Table 3: Profile of land reform projects and beneficiaries

||_National_|_Eastern_<br>_Cape_|Free_State_|_Gauteng_|_KwaZulu_<br> <br>_Natal_|_Mpumalanga_|_Northem_<br>_Cape_|_Northern_<br>_Province_|_Northwest_|_Western_<br>_Cape_|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||||House|hold level info|rmation<br>||||||
|Poor|74.9%|77.9%|73.4%|74.6%|79.7%|83.1%<br>|66.7%<br>|71.8%<br>|83.3%<br>|66.8<br>|
|Percapita expenditure median|221.08|209.19|237.51|248.28<br>|177.91<br>|191.14<br>|263.50<br>|180.39<br>|120.73<br>|310.66<br>|
|No. of household members|5.47|4.68|4.64|4.14|7.61<br>|6.35<br>|4.54<br>|5.97<br>|5.03<br>|4.81<br>|
|Head's age years|50.45|48.41<br>|51.41|44.96|52.14<br>|52.47<br>|51.07<br>|54.37<br>|50.67<br>|45.53<br>|
|Head's education years|3.09|3.58|3.38|4.69|1.87<br>|2.75<br>|3.65<br>|2.73<br>|2.45<br>|3.48<br>|
|Female headed|30.8%|28.4%|21.2%|50.0%<br>|25.9%<br>|28.8%<br>|35.4%<br>|56.5%<br>|30.2%<br>|20.0%<br>|
|Access to housing subsidy|6.2%|2.7%|3.9%|6.8%<br>|4.8%<br>|2.1%<br>|11.6%<br>|0.0%<br>|0.0%<br>|21.3%<br>|
|Receive pension|32.4%|22.3%|23.9%|14.0%|38.8%<br>|35.4%<br>|32.0%<br>|53.5%<br>|42.9%<br>|23.5%<br>|
|Have savings account|50.1%|44.2%|55.3%|47.5%|48.3%|38.7%|51.4%|37.0%|41.3%<br>|82.6%<br>|
|<br>Access to credit|24.1%|37.5%|35.3%|10.3%|24.3%|12.0%|20.5%|10.2%|27.0%<br>|35.5%<br>|
|Accesstoelectricity|42.2%|35.4%|82.5%|42.4%|10.8%|42.1%|38.8%|24.1%|4.5%<br>|71.8%<br>|
|<br>No running water|54.9%|69.9%|21.4%|52.5%|85.8%|67.2%<br>|51.0%<br>|73.6%<br>|87.9%<br>|2.8%<br>|
|Roads bad|72.5%|59.3%|53.9%|83.1%|94.6%|80.5%|65.3%|86.4%<br>|74.2%<br>|66.9%<br>|
|Roads impassable most of the time|44.6%|46.0%|28.6%|23.7%|49.3%<br>|50.3%<br>|93.2%<br>|50.9%<br>|13.6%<br>|16.2%<br>|
|Pit latrine or no toilet|66.2%|92.0%|57.1%|45.8%|86.5%|90.8%<br>|56.5%<br>|95.5%<br>|28.8%<br>|16.9%<br>|
|No permanent housing|54.1%|51.3%|48.7%|74.6%|82.4%|57.9%<br>|45.6%<br>|42.7%<br>|74.2%<br>|26.8%<br>|
|Noofindividuals|1160|113|154|59|148|195|147|110|66|142|
||||Proj|ect level inform|ation||||||
|Mean revenue per beneficiary|6212.7|1630.0|2222.5|1484.5<br>|-3.3<br>|5355.6<br>|181.8<br>|18043.3<br>|5.4<br>|15432.7<br>|
|Number of people on the legal entity|24.5|94.9|7.8|12.0|10.3|12.0|10.6|80.8<br>|13.5<br>|7.6<br>|
|<br>Share of land communally operated|71.3%|72.8%|97.8%|45.7%|37.1%|95.9%|34.4%<br>|64.8%<br>|86.3%<br>|37.6%<br>|
|<br>Share of projects who received land|50.5%|19.5%|60.4%|40.7%|34.5%|73.8%|39.5%|67.3%<br>|77.3%<br>|39.4%<br>|
|<br>Know community constituiton|64.4%|44.2%|98.1%|45.8%|58.1%|39.5%|84.4%|71.8%<br>|74.2%<br>|62.7%<br>|
|<br>Make contribution to project|35.4%|48.7%|77.3%|44.1%|10.8%|26.7%|10.9%|50.0%|22.7%<br>|34.5%<br>|
|<br>Committee works harmoniously|71.3%|87.5%|46.7%|60.0%|84.6%|76.9%|63.6%|100.0%|50.0%<br>|66.7%<br>|
|<br>Violence is a problem|27.6%|12.5%|20.0%|60.0%|61.5%|15.4%|36.4%|11.1%<br>|50.0%<br>|22.2%<br>|
|<br>Land invasions are a problem|35.6%|25.0%|26.7%|40.0%|84.6%|46.2%<br>|27.3%<br>|11.1%<br>|50.0%<br>|22.2%<br>|
|Theft is a problem<br>|60.9%<br>|37.5%<br>|66.7%<br>|40.0%<br>|100.0%<br>|69.2%<br>|54.5%<br>|66.7%<br>|100.0%<br>|55.5%<br>|
|No of projects|87|8|15|5|13|13|11|9|4|9|

Source: DLA Land Reform Beneficiary Survey