Rwechungura, Fred Alfred2023-07-062023-07-062011APAhttp://192.168.30.20:4000/handle/123456789/152A Thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy of Economics of Mzumbe UniversityThis study assessed whether rural-out migration as a livelihood strategy enhanced livelihoods of rural households in Iringa region. The objectives were, to establish how dependent households were on diversified livelihood portfolios, what the determinants for rural-out migration were, and outcomes of rural-out migration and remittances from it to household assets. The study used cross-sectional data involving 272 migrant and non-migrant households. Findings revealed that out of 272 households, 93(34%) had out-migrants. Additionally, all 272 households were dependent on diversified livelihood portfolios, with agriculture dominating, followed by non-farm activities. However, in ranking these portfolios, migration came eighth out of nine listed activities, suggesting it was not a valued source of livelihood. At household level, the following variables were significant and positively associated with rural-out migration: household size, age of household head, and the marital status of head of household. At societal level, lack of job opportunities such as non-farm self-employment, casual labour, and working in enterprises; and poor or lack of infrastructures and /or utilities such as water dams, irrigation schemes, electricity, and markets/market places accounted for rural-out migration. On the outcomes of migration to the households’ assets, migration did not have any significance to the households; instead it had more detrimental outcomes, including withdrawal of productive human resource from community; family abandonment; erosion of morals; spread of HIV/AIDS; increasing number of vulnerable children; and school drop-out. The main conclusion from these findings is that unlike what many studies had found (in other countries), out-migration did not have better outcomes to the livelihoods of rural households in the studied districts. The policy implication of these findings is that unless rural livelihood is improved, rural-out migration will continue, as rural dwellers continue searching for ‘greener pastures.’ As this continues, poverty is perpetuated. Consequently, not only will this affect urban and other economically vibrant areas where migrants continue flocking to by saturating these destinations’ capacity to handle the migrants, but it will also affect poor rural areas negatively by draining their energetic and productive human resource. On this basis, the need to promote rural livelihood diversification by breaking the cycle of poverty through development of correct policies on human capital, infrastructure and utilities, credit provision, and enabling environments for grassroots initiatives is imperative. Likewise, adopting social protection approach, market-based approach, labour union approach, and rehabilitation approach could be steps in the right direction towards addressing problems associated with rural-out migration.en-USRural out migrationSustainable livelihoodHarris-Todaro Income differential TheoryThesis