Farmers’ Adaptive Strategies in Balancing Commercial Farming and Consumption of Nutritious Foods: Case Study of Myanmar
Abstract
:1. Introduction: Food System Transitions and the Case of Myanmar
1.1. Theoretical Outline
1.2. Definitions of Key Concepts Used in the Study
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Sampling and Household Selection
- Started farming as landless or smallholder (less than two ha of productive land). This threshold was based on the fact that land is the most commonly used dimension for measuring farm size, although other criteria can also be used. Small is a relative concept, depending on agro-ecological as well as socio-economic considerations, but a 1 or 2 ha threshold is frequently used to designate farms as small [45];
- engage or engaged in the past for at least 10 years in any form of market-oriented farming in the study area; and
- relate directly to current concerns of ‘scaling up’ of technology, methods, social innovation, and good and best practices.
2.2. Data Collection
- Introduction and collecting data for respondent and household characteristics.
- Drawing up the timeline: A timeline was drafted on a flipchart, whereby respondents freely included important moments, transitions, turning points, etc. in relation to agricultural practices and their diets.
- In-depth interview: Respondents described their personal experience in relation with agriculture and their diets in line with the events graphically plotted on the timeline. Particular attention was given to important stages over the life course and how respondents dealt with challenges and stressors.
- Reflection on healthy food: Respondents were asked to select an item, which they associated with healthy food, and to explain their choice.
2.3. Data Analysis
3. Results: Farm Household Adaptive Strategies over the Life Course
“When I was a child, my parents were selling half of the total harvest and we were eating the rest. Now, I store my crops in my house and I wait until market prices are going up. We can also send our crops to warehouses. They will keep it for you and you can sell to them at any time. In the past, we did not have this option. Today, I grow crops with a market-oriented view.”[Male respondent Sar Kyin]
3.1. Agriculture-Related Events and Adaptive Strategies
“Around 1999–2000, due to intensive rainfalls, <…> there was famine, particularly scarcity of rice and also our crop (mung bean) in the field was damaged by fungus and we could not sell it. Therefore, I borrowed money with high interest rate. I faced debt-burden and it was a very difficult time for me. I tried to raise pigs to have an income. In that period, my husband was bitten by a snake and got sick. This created more difficulties in our family.”[Female respondent Kan Zauk]]
- At the individual level, the Buddhist practices and beliefs were mentioned as an important resistance resource to guarantee fortune and good health in the present and in the afterlife. Practicing religion offered support to cope with events beyond people’s control. Other individual level resources mentioned were related to (personal) values, knowledge, internal strength, and being healthy. Some respondents explained that they could rely on their own or others’ knowledge in the household, and their ability to properly apply it in certain situations.
- At the family-level, family ties were mentioned as the main network of resources, providing material support and a sense of belonging. Through family ties, respondents gained access to different kinds of capital:
- -
- Natural, i.e., inheritance of family land;
- -
- Physical, i.e., family assets, such as cattle, carts, bicycles, motorcycles, or agricultural tools;
- -
- Financial, i.e., credit; relatives were mentioned as a source of financial capital in the form of credit, but also children’s remittances and physical help in agriculture were crucial for the sustainment of the household;
- -
- Human, i.e., educational level of family members. Respondents made efforts to support their children to complete their studies and find jobs outside the agricultural sector, as input from the farm, but also hoping to spare them from the difficulties and struggles experienced by the parents; and
- -
- Social (i.e., family unity, perseverance); respondents indicated that parental support was particularly relevant in the past, when they were young and lived under the parental roof with the aim to save money for their own future investments.
