What Farm Size Sustains a Living? Exploring Future Options to Attain a Living Income From Smallholder Farming in the East African Highlands

Abstract

Smallholder farming in sub-Saharan Africa keeps many rural households trapped in a cycle of poor productivity and low incomes. Two options to reach a decent income include intensification of production and expansion of farm areas per household. In this study, we explore what is a “viable farm size,” i.e., the farm area that is required to attain a “living income,” which sustains a nutritious diet, housing, education and health care. We used survey data from three contrasting sites in the East African highlands—Nyando (Kenya), Rakai (Uganda), and Lushoto (Tanzania) to explore viable farm sizes in six scenarios. Starting from the baseline cropping system, we built scenarios by incrementally including intensified and re-configured cropping systems, income from livestock and off-farm sources. In the most conservative scenario (baseline cropping patterns and yields, minus basic input costs), viable farm areas were 3.6, 2.4, and 2.1 ha, for Nyando, Rakai, and Lushoto, respectively—whereas current median farm areas were just 0.8, 1.8, and 0.8 ha. Given the skewed distribution of current farm areas, only few of the households in the study sites (0, 27, and 4% for Nyando, Rakai, and Lushoto, respectively) were able to attain a living income. Raising baseline yields to 50% of the water-limited yields strongly reduced the land area needed to achieve a viable farm size, and thereby enabled 92% of the households in Rakai and 70% of the households in Lushoto to attain a living income on their existing farm areas. By contrast, intensification of crop production alone was insufficient in Nyando, although including income from livestock enabled the majority of households (73%) to attain a living income with current farm areas. These scenarios show that increasing farm area and/or intensifying production is required for smallholder farmers to attain a living income from farming. Obviously such changes would require considerable capital and labor investment, as well as land reform and alternative off-farm employment options for those who exit farming.

Narrowing yield gaps does not guarantee a living income from smallholder farming–an empirical study from western Kenya

“…Additional research is required to assess how a living income from farming could be attained through changes in farm area and/or adjusting the cropping system, e.g. cultivating more profitable crops or reaching higher yield levels [ 57 ]. High-value crops could be included in a voucher or subsidy scheme for increased household level income and diversified production.…”

Understanding the Drivers of Production in South African Farming Systems: A Case Study of the Vhembe District, Limpopo South Africa

“…Non-farm Income Marinus et al (2022) highlight the value of diversification of livelihoods to improve the living income of small-scale farmers in Africa. Non-farm income, livestock and vegetable farming rank high amongst examples of additional income sources that have proven successful for smallholder farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa.…”

“…More recently Nwafor and van der Westhuizen (2020) proposed that smallholder farmers could improve their competitiveness through participating profitably and sustainably in agricultural supply chains. This has become the focus of a growing body of research (Giller et al, 2021;Marinus et al, 2022).…”

Relational rationality in land- and water use: facing Mount Kenya in times of change

“…Farming of traditional crops was found to be significantly influenced by a farmer's age or level of education (Brown et al, 2019;Dhraief et al, 2018;Jha and Gupta, 2021;Lambert and Ozioma, 2012) while larger households were likely to adopt new land-use practices (Bartkowski and Bartke, 2018;Kansanga et al, 2021). Finally, an increase in land, labour, capital, and knowledge was likely to increase sustainable crop production (Marinus et al, 2022).…”

“…In Chapter 3, we assess some of the influencers of farmer decisions in the Sub-Saharan Africa which include sociodemographic, geographic factors, economic, and ecological factors as found out in other studies (Beyene et al, 2019;Lambert & Ozioma, 2012;Marinus et al, 2022;Oduniyi, 2022;Pello et al, 2021;Siphesihle & Lelethu, 2020;Wanyama et al, 2021). Besides these factors, rationality of farmer decisions is also based on values they place on nature.…”