Development Southern Africa

ISSN: 0376-835X (Print) 1470-3637 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cdsa20

Rural development: Putting theory into practice

J M Erskine

To cite this article: J M Erskine (1985) Rural development: Putting theory into practice,
Development Southern Africa, 2:3, 368-382, DOI: 10.1080/03768358508439168

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/03768358508439168

Published online: 27 Feb 2008.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 123

View related articles

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cdsa20
Development Southern Africa Vol 2, No 2, May 1985

Rural development
Putting theory into practice
JM Erskine*

In this article the whole question of rural development, what it means and who
it benefits, is critically examined and special emphasis is placed on the type of
research that is required in respect of designing appropriatedevelopment
systems. Attention is drawn to the value of action research and to the
importance of involving the local people in the preparation of any land use
plans. Reference is made to a model for the modernization of traditional
agriculture that has been tested and proven to be successful in Israel. Finally, it
is concluded that action research conducted amongst rural communities is the
only realistic means of generating practically relevant theory.

1. INTRODUCTION
Why is it that the characteristics of traditional agriculture in most of the
tribal areas of South Africa's independent and self-governing national
states have remained practically unchanged since the turn of the century;
that the presence of modern mechanised farms in adjacent White rural
areas has had very little impact on the subsistence agriculture of the Afri-
can farmers; that although there is no shortage of publications by techni-
cal experts, sociologists, anthropologists and economists which describe
extensive survey workand discuss how 'development' ought to be planned
and designed, the African rural areas remain underdeveloped; and that
whilst various development agencies have introduced pre-planned 'blue-
print' projects on land belonging to the SA Development Trust, there have
been few 'trickle-down' benefits observed in the African tribal areas?
Since the governments (central and others) express a real interest in
achieving change in the African rural areas, why is it taking place only to
an insignificant degree?
An attempt to find answers to these questions forms the subject of this
paper.
2. A FRAMEWORK FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT
2.1 The underdevelopment syndrome
The signs and symptoms that together indicate an unsatisfactory situa-
tion in the African rural areas are unfortunately often overlooked by city-
based development thinkers, planners and financiers simply because they
are off the beaten track (out of sight, out of mind).
Briefly stated, the African rural areas are characterised by small, dis-

* Co-odinator of Rural Development, Institute of Natural Resources, University

of Natal, Pietermarttzburg.
368
persed settlements, mostly lacking adequate infrastructure, means of
communications, health, education and commercial services. The few
small towns in existence do not provide an adequate range of functions
either in support of agriculture or to meet the basic needs of rural com-
munities. Although natural ecosystems often display remarkable resili-
ence to transgressions by rural communities, yet they also display their
limits. Loss of grasslands and forests accompanied by soil erosion and un-
wanted changes in freshwater systems and a general decline in the pro-
ductivity of the land are among the penalties paid for failing to manage
these ecosystems properly.
Because the burgeoning population has in many rural areas exceeded the
carrying (agricultural) capacity of the land, we see how rural communities
have been forced to destroy renewable resources, like fuelwood and soil,
