CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1Land Rights and ReformsAfrican studies and sociopolitical issuesAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development

Socioeconomic implications of the proactive land acquisition strategy on beneficiaries in Mahikeng, South Africa

Open access
Yacim, Joseph Awoamim, Zulch, Benita G., Merafe, Boitshoko Grace, Partson, Paradza·2026·Real Estate Management and Valuation
DOI 10.2478/remav-2026-0008
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy (PLAS) was introduced to purchase land from white farmers and redistribute it to disadvantaged black farmers. Laudable as the scheme was in redressing historical injustice for marginalized people, the reality on the ground is a complicated story where ongoing socioeconomic difficulties may compromise the intended benefits. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the roles of the Department of Rural Development (DRD) in PLAS and assess the extent to which the beneficiaries of the scheme have used farmland with appreciable yields to enhance their social and economic wellbeing. A qualitative research approach with a case study design was employed to collect relevant data from the literature, public authorities and PLAS beneficiaries. The study revealed that the PLAS scheme unlocked land access for black populations, increased farm produce, alleviated hunger, created jobs, reduced poverty, promoted local economic development, and improved living standards despite minor glitches. The glitches included persistent paternalistic governance structures, poor economic empowerment and inadequate support services. Thus, it was concluded that PLAS beneficiaries could assist in achieving food security given the right environment and support. The study recommended that the government should scale up efforts to facilitate land access for disadvantaged groups and support them through increased awareness, training, and financial assistance. Future studies might consider using cost-benefit analysis to measure the relative cost in monetary terms from the scheme’s inception and compare it with the benefits of the PLAS scheme.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2478/remav-2026-0008

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In Mahikeng, PLAS beneficiaries had limited autonomy due to a lack of ownership, requiring departmental permission for farm improvements, which affected productivity and investment decisions.

    “Similarly, in Mahikeng, beneficiaries of the Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy (PLAS) had limited autonomy due to a lack of ownership, requiring departmental permission for farm improvements, which affected productivity and investment decisions [52].”

    From How Has South Africa's Land Reform Policy Performed from 1994 to 2024? Insights from a Review of Literature (2025) · cites this paper as [52]

    The Introduction says the state retains ownership rather than transferring it to beneficiaries, and the Conclusions say beneficiaries should obtain DRD permission before improving farm infrastructure. These passages support the limited-autonomy account, but the paper does not establish that the permission requirement affected productivity or investment decisions in Mahikeng. The indexed passages provide section labels but no page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In Mahikeng, PLAS beneficiaries with political ties secured large farms, whereas marginalized groups lacked access to credit and infrastructure.

    “In Mahikeng, PLAS beneficiaries with political ties secured large farms, whereas marginalized groups lacked access to credit and infrastructure [52].”

    From How Has South Africa's Land Reform Policy Performed from 1994 to 2024? Insights from a Review of Literature (2025) · cites this paper as [52]

    The Elite Capture Theory (section 2.1; page unavailable) says affluent PLAS farmers have disproportionately benefited from land allocations, and the Literature Review (section 3; page unavailable) describes vulnerable people being sidelined. But the paper does not establish that politically connected beneficiaries secured large farms in Mahikeng or that marginalized groups there lacked both credit and infrastructure. Its account of Mahikeng beneficiaries’ access to finance is mixed, rather than uniformly negative. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Youth-focused initiatives such as High Haven Farm and Batho Youth Empowerment illustrate the critical role of post-transfer training, infrastructure, and targeted support in enhancing local livelihoods.

    “Youth-focused initiatives such as High Haven Farm and Batho Youth Empowerment illustrate the critical role of post-transfer training, infrastructure, and targeted support in enhancing local livelihoods (Zantsi and Mgidi, 2025; Yacim et al., 2026).”

    From Over three decades of land distribution in South Africa: a review of progress, challenges and prospects (2026) · cites this paper as Yacim et al., 2026

    Section 5.2 says PLAS beneficiaries need training and support, including assessments of farm infrastructure and production needs after allocation. The Conclusions likewise recommend training, technical assistance, and infrastructure maintenance. Neither passage identifies High Haven Farm or Batho Youth Empowerment or establishes that these youth-focused initiatives enhanced local livelihoods. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Market-led approaches integrating infrastructure and market access generally produced higher per-hectare productivity, whereas supply-led programs such as PLAS and FALA expanded coverage but struggled with administrative bottlenecks and inconsistent post-transfer support.

    “Figure 2, demonstrates that market-led programs, integrating infrastructure and market access, achieved higher productivity per hectare, while supply-led programs covered larger areas and targeted marginalized groups but experienced implementation bottlenecks.”

