Prospects for Negotiation as a Means of Undoing the Gordian Knot of Just Land Reform in South Africa

IF 0.9 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
M. Anstey
{"title":"Prospects for Negotiation as a Means of Undoing the Gordian Knot of Just Land Reform in South Africa","authors":"M. Anstey","doi":"10.1163/15718069-bja10071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Creative and courageous negotiations between 1990 and 1994 enabled South African leaders to end apartheid and manage the first phase of a transition to a constitutional democracy. Land was a key issue in the struggle for democracy, but after thirty years remains unresolved. The Bill of Rights in the Constitution affords protection for property rights but also commits the government to land reform by way of restitution or redress of the disadvantaged who suffered through dispossession following the 1913 Land Act. The failure of government’s three-track system to deliver on the goals it set for transfer of land from white to black ownership has strengthened demands for radical change. This article explores the prospects of negotiation as a means for resolving obstacles to progress, including the problem of competing notions of justice. New levels of engagement between stakeholders enabling a sense of justness in the process and outcome are required.","PeriodicalId":45224,"journal":{"name":"International Negotiation-A Journal of Theory and Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Negotiation-A Journal of Theory and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718069-bja10071","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Creative and courageous negotiations between 1990 and 1994 enabled South African leaders to end apartheid and manage the first phase of a transition to a constitutional democracy. Land was a key issue in the struggle for democracy, but after thirty years remains unresolved. The Bill of Rights in the Constitution affords protection for property rights but also commits the government to land reform by way of restitution or redress of the disadvantaged who suffered through dispossession following the 1913 Land Act. The failure of government’s three-track system to deliver on the goals it set for transfer of land from white to black ownership has strengthened demands for radical change. This article explores the prospects of negotiation as a means for resolving obstacles to progress, including the problem of competing notions of justice. New levels of engagement between stakeholders enabling a sense of justness in the process and outcome are required.
谈判作为解开南非公正土地改革难题的一种手段的前景
1990年至1994年期间进行的富有创造性和勇气的谈判使南非领导人结束了种族隔离制度,并顺利完成了向宪政民主过渡的第一阶段。在争取民主的斗争中,土地是一个关键问题,但30年后仍未得到解决。《宪法》中的《权利法案》保护财产权,但也要求政府进行土地改革,向1913年《土地法》之后被剥夺土地的弱势群体提供补偿或补偿。政府的三轨制度未能实现其设定的将土地从白人所有权转移到黑人所有权的目标,这加强了对彻底改革的要求。本文探讨了谈判作为解决进展障碍的一种手段的前景,包括相互竞争的正义概念的问题。需要在利益相关者之间建立新的参与水平,从而在过程和结果中产生正义感。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: International Negotiation: A Journal of Theory and Practice examines negotiation from many perspectives, to explore its theoretical foundations and to promote its practical application. It addresses the processes of negotiation relating to political, security, environmental, ethnic, economic, business, legal, scientific and cultural issues and conflicts among nations, international and regional organisations, multinational corporations and other non-state parties. Conceptually, the Journal confronts the difficult task of developing interdisciplinary theories and models of the negotiation process and its desired outcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信