Who are we?

ELF (the Environmental Liaison Forum) is a representative body for environmental NGOs in Zimbabwe. It was formed in 1995 to:

• provide a forum for environmental NGOs in Zimbabwe to identify and debate matters of common interest, build consensus and influence policy and implementation strategies; and
• create an enabling environment for NGOs to share information and co-ordinate activities.

The ELF Land and Environment Working Group is a sub-grouping of ELF members (who number in excess of 30 NGOs), who share a common interest in promoting ecologically sustainable and economically productive land reform in Zimbabwe. The Group was formed in 1998, when it incorporated a previous NGO grouping called the NGO Lands and Livelihoods Group.

The Working Group is currently chaired by one of its members, ZERO, an NGO that itself has long advocated for, and participated in, national consultations on land reform.

What have we done?

Since its inception, the ELF Land and Environment Working Group has involved nearly 20 NGOs (both members and partners) in a series of activities that have included:

• Hosting consultative national workshops on land reform
• Preparation of common position papers, on behalf of Working Group members, on land reform
• Monitoring of national policy processes related to land reform
• Information sharing between Working Group members related to current and projected land reform initiatives
• Holding regular feedback and strategy meetings for Working Group members.

As a result of these activities, the Working Group members have agreed a common position on land reform and the environment in Zimbabwe, the framework of which is contained in this document.

What is our analysis of the problem?

Since Independence, land reform in Zimbabwe has been driven primarily by social and economic imperatives. The inequitable distribution of land inherited from the colonial era was, of course, socially (and indeed morally) unacceptable, while the untapped potential of idle and underutilised land lying in commercial farming areas was economically unjustifiable. The steady increase in population levels and densities throughout the country during the first decade of independence only heightened the urgency for comprehensive and far-reaching land reform, and the force of these social and economic imperatives grew stronger and stronger.

For 20 years, the approach to land reform in Zimbabwe has been piece-meal and reactive. Limited gains have been realised, but as the unstable and unpredictable events of 2000 have shown, they have not been enough to offset the mounting social and economic pressure for broader and more sweeping land reform. Today the nation stands poised on the brink: in one direction ahead lies the opportunity to redress, once and for all, the imbalances of the past, and to create a meaningful economic base for our future development; in another direction lies the potential danger: dismemberment of our existing commercial agricultural sector, degradation of once productive lands, and the creation of unmanageable expectations, destined to remain forever unfulfilled.

It is our belief that there is a third imperative that needs to be included in the equation. This is an environmental imperative. Zimbabwe’s current system of land ownership and land management is not only socially and economically unsustainable. It is also environmentally unsustainable.

Inequitable patterns of land distribution have led to uneven pressures on natural resources. In some areas, relatively sparse population densities, and relatively high levels of capital investment, have promoted sound environmental management practices. In other areas, high population densities and low levels of capital investment perpetuate poor environmental management practices. These differences are exacerbated by variations in the systems of tenure over land and resources. Where there are clear rights of ownership and access to natural resources by their users, these resources are inherently more likely to be managed sustainably. Where such rights are absent, or unclear, patterns of resource use are inevitably less sustainable.

The post-colonial era in Zimbabwe has been characterised by growing levels of environmental degradation. The poorest sections of rural society, generally those who live in communal areas, have found themselves having to work harder to survive off a diminishing land base of ever-decreasing productivity and environmental integrity. It is well-documented syndrome, usually referred to as the ‘poverty-degradation cycle’, and one by which we have been especially hard hit since 1980.

Ironically, the pace of environmental degradation has nowhere been quicker than in resettlement areas. Here, uncertain tenure, backed by a system that advocates for rapid arable conversion (even where this is patently unsuitable), that selects farmers who are perhaps the poorest equipped in terms of knowledge and experience, and that has not made available the finance required for appropriate capital investment, has precipitated a succession of disastrous resettlement experiences.

To date, land reform in Zimbabwe has done little to improve the environmental sustainability of rural land use practices, and we have reached a point of no return. The environmental imperatives for land reform are now at least as strong as their social and economic counterparts (indeed, all three are inseparably intertwined). We desperately need land reform in Zimbabwe, and we desperately need a model of land reform that precipitates economic growth, social development, and environmental sustainability.

