Economics of land reform models used in Mashonaland Central Province of Zimbabwe
- Authors: Musemwa, Lovemore
- Date: 2011
- Subjects: Land reform -- Zimbabwe , Agricultural productivity -- Zimbabwe , Land tenure -- Zimbabwe , Infrastructure (Economics) -- Government policy -- Zimbabwe , Land reform beneficiaries -- Zimbabwe , Land use -- Economic aspects -- Zimbabwe , Field crops -- Zimbabwe , Data envelopment analysis -- Zimbabwe , Land settlement -- Zimbabwe
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Doctoral , PhD (Agricultural Economics)
- Identifier: vital:11168 , http://hdl.handle.net/10353/435 , Land reform -- Zimbabwe , Agricultural productivity -- Zimbabwe , Land tenure -- Zimbabwe , Infrastructure (Economics) -- Government policy -- Zimbabwe , Land reform beneficiaries -- Zimbabwe , Land use -- Economic aspects -- Zimbabwe , Field crops -- Zimbabwe , Data envelopment analysis -- Zimbabwe , Land settlement -- Zimbabwe
- Description: The land reform that has unfolded in Zimbabwe since 1980 used different models and had diverse consequences. Since the implementation of the fast tract land reform programme in 2000, Zimbabwe experienced heavy reduction in yield and output at farm level that led to a 70% shortfall in production to meet annual food requirements (Richardson, 2005). The economic crisis in Zimbabwe has been characterized by worsening food insecurity especially in the rural areas where harvests continue to be poor. In the beef sector, Zimbabwe has failed to meet its export quota to the EU. The shortfall in production to meet annual food requirements shows a very grim situation but do not tell us about the performance of resettled farmers who now occupy much of the productive land. The broad objective of the study was to determine and compare the production efficiency of resettled farmers in Zimbabwe across land reform models. In addition, the study determined land use intensity. The study was conducted in the Mashonaland Central Province of Zimbabwe mainly because a wide variety of field crops were grown by resettled farmers. The respondents were stratified into three groups. These were: beneficiaries of land reform before 2000 (resettle scheme), fast track A1 model and fast track A2 model. The three models differ on how they were implemented and supported and this might result in different efficiencies of the models. A total of 245 copies structured questionnaire were administered on the resettled farmers from June to September 2010. Descriptive statistics was applied to the basic characteristics of the sampled households. The effect of model of land reform, gender of the household head, marital status, age of the household head, education, household size, religion, dependence ratio, whether the farmer was fulltime or part-time in farming, experience of the farmers in farming at that environment, total land size owned by the farmers and soil type on revenue per hectare and land use rate were determined using the GLM procedure of SAS (2003). Significance differences between least-square group means were compared using the PDIFF test of SAS (2003). The relationship between Revenue and land utilization was examined using the Pearson‟s correlations analysis. Dependance between response variables that had an effect on either revenue per hectare or land utilization with all the other response variables was tested using the Chi-square test for dependance. To find the effect of arable land used and herd size on revenue per hectare and land use the RSREG Procedure of SAS (2003) was used. Input oriented DEA model under the assumption of constant return to scale was used to estimate efficiency in this study. To identify factors that influence efficiency, a Tobit model censored at zero was selected. The mean land use rate varied significantly (p<0.05) with the land reform model with A2 having highest land use rate of 67%. The A1 and old resettlement households had land use rates of 53% and 46%, respectively. Sex, marital status, age of the household head, education and household size significantly affected land use (P<0.05). Revenue per hectare was not affected by any the factors that were inputted in the model. Results from the DEA approach showed that A2 farmers (large land owners) had an average technical efficiency score of 0.839, while the lowest ranking model (A1) had an average score of 0.618. Small land holders (A1 and the old resettled farmers) are on average less cost-efficient than large land owners, with a score of 0.29 for the former compared with 0.45 for the latter. From the factors that were entered in the Tobit model, age of household head, excellent production knowledge and farmer status affected technical efficiency whereas allocative efficiency was only affected by good production knowledge, farm size, arable land owned and area under cultivation. Factors which affected economic efficiency of the resettled farmers are secondary education, household size, farm size, cultivated area and arable land owned. None of the included socio-economic variables has significant effects on the allocative and economic efficiency of the resettled farmers. Thus, the allocative and economic inefficiencies of the farmers might be accounted for by other natural and environmental factors which were not captured in the model.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2011
- Authors: Musemwa, Lovemore
- Date: 2011
- Subjects: Land reform -- Zimbabwe , Agricultural productivity -- Zimbabwe , Land tenure -- Zimbabwe , Infrastructure (Economics) -- Government policy -- Zimbabwe , Land reform beneficiaries -- Zimbabwe , Land use -- Economic aspects -- Zimbabwe , Field crops -- Zimbabwe , Data envelopment analysis -- Zimbabwe , Land settlement -- Zimbabwe
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Doctoral , PhD (Agricultural Economics)
- Identifier: vital:11168 , http://hdl.handle.net/10353/435 , Land reform -- Zimbabwe , Agricultural productivity -- Zimbabwe , Land tenure -- Zimbabwe , Infrastructure (Economics) -- Government policy -- Zimbabwe , Land reform beneficiaries -- Zimbabwe , Land use -- Economic aspects -- Zimbabwe , Field crops -- Zimbabwe , Data envelopment analysis -- Zimbabwe , Land settlement -- Zimbabwe
