MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, LTVESTOCK AND NATURAL RESOURCES

ZANZTBAR CASH CROPS X'ARMTNG SYSTEMS PROJECT (ZCCFSP)

MARCH 1995

SOCIO-ECONOMIC RESEARCHAND MONITORING

ONPEMBAAND UNGUJA

Social Anthropologist's Inception Report

BY: Martin Walsh

zccFsPPO BOX 2283Ztnzibal.

Telephone : (054) 33121Fax : (054) 33121

CONTENTS

Preface

Acronyms

INTRODUCTION

INITIAL TASKS

Introductions and Institutional Review

Contact with Anthropologists and Other Researchers

Library Research and Literahre Review

Review of Socio-economic Research and Monitoring in ZCCFSP

Socio-economic Research and the Socio-economics Section

The PM Programme

Farming Systems and Fanning Systems Zones

Itealth Ranbing

Monitoring Systems

WORKPI.AN

Monitoring of Trials

Cash Crop Case Studies

Research on Household Resource Flows and Allocations

Individual Case Sndies

Community Case Studies

PRAs and the Farming Systems Zones

Farmer Research Groups

ZCCFSP Research Methodoloeies

StaffTraining

Social Development Issues

References

Arnex l: Terms of Reference for the ZCCFSP Social Anthropologist

Arnex 2: First Workplan for the ZCCFSP Social Anthropologist

Annex 3: Formal Meetings and Contacts

Annex 4: Anthropologists and Other Researchers

Page

2

2

J

J

J

5

5

6

6

8

1 1

t4

l 5

l 5

l 6

l 8

l 8

t8

1 9

l 9

20

20

2 l

22

24

25

26

29

PREFACE

It was agreed with the ZCCFSP Field Manager that in view of their overlappingcontent the bnef Situation Summary Report being prepared by the SocialAnthropologist for the end of November should be combined with lns InceptionReport, due in March 1995 (see the earlier workplan in Annex 2). The followingreport is the outcome of that decision.

Here I would like to take the opportunity to thank all of my colleagues for their warrnand friendly welcome to Zamibu and ZCCFSP and for providing an atmosphere inwhich work is enjoyable and never lacking in fruitful debate. Let us hope that thepeople of Zaruibar will benefit thereby.

Martin WalshZCCFSP Social AnthropologistWete, PembaMarch 1995

ACROI\-YMS

APOS Associate Professional Officer Scheme

BDDEA British Development DMsion in Eastern Africa

GTZ German Agency for Technical Co-operation Ltd.

FINNIDA FinnishlnternationalDevelopmentAgency

FRGs Farmer Research Groups

FS Farming Systems

IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development

MALNR Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Natural Resources

NCDP National Coconut Development Programme

NRI Natural Resources Institute

ODA Overseas Development Administration

PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal

TCO Technical Co-operation Officer

ZCCFSP Zamibu Cash Crops Farming Systems Project

ZEDO Zanzibar Enterprise Development Organisation

INTRODUCTION

l. The Zarnbar Cash Crops Farming Systems Project (ZCCFSP) began in November1991 with the primary objective of identifying and developing alternative export cropsto cloves. Following the recommendations of a Mid-term Review held in November -December 1993 this objective was broadened and a revised Project Framework for theperiod November 1993 to November 1995 was drawn up. This described the projectas follows.

'A multi-disciplinary team, within the Research sub-commission of theMALNR [Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Natural Resources]will conduct research into: cash crops within the farming systems of thetwo islands; and marketing systems. The aim of the project is todevelop: the contribution of cash crops to household income and to thewider economy; the capacity of the public and private sector to conductresearch; and the capaclty ofthe private sector to trade in agriculturalproduce."

2, The Mid-term Review also recommended the appointment of a socialanthropologist (TCO) for the remainder of the project. Recruitment by NRI tookplace in nrd-1994 and led to the appointment of the author of this report. I arrived inZaruibw, Unguja island, on29 August and proceeded to post at Wete on Pemba islandon 2 September 1994. Since then, and following my terms of reference (reproduced inAnnex l), I have been engaged in work on both islands.

3. This situation summary report describes the major initial tasks undertaken to theend of November 1994 and outlines a workplan for future work togther with thesocio-economics section of ZCCFSP. As such it completes the workplan for Octoberand November drawn up during the visit of the Project Manager in September 1994and adds to and modifies the projections contained therein (see Barret 1994, paragraph18, and Annex 2).

INITIAL TASKS

Introductions and Institutional Review

4. A series of visits was made to different projects and departments within MALNR aswell as some in other ministries and non-govemment agencies. Most of these visitstook the form of official appointments, though this was not exclusively the case. OnPemba I was accompanied by Suleiman Shehe and occasionally Aweina Omar,colleagues in the socio-economics section of ZCCFSP. On Unguja visits were made inthe company of the new ZCCFSP marketing economist, Peter Oldham, sometimestogether with his counterpart in the Mnistry of Trade, Industries and Marketing, JihadAbdullahi.

5. Other general meetings provided the opportunity to make further contacts withministry staff and have both formal and informal discussions with them. Thesemeetings included the Unguja Farming Systems Zones Workshop in Kizimbani(2019194), the Research and Extension 2nd Co-ordinating Meeting in Wete (2519194),the Pemba Farming Systems Zones Workshop in Wawi (lllll94), the visit of theBritish High Commisioner to ZCCFSP Pemba (I5llll94) and the first meeting of theFarming Systems Zones Working Group in Wete (24llll94).

6. Annex 3 list the names of the people met, together with their positions, institutionsand the dates discussions were held.

7. The purpose of these appointments and discussions was manifold. First, tointroduce myself and my colleagues, the current work of ZCCFSP and our own workwithin it. Second, to gather basic information about other projects and departments,especially within MALN& and learn about their current objectives and programmes,personnel and institutional structures and other relevant characteristics. Third, toreview points of contact, both existing and potential, between their own work and thatof ZCCFSP including its socio-economics section. Fourth, to benefit from the wideexperience of the indMduals met with and the general insights into social andeconomic development inZamibar which they could provide.

8. The discussions held were therefore typically wide-ranging. They provided anexcellent insight into the institutional structure and capacity of MALNR and the variedactivities, past, present and projected, of its many constituent parts. They provided anopportunity to discuss ZCCFSP's own work, to understand external perceptions of itand to explain its current objectives and programme. They provided many detailedobservations about agricultural production and marketing and the social, economic andother factors which impinge upon these. However, they also revealed a general failureto incorporate socio-economic and anthropological research and monitoring, includinga concern with gender issues, into project activities.

9. Some projects and departments were able to provide data of relevance to our work.The most useful of these were recent survey and census results not in the ZCCFSPlibraries. It is clear that most of the project-oriented socio-economic research whichhas been done in recent years has been based upon formal questionnaires and surveys.By contrast there has been very little qualitative or anthropological research, especiallywithin MALNR and its projects. The current capaclty for conducting this type ofresearch is therefore almost non-existent.

10. To detail all of the subjects discussed or even to summarise the main points whichemerged would constitute a report in itself. Where relevant these will be incorporatedinto future reports.

I l. Individual meetings and discussions of this kind outside the usual frame of ministryand project work are evidently of some value, as an ongoing activity and not just aspart of a newcomer's familiarisation process. A number of individuals and institutions,especially on Unguja and outside MALN& could not be contacted or were not

available during this round of meetings, and I therefore anticipate making furtherappointments in the future.

Contact with Anthropologists and Other Researchers

12. Given the general lack of qualitative (and high qualrty) research referred to above(paragraph 9), a determined effort has been made to locate other anthropologists andacademic researchers who are working inZar.z:ibw or have done so in the recent past -with a view to finding out what up-to-date information is available, published orotherwise. A list of overseas researchers, together with a brief description of theprincipal subjects of their research, is given in Annex 4.

