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.