on which their future well-being depends.
The lack of a network of physical bases from which to deliver services, and
the focal points needed to stimulate socio-economic activity and innova-
tion, means that government services tend to be poorly co-ordinated, dis-
persed, costly and often ineffective. Furthermore, because settlements are
small and remote, and because living conditions tend to be simple, it be-
comes difficult to attract staff of the desired calibre for rural postings.
This lack of adequate infrastructure (physical, social, economic and ad-
ministrative) makes it difficult for development efforts to reach rural com-
munities.
2.2 What is development?
Before attempting to account for the lack of development progress in the
African rural areas, it is important to define what is meant by the term 'de-
velopment', for here may lie one of the problems. In any programme of de-
velopment it is essential that rural communities (those in need of help),
development thinkers (academics), planners and implementers have the
same perceptions of needs and what development means. I believe that
there has not been and there still is not concensus on this point among
these different groups in South Africa simply because there has been very
little meaningful discussion to date between them.
In defining 'development' we do not need to 're-invent the wheel' in South
Africa but rather let us take cognisance of current international thinking
on this matter and, above all, of the views of the recipients of development.
At the macro level, economic development has been understood in West-
ern economic thought, and in South Africa's First World sector, primarily
in terms of economic growth, that is, an increase in the physical quantity
of output as measured in monetary (GNP) terms. The aimofthis approach
has been to attain a high degree of industrialization (with its attendant
urbanization) and a society enjoying mass consumption of material
goods. However, this evaluation of development in terms of purely
economic criteria has not led to the expected increase in the welfare of
people in less developed regions worldwide (including South Africa's
Third World areas). The concept of development, in the macro sense, used
in this paper is different from the concept stated above in that growth is
taken to mean the physical increase in output whilst development is un-
derstood to entail growth with a change in production technique, con-
sumer behaviour, consumption patterns and in the distribution of re-
369
sources through the economy. Furthermore, rural development must be
considered in terms of social progress, a broader concept which implies a
decrease in the level of social tension as well as material development.
The change in development priorities that has taken place worldwide has
given rise to what is known as the 'basic needs' approach. Typically, this
relatively new approach alms at improving living standards, and spread-
ing the benefits of growth, by extending services and facilities to the areas
where the poor are located, by increasing agricultural productivity, and by
reducing malnutrition, disease, illiteracy, and inequality (Meier,1976).A
cornerstone of the approach is the participation of the people in decision
making in organisations of their own choice (Szal, 1979, p 27).
A useful working definition of rural development, emanating from the Un-
ited Nations Development Programme (UNDP, 1979), describes it as a pro-
cess of socio-economic change involving the transformation of agrarian
society in order to reach a common set of development goals based on
capacities and needs of people; these goals include a nationally deter-
mined growth process that gives priority to the reduction of poverty, un-
employment and inequality, and the satisfaction of minimum human
needs, and stresses self-reliance and the participation of all the people,
particularly those with the lowest standard of living.

