Endgame

Posted on June 11, 2007 by ILRIComms

When is it the ‘end of the game’ for livestock keepers wresting a living from diminishing natural resources? A new study suggests when adaptations to increasing external stresses are no longer viable for livestock peoples and their lands.

Sub-Saharan Africa has been called the food crisis epicentre of the world. Global change is likely to add to the burdens of many millions of poor and vulnerable people on the continent. Equipping policymakers and donor agents with tools and information with which to identify the ‘bounds of the possible’ in natural resource use is likely to become crucial in the fight to help hundreds of millions of Africans dependent on diminishing natural resources escape poverty, hunger and environmental degradation.

The business of scientists conducting livestock research for development is to help farmers and herders protect and grow their ‘living assets’ so that small-scale livestock enterprises become sustainable pathways out of poverty. That is what a group of scientists set out to do in an ‘integrated assessment’ of coping strategies in livestock dependent households in East and Southern Africa. Integrated assessment combines models to test the likely impacts of different future scenarios on ecological functioning as well as household well-being.

The authors of this new study entitled ‘Coping strategies in livestock-dependent households in East and Southern Africa’, recently published in the scientific journal Human Ecology, synthesized results of work undertaken in four livestock systems in eastern and southern Africa: pastoralist communities in northern Tanzania, agro-pastoralists in southern Kenya, communal and commercial ranchers in South Africa, and mixed crop-and-livestock farmers in western Kenya.

The authors of the synthesis are scientists at the Africa-based International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Colorado State University’s Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory and Department of Anthropology, and the Eastern and Central Africa Programme for Agricultural Policy Analysis. The results of their study confirm that household capacity to adapt to increasing external stresses is governed by the flexibility the householders are able to exercise in livelihood options. Such options include intensifying one’s crop and animal production, diversifying the kinds of plant and animal products one produces on the farm, and working for wages in a job found off the farm. The researchers quantified the likely impacts on households and ecosystems of people taking up such options. The results are being used to better target interventions designed to help poor people manage increasing change and risk.

The four case studies employed in this synthesis, all conducted since the late 1990s, looked at increasing risks and external stresses in the pastoral, agro-pastoral and mixed crop-livestock agricultural systems of eastern and southern Africa. All four studies focussed on households made particularly vulnerable not only because they rely on diminishing ecosystems goods and services (e.g., land, water, forages) for a large part of their livelihoods but also because they face volatile changes driven or characterized by increasing (1) population growth; (2) in-migrations and fragmentations of pastoral lands; (3) climate change and variability; and (4) increasing/changing consumption of meat, milk and other livestock foods and (5) decreasing land size.

In each case study, the researchers worked directly with farmers and pastoralists in collecting data with which to build and calibrate appropriate household models, in setting up and testing a wide variety of scenarios, and in visualizing and assessing the likely impacts of interventions on the various system components. Discussions by stakeholders and researchers of results of running the models helped disclose other scenarios to investigate and identify options that were subsequently tested by the farmers.

This paper synthesizes lessons learnt from these case studies and outlines future research needs.

Conclusions

The mixture of fieldwork and integrated assessment modelling employed in this synthesis indicate that having different options available with which to manage natural resources can help households at least partially overcome the effects of increasing stresses to the system caused by population growth, changes in climate and weather variability and land fragmentation. But there are also costs to implementing these options: costs to natural resources, to other stakeholder groups and to household incomes. Furthermore, households can offset increased stresses through natural resource management only up to a point. With the tools employed in these assessments, scenarios can be set up and run that go well beyond these thresholds, to points where offsetting is no longer possible through internal manipulation of the system.

The good news
The four case studies used in this synthesis indicate that households can partially offset the impacts of external stresses by increasing the size of cultivated plots (as pastoral communities are doing in northern Tanzania and agro-pastoral communities in southern Kenya), by diversifying their activities into other agricultural and nonagricultural activities (agro-pastoral communities in southern Kenya), by using climate forecasts to make stocking decisions (communal and commercial ranchers in drought-prone regions of South Africa), and by intensifying and/or diversifying agricultural production (mixed crop-livestock farmers in western Kenya).

The bad news
Although households are able to offset impacts of increasing stress to some degree through diversification and intensification, implementing these options generates other potential, and actual costs. ‘What this simply means’, says ILRI’s Philip Thornton, lead author of the synthesis, ‘is that there are thresholds in these systems beyond which it is unlikely that management options alone can offset increasing system stresses.’

