Re: [Diggers350] What next for young people in Zimbabwe’s land reform areas?
seeds at snail.org.uk
Fri Nov 10 07:17:16 GMT 2017
DfID was brought in to a newly created National Security Council by
Now DfID business gets organised from occupied Golan Heights to suit
the likes of Dan Gertler who stands so exposed after Paradise Papers.
DfID;s new game in vulnerable parts of Africa is Land Reform along the
lines of post Brexit theory that goes like this:
"we need to invest now more than ever in rebuilding Britain’s
international position. More than ever, we need nimble and intelligent
ways of thinking about Britain in the world. I would love to have the
opportunity now to try and frame for the next fifty years what this
country is and what our values are, and reassure people that we can
make a success of this." -- Minister for Africa and State Minister at
DfID who hacked his way in to DRC yesterday as attention was
professionally diverted elsewhere.
Zimbabwe is a similar story.
This is what the author of the article below. from IDS at Sussex had to
state a month or so ago:
"The Nacala corridor: more than coal?
I recently spent a week in Nampula province in northern Mozambique. This
is the location of the Nacala corridor, which stretches from the coal
mining region of Tete through southern Malawi to the port of Nacala. The
visit was part of a project, led in Mozambique by Euclides Gonçalves, on
the political economy of agricultural growth corridors in eastern
Africa. It is a small component of the new DFID-funded APRA programme,
which has just produced its first Working Paper by Rebecca Smalley on
Rio Tinto lost heavily to Vale in opening up Nacala for extractive
industry loot [read rape of African land rights!] and now the shameful
collective post-Brexit plan for UK Plc is this old sickness!
On 09-11-2017 20:27, Tony Gosling tony at cultureshop.org.uk [Diggers350]
> next for young people in Zimbabwe’s land reform areas?
> As discussed in the
> series earlier this year, we have been investigating
> inter-generational questions in land reform areas. 17 years on, young
> people born after the land reform are leaving school, and thinking
> about what next? Will this be farming, or other occupations? In the
> context of a declining economy what prospects are there?
> We wanted to hear from those currently in secondary school (Form IV,
> mostly aged between 16 and 18) and undertook an exercise with school
> students asking two questions in sequence: What do you think you will
> be doing in 20 years’ time? And, what are the constraints to getting
> It was a fascinating set of interactions held in three schools in our
> study areas – in high potential Mvurwi, in dryland Wondedzo near
> Masvingo and in the deep Lowveld in Chikombedzi. We used
> Q sort methodology, which analyses subjective viewpoints using both
> qualitative and quantitative methods. A first step is to decide on the
> statements that are going to be sorted. We did this in a separate
> exercise with a number of young people and ended up with 49 statements
> (a list of envisaged occupations) related to the first question and 36
> statements (on constraints) for the second question. You can have a
> look at what young people chose as the full set for sorting,
> In the Q sort sessions, participants are asked to rank their opinions
> along a continuum from agree to disagree against a set of statements
> about a subject. In the end we had 61 valid responses across the
> sites, with 39 males and 22 females. The Q sort method has been used
> in several other studies on youth and agriculture in Ghana, including
> exploring perspectives on
> work and on
> people’s perspectives on farming. We wanted to see if the setting of
> land reform areas in Zimbabwe threw up different results.
> The statistical analysis of the sorts (using the
> software – thanks to Jim Sumberg for helping navigate this) revealed a
> number of factors for both questions, differentiated by gender but
> combining all the schools. The qualitative interpretation exploring
> what these factors mean is the interesting part of the analysis, and
> is hugely revealing on how young people imagine their futures, and
> what constraints they perceive as being in the way. This blog focuses
> on the question: “what do you think you’ll be doing in 20 years’
> time?”, preliminary results of which were
> before. The next blog focuses on the constraints.
> Imagined futures
> The analysis of the statements linked to the factors highlighted some
> potential narratives around each, including the role of agriculture.
> Some very brief summaries of these narratives are presented below. For
> male students, three factors emerge from the statistical analysis:
> * Factor 1 focuses on a future life in professional jobs, with
> mentions of being a lawyer, doctor, teacher, solider and nurse
> characterising this group. Some saw this happening outside Zimbabwe,
> including ‘working in the UK’. Imagined futures focused on agriculture
> were in management and business roles, such as being an irrigation
> dealer or an owner of an agricultural-related business, with less
> emphasis on actually producing.
> * Factor 2 focuses on being self-employed and owning a business.
> Being a bottle store owner was characteristic of this clustering.
> Commercial farming and agricultural marketing/input supply jobs were
> identified as important.
> * Factor 3 relates to wage work, and a number relatively
> low-skilled jobs, including being a conductor, driver, working in a
> factory. Given the employment situation in Zimbabwe currently, some in
> this group envisaged themselves working in South Africa. Agriculture
> was more prominent in characterising this factor, and involved a
> number of business ‘projects’, including vegetable gardening, poultry
> production, combining with off-farm wage work.
> A rather different set of factors emerged amongst female students.
