Livelihood Diversification
in Borana Pastoral Communities of
By
Kejela
Gemtessa[1]
Bezabih
Emana (Ph.D)
Waktole
Tiki
Abstract
This paper analyzes the livelihood of the Borana pastoral
communities of
The
study shows that livestock mobility would continue to ensure high productivity
due to changing environment, change water and feed sources, better pasture
supply, etc. However, mobility is curtailed by combination of factors such as
population growth and settlement in remote grazing areas, existence of claims
by different ethnic groups on rangelands, the impartial impact of drought,
increasing settlement to get social services, and the declining number of
cattle holding per household.
In
both pastoral and agro-pastoral communities, the contribution of livestock and
livestock products to the household's income is the highest for the rich and
smallest for the poor owing to the size of livestock they hold. The destitute
households have no livestock. Yet the number of poor households is increasing
due to drought. The livelihood of the pastoralists diversified into crop
production, petty trades, wage, remittance, firewood and charcoal production,
and incense collection.
The
study revealed that the agro-pastoralists are poorer than the pure pastoral
communities indicating that farming has been adopted to cope with food
insecurity caused by declining livestock herd. But the income discrepancy
between the social groups is significantly high. The rich could generate four
folds of the income the poor earns.
Finally,
the researchers recommended that the need for mobility in the use of range
resources in order to cope with the ecosystem vulnerability should be
understood by the federal and regional governments. Appropriate land use planning for appropriate
use of rangeland and delimiting cropland from rangeland is an essential
intervention in a participatory manner.
1. Background of the Study
The
study was conducted in Dire District of Borana zone in Oromiya region in
The
development objective of the study was to inform the policy makers, donors, and
development practitioners on areas and strategies of improving sustainable
livelihoods of the pastoral communities in
The research approach took
account of stakeholders and development partners in the pastoral areas in a
participatory manner. The participatory social analysis used in this study will
be instrumental in the future to properly design and implement interventions
for sustainable development.
Participatory
research methodologies such as Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA),
Participatory Community Dialogue (PCD), and household survey were applied using
standard data collection tools. Participatory tools such as focus groups
discussions, semi-structured interviews, mobility mapping, proportionate
pilling, ranking and scoring, observations, key informants interview, participatory
community dialogue, and woreda and regional-level conferences were used.
Different social groups such as women, elderly persons, adult and youth
pastoralists, minority groups, traditional and religious leaders, and Kebele
administrations participated in the research. Moreover, household survey was
conducted to collect quantitative information in the pastoral communities. Besides, limited household survey was
conducted in order to complement the information obtained through participatory
methods.
2. Methodology and Processes
2.1 Study Area
and the Community
The study was conducted in Dire Woreda, Borena Zone of the
Three communities were selected from 31 communities
for the study. These were Haralo, Dhasi,
and Gollolcha. Communities in Haralo are practicing both livestock and crop production. The rich
households are mainly depending on livestock while the poor households depend
mainly on crop production. On the other hand, the communities in Dhasi and Gololcha rely more on livestock husbandry than crop
production. Crop production in both
communities is a recent phenomenon. Official classification of the communities,
say by the Woreda development Committee, puts Dhasi and Gololcha as
pure pastoralists although crop production is gaining importance in these
communities, too.
2.2 Participatory
Methodologies
The participatory methodologies used in the study include
Focus Group Discussions (FGD), Semi-Structured Interview, case studies,
mobility mapping, wealth ranking, ranking and scoring, proportionate pilling,
Harvard Framework of Gender Analysis, Venn-diagram, and community dialogue. The
process of undertaking the study was recorded by video and digital cameras.
Focus group discussions using semi-structured
interviews were held with four social groups namely, elders and traditional
leaders, women, youth and adult pastoralists, and Kebele administrations in each community. Case studies were also
conducted with minority groups, urban pastoralists, and some selected
pastoralists. Mobility mapping was used to understand the pastoralists'
movement within and outside of their community. Wealth ranking was used to
identify wealth classes among the communities. Proportionate pilling method was
used in order to determine the proportions of various factors from the total
cases. It was used in gender division of labour, household economy, income and
expenditures, wealth classes, etc. Daily routine calendar was used to assess
the gender division of labour. Harvard Frameworks such as activity profile and
access to and control over resources and benefits were used to analyse gender
relations. Venn -diagram was used in
order to identify institutions in the communities. Community dialogue
(conference) was used as a means of creating awareness on pastoral community
development issues and existing gender relations.
