Household-level farming and marketing practices determining body condition score and economic value of cattle in Cambodia

Hasnah¹, Ian Patrick and Robert Geoff B Smith

Institute for Rural Futures, University of New England. Armidale NSW Australia
¹ Faculty of Agriculture, Andalas University, Padang, West Sumatra, Indonesia

Abstract

The Cambodian cattle industry is at a crossroads. Increasing access to markets and a decreasing demand for cattle as a source of draught power is leading to a rethinking by smallholder cattle owners as to the purpose of cattle raising. Many factors, including cattle quality and marketing practices, determine farm gate prices. This study used Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) to examine the household characteristics that determine cattle Body Condition Score (BCS) and marketing practices that affect cattle prices.

Cattle with higher BCS achieved higher prices. Marketing factors such as access to price information didn’t affect prices, although farmers perceived they had lack of appropriate price information during HS outbreaks and prices were lower where outbreaks had occurred. Farms that kept cattle for draught or for fattening had higher BCSs and, therefore, prices. Older male crossbred cattle achieved the highest prices. Wealthier households used a combination of early weaning and castration to achieve greater returns. The body condition had a significantly positive relationship with cattle price received by smallholders. Therefore, BCS is an indicator for determining the price of cattle. The value of the unstandardised coefficient between BCS and selling price was 0.913. This coefficient indicates that as BCS increases by 1 (on a scale from 1 to 5) the average price of cattle will increase by $US91.30. Smallholders now have the opportunity to produce animals for domestic and international markets, and it is important to maximise quality and marketability of the cattle.

Keywords: cattle management, livelihoods, smallholder

Introduction

Cambodian smallholders have traditionally kept cattle as assets to sell when required and to provide draught services to assist in rice production. More recently, increasing per capita incomes and a resulting growing demand for meat are leading to commercial, market oriented cattle production supplying growing urban populations. Cattle are playing an increasingly important role in the national economy and livelihoods of rural communities and households (Patrick et al 2014).

An efficient and equitable cattle industry in Cambodia faces issues of biosecurity, production and markets. Smallholders still own the great majority of cattle and many improvements need to take place at the household level. Efficient production requires good quality feed available throughout the year. Improved biosecurity requires changes to traditional management practices and greater uptake of vaccination for key diseases. An efficient market system rewards producers who invest in and produce good quality cattle. Effective policy requires a greater understanding of the factors driving farmer behaviour and influencing management and market outcomes. Policy needs to be pro-poor and rural development to achieve sustained growth and reduced poverty (Henley 2012).

Native grasses and crop residues are the traditional feed in Cambodia and have low nutritive value and high labour requirements (Som et al 2011). Combined with increasing land use intensity and seasonality of availability (Ngim et al 2011) means feed is the main limiting factor contributing to low growth rates (less than 100 grams per day) and poor reproductive performance ( Pen, Savage, Stür, and Seng 2009) in cattle.

Other biotic and management factors that affect the productivity and therefore profitability of cattle farming include type of housing, season, initial body weight, sex, and housing (Koknaroglu et al 2005 ), age of cattle (Arango et al 2002), genetic selection, parity, age within parity, season of calving, stocking rate, level of feeding, and diet type (Roche et al 2009).

Other external factors also influence cattle price. Foe example, the type of sellers, buyers’ purposes, festivals, time of transaction and international trends influenced cattle prices in Ethiopia (Adugna 2006). Access to market information is another important factor influencing the smallholder’s ability to maximise profit. Smallholders lack of knowledge of market prices, exacerbated by poverty, illiteracy and low social status, often allow traders to take advantage of smallholders (Pokhrel and Thapa 2007; Norton, Alwang, and Masters 2010). Imperfect information and collusion by marketing agents contribute to low prices received by smallholders (ACDI/VOCA 2005; Alwang and Marió 2008; Norton, Alwang, and Masters 2010).