2.3 Rural development for whom?

There are some development thinkers in South Africa who believe that at-
tempting to develop the African rural areas is a waste of time, and there
are some economists who choose to totally ignore the reality of African ag-
riculture and the millions of African families presently attempting to eke
out a subsistence existence on the land, who would like nothing better
than to enter the market economy.
For example, an agricultural economist interviewed on the radio during
July 1984 stated that South African agriculture is presently amongst the
most productive in the world. If the commentator had considered White
and African agriculture together, he would have had to conclude that
South African agriculture is amongst the least productive in the world in
terms of both capital and labour productivity. The commentator went on
to say that because of an increasing emphasis on a market-orientated
economy in South Africa (= White) agriculture, there was an increasing
tendency not to use marginal land. In African agriculture, of course, the
reverse is true: more and more marginal land is being used with disas-
trous environmental consequences. Many African farmers (and agricul-
tural production in South Africa as a whole) could benefit from having ac-
cess to the discarded 'marginal' land of the White fanning sector!
Taking into account the antipathy to rural development described above,
it is perhaps appropriate to establish the position of South Africa's rural
areas in the development status hierarchy. Weitz (1979) maintains that
for a country to be considered as developing, a continuous decrease in the
relative number of those employed in agriculture must occur, otherwise -
except for special cases — economic growth will not take place. Thus in
economic growth terms only, that Is, ignoring the basic needs of rural in-
habitants, the benefits accruing to them of any form of development and
the fact that in South Africa most inhabitants In the African rural areas
370
cannot escape from those areas, developing regions can be divided into
three categories:
— Regions where available capital and skills are still insufficient to gener-
ate non-agricultural employment at a rate concomitant with the in-
crease in the number ofjob seekers. These regions usually rank low in
terms of per capita income. The percentage of agricultural workers in
the total labour force is decreasing, but their absolute number (in-
habiting rural areas) is still increasing. Here, the planned generation of
employment in agriculture is an absolute necessity and economically
beneficial.
— Regions in a transition period where the increase in demand for
employment is of the same order of magnitude as the increase in non-
agricultural job opportunities. In these regions, the percentage of
those employed in agriculture is decreasing, but their absolute number
remains more or less constant. Here, there is not a priori justification
to generate new employment opportunities in agriculture.
— Regions where both the percentage and the absolute number employed
in agriculture is decreasing. Here, the priority for rural development,
from the economic point of view, no longer constitutes a prima facie
case.
Weitz suggests that a full programme of rural development is appropriate
in regions falling into the first two categories.
South Africa's African rural areas quite clearly fall into the first category.
Accordingly, even in strict economic terms, there can be little doubt that
there is a very strong case for rural development in these areas and, in par-
ticular, for environment-based development which enhances rather than
damages the environment.
2.4 Selecting therightapproach
There is increasing emphasis, in development literature and in project de-
sign and consultancy throughout the world's less developed areas, on the
need to bring the benefits of development more fully to the rural poor and
to encourage and foster participation by the poor in choosing and execut-
ing their own programmes. There are three main reasons which support
this emphasis: a strong moral argument, a political argument in so far as
that continued failure to tackle poverty may result in instability in the
rural areas (which in turn is inevitably transferred to the urban areas),
and a development argument.
The development argument points to the waste of muscle and brain, to ill
health, malnutrition and resulting lethargy which are involved in under-
employment, and to the poor use of land and water resources which
characterise so much of the poverty-stricken African rural areas. The case
for a poverty
-orientated and participatory rural development strategy has
been tellinglyput forward (Hunter, 1981). It has been criticized, both from
the right and from the left—from the right on the grounds that maximum
economic growth will come from 'backing winners', that is, directing as-
sistance to the most productive areas and the most competent and in-
novative farmers with adequate land resources; from the left by maintain-
ing that without at least a widespread transfer of capital assets (mainly
land) to the poor, the benefits will never reach them: and, indeed, from
both right and left on the grounds that the typical bureaucratic style of
371
planning and execution of development programmes is, in itself, a fatal
obstacle to an adequate flow of benefits to the poor.
In the great vairety of countries and of situations within countries it is not
possible or enough to sieze upon some generalizedprescription or institu-
tional pattern for rural development. The main drift of the argument pre-
sented in this paper is that each situation must be treated as a unique
case requiring a great deal of patience and of perceptive social engineering
in the effort to open new opportunities for a presently dependent section
of population in the developing areas. It is, nevertheless, clear from experi-
ence built up in other less developed rural areas of the world that there is a
need for placing emphasis on:
— More benefits to the poor
— Participatory development
— Integrated rural development.
This last element describes a way of meeting the basic needs of rural
people in terms of three broad dimensions:
