Graduate School of Development Studies
Understanding Rural-Urban Linkages:
The Impact of Urban Expansion on Livelihoods of Peri -Urban
Communities
A Case Study of Kibaha District,Tanzania.
A Research Paper presented by:
Victor Samba Chembo
Tanzania
in partial fulfilment of the requirements for obtaining the degree of
MASTERS OF ARTS IN DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Specialization:
Poverty Studies and Policy Analysis
(POV)
Members of the examining committee:
Dr Erhard Berner
Dr Andrew Fischer
The Hague, The Netherlands
December, 2011
Disclaimer:
This document represents part of the author’s study programme while at the Institute of Social
Studies. The views stated therein are those of the author and not necessarily those of the
Institute.
Research papers are not made available for circulation outside of the Institute.
Inquiries:
Postal address:
Location:
Telephone:
Fax:
Institute of Social Studies
P.O. Box 29776
2502 LT The Hague
The Netherlands
Kortenaerkade 12
2518 AX The Hague
The Netherlands
+31 70 426 0460
+31 70 426 0799
ii
Table of Contents
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................................. v
List of Figures................................................................................................................................................................ v
List of Maps ................................................................................................................................................................... v
List of Acronyms .........................................................................................................................................................vi
Acknowledgement ......................................................................................................................................................vii
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................................................viii
Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background ......................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Statement of Problem ....................................................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Research Objective and Questions ................................................................................................................. 3
1.4 Selection of study Location .............................................................................................................................. 3
1.5 Data collection methods ................................................................................................................................... 5
1.6 Data analysis and presentation......................................................................................................................... 6
1.7 Limitation of Study ............................................................................................................................................ 6
1.8 Structure of the Paper ....................................................................................................................................... 6
Chapter 2: Conceptual and Analytical Review ......................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 7
2.2 Urbanization ....................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.3 Peri-Urban Interface (PUI) .............................................................................................................................. 8
2.3.1 Peri- urban Conceptualisation .................................................................................................................. 8
2.3.2 The Urban approach.................................................................................................................................. 8
2.3.3 Rural approach ................................................................................................................................................ 9
2.3.4 An integrated system (rural -urban linkage) Approach...........................................................................10
2.4 Peri-urban livelihoods .....................................................................................................................................10
2.5 PUI Analytical Frameworks ...........................................................................................................................12
Chapter 3: Peri - Urban Development and Migration ..........................................................................................15
3.1 Villages spatial positioning .............................................................................................................................15
3.2 Population growth ...........................................................................................................................................15
3.3 Household demographic composition .........................................................................................................16
3.4 Migration trends ...............................................................................................................................................17
3.5 Origin of migrants ...........................................................................................................................................18
3.6 Chapter Conclusion .........................................................................................................................................21
Chapter 4: Livelihoods ...............................................................................................................................................22
4.1 Productive asset base.......................................................................................................................................22
4.1.1 Land............................................................................................................................................................22
4.1.2 Housing......................................................................................................................................................23
4.2 Peri-urban Occupations ..................................................................................................................................23
4.2.1 Farming ......................................................................................................................................................23
4.2.2 Non-farm Activities .................................................................................................................................24
4.3 Livelihoods supportive structures: Rural -urban Interdependence .........................................................26
4.4. Constraints to livelihoods strategies ............................................................................................................27
4.4.1 Human capital ...........................................................................................................................................27
4.4.2 Lack of technology:..................................................................................................................................29
4.4.3 Loss of soil fertility and Climate change ..............................................................................................30
4.4.4 Financial Capital .......................................................................................................................................30
4.4.5 Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................................30
4.4.6 Poor Institutions.......................................................................................................................................31
4.5 Chapter conclusion ..........................................................................................................................................32
iii
Chapter 5: Livelihoods Outcomes and Coping Strategies....................................................................................33
5.1 Outcomes of livelihoods.................................................................................................................................33
5.2 Coping strategies ..............................................................................................................................................34
5.2.1 Social capital ..............................................................................................................................................34
5.2.2 Migration ...................................................................................................................................................35
5.2.3 Remittances ...............................................................................................................................................35
5.2.4 Land Disposal ...........................................................................................................................................36
5.2.5 Other Extreme Means .............................................................................................................................36
5.3. Chapter conclusion ....................................................................................................................................37
Chapter 6: Conclusion................................................................................................................................................38
6.1 Salient Recollections ........................................................................................................................................38
6.2 Emerging Issues ...............................................................................................................................................39
References ....................................................................................................................................................................40
iv
List of Tables
Table 1 Urbanisation Trend in Tanzania
Table 2: A summary of respondents and informants
Table 3: A summary of asset vulnerability
Table 4:Percentage Frequency distribution of Heads of Households by village
Table 5: A number of migrant households by Village
Table 6: Respondents livelihood perceptions by village
1
4
14
17
18
33
List of Figures
Figure 1 :Sustainable Livelihoods Framework
Bookmark not defined.
Figure 2:Origin of respondents by Village
Figure 3:Occupations of Respondents by Village
Figure 4:The Level of Educations of Respondents by Village
1Error!
19
24
28
List of Maps
Map of Kibaha ward
5
v
List of Acronyms
DFID
FAO
HBS
IMF
MDGs
NBS
NFA
PUI
SLF
UNICEF
UN
URT
USAID
British Department for International Development
International Food and Agriculture Organisation
Household and Business Survey
International Monetary Fund
Millennium Development Goals
National Bureau of Statistics
Non-Farm Activities
Peri-Urban Interface
Sustainable Livelihood Framework
United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund
United Nations
United Republic of Tanzania
United States Agency for International Development
vi
Acknowledgement
My sincere gratitude goes to Dr Erhard Berner my Supervisor and Dr Andrew Fischer my
Second Reader, whom through their constructive criticisms, recommendations and timely
responses has made Research process possible. I also owe a debt of gratitude to lecturers in
Poverty Studies and Policy Analysis course who sharpened my general and specialised knowledge
on Development Studies in and out of class.I am also grateful to Mzee Wilson Enzama and my
classmates, whom we discussed together several matters regarding to research paper.
I am equally grateful to Kibaha District Officer, Kibaha Division Officer and NBS officers
Mr Philemon Mwenda, Noela John and Mr Abbasy for making time out of their busy schedules
to assist me in field study. Many thanks also go to Adelina, Stella and Mr. Sadick Machota whom
were of tremendous help to me as Research Assistants particularly during the survey exercise.
vii
Abstract
The study linked urban expansion resulting from urbanization with transformation
processes happening in peri-urban areas. Two villages in Kibaha district were used as case
study. Relevant methodologies, data collection techniques and analytical frameworks were
used to ensure that all pertinent issues to PUI transformation processes are brought to
light. This was further complimented with literature review and empirical evidence from
other places.
The study found out that despite urbanization continuing to be among major
contributors to peri-urban migration, current trend show that rural migrants from both far
away and nearby villages are also important groups. Presence of migrants from various
origins and with different social economic classes; have found to bring a complex scenario
in access and utilization of resources. Since peri-urban livelihoods is more associated with
assets bases, it has been found that asset stock as well as transformation processes were
key factors in shaping of livelihoods strategies. Therefore, success or failure of livelihoods
was seen to relate to the type of livelihood strategy used.
Although the general perceptions of many respondents indicated slump in livelihoods,
however the groups practicing non-farm activities were seen to be better off than local
farming groups. With early evidence showing groups of women, youth and urban migrants
among those practicing non-farm activities, while local communities and elderly are more
involved in less remunerative farming. This is group was seen to be negatively affected by
transformation processes. With efforts to mitigate for livelihoods failure being further
hampered by structural constraints, therefore making the group more vulnerable to
poverty. In places where peri-urban transformation processes have failed to provide and
promote livelihood opportunities for all groups, the paper calls for state interventions in
regulating the transformation process and providing safety nets for the poor.
Key Words
Rural-urban linkages, urban expansion, Peri- Urban Interface, livelihoods, Kibaha District.
Relevance to Development Studies
Urban expansion and peri-urban livelihoods is currently a major issue in many developing
countries. While various policies and initiatives have been implemented, it seems not much have
been attained in terms of tackling the rapid urban expansion and addressing PUI livelihood
problems. Although policy makers may claim to be acting on behalf of people, but still people’s
own agency is important and their voices need to be heard. Knowing of people’s knowledge will
improve policy making and ultimately advance PUI livelihoods.
viii
ix
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background
The last three decades has witnessed rapid urbanisation processes in many developing countries
especially in Sub Saharan Africa. The major features of urbanisation process in many places being
population growth, urban expansion and an increase in informal settlements. It is projected that
the urbanisation process in Africa is likely to continue at a rate 1.1% for next twenty years (UN
World Urbanization Prospectus, 2006)
Although Tanzania remains one of the less urbanised countries when compared to many
African countries, the current trend show that it is increasingly becoming urban. Available data
indicate a percentage of urban population in Tanzania has grown from 6.4% in 1967 to 23.1% in
2002. In absolute numbers, the urban population has increased from 786,567 in 1967 to
7,943,561 in 2002.This is an increase of almost 11 times. It is expected that the urbanisation
trend is likely continue (See Table1 below), with projections showing that the urban population
ratio will go up to 31.3% by year 2022 (URT Population Census 2002).
Table 1: Urbanization Trend in Tanzania.
1967
1978
1988
2002
20221
Total Population
12,312,467
17,512,610
23,095,882
34,443,603
54,259,053
Urban Population
786,567
2,412,900
4,247,272
7,943,561
16,983,084
Urban Percentage
6.4%
13.8%
18.4%
23.1%
31.3%
Source: URT Population Projection Report, Volume VIII, 2006.
Unlike in industrialised countries where urbanisation was driven by industrialisation, the rapid
urbanization in Tanzania as is in other African neighbours, is a result of both natural growth of
urban population and movements of people from rural to urban. Population growth in cities has
triggered uncontrolled expansion and informal settlements around cities as more people move
away from saturated inner cities to peri-urban areas.
Pwani, a region closer to Dar es Salaam city bears the highest effect of urban expansion,
where city migrants often move out there for varied social economic reasons. The city of Dar es
Salaam which is a prime urban region with 93.9% urbanisation had largest turnover with Pwani
region among the 26 regions in Tanzania. The survey data for year 2001-2002 indicate that Dar
es Salaam experienced a net loss of migrants with Pwani, indicating that there were more out
migrants moving from Dar es Salaam to Pwani region than those coming in (URT Population
Census, 2002). This makes migration among major factors behind rapid urbanisation of Pwani
1
Figure projected by author based on National Projection Report ,Volume VIII,February 2006
1
region. As of year 2002, the ratio of urban population in Pwani region has grown to 21.1% from
7.2% in 1978. Although the urbanisation ratio of 21.1% seems to be lower than country ratio of
23.1%, Pwani was the fourth urbanized among 26 regions, only behind Dar es Salaam City
(93%), Arusha (31.3%) and Morogoro (27%). Urbanisation ratio in other regions falls between 15
% and 20 % (URT Population Census 2002).
One of the major consequences associated with rapid urbanisation and particularly
movements of people from within cities to peri- urban areas; has been the social-economic
transformations it has brought to livelihoods of both migrants and local communities. Studies on
peri-urban interface in Tanzania and elsewhere indicate that migrations to peri-urban areas have
created a varied opportunities and threats among members of various social classes within the
peri-urban interface (Briggs and Mwamfupe, 2000; Mbiba and Huchzermeyer, 2002).
One of the positive sides in peri-urban interactions has been a flow of resources from urban
to peri- urban areas, where the resources have been a major catalyst in construction of
livelihoods. It is thought that a flow of resources has positive impact in creation of non-farm
activities (Kamete, 1998). Available data in Tanzania show that there is an increase in non-farm
activities as a source of households’ income from 17.8% in 2001 to 27.3% in 2007 (URT
Household Budget Survey, 2007). This means at times when agriculture is thought to be
shrinking and its productivity falling, many farmers and policy makers alike are looking at nonfarm activities in peri-urban areas as an alternative livelihoods strategy.
While much hope and enthusiasm have been placed on peri-urban transformations as a new
route to positive livelihoods, other studies however indicate that peri-urban transformation
processes have not necessarily supported livelihoods of the poor. One of the major impediments
brought in by peri-urban transformation process being the changes it has brought on the use and
access to resources. It has been observed that the poor are often victims of conflicts and
competition on resources (Mbimba and Huchzermeyer 2002:120). The negative consequences on
poor’s ability to access and use resources have neither helped them maintain their current base
of livelihoods nor shaped changes towards new livelihood strategies where many face many
structural constraints. In certain places, failure in livelihoods have often prompted households to
adopt unique survival and coping strategies. For instance, Briggs and Mwafupe(2000) in their
study on peri-urban in Dar es Salaam, noted that after failing to adopt or diversify, indigenous
communities had a tendency of selling their high value peri-urban land and moving away to
further rural side where they engage in intermediate agriculture. This phenomenon is not
uncommon in other parts of Tanzania where the poor tend to survive on selling parts of their
land to meet basic needs until when they have nothing more to sell.
