Presented by Alan Duncan at the Ethiopian Livestock Feed Project Synthesis workshop, Addis Ababa, 28-29 May 2012

1. Ethiopian Livestock Feed Project – Approaches,
Tools, Results
Alan Duncan
Ethiopian Livestock Feed Project Synthesis workshop, Addis Ababa, 28-29 May 2012

2. Objectives
 Original: To develop a preliminary understanding
of how feed components of intensifying livestock
production systems in Ethiopia are changing as
systems intensify and how this is reflected in the
feed-related elements of focal value chains
 Evolving: To develop refined tools for rapid
assessment of feed resources to allow effective
feed intervention strategies to support
intensification of livestock production in value
chains benefiting smallholder producers.

3. Outputs
s
 Refined tools for feed resource assessment, earc chain
her
s value
analysis, rapid market appraisal and feedRe
AR I
technology
prioritization R / AR
EIA of feed elements of dairy,
lera
 Targeted value chain assessment
beef and sheep value chains
gn a To
 Data base of price, quality and volume Ad udata on a seasonal
basis for key feeds associated with the target value mat
u
chains.
e Wa

Ja n
Synthesis of experiences with successful small ruminant
pe/
feeding strategies from elsewhere andrtheir local
a el
ho h
applicability
B ill T e/Mic
 Assessment of feed availability and demandlas forsismall
ruminant production in Menz area* e Hai
les mel
m
 Synthesis workshop Am
ar Blu

4. Workshop objectives
 Review and refine the experience of
using VCA, FEAST and Techfit tools
and draw lessons for their
improvement
 Think about application of the tools in
wider contexts

5. Anticipated links to other
initiatives
 CGIAR Research Programme 3.7, More
milk, meat and fish, for and by the poor
which involves targeted research on the
small ruminant value chain in Ethiopia.
 Gates-funded East Africa Dairy
Development Project (Phase 2)
 Multi-donor funded Agricultural Growth
Programme for Ethiopia
 CIDA-funded Livestock Value Chain
Enhancement (LIVES) project

6. Which tools?
 Value chain analysis (VCA)
 Feed assessment tool (FEAST)
 Feed technology prioritization
(Techfit)

7. Process vs output
 Tools are designed as “discussion
tools”
 No recipes or blue prints. Only a way
of guiding and informing enquiry and
suggesting options
 Use of tools needs to involve a range
of actors: research, development,
private sector, NGO etc

8. She
ep
Da Menz
iry
Be
e f

9. Value chain assessment
Inputs & services Production Processing Marketing Consumers

10. FEAST
The problem

11. Feed assessment
 Conventionally focuses on:
– The feeds
– Their nutritive value
– Ways of improving nutritive value
 FEAST broadens assessment:
– Is livestock an important livelihood strategy?
– How important are feed problems relative to
other problems?
– What about labour, input availability, credit,
seasonality, markets for products etc.?
– Involves dialogue with farmers

12. How does FEAST work?

13. Sample output
Contribution of livelihood activities to household income (as a
percentage)
6%
6%
32%
Agriculture
14%
Livestock
Remmitance
Labour
Others
Business
20%
22%

14. More sample output
DM content of total diet
Crop residues
Purchased
5%
7%
Naturally Cultivated
occurring and fodder
collected 25%
33%
Grazing
30%

15. Final output
 Feast report with some ideas for key
problems and solutions
 Better links and understanding
between farmers, research and
development staff

16. Techfit
The problem

17. What is your Feed
main problem

18. What feed
technologies Planted forage
have you got? Urea treated straw
Bypass protein
OK, let’s try
those

19. A solution

20. Techfit
 A discussion support tool for
prioritizing feed technologies

21. The core concept
Key context attributes Key technology
attributes
Land Land
Labour Labour
Credit Credit
Input Input
Knowledge Knowledge

22. Matching context to
technology
Key context Key technology
attributes attributes
Land Land
Labour x Labour = Score
Credit Credit
Input Input
Knowledge Knowledge

23. Technology filter
r
list
ain
filte core
logy ilter M
S
hno P re-f
III. Tec Score the pre-selected technologies based on the requirement, availability and scope for
Pre-select the obvious
improvement of five technology attributes
TECHNOLOGY (5-6) based Scope for
FILTER Attribute 5: improve
on context relevance Attribute 1: Attribute 2: Attribute 3: Attribute 4:
(Technology Knowledge ment of
and impact potential Land Labour Cash /credit Input delivery attribute
options to /skill
s
address Total
Context Impact Total Requ Avail Requ Avail Requ Avail Requ Avail Requ Avail Score 1-5
quantity, Score
relevanc potential score Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 (1 for
quality, e (score 1- (score 1- (context (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for less and
seasonality 6; low- 6; low- X impact) more; less; more; less; high; less; high; less; high; less; 5 for
issues) high)) high) 3 for 3 for 3 for 3 for 3 for low) 3 for 3 for low) 3 for 3 for low) 3 for more)
less) more) less) more) more) more) more)
Urea treatment
2 3 6 3 2 2 2 2 0
of straw
Supplement with
2 5 10 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 22
UMMB
By-pass protein
1 3 3 3 3 1 1 3 0
feed
Feed
conservation
4 3 12 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 41
(surplus)
(HAY)
etc
etc

24. Cost-benefit assessment
 What does the technology cost?
– Inputs, labour, land etc?
 What does the technology deliver?
– Enhanced milk yield, improved
reproductive performance, better growth
etc
 Does it make sense?
 Adugna price/quality dataset helps
here

25. Final output
 Ideas for some promising feed
interventions that might work
 Better understanding of why the
usual suspects often don’t work.

26. Fitting the tools together
t
VCA effor
ee ded
N
Framework: is productivity the main issue?
yes no
FEAST
Homing in: is feed the main issue?
yes no
ent
C urr t
or
ffparticipatory
Techfit options e
testing

27. “If you do what
you’ve always done,
you’ll get what you
always got.”
Mark Twain

28. Key messages

29. More Information:
http://elfproject.wikispaces.com
29