• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
120626 evaluation of small ruminant value chain in enhancing household food security the case of dale and loka abaya woreda, sidama zone of snnpr   teshale endalamaw for ma defence
 

120626 evaluation of small ruminant value chain in enhancing household food security the case of dale and loka abaya woreda, sidama zone of snnpr teshale endalamaw for ma defence

on

  • 190 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
190
Views on SlideShare
190
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    120626 evaluation of small ruminant value chain in enhancing household food security the case of dale and loka abaya woreda, sidama zone of snnpr   teshale endalamaw for ma defence 120626 evaluation of small ruminant value chain in enhancing household food security the case of dale and loka abaya woreda, sidama zone of snnpr teshale endalamaw for ma defence Presentation Transcript

    • Evaluation of small ruminant value chain in enhancing household food security: The case of Dale and Loka Abaya Woreda, Sidama Zone of SNNPR By Teshale Endalamaw Advisors Major Advisor: Legesse Dadi (PhD) Co- Advisor: Girma Abebe (PhD) Hawassa University School of Governance and Development Studies June 2012 Hawassa
    • Presentation Outline • Introduction (Background) • Statement of the Problem • Research Questions and • Objectives of the study • Research Methodology • Results and Discussion • Conclusion and • Recommendations
    • • The study focus on food security and value chain & the definition and term the researcher used were as follows: 1. “Food Security (FS) is a situation that exists when all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life,” Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), 2002 2. “A value chain (VC) is the full range of activities that are required to bring a product or a service from conception, through different phases of (the intermediary of) production, involving a combination of physical transformation and the input of various producer services, delivery to final consumers, and final disposal after use” (Kaplinsky et.al 2000) 3. Small Ruminant (SR) for this study mean Sheep & Goat BackgroundBackground
    • • Value chain is a pro-poor when … • Impact beyond increasing income • Strengthens the economic, social and organization capacity • VC focus on linking HH to growing market • VC integrate with the 3 dimension of FS – • Availability – at a larger scale • Access – at HH level • Utilization – at individual level • Food insecurity shapes the behavior of HHs and the success of VC initiatives BackgroundBackground
    • • Ethiopia has the largest livestock population in Africa • Small Ruminant (SR) – 47.8 million (CSA, 2010) • SR contribution b/n 1995/96 to 2005/06 – in average 11 % of NGDP & 24 % of AGDP • Dale and Loka Abaya Woredas (the study areas) found in Sidama Zone • SRs are one of the main source of income and help the HH to diversify its livelihood and asset creation then to HH FS • PSNP PLUS project help more than 47 thou. CFI HH over 12 Woredas of 4 regions BackgroundBackground
    • • Food insecurity in Ethiopia is a long term phenomena caused by a combination of natural & manmade factor • 300 PSNP Woreda in Ethiopia and 78 in SNNPR • SR as an integral component of CFI HHs have numerous advantage • they need smaller capital for investment, smaller place, smaller feed requirement, easy to sale, source of food for HH as meat and milk • CFI HH keeps SR for a variety of economic reasons • saving and investment, • security and insurance, • stability and social functions as a status indication Statement of the ProblemStatement of the Problem
    • • CFI HH often less likely to take risks to make investments in upgrading and engaging in VC initiatives • However, SR need a small initial investment - to buy, maintain & add value - & also small risk of loss. • SR are becoming more important in the export market. • However, • the potential of the Woredas not recognized • key value chain actors and their functions integration, sources of market information and strategies, and required infrastructure and support services were not known and documented • there was no well documented evidence that can show the performance & level of SR VC contribution for HH FS • the inhibiting bottlenecks were not also identified Statement of the ProblemStatement of the Problem
