Sampling Techniques

The research utilised mixed sampling techniques. A variety of sampling techniques were employed at different stages of the research process depending on a number of factors encountered during fieldwork. The reasoning is that as any study progresses, new categories or nascent situations may arise which propels the researcher to decide on sampling in a particular dimension.

1.7.3.1 Selection of Main Case Study

The selection of Mutoko district as the case study area was done using a purposive sampling technique. Purposive sampling is a form of non-probability sampling where the researcher subjectively targets a certain area, group of people and/or respondents whom she/he conceives are most suitable (and possess sufficient characteristics) to be able to address the postulates of the problem(s) under study. According to Patton (1990), the logic on sampling termed

26

‘purposeful’ rests on choosing information-rich cases for studying in depth, with such cases being those from which one can learn a great deal about aspects of fundamental importance to the purpose of the research. The objective is therefore to obtain the greatest possible amount of evidence on a given problem or phenomenon, and the case is chosen on the grounds of its suitable information content (Nyanwanza, 2012).

Therefore, I considered a number of aspects in selecting Mutoko as a case study, which are:

 The major part of the area falls in semi-arid, agro-ecological region IV (the annual rainfall is between 450-650 mm);

 The area is found in a hot, low lying land and ecosystem which is marginal for rain-fed maize; it is however ideal for drought resistant grain, fodder crops and livestock production (Bird et.al, 2002);

 The area is susceptible to seasonal droughts and severe dry spells during the rainy season (mid-season droughts); and

 Livelihood strategies are dependent upon climate, marked by significant levels of poverty and complicated more specifically by climate variability.

1.7.3.2 Selection of Wards and Villages

The case study unit selected for the inquiry is Charewa A (ward 3) which has 20 villages. There were a number of considerations in selecting the number of wards and villages for this study.

Significantly, these included the motive to uphold analytical rigor and develop research that is robust, and gathering a quality and amount of data sufficient to accomplish the main objective of my study. I also considered the fact that no scientific study of this nature has been conducted in the ward. The practical aspects of conducting robust research within the available time frame and with the available resources also counted in the selection of the ward and villages.

The ward selected provides generally an enlightening depiction of the features of most of the other 18 communal wards in the district. It has the following attributes: located in agro-ecological region IV like most of the communal wards; livelihood activities (communal

27

subsistence farming centered on maize, groundnuts and horticulture) which are common in all the communal wards; malaria prone as most wards in Mutoko; high population density (46 people per square kilometer, a common feature of Mutoko communal areas (Mika, 2010); poor road networks which makes it remote; and a virtually homogenous ethnically as most communal wards (as opposed to resettlement areas). Therefore, I was convinced I would obtain data from the ward that would allow me to do an analysis which is in line with the thought to provide as rigorous as conceivable an understanding of the issues under research.

The two villages selected for this study are Pasirayi and Nyakanyanga with 19 and 56 households respectively. As I mentioned above, the selection of these 2 villages from a total of twenty had more to do fulfilling the objectives of this study and conducting robust research as well as the practicalities of conducting research is such a distant area. It is also imperative to mention that my study dwells more on temporal properties regarding farmers’ adaptive strategies rather than their spatial dimensions. Therefore, these two villages cannot be regarded as statistically representative but nonetheless ‘represent’ the authentic experiences of farmers in ward 3 and more general patterns and trends in climate variability and adaptive strategies.

1.7.3.3 Selection of Historical Timeline and Timing of Research

The period covered in this study is 1992 to 2014. It is critical to take temporal dynamics into account given that livelihood emerges out of past actions and livelihood decisions are taken within specific historical and agro-ecological conditions. However, establishing the appropriate temporal scale demands that one captures the time periods that are decisive to qualify change in the area under study. Several factors, including significant historical events and data availability, should be taken into account before ascertaining the temporal range and increments for a study (Buchanan and Acevedo, 2012). Therefore, factors considered in my study include the following:

evidence that 1990-2000 was the warmest and driest decade of the century in the country; the debilitating 1992 drought, which was the country’s worst in the 20^th century; and, generally between 1992 and 2014, the country has experienced several severe droughts (1991/1992, 2000/2001, 2007/2008). I also took cognisance of increased extreme events such as floods and cyclones (Eline in 2000/2001, Japhet in 2002/2003 and Ernest in 2004/2005) under the same

28

timeline. Since climate variability denotes short term (5-10 years) fluctuations, this selection made it possible to trace and compare decadal changes in the 1990s and 2000s. In addition, the availability of meteorological data for Mutoko district contributed to my interest in selecting the aforementioned period.

Furthermore, in line with meeting my study goal, which is to provide an in-depth understanding and analysis of adaptation to climate variability, the 1992 to 2014 period was long enough to trace and capture in-depth adaptive strategies across time. I am confident that it would have been an analytical error to assume farmers’ strategies are static. The period was also long enough for one to conduct robust research, obtain adequate data and make concrete conclusions.

My fieldwork was conducted between March and August 2014. I planned my fieldwork to coincide with the 2013/2014 agricultural season. The seasonal perspective greatly enriched my understanding of the issues under study. It was appropriate timing because it allowed me to observe farmers’ livelihood activities in real life. As well, this enabled me to understand farmers’

concerns on the particular season’s trends in rainfall and temperature as well as livelihood challenges. Any changes in livelihoods strategies within the season were also probed.