- At the community level, community or social support from the village or the monasteries were mentioned. Respondents highlighted a sense of unity and solidarity in their communities, which helped farmers to develop their business, for example, farmers organizing to rent a truck to sell directly to the market in order to avoid brokers’ intermediation, or villagers mobilizing themselves to secure the riverbank during a flood. Other forms of resistance resources were mutual support among families during hard times, joint production of handcraft, or support of each other by borrowing money at low interest rates. An important community level resource was access to and sharing of agricultural knowledge and information through different sources (traditional knowledge, observation of other farmers, private companies, trainings by non-governmental organizations, radio, TV, social media, books, university, smart phone). The majority of the respondents indicated that the main source of information on market prices and agricultural inputs and new techniques and inputs stems from fellow farmers.
- At the societal level, respondents mentioned the increased presence of NGOs, private companies, a university, and, to some extent, governmental extension services over the years. These actors provided farmers with trainings (on agriculture, food, or vocational training), access to agricultural inputs (fertilizers, pesticides, seeds, tools, etc.), and market information. The presence of microfinance organizations allowed farmers to access lower interest rates compared to informal moneylenders. Some respondents felt that the support of NGOs was fundamental. Others, however, expressed concerns related to dependency and the real effectiveness of the help received. At the institutional and governance level, the transition towards more democracy created space to form organizations. While, until recently, law in Myanmar forbade meetings of more than five people, during the interviews, it became evident that associations are more common now at the village level. Some respondents expressed the wish to be able to organize more structured farmers’ organizations, enabling farmers to improve access to better information and prices and advocate for farmers’ rights. Other societal resistance resources were related to improved infrastructure (roads, smartphones, and internet) and inputs (better seeds, fertilizers). Increased mobility of goods, people, and information created better opportunities for the farm households to commercialize their products to the market. Table 2 summarizes an overview of the adaptive strategies in agriculture described by the respondents.
3.2. Farm Households’ Diet-Related Events and Adaptive Strategies
“At my parent’s time, this area was very poor and vulnerable and we used to eat food in a traditional way. There were available only local vegetables and fruits like beans, rosella and bean leaves that we grow ourselves.”[Male respondent Kan Zauk]
“In the past, we never considered eating healthy food and we were just eating for work and living. We had to eat what we had. Lately we got some money, we buy what we want to eat but without thinking about nutritious food consumption.”[Female respondent Kan Zauk]
- At the individual level, practicing religion offered support to cope with events as well as (personal) values, tacit knowledge on food, internal strength, and being healthy.
- At the family-level, the family income as a means to get access to market goods, came out most prominently, but also other kinds of household capital:
- -
- Physical, i.e., cattle, motorcycles;
- -
- Financial, i.e., credit; relatives were mentioned as a source of financial capital, children’s remittances were crucial for the sustainment of the household;
- -
- Human, i.e., educational level of family members; and
- -
- Social (i.e., family unity); respondents indicated that family support was particularly relevant in relation to child and family care. In addition, wives were taking over tasks of the husband in the case of absence or illness.
- At the community level, respondents, as was mentioned for agricultural events, highlighted access to and sharing of knowledge and information on nutrition, health, food preparation, and care, mainly originating from trainings by NGOs, radio, TV, and social media. In addition, knowledge sharing on organic food farming for home consumption was highlighted.
- At the societal level, respondents, as was mentioned for agricultural events, highlighted in particular the role of NGOs as a source of information. In addition, the improved roads, increasing mobility, and access to smartphones and the internet, were re-emphasized. Respondents expressed the wish to be able to organize more structured farmers’ organizations. Table 3 summarizes an overview of respondents’ adaptive strategies in diet-related events.
4. Discussion
Methodological Considerations
5. Conclusions
6. Ethical Considerations
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Acronyms
ASEAN | Association of South East Asia Nations |
FAO | United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation |
FNS | Food and Nutrition Security |
LMICs | Low and Middle Income Countries |
NGOs | Non-governmental Organizations |
SDG | Sustainable Development Goal |
UNICEF | United Nations Children’s Fund |
WCDI | Wageningen Centre for Development Innovation, |
WFP | World Food Program |
WUR | Wageningen University & Research |
References
- USAID. Convergence and Tension in Nutrition-Sensitive Agricultural Market Development Activities [Draft]; Discussion Paper; USAID: Washington, DC, USA, 2016.
