Food Security Information Brief 12:
The 2006 livelihood survey conducted in Greater Sekhukhune
District Municipality explores, among other things, the role of
agricultural production at household level. Although agricultural
production is declining because of poor climatic conditions and
many constraints, including a lack of support, it offers a policy
option for grappling with food insecurity and improving the
livelihoods of people in Sekhukhune.
Agriculture production can play an important role in food
security – providing not only a more balanced diet but also a
supplementing income through the sale of produce. In the
livelihood survey conducted in 2004, although over 40% of
households in Sekhukhune indicated they grew their own
crops, this was largely for supplementary purposes. Major
constraints to agricultural production were a lack of inputs
such as seed, fertiliser, money and water. It can be argued,
therefore, that poverty and insufficient government support
means that people cannot afford to invest in agriculture. Other
constraints included a lack of extension services, information
and support from government.
In the 2006 livelihood survey a large number of the households
did not respond to the section on agricultural production
because they did not plant crops.
Land ownership, access and use seem to be falling
The arable land map shows that agricultural production is
possible across much of Sekhukhune in terms of soil quality
and the slope of land, if climatic conditions allowed and if
water and other inputs were available.
Access to land for the purpose of the survey means access to
a garden, small plot or field for cultivation or grazing land. The
percentage of households that have such access to land for the
whole of Sekhukhune is 26.1% - much lower than results from
April 2007
the 2004 study, when 34.7% of households had access to
land. In the 2004 study, 22.4% of households with access to
land used it for cultivation; 20.2% of households in the current
study do so, which is a marginal difference.
Poor access to water and markets is a constraint
Relatively few households have access to dams or river water
(7.3% and 12.9% respectively). Access to river water
increased by 8.7% from the 4.2% in the 2004 survey, while
use of dam water declined to 7.3% from 8.9%. This reflects
better rainfall in recent months and with the rivers filling with
water, residents do not have to rely as much on dam water.
A large percentage (92.2%) depends solely on rainwater for
their crops and/or livestock. This is a major source of
vulnerability with increasingly erratic rainfall in the area.
Access to a place to sell or buy produce is also limited (17.8%
and 17.3% respectively), although it increased from the 2004
study, when access was limited to 5.6% and 2.4%
respectively. Access to markets tends to be better when
communities are located near major road infrastructure.
Table 1: The percentage of households that have access to
water from a dam or river as well as those who have access to
a place to buy or sell their products.
% of all households
Fetakgomo
Elias Motsoaledi
Greater Marble Hall
Greater Tubatse
Makhuduthamaga
DISTRICT
Dam
2.5
7.6
12.7
2.9
10.2
7.3
River
23.2
2.6
17.2
13.8
17.3
12.9
Place to
sell
17.9
16.4
16.0
13.8
23.4
17.8
Place to
buy
20.7
13.6
18.1
14.8
21.9
17.3
This provides an opportunity for policy makers to implement
targeted interventions in providing greater access to markets
for small-scale producers, but only once other possible reasons
for people not producing crops have been explored.
Planting diminishes with lack of money and interest
The main reasons reported for not planting crops are a lack of
money (44.6%) and lack of interest (44.6%). In the 2004
survey only 1.7% of households cited lack of interest as a
reason. Lack of water was cited by only 11.1% of the
households, compared with 48.8% in the 2004 study.
Other apparent reasons include the forms of employment
available outside of agriculture, a history of crop failure; and
the high ratio of input or effort relative to the return of crops,
or the risk of no return at all. Grants in the form of money or
Director: Food Security Directorate
Tel: 012 319 6736
Email: [email protected]
www.nda.agric.za www.agis.agric.za
food could also discourage households
from planting food crops, as these are
more dependable sources of food. An
integrated approach that includes better
agricultural extension services, financial
support and social welfare should be
looked at for small-scale farmers.
Choice of crops is based on
viability
Only 20.2% of households surveyed
entered information regarding the type of
crop they planted. The main crops listed
in order of priority for 2006 are: maize,
56.4%; sorghum, 27.7%; vegetables,
12.9%; and sweet potatoes, potatoes
and beans, each 1.0%. Consumption of
planted crops increased by 48.6% for
fruit, 69.3% for maize, 69.7% for
vegetables and 96.8% for sorghum. This
is a reflection of the improved food
production and access resulting from
better climatic conditions in Sekhukhune
between 2004 and 2006.
Most households that plant crops do not
use fertiliser or pesticides (72.9% and
92.8% respectively). Natural compost is
used by 21.9%.
