Assessment of Access to Welfare Services by the Resettled Poor: a Case Study of Solio Ranch in Laikipia County

Abstract

This study assessed the benefits and risks of resettlement using a case study of Solio Ranch Resettlement Scheme, Laikipia County, Kenya. The study was guided by the following objectives to; among the resettled households, assess the availability and appropriateness of the welfare services in the Scheme, determine the risks experienced by the resettled households and, analyze the coping strategies adapted by the resettled households. The study adopted an exploratory descriptive research design and all the517 households resettled by the Government in the Scheme participated in the study. Data were collected using a structured interview guide for household heads and an interview guide for key informants. An observation schedule was also used to gather relevant information related to the study. The data collected were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. The study found that the main perceived benefits of resettlement among the resettled households areland ownership, engaging in crop farming, relative peace of mind and ownership of livestock. The findings revealed that majority of the respondents felt that they are readily accepted by the people they found in the Scheme. Most of the resettled households concurred that the resettlement land has soils of high quality while indicated that overall, their standards of living had improved. The available welfare services in the Scheme are schools, local administration, electricity and clean water supply. The study concludes that the perceived benefits of resettlement in Solio Scheme included land ownership. Land ownership enabled households to own a house, engage in crop farming and own livestock resulting to marginal improvement in economic status. Households resettled in the Scheme were gradually accepted by the people they found around there but experience inadequate social networks. Inadequate knowledge on farming practices result to households’ inability to grow new crops in the area. The environment is also harsh resulting to poor health among some households. The study concludes that the Scheme has inadequate welfare services. It was also established that the households were at risk of joblessness, food insecurity, inaccessibleand unaffordable health services, loss of access to common property such as grazing lands and declining land productivity. Among the positive coping strategies adopted by the residents, include seeking casual labour for an income, migrating to other areas, seeking relief food and borrowing soft loans from welfare groups. The negative coping strategies adopted by households are idling in social places, deserting families, resigning to fate, and chewing of khat among the youths. The study recommends that programme planners need to factor risks and livelihood reconstruction in implementing resettlement programs.