- Westhoek, H.; Ingram, J.; Van Berkum, S.; Özay, L.; Hajer, M. Food Systems and Natural Resources; United Nations Environment Programme-International Resource Panel: Paris, France, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Carletto, G.; Ruel, M.; Winters, P.; Zezza, A. Farm-Level Pathways to Improved Nutritional Status: Introduction to the Special Issue. J. Dev. Stud. 2015, 51, 945–957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hawkes, C.; Ruel, M. Value Chains for Nutrition. In Reshaping Agriculture for Nutrition and Health; IFPRI, Ed.; IFPRI Publications: Washington, DC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Pingali, P.L. Environmental consequences of agricultural commercialization in Asia. Environ. Dev. Econ. 2001, 6, 483–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pingali, P.L.; Rosegrant, M.W. Agricultural commercialization and diversification: Processes and policies. Food Policy 1995, 20, 171–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rerkasem, K.; Lawrence, D.; Padoch, C.; Schmidt-Vogt, D.; Ziegler, A.D.; Bruun, T.B. Consequences of swidden transitions for crop and fallow biodiversity in Southeast Asia. Hum. Ecol. 2009, 37, 347–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anderman, T.L.; Remans, R.; Wood, S.A.; DeRosa, K.; DeFries, R.S. Synergies and tradeoffs between cash crop production and food security: A case study in rural Ghana. Food Secur. 2014, 6, 541–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller, D.D.; Welch, R.M. Food system strategies for preventing micronutrient malnutrition. Food Policy 2013, 42, 115–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fisher, J. Myanmar’s 2015 Landmark Elections Explained; BBC, Ed.; BBC: London, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Haggblade, S.; Boughton, D.; Cho, K.M.; Denning, G.; Kloeppinger-Todd, R.; Oo, Z.; Sandar, T.M.; Than, T.M.; Wai, N.E.M.A.; Wilson, S.; et al. Strategic choices shaping agricultural performance and food security in Myanmar. J. Int. Aff. 2014, 67, 55–71. [Google Scholar]
- Rammohan, A.; Pritchard, B. The role of landholding as a determinant of food and nutrition insecurity in rural Myanmar. World Dev. 2014, 64, 597–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, S.; Aye Wai, N.E.M. Background Paper No. 4: Food and Nutrition Security in Burma; MDRI-CESD, Ed.; USAID: Washington, DC, USA, 2013.
- Mercy Corps. What Holds Vegetables Farmers Back? Conflict, Governance and Markets Assessment. Making Vegetable Markets Work for Smallholders Program; LIFT Fund: Yangon, Myanmar, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Herens, M.; Peters, B.; Brouwers, J.; Bosch, D.; Van der Maden, E.; Linderhof, V.; Verhagen, J. Commercially Viable Agriculture and Consumption of Nutritious Foods: A Framework for Identifying Development Pathways; Wageningen Centre for Development: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2018; p. 53. [Google Scholar]
- Hawkes, C.; Ruel, M. From Agriculture to Nutrition: Pathways, Synergies and Outcomes; World Bank Agriculture and Rural Development Department: Washington, DC, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Meeker, J.; Haddad, L. A State of the Art Review of Agriculture-Nutrition Linkages; An AgriDiet Position Paper; Department of Food Business and Development, University College Cork: Cork, Ireland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- UNICEF. Conceptual Framewrok for Nutrition; UNICEF: New York, NY, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- Black, R.E.; Victora, C.G.; Walker, S.P.; Bhutta, Z.A.; Christian, P.; de Onis, M.; Ezzati, M.; Grantham-McGregor, S.; Katz, J.; Martorell, R. Maternal and child undernutrition and overweight in low-income and middle-income countries. Lancet 2013, 382, 427–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- FAO/FIVIMS. FAO/FIVIMS Framework: Linkages between the Overall Development Context, the Food Economy Households, and Individual Measures of Well-Being; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Webb, P. Impact Pathways from Agricultural Research to Improved Nutrition and Health: Literature