Analysis of Effects of Rain Water Harvesting Technologies on Livelihoods Among Households in Matungulu Sub-county, Machakos, Kenya

Abstract

Green agricultural innovations and technologies, rain-water harvesting technologies (RWHTs) included have the ability to overcome the water related difficulties experienced by households in rural areas. RWHTs have since been utilized for decades. Previous studies have evidenced the benefits of RWHTs to rural livelihoods. However, there is scanty documentation that explains the effects of RWHTs to rural livelihoods in Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASALs). The overall objective of this research was to analyze the effects of utilizing RWHTs on rural livelihoods. The specific objectives were: to assess the barriers and enablers of utilization of RWHTs among households; to evaluate the livelihood difference of households with or without RWHTs; to examine the extent to which Machakos County Government integrates RWHTs in its programs, planning and budgeting. The research used both quantitative and qualitative methods. Primary data was obtained by a household survey, focus group discussions and key informants’ interviews (Appendix V). Pretested household questionnaires (Appendix II) were used to collect data from a sample of 384 respondents and participants observations were used for data triangulation. Secondary data was obtained through literature review of peer reviewed papers, reports and existing legislations on RWH. Descriptive analyses, tabulations, percentages, inferential statistics (correlation and regression analyses) and exploratory analyses were used for data analysis. The study affirmed that barriers and enablers did not significantly affect the utilization of RWHTs among the households. RWH had a significant (β= 0.703, t=19.207, p=0.000<0.05) impact on household livelihoods. In addition, incentives from the County Government of Machakos encouraged RWHTs. Correlation analysis outcomes showed a positive but weak correlation on barriers (costs and a lack of expertise on the utilization of these technologies) and enablers (incentives, sensitizations and funding) had an impact on household livelihoods. Regression assessment showed that barriers and enablers had a confident but statistically insignificant effect (β= 0.036, t=0.700, p=0.484>0.05) on the influence on household livelihoods but on the other hand, RWHTs had a positive and significant effect on the influence on household livelihoods. Moreover, integration of RWHTs in County Development Agenda had enhanced household livelihoods. The findings indicated that overall, a composite mean of 4.04 and a standard deviation of 0.699 of the respondents agreed that incentives from the county government significantly promoted RWHTs. This was confirmed by a positively strong and significant correlation (β= 0.703, t=19.207, p=0.000<0.05) between the integration of RWHT in the county development agenda and the impact on household livelihoods Results of this survey indicate that RWHTs are financed mostly by household heads and county government initiatives have not been adequately felt. There is a strong indication from the study that RWHTs had a significant influence on the impact on household livelihoods. To ensure the sustainability of RWHTs, the study recommended that the County Government of Machakos and other counties needed to intensify campaigns on RWH and incentivize households to utilize these technologies. Additionally, there is a need to strengthen funding and sensitization on the best technologies to enhance water harvesting. To ensure sustainability of RWHTs, the study recommends that Machakos County Government need to give continuous support, strengthen stakeholder and community participation in water management practices.