4.0 INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents, describes and explains the key activity systems in Nyanyadzi irrigation scheme and gives an account of the history of the object. In line with the CHAT, identification of the activity systems is critical as is understanding the object of activity. Data was generated from the fifteen (15) face to face interviews with three generations of farmers, three (3) focus group discussions with male and female smallholder farmers in Nyanyadzi irrigation scheme, a three (3) Day-Change laboratory workshop, site observations, and literature review.
4.1 INTERSECTING ACTIVITY SYSTEMS IN NYANYADZI IRRIGATION SCHEME.
Nyanyadzi irrigation scheme is one of the oldest community owned irrigation schemes which is believed to have been conceived as a dream by Rev. Emory D. Alvord and was later established in 1931. Furthermore, Rev. Alvord was believed to be the godfather of irrigation engineering in Zimbabwe (Bolding, 2004) and designed Nyanyadzi irrigation scheme. Historical accounts of Nyanyadzi irrigation scheme also relate that, Rev. Emory D. Alvord passed through Nyanyadzi area on the 26th of September 1926 and saw the dryness of the region but saw the potential of the river and the rest is history, the oldest irrigation in Zimbabwe (Bolding, 2004: 125). The primary motive of establishing Nyanyadzi irrigation scheme was to promote household food production in the dry region where cropping was continuously failing. It was also to utilise Nyanyadzi river water Rev. Alvord termed “a waste” since it just flowed downstream. However, how the dream became a scheme is also subject to various interpretations and narratives, some of which are presented in this chapter.
In 1983 the Nyanyadzi irrigation scheme was officially handed over to the community and the management shifted from the Government-oriented to the Kraalhead Committee management approach commonly referred to as Community Irrigation Management (Manzungu & Van der Zaag, 1994). Nyanyadzi irrigation scheme has endured transitional governance and the test of time,
having been in existence for nearly a century now. The uniqueness of this research context does not only lie in its length of historicity but also the inter-generational knowledge that accompanies the object of the activity. The irrigation scheme has passed through three distinctive generations of farmers which had influence on the practice and some elements of these three generations of farmers still exist. It now has a wide audience, which also interact with several other key neighbouring activity systems.
A critical analysis of key activity systems in this study was necessary to start this study, as it informed more in-depth exploration of the interactions and the transformative learning processes that happened within the farmers and the other interacting key stakeholders. An in-depth understanding of the key activity systems and their interactions with each other was also helpful in illustrating and enhancing a better understanding of the multidimensional complexities experienced within and between the key activity systems as they collaborate towards a shared object. With the help of the CHAT methodological and analytical lenses the key stakeholders in this study were identified and defined by their positionality and role played towards the fully shared or partially shared object with the farmers in the irrigation scheme (see Section 2.2.3;
Section 2.3 and Section 3.2.3). Identifying and defining activity systems was critical to the understanding of the historicity of the object and illuminated a better understanding of the multidimensional complexities and the transformative learning processes that accompanied each activity system. Hence, a deeper and distinctive understanding of the different activity systems at interplay in Nyanyadzi irrigation scheme helped in the mediation of the expansive learning and transformative agency pathways with the farmers and other stakeholders in the Change Laboratory Workshop (CLW).
In this study six activity systems were identified and described in this chapter. The participants in each activity system are referred to as the subjects. For instance, in the farmers’ activity system the subjects are those farmers who dedicate their time, power and knowledge towards household crop production and income generation through marketing to meet household food security, which in this case is the object. Through irrigation cropping they intend to meet their household food
security and income needs which can be therefore referred to as their intended outcome(s). These key subjects engage and use some artefacts or mediation tools which mediate the interactions towards meeting their object (food production and marketing under irrigation farming). Examples of such artefacts and mediation tools include the ploughs, hoes, water, siphons and pesticides manuals together with food processing, sustainable farming and marketing concepts and understandings of irrigation farming. It is important to note that, the farmers’ activity(ies) is/are also guided and informed by some rules. In this case the dominant rules to mention just a few are the Irrigation Management Constitution (1983); Department of Water Development policy;
Zimbabwe Water Authority Act (Water Act, 1998; 2002); Communal Lands Act 13/2002;
Traditional Leaders Act [Chapter 29:17] and the government policy among others. Some of the rules are specifically instituted by the farmers and some are as a result of an interplay between the farmers’ activity system and other neighbouring key stakeholders’ activity systems who could have predefined rules. For example, Government departments like the Agricultural Technical and Extension Services (AGRITEX) have a mandate to provide extension services in the form of farmer education and training and other technical services to the farmers working in the irrigation scheme hence, in the process they have their own governing rules that also bind the farmers in a way.
