ROLE OF LIVESTOCK ON MIXED SMALLHOLDER FARMS IN THE ETHIOPIAN HIGHLANDS
A Case Study from the Baso and Worena Wereda near Debre Berhan
Guido Gryseels
icó l) \-bob-bo PROMOTORS: Dr. D. Zwart, Hoogleraar in de Tropische Veehouderij Dr. F.P.Jansen , Hoogleraar in de Agrarische Ontwikkelingseconomie, in het bijzonder de economische aspecten
BIBLIOTHEEK jiANDBOUWUNIVERSITEÎt ^AGENINGEN Guido Gryseels
ROLE OF LIVESTOCK ON MIXED SMALLHOLDER FARMS IN THE ETHIOPIAN HIGHLANDS
A Case Study from the Baso and Worena Wereda near Debre Berhan
Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor in de landbouwwetenschappen, op gezag van de rector magnificus, dr. H.C. Van der Plas, in het openbaar te verdedigen op woensdag 28 september 1988 des namiddags te vier uur in de aula van de Landbouwuniversiteit te Wageningen
;sw.v2>o£>3o Gryseels, Guido. 1988. Role of Livestock on Mixed Smallholder Farms in the Ethiopian Highlands. A Case Study from the Baso and Worena Wereda near Debre Berhan. Dissertation, Agricultural University, Wageningen, The Netherlands. *JooJ^of/ '2^
STELLINGEN 1. Inth emixe d farming systemo f theEthiopia nhighlands ,farmer s allocate their resourcesefficiently .Change s inth ewa y these farmers manage their farmswil l thereforeno t raise farm productivity significantly.Ne wtechnology ,o rexterna l inputsar enecessar y fora substantial increase insmallholde r agricultural production. 2.A strategy for livestock development on smallholder farmsi nth e Ethiopianhighland s should give firstpriorit y toth e intermediate functionso f livestock, sucha sdraugh tpowe r andmanure , (eigen proefschrift) 3.Timel yacces s todraugh tpowe r isa strongdeterminan t of farm grainproductio n inth eEthiopia nhighlands , (eigen proefschrift) 4.Th e introduction of crossbred dairy cows isa valuabl e development option fora significant fractiono fth e farmpopulatio no f the Ethiopian highlands,provide d appropriatemarketin g arrangements and extension servicesar eavailable , (eigenproefschrift ) 5.I nth eEthiopia nhighlands ,one-o xplough s canb e useful for seed covering,bu tcanno t replace the traditional ox-pair forprimar y cultivation, (eigen proefschrift) 6. On-farm livestock research shouldno tb e conducted solelyb y economists. 7. Inarea so f theEthiopia nhighland s thatar e structurally famine-prone,non-emergenc y foodai ddiscourage s themigratio n of the local farmpopulatio n toothe r areaso fhighe r agricultural potential. 8.Livestoc k research inth eAfrica nhighland sha sneglecte d small ruminants,an d therefore,th epoore r farmers. 9.Althoug h onlya smallfractio no fEthiopia' sgrai n isproduce d during the seasono f the 'small rains',thes e rainsdetermin e the timingo f firstcultivatio n and therefore theproductivit y of themai n cropping season.Thi saspec t iso f crucial importance inth e development of 'earlywarning ' systems thathav ea predictiv e capacity for crop failurean d foodai d needso fa particula r region.
10. Farmersparticipatin g inon-far mverificatio n trials should normallyno t receive compensation forparticipatin g insuc htrials . 11. The succesful outcome ofagricultura l research isusuall y associatedmor ewit h intuitiono f individual researchers and serendipidy, thanwit h formalplannin g and theavailabilit y ofa criticalmas so fstaff . 12.Mos texperienc e results fromba ddecisions .A n experienced person isthu sno tnecessaril ywise .
Proefschriftva nGuid oGryseel s Roleo f Livestock onMixe d Smallholder Farmso f the Ethiopian Highlands.A CaseStud y fromth eBas oan dWoren aWered a near Debre Berhan. Wageningen,2 8Septembe r 1988
W« Aan mama, papa, filip, dirk, joris, hugo, machteld, bruno, jan, jos, lief en albert ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thisdissertatio n isbase do n research Iundertoo k while Iwa s working at theInternationa l Livestock Centre forAfric a (ILCA)i nAddi s Abeba, Ethiopia from197 9t o1987 . Ia mdeepl ygratefu l to ILCA for the opportunity toundertak e this research,an d for theexcellen t research facilities itprovided . Particular thanksar edu et oDr .P.J . Brumby, ILCADirecto rGenera l from198 2t o1986 ,wh o took akee n interest in this work andwa sa continuous sourceo fencouragemen t throughout the research process. Ihav egreatl yappreciate d hisgenerou ssupport ,an d benefitted tremendously fromhi s sharp intellectan d in-depthknowledg e of the problemsan dopportunitie s of livestock production.
I amals over ygratefu l tom ypromotors ,Prof .D . Zwartan dProf . F.P. Jansen for theconfidenc e theygav eme ,th esuppor t inpreparin g thisdissertation ,an d their critical reviewso f successivedrafts . Their positive attitude and constructive commentswer ever y encouraging, and gavem e the strength tocomplet e thetask .
Dr.H .Bakker ,formerl yProfesso r ofTropica lAnima l Husbandry, encouraged me toundertak e thisdissertatio n andwa sver yhelpfu l inth e initial stageso f itspreparation . Igratefull y acknowledge his contributions andhav ever ymuc happreciate d ourman y interesting discussions. My researcha t ILCAwa sundertake nwithi n the framework of the HighlandsProgramme . Iow ea grea tdea l toDr .Fran kAnderson ,Tea m Leader of thisprogramme ,wh owa s anendles s sourceo f support and scientific advice. Frankwa salway savailabl e asa soundingboard , generouslyprovide d ideas,an defficientl y organized thelogistica l and administrative supportneede d toundertak e the field research. He also assisted inth edat aanalysis ,an dprovide d critical commentso ndraf t papers Iprepared . Many thanksar eals odu e toGetache wAssamenew , Senior TechnicalAssistan t Socio-Economics,wh oprovide d much appreciated assistance inth esupervisio n ofdat a collectionan do fdat a tabulation. Getachewwa sals over yhelpfu l inth emanagemen to f thedat afiles , assisted indat aanalysi san dmad eusefu l commentso n somedraf t chapters.
Inundertakin g fielddat a collection,I enjoye d the solid support ofa numbe r ofenumerators . Theywer ea finetea mtha t included Tesfayesus Seiro,Seif uKebede ,Kebed eAydefer ,Asfawose n Haile, Isayas Alemayehu,Alem uGemeda ,Samue lMesakal ,Kind e Engada,Danie lHabt e Wolde,Shifera wHail uan dAbayne hHaile . Day toda y supervision of their workwa sprovide d by theTechnica lAssistan t Socio-Economics of the ILCA DebreBerha nStatio nwhic h from 1979t o198 2wa sBerhan uWold eKidane , and from 1983 to198 6wa sAbeb e Misgina. Toal l Ia mver ygrateful . Theyworke d hard andmeticulousl yunde r oftendifficul t fieldconditions , and ensured a smooth cooperationwit h the farmers,th e representatives of PeasantsAssociation s andofficial s ofth eMinistr y ofAgriculture . Thanks are alsodu e toWoldea bWold eMariam ,Office r inCharg e of the Debre BerhanResearc h Station,fo rprovidin g administrative and logistical support,an dextensio n services. He alsoorganise d many of the farmer fielddays . AbiyeAstatke ,Senio rTechnica lAssistan tAnima l Traction,playe d acrucia l role indevelopin g thesingl e ox technology, andwa salway s availablewheneve r needed inth e field. I alsogratefull yacknowledg e the inputso fothe r staffo fth e HighlandsProgramme ,particularl yo fDr .Samue lJutzi ,Abat eTedla , MartieWagenaar-Brouwer ,Tay eWold eMariam ,Dr .I .Haque ,Ephrai mBekele , TadesseTessema ,Wagne wAyelneh ,Kelemewor kAsrat ,Asfa wYimegnuhal , FerdaworkDebele ,Negussi eAkalework ,Dr .Michae lGoe ,Aze bSahlemariam , Dr. IreneWhale nan d thelat eFran kO'Mahony . Inundertakin g fieldwork , I benefitted fromth eoccasiona l assistanceo fgraduat e studentsan d ILCA trainees,particularl yo fDorothé eDersch ,Aar tVoorthuizen ,Rit a Giglietti andMari aRos aStevan .
ILCA'scompute runi tprovide d substantial assistance inth e statistical analysiso fth edat aan d Ia mparticularl ygratefu l toRobi n Sayers,Jef fDurkin ,Darel lLigh tan dDr .Tre yRichardson . Other ILCA unitstha twer ever yhelpfu l inth e researchproces swer eDocumentation , AnimalNutrition ,Cartography ,Publicatio nan dLiaison .
I havegreatl ybenefitte d fromth e supportan dadvic eo fDr .Kur t Peters,ILC ADirecto ro fResearch .Othe r ILCAstaf ftha tprovide d helpful thoughtsan dwer ever ysupportiv e includedDr .Joh nM e Intire,Stephe n Sandford,Cee sD eHaan ,Dr .M .Sail ,Dr .Ji mLambourne ,Dr .Joh nTothill , KoenGeerts ,Dr .Joh nTrail ,Simo nChater ,Amd eWondafrash ,Dr .Joh n Walsh, thelat eDr .Marty nButterworth ,Joh nThersby ,an dBarr y Henricksen.
Thanksar eals odu et oth e staffo fth eDepartmen to fTropica l AnimalHusbandr ya tWageninge nUniversity . Theywer e alwayshelpful , interestedan d supportive. During thefina l stageso fth ewrit eu pI enjoyed thesuppor to fDr .Joh nMonyo ,Executiv eSecretar yo fTAC ,whic h wasmuc happreciated .
A significant contributionwa smad eb yDr .Joze fDecker san dhi s wife Koeki Claessens. Inadditio nt othei rwar man dgenerou s friendship, theycarefull y readthroug h successivedraft so fthi sdissertatio nan d gaveman yusefu l suggestions. Other friendstha twer ehelpfu l inon ewa y oranothe r includeJacquelin e Snijder,Lou kOchtman ,Doroth éAppels , MichielCherlet ,Mi aSavenberg ,Kee sTuinenburg ,Susan nHofs ,Kar l Herz, GarySmit han dAn nStroud .I a mals ogratefu l tom y familyan d friends for theirmora l supportan dunderstanding .
Theman ydraft so fthi sdissertatio nwer epatientl ytype d by MerronSeifu ,Gunill aArner-Tamantin ian dJoann eMorgante . Theydeserv e great credit for theirhar dan dexcellen twork .
A specialnot eo fthank si sdu e toAnn . Herenthousiasti c support and love,particularl ydurin gdifficul tperiods ,wer eo f critical importance inwritin gu pthi sdissertation .
Thisstud ywoul dno thav ebee npossibl ewithou t theful l cooperationo fth e farmerso fth eFaji-Bokafia ,Karafino ,Kormargfi a and MilkiPeasant sAssociations . Theywer e interestedpartner s inth e researchprocess ,provide d many ideasan d thoughts,an d Igreatl y enjoyed theman ydiscussion s Iha dwit h them. Theywer ealway s cheerfulan d cooperativean dpatientl y replied tohundred so fquestion swit hadmirabl e knowledge andhonesty . They taughtm ea grea tdea labou t farming,an d generouslyprovide d insights intothei rwa yo f life. Iwil lneve r forget theirwar mhospitalit yan d their senseo fhumour . Yet,despit e theirhig h levelo f traditional agricultural skills, their life remainson eo fdail y struggle for survival. Isincerel y hope that this studywil l provide theoutsid eworl dwit h a better understanding of their farming environment,an dwil l ultimately contribute togreate r food security for the smallholder farmer inth e Ethiopian Highlands. ABSTRACT
Theproductivit yo flivestoc k insub-Sahara nAfric a interm so f milk andmea t isth elowes to fan yworl d region.Th eoutcom e of livestock developmentproject sha sbee ndisappointing .Lo w returnst oinvestmen t in suchproject shav eofte narise n frompoo rprojec tdesign ,i ntur nth e resulto f inadequateunderstandin g ofth e relevantlivestoc k production systems. Livestock insub-Sahara nAfric a isconcentrate d on smallholder farms,wher ecro pan d livestock husbandryar epractice d inassociation . The roleo flivestoc k insuc h "mixed" farming systemsan dth e interactionsbetwee n thecro pan d livestock componentshav eofte nbee n poorlyunderstood .
Thehighland shav e thehighes tdensit yo fbot hth ehuma nan d livestockpopulation so fan ymajo recologica l zone insub-Sahara nAfrica . Almostal lth elivestoc k ofthi szon eca nb e foundo nmixe d smallholder farms. Ethiopiaaccount s for 50%o fth eAfrica nhighlan d landmass,an d hasth elarges tlivestoc k herdo nth eAfrica ncontinent .Thi sstud y reviewsth e roleo f livestock onmixe d smallholder farms inth e Ethiopian highlands.
The studytake sa farming systemsapproac h to research.I twa s undertakenwithi n the framework ofth eHighland sProgramm eo fth e International Livestock Centre forAfric a (ILCA). Fielddat awer e collected from197 9t o198 5throug h farmmanagemen tan dhousehol d economic surveyso fa tota lo f17 0traditiona l smallholder farmslocate d infou rdifferen tPeasant sAssociation so fth eBas oan dWoren adistrict . Theare a isrepresentativ e of thehighe raltitud e zoneo f theEthiopia n highlands,an d islocate d ina cereal-livestoc k zone.Th e farming system isbase do nsmallholde r rainfed subsistence agriculture,annua l crops planted bybroadcaste d seed, rudimentary implementsan da nox-draw n woodenplough ,th e 'maresha'. The resultso fthi sstud y showtha t livestock areo fcrucia l importance tothi sfarmin g system,an dtha t there isa hig h levelo fcrop-livestoc k integration. Livestock providea dominantpar to f the farm'scas h incomean dgros smargin . Themai n outputso fcattl ewer e intermediateproduct suse da sinput s intoth e crop productionenterprise ,suc ha sdraugh tpowe r forlan d cultivationan d cropthreshing ,an dmanur e for fertilizer. Theavailabilit yo fanima l draughtpowe rwa sa significant factor indeterminin g the levelo f farm grainproduction . Livestock generated a substantial amounto f employment,an dwa so fprim e importance inprovidin g securityan da sourceo f investment toth e farmhousehold . Animals,particularl y small ruminants,wer e soldaccordin g tocas h flowneeds ,an dpurchase d asa storeo fwealth . Donkeysprovid ealmos tal lth etranspor to f inputsan d outputso fagricultura lproducts .Th edat a showtha tlivestoc k productivity islo wfo r finalproducts ,bu thig h interm so f intermediate products.Th emai nproductio nan d institutional constraints to increased farmoutpu tar e identified anddiscussed . Theprincipa l constraint to thedevelopmen t oflivestoc k production for increased offtakeo fmea tan d milk isth e importance givenb y farmerst oth e intermediate functionso f livestock. Research on relevant technology to increase theproductivit y of livestock inth eEthiopia nhighland s is reviewed.A t ILCA's experiment station inDebr eBerhan , researchwa sundertake n on possible interventions forth efarmin g systemo fth eBas oan dWoren adistrict .Tw o technologies related tosmallholde r livestock production appeared particularlypromising :th eus eo f crossbred dairycow s (Boranx Friesian) formil k production,an d theus e ofa newl ydevelope d single-ox plough.Th eencouragin g resultso fon-statio n researchan d anex-ant e evaluationusin g a linearprogrammin gmode l led toth e initiation of farmer-managed on-farm trialso fbot htechnologie s inth e samepeasant s associations inwhic h thediagnosti c studiesha dbee n undertaken previously. Theproductivit y of test farmswa scompare dwit h thato f other farmstha t serveda sa control.Crossbre d dairycow sha d significantlyhighe rmil kyield s thancow so f local breeds, incomes of dairy test farmerswer e significantlyhighe r thanthos eo f control farmers,an dn omajo rproblem swer eencountere d intechnolog yadoption . Themajo r constraints todair ydevelopmen t inth eare awer e found tob e a shortage of feeddurin g thedr y season,lac k ofmil kmarketin g facilities particularlydurin g themai n fastingperiod ,occasiona l disease problems of crossbred cattle,an d the lack ofappropriat ebreedin g services. If adequate extension services canb eprovided , smallholder dairy production on thebasi so f crossbred cowscoul db ea nefficien tvehicl e for agricultural development inth earea . Verification trialswer e also conductedo nth eutilisatio nan d rateo fadoptio no fth e single-ox plough for land cultivation.Bot hutilisatio n and adoptionwer e low. An importantweaknes so f the technology appeared tob e thepoo r structural stability of the single-oxuni t comparedwit h thetraditiona l 'maresha' ploughdraw nb ya pai r ofoxen . The research findings suggest that single-ox ploughingma yb eusefu l for seed covering operations,bu t could not replace theus eo fpaire doxe n for land cultivation.