The current rapid out- migration to peri-urban areas seems to exacerbate an imbalance
between people and resources, and possibly leading to stiff competition for resources where the
poor and vulnerable are also caught in a scramble for the same. In places where the poor have
been unable to efficiently utilise scarce resources in their possession or switch to new livelihood
strategies their future remains bleak.
While current peri-urban studies acknowledge the complexity of peri- urban transformation
processes, less attention has been put on peoples’ own account about transformation processes,
and particularly how they react to such complex processes and solve the challenges associated
with resource imbalances and changing livelihoods. Knowledge of peoples thinking on current
social economic transformation changes happening in peri-urban areas will increase awareness
2
and better understanding of matter and ultimately assist policy makers in formulation of
informed policies to deal with challenges associated with rapid urban expansion.
1.2 Statement of Problem
Although peri-urban interactions are known to play a positive role in shaping livelihoods of
various groups through new livelihood strategies and paving the way for the poor to break out of
poverty (Lanjouw et al., 2001), however that has not been the case for the sections of poor who
cannot diversify and whose living is still attached to use of productive assets particularly farming
land. In places where new social economical transformations processes are not controlled we
usually see stiff competition for resources, with more poor being alienated from access to
resources. And for those poor who are unable to efficiently utilise scarce resources or switch to
new livelihood strategies, they are prone to be left behind. It is within this context that this study
explores the impact of inadequately managed urban expansion on peri-urban livelihoods in
Kibaha district with the expectation of unveiling through peoples’ own voices on factors behind
peri-urban transformation processes and its consequences on the livelihoods of various actors.
1.3 Research Objective and Questions
The general objective of the study is to increase awareness on current social economic
transformation changes happening in peri-urban areas. The better understanding of the processes
will assist policy makers in formulation of informed policies to deal with challenges associated
with rapid urban expansion. The study specifically assesses how movement of people and
resources into peri-urban impacts on livelihoods strategies among various peri-urban
communities and particularly those whose life is associated with own farming. In that regard, the
research was anchored on the two main questions;
(a)
How does urban expansion resulting from rapid urbanisation affect the livelihoods
environment of the peri-urban communities?
(b) What are the social and economical consequences of such interactions to various actors?
In order to facilitate the operational work, the two major questions were further broken up into
the following operational sub questions:
(i) Who are key actors in transformation processes?
(ii) What are main livelihoods activities of peri urban communities?
iii) What factors does support or constrain livelihoods strategies?
iv) How do various actors perceive their livelihoods outcomes?
(v) In the event of livelihoods failure, how does households mitigate for vulnerability?
1.4 Selection of study Location
The Study was conducted in Kibaha district which is among the six districts making the Pwani
region. Other districts are Bagamoyo, Rufiji, Kisarawe, Mkuranga and Mafia. The district covers
an area of 1,812 square kilometres and that makes about 56% of total area of Kibaha region.
The district is bordered by Bagamoyo district in northern side, Morogoro Rural District in west
and Kisarawe district in the south. According to Population Census (2002), the district has a
population of 131,242 with projection showing an annual population growth of 3.4% per annum.
3
The district annual growth rate seems to be above both national (2.9%) and regional (2.4%) rates,
that making Kibaha district among the fastest growing places in the country.
Kibaha district was purposefully selected based on its history of rapid population growth
and also because of its proximity to Dar es Salaam which doubles as largest commercial and
capital city of Tanzania. As pointed out earlier, Dar es Salaam city has largest turnover with
Pwani region among the 26 regions in Tanzania. This implies that Kibaha district which is closer
to Dar es Salaam provides a gateway for migrants going to and coming out of city. It is
considered that Kibaha district serves both as a temporary stop over for upcountry migrants on
their way into the city and an immediate destination for out-city migrants who fail to cope with
city processes. Kibaha district has its main administrative centre at Kibaha -Mailimoja which also
doubles as the main administrative town of Pwani region.
Due to limitation of time and other resources, the study was only limited to Kibaha ward,
one among the nine wards making the Kibaha district. Other administrative wards include
Mailimoja, Kongowe, Visiga, Magindu, Tumbi, Kwala, Soga and Mlandizi. The Kibaha ward
being accessible by main highway is one of the wards most affected by city expansion. Villages in
Kibaha ward especially those along the Dar es Salaam -Morogoro highway are turning into small
centres. In view of these facts, the researcher found out that Kibaha ward was an ideal place for
study as well as a good representative of rapid peri-urban interactions in Tanzania which depicts
many identifiable features of rural -urban linkages.
Within Kibaha ward itself, a sample of two villages (clusters) was picked. The villages were
purposefully selected in a way that one village (Mikongeni) has predominantly a more rural life
and another (Miembesaba) being a small centre within peri-urban sphere as shown on Map 1
below. Selection of villages within different spatial locations was intended to capture a wide range
of spatially separated economies. Furthermore, with the help of village leaders, a semi structured
sampling of households representing two major groups (migrants and local communities) from
two clusters was drawn .A sample of 30 households was drawn from Mikongeni which has 186
households. Likewise 30 households were drawn from Miembesaba which has 318 households.
Overall, the drawn sample representing about 10% of households in both villages was thought to
be adequate for gauging respondents’ voices and complemented my understanding of problem.
Furthermore, a snowballing sampling approach was applied to get key informants familiar
with peri-urban interactions and livelihoods. The list includes village elders, Village Executive
Officers (VEOs), Ward Executive Officer (WEO), Division Officer (DO) and District
Administrative Officer (DAO). Table 2 represent key informants in study.
Table 2: A summary of respondents and informants
Category
Heads of household
Village elders
VEOs
WEOs
DO
DAO
Total
Sample size
60
2
2
1
1
1
67
Source: By Researcher -2011
4
Map 1: Showing Kibaha Ward
Source: National Bureau of Statistics 2011.
1.5 Data collection methods
In the study, both primary and secondary data were collected. Primary data were collected to
explore more on peri-urban livelihoods such as migration trends, land size and use. Secondary
data were collected to give past information about the problem in study area and comparable
data from other places. Primary data were gathered through a combination of households’
survey, interviews and observation. A survey was done through open and closed end
questionnaires, which were administered to heads of households to get social economical
profiling such as demographic patterns, migration trends, livelihoods and coping strategies.
Interviews were conducted with key administrative officers (VEOs) at two villages. It was
further extended to knowledgeable elders outside the formal administrative circles so as to
5
compliment information obtained from official channels. Furthermore, interviews were
conducted to WEO, DO and DAO on matters beyond the villages and on general government
administrative issues. Observation was also made at household and community level in order to
construe a better understanding on people’s livelihoods. The researcher used the opportunity to
observe matters not captured in household survey or during interviews with an emphasis being
put on unaccounted and informal livelihoods and coping strategies.
Furthermore, a wide range of secondary data was gathered at village, district and national
levels. Useful secondary data collected at village level includes past and current population
statistics, migration and land disposal records. At district and national levels, useful data on
population, migration trends, and poverty statistics were collected from National Bureau of
Statistics (NBS) archive.
1.6 Data analysis and presentation
Quantitative data obtained from surveys was analysed by Excel programme. The data was
analysed and summarised in frequency tables and charts. Qualitative data was analysed manually
and used in combination with quantitative data to supplement researcher’s knowledge in
interpretation and understanding of study findings. The presentation of finding is both in
qualitative and quantitative. Data obtained through interview and observation is presented in
descriptive form, while those from questionnaires are presented mainly in tables and figures.
1.7 Limitation of Study
Confinement of the study to one district and sixty households may have narrowed the scope and
objectivity of study. Therefore, the results from this study could not be taken as a representative
of the problem in Tanzania. The researcher also experienced some problems on obtaining
accurate and complete secondary information at village level. The Villages’ offices lacked
complete and updated records. The secondary data used in study which was mainly extracted and
compiled by triangulating various sources may not be completely free from error. Furthermore,
given the time constraint, it was difficult for the researcher to access District Executive Director,
a key policy maker at district level. Failure to access this key informant may have denied a
researcher an opportunity to know important policy issues on livelihoods. In order to achieve the
objectives, the researcher addressed this weakness by extensive use of secondary data obtainable
from various sources.
1.8 Structure of the Paper
The study is organised in five chapters. The first chapter covers the background, statement of
problem and data collection methods. Chapter two presents a review on relevant peri-urban
literature and analytical frameworks. The case study findings and discussion are presented in
chapters three, four and five. The last chapter gives the conclusions on the study.
6
Chapter 2: Conceptual and Analytical Review
2.1 Introduction
This study is constructed on the premises that rapid urbanization resulting from natural
population growth and rural-urban migrations has been one of the main causes for the flow of
people from cities to peri- urban interface. The flow of people and resources from urban has
often triggered off new transformation processes within peri- urban areas. The transformation
processes have resulted into changes of livelihoods strategies depending on the social economic
position of peri- urban actors. Tacoli (2002) argue that construction of livelihood strategies also
depends on rural- urban linkages such as a form and type of migration.
The discussion in this chapter therefore focuses on the linkage between peri-urban
transformation processes and livelihoods changes. First, is the discussion on urbanisation, urban
expansion and a flow of people to peri-urban interface. The second part is on peri-urban
conceptualisation including references to various alternative approaches key for understanding
peri- urban interactions. Then follows the discussion on the central point to peri-urban
transformation processes (peri-urban livelihood strategies).The chapter concludes with a
discussion on peri-urban analytical frameworks as tools of study analysis.
2.2 Urbanization
Dyson (2011:36) defines the term urbanization as “an increase in the proportion of a population
living in the area that is defined urban’’. The classification of the area as urban has long remained
subjective and country specific. This has been a source of problems in making urbanisation
comparison between countries and also over time as there is no uniformity in setting population
threshold of urban places (Owusu 2008, Oucho and Gould 1993:276). In Tanzania too, a
definition of what constitutes an urban is still problematic, however it is widely accepted that the
criteria that characterise urban or town include demographic changes, a concentration of a
minimum economic and commercial activities within limited location triggered by
industrialization, spatial expansion of settlements and changes of people’s life styles (URT
Population Census, 2002)
While an urbanisation process in developed countries has been part of long term
industrialization process, the urbanisation process in developing countries especially Sub Saharan
Africa has not entirely been associated with industrialisation drive. The process in developing
countries and sub Saharan Africa inclusive has occurred in places with little economic growth. In
extreme cases it has occurred in places where the economy was negative (Fay and Opal 1999,
Oucho and Gould 1993). Failure of urbanisation process in Africa has often linked to failure of
economic policy and poor governance. Van der Ploeg and Poelhekke (2008:15) argue that this is
partly due to urbanisation concentration in few governments’ preferred cities without considering
market competitiveness. In most countries where industrialisation has preceded economic
growth, it is often considered that rural-urban migration has been a major driving factor beyond
rapid urbanisation process.
The major consequence of urbanisation process in Africa is that it has not contributed to
betterment of living standards. In many countries including Tanzania the process has been a
7
source of unemployment and other challenges associated with megacities, such as slum growth,
poor infrastructure and uncontrolled expansion of urban areas (Owusu, 2008). Rapid spatial
expansion of settlements has forced people to converge to areas around cities as they seek new
social economic opportunities and productive bases. This is now a common manifestation found
in most major cities in Africa where peri-urban areas are considered as key strategic places for
both rich and poor city dwellers.
2.3 Peri-Urban Interface (PUI)
Under ordinary meaning Peri-urban area normally represents a circular area around urban
centres, which may depict both rural and urban characteristics. However, in social development
context, peri -urban area which is also referred as Peri-Urban Interface (PUI); is considered to be
more than being an area surrounding cities. Nottingham Forest and Liverpool Universities
(1999:5) view it “as an area where urban and rural development processes meet, mix and interact
on edge of cities. It not as discrete but rather [as] a diffuse territory identified of features and
phenomena, generated largely by activities within the urban zone proper”. On the other side
Narain(2009:502) define PUI as “a place characterised by continuous but un-even process of
urbanisation, where agriculture, urban and natural resource systems are in constant interaction”
In many places, peri-urban areas have resulted from urbanisation processes within major cities,
where cities have depended on resources from peri-urban areas (Satterthwaite and Tacoli, 2003a).
Peri-urban interface is therefore considered to be a home to different groups of people with
diverse origins, occupations and social classes who interact together to exploit available resources
for construction of livelihoods.
