A preoccupation with the idea of land as a productive asset continues to dominate donor policy prescriptions imposed on poor nations of the world. The presumption is that a view of land as a productive asset implies security which then induces investment and improvements in agricultural productivity. Emerging evidence from Zimbabwe's fast track land reform programme shows a nuanced and complex picture whereby land has multiple and often conflicting meanings to individuals, groups, and the state: as a productive asset, political instrument, symbol of belonging, and as a safety net for the poor. Any policy to support a revitalized agricultural sector in post – crisis Zimbabwe will need to take account of the multiple meanings of land and build on emerging trends of land reform beneficiary, white farmer, and private sector collaboration; as well as livelihoods diversification.
Autores y editores
Elsevier is a world-leading provider of information solutions that enhance the performance of science, health, and technology professionals.
All knowledge begins as uncommon—unrecognized, undervalued, and sometimes unaccepted. But with the right perspective, the uncommon can become the exceptional.