Livelihoods, institutions and the small farmer - Institutional Constraints to Small Farmer Development in Southern Africa - page 291

have contributed in no small way to this situation. But it is also considered that excessive
regulation of the maize market by the statutory body, the National Maize Corporation
(NMC) has played a major role as an institutional constraint to the development of
the smallholder sector in that land-locked country. For instance, the NMC has the
sole responsibility to anticipate domestic maize demand based on which imports are
programmed. In turn, importation of maize can only be done upon receipt of an import
license which is not only costly but also involves very cumbersome processes.
The study established that the maize industry of Swaziland is uncompetitive and that this
situation gives rise to the serious distortions in the maize market. It was also observed
that the system features high degree of efficiency losses as a result of the misallocation
of resources in the economy. Prospects for any improvement look quite bleak. In 2009,
the maize production deficit remains high despite improvements in the rainfall levels and
timing. The chapter concludes by calling for a full deregulation of the maize market and
the dismantling of the statutory structures that currently manage the system. Implications
for effective food chain management are highlighted.
12.9 Land and natural resource management
The sub-theme of land and natural resource management is a crucial one in a discussion
of institutions and the African farmer. Land tenure systems relating to ownership patterns
and whether or not land can be alienated and under what conditions merely reflect the
significance attached to this resource by different societies. As can be seen quite easily,
the more land serves other than productive purposes, the less easily is alienation or sale
permitted. It is often the case that elaborate systems and mechanisms are created for
controlling the asset and ensuring that it remains within the society that owns it. It is a
question of group identity and survival. In fact, in certain societies, it is so important that
the traditional power élite has to hold it in trust for the rest of the community and no
person can have other than usufructuary rights of an asset that virtually represents the soul
of the society.
In South Africa, land remains an emotive issue. Commentators and researchers attribute
this to the history of land as a tool in the hands of settlers for creating economic and social
dichotomies in the country rather than its contribution to gross national output (Bundy,
1987; Mabin, 1991; Adams et al. , 2000, among others). Frost (1998) observes that to the
South African black, land has both territorial significance as well as symbolic power that
is intimately linked to their very identity as a people. Hence, the bitterness about forced
removals from their land, an action that was seen as a symbolic erasure of black identity
and insights (Frost, 1998). According to the Reconstruction and Development Programme
document (RDP), land is a 'basic need' of the people of South Africa (African National
Congress, 1994; Machete, 1995). The discussions about how to develop the smallholder in