— An increase in agricultural productivity
— The provision of such infrastructure and services as are necessary to
improve the quality of life of rural people (for example, domestic water
provision, health centre, educational facilities, etc)
— The stimulation of non-farm, commercial and industrial activities to
provide employment for people who are in excess of the land's agricul-
tural capacity.
These activities need to be tackled simultaneously: this is the very essence
of integrated rural development. A comprehensive planning approach is
needed — one that will take into account the economic, social, organisa-
tional and physical aspects, and that will co-ordinate national policies
with local needs. It will also involve a commitment to long-term planning.
2.5 Researching in vain
Having established the nature of rural development, the extent to which it
is needed, wanted and economically desirable in South Africa's less de-
veloped rural areas, and the most appropriate approach to be followed, let
us now consider possible reasons for the apparent lack of meaningful
progress in achieving it.
Because of a paucity in the less developed rural areas of the necessary edu-
cational and research institutions, libraries and the other channels
necessary for the growth and transfer of knowledge, the customary
academic exercise of analysis and synthesis of all the information that
could lead towards a process of positive change is beyond the reach of the
rural inhabitants and is conducted instead by outsiders who usually have
little empathy with the people. In some cases, the needs and opinions of
the people involved have been totally ignored in the preparation of develop-
ment plans for an area. Even where surveys have been carried out, often
over a period of a few days, the people whose lives would be most affected
by the development plans, and who participated in supplying the informa-
-tion in the first place, are denied any involvement in the crucial stage
when the actual recommendations are formulated.
Most surveys result in a report of some description but all too often the
people from whom the information was gathered or who would be affected
372
by the resulting development plans are unaware even of the existence of
these reports, not to mention the implications for them of the recommen-
dations contained therein. There have been so many 'development' re-
ports, some based on survey work and some not, that have resulted in dis-
cussions and yet more reports, with insignificant practical improve-
ments.
It was concluded at a workshop on survey questionnaires (SALDRU, 1982)
that questionnaires are no short cut to understanding society: they are no
subsitute for the long and patient work of a dedicated field worker spend-
ing years working with and getting to know a rural community. I believe
that such a field worker must be first and foremost apracticalperson with
experience of and a real interest in the implementation of development
proposals. He need not be a sociologist or anthropologist. Indeed, I would
go so far as to say that the contribution of a person with a narrow
academic training in one of these fields, working in isolation, will be neg-
ligible in terms of promoting development action. Such persons may even
encourage bureaucratic inertia and retard development through over em-
phasis of the so-called 'traditional attitudes' reflected in the conservative
response of rural people to questioning. The basis of this problem lies
largely in the fact that those questioned may filter their information to fit
in with their past experience of the concerns of the group represented by
the interviewer.
Too often in this country in the past, development researchers have
adopted a hands-off approach to their research, whether concerned with
physical (infrastructure), biological (agriculture) or sociological aspects.
From this stance the people living in the areas of concern have been seen
as objects of external enquiry or experiment rather than as potential col-
laborators in decision-making. The rigorously 'scientific' academic
theoreticians that abound in our universities can be criticized for seeking
to analyse the situation in the less developed areas from the outside in-
stead of entering into an equal and collaborative relationship with the
people involved, and for failing to establish strong links between theory
and practice. These academics frequently devote themselves to studies
whose results are of minimal relevance to decision-making in the real
world. Indeed, they stand accused of having encouraged the divorce of
theory from practice and of having created a communication gap between
themselves (the 'experts') and both development implementers and the
members of communities they study. Ideally, the researcher brings
breadth of experience (gained through involvement in the practical im-
plementation of development proposals) as well as theoretical knowledge
to the problem-solving process; the people to be helped bring knowledge of
local needs and aspirations and experience of the situations in which they
themselves are trying to solve problems. Neither client nor researcher has
better knowledge; in a sense, they are both experts.
Similarly, what little practical research has been carried out in respect of
African agriculture in this country has usually been conducted in an ex-
perimental plot situation and has assumed access to inputs, ignored risks
and not recorded labour inputs. Rarely have results been adjusted to ac-
count for farmers' varying managerial skills and resource availabilities.
'Recommendations' may eventually arrive (often they simply disappear in
a 'report') at the district office of the Department of Agriculture, where an
373
attempt is made to translate them into the simplified vernacular required
by the field agents. The contact staff may then in turn read out these in-
structions —which from previous experience they do not trust—in public
meetings that are attended mainly by the oldest, semi-retired farmers. In
such meetings decorum inhibits fanners from voicing their frank disag-
reement with many of the technical recommendations (usually untested
in their area). And, finally, when they get home they may choose to tell
