| Literature DB >> 29201492 |
Abstract
This study aimed to examine the argument of environmental resource-use conflict as the primary cause of crop farmers and agropastoralists conflicts in Tabora Region, Tanzania. It explored the multiple interdependent phenomena that affect livelihoods relationships between crop farmers and agropastoralists and the nature of their continuing conflicts over the ecozonal resources. A primary dataset of the two groups' conflicts was used. An ex post facto and multistage sampling design was adopted. A total of 252 respondents were interviewed in three separate villages drawn from agroecological zones fringing the miombo woodland where such tensions are high. Data were analyzed using logistic regression. Results indicate that education (β = -1.215, .297; p = .050), household size (β = .958, 2.607; p = .017), herd size (β = 4.276, 7.197; p = 0.001), farm size (β = -1.734, .048; p = .176), the police (β = -.912, 4.582; p = .043), and village leaders (β = -.122, .885; p = .012) were the most potent predictors of causes of conflicts. The study found no support for demographic variables, like age, sex, marital status, income, duration of residence, and distance to resource base. The study recommends population growth control and strengthening of local institutions and recommends local communities to sustain management of natural resources base in the area.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29201492 PMCID: PMC5672148 DOI: 10.1155/2017/5835108
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Scientifica (Cairo) ISSN: 2090-908X
Figure 1Southward agropastoral migration routes in Tanzania. Source: adapted and modified from Sendalo, 2009.
Distribution of study villages in Tabora Region.
| District | Ward | Village |
|---|---|---|
| Nzega | Karitu | Bugembe |
| Igunga | Simbo | Tambalale |
| Uyui | Kigwa | Kigwa |
| Urambo | Ichemba | Ichemba |
| Sikonge | Ngoywa | Mabangwe |
| Kaliua | Kangeme | Kangeme |
| Tabora Urban | n.a. | n.a. |
n.a. = not applicable. Source: Regional Administrative Office, Tabora, 2016.
Figure 2Map of Tabora Region showing study areas. Source: Tabora Lands Office, 2016.
| Round 2 | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | |||
| Round 1 | Yes |
|
|
|
| No |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| ||
Socioeconomic characteristics of respondents (n = 252).
| Variable | Agropastoralists (frequency) | Percentage | Crop farmers (frequency) | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Males | 98 | 77.78 | 89 | 70.63 |
| Females | 28 | 22.22 | 37 | 29.37 |
| Total | 126 | 100.00 | 126 | 100.00 |
|
| ||||
| 15–30 | 38 | 30.16 | 52 | 41.27 |
| 31–50 | 65 | 51.59 | 64 | 50.79 |
| 51–70 | 22 | 17.45 | 8 | 6.35 |
| >70 | 1 | 0.80 | 2 | 1.59 |
| Total | 126 | 100.00 | 126 | 100.00 |
|
| ||||
| Married | 88 | 69.84 | 89 | 70.63 |
| Never married | 21 | 16.66 | 17 | 13.49 |
| Divorced | 7 | 5.55 | 5 | 3.97 |
| Widowed | 9 | 7.15 | 14 | 11.11 |
| No response | 1 | 0.80 | 1 | 0.80 |
| Total | 126 | 100.00 | 126 | 100.00 |
|
| ||||
| No formal education | 38 | 30.16 | 19 | 15.08 |
| Primary school | 85 | 67.46 | 90 | 71.43 |
| Secondary school | 3 | 2.38 | 16 | 12.69 |
| Tertiary education | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.80 |
| Total | 126 | 100.00 | 126 | 100.00 |
|
| 120 | 47.62 | 132 | 52.38 |
|
| ||||
| 1–10 | 105 | 83.33 | 115 | 91.27 |
| 11–20 | 21 | 16.67 | 11 | 8.73 |
| >30 | — | — | — | — |
| Total | 126 | 100.00 | 126 | 100.00 |
|
| ||||
| <15 yrs | 67 | 53.17 | 37 | 29.37 |
| 15–20 yrs | 39 | 30.96 | 55 | 44.65 |
| >30 yrs | 20 | 15.87 | 34 | 26.98 |
| 126 | 100.00 | 126 | 100.00 | |
|
|
| |||
| <1 | — | — | 30.09 | |
| 3–4.99 | — | — | 53 | 24.54 |
| >5 | — | — | 21 | 9.72 |
| <50 | 97 | 42.17 | — | — |
| 51–100 | 65 | 28.26 | — | — |
| 101–200 | 39 | 16.96 | — | — |
| 201–300 | 24 | 10.44 | — | — |
| >300 | 5 | 2.17 | — | — |
Note. Mean age = 44 years. Mean family size was 9; Mean farm size = 2.8 ha. Source: Tabora Agropastoral Mobility Survey, 2016.
