Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Goat Production and Marketing in Zimbabwe

6,129 views

Published on

Presentation by Andre Van Rooyen at CPWF's final grant event at IFAD headquarters in Rome on October 28-29, 2014.

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

Goat Production and Marketing in Zimbabwe

  1. 1. By Andre van Rooyen, Sabine Homan Kee-Tui, Patricia, Thabani Dube & Allan Majuru. Commercializing the Goat sector in Zimbabwe
  2. 2. How can we engineer better lives for people in water-scarce environments?
  3. 3. • Focused our work at the level of the farmer, their world, how they operate and make decisions. Working hypotheses: (i) poorly developed markets (for livestock products and services) are the main constraint limiting the intensification of small-scale farming systems; (ii) only when farmers engage in markets will they invest in more productive management technologies.
  4. 4. It facilitates dialogue between the main local market players to collectively identify challenges and opportunities to improve production and marketing of livestock. Farmers, input suppliers, traders, transporters, processors, wholesalers, retailers, research and development fraternity, regulators and policy makers Platforms are established around local specific production and marketing systems, and ideally merge into larger networks for improved coordination of livestock commercialization processes (geographical, institutional). The Innovation Platform
  5. 5. Identify and implement strategies that will improve market efficiency and reduce transaction costs along the value chain, thereby increasing the efficiency of the overall system, allowing more money to flow to the producer and increasing the incentive for improved farming practices. Identify and promote technologies that will improve agricultural production at the household level - and thereby increase productivity and eventually profitability. Develop local capacity to innovate, analyze challenges and opportunities – reduce risk and increase potential income. Ensure the real questions/issues are asked and addressed Ensure that processes are pursued and not only technologies or commodities. Objectives of the IP
  6. 6. Structure of the IP Farmer Trader Processor R&D Community Wholesaler Retailer Consumer Input Supplier Regulators
  7. 7. Development Process Activities & Outputs Time Establish IP and define roles and responsibilities Workshop Workshop Workshop Workshop Workshop Activities implemented by members Activities implemented by members Activities implemented by members ProjectDriven StakeholderDriven Activities implemented by members Sustainability M&E M&E M&E M&E Set Impact Indicators Functioning of the Innovation platform
  8. 8. Development trajectories and a conceptual model of rural/agricultural development
  9. 9. Concept: Generic scheme of value chain functions (micro level) Specific Inputs Provide - equipment - inputs Production Produce Harvest Dry etc. Trans- formation Classify Process Pack Trade Transport Distribute Sell Con- sumption Prepare Consume Basic functions in a value chain Product flow Information flow Flow of money from the consumer
  10. 10. Inputprovision VC FunctionsVCActors goat production Transformation Retailing Consumption Intermediary trade Urban Consumer Rural Consumer RDC/EMA Urban butchery Mapping Goat VCs Local agro- dealers VCSupportServices Traders NGOs Vet/DLPD ARIBANK:credit access Local Middlemen Local schools,hospi tals New national,regi onalmarkets Smallholder Farmer Rural butchery Small holder farmers Stock feed/ fodder crops Supermarket & restaurants Abattoir LPD,VET, CARE, World Vision, ORAP , ICRISAT: Input supply, capacity dvpt, market linkages RDC/Urban council
  11. 11. Input provision VC Functions Goat Production Transfor- mation Retailing Consump -tion Intermediary Trade Challenges/Opportunities for Goat VCs Poor local input supply/use (pvt/gvt) High input/raw material prices Feed shortages Poor infrastructure (roads, markets, water) Poor information flow and communication VCChallenges Pen fattening Use of auction as trading platform High demand for (quality) livestock Interest in feed /fodder/suppl. feed Opportunities Availability of abattoirs Use of contracts when doing business Poor support services (livestock, vet) No access to proper credit facilities Gvt input subs. harm agrodealers Collective action (formation of cooperatives to reduce transaction costs) Potential for agro-dealer net Policy support Droughts Provision of credit facilities Improvement in production practices Diversification Change in market demand
  12. 12. And a few words on the process… • Found a strong entry point – contextualize the work in the farmers reality • Goats represent food and income – buy food, pay for education and human health • Bottlenecks in goat production and marketing – Very high mortality rates because of poor nutrition, animal health and housing. – Very limited support systems. – Absence of functional markets
  13. 13. The development process • Built markets and reduced transaction costs along the value chain, involved many other players. • Functional markets resulted in dramatic increases in prices… increased from < $12 to $60 between 2008 and 2014 at the formal market. Farm gate price is $23! • This drove significant investments in goat management and the way farmers made decisions; – Mortalities dropped from 18-25% to less than 10%! • Farmers are reinvesting in goats – Increased diversity in crops/feed • True to complex systems, other role players started investing too. NGOs built 19 more sale-pens in Matabeleland; dip tanks, vet inputs supply etc.
  14. 14. Goat mortalities and sales 2006: 25%
  15. 15. Turnover at Nhwali Goat Auction in the first year after dollarization (2009)
  16. 16. Sources of income in Gwanda District
  17. 17. H/h expenses and agricultural investments Seed 1% Others 0% Livestock feed 11% Livestock health 2% Food 44%Hired labour 9% Education 20% Health 2% Social events 2% Transport 7% Rented grazing 2%
  18. 18. Farmers Investing in Improved Feed Technologies Nhwali Shashe Sign Graze residues in fields 71. 73.3 ns Cut & carry leaves, grass, pods 66.7 17.8 p < 0.01 Feed leguminous crop residue 35 2.2 p < 0.01 Commercial feeds 22.2 6.7 p < 0.05 Grazing reserves 24.4 2.2 p < 0.01 Feed cereal crop residue 8.9 6.7 ns Produce forages 11.1 2.2 p < 0.05 Treat crop residues 11.1 0 p < 0.05
  19. 19. Farmers Investing in Goat Health Practices (2012) Nhwali Shashe Sign Traditional methods 53.3 44.4 ns Vaccination 40 26.7 ns Dosing 33.3 13.3 p < 0.05 Dipping 33.3 11.1 p < 0.05
  20. 20. Sources of cash to purchase stock feed – invest in agriculture… Sold livestock 55% Income from non farm activities 36% Given by family member/friend 6% Borrowed 3%
  21. 21. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 jan feb mar apri may jun jul aug sept oct nov dec death sold/exchange slaughter lost/strayed predators Goat mortalities and sales 2012: 10%
  22. 22. Data from Value Chain Analysis showing the profit per animal for farmers when using the different marketing channels now available in Gwanda, Zimbabwe. (FG = Farm practice at farm gate; Impr FG = Improved production sold at farm gate; Impro MKT = Improved market; Impro MKT_Price = Improved market with price incentives for quality; Good MKT_Price = Potential best case scenario.)
  23. 23. Woman are very active and proud participants
  24. 24. Farmers “buy food security” with income from livestock sales!
  25. 25. School uniforms are sold at livestock markets!!
  26. 26. Complex systems theory • Complex systems consist of many (layers, tiers) of interacting subsystems • Synergies between subsystems: the system is larger than sum of the individual sub systems • No central coordination - complex systems are self regulating with many and complex feedback loops
  27. 27. Folke et al. (2003) defined four clusters of factors that interact across temporal and spatial scales that increase the resilience of SES A word on Resilience • Learning to live with change and uncertainty • Nurturing diversity in its various forms • Combining different types of knowledge for learning • Creating opportunity for self-organization and cross-scale linkages
  28. 28. Places to Intervene in a System (in increasing order of effectiveness) Donella Meadows (1999) 12. Constants, parameters, numbers (such as subsidies, taxes, standards) 11. The sizes of buffers and other stabilizing stocks, relative to their flows 10. The structure of material stocks and flows (such as transport networks, population age structures) 9. The lengths of delays, relative to the rate of system change 8. The strength of negative feedback loops, relative to the impacts they are trying to correct against 7. The gain around driving positive feedback loops 6. The structure of information flows (who does and does not have access to what kinds of information) 5. The rules of the system (such as incentives, punishments, constraints) 4. The power to add, change, evolve, or self-organize system structure 3. The goals of the system 2. The mindset or paradigm out of which the system—its goals, structure, rules, delays, parameters—arises 1. The power to transcend paradigms
  29. 29. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Probabilityofexceedence(%) % grain requirement met Control Micro-dose Mz_muc 100% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 Probabilityofexceedence(%) % DM requirement met Control Micro-dose Mz_muc 100% Risk management & diversification
  30. 30. Livestock water productivity (LWP) The ratio of beneficial livestock related products and services to the water depleted as a result of animal keeping.
  31. 31. Framework for assessing livestock-water productivity
  32. 32. Gains from market development/participation Situation Gross margin analysis (usd) Linear Programming (LINGO) (usd) Base state at farm gate 89.24 120.29 Improved management at farm gate 125.92 135.12 Improved management at market 301.79 321.80 Improved management with price differentiation at market 418.90 448.56 Extremely good management with price differentiation at market 847.50 1 420.00
  33. 33. Amount of water used to raise a goat per year! Calculated using Peden 2006 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 1 2 3 4 5 6 m3Waterused Total Water Req Annual Water Req
  34. 34. Increasing system efficiency through reduced animal mortality 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Meat/Feedused Feedused(ton/anum)&Meatkg Reducing Mortality Feed used in Y20 Meat kg Meat/Feed Used
  35. 35. Reducing mortality and the impact on livestock LWP 0.00000 0.00010 0.00020 0.00030 0.00040 0.00050 0.00060 0.00070 0.00080 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 LivestockWaterProductivity Reducing Mortality
  36. 36. • Find workable entry points and system leverages – Ensure the entry points used are valid and contextualized. • Create the incentives for investments: markets – Real change is a function of decision making and changing behavior rather than the mere adoption of technologies • Technology-based interventions or Process-oriented R&D – Its not bad science – its good science poorly implemented – Putting technologies in context of livelihood systems • Water vs. System level entry points – You don’t have to work with water to have an impact on water • Sometimes improving existing systems have no/little impact, we need to facilitate the transformation of systems – From crop focused systems to livestock focused systems What are the lessons learnt?
  37. 37. Places to Intervene in a System (in increasing order of effectiveness) Donella Meadows (1999) 12. Constants, parameters, numbers (such as subsidies, taxes, standards) 11. The sizes of buffers and other stabilizing stocks, relative to their flows 10. The structure of material stocks and flows (such as transport networks, population age structures) 9. The lengths of delays, relative to the rate of system change 8. The strength of negative feedback loops, relative to the impacts they are trying to correct against 7. The gain around driving positive feedback loops 6. The structure of information flows (who does and does not have access to what kinds of information) 5. The rules of the system (such as incentives, punishments, constraints) 4. The power to add, change, evolve, or self-organize system structure 3. The goals of the system 2. The mindset or paradigm out of which the system—its goals, structure, rules, delays, parameters—arises 1. The power to transcend paradigms
  38. 38. Conclusions • Using sound theory, hypotheses, process thinking, the correct entry points, system leverages and incentives, we can improve the efficiency of crop livestock systems (in terms of income, reducing risk and WUE/LWP) • We can impact on water without making it the “entry point” because water as such may not provide sufficient incentive for changes in behavior. • System and process oriented R&D strategies are required to bring about lasting positive change. • Transforming crop-focused mixed systems to livestock-based crop livestock systems with functional markets will be a real option in the face of climate change. • Improving market access and overall systems efficiency will improve income, and feedback mechanisms will increase sustainability while increasing diversity (in commodities and markets), knowledge sharing and capacity to self-organize will increase resilience.

×