A better understanding of the factors driving cattle price at the farm level will allow targeted investigations around those identified management and marketing factors. An understanding of how smallholders can respond will contribute to maximise returns from cattle, thereby improving livelihoods. This study identifies the factors that influence the on-farm economic value of cattle in Cambodia. The specific objectives are to:

• identify farming practices that increase cattle quality through improved production and disease management.
• investigate whether smallholder marketing behaviour and other characteristics are correlated with price achieved, independent of cattle quality.

The study assumes that better cattle production and disease management will result in better body condition and that better body condition will result in better price.

Method

The study was conducted in two Cambodian provinces: Kampong Cham and Pursat. These two provinces were selected due to their important roles in the Cambodian cattle industry. Cattle are very important as sources of income to smallholders in Kampong Cham, and there is easy access to the higher value Vietnamese market. Pursat is more centrally located with a greater emphasis on rice production, and cattle are a less important activity. Data were collected through household interviews with structured questionnaires. A total of 287 smallholders were randomly selected for interview, 144 in Kampong Cham and 143 in Pursat. The interviews collected information on cattle production and animal health management, cattle marketing, as well as socio-economic data. Smallholders were asked to provide production information for the previous 12 months.

Modelling and data

Based on interview data, an initial model hypothesised relationships between factors expected to affect cattle prices (Figure 1). Structural equation modelling (SEM) then tested the proposed model. (SEM) uses a priori knowledge in the form of a diagram incorporating assumptions of linear relationships among variables (Iriondo, Albert, and Escudero 2003; Kingsolver and Schemske 1991). SEM is a suitable method for exploring cause and effect relationships among variables in a complex system, if underlying theory establishes a sound basis for expecting causal relationships to be present (Schumaker and Lomax 2004). Data analysis used Stata 12. Normality and homogeneity of variance of the residuals were tested, and a multicollinearity check conducted. In the preliminary analysis, ANCOVA guided the selection of significant variables. During this stage, model trimming removed some insignificant variables from the model. For categorical variables, further analysis tested the significant effect among categories. The significant categories with the highest impact were the basis for further analysis.

Figure 1. Potential factors affecting farm-gate cattle price in Cambodia

Farmer characteristics will influence both production and health management and the marketing practices utilised. Farmer characteristics will influence marketing practices that will determine the price received directly. Better production and management practices will result in higher BCS. A positive correlation between BCS and price received by smallholders reflects market efficiency (Figure 1).

Production practices and health management

Production practices that increase BCS include cattle housing, breed, age, sex of cattle, feed type, feeding method, weaning age, calving time and age of castration. Cattle housed under shelter gained more weight than those left outside, and fewer cattle per pen generated an increase in profit per head (Koknaroglu et al 2005). BCS is related to cattle breed, age and sex. BCS tends to be higher in older cattle (Renquist et al 2006). Liveweight price increases until cattle were five years of age and then decreased (Adugna 2006. Steers tend to be more profitable than heifers because they are heavier, consume more feed, gain weight faster and utilise feed more efficiently (Koknaroglu et al 2005; Adugna 2006).

Feed quantity and quality affects BCS (Bastin and Gengler 2013 ) and season plays a major role in feed type and availability in Cambodia. Good quality feed may not be available throughout the year, and hence body condition varies. It is important to match feed quantity with feed requirements, particularly in breeding systems where cows and calves have different feed needs. Method of feeding will also affect BCS. Smallholders use different feeding methods according to the season. During the wet season, where grasses are available and easily accessed, cattle do not need to travel a long distance to obtain food. During the dry season, however, cattle may need to walk a significant distance, affecting energy reserves.

Cows have various calving times in Cambodia, and the time of calving can influence BCS. BCS increased as calving age increased (Koenen et al 2001).

Age of weaning and age of castration were also included. Castration produces good quality meat and reduces aggression and mounting behaviour, preventing injuries (Coetzee 2010; Lazzaroni and Biagini 2008). Castrated cattle produce better quality meat than intact males, even though they often have lower liveweights, and therefore command a higher price (Lazzaroni and Biagini 2008).

Healthy cattle maximise weight gain and body condition. Therefore, farming practices that maintain the health of cattle may can result in higher BCS. These activities include maintaining a regular vaccination and parasite control programme.

