IV.1.2.SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECT
IV.1.2.1.Land tenure status
The results presented in table 7 reveal that moat farmers
(86.2%) have acquired land through in heritage while 3.1% have bought their
land. 10.8% of surveyed farmers bought part of their land and inherited the
other part of the land. The results also show that only 11% of well off farmers
and 13.6% of intermediate farmers declared to have bought some land. These are
farmers with relatively resources who can buy land and invest in coffee
production, lucrative activity in the area.
Table 7: Land tenure in
relation to farmer wealth status
|
Land tenure
Wealth category
|
Inherited
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Bought
|
Part inherited, rest bought
|
|
Well-off farmer
|
8
|
0
|
1
|
9
|
|
88,9%
|
,0%
|
11,1%
|
100,0%
|
|
Intermediate farmer
|
17
|
2
|
3
|
22
|
|
|
77,3%
|
9,1%
|
13,6%
|
100,0%
|
|
Poor farmer
|
31
|
0
|
3
|
34
|
|
|
91,2%
|
,0%
|
8,8%
|
100,0%
|
|
Total
|
56
|
2
|
7
|
65
|
|
86,2%
|
3,1%
|
10,8%
|
100,0%
|
It is however important to notice that some information
provided should be taken with caution since farmers may refrain to reveal all
the land resource he owns. In this coffee growing area, wealthy farmers tend to
buy more land for extending coffee production. So we should expect this
category to have bought more land compared to poor farmers.
IV.1.2.2.Total farm size
According to the table 8, results revealed that the majority
of farmers interviewed (56.9%) have land of size ranging from 0.10 to 0.30 ha.
Most of wealthy farmers (77%) own land of size varying from 0.30 to 3 ha
whereas land surface of most of poor farmers (70%) ranged between 0.10 to 0.3
ha.
Table 8: Total farm area in different wealth
categories groups.
|
Total area
Wealth category
|
0.03 to 0.10
|
0.101 to 0.30
|
0.301 to 0.60
|
0.601 to 1 ha
|
1.001 to 3 ha
|
Total
|
|
Well-off farmer
|
0
|
2
|
3
|
1
|
3
|
9
|
|
|
,0%
|
22,2%
|
33,3%
|
11,1%
|
33,3%
|
100,0%
|
|
Intermediate farmer
|
4
|
11
|
5
|
1
|
1
|
22
|
|
|
18,2%
|
50,0%
|
22,7%
|
4,5%
|
4,5%
|
100,0%
|
|
Poor farmer
|
8
|
24
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
34
|
|
|
23,5%
|
70,6%
|
5,9%
|
,0%
|
,0%
|
100,0%
|
|
Total
|
12
|
37
|
10
|
2
|
4
|
65
|
|
18,5%
|
56,9%
|
15,4%
|
3,1%
|
6,2%
|
100,0%
|
The table shows again that farm size is an indicator of wealth
in the area. However, the rule does not exclude cases of poor farmers who have
inherited large land from grand fathers and that may wrongly be classified as
wealth farmers.
IV.1.2.3.Area fallowed
Fields under fallow are almost inexistent in Shanga cell,
because 92.3% of all farmers have no area under fallow (Table 9). From our
findings, no single farmer was able to fallow more than 0.10 ha of land,
showing that land is being fully cultivated over time. The tendency is that as
the resources become scarce, the fallowed area becomes smaller, where 22.2% of
the well-off, 9.1% of middle farmers and 2.9% of poor farmers confirmed to have
area under fallow.
Table 9: Area
fallowed based on wealth groups categories condition
|
Area fallowed
Wealth category
|
No fallow
|
0.01 to 0.10 ha under fallow
|
Total
|
|
Well-off farmer
|
7
|
2
|
9
|
|
|
77,8%
|
22,2%
|
100,0%
|
|
Intermediate farmer
|
20
|
2
|
22
|
|
|
90,9%
|
9,1%
|
100,0%
|
|
Poor farmer
|
33
|
1
|
34
|
|
|
97,1%
|
2,9%
|
100,0%
|
|
Total
|
60
|
5
|
65
|
|
92,3%
|
7,7%
|
100,0%
|
|
|
