Implications of peri-urban land reform programs on urban land markets: a case study of Harare, Zimbabwe

Land reform and access to urban land are central, contested issues in many African cities due to historical inequities, political influence, and high demand for land as an economic resource. In Zimbabwe, bureaucratic inefficiencies and corruption have fostered a dual formal–informal urban land market. While extensive research has examined Zimbabwe’s Fast Track Land Reform Program (FTLRP) since 2000, there is limited scholarship on its implications for urban land markets, particularly in peri-urban areas. This paper addresses that gap by focusing on Harare. It asks: How have peri-urban land reform programs impacted urban land markets in Harare, Zimbabwe, and what are the implications for sustainable urban development? The study aims to characterize peri-urban land reform processes, evaluate their implications for land markets, and analyze stakeholder roles. The article argues that effective peri-urban land reform must balance planning, politics, and power to avoid undermining land market functionality, a critical element for producing inclusive, sustainable, and resilient human settlements consistent with SDG 11.

Urban land markets facilitate the exchange of rights in land and underpin urban development by allocating ownership, enabling economic use, and supporting taxation and land value capture. Location and plot size generally determine land value, with proximity to services increasing value; however, rapid urbanization has driven up demand even in peripheral areas lacking services. African cities such as Accra and Lagos illustrate how demand, migration, and commercial opportunities stimulate land market activity. Land markets operate along a formal–informal spectrum. Formal markets are governed by legal and institutional frameworks, enforceable property rights, and state oversight; experiences from China highlight the need for coherent policy and accountability. Informal markets, prevalent in many African cities, incorporate social, civil, and customary practices, often emerging from institutional collapse, corruption, negotiated planning, and political economy dynamics. These markets frequently accommodate the urban poor, especially in peri-urban areas, and the boundary between formal and informal is dynamic and blurred. The nexus between land reform and urban land markets is rooted in post-independence redistributive efforts to address colonial landlessness, with the state as a key actor. Planning—typically a state function—structures how land is identified and allocated. Yet political elites can capture land reform agendas, leading to land grabbing, clientelism, and informalization of urban land transactions. When reform is driven by partisan interests rather than transparent planning, formal processes are overridden, public trust erodes, and informal markets expand.

The study used a qualitative case study design centered on Harare and its peri-urban farms within the Greater Harare Combination master plan. Data collection triangulated secondary and primary sources. Secondary data included key statutes and policy documents (Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment No. 20 of 2013, Regional Town and Country Planning Act of 1996, Land Acquisition Act of 1992), as well as peer-reviewed literature, reports, and books to establish historical and legislative context. Primary data comprised semi-formal unstructured interviews with purposively selected key informants: five land use planning professionals, five war veterans, three land valuation experts, three city officials (town planner, deputy-city planner, physical planner), and one official from the Ministry of Local Government’s Department of Physical Planning. Interviews followed an interview schedule allowing in-depth exploration, lasted approximately 60 minutes, were recorded with consent, and complied with ethical clearance from the University of the Free State (UFS-HSD2020/1704/192). Analysis applied content analysis to documents and thematic analysis to interview transcripts to identify patterns aligned with study objectives and to interpret the implications of peri-urban land reform for Harare’s urban land markets.

Historical context and first-phase reform: Harare’s development was shaped by colonial-era spatial segregation and a dual land tenure system (state vs. freehold), with Europeans controlling urban and peri-urban land; approximately 414,016 hectares in Harare were once under European agricultural use. The first phase of land reform under the Lancaster House Agreement (willing-buyer–willing-seller) maintained a largely formal, freehold-based urban land market with clear tenure, court-backed rights, and city oversight, including capital gains taxation and municipal acquisition of farms for development. However, limited compulsion meant viable peri-urban land near Harare remained with white commercial farmers, and an elite-dominated private market persisted, setting the stage for compulsory acquisition. FTLRP and peri-urban impacts: In 2000, constitutional changes removed the right to full compensation (except for improvements), enabling compulsory acquisition. Implementation in Harare’s peri-urban areas was politically driven, often law-disregarding, and featured invasions of farms such as Hopley, Caledonia, Whitecliff, Tongogara, Saturday Retreat (now Ushewekunze), and Odar Farm (now Southlea Park). State support and intimidation were reported, with war veterans and security elites central to occupations. This produced multiple competing claims, with actors including war veterans, ministers, army/police officials, ministries, the city council, and housing cooperatives, generating conflicts and polarization. Informalization and urban sprawl: Rapid growth of informal settlements and urban sprawl strained water, sanitation, electricity, transportation, and planning capacities. Weak zoning enforcement, non-transparent allocations, and corruption undermined governance. Land barons and politically aligned cooperatives sold land without documentation, leading to loss of municipal revenue, heightened tenure insecurity, and demolitions that increased perceived risk and deterred investment. Patronage dynamics: Access to land in peri-urban Harare frequently hinged on political connections and electoral cycles, with ZANU-PF-linked structures using land to consolidate support, while opposition-controlled councils attempted more transparent allocations but faced central government interference. Positive effects: Despite significant challenges, some informants reported increased land access and tenure for low-income groups, perceived reductions in land prices due to increased supply, improved affordability for some, and growth in urban agriculture contributing to food security and livelihoods. Overall, however, the negative market distortions, tenure insecurity, and planning reversals outweighed benefits.

Peri-urban land reform under the FTLRP significantly disrupted Harare’s urban land market by informalizing transactions, creating overlapping claims, and intensifying clientelism. Although reform aimed to redress historical inequities and expand land access, implementation through political patronage and elite capture produced mismatches between market offerings and the affordability of low- to middle-income households. Powerful syndicates, often involving local administrators and security actors, profited from low-income housing demand, while the urban poor remained marginalized. ZANU-PF’s distributive politics deepened clientelist exchanges of land for votes, and ambiguous public communication on redistribution exacerbated uncertainty. Market dynamics were further stressed as demand exceeded supply, pushing prices up beyond what location and plot size alone would predict. Planning systems were undermined: the typical sequence of layout planning, surveying, servicing, and occupation was reversed, weakening rational and technocratic frameworks and placing planners in conflict with political imperatives. Broader structural factors—macroeconomic instability, rapid population growth, weak land administration and governance, and traditional leaders allocating land outside formal processes—amplified informal market growth. Together, these forces impaired coherent urban development, hindered infrastructure provision, and reduced investor confidence in the formal land market.

Land reform in post-colonial African contexts intersects with contested politics and state planning, shaping urban land markets in complex ways. In Harare, peri-urban components of the FTLRP increased land access for some marginalized groups but also spurred informal transactions, multiple claims, urban sprawl, informal settlements, and exploitation by land barons, ultimately distorting the urban land market and undermining sustainable development. The study contributes to African peri-urban land reform scholarship by evidencing how politically driven processes can erode formal market functionality and planning systems. Policy implications include the need to reconcile planning, power, and politics to protect land market integrity; enhance transparency, accountability, and enforcement in land allocations; strengthen municipal revenue and land value capture; and stabilize macroeconomic and governance conditions to curb informality. Lessons from Harare are pertinent to other African countries confronting peri-urban tenure insecurity and informal settlements: reforms should prioritize transparent, planned redistribution that preserves market functionality and treats land as an economic tool for inclusive urban development rather than a vehicle for partisan gain.