Finally, digital documentation of the whole process
was made using video and digital camera.
The Woreda level consultation workshop was organized to create
awareness of the process of the study in
a wider area and give the study a wider perspective. During the Woreda level consultation workshop, the
consulting team also introduced mechanisms of preparation of action plans.
A regional conference was organized based on the
results of the study in Dire Woreda.
Representatives from Oromia Regional Offices, Oromia Pastoral Area Development
Commission, regional PCDP, NGOs and pastoral Woreda representatives
participated in the workshop. The Oromia region PCDP staff and Oromia Pastoral
Area Development Commission participated in the organization and facilitation
of the regional conference. They also participated in the workshop, which
included group work on thematic issues relevant for generating socio-cultural
systems and indigenous institutions, gender relations, social differentiations
and policy perceptions of pastoral communities in different Woredas.
The conference contributed a lot to identifying
uncovered issues relevant for the study in different pastoral areas of Oromia.
The process also helped to create awareness about the problems of pastoral
communities, the roles of indigenous institutions, gender issues, socio-economic
problems of women and pastoral development interventions in general and PCDP in
particular.
2.3 Household
Survey
Besides,
household survey was conducted in the three sample communities. A total of 92
households were interviewed from the three communities. Household survey
questionnaire was administered for various wealth groups, female-headed
households, and husband and wife of the male-headed households. The sample
distribution shows that 34% of female-headed households and 39% poor households
were covered.
3. Land Tenure
Land
in the pastoral area of Oromia is classified into rangeland, cropland,
forestland and water resource areas. The rangeland of the pastoral communities
belongs to the clan. There are two categories of rangelands in the community.
Open graining area is most commonly accessible to all members of the community
and other mobile communities. The second category of rangeland is the so called
“Kalo” means reserved rangeland,
which is managed at Reera level in
Borana. The reserve is often fenced putting a confined area of land out of free
grazing so that some pasture would be available during the dry season. It is
also made available to calves, oxen, lactating animals, and weak animals which
cannot go for fora[2].
Access to the reserve is discussed and decided by Jarsa Reera (the community elders),
and only few animals are allowed to graze at a time so that the reserve is not
depleted.
Crop
farming is expanding in pastoral areas of Oromia. It is recently introduced in
the pastoral communities of Borana. The farmland is locally called Obru.
A community member could request the Kebele
Administration to get a plot of land for crop production. Based on the request
of an individual, the Kebele
administration consults Abba Olla- traditional village leader.
Currently, local government administrations started playing role in limiting
the expansion of cropland and resolving conflicts associated with cropland
expansion. The kebele administration in consultation with the Jarsa Reera permits cultivation of a
given plot for crop farming. The Jarsa
Reera checks if the intended cultivation would affect grazing area, reserve
pastureland, routes to grazing areas and water points and passes a no objection
to the community/Kebele
administration.
The
farmland could be inherited to sons. In most agro-pastoral areas, land
transaction exists. However, as the land in the pastoral community is fragile,
continuous ploughing for a longer period of time is not feasible. Due to this
one can use the plot for one or two seasons. As long as the first person
abandons the plot, other persons could request the local administration and
traditional leaders to use the land without the permission of the former user
of the same plot. This is because the land belongs to the clan (the community)
and the Abba Olla has the authority to relocate the land for another
purpose.
Some
years back, anybody could go and start faming without asking the Abba Olla
or Kebele administration. However,
recently, due to population pressure and high demand for cropland, the process
of acquiring land for crop farming is administered by the Abba Olla and Kebele administrations.
Land
renting in most of the pastoral communities is not yet started. This is mainly
because of the fact that the land is used for livestock grazing. This type of
land use is basically communal type and no one claims it as a private property.
On the other hand, crop production has a risk of failure due to shortage of
rainfall in the pastoral communities. Hence, receiving land on contract form
for crop production is not a feasible business. As a result, the land
contracting policy of the regional government seems not feasible in the
pastoral areas of Oromia.
On
the other hand, the pastoral communities do not have information on the land
certification policy of the regional government. However, according to the
pastoral communities, land certification of the cropland could be feasible
whereas, the land certification of the rangeland is not possible. This is
because the rangeland belongs to the clan. The land certification will lead to
privatization of the land, which is not feasible in the pastoral communities.
Privately owning the land would restrict livestock mobility and creates
pressure on the rangeland and hence affects the pastoral livelihood system. As
a result, the policy of landholding certification as it is applied in the
non-pastoral areas cannot be applied on the rangelands.
