This article explores the contradictory and contested but closely interlocking efforts of NGOs and the state in planning for land reform in South Africa. As government policy has come increasingly to favor the better-off who are potential commercial farmers, so NGO efforts have been directed, correspondingly, to safeguarding the interests of those conceptualized as poor and dispossessed. The article explores the claim that planned "tenure reform" is the best way to provide secure land rights, especially for labourers residing on white farms; illustrates the complex disputes over this claim arising between state and NGO sectors; and argues that we need to go beyond the concept of "neoliberal governmentality" to understand the relationship between these sectors.Keywords: citizenship, NGOs, land reform, planning, South Africa, the state Planning "seeks to make the will of the people in some way compatible with efficient control" (Robertson 1984). Whereas such planning was a paradigmatic undertaking of states in the postwar era, the outsourcing of many state functions and the establishment of parallel bureaucracies-often by NGOs-have been seen as both cause and effect of the progressive weakening of states and their functions (Abrams and Weszkalnys, this volume). NGOs have become involved in "planned interventions" (Long 2001), drafting policies and laying out designs that aim to shape the future. Rather than replacing the state, however, they interact with it in the enterprise of planning "to turn an unreliable citizenry into a structured, readily accessible public" (Selznick 1949: 220).Such outsourcing of state functions has been associated with neoliberalism, and seen as a sign of "neoliberal governmentality" (Ferguson and Gupta 2002). The program of planned intervention described here sounds like an enclosed and self-referential system, and hence evidence of "South African exceptionalism" (Bernstein 1996). But the country's economy is of course implicated in global trends, and was incorporated into the sphere of global trade and industry during the 1990s on terms that made competing in the world market difficult. This led to a loss of jobs in industry, to the government's adoption of strict restrictions on state spending, and to its pursuit of an economic restructuring similar to that implemented in many other countries. Some have claimed that South Africa's new political leaders showed unwarranted enthusiasm in choosing the path of privatization rather than delivering welfare and safeguarding the interests of the poor and marginalized, attributing the failure of all of these to strategies followed by the new elite within the context of the neoliberal global economy, rather than to the complex and particular history of South Africa or to its specific social and legal culture (Bond 2000;Marais 2001).Seen from this point of view, it seemed clear that poor people in post-1994 South Africa were destined not to enjoy much improvement in their well-being. Ambitious plans for restructuring the ownership of pr...