Rural Development Policies and Sustainable Land Use in the ...

44 CHAPTER 4
strategy (clusters 1 and 5), and to a lesser
degree coffee production (and as coffee
laborers).
Brief Description
of Livelihood Strategies
This section describes how each cluster employs
its land and labor resources, which
formed the basis for the cluster analysis.
The livelihood of households in cluster
1 (16 percent of the sample) is based on extensive
livestock farming, as indicated by
the fact that this cluster has the largest share
of pastures (65 percent of operated area
on average) and the smallest share of basic
grains in their use of land (13 percent; see
Table 4.7). These farmers also spend the
highest proportion of their total family labor
on their own farms, with most of their time
devoted to livestock. However, even these
farmers put a high value on food security
and devote an average of 4 ha to basic grains
production.
Cluster 2 (7 percent of the sample) consists
of coffee producers who on average
devote 40 percent of their farm area and 34
percent of their family labor to coffee. However,
these farmers still rely on basic grains
for their subsistence needs: they use about
one third of their farm area and more than
one quarter of their family time to grow basic
grains.
Cluster 3 (18 percent of the sample) represents
subsistence farmers. Table 4.7 shows
that these households devote most of their
farmland and family labor to the cultivation
of basic grains (mostly maize and beans).
These households work relatively little outside
their own farm. Households in cluster 4,
representing nearly one quarter of the total
sample, are similar to those in cluster 3 in
the sense that they devote most of their farm
area to basic grains. However, rather than
working exclusively on their own farms
(where the land is often not suitable for
second season cultivation), they spend about
equal proportions of their time working on
their own farms and off-farm (mostly on
other people’s farms).
Households in cluster 5 account for
nearly one third of the total sample and on
average keep nearly two thirds of their farm
under fallow and/or forest. Their livelihood
is similar to that of households in cluster 4
but they hire more labor and devote more
time to livestock activities.
Cluster 6 is a small group (12 households,
representing 3 percent of the total
sample) of permanent crop producers, who
devote most of their land and time to intensive
tree crop production such as fruits, oil
palm, some sugarcane, and so forth.
Finally, cluster 7 consists of only eight
households (2 percent of the total sample)
most of which are vegetable growers or intensive
livestock producers. These households
work very little off-farm, probably
because of the labor-intensive character of
most vegetable crops. Below we describe
the main characteristics of the various livelihood
strategies in terms of assets and outcomes
such as level and composition of
household income. Shockingly, none of the
livelihood strategies in the hillside areas are
able to generate an average annual income
above the extreme poverty line of US$365
per capita, let alone above the poverty line
of US$550 per capita (Figure 4.1). 38 Differences
in outcome variables can be regarded
as the result of differences in asset endowments
that, in turn, are causal factors for differences
in livelihood strategies represented
by the clusters.
38
Total household income is defined as the sum of the net value of crop and livestock production (revenues minus
costs) and income from off-farm salaried work (either farm or nonfarm), own business, and transfers. Own production,
whether consumed by the household or sold, is included in the calculation of household income.