Fewer households own livestock
Only 16.0% own livestock, compared
with 54.5% in the 2004 survey. The
reason for this huge reduction is unclear
– intense drought in recent years could
have played a role. Other reasons for the
decline may be due to sales for
household cash requirements, disease,
death from starvation, slaughtering for
initiation ceremonies or funerals. This
needs to be interrogated further.
Livestock ownership varies from 4.3% in
Elias
Motsoaledi
to
26.6%
in
Makhuduthamaga. Of those who own
livestock, most own chickens (60%) and
goats (50%), while 25% own both.
Cattle are owned by 31.3%.
Trees provide shade, wood and
fruit
Only one in five households responded to
the question whether they have trees on
their properties or in the neighbourhood.
Of these respondents, 73.6% indicated
that they have trees, while 26.4%
indicated that they do not. Between 75%
and 79% of households have trees on
their properties or in the neighbourhood
for all the municipalities except Greater
Marble Hall, where only 56.3% of
households do.
Most households use trees for shade
(40%) and for fruit (32.5%) while 23.8%
use trees for wood and 3.8% do not use
the trees at all. The latter could represent
households that have a tree in the
neighbourhood but not at home. None of
the households use trees for crafts or to
collect worms, such as mopani, which
are an important food source in other
parts of Limpopo. Those that used trees
for fruit were largely situated in the Elias
Motsoaledi and Greater Marble Hall
municipalities, where large-scale citrus
plantations are situated. The usage of
trees should not be compared to those
who planted trees. Of all the households
who indicated that they use trees for
fruit, only one household had also planted
a tree.
Training and information could
be improved
Agricultural training was received by just
over
5%
of
the
household
in
Sekhukhune. Rather than rely on
extension
services,
people
keep
themselves informed through information
obtained in their neighbourhoods (59.2%)
and from friends (26.2%). Where 38.5%
of the households in Fetakgomo received
information from the Department of
Agriculture during the 2004 survey, none
of the households in Fetakgomo received
information from the department in this
survey. This appears to reflect the
declining interest and use of land for
agricultural production, combined with a
decline in agricultural support services in
Sekhukhune.
The Limpopo Department of Agriculture is
investigating the possibility of creating
agricultural hubs, where agriculture in
selected areas will be promoted, possibly
with training facilities included. Ideally
community
representatives
from
Sekhukhune should participate in such
initiatives when they are implemented.
Table 2 provides a comprehensive
summary and comparison of results from
the livelihood surveys conducted in 2004
and 2006.
Table 2: Comparison of results from the 2006 survey with results from the 2004 survey
Short description of question
Households that plant vegetables (Fetakgomo)
Households that own cattle as % of those who own livestock
Households that plant fruit trees
Agricultural training received (Fetakgomo)
Agricultural training received (Makhuduthamaga)
Training received from the Department of Agriculture
% of households that own livestock
Lack of water as the reason for not planting crops
Agricultural training received
Households that plant crops (including trees)
Access to commonage
Access to land
Percentage of households that have access to land and use the land for cultivation
Access to dam water
Access to river water
Access to a place to buy materials for farming
No money as the reason for not planting crops
Access to a place to sell produce
Households that plant maize
Use land that was allocated by a tribal authority
Not interested as the reason for not planting crops
Consumption of planted fruit
Consumption of planted maize
Consumption of planted vegetables
Consumption of planted sorghum
2004 results
100.00%
100.00%
69.50%
65.40%
66.10%
38.50%
54.40%
48.80%
36.00%
44.80%
17.60%
34.70%
22.40%
8.90%
4.20%
5.60%
31.40%
2.40%
38.40%
42.70%
1.70%
51.40%
24.90%
24.30%
0.00%
2006 results
16.70%
31.30%
4.00%
0.00%
2.50%
0.00%
16.00%
11.10%
5.70%
20.20%
0.00%
25.9%.
20.20%
7.30%
12.90%
17.80%
44.60%
17.30%
64.40%
83.50%
44.60%
100.00%
94.20%
94.00%
96.80%
Difference
-83.30%
-68.70%
-65.50%
-65.40%
-58.60%
-38.50%
-38.40%
-37.70%
-30.30%
-24.60%
-17.60%
-8.80%
-2.20%
-1.60%
8.70%
12.20%
13.20%
14.90%
26.00%
40.80%
42.95%
48.60%
69.30%
69.70%
96.80%