UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

FACULTY OF ARTS

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL WORK

TOPIC:

THE EFFECT OF DROUGHT AND FAMINE ON AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION,

LIVING STANDARDS AND EDUCATIONAL STATUS OF THE PEOPLE OF KITUI
COUNTY, KENYA

PRESENTED BY:

ANGELA SIMEL

REG NO.C50/82073/2012

A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT FOR THE

REQUIREMENTS OF THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN
SOCIOLOGY (ADVANCED DISASTER MANAGEMENT), UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

NOVEMBER 2015

i
DECLARATION

This research report is my original work and has never been presented for a master‟s degree or
any other award in any other Institution of higher learning.

Signed………………………………………………Date………………………………………….

ANGELA SIMEL
REG NO: C50/82073/2012

This research report has been submitted for examination with my approval as the University
supervisor.
Signed………………………………………………Date………………………………………….

PROF. EDWARD K. MBURUGU

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY
UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

ii
DEDICATION

I wish to dedicate this project to my family for their love and everlasting support. May the
Almighty God bless you all tremendously.

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to express my sincere gratitude to the Almighty God for His goodness and mercy in my
life and especially during my research project.

I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation to my supervisor, Professor Edward Mburugu,

Department of Sociology, not only did he provide professional expertise but also the much
needed support, encouragement and guidance which helped me to complete this research project.

Finally, my thanks go to the respondents, workmates, college mates and friends for their prayers,
support and inspiration throughout this project.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ............................................................................................................................ ii
DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ v
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................ xi
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. xii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1
1.0 Background of the Study .......................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Problem Statement .................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Research Questions ................................................................................................................... 7
1.3 Objective of the study ............................................................................................................... 7
1.3.1 Main objective ....................................................................................................................... 7
1.3.2 Specific Objectives ................................................................................................................ 7
1.4 Justification of the Study .......................................................................................................... 8
1.5 Scope and Limitations of the Study .......................................................................................... 8
1.5.1 Scope of the Study ................................................................................................................. 8
1.5.2 Limitations of the Study......................................................................................................... 8
1.6 Operational Definition of terms ................................................................................................ 9
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK..... 11
2.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 11
2.1 Literature Review.................................................................................................................... 11
2.1.1 Overview of Community Participation ................................................................................ 11
2.1.2 Community Participation and Beneficiary Identification .................................................... 14
2.1.3 Community Participation and Needs Identification ............................................................. 15
2.1.4 Community Participation and Information Dissemination .......................................... 19
2.1.5 Community Participation, Ownership and Community Control ......................................... 20

v
2.2 Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................................... 21
2.2.1 Social Theory of Disaster..................................................................................................... 21
2.2.2 Famine theories .................................................................................................................... 23
2.2.3 Systems Theory.................................................................................................................... 26
2.3 Conceptual Framework ........................................................................................................... 27
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ......................................................... 29
3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 29
3.2 Study Site ................................................................................................................................ 29
3.3 Research Design...................................................................................................................... 29
3.4 Unit of analysis and Unit of observation ................................................................................ 30
3.5 Target Population .................................................................................................................... 30
3.6 Sample Size and Sampling Procedure .................................................................................... 31
3.7 Methods of Data Collection .................................................................................................... 32
3.7.1 Collection of quantitative data ............................................................................................. 32
3.7.2 Collection of qualitative data ............................................................................................... 32
3.8 Ethical considerations ............................................................................................................. 33
3.9 Data Processing and Analysis ................................................................................................. 34
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION ... 35
4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 35
4.1.1. Response Rate ..................................................................................................................... 35
4.2. Characteristics of Respondents .............................................................................................. 35
4.2.1 Gender of the Respondents .................................................................................................. 35
4.2.2 Age of the Respondents ....................................................................................................... 36
4.2.3 The Number of Years the Respondents Have Lived In the Community ............................. 37
4.2.4 Marital Status of the Respondents ....................................................................................... 38
4.2.5 Education status of the respondents ..................................................................................... 38
4.2.6 Socio-Economic Characteristics .......................................................................................... 39
4.3 Control Measures Adopted To Help In Curbing Drought and Famine .................................. 42
4.3.1 Action taken in times of Food Shortage .............................................................................. 42
4.3.2 Contribution of the Community towards Intervention......................................................... 43

vi
4.3.3 Adjustments in Farming Practices to Climate Variability and Change ............................... 44
4.3.4 Adjustments made in farming practices to long-term shifts in temperature and rainfall ..... 44
4.3.5 Main Constraints to Adaptation Measures ........................................................................... 46
4.3.6 Challenges and Successes during the Current Response to Drought ................................... 47
4.4 Role of NGOs in Counteracting Drought and Famine in the County ..................................... 48
4.4.1 Institutions/ Organizations the Community has worked with to address climate change ... 48
4.4.2 Type of Institutions/ Organizations to Address Climate change ......................................... 48
4.4.3 How the organization helped the community in coping with drought ................................. 49
4.4.4 Negotiations and discussions about Disaster risk management interventions ..................... 49
4.4.5 Proposal for Disaster risk management interventions ......................................................... 50
4.4.6 Residents‟ Understanding of Climate Change ..................................................................... 51
4.5 The Effect of Drought and Famine on Agricultural Production in the County ...................... 52
4.5.1 Food Crop Grown in the Community .................................................................................. 52
4.5.2 Fertility of the Land ............................................................................................................. 52
4.5.3 Sources of Agricultural Extension Officers/Services .......................................................... 53
4.5.4 Household Food Shortage Experience ................................................................................. 53
4.5.5 Crops Produced as Surplus for Sale in the County .............................................................. 54
4.5.6 Reasons for Food Shortage in the County ........................................................................... 55
4.5.7 Effect of Rainfall days over the last 10 years in the County ............................................... 55
4.6 How Drought and Famine Influence the Living Standards of the Community ...................... 56
4.6.1 Main Source of Household Income in the County............................................................... 56
4.6.2 Type of Housing in the County............................................................................................ 57
4.6.3 Fuel Used For Cooking in the County ................................................................................. 58
4.6.4 Problems When Accessing Water in the County ................................................................. 58
4.6.5 Means of Transport for Farm Products to the Market in the County................................... 59
4.7 Relationship between Drought and Famine and Education Status in the County .................. 60
4. 7.1 Respondents‟ Level of Education in the County ................................................................ 60
4.7.2 Respondents Number of Children in the County ................................................................. 61
4.7.3 Number of Children in School in the County ...................................................................... 61

vii
4.7.4 School Going Age Children Not in School in the County ................................................... 62
4.7.5 Reason for Failure of the Children to Attend School in the County .................................... 63
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................................ 64
5.1 Summary of Findings .............................................................................................................. 64
5.1.1 Role of government and NGOs in Counteracting Drought and Famine in the County ....... 64
5.1.2 Effect of Drought and Famine on Agricultural Production in the County .......................... 66
5.1.3 How Drought and Famine Influence the Living Standards of the Community ................... 68
5.1.4 Relationship between Drought and Famine and Education Status in the County ............... 70
5.1.5 Control Measures Adopted To Help In Curbing Drought and Famine ............................... 72
5.2 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 74
5.3 Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 75
5.4 Further Research ..................................................................................................................... 76
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 77
APPENDIX A: HOUSEHOLD QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................................... 81
APPENDIX B: KEY INFORMANT GUIDE............................................................................... 87
APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION............................ 88

viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2. 1: Systems Approach Model (Wilhelm C., 1999) ......................................................... 26
Figure 2. 2: Elements of Community Participation that Define the Role of Community
Participation in the Management of Drought Risk Reduction .................................. 28

ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3. 1: Total Population of Mutomo, Ikutha and Lower Yatta Districts ................................ 31
Table 4. 1: Response Rate............................................................................................................. 35
Table 4. 2: Distribution by Gender of the Respondents................................................................ 36
Table 4. 3: Distribution of the Respondents by Age ..................................................................... 37
Table 4. 4: The Number of Years the Respondents Have Lived In the Community .................... 37
Table 4. 5:Marital Status of the Respondents ............................................................................... 38
Table 4. 6: Education level of Respondents per Gender ............................................................... 39
Table 4. 7: The main assets Found in Kitui County ..................................................................... 40
Table 4. 8: Dependency on Crop Farming in Kitui County.......................................................... 41
Table 4. 9: The Number of Mud Walled Houses .......................................................................... 41
Table 4. 10: The Main Source of Cooking Fuel ........................................................................... 42
Table 4. 11: Action taken in times of Food Shortage ................................................................... 43
Table 4. 12: Contribution of the Community towards Intervention ............................................. 43
Table 4. 13: Adjustments in farming practices to climate variability and change ........................ 44
Table 4. 14: Adjustments made in farming practices ................................................................... 46
Table 4. 15: Main Constraints to Adaptation Measures ............................................................... 47
Table 4. 16: Institutions the Community Has Worked With to Address Climate Change ........... 48
Table 4. 17: Type of Institutions/ Organizations to Address Climate change .............................. 49
Table 4. 18: Negotiations and Discussion about Disaster Risk Management Interventions ........ 50
Table 4. 19: Proposal for Disaster Risk Management Interventions ............................................ 51
Table 4. 20: Residents‟ Understanding of Climate Change .......................................................... 51
Table 4. 21: Food Crop Grown in the Community ....................................................................... 52
Table 4. 22: Fertility of the Land .................................................................................................. 53
Table 4. 23: Sources of Agricultural Extension Officers/Services ............................................... 53
Table 4. 24: Household Food Shortage Experience...................................................................... 54
Table 4. 25: Crops Produced as Surplus for Sale in the County ................................................... 55
Table 4. 26: Reasons for Food Shortage in the County ................................................................ 55
Table 4. 27: Effect of Rainfall Days over the Last 10 Years in the County ................................. 56
Table 4. 28: Main Source of Household Income in the County ................................................... 57
Table 4. 29: Type of Housing in the County ................................................................................ 58
Table 4. 30: Fuel Used For Cooking in the County ...................................................................... 58
Table 4. 31: Problems When Accessing Water in the County ...................................................... 59
Table 4. 32: Means of Transport for Farm Products to the Market in the County ....................... 60
Table 4. 33: Respondents‟ Level of Education in the County ...................................................... 61
Table 4. 34: Respondents Number of Children in the County...................................................... 61
Table 4. 35: Number of Children in School in the County ........................................................... 62
Table 4. 36: School Going Age Children Not in School in the County........................................ 63
Table 4. 37: Reason for Failure of the Children to Attend School in the County ........................ 63

x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CBO Community Based Organization

DRM Disaster Risk Management

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development

IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IISD International Institute for Sustainable Development

ISDR International Study for Disaster Reduction

KNBS Kenya National Bureaus of Statistics

MDG Millennium Development Goals

NCLR National Council for Law Reporting

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

ROK Republic of Kenya

SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Science

UN United Nations

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

USAID United Sates Agency for International Development

WFP World Food Programme

xi
ABSTRACT

The study examined the effects of drought and famine on agricultural production, living
standards and educational status of the people of Kitui County and also the control measures
adopted by the community in curbing drought and famine. The study is meant to add knowledge
on the understanding of how prepared and resilient rural communities are in response to drought
and famine. The study was conducted in Ikutha, Mutomo and Lower Yatta districts of Kitui
County. The site was chosen because it is a semi-arid area with a large number of small-scale
agro-pastoralists and has been affected by drought and famine for over a period of 30 years.
However, many efforts have been made by the government and both local and international
NGOs to assist the communities cope with famine and drought.

The design of this research was descriptive research design. The study used simple random
sampling to select a sample of 150 respondents, who provided the relevant data for the study as
they have experienced drought and famine in the area and have seen the resilience measures
adopted to curb the impact of drought and famine. The quantitative data was collected from
households and analyzed using a Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) while qualitative
was by use of focus group discussions and key informant interviews and was analyzed using
content analysis.
The study concluded that failure to involve all stakeholders in responding to drought has been a
major challenge. Community participation, resilience and preparedness in drought has been
ignored and emphasis has been on emergency relief and response. The affected communities
have also become too weak when drought strikes and unilateral declaration by project
administrators without listening to people‟s responses which would involve communities has
also been a challenge. Failure to implement the recommendations made has also been a major
challenge. On the success there has been building of boreholes which has increased access to
water for the community. Irrigation has also been implemented and conservation of the
environment has also been implemented. The study also concluded that various organizations
have supported the community in coping with drought through various measures such as
conducting forums and sensitizing the locals on the need of conserving the environment through
planting of trees and eliminating deforestation which is a major cause of drought. Various
organizations have built boreholes for the locals to increase the water content for the community.
In coping with drought the residents have been empowered to grow drought resistant crops
which can cope under harsh weather conditions.
The study recommends that the community in Kitui County should be encouraged to diversify
their income generating activities. The study also recommends that the residents in Kitui County
be encouraged to grow drought resistant crops such as sorghum and millet. The community
should be educated on the importance of trees to the environment to reduce tree` cutting
firewood. The government should encourage parents on the importance of education. Education
will provide opportunities in the future for their children. Promote formation of local rural
institutions and farmer groups. This will help in educating farmers on fertilizers, seed varieties,
crop diversification and also livelihood diversification, development of community drought early
warning systems.

xii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.0 Background of the Study

A drought is a period of below-average precipitation in a given region, resulting in prolonged
shortages in its waters supply, whether atmospheric, surface or ground water. A drought can last
for months or years, or may be declared after as few as 15 days. It can have a substantial impact
on the ecosystem and agriculture of the affected region. Although droughts can persist for
several years, even a short, intense drought can cause significant damage and harm to the local
economy.

The drought and famine of 1984-85 began in Ukambani with the failure of rain and crops in two
consecutive seasons in 1983 and 1984, combined with the near total depletion of green fodder
sources. The Akamba suffered up to 60% reductions in livestock and liquidated many of their
hard-won assets in order to purchase food (Glantz, 1976). The loss of draught animals (oxen)
hampered many farmers‟ recovery from the drought and reduced their ability to cultivate their
croplands in subsequent years. Children and the elderly died from starvation in many areas and
severe and chronic malnutrition were widespread in Machakos and Kitui. The extent and impact
of the drought and the experience of famine varied substantially among regions, communities,
households and individuals, with results ranging from death and disability of family members to
windfall profits from livestock and food trading (Abdul, 1976).

Ukambani had recourse to off-farm enterprises, savings, and investments, as well as to cash
remittances from urban migrants, while the drier, lowland areas were harder hit. Farmers had to
typically offset crop losses through livestock sales or remittances and purchased food at
“normal” prices from the cities or the highlands. In 1984-85, however, livestock prices were
greatly reduced in a nationally glutted market (Makau, 1998). Due to the national scale of the
drought, there was for a time virtually no food to be purchased in the dry land communities of
Ukambani, except at vastly inflated prices beyond the means of most rural people. Hence, in
Machakos, 1984 was known as the famine “Nikw‟a Ngwete” (“I Shall Die with money in my
hand‟). Eventually, at least 300,000 people in Kitui and as many in Machakos received food aid
from the Government of Kenya relief program in 1984-85.

1
There were pronounced differences in the magnitude and character of drought impacts on men
and women. As their usual dry season water sources dried up, women and children in the drier
zones spent substantially longer hours fetching and carrying water. The feminization of poverty
in Ukambani expanded in 1984 to include the feminization of famine and of famine response
(Glantz, 1987). Women sought the advice of elder men and experimented widely to identify
emergency fodder plants - a knowledge and responsibility previously in men‟s domain. They fell
back on political and social skills to gain access to food, fodder, water, and cash from neighbors,
relatives, and absentee husbands and sons. Their returns to labor decreased sharply in the daily
search for water, food, and fuel, while their purchasing power with remittance income (when
available) also declined due to rising prices of scarce food. As Ukambani began to recover in
1985 rural people variously attributed their successful survival of the famine to indigenous food,
fodder, and medicinal plants, cash remittances, migration, group work and group contacts with
official and external sources of relief aid, and mobilization of family; clan, church, and other
networks of mutual support. Government authorities and development agencies, in contrast,
emphasized the success of market-based relief policies in the 1984-85 famine, an approach
which they extended when Ukambani faced another famine seven years later (John, 1997).

The drought of 1991-92 was more localized and food was more widely available in the markets,
but cash- and asset-starved farmers could purchase it only at inflated prices three to four times
the normal cost. Due to the 1984-85 drought, as well as land hunger, most farmers had few
animals to sell and many none at all (John, 2007). In addition to wage labor on plantations, many
families in the dry lowlands of Machakos and Kitui, from the poorest to the more “successful”
farmers, produced and sold charcoal at one-fourth the usual price to earn cash for food
purchases. The landless and near-landless, as well as smallholders with no trees, either purchased
trees to burn or entered into tree “sharecropping” arrangements. The inflated price of food and
depressed price of charcoal resulted in a distorted exchange of trees for food; trees as assets were
liquidated at 8-10% of their usual market value as measured in food purchasing power.
Unforeseen by the analysts of the 1985 drought response, the market as a mechanism for food
relief in Ukambani carries with it a strong incentive to deplete standing trees for charcoal,
preempting future use as sources of food, fodder, timber, fuel and watershed protection (William,
2001).

2
As for drought recovery in 1991-92, several national and international development agencies
attempted to apply another lesson of the last famine that the nation‟s dry lands were over
dependent on maize. They distributed sorghum and millet seed, much to the consternation of
Akamba farmers otherwise lacking any seed to plant at the onset of the next rains (Dummett,
2004). When the millet matured there was a milk shortage, since the traditional millet porridge
requires milk - already a scarce commodity due to large-scale livestock reductions in the 1984-85
famine. With no milk to prepare the millet, poor farmers sought to trade or sell millet to procure
maize. The price of milk soared, the price of millet plummeted, and once again, decreased
returns to land and labor, in real terms, left poor farmers (mostly women) paying for the mistakes
of crisis response policy(Kinealy, 1995).