their wives (the farmers in the community) what was said; but often they
do not.
If we accept this rather dismal picture of the existing contribution of re-
searchers to improvement of the less developed rural areas of South Af-
rica, then it is important to consider what alternative approach can be
adopted to bring about a situation whereby theory and research are made
more meaningful, and converted into action.
2.6 What is a project?
Projects are the "cutting edge" of development (Gittinger, 1972). It is gen-
erally accepted that the most difficult single problem facing agricultural
administrators in developing areas is implementation of development
programmes. Much of this can be traced to poor project preparation and
inappropriate survey and research work. For most agricultural0/rural de-
velopment activities, careful project preparation in advance of expendi-
ture is essential to ensure efficient, economic use of capital funds and to
increase the chances of on-schedule implementation.
In most developing countries, and South Africa's less developed areas are
no exception, the capacity to prepare and analyze projects lags. Adminis-
trators often overlook the fact that most development cannot proceed un-
less there is a specific project on which to spend the money available. El-
conceived, hastily planned projects virtually improvised on the spot, or no
projects at all, are too often the result.
The whole complex of activities involved In using resources (physical, cap-
ital, human) to gain benefits constitutes a 'project'. There is of course an
enormous variety of activities in the rural areas which may legitimately be
cast in project form. They may be as widely varying in their nature as irri-
gation, livestock, agricultural credit, land settlement, tree crops, agricul-
tural machinery, agricultural education as well as various non-agricul-
tural activities (small-scale industries, etc). Usually in such projects there
is an investment activity in which capital resources are expended to create
a producing asset from which it is expected that benefits will be realized
over an extended period of time. Often, projects are the first, concrete por-
tion of a larger, less precisely identified "programme".
In general, then, it can be said that a project is an activity on which money
will be spent in expectation of returns (not necesarily financial) and which
logically seems to lend itself to planning, financing and implementation
as a unit. It is a specific activity with a specific starting point and a
specific ending point intended to accomplish a specific objective. Nor-
mally it will have some geographic location or at least a rather clearly un-
derstoo'd area of geographic concentration.
3 . RESEARCH: DIAGNOSIS, DESIGN AND ACTION
How does one identify research priorities in a field like rural development
374
which, in this country, has no established research tradition? How does
one avoid disciplinary or 'pet technology' biases when designing rural de-
velopment systems? What is the most efficient and logical sequence of
steps to follow in rural development research?
I believe that the answer to all three questions lies in the deployment of a
multidisciplinary research team that will give attention to the three vital
components of the research process, namely, diagnosis, design and ac-
tion. The diagnosis phase relates to the identification of constraints and
potentials in any given land use or production system type. Detailed
guidelines for this phase would include a variable scale of analysis, rang-
ing from field to farm to the local catchment area or community level of or-
ganisation and beyond that to larger geographic or socio-economic units.
The design phase is concerned with the elaboration and testing of various
technological options in a tightly controlled situation. The last, most im-
portant of the three phases is that stage of the research programme when
the different units or parts of the development project or programme are
tested for socio-economic fit, as an integrated whole, in the field.
This phased approach to rural development research, which places em-
phasis on field evaluation, can be best described as development systems
research, or action research, which is more precisely defined as the design
and testing in less developed rural areas, in a situation where people are
involved, of new systems relating to crop, livestock and off-farm enter-
prises, with attention being given to the allocation and use of the four fac-
tors of production: land, labour, capital and management. The develop-
ment systems research approach forms an integral part of the integrated
rural development methodology referred to earlier. It differs from the con-
ventional approach (in South Africa) to academic research in that it in-
volves an integration of research and extension activities. Abasic and very
important feature of the approach is a continuing dialogue among re-
search workers, agricultural planners, and farmers that provides the feed-
back required in the design of meaningful rural development systems and
programmes.
3.1 Diagnosis and design at the macro level
Just as the presence of modern mechanized farms of the French colonists
in North Africa, the German Templar villages and the Jewish settlements
in Palestine, had very little impact on the subsistence agriculture of the
native Arab farmers, so the influence of White agriculture in South Africa
has had little influence on African agriculture. Even during the first de-
cade after the establishment of the state of Israel, the Arab's traditional
subsistence-type agriculture continued to exist side by side with the in-
tensive and specialized agriculture of the Jewish sector (Arnon & Raviv,
1980). However, in recent years, a striking change in Arab agriculture has
occurred. This change encompasses types and methods of production as
well as the way of life in the villages. The traditional crops, grown mainly
for home consumption, have been largely replaced by crops for processing
and for export. How this change has been brought about is of particular
interest in the context of designing an approach, at the macro level, for
breaking the vicious circle of poverty that is characteristic of subsistence
agriculture in South Africa.

