Mopane worm utilisation and rural livelihoods in Southern Africa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

households MW are likely to be important in helping them ‘hang on’ at the margins of survival through this difficult time. These households, who often have limited nonfarm income sources, may identify mopane as their most important source of income. Further, the main use of this income is to fund seasonal consumption needs. For other households who are not so badly off (generally due to higher livestock holdings, larger cultivated area, or a regular source of non farm income or remittances) the mopane worm business generates subsistence and cash income that funds not only essential consumption goods but also small purchases (kitchen utensils, clothing), investment in education (human capital), visits to relatives (social capital) and small-scale farm and non farm activities (petty trading, vegetable gardens, membership of informal credit groups etc). Information on how collectors used mopane income from the 2001/2002 harvest suggests that quite a few collectors were able to fund ‘linking in’ type of activities’. Its role here, however, is likely to be limited. For most collectors the income earned from mopane sales is not sufficient to fund investments in other livelihoods. Although some households mention using income from mopane to invest in agricultural inputs and small livestock purchases those that mention such investments generally acknowledge that mopane worm income is not the most important source of income used for these investments (Table 18). Table 18. Use of income from Mopane sales, Zimbabwe study areas, 2002 Income Use Mwenezi N=45 % hhld % 1st Masvingo Midlands Gwerima N=42 % hhld % 1st Chilonga N=30 % hhld % 1st Bangwe N=31 % hhld Buy food grains 82 40 90 35 53 na 36 16 Buy other food 84 36 93 39 67 na 68 28 Buy agric Inputs 73 11 73 12 60 na 48 16 Buy agric implements 36 7 39 7 3 na na na Buy cattle 7 0 7 0 0 na na na Buy goats 22 2 24 0 3 na na na Medical expenses 71 2 78 2 na na 32 0 Funeral expenses na na na na 0 na 68 0 School fees/stationary 78 38 85 41 60 na 48 12 Travel 73 4 81 5 40 na 12 0 Buy clothes 71 11 78 2 23 na 88 36 Buy household utensils 80 64 88 70 na na 56 12 Buy durables na na na na 3 na 68 8 Note: 1 st means the share of households who indicated that income from MW sales was the main source of cash for this expenditure. For example, 82% households in Mwenezi used income form MW sales to purchase food grains, and 40% of households indicated that this income source was the most important source of income for purchasing food grains. There are, however, a few better off households for whom trading MW (buying from other collectors and trading locally or in outside markets) may provide opportunities to earn sufficient income to invest further in the MW trading business, (e.g. holding % 1st 27
stocks, increasing size of business, value added processing etc). Here MW trading (rather than harvesting and processing) plays a ‘stepping up’ role, or a ‘stepping out’ role if income from mopane trading is invested in, for instance, livestock, cash cropping, non-farm activities, post school training (human capital), and assets for other business such as shops or vehicles (physical capital). Generally it was more common for income from mopane worm trading to play a ‘stepping out’ role funding investments in alternative means if increasing income rather than a ‘stepping up’ role. This is consistent with the observation that income from mopane worm activities is both seasonal and variable from year to year and therefore not a very reliable business activity. Levels of mopane worm harvesting and reported use on MW income also indicate that currently more harvesters in Botswana than Zimbabwe use mopane worm activities in a ‘stepping out’ and/or ‘stepping up’ role. This discussion of the different roles that MW harvesting and processing and MW trading may play in the livelihoods of different people is, we suggest, helpful as we turn to consider the potential for livelihood improvement through technical and institutional innovations. We need primarily to look for innovations that support the ‘hanging in’ roles of MW harvesting and processing. We also need to look for innovations that may facilitate their role in ‘linking in’ with other activities, perhaps catalysing a shift towards ‘stepping up’ or ‘stepping out’ through other livelihood activities. However, this is likely to require, among other things, improvements in marketing systems, and here we need to understand the roles of MW trading in the livelihoods and business of rural and urban based traders. Table 19 therefore presents in more detail the principle roles of MW by livelihood strategy, together with problems and constraints identified from the research findings (described in section a categorization of livelihood strategies). The final column, suggesting possible development opportunities, anticipates to some extent issues raised in the next section, where we discuss priorities for technical and institutional innovation. PRINCIPLE ROLES OF MOPANE WORMS BY LIVELIHOOD STRATEGY, PROBLEMS, CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES The principle roles of mopane by livelihood strategy, problems and constraints identified from the research findings (described in section a categorization of livelihood strategies) together with potential development opportunities are summarised in Table 19. For households where mopane worms play primarily a ‘hanging on’ role problems such as variable and unreliable outbreaks and low market returns dominate. These households are cash constrained and unlikely to be able to afford even low cost technology for improving productivity of MW harvesting or processing. In addition, the small quantities of MWs offered for sale and economies of scale associated with selling in alternative markets limit their ability to access outside markets. Improved returns for such households are likely best achieved through group or cooperative efforts to undertake some of the market functions currently provided by middlemen and traders. Organised collective action to manage and protect mopane resources is also of vital importance. 28
Page 1 and 2: Topic 2: Non-timber forest products
Page 3 and 4: INTRODUCTION In recent years there
Page 5 and 6: together with key informant intervi
Page 7 and 8: Table 1. Demographic and socio econ
Page 9 and 10: Figure 1. Map of Zimbabwe study are
Page 11 and 12: involvement in MW collection, measu
Page 13 and 14: on traditional non working days. In
Page 15 and 16: considering innovation development.
Page 17 and 18: Table 9. MW Processing methods, in
Page 19 and 20: Table 113. Average quantity of MWs
Page 21 and 22: 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 For instance, i
Page 23 and 24: and youths; participation in MW act
Page 25 and 26: Variation between households and co
Page 27: Table 17. Principal Activity Roles
Page 31 and 32: - lower order ‘stepping out’ in
Page 33 and 34: development initiatives need to be
Page 35 and 36: REFERENCES Agritex/USAID FEWS - Zim
Page 37 and 38: Mutamba, M., Chirara, C., and Peter

Mopane worm utilisation and rural livelihoods in Southern Africa

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?