This paper is intended to provide answers to the agrarian reform problems in Zimbabwe. It was over twenty years ago when Zimbabwe received its independence, and the country had a likelihood to become a success story: good soil, lots of mineral resources and a new government that spoke of modernization and reform. The Zimbabwean government learned that its agrarian reform would succeed only if its people were given access to the land. This is vital to the success of any developmental program. There is a link between poverty reduction and land reform, and issues of poverty reduction cannot be corrected without addressing the issues of land reform. .
Land reform is a political process, which must be viewed and challenged both at the national and international level. What has also emerged is that market based forms of acquiring land are simply not the answer in a situation where there are historical injustices and resource constraints. There has to be a balance between the market based land and the state led approaches to land acquisition. .
At the beginning of the independence, the inequality in Zimbabwe was very large. The population communal areas were three times the size of the commercial farming areas. There was also a high racial division of land, with the white farmers owning approximately 42 per cent of the country. .
The Lancaster House negotiations offer for a Development Fund was introduced in 1979. Previous discussions for a development fund had been ignored. However, in the end, the offer of the Fund was withdrawn, and the.
UK government offered a compromise. In exchange for promising existing property rights in Zimbabwe, the UK would back half of the costs to resettle. The Zimbabwe government was required to match the UK's funding to make up the full costs of the program. .
The land would be sold through the method of willing seller/willing buyer, where as the white farmers who chose to keep farming could.