    • • Research Question 1.Does SR fattening VC contribute to HH I & FS? 2.How key VC actors, supporters and influencers of SR fattening VC interact with each other? 3.What are the challenges and opportunities for SR fattening VC to contribute for HH FS? • Objectives of the study 1.To assess the contribution of SR fattening VC in improving CFI HH financial I & FS 2.To identify the key VC actors, supporters and influencers involved in SR fattening VC 3.To identify key challenges and opportunities for SR fattening VC at different levels Research Question andResearch Question and ObjectivesObjectives
    • 1. Dale • 124, 707 ha; • 36 Kebles; • 17 CFI Kebles (PSNP); • 244, 932 Pp; • 8677 PSNP beneficiaries; • 3 –livelihood zones; • 17 PSNP PLUS Kebles; • 579 SR fattening VC participants Research MethodologyResearch Methodology Study woredas 2. Loka Abaya • 119, 000 ha; • 26 Kebles; • 26 CFI Kebles (PSNP); • 114, 480 Pp; • 18,179 PSNP beneficiaries; • 2 –livelihood zones; • 9 PSNP PLUS Kebles; • 579 SR fattening VC participants
    • Research MethodologyResearch Methodology
    • Methods of data collection and tools • Qualitative and quantitative methods • Primary and secondary data • Primary data • Structured Interview questionnaire (open and closed) • Focus group discussion (two) • 8 SR VC participants of CFI HH • Key informant interview from • Keble officials, DA, ADO & CMPO experts, Local Traders (3 Yirgalem, 2 Hawela Tula & 2 Hawassa), Luna, brokers, butchers, & restaurants. • Researcher personal observation was also employed. • Secondary data • Desk review of different literatures • Websites Research MethodologyResearch Methodology
    • Data analysis • Descriptive statistics (%age, frequency, and mean) using SPSS version 20 • SGP and SGM calculation • Pearson’s chi-square, correlation and one way ANOVA • Value Chain map • Tables and figures Research MethodologyResearch Methodology SGP = Turnover (gross sales) – Direct cost SGM = ………………….. (1) …………………… (2)
    • Conceptual Framework of the studyConceptual Framework of the study Income FlowIncome Flow Consumers (End user) •Local •Abroad Consumers (End user) •Local •Abroad Local and Urban Traders Local and Urban Traders Chronically Food Insecure Household (CFI HH) Chronically Food Insecure Household (CFI HH) Government Service providers/NGO MFI Government Service providers/NGO MFI HFS •Availability •Access •Utilization •Stability HFS •Availability •Access •Utilization •Stability Information flowInformation flow Value additionValue addition Contributing Factors to upgrade the small ruminant value by CFIH •Availability of small ruminant •Availability of input •Price fluctuation •Availability of veterinary Service •Availability of finance •Availability of feed and water •Infrastructure •Information •Appropriate extension service •Government Policy •Availability of space •Governance Structure Contributing Factors to upgrade the small ruminant value by CFIH •Availability of small ruminant •Availability of input •Price fluctuation •Availability of veterinary Service •Availability of finance •Availability of feed and water •Infrastructure •Information •Appropriate extension service •Government Policy •Availability of space •Governance Structure Restaurant and Butchers Restaurant and Butchers Input Supplier Input Supplier Exporter and Processor Exporter and Processor Government Service providers/NGO MFI Government Service providers/NGO MFI
