| Literature DB >> 29348969 |
Sampson Yamba1, Divine O Appiah1, Lawrencia Pokuaa-Siaw1, Felix Asante1.
Abstract
Farming as a livelihood activity in the Bosomtwe District is threatened by climate change. This paper ascertained the alternative livelihood options of smallholder farmers against climate variability and change in the Bosomtwe District. Using a cross-sectional survey, 152 smallholder farmers were sampled from 12 communities using a multistage sampling procedure. The quantitative data collected were subjected to binary logistic regression analysis, contingency tables, frequencies, and Nagelkerke tests of association, embedded in the statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) v.17. The results indicate that farmers are resorting to alternative livelihood activities that are less capital intensive and require less skill in order to secure income and household food supply. Significant determinants of farmers' alternative livelihood are age, household size, and household food supply, which were significant at p < .030, p < .019, and p < .012, respectively. At a 95% confidence interval (CI), these variables had lower to upper CIs for each of the EXP (B), respectively, at CI = 1.134-12.524, CI = 1.359-30.224, and CI = 1.781-104.561, respectively. The paper recommends that government institutes policies that will create opportunities and draw on various local/grassroots opportunities and resources to expand farmers' asset base for sustainable livelihood strategies.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29348969 PMCID: PMC5733969 DOI: 10.1155/2017/1868290
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Scientifica (Cairo) ISSN: 2090-908X
Figure 1Map of the Bosomtwe District in Ghana. Source: author's construct (2015).
Logistic regression table of variables in the equation.
| Predictive variables |
| S.E. | Wald | df | Sig. | Exp( | 95.0% C.I. for EXP( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | |||||||
| Age of respondent ( | 1.327 | .613 | 4.685 | 1 | .030 | 3.768 | 1.134 | 12.524 |
| Type of household | 17.435 | 1.504 | .000 | 1 | .999 | 3.733 | .000 | — |
| Marital status of respondent | .708 | .456 | 2.413 | 1 | .120 | 2.030 | .831 | 4.958 |
| Size of household ( | 1.858 | .791 | 5.510 | 1 | .019 | 6.408 | 1.359 | 30.224 |
| Location of community | −1.783 | .998 | 3.191 | 1 | .074 | .168 | .024 | 1.189 |
| Increased expenditure on agricultural inputs | .053 | 1.070 | .002 | 1 | .961 | 1.054 | .129 | 8.582 |
| Reduced income from agriculture | .623 | 1.037 | .361 | 1 | .548 | 1.865 | .244 | 14.243 |
| Insecure household food supply ( | 2.613 | 1.039 | 6.326 | 1 | .012 | 13.644 | 1.781 | 104.561 |
| Constant | −49.068 | 3.009 | .000 | 1 | .999 | .000 | ||
Note. Significant at α0.05.
Figure 2Alternative income generating activities.
Figure 3Number of years of involvement in alternative income activity.
Cross tabulation showing farmers switching to alternative livelihood activities as their main economic activity based on the consistency and predictability of rainfall.
| Perceived rainfall pattern in the last 15 yrs |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consistent and predictable | Inconsistent and not predictable | |||
| Consideration of agriculture as primary or secondary activity with respect to alt. livelihood activity | Primary occupation | 8 (9%) | 83 (91%) | 91 (100%) |
| Secondary occupation | 3 (6%) | 47 (94%) | 50 (100%) | |
| Not applicable | 2 (19%) | 9 (82%) | 11 (100%) | |
|
| 13 (100%) | 139 (100%) | 152 (100%) | |