13. Most of those listed have already been contacted. a few remain to be traced.Some of their research is directly relevant to my own and vice versa, and it is hopedthat a fruitful exchange of ideas and information will result. It is particulary hearteningto note that many of these researchers are interested in gender issues, and this shouldprovide a useful source of inspiration and corrective to the current lack of emphasis onwomen in development in project-oriented research within MALNR and otherministries.

Library Research and Literature Review

14. Before embarking for Zannbu I began a review of the anthropological and relatedliterature on the islands and their people using the University of Sussex and Institute ofDevelopment Studies libraries, together with my own collection. In the liule sparetime available I have continued with this work in Zanabar, consulting unpublishedarchives and reading through the 'grey' (development) literature as well. Smith (1992)is a useful introduction to both published and unpublished material, though his focus isrestricted to agricultural research and development narrowly understood. In additionto ZCCFSP's own libraries on Pemba and Unguja, a number of libraries in Zannbartown have been used: the Natural History Museum library, the Zamibiu NationalArchives, the Zamibar town public library and the private collection of Mzee M. A.Ghassany (Executive Chairman of the Cash Crops and Fruit Authority and an authorityon the history of MALNR and agricultureinZamibu).

15. This work is ongoing. It is already apparent, however, that a lot of the relevantliterature is not available locally. In future it may therefore be desirable to visit thelibraries in the University of Dar es Salaam (though access is difficult), the Universityof Nairobi (the main library and the Institute of African Studies), the British Institute inEastern Africa (also Nairobi) and the library of Fort Jesus Museum in Mombasa. Thiswill be done if and when opportunity arises and preferably in conjuction with otheractivities. Otherwise readily available items (that can be photocopied in the UK) willbe ordered throughNRI.

16. Although the historians and others have kept fairly busy, there has been asurprising lack lack of professional anthropological research on both Pemba and

Unguja, especially research which is action-oriented. The classic piece of researchremains Middleton's (1961) study of land tenure, based upon three months' work forthe colonial government in 1958. This underlines the potential wider importance ofapplied anthropological research undertaken within ZCCFSP, and the need to ensureits dissemination throughout MALNR and other institutions which might benefit.

Review of Socio-economic Research and Monitoring in ZCCFSP

Socio-economic Research and the Socio-economics Section

17. A lot of valuable socio-economic research has already been undertaken withinZCCFSP. Much of this has taken the form of one-off studies written up into reports.These include, for example, studies of rural income earning opportunitiesinZat:r;ibarand of marketing and transport on Pemba (Fox and Packham 1994; Fox et al. 1993).In some cases these studies raise as many questions as they solve, a good examplebeing the whereabouts of the "missing middlemen" of Pemba island (Fox el al. 1993.paragraph 28). Nonetheless they provide a wealth of basic background informationand, as in the case just mentioned, form an excellent starting point for further research.

18. Research of this kind has typically been led by expatriate project stafl andsometimes by outside consultants. This is perhaps unavoidable under currentcircumstances, given the fact that almost all of the MALNR project counterparts comefrom a background of training in agriculture, agronomy and related subjects, therebeing a marked absence of economists and others trained in the social sciences amongthe local staff It will be difficult to provide all of the training that is needed, whetheron-the-job or offit, during the remaining life of the project. The alternative is to draftin Zamibais who already have the appropriate qualifications in terms of their trainingand/or work experience. This would probably mean recruiting outside of MALNR: abackground in agronomy is not necessary at all, rather an understanding of the basicmethods and principles of social science or economics, depending on the position to befilled.

19. At present ZCCFSP comprises a multi-disciplinary team of expatriates and a moreor less mono-disciplinary team of local staffassigned to different disciplinary functions(in the agronomy, post-harvest and socio-economics sections). Unless a concertedeffort is made to change this imbalance, it will be difficult for MALNR to sustain themulti-disciplinary emphasis of ZCCFSP's farming systems approach when theexpatriates leave.

20. As currently constituted the socio-economics section comprises two counterpartson Pemba and four (three active) on Unguja. Early indications are that they may havedifficulty in meeting the increased workload resulting from the arrival of the TCOsocial anthropologrst and marketing economist, both of whom are detailed to workwith the socio-economics section. It may be relevant to mention here that they sharewith other MALNR staff the problem of low salaries and lack of incentives. Somemembers of the socio-economics section have shown themselves wining to worklonger hours than usual - for example in cases where it is easier to interview farmers in

6

the late afternoon than during office hours - but feel that they are offered insufficientincentives to do so. In this case it may be worth reviewing current practice andeliciting the views and suggestions of staff more systematically than has hitherto beenthe case.

The PM Programme

21. Between mid-1992 and mid-1993 ZCCFSP organised a progranrme of ten villageParticipatory Rural Appraisals (PRAs, otherwise referred to as PlRRAs,Participatory/Rapid Rural Appraisals), five on each island. As described in the finalreport (Thomas 1993), the PRA progranrme was a resounding success and achieved anumber of important objectives. A wealth of information was gathered in the tencommunities studied, including a lot of socio-economic information and descriptions ofthe constraints upon cash cropping in each of these areas. This information hasprovided a considerable boost to ZCCFSP's understanding of local farming systems,and has also made a crucial contribution to the definition and description of farmingsystems zones on the two islands.

22. The PRAs also had an important institutional impact. They involved the trainingof staff from different sections in MALNR in the methodology of PRAs and theirsubsequent collaboration in multi-disciplinary PRA teams working in the field, aconsiderable deviation from traditional MALNR practice. As a result the PRAprogramme had a direct impact upon the 36 individual participants as well as anindirect impact upon MALNR as a whole in that it helped to disseminate the farmingsystems approach fostered by ZCCFSP.

23. The way in which PRAs were used by ZCCFSP was somewhat different from thatprescribed in much of the literature, and this was the subject of some discussion at thetime between project staff and various external advisers. The primary objective ofPRAs is often taken to be to provide a means by which local communities canparticipate in preparing and implementing plans for action based upon a rapidassessment of their problems and prioritisation of their needs - the reasoning behindthis being that locally planned and managed interventions are more likely to succeedthan solutions and projects imposed from outside the community. ZCCFSP's PRAprograrnme did not lead to the formation of action plans or indeed actions of any kindin most of the villages involved. One important exception has been in Daya on Pembawhere a farmer's research group has been formed which has been able to act, with thehelp of ZCCFSP, on some of the problems identified during the village PRA conductedthere in November 1992. Otherwise the communities which were the subjects of PRAshave not benefited directly from the exercise, though they may do so indirectly becauseof the long-term impacts of the PRA programme as a whole on MALNR policy andpractice.

24. Arguably the correct role for PRAs in MALNR is as a tool to be used by theextension service, working in collaboration with the research sections, to identify andprioritise local problems and take action upon them in close collaboration with thecommunity. However, glven current institutional constraints, including limited

7

resources, it is unlikely that anything like an action-oriented PRA progranrme could bedeveloped within MALNR and its Extension Sub-commission at present.

25. Critics may argue that there was therefore a mismatch in ZCCFSP's PRAprogramme between the method used and the intended objectives. To the extent thatthis mismatch was not evident - the method did, after all, attain various projectobjectives - then it did not matter. However, we have no record of what most of theparticipating villagers think about the outcome, or what may seem to them a lack ofoutcome. According to recent reports "survey fatigue" has become prevalent in someareas of Unguja, and it is not impossible that the PRA programme has contributed tothis. The mismatch also means that ZCCFSP has trained MALNR stafl includingmany of its own, to think of PRAs primarily as research tools, when in fact they arenot. During workshops and meetings on the description of farming systems zonesresearchers both within and outside of ZCCFSP have been quick to suggest PRAs as away of gathering more information on these zones, especially those zones which havenot already had PRAs conducted within them (however see paragraph 77 below).