    • Demographic characteristics of the respondents Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion Description Dale (n=92) Loka Abaya (n=95) Test Mean Mean F-Value P-Value Age 40.74+2.15 43.85+2.31 3.828 0.052 Family size 5.47+0.34 6.17+0.41 6.743 0.010 PSNP participation in years 6.36+0.16 7.00+0.29 14.597 0.000 Family members in PSNP 2.40+0.17 2.61+0.15 3.330 0.070 Land Holding hectare (ha) 0.49+0.04 0.59+0.06 7.940 0.005 Description Dale (n=92) Loka Abaya (n=95) Overall (N=187) Count % Count % Count % Sex Male 66 71.7 70 73.7 136 72.7 Female 26 28.3 25 26.3 51 27.3 Marital Status Single 3 3.3 0 0 3 1.6 Married 79 85.9 75 78.9 154 82.4 Widowed 10 10.9 19 20 29 15.5 Divorced 0 0 1 1.1 1 0.5 Education level Illiterate 36 39.1 48 50.5 84 44.9 Read and write 15 16.3 22 23.2 37 19.8 Elementary 37 40.2 22 23.2 59 31.6 High School 4 4.3 3 3.2 7 3.7
    • SR fattening practice in the study areas Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion Description Woreda Name Overall (N=187) Test Dale (n=92) Loka Abaya (n=95) X2 P-value Count % Count % Count % Owning sheep Yes 18 20 1 1 19 10 17.548 0.000 No 74 80 94 99 168 90 Owning goat Yes 50 54 61 64 111 59 1.885 0.110 No 42 46 34 36 76 41 • There is a positive & significant correlation between total land holding & goat owning (r=0.402, P<0.01) & grazing land (r=0.469, P<0.01) • 88.8% respondents considered body conformation, 75.4% age, 74.9% physical characteristics and 44.9% sex as criterion for selecting SRs’ for fattening • market is the sole source (100%) of SR for fattening • nearby traders (86.6%) and farmers (13.4%) are the major suppliers
    • Cont ... • 76.5% (75 % of Dale and 77.9 % of Loka Abaya) practice supplementary feeding (SF) • Enset leaf “Ensete Ventricusum” (64.3%), crop residue (60.1%) and wheat bran (55.2%) • 87.7% (76.7 % of Dale and 98.9 % of Loka Abaya) accessed veterinary services when SRs • got sick (88%) and bought (24.4%) • 97% of the respondents provide water for SRs • none of the respondents constructed a house for SRs due to • expensiveness (52.9%), unavailability of space (38.5%), unavailability of construction material (35.3%) and lack of knowledge (27.3%) Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion
    • Financial services for SR fattening • respondents borrowed (100.0%) to buy SR, (16.6%) to pay for SR veterinary service and (12.3%) to buy feed • main loan source were 100.0% MFI & 19.3% VSLA • 70% loan amount is not enough but 57.8% not enough but it helped & 12.3% it is very low amount; so • 73.3% decided to buy two small SRs and 26.7% of them decided to buy only one SR • 31% revealed that the loan was untimely - reason • time taking to get the money (84.7%), short repayment period (76.3%) and difficult to be eligible (35.6 %) • 87% of the respondents repaid their loan Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion
    • SR Marketing • 98% (Dale) and 79% (Loka Abaya) for targeted market • Easter (88%), Christmas (76%) & New Year (67%) - are markets to sell SR Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion Description Dale (n=92) Loka Abaya (n=95) Overall (N=187) X2 P-ValueCount % Count % Count % Fattened SR buyers Butchers/restaurants 9 9.8 15 15.8 24 12.8 1.507 0.156 Traders 67 72.8 65 68.4 132 70.6 0.437 0.309 Village L. Collectors 14 15.2 3 3.2 17 9.1 8.225 0.004 Consumers 57 62.0 83 87.4 140 74.9 16.040 0.000 Better price offered by Butchers/restaurants 25 27.2 56 58.9 81 43.3 19.217 0.000 Traders 44 47.8 87 91.6 131 70.1 42.649 0.000 Village LC 12 13.0 32 33.7 44 23.5 11.067 0.001
    • Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion Fattened SR Price decision
    • Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion • SRs supplied for targeted market per respondents for the last six months were • 3.26 (Dale • 1.92 (Loka Abaya) Fattened SR supply interval for targeted market
    • SR Value chain related Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion Description Sheep (N=38) Goat (N= Dale Loka Test Dale Loka Test Average Fattening cost (n=36) (n=2) F - value P- Value (n=36) (n=36) F - value P – Value 551.50 472.00 0.706 0.406 501.59 529.16 1.755 0.187 Average price when the price was … High 842.08 800.00 0.095 0.760 854.85 864.61 0.063 0.802 Medium 636.94 650.00 0.019 0.892 619.09 675.56 4.100 0.045 Low 495.28 550.00 0.431 0.516 475.30 549.33 9.481 0.002 Average SGP when the price was … High 290.58 328.00 0.099 0.755 353.24 335.42 0299 0.585 Medium 85.44 178.00 0.979 0.329 117.48 146.38 1.251 0.265 Low -56.22 78.00 2.540 0.120 -26.30 20.15 3.120 0.079 Average SGM when the price was … High 33.26 41.27 0.568 0.456 40.15 36.28 2.734 0.100 Medium 16.41 33.68 0.966 0.332 17.00 18.70 0.245 0.621 Low -13.60 14.04 2.734 0.100 -12.98 -0.37 5.518 0.020 • CFI HHs obtained the average SGM of 13% and 17% from sheep and goat selling respectively 1. Simplified Gross Profit (SGP) & Simplified Gross Margin (SGM)
    • 2. Fattened SR marketing channels in the study areas Farmers (CFI HHs) Traders at Yirgalem, Hantatie, Naramo Della, Anferara, Derara Traders at Hawassa, Tula, Shabadino, Shasahmane Butchers at Yirgalem, Hantatie, Hawassa, Shabadino, Tula, Shasahmane Hotels/Restaurants at Yirgalem, Hantatie, Hawassa, Shabadino, Tula, Shasahmane Village Level Collectors at Yirgalem, Hantatie, Naramo Della, Anferara, Derara Exporter/Slaughtering House at Modjo Consumers at Yirgalem, Hantatie, Hawassa, Shasahmane, Tula, Shabadino Export market (not discussed by this study) Supermarket at Addis, Adama, Debre Zeit Cont …
    • Pd C* R/W Pr E C** SmallRuminant Fatteners SmallRuminant Fatteners Village level collectors Village level collectors TradersTraders Butchers & Hotels/ RestaurantsButchers & Hotels/ Restaurants Local Consumers Local Consumers Woreda ADO, CPMO, CARE, SNV, Sidama MFI, Input Suppliers, PMC Woreda ADO, CPMO, CARE, SNV, Sidama MFI, Input Suppliers, PMC Input Suppliers CARE, SNV and transport Input Suppliers CARE, SNV and transport SupermarketsSupermarkets Export AbattoirsExport Abattoirs Skin and Hide processors Skin and Hide processors EMPEA, Export Promotion, Bank, Ministry of Agriculture, Transport, Input Supplier EMPEA, Export Promotion, Bank, Ministry of Agriculture, Transport, Input Supplier Municipality, Bank, Transport, CARE & SNV Municipality, Bank, Transport, CARE & SNV 3. SR fattening VC map in the study area Remark: (i) Pd – Production, (ii) C* - Collection, (iii) R/W – retailing/wholesaling, (iv) Pr – Processing, (v) E- Exporting, (vi) C** - consumption Cont …
    • SR contribution for HH income and FS Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion Description Dale (n=92) Loka Abaya (n=95) Overall (N=187) X2 P-ValueCount % Count % Count % SR contribution for HH income Increasing 89 96.7 54 56.8 143 76.5 41.347 0.000 Decreasing 3 3.3 4 4.2 7 3.7 0.117 0.518 I do not know 0 0 37 38.9 37 19.8 44.670 0.000 Income source Dale (n=92) Loka Abaya (n=95) Test Mean (Birr) Percent Mean (Birr) Percent F-value P-value Coffee 2223.91 32.50 1016.31 19.18 36.599 0.000 Cereal 1057.06 15.45 1740.00 32.83 15.762 0.000 SG Fattening 922.77 13.49 454.21 8.57 53.452 0.000 Other Livestock Prt. 402.17 5.88 210.00 3.96 5.999 0.015 Petty Trading 496.73 7.26 296.00 5.58 3.596 0.059 Daily Laborer 227.71 3.33 78.94 1.49 4.140 0.043 Cash for Work 1061.41 15.51 1155.78 21.81 2.960 0.087 Other 450.10 6.58 348.94 6.58 1.299 0.256 Total 6,841.86 100.0 5,300.18 100.0
    • Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion • 97% from Dale and 78% from Loka Abaya (P<0.05) confirmed that SR fattening has a contribution for HH FS The way SR contribute for HH FS Dale (n=89) Loka Abaya (n=74) Overall (N=163) X2 P- Value Count % Count % Count % To buy food items for HH consumption 65 73.0 23 31.0 88 53.9 40.462 0.000 To cover other HH expenses 77 86.5 66 89.1 143 87.7 5.254 0.017 Help HH not to sale food items 1 1.1 15 20.2 16 9.8 12.913 0.000 Cont ...
    • Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion • 90% from Dale and 95% from Loka Abaya respondents did not slaughter SG for HH consumption Descriptio n Dale (n=92) Loka Abaya (n=95) Overall (N=187) X2 P- Valu eCount % Count % Count % SR contribution for HH income To buy farm inputs 46 50.0 81 85.3 127 67.9 26.671 0.000 To pay school fee 17 18.5 36 37.9 53 28.3 8.676 0.003 For medical treatment 16 17.4 14 14.7 36 16.0 0.245 0.384 To purchase food items 34 37.0 18 18.9 52 27.8 7.551 0.005 To pay back credits 85 92.4 66 69.5 151 80.7 15.791 0.000 For next round fattening 44 47.8 28 29.5 71 38.5 6.648 0.007 Cont ...
    • • 77% across the study woredas have an interest to keep and continue SRs fattening because SRs • are easy to manage (60.7%), • minimize HH vulnerability (47.7%), • have high market demand (42.1%) • are easy to sale (24.8%) and • have immediate return (24.1%). • 23% respondents do not want to continue SR fattening • SRs management is too difficult (92.9%) and • 71.4 % the business has low ROI • 60% faced challenge while they fattened & 35% while selling Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion SR Fattening Challenges and opportunities
    • Cont ... Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion Description Dale (n=31) Loka Abaya (n=81) Overall (N=112) Count % Count % Count % X2 P-Value Fattening Challenges Unavailability of SR for fattening 6 19.4 34 42.0 40 35.7 23.810 0.000 Unavailability of feed 13 41.9 77 95.1 90 80.4 83.845 0.000 Unavailability of water 1 3.2 18 22.2 19 17.0 16.333 0.000 Unavailability of house (space) to keep SR's 1 3.2 52 64.2 53 47.3 66.283 0.000 Unavailability of Veterinary Service 7 22.6 15 68.2 22 19.6 3.013 0.065 Lack of finance 16 51.6 75 92.6 91 81.2 70.890 0.000 Selling Challenges Dale (n=23) Loka Abaya (n=43) Overall (N=66) Lack of market information 1 4.3 3 7.0 4 6.1 0.958 0.323 Traders bad behavior 4 17.4 33 76.7 37 56.1 27.195 0.000 Fewer buyers/low demand 2 8.7 2 4.7 4 6.1 0.001 0.677 Lower price 15 65.2 38 88.4 53 80.3 12.921 0.000 Weak Bargaining Power 0 0.0 27 62.8 27 40.9 30.560 0.000 High brokers involvement 10 43.5 8 18.6 18 27.3 0.322 0.375
    • HH Food Security Related Results and DiscussionResults and Discussion 1. Access and availability Dale (n=92) Loka Abaya (n=95) Overall (N=187) X2 P- Value Count % Count % Count % Producing own food production Yes 92 100.0 95 100.0 187 100.0 0.974 0.508 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 Enough amount of own production Yes 7 7.6 15 15.8 22 11.8 3.013 0.065 No 85 92.4 80 84.2 165 88.2 Availability of enough food amount in the market Yes 49 53.3 70 73.7 119 63.6 8.425 0.003 No 43 46.7 25 26.3 68 36.4 Availability of better quality food in the market Yes 48 52.2 65 68.4 113 60.4 5.159 0.017 No 44 47.8 30 31.6 74 39.6 On time availability of food Yes 47 51.1 46 48.4 93 49.7 0.133 0.414 No 45 48.9 49 51.6 94 50.3 Afford the market Yes 19 20.7 19 20.0 38 20.3 0.012 0.528
    • 2. Utilization Consume enough amount of food by HH Reason for lower amount of food consumption Source of food for HH consumption Reason for shortage and unavailability of food
    • 3. HH food self sufficiency • Dale woreda respondents are food self -sufficient in average for 8.02 months whereas at Loka Abaya (P<0.05) they are only for 6.05 months Result and DiscussionResult and Discussion Food self-sufficient HHs Coping Mechanisms to fill food gap months Dale (n=82) Loka Abaya (n=83) Overall (N=165) X2 P- ValueCount % Count % Count % PSNP transfer (CfW) 82 100.0 83 100.0 165 100.0 42.921 0.000 Labour sale in the village to buy food 9 11.0 14 16.9 23 13.9 1.063 0.210 Sale HH assets to buy food 40 48.8 9 10.8 49 29.7 27.948 0.000 Migrate to other place for work 0 0.0 1 1.1 1 0.5 0.974 0.508 Minimize meal frequency and amount 32 39.0 59 71.1 91 55.2 13.956 0.000 Use petty trading income to buy food 18 22.0 19 22.9 37 22.4 0.006 0.544
    • ConclusionConclusion • Family size and members participated in PSNP are not proportional • The emphasis given for sex to select SR is less • supplementary feeding (SF) of less nutritious feed • SRs to veterinarian when they got sick and there are limited numbers of veterinarian • Interest to continue SR fattening (but financial shortages) • In the SR value chain; • there is no win-win relationship, • the price information transferred in an ear-to-mouth mechanism, • SRs sold in eye-ball estimation, • there is no legalized trader, • there is no transportation facilities, • there is high brokers involvement, and • there is lack of finance
    • ConclusionConclusion • six of marketing channels for CFI HH • To sale fattened SR focused on Ethiopian holidays • CFI HHs obtained on ave SGM of 13% (S) & 17% (G) • SR contributed for CFI HHs income is increasing (low) • SR contribution for CFI HHs food security • The forward linkage - using the income to buy farm inputs, food items, and to minimize HH vulnerability. • The backward linkage – when pay back loan, school fee and medical expenses, cover other HH expenses and help not to sale food items
    • ConclusionConclusion • Lack of finance, unavailability of feed, house & SR are the major fattening bottlenecks • Lower price, traders delinquency, Weak bargaining powers and high brokers involvement are the critical challenges in selling fattened SRs • CFI HHs doesn’t consume enough amount of food and they are food self-insufficient for 3.98 (D) and 5.95 (L) months
    • RecommendationRecommendation • the government should set and follow a “Push – Pull” factor to address all • ADO should work on SF production and preparation & should encourage private sectors (PSs) to supply SF • concerned stakeholders should train CAHWs and equip with necessary materials and create linkage with PSs • CPMO and ADO should • enhance CFI HH to consider other mkt & export mkt (CSFs) and create awareness on pros & cons, • strengthen PMCs and keep and continue the MSP, • legalize traders and brokers and help to access land
    • RecommendationRecommendation
    • Thank you