According
to the information obtained from key informants, there is divergence in needs
over plots of land for crop production and for livestock husbandry (Fig. 1).
Figure 1:
Relationships between the Demand for Pasture and Crop Production among Wealth
Groups in Borana Pastoral Area
Source: Based on discussions with
Borana Pastoralists (2005)
The
rich households who own large size of livestock require larger area of pasture.
On the other hand, the poor and the destitute households require plots of land
for crop production. The later started crop production on wet lands where such
plots are conducive both for livestock and crop production. There is negative
relationship between the two wealth classes on land use system in the rural
pastoral area (Figure1). It was also found out that people residing near towns
are putting larger areas under cultivation and these people were often not
pastoralists.
Cropland
is expanding in the studied pastoral communities. It was recognized that the
community members perceive cropland as a resource under the disposal of the
head of the pastoral household, often men. Expansion of cropland by intruding
into pasture areas has been considered as threat to livestock production.
Apparently, it is the productive land, which is put under cultivation reducing
pasture production. Yet, due to the opportunities crop production provides to
the households in terms of employment, income generation, food supply, etc.,
several pastoralists have started tilling land.
The survey results shows that about 50% of those who have land own less
than one hectare while the average holding is two hectares. A bout 75% of them
have less than two hectares while only 2% have five hectare, which is maximum
size reported in the survey.
As
shown on Figure 1, the controversial view on expansion of cropland is a matter
of equity. The rich who have large herd size wishes to have larger rangeland
size to feed the livestock. On the other hand, the poor who in most cases lost
their animals due to drought would like to increase their income portfolio by
expanding cropland. Some other members provide economic and ecological reasons
of refuting the expansion of crop farming in the pastoral areas. They argue
that crop production is a risky undertaking in the pastoral area due to
recurrent rainfall. Compared to livestock production, crop production is more
vulnerable to environmental risk. According to the Dire woreda conference participants, the probability of good crop harvest
is two to three times in eight years whereas livestock may suffer from drought
once in eight years. With proper management of the animals, a cow can produce
4-5 calves during this period.
Cultivation
of cropland is a means used to put land under private holding as far as the
individual tiller belongs to the same community. When he leaves the community,
it becomes communal property. Another critical issue in this regard is an
attempt to expand boundaries by fencing the plot beyond the cropland to hold
pasture reserves privately. Some communities have already started taking action
to limit such an expansion and protect common interest of the communities.
Both
at community, woreda and regional
conferences, it was indicated that cropland ownership could be certified to the
household tilling the plot. Moreover, there was a consensus to follow
appropriate land use planning for each community so that crop farming can be
delineated from pastureland. This approach would reduce the contradiction
between crop and livestock production and minimize the danger of ecological
hazard since the pastoral areas are already environmentally fragile. It is also
indicated that in areas where irrigation is feasible, e.g. in Fantale area,
crop production should be augmented by irrigation. Any such intervention
should, however, be participatory including the pastoralists.
4. Rangeland and Natural Resources Management
Despite
the recurrent drought in the area, the communities perceive that the livestock
population increased over the past few years. On top of this, the declining
rangeland productivity reduced the carrying capacity. Policies needed for
enhancing rangeland management would be successful if they are based on the
indigenous knowledge of the community.
The
traditional rangeland management system involves classification of the grazing
area into open grazing areas and reserve pasture areas (kalo). The classification helps as means of rationing feed for
animals that should not be trekked to a far distance or used as a means of
minimizing risk of feed shortage during dry season. The area is said to be
fenced implying that it is not available to livestock for grazing unless
permitted by Jarsa Reera. The large
free grazing pastureland is often overgrazed due to large number of livestock
in the area. According to the survey result conducted in the Dire woreda,
98% of the respondents recognize that rangeland productivity is poor. They have
indicated different reasons for the worsening situation (Table 1).
