INTRODUCTION.
Geita district is one of the districts forming Mwanza region. It occupy the total area of 7,825 sq km where water is 1,050 sq km and land is 6,775 sq km.According to the national population and census of August 2002, the district had population of 709,078 of which 354,065 are males and 355,013 are females with a growth rates of 3.6%.Average household size as per census is 6.5.The content of this paper describes the community economic analysis of the district. The analysis was done through participatory methodologies which are focus group discussion, resource mapping, observation and interview. Documentary review was another method used to analyze the economic situation in the community through extracting information that already exist in either published or unpublished reports. The analysis was intended to assess local circumstances effectively and efficiently and on that basis propose a potential business and investment opportunities to invest on limited resources. The chronology in the paper starts by introducing methodology used in study, analysis of community economic status and proposed potential business/investment opportunities in the community then conclusion.
METHODOLOGY.
The information was collected through analysis of data collected from a sample of 30 respondents who are the representative in the key economic positions, residents of the community and through documentary review. In documentary review, the method was done to obtain the insights about the community economic situation by the use of non attitudinal statistical data. The process involves tapping of information from sources that already exist in either published or unpublished reports. This includes data (like demographic data and statistics) from district council planning department, central government and private agencies. The community economic analysis was also done through participatory way with sampled community who are well aware of the economy in the district, these are members of district council planning and economic committee, residents of the community, chamber of commerce members, petty traders and wholesalers and employees from government and non governmental organizations. The methods used are;-
Focus group discussion this method involved dialogue with members of district council planning and economic committee, I was luck to meet the committee with a group of about 15 people. In the group we were able to exchange views and ideas about community economic development in the district.
Resource mapping is a visual representation of the community showing various resources within the area, the resources which were shown on a resource map are land, forest, water sources, recreation areas and socio economic infrastructure including roads/communication networks.
Observation was done through accurately watching and nothing of phenomenon as they occur in nature with regard to cause and effect or mutual relation aiming to scrutinize collective behavior and complex social institutions.
Likewise interview was done through social interaction with sampled persons then gather the news and ideas on community economic issues basing on the guiding questionnaire.
COMMUNITY ECONOMIC ANALYSIS.
The Geita district community has a number of economic activities which are agricultural, Forestry, Fisheries, Beekeeping, wildlife, mining, trade both petty business and medium scale business-which range from food vendor, vegetable selling and fish mongering. Agriculture comprises of two main activities which are cultivation and livestock keeping. Major food crops produced are cassava, maize, sweet potatoes, beans, finger millet, cowpeas, yams and region peas and major cash crops produced are cotton, groundnuts and pineapples. According to livestock census of 2005/2006 in the community there is 431,434 cattle(local),609 cattle(exotic),333,372 goats,61,285 sheep,1,409 pigs,2,339,540 chicken (local) and 7,500 chicken(exotic) (refer Appendix iiia) .Agriculture contributes more than 73% of the District GDP and more than 77% of the labor force relies on agriculture for earning their living. Though agricultural sector has lions share in the district GDP it is associated with some problems such as existence of diseases which includes Anoplasmosis trypanosomiasis, worms, East cost fever, Ndigana kali, mastitis, Babessiosis and new castle, lack of reliable market information and poor transport network (refer appendix iv) for agriculture products, other problems are unreliable weather forecasts, poor agricultural knowledge, poor methods of production and implements, inadequate extension crop and livestock staff,lazzness among able bodied and energetic youth who have abandoned agriculture and engage in petty trade in towns. As a result the burden of agricultural activities has been left in the hands of women who often use less unproductive methods as per respondents in focus group discussion. The area in the community suitable for cultivation is 516,000 Ha while area under cultivation is 206,000 Ha and the area suitable for livestock husbandry is 63,930 Ha (refer appendix ii).
Fisheries is the main occupation of the inhabitants along the shores of Lake Victoria,
Forestry. The community is endowed with forest cover.Acoording to five year development plan 1996/97-2000/2001-Mwanza region, Comparison of areas covered by forest against the total area of the district, the district area is 6,775 sq km and the forest cover area is 88.5 sq km, Percentage coverage of total district land area is 1.3.Forest products includes timber, poles, logs, firewood, charcoal, honey, beeswax and animals(note appendix vi-forest products and estimated value in year 2003-2005).The products sold are important source of income to the residents though the extraction from the forest is not done in a sustainable way. The present forest is affected by the community residents through extensive clearing of forest for agriculture, cutting of trees for timber, poles, firewood, and charcoal without replenishment.
