The consultant visited Zambia from 25 August to 16 September 1987. He divided his time between the Lusaka office of the Programme, and field testing of questionnaires from the Programme's office in the Eastern Province. A list of main persons met is given in Appendix 2.
During the initial stay in Lusaka the consultant agreed with the Programme Manager that the survey, when finalized, should serve:
to identify the current situation and outlook of rural fish culture;
to study the significance of factors thought to determine the involvement of rural populations in fish-farming (“Fish-Farmer I”), and;
to study the nature and effect of some aspects of public support for fish-farmers in rural communities (“Fish-Farmer II”).
The first part (Current Situation and Outlook) was intended to give a feed-back to the Directorate of Fisheries as soon as a full-scale survey had been completed. It was agreed to design this survey such that it would provide information on the existing situation (last harvest and problems if any) and the outlook (expected production from the current culture period and possibilities for expansion). While the survey would identify problem areas, this would facilitate use of the Directorate's resources in solving problems of rural areas.
Parts (ii) and (iii) of the survey concern the “Fish-Farmer”: one part is designed to identify the main factors responsible for the fish-farmer's decisions relating to the fish-farm, and the second aims ultimately at revealing the most effective manner for government to support the rural farmer.
In order to develop the format and procedures for this survey it was agreed to carry out a test survey as planned in the Eastern Province under the consultant's guidance.
As there are relatively few fish-farmers in the Eastern Province, it was thought that the test survey, for logistical reasons, would not be likely to cover more than 20 farmers. Therefore, the test survey would not be extensive enough to finalize the questionnaires. It was thus agreed that the Chipata exercise would be a test survey and would be followed by a full-scale pilot survey in the Northern Province. Once that was completed it would be possible to finalize the social and economic survey of fish farmers in rural communities.
It was agreed that the test survey would serve to:
identify weaknesses (ambiguities, etc.) in the design of questionnaires;
identify questions to which it is difficult to obtain adequate/reasonable/trustworthy replies, and;
define the survey methodology to be employed during the pilot survey (composition of interview teams, sequence of questions; sampling procedures, etc.).
The Programme's desk studies identify a large number of factors which can have a direct influence on the behaviour of fish-farmers. These factors are listed in Appendix 3. The list is so long that it would have been far too time-consuming to cover all the subjects (see, for example, “Description of community in which the target group belongs”, “Patterns of settlement and mobility”). On the other hand, the danger of eliminating factors before they have been tested is recognized by the consultant. He attempted to solve this problem by drawing up the questionnaire on the basic premise that the best person to ask about the characteristics of the fish-farmer, is the fish-farmer himself. The questionnaires are structured so as to obtain from the fish-farmer information about his considerations when taking major decisions about his fish-farm. A review of the questions will show that while these are dominated by economically oriented considerations, an interview when completed should have informed the interviewer about any cultural or political restraints which the fish-farmer faces or faced in his fish-farming activity. Also, the interview will yield basic information permitting to categorize the individual socially, culturally and politically. At a later stage in the analysis these data can be complemented, from other government agencies, universities or non-governmental organizations with more detailed information on cultual particularities (kinship systems, available sanctions, ritual activities, etc.) to the extent found essential or interesting.
It is imperative, given the Programme's objectives, that the Fish-Farmer survey be carried out in several of the countries which participate in the Programme. Unless this is done, few generally valid conclusions will emerge. However, this means also that the questions must be so designed that any bias on the part of interviewers be reduced to a minimum. The questions are, as a result, often of the “yes” / “no” type, or offer categories of replies to mark. Information recorded in this way facilitates subsequent analysis by computer.
It seemed appropriate, as a first attempt, to place aquaculturists - for subsequent comparative studies - into the following groups:
practising fish-farmers;
former fish-farmers;
potential fish-farmers.
It was decided to complete questionnaires for these three groups.
Thus the first few days in Chipata were spent drafting a questionnaire. Mr Boyd Haight edited the consultant's draft, gave it an operational format and entered it into his micro-computer to facilitate later revisions. This proved very fortunate and without Mr Haight's effort the assignment would not have been completed in the time foreseen.
While preparing the questionnaires for that part of the survey designed to give information on the nature and effectiveness of public support to fish-farmers (Fish Farmer II), it was agreed that it would be better to severely limit this part of the survey until it had been endorsed by the Director of Fisheries. Those questions which were excluded are given in Appendix 7.
The questionnaires were tested in four days of interviews with 14 fish-farmers (6 in Chipata District and 8 in Petauke District). Five of the interviews were held in English, 9 in Nyanja. Interviews were carried out by Messrs Haight, van der Mheen, Aase, Mutale (ARAC trainee 1), Sinyama and Zulu, Ms Van Der Mheen and by the consultant. Mr Mutale, who proved most competent, carried out 7 of the interviews. Finally the questionnaires were revised, drawing on the experience of those who had participated in the test survey.
1 ARAC - African Regional Aquaculture Centre
