Livelihood improvement and smallholder beekeeping in Kenya: the unrealised potential

Abstract

This article examines the potential of beekeeping, as an appropriate livelihood strategy for smallholder farm households using the sustainable livelihoods framework. A study undertaken over a six-year period (2004–9) with over 300 small-scale farmers in Kenya's Rift Valley Province found that despite excellent revenue earning potential, honey yields and returns remain comparatively low. Compared to maize, the staple crop of most Kenyan farmers, it was found that a typical ten-hive enterprise generated earnings equivalent to 0.86ha of maize. The article emphasises the need to build human capital for beekeeping rather than just promoting modern beehives.

L'amélioration des moyens d'existence pour les petits apiculteurs au Kenya

Cet article examine le potentiel de l'apiculture comme une stratégie adaptée à l'amélioration des sources de revenu pour les ménages de petits agriculteurs en se servant du cadre moyens d'existence renouvelable. Une étude d'une durée de six ans (2004-09) entrepris parmi plus de 300 petits agriculteurs dans le Rift Valley Province du Kenya a trouvé que, malgré le potentiel excellent pour faire des bénéfices, la récolte du miel et les revenus restent relativement faibles. Une comparaison avec le maïs, la culture de base de la plupart de fermiers kényans, a trouvé qu'une entreprise typique de dix ruches génère un revenu qui est l'équivalent de celui produit par 0.86ha de maïs. L'article souligne l'importance de développer le capital humain pour l'apiculture plutôt que de se limiter à la promotion de ruches modernes.

Mejoras en los medios de vida y los pequeños apicultores de Kenia: el potencial no realizado

El presente artículo analiza el potencial que tiene la apicultura como estrategia de sustento para los pequeños productores que utilizan el marco de medios de vida sustentables. Durante seis años, de 2004 a 2009, se llevó a cabo un estudio entre 300 pequeños productores de la provincia del Valle Rift en Kenia, el cual evidenció que, a pesar de su excelente potencial para generar ingresos, los rendimientos de miel y las ganancias se mantienen relativamente bajos. Asimismo, se halló que, en comparación con el maíz, cultivo básico de la mayoría de los campesinos kenianos, el conjunto típico de 10 colmenas generó ganancias equivalentes a 0.86 ha de maíz. El artículo concluye afirmando que, además de promover la apicultura moderna, es necesario construir el capital humano para la apicultura.

Melhoria dos meios de subsistência e pequenos produtores de abelhas no Quênia: o potencial não-percebido

Esse artigo examina o potencial da apicultura como estratégia adequada para meios de subsistência de famílias de pequenos produtores rurais utilizando a estrutura de meios de subsistência sustentáveis. Um estudo realizado durante um período de seis anos (2004–9) com mais de 300 pequenos produtores rurais da Província de Rift Valley, no Quênia, constatou que apesar do excelente potencial para gerar renda, a produtividade e rendimento da apicultura permanecem comparativamente baixos. Em comparação com o milho, plantação básica da maioria dos produtores rurais quenianos, constatou-se que um empreendimento típico com dez colméias gerou ganhos equivalentes a 0.86ha de milho. O artigo enfatiza a necessidade de se desenvolver capital humano para apicultura em vez de apenas promover instalações modernas para a produção de abelhas.

Keywords:

• Environment (built and natural) – Agriculture
• Labour and livelihoods
• Aid – Capacity development
• Sub-Saharan Africa

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all who contributed to the development of this article, particularly the beekeepers interviewed. They also acknowledge the valuable comments of the two anonymous referees. Thanks to the Franciscan Brothers, Baraka Agricultural College Kenya, and Self Help Africa for supporting the collection of data. Special thanks to Gorta for their financial support for this research.

Notes

Hive types

The most basic type of beehive is a hollow container (commonly a hollow log) in which the bees build their wax honeycomb. The bees attach their comb to the top and sides of the container hence the comb is fixed in the container, hence the term “fixed comb” hive. “Traditional hives” are fixed comb hives.

The second type of beehive is a “top bar hive” where the bees are provided bars at the top of the hive (top bars) from which to hang their comb. Each top bar is made an exact width so that the bees only build one comb per top bar. The result is that honeycombs can be moved in and out of the hive without breaking, hence the term “moveable comb” hive. A common type of top bar hive design is the Kenya Top Bar Hive (KTBH).

The third type of beehive is the frame hive. This type of hive is designed so that the bees build each honeycomb within a wooden frame, making it less likely to break, hence the term “frame hive”. Each comb in a frame hive can be moved in and out of the beehive without breaking so the frame hive is categorised as a “moveable comb” hive. A common design of frame hive is known as the “Langstroth Hive”. Both top bar and frame hives are also referred to as “modern hives”.

This estimate is based on Muya's calculations and augmented by data collected by the authors through a 2007 survey of beekeepers from RVP.

All references to Kenyan districts in this paper refer to pre-2007 district boundaries.

Unless otherwise indicated survey results refer to the 2007 survey of 91 beekeepers.

The estimate of 11kg of honey consumed per household per annum is based on the 2009 survey of 30 households in Nakuru district.

In 2009 a parasitic mite, Varroa destructor, was identified in Kenyan honeybees (Frazier et al. 2010). Some of the beekeepers interviewed may have had Varroa mites in their bee colonies but were unaware of their presence.