ulawayo is located in the southwestof the country and is home to anestimated two million people. The

city is the hub of the Matabelelandregion, which comprises all of westernZimbabwe from the South African borderin the south to Victoria Falls in the north.The region receives relatively littlerainfall. The bulk of the water consumedin the city is extracted from an aquifercalled the Nyamandhlovu.

The city of Bulawayo has beendeveloping a policy framework for urbanagriculture since 1996, when the citycouncil recognised the emergingphenomenon of urban farming and tooka decision to improve it for the benefit ofits residents. The council sought toimprove urban agriculture in terms ofincreasing the area under urbanagriculture activities and also theintensity of production per given area in amanner that would not harm theenvironment. In 1998 the council set-upan inter-departmental committee thatwas mandated to develop draft policy onurban agriculture. The committeedeveloped a draft policy, which thecouncil adopted in July 2000. InZimbabwe policy at central or local

government level usually influenceslegislation in the form of Acts ofParliament or bye-laws for localauthorities. The importance of theadoption of a policy on urban agricultureby the city of Bulawayo can therefore notbe over-emphasized.

THE POLICY DOCUMENT ONURBAN AGRICULTUREThe policy document for Bulawayocrafted by an inter-departmentalcommittee and adopted by the citycouncil in 2000. It is entitled UrbanAgriculture in Bulawayo – Issues andan Inception of Policy Guidelines. Thedocument highlights, in the first section,the key issues for urban agriculture in thecity in terms of the characteristics, typesof activities, and problems encountered.The second part deals with the objectivesof urban agriculture in the city and thelast part deals with urban agricultureproposals and policy guidelines.

The policy document defines urbanagriculture as “a system of land use foragricultural purposes within the urbanenvironment for crop and animal

husbandry.” It therefore recognises urbanagriculture in its broad sense and doesnot limit it to crop cultivation. The policyalso recognises that urban agriculture iswidespread in the city and is a major landuse activity with immense socio-economic benefits to the residents. Itrecognises urban agriculture as anindustry that should be supported andorganised. In Bulawayo, as well as inZimbabwe in general, urban agricultureis seen as illegal or unwanted, so theintention of the policy is to legalise theactivity in certain designated areas withinthe city.

The objectives mentioned in the policydocument are to identify suitable landand allocate it to deserving people (i.e.the elderly, women and youths), promotethe utilisation of urban wastewater,support the activity (with properextension services, finances and projectappraisals) and above all to make surethat the activity is properly coordinated.In order to control the practice, the citycouncil must first formally accept it,register all pieces of land used for thepurpose, categorise the agriculturalactivities and where they can be

38 UA-Magazine

The Policy Framework andPractice of Urban Agriculture inBulawayo

_________________

Takawira Mubvami

✉ mubvami@mdpafrica.org.zw

Bulawayo is Zimbabwe’s secondlargest city. Once Zimbabwe’s

industrial hub, the city has lost mostof its major industries, through

outright closure or relocation to thecapital city, Harare. The city is thus

home to a relatively poor urbanpopulation, compared to the

population of Harare. A policyframework on urban agriculture is

under development since 1996, andis supported by RUAF.

The mayor of Bulawayo, Mr. Ndabeni Ncube addressing the stakeholder forum

meeting in Bulawayo

MD

PB

4719-2006 UA Magazine 21-11-2006 15:43 Pagina 38

practiced, and re-affirm positive existingbye-laws that prohibit cultivation oncertain areas like road verges, streambanks, etc., or prohibit the keeping ofanimals on residential plots or standswith limited space.

URBAN AGRICULTURE PROJECTSThere are nine garden allotments in thecity that are managed by the socialservices office in the Department ofHousing and Community Services. Someof these allotments were in existencebefore the policy was accepted in 2000.The beneficiaries are mostly the elderlyand the destitute. In addition the citymanaged the Gum Plantation Allotment,a massive community garden project onan estimated four and a half squarekilometres. Like in the other gardenallotments, preference in allocation ofplots is given to the elderly and thedestitute. Were most of the vegetablefrom the Gum Plantation Allotment forown consumption in 2000, it has beenestimated that nowadays sixty percent ofthe vegetables are sold in the city and therest in Francistown in neighbouringBotswana. The city still manages thisGum Plantation and wastewater from thecouncil’s sewage treatment works wasand is pumped to the nine gardenallotments for irrigation. Two extensionofficers assisted the residents with advice.However, the council has not been ableto support the farmers recently due tomanpower and financial constraints.