Thornton says the integrated assessment framework is useful in identifying not only what is desirable, in terms of possible impacts on different groups of stakeholders, but also what is feasible. ‘Given increasing system stresses,’ he says, ‘the point may well be reached at which natural-resource-based livelihood options are simply no longer feasible.’

Indeed, a key use of integrated assessment is identifying situations where households are unlikely to be able to sustain current livelihood options based on exploitation of natural resources. In such cases, appropriate livelihood options will likely involve making radical rather than incremental shifts in agricultural and/or livestock productivity, finding off-farm employment, and exiting farming enterprises altogether.

The news for policymakers
All four case studies analyzed in this synthesis have substantial implications for policymaking. Among these are the following:

The new options that poor households need to consider when adapting to change do not impinge merely on one or two economic sectors but rather strike at the heart of national policies for food security, self-sufficiency and the role of agriculture in economic growth and development in general (see Ellis 2004). Such policy debates can be enhanced by research.
Policymakers can profit from demanding, supporting and utilizing broad integrated assessments that apply new approaches to development. Such approaches include those based on the principles of ‘integrated natural resources management’ (see Sayer and Campbell 2001) and ‘adaptive resource management’ and ‘adaptive governance of resilience’ (see Folke et al. 2002 and Walker et al. 2004).
Poorer people often have the most to gain from implementing options that increase household ability to cope with change. Investments in developing and disseminating coping strategies and risk management options thus can help alleviate poverty in substantial ways.
Householders’ objectives and their attitudes about, and access to, natural resources vary greatly. The type of household model best suited to each case will thus often differ, requiring that integrated assessments be done on a case-by-case basis. As Thornton says, ‘So-called “recommendation domains” for targeting technology and policy interventions are probably smaller than we thought.’ Acknowledging that, contrary to conventional wisdom, research impacts cannot easily be generalized across large areas has considerable implications for the way in which research for development can most effectively be carried out.
We need to employ a dynamic framework to assess the ecological impacts of changes, together with their major feedbacks to livelihood systems, over the medium term at the least. There are lags and dampers in the system that need to be elucidated in any even partially integrated assessment.
The assessment framework has to allow the quantification of major trade-offs so that decision-makers and stakeholders can visualize impacts of different actions on different parties.
Although the integrated assessments employed in these case studies have limitations that should be addressed in further work, such assessments have a key role to play not only in quantifying trade-offs but also in identifying what is both desirable and feasible in highly complex systems. Integrated assessments, in other words, can help establish the outer limits within which agricultural research can reasonably be expected to contribute to improving and sustaining livelihoods in given situations.

Citation:
Thornton, P.K., R.B. Boone, K.A. Galvin, S.B. BurnSilver, M.M. Waithaka, J. Kuyiah, S. Karanja, E. Gonzalez-Estrada, and M. Herrero. Coping strategies in livestock-dependent households in East and Southern Africa: A synthesis of four case studies. Human Ecology. Vol. Online first (2007)

Download the paper: http://www.springerlink.com/content/75368853th35r755/

References:
Ellis, F. (2004). Occupational diversification in developing countries and the implications for agricultural policy. Programme of Advisory and Support Services to DFID (PASS) Project No. WB0207. Online at:
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/25/9/36562879.pdf

Folke, C., Carpenter, S., Elmqvist, T., Gunderson, L., Holling, C.S., Walker, B., Bengtsson, J., Berkes, F., Colding, J., Danell, K., Falkenmark, M., Gordon, L., Kasperson, R., Kautsky, N., Kinzig, A., Levin, S., Mäler, K.-G., Moberg, F., Ohlsson, L., Olsson, P., Ostrom, E., Reid, W., Rockström, J., Savenije, H., and Svedin, U. (2002). Resilience and sustainable development: building adaptive capacity in a world of transformation. Scientific background paper on resilience for the process of The World Summit on Sustainable Development on behalf of The Environmental Advisory Council to the Swedish Government. Ministry of the Environment, Stockholm, Sweden. Online at:
http://www.sou.gov.se/mvb/pdf/resiliens.pdf

Sayer, J. A., and Campbell, B. (2001). Research to integrate productivity enhancement, environmental protection, and human development. Conservation Ecology 5(2): 32. Online at:
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol5/iss2/art32/

Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S. R., and Kinzig, A. (2004). Resilience, Adaptability and Transformability in Social-ecological Systems. Ecology and Science 9 (2): 5. Online at:
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5/

Integrating livestock and water management

Posted on March 22, 2007 by ILRIComms

Livestock are often neglected in water management policies, yet demand for livestock products is predicted to soar, placing even greater pressure on scarce water supplies. A new brief outlines strategies and opportunities to double livestock water productivity.

