African population, employment and incomes on farms outside the reserves, 1923-1969¶
Charles Simkins (1984). African population, employment and incomes on farms outside the reserves, 1923-1969. Second Carnegie Inquiry into Poverty and Development in Southern Africa, Carnegie Conference Paper No. 25. SALDRU, University of Cape Town.
| Type | conference paper |
| Scope | Economics and economic history of apartheid |
| Method | descriptive quantitative |
| Period studied | 1923–1969 |
| Regions | White rural areas of South Africa outside the reserves, Eastern Cape/Ciskei, Natal/Zululand, Transvaal, Orange Free State, Northern Cape |
| Themes | agriculture land, labour markets wages, bantustans removals influx, demography urbanisation, inequality poverty unemployment, methods data sources |
| Citation key | simkins1984a |
Argument¶
Simkins reconstructs the African population, labour supply, employment and cash-and-kind incomes on White-owned farms from 1923 to 1969. He finds that regular and domestic employment was close to the available labour supply (a shortage) until about 1955, then fell well below it as employment levelled off while population kept growing. He argues that the Agricultural Census undercounts Africans after 1955 because more Africans lived in de facto occupation of unoccupied farms or parts of holdings. Cross-sectional district maps show low-wage, low-cash, labour-abundant 'backward' regions next to the major reserves. These are the prime targets of state resettlement, and the state encouraged labour-saving change. He concludes that 1955 (labour bureaux and modern influx control) was a turning point, and that Lipton's 'two agricultures' should be replaced by three agricultures that shade into one another.
Evidence and method¶
Six Population Censuses (1921-1970) with interpolation; Agricultural Censuses (1955-1969); Union Statistics for Fifty Years; the Report of the Native Farm Labour Committee 1937-39; the 1936-37 to 1953-54 Summary Report on Agricultural and Pastoral Production; 1980 Current Population Survey participation rates; magisterial-district data from the 1960 and 1955 censuses; 1959 Commission on European Occupancy of the Rural Areas. Production is valued at 1946 producer prices and incomes are deflated with the consumer price index.
Place in the debates¶
- Lipton's 'two agricultures' (efficient white vs backward black sector) (see Agricultural policy, productivity, farm size and land reform). Questions the sharp dual thesis: transitional belts are extensive and the interquartile range of incomes is narrow. Proposes three agricultures (progressive capitalist, backward capitalist, reserve) shading into one another.
- Whether farmer pressure caused the 1955 labour bureau/influx control system (see Farm labour: mechanisation, labour shedding, wages and labour control). Cites Morris's argument that White farmers pressed for it. Adds that within a decade farm labour demand had levelled off, making the system unnecessary to farmers.
- Reliability of census data on the farm population and of farmer valuations of payments in kind (see Data reliability and econometric method). Holds that population is substantially undercounted after 1955 while employment is measured fairly well. Uses farmers' in-kind valuations, noting others claim they are too high or omit goods and services.
- Causes of the post-1960 emigration and resettlement from White farms (see Farm labour: mechanisation, labour shedding, wages and labour control). Attributes it both to wage differentials and, very importantly, to state resettlement under the 1936 Land Act anti-squatting provisions, aimed at areas of 'surplus labour' and rising black/white ratios.
Findings¶
-
Farm population grew slightly 1921-36, suggesting net immigration onto farms, before emigration after 1936. (p. 2)
The 1921-1936 population growth rate figure suggests a possible small net immigration on to the farms.
-
Agricultural Census farm population counts fall far below Population Census counts, implying many Africans were uncounted on farms. (p. 3)
These observations are 25%, 29~ and 46% below the Population Census estimates.
-
The number of holdings fell much faster than area held in the 1960s, consistent with growing de facto African occupation of farm land. (p. 5)
the number of holdings fell fran a peak of 106 220 in 1959 to 91 886 ten years later while the total area held fell fran 92 859 000 to 89 135 000
-
Regular and domestic employment was a very high share of on-farm labour supply from 1936 to 1956, consistent with the documented farm labour shortage. (p. 7)
Between 1936 and 1956 the proportion was consis- tently 90% or higher
-
Pre-war African farm income in cash and kind was estimated at about £9.7 million, with two independent estimates agreeing. (p. 12)
yields a total incane in cash and kirrl- in 1937 of £9.66 million, which agrees very well with an estimate of £9.73 million
-
The share of own production in African farm income fell sharply, from 28% around 1929 to about 10% in 1969, as wages became dominant. (p. 15)
to the point where the share of production in 1969 was aJ:out 10%, canpared with the 28% of forty years earlier.
