ANALYSIS OF THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT AND

SUSTAINABILITY OF LIVELIHOOD DIVERSITY STRATEGIES OF RURAL

WOMEN IN ZING LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE,

NIGERIA

* Vosanka, I.P; * Tari, B; *Musa, H.Y and **Hammangabdo, J.J

* Department of Agricultural Extension and Management, Taraba State

College of Agriculture, Jalingo

* Department of Agricultural and Natural Resources, Zing Local

Government, Taraba State

Abstract

The objectives of the study include describing the socio-economic characteristics of the respondents in the study area, to identify the major livelihood diversity strategies of the respondents, to ascertain the socio-economic characteristics influencing the livelihood strategies of the respondents and to assess the perception of the impact of the livelihood strategies on the respondents. Data were collected with the aid of interview schedule from 120 respondents drawn through multi-stage random sampling technique. The data collected were analyzed using frequency, percentage, mean, rank order and person correlation (r) . (SPSS version 15). The findings of the study revealed that the rural Women in the study area were involved in the following important livelihood diversity strategies: firewood, kunu, cooked vegetables and groundnut oil processing. The correlation result showed significant relationship between the socio-economic characteristics such as age (r = 0.20), annual income (r = 0.25) and access to credit (r = 0.192) and the livelihood activities of the respondents at 5% 1% and 5% level of significance respectively. The respondents disagreed in their perceptions that the livelihood strategies had inpact on their living standard and well being. It was recommended that capacity building and empowerment of Women in rural areas could significantly enhance the livelihood activities of the rural women for sustainability.

Key words: Socio-economic, impact sustainability and livelihood diversity strategies,

rural women.

Introduction

It is very certain that in African countries women play a significant role in

the well being of a family and in the overall economic development of a nation.

According to Kwaghe (1999) a large proportion of the rural traders in West Africa

are women. They are involved in the trading of mainly food items and other

household items in the rural open market or in confined compounds, depending on

their religious and socio-cultural beliefs. Kwaghe (1999) further observed that

1

women process and market the crops as well as engage in range of small and off

farm enterprises earning vital income for their families. They participate in home

based businesses such as carving, weaving, knitting, sewing, etc. Thus, they are

farmers as well as wage workers.

According to Matthew-Njoku and Adesope (2007) the increasing pressure

on the income and assets of rural farm families have forced them to diversify into

non-agricultural activities as a way of improving livelihood. Ugboh (2006) also

stressed that women in Nigeria are involved in almost all phases of food

production such as cassava, maize and vegetable crop production. They have also

undertaken the rearing of small farm animals and execution of certain farm

operations. It is then evident that women involved in both agricultural and non-

agricultural activities as a sure means of generating income for sustainable

livelihood of the household.

What is sustainable livelihood?

The term sustainable livelihood was first used as a development concept in

the early 1990s. Chambers and Conway (1991) defined sustainable livelihood as

follows: a livelihood comprises peoples’ capabilities and their means of living,

including food, income and assets. A livelihood is environmentally sustainable

when it maintains or enhanced the local and global assets in which livelihood

depends and has net beneficial effect on other livelihoods. A livelihood is socially

sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stress and shock and provides

for future generation.

Sustainable livelihood approaches or strategies are centered on people and

their livelihood. They prioritize people’s assets ( Tangible and intangible), their

ability to withstand shocks ( the vulnerability context) and policies and institutions

that reflect poor people’s priorities, rather than those of the elite. Also, the concept

sustainable has been used by many scholars, more especially on development

issues. According to the Cambridge English Dictionary, to sustain means to bear,

to maintain or to support the life of. (Undiandeye et al., 1999). Uyanga (2005)

2

stated that sustainable development requires meeting the basic needs of all and

extending to all opportunity to satisfy their aspirations for a better life.

On the other hand, a livelihood is defined by chambers (1988) as adequate

stocks and flows of food and cash to meet basics needs. Livelihoods are secure

when households have secure ownership of or access to resources and income-

earning activities, including reserves and assets to offsets risks, ease shocks and

meet contingencies (Chambers, 1988).

For a livelihood to be sustainable it must have some of the following

features:

It must raise the standard of living of the people and must be

economically viable.

It must result in the reduction of human suffering or alleviating human

sufferings;

The livelihood strategy must be technically feasible, economically

viable, ecologically adaptable, socially acceptable and culturally

compatible (Undiandeye et a.l, 1999).

