Agricultural Research Management Information System

Home
Research Summary
Search
About Us
- ARMIS
- Brochure
Contact Us
Report
User Request
Data Input
Help
- Operation Manual
  - PDF
  - Video
- Program Area & Commodity
We have reached 37600 number of research entries at this moment.

- Logout

Research Detail

Home
Research
Detail

Resilient Livelihood Diversification of Aquaculture Farmers in Noakhali, Bangladesh

Mehedi Mahmudul Hasan
Department of Fisheries and Marine Science, Noakhali Science and Technology University, Sonapur, Noakhali-3814, Bangladesh

Shiuly Rahman Tinni
Department of Fisheries, University of Dhaka, Dhaka-1000, Bangladesh

Mahabubur Rahman
Department of Fisheries and Marine Science, Noakhali Science and Technology University, Sonapur, Noakhali-3814, Bangladesh

Harvey Demaine
Regional Fisheries and Livestock Development Component (RFLDC), GoB-DANIDA, Noakhali, Bangladesh

Arne Eide
Norwegian College of Fishery Science, University of Tromso, Norway

Abstract/ Executive Summary:

The present study focused on the vulnerabilities of the rural aquaculture farmers’ livelihoods and the resilience with special emphasis to climate change. The study used extensive field visits, interviews with the key informants of Regional Fisheries and Livestock Development Component (RFLDC) and farmers, personal communications and focus group discussion as the main procedures to collect data and information. The sustainable rural livelihood framework was also used to illustrate farmers’ livelihood resources and transforming strategies to resilient livelihood outcome. Low productivity, low income, starvation, poor health of farmers and poor standard of living was identified as the major livelihood risks from climatic disasters. The study suggested that the diversification of livelihood can be very effective in creating resilient livelihood outcome.

Keywords: Sustainable rural livelihood, Diversification, Aquaculture farmer.

Location: Regional Fisheries and Livestock Development Component (RFLDC), Noakhali

Start Date:

End Date:

Program Area: Conservation and Biodiversity

Non-commodity: , Performance, Social status

Objectives:

To evaluate the vulnerabilities of the rural farmers’ livelihoods and the resilience with special emphasis to climate change

Methodology:

Sustainable rural livelihood (SRL) framework was used in the current study for studying livelihood security of the farmers. The livelihood assets of the farmers were studied which helped to identify the resilient livelihood outcome for them. The sustainable livelihoods framework and its various factors shows the way of thinking through the different influences (constraints and opportunities) on livelihoods, and ensuring that important factors are not neglected (Ashley and Carney, 1999), which constrain or enhance livelihood opportunities and gives the impression of how they relate to each other. The aim of this framework is to think holistically about the factors poor might be vulnerable to, the assets and resources that help them thrive and survive, and the policies and institutions that affect their livelihoods (DFID, 1999). The sustainable livelihood framework shows how, in differing contexts, sustainable livelihoods are achieved through access to a range of livelihood resources that are combined in the pursuit of different livelihood strategies. A range of resources are required to achieve positive livelihood outcomes. The poorest people even have resources upon which they depend. Thus, the attempt to make livelihoods more secure and sustainable has to build upon an understanding of the resources that people already have, and how they are used. Failure to do this can lead to policies that undermine or destroy the basis of peoples’ livelihoods, or make more vulnerable. The sustainable livelihoods framework draws attention to human capital, natural capital, financial capital, physical capital and social capital upon which farmers’ livelihoods depend. According to DFID (1999), vulnerability context shown in Figure 3 refers to the ability to cope with shocks, trends and seasonality. Shocks can be floods, cyclones o r tidal surges, sudden increase in input costs, death in the family and civil conflicts which can destroy the resources of farmers. Events have highlighted the impact that international economic shocks, including rapid changes in exchange rates and terms o f trade, can have on the very people. The increase in oil price, climate change in terms of water logging and salinity intrusion, long time illness and disease can be the trends. Trends have particularly important influence on rates of return to chosen livelihood strategies. Although trends are more predictable, they may be more benign. Changes in seasonal patterns can be more rain coming in short period or prolonged winter or rainy season. Socio - culturally seasonality may denote to seasonal migration reducing the labor force restricting what a farmer can do in that part of the year. Seasonal shifts in prices, employment opportunities and food availability are the greatest and most enduring sources of hardship for poor people in country like Bangladesh. Th us, shocks which are the non - predicted events, trends and seasonality which are expected and predicted changes can have major impacts on resources of households and individuals, and consequently on their abilities to generate incomes, to benefit from employment, and to provide food and nutrition for their families, and this complex of influences is directly or indirectly responsible for many of the hardships faced by the poorest people in the world and poor aquaculture farmers are no exception. The inherent fragility of poor farmers’ livelihoods makes them unable to cope with stresses and also makes them less able to manipulate or influence their environment to reduce those stresses; as a result they become more vulnerable. And even when trends move in the right direction, the poorest may be unable to benefit because they lack assets and strong institutions working for them. In the SRL framework, vulnerability context is linked to the various elements of the livelihood framework such as impact on resources an d changes in livelihood strategies and outcomes (DFID, 1999). Extensive field visits, interviews and personal communications were used for collecting data on livelihood assets. Key informants of RFLDC also informed about the vulnerabilities, resilience and livelihoods of farmers. Informal meetings were arranged with the key informants. One Focus Group Discussion (FGD) with the farmers in a CCBO office was arranged to have better ideas of the vulnerability context and their resilience to those vulnerabilities. No questionnaire was used during the interviews. The methodology was based on the following assumption that there was need for resilient livelihood outcome for the poor farmers.

Source of Information: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BUSINESS, SOCIAL AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (IJBSSR), ISSN: 2309-7892, Page: 53-57, Volume 01, Issue 02, January-March 2014.

Article Link (Online Journal): http://www.ijbssr.com/currentissueview/13090109

Funding Source:

Total Budget (Tk.) :

Achievement/Findings:

The implication of this study is that the livelihood conditions of rural farmers’ were not satisfactory and not secured. Farmers’ livelihoods were affected by several climatic factors and also became vulnerable by different shocks, trends and seasonality factors. The study suggested that the diversification of livelihood can be very effective in creating resilient livelihood outcome. Effective livelihood diversification required extensive external support like training, field technical supervision and technical support services.

Knowledge Management: Journal