© Kamla-Raj 2018 J Hum Ecol, 62(1-3): 58-68 (2018) PRINT: ISSN 0970-9274 ONLINE: ISSN 2456-6608 DOI: 10.31901/24566608.2018/62.1-3.2965 Diversification and Farm Household Welfare in Grasslands ‘A’ Farm, Kwekwe District, Zimbabwe
Nyathi Douglas1, Beremauro Reason2, Tonderai Takavarasha3 and Joram Ndlovu4
1,4University of KwaZulu Natal, School of Social Sciences, Durban, South Africa 2University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa 3Lupane State University, Department of Development Studies Bulawayo, Zimbabwe
KEYWORDS Livelihoods. Diversification. Household Welfare. Farm. Employment
ABSTRACT The problem of poverty and how to reduce it remains the most pressing dilemma in the rural development lexicon of most developing countries. Livelihoods diversification has been seen as one of the ways in which households seek to address their vulnerability to poverty and other shocks. This study explores the determinants and household welfare implications of livelihood diversification in newly resettled areas of Zimbabwe. Specifically, the study was done in Grasslands ‘A’ farm in Kwekwe District. Data was collected from 178 household heads using in-depth interviews, focus group discussions and key informants. The study reveals that market gardening, gold panning, firewood selling, casual labour and temporary employment are the major livelihood options pursued by farmers in the study area as part of their livelihood diversification attempts. Furthermore, resettled farmers have not been confined to only crop farming, rather they have embraced on-farm and off-farm livelihood activities. As diversification is a reality in newly resettled areas, there is need to support the engaged livelihoods together with crop farming. The study recommends the security of tenure through issuing of title deeds, the funding of small cooperative gardens development and expansion of markets for garden produce.
INTRODUCTION Lu 2017; Idiake-Ochei and Okoh 2017) and the causal factors for livelihood diversification vary Livelihood diversification for rural dwellers across regions. As a result of the much-contest- has become a common strategy for rural farm ed Zimbabwe’s Fast Track Land Reform and households across the developing world as ag- Resettlement Programme (FTLRRP), a radical riculture (the traditional farm household liveli- transformation of land ownership and agrarian hood activity) faces diverse threats (Kumar and structures (Njaya 2014) was experienced in the Srivastava 2017) and also as rural incomes be- country. The agrarian nature of the reform pro- come under pressure (Barrett et al. 2001). Liveli- cess was viewed by many as a straight-jacket hood diversification is a process involving the approach which failed to capture the vulnerabil- maintenance and continuous variation of a high- ity context, trends, shocks, seasonality (Depart- ly diverse portfolio of activities over time in or- ment for International Development 1999) [DFID] der to secure survival and improve standards of and incentives offered by other non-farm activ- living (Mathebula et al. 2017). Consequently, it ities (Barrett et al. 2001; Mathebula et al. 2017). has become a subject of conceptual and policy- Land reforms have been seen as a means for based research and at the forefront in discus- eradication of rural poverty, increasing food sions for rural poverty alleviation and food se- stocks for household consumption by provid- curity in low income developing countries ing sources of income and insurance against (Onunka and Olumba 2017). Despite the agrari- price shocks (Jacobs 2013). Drawing evidence anisation (Scoones et al. 2012) of rural develop- from Grasslands ‘A’ farm in Kwekwe District, ment and poverty reduction policies, farmers the researchers argue that newly resettled farm- particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, are gradually ers in Zimbabwe have not been confined to crop being divorced from farming activities as they production alone but there have been a number embrace a diverse portfolio of both non-farm of ‘push and pull’ factors that have inspired farm and on-farm activities in their struggle to con- households to engage on other on-farm and non- struct livelihoods and sustain lives (Onunka and farm livelihood activities. Therefore, livelihood Olumba 2017). Burgeoning literature reveals that diversification of the rural dwellers has become agriculture has suffered the brunt of neglect in a subject of conceptual and policy-based re- many rural communities (also see Sultana and search and at the forefront in discussions for DIVERSIFICATION AND FARM HOUSEHOLD WELFARE IN GRASSLANDS 59 rural poverty alleviation and food security in METHODOLOGY low income developing countries (Onunka and Olumba 2017). In simple terms, vulnerability to Merriam (2009.) argues that a qualitative re- shocks, trends and seasonal variations has been search is important in gaining understanding of seen as the greatest threat to sustainable rural underlying reasons, opinions, and motivations livelihoods. As rural households attempt to man- to a particular research problem. Given the qual- age vulnerability, they engage in various liveli- itative nature of the study, a case study was hood diversification strategies such as agricul- used to examine subjects in their natural setting tural intensification/extensification, national and and for employing multiple methods of data col- international migration and this influenced by lection (Yin 2014). A qualitative approach allowed institutional and structural factors (Chimhowu for an exploration of a range of livelihood expe- and Hulme 2006). riences in Grasslands ‘A’ farm. The population for this study was made up of 178 household Objectives heads from farms in Grasslands ‘A’. A purpo- sive sampling was used in selecting the partici- Estimation by the W (2008) reveals that agri- pants. These households entailed both male and culture provides livelihoods to about 1.3 billion female headed households and there were no smallholders and landless workers. The bulk of cases of child-headed households. In-depth in- rural livelihood activities are land-based (Simane terviews and a focus group discussion were used et al. 2017) therefore, a comprehensive and well as data collection techniques applied in the administered land redistribution process can study. Prior to entering the Grasslands commu- unlock livelihood opportunities for rural popu- nity, permission was sought