Table 1: Proportion of
Respondents indicating Causes of Decline in Rangeland Productivity (%)
|
Reasons
for poor productivity of rangeland |
Percent
of respondents |
|
Declining
traditional rang management system |
27 |
|
Increased
livestock population |
48 |
|
Bad
climatic factors including soil erosion |
25 |
|
Total |
100 |
Source: Household survey in Dire
woreda of Borana (April 2005)
Another
important rangeland management practiced by the community was bush clearing and
burning. The community recognizes the importance of tree species for medicine,
shelter, income generations (such as incense and Gum arabic), conservation of soils, etc. In communities such as Dhasi, forest products, mainly incense,
is collected and sold by men and women pastoralists. But the thorny bushes
destroy grasses and affect the pastoral livelihood. The community attributes
the vast encroachment of bush to the rangeland to the banning of bush burning
during the Derg regime. With meager
implements/equipments and vast coverage of the bush, it has been a challenge to
control the bush encroachment. Besides improving rangeland productivity, bush
burning was used as a means of livestock pest management. As a result of
banning of bush burning, ticks infestation increased. This led to increased
incidence of mastitis. It has been indicated that the rate of milking cows with
four functional teats is about 40%. The remaining proportion of cows has one to
three functional teats. As a result of mastitis and reduced rangeland
productivity, livestock productivity in terms of milk yield drastically
declined.
The
communities indicated that bush burning is catalyzed by the grass underneath of
the bushes, which is not available today. As a result, the communities perceive
that bush burning would not be effective as it stands now. On the other hand,
they are not ready to commit loss of grasses by burning the existing kalo (reserves) and areas where there is
pasture due to the fact that the livestock rely on this pasture and there is no
sufficient reserve to feed the animals until the burned part rejuvenates.
Another
critical challenge on rangeland productivity is expansion of termites. The
conference participants discussed on the issues of how to improve rangeland
productivity. The consensus builds on the knowledge of proper rangeland
management that reduces degradation and increases plants growth during certain
period of the year. Accordingly, delineation of the rangeland into bona (winter) and ganna (summer) rangeland areas was suggested. This classification
is applicable in areas with bimodal rainfall pattern such as Borana. Such a
land use plan enables vegetation growth using the precipitation of the alternate
seasons. Application of this suggestion together with the proper land use
planning to integrate crop and livestock production would be essential for
improvement of the livelihood of the pastoral community of in Oromia.
5. Community - Livestock Mobility
Herd
mobility is the main strategy used by pastoralists to manage risk and use the
range resources communally and efficiently. Mobility takes two forms in the
pastoral system. The first one is mobility of the satellite herds called Godaansa
Fooraa and the other type is called Godaansa Warraguda. The movement
of camel away from the semi-permanent residential areas in Fental is done by
young boys. In fact, camel herd are more mobile than the cattle or shots.
i. Regular
Mobility (Godaansa Fooraa)
Regular
mobility is the most common type of mobility in which certain family members
move with their livestock from their permanent place to other neighboring
communities or Woreda to search for
pasture and water. In areas where traditional wells are available, shortage of
pasture is more critical reason for the regular mobility.
During
the regular mobility, the Ollas send a team called aburu, often
men, to identify locations suitable for mobility in terms of availability of
pasture and water, the carrying capacity of the rangeland- including estimated
duration of stay if the livestock is moved to the place, absence of livestock
diseases in the area, the willingness of the hosting community, etc. Based on the feedback of the aburu, decisions are taken on the direction
of mobility, what types of animals and who will move with the animals. The
division of the animals will be based on the indigenous knowledge of the
community. It considers the capacity of the animals to travel the anticipated
distance, the available resource at homestead, the animals more importantly
needed at the semi-permanent settlement either for their power or to provide
milk for the people. Accordingly milking animals will be distributed between
the two places based on the number of people who depend on them and how many
milking animals are available.
Most
of the time forra movement takes
place during rainy season to lowland areas where there are no permanent sources
of water. After exploiting the pasture and floodwater in the new area, they
either change the place to other places or go back to permanent water sources.
This shows that duration of stay at a given place depends on the length of
rainy season, particularly in areas like Borana where the place they use as
fallback areas are devoid of any permanent water sources. Opportunistic grazing
is the strategy they use.
At
forra area, there is division of
labor among the people who move with the animals. The young boys go for
herding, while the adult men work on construction of kraals, watering the animals and other labor intensive work related
to herding. The elders, who usually commute between semi-permanent homestead
and forra will take care of the
health of the animal, negotiate with the host community to settle down herders
and the animals. Women construct huts, cook food and undertake all the
household activities.
Children,
women and aged persons remain behind. Among the agro-pastoral groups there is a
new development that considers labor allocation for both herding and farming.
Those people who do not have enough labor will depend on others. Someone who
remains at home will take care of the farming activities for both households,
while the other person will take care of the herding activities at forra.
According
to Borana elders, mobility of herd and the whole family is compatible with a
pure pastoral production system. However, some Borana started cultivation. At
the same time, they started enrolling their children in the few schools
available. Furthermore, there are few social services such as human and
livestock clinics that are not mobile. The solution for this was movement of
part of the herds with few family members as discussed above.
