Client satisfaction with livestock improvement technologies in Marsabit, Turkana and Garissa counties of northern Kenya

F O Wayua, S G Kuria, A Gudere, D Golicha, J Lesuper, H K Walaga and A Adongo

Kenya Agricultural Research Institute, National Arid Lands Research Centre,
P. O. Box 147 Marsabit-60500, Kenya
fwayua@yahoo.co.uk   ;   francis.wayua@gmail.com

Abstract

A study was conducted in Marsabit, Turkana and Garissa counties of arid northern Kenya to capture client satisfaction on livestock improvement technologies. Data was collected using a structured questionnaire randomly administered to different clients in various exhibitions where the technologies were disseminated in Marsabit (n=56), Garissa (n=47) and Lodwar (n=107). The data was analysed using descriptive statistics.

Results show that 2,580 clients were reached with the technologies during the exhibitions, 32% being adult males, 21% adult females, 30% youth males and 17% youth females. Out of these, 210 filled the client satisfaction questionnaire, 70% being males and 30% females. Majority of the clients in Lodwar (93.2%) and Garissa (69.6%) were satisfied with the technologies, as opposed to only 19.6% in Marsabit. The same trend was observed in the rating of service delivery in terms of quality, cost and usefulness. The main reason is that people in Marsabit also practice agro-pastoralism and would have preferred more crop-based technologies. Clients mostly liked milk processing technologies and the fact that the exhibitions were elaborate, well-organised and relevant to their livelihood systems. However, 10% of the clients disliked selling of brochures and literature of materials being in English. Clients in all the exhibitions agreed that technology dissemination at grassroots needed to be improved and the exhibitions organised more regularly.

In conclusion, this study shows that clients were generally satisfied with the livestock technologies. Future studies should investigate the extent to which agricultural technologies disseminated through shows and exhibitions in pastoral areas impact on the clients.

Key words: agricultural technologies, dissemination, pastoralism, Kenya

Introduction

Satisfaction is a subjective concept and varies from individual to individual. It can be loosely viewed as the utility an individual obtains from consumption of a certain good or service (Allen and Wilburn 2002). However, just like utility, it is hard to quantify. It can, therefore, be viewed in ordinal terms, where an individual is asked to rank or score the level of satisfaction obtained from using a certain service or commodity.

Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) is the premier national agricultural research organisation in Kenya, with the legal mandate to carry out research in agriculture and veterinary sciences. The Institute has 22 main research centres mandated to undertake strategic, applied and/or adapted research as well as outreach and partnerships. KARI-Marsabit is one of the KARI centres located in the northern part of the country and conducts research on livestock (camels, cattle, sheep, goats), crops (cereals and pulses) and cross-cutting issues (climate change, gender, etc.). KARI-Marsabit provides technologies, products and services to various clients’ who have varied requirements. Their level of satisfaction, therefore, largely depends on how the technologies, products and services benefit them at their environment. In order to improve on service delivery to its clients, KARI-Marsabit should ensure that there is continuous improvement on technologies, products and services it offers to its clients to suit their needs. However, the extent to which clients are satisfied with the livestock technologies and services is not clearly known. This study, therefore, aimed to capture client feedback on their level of satisfaction with different aspects of livestock technologies, products and services offered to them through shows and exhibitions, and suggest ways for improvement.

Methodology

Study sites

The survey was conducted in Marsabit, Garissa and Turkana counties of arid Northern Kenya. These areas are arid and fall in agro-ecological zones V and VI. The prevailing agricultural system is livestock keeping (pastoralism) and agro-pastoralism in a few pockets in the arid rangelands. The main livestock kept are camels, sheep, goats and cattle. The sites were purposively selected following the shows and exhibitions held in the areas, and the high potential for commercialising livestock production.

Data collection

Data was collected using a structured questionnaire randomly administered to different clients in various shows and exhibitions. These included the Agricultural Sector Development Support Programme (ASDSP) launch in Marsabit (n=56), the Garissa Agricultural Society of Kenya (ASK) show (n=47) and the Kenya Pastoralist Week (KPW) in Lodwar (n=107). Several technologies were exhibited during the shows and exhibitions, including the following:

(a)    Natural resources management technologies

• Agroforestry tree species

• Different grass species for drylands

• Baled hay

(b)   Livestock technologies

• Management of diarrhoea in camel calves

• Management of ticks in camel calves

• Management of worms in small ruminants

• Mobile house for kids and lambs

• Honey processing and packaging

• Mineral supplements

• Camel-drawn plough

(c)    Value addition and postharvest technologies

• Technologies for milk quality testing (California Mastitis Test (CMT), lactometer, resazurin)

• Milk cream separator and ghee making

• Processed milk products (cultured fermented milk, yoghurt, ghee)

• Wet salting technology for hides and skins

• Tanned leather

Practical demonstrations on the application of the various technologies and information were held during the shows and exhibitions.

The clients were asked about the positive and negative aspects in the KARI-Marsabit stand in each show /exhibition, and areas of improvement. The level of client satisfaction with the livestock technologies and their overall rating of KARI-Marsabit service delivery in terms of quality, cost and usefulness was assessed using a 5-point Likert scale (i.e. satisfied, somewhat satisfied, neutral, somewhat dissatisfied, dissatisfied). Likert scales have been widely used to measure observable attributes in various social science measurement areas. Examples of measured variables include customer attitudes towards labelling in nutrition (Lindhorst et al 2007) and satisfaction of journal quality in library science (Yue et al 2007), among others. 

Clients in Marsabit were specifically asked about their knowledge of KARI-Marsabit functions, as the research station is situated within the county, and if they had received services from the research centre in the last 12 months preceding the survey. The clients were given the questionnaire at the exit point of the KARI stand after they had seen the various technologies; they filled the questionnaire and left it at the customer desk.

Data analysis

The collected data was analysed in SPSS Statistics Version 20 (SPSS 2011) and presented using descriptive statistics (totals, frequencies, percentages and measures of dispersion).

Results and Discussion

Clients reached

A total of 2,580 clients were reached with the technologies and information, 32% being adult males, 21% adult females, 30% youth males and 17% youth females. Out of these, 210 filled the client feedback questionnaire, 70% being males and 30% females (Table 1).

Positive aspects (likes) in the KARI-Marsabit stand in each show /exhibition

The customers indicated different positive aspects in each show/exhibition (Table 2). Technologies on milk processing (milk testing, cultured fermented milk, ghee making) were the most liked in all the three sites. This could be because this resonates directly with household food security in the study sites in which livestock keeping (pastoralism) is the main livelihood activity. Clients secondly liked the fact that KARI-Marsabit stand was very elaborate, well organised and relevant to their livestock-based livelihood systems.

Negative aspects (dislikes) in the KARI-Marsabit stand in each show /exhibition

Ten percent of the interviewed clients (n=210) were not happy with some of the aspects in KARI-Marsabit’s stand. These aspects were different in each show (Table 3). In Marsabit, for example, the three aspects that customers (n=8) disliked most about KARI-Marsabit’s stand were selling of brochures and ghee, lack of demonstration farms and brochures, posters and labels being in English. The KARI-Marsabit stand at the KPW in Lodwar attracted a lot of clients who overcrowded the stand, and this was a cause of dissatisfaction to some clients (n=3).

Knowledge of KARI-Marsabit functions

Of the 56 respondents during the ASDSP launch in Marsabit, 70% were aware of KARI-Marsabit’s functions, whereas 30% were not. Those who were aware of KARI-Marsabit functions listed the functions as presented in Table 4. Those who were not aware of KARI-Marsabit’s functions gave the reasons as presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Reasons for not knowing KARI-Marsabit functions as reported by clients

Of the 56 respondents during the ASDSP launch in Marsabit, 21.4% had received services from KARI-Marsabit in the last 12 months preceding the survey (Figure 2), 78.6% had not.

Figure 2: Services received by clients from KARI-Marsabit in the last 12 months prior to the survey

Level of satisfaction with KARI-Marsabit technologies

Majority of the clients in Lodwar and Garissa were satisfied with the KARI-Marsabit technologies. However, some of the clients in Marsabit were somewhat dissatisfied or indifferent about the KARI-Marsabit technologies (Table 5). This is mainly because most of the technologies were livestock-based, whereas a significant population within Marsabit Mountain practice a mixture of livestock and crop farming because of the micro-climate provided by Marsabit Mountain.

Overall rating of KARI-Marsabit’s service delivery in terms of quality, cost and benefits criteria

Results in Table 6 show that most of the clients in Lodwar and Garissa were satisfied with KARI-Marsabit’s service delivery in terms of quality, whereas 52.7% of the clients in Marsabit were somewhat dissatisfied and 27.3% were indifferent.

There seems to be no problem with costs because most of the customers in Lodwar and Garissa were satisfied, except in Marsabit where about 60% were somewhat dissatisfied or indifferent (Table 7). The main reason for the low satisfaction with clients in Marsabit was that most of the displayed technologies were livestock-based whereas the community in Marsabit practices agro-pastoralism and would have preferred more crop-based technologies. 

Most of the clients were satisfied with the benefits (usefulness) of KARI-Marsabit’s service delivery, even though this varied within the shows/exhibitions (Table 8).

Areas of improvement on the technologies, products and services

Table 9 shows that the customers who visited KARI-Marsabit stand in all the shows and exhibitions were in agreement that information dissemination and feedback at grassroots needed to be improved, and the shows/exhibitions to be organised more regularly and for longer duration. Clients in all the shows also agreed on the need to increase dissemination of livestock products value addition technologies (milk, hides and skins). This should be encouraged, as the study by Kuria et al (2013) showed that farmers are more likely to adopt technologies if these are availed to them, and this could improve livestock productivity in the arid northern Kenya.

Conclusions and recommendation

• The study shows that clients were generally satisfied with KARI-Marsabit technologies, products and services. Shows and exhibitions provide an expensive and rapid way of disseminating agricultural technologies to a large population in a relatively short time and capturing their feedback on the same, especially in the hard to reach pastoral areas.
  
  
• To increase attendance, deliberate efforts should be made to sensitise the clients on the importance and benefits of attending such events, and especially to encourage women to attend.
  
  
• Future studies should investigate the effectiveness of exhibitions as a means of disseminating agricultural technologies in pastoral areas, and the extent to which the disseminated technologies impact on the clients.

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by the European Union though the Arid and Semi Arid Lands Agricultural Productivity Research Programme (ASAL-APRP).

References

Allen D R and Wilburn M 2002 Linking Customer and Employee Satisfaction to the Bottom Line. American Society for Quality, Milwaukee, WI. 

Kuria S G, Murage A, Walaga H K and Lesuper J 2013 Likelihood of agricultural technologies adoption by pastoralist communities: the case of camel improvement technologies and information in Marsabit and Isiolo Counties of northern Kenya. KARI-Marsabit Technical Report. 

Lindhorst K, Corby L, Roberts S and Zeiler S 2007 Rural consumers’ attitudes towards nutrition labelling. Canadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research, 68, 146–150. 

SPSS 2011 IBM SPSS Statistics Version 20 (Release 20.0.0). IBM Corp. 

Yue W, Wilson C S, and Boller F 2007 Peer assessment of journal quality in clinical neurology. Journal of Medical Library Association, 95, 70–77.

Received 25 March 2014; Accepted 21 April 2014; Published 1 May 2014

Go to top