- Description: The land reform that has unfolded in Zimbabwe since 1980 used different models and had diverse consequences. Since the implementation of the fast tract land reform programme in 2000, Zimbabwe experienced heavy reduction in yield and output at farm level that led to a 70% shortfall in production to meet annual food requirements (Richardson, 2005). The economic crisis in Zimbabwe has been characterized by worsening food insecurity especially in the rural areas where harvests continue to be poor. In the beef sector, Zimbabwe has failed to meet its export quota to the EU. The shortfall in production to meet annual food requirements shows a very grim situation but do not tell us about the performance of resettled farmers who now occupy much of the productive land. The broad objective of the study was to determine and compare the production efficiency of resettled farmers in Zimbabwe across land reform models. In addition, the study determined land use intensity. The study was conducted in the Mashonaland Central Province of Zimbabwe mainly because a wide variety of field crops were grown by resettled farmers. The respondents were stratified into three groups. These were: beneficiaries of land reform before 2000 (resettle scheme), fast track A1 model and fast track A2 model. The three models differ on how they were implemented and supported and this might result in different efficiencies of the models. A total of 245 copies structured questionnaire were administered on the resettled farmers from June to September 2010. Descriptive statistics was applied to the basic characteristics of the sampled households. The effect of model of land reform, gender of the household head, marital status, age of the household head, education, household size, religion, dependence ratio, whether the farmer was fulltime or part-time in farming, experience of the farmers in farming at that environment, total land size owned by the farmers and soil type on revenue per hectare and land use rate were determined using the GLM procedure of SAS (2003). Significance differences between least-square group means were compared using the PDIFF test of SAS (2003). The relationship between Revenue and land utilization was examined using the Pearson‟s correlations analysis. Dependance between response variables that had an effect on either revenue per hectare or land utilization with all the other response variables was tested using the Chi-square test for dependance. To find the effect of arable land used and herd size on revenue per hectare and land use the RSREG Procedure of SAS (2003) was used. Input oriented DEA model under the assumption of constant return to scale was used to estimate efficiency in this study. To identify factors that influence efficiency, a Tobit model censored at zero was selected. The mean land use rate varied significantly (p<0.05) with the land reform model with A2 having highest land use rate of 67%. The A1 and old resettlement households had land use rates of 53% and 46%, respectively. Sex, marital status, age of the household head, education and household size significantly affected land use (P<0.05). Revenue per hectare was not affected by any the factors that were inputted in the model. Results from the DEA approach showed that A2 farmers (large land owners) had an average technical efficiency score of 0.839, while the lowest ranking model (A1) had an average score of 0.618. Small land holders (A1 and the old resettled farmers) are on average less cost-efficient than large land owners, with a score of 0.29 for the former compared with 0.45 for the latter. From the factors that were entered in the Tobit model, age of household head, excellent production knowledge and farmer status affected technical efficiency whereas allocative efficiency was only affected by good production knowledge, farm size, arable land owned and area under cultivation. Factors which affected economic efficiency of the resettled farmers are secondary education, household size, farm size, cultivated area and arable land owned. None of the included socio-economic variables has significant effects on the allocative and economic efficiency of the resettled farmers. Thus, the allocative and economic inefficiencies of the farmers might be accounted for by other natural and environmental factors which were not captured in the model.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2011
Former farm workers of foreign descent in communal areas in post-fast track Zimbabwe : the case of Shamva District
- Authors: Chadambuka, Patience
- Date: 2021-10-29
- Subjects: Migrant agricultural laborers -- Zimbabwe -- Shamva District , Agricultural laborers, Foreign -- Zimbabwe -- Shamva District , Land reform -- Zimbabwe , Belonging (Social psychology) -- Zimbabwe -- Shamva District , Social integration-- Zimbabwe -- Shamva District , Fast Track Land Reform Programme (FTLRP)
- Language: English
- Type: thesis , text , Doctoral , PhD
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/178420 , vital:42938 , 10.21504/10962/178420
- Description: Land and ethnicity continue to condition contestations in relation to belonging amongst rural Zimbabweans. The colonial era defined Zimbabwe’s land politics in a highly racialised and ethnicised manner. Racially, the colonial era gave birth to white-owned fertile farm lands, while blacks (or Africans) were resettled in agriculturally-unproductive Reserves, later referred to as communal areas in the post-colonial era. Though they were initially created with a segregatory and oppressive intent bent on disenfranchising native Africans, the Reserves became a definitive landscape embedded in ethnic and ancestral belonging for the autochthonous Natives. The Reserves were created exclusively for autochthonous Africans, and the colonial administration ensured that foreign migrant Africans recruited mainly as covenanted labour from nearby colonies would not be accommodated and consequently belong in Reserves. Migrant Africans were instead domiciled in white commercial farms, mines and urban areas, and deprived of land rights accorded to the autochthones. In the case of white farms specifically, the labourers experienced a conditional belonging (to the farm). This overall exclusionary system was later