Beekeeping is one of the economic activities that provide the community residents with financial gain. Beekeeping economic activity is supported by the presence of forestry in the community. In years 2004 and 2005 the community was able to extract 2,856 and 3,554 kgs of honey which valued 8,568,000 and 10,662,000 Tshs but the activity according to respondents in focus group discussion is still conducted traditionally using traditional beehives while there is a need to transform the activity to the use of modern equipments.
Mining-The most glamorous feature of this community is presence of gold. The Gold has led to influx of prospecting companies to the extent of a” Gold Rush” in a Tanzanian sense. Today there are mining companies called East African Gold mine and Geita Gold mine which is extracting Gold few meters from
Wildlife The community is endowed with attractions but revenue from this sector is very minimal due to development of infrastructure for attraction of tourism. There is game reserve called
Industrial development. In the District there are a limited number of industrial developments. The main significant industries are cotton ginning which processes seed and cotton lint ready for semi processing, these are Copcot Cotton Trading(private owned) and Kasamwa (under Nyanza cooperative Union- not operating)others include mining industries run by large mining companies(Geita Gold Mine and East Africa Mining) and small scale industries under indigenous people. Factors which contribute to poor development of industries in the community are attributed by lack of capital, illiteracy, road networks and poor development of social services.
Business/Trade: The trading includes both petty business and medium-scale business - range from food vendor, shops, vegetable selling, live stock selling, and fish mongering. Micro business employs 1-5 people and normally managed by the owner of that business, this are found in town. The small scale employ 6-10 people where as medium scale employs 1-10 people. These activities are important in absorbing large number of unemployed people in the community, an approximately 75% of the population is employed by the informal business while formal business employs 20% of the population. The community have no manufactured industries, traders imports processing and manufactured products from outside the community. Informal business involves goods such as foods, fruits, vegetables, industrial goods by petty traders. Private investor are attracted by availability of opportunities caused by increase of population and mineral sector, markets for their products tends to attract for expansion of their activities, there is private number of people emerging to buy cotton, pineapple and Gold.
Employment and Household income: Employers are district council, central Government, COPCOT, NGOs, East Africa Gold Mine and Geita Gold mining. Majority of people in the community are employed in private sector which caters about 89%, where as 15% are employed by the government sector, NGOs and Companies. Approximately 65% of the population especially young people are not permanently employed except day work or short time contract which normally is available occasionally. An average budget for family in a day is estimated to be Tshs 4,000/-, 60% of the income goes to food, 15% goes to water services charges, 10%goes to health care and 5% goes to clothing. People in the community have varied professional and entrepreneur skills this include furniture making, brick making, food processing, Shoe making, electricity, electronic service and maintenance, poultry keeping and gardening, petty business, micro enterprise and garment making.
Community financial services: The available financial institutions are National microfinance bank, National bank of commerce, there are also some semi-formal Microfinance Institutions - which are SEDA, FINCA, GEITA SACCOS & TEACHES SACCOS, and private money lender, but have limitation to deliver services to the majority poor, this formal, semi formal institutions and private individuals have high interest rates thus it hinders poor people who do not have collaterals and services are normally limited in town. The emerge of informal savings and loan associations supported by Community and Development Relief Trust(CODERT) provides an alternative means for the poor people because the interest rate is not too high, no need of collaterals instead they are built upon mutual trust and guarantee among the members of the association.
BUSINESS AND INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE IN THE COMMUNITY.
Agricultural activities: The district has good potential for a variety of crops i.e. food crops, cash crops and horticultural crops. As it has been referred early the district has surplus suitable areas for agriculture (appendix ii), it has well favored in having reliable rains of over 900mm per year. These agricultural potential areas are in the divisions of Bugando, Busanda, Nyangwale and Butundwe sub division. Principal food crops suitable for these areas are maize, beans, paddy, and cassava. Horticultural crops are mainly citrus(oranges), bananas and pineaples.Cotton as a cash crop in this are is highly regarded as cash crop, however much is yet to be done for farmers to maximize realization of their agricultural efforts.