PROBLEMS IN IMPLEMENTATIONOF THE POLICYThe major problem initially encounteredin implementing the policy was the lackof a driver and an institutional home forthe policy. The policy is largely a result ofthe work of an interdepartmentalcommittee sponsored by the TownPlanning Division, but in fact one person,who also had other duties within the citycouncil, did most of the work. This has

changed now, since the council hasagreed that the Town Planning Divisionwill deal with urban agriculture and staffwill be dedicated to the activity.

Another problem in the implementationof the 2000 policy was that it conflictedwith some existing bye-laws inBulawayo. The main conflict arose withthe Bulawayo (Protection of Lands andNatural Resources) Bye-Laws of 1975,which regulate how residents in theurban or periurban area may practiceurban agriculture by detailing the typesof land that can be used for agricultureand restricting stream bank cultivation.Whilst the 2000 policy identified landvery close to streams as being suitableand desirable for urban agricultureactivities, the earlier bye-laws stipulatethat cultivation is not allowed within 30metres of a stream. The residents’association is in favour of stream bankcultivation and even some of thedemarcation of land for urban agriculturehas taken place in areas that do not meetthe provisions of the regulations. Recentscientific research has shown that not allstream bank cultivation causes soilerosion; certain crops can actually helparrest soil degradation, such as bananas.Therefore the regulations, which proveddifficult to enforce anyway, need to bespecific to certain types of crops orcultivation methods.

The policy further encourages thekeeping of small livestock, including pigs,rabbits and to some extent goats, withinthe areas designated for urbanagriculture. However, the Town PlanningSchemes of 1975, in Part II Condition 4(b) state that no cattle, sheep, goats,swine or horses shall be kept withoutconsent of the authority responsible fortown planning. Most people believe thiscondition is no longer applicable andnew initiatives to review the policyguidelines will tackle the issue.

Finally, the 2000 policy encourages theestablishment of fisheries and the use oftreated wastewater for the aquaculturesystems. This could create a conflictbecause the wastewater is currentlybeing used for the production of crops atGum Plantation and other gardenallotments dotted within Bulawayo. Thediversion and use of the water forfisheries would reduce the amountavailable for irrigated crop production.

THE SITUATION IN 2006The 2000 urban agriculture policy forBulawayo reflected the intention ofBulawayo city council to recognise urbanagriculture within the city. The policy infact was a proposal for an agricultureplan for the city. The proposals aredivided into immediate-term (1-5 years),medium-term (5-10 years) and long-term(over 10 years) plans for developingurban agriculture. However, the draftproposal failed to deal with critical issuesof incentives for urban farmers and howland and other resources like water andfinancial matters should be tackled.Unfortunately, since the adoption of thispolicy in 2000, no new initiatives havebeen developed.

Following the introduction of the RUAF-CFF project in the city in 2005, the citycouncil started implementing new city-wide activities (see also the article byDubbeling and de Zeeuw in thismagazine). The debate on urbanagriculture was revived and the city hasrevisited the policy with the intention ofstreamlining it and coming up with apolicy on urban agriculture thataddresses some of the issues emanatingfrom the current debates in the city. Someof the activities that have been embarkedon include:● Establishment of an Urban Agriculture

Multi-stakeholder Forum for the city toguide the further development andimplementation of the urbanagriculture agenda for the city.

● Engaging a team of experts to identifypilot projects on urban agriculture. Thisdid not get off the ground earlier due tolack of funds.

● Identification of periurban land on theedge of the city. The land is to bedemarcated into 200-square-metreplots for use by households.

● Resuscitation of boreholes in the cityand the use of land around them forurban agriculture.

