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
1
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:Institute of Social Studies
P.O. Box 29776
2502 LT The Hague
The Netherlands
Location:Kortenaerkade 12
2518 AX The Hague
The Netherlands
Telephone: +31 70 426 0460
Fax: +31 70 426 0799
Table of Contents
List of Tables
List of Figures
List of Maps
List of Acronyms
Acknowledgement
Abstract
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background
1.2 Statement of Problem
1.3 Research Objective and Questions
1.4 Selection of study Location
1.5 Data collection methods
1.6 Data analysis and presentation
1.7 Limitation of Study
1.8 Structure of the Paper
Chapter 2: Conceptual and Analytical Review
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Urbanization
2.3 Peri-Urban Interface (PUI)
2.3.1 Peri- urban Conceptualisation
2.3.2 The Urban approach
2.3.3 Rural approach
2.3.4 An integrated system (rural -urban linkage) Approach
2.4 Peri-urban livelihoods
2.5 PUI Analytical Frameworks
Chapter 3: Peri - Urban Development and Migration
3.1 Villages spatial positioning
3.2 Population growth
3.3 Household demographic composition
3.4 Migration trends
3.5 Origin of migrants
3.6 Chapter Conclusion
Chapter 4: Livelihoods
4.1 Productive asset base
4.1.1 Land
4.1.2 Housing
4.2 Peri-urban Occupations
4.2.1 Farming
4.2.2 Non-farm Activities
4.3 Livelihoods supportive structures: Rural -urban Interdependence
4.4. Constraints to livelihoods strategies
4.4.1 Human capital
4.4.2 Lack of technology:
4.4.3 Loss of soil fertility and Climate change
4.4.4 Financial Capital
4.4.5 Infrastructure
4.4.6 Poor Institutions
4.5 Chapter conclusion
Chapter 5: Livelihoods Outcomes and Coping Strategies
5.1 Outcomes of livelihoods
5.2 Coping strategies
5.2.1 Social capital
5.2.2 Migration
5.2.3 Remittances
5.2.4 Land Disposal
5.2.5 Other Extreme Means
5.3. Chapter conclusion
Chapter 6: Conclusion
6.1 Salient Recollections
6.2 Emerging Issues
References
List of Tables
Table 1 Urbanisation Trend in Tanzania 1
Table 2: A summary of respondents and informants 4
Table 3: A summary of asset vulnerability 14
Table 4:Percentage Frequency distribution of Heads of Households by village 17
Table 5: A number of migrant households by Village 18
Table 6: Respondents livelihood perceptions by village 33
List of Figures
Figure 1 :Sustainable Livelihoods Framework 1
Figure 2:Origin of respondents by Village 19
Figure 3:Occupations of Respondents by Village 24
Figure 4:The Level of Educations of Respondents by Village 28
List of Maps
Map of Kibaha ward 5
List of Acronyms
DFID British Department for International Development
FAO International Food and Agriculture Organisation
HBS Household and Business Survey
IMF International Monetary Fund
MDGs Millennium Development Goals
NBS National Bureau of Statistics
NFA Non-Farm Activities
PUI Peri-Urban Interface
SLF Sustainable Livelihood Framework
UNICEF United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund
UN United Nations
URT United Republic of Tanzania
USAID United States Agency for International Development
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 discussedtogether several matters regarding to research paper.
I am equally grateful to Kibaha District Officer, Kibaha Division Officer and NBS officers Mr PhilemonMwenda, 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, Stellaand Mr. SadickMachota whom were of tremendous help to me as Research Assistants particularly during the survey exercise.
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 arebrought to light.This was further complimented with literature review and empirical evidence from other places.
The study found out that despite urbanizationcontinuing to be among major contributorsto peri-urban migration, current trend show that rural migrants from both far away and nearby villages are alsoimportant 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 stockas well as transformation processes were keyfactors 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 whereperi-urban transformation processes have failed toprovide 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 ofpeople, 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.
1
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.
Total Population / Urban Population / Urban Percentage1967 / 12,312,467 / 786,567 / 6.4%
1978 / 17,512,610 / 2,412,900 / 13.8%
1988 / 23,095,882 / 4,247,272 / 18.4%
2002 / 34,443,603 / 7,943,561 / 23.1%
2022[1] / 54,259,053 / 16,983,084 / 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 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 non-farm 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 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. 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-urbansphere 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.