The studyconclude swit h anappraisa l of the methodological approach taken inth e researchprocess ,an da discussio n ofth e transferability of the research resultstha twer e obtained. The implications of the study for future researchwor k onagricultur e and livestock inth eEthiopia nhighland sar eals odiscussed . TABLEO FCONTENT S
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABSTRACT
TABLEO FCONTENT S vi
LISTO FTABLE SAN DANNEXE S ix
LISTO F FIGURES xiii
1. BACKGROUNDT OLIVESTOC K DEVELOPMENT INSUB-SAHARA NAFRIC A 1
1.1. Introduction 1 1.2. Contributiono fLivestoc k toAgricultura l Development 4 1.3. Livestock ProductionSystem s 11 1.4. Crop-Livestock ProductionSystem s inth eHighland s 16 1.5. Objectiveso fth eStud y 19
2. RESEARCHO NSMALLHOLDE RMIXE DCROP-LIVESTOC K FARMINGSYSTEM S 21
2.1. TheNee d forResearc h 21 2.2. TheFarmin gSystem sApproac h toResearc h 23 2.3. FarmingSystem sResearc h inMixe dCrop-Livestoc k Agriculture 27 2.4. Need forAdditiona l Studies 33
LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION INTH EETHIOPIA NHIGHLAND S 35
3.1. Agriculture inEthiopi a 35 3.1.1. Introduction 35 3.1.2. TheEconom y 37 3.1.3. Topographyan dClimat e 39 3.1.4. Framework forRura lDevelopmen t 40 3.1.5. Agricultural Production 41 3.1.6. Importanceo fth eHighland s 43 3.2. Researcho nFarmin g Systems inth eHighland s 44 3.2.1. Zonationo fth eEthiopia nHighland s 44 3.2.2. Livestock Production Systems 45 3.2.3. Researchan dDevelopmen tEffort s 48 3.3. A CaseStudy :Researc ho na Smallholde r Mixed Farming System inth eBas oan dWoren aWoredd a ofth e EthiopianHighland s 51 3.3.1. Background 51 3.3.2. Objectiveso fth eFiel d Research 54 3.3.3. ResearchDesign ,Dat aCollectio n andDat aAnalysi s 55 4. RESOURCEALLOCATIO NB YSMALLHOLDE R FARMERSI NTH EBAS OAN D WORENAWOREDD A 62
4.1. Introduction 62 4.2. ProductionEnvironmen tan dEcolog y 63 4.2.1. Physiography andSoil s 63 4.2.2. Agro-Ecological Characteristics 64 4.3. FamilySiz ean dCompositio n 67 4.3.1. CapitalAsset s 68 4.4. FarmHolding ,Lan dUs ean dLan dProductivit y 70 4.4.1. FarmHoldin g 70 4.4.2. LandProductivit y forCro pProductio n 72 4.4.3. LandProductivit y forFodde rProductio n 80 4.5. Livestock Holdings,Managemen tan dProductivit y 82 4.5.1. Background 82 4.5.2. LivestockHolding s 82 4.5.3. Livestock Husbandry 89 4.5.4. Livestock Productivity 90 4.5.4.1. Cattle 90 4.5.4.2. SmallRuminant s 93 4.6. LabourUs ean dTim eAllocatio n 96 4.6.1. Introduction 96 4.6.2. Labour Inputsi nCro pProductio n 97 4.6.3. Labour Inputsi nLivestoc k Production 104 4.6.4. OtherLabou r Inputsi nFar mProductio n 109 4.6.5. Returnst oLabou r inCro pProductio n 110 4.6.6. Returnst oLabou r inLivestoc k Production 111 4.7. Useo fAnima lDraugh tPowe r 111 4.8. Subsistence FoodEconom yan dMarketin g 115 4.8.1. Nutritionan dHealt h 115 4.8.2. Marketing 119 4.8.2.1. Introduction 119 4.8.2.2. Government Impacto nMarketin g 120 4.8.2.3. Marketingo fCrop s 121 4.8.2.4. Marketingo fLivestoc k andLivestoc k Products 124 4.9. FarmIncome san dGros sMargin s 125 4.9.1. Cash Incomes 125 4.9.2. GrossMargin san dValu eo fProductio n 128 4.10.Rol eo fLivestoc k and Interactionswit hCro pEnterpris e 133 4.10.1.Introductio n 133 4.10.2.Draugh tPowe ran dGrai nProductio n 133 4.10.3. Livestock forSecurit yan d Investment 139 4.10.4.Crop-Livestoc k Interactions 141 4.11.Majo r Constraints toa n Increaseo fFar mOutpu t 145 4.11.1. Introduction 145 4.11.2.Factor sLimitin g theProductivit yo fCro p Enterprises 146 4.11.3. FactorsLimitin g theProductivit yo fLivestoc k Enterprises 147 4.11.4. Institutional Constraints 149
TECHNOLOGICALOPTION SFO RON-FAR MVERIFICATIO N 151
5.1. Introduction 151 5.2. AnOvervie wo fPossibl e Interventions 153 5.2.1. DraughtAnima lUsag e 153 5.2.2. ImprovedBreed s 156 5.2.2.1. Cattle 156 5.2.2.2. SmallRuminant s 159 5.2.3. AnimalFee dan dNutritio n 160 5.3. AnEx-ant e Evaluationo fPropose d Interventions 161
6. INTEGRATIONO FCROSSBRE DCOW SAN DFORAGE S INTH EFARMIN GSYSTE M 171
6.1. Introduction 171 6.2. Materialsan dMethod s 171 6.3. Results 173 6.3.1. Background Informationo nDair yTes tFarmer s 173 6.3.2. FarmHoldings ,Lan dUs ean dProductivit y 173 6.3.3. LivestockHolding san dProductivit y 176 6.3.4. Productivityo fCrossbre d Cows 179 6.3.4.1. ReproductionCharacteristic s 179 6.3.4.2. ProductionCharacteristic s 180 6.4 FarmIncome san dGros sMargin s 182 6.4.1. Marketing 182 6.4.2. GrossMargin san d Incomes 183 6.4.3. CashIncome s 183 6.4.4. Effectso nGros sMargin s 184 6.4.4.1. CropGros sMargi n 184 6.4.4.2. GrossMargi n fromTraditiona l Livestock Production 185 6.4.4.3. GrossMargi n fromCrossbre d Cow Enterprise 185 6.4.4.4. Overall FarmGros sMargi n 188 6.4.5. Effecto nHuma nNutritio n 189 6.5. Constraints toDair yDevelopmen t 189 6.5.1. Background 189 6.5.2. Feed 189 6.5.3. Marketing 190 6.5.4. Disease 191 6.5.5. Breeding 191 6.6. Discussion 192
7. USEO FSINGL EOXE NFO RCRO PCULTIVATIO N 193
7.1. Introduction 193 7.2. Materialsan dMethod s 193 7.3. Results 195 7.4. Discussion 197
8. SUMMARYAN DDISCUSSIO N 200
8.1. Summary 200 8.2. Transferability ofResult s 205 8.3. Evaluationo fMethodolog y 207 8.4. Implicationsfo r FutureResearc h 211
LISTO FABBREVIATIONS ,ACRONYMS ,SIGN SAN DUNIT S 214
REFERENCES 217
SAMENVATTING 247
CURRICULUMVITA E 249 LISTO FTABLE SAN DANNEXE S
CHAPTERON E Page
Table 1.1. Valueo fTota lan dRegiona lLivestoc k Productionb y Kindo fOutpu t inSub-Sahara nAfric a (1975) Table1.2 . Distributiono fArea ,Rura lPopulatio nan dDifferen t Specieso fRuminan tLivestoc k byEcologica l Zoneo f Sub-SaharanAfric a (% oftota l inSSA ) 12 Table 1.3. Sizeo fHighlan dArea si nSub-Sahara nAfric ab y Regionan dEcologica l Zone 18
CHAPTERTW O
Table2.1 . AnnualYiel do fLivestoc k andMajo rCrop s inEthiopia , Kenyaan dTanzani a 21 Table2.2 . Comparison ofCharacteristic s ofCrop san d Livestock and Implications forOn-Far mTestin g 28
CHAPTERTHRE E
Table 3.1. Characteristicso fth eMajo rAgro-Ecologica l Zonesi n theEthiopia nHighland s 44 Table 3.2. Characteristics ofBas oan dWoren aWoredd a 54 Table 3.3. Sizeo fHuma nan dLivestoc k Populationso fth e4 SamplePA s 55 Annex 3.1. Specificationo fDat aCollecte d inFar mSurvey sa t Basoan dWoren aWoredd a 60 Annex 3.2. Sizeo fDat aSampl e (No.o fFarmers/PA ) 60 Annex 3.3. Areao fLan dUs eo fSampl ePA sb ySourc eo f Estimate (ha) 61 Annex 3.4. Land-Use SamplePA s (1984,% o fTota lArea ) 61
CHAPTER FOUR
Table 4.1. Meteorological RecordsDebr eBerha n (1979-1984) 66 Table 4.2. FarmSiz ean dLan dUs ePatterns ,1979-198 4 (ha) 70 Table 4.3. Proportiono fFarmer sGrowin g 'Belg'Crop san d Sizeo f 'Belg'Are a Sown 72 Table 4.4. Annual Cropping Patterno fContro l Farms (1979-1984) 73 Table 4.5. AverageGros sCro pYield sDurin gBel gan dMehe r Seasons (1979-1984,Kg/Ha ) 74 Table 4.6. AverageNe tCro pYield s (1979-1984,Kg/Ha ) 75 Table 4.7. Proportiono fFarmer sUsin gMinera l Fertilizer and AverageQuantit yUse d PerFarme r (1979-1984) 77 Table 4.8. Fertilizer Response ofBarle yan dVCR s (1979-1983) 78 Table 4.9. Costo fMinera l Fertilizer atDebr eBerha n (1979-1984) 78 Table4.10 . Effecto fPlantin gDat eo nBarle yYield s 80 Table 4.11. AverageAnnua l StrawYield s (1979-1984,Kg/Ha ) 80 Table 4.12. Grain/StrawRati oEstimate s (1979-1984) 81 Table 4.13. FeedQualit yo fHay ,Stra wan dNatura lGras si n Basoan dWoren aWoredd a 81 Table 4.14. MeanLivestoc k HoldingsContro l Farmers (No.o f Animals/Fa™, 1979-1984) 84 Table 4.15. Distributiono fLivestoc k Holdings (Mean1979-1984 ) 85 Table 4.16. ConversionProcedure s forMetaboli cWeigh tan dTL U Holding 85 Table 4.17. Herdan d Flock Structure 86 Table 4.18. FeedBalanc e (% FeedAvailable/Fee d Required) 90 Table 4.19. Frequencyo fWaterin gb yClas so fCattl ean db y Season (% ofFarmers ) 93 Table 4.20. SheepProductivit y 95 Table 4.21. Seasonalityo fMortalit yo fShee pan dLamb s (% ofFlock ,1983/1984 ) 96 Table 4.22. Labour Inputsi nCro pProductio n (1979-1981) 98 Table 4.23. LabourInpu tPe rCro pProductio nActivit y 99 Table 4.24. AverageLabou r InputPe rCro p (Hrs/Ha,Mea n 1979-1981) 99 Table 4.25. LabourAllocatio nb yActivit yan db yCro p (Hrs/Ha, Mean 1979-1981) 99 Table 4.26. ModalPlantin gWeek s forMajo rCrop s 100 Table 4.27. ModalHarvestin gWeek s forMajo rCrop s 100 Table 4.28. MonthlyDistributio no fLabou r Inputsfo rCro p Productionb yActivit y (Hrs/Farm,Mea n 1979-1981) 101 Table 4.29. Useo fFemale ,Child ,Hire dan dExchang eLabou r (Hrs/Farm) 102 Table 4.30. Saints'Day san dReligiou sHoliday si nth eBas oan d WorenaWoredd a 103 Table 4.31. Labour Inputs inLivestoc k Production (Hrs/Farm) 107 Table 4.32. TimeAllocatio no fHousehol dHead s (1981) 109 Table 4.33. TimeAllocatio n toFiel dWor k byDifferen t Family Members (1981) 109 Table 4.34. AssociationWor k ofContro l Farmers (1984) 110 Table 4.35. Returnst oLabou r forDifferen tCrop s (1979-1981) 110 Table 4.36. Animal Power Inputfo rCro pProductio nb yActivit y (Hours/Farm, 1979-1981) 112 Table 4.37. Weighto fDonke yLoa db yCommodit y 112 Table 4.38. AnimalPowe r Inputsfo rCro pProductio nb yP A (1979-1981) 113 Table 4.39. AnimalPowe r inputspe rCro p (Hours/Ha,Mea n 1979-1981) 113 Table 4.40. FastingPeriod sChristia nOrthodo x Church 116 Table 4.41. GrainProductio nan dUs ePe rFar m (1981,Kg/Farm ) 117 Table 4.42. Proportiono fHousehol dMember s inVariou s Categories Height forWeigh t (December 1982) 118 Table 4.43. Differential PricesPai da tDebr eBerha nMarket , December 1985 (Birr/Qt) 121 Table 4.44. MeanConsume r Prices forMajo r Cropsa tDebr e BerhanMarke t (1979-1984,Birr/Quintal ) 122 Table 4.45. MonthlyConsume r Priceso fMajo rCrop sa tDebr e BerhanMarke t (Mean1979-1983 ,Birr/Quintal ) 122 Table 4.46. Priceso fStra wan dHa ya tDebr eBerha nMarke t (1979-1984,Birr/Kg ) 123 Table 4 47 MonthlyPrice so fStra wan dHa ya tDebr eBerha nMarke t (Mean1979-1983 ,Birr/Kurbet ) 123 Table 4 48 Livestock Pricesa tDebr eBerha nMarke t (1979-1983, Birr/Animal) 124 Table 4 49 MonthlyLivestoc k Pricesa tDebr eBerha nMarke t (Mean1979-1983 ,Birr/Animal ) 124 Table 4 50 Priceo fLivestoc k Productsa tDebr eBerha nMarke t (1979-1983,Birr/Year ) 125 Table 4 51 CashIncom e fromFar mSource s (1979-1984,Birr/Farm ) 126 Table 4 52 CashIncom efro mAnima lTrad e (1980-1983,Birr/Farm ) 127 Table 4 53 Off-FarmCas h Income (1979-1981,Birr/Farm ) 127 Table 4 54 Household Expensesan dPurchase s (1980,Birr/Farm ) 128 Table 4 55 GrossMargin so fMajo rCrops ,Fallo wan d Pasture (1979-1983,Birr/Ha ) 129 Table 4 56 GrossMargin s fromLivestoc k (1979-1983,Birr/Farm ) 129 Table 4 57 GrossMargi nPe rUni to fLivestoc k (Birr/Animal) 130 Table 4 58 FarmGros sMargi nb yEnterpris e (Birr/Farm) 131 Table 4 59 AnnualGros sMargi n Including Intermediate Products PerUni tLivestoc k Enterprise (Birr/Animal) 131 Table 4 60 FarmGros sMargin s Including Intermediate Products (Birr/Farm) 132 Table 4 61 GrossValu eo fProductio n (Birr/Farm,1979-1983 ) 133 Table 4 62 LeastSquare sEstimat e ofGros sCerea lYiel d (kg/ha) fromth e Interactiono fYea ran dLeve lo fO xOwnershi p13 7 Table 4.63. LeastSquare sEstimat e ofTota lNe tCerea lYiel d from the Interactiono fLeve lo fOxe nOwnershi pan dYea r (1979-1984,Kg/Farm ) 137 Table 4 64 Areao fBel gPlanting sb yO xHoldin g (m2/Farm) 138 Table 4 65 AnnualRat eo fRetur nShee pEnterpris e 140 Table 4 66 AnnualRat eo fRetur nCattl eEnterpris e 140 Table 4 67 Livestock Sales (1984) 141 Table 4 68 StockingRate sb yCultivate dAre a (No.o f Livestock/ Farm/Ha) 142 Table 4.69. MeanCultivate dArea ,Fallo wArea ,Pastur eArea ,an d Productivityo fCerea l Strawsb yDifferen t Farmer Groups 142 Table 4.70. GrainSale sb yO xHoldin g (Birr/Farm) 143 Table 4.71. Fertilizer Useb yLivestoc k Holding 143
CHAPTER FIVE
Table 5.1 DraughtPowe rDevelope d and FeedConsume d bya Pai r ofLoca l anda Pai ro fCrossbre dOxe n 158 Table 5.2. Expected Costsan dReturn so fa Crossbre d Cow Enterprise inth eBas oan dWoren aWoredd a (Birr/Cow) 169 Table 5.3. Meanan d Standard Deviation (SD)o fNe tFar m Income Corresponding toAlternativ e Livestock Technologies (Birr/Farm) 170
CHAPTER SIX
Table 6.1. FarmSiz ean dLan dUs ePatter nDT F (1983-1985) 174 Table 6.2. Cropping PatternDT F (MeherSeason s 1983-1985,% CultivatedArea ) 174 Table 6.3. Grossan dNe tCro pYield sDT F (1983-1985,kg/ha ) 175 - Xll -
Table6.4 . NetYield sMajo r CropsDT Fan dContro l Farmers (1983-1985,kg/ha ) 175 Table6.5 . Fertilizer Useb yC Fan dDT F (% ofFarmer sUsing ) 176 Table6.6 . Feedstuffso fDifferen tType sOffere d toCrossbre d Cows (% ofFarmer sGiving ) 176 Table6.7 . Livestock Holdingso fC Fan dDT F (TLUEquivalen tpe r Farm,1983-1985 ) 177 Table6.8 . MeanLivestoc kHoldin gDT Fb yTyp e (1983-1985) 178 Table6.9 . FodderAmount sFe dt oCrossbre dAnimal s (Kg/Farm) 178 Table6.10 . Holdingso fCrossbre dCattl e (Meanpe r Farm, 1983-1985) 179 Table6.11 . MeanProductio nResult so fCrossbre d Cowsb y LactationNumbe r 180 Table6.12 . MonthlyMean so fMil k ProductionPe rCo w(1983-85 , Kg/Month) 181 Table6.13 . Disposalo fMil kProductio n fromCrossbre d Cows (Kg/Farm) 183 Table6.14 . CashIncome so fDT Fan dContro l Farmersb ySource , (1983-1985,Birr/Farm ) 183 Table6.15 . GrossMargi nPe rCro pfo rDT Fan dC F (1983-1985, Birr/Ha) 184 Table6.16 . GrossMargin s fromCro pProductio n forDT Fan dC F (1983-1985,Birr/Farm ) 184 Table6.17 . GrossMargi no fC Fan dDT F fromTraditiona l Livestock Production (1983-1985,Birr/Farm ) 185 Table6.18 . AverageCos to fFee dpe r FarmPe rYea rb y FeedType , forth eCrossbre d CowEnterpris e 186 Table6.19 . Costsan dReturn so fCrossbre dCo wEnterpris e (1983-1985,Birr/Farm ) 187 Table6.20 . Overall FarmGros sMargi nDT Fan dC F (1983-1985, Birr/Farm) 188
CHAPTER SEVEN
Table7.1 . Useo fSingl eO xPloughin g System (1983-1985,Are a Per Farm) 195 Table7.2 . MeanCro pYield so nPlot sPloughe d bySingl ean d PairedOxe n (Kg/Ha) 196 - XT1 1 -
LISTO F FIGURES
CHAPTERON E Page
1.1. Importanceo fDraugh tAnimal si nAfric a 8 1.2. Environmental Zonesi nSub-Sahara nAfric a 13 1.3. TheHighland so fSub-Sahara nAfric a 17
CHAPTERTW O
2.1. InteractionsBetwee nStation-Base d TechnicalResearc han d On-FarmAdaptiv eResearc h 26 2.2 Crop-Livestock Interactions inMixe dFarmin gSystem s 31
CHAPTERTHRE E
3.1. Mapo fEthiopi a 36 3.2. Zonationo fth eEthiopia nHighland s (basedo naltitud ean d agro-ecology) 46 3.3. Locationo fth eBas oan dWoren aWoredd a 52 3.4. Locationo fControl ,Singl eO xan dDair yTes tFarmer s inth e Basoan dWoren aWoredd a 56
CHAPTER FOUR
4.1. MainFactor s InfluencingEnterpris eChoic ean d Productivity ofa nEthiopia nSmallholde r 62 4.2. GrowingPerio dCharacteristic sa tDebr eBerha n 64 4.3. Distributiono fRainfal la t ILCAResearc hStatio na tDebr e Berhan (1979-1984,m mpe rMonth ) 65 4.4. FrequencyDistributio no fAre aCultivate d byContro l Farmers 71 4.5. Effecto fLengt ho fGrowin g Periodo nCro pYield si nBas oan d WorenaWoredd a (1979-1984) 75 4.6. CropYiel dan dHoldin go fSmal lRuminant s (1979-1985) 83 4.7. Liveweighto fLivestoc k Holdingb yFarme ran dAre aCultivate d 87 4.8. LivestockHoldin gb yFarme r andAre aCultivate d 88 4.9 Productiono fCerea l Strawb yFarme ran dAre aCultivate d 88 4.10. Seasonalityo fCalvin g (% ofCalve sBorn/Month ) 91 4.11. Seasonalityo fLambin g (Lambing%/Month ) 95 4.12. Distributiono fLabou r Inputsfo rCro pProductio n (Hourso f Labourpe rFar mpe rMonth ) 97 4.13. Incidenceo fReligiou sHoliday spe rMont h 104 4.14. Distributiono fLabou r Inputsfo rCro pan d Livestock Production 108 4.15. Distributiono fAnima l Power Inputsfo rCro pProductio n (Hourspe r Farm,Mea n 1979-81) 114 4.16. AreaCultivate dwit hCereal s forThre eLevel so fOxe n Ownership (Ha/Farm) 136 4.17. TotalNe tFar mCerea l Production forThre eLevel so f OxenOwnershi p (Kg/Farm) 138 4.18. MeanCro pYield sb yLivestoc k Holding 144 CHAPTERFIV E
5.1. LinkagesAmon g thePrincipa lComponent sbein gResearche d byILCA' sHighland sProgramm e 152
CHAPTER SIX
6.1. MonthlyMil k Productiono fCrossbre dDair yCow san d MonthlyRainfal l 182
CHAPTER SEVEN
7.1 Traditional andModifie dYok ean d 'Maresha'Ploug h 193 BACKGROUNDT OLIVESTOC KDEVELOPMEN TI NSUB-SAHARA NAFRIC A
1.1. Introduction.
Foodproductio npe rcapu ti nsub-Sahara nAfric aha sdecline d sharplydurin gth elas ttw odecades ,an dthi sha sresulte d ina widespread foodcrisi san da n increasingdependenc eo nfoo dimport s (Eicher,1982 ;Congres so fth eUnite dStates ,1984 ;Worl dBank ,1981 aan d 1984a;FAO ,1986a ;Mello re tal , 1987). There isa nurgen tnee d to increase theproductivit yo fagricultur e insub-Sahara nAfric a torever t thistren dan d toensur egreate r food security. Effortst o improve food securitynee d tofocu so nagricultura lproductio n rather thanfoo d productiononly ,becaus eo fth e incomean demploymen tgeneratin g capacity ofnon-foo d cropsan d livestock (Eicher,1982 ;Pinstrup-Andersen , 1983).
The importance ofdomesticate d animals inagricultur ean deconomi c developmentha sbee nwel ldocumente d (Winrock,1978 ;Crotty ,1980 ;FAO , 1983a;Nestel ,1984) . Theyar ea majo r sourceo fhig hqualit yfood , provide substantial inputsint ocro pproduction ,an dcontribut e amajo r partt ocas h incomeo fsmallholders ,fo rwho mthe yals oserv ea sa form of securityan dinvestment .
Sub-SaharanAfric aconsist sO f 46countrie s (FAO,1986b )an d isa regiono fextrem ediversit y interm so fclimate ,ecology ,environment , population,culture ,politica l systeman deconomi cmanagement . This diversity isals o reflected inth e region'sagricultura lsystems . Livestock productionvarie s frompastora lnomadis m tointegrate d systems with cropagriculture . Inman yareas ,th enatur eo flivestoc k production systemscorrespond s tostage si nth edevelopmen to flan duse . Virgin land isusuall yexploite d firstb ylivestoc k and thenuse d forcro p production,wit heventua l integrationo flivestoc k andcro pproductio n (Hawksworth, 1984).
Livestock production systems insub-Sahara nAfric aar e predominantly subsistenceoriented ,an d relatively concentrated geographically inarea swhic har etsets e freeo ronl ylightl y infested (ILCA,1980a) . Traditionalpastoralis mi susuall y found infragil e environmentsunde r constant threato fdrought ,an d characterized by overgrazing and resourcedegradation . Pastoralistsar epeopl ewh oderiv e mosto f their incomeo rsubsistenc e fromkeepin gdomesti c livestock that are fedo nnatura l forage,rathe rtha ncultivate d foddersan dpasture s (Sandford, 1983). Although recentevidenc e suggeststha tpastoralist s manage their resourcesefficientl y (Bremanan dd eWit ,1983 ;Cossins , 1985; Grandin,1987) , theirproductio n system isunde r increasing pressurea sth eavailabilit yo ftraditiona l rangelands issteadil y reducingbecaus epopulatio ngrowt h inAfric aha sle d toa nexpansio no f areascropped . Thedeclinin gamoun to f rangelandsan d inappropriate governmentan d land tenurepolicie shav e resulted inovergrazin g and land degradation (ILCA,1980b) . Overstocking isencourage d by thetenur e statuso fthes e rangelands,becaus epastoralist s lack incentivesan d alternative investmentopportunitie s toadjus t thesiz eo f their individualher d toth ecarryin g capacityo fth egrazin g landstha tar e communal (Lele,1984) . Todate ,researc heffort shav e failed toidentif y technical innovations thatca n substantially increaseproductivit y of thesepastora l systems,an d inth e short runonl y changes ingovernmen t policiescoul dbrin gwelfar e gains for thepopulation s involved (ILCA, 1987a). Aspastoralist s introduce somecroppin g inthei r production system,the ybecom eagropastoralists ,bu t stillderiv e themajo rpar to f their income fromlivestoc k production. As thecroppin g intensity increases,livestoc k andcro pproductio n graduallybecom emor e integrated ina mixe d farming system. Mixed farmsar emanagemen tunit s inwhic h livestock husbandry ispractise d inassociatio nwit h cropproductio n (Jahnke, 1982). During thelas tdecade ,increasin g attentionha s been givent oth eproblem san dopportunitie s of livestock production inmixe d farmingsystems .