Livelihood Diversity Strategies of Rural Women

Women have been reported to be involved in various income generating

activities in order to sustain themselves and the family. Ogunbameru (2006) found

that women were involved in agricultural activities such as food processing,

marketing, milking of cow and keeping of poultry in order to combat poverty, as

source of income for home consumption, and recreation or hobby. Winters (2001)

reported that rural households obtain additional income from migrant remittances,

agricultural wage employment and by a range of agricultural activities including

livestock and crop production. On their part Matthews-Njoku and Adesope

reported the livelihood diversity strategies of rural women involved in to include

petty trading, tailoring, thrift savings, farming, cooking at occasions and hair

plaiting. The evidence from these studies suggest that not only is the rural sector

3

fairly diversified across activities, but also that households and individuals

especially women use a range of activities as part of their survival strategies.

Although empirical, studies on livelihood diversity strategies have been

reported elsewhere; little or no empirical studies on the livelihood diversity

strategies of rural women in Zing Local Government Area have been conducted

and/ or reported. A study of the livelihood diversity strategies of the rural women

could help to understand their major sources of income with a view to supporting

them raise and improve their standard of living in the many rural communities.

Equally, a study of the Women’s perception will help to empower them and to

have confidence and trust in their livelihood in the rural areas which can reduce

the incidence of rural urban migration in the country.

The objectives of the study:

The broad objective of this study is to analyze the socio-economic impact

and sustainability of livelihood diversity strategies of rural women in Zing Local

Government Area of Taraba State, Nigeria, while the specific objectives are to:

1. describe the socio-economic characteristics of the rural women in the study

area;

2. identify the major livelihood diversity strategies of the rural women in the

study area;

3. ascertain the socio-economic characteristics influencing the livelihood

strategies of the respondents.

4. asses the perception impact of the livelihood strategies of the respondents.

Methodology:

The Study area

The study was carried out in Zing Local Government Area of Taraba State,

Nigeria. The area consist of ten (10) council wards. Farming is the major

occupation of the people. The LGA shares common boundaries with Ganye LGA

of Adamawa State to the South, Mayo- Belwa in the east and Yorro LGA (Taraba

4

State) in the east. It is located between latitude 8° 401 and 9º North and longitude

11° 351 and 11º 871 East. The average rainfall of the area is approximately

1500mm per annum. The temperature ranges between 20-35°c, the vegetation is of

Guinea Savannah zone and it has a total population of 127,63 people (National

Population Commission, NPC, 2006) with land mass of 4,041, 123 square

kilometers.

Sources of data and sampling procedure

Data were obtained from primary and secondary sources. The primary

source involved the use of interview schedule designed by the researchers. The use

of journal, seminar proceeding and the internet source were some of the secondary

sources employed for the study. The population considered for the study was rural

women. Multi-stage random sampling techniques were used to draw respondents,

viz:- The first stage involved a purposive selection of six (6) council wards

namely:- Monkin A, Dinding, Bubong, Zing A1, Zing B and Bitako, based on their

rurality out of the ten council wards in the study area. The random selection of 12

villages in the six wards drawn was the second stage. Finally, 10 women were

selected at random in each of the villages drawn, giving a total sample size of 120

respondents in the third stage.

Method of data Analysis

The data collected were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.

The descriptive statistics include frequency, percentage and rank order. These

were used to describe the socio-economic characteristics, identify the major

livelihood diversity strategies and to assess the perception of the impact of the

livelihood strategies on the respondents (objectives, 1,2 and 4). Information on the

perception of the impact of the livelihood strategies on the respondents was

collected using closed ended question which contained 10 items were based on a

5- point rating scale of completely agreed = 5; agreed = 4; completely disagreed =

3; disagreed = 2 and no responses = 1. The respondents mean scores were obtained

for each response item such that any mean score equal or higher to 3.50 were

5

regarded as agreed, while a mean score below 3.50 implied disagreement on the

impact of the livelihood strategies on the respondents. The inferential statistics

used to compute the socio-economic characteristics influencing the livelihood

strategies of the respondents was correlation analysis (SPSS version 15). The

variables were measured as follows:-

Y = Livelihood activities involved (Number).

X1 = Age (years)

X2 = Formal schooling (Years)

X3 = Income from livelihood activities (Naira).

X4 = Members of household assisting in livelihood activities (Number)

X5 = Access to credit (dummy: yes = 1, No= 0)

Results and Discussion

Socio-Economic characteristics

The study revealed that most of the respondents (44%) were between 40-59

years, which showed that they are in the middle age. Mafimisebi (2007) observed

that respondents within this age limit are in the economically active age bracket to

undertake various livelihood activities. The result (Table 1) also indicated that

most (45%) of the respondents are married. This is in accord with Ogunbameru et

al, (2006), Matthews- Njoku and Adesope (2007) who reported that most of the

respondents were married women. Married women are involved in various

livelihood activities to solve numerous family problems and to assist in

supplementing the family income for sustenance.