2.3.1 Peri- urban Conceptualisation
The study and research work on PUI in developing countries dates back to 1990s when early
pioneers like Rakodi (1998) and Nottingham and Liverpool Universities (1999) started research
on PUI poverty and resources management. Given the scarcity of specific literature on PUI at
that time, the early work on PUI had to borrow from either a rural or urban literature and
extrapolate it to Peri urban studies. In addition to aligning with either rural or urban side, the
school of thoughts and approaches to peri-urban understanding seems also to be influenced by
social development theories such as neoclassical, dependency and human agency theories (Mbiba
and Huchzermeyer, 2000). Apart from ‘rural’ or ‘urban’ way of thinking, there have been those
in intermediate position, who viewed peri-urban area through a holistic approach incorporating
both rural and urban characteristics.
2.3.2 The Urban approach
The urban approach seems to anchor on Neo-classical and Modernisation theories. Neo-classical
thinking is based on the ground that free market conditions can bring optimal results in both
economic and social activities. From neo-classical view, peri-urban contradictions and conflicts
are seen as necessary outcomes of market led changes (Mbiba and Huchzermeyer 2000:124).
Likewise, modernisation theory views peri-urban change as a positive process which leads to
better local economy. One of the key influences of neo-classical and modernization theories are
emergence of Growth Pole Theory. The Growth pole theory which has its prominence in1960s
and 1970s was based on notion that government planning and investment in urban were key in
8
propelling economic growth, which was ultimately to flow to rural areas. (German
1999:9).USAID and UNICEF organisations development work looked at PUI from an urban
point of view (Mbiba and Huchzermeyer 2000:119).The same pro- urban thinking was also
reflected in formulation of policies for solving the urban problems.
The major critique of the approach is that trickle-down effect thought to benefit the poor in
terms of increased services and employment did not materialise in places where the policy was
adopted. Therefore, the urban approach was critiqued by rural “developmentalists” as being
parasitic. It was advanced that the tackling of inequality to resources access was more important
for the poor than waiting for growth effects. It is within this sphere of pro urban criticisms that
we find the ‘urban bias theory’ which has based on long-time notion that the rural ways of life
were being eroded and turned into place of neglect. Lipton (1977) argue that despite all the
resources in rural area, the rural was becoming poor and the urban which has little resource has
much articulation. He saw it as systematic distortion of development policies in global South in
favour of the interests of urban area against that of majority rural population. Behind distorted
policies goes the power of urban dwellers in determining and allocating state resources for the
benefit of urban sectors at discrimination of rural sectors. The government being under influence
of powerful urban classes tend to allocate development project for the benefits of city dwellers
and vocal rural elites. The implication of this is that the resources flow from the poor to the less
poor urbanites.
Although there have been subsequent counter criticisms on Lipton views, however I find the
theory still relevant today as it serves to highlight the effect of power abuse in many developing
countries, where projects are politically determined and rural life is neglected. Despite the cry
against the anomaly, urban bias is increasing (Eastwood and Lipton, 2000 quoted in Jones
2010:9); and still the rural is experiencing massive levels of poverty.
2.3.3 Rural approach
The rural oriented approach is a shift away from economic growth approach and more inclined
on Neo-Marxist or Dependency theories. The Neo-Marxist considers spatial arrangements and
conflicts as unavoidable outcomes of capitalist organised community. Under such arrangements
land holding classes use land for their own benefits at the expense of poor and landlessness
(Mbiba and Huchzermeyer 2000:125). The assumption being that structural inequalities are
replicated in urban, rural and peri urban areas. Dependency (underdevelopment) theory considers
peri- urban commercialisation of peri urban activities and land markets destructive to community
livelihoods. Negative outcomes are considered to be product of exploitation whereby capitalist at
centre are undermining the periphery whereby government and institutions are viewed too weak
to be able protect the loss of livelihoods (Maxwell et al. 1998)
Based on early underdevelopment theories, the rural approach to peri -urban studies focuses
on bottom up development. It aims at people centred development where satisfying people’s
wants at their rural areas is given priority. It is from this notion we find that the pro-rural and
agriculture donors such as DFID and FAO viewing peri-urban interface as rural place
transforming to urban and not urban transforming rural. The rural underdevelopment thinking
was also complimented with pro rural policies aimed at increasing agriculture productivity and
addressing the rural-urban inequality by reducing spatial differences (German, 1999).
9
The critics to the rural approach view it as another form of bias, insensitive to urban poverty. It
is argued that the poverty is an issue of rural as well as urban (Lofchie 1997 in German 1999:11).
Therefore development plans should not be selective of either rural or urban side. Furthermore,
as it was the case with industrialization drive, the rural policy failed and in many places
contributed to rural-urban migration (Mosha 1989).
2.3.4 An integrated system (rural -urban linkage) Approach
Looking at PUI through either a rural or urban perspective, left much room for subjectivity
depending on donors, discipline and viewers focus (German,1999).In certain cases the
complexity of peri-urban interactions has often led to vague conceptualization and understanding
of the nature of processes taking place (Mbiba and Huchzermeyer, 2000: 114). In that view,
looking at peri-urban problems from either a rural or urban perspective appeared to be
misleading and denies an opportunity of understanding the ‘hybrid’ life within the peri urban
sphere. It is argued that since PUI problems results from complex interactions of both urban and
rural aspects (Rakodi 1998; German 1999); then its conceptualisation should also follow an
integrated system approach made of rural and urban subsystems. It is further argued that the
system approach views peri-urban livelihoods in a holistic rural-urban linkage and allows studying
of components of peri-urban social and economic processes and linkages between them (Potter,
1989 cited in German 1999:15).
Rural- urban linkages recognises that there is a flow of people, resources and information
between rural and urban areas(Owusu 2008,Tacoli 2002).The linkages between the rural and
urban sub sectors are viewed as a two- way interaction, whereby there are movements of people
and resources from rural to urban and vice versa. The economic linkage between two sides is one
of key factors influencing the outcome of rural or urban livelihoods as result of residents
depending on a combination of rural and urban resources. There is documented literature on acts
of reciprocity between rural and urban households where rural families benefits from urban
remittances and urban members receives food from rural (Tacoli, 2002; Kamete 1998).The
existence of symbiotic relations between rural and urban has often made poverty as an issue of
both rural and urban areas, with studies showing that poverty in rural areas have an impact on
urban and vice versa (Tacoli 2007). Bah, et al. (2003) further observed that linkages and sectoral
inter-dependence are key systems which determine how different peri-urban groups construct
their livelihoods.
2.4 Peri-urban livelihoods
Based on system thinking which informs this study, the peri-urban livelihoods is further linked to
a closely related concept of ‘Sustainable Livelihood Approach’ (SLA). In an ordinary meaning
livelihood means earning a living. However, in rural social studies, SLA can be used in three
different ways: as a set of principles, as an analytical tool and or as general development objective
(Farrington 2001).To understand it as a concept one has to rely on the work of Chambers and
Conway(1991:10) which describe it as;
a livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets (stores, resources, claims and accesses) and activities
required for a means of living: a livelihood is sustainable which can cope with and recover from
stress and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets and provide sustainable
10
livelihoods opportunities for the next generation; and which contributes net benefits to the
livelihoods at the local and global levels and in short and long term.
According to Chambers and Conway, capabilities and assets are two key pre-conditions for
people to achieve sustainable livelihoods. He asserts that it is the interaction of people
capabilities and assets (tangible and intangible) which determine livelihoods strategies and
ultimately output/outcome. Maxwell and Smith (1992:31) see livelihoods outcome (good or bad)
as much determined by assets, access and management of those assets. DFID (1999) recognise
people at centre of development and poor have a right to interpret and determine their own
development. In that respect, sustainable livelihoods approach allows people to interpret and act
according to their own priorities. It further allows people to venture into activities which they
are competent of. This implies livelihoods results from the means, entitlements and other
possessions at people’s disposal.
Although many scholars have tended to conceptualize livelihoods differently, however they
tend to converge to the view that sustainable livelihood outcomes are influenced by multiple
factors. They view sustainable livelihoods as an outcome of complex interactions which vary
among individuals, from one place to another and across spaces. Understanding complexity of
people’s livelihoods usually starts with identification of many factors influencing the decision
making and livelihood strategies of peri- urban population. In developing countries, peri-urban
population is often composed of urban migrants, rural migrants and indigenous communities.
Regarding urban migrants, Browder et al. (1995) argue that this group move to peri-urban areas
as result of urban expansion and transformation processes within cities, mostly low income city
dwellers that move to city peripheries for the purpose of seeking cheap accommodation.
However, it has also been observed that alongside the poor city migrants, middle income earners
and wealthier people also tend to move out to exploit natural resources such as land. Middle
income dwellers are known to acquire land for construction of own houses and for
establishment commercial activities as supplement to income (Owusu 2008).On the other side,
Briggs and Mwamfupe(2000:804) observed that following 1980s trade liberalization in Tanzania,
middle income workers transformed the Dar es salaam peri-urban areas from a zone of survival
to zone of investment.
In addition to urban migrants, PUI has also been a favourite destination for rural migrants,
who prefer to reside in peri-urban areas and small towns either as their final destinations or
temporary stop before finally settling in inner cities (Owusu 2008:461). Migrants tend to rely on
informal nonfarm activities within peri-urban areas for their livelihoods and some do daily
commuting to inner cities to seek for informal jobs. A small portion of temporary migrants often
opt to make peri-urban settlements their final destination.
The indigenous group is normally the largest at the start of transformation process, with the
majority of people engaged primarily in agriculture and natural resources extraction and mostly
utilising family labour in production of own food and for sale. For this group land is still an
important asset. However, this is the group thought to be negatively affected by transformation
process as they are often caught in resource competition. In sub Saharan Africa, it is dominated
by competition between wealthier and poor and but also between poor and politicians and
government officials. ‘The powerful groups tend to exploit their access to resources and ability to
dictate over land entitlements’ (Leduka 2000 cited in Mbiba and Huchzermeyer 2002:121) This
may also be understood from Marxist thinking , where land conflict is seen as a process of
gradual dispossession of land from the poor with the farming bases being is eroded. In many
11
places that has often led to unfavourable consequences on poor farming communities.
Despite land being a major source of livelihoods for this group, recent studies in rural and periurban show that more people are also moving from agriculture to non-farm activities (Owusu,
2002). However, it has been observed that in certain places the majority of farming communities
have failed to move to nonfarm activities, probably as result of both extrinsic and intrinsic
factors. For instance, Fischer (2008) noted that Tibetan farmers’ inability to take low paying jobs
was associated with culture and personal dignity rather than low education. That implies the
locals will only be able to diversify in places where social economical constraints to non-farming
activities are well addressed to.
Presence of diverse groups and classes with different power relations, interests and
livelihoods strategies within peri-urban interface, therefore brings complex interactions between
people and resources. This kind of interactions often create a mix of opportunities and
constraints to various groups, where some win and some loose In places where peri -urban
transformation process particularly land use has not properly managed, that has exacerbated the
polarisation between winners and losers (Mbiba and Huchzermeyer 2002:121).Therefore,
management of people’s movement and resources in PUI for the benefit of all actors is a
challenge which we need to overcome if we are to secure sustainable livelihoods of the
poor.(Satterthwaite and Tacoli 2003a:65).
However, critics including Scoones (2009) argue that the livelihood literature have put much
emphasis on peoples own ability to act on their own discretion forgetting the position of politics
and power in livelihoods construction. In reality, it is not every poor could make rational choices
in construction of livelihoods as it is often common to see the poor losing in the very place the
richer are thriving. Lipton (1977) calls for redistribution mechanisms as means of helping the
poor rather than thinking on wealth creation alone.
2.5 PUI Analytical Frameworks
The recent shift from analysing individual’s income to multidimensional poverty approaches
particularly asset approach seem to have an impact on a shift in analytical methods; as researchers
sought a way of capturing the individual transformation process and specifically management of
individual’s capability and assets base. It is within this shift we now find PUI Asset Models, and
particularly the Asset Vulnerability Framework becoming a common tool of analysis in periurban livelihoods.
While conventional poverty studies uses poverty line approach as measure of poverty, the
Asset Vulnerability Framework as tool of analysis goes beyond the income poverty dimension;
and recognises poverty as much related to vulnerability(Carney 1998, DFID 1999, Moser 1998;
Rakodi 1998 ). Vulnerability as a multi-dimensional approach looks more on long term poverty
dynamics and observes how people fall into and come out of poverty as well as identification of
risks and response in using available opportunities to recover from shocks (Maxwell and Smith
1992).
Despite the minor variations on analytical frameworks in use today (DFID, Moser, Carney,
Ellis and others), depending on where the framework is applied (rural or urban) or themes
addressed; the general Asset Framework Model as an illustrative tool (Figure 1) recognises
livelihoods as a function of three interrelated factors namely assets (resources), transformation
structures and processes and outcome and adaptation strategies (Carney 1998). The Asset
12
Vulnerability Framework depicts various components of a livelihoods system. It usually shows
that people own and use various assets (tangible and intangible) at their disposal for income
generating activities. The type of activities one engages in depends on the type of assets
(resources) owned or available to him.