Water management policies tend to focus on water productivity in crop production and industrial and domestic use. Livestock are given little attention. A new brief entitled ‘Integrating livestock and water management to maximize benefits’, highlights the important contributions livestock make to livelihoods, particularly in developing countries, and the need for livestock to be fully considered in water management policies in order to maximize benefits.

Demand for livestock products are predicted to double over the next twenty years and this will place greater pressure on already scarce water supplies. Livestock contribute to the livelihoods of at least 70% of the world’s rural poor, providing many benefits including food, fuel, fertilizer and transportation. According to ILRI scientist Don Peden, ‘integrating livestock and water could bring big benefits, but it is receiving little attention in the livestock and water sectors.’

Livestock water productivity
Livestock water productivity is the amount of water depleted or diverted to produce livestock and livestock products and services. Livestock require a great deal of water – not for drinking – but for their feed. Livestock water productivity can be increased by identifying areas where water efficiency gains can be made to free up scarce water for other uses.

Many people in industrial countries eat more food than is necessary and healthy.
‘Health experts and environmentalists in industrial countries are calling for people to reduce their consumption of meat and dairy products. In the developing world, nutritionally deprived people could benefit from consumption of more animal products’ says Peden.

‘The challenge is to enable poor livestock keepers to get more from their animals, while using less water and reducing degradation of land and water resources.’ The convergence of high livestock densities and poverty occurs mostly in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. To help the greatest number of livestock-dependent rural poor, these two regions would therefore be priority regions for integrating livestock and water development.

Distribution of poor livestock keepers (no.km3)

https://www.ilri.org/Link/Publications/Publications/Theme%201/Kruska%20et%20al%20Livestock%20systems%20Ag%20systems.pdf

Strategies for improving livestock water productivity

The brief outlines four strategies for improving livestock water productivity, to reduce the amount of water used in livestock production and to increase the benefits from livestock per unit of water used. The authors argue that by taking a balanced site-specific approach, that combines all four strategies, it should be possible to at least double livestock water productivity.

Strategic sourcing of animal feeds – Reducing the amount of water depleted to produce animal feed may be one of the most effective ways to improve water productivity globally. Three basic ways of accomplishing this are (i) promoting non-grain food sources with high water productivity, (ii) use of crop residues and by-products as feed, and (iii) practices that encourage more efficient grazing.
Enhancing animal productivity and reducing herd sizes – In much of the developing world livestock productivity is less than 50% of genetic potential. Milk production is low – often less than two litres per cow per day – as opposed to 15 litres or more. Promoting better health, genetics, nutrition and animal husbandry practices would enable livestock keepers to get more from fewer animals.
Reducing negative environmental impacts – Loss of vegetation due to overgrazing results in increased soil erosion, downslope sedimentation and reduced water infiltration. Research indicates that low to moderate grazing pressure has little negative impact on hydrology. Managing animals in ways that reduce land and water degradation, for example, by restricting animal access to certain areas and more integrated management of grazing land will help to reduce negative environmental effects.
Strategic provision of drinking water – The amount, quality and location of livestock drinking water can have a big impact on livestock water productivity. Water deprivation reduces feed intake and can greatly lower milk production. Providing adequate quality drinking water – strategically placed – enables animals to reach otherwise inaccessible grazing areas, keeps them from contaminating domestic water sources, and enhances production of meat and milk. Given the high value of animals, particularly to poor households, and the relatively small amount of water animals drink, strategic provision of drinking water is a good investment.

The authors argue that the livestock water productivity opportunities identified in the brief can only be realized if livestock and water are fully integrated and location-specific adjustments are made, for example, at the community level and integration of pasture management and water users associations.

Exploring farmer-herder relations and conflict management in Niger

Posted on November 24, 2006 by ILRIComms

This week, ILRI and partners are presenting research on farmer-herder relations and conflict management at an international conference on 'the future of transhumance pastoralism in west and central Africa'.

The main objective of the conference, taking place in Abuja, Nigeria, from 20-24 November 2006, is to provide a forum for discussing the challenges of transhumance pastoralism and associated issues affecting the economy and society of pastoral communities in the West Africa sub-region. Through the presentation and analyses of different experiences, conference participants will share experiences to identify interventions that could enhance pastoral livelihoods and promote environmental and social harmony among communities.

Researchers from the University of Wisconsin and the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) are presenting their findings on farmer-herder relations and conflict management, based on research conducted in Niger. Their study found that conflict, in some form or another, is common in agro-pastoral communities of Niger and has the potential to affect the livelihoods of farmers and herders alike.

