Search

There is no doubt that Zimbabwe's Fast Track Land Reform Program resulted in repeasantization. As several studies point out, it also resulted in accumulation from below by a majority of the resettled peasantry. Our study focuses on an area where counter-agrarian reform is in motion and accumulation from below is constrained. In this location, we argue that repeasantization is severely being contested as indicated by the re-emergence of a dual-mode of production and the subsequent 'virtual' dispossession and proletarianization of the land reform beneficiaries. Our findings shed more light on the dynamics of capitalism and agrarian politics in a context where land reforms are implemented under neoliberalism. In this enclave, peasants after accessing land through the land reform collectivized their land and parceled it to the downsized and nearby capitalist farming system. The capitalist farming system engages in spatio-temporal fix by moving from one rural site to another as it follows the dictates of accumulation. While the possibility of full-scale land dispossession exists, the current state ownership of land and the peasantry's resistance provided some brakes to full-scale land dispossession. At the same time, the state's limited support to land reform beneficiaries fuels this localized land dispossession. The peasantry's exploitation in this enclave ranges from corvee labor to coercion into the mini-land enclosures; these are implemented by village heads, who are local state functionaries. This study also recasts the relevance of the Marxist framework in understanding rural dynamics more specifically; it revisits Karl Kautsky's arguments on the coexistence thesis of the peasantry and capitalist farming and illustrates the Zimbabwean state's ambivalence with regards to the conditions of peasant and capitalist farming. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The land question in postcolonial Africa, particularly in former settler colonies, has an enduring legacy. To illuminate the enduring dimensions of the land question, this article explores various land recovery options adopted by (former) white commercial farmers in Zimbabwe as they renegotiate access, ownership and control of land expropriated via the Fast Track Land Reform Programme. Zimbabwe has been fluid in handling these recovery options as it strives to reposition the economy and score political goals locally and globally. A transitional justice approach ensures that the contemporary land question, rooted in a historical racialized struggle, is resolved on an equality basis that transcends the current politicized productivist land recovery discourse. As the transitional justice approach takes cognisance of longstanding marginalization and embraces robust institutions that withstand political whims and the test of time, it ensures meaningful policy and practical interventions that confront the contentious land question in Zimbabwe and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Review of African Political Economy is the property of Review of Political Economy (ROAPE) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Zimbabwe's Fast Track Land Reform Programme resulted in a massive growth of the country's tobacco sector. Some authors have labelled this, the 'tobacco boom'. The effects of this growth are variegated across space and time. This study explores the growth of tobacco contract farming in Goromonzi and Zvimba districts and the resultant effects on land use patterns, accumulation, power dynamics and livelihood outcomes. In illuminating on contract farming, the study also pays attention to non-contract farmers. The rise in the number of contract farmers is attributed to; better extension services, improved and guaranteed access to input and output markets. At the same time, tobacco contract farming is marked by several vicissitudes. Some farmers withdrew from the contracts due to low output prices and high input costs resulting in indebtedness. Similarly, some contracting firms dropped out from the contracting arrangements. Overall, many contracted growers accumulated more than non-contract farmers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]