Livelihood Diversification: A Streatagy for Rural Income Enhancement (original) (raw)
Related papers
Sustainable Rural Development and Livelihood Sources of the Rural Households in Mountainous Pakistan
Livelihoods of the rural households in the developing regions are still dependent on farm and off-farm economic activities and this approach emerged from a range of efforts to understand that how the people survive in a particular area. Empirical research conducted on this subject give diverse results in this respect. The main purpose of the present study was to analyze the livelihood sources and the level of participation of the rural household in various economic activities and their contribution towards the households' income in northern parts of Pakistan. Primary data was collected through random sampling methods from 323 household's head. Findings of the study reveal that the rural people are engaged in multiple economic activities including both farm (crop, livestock, forestry, rent land, agriculture wages, hiring out farm machinery, fodder and sale of fruits and vegetables) and off-farm (small-scale businesses, services, foreign and domestic remittances, and off farm wages) for their survival. The lion share of contribution towards household's income from farm livelihood sources was the income from crops and livestock. In non-farm economic activities public/private sector employment was the major source of non-farm source of livelihood for the rural households in the research area. The average annual income per household from crops was Rs. 65,340, followed by income from forests and livestock respectively. On average, households were earning Rs. 4,33,390 per annum from these sources. The study concludes that the farm sources of income contribute more to the livelihood of the rural people than the non-farm sources of income and hence having play crucial role in the reduction of poverty. The study recommends preservation and a sustainable use of the farm resources so that to overcome the problems faced by the future generation and the creation of more nonfarm activities for sustainable livelihood. Keywords: livelihoods, farm and non-farm income, sources of income and rural areas
Agricultural Economics Research Review, 2017
This paper has examined the question 'Can diversification of livelihood sources increase the income of farmers?' through a case study conducted on 151 farm households in the districts of Moradabad and Aligarh in Uttar Pradesh in the first quarter of 2017. The study has considered three sources of income, viz. crops, animal husbandry and non-farm sector. The analytical tools used in the study are Simpson index of diversification, chi-square test and censored Tobit regression model. The study has observed a significant difference between the incomes of diversified and undiversified farm households. The determinants of income sources of farm households identified in the study are age, education level, use of ICT, access to credit, input supply and market. The study has suggested that to increase farmers' income, policies should focus on the development of livestock sector to motivate them for rearing of animals for commercial purposes. Also, the delivery of formal and informal education and extension services should be strengthened to enable the farmers to utilize their full capacity and consequently earn more. Information centres should be opened at the block level to provide information on less time-consuming farming techniques, marketing and opportunities in the non-farm sector.
Livelihood Assets and Outcomes of Rural Farm Households in Central Khyber Pakhtunkhwa of Pakistan
Journal of Applied Economics and Business Studies, 2021
This study explores the factors of livelihood assets possessed by small farm households in Central Khyber Pakhtunkhwa of Pakistan that determines the livelihood outcomes using sustainable livelihood framework. Primary data were collected from 349 small farm households using well-structured pre-tested questionnaire having both closed and open-ended questions. The study first measured the livelihood assets worth through composite indices followed by the factors that influencing the livelihood outcomes using multiple regression model. The overall value of livelihood assets of small farm households in the study area was 0.297. The area small farmers were lacked in livelihood assets along with low level of living standards as well as economic development in the area. The empirical findings of regression model revealed that all the five capitals of livelihood asset had significant positive effect on livelihood outcomes. Additionally, household active labour and education of labor earners ...
Timisoara Journal of Economics and Business, 2016
The agricultural sector in Pakistan is not well-established to provide full employment opportunities and sufficient income for needed living standard to the rural population. Stagnant agricultural productivity and low returns in farming have led rural residents to look for alternative livelihoods, especially non-farm employment. With this background, the present study is an endeavor to empirically determine the factors of non-farm income diversification of rural farm households in Peshawar district of Pakistan. The study was undertaken in four villages and data was amassed from 196 small farming households by using the multi-stage sampling technique. The data were analyzed using the descriptive statistical measures, the mean of income shares approach and the ordinary least squares regression analysis. The results indicate that in all the selected villages, the pattern of non-farm employment was more or less the same; however, the income from non-farm employment activities had an important contribution towards incrementing the absolute income of farm households. Non-farm income diversification is hence crucial for sustaining livelihoods and an integral dimension for invigorating rural economies. Therefore, the study recommends the promotion of non-farm employment as a good strategy for supplementing the income of small farmers without shifting attention from agriculture. Keywords: Income diversification, Farm income, Non-farm income, Peshawar district, Pakistan.