Theproductivit y of livestock interm so fmil k andmea t in sub-SaharanAfric aha sbee n thelowes to fan yworl d region. During the lasttw odecade s increases inlivestoc k outputhav ebee n largelydu e toa numeric expansiono fherd san d flocks,rathe r thana n improvement of yield peranima l (Anteneh,1984) . Substantial investmentswer emad e in livestockdevelopmen tproject s throughout sub-SaharanAfrica . From 1974 to1983 ,annua lexterna lai d (notincludin g FAOan dUND Pprojects )fo r livestock projects inAfric aaverage dUS $ 78.9millio npe ryea r (FAO, 1986c). Theeconomi can d technicalperformanc e of these livestock projectshav egenerall ybee ndisappointing . From 1960 to1985 ,th eWorl d Bank invested approximately 1.34 billionUS $ inlivestoc k projects in sub-SaharanAfrica . AWorl d Bank audito f theseproject s found thatonl y 38% of themha d anEconomi c Rateo fRetur n (ERR)o fmor e than10% ,an d that 36%o fproject sha da negativ e rateo f return. Theoveral l ERR averaged -.8%fo r livestock projects inEaster nan d SouthernAfric a and -2.7% inWester nAfric a (WorldBank , 1985a). Anothermajo rdonor ,USAID , had similarly lowperformanc e recordso f itslivestoc k projects inth e region (Hoben,1979 ;Atherton , 1984).
A major causeo f thelo w returnt o investment in livestock has been inappropriate projectdesig nwhic h resulted froma lack of adequate understanding of livestock production systems,give n the complex relationships betweenth ebiological ,technica l and social componentso f these systems (Brumby, 1982). Inthei r surveyo f theliteratur e on agricultural development insub-Sahara nAfrica ,Eiche r andBake r (1982) noted that thereha dbee n little rigorous researchb yeconomist so n the motiveso fkeepin g cattlean d that "researcho n thebehaviou r of livestock herders inAfric a isabou ta tth e samepoin twher e researchwa s on theeconomic s ofcro pproductio n some 20year sag o- man y assertions anda sparse supply of facts". The sameauthor shighlighte d thenee d to givehig hpriorit y inlivestoc k research toa n improvemento f thedat a base, toproble m solving researchunde r field conditions,an d to acquiringbasi c knowledge of the interactionbetwee n the cropping and livestock subsectors inmixe d farmingsystems .
The lack ofbasi c knowledge of livestock productionsystems , despite their critical importance tosubsistenc e formillion so f smallholders andpastoralist s insub-Sahara nAfrica ,le d toth e establishment of the International Livestock Centre forAfric a (ILCA)i n 1974 (Gryseels et al, 1986a). ILCA's foundation report stated that "technical answersar eavailabl e toman yo f the specificproblem s facing livestock development inAfrica . Themajo r constraint lies rather inth e difficultyo f introducing change intoexistin g socio-economicsystems , combinedwit h inexperience inadaptin g technologies to suitloca l conditions" (Nesteletal, 1972).
Themajorit yo f livestock canb e foundo nmixe d farms,whic h account for 59%o f ruminantanima lunit s inAfric a (Wheeler, 1982). Thesemixe d farmsar eusuall y "small",althoug h thiscategorizatio n has been subjecto fmuc hdebat e (Wharton,1969 ;Valde s etal , 1979). According toDillo nan dHardake r (1980),a precis edefinitio no f "small farmers" isno t required to recognize the realityo f theirplight ,o r their importance inworl ddevelopment . Twocharacteristic s standout : their small size interm so f resources,an d their lowincom elevels . Although the importanceo f livestock insmallholde rmixe d farming systemso f sub-SaharanAfric aha sbee nacknowledge d (Musangi,1971 ; Sprague,1976 ;McDowell ,1978 aan db and1979 ;McDowel l and Hildebrand, 1980;Ruthenberg , 1980), relatively littlequantitativ e information is available on the rolean dcontribution so f livestock on these farms,an d efforts to increase theirproductivit yhav ebee nlargel yunsuccessful . While agronomists,economist san danthropologist s tended to ignore the contribution of livestock onsmal l farms,anima l scientistsha d little concern forunderstandin g theconstraint s toanima lproductio no n these farms,an dhav ebee n reluctant toaccep tth econcep t thatbiologica l and economicefficienc yd ono talway scoincid e (McDowell,1978b) .
Mixed farming systemsca nb e foundacros sal lecologica lzones , except theari d zone,o f sub-SaharanAfrica . Inth ehighlan dan d humid zones,almos tal l livestock areowne db ymixe d farmers. The highlands form theecologica l zonewit h thehighes tdensit yo fbot hhuma nan d livestock populations. Although thiszon eaccount s foronl y 5%o f the total landmas so f sub-SaharanAfrica ,th eare a containsalmos t 20%o f thehuma nan d 17%o f its ruminant livestock population (Jahnke,1982) . Ethiopiaalon eaccount s forapproximatel y 50%o f thehighlan darea ,an d themajorit yo fhighlan d livestock of sub-SaharanAfric a (Getahun, 1978a).
Thedisappointin g experienceso fmos t livestock development projects,whic h showed thatWester n technologyan d the resultso f classical on-station research couldno tb etransferre ddirectl y to African conditions,reinforce d thevie wtha tattempt s to increase the productivity of smallholder agriculturewoul dnee d tob ebase do na sound knowledge of theexistin g farming systems. A betterunderstandin g of these systemsan d adaptive researchwoul db enecessar y for the identification of relevant improvements (McDowellan dHildebrand ,1980 ; Gryseelse t al, 1986a;ILCA , 1987a).
Thisstud y reviewsth e roleo flivestoc k onmixe d smallholder farmso f theEthiopia nhighlands . Usinga farming systemsapproach ,i t characterises indetai l theallocatio no f resourceso nsmallholde r farms ina representative areao f theEthiopia nhighlands ,an d reportso n researcheffort s to increase theproductivit y of the livestock component of thismixe d crop-livestock agricultural system. The knowledge and experiencesgaine dhav e implications for themethodolog y of identification,appraisa l and resolvingproblem so f smallholder livestock production systemselsewher e inth ehighland so f sub-SaharanAfrica .
1.2. Contributiono f Livestock toAgricultura l Development Domesticated livestock insub-Sahara nAfric a canb ebroadl y categorized inlarg e ruminants (cattlean d camels), small ruminants (sheepan d goats),equine s (donkeys,mule san d horses),pig san d chickens. Ruminant livestock andequine sca nb egroupe d asgrazin g animals, i.e.animal s thatdepen d largelyo ngrazin g fornutrition .
Having converteddifferen t specieso f livestock intoa common referenceuni t ofTropica l Livestock Unit (TLU,o r ananima l of 250k g liveweight),Jahnk e (1982)estimate d that ruminantswer e of overwhelming importance,accountin g for 91.4%o f thelivestoc k populationo f tropical Africa. Equinesaccounte d for 4.8%,an dpig san d chicken for 3.8%o f the totalTL Upopulation . Theprim e importance of ruminants tomankin d lies inthei r ability toconver t grassan dothe r fibrous forage into foodan dothe rusefu l products,thereb yutilizin g plantmaterial s forwhich therewoul d otherwiseb e littlealternativ euse . The contribution of livestock toeconomi cdevelopmen t ofAfric a and elsewhereha sbee nwel ldocumente d (Ward,1974 ;Vandemaele ,1977 ; Winrock International,1978 ;Wheeler ,1982 ;Jahnke ,1982 ;Princ e Leopold Institute ofTropica lMedicine ,1982 ;FAO ,1983a ;Bernste ne t al,1984 ; Nestel, 1984;Lebbie ,1984) . Livestock playa variet yo f economic and social roles insub-Sahara nAfrica . Theyprovid e foodoutput s (milk, meat,an d blood), inputs intocro pproductio n (manure,draugh t power), and other outputs (hidesan d skins,transport) . Trade inlivestoc k and livestock productsprovide s cash farm income. Livestock areals oa form of investment and security inwhich savingsca nb ekept . Inman y societies,livestoc k ownershipals oprovide sprestige .
On themacro-economi c level,th elivestoc k sub-sector contributes approximately 17%o f totalagricultura l GrossDomesti c Product (GDP)o f tropicalAfrica ,o rabou t 5%o f totalGDP . Inabsolut e terms,th eannua l value of livestock productionha sbee nestimate d atUS $ 6billion ,usin g 1975price s (Jahnke,1982) . Thisestimat e includesonl y thevalu e of commodityoutputs ,no t the intermediate products sucha sdraugh tpowe r or manure. On thebasi so fdat a from197 5also ,ILC A (1987a)estimate d the total grossvalu e of foodan dnon-foo d outputso f ruminantlivestoc k in sub-SaharanAfrica ,no t includinghide san d skins,a tUS $6,48 6millio n (Table 1.1). According to ILCA'scalculations ,mea t isth e singlemos t important formo f livestock production,accountin g for 47%o f thevalu e of totaloutput . Beefalon eaccount s for 55%o fmea toutput . Thenex t most important livestock output isanima l traction,accountin g for31% . The importance of thislatte r output is regionallyorientate d however,a s iti sproduce d for 75%i nEas tAfrica . The transportvalu eo f livestock wasno t included inth ecalculation showever . Milk accounts for 15%o f the totalvalu eo f livestock output. Table1.1. : Valueo fTota lan dRegiona lLivestoc kProductio nb yKin do f Outputi nSub-Sahara nAfric aa/(1975 ) Kindo f Value inUS $million s (b) output WA CA EA SA SSA
Animal tractionc / 312 (21 )d / 11 ( 3) 1474 (39 ) 239 (26 ) 2036 (31 ) Manuree / 62 ( 4) 5 ( 1) 111(3 ) 16 ( 2) 194 ( 3) Meat f/ 811 (56 ) 277 (79 ) 1410 (38 ) 545 (58 ) 3043 (47 ) Milk 160 (11 ) 40 (12 ) 644 (17 ) 85 ( 9) 929 (15 ) Eggs 115 (8) 16 ( 5) 108 (3) 45 ( 5) 284 ( 4) Total 1460 (100) 349 (100) 3747 (100) 930 (100) 6486 (100) a/ Includesonl y foodan d food-relatedoutputs ,bot hmarkete d and non-marketed. b/ Outputwa svalue da tuniform , continent-wideprice s (1975). The pricesuse dwere : meat$ 1,000 ,mil k $15 0an degg s$ 750 ,al l expressed inUS$/tonne . Animal tractionwa svalue d atUS $ 5.2/ox- dayworked . WA= Wes tAfrica ;C A= Centra lAfrica ;E A= Eastern Africa;S A= SouthernAfrica ;SS A- Sub-SaharanAfrica . c/ Includes fieldoperation sb ybovine sonly . 3/ Figures inparenthese s indicatepercentage so f columntotals . e/ Valued atth eequivalen t commercial fertilizerprice so f theplan t nutrients contained. f/ Includesbeef ,goat ,mutton ,por k andpoultr ymeat . Source: ILCA (1987a).
These findingsar e incontras twit hthos eo fJahnk e (1982)wh o estimated thatmil kwa s themos t important livestock output. His calculations included onlymeat ,mil k and eggs,an dwer eo n thebasi so f grainequivalents . Thedifference sbetwee nbot houtcome sca n further be attributed toth eassumption s regarding thevalue so fcommodit youtputs . Whereas ILCAha sassume d init scalculation svalue spe r tonneo fUS $ 1,000 formea tan dUS $15 0 formilk ,Jahnk eapplie d importparit y prices ofUS $ 640 formea tan dUS $27 2fo rmilk . Over the lasttw odecades ,pe r caputmea tan dmil kproductio n in sub-SaharanAfric aha s remained statico rdeclined . Therewa sn oclea r pattern inth eproductio ntrend sbetwee n regions. Beefproductio n grew at2 %p.a . inth e firstdecad ean d 2.4%p.a .i nth esecond . Cowmil k output grewa t1.2 %p.a .i nth e firstdecade ,an d 3.5% inth e second (ILCA,1987a) . Thegrowt hi nhuma npopulatio nwa sapproximatel y 3%p.a . (FAO, 1986b).
Thedeman d for livestock products increased strongly, leading toa rapid increase ofdair y imports (Brumbyan dGryseels ,1985) . Dairy imports increased 8%a yea rdurin g 1961-70,an db y12 %a yea r during 1970-80. By 1979-81,on e third ofal l thedair yproduct s consumed in Africawer e imported. Sub-SaharanAfric a also imported substantial quantitieso fmeat ,averagin g 139,000 tonnesannuall y from 1983-85,fo ra value ofUS $ 184millio n (FAO1986 aan db) . The rapid increase inth edeman d forlivestoc k productsha sbee n linked toit shig h incomeelasticit yan d theeconomi cgrowt htha t occurred insub-Sahara nAfric adurin g the sixtiesan d 1970s. De Montgolfier-Kouevian dVlavono u (1983)estimate d theaverag e income elasticityo fdeman da t0.9 8 formeat ,0.8 2 formil kan d 1.10 for eggs. Thesevalue swer emor etha n fourtime shighe r thansimila r estimatesfo r staple foods. Thedeman d forlivestoc k products insub-Sahara nAfric a wasprojecte db yth e sameauthor st ogro wb y 3.8%fo rmil kan d 4.2%fo r meatpe rannu munti l theyea r 2000.
Sarmaan dYeun g (1985)foun d somewhat lowerestimate so f income elasticitieso fdeman d for livestock products insub-Sahara nAfrica . Theirestimat eo fth e incomeelasticit yo fdeman d formea twa s 0.79,fo r milk 0.68 and foregg s1.05 . Forcereal s theyfoun da correspondin g valueo f 0.16.
While importshav ebee n rising,export so flivestoc k products from Africahav ebee ndeclining . Thevolum eo fmea texport sdecrease d ata n averageannua l rateo f4 %ove rth elas tdecad e (ILCA,1987a) . This deteriorating tradepositio n canb eattribute d toth edeclin e inrea l internationalmea tprices ,overvalue d exchange rates,dumpin g practices bydevelope d countries,th eeffect so fdrought ,an d thegrowt h in domesticdeman d (ILCA, Ibid). Beefexport s inWester nan dCentra lAfric a aremainl y intraregionalbetwee nth eSahe lzon ean d theAtlanti c coast area. Easternan d SouthernAfric aaccoun t forapproximatel y twothird s ofbee fexport s inTropica lAfrica ,an dexpor tmainl y tocountrie so f the EECan dth eMiddl eEas tare a (ILCA,1979a) .
Onth ebasi so fFA O (1986b),tota lannua lexpor tearning s from trade inmea tca nb eestimate d (usingth emea no f1979-8 1expor t quantities)a tUS $23 6millio npe rannu m (assuminga valu eo fUS $ 1,000 per tonne)an da tUS $9 1millio n fromtrad e inhide san d skins. Hides and skinsar e themos t importantnon-foo d livestock commodity outputo f livestock. Totalvalu eo fnon-foo dproduct saverage sUS $42 0millio npe r yearo r7.5 %o fth evalu eo f foodoutput s (Jahnke,1982) .
Thevalu eo fth ecommodit youtpu to f livestock atdomesti c price ratiosha sbee nestimate db ySandfor d (1986)t ob eth eequivalen to f25 % of staple foodcrops .
Animalproduct sprovid eapproximatel y 6.5% ofdietar yenerg y supplyo fsub-Sahara nAfric a (FAO,1987a) , ranging from2.1 %i nRwand a to 26.2% inSomali a (FAO,1986b) . Thecontributio nt ohuma nnutritio no f livestock products isparticularl y important through thesuppl yo fhig h qualityprotein . Bernstene ta l (1984)estimate d thatmea tan dmil k productsaccounte d inAfric a for17 %o fdigestibl eprotei n retained,an d supplyalmos tal l theamin oacid s requiredb yhumans . Sandford (1986) found thecontributio no fanima lproduct st oprotei n supplyt ob e20% . Although thecontributio no flivestoc k tohuma ndie tma yappea r low compared toth eworl daverage so f 16%t oenerg ysuppl yan d 34%t oprotei n intake (FAO,1987a) ,amon gparticula r groupso fpastoralist s the ratioi s muchhighe ran d inman ytraditiona l societies livestock productspla ya n important rolea sa foodsourc e seasonally (Gryseelsan dWhalen , 1984). Inadditio n tocommodit y or finaloutputs ,livestoc k also supply intermediate products,whic har euse da s inputs inth e cropenterprise . Themos t important intermediate livestock product isdraugh tpower . Although itha sbee nestimate d thatanima l traction isth e second-most valuable livestock output (Table 1.1), itsimportanc e isno t spread equally acrossAfrica . Estimateso f thenumber so fdraugh t animalsvar y widely,bu tar eestimate d byJahnk e (1982)a s1 3millio n cattle,6 million equines,an d 5millio n camels. Theseprovid e draughtpowe r for land cultivation,threshing ,an d transport. Cattlear euse dusuall y for ploughing, soilpreparation ,seedin gan dthreshing . Equinesan d camels areparticularl y important for transporto f loadsan dpeople .Figur e 1.1. shows the importance of animal traction invariou scountrie so fAfrica . Theus e ofanima l traction for cropcultivatio n canb e traditional or introduced,bu t iswidesprea d inEthiopia ,Botswana ,Madagascar ,Niger , Burkina Faso,Mal i and Senegal. Theeffect so fanima l tractionhav e been subjecto fmuc hdebat e (ILCA,1981a ;Sargen t etal , 1981;FAO ,1984a ; Eicher andBaker ,1982 ;Munzinger ,1982 ;Go e andGryseels ,1983 ; Anderson,1984 ;FAO ,1984a )bu ta comprehensive quantitative evaluation hasbee nprovide d byPingali ,Bigo tan d Binswanger (1986). The technical aspectso fdraugh tanima lusage ,an d the implications for future research havebee n reviewedb yGo ean dM cDowel l (1980)an dGo e (1983).
Thepotentia l contributiono fanima ldraugh tpowe r tocro p production canb eachieve d througha n increase inth e cultivated area,a change incroppin gpattern ,highe ryield so ra n improvement of labour productivity. The area effectha sbee nth emos t important component in empirical studies,wherea scroppin gpatter nan dyiel d effectswer e usually small. Pingali eta l (1986)foun d that theare a cultivated per familywa so naverag e 25%greate rwher e animal tractionha d been introduced. Abouttwo-third so fth e studiesthe y reviewed reported that the introductiono f animalsha da neffec to n cropping pattern,bu t only 28% reported any effect onyield . Their studywa salmos t exclusively basedhoweve ro nproject s inWes tAfrica ,excep t foron e inKenya . In thearea sunde r consideration,anima l tractionha dbee nonl y recently introduced andwa sno ta traditionalpractice .
The concentration ofanima l tractionusag e inhighlan d and semi-aridecologica l zones isdetermine d by twomajo r factors. In highland areas,man yo f the soilsar eo fth eheav y clay typean d difficult tocultivate . Theus eo fanimal s then reduces substantially humandrudgery . Inarea s sucha s thesemi-ari d zonewher e the growing season isshort ,th eus eo fdraugh t animalsallow s forearlie r planting and for cultivation of larger areaso f land. Other factors that favour the introduction ofanima l tractionar e increases inpopulatio n density, accesst omarkets ,an d theavailabilit y ofadequat eextensio n services (Eicher andBaker ,1982 ;Pingal i et al, 1986). Theoutcom e of past investments inanima l tractionproject shav e oftenbee n disappointing (Sargent et al, 1981;Eiche r andBaker ,1982 ;Go ean dGryseels , 1983). Thisha sBee ndu emainl y tohig h investment costs, inappropriate technology,an dunattractiv e benefit cost ratios. Projectshav ebee n poorlydesigned ,wit h littleunderstandin g of the farmers' resources in termso f feedavailability , cash income,capacit y formaintenanc e and access toveterinar y drugs. Nevertheless,ther e isstil l substantial scope for anexpande d andmor e effectiveus eo fanima l traction,an d this would lead tolarg e increases infar mproductivit y (ILCA, 1987a). The valuation ofbenefit s isofte n complicated however,an d itma yb e misleading toevaluat e projectso n thebasi so f singleproductio n factors (Munzinger, 1982). Figure 1-1- Importance of Draught Animals in Africa
IMPORTANCEO FDRAUGH TANIMAL S INAFRIC A
MOROCCO
1.Gambi a 2.Guine aBissa u 3.Eq .Guine a 4. Ruanda 5- Burundi 6. felawi
DEGREE OF IMPORTANCE:
THA1MTI0NAU.Ï HIGH (DECKKA.SÜYG TKNPFNCY)
WIRING COLONIAL- DAYS MAHGINAI,, WITH DEVELUl-MKNT (r*w RKUJCK.II) POTENT!AI. ( 'JS6 OF IIOIDINGS)
INCREASING- IAJK 'l\J DFVF.Ii )PMENT NONK; SEVEKK LIMITING MKAUUKE3 (S - Kft OK HOIJHNGS) FACTORS
Source: Hunzinger (1982). Very little researchha sbee nundertake n on thetranspor t function of livestock. Usuallyequine sar euse d for thispurpose ,i.e .donkeys , muleso rhorses . Thedonke y isth emos tnumerou sAfrica nequine , constituting more then67 %o f theequin eher d inAfrica . Approximately one third of allAfrica ndonkey s canb e found inEthiopia ,whil eMali , Nigeria and Sudanhav e substantial populationsals o (FAO, 1985). Although inEthiopi adonkey sar euse d almostexclusivel y aspac kanimals , insemi-ari dAfric a theyar eals ouse d occasionally for cultivation of lightan d sandy soils. Theus eo fdonkey s in rural transport inAfric a hasbee n reviewedb y Fielding (1987). ILCA (1980a)ha sestimate d the value of thetranspor t functiono f livestock atUS $1,79 6 million,bu t did not indicateho wthi samoun twa s calculated. Thisestimat e almost equalsa subsequent estimate (ILCA,1987a )o n thevalu e ofanima l draught power in fieldoperations .
