IN the heart of Zimbabwe, a significant number of fields once known as the “bread-basket” of southern Africa, now seemingly lie in disarray, a stark reminder of failed agricultural reforms and stagnated production.
As the country grapples with the consequences of past policies, a new dawn beckons — one where old and new farmers should unite to innovate and reclaim their agricultural heritage.
This feature delves into the narratives of those who toil on the land and the experts who study it, revealing a path forward that promises to revitalise Zimbabwe’s once productive agricultural sector.
For nearly 25 years, the land reform programme has reshaped the agricultural landscape of Zimbabwe, dividing farmers into two distinct groups: the new beneficiaries of acquired farms and the old producers who once thrived in this fertile soil.
While the government and various stakeholders grapple with their roles in this ongoing saga, the voices of local farmers — both old and new — remain crucial in the dialogue around agricultural revival and innovation.
“We’ve always known how to cultivate the land,” says Nyaguyo, a second-generation farmer who inherited his family’s farm, now the A2 model.
“But it feels like our voices are lost in the noise of policy discussions.”
The A2 model of land reform in Zimbabwe, implemented in the early 2000s, aimed to resettle landless farmers on commercial farms.
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Bulls to charge into Zimbabwe gold stocks
- Ndiraya concerned as goals dry up
- Letters: How solar power is transforming African farms
Keep Reading
This model focused on providing larger plots to individual beneficiaries, often with access to resources and support for commercial agriculture.
It was intended to enhance productivity and promote economic development, addressing historical land inequalities.
However, it still faces challenges, including insufficient funding, lack of infrastructure and political controversies, leading to mixed outcomes in agricultural performance and social stability.
The A1 model of the land reform in Zimbabwe, introduced in the late 1990s, aimed to redistribute land to smallholder farmers.
It focused on providing smaller plots for subsistence farming, enabling landless individuals and families to cultivate land for their own use.
The model emphasised community-based resettlement and aimed to address historical injustices related to land ownership.
However, it faced challenges such as inadequate support services, limited access to markets and issues of land tenure security, impacting its effectiveness in improving agricultural productivity and livelihoods.
“We still need better and improved support and security to truly thrive on our plots of land”, Madovi, a farmer in Mashonaland West province, asserted.
Twenty-five years after their implementation, the A1 and A2 land reform models in Zimbabwe continue to shape agricultural practices and land ownership.
While A1 focuses on smallholder subsistence farming, A2 aims at commercial agriculture.
Both models face challenges, including resource allocation and infrastructural deficits, but they remain crucial in addressing historical land inequities and fostering rural development in a complex socio-economic landscape.
“We want to learn and grow,” Madovi insists.
“But we need the support of those who have been here longer. Collaboration is key.”
Agricultural experts point out that despite the models offering contrasting experiences, there is need for a unified approach to agricultural development that respects the wisdom of traditional practices while embracing modern techniques.
Despite a prevailing belief that innovation is the exclusive domain of researchers and technicians, evidence shows that local farmers have been true innovators.
Their ability to adapt to changing climatic, economic and agronomic conditions is rooted in a rich tapestry of indigenous knowledge.
Crispen Sukume, a prominent agricultural economist and researcher, emphasised the importance of incorporating local knowledge into research processes.
“We can no longer afford to sideline the insights of local farmers,” he stated.
“Their experiences provide invaluable data that can inform effective innovations.”
This sentiment is echoed by local farmers who have developed unique methods and resilient crop varieties tailored to their specific environments.
“We know what works for us,” said Diana Sedze, a farmer from ward 19 in Nyanga South.
“But we need help to scale those solutions and connect to broader markets.”
As the agricultural sector faces pressing challenges, collaboration between researchers and farmers becomes imperative.
Development experts argue that successful agricultural strategies must be rooted in understanding the socio-economic contexts of both new and old farmers.
“We need to analyse production data not just for trends, but to understand the realities on the ground,” said Sukume.
“This information is paramount in identifying the factors that will make innovations relevant and useful.
“It is critical at interweaving long-term productive innovations that address environmental change, broad shifts in agricultural economies and specific changes induced by local farmer agency.”
Farmer Nyaguyo reflected on her experiences with the recent local and regional agricultural workshops she attended aimed at fostering collaboration: “When we work together, we can create innovative solutions that are sustainable and profitable”.
The desire for sustainable farming practices resonates deeply among local producers.
Many express a longing not just for survival, but for a thriving agricultural future.
“We want to diversify our activities,” said new farmer Tendai.
“By doing so, we can improve our living standards and contribute to the economy.”
However, they also recognised the necessity for support from various sectors — public, private and research institutions.
Local farmers are increasingly calling for partnerships that allow them to profit from their innovations while ensuring that these ideas are disseminated widely.
“We need to connect with markets beyond our villages,” Madovi added.
“Innovation should not only be about new technologies, but also about how we share our knowledge and products.”
As Zimbabwean farmers strive to regain their status as the bread-basket of southern Africa, they should also navigate the complexities of global markets.
This requires an understanding of how local ecological knowledge can adapt to the changing demands of both regional and international consumers.
“We have to learn to speak the language of the market,” Sukume insisted.
“By blending local practices with modern demands, we can create products that stand out.”
Local farmers are beginning to see the value in aligning their practices with market trends, ensuring their innovations are not only environmentally sustainable but also economically viable.
The journey to reviving Zimbabwe’s agricultural legacy is fraught with challenges, yet it is also filled with potential.
By uniting the traditional wisdom of old farmers with the fresh perspectives of new producers, Zimbabwe can forge a path towards agricultural innovation that honours its past while looking boldly to the future.
Current discussions focus on land tenure insecurity, which hampers investment and productivity.
Overall, the discourse reflects a complex interplay between social justice, economic viability and the need for sustainable agricultural development.
These should help to transform Zimbabwe from a land of agricultural despair back into the thriving bread-basket it once was, ensuring food security and prosperity for generations to come.
