The study investigated the impact of transport costs on household income the case of Nkonkobe Local Municipality. The objective of the study was to establish the impact of transport costs on household income. To achieve the objective, the study hypothesized that transport costs have a negative impact of household income. The research design of the study that was used include research instrument, research technique, sample size, population and data analysis procedure. However the research instrument that was followed was the questionnaire which contains a set of questions whilst the research technique used to collect primary data was the self-administered questionnaire. The results of the study revealed that households in Nkonkobe Local Municipality were spending more of their income on transport. Finally, the study recommended that subsidies for poor households must be provided by the government.

[Partial abstract]: This study was carried out to determine the contribution of non-timber forest products (NTFPs) to household total income, other livelihood sectors were also examined simultaneously. The contribution of agriculture involved livestock and crop production. Wages and government grants were other livelihood sectors that were looked into. This study was important in determining the change in livelihood strategies in the last decade and to quantify the NTFPs used at the two sites. It was carried out in Guquka and Koloni, both part of the central Eastern Cape. Information on direct use value of the NTFPs used, the quantities and local price; crop production outputs and inputs and the costs. Data were collected via a questionnaire.

Livelihood stressors in southern Africa, such as HIV/Aids and climate change, do not act in isolation but rather interact concurrently in complex socio-ecological systems with diverse, interrelated and compounded affects. Households experience differential vulnerability to such stressors based on contextual factors such as geographical location, income level and the gender and age of its members. Households’ differential experiences of vulnerability are further defined by the households’ use of their capital stocks: the human, social, natural, financial and physical capital available to the household to form livelihoods and resist the detrimental effects of a stressor. The capital stocks of 340 households were measured in two sites in the Eastern Cape, South Africa, using a household survey. These data were analysed to determine differences between the sites, households with heads of different gender and households of different income levels. Further data relating to the drivers and interactions of stressors over temporal and spatial scales, as well as the perceived value of various forms of capital by different social groups in the two sites, were collected via Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) methods including timelines, mental modelling and pair-wise ranking. Although the two sites have similar levels of income and fall within the same province, many significant differences emerged. The two sites showed different distributions of household head genders and different stressors and perceptions of vulnerability, perhaps owing to differences in their capital stocks, acting alongside the influence of culture and access on a shifting rural-urban continuum. These discrepancies further transpired to reflect crucial differential experiences along gender lines and income levels in each site. Vulnerability was often context specific, not only because of unique drivers of stress in different areas, but also because socio-economic groups and localities often had characteristics that could potentially exacerbate vulnerability, as well as characteristics that can potentially facilitate adaptive capacity. Stressors were found to have depleted multiple forms of capital over time, while new stressors were emerging, raising concerns over the most appropriate means of social protection within these contexts.

Climate change and the HIV/AIDS epidemic are two of the most critical long-term global challenges, especially for Africa and even more so Southern Africa. There is great concern that the poor will be unable to adapt to the impacts of climate variability and change while HIV/AIDS will exacerbate the impacts of such stressors and deepen the insecurities of many communities already affected by this disease. Studies that consider the interlinked effects of climate change and HIV/AIDS along with other multiple stressors are increasingly needed. This study, located in two rural communities in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa, namely Lesseyton and Willowvale, assessed the responses of vulnerable households to the linked shocks and stressors of climate change and HIV/AIDS. This involved assessing, through household surveys, life history interviews and Participatory Learning and Action (PLA), the way in which multiple stressors interacted and affected vulnerable households, the way in which these households responded to and coped with such shocks and stressors, and the barriers which prevented them from coping and adapting effectively. Unemployment emerged as the dominant stress amongst households. The lack of development and having too few opportunities for employment has limited vulnerable households from being able to invest in assets, such as education or farming equipment. This, in combination with the impacts of increased food and water insecurity from recent drought, has created an extremely vulnerable environment for these households. They rely largely on two important safety-nets, namely social capital and the use of natural and cultivated resources; however the latter has been limited due to the impacts of water scarcity and an inability to farm. It was evident that there was little planned long-term adaptation amongst households and from government. Maladaptive short-term coping strategies, such numerous household members depending on one social grant and transactional sex, were too often relied upon, and although they may have helped relieve the stress of shocks momentarily, they did not provide for the long-term well-being of individuals and households. Poor communication and capacity between the different levels of government and between the government (especially at the local level) and the two rural communities has created an environment full of uncertainty and lacking in advocacy. Local government needs increased human, informational, and financial capacity and a clear delegation of responsibilities amongst the different departments in order for the two communities to benefit from the implementation of support strategies. There is also a great need for educational programmes and capacity development within the two rural communities, particularly based on improved coping and longer-term adaptation strategies in response to climate change in order for households to better prepare themselves for the future.