Chapter 6
Analysis of livelihood strategies and outcomes for individual farm-power groups

This chapter continues the livelihoods analysis which commenced in Chapter 5, examining the livelihood strategies adopted by different farm power groups and the outcomes they achieve.

Association between source of farm power and farm-based livelihood strategies

Farm-based livelihood strategies are reflected in the area cultivated, the number of food- and cash-crops grown, the amount of land left fallow, and the interrelationships between different farm-power groups.

Area cultivated

The area cultivated per household is influenced strongly by the source of farm power used to till the land, coupled with the ability to mobilize labour for subsequent operations. This relationship transcends any relationship between area cultivated and the farming system. Households reliant on hand power typically cultivate 1 - 2 ha, while DAP hirers cultivate 2 ha, DAP owners 3 - 4 ha, tractor hirers about 8 ha, and tractor owners more than 20 ha (Table 12).

While the increase in the area cultivated between hand power and DAP households is modest, the difference between these households and tractor owners is substantial. Not only do the latter have access to more power for primary tillage, they also have financial resources to hire labour for planting, weeding and harvesting (or large families). In a few communities where there is severe pressure on land, such as Kokate Marachere and Kapchesombe, the areas cultivated are much smaller.

TABLE 12
Association between source of farm power and area cultivated per household by farming system

Source: Community estimates at field sites.

Most communities in the study noted that it is the ability to cultivate land rather than access to land that is a major constraint on production. Loss of access to a source of farm power, such as tractor hire services or draught animals, invariably results in a reduction in the area cultivated. One of the strategies used by hoe cultivators to overcome farm-power shortages is to rent out (or, in Ethiopia, to sharecrop) land that they are unable to cultivate to power-rich households. Another strategy adopted by some hoe cultivators is to reduce land preparation activities through reduced tillage (Box 9).

Commercialization of crop production

Another aspect of farm-based livelihood strategies is the degree of commercialization of crop production. Generally, as households switch from hand power to DAP and tractors, the number of cash crops grown increases (Table 13). Hoe cultivators grow food crops for household consumption and only sell small quantities in order to raise cash to meet their essential needs. Tractor owners not only produce significant quantities for the market but often grow a much wider range of cash crops. However, at Mvomero (United Republic of Tanzania), tractor owners have specialized rather than diversified, focusing on cash production of maize and rice, and forgoing sorghum and simsim.

The commercialization of cropping patterns not only reflects the impact of mechanization on increasing the area cultivated (thereby enabling some land to be devoted to cash-crop production) but also the wealth of the household (in terms of being able to afford to purchase inputs, such as improved seeds, and follow improved management practices). The process of commercialization is also influenced by market accessibility and the relative profitability of the various crops grown.

Fallow

The length of fallow is determined by the availability of land, ability to purchase inorganic fertilizer and sources of farm power. In Sanchitagi (Nigeria), where land is abundant, tractor hirers and tractor owners use longer fallow periods (four to five years) than hoe cultivators (two to three years) because it is relatively easy for them to open up land using a tractor. In Ojo (Nigeria), where land is scarce and farmholdings are much smaller, households abandoned fallow periods when it was possible to hire tractors and applied fertilizer to improve yields and replenish lost nutrients. However, with the demise of tractor-hire services, these households have reduced the areas they cultivate and reverted to using fallow for natural replenishment of the soil. In Lodjwa (Malawi), where the average holding is relatively small, DAP users cultivate a higher proportion of their land and have smaller areas under fallow than do hand-power households.

Interrelationships between farm-power groups

A mutual interdependence exists in many communities between the farm-power rich and the farm-power poor, and this interrelationship is essential for the livelihood outcomes of both. Hoe cultivators play a pivotal role in enabling tractor owners and hirers and, to a lesser extent, DAP owners realize the benefits of mechanizing land preparation (Figure 9). They rent out their land, which enables households using tractors, in particular, to significantly increase their area under cultivation. They also hire out their labour, which is vital for all operations following land preparation, none of which is mechanized. In return, hoe cultivators receive inputs that are essential for their survival: cash, food in hungry months, and even seeds on loan. Tractor owners may assist those hiring their tractors by enabling them to pay in kind after harvest rather than in cash at the time of ploughing. Similar arrangements exist between DAP owners and hoe cultivators. Thus, the presence of tractors or draught animals can have a multiplier effect on activities within a community, and their owners may act as social safety nets.

Nevertheless, these interrelationships may have some equity implications. Where the land rented out by poorer households is traditionally used by women to grow food crops for family use, not only do the women lose control over the crops but the food security of the household may also be compromised. Sharecropping arrangements, as practised in Ethiopia where half of the produce is shared with the oxen owner, may result in very small returns for households with no oxen.

Non-farm activities

Women are often involved in non-farm activities that are closely related to their household responsibilities, such as processing food, brewing beer, knitting and sewing, harvesting and selling wild fruits, as well as petty trading. Men engage in a wider range of activities, such as carpentry, brick making, blacksmithing, tailoring, trading, store keeping, charcoal burning, and harvesting and selling forest products. In communities adjacent to water bodies, men may also fish, and both women and men may trade in fish. Men and women from poorer households often work as casual labourers.

DAP owners often prefer to diversify their livelihood strategies into non-farm businesses, such as shop keeping or grinding mills, rather than move on to tractor ownership. Tractor owners often have a diverse livelihoods portfolio and do not depend on agriculture for their livelihood. Their non-farm activities tend to be more capital intensive than those of other farm-power groups.

TABLE 13
Association between source of farm power and number of different food and cash crops grown at household level, by farming system

Source: Community estimates at field sites.

TABLE 14
Association between source of farm power and household food security, by farming system

Association between source of farm power and farm-based livelihood outcomes

Food security

In agricultural communities, the most fundamental livelihood outcome is food security. This is unattainable for most households relying on hand power, particularly just before harvest (Table 14). Hoe cultivation imposes severe limitations on how much land these households can cultivate. Furthermore, the need to earn cash for survival draws them away from working on their own land at critical times of the farming season. Where they do grow enough to feed themselves, they are often obliged to sell a proportion of the crop to meet cash requirements for health and education, even when prices are not favourable. Access to small pockets of irrigated land for dry-season cultivation is a crucial survival strategy. The only hoe cultivators who describe themselves as food secure in normal years are found in the cereal - root farming systems of Ghana. Food security improves as households switch power sources, with tractor and DAP owners and tractors hirers generally being food secure.

Other outcomes

Households with stronger asset-based wealth and a range of livelihood strategies enjoy many other livelihood outcomes that are rated highly by the communities. These include the ability to send children to school, to afford modern medication, and to purchase farm inputs. The labour-intensive demands on hoe cultivators restrict their livelihood outcomes not only at the present but also for the future. Their children become trapped in subsistence agriculture with little opportunity to pursue their education, and with limited skills with which to seek alternative employment.

Conclusion

A household’s principal source of farm power for primary tillage is associated closely with key livelihood strategies and, thereby, with livelihood outcomes. An understanding of these relationships underpins the recommendations set out in Chapter 7 for enhancing the contribution of farm power to smallholder livelihoods.