Communal Land and Belonging Among Foreign Former Farmworkers in Zimbabwe

IF 1 4区 社会学 Q2 AREA STUDIES African Studies Pub Date : 2023-10-10 DOI:10.1080/00020184.2023.2264240
Patience Chadambuka, Kirk Helliker
{"title":"Communal Land and Belonging Among Foreign Former Farmworkers in Zimbabwe","authors":"Patience Chadambuka, Kirk Helliker","doi":"10.1080/00020184.2023.2264240","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTIn the year 2000, the nation-wide land occupations and the ensuing Fast Track Land Reform Programme displaced tens of thousands of farm labourers from white commercial farms in Zimbabwe. Many of these farm labourers were of foreign origin, including from Malawi and Mozambique, though they had lived in Zimbabwe for extended periods. While farm labourers with Zimbabwean ancestry found it relatively easy, but not without problems in many cases, to move into communal areas subsequent to displacement, foreign farm labourers typically failed to do so because of their alien status. Nevertheless, some ex-farm labourers of foreign status did move into communal lands successfully, and sought to construct a project of belonging in doing so. Based on semi-ethnographic fieldwork conducted in the Shamva District’s Bushu communal areas in Mashonaland Central Province, this article examines the many challenges faced by Africans of foreign origin in accessing communal land and how their ‘foreign’ identity continues to limit their tenure security while living alongside indigenous communal villagers.KEYWORDS: landZimbabwebelongingforeign farmworkerscommunal areasShamva Disclosure statementNo conflict of interest has been declared by the authors.AcknowledgementsThe authors wish to thank all those who participated in this study.Notes1 Though we use the term ‘autochthonous Zimbabweans’, we also problematise it throughout the article. In particular, claims about being an autochthonous Zimbabwean entail a project of belonging that is possibly subject to contestation from others. Overall, an autochthonous status is socially-constructed and dynamic, rather than a fixed identity.2 Fast track resulted in the creation of a two-tier land-redistribution model comprising smaller, villagised A1 farms, and the larger commercial A2 farms.Additional informationNotes on contributorsPatience ChadambukaPatience Chadambuka is acting head of the department of community studies at Midlands State University in Zimbabwe.Kirk HellikerKirk Helliker is a research professor and head of the unit of Zimbabwean studies at Rhodes University in South Africa.","PeriodicalId":51769,"journal":{"name":"African Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00020184.2023.2264240","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACTIn the year 2000, the nation-wide land occupations and the ensuing Fast Track Land Reform Programme displaced tens of thousands of farm labourers from white commercial farms in Zimbabwe. Many of these farm labourers were of foreign origin, including from Malawi and Mozambique, though they had lived in Zimbabwe for extended periods. While farm labourers with Zimbabwean ancestry found it relatively easy, but not without problems in many cases, to move into communal areas subsequent to displacement, foreign farm labourers typically failed to do so because of their alien status. Nevertheless, some ex-farm labourers of foreign status did move into communal lands successfully, and sought to construct a project of belonging in doing so. Based on semi-ethnographic fieldwork conducted in the Shamva District’s Bushu communal areas in Mashonaland Central Province, this article examines the many challenges faced by Africans of foreign origin in accessing communal land and how their ‘foreign’ identity continues to limit their tenure security while living alongside indigenous communal villagers.KEYWORDS: landZimbabwebelongingforeign farmworkerscommunal areasShamva Disclosure statementNo conflict of interest has been declared by the authors.AcknowledgementsThe authors wish to thank all those who participated in this study.Notes1 Though we use the term ‘autochthonous Zimbabweans’, we also problematise it throughout the article. In particular, claims about being an autochthonous Zimbabwean entail a project of belonging that is possibly subject to contestation from others. Overall, an autochthonous status is socially-constructed and dynamic, rather than a fixed identity.2 Fast track resulted in the creation of a two-tier land-redistribution model comprising smaller, villagised A1 farms, and the larger commercial A2 farms.Additional informationNotes on contributorsPatience ChadambukaPatience Chadambuka is acting head of the department of community studies at Midlands State University in Zimbabwe.Kirk HellikerKirk Helliker is a research professor and head of the unit of Zimbabwean studies at Rhodes University in South Africa.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
津巴布韦外籍前农场工人的公有土地和归属感
2000年,津巴布韦全国范围内的土地占领和随后的快速土地改革计划使成千上万的农场工人从白人商业农场流离失所。这些农场劳工中有许多是外国人,包括来自马拉维和莫桑比克的人,尽管他们在津巴布韦生活了很长一段时间。虽然具有津巴布韦血统的农场工人在流离失所后相对容易,但在许多情况下并非没有问题地迁入公共地区,但外国农场工人通常由于其外国人身份而未能这样做。然而,一些具有外国身份的前农场工人确实成功地搬进了公共土地,并试图在这样做中建立一个归属感项目。本文基于在马绍纳兰中部省Shamva区Bushu社区进行的半人种学田野调查,研究了外国非洲人在获得公共土地时面临的许多挑战,以及他们的“外国”身份如何继续限制他们与土著社区村民生活在一起时的使用权保障。关键词:土地津巴布韦属于外国农场工人公共区域沙姆瓦披露声明作者未声明存在利益冲突。作者希望感谢所有参与这项研究的人。注1虽然我们使用了“本地津巴布韦人”一词,但我们在整篇文章中也对其提出了质疑。特别是,声称自己是土生土长的津巴布韦人,会带来一种归属感,可能会受到他人的争议。总的来说,本土身份是社会建构的和动态的,而不是固定的身份快速通道导致了两层土地再分配模式的创建,包括较小的村庄A1农场和较大的商业A2农场。关于作者patience Chadambuka的说明patience Chadambuka是津巴布韦米德兰兹州立大学社区研究系的代理主任。Kirk Helliker是一名研究教授,也是南非罗德大学津巴布韦研究部门的负责人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
African Studies
African Studies AREA STUDIES-
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Discourse of Secession in Novuyo Rosa Tshuma’s House of Stone (Un)doing Gender: The Ethnographic Significance of Mbube Dirge Black Diasporic Subjectivity and Lacanian Lack of Home: A Reading of Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s Americanah Laying Waste to History: Recyclia and Urban Art Traditions in Mozambique Local Market Institutions and Solid Waste Management in Accra’s Open-Air Markets
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1