-
Agricultural production per head on farms was consistently a little over half of that in the reserves. (p. 15)
one finds that throughout the period the former fluctuated without trerrl at about 59% of the latter
-
In 1955 lower-income districts tended to pay a lower proportion of income in cash, confirming R.H. Smith's earlier Natal observation. (p. 18)
the lONer the incane per head, the lewer ten:l.s to be the proportion of inCCITe paid in cash
-
1955 was a turning point for farm Africans, as for reserve Africans, because of labour bureaux and modern influx control. (p. 21)
1955 was a turning point for Africans on White farms just as it was for Africans in the reserves and for the same reason - the installation of the labour bureau systen and the rro:l.ern form of influx control.
-
Farm labour demand levelled off within about a decade of influx control, making it unnecessary for farmers and shifting policy towards expulsion. (p. 21)
danand for labour had started to level off in absolute tenns, rendering the systen unnecessary for farmers
-
The evidence supports a three-fold rather than dual classification of South African agriculture. (p. 23)
Perhaps it would be best to distinguish three agricultures in South Africa which shade into one another:
-
State policy encouraged labour-saving technical change and turned backward White farming into progressive farming, alongside resettlement to the reserves. (p. 23)
The state response has been a policy of en=uraging labour-saving technical change: in practice an important part of this process has been the conversion of backward white agriculture into progressive white agriculture.
Evidence ledger¶
Sources used¶
| Source | Kind | Period | How used |
|---|---|---|---|
| Population Censuses (six observations 1921, 1936, 1946, 1951, 1960, 1970) of the African farm population | population census | 1921-1970 | Provides the benchmark African farm population observations from which annual estimates are interpolated. |
| Statistical News Release P11.1 of 12.2.1969 (1960 census farm population) | official statistical series | 1960 | Supplies the 1960 African farm population figure in Table 1. |
| Unpublished tabulation from the 1970 census C-returns | population census | 1970 | Supplies the 1970 African farm population figure in Table 1. |
| Agricultural Censuses (farm population counts 1955, 1960, 1965; production, employment, income in cash and kind, casual workers, by magisterial district) | agricultural census | 1923-1969 | Source of African agricultural production, regular/domestic employment and income data, and of a competing farm population count used to infer undercount. |
| 1951 Population Census figures on Africans on unoccupied farms | population census | 1946, 1951 | Gives the only data on Africans living on unoccupied farms, supporting the de facto occupation argument. |
| Report of the Commission of Enquiry into European Occupancy of the Rural Areas (1959), Chapter 4 and pp.19-20 | commission or official report | 1959 | Used for analysis of the rising African/White ratio and the police estimate of Africans on unoccupied farms. |
| South African Police evidence to the Commission on African numbers on unoccupied farms, 1954 | state archives | 1954 | Gives a (disputed) estimate of Africans on unoccupied farms, halved by the author to show it still exceeds 500 000. |
| South African Statistics 1978, p.9.4 (number and area of holdings 1959 and 1969) | official statistical series | 1959-1969 | Shows the number of holdings fell much faster than area, suggesting growth in African de facto occupation. |
| Current Population Survey, rural African labour force participation rates, March 1980 (via Simkins, The Context of African Unemployment, Table 12) | household or labour survey microdata | March 1980 | Starting point for participation rates used to construct historical on-farm labour supply curve. |
| Simkins, Distribution of the African population of South Africa by age, sex and region-type 1960, 1970 and 1980, SALDRU Working Paper No. 32 | secondary literature compilation | 1960-1980 | Provides the 1980 rural age distribution used to compute average participation rates. |
| Union Statistics for Fifty Years, p.G.3 (regular and domestic African farm employment to 1957) | official statistical series | 1918-1957 | Source of regular and domestic employment series in Table 3 up to 1957. |
| Report of the Native Farm Labour Committee 1937-39 (Pretoria, 1939) | commission or official report | 1937-1939 | Documents farm labour shortage and provides illustrative family cash-and-kind incomes used to estimate prewar per capita income. |
| 1937 Agricultural Census (provincial distribution of Africans working on White farms) | agricultural census | 1937 | Weights provincial income estimates into a national average of £4.33 per head. |
| Department of Economics, University of Natal, estimate of national income (1936), in 'The National Income and the Non-European', Handbook of Race Relations (Hellman, 1949), p.316 | secondary literature compilation | 1936 | Cross-check on the author's 1937 total cash and kind income estimate. |
| Consumer price index (used to convert incomes to 1946 prices) | official statistical series | 1920s-1969 | Deflates cash and kind incomes to 1946 prices. |
| Native Economic Commission Report 1930-32 wage tabulations | commission or official report | late 1920s-1932 | Via the Farm Labour Committee, used to justify constant per capita real incomes 1929-39. |
| Summary Report on Agricultural and Pastoral Production 1936-37 to 1938-39 and 1946-47 to 1953-54 | official statistical series | 1936-1954 | Defines what in-kind payments are included in farm worker income. |
| 1962 Agricultural Census separate tabulations on grazing and arable land | agricultural census | 1962 | Shows that value of land made available to Africans is not counted in income, avoiding double counting. |
| Simkins, Agricultural Production in the African Reserves of South Africa 1918-1969, DSRG Working Paper No. 10 (1979) | secondary literature compilation | 1918-1969 | Provides the reserve production series and valuation methods used for comparison and for Figure 8. |
| R.H. Smith, Native Farm Labour in Natal, South African Journal of Economics, 1941 | secondary literature compilation | 1941 | Prior finding that low incomes go with low cash proportions, compared with the 1955 pattern. |
New data¶
Author-constructed annual series 1923-1969 of African farm population (interpolated), labour supply, regular/domestic employment, agricultural production and cash-and-kind income on White farms (1946 prices), plus 1955/1960 magisterial-district cross-sections of employment/labour supply, income per worker, cash share and per capita agricultural income.
