Dekker, Marleen and Bill Kinsey. "Contextualizing Zimbabwe's land reform: long-term observations from the first generation". The Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol.38, No.5 (2011): 995-1019.

Dekker, Marleen and Bill Kinsey. "Contextualizing Zimbabwe's land reform: long-term observations from the first generation". The Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol.38, No.5 (2011): 995-1019.

• The fast-track land reforms undertaken in Zimbabwe in the 2000s were fundamentally different than those pursued in the 1980s and 1990s, largely because the plans for the earlier reforms had been created by moderate White Rhodesians for a transition prior to the end of White minority rule in 1980 (995).
• In addition to being less radical, previous reforms also came out of more substantial planning and had more infrastructure to support their implementation. Benefits were provided to all new landholders and division of land was prohibited to ensure that it was used to support families (995-996).
• The land seized under fast-track reforms began by being extralegally occupied by landless citizens, forcing the government to create legal and logistical underpinnings for land reform following rather than preceding the actual transfer of land use (996).
• The beneficiaries of land reform in Zimbabwe were from a wide variety of backgrounds, including both current peasant farmers and the urban poor. Most were from rural areas, and received land close to their current residences. At this point, many neighbors are intermarried, partially as a solution to management of common resources (998-999). 
• Communities of newly redistributed farms had to create new methods of regulating common resources and social relations, a function often performed through community organizations and church groups, which are more common and intense in redistributed communities than pre-existing communities (999).
• The large scale movements of people during fast-track land reform destroyed much of the social infrastructure for these organizations, and a good number ceased to exist entirely after 2000. The exception was church groups, which remained, but play less of an administrative role (1005).
• The resettlement program appears to have been extremely successful in improving the livelihood of the landless poor, with incomes in resettled communities being significant higher than communities not benefiting from resettlement. This is largely because resettled communities were more agriculturally successful in all fields (1000-1001).
• Resettled villages were also more dependent on agriculture, whereas earlier communities had to depend on multiple sources of income. This was largely a necessity of poverty rather than a choice (1000).
• The fast track redistribution of land beginning in 2000 has encouraged large-scale migration throughout Zimbabwe, mainly of young men and their families seek to claim new agricultural land and escape poverty. Although many stayed within their general area, there was also significant movement out of urban areas into rural land (1003).
• Around 30% of migrants reporting taking cattle or livestock with them to their new landholdings, and a smaller number moved equipment. Those receiving land locally usually did not move livestock, as they could share their neighbor's (1004).
• The severe economic crisis which hit Zimbabwe in the late 1990s and continued afterwards crippled much the agricultural system, as chains of credit and supply of agricultural inputs entirely broke down under the weight of hyperinflation. Selling agricultural produce for cash also become unprofitable, leading to a breakdown in the national food system (1005).
• This economic crisis resulted in a change in the types of crops cultivated by Zimbabwean farmers. Lacking incentives to receive cash for goods, farmers switched from crops for export to a greater diversity of food crops intended to feed the local community (1005-1006).
• The lack of effective market system to distribute seeds and fertilizer to farmers was so serious that in 2009, NGOs and UN agencies actually distributed free seed and fertilizer supplies in Zimbabwe to prevent an entire collapse of the farming sector. Most farmers depended at least partially on these supplies (1006-1007).
• The lack of agricultural inputs placed severe restrictions on the ability of farmers to fully utilize their land, meaning that in 2008 and the years following, farmers often cultivated less than two-thirds of their available land, saving fertilizer for a smaller portion of crops (1011).
• The prolonged economic crisis in Zimbabwe has been marked by a decline in income across rural areas, both loss of direct income through reduce farm productivity, and loss of secondary incomes as temporary work is now less common than previously (1012-1013).
• Zimbabwean farmers traditionally invested their wealth in cattle, which most farmers cultivated on the side and used as a source of alternative income. During the hyperinflation crisis, when cash was worthless, farmers sold their herds for food, precipitating a massive loss of rural livestock ownership and a lost of draft animals during the 2000s (1014-1016).