Animalmanure ,o r faecesproduce db y livestock,ha smultipl e uses and iso f significant importance inbot h farman dhousehol d systems throughoutAfrica . Most farmers recognize thevalu eo fmanur e to improve soil fertility,a s itadd ssignifican tamoun to fnutrient ssuc ha s nitrogenan dphosphorus. Theadditio no fmanur eals o increases soil organic content,an d raisesth ep H level inaci d soils (Sandford, 1986). Although thepositiv e effectso fmanur e application oncro pyield s has beendemonstrate d onmos tagronomi c research stationsthroughou tAfrica , onlyver y fewon-far m studieshav ebee nundertaken . Powell (1986) studied theeffect so fmanurin g inNigeri aan dnotice d somedrawback s of thepractice : itma yencourag eweed swhic h intur ncompet ewit h crops forbot hnutrient san dmoisture . Eicher andBake r (1982)hav e reported onvariou s studies that foundpositiv e relationsbetwee nmanur e application andgrai noutput . As only fewfarmer shav e sufficient manure tomaintai n soil fertilityo fal lo f their land,the yofte nus e available manure selectively onhigh-valu e crops,o rnea r thehousehold .
Inman ycountries ,drie dmanur e isals o importanta sa household fuel. Thisus e isparticularl y important in subsistence oriented rural economies sucha sEthiopia . Newcombe (1985)mad ea cost-benefit analysis of alternativeuse so f farmmanur e of theEthiopia nhighlands ,an d assessed the returnso n smallholder farms fromusin gmanur e in comparison toothe r fuel sources. He found thatth e farmer strategyo fusin g farm produced manureprimaril y for fuelpurposes ,wit h remaining leftovers being sold for cash,wa s a rational andprofi tmaximizin g strategy. ILCA (1987a)estimate d thevalu eo f theannua lproductio n of livestock manure insub-Sahara nAfric aa tUS $ 196millio n annually, equivalent to 3%o f the totalvalu eo f livestock output. Thisvalu e contrastswit ha nearlie r estimate ofUS $ 575millio n (ILCA, 1980a). Livestock productionma ywel l be the largestemploye r of labour in sub-SaharanAfrica . Of thetota l ruralpopulatio n of 325million , approximately 15-20millio npeopl ear epastoralist swh o canb e considered full-time livestock producers,whil e approximately 190millio npeopl e are estimated tob e livingo nmixe d smallholder farms (Wheeler,1984;FAO , 1986a). Available evidence indicates thato n thesemixe dfarms , approximately 30t o 40%o fhousehol d labour isuse d for livestock production related activities (CBS,1977 ;Vincent ,1977 ;Stotz ,1983 ; Vaidyanathan,1983 ;Fafchamps , 1985). Little seasonal variation hasbee n 10 recorded of labour inputs for livestock production,whic har e largely supplied bywome nan d children. Livestock production appears toallo w fora n increase inlabou rproductivit yo f family resources inmixe d farmingsystems . Theavailabl equantitativ e evidence on theus e and productivity of household labour for livestock production inmixe d farming systems is scarce. Moreattentio n shouldb e given to thistopi c as it isno wwidel y accepted that the lowproductivit y of labour and inelastic labour suppliesdurin g critical periods,leadin g to seasonal labourbottlenecks , are themajo r constraints toth e improvement of farmproductivit y in sub-SaharanAfric a (Mellor et al, 1987;Delgad oan dRanada , 1987). Collinson (1972)alread y stressed that "thepatter no f labour availability andus e over the season isth eke yt ounderstandin g traditionalAfrica n agricultural systems",whil eCleav e (1974)furthe r noted the "overwhelming importance ofthi s factor ofproduction" . Various studieshav ebee nundertake n on labourus e inpastora lsystems , particularly ofa nanthropologica l nature,an d Sandford (1983)note d that shortage of labour isa critical constraint forman ypastora l activities. Eicher andBake r (1982)d ono t lista single studyo n labour productivity of livestock production inmixe d farming systems inthei r comprehensive literature reviewo fagricultura l development insub-Sahara nAfrica . In three recentlypublishe d basicwork s on livestock development in sub-SaharanAfrica ,th e topico f labourus e isno tdiscusse d explicitly (Jahnke,1982 ;Simpso nan d Evangelou,1983 ;ILCA ,1987a) . A large proportion of labour inputs into livestock productionar e supplied by women and children. The tasksar epermanen t rather thanseasonal , creating a stable labourdeman d throughout theyear . The labour employed mayhav e fewalternativ euse san d havea lowopportunit y cost. Yet,thi s hypothesis requires further investigation. Labour inputsan d returns to labour are keyelement s inunderstandin g decisionmakin g and resource allocation ina farmhousehol d (DeWilde ,1967 ;Collinson , 1972). Some estimateso n labour inputs ingrazin g andwaterin ghav ebee nmad e (Ruthenberg, 1980). Itha sbee n claimed that livestock labour usually hasa lowproductivit y (Fafchamps,1985) , or that returns tolabou r are lower inlivestoc k production (Vaidyanathan, 1983). Thisoutcom e may largely resultfro mth eexclusio no f intermediateproducts ,suc ha s the value ofdraugh tpowe r and ofmanure ,i nth e calculation of income derived fromlivestoc k production. Usually,onl y finalproduct s such as meat,mil k orhides/skin s havebee n incorporated, thereby underestimating livestock income levelsan d returns tolabour .
The contributiono f livestock togros s farmoutput ,a s reported by Ruthenberg (1980), rangesfro m8 % ina systemo f shifting cultivation in CentralAfrica nRepublic ,t o60 %o n ley-maize farms inKenya . Onlymil k output andmea tofftak ewer e taken intoconsideratio n in calculating gross returns. Livestock oftenprovid e a substantial parto f the farmcas h income inmixe d farming systems. Althoughdat a are scarce,availabl e information (Collinson,1972 ;CBS ,1977 ;Ruthenberg , 1980;Fafchamps , 1985) indicates that theaverag e livestock contribution isgenerall y between 5an d 40%. According toBrumb y (1986), this factor iso f crucial importance for the improvement of farming systems. If livestock productivity canb e improved, cash incomeswil l changealso ,an d the increased availability of fundswil l allow the farmer to improve crop 11
productivity throughth epurchas ean dapplicatio n ofadditiona l inputs sucha s chemical fertilizer or improvedseeds . Livestock areals oa "storeo fwealth "and a n importantcapita l asset inmos t farming systems (Dorane tal , 1979). The animalsar e kept asa formo f savings,which caneasil yb e converted tocas h intime so f need. Only fewstudie shav e studied theprofitabilit y of investment in livestock,althoug hUpto n (1985)foun d thatsmallholder sobtaine d rates of returno f 24%t o investment insmal l ruminants inNigeria .
A livestock component inth e farming systemca ndiversif y the agricultural outputs,an d reduceproductio n riskso f smallholders (Rodriguezan dAnderson ,1985 ;FAO ,1986a) . Recently,th e important role ofanimal s insupportin g the sustainability ofagricultura l systemsha s been recognized. Sustainability referst oth eabilit yo fa n agricultural system tomaintai n foodproductio n levels soa st oenabl e the satisfaction ofchangin g needso f itspopulation ,whil emaintainin g the normal resourcebas eand avoidin g environmentaldegradatio n (TAC/CGIAR, 1987). Themos t importantendangere d livestock production systems in sub-SaharanAfric aar e themixe d farming systems inth esemi-ari d and highland areas. Despite their sometimes favourable ecology,thes e areas havea declinin g resourcebas e tosatisf y thegrowin g foodneed so f their populationsan d themajo r factors responsiblear ewate r and landerosion , anddeterioratio n of soil structure (ILCA,198 6an d 1987a). Livestock provideopportunitie s to improve the sustainability ofmixe d farming systems,b yprovidin gmanur e to improve soil fertility,an ddraugh t power to improve soiland wate r conservation.
Finally, inman y traditional societies livestock alsohav e an important socialan d cultural function. Theyprovid eprestig ean d status, serve asa currency forbrides ,an dhav e ritual functions (Schneider, 1984).
1.3. Livestock Production Systems Sub-SaharanAfric a isa regiono fgrea tenvironmenta ldiversity , and agro-ecological conditionsvar ywidely . As livestock depend upon vegetation or cropsa sthei r feedbase ,lan dus e characteristics have beena central consideration inth eclassificatio n of livestock production systems. Thisclassificatio n hasbee napproache d indifferen t ways (Chudleigh,1976 ;D eBoer ,1977 ;Ruthenberg ,1980 ;Humphrey , 1980), thereby identifying themajo r factorscharacterizin g and influencing the utilization andproductio no f livestock. The livestock production system may representth e total farmsystem ,o r representa sub-seto f farming systems. Insub-Sahara nAfrica ,Jahnk e (1982)ha sdistinguishe d three major systems: range-livestock production systems,crop-livestoc k production systems,an d landlessproductio nsystems .
Jahnke (ibid)ha spointe d toth enee d to study livestock production systemswithi n the framework ofecologica l zones,s oa s to enable anappraisa l of thebasi c resourceendowment . Thisendowmen t is largelydetermine d by the climatic conditions,i nparticula r by the growingperio d i.e. theperio dexpresse d innumbe r ofday swhe n available water and temperature regimepermit splan tgrowth . The concept allows for aquantitativ e assessmento f suitabilityo f climate for rainfed 12 agriculture. Thegrowin gperio dha sbee ndefine da sth econtinuou s period duringth eyear ,fro mth etim ewhe n rainfall exceedshal f potentialévapotranspiratio nunti lth emomen twhe nprecipitatio n falls below fullpotentia l évapotranspiration,plu sa numbe ro fday s required toevaporat ea nassume d10 0m mo fsoi lmoistur e reservewhe n available (FAO, 1978). Periodsdurin gwhic h cropgrowt hi sno tpossibl ebecaus eo f lowtemperature sar eexcluded . Althoughth econcep to fgrowin g period hasbee ndevelope d primarilyt oasses sit simplication sfo rcro p production,i ti sals oo fdirec t significancet ofee dproduction .
Onth ebasi so fnumbe ro fgrowin gday s (GD)an dtemperature , Jahnke (1982)ha sclassifie d sub-SaharanAfric ai nfiv emajo r ecological zones: arid (lesstha n9 0GD) , semi-arid (90-179 GD), sub-humid (180-269 GD), humid (over27 9GD )an dhighland s (Figure 1.2). Thehighland sar e thosearea si nth esemi-arid , sub-humidan dhumi d zoneswher eth emea n daily temperature isles stha n2 0C durin gth egrowin gperiod . The extentan drelativ e importanceo feac ho fth eecologica l zonesi nterm s of area covered, ruralpopulation ,an dlivestoc k holdingi sgive ni n Table 1.2. Thedr yarea s (aridan dsemi-ari d zones)accoun tfo r54 %o f sub-SaharanAfrica' s surface area,an dfo rmor e than 50%o fth eruminan t livestocko feac ho fth emajo r species,bu tfo ronl y 38%o fth ehuma n rural population. Ashumidit y increases,livestoc k densitydecreases . Thehumi d zoneaccount sfo r19 %o fth elan darea ,bu tfo ronl y6 %o f TLU's. Thehighland s haveth ehighes tpopulatio ndensity . Withonl y5 % ofth esurfac e area,approximatel y 16%o fth erura lpopulatio nan d18 %o f TLU's,ca nb efoun di nth ehighlands .
Theari dan dsemi-ari d zonesar eimportan ti never y regiono f Africa except CentralAfrica ,th esub-humi d zonei ssprea d throughoutal l regions,nearl y 75%o fth ehumi d zonei si nCentra lAfrica ,whil e East Africa aloneaccount sfo r73 %o fth ehighlan d zone. Thedistributio no f livestock insub-Sahara nAfric a isuneven . EasternAfric aha smor e than halfth eruminan t livestock herd,whil e CentralAfric a accountsfo ronl y 3% (Jahnke, ibid).
Table1.2 . Distributiono fArea ,Rura l Populationan dDifferen t Specieso fRuminan t Livestockb yEcologica l Zoneo f Sub-SaharanAfric a (%o fTota l inSSA )
Zone Area Rur.Pop. Cattle Sheep Goats TLU
Arid 36 10 21 35 39 30 Semi-arid 18 28 31 22 26 27 Sub-humid 22 25 22 14 16 19 Humid 19 21 6 8 9 6 Highlands 5 16 20 21 10 18
Total (%) 100 100 100 100 100 100 Totaln (inmillions ) 22.4 km2 279 155 117 136 137 a/ ATropica l Livestock Unit (TLU)i sa composit e factort oaggregat e livestock specieso nth ebasi so fthei r respective liveweights. One TLUi sth eequivalen to fa nanima lo f25 0k gliveweight . The calculationi nth ecolum n includescattle ,sheep ,goats ,a swel la s camels. Sources: Jahnke (1982),D eMontgolfier-Kouev ian dVlavono u (1983) andFA O(1986b) . 13
Figure 1.2.Environmenta l Zones of Sub-Saharan Africa
Highlands Humid Zone >1500m >270 plant a.s.l. growing days/year
Subhumid Zone Arid and semi-arid zones 180t o 270 plant 0 to 180 plant growing growing days/yeai days^year
Source: ILCA (1984) 14
These ecological andgeographica l factorsar e important for an appraisal of livestock production systems insub-Sahara nAfrica . A major obstacle tolivestoc k developmenton th econtinen t isth eproble mo f trypanosomiasis,a deadl yanima ldiseas e transmittedb y tsetse flies. This tsetse infestationvirtuall ypreclude slivestoc k production on almost 50%o r 10millio nkm 2o f sub-SaharanAfric a that includes someo f thebes twatere d and fertile land. Tsetse infestation isa majo r contraint inth ehumid, sub-humi dan d semi-arid zones. If trypanosomiasiscoul db e controlledo rcircumvented ,a largepar to f this areacoul db euse d foragricultura l and livestockdevelopment . Encouraging resultshav ebee nobtaine dwit h theus eo f chemoprophylactic drugsan d the introductiono ftrypenotoleran tbreed s (Traile t al,1984 ; Trail eta l 1985;ILCA , 1987b).
Theari d zonesar e toodr y forcro pproductio nan d their populationsar e largelydependen tupo n livestock for subsistence. Inth e highlands,th eecolog y is relatively favourable tocro pan d livestock production,leadin g tohig hdensitie so fbot hhuma nan d livestock population. Livestock production systemsar e thuslargel ydetermine d by theirecologica lenvironments . Range-livestock production systemsar ebase d onth eus e ofnatura l or semi-naturalvegetatio nvi adomesti canimals ,particularl y ruminants (Jahnke, 1982). These systemsca nb epurel ypastoral ,agro-pastoral ,o r ofth e "ranching" type. Inpastora l systems,rangeland sar e collectively owned and communallygrazed . Cattle,sheep ,goat san d camelsar e the principal livestock species. Themai nproduc t ismilk ,an d theprincipa l livestock function issubsistence ,i nadditio n tosocia l and cultural functions. Additional household income isderive d fromoccasiona l sales of liveanimal swhic har e sold forcas ht o traders,o rbartere d for grain andothe r goodso r services (Dahlan dHjort ,1976 ;Sandford , 1983).
Pastoral systemsca nb enomadi c or transhumant innature . Nomadic systemsar echaracterize d byth emovemen to fwhol e familieswit h their animals insearc ho fwate r andgrazing . These familieshav en o fixed placeo f residence. Intranshuman t systemsmigratio n followsa similar seasonalpatter neac hyear . The farmerso rherdsme nhav e apermanen t place of residence towhic h they returna t someperio d of theyea r (Humphrey, 1980). Insemi-ari dan d sub-humid zones, there isan increasing trend towardssedentar y farming,i nan agropastora l system,particularl y inth e Sahel region. This trend is inducedb ypopulatio nan d cropping pressures, restrictions inmovement sacros sborders ,th eeffect so f prolongeddrought ,an d government regulations (USAID, 1982). Absentee livestock ownership,whereb y livestock owned by farmerso r tradersar e herded andmanage d bypastoralist so ragropastoralists ,i sals o widespread.
Ranching isa range-livestock production systembu t ina differen t management setting. Livestock managementon ranches ischaracterize d by grazingon ofte n improved anddevelope d rangelandswithi n fixed boundarieso f individual tenure. Ownerso rmanager s live inon eplace , and livestock production is for cash income. Ranchesusuall y produce one or twomarketabl e commodities sucha sbeef ,mutton ,mil k orwool . They canb eprivatel y owned or leased,o rb e ofa parastata l or cooperative 15 nature. Ranching canb e found throughoutAfrica ,an dha susuall y been introduced byWester n colonists. Ranchesaccoun t foronl y 5%o fTLU' s in sub-SaharanAfric a (Jahnke,1982) . Landless livestockproductio n systems refert oa situation in which livestock doesno tderiv e feed fromgrazin g or fodderproduction , but fromhousehol d refuse and/or purchased concentrates or feedstuffs. Intraditiona l farming,thes e systemsar eusuall ybase d onpi go rpoultr y production. Incommercia l systemsthe yma yals ohav e cattle orsheep , usually infeedlot sfo r fatteningpurposes . Inth elatte r case,animal s will behouse dan d fedwit h the intentiono fmaximizin g output inth e shortestpossibl e time (Humphrey, 1980).
Crop-livestock production systems refer tolan dus e systems in whichcrop san d livestock husbandryar epractise d inassociatio n (Jahnke, 1982). They canb e of twobasi c types;segregate d or integrated systems (Mclntirean dGryseels ,1987) . Insegregate d systems,cro pan d livestock husbandry areundertake na sparalle l activitieswithou tinteractions . Thisma y refert oa situationo feithe r simple geographical proximity of bothactivities ,o rwher e cropsan d livestockproductio n isundertake n within the samemanagemen tuni tbu twithou t interchange of inputan d outputbetwee nbot h sub-systems.
Inintegrate d systems,cro pan d livestock production are undertakenwithi n thesam emanagemen tunit ,an d interactthroug ha n interchange of inputsan doutputs . Forexample ,animal scontribut e to cropproductio n byproducin g draughtpowe r for landcultivatio nan d manure to improve soil fertility,whil e intur ncro pby-product sar euse d to feed livestock.
Segregated crop-livestock systemsar edominan t inth eWes tAfrica n Sahelan d savannah. Integrated systemsar edominan t inth ehighland san d partso f Zimbabwe,Malawi ,Mal i andSenegal . Jahnke (1982)distinguishe scrop-livestoc k systemsi nth e lowlands from those in thehighlands ,becaus eo f thespecia l featureso f the latter. Inth elowlands ,crop-livestoc k production systemsca nb e found inth e semi-arid, sub-humid andhumi d zones. Often theyhav edevelope d inarea s thatwer e traditionallydominate d bypastora l systems. In semi-arid and sub-humid zones,agricultura l systemshav ebecom emor e sedentaryan donl ypartl ypastoral . Pastoralpeopl ehav e settled and started growing crops. Insemi-ari d zones,crop sar egrow n through either small-scale irrigation,o rb yusin gdrough t resistant varieties sucha smille t and sorghum (ILCA,1981b) . Sub-humid zoneshav e longer growingperiod sand mor ediversifie d croppingpatterns . Theprincipa l field cropsar e sorghum,maize ,ric ean dgroundnuts . Rootsan dtubers , sucha syam san d cassava,an dgarde n cropsals obecom e important (Mclntire andGryseels , 1987). Inhumi d zones,livestoc k production is severly constrained by the tsetse challenge. Smallpopulation so f cattle,shee pan dgoat sar epossessin g somedegre eo f resistance to trypanosomiasis. These trypanotolerant breedsar e characterized by their small size. Themajo r cattlebreed s are theN'Dama ,th eWes tAfrica n shorthorn,an d crosseswit hBo s indicuso r Zebubreeds . 16
Trypanotolerant small ruminantsar eo fth edwar f types,suc ha s theDjallonké . A systematic reviewo ftrypanotoleran t livestock breeds insub-Sahara nAfric aha sbee nmad eb yILC A (1979b). Theproductivit yo f trypanotolerant livestock diminishesa stsets echalleng e increases. In order toobtai nmor eknowledg eo ntrypanotoleran tbreeds ,includin g detailed informationo ngeneti can dacquire d resistance,environmenta l factorsaffectin g susceptibility,an d theefficienc y ofcontro lmeasures , ILCAan dth e International Laboratory forResearc ho nAnima l Diseases (ILRAD)hav ecreate d theAfrica nTrypanotolerane eNetwork ,whic h is operatinga tvariou s sites in1 0Africa n countries (Traile tal , 1984).
Crop-livestock production systems inth elowland sar eoutsid e the scopeo fthi sstudy . Theyar ewel ldescribe d indetai l inDelgad o (1979),McCow ne ta l (1979),Ruthenber g (1980),Jahnk e (1982),Powel lan d Taylor-Powell (Ï987T,Wilso n (1986)an dvo nKaufma ne ta l (1986).
