| Livestock Research for Rural Development 18 (5) 2006 | Guidelines to authors | LRRD News | Citation of this paper |
Dairying is one of the ways farmers earn a living. A study was carried out in Masaka district of Uganda. The major objective was to understand farmers' constraints, objectives and achievements in the dairy production. The study was conducted in two phases, the informal cross-sectional survey and a longitudinal study. A participatory method was used.
Farmers had several objectives, which included, paying school fees, daily home maintenance, buying cow requirements (enterprise self sufficiency), increasing soil fertility, home milk consumption and increasing herd value in order of importance. Generally, farmers achieved the following objectives: improving soil fertility by manure, followed by buying cow requirements and home milk consumption. However the farmers did not fully achieve their most important objective of paying school fees for the children. The major constraining factors to dairy production were prolonged drought, which lead to feed scarcity and the poor milk market.
Key words: Achievement, constraint, dairy, objective, smallholder
Dairying is one of the ways farmers earn a living. It was introduced by NGOs and the Uganda government to smallholder farmers. The NGOs involved in this work included: Send a cow, Masaka Diocese Development Organization (MADDO), 'World Vision' and Heifer Project International West Buganda. The introduction of a cow to the smallholder's farm was expected to provide additional benefits such as a daily income from milk sales, milk for home consumption and improved soil fertility through manure application. However, farmers encounter a lot of problems in dairying. Brown (1979) revealed that farmers on transition to commercial farming have many objectives that contribute to maximization of family satisfaction. Satisfaction is increased by the benefits of farm output and decreased by the cost of sacrificing food, leisure, and money or taking risks. Upton (1987) reports that the objective of profit maximization is modified by other aspects such as getting adequate cash income in commercial farming and adequate diet in subsistence farming. He further reveals that without these, neither the business nor the family could survive to aspire to any other objectives. Akatugba-Ogisi's studies (1994) in the Bendel states in Nigeria identified farmers' objectives as to: provide food for family from own farms, provide for education of own children, strive to repay debts and avoid more, make the most profit from farming, employ family members on own farms and arrange work so as to have more hours off farm work. Upton (1996) revealed that a farmer can have difficulty to achieve his goals and hence strives to minimize the extent of under achievement of the goals. However all farmer's goals are not equally important to him so prioritising them indicates the optimum choice of a particular farmer. This study was designed to understand farmers' constraints, objective and achievements in the dairy production.
The study was carried out in Masaka district which is located between 00 15'and 00 43' below the equator and between 310 and 320 East longitude. The study was carried out in two phases. These were the informal cross-section survey (three months) and the longitudinal study (one year). A sample of 60 farmers was selected randomly from zero-grazing farmers' lists from four sub counties. Participatory method was used and the following research tools were used to collect the data: focus group discussion, individual semi-structured interviews (Waters-Bayer and Bayers 1994), observations, farmer data recording, participatory budgeting (Galpin et al 2000), objective matrix, ranking and scoring and resource flow maps.
Smallholder dairy farmers had several objectives, which, they wanted to achieve, by having a dairy cow. These included getting milk for home consumption, getting money for maintaining their homes; paying school fees; buying cow requirements (dairy enterprise self sufficiency), medical treatment for the family, improving soil fertility by manure and cow urine and increasing herd value (increasing cattle numbers in the herd).
Farmers ranked their dairy enterprise objectives (Table 1). Paying children's school fees was ranked number one, followed by daily home maintenance, buying cow requirements (enterprise self sufficiency) and increasing soil fertility in order of importance. Increasing herd value was the least ranked objective. The achievement of all these objectives depends upon the income or 'net margin' earned from the dairy enterprise.
