Moving forward in Zimbabwe - Brooks World Poverty Institute - The ...

Moving forward in Zimbabwe
Reducing poverty and promoting growth
Moving forward in Zimbabwe
Reducing poverty and promoting growth
CHAPTER 3:
Agriculture and land reform
3.1 Introduction
It was shown in Chapter 1 that a majority of the nearly 1.3 million
families in rural Zimbabwe make a living through farm-related
activities, although other non-farm non-agricultural activities are
also increasingly important. It was also shown that the sector is
the backbone of Zimbabwe’s economy and has a strong influence
on trends in GDP growth. Historically, close to half of total
export earnings have originated from agriculture and natural
resources, including forestry (GoZ, 1995). It is thus a key sector
in determining overall economic performance and prospects for
poverty reduction.
Before 2000 the agricultural sector in Zimbabwe was highly
dualistic. Although after the 2000 land reforms the smallholder
sector now occupies most of the agricultural land, dualism has
been maintained. In the commercial farming sector, land is still
privately owned, production is for the market and farms are
run as commercial profit-seeking enterprises. By contrast, in the
smallholder sector a majority of households do not have title to
the land they farm, much of the production activity is familybased
and subsistence production remains an important part
of livelihood strategies. 1 This dualism not only affects income
distribution within the sector but also has important consequences
for the rest of the economy, particularly through its impact on the
labour market. Poverty prevalence also follows this structure, with
high prevalence in the family-based, subsistence sector (mostly in
poor agro-ecological regions) and relatively low prevalence in the
commercial sector (mostly in the agro-ecological areas with high
rainfall and good agricultural soils).
This chapter provides an analysis of the land and the
agricultural sector during the socio-economic crisis in Zimbabwe
and beyond, reviews agricultural policies during the crisis and
considers the effects on productivity and production. It argues
that, despite some well-known success stories, the agricultural
sector has not yet made a significant or sustained contribution to
poverty reduction in post-independence Zimbabwe. The chapter
makes some suggestions, and raises some key questions regarding
post-crisis recovery scenarios. Its principal argument is that the IG
and its successor government should focus on an agriculture-led
recovery.
3.2 Agriculture and the economy
It was shown in chapter 1 (Figure 1.5) that during the 1990s,
the contribution of agriculture and forestry to GDP fluctuated
between 13 and 19 per cent. With the exception of the second
half of the 1980s, these fluctuations closely follow annual rainfall
variations. After 2000 most major sectors of the Zimbabwean
economy declined substantially as the socio-economic crisis took
root. Agriculture was one of the most affected of all sectors and
the overall effect was a distinct slow-down in overall GDP growth.
We saw in Chapter 2 that as well as providing a source of livelihood
for approximately 70 per cent of the population, agriculture also
generated 30 per cent of formal employment before the major
land reform programme. 2 It also supplies 60 per cent of the raw
materials required by the industrial sector. When rainfall is good
it generates 40-50 per cent of total export revenues, over half of
which comes from tobacco. Thus agriculture remains the backbone
of the Zimbabwean economy and with the general macroeconomic
down-turn during the crisis years the sector has had to
deal with the largest disruptions both internally (brought about by
policy decisions based on issues directly related to agriculture) and
externally (brought about by policy decisions based on more social
than sectoral agricultural considerations). It is against this backdrop
that we now examine individual elements of agricultural policy and
their performance.
3.3 Agricultural performance
Agricultural production in Zimbabwe varies from year to year
according to rainfall and performance is often linked to the
weather patterns. Since independence, there have been droughts in
the 1982-3, 1986-7, 1991-2 (most serious), 1994-5 and 2004-2005 3
agricultural seasons. These generally affect lower potential agroecological
zones more than higher potential ones and, therefore,
the communal sector (taken as a whole) more than commercial
producers. Official data show moderate growth in the value of
agricultural output produced in both commercial, including smallscale
commercial (SSC) and communal (including resettlement)
areas over the 1982-97 period, in contrast to the two years before
that period. From 1999 production slumped to below levels of
the mid 1980s, with major fluctuations in production according
to weather conditions. Official figures, though, show that between
1982-4 and 1996 the real value of production in communal areas
grew by 40 per cent, whilst between 1983-4 and 1996 the real value
of production in commercial areas grew by 35 per cent. In the crisis
period there was a distinct reversal of this trend and the real value
of production fell by 33 per cent (CSO, 2006b). A comparison
of agricultural production performance with population growth
in communal and resettlement areas shows that, although in
good years in the 1990s the real value of smallholder agricultural
production has exceeded its peak levels in the 1980s, since 1985-6
35