During the early colonial period, human and cattle disease was the dominant crisis identified by
administrators and travelers in Ukambani. The 1890s saw the construction of the Uganda
Railroad, which likely contributed to the spread of rinderpest among cattle as well as the
introduction of smallpox by foreigners. These forces combined with a drought in the late 1890s
to bring about the great famine of 1897-1901. Since cattle served as the main drought insurance,
the results of combined drought and cattle disease were devastating, particularly in Kitui, where
official figures suggest that upward of 50% of the people perished. Viewing the devastation
around them, colonial officials and observers, while recognizing the epidemics, blamed Akamba
cattle-rearing practices as well as their “primitive” standard of living for the magnitude of the
disaster. Writing around the turn of the century, colonial observers identified several reasons for
the Akamba‟s supposedly low standard of living, accusing them of weakness of character,
irrational attachment to their cattle, and inefficient and destructive cultivation practices. Noting
the famine “resulting” from these social and agricultural practices, colonial authorities defined a
“public health crisis” among the Akamba. This “public health crisis” paralleled a concurrent
crisis construction by Progressive-era reformers in the United States and Great Britain who were
associating high population densities in urban slums with poor household maintenance practices,
poor hygiene, and the spread of disease. Colonial and urban reform movements identified similar
problems and solutions, each relying optimistically on state regulation of household behavior to
cope with the problems which ensued with the advent of modernity.

3
In both Ukambani and working-class England, women‟s household practices were judged against
the standard of the Victorian women and were frequently found wanting. As working-class
English women received training in mothering skills and home economics. Colonial observers
criticized the Akamba for their alleged “sexual immorality” and noted critically that “the women
do all the work in the fields and are also hewers of wood and drawers of water”. While the
naming of the epidemics which plagued Ukambani during the 1890s reflected European
experiences and prejudices, the epidemics themselves derived from contact with European
people and livestock, whose very presence was a response to events unfolding in Europe (Miller,
1982). The British were primarily responding to conflicts on the global stage, as inter- European
political and economic competition intensified, culminating in the 1884 Congress of Berlin and
the “scramble for Africa.” The Uganda Railroad was built in part to solidify British control of
East Asia and the authorities encouraged European settlers in an effort to make the railroad pay
for itself (Blake et al., 1967). The settlers, in turn, faced a land shortage, as the Akamba tenure
system depended on expanses of open, communally held pastureland. The settlers responded
with an extensive land seizure and enclosure program.

By 1920, the Akamba had lost effective access to about two-thirds of the land they had formerly
controlled, including their most fertile lands and half of all their pasture. Along with some of
their best grazing land, they lost the freedom to migrate seasonally and periodically in search of
water, pasture, and cropland. For the Akamba, the crisis of the era was one of land alienation, as
settlers disrupted their tenure system and took away their land. At the same time, the state barred
the Akamba from the export-oriented agricultural sector in an effort to protect the white settlers‟
monopoly (Brennan, 1984). These policies contributed to a continuing crisis of cattle disease;
agro- pastoralists were left with few options other than to preserve underfed and sickly cattle,
their major assets, in overcrowded reserves where disease spread easily. These colonial land
tenure policies also forced the Akamba into sedentary settlements and continuous cultivation on
relatively small areas of poor quality land. This process of concentration, in turn, sowed the
seeds of future crises, including those of land degradation, “overpopulation,” and urban
migration (Kinealy, 1995).

4
1.1 Problem Statement
Drought and famine have been the talk in the last decade in Kitui County where the residents
have suffered a lot from the disaster. The rainfall trends in the area have been very unpredictable
exposing the area to persistent droughts leading to famine. According to the UN reports greater
populations rely on relief foods from the NGOs and the central government as the area is not
able to sustain its population in terms of food production. Various studies done and implemented
on other areas with the same geographical position have shown that drought and famine can be
controlled by creating awareness then coming up with counteractive measures of helping the
population from famine which is the later disaster.

Droughts have become more frequent and severe over the recent years. Owing to the drought
effects, loss of livelihood and assets during successive droughts, has been experienced in many
parts of Kenya rendering her food security status, fragile. (USAID 2012). Disaster risk
management at the local level was a key element in any viable national strategy to reduce
disaster risks, building on the quality of community networks, the social fabric, and effective
governance. (UNDP, 2005) Community participation in drought disaster risk management had
been ignored and emphasis has been on emergency relief and response. The affected
communities become too weak when drought strikes and unilateral declaration by project
administrators without listening to people‟s responses would involve communities by; answering
questions posed by extractive drought risk assessors and using questionnaire surveys without
giving the opportunity to prioritize felt needs (Wilford, 1993).

Various actors have implemented work based food assistance programmes as a way of involving
the public in resilience building. Several drought disaster risk management programmes have
been designed by the government and development partners to save livelihoods and help
communities become more resilient by creation of productive communal and household assets.
These efforts have not yielded sustainable resilience in Kitui County. Participation roles assumed
by the community in interventions should support the investment by the agencies and create
synergy among disaster risk management actors geared towards spurring positive impact of
designed interventions in order to navigate communities from drought risk (Wilford, 1993).
Drought risk management was more effective when the communities themselves (IFRC 2011)

5
undertook majority of the activities contributing to a safe and resilient community. Accordingly,
this study sought to determine and describe the role of community participation in the
implementation and management of drought reduction interventions in Kitui County, Kenya.

Drought and famine have affected various aspects in the county as education levels are very low
with schools attracting low enrollments while majority of the youth migrate to urban areas to
look for jobs to sustain their siblings and their families. This calamity has also lead to poor
agricultural production and forces the population to rely on relief foods which are not enough
and cannot be provided all through the year. Low food production results to poorly fed
population meaning that majority are malnourished and generally subjected to poor health.
Living standards also are an aspect to be looked at, as it‟s also affected by the disaster. A very
big population lives poorly and in sketchy structures since their incomes cannot allow them to
develop in terms of housing. This is because the little that is earned is for food, and is normally
not enough.

With all these problems in place, NGOs have established their camps in the area to help the
people in curbing the problems associated with the disaster. They majorly focus on irrigation
projects to supplement the little food they raise in the farms; this has gone to the extent of
establishing greenhouses in the area so as to boost food production. Water projects also have
been established and making sure that the population can reach water from the nearby sources
without much straining and at a reduced distance. This is not only done by NGOs but the
government has also chipped in and funded the construction of dams across seasonal rivers and
streams so as to harvest water in a reservoir. The government introduced feeding programmes in
schools, so as to reduce the effects of hunger in schools and also to attract reasonable enrollment.
With these problems and some solutions offered the study sought to find more solutions with
regards to disaster preparedness and resilience in rural communities and in this case, a study of
Kitui County. The research focused on how famine and drought affected various aspects of the
community, like agricultural production, educational status and their living standards.

6
1.2 Research Questions
i. How has drought and famine affected agricultural production in the county?

ii. To what extent does drought and famine influence the living standards of the people in
the county?

iii. Is there any significant relationship between drought and famine and education status in
the county?

iv. Do the control measures adopted by the people of Kitui County help in curbing the
problem of persistent drought and famine?

v. What is the role of the government and NGOs in counteracting drought and famine in the
county?

1.3 Objective of the study

1.3.1 Main objective
The main objective of the study was to investigate disaster preparedness and resilience in Kitui
County and its effect on agricultural production, living standards and educational status of the
people of Kitui County.

1.3.2 Specific Objectives

The specific objectives of the study are:
i. To establish the effects drought and famine has on the living standards and household
welfare of the people of Kitui County.

ii. To identify the control measures put in place to curb drought and famine in Kitui County

iii. To show how efforts to combat drought and famine have affected agricultural production
in Kitui County.

iv. To investigate the role played by the government, local and international NGOs and
community based organizations in counteracting drought and famine in the county.

7
1.4 Justification of the Study
The study helped in identifying the effects of drought and famine on aspects like; living
standards, educational level and agricultural production of the people of Kitui County. The study
also focused on the role played by NGOs and the government in counteracting the effects of
drought and famine in Kitui County. Kitui County was chosen because it is a semi-arid area and
the community has experienced many years of persistent drought and famine. On the other hand,
the topic was chosen because drought is one of the leading disasters in the country. The study
generated suggestions, which were significant to formulation of policy statements through its
recommendations. The study made recommendations on the diversification of income generating
activities, planting of drought resistant crops and adaptation efforts in farming practices. Such
recommendations could inform policy formulation in the county and other counties in the
country because they originated from valid research data.

1.5 Scope and Limitations of the Study

1.5.1 Scope of the Study
The scope of the study was disaster preparedness and resilience in Kitui County and its effect on
agricultural production, living standards and educational status of the people of Kitui. The study
was conducted in Ikutha, Mutomo and Lower Yatta districts of Kitui County. Kitui County is
among the most drought-vulnerable regions in Kenya. The manifestation of climate change has
resulted into unpredictable and depressed crop yields and loss of livestock, leading to perennial
food shortages and over-reliance on emergency food-based interventions to meet the local food
deficit (ROK, 2005). Therefore, there was need to assess how the community in Kitui have
adapted to changes in climate change. This was done by investigating the effects of drought and
famine on the living standards, educational status and agricultural production of the people of
Kitui

1.5.2 Limitations of the Study

The area under study was not easily accessible due to the poor infrastructure; Time factor was
also a limitation factor as the researcher was based in the urban area and the study was conducted
in the rural area which meant a lot of time was spared for the study; Financial resources also

8
posed a challenge to the researcher in carrying out the study; Language barrier and illiteracy of
the respondents was also as a big challenge to the researcher and therefore, an interpreter had to
be sought and finally long bureaucratic procedures from government officers and NGOs, who
were the key informants, caused delays in approval of authority to collect data.

1.6 Operational Definition of terms

Drought

A drought is a period of below-average precipitation in a given region, resulting in prolonged

shortages in its waters supply, whether atmospheric, surface or ground water. A drought can last
for months or years, or may be declared after as few as 15 days.

Famine

A famine is a widespread scarcity of food,[1] caused by several factors including crop failure,
population unbalance, or government policies. This phenomenon is usually accompanied or
followed by regional malnutrition, starvation, epidemic, and increased mortality.

Climate Change

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) defines climate
change as “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that
alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate
variability observed over comparable time periods”.

Disaster

A disaster is a serious disruption of the functioning of a community or society causing

widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses which exceed the ability of the
affected community and society to cope using its own resources.

9
Disaster Preparedness

The knowledge and capacities developed by governments, professional response and recovery
organizations, communities and individuals to effectively anticipate, respond to, and recover
from, the impacts of likely, imminent or current hazard events or conditions.

Disaster Resilience

The ability of a system, community or society exposed to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate
to and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through
the preservation and restoration of its essential basic structures and functions.

Disaster Risk Management

The systematic process of using administrative directives, organizations, and operational skills
and capacities to implement strategies, policies and improved coping capacities in order to lessen
the adverse impacts of hazards and the possibility of disaster

Hazard

A dangerous phenomenon, substance, human activity or condition that may cause loss of life,
injury or other health impacts, property damage, loss of livelihoods and services, social and
economic disruption, or environmental damage.

10
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.0 Introduction
This chapter looks at the overview of drought risk reduction and published literature on the role
of community participation. It further considers what has been learnt on community participation
in various settings for comparison purposes so as to elicit how community participation could be
enhanced in effective disaster preparedness and resilience efforts and ultimately disaster risk
management.

2.1 Literature Review

2.1.1 Overview of Community Participation
Drought is a weather-related natural hazard which may affect vast regions for months or years
with protracted impacts on food production reducing life expectancy and the economic
performance of large regions or entire countries (ISDR, 2009). Keddy (2007) elaborates drought as a
recurrent feature of the climate occurring virtually in all climatic zones whose characteristics vary
significantly among regions differing from aridity in that it is temporary whereas aridity is a
permanent characteristic of regions with low rainfall. Drought is more than a physical
phenomenon or natural event whose impact results from the relation between a natural event and
demands on water supply and often exacerbated by human activities. Significant environmental,
agricultural, health, economic and social consequences signifies drought periods.

According to George, et al (2003), drought is among the world‟s earliest documented climatic
events, present in the Epic of Gilgamesh and tied to the biblical story of Joseph's arrival in and the
later exodus from Ancient Egypt. The Akkadian empire, under the rule of Sargon, collapsed
abruptly in the beginning of 2200 B.C. after only a century of prosperity following a 300-year
drought as depicted by microscopic analysis of soil moisture at the ruins of Akkadian cities in the
northern farmlands, which disclosed that the onset of the drought was swift, and the
consequences severe. In 2005, parts of the Amazon basin experienced the worst drought in 100
years (World Bank, 2010). According to Mayell (2002), the earliest exodus of humans out of
Africa and into the rest of the world were the hunters and gatherers migration, linked to drought
phenomenon, dating back to 9,500 BC. Immense droughts overwhelmed community coping and
survivability capabilities owing to low level of preparedness and participation in drought risk

11
reduction. ISDR (2005) records that Sahel region suffered from a series of historic droughts,
beginning the 17th century to the end of the 19th century where droughts caused dramatic
environmental and societal effects upon the Sahel nations. The area was struck by severe famine
from the late 1960s to early 1980s that claimed thousands lives, left many people dependent on
food aid and severely destroyed livelihoods impacting economies, agriculture, livestock and
human populations of much of Upper Volta countries. Ahmeda (2013) observed that people
living in the drainage basin of the Himalayan Rivers would be at risk of floods followed by
droughts in coming decades affecting the Ganges while the west coast of North America, which
gets much of its water from glaciers in mountain ranges were also be affected. Kenya (2009)
indicates that there has been an increase in the intensity and frequency of occurrence of drought
disasters over the past two decades. UNDP (2011) illustrates that in the ASALs of Sub-Saharan
Africa, it is likely that the forces of extreme weather events and aridity became more frequent
and intense as a result of climate change thereby undermining and offsetting much of the
progress already achieved in meeting the United Nations Millennium Development Goals and
contribute to the continued downward spiral of poverty and environmental degradation

Oxfam (2011) elaborates that climate in the Horn is experiencing an increase in the rates of
drought and that drought-related shocks used to occur every ten years, and they are now
occurring every five years or less. Among Borana communities of Ethiopia, whereas droughts
were recorded every 6-8 years in the past, they now occur every 1-2 years which is now the case
over the entire East Africa region (Burundi, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda,
Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda) and come with inevitable uncertainties associated with
localized impacts. They nonetheless show that even with moderate increases in the length of crop
growing period in some patches of the region, agricultural productivity could decline
dramatically due to climate change in the decades ahead as temperatures increase and rain
patterns change. On top of these projections, any incidence of extreme weather events like
droughts would further be hit food production in the region. These reductions in food production
would have severe consequences most directly for smallholder farmers and agro-pastoralists,
who rely on farming for income, and for all those who purchase such crops. Kenya (2009)
describes Kenya‟s disaster profile as being dominated by drought disasters that disrupt people‟s
livelihoods, destroy infrastructure, divert planned use of resources, interrupt economic activities and

12
retard development. Kenya (2009) records that 1999-2001 drought disaster response costs were
more than would otherwise be the case if sufficient efforts had been put in place for effective
disaster management.

Drought disaster risk management involves systematic analysis and manage of the effects of
droughts through reduced exposure, lessened vulnerability of people and property, wise
management of land and the environment, and improved preparedness for adverse events (ISDR,
2005). Community participation refers to members of the public taking part in the analysis and
management of threats posed by drought and developing survivability capacities. Goyet, (1999)
challenges the myth that drought affected population would be too shocked and helpless to take
responsibility for their own survival as superseded by the reality that many find new strength
during emergencies. Keen (1994) explains that communities affected by drought disasters have a
role to play in disaster risk management and should be given the maximum opportunity to
participate in risk reduction and response programmes. People are involved to solve their own
problems and cannot be forced to participate in projects which affect their lives but should be
given the opportunity for involvement as it is a basic human right and a fundamental principle of
democracy (Mainlay & Tan, 2012). Citizens are involved in community needs assessment where
the community expresses opinions about desirable improvements, prioritizing goals and
negotiating with agencies for synergy building where they are engaged to plan and design
interventions through formulation of appropriate objectives, setting goals, criticizing plans based
on traditional knowledge of disaster risk management.

Government mobilization of community participation into drought management dates back to the
times of Epic of Gilgamesh and biblical times of Joseph. The Bible presents a scenario where the
government authoritatively commanded community participation in drought management and
drought risk reduction in Egypt where it worked efficiently (ABS, 2004). Effective drought risk
reduction involves the participation of communities for maximizing the opportunities, knowledge,
and synergies in interventions considering appropriateness of needs, perceptions, and existing
capacities. Community knowledge on drought disaster patterns forms a rudimental part of early
warning system where forecasting of drought disaster through traditional and scientific methods is

13
very vital. India, (2009) observed that most drought risk reduction have yielded mixed results due
to their failure to recognize the role of community participation in planning and management of
interventions and relating them to the traditionally practiced adaptation and coping strategies.

2.1.2 Community Participation and Beneficiary Identification

According to Bryson (2004), beneficiaries in drought risk reduction refers to persons, groups, or
organizations that whom leaders, managers and front-line staff must consider in the process of
implementing a drought disaster risk management venture. Ironically, while the term has passed
the tipping point into common use and the notion that communities must be attended to as key
stakeholders is an idea in good currency there is relatively little in the public and non-profit
literatures on exactly the role of community in systematically identifying and analyzing
beneficiaries (Gladwell, 2000; Schon, 1971).

People participate by forming groups to meet predetermined objectives related to the project,
which can involve the development or promotion of externally initiated social organization,
which tend to take place after major decisions are made instead o f taking place at early stages of
project cycles or planning. Many institutions and even the government tend to be dependent on
external initiators and facilitators in beneficiary mobilization. Shileche (2012) observes that the
role of community participation in identification of beneficiaries of the oil spill related disasters in
Kenya was scanty. Shileche further elaborates that an effective disaster risk management
should involve effective community participation in identifying the beneficiaries‟ interests,
involvement, expectations, importance, influence and impact on desired disaster risk
management project execution as well as any specific communications requirements and come
up with a stakeholder register.