Background to study

The nature of livestock husbandry and farmer-herder relations is changing and the potential for conflict management failure increases unless systems of governance change accordingly. Farmer-herder conflicts are enduring features of social life in the Sudano-Sahelian zone. A survey was carried out in four sites in Niger (Bokki, Katanga, Sabon Gida and Tountoubé) to determine the proximate and long-term causes of conflict over natural-resource use, to evaluate the appropriateness of existing institutional arrangements for managing conflicts and identify innovative options and incentives to reduce the incidence and severity of conflicts.

Causes of farmer-herder conflict

Conflict should be expected in an environment of highly fluctuating resource availabilities on unfenced land. Results from this study showed that in all sites, damage to crops was the first reported cause of conflict between farmers and herders. Crop damage is not limited to growing crops on the field but also unauthorized livestock grazing of crop residues after harvest.

Reported causes of farmer-herder conflict in study sites between 2002 and 2004

The increasing number of conflicts due to unauthorized livestock grazing of crop residues is a reflection of the change in farmer-herder relations from that of mutual trust that characterized manure and entrustment contracts to more inherently conflictual relationships based on wage and tenancy contracts. Other causes of conflict reported were access to watering points, expansion of crop fields to corridors used for animal passage, and theft of animals.

Farmer-herder relations and conflict management

The ability of rural communities to prevent and manage conflict is largely based on the strength of networks of communication between herding and farming interests, respected community leaders, and leaders in neighbouring communities. Overall, local institutional arrangements were found to be functional with a high percentage of conflicts effectively managed at local levels. In all the study sites except Bokki, there was a high level of involvement of internal mediators.
Reported causes of farmer-herder conflict in study sites between 2002 and 2004

In all the villages, at least 75% of reported cases of farmer-herder conflict between 2002 and 2004 were resolved. In Tountoubé all reported cases of conflict were resolved. The results support a basic premise that conflicts that necessarily arise as people pursue diverse livelihood strategies are largely managed effectively at the level of local communities. In all the villages, the elders, marabouts and chiefs are the main channel for mediation. For example, all resolved conflict cases in Sabon Guida and Tountoubé were through village elders and chiefs. The high level of success of internal mediation in both villages could be attributed to the high respect for the authority of village chiefs and council of elders by all social groups. However, in Bokki there is a relatively high involvement of external mediators – local court and police- in resolving conflict in the village.

Understanding changing farmer-herder relations

Over the past 20 years, there have been changes in livestock ownership and management that have worked to increase both the inherent conflicts of interest between farming and herding and the potential for these conflicts of interest to escalate. Conflicts of interest have intensified in many areas due to the greater proximity of livestock and cropping during the growing season.

There have also been a number of changes that have affected how local communities manage farmer-herder conflicts. The continued erosion of the local authority of elders, while welcome on a number of levels, have increased the number of poles of authority which may potentially reduce local communities’ ability to manage conflict effectively. The number and nature of social ties between farmers and herding professionals have changed as livestock wealth has become more concentrated, availability of cropland has declined, and the range of herd movements has shrunk and become more erratic.

The relationships between farmers and herders in the Sudano-Sahelian region of West Africa have always been multi-dimensional and like most social relationships have involved both cooperation and conflict. There has always been a strong seasonality to this relationship, with conflicts associated with crop damage and field encroachment onto key pastoral sites common during the rainy season, while cooperative relationships of milk barter and manure contracting are more important during the dry season.

Understanding farmer-herder relations is key to conflict management and resolution. This will improve understanding of the proximate and underlying causes of conflict, the behavioural patterns that are most conducive to provoking or avoiding conflict and the main mechanisms by which conflict between the groups are resolved or managed. Innovative options and incentives that reduce the incidence and severity of conflicts would enhance livelihoods of both farmers and herders, and promote social harmony within and between communities.

Call for case studies from riparian countries of the Nile River Basin

Posted on June 22, 2006 by ILRIComms

Contest call for case studies describing innovations in technology, community and household practices that result in better management of water and livestock resources.

The International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) in collaboration with the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) and the CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food (CPWF) invites individuals and organizations located in any of the ten riparian countries of the Nile River Basin to submit short well-written case studies describing traditional or contemporary innovations in technology, community and household practices, and policy, that result in better management of water and livestock resources.

The call is for studies that capture innovations and 'bright spot' studies demonstrating water-livestock management innovations that people are using now and those that have been in use for a long time.

Innovations in livestock and water development

Closing date for submissions is 6 August 2006.

