Zim takes its land back
1367 
0 
Sunday, 07 April 2013 00:00
View Comments
Part 8 of the panel discussion on the book Zimbabwe Takes Back its Land (published below) looks at the importance of infrastructure in farming communities. Dr Joseph Hanlon, who co-authored the book with Dr Jeannette Manjengwa and Ms Teresa Smart, responds to
issues presented to him. The audience is also invited to pose questions.Dr Hanlon: Final comment on South Africa. I don’t know anything about South Africa, but, I would say that one thing that makes the Zimbabwean land reform special is the liberation movement was about land and if you look (at Zimbabwe) it was a lot of people who did that liberation movement, but, if we look at South Africa and Mozambique to me these were urban liberation movements. Zimbabwe is a rural liberation movement and the second thing is we did not talk about this passion for farming.
It is the sense of the Zimbabwean that you can actually make money from farming and that is true of the elite; the people who have taken the larger farms because they think they can make money out of it.
I don’t see that happening in Mozambique or South Africa or other countries in the region because of this passion for farming that makes the land reform work. So, I am not sure whether it works in South Africa or not.
Teddy Bridge: I did actually grow up in South Africa myself, where you were not even allowed to marry at all even if you have other more interesting kinds of relationships with someone of a different colour without being put in prison and where the land reform of 1913 allocated 87 percent of the land to white farmers and crowded the African population onto the 13 percent.
Interestingly, although there has been politically a demand for land reform, it does not have the same kind of passion behind it, perhaps not yet and I think because South Africa has become a much more organised society for the reasons that we know about and the points that were made. Could I just make a point that I am a little bit concerned about this notion that it takes somebody 20 years to learn how to farm especially given that I suspect quite a lot of the people who came into these farms have been farmers before.
Dr Hanlon: I think it is very important to focus on the fact that what makes a farmer efficient is less of what goes on to the farm than what happens off the farm most especially how easily and effectively they can access the inputs that they need. Most inputs would include credit and they would also include decent seeds, agricultural research, extension services and how easy it is to get the stuff off the farm and to market on reasonable terms.
Talking before this meeting with Charles Taffs there, he told me that there are parts of Zimbabwe now where the roads are now difficult to drive over as it did when I went back to Uganda in 1987.
If it takes you several hours to drive 20 miles down what used to be a good road as it did when I went back to Ugandan then it is going to be very tough. I don’t think that is true of a lot of places that are probably not as bad. But in any case, it is certainly true that the overall level of service available to people was systematically undermined over that period.
Charles Taffs: That was 10 years. The last 10 years alone both cities and towns have been run by the very institutions that the West was saying were the good boys. It was not to do with the government; it was not to do with Zanu-PF.
The infrastructure in Zimbabwe’s cities and towns was maintained, run by and planned by the MDC establishment. Now before you make the swing, which you seem to be really liking, we have to look at things as they exist.
Yes the infrastructure and roads of Zimbabwe have gone ancient, but, the reason for it has nothing to do with the unquestioned dormancy. We can even question who is in the driving seat, under whose watch? And that is what has happened under the watch of the MDC.Teddy Bridge: Can I say that we don’t want to get detailed into pointing fingers.
The issue that I am making is that if we are going to move forward I think this is what people want. The point is that who is to blame for infrastructure and development? It is a political issue that has to be resolved in Zimbabwe, but, the fact is that if farmers are going to be given the opportunity to develop then those services have to be reconstructed.
It seems to me that there are two big issues that need to be resolved. The one is the issue of property rights because of the possibility of getting credit. So, I would certainly support the fact that if we accept that the land redistribution has been decided and is not going to go back it is critically important to give these farmers property rights so that they can actually get home and develop their farms and of course this is something that I would strongly support.
The proposition that this has been brought by the fact that it will be difficult for donors to buy into this because we all know the reason why, but, it does seem to me that issues of property rights and finding the packaging of solutions that are going to provide these farmers with better inputs is not an issue now and I do not know whether perhaps Charles Taffs wants to say something about that and whether any people have something to say?
A Zimbabwean (name not given): I think it was on the very issue of property rights . . . I wanted to say how can you put the property rights in concrete (terms) before the majority of people get property?
I mean the whole thing about land reform was to actually empower people by giving them land and property rights and when they have property rather than this gentleman who came here and said we have done this and done that and we want property rights put in concrete (terms), no, we want property rights when people have property.Charles Taffs: I want to make a quick intervention on property rights. One is to comment that although technically the rights of the people who are there are insecure, one of the things that we found was that people were investing and we were investing substantially.
The people who are on the small farms feel secure.Now, the second thing is that Teddy wants property rights so that land can be mortgaged. The whole point about land is how you use the land. So you want to work for other kinds of credit systems like contract systems and some of these credit systems which do not require people to lose their land. We have just done a land reform.
Giving free property rights is exactly saying okay we will let the land reform be reversed. This is exactly what happened in Brazil and exactly what happened in another country. There is a huge debate going on in Zimbabwe about how you will define property rights that do not involve mortgaging land and then this is going to go on for another five years, I think.
But the point is that the people who have these farms feel that by investing in the farms they are secured and the people who are doing the contract farming systems for cotton, for tobacco, are accepting people who just have an offer letter and so there is a security of tenure which is working.
