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.
Rural extensive
and cooperative-
poor
Rural mixed
intensive and
extensive
Peri-urban
intensive and
associational type
N (%...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

of

Characterization of smallholder pig production systems in Uganda Slide 1
Upcoming SlideShare
Family diversity
Next
Download to read offline and view in fullscreen.

0 Likes

Share

Download to read offline

Characterization of smallholder pig production systems in Uganda

Download to read offline

Poster prepared by Emily Ouma, Michel Dione, Peter Lule, Kristina Rosel, Lawrence Mayega, David Kiryabwire, Gideon Nadiope and Danilo Pezo for the ILRI APM 2013, Addis Ababa, 15-17 May 2013

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Related Audiobooks

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all
  • Be the first to like this

Characterization of smallholder pig production systems in Uganda

  1. 1. Rural extensive and cooperative- poor Rural mixed intensive and extensive Peri-urban intensive and associational type N (%) 9 (26%) 21(60%) 5(14%) Variables Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Cooperative involvement % male farmer group membership 29.1 (19.8) 43.4 (39.7) 56.7 (36.5) % female farmer group membership 27.1 (33.1) 39.6 (31.6) 66.7 (20.4) % male pig group membership 11 (33.3) 0 (0) 30.0 (44.7) % female pig group membership 18.5 (37.7) 3.8 (8.8) 36.7 (50.6) No. of institutions involved in livestock VC 2.3 (0.9) 1.7 (1.1) 3.2 (1.1) Production systems % improved breeds 52.3 (18.0) 57.8 (23.2) 81.2 (8.0) % local breeds 47.7 (18.0) 42.2 (23.2) 18.8 (8.0) % with pig sties 12.6 (12.1) 26.9 (14.7) 98.0 (4.5) % free range 15.9 (20.8) 13.9 (18.9) 3.4 (7.6) % tethered 68.8 (27.2) 41.0 (27.6) 8.2 (7.9) % castration 87.3 (17.8) 72.5 (25.4) 89.2 (16.4) % deworming 93.2 (8.7) 91.9 (22.3) 100.4 (9.2) % iron injection 2.0 (4.0) 7.1 (17.0) 33.4 (40.5) % servicing the sows 0.0 (0.0) 90.7 (13.2) 0.0 (0.0) Value chain domains (% of villages) Rural-rural 66.7 57.1 0 Rural-urban 33.3 19.0 0 Urban-urban 0 23.8 100.0 Unlocking livestock development potential through science, influence and capacity development ILRI APM, Addis Ababa, 15-17 May 2013 Characterization of smallholder pig production systems in Uganda This document is licensed for use under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported Licence May 2013 Emily Ouma, Michel Dione, Peter Lule, Kristina Rosel, Lawrence Mayega, David Kiryabwire, Gideon Nadiope and Danilo Pezo  The production system intensification related indicators reliably differentiate the smallholder pig production systems typologies through their cluster means. Three typologies are evident:  The rural extensive and cooperative poor, which comprise of villages in the rural-rural value chain domains. It is characterized by farmers low levels of involvement in cooperative action and low investments in the pig enterprise in terms of husbandry practices and housing.  The rural mixed intensive and extensive type is the dominant cluster comprising villages in the rural-rural domain. Majority of farmers, 41% practice tethering. Most of the pig farmers in this cluster have sows and breeding boars, an indication that they focus on piglet production for sale.  The peri-urban intensive associational type mainly comprise of villages in the peri-urban settings. The cluster is characterized by relatively high investments in the pig enterprise in terms of pig housing, improved breeds and husbandry practices. Members of this cluster are involved in cooperative action and focus on fattening and sale of grown pigs. They have the advantage of availability of a number of livestock value chain supportive institutions. ResultsIntroduction  Pig production is an important activity in Uganda as evidenced by the rise in pig population (0.19 to 3.2 Mn) and per capita consumption of pork (0.2 - 3.4 kg person-1 year-1) in the last 3 decades.  Most of the pigs are raised under smallholder systems and are mostly managed by women and children as a backyard activity.  Under such systems, the enterprise serves as an important source of household income for meeting emergency and planned needs, especially school fees.  The pig sector is largely informal with poorly organized markets, limited access to technology, information and services. Besides, several productivity related constraints associated with feeds, breed types and diseases also exist.  The constraints and opportunities vary among the smallholder producers as they are not a homogeneous group and are affected by differing factors. Photo 1: A woman pig farmer in Kiboga district Photo 2: Pigs in raised wooden floor structures in Mukono district Table 1: Extracted solution from cluster analysis Conclusions and Implications  Improvement in productivity and marketing of smallholder pig production systems necessitates different intervention packages given the heterogeneity of the smallholder systems and constraints.  Focus group discussions were conducted on stratified random samples, based on sex, of about 1400 pig farmers in 35 villages of Masaka, Kamuli and Mukono districts, using a semi-qualitative interview checklist.  A standard cluster analysis utilizing Ward’s hierarchical algorithm based on squared Euclidean distances and a K-means iterative partitioning analysis was employed focusing on 3 themes considered important to the heterogeneity of the smallholder production systems from the data collected. These included;  farmers’ cooperative involvement,  number of institutions involved in livestock value chains,  some intensification related indicators comprising breed type, housing, and husbandry practices. Objectives  To characterize the smallholder pig production systems into typologies for purposes of identification and improved targeting of technological and policy interventions. Methodology Acknowledgement The support of staff from Kamuli, Masaka and Mukono District Local Government authorities and VEDCO is greatly appreciated. Funding for the study was provided by the European Commission-International Fund for Agricultural Development (EC-IFAD), in the framework of Smallholder Pig Value Chains Development (SPVCD) Project in Uganda. The authors gratefully acknowledge the time commitment by the farmers who participated in the value chain assessment work.

Poster prepared by Emily Ouma, Michel Dione, Peter Lule, Kristina Rosel, Lawrence Mayega, David Kiryabwire, Gideon Nadiope and Danilo Pezo for the ILRI APM 2013, Addis Ababa, 15-17 May 2013

Views

Total views

620

On Slideshare

0

From embeds

0

Number of embeds

2

Actions

Downloads

9

Shares

0

Comments

0

Likes

0

×