ILRI and partners launch project to increase livestock water productivity in the Nile Basin

Posted on September 5, 2005 by ILRIComms

ILRI and partners launch an innovative livestock-water project at a workshop in Kampala, Uganda.

ILRI and partners launched an innovative livestock-water project at a workshop, which ran from 5 – 9 September. Participants identified technological, policy and behavioral changes that would allow livestock to become effective and productive users of the scarce water resources of the Nile Basin.

CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food (CPWF) Brochure

The Nile waters sustain life for about 200 million people, many of whom are desperately poor, from ten African countries. Water shortages already constrain food production in much of the Basin.

CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food (CPWF) News Release 1 September 2005

Livestock have been overlooked in water management programs. But the amount of water depleted by livestock in the Basin appears to be at least as great as that used to produce human food. (Production of livestock feed requires 50 to 100 times more water than animals drink.) A rising demand for livestock foods in these countries is placing even greater demand on water resources.

Uganda's State Minister for Animal Industry, Ms. Mary Mugyenyi, opened the workshop, ‘Nile Basin Water Productivity: Developing a Shared Vision for Livestock Production’, which was also attended by Dr. Carlos Seré, ILRI’s Director General.

For news items on the workshop and extracts from Carlos Seré's speech, click on the following links:

Monitor (Uganda) and All Africa Wire Service
People's Daily (China)
Sudan Tribune
Xinhua (China)

Explosion in livestock products and livestock feed

Posted on July 15, 2005 by ILRIComms

An 'explosion' in milk and meat consumption in developing countries is being predicted, which will, in turn, lead to an 'explosion' in demand for nutritious livestock feed. ILRI Director and economist Christopher Delgado, addressing 1,500 scientists at the 20th International Grassland Congress conference in Dublin this month, predicted an “explosion” in consumption of milk and meat in developing countries over the next 15 years, which, he says, is already causing a “livestock revolution”. This, ‘explosion’ will, in turn, create an ‘explosion’ in the demand for livestock feed in developing countries. Imports of livestock feeds are expected to grow exponentially to meet this demand, but it also presents opportunities for poor farmers to explore markets for ‘home-grown’ forages. ILRI researchers are assisting in the identification of grasses and legumes for tropical climates that have the greatest potential as nutritious feeds. Poor-quality feed and fluctuating feed supplies place huge constraints on livestock productivity in developing countries. Nutritious grasses, that are readily accessible and affordable, can play a key role in alleviating poverty. But, knowing which grasses best suit the particular climate and conditions is a prerequisite. At the Grassland Conference, ILRI and partners launched a new interactive decision support tool which will help growers in developing countries select the best forage grasses for their local environments. The new decision support tool has captured 50 years of documented knowledge on grasses and legumes for livestock food, suitable for tropical and subtropical climates. But this is not just a collection of papers. It has also captured decades of tacit knowledge – expertise and know-how – garnered from the world’s most experienced scientists in tropical forages, and made this available as a public resource. According to ILRI’s Forage Diversity Project Leader, Dr Jean Hanson “There are a diverse range of grasses that could be grown as new forage resources for livestock in the tropics. Growers need to know which grasses are going to be the most productive and most nutritious in relation to their particular environment and livestock. To a great extent, this software has removed much of the trial and error as it will help select the ‘best-bet’ options. Ultimately, this is going to be of great benefit to thousands of small farmers in developing countries." Tropical Forages Decision Support Tool The Tropical Forages Decision Support Tool has been developed by an international team of forage experts led by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization/Queensland Department of Primary Industry/University of Queensland, Australia, the Centro Internacional Agricultura Tropical (CIAT) and the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) with financial support from ACIAR (the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research), BMZ (Germany), DFID (UK). The new information and selection tool is available online at: http://www.tropicalforages.info/ ILRI undertakes a host of forage diversity activities, with the purpose of identifying tropical grasses and legumes that have greatest potential as nutritious livestock feed in developing countries.

Blue Revolution follows Livestock Revolution

Posted on July 11, 2005 by ILRIComms

ILRI director and economist Christopher Delgado says that Asia's abundance of labour makes aquaculture attractive for the region, where farmers are raising fish in abandoned ponds and ditches to sell at markets, thus earning them an income as well as helping them to feed their families. ILRI director and economist Christopher Delgado is quoted in the Des Moines Register newspaper this June. Dr. Delgado leads research on both fish and ruminant livestock revolutions at ILRI and the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), based in Washington DC.

Des Moines Register (USA) article, 11 June 2005 – Indian scientist wins food prize

ILRI news

Better lives through livestock

Category Archives: CRP5