19.06.2014 Views

A Socio-Economic Profile of the Rufiji Floodplain and Delta.

A Socio-Economic Profile of the Rufiji Floodplain and Delta.

A Socio-Economic Profile of the Rufiji Floodplain and Delta.

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Socio</strong>-economic pr<strong>of</strong>ile <strong>of</strong> <strong>Rufiji</strong> flood plain <strong>and</strong> <strong>Delta</strong> - Vol. 1<br />

AEZ<br />

Inner <strong>Delta</strong><br />

North<br />

<strong>Delta</strong><br />

North<br />

Amt<br />

harvested by<br />

hh per year<br />

Table 25:Statistics <strong>of</strong> Mpingo by AEZ<br />

amt. used for<br />

home<br />

consumption<br />

price per<br />

piece<br />

Cost per<br />

year<br />

Gross value per Net value per<br />

year/ hh year /hh<br />

Mean 640.0 1233.3 30000.0 1063333.3 1040000.0<br />

N 3 3 2 3 3<br />

Std. Dev. 539.3 1537.3 0.0 1679355.0 1994041.1<br />

Min. 20 200.0 30000.0 10000.0 150000.0<br />

Max. 1000 3000.0 30000.0 3000000.0 2970000.0<br />

Mean 4.00 4.00 1000.0 4000.0 4000.0 0.0<br />

N 1 1 1 1 1 1<br />

Std. Dev. . . . . . .<br />

Min. 4 4 1000.0 4000.0 4000.0 0.0<br />

Max. 4 4 1000.0 4000.0 4000.0 0.0<br />

Total Mean 481.0 4.00 1175.0 21333.3 798500.0 1040000.0<br />

N 4 1 4 3 4 3<br />

Std. Dev. 543.1 . 1260.6 15011.1 1469932.7 1673110.8<br />

Min. 4 4 200.0 4000.0 4000.0 0.0<br />

Max. 1000 4 3000.0 30000.0 3000000.0 2970000.0<br />

F-value F=1.04, p=<br />

0.41<br />

- F=0.02,<br />

P=0.91<br />

Source: Computed from survey data (2000).<br />

- F=0.3, p=0.64 F=0.4, p=0.64<br />

Table 26 shows <strong>the</strong> amount <strong>of</strong> wood products lost by AEZ, in <strong>the</strong> survey area. The table shows <strong>the</strong><br />

number <strong>of</strong> people involved in wood products is only 25 out <strong>of</strong> a sample <strong>of</strong> 182 people. The majority <strong>of</strong><br />

people involved in wood products (76%) estimate <strong>the</strong> losses to be less than a quarter (Table 26).<br />

The opinions <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents regarding losses <strong>of</strong> wood products can be summarised as follows:<br />

• Price fluctuations;<br />

• High taxation rates;<br />

• Most buyers are defaulters;<br />

• Lack <strong>of</strong> reliable markets;<br />

• Poor transport infrastructure including road accidents;<br />

• The use <strong>of</strong> inferior cooking stoves;<br />

• Poor harvesting tools;<br />

• Wildfires.<br />

Table 26: Amount <strong>of</strong> wood (products) lost by AEZ<br />

Less than<br />

a quarter<br />

A quarter<br />

to a half<br />

More than<br />

a half<br />

Inner<br />

<strong>Delta</strong><br />

North<br />

(n=4)<br />

Inner<br />

<strong>Delta</strong><br />

South<br />

(n=3)<br />

<strong>Delta</strong><br />

North<br />

(n=8)<br />

<strong>Delta</strong><br />

South<br />

(n=6)<br />

North Flood<br />

Plain (n=2)<br />

West<br />

Valley<br />

(n=2)<br />

Total<br />

(n=25)<br />

Percent <strong>of</strong> respondents<br />

75.0 33.3 100.0 66.7 100.0 50.0 76.0<br />

25.0 33.3 12.0<br />

66.7 50.0 12.0<br />

Source: Survey data, 2000<br />

When asked <strong>the</strong> ways to improve pr<strong>of</strong>its from wood <strong>and</strong> wood products, respondents gave <strong>the</strong><br />

suggestions:<br />

• Government to regulate prices, however this is in contradiction with government policy on prices,<br />

following <strong>the</strong> liberalisation <strong>of</strong> trade.<br />

• The use <strong>of</strong> modern harvesting equipment<br />

27

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!