Advertisement
Assessing sustainability of milk production farm in Tanzania
Upcoming SlideShare
Livestock and Fish in Asia Livestock and Fish in Asia
Loading in ... 3
1 of 1
Advertisement

More Related Content

Slideshows for you(20)

Similar to Assessing sustainability of milk production farm in Tanzania(20)

Advertisement

More from ILRI(20)

Advertisement

Assessing sustainability of milk production farm in Tanzania

  1. Maziwa Zaidi (More Milk) in Tanzania Assessing sustainability of milk production in Tanzania 12Celestin MUNYANEZA, 2Lusato R. KURWIJILA, 2Ntengua S.Y. MDOE, 1Isabelle BALTENWECK, 1Edgar Edwin TWINE 1International Livestock Research Institute, 2Sokoine University of Agriculture Key messages • Sustainability of Tanzania’s milk production requires an assessment to monitor its progress. • This study developed a milk production farm sustainability assessment tool and applied it to assess the sustainability of smallholder dairy and traditional milk production systems in four districts of Tanzania. • The overall sustainability performance index was weak; some key sustainability performance indicators like income, cow productivity, participation in trainings and organizations and land ownership were weak to moderate. Opportunities for inclusive investment and scaling • Public and private sector: using the developed tool to monitor sustainability of milk production farms in the study context; improving farmer knowledge on farm management through training and education; establishing and strengthening farmers’ organizations for better access to inputs, services and market through collective action. • Private sector: Creating a conducive environment by establishing active milk collection centers and set a better milk price • Public sector: Sensitization on use of environmentally friendly practices and improve land ownership. Pictures Key results • The study generate a milk production farm sustainability assessment tool made of fifteen indicators, which cover economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainability. • The overall sustainability mean performance index was weak (0.30±0.15) • The economic, environmental and social sustainability performance dimensions were weak (<0.33) • Some key performance indicators like income, cow productivity, participation in organizations and trainings, gender and land ownership were weak to moderate (from 0 up to 0.66) This document is licensed for use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. April 2017 March 2017 Objectives and approach • This study assessed sustainability of smallholder dairy and traditional cattle milk production farms in Tanzania. • A set of relevant economic, social and environmental sustainability indicators were selected using the Delphi approach. • A sustainability assessment tool was developed based on the identified indicators and applied on 431 farms in Kilosa, Mvomero, Handeni and Lushoto districts • The performance indices were ranked from 0 to 1→weak: (0; 0.33); moderate (0.34; 0.66); high (0.67; 1). Maziwa Zaidi thanks all donors and organizations which globally support the work of ILRI and its partners through their contributions to the CGIAR system - 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 Erosion control Risk to water quality Water quantity Land ownership Education level Farmer training Farmer group Gender Labour productivity Animal health Breeding system Feed conservation Forage self sufficiency Cow productivity Income EnvironmentSocialEconomic Fig 2: Sustainability performance indicators per milk selling systems in Morogoro and Tanga Regions, Tanzania 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.3 0.32 Economic Social Environment Overall Fig 1: Farm sustainability performance indicators in smallholder dairy and traditional milk production systems in Tanzania Table 1: Weight of sustainability indicators Dimension Indicator Weight Economic Income from milk production 0.13 Cow productivity 0.31 Labour productivity 0.11 Feed self sufficiency 0.16 Animal health 0.11 Use of artificial insemination 0.03 Feed conservation program 0.15 Social Education level 0.14 Participation in training 0.35 Participation in farmer group 0.37 Women’s empowerment 0.14 Environment Erosion control 0.01 Water quality 0.43 Water availability 0.18 Land ownership 0.38
Advertisement