Smallholders raise cattle for different purposes, including draught power, breeding, fattening, and cultural and social reasons. The purpose/s of keeping cattle can therefore affect smallholders’ management practices. In the model, this variable has an indirect relationship with BCS.

Marketing practices

Cattle prices in Cambodia show large price differences for the same cattle breed, sex, BCS and age groups (O’Connell et al 2011). Prices for local breed females in the fat BCS group ranged from US$296 to US$914 for a 2 to 4 year old cow, and US$296 to US$815 for a 4 to 10 year old cow. The price of local breed males with medium BCS ranged from US$296 to US$864 for a 4 to 10 year old male. Such major price variations may indicate a significant lost opportunity for smallholders to maximize their returns. Lack of an accessible market information system and a lack of business acumen are possible major contributing factors to smallholders not receiving an appropriate price (O’Connell et al 2011). Testing the influence of household marketing practices on price included time of selling, mode of payment, reason for selling, access to price information, communication among value chain actors, and the number of competing traders.

Selling cattle direct to consumers during religious festivals or traditional events may generate higher prices as it eliminates market chain actors. The decision to sell by credit or cash may also influence price. A credit price should be higher than a cash payment price to reflect risk and the cost of credit. Traditionally, smallholders sell cattle for cash needs (i.e. to pay school or health costs) rather than selling at a seasonal high or for a particular market. Selling under pressure may lead to a lower price.

In most developing countries there are no specified marketplaces for cattle trading. Small scale actors, who employ traditional methods of processing and handling, are the main participants in the market. It is common that smallholders, who are the main producers in the cattle industry, receive only a small fraction of the value of their output (Rota 2010). If smallholders have access to up to date price information, they are in a better position to negotiate with traders. Similarly, the ability to negotiate with numerous buyers will improve competition and lead to higher prices. Most smallholders knew an average of three traders who bought cattle in their area, a positive sign for pricing.

Smallholders’ characteristics

Characteristics such as total landholding, level of saving, farm income, leadership status, education, and frequency of public meeting attendance may influence the ability of smallholders to manage their resources and to maintain cattle in good health. Smallholders with high economic status can afford higher quality inputs for their cattle.

Farmers who have leadership roles within the community may have greater access to information and knowledge that can influence farm management. Leaders may also be early adopters of new farming technologies. Educational level correlates with farm management practices. Well-educated farmers are better equipped to understand and implement improved management practices. Attending meetings may also affect the way smallholders manage their farms, providing opportunity for information exchange. Therefore, higher BCS would result from frequent meeting attendance.

Preliminary analysis

ANCOVA identified variables correlated to cattle condition and health. Some exogenous variables showed significant correlation with BCS and health status of cattle (Table 1).

Study location, breed, type of cattle house, the reason for keeping cattle, age of castration, the interaction of breed type and weaning practices, the interaction of breed type and castration practices, and feeding management (interaction between type of feed and feeding method) have significant relationships with BCS. The sex of cattle, calving practices, and health status showed no significant correlation with BCS (Table 1).

Pairwise comparison revealed that among the five keeping methods practiced by smallholders, keeping cattle under the house provided the highest average BCS (1.95). Keeping them in the garden near the house, or in a fenced area, was related to a lower BCS. The smallholder’s reason for keeping cattle influenced BCS (ρ-value < 0.05). Cattle used for draught power had the highest average BCS (1.92). The BCS of cattle kept for fattening or draught power was significantly higher than cattle kept for breeding and cultural reasons.

Smallholders castrated their male cattle across a range of ages, from two to 72 months. Males castrated at a younger age (3 to 18 months) had a higher average BCS than males castrated at an older age. However, most smallholders (76%) castrated their cattle when they were over 20 months of age. This partly contributes to the non-significant effect of castration on BCS. Castration practices can increase BCS when smallholders also practice weaning, as shown by the joint effect test of these two variables (ρ-value = 0.006).

