The Influence Of Innovations Intervention On Beekeepers’ Livelihoods In Sikonge District Of Tabora Region In Central Tanzania

ABSTRACT

The overall objective of this study was to examine the influence of innovations on beekeepers‟ livelihoods in Sikonge District in Tabora region. The specific objectives of the study were: (1) to characterize beekeeping innovations typologies in the district, (2) to examine beekeeping innovations processes and their associated adoption rates, and (3) to analyze the possible influence of innovations on beekeepers‟ livelihoods. A cross-sectional research survey, coupled with mixed research techniques, was used as parts of research methodology. Interviews, in-depth interviews, focus group discussions (FGDs), observations and documentary review were adopted as data collection techniques while content analysis and ANOVA were adopted in data analysis. The results revealed variable beekeeping innovations typologies, ranging from the introduction of modern hives (16%), enhanced protective gears (33%), and establishment of honey collection centres (66.1%). Other innovations typologies were adoption of joint marketing ventures through beekeeping social networks (49.4%) and contract beekeeping (50%). Beekeeping diffusion processes included information dissemination (10.6%), capacity strengthening (99.4%), introduction of sound beekeeping extension approaches (28.4%), promotion of service providers, establishment of social networks and infrastructural development (36.8%). It was found that beekeeping innovations were characterized by arelatively high propensity to resist adoption of intervening innovation including movable frames and top-bar hives (78.9%), protective gears (68.3%), honey collection and storage facilities (72%),and (92.2%) respectively on contract beekeeping, indicationg a low innovation adoption rate. The study concluded that the factors influencing a low adoption rate of beekeeping innovations included inefficiency in institutional arrangements as reflected v by ineffectiveness of the quantity and quality of both human and physical resources to coordinate diffusion processes, inability of the majority of beekeepers (83.7%) to adopt innovations that demanded financial capital. Nevertheless, the ANOVA statistical analysis indicates that none of the intervened innovations had positive correlation coefficient on the beekeepers‟ livelihoods except access to natural capital including bee resources (gazetted national forests, beekeeping and game reserves) as one of livelihood assets for beekeeping activities. It was thus concluded that beekeeping is still potential for sustainable livelihoods although it needs effective and user-friendly innovation intervention to realise its potentiality. However, to improve the potentiality of the beekeeping sector, the study puts forward policy recommendations which include screating effective linkages between policy objectives and their implementation to promote beekeeping social networks, creating effective institutional arrangements on public-private partnership with clear targets and concerted efforts among beekeeping stakeholders at local level. Other policy recommendations include considering beekeepers‟ socio-economic and cultural factors as the centre of innovations diffusion, harmonizing related policy conflict of interests between natural resource conservation and promotion of modern beehives and investing on traditional beekeeping innovations through Research and Development (R&D).