It is therefore safe to say the irrigation system is constituted by many participants from multiple activity systems, interacting towards a common object or partially shared object who therefore becomes the community. In essence, these participants play critical roles in shaping and guiding the processes and activities towards household food production and income generation (object).
These participants are the community in the activity system and include the plot owners, lease agreement holders, the business people, government officers and the Non-governmental organizations working together with the farmers on various issues and aspects of farming.
Therefore, for proper functioning of the irrigation scheme there is a complex division of labour in which distinctive explicit and implicit roles are spelt out within and across the activity systems.
In other words, each relevant stakeholder in the Nyanyadzi irrigation activity system has a distinctive role and part to play and knows what to do, when, how and where as well as the shared roles and responsibilities within and across the activity systems.
It is important to note and acknowledge that the multiple activity systems in Nyanyadzi irrigation scheme as described above are likely to be sources of multidimensional complexities which are ideal for expansive learning. The interaction between these six activity systems can produce complex dynamics which manifest into conflicts, misunderstandings, different stand points within the elements of these activity systems which can be primary contradictions or for example, there could be a collision in the old rules and a new rule which can be referred to as secondary contradiction and sometimes when the irrigation’s object clashes with a historically more advanced activity systems, these are referred to as tertiary contradictions and lastly, when the irrigation scheme’s activity system elements clash with neighbouring activity systems like the conservation fish farming activity system quaternary contradictions emerge. It is these forms of contradictions that people with a common object may be concerned with, may debate and deliberate with the possibility that they may develop some tools and understandings that can allow them to collectively develop new practices or activity. In this case, the use of the insider formative intervention approach together with Engeström’s work on expansive learning can be useful in the mediation using double stimulation, thereby allowing for new knowledge creation in which all the stakeholders involved/concerned may become part of the process. However, the above- described process remains generic and it calls for specific insights into this process in order to develop in-depth insights into the possible expansive learning processes and examining how learning is and can be mediated to expand human activity.
4.1.1 Farmers’ Activity Systems
Since 1935 when the first 90 people flocked to the irrigation adding to the existing 29 plot holders that were there first, the irrigation scheme has seen an influx of different people adding to the diversity amongst the farmers. The irrigation scheme as community, is constituted by farmers of diverse socio-cultural backgrounds. In chapter one, the history of Nyanyadzi irrigation scheme showed that of the 29 plot holders present by 1935, eight of them were tax defaulters and added to them were another 90 people mentioned above who were believed to have come from the areas around the Savi-Limpopo valley. Notably, the irrigation scheme was always open to new farmers and the diversity of the farmers also grew with time as the irrigation scheme grew and sphere of influence. One thing that has remained stable is that the irrigation farmers had one object in their
activity that is crop production and marketing under irrigation, to meet household food security needs. The irrigation farmers make the biggest activity system that also interacts with several other activity systems in the irrigation scheme. In the farmers’ (subjects) activity system, the farmers directly interact with the mediation tools and instruments like water, farming inputs the land; are guiding by rules such as the Irrigation scheme constitution, 99 year lease agreement, the Water Act; and they engage in some sort of division of labour within their activity so as to achieve their object (crop production and marketing under irrigation) and achieve their outcomes (household food security and income) (see the Farmers’ activity system diagram in Figure 4.1).
As much as irrigation farming is an activity system made up of various actions (goals) it is also a learning space guided or directed by certain norms, rules, regulations and/or values. The learning that happens is mediated by extension material, demonstrations and by traditional conceptual tools or artefacts such as seeds (maize, beans and tomatoes), farm inputs (fertilizers), water and draught power. It is also an activity system facing policy crises including climate variability and change (nature’s rules) and poor political-economic environments (McIntyre et al., 2019). This is the primary activity system in focus in this study because this is where the outcomes of farming education, research and extension work play out in the lives of people dependent on the irrigation scheme for livelihoods and food security per se.
Fig 4.1: Nyanyadzi Smallholder Irrigation Farmers’ Activity Systems Source: Author
The farmers’ activity system has a long history of existence (1931- to date). It is not a secret to mention that the farmers’ activity system is composed of subjects (farmers) and the subjects were categorically described as three distinctive groups of farmers. In this study the subjects were characterised and described as the first generation (born before 1900-1964) who were the first farmers in the irrigation as explained in chapter one and by birth they were born before 1920 (see Section 3.2.1.1). The second generation of farming was basically defined as those farmers born between 1921-1970 (see Section 3.2.1.2). These farmers are the offspring of the first generation of farmers. By the period described they were actively integrated into the irrigation farming activity