Villagised farms, with allocated homestead areas and fields and common grazing, are the most common type of land reform farm across the country, including in Masvingo province. We have three such case study sites – Lonely Farm (Gutu), Wondedzo Wares (Masvingo) and Sanangwe (Masvingo). Across these sites we discussed with a total of 52 people in three groups (4 men, 6 women; 9 men, 8 women and 15 men and 8 women respectively).
These were lively and informed discussions and tell us a lot about the trajectory of land reform. The three sites have many commonalities (increasing numbers of people, declining common land, reliance on a combination of farm-based accumulation and off-farm diversification, investment in small-scale irrigation and so on), but some important differences.
We found the participants at the Lonely farm success ranking discussion to be confident, forward-looking and relatively young and energetic. This contrasted with the nearby Clare farm that we visited immediately beforehand, where concerns around cross-generational transition had upset earlier success for some (see last blog). Although perhaps not as materially rich, the direction of travel seemed more positive in Lonely, and it contrasted with the past when we first went there when a few older households were in charge and the rest of those who settled were poor, with limited assets, often shuttling between Lonely and Serima communal area next door.
Today, there is a sense of collective purpose and a pride in the place. People commented on the emergence of business and shops at various points on the nearby farms. Such diversification into business activities of different sorts (all small scale, mostly shops) absorbs more of the population in gainful activity locally. Retail shops, processing, input supply, transport provision all adds to the economic possibilities for the area. It is increasingly seen as place to come and live, they argued. For those who are more successful, this is enhanced by access to solar electricity, cars and so accessibility and comfort. As they noted, people copy each other and sometimes compete, driving everyone upwards together.
Wondedzo Wares, immediately adjacent to Wondedzo extension discussed in the previous blog, is different again. Here the struggles to sustain accumulation from farming were evident, and the contrast with the successful self-contained area was marked. Different members of the same family have plots across the two sites, with the more influential, older ones getting land in the self-contained farms, while others took on villagised plots during the land invasions. Their starting points were quite different too, with many fewer assets in the villagised area. As everywhere in this region, success is very much dependant on access to cheap irrigation technology, but few in Wondedzo Wares have been able to sustain this success across generations.
Sanagwe is located a bit further east, and has always had a troubled land use history, with many different claimants arriving independently or being settled there by the state since 2000. The place is crowded as a result and feels more like a communal area than many other land reform sites because of the density of population. From only two there are now six sabhukus (village heads), reflecting the expanded population, including ‘new’ young entrants along the riverbanks developing irrigated horticulture. So large is the Vapostori population in our Masvingo sites as a whole now that they have invested in a brand-new school, paid for by church subscription and built by church followers, and many Vapostori and non-Vapostori children attend from all around, often renting out houses in other settlers’ homesteads.
An important feature of Sanangwe is the links to the diaspora, with impressive new houses being built by relatives in the UK and elsewhere. These links have allowed some households to manage transitions when older parents die. Many Sanagwe residents though have not improved their success over time. They are managing, accumulating in small amounts and intermittently from below – many in SG2 – but not progressing, as it is difficult to move to SG1 with limited locally-based accumulation due to lack of land (and water). Those who have managed to move to SG1 have usually done so with subsidy from outside, mostly notably from diaspora relatives.
Indicators of success
Across the three sites, many success indicators were mentioned, albeit with slight differences in emphasis. In all the sites, housing conditions, ownership of productive assets such as access to irrigation, large herds of cattle, fish ponds, possession of tractors and other farming equipment (scotch-carts, ploughs) and security fences were mentioned. Alternative off-farm sources of income from wage employment, self-employed business and/or remittances was also regularly mentioned as an indicator of success. As with other sites, harvesting maize surplus beyond household requirements was also regularly mentioned as an indicator. Affording private medical care was also seen as a marker of success. Households’ work ethic, determination (shungu), knowledge (ruzivo), unification and planning were seen as determinants of success (or lack of it). As one female participant in Wondedzo Wares noted, “You have to work very hard in order to be successful. One has to use his/her knowledge to be successful. A husband and wife must have unity.” Another female participant followed up on this, noting “husbands and wives must plan together and share ideas. They must also teach their children, starting from a very young age, good work ethics.” At community level, access to better water supply, roads, schools (with computers), clinics, shops and dip tanks were also mentioned as indicators of success.
Transitions over time
The following tables show the patterns of change across the three sites between 2008 and 2025 for households that were present in both time periods.