Analysis and Research Priorities; Background Paper Prepared for the ICN2; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Herforth, A.; Harris, J. Understanding and Applying Primary Pathways and Principles Improving Nutrition through Agriculture. In Technical Brief Series Strengthening Partnerships, Results, and Innovations in Nutrition Globally (SPRING) Project; USAID: Arlington, VA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Von Braun, J. Agricultural commercialization: Impacts on income and nutrition and implications for policy. Food Policy 1995, 20, 187–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kanter, R.; Walls, H.L.; Tak, M.; Roberts, F.; Waage, J. A conceptual framework for understanding the impacts of agriculture and food system policies on nutrition and health. Food Secur. 2015, 7, 767–777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Antonovsky, A. The salutogenic model as a theory to guide health promotion. Health Promot. Int. 1996, 11, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Antonovsky, A. Health, Stress and Coping; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1979. [Google Scholar]
- Mittelmark, M.B.; Bauer, G.F. The Meanings of Salutogenesis. In The Handbook of Salutogenesis; Mittelmark, M.B., Sagy, S., Eriksson, M., Bauer, G.F., Pelikan, J.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 7–13. [Google Scholar]
- Lindström, B.; Eriksson, M. The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Salutogenesis: Salutogenic Pathways to Health Promotion; Folkhälsan Research Center: Helsinki, Finland, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Mittelmark, M.B.; Sagy, S.; Eriksson, M.; Bauer, G.F.; Pelikan, J.M. The Handbook of Salutogenesis; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Pascale, R.T.; Sternin, J.; Sternin, M. The Power of Positive Deviance: How Unlikely Innovators Solve the World’s Toughest Problems; Harvard Business Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2010; Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
- Nicholls, A.; Simon, J.; Gabriel, M.; Whelan, C. New Frontiers in Social Innovation Research; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Olsson, P.; Moore, M.-L.; Westley, F.R.; McCarthy, D.D.P. The Concept of the Anthropocene as a Game-Changer. Ecol. Soc. 2017, 22, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- HLPE. Food Losses and Waste in the Context of Sustainable Food Systems; FAO, UN Committee on World Food Security: Rome, Italy, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Jaleta, M.; Gebremedhin, B.; Hoekstra, D. Smallholder Commercialization: Processes, Determinants and Impact. In Improving Productivity and Market Success of Ethiopian Farmers Improving Market Opportunities; International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI): Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Gebremedhin, B.; Jaleta, M. Commercialization of Smallholders: Does Market Orientation Translate into Market Participation? ILRI (aka ILCA and ILRAD): Nairobi, Kenya, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- UNSCN. Meeting of the Minds on Nutrition Impact of Food Systems; United Nations Standing Committee on Nutrition (UNSCN): Geneva, Switzerland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Griffiths, C.A.; Ryan, P.; Foster, J.H. Thematic analysis of Antonovsky’s sense of coherence theory. Scand. J. Psychol. 2011, 52, 168–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bowling, A.; Ebrahim, S. Handbook of Health Research Methods: Investigation, Measurement and Analysis; McGraw-Hill Education: London, UK, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Ah Poe, C. Food Security Assessment in the Dry Zone Myanmar. 2011. Available online: http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/ena/wfp234780.pdf?iframe (accessed on 14 May 2017).
- Shaw, J.E. Assessment of Stakeholder Interventions for Sustainable Agriculture in Myanmar’s Dry Zone. 2016. Available online: http://uncapsa.org/?q=publications/assessment-stakeholder-interventions-sustainable-agriculture-myanmar%E2%80%99s-dry-zone (accessed on 14 May 2017).