26. Village PRAs may not therefore be the most appropriate way either to do researchor to train staff in future. This is not to say that village PRAs have no place withinMALNR or that different PRA methods can have no role in research. As RobertChambers pointed out in a discussion of this issue with the Field Manager PRAs do nothave norms (though the literature has tended to create these) but can and should beadapted to different circumstances. However, if PRA tools are to be used in researchthen they should be carefully selected and applied (for further discussion of one ofthese methods, wealth ranking, see paragraphs 36-47 below). One of the advantagesof working with farmer research groups is that many of the pitfalls referred to abovecan be avoided: it is possible to conduct research using a variety of methodologieswhile also helping to find solutions to group members' problems. At the same time itis possible to foster and develop staffmembers' use of participatory methods as well asto stimulate collaboration between different sections of MALNR.

Farming Systems and Farming Systems Zones

27. ZCCFSP, as its title implies, uses and actively promotes a farming systemsapproach. One development of this has been the dMsion of both islands into farmingsystems zones (currently five on Pemba and four on Unguja) and various effortsdesigned to secure the acceptance of these as research, planning and extension toolswithin MALNR. The latest quarterly report (ZCCFSP 1994) recognises that this willbe a long-term process, and I agree. However, I also have some reservations aboutour definition and use of farming systems zones, and this is probably a good place tostate them.

28. To an experienced anthropologist farming systems are a statement and often asimplification ofthe obvious. The value of farming systems research is in introducing amore holistic perspective to agronomists and in encouraging a definite move awayfrom the traditional protocols of agricultural research towards a more participatory on-farm and farmer-sensitive practice. This is also the major significance of ZCCFSP's

8

approach within MALNR, which has been dominated historically by on-station andresearcher-led research.

29. The definition of farming systems per se, however, is a tricky business. Iunderstand farming systems as a convenient shorthand for refening to farmers andwhere they farm and what they farm and how they farm and what they do with theirproduce. This is perfectly intelligible: the difficulty comes in tryrng to put this intopractice by distinguishing one farming system from another. The problem, in otherwords, lies in converting the general definition into guidelines for classification.

30. A quick glance at the literature indicates that different researchers give priority todifferent criteria. The NCDP-sponsored survey conducted on both islands in 1988resulted in the choice of land tenure status as the main criteria for defining farmingsystems. Various areas, however, were excluded from the survey - Zamibar town, thecoral rag, and irrigated rice- and sugarcane-growing areas - and it is not clear whatcriteria (other than lack of potential for coconut production) were employed inexcluding them or how they might be treated in the classification of farming systems(Wirth et al. 1988). A subsequent (1989) NCDP survey of the coral rag areas led tothe rejection of land tenure status as the principal criterion and an alternative analysisbased upon a rather confusing mixture of variables: 'typical coral rag farms" (with avery high proportion of coral rag land) versus others, male- versus female-headedhouseholds, and farms on Pemba versus farms on Unguja (Krain et al. 1992).

31. Here it might be pointed out that ZCCFSP has never produced its own coherentclassification of farming systems. An early report (Thomas 1992) emphasised theimportance of "household farming systems" over the "land use systems" used byNCDP and others. Following the PRA prognunme, however, a classification ofhousehold farming systems was suggested which was based on the combination of twodifferent sets of features: the identification of four different household wealth groupsthroughout rural Zarmbar plus the division of the islands into seven 'broad agro-ecological systems", three on Pemba and four on Unguja. As stated in the final reportof the PRA programme this would gwe a total of 28 household farming systems,recognising that further research would be required to confirm and develop thisanalysis (Thomas 1993, puagraphs 29-31). The household wealth groups were basedupon the results of wealth ranking exercises conducted as part of the ten village PRAs.The methodology and practice of wealth ranking suffers from a number of problems,and I will discuss these below (see paragraphs 36-47). In any event the use ofhousehold wealth groups in this way to develop a classification of farming systemsproved impracticable, and the idea was quietly dropped. The "agro-ecological

systems", however, remained, and, after various changes and refinements, including theintegration of economic information derived from ZCCFSP studies, they havemetamorphosed into our nine farming systems zones. Although this is not madeexplicit, the imptcation is that these zones represent different farming systems.

32. This brings me to my first major difficulty with the concept of farming systemzones. It seems to me that a "farming systems zone" is a contradiction in terms andthat the ZCCFSP zones are really agro-economic zones or land use systems hidingbehind a false name. This should be evident from the history just outlined and the

9

gradual change in emphasis from household farming systems to farming systems zones.Moreover the reasoning behind my argument is anticipated and set out quite clearly inthe earlier report:

"In Zar:r;tbar a distinction must be drawn between "land use systems"and "household farming systems". This is very important, as although itis relatively easy to identify different land use systems related to theirgeographical location, physical environment and land tenurearrangements, it is quite another thing to differentiate betweenhouseholds, as the majority of households will use several different"land use systems". ZCCFSP needs to work with households ratherthan areas, as households make the decisions about farming activities"(Thomas 1992: l-2).

33. Agro-economic factors have been given priority in drawing up the ZCCFSPfarming systems zones, not only because many of the socio-economic variables remainunknown, but because it would be very difficult to fit them into zones even if theywere. This does not mean that we should abandon the zones or even, at this late stage,change their name; but we should recognise them for what they are and be aware oftheir limitations. One of these limitations is that they do not necessarily form the bestframework for undertaking socio-economic and anthropological research nor formaking interventions which have social development issues as one of their primaryconcerns.

34. I have another, related, reservation about the promotion of zonal planning withinMALNR which also relates back to my earlier observations about village PRAs (seeparagraphs 2l-26 above). Pemba and Unguja comprise a patchwork of localcommunities which share many features with their nearest neighbours but also differfrom one another in numerous ways, a fact underlined by the village PRAs. There arealso different ways of simpliSing this situation for the purposes of research, planningand actual intervention. During the colonial period, for example, it was common forracial and ethnic criteria to be employed. The most widely accepted and usedclassification has otherwise been the distinction between urban and rural Zamrbar andthe division of the latter into two principal agro-ecological zones, the plantation areasand the coral rag. ZCCFSP's farming system zones represent a further refinement ofthis classification, with other agro-economic factors added. There is danger, however,that the use of these zones for planning will foster insensitivity to local differences andneeds. It is ironic that village PRAs, a planning tool designed to maximise sensitivityto local requirements, have and are being used by the project to help define muchlarger planning units.

35. I would suggest that this is a question which deserves serious consideration beforeZCCFSP attempts to coax MALNR into a zonal future. The recruitment of zonalplanners, for example, either to supplant or supplement district agricultural officers,would do little to increase responsiveness to local needs and opporhrnities unlessaccompanied by radically new working methods which did not stop at the level of thezone. I have already suggested (in paragraphT4 above) that village PRAs (or slimmeddown, more topical versions thereof) used by the extension service might be one of

l0

these methods. It might therefore make more sense for ZCCFSP to concentrate onencouraging Extension and others to implement a participatory approach within theexisting institutional framework than to spend a lot of time in attempting to create anew framework based upon farming systems (read agro-economic) zones.