The use of assets is further influenced by external and internal transformation structures
(Ellis, 2000). While the external influences can determine who to access and how to use
resources, the internal factors determine nature of activities people engage in. The
transformations processes in peri-urban areas are influenced by formal institutions at national
and local levels as well as social relations, culture and norms. Therefore in order to achieve
positive economic outcomes, a person needs a combination of assets and favourable
institutional structures which allows access and free utilisation of assets in construction of
livelihoods. Ellis(2000) further noted that the end results of optimal use of assets and livelihoods
strategies is outcomes, which in its positive form could be represented by improved well being,
reduced poverty and increased capability as well as environmental sustainability.
Figure 1: The Sustainable Livelihoods Framework
Source: Adopted from Carney (1998)
Among the major criticisms on Asset Vulnerability Framework is that, the model is rural based
and that it is mostly suited for those who obtain livelihoods from agriculture and natural
resources. Therefore it is unsuitable for urban and small urban centres which are a usual
phenomenon in peri-urban interactions. Since PUI involves both urban and rural characteristics,
failure to capture urban characteristics may make the model misleading (Tacoli 2002).
Despite the criticisms, the Asset Vulnerability Framework remains as main tool of analysis on
poor’s livelihoods strategies and outcomes. The tool enables researchers to understand better the
changes of livelihoods occurring among various groups in peri-urban interface as they pass
through transformation process. By nature, any transformation process is a dynamic process
which is likely to put one group of people into poverty and assist another to come out of
13
poverty. That kind of dynamism and vulnerability could be fairly captured through Asset
Vulnerability Model. The model cuts across many livelihoods stages such as acquisition and loss
of assets, positive and negative changes in livelihoods and peoples own response to changes. In
totality, it fairly identifies the type of vulnerability associated with each asset (table 3 below),
outcomes of such inability to use assets and assists in designing likely solutions for taming the
causes of vulnerability (Maxwell and Smith 1992, Moser1998, Carney 1998)
Table 3: A Summary of Asset Vulnerability
Type of Vulnerability
Land and Housing
Outcome of crisis
Potential solutions
Loss of land asset and Facilitate ownership, improve
livelihood source,
regulatory structure
Inability to use housing in
productive work,
Human capital
Inability
to
maintain
investment in education and
health,
Decline in use of social
networking,
Social capital
Labour
Financial capital
Improvement of
and health for all
education
Encourage community based
organisation, provide safety
nets.
Loss of income(unable to Provide safety nets, provide
diversify)
skill training
Inability to start new business Encourage micro financing,
facilitate use of
land as
collateral
Source: Adopted from Moser (1998) and modified by Author, 2011.
In this regard the framework allows the researcher to follow a chronological flow of
transformation processes within the peri-urban, from the time migrants enter and thereafter as
the process passes through other stages such as access to resources, construction of livelihoods
and the outcomes of such interactions. It further allows incorporation of diversity of assets from
both rural and urban perspective, therefore removing the rural or urban bias. In place where
there model was insufficient, other related theories and literature particularly on rural livelihoods
have been used to compliment my study.
14
Chapter 3: Peri - Urban Development and Migration
This is the first among the three chapters which reports and discusses the findings obtained from
a study of peri- urban interactions. Other research findings could be found in chapters four and
five. The study findings in this chapter covered peri-urban development and migration. The
findings explore villages spatial positioning, migration trends, population growth and households’
demographic composition and its consequences on livelihoods.
3.1 Villages spatial positioning
Both villages under study fall within the ambit peri-urban fringe. Despite the villages being within
range of peri-urban area, the two are marked by differences in development and livelihoods as
result of their spatial positioning. Mikongeni is a peri-urban village situated about 5 kilometres off
the main Dar es Salaam – Morogoro highway. The village was established in 1982, following
nationalisation of colonial sisal estate by the government. The freed land was made available for
resettlement by former landless estate labourers. By the year 2006, the village has 180 households
and a population of 989. For the majority of households, the main activities have remained to be
agriculture and natural resource exploitation. However, in the past five years, the village has
experienced a slight change in livelihoods following an increased flow of migrants. This kind of
interaction has a slowly changed the economical life of the villagers and livelihoods strategies,
where now a few people are turning to non-farm activities. On the social front, the village still
lacks reliable infrastructure and necessary public social services such as hospital and schools.
On other side, Miembesaba village gained its village status in 2000 following the division of
Kongowe Village. According to 2002 census, the village had 316 households and population of
1,668.The village is located on Dar es salaam-Morogoro highway, which is a busy trunk road
linking the capital city with upcountry regions. Due to its strategic spatial position, the village
cum small centre is bustling with multiple non-farm activities along the main road, giving the
impression of a thriving and upcoming peri-urban small centre. There are a few upcoming new
private investments in form of light factories which make it potential place for employment
creation in future. On the social side there are noticeable modern houses and other urban social
amenities such as electricity, piped water and public schools.
The major notable phenomenon is that the difference in spatial positioning has been a major
determinant of the speed and direction of peri-urban growth. The growth and population
concentration often start with peri- urban areas along major connecting roads, before spreading
to other peri-urban areas beyond the trunk roads. In this case Miembesaba which is along the
road seems to have more economic potentiality than Mikongeni .This pattern of peri-urban
growth and population concentration could also be observed in other towns in Tanzania where
peri urban growth has primarily concentrated along major trunk roads leading to evolution of
many small towns(Mung’ong’o and Mwamfupe 2003).
3.2 Population growth
As is the case with most peri-urban areas in Tanzania, the population in both villages has also
been growing. Population data indicate that number of population growth in Mikongeni village
rose from 600 in 2002 to 989 in 2006. This represents an average annual increase of 10%.
15
Likewise, the population in Miembesaba rose from 1,668 in 2002 to 2015 in 2011, that
representing an average annual increase of 3.4%. The population growth in both villages is above
the annual increase of Kibaha region, thus making both villages among the fastest growing places
in the region. Although population growth of a place could be determined by both demographic
transitions and migration (Oucho and Gould 1993), it seems in- migrations have been a major
contributing factor in population growth in both villages. This appears to be in line with evidence
from other small centres in Tanzania which show migration as major cause of population
growth. Data on natural growth in both villages were not available to enable a full analysis of
other factors contributing to population growth.
The rapid growth of the population in both villages may point to an impending pressure on
resources of which people use in meeting their needs. Since the peri-urban resources particularly
land is fixed, people needs to overcome the resource pressure through efficient and equitable use
of recourses in order to meet their needs. In places of extreme pressure, people should start
thinking of alternative livelihoods.
3.3 Household demographic composition
Apart from population growth, other household demographic composition such as size of
households, distribution of members by age and gender and distribution of head of households
by gender, are important factors in determining the livelihood strategies. The household
characteristics not only allow households to choose the type of activities they engage in, but also
determine and prioritise the use of household resources such as productive assets and labour.
The same is also true when it comes to livelihoods failure as household composition often
influences the kind of coping strategy to be adopted.
The study review shows that most households have an average of 4.3 persons. This is below
national statistics which show average household is 4.7 for urban and 4.9 persons for rural (URT
Population census, 2002).However, the size of household is similar to that of nearby Dar es
Salaam city. This may be interpreted that the PUI household size is taking a more urban pattern.
The household size may look suitable for non-farm activities rather than farming work which is
normally labour intensive. This could probably be one of the reasons which make non-farm
activities an upcoming strategy in peri-urban areas.
The distribution of head of households by gender show male dominance, which is consistent
with general trends in many households in Tanzania.(Table 4) However, data showing female
heads of households at 22 % in the area of study were a little bit lower compared to national
average which show the female heads of households at 36%. A comparison of the head of
households’ data for the two villages show that female heads of household ratio was higher in
Miembesaba than in Mikongeni. This poses the question of whether the female heads of
households, who mainly comprise of widows and divorcee, are finding small centres more
accommodating. In other peri-urban studies in Tanzania, Tacoli (2005) observed that female
attraction to urban and preference to non-farm work is influenced by lack of land bases, which in
many places is mainly dominated by their male counterparts.
16
Table 4: Percentage Frequency Distribution of Head of Households by Village, by Age
and Gender
25-40 yrs
41-60 yrs
61-96 yrs
TOTAL
Mikongeni
Female Male
2
8
2
15
3
20
7
43
Village Total
10
17
23
50
Miembesaba
Female Male
2
8
8
12
5
15
15
35
Village Total
10
20
20
50
Grand
Total (%)
20
37
43
100
Source: Field Data- August 2011
It has also been identified that age was another important characteristic in household livelihood
strategy. In Tanzania, active working age is recognised to range between 15 and 60s .However, it
was noted that many households (43%) are headed by elderly above 60 years. The ratio of elderly
heads of households with age above 60s, were higher in Mikongeni than in Miembesaba. The
high ratio of elderly at Miembesaba may be related to its history, where the majority of heads of
households remain to be those who founded the village following nationalisation. The overall
dominance of elderly in many rural and peri-urban places can also be explained by migration to
urban by young men, leaving behind elders to care of ancient homes (URT Household Budget
Survey, 2007).Presence of many elderly headed households cast doubt on the ability of
households to improve their livelihoods.
3.4 Migration trends
An overall peri-urban migration trends show an increased flow of people from various places to
PUI. While the peri-urban migration has known to be a two sided affair (incoming and
outgoing), however recent migrations streams in Tanzania show that peri-urban areas are more
of receivers than senders (URT, population census, 2002). This is also the case for most periurban areas in Kibaha region. The survey results indicate that in both villages a number of inmigrants exceeded the number of out- migrants. Interview with village executives in both villages
revealed that there has been a steady annual increase in number of in-migrant households, while
the number of out -migrant households remaining low or negligible. For instance in Mikongeni
village, the number of annual incoming households in village register raised from 12 in 2006 to
24 in 2010, while the VEO estimated a number of households moving out over the same period
to be about ten2. In Miembesaba, the annual in- migrants’ households increased from 6 in 2006
to 25 in 2010 while the recorded number of out-migrant households for same period was about
five. Table 5 below summarizes a number of incoming households from 2006 to 2010.
2
The Researcher could not get the exact number of out migrants as no records are kept for that purpose
17
Table 5 - Number of Migrant Households in Miembesaba and Mikongeni
Village
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Miembesaba
6
13
12
18
25
Mikongeni
12
17
17
23
24
Source: Compiled by researcher from village records- August 2011
3.5 Origin of migrants
As pointed out earlier, peri-urban migrants are known to originate from different places. During
the study, migrants was found to be coming from ‘urban nearby’, ‘urban faraway’, ‘rural nearby’
and ‘rural faraway’. The overall data from respondents in both villages show that migrants from
rural-faraway were dominating. This was followed by migrants originating from urban–faraway
and rural-nearby. In third position was those who came from urban-nearby(see figure 2
below).While the survey data appear to be in agreement with available national data which show
more people are moving from rural to urban, but one needs to be cautious to generalise this
trend. As already pointed out, the presence of high number of rural to rural migrants in my study
could be partially influenced by the fact that the majority of Mikongeni founder members were
labourers from other rural areas who came to work in sisal estate before nationalisation or a few
years after. Therefore, the rural-faraway migration picture in Mikongeni doesn’t necessarily reflect
current migration trends elsewhere. Nevertheless, one important observable phenomenon is that
it seems most rural migrants are becoming a leading group in peri-urban migration patterns.
Although the data further tell us that urban is still an important source of peri-urban
migrants; however the data show that within this sub group, migrants from urban-faraway were
dominating. These findings are not consistent with available national data which indicate that
cities have higher turnovers with nearby regions than distant ones. Given the fact that Dar es
Salaam city had a high turnover with Pwani region; it was expected that majority of urban
migrants in these villages to be originating from Dar es Salaam City. Whether this is a one off
phenomenon, the matter may need further analysis.
18
Figure 2: Origins of respondents by village
Source: Field Study- 2011
Apart from peri-urban migrants originating from different places, they also belong to different
social- economical classes. The social –economical class of migrants often determine the reasons,
purpose of migration and livelihood strategy. Using an economic factor to categorise them, in
general peri-urban migrants could further be divided into sub groups of wealthier, middle income
and poor migrants.
The wealthier category comprises of migrants who buy big pieces of land for immediate and
future use. Among the land immediate users, are investors who buy land for the purpose of
establishing industries and other big projects. This category of investors was observed in
Miembesaba village. Other investors buy land for either future use or speculative motive. It was
observed that in majority of the cases they do not develop the acquired land, apart from fencing
the land and building small quarters for security guards. However, this sub group is known to be
the provider of limited non-farm employments. Apart from providing employments, they also
tend to enhance migration as result of sourcing security guards and farm boys from their rural
places of origin. This could definitely limit employment opportunities to locals.