1.4. Crop-Livestock Production Systems inth eHighland s
Thehighland so fsub-Sahara nAfric ahav ebee ndefine da sarea s above1,50 0 m elevationabov e sealevel ,o rwit hmea ndail y temperatures of lesstha n2 0C durin g thegrowin gperio d (Jahnke,1982 ;Getahun , 1978a;FAO ,1978) .
Thehighland scove rapproximatel yon emillio n squarekm ,o r some 5%o fth elan dare ao fsub-Sahara nAfrica . About76 %o fth ehighland s and located inEaster nAfric a (Table 1.3.). InEthiopia ,Kenya ,Rwand a andBurund i theyaccoun t forth egrea tmajorit yo fth ehuma nan d livestock populations. Tanzania,Zaire ,Chad ,Somalia ,Cameroon ,Angola , Réunion,Malawi ,Uganda ,Zambi aan dMadagasca r have largehighlan d areas also. Thedistributio no fhighlan d areasi nAfric a isillustrate d in Figure 1.3. Recentlyhighlan d zoneshav eals obee n referred toa s mountain environments (Getahun,1984 ;Getahu nan dKirkby , 1987). Init s study "AfricanAgriculture : TheNex t2 5Years "FA O (1986a)ha s classifiedmos to fth ehighland sa s "Sub-humidan dMountai n EastAfrica" . Thedifference sbetwee n theFA Oan dearlie r classifications originate fromth efac ttha tFA Oha ssubdivide dAfric a inregion swhic hhav et o accordwit hnationa lboundaries ,i norde r toenabl eth eus eo f statistical informationwhic h isavailabl ea tth ecountr ylevel ,fo r its assessmento fth e resourcebase . Broadly,FAO' sclassificatio n correspondswit h thato fGetahu n (1978a)an dJahnk e (1982).
Thehighland sencompas sa wid evariet yo fenvironmenta lcondition s coveringever yecologica l zone. Almosthal fo fth ehighland s canb e classified assub-humi d (Table 1.3.).
Although thehighlan d zone isonl ya fractiono fth elan d areao f sub-SaharanAfrica ,i taccount s for1 6an d 18%respectivel yo f thehuma n and livestock populations (Table 1.2.). Thehuma npopulatio ndensit y (44 personsAni2)i smor e thandouble ,whil e the stockingdensit yalmos t (26 TLU/km2)fou r timesth eaverag e forsub-Sahara nAfric a asa whol e (Jahnke, 1982). Several factorscontribut e toth econcentratio n of people and their livestock inth ehighlands ,includin g favourable climatesan decologica l conditions,th eabsenc e of tsetseflies , comparativelyhig h feedavailability ,an dgreate rmilitar y security. Yet, the concentrationo fpeopl ean dlivestoc k overman ycenturie sha s resulted insubstantia l erosionproblem san ddeclinin g soil fertility. 17
Figure 1.3.: TheHighland so f Sub-SaharanAfric a
Source: Adapted fromAmar eGetahu n (1978a);Gryseel s andAnderso n (1983a).
The humanpopulatio no f theare a isexpecte d togro wb y 3.35%pe r annumbetwee n 1980-2010,whil epe r caput foodproductio nha sdecline d by 1.5%pe r annum from1970-8 4 (FAO,1986a) . This leads to increased pressure onlan d for growing food crops,an d increasingdependenc e of livestock on crop residuesa spastur e availabilitydeclines . Subsistence smallholdermixe d farming systemsprevai l generally throughout thehighlands ,wit h cropsan d livestock husbandry typically producedwithi n the samemanagemen tunit . There isa hig hdegre e of integration between the cropan d livestock sub-systems,althoug h there is substantial scope for further intensification. 18
Table 1.3.Siz eo fHighlan dArea si nSub-Sahara nAfric ab yRegio n and Ecological Zone A. Byregion . Highlandsdefine da s1,50 0m a.s.l . (Getahun,1978a ) Area ('000km2 ) Proportion (!)
EasternAfric a 790 76 CentralAfric a 63 6 WesternAfric a 45 4 SouthernAfric a 118 11 Islandso f IndianOcea n 33 3 Total 1,049 100 B. Byecologica l zone (FAO, 1978)
Climate type Growingperio d (days) Area ('000 km2) Proportion (%)
Arid 0-9 0 140 14 Semi-arid 90-180 195 20 Sub-humid 180-270 441 44 Humid >270 189 19 Cold 0 29 3
994 100
Source: Jahnke (1982)
Crop-livestock systemsi nth ehighland sar edistinc tt othos ei n the lowlands. Therei sa muc hhighe rdegre eo fcrop-livestoc k integration,livestoc kproductio ni sno taffecte db ytrypanosomiasis ,a largeproportio no flan di sonl ysuitabl efo rgrazing ,becaus eo f waterloggingo rfros texposure ,croppin g intensityi shig han da larg e amounto fcro pby-product si savailabl ea slivestoc k feed. Thehighland s provideals obette r opportunitiesfo ra nintensificatio no fbot h cropan d livestock production,throug hth eintroductio no fne wvarietie san d breedsfro mtemperat e zoneselsewher e (ILCA,1978 ;Ruthenberg , 1980; Jahnke, 1982).
Yet, thehighland sar ea comple x zonewit ha wid ediversit yi n agroclimatology (Brownan dCochemé , 1973). Asa result ,considerabl e differencesi nsettlemen tan dlan dus eoccur . Forexample ,Rwand aan d Burundihav epopulatio ndensitie so f20 0an d15 4people/km 2 respectively, which compareswit ha naverag eo f4 4peopleAm 2fo rth ehighland s region asa whole . Somedifference si nlan dus eals o reflectth eimpac to fa differential historicalan dcultura lbackgroun d (Jahnke, 1982). Ethiopia,which alon eaccount sfo r50 %o fth etota lhighland sare aa s wella so fit shuma nan dlivestoc k population,ha sancien t indigenous farming systems,largel ydependen to no xtractio nfo rcro p cultivation andwidesprea dus eo fequine sfo rtraction . Kenya,wher e nearly 80%o f thepopulatio n livei nth ehighlands ,ha sa significan tamoun to fdair y farming,throug hth einfluenc eo fcolonizatio nan dEuropea nsettlement . InRwand aan dBurund i agricultural developmenti smarke db yth eexistenc e 19
of tribal structures,whereb y theTuts iha d thetraditiona l rightt oow n cattle,whil e theHut uwer e largelyconfine d tocro pproductio nan dsmal l ruminantholdings .
Inth ehighlands ,tw obroa denvironment swit h corresponding farming systemshav ebee ndistinguishe d (Getahunan dKirkby , 1987). First,th eequatoria l highlandslargel ylyin gnea r theequato rwhic har e characterized byho ecultivatio nan dproductio no f rootsan d tubers,an d cashcrop s sucha scoffe ean d tea (Jonesan d Egli, 1984). Second,th e sub-tropicalhighland sdominate d bycereal-o xploug hagriculture . Each ofth earea s isequa l insize ,coverin gapproximatel yhal fo fth e highland landmass .
Thecereal-o x ploughfarmin g systemcorrespond s largelyt oth e centralan dnorther nEthiopia nhighlands ,centra lMadagasca r andth e communalarea so fZimbabwe . Theho e cultivation/perennial farming system iswidesprea d inth ecentra lhighland so fKenya ,Rwanda ,Burundi , southernEthiopi aan dnorther nTanzania .
Tobot hthes e farming systemscorrespon ddifferen t levelso f crop-livestock integration. Inth ecereal-o xploug hsyste mther e is widespreadus eo fanima l traction forseedbe dpreparatio nan d transport among smallholders. There isals o recoveryo flivestoc kmanur e for crop fertilizationo r forhousehol d fuel. Livestock are fedo ncro p by-products,fodde r cropsan dpastures .
Inth eho ecultivation/perennia l farming system,anima l traction islargel yabsen tpartl ydu e toth e smallsiz eo fholdings ,uneve n topography,an d intercroppingpractises . There isintensiv eus eo f manure forcro pfertilizatio nan do fby-product s foranima l feed. Becauseo f the rapiddeclin e ingrazin gareas ,fallows ,an d average farm sizes,ther e isa gradua lshif tfro mcattl e tosmal l ruminantholdings . InRwanda ,betwee n197 0an d 1980,th eaverag eholdin g sizedecline d by 17%, theaverag eare aunde rpastur eb y 56%,th enumbe ro fcattl eb y16% , while thenumbe r ofgoat s increasedb y84 %an d sheepb y 59%(Gryseels , 1983b).
Inbot hdominan t farming systemso fth ehighlands ,livestoc k play an important rolean dprovid ea significantpar to f farmincom e (Ruthenberg, 1980). However,populatio npressure slea dt orapi d degradationo fnatura l resources,reflecte d ina nexpansio no farea s cropped and the resulting removalo fnatura lvegetation ,grazin glands , and treecover . There isa nee d fora developmen t ofmor e sustainable agricultural systems. The improvemento flivestoc k productivitywil l therebypla ya ke yrole .
1.5 Objectiveso fth eStud y
The interest forthi sstud yaros e fromth egrowin gperceptio n that inadequate attentionha dbee ngive nt oth e roleo flivestoc k onmixe d smallholder farms,an d thatther eappeare d tob ea substantia l potential fora n increase inth eproductivit y oflivestoc k onthes e farmsi nth e highland areaso f sub-SaharanAfrica . The study focused onth eEthiopia n highlandsbecaus e of theirpredominan t importance interm so f sizeo f humanan d livestock populations. Agriculture inth eEthiopia n highlands 20 alsoprovide sa goo d exampleo f a farming systemwit ha hig h level of integrationo f cropan d livestockproduction . The studywa sundertake n from197 9 to198 5whil e theautho rwa s working asa nagricultura l economist at the International Livestock Centre forAfric a (ILCA). iLCA'sfiel d researchprogramm edurin g that periodwa sorganize d on thebasi so f themajo r agro-ecological zoneso f sub-SaharanAfric a (Brumbye t al, 1985). The research reportedupo n in thisstud ywa sundertake nwithi nth e framework of ILCA'sHighland s Programmewhic hwa sbase d inEthiopia . Thebasi c objective ofth e HighlandsProgramm ewa s tostud yway so f improving the overall productivityo fmixe d smallholder farms inth ehighland sb y increasing the technical and economicefficienc yo f livestock enterprises (Gryseels andAnderson ,1983 aan d b). Theautho r hadprincipa l responsibility for on-farm researcho f theHighland sProgramm edurin g thisperiod .
The specific objectiveso f the research reported inthi s study wereto : (i) obtainbasi c fielddat ao na nexistin gmixe d agricultural system ina region representative ofbroa d areaso f the Ethiopianan dothe rAfrica nhighlands ; (ii) to identifyproductio nconstraint s intha t farming system,an dpossibl e researchan d development opportunitieso f itslivestoc k component; (iii) to identify component research relevantt oth e priority problemso f smallholder livestock production systems in theEthiopia nhighlands ; (iv) totes t technologies innovative toth e livestock componento f the farming systemunde r farmerconditions, and tostud y thesocio-economi c impacto fth eadoptio no f these innovationso n farmers'incom ean dwelfare ; (v) to studyan dasses s theproblem san dprocesse s associated with theadoptio no f innovations inthi s farming system; (vi) toevaluat e amethodolog y forproble m identification,an d appraisal and testingo f innovations relevant to smallholder crop-livestockproductio n systems inth e highlandso f Sub-SaharanAfrica . 21
2. RESEARCHO NSMALLHOLDE RMIXE DCROP-LIVESTOC K FARMING SYSTEMS
2.1. TheNee dfo rResearc h Thenee dfo rresearc ho nsmallholde rmixe d crop-livestock farming systemsarise s fromth edesperat e food situationo fsub-Sahara nAfrica . Cropan dlivestoc kyield shav e remained stagnantdurin gth elas ttw o decades,whil eth ehuma npopulatio ncontinue st oexpan d rapidly. The majorityo fAfrican sderiv e their food supply frommixe d farming systems,whic hhav e increasinglycom eunde rpressure ,whil eth eresourc e basei seroding . Researchi sneede dt oproduc ene wtechnologie swhic h cansustainabl y increaseth efoo doutpu to fthes e farming systems. The lacko fprogres si nimprovin gth eproductivit yo flivestoc k inpastora l systemsha sgive n increased attentiont oth eproblem san dopportunitie s of livestock productioni nmixe d crop-livestock agriculture. Particular emphasisi sthereb ygive nt oth epossibilitie so fa greate r integration betweencro pan dlivestoc k production,a si ti sthough ttha tbot h componentso fmixe d farming systemshav eunuse d inputst ocontribut et o theother .
Theproductivit yo flivestoc ko nthes e smallholder mixed farming systemsi spersistentl y low,eve ni nth ehighland sdespit eth e favourable ecologyi nwhic h thesear esituated . Therear emajo r gaps betweenpresen tyiel d levelsan dpotential so fbot h food cropsan d livestock production (Table 2.1.). Some carei st ob etake ni nth e interpretationo fTabl e2. 1an dth ecompariso n thati smad ebetwee nth e productivityo fsmallholde r subsistenceagricultur e inEthiopia ,Keny a andTanzani aan dth eproductivit y thati scommonl yachieve di n commercial farming. Commercial farmsar eusuall ylocate do ngoo d soils thatar ewel ldraine dan dno texpose dt ofrost . Theyals ohav e good accesst oa marketin g systemfo rinput san doutputs ,an dca nmor e easily obtainminera l fertilizers,pesticides ,veterinar y carean ddrugs , etc.
Table 2.1. AnnualYiel do fLivestoc kan dMajo r Cropsi nEthiopia ,Keny a and Tanzania
Product Ethiopia Kenya Tanzania Commercial farms inhighland s
Crops (kg/ha)
Sorghum 900 1.050 630 5,000 Maize 1,000 1,850 575 3,500-8,50 0 Wheat 940 1,770 1,400 6,000 Irishpotat o 6,000 7,600 5,600 40,000 Pulses 735 435 435 2,000
Livestock
Milk (kg/head) 230 447 325 2,000 Beef (kg/carcass ) 109 130 101 500 Source: Collinson (1987) 22
Efforts toimprov e theproductivit yo flivestoc k inthes e smallholder farming systemshav e largely failed. Livestock projects financedb yth eWorl dBan kan dUSAI Dhav eha dver ylo wo rnegativ e returns (Sandford,1981 ;USAID ,1982 ;Worl d Bank, 1985a).
A major causeo fth e failureo fthes eproject sha sbee npoo r projectdesign ,an d lacko fappropriat eproductio n technology, leading topoo radoptio n ratesb yth e farmers. According toSandfor d (1981) donorshav eunderinveste d inadaptiv e researchan dassume d that technology fromtemperat e zonesi nWester n countriescoul d automatically be introduced inAfrica n farmingsystems .
The reasonsbehin d the lacko fadoptio no f improved technologies insmallholde r farming systemsgenerall yhav ebee nextensivel y reviewed byHardake r eta l (1984)an dMerrill-Sand s (1986). Reviewso f research onlivestoc kproductio n insub-Sahara nAfric ahav e reached similar conclusions (McDowell,1978 ;McDowel lan dHildebrand ,1980 ;Eiche r and Baker,1982 ;Jahnk ee ta l (1987). Manytechnologie s thatwer e introducedwer e simply inappropriate toth econdition so f smallholder farming systems,an dt oth egoal so fth etarge tfarmers . There isa basic lacko fknowledg eo n technical,economi can d social issues involved insmallholde rmixe d farming,an do nth e interactions between the livestock and cropsub-sectors . There isa nee d toobtai n farm leveldat ao fsmallholde r production systems,particularl yo fth e livestock sub-sector. Thedecisio nmakin gproces so f smallholder farmers iscomple xan d insufficientlyunderstood . Farmershav emultipl e objectiveswit h their livestock enterprise,an d tryt osatisf y these simultaneously. Thesedifferen tobjective s includeth e supplyo fmea t andmilk ,draugh tpower ,manure ,capita l savingsan d riskminimization . Livestock projectshav etempte d tostres ssingl eobjectives ,suc ha sfo r example themaximizatio no fmea to rmil k output,whic h resulted ina lacko f cooperationb yth efarmer .
Inth epast ,researc ho nlivestoc k production insub-Sahara n Africaha sbee ndominate db yveterinar y research. Thisha sbee nwel l documentedb yToulmi n (1984)wh oundertoo k ahistorica l surveyo f resourceallocatio n tolivestoc k research. Theemphasi so nveterinar y research,oriente d towards theunderstandin g andcontro l ofth emajo r epizootic livestockdiseases ,wa sa consequenc eo fth edevastatin g effectso fth e rinderpestepidemi c atth een do fth elas tcentury . After the secondworl dwar ,ther ewa sa gradua l shifto femphasi s towardseffort st otransfe r technology fromth eWester nworld . These studieswer eundertake nalmos texclusivel y onexperimen tstations , focussingo ncross-breedin g andnutritio n trials. According toToulmi n (Ibid), incountrie swit hpowerfu lproduce r lobbies,researc hwa s oriented towardsth egeneratio no ftechnologie s toimprov e commercial beefan ddair y farmingenterprises . Sinceth e seventies,mor e emphasis hasbee ngive n toactivitie s related toanima lhusbandr yan d socio-economics,followin g thegrowin gdissatisfactio nwit h the failure of researcht oincreas e theproductivit y oftraditiona l smallholder livestock systems.
Similar conclusionshav ebee n reachedb y theWorl d Bank inthei r Reviewo fAgricultura l Research inEastern ,Souther nan dWester nAfric a (WorldBank ,1986 aan d b). Thedominanc eo fveterinar y sciencean d animalhealt h in researcho n livestock production continueshowever . 23
Mclntire (1985)ha s found that 53%o f livestock researchpublication s in sub-SaharanAfric adurin g theperio d 1975-1983wer eo n issues related to animal healthan d trypanosomiasis,whil eecology ,pasture s andforages , and generalmanagemen taccounte d for25% . The emphasiso n trypanosomiasis is related toth eargumen t that thisdiseas emus t first bebrough tunde r control,befor e livestock canb eusefull y introduced in tse tse infested areas. Thisargumen t isonl ypartl yvali dhowever . The successful introductiono f controlmethod swil lb e largely determined by itsimplication s for thesustainabilit y of the target crop/livestock system. This requiresi ntur na prio r and solid understanding of this farming system.
Inadditio n toth edominanc e ofveterinar y science,researc h to developlivestoc kproductio n systemsunti l theearl y 1980sha s largely focusedo npastora l systems (ILCA, 1981b). Iti sno wwidel yacknowledge d that researcho n livestock production insub-Sahara nAfric a should givehig hpriorit y toth e problemso fmixe d farming systems,an d that theapproac h shouldb e adaptive and farming systemsoriente d (Wheeler,1982 ;FAD ,1983a ;USDA , 1982; Eicher andBaker ,1982 ;Worl dBank ,1984a ;U SCongress ,1985 ; SPAAR, 1986). Thishig hpriorit yha sbee ngive no n thebasi so f the importance oflivestoc k inthes e systems,numerically ,a swel l as in termso f contribution tomeat ,milk ,power ,an dnutrien t supplies. Is alsoacknowledge d thatmixe d farming systemshav ea majo r potential for productivity increases,an d thata n improvement inlivestoc k productivityma y lead topositiv e spilloverst o thecro penterprise . Theexperience sgaine d inAsi aprovid egoo dexample so f the opportunities forgreate r crop-livestock integrationo n smallholder farms (FAD,1976 ;Fin ean d Lattimore,1982 ;Groenewold , 1983;FAO , 1984b;Ami r andKnipscheer , 1987).
Agricultural researchca nb edivide d into fourmai n categories (CGIAR, 1981): Basic or strategic research: generatesne wknowledg e and new methodologies for thesolutio no f specific researchproblems ; - applied research: createsne wtechnolog y from theknowledg e and methodologies generated bybasi c research; adaptive research: adapts technologygenerate db y applied research toth especifi cneed san dagro-ecologica l conditions prevailing ina give n locality;an d maintenance research: isth e researchcontinuousl ynecessar y to preventproductivit ydecline . Thenatur eo f researcho n farming systemsi sapplie d andadaptive .
2.2. The Farming SystemsApproac h toResearc h Stagnantproductivit y of cropsan d livestock in sub-Saharan Africa led inth eearl y seventies toth econclusio n that technological innovationspropose d byagricultura l research institutionswer e not 24 being adopted by farmers. The reasons for thenon-adoptio n of these innovationswer e that theywer e inappropriate toth eneeds ,an d unsuitable for the socio-economic environment,o f the farmers. This gavegrowin g rise toth eperceptio n thatagricultura l researchha d tob e reoriented,an d be tailored to theneeds ,resources ,an d goalso f the target smallholder farmer. A newapproac h emerged,whic hwa s commonly called "Farming SystemsResearch " (FSR).
