The Interplay Between Livelihood Diversification, Gender Roles, and Food Security by Rural Women Farmers in Osun State Nigeria

O.C Olaniyan , O.S Akintobi , O.B Oyesola

Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria

Corresponding Author Email: akintobiolanrewaju@gmail.com

DOI : https://doi.org/10.51470/ABP.2024.03.03.24

Abstract

Keywords

Download this article as:

Introduction

A common view shared by several empirical studies is that most people in Africa reside in rural areas, where agriculture is a major source of livelihood [14]. However, in recent times, majority of rural households no longer rely solely on agriculture to sustain their livelihood. The challenges of emerging times have compelled households to seek additional means of sustenance to meet pressing demands both at home and beyond.  For instance, in Nigeria,  notably, 82% of rural households diversify their income sources, with as much as 69% of the total rural household income derived from non-farm activities [4].

According to [18] Livelihood is a means of obtaining life’s basics such as food. It encompasses actions required to survive a particular time, as well as the ability to attain the aforementioned demands by working alone or as a community employing both human and material resources. According to [3], livelihoods are a variety of activities people engage in to generate income for a living. Sustainable livelihoods retain their structure, capacities, and assets both now and in the future without causing harm to the natural resource base. Livelihood assets, or means of production available to rural populations, are crucial to the sustainability of livelihoods [16].

Rural households in their struggle to survive and develop a better and sustained standard of living, build a diversified portfolio of activities and social support capacities through a process known as livelihood diversification [7]. Livelihood diversification as defined by [7] is the process by which rural households construct a diverse portfolio of activities and social support capabilities in their struggle for survival and improvement in their standards and means of earning a living. Diversifying one’s source of income can help one manage risks, deal with shock, or locate a substitute for agricultural production. These communities’ inhabitants have come up with alternate economic pursuits as a result of the concomitant rise in poverty. These livelihoods which are activities aimed at earning an income, which could be in the form of hired employment, or self-employment, are all aimed at reducing the level of poverty of rural households and the providing for better living.

Women, especially those in the rural areas are becoming economically diverse, shouldering more than one economically viable activity such as farming, trading, pottery, weaving, and tailoring, to improve earnings and provide a more robust livelihood for their households, while also contributing to the rural economy in regions where they exist. The apparent goal of these activities is to mitigate the seasonality of primary agricultural production and establish a steady flow of income to support life’s challenges. The majority of rural economies have become more diversified, which has reduced policy concerns associated with persistently low farm income and increased the average income of women farmers. It has also opened up new prospects for non-farm employment. [12] inferred that most of the research conducted within this threshold provided insights into the determinants of rural women’s participation in starting and running non-farm enterprises, as well as their contribution to rural household income and quality of life.

Nearly all rural women in low-income families in Nigeria participate in home-based activities such as family farming and non-farm businesses [8], in a bid to reduce the pressure on income from a single source which is inadequate to meet their needs and that of their families. This makes adopting livelihood activities to increase revenue extremely advantageous to their family welfare [10]. It is reasonable to conclude that livelihood diversification activities are the only way impoverished households in developing nations like Nigeria can improve their level of living. The process of sustainability is highly dependent on rural livelihoods’ tolerance to the numerous obstacles faced by rural women [18].

Based on the above, this study analyzed the interplay between livelihood diversification, gender roles, and food security among rural women farmers in Osun State, Nigeria to determine the levels and limitations of  livelihood diversification among rural women in Osun State, Nigeria.

Methodology

The study was carried out in Osun State, located in the south-west geopolitical zone of Nigeria. It is bound in the north, east, south and west by Kwara, Ekiti/Ondo, Ogun and Oyo States, respectively. Osun State has 30 Local Government Areas. The people of the state are warm, hospitable and highly enterprising [17].

A multistage sampling procedure was used to select respondents. In the first stage, the local government areas (LGAs) were stratified into rural and urban areas. At the second stage, nineteen (19) LGAs were purposely selected because they are mostly rural. At the third stage, three (3) LGAs (Ede South, Atakumosa West and Egbedore) were randomly selected from the nineteen (19) LGAs. At the fourth stage, seven (7) villages were randomly selected from the three (3) LGAs. Finally, in the fifth stage,  twenty percent (20%) of rural women were selected using proportionate sampling techniques from the households to give 129 respondents. Descriptive statistics was used to determine the socioeconomic characteristics while Pearson Product Moment Correlation and linear regression were used to test the hypotheses.