|
Table 1. Farmers’ dairy enterprise objectives over all ranks |
|||||||||||
|
Farmer objective |
Farmers percentage |
Number of ranks |
Over all rank |
Number of farmers |
|||||||
|
Rank1 |
Rank2 |
Rank3 |
Rank4 |
Rank5 |
Rank6 |
Weighted total |
Weighted average |
||||
|
School fees |
32.6 (196) |
23.9 (120) |
6.5 (26) |
15.2 (46) |
19.6 (39) |
2.2 (2) |
428 |
71 |
6 |
1 |
46 |
|
Daily home maintenance |
15.2 (76) |
43.5 (174) |
6.5 (20) |
13.0 (26) |
21.7 (22) |
NA |
317 |
63 |
5 |
2 |
46 |
|
Cow requirements |
20.0 (120) |
17.8 (89) |
8.9 (36) |
26.7 (80) |
22.2 (44) |
4.4 (4) |
374 |
62 |
6 |
3 |
45 |
|
Increasing soil fertility |
11.6 (70) |
2.3 (12) |
23.3 (93) |
27.9 (84) |
11.6 (23) |
23.3 (23) |
305 |
51 |
6 |
4 |
43 |
|
Home milk consumption |
0.0 (0) |
0.0 (0) |
44.7 (179) |
15.8 (47) |
7.9 (16) |
31.6 (32) |
274 |
46 |
6 |
5 |
38 |
|
Increasing herd value |
13.3 (80) |
3.3 (17) |
13.3 (53) |
6.7 (20) |
13.3 (27) |
50.0 (50) |
246 |
41 |
6 |
6 |
30 |
|
NA represent not applicable ( ) represents weighted percentage farmers per rank Rank1: Most important objective followed by ranks 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 |
|||||||||||
Calculation of weighted average farmer percentage is done, first of all by multiplying the farmers' percentages by used ranks in the reverse order, then adding all products to produce a weighted total percentage, this is divided by the number of ranks used. For example for school fees
71.4 = ((32.6x6) +(23.9x5) + (6.5x4) + (15.2x3) + (19.6x2) + (2.2x1)) /6
Farmers were asked to what extent they managed to achieve each of their objectives during the entire period they were engaged in keeping dairy cattle by scoring out of 10. A score of 10 meant that the farmer got all he wanted in that objective and lower scores meant that he got less than he expected in that objective. Zero score meant that a farmer failed completely to achieve that objective.
Generally, farmers achieved many of their objectives (Table 2). The objectives, which were scored highly (i.e. 6-10), were: improving soil fertility by manure (87% of farmers); followed by buying cow requirements (self sufficiency) (85%); improving soil fertility by urine (84%) and home milk consumption (84%).
|
Table 2. Percentages of farmers at different levels of achievement of stated objectives |
||||||||
|
Level of achievement |
Home milk consumption |
Buy cow requirements |
School fees |
Increasing herd value |
Home maintenance |
Human treatment |
Manure soil fertility |
Urine soil fertility |
|
0 – 1 (Low) |
0 |
0 |
12 |
17 |
4 |
21 |
0 |
6 |
|
2 – 5 (Medium) |
16 |
15 |
37 |
36 |
31 |
21 |
13 |
10 |
|
6 – 10 (High) |
84 |
85 |
51 |
48 |
65 |
58 |
87 |
84 |
|
The level of achievement 10
means a farmer achieved what he wanted in a certain objective |
||||||||
The mean milk home consumption was 1.75 l/farm/day, but ranged from 0-7 l/farm/day. The objectives which were scored poorly (i.e 2-5) were increasing herd value (48%) and paying school fees (51%) (Table 1).
The reason for the low scores for increasing herd value was associated with most cows producing bull calves (i.e. 60 male calves and 41 female calves were produced during the study period), which were sold off the farm. Another reason was failure of cows to conceive, which resulted in long calving intervals (mean calving interval = 16.8 months and ranging from 11 - 36.5 months). However, on the issue of school fees, the farmers were expecting too much from the cow especially for the farmers with several children in secondary schools. The income from the cow could not meet this level of school fees (Table 3).
