![Sample our Global Development journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5929/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Global-Development.jpg"})
Abstract
Land self-provisioning has been a strategy not only for land access for the landless, but also to rebuild or improve livelihoods for people recovering from livelihood shocks. An analysis of siziphile land occupation of an abandoned safari ranch by communal area residents in south-western Lupane District, reveals the limitation and livelihood risks of such occupations. It shows how by extending farming activities into a safari ranch (which was home to a variety of wild life), farmers were exposed to a great threat from wild life and to their livelihoods. Yet, these farmers typically lacked the means to protect their crops from wild animals. They had no means to recover from the loss of what they had invested after elephants destroyed their crops. The paper emphasizes the risk taken by households to farm a former safari ranch and how it worked to further impoverish households as opposed to improving their livelihoods situation.
Notes
1. The land hosted villages for two of the villages and also acted as a grazing zone until it was annexed by the Kusile Rural Council for a pilot grazing project.
2. Alexander et al. (Citation2000) talked of Ngabetsha, a big sili men, who was a good hunter. The Ngabetsha lineage is currently found in Gumede Village and holds the title of Chief saBhuku (uSihlahla) of the entire ward.
3. The latter were regarded as restricted areas of access for local communities, and sanctuaries for commercial livestock and wildlife, which were protected from destructive human activities by ranch guards and game rangers. The local communities were virtually excluded from these protected areas, and could only access the land as employees, living in compounds.
4. In his study in Gokwe, Nyambra talked of a system of booking the land by migrant labourers, who would then leave the wives and children perform farming duties while they returned to work.
5. It is worth noting that conservation measures were abandoned during the liberation war, as ZIPRA guerrillas operating in the area encouraged madiro.
6. Through the coercive enforcement of centralization measures, the arable zone remained closed for settlements and development of fields, despite the land being the most fertile of the land available to rural households.
7 .Many households lost urban-based livelihoods because of deindustrialization and growing unemployment.
8. Two local sawmill companies operated in the area in the late 1980s and early 1990s, but later winded operations, which affected livelihoods of many of many people.
9. The 2001/2002 drought was succeeded by other droughts of varying severity, and in this region, this was further exacerbated by the abandonment of drought resistant crops like millet and sorghum.
10. The ZIPRA guerrillas operating in the area had forced people to abandon colonial conservation measures and encouraged people to exercise madiro as part of their freedom.
11. The ranch was a major employer in the area, while the Forestry Commission preferred the employment of the sili because of their tracking abilities.
12. While the ranch did not immediate close down operations, it endured more attacks from guerrillas, while incidents of cattle poaching also increased.
13. Poaching became rampant as there were no ranch guards to guard the property.
14. The Gwayi River provides a border between settlements and the wilderness, and there is no bridge that could provide a passage between the former reserve and the wilderness, while there is no infrastructure south of the river. This means people on the other side of the river could not access the former reserves when the river is in flood.
15. The ranch was allocated to three politician, one from neighbouring Thsolotsho District and two from Lupane District.
16. Dabula Moyo, interview conducted 2017
17. Makhala Ngulube, interview conducted in 2017.
18. Nongedla Mafu, interview conducted in 2017
19. The Zimbabwean state is known for its intolerance for illegal land occupations, and for treating land occupiers with a heavy hand.
20. Mandebele, interview conducted in 2016.
21. The fields were smaller than fields in the communal area where households may hold more than one field.
22. These were mainly poor individuals that could not afford to hire additional labour.
23. Since the adoption of maize, it has become a stable while pearl millet and sorghum have slipped down the consumption priority list.
24. Mahlafuna Mangobe, interview conducted in 2017.
25. Makunyalila Nkonjeni, interview conducted in 2018.
26. Nondolwane Masuku, interview conducted in 2018.
27. Mzwanyana Masonganyana, interview conducted in 2018.
28. MaNgwenyama, interview conducted in 2018.
29. This Shona terminology, which loosely refer to the freedom to clear as much land as is possible, is borrowed from Chimhowu and Hulme (Citation2006, p. 735).
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Vusilizwe Thebe
Vusilizwe Thebe is an Associate Professor of Development Studies and Acting Head of the Department of Anthropology and Archaeology, University of Pretoria. His research interest lies in the social dynamics of former migrant labour societies in Southern Africa, particularly livelihoods, land and agriculture, food security, gender dynamics and socio-economic changes. He is currently working on a project on changing food security and households’ survival.