The overall development objective of the FAO/UNDP project Support for Rural Aquaculture Extension (ZIM/88/021) is the increased productivity of the communal lands and waters through support of fish farming development in rural areas and the improved management of small water bodies.
The original project proposal included a fish marketing survey in order to determine any potential marketing constraints fish farmers might face in the longer term. Following project implementation, the lack of information on the socio-economic and demographic characteristics of target households was felt to have an impact on the effectiveness of extension messages. It was felt that the acquisition of this information was important, and thus the emphasis was changed towards a socio-economic study of fish farmers and non-fish farmers which included a marketing component.
The study was carried out by consultants Mr Jones Govereh and Mr Solomon Chigume of the Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Zimbabwe. They were assisted by FAO consultant fisheries economist, Ms Sevaly Sen for the design of the study, interpretation of results and preparation of the final report. The fieldwork was carried out from mid- June to end- August 1991.
The objectives of the socio-economic and marketing study were to:
Evaluate the project progress in terms of its impact on developing aquaculture in the pilot zones in Natural Regions II,III, and IV.
Identify the social and economic constraints that limit the development of fish farming and fishing.
Investigate the socio-economic potential for aquaculture and fishing in the pilot zones.
Assess the level of the participation of women in aquaculture and fishing activities.
Identify the nature and socio-economic structure of fishing groups.
Assess the level of demand and consumer preferences for fresh water fish from fish ponds and small water bodies.
Make recommendations for strategies on the future marketing of fish produced from aquaculture and small water bodies.
Make recommendations for improvements in extension methods.
Make recommendations for further investigation of market conditions for fish and fish products.
Zimbabwe is divided into five natural regions on the basis of soil type, rainfall and other climatic factors. Regions I, II and III are suitable for intensive crop and livestock production whereas IV and V offer limited scope for agricultural development. Table 1 provides a summary of the main characteristics of each natural region.
The first objective of the study was to evaluate the impact of the project in natural regions II, III and IV. As a result, the study on fish farming was carried out in two of the four project pilot zones, in the provinces of Mashonaland East and Masvingo. Wards in Murehwa District, Mashonaland East covered Natural Regions II and III, while wards in Masvingo District covered Natural Regions III and IV.
The study area with regard to small water body utilisation covered the provinces of Mashonaland East, Mashonaland Central, Manicaland and Masvingo.
For the marketing study, the rural areas of Masvingo East and Masvingo, the peri-urban area of Murehwa and the urban areas of Mabelreign in Harare (high income) and Chitungwiza (low income) were included.
| Natural Region | Rainfall | Area | Land Use | Production |
| I | >1000mm | 2% | 74% large scale commercial | Fruit, intensive livestock, tea, coffee, plantation crops. |
| 24% communal | ||||
| 2% small scale commercial | ||||
| II | 750–1000mm | 15% | 74% large scale commercial | Crops and intensive livestock production. |
| 22% communal | ||||
| 4% small scale commercial | ||||
| III | 650–800mm | 19% | 49% large scale commercial | Livestock, fodder & cash crops Marginal production of maize, tobacco and cotton. |
| 43% communal | ||||
| 4% small scale commercial | ||||
| IV | 450–650mm | 38% | 62% communal | Livestock and drought resistant crops. |
| 34% large scale commercial | ||||
| 4% small scale commercial | ||||
| V | v.low | 27% | 45% communal | Extensive cattle or game ranching. |
| 35% large scale commercial | ||||
| 20% national parks |
Source: Statistical Yearbook 1989, CSO
This chapter discusses the methods used in carrying out the survey, mainly, the selection criteria, survey modules and management and methods of data analysis. The nature of the study with a broad range of objectives required that the research to be divided into three modules:
Fish Farmer and Non Fish Farmers: Socio-economic characteristics, practices, attitudes and knowledge
Fisherfolk and Fishing Groups around Small Water Bodies
Marketing Study
1.4.1 Fish Farming
Aim
The socio-economic study on fish farming sought to test the following hypotheses:
Success of aquaculture is linked to the classification of ‘Natural Regions’ commonly used in Zimbabwe.
Extension institutions provide less support to fish farming in lower rainfall areas (Natural Regions III and IV).