The
participants of group discussions disclosed that herd mobility is declining
through time. They have given different reasons for the decline in the distance
satellite herds' move from the semi-permanent settlement in search of pasture.
These include land annexation, population growth and settlement, ethnic
conflict, cultivation, absence of water in the remote forra areas, and the declining trend of Borana customary laws that
forces the excess herds to move.
With
the above constraints on the mobility, and absence of a viable alternative
production system that can fit to the ecology of pastoral system, the crises
that might affect the system could be serious.
ii. Drought Year Mobility (Godaansa Warraguda)
The
second form of mobility is the movement of the family and whole herds that
occurs when there is acute drought or conflict.
This type of mobility is called Godaansa Warraguda. This type of mobility follows
rainfall or movement to permanent water sources, the nine Tulla (tulla salgan) in Borana area. According to people
who participated in the SSI, Tulla
areas are protected from cultivation, and the pasture can accommodate many
herds for quite some times without any irreversible environmental change.
The
pastoralists were asked to give their views on the general prospect of herd
mobility. They unanimously agree that in any case herd mobility continues as
water and grazing cannot be found at a given place throughout a year. Mobility
reduces overgrazing and degradation. Other important reason is that animals
require changes of places to gain weight, conceive, and grow properly. Movement
to lowland areas is important for this purpose.
The
major purpose of mobility of the pastoral communities with their livestock is
to save lives of the livestock from death that could have occurred due to
drought. In most of the cases, the pastoral communities get success in
achieving this objective. However, negative effects could also occur as a
result of mobility. These are:
q
Mobility of the
community and their livestock to the hosting community creates great pressure
on resources such as grazing areas and water. Host communities are affected
negatively due to the competition over resources.
q
Environmental
degradation could occur when there is over population of livestock in one
place.
q
Diseases such as
Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) could be transmitted from the mobile livestock to
the host community livestock or vice versa.
q
Mobility could
also lead to abandoning of farmland. This happens when one stays away for three
to four months from the semi-permanent place, his farmland could be abandoned.
This could bring shortage of food for the family.
q
Mobility has
expenses in preparation of food in two places for mobile family member and for
those staying at home.
q
High livestock
death during mobility could occur.
q
Ethnic conflict
occurs usually between the Borana and Guji, between Oromo and Somali or Afar
people over resources that often claimed several lives.
q
Nutritional
imbalance as milking cows move away due to shortage of pasture. This often
negatively affects the children and women who remain in the semi-permanent
area.
As
discussed above mobility of livestock also have effect on the host communities.
The survey result in Borana also confirms that conflict over resources,
competition for resources, and hence natural resources degradation as well as
disease transmission between animals are the major consequences of mobility
(Table 2).
Table 2: Effect of Mobility on the Host Community
|
Type of
Effect |
Percent of respondents |
|
Conflict
over resources |
6 |
|
Competition
on grass and water |
49 |
|
Livestock
disease transmitted |
14 |
|
Natural
resources degradation |
29 |
|
Supplied
livestock and livestock products |
2 |
|
Total |
100 |
Source:
Household survey in Dire Woreda (April 2005)
6. Marketing of Livestock and Livestock Products
In
Borana pastoral area, livestock and livestock products are marketed at Dubluk and Mega markets. Friday and Saturday are the two market days at Dubluk and Mega, respectively. Livestock prices have increased over the past
years although there are price fluctuations. This price improvement is
attributed to promotion of the export of live animals to the
The
woreda towns form the major market centers for the pastoral communities. In
Dire woreda for instance, livestock markets are located at Dubluq (69 km), Mega (70
km) from Dhasi community. Moreover,
women in Dhasi community transport
milk to Moyale for sale. Milk
attracts better price at export route of Moyale. When the quantity of milk
produced is small as it is the case during dry seasons, women collect milk
through contribution and sell it in Moyale.
This is an informal association of women in which they contribute a fixed amount
of milk in reciprocity so that they increase the volume of milk transported and
increase the income per trip, owning to the long distance to Moyale market. Although there is
shortage of milk, even for consumption, during dry seasons, the supply is sufficiently
large during rainy season. This considerably reduces the demand for milk.
Hence, there is a strong need for introduction of milk processing facilities
such as milk processing machines starting from milk churner. Similar situations
hold in other pastoral woredas of Oromia.