> Again, three are identified. These are:
> * Factor 1 highlights business ownership and entrepreneurship. The
> factor included mention of butchery, grocery, grinding mill ownership
> for example. This factor was also associated with professional jobs
> (but few cases), including mention of careers as lawyers and in the
> police service. Where agriculture was mentioned, if focused on a job,
> as an input supply dealer or an irrigation dealer, but also production
> for the market, with agriculture as a business, including commercial
> vegetable and tobacco production.
> * Factor 2 focuses on piecework – the casual sale of labour – as
> well as the trading of vegetables, food and clothes. By contrast to
> Factor 1, these are very low income options, but maybe a realistic
> vision for many. Some in this cluster combined these choices with a
> hope of escape, where fortunes would be made, and there were mentions
> of ‘working in the UK’ and ‘politician’ (in the Zimbabwe context
> perhaps seen as a route to patronage and the spoils of corruption).
> Engagement in agriculture was through markets and trading, selling
> vegetables and food, for example, but less focused on direct
> * Factor 3 by contrast emphasised service jobs (including
> hairdressing and tourism) and care (nurse, being a preacher, looking
> after kids). For this factor, agriculture was not part of an imagined
> future at all it seemed.
> Future trajectories
> previous blogs have shown, young people’s imagined futures do not
> always pan out. The option of becoming a lawyer or doctor or migrating
> to the UK, for example, are available to very few. The conditions of
> in the land reform areas are poor, and the opportunities for upward
> mobility constrained, perhaps especially so given the declining
> economic conditions in Zimbabwe more generally. Escape is an option,
> to South Africa, the UK and elsewhere have been significant in the
> past, but again options are limited, and
> and violence a concern in South Africa.
> So it is not surprising that many young people imagine getting on
> through self-employment, piecework and small-scale businesses at home.
> Where agriculture is seen as central to future livelihoods, it is as a
> business, or through engagement with markets. Some saw themselves as
> focused commercial producers (vegetables and tobacco, mostly), but
> this was not a dominant theme in any factor. While in practice many
> young people end up focusing on
> ‘projects’ at home, on their parents’ or in-laws’ fields, this is not
> central to their future imaginaries.
> The factors also differed by gender. While both male and female
> students mentioned professional careers, owning businesses and so on,
> it was noticeable that the male sorters were more aspirational,
> imagining futures in the professions or owning lucrative businesses.
> The female students by contrast had generally set lower targets, with
> self-employment and entrepreneurship being associated with piecework
> and trading, as well as owning a stores or grinding mills. Engaging
> with agriculture is also much less emphasised among women compared to
> men, who saw some options of commercial agricultural production, as
> well as engaging in agriculture-related businesses. Significantly both
> male and female sorters highlighted what Henry Bernstein would call
> the ‘fragmented classes of labour’, the array of informal, fragile and
> low paid jobs, some including wage work, but many simply casual
> piecework, perhaps combined with some part-time agriculture. For many
> this is, even now, envisaged as the future.
> In the discussions that followed the sorts, the participants were very
> sanguine about the constraints, and these certainly affected their
> choices. The question was purposely focused on an
> self’ – what do you think you will doing in 20 years? – rather than
> simply open-ended aspirations, where the usual list of footballers,
> pop stars, astronauts and so on get added.
> Constraints impinging on futures are very real for young people in
> Zimbabwe, creating
> and anxiety and a resort to drink and drugs for some. The
> reform intergenerational question is simply not being addressed by
> policy, development programming or government services. The next blog,
> focuses on the array of constraints young people identified, and
> explores the implications.
> This post was written by
> Scoones and first appeared on
> From South America, where payment must be made with subtlety, the
> Bormann organization has made a substantial contribution. It has drawn
> many of the brightest Jewish businessmen into a participatory role in
> the development of many of its corporations, and many of these Jews
> share their prosperity most generously with Israel. If their proposals
> are sound, they are even provided with a specially dispensed venture
> capital fund. I spoke with one Jewish businessmen in Hartford,
> Connecticut. He had arrived there quite unknown several years before
> our conversation, but with Bormann money as his leverage. Today he is
> more than a millionaire, a quiet leader in the community with a
> certain share of his profits earmarked as always for his venture
> capital benefactors. This has taken place in many other instances
> across America and demonstrates how Bormann's people operate in the
> contemporary commercial world, in contrast to the fanciful nonsense
> with which Nazis are described in so much "literature."
> So much emphasis is placed on select Jewish participation in Bormann
> companies that when Adolf Eichmann was seized and taken to Tel Aviv to
> stand trial, it produced a shock wave in the Jewish and German
> communities of Buenos Aires. Jewish leaders informed the Israeli
> authorities in no uncertain terms that this must never happen again
> because a repetition would permanently rupture relations with the
> Germans of Latin America, as well as with the Bormann organization,
> and cut off the flow of Jewish money to Israel. It never happened
> again, and the pursuit of Bormann quieted down at the request of these
> Jewish leaders. He is residing in an Argentinian safe haven, protected
> by the most efficient German infrastructure in history as well as by
> all those whose prosperity depends on his well-being.
More information about the Diggers350