SIERRA LEONE maq 4ª.indd - agrilife - Europa

5 Survey Methodology
84
farm provides (i) a minimum relative satisfactory
livelihood for the farmer and (ii) a surplus
for accumulation and investment. A negative
difference means that the farm provides neither
an investment opportunity nor acceptable living
standards for the farmer, i.e. the farm activity
is not viable. In this case, the farmer needs to
improve his/her farming activities up to the status
of economic viability. If the farmer cannot afford
to do this, then alternative sources of income need
to be sought out to supplement farm income.
Under some economic thresholds, defined by
specific constraints faced at household level,
farmers will not have any choice other than to
adopt unviable systems and most likely become
indebted to survive (FAO 1999).
Based on ASD, the economic viability of
smallholders is assessed by Farm Net Income per
household working unit (FNI/hhWU) in relation
with a significant farm indicator such as the
utilised agricultural land area per working unit
(area/hhWU). These economic analyses allow
direct comparisons of the income levels that the
different types of farms existing in these regions
could attain, and show their degree of viability
according to socio-economic criteria expressed
by the farmers in the region.
This basic notion, used in the methodological
approach of the present study, can be applied to
interpret various agricultural sector dynamics,
not only the viability of farming systems, but also
aspects related to agricultural employment, rural
emigration and incentives to promote economic
and social development.
Poverty Line
The poverty line is determined in order
to assess what is the proportion of the farm
households which fall below this line and what
are the characteristic of the farming systems
adopted by households categorised as poor
or extremely poor. In the particular case of the
Sierra Leone survey (where off-farm income was
not quantified), the poverty lines will reveal the
extent to which farming activities cover the basic
needs of the farm household. For this purpose,
the assessment is undertaken at Farm Net Income
per household unit (FNI/hhUnit) or household
member in adult equivalent terms.
In order to measure the level of poverty
of smallholders in this study, the Poverty Line
Approach as implemented by FAO (1999) was
introduced. This requires the definition of basic
needs in monetary terms in order to represent
the poverty line. The poverty line is then
compared to the farm household income, and
those households who fall below this line are
classified as poor. In the present study the Peasant
Farming income measurement approach was
selected to conduct the poverty analysis because
it provides not only a more realistic overview
of effective monetary transactions but it takes
into full consideration the thinness of labour
markets among other institutional constraints and
arrangements of the surveyed smallholders.
Poverty can be defined qualitatively from
a basic needs perspective as “the lack of basic
needs and services such as food, money, shelter,
clothing, health facilities, schools and safe
drinking water” (FAO, 1999). Quantitatively, it
can be further refined by distinguishing between
Extreme or Food Poverty Line and Full Poverty
Line. The Extreme (Food) Poverty Line was
defined as the level of expenditures required to
attain the minimum daily nutritional requirement
of 2700 calories per adult equivalent. The
Full Poverty Line, besides the basic food
requirements, includes also the necessary nonfood
expenditures (such as shelter, access to safe
water, education, health care).
Based on Integrated Household Survey
of 2004 in Sierra Leone (PRSP, 2005) these
expenditures are Le 377,045 (121) 37 per year
(Le 1,033 per day = 0.33) for food needs, and
Le 770,678 (247) per year (Le 2,111 per day
37 Yearly average currency exchange rate: http://www.oanda.
com/currency/average (Accessed: 2 May 2012)