The middle class sub group seems to be very active in terms of land development and
nonfarm activities. The sub group is usually made up of “urban nearby” working class and
retirees, with the majority acquiring land for construction of residential houses. While in the past
retirees retained strong links with rural home and had a tendency of going back in their native
land (Oucho and Gould 1993:265, Tacoli 2007), the situation in Tanzania seems to change. Most
retirees now establish homes in the nearby peri -urban areas of their last duty stations, where they
engage in farming and non-farm activities. It was observed that the retirees’ favourite activities
include animal rearing and commercial farming of high value products. It is also not uncommon
for those still within active age, to go back for wage jobs in nearby cities.
19
On the other side, the working urban migrants appear to capitalise on relatively cheaper
prices of peri-urban land (compared to city) to establish settlements. This class has also been
observed to be very active in peri-urban trade. Most bars, shops, brick making sites are owned by
this sub group. They tend use it a source of income supplement as well as a strategy of wealth
accumulation. Given the fact all sub groups here live on multiple activities, the strategic position
of the peri urban area offers this group more flexibility of combining work and trade. This has
been a common practice in other peri-urban areas in Africa, as was also observed by Kamete
(1998) in Banket in Zimbabwe.
The poor peri-urban migrants could be of two types, namely poor urban migrants and poor
migrants with rural origin. While studies show that poor urban dwellers are among those moving
to urban places for settlements (Satterthwaite and Tacoli 2003a), in my study, the picture of poor
urban dwellers was relatively missing. They were missing as both land buyers and house renters.
In the first case, it seems the poor are incapable of buying land in competitive peri -urban land
markets. The poor who normally prefer small plots are now locked out of land transactions
which goes by acreage, locally known as ‘’hatua sabini kwa sabini”3 . In later case, while Rakodi
(1998) argue that low-income urban poor prefer cheaper peri-urban settlements, it can be
suggested here that long distance from peri-urban locations to town and poor state of
infrastructure are becoming a barrier for migrants to reside in PUI. It makes it difficult for them
to reside and commute to town. As it stands now, the peri-urban set up doesn’t support the
livelihoods of poor urban migrants.
The poor rural migrants are further grouped into two sub types; those coming from rural
nearby villages and those coming from rural far away. The rural nearby migrants represent
migrants attracted to the upcoming opportunities in the small centres along the main road. It was
observed that migrants from the ‘nearby rural’ are now seizing an opportunity of growing
centres to do petty trading and some are looking for informal employments. A key informant
confided with me that it was now common for the nearby rural communities to sell their
agricultural land and use the money to establish settlements in upcoming centres, with the hope
of making quick returns from non-farm activities or land deals along the highway which its value
tend to appreciate much quicker than the rural one. Very few are known to have invested in
houses with a view of rental.
The ‘far- rural ‘type represents rural -urban migrants from other regions who migrate to work
in non-farm activities or on their way to the city. Most engage directly in non-farm activities such
as petty trade and passenger ferrying ventures, locally known as “bodaboda”4. Within this category,
some migrants later opt to settle permanently after failing to complete their dream journey to the
city.
Presence of migrants from various destinations and of different social classes seems to create
different perceptions among various groups and particularly the locals. The perceptions by
groups were seen to be more influenced by its social economical status. Discussion with
members of local community on perceptions on migration patterns revealed mixed feelings. On
one side, there are a few locals who see no tangible benefit accruing from migrants, while
migrants viewed just as exploiters of natural resources particularly land. Despite the negative
comments, they failed to substantiate how their own livelihoods were impended by migrants’
3
4
This represents estimation of an area equivalent to one acre.
Ferrying of passengers by use of motor cycles, mainly an activity of youths.
20
actions. Furthermore, it was observed that these were the very people who sold land to migrants,
hence making their statements contradictory.
On the other side, it was the view of the majority respondents that the migration activities
were beneficial to the local community. The majority explained that migrants’ presence played a
key role in creation of non-farm jobs which helped them to supplement their farm income.
Other respondents saw creation of non-farm activities as a major support to the landless youths.
These views were also echoed by the VEO in Mikongeni who said that;
Migrants have helped to create employment for the youth and in that matter kept them out of
criminal acts which are normally associated with high levels of youth unemployment.
While the majority had a positive view on migrations, however they point out that a more
organised peri- urban transformation process could have brought better results than what we see
now. In that case, they shift the blame to government institutions for failing to regulate the
transformation processes.
3.6 Chapter Conclusion
It has been observed that the location of villages within peri-urban sphere influences the
economic development of the village and pattern of settlements. Villages located along the
highways were seen to attract more migrants than those away from trunk roads. Study findings
show that peri-urban population is rapidly growing at rate higher than national average with inmigration particularly from rural areas being a major contributing factor.
It has been observed that while the village’s economic strategies were influenced by spatial
positioning, household livelihoods strategies were more dependent on other factors such as
social class and household composition. It was generally established that wealthier and middle
income urban migrants had better chances of engaging into remunerative activities. It was further
observed that poor migrants from rural and urban areas had problems in shaping their
livelihoods where many were lacking asset bases particularly land. Difference in livelihoods
opportunities among various groups was a source varied perceptions on impact of peri-urban
migration. However, the majority respondents are seeing peri-urban migration beneficial to their
general wellbeing.
On other side household composition was also found to be another key factor in determining
livelihoods strategy. Households’ characteristics such as gender, age, size of households were
seen to influence livelihoods strategies and determine type of activities one engages in.
21
Chapter 4: Livelihoods
This chapter covers the livelihoods strategies practiced by peri-urban communities. The first part
covers productive assets which includes discussion on ownership and uses of productive assets.
This is followed by a discussion on major occupations of peri- urban communities. Last in this
chapter, is a discussion on factors perceived to support as well as constrains livelihood strategies.
4.1 Productive asset base
Although income measurement is commonly used as measure of one’s livelihood outcomes,
assets bases is an important factor in determining how one engages in economic activities and in
case of livelihood failure, how better and quicker responds to shocks(Moser 1998). In many
places depending on whether urban or rural areas, the poor normally attach importance to a wide
range of productive assets such as land, passenger vehicles and housing. The study reviewed the
ownership and use of two common productive assets of the peri -urban communities namely;
housing and land.
4.1.1 Land
In many places, land issue has exhibited a complex scenario of ownership, acquisition and usage.
In Tanzania, land is normally under the mixture of customary and statutory rights. In peri-urban
areas, the situation is even more complex as we find existence of both formal and informal land
markets (Bah et al. 2003). A similar situation was also revealed in my study. For instance, though
the field study shows that land was a major productive asset in both villages, the majority of
households (76%) had land below 4 acres, which is below national average of 5 acres (HBS 2007)
.Shrinkage in land size, may indicate early signals of pressure on land in the area of study. A
comparison of land ownership overtime, indicate that the land acreage per person is decreasing.
Such a decrease could result from either natural increase or in-migration. Further analysis show
that, the share of land owned by local households was decreasing, while that of new wealth
migrant’s was increasing in size and in proportion to total land in village. This implies that new
incoming migrants have been acquiring land from locals and some already settled migrants were
increasing the size of their land at the expense of locals. This pattern corresponds with studies in
Mali where it was observed that wealth and middle class tended to displace undercapitalised
farmers (Bah et al. 2003).
However, the notable difference is that despite the land acquisition being mostly done my
wealth urban in-migrants, there were remarkable acquisition by a few locals (founders) aimed at
increasing their share of land. On face value one may be tempted to think that the locals were
using extra remittances above consumption amount to acquire land which they had no
immediate use; however information from key informants revealed that some were in fact buying
land on behalf of their family members as part of accumulation strategy.
Although the study show that the share of land held by locals was shrinking, the data on land
usage show that an average cultivated land per annum was less than available cultivatable area.
This indicates that despite the decrease in land size; not all cultivatable land was utilised.
However, under cultivation may not mean surplus land, but point out to either unequal
22
distribution of land or lack of adequate labour. Inequality in distribution of land is supported by
number of respondents reporting incidences of land borrowing for cultivation. As pointed out
earlier, land access and ownership was found out to be a critical issue to youths and low income
migrants.
4.1.2 Housing
While land remains important for those households practising farming, on the other side there
is an increased importance of housing as assets among certain households. This is more evident
in upcoming centres such as Miembesaba. Apart from using it as commodity (shelter), poor
house owners use it as a source of income through rental and base for establishing small
business. Though house renting does not provide substantial income, it has been an important
security for house owners. People with houses are bankable and that allows owners to engage in
informal borrowing for consumption purposes. It has been a common habit for poor house
owners to borrow from their better off tenants on condition of offsetting it with future rental
liabilities. However, money obtained this way has mainly been used for consumption purposes
with cases of using money for investment being limited. The study also noted a number of house
owners operating from their homes. This can perhaps be reflected by easiness to start new
business ventures from home bases without worrying for rental premises. Small businesses such
as shops, restaurants, and salons can be easily accommodated in one part of family house. This
was also noted by Berner et al. (2008) where they found out that survival of home businesses was
attached to advantageous usage of household labour such as housewives and children. However,
given the small magnitude of such businesses, returns from this source are merely meant for to
households’ survival rather than providing a real economic ‘take-off’. That means in places where
house cannot command valuable rent, it is unlikely for housing assets to be used as means of
uplifting the poor from poverty.
4.2 Peri-urban Occupations
PUI is normally marked by differences in livelihoods strategies depending on the level of
development and geographical location of the village. Presence or absence of investments and
livelihood supporting services such as road and market access could clearly make a difference.
Within PUI itself, differences in individual choice of occupations depend on social-economical
position of actors as well as the type of asset stock held. Studies on PUI in Tanzania by Eriksen
et al. 2005) as well as in area of study revealed that the livelihood is characterised by multiple
activities such as agriculture and a range of non-farm activities.
4.2.1 Farming
Agriculture still remains a number one activity for the majority of the PUI poor communities
particularly within households still having ample farming land and who reside a bit far from the
roadside. Households depend on farming as source of both food and cash. Since much
importance is still attached to the use of productive assets (land), failure of crops or loss of
productive assets could be disastrous to this group of peri-urban dwellers. Apart from being an
23
occupation for the poor community, agriculture is also increasingly becoming important
occupations for peri-urban retirees. Taking the advantage of their retirement benefits and
superior education, retirees mostly engage in farming of high value products destined for nearby
city markets. It was observed that retirees along the Dar es Salaam –Morogoro highway are much
dependant on vegetable and fruit farming as well as indoor poultry and dairy farming. The
cultivation of high value product is a common phenomenon in other parts of Africa. Bah et al.
(2003) report it being a major source of livelihoods for peri-urban communities around Bamako
city in West Africa.
It was further noted that communities depending on land, also depend on natural resources
extraction such as sand quarries and forest products. It was observed that the local households
with ample land in Mikongeni village have been leasing their land for sand quarrying. This
strategy has gained importance as an alternative way of livelihoods among elderly that are weak
enough to engage in active agriculture or non-farm activities.
4.2.2 Non-farm Activities
Although data from field show the majority of respondents here still value farming as main
activity, there is also a substantial group who recognise non-farm activities as another alternative
to livelihoods (figure 3 below). Non-farming activities involve both self employment and
employment within the sector. Self employment comprises of those households engaged in own
trade, production and service activities such as petty trade, brick making, passenger ferrying,
carpentry among others. Also non-farm activities offer employment in informal activities as well
as formal sectors. Miembesaba being a small and upcoming centre; it attracts miscellaneous petty
trade in consumer goods and social services. With the emergence of new industries in the area, it
is likely a number of those engaged in formal employment will increase. However, it is unlikely
such an increase in employment will benefit the locals, given the low level of education in the
area.
24
Figure 3: Respondents’ Main Occupations by Village
Source: Compiled by researcher-2011
Although field data tend to suggest the notion of activity preference, however that does not
mean that preference in one activity excludes one from engaging in other activities. The real
practice is that many households are increasingly depending on multiple activities (diversification)
rather one major activity. HBS (2007) data also tend to support this view. During my study,
presence of multi activities was further confirmed by one village elder who revealed that;
People here tend to work on farms during rainy season, doing employment when the work is
available and doing petty business when employments ceases. Generally they do whatever jobs
come on their way. They do so to make sure the end meets, as nowadays single source is neither
reliable nor sufficient
However, the nature of activity and ability of household to diversify was found to relate to
various determinants such as household labour, age and gender. It was observed that households
with ample human labour were in better position to diversify as result of superior labour
advantage. That allowed family members to work in farm and do non-farm activities at same
time. It was noted that though many households prefer to diversify, household labour was not
always available. This was the case for the majority of respondents (56%).It was further noted
that availability of labour was also influenced by households’ composition, where households
with more children and elderly were considered to be disadvantaged. The majority of
respondents in field study (about 70%) indicated that household members were not able to work
because of members being either too young or too old.