Lonely farm
| 2025 rankings | |||||
| 2008 rankings | SG1 | SG2 | SG3 | Total | |
| SG1 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 13(52.0%) | |
| SG2 | 1 | 6 | 2 | 9(36.0%) | |
| SG3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3(12.0%) | |
| Total | 8(32.0%) | 13(52.0%) | 4(16.0%) | 25(100%) | |
Twenty-five of the initial 30 households were there in both periods, while the other five had sold their plots and moved out. Although there is an overall decline in ranks in Lonely farm, this does not detract from the increasing array of business and other opportunities in the area. This gives the sense of possibility even when land is constrained and farm-based accumulation is limited as livelihoods are diversified. Lonely area was hit hard by January Disease, which undermined livestock production and cut the availability of draft power. However, those who have drilled boreholes and are irrigating land are doing relatively better, even if many are still stuck in SG2.
- 52% (13 households) remained static (6 households remained in SG1, 6 households remained in SG2, and 1 household remained in SG3.
- 36% (9 households) decreased their rank moving down to one or two categories over the period.
- 12% (3 households) increased their ranking moving one or two rankings over the period.
- Overall, 48% (12 households) had changed rank
Wondedzo Wares
| 2025 rankings | |||||
| 2008 rankings | SG1 | SG2 | SG3 | Total | |
| SG1 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 7(14.3%) | |
| SG2 | 3 | 13 | 3 | 19(38.8%) | |
| SG3 | 1 | 12 | 10 | 23(46.9%) | |
| Total | 4(8.2%) | 30(61.2%) | 15(30.6%) | 49(100%) | |
Comparing our lists from Wondedzo Wares in 2008 and now, only 49 of the 64 households were there at both times. 14 of the initially studied households had sold their plots to new entrants and moved elsewhere, while in one case no one knew where the person was. In Wondedzo Wares village none of the households ranked SG1 in 2008 were able to maintain that status by 2025. While others had moved up due to windfalls and external investment, simply keeping going has proved tough. Many remained ‘stuck’ in SG3 and SG2. The possibilities for accumulation from below through farming have become increasingly constrained due to labour constraints, as people age; as a result of droughts and because many cattle – key assets for production – have died due to January Disease, which swept through the area from 2021xx onwards.
- 46.9% (23 households) remained static (0 households remained in SG1, 13 households remained in SG2 and 10 household remained in SG3).
- 20.4% (10 households) decreased their rank, moving down to one or two categories over the period.
- 32.7% (16 households) increased their ranking moving one or two rankings over the period.
- Overall, 53.1% (26 households) had changed rank
Sanangwe
| 2025 rankings | |||||
| 2008 rankings | SG1 | SG2 | SG3 | Total | |
| SG1 | 4 | 9 | 7 | 20(37.7%) | |
| SG2 | 1 | 9 | 8 | 18(34.0%) | |
| SG3 | 0 | 3 | 12 | 15(28.3%) | |
| Total | 5(9.4%) | 21(39.6%) | 27(50.9%) | 53(100%) | |
Unlike in Wondedzo Wares, 53 out of 54 households were there at both times, with only one household declared as unknown. Overall, the story of change for those households present across the 17 years for Sanangwe is one of decline, with 45% of all households moving down ranks, including 9 from SG1 to SG2 and 7 from SG1 to SG3. Very few had increased, with only 1 household moving into SG1 over time. Resource constraints were very evident as more people are now resident. Those who were able to compensate for this did so through irrigated farming (in some limited areas) and subventions from diaspora children who supported aging parents. The new arrivals (not present in 2008), however, overall were doing better, being younger, investing in new production and so on.
- 47.2% (25 households) remained static (4 households remained in SG1, 9 households remained in SG2 and 12 household remained in SG3).
- 45.3% (24 households) decreased their rank moving down to one or two categories over the period.
- 7.5% (4 households) increased their ranking by moving one or two rankings over the period.
- Overall, 52.8% (28 households) had changed rank
The following sections offer case studies of transitions from across the three sites.
