Agroforestry Systems

, Volume 59, Issue 3, pp 295–305 | Cite as

Income and labour productivity of collection and use of indigenous fruit tree products in Zimbabwe



Rural people in Africa periodically rely on wild fruits to supplement their diet and to generate cash income. However, scientific evidence on the economics of using indigenous fruit tree (IFT) products is scarce. The objective of the study was to fill in some of the gaps for which farm-household surveys were conducted in Zimbabwe during 1999–2000. Gross margins and returns to labour in collection, use and sale of products of Uapaca kirkiana (Muell. Arg., Wild Loquat), Strychnos sp. (S. cocculoides (Baker) and S. spinosa (Lam.), Monkey Orange) and Parinari curatellifolia (Planch. ex. Benth., Fever Tree) were compared with other farming activities. A random sample of over three hundred households in the Murehwa Communal and the Takawira Resettlement Areas was interviewed to gather income and expenditure data. Additionally, income, expenditure and labour allocation of 39 households were closely monitored for one year. Results indicated that the majority of rural households benefited from consumption and sale of indigenous (IF), although the extent varied among households. Within the households, children were the main consumers of fruits. Marketing of IF are carried out by women who used the receipts to purchase household goods. While U. kirkiana fruits were more important in generating cash income than others, fruits of P. curatellifoliawere important for home consumption during periods of food shortages. The gross margins for collection of IFT products were lower than for livestock and crop production. However, returns to labour from collection and use of IFT products were considerably greater than from other activities including gardening and livestock rearing. The study indicates that collection of IFT products is an efficient labour allocation strategy in Zimbabwe.

Gross margin analysis Indigenous fruits Returns to labour Parinari curatellifolia,Strychnos sp. Uapaca kirkiana 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alderman H., Chiappori P.A., Haddad L., Hoddinott J. and Kanbur R. 1995. Unitary versus collective models of the household: Is it time to shift the burden of proof? The World Bank Research Observer 10 [1]: 1–19.Google Scholar
  2. Ayuk E.T., Duguma B., Franzel S., Kengue J., Mollet M., TikiManga T. and Zekeng P. 1999. Uses, management and economic potential of Dacryodes edulis (Buseraceae) in the humid lowlands of Cameroon. Economic Botany 53: 292–301.Google Scholar
  3. Becker G.S. (ed.) 1993. Ökonomische Erklärung menschlichen Verhaltens. Die Einheit der Gesellschaftswissenschaften. J.C.B. Mohr. Tübingen, Germany, 351 pp.Google Scholar
  4. Campbell B. (ed.) 1996. The Miombo in Transition: Woodlands and Welfare in Africa. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia, 266 pp.Google Scholar
  5. Campbell B., Luckert M. and Scoones I. 1997. Local level valuation of savanna resources: A case study from Zimbabwe. Economic Botany 51: 59–77.Google Scholar
  6. Campbell B.M., Jeffrey S., Kozanayi W., Luckert M., Mutamba M. and Zindi C. 2002. Household Livelihoods in the Semi-Arid Regions: Options and Constraints. Center for International Forestry Research. Bogor, Indonesia, 153 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Cavendish W. 2000. Empirical regularities in the poverty-environment relationship of rural households: Evidence from Zimbabwe. World Development 28: 1979–2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chidumayo E. 1997. Miombo Ecology and Management. An Introduction. IT Publications, London, UK, 166 pp.Google Scholar
  9. Emana B. 2000. The role of new varieties and chemical fertiliser under risk: the case of smallholders in Eastern Oromia, Ethiopia. Shaker. Aachen, Germany, 221 pp.Google Scholar
  10. FAO 1985. Farm management glossary. Agricultural Services Bulletin 63. FAO, Rome, 221 pp.Google Scholar
  11. Gunatilake H.M., Senaratne D.M.A.H. and Abeygunawardena P. 1993. Role of non-timber forest products in the economy of peripheral communities of Knuckles National Wilderness Area of Sri Lanka: A farming systems approach. Economic Botany 47: 275–281.Google Scholar
  12. Maghembe J.A., Simons A.J., Kwesiga F. and Rarieya M. (eds.) 1998. Selecting Indigenous Trees for Domestication in Southern Africa. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya, 94 pp.Google Scholar
  13. Nakajima C. 1986. Subjective Equilibrium Theory of the Farm Household. Elsevier. Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 302 pp.Google Scholar
  14. Neumann E.P. and Hirsch E. 2000. Commercialisation of Non-Timber Forest Products: Review and Analysis of Research. Centre for International Forestry Research CIFOR. Bogor, In-donesia, 176 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Nyoka B.I. and Rukuni D. 2000. Progress with Domestications of Indigenous Fruit Tree Species in Zimbabwe. In: SADC Tree Seed Centre Network Technical Meeting. SADC Tree Seed Centre Network, FAO and Canadian International Development Agency. Windhoek, Namibia, pp. 62–66.Google Scholar
  16. Ramadhani T., 2002. Marketing of Indigenous Fruits in Zimbabwe. Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk. Kiel, Germany, 212 pp.Google Scholar
  17. Rukuni D., Kadzere I., Marunda C., Nyoka I., Moyo S., Mabhiza R., Kwarambi J. and Kuwaza C. 1998. Identification of priority indigenous fruits for domestication by farmers in Zimbabwe. In: Rukuni D., Kadzere I., Marunda C., Nyoka I., Moyo S., Mabhiza R., Kwarambi J. and Kuwaza C. (eds.), Selecting Indigenous Trees for Domestication in Southern Africa. International Centre for Research in Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya, pp. 72–94.Google Scholar
  18. Scherr S. 1995. Economic analysis of agroforestry systems: the farmers' perspective. In: Scherr S. (ed.) Costs, Benefits and Farmer Adoption of Agroforestry. Project Experience in Central America and the Caribbean. World Bank Environment Paper 14, CATIE-IFPRI-World Bank Project. Washington, USA, pp. 28–44.Google Scholar
  19. Shackleton S.E., Shackleton C.M., Netshiluvhi T.R., Geach B.S., Ballance A. and Fairbanks D.H.K. 2002. Use patterns and value of savanna resources in three rural villages in South Africa. Economic Botany 56: 130–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Steinfeld H. 1988. Livestock Development in Mixed Farming Systems. Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk. Kiel, Germany, 244 pp.Google Scholar
  21. Steinhauser H., Langbehn C. and Peters U. 1989. Einführung in die landwirtschaftliche Betriebslehre-Allgemeiner Teil. Ulmer Taschenbuch Verlag. Stuttgart, Germany, 329 pp.Google Scholar
  22. Tietenberg T. 1996. Environmental and Natural Resource Economics. Harper Collins College Publishers. New York, USA, 614 pp.Google Scholar
  23. Upton M. 1987. African Farm Management. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK, 190 pp.Google Scholar
  24. WorldBank 2002. World Development Indicators 2002. The World Bank. Washington, D.C, USA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Agriculture, Environment and Development Group, Department of Economics and Business AdministrationUniversity of HannoverHannoverGermany

Personalised recommendations