Tana Delta Irrigation Project, Kenya: An Environmental Assessment

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Rehabilitation of the Tana Delta Irrigation Project, Kenya: An Environmental Assessment. Market Linkages and Investment Vehicles External versus internal needs (determined from focal groups) are summarised as follows: Internal supply Tilled crops Fruit crops Fish Poultry Goats Cattle/sheep (Orma only) Honey Firewood Building materials/thatch/rope Limited charcoal Other wood-related raw materials Micro-finance (merry-go-round) External supply (cash market) Sugar / tea / rice Salt Cooking oil Posho mill Generator Diesel Kerosene Doctor/medicine Clothes School education Market/personal transport Corrugated iron (‘mabati’) Roof timbers Nails Mattresses Radio Bicycle * Malindi preferred due to lower prices, if the opportunity arises Market location Garsen* Garsen Garsen Malindi Malindi Garsen Garsen Garsen Garsen* Local Garsen Malindi Malindi Malindi Garsen Garsen* Garsen* The above chart shows a relatively limited reliance on outside supplies, limited to essential staples. This is largely a factor of distance combined with lack of transport. In addition, investment options are limited to: 1. Livestock (Orma) 2. Postbank savings (Garsen) – cheaper than conventional bank 3. Village business e.g. food kiosk, hotel, posho mill (no outside business) Coping strategies The following two tables summarise focal group information concerning survival, or coping, mechanisms utilised by households during stress periods (which typically occur particularly in the long-dry season each year). Table 3 indicates mechanism types and importance, and includes perceived trend in availability/viability. Of note is that some 50% of mechanisms are seen to be in decline, with no alternative replacement. Table 4 summarises mechanism sources. The latter indicates that the forests play a vital role in coping strategies, followed by the Tana River and associated lakes. The dry land woodlands (‘Gubani’) beyond the floodplain area are also important (being the dominant source of building poles); whilst casual employment by TARDA is also an important coping mechanism (however, the value of the latter as a viable coping mechanism source has been severely compromised due to delayed (up to one year) and/or partial payment for labour carried out). 9
Rehabilitation of the Tana Delta Irrigation Project, Kenya: An Environmental Assessment. Table 3: Household coping mechanisms during stress periods (income generators, unless otherwise stated). H=high reliance M=medium reliance L=low reliance Blank=no reliance Village Group/ Tribe Livestock** Share food* Fish** Water lilies* Building poles Firewood Charcoal burning Weaving mats Edible forest foods* Rope Honey** Casual labour (TARDA) Banana** Mango** Kulesa Pokomo L L M L L L L L L L Bfumbwe Pokomo H L H L L L L Sailoni Pokomo L M L L L L L M Wema Pokomo L L M L L L L L L L H Hewani Pokomo L L M L L L L L L Baandi Orma H M L L L L L Frequency 1 1 5 3 6 6 6 6 4 3 3 6 1 cited RESOURCE SUPPLY TREND * for home consumption ** for both home consumption and sale Table 4: Summary of coping sources cited across villages: Activity Frequency cited % of options Forest products (‘Madzini’ or ‘floodplain’ forests) 23 51 Lakes/river 7 16 Forest products (‘Gubani’ or dry land forests/woodlands) 5 11 Casual labour (TARDA) 5 11 Agriculture 2 4 Livestock (Orma) 1 2 Relief food 1 2 Share food 1 2 LIVELIHOOD VULNERABILITY AND CONSTRAINTS ASSESSMENT Vulnerability Vulnerability can be assessed from three measures: 1. Key informants assessment of distribution of population between wealth levels within each village (also used to stratify the household forest survey sample) 2. A simple set of four standard vulnerability indicators, measured by the household survey: housing; food supply; income options; and capacity to school children 3. Village focal group discussion results A. Key informant vulnerability results The distribution of village populations across three wealth categories – poor, medium, rich – was estimated by key informants from each village, as follows: Table 5: Distribution of village populations amongst wealth categories % Poor % Medium % Rich Bfumbwe 50 43 7 Hewani 47 40 13 Kulesa 75 21 4 Sailoni 64 24 12 Wema 71 24 5 Baandi 60 30 10 Average across villages 61 30 9 10
Page 1 and 2: REHABILITATION OF THE TANA DELTA IR
Page 3 and 4: Rehabilitation of the Tana Delta Ir
Page 17: Rehabilitation of the Tana Delta Ir
Page 23 and 24: INSTITUTIONAL LINKAGES Primary link
Page 69 and 70:
Rehabilitation of the Tana Delta Ir
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Table 19. Spatial distribution and
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113:
show all

Tana Delta Irrigation Project, Kenya: An Environmental Assessment

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?