Results of logistic regression showing the predictive effect of demographic factors on conflicts over natural resource access.
| Variables in the equation | Estimates | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| SE | Wald | df |
| exp( | |
| Sex | .767 | .495 | 2.402 | 1 | .121 | 2.153 |
| Age | −.012 | .011 | 1.822 | 1 | .183 | 1.038 |
| Education | −.162 | .088 | 3.394 | 1 | .065 | .851 |
| Marital status | .163 | .632 | .064 | 1 | .803 | 1.173 |
| Income level | −.052 | .543 | .011 | 1 | .924 | .949 |
| Residence (0–10 years) | −.052 | .024 | 5.901 | 1 | .121 | .949 |
| Household size | .042 | .033 | 2.713 | 1 | .011 | 1.052 |
| Land allocated for Crop production | −.384 | .216 | 3.172 | 1 | .075 | .681 |
| Herd size | 1.237 | .525 | 5.539 | 1 | .019 | 3.444 |
| Constant | .765 | 1.339 | .327 | 1 | .000 | 2.149 |
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Number of observations = 252 | ||||||
| Overall percentage = 86.95 | ||||||
| Model | ||||||
| −2 log likelihood = 118.331 | ||||||
| Nagelkerke | ||||||
Significance at p < .05. Source: Tabora Agropastoral Mobility Survey, 2016.
Logistic regression results predicting factors influencing migration of agropastoralists into frontier landscapes.
| Variables in the equation | Estimates | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| SE | Wald | df | Sig. | exp( | |
| Perceived degradation of rangelands | 1.425 | .499 | 8.162 | 1 | .004 | 4.157 |
| Land for agriculture | −1.222 | .0394 | 9.631 | 1 | .002 | .295 |
| Grazing land | 3.343 | .832 | 16.121 | 1 | .000 | 28.292 |
| Family size | .013 | .009 | 2.413 | 1 | .013 | 1.014 |
| Rainfall | 2.398 | 1.154 | 4.314 | 1 | .038 | 10.999 |
| Business | .510 | .710 | .517 | 1 | .032 | 1.666 |
| Local community kin ties | 1.091 | .820 | 1.769 | 1 | .183 | 2.976 |
| Constant | −9.561 | 1.662 | 33.122 | 1 | .000 | .000 |
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Number of observations = 252 | ||||||
| Overall percentage = 90.4 | ||||||
| Model | ||||||
| −2 log likelihood = 115.10 | ||||||
| Nagelkerke | ||||||
Significance at p < .05. Source: Tabora Agropastoral Mobility Survey, 2016.
Results of logistic regression indicating factor estimates that determine resources-use conflicts.
| Variables in the equation | Estimates | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| SE | Wald | df | Sig. | exp( | |
| Age of HH head | −.063 | −1.299 | .196 | 1 | .272 | 0.72 |
| Gender of HH head | 1.465 | 1.187 | 1.522 | 1 | .217 | 4.326 |
| Marital Status | .045 | .089 | .693 | 1 | .250 | 1.154 |
| Educational level | −1.215 | .619 | 3.852 | 1 | .050 | .297 |
| Farm size | −1.734 | 1.261 | 1.891 | 1 | .048 | .176 |
| Household size | .958 | .541 | 3.133 | 1 | .017 | 2.607 |
| Herd size | 4.276 | 1.201 | 12.673 | 1 | .000 | 7.197 |
| Distance to resource base | −.812 | .532 | 2.330 | 1 | .067 | 2.253 |
| Duration of residence | −1.401 | .762 | 3.379 | 1 | .146 | .246 |
| Constant | 14.469 | 4.153 | 12.140 | 1 | .000 | .000 |
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Number of observations = 252 | ||||||
| Overall percentage = 92.20 | ||||||
| Model | ||||||
| −2 log likelihood = 26.405 | ||||||
| Nagelkerke | ||||||
Significant at p < .05 level. Source: Tabora Agropastoral Mobility Survey, 2016.
Results of logistic regression showing perceptions on the effectiveness of conflict reconciliatory institutions.
| Variables in the equation | Estimates | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| SE | Wald | df |
| Odds ratio | |
| Rangers | .801 | .522 | 2.323 | 1 | .133 | 2.473 |
| Village leaders | −.122 | −.366 | 2.527 | 1 | .012 | .885 |
| Village land tribunals | .962 | .374 | 6.644 | 1 | .014 | 2.612 |
| Ward land tribunals | 1.943 | .362 | 29.661 | 1 | .006 | 6.923 |
| District housing and land tribunals | 1.082 | .312 | 11.951 | 1 | .003 | 2.951 |
| Village environmental committees | 1.694 | .283 | 35.774 | 1 | .008 | 5.403 |
| Police | −.912 | .491 | 3.412 | 1 | .043 | 4.582 |
| Constant | .134 | .366 | .133 | 1 | .715 | 1.143 |
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||
| Number of observations = 252 | ||||||
| −2 log Likelihood = 73.843 | ||||||
| Cox & Snell | ||||||
| Nagelkerke | ||||||
| Model | ||||||
| Overall percentage = 92.1 | ||||||
Statistically significant at .05 level of significance. Source: Tabora Agropastoral Mobility Survey, 2016.