Case 1: LN, Lonely (from SG2 to SG1). 36-year-old LN came with his parents to Lonely farm in 2001. His parents were communal area farmers from Zvavahera area in Gutu. LN remembered that his parents came with a herd of 8 cattle and a plough. On acquiring land, LN’s parents embarked on clearing the crop field and steadily built up the home with proceeds from farming. However, in 2005, LN’s mother passed away. This had a negative impact on the trajectory of the household. According to participants of our success rankings in 2008, LN’s father was “disadvantaged by the death of his wife.” Following the death of LN’s mother, his father decided to take another wife, a decision that did not sit well with LN and his siblings. “Children are no longer willing to work since the young mother (wife) came”, affecting production. Because of all this, the household was ranked in SG2 in 2008. In 2017, LN’s father passed away and the younger wife left, leaving LN and his siblings to inherit the plot. LN is the oldest of the 6 children (5 boys and 1 girl) and went to school up to form 4. LN and his three other brothers work as builders in South Africa. In 2017, LN constructed a large modern house (5-roomed), with a solar system, which costed him R12 000 to install. In 2024, he drilled a borehole, installed a submersible pump and jojo tank for US$3000 using income from his job as a builder in South Africa and cattle sales. He also owns 14 cattle, which he bought using income from wage employment in South Africa. While LN spends most of the time away in South Africa, his wife stays at the farm on a fulltime basis, engaging in farming (including horticulture). Because of all these investments and production, LN’s household was ranked in SG1 category.
Case 2: RM, Wondedzo Wares (from SG3 to SG1). RM was born in Nyajena in 1965. She went to school up to Form 4 but did not write the final examinations after she fell pregnant. She then got married in the same year. Her now late husband worked as a mechanic in Bulawayo and later Masvingo. In 1996, realising that life in town was difficult, RM and her husband illegally settled in Nemamwa area, but they were later evicted by the state. In 2000, they joined land invasions and acquired a plot in Wondedzo Wares. Unfortunately, in 2003, only three years after settlement, RM’s husband passed away, leaving her with three young children (one boy and two girls). Following the death of her husband, she struggled to send her children to school, and her sister assisted with paying of school fees. At that time, his oldest son was in the process of completing his Form 4. She told us that her household was “very poor” at the time of her husband’s passing. Indeed, in a 2008 ranking exercise, the household was ranked in SG3. During this period, she also fell seriously ill. Later, a pastor from her AFM church provided financial support that enabled her to send her son to do ‘A’ level. Her son later enrolled for a diploma in accounting at Masvingo Polytechnique College. Upon completion in 2010, he then found a job at ZIMRA. He then began to invest on the farm with his wages, starting with replacing pole and dug houses with a large brick and tin house with solar system and flush toilets. In 2020, he drilled a borehole and installed a submersible solar pump, jojo tank and irrigation. RM manages the horticulture enterprise, while her son is still at work. He also runs a butchery business in town. As a result, the household was ranked SG1 recently.
Case 3: AC, Sanangwe (from SG3 to SG2). AC was born in Nyahunda Purchase Area in Bikita in 1962. After completing Form 4 in 1982, he immediately enrolled at Teachers’ College and later worked as a school teacher until his retirement in 2017. He acquired land in 2001. He arrived with 8 cattle, 7 goats, a plough and cultivator. All these assets were purchased with savings from his wages. On acquiring land, he began to slowly invest on the farm – building houses, clearing the crop fields and buying a scotch-cart with savings from his salary. However, he admits that in the early 2000s he did not make a lot of investments on the farm as his children were still in boarding schools and was therefore “under pressure” to pay school fees. As he explained, “the pay was not enough to do everything”. Moreover, AC suffered a good deal of misfortune over the years. His first wife passed away in the late 1990s. He then remarried again, but the second wife died in 2001. Years later, his two children also passed away. All this sapped the household’s resources. The situation was exacerbated by the hyper-inflation during the time. Thus, in our 2008 success ranking exercise, the household was placed in SG3 category. At the time, he was also away at work, with a worker living at the farm. Since then, things have improved for AC. In 2008, he received ‘lobola’ for his daughter and used some of the money to build a brick and iron-roofed house. In 2011, he remarried again. In 2015, the couple built another larger brick and iron-roofed house with his wages and that of his wife (who was employed as a temporary school teacher), as well as proceeds from maize sales. Although the family have managed to harvest some good yields over the years (especially during the 2016-17 season), hyperinflation has wiped out those gains. In 2024, he drilled a borehole with his retirement package. Today, he owns 10 cattle and 4 goats. With all these improvements, AC’s household was placed in SG2 in our recent success rankings. While his wife lives in Gutu town where his young children attend school, he is now a full-time farmer.
Cases I: transitions to a higher rank
Those who have increased their ‘success’ over time have done so largely due to investments in irrigation infrastructure paid for by funding from outside (retirement package, external job etc.). Access to irrigable land is key. In Sanangwe, the few who have managed to secure land along the river have done relatively well. Others have been able to lease or purchase land elsewhere, increasing their opportunities. Drilling boreholes in dryland farms is increasing, but getting sufficient water is challenging, and can be expensive. Overall, success in these areas is centrally about water access and control to allow intensification because of shrinking land areas.
