Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

Assessing the potential to change partners’ knowledge, attitude and practices on sustainable livestock husbandry in India

Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad

Check these out next

1 of 18 Ad

Assessing the potential to change partners’ knowledge, attitude and practices on sustainable livestock husbandry in India

Download to read offline

Presented by Sapna Jarial, Harrison Rware, Pamela Pali, Jane Poole and V. Padmakumar at the International Symposium on Agricultural Communication and Sustainable Rural Development, Pantnagar, Uttarkhand, India, 22-24 November 2012.

Presented by Sapna Jarial, Harrison Rware, Pamela Pali, Jane Poole and V. Padmakumar at the International Symposium on Agricultural Communication and Sustainable Rural Development, Pantnagar, Uttarkhand, India, 22-24 November 2012.

Advertisement
Advertisement

More Related Content

Viewers also liked (19)

Similar to Assessing the potential to change partners’ knowledge, attitude and practices on sustainable livestock husbandry in India (20)

Advertisement

More from ILRI (20)

Advertisement

Assessing the potential to change partners’ knowledge, attitude and practices on sustainable livestock husbandry in India

  1. 1. Assessing the potential to change partners’ knowledge, attitude and practices on sustainable livestock husbandry in India Presented at an international symposium on Agricultural Communication and Sustainable Rural Development Pantnagar, Uttarakhand, India, 22-24 November 2012 Sapna Jarial1, Harrison Rware2, Pamela Pali2, Jane Poole2 and V. Padmakumar3 1International Livestock Research Institute, 65/ II Vasant Vihar Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India 2International Livestock Research Institute, P.O. Box 30709-00100, Nairobi, Kenya 3 International Livestock Research Institute, c/o ICRISAT Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh, India 1
  2. 2. Overview of the Presentation  Introduction  Methodology  Results & Discussion  Conclusion
  3. 3. Introduction ‘Enhancing Livelihoods Through Livestock Uttarakhand Knowledge Systems’ is an initiative to put the accumulated knowledge of advanced Nagaland livestock research directly to use by Jharkhand disadvantaged livestock rearing communities in rural India. ELKS provides research support to Sir Ratan Tata Trust and its development partners to address Technological, Institutional and Policy gaps.
  4. 4. Knowledge Attitude and Practice study (KAP) study was conducted on development partners in relation to the: - Production - management practices, - service provision - marketing.
  5. 5. Methodology
  6. 6. Seventeen participants representing thirteen ELKS partner organizations participated in the KAP survey in May, 2011 The KAP questionnaire contained questions about the background of the partners including their provision of services in TATA – ILRI villages and the KAP section had 3 levels.
  7. 7. Knowledge section was sub divided into: -assessment of knowledge, -training, -materials used to train stakeholders, and -whether the partners trained other stakeholders; Attitude section contained questions in four domains: -the services partners provided, -production aspects, -markets and -by laws and policies. Practices section contained information -about the partners’ promotion of production, management and market/market chain practices.
  8. 8. Table 1: Background of Sir Ratan Tata Trust and ELKS Partner organisations State Uttarakhand Districts Pithoragarh, Tehri Garhwal, Chamoli Organization type Partner Livestock Species Number of partners Focus Government 1. Uttarakhand Livestock Development Board (ULDB) Cattle 1 NGO 2. Himmotthan Society (HS) Goat/ 5 cattle/buffalo 3. Mount Valley Development Association (MVDA) Cattle/buffalo/goat s 4.Himalayan Gram Vikas Samiti (HGVS) Cattle/buffalo 5.Central Himalayan Rural Action Group (CHIRAG) Cattle/buffalo/goat s 6.Sankalp Samiti Tharali (Sankalp) Goats State Jharkhand Districts Gumla, Deoghar, Khuntim. Ramgarh NGO 1.Society for Upliftment of People through People Organization Pigs 4 and Rural Technology (SUPPORT) 2.Network for Enhancement and Enterprises and Development Goats Support (NEEDS) 3.Nav Bharat Jagriti Kendra (NBJK) Pigs 4.Collectives for Integrated Livelihood Initiatives (SRTT CINI) Pigs State Nagaland District Mokokchung, Wokha, Kohima, Dimapur NGO 1.Prodigals’ Home (PH) Pigs 3 2.Sir Ratan Tata Trust – North East Initiative (SRTT – NEI) Pigs 3.Agency for Porcine Foundation and Development of Nagaland Pigs (APFD) Source : KAP Survey 2011
  9. 9. Results & Discussion
  10. 10. Key Findings:  Few partners were trained and if they were trained, even fewer trained other partners including farmers  The partners had a better knowledge about production related activities.  Partners felt that they provided services in a very un co-ordinated way and they needed to be more co-ordinated.  Partners knew less about the value chain related activities of the livestock they were mainly dealing with.
  11. 11.  Access to services and technological packages by smallholder producers was more constraining than factors such as CSF and adoption of clean hygienic practices for pigs, and shortage of fodder for large ruminants and goats.  Less support was provided for pigs by SUPPORT, cInI and APFD.  Fewer services were provided for pigs by partners who mainly promoted sty feeding.
  12. 12.  Partners had neither a positive nor negative attitude about the method in which they provide services.  A quarter of the partners promoted the use of cross breeds for pigs and cattle but none reported this practice for goats and buffaloes.  The widest variety of indigenous breeds that were promoted by NEEDS -Jharkhand NGO was for goats.
  13. 13. • The Jersey cross breed (Jersey X HF cross) was promoted for cattle by HGVS, ULDB and CHIRAG in Uttarakhand. • In Jharkhand SUPPORT promoted pig breeds the Tamworth X Desi breed. • For pigs SRTT - cInI, APFD promoted the large black and Hampshire breeds respectively.
  14. 14. Conclusion
  15. 15.  The capacity built was limited to livestock production and management practices for all species except buffaloes.  Capacities were limited in value chain management aspects (with the exception of goats) and policy dialogue probably because these aspects were not the participants’ area of expertise.  Knowledge about market aspects were perceived to be lower than for livestock management practices.
  16. 16. • Positive attitudes need to be re-enforced in the increased potential for backyard production for increased incomes and transformation to semi commercial pig production. • Partners’ capacities need to be enhanced in animal management aspects (use and promotion of cross breeds, participation and strengthening value chain activities). • Strengthening value chain activities needs to begin with the value chain analysis by the different stakeholders.
  17. 17. Thank you for your attention ! 17
  18. 18. Better lives through livestock ilri.org The presentation has a Creative Commons licence. You are free to re-use or distribute this work, provided credit is given to ILRI.

×