Fish farming is perceived to have greater economic benefits than alternative on-farm economic and/or off-farm activities.
Cost of fingerlings and availability for stocking ponds is not a constraint to fish farming development in the survey areas.
Availability of draught power and other tools for fish pond construction is a constraint to the development of aquaculture.
Availability of on-farm inputs for feeding is a constraint to fish farming.
Lack of technical knowledge affects the continuation of fish farming.
Women from male-headed households are responsible for the day to day management of fish ponds owned by their husbands.
Female headed households are not fish pond owners because they have poor access to land and labour.
Proximity to market centres influences the level of participation in fish farming or fishing.
Survey Methods
A sample survey of both fish farmers and non-fish farmers in the study area was designed. Because of the amount of information required, the survey was designed to be carried out in two phases: Phase I and Phase II. The Phase I interview schedule collected information on the socio-economic characteristics and resource capacities of fish farming households, and for comparative purposes also of non-fish farming households. In addition, the survey included questions for non-fish farmers related to their knowledge about, and attitudes towards, fish farming. The Phase I questionnaire also included questions concerning the consumption of fish as part of the marketing study and are discussed in more detail in Section 1.4.3 Following the collection of Phase I data, a return visit was made to fish farming households to obtain information about their perceptions, knowledge and current practices of fish farming. (Phase II questionnaire).
The interview schedules were pre-tested in Chiweshe District and appropriate changes made. This ‘final’ version of the questionnaire was then distributed to Agritex and the FAO/SIDA Aquaculture for Local Community Development (ALCOM) Programme for further comments. Relevant changes were made to the questionnaires following these comments and after enumerator training. Copies of the questionnaires used are attached as Appendix 2. Phase I questionnaires took on average, 90 minutes, whilst Phase II questionnaires took on average, 60 minutes.
Sample Size
A recent census of fish farmers carried out by AGRITEX Fisheries Unit formed the basis for selection of sample size. A population list of wards with more than five practising fish farmers was compiled and from this list, a random sample of wards was selected. In Mashonaland East Province, a total of 10 wards were selected from regions II and III, all falling within Murehwa District. In Masvingo Province, 10 wards were selected in Natural Regions III and IV. The proposed sample size and the actual sample size is given in Table 1.2.A general socio-economic background to the study areas is given in Appendix 1.
| Area | Natural Region | Wards | Fish Farmers | Non-Fish Farmers | |||
| P | A | P | A | P | A | ||
| Murehwa | IIb | 6 | 6 | 48 | 41 | 24 | 30 |
| Uzumba | III | 4 | 4 | 32 | 24 | 16 | 22 |
| Masvingo | III | 4 | 4 | 32 | 30 | 16 | 18 |
| Masvingo | IV | 6 | 6 | 48 | 41 | 24 | 32 |
| TOTAL SAMPLE | 20 | 20 | 160 | 136 | 80 | 102 | |
As the emphasis of the study was on fish farming, two-thirds of the sample size was accounted for by fish farming households. Female fish farmers were systematically included in the total sample of fish farmers to address gender issues related to fish production. The actual sample size is sometimes different than the proposed sample size because some selected wards had an actual population of fish farmers less than that recorded in the census data.
Of the total sample in each region the number of de facto (male household head is absent) and de jure female headed households interviewed as an actual figure and as a percentage of total sample size is given in Table 1.3.
| Natural Region | Male | De-jure Female | De-facto Female | |||
| # | % | # | % | # | % | |
| NR II | 53 | 22 | 7 | 3 | 11 | 5 |
| NR III | 84 | 35 | 7 | 3 | 14 | 6 |
| NR IV | 46 | 20 | 5 | 2 | 9 | 4 |
1 Fish farming households and non-fish farming households.
Source: Socio-Economic and Marketing Survey, 1991.
1.4.2 Utilisation of Small Water Bodies: Fisherfolk and Fishing Groups
Aim
Little is known about fisherfolk, fishing activity and fishing groups around small water bodies. Given this paucity of information, the study sought to collect basic information on fishing activity and to assess whether certain assumptions held about the exploitation of small water bodies were true. These assumptions were:
The cost of fishing gear and availability and cost of boats is a constraint to the exploitation of small water bodies.
