While it remains important to address abuses of the land reform programme according to strict criteria set by a land audit, it is also important to focus on the wider story, dispelling myths and engaging with the realties of the majority. The Masvingo study has challenged a number of recurrent myths about Zimbabwe’s land reform: for example, that there is no investment going on, that agricultural production has collapsed, that food insecurity is rife, that the rural economy is in precipitous decline and that farm labour has been totally displaced. Getting to grips with the realities on the ground is essential for reframing the debate. This is why solid, empirical research is so important. Only with these facts to hand can sensible policymaking emerge. Evidence rather than emotion must guide the process. Land and politics are deeply intertwined in Zimbabwe. The current impasse cannot be resolved by technocratic measures alone: plans, models, audits and regulations are only part of the picture. A reframed debate must encompass redistribution and redress, as well as rights and responsibilities. The recent divisive debate on land in 17 Zimbabwe has seen these as opposites, creating what has been called a ‘dangerous rupture’ in Zimbabwe’s political discourse. But of course a focus on rights need not emphasise only individual private property rights, while an advocacy of redistribution must also accept appropriate compensation for those who lose out. Bringing a broad perspective on rights together with a continued commitment to redistribution must therefore be central to Zimbabwe’s next steps towards democratic and economic transformation. Only with land viewed as a source of livelihood and redistributed economic wealth, and not as a political weapon or source of patronage, will the real potentials of Zimbabwe’s land reform be fully realised.