ASSESSMENT OF THE LIVELIHOOD CAPITALS AND PROBLEM CONFRONTATION OF THE FARMER’S IN TILAPIA WITH CARPS FARMING IN DINAJPUR DISTRICT

Abstract

The livelihood capitals and problem confrontation in Tilapia farming of Dinajpur district, Bangladesh were studied during July to October, 2017. Data was collected from randomly selected 100 tilapia fish farmers, 25 from each sub-district (Dinajpur Sadar, Birampur, Birganj and Biral) under Dinajpur district of Bangladesh through personal interview using a pre-tested well structured interview schedule. Livelihood capital was the focus variable. To measure the focus variable, five capitals (Human capital, Social capital, financial capital, Physical capital, Natural capital) were categorized in positive and negative statement about tilapia farming. The overall livelihood improvement score could be ranged from 30 to 150, where 30 indicating low livelihood improvement and 150 indicating high livelihood outcome. Total of 13 probable problems were selected to measure the extent of the problems and a four - point rating scale having category of “high”, “medium”, “low” and “not at all” was used. Therefore, the range of possible problem score of a respondent was 0-39. Results revealed that majority of the respondents (64 percent) had medium level of livelihood status compared to 34 percent of them having high leveled and 2 had low livelihood status. The findings indicated that majority of the respondents (41 percent) had high extent of problem confrontation compared to 46 percent of them had medium level problem confrontation and 13 had low problem confrontation. Among the problems, labor crisis on pick time and lack of security in fish farm was the most common problem in the study area. Out of eleven selected characteristics, six characteristics (i.e. age, farm size, total land area, annual income, aquaculture knowledge on tilapia with carps farming and training experience) showed significant positive relationships with their livelihood capitals in Tilapia with carps farming. Family size and problem confrontation level showed positive relationship with livelihood capitals. Education showed significant negative relationship with livelihood capitals.