White Farms, Black Labour: Agrarian Transition in Rural South Africa, 1930-1970¶
Alan Jeeves; Jonathan Crush (1990). White Farms, Black Labour: Agrarian Transition in Rural South Africa, 1930-1970. History Workshop, 'Structure and Experience in the Making of Apartheid', 6-10 February 1990. University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
| Type | conference paper |
| Scope | Economics and economic history of apartheid |
| Method | synthesis review |
| Period studied | 1930–1970 |
| Regions | Northern Transvaal, Eastern Transvaal, Northern Natal, Zululand, Swaziland |
| Themes | agriculture land, mining migrant labour, labour markets wages, bantustans removals influx, business and state, demography urbanisation, resistance social movements |
| Citation key | jeeves1990 |
Argument¶
This is an outline of a new research project on the labour systems of white commercial agriculture after 1930. It argues that white farming, like gold mining, was a pillar of the low-wage labour system. The state's pass laws and influx control, together with subsidies and protection, gave farmers guaranteed access to cheap black labour, and this distorted farm development and depressed wages. The authors identify unexplained puzzles: why urban competition for labour did not force up farm or mine wages, why output and employment grew despite constant complaints of shortage, and why shortage turned into surplus by the late 1950s. They say mechanization alone cannot explain that last shift. They propose an archival and oral-history study of an 'eastern arc' from the northern Transvaal to Swaziland and northern Natal, including foreign migrant labour on farms.
Evidence and method¶
A literature review plus a preliminary survey of archival collections. The authors say the main sources will be archival, supplemented by oral data on sharecroppers, labour tenants and migrants, and by contemporaneous investigative literature on farm labour and Simkins' statistical series. The paper itself presents no new data.
Place in the debates¶
- Agrarian transition to capitalism (Morris structural-marxist model vs disaggregated critics such as Keegan) (see Agrarian transition to capitalism and the fate of the African peasantry). Sides with the critics. It cites Keegan's view of a 'complex, ambiguous and multi-faceted process' and calls for geographically and temporally disaggregated, regional study.
- Causes of the shift from farm labour shortage to labour surplus (mechanization explanation) (see Farm labour: mechanisation, labour shedding, wages and labour control). Sceptical of the conventional mechanization account. It says mechanization was unevenly introduced and 'cannot explain all of it', and points to other causes such as rural radicalism and state policy.
- Cheap/low-wage labour system and the role of agriculture alongside mining (see Cheap labour thesis and the function of the reserves). Holds that white agriculture was a bastion of low-wage labour, sustained by state coercion and by subsidies funded from the gold mines.
- Effectiveness of influx control (see Influx control, pass laws and African urbanisation). Notes that research shows influx control failed to protect low-wage employers' labour supplies. The authors want to know why this did not force wage improvements or the end of migrancy.
Findings¶
-
Farming was the largest employer of black labour in the period of rapid growth, exceeding mining. (p. 2)
During its decades of most rapid growth after 1930, white agriculture employed more black workers by far than any other part of the economy, including mining.
-
The labour history of white farms is under-studied relative to mining and manufacturing despite its scale. (p. 3)
until the 1960's, the white farms employed far more black workers than any other economic sector, including mining.
-
White agriculture was backward and dependent on the state rather than a generator of surplus for industry. (p. 4)
white agriculture remained backward and inefficient well into the twentieth century.
-
Gold mining subsidized white agriculture via taxation. (p. 4)
Every South African government after Union taxed the gold mines in order to subsidize farming.
-
The state guaranteed farmers a labour supply free from competition. (p. 4)
Above all, the state made sure that the white farms had guaranteed access, free of competition, to large pools of unskilled, inexpensive black labour.
-
State-managed labour supply distorted farming and held down wages. (p. 4)
The effect of this was to distort the development of farming in South Africa, to divert resources from other areas which would have used them more productively and to depress farm wages.
-
Urban competition for labour did not raise wages on farms or mines, a puzzle the authors leave unexplained. (p. 5)
Yet competition for labour from the emerging industrial sector had little effect on wages or conditions on either mines or farms.
-
The farm labour market moved from shortage to surplus by the late 1950s. (p. 5)
By the end of the 1950's, the labour situation on white farms had changed from one of labour shortage to labour surplus.