from the Local Au- lations. Jacobs (2013) contends that land reforms thority (Zibagwe Rural District Council), the can strengthen the rural poor and transform them Local Government and the War Veterans Offic- into a new class of smallholders with economic es. These respective institutions provided with and political stakes in a capitalist or social dem- access letters and this made the research to be easily accepted by the community. Before en- ocratic societies. In an effort to address poverty gaging the selected households for interviews, and inequalities, the government of Zimbabwe participants were asked to sign an informed con- pursued agrarian reforms which were fraught sent form. with contestation and condemnation. Although, it was believed that the land redistribution exer- RESULTS cise would serve as an engine to increase in- comes and empower poorer peasants these ben- The study revealed a number of push and efits have not been realised in Grasslands ‘A’ pull factors. The motives for “diversification are farm in Kwekwe District. The main objectives of usually survival-led and opportunity led diver- the study were to: sification. Survival-led diversification is mainly Discuss the variety of sources and activi- driven by push factors and occurs when poorer ties of rural people make a living and wheth- rural households engage in low return activities er their livelihood is secure or vulnerable to ensure survival, reduce vulnerability or avoid over time. falling deeper into poverty. Opportunity-led di- Examine the extent to which farm households versification is mainly driven by pull factors and deploy livelihood capitals and recover from it occurs when wealthier rural households en- shocks and stress within their environment. gage in high-return non-farm activities, with ac- Analyse the effect of livelihood diversifica- cumulation objectives, in order to increase house- tion, on the food security status of the rural hold income by maximising returns from their as- farming households. sets” (Mathebula et al. 2017). In this study the Inform the policy makers in designing ap- push factors included, low producer prices from propriate food security mitigation policies the sole buyer of grains (the Grain Marketing in rural Zimbabwe. Board) and not paying on time, erratic climatic Contribute to literature on livelihood diver- changes and lack of knowledge to adapt to cli- sification and farm household welfare of re- matic conditions, lack of farm inputs, lack of farm settled farmers in Zimbabwe. productive assets and lack of farming knowl- 60 NYATHI DOUGLAS, BEREMAURO REASON, TONDERAI TAKAVARASHA ET AL. edge. Similarly, Takane and Gono (2017) argue and the war veterans spearheaded the land re- that many poor smallholders were unable to over- form process (Moyo 2004). The dominance of come entry to barriers into highly remunerative these political cronies saw an exclusion of the non-farm activities, leaving them with fewer re- youths and women in accessing land in Grass- munerative activities. Therefore, the pull factors lands ‘A’. The youths had no liberation war cre- included; better returns from gold panning, ready dentials and few elderly women had participat- market for firewood, proximity to water sources ed in the liberation struggle which was a requi- and proximity to markets for garden produce. site in accessing land hence many women and the youth were shut out of the programme. The Overview of the Characteristics of the few youths, 11.8 percent, who own land in Grass- Sample: Demographics lands ‘A’ revealed that they had inherited the land after the death of their parents. In exploring the concept of livelihood diver- sification, a household has normally become a Sex unit of analysis (Ellis 1998; Ellis et al. 2003). The unit of analysis in a study is the level of abstrac- Most of the respondents were females with tion in which the researcher looks for variability 58.8 percent and males were 41.2 percent. Table and this can be at an individual, group, house- 2 presents a categorisation of respondents to hold and community level (Bernard and Ryan in-depth interviews according to their sex. Fe- 2010). This study conceptualised a household males who participated in the interviews out- as a unit of analysis in exploring livelihoods numbered males and it emanated from the re- pursued by newly resettled farmers, determi- spondents that most men had temporarily mi- nants of household livelihood diversification, grated to Kwekwe town in search of temporary and implications of livelihood diversification on employment (piece jobs). This accounted for a the household economy and areas of interven- higher percentage of female respondents. Fe- tion. Demographic characteristics which were male dominance during the time of the study of major interest are age, sex, household size, authenticates the notion that women play a key household type, education and employment. role in subsistence agriculture in Zimbabwe. As noted by the Human Rights Watch (2003), Age eighty-six percent of women in Africa depend on the land for their livelihoods yet the paradox The age distribution of respondents ranged is these women do not own land and they de- from 19 years and above (see Table 1) with the pend on men. Property in most African societies age group 19-35 having 11.8 percent respon- is held in a man’s name and passed partrilineally dents, 36-49 had 17.6 percent and those who within the group (FAO 2002). The study obtained were above 50 were 70 percent. It emanated from that most women in Grasslands ‘A’ are depen- the interviews that most household heads were dent on land for the construction of livelihoods above the age of 50 and from the elderly popula- of themselves and their families’ as revealed by tion, males were older than female. The domi- a greater proportion of women respondents nance of an elderly population in land owner- staying on the farm. An analysis by FAO (2002) ship in Grasslands ‘A’ farm concurs with a con- concurs with what was obtained from the study. tention by Moyo (2011) that mostly ZANU-PF Property, in this case land, in Grasslands ‘A’ is cronies benefited from the Fast Track Land Re- held in a man’s name despite the fact that most form Programme (FTLRP). During the inception men were reported to be working in towns and of the FTLP, war veterans and security services women being the ones staying and working in members were the renowned ZANU-PF elites the fields.
