By Andre van Rooyen, Sabine Homan Kee-Tui, Patricia, Thabani Dube & Allan Majuru.
Commercializing the Goat sector in Zimbabwe
How can we engineer better lives for peoplein water-scarce environments?
• Focused our work at the level of the farmer, their world, how they operate and make decisions.
Working hypotheses:
(i) poorly developed markets (for livestock products and services) are the main constraint limiting the intensification of small-scale farming systems;
(ii) only when farmers engage in markets will they invest in more productive management technologies.
It facilitates dialogue between the main local market players to collectively identify challenges and opportunities to improve production and marketing of livestock.
Farmers, input suppliers, traders, transporters, processors, wholesalers, retailers, research and development
fraternity, regulators and policy makers
Platforms are established around local specific production and marketing systems, and ideally merge into larger networks for improved coordination of livestock commercialization processes (geographical, institutional).
The Innovation Platform
Identify and implement strategies that will improve market efficiency and reduce transaction costs along the value chain, thereby increasing the efficiency of the overall system, allowing more money to flow to the producer and increasing the incentive for improved farming practices.
Identify and promote technologies that will improve agricultural production at the household level - and thereby increase productivity and eventually profitability.
Develop local capacity to innovate, analyze challenges and opportunities – reduce risk and increase potential income.
Ensure the real questions/issues are asked and addressed
Ensure that processes are pursued and not only technologies or commodities.
Objectives of the IP
Structure of the IP
Farmer
Trader
Processor
R&D CommunityWholesaler
Retailer
Consumer
Input SupplierRegulators
DevelopmentProcess
Activities & Outputs
Time
Establish IP and define roles and responsibilities
Workshop
Workshop
Workshop
Workshop
Workshop
Activities implemented by members
Activities implemented by members
Activities implemented by members
Project Driven
Stakeholder Driven Activities implemented
by members
Sustainability M&E
M&E
M&E
M&E
Set Impact Indicators
Functioning of the Innovation platform
Development trajectories and a conceptual model of rural/agricultural development
Concept: Generic scheme of value chain functions (micro level)
SpecificInputs
Provide- equipment- inputs
Production
ProduceHarvestDry etc.
Trans-formation
ClassifyProcessPack
Trade
TransportDistributeSell
Con-sumption
PrepareConsume
Basic functions in a value chain
Product flow
Information flow
Flow of money from the consumer
Input provision
VC
Fun
ctio
nsV
C A
ctor
s
goat production Transformation Retailing ConsumptionIntermediary
trade
Urban Consumer
Rural Consumer
RDC/EMA
Urban butchery
Mapping Goat VCs
Local agro-dealers
VC
Su
ppor
t S
ervi
ces
Traders
NGOs
Vet/DLPD
ARIBANK: credit access
Local Middlemen
Local schools, hospi
tals
New national, regional markets
Smallholder Farmer
Rural butchery
Small holder farmers
Stock feed/
fodder crops
Supermarket & restaurants
Abattoir
LPD,VET, CARE, World Vision, ORAP , ICRISAT: Input supply, capacity dvpt, market linkages
RDC/Urban council
Input provision
VC
F
unct
ions
Goat Production
Transfor-mation Retailing Consump
-tionIntermediary
Trade
Challenges/Opportunities for Goat VCs
Poor local input supply/use (pvt/gvt)
High input/raw material prices
Feed shortages
Poor infrastructure (roads, markets, water)
Poor information flow and communication
VC
Cha
lleng
es
Pen fattening
Use of auction as trading platform
High demand for (quality) livestock
Interest in feed /fodder/suppl. feed
Opp
ortu
nitie
s
Availability of abattoirs
Use of contracts when doing business
Poor support services (livestock, vet)
No access to proper credit facilities
Gvt input subs. harm agrodealers
Collective action (formation of cooperatives to reduce transaction costs)
Potential for agro-dealer net
Policy support
Droughts
Provision of credit facilities
Improvement in production
practices
Diversification
Change in market demand
And a few words on the process…
• Found a strong entry point – contextualize the work in the farmers reality
• Goats represent food and income – buy food, pay for education and human health
• Bottlenecks in goat production and marketing– Very high mortality rates because of poor
nutrition, animal health and housing.– Very limited support systems. – Absence of functional markets
The development process• Built markets and reduced transaction costs along the value chain,
involved many other players.• Functional markets resulted in dramatic increases in prices…
increased from < $12 to $60 between 2008 and 2014 at the formal market. Farm gate price is $23!
• This drove significant investments in goat management and the way farmers made decisions; – Mortalities dropped from 18-25% to less than 10%!
• Farmers are reinvesting in goats– Increased diversity in crops/feed
• True to complex systems, other role players started investing too. NGOs built 19 more sale-pens in Matabeleland; dip tanks, vet inputs supply etc.
Goat mortalities and sales 2006: 25%
Turnover at Nhwali Goat Auction in the first year after dollarization (2009)
US$ >50,000 per annum
Sources of income in Gwanda District
H/h expenses and agricultural investments
Seed2%
Others0% Livestock feed
11%
Livestock health2%
Food44%Hired labour
9%
Education20%
Health2%
Social events2%
Transport7%
Rented grazing2%
Farmers Investing in Improved Feed Technologies
Nhwali Shashe Sign
Graze residues in fields 71. 73.3 ns
Cut & carry leaves, grass,
pods
66.7 17.8 p < 0.01
Feed leguminous crop residue 35 2.2 p < 0.01
Commercial feeds 22.2 6.7 p < 0.05
Grazing reserves 24.4 2.2 p < 0.01
Feed cereal crop residue 8.9 6.7 ns
Produce forages 11.1 2.2 p < 0.05
Treat crop residues 11.1 0 p < 0.05
Farmers Investing in Goat Health Practices(2012)
Nhwali Shashe Sign
Traditional
methods
53.3 44.4 ns
Vaccination 40 26.7 ns
Dosing 33.3 13.3 p < 0.05
Dipping 33.3 11.1 p < 0.05
Sources of cash to purchase stock feed – invest in agriculture…
Sold livestock55%
Income from non farm activities
36%
Given by family member/friend6%
Borrowed 3%
Goat mortalities and sales 2012: 10%
Data from Value Chain Analysis showing the profit per animal for farmers when using the different marketing channels now available in Gwanda, Zimbabwe.
(FG = Farm practice at farm gate;
Impr FG = Improved production sold at farm gate;
Impro MKT = Improved market;
Impro MKT_Price = Improved market with price incentives for quality;
Good MKT_Price = Potential best case scenario.)
Woman are very active and proud participants
Farmers “buy food security” with income from livestock sales!
School uniforms are sold at livestock markets!!
Complex systems theory
• Complex systems consist of many (layers, tiers) of interacting subsystems
• Synergies between subsystems: the system is larger than sum of the individual sub systems
• No central coordination - complex systems are self regulating with many and complex feedback loops
Folke et al. (2003) defined four clusters of factors that interact across temporal and spatial scales that increase the resilience of SES
A word on Resilience
• Learning to live with change and uncertainty
• Nurturing diversity in its various forms
• Combining different types of knowledge for learning
• Creating opportunity for self-organization and cross-scale linkages
Places to Intervene in a System (in increasing order of effectiveness) Donella Meadows (1999)
12. Constants, parameters, numbers (such as subsidies, taxes, standards)
11. The sizes of buffers and other stabilizing stocks, relative to their flows
10. The structure of material stocks and flows (such as transport networks, population age structures)
9. The lengths of delays, relative to the rate of system change
8. The strength of negative feedback loops, relative to the impacts they are trying to correct against
7. The gain around driving positive feedback loops
6. The structure of information flows (who does and does not have access to what kinds of information)
5. The rules of the system (such as incentives, punishments, constraints)
4. The power to add, change, evolve, or self-organize system structure
3. The goals of the system
2. The mindset or paradigm out of which the system—its goals, structure, rules, delays, parameters—arises
1. The power to transcend paradigms
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 4500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100 Control
Micro-dose
Mz_muc
100%
% grain requirement met
Pro
ba
bili
ty o
f exc
ee
de
nce
(%
)
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 2500
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100Control
Micro-dose
Mz_muc
100%
% DM requirement met
Pro
ba
bili
ty o
f exc
ee
de
nce
(%
)
Risk management & diversification
Livestock water productivity (LWP)
The ratio of beneficial livestock related products and services to the water depleted as a result of animal keeping.
Framework for assessing livestock-water productivity
Gains from market development/participationSituation Gross margin
analysis (usd)Linear Programming (LINGO) (usd)
Base state at farm gate 89.24 120.29
Improved management at farm gate
125.92 135.12
Improved management at market 301.79 321.80
Improved management with price differentiation at market
418.90 448.56
Extremely good management with price differentiation at market
847.50 1 420.00
Amount of water used to raise a goat per year!Calculated using Peden 2006
1 2 3 4 5 60
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Total Water Req Annual Water Req
m3
Wat
er u
sed
Increasing system efficiency through reduced animal mortality
1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 00
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
Feed used in Y20 Meat kg Meat/Feed Used
Reducing Mortality
Fe
ed
us
ed
(to
n/a
nu
m)
& M
ea
t k
g
Me
at/
Fe
ed
us
ed
Reducing mortality and the impact on livestock LWP
1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 00.00000
0.00010
0.00020
0.00030
0.00040
0.00050
0.00060
0.00070
0.00080
Reducing Mortality
Live
stoc
k W
ater
Pro
ducti
vity
• Find workable entry points and system leverages– Ensure the entry points used are valid and contextualized.
• Create the incentives for investments: markets– Real change is a function of decision making and changing behavior rather than
the mere adoption of technologies• Technology-based interventions or Process-oriented R&D
– Its not bad science – its good science poorly implemented– Putting technologies in context of livelihood systems
• Water vs. System level entry points – You don’t have to work with water to have an impact on water
• Sometimes improving existing systems have no/little impact, we need to facilitate the transformation of systems– From crop focused systems to livestock focused systems
What are the lessons learnt?
Places to Intervene in a System (in increasing order of effectiveness) Donella Meadows (1999)
12. Constants, parameters, numbers (such as subsidies, taxes, standards)
11. The sizes of buffers and other stabilizing stocks, relative to their flows
10. The structure of material stocks and flows (such as transport networks, population age structures)
9. The lengths of delays, relative to the rate of system change
8. The strength of negative feedback loops, relative to the impacts they are trying to correct against
7. The gain around driving positive feedback loops
6. The structure of information flows (who does and does not have access to what kinds of information)
5. The rules of the system (such as incentives, punishments, constraints)
4. The power to add, change, evolve, or self-organize system structure
3. The goals of the system
2. The mindset or paradigm out of which the system—its goals, structure, rules, delays, parameters—arises
1. The power to transcend paradigms
Conclusions• Using sound theory, hypotheses, process thinking, the correct entry points,
system leverages and incentives, we can improve the efficiency of crop livestock systems (in terms of income, reducing risk and WUE/LWP)
• We can impact on water without making it the “entry point” because water as such may not provide sufficient incentive for changes in behavior.
• System and process oriented R&D strategies are required to bring about lasting positive change.
• Transforming crop-focused mixed systems to livestock-based crop livestock systems with functional markets will be a real option in the face of climate change.
• Improving market access and overall systems efficiency will improve income, and feedback mechanisms will increase sustainability while increasing diversity (in commodities and markets), knowledge sharing and capacity to self-organize will increase resilience.