Thesis, Sokoine University of Agriculture, 2018Large-scale agricultural investments have the potential of improving household livelihood outcomes among households participating in the out-grower schemes and in the investor farm wage employment. However, there is no consensus whether large-scale agricultural investments generate better livelihood outcomes for participating households. This study was conducted in Kilombero Valley in Tanzania to examine socio-economic determinants of household participation in large-scale agricultural investments and the influence of socio-economic characteristics and large-scale agricultural investments on household livelihood outcomes. Data were collected through Key Informant Interviews (KIIs), Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and involving a sample of 376 households in the survey. Content analysis was used to analyse qualitative data. Quantitative data were analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). The analysis was done using the following techniques: descriptive statistics, multiple responses analysis, binary logistic regression, One Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), independent samples t-test and multiple regression. The results show that there were associations between out-growers scheme opportunities and household headship with Male-Headed Households (MHHs) enjoying more benefits. There were differences between households participating in sugarcane out-grower scheme, the non-participants and investor farm wage employment in terms of livelihood outcomes (p < 0.05) with MHHs having higher livelihood outcomes. There was a difference in livelihood outcomes by household headship (p < 0.05) and MHHs had higher livelihood outcomes. The most important predictors of household participation in the out-grower schemes were age, household headship, and group membership, access to credit, distance to investor, asset stocks and asset ownership (p < 0.05). Household participation in the investor farm wage employment was influenced by age, household headship, marital status, land size, asset stocks and income (p < 0.05). iii The age of household head, years of schooling, household size, land size, group membership, household participation in the out-grower scheme, and livelihood strategies had influence on household livelihood outcomes (p < 0.05). Therefore, MHHs participating in the out-grower schemes derived more benefits in terms of opportunities and showed possibilities of having higher livelihood outcomes than FHHs. Households‟ participation in the out-grower scheme is influenced by socio-economic characteristics including gender variables. Also, household participation in the investor farm wage employment reflected gender differences with MHHs and married household heads having higher chances of participating in the investor farm employment. Out-growers benefit more from large-scale agricultural investments compared to investor farm workers and to non-participants. Household livelihood outcomes depend on household socio-economic characteristics and household participation in large-scale agricultural investment through the out-grower schemes. The study recommends that Local Government Authorities and non-governmental organizations involved in promoting livelihood improvement through large-scale agricultural investments should train out-growers on the diversification of livelihood strategies, group strengthening and promoting gender dialogues in the community with a view to changing gender norms that discriminate against FHHs from participating in the out-grower schemes as well as promoting FHHs ownership of sugarcane land. Out-grower associations, in collaboration with investors, should set up plans to ensure that there is a representation of out-growers in every decision making process that affects their payments and raise household livelihood outcomes by raising the minimum wages of those working in the investor farms.