Nigeria’s Zimbabwean farmers

Nothing like chicken feed

Why commercial farming in Nigeria is so hard

See article

Readers' comments




My parents were farm managers(white) in Zimbabwe. The owners (also white) never stole the land from anyone; they bought it from the previous owner (also white of course) who bought it from the owner before that.

The farm now lies fallow. The school, shop and clinic all closed. Both farm houses have been stripped bare of anything of value. Including the corrugated iron roofing. I don't know what became of the hundreds of farm laborers and their families that were supported by this "corrupt legacy of colonialism" but the only cash generated by this once productive land is made by the local ZANU-PF cadre that sells the remaining trees for firewood.

erniejpdx in reply to Batanai

I'm not sure where you're getting your information from but I'd certainly reconsider my sources if I were you.

The 1999 convocation was on the right track, but in 2005 a constitutional amendment was passed eliminating the need for compensation to the Zimbabwean owners of large commercial farms. The end result was the murder of many farm families and the usurpation of some of Zimbabwe's most productive farmland by subsistence farmers (mostly rent-seeking ZANU-PF appointees with no interest in farming).

Moving from large, profitable commercial farming to the subsistence type destroyed the agricultural income the state depended on. GDP per person went from US$575 to $275, and tens of thousands of skilled farm workers were laid off.

To take only one crop, Zimbabwe before the confiscations was the world's 6th largest producer of tobacco (WHO), with an annual harvest of 237 million kilos. After the confiscations the harvest dropped by several orders of magnitude, although it's slowly recovering. Last year's harvest was 73.4 kilos, with a total value of US$116 million. Where you came up with the idea that tobacco farms are outearning pre-2000 tobacco farms by $200 million a year is beyond me.(

Zimbabwe, formerly known as the breadbasket of Southern Africa, now barely manages to feed itself without expensive imports (WHO).

You also seem to have missed the point of the article. Commercial farmers who emigrated from Zimbabwe in hopes of reestablishing the successful farms they used to have were driven out by Nigeria's famous bureaucratic incompetence, theft and the nonexistence of agricultural support programs. It's next to impossible for anyone to set up a successful enterprise in Nigeria's kleptocracy. That's why, decades after the exploitation of oil began there, Nigeria still depends on oil for 95% of its income. There is no manufacturing to speak of because there is no infrastructure to support it.

And finally, with 60% of the country living below the poverty line (IMF), where do you get the idea that Nigerian subsistence farmers are living in luxury?


Are we speaking here of the same country called Nigeria which boasts to all who would hear that in the next half-century it would be an economic power-house competing with the likes of Germany and Japan ; or am I reading of another country also called Nigeria ?

k005 in reply to Batanai

The economic performance I have seen have been far from positive, possibly improving after the USD was adopted, but far from what it was in the past. So I'm curious where you found the stats that indicate the growth in production since the transfer of ownership.

I would agree that there was great inequality within the country that lead to these events, but referring to Mugabe as a visionary...

erniejpdx in reply to sanchoz

Mugabe is a visionary in the same sense that Kim Jong Un is a visionary.

Btw, there are excellent English as a Foreign Language websites where you can improve your communication skills.

Cabanga in reply to Batanai

@Batanai: Have you considered applying to the ZANU-PF division of propaganda? Your competency for such a position is remarkable and I urge you to join our beloved government; Lord knows they need all the help they can get!

Batanai in reply to guest-lewllsj

You are very correct when you state that your parent's bosses never stole their farm but purchased it "legally". However, this legality you highlight is no different than someone that purchases stolen goods "legally"!

The FIRST white farmer to "legally" own that land got it from the white government violently seizing it from the indigenes that lived there. Thereby, they created title deeds that "legalized" white farmers who paid into the farm.

So, yes, the farmers did not directly steal land, but they purchased land stolen by their government. Today, Mugabe has returned the land back to the original victims. That should close this chapter, unless a new army of whites invades the country and reverses the current paradigm!

It is also true to say some former workers are in misery and some farms are hardly being utilized. However, judging from the massive employment rise from 360 000 during the white farmer era to 900 000 today, one has to conclude that land reform has been very good for employment.

