Rural Income Generation and Diversification - A Case Study ... - Doria

112
tares – the difference being statistically significant. The proportion of households selling
groundnuts was 36 per cent during both periods.
The cotton-growing households had access to seasonal credits through out-grower schemes
during the 2001/02 season, but only a few obtained any other kind of credit. The main source
of seasonal maize credit in 1985/86 was the cooperatives, which provided seeds and fertilisers
against the expected yield. Although the sources and purposes had changed, approximately
40 per cent of the interviewed households had access to input credit in both periods.
There were clear changes in agricultural land use between the two points of time. The range
of crops became more diverse when maize lost its dominance, declining from 68 to 46 per
cent in terms of land area. Similarly, the cultivation of other cereals (sorghum, millet) was
also on the decline, whereas cotton, groundnuts and other legumes, sweet potato and cassava
increased in proportion (Figure 9).
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Figure 9. The use of agricultural land, Eastern Province.
Sources: IFPRI Dataset 1985/86 and the researcher’s own dataset 2003.
Livestock income
% of land 1985/86 % of land 2001/02
maize
other cereals
ground nut
other legumes
cotton
sunflower
sweet potato
cassava
The proportion of income from livestock was higher in 2002/03 than in 1985/86, although
the number of cattle had declined in the Province due to animal disease, which also restricted
the use of animals as draught power. Livestock income remained unchanged between the
two points of time in constant terms: the increasing share can be explained by the decrease in
total income. Income from the sales of livestock products and live animals was included in
this comparison, while the value of home consumption was excluded from the calculations