- Ministry of Health and Sports and ICF. Myanmar Demographic and Health Survey 2015-16. In The DHS Program; MoHS and ICF: Naypyidaw, Myanmar, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Thorpe, J. Delivering Prosperity in Myanmar’s Dry Zone. Lessons from Mandalay and Magwe on Realizing the Economic Potential of Small-Scale Farmers; Oxfam Briefing Paper; Oxfam GB: Oxford, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- MHDO. Dry Zone Food for Asset Creation Project WFP; Pakokku & Ngape Townships, Magwe Region, WFP, Eds.; Mynamar Heart Development Organization (MHDO): Yangon, Myanmar, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Biggs, S. Learning from the positive to reduce rural poverty and increase social justice: Institutional innovations in agricultural and natural resources research and development. Exp. Agric. 2008, 44, 37–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lowder, S.K.; Skoet, J.; Raney, T. The number, size, and distribution of farms, smallholder farms, and family farms worldwide. World Dev. 2016, 87, 16–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wielinga, E.; Vrolijk, M. Language and Tools for Networkers. J. Agric. Educ. Ext. 2009, 15, 205–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Edquist, S.; Koch, P.; Contento, I.R. Understanding Adolescent Food Choices through Personal Food Stories. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2009, 41, S16–S17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Newcombe, M.A.; McCarthy, M.B.; Cronin, J.M.; McCarthy, S.N. “Eat like a man”. A social constructionist analysis of the role of food in men’s lives. Appetite 2012, 59, 391–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papathomas, A.; Lavallee, D. Narrative Constructions of Anorexia and Abuse: An Athlete’s Search for Meaning in Trauma. J. Loss Trauma 2011, 17, 293–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCormack, L.; Lewis, V.; Wells, J.R. Early Life Loss and Trauma: Eating Disorder Onset in a Middle-Aged Male—A Case Study. Am. J. Mens Health 2014, 8, 121–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Busanich, R.; McGannon, K.R.; Schinke, R.J. Expanding understandings of the body, food and exercise relationship in distance runners: A narrative approach. Psychol. Sport Exerc. 2012, 13, 582–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosen, L. Salutogenic Lives: Stories of Healthy Eaters. In Health and Society, Social Sciences Department; Wageningen University: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- O’Kane, G.; Pamphilon, B. The importance of stories in understanding people’s relationship to food: Narrative inquiry methodology has much to offer the public health nutrition researcher and practitioner. Public Health Nutr. 2016, 19, 585–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wielinga, E.; Herens, M. Monitoring Creative Processes: The Timeline and Learning History. In 21st European Seminar on Extension Education; Routledge: Antalya, Turkey, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Hughes, I. Action research in healthcare. In The Sage Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice; Reason, P., Bradbury, H., Eds.; Sage: London, UK, 2008; pp. 381–393. [Google Scholar]
- Koelen, M.A.; van den Ban, A.W. Health Education and Health Promotion; Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2004; p. 285. [Google Scholar]
- Savin-Baden, M.; Niekerk, L.V. Narrative Inquiry: Theory and Practice. J. Geogr. High. Educ. 2007, 31, 459–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polkinghorne, D.E. Validity Issues in Narrative Research. Qual. Inq. 2007, 13, 471–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheridan, J.; Chamberlain, K. The Power of Things. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2011, 8, 315–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Devine, C.M. A life course perspective: Understanding food choices in time, social location, and history. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2005, 37, 121–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Devine, C.M.; Connors, M.; Bisogni, C.A.; Sobal, J. Life-Course Influences on Fruit and Vegetable Trajectories: Qualitative Analysis of Food Choices. J. Nutr. Educ. 1998, 30, 361–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Croll, E.J. The Intergenerational Contract in the Changing Asian Family. Oxf. Dev. Stud. 2006, 34, 473–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ellis, F. Household strategies and rural livelihood diversification. J. Dev. Stud. 1998, 35, 1–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Swan, E.; Bouwman, L.; Hiddink, G.J.; Aarts, N.; Koelen, M. Profiling healthy eaters. Determining factors that predict healthy eating practices among Dutch adults. Appetite 2015, 89, 122–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wigboldus, S. Ten Types of Social Innovation—A Brief Discussion Paper; Wageningen CDI Working Paper; WCDI, Ed.; Wageningen University and Research: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Van der Have, R.P.; Rubalcaba, L. Social innovation research: An emerging area of innovation studies? Res. Policy 2016, 45, 1923–1935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marsh, D.R.; Schroeder, D.G.; Dearden, K.A.; Sternin, J.; Sternin, M. The power of positive deviance. BMJ 2004, 329, 1177–1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- De Adelhart Toorop, R.; Gosselink, K. Analysis of Positive Deviants Among Organic Dairy Farmers in The Netherlands; Wageningen University: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Brunton, M.A.; Jeffrey, L.M. Using the critical incident technique for triangulation and elaboration of communication management competencies. J. Vocat. Educ. Train. 2010, 62, 239–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McAllister, L.; Whiteford, G.; Hill, B.; Thomas, N.; Fitzgerald, M. Reflection in intercultural learning: Examining the international experience through a critical incident approach. Reflective Pract. 2006, 7, 367–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bonevski, B.; Randell, M.; Paul, C.; Chapman, K.; Twyman, L.; Bryant, J.; Brozek, I.; Hughes, C. Reaching the hard-to-reach: A systematic review of strategies for improving health and medical research with socially disadvantaged groups. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2014, 14, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- CCMO. Manual for the review of medical research involving human subjects. In Behavioural Research and the WMO; CCMO [Central Committee on Human Related Research]: The Hague, The Netherlands, 2002; pp. 66–69. [Google Scholar]
Village | # Resp | Sex | Age yrs | Education | # Household Members | Household Livelihoods | # Migrants/Household | Type Commercial Crop | % Product. Sold * | Acres Owned Start Farm ** | Acres Owned (2017) ** |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kan Zauk | 2 | F M | 60 51 | Primary Literate NS *** | 8 | Mixed **** | 3 | Groundnut, mung beans, toddy-palm | 50% | 0 | 5 |
1 | F | 44 | Primary | 7 | Agriculture | 0 | Ground nut, mung bean, pigeon peas, sesame, toddy-palm | 90% | 0 | 7 | |
1 | M | 56 | Primary | 6 | Mixed | 1 | Ground nut, mung bean, pigeon peas, sesame, lablab bean, potato, tomato, onion | 50% | 5 | 5 | |
Sar Kyin | 1 | M | 41 | Primary | 7 | Mixed | 1 | Pigeon peas, cotton, sesame | 50% | 0 | 5.5 |
1 | M | 44 | Literate NS | 9 | Mixed | 1 | Mung bean, pigeon peas, cotton, maize, sesame | 80% | 2 | 7 | |
2 | F M | 66 66 | Illiterate Literate NS | 8 | Mixed | 3 | Ground nut, pigeon peas, cotton, maize, sesame | 80% | 0 | 13 | |
1 | M | 43 | Primary | 6 | Mixed | 0 | Pigeon peas, cotton, lablab bean, maize, sesame | 80% | 0 | 10 | |
Oo Yinn | 2 | F M | 58 55 | Literate NS Primary | 5 | Mixed | 1 | Maize, lablab bean, tomato, chili | 90% | 0 | 4 |
2 | F F | 60 58 | Primary Primary | 6 | Agriculture | 0 | Chick pea, maize, bean, chili, eggplant | 80% | 5 | 5 | |
1 | M | 31 | Primary | 10 | Mixed | 2 | Maize, chick pea, tomato, eggplant, chilly | 60% | 8 | 9 | |
Yae Lar Lay | 3 | F F M | 57 50 58 | Literate NS Intermediary Literate NS | 5 | Mixed | 0 | Groundnut, sesame, pigeon pea, mung bean, cotton | 70% | 0 | 10 |
Aung Tha | 1 | M | 56 | Literate NS | 7 | Mixed | 2 | Groundnut, pigeon pea, maize, sesame | 70% | 3 | 7 |
1 | M | 41 | Secondary | 7 | Agriculture | 0 | Chick pea, mung bean, green gram, maize, cotton, sesame, groundnut, pigeon pea | 95% | 0 | 9 | |