Disasters strike the communities in their local setting where they command a big share of the
wellbeing of the community (World Bank, FAO & IFAD, 2009). In this case, the community is
the primary beneficiaries who are also the key actors as planners, implementers, partners and
leaders of disaster risk management. Disaster risk management should be built upon the interest
of the most vulnerable members of the community, including women, children, the youth, the
elderly, disabled and the sick while addressing the concerns of other stakeholders. Most

14
vulnerable people have a chance to participate in disaster management activities at local level
and may require to be supported in activities to both reduce vulnerability and promote own
responsive capacity to disasters. The disaster risk management process must be gender-sensitive
and ensure the full participation of women during the whole disaster management process.

However, there are different perceptions of risk amongst the community members and all
people see the danger of risk in their own community thus this diversity should be considered
in the process of disaster risk management through community participation in planning
interventions. Different individuals, families and groups in the community have different
vulnerabilities and capacities varying by age, gender, class, occupation, sources of
livelihoods, ethnicity, language, religion and physical location.

A successful community managed disaster risk management should bring together

local communities in a given geographical setting in the identification of their most at
risk beneficiaries and risk reduction strategies to address the priority groups vulnerability.
The practice had failed to recognize that the most effective support system during disasters in
the community itself since it bears the burden on the survivors and casualties. While external
organizations and individuals outside the community play a key role in supporting and
guiding local people in disaster management activities more often than not assumes the
role of communities in beneficiary identification. Disasters are viewed as unmanaged
development risks and unresolved problems of the development process, community disaster
risk management should lead to a general improvement of the quality of life of the vast
majority of the poor people and of the natural environment (World Bank, 2010).

2.1.3 Community Participation and Needs Identification

According to IISD (2007), disasters, large and small, strike people where they live. It is at the
community level that disasters are felt most and frequently, it is also where hazard force is
felt and risk reduction steps make the biggest difference. As observed by UNDP (2005),
disaster risk management at the local level is a key element in any viable national strategy to
reduce disaster risks, building on the quality of community networks, the social fabric and

15
effective governance. IFRC (2011) elaborates that needs identification and goal
determination that contribute to a safe and resilient community should be undertaken by the
communities themselves. In the Hyogo Framework for Action, states acknowledged, as a
general consideration, that both communities and local authorities should be empowered to
manage and reduce disaster risk by having access to the necessary information, resources and
authority to implement actions for disaster risk management (ISDR, 2005).The 1992 Rio
Declaration on Environment and Development affirmed that disaster issues could best be
handled with the participation of all concerned citizens. At the national level, each individual
shall have appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is held by
public authorities, including information on hazards in their communities, and the
opportunity to participate in decision-making processes.

Williams(2006) describes community participation in Post-apartheid South Africa to have

literally became synonymous with legitimate governance where executive mayors annually
reported on the involvement of community organizations in the affairs of the municipality
and ensure that due regard was given to public views and report on the effect of consultation
on the decisions of council. Most community participation in post-apartheid South Africa
was yet largely spectator politics. Ordinary people mostly become endorsees of pre-designed
planning programmes and often the objects of administrative manipulation and a miracle of
reconciliation in the international arena of consensus politics whilst state functionaries of
both the pre-and post-apartheid eras ensconce themselves as bureaucratic experts summoned
to ensure a better life for all.

Consequently, the process, visions and missions of a more equitable society operated merely
as promissory notes issued every four years during election campaigns. In the course of this
endless rhetoric and multiple platitudes, the very concept of community participation has
been largely reduced to a cumbersome ritual; a necessary appendix required by the various
laws and policies operating at the local government level. Informed discussions and rational
debates on the merits and demerits of specific planning programmes are literally nonexistent,
even though community participation features as a key component of planning programmes
at the local level. Onsomu et al. (2004) observed that community participation in community
schools in Kenya in spite of their high level of poverty and illiteracy, communities had

16
organized parents associations that had some responsibility in school management.
Communities strongly believed in themselves in solving their problems and expected
education of their children to insure the way to get out of the vicious circle of poverty and
improved resilience.

Community participation is expected to yield more satisfaction to the community from open
community involvement and also achieve more results, more rapidly and with greater benefit
to the community as a whole (IFAD, 2007). Communities with higher rates of citizen
participation in identifying their needs are much more likely to have citizen control of their
community governing institutions, more diverse membership, greater adoption of the
empowerment approach, and as a result higher levels of success in attracting the resources
needed to implement plans to meet their needs. Scott (1998) pointed out that community
power involves deep acceptance of one another, complete inclusiveness, and the self-
awareness to have a realistic understanding of the circumstances in which the community
finds itself. The community offers each member the safety of knowing that they are accepted
for whom they are, and bring forth the best each person can to offer, because they know their
gifts of time, talent and ideas are acceptable which motivates community members to offer
what they have to enable the whole community to prosper (World Bank, 2010). All members
of the area should be invited into an open, welcoming community of action, establishing a
safe environment in which all can not only benefit, individually and collectively, but also
give. Past discrimination, or just the belief that drought disaster risk management needs
identification is expert‟s job, is likely to make citizens reluctant to engage. This is especially
true for members of minority groups and for groups that have newly arrived.

Disaster risk management revolves around reducing vulnerable conditions and the root
causes of vulnerability while building community readiness and individual survivability
capacities. The primary strategy is to increase community‟s capacities, resources and coping
strategies in order to avoid the occurrence of disasters in future. Population numbers and
density, economic conditions, religious traditions, literacy, health status, nutritional benefits,
political economy, land arrangements, government structures and effectiveness, levels of
infrastructural development, educated unemployed youth, exposure levels and other
factors are relevant variables in needs identification that are well understood by the

17
community (Lovell,1992). Lovell also notes that development strategies appropriate in one
country are not necessarily needed or appropriate in another because contextual constraints
and possibilities differ widely; particular programs are not necessarily replicable country to
country even where needs are similar. Barret & Clay (2003) recommended that communities
should be involved in the earliest stages of programme inception to ensure the programme
meets their needs and captures their support.

In an endeavor to increase women participation in governance, the constitution of Kenya has

entrenched the gender policy, which mainstreams the needs of women in planning and
encourages women empowerment in decision making process (NCLR, 2010). Many
stakeholders are privy of the two-thirds gender rule and have tried to embrace it in disaster
risk management and development which aims to improve women voices in decision making
process. In Kenya, females constitute a majority of the population (KNBS, 2009). In Kitui
County, Women form majority of the workforce for both productive and reproductive work
(Kenya, 2007). The community understands the unique needs of the youth with respect
to the physical, psychological, cultural, social, biological and political aspects that confront
the youth and this knowledge should be considered in drought disaster risk management
interventions. The Kenyan youth constitute 75 percent of the country's population, forming
the largest source of human resource but have remained on the periphery of the country's
affairs and their status has not been accorded due recognition (Kenya, 2007). As a result,
many of the youth who are productive and energetic remain unemployed, continue to suffer
from poor health, lack sufficient support and apparently play no role in drought disaster risk
management. A common misconception of most youth policies has been that boys and girls
are a homogeneous group. It is important to critically assess the needs of female and male
youth differently as they have different and conflicting interests. Rural adolescent girls are
virtually trapped within the domestic sphere performing reproductive chores whereas boys
spend more time in productive activities that generate income to the household or for
themselves (Bennell, 2007). Involvement of the youth in needs identification is very vital
since youth are driven by results of their work and may be discouraged by routine activities
which take long to give results (WFP, 2011).

18
2.1.4 Community Participation and Information Dissemination

An effective drought disaster risk management network is characterized by the establishment

of a disaster information management system that clearly outlines the perceived benefits of
the community according to their priorities with outreach programs to develop and
implement mechanisms that increase community awareness and improve management of
hazard risks and vulnerabilities (World Bank, 2010). The system should strive to increase
awareness and understanding at the community levels of the sector impact of natural hazards
demonstrating strong training programs for community leaders, possessing communication
and coordination mechanisms to facilitate preparedness and response capabilities of the
communities. The disaster risk management system should set out a clear framework that
assists the community in monitoring, forecasting and early warning and assist in warning
dissemination incorporating forecasting through mass information dissemination system
for community disaster preparedness. The information system should be sensitive to the
needs of different groups in the community thereby enabling vulnerable communities and
local groups to understand climate forecasts and undertake corresponding disaster
preparedness and mitigation activities. Incorporate innovative approaches and technologies
for reducing risk to vulnerable communities, incorporating local context with guidelines on
financing sources and possible risks.
Today (2009) argues that while drought is one of the hurdles that may prevent Kenya from
achieving the millennium development goals (MDGs), especially those related to
poverty eradication, attainment of food security and promotion of environmental
sustainability involvement and participation of communities would check the situation a great
deal. The last decade alone recorded four major food crises in Kenya triggered by
drought. When the community lack the opportunity to discuss progress, gaps, relevance of
disaster risk management and contribute ideas on best practices for beneficiary identification
it leads to poor targeting and embezzlement of resources. Article 1 of the constitution of
Kenya vests all sovereign power to the People of Kenya and directs that the power shall be
exercised only in accordance with the Constitution. First, the constitution gives the power
of self-governance to the people and enhances the participation of the people in the

19
exercise of the powers of the State and in making decisions affecting them. Secondly,
recognizes the right of communities to manage their own affairs and to further their
development. Thirdly, protects and promotes the interests and rights of minorities and
marginalized communities. Fourthly, promotes social and economic development and the
provision of proximate, easily accessible services throughout Kenya; and lastly ensures
equitable sharing of national and local resources throughout Kenya. This by default requires
timely feedback to the beneficiaries for these powers to be recognized. Timely feedback is
vital in management of drought disaster risk management as to provide the community with
the opportunity to learn and get involved in the process of recovery and improve on the level
of acceptance and survivability. According to Finsterbusch & Van Wicklin (1987),
communities should be empowered so as to place final decision-making power in the hands
of the public and the agencies should be ready to implement what the community decides and
set up community project management committees. Higher levels of community participation
allow for increased potential for conflict resolution and arbitration; increased capacity for
critical thinking and innovation; and increased capacity for problem-solving. Accountability
is a relationship based on obligations to demonstrate, review, and take responsibility for
performance, both the results achieved in light of agreed expectations and the means used
from an internalized sense of integrity (Finsterbusch & Van Wicklin, 1987). Demonstrating
performance involves proactively reporting results achieved and the appropriateness of the
means used, which requires honesty, openness, and transparency.

2.1.5 Community Participation, Ownership and Community Control

Community participation in drought risk reduction can represent assigning certain decisive roles
to the individuals who are beneficiaries of drought risk reduction. Community participation
implies involvement of people, with similar needs and goals, in making decisions that affect their
lives. The local community plays an active role in the ownership and control of drought disaster
risk management programs and improvements directly affecting their lives. It is rational to give
control of affairs and decisions to people most affected by them.

20
Besides, since no government or authority has the means to solve all the public problems
adequately, it is necessary for the communities to own the process and activities of disaster risk
management and have control over the matters that affect them (Abrams, 1971).
Community participation not only brings many lasting benefits to people but also a means of
getting things done. Citizen participation can be associated with citizen power and control as, the
redistribution of power that enables the have-not citizens to be deliberately involved in the
planning and implementation of disaster risk management activities. Participation is good and
brings people together in creating and making decisions about their environment. Since people
are actively involved in the process, participation helps promote sense of ownership and control
among the people. In 2004 the world identified and recognized Wangari Muta Maathai for Nobel
Prize award, the founder of a community movement that enlisted community participation and
control in environmental conservation popularly known as The Greenbelt Movement in Kenya.
Although it was the first award to an environmentalist to be awarded the movement did not last
long (IISD, 2007). IISD also elaborates an exercise of community control where the public in
1988 apprehended a Brazilian rubber tapper in vehement fight against destruction of Amazon
rainforest and made recommendations to the government for assassination of the culprit and a
plea that was heeded.

2.2 Theoretical Framework

This part discusses various theories which are related to drought and famine and the adopted
resilience measures put in place to counteract their impacts.

2.2.1 Social Theory of Disaster

The issue of disaster in the arena of social sciences gained attention at mid-20th century during
which the US government showed interest in understanding the behaviour of the population in
case of war (Quarantelli, 1988, quoted in Cardona, 2004). Then a “social theory of disasters”
came to life, and this approach involves a series of studies about reactions, and been on
responses/reactions of the people in case of emergency, and not strictly on the study of risk.
However, this “paradigm of war pattern approach” has been challenged by writers like
Quarantelli (Gilbert, 1995) who argued against “the unnecessary linkage between destructive
factor and the community as it emerged from the notion of panic”. In relation to this Quarantelli

21
pointed out that “there was no mechanical relation between these two factors, and thus there was
greater autonomy in reactions of people to panic”. Thus Quarantelli‟s work contributed to the
emergence of new modes of approaching disaster, and thus the relevance of social factors within
communities for understanding disasters has been recognized. By the 1970s social science
researchers in USA had made shift in conceptualizing disaster, and they have recognized that
“disaster has to be studied within the human group involved in it, and not as the result of an
exclusive external factor” (Gilbert, 1995). This critical analysis, in fact, rigorously pursued and
enhanced by European scientists. This has led to emergence of new approach to disaster which
Gilbert calls it “disaster as social vulnerability”. Contributions from geography and “ecologist
school” from the 1930s had also led to the conception of social-environmental perspective that
subsequently inspired the approach of applied sciences. Its emphasis on the notion that “disaster
is not synonymous of natural events and the need to consider the capacity for adaptation or
adjustment of a community when faced with natural or technological events was the springboard
for vulnerability concept” (Cardona, 2004).

Since 1980s and especially in the 1990s, in Europe and in certain developing countries (Latin
America and Asia), social science researchers have critically discussed natural and applied
science approaches, and “their approach suggests that vulnerability has a social character and is
not limited to potential physical damages or to demographic determinants” (Cardona, 2004).
Initially disaster or hazard studies were dominated by disaster-centered interest and by searching
for technological responses. In the 1950s and before this period, disaster studies were dominated
by two paradigms - the behavioral and structural paradigms. The former combined hazard-
centered interest with the idea that people had to be taught to anticipate it.

Therefore, this approach emphasized monitoring and predicting hazards; explaining people‟s
behaviour in response to risks and disasters; and developing early warning systems and disaster
preparedness schemes. In general, this approach is technocratic and hazard-centered approach to
disasters (Hilhorst, 2004). Some authors remarked that this perspective, referred as “dominant
approach”, is based on Western science which considered nature and society as separate. The
premise was that natural hazards can be controlled, and disasters be avoided through technology

22
and modern administration. This suggested that less-developed countries suffered disasters than
developed ones, since they lacked that necessary technologies and the required modern
administration.

War has long been the subject of exploration by social scientists However, in the 1970s and
especially in the 1980s; social scientists began to question the explanatory power of such
“dominant approach”. During these periods the relationship between human actions and the
effects of disaster (socio-economic dimensions of vulnerability) was increasingly documented
and argued by many writers. For instance Hiwett (1998) came up with a landmark work called
“Interpretations of calamity from the view points of human ecology”, and argued that “disasters
were not primarily the outcome of geographical processes. Especially in developing countries,
structural factors such as increasing poverty and related social processes accounted for peoples‟
and societies‟ vulnerability to disaster”

This has been a new development over the “dominant paradigm” and brings better
conceptualization of disaster through connecting hazards and vulnerability where their
interaction leads to disaster. This relation is portrayed by the formula of risk = hazard X
vulnerability (Blaikie et al., 2004). The scrutinies of the approaches and further empirical work
have inspired the development of subsequent perspectives which give attention to environmental
processes and impacts of anthropogenic activities. Therefore, an alternative view, described as
“social vulnerability approach” has got space in different disciplines and policy communities.

2.2.2 Famine theories

Famine, the most damaging of all disaster types, has a long record in human history. It can be
stated that no aspects of social, economic and political lives are untouched, when a famine
occurs (Blaikie et al., 2004). Apart from death tolls, it brings livelihood insecurity,
impoverishment of natural-resource base, destitution, displacement, trauma, social
disorganization, political instability, which may endure for post-famine periods (Davies, 1996;
Blaikie et al., 2004). The nature, degree or severity and causes of specific famine disasters vary
over time and from one context to another. Whereas there is general understanding on types of

23
its direct impacts and consequences, there have been various debates about its causes.
Accordingly various perspectives have been developed in searching of explanatory factors.

The current literatures show that famines persist, and affect severely some regions of the world,
particularly the African countries. Location of famines has shifted, and in fact the supposed
causes have changed overtime, and famines have become more complex (Devereux, 2000;
Devereux et al., 2002; Blaikie et al., 2004). Traditionally famines have been attributed to
drought, and sometimes to flood or epidemics. But as it is stated earlier attributing famines to
natural factors has been challenged since the 1980s claiming that drought and sudden-onset
„natural causes‟ are less capable of acting as causes of famines. This notion has stimulated more
academic debates on famine causation and led to development of various disciplinary
perspectives to explain famine causes. There are four main famine theories which have been
developed in the past four decades and are discussed below.

1. Neo-Malthusian

This theory gets its root in Malthus‟s thesis (i.e. „Essay on Principle of Population, 1798).
Malthus‟s principle of population was based on the idea that population, if unchecked, increases
at geometric rate whereas food supply grows at arithmetical rate. Malthus‟s thesis suggests that
population grows at exponential rate, while food production increases at arithmetic rate which
would lead to food shortage, and ultimately resulting in hunger. In its simplest form, the thesis
demonstrated that population could not continue growing indefinitely in a world of fixed natural
resources (Devereux, 2002:17). Malthus assumed famine as “natural check” on population
growth. According to Malthus famine would act as natural check on population growth,
equilibrating the demand for food with supplies.

In general terms, Malthus‟s thesis had been criticized and rejected on many grounds. First,
viewing famine as „natural check‟ on population growth control is abhorrent. Secondly Malthus
failed to “foresee the „fertility transition‟ to small families as living standard rose” and the
“exponential increases in agricultural productivity” owing to technological advances which
“pushes production beyond the consumption needs of the global population” (Devereux, 2002).

24
And yet Malthus‟s line of argument is still pursued by neo-Malthusians. These days, a relatively
rapid population growth as principal cause of famine lingers among the neo-Malthusians (Fassil,
2005). The neo-Malthusian approach is “focused on potential famine inducing consequences of
rapid population growth outstripping the limits of global and regional food production” (Blaikie
et al., 2004). This approach emphasizes the supply side and rapid population growth which
exceeds the means of subsistence. In other worlds population growth exceeds the capacity of
natural resources which provide means of subsistence (i.e. carrying capacity). Thus in the light of
„carrying capacity‟ debate, demographers and environmentalists blame the persistent of famine
on „overgrazing‟ in Africa and on „overpopulation‟ in Asia (Devereux, 2002).