Results and Discussion

Socio-economic characteristics of respondents

Results in table 1 show that most of the respondents (35.7%) are within 51 to 60 years of age. The women in the study area are fairly old but still in their productive age which means they can be productive if systems are put in place.

The results further reveal 72.9% of the respondents are married. This describes a value shared by the rural community around the family. Having a family could mean more responsibilities in terms of provision of family needs which will necessitate diversification of livelihood and revenue opportunities in order to ensure security of food for the household members.

The household size data show that most of the respondents (51.9%) have a fairly large house household size of 5 to 7 members. This is descriptive of the number of mouths these rural women have to feed per day. This means they have higher responsibilities in ensuring food security for their large households and could possibly diversify their livelihood to ensure all members of the family are cared for. This result corroborates that of [1] that rural women with fairly large household sizes are motivated to engage in economic activities to support their large households.

Most of the respondents (48.8%) had monthly incomes between N100,000 and N150,000, which is a decent income for an average rural worker. This could be due to livelihood diversification in a bid to ensure a food secure household. This is consistent with the results of [2] who also reported relatively high monthly income among rural households.

The data on levels of education show that most of the respondents had no formal education (48.8%) Lack of formal education could imply lack of access to diverse livelihood sources as formal education has been proven to unlock opportunities and understanding of revenue generating pathways.

The primary occupation of most of the respondents were farming (72.1%)  and trading (27.1%). The rural women are predominantly farmers, who need to diversify their livelihood due to the seasonality of most agricultural produce in order to provide for their households during off seasons. This corroborates with (5) who opined that most of the rural population in south-west Nigeria were farmers.

Level of involvement in livelihood diversification

Table 2 reveals that the major activities the households diversified into were crop farming (x̅ =2.55), trading (x̅ =1.85), palm oil processing (x̅ =1.75), and garri processing (x̅ =1.67). This implies that the rural  women were highly involved  in crop farming, trading, palm oil processing and garri processing. From the result, active participation in these livelihood activities by these rural women could be the sources of stable income.

The result also reveals that respondents also diversified into grinding (x̅ =1.15), hawking (x̅ =1.09), hairdressing (x̅ =1.08), shoe making, and fashion designing (x̅ =1.02), though their level of involvement in these activities was low. This suggests that the limited and unstable income generated from these livelihood activities could be linked to the low level of involvement.

This implies that respondents engaged in farming and  non-farming activities.

Severity of limitation to livelihood diversification

The results in Table 3 show that more respondents (57.4%) experienced severe limitations to livelihood diversification. This indicates that the limitations faced by rural women in diversifying their livelihood are averagely high. This result corroborates the findings of [13] who also observed severe constraints in livelihood diversification among rural households. This could be due to the low level of formal education among rural women which implies that they have to compete with other women to access the limited non-skilled job roles available in the community.

Limitations to livelihood diversification

The result of the analysis for limitations to livelihood diversification on Table 4 reveals that the major limitations were poor transportation system  (x̅ =1.96),  lack of capital  (x̅  =  1.95),  lack of basic infrastructures (x̅ = 1.95), high cost of labour  (x̅  =  1.94)  and lack of credit facilities  (x̅  = 1.91). This means rural women in Osun state had limited access to good roads that should assist them in transporting their inputs and products. This enhances the additional cost of transportation and increases post-harvest losses. The result also reveals that rural women lack enough capital and access to credit facilities to add up additional livelihood activities with the high cost of labour.

Other limitations to livelihood diversification were lack of access to agricultural input (x̅ = 1.75), lack of access to modernized farming techniques (x̅ = 1.75), lack of access to information on different livelihood activities (x̅ = 1.74), and lack of access to land (x̅ = 1.14). The results show that majority of the respondents had access to land and markets for their products.

Relationship between respondents’ level of livelihood diversification and rural women economic security

The result in Table 5 reveals a significant relationship between livelihood diversification (r =0.363, p = 0.003) and the economic security of rural women. This implies that involvement in livelihood diversification had a positive effect on the economic security of rural women. This also indicates that having more than one livelihood activity will make rural women economically secure.

This shows that the ability to support oneself is directly correlated with the degree of livelihood diversity, as has been demonstrated repeatedly in the literature on livelihood studies [11]. This claim that a rural household’s ability to make a living in the informal economy of developing nations is supported by [9]. A person’s degree of livelihood diversification raises productivity, which raises earnings and lowers the amount of poverty for the individual and their families [6].