Livestock keeping: Increased meat production for intra and inter-regional consumption, hides and skins for domestic and export must have high priority.Realisation of the economic potential of this sector has is marginal though it is profitable as seen in the appendix iiib. The livestock sector is very difficult one to deal with for reasons of the traditional and sociological backgrounds of the cattle owners. Much need to be done to educate owners in this community in order to realize the importance of destocking the surplus heard. The introduction of dairy keeping is a positive more away from traditional livestock keeping. Area to start with could be those near to or around towns for easy access to the milk markets. Secondary areas could be to those already identified as suitable for potential agricultural development. These areas have adequate pasture and watering supplies for livestock. Other areas for possible investment in this sector are through development of interregional livestock trade between the neighboring countries of
Tourism industry: There is game reserve available in the community and forest reserves.
Mining: The development of Geita goldfields is already attracting many prospectors from within and outside
Forestry: Tree seedlings should be easily accessible to residents for planting their own woodlots, shade trees at the homestead and to mark field boundaries. Hence investment in tree nurseries is called for. The setting aside by a village of community woodlot areas for communal planting is another approach which could prove effective. Local government should invest in the protection of existing forest reserves from encroachment. The investment in education and the distribution of energy saving stoves could reduce the rate at which forests are being depleted as well as save income. Commercial tree planting especially the divisions of Bugando, Busanda and Butundwe sub division are an attractive possibility. Such plantations would cater for soft timber and for building poles.
Fisheries. In the community, annual fish catches are still low because of low capacity gear and fishing vessels. Investment into more, better, and more modern fishing gear and vessels are called for, patrol boats to monitor dynamite fishing needs to be consided.All of the fishes catches apart from those consumed are collected by commercial traders to processing factories in Mwanza city. There is still a lot of room for fish processing factories that can other side provide employment to local residents in the community.
Beekeeping.Geita district show potential for investment on beekeeping. This activity land itself well to the small investors and to giving employment to young people in rural areas. Investment in modern beehives and the processing of honey and beeswax centrally would enhance both yield and quality of the products. Marketing could be handled better giving rise to good producer prices. Local carpenters could be involved in the manufacture of modern beehives and honey presses.
Industrial development. It is through industrial development in the community that the ever increasing number of unemployed youths in the community could gain employment opportunities in the future. The existing industrial establishment so far has not significantly solved the problem. There is a wide scope for potential investors to invest in agro industries for the processing of agriculture and livestock procucts.meduim sized industries such as textile mills, animal feed mills and cassava starch processing and pineapples juice canning. Supporting infrastructures and services could act as the catalyst necessary to speed up industrial development in the community. Both public and the private sector including NGOs could participate in this.
Financial institutions. The district community still needs banking institutions and microfinance enterprises. The available services are servicing few residents especially who are employed in formal sectors and living in Geita township while segregating the majorities who are agriculturalists and employee in other informal sector. Investment in financial services with products ready to save all people in informal and formal sector is of great value to meet the demand of people without access aspiring towards capital formation.
CONCLUSION.
Geita district community is the community which is well endowed with economic resources, but the extraction and investment in these resources is still minimal. The community is still faced with lack of capital and illiteracy for the development of investment in agriculture, minerals, fisheries and business initiatives. The room for business and investment opportunities is very wide for investors profit making profit making and for community developments.
REFERENCES.
CED Program student handbook. (2007-2009).
Center for community enterprise (2003) Tools and Techniques for community Recovery
and Renewal.www.cedworks.com
Rwegoshora H.M (2006): A guide to social science research. Institute of social work Dar-
es-salaam.
Michelle C.M (2000): The community resilience manual. The center for community
enterprises.
Mwanza region socio-economic profile (1998).
Geita District community profile (2007-2008).
Hustedde R.J etl (1993): Community Economic analysis –A How to manual
University Printing Press.
Appendix. I
Guiding questionnaire.
1.0 What kind of business/economic activities available in the community?
1.1 What business is linked to outside non local market?
1.2 What are the potential retail and service sales for the community?
1.3 Is the community effective in attracting and keeping retail and service sales?
1.4 Does business tend to buy locally or outside the local economy?
1.5 What is the size of informal business in the community?
1.6 What % age of the active population involved in informal business?
1.7 .What % of the population benefits from the informal business?