Wealth Ranking

36. Wealth ranking exercises were an important component of the village PRASundertaken by ZCCFSP in 1992-93. They have since been used as an independent toolin helping to monitor the impact of the pilot trials on Pemba. The primary objective ofwealth ranking in this context has been to provide a rapid assessment of the status offarmers participating in the trials vis-d-vis one another and other community membersso that the role of relative wealth and poverty in determining their participation andperformance in the trials can be appraised. Three such exercises have been completedsince June 1994 - in Kengeja (the site of a cinnamon trial), Msuka (also cinnamon), andMkanyageni (black pepper)

37. These exercises have provided interesting insights into local perceptions of wealth.Their appropriateness as a monitoring tool, however, is doubtful, especially glvenvarious problems in their use and application. The following comments are based uponmy own observations of the Mkanyageni exercise and an analysis of the data andwritten reports for all three Pemba rankings. I have chosen to discuss these at somelength because they raise important points about the relation between the objectives ofmonitoring, the methods which should be used, and our capacrty to use them.

38. I will begin by focusrng upon the actual performance of the exercises. A firstproblem hinges upon the choice of households which are to be ranked. Ideally thiswould comprise all of the households in the community in which the trial participantslive, and would include all of the participants' own households. On Pemba and in thecontext of the pilot trials, however, this is not very easy to achieve. Many ruralcommunities on the island do not form discrete or bounded entities but comprisescattered hamlets inhabited by groups of close kin, with other, less cohesive,settlements typically strung out along the main roads. The homes of trial participantsare therefore likely to be scattered over a wide area and a large number of localhamlets and other settlements. The total number of households in the area in which allof the participants live thus frequently exceeds the number which can be treated in asingle ranking exercise (not much more than 100 households in total). As a resultZCCFSP researchers have had to exclude some trial participants' households from theranking exercises and only a subsample of the subjects of our monitoring are ranked (intwo cases less than a third of the total). This means that we can only then look at therole of wealth rank within this subsample of trial participants. The others have to beexcluded from any analysis based upon these exercises.

39. This problem does not usually arise in wealth ranking exercises because ascattered target population (in this case our trial participants) is not normally stipulatedin advance. This problem did not therefore arise in the village PRAs (although thewealth ranking exercises conducted in these suffered from their own sampling

1 1

problems). In the context of the trials there is no way to solve this problem: all of theparticipants' households might be covered by a series of wealth ranking exercises, butthis would only create another problem, deriving from the fact that separate wealthranking exercises can be compared but not combined into a single set of figures andtherefore ranks. This is not to mention the additional time which more than oneranking exercise would take.

40. In the Msuka exercise this is what in fact happened. The residential scatter of trialparticipants led to the choice of two locations, Sebleni and Kichakapumu, in whichseparate wealth ranking exercises were conducted (and even so only 13 out of a totalof 46 original trid participants were included). The two rankings were then combinedinto one, an invalid procedure. Moreover the number of households in each exercisewas too small (31 in each place) while in Kichakapumu two of the informants onlyranked the households into two groups, another invalid procedure. These proceduralelrors unfortunately invalidate the whole exercise, though they should be thought of asa consequence of the geography of settlement in the Msuka area as of anything else.The scatter of participants led to the choice of two settlements, while the small numberof households in each of these led to the small sample size and the inability of twoinformants to distinguish more than two wealth ranks in one of them.

41. The choice of informants can also be a source of bias. All three informants in theMkanyageni exercise were men in the same age group (late 20s, early 30s), and mightbe expected to have more similar perceptions than three or more informants ofdifferent ages and gender. A further bias was introduced by the fact that the first twoinformants were interviewed in the presence of one another. Not surprisingly,therefore, they selected the same number of wealth groups, employed the same criteriain differentiating them, and agreed in their allocations of almost all the 108 householdsthey were asked to rank. The third informant was interviewed later, but also in thepresence of the first two. Ideally other informants as well as external observers shouldnot be in attendance, because their very presence might bias an informant's responses.Other factors may also bias the results, including informants' perceptions ofresearchers the responses they are assumed to want or, indeed, may suggest byprompting or asking leading questions. The existence of so many potential sources ofbias naturally reduces confidence in the validity of the rankings produced by theseexercises.

42. Analysis of the data also has its problems, some more serious than others. Oneproblem is the time taken to complete the analysis and write the 2-3 page reports. Inthe Mkanyageni case this took more than two weeks, although it must be said that thisis consistent with the general pace of work on Pemba, and so is not a problem for thewealth ranking exercises alone.

43. Far more serious than this, however, is what I consider to be a flaw in themethodology of wealth ranking. This concerns the last and crucial step in analysis, thefinal grouping of households into wealth strata as an average (which is based uponconversion into numerical values) of the different ranks assigned to them by individualinformants. The locus classicus on wealth ranking offers the following advice on howto proceed after assigning average scores to the households being ranked:

t2

"The next step is to list the household numbers according to their scorefrom the smallest number to 100, which is from richest to poorest.Next the households need to be grouped into a number of wealth strata.(To use the absolute scores obtained would not be valid but wouldrepresent a false degree of accuracy.) As a rule of thumb, the numberof final groups should not be more than the average number [of] pilesused by the informants. It can be fewer, depending on the researcher'sinterests, but not less than three. Normally, for ease of comparison, thesize of the final groups should be roughly equal. When the size ofgroups cannot be equal because of the clustering of scores, it is betterfor the middle group or groups to be larger and the extremes(richest/poorest) to be slightly smaller." (Grandin 1988: 30)

44. This is very imprecise advice, and in effect leaves too much to the whim of theanalyst(s). In the Mkanyageni case this manifested itself as follows, When theinformants were asked to rank the 108 households, they each placed only two or threehouseholds in the wealthiest of four categories. Their descriptions afterwards left nodoubt that these households were led by very wealthy individuals with significantbusiness interests and considerable resources at their disposal, and that they stood outin this way from most of their fellows. Subsequent analysis of the Mkanyageni data,however, produced a final wealth ranking in which the wealthiest stratum contained 3lhouseholds. There was thus a marked discrepancy between informants' perceptionsand the analysis which resulted. It might be said that this kind of discrepancy can beavoided by an experienced researcher. However, the fact that it can occur at all mustbe ascribed to the imprecision of the method. As an experiment I reanalysed the datafrom this and other wealth rankings and found it quite difficult in a number of cases toidentify unequivocal cut-off points at which to separate different strata. I concludethat it would be relatively easy for different analysts to produce very different analyses,resting upon quite arbitrary decisions about cut-off points or the other factors whichGrandin suggests ought to be considered.

45. As a result wealth ranking is liable to be very much a hit-and-miss affair. It canalso lead to a very false impression of the significance of wealth differences in ruralcommunities, suggesting a pattern of permanent or incipient differentiation where infact there may be none at all. This is because the method of wealth ranking rests uponthe synchronic classification of households without considering dMsions within thehousehold (for example the different access of husbands and wives to householdresources), the pattern of relations between them (for example the pooling of resourceswithin larger domestic groups), and the evolution of households and of these divisionsand relations over time. Therefore many of the apparent differences between strata(assuming their identification to be unproblematic) might be a simple reflection of thefact that the households within them are at different stages of the developmental cycle.

46. This certainly seems to have been the case in Mkanyageni. It was noticeable thatamong the principal criteria used by informants to classify households were the age,sex and marital status of the household head. The second stratum was dominated byhouseholds with relatively young and active male household heads, the third by

l 3

households with older and less active male household heads, and the fourth by widowsand old people with a limited capacity for labour. I also asked about relations betweenhouseholds in different strata and informants observed that one local family mightinclude households in all three of these categories, while households in the upperstratum frequently helped their kin in lower strata during times of need. Informantsalso confirmed that households were apt to change their position in this nominalranking over time.

47. To sum up, wealth ranking exercises suffer from a host of problems which renderthem of dubious value in the monitoring of trials and their impacts. It would be moreuseful to ask participants directly about their age, domestic status, access to land andoFfarm enterprises. I therefore recommend that wealth ranking be discontinued as amonitoring tool.

