Youth, agriculture and land reform in Zimbabwe: Experiences from a communal area and resettlement scheme in semi-arid Matabeleland, Zimbabwe

Abstract

Three decades of land reform in Zimbabwe ended in an ambiguous victory for youth. Focus on the cumulative outcome, in terms of scale and scope, led to conclusions that the exercise was a success, which obscured the resultant forms of exclusion. This article attempts to sketch an analytical context in which the dynamics of Zimbabwe"s land reform may be understood. It focuses at the broader policy and societal levels, and investigates the socio-political dynamics, and their combined effects on landing the economy for youth. It highlights the challenges associated with poverty reduction through land and agriculture for a semi-proletarian youth, and suggests that a policy of agricultural modernisation is unlikely to succeed in changing the economic circumstances of young people.

The generational questions after land reform in Zimbabwe: a social reproduction perspective

“…It was in this background that the study explored the labour dimension of the FTLRP in the context of the generational questions, in line with the objectives of looking at how the youth have inserted themselves in the new agrarian structure and the future of agriculture in rural Zimbabwe. This was done, bearing in mind that this is an area that is attracting renewed academic interest (see Chambati, 2017; Thebe, 2018).…”

“…While “youth” is a fluid term as this is a social category constantly undergoing regeneration, at this juncture, it has become a critical group in Zimbabwe (particularly the farming areas) in a context where the generation that occupied farms in 2000 is ageing and questions are arising on who will take over from this generation. The work by Scoones (2017, 2018), Rwodzi (2017), Thebe (2018) and Tom (2019) in Wondedzo Extension (Masvingo Province), Mvurwi (Mashonaland East Province), Chikombedzi (Manicaland Province), Matabeleland Province and Zvimba (Mashonaland West Province) captures some of the dimensions of generational issues and agricultural futures after land reform. These scholars look at the livelihood opportunities of the youth in the farming areas, governance and prospects of them taking over the land from their parents and grandparents, the current situation of farm workers and their children, possibilities for the future of young people on the farms, their aspirations and structural constraints which confront them.…”

COVID-19, lockdown and peasants in Zimbabwe

“…This group lacks knowledge of the pandemic and, despite being equipped with information by parents and guardians (some of whom lack appropriate information or 'did not believe' in COVID-19), is therefore more vulnerable. Generational questions after Zimbabwe's land reform are explored by other renowned scholars (Chipenda 2019;Thebe 2018). In addition, gender issues were highlighted, primarily in relation to women and girls who are more vulnerable to contracting the virus due to use of common water sources and grinding mills, and culturally defined care roles.…”

‘Hustling Out of Unemployment’: Livelihood Responses of Unemployed Young Graduates in the City of Bulawayo, Zimbabwe

“…This does not mean, however, that farmworkers were not considered for land in the occupied farms as some were allocated land. Studies have shown that farmworkers that were deemed loyal to ZANU (PF), or had supported and joined the occupations, were allocated land (Chaumba et al, 2003; Thebe, 2018).…”

“…This has particularly been the case in Zimbabwe where education levels among youth are relatively high, and agriculture has long been denigrated and viewed as an occupation for pensioners. This is exemplified by the weak participation of youth in the land reform and resettlement process, which we may regard as a potential platform for youth empowerment and development (Chipenda, 2020; Scoones et al, 2019; Thebe, 2018). Through education reforms introduced by the postcolonial state, Zimbabwe has a demographic profile of educated and urbanised youth who are ill-equipped for careers in agriculture.…”