{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01903807615230461, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.403846153846154, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Efficacy of Preserving Communal Tenure in South Africa

European colonialism and apartheid in South Africa included the alienation of land just as the restructuring of customary tenure. The reconstructed customary tenure vested title to land in the colonial and apartheid state in this way, merging sovereignty and property. The merger encouraged authoritative control of rural society. Customary tenure was argued to be communal and excluded individual rights. Regardless of the official rendition, customary tenure was dynamic, recognized individual use rights and “facilitated accumulation and differentiation.” In the present-day, customary tenure is perceived as unregulated capital, holding back the ability of the poor people to prosper. Thus, the relevance and place of customary tenure is in dispute. This article aims to examine the efficacy for preserving customary tenure, using Vhembe district as a case study. The article uses the exploratory qualitative approach to collect data.