Table 1 further showed that 40.83% of the respondents did not attend any

formal education and only 3.33% were observed to have had tertiary education.

With their little education, the women could lacked skills/training and knowledge

to improve on their livelihood activities. Imam (1998) observed that women with

little or no education have limited economic opportunities. The result (Table 1) on

the members of the family assisting in the livelihood activities of the respondents

indicated majority (73.33%) had between 1-4 members assisting in their livelihood

6

activities, 17.54 percent had between 6-10 members and those with 11 members

and above were 12.5%. Table 1 further shows the annual income (Naira) realized

by the respondents in their major livelihood activities. Those that earned between

N5000-N30, 000 were 9.17%, 55% of the respondents earned income in the range

of N31,000-N56,000 and the remaining 35.83% had income of N57,000 and

above. Sallau and Rahman (2007) reported an annual income of less than N100,

000 among rural women. If the income of the women in their livelihood activities

is small, it cannot sustain and maintain the family and hence could be

unsustainable.

Major Livelihood Activities of the Respondents

Analysis of the results in Table 2 showed that the most important livelihood

diversity strategies of the respondents were the sells of fire wood, which ranked 1st

on the list with 19.2% of the respondents involved in. others were the sells of

Kunu (12.2%), the sells of cooked vegetables (10.3%) and the least important

activities in the order of hierarchy was selling of sweet pepper, that ranked the 11th

position (0.3%). These livelihood activities are in contrast to Matthews- Njoku and

Adesope (2007) who found the important livelihood strategies of the respondents

as a petty trading, hair plating, thrift-saving, farming and cooking at occasions.

This is obvious as the activities are agricultural based and therefore, could only be

the means for livelihood in rural areas.

Correlation results of the relationship between the socio-economic

characteristics and the livelihood activities of the respondents.

Correlation results of the relationship between the socio-economic

characteristics and the livelihood activities of the respondents were determined

and the results presented in table 3. The results showed significant relationship in

age, access to credit and annual income at 5%, and 1% level of significance

respectively. This implies that age, annual income and access to credit contributes

to the respondent’s involvement in their livelihood activities.

7

Perception impact of the livelihood strategies on the women

The results of the differential ratings on the impact of livelihood strategies

on the rural women are shown in Table 4. Analysis of the results showed that all

the women disagreed in their perception with regard to positive impact of their

livelihood activities on their well being and living standard. This suggests that the

livelihood activities of the rural women in the study area are unsustainable.

Matthews- Njoku and Adesope (2007) however, reported most serious impact of

the various livelihood strategies to include the ability to feed adequately, buy or

rent land for farming, and access to improve health care and education.

Table 1, Socio-economic characteristics of the respondents (n=120).

Variables Frequency Percentage(%)

1. Age. (Years) 20-39 43 36.00 40-59 53 44.00 60+ 24 20.002. Marital Status.Married 56 45.00Single 45 40.00Divorced 19 15.003. Educational LevelNo formal schooling 49 40.83Primary education 28 23.33Secondary education 16 13.33Tertiary education 4 3.33Adult education 23 19.174. Household Assisting in activities (Number) 1-4 88 73.335-7 21 17.548-1 11 9.12 5. Annual income (N)5,000-30.000 = 11 9.1731,000-56,000 = 66 55.0057,000+ 43 35.83Source: field Study, 2009

8

Table 2: Major Livelihood Activities of the respondents

Livelihood Strategies * Frequency Percentage Rank

Sells of fire wood 60 19.2 1st

Sells of kunu 38 12.2 2nd

Cooked vegetables 32 10.3 3rd

Processing of groundnut oil 30 9.6 4th

Daddawa (processing) 29 9.3 5th

Cake (frying) 28 9.0 6th

Yam (frying) 27 8.7 7th

Burkutu (local drinks) 27 8.7 7th

Hair plaiting 25 8.0 8th

Sells of fresh vegetables 18 5.8 9th

Farm labour 12 3.8 10th

Maize (roasting) 12 3.8 10th

Sweet pepper (retails) 1 0.3 11th

Source: Field study, 2009

* = Multiple responses

9

Table 3: Correlations results of the relationship between the socio-economic

characteristics and livelihood Activities of the respondents.