Inth epas tdecade ,ther eha sbee na n increasing commitment to FSR asa newtoo lo fagricultura l research. The topicha sbecom e sucha popular theme that itsmeaning ,approaches ,activitie san dmethod shav e recentlybee n subject ofmuc hdebat e (Simmonds,1985 ;Merril lSands , 1986b; IARCs, 1987). FSR isa napproac h toagricultura l researchwhic hview s the farm ina holisti cmanner ,i.e . itattempt s tounderstan d how thedifferen t componentso f the farming system relate and interactwit h themember s of the farmhousehold ,an dwit h theoutsid ephysical ,biologica l and socio-economicenvironmen t (TAC/CGIAR1978 ;Shane r et al, 1982). FSR isdifferen t from traditional farmmanagemen t research in that iti soriente d towards theneed so f small farmers,set s priorities for research reflecting itsholisti c perspective,an d isaime d at defining general farming systems ina regionunde r studya sa mean s to identifyan ddescrib e apopulation' s activities (Simpson, 1985). Thebasi c concepts and approaches toFS Rhav ebee ndescribe d by Norman (1978an d 1980),TAC/CGIA R (1978),Byerle e and Collinson (1980), Gilbert eta l (1980),Zandstr a eta l (1981),Collinso n (1982),Byerle e eta l (19B2T7Shane r eta l (19827,Dillo nan dAnderso n (1984), Fresco TÏ9ÏR),Remeney i (19857,Simmond s (1985)an d IARCs (1987). Simmonds (1985)ha s identified threemai n typeso f FSR: farming systems research inth enarro w sense,on-far m researchwit ha farming systemsperspectiv e (OFR/FSP),an dne w farming systemsdevelopmen t (NFSD). FSRi nth enarro wsens e isth e studyo f farming systemsa s they exist. Itinvolve sa n in-depthdescriptio n andanalysi s of these systems,bu t the objectha sbee n scholarly rather thanpractical . OFR/FSP isproblem-oriente d research founded on the assumption that changesnee d tob eadapte d to the circumstances of theirusers ,an d thaton-statio n researchdoe sno tpredic t farmexperience . The approach stresses incremental improvements to farming systems,rathe r than revolutionarychanges . NFSD takesa s its starting point thevie w thatman y tropical farming systemsar eunde r suchheav y stresstha t their radical restructuring isnecessary . NFSD involves the conception,testin g and implementation ofne w systems. The approachusuall yha sa longer term perspective. Development ofne w farming systemsma yb e appropriate howeverwher e there isa drasti c change in the farmers'externa l environment,suc ha s the introduction of irrigation or a settlement program (CIMMYTEconomic s Staff, 1984). 25
Successful researcht o improve theproductivit y ofmixe d farming systemswil lusuall yhav e tob eOFR/FSP ,a s it isproble man d impact oriented,an d since incremental rather than radical change isth e objectiveo fthi styp eo f research. Theapproac h isgradua lan d stepwise,an d tailored towardsth e smallneed so f farmerswhic hhav e been characterized as resource-poor,shor to fcash ,ris k averse,an d experiencingbot hunder-employmen ta swel la s seasonal labour shortages (Collinson, 1984). OFR/FSPha sth e followingcharacteristics :i taim s togenerat e technology toincreas eproductivit y ofa targetgrou po f farmers, iti sconceptuall ybase d ona farming systemsperspective ,an d ituse son-far m researchmethod s (CIMMYTEconomic sStaff , 1984).
There isgenera lagreemen ton th estep st ob e followed inFSR . The startingpoin t isth e choiceo fa "target"farmin g systemo r recommendationdomain . Generally,a recommendationdomai nwil l consist of farmerswit h commonproductio npattern san d similarpractice swithi n anagroclimati c zone (Harringtonan dTripp , 1984). The areawher e the actual field research takesplac ewil lhav e tob e representativeo f the zone. Research isthe ngenerall y going through threemajo rstages : diagnosis,desig n and testing,an d evaluationan dextension .
Inth ediagnosti c stage,th eenvironmental ,technical ,economi c and sociological contextswithi nwhic h the farming systemoperate sar e determined and assessed. The literature reviewan d systematic collectiono f secondarydat aar e supplementedwit ha separate , problem-orientedbaselin e surveyo fth e targetareas . The latter providesa basi cunderstandin g ofth e functioningo fa farming system and anappraisa l ofth eavailability ,us e andproductivit yo fth e farm resources. Itals o illustrates theboundarie s inwhic ha farmer operateswithi na system,an d theexogeneou s factorstha t influence his decisionmaking . The resultso f thediagnosti c stagepermi tan assessmento f themajo r constraints,an do f theagricultura l development potential of thearea . Priorities forcomponen t researchca nb edefine d at thisstage .
Thedesig nan d testing stage isno tnecessaril y sequential toth e diagnostic phase,bu tca nb e interactive andoverlapping . During this stage,th e informationgenerate d inth ediagnosti cphas ewil l suggest possible technological interventions foran increase infar m productivityan d income. New technologiesar e tested,usuall y first on-station,an d ata later stageon-farm . On-farm research is research conducted infarmers 'field swit h theparticipatio no f farmers. This ensurestha ttechnologie sar e testedunde r their conditionsan d enables a verificationo f resultsobtaine d on-station. Thisproces s is necessarybecaus e researcherstha twor k on-stationma yhav edifferen t productionobjective s toth e farmer. A two-wayflo wo f information should existbetwee non-far m researchan dexperiment-statio n research (CIMMYTEconomic sStaff , 1984). Informationobtaine d fromon-far m researchwil l allowa specificationo fdesire d technology characteristics for the farmer,an dprovid eguideline s for prioritisationo fexperiment-statio nwork . Researchon experiment stationsaim sa t thedevelopmen to fne wtechnology ,an d screenexistin g technological components for their suitabilityo f introductionon-farms . The interactionsbetwee nexperimen t stationbase d researchan d on-farm researchar ewel l illustrated inFigur e 2.1. Farmersparticipat e inth e testingb ymanagin g thene wtechnolog yaccordin g toth edesigne d 26 Figure 2.1. Interactions Between Station-Based Technical Research and On-FarmAdaptiv e Research Target Group Farmers ofa Recommendatio n Domaini na Region '
Survey diagnosiso f Experimentso napparentl y farmer priorities, relevant materials ,^ (1)resourc e and environment and techniques under ^ ' problems and development farmers' conditions opportunities.
(2) Identification& Evaluatio n ofmaterial san dtechnique s offering potential for problem solution and the exploitation ofopportunities .
Unsolved technical problems and possible /STATION- Bodyo fKnowledg eo f new practices and IBASE D materialsan dtechnique s (4) materials relevant ITECHNICA L suitable for the climate to farmers'developmen t \RESEARCH and soilso fth e Region opportunities.
(5) »Commodity and Disciplinary research,solvin g priority technical problems and investigating possible newmaterial s and practices
Source: Collinson (1982) 27 methods,wit h frequentadvic e froman dmonitorin gb y researchstaff . Informationo nth eperformanc e andadoptio n rateo f thetechnolog ywil l beuse d for furtheradjustment so r redesigno f the research. Menzan d Knipscheer (1981)hav epointe d toth eproble mo f location specificity in farmingsystem s research. Technologies thereforehav e tob edesigne d in sucha wa y thatthe yca neasil yb e adapted toloca lconditions .
Inth eevaluatio nan d extension stage,a n in-depthappraisa l of thetechnology ,an d itseconomi c impacto n farmproductivit ywil l be undertaken. The suitability of thene wmethod s tolarge recologica l and production zones isassessed ,a sa prio r stept oextensio nactivitie s by developmentagencies .
2.3. FarmingSystem sResearc h inMixe d Crop-Livestock Agriculture Farming systems researchha sbee nconducte dmainl yb y crop research institutes,an dmethodologicall yha sbee nmor e advanced for cropping systemstha n formixe d systems. Gilberte ta l (1980)note d specifically thatth elivestoc k sub-systemha d reciîviHlittl e attention inth e contexto f FSR. Shanere ta l (1982)observe d that "asubjec t with considerable andye tuntappe d potential is researcho nmixe d farming systems inwhic h researchers consider the influenceo f cropsan d livestock oneac hother" . As a result,variou sauthor shav e attempted to suggestho wth emethodolog yo fFSR/FS Pcoul db e extended to livestock andmixe d crop-animal farming systems (Bernsten,1982 ;Gryseels ,1983a ; ILCA,1983a ;Zandstra ,1982 ;Bernste ne t al, 1984;an d Zandstra, 1985). In recentyears ,severa l conferences an3workshop shav eals o tried to bring together researchers toexchang eexperience san d refine the conceptual andmethodologica l approaches (Fitzhughe t al, 1982;Butle r Flora,1984 ;Nordblo m et al, 1985;Kearl ,1986 ;Ami r anHKnipscheer , 1987).
Although thegenera l cropping systemsmode l providesa basi c framework to integrate livestock research,a numbe r of attributesmak e on-farm studieswit hanimal sdifferen t andmor e complicated thanwit h crops. Thesedifferen t characteristics are summarized inTabl e2.2 . Theproblem s relate toth e following (Gryseels, 1986): Mobilityo f livestock Mobilitymake s itdifficul t todescrib e environment-livestock interactions,t omeasur ean d control factorsno t included astreatments , and toorganiz edat acollections . Life cycleduratio n While grain cropstypicall ymatur e ina fewmonths ,th e reproductive cycle of ruminant livestock extendsove r at leasta year . This increases the timeframe and costo fexperimentation ,a swel l as the risk thatexperimenta l animalsma ydi e orb e soldbefor e the trial is completed. 28
Table2.2 . Comparisono fCharacteristic so fCrop san dLivestoc k and Implicationsfo rOn-Far mTestin g
Situationwit h respectt o
Factor Crops Livestock Implications for onfar mlivestoc k research
Mobility Stationary Mobile Difficult to measure and control non-experimenta l factors
Lifecycl e Generally
Life cycle Allunit s Unitsseldo m Difficult tofin d synchronization synchronized synchronized comparable units
Multiple outputs Onlygrain/tube r Meat,hides , Difficult to and residues milk,manure , measure/value power treatment effect
Non-market inputs Few Many Difficult tovalu e andoutput s
Experimental Small,divisibl e Large, Increasescost , unitsiz e indivisible risk to cooperator
Producer Impersonal Personal taboos Difficult tocull , attitudes castrate,earmar k
Management Low High Difficult to variability isolate treatment effect
Observation Many Few Large statistical units variability
Ownership Individual Often shared Jointmanagemen t or inherited
Resource Land tenure Often communal Reducesmotivatio n attribute individual land
Targetaudienc e Individual farmer Farm family Increases management variability
Source: Adapted fromBernste ne ta l (1984)an dGryseel s (1986). 29
Life cycle synchronization Cropso f similarvarietie sar eplante d andharveste dmor eo r less at the same time. Animal production,however, i sno t synchronized and occursa tdifferen t timesan d intervals. Thismake s itdifficul t to find animalso f thesam eproductio n categoriesan d inth esam e production phase. Multiple outputs Animalsproduc e severaloutput so feconomi cvalue . These outputs includemilk ,meat ,manure ,draugh tpowe r andhides . Someo f these animal outputsar e intermediateproduct san dar euse d as inputsi nth e cropenterprise . Thismake s itdifficul t tomeasur e the impacto f treatments,t oevaluat e theeconomi c impacto fa n intervention and to assess theconstraint s inth e farming system.
Non-market inputsan d outputs Smallholder livestock production systemsdepen d on inputs sucha s child labour,cro p residuesan dwate rwhic har edifficul t tovalue ,an d produce outputs sucha sdraugh tpowe r andmanur e forwhich there isn o readymarket . Thevalu eo fothe r functionso fanimal s sucha scapita l accumulation, riskmanagemen tan d ceremonial functionsar edifficul t to measure.
Sizeo f experimentaluni t Smallholder farmershav eonl ya fewlarg e ruminants. Exposing these to trialsan d treatments inth e researchexpose sth eproduce r to substantial risks. Moreover,a largenumbe r of farmerswil l have to participate intrial s inorde r toachiev e statistical significance. This increasesth ecos to fon-far mexperimentatio n substantially. Also,far m comparisonswit ha control groupar e rarelypossibl ean d the researcher needs to resortt ocross-far mcomparisons . Producer attitudes Livestock are subject tovariou s religiousan dcultura l taboos whichmake s itdifficul t tocull , castratean d earmark them. Management variability Themanagemen to f livestock includesa largenumbe r of critical decisions (feeding,watering ,milking ,breeding ,anima lhealt hcontrol , etc.)whic h need tob emad e regularly,ofte ndaily, ove r a long production cycle. Thevariabilit y of thismanagemen tmake s itdifficul t toattribut e theeffect so fcertai ntreatment sgive nth enumbe r of experimentalunits . Number ofobservatio nunit s Livestock performance ismeasure d asproductio npe r animal,an d as small farmsten d tohav e only fewanimals ,th e statistical variability of performancewithi ntreatmen tgroup s tendst ob elarge . 30
Other factorstha tcoul db eadde d tothi sclassificatio n are problems relatedto : Ownershipo fanimal s Manyanimal sar e inherited,o rmanage d bypeopl e other thanth e owner ina benefit-sharin gagreement . Thismake s individualdecision s related tomanagemen tdifficult . Resource attributes Livestockwil lofte ngraz eo f landwhic h iscommunall yowned . This tenureproble m severely limitsth escop eo fon-far mpastur e experiments. Targetaudienc e Livestock aremanage db yvariou shousehol d members. The roleo f womenan d children isparticularl y important. Thiscomplicate s the organizationo fmanagemen to f livestock experimentation,i ncompariso n withon-far mcro pexperiments . Mclntire (1986)ha sdispute d thevalidit y of these factorst o conclude thatlivestoc k on-farm trialswoul d inherentlyb emor e difficult thancro pon-far mtrials . Although theyma ywel l standa s reasonswh y notmor eon-far mwor kwit h livestockha sbee nundertaken ,th eautho r argues thatwit h rigorous statisticalprocedure smos to fth eproblem s cited canb eovercome ,an d that sometimeson-far mexperimenta l research had beenundertake n toohastily ,withou t sufficientprio r on-station validation. Bernsten (1982)ha spointe d to institutional obstacles,th e complexityo f crop-animal systems,an d the lack ofavailabl e technology inexplainin g thelac k ofFS Roriente d studieso n livestocksystems .
Instudie so ncrop-livestoc k systems,particula r emphasis ist ob e givent oth e interactionsbetwee nbot henterprise s (Figure2.2) . Linkagesbetwee n theseenterprise s canb e complementaryo r competitive for resources,an d canb edirect ,o r indirectvi a themarke to r household. Among thecomplementar y linksar e theus eo fanima lpowe r for cropproduction ,whil e crops intur nproduc e straws,stubble san d residueswhic har e fed to livestock;th eus eo fmanur e to improve soil fertility;cas h income from livestock forth epurchas e ofcro pinputs ; reduction inoveral lproductio n riskb ycombinin g cropan d livestock enterprises;an d increase inlabou rproductivit yb ymaximizin g the contributiono f childan d femalelabou r (McDowel lan dHildebrand ,1980 ; Zandstra,1983 ;Mclntir ean dGryseels ,1987) .
Cropan d livestock enterprises canals ocompet e forresources . Forage cropsma y compete forlan dwit h food cropsan d labour required for livestockproductio n (particularly forherdin gan d fodder harvesting) reduces theamoun tavailabl e forcrop-relate d tasks.
Inth ediagnosti cphas e itwil l therefore beusefu l tomak e a flow charto fho w thedifferen t componentso f the farming systemunde r study are linked. Particular emphasis ist ob e givent o input/output transfers,th e functionso f livestock and farmerobjective swit h the various enterprises. Inorde r toensur e transferability ofresults , 31 delineationo frecommendatio ndomain sneed st oinclud ea stratificatio n ofcrop-anima lproductio n systemsi nth elarge r agroclimatic zoneunde r study. Thisca nb edon eb yvariou s criteria,usin gth epredominan t crop andanima l enterprise,suc ha sfo rexampl emaize/bean san dpasture/dair y cows,o rcoffee/banana san dsmal l ruminants;livestoc k functions sucha s animal tractiono rdair yproduction : resourceendowments ;o rmor e general characteristicso fth efarmin g system structure sucha sth edegre eo f subsistencean dmarke tacces so rsoi l types (Zandstra, 1985).
Figure 2.2.: Crop-Livestock Interactionsi nMixe d Farming Systems
CashCTd Fa m Inputs
Grain and Straw Live animals and Livestock Froducts
Draught power - reruns - Transport
-^ LIVESTOCK 'T
Land - Labour - Capital •
} HOUSEHOLD £ Milk - Meat - Hides - Security - Ti T.
Source: Adapted fromM cDowel lan dHildebran d (1980),
Bernsten (1982)stresse sth eimportanc eo fa clea r identification ofhypothese sa tth eoutse to fth eresearc hprogramme ,t oformulat eth e criteriafo revaluatin g thesehypotheses ,an dt ospecif ydat aneed st o 32
testthem . Collinson (1981)ha sprovide d a checkliston information needs inth ediagnosti cphas e of researcho nmixe d farmingsystems . Gryseels (1985)ha s listed the specificdat a requirementso f the research on livestock sub-systems. Inth eanalysi so f theproductio n system, Zandstra (1985)ha s identified threelevels . Firstth eexogenou s factors which have conditioned the systemar econsidered ,a t the second level analysis isstructure d and referst oan inventoryo f landuse ,livestoc k herdsan d capitalassets . At the third level,th eanalysi swil l focuson thewa y the system functions. Theautho rnote s the importance for the researcher tounderstan d the reasonsbehin d theparticula r formth e production systemha staken ,e.g .wh yar e farmersno tusin ga particula r inputeve n thoughthe yar eawar eo f it?
Inth ediagnosti c stage,emphasi s ist ob e givent oth e seasonalityaspect so fth e inputsan doutput so f theproductio n system. Thiscoul db e inth e formo fagroeconomi c profiles (DeBoer , 1983). This stage shouldals o include anappraisa lo f futureprospect s for theare a ifther ear en odevelopmen t interventions,th e socalle d "zerooption " (Gryseelsan dAnderson , 1983a).
Informationgenerate db yth ediagnosti cphas e should lead toth e formulationo fpossibl e interventionswit h likelypotentia l to increase farmproductivity . Particular emphasiswil lb e given toway san dmean s toenhanc e the interactionsbetwee n cropsan d livestockproduction . Interventionswil lnee d totr yt oovercom e themajo r constraints toth e farming system,whic h canb e biological,ecologica l or socio-economic in nature. Nutritional factorsar e generally considered theprimar y limiting factors incrop-livestoc k research (Bernstene t al,1983 ; Zandstra, 1985). New technologies shouldb e lowcost ,ancTmee tmajo r concernso fth efarmer .
These technologieswil l need tob epre-screene d beforebein g tested on-farm, inorde r tominimiz e the risk of the farmer involved. Thispre-screenin g canb edon e through theus e ofunit ,research ,o r experimental farms (Jolly,1952 ;Gryseel san dAnderson , 1983a). These are farmsusuall y locatedon a research stationwhic har emanage d under the supervisiono f research staff. Budgeting,programmin g and simulation modellingprocedure sals ohav e an important rolet opla y inpre-screenin g technologies (DeBoer , 1983). These technologieswil lusuall y relate to forageproduction ,anima lnutrition ,anima lhealth ,integratio no fhighe r yielding breeds,o ranima ltraction .
When sufficient confidence isdevelope d inth eappropriatenes s of a particular technology,on-far m testing canb e initiated . The objectiveo fthi sstag e ist oevaluat e the improvedpractice s flowing from thedesig n stage,t oth e farm. On-farm trialsar e the intermediate stepbetwee n controlled laboratorywor k oron-statio n research,an d extension/development . Theyca nb eo f three types: researcher-managed, farmer-managed,o rpromotiona l trials (Knipscheer, 1985). Researcher-managed trialsma yus e the farmer'slan dan dhi slabour ,bu t themanageria l input isprovide d byth e researchworkers . Farmer-managed trials involve the supplyo fal lmajo r resources (land,labour ,capita l andmanagement )b y the farmerwh o isals o the risk taker. Promotional trialsconsis to fdemonstration s to illustrate the superiority of a technology. 33
The interventionsar e thenevaluated ,bot htechnicall yan d economically,an d the impacto f theiradoptio no nfar mproductivit y appraised. Inth eevaluation ,thre emai narea sar et ob eaddressed : technicaleffectiveness ,economi cbenefit san d sociocultural compatability (Cook,1985) . Factorsaffectin gadoptio no fth e technology byth e target farmershav et ob e carefully studied. Inth e research process,clos econtac twil lb ekep twit hgovernmen textensio nagents , officialso f theMinistr y ofAgriculture ,an d researchworker so fothe r institutes. Issues related toextensio nan ddevelopmen to fne w technology formixe d farming systemsar efurthe rdiscusse d inBernste n (1982).
2.4. Need forAdditiona l Studies
Despite thegrowin gacceptanc e ofFS Ri nsub-Sahara nAfrica , only fewon-far m studieshav ebee nundertake no nlivestoc k production in mixed farming systems inth eAfrica nhighlands . Almostal l studieso n smallholder farminghav e focused onth ecro pcomponents . Mosto fth e literature reportingo n resultso fon-far manima l research relate toAsi a andLati nAmerica . Insub-Sahara nAfrica ,farmin gsystem s research programmeswit ha nemphasi so nlivestoc k have focusedo npastora lo r sedentary farming systems. Theyhav ebee ndominate db y international centreso r institutes,an dUSAlD-sponsore dprojects . ILCAha sproject s inMali ,Kenya ,Nige r andEthiopia , Winrock International inKenya ,an d WSARP/USAIDi nSuda n (Bernstene tal , 1984). ILCA'sproject s inMali , Nigeria andKenya ,a swel la sth eWSARP/USAI Dproject s focuso n transhumantpastora lan d sedentaryfarming .
