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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

78 The households considered market-related problems in general a threat to their well-being. The problems materialised as the limited availability and high prices of inputs, the lack of traders, and the low prices obtained for products in the villages. Because of the poor infrastructure and shortages of oxen, ox-carts and bicycles, transport was difficult to organise. Still, there appeared to be no collective efforts among the households to ease these market- and transport-related problems. Livestock income The second element of farm income, revenue from livestock keeping, was distributed rather unevenly among the households: 152 (77%) had some livestock, chickens being the most common type kept by 69 per cent of them, followed by cows (27%), goats (21%), pigs (24%) and oxen (17%). All in all, 100 households generated some income by selling livestock products or live animals, the mean amount being ZMK 228,040. On average, livestock income generated six per cent of the total income. The value of the home consumption of livestock products was not included in the calculations because such data were not collected in the survey. According to information on the composition of an average Zambian diet 35 and the IFPRI dataset, however, it would be feasible to estimate it at less than 10 per cent of the respective value of crop consumption. It could therefore be assumed that the missing estimates for livestock consumption did not cause a significant bias in the results. The costs of livestock inputs were ignored in the calculations which may lead to overestimation of the income. The amount of livestock income in the poorest group was one tenth of the respective amount in the wealthiest group. Moreover, one third of the households in the lowest income group had income from livestock, 56 per cent in the middle-group and 62 per cent in the highest group. Since none of the households had a bank account and the value of their other assets was limited, livestock served both as a bank and as insurance: the average estimated value of livestock kept was ZMK 1,409,413, which was more than the average net value of the annual crop production. Eastern Province has traditionally accommodated a large amount of livestock. The severe attacks of animal diseases around the mid-1990s, however, reduced their numbers and the restocking rate has been slow since then. There were also complaints about livestock disease in 2003 36 and in some areas about attacks by predators. According to the interviewees, veterinary services were not easily accessible, and farmers had to pay for animal drugs whereas 35 FAO Statistical Yearbook 2005. Vol.1(2). Country Profiles. 36 The livestock health problems mentioned most often included Corridor disease among cattle, Newcastle disease among chickens, and African swine fever among pigs.
consulting the veterinary was free provided it took place in the clinic. If the veterinary staff came to the village to vaccinate cattle, the farmers had to pay ZMK 10,000 per vaccination. The interviewees said that such services used to be free of charge before the agricultural reforms. In addition, without government support the high maintenance costs had resulted in the virtual disappearance of communal dip tanks in rural areas, and only very few farmers regularly sprayed their animals against ticks. 6.1.4 Non-farm income Four sources contributed to non-farm income: forestry, business activities, wage employment and transfers. Many studies on income diversification include forest in business or other sources. In this study, however, the data was collected separately because forest-related activities were assumed to be of specific importance in some parts of Eastern Province. Forest income The survey revealed that 104 households (52%) generated income from forest products during the 2002/03 season: each of these sold, on average, 1.6 different forest products of which thatching grass was the most common (Table 7). Table 7. Forest products sold by households. Product No. of % of % of all households households a households thatching grass 52 50 26 firewood 30 29 15 charcoal 28 27 14 mushrooms 15 14 8 timber 13 13 7 wild fruits 13 13 7 honey 10 10 5 a Percentages of households engaged in the exploitation of forest products (n=104) Source: the researcher’s own dataset 2003. A licence legalising for selling timber, poles, firewood, charcoal and planks was acquired from the Forest Department by 36 (35%) households selling forest products, while the most common commodity, thatching grass, traded by 52 households requires no licence. Fiftyeight households sold charcoal or firewood, whereas only 10-15 sold other products, such as timber, mushrooms, honey and wild fruits. All the commodities were traded within the village or district, and thus did not bring external money into the local economy. 79
Page 1 and 2:
Kaisa Karttunen Rural Income Genera
Page 3 and 4:
University of Helsinki Department o
Page 5 and 6:
CONTENTS 1. Introduction ..........