Inference¶
Quantification: Descriptive tables.
Time-series reconstruction by interpolation of census data, with assumed participation rates and income constants, checked by cross-sectional district-level maps (1955, 1960, 1960-70 growth) and interpreted through inference about undercounting and de facto African occupation.
Key claims¶
| Claim | Basis | Strength |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural Census farm population counts fall far below Population Census figures, largely because of growing de facto African occupation of farms without resident White holders. (p. 3) | Comparison of Agricultural Census counts (1955, 1960, 1965) with Population Census; holdings vs area data; police and census data on unoccupied farms. | Partial data |
| Employment as a share of labour supply was 90%+ in 1936-56 (labour shortage) then fell below 80% for most of the sixties as employment levelled off. (p. 9) | Table 3 employment series against supply curve derived from Population Census and 1980 participation rates; Native Farm Labour Committee report. | Partial data |
| Income per head of Africans on farms rose during the war and early 1950s, fell substantially 1955-65 and the share of own production in total income fell from 28% to about 10%. (p. 15) | Table 4 constructed from Agricultural Census production and income data and the Farm Labour Committee-based prewar estimate. | Partial data |
| 1955 district cross-sections show low-wage, low-cash-share regions near reserves (Eastern Cape, northern Natal, northern Transvaal), with plentiful labour and backwardness near reserve boundaries. (p. 21) | Agricultural Census 1955 and 1960 magisterial district data mapped in Figures 3, 6 and 7. | Partial data |
| Introduction of the labour bureau system and influx control in the 1950s was a turning point, partly due to farmer pressure, but was soon unnecessary as labour demand levelled off. (p. 21) | Table 1 population growth rates and employment series; reliance on Morris for the pressure argument. | Illustrative or anecdotal |
| Per capita African agricultural incomes in some white rural areas exceeded those in reserves, but with shading transitions, supporting three overlapping agricultures rather than two sharply divided ones. (p. 23) | Figure 8 map of per capita agricultural incomes by magisterial district combining wages and own production with reserve production. | Partial data |
| Emigration from backward farm areas was fastest 1960-70, driven partly by state resettlement under the anti-squatting provisions of the 1936 Land Act. (p. 23) | Figure 4 district growth rates 1960-70 combined with qualitative reasoning about resettlement; no direct resettlement data. | Asserted |
The author's caveats¶
Acknowledges the large discrepancy between Agricultural and Population Census counts, that the Population Census is itself likely a slight undercount, and that this explanation is 'as yet inadequately confirmed'. Notes that census participation rates are too high, that 1955 participation rates may differ from 1980, that farmer valuations of in-kind income are contested, that casual workers' residence is unknown, and that several years are interpolated or missing.
Gaps in the evidence¶
The central claim of unrecorded de facto African occupation relies on inference from discrepancies; direct evidence such as farm-level surveys, magistrates' or Native Affairs Department records, or removal registers would test it better. Participation rates from 1980 are projected backward, and the 1923-28 and prewar income series rest on a single committee's illustrative budgets; household budget surveys or wage records existed only partially. The role of influx control, farmer lobbying and resettlement is asserted rather than evidenced from archives or Hansard, which exist and could be used.
Replicability: Data described but not public.