Table 1: Age distribution Table 2: Sex distribution Age group (in years) Frequency Percentage Sex Percentage 19-35 2 11.8 36-49 3 17.6 Males 41.2 Above 50 12 70.6 Females 58.8
Total 17 100.0 Total 100.0 DIVERSIFICATION AND FARM HOUSEHOLD WELFARE IN GRASSLANDS 61
Household Size heads respondents that they had inherited the plots after the death of their parents. A total of 15 respondents based on house hold size were interviewed. Table 3 shows the Education number of household members of respondents to the in-depth interviews and two key informant There is not much variation in education lev- interviews with traditional leadership. Based on els of household heads and age appeared to be the above table, 40 percent of the respondents the determinant of household head educational interviewed were from a household with more attainment. It emerged from respondents that at than 6 members and 26.7 percent were from a least all household heads attained some level of household with more than 5 members (see Table education. Most of the respondents above the 3). All households which participated in the re- age of 50 attained primary level education only search process were composed of a single family and informed that their failure to further with unit. It emerged from the research that other education was a result of participating in the household members of small family units (house- liberation struggle (Table 5). In terms of tertiary holds with 2-4 members) had permanently migrat- education, one household head responded that ed to urban areas where they are employed. one of its household members attained a degree from the National University of Science and Tech- Table 3: Household size distribution nology. Another head also revealed that one household member attained a National Diploma Number of members Respondents Percentage from Kwekwe Polytechnic College. 2 1 6.7 3 2 13.3 Table 5: Education levels of households 4 2 13.3 5 4 26.7 Level of education Percentage More than 6 6 40 No education 0 Total 15 100.0 Primary education 20 Secondary education 67 Household Type Tertiary education 13 Total 100 Grasslands ‘A’ farm is comprised of younger and older households. A younger household in Employment the study refers to a household with a head be- tween the ages 19-35 and an older household The key informants informed that the major- refers to a household with a head above the age ity of household heads in Grasslands ‘A’ farm of 35 (Table 4). It emanated from a key informant were unemployed as a result of retirement (47%), that landholders in Grasslands ‘A’ are war veter- retrenchment (27%) and some never worked ans, ex-combatants and land seekers from neigh- (13%) and only (13%) were employed (Table 6). bouring areas and most of these people are above This was authenticated after carrying out in- the age of 35. This accounted for a larger pro- depth interviews with household heads where portion of older household heads being en- the majority indicated that they retired from se- gaged. This land ownership format reinforces a conclusion drawn by Moyo (2011) that the ben- curity forces, government departments and oth- eficiaries of Zimbabwe’s land reform programmes ers from ZISCO Steel Company. It also emanat- were mainly ZANU-PF elites and political cro- nies. It also emerged from younger household Table 6: Employment status
Table 4: Younger and older households Employment status Percentage
Household type Percentage Employed 13 Retrenched 27 Younger 33 Retired 47 Older 67 Never worked 13
Total 100 Total 100 62 NYATHI DOUGLAS, BEREMAURO REASON, TONDERAI TAKAVARASHA ET AL. ed from other unemployed heads that they had process carried out by the District Lands Com- faced retrenchment from ZIMASCO Company mittee. This committee is comprised of different as it was scaling down operations. departments which are; Local Government, Lo- cal Authority, War Veterans Association, ZANU- Profiling the Area under Study Pf office, Zimbabwe Republic Police, President’s Office, Ministry of Lands and Resettlement and Grasslands ‘A’ Residents the Zimbabwe National Army. It emerged from the respondent that each department had to Beneficiary selection to Zimbabwe’s land bring its beneficiary names and the committee reform programmes has been central to debates deliberate on them. Below is a Narrative from a in as far as land redistribution is concerned. War Veteran: These debates emanate from what group of peo- Mr Chiga works at the War Veterans Office ple is worthy beneficiaries (Bernstein 2004). As and he is a war veteran. He has attended nu- revealed by study findings, Grasslands ‘A’ is merous District Lands Committee meetings comprised of people of varying backgrounds, where issues to do with land redistribution, tribes and origins. One of the key informants land ownership and land disputes are deliber- revealed that the selection criterion of benefi- ated and resolved. Mr Chiga noted that the ciaries was based on the waiting list from the meeting is attended by representatives from Local Government. The list constituted of peo- various departments and these are; the District ple from across many districts in Midlands Prov- Administrator, Local Chiefs, Rural Council ince. This interview with the key informant also Chief Executive Officer, District Lands Officer, revealed that people in the area are of mixed ZANU-Pf representative, President’s Office rep- tribes. The Local Government beneficiary narra- resentative, Zimbabwe