Poster by Simon Nyokabi, Regina Birner, Johanna Lindahl and Bernard Bett presented at Tropentag 2015, Berlin, Germany, 16-18 September 2015.

1. Results
Biosecurity Measures in Meat and Milk Value
Chains: A Study in Bura Sub-county, Kenya
Simon Nyokabi a, Regina Birner a, Johanna Lindahl b, Bernard Bett b,
a Hohenheim university, Germany, b International livestock research institute, Nairobi, Kenya
Simon Ndungu Nyokabi
Center for Agriculture in Tropics and Subtropics
Hohenheim University, Germany
Email: ndungukabi@gmail.com
Contact: 1. DFID, 2012. Mapping of poverty and likely zoonoses hotspots-Zoonoses Project 4 Report to Department for International
Development, UK.
2. Roesel, K. & Grace, D., 2015. Food safety and informal markets: Animal products in sub-Saharan Africa K. R. and D. Grace,
ed., Routledge Jan 2015.
3. Schelling, E. et al., 2007. Research approaches for improved pro-poor control of zoonoses. Food and nutrition bulletin, 28(2
Suppl), pp.S345–56. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17658081.
References:
The study utilised a mixed methods approach:
 Knowledge, attitudes and practices questionnaire
administered to 153 value chain actors.
 Informal discussions with actors.
 Key informant interviews with public health, value chain
actors, human health and animal health departments.
 Observations of actors in their work places.
 Participatory mapping of meat and milk value chains
including activities, geographical locations and biosecurity
measures.
Methods and Materials
 Need to ensure food safety through proactive disease management.
 Need to implement One health and ECO-health approaches through resource sharing and
recognise that reduction of zoonoses is a public good.
 Improve public education and skill development of actors in informal value chains
 Raise adoption levels of food safety standards which poses a major public health challange in
Kenya.
Safe informal value chains will mean safe food and healthier nations where the whole nation
benefits considering the poor suffer more from zoonoses.
Recommendations
Introduction
In developing counties, where informal livestock value chains dominate,
actors often operate under loose legal frameworks. Hygiene and safety
standards are low, and as a consequence, both consumers and actors are
exposed to zoonoses. In Kenya, 80% of milk is traded in the informal
markets, and there is a need to evaluate knowledge, attitudes and
biosecurity practices in order to identify intervention that could improve
food safety.
Figure 1. Study area of Bura Tana, Kenya
Ease of Implementation
C
o
s
t
Easy -
Expensive
Somehow Easy -
Expensive
Difficult – Expensive
Testing for
diseases
Isolation of
animals
Quarantine
facilities
Public
education
Vaccinations
Cooling facilities
Pasteurization
Sterilization of milk (in
bottle)
UHT (ultra-high-
temperature) treatment
institutional capacity
Certification
Sewer systems
Testing labs
Good infrastructure
Good governance and
Laws and policies
Competent body of
inspectors
(veterinarians, meat
inspectors)
Testing and culling
Easy - Medium
Cost
Somehow Easy –
Medium Cost
Difficult - Medium Cost
Protective
clothing
Meat
inspection
Refrigeration
Toilets
Public education
Food testing
Aluminium milk
containers
New food laws
Testing equipment
Animals tracing
Easy – Cheap Somehow Easy - Cheap Difficult – Cheap
Washing hands
Disinfection
Water
treatment
Sanitation use
Premises
inspections
Medical check ups
Licencing
Ante mortem inspection
post-mortem
examination
Manure disposals
Low cost packaging
 There is low knowledge of zoonoses among actors.
 Most actors are not trained on food safety or the standards
needed in their line of work.
 Adoption of important biosecurity is very low or non-
existent.
 Women had the lowest adoption and knowledge showing the
unevenly gendered exposure to zoonoses.
 Cultural and religious practices also play a role in exposure
and transmission of diseases.
Conclusions
Food biosecurity
No microbial test
Risky testing of milk
Unhygienic handling
Dirty containers
Unhygienic packaging
Dirty processing places
Animal health biosecurity
No isolation grounds
Movement certificates
not enforced
No inspection observed
Personal biosecurity
 No use of PPE by actors
Few actors had medical
certificates
Figure 2. Key informant interview
Table 3. Biosecurity measures - ease vs. cost