Contested Space: Climate Change Adaptation in South African Agriculture

The politics of land reform is a constant feature in the political landscape of South Africa. Historic grievances, poverty, and food insecurity combine for a potent discourse, which has led to ineffective government policy. Land reform has a clear documented impact on peacebuilding. What is less certain is its impact on successful climate change adaptation, particularly the growing problem of water scarcity. South Africa is currently suffering from its worst drought since records began and its warming climate combined with its semi-arid environment renders it prone to limitations in the water supply, which is a scarce resource that is overused by current agricultural practices. South Africa's dualistic agricultural sector — often framed as agri-business and small-scale farmers — is at the forefront of climate change vulnerability and adaptation efforts. However, the prism of land reform continues to direct climate adaptation discourse in South Africa.

Adapting to climate change is an important tool in building community resilience, defined as addressing the consequences of climate change through investment in climate resilience and transforming communities in response to climate and its effects. The case for adaptation to agricultural practices in African countries is very strong, as adaptation builds resilience into the societal structures to help deal with projected climate events.

Agricultural Adaptation Methods

South Africa's dualistic agricultural sector is a legacy of the political economy during the 20th century, where state regulation and subsidies supported the white farming class while subsistence farming was relegated to the Bantustans. Since 1994, land has been distributed to a limited number of small-scale farmers, and they now compete with the established agri-businesses for resources and output, both in the national and global market. The redistribution program also seeks to increase knowledge transfer between agri-business farmers and the new small-scale farmers, which has clear implications for managing climate adaptation. However, the diversity of vulnerabilities and actors within South Africa's agricultural sector helped develop a variety of adaptation methods. In the context of water scarcity in South Africa, small-scale farmers are the most vulnerable, whereas large-scale farming has access to the capital required for extensive irrigation.

Large-scale/commercial farming dominates South African agricultural sector, both in terms of production and demand for water. In terms of economic output, it represents 2.5 percent of South African GDP, uses 80 percent of the available land, and 60 percent of available water. Agriculture is also the second highest emitting sector and contributes 7 percent of total greenhouse gases (GHGs). The adaptation methods used by large-scale farming reflect the product they are producing, with the intensive monoculture production of vegetables, cereals, and livestock. These businesses have access to significant capital and technology-driven adaptation, with examples including the use of trip-fed irrigation. However, farmers are increasingly being affected by desertification, and are under growing pressure to increase the productivity of their farmland.

Conversely, small-scale farmer's adaptation to climate change has been characterized by projects that are indicative of their situation. One in ten South Africans do not have access to a basic water supply, and as such rely on unmanaged local resources, which are vulnerable to climate change. This dependence is highest in rural communities of KwaZulu-Natal and Limpopo, where water resources are more erratic and compounded by a lack of funds for investing in soil fertilization and disease control. Due to a lack of capital, adaptation for small-scale farmers has generally taken the form of in-field rainwater harvesting, as well as roof and road runoff water collection.

Accounting for the Divergence

Adaptation as a pyramid of needs provides a framework to account for this divergence. Small-scale farmers seek to reduce their vulnerability to stress more broadly before moving to the more capital-intensive techniques favored by larger agricultural businesses. This reflects the interdependency between poverty alleviation and climate change adaptation, as well as questions of development and equity.

Increasing water scarcity, especially for small-scale farmers, has a detrimental effect on rural development and disproportionately affects the welfare of the poor in rural areas. Similar to the international system, where there is an inequality of cause and effect, a similar state of affairs exist in South Africa's agricultural sector, where the majority of water stress is being caused by larger agribusinesses and small-scale farmers are left to suffer the most.

Adaptation and biodiversity are also closely related to the political economy of South Africa's agriculture and projected climate stress. Using biodiversity in assisting adaptation is still in its infancy, but has been shown to be more receptive to small-scale farming methods, as it is a cheaper alternative. This approach is juxtaposed to agribusiness monoculture, where adaptation through monoculture has led to increased fertilizer runoff, leading to accusations by small-scale farmers that large-scale farming operations are adversely affecting water scarcity, due in a large part to their farming methods. A recent evaluation of the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) projects suggests that adaptation methods must move beyond technological solutions and lend support to the biodiverse technological solutions used by small-scale farmers.

The Political Economy of Agriculture within South Africa

The political economy of agriculture within South Africa colors the adaptation methods used by all actors in the agricultural sector, where there is a continuous trade-off between interests and resource mobilization. Resilience built in a fragmented and ad hoc manner achieves neither integration nor the mainstreaming of adaptation. South Africa is notable for having a progressive climate policy, however, it is struggling in terms of coordination and communication. This, as well as the context-specific nature of adaptation, has led to a duality of adaptation within the South African agricultural sector, an issue that is exacerbated by the land reform program. This lack of coordination, seen in climate change adaptation where the government has favored techniques used by large-scale producers, while favoring small-scale farmers in its rhetoric concerning land reform. This confusion hampers attempts to successfully adapt to climate change.

South Africa remains a country of contradictions, it has a very successful agricultural exporting industry and is funding large-scale adaptation to climate change efforts. Conversely, most South Africans live below the national poverty line and 30 percent of its population is highly vulnerable to climate shocks, with low levels of endogenous resilience. This duality is present within the different business adaptation methods used, and the contentious relationship that exists between different farming methods. The divergence is further complicated by the historical context of agriculture within South Africa, which has led to an incoherent government policy towards agriculture and adaptation. To find any meaningful solutions to water scarcity, there needs to be both a better understanding of the relationship both between agriculture and climate change, and how agri-business, small-scale farmers, and the government interact concerning adaptation to water scarcity within the broader political economy.

Jack Stuart is a former intern at the Africa Program during the 2018 summer term and a Masters student at the Elliott School of International Affairs. He is currently a Research Assistant at the United States Institute for Peace.