However, neo-Malthusian approach is also criticized heavily. Like Malthus‟s crude argument,
neo-Malthusians failed to take into account the role of technology in increasing food production.
Moreover, „mass mortality famines‟ („natural check‟) does not act as population control. Rather
fast population growth has been witnessed in countries which were afflicted by various famine
episodes in the past (Devereux, 2002:18). There is also evidence that “excessively low
population densities increase vulnerability to famine by inhibiting investment in basic economic
infrastructure and agricultural technologies” (Boserup, 1983, quoted in Devereux, 2002).

Though Malthusians perspective is implicitly indicated in some contemporary analysis of

famine, its theoretical foundation has been challenged. Firstly, technological progress has
allowed enormous increase in food production outstripping population growth. Secondly, famine
has not acted as the ultimate and powerful check of population growth (Fassil, 2005). Therefore,
neo-Malthusians perspective has remained inadequate to explain famine causation.

2. The Environmental ‘Supply-side’ Explanations

This approach considers drought (sometimes floods) and recently climate change factors in the
explanation of disruption or reduction of food output. This approach focuses on environmental
limitations on food output, mainly through drought. It looks primarily at supposed „natural
causes‟ which reduce the capacity of the natural resources to provide adequate food supply
(Blaikie et al., 2004). This approach, however, is criticized on the basis that natural events (like

25
drought, flood and climate change) can act as triggers, rather than causing famines. Because
increased risks are caused by human actions, and relate to social vulnerability and to pre-existing
„normal‟ level of hazards. In other words human action is responsible for both the generation of
peoples‟ vulnerability and the increased level of hazard (Blaikie et al., 2004).

2.2.3 Systems Theory

A system may be defined as a set of social, biological, technological or material partners co-
operating on a common purpose. System theory is a philosophical doctrine of describing systems
as abstract organizations independent of substance, type, time and space. Systems theories are
connected to both ontological and epistemological views. The ontological view imply that the
world consist of “systems” or “integrative levels”. The epistemological view implies a holistic
perspective emphasizing the interplay between the systems and their elements in determining
their respective functions.

Due to natural disasters, such as drought and famine, there is need to create a network for applied
research, implementation, and dissemination in the field of disaster risk management. The
planned work should shift away from the post-disaster response towards an integrated risk
management and sustainable risk prevention culture. The starting point of an integral risk
management concept is the relation between hazard, vulnerability, risk and risk management.
The approach of the World Institute for Disaster Risk Management (DRM) includes the Systems
Approach Model by Wilhelm C., 1999.

Figure 2. 1: Systems Approach Model (Wilhelm C., 1999)

TION
DECISION/COMMUNICA

VULNERABILITY
CONFLICT/PROBLEM

RISK RISK
ANALYSIS ASSESSMENT

COMBINATION/ASSESSMENT/OPTIMISATION OF
PROTECTION MEASURES AND STRATEGIES

26
The model links together the elements risk analysis, vulnerability, and risk assessment. It
requires the development of tools for an overall risk mitigation. The development of methods
and measures to support prevention and intervention activities such as monitoring, registration,
forecasting, early warning, and decision-supporting tools for frontline decisions becomes
particularly important. Efficient risk management requires a careful evaluation of the
vulnerability of the objects and of the systems at risk. Cost-benefit analyses of prevention
measures can only be performed on the basis of a quantitative evaluation of possible damage to
structures and entire systems.

Vulnerability is a concept still lacking clear scientific definition and theory that allows precise
quantification. This is especially true of indirect damage costs, e.g. damage to society, loss of
market share due to destruction of production facilities, and of cost estimates of damage to
cultural heritage and to environmental systems. Risk assessment consists of an enlarged method
to understand the potential effects of natural hazards on human activities and on the
environment. The main goal includes developing techniques that allow the most appropriate
allocation of available resources in order to optimise the protection of a number of assets. This is
a classical economic question. Hazard assessment is based on the study of natural hazards
interacting at different spatial and temporal levels, varying on the local, regional, and
international scale. Individual hazards and physical processes have been studied individually.
Today, this is the core activity of a great number of research institutes. Therefore, DRM supports
the multidisciplinary understanding and integrated analyses of different processes. From there
innovation should come.

2.3 Conceptual Framework

This conceptual framework, in figure 2.2, is a graphical representation of the elements of
community participation that define the role of community participation in management of
drought risk reduction. Drought risk reduction is the dependent variable in the study that depends
on the roles of community participation in beneficiary identification, needs identification,
information dissemination, and control as the independent variables. The existence of

27
appropriate policy provisions, government‟s goodwill and the prevailing political atmosphere are
the moderating variables of the study.

Figure 2. 2: Elements of Community Participation that Define the Role of Community

Participation in the Management of Drought Risk Reduction

Independent variables

Dependent Variables
Beneficiary Identification
-Individuals or groups in the
community
-Government Agencies Disaster Risk Reduction
-Non-governmental Agencies -Sustainability of
Investments
Needs Identification -Ownership of Projects
-Identification of Needs -Value for money
-Identification of the required -Social Equity
resources -Reduced Vulnerability

Information Dissemination
-Early Warning
-Discussion time span
-Feedback Timing
-Access to budgets

Ownership and Control

-Negotiations
-Resource Contributions
Moderating variable
-Economic and social equity and
equality
-Empowerment Government‟s goodwill
A

appropriate policy
provisions

28
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This chapter comprised of the study area, study population, research design, sample size and
sampling procedures, methods of data collection, research instruments and field work procedure
and data analysis.

3.2 Study Site

This study was carried out in Kitui County on the lower eastern parts of Kenya. Kitui County is
the sixth largest in terms of size and covers an area of 30,520 square kilometers. It is 11th in
population size at 1,000,012 based on 2009 censuses and has steadily grown since. The county is
diverse with some areas being semi-arid and mostly dry, while others are fairly arable. The
periods falling between June to September and January to March are usually dry.

The annual mean minimum temperatures range from 22 -28ºC, while the annual mean
maximum temperatures range from 28 - 32º C. Due to limited rainfall and high temperatures,
surface water sources are very scarce and limited to seasonal rivers that form during the rainy
seasons and drying up immediately after rains. River Athi is the only perennial river in the region
and flows along the border with Machakos County. The County has no lake, but has several
dams that play a significant role in water supply and storage. However, most of the dams dry up
during dry season due to high evapo-transpiration rates and seepage (ROK, 2010). Kitui County
had an estimated population of 1,012,709 people, and over 205, 491 households (ROK, 2009)

3.3 Research Design

This is a case study which used descriptive research design. Descriptive design helped in
investigating the impact of drought and famine in Kitui County and the resilience measures
adopted to counteract the impact of drought. Descriptive research design provide deep
understanding of the events been studied and its instruments are helpful in getting first-hand
experience as well as in depth coverage of the study (Kothari, 2004). This research design is a
present oriented methodology that the researcher used to investigate disaster preparedness and
resilience amongst communities in Kitui County by selecting a sample population. The design
helped the researcher to establish conditions that exist, practices that prevail, beliefs and attitudes

29
that are held, processes that are ongoing and trends that are developing. The research design
provided numeric descriptions of the sample population by describing the role of the community,
government and NGOs in the management of drought in Kitui. Kothari also notes that this
method has the ability to allow collection of large amount of data quickly and at minimal costs.
The researcher opted for a descriptive survey design to cater for the large population that will be
involved in the study through a sample for the purpose of data collection and analysis.

3.4 Unit of analysis and Unit of observation

The unit of analysis is the major entity that is being analyzed in a study. It is the 'what' or 'who'
that is being studied. In social science research, typical units of analysis include individuals
(most common), groups, social organizations and social artifacts. The literature of international
relations provides a good example of units of analysis. The unit of analysis in the study was the
farmers. This should not be confused with the unit of observation, which is the unit described by
one's data (neighborhoods using the U.S. Census, individuals using surveys, etc.). For example, a
study may have a unit of observation at the individual level but may have the unit of analysis at
the neighborhood level, drawing conclusions on neighborhood characteristics from data collected
from individuals. The unit of observation in the study was the household level.

3.5 Target Population

The study targeted Kitui county residents in three districts which include; Mutomo, Ikutha and
Lower Yatta. The group of respondents included 150 farmers who provided relevant data for the
study as they have experienced drought and famine in the area and have seen the resilience
measures adopted to curb the impact of drought and famine. The study was aimed at establishing
the effects agricultural production has on the living standards and household welfare of the
farmers of Kitui County and therefore some of the household characteristics studied included;
age, education level, gender of the head of the household, family size, years of farming
experience, and wealth. Lower Yatta has a population of 18,765 people, Ikutha district has a
population of 26,176 people and Mutomo district has a total of 24,450 people according to the
2009 census report.

30
Table 3. 1: Total Population of Mutomo, Ikutha and Lower Yatta Districts

Districts Total Population Sample Size( n) Percentage (%)

Lower Yatta 18,765 40 27.04

Ikutha 26,176 57 37.72

Mutomo 24,450 53 35.24

Total 69,391 150 100

3.6 Sample Size and Sampling Procedure

According to Bryman (2008), sampling is the process of selecting a number of individuals for a
study in such a way that the individual represents a larger group from which they are selected.
The major criterion used when deciding on the sample size is the extent to which the sample size
represents the population. The researcher used random sampling technique to gather data from
the target population. According to Mugenda and Mugenda (2005) a third of the population is an
ideal sample. The sampling technique is the process of selecting a specific number of
respondents for a study (Ngulube, 2003). The study employed simple random sampling
technique to collect data from 150 farmers. Simple random sampling was conducted to ensure
that each member of the target population had equal and independent chance of being included to
produce unbiased sample of study.

The researcher did not posses a list of households in the area under study. Therefore, the
researcher used population estimates from the last census report of Mutomo, Ikutha and Lower
Yatta districts. The researcher also did not posses the number of households in each sub area and
therefore she identified the midpoint (market, school or church) in each district and then
proceeded to divide the area into 4 sub areas (North, South, East, West). The number of
households to be included in each sub area was obtained by dividing the sample size in each
district by 4. For example, Lower Yatta had a sample size of 40 and dividing this by 4 means 10
households per sub-area. Once, the researcher had the number of households from each sub-area,

31
she then used a distance of 500m between households to select the intended number of
households. The researcher used a path from the mid point which is frequented used by many
residents to go to their homes. The path assisted the research in calculating distance between
households and also helped in identifying boundaries.

3.7 Methods of Data Collection

Data was collected through interviews with key informants, focus group discussions (FGDs) and
household questionnaire survey. Key informant interviews were conducted with a broad variety
of stakeholders comprising of; government officials, local and international NGOs and CBOs.
The interviews were aimed at getting insights into the impact of drought in the county and their
efforts to assist the communities in coping with the disaster. During the field study, ten key
informants were interviewed and focus group discussions held comprising of eight farmers. Data
was also collected through household survey using semi-structured questionnaires that provided
the basis for a quantitative characterization of household‟s socio-economic characteristics,
perceptions of climate change and coping mechanisms of the household heads.

3.7.1 Collection of quantitative data

The study used semi-structured questionnaires to collect data from the households. Mugenda and
Mugenda (2003) observed that, the pre-requisite to questionnaire design is definition of the
problem and the specific study objectives. Kothari (2004) observed that questionnaires are very
economical in terms of time, energy and finances. Questionnaires yielded quantitative data which
was easy to collect and analyze.

3.7.2 Collection of qualitative data

Data collection approaches for qualitative research usually involves:

1. Direct interaction with individuals on a one to one basis

2. Or direct interaction with individuals in a group setting
Qualitative research data collection methods are time consuming, therefore data is usually
collected from a smaller sample than would be the case for quantitative approaches - therefore
this makes qualitative research more expensive. The benefits of the qualitative approach are that
32
the information is richer and has a deeper insight into the phenomenon under study. The two
types of qualitative techniques used in the study included:

a) Key informants
The term “key informant” in this study refers to a person who disposes specific
competence/knowledge of drought and famine, its impacts and response mechanisms due to
academic qualifications or/and many years of work experience. The interviews were aimed
at getting insights into the impact of drought in the county and their efforts to assist the
communities in coping with drought and famine. During the field study, ten key informants were
interviewed using an interview guide. They were selected using purposive selection. The key
informants included; government officials, local and international NGOs and community based
organizations.
b) Focus Group Discussions
A focus group discussion is an interview with a small group of people usually eight to twelve
people participate in the interview for about one to two hours. The interviews are expected to
yield higher response rates by using probing questions (Patton, 1990). Patton argues that focus
group discussion is the highly efficient qualitative data collection technique, which provides
some quality controls on data collection. Participants tend to provide checks and balances on
each other and it is fairly easy to assess the extent to which there is a relatively consistently
shared view among the participants. During the study, the researcher held focus group
discussions with eight farmers who experienced drought and famine in the region. The
discussions were on the following topics; community participation, coping mechanisms, impact
of drought and famine on the lives of the community and their understanding of drought and
famine. The researcher used snowballing sampling as a means of identifying the group
participants. The researcher encouraged the respondents to participate without holding back the
information they might be having as the research instruments would not bear their names.

3.8 Ethical considerations

According to Kerridge, Lowe and McPhee (2005), ethic involves making a judgment about right
and wrong behavior. Ethics as noted by Minja (2009) is referred to, as norms governing human
conduct which have a significant impact on human welfare. Indeed as observed by Devettere

33
(2000), ethics is about choice between good and bad. In this study, the researcher followed
ethical considerations in the course of the data collection process. Respondents participated on
their own will without coercion from either the researcher or their supervisors. The researcher
protected the privacy and confidentiality of the respondents‟ identities.

3.9 Data Processing and Analysis

Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) assert that data obtained from the field in raw form is difficult to
interpret unless it is cleaned, coded and analyzed. The collected data was analyzed using both
quantitative and qualitative data analysis methods. Quantitative method involved descriptive
analysis. Descriptive analysis such as frequencies, percentages were used to present quantitative
data in form of tables. Data from questionnaire was coded and logged into the computer using
Statistical Package for Social Science (SPPS).

Qualitative data was collected and analyzed using content analysis. According to Creswell
(2003), content analysis is a research technique used to determine the presence of certain words
or concepts within texts or set of texts. The researcher quantified and analyzed the presence,
meanings and relationships of such words and concepts then make inferences about the messages
within the text. To conduct a content analysis on any such text, the text was broken down into
manageable categories on a variety of levels; word, word sense, phrase, sentence or theme and
then examined using content analysis.

34
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION
4.1 Introduction
This chapter discussed the interpretation and presentation of the findings obtained from the field.
The chapter presented the background information of the respondents; findings of the analysis
based on the objectives of the study that included disaster preparedness and resilience in Kitui
County and its effect on agricultural production, living standards and education status of the
people of Kitui County.

4.1.1. Response Rate

The table 4.1 below represents the findings of the response rate of the research study. The study
targeted a sample size of 150 respondents from which 115 filled in and returned the
questionnaires making a response rate of 77%. This response rate was satisfactory to make
conclusions on the disaster preparedness and resilience in Kitui County and its effect on
agricultural production, living standards and education status of the people of Kitui County.
According to Mugenda and Mugenda (2003), a response rate of 50% is adequate for analysis and
reporting; a rate of 60% is good and a response rate of 70% and over is excellent. Based on the
assertion, the response rate was considered to excellent.

Table 4. 1: Response Rate

Response Frequency (n) Percentage (%)

Response 115 76.7
Non Response 35 23.3
Total 150 100.0

4.2. Characteristics of Respondents

4.2.1 Gender of the Respondents
A total of 115 respondents from Mutomo, Ikutha and Lower Yatta were interviewed. Table 4.2
shows that the majority of the respondents as shown by 53.9% (62) indicated that they were
female whereas 46.1% (53) of the respondents indicated that they were, male. This is an
indication that both genders were involved in assessing disaster preparedness and resilience in
Kitui County and its effect on agricultural production, living standards and educational status of

35
the people of Kitui County. It‟s important to involve both genders while conducting a study in
order to be representative (Okello 2010). Most cultures in Kenya dictate that men should be the
heads of the household. In addition, men have a better access to land, assets, education and other
critical services such as credit, technology and input supply. This therefore qualifies them to be
the main decision makers in the household (FAO, 2010). In Kitui County the high number of
women as heads of households dictates that women are not able to make decisions on disaster
preparedness and resilience.

Table 4. 2: Distribution by Gender of the Respondents

Gender Frequency (n) Percentage (%)
Female 62 53.9
Male 53 46.1
Total 115 100.0

4.2.2 Age of the Respondents

According to Table 4.3 on the age of the respondents, the study requested the respondents to
indicate their age category, from the findings, it is clear that most of the respondents as shown by
35.7% (41) indicated that they were aged between 40 to 49 years, 19.1% (22) of the respondents
indicated 30 to 39 years, 15.7% (18) indicated they were aged 50 to 59 years, 10.4% (12)
indicated 60 to 69 years, 7.8% (9) indicated 20 to 29 years, 5.2% (6) indicated that they were
aged 70-79 years, 3.5% (4) indicated that they were aged above 80 years whereas 2.6% (3) of the
respondents indicated they were aged 10-19 years.

This is an indication that respondents were well distributed in term of their age. In terms of
implementation of disaster preparedness and resilience strategies. In Kitui County there is a large
population of household heads below 50 years such a population is likely to be more willing to
access information on disaster preparedness and resilience strategies as compared to their elderly
counterparts (Onu, 2007).

36
Table 4. 3: Distribution of the Respondents by Age
Age of the Respondents Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
10-19 years 3 2.6
20-29 years 9 7.8
30-39 years 22 19.1
40-49years 41 35.7
50-59years 18 15.7
60-69years 12 10.4
70-79years 6 5.2
80+ 4 3.5
Total 115 100

4.2.3 The Number of Years the Respondents Have Lived In the Community
Table 4.4 below indicates respondents‟ period of living in the community, from the findings, it is
clear that most of the respondents as shown by 53.9% (62) had lived for 11 years, 27% (31) of
the respondents indicated they had stayed for between 6 -10 years, 13.9% (16) had lived for 1-5
years whereas 5.2% (6) of the respondents indicated they had lived for less than an year.