Relationship between limitation to livelihood diversification and economic security

The result of the analysis in Table 6 shows that there was no significant relationship between limitation to livelihood diversification (r = 0.008, p = 0.949) and economic security. This implies that the limitation to livelihood diversification does not influence the economic security of rural women. Furthermore, it implies that the limitations faced by rural women do not prevent them from diversifying their livelihood activities nor do they influence their economic security because diversification contributes to economic security.

Conclusion and Recommendation

From this study, it is concluded that the majority of the women are informally educated, in their productive age, married, and have a fairly large family size which necessitates livelihood diversification to enable food security. They are fully involved in livelihood diversification with crop farming and trading their key livelihood activities Lack of access to agricultural input and credit facilities are the key limiting factors to livelihood diversification however they are not deterred as they still diversify their livelihood. The result show a positive significant relationship between livelihood diversification and food security. The research concluded food security for rural women is a function of their livelihood diversification. It is recommended that the women be trained on livelihood diversification opportunities and economic support systems be provided for the women.

References

1. Aderinto A. (2012). Effectiveness of stakeholders services on productivity of cassava farmers in southwest Nigeria. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, University of Ibadan, Nigeria, 380.

2. Babatunde, R.O. (2009). Patterns of income diversification in rural Nigeria: Determinants and Impacts: Journal of International Agriculture 48 (4), 305-320.

3. Bryceson D. F. (2002). Multiplex livelihoods in rural Africa: recasting the terms and conditions of gainful employment. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 40 (1), 1-28.

4. Djido A. I. and Shiferaw, B. A. (2018). Patterns of labor productivity and income diversification– Empirical evidence from Uganda and Nigeria. World Development, 105, 416-427.

5. Fabusoro, E. Omotayo, A.M. Apantaku, S.O. and Okuneye, P.A. (2010). Forms and determinants of rural livelihood diversification in Ogun State, Nigeria, Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 34(4), 417-438.

6. Fluitman, F. (2002). Unpublished Plenary discussion on the draft of the World Banks Vocational Skills Development in Sub-Sahara African Synthesis of a Regional Review, Edinburgh University Pp. 83-97.

7. Gebru, G. W., Ichoku, H. E., & Phil- Eze, P. O. (2018). Determinants of livelihood diversification strategies in Eastern Tigray Region of Ethiopia. Agriculture and Food Security, 7(1), 1-9.

8. Haggblade S, Hazell P, Reardon T. (2010). The rural non‑farm economy: prospects for growth and poverty reduction. World Dev., 38 (10), 1429–41.

9. Korboe D. (2001). Government of Ghana: Vocational Skills and Informal Sector Support Project (VSP). Project Evaluation Report (draft, 30 June 2001), 55-61.

10. Matthews-Njoku, C. E. and Adesope, C.O.N. (2007). Livelihood diversity strategies of rural women in Imo State, Nigeria. The Nigerian Journal of Agricultural Extension (10):117-123.

11. Monazza, A., G.G. Kingdon and M. Soderbom (2007). “Genderand Household Education Expenditure in Pakistan” CSAE Working Paper Series GPRG-WPS-025, University of Oxford, forthcoming in applied economics, 119-227.

12. Nagler, P. and Naudé, W. (2014). Non-farm entrepreneurship in rural Africa: patterns and determinants. Discussion paper no. 8008. Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit (IZA) (Institute for the Study of Labour), Bonn.

13. Ogunbanwo, O. O. (2008). Effect of Capital Assets on Livelihood Diversification of Rural Household in Oyo State, Nigeria. Unpublished M. Sc. Dissertation in the Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, 41.

14. Ssozi, J., Asongu, S., & Amavilah, V. H. (2019). The effectiveness of development aid for agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Economic Studies, 46(2), 284-305.

15. Townsend, R., Ronchi, L., Brett, C., and Moses, G. (2018). Future of Food: Shaping the Food System. Retrieved from: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/26506.

16. Vercillo S. (2016). ‘Sustainable livelihoods and rural development’, Canadian Journal of African Studies/Revue Canadienne des Études Africaines, 50(2), 326–328.

17. Olatunji T.T, Ezenagu N. (2016). An Evaluation of selected attractions in Osun state for tourism promotion. The Journal of Hospitality Leisure Sport and Tourism.15, 7-15.

18. Olaniyan O.C., J. O. Oyedele, and O. S. Akintobi. (2024). Livelihood Diversification: A Panacea to Food Security by Rural Farmers in Osun State. Journal of Food, Nutrition and Agriculture. 7: 1-8.