black owners by white colonialists. Even though whites made up less than 20% of the nation‟s population, they took more than 80% of the agriculturally productive land and drove the original owners to the unproductive reserves where they were cramped and could not practice agriculture at all. Various acts such as the Black Land Act of 1913, Development Trust Act of 1936 and the Native Laws Amendment Act of 1937 were introduced which further frustrated the displaced black population thereby plunging it deeper and deeper into poverty. The main objective behind the introduction of these acts was to restrain the black population from earning livelihoods through agriculture thus forcing them to offer their labour to white farmers for low wages just to earn some form of livelihood. Such unfair practices and distribution of land prompted the first democratically elected government of South Africa to embark on a drive to redistribute the nation‟s land equitably amongst its citizens to foster national reconciliation, stimulate economic growth and compensate those that were forced out or lost their land during the apartheid era. This initiative was called the Land Reform Programme (LRP) and was implemented with three prongs namely (i) land redistribution; (ii) restitution; and (iii) land tenure. Among the beneficiaries of the LRP were farmers from a community called Marselle in Kenton-on-sea. In addition to getting land for farming purposes, the Marselle farmers also obtained financial support from the government‟s Land Bank to help them kick-start their farming activities. However, in spite of such interventions, they have struggled to turn their activities into sustainable livelihood sources. One most likely cause for this is the lack of farming knowledge and skills needed to make them more efficient and productive. This study was thus geared towards evaluating the knowledge and skills gap in Marselle which, when addressed, could make the Marselle farmers more productive. Its focus was limited to the 32 livestock and 8 chicory farmers that are recognized members of their respective projects. Focus was limited only to these farmers since the next phase of this study will involve building their capacity based on the skills gaps identified through this study. The findings showed that the two projects benefited at least 130 individuals belonging to the farming households, with 67.5% of these households headed by males. The age of these farmers was equally shared at 40% each between those above 65 years and those that only went as far as fourth grade. No one went to tertiary at all. At least 75% of the investigated farmers were unemployed and 42% of this population was pensioners. In terms of income though, 64.98% of it was from external sources. The Masakhane Silime (Chicory) project was implemented to generate income and provide job opportunities for the locals but neither of these objectives had been met at the time the data for this study was collected due to various challenges like lack of funds and infrastructure to enhance productivity. Just like the chicory project, the livestock project had its own objectives, namely; to remove animals from the residential areas, provide the animals with a safe place, reduce road accidents and also to provide a livelihood source for local farmers. Due to overgrazing the pastures, lack of proper camps and other challenges, some effort still needs to be put to achieve these objectives. Even though the livestock project was formed with these objectives in mind, the farmers themselves reared livestock either for personal consumption, selling, ritual purposes, store of wealth or all these combined. Regarding technical skills, livestock farmers were found to rely mostly on indigenous knowledge sources to attain farming knowledge. Only animal healthcare knowledge was popular to more than half the respondents. This was said to be due to the focus group meetings held on the farm every other Wednesday to share information with local extension officers. In spite of these information sharing events, livestock farmers identified training on how to feed; market; handle; and treat their livestock as key intervention knowledge areas. Attendance to these focus group meetings was limited to livestock farmers only. Various socio-economic factors were also found to have some form of influence on the acquisition of livestock knowledge. Education was the most dominant factor, with a significant association with the farmers‟ feeding (p=0.033); animal healthcare (P=0.038); marketing (p=0.009); veld management (p=0.036); and cattle slaughtering (p=0.027) knowledge. Other variables most influential include the gender and age of the household head. The former was significant at 95% confidence level for farmers‟ feeding knowledge (p=0.021); animal healthcare (p=0.039); marketing (p=0.043); livestock housing and handling (p=0.023); veld management (p=0.018); and cattle slaughtering (p=0.043). The dominance of males in acquiring these skills could be explained by the fact that the majority of the livestock project members were males. The majority of the few female members became members by default after the passing on of their husbands but their participation in the project was done through other project members who looked after their animals on their behalf. The number of farming years also had some positive and significant influence on other knowledge areas such as feeding (p=0.021) and livestock housing and handling (p=0.013). The logic supporting this association is that farmers tend to accumulate new and more skills the longer they stay in the same enterprise. In addition, most of the interviewed farmers were farm labourers prior to relocating to Marselle hence they acquired the necessary knowledge long before the project started. Concerning the chicory project, its members also relied heavily on indigenous knowledge sources for farming knowledge. Soil preparation (24.1%); planting (20.7%); land care (24.1%); and mechanical weed control (48.3%) were the knowledge areas lacked by more than half the respondents. The farmers identified land preparation (75%); communication skills (25%); marketing (100%); financial management (62%); and harvesting (88%) as the key crucial intervention areas they needed prioritized. As a study meant to inform the capacity building phase of the Land Bank project, this study identified the existing skills gaps in the two projects implemented in Forest Hill. When implementing the Capacity Building (CB) phase, various socio-economic factors will have to be considered. For example, the proposed intervention should not discriminate against anyone on the grounds of gender or physical abilities. The skills introduced should also be simple enough to be accepted and acquired even by the illiterate, especially when one considers the high illiteracy levels amongst the respondents. Efforts should also be made to create partnerships with the right organizations or groups of people so that they provide the required expertise and resources for the benefit of the farmers as and when required.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:ufh/vital:11205 |
| Date | January 2013 |
| Creators | Tshuma, Mengezi Chancellor |
| Publisher | University of Fort Hare, Faculty of Science & Agriculture |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis, Doctoral, PhD (Agricultural Economics) |
| Format | xxiii, 276 leaves: ill. (some col.); 30 cm, pdf |
| Rights | University of Fort Hare |
Page generated in 0.0062 seconds