Monitoring Systems

48. To date ZCCFSP has not developed a coherent and ef[ective approach tomonitoring the socio-economic impacts of its on-farm trials and other field activities.There are a number of reasons for this, one of them being that the field progranrmeitself has been in state of constant flux as well as being somewhat different on the twoislands (where both the methodology of trials and the crops involved have differed).This situation still prevails though is likely to change as the emphasis of the progranrmeshifts away from conducting on-farm trials in the traditional way to working insteadwith farmers' research groups.

49. Socio-economic monitoring on both islands has revolved around the use ofdifferent monitoring forms, each designed with a different application and field activityin mind. In some cases these combine socio-economic and agronomic information,while some forms have been designed for specific crops and the activities associatedwith these. The overall result is very confusing.

50. On Unguja an attempt was made to improve this situation by producing and field-testing a'Tarmer Profile Data Collection Form". These forms are four pages long andare designed to elicit information on the farmer, household composition, plotownership and use, household assets, extension contacts and access to financialresources. So far about 37 forms have been filled in for farmers involved in the chillicampaign. Some effort was made to introduce these forms to the socio-economicssection on Pemba but they were not adopted. On Pemba a different set of forms hasbeen sporadically in use. The most recently produced of these is a '?ilot TrialMonitoring Form, Socio-economics", designed for use with farmers involved in thepilot cinnamon trials. This form is only two pages long and contains sections on thefarmer, household labour, land ownership and use, income and agricultural constraints,including constraints to planting cinnamon.

51. Both of the forms described can and have been used to collect interesting anduseful information. They could also no doubt be improved, perhaps by combining thebest features of each of them - although it is difficult to know what questions to ask

t4

and how best to ask them before undertaking qualitative research. Staff could also bebetter trained in completing the forms. A more serious problem, however, lies in ourcapacity to make use of the data which they could supply. Completed forms tend to lieidle in files, and no attempt is made to analyse or do anything further with them. Onereason for this is that the forms do little more than provide baseline information. Thisis all very well - the possession of baseline information on programme participants is anecessary prerequisite for many monitoring systems - but it does not in itself performthe task of monitoring impacts or eliciting the reasons for these.

52. Although it is tempting to treat these forms as the starting point for thedevelopment of a comprehensive monitoring system, a further note of caution isnecessary. Previous attempts to establish databases of different kinds on both Pembaand Unguja have foundered on the failure to keep them updated. This may partly bedue to lack of time and inclination on behalf of the staff involved. This is an activitywhich ZCCFSP (and MALNR) in its current institutional state cannot sustain, and it ishard to envisage it being possible without the recruitment or assignment of staff solelyto the task. Another obstacle in the way of creating and maintaining large or complexdatabases stems from the difficulty of working with modern information technology inZanzrbar, where computer equipment suffers from the humidity and computer users arehampered by frequent shortages of electricity.

53. Needless to say the current process of winding up on-farm trials and the shift offocus to farmers' research groups makes the development of monitoring systems asoriginally envisaged redundant. Farmers' research groups require a quite differentapproach, in a context where intensive contact allows more qualitative and detailedwork. This and other future plans are discussed in the sections which follow.

WORKPLAII

54. This section of the report outlines a workplan for the year beginning January1995.

Monitoring of Trials

55. Following this review and discussion with the Agronomy Section a new and moredirect approach to pilot trial monitoring was initiated in December 1994. This is basedupon open-ended interviews with the trial participants both as a group and, in somecases, as indMduals.

56. The purpose of these interviews, in addition to gathering background informationon the community and participants, is to explain the performance of the trials anddifferent aspects of the farmers' response. Interviewers are guided by a checklist ofquestions. The meetings with farmers are held together with project agronomists, whoalso ask their own questions to the group as a whole. The resulting information,together with any additions from project stafl is written up into brief (2-3 page)narrative reports.

1 5

57 Interviews began in December, in Makombeni and Shangafu (both sites of blackpepper trials) and continued in the New Year in Mkanyageni (black pepper), Jomvuand Msuka (both cinnamon sites). Given the large number of trial sites - originally la -the aim was to complete the monitoring interviews in a single visit, dealing with onesite per week. This schedule has proved a little ambitious, and the current goal is tofinish this work in April. It is then planned to compile all of the reports together and towrite a short paper summarising the salient points.

58. It has already become clear that many of the problems experienced in the trialswere a result of either imperfect planning and control on the part of ZCCFSP (e.g. theprovision of defective seeds and seedlings) or unrealistic expectations on the part ofthe farmers involved. A lot of farmers joined the trials in the belief that the project -evidently led by wealthy Europeans - would distribute free materials and providevarious benefits to them other than just cheap seeds and/or seedlings, and when thesepresumed benefits were not forthcoming, their interest in the trials often waned, andmanagement of the trial crops suffered accordingly. While this attitude on the part offarmers no doubt reflects their past experience of agricultural extension and otherproject interventions, it must also owe something to the naivety of our own approach.

59. Consideration of these preliminary results has already played a part in the decisionto wind down the pilot trials on Pemba. The ongoing attempt to persuade indMdualtrial participants to establish their own seedling nurseries with initial ZCCFSPassistance is already running into related difficulties (i.e. in many villages the farmersdeclare themselves unwilling or unable to manage nurseries unless additional inputs areprovided by ZCCFSP), and will have to be rethought.

60. A similar approach to trial monitoring has been recommended to the Socio-economics Section on Unguja, but not yet put into practice.

61. As well as providing important information to the project about reasons for thesuccess and failure of trials, this method is designed to improve the interviewing andreporting skills of section members, encouraging them to focus upon the analysis of aproblem (e.g. why did a large number of farmers in site x not follow up on their initialorders for seedlings?) and its description. Project staff already do this in everyday lifeand informal discussion (e.9. about the trial sites and their visits to them) but tend notto think of recording this as important knowledge for the project. It is hoped that theopen-ended interview and narrative report approach will give them greater confidenceto do so. In this respect the method is already beginning to prove effective.

Cash Crop Case Studies

62. Given that the pilot and other trials on Pemba and Unguja were mainly providinginformation on crops which had not yet been harvested or marketed, it was felt that itwould be of considerable value to undertake detailed studies of indMdual crops whichhad 'taken off as cash crops in particular local areas.

T6

63. A rough model for this type of study is provided by a paper written by Gerlach(1963) on the development of the fresh fish trade in the hinterland of the southernKenya coast. While this study does not deal with cash crops as such, it does give aclear account of how trade in a particular commodity was developed, and how variousobstacles to this development were overcome (so clear that it has been used in aparticipatory business training programme for women's groups in Kenya). It wasproposed that the Zamibar case studies be begun with a similar format in mind.

64. ln addition to providing information on the cash crops concerned, these cash cropcase studies are designed to produce general insights into the development of crops aswidely-marketed commodities, and especially to indicate how and why various localconstraints were overcome in the course of this development, what problems mightstill remain, and what other impacts it may have had. It is hoped that the lessonslearned will then feed into the formulation of ZCCFSP's own strategy for stimulatingsimilar developments.

65. Two case studies were initiated on Pemba, one on sweet potatoes in Makangaleand the other on turmeric in Muwambe. The first of these concerns a crop normallythought of primarily as a food crop (and therefore never before the subject of ZCCFSPinterest, also because it has no obvious export potential) in an area which is ofadditional interest for a number of reasons. these include a pattern of land tenureproblems and disputes, invoMng immigrant and indigenous communities, and areputation for sharply declining soil fertility, It is also in Pemba Farming Systems Zonel, which was not covered by any of ZCCFSP's village PRAs. The second caseconcerns a crop which has already been considered in some detail by ZCCFSP, onUnguja as well as on Pemba.

66. Together with the Marketing Economist and members of the Socio-economicsSection on Unguja two studies were also selected and begun on that island. Both ofthese concern fruit crops: oranges in Ndijani and pineapples in Machui andthereabouts. These Unguja case studies are also being combined with cost ofproduction studies initiated by the Marketing Economist.