This is an indication that respondents had lived in the community for a good time and thus
understood the disaster preparedness and resilience in Kitui County and its effect on agricultural
production, living standards and education status of the people of Kitui County. Most of the
household heads had lived in the community for more than 11 years and are therefore expected
to have a better adaptation to climate variability owing to the fact that experienced residents are
expected to have more knowledge and information about climate variability. The knowledge of
climate variability will enable the residents in Kitui County to be prepared for disasters and
resilience (Maddison, 2006).

Table 4. 4: The Number of Years the Respondents Have Lived In the Community
Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Below one year 6 5.2
1-5 years 16 13.9
6-10 years 31 27.0
11+ years 62 53.9
Total 115 100.0

37
4.2.4 Marital Status of the Respondents
Table 4.5 illustrates the marital status of the respondents, the study requested the respondents to
indicate their marital status, from the findings, the study found that most of the respondents as
shown by 70.4% (81) indicated they were married, 15.7% (18) indicated they were single, 8.7%
(10) indicated they were widowed, whereas 5.2% (6) of the respondents indicated they were
divorced, this is an indication that most of the respondents were married.

Tizale (2007) noted that when the head of the household is married is able to consult the spouse
and make good decisions concerning disaster preparedness and resilience. Most cultures in
Kenya dictate that men should be married unlike women thus when men are the heads of the
households and have a better access to land, assets, education and other critical services such as
credit, technology and input supply will enable them make good decisions (FAO, 2010).

Table 4. 5:Marital Status of the Respondents

Marital Status Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Single 18 15.7
Married 81 70.4
Divorced/Separated 6 5.2
Widow/ Widower 10 8.7
Total 115 100.0

4.2.5 Education status of the respondents

Table 4.6 represents the education level of respondents per gender, the study found that 34.0%
(18) male heads had primary education compared to 35.5% (22) female heads. On secondary
education, 26.4% (12) male heads had secondary compared to 19.4% (12) female heads. On
college education, 18.9% (10) male heads had college education compared to 11.3% (7) female
heads that had college education. On university education 7.5% (4) male heads had university
education compared to 4.8% (3) female heads. On the respondents who had no education 13.2%
(7) male lacked education compared to 29.0% (18) female.

38
Most of the Kenyan cultures especially in the rural sector don‟t value girl child education
compared to the boy child hence the higher percentage of female with no education compared to
the male. The lack of enough formal education, as most of the respondents had attained only
primary education is a major cause of lack of decisiveness on disaster preparedness and
resilience in Kitui County. Good access to education makes one able to access critical services
such as credit, technology and input supply which will enable them make good decisions on
disaster preparedness and resilience (FAO, 2010).

Table 4. 6: Education level of Respondents per Gender

Education of the Respondents Gender Total
Male Female
N Percentage N Percentage N Percentage
Primary 18 34.0 34 35.5 40 34.8
Secondary 14 26.4 26 19.4 26 22.6
College 10 18.9 19 11.3 17 14.8
University 4 7.5 8 4.8 7 6.1
None 7 13.2 13 29.0 25 21.7
Total 53 100.0 100 100.0 115 100.0

4.2.6 Socio-Economic Characteristics

4.2.6.1 The main assets Found in Kitui County

Table 4.7 shows the main assets found in Kitui County, the study found that the main assets
found in Mutomo District include houses, farm equipments, livestock, land, businesses and
bicycles. Generally most people in Mutomo District had houses as represented by 84% the rest
had rental houses. 76% of the households owned at least some land where 69% practiced some
farming and 58% reared livestock. Finally 18% household heads had business and 7% had
bicycles.

The study also revealed that the main assets found in Lower Yatta include houses, farm
equipments, livestock, land, businesses and bicycles. Generally most people in Mutomo District
had houses as represented by 73% the rest had rental houses. 67% of the households owned at

39
least some land where 62% practiced some farming and 51% reared livestock. Finally 32%
household heads had business and 14% had bicycles.

The study finally revealed that the main assets found in Ikutha District include houses, farm
equipments, livestock, land, businesses and bicycles. Generally most people in Ikutha District
had houses as represented by 77% the rest had rental houses. 71% of the households owned at
least some land where 66% practiced some farming and 55% reared livestock. Finally 25%
household heads had business and 9% had bicycles.

Table 4. 7: The main assets Found in Kitui County

Mutomo Lower Yatta Ikutha
Assets Percentage
Houses 84.00% 73.00% 77.00%
Land 76.00% 67.00% 71.00%
Farm equipment 69.00% 62.00% 66.00%
Businesses 18.00% 32.00% 25.00%
Livestock 58.00% 51.00% 55.00%
Bicycles 7.00% 14.00% 9.00%

4.2.6.2 Dependency on Crop Farming in Kitui County

Table 4.8 shows the dependency of crop farming in Kitui County. The study found 66.1% (76) of
the respondents depended on crop farming compared to 33.9% (39) that didn‟t depend on crop
farming. The key informants stated that most people depend on crop farming due to poverty in
the region since they cannot be able to access financial services such as loans from banks to start
a business in the county. The key informants further stated that the high dependency of the
household heads on crop farming is the cause of famine and poverty in Kitui County since the
County is prone to drought and when drought strikes it leads to famine and poverty since the
residents have no other source of income.

Kitui County being an agricultural based rural community, the available options in crop farming
are adversely affected by a changing climate; small scale businesses and labor opportunities are

40
the most probable alternative livelihood opportunities to reduce their vulnerability and enhance
their resilience, though this is dependent on other socio-economic factors that might reduce on
the opportunities that they would like to diversify.

Table 4. 8: Dependency on Crop Farming in Kitui County

Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)

Yes 76 66.1

No 39 33.9

Total 115 100.0

4.2.6.3 The Number of Mud Walled Houses

According to Table 4.9 the number of mud walled houses 49% (56) mud walled compared to
51% (59) that were not mud walled. The mud walled houses were spread across the three
districts in Kitui County indicating poverty. The increased poverty in the region leads to inability
to access education and other critical services such as credit, technology and input supply which
will enable them make good decisions on disaster preparedness and resilience (FAO, 2010).

Table 4. 9: The Number of Mud Walled Houses

Mud Walled Houses Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Yes 56 48.7
No 59 51.3

Total 115 100.0

4.2.6.4 The Main Source of Cooking Fuel

Table 4.10 shows that on the main source of cooking fuel an overall of 69% (79) respondents in
Kitui County used firewood as source of fuel indicating poverty was spread across the 3 districts
compared to 31% (36) who didn‟t use firewood. The key informants indicated that they used
firewood as a source of fuel since they could not be able to access other sources of fuel such as
gas which are eco friendly. Furthermore those who didn‟t use firewood used charcoal as a source

41
of fuel. The increased use of firewood as source of fuel has led to environmental degradation
leading to drought and hence famine in Kitui County.

Table 4. 10: The Main Source of Cooking Fuel

Firewood as a Source of Fuel Frequency (n) Percentage (%)
Yes 79 69
No 36 31
Total 115 100

4.3 Control Measures Adopted To Help In Curbing Drought and Famine

4.3.1 Action taken in times of Food Shortage

Table 4.11 shows the action taken in times of food shortage, the study requested the respondents
to indicate the action taken in times of food shortage, from the findings, it is clear that most of
the respondents as shown by 63.5% (73) indicated they beg food relief from government, 23.5%
(27) indicated they begged assistance from relatives, friends or neighbours, while 13% (15)
indicated they bought food. This is an indication that most residents begged food in times of
shortage hence there should be measures to conserve the environment hence reduce drought and
famine.

The key informants who were government officials, local and international NGOs and
community based organizations also indicated that in times of food shortage there is creation of
awareness and distribution of food in the region which is done mostly by the government
ministries. The ministry of agriculture is mostly involved in this process. Ministry, department of
water also plays a major role in the distribution of water and creation of awareness on
environmental conservation. The stakeholders also introduce education to the community on the
involvement of growing drought resistant crops to help boost the food supplies of the
community. Farmers are given the civic education and knowhow of how to manage farming in
water scarce areas. They are provided with the necessary facilities and resources by the
government to manage the small scale farming.

42
Table 4. 11: Action taken in times of Food Shortage
Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Buy food 15 13.0
Beg assistance from relatives, friends or neighbours 27 23.5
Beg food relief from government 73 63.5
Total 115 100.0

4.3.2 Contribution of the Community towards Intervention

From the table 4.12 below on the contribution of the community towards intervention, it is clear
that most of the respondents as shown by 36.5% (42) indicated they contributed labour, 27% (31)
indicated they contributed information, 17.4% (20) contributed materials, 10.4% (12) contributed
training, 6.1% (7) contributed funds while 2.6% (3) had nothing to contribute. This is an
indication that most residents had something to contribute towards the interventions to conserve
the environment hence reduce drought and famine. The key informants who were government
officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations indicated that the
community provided labour and information which is done mostly through disaster management
committee formed under supervision of the ministries and also educating the community as a
whole. Water committees are also formed in the area so that they can be responsible of the water
conservation initiatives that are introduces through projects which can reduce drought hence food
shortage.

Table 4. 12: Contribution of the Community towards Intervention

Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Labour 42 36.5
Funds 7 6.1
Trainings 12 10.4
Materials 20 17.4
Nothing 3 2.6
Information 31 27.0
Total 115 100.0

43
4.3.3 Adjustments in Farming Practices to Climate Variability and Change

From the table 4.13 on the adjustments in farming practices to climate variability and change, it
is clear that most of the respondents as shown by 59.1% (68) indicated there were adjustments in
farming practices to climate variability and change while 40.9% (47) indicated that there were no
adjustments in farming practices to climate variability and change. This is an indication that
there is need for adjustments in farming practices to climate variability and change to reduce
drought and famine.

The key informants who were government officials, local and international NGOs and
community based organizations indicated that some community members have resulted to
growth of drought resistant crops such as sorghum and millet which would help reduce food
shortage in the reduce and also earn the households some income that would help diversify their
economic activities. Kitui county being an agricultural based rural community, the available
options are adversely affected by a changing climate; small scale businesses and labor
opportunities are the most probable alternative livelihood opportunities to reduce their
vulnerability and enhance their resilience, though this is dependent on other socio-economic
factors that might reduce on the opportunities that they would like to diversify.

Table 4. 13: Adjustments in farming practices to climate variability and change

Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Yes 68 59.1
No 47 40.9
Total 115 100.0

4.3.4 Adjustments made in farming practices to long-term shifts in temperature and

rainfall

From the table 4.14 on the adjustments made in farming practices to long-term shifts in
temperature and rainfall, it is clear that most of the respondents as shown by 77.4% (89)
indicated there was irrigation, 67.8% (78) indicated there was change crop variety, 53% (61)
indicated that there was diversification of crop types and varieties, 41.7% (48) indicated there
were changes in size of land under cultivation, 40.9% (47) indicated there were diversification of

44
livestock types and varieties, 33% (38) they built water harvesting schemes, 31.3% (36)
indicated there were changes in planting dates, 29.6% (34) indicated they implemented soil
conservation schemes, 23.5% (27) indicated they diversified from farming to non-farming
activity while 20% (23) indicated that they had reduced number of livestock. This is an
indication that that there were changes in adjustments made in farming practices to long-term
shifts in temperature and rainfall to reduce drought and famine.

The key informants who were government officials, local and international NGOs and
community based organizations indicated that with the changing climate and inherent risks
associated with rain fed agriculture, the percentage found in the study show an equal number of
households are embracing the use of drought resistant agricultural practices as those who still use
the regular farming practices. With the cyclic droughts being experienced in the County, poor
performance of rainy seasons, multiple re-planting routines, drought resistant agriculture farming
practice would be an appropriate risk reduction initiative that would help reduce the high risks of
food insecurity; as was found in the study on the number of people who are food insecure during
droughts.

The key informants who were government officials, local and international NGOs and
community based organizations further stated that any adaptation efforts in farming practices that
can reduce community vulnerability to succeed, it will require there to be changes in agricultural
processes, changes in existing social practices and environmental processes, changes in the
perceptions of the community towards the inherent risks resulting from a changing climate,
changes to the community cultural and traditional practices and activities that ultimately reduce
potential damages or provide communities with diverse methods of farming such as irrigation,
crop rotation etc.

45
Table 4. 14: Adjustments made in farming practices
Response Frequency (n) Percentage (%)
Change crop variety 78 67.8
Build water harvesting schemes 38 33.0
Implement soil conservation schemes 34 29.6
Diversification of crop types and varieties 61 53.0
Diversification of livestock types and varieties 47 40.9
Changing planting dates 36 31.3
Changing size of land under cultivation 48 41.7
Irrigation 89 77.4
Reduce number of livestock 23 20.0
Diversify from farming to non-farming activity 27 23.5

4.3.5 Main Constraints to Adaptation Measures

From the table 4.15 below on the main constraints to adaptation measures, it is clear that most of
the respondents as shown by 50.4% (58) indicated lack of access to water, 28.7% (33) indicated
lack of capital, 28.7% (33) indicated that lack of capital was a major constraint, 14.8% (17)
indicated lack of information, 4.3% (5) indicated shortage of labour while 1.7% (2) indicated
poor health. This is an indication that lack of access to water was a major concern to adaptive
measures hence need for interventions to conserve the environment and reduce drought and
famine. The government can also build borehole to facilitate irrigation.

From the results the key informants who were government officials, local and international
NGOs and community based organizations stated that, capital and lack of access to water inhit
adaptive measures. Most of the households in the County have an appreciation on the need for
monetary savings as an alternative backup, which could come in handy during crisis times
especially drought. Also the community way of livelihood acted as a hindrance to effective water
conservation as they do not pay attention to water demanding activities. Much of the water
present is directed to livestock management and household needs which do not give the morale
for water conservation. During drought seasons, the communities rely greatly on the government
for survival and many deaths occur due to this reason as they have only one way of livelihood.

46
Table 4. 15: Main Constraints to Adaptation Measures
Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Lack of capital 33 28.7
Lack of information 17 14.8
Shortage of labour 5 4.3
Lack of access to water 58 50.4
Poor health 2 1.7
Total 115 100.0

4.3.6 Challenges and Successes during the Current Response to Drought

The study established that failure to involve all stakeholders in responding to drought has been
major challenge. Community participation in drought disaster risk management has also been
ignored and emphasis has been on emergency relief and response. The affected communities
have also become too weak when drought strikes and unilateral declaration by project
administration without listening to people‟s responses which would involve communities has
also been a challenge. Failure to implement the recommendations made has also been a major
challenge. On the success there has been building of boreholes which has increased access to
water for the community. Irrigation has also been implemented and conservation of environment
has also been implemented. From the study, it can be deduced that households with alternative
financial resources tend to be better placed in comparison to those with no alternative sources;
this is clearly witnessed during any crisis. Those households with alternative cash sources are
able to purchase the basic necessities as opposed to those without, who ultimately end up relying
on external assistance for their basic needs. The key informants who were government officials,
local and international NGOs and community based organizations indicated that some
community members have resulted to growth of drought resistant crops such as sorghum and
millet which would help reduce food shortage in the reduce and also earn the households some
income that would help diversify their economic activities.

47
4.4 Role of NGOs in Counteracting Drought and Famine in the County
4.4.1 Institutions/ Organizations the Community has worked with to address climate
change
From the table 4.16 below on whether there are institutions/organizations the community has
worked with to address climate change, it is clear that most of the respondents as shown by
71.3% (82) indicated there were institutions the community has worked with to address climate
change while 28.7% (33) indicated there were institutions. This is an indication that the
community has worked with institutions to address climate change and reduce drought and
famine. The participation of the NGOs and other organizations in the community in addressing
climate change means that the community is given resources informs of information and
financial services thus the members in the community are able to diversify their activities hence
they are in a better position of disaster preparedness and resilience.

Table 4. 16: Institutions the Community Has Worked With to Address Climate Change
Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Yes 82 71.3
No 33 28.7
Total 115 100.0

4.4.2 Type of Institutions/ Organizations to Address Climate change

From the table 4.17 below on the type of institutions/ organizations used to address Climate
change, it is clear that most of the respondents as shown by 44.3% (51) indicated the institution
used was NGO, 37.4% (43) indicated government ministries were used, 13% (15) indicated the
private sector was used while 5.2% (6) indicated it was the contribution of the individuals in the
community. This is an indication that there are institutions within the community used to address
climate change and reduce drought and famine.

48
Table 4. 17: Type of Institutions/ Organizations to Address Climate change
Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
NGOs 51 44.3
Government ministry 43 37.4
Private sector 15 13.0
An individual 6 5.2
Total 115 100.0

4.4.3 How the organization helped the community in coping with drought
The study found that the organizations have supported the community in coping with drought
through various measures such as conducting forum and sensitizing the locals on the need of
conserving the environment through planting of trees and eliminating deforestation which is a
major cause of drought. The organizations have also built boreholes to the locals to increase the
water content for the community where the residents can irrigate their lands. The key informants
who were government officials, local and international NGOs and community based
organizations indicated that in coping with drought the residents have empowered the residents
to grow drought resistant crops which can cope under harsh weather conditions. The
organizations further strengthen the need for diversification of income generating activities and
livelihood strategies for households and communities living in Kitui County, in situations with
limited income generating opportunities, it is usually a vulnerable households limited productive
assets‟ that are at the greatest risk from the negative impacts of drought.

4.4.4 Negotiations and discussions about Disaster risk management interventions

From the table 4.18 below on whether there were negotiations and discussions about disaster risk
management interventions in the area, it is clear that most of the respondents as shown by 70.4%
(81) indicated there were some interventions, 29.6% (34) indicated there were no interventions.
This is an indication that there are some negotiations and discussions about disaster risk
management intervention which helps to reduce drought and famine but there should be more
interventions. The key informants who were government officials, local and international NGOs
and community based organizations indicated that the organizations have requested the residents
to diversify their income through engaging in other business generating income activities apart

49
from crop farming. The communities are also advised to save money which would be useful to
the households in times of disaster.