The interaction between breed type and male cattle at more than 3 years of age, and between feed type and feed method in all four seasons also had significant effects on BCS, (ρ-values < 0.05). Crossbred male cattle of 3 years of age and over also had a higher BCS. Feeding management including type of feed and method of feeding was assumed to affect BCS. The type of feed and feeding method varies with season. Joint tests for feed management reveal that in the period from November to January, if rice straw, native grass, or rice bran was the feed type, then keeping cattle in the pen all day or cutting and carrying feed were the methods contributing to an increase in BCS (Table 2).

Between February and April, keeping cattle in the pen all day was the only method to increase BCS if the main feed type was rice straw or native grass or rice bran. However, the range of effective feeding methods extended to tethering and cutting and carrying feed if smallholders fed cattle with rice straw.

There were some options available for smallholders in feeding management in order to obtain high BCS in May to July. Keeping cattle in the pen all day, tethering cattle, or cutting and carrying feed were appropriate feeding methods where smallholders fed cattle with rice straw. For native grass, keeping cattle in the pen or free grazing or cutting and carrying feed was effective. Crop residues worked well for high BCS if smallholders tethered their cattle.

Tethering and free grazing were suitable methods when using rice straw between August and October. When feeding native grasses, keeping cattle in the pen appeared to be the most effective feeding methods. Herding and cutting and carrying feed worked well with crop residues. Free grazing was a good method for rice bran.

No cattle health variables were significantly related to BCS. However, the incidence of FMD and HS in the study location related health status of cattle positively. Cattle were likely to get sick if there were FMD and HS outbreaks in the smallholders’ area. The number of FMD and HS in smallholders’ area, type of vaccine, frequency of vaccination, and worm control practices did not impact health status.

The significant variables identified through this preliminary analysis were then included in the structural equation modelling (SEM). To represent significant interactions of variables, new variables were generated. These new variables were interaction of weaning and castration and interaction of breed type and quantity of male cattle over 3 years old.

Smallholder household characteristics

Six smallholder characteristics, including total landholding, saving, farm income, leadership level, frequency of meeting attendance, and education, were included in order to capture how these factors influence farm management. These six variables were reduced to two using confirmatory factor analysis. Farm income, total landholding and savings became a new variable economic status, while leadership level, frequency of meeting attendance and educational level became social status. The model had good fit with RMSEA value of < 0.05, and CFI and TLI values of 1.00.

Household cattle marketing

Four out of 14 variables were significantly correlated with farm gate price (Table 3). They include castration, sex of cattle sold, the interaction of breed and age of cattle sold, and access to price information. Castrated cattle receive a higher price than those were not castrated (ρ = 0.036) as it was expected that the castrated cattle could produce better quality meat.

The results show that male cattle obtained a higher price than female cattle. The average price of male cattle was $570 per head, while it was $360 per head for female cattle. The price of Crossbred male cattle was slightly higher than that of local breed male cattle, but the difference was not significant. The age of cattle sold range from one to 11 years of age, however most smallholders (96%) sold their cattle under nine years of age. The highest priced cattle were between 5 and 8 years of age.

The four significant marketing variables were included in the following analysis. All non-significant variables were removed. Although BCS was not significant, it was included as the only variable that linked farming practices and the price of cattle.

Results and Discussion

Survey results

The BCS was low in both provinces, with an average of 1.81, however Kampong Cham was higher than in Pursat. This higher BCS may be related to the higher cattle price received by smallholders in Kampong Cham (US$446) compared to in Pursat (US$303).

Even though the average landholding in Pursat (4.0ha) was larger than in Kampong Cham (1.6ha), the reverse was true for farm income. Smallholder farm income in Kampong Cham was approximately twice as high as in Pursat.

Most smallholders (87%) had no savings. The percentage of smallholders with savings was higher in Pursat than in Kampong Cham, although the income from farming was lower. Non-farm income of Pursat smallholders made a greater contribution to household income. Most smallholders were not interested in participating in community organisations (87%). Of those who were involved, most played a role at the village level (11%).

The level of education was fairly low among smallholders in both provinces, with most (75%) only attaining primary schooling or lower. The highest level of education attained by another member of the farm household was generally higher. The remaining approximately 20% had attained high school or secondary level. 3% of Pursat respondents had attended university, compared to none from Kampong Cham.

