Being Short-Changed: Women and Access to Land in Patriarchal Societies
By Noxolo Kabane
Women have a dismally minimal access to land across the globe. This is an extremely complicated issue that changes according to national contexts, social groups and legal systems. It is one of the key indicators of the marginalisation of women.
The issue of land access takes on different forms depending on whether those concerned live in urban or rural areas and whether they are married or single. While the type of prenuptial agreement is of importance, in most rural areas such agreements are largely non-existent, which means women have no form of security or protection in the event of death.
In urban areas, most seek to hold land for residential houses, as well as commercial and industrial buildings. Any citizen, male or female, can make an offer to rent or buy a plot of land from the relevant institutions, although the final decision depends largely on the weight of the applicant’s wallet. In rural areas the communal land holding system makes land a family property (for occupation) that ordinarily gets inherited by the eldest patriarch.
South African rural-based women occupy and use land in a variety of different forms. Women's relationships to land are determined by a mixture of apartheid land policy, the contemporary South African economy and the nature of the rural specific rural areas. The challenge of developing a coherent national policy to address the range of issues and diverse forms of rural production, and to do so in ways that simultaneously challenge the subordination of women, is daunting (Mann, 2000). There are many challenges facing various groupings of rural women and land activists.
Three key elements characterise rural women's position in relation to land. The first has to do with their lack of legitimate access to land in the form of rights. The second highlights their minimal role and access to decision-making around land. The third relates to the broader social, economic and environmental context.
Both women and men from rural and dispossessed communities share a basic need for land with secure tenure and associated support services. In a traditional setting, women lack independent rights to land and are only eligible for allocation through men, either husbands or sons. Hence, much to do with land relations is bound up in laws and practices around domestic relations, in particular those pertaining to marriage, inheritance, etc. Only married males are formally eligible for land rights. Also, inheritance operates through sons; in customary law the eldest usually inherits the land. A widow without children is particularly vulnerable since the land she works will probably be taken by her parents-in-law or her late husband's brothers.
Women’s lack of authority in society also limits their control over the land resources. South African tenure reform policy, particularly with regard to communal areas, has done very little (apart from stated commitments to gender equity in policy documents like the 1997 White Paper) to address the needs of the majority of poor, black women in South Africa’s rural areas (Mann, 2000). The Draft Land Rights Bill of 1999, provided that where protected tenure rights are shared by family members, the rights must be registered jointly, by two adult members, and where practical, one of these adults must be a woman. The Bill did not define, however, what was meant by “where practical.” Furthermore, subsequent draft tenure policies may even have negative implications for gender equitable tenure systems. The proposed Communal Land Rights/Draft Tenure Bill, released in late November 2001, appeared to increase the power of traditional authorities with regard to land allocation and introduced contentious concepts such as “tribal” land ownership. Critics maintain that the such legislations just serve to undermine the land rights of vulnerable groups, especially women.
The Secretary General of the World Conference of the United Nations’ Decade for Women stated that women are “basically powerless and property-less.” This is not an exaggeration. In 1980, women still owned only an estimated 1% of the world’s property, and part of this 1% masks male ownership hidden for tax purposes (French, 1992). Despite more than a decade of land reform in Zimbabwe, men still own 90% of the land in rural areas.1 Female-headed households in Botswana own a third less land than male-headed households.2 In Nigeria in 1990, women still constituted 50% of those who lived and worked in rural areas, but owned less than 5% of the total land area.3 In Tanzania, it was only with the introduction of the Village Land Bill in 1999 that women were officially allowed to own land.4 In South Africa, it was only through legislation introduced in 1985 and again in 1988 that rural African women ceased to be considered minors in land-related transactions (Mann, 2000). These statistics have improved in some countries as a result of women-based organisations that are voices for these women and because the legislation is now considering the empowerment of women when reviewing laws.