Group N Mean Standard AF-Value P-Value r-value

Decision Deviation

Livelihood 120 2.2692 0.6909

Activities

Age 120 41.533 11.205 0.05 0.028 0.201 S

Education 120 3.392 4.127 0.05 0.532 0.58 NS

Annual 120 52759.66 136009.299 0.01 0.005 0.257 S

Income

No

Household 120 3.183 1.720 0.05 0.175 0.125 NS

Access to 120 0.433 0.498 0.05 0.036 0.192 S

Credit

Source: Field study, 2009

S = Significant at 1% and 5% level

NS = Not significant at 5% level.

10

Table 4: Differential ratings of the perceptions of the impacts of livelihood

strategies on the respondents.

Impact/perception Mean Standard Deviation Remarks

Adequate food 3.2417 0.91666 D

Improved health care 2.6667 0.74848 D

Increased income 3.2333 0.63157 D

Better clothing 2.3500 0.69391 D

Provision if employment 3.0500 1.12160 D

Payment of Children school fees 2.4667 1.19476 D

More farm inputs 1.6250 0.89876 D

Means of transportation 2.9083 0.90745 D

Improved family welfare 3.3833 0.9365 D

Less dependence on people 3.4167 1.7632 D

Source: Field study, 2009

D= Disagreed.

11

REFERENCES

Chambers, R. (1988), Sustainable rural livelihood; a key for people, environment

and development, in Uyanga, J and Ekop, O.B. (2005), Towards

sustainable livelihoods in recureent drought-prone areas of Africa. In

Uyanga et al; (eds) Towards A sustainable Environmental management,

paraclete publishers, Yola-Nigeria. PP 24-31.

Chambers, R. and Conway, G. (1991), Sustainable rural livelihoods. Practical

concepts for the 21st century. IDS Discussion paper 296 Brightain.

Imam, H. (1998), The challenges of Micro-finance in Africa. A Paper presented at

the 2nd Global Women Entrepreneurs trade fair and investment forum on

credit and private Direct investment for the enhancement of women

Entrepreneurs participation in the Global Economy held in Addis-Ababa,

Ethiopia, 15-23 Oct.

Kwaghe, P.V. (1999), Women Feed the Women Feed the World: prospects,

problems and solutions for sustainable Agriculture. In Undiandeye et al,

(eds), Sustainable Agricultural development, principles and case studies.

Mainasara publishing company Borno State Pp 86-98.

Mafimisebi, T.E. (2007), A comparative Economic Analysis of two-cassava Based

business Activities Exclusive of the female Gender in Oyo State, Nigeria.

Journal of Agricultural Extension, Vol. 10 Pp 1-8

Matthews-Njoku, E.C and Adesope, O.N. (2007), Livelihood Diversity Strategies

of rural women in Imo State Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural extension,

Vol. 10 Pp 117-123 NPc (2006), Http/en. Wikipedia. Org/wii/Taraba State.

Ogunbameru, B.O; M.M Gwary; Y.L. Idrisa; A.O Ani and A.B. Yero (2006),

Empowerment of women through Urban Agriculture Development in

Maiduguri Metropolitan, Borno – State. Proceedings 11th Annual national

conference of the Agricultural Extension Society of Nigeria (AESON), 3rd-

6th April, Pp 147-156.

12

Sallau, E.S, and S.A Rahman (2007), Gender Analysis of Accessibility of farm

resources among small scale farmers in Lafia area of Nassarawa State-

Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension, Vol.10 Pp 102 – 108

Ogboh, O. (2006), Factors impeding Women Active Participation in Agricultural

and Rural Development. Proceedings, 11th Annual Conference of AESON

5th April, P 157.

Undiandeye, U.C. Bila, Y. and Kushwaha, S. (1999), Perspective in Sustainable

Agricultural Development in Nigeria. In Undiandeye, U.C Bila, Y. and

Kushwaha, S (eds), Sustainable Agricultural Development Principles and

case studies in Nigeria, Mainasara Publishing Company, Maiduguri-

Nigeria Pp 1-9.

Uyanga, J. (2005), Sustainable Development and Environmental Management: An

Overview, Uyanga, J.m; Galtima, M. and Ono, M. (eds), Towards

Sustainable Environmental Management. Paracelete Publishers, Yola-

Nigeria P13.

Winters, P; Corral, L and Gondillo, G. (2001), Rural Livelihood Strategies and

Social capital in Latin America. Implications for rural development

projects. Working paper series in Agriculture and resource economics in

Matthews-Njoku, E.C and Adesope, O.N. (2007), Livelihood Diversity

Strategies of Rural Women in Imo-State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural

Extension, Vol. 10 pp 117-123.3 9

13