Another important observation made was that diversification and moving into non-farm
activities was also age and sex dependant. An observation on those practicing non-farm activities
indicates that the youths and female were among active groups. It was further observed that a
proportion of youth, and migrants engaged in nonfarm activities were higher than that of other
25
groups. For instance in Mikongeni, it was the youth and migrants who were mostly involved in
brick making and sand quarrying. While male youths were active in manual work, female youth
were the ones who provided quarrying support services such as food vending. A good number of
youth are also known to commute daily to nearby road side, where they engage in petty trade and
passenger ferrying activities.
As it was the case for the farming communities, the youth attraction to nonfarm activities is
also thought to be influenced by both push and pull factors. Push factors include frequent crop
failure, lack of own land and negative attitude towards agriculture where youth perceive that no
meaningful development could be obtained from agriculture. As the youth see no breakthrough
in agriculture, therefore tend look for alternative source of livelihoods. This can be summarised
by this statement from one of the youths;
“I have seen my father doing this odd job (agriculture) since I was little boy. See what we are
having today, it is a patchy house, we can hardly afford ordinary meals and my young brothers and
sisters can’t follow school properly. If I don’t do something different now, definitely am going to
fall into my father’s footsteps”
Bah et al. (2003) argue that the movement of youth into non-farm activities is also influenced by
their desire to seek own independence from control of elderly in family farming. Therefore, nonfarm activities offer them an opportunity to break away and balance the power relations. On
other side, the pull factors include a dream of obtaining high income in nonfarm, hence able to
own or buy own assets such as bicycles, mobile phone and even motorcycles.
Apart from the youth group, female group was also among the active participants in nonfarm activities. While previous peri-urban studies in Tanzania (Lanjouw et al. 2001) show less
participation of female in non-farm activities; however in my study female were seen to be
competing with men in various sectors of non-farm activities. This could probably result from
increased levels of household poverty, therefore making female participation an important part
of overall household diversification and income generation strategies.
Despite female participating in many non-farm activities, but they were more dominant in
certain activities where they had a niche. Female were active in petty trade such local brewing,
selling vegetables, food vending, hand craft and charcoal selling. These are the types of
businesses which require minimum establishment capital that can be easily obtained from family
members or money lenders. However, it was noted that female entrepreneurs in Miembesaba
relies much on borrowing from FINCA, a micro finance institution. Observation made during
the weekly loan remittance exercise at village local office, was that micro credit is almost a
women affair. It was noted that 18 out of 20 present were women. VEO of Miembesaba
explained that, though credit was not contributing so much in business growth but helped them
to run small business and smooth consumption.
4.3 Livelihoods supportive structures: Rural -urban Interdependence
The importance of the link between rural and urban cannot be overemphasised as we see how
the two spatial areas continue to depend on one another. With an increase in spatial economic
integration and modern communication networks in many places, it has now been made it easier
and cheaper for the linkage between remote areas and biggest cities, almost on daily basis. For
instance, in places where money remittances from town to remote rural areas used to take weeks,
it can now be conveniently transacted by mobile money transfer just within seconds. Likewise, it
26
is now possible for rural farmers to connect with urban markets over mobile phones. (Aker and
Mbiti 2010).This kind of rural-urban interdependence has in most cases facilitated livelihoods
strategies.
The study observed existence of linkages where both sides benefited from each other. It was
observed that the peri- urban communities have been relying on remittances, city crop markets,
supply of capital, employments and supply of social services. City markets were found to be
important market for cassava producers in Mikongeni as well as for those engaged in farming of
high value products in Miembesaba. Migrants’ movements to peri-urban areas were a major
source of cash originating from land transactions. In other places migrants’ investment in
economic and social services had contributed to an increase in non-farm employments.
On the other side, urban dwellers have been major beneficiaries in peri-urban interface as
they continue to depend on peri-urban land as place for settlements and investment. Acquisition
of land for settlements was visible in both villages. Although land acquisition for investment was
a pattern in both villages, it was more visible in Miembesaba where urban dwellers are investing
in light industries. Another potential linkage between urban and rural has been through
utilization of rural labour. Urban dwellers have been utilising labour from the local communities
as well as from other rural faraway places. Labour could be utilized either in peri-urban
investments or investments located in city.
Urban side further enjoyed exploitation of various peri- urban natural resources. It has been
observed that peri -urban area was a major source of cooking energy for poor urban dwellers.
Since poor cannot afford costly urban electricity and gas energy, many depend on firewood and
charcoal sourced from peri-urban areas.
4.4. Constraints to livelihoods strategies
While agriculture and non-farm works remain the two major livelihood strategies available in
both villages, there have been various impediments to farming as well as in adoption of non-farm
activities. The study identified human capital, lack of technology, loss of soil fertility and climate
change among the barriers to livelihoods. Other factors like poor infrastructure, and weak
government’s institutions were also seen to constrain livelihood strategies.
4.4.1 Human capital
Investment on Human capital (Health and Education) has been at centre of global poverty
agenda including World Bank, IMF and United Nation through MDGs .For instance IMF view
human capital not only as key determinant to growth and poverty alleviation but also critical for
human development in general (Baldacci et al. 2004).In its broader perspective, investment in
human capital is viewed as both a short and long term strategy which could help countries reduce
poverty and stimulate economic growth.
Education
At micro level, education level attained by household head or one among the family members is
considered to play a key role in livelihood construction and income generation. It is now
generally considered that families with high education level have high chances of attaining better
27
life than those with inferior education. In peri- urban interactions where productivity is declining
and land shrinking, it considered increased human qualities and skills could help households
enlarge their opportunities and improve wellbeing.
Although education was not considered by many respondents as a barrier, occupations in
two villages suggest that education has an important role to play in livelihood strategies. While
field study (figure 4) indicates that the majority of population in both villages are those who
attained the primary education and a few with no schools at all, however the difference of
livelihoods strategies in two villages is likely to be associated with education level. Data indicate
that Miembesaba village which had people with vocation education as well as those with
university education was more engaged in nonfarm employment than Mikongeni.
Figure 4: The Level of Education by Village
Source: Field Survey, 2011
This suggests that NFA adoption in Miembesaba village may probably be related to superior level
of education as it is considered that an educated person can easily excel in nonfarm through
adopting new business skills and technology. Likewise, ability to get formal employment is much
related to level of education. This can be supported with survey data which show Miembesaba
had more people employed in formal sector than Mikongeni.
Lack of adequate education therefore, has both shorter and longer effects. On short term, in
places where education level is high people are likely to venture into remunerative activities with
high probability of success while people with less education will remain relying on traditional and
less productive jobs which only allow them to survive. On longer term horizon, people with poor
education will fail to improve their livelihoods and end up passing the poverty burden to their
children.
28
Health
On equal footing presence of good health is an important factor in production and livelihoods
activities. Health is both human capital on its own and supports production of other types of
human capital (Bleakley 2010). In short term, a health person can be able to follow work and
generate income. In the longer term, the health society has potential of promoting its general
wellbeing and reduces poverty.
A Survey in two villages show the level of health services in two villages was not adequate.
While Miembesaba has a single public health facility, on the other side Mikongeni had none.
Inadequacy of health services has a negative impact on health, which subsequently may have
further impacted production. For instance it was observed that women in Mikongeni had to walk
long distances to nearby villages to attend to under-five children clinics .This causes mothers to
lose many labour hours which could have been utilised in production. Lost working hours was
likely to be more adverse to households with labour constraint.
4.4.2 Lack of technology:
Technology which is closely related to education is a key factor in increasing productivity. During
the study, low technology and skill were seen as barriers to both farming and non farming
households. The farming households lacked appropriate agriculture technology which could have
helped them turn around agriculture productivity. Challenges associated with lack of farming
technology may be addressed through introduction of relevant technology which could facilitate
adoption and application of appropriate technology of land and resource management. Adoption
of appropriate agriculture technologies would ultimately lead to agriculture intensification and
subsequently allow farmers to reap more return from farming activities.
Lack of technology may have also been a constraint to sustainable utilisation of natural
resources. It was observed that sand quarrying and lumbering which are now used as poor’s
coping strategies were causing negative impact on environment. Uncontrolled sand quarrying has
become a major source of soils erosion and loss of farming land. Likewise wanton tree cutting
has been a major source of deforestation, soil erosion, and climate change. Environment
degradation through sand quarrying and lumbering can be limited through adoption of new
conservatory technologies. Such technologies should allow current sustainable utilisation of
natural resources without compromising the future use of natural resources. Households should
be taught on how to use natural resources in making high value products rather than selling low
priced raw materials. This will save the environment from destruction and it also contributes to
households’ income generation.
For non-farming activities, lack of skill was found to be a challenging hurdle. Lack of skill has
an impact on the quality of goods and services produced. Most of those engaged in NFA
particularly in Miembesaba, are poor artisans using rudimentary production technology and tools.
The use of poor technology results into production of costly and inferior goods. Inferior goods
have little chances of competing in free market thus making artisans’ activities less remunerative.
On contrary, adoption of better production technology will lead to production of quality goods
at lower cost, thus allowing the artisans to reap reasonable return on investment. This will
ultimately allow them to meet their consumption as well as expand their businesses.
29
4.4.3 Loss of soil fertility and Climate change
Following years of continuous tilling of land, it seems the farming land has lost soil fertility. The
farming community also reported experience of erratic rains and frequent spells of draught. Loss
of fertility and draught has been hampering farming activities resulting into a decline in crop
yields. This may linked to frequent spells of food experienced by farming households. This
notion was supported by VEO of Mikongeni who reported severe shortage of cassava (the main
food and cash crop) to the extent that the village small cassava processing mill has stopped
operating because of lack of cassava raw materials. The major effect of poor yield can also be
evidenced by a number of people turning to other livelihood strategies, as they find agriculture
less remunerative. Challenges associated with poor yields associated with loss of soil fertility
could be dealt with by introduction of relevant technology to increase farm yields. It further calls
for the provision of safety nets in event of unpredictable short term weather related fluctuations.
That will provide for the poor a leverage they need so as to enable them mitigate for
vulnerability.
4.4.4 Financial Capital
Lack of adequate financial capital or credit has been a major barrier in establishment of business
or expanding business. Interview with key informants in both villages revealed that capital was a
major barrier to people to establish economic business. They further claimed that new businesses
needed substantial upfront capital to buy working tools as well as provision of working capital. In
places with low infrastructure which is a typical case for most peri-urban areas, the start up
capital is usually much higher as business owners would further need extra money to put up
necessary infrastructure such as electricity and piped water.
Data from survey show that majority of people are not connected to formal lending facilities
such as banks and microfinance institutions. The data show that 57% of those who started new
business depended on own saving as a source of finance. This was followed by 15% of
respondents who relied on capital from family and friends. 10% of respondents reported to have
sold their assets to obtain a start up capital. Only 5% of respondents reported obtaining loan
from formal lending such as microfinance institutions and saving and credit societies. The
observed pattern here is also common in other parts of Tanzania, where lack of capital has been
major hindrance to establishments of new economic ventures. Absence of formal money lending
institutions in peri-urban areas has compelled people to resort into unreliable and costly informal
borrowing. And for those with no ability to attract lending from any other sources, may
completely be unable to start business or improve farming. The credit constraint was also found
to be a barrier in Asuncion (Paraguay) where peri-urban farmers were unable to expand their
high value farming to take advantage of city markets (Zoomers and Kleinpenning 1996 in
Satterthwaite and Tacoli 2003a).
4.4.5 Infrastructure
Presence of good infrastructure is known to be a stimulant of social and economic wellbeing of
people in a given place and its absence means the contrary. As it has been observed earlier, the
30
difference in the level infrastructure particularly road network in the villages has been a major
factor for varied level of livelihood strategies. During the study, infrastructure was considered a
setback in Mikongeni area as the village lacked a passable road, public water and electricity
systems. Respondents in the village observed that while the road was an important in
transportation of farm products, they found out it was the water and electricity which affected
them most. Apart from water and electricity being important social amenities, the two are crucial
inputs in many nonfarm activities. Non-farm ventures like bricking making cannot thrive without
adequate water and electricity as inputs. While the Miembesaba village has a well developed
infrastructure, the respondents however complained of unreliability of services and high costs
associated with utilisation of such services. They pointed out that the charges were so high to the
extent of becoming unaffordable. High cost of inputs renders final goods expensive and non
competitive.
4.4.6 Poor Institutions
Strong and reliable social economic institutions are crucial in enhancing and promoting
livelihoods. At micro level they tend to influence resource access and use. While farming
community relies on institution for regulation of land tenure, rights and markets; those engaged
in nonfarm activities will require government interventions for proper functions of businesses
and trade.