Most smallholders in both provinces sold cattle in the last three years (Table 5). Local breeds and male cattle comprised the majority of the cattle sold. Traders were the main buyers, accounting for 63 per cent in Kampong Cham and 48 per cent in Pursat. Other smallholders or family were the second most common buyers. Only a relatively small percentage of smallholders in either province sold cattle to a broker or direct to a slaughterhouse. It is expected that direct selling to a slaughterhouse would enable smallholders to obtain a higher price because of a shorter market chain and hence lower transaction costs.

Almost all smallholders were paid cash at the time of sale, with the remaining cattle sold on credit. The mode of payment chosen by smallholders may relate to their reason for selling cattle, as an immediate need for cash is the main reason of selling cattle (75%). In terms of the best time to sell cattle with regard to price, there was no significant difference in smallholders’ perceptions of different times of the year.

Smallholders undertook a variety of practices to organise selling cattle and to obtain marketing information (Table 6). When considering the sale of cattle, smallholders tended to discuss their potential sale with their neighbours, with a broker visiting their house, or to contact a broker to sell the stock. This seems to be relatively consistent between the two provinces.

Three quarters of smallholders communicated with their brokers or traders in person in both provinces, although 20% communicated using mobile phones. More than half the smallholders sold without price information (27%) or with information from the broker (27%). The remainder had a range of people they approached for information about price such as neighbours and relatives. Just under half the smallholders perceived that they had the same access to price information as brokers/traders. Over one third of the smallholders felt that they did not have as much price information as the brokers and traders, while another 15 per cent to 19 per cent were not sure.

Structural equation model of cattle farming

A structural equation model (SEM) was built using the significant variables from preliminary analysis. Variation inflation factor (VIF) measured the extent of multicollinearity in the model. VIF greater than 10 is considered high (El-Dereny and Rashwan 2011) or when the correlation coefficient among the exogenous variables is greater than 0.9 (Grewal, Cote and Baumgartner 2004). VIF values for variables in the model were less than 3, indicating that multicollinearity was not a problem.

21 variables were included in the initial model (Figure 2) and are described in Table 7. Because the model contains unidirectional relationships between the variables, it is categorised as recursive.

Figure 2. The initial model of cattle farming in Cambodia

The goodness of fit of the initial model was tested using the root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA), comparative fit index (CFI) and Tucker Lewis index (Bayard and Jolly 2007; Cai, Jun and Yang 2010). Values of fit statistics for the initial model indicated that it was a poor fit, with a RMSEA value greater than 0.10 and the values of CFI and TLI less than 0.90. To improve the goodness of fit, the model was modified by removing insignificant variables and paths (model trimming), or by adding additional paths (model building). Model trimming was completed by constraining free paths to zero. Model building was carried out by specifying previous zero paths as free parameters.

Model trimming

The Wald test was used to identify the insignificant variables and paths to be trimmed. The variables; house type, feed and feeding method in Nov – Jan and May – Jul and interaction variable of breed and quantity of male cattle > 3 years were removed due to insignificant correlation with any variables in the initial model. The Wald test suggested that trimming these variables could improve the model fit. Insignificant paths were also removed based on the results of the Wald test.

Model building

The model was built based on a modification indices test. The selection of additional paths was based on the value of the indices. Paths added to the model were; (i) from castration practices to age at time of castration; (ii) from incidence of HS to access to price information and selling price.

The model modification generated the final model presented in Figure 3. The test of the revised model provided a good model fit with the values of RMSEA, CFI and TLI were 0.033, 0.965, and 0.954, respectively. These measures met the recommended levels, indicating support for the proposed model. Thus, we can proceed to interpret the estimation results of the structural model. The coefficients for the relationship between exogenous and endogenous variables in this paper are reported in standardised forms, allowing us to compare the coefficients among variables with different units. The standardised path coefficients of the structural model for cattle production are presented in Table 8.

Figure 3. Final model of SEM for cattle farming.

The numbers near to the arrows are path coefficients between the variables, while error values are located close to the error terms. For endogenous variables, intercepts are written in the rectangles. For exogenous variables, means are on the top and variances on the bottom in rectangles.

Production and health management effects

The findings reveal that all exogenous variables correlate with BCS significantly. BCS was significantly different between the two research locations. The BCS of cattle in Kampong Cham Province was significantly higher than in Pursat (β = -0.207, z = -3.78). This indicates that smallholders in Kampong Cham managed their cattle and farm more efficiently than those in Pursat. This allowed smallholders in Kampong Cham Province to receive higher prices for their cattle ($US446) than those in Pursat ($US303).

Age at the time of castration influenced BCS (β = -0.198, z = -2.36). Castration should be undertaken in younger cattle as it has a significant impact on body condition. However, in Cambodia, cattle are generally castrated when they are older (β = 0.802, z = 47.9). The economic status of famers correlated negatively with age of castration (β = -0.217, z = -3.06). Wealthier smallholders castrated their cattle at a younger age than poorer smallholders, although this is inconsistent with the anticipated effect of social status. Farmers with higher social status castrated their cattle when they were older.

Smallholders who kept cattle for draught power and for fattening rather than other purposes tended to have higher quality cattle (β = 0.154, z = 2.93). Nearly half of respondents kept cattle for these purposes. Weaning and castration were important cattle farming practices influencing BCS. Smallholders who undertook weaning, castration, or both practices, gained the same level of cattle BCS. The average score of BCS (1.89) was significantly higher than cattle that were neither weaned nor castrated (1.68).

Among the four feeding seasons, only two periods affected body condition: feed and method of feeding in February – April (the end of dry season); and August – October (the end of wet season). A right feeding method should be chosen for different type of feed to maximise the effect of feeding management on BCS.

Between February and April, two feeding managements contributing to higher BCS were: (1) when native grass or rice bran was the main feed, then keeping cattle in the pen all day should be the method of feeding; (2) keeping cattle in the pen all day or tethering or cutting and carrying feed was effective method for rice straw. The average of BCS (1.91) for these two feeding managements was significantly higher than other feeding managements.

For period August – October, feeding managements that led to higher BCS include: (1) rice straw given to cattle with the method of tethering or free grazing; (2) feeding cattle with native grass by keeping cattle in the pen; (3) feeding cattle with crop residues by herding cattle or cutting and carrying feed; (4) giving cattle rice bran by free grazing.

Economic status had opposite impact on feeding management from social status. Poor farmers appeared to have better feeding management than wealth farmers. While farmers who had higher social status applied better feeding management.

The health status of cattle was expected to influence body condition. About 75 per cent of smallholders in this study identified sick cattle at least once between 2010 and 2012, most of these were local breed cattle (73%). FMD was the most common disease with 75 per cent of sickness attributed to FMD. The incidence of FMD had an expected, significant correlation with the health status of cattle (β = 0.390, z = 8.44). FMD outbreaks in areas near the farms increased the likelihood of cattle becoming sick. The health status of cattle significantly influenced the BCS (β = -0.102, z = -1.97), sick cattle had a lower BCS than healthy cattle.

Marketing practice effects

Almost all the marketing variables were significantly correlated to selling price as expected. Smallholder characteristics did not affect the way they bought and sold their cattle. The body condition had a significantly positive relationship with cattle price received by smallholders. Cattle with high BCS received a higher price (standardised coefficient of 0.147 and z-value of 3.03). This indicates that BCS can be used as a means of determining the price of cattle. The value of the unstandardised coefficient between BCS and selling price was 0.913. This coefficient indicates that for every unit increase in BCS, the average price will increase by $US91.30.

Castration practices also had a positive impact on the value of cattle (β = 0.153, z = 3.09). Smallholders who castrated their males received higher prices than those who did not. The interaction of breed type and age of cattle sold also affected the price obtained by smallholders (β = 0.309, z = 6.61). Older cattle received a higher price, and this trend was further enhanced in certain breeds. The price of older crossbred cattle was higher than local breed young cattle. The unstandardised coefficient between the interaction of breed type and age of cattle sold and selling price is 0.483. This suggests that for each extra year that a crossbred animal is kept, smallholders will receive an additional $US48.30 per animal. However, this case only applies to cattle until 7 years of age. The price of cattle begins to decline over 7 years of age.

Male cattle appeared to obtain a higher price than female cattle (β = -0.236, z = -5.04), and therefore most smallholders (74%) preferred to sell male cattle. The average price of male cattle was $568, while the average price of female cattle was $349.

The incidence of HS negatively influenced cattle price (β = -0.118, z = -2.38). About 42 per cent of famers reported HS in their area. Where HS exists, or is perceived to exist, the price of cattle is reduced.

Having the same access to price information as brokers or traders did not affect the price smallholders received. However, smallholders perceived that they had lack of access to price information when there were HS outbreaks in their area (β = -0.240, z = -4.56). Unstable prices during these outbreaks may contribute to this. This can disadvantage smallholders due to the potential for unscrupulous trading.

Conclusion

Cattle management factors affecting quality and marketing practices influenced the price famers received for cattle. Management practices implemented by producers influence BCS, a measure of quality. Encompassing all this is the concept that smallholders’ decisions with regard to cattle management and marketing practices will, in turn, be influenced by the individual characteristics of the farmer.

Preliminary descriptive and structural equation modelling (SEM) identified the major factors that both directly and indirectly affected price. Age of weaning and castration influenced BCS with wealthier farmers tending to castrate at a younger age and hence improve cattle condition and value. Management practice reflected the reason for keeping cattle. Cattle kept for draught or fattening tended to be better quality. Sick animals also tended to have a lower BCS. Feeding methods were also important with the key times being the end of the dry season and the end of the wet season.

Other factors influenced the value of cattle while not directly affecting BSC. These include; castration resulting in better quality meat and better temperament in the animal, breed type and age of cattle sold and the incidence of disease such as HS in the area.

The importance of cattle quality was reflected in the finding that an increase in BCS (on a scale of 1 and 5) of one grade will lead to an increase in sale price of US$91, an average 25 per cent increase in value. Smallholder cattle owners in Cambodia now have the opportunity to produce cattle for specific domestic and export markets, it is important that they maximise the quality of the animal, as indicated by BCS, and maximise the marketability of their cattle.

Public and private service providers should continue to assist with the development of the industry by encouraging the adoption of management practices such as early weaning and castration, provision of good quality feed in the dry and late wet seasons and evaluate the appropriate breeds most suited to the Cambodian social and environmental conditions.

References

ACDI/VOCA 2005 Sustainable Cocoa Enterprise Solutions for Smallholders (SUCCESS): Alliance – Indonesia. Washington DC: Office of Economic Growth USAID.

Adugna T 2006 Determinants of Market Prices of Cattle in Eastern Ethiopia. Paper presented at the International Association of Agricultural Economists Conference, Gold Coast Australia.

Alwang J and Marió E G 2008 Poverty and Social Impact in the Agricultural Sector: Lessons from Experience. Development Policy Review, 26(2), 189-210. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1467-7679

Arango J A, Cundiff L V and Van Vleck L D 2002 Genetic parameters for weight adjusted for body condition score, height, and body condition score of cows. Journal of Animal Science. 80:3112‐3122. http://jas.fass.org/

Bastin C and Gengler N 2013 Genetics of body condition score as an indicator of dairy cattle fertility. A review. Biotechnologie, Agronomie, Société et Environnement, 17(1), 64-75. http://www.pressesagro.be/base/index.php/base

Bayard B and Jolly C 2007 Environmental behavior structure and socio-economic conditions of hillside farmers: A multiple-group structural equation modeling approach. Ecological Economics, 62(3-4), 433-440. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09218009

Cai S, Jun M and Yang Z 2010 Implementing supply chain information integration in China: The role of institutional forces and trust. Journal of Operations Management, 28, 257 - 268

Coetzee H 2010 Recommendations for Castration and Dehorning of Cattle. American Association of Bovine Practitioners. Conference. Proceedings of the Annual Conference, 40-45.