-
Mechanization is an incomplete explanation of the shortage-to-surplus shift. (p. 5)
The causes of the transformation of shortage into surplus are, however, complex, and simple mechanization (which anyway was very unevenly introduced) cannot explain all of it.
-
Farms in the eastern arc relied heavily on foreign migrant labour. (p. 6)
Indeed, the farms in this region were major employers of foreign migrant labour throughout this period.
Evidence ledger¶
Sources used¶
| Source | Kind | Period | How used |
|---|---|---|---|
| Archival collections on white farmers' politics and farm labour (unspecified) | state archives | 1910s-1970 (Union onward) | Described as the main source for the planned project, revealing the political battles of white farmers and the struggles of workers and families over labour tenancy. |
| Oral data from black sharecroppers, labour tenants and migrants | interviews oral history | 1930-1970 experiences | Planned to illuminate the experiences of sharecroppers, labour tenants and migrants alongside the archival core. |
| C. Simkins, 'African Population, employment and Incomes on Farms Outside the Reserves, 1923-69', Carnegie Conference Paper, 1984 | secondary literature compilation | 1923-1969 | Statistical overview of demographic and wage trends on farms, used as background for the period after 1930. |
| Contemporaneous investigative literature on farm labour conditions (Ainslie, First, Race Relations Journal articles, SAJE articles, ILO Review on Zululand sugar estates, Native Farm Labour Committee report as reviewed by Marquard) | newspapers periodicals | 1931-1959 (plus Ainslie 1973) | Treated as contemporary evidence on farm labour conditions, an important source for the project. |
| Statements of farmers' associations and the Chamber of Mines on labour shortages | employer association records | 1930s-1950s | Cited as evidence that employers attributed shortages to growing urban employment; no specific records are named. |
Inference¶
Quantification: None.
Research-project outline: a historiographical review plus a proposed regional case study of the 'eastern arc', with a Swaziland comparison. The argument rests on synthesis of secondary literature and theory-informed assertion; archival and oral research is yet to be done.
Key claims¶
| Claim | Basis | Strength |
|---|---|---|
| White agriculture employed more black workers than any other sector, including mining, in the period of its rapid growth, and was a pillar of the low-wage labour system. (p. 2) | No source is cited; asserted from general knowledge and secondary literature (Wilson, Simkins). | Asserted |
| White agriculture depended on state support and on subsidies from gold mining, and was shielded from competition from black peasant farming and guaranteed cheap labour. (p. 4) | Secondary literature (Legassick, Morrell, Trapido, Bundy); no primary data presented. | Asserted |
| The labour situation on white farms shifted from shortage to surplus by the end of the 1950s, and mechanization alone cannot explain this. (p. 5) | Conventional account from secondary literature; the authors' doubt rests on assertion, to be tested in the project. | Asserted |
| Despite employer complaints of shortage and competition from urban industry, wages and conditions on mines and farms did not improve and output and employment kept expanding, a paradox unexplained within the South African labour market. (p. 5) | Employer association statements and the authors' reading of the literature; no data given. | Asserted |
| Farms in the eastern arc were major employers of foreign migrant labour, and Swaziland provides a comparison of progressive agribusiness capital. (p. 6) | Authors' prior work (Crush on Swazi labour) and preliminary archival impression; no data presented. | Illustrative or anecdotal |
| Labour conditions on white farms after 1930 are under-researched, and the archival sources are extensive and little used. (p. 6) | Review of the historiography and a preliminary look at archival collections. | Partial data |
The author's caveats¶
The authors state this is an outline of a project 'just beginning', based on a preliminary examination of archives. They note that earlier work (Wilson's farm labour essays) contained very little archival research.
Gaps in the evidence¶
The paper presents no quantitative data, so claims about farm employment, wages, mechanization and the shortage-to-surplus shift need the agricultural censuses, the population censuses and Simkins' farm employment and wage series. Claims about the labour system's operation would need named archive files, such as Native Affairs and magistrates' records and farmers' association minutes, plus the oral histories, which could be collected from the 1980s. Evidence on foreign migrant recruitment would need recruiting company and Swaziland colonial administration records, which existed then and survive in archives now.
Replicability: Data poorly documented.