With increased drought, market is needed not only for sales of livestock and livestock products
but also for exchange of goods at profit. For instance, Gololcha community is one of the most drought affected communities
during 1999/2000 as a result of which the number of livestock of the community
declined by more than 50% and the proportion of the poor increased
considerably. These people need to engage in different income generation
activities. However, there is no market in the vicinity. They get marketing
service at Dubluq and Mega markets,
located at more than 60 and 40 km respectively. In the pace of increased market
integration in the pastoral areas, increased proximity and frequency of markets
would be essential. Due to the long distance to market places, sales of
livestock products particularly milk takes place among the pastoral
communities. In most cases, however, milk is given to neighbors freely.
It
has been indicated that generally there is lack of market for most of the
livestock and livestock products. Recently, there has been market created for
young bulls and male goats in the big markets such as Mega and Dubluq. This has
created incentives for pastoralists to buy some animals, keep them for some
months and sell them to make profit. For other kinds of livestock, there is no
market and the pastoralists look for better markets even crossing the national
border. There is no market for hides and skin. Some communities indicated that
they use the hides and skin at home due to lack of market whereas some reported
to sell a piece for Birr 2.00.
Although
the government considers the livestock marketing to
However,
the pastoral communities reported that there is positive change in prices of
livestock during the last decade due to the promotion of livestock marketing to
the
7. Livelihood of the Pastoral Communities
7.1 Well-being Classification
In
the pastoral communities, the households have been classified into rich,
medium, poor, and destitute. According
to the key informants at Dhasi community, about 13 percent of the households
are rich, 50 percent medium, 27 percent poor, 10 percent are destitute. The
magnitude of poverty in the pastoral area is high. In some communities, about
60% of the households are identified as poor.
The
wealth class differentiations are not based on minority and majority concepts,
which have influence through access to resources. However, the minority group
(the Watta) is often poor and depends on hunting for their livelihood. They
also live on contributions rendered based on certain events. The Watta group is
small in number and feels like subordinate in the Borana community. Dawe people
in Bale pastoral area are also minority with limited social interaction with
others. Another minority group is the Tumtuu, people whose livelihood is based
on blacksmith, using traditional tools to make implements for use by the
community. The number of this group of community is very small and they are
often poor. From gender point of view, female-headed households depend on the
boy child or the support of the clan of their husband for survival. Handcrafts
are practiced by women often for home use.
Source: Field Work in Dire Woreda
(April 2005)
Compared
to the wealth classes in the agro pastoral community of Haralo, the proportion of the households falling in the medium
wealth category in pastoral community is high, i.e. the largest share within
the pastoral community. It is the destitute which forms the largest proportion
in the agro pastoral communities. This clearly indicates that those involved in
farming are relatively poorer than the pure pastoralists.
The
wealth status is determined by sources of income and major occupations, which
determine the livelihood of the household. Livestock production is the most
important source of income. Hence, the number of cattle, camels, goats or sheep
is a good indicator of the wealth status in the community. Moreover, the nature
of occupation such as trading and the income generated through such an employment
is also an indicator of wealth group. The rich devotes only limited time for
trading although the business of relatively larger capital used for buying and
selling livestock for making profit. The poor and the destitute, on the other
hand, have limited capital to run business. As a result, they involve in
brokering rather than direct trading.
Wage labor involvement is an indicator of poorness in the study
community. Indicators of wealth classes in the Gololcha community are given in Table 3.
The
number of female-headed households is comparatively high in the pastoral areas.
In Gololcha community, for instance,
the proportion of female-headed households reaches about 30%. There was
argument that female-headship is not a criteria for wealth ranking since the
status of those female-headed households would be similar to what the husbands
had, as far as she has a children. But it is apparent that many of the
female-headed households are poor or destitute.
Table 3: Wealth Indicators for Gololcha Community Pastoralists (Average Values)
|
Indicators |
Rich |
Medium |
Poor |
Destitute |
|
Number of
cattle |
50 |
28 |
8 |
2 |
|
Number of
camel |
10 |
5 |
2 |
1 |
|
Number of
mule |
1 |
|
|
|
|
Number of
donkey |
5 |
3 |
1 |
|
|
Number of
chicken |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Number of
goats/sheep |
30 |
20 |
10 |
5 |
|
Participation
in trading and wage work (% of HH) |
25 |
30 |
50 |
75 |
|
Income
from trading (Birr per year) |
2600 |
1560 |
520 |
260 |
|
Value of
animas sold (Birr) |
7250 |
5950 |
750 |
0 |
|
No. of
cows milked |