Sustainable Rural Development and Livelihood Sources of the Rural Households in Mountainous Pakistan (original) (raw)
Related papers
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.
Sustainable Livelihood Strategies Rural Household in Sanden District Bantul Regency
2020
People living in the countryside mostly have a profession as a farmer. Farming is one of the largest sources of income for rural households. In the district of Sanden, rural communities utilize a variety of land agroecosystems for agriculture. Utilization of various types of agricultural land agroecosystem is one of the household livelihood strategies. Livelihood strategies undertaken by rural communities aim to reduce poverty and improve household welfare. This research aims to (1) describe strategy of rural households to support the achievement of sustainable livelihoods (2) Knowing the inequality of farmers ' income distribution based on livelihood strategies used by rural households. The basic method used is a descriptive analytical method. The research site in Sanden district, Bantul regency was then taken by random farmer owners of 30 people as respondents. Rural household strategy to support sustainable livelihood achievement is calculated using descriptive statistics, an...
Socio-Economic Constraints Affecting Sustainable Rural Livelihood
Arts and Social Sciences Journal, 2017
The present study about "Constraints of rural livelihood with reference of services providers and rural female in Mansehra" was conducted with objectives to determine the constraints of rural livelihood and the role of services providers i.e. government and NGOs and the rural female in enhancing rural livelihood. A sample size 210 respondents out of 460 was selected through random sampling procedure. The study concluded that a highly significant association was found between rural livelihood and finance is the core problem for all categories of entrepreneurs in rural areas was found highly significant (p=0.000), poor health issues block sustainability of rural livelihood (p=0.000), prevalence of diseases in livestock and crops contribute income decline in rural areas (p=0.003), marketing problem is a major obstacle in rural economy production (p=0.003), land shortage affects rural economy (p=0.005) and rural livelihoods affect adversely by any kind of shock (p=0.007) while Illiteracy affects negatively sustainability of rural livelihood (p=0.014), conflict leads decline in rural livelihoods (p=0.021). In addition, highly significant relationship was found (p=0.000) between rural livelihood and through NGOs efforts people adopted ability for livelihood choices. Moreover, skill development training on male side contributed good results in enhancing livelihood (p=0.018), microfinance service of government/NGOs plays a pivotal role in the development of rural economy (p=0.031),through rural livelihood programs, the NGO is promoting livelihood and food security activities (p=0.025), protective interventions are considered vital to facilitating livelihood recovery (p=0.016) and between livelihood promotion through irrigation development and introducing of productive yield is a good step by the government (p=0.024) had significant relation with rural livelihood. Furthermore, significant relation was found between absence of basic livelihood assets for female makes unstable livelihood (p=0.003), kitchen gardening, poultry and livestock rearing are major livelihood activities of rural female (p=0.004), female make contribution to run livelihood system to contribute household expenses (p=0.029) and rural livelihood. In light of the study it was suggested to policy makers to provide assistance in term of material and capacity building i.e. easy credit system, agriculture, livestock, health, illiteracy interventions and NGOs and rural female participation in sustaining rural livelihood to minimize the risk of rural livelihood vulnerability.
Agrifood Economics and Sustainable Development in Contemporary Society
In the present day, when human beings have excessively exploited the natural resources, sustainable development has become a catchword for countries around the world. With respect to the rural scenario, diversion of watercourses and settled agriculture are deemed as tactical imperatives for sustainable livelihood. The present study focuses on a village, Hiware Bazar, situated in the Ahmednagar district of Maharashtra, India. The village is known for its livelihood status, which can be distinctly categorized into two phases, the period before 1991 and the period after 1991. In the first phase (before 1991), the village was marked by severe livelihood crisis owing to acute water scarcity. The second phase (after 1991) is known for livelihood improvement realized through community engagement and planned investment initiatives for watershed development and organic farming.
Livelihood Diversification: A Streatagy for Rural Income Enhancement
The aim of this study was to study the diversified income, its contribution and the effect of income of the households in Shangla district of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Data were collected from 323 households through face to face interviews with the help of a structured questionnaire. The empirical evidence shows that among the farm sources of livelihood the crop and livestock activities of the household were diversified and have been increased. The adoption of latest seed technologies of maize and wheat had increased the productivity and hence income of the farm households. The sample respondents had also diversified livestock activities. Average income from crop was Rs. 65,350 per annum per household based on total household. While its contribution to total income was 15.08%. Diversification was observed mainly in non-farm income sources. The overall non-farm income contribution to the total income after diversification was 69.40% and the average income was Rs. 300,811 per household per annum income. The contribution of total income from farm sources was decreased by 10.03% after the diversification of income. Agriculture to non- agriculture ratio decrease to 0.4408 after the diversification of income. Average income from the farm sources decreased while from non-farm sources increased. From all sources of income the change was Rs. 1,80,812 per annum per household. But the contribution of non-farm sources was more than the farm sources of income to the total household income. It was concluded from the findings that diversification had increased the household income. The area lack in development compared with other areas of the province. The study recommends further improvements in both the farm and non-farm sources of income for sustainable livelihood and this can be done by investing more in the productive capitals of the rural households.
AN ANALYSIS OF LIVELIHOOD SOURCES IN HILLY AREAS OF NORTHERN PAKISTAN
The aim of the present study was to analyze the sources of livelihood in rural areas of Northern Pakistan. Shangla were selected as sample district for the research. Information regarding income from different sources of livelihood was collected form the sample households from 323 respondents by random sampling techniques. Data were analyzed by using descriptive statistics and chi-square test at 50:50 percent. The findings show that main sources of livelihood were agriculture and its related activities and supplemented by off farm activities in the area. Among the farm households income from crops, livestock, forest, and rental land was important, while the non-farm households were dependent on small scale businesses, public/private sector services, to some extent on remittances, and working as daily wage laborers. The average income of the households was R.s: 252578 per annum. The contribution of the farm sector was 40.63%, while the rest of the income (59.37%) was from the off farm activities. Among the farm sources the lion share of income was contributed by growing of crops followed by income from livestock. In the income from off farm sources the people are relying on the public sector followed by small scale businesses. The ratio of agriculture to non agriculture sources was 0.684. The study concludes that off farm livelihood sources are more popular than the farm sources in the area showing that the natural resources available are under utilized. There is a need to properly exploit these resources through launching such development project that can enhance the agricultural productivity. Moreover the area under reference has a natural advantage of free/cheaper grazing facility so encouragement of dairy farming business can enhance the income of rural people and hence overall development of the area.
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 ...