1 | M | 55 | Literate NS | 6 | Mixed | 2 | Sesame, mung bean, pigeon pea, cotton, chick pea, groundnut and maize | 70% | 0 | 9 |
Stressor | Adaptive Strategies Applied | Goal | Key Resistance Resources |
---|---|---|---|
Endangered family living conditions | Agriculture with diversified production (incl. cash crops) | Income stability | Individual: Physical health, strength, (tacit) knowledge, perseverance, faith, austere lifestyle Family: Parental support, land, financial capital and credit, remittances, labor, education and agricultural knowledge of family members, social support Community: Information sharing of agricultural knowledge, sense of unity and solidarity, business collaboration, (social) protection, collaboration for disaster mitigation Society agriculture, food, or vocational training by various actors (NGOs, private companies, knowledge institutes), government extension services), microfinance, improved infrastructure, increased opportunities for famers cooperating and organization |
Agriculture and husbandry | |||
Agriculture, husbandry, and migration | |||
Agriculture, husbandry, and self-employment | |||
Agriculture and migration of a family member | |||
Agriculture and self-employment | |||
Change type of crops in response to climatic conditions | |||
Harvest loss due to climate or pests | Increase use of chemical pesticides and fertilizers (organic and chemical) | Improve yields and profit | |
Crop rotation | |||
Change type of crops in response to market fluctuations | Better inputs and cultivation techniques | ||
Price fluctuations | Storage of products until prices are favourable to sell | Responsiveness to price fluctuations | |
Improved information on market prices | |||
Join forces to facilitate/improve market access | |||
Viability of farming and food system | Participate in training | Sustainable farming | |
Continue with or re-introduction of rational farming practices/Traditional tillage | |||
Organic farming |
Stressor | Adaptive Strategies Applied | Goal | Key Resistance Resources |
---|---|---|---|
Lack of nutritious food | Collecting food (from the wild) | Stability of access to food | Individual: Physical health, strength, (tacit) knowledge, faith, austere lifestyle Family: Financial capital and credit, remittances, labor, education and tacit knowledge of family members, family care and social support Community: Information sharing of knowledge on nutrition, food safety and health, and on organic food production, sense of unity and solidarity Society Nutrition and health training by various actors (NGOs, improved infrastructure |
Home production of food | |||
Eating less preferred food | |||
Regular meal frequency | |||
Home production of food | Better dietary diversity | ||
Buying foods from the market, in particular animal sources foods | |||
Lack of market access | Commercial farming | Increased income | |
Remittances | |||
Off-farm labour | |||
Purchase of means of transport | Better means of transport | ||
Join forces to facilitate/improve market access | |||
Lack of food safety and unhealthy diets | Participate in training | Sustainable diets | |
Continue with or re-introduction of rational farming practices/no contaminants | |||
Organic food production for home consumption |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Herens, M.; Gabrielli, M.; Peters, B.; Brouwers, J.; Bosch, D. Farmers’ Adaptive Strategies in Balancing Commercial Farming and Consumption of Nutritious Foods: Case Study of Myanmar. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4721. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124721
Herens M, Gabrielli M, Peters B, Brouwers J, Bosch D. Farmers’ Adaptive Strategies in Balancing Commercial Farming and Consumption of Nutritious Foods: Case Study of Myanmar. Sustainability. 2018; 10(12):4721. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124721
Chicago/Turabian StyleHerens, Marion, Monica Gabrielli, Bram Peters, Jan Brouwers, and Diane Bosch. 2018. "Farmers’ Adaptive Strategies in Balancing Commercial Farming and Consumption of Nutritious Foods: Case Study of Myanmar" Sustainability 10, no. 12: 4721. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124721