The overriding characteristic of traditional agriculture is its low produc-

375
tivity, which basically is due to the low productivity of the rural labour
force and of the land. These two factors reinforce each other and are mutu-
ally self-perpetuating: when the labour force is far in excess of the work op-
portunities provided by subsistence agriculture, productivity of labour is
bound to remain low, and this has a direct bearing on the productivity of
the land. The situation becomes progressively worse as the rural popula-
tion increases without a concomitant increase in the area available for
cultivation.
All inputs that are essential for increasing the productivity of the land —
fertilizers, pesticides, improved tools, etc — have to be purchased. The
farmer cannot afford these inputs as long as labour productivity is low,
and so a vicious circle ensues which cannot be broken by the sole efforts of
the traditional farmer (figure 1). This situation explains the dominant'
Figure 1 — Vicious circle perpetuating the low productivity of
subsistence agriculture

Source: Arnon & Raviv, 1980, p 209.

characteristic of traditional agriculture, namely, its unchanging charac-
ter. The vicious circle of underemployment and low yields can be broken
only by forces from outside traditional agriculture. Change can be
achieved either by increasing the productivity of the land (as is the case in
376
countries which have experienced a "green revolution") and/or by
eliminating rural underemployment and thereby increasing the produc-
tivity of labour.
The major factor in the transformation of the Arab village in Israel was the
possibility of finding well-paid employment outside the village for the
superfluous village labour, with the attendant proviso that the ties with
the home village were maintained and savings invested primarily in the
home farms (Arnon & Raviv, 1980). While this model obviously cannot
apply to all the circumstances in which it is desired to modernize agricul-
ture, the Israeli experience is applicable to those cases in which an in-
teraction is possible between a developed sector, which temporarily ab-
sorbs surplus labour, and an underdeveloped sector in need of moderniza-
tion, which provides the labour.
Such a process can occur when two ethnic sectors exist side by side within
the confines of a single country, as is the case in Israel; or when in the
same country there are regions or sectors of the population at widely diffe-
rent levels of development — as between southern and northern Italy, or-
the rural and urban populations of Spain; or when a developed country,
such as West Germany, absorbs temporary labour from the rural areas of a
developing country, such as Turkey. In all these cases, workers can mi-
grate temporarily from the underdeveloped to the developed area while
still maintaining their permanent ties with the rural regions from which
they originate. This temporary migration can serve as the catalyst that
sets in motion the process of modernization and development of the back-
ward sector.
The similarity of the situation in Southern Africa, wherein temporary
labour migration to the developed sector is widespread, is apparent, al-
though in this instance the links maintained with the underdeveloped
sector are in many cases the result of government regulatory action rather
than a reflection of the wishes of the migrant worker and his family. It can
be assumed, however, that many migrant workers and their families
would choose to be rural based provided that the rural environment pro-
vided sufficient opportunity for the family to maintain itself at a reasona-
ble level and to enjoy the fruits of its labour. An indication of the extent of
labour movement in South Africa, and the need for it, from the indepen-
dent and self-governing national states to the developed White sector, is
presented in table 1.
Experience has shown in Israel and in other countries that the simple
existence of the precondition for modernization and development of the
backward sector, inherent in the temporary migration phenomenon, is
no assurance that modernization of the rural sector will actually take
place. On the contrary, it is a well-known fact that in most cases migration
of labour from rural areas to urban centres has no appreciable impact on
progress in the areas supplying the labour. Transformation of the rural
areas, even when the preconditions do exist, depends on a complex of
technical, social, cultural and economic factors. The absence of any one of
these will generally result in perpetuation of the state of stagnation in
which the rural sector finds itself. In addition, as far as South Africa is
concerned, it must be remembered that the tendencies in present migra-
tion patterns (net exodus between 1960 and 1980 of 1,25 million Africans
377
from the White rural areas and 0,75 million from metropolitan and other
urban areas combined, and the corresponding net immigration into the
independent and self-governing states) has given rise to an absurd, artifi-
cial population distribution (Simkins, 1981) which exerts a major influ-
ence on land use practices and possibilities in the underdeveloped rural
areas.
Table 1 — Population statistics for the independent and self-governing
national states

State Estimated Total Daily Migrant

resident population commuters workers
population economically to work in in SA
(1980) active (1980) SA(1981) (1981)

Transkei 2 300 000 553 789 9 100 336 000

Bophuthatswana 1 300 000 333 320 162 200 197 000
Venda 316 000 59 550 5 700 41000
Ciskei 670 000 136 220 38 400 60 000
KwaZulu 3 400 000 626 580 384 200 280 000
Qwaqwa 157 000 17 520 9 500 51 000
Lebowa 1 700 000 230 380 72 200 186 000
Gazankulu 512 000 48 720 9 700 58 000
Kangwane 161000 25 400 40 000 57 000
Kwandebele 157 000 19 100 8 700 63 000

Source: BENSO, 1980, 1981.