Table 4. 18: Negotiations and Discussion about Disaster Risk Management Interventions
Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Yes 81 70.4
No 34 29.6
Total 115 100.0

4.4.5 Proposal for Disaster risk management interventions

From the table 4.19 below on the proposals for disaster risk management interventions, it is clear
that most of the respondents as shown by 35.7% (41) indicated the proposals came from NGOs,
27% (31) indicated politicians, 16.5% (19) indicated the proposals came from the governments,
11.3% (13) they came from the community, 5.2% (6) while 4.3% (5) indicated they got the
proposals from the politicians. This is an indication that most proposals came from NGOs hence
other stakeholders should bring proposals for disaster risk management. The key informants who
were government officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations
indicated that there is need for safety net programs that communities and households are well
aware of, and they are able to tap in for assistance. This should be realized during the disaster
phase and post-disaster phase of a crisis and thus the communities would benefit, such activities
would not necessarily lift them out of poverty but they are required as risk reduction measures to
cushion them from the negative impacts of drought. This should however not be confused with
the regular emergency relief, and can be introduced in the community using innovative but
sustainable means, as risk reduction measures that the community will be able to have the
acceptable indicators or triggers to use to gain access to assistance.

50
Table 4. 19: Proposal for Disaster Risk Management Interventions
Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Community 13 11.3
Chief 6 5.2
Government 19 16.5
NGO 41 35.7
Elders 5 4.3
Politicians 31 27.0
Total 115 100.0

4.4.6 Residents’ Understanding of Climate Change

From the table 4.20 below on whether the clients understand climate change, it is clear that most
of the respondents as shown by 62.6% (72) indicated they understood climate change while
37.4% (43) indicated they didn‟t understand. This is an indication that some of the residents
didn‟t understand climate change hence there is need for education about climate change to
reduce disasters and manage them. The key informants who were government officials, local and
international NGOs and community based organizations indicated most of the residents
understand climate change and have inherent abilities and disabilities to deal with climate
variability and a changing climate, with adaptive capacities being unevenly distributed across
households. However, the most vulnerable households in a community who traditionally are the
poor and most at risk, are highly vulnerable to the negative impacts of a changing climate, as a
result of the underlying factors that inhibit their capacity to sufficiently cope with the emerging
climatic conditions.

Table 4. 20: Residents’ Understanding of Climate Change

Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Yes 72 62.6
No 43 37.4
Total 115 100.0

51
4.5 The Effect of Drought and Famine on Agricultural Production in the County
4.5.1 Food Crop Grown in the Community
From the table 4.21 below on the food crop grown in the community, the study requested the
respondents to indicate the food crop they grow, from the findings, it was deducted that most of
the respondents as shown by 77.4% grew maize, 67.8% indicated they grew beans, 37.4%
indicated they grew millet while 32.2 % indicated they grew cassava. This is an indication that
the region is dry as these crops thrive in dry regions. The key informants who were government
officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations indicated that only
drought resistant crops can thrive in Kitui County since the area is prone to drought and has
infertile soil. Further most farmers don‟t engage in cash crops since they don‟t have enough food
for their families.

Table 4. 21: Food Crop Grown in the Community

Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Maize 89 77.4
Beans 77 67.8
Millet 43 37.4
Cassava 37 32.2

4.5.2 Fertility of the Land

From the table 4.22 below on the fertility of land, the study requested the respondents to indicate
the fertility of their land, from the findings, it is established that most of the respondents as
shown by 70.4% (81) indicated the land was infertile, 23.5% (27) indicated the land was fertile
while 6.1% (7) indicated the land was very fertile. This is an indication that the infertility of the
land was high, the reason for the residents being unable to grow sufficient food crops leading to
famine. The key informants who were government officials, local and international NGOs and
community based organizations indicated although most of the land is infertile most farmers in
the county practice traditional farming methods, with low use of mechanized farming and
application of fertilizer, a factor which results in low output per acreage in comparison to those
practicing modern farming approaches. Introduction of inexpensive and easily adaptable risk
reduction methods, such as conservation agriculture, would help in food security.

52
Table 4. 22: Fertility of the Land
Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Very fertile 7 6.1
Fertile 27 23.5
Infertile 81 70.4
Total 115 100.0

4.5.3 Sources of Agricultural Extension Officers/Services

From the table below 4.23 on the sources of agricultural extension officers/services, the study
requested the respondents to indicate the sources of agricultural extension officers/services, from
the findings, it is clear that most of the respondents as shown by 61.7% (71) sourced agricultural
extension services from the government, 27% (31) indicated NGOs while 11.3% (13) indicated
private sector. This is an indication that the government is committed to giving the residents
agricultural extension officers/services to end poverty. The key informants who were
government officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations
indicated that as a result of drought, conservation agriculture has been used which provides
benefits, like higher produce yields, preservation of the soil quality and less man hours spent by
the farmers in the farm. It could be adopted by vulnerable communities, and if well introduced
into the county this method of farming would help counter the negative climatic conditions and
create opportunities for more food production hence reducing the high levels of food insecurity.

Table 4. 23: Sources of Agricultural Extension Officers/Services

Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Government 71 61.7
Private 13 11.3
NGO 31 27.0
Total 115 100.0

4.5.4 Household Food Shortage Experience

From the table 4.24 below on whether the household experience food shortage, it was established
that most of the respondents as shown by 66.1% (76) faced food shortage while only 33.9% (39)

53
indicated they didn‟t face food shortage. This is an indication that the poverty level was high as
most people faced food shortage and hunger this could be due to drought and infertility of the
land. The key informants who were government officials, local and international NGOs and
community based organizations indicated access to sufficient food is critical for households to
hold together, lack of sufficient food at the household level eventually moves to the community
and other higher levels of the society, which eventually leaves majority of the people without
enough food to eat. As a consequence, the affected populations eventually resort to negative
ways to cope, and this has a negative impact on the livelihoods of a community, as more
resources previously not meant for food are redirected to purchase food and leaving other equally
important needs unmet.

Table 4. 24: Household Food Shortage Experience

Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Yes 76 66.1
No 39 33.9
Total 115 100.0

4.5.5 Crops Produced as Surplus for Sale in the County

From the table 4.25 below on the crops produced as surplus for sale, the study requested the
respondents to indicate the crops they produced as surplus for sale, from the findings, it is came
into the researchers attention that most of the respondents as shown by 40.8% (31) sold maize,
28.9% (22) indicated they sold millet, 19.7% (15) indicated they sold cassava while 10.5% (8)
indicated they sold beans. This is an indication that at least people in the region could sell some
produce thus with support through irrigation and conservation of the environment the residents
could have some income and thus reduce poverty. Food security exists when all people, at all
times have physical or economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their
dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life (FAO, 2008). With this high
percentage of people with no sufficient food, there is no much surplus available for sale.

54
Table 4. 25: Crops Produced as Surplus for Sale in the County
Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Maize 31 40.8
Beans 8 10.5
Millet 22 28.9
Cassava 15 19.7
Total 76 100.0

4.5.6 Reasons for Food Shortage in the County

From the table 4.26 below on the reasons for food shortage, the study requested the respondents
to indicate the reasons for food shortage, from the findings, it is clear that most of the
respondents as shown by 62.6% (72) indicated it was due to drought, 23.5% (27) indicated lack
of farm inputs, 12.2% (14) indicated shortage of land while 1.7% (2) indicated floods. This is an
indication that drought was the main cause of the food shortage hence there should be measures
to conserve the environment hence reduce drought and famine. The key informants who were
government officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations
indicated that drought and famine has been the talk in the last decade in Kitui County where the
residents have suffered a lot from the disaster, there has been in reduction in food production
leading which makes the lives of the residents difficult.

Table 4. 26: Reasons for Food Shortage in the County

Response Frequency(n) Percentage(%)
Drought 72 62.6
Floods 2 1.7
Lack of farm inputs 27 23.5
Land 14 12.2
Total 115 100.0

4.5.7 Effect of Rainfall days over the last 10 years in the County

From the table 4.27 on the effect of rainfall days over the last 10 years, it was established that
most of the respondents as shown by 51.4% (37) indicated there was decrease in rains and
change in timing, 18.1% (13) indicated there were changes in the timing of rains, 15.3% (11)
indicated that there were change in frequency of droughts/floods, 12.5% (9) indicated the rainfall

55
had declined, while 2.8% (2) indicated that rainfall had increased. This is an indication that that
there was change in climate change due to destruction of the environment hence need for
interventions to conserve the environment and reduce drought and famine.

The key informants who were government officials, local and international NGOs and
community based organizations found that the decrease in rainfall days over the last 10 years has
led to frequent droughts in the county and continue to be one of the key challenges affecting
development goals, with water and sanitation sector being among the most affected by drought.
During drought, residents with no alternative water sources are forced to institute measures that
ensure their basic needs are met, however once the available water sources are depleted, people
have to get water from alternative sources which are usually further away from the affected
households.

Table 4. 27: Effect of Rainfall Days over the Last 10 Years in the County
Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Increased 2 2.8
Declined 9 12.5
Change in the timing of rains 13 18.1
Decrease in rains and change in timing 37 51.4
Change in frequency of droughts/floods 11 15.3
Total 72 100.0

4.6 How Drought and Famine Influence the Living Standards of the Community
4.6.1 Main Source of Household Income in the County

According to table 4.28 on the main source of household income, the study requested the
respondents to indicate the main source of household income, from the findings, it is clear that
most of the respondents as shown by 40.9% (47) indicated the main source of income is crop
farming, 22.6% (26) indicated the main source was wages, 18.3% (21) indicated pastoralism,
11.3% (21) indicated business while 7% (8) indicated the main source was salary.

The key informants who were government officials, local and international NGOs and
community based organizations stated that most people depend on crop farming due to poverty

56
in the region since they cannot be able to access financial services such as loans from banks to
start business in the county. Also most people in Kitui county lack education and hence formal
employment are skills to start a business. Kitui County being an agricultural based rural
community, the available options in crop farming are adversely affected by a changing climate;
small scale businesses and labor opportunities are the most probable alternative livelihood
opportunities to reduce their vulnerability and enhance their resilience, though this is dependent
on other socio-economic factors that might reduce on the opportunities that they would like to
diversify.

Table 4. 28: Main Source of Household Income in the County

Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Crop farming 47 40.9
Business 13 11.3
Pastoralism 21 18.3
Salary 8 7.0
Wages 26 22.6
Total 115 100.0

4.6.2 Type of Housing in the County

From the table 4.29 below on the type of housing of the residents, the study requested the
respondents to indicate the type of house they live in, from the findings, it was found that most of
the respondents as shown by 48.7% (56) indicated they lived in mud walled grass thatched
houses, 40.9% (47) indicated they lived in semi-permanent houses with iron sheets while 10.4%
(12) indicated they lived in stone walled- permanent houses. This is an indication that the
poverty level was high as only 10.4% of the residents lived in permanent houses. The increased
poverty in the region leads to inability to access education and other critical services such as
credit, technology and input supply which will enable them make good decisions on disaster
preparedness and resilience.

57
Table 4. 29: Type of Housing in the County
Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Mud walled grass thatched 56 48.7
Stone walled- Permanent 12 10.4
Semi-permanent with iron sheets 47 40.9
Total 115 100.0

4.6.3 Fuel Used For Cooking in the County

Referring to table 4.30 on the type of fuel used for cooking, the study requested the respondents
to indicate the type of fuel they use for cooking, from the findings, it was determined that most
of the respondents as shown by 68.7% (79) indicated they used firewood, 20% (23) indicated
they use charcoal, 7.8% (9) indicated they used kerosene while 3.5% (4) indicated they used gas.
This is an indication that the poverty level was high as only 3.5% of the residents used gas as a
source of fuel. The high number of residents who used charcoal and firewood also destroyed the
environment causing drought and famine. The key informants indicated that they used firewood
as a source of fuel since they could not be able to access other sources of fuel such as gas which
are eco-friendly. Furthermore those who didn‟t use firewood used charcoal as a source of fuel.
The increased use of firewood as source of fuel has led to environmental degradation leading to
drought and hence famine in Kitui County.

Table 4. 30: Fuel Used For Cooking in the County

Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Firewood 79 68.7
Charcoal 23 20.0
Kerosene 9 7.8
Gas 4 3.5
Total 115 100.0

4.6.4 Problems When Accessing Water in the County

From table 4.31 on the problems faced when accessing water, it is clear that most of the
respondents as shown by 56% (48.7) indicated long distance travelled was a major problem,

58
35.7% (41) indicated scarcity of water, 11.3% (13) indicated dirty water while 4.3% (5) indicated
conflict with neighboring communities. This is an indication that the poverty level was high as
most people don‟t access water easily. The study also found that the rainfall trends in the area
have been very unpredictable exposing the area to a persistent droughts leading to famine. The
extent and impact of the drought and the experience of famine varied substantially among
regions, communities, households, and individuals, with results ranging from death and disability
of family members to windfall profits from livestock and food trading.

This low level of water availability has the high chance of increasing incidences of water borne
diseases, because people use the water that is available as a life saving measure. Low availability
of water makes household‟s compromise on many issues, resulting in poor hygiene levels since
water use is highly prioritized. Other unforeseen challenges arise in communities, such as family,
clan, tribal conflicts increase within communities that have traditionally lived peacefully,
however as a result of the changing climatic conditions; they are forced to resort to unforeseen
means for their livelihood survival.

Table 4. 31: Problems When Accessing Water in the County

Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Long distance 56 48.7
Dirty water 13 11.3
Scarcity of water 41 35.7
Conflict with neighboring communities 5 4.3
Total 115 100.0

4.6.5 Means of Transport for Farm Products to the Market in the County

As per the table 4.32 on the means of transport for farm products to the market, the study
requested the respondents to indicate the means of transport for their farm products to the
market, from the findings, it was established that most of the respondents as shown by 40% (46)
used human transport, 20.9% (24) indicated they used Matatu, 16.5% (19) indicated they used
donkeys, 12.2% (14) used carts, 7% (8) used buses while 3.5% (4) indicated they used lorries.
This is an indication that the poverty level was high as most people used human transport to take
their products to the market. The key informants who were government officials, local and

59
international NGOs and community based organizations indicated that the increased poverty in
Kitui county and lack of income due to over dependence in crop farming is the reason for most
of the residents left with human transport and Matatus as the main use of transport.

Table 4. 32: Means of Transport for Farm Products to the Market in the County
Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Lorry 4 3.5
Bus 8 7.0
Matatu 24 20.9
Cart(Mkokoteni) 14 12.2
Donkey 19 16.5
Human Transport 46 40.0
Total 115 100.0

4.7 Relationship between Drought and Famine and Education Status in the County
4. 7.1 Respondents’ Level of Education in the County
From the table 4.33 on the level of education of the respondents, the study requested the
respondents to indicate their level of education, from the findings, it came to the researchers
attention that most of the respondents as shown by 33.9% (39) indicated that they had only
primary education qualification, 24.3% (28) of the respondents indicated they had only
secondary education, 22.6% (26) indicated they had no education at all, 13% (15) had college
education qualification whereas 6.1% (7) of the respondents indicated they had university
education, this is an indication that respondents were the illiteracy level was high. The key
informants who were government officials, local and international NGOs and community based
organizations indicated that the high level of illiteracy was the cause of poverty in the region.
The lack of enough formal education, as most of the respondents had attained only primary
education is a major cause of lack of decisiveness on disaster preparedness and resilience in
Kitui County. Good access to education makes one able to access critical services such as credit,
technology and input supply which will enable them make good decisions on disaster
preparedness and resilience (FAO, 2010).

60
Table 4. 33: Respondents’ Level of Education in the County
Level of Education Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
No Education 26 22.6
Primary 39 33.9
Secondary 28 24.3
College 15 13.0
University 7 6.1
Total 115 100.0

4.7.2 Respondents Number of Children in the County

From the table 4.34 on the number of children of the respondents, the study requested the
respondents to indicate the number of children, from the findings, it came to the researchers
attention that most of the respondents as shown by 58.3% (67) indicated that they had 1-4
children, 30.4% (35) of the respondents indicated they had no children whereas 11.3% (13) of
the respondents indicated they above 4 children, this is an indication that most of the respondents
had between 1- 4 children. The significant number of respondents with above 4 children could be
a major cause of poverty hence increasing disaster in the region. The key informants who were
government officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations
indicated large family size is expected to be an enabling factor for farmers to take up labour
intensive adaptation strategies. Some noted that large family sizes might be forced to divert part
of their labour into other off-farm activities so as to generate extra income. The families that had
large number of children were poor and thus could not prepare well for drought and other disasters
associated with drought.

Table 4. 34: Respondents Number of Children in the County

Response Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
No children 35 30.4
1 to 4 children 67 58.3
Above 4 children 13 11.3
Total 115 100.0

4.7.3 Number of Children in School in the County

From the table 4.35 below on the number of children of the respondents who are enrolled in
school, the study requested the respondents to indicate the number of children, from the findings,

61
it came to the researchers attention that most of the respondents as shown by 67.5% (54)
indicated that all children were in school whereas 32.5% (26) of the respondents indicated they
had not enrolled all their children in school. The key informants who were government officials,
local and international NGOs and community based organizations indicated that the high number
of children who were in school was due to the free primary education offered by the government
and the subsidized secondary education. Poverty and lack of awareness was a major cause of the
high number of children who were not in school. The lack of enough formal education, as most
of the respondents had attained only primary education is a major cause of lack of decisiveness
on disaster preparedness and resilience in Kitui County. Good access to education makes one
able to access critical services such as credit, technology and input supply which will enable
them make good decisions on disaster preparedness and resilience.

Table 4. 35: Number of Children in School in the County

Number of Children in School Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Not all 26 32.5
All 54 67.5
Total 80 100.0

4.7.4 School Going Age Children Not in School in the County

From the table 4.36 below on whether there are school going age children not in school, the
study requested the respondents to indicate whether there are school going children not in school,
from the findings, it was established that most of the respondents as shown by 77.5% (62)
indicated that no school going children who had not been enrolled in school whereas 22.5% (16)
of the respondents indicated some of the school going children were not in school. The key
informants who were government officials, local and international NGOs and community based
organizations indicated that the high number of children who were in school was due to the free
primary education offered by the government and the subsidized secondary education. Poverty
and lack of awareness was a major cause of the high number of children who were not in school.
Good access to education makes one able to access critical services such as credit, technology
and input supply which will enable them make good decisions on disaster preparedness and
resilience.