Republic Police officer tive below shows the differing backgrounds, and the Zimbabwe National Army officer. The tribes and origins of farmers in Grasslands ‘A’: committee compile names of people to acquire Mrs Banya (not real name) has been work- land and approve who should benefit. Each ing at the Local Government offices for more department is given an opportunity to present than 15 years and she gave her narration of names of its intended beneficiaries. Fast-Track Land Reform Programme beneficiary criterion in Kwekwe District. She noted that Livelihood Portfolios people who benefited are the ones who were in the waiting list at Local Government offices. Rural households combine a diverse set on People were drawn from various parts of Mid- incomes generating and social activities and lands Province. There are Ndebele speaking construct a portfolio of livelihood activities to people who came from communal areas under meet and possible, to enhance better livelihood the jurisdiction of Chief Malisa and Chief Nta- outcomes (Khatiwada et al. 2017). The present beni in Kwekwe District. There are also Shona study show that the major livelihoods options speaking people drawn from Gokwe, Mvuma pursued by farmers in Grasslands ‘A’ farm are: and Kadoma districts while others are from a crop farming, gardening, small-scale gold min- communal area under Chief Samambwa in ing, firewood selling, casual labour and tempo- Kwekwe district. From this group of beneficia- rary employment and reliance on pension funds. ries, some are former ZISCO Steel Company An engagement with selected household heads employees, others are former and current em- revealed that crop farming is still upheld as a ployees from different government sectors and livelihood activity in the area, though not as others were peasant farmers from communal dominant as it used to be during the initial years areas. These people were allocated 30 hectare of resettlement. Furthermore, farmers from Grass- pieces of land under the A1 model. lands ‘A’ farm used to supply a considerable Another key informant interview revealed amount of maize to Kwekwe Grain Marketing another dimension of the beneficiary criterion in Board (GMB), but due to the reduction in the Grasslands ‘A’. The informant revealed a crite- scale of maize production, supply has also de- ria biased towards alignment to the ZANU-PF clined. The above results show that agrarian- party and the liberation struggle credentials. The based activities are critical to the livelihood strat- beneficiaries should have undergone a vetting egies of rural households. Thus, crop farming DIVERSIFICATION AND FARM HOUSEHOLD WELFARE IN GRASSLANDS 63 remains visible in newly resettled communities However, low productivity in farming and for intra-household food consumption, for in- limited accessibility to non-farm income sourc- stance, to enhance food security and to safe- es have been increasing vulnerability of these guard the earned land parcels. This realisation people who are often poor and deprived with has led to a mixed-bag/ diversification picture of minimum standard of life (Khatiwada et al. 2017). rural households’ livelihood portfolios as they try to augment seasonal agricultural produce Gold Panning (Tombindo and Chirau 2017). One non-farm activity that has been over- Market Gardening looked is artisanal or small-scale gold mining, (Banchirigah and Hilson 2009) and the activity Household strategies comprise different absorbs the bulk of labour capital in areas close support sources and activities at different times to gold ore deposits such as Grasslands ‘A’ farm. of the year and these include gardening, use of In this study, artisanal or small-scale mining is common pool resources, share-rearing livestock referred as gold panning. This activity of gold and family splitting (Tombindo and Chirau 2017). panning (kukorokoza), has become another Gardening was found to be one of major liveli- livelihood and source of income for Grasslands hood activity which is being embraced by new- ‘A’ households. These household members mi- ly resettled farmers in Grasslands ‘A’ as they grate to Riverlea farm and Bell mine which bor- downscale crop cultivation. Up-taking food gar- ders Grasslands ‘A’ farm to exploit gold. dening improves household food availability and Mr Chaka (not real name) revealed that: also provides a long term solution to the dietary “Tinotokorokoza goridhe kuRiverlea neku- diversity of people in poor communities (UNDP Bell mine totengesa” (We do gold panning in 1996). Riverlea and Bell mine and sell). It emerged from an interview engaging a tra- The study reveals that gold panning is sus- ditional leader that: taining lives of various households in the area Pama 30 hectares atakapiwa nehurumende, as returns are realised immediately after the ac- varimi varikungokwanisa kurima ndima diki. tivity and many young people have been ab- (On 30 hectare land allocated to us by govern- sorbed into the livelihood activity. Despite the ment, farmers are only ploughing small pieces of fact that gold panning is labour intensive, farm- land). ers pursue it due to the few barriers to entry and Another household head Mr Kombo (not real quick returns compared to other livelihood al- name) who was engaged in an in-depth inter- ternatives such as petty trade. Most rural house- view reiterated that he was still practising crop holds’ safety nets reflect elements of mechani- farming though at a smaller scale