The probability of the process of modernization occurring spontaneously

is slight indeed. In order to activate the potential inherent in the possible
interaction between a developed sector which absorbs labour, and an un-
derdeveloped sector which "exports" its surplus labour, the entire process
has to be planned and orientated towards thegoalof rapidly transforming
the backward partner in this relationship. This requires a co-ordinated ef-
fort between the governing bodies of the two sectors concerned, both in
planning and in implementation. The planning should include:
— A comprehensive regional development plan for the rural region sup-
plying the labour, which would integrate industrial and agricultural
development of the area (that is, integrated rural development).
— A comprehensive plan for training the manpower that will be required
for the implementation of the development plan.
— A savings plan, whereby excess income over expenditure of the migrant
labour would be channeled into the productive enterprise envisaged in
the development plan, supplemented by additional funds coming from
governments and other sources.
If such a constructive approach can be adopted in South Africa, the
enormous wave of labour migration described in table 1 could make a con-
siderable contribution to the development of the underdeveloped African
rural areas. The modernization itself is complex, involving profound
changes in the factors of production and their relative importance. Four
related functions have to be developed simultaneously if efforts to trans-
form traditional agriculture are to be successful:
378
— The generation of new technology. This must be appropriate to the
specific conditions of a region and its resources, and is the function of
research.
— The effective transfer of the new technology to the farmer. This involves
education and training to make the fanner receptive to new ideas and
capable of applying new technologies, and an effective extension ser-
vice to provide the link between research and the farmer.
— The provision of essential conditions. Incentives are required to moti-
vate the farmer to change his methods of production, notwithstanding
the risks involved, such as appropriate pricing, credit, land reform and
other measures. A complex infrastructure is needed to service agricul-
tural production that is able to provide the necessary supplies and
facilities for both production and marketing. New social forms and
structural changes in rural society are also needed to enable the farmer
to cope with the new complexities with which he will be increasingly
faced as he moves from traditional to modern agriculture.
— The analysis of land capability, land use planning and the formulation
of strategies for promoting the process of change.
The course of events envisaged in the process of modernization of agricul-
ture, the key to development in the underdeveloped rural areas, is de-
picted in figure 2 which illustrates how advantage might be taken of a
situation which hitherto has been assumed to militate against develop-
ment of the African rural areas. The mobilisation of migrant workers,
through training and remuneration sufficient to provide a surplus for in-
vestment in their home area, could be one of the most productive forces of
aid provided by advanced to backward sectors in South Africa. Because of
the close juxtaposition between the developed and underdeveloped sectors
throughout Natal/KwaZulu, it is an approach that has particular appeal
in this region.
Whilst temporary migration can serve as the catalyst that sets in motion
the process of modernization and development of the backwards sector, at
the same time those people not interested in farming should be allowed,
indeed encouraged, to move permanently in an organised way into vil-
lages, rural service centres, urban/metropolitan areas where facilities are
provided and opportunities exist for them to find employment and enjoy a
decent standard of living.
In considering this concept of modernization of agriculture, it is impor-
• tant to recognize that although many African farmers have to date oper-
ated within traditional constraints and social obligations, they are not
wholly reactionary and unprogressive; they are most certainly not insensi-
tive to economic factors. It is also worth noting that it is often much easier
to introduce completely new systems than to try to modify custom.

3.2 Action at the local level

When all is said and done, however, it is the translation of theory into
practice at the local level that really matters. In this section, an indication
is given of the kind of basic principles on which all action programmes
need to be developed.
In South Africa there can be expected to be strong resistance to proposals
for change in the underdeveloped rural areas both from without (conser-
379
Figure 2— Process of modernization of agriculture

Source: modified from Arnon & Raviv, 1980, p 217.