TheSmal lRuminant-Collaborativ e Research SupportProgramm e in Kenyaha sbee nse tu pwit h support fromWinroc k International andUSAID . Itsobjectiv e ist odevelo pan devaluat edua lpurpos egoa tproductio n systems forlimite d resource farmers (Sidahmede tal , 1985). Iti s undertakenb ya multidisciplinar ytea mo fscientists ,an dha s involved diagnostic studies,on-statio nan don-far m trials,an d large scale monitoring onth eeffect so fpackag e technologiesadopte db yfarmers .
ILCA's initial resultso f studieswit h smallholders inth e highlandshav ebee n summarized byGryseel san dAnderso n (1983a). These studieswer eundertake n inEthiopia ,whic haccount s for 50%o fth e Africanhighlands . The country containsth elarges t livestock population of sub-SaharanAfrica ,an d itsfarmin g system ison eo fsmallholde r mixed farming,wit ha clos e integrationo fth ecro pan danima l components. The following chapterwil ldea lwit hagricultur e inEthiopi a ingreate r detail.
A major studyo nth eeconomic so f smallholder livestock production systems inth ehighland swa sundertake n inKeny a (Stotz,1983) . The systemsdiscusse dwer e commercial innature ,an dhighl ymarke tdependent . The study reviewed thepossibilitie so f intensification of livestock production inKenya . Livestock production systemswer e studied in isolationo fth ecroppin g systemassociate dwit h them,an dcrop-livestoc k interactionsbetwee nbot h systemswer eoutsid e the scope of thisstudy .
Anovervie wo f researcho nmixe d smallholder farming systemsi n sub-SaharanAfric a generally canb e found inILC A (1983a),Nordblo me ta l 34
(1985),Vo nKaufma ne ta l (1986)an dKear l (1986). Manyo fth e research projectsar e inth e formo f case studies. Theusefulnes so fthi s approachha sbee ndiscusse db yCasle yan dLur y (1982)an dMaxwel l (1986a). Tuizaan dAmi r (1986)prepare da usefu lglossar yo fon-far m livestock research terms,whil eRevill aan dAmi r (1986)hav emad ea bibliographic studyo fongoin gon-far mlivestoc k researchthroughou tth e developingworld . 35
3. LIVESTOCK PRODUCTIONI NTH EETHIOPIA N HIGHLANDS
3.1. Agriculture inEthiopi a
3.1.1. Introduction Ethiopia islocate d inth enortheaster n corner ("the Horn")o f Africabetwee n 3 and 18 latitudenort han d from3 3 to4 8 longitude east,an d issurrounde d by Sudan,Somalia ,Kenya ,Djibout i and theRe d Sea. The countrycover s a landare ao f1. 2 million km2,an d hasa population of 42millio npeople, th e third largest inAfric a after Nigeria and Egypt. Thepopulatio n growthha sbee nestimate d at2.7 %p.a . from 1965 to1980 ,an d 2.5%p.a .fro m198 0 to198 5 (WorldBank , 1987). Ethiopia's population ischaracterize d by awid evariet yo f ethnic groups, languages,culture san d religions. TheAmhar a formth e culturallymos tdominan t groupalthoug h theyaccoun t foronl y 30%o f the population,whil e theOromo sar ewit h 40%o f thepopulatio n numerically the largest tribe. The third largest group isth eTigra ywit h 15%,whil e other tribes forma nadditiona l 15%o fth epopulation . The official language ofEthiopi a isAmharic ,whil eOrominy a andTigriniy a aremajo r regional languages. Approximately 40%o f thepopulatio n isCopti c Christianwhil e 45%i sMosli m (Slikkerveer, 1986). Ethiopia still retains theJulia n calendar, rather thanth eGregoria n Calendarwhic h is common throughout theWester nworl d and elsewhere insub-Sahara nAfrica . Theyea r isdivide d into 12month so f 30day seac han d a 13thmont h of fiveday s (or six ina leapyear) . The EthiopianCalenda r isseve nyear s and eightmonth sbehin d theGregoria n Calendar. Unless specified, the dates referred to inthi s study refer toth eGregoria nCalendar .
Administratively, Ethiopia isdivide d in 14province s (Figure 3.1). Eachprovinc e isdivide d intoAwradjas ,o fwhic h therear e102 . EachAwradj a issub-divide d intoWeredas ,whic h total 586. Ethiopia's capital cityAddi sAbeb a islocate d inShoa ,th emos tdensil y populated province and in198 7ha d apopulatio no f justunde r 2millio npeople . The economieso f thenorther nprovince so fEritre a andTigra yar e severelydisrupte d bywarfar e and civilunrest . Approximately 15%o f Ethiopia'spopulatio n live inurba nareas ,an d 85%i n ruralarea s (World Bank,1984 a andb) .
With ape r capita incomeo fUS$ 110i n 1985 (WorldBank , 1987), Ethiopia ison eo f the leastdevelope d countrieso f theworld ,an d the pooresto fAfrica ,amon g thecountrie s forwhic h information is available. Life expectancy atbirt h is4 5years ,infan tmortalit y (aged under one)i s168 ,onl y 6% of thepopulatio nha sacces s to safewate r and theaverag e calorie supply isonl y 75%o f requirements (WorldBan k 1981a and 1987). Despite itspoverty ,Ethiopi aha s receivedunti l recently relatively littledevelopmen t aid. In198 2 forexample ,th ene t official development assistance toEthiopi awa sUS$ 6.1 per caput,compare d with anaverag e ofUS $ 19 for sub-SaharanAfric a (WorldBank , 1984aan db) .
In recentyears ,Ethiopi aha s receivedworldwid e attention because ofwidesprea d faminean d starvation. During 1984an d 1985,th e country had toprovid e emergency relief for 9millio npeople ,an d import 36 Figure 3.1. Map of Ethiopia
(ERITREA \ ^ Annan -
A-x ^J T I GRAY" • ttetota N. G 0 N D E R fN \ • Gonder ( * "*"'**.^
W ELO
V 0««* G 0 J A M
. Gond«. \
W E L E GA *&4Bat eaWorox a Nakwnt«, _-» Addit Alubo •D**»1-,r*\ ./ .Metu SHEWA ^«*Mlo u ILUBABO R/'Jmmo ƒ «e A R S I / \ H A R E R,G E
K E F A •**0 Arte f) f GAM O BALE ! G O F A S' \ S I O A M O \ 37 approximately1 millio n tonneso fgrai nannually . Thenee d formassiv e importso f cereals as "food aid" iscontinuin g todat e (Maxwell,1986b ) '. The rugged andmountainou s terraino f theEthiopia n highlands isa majo r constraint fora neffectiv e distribution of foodaid ,an d for economic development ingeneral . Themajorit y of ruralpeopl e livea tmor e thana day returnwal k froma nall-weathe r road (Stommesan d Sisay, 1979). Efforts tohal t the trend ofdeclinin g foodproductio n per caput areurgentl y needed,an d the sizeo fth e food crisisalon e provides sufficient justification tofocu sagricultura l research effortso n Ethiopia, inorde r tofin dway san dmean s to rapidly increase the productivity ofagricultur e inth e country.
3.1.2. The Economy Ethiopia's economy isdominate d by theagricultura l sector which in 1985contribute d approximately 44%o fth e totalGros sDomesti c Product (GDP)o fUS$ 4,23 0millio n and 80%o f itslabou r force. Agricultural production hasbee ngrowin gwit h 2%p.a .betwee n 1971an d 1980,an d declinedb y -0.34%p.a .betwee n 1980an d 1984. Foodproductio n grewb y anapproximatel y equal amountunti l 1980,an d thendecline d by-1.4 %p.a . until 1985. GDPdecline d by-0.7 %p.a .betwee n 1980an d 1983 (World Bank, 1984b,1985 ban d 1987;FAO , 1986). Theminimu mwag e rate fixed by thegovernmen t is1.9 2 Birrpe rday , reflecting the low income levels of the country 1/. Thisminimu m rate isth eactua lwag e throughoutmos t of the ruralarea s exceptdurin gpea k seasonal periods. Inurba nareas ,th e minimumwag e rate is 50Birr/month ,an d themajorit y ofunskille d labourersear n lesstha n10 0Birr/mont h (WorldBank , 1984b).
Agricultural exports account forclos e to90 %o f total export earnings. Thebalanc e of tradeha sbee nnegativ e for the lastdecade , anddespit e severe restrictions on imports,thes e exceed exports by almoston e third. Coffeealon eprovide smor e than65 %o f export earnings,an dothe r agricultural exports include oilseeds,pulses , cotton,sugarcane ,fruits ,flowers ,hide san d skins,an d livestock (sheep and cattle). Ethiopiaha s the largest livestock herd ofAfrica . Other knownnatura l resources includegold ,platinium , copper,potas han d petroleum. None of thesemineral sha sbee nexploite d ona largescale , and thepotentia l for commercial development remains tob e proven. There are someprospect s for theexploitatio n ofgeotherma l energy.
In1974 ,th e countryunderwen t aprofoun d political changewit h theoverthro wo f itsemperor ,Hail eSelassie ,an d his replacement by a marxist governmentwhic h hasbee n led since 1977b y Lt.Col .Mengist u HaileMariam . Thebank san dmajo r industryan d service corporationswer e nationalized,an dprivat e landownershi p abolished. The Ethiopian economyexperience d severedisruption s inth epost-revolutionar y period, resulting instagnatio nan d decline of industrial and agricultural production,unti l the end of the70s .
1/ Thevalu e of the EthiopianBir r islinke d to theUS$ ina fixed exchange rateo f 1US $= 2.07 Birr. OneBir r isthu sofficiall y worth approximatelyUS $ 0.50. 38
Since the197 4politica l revolution,Ethiopi aha smad e considerable socialprogress ,a sreflecte db ysignifican t increases in literacy ratean d schoolenrollment . The literacy rate rose from7 %i n 1973t o40 %i n1981 ,an d theprimar yschoo lenrollmen t rate increased from19 %t o47 %ove r the sameperio d (WorldBank , 1984b). Themarxis t governmentha stransforme d the institutional and socialbasi sfo r agriculture. TheLan d ProclamationAc to f197 5dissolve d all existing tenancy relationships andabolishe d private landownership . All rural landbecam e thecollectiv epropert yo fth eEthiopia npeople . Thepolic y of theEthiopia nGovernmen t ist opromote ,o na voluntar ybasis , cooperativemode so fproduction .
Although iti sto oearl y toasses sth eoutcom eo f theagraria n reform, itha sbee nwidel yacknowledge d thatth eproces sha sle dth e basis fora mor eegalitaria n incomedistributio n (WorldBank ,1981c ; Rahmato,1984 ;Tegegne ,1984 ;Ghose ,1985 ;Dejene ,1987) . The performance ofth eagricultura l sector isdisappointin g however,foo d production isstagnatin gan d increasingly laggingbehin d population growth.
Someo fth epolicie so fth eEthiopia nGovernmen thav e stirred strong controversy,particularl y inth eWester nworld . Although individual smallholder peasantscultivat e 95%o farabl e land,governmen t investments inth eagricultura l sectorar eallocate d primarily toth e state farmsecto rwhic hcover s lesstha n4 %o farabl e land,an dwhic h incursheav y recurrentlosses .
Shortlyafte r the revolution,th eEthiopia nGovernmen t introduced controlso ngrai nprice sb yannouncin gmaximu mpric e limitsa twhic h graincoul db e soldb yproducer san d retailers. As theeffect so f this policywa snegligible ,th egovernmen t strategymove d towards controllng supply throughth eAgricultura lMarketin gCorporatio n (AMC). Farmersan d merchantsar e sinceoblige d tosel l toAM Cparticula r grainquotas, whic h are set foreac h region,a tofficia lwholesal eprice swhic har ewel l belowfre emarke tprices . According toGhos e (1985)th eofficia l prices implya genera lunderevaluatio n ofpeasan t labouran d thepric e control measuresoperat ea smechanism so f surplusextraction . Thegovernmen tha s also instituted legalcontrol so nth edomesti cgrai ntrad e inth emajo r surplusproducin gprovince s sucha sGondar ,Bal ean dArss i (Griffinan d Hay, 1985). Thisprevent strader s inmovin ggrai n fromsurplu st o deficitareas . Thepolicie s tocontro lgrai nprice san ddomesti c grain tradear e thought toresul ti na discouragemen t of farmerst oproduc e abovethei r subsistenceneed s (WorldBank , 1983).
Invie wo f thecontinuin gproblem so fdrough t and famine,an d the need toaccelerat eagricultura l andeconomi cdevelopment ,th eEthiopia n Government in198 4initiate d twomajo rprogrammes : resettlement and villagization. The resettlementprogramm e aimst otransfe rpeopl e from theecologicall y fragilean d famine strickenarea si nth enorth ,t omor e fertilearea s inth esout han d southwes to fth ecountry . Inman yarea s ofTigray ,Eritrea ,Woll oan dNorthe r Shoa soilsar e soerode d thateve n inyear so fnorma l rainfallno t sufficient foodca nb eproduce d to support theeve rexpandin gpopulation . At thesam e timeman yarea so f Kaffa,Wollega ,an d Illubaborhav ea lowpopulatio ndensity , fertile soilsan dhig hagricultura l potential. The resettlementprogramm ewa sa n 39
expansiono factivitie s thatha dbee n startedb y theRelie fan d Rehabilitation Commissiondurin g theearl y seventies (RRC,1985) . The newprogramm e ishoweve rundertake no na muc h larger scale andb y theen d of 1985a totalo f 600,000peopl eha dbee n transferred. Although the need foran dprincipl e of resettlementan dmigratio nou to f the famine pronearea so f thenort hwa sgenerall y agreedupon ,i twa s felt that the programmewa sno twel l planned and toohastil yexecuted . Someo f the new settlement siteswer eunsuitabl e foragriculture ,an dpron e todiseases , particularlymalaria . Inaddition ,th emigratio nha doccasionall y been imposed compulsory,an dman y familieswer e split inth eprocess . These problems caused an international outcryan d thegovernmen t in198 6 temporarily suspended foron eyea r the implementation of the resettlement programme.
In1984 ,th eEthiopia nGovernmen t also starteda 'Villagization' programme,throug hwhic h farmerswer eencourage d toleav e their individual homestead,ofte n located onto po f scathered, isolatedhills , andbuil d ane won e ina centrally located siteo feac hvillage . The objective of thevillagizatio nprogramm ewa s tofaciliatat e the provision of social servicessuc ha sdrinkin gwater ,educatio n and schools,bette r housing,clinic san dagricultura l extension. Critics of theprogramm e pointed to thenegativ eexperience so fa similarprogramm e carried out in Tanzania,th e resultingdifficultie so fcro pprotectio ndu e toth e larger distancefro m thevillag e toth e fields,th edanger so f overgrazing and infectuousdisease saroun d thevillage ,th edisturbance s inagricultura l productiona s farmersha d tobuil dne whousin gdurin g theploughin g and harvesting seasons,an d the large financial expenses,bot h for the governmentan d the farmers,associate dwit h the implementationo f the programme. The rapid speed inth e implementation of theprogramm ema y have caused a reductiono fnationa l agriculturalproductio ndurin g 1985 and1986 .
3.1.3 Topographyan d Climate Ethiopiaha sa complex and rugged topography,dominate d by ahig h central plateau ranging inaltitud ebetwee n 1,800 and 3,000m a.s.l.,bu t onaverag e 2,200m ,wit h somemountai npeak s rising tomor e than4,00 0m . Thisplatea udescend s inth eeas t ina coasta lplai n spreading to theRe d Sea,an d inth ewes t inth eWhit eNil eValle yplai no n the Sudanese border. TheRif tValle ydivide s the country fromnortheas t tosouthwest , which isfurthe rdissecte db ygorge san dbroa dvalleys . The central plateau isboun db yextensiv e lowlandareas ,mos to fwhic h are extensive rangelands.
The country canbroadl yb edivide d intohighland s andlowlands . Thehighlands ,define d asarea sabov e 1,500 m a.s.l., represent 490,000km 2o r approximately 40%o f thecountry' s landmass. The lowlands represent 740,000km 2o r 60%o f the country. The choice of 1,500 m as thedividin g linebetwee nhighland s and lowlands isjustifie d because in Ethiopia itals ocorrespond s toth ealtitud e atwhic h themea ndail y temperature during thegrowin gperio d isles s than20°C ,an d toth e boundarybetwee n themixe d crop-animal farming systemo f thehighlands , and thenomadi c pastoralistproductio n systemo f the lowlands (Constable, 1984).
Ethiopian culturedistinguishe s three principalaltitude - physiographic zones: the "kolla" (tropical)belo w1,50 0 m, the 40
"waina-dega" (subtropicalhighlands )betwee n 1,500 and2,50 0m and the "dega" (highlands)abov e2,50 0m . At the lower anduppe r limits,th e "behera" (desert)zon ea t lesstha n80 0m a.s.l.,an d the "woorah" (alpine)zon eabov e 3,500m areals odistinguished . This traditional classification on thebasi so faltitud e islargel ydetermine d by the temperature regime. Themea nannua l temperature in the "behera"i s between 30an d 40C , inth e "kolla"betwee n 20an d 30C , inth e "waina-dega"betwee n 15an d 20C , in the "dega"betwee n 10an d 15°C,an d inth e "woorah"les stha n1 0C (Getahun,1978a ;AACM ,1984 ;FAO , 1986d).
Climatologically,Ethiopi a canb edivide d into sixmoistur e regions: perhumid,humid ,mois t subhumid,dr y subhumid, semiarid and arid (DeMontgolfier-Kouevi , 1976). The combination ofaltitude ,temperatur e and rainfall determines the range limitso fvegetation . Actual landus epattern s are determined by the lengtho f thegrowin gperio d and socio-economic factors. The agroclimatic conditionsan d thegrowin gperio d classesan d types for different areas inEthiopi ahav ebee nestimate d byGoebe l and Odenyo (1984).
3.1.4. Framework forRura l Development Agriculture inEthiopi a isdominate d by thepeasan t sector,whic h accounts for 91%o f ruralhouseholds ,95 %o f theare a cultivated and95 % ofproductio n (Ghose,1985) . Since theLan d ReformProclamatio n of1975 , all tenancy relationshipshav ebee nabolished ,an dmos t commercial farms havebee nnationalized . Prior toth e revolution,a nestimate d 55%o f farmerswer e tenantsan d theyaccounte d for 61%o f cultivated land (Abate and Teklu, 1979). Thepre-revolutio nlan d tenure systemwa s complex, differed regionally andwa s closely linked toth e social class organization andpolitica l power structuresexistin g at that time (Goericke,1979 ;Rahmato ,1984 ;Dejene, 1987). The Land Reform Proclamationdeclare d "all rural land tob e thecollectiv e property of the Ethiopianpeople" ,an d that "noperso no r anyothe r organization shall hold land inprivat e ownership" (Government ofEthiopia , 1975). It also specified thatth e right tous e landwa s tob edistribute d as equally aspossible ,an d that thepractic e ofhirin g labourwa s prohibited. The institutional vehicle toimplemen t these reformswer e the Peasants'Association s (PAs)tha twer e established by the same proclamation. A PAusuall yha sbetwee n200 an d 500families ,an d a mean total landare a ofaroun d 800ha . PAshav ebee ngive nwid e administrative and judicialpower s to redistribute the land,organiz e cooperations andbuil d social services. By 1984,som e 20,000PA swer e in existence,wit h a totalmembershi p of 6.5 million farm families (Constable, 1984).
Thepolic yo f theEthiopia nGovernmen t ist oprovid e cooperative modes ofproduction . Itargue s that the formation of Producer Cooperatives (PCs)wil l allow foreconomie s of scale inth e utilization of land and labour,an d facilitate theprovisio n ofextension , input and market facilities. Theproces so f transformation from individual to collective farming isvoluntar y and gradual. Although the formation of PCs isencourage d by incentives sucha s cheaper inputs,lowe rtaxes , higher output pricesan d access toextensio n services,b y 1984 PCs accounted foronl y 2%o fcro pland . 41
TheProclamatio no f197 5als oallowe d forth ecreatio no f Service Cooperatives (SCs). Thesear e formedb ya minimu mo fthre ean da maximu m ofte nPAs ,an dar eencourage d toprocure ,stor ean ddistribut e crop inputsan d consumer goods,provid e credit,marke t crops,an dpromot e rural industryan dpolitica l education. By1984 ,3,81 5 SCsha dalread y beenestablishe dwit ha membershi po ffou rmillio nhousehold s (Constable, Ibid). MostSC shav econcentrate d onth edistributio no fconsume rgoods , and the collectiono fgrai n forth eAgricultura lMarketin gCorporation .
State farmswer e createdo nth ebasi so fcommercia l farmstha t werenationalize d in1975 . Theyaccoun t foronl y 4%o f theare a cultivated and for6 %o fagricultura lproduction . State farmsoperat e withheav y losses,an dproductio n costs farexcee d revenues. The Governmentha sno texpande d the state farmsecto r since 1984,an d is undertaking effortst oincreas ethei rproductivity . Thepeasan t sector iso foverwhelmin g importance,an duse s itsresource s farmor e efficiently thanproduce r cooperativeso rstat e farms (Griffinan dHay , 1985).
3.1.5. Agricultural Production
Agriculture inEthiopi aha sbee ndescribe db yvariou s authors includingHuffnage l (1961),Westpha l (1975), Getahun (1978ban d 1980b) and FAO (1986d). Thesedescription shav ebee nmainl ymad e inqualitativ e terms. Thelac ko fa quantitativ edat abas eha sbee na severe constraint inth eplannin go fdevelopmen tactivities .
Inadditio n toit sslo wrat eo fgrowth ,agricultur e inEthiopi a is characterized by three conditions: geographical concentrationo foutpu t inabou t athir do f thelan darea ;th elimite d amounto fintra-regiona l trade;an d instabilitydu e toclimati cvariabilit y (Griffinan dHay , 1985).
