Only a summary of those factors which differ significantly between the two areas or between adopters and non-adopters are discussed here. The variables which are the same are given in Appendix 1 and 2. Detailed data are given in Appendix 5 and 6.
The communities in Rukuzye Area wanted to construct fish ponds at the shore of the two dams in the area. During the rainy season the pond would fill with the rising water from the dam and would therefore be seasonal. The land belongs to the villages. Instead of allocating it to individuals, the different headmen proposed to construct village ponds.
In Magwero Area ponds were built in a valley with clay soil and a high water table. Households do have individual user rights on these plots.
The cultivation of cash crops places high demands on the labour in Rukuzye Area. After harvesting and cashing of the cheques of the Marketing Board, people travel to visit friends and relatives.
In Magwero Area, where possibilities for cash crop farming are less than in Rukuzye, farmers tend to diversify their activities to meet their needs. They spend more time working as day or seasonal labourers and on other (non-agricultural) income earning activities. The labour demand is thus more evenly spread throughout the year. As a consequence, people do not have as much time for travelling as in Rukuzye.
Earnings from farming are on average 70% higher in Rukuzye Area, which means that they have more capital at their disposal.
The availability of agricultural byproducts and manure which could be used as inputs for composting and feeding of fish, is less in Magwero than in Rukuzye. Although in the dry season the quantity is such that no problems for feeding and fertilizing are anticipated, in the rainy season, only small amounts are available.
The majority of the inhabitants of Rukuzye Area belong to patrilineal3 tribes, whereas in Magwero Area most people are matrilineal4. The matrilineal system is in transition and many now inherit land via the male line.
The majority of the villages in Rukuzye Area are composed of extended families. In Magwero Area there is a higher influx of outsiders and people tend to leave the area to look for employment. There is thus a more mixed composition of the villages in Magwero Area than in Rukuzye.
Almost 70% of the respondents in Rukuzye Area belongs to the African National Church. There is high social control amongst the members to attend funerals which takes an important part of their time. They often organize social activities for church members. This creates a sense of solidarity. In Magwero, church membership is more diverse. Most of the people belong to Christian churches which are believed to focus more on individual achievement and self-discipline than those belonging to the African National Church.
The comparatively more homogeneous villages in Rukuzye and the sense of solidarity between the members of the African National Church, indicates that the social system in Rukuzye is more close-knit than in Magwero. Moreover, many of the farmers in Rukuzye obtain group loans for farming. There is high control between the members to make loan repayments. Therefore, the normative pressure on community members in Rukuzye is high, which results in a higher degree of consensus than in those communities where the structure is more loose-knit, like in Magwero.
In Magwero area, a school teacher who started fish farming in 1981 has become an opinion leader. He had been envied for having fish by the surrounding communities. After the pilot project's introduction, people started discussing certain issues of fish farming with him, while before they were only observing his ponds. The first farmer who constructed individual ponds is also often solicited for advice.
3 Patrilineal: descent through the male line
4 Matrilineal: descent through the female line
During the rainy season, fish consumption in Rukuzye is more than four times as high as in Magwero. During the dry season, it is almost twice as high. Over 60% of the respondents in Rukuzye mentioned that these fish are caught in the dams. In Magwero Area most of the fish (dried) is purchased from Malawian traders.
The felt need for animal protein is less in Rukuzye. Besides, the distribution of the perceived supply of animal protein throughout the year differs for the two areas. In Rukuzye, the perceived supply of animal protein is lowest in October, just before the start of the rains and increases during the rainy season. From May, the beginning of the dry season, it decreases again. In Magwero, the perceived supply of animal protein is lower in the rainy season than in the dry season.
The fact that cash needs are easier to meet in Rukuzye than in Magwero Area is reflected in how respondents would use the fish in case they had a pond. 76% of the respondents in Rukuzye give priority to fish for home consumption while in Magwero 74% answered that they would sell the fish.
The perceived newness of fish farming is less in Magwero Area where, as mentioned above, a teacher already had three ponds. Besides, the primary school has four ponds which have been more or less operational since 1976. In Rukuzye, school ponds were built in 1977 – 1979 and abandoned in 1980.
In Magwero, where several ponds have been completed, people saw fish farming as an arduous job. They listed easier and cheaper alternatives to obtain animal protein and easier ways to obtain cash.
The perceived risks of fish farming differ considerably in the two areas. In Magwero, the majority of the respondents saw predation by birds and otters as the main problem. In Rukuzye, theft and poisoning of fish were considered a big risk.
Although people in Magwero were more familiar with fish farming, it has not resulted in a better knowledge.
Expectations concerning the yield of a fish pond were far higher in Rukuzye than in Magwero.
Fish farmers differ from non-adopters in that they are all men, and relatively young with one exception. All were under 50 years old at the time of adoption. The exception is an older man with adult sons staying with him.
The size of the households is the same for both categories.
Fish farming is not limited to a certain social category within the population.
Non-adopters concentrate more on agriculture and animal husbandry than adopters. Consequently, the income derived from farming is higher for the first category.
To supplement their household budget, adopters optimize their labour resource through diversifying their income generating activities.
Because the farming activities of the non-adopters are more important compared with those of the adopters, fish farmers have less agricultural byproducts which could be used for composting and feeding. They keep less animals so that they also have less manure at their disposal.
Adopters had a better knowledge of fish farming than non-adopters. They also had a more realistic picture of the yield of a pond. However, a certain degree of uncertainty concerning the results of fish farming still exists for the adopters at the implementation stage.
Although there is no difference in fish consumption between adopters and non-adopters, the last category feels a higher lack of animal protein. The explaining factor was found to be the age of the respondents. It is common knowledge in villages that older people think they should eat more meat or fish than younger ones.
A drudgery index was developed in order to compare the perception of tediousness of fish farming by adopters and non-adopters. The farmers who have constructed a pond scored highest, which means that they find fish farming a wearisome way of obtaining animal protein as well as money.
When interviewing the elders, they stated that many people believe in seeing the results first before they consider adopting an innovation. The perceived risks decrease if peers have already tried it. However, data suggest that those respondents who had only seen ponds did not adopt fish farming.
On the other hand, there are indications that foreknowledge on the existence of fish farming had a positive effect on the adoption decision.