|
Table 3. Farmers’ net margin, monetary requirements, cost of input requirements in the dairy enterprise and school fees requirements in one year |
||||
|
Item |
Mean (000’ Ug shs) |
Minimum (000’ Ug shs) |
Maximum (000’ Ug shs) |
Farmer numbers |
|
Farmers’ net margin per cow in 1year |
636 |
39 |
1,320 |
52 |
|
Amount of money required by farmers in order to achieve all their objectives in 1 year |
1,245 |
400 |
2,700 |
16 |
|
Cost of input requirements for the dairy enterprise per farm in 1 year |
614 |
293 |
1,499 |
52 |
|
Primary school fees estimates * Day rural Day urban Boarding rural/urban |
NA NA NA |
25 100 750 |
50 150 900 |
NA NA NA |
|
Secondary school fees estimates * Day rural/urban Boarding rural/urban |
NA NA |
150 600 |
300 900 |
NA NA |
|
University school fees estimates * University day urban |
NA |
900 |
1,600 |
NA |
|
Number of farmers who say they would have achieved their objectives if they had no problem |
NA |
NA |
NA |
45 |
|
NA = not applicable. Information obtained from schools |
||||
Farmers ranked paying children's school fees number one (Table 1). However in achievements it received a relatively low score (51%) (Table 2). School fees in Masaka varied depending on the class, type of school and its location (Table 3). In the Masaka area, a farmer generally had two or more children going to school. Therefore, the income from a cow could generally cover school fees for one or two children. However, in other cases one cow could only produce enough net margin to buy exercise books, uniforms and pay for accommodation and food for those children at the university. Daily home maintenance, buying cow requirements and improving soil fertility objectives were ranked high in terms of importance to a farmer and were also scored high in terms of objective achievements. Increasing herd value was the lowest ranked objective and least scored in terms of objective achievements. This meant that although the farmer did not achieve this objective, it was not high on his targets.
Masaka farmers had several objectives for keeping a dairy enterprise some of which modified the objective of net margin maximization. Adequate cash income, particularly for paying school fees, soil fertility improvement and home milk consumptions were the major motivating factors for farmers' participation in the dairy enterprise.
In the current study, farmers achieved many of their objectives, especially those in kind, such as improving soil fertility and providing milk for home consumption (approximately 2 l/farm/day). This was satisfactory according to the farmers' expectations. However, the FAO recommendation for per capita consumption of fresh whole milk is 0.5l/person/day. Thus although the farmers feel that they have achieved their objective, they still have some way to go in meeting the FAO values, as there are between 8 and 17 children per household in urban and rural areas respectively in Masaka (LSRP 1999) that would need 4 to 8 litres of milk for home consumption.
Paying school fees using income from the dairy cows was only partially achieved. The reason for this was that farmers expected more than a cow could produce. This study revealed that a farmer needs about 1,245,000 Ug shs in a year in order to achieve all their objectives (Table 3). However, on average a farmer gets a net margin of 636,000 Ug shs /cow/year. Therefore, keeping approximately two cows per farm could help farmers to full fill their cash requirements.
Constraints to achieving farmers' Objectives
Farmers were interviewed in individual semi structured interviews and revealed some of the reasons that prevented them from achieving their objectives (Table 4).
|
Table 4. Constraints to achievements of farmers’ objectives |
|||||
|
Item |
Reason for not achieving farmers’ objectives |
No of farmers |
% of farmers |
Affected activity |
Affected objective |
|
Milk transaction |
·People did not pay for milk ·Low milk prices ·Lack of transport to the market ·Fail to sell all the milk at times ·Poor milk market |
20 12 3 8 6 |
37 26 7 17 13 |
-Less income |
Getting money for: -paying school fees -buying cow requirements -treating human beings -daily home maintenance |
|
Cattle inputs |
·Expensive cattle inputs ·High price of maize bran ·Repeated AI is expensive ·Expensive mineral lick, nutrimix and dairy meal ·High transport costs ·Buying water ·Many required cattle inputs ·Expensive drugs |
3 11 6
11 1 1 1 1 |
7 24 13
24 2 2 2 2 |
-Less money for buying dairy meal and other house hold requirements, less milk -No maize bran bought, less milk, less income -Less income -Less income -Less income -Less income -Less income -Less income |
Getting money for: -paying school fees -buying cow requirements -treating human beings -daily home maintenance |
|
Household problems |
·Treating sick children
·Human famine
|
1
2 |
2
4 |
-Less income for buying dairy meal, less milk, less income -Much milk fed to family, buy human food instead of buying dairy meal, less milk, less income |