In terms of policy and legislation, there is no doubt that the ANC-led government is committed to gender equity. The ANC’s 1992 Land Policy document called for special procedures to ensure that women gain equal access to land and participate effectively in policy formulation and decision making. The Reconstruction and Development Programme recognised women’s land rights: “Women face specific disabilities in obtaining land. The land redistribution programme must therefore target women. Institutions, practices and laws that discriminate against women’s access to land must be reviewed and brought in line with national policy. In particular, tenure and matrimonial laws must be revised appropriately,” (ANC Land Policy Document, 1992). Not much has been achieved, though, in practical terms.
A few other countries have attempted some progressive approaches to ensure gender equity. For instance, a redistribution project in Bangladesh in 1997 provides a positive example. Redistributed plots in the project were leased on a permanent basis – jointly, in the names of husband and wife. In case of divorce, legislation stipulated that the wife would retain access to the land (Hargreaves, 2001). Such strategies help to empower women and make them less vulnerable. However, policies and legislation alone may not result in gender equity in land access and ownership. Effective implementation, monitoring and evaluation needs to be stepped up.
Essentially, a radical transformation of society is required in order to defeat the patriarchal norms and standards that contrive to oppress women. Land acquired through any of the land reform programmes in South Africa, should be registered jointly in the name of wife and husband, or life partners. In case of divorce or legal separation, it should be made possible for women to retain a stake on the land.
References
• Mann, M., (2000), Women’s access to land in the former Bantustans: Constitutional Conflict, Customary Law, Democratisation and the Role of the State, Occasional Paper Series, PLAAS, UWC,
• French, M.,(1992), The War Against Women, Hamish Hamilton, London, p. 24
• 1Maocha, P., (1991), “Peasant women in Zimbabwe”, African Women, Transformation and Development, IFAA, UK, p. 43
• 2Roe, E.M., (1993) “Public Service: Rural Development and careers in public management: A case study of expatriate advising in African land reform”, World Development, Vol. 21, 3,
• 3Idike, A.A., (1991) “Transformation for rural women in Nigeria: Myth or Reality”, African Women, Transformation and Development, IFAA, UK, p. 15 & 16
• 4 Sunday Independent, February 14, 1999
• ANC, 1992 Land Policy Document, Education Section, April.
• Hargreaves, S,. “Chilli powder and kitchen knives”, Land and Rural Digest, May/June, 2001
Women have a dismally minimal access to land across the globe. This is an extremely complicated issue that changes according to national contexts, social groups and legal systems. It is one of the key indicators of the marginalisation of women.
The issue of land access takes on different forms depending on whether those concerned live in urban or rural areas and whether they are married or single. While the type of prenuptial agreement is of importance, in most rural areas such agreements are largely non-existent, which means women have no form of security or protection in the event of death.
In urban areas, most seek to hold land for residential houses, as well as commercial and industrial buildings. Any citizen, male or female, can make an offer to rent or buy a plot of land from the relevant institutions, although the final decision depends largely on the weight of the applicant’s wallet. In rural areas the communal land holding system makes land a family property (for occupation) that ordinarily gets inherited by the eldest patriarch.
South African rural-based women occupy and use land in a variety of different forms. Women's relationships to land are determined by a mixture of apartheid land policy, the contemporary South African economy and the nature of the rural specific rural areas. The challenge of developing a coherent national policy to address the range of issues and diverse forms of rural production, and to do so in ways that simultaneously challenge the subordination of women, is daunting (Mann, 2000). There are many challenges facing various groupings of rural women and land activists.
Three key elements characterise rural women's position in relation to land. The first has to do with their lack of legitimate access to land in the form of rights. The second highlights their minimal role and access to decision-making around land. The third relates to the broader social, economic and environmental context.
Both women and men from rural and dispossessed communities share a basic need for land with secure tenure and associated support services. In a traditional setting, women lack independent rights to land and are only eligible for allocation through men, either husbands or sons. Hence, much to do with land relations is bound up in laws and practices around domestic relations, in particular those pertaining to marriage, inheritance, etc. Only married males are formally eligible for land rights. Also, inheritance operates through sons; in customary law the eldest usually inherits the land. A widow without children is particularly vulnerable since the land she works will probably be taken by her parents-in-law or her late husband's brothers.
