Upload
lytuong
View
216
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ILRIINTERNATIONALLIVESTOCK RESEARCH I N S T I T U T E
Sheep meat value chain in Ethiopia: Background proposals for the CGIAR Research Program on Livestock and Fish
RESEARCH PROGRAM ON
Livestock and Fish
March 2011
ILRI works with partners worldwide to help poor people keep their farm animals alive and productive, increase and sustain their livestock and farm productivity, and find profitable markets for their animal products. ILRI’s headquarters are in Nairobi, Kenya; we have a principal campus in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and 14 offices in other regions of Africa and Asia. ILRI is part of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (www.cgiar.org), which works to reduce hunger, poverty and environmental degradation in developing countries by generating and sharing relevant agricultural knowledge, technologies and policies.
© 2011 International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI)
This publication is copyrighted by the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). It is licensed for use under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License. To view this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/. Unless otherwise noted, you are free to copy, duplicate, or reproduce, and distribute, display, or transmit
any part of this publication or portions thereof without permission, and to make translations, adaptations, or other derivative works under the following conditions:
ATTRIBUTION. The work must be attributed, but not in any way that suggests endorsement by ILRI or the author(s) NON-COMMERCIAL. This work may not be used for commercial purposes. SHARE ALIKE. If this work is altered, transformed, or built upon, the resulting work must be distributed only under the same or similar license
to this one.
NOTICE: For any reuse or distribution, the license terms of this work must be made clear to others. Any of the above conditions can be waived if permission is obtained from the copyright holder. Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author’s moral rights. Fair dealing and other rights are in no way affected by the above. The parts used must not misrepresent the meaning of the publication. ILRI would appreciate being sent a copy of any materials in which text, photos etc. have been used.
Download the full Program proposal: http://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/3248
Important note: Full information on references is included in the Program proposal that can be downloaded from http://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/3248
International Livestock Research Institute
P O Box 30709, Nairobi 00100, Kenya Phone + 254 20 422 3000 Email [email protected]
P O Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Phone + 251 11 617 2000
Email [email protected]
www.ilri.org
1More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Sheep meat value chain in Ethiopia: Background proposals for the CGIAR Research Program on Livestock and Fish
Ethiopia is home to 77 million people; 32 million are classified as poor living on less than USD 1 per day. With a population of 48 million small ruminants (FAOStat 2010) Ethiopia has one of the largest populations in sub-Saharan Africa (see Table below). Sheep (24 million) are the second most important species in Ethiopia (CSA 2008a).
Sheep and goat populations in selected sub-Saharan African countries in 2009
CountrySheep and goat population (000s)
Production of sheep and goat meat (1000 t)
Sudan 93,931 334
Ethiopia 47,827 124
Kenya 23,395 124
Mali 18,538 78
Uganda 9,972 35
Cameroon 8,200 32
Mozambique 5,219 26
Congo, Democratic Republic 4,935 21
Malawi 2,906 18
Burundi 1,900 2
Sheep are mostly kept by smallholders and the rural poor, including women headed households. They contribute substantially to the livelihoods of Ethiopian smallholder households as a source of income, food (meat and milk), and non-food products like manure, skins and wool. They also serve as a means of risk mitigation during crop failures, property security, monetary saving and investment in addition to many other socioeconomic and cultural functions (Tibbo 2006). At the farm level, sheep contribute up to 63% to the net cash income derived from livestock production in the crop–livestock production system. In the lowlands, sheep together with other livestock are a mainstay of pastoral livelihoods (Negassa and Jabbar 2008).
The annual meat production from small ruminants is relatively small compared to the number of heads. The average annual offtake rate and carcass weight per slaughtered animal for the years 2000–2007 were estimated at 32.5% and 10.1 kg, respectively (FAO 2009); the lowest among sub-Saharan African countries. Negassa and Jabbar (2008) reported an even lower sheep off take rate of only 7% in the Ethiopian highlands.
2More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Reasons attributed for the apparent low productivity are: absence of well-planned/appropriate breeding programs, lack of technical capacity, inadequate and poor quality feeds, diseases leading to high lamb mortality, and underdeveloped markets in terms of infrastructure and market information. As the market systems are typically informal, individual producers have little bargaining power. Furthermore, sheep and goats generally receive little policy or investment attention.
Although technologies to address many of the most common constraints are in hand, a key constraint is the lack of models of suitable and acceptable organizational strategies for producer groups that could facilitate access to services and markets. Research is therefore required to develop and test input and market service delivery options and models, as well as the institutional and organizational arrangements that would provide sustainable delivery and uptake of the available health management, feeding and genetic improvement technologies through effective public–private partnerships in which governmental support services and private partners are integral part of value addition process.
Why this value chain?
Demand and prices for sheep and goat meat show an increasing trend due to urbanization and increased income in the cities and increased demand from the Gulf countries. From 2000 to 2008 the price of live sheep and sheep meat increased by 157%; the increase for live goats and goat meat was slightly lower at 107% (FAOStat 2010).1
A structural model of the Ethiopian livestock sector estimates the total consumption of sheep and goat meat at 91,200 and 91,600 t in 2010 which exceeds the estimated sheep and goat meat production (124,000 t) by 47%. The same model predicts a per capita annual growth rate in sheep and goat meat consumption from 2010 to 2020 by 3.4% and 1.3%, and an overall change of 41% and 14%, respectively (Fadiga and Amare 2010).
It is evident that the increasing demand for sheep meat cannot be met with the current inefficient production and marketing systems. Although Ethiopian sheep breeds are well adapted to the existing production environments, their full production potential is obviously not being realized due to a combination of constraints. Many of these constraints have already been studied and technologies to overcome some of them have been developed. However, their uptake and wider adoption remains low, thus further research and dissemination of the knowledge and technologies are still required.
In our view this situation provides good opportunities to increase sheep meat production and ensure that this will benefit poor rural producers, both men and women. The following Table summarizes the reasons for proposing the sheep meat value chain as a focus value chain for our proposal.
1. ILRI data.
3More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Criteria and rationale for choosing Ethiopia
Criteria Rationale for choosing Ethiopia
Growth and market opportunity
Huge and increasing demand for sheep meat within and outside the country reflected in increasing prices
Ethiopia’s strategic location promoting exports to Middle East markets
Current annual livestock and meat export potential is estimated at USD 136 million; however, the realized export earning over the past 15 years to 2003 averaged only to USD 2.5 million.
Abattoirs in Ethiopia operate only at 40% of their capacity (information from Elfora)
High potential to raise the low flock productivity and offtake rate in smallholder flocks Pro-poor potential
The majority of rural poor in Ethiopia depend on sheep (and goat) production
Both men and women are involved in sheep production with different tasks and decision making power
Good income opportunity for women headed households
Many market agents along the value chain (input/livestock traders, meat processors and transporters etc.) provide potential as well as challenge for cooperation
Researchable supply constraints
Negative selection of breeding rams for lamb growth as fast growing lambs are sold first and inbreeding due to small flock sizes
Shortage and fluctuation in quantity and quality of feed supply
Poor animal hygiene and diseases (high lamb/kid mortality, PPR, CCPP)
Lack of business enterprise production strategy
Lack of sustainable organizational structures for breeder and producer groups in order to facilitate their access to affordable breeding animals, animal health care and efficient market services
Poor market infrastructure and institutional arrangements (underdeveloped marketing system) resulting in high price difference between rural and urban markets, high number of middlemen and thus small producer margins
Poor input supply system and limited support services (extension and credit systems)
Insufficient supply of abattoirs with sheep meat (number, weight, age and body condition)
Ineffective knowledge management systems, in particular knowledge sharing between producers and scientists, to enhance uptake of proven technologies
Enabling environment
Increasing international interest and support from donors for developing the livestock sector in Ethiopia (a number of livestock development projects funded by USAID)
Various projects/initiatives on-going or planned and competent organizations/institutions
Commitment by Government of Ethiopia to improve policy environment
On-going improvement of paved road network which will enhance market accessExisting momentum
ILRI and ICARDA, together with their key partners, bring in a rich combination of technical and practical experiences on developing country and low-input mixed crop–livestock systems, and a history of having successfully worked together in related research, on which to build on
Very few other global organizations combine development with innovative and adaptive research
Both centres have experience with value chain development in small ruminants and other livestock production systems
A number of ILRI and ICARDA partner organizations are already active in Ethiopia or are partners in new project proposals, such as the Ethiopian NARS, BOKU-Vienna, University of Goettingen, and EMBRAPA
ILRI provides an excellent infrastructure and is partner in complementary project like IPMS;2 two projects, SPS-LMM and ESGPIP3 funded by USAID provide opportunities for linkages and knowledge sharing
2. IPMS = Improving Productivity and Market Success of Ethiopian farmers. 3. SPS-LMM = Ethiopian Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards and Livestock and Meat Marketing Program; ESGPIP = Ethiopian Sheep and Goat Productivity Improvement Project.
4More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Research and supporting actionsFurther discussion with stakeholders along the value chain are required to refine and prioritize the major barriers and opportunities for increasing sheep flock productivity and meat production and supporting research and development actions. The constraints listed in the above Table are based on the experiences of an on-going ICARDA/ILRI/BOKU Community-based Sheep Breeding project and the ILRI IPMS (Improving Production and Market Success of Ethiopian Farmers) project.
In common with many other livestock production systems in the developing world and constraints identified in other key value chains, major constraints at input and production level include lack of access to breeding rams with proven genetic attributes (breeding value), inadequate feeding at critical production stages and poor healthcare, inefficient healthcare services (disease control and prevention measures), lack of access to inputs and supportive institutional/organizational and knowledge systems. This preliminary analysis underlines the need for the platform research approach described in an earlier section of this proposal that will allow the program to search for technology solutions across the proposed value chains.
Not surprisingly, the share of the retail value captured by sheep producers is small and could be increased by developing and organizing the sheep markets in all important aspects—market access, structure, and transparency in transactions and price information. One root of the problem is the failure of producers to coordinate and collaborate with each other to increase their bargaining power by supplying more attractive quantities to the buyers at the time of peak demand. But it is difficult for such collective action to spontaneously occur in these traditional rural communities. Innovations in rural organizations and cooperation among different market players (producers, traders, fatteners, abattoirs, and retailers) are needed. The following Table summarizes the key development challenges, knowledge gaps and areas of intervention envisaged for the value chains in pilot areas of Ethiopia.
Variable product quality of both live animals and meat are additional drawbacks to satisfying qualities that are demanded by the domestic and export markets; although both offer better prices they are also increasingly demanding higher product safety and quality consistency. For example, the export markets which mainly trade in sheep carcasses demand more rigorous meat inspection systems, thus cold chains are prerequisites to accessing such markets. Combined, these constraints limit the sheep producers’ capacity to maximally benefit from their sheep and to further invest in this industry.
Studies by IPMS and the community-based sheep breeding project across different regions in Ethiopia showed that women share responsibilities with men in the production of sheep and are mainly responsible for feeding, maintaining hygiene and day to day management. Children are often responsible for supervising the grazing during rainy season. However, men dominate the marketing of sheep and control the income from sales. It was found that the workload of women and children may increase due to market-oriented development of the commodity, but men tend to benefit more in terms of income obtained.
5More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Opp
ortu
niti
es a
nd c
onst
rain
ts in
the
she
ep m
eat
valu
e ch
ain
in E
thio
pia
and
the
rese
arch
and
dev
elop
men
t ac
tion
s to
ove
rcom
e th
emV
alue
cha
in
com
pone
nts
Dev
elop
men
tal c
halle
nge
Res
earc
habl
e is
sues
and
Sup
port
ing
actio
nsIn
dica
tive
part
ners
1O
utco
mes
How
to o
rgan
ize
effic
ient
and
su
stai
nabl
e in
put s
ervi
ces
for
smal
lhol
ders
(ind
epen
dent
from
de
velo
pmen
t pro
ject
s in
the
long
te
rm)?
How
to o
rgan
ize
long
-ter
m
func
tiona
l and
affo
rdab
le a
nim
al
heal
th d
eliv
ery
serv
ices
for
rem
ote
area
s?
Res
earc
habl
e is
sues
Wha
t is
the
mos
t effi
cien
t str
ateg
y/ m
odel
for
orga
nizi
ng in
put d
eliv
ery
syst
ems
for
smal
lhol
der:
Req
uire
d pa
rtne
rshi
ps (g
over
nmen
t, pr
ivat
e pa
rtne
rs, d
evel
opm
ent p
roje
cts)
Req
uire
d in
vest
men
ts b
y sm
allh
olde
rs (m
icro
-cre
dits
)
Req
uire
d su
ppor
ting
trai
ning
/ext
ensi
on p
rogr
am fo
r sm
allh
olde
rs
Supp
ortiv
e, p
olic
ies,
org
aniz
atio
nal a
nd in
stitu
tiona
l arr
ange
men
ts fo
r im
prov
ed s
heep
pro
duct
ion
Diff
eren
ces
in m
en’s
and
wom
en’s
and
poor
and
ric
h ho
useh
olds
’ acc
ess
to
inpu
ts, p
refe
renc
e fo
r in
puts
, use
of i
nput
s, r
oles
in in
put s
uppl
y.
Supp
ortin
g ac
tions
Ass
ess
curr
ent i
nstit
utio
ns a
nd p
olic
ies;
iden
tify
gend
er s
ensi
tive
and
equi
tabl
e op
tions
to b
ette
r su
ppor
t bre
edin
g pr
ogra
ms,
res
ourc
e m
anag
emen
t and
mar
ketin
g
Und
erta
ke a
ctor
ana
lyse
s an
d ev
alua
te th
e ex
istin
g an
imal
hea
lth s
ervi
ces
(vac
cine
s, a
nd d
rugs
), de
liver
y sy
stem
s (in
clud
ing
priv
ate)
and
des
ign
effic
ient
and
affo
rdab
le d
eliv
ery
optio
ns s
yste
ms
to c
over
in p
artic
ular
w
omen
and
the
poor
, inc
ludi
ng tr
aini
ng c
omm
unity
bas
ic v
eter
inar
y w
orke
rs a
nd li
nkin
g th
em w
ith g
over
nmen
tal v
eter
inar
y se
rvic
es
Ass
ess
the
exis
ting
fora
ge s
peci
es, t
heir
pot
entia
l in
the
vari
ous
prod
uctio
n sy
stem
s an
d de
sign
fora
ge s
eed/
seed
mat
eria
l del
iver
y sy
stem
s an
d th
e ag
rono
mic
pra
ctic
es th
at w
ould
ens
ure
sust
aine
d yi
elds
Des
ign
adeq
uate
trai
ning
pro
gram
s fo
r m
ale
and
fem
ale
shee
p ow
ners
Faci
litat
e lin
kage
s to
mic
ro-c
redi
t and
oth
er fi
nanc
ial s
ervi
ces
oper
ated
th
roug
h ot
her
part
ners
with
a fo
cus
on w
omen
and
poo
r
Res
earc
h
NA
RS-
Ethi
opia
IPM
S
ESG
PIP
Supp
ortin
g ac
tions
, in
part
icul
ar o
rgan
izin
g in
put
deliv
ery:
Priv
ate
vete
rina
rian
s or
go
vern
men
tal s
ervi
ces
Seed
com
pani
es
Feed
ent
erpr
ises
Mic
ro-c
redi
t sch
emes
Inpu
ts a
nd s
ervi
ces
(incl
udin
g va
ccin
atio
n ca
mpa
igns
) acc
essi
ble
and
deliv
ered
in ti
me
to m
ale
and
fem
ale
smal
lhol
ders
Incr
ease
d kn
owle
dge
of m
ale
and
fem
ale
smal
lhol
ders
abo
ut
usef
ul in
puts
and
se
rvic
es
Func
tiona
l ins
titut
ions
an
d co
nduc
ive
polic
y en
viro
nmen
t
Inpu
tsan
d se
rvic
es
6More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Val
ue c
hain
co
mpo
nent
s D
evel
opm
enta
l cha
lleng
eR
esea
rcha
ble
issu
es a
nd S
uppo
rtin
g ac
tions
Indi
cativ
e pa
rtne
rO
utco
mes
How
do
we
incr
ease
she
ep m
eat
prod
uctio
n an
d flo
ck p
rodu
ctiv
ity
to m
eet c
urre
nt a
nd fu
ture
mar
ket
need
s?
How
to a
void
inbr
eedi
ng a
nd
nega
tive
sele
ctio
n of
ram
s?
How
to o
verc
ome
seas
onal
or
cont
inuo
us g
aps
in fe
ed q
uant
ity
and
qual
ity?
Whi
ch p
reve
ntiv
e m
easu
res
and
trea
tmen
ts a
re e
ssen
tial t
o in
crea
se p
rodu
ctiv
ity?
Res
earc
habl
e is
sues
Wha
t des
ign
of b
reed
ing
prog
ram
s an
d st
rate
gies
wou
ld b
e ap
prop
riat
e fo
r th
e ex
istin
g an
d em
ergi
ng p
rodu
ctio
n sy
stem
s/en
viro
nmen
t (in
cl. a
ppro
pria
te d
ata
reco
rdin
g an
d fe
edba
ck
syst
em)?
Wha
t are
the
best
str
ateg
ies
to r
educ
e m
orta
lity,
par
ticul
ar in
you
ng
anim
als
and
avoi
d de
crea
sed
prod
uctiv
ity c
ause
d by
dis
ease
s?
How
to d
esig
n op
timiz
ed fe
edin
g sy
stem
s?
Are
ther
e op
tions
to in
trod
uce
fora
ges
and
the
econ
omic
s of
thei
r pr
oduc
tion?
Are
ther
e di
ffere
nces
am
ong
men
’s an
d w
omen
’s m
otiv
atio
n to
eng
age
in th
e en
terp
rise
, in
antic
ipat
ed b
enefi
ts, r
oles
in
prod
uctio
n, s
kills
/cap
acity
nee
ds, s
ourc
es o
f kno
wle
dge/
tech
nolo
gy,
influ
ence
of p
olic
ies
and
inst
itutio
ns?
Are
ther
e an
y as
pect
s of
pro
duct
ion
that
are
har
d fo
r w
omen
or
soci
ally
dis
cour
aged
?
Wha
t cha
nges
are
req
uire
d in
she
ep m
anag
emen
t sys
tem
s to
ov
erco
me
spec
ific
cons
trai
nts
that
wom
en fa
ce, e
.g. h
erdi
ng?
How
will
impr
oved
res
ourc
e us
e an
d sh
eep
prod
uctiv
ity a
ffect
ho
useh
old
livel
ihoo
ds, e
spec
ially
wom
en a
nd c
hild
ren
taki
ng in
to
cons
ider
atio
n th
e sp
illov
er in
to o
ther
par
ts o
f the
farm
ing
syst
em?
Res
earc
h
NA
RS-
Ethi
opia
BO
KU
-Vie
nna
INTA
CIR
AD
IPM
S
ESG
PIP
Supp
ortin
g ac
tions
MoA
RD
-Eth
iopi
a
IPM
S
ESG
PIP2
Acc
ess
to b
reed
ing
ram
s w
ith h
ighe
r br
eedi
ng
valu
e
Dec
reas
ed in
bree
ding
in
dex
Floc
ks m
ore
hom
ogen
ous
in
desi
rabl
e tr
aits
Impr
oved
mar
ket w
eigh
t an
d bo
dy c
ondi
tion
Red
uced
mor
talit
y
Incr
ease
d of
ftake
rat
e
Incr
ease
d m
eat
cons
umpt
ion
in th
e ho
useh
olds
Prod
ucti
on
7More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Val
ue c
hain
co
mpo
nent
s D
evel
opm
enta
l cha
lleng
eR
esea
rcha
ble
issu
es a
nd S
uppo
rtin
g ac
tions
Indi
cativ
e pa
rtne
rsO
utco
mes
Supp
ortin
g ac
tions
Impl
emen
ting
best
bet
bre
edin
g pr
ogra
ms,
incl
. per
form
ance
re
cord
ing,
sel
ectio
n st
rate
gies
to e
nabl
e su
stai
ned
gene
tic
impr
ovem
ent i
n th
e ke
y br
eedi
ng o
bjec
tive
trai
ts, w
hile
mai
ntai
ning
re
ason
able
leve
ls o
f gen
etic
div
ersi
ty, i
nclu
ding
min
imiz
ing
inbr
eedi
ng a
nd it
s ef
fect
s at
her
d an
d at
pop
ulat
ion
leve
l.
Dev
elop
ing
and
faci
litat
ing
inst
itutio
nal (
e.g.
by-
law
s an
d gu
idel
ines
) and
org
aniz
atio
nal a
rran
gem
ents
thro
ugh
farm
er g
roup
ap
proa
ches
and
col
lect
ive
actio
n
Opt
imiz
e an
imal
hea
lth a
nd d
isea
se c
ontr
ol, t
hrou
gh
i
nves
tigat
ing
the
epid
emio
logy
of p
aras
ites
and
path
ogen
s, a
nd
d
esig
ning
pre
vent
ive/
cont
rol s
trat
egie
s in
acc
orda
nce.
p
rom
otin
g si
mpl
e pr
even
tive
mea
sure
s su
ch a
s ac
cess
to
a
dequ
ate
feed
, cle
an w
ater
, cle
an h
ousi
ng, s
pray
ing/
dipp
ing
Opt
imiz
e fe
edin
g sy
stem
s an
d in
crea
se fe
ed r
esou
rces
, in
part
icul
ar
Test
ing
fora
ges
vari
etie
s (fo
od-f
eed
vari
etie
s) a
nd in
tegr
ate
them
into
cr
oppi
ng s
yste
ms
Opt
imiz
ing
use
of c
urre
ntly
ava
ilabl
e fe
ed r
esou
rces
, (st
rate
gic
supp
lem
enta
tion,
feed
pre
serv
atio
n, p
urch
ase
of m
ost l
imiti
ng
nutr
ient
s).
Prom
otin
g fe
ed p
roce
ssin
g op
tions
(sim
ple
hand
cho
ppin
g; v
illag
e ba
sed
mot
or-d
riven
cho
pper
s; c
omm
erci
al b
ut d
ecen
tral
ized
feed
pr
oces
sing
uni
ts)
Plan
ting
fodd
er tr
ees
in p
rivat
e an
d co
mm
unity
man
aged
plo
ts
8More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Val
ue c
hain
co
mpo
nent
s D
evel
opm
enta
l cha
lleng
eR
esea
rcha
ble
issu
es a
nd s
uppo
rtin
g ac
tions
Indi
cativ
e pa
rtne
rsO
utco
mes
How
to d
eliv
er r
elia
ble
quan
titie
s of
mor
e ho
mog
enou
s, s
afe
and
qual
ity p
rodu
cts
(mea
t or
live
anim
als)
from
sm
allh
olde
r sy
stem
s?
How
to in
crea
se th
e su
pply
of
qual
ity s
kins
(sla
ught
er a
t bot
h pr
ivat
e pl
aces
and
aba
ttoir
s)
Res
earc
habl
e is
sues
Is a
car
cass
gra
ding
sys
tem
req
uire
d an
d w
hat w
ould
be
an
appr
opri
ate
grad
ing
and
pric
ing
syst
em?
Doe
s th
e m
arke
t pre
fer/
segr
egat
e ca
rcas
s pa
rts
or c
uts
and
if so
, ho
w c
an th
is b
e m
ains
trea
med
in th
e br
eedi
ng s
trat
egy
and
pric
ing
syst
em?
How
to r
educ
e m
eat q
ualit
y lo
sses
cau
sed
by tr
ansp
ort a
nd
inad
equa
te h
andl
ing
of a
nim
als?
How
to a
void
dar
keni
ng o
f mea
t fro
m h
ighl
and
shee
p im
pedi
ng
thei
r ex
port
?
Wha
t are
the
caus
es o
f mos
t com
mon
pre
and
pos
t mor
tem
ski
n de
fect
s?
Is th
ere
any
diffe
renc
e in
qua
lity
of p
rodu
cts
supp
lied
by m
en a
nd
wom
en?
Are
ther
e di
ffere
nces
in a
cces
s to
tran
spor
t and
pro
cess
ing
serv
ices
?
Supp
ortin
g ac
tions
Esta
blis
h gr
adin
g / q
ualit
y sy
stem
s fo
r ca
rcas
ses
if ap
prop
riat
e
Cap
acity
bui
ldin
g on
tran
spor
t, ha
ndlin
g an
d sl
augh
ter
of s
heep
w
ith a
ll in
volv
ed s
take
hold
ers
Stud
y fa
ctor
s ca
usin
g pr
e- a
nd p
ost m
orte
m s
kin
defe
cts
and
desi
gn h
andl
ing
and
proc
essi
ng s
trat
egie
s to
impr
ove
skin
qua
lity
acco
rdin
gly
Des
ign
of tr
acea
bilit
y sy
stem
for
shee
p m
eat (
long
er te
rm)
Res
earc
h
NA
RS-
Ethi
opia
IPM
S
SPS-
LMM
Supp
ortin
g ac
tions
MoA
RD
-Eth
iopi
a an
d SP
S-LM
M
for
sani
tary
reg
ulat
ions
, e.g
. mea
t in
spec
tion
Aba
ttoir
s (E
lfora
)
But
cher
s (m
eat s
hops
)
Mea
t qua
lity
crite
ria
defin
ed w
ith tr
ader
s an
d co
nsum
ers
Hig
her
qual
ity c
arca
sses
an
d sk
ins
prod
uced
Hig
her
pric
es a
nd
inco
mes
for
shee
p pr
oduc
ers
Tran
spor
tan
dpr
oces
sing
9More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Val
ue c
hain
co
mpo
nent
s D
evel
opm
enta
l cha
lleng
eR
esea
rcha
ble
issu
es a
nd s
uppo
rtin
g ac
tions
Indi
cativ
e pa
rtne
rsO
utco
mes
How
to o
rgan
ize
mar
kets
(bot
h de
man
d an
d su
pply
) for
equ
itabl
e be
nefit
s al
ong
the
chai
n?