Approximately 55%o fcerea loutpu tan d 72%o foutpu to fpulse s in Ethiopia isproduce d inth eprovince so fShoa ,Gonda r andArss i (Ministry ofAgriculture , 1979). Although thisi slargel ydu e toth ebette r quality oflan d inthes e regions,Griffi nan dHa y (1985)note d thatth e farmers inthes e regionsals oenjo ybette r access tolan dan dha d larger holdings. The sizeo fcroplan d availablepe rpeasan t family inEthiopi a rangesfro ma naverag e of2 h a inGonda r toonl y .7h a inGam oGofa . Average cropyield s range from128 0kg/h ao fcereal s inBal e to49 0kg/h a inGam oGofa ,an d forpulse s from45 0kg/h a inWoll ot o25 0kg/h a inGam o Gofa. Themai n regional food surplusarea sar eArssi ,Bal e andGondar , and themai ndefici tarea sGam oGofa ,Hararghe ,Sidamo ,Wollo ,Tigra yan d Eritrea.
Because ofth epric ean ddistributio n controlso ftrad e ingrain s throughAM C the intra-regional trade flowsar e severely restricted. Asa result, inter-regional pricedifference sar e substantial andth e coefficient ofvariatio n ofprice so fcereal s forexampl e are 34%fo r teff,25 %fo rwheat ,37 %fo rmaize ,21 %fo rbarley ,49 %fo r sorghuman d 72% formille t (Griffinan dHay , 1985). Inadditio n toth e legal controls,transpor tdifficultie s and thelac k of infrastructure also explainth e limitedamoun to f inter-regional graintrade . 42
Themos t importantattribut eo fth eEthiopia nclimat e isth e variability inth e intensityan donse to f rainyperiods . Cropyield s varyaroun da tren d lineb y10-15 %an d thecoefficien to fvariatio no f cerealproductio n inEthiopi abetwee n197 0an d 1985ha sbee nestimate d at 13.9% (Griffinan dHay ,Ibid ;FAO ,1986b) . Thisvariabilit yput s additionalburden so nth edistributio n systema sreliabl ecro p forecast dataar eno tavailable .
An increase ingrai nproductio n couldb eachieve d byeithe ra n expansiono fare a cultivated orb y increasing theproductivit y of cropland.
OfEthiopia' stota l landare ao f11 0millio nha ,approximatel y 13.9millio nh a (12.6%)i sregularl ycultivate d rainfed cropland,94,00 0 ha (.8%) isirrigate d land,9 millio nh a (8%)i scovere dwit h forests,6 2 millionh a (56%)wit hpasture san d the remaining 25millio nh a (23%)i s waste orwoodlan d (WorldBank ,1984b ;FAO ,1987b) .Th eofficia l statisticsprovide db yth eCentra lStatistica l Office (Ministryo f Agriculture,1977 )indicat e thatprivat eholding scultivat e approximately 5.9millio nh aannually ,whil ePC san dstat efarm scultivat ea n additional 300,000ha . Thedifferenc ebetwee nbot hestimate sca nb e attributed toarea scroppe dwit hperennia l cropssuc ha sense t (false banana), coffee,cha tan d tubercrop sfo rwhic hdat aar e generally lacking,an d the incidenceo f fallowlan dwhic hcover sapproximatel y 3 millionh ape ryear .
Cropproductio nb y smallholders isdominate d bycereal swhic h account for81 %o fcultivate d land. Theprincipa l cerealsan dth e proportiono f totalare a cultivated aretef f (24%),barle y (13%),maiz e (11%),whea t (12%),sorghu m (13%)an dmille t (4%). Pulsesaccoun t fora totalo f 14%o fth etota lare a cultivated,particularl yhors ebean s(6%) , chickpea s (2%),fiel dpea s (3%)an d lentils (1%). Other cropsaccoun t for 5%o fare acultivated ,an d includenoug ,flax ,an d sesame. These dataar e forth e 1981/82cro pyear . During thatyea r total food productionwa s 5.7millio ntonne so fcereals ,0. 9 milliontonne so f pulses,an d 0.3 million tonneso foilseed s (WorldBank ,1984b) . In1986 , foodproductio namounte d to5. 7millio ntonne so fcereals ,1. 3 million tonneso f rootcrops ,. 9millio n tonneso fpulses ,an d .12millio n tonnes ofoilseed s (FAO,1987b) .
Therear eopportunitie s fora nexpansio no fu p to20 %o f cultivated land. Inth ewest ,sout hwes tan d southernpart so fth e centralhighlands ,th elan d isrelativel yunder-utilize d andha sa hig h fractiono f fallow. Inthes eareas ,th econstraint s toexpandin g productionar e first labouran d thencapital . Inth enorther n highlands land isscarce ,an d the remaining landusuall yeroded ,waterlogge d or exhausted. Theconstrain tt olan dexpansio n inthes earea si sprimaril y capital,fo rexampl e for land conservation,irrigation ,o rdrainag ework s (Griffinan dHay ,1985 ;RRC ,1985) .
Cropyield s inEthiopi aar egenerall y lowan d formos tyear s average nationally justbelo w100 0kg/h a forbot hcereal san dpulses . In theperio d 1974-1978,th enationa laverag ewa s74 0kg/h a forteff ,95 0 kg/hafo rwheat ,95 0kg/h a forbarley ,63 0kg/h a forchic k peas,60 5 kg/ha for fieldpea san d 985kg/h a forhors ebean s (Ministryo f Agriculture,1979) . 43
Increases incro pyield scoul db eachieve d froma highe rus eo f inputs,particularl yminera l fertilizers,improve d seedvarietie san d irrigation. Mineral fertilizer consumption islo wan daverage s nationallyonl y 35gram so fplan tnutrien tpe rhectar eo farabl e land (WorldBank , 1987). In1981/8 2approximatel y 76%o favailabl e fertilizerswer eallocate d toth estat e farmsecto r andonl y24 %t oth e peasant sector. Onpeasan tholdings ,fertilize rus e isconfine d to2.5 % of land cultivated. Theprincipa l reasonsfo rthi slo wus eo f fertilizer are itslimite davailabilit yan dunfavourabl e benefit/cost ratios. Only 5000tonne so f improved seedsar euse dannuall yb yth epeasan tsector , mostly inproduce r cooperatives. Approximately 88%o f improved seedsg o toth e state farmsecto r and resettlements (Ghose,1985 ;FA O 1986d).
Irrigation islimite d toles stha n1 %o fcultivate d landbu t the high capital costo f irrigationwork sconstrain sa further expansion.
Nationally,crop saccoun t for80 %o fth egros svalu eo fproductio n ofagricultur e and livestock forth e remainder. Ethiopiaha sth e largest livestock herdo nth econtinen tan daccount s for17 %o fcattle ,20 %o f sheep,13 %o fgoat san d 55%o fequine so fsub-Sahara nAfrica . Its livestock populationwa sestimate d in198 3a t26. 3millio ncattle ,23. 4 million sheep,17. 2millio ngoats ,an d 1millio ncamels . A description ofth e indigenouscattl ebreed sca nb efoun d inAlberr oan dHail eMaria m (1982aan db )an do fth e indigenousshee pbreed s inMinistr yo f Agriculture (1975). Annualproductio no fmil kdurin g 1979-81wa s estimated at80 8millio ntonnes ,an do fmea t41 5millio n tonnes (FAO, 1986b). The country recoversannuall yabou t1. 9millio nhide san d 15 million skinsfro mth e slaughter ofanimals . Inadditio nanimal sprovid e nearlyal l thedraugh tpowe r forth ecultivatio no fcropland ,an d produce 24millio n tonneso fdryweigh tmanur e (AACM, 1984). Donkeysprovid emos t ofth e rural transportneeds .
Marketing systems forlivestoc k areno twel ldeveloped . Smallholder farmersd ono tkee plivestoc k for thepurpos eo f selling marketproducts . Mostanimal sar epurchase d and soldo n smallloca l markets,an deventuall y trekked tomajo r consumptionareas ,causin g substantialweigh t losses (AACM, 1984). Theorganisatio no f themea t market inAddi sAbeb aha sbee ndescribe d byAssamene w (1977).
Inth epeasan t farming sector ofEthiopia ,broadl ytw omai n agricultural systems canb edistinguished : smallholder mixed farming in thehighlands ,an dpastoralis m inth elowlands .
3.1.6. Importance ofth eHighland s
Although thehighland scove r only 40%o fEthiopia' s landmass , theycontai n88 %o f itshuma npopulation ,accoun t for95 %o f regularly cultivated cropland, 70%o flivestoc k and90 %o f thecountry' seconomi c activity (Constable,1984) . Within thelivestoc k population,70 %o f cattle,75 %o f sheep,27 %o fgoat san d80 %o fequine sca nb e found inth e highlands (Jahnkean dAsamenew , 1983).
Agricultural production inth ehighland s iso f overwhelming importance toEthiopia . Yet,th ephysica l resourceso fth ehighland sar e at risk. Degradation isincreasin g rapidly,an dove r 200millio n tonnes of soilar e lost from thehighland sannuall y (FAO,1986d) . The 44 sustainabilityo fth efarmin gsystem si sthreatened ,mainl y throughth e reductioni nsoi ldept han dth elos si nvegetatio ncover . For that reason,th eEthiopia nGovernmen t initiatedi n198 3a HighlandsReclamatio n Study (FAO,Ibid) . This studywa sintende dt o assessth eexten tan dcause so fdegradatio nan dformulat e development options. By1987 ,a strea mo fworkin gdocument sha dbee nprepared ,an d an integrated studywa sbein g finalized. Almostal lworkin g documents thatwer eproduce d pointedt oth elac ko ffar mleve ldata ,an dth e difficultieso fplannin gan dappraisa lo fdevelopmen tactivitie si nth e absenceo fquantitativ edat abase .
3.2. Researcho nFarmin g Systemsi nth eHighland s
3.2.1. Zonationo fth eEthiopia n Highlands Variousauthor s (Getahun,1978 aan db ,an d1980 ;AACM ,1984 ; FAO, 1986d)hav e attemptedt oclassif yth eEthiopia nhighland si nterm so f agro-ecological zones. Broadly,a distinctio nca nb emad ebetwee na hig h potential cereal-livestock zone,a lo wpotentia l cereal-livestock zone, anda hig hpotentia l perennial-livestock zone. Theprincipa l characteristicso fthes emajo r zonesar esummarize di nTabl e3.1 .
Table 3.1. Characteristicso fth eMajo rAgro-Ecologica l Zonesi nth e EthiopianHighland s
Highpotentia l Lowpotentia l Highpotentia l cereal-livestock cereal-livestock perennial-livestock
Area 149,900 134,000 139,500 Populationdensit y (persons/km2) 73 72 74 Proportiono ftota l humanhiglan d population (%) 32 35 33 Livestock density (TLU/km2) 55 30 27 Proportiono ftota l highlands livestock population (%) 41 26 33 Ratio livestock/ humanpopulatio n 0.75 0.42 0.36 Soils volcanic parent sedimentaryo r volcanic parent materials metamorphicparen t materials materials Climate sub-humid/humid sub-humid/semi-arid humid
Topography rollingplateau x mountainous/ dissected escarpments plateaux Growingperio d (days) 150t o24 0 90t o15 0 >240 Agricultural output cereals,pulses , cereals,pulses , coffee,tubers , livestock livestock enset, livestock
Source: Adapted fromGetahu n (1978a),Jahnk ean dAsamene w (1983)an d Constable (1984). 45
The three zonesar eapproximatel yequa l insiz ean d inhuma n populationdensity ,bu t thehig hpotentia l cereal/livestock zoneha sa muchhighe r livestock density thanth eothe r zones. For every human being inth ehig hpotentia l ceral/livestock zone (HPCL), therear e 0.75 TLU,agains t only 0.42 TLU inth e lowpotentia l cereal/livestock zone (LPCL),an d 0.36 inth ehig hpotentia l perennial/livestock (HPPL)zone . The climate ranges from sub-humid/humid inth eHPC L to sub-humid/arid in theLPC Lan dhumi d inth eHPPL ,an d thegrowin gperio d ranges accordingly.
Soildegradatio n iswidesprea d and severe inth eLPCL ,moderat e to severe inth eHPCL ,an d limited inth eHPPL . Smallholder mixed farming isdominan t inal l three zones,an d ox-ploughing isth eusua l tillage system inbot h the cereal/livestock zones. Although inth eHPP L ox-ploughing mayoccu r occasionally, thecommo n tillage system consists of theus e ofhan d hoes. TheHPC L comprisesth e centralhighland so fShoa ,Gojam , South Gondar,Eas tWelega ,Ars i and Balemassifs ,Wol e excarpmentan d the CentralHarargh ehighlands . The LPCLconsist so f thenorther n provinces of Eritreaan d Tigray,Nort hGondar ,Woll oexcep t escarpment,northeas t Shoaan d itsRif tValley ,an d the lowerhighland so fHararghe ,Arss i and Bale. TheHPP L islocate d inth e southernan dwester n partso fEthiopia , particularly inth eprovince so f Sidamo,Gam oGofa ,Kef aan d Illubabor, eastWelega ,an d southwest Shoa (Figure 3.2.).
It ismainl y inth eLPC L that famineshav eoccurre d in recent years,whil e theHPP Lha sattracte d attention because of government resettlementprogrammes .
3.2.2. Livestock Production Systems The livestock population of the Ethiopianhighland sha sbee n estimatedb yvariou sauthor s (DeMontgolfier-Kouevi ,1976 ;Ministr y of Agriculture,1977 ;AACM , 1984)an d summarized byJahnk ean dAsamene w (1983)a sconsistin g of 18.9millio n cattle,1 8millio n sheep, 4.8 million goatsan d 5.6 millionequines . The cattleher d includes four to sixmillio n draughtoxen . FAO (1987b)ha sestimate d the livestock populationo f Ethiopiaa t26. 3millio n cattle,23. 5millio n sheep,17. 2 million goatsan d 5.6 millionequines . Theestimat e of thenumbe r of goats isparticularl ywideranging ,an d reflects thepoo r stateo f the existingdat abas eo n the sizeo f Ethiopia's livestock population.
Livestock husbandry systemsar e similar throughout the highlands butdifference s inpopulatio ndensity , cropping systemsan d resource availability cause regional characteristics. Principally,cattl e are kept fordraugh tpowe r andmanure ,shee p formea tan d asa n investment. Equinesar euse d aspac k animals. All livestock grazeo nunimprove d pastures,an d areoccasionall y fed cropsby-products . Mating isnatural . Productivity islo wfo r all species interm so f conventional outputs such asmil k andmeat .
AACM (1984)ha sdistinguishe d three zones inth ehighland s that havedistinc t livestock production systems: thebarle yan d sheep farming zoneabov e 3,000m a.s.l., intensive field crop farmingbetwee n 1,500 and 46
Figure 3.2. Zonation of the Highlands
(based on altitude and agro-ecology)
ALTITUDE
HPP HIGH POTENTIAL PERENNIAL CROP ZONE|
HPC HIGH POTENTIAL CEREAL ZONE 2 500 - 3000 LPC LOW POTENTIAL CEREAL ZONE
2 000— 2 500
I 500 — 2 000
-^r Source: FAO (1986d). 47
3,000m a.s.l.,an dmoderat e cultivation orperennia l crop farming also ataltitude so fbetwee n 1,500 and 3,000m . Thebarle yan d sheep farming zoneabov e 3,000m hasa short growing seasonbecaus e of frost,an d livestock are fedo nnatura l grazing andbarle y stubbles. Thedominan t livestock are sheepwhic h areherde d inlarg e flocksan downe d by several farmersan dherde db ychildren . Cattlear e onlykep t for cropcultivation .
Themos t important livestock production and farming system canb e found inth eare abetwee n 1,500 and 3,000m . Theproportio n of land plantedwit h cropsca nvar y from70 %i nth e intensively cultivated areas to 50%i narea swit hmoderat e cultivation. Usually theare a between 2,000an d 3,000m ismoderatel y cultivated becauseo f frostproblem san d lowerhuma npopulatio ndensities . Themai n crops inthi sare aar ewhea t andbarley , inadditio n topulse s sucha shors ebean san d fieldpeas . A largeproportio n of thiszon e iskep ta s fallowo rpasture ,an d livestock density ishighe r thanelsewhere . The intensively cultivated areas can be found ataltitude sbetwee n 1,500 and 2,000m . Themai ncrop sar e teff,wheat ,maize ,chic k peasan dhors ebeans ,an dalmos tal l land on the slopes isbein g cultivated. Livestock graze inth ebottomlands , which areunsuitabl e for cultivation becauseo fwaterloggin g during the rainy season,an do n rougho rwast e land. Fallowlan d is rapidly disappearing inthi sarea . Feed intakeo fanimal s is increasingly dependento ncro pby-products . Cattlear ekep tmainl y for land cultivation,an dmil k andmanur eproduction . Small ruminants arekep t as a secondary investment.
Livestock production in field crop farming systemsha sbee n described byGryseel san dAnderso n (1983a). Livestock productivity is lowb yWester n standards. Milk offtake ofZeb ucow s rarelyexceed s 300 kg for lactationperiod so f lesstha n7 months . Theannua l calving rate for indigenouscattl e isjus tove r 50%an d cattle take from four to five years to reachmaturity . Lambingpercentage sar en omor e than 110%,an d morbidity andmortalit y arehigh ,u p to 30%. Livestock graze inmixe d sexgroups ,givin g littleopportunit y for controlled mating or seasonal calving.
Inth ehighland-perennia l zone,animal sar eo fles simportanc e in the farming system. The staple food isenset e (falsebananas )an dmaize , while coffee servesa sa cash crop. Land cultivation isb yhan dhoe , because of the fragmentation of theholdin g into smallparcel san d intensive intercropping,an d therear ehighe r numberso f small ruminants. Manure isimportan t for crop fertilization. Littlegrazin g land is available and livestock aremainl y fedo nby-product san d roadside verges.
Inth eliteratur e onagricultura l production inEthiopi a very littleattentio n hasbee ngive n toth eproblem san dopportunitie s of livestock production,excep t inpastora l systems. Westphal (1975)limit s his consideration of livestock in thehighland s toa descriptio n of ox-ploughing and somever ybrie f references,whil eHuffnage l (1961)an d Getahun (1978b)onl ygiv ea qualitativ e overviewo f the livestock sector. Only few farmmanagemen tdat a areavailabl e on smallholder livestock production systems inth ehighlands ,an d these relatemainl y toth e size of livestock holdings on individual farms. 48
3.2.3. Research andDevelopmen t Efforts The Instituteo fAgricultura l Research (IAR)wa sestablishe d in 1966 toundertak e and coordinateagricultura l research inEthiopia . Its research isorganize d ona commodityan ddisciplinar y basis,an d livestock research iscoordinate dwithi n theDepartmen t ofAnima l Science. TheDepartmen t consistso f threedivisions : Animal Production, concernedwit hcattle ,shee pan dgoats ;Anima l Feedsan dNutrition ,tha t includes foragean dpastur e researchan dAnima lHealth ,which ha sa n advisoryan d service function. Recently,IA Rha sorganise d amajo r workshop inwhich the stateo f itslivestoc k researchha sbee n critically reviewed (Kebedean dLambourne , 1987).
Themajo r researchemphasi sha sbee no ncrossbreedin gtrials . Managerial and fattening trialshav eals obee nconducted ,mainl y in associationwit h thebreedin gprogramme . A number ofpromisin g grassan d legume species fordifferen t agro-ecological zoneshav ebee n identified, and the composition ofvariou s feedsdetermined . Thereha sno tye tbee n anattemp t to testan y resultsunde r farmconditions ,an d the impacto f the researchprogramm e on farmproductio nha sbee nvirtuall yni l (Abebe et al, 1983;ISNAR , 1987). TheDepartmen t ofSocio-Economi c Studiesha sundertake n farm management surveys (Friedriche t al, 1973), and starting in 1977,som e initial FSR studies. Thesewer e rapid,singl e interview surveysaimin g at identificationo fproblems ,an d toindicat epriorit yarea sfo r research (Zegeyee t al, 1979a ,b an d c). These surveys focused on the cropping systembu tgav e initial indicationso n theconstraint s to livestock production inth earea s surveyed. An attemptwa smad e to develop 'packages'o f innovationswhic hwoul d include improved crop varietiesan d recommended cultural practises,bu t fewpositiv e results were achieved. Therewa sn o follow-upo nth e resultso f surveys inth e livestock component researchprogramme . Since 1985,IA Rha s strengthened itscapacit y for FSR througha n in-depth trainingprogramm e for its staff,organize d byCIMMY Twit h support from ILCA. A reviewo f FSRa t IARha sbee nmad eb yMekuri a and Franzel (1987). A major problem in achieving impact isth ewea k link between IARan dth eextensio n services of theMinistr yo fAgriculture .
Mosto f the studieso n the traditional farming system inth e Ethiopianhighland swer eundertake n inth eperio d before the land reform. Cossins (1973)fo r exampleundertoo k a surveyo f the farming systemo f 4 areas inth eEthiopia nhighlands . Althoughhi s report ismainl y descriptive,i tcontain smuc hvaluabl e information about the farming systemsdurin g theperio dbefor e the land reform. Leander (1969)studie d the traditional farming system inChilal oprovince . Recently, the Ministry ofAgricultur e hasals o started toundertak e farming systems surveys throughout thecountr y (Ministry ofAgriculture ,1986 aan db ; Mitchelhill, 1986).
Livestock development efforts inEthiopi a are coordinated by the Ministry ofAgriculture ,throug h itsAnima l Resources Development 49
Department (ARