Non-Farming Activities among Orang Asli

Households in Royal Belum State Park, Perak

Khairul Hisyam Kamarudin, PhD *

Khamarrul Azahari Razak, PhD

Rozaimi Che Hasan, PhD

Shamsul Sarip, PhD

UTM RAZAK SCHOOL of Engineering & Advanced Technology

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Kuala Lumpur

Outline of presentation:

Introduction

Role of RNF in Rural & Community Development

Study Approach

Results & Discussions

Issues & Challenges of RNF – some examples

Conclusion

Introduction

Rural transformation in Malaysia can be

observed in the multi-dimensional

changes towards the diversification of

rural activities with increases in non-

farming activities, the broadening of

farm or land-based activities and the

introduction of quality and local

specialty products.

Federal government agencies began to seek out alternatives in developing the

countryside and rural communities, specifically to identify more profitable economic

activities as it became obvious that the agricultural sector alone did not hold the key

to rural development.

Introduction

One of the main strategies of this search was

to find ways of encouraging the diversification

of rural economic activities brought an

interest in rural non-farming (RNF) sector as

a tool to revitalize the countryside and rural

communities.

The emergence of non-farming (NF) or non-agricultural economic activities in rural areas

is not an entirely new phenomenon. Unfortunately, as of now, there is very limited

research in Malaysia to identify their roles and contribution to rural livelihoods.

This study aim to examine the roles and contribution of non-farming (NF) activities in

rural livelihoods and how they are linked to the rural economy.

The Role of RNF in

Rural & Community

Development

Migration to the cities has eroded

the vitality of rural communities

traditional economic systems

that usually involve farming and

forest-related activities, are

falling into disuse + the quality

of the environment deteriorates

thus affecting the income and

employment opportunities in rural

communities.

NF enterprises in Africa (Reardon, 1997)

indicated that the RNF sector has

employed more than one member of a

typical rural household and the income

shares from RNF enterprises contributed

between 22 to 93% to the local

economic performance.

Islam (1997) reported that RNF capable

to generate between 20 to 50% of total

local employment, resulting in households

earning more from RNF activities than

from farm wage labour.

Absorbing surplus

labour in rural areas

Assisting farm-based

households in spreading

risks Offering more

remunerative activities to

supplement or replace

income from agricultural

activities

Offering potential income

during the agricultural off-

season

Providing a means to cope

or survive when farming

sector fails or becoming

unviable

Contribution

of RNF

Gordon and Craig (2001)

1

2

3

4

5

linkage between NF

development with the

local community

provision of widespread

benefits to all segments

of the community

especially the

underprivileged

active engagement with the

local community in the

development and management

RNF – a

development

concept

Source: Ngah et al. (2016); Kamarudin (2015a & 2013) and Wood (2005)

Materials & Methods

• Household surveys and interviews (9-11 Sept 2015).

• A total of 15 respondents (seven respondents from SungaiKejar and eight from Sungai Tiang) have agreed toparticipate in the survey by answering a questionnaire-guided interview.

• SPSS software was used to aid data processing andanalyses.

• A simple frequency and comparative statistical analysiswas adopted to differentiate the variation in thecontribution of non-agricultural activities to the rurallivelihood in different localities.

• Cross-tabulation analysis used to examine the relationshipsbetween different variables such as the respondents’ mainreasons for participating in non-farm activities.

1 Kg. Sungai Kejar

1

2

2 Kg. Sungai Tiang

Legend:

ResultsInformation Frequency

(n=15)

Percentage

(%)

Number of respondents

Kg. Sg. Kejar

Kg. Sg. Tiang

7

8

47

53

Gender

Male (head of household)

Female

15

0

100

0

Marital status

Married

Widower

13

2

87

13

Education level

No formal education

Adult school (sekolah dewasa) for 3 months

9

6

60

40

Profile of respondents

7%

20%

13%

20%

13%

20%

7%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

<17 y.o 18-24 25-30 31-34 35-40 41-50 >51 y.o

Age distribution

Information Frequency (n=15) Percentage

(%)

Involvement in non-farm activity

Yes

No

15

0

100

0

Involvement as a full-time job

Yes

No

13

2

87

13

Involvement as a part-time job

Yes

No

2

13

13

87

Involvement as a seasonal job

Yes

No

9

6

60

40

Location of non-farm activities

Inside Royal Belum

Outside Royal Belum

15

0

100

0

Types of NF activity

Sandalwood / Kayu gaharu (full-time every month)

Honey gatherer (madu Tualang) (seasonal)

Honey gatherer (madu Kelulut) (part-time every month)

Fishing (part-time every month)

13

15

13

13

87

100

87

87

Frequency of activity per month

Every week

Not related

13

2

87

13

Involvement of family members in NF

Yes

No

1

14

7

93

Sta

tus

of

resp

ond

ent

s’ inv

olv

em

ent

in

RN

F act

ivitie

s

87%

27%

93%

27%

40%

27%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

As mainincome

Assupporting

income

No otheroption

Moreflexibility

Marketableproduct

Inherit andgood at the

job

Respondents’ main reasons for participating in RNF activities

Frequency Percentage (%)

Valid Not related 1 6.7

<RM10/day 3 20.0

RM15/day 7 46.7

RM30/day 4 26.7

Total 15 100.0

Average income from RNF activity (n=15)

Note: National poverty line (average) – RM950 (poor) and RM600 (hard core poor)

RM15 x 30 days = RM450

60%

20%13%

7%

0%

0%

73%

27%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Is increasing No change Is decreasing Not sure

Resource availability Market price

Perceptions on prospect of

RNF activities – market price

and resources availability

(n=15)

38%

0%

32%

22%

0%

8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Resourcedepletion

Competition(outsideproduct)

Illegalpoachers

Seasonality Instability inmarket price

Highcost/capital

issue

Issue and challenges

related to RNF

activities (n=15)

Family dispute?

Merajuk?

Or…..

Just a small sign of…..

……contest for resources (land,

spatial, food, comfort)?

Akta Orang Asli 1954 (Akta 134) ………………..

Enakmen Perbadanan Taman Negeri Perak 2001…………………..

Unsustainable practice in extracting wild

kelulut honey observed in Royal Belum

State Park during field study

Not a BIG Q:

By Orang Asli?

By illegal poachers?

By locals from outside RBSP?

BIG Q:

State of natural resources conservation?

Long term sustainability/survivability of a

species?

The Way Forward

RNF activities played a significant role in shaping the livelihoods of Orang Asli households in Royal

Belum State Park.

The community’s involvement in RNF activities undoubtedly generated local jobs and income. However,

the current data showed that the level of household income is far from satisfactory and it is not able to

bring them out of poverty.

Respondents agreed that the price for RNF products has increased over the years + also admitted that

local resources harvested as RNF products have also decreased in tandem with the market price hike -

sandalwood, rattan, wild honey and other products.

It is recommended by this study that new forms of RNF and RNF-related activities, such as community-

based tourism should be introduced in the near future to reduce the community’s dependency on the

exploitation of the natural resources, hence reducing the pressure on the valuable resources of Royal

Belum State Park solving the issue of energy/power + telecommunication.

Thank you!

KHAIRUL HISYAM KAMARUDIN, PHD

Lecturer/Researcher in Planning (Rural Development & Sustainable Tourism)

UTM Razak School of Engineering & Advanced Technology

UTM Kuala Lumpur

Email: khkamarudin@gmail.com

Website: http://khairulhkamarudin.wordpress.com