Information on ecology, population, and social and political organization in Luapula Province was collected from secondary sources prior to and during the stay of the team in the Province. Publications of the Adaptive Research Planning Team (ARPT) provided information about the various farming systems. The results of the socio-economic survey of fish farmers in Luapula (ALCOM Field Document No. 9) give an overview of fish farming in the province.
Key persons in Government departments, institutions and development agencies complemented the information gathered. Missionaries, priests and individuals with long experience in Luapula were interviewed on topics such as religion and cultural and socio-economic changes that have taken place in the last decennia.
The information from secondary sources and key persons was supplemented with observations and data gathered during field visits.
In total, 34 individual fish farmers, three schools and one training institute with ponds, one fish farming project for handicapped people, two farmers without fish ponds and several fishermen and fisherwomen were interviewed. Also, three group interviews were conducted with farmers owning fish ponds, one with women, and one with men interested in fish farming.
The following types of information were collected:
households' resources (land, labour, capital, technology and knowledge);
political and economic data
socio-economic data
production systems.
The field visits were carried out in the following districts:-
| Mansa District | : | 13 interviews in 9 villages |
| Kawambwa District | : | 22 interviews in 13 villages |
| Samfya District | : | 13 interviews in 12 villages |
| Mwense District | : | 1 interview |
Nchelenge District was not visited since it has no fish farmers known to DoF. Mwense District has only a small number of practising fish farmers concentrated on the plateau area. Their farming system is the same as on the Kawambwa plateau.
Since ALCOM had already conducted fish farmer surveys in 1988, it was decided not to approach respondents with a formal questionnaire. The interviews were intended to provide additional first-hand observations and impressions. It was not meant as a statistically reliable baseline survey of Luapula fish farmers. The interviews were semi-structured, with questions about the farm, the household and the ponds. The length and the nature of each interview were determined by the interest and openness of the persons interviewed. If a certain topic provoked a lively discussion, the interview dwelt on that topic even if it meant not raising some other topics. Thus, “completeness” of data was sometimes sacrificed. Besides being incomplete in terms of specific data collected from all interviews, the method has the following limitations :
Persons interviewed were mostly fish pond owners. This may be a special group who are more inclined to take up new activities. Their farming practices and resources may not be typical of farmers in the area;
Interpretation was done mainly by male staff members of the Department of Fisheries;
The overwhelming majority of fish farmers are men and thus more men than women were interviewed. The role women play in Luapula farming activities is not reflected in the information gathered. Example: When men describe the division of labour in the household, it can be expected that the information is male-biased;
Data on quantities of materials used as fish pond inputs, the size of the harvest and the exact date of certain activities were difficult to obtain since weighing and recording was not done. Consequently, the information on these aspects is mainly qualitative.
