Findings showed that 52 percent of the interviewed household heads were females and 48 percent were males

Findings showed that 52 percent of the interviewed household heads were females and 48 percent were males. At village level, two villages of Mkungugu and Mkulula had a different number of respondents for both males and females. Mkungungu village had 52.9 percent respondents as males compared to Mkulula village, which had 43.8 percent responded as males. There were more females respondents in Mkulula village 56.3 percent than Mkungugu 47.1 percent (Figure 4.1). Therefore, Findings indicate that more female than male headed households were interviewed in the study area as shown in Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1: Respondents’ distribution by gender

Source: Field Survey (2018)

4.2.2 Age of Respondents
In terms of age group, 30 percent respondents’ household heads were aged between 46-55 years. In totality, household heads with 46 years and above were 76 percent for the total number of 150 interviewed household heads (Figure 4.2).

Figure 4.2: Age group of respondents

Source: Field Survey (2018)

At village level, respondents with 66 years and above from Mkulula villages were 15 percent, while in Mkungugu village they formed 20 percent. Then 63.8 percent and 51.5 percent from Mkulula and Mkungugu had their ages that ranged between 46 and 65 years, respectively. Respondents in the age groups that ranged from 18-45 years accounted for 21.3 percent and 28.6 percent in Mkulula and Mkungugu villages, respectively. Based on the objectives of the study, having the maximum percentage of the respondents aged 46 and above has a positive implication to the study because information required one to have depth understanding on changes of the local climate at least 20 years and its impacts (Figure 4.3). That also encompassed experience and knowledge on strategies that farmers have adopted towards the changes of local climate and effectiveness of those responses.
Figure 4.3: Age groups of household respondents in the study villages

Source: Field Survey (2018)

4.2.3 Education levels
Majority of households in the study area had attended basic education (primary education) by 59.3 percent and only 6.0 percent attended secondary education, while 0.6 percent attended higher learning education (Table 4.1). Cross-tabulation of age group and education level indicated that 70 percent of the respondents had attended formal education, while 30 percent of the respondents were found to have not attended any level of education level as shown in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1: Cross-tabulation of age and education levels
Age Groups Education level (frequency and %) Total (frequency and %)
None Completed Primary Did not completed primary Secondary Higher education
18-25 7(4.6%) 6(4%) 1(0.6%) 0(0.0%) 0(0.0%) 14(9.3%)
26-35 5(3.3%) 6(4%) 0(0.0%) 0(0.0%) 0(0.0%) 11(7.3%)
36-45 4(2.6%) 7(4.6%) 0(0.0%) 1(0.6%) 0(0.0%) 12(8%)
46-55 10(6.6) 27(18%) 3(2%) 4(2.6%) 0(0.0%) 44(29.3%)
56-65 10(6.6%) 28(18.6%) 1(0.6%) 3(2%) 1(0.6%) 43(28.6%)
Over 66 9(6%) 15(10%) 1(0.6%) 1(0.6%) 0(0.0%) 26(17.3%)
Total 45 (30%) 89(59.3%) 6(4%) 9(6%) 1(0.6%) 150(100%)
Source: Field Survey (2018)

At village level, this study found that both villages have about 30 percent of the respondents who had no formal education. Then 70 percent respondents from both villages had attended formal education. Mkulula had one (1.3%) respondent who attended higher education (Table 4.2). The study results imply that majority of the households had attended formal education. Table 4.2 demonstrates details.

Table 4.2: Respondents’ education levels
Village Education (frequency and %) Total (frequency and %)
Non Completed primary Did not complete primary Secondary Higher education
Mkulula 24(30%) 45(56.2%) 4(5%) 6(7.5%) 1(1.3%) 80(100%)
Mkungugu 21(30%) 44(62.8%) 2(2.8%) 3(4.3%) 0(0.0%) 70(100%)
Total 45(30%) 89(59.3%) 6(4%) 9(6%) 1(1.2%) 150(100%)
Source: Field Survey (2018)

4.2.4 Family size
The study results showed that 34.7 percent of households had size between 4 and 6 members (Figure 4.4). The household size between 1 and 3 individuals represented 10.7 percent. Household size with people ranging from 7 to 9 represented 32.7 percent, while respondents with 10-13 household members accounted for 15.3 percent. Only above 13 household size accounted for 6.7 percent (ibid.). The study found that households involved in different cultivation strategies using household members as the source of labourer and minority of the households depend on hiring labourers or tractors to perform farming strategies. Figures 4.4 and 4.5 show household for general study area and at village level, respectively.
Figure 4.4: Household size in the study area

Source: Field Survey (2018)
Figure 4.5: Household size at village level

Source: Field Survey (2018)

4.2.5 Farm size
Land plays a great role in socio-economic development to majority of households living in rural areas. In the study area, land has been a significant source of employment and livelihood activities for the families. Cultivated farm sizes of respondents in the study area were found to vary among respondents. About 50.7 percent of the respondent households cultivated between 2 and 4 acres, 28 percent cultivated between 5 and 7 acres, while 4 percent of respondents cultivated between 8 and 10 acres and 3.3 percent was for 11-13 acres. Only 5.3 percent of the households cultivated below or one acre. It is the smallest piece of land cultivated by the interviewed families in the study area. Also, 6.7 percent of respondents cultivated land above 16 acres followed by 2 percent who cultivated between 14 and 16 acres (Figure 4.6). The study results imply that majority of the households cultivated below 5 acres (56%) produced for subsistence and those cultivated above 5 acres produced for cash and subsistence as shown in Figure 4.6.
Figure 4.6: Farm size of the respondent households

Source: Field Survey (2018)
4.2.6 Source of Income
Results identified that crop farming accounts for 65.3 percent of the livelihood activities of the respondents’ households. Also farming and petty trading accounted for 17.3 percent followed by farming and livestock keeping (13.3%). Only 2.7 percent were civil servants, while 0.7 percent were livestock keepers and brick makers (Table 4.3). Most of the respondents’ farming productions were intended for home consumption, such as maize, beans, pigeon peas and sorghum, though if harvests are in surplus, the farmers sell them for income in order to fulfil other basic needs. In both villages, farmers produced maize, cotton, sunflower, simsim and millet for commercial purposes. The study found that farmers have multiple sources of income. Table 4.3 presents livelihood activities of 150 respondents from the study area.
Table 4.3: A detailed source of income of respondent households
Source of Income Frequency Percent
Crop farming 98 65.3
Livestock farming 1 .7
Farming and Petty trading 26 17.3
Civil Servant 4 2.7
Farming and livestock keeping 20 13.3
Break making 1 0.7
Total 150 100.0
Source: Field Survey (2018)