Baseline survey for farmer livelihood improvement at farming system research and development.pdf
International Journal of Business, Management and Social Research, 2015
A base line survey was undertaken to know the existing farming practices of the farmers of Lahirirhat area of Rangpur. Survey covered crop, livestock, fish, homestead, agro forestry systems with data pertaining to 50 farmers from two villages of Chandonpat union. Data refer to the input output details and other socio-economic characteristics of farm households in the crop year 2011-2012. Random sampling technique has been used for collecting data. The result of the baseline survey showed that out of 50 sample farmers; landless (less than 0.02 ha), marginal (0.021–0.2 ha), small (0.21–1 ha), medium (1–3 ha) and large (>3 ha) farmer numbers were 4, 9, 28, 8 and 1, respectively. Four types of major farming systems exist in the Farming System Research and Development (FSRD) site of BARI. Among the four farming systems, the highest number of farmer were under Crop+Livestock+Poultry system followed by Crop+Livestock+Poultry+Fisheries, Crop+Poultry and Crop+Livestock+ Poultry+Agroforestry. Average farm size was the highest under Crop+Livestock+Poultry+Fisheries+Agroforestry system and lowest under Crop+Poultry farming systems. About 87 percent of lands were used under high yielding variety crop whereas only 13 percent land use under local variety. There were 7 major cropping patterns are observed in the site. The main cropping pattern was Boro–Fallow–T. Aman rice followed by Potato–Maize–T. Aman, Potato–Jute–T. Aman, year round vegetable, Potato–Boro rice–T. Aman, Banana and sugarcane. Out of seven cropping patterns, net returns was the highest in banana cultivation (Tk. 159,767 ha-1) followed by Vegetables–Vegetables–Vegetables (Tk. 117,996 ha-1), Potato–Jute–T. Aman (Tk.115,590 ha-1), Potato–Maize–T. Aman (Tk. 10,610 ha-1), Potato–Boro–T. Aman (102,898 ha-1), Sugarcane (Tk 59,036 ha-1) and Boro-Fallow-T. Aman rice (Tk. 31,352 ha-1). Average per farm total net return were from livestock Tk.12,132 and from poultry Tk. 392 for the year 2011–2012. Out of 50 sample farmers, 10 farmers culture fishes in the Farming System Research and Development site. On an average, per farm total gross margin was Tk. 2680 containing telapia Tk. 620, carps Tk.600 and other fish Tk.1460. Income was categorized by crop, livestock, fisheries, poultry, homestead, agro forestry, off farm and non-farm system. In case of landless and marginal farm, non-farm income was higher compared to farm income. Contrary, in case of small, medium and large farm, farm income was higher compared to non-farm income. Farming constraints that were identified include lack of knowledge about new crop variety and technology was the main problems of the farmer followed by high price of inputs, lack of knowledge about fish feed and pond management, lack of quality seeds/fingerlings/duck links, lack of credit facility, lack of knowledge about homestead vegetables production, lack of knowledge about vaccination, deworming, feed of livestock and poultry, insect/pests/weeds and lack of money for buying inputs.
Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2020
the research work was undertaken in four villages near Ranchi, Jharkhand under the Farmer FIRSt Project to test the effectiveness of the technological options in improving the profitability of peri-urban agriculture system. Based on Principal Component Analysis of data on agri-economic conditions of farmers, the farm households could be classified into five broad typologies, viz. 1: Marginal farmers and landless labourers, 2: Cereal dominated small farmers, 3: IFS based small farmers, 4: livestock based marginal farmers and 5: Cereal based medium farmers. Results of two years of experimentation indicated promising technological options like rainy season cultivation of solanaceous vegetables, cultivation of crops like wheat, chickpea and other rabi and summer season vegetables in rice fallow, management of ecto-and endo parasite in the animals and supplementation of area specific mineral mixture, cultivation of oyster mushroom for increasing income from agricultural production system. the project has resulted in increase in income of all typologies of farmers with a maximum increase in case of small farmers practising integrated farming and minimum increase in case of marginal farmers and landless labourers. notably, income from non-farm sources saw a decrease in all five typologies.