comparing to cal solidarity where social relations/resources the initial period when they acquired land: are used to make ends meet (Tombindo and Haa kurima ndinorima hangu asi zvekun- Chirau 2017). godya nemhuri yangu. (Yes I am still growing crops, but only for household consumption). Selling Firewood A variety of vegetables and beans are grown for household subsistence consumption and Selling of firewood emerged as a complemen- to generate extra household income. The study tary livelihood activity pursued due to unreli- shows that growing and selling vegetables has able and or failing crop farming activity in newly high returns compared to maize production in resettled areas of Zimbabwe. There is a general the area hence households with access to wa- agreement that an increase in natural resource ter sources embrace gardening. A household exploitation is a result of increasing rural popu- who has more than five years gardening re- lations and diminishing agricultural productivi- vealed that: ty. Hence, households in Grasslands ‘A’ farm Tatove ne5 years tichiita zvegadheni kun- have resorted to harvesting small forests in un- gobva kudzoka kwakaita mukomana kuchiko- der-utilised farms to extract firewood. However, ro kuNUST (We now have five years doing gar- the sour relationship between Environmental dening since the return of our son from National Management Agency (EMA) and households University of Science and Technology). selling firewood makes it difficult for such house- 64 NYATHI DOUGLAS, BEREMAURO REASON, TONDERAI TAKAVARASHA ET AL. holds to pursue firewood selling as a freely em- Similarly, other household heads in Grasslands braced livelihood alternative. The informant high- ‘A’ farm revealed that other members temporari- lighted that: ly migrate to Kwekwe urban to do temporary Maticket akawanda eEMA arikupiwa vari- short time jobs often referred as piece jobs. It mi vekuGrasslands. (The bulky of Environmen- emanated that casual labour and temporary em- tal Management Argency (EMA) fine tickets ployment are mainly embraced by households have been issued to Grasslands ‘A’ farmers). without productive farm assets as the respon- Off-farm activities are sometimes locally dents pointed out that they had neither draught available in rural areas as households make use power nor scotch carts to pursue activities such of their surroundings natural resources to sur- as firewood selling and gardening. vive (Tombindo and Chirau 2017). Mr Moyo who earns a living from firewood selling pointed out Role of Education in Livelihood Diversification that: Ndinototema huni ndichitengesa kuti ndi- Households from different circumstances wane kudya kwemhuri, asi ndikabatwa neE- diversify their sources of income in order to MA ndinenge ndashandira mahara. (I cut fire- smoothen consumption and spread risks. Gen- wood and sell to get food for the household, but erating diversified incomes was found to be the if I got caught by EMA, I will have worked for most essential rural development strategy for nothing). the majority of the rural poor. Households with Similarly, in Ghana, the sale of firewood was at least a single member who attained tertiary found to be high because it serves to provide level education revealed their commitment to fuel wood for food vending activities near the intensive gardening and directing little time to- lake; whilst carpentry and livestock rearing were wards crop farming. Mrs Svari, a key informant, widespread among communities which were fur- revealed that: ther away rather than those close to the lake Tine government policy yakaita GMB kuti (Yamba et al. 2017). ive nemonopoly yekutenga chibage, you find kuti zvakaaffecter maprice echibarwe, saka Casual Labour in Commercial Farms varimi vakarima, kuti vatengese chibarwe, ha- chisi kutengwa nemari yakanaka. (We have a Migration also provides a livelihood diver- government policy which made GMB enjoy mo- sification avenue through searching for work, nopoly in buying maize, you find that it affected markets and various goods and services maize prices, after farming, farmers are not re- (Tombindo and Chirau 2017). The study further ceiving good or reasonable money from the revealed that female headed and poor house- sales). holds rely on casual labour (maricho) in the Though gardening is a livelihood alternative neighbouring A2 farm (commercial farm) owned embraced by various households, the scale and by a white farmer. Not every household is into levels of production vary due to variances in gold panning, firewood selling or gardening. It levels of education. A contacted household head emerged from a female household head that they informed that: live on casual labour (maricho) in the neigh- Vana tinotovabhadharira chikoro nemari bouring A2 farm owned by a white farmer. Mrs yegarden. (We pay school fees for our children Svari (not real name), a key informant in the area using returns from garden produce). also stressed out that: Households with low levels of education Kune murungu ariko, akasara, vanhu va- find it difficult to diversify. Similarly, a study noenda ikoko voshanda mumunda make, by Khatiwada et al. (2017) revealed that house- vachibhadharwa nechikafu kana mari. (There holds headed by more educated head, having is a white farmer (A2) close to the area, people member with skilled development training, hav- go and work in his field and get paid with food ing more access to credit, no member with agri- or money). cultural training, smaller size of land holding, Casual or waged labour was seen as a reli- located closer to the road, located closer to the able livelihood option to the poor (without pro- market centre and at a higher elevation were more ductive assets) as they pointed out that the A2 likely to adopt a business strategy than food farmers always have work in their irrigation fields. grain production. DIVERSIFICATION AND FARM HOUSEHOLD WELFARE IN GRASSLANDS 65
