Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-dc8c957cd-cpb9g Total loading time: 0.35 Render date: 2022-01-29T13:58:22.746Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

5 - Failure by the numbers? Settlement statistics as indicators of state performance in South African land restitution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2015

Olaf Zenker
Affiliation:
Freie Universität Berlin
Richard Rottenburg
Affiliation:
Martin Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Germany
Sally E. Merry
Affiliation:
New York University
Sung-Joon Park
Affiliation:
Martin Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Germany
Johanna Mugler
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
Get access

Summary

Government and public opinion have mainly measured the achievements of restitution quantitatively in terms of the number of claims settled and people who have benefitted, and the extent of land restored to claimants.

Ruth Hall (2010: 28)

Introduction

On 30 March 2011, the South African Department of Rural Development and Land Reform presented its Draft Annual Performance Plan: 2011–2012 to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform. When referring to its land restitution programme, the presentation indicated that the ‘purpose’ of this programme was to settle land restitution claims under the Restitution of Land Rights Act (Act No. 22 of 1994) and to provide settlement support to restitution beneficiaries, further highlighting as ‘key priorities’ the reduction of the backlog of land claims and the settlement of all outstanding land claims (Department of Rural Development and Land Reform 2011a: 29). The presentation then displayed a table containing its annual targets for backlog claims to be implemented, totalling 360 claims, as well as 90 new outstanding claims to be settled (Department of Rural Development and Land Reform 2011a: 30). The title of the table column containing these numbers read: ‘Performance indicator’.

Increasingly, we are living in a world informed by indicators. Indicators are statistical measures used to consolidate and standardize complex data into a simple number or rank that is meaningful to policy-makers, civil servants and the public (Merry 2011: S86). Thus constituting emerging technologies of knowledge quantification, indicators and their circulation support new forms of ‘evidence-based’ governance at the national, transnational and international levels (Davis, Kingsbury, and Merry 2010; Merry 2011). Embedded in epistemic environments that appeal to ‘new governance’ – a form of governance characterized by participation, flexibility, data-based monitoring and evaluation within an overarching ‘audit culture’ (Power 1997; Strathern 2000) – this recent upsurge of indicators is arguably based on a migration of basic technologies from corporate management and control into the realms of the state and civil society (Merry 2011: S90–S92). As a form of governance, indicators induce those subject to their measures to take responsibility for their own actions. They are meant to lead to forms of self-discipline and self-regulation that can be easily read and monitored from the outside, and as such, contribute to an increase in public accountability.

