\documentclass[english,german]{scrartcl}
\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
\usepackage{geometry}
\geometry{verbose,a4paper,tmargin=1.75cm,bmargin=2cm,lmargin=2cm,rmargin=2cm,headheight=0.8cm,headsep=0.5cm,footskip=0.5cm}
\usepackage{babel}
\usepackage{url}
\urlstyle{same}
\newcommand\email{\begingroup \urlstyle{same}\Url}\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{units}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\usepackage{wasysym} % enable use of \permil instead of \textperthousand
\usepackage{marvosym}
\usepackage{arabtex}
\usepackage{hyphenat}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{mdwlist}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\relax}
\usepackage{index}
\newindex{key}{kdx}{knd}{Keywords}
\newindex{author}{idx}{ind}{Authors}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\pagestyle{fancy}
\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}
\fancyfoot{}
\usepackage{ifpdf}
\ifpdf
%\usepackage[activate]{pdfcprot}
%\usepackage[owner=Tapioka, print=true, copy=true, edit=false, annotate=false,set]{pdfcrypt}
%encryption: not supported any more (since pdftex 1.10)
\usepackage[pdftex]{thumbpdf}
\usepackage[pdftex]{hyperref}
\hypersetup{pdftitle={Characterisation of Matopos Resettlement in Southern Zimbabwe},pdfauthor={Newman Kusina, K. Dube, P. Buruzi},pdfsubject={Tropentag 2010: Abstract},pdfkeywords={Agriculture, arid, communal, policy, productivity, resettlement},pdfpagemode=None,colorlinks=true}
\else
\usepackage{ae}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\fi
\begin{document}
\ifpdf
\parbox[b]{2.5cm}{\resizebox*{2.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{dtt2010.jpg}}}
\else
\parbox[b]{2.5cm}{\resizebox*{2.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{dtt2010.eps}}}
\fi
\hfill
\parbox[b]{13.4cm}{\centering \large{\textbf{Tropentag, September 14-16, 2010, Zurich}}\\[1ex] \Large{``World Food System  ---\\A Contribution from Europe''\\[2ex]}}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\begin{center}
\Large{\textbf{Characterisation of Matopos Resettlement in Southern Zimbabwe\footnote{\textbf{Contact Address:} Newman Kusina, University of Minnesota, Department of Animal Science, 120th Street, 35471~Waseca, United States of America, \mbox{e-mail}: \email{newkusina@yahoo.com}}\\[0.8ex]}}
\normalsize{\textsc{Newman Kusina$^{1}$, K. Dube$^{2}$, P. Buruzi$^{2}$}}
\end{center}
\begin{itemize*}
\item[]{\small{\textit{$^{1}$University of Minnesota, Department of Animal Science, United States of America}}}
\item[]{\small{\textit{$^{2}$Midlands State University, Zimbabwe}}}
\end{itemize*}
\index[author]{Kusina, Newman}
\index[author]{Dube, K.}
\index[author]{Buruzi, P.}
\begin{center}
\vspace{1.1cm}
\textbf{Abstract}
\begin{abstract}
\normalsize{
This article characterises Matopos resettlement in comparison with an already renown local community in close proximity. Basically, Matopos resettlement like other established `satellite agricultural sites across the nation are a new development starting early 2000 seeking to promote `commercial agricultural production' under indigenous Zimbabweans management and as a prototype, it was expected to act as satellite for successful indigenous"=led agricultural venture. Data summary presented in this script data was derived by PRA techniques from 87 resettled families and 96 rural families in a 4-year research study. Basically, resettlement was a special project trying to wow indigenous people to be transformed into commercial agricultural entrepreneurs through satellite demonstration site given government support emulating environment currently available only to the rich and famous. As a satellite site, its success was expected bring glory and pride to Zimbabwe as a showcase for indigenous ingenuity in successful and productive agriculture. Considering that mandate, it was a major surprising observation that only \mbox{28\,\%} of resettled families reportedly engaged in any agricultural activity and when involved, they were growing millet, sorghum and rapoko with minimal corn production in contrast to \mbox{36\,\%} participation from the rural sectors. This observation can be partly attributed to the aridity of the site that is not ideal for corn production, unfortunately government policy markers failed to recognise during policy formulation and site selection. Despite identified climatic challenges, both sectors exhibited abilities to combat the challenges by indulging in a diversity of non"=farm activities such as off"=farm employment accounting \mbox{24\,\%} compared to \mbox{19\,\%} resettled dully diversified in farm with diversifying activities as evidenced by \mbox{31\,\%} involved in tapping of natural resources such as stone and converting into stone sculptures while wood was transformed into formidable wooden carving artifacts that proved popular among the frequent international tourists as opposed to\mbox{13\,\%} resettled. It is highly likely that they benefited from indigenous. In conclusion, rural folks appear to be superior to resettled people and also, it is apparent that resettlement in Matopos failed to achieve objectives probably due site choice and lack of resources on the part of government.}

\vspace{0.5cm}
\end{abstract}
\end{center}
\noindent \textbf{Keywords:} Agriculture, arid, communal, policy, productivity, resettlement
\index[key]{Agriculture}
\index[key]{Arid}
\index[key]{Communal}
\index[key]{Policy}
\index[key]{Productivity}
\index[key]{Resettlement}
\end{document}