62
Table 4. 36: School Going Age Children Not in School in the County
Response Frequency(n) Percentage(%)
Yes 18 22.5
No 62 77.5
Total 80 100.0

4.7.5 Reason for Failure of the Children to Attend School in the County
As can be seen from table 4.37 below on reason for failure of children to attend school, the study
requested the respondents to indicate their reason of failure of children not being in school, from
the findings, it is clear that most of the respondents as shown by 36.5% (42) indicated it was due
to lack of fees, 21.7 (25) indicated it was due to lack/inadequate school materials. 18.3% (21)
indicated that they were working where they helped their parents, 13% (15) indicated marriage
was a cause of students failure to attend school while 10.4% (12) indicated that the students
generally refused to go to school leading to drop out of the students. The key informants who
were government officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations
indicated poverty and lack of awareness was also a major cause of the high number of children
who were not in school. The residents also lack a source of income which is important to support
their families and send the children in schools. The children are also forced to drop out of school
due to hunger as a result of drought. Good access to education makes one able to access critical
services such as credit, technology and input supply which will enable them make good
decisions on disaster preparedness and resilience.

Table 4. 37: Reason for Failure of the Children to Attend School in the County
Reason for Failure of Children to go to School Frequency(n) Percentage (%)
Lack of fees 42 36.5
Lack of/Inadequate schools materials 25 21.7
Refused to go to school 12 10.4
Married 15 13.0
Working 21 18.3
Total 115 100.0

63
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter presents summary of key data findings, conclusion drawn from the findings
highlighted and the recommendation made.

5.1 Summary of Findings

5.1.1 Role of government and NGOs in Counteracting Drought and Famine in the County

Most of the respondents represented by 71.3% (82) indicated there were institutions the
community has worked with to address climate change while 28.7% (33) indicated there were
institutions. This is an indication that the community has worked with institutions to address
climate change and reduce drought and famine. The participation of the NGOs and other
organizations in the community in addressing climate change means that the community is given
resources informs of information and financial services thus the members in the community are
able to diversify their activities hence they are in a better position of disaster preparedness and
resilience. On the type of institutions/ organizations used to address Climate change, it is clear
that most of the respondents represented by 44.3% (51) indicated the institution used was NGO,
37.4% (43) indicated government ministries were used, 13% (15) indicated the private sector
was used while 5.2% (6) indicated it was the contribution of the individuals in the community.
This is an indication that there are institutions within the community used to address climate
change and reduce drought and famine.

The study found that the community has received support from various organizations in coping
with drought through various measures such as conducting forum and sensitizing the locals on
the need of conserving the environment through planting of trees and eliminating deforestation
which is a major cause of drought. Boreholes have been built for the locals to increase the water
content for the community. The key informants indicated that in coping with drought the
residents have empowered the residents to grow drought resistant crops which can cope under
harsh weather conditions. The organizations further strengthen the need for diversification of
income generating activities and livelihood strategies for households and communities living in
Kitui County, in situations with limited income generating opportunities, it is usually a

64
vulnerable households limited productive assets‟ that are at the greatest risk from the negative
impacts of drought On whether there were negotiations and discussions about disaster risk
management interventions in the area, it is clear that most of the respondents represented by
70.4% (81) indicated there were some interventions, 29.6% (34) indicated there were no
interventions. This is an indication that there are some negotiations and discussions about
disaster risk management intervention which helps to reduce drought and famine but there
should be more interventions. The key informants indicated that the organizations have requested
the residents to diversify their income through engaging in other business generating income
activities apart from crop farming. The communities are also advised to save money which
would be useful to the households in times of disaster.

On the proposals for disaster risk management interventions, it is clear that most of the
respondents represented by 35.7% (41) indicated the proposals came from NGOs, 27% (31)
indicated politicians, 16.5% (19) indicated the proposals came from the governments, 11.3% (13)
they came from the community, 5.2% (6) while 4.3% (5) indicated they got the proposals from
the politicians. This is an indication that most proposals came from NGOs hence other
stakeholders should bring proposals for disaster risk management. The key informants indicated
that there is need for safety net programs that communities and households are well aware of,
and they are able to tap in for assistance.

On whether the clients understand climate change, most of the respondents represented by 62.6%
(72) indicated they understood climate change while 37.4% (43) indicated they didn‟t
understand. This is an indication that some of the residents didn‟t understand climate change
hence there is need for education about climate change to reduce disasters and manage them. The
key informants indicated most of the residents understand climate change and have inherent
abilities and disabilities to deal with climate variability and a changing climate, with adaptive
capacities being unevenly distributed across households. However, the most vulnerable
households in a community who traditionally are the poor and most at risk, are highly vulnerable
to the negative impacts of a changing climate, as a result of the underlying factors that inhibit
their capacity to sufficiently cope with the emerging climatic conditions.

65
5.1.2 Effect of Drought and Famine on Agricultural Production in the County
Most of the respondents represented by 77.4% grew maize, 67.8% indicated they grew beans,
37.4% indicated they grew millet while 32.2 % indicated they grew cassava. This is an indication
that the region is dry as these crops thrive in dry regions. The key informants indicated that only
drought resistant crops can thrive in Kitui County since the area is prone to drought and has
infertile soil. Further most farmers don‟t engage in cash crops since they don‟t have enough food
for their families. It was also established that most of the respondents represented by 70.4% (81)
indicated the land was infertile, 23.5% (27) indicated the land was fertile while 6.1% (7)
indicated the land was very fertile. This is an indication that the infertility of the land was high,
the reason for the residents being unable to grow sufficient food crops leading to famine. The
key informants indicated although most of the land is infertile most farmers in the county
practice traditional farming methods, with low use of mechanized farming and application of
fertilizer, a factor which results in low output per acreage in comparison to those practicing
modern farming approaches. Introduction of inexpensive and easily adaptable risk reduction
methods, such as conservation agriculture, would help in food security.

Most of the respondents represented by 61.7% (71) sourced agricultural extension services from
the government, 27% (31) indicated NGOs while 11.3% (13) indicated private sector. This is an
indication that the government is committed to giving the residents agricultural extension
officers/services to end poverty. It was also established that most of the respondents represented
by 66.1% (76) faced food shortage while only 33.9% (39) indicated they didn‟t face food
shortage. This is an indication that the poverty level was high as most people faced food shortage
and hunger this could be due to drought and infertility of the land. The key informants who were
government officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations
indicated access to sufficient food is critical for households to hold together, lack of sufficient
food at the household level eventually moves to the community and other higher levels of the
society, which eventually leaves majority of the people without enough food to eat. As a
consequence, the affected populations eventually resort to negative ways to cope, and this has a
negative impact on the livelihoods of a community, as more resources previously not meant for
food are redirected to purchase food and leaving other equally important needs unmet.

66
On the crops produced as surplus for sale, the study requested the respondents to indicate the
crops they produced as surplus for sale, from the findings, it is came into the researchers
attention that most of the respondents as shown by 40.8% (31) sold maize, 28.9% (22) indicated
they sold millet, 19.7% (15) indicated they sold cassava while 10.5% (8) indicated they sold
beans. This is an indication that at least people in the region could sell some produce thus with
support through irrigation and conservation of the environment the residents could have some
income and thus reduce poverty. Food security exists when all people, at all times have physical
or economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food
preferences for an active and healthy life. With this high percentage of people with no sufficient
food, there is no much surplus available for sale. Most of the respondents represented by 62.6%
(72) indicated it was due to drought, 23.5% (27) indicated lack of farm inputs, 12.2% (14)
indicated shortage of land while 1.7% (2) indicated floods. This is an indication that drought was
the main cause of the food shortage hence there should be measures to conserve the environment
hence reduce drought and famine. The key informants indicated that drought and famine has
been the talk in the last decade in Kitui County where the residents have suffered a lot from the
disaster, there has been reduction in food production, which makes the lives of the residents
difficult.

Most of the respondents as shown by 51.4% (37) indicated there was decrease in rains and
change in timing, 18.1% (13) indicated there were changes in the timing of rains, 15.3% (11)
indicated that there were change in frequency of droughts/floods, 12.5% (9) indicated the rainfall
had declined, while 2.8% (2) indicated that rainfall had increased. This is an indication that that
there was change in climate change due to destruction of the environment hence need for
interventions to conserve the environment and reduce drought and famine. The key informants
who were government officials, local and international NGOs and community based
organizations found that the decrease in rainfall days over the last 10 years has led to frequent
droughts in the county and continue to be one of the key challenges affecting development goals,
with water and sanitation sector being among the most affected by drought. During drought,
residents with no alternative water sources are forced to get water from alternative sources which
are usually further away from the affected households.

67
5.1.3 How Drought and Famine Influence the Living Standards of the Community
On the main source of household income, the study requested the respondents to indicate the
main source of household income, from the findings, it is clear that most of the respondents as
represented by 40.9% (47) indicated the main source of income is crop farming, 22.6% (26)
indicated the main source was wages, 18.3% (21) indicated pastoralism, 11.3% (21) indicated
business while 7% (8) indicated the main source was salary. The key informants who were
government officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations stated
that most people depend on crop farming due to poverty in the region since they cannot be able
to access financial services such as loans from banks to start business in the county. Also most
people in Kitui county lack education and hence formal employment are skills to start a business.
Kitui County being an agricultural based rural community, the available options in crop farming
are adversely affected by a changing climate; small scale businesses and labor opportunities are
the most probable alternative livelihood opportunities to reduce their vulnerability and enhance
their resilience, though this is dependent on other socio-economic factors that might reduce on
the opportunities that they would like to diversify.

Most of the respondents represented by 48.7% (56) indicated they lived in mud walled grass
thatched houses, 40.9% (47) indicated they lived in semi-permanent houses with iron sheets
while 10.4% (12) indicated they lived in stone walled- permanent houses. This is an indication
that the poverty level was high as only 10.4% of the residents lived in permanent houses. The
increased poverty in the region leads to inability to access education and other critical services
such as credit, technology and input supply which will enable them make good decisions on
disaster preparedness and resilience. It was determined that most of the respondents represented
by 68.7% (79) indicated they used firewood, 20% (23) indicated they use charcoal, 7.8% (9)
indicated they used kerosene while 3.5% (4) indicated they used gas. This is an indication that
the poverty level was high as only 3.5% of the residents used gas as a source of fuel. The high
number of residents who used charcoal and firewood also destroyed the environment causing
drought and famine. The key informants who were government officials, local and international
NGOs and community based organizations indicated that they used firewood as a source of fuel
since they could not be able to access other sources of fuel such as gas. Furthermore those who

68
didn‟t use firewood used charcoal as a source of fuel. The increased use of firewood as source of
fuel has led to environmental degradation leading to drought and hence famine in Kitui County.

On the problems faced when accessing water, it is clear that most of the respondents represented
by 56% (48.7) indicated long distance travelled was a major problem, 35.7% (41) indicated
scarcity of water, 11.3% (13) indicated dirty water while 4.3% (5) indicated conflict with
neighboring communities. This is an indication that the poverty level was high as most people
don‟t access water easily. The study also found that the rainfall trends in the area have been very
unpredictable exposing the area to persistent drought leading to famine. The extent and impact of
the drought and the experience of famine varied substantially among regions, communities,
households, and individuals, with results ranging from death and disability of family members to
windfall profits from livestock and food trading. The key informants who were government
officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations indicated that this
low level of water availability has the high chance of increasing incidences of water borne
diseases, because people use the water that is available as a life saving measure. Low availability
of water makes household‟s compromise on many issues, resulting in poor hygiene levels since
water use is highly prioritized. Other unforeseen challenges arise in communities, such as family,
clan, tribal conflicts increase within communities that have traditionally lived peacefully,
however as a result of the changing climatic conditions; they are forced to resort to unforeseen
means for their livelihood survival.

On the means of transport for farm products to the market, the study requested the respondents to
indicate the means of transport for their farm products to the market, from the findings, it was
established that most of the respondents represented by 40% (46) used human transport, 20.9%
(24) indicated they used matatu, 16.5% (19) indicated they used donkeys, 12.2% (14) used carts,
7% (8) used buses while 3.5% (4) indicated they used lorries. This is an indication that the
poverty level was high as most people used human transport to take their products to the market.
The key informants who were government officials, local and international NGOs and
community based organizations indicated that the increased poverty in Kitui county and lack of
income due to over dependence in crop farming is the reason for most of the residents left with
human transport and matatus as the main use of transport.

69
5.1.4 Relationship between Drought and Famine and Education Status in the County
On the level of education of the respondents, the study requested the respondents to indicate their
level of education, from the findings, it came to the researchers attention that most of the
respondents represented by 33.9% (39) indicated that they had only primary education
qualification, 24.3% (28) of the respondents indicated they had only secondary education, 22.6%
(26) indicated they had no education at all, 13% (15) had college education qualification whereas
6.1% (7) of the respondents indicated they had university education, this is an indication that
respondents were the illiteracy level was high. The key informants who were government
officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations indicated that the
high level of illiteracy was the cause of poverty in the region. The lack of enough formal
education, as most of the respondents had attained only primary education is a major cause of
lack of decisiveness on disaster preparedness and resilience in Kitui County.

On the number of children of the respondents, the study requested the respondents to indicate the
number of children, from the findings, it came to the researchers attention that most of the
respondents represented by 58.3% (67) indicated that they had 1-4 children, 30.4% (35) of the
respondents indicated they had no children whereas 11.3% (13) of the respondents indicated they
had above 4 children.. The key informants who were government officials, local and
international NGOs and community based organizations indicated large family size is expected
to be an enabling factor for farmers to take up labour intensive adaptation strategies. Some noted
that large family sizes might be forced to divert part of their labour into other off-farm activities so
as to generate extra income. The families that had large number of children were poor and thus could
not prepare well for drought and other disasters associated with drought.

On the number of children the respondents had enrolled in school, the study requested the
respondents to indicate the number of children, from the findings, it came to the researchers
attention that most of the respondents represented by 67.5% (54) indicated that all children were
in school whereas 32.5% (26) of the respondents indicated they had not enrolled all their children
in school. The key respondents indicated that the high number of children who were in school
was due to the free primary education offered by the government and the subsidized secondary
education. Poverty and lack of awareness was a major cause of the high number of children who

70
were not in school. The key informants who were government officials, local and international
NGOs and community based organizations indicated lack of enough formal education, as most of
the respondents had attained only primary education is a major cause of lack of decisiveness on
disaster preparedness and resilience in Kitui County. Good access to education makes one able to
access critical services such as credit, technology and input supply which will enable them make
good decisions on disaster preparedness and resilience.

On whether there were school going age children not in school, the study requested the
respondents to indicate whether there were school going children not in school, from the
findings, it was established that most of the respondents represented by 77.5% (62) indicated that
school going children had been enrolled in school whereas 22.5% (16) of the respondents
indicated some of the school going children were not in school. The key informants who were
government officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations
indicated that the high number of children who were in school was due to the free primary
education offered by the government and the subsidized secondary education. Poverty and lack
of awareness was a major cause of the high number of children who were not in school. Good
access to education makes one able to access critical services such as credit, technology and
input supply which will enable them make good decisions on disaster preparedness and
resilience.

On reason for failure of children to attend school, the study requested the respondents to indicate
their reason of failure of children not being in school, from the findings, it is clear that most of
the respondents represented by 36.5% (42) indicated it was due to lack of fees, 21.7 (25)
indicated it was due to lack/inadequate school materials. 18.3% (21) indicated that they were
working where they helped their parents, 13% (15) indicated marriage was a cause of students
failure to attend school while 10.4% (12) indicated that the students generally refused to go to
school leading to drop out of the students. The key informants who were government officials,
local and international NGOs and community based organizations indicated poverty and lack of
awareness was also a major cause of the high number of children who were not in school. The
residents also lack a source of income which is important to support their families and send the
children in schools. The children are also forced to drop out of school due to hunger as a result of
drought. Good access to education makes one able to access critical services such as credit,

71
technology and input supply which will enable them make good decisions on disaster
preparedness and resilience.

5.1.5 Control Measures Adopted To Help In Curbing Drought and Famine

The study found that most of the respondents represented by 63.5% (73) indicated they beg food
relief from government, 23.5% (27) indicated they begged assistance from relatives, friends or
neighbours, while 13% (15) indicated they bought food. This is an indication that most residents
begged food in times of shortage hence there should be measures to conserve the environment
hence reduce drought and famine. The key informants who were government officials, local and
international NGOs and community based organizations also indicated that in times of food
shortage there is creation of awareness and distribution of food in the region which is done
mostly by the government.

On the contribution of the community towards intervention, it was clear that most of the
respondents represented by 36.5% (42) indicated they contributed labour, 27% (31) indicated
they contributed information, 17.4% (20) contributed materials, 10.4% (12) contributed training,
6.1% (7) contributed funds while 2.6% (3) had nothing to contribute. This is an indication that
most residents had something to contribute towards the interventions to conserve the
environment hence reduce drought and famine. The key informants who were government
officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations indicated that the
community provided labour and information which is done mostly through disaster management
committee formed under supervision of the government.

On the adjustments in farming practices to climate variability and change, it was clear that most
of the respondents represented by 59.1% (68) indicated there were adjustments in farming
practices to climate variability and change while 40.9% (47) indicated that there were no
adjustments in farming practices to climate variability and change. This is an indication that
there is need for adjustments in farming practices to climate variability and change to reduce
drought and famine. The key informants who were government officials, local and international
NGOs and community based organizations indicated that some community members have
resulted to growing drought resistant crops such as sorghum and millet.