Given also the fact that at $550M in tobacco exports in 2012 vs $320M in the 90s, its also easy to see most farms are being used very productively!

erniejpdx in reply to Batanai

Oh, other world leaders have done the same: Josef Stalin in the Ukraine, Mao Zedong in rural China, Kim Jong Il and Li'l Kim in Korea-- why, the world is filled with success stories like Mugabe's.


Why are only the men's names and ages written, and the women dismissed as doughty wives? There is no excuse for this sort of shoddy sexist journalism.

erniejpdx in reply to Batanai

So was it 12, 189, or 201 white farmers who were killed?

As a retired DARPA researcher I don't "pull figures out of the air."

You're confusing farm employment as an economic indicator (a job that pays wages) with the number of people engaged in subsistence farming, quite a different thing. Yes, more people are farming nowadays, but few are making the money they earned before 2000.

Smallholder tobacco farmers, as the NYT article point outs, are slowly regaining the ground that was lost with the breakup of the big farms, but the harvests are nowhere near what you claim. Other subsistence farmers are hanging on, but the efficiencies and economies of scale achieved by the commercial farms can never be matched by a mosaic of smallholders, no matter how dedicated they are. Economics is economics.

The NYT article you referenced also reinforces my argument:
"The takeover of white commercial farms was a disaster for Zimbabwe on many levels. It undermined one of Africa’s sturdiest economies, and as growth contracted and its currency became worthless because of hyperinflation, joblessness and hunger grew. Large chunks of land were handed to cronies of President Robert Mugabe, many of whom did not farm them. It spurred a political crisis and violent reprisals by the security forces that have killed hundreds of people. Yields on food and cash crops plummeted."

Don't forget that just before dollarization in 2009, a US dollar could buy ZW$10 quadrillion. If that isn't the sign of a bankrupt nation, I don't know what is.

And your comments about Zimbabwe's former status as the breadbasket of southern Africa are somewhat awry: Zimbabwe used to be an exporter of food crops, as you say. Since the land confiscations in 2000, the country has been a net importer of food (UN/WFP).

Zimbabwe today is gamely trying to recover the economy it had prior to 2000. I wish its citizens well-- they deserve it. But it will be a long time before they reach the level they were at before Mugabe's depredations.

Batanai in reply to erniejpdx

That was my mistake, I meant 12 white farmers died during the 4 years of land reform in Zimbabwe. I left out the country where the 189 were being killed every year during the same period. That would be South Africa!

The average income for peasants before the land reform was $100 per year. Today, the new black tobacco farmers average $20 000 per year (Dr. Joseph Hanlon); how could you even sprout the idea that resettled farmers are earning less given the obvious available evidence?

In case the numbers escaped you, the NYT article says 330M pounds of tobacco was produced by the new farmers. That's 150Mt if you deal in metric! The icing on this is, the quality is so good, the farmers are getting thrice the amount per kg than white farmers used to earn.

I gave you a reference that shows Zimbabwe was NEVER a breadbasket for Africa. Google the research and you will see that it only exported food in 7 of its 20 years before land reform!

Everyone knows the Zim$ was being assaulted by western machinations. Exactly one month after the us$ was adopted, inflation dropped to 3%! How "dead" can an economy be if all it takes to revive is one month of using the enemy's currency?

Stop spouting statements not supported by facts! I have already given you references that show the GDP to be $8billion in 2000 and $28billion in 2012, why do you keep pretending the economy is smaller now than it was 13 years ago? where is your evidence for this foolishness?

King Jaja in reply to theHotelKing

Excellently put, there are several commercially successful privately owned farms in Nigeria, but since they are owned by "bloody black Africans", they are of no interest whatsoever to "The Economist".

A good number of my friends are into agriculture (even in Lagos) and they are doing well. We are supposed to believe the "sky is falling" because "white farmers aren't doing well".


This article seemed almost pointless besides it highlighting the failure of these farmers. The political and infrastructural landscape in Nigeria is not ideal but there are many commercial farming successes in spite of this. I'm not sure why they expected it to be easy. They clearly lacked the creativity and industrious streak that local farmers that have to survive in those conditions seem to have.

Batanai in reply to erniejpdx

Stop the drama! Between 2000 and 2004, just 12 white farmers died in the process of land reform. In the same period, 189 white farmers were being killed every year!

