Detailed case studies were developed in the major land use and land tenure categories in Zimbabwe. Through the case studies, the study unravelled some of the social, economic, political and environmental processes that are at the centre of the development of conflicts in Zimbabwe. A major component of the study was an examination of how the existing policy and institutional framework were fairing (positively and negatively) to the resolution of land-based conflicts. Central to the study were the issues surrounding access to land and other natural resources, legitimacy of boundaries and their role in the evolution and resolution of conflicts and historically based land claims as the “unknown” factor in the development of land conflicts. Land occupations particularly those that happened during 1998 and 2000 was also another interesting issue the study looked at in detail. The study also proposed appropriate conflict resolution mechanisms based on the assessment that would have been made.

A synthesis of some of the outcomes and lessons drawn from the study:

The study basically unravelled the underlying causes of conflicts over land and other natural resources in Zimbabwe. Analysis of land conflicts in the various kinds of land-use and land tenure categories show a variation of the significance of the land conflicts.

Boundaries were more of a problem in the communal areas as compared to the other
   land tenure categories. Farm occupations were mainly directed to the large-scale
   commercial farms and other forms of state-lands.
Social processes are important in the development of conflicts in society. Social factors
  were important in defining the type of conflicts that happened at the local level. Conflicts
  over land and other natural resources can be just a tip of the iceberg of long-standing
  social conflicts between households or communities.
Analysis on land occupations revealed that social relations between a farmer and his
   farm-workers or a farmer and surrounding communities determined whether a farm was
   to be occupied or not.
Attempts to resolve and manage land conflicts should be premised on the understanding
   of the underlying social causes of the conflicts.
Political factors alone can lead to widespread conflicts in society, particularly in
   situations where there are weak or non-existent governance structures at the local level. 
Economic factors bring the whole debate of survival in the discourse on conflicts. In
   most cases it is the ownership and distribution of means of production, particularly land
   that is at the centre of conflicts among and between nations. 
Conflicts have many dimensions and conflict resolution therefore requires a
   multi-stakeholder approach from problem identification right through to the finding of
   lasting solutions.
It emerged that the stage of development has an impact on the emergence of conflicts in
   society and vice-versa. What is missing on the discourse on development and conflicts is
   how the development model itself can be used as a conflict resolution model. 
Development brings benefits with it and such benefits need to be distributed in a manner
   that reduces conflicts between communities affected and the development activity.
Employment creation is a good example of benefit that has the potential to assist
   communities who have been negatively affected by some development activities.
Some production systems could enter into partnership with communities as way of
   ensuring that communities benefit from development activities taking place around them. 
Partnership with communities in development has been mooted in the area of tourism. A
   good example is the development of conservancies. 
Many other land-uses that are inclusive forms of land-uses could initiate partnership
   arrangements as a way of reducing the incidence of conflicts that are directly linked to
   development. 
Exclusive forms of land-uses such as National Parks have problems in terms of the
   potential for creating partnerships with communities.
A number of case studies used in this study have shown that the non-recognition of
   restitution of land rights is part of the problem of land conflicts in Zimbabwe. The
   analysis observed that such claims do exist and are being made on both state lands and
    private land. 
The year 2000 farm occupations were used by some communities to present their
   historically based land claims. In this regard relevant policy should be put in place to
  deal with historically based land claims.
The study suggests the need for an institutional frame-work that could start dialogue on
   the various aspects of restitution.
Despite the high prevalence of land conflicts, there are no institutions, especially at the
   Rural District Council (RDC) levels, that specialise in the handling of conflicts. There is
   therefore need for a purely technical institution that deals with conflicts at least at the
   RDC level.
There is no information system for conflict analysis resolution and management
   particularly in communal areas. The success in solving conflicts lies in the development
   of  an information system that captures all land related information and transactions and
   continuously updates it. 
The concept of institutional development should go hand in hand with the development
   of a land information system.

ZERO - Regional Environment Organisation - All Rights Reserved  2005