What do we advocate?

As a stakeholder grouping within the land reform programme, the ELF Land and Environment Working Group does not pretend to have all the answers. We are working in a highly fluid and dynamic landscape, and we too are struggling to come to grips with evolving reality. However, there are certain prerequisites that we believe are fundamental to a successful land reform programme in Zimbabwe. These include the following:

Acknowledgement of the centrality of environment to land reform

It is our primary assertion that there is a reciprocal cause and effect relationship between environment and land reform, and that this needs to be fully recognised at both policy and practical levels in the implementation of a national land reform programme. Environmental degradation is one of the leading effects of our failure to adequately address land reform in Zimbabwe to date. However, previous attempts at land reform have often actually caused further environmental degradation, rather than alleviating existing degradation. Future land reform initiatives must therefore have as a central target the improvement of environmental management practices, and the reduction of environmental degradation, in rural Zimbabwe.

Secure tenure

Land reform must maximise the tenurial rights of rural people to the land and natural resources on which they depend. People will only invest in the sustainable management of natural resources if they know their tenurial rights to those resources are secure. In this regard, the Working Group strongly advocates for the incorporation of the findings of the Land Tenure Commission into any land reform programme

Decentralisation

Land reform in Zimbabwe cannot succeed if it is managed in a top down, highly centralised manner. The primary beneficiaries of land reform are intended to be rural people. These people must be involved, at all levels, in the management of the land reform process. Again, the institutional mechanisms proposed by the Land Tenure Commission for decentralised management of land and natural resources are wholeheartedly endorsed by the Working Group.

Diversification of land use options

The current ideology of land use planning in Zimbabwe is outdated and irrelevant. The diversity of land use options in rural areas is far greater than is usually acknowledged, particularly in terms of natural resource-based production systems. Provision has to be made within the context of a land reform programme for the promotion of a variety of alternative and complementary land uses including forest and/or agro-forest-based production, wildlife farming, eco-tourism and natural product farming. These production systems should draw on both indigenous technical knowledge systems and improved appropriate technologies.

Appropriate marketing support

Pursuant to the above, the primary hindrance to diversified land use systems is the lack of a marketing infrastructure for alternative produce. If land is to be managed in a manner that is both economically productive and ecologically sustainable, its managers have to be sure that they can and will sell their products. This requires a major investment in marketing information services, market linkages, market delivery channels and co-ordinated product and market development activities.

Appropriate valuation of natural resources

Linked to the outdated land use planning ideology prevalent in Zimbabwe is the institutionalised undervaluation of natural resources. Ironically, amongst the criteria for land designation within the previous land reform programmes has been that of ‘underutilisation’, based on the presence of non-arable natural resources. This of course completely fails to acknowledge the environmental and, potentially, economic value of these resources. The Working Group strongly advocates for the inclusion within the land reform programme of a methodology that accords natural resources their real value.

Adequate infrastructural development

The absence of adequate infrastructural development in support of land reform promulgates unsustainable resource use. Without assured supplies of energy, water and construction materials, without health and education services, and without an accessible transport infrastructure, resource users become resource degraders. For land reform to support better environmental management, it must be preceded by an appropriate level of infrastructural investment.

Environmental Assessments as prerequisites to Resettlement

A guiding principle to any successful resettlement process is pre-environmental assessments, which will assist in determining the potential activities that can be undertaken to sustainable development levels and avert potential damages tot he environment.

What can you do to help us?

The ELF Land and Environment Working Group seeks support for the following:

• Recognition of the group as a legitimate stakeholder in the land reform process in Zimbabwe, and its inclusion in all relevant national policy and implementation fora.
• Creation of, or access to, a financing mechanism that supports land reform-related projects with explicit environmental objectives
• Development of a policy briefing for stakeholders in the land reform process that explicitly outlines steps in policy and practice relating to better environmental management
• Collation and dissemination of information related to environmentally friendly land reform experiences from Zimbabwe and other countries, and to the land reform process in Zimbabwe itself

For more information contact Mrs Fanny Mutepfa at info@zero.org.zw