inherited and maintained by the post-colonial Zimbabwean government, up until the year 2000. Zimbabwe’s highly documented Fast Track Land Reform Programme (FTLRP) from the year 2000 did away with the entrenched racial bifurcations of land, as white commercial farms became fast track farms. However, it did not undercut the existence of communal areas. The FTLRP had a profound effect on the lives of commercial farm workers, particularly those of foreign origin who had no other home or source of livelihood to fall back on after fast track displacements. Some though sought to move into communal areas, from which they had been excluded previously. Within this context, most scholarly studies of the post fast track period ignore the plight of former farm workers especially those that moved to, and into, communal areas. This ethnographic study, specifically of former farm workers of foreign origin in Shamva communal areas, therefore seeks to contribute to Zimbabwean studies in this regard. It documents and examines the perceptions, practices and lived experiences of former farm workers of foreign origin now residing in the Bushu communal areas of Shamva, and how they interface with Bushu autochthones in seeking to belong to Bushu. This is pursued by way of qualitative research methods (including lengthy stays in the study sites) as well as through the use of a theoretical framing focusing on lifeworlds, interfaces, belonging, othering and strangerhood. Key findings reveal that belonging by the former farm workers in Bushu entails a non-linear and convoluted process characterised by a series of contestations around for instance land shortages, limited livelihood strategies and cultural difference. This project of belonging does not entail assimilation on the part of the former farm workers, as they continue to uphold certain historical practices, leading to a form of co-existence between the autochthones and allochthones in Bushu. In this way, the former farm workers seem to develop a conditional belonging in (and to) Bushu, albeit different than the one experienced on white farms in the past. , Thesis (PhD) -- Faculty of Humanities, Sociology, 2021
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2021-10-29
- Authors: Chadambuka, Patience
- Date: 2021-10-29
- Subjects: Migrant agricultural laborers -- Zimbabwe -- Shamva District , Agricultural laborers, Foreign -- Zimbabwe -- Shamva District , Land reform -- Zimbabwe , Belonging (Social psychology) -- Zimbabwe -- Shamva District , Social integration-- Zimbabwe -- Shamva District , Fast Track Land Reform Programme (FTLRP)
- Language: English
- Type: thesis , text , Doctoral , PhD
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/178420 , vital:42938 , 10.21504/10962/178420
- Description: Land and ethnicity continue to condition contestations in relation to belonging amongst rural Zimbabweans. The colonial era defined Zimbabwe’s land politics in a highly racialised and ethnicised manner. Racially, the colonial era gave birth to white-owned fertile farm lands, while blacks (or Africans) were resettled in agriculturally-unproductive Reserves, later referred to as communal areas in the post-colonial era. Though they were initially created with a segregatory and oppressive intent bent on disenfranchising native Africans, the Reserves became a definitive landscape embedded in ethnic and ancestral belonging for the autochthonous Natives. The Reserves were created exclusively for autochthonous Africans, and the colonial administration ensured that foreign migrant Africans recruited mainly as covenanted labour from nearby colonies would not be accommodated and consequently belong in Reserves. Migrant Africans were instead domiciled in white commercial farms, mines and urban areas, and deprived of land rights accorded to the autochthones. In the case of white farms specifically, the labourers experienced a conditional belonging (to the farm). This overall exclusionary system was later inherited and maintained by the post-colonial Zimbabwean government, up until the year 2000. Zimbabwe’s highly documented Fast Track Land Reform Programme (FTLRP) from the year 2000 did away with the entrenched racial bifurcations of land, as white commercial farms became fast track farms. However, it did not undercut the existence of communal areas. The FTLRP had a profound effect on the lives of commercial farm workers, particularly those of foreign origin who had no other home or source of livelihood to fall back on after fast track displacements. Some though sought to move into communal areas, from which they had been excluded previously. Within this context, most scholarly studies of the post fast track period ignore the plight of former farm workers especially those that moved to, and into, communal areas. This ethnographic study, specifically of former farm workers of foreign origin in Shamva communal areas, therefore seeks to contribute to Zimbabwean studies in this regard. It documents and examines the perceptions, practices and lived experiences of former farm workers of foreign origin now residing in the Bushu communal areas of Shamva, and how they interface with Bushu autochthones in seeking to belong to Bushu. This is pursued by way of qualitative research methods (including lengthy stays in the study sites) as well as through the use of a theoretical framing focusing on lifeworlds, interfaces, belonging, othering and strangerhood. Key findings reveal that belonging by the former farm workers in Bushu entails a non-linear and convoluted process characterised by a series of contestations around for instance land shortages, limited livelihood strategies and cultural difference. This project of belonging does not entail assimilation on the part of the former farm workers, as they continue to uphold certain historical practices, leading to a form of co-existence between the autochthones and allochthones in Bushu. In this way, the former farm workers seem to develop a conditional belonging in (and to) Bushu, albeit different than the one experienced on white farms in the past. , Thesis (PhD) -- Faculty of Humanities, Sociology, 2021
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2021-10-29
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »