Why did some forage development initiatives get it right, while others
achieved much less success?
What is positive deviance?
Positive deviance refers to cases that diverge from the general trend and the
presence of certain individuals or groups whose behaviours and strategies
enable them to find better solutions to forage problems than their peers, while
having access to the same resources and facing similar or worse challenges
What is this study about?
This study tried to unravel the processes, factors and conditions underlying the
observed pockets of success in forage technology adoption and use focusing on
four cases in Ethiopia, with a focus on drawing out lessons and principles on how
improved feed resources can be promoted in ways that are relevant, usable and
beneficial to poor.
Windows for productive use of improved feed in Does this research deal with livestock
goods and bads and if so how?
intensifying crop-livestock systems
This research provides an understanding of factors
that can lead to enhanced use of improved feed
technologies, which can contribute to improved
livelihoods through livestock productivity. It also
Possibilities (windows) for Best-bet promotion and governance model Location looks at role of forages as contributors to agro-
ecosystem management.
successful promotion and use of (example/case
improved feed study)
Who are the “next users” of the research and
Feed as enhancer of productivity in Initial public sector support to develop value chains; Dejen, North how will they use the findings?
potential or emerging livestock enable smallholder participation & extraction of Western Ethiopia
Research & development agencies and, policy
value chains: dairy; fattening value. Eventual take over by private sector & makers involved in forage and feed resources and,
Tiyo, Eastern livestock development and, natural resources
Ethiopia management.
Feed seed chains for income Private sector led. Public sector intervention to Tiyo, Eastern
support and diversification develop seed markets & private capacity. Ethiopia
Public-private investment to support smallholder
participation
Feed as part of solution for reducing Feed as public good in ‘commons’ Ambasel, Northern
risk & vulnerability to adverse Public sector led but declining support as some Ethiopia
events (drought, food and feed functions of feed become private sector led
scarcity) Private feed seed chains for income support
Feed as part of integrated solution Feed as public good in ‘commons’ Gununo, Southern
for agro-ecosystem management Non-perverse incentives for feed as public-private Ethiopia
good on private landholdings
Lessons and generic principles
• Pockets of success mostly found in intensifying crop-livestock systems
• Pockets of success tend to be highly concentrated in a few locations around urban centres (markets),
research centres and, urban-based district offices of agriculture.
• Feed technologies have the greatest chance/likelihood of being used productively either because of
geographical suitability, ecological imperatives, sense of urgency (pressure of intensification), potential for
tapping into livestock value chains or good history of risk-taking and associated local capability in the area
What helped
• Improved incentive regimes for local actors
• Functional partnerships with early adopters/modern farmers
• Reduction of less productive breeds
• Introduction of improved and strategic ways of managing feed
• Pro-active efforts to provide access to improved breeds
• New forms of smallholder organization to facilitate various forms of joint action
• Enabling policy environment
Kiggundu Rose [1] and Mengistu Solomon [2]. Positive Deviance in Using Livestock Feed Technologies:
Addressing an Old Problem in New Ways. [1] International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI)
[2]Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR)
ILRI
INTERNATIONAL LIVESTOCK RESEARCH INSTITUTE