This review was carried out on appraisal of rural household in livelihood diversification strategies and livelihood outcome in Ethiopia. The target is specifically to review the impact of income diversification on livelihood outcome situation, to review determinant participation of rural household in off/non-farm diversification, and to review the determinants level of income generated from the activities in Ethiopia. In Ethiopia, Agriculture is the main livelihood of most population in the countries and it contributes 79% of foreign earnings, employs some 79% of the population and 34.1% to the GDP and is the major sources of raw material and capital for investment and market. Despite it's the main contribution for the event of country's economy, the prevailing capacity of agriculture to achieve food and livelihood security is tremendously declining from time to time due to diverse challenges and risks. As a result, majority of the population is multidimensional poor, affected by some combination of food insecurity, insufficient access to adequate education and health services and inadequate employment opportunities. With this reason Ethiopia faces high levels of food insecurity and ranking joined of the hungriest countries within world even if the Global Hunger Index (GHI) score has declined from 55.9 in 2000 to 29.1 in 2018. As reading from different literature, income diversification is coined for these situations to handle all the interrelated problems associated to economy of rural household. As a result, a numbers of rural household participate in off/non-farm activities additionally to on-farm have gradually customized as coping mechanism and to boost their livelihood. Therefore, policy makers should give due emphasis to the aforementioned variables within the empirical review that determine participation of rural household in income diversification activities so as to improve the livelihood of smallholder farmers.
Sustainability
Many farmers worldwide resort to choosing various income-earning options for diversifying their income sources as a means of risk-avoidance, social protection, and, above all, to finance agricultural operations. Non-farm income generation among farm families has become an imperative part of livelihood earning strategies in recent years amid fast-evolving climatic and sociodemographic changes. In this regard, this study seeks to identify the patterns and socioeconomic factors responsible for the uptake of various non-farm income diversification sources among agricultural households in southern Punjab, Pakistan. For this purpose, a total of 290 farm households were sampled using a random sampling technique to collect relevant data through structured questionnaires. Results show that approximately 79% of the surveyed farmers were involved in non-farm income generation activities, whereas, the income from these sources accounts for about 15% of total household income. The majority of th...
2014
Progress of diversification of Indian agriculture for assured higher income and employment through dispersal of risks of excessive concentration on vegetable cropping pattern, labour used and income from different farm enterprises were collected through personal interview with the respondents during the agricultural year 2008-2009. Total 50 number of households were observed for the study. Average size of holding was 1.80 ha. and 88.50 per cent area was under irrigation. It is good shine for vegetable crops that was grown by farmers. Through diversification general cropping intensity was found 272.87 per cent. It is enough for increasing the income and employment. Under study observed average returns from cereal crops was Rs. 4836.72 and Rs. 9669.27 from vegetable crops per ha. Here is the effect of diversification of crops. Out of total income from agriculture nearly 55.38 per cent came from vegetable crops and 44.62 per cent come from cereals crops. Over all income came from agric...
Rural Livelihoods: Interplay Between Farm Activities, Non-Farm Activities and the Resource Base
Despite ongoing urbanization, over 70% of the world’s poor are located in rural areas (IFAD 2001). Agriculture plays an important part in their livelihoods. Rural households play a central role in realizing policy objectives. Production decisions at farm household level determine the current availability of agricultural produce (food security objectives; Roetter and Van Keulen 2007), as well as future production potentials (sustainability objectives; Verhagen et al. 2007). The majority of the poor are furthermore located in the rural areas of developing countries. Rural households are, thus, also key to poverty reduction policies. Farm households, however, do not live of farming alone. Parallel to the developments in agricultural science, the view on rural households has changed in the past decades. Analyses of single production systems have given way to a view on rural households as diversified enterprises. Rural household enterprises are not limited to the agricultural sector. Non-farm activities play an important role in income of these households all across the world, even in regions commonly thought of as subsistenceoriented, such as Sub-Saharan Africa. In a rare worldwide comparison of the importance of non-farm income in developing countries, Africa ranked first with 42% of total rural income, followed by Latin America (40%) and Asia (32%) (Reardon et al. 1998). Rural areas play a prime role in two of the Millennium Development Goals: reducing poverty and hunger and ensuring environmental sustainability. The omnipresence of non-farm income in rural areas implies that any policy aimed at realizing these two Millennium Goals needs to look beyond households’ agricultural activities. Non-farm activities play a prime role, directly by contributing significantly to household income and indirectly by shaping agricultural activities with implications for sustainability. However, the effect can be positive or negative. Pressure on natural resources may be reduced when households have alternative sources of income (Bahamondes 2003). Non-farm income may also (partially) be invested in sustainable agricultural practices. Soil nutrient mining is a key issue in the African context (see Verhagen et al. 2007). Inorganic fertilizers are an important source of nutrients. These fertilizers require cash which may be generated by non-farm activities. Nonfarm activities would then contribute to sustainability. In the Asian context, excessive use of pesticides and herbicides is a prime concern (see Verhagen et al. 2007). Farm households that are engaged in non-farm activities could replace hand weeding by herbicides. In that situation, non-farm activities would threaten the sustainability of agricultural practices.