Cases II: transitions to a lower rank
Declines, common across all sites, were prompted often by the death of a household head, made worse by the death of cattle due to January Disease. Other misfortunes, including deaths of relatives, and demands on limited funds due to school fee obligations added to the reasons.
Case 4: NV, Lonely (from SG1 to SG2). NV was born at Rufaro Farm (owned by AFM) in 1950. Her father worked there as a farmworker until his retirement in 1957. The family then moved to nearby Bidhi area in Serima communal areas, where they had a rural home. She dropped out of school at Standard 3 in 1967 after the death of her father. She then got married to FV in 1969, and had ten children together. FV worked as a general hand at Greek-owned store in Chatsworth from 1978 until his retirement in 1998. They used his earnings to pay school fees for their children. Four of their children became teachers (of which two later became headmasters), while one is now working as a pastor. The last-born son, F went to school up to Form 6 but refused to go for a teachers’ training course, and instead became a self-employed businessman. The family came to Lonely during invasions. On acquiring land, NV and her husband steadily invested in their land with proceeds from farming. They came with 18 cattle, a plough and cultivator. Thanks to good grazing, their herd grew to 44. She remembered having two spans of 4 oxen each. They also invested in two irrigation pumps, which they moved between their new land and old communal areas home. With adequate draft power and manure, they would cultivate their 4ha crop field and 2.5ha ‘doro’ field situated in the vlei. In 2008, the household was placed in SG1. However, the household suffered a series of unfortunate events, leading to a drastic decline. In 2017, NV’s husband passed away following a long illness. During the January Disease outbreak, NV lost most of her 44 cattle and she is now left with 6. In 2020, her second born son (born 1972) who was employed as a headmaster at a nearby school committed suicide. Meanwhile, her last born son’s economic fortunes have varied drastically over time. He has been running a business in Harare, supplying stationery to over 10 schools there. However, starting from 2020, the business began to collapse. In 2022, her first born son (born 1970) who was also a headmaster at a secondary school died after a short illness. All these events hit NV’s family very hard through a decline in remittances.
Case 5: SC, Wondedzo Wares (SG1 to SG2). SC is one of the oldest persons in the area at 101 years old. He is also a headman. In 2008, his household was placed in SG1. At the time, he had a herd of 20 cattle, 12 goats, 3 ploughs, 2 cultivators and a harrow. He had managed to purchase some of these things through farming. For example, during the 2007-8 season, he managed to purchase 2 cattle through proceeds from maize sales. In our recent success rankings, however, SC’s household was placed in SG2. Although the household still has productive assets (including cattle), a key reason why his household’s ranking has fallen is old age.
Case 6. OB, Sanangwe (SG2 to SG3). OB was born in 1965 in Gutu district. An electrician by training, OB lives in South Africa with his wife and children. In 2008, his household was ranked in SG1. Described as a “hard worker” at the time, he and his wife (a school teacher) were working in Masvingo at the time, allowing him to visit the plot during weekends and holidays, while a hired worker lived on the plot. They grew mainly maize and regularly sold to GMB. Today, his mother-in-law lives on the plot and agricultural activities have declined. The group ranked the household SG3 in 2025 due to absence from the plot.
Cases III: remaining the same, stuck in lower ranks
Case 8. JM, Lonely (remained in SG2). JM was born in Gutu in 1979. He went to school up to Form 4 and is a builder by trade. His wife, FM, was born in 1983 and completed Form 4 in 2001. They have three children aged 23 (the only son), 17 and 8. The son completed Form 4 in 2019, but did not do well, while the daughters are still in school. Both JM and his wife live on the farm on a full-time basis. JM and his son rely on piece jobs (including building) and fishing, while his wife rears broilers and does vegetable gardening. JM’s wife got initial capital from his sister whose husband works in a bank in Harare. The family acquired land in 2002. At the time, JM was working as a cook at Rufaro High School. On acquiring land, they erected two “fast-track” huts (pole and dagga houses) and started farming. They grew maize in the 4ha crop field, while JM’s wife engaged in vegetable gardening in their vlei garden. She would sell the vegetables in Masvingo or Gweru, with the train providing a cheap means of transport. However, she was forced to stop when the train operation ceased in 2008. For her, the new small taxis (mushikashika) are prohibitively expensive when transporting goods in large volumes. Nowadays she relies on the AFM gatherings, although the split of the church has affected the market.
