SIERRA LEONE maq 4ª.indd - agrilife - Europa

7 Conclusions
166
determining the differential success of individuals
and households in securing viable livelihoods
that can provide higher material standards of
living. Concerning agricultural aspects, it has
been already explained that it is the Paramount
Chief who solves land disputes, assigns lands
to new or foreign claimants and in the cases
of certain families may even organises land
rotation and allocate plots to farm households.
This implies that as land is rotated every one
or two years, plot sizes cultivated by each farm
household may vary regarding situation and crop
orientation and mixes. This also indicates that
property rights and the necessary mechanisms
to access credit are not in place, thus limiting
smallholders’ possibility of investing. Ultimately,
a major improvement in future surveys lies in
distinguishing key players in the decision-making
process regarding agricultural production as well
as a deeper understanding of the institutional
background. Also, it would be interesting to
analyze whether the Paramount Chief has
influence in other off farm economic activities,
such as petty trade or small scale manufacturing.
Ellis (2000) argues that field methods aimed
at investigating rural poverty may be improved
by combining sample surveys with participatory
approaches such as the Participatory Rural
Appraisal (PRA). Other participatory approaches
include the Community Development Approach
(CDA) promoted by the World Bank. While the
principal strength of the sample survey is its
capacity to yield detailed quantitative information
at a household/individual level, PRA or CDA may
allow capturing some of the complexity involving
farm-household relations and their immediate
socio-economic and institutional environment.
By explicitly considering these issues in the
elaboration of farm household surveys, the analysis
of income generation and production practices
could be substantially enhanced, mainly for the
contexts of agro-forestry systems in West Africa.