Women’s lack of authority in society also limits their control over the land resources. South African tenure reform policy, particularly with regard to communal areas, has done very little (apart from stated commitments to gender equity in policy documents like the 1997 White Paper) to address the needs of the majority of poor, black women in South Africa’s rural areas (Mann, 2000). The Draft Land Rights Bill of 1999, provided that where protected tenure rights are shared by family members, the rights must be registered jointly, by two adult members, and where practical, one of these adults must be a woman. The Bill did not define, however, what was meant by “where practical.” Furthermore, subsequent draft tenure policies may even have negative implications for gender equitable tenure systems. The proposed Communal Land Rights/Draft Tenure Bill, released in late November 2001, appeared to increase the power of traditional authorities with regard to land allocation and introduced contentious concepts such as “tribal” land ownership. Critics maintain that the such legislations just serve to undermine the land rights of vulnerable groups, especially women.
The Secretary General of the World Conference of the United Nations’ Decade for Women stated that women are “basically powerless and property-less.” This is not an exaggeration. In 1980, women still owned only an estimated 1% of the world’s property, and part of this 1% masks male ownership hidden for tax purposes (French, 1992). Despite more than a decade of land reform in Zimbabwe, men still own 90% of the land in rural areas.1 Female-headed households in Botswana own a third less land than male-headed households.2 In Nigeria in 1990, women still constituted 50% of those who lived and worked in rural areas, but owned less than 5% of the total land area.3 In Tanzania, it was only with the introduction of the Village Land Bill in 1999 that women were officially allowed to own land.4 In South Africa, it was only through legislation introduced in 1985 and again in 1988 that rural African women ceased to be considered minors in land-related transactions (Mann, 2000). These statistics have improved in some countries as a result of women-based organisations that are voices for these women and because the legislation is now considering the empowerment of women when reviewing laws.
In terms of policy and legislation, there is no doubt that the ANC-led government is committed to gender equity. The ANC’s 1992 Land Policy document called for special procedures to ensure that women gain equal access to land and participate effectively in policy formulation and decision making. The Reconstruction and Development Programme recognised women’s land rights: “Women face specific disabilities in obtaining land. The land redistribution programme must therefore target women. Institutions, practices and laws that discriminate against women’s access to land must be reviewed and brought in line with national policy. In particular, tenure and matrimonial laws must be revised appropriately,” (ANC Land Policy Document, 1992). Not much has been achieved, though, in practical terms.
A few other countries have attempted some progressive approaches to ensure gender equity. For instance, a redistribution project in Bangladesh in 1997 provides a positive example. Redistributed plots in the project were leased on a permanent basis – jointly, in the names of husband and wife. In case of divorce, legislation stipulated that the wife would retain access to the land (Hargreaves, 2001). Such strategies help to empower women and make them less vulnerable. However, policies and legislation alone may not result in gender equity in land access and ownership. Effective implementation, monitoring and evaluation needs to be stepped up.
Essentially, a radical transformation of society is required in order to defeat the patriarchal norms and standards that contrive to oppress women. Land acquired through any of the land reform programmes in South Africa, should be registered jointly in the name of wife and husband, or life partners. In case of divorce or legal separation, it should be made possible for women to retain a stake on the land.
References
• Mann, M., (2000), Women’s access to land in the former Bantustans: Constitutional Conflict, Customary Law, Democratisation and the Role of the State, Occasional Paper Series, PLAAS, UWC,
• French, M.,(1992), The War Against Women, Hamish Hamilton, London, p. 24
• 1Maocha, P., (1991), “Peasant women in Zimbabwe”, African Women, Transformation and Development, IFAA, UK, p. 43
• 2Roe, E.M., (1993) “Public Service: Rural Development and careers in public management: A case study of expatriate advising in African land reform”, World Development, Vol. 21, 3,
• 3Idike, A.A., (1991) “Transformation for rural women in Nigeria: Myth or Reality”, African Women, Transformation and Development, IFAA, UK, p. 15 & 16
• 4 Sunday Independent, February 14, 1999
• ANC, 1992 Land Policy Document, Education Section, April.
• Hargreaves, S,. “Chilli powder and kitchen knives”, Land and Rural Digest, May/June, 2001