Case 9. MN, Wondedzo Wares (remained in SG3). MN is 37 years old and went to school up to Form 4. She was able to pass her ‘O’ levels after two attempts, and now works as a clerk at a local school nearby and comes home during weekends. She is married and her husband works in Harare. In 2008, MN’s household was ranked in SG3. Her mother, who was the household head at the time,was old and ill. MN’s mother acquired land in 2000 on her own account after joining jambanja. As a widow who had returned to her natal home in Gorondondo following the death of her husband, she was determined to have her own homestead. At settlement, she had nothing. She had lost her productive assets following the death of husband when she was made to leave “everything” by the relatives of her late husband. Without productive assets, she struggled to gain a foothold in farming. The little profit she made through farming after resettlement was used to pay school fees for MN and to buy food. In 2010, she passed away and MN took over the plot, although she admitted that she is keeping the plot for one of her brothers who works in Chiredzi. Over the years, MN has bought cattle using savings from her job and kept them at her mother’s young sister’s homestead in the nearby communal areas, given that she is oftenabsent. She also bought a plough and wheelbarrow, and sunk a deep well with savings from her wages. Despite the accumulation of assets, the household was again ranked as SG3, in part because of the uncertainty around inheritance.
Case 10. SG, Sanangwe (remained in SG3). A 2008 success ranking exercise placed SG’s household in SG3 because he was an absentee landlord. He had a hired worker living on the plot, while he continued to live in the communal areas. It was clear that he held the land for speculative reasons rather than for production. 17 years later, the situation has not changed. SG still lives in the communal areas. Most participants in our success ranking exercise said that they did not know him very well.
Success is not guaranteed
In sum, the possibilities of ‘accumulation from below’ through farming in the A1 villagised areas is still evident, with around xxx% within SG1/2 ranks. For all those achieving success, irrigation is central across these sites. This allows for intensification and commercialisation of agriculture and, with this, opportunities for accumulation. Such intensification is important especially for younger people with smaller land areas – including many who had established farms in the area since 2008.
However, becoming really successful and maintaining this over time especially when older or when original residents die is hard, as multiple the declines from the SG1 rank across the sites show. Success is fragile and can easily be offset by droughts, diseases, misfortunes and the consequences of the death of a household head.
The generational transition questions are however not as obvious as in the A1 self-contained areas discussed in the previous blog. In these areas, there have been many new, younger entrants (so not appearing in the transitions analyses), and it is these people, often slotted into new plots in grazing areas or on subdivided land, who are driving change today. In contrast to those who have been around since 2008, here there is much more vibrancy as they accumulate from below, generating surpluses and investing.
How long this can carry on is a subject of much debate. As the villagised A1 areas become increasingly densely populated, how to sustain success through agriculture becomes more and more of a challenge. Intensification in smaller irrigated patches is one option, as are the variety of ‘projects’ we see (pigs, poultry etc.), but in the end there are limits. The fact that many are ‘stuck’ in SG3 ranks over time is witness to this.
An alternative scenario – very much what we see in many communal areas today – is what we get a glimpse of in Sanangwe. This involves a reliance on external (diaspora) finance to sustain households – often in large, well-built homes – with farming becoming more akin to gardening on small homestead plots, combining with some limited other projects. With sons and daughters abroad, the residents of such households are largely older people and some younger children of relatives being looked after.
‘Success’ in the land reform areas is therefore not certain. It varies for different people over time. But maintaining and extending success for land reform beneficiaries is essential if the agrarian reform is to realise its potentials in the long-term. While accumulation from below and surplus investment in farm and off-farm enterprises continues, there are many barriers as land becomes more constrained and external shocks are felt more severely.
The future of Zimbabwe’s land reform is therefore not guaranteed. A range of policy issues require urgent attention to address the next-generation challenges of land reform, as discussed in the final blog of this series.
This is the fourth blog in a series exploring ideas of ‘success’ in post-land reform Zimbabwe. The blog has been written by Ian Scoones and Tapiwa Chatikobo, with inputs from Felix Murimbarimba (who facilitated the workshops), Godfrey Mahofa, Jacob Mahenehene, Sydney Jones (Matobo), Moses Mutoko (Masvingo), Makiwa Manaka (Gutu), Vincent Sarayi/Peter Tsungu (Mvurwi) amongst many others in each of our sites. This blog first appeared on Zimbabweland