| dc.description |
Land is a key asset for rural livelihoods. The general objective of this paper is to determine the relationship between land access and livelihood strategies (LS) in the context of land scarcity. A good understanding of the above relationship is of great importance to policy makers and all those interested in improving the well-being of those living in such areas. Moreover, the above could offer guidance for focused poverty interventions aiming at promoting diversity of LS. The paper is based on a study that was carried out in Mvomero District, Tanzania. The study adopted a cross-sectional research design and both qualitative and quantitative data were collected through a pre-structured questionnaire, focus group discussions and key informant interviews. A total of 267 respondents were involved in the household surveys that aimed to explore the portfolio of household’s livelihood strategies, the availability of assets requisite for smooth diversification, challenges associated with LS and the effects of land access on LS. The quantitative data collected was analyzed using the SPSS software: descriptive and multinomial logistic regression were performed to identify dominant LS, determine assets portfolios and the influence of land access and selected household socio-economic characteristics on choices of LS. Qualitative data were analysed using the content analysis method and used to supplement the quantitative information. The results show that, farming was the dominant household LS. However, a significant proportion of households cope with land shortage by engaging in survival off-farm LS due to lack of labour skills, savings and capital necessary for undertaking high paying LS. A households location and its distance to the farm was positively related to its engagement in survival off-farm LS. Moreover, ownership of land without formal land titles negatively influenced a household’s diversification of its LS (p < 0.05). It is concluded that regardless of land scarcity in the study area, majority of households are still confined in farming. However, insecure access to land coupled with lack of capital for engaging in high paying LS has forced a significant proportion of households to venture in survival LS. Tanzania government is therefore advised to support the studied communities and those with similar context to diversify livelihood strategies in a meaningful manner through provision of education and labour skills as well as improvement of their access to credits. In addition, the studied community is advised to strive to have savings and obtain labour skills. |
|