Difficult access to fishing rights on small water bodies discourages their exploitation.
Origins, structure, social cohesion and level of local community support are major influences on fishing group viability.
A lack of technical knowledge affects the development of fishing around small water bodies.
Women are not involved in fishing because this is perceived as a male activity.
Survey Methods
A short questionnaire (average time: 10 – 15 minutes) was designed to collect information on the type and frequency of fishing activity from fisherfolk. Guidelines were drawn up for in-depth studies on fishing groups. The questionnaire and the guidelines were pre-tested in Chiweshe District, changed accordingly and finalised following comments from Agritex, ALCOM and after enumerator training.
Sample Selection
As there was no information on the population of fisherfolk, they were to be selected from members of households which were part of the original sample of fish farmers and non-fish farmers. However, in practice this was often not possible because some households in the sample did not have members who fished. Enumerators therefore interviewed eight fisherfolk in each ward giving a total sample of 160. Some of these respondents may have come from households interviewed in the fish farming survey, but no systematic record was kept of this.
In-depth case studies were carried out with nine fishing groups. The groups studied were operational in Mashonaland East(4) and Central (3), Manicaland (1) and Masvingo (1). There were few active fishing groups in communal areas (approximately 36) and they were also very scattered.
1.4.3 Marketing Study
Aim
The aim of the marketing study was to determine whether the following assumptions were correct:
An excess demand for fresh water fish in relation to supply exists in rural and urban areas.
Absence of rural marketing structures are a major constraint to the development of fish farming and fishing as well as fish consumption in rural areas.
Survey Methods
Questions relating to fish consumption and attitudes were included in the Phase I questionnaire for non-fish farmers and fish farmers described in Section 1.5. This was intended to provide information for rural areas. Questions were also included on the Phase II questionnaire for fish farmers relating to disposal of their fish.
A brief questionnaire was designed for urban consumers, pre-tested in Harare and altered accordingly. The questionnaire is attached as Appendix 3. The average time taken for each questionnaire was 10–15 minutes.
Due to a combination of time and staff constraints, the following activities were not carried out as part of further investigation into market conditions for fish and fish products:
Price survey of fish and fish products at small and large retail outlets in Harare, Masvingo and Murehwa.
Interviews with a sample of commercial fish farmers to gather information on their current and expected production, customers and current marketing problems.
Interviews with a sample of market traders, large and small retailers and wholesalers of fish and fish products in Harare and Masvingo to determine quantities handled, consumer preferences and current trends in fish sales.
Sample Size
For rural consumers, the sample size and distribution is described in Section 1.4.1. For urban consumers, a sample of 50 respondents were picked randomly among shoppers at the marketing or shopping centre.
1.4.4 Survey Management
To carry out the fish and non-fish farmer survey module, and the fisherfolk survey, enumerators were selected from candidates who resided in the wards where the survey was to be carried out. This was to reduce the logistical problems (accommodation, transport) of running such a geographically dispersed survey. Each enumerator was responsible for conducting surveys in two wards, giving a total of ten enumerators for all areas. Enumerators were trained and supervised by the national consultants, each responsible for one area. Case studies of fishing groups and informal interviews were carried out by the national consultants. Three additional enumerators were hired to conduct the consumer interviews in urban areas, supervised by the national consultants.
The fieldwork for the fish farming, fisherfolk and fishing group modules extended over the period 8 july – 18 August. The urban consumer survey was carried out during 1 – 15 September.
A data processor, Ms Mugumbate, was hired to enter data using the computer software package, SPSS. Data entry was an on-going process carried out during the course of the study.
1.4.5 Data Analysis
Both qualitatative and quantitative information was collected during the study period. Several analytical techniques were used for quantitative data. Simple descriptive statistics was used to show averages and the distribution of key variables. Bivariate analysis was used to test the hypothesis that natural conditions and socio-economic factors influence the potential uptake of fish farming. T-tests were performed but the sample size was too low to allow Chi-Square tests.
Bivariate analysis was used to identify individual factors that significantly characterise fish and non-fish farmers within one natural region.
Interpretation of data was based on both the statistical analysis of quantitative data and qualitative information obtained from the survey, as well as field observations.