DISCUSSION are poor. Over reliance on one source of income prevents achievement of economies of scope The contribution to livelihoods of economic and increases the risk of destitution. An engage- activities encompass more than just income, as ment with key informants and household heads there is a need to consider a wider range of fac- revealed that household livelihood diversifica- tors such as health, access to goods and servic- tion in Grasslands ‘A’ farm has far reaching im- es, social relations and food security, especially pacts within the perimeters of household income when measuring progress in development and improvements. “Non-farm activity is typically reduction in poverty (Smith et al. 2017). Thus, positively correlated with income and wealth...” household livelihood diversification has vary- (Barrett et al. 2001), increases considerably and, ing impacts on the economy and welfare of in fact, drives income growth of the poorest, household. In developing countries, it is increas- whose income from agriculture stagnates (Ayan- ingly seen as one of the pathways for poverty toye et al. 2017). These households managed to reduction and economic growth (Mathebula et construct typical rural modern houses built of al. 2017). The available literature reinforces the cement and corrugated iron sheets, to procure findings on increased income resulting from in- productive assets such as mega-tanks for a fu- creased diversification (see Dose 2007). For in- ture intended garden projects and fence their stance, Ellis (1998) suggests that livelihood di- homesteads using barbed wire. Also, in Burkina versification plays a significant role towards Faso off farm alternative livelihood activities enhancing food security at household level by were predominant in the dry season when agri- enabling the household to maintain food con- culture produce is being old and when people sumption throughout the year. However, there have more money and time in their hand (Yamba could be multiple motives which prompt house- et al. 2017). Hence, proximity to market areas is holds or individuals to diversify their assets and considered as an incentive for rural population income-earning activities (Mathebula et al. 2017). to engage in non-farm economic activities (As- In another study, diversified crop livestock sys- faw et al. 2017). However, a study by Sallawu et tem was aimed at spreading risk by reducing al. (2016) found that accessibility of credit insti- cattle off take and adaptation to natural resource tution and availability of adequate loan were competition and insecurity by extensification important factors for the participation of house- and evening out consumption (Sultana and Lu hold in non-farm activities (Asfaw et al. 2017). In 2017). Therefore, further diversification into off- contrast, those households that have neither farm activities to spread risk increased livelihood access to non-farm activities nor sufficient pro- security and opportunities (Majekodunmi et al. ductive non-labour assets to devote themselves 2017). The adopted strategies in diversification entirely to on-farm agricultural production, typ- of income include non-farm income sources, ically relied on a low return strategy of complete most importantly those obtained from sources dependence on the agricultural sector and often other than unskilled labour. The income derived find themselves caught in a dynamic stochastic from off-farm sources plays an important part in poverty trap (Ayantoye et al. 2017). Hence, the ensuring household food security through eas- capability of Grasslands ‘A’ farmers to diversify ing greater access to food. These are associated livelihoods and income sources proved to be a with increased income and enormous income critical survival strategy as it ensured income mobility especially upward earnings mobility and reduction in food risks. Poor infrastructure (Ayantoye et al. 2017). Households who have will continue to be a disincentive to farmers di- diversified livelihoods are food secure since they versifying in other activities due to high trans- can direct some of their income towards the pur- action costs coupled with other constraints such chase of sufficient food supplies. So, diversifi- as poor assets base, lack of credit facilities, lack cation decisions seem to be driven to a large of awareness and training (Ayantoye et al. 2017). extent by desperation rather than new opportu- Education plays an important role in the con- nities, in particular with regard to migration struction of livelihoods by households. The fac- (Ayantoye et al. 2017). Pursuance of alternative tor on education corroborates findings from dif- livelihoods activities is done concurrently with ferent countries where diversification has be- agricultural activities. Their intensity is realised come the norm, for example, Khatun and Roy during dry seasons particularly when crop yields (2012) in West Bengal, Demissie and Legesse 66 NYATHI DOUGLAS, BEREMAURO REASON, TONDERAI TAKAVARASHA ET AL.