Type
Chapter
Information
The World of Indicators
The Making of Governmental Knowledge through Quantification
, pp. 102 - 126
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Benjamin, Walter 2000/1923. ‘The Task of the Translator’ in Venuti, Lawrence (ed.), The Translation Studies Reader. London/New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 1996. First Annual Report 1996. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 1997. Annual Report 1996/97. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 1998. Annual Report 1997/98. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 1999. Annual Report 1998/99. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2000. Annual Report 1999/2000. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2001. Annual Report 2000/01. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2002. Annual Report 2001/02. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2003. Annual Report 2002/03. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2004. Annual Report 2003/04. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2005. Annual Report 2004/05. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2006. Annual Report 2005/06. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2007a. Annual Report 2006/07. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2007b. Strategic Plan Review 2007–2008. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2008. Annual Report 2007/08. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2009. Annual Report 2008/09. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2010. Annual Report 2009/10. Pretoria: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2011. Annual Report 2010/11. Pretoria: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2012. Annual Report 2011/12. Pretoria: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform
Commission on Restitution of Land Rights 2013. Annual Report 2012/13. Pretoria: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform
Davis, Kevin E., Kingsbury, Benedict and Merry, Sally Engle 2010. Indicators as a Technology of Global Governance, Institute of International Law and Justice (IILJ) Working Paper 2010/2. New York:New York University School of LawGoogle Scholar
Department of Land Affairs 1997. White Paper on South African Land Policy. Pretoria: Government Printers
Department of Land Affairs 2007a. Annual Report: 1 April 2006–31 March 2007. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Department of Land Affairs 2007b. Restitution of Land Rights Act, No. 22 of 1994 as amended, and related documents. Pretoria: Department of Land Affairs
Department of Rural Development and Land Reform 2011a. ‘Draft Annual Performance Plan: 2011–2012’, presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform, 30 March 2011. Pretoria: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform
Department of Rural Development and Land Reform 2011b. Strategic Plan 2011–2014. Pretoria: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform
Hall, Ruth 2010. ‘Reconciling the Past, Present, and Future: The Parameters and Practices of Land Restitution in South Africa’ in Walker, Cherryl, Bohlin, Anna, Hall, Ruth and Kepe, Thembela (eds.), Land, Memory, Reconstruction, and Justice: Perspectives on Land Claims in South Africa. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University PressGoogle Scholar
Hellum, Anne and Derman, Bill 2009. ‘Government, Business and Chiefs: Ambiguities of Social Justice through Land Restitution in South Africa’ in Benda-Beckmann, Franz von, Benda-Beckmann, Keebet von and Eckert, Julia M. (eds.), Rules of Law and Laws of Ruling: On the Governance of Law. Aldershot: AshgateGoogle Scholar
James, Deborah 2007. Gaining Ground? ‘Rights’ and ‘Property’ in South African Land Reform. Abingdon/New York: Routledge-CavendishGoogle Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas 1995. Social Systems. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University PressGoogle Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle 2006a. Human Rights and Gender Violence: Translating International Law into Local Justice, Chicago series in Law and Society. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle 2006b. ‘Transnational Human Rights and Local Activism: Mapping the Middle’, American Anthropologist 108(1): 38–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle 2011. ‘Measuring the World: Indicators, Human Rights, and Global Governance’ (with CA comment by John M. Conley), Current Anthropology 52(S3): S83–S95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mostert, Hanri 2010. ‘Change through Jurisprudence: The Role of the Courts in Broadening the Scope of Restitution’ in Walker, Cherryl, Bohlin, Anna, Hall, Ruth and Kepe, Thembela (eds.), Land, Memory, Reconstruction, and Justice: Perspectives on Land Claims in South Africa. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University PressGoogle Scholar
Porter, Theodore 1995. Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
Power, Michael 1997. The Audit Society. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Rottenburg, Richard 2005. ‘Code-switching, or Why a Metacode is Good to Have’ in Czarniawska, Barbara and Sevon, Guje (eds.), Global Ideas: How Ideas, Objects and Practices Travel in the Global Economy. Malmö: Författarna och Liber ABGoogle Scholar
Rottenburg, Richard 2008. ‘Übersetzung und ihre Dementierung’ in Kneer, Georg, Schroer, Markus and Schüttpelz, Erhard (eds.), Bruno Latours Kollektive: Kontroversen zur Entgrenzung des Sozialen. Frankfurt am Main: SuhrkampGoogle Scholar
Rottenburg, Richard 2009. Far-fetched Facts: A Parable of Development Aid. Cambridge, Mass./London: MIT PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, James C. 1998. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition have Failed, Yale Agrarian Studies. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
Star, Susan Leigh and Griesemer, James R. 1989. ‘Institutional Ecology, “Translations” and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39’, Social Studies of Science 19(3): 387–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strathern, Marilyn (ed.) 2000. Audit Cultures: Anthropological Studies in Accountability, Ethics and the Academy. London: RoutledgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, Cherryl 2008. Landmarked: Land Claims and Land Restitution in South Africa. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University PressGoogle Scholar
Walker, Cherryl 2012. ‘Finite Land: Challenges Institutionalising Land Restitution in South Africa, 1995–2000’ Journal of Southern African Studies 38(4): 809–26.
Weber, Max 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
Zenker, Olaf 2011. Land Restitution and Transitional Justice in post-Apartheid South Africa, Working Paper No. 134. Halle: Max Planck Institute for Social AnthropologyGoogle Scholar
Zenker, Olaf 2014. ‘New Law Against an Old State: Land Restitution as a Transition to Justice in Post-Apartheid South Africa?’, Development and Change 45(3): 502–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zenker, Olaf 2015. ‘De-judicialisation, Outsourced Review and All Too Flexible Bureaucracies in South African Land Restitution’, Cambridge Journal of Anthropology 33(1): 81–96Google Scholar
Zenker, Olaf forthcoming. ‘Bush-level Bureaucrats in South African Land Restitution: Implementing State Law under Chiefly Rule’ in Zenker, Olaf and Hoehne, Markus V. (eds.), The State and the Paradox of Customary Law in Africa. Aldershot: Ashgate

Send book to Kindle

To send this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Send book to Dropbox

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Send book to Google Drive

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×