I see you do have a weakness of pulling figures from thin air! Everyone was invited to make applications for land. Of the 500 000 that applied, 300 000 got land. Recent research books by Dr Ian Scoones and Dr Joseph Hanlon show that over 90% of the beneficiaries are not linked to ZANUpower structure.

These same books by these British professors, show that farm employment that used to be 360 000 before 2000 is now at 900 000, a three-fold increase! With a GDP of $12B and a population of 12,6 million, current per capita is at over $900, not the $275 to mention (world bank, ministry of finance).

The average tobacco output in Zimbabwe was 160Mt. The 237Mt you mention happened ONCE in 2000/2001 season.
Last year, yield was 144Mt, not 73.4! This tobacco sold for $550M compared to the 90s average of $320M. (NYT,

Again, according to the book "Zimbabwe Takes back Its Land" the country only exported food in 7 of 20 years from 1980 to 2000. It imported food in the remaining 13 years. The talk of "breadbasket of Africa" is a myth!

I got the point of the article alright. This and many other articles before on these same farmers. Previously presented to us as the "success" story, opposite Mugabe's black farmer "failures"!
Today, Mugabe's farmers are the success and hardly any white farmers remain in Nigeria to continue the false propaganda of their "success"!

Batanai in reply to edwardong

So, which theft are you condemning? The one where Rhodesian whites drove off blacks and gave themselves title deeds to the land? Or the one where the blacks got strong enough to seize back their land, taking it back ALSO without compensation?

I think that you should get a reality check.
I left Zimbabwe years ago, and have returned on a number of occasions. I I am not sure what utopia you are talking about however what I have personally witnessed is a direct contardiction to almost everything that you have posted here in this specific post and the others that follow.
Another writer asked you about the Matabele slaughters, you did not provide much of an answer. An explanation of the N. Korean trained 5TH Brigades activities would be a good place to start. Unless you care to dispute their existence in the early 1980's.
I would also like to hear your viewpoints on the Diamond mines and the killing and detainment of the initial claim owners and also about the presence of the "NEW CHINESE CLAIM OWNERS/Workers. Additionally I would like to know where the wealth generated by these Diamonds goes, it should certainly help the GDP and the people of the country....That is unless the political elites of the ZANU-PF are the sole beneficiaries.
Explain why your 100 TRILLION dollar notes are worthless and why your own banks will no longer accept its own currency. I do remember a time when the Zimbabwe Currency, while not a reserve currency was on a par with the US Dollar with regards to official exchange rates. Why would you even need a 100 TRILLION DOLLAR BILL if the currency had any value.
It would seem that if the Agricultural sector was so properous you own currency would have some value to it. Zimbabwe used to export the majority of its food and tobacco production. Now the country cannot even feed its self at a reasonable level. The average person cannot afford to buy basic food supplies.
What happened to the once prosperous mining industry? As I recall the government took that over to. As I recall much of the equipment in some of the mines was sold off and the profits when to local party officials.
With regard to Botswana, its always easier to blame a prosperous neighboring country for your own failures. For the most part Botswana never went down the same road that Mugabe took Zimbabwe.
Your postings sound very much like the politically conditioned proaganda that is always used to justify Mugabe and ZANU-PF economic and social policies. The only people doing well in Zimbabwe are Mugabe and his political elites and their hangers on.
Alternatively, you could always just blame the mess in Zimbabwe on the white settler thieves and their colonial puppet masters (pun intended), which is also the hallmark rhetoric of the Mugabe regime.

Batanai in reply to guest-lewllsj

Dr Ian Scoones Sussex Univesity(Zimbabwe’s Land Reform. Myths and Realities)

Dr. Joseph Hanlon UK Open university (Zimbabwe Takes Back its Land)

The above are two of many books written by people not associated with Mugabe or his party. They are available on


Latest blog posts - All times are GMT
Gun laws: Prayers and pistols
Democracy in America July 11th, 17:43
Daily chart: Justice on trial
Graphic detail July 11th, 13:40
Technology and fashion: Storming the maisons
Schumpeter July 11th, 10:05
Financial literacy: Back to basics
Free exchange July 11th, 10:01


Products and events



