This study focuses on rural livelihood diversification and improvement in dry districts of Zimbabwe during the period from 2000 to 2010. It establishes and documents livelihood activities and interventions in three semi-arid districts in Zimbabwe, analyses evidence for rural livelihood diversification and improvement and related challenges, and analyses institutional and policy issues that determine rural livelihood development in the politically charged period from 2000 to 2010. Rural livelihood diversification and improvement is not a recent phenomenon. For years, rural people have diversified their livelihoods for different economic reasons. Despite several studies on rural livelihoods in Zimbabwe, no similar studies have been done to determine the types of livelihood diversification that occur in a politically charged environment and whether they improve people‟s livelihoods. The study was guided by both the sustainable livelihoods framework and the actor oriented approach. Qualitative methodology was used for the overall data collection. Firstly data was collected „from the top‟ through in-depth interviews with officials from government institutions, non-governmental organisations and community leadership structures. Secondly data was collected „from the bottom up‟ through selected participatory methods in study areas. The overall study findings show that despite having increased livelihood interventions in all semi-arid areas, the politically fraught atmosphere constrained livelihood improvement and poverty remained. Although evidence for livelihood diversification is undisputed in the study, the extent to which it contributed to livelihood improvement was limited. The extended period of political constraint reversed some of the livelihood improvement gains recorded by external interventions. As most of the support was targeted at addressing the immediate food needs of the poor in semi-arid districts, this affected the number of long-term interventions targeted at sustainable livelihood development. The study found that the changing policies and institutional arrangements constrained and limited the potential of some of the livelihood strategies adopted during the period under study and as a result most livelihood activities were limited to survival strategies. The study shows that despite a decline in agricultural production during the period under study, it remained the major livelihood activity. Agricultural activities such as cotton and maize production and livestock rearing experienced a decline, but were partially revived through external support from both the government and nongovernmental organisations. Agriculture as a livelihood activity largely benefited from external interventions that rehabilitated irrigation infrastructure and the provision of agricultural inputs during the period. However, despite the dominance of agriculture as a livelihood activity in semi-arid areas non-farm livelihood activities, both locally initiated and externally fostered, played a significant role in supporting rural livelihoods. Poaching and wild fruit harvesting provided food for immediate consumption, whilst gold and diamond panning, wood carving and the commercialisation of non-timber forest products generated cash income for rural livelihoods. Non-farm external livelihood interventions identified resulted in a number of rural livelihood development models important for future rural development. These models were developed around the commercialisation of non-timber forest products for cash income generation, rural human capital development through vocational skills training and rural small livestock asset development. Human capital resulted in the development of rural industry in the form of community based enterprises. Indirectly it also contributed to migrant labour that sent cash and goods back home. The study shows that it is evident that in a politically charged environment livelihood diversification has a range of positive effects. The re-emergence of the barter exchange economy in rural communities contributed to livelihood diversification although sustainability was limited. It is also possible for both barter exchange and the cash market to co-exist in a politically charged environment. The study also shows that traditional leadership and local authorities in study areas became more politicised and militarised and this diverted them from facilitating and supporting rural development and inhibited rural livelihood development efforts by different rural players. The study found that rural livelihoods are not static, and they adapted as best they could in the face of exogenous trends and shocks. Rural areas underwent deep transformations as a result of political dynamics, local livelihood initiatives and external livelihood support. Rural livelihoods changed as rural people devised combined livelihood strategies that went beyond farming. However, in contrast to the widely accepted argument that diversification plays an important role in poverty alleviation, this was clearly not the case in Zimbabwe‟s politically charged environment. This study contributes to the development debate with a case study on the type and extent of livelihood diversification strategies possible in a politically charged environment. Methodologically the study contributes to the possible application of a dual data collection system where data is collected from the top using different methods from those used to collect data from the bottom. This enriched the data at triangulation phase during analysis. The study also contributes to the understanding of the political economy, the type of rural livelihood development possible in politically charged environments, and to how rural people in Zimbabwe react and behave in an endeavour to survive. There was an increased role played by external interventions in livelihood diversification but the extent of their contribution to positive livelihood outcomes was constrained by the politically charged environment that prompted the interventions in the first place. The normal processes of policy development and implementation changed as the role of politicians in planning and implementation became evident and policy aims shifted from rural development to political party self-preservation.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:nmmu/vital:9149 |
| Date | January 2012 |
| Creators | Musevenzi, Julius |
| Publisher | Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Faculty of Business and Economic Sciences |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis, Doctoral, PhD |
| Format | xi, 352 leaves, pdf |
| Rights | Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds