In his 12 October 2026 newsletter, President Ramaphosa announced that government is making approximately 2.5 million hectares of state-owned agricultural land available to black farmers, complete with title deeds. The initiative aims to address the historical imbalance in commercial agriculture, where black farmers currently account for only around 10% of production. The government also intends to support emerging farmers through mentorship, training and blended financing arrangements involving the Land Bank and commercial lenders. The broader objective is to expand agricultural production, improve food security, create employment and develop a new generation of black commercial farmers.
What interests me particularly is the transfer of title deeds, rather than merely leasing the land. While this gives emerging farmers the opportunity to build equity and access financing, it also raises important questions about what happens to that land when farmers default on their loans or decide to sell.
I genuinely hope that this initiative comes with safeguards against the sort of oligarchic land grabs we saw in Russia following the collapse of the Soviet Union. The privatisation of state assets there is a rather good example of how something intended to broaden ownership can end up concentrating wealth in the hands of a very small group of people.
Consider what happens when one of these emerging farmers needs financing. The land becomes collateral, which is a good thing, because access to capital is one of the biggest obstacles facing emerging farmers. But what happens when the farmer defaults?
If the lending institution can simply auction the property to the highest bidder, we could quite easily end up with established farmers, wealthy investors and politically connected individuals buying up land that was originally intended for redistribution.
I would argue that the transfer of these properties should come with conditions. If a farmer decides to sell, or the property is repossessed by a lending institution, the state or other qualifying farmers on the waiting list should have the first right to purchase it at a fair valuation. Perhaps a dedicated state institution, working alongside the Land Bank, could oversee this process. We need to ensure that farmers can still access finance and build equity without creating the conditions for the land to become concentrated in the hands of a few again.
Frankly, I also question the assumption that all this land should necessarily be used for large-scale commercial agriculture. Why not allocate a significant portion to smallholdings and homestead development? There is a lot to be said for giving people the opportunity to establish a home, grow some of their own food and develop small agricultural enterprises. Not everyone needs to become a commercial farmer.
I think we need to consider what we actually want to achieve through land reform. Is the objective simply to create more black commercial farmers, or should we also be looking at how land can be used to give a much larger portion of the population some degree of economic independence?
Both are worthwhile objectives, but they don’t necessarily require the same approach.