vative attitude of government officials arising from a lack of experience

and understanding of how change can be brought about and from fear
that change will mean loss of control) and within (past experience of bet-
terment planning and suspicion concerning the motivation for change). It
is argued that, in this situation, development planning and implementa-
tion requires a process of resource evaluation, land use planning, and
selection of appropriate technology and management systems, followed by
a programme of evaluation in situ. By this is meant a pilot programme/
project, involving field experimentation with a new technology, alterna-
tive management systems and/or new organisational structures (promot-
ing local participation and effective transfer of information to the rural in-
380
habitants), which a multidisciplinary research team helps to design and
monitor with a view to the subsequent replication of the approach on a
larger scale after field tests have shown it to be viable.
The principal purposes of the exercise described above would be research
(close analysis of the benefits and costs of reform), demonstration (to pol-
icy-makers, administrators and farmers), and training (of officials and
staff charged with responsibility for extending the pattern elsewhere).
The principal responsibility for designing action research programmes
should be given to local research/consultancy bodies wherever possible,
under the supervision of government and in close consultation with the
administrators who will have to implement development plans. Monitor-
ing should be exclusively in the hands of external research bodies since
accuracy and objectivity in assessing experimental results is of the high-
est importance. Substantial training in the techniques of action research,
not only because it is an unfamiliar field to most but also because it in-
volves work of a kind which academic researchers do not find to be profes-
sionally rewarding at present, is essential.
It is important to emphasize that action research programmes are in-
tended as 'learning laboratories' for both clients (government planners
and rural people) and researchers. They require the direct involvement of
all parties in identifying problems, planning new approaches designed to
overcome them, and evaluating the results. If properly executed, action re-
search should be of much greater utility than conventional research or
consultancy, not only in identifying solutions to immediate problems but
also (through the learning it entails) in helping to develop the capacity to
deal with other problems that arise later. Moreover, by giving the resear-
chers access to knowledge about the inner workings of rural com-
munities, it should also provide much better opportunities to generate
practically relevant theory.
The potential advantages of action research stem from its rejection of the
view of the researcher as sole expert, investigating and experimenting on
an essentially passive world. Instead, the involvement of people in the re-
search process makes it possible to synthesize contributions to know-
ledge by both parties.
Kurt Lewin, to whom first use of the term action research is attributed
(Susman &Evered,1978, p 582-603), conceived of the process as a 'spiral
of steps, each of which is composed of a circle of planning, action and fact-
finding about the result of the action'. In more precise terms it is perhaps
better represented as a cyclical process with five phases:
— Diagnosing (identifying or defining a problem)
— Action planning (considering alternative courses of action for solving a
problem)
— Action taking (selecting a course of action)
— Evaluating (studying the consequences of an action)
— Identifying general findings (for application in development program-
mes/projects elsewhere)
An important point to bear in mind is that once the action research pro-
gramme has been completed and the development recommendations have
been accepted, the development programme/project must be executed by
the responsible implementation agency, with the research team reverting
381
to an advlsory and analytical role. This principle is central to the whole
purpose of action research which is to develop and test local capabilities
(government extension staff and people) under new conditions.
The reasons for most academics tending to shy away from action research
include a fear of association with problem solving programmes that may
yield no clear-cut answers, aversion to working with governments or
businesses, or an awareness that action research may not prove to be pro-
fessionally rewarding in terms of providing material for publications.
4. CONCLUSION
There are no easy, foolproof answers to the questions posed at the begin-
ning of this paper, but if the problems described and the solutions
suggested prompt positive action amongst those able to make some im-
pact on these problems, then the paper will have achieved its purpose.
Meaningful action in respect of rural development will only result if a
hard-nosed and down to earth approach is followed in collecting data,
analysing results and drawing up a cost/benefit balance sheet based on in-
field testing for economic viability and social acceptability.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
ARNON,I&RAVIV, M, 1980. From fellah to farmer. Settlement Study Centre, Re-
hovot.
BENSO, 1980, 1981. Statistical survey of Black development (1980, 1981). Pre-
toria.
GITTINGER, JP, 1972. Economic analysis of agricultural projects. John Hopkins
University Press, Baltimore.
HUNTER, G, 1981. A hard look at directing benefits to the rural poor and at par-
ticipation . Agricultural Administration Network Discussion Paper, No 6. Overseas
Development Institute, London.
MEIER, GM, 1976. Leading issues in economic development. Oxford University
Press, London.
SALDRU, 1982. Questionnaires are no short cut. Proceedings of workshop on
questionnaires held at the School of Economics, University of Cape Town, 30 April
— 1 May, 1982. Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University
of Cape Town.
SIMPKINS,CEW, 1981. The distribution of the African population ofSouth Africa
by age, sex and region-type: 1960, 1970 and 1980. Working Paper, No 32. Southern
Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, Cape Town.
SUSMAN,GI&EVERED, R D, 1978. "An assessment of the scientific merits of ac-
tion research". In Administrative Science Quarterly, 23.
SZAL, R J, 1979. "Popular participation, employment and the fulfilment of basic
needs". In International Labour Review, 118.
UNDP, 1979. Evaluation study No. 2: rural development. UNDP, New York.
WEITZ, R, 1979. Integrated rural development. Settlement Study Centre, Rehovot.

382