*3.1. Socio-Economic Attributes of Respondents*

Table 2 below is a characterization of the study participants and summarizes the key social and economic attributes which are assumed to be critical determinants of household adaptive capacity. Table 2 shows the frequencies, associated proportions (%) or means (as appropriate) of these attributes and the *p*-values of the Chi-square tests of differences among different respondents.


**Table 2.** Socio-economic attributes of households in Bobirwa Sub-district, Botswana.


**Table 2.** *Cont*.

Significance level; \* *p* < 0.05, \*\* *p* < 0.01, \*\*\* *p* < 0.001. Source: Household Survey Data, 2017.

Table 2 shows that there were significantly more female-headed (79.7%) than male-headed (20.3%) households. The majority of main decision-makers (de jure) at the household level were also female (55.8%). Regarding the marital status of the household heads, 47.1% were single (never married), 25.8% were married, and 20.3% were widowed. The majority of the household heads (41.3%) were adults (40–60 years), 40.3% of the heads of household were elderly (>60 years), and the remainder (18.4%) were young (<40 years). The average household size was 5.9, with more female members (3.3) of household than males (2.6). Household heads (decision-makers) who had primary education or higher (72.9%) were significantly higher (*p* < 0.05) than those who had no formal education (27.1%). A third (33.5%) of the household heads—46% of those who had formal education—had post-primary school education.

Among the households surveyed, 68% owned agricultural land either "privately" or as family land, 20% did not own any agricultural land while the rest either rented land privately (6.8%) or used communal land (5.2%). Just over two-thirds of the household heads (67.7) were part-time farmers and 32.3% were full-time farmers. The average total land holding per household was 8.85 ha. On average, only 2.25 ha was cropped. Regarding livestock, 61.3% of the households owned poultry (mainly chickens), 55.5% owned goats, 37.4% owned cattle, 26.1% owned donkeys, and 10.3% owned sheep. Some owned more than one type of livestock. On average, each household owned six cattle, one donkey, seven goats, one sheep, and seven chickens.

The major farm implements used by households differed among households with most households using hand-held implements such as hoes (65.8%) while others used animal drawn (using donkeys) ploughs (44.2%) and tractor-drawn implements (3.5%). There was no significant difference (*p* > 0.05) between households using hand-held implements and those using animal or tractor-drawn implements. At least half of the households (52.3%) received government input support under the Integrated Support Programme for Arable Agriculture (ISPAAD) although this was not significantly different (*p* > 0.05) from those who did not benefit during the 2016/2017 agricultural season. Although a higher proportion of the households (62.3%) had annual cash incomes below BWP5000 (US \$450), the difference with those who had higher incomes was not significant (*p* > 0.05). Only 32.9% of the households received remittances which they also invested varying proportions in agricultural climate change adaptations.

The majority of the households (91.0%) had access to climate and agricultural information. However, there was no significant difference (*p* > 0.05) between those households which mainly relied on climate information from the Meteorological Services Department (58.4%) and those relying on traditional knowledge (41.3%). Regarding access to information, 63.5% of the households surveyed had at least one television set, 51.64% had at least one radio and 94.5% had at least one cellphone. At least 70% of the households reported that the adoption of new farming practices was influenced by radio or television programs, seasonal weather forecasts, and information from extension officers. The information which influenced adoption of new farming practices by surveyed households was received through village chiefs (Kgosi) (41.9%), observing other successful farmers (39.7%), farmer organizations (23.2%), and farmers' magazines (8.4%).
