Okay so first things first. I am actually a Boer, with half my family coming from the north and the other half the south. This means that I have several family members involved in the conflict, all on the Boere side. So with that bit of bias out of the way, on to the point.
The Camps, were merely a symptom of the wider British policy of Scorched Earth. This was basically a system of establishing Blockhouses and cordoning off parts of the Veld. They would then enter the area and clear out anyone suspected of Collaboration with the Commandos, remember at this point the government has officially annexed the republics, and all major towns have surrendered de jure. In this sense, they weren't really war crimes, so much as crimes of the British state against British Citizens. The procedure after the clearing out was to send anyone taken to the Camps. The idea then was that by removing the basis of support for the Commandos, i.e. denying the Commandos resupply, would break them, it did. However, as we now know it was partially for a different reason, namely the fear that someone's spouse had died.
Fundamentally, removing the camps would likely make the situation worse, due to the fact that it would leave a large population of women and children homeless, and without a way to support themselves. If you remove the entire policy, you won't defeat the Commandos, simple as. This is for a multitude of reasons, the Transvaal and Free State, are hilly, but rather flat, they are generally not super suited to Guerilla warfare, unlike Vietnam, Afghanistan, Yemen, or Spain. This meant that unlike in those situations it was possible for the Brits to break the farms, and as such the Commandos, compared to the strategic villages, or the ring road, which are/were total failures. If this didn't happen however, the entire countryside would remain opposed to British rule, and the city's too a large extent as well, remember most Uitlanders, were Irish or Scottish, hardly friends of the English. This would likely result in a very long running military occupation, and would arguably make the situation worse, due to it will over time become easier for the Commandos to move south, and operate inside the Cape and Natal Colonies, were there are/were, large Boere minorities.
Finally, in terms of long term effects. The rise of the South African National Party, who implemented apartheid, was on the basis of a large minority of so called "poor whites". Many of these were poor due to the loss of farms, following the Boer War. Depending on what happens this effect will be more or less pronounced. Should, the scorched earth remain in effect, without camps, it is likely that they would be elected sooner, this would probably mean South Africa would support the Nazis, during WW2, or at least stay neutral. Comparatively, if no Scorched Earth happens, you could see a situation were a long running insurgency racks the north. This would likely keep large numbers of South African Politicians out of power, for example Jan Smuts was a Commando. In the long run this would promote sectarian politics, due to the fact that those in power would be the most pro-British, and from the Cape, while this would likely prevent the start of Apartheid, it would increasingly radicalise a disaffected white poor, due to the white poor being the largest supporters of Apartheid. This could potentially lead to a situation where SA is largely ungovernable, especially if the Boer Commandos turn to political violence and assassinations, of collaborators and the like.
