The youth after land reform in Zimbabwe: exploring the redistributive and social protection outcomes from a transformative social policy perspective

ABSTRACT

Focusing on the youth, this paper explores the social policy dimensions of Zimbabwe’s fast-track land reform programme (FTLRP) using the transformative social policy (TSP) theoretical framework. It shows that in rural Zimbabwe, the FTLRP has impacted the youth in diverse ways which are only becoming visible now. Using the TSP framework, the paper argues that land reform is a social policy instrument that can be used to transform livelihoods and bring about inclusive development in former settler colonies. It uses empirical evidence gathered in Goromonzi district in Zimbabwe to show that there are discernible redistribution, production and social protection outcomes of the FTLRP. In a context where some Southern African countries are grappling with how best to deal with their “land questions,” the paper argues that there are lessons to be learned from the Zimbabwean experience.

RÉSUMÉ

Se concentrant sur la jeunesse, cet article explore les dimensions de la politique sociale du programme de réforme agraire accélérée du Zimbabwe (FTLRP) en se basant sur le cadre théorique de la politique sociale de transformation (TSP). Il montre que dans le Zimbabwe rural, la FTLRP a influencé la jeunesse de diverses manières qui ne deviennent visibles qu’aujourd’hui. En se référant au TSP, l’article soutient que la réforme agraire est un instrument de politique sociale qui peut être utilisé pour transformer des vies et susciter le développement inclusif dans d’anciens sites habités par des colons. Il utilise l’évidence empirique collectée dans le district de Goromonzi au Zimbabwe pour démontrer l’existence de résultats visibles de la redistribution, de la production et de la politique sociale relevant de la FTLRP. Dans un contexte où certains pays d’Afrique australe sont déterminés à rechercher la meilleure méthode à employer pour traiter de leurs « questions foncières », l’article soutient que certaines leçons peuvent être tirées de l’expérience zimbabwéenne.

KEYWORDS:

• Land reform
• redistribution
• social protection
• transformative social policy
• youth
• Zimbabwe

MOTS-CLÉS:

• Réforme agraire
• redistribution
• protection sociale
• politique sociale de transformation
• jeunesse
• Zimbabwe

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to Professor Jimi Adesina for great intellectual support, mentorship and guidance.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. This is not to suggest that South Africa and Namibia should undertake a Zimbabwean type of land reform, but the Zimbabwean experience has important lessons. The South African context is unique and complex but the positive and negative outcomes from the Zimbabwean experience may be relevant.

2. The Resolving the Land Question: Land Reform for Redistribution for Equitable Access to Land in South Africa Conference (4–5 February 2019) was held at PLAAS, University of the Western Cape.

3. This is an ambitious government programme which outlines policies, strategies and projects that guide the country’s social and economic development interventions up to December 2020. It provides a foundation to guide the country “Towards a Prosperous & Empowered Upper Middle Income Society by 2030.”

4. Mugwazo/maricho is a derogatory term which is used to describe daily wage work.

5. At the time of the study, weeding and digging of holes was pegged at an average of US$5/ task (agreed between the employer and employee) while planting and applying fertiliser was pegged at US$4/task and this was on an agreed time period between both parties. This rate was said to be too low by respondents in the study. According to Statutory Instrument 195 of 2018, the lowest grade in the agricultural sector, A1, has a minimum gazetted wage of US $80.00 per month, while the highest, C2, has a gazetted wage of US$160.00 per month. As of 15 June 2018, farmworkers are not being given these wages, with some farmers preferring part-time employees to manage labour costs.

6. These youths are resident in the communal areas and do not own any land in the resettlement areas. The sample which reported on this was mixed, comprising 30 young people; 15 practice agriculture (on an average of 3 hectares of land or less) and 15 engage in other economic activities.

7. Lack of proper record keeping made data collection challenging; some of the farmers had not kept proper records of their income and expenditures, but they provided figures of their income ranges after deducting their expenses.

8. These were the Zimbabwe Leaf Tobacco Company, Chidziva and Curverrid Tobacco.

9. Dekker and Kinsey (2011, 1007) argue that for smallholder farmers “… at even moderate standards of cultivation, the output from one acre should have been over 1000 kg, enough to feed a family of five for a year.”

10. In Zimbabwe all tobacco producers must be registered and must have all the necessary documentation to officially produce and sell their crop at the auction floors.

11. As this has been initial research, there was no baseline to use for comparative purposes, and there was the challenge that households rarely record the food which they consume or remember over a long time. Consequently, this approach was seen as appropriate just to gain insights on dietary diversity in the past 72 hours, although it does have its weaknesses. As this is now an ongoing panel study, improvements have been made in order to continue collecting this valuable data which will provide nuanced empirical evidence over a longer time period.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Clement Chipenda

Clement Chipenda has just completed his PhD in sociology with the DST/NRF SARChI Chair in Social Policy at the University of South Africa (UNISA). His research interests are in agrarian studies, social policy, youth development and child rights.