(2013) in Ethiopia, Kangalawe et al. (2008) in Lake strategies of newly resettled farmers. Low pro- Victoria Basin and Rahman and Akter (2014) in ducer prices, late payments by GMB, climatic Rural Bangladesh. Information centres operat- changes, poor adaptation skills and knowledge ing at the block level can provide information to to climate change among farmers and lack of house holds on less time-consuming farming farm inputs push Grasslands ‘A’ farmers to di- techniques, marketing and opportunities in the versify their livelihoods. Higher income returns non-farm sector (Khan et al. 2017). Many house- from gold panning, proximity to a reliable source holds contacted during the study revealed that of water, proximity to markets for garden pro- livelihood diversification has considerably im- duce and a ready market for firewood lure farm- proved their property and productive assets ers to embrace other livelihood activities other ownership. It was evident that the type of liveli- than crop farming. The availability of facilities hood activities pursued had a greater influence and infrastructure contributes to the possibility on the type and extent of assets accumulation. of households to diversify their livelihood. Con- Other households managed to purchase pro- sidering the drop in crop production within and ductive households’ assets such as scotch carts among newly resettled farmers in Zimbabwe, the and mouldboard ploughs. The study has sug- research recommends the national government gested that to increase farmers’ income, policies to urgently intervene with vibrant agricultural should focus on the development of livestock policies to support small-holder crop produc- sector to motivate them for rearing of animals tion. Access to credit facility, affordability and for commercial purposes (Khan et al. 2017). It training can either help or hinder their living. was also evident that such newly embraced live- Through the Ministry of Lands and Rural Re- lihoods are of greater benefit especially when settlement, the government should avail title comparing property and assets ownership with deeds to these new land holders so that they households confined to crop farming. Diversiû- can have collateral to access lines of credits. cation outside agriculture is mainly wage labour, This is expected to enhance the financial base international and national migration, construc- of farmers to invest in crop production. The gov- tion work in local towns, participation in public ernment of Zimbabwe should also liberalise the works and piecework on nearby farms. There- market for grains by reframing of the policy which fore, policymakers should do more to support makes GMB enjoys monopoly in buying grains non-farm diversiûcation strategies by recognis- so as to pave way to competitive buyers. This ing the importance of rural-urban connections will ensure improved producer prices and resus- in fostering adaptation. citate crop farming in the country.
CONCLUSION RECOMMENDATIONS
The Zimbabwean FTLRP has been a subject As diversification has become a norm, there of contention as to whether it attained agrarian is need for acceptance, tolerance and support reform, addressed the national land question or for the newly embraced livelihood activities. Fire- led to poverty reduction in the country. With wood selling should be legalised through issu- reference to the Sustainable Livelihoods Frame- ing out licenses to households pursuing the work, newly resettled farmers were provided with activity. The research recommends that the For- land, a natural capital, and received little to no estry Commission in collaboration with the EMA financial, human, physical and social assets to and Rural District Councils issue out these fire- enable them to construct sustainable livelihoods. wood selling licenses. Gold panning should be Subsequently, these farmers have diversified to legalized and supported. Those participating in off-farm and on-farm livelihood activities in or- the activity must be formally registered with the der to survive and improve their lives. The study Ministry of Mines and Minerals Development interrogated the determinants of household live- and the registration process should be less bu- lihood diversification in newly resettled farmers reaucratic and less cumbersome. in Zimbabwe. Grasslands ‘A’ farm presented a In view of the proximity of Grasslands ‘A’ case study to interrogate questions posed by farm and other new resettlement areas across the study. The findings reveal that livelihood Zimbabwe to reliable water sources, the Minis- assets determine the choice of diversification try of Agriculture, Mechanisation and Irrigation DIVERSIFICATION AND FARM HOUSEHOLD WELFARE IN GRASSLANDS 67
Engineering must support irrigation develop- Demissie A, Legesse B 2013. Determinants of income ment. In the face of climatic changes, the study diversification among rural households: The case of smallholder farmers in Fedis District, Eastern recommends the development of small scale irri- Hararghe Zone, Ethiopia. Journal of Development gation (in form of gardening) to large scale irri- and Agricultural Economics, 5(3): 120-128. gation as rainfalls have become unreliable. This Department for International Development (DFID) 1999. Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheet. UK: will go a long way in enhancing national food DFID. security and rural development. The delivery of Department for International Development (DFID) formal and informal education and extension 2000. Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets. UK: DFID. services should be strengthened to enable the Dose H 2007. Securing Household Income among Small- farmers to utilize their full capacity and conse- scale Farmers in Kakamega District: Possibilities and quently earn more. The research also advocates Limitations of Diversification. GIGA Research Pro- for scaling up of more comprehensive trainings gramme: Transformation in the Process of Globali- sation. Working Papers No. 41. and information dissemination on ways to curb, Ellis F 1998. Survey article: Household strategies and adapt and cope with climate change among rural livelihood diversification. Journal of Develop- small-holder farmers. To areas with access to ment Studies, 35(1): 1-38. Ellis F, Kutengule M, Nyasulu A 2003. Livelihoods and reliable sources of water, the research recom- rural poverty reduction in Malawi. World Develop- mends the electrification of these areas through ment, 31(9): 1495-1510. the Rural Electrification programme. This should Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) 2002. Spe- cial Report FAO/WFP Crop and Food Assessment be done to support and boost irrigation activi- Mission to Zimbabwe, 29 May 2002. ties. Rural electrification will also mark the intro- Human Rights Watch 2003. Fast Track Land Reform duction of new livelihood activities to comple- in Zimbabwe. New York: HRW. ment crop farming and other existing ones. Fur- Idiake-Ochei O, Okoh IJ 2017. Livelihood diversifica- tion among male and female rural farmers in Esan ther recommendation is given on a deeper ex- West Local Government Area, Edo State. Interna- ploration of the implications of livelihood diver- tional Journal of Research in Agriculture and For- sification on household economies of women estry, 4(11): 5-8. Jacobs S 2013. Agrarian reforms. Current Sociology and child-headed households. Review, 61(5-6): 862-885. Kangalawe RYM, Liwenga ET, Majule AE 2007. The REFERENCES Dynamics of Poverty Alleviation Strategies in the Changing Environments of the Semiarid Areas of Sukumaland, Tanzania. Research Report Submitted Asfaw A, Simane B, Hassen A, Bantider A 2017. Deter- to REPOA, Dar es Salaam, 2007. minants of non-farm livelihood diversification: Ev- Khan W, Tabassum S, Ansari AS 2017. Can diversifica- idence from rainfed-dependent smallholder farmers tion of livelihood sources increase income of farm in north-central Ethiopia (Woleka sub-basin). De- households? A case study in Uttar Pradesh. Agricul- velopment Studies Research, 4(1): 22-36. Doi: tural Economics Research Review, 30: 27-34. 10.1080 /2166 509 5. 2017.1413411. Khatiwada S, Deng W, Paudel B, Khatiwada JR, Zhang Ayantoye K, Amao JO, Fanifosi GE 2017. Determi- J, Su Y 2017. Household livelihood strategies and nants of livelihood diversification among rural house- implication for poverty reduction in rural areas of holds in Kwara State, Nigeria. International Journal Central Nepal. Sustainability, 9(4): 612. of Advanced Agricultural Research, 5(2017): 82- Kumar D, Srivastava SK 2017. An analytical study of 88. livelihood diversification at farm households of dif- Banchirigah SM, Hilson G 2009. De-agrarianisation, ferent altitude of Kumaun Hills. Indian Research re-agrarianisation and local economic development: Journal of Genetics and Biotechnology, 9(1): 172- Re-orienting livelihoods in Africa artisanal mining 178. communities. Policy Science, 43: 157-180. Khatun D, Roy BC 2012. Rural livelihood diversifica- Barrett CB, Reardon T, Webb P 2001. Non-farm in- tion in West Bengal: Determinants and constraints. come diversification and household livelihood strat- Agricultural Economics Research Review, 25: 115- egies in rural Africa: Concepts, dynamics and policy 124. implications. Food Policy, 26(4): 315-331. Majekodunmi OA, Dongkum C, Langs T, Shaw MPA, Bernstein H 2004. “Changing before our very eyes”: Welburn CS 2017. Shifting livelihood strategies in Agrarian questions and the politics in land capital- northern Nigeria-extensified production and liveli- ism today. Journal of Agrarian Change, 1(2): 283- hood diversification amongst Fulani pastoralists. Pas- 324. toralism: Research, Policy and Practice, 7: 19. Bernard HR, Ryan GW 2010. Analyzing Qualitative Merriam S 2009. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Data: Systematic Approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Design and Implementation. Harare: African Insti- Sage. tute of Agrarian Studies. Chimhowu A, Hulme D 2006. Livelihood dynamics in Mathebula J, Molokomme M, Jonas S, Nhemachena C planned and spontaneous resettlement in Zimbabwe: 2017. Estimation of household income diversifica- Converging and vulnerable. World Development, tion in South Africa: A case study of three provinces. 34(4): 728-750. South African Journal of Science, 113(1/2): Article 68 NYATHI DOUGLAS, BEREMAURO REASON, TONDERAI TAKAVARASHA ET AL.
ID #2016-0073, 9 pages. Doi: 10.17159/ sajs.2017/ tion in southern Malawi. Energy for Sustainable 20160073. Development, 36: 22-36. Moyo S 2004. The Overall Impacts of the Fast Track Sultana N, Lu Q 2017. Household livelihood strategies Land Reform Programme. South Africa: AIAS Books, choice and the impact of livestock rearing on the pp. 1-7. sustainable rural livelihoods of indigenous people in Moyo S 2011. Three decades of agrarian reform in Zim- three selective districts of Bangladesh. Internation- babwe. Journal of Peasant Studies, 30(3): 493-531. al Research Journal of Social Sciences, 6(8): 9-22. Njaya T 2014. Transforming people’s livelihoods through Takane T, Gono H 2017. Smallholder livelihood diver- land reform in a1 resettlement areas in Goromonzi sification and income inequality in rural Malawi. district in Zimbabwe. IOSR Journal of Humanities Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS), 20(2): 91-99. 4(13): 40-53. Onunka CN, Olumba CC 2017. An analysis of the ef- Tombindo F, Chirau JT 2017. Livelihood diversifica- fect of livelihood diversification on the food securi- tion among riverbed famers: A case study of NyamiN- ty status of the rural farming households in Udi L.G.A yami District, Zimbabwe. Educor Multidisciplinary of Enugu State. International Journal of Agricultur- Journal, 1(1): 112-139. al Science and Research, 7(6): 389-398. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Rahman S, Akter S 2014. Determinants of livelihood 1996. Global Reports Hdr. From