El-Dereny M and Rashwan N I 2011 Solving multicollinearity problem using ridge regression models. International Journal of Contemporary Mathematical Sciences (IJCMS), 6(12), 585 - 600. http://www.m-hikari.com/ijcms.html

Grewal R, Cote J A and Baumgartner H 2004 Multicollinearity and Measurement Error in Structural Equation Models: Implications for Theory Testing. Marketing Science, 23(4), 519 - 529. doi: 10.1287/mksc.1040.0070

Henley D 2012 The Agrarian Roots of Industrial Growth: Rural Development in South-East Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. Development Policy Review, 30 (s1): s25-s47. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1467-7679

Iriondo J M, Albert M J and Escudero A 2003 Structural equation modelling: an alternative for assessing causal relationships in threatened plant populations. Biological Conservation, 113(3), 367-377.

Kingsolver J G and Schemske D W 1991 Path analyses of selection. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 6(9), 276-280.

Koenen E P C, Veerkamp R F, Dobbelaar R P and De Jong G 2001 Genetic analysis of body condition score of lactating Dutch Holstein and Red-and-White heifers. Journal of Dairy Science, 84, 1265 1270. http://jds.fass.org/

Koknaroglu H, Loy D D, Wilson D E, Hoffman M P and Lawrence J D 2005 Factors Affecting Beef Cattle Performance and Profitability. Professional Animal Scientist, 21(4), 286-296. http://www.professionalanimalscientist.org

Lazzaroni C and Biagini D 2008 Effect of pre- and post-pubertal castration on Piemontese male cattle. II: Carcass measures and meat yield. Meat Science, 80(2), 442-448. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.01.007

Ngim M S, Pha K, Savouth H, Young J and Bush R 2011 Introduced forage productivity and quality in the smallholder environment. Paper presented at the Cattle health, production and trade in Cambodia. 7–8 June 2011. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Norton G W, Alwang J and Masters W A 2010 Economics of agricultural development: world food systems and resource use (2nd ed.). Milton Park, Oxon: Routledge.

O’Connell J, Young J, Henry L, Rast L, Sothoeun S, Bush R and Windsor P 2011 Assessment of current trends in smallholder cattle trade in Cambodia. Paper presented at the Cattle health, production and trade in Cambodia, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Patrick I, Muniroth S and Smith G 2014 The Changing Beef Industry in South-Eastern Cambodia’ in L. Robins (ed.) A Policy Dialogue on Rice Futures: Rice-Based Farming Systems Research in the Mekong Region. Proceedings of a dialogue held in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, 7-9 May, 2014, ACIAR Proceedings No. 142, Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, Canberra, pp. 84-87.

Pen M, Savage D, Stür W, and Seng M 2009 Constraints to Cattle Production of Small-scale Farmers in Kampong Cham Province, Cambodia. Paper presented at the International Research on Food Security, Natural Resource Management and Rural Development, University of Hamburg.

Pokhrel D M and Thapa G B 2007 Are marketing intermediaries exploiting mountain farmers in Nepal? A study based on market price, marketing margin and income distribution analyses. Agricultural Systems, 94(2), 151-164. http://www.journals.elsevier.com/agricultural-systems/

Renquist B J, Oltjen J W, Sainz R D and Calvert C C 2006 Effects of age on body condition and production parameters of multiparous beef cows. Journal of Animal Science. 84:1890‐1895. doi:10.2527/jas.2005-733

Roche J R, Friggens N C, Kay J K, Fisher M W, Stafford K J and Berry D P 2009 Invited review: Body condition score and its association with dairy cow productivity, health, and welfare. Journal of Dairy Science, 92(12), 5769-5801. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2431

Rota A 2010 Value chains, linking producers to the markets. Livestock Thematic Papers, February 2010

Schumacker R E and Lomax R G 2004 A Beginner's Guide to Structural Equation Modelling (2nd ed ed.). Marwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Som D, Miranda P, Sophal L, Mom S, Stür W and Savage D 2011 Improved cattle nutrition increases the time available for children of smallholder farmers in Cambodia to attend school. Paper presented at the Cattle health, production and trade in Cambodia, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Received 2 April 2016; Accepted 11 May 2016; Published 2 June 2016

Go to top