Getting money for: -paying school fees -buying cow requirements -treating human beings -daily home maintenance |
|
Weather |
·Prolonged drought |
41 |
89 |
-Reduction in forage and concentrate availability, low milk production, less income |
Getting money for: -paying school fees -buying cow requirements -treating human beings -daily home maintenance -Less home milk consumption |
|
Feed |
·Feed scarcity ·Did not give dairy meal ·Feed theft ·Distant e. grass ·Buying forage ·Buying forage instead of dairy meal ·Maize bran was not available in drought |
41 9 2 1 2 1
4
|
89 20 4 2 4 2
9
|
-Low milk production, less income -Low milk production, less income -Less feed , low milk production, less income -Less feed, low milk production, less income -Reduced income and forage, less milk, less income -Low milk production, less income -No maize bran was fed, low milk production, less income |
Getting money for: -paying school fees -buying cow requirements -treating human beings -daily home maintenance
|
|
Cow |
·Treating sick cow /cow fell sick ·Cow was dry most of the year ·Low milk production ·Cow failed to conceive ·Long lactation period ·Poor breed ·Cow did not take water ·Cow did not come on heat ·Had a heifer which was still pregnant ·Cow suckled itself ·Cow ate ropes, digestion a problem, cow not productive ·One of the cows died ·Cow had 2 blocked teats ·When given dairy meal, cow did not increase milk production ·Cow was in late lactation ·One of the cows was not milking |
5 3 17 8 7 8 2 2 1
1 1
2 1 1
3 1
|
11 7 37 17 15 17 4 4 2
2 2
4 2 2
7 2
|
-Less income for other requirements -Less milk production, less money and milk consumption -less milk, no calf +more money spent on AI, less income -Less milk production, less milk for home consumption, less income -Less milk production, less income -Less milk production, more money spent on hormones, less income -No milk, no money from milk sales -Less milk, less income and milk for home consumption -Low milk production + more money spent on dairy meal, less income -Low milk production, less milk for home consumption and less income |
Getting money for: -paying school fees -buying cow requirements -treating human beings -daily home maintenance
-Less milk for home consumption
-Less increase in herd value |
|
Money |
·Money was scarce to buy dairy meal |
17 |
37 |
No dairy meal bought, low milk production, less income |
Getting money for: -paying school fees -buying cow requirements -treating human beings -daily home maintenance |
|
Pests and diseases |
·Biting flies were a problem |
15 |
33 |
Cow uncomfortable, ate less feed, low milk production, more money spent on pesticides, less income |
Getting money for: -paying school fees -buying cow requirements -treating human beings -daily home maintenance |
The major constraints to achieving farmers' objectives include prolonged drought, which brings about feed scarcity resulting in low milk yield. Other constraints are poor milk market, which is characterised by consumers not paying for the milk, low milk prices, failure to sell all milk and lack of transport to the market. Scarcity of money to buy expensive cattle inputs like dairy meal, maize bran, mineral lick, nutrimix and repeated AI also constrains farmers' achievement of their objectives. According to UNDP/FAO (1993), the use of purchased animal feeds is constrained by high costs, lack of standards and reliable information about feeds. This study revealed the most constraining factors to the use of purchased animal feed was its high cost and lack of cash to purchase it. In addition, poor reproductive performance also constrained profitability and hence objective achievement.
Akatugba-Ogisi O D 1994 Multiple Objectives and small farmer Production Behaviour in delta and EDO states Nigeria: An Application of Goal Programming. PhD Thesis, University of Reading, UK.
Brown M L 1979 Farm Budgets From Farm Income Analysis to Agricultural Project Analysis. World Bank Staff Ocasional Papers. No. 29. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, USA, 136 pp.
Galpin M, Dorward P and Shepherd D 2000 Participatory Farm Management Methods for Agricultural research and extension: a training manual. The University of Reading.
Livestock Systems Research Programme (LSRP) 1999 Masaka District Diagnostic Survey Report.
UNDP/FAO 1993 Rural Community Dairy Production and Marketing, Project Findings and Recommendations, Terminal Report, UNDP/FAO Project UGA/92/010, Kampala.
Upton M 1987 African Farm Management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Upton M 1993 Livestock productivity assessment and modelling. Agricultural Systems 43: 459-472.
Upton M 1996 The Economics of Tropical Farming Systems. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge 374 pp.
Waters-Bayer A and Bayer W 1994 Planning with Pastoralists: PRA and more a review of methods focused on Africa. GTZ Division 422: Working Paper.
Received 27 February 2006; Accepted 12 April 2006; Published 11 May 2006