    From Over three decades of land distribution in South Africa: a review of progress, challenges and prospects (2026) · cites this paper as Yacim et al., 2026

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Public-private partnerships, agri-hubs, and technical extension services demonstrate localised improvements in productivity, livelihoods, and food security, particularly when combined with gender- and youth-focused interventions.

    “Public-private partnerships, agri-hubs, and technical extension services demonstrate localised improvements in productivity, livelihoods, and food security, particularly when combined with gender- and youthfocused interventions (Zantsi and Mgidi, 2025; Yacim et al., 2026).”

    From Over three decades of land distribution in South Africa: a review of progress, challenges and prospects (2026) · cites this paper as Yacim et al., 2026

    Section 5.2 reports projects supported through partnerships with local agribusinesses, and the Conclusions recommend training and technical assistance. The paper also describes livelihood gains for some beneficiaries, but it does not show that partnerships, agri-hubs, or extension services produced the claimed combined improvements in productivity and food security, particularly alongside gender- and youth-focused interventions. The passages in our copy provide no page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT AND VALUATION -vol. 34, no. …, 2026 eISSN: 2300-5289 | Received 2025-05-24 | Revised 2025-09-05 | Accepted 2025-11-07
  2. Binswanger-Mkhize, H. P. (2014). From failure to success in South African land reform. African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 9(4), 253-269.
  3. Deninger, K., Lara, F., Maertens, M., & Olinto, P. (2000). Redistribution, investment and human capital accumulation: The case of agrarian reform in the Philippines. Proceedings World Bank Annual Conference on Developmental Economics, Washington, DC: April 2000.
  4. Dlamini, S. I. (2016). Transforming local economies through land reform: political dilemmas and rural development realities in South Africa (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation).
  5. Dorner, P. (1992). Latin American land reforms in theory and practice: A retrospective analysis. The University of Wisconsin Press.
  6. Holomisa, P. F. (2015). The importance of property rights in economic development. Pretoria: University of Pretoria (Unpublished Masters Dissertation).
  7. Kalabamu, F. T. (2011). Limits of incremental land tenure reforms in Botswana. In: Home, R. (Ed.), Local Case Studies in African Land Law. University of Pretoria Law Press (PULP), 117-136.
  8. Malatji, T. L. (2017). Challenges in the Implementation of Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy (PLAS) in Mopani District area, Limpopo Province (Doctoral Dissertation).
  9. Malatji, T. L. (2019). How critical is government commitment and support to successfully implement the land reform programme? A review of Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy in South Africa. Proceedings of the International Conference on Public Administration and Development Alternative. Johannesburg, 03- 05 July 2019.
  10. Masemola, M. (2021). Land reform: A comparison of Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy and Land Redistribution for Agricultural Development: The Case of Emalahleni Local Municipality (Doctoral Dissertation, University of the Free State).
  11. Mbandlwa, Z. (2023). Failures of black empowerment in agriculture in South Africa. Latin American Journal of Pharmacy, 42(1), 235-241.
  12. Mudau, J., Mukonza, R.M. and Ntshangase, B.A. (2018). A comparative overview of land reform experiences in Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa: A lesson that South Africa can learn from. Journal of Public Administration, 53(2-1), 580-601.
  13. Njaya, T., & Mazuru, N. (2010). Land reform process and property rights in Zimbabwe: Constraints and future prospects (1980- 2002). Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 12(4), 164- 185.
  14. Pilossof, R. (2012). The unbearable whiteness of being: Farmers voices from Zimbabwe. Weaver Press and UCT Press.
  15. Ranwedzi, E. N. (2013). The potential and limits of the Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy: land reform implementation in Gauteng Province of South Africa. MPhil Thesis, University of the Western Cape.
  16. Winters, O. J. (2014). The Botswana bushmen fight for water & land rights in the central Kalahari game reserve. Consilience: Journal of Sustainable Development, 13(1), 285-300.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Yacim, J. A., Zulch, B. G., Merafe, B. G., & Partson, P.
Affiliations
  • University of the Free State (ZA)
  • Department of Construction Economics , University of Pretoria , cnr Lynnwood Road and Roper Street , Hatfield , South Africa
  • School of Construction Economics and Management , University of the Witwatersrand , 1 Jan Smuts Avenue Braamfontein , Johannesburg , South Africa
ORCID
Venue
Real Estate Management and Valuation
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Published
2025-11-16
Volume
34
Issue
1
Pages
97-114
ISSN
  • 1733-2478 (ISSN-L)
  • 2300-5289
DOI
10.2478/remav-2026-0008
OpenAlex
W4416255753
Cited by
1
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 1
FWCI
0.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Real Estate Management and Valuation (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Land Rights and Reforms
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › African studies and sociopolitical issues
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Keywords
land redistribution, land acquisition, land access, socioeconomic outcomes, food security, poverty reduction, Black farmers, economic empowerment, Mahikeng

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review