. Where it occurs at all, interaction between these different institutions is generally restricted to approval being required from traditional leaders for land allocated to development projects. On this basis it is argued that a more radical approach to land reform in communal areas is required, which transfers all powers over land to elected and accountable local institutions and integrates land allocation, land management and agrarian development more effectively.