67. The Pemba case studies began in November and the Unguja studies in December1994. They are being undertaken by section members following the initial formulationof research questions (in the form of an open checklist) in conjunction with the SocialAnthropologist. Again the method is one of open-ended interviews and the productionof narrative reports. It was originally hoped that two of the four studies would becompleted in February. Fieldwork and working notes for three of the studies werefinished by the end of the month but the full writing up of the results has beenpostponed to April, when work on the fourth study will also be finalised. Fieldworkfor an additional case study on Boribo Muyuni mangoes by the APO Agronomist onUnguja has also been completed and is ready to be written up.

t7

Research on Household Resource Flows and Allocations

68. Intensive anthropological research into household decision-making, resourceflows, and the constraints, opportunites and impacts of cash crop production andmarketing at local level has begun using two different methods and sources ofinformation. These are individual case studies and community case studies, discussedseparately below.

Individual Case Studies

69. The individual case studies focus upon project field staff and their families.Following preliminary visits with one Pemba colleague to his natal and other homes,this idea was suggested to project staff on Pemba and Unguja and met with generalapproval. It was emphasised that, as is the norm in anthropological research,informants' confidentiality would be fully respected, and that the results would begeneralised and combined with those emerging from the community case studies andother sources.

70. In mid-December a participatory training session was held for the Pemba field staffon how to draw kinship diagrams. Participants were encouraged to follow up byrecording information on their own families using the methods presented. This servedas an entrde to the case studies themselves which began in January 1995 and have sofar involved five Pemba staffmembers. Similar work will begin on Unguja during theanthropologrst's next extended visit there (not yet scheduled).

71. The adoption of this method in addition to the community case studies presents anumber of advantages. Project staff and their kin represent a wide spread ofcommunities on the two islands, including town dwellers, and because of theirfamiliarity with the research and the researcher it relatively easy to pursue somequestions in considerable depth. It is hoped that direct involvement of the field staffinthis research will also increase their understanding of it, the informal research methodsused, and of social development issues in general.

72. It is anticipated that the bulk of this research will be complete by June andincorporated in the Interim Report to be produced then (see paragraphT5 below).

Community Case Studies

73. The community case studies will focus upon ZCCFSP's farmer research groupsand their members' local communities. This will involve fieldwork undertaken by theanthropologist as well as follow-up work by other section members. A complementaryprogranrme of agronomic research is being planned on Pemba, and hopefully can alsobe undertaken on Unguja.

74. Fieldwork will begin on Pemba in April with Daya Farmer's Research Group.Two months of the anthropologist's time has been provisionally assigned to each of

18

four research groups, Daya and Kangagani on Pemba and Gamba and Ndijani (orperhaps a new research group) on Unguja. This means that April and May areassigned to Daya, June and July provisionally to Gamba, and so on through toNovember. Field research will not take up all of this time, but as much as possible(and/or necessary) given other project commitments.

75. The preliminary results of this research as well as of the individual case studies willbe presented in an Interim Report scheduled for June 1995. A final report will beprepared at the end of the year. Interesting and potentially important findings will also,of course, be discussed with colleagues as and when they arise.

PRAs and the Farming Systems Zones

76. Contrary to earlier assumptions (see Annex 2 below) no further village PRAs areat present planned for either island. Research on the Farming Systems Zones,however, will continue, largely as part and parcel of the work already described.

77. The Pemba FS Zones Working Group, hosted by ZCCFSP and withrepresentatives from different sections and projects within MALN& has recommendedthat data on each of the zones should be consolidated, each section/projectcontributing as it can and using the various methods at its disposal, without recourse tomulti-disciplinary PRAS at present. The research being undertaken by the agronomicand socio-economic sections of ZCCFSP on Pemba, which uses selected PRAtechniques, is already adding to the description ofthe zones and an understanding ofthe problems and opportunities within each of them, and will continue to do so.

78. A similar situation prevails on Unguja, although there has been no furtherdiscussion of the FS Zones within the Mnistrv there.

Farmer Research Groups

79. There is no doubt that the Farmer Research Groups (FRG$ comprise one of themost promising lines of further development for ZCCFSP. Their full potential forparticipatory research has yet to be realised and the current workplan has beendesigned with a view to making much fuller use of them.

80. Needless to say, various issues remain undecided. Considerable discussion hasand continues to take place over the best ways to form and work with FRGS.Following an exploratory workshop with Gamba FRG on Unguja it was decided toadopt a more systematic approach to working with the FRGs on Pemba. It wasproposed that one of the first steps in working with a group should be to hold one ormore one-day participatory workshops to elucidate their perception of the mainconstraints to agricultural and cash crop production and to discuss possible solutionswith them. It was also suggested that this should be followed by a more regularpattern of meetings with the FRGs than had hitherto been the case.

19

81. In December a workshop was held with Daya FRG at which their constraints tocash crop production were discussed and regular monthly meetings were agreed upon.In the same month background information was collected on the formation ofKangagani FRG and the other group activities of its members (all of them women)prior to holding a workshop with them in late January 1995. Because relatively workhad been done before in Kangagani, this workshop focused on the constraints toagricultural production in general. Again, regular monthly meetings were agreed upon.

82. ZCCFSP Pemba is currently planning its work programmes for both Daya andKangagani: this includes the anthropological research already referred to above(paragraphT4). Agronomic research on individual farmers and their plots which willbe linked to the anthropological research has already begun in Daya.

83. Given the project's decision to limit the number of FRGs (perhaps adding onemore on each island) the issue of selection approaches seems to be less critical than itonce was. It would seem sensible to review this issue at a rather later stage, when theoutcome of work with existing FRGs can be properly assessed.

ZCCFSP Research Methodologies

84. Given the processual nature of ZCCFSP and the variety of research methodologieswhich it has employed over the years, project staff agreed that it would be useful toprepare a paper summarising these and their various pros and cons. The socialanthropologist has agreed to do this in readiness for the March 1995 review missionfrom BDDE,\ Nairobi.

StaffTraining

85. The anthropologist has also been and will continue to provide an ongoing inputinto stafftraining. This focuses in particular upon participatory research methods andfield staff on Pemba have already progressed considerably in their use of varioustechniques, developing open-ended checklists, conducting semi-structured interviewsand writing narrative reports on the basis of these. This work is also being extended toPemba with the help of the project Marketing Economist.

86. Constructive use is also being made of the anthropologist's experience in andfamiliarity with participatory training methods, especially in the planning andorganisation of training and other workshops on both Pemba and Unguja for ZCCFSPand other MALNR staff and others outside of the Ministry. Although ZCCFSP staffhave already attended some training of trainers workshops their use of participatorytraining techniques has not been reinforced through constant practice and it is evidentthat they still have some way to go before they can become fully effective trainers.The anthropologist's input to this work on both islands will therefore continue as andwhen advice and assistance are required.

20

Social Development Issues

87. It goes without saylng that one of the anthropologist's tasks is to ensure thatsocial development issues are given full consideration within the project at all levelsfrom project planning to the actual conduct of research, its outputs and therecommendations and development activities based upon these. Social developmentconcerns are an integral aspect of all the work described in preceding paragraphs.Here I will only highlight some of the major issues which I will pursue.

88. Gender issues have hitherto received very little attention in Zarzibar and in thevarious projects within MALNR as well as in other ministries. Notable exceptionsinclude the work of the Village Forestry Department with women's groups (describedby Khatibu and Suleiman 1992), a report produced by the Zanzibar EnterpriseDevelopment Organisation (ZEDO) on women's ownership of land in Zanzibw@onkerlo and Aboud 1994), and the ongoing women's group projects located withinthe Ministry of State, President's Office, (and) Women and Children's Affairs. Thepotential role of women's groups in ZCCFSP activities is currently underconsideration, and one of the FRGs on Pemba, Kangangani, is composed entirely ofwomen (who are members of different women's groups in the village). Particularattention will be paid to gender issues in the programme of socio-economic research aswell as in other aspects of ZCCFSP's work, including its training activities.