How
to e
nsur
e ac
cess
for
the
Ethi
opia
n pe
ople
to s
afe
mea
t at
an a
fford
able
pri
ce?
Res
earc
habl
e is
sues
Mar
ket/C
onsu
mer
dem
ands
: wha
t do
mar
kets
pay
for
(bre
ed,
regi
on, s
peci
fic li
vew
eigh
t or
size
, qua
lity)
?
Mar
ket s
truc
ture
s: r
elat
ions
/tran
sact
ions
bet
wee
n lo
cal,
regi
onal
an
d ex
port
mar
kets
incl
udin
g tr
ansb
ound
ary
trad
e is
sues
(e.g
. foo
d sa
fety
) to
be a
ddre
ssed
for
incr
easi
ng e
xpor
ts
Mar
ket a
cces
s: is
it p
refe
rabl
e to
org
aniz
e th
e fa
rmer
s fo
r ac
cess
ing
mar
kets
or
to im
prov
e m
arke
ting
syst
ems
and
infr
astr
uctu
re (e
.g.
infr
astr
uctu
re o
f mar
kets
)?
Mar
ket t
rans
pare
ncy:
wha
t mar
ket i
nfor
mat
ion
is a
vaila
ble
/ nee
ded,
an
d ho
w c
ould
it b
e be
tter
diss
emin
ated
(inf
orm
atio
n sy
stem
s)?
Diff
eren
ces
in m
en’s
and
wom
en’s
acce
ss to
mar
kets
and
mar
ket
info
rmat
ion
Intr
a-ho
useh
old
deci
sion
mak
ing
on s
ales
(whe
re, w
hen,
how
m
any)
and
con
trol
of b
enefi
ts
Are
ther
e an
y as
pect
s of
trad
ing
that
are
diffi
cult
or s
ocia
lly
disc
oura
ged
for
wom
en a
nd p
oor?
How
can
wom
en o
wni
ng s
heep
bet
ter
part
icip
ate
in, a
nd b
enefi
t fr
om s
mal
l rum
inan
t mar
kets
?
Res
earc
h
NA
RS-
Ethi
opia
IPM
S
Supp
ortin
g ac
tions
MoA
RD
-Eth
iopi
a an
d U
SAID
-SPS
-LM
M fo
r re
gula
tory
fram
ewor
k
ELFO
RA
-Eth
iopi
a (a
batto
irs)
and
tr
ade
orga
niza
tions
for
defin
ing
prod
uct s
tand
ards
and
arr
angi
ng
mar
ketin
g ch
anne
l
Incr
ease
d m
argi
ns fo
r sm
allh
olde
rs in
the
valu
e ch
ain
Sale
s of
she
ep w
ith
appr
opri
ate
wei
ght a
nd
size
acc
ordi
ng to
mar
ket
dem
ands
Org
aniz
ed m
arke
ting
of
shee
p at
goo
d pr
ices
Shee
p ow
ners
wel
l in
form
ed a
bout
m
arke
ting
oppo
rtun
ities
Aba
ttoir
s op
erat
e ne
ar
thei
r fu
ll ca
paci
ty
Mar
keti
ng
10More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Val
ue c
hain
co
mpo
nent
s D
evel
opm
enta
l cha
lleng
eR
esea
rcha
ble
issu
es a
nd s
uppo
rtin
g ac
tions
Indi
cativ
e pa
rtne
rsO
utco
mes
Supp
ortin
g ac
tions
Ana
lyze
the
mar
ket s
truc
ture
, con
stra
ints
and
opp
ortu
nitie
s fo
r sh
eep
and
mut
ton,
cov
erin
g al
l age
nts
and
acto
rs in
volv
ed in
sh
eep
mar
ketin
g in
clud
ing
trad
ers,
mid
dlem
en, t
rans
port
ers
and
expo
rter
s.
Eval
uate
and
test
opt
ions
for
coor
dina
ting
and
tran
spor
ting
bulk
gr
oup
sale
s of
ani
mal
s.
Test
mar
ketin
g ar
rang
emen
ts th
roug
h br
eede
rs c
oope
rativ
es
Ass
ess
the
perf
orm
ance
of d
iffer
ent m
arke
ting
serv
ices
incl
udin
g pr
ovis
ion
of m
arke
t inf
orm
atio
n, fa
cilit
atio
n of
mar
ket l
inka
ges,
pr
ovis
ion
of m
arke
ting
faci
litie
s, tr
ansp
ort o
f she
ep a
nd m
utto
n an
d id
entif
y w
ays
of im
prov
ing
them
Iden
tify
and
resp
ond
to d
eman
d-dr
iven
mar
ket o
ppor
tuni
ties
for
valu
e ad
ditio
n, th
roug
h im
prov
ed p
rodu
ct q
ualit
y
Faci
litat
e lin
kage
s to
mar
ket i
nfor
mat
ion
syst
ems
oper
ated
by
othe
r pa
rtne
rs.
Gen
der-
disa
ggre
gate
d an
alys
is o
f mar
ket a
nd s
ervi
ces
acce
ss
11More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Val
ue c
hain
co
mpo
nent
s D
evel
opm
enta
l cha
lleng
eR
esea
rcha
ble
issu
es a
nd s
uppo
rtin
g ac
tions
Indi
cativ
e pa
rtne
rsO
utco
mes
Cro
sscu
tting
is
sues
How
to o
rgan
ize
a va
lue
chai
n to
co
nsid
erab
ly in
crea
se th
e ou
tput
–
wha
t are
ess
entia
l com
pone
nts
and
part
ners
hips
?
Res
earc
habl
e is
sues
Impa
ct o
f val
ue c
hain
dev
elop
men
t on
wor
kloa
ds a
nd o
n co
ntro
l ov
er th
e in
com
e w
ithin
the
hous
ehol
d
Who
ben
efits
from
new
tech
nolo
gies
in h
ouse
hold
s an
d co
mm
uniti
es (e
quity
)?
Wha
t are
ince
ntiv
es fo
r va
riou
s ke
y ac
tors
(far
mer
s, in
put p
rovi
ders
, tr
ader
s an
d an
imal
hea
lth p
rovi
ders
etc
.) to
inve
st in
sm
all
rum
inan
ts?
And
how
can
thes
e ac
tors
coo
pera
te?
Is it
feas
ible
to d
esig
n (a
) com
mon
mod
el(s
) for
val
ue c
hain
de
velo
pmen
t thr
ough
ana
lysi
s of
the
less
ons
lear
nt fr
om th
e di
vers
e va
lue
chai
ns, i
n pa
rtic
ular
com
pari
ng th
e SR
val
ue c
hain
s in
Mal
i an
d Et
hiop
ia?
Supp
ortin
g ac
tions
Cha
ract
eriz
atio
n of
com
plet
e va
lue
chai
ns a
nd p
rodu
ctio
n sy
stem
s in
the
targ
et lo
catio
ns (o
wn
surv
eys
and
othe
r st
udie
s) a
t the
sta
rt
Dev
elop
indi
cato
rs o
f suc
cess
Cap
acity
bui
ldin
g at
all
stag
es
Com
pare
the
appr
oach
es a
pplie
d fo
r th
e di
ffere
nt v
alue
cha
ins
Dev
elop
an
easy
mon
itori
ng s
yste
m fo
r ho
me
cons
umpt
ion
of m
eat
Res
earc
h
NA
RS-
Ethi
opia
,
IPM
S
Bok
u, V
ienn
a
Supp
ortin
g ac
tions
MoA
RD
-Eth
iopi
a
IPM
S
ESG
PIP
Con
trib
utio
n of
sh
eep
prod
uctio
n to
liv
elih
oods
incr
ease
d co
nsid
erin
g ta
ngib
le a
nd
inta
ngib
le b
enefi
ts
1. C
ompa
re T
able
bel
ow
2. T
he p
roje
ct w
as s
uppo
sed
to e
nd in
201
0 bu
t it m
ay b
e ex
tend
ed fo
r on
e or
two
mor
e ye
ars
12More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Geographic focus
Diverse sheep breeds and ecotypes are kept in different regions and ecologies—from the mountainous highlands to the arid pastoral lowland areas. Nine indigenous sheep breeds have been identified by phenotypic and molecular characterization methods (Gizaw et al. 2007). The community based sheep breeding programs is being implemented in four areas in Ethiopia, namely Horro, Bonga, Menz and Afar. Based on the project related studies and the experience during the last four years we are proposing to initiate sheep production value chains for Horro, Menz and Afar sheep in their home areas of the same name.
Human population in Menz area is estimated at 324,720. However, the breed is being used out of its original home region by an estimated 2 million people and is widely distributed. Horro sheep are reared by about 6,874,480 people. Population of Afar sheep is estimated at 2,499,640 and is kept by 1.4 million Afar people and other neighbouring communities (CSA 2008b).
Map of Ethiopia depicting Horro, Menz and Afar region
The arguments to select Horro and Menz area as pilot sites for value chain development include:
Horro, Menz and Afar sheep are the most populous breeds in Ethiopia (population is estimated at more than •2 million for each breed) with a wide area coverage
Pilot community based breeding programs have been established in two communities of each region that •can be used as learning and demonstration sites
Regional research centres with well-educated and interested staff are found in Menz and Horro region•
13More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Reasonably good information is available on the breeds and the production systems as base for future •research and development work4
The three areas are comparatively easy accessible•
Afar and Menz sheep are major contributors to the households’ incomes: Menz is a highly degraded •highland area mostly not suitable for other crop and livestock production. Thus, there is trend towards specialization in sheep production and this will help us to achieve impact. Afar sheep are kept in the lowlands by pastoralists, livestock production being the mainstay of the population. Horro region is characterized by crop–livestock production systems with more diverse farming activities; nevertheless the communities also depend to a relatively large extent on sheep for livelihood and as security measure against crop failure.
Based on an ILRI classification of recommendation domains within Africa (Omolo et al. 2009) the three sites represent three different domains: Horro is located in an area mainly characterized as having high agricultural potential, good market access and low potential density, while Menz area shows low agricultural potential, good market access and high population density and Afar low agricultural potential and population density with partly good and partly poor market access. Thus, this diversity will enable across site learning and a more precise definition of recommendation domains for certain technologies.
Potential for impact
The general principles of the value chain approach that we intend to apply in this Program and the envisaged impact pathway were explained earlier in the proposal. A key principle is to enhance the competitiveness of all value chain components, combining research and development activities in strategic partnerships. This is considered as the most promising option to achieve the envisaged impact—higher sheep meat production levels and increased living standards of the involved households. The pathway to impact will be through increasing offtake rates from sheep flocks and easier access for smallholders to markets with higher producer margins, resulting in higher incomes for rural households and thus enabling the required investment in sheep production to further enhance production levels.
However, developing a comprehensive strategy and a model approach for organizing the sheep meat value chain will be a challenge—one that has not been achieved for smallholder systems in developing countries up to now. Research and development projects tend to focus on individual components of the value chain or specific technologies only. Our approach aims at integrating research and development efforts to provide solutions and strategies to overcome the existing system deficiencies along the whole value chain in a comprehensive and synergistic manner. The level and scale of impact will depend on our ability to build the essential partnerships along the value chain and attract investments from development partners.
Based on simulation models for the breeding program (Tadele et al. 2010) and current productivity levels it is expected that by 2017 the number of weaned lambs per ewe can be increased by 10% and yearling weight can be improved by about 20% (from about 24 kg to 27 kg per year on average across the three regions) which would result in an increased annual production per ewe by 20% (an increase of about 7 kg per ewe and year). Flock sizes per household are relatively small: 15.2 productive ewes in Menz, 5.6 in Horro and 10 in Afar.
4. The Community based Sheep Breeding Project focuses on genetic improvement and related aspects. Initially other constraints such as feed availability and quality and animal healthcare and access to efficient markets that are equally important were not addressed. Ac-knowledging the importance of these constraints for achieving impact, during its last year the project has started to introduce interventions addressing some of these constraints.
14More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
The number of households that will benefit from the focus on this value chain, and thereby the per cent increase in sheep meat production, will ultimately depend on the investment that can be made by the Program and its partners. About 1.46 million households keep Horro, Menz or Afar sheep in Ethiopia. If we assume that 5% of these are impacted by this Program, through activities that strengthen the sheep value chain, this means that some 70,000 households will enjoy enhanced livelihoods, and this will in result in production of an additional 5,000 t of sheep meat annually.
In contrast to the dairy, pig and fish value chains we expect only a small increase in home sheep meat consumption of the rural households: sheep meat is not consumed on a regular basis in rural communities. Instead the increased sheep meat production will benefit urban consumers and export markets. The major impact of developing the value chain on livelihoods of rural smallholders and poor households is expected to be achieved through increased income from sales.
Inputsand
services
Production
Transportand
processing
Marketing
Intermediate outcome
Priority VC constraints lessened or resolved
Partnerships with major stakeholders established and additional investments aligned
Flock productivity increased by 20%
Ultimate outcome
100% sheep meat producing households in three pilot regions directly participating in the program
Increased meat production (plus 72t) in 1000 households which is efficiently marketed
Impacts
5000 tonnes additional sheep meat produced annually
70,000 households involved in the value chain program improve their standard of living
Summary of indicators along the impact pathway that we believe can achieve these impacts.
15More meat, milk and fish—by and for the poor
Stakeholders in Ethiopia and their possible role
Stakeholder Type Role Remark
ELFORA Agro-industries PLC. Private Could create market outlet for the community sheep and export of mutton, live animal and skins
Consulted
Luna Private Abattoir in Modjo
Exports small ruminant meat to the Middle East; ILRI has been working with Luna in IPMS and have developed a strong linkage
To be consulted
Improving Productivity and Market Success of Ethiopian farmers (IPMS)
ILRI project Cooperate on the whole sheep value chain development
Consulted
Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR)
Government Implement the field research activities in Afar
Consulted
Amhara Regional Agricultural Research Institute
Regional Agricultural Research Centre, Government
Implement the field research activities in Menz
Consulted
Oromia Agricultural Research Institute
Regional Agricultural Research Centre, Government
Implement the field research activities in Horro
Consulted
USAID–Ethiopian Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards and Livestock and Meat Marketing Program (SPS-LMM)
NGO Cooperate on marketing of mutton, sheep, skin
To be consulted
USAID–Ethiopian Sheep and Goat Productivity Improvement Project (ESGPIP)
NGO Cooperate on breeding at field level To be consulted
Pastoral Community Development Program
Government-project Research and tailored training in Afar To be consulted
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MoARD)
Government Support the field activities in all the project sites
Consulted
Netherlands Development Organization (SNV Ethiopia)
NGO Experience sharing on value chain development
Synergies to be discussed and agreed upon
Important note: Full information on references is included in the Program proposal that can be downloaded from http://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/3248