Where much criticisms on institutional failure in land policy and regulation has in the past
been directed at national level (Kombe 1994), it seems the same has now transcended to lower
levels of administration. Observation made at community level revealed that there are no
regulations regarding land rights, utilisation of public or private land. Absence of regulations on
land usage at local level was seen as an impediment to livelihoods and development processes.
One example of poor utilisation of land was observed in Miembesaba, where after failing to find
a suitable place for a public secondary school; the village had to locate it in an abandoned sand
quarry.
Absence of land rights was also found to constrain livelihoods. Interview made with farming
communities revealed that absence of legal documents on land ownership was a major hindrance
to their livelihoods strategies as it denied them chances to obtain loans by using land as security.
Since land remains to be the only reliable asset for the majority of poor farmers, the chances of
poor getting capital to finance farming and nonfarm activities will also remain slim. And for
those who have opted for land disposal, they have not been successful either. Many have
sometimes found falling prey to buyers and middlemen as there are no institutional frameworks
at village level to protect them. In many cases the land disposal issue has remained between the
wealth buyers and desperate poor sellers. The Village leaders have in many places remained just
as certifying agents with no clear institutional role. On extreme cases they tended to side with
wealth buyers.
On the other side those engaged in nonfarm activities particularly petty traders, have been
involved in frequent crashes with the government institutions for contravening government
restrictions on conduct of business. It was observed that most of petty traders in Miembesaba
prefer hawking their merchandise along the main road, which is prohibited place. Absence of
designated places for petty traders is a common phenomenon in many upcoming centres and
31
mostly associated with poor institutions. Presence of institutions could have alleviated the
problem and hence saving lives lost through accidents and goods lost during skirmishes between
law enforcers and petty traders.
4.5 Chapter conclusion
The discussion in this chapter has pointed out that although agriculture still dominates as number
one livelihood strategy; current transformation processes coupled with the dwindling farming
fortunes are compelling people to switch to non-farm activities as an alternative livelihoods
strategy. Though non-farm activities are yet to be of a larger scale, however the general trend
shows a positive potentiality as an alternative livelihood strategy and particularly for urban
migrants, youth and women. This could be seen through an increased number of people within
these groups joining non-farm activities.
While the migrants, women and youth are moving into non-farm activities because of their
competitive advantages, other groups and particularly elderly farmers cannot move along this
trend as they still face various constraints such lack of skill and capital. Ellis (2005) argues that
ability of this group to diversify depends on how well we address the constraints in order to
allow expansion of opportunities for diversification.
32
Chapter 5: Livelihoods Outcomes and Coping Strategies
5.1 Outcomes of livelihoods
Outcomes of livelihoods can be either positive or negative. The positive livelihoods can be
exhibited in various ways such as improved income, capability or empowerment among many
others. On the other hand negative livelihoods can be expressed by an increase in poverty and
lack of empowerment. Although income measurement of poverty has been a conventional way in
identification of poverty levels, however the poverty identification method issue is still subject to
debate as we see rise of various alternative methods such as Sen’s (1985) Capability and
Chambers (1992) Participatory approaches among others. Given the time constraints and
unavailability of household income data, this study used a participatory approach to gauge
respondents’ views on how they perceive their well being. Respondents were asked to give their
perceptions on their current economic wellbeing in relation to past years and further to explain
on how they meet their current expenditure. Furthermore, respondents were asked to make a
comparison between their respective villages and neighbouring villages.
Survey outcomes from respondents in the two villages gave varied results. The results from
survey show that 52% of respondent considered themselves as much worse off than they were a
year ago. With 23% of respondents reported being little worse off. It is only 9% who reported
being better off. (Table 6).The data for those reporting being much worse off, was almost similar
in both villages. Furthermore, the majority of respondents in the two villages (about 58%) think
that the livelihoods across villages were just the same.
Table 6: A Number and Percentage of Respondents livelihoods Perceptions
Mikongeni Miembe saba
Much
worse
now
A little worse
Just the same
A little better
Total
15
16
Total number Percentage
of respondents
31
52%
5
6
4
30
9
4
1
30
14
10
5
60
23%
17%
8%
100%
Source: Field Study-2011
Analysis of consumption patterns does not indicate positive results either, as many households
were found having problems in meeting basic needs such as food, shelter and replacement of
basic household assets. During the study, a significant figure of respondents (28%) reported
frequent food insecurity while the about half of respondents (48%) seldom facing food
shortages. It was only 21% who reported to have never experienced shortages. However, level
and intensity of problems differ among groups and between villages. Of that frequently facing
33
food insecurity, the majority were elderly and households with big size of members. While female
headed households are usually considered to be food insecure (HBS, 2007); however it seems
that is not the case here and particularly in Miembesaba. Most female headed households are
considered food secure, probably due to a higher number of women heads of households
participating in moderately paying nonfarm activities.
Another observable phenomenon is that food insecurity patterns differed among the two
villages. In Mikongeni village most households faces food shortages at certain times of the year,
mostly when the harvest fails to last the whole year. This could be construed that despite the
Mikongeni residents producing own food; they could not get enough food to last the whole year.
Conversely, most households in Miembesaba were unable to access food because of financial
constraints; therefore cash requirements for them become an important part of their livelihoods
strategies.
The deterioration in livelihoods condition can also be observed by poor households’ inability
to access adequate shelter. It was observed that apart from a few modern houses owned by urban
migrants, the majority of houses in two villages particularly by locals where of low quality and
many lacked regular maintenance. It was only 28% of respondents who reported to have
improved their houses in the past twelve months. And for those who did maintenance often had
to rely on remittances and money obtained from the disposal of land. The same trend was
observed when it came to meeting other basic household obligations. The majority of
respondents had problems in meeting children schooling costs. Although public primary schools
are relatively cheap, however some households had children missing classes as result of failing to
meet nominal school contributions. In such circumstances, it is increasingly becoming difficult
for such households to save enough money to enable them purchase other essential household
assets such radios or watch. That implies the majority of peri-urban households are working for
survival rather than improvement of general well being.
5.2 Coping strategies
Households are known to respond differently in event of livelihoods failure. Historically, long
term solutions (adaptations) as well as short term responses (coping strategies) have known to
depend on social capital and economic positioning such as entitlements or set of commodities a
person commands(Eriksen et al,2005:288). With an increase in levels of poverty and livelihood
failure, it seems now coping strategies have been embedded in household livelihood strategies.
However with rapid changes in level of social economic development in peri-urban areas, we are
also witnessing changes in patterns of coping strategies. In some places, traditional coping
strategies are becoming less important, while the use of other coping strategies growing and new
ones cropping up.
5.2.1 Social capital
Social network is now recognised among the important factors in determining household income
as well as a key strategy at time of income failure (Narayan and Pritchett 1997). At times of
hardship, poor households were known to receive food and other forms of assistance from
friends and other close related family members. However, with current social economic changes
34
and particularly in urban and peri- urban areas it seems less importance is now attached to social
capital. It is argued that presence of people from different origins with different culture, varied
sources of income and social classes have been a source of social and cultural fragmentations
(Moser 1998:4). Social fragmentation removes the ‘help each other spirit’. With peri-urban life
being so close to urban life, people are attaching much weight to commoditisation rather than
barter trader. Where in the past it was possible to borrow food and repay in food that is not
possible nowadays.
It was also observed that increased level of poverty which is marked by unreliable incomes
and frequent food shortages may be another reason for a collapse of social help spirit.VEO at
Miembesaba noted that “it has now become increasingly difficult for people to help each other,
as nobody is certain of what will tomorrow income inflows be. People tend keep for themselves
whatever little food they have, with the hopes of striking a fortune before the stock is over. This
suggests that social network; a traditional coping strategy for the poor is becoming less significant
therefore leaving the poor on their own. Beall (2001:361) observed that in Ghana poverty among
families was the main cause in eroding the social networks of poor than creating opportunities
for strengthening social capital. In places where there are no reliable public safety-nets the poor
are likely to suffer most.
5.2.2 Migration
Migration has been known to be one of key aspect in shaping African settlements trends and a
favoured coping strategy in event of adverse livelihoods (Tacoli 2002) People are known to
migrate from one place to another as result of adverse conditions or promising opportunity at
place of destination. During the study it was noted that the traditional use of migration as
copping strategy by peri-urban local communities is declining and changing direction. While in
the past the local community failing to cope with peri-urban life, has a tendency of moving from
peri-urban locations to more rural places where they acquired free land and started new
settlements (Briggs and Mwamfupe 2000), however the current trend shows that in event of
livelihoods failure the local communities tend to sell their remaining land and move to nearby
centres. This is reinforced by survey data which show an increase of number of migrants from
‘rural-nearby’ to Miembesaba village. Oucho and Gould (1993: 263) also noted that rural to rural
migration which involves farmers moving from one area to another in search of new land is
falling, probably because of suitable land is increasingly in short supply”.
Another observable unusual migration pattern was that of elderly migrating to large cities or
elsewhere to join their working family members. Some elderly are known to have sold all family
property including land before they migrate. Traditionally elderly have been watchdogs of family
land and property in rural areas. It seems this role is now vanishing, probably due to less
importance attached to rural assets and place of origin by current working generation. The trend
of not attaching importance to traditional home is also observable within retirees, who now
prefer to settle close to their last duty station.
5.2.3 Remittances
Remittances as a coping strategy are increasingly becoming important. Many studies including
that by Eriksen et al. (2005) in Kenya and Tanzania found out that remittance was an important
35
aspect of family income during drought season. During the study, it was also observed that a
substantial number of peri-urban households were receiving remittances from elsewhere.
However, the groups of those receiving remittances were mostly confined to elderly and retirees.
In Mikongeni, where a number of elderly constituted a major proportion of population, elderly
were big beneficiaries of remittances. Since most of them were above the working age,
remittances had been their dependable source of livelihoods. On the other part, retirees were
found out to be major recipients of remittances in Miembesaba. Apart from using it for
consumption, surplus remittances was used in purchase of land plots closer to highway and
establishment of nonfarm activities. In both cases the studies demonstrate that remittances are
still important particularly for those sections of poor who cannot thrive on their own. And in
case of surplus remittances, the poor have gone beyond consumption and used it wealth
accumulation.
5.2.4 Land Disposal
Sale of land asset is usually used by the poor in rural areas as a measure of last resort, only
disposed off when all other survival and coping means have proved futile. However, it was
established that selling of land has been used by un-bankable poor households as source of
capital for starting new businesses, and in other places for buying new assets (housing,
motorcycles).In this regard land disposal is increasingly becoming an important source of capital
among the farming communities. It has also been observed that the use of land as copping
strategy is gaining importance among farming communities. Discussion with key informants
revealed that the disposal of land to meet daily expenditure is becoming common. Local
households are selling land in order to buy food, meet their children’s schools expenses and
house maintenance. The current uses of using land disposal as a coping strategy are not
sustainable as land is always fixed. This means in long run it may completely erode the livelihood
base of farming communities.
5.2.5 Other Extreme Means
Failure of livelihoods brings many challenges to the poor. In places where the poor are in
desperate need for food and have no legal bailout means, they may be tempted to try whatever
means available. Poor tend to think of survival rather than the means. It was observed that with
increasing level of poverty, landless people have opted for illegal means such as use of public and
private owned natural resources. These practices have further tended to destroy the environment.
While the poor can meet their short term needs, they tend to suffer in long term. Mung’ong’o
and Mwamfupe (2003:3) point out that “degraded environments themselves create and deepen
poverty, as they exacerbate the exposure of the poor to the ravages of nature...”
Discussion with VEOs in both villages revealed that there is increased crime, where people are
now engaging in lumbering activities in public forest reserves and water catchment areas. An
increase in land disputes was also referred to as another indicator of illegal coping strategies,
where conmen tend to sell public land. DAO of Kibaha confirmed that the peri-urban areas
where these villages are located is among the places with high rates of land disputes in the region
36
5.3. Chapter conclusion
From above analysis, it is evident that the general livelihood outcomes have not been promising
as the majority of respondents perceived a slump in wellbeing. However, the magnitude of
impact differs among occupations and also between groups. It is considered that local farming
communities are more vulnerable than non-farming groups. It is within this group we find
people being more prone to food insecurity than other groups. Women and urban migrants
groups were found to be relatively doing better. This reinforces the point that even in same
spatial location; the type of activity, gender and age could influence the level of wellbeing.
It was observed that in event of livelihood failure, the poor often use varied ways to sustain
themselves. The coping strategy adoption often depends on assets and environment surrounding
the poor. Whilst some old coping strategies are still relevant, on the other side some are
becoming less important and new ones are coming up. The new strategies include illegal ones
which tend to meet the poor’s short term needs, while sacrificing longer term livelihood
sustainability.