89. ZCCFSP also has a clearly stated interest in poverty alleviation, though the mosteffective ways to achieve this objective are still the subject of discussion. Research willtherefore be directed to providing a deeper understanding of this issue so thatappropriate recommendations can be made. The available literature contains onlysuperficial analyses of social stratification and class in Zalzibar, and detailed villageand urban studies of this issue have yet to appear. Reference has already been made(see paragraphs 36-47 above) to ZCCFSP's wealth ranking exercises and thesuggestion that the ranking that these produced may reflect different stages in thedevelopmental cycle of rural households as much as permanent wealth differences inthe community. A clearer picture of intra- and inter-household relations and theirdevelopment over time in both rural and urban contexts is clearly needed, as this mayhave important consequences for decisions about targeting households andcommunities in ZCCFSP as well as in other projects and ministry activities.

90. Social development concerns also extend to the institutional structure of MALNRand ZCCFSP's present and future position within it. The development of institutionalcapacity is already the subject of considerable effort by ZCCFSP and intensivediscussions within the project about how this can best be achieved in future. One areaof discussion is the possible future role of NGOs and here it is anticipated that theproject anthropologist, who has a wide experience of working in the NGO sector aswell as in other institutional environments, will have a potentially useful contribution tomake.

91. Last but not least, the anthropologist is contributing to ongoing discussions aboutthe institutional structure of ZCCFSP itself, including the need to improve

2 I

communication within the project, especially between Zatuiban andnon-Zatuibari staffand between the two islands.

References

Barrett, J. C. 1994 Report of a Management Visit to the Zqnzibar Cash CropFarming Systems Project: 19-23 September 1994, NR[, Chatham (File: FSCe2e4 ssztsl8l046c).

Cameron, Greg 1992 'The State and Co-operatives \n Zamlbar', paper presentedat the Internntional Conference on the History and Cuhure of Zanzibar, 14-16December.

Donkerlo, Janneke and Asha Aboud 1994 lV'omen and Land in Zanzibar.Zannb ar : Zamib ar Ent erpri se D evelopment Organi sation.

Fox, Diana, Salum Shaali Ali, Abdulla Juma Khamis and Aweina Omar Issa 1993Marketing and Transport in Pemba Island, Working Paper No. 93112, ZCCFSP,MALN& Zallu;ibar.

Fox, Diana and James Packham 1994 Rural Income Earning Opportunities inZanzibar with Regiorul Analysis (2 volumes), Technical Report No. TR 93110,ZCCFSP, MALN& Zannbar.

Gerlach, Luther P. 1963 'Traders on Bicycle: A Study of Entrepreneurship andCulture Change among the Digo and Duruma of Kenya', Sociologus, 13 (l),32-49.

Grandin, Barbar4 E. 1988 Wealth Ranking in Smallholder Communities: A FieldManual. Rugby: Intermediate Technology Publications Ltd.

Khatibu, Mwantanga L and Rahika H. Suleiman 1992 Women's Participation inForestry Activities in Zanzibar (Zanzibar Forestry Development ProjectTechnical Paper No.6). Helsinki: Commission for Natural Resources, Zarzibw;FINNIDA; Finnish National Board of Forestry.

Krain, E. et al. 1992 Farming Systems of the Coral Rag Area of Zanzibar,National Coconut Development Programm e, Zanzibw .

Middleton, John 1961Stationery Office.

Land Tenure in Zanzibar. London: Her Majesty's

ODA 1993 Report on A Visit to Zanzibar: Mid-term Review of Zanzibar CashCrops Farming Systems Project, 29 November - 3 December 1993, BDDEA'Nairobi.

Rose, Kimberely, D. E. 1994 Sickness and Malnutrition on Pemba: AnAnthropological Study of the Social Relations of Food, Perceptions of Sichtess,and Help-seeking Behaviour, report for Save the Children Fund, Wete.

Smith, P. D. 1992 Agricultural Research and Development in Zanzibar: AnAnalysis of the Literature, Centre for Arid Zone Studies, University College ofNorth Wales, Bangor.

Thomas, Mark 1992 Farming Systems (FS) Within ZCCFSP, Working Paper No,WP 9215, ZCCFSP, MALNR, Zaru;,tbar.

Thomas, Mark 1993 Final Report: P/RRA Programme, Ten Village P/kRAs andthe Findings of A Workshop Held at the EACROTANAL Centre, 3ll5/93 -416193, Report No. P/RRA 93lll, ZCCFSP, MALN& Zannbar.

Wirth, Figga et al. 1988 A Baseline Sumey for the ldentification of FarmingSystems in Zanzibar. Berlin: Centre for Advanced Training in AgriculturalDevelopment, Technical University of Berlin.

ZCCFSP 1994 Zanzibar Cash Crops Farming Systems Project Quarterly Report,I July - 30 September 1994, Report No. ZNZ 94/95 Q2, ZCCFSP, MALNR,Zarulbar.

23

Annex l.: Terms of Reference for the ZCCFSP Social Anthronolosist

"The duties of the appointment will include:

a. To work as part of the ZCCFSP inter-disciplinary team, with farmersand traders in pilot villages to establish the impacts and opportunitiesfor the production and marketing of candidate crops. To contribute tothe interpretation of these crops made by rural households.

b. To contribute to the development of methodology for the design,implementation and analysis of trials to assess cash cropping impactsand opportunities within the farming system.

c. To conduct research on individual and household investments bothwithin and outside agriculture. As far as possible and where relevant,to place these individual and household strategies within the widercontext of whole family investment patterns.

d. To cover individuals and households from different areas with accessto and control of different resource levels. To include one or morecategories of persons investing in agriculture but not resident withinthe rural areas. This research should cover both islands.

To use a case study approach for c. and d., stayrng in villages duringfield work. To plan with the rest of the team follow up researchrequired, to test the findings from the case study material.

To assess the potentially negative social impact of candidate cash cropdevelopment especially with respect to women, children, and foodcrop cultivation. To use this information to give guidance in furtherselection between candidate cash crops.

To supervise the APOS social scientist and ensure a complementaryUnguja progranrme specifically in the monitoring of on-farm trials.

To contribute to the overall inter-disciplinary planning, research andextension progr.mlme activities of the project.

To train counterpart staffin survey work and analysis."

(from ODA letter of appointment dated 17 August 1994)

It should be pointed out that given the "process" nature of the project, some of theseterms have already, in practice, been modified. Item (g), for example, does not applyin full because an APOS social scientist was not recruited.

g.

h.

24

Annex 2: First Workolan for the ZCCFSP Social Anthropoloeist

a

l. To visit different sections and projects within the Ministry of Agriculture and otherrelevant ministries / agencies, for the purposes of introduction (to personnel andprogrammes) and to review points of contact (past, present and future) betweenZCCFSP and its socio-economic programme and relevant aspects of their own work.

2. To review the existing progranrme of socio-economic data collection andmonitoring in ZCCFSP and the capabilities of the staffinvolved.

3. To plan socio-economic involvement and inputs in the ongoing programme of pilotand other trials on Pemba and Unguja.

4. To prepare, at the end of November, a situation summary report of 5-10 pages onthe results of tasks l-3 above.

Interim Workplan- December 1994 - March 1995

While a more detailed plan will be presented in the November report, it is anticipatedthat the period December through to March will include the following tasks:-

l. Active involvement in pilot and other trials.