POLICY CHANGES Through the experience of implementingthe policy and the introduction of theRUAF CFF project in 2005, the citycouncil and other actors learned that

39October 2006

The major problem initiallyencountered was the lack of a driver and an

institutional home

Urban agriculture around resuscitated

borehole in Bulawayo

MD

P

4719-2006 UA Magazine 21-11-2006 15:43 Pagina 39

several changes have to be made to thepolicy guidelines and that a new policyneeds to be developed. They also realisethat the new policy needs to be based onan inventory of the 2000 policyguidelines and current legislation. Anaudit of legislation was undertaken in2003 by MDP and the ZimbabweEnvironmental Law Association (ZELA)to identify relevant and current policiesand legislation which impacts urbanagriculture (Makonese and Mushamba,2004). The research established that,despite the seemingly prohibitiveenvironment, current legislation doesindeed offer many opportunities for thepractice of urban agriculture. This iscontrary to popular belief that the lawprohibits urban agriculture in Zimbabwe.In fact, the law recognises the risks thatgo along with agricultural production inthe city, and is intended to regulate urbanagriculture.The first and main issue that will have tobe addressed as a direct result of the 2000policy is the need to establish aninstitutional home for urban agriculture,preferably within the city council. At themoment it is not clear which departmentor section within the council will beresponsible. The Town Planning Sectionwithin the Engineering Department has

been temporarily assigned responsibility.What is needed is confirmation of thisarrangement as a permanent one. Thepolicy needs to be clear on whichdepartment will coordinate urbanagriculture activities. All indications arethat the Town Planning Section withinthe Engineering Department will playthis crucial role.The second issue is that the new policy tobe developed should articulate and giveclear guidelines on the issue of irrigationand water harvesting for urbanagriculture (i.e. both gardening andaquaculture). The policy guidelines of2000 do not mention water harvestingand the use of wastewater for irrigation.The current description of urbanagriculture in the policy guidelines doesnot distinguish between on-plot farmingand off-plot farming activities. It isimperative to encourage thedevelopment of “on-plot” urbanagriculture as land for this is alreadysecured. There is a general feelingamongst most stakeholders that thecurrent guidelines emphasise “off-plot”urban agriculture activities withoutadequately addressing issues of “on-plot”farming.

Issues related to integration of urbanagriculture into overall urbandevelopment are not covered by thecurrent policy guidelines. It is imperativethat this be addressed in the revision ofthe policy and in the development of anew policy on urban agriculture. Theaction plans being developed under thecurrent CFF programme for the city arearticulating this issue.

The last important issue to consider inreviewing the 2000 policy, involves the

need for broad-based participation by allstakeholders in the reviewing of policy.As was mentioned, the policy was largely

crafted by a small committee of the citycouncil. One of the results is that thepolicy has remained largely unknownamong the majority of stakeholders.Participation of a wide array ofstakeholders and their inputs in thedevelopment of a new urban agriculturepolicy will also assist in the organisationof the projects on urban agriculture atcommunity level. It will also make iteasier to find sources for funding and toregulate the activity. The CFF project hasfacilitated this process through theformation of the urban agriculturestakeholder forum in the city. The forum,which was established in September2005, met five times in 2006. A summaryof their deliberations is available onwww.mdpafrica.org.zw. The UrbanAgriculture CFF programme is currentlyparticipating in the policy review andformulation process. Details of the MPAPprocess are discussed elsewhere in thearticle by Dubbeling.

CONCLUSIONUrban centres in Zimbabwe can becomehome to some of the highly productivefarming operations in Zimbabwe,enabling the country to achieve a muchfaster economic recovery thananticipated. The draft policy guidelinesfor Bulawayo adopted in 2000, wereinadequate in addressing critical issuesrelating to urban agriculture, like creatingan institutional home, proper integrationof urban agriculture into urbandevelopment, and the absence of criticaldiscussions on how to make resourcesavailable for urban agriculture.Constraints in funding have also contri-buted to this lack of proper attention.These issues are now being addressedunder the CFF Action Plan for Bulawayo.

40 UA-Magazine

There is a need for broad-based

participation in thereviewing of policy

Participants of the stakeholder forum

meeting in Bulawayo in 2006

MD

P

ReferencesMakanatsa Makonese and Shingirayi Mushamba.2004. The Policy and Legislative Framework forUrban Agriculture in Zimbabwe Bulawayo City Council 2000. Urban Agriculturein Bulawayo – Issues and an Inception of PolicyGuidelines.

4719-2006 UA Magazine 21-11-2006 15:43 Pagina 40