approaches to redistribution. Examples of approaches to land redistribution can be seen in South Africa and Malawi, and each has drawn on lessons from programs in Brazil.

_South Africa’s land reform program._<sup>_24_</sup> At the end of apartheid in 1994, South Africa’s new government introduced tenure reform, restitution, and redistribution of land. The redistribution portion of its program was designed to facilitate transfer of land through marketmediated transactions to historically disadvantaged South Africans who wanted to enter farming. In 2001, after disappointing experience up until then, a new program was introduced that provided graduated levels of land and start-up grants depending on the amount of the beneficiary’s contribution. Those who could contribute little (and most of that in kind) received a base allotment of land and a grant of R20,000. Those who could contribute more or leverage a bank loan could receive larger holdings and a grant of up to R100,000. Although the goal was to redistribute 30 percent of the land by 2014, as of March 2011, only 6.27 million hectares (7.2 percent of land owned by white African farmers) had been redistributed to black African farmers, and many of those who received it struggled to manage it well. The program had limited success because the allocations of land and start-up capital were not accompanied by advisory services or technical assistance. Moreover, the land available through the program was constrained by a prohibition on subdivision, even though repeal of the prohibition was announced several times. Beneficiaries of small allotments were forced into group structures similar to collective farms, and experienced the deficiencies in internal management under these arrangements that are well documented elsewhere. Despite programs in place for a decade and a half, South Africa has made little progress in providing growing numbers of underemployed rural young people with land that they can farm.

_Malawi’s land reform program._<sup>_25_</sup> Malawi recently piloted a land reform program in four districts in which underutilized land from former tea estates was made available to smallholders wishing to relocate from densely settled areas. Patterned after Brazil’s market-based approach to land reform, the pilot had three key elements: (i) voluntary acquisition by communities of land from estate owners, the government, or private donations; (ii) resettlement and on-farm development, including transportation of settlers, establishment of shelter, and purchase of basic inputs and necessary advisory services; and (iii) survey and registration of redistributed land, initially under group title with the expectation that individual titles would be provided to beneficiaries upon demand in the future. A cap on the maximum amount of a grant that could be spent on acquisition of land improved the bargaining power of beneficiaries relative to that of sellers of land,<sup>26</sup> and access to advisory services significantly lowered the failure rate.

Although the program did not have an explicit focus on attracting young people, most participants were in fact young. Beneficiaries preferred to relocate within or close to their original homes, which served to preserve cultural and social ties. This was also beneficial for young people for whom links to the older generation during a period of family formation were

> 24 Adapted from Lahiff and Li (2012) and World Bank (2012b).

> 25 Adapted from Tchale (2012) and World Bank (2012b).

> 26 Each family received a grant of US$1,050, managed directly by beneficiaries, of which up to 30 percent was for land acquisition, and the rest for transportation, water, shelter, and farm development.

28