Page 7 and 8:
Table 6. Percentages of income from
Page 9:
WFP World Food Programme WHO World
Page 12 and 13:
12 man 2002). These include income-
Page 14 and 15:
14 The following questions were for
Page 16 and 17:
16 of household comsumption is also
Page 18 and 19:
18 Zambian farmers fall into three
Page 20 and 21:
20 impact on rural poverty. Startin
Page 22 and 23:
22 1992 consumer and transportatio
Page 24 and 25:
24 The Government of Zambia (GRZ) i
Page 26 and 27:
26 inadequate monitoring of the act
Page 28 and 29: 28 Distributor Scheme was fully in
Page 30 and 31: 30 as tobacco and cotton the out-gr
Page 32 and 33: 32 households were directly afflict
Page 34 and 35: 34 If it had no control over the m
Page 36: 36 According to the AHM, a househol
Page 39 and 40: icultural economy was opened up to
Page 41 and 42: Similar concerns were shared by Tay
Page 43 and 44: order to reduce income variablity.
Page 45 and 46: of infrastructure development, the
Page 47 and 48: which implies that diversification
Page 49 and 50: Haggblade et al. (2002) argue that
Page 51 and 52: In many cases the processing of the
Page 53 and 54: 4.9 Rural income diversification in
Page 55 and 56: Table 3. Rural income-diversificati
Page 57 and 58: 1990s - made the farmers reluctant
Page 59 and 60: In addition to asset endowments and
Page 61 and 62: 5.1.2 The 2003 dataset The second s
Page 63 and 64: clarifying some concepts and assess
Page 65 and 66: 5.2 Methods The theoretical grounds
Page 67 and 68: able random variables not explicitl
Page 69 and 70: Incshare 25 or Inclevel 26 = β0 +
Page 71: 5.2.4 Choosing the estimation metho
Page 74 and 75: 74 Both cash and in-kind income wer
Page 76 and 77: 76 Share of income 100 90 80 70 60
Page 80 and 81: 80 The proportion of income generat
Page 82 and 83: 82 The seasonality effect was clear
Page 84 and 85: 84 Since a lack of money was given
Page 86 and 87: 86 % of income 100 90 80 70 60 50 4
Page 88 and 89: 88 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Page 90 and 91: 90 6.1.7 Grouping households accord
Page 92 and 93: 92 number of adult members, was cri
Page 94 and 95: 94 more likely to use fertilisers a
Page 96 and 97: 96 holds. According to the responde
Page 98 and 99: 98 The following process was follow
Page 100 and 101: 100 6.1.9 The results of the econom
Page 102 and 103: 102 The categorisation of household
Page 104 and 105: 104 Table 20. Determinants of the s
Page 106 and 107: 106 In some cases the former househ
Page 108 and 109: 108 indicated thus an opposite tren
Page 110 and 111: 110 The Simpson diversification ind
Page 112 and 113: 112 tares - the difference being st
Page 114 and 115: 114 which brought more purchasing p
Page 116 and 117: 116 diversification index. Block an
Page 118 and 119: 118 evidence that households had no
Page 120 and 121: 120 such as piecework and forest la
Page 122 and 123: 122 7.2 Changes in the households b
Page 124 and 125: 124 lower soil fertility, and the l
Page 126 and 127: 126 8. Conclusions and recommendati
Page 128 and 129:
128 Rural non-farm activities are l
Page 130 and 131:
130 Politiikkamuutosten seurauksena
Page 132 and 133:
132 References Abdulai, A. & CroleR
Page 134 and 135:
134 CSO. 1997. Living Conditions Mo
Page 136 and 137:
136 Ellis, F., Kutengele, M. & Nyas
Page 138 and 139:
138 Heltberg, R. (mimeo) 2001. Comm
Page 140 and 141:
140 Lanjouw, J.O. & Lanjouw, P. 200
Page 142 and 143:
142 Ruotsi, J., Lindberg, O., Seger
Page 144 and 145:
144 Zulu, B., Nijhoff, J.J., Jayne,
Page 146 and 147:
146 Annex 2. The theoretical framew
Page 148 and 149:
148 1,050 millimetres, while in the
Page 150 and 151:
150 Annex 4. Schedule of the field
Page 152 and 153:
152 Annex 5. Three household cases
Page 154 and 155:
154 In the 1970s and 1980s, and eve
show all

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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?