2. Involvement in village PRA exercises (on Farming Systems zones not previouslycovered by village PRAs).

3. Initiation of a programme of basic research on Pemba, looking in particular at inter-and intra-household resource allocations and flows, gender relations and other factorswhich imprnge upon opportunities for and constraints upon expanded or otherwisemodified cash crop production and marketing. This research will also involve Ministrycounterparts and include an important training component.

4. To prepare an inception report for the March 1995 review mission and to discussthis in advance with the BDDEA Social Development Adviser, Dr Philip Evans."

(workplan dated I October 1994, agreed by the Field Manager and forwarded to NRI)

25

Annex 3: Formal Meetings and Contacts

Pemba

Shariff Maalim Hamadi (Head), Plant Protection Division, Research Sub-commission, MALNR (7 19 19 4, 2819 194)

Matthis Spittel, Strengthening the Plant Protection Division of Zarulbar, PlantProtection Division, Research Sub-commission, MALNR (7 19 I 9 4)

Merja Mflkelli, FINNIDA Forestry Project, Forestry Sub-commission, MALNR(visiting from Unguj a, 819 194)

Rashid Said Nassoor (Administrator), Save the Children Fund, Wete (1319194).

Juma Omar Hamad (Farming Systems Research Officer), National CoconutDevelopment Programme, Research Sub-commission, MALNR (28 I 9 I 9 4, 6 I | 0 I 9 4)

Masood Suleiman Hamad, Village Forestry Department, Forestry Sub-commission,MALNR (28lele4)

Suleiman Hamisi Ali (Regional Forestry Officer), Forestry Sub-commission, MALNR(28lele4)

Khatid Zahor Muhiddin (Acting Head), Extension Sub-commission, MALNR(28tete4)

Rex M. Kenneh, Extension Sub-commission, MALNR (3110194)

Khatib Juma Khatib, IFAD, Food Crops Adaptive Research, Research Sub-commission, MALNR (4110194 and various)

Dr Kassim Juma (Head), Livestock Sub-commission, MALNR (6110194)

Rashid H. Said (Head), Agricultural Sub-commission, MALNR (6110194)

Rashid Juma Qlead), Forestry Sub-commission, MALNR (6110194)

Said Abdulrahman Abdi (Regional Coconut Extension Officer), National CoconutDevelopment Programme, Research Sub-commission, MALNR (6 I l0 I 9 4)

Ati Saidi Hamadi (Fisheries Development Officer and Acting Head), Fisheries Sub-commission, MALNR (61 10194)

Omar Majid Salim (Extension Officer), Fisheries Sub-commission, MALNR(6tr0te4)

26

Ali Salim Chenga (Planning Officer), Ministry of State, President's Office, Womenand Children's Affairs (l9ll0l94)

Shaibu Abdallah Mohammed (Personnel and Administration Officer), Ministry ofState, President's Office, Women and Children's Affairs (l9ll0l94)

Omar Salehe Ali (Assistant Planning and Projects Officer), ), Ministry of State,President's Office, Women and Children's Affairs (19110194)

Halima Ali (Research Officer, Sociologist), ), Ministry of State, President's Office,Women and Children's Affairs (26110194)

Mwalimu Anas (Officer In Charge), MALNR (l5llll94)

Unsuia

Amina Mohammed (Assistant Commissioner), Research Sub-commission, MALNR(3118194 and various)

Mohammed Abdallah Ghassany (Executive Chairman), Cash Crops and FruitAuthority, MALNR (l 19 /94, 9 I | | 194)

Saleh Sadiq Osman (Permanent Secretary), MALNR (l7ll0l94)

Mwadini Haji Kutenga (Acting Commissioner), Research and ExtensionCommission, MALNR (17 I 1019 4)

Abu Bakr (Assistant Commissioner), Agriculture Sub-commission, MALNR(8true4)

Dr Mahmoud E. Mansour (Adviser), IFAD Smallholder Support Project, ResearchSub-commission, MALNR (8 I | | 194)

Rashid Said Masoud (Assistant Commissioner), Forestry Sub-commission, MALNR(8trve4)

Majid Muhammed (Director),Zamibw Rainfed Rice Development Project, MALNR(8l1ve4)

Dr Gerard C. A. Bruin (Plant Pathologist / Chief Technical Advisor), Strengtheningthe Plant Protection Division of Zanabw, Plant Protection Division, Research Sub-commission, MALNR (81 | | 194)

Maulid Musa Takrima (Director of Trade and Marketing), Ministry of Trade,Industries and Marketng (9 I I U9a)

27

Omar Salim Ali (Statistical Officer), Statistical Unit, Planning Sub-commission,MALNR (elrve4)

Hassan Ussy Ameir (Statistical Officer), Statistical Unit, Planning Sub-commission,MALNR (elrve4)

I. H. Makame (Statistician), Demographic Section, Department of Statistics, MinistryofPlanning (9llll94)

A. S. Bajaria (Manager), National Bank of Commerce, Shangani,Zanzibar (l0llll94)

Dr Mohamed A. El-Lakany (Adaptive Research Specialist), IFAD SmallholderSupport Project, Research Sub-commission, MALNR (l I I | | I 9 4)

Professor Sayed H. Nassar (Vegetable Research Consultant), IFAD SmallholderSupport Project, Research Sub-commission, MALNR (l I I | | I 9 4)

Haji Suleiman Hamad (Head), Food Crops Research, Research Sub-commission,MALNR (rvrve+)

28

Annex 4: Anthroooloqists and Other Researchers

Hege Aasbo, currently doing short-term anthopological research on social and urbanspace inZandbu town for an M.A. at the University of Troms6, Norway.

Glen Cameron, has worked for some years with women's co-operatives on Pembaisland and is writing a political science Ph.D for the School of Oriental and AfricanStudies, London, on this subject. He has already produced a short historical overviewof the co-operative movement inZamrbu (Cameron 1992).

Helle Goldman, currently writing up a Ph.D at New York University dealing withissues of identity, stratification and ideological hegemony among the Swahili, Arabsand others on Pemba island. This is based upon anthropological fieldwork conductedin the villages of Mzambarauni and Furaha between 1992 and 1994.

Peter Green, starting Ph.D research for Stockholm University, Sweden, on the spatialconceptualisation of natural resources and environment in fishing villages in Unguja.Already undertaken preliminary research in Nungwi.

Bethan Jones, has lived and worked in Zamibar town for four years and isconsidering starting an M.A. and researching the changing status of women in thetown.

Karina Kielmann, a doctoral candidate at John Hopkins University School of PublicHealth, USA, and currently working on a GTZ internship and a four-month study ofwomen's perceptions of fertility and infertility on Pemba (not connected to her Ph.D).Due to leave Pemba in January 1995.

Eberhard Krain, worked for the National Coconut Development Programme from1986 and in 1990 began research for a Ph.D on agricultural economy and institutionsin Zamibar (working on both islands) for the Friedrich-Wilhelms University, Bonn,Germany. He has recently presented the preliminary conclusions of this work toMALNR in a series of discussion papers.

Kjersti Lrrsen, completed a Ph.D at the University of Oslo, Norway, and recentlypublished a book (in Norwegian) on inititation and marriage rituals nZaruibw town.

Kimberley Rose, recently completed research on health, nutrition and related issues inKukuu and nearby villages of south Pemba. The preliminary results of this research areavailable in a report written for the Save the Children Fund, Pemba (Kimberley 1994).

Ulrike Seibel, recently completed field research in fishing villages on Unguja,including Uroa and Nungwi, looking at nutrition and household resources. Currentlybased in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.

29

Chris Walley, starting anthropological field research for a Ph.D at New YorkUniversity, US.t looking at the issues of tourism and environment on Unguja andMafia islands. Currently focusing upon the latter.

30