While livelihood failure and negative coping strategies could be viewed by neo-classicals as
inevitable results of peri-urban transformation processes; however that also points to failure by
state and institutions in regulating the transformation processes. State intervention and regulation
on use of resources for the benefit of poor is a key factor in creating sustainable wellbeing. This
further call for state assistance for vulnerable groups through provision of safety nets rather
depending on transformation processes to take its own cause.
37
Chapter 6: Conclusion
6.1 Salient Recollections
It has been observed that the ongoing urbanization processes within cities still remain among the
factors which compel urban migrants of various groups to migrate to peri-urban vicinity.
Although many tend to think that the peri-urban interactions are largely dominated by urban
migrants, however it was observed that rural migrants; particularly inter-regional migrants are
becoming a dominant force in peri-urban migrations. It was further observed that within the
peri-urban sphere itself, farming communities are converging to established small centres along
the highways. This pattern might indicate that rural migrants are now more attracted to periurban areas rather than going into big cities. This may contravene previous thinking (Owusu
2008), which thought that migrants are using peri-urban fringe as stop over on the way to inner
cities.
Presence of big number of migrants of different origins and classes have seen to create
complex and varied livelihood strategies. Despite agriculture remaining the major occupation by
the majority peri-urban communities, there are changes towards non-farm activities with early
indictors showing that NFA is coming up as an alternative and potential peri-urban livelihood
strategy. The potentiality of non-farm activities is exhibited by an increased number of
households performing non-farm activities with perceptions from groups engaging in NFA
showing that they are relatively doing better. Therefore this creates the expectations that nonfarm activities had the potentiality of stimulating PUI economic development. Empirical
evidence from other peri urban studies show that where the momentum had been supported and
sustained, there is likelihood of more people breaking out of poverty (Lanjouw et al. 2001)
On the other side, for the groups remaining in farming it seems that their future still remain
bleak as was portrayed by a sizable number of households perceiving deterioration in their
wellbeing. Many households in this group are still facing both traditional and new livelihood
constraints. Peri-urban farming communities are still facing old problems common to most rural
communities like low yields and climate change. They also face problems associated with
transformation process where issues such as land shrinkage, inequality in resources utilisation are
being more pronounced. Efforts by farmers to mitigate for such problems are further hampered
by a string of constraints including lack of skill, capital and inability to adapt to change among
others.
Although those facing livelihoods failure could have survived through adopting available
coping strategies, however that too has often been distracted by various constraints making some
of old and known coping strategies being inapplicable. In places where old coping strategies such
social networks are becoming less dependable, the poor are opting for new unsustainable coping
strategies such as sale of land plots. Since many peri-urban areas are characterised by weak
institutions that means the poor are prone to lose as they fall prey to ruthless intermediaries
within uncontrolled informal land markets.
This kind of livelihoods complexity therefore puts much emphasis on role of state and
proper functioning institutions as key factors in promoting livelihoods and wellbeing. In case of
peri-urban areas institutional-led transformation processes should be accorded desirable weight
38
by policy-makers so as to bring levelled played ground for all. Such initiatives should go together
with public provision of safety nets in places where the poor efforts are falling short.
6.2 Emerging Issues
Although the study was framed to answer specific research questions, however the study process
brought up some new insights beyond the study scope which might be of interest to know. It
was observed during the study that there is a growing trend of retirees settling around cities of
their last station of duty, rather settling in inner city or going back to traditional homes.
Documented literature (Kruger 1998:129, Beall 2001:364) shows that the maintenance of rural
asset bases and networks have been part of rural migrants’ security strategies upon retirement
and a way of maintenance of social-cultural link. In this new situation one might be interested to
find out whether this group of peri-urban retirees still maintain any contacts and asset bases in
rural country side as it has been the case before and what implications it has on both retirees and
rural development.
Furthermore, it was observed that a proportion of rural migrants in peri- urban areas are growing
implying that peri-urban areas is probably becoming a favourite and definite destination for
migrants. As this contrasts with previous thinking that rural migrants were city bound, one might
be interested to validate this with bigger sample and assess its impact on urbanization trends and
urban poverty policies.
39
References
Aker, J and I. Mbiti (2010) ‘Mobile Phones and Economic Development in Africa’ The Journal of Economic
Perspectives, Volume 24, Number 3, Pp 207-232.American Economic Association.
Bah,M,.S.Cisse,B.Diyanett,G.Diallo;F.Lerise;D.Okali;E.Okpara;J.Olowoye and C.Tacoli (2003) ‘Changing
Rural-Urban Linkages in Mali, Nigeria and Tanzania’, Environmental and Urbanization 2003:15;13.
Baldacci E., Clements B, Gupta.S and Qiang Cui (2004) ‘Social Spending, Human Capital, and Growth in
Developing Countries: Implication for achieving the MDGS’ IMF Working Paper 04/217, New
York.
Beall, J. (2001) ‘Valuing Social Resources or Capitalizing on them? Limits to Pro-poor Governance in nine
Cities in the South’ International Planning Studies, Volume 6, Issue 4: pp 357- 375.
Berner, E., G. Gomez and P. Knorringa (2008) ‘The logic of Survival of Entrepreneurs and the Moral
Economy of Slum’ Paper presented at The UNU-WIDER workshop’ Entrepreneurship and
Economic Development’ Helsinki, 21- 23 August, 23 pages.
Bleakley, H (2010) ‘Health, Human Capital and Development’ Annual Review of Economics, Volume 2, pages
283-310
Briggs, J and D. Mwamfupe (2000) ‘Peri -Urban Development in Era of Structural Adjustment in Africa:
The City of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania’. Urban Studies, Volume 37, Number 4, Page 797-809.
Browder, J., J. Bohland and J. Scarpadi (1995) ‘Patterns of Development on the Metropolitan fringe, Periurban fringe expansion in Bangkok, Jakarta and Santiago’ APA Journal, summer, pages 310-27
Carney, D (1998) ‘Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: What Contribution can we make? Papers Presented at
Department for International Development of Natural Resources Advisers conference’ DFID
Chambers, R. (1992) ‘Rural Appraisal: Rapid relaxed and participatory’. Discussion Paper number
311.Institute of Development Studies Brighton.
Chambers, R and Conway, G.R. (1991) ‘Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: Practical Concepts for the 21
Century’, IDS Discussion Paper 296.
DFID (1999) ‘Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets: 1-4’. Department of International Development,
London
Dyson, T. (2011) ‘The Role of the Demographic Transition in the Process of Urbanisation”, Population
Development Review, Volume 37, pages: 34-54.
Ellis, F (2000). ‘The Determinants of Rural Livelihoods Diversification in Developing Countries’ Journal of
Agriculture Economics, Volume 51, Issue 2, pages 289-302.
Ellis, F. (2005) ‘Household Strategies and Rural Diversification’ Journal of Development Studies, Volume 35,
No 1, pages: 1-38.Frank Cass, London
Eriksen, S., K. Brown and P. Mick Kelly (2005) ‘The Dynamics of Vulnerability: Locating Coping
Strategies in Kenya and Tanzania’ The Geographical Journal, Vol.171, No 4, pp 285-305.
Farrington, J. (2001) ‘Sustainable Livelihoods, Rights and the New Architecture of Aid” Natural Resource
Perspectives, Number 69.
Fay, M and C. Opal. (1999) ‘Urbanisation without Growth: not so Uncommon Phenomenon’ World Bank
Series Paper, Washington DC.
Fischer, A. (2008) ‘Subsistence and Rural Livelihoods Strategies in Tibet under Rapid Economic and
Social Transition’ Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, Issue 4.
German, A. (1999) ‘Theories and Models of Peri-Urban Interface: A Changing Conceptual Landscape;’
Discussion Paper, University College of London.
Jones, G and S. Corbridge(2010) ‘The Continuing Debate About Urban Bias: The Thesis, its Critics, its
Influence and its Implication on Poverty reduction Strategies’ Progress in Development Studies, Volume
10,issue 1 pp 1-18.
Kamete, A. (1998) ‘Interlocking Livelihoods: Farms and Small Town in Zimbabwe’ Environment and
Urbanisation, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 23-24.
Kombe, J. (1994) ‘The Demise of Public Land Management and Emergence of informal Land Markets in
Tanzania: A case of Dar es Salaam City’ Habitat International, Volume 18, Issue 1, pages 23-43.
40
Kruger, F. (1998) ‘Taking Advantages of Rural Assets as Coping Strategy for Urban Poor: The Case of
Rural-Urban Interrelations in Botswana’ Environmental and Urbanisation, Volume 10.issue 1, pages 119134.
Lanjouw, P., J. Quizon and R.Sparrow (2001) ‘Non-Agricultural Earnings in Peri- urban areas of
Tanzania: Evidence from Households Survey Data’ Food Policy, Volume: 26, Issue 4, Pages 385-403.
Lipton, M (1977) ‘Why Poor People Stay Poor: Urban Bias in World Development’ Maurice T. Smith,
London.
Maxwell, D, O. Larbi, G. Lamptey, S. Zakaria and M. Arma-Klemesu (1998) ‘Farming in The Shadow of
the City: Changes in Land Lights and Livelihoods in Peri urban Accra’ Cities Feeding the People Report
Series. Report no 23.Totonto, IDRC.
Maxwell, S and Smith (1992) ‘Household Food Security: A Conceptual Review’. In Maxwell S and
Frankenberger T, 1992, Households Food Security: Concepts, Indicators, Measurement, IFAD and
UNICEF, Rome and New York.
Mbiba, B and M. Huchzermeyer (2002) ‘Contentious Development: Peri- Urban Studies in Sub Saharan
Africa’ Progress in Development Studies, Volume 2, Issue 2; Pages 113-131.
Moser C.O.N (1998) ‘The Asset Vulnerability Framework: Reassessing Urban Poverty Reduction
Strategies’ World Development, Volume 1, Pages 1-19.
Mung’ong’o, C and D. Mwamfupe (2003) ‘Poverty and Changing Livelihoods of Migrant Maasai
Pastoralists in Morogoro and Kilosa Districts, Tanzania’. Mkuki na Nyota Publishers, Dar es Salaam.
Narain, V. (2009) ‘Growing City, Shrinking Hinterland: Land acquisition, Transition and Conflicts in Periurban Gurgaon, India’. Environment and Urbanization, Volume 21, pages 501-512.
Narayan, D. and Pritchett, L. (1997) ‘Cents and Sociability: Household income and Social capital in rural
Tanzania’. Policy Research Working Paper 1796.World Bank, Washington DC
Nottingham and Liverpool Universities(1999) ‘Literature Review on Peri- urban Natural resources
Conceptualization and Management Approaches’ Technical Report Project No R 6949,Natural
Resources Programme, DFID,UK
Oucho, J and Gould, W. (1993) ‘Internal Migration, Urbanization, and Population Distribution’ World
Bank, Washington DC, National Academy Press
Owusu, G. (2008) ‘The Role of Small Towns in Regional Development and Poverty Reduction in Ghana”
International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Volume 32, Issue 2,453-472
Rakodi, T (1998) ‘Review of Poverty Relevance of Peri-urban Interface Production System’ DFID, UK
Satterthwaite,D and C.Tacoli(2003a) ‘Seeking an Understanding of Poverty that Recognises Rural Urban
Differences and Linkages’ in C. Rakodi with T.Lloyd-Jones(ed)Urban Livelihoods: A People –
Centred Approach to Reducing Poverty. London& Sterling: Earthscan, pp 52-70.
Scoones, I. (2009) ‘Livelihoods Perspectives and Rural Development’ Journal of Peasant Studies, Volume 36,
Issue 1, pp 171-196.
Sen, Amartaya (1985) ‘Commodities and Capabilities’ Amsterdam: North Holland Reprinted by Oxford
University Press, Delhi.
Tacoli, C. (2002) ‘Changing Rural-Urban Interactions in Sub Saharan Africa and Their Impact on
Livelihoods: A Summary” Rural- Urban Working Paper Number 7, International Institute of
Environment and Development, London.
Tacoli, C. (2007) ‘Poverty, Inequality and Underestimation of Rural-urban Linkages’ Development, Volume
50(2), pages 90-95.
United Nations (2006) ‘World Urbanisation Prospects: 2005 Revision’ New York.
United Republic of Tanzania (2002), ‘National Population Census -2001’, Dar es Salaam: Ministry of
Planning and Economic Affairs.
United Republic of Tanzania (2006), ‘National Population Projection Report, Volume VIII’, Dar es
Salaam: Ministry of Planning, Economy and Empowerment.
United Republic of Tanzania (2007) ‘Household Budget Survey- 2007’, Dar es Salaam: Ministry of
Finance and Economic Affairs.
Van der Ploeg, F and S. Poelhekke (2008) ‘Globalisation and the Rise of Mega Cities in The Developing
World’, Cambridge Journal of Region Economy Society, Volume 1, pages: 477-501.
41