72
On the adjustments made in farming practices to long-term shifts in temperature and rainfall, it is
clear that most of the respondents represented by 77.4% (89) indicated there was irrigation,
67.8% (78) indicated there was change in crop variety, 53% (61) indicated that there was
diversification of crop types and varieties, 41.7% (48) indicated there were changes in size of
land under cultivation, 40.9% (47) indicated there were diversification of livestock types and
varieties, 33% (38) they built water harvesting schemes, 31.3% (36) indicated there were
changes in planting dates, 29.6% (34) indicated they implemented soil conservation schemes,
23.5% (27) indicated they diversified from farming to non-farming activity while 20% (23)
indicated that they had reduced number of livestock. This is an indication that that there were
changes in adjustments made in farming practices to long-term shifts in temperature and rainfall
to reduce drought and famine.

The key informants who were government officials, local and international NGOs and
community based organizations further indicated that with the changing climate and inherent
risks associated with rain fed agriculture, the percentage found in the study show an equal
number of households are embracing the use of drought resistant agricultural practices as those
who still use the regular farming practices. With the cyclic droughts being experienced in the
County, poor performance of rainy seasons, multiple re-planting routines, drought resistant
agriculture farming practice would be an appropriate risk reduction initiative that would help
reduce the high risks of food insecurity; as was found in the study on the number of people who
are food insecure during droughts. The key informants further stated that any adaptation efforts
in farming practices that can reduce community vulnerability to succeed, it will require there to
be changes in agricultural processes, changes in existing social practices and environmental
processes, changes in the perceptions of the community towards the inherent risks resulting from
a changing climate, changes to the community cultural and traditional practices and activities
that ultimately reduce potential damages or provide communities with diverse methods of
farming such as irrigation, crop rotation etc.

On the main constraints to adaptation measures, it was clear that most of the respondents
represented by 50.4% (58) indicated lack of access to water, 28.7% (33) indicated lack of capital,
28.7% (33) indicated that lack of capital was a major constraint, 14.8% (17) indicated lack of

73
information, 4.3% (5) indicated shortage of labour while 1.7% (2) indicated poor health. This is
an indication that lack of access to water was a major concern to adaptive measures hence need
for interventions to conserve the environment and reduce drought and famine. The government
can also build borehole to facilitate irrigation. From the results the key informants who were
government officials, local and international NGOs and community based organizations stated
that, capital and lack of access to water inhibit adaptive measures. Most of the households in the
County have an appreciation on the need for monetary savings as an alternative backup, which
could come in handy during crisis times especially drought. Also the community way of
livelihood acted as a hindrance to effective water conservation as they do not pay attention to
water demanding activities. Much of the water present is directed to livestock management and
household needs which do not give the morale for water conservation. During drought seasons,
the communities rely greatly on the government for survival and many deaths occur due to this
reason as they have only one way of livelihood.

5.2 Conclusion

The study found that most of the respondents lacked formal education and were married. The
study also concludes that most household heads in Kitui County depend on crop farming as a
source of income. The study also concludes that drought was the main cause of food shortage in
the county. The study concludes that there were changes in adjustments made in farming
practices to long-term shifts in temperature and rainfall to reduce drought and famine. The study
also concludes that lack of access to water was a major concern to adaptive measures hence the
need for interventions to conserve the environment and reduce drought and famine. The
government can also build more boreholes and dams to facilitate irrigation.

The study concludes that failure to involve all stakeholders in responding to drought has been a
major challenge. Community participation in drought disaster risk management has also been
ignored and emphasis has been on emergency relief and response. The affected communities
have also become too weak when drought strikes and unilateral declaration by project
administration without listening to people‟s responses which would involve communities has
also been a challenge.

74
The study also concludes that the community has worked with various institutions to address
climate change and reduce drought and famine. The study also concludes that the organizations
have supported the community in coping with drought through various measures such as
conducting forums and sensitizing the locals on the need of conserving the environment through
planting of trees and eliminating deforestation which is a major cause of drought. The
organizations have also built boreholes and dams for the locals to increase the water content for
the community. In coping with drought the residents have been empowered to grow drought
resistant crops which can cope under harsh weather conditions. The institutions have also
requested the residents to diversify their income through engaging in other income generating
activities.

5.3 Recommendations
The farmers in Kitui County should be encouraged to diversify their income generating activities
since high dependency in crop farming leads to losses and increased poverty in times of drought
as majority of the residents have no other source of income for their livelihood.

The farmers should be encouraged to grow drought resistance crops such as sorghum and millet
which are not prone to drought and this will reduce famine in the region.

The government and both the local and international NGOs should put in place various measures
to mitigate drought in the region by enhancing opportunities for small scale irrigation, water
harvesting and the construction of more boreholes and dams in the region.

The community should be educated on the importance of trees to the environment. The
community should be discouraged from cutting down trees for firewood and given other options
like biogas production or solar power generation

The government should encourage parents on the importance of education. Education will
provide opportunities in the future for their children. Parents can enroll in adult education
programs that are available in the county.

75
The government should promote the formation of local rural institutions and farmer groups. This
will help in educating farmers on fertilizers, seed varieties, crop diversification and also
livelihood diversification and the development of community drought early warning systems.

5.4 Further Research

Research can be done to improve agricultural production in the County such as planting drought
resistant seed varieties. For example; Drought tolerant maize varieties are higher yielding when
drought strikes. They have in-built tolerance mechanisms to water shortage and continue
producing more than other maize varieties.

Research can be done to improve agricultural production in the county by introducing small scale
irrigation. For example; In Zambia, it is found that rural farmers in drought prone areas, were
able to cultivate vegetables in the dry season and earned 35% more than those who do not. The
systems used for small-scale irrigation, such as pumps and on-farm ponds, are relatively cheap,
and being freed from rain dependence can allow farmers to grow crops year-round, and to grow
more high-value crops.

76
REFERENCES

Adams, M. E. (1986). „Merging Relief and Development: The Case of Turkana,‟ Development
Policy Review (4):314-324. Kenya.

Ahmeda, Z. (2013). Disaster risks and disaster management policies and practices in Pakistan: A
critical analysis of Disaster Management Act 2010 of Pakistan, International Journal of
Disaster risk management. Queen Mary,University of London, UK.

Arnstein, S.R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning
Association, Vol. 35, No.4 1969, pp. 216-224. USA.

Bamberger, M. (1988). The Role of Community Participation in Development Planning and

Project Management. Washington D.C. USA: Economic Development Institute of the
World Bank.

Barrett, B. and Clay, D. (2003). Self-targeting accuracy in the presence of imperfect factor
markets: evidence, from food for work in Ethiopia. Journal of Development Studies, Vol.
39, No. 5. Rome: World Food Programme.

Bazarragchaa, S. (2012). Community participation in disaster risk mitigation: a comparative

study of Mongolia and Japan. Mongolia: Disaster Research Institute.

Benson, C. and Clay, E. J. (1986). Food aid and food crisis in Sub-Saharan Africa: Statistical
trends and implications. UK.

Birner, R. (2007). Choosing Policy Instruments to Reduce Poverty and Hunger. In 2020 Focus
Brief on the World's Poor and Hungry People. Washington D.C.

Buckles, R. (1988). Food Targeting in Darfur: Save the Children Fund's Programme in 1986‟ ,
Disasters 12 (2):97-103. De U.S., Dube R.K. and Rao G.S. P. (2005) Extreme Weather
Events over India in the last 100 years University of Pune, India Delhi . Vol.9, No.3,
pp.173-187

Gero, A., M´eheux, K. and Dominey-Howes D. (2011) Integrating community based disaster risk
management and climate change adaptation: examples from the Pacific, Australian
Tsunami Research Centre and Natural Hazards Research Laboratory. University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia.

Gilligan, D.O. and Hoddinott, J. (2007). Is There Persistence in the Impact of Emergency Food
Aid? Evidence on Consumption, Food Security, and Assets in Rural Ethiopia, American
Journal of Agricultural Economics 89 (2):225-242.

77
Goyet, C. V. (1999). Stop propagating disaster myths, disaster preparedness and emerging
response association. DERA Newsletter. Denver, USA.

Haan, N., Nisar M. and James, D. (2006). A Review of Emergency food Security assessment
practice in Ethiopia: HPG Research Report. Rome: World Food Programme.

IED. (2011). Hand book on provisions on Governance structure and elections in the constitution
of Kenya. Kenya National Civic Programme. Institute for Education in Democracy,
Nairobi.

IIRR. (2011). Report on community managed disaster risk management (CMDRR) customized
course for COOPI staff and partners. Mandera, Kenya.

ILO and KNBS. (2012). Kenya Child labour baseline survey: Kitui District report. Nairobi,
Kenya.

Kenya, Government of, (2004). Draft National Disaster Management Policy. Nairobi, Kenya.

Kenya, Government of, (2004). Kitui District Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper: Consultation
Report for the period 2001-2004. Ministry of Finance and planning, Nairobi, Kenya.

Kenya, Government of, (2007). Draft National Social Protection Strategy. Ministry of Gender,
Sports, Culture and Social Services, Nairobi.

Kenya, Government of, (2007). National Policy for the Sustainable Development of Arid and
Semi-Arid Lands of Kenya. Office of the President - Special Programmes, Nairobi

Kenya, Government of, (2008) Kitui District Development Plan (2008-2012). Ministry of
Finance and planning, Nairobi, Kenya.

Kenya, Government of. (2007). Kenya Vision 2030: A Globally Competitive and Prosperous
Kenya, Nairobi.

Kenya, Government of. (2009). Agriculture Sector Development Strategy (ASDS): 2009- 2020.
Ministry of Agriculture, Nairobi.

KFSSG (2003). The 2002/2003 Long rains Food security Assessment Report, Kenya.

KFSSG (2012). The 2011/2012 Short rains Food security Assessment Report, Kenya.

KNBS (2009). Kenya National Population and Housing Census: Coast Province Summary of
Census Results (Volume I & II). Nairobi, Kenya.

Kothari C.R. (2004). Research Methodology, Methods and Techniques. New Delhi, India: New
Age International (P) Ltd.

78
Mugenda O. M. & Mugenda, A. G. 1999). Research methods: quantitative and qualitative
approaches. Nairobi: ACTSPress

Musimba S.(2014) Role Of Community Participation In Drought Risk Management In Kilifi

County, Kenya. Masters Dissertation. University of Nairobi, Kenya.

NCLR (2010) Kenya Law Reports; The Constitution of Kenya, 2010, Published with the
Authority of the Attorney General, Kenya. www.kenyalaw.

Norton, A., Conway, T. and Foster, M. (2002). Social Protection: Defining the Field of Action
and Policy. Development Policy Review 20 (5):541-567.

Oremo , F. (2013). Small-Scale Farmers‟ Perceptions And Adaptation Measures To Climate

Change In Kitui County, Kenya. Masters Dissertation. University of Nairobi, Kenya.
Patrick, L. K. and Akureje, N. O. (2012). Evaluation Report for Community Managed Disaster
risk management Intervention: Approach and Methodology Employed in Karamoja
Region. DanChurchAid, Kampala, Uganda.
UNICEF. (2008). Community-based Disaster risk management: Conference proceedings.
Kolkata, India

UNISDR and UNOCHA. (2008). Disaster Preparedness for Effective Response Guidance and
Indicator Package for Implementing Priority Five of the Hyogo Framework. Geneva,
Switzerland

USAID (2012) Gender Equality and Female empowerment Policy, Washington DC.

Wanninayake W.M.S.B. (2011) A preliminary study of the drought mitigation practices of

agriculture sector in Japan and looking for possibilities to apply best practices to Sri
Lanka, Research Report, Sri Lanka

WFP Uganda. (2005). WFP‟ s development and recovery portfolio in Uganda: Evaluation
Report. Rome.

WFP. (2003). Enhanced Commitment to Women to ensure Food security: WFP Gender Policy
2003 -2007. Rome.

WFP. (2004). WFP West Africa Coastal Region Protracted Relief and Recovery Operation
Project: Final evaluation Report. Rome.

WFP. (2008). Evaluation of WFP‟s Gender Policy (2003-2007): Enhanced Commitments to

Women to Ensure Food Security. Rome: WFP.

79
WFP. (2011). Promoting Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women in Addressing Food
and Nutritional Challenges. WFP Gender Policy and Strategy. Rome.

World Bank.(2010). Natural hazards, unnatural disasters: The economics of effective

prevention. Washington D.C.; The World Bank.

Yonder, A. (2012). Community Participation in Disaster risk management: An analysis of

Grassroots Women‟s Initiatives for Building Community Resilience, 26th Annual
Congress July 11-15, 2012. Pratt Institute, Ankara Turkey

80
APPENDIX A: HOUSEHOLD QUESTIONNAIRE

QUESTIONNAIRE

Serial Number

Household Number

Location/Sub-
Location/District

Enter
Code

1.Gender of the respondents 01=Male 02= Female

2. How old are you?

01= 10-19 years 06= 60-69years
02= 20-29 years 07= 70-79years
03= 30-39 years 08= 80+
04= 40-49years 99=Don‟t Know
05= 50-59years
3. How Long Have you lived in this 01=Below one year 03= 6-10 years
community?
02= 1-5 years 04= 11+ years

4. What is your marital status? 01 = Single

02 = Married
03 = Divorced/Separated
04 = Widow/ Widower
98 = No answer
99 = Don‟t know
5. What is your highest level of 01=Primary 04=University
education?
02=Secondary 05=None

03=College 97=Others(Specify)

6. How many children do you have? 01=None

81
 02=1-4

03=5+

7. How many of the above children are 01=None

in school?
02=All

03=Specify No.

8. Are there any of your children who 01=Yes

are of school going age, currently not
attending school? 02=No

9. If YES above, what are the reasons 01=Lack of fees

that they are not attending school?
02=Lack of/Inadequate schools

03=Refused to go to school

04=Married

05=working

97=Others

10. What is your main source of 01=Crop farming 05=Wages

income?
02=Business 06=None

03=Pastoralism 97=Others(Specify)

04=Salary

11. What type of housing do you have? 01=Mud walled grass thatched

02= Stone walled- Permanent

03=Semi-permanent with iron sheets

97=Others(Specify)

12. What is your main fuel for cooking 01=Firewood 03=Kerosene

in your household? 97=Others(Specify)

82
 02=Charcoal 04=Gas

13. What problems do you experience 01=Long distance

in accessing water?
02=Dirty water

03=Scarcity of water

04=Conflict with neighboring communities

14. What food crops do you grow? 01=Maize 04=Cassava

02=Beans 97=Others(Specify)

03=Millet

15. Is your land fertile? 01=Very fertile

02=Fertile

03=Infertile

98=Don‟t know

16. What is the main means of transport 01=Lorry

for farm products to the market? 04=Cart(Mkokoteni)

02=Bus 05=Donkey

03=Matatu 97=Others(Specify)

17. What are the sources of agricultural 01=Government 99=None

extension officers/services?
02=Private 98=Others(Specify)

03=NGO

18. Does the household experience 01=Yes

food shortages of main food items?
02=No

19. If NO, what crops do you 01=Maize 04=Cassava

sometimes produce as surplus for sale?
02=Beans 97=Others(Specify)

03=Millet

83
20. If YES, what are the reasons for 01=Drought
food shortages?
02=Floods

03=Lack of farm inputs

04=Land

97=Others(Specify)

21. If YES, how do you cope with food 01 = Buy food

shortage?
02 = Beg assistance from relatives, friends
or neighbours.

03 = Beg food relief from government.

97 = Others(Specify)

22. Have you ever been involved in 01=Yes

negotiations and discussions about
Disaster risk management interventions 02=No
in this area? 98=No answer

99=Don‟t know

23. For Disaster risk management 01=Community 05=Elders

interventions to come in this area, who
proposes them? 02=Chief 06=Politicians

03=Government 99=Don‟t Know

04=NGO

24. What did the community contribute 01=Labour

towards the interventions?
02=Funds

03=Trainings

04=Materials

05=Nothing

06=Information

84
25. Do you understand what climate 01=Yes
change is?
02=No

26. If yes, what has happened to the 01 = Increased

number of rainfall days over the last 10
years? 02 = Declined

03 = Change in the timing of rains

04 =Decrease in rains and change in timing

05 =Change in frequency of
droughts/floods

27. Have you made any adjustment in 01=Yes

your farming practices to climate
variability and change? 02=No

28. What adjustments have you made in 01 = Change crop variety

your farming practices to these long- 02 = Build water harvesting schemes
term shifts in temperature and rainfall? 03 = Implement soil conservation
schemes
Tick the adjustments made. (Multiple 04 = Diversification of crop types and
responses allowed) varieties
05 = Diversification of livestock types
and varieties
06 = Changing planting dates
07 = Changing size of land under
cultivation
08 = Irrigation
09 = Reduce number of livestock
10 = Diversify from farming to non-
farming activity
29.List the main constraints to 01 = Lack of capital
adaptation measures
02 = Lack of information 03 = Shortage of
labour

04 = Lack of access to water

05 = Poor health

85
 97 = Others

30. Are there institutions/organizations 01 = Yes

your community has worked with to
address the effects of climate change on 02 = No
livelihood?

31. If, yes please indicate what type of 01 = NGOs

institutions/organizations they were?
02 = Government ministry

03 = Private sector

04 =An individual

97 = Others (specify)

99 = Don‟t know

THE END THANK YOU

86
APPENDIX B: KEY INFORMANT GUIDE

The guiding questions are designed to capture contextual constraints, the most significant drivers
of change, organizational successes and challenges, and general recommendations.
Each participant will be asked the following questions:

1. Tell us about your organization and what you‟re doing in Kitui?

2. Please provide an overview of the drought situation in Kitui over the last 5 years?
3. What has been the most significant impact of drought on agricultural production, living
standards and educational status of the people of Kitui County?
4. How has your organization helped the community in coping with drought?
5. What have been the challenges and successes during the current response?
6. Do you have any recommendations?

87
APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION

1) What is your understanding of drought and famine?

2) How often has drought occurred in the past? Say in the last 10 years.
3) What are the impacts of drought on the community‟s health, food security, livestock,
education, purchasing power, agricultural production:
4) How did the community of this area cope with drought in the past?
5) How did the community of this area cope with the recent drought?
6) What other livelihood options do people have in the event of severe drought?
7) How do you get information about an impending drought?
8) How do you prepare after getting such information?
9) What has the government done to help reduce the impacts of drought?
10) Is the government response helpful?

88