FARMERS’ RESPONSE TO INSTITUTIONALIZED LAND CONSERVATION APPROACHES FOR IMPROVED AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY IN TANZANIA: THE CASE OF KILOSA AND KITETO DISTRICTS
Dr.BATIMO DONALD SEBYIGA
Abstract
The main objective of this study was to examine how farmers responded to different formalized land conservation approaches introduced by various institutions, and how their responses affected food crop productivity in the study area since the second half of the 1980s to the first half of 2000s. Both quantitative and qualitative approaches were adopted in the methodology of this study. The qualitative approach was characterized by an extensive use of Focus Group Discussions, direct observations and key informant interviews. Data was collected from 201 crop farming households and was analysed quantitatively and descriptively. Information was obtained from 120 people who attended at 10 Focus Group Discussions, 12 people from each of the10 study villages crosschecked and confirmed the information provided by interviewed households. Models of analysis used included the Logistic and Cobb­Douglas Production Function. Empirical maximum likelihood estimation of the factors influencing farmers’ adoption of the Agro­Forestry and Food Security Project (AFSP) and the Land Management Project (LAMP) recommended on­farm land conservation approaches (which included the technologies and governance laws and procedures) were derived using multinomial logistic analysis. Furthermore, the Cobb­Douglas Production Function model was used to confirm whether the factors which had significant influence on the probability of adoption had similar effects on crop productivity, especially of maize, in the study area.
Results from the study show that, both AFSP and LAMP introduced the land conservation approaches to farmers mainly through extension methods and farmer groups training, campaigns in meetings, and coercion through use of existing laws and village/district by­laws on land conservation and care.
Adoption rate of the formalized land conservation approaches by farmers was 32% and 29% in Kilosa and Kiteto districts, respectively. This result implies that only a few farmers adopted the land conservation approaches.
Based on the logit model of analysis, the study determined factors influencing farmers’ adoption of the formalized land conservation approaches in the study districts. These factors, district­wise, included the age of the household head, level of education of the head of the household, number of household members actively engaged in crop farming activity and the farm size cultivated and grown with crops in a year by a household in the case of Kilosa district. In the case of Kiteto district, the factors included the age of the head of the household, level of education of the head of household, household size and number of household members actively engaged in crop farming in a year. These results implied that effective farmers’ adoption of the land conservation approaches can only take place if there are endeavors by institutions of whether public or private to improve and or strengthen the determinant factors for formalized land conservation approaches in the districts.
Based on the linear regression analysis, the relationship between farmers’ adoption of the formalized land conservation approaches and food crop productivity per unit area, in the case of maize output per acre, showed a positive relationship. This result implies that where farmers adopted the recommended on­farm land conservation approaches; there was an increase in maize crop production per acre in all the study districts. Factors which determined the productivity of maize in the study districts included the age of the head of the household, household labor size actively engaged in maize production, number of farmers who adopted the formalized land conservation approaches, and the level of capital available in households used to purchase and or hire farm equipment, farm yard manure and pay for hired labor in the case of Kilosa district. In Kiteto district the factors were age of household head, household labor size actively engaged in maize production, total household income earned in a year, number of farmers who adopted the formalized land conservation in the district, and capital, that is cash income available in a household for purchasing and or hiring farm equipment, farm yard manure and pay for hired labour.
Furthermore results revealed that in Kilosa district, on average, maize output per acre increased to 9.6 bags of 100 kgs each in the year 2003/04 from 6 bags of 100 kgs each in 1999/2000, while in Kiteto district, average maize output per acre was 8.2 bags of 100kgs each in 2003/2004 from 6.1bags in 1999/2000. This results suggest that land conservation approaches recommended and promoted by land conservation programmes, designed for the purpose of improving soil fertility for increasing agricultural productivity, if are effectively implemented and adopted by farmers, food crop production per unit area will improve and that household food security can also be improved and consequently improve household incomes.
The study concluded that strategies to enhance more farmers to adopt the land conservation approaches must go hand in hand with enforcement of the laws for land conservation in the area. This is important due to the positive effects of smallholder farmers’ adoption of the land conservation approaches on crop (maize) productivity per unit area in the study districts. Along with the conclusions of the study, there are recommendations made from the study which mainly are on policy implications together with the future research areas to fill in the identified gaps of this research. The following were policy implications: Firstly, in both districts of Kilosa and Kiteto, respective land conservation programmes, namely LAMP and AFSP, recommended the physical and biological approaches (or technologies) to be used by farmers in their coverage areas. The recommended approaches (technologies) included tree planting in farms, farm boundaries and surrounding open spaces; making ridges; contour farming; use of farm yard manure; mulching; alley cropping; and terracing. These land conservation approaches (technologies) were introduced and disseminated to farmers mainly through extension and farmer groups training and campaigns in meetings. This implies that extension services are important in enabling farmers to engage into agricultural productivity improving technologies, and therefore, extension agents need to strengthen extension services to farmers for the purpose of improving farmers’ knowledge on sustainable crop production methods.
Secondly, there was low adoption by farmers of the formalized land conservation approaches in both land conservation programmes. To AFSP and LAMP, adoption rates were 32% and 29% respectively. Tree planting, farm yard manure and alley cropping in Kilosa district, and in Kiteto district, terracing, alley cropping and tree planting were adopted by 30% or more of farmers. This low adoption has been attributed by first, the weak supervision of the implementation of project activities by the village, ward and districts; and political interference in cases of land conservation to the extent of limiting enforcement of the by­laws and laws enacted for promoting land conservation to defaulters in the district. Policies to step up good governance are crucial to enhance the adoption of land conservation approaches by majority of smallholder farmers and thus increasing the rate of adoption. Thirdly, findings from the study indicate that there was a positive relationship between farmers’ adoption of formalized land conservation approaches and crop productivity. Farmers who adopted the approaches were the real farmers whose output of maize per acre increased. It is therefore, evident that, if development agencies want to reduce poverty among rural smallholder farmers it is important for them to design policies which are likely to enhance farmers’ adoption of land conservation approaches in the districts of study. Fourthly, governance and formal rules were the main institutions which were used to enforce and guide farmers to adopt and use the land conservation approaches recommended by AFSP and LAMP. However, due to problems and weaknesses inherent in these institutions and the general institutional framework, farmers’ adoption to the land conservation approaches was low in both districts. This implies that enabling policies be designed for the sole purpose of improving and strengthening the capacity of leaders at all levels in the districts in order to effectively supervise land conservation activities which consequently bears an effect of improving crop productivity and hence reducing poverty at household level.
Keywords: RESPONSE TO INSTITUTIONALIZED LAND CONSERVATION APPROACHES FOR IMPROVEDAGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY IN TANZANIA
Institute of Rural Development Planning 2008: