Farming among the Attappady tribes of Kerala: a livelihood analysis
Loading...
Files
Date
2020
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Department of Agriculture Extension, College of Horticulture, Vellanikkara
Abstract
Kerala has achieved remarkable improvement in the social sector, celebrated as ‘Kerala Model of Development’. But it is observed that the development process fell short to encompass tribal communities in the course. Majority of the tribes in Kerala continue to depend on agriculture and are struggling to compete with the current situational threats like climate change and wild animal menace. Moreover, the commercial exploitation of forest resources has resulted in extensive soil erosion and loss of soil fertility. Therefore, sustaining crop production and productivity without damaging the resources and environment are posing big challenge to the tribal farming. This threatened the livelihood of the tribal community which depended on agriculture and forest, forcing them to be bonded and migrant labour (Patidar et al. 2018). Attappady tribal development block of Palakkad district is one of the 43 tribal development blocks in India and is inhabited by three tribal communities viz., Irulas, Mudugas and Kurumbas.
Delineation of the factors influencing the selection of farming techniques and strategies among tribal farmers were studied and data collected was analysed using factor analysis to delineate the factors. Agricultural technology and input services, policy, knowledge and information support, infrastructure, weather & technological constraints, farm management and market orientation and access to extension services were found to be the factors determining for the selection of farming strategy and agricultural technologies. Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) was used to measure the dietary diversity and was found to be relatively very low compared to the Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDA). The tribal diets were found to be grossly deficient in calcium, vitamin A, vitamin C, riboflavin and animal protein. Community kitchen based on food aids that functioned in the respective tribal hamlets (ooru) played a significant role in maintaining the food security of the community. Simpson crop diversity index used to measure the cop diversity in areas where Millet village programme implemented. Majority of 68.3 and 16.7 per cent of the households belonged to categories with high and very high
crop diversity indices. Food security status of Attappady tribes was measured using Food Security Index (FSI) based on the parameters of availability, accessibility, utilization and stability. Eight per cent of the tribes recorded very low food security (FSI 0.01-0.20), another 46.7 per cent of the tribes belonged to low food security status with FSI values between 0.21 and 0.40. However, there were 33.3 and 12 per cent of them respectively in medium and very high food security categories. Livelihood security assessment was done using Livelihood Asset Pentagon (FAO,
2008) based on the five core assets viz. natural, social, human, physical and financial capital. Livelihood status of tribes of Agali panchayath on the selected dimensions and also the overall score indicated low Financial Capital Index (FCI) scores of 35.91 for the region. It could also be observed that on all other dimensions, the panchayat had moderate scores with Social Capital Index (SCI) of 59.52, Human Capital Index (HCI) of 62.27, Physical Capital Index (PCI)of 65.00 and Natural Capital Index(NCI) of 66.35. Overall Livelihood Security Index for the Agali panchayat was at 57.81. Livelihood status of tribes of Pudur panchayath on the selected core dimensions indicated comparitively low scores on all the selected dimensions with lowest scores for social capital (16.88), Financial Capital Index (FCI) of 47.00, Human Capital Index (HCI) of 45.14, Physical Capital Index (PCI)of 57.75 and Natural Capital Index(NCI) of 50.96. The overall Livelihood Security Index (LSI) for the panchayat was only 43.55. In the case of Sholayur panchayat very low Social Capital Index (SCI) of 21.63, Financial Capital Index (FCI) of 40.57, Human Capital Index (HCI) of 48.45, Physical Capital Index (PCI) of 62.93 and Natural Capital Index (NCI) of 52.95. The overall Livelihood Security Index (LSI) for the area was 45.31. The livelihood status of tribes of Attappady tribal development block on the selected core dimensions indicated comparitively low scores on all the selected dimensions with lowest scores for social capital (32.68). The area also had very moderate scores on Financial Capital Index (FCI) of 41.16, Human Capital Index (HCI) of 51.95, Physical Capital Index (PCI)of
61.89 and Natural Capital Index(NCI) of 56.75. The overall Livelihood Security
Index (LSI) for the block was only 48.89.
Description
PhD
Keywords
Citation
175050