So, we should not worry too much about hurrying to get land mortgages when contract farming and other systems that provide credit are available.
// View the discussion thread. blog comments powered by DISQUS back to top
issues presented to him. The audience is also invited to pose questions.Dr Hanlon: Final comment on South Africa. I don’t know anything about South Africa, but, I would say that one thing that makes the Zimbabwean land reform special is the liberation movement was about land and if you look (at Zimbabwe) it was a lot of people who did that liberation movement, but, if we look at South Africa and Mozambique to me these were urban liberation movements. Zimbabwe is a rural liberation movement and the second thing is we did not talk about this passion for farming.
It is the sense of the Zimbabwean that you can actually make money from farming and that is true of the elite; the people who have taken the larger farms because they think they can make money out of it.
I don’t see that happening in Mozambique or South Africa or other countries in the region because of this passion for farming that makes the land reform work. So, I am not sure whether it works in South Africa or not.
Teddy Bridge: I did actually grow up in South Africa myself, where you were not even allowed to marry at all even if you have other more interesting kinds of relationships with someone of a different colour without being put in prison and where the land reform of 1913 allocated 87 percent of the land to white farmers and crowded the African population onto the 13 percent.
Interestingly, although there has been politically a demand for land reform, it does not have the same kind of passion behind it, perhaps not yet and I think because South Africa has become a much more organised society for the reasons that we know about and the points that were made. Could I just make a point that I am a little bit concerned about this notion that it takes somebody 20 years to learn how to farm especially given that I suspect quite a lot of the people who came into these farms have been farmers before.
Dr Hanlon: I think it is very important to focus on the fact that what makes a farmer efficient is less of what goes on to the farm than what happens off the farm most especially how easily and effectively they can access the inputs that they need. Most inputs would include credit and they would also include decent seeds, agricultural research, extension services and how easy it is to get the stuff off the farm and to market on reasonable terms.
Talking before this meeting with Charles Taffs there, he told me that there are parts of Zimbabwe now where the roads are now difficult to drive over as it did when I went back to Uganda in 1987.
If it takes you several hours to drive 20 miles down what used to be a good road as it did when I went back to Ugandan then it is going to be very tough. I don’t think that is true of a lot of places that are probably not as bad. But in any case, it is certainly true that the overall level of service available to people was systematically undermined over that period.
Charles Taffs: That was 10 years. The last 10 years alone both cities and towns have been run by the very institutions that the West was saying were the good boys. It was not to do with the government; it was not to do with Zanu-PF.
The infrastructure in Zimbabwe’s cities and towns was maintained, run by and planned by the MDC establishment. Now before you make the swing, which you seem to be really liking, we have to look at things as they exist.
Yes the infrastructure and roads of Zimbabwe have gone ancient, but, the reason for it has nothing to do with the unquestioned dormancy. We can even question who is in the driving seat, under whose watch? And that is what has happened under the watch of the MDC.Teddy Bridge: Can I say that we don’t want to get detailed into pointing fingers.
The issue that I am making is that if we are going to move forward I think this is what people want. The point is that who is to blame for infrastructure and development? It is a political issue that has to be resolved in Zimbabwe, but, the fact is that if farmers are going to be given the opportunity to develop then those services have to be reconstructed.
It seems to me that there are two big issues that need to be resolved. The one is the issue of property rights because of the possibility of getting credit. So, I would certainly support the fact that if we accept that the land redistribution has been decided and is not going to go back it is critically important to give these farmers property rights so that they can actually get home and develop their farms and of course this is something that I would strongly support.
The proposition that this has been brought by the fact that it will be difficult for donors to buy into this because we all know the reason why, but, it does seem to me that issues of property rights and finding the packaging of solutions that are going to provide these farmers with better inputs is not an issue now and I do not know whether perhaps Charles Taffs wants to say something about that and whether any people have something to say?
A Zimbabwean (name not given): I think it was on the very issue of property rights . . . I wanted to say how can you put the property rights in concrete (terms) before the majority of people get property?
I mean the whole thing about land reform was to actually empower people by giving them land and property rights and when they have property rather than this gentleman who came here and said we have done this and done that and we want property rights put in concrete (terms), no, we want property rights when people have property.Charles Taffs: I want to make a quick intervention on property rights. One is to comment that although technically the rights of the people who are there are insecure, one of the things that we found was that people were investing and we were investing substantially.
The people who are on the small farms feel secure.Now, the second thing is that Teddy wants property rights so that land can be mortgaged. The whole point about land is how you use the land. So you want to work for other kinds of credit systems like contract systems and some of these credit systems which do not require people to lose their land. We have just done a land reform.
Giving free property rights is exactly saying okay we will let the land reform be reversed. This is exactly what happened in Brazil and exactly what happened in another country. There is a huge debate going on in Zimbabwe about how you will define property rights that do not involve mortgaging land and then this is going to go on for another five years, I think.
But the point is that the people who have these farms feel that by investing in the farms they are secured and the people who are doing the contract farming systems for cotton, for tobacco, are accepting people who just have an offer letter and so there is a security of tenure which is working.
So, we should not worry too much about hurrying to get land mortgages when contract farming and other systems that provide credit are available.
// View the discussion thread. blog comments powered by DISQUS back to top
New Zimbabwe