1.8 .How wills a change in this business affect the rest of the local economy?
1.9 .Is it usually difficult to get a business or home loan in this community?
1.10. Does local economy success make housing more or less affordable in certain areas?
1.11. Do private investors tend to invest or shun the community?
1.12. Do business provide adequate employee benefits?
1.13. Do business people in the community feel they are operating in a supportive business environment?
1.14. Does much money or resources leak from the local economy?
1.15. What is the problems affecting business in the community?
1.16. What is the problems affecting the already existing investment opportunities
Appendix ii.
Land use
| Category | Ha |
| Area suitable for cultivation | 516,000 |
| Area under cultivation | 206,000 |
| Area suitable livestock husbandry | 64,930 |
| Area covered with water | 105,000 |
| Natural forest | 12,000 |
| Protected forest | 88,550 |
| Artificial forest | 20 |
Source: Geita District Community Profile 2007/8.
Appendix iii
(a)Livestock Population from year 2001-2006 in the district.
| Type | 2001/2 | 2002/3 | 2003/4 | 2004/5 | 2005/6 |
| Cattle(local) | 411,555 | 423,490 | 435,771 | 435,771 | 431,434 |
| Cattle(exotic) | 248 | 306 | 398 | 486 | 609 |
| Goats | 252,873 | 264,505 | 274,820 | 274,820 | 333,372 |
| Sheep | 40,221 | 55,691 | 57,640 | 570,640 | 61,285 |
| Pigs | 1,200 | 1,250 | | 1,300 | 1,409 |
| Chicken(local) | 105,000 | 1,261,200 | | | 2,339,540 |
| Chicken(exotic) | 3,300 | 5,600 | 6,400 | 7,950 | 7,500 |
Source: Geita District community profile 2007/8.
(b)Number of Cattle sold for the past 5 years.
| Year | Number | Value |
| 2001/2 | 12,000 | 1,242,359.186 |
| 2002/3 | 11,565 | 1,288,160.000 |
| 2003/4 | 8,175 | 938,582,000 |
| 2004/5 | 20,741 | 2,770,935,000 |
| 2005/6 | 28,749 | 3,971,038,000 |
Source: Geita District community profile 2007/8.
APPENDIX IV.
(a)Roads classification by type.
| Types | Distance(km) | % |
| Tarmac road | 28 | 10.76 |
| Gravel road | 90 | 34.62 |
| Earth road | 142 | 54.62 |
Source: Geita District community profile 2007/8.
APPENDIX V.
SACCOs Development.
| Year | 1998/9 | 99/00 | 2000/01 | 2001/02 | 2002/03 | 2003/04 | 04/05 | 05/06 | 06/07 |
| No of Saccos | 2 | 3 | 3 | 12 | 5 | 9 | 18 | 26 | 26 |
Source: Geita District community profile 2007/8.
APPENDIX VIa
| Units | Type of product | Unit produced | Values(Tsh) | ||||
| 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | ||
| Square M | Firewood | 345 | 35.5 | 29.8 | 345,000 | 94,500 | 89,400 |
| Bags | Charcoal | 192,232 | 26,542 | 33,334 | 76,893,000 | 26,645,800 | 40,001,500 |
| Kgs | Honey | 2,580 | 2,856 | 3,554 | 7,740,000 | 8,568,000 | 10,662,000 |
| Kgs | Beeswax | 44 | 62 | 95 | 154,000 | 248,000 | 380,000 |
| Square M | Timber | 3,052 | 877.15 | 2,095 | 98,993,200 | 51,820,300 | 1,004,931,786 |
Source: Geita District community profile 2007/8.
APPENDIX VIb
| Name of Reserve | Owner | Area(Ha) | Illegal harvesting level | Encroached area.(Ha) |
| Geita | Central Government | 47,700 | moderate | 0 |
| Mianze | Local Government | 9,100 | small | 0 |
| Rwamugasa | Central Government | 15,600 | severe | 0 |
| Ruande | Local Government | 15,500 | severe | 7,750 |
| Sinde hill | Local Government | 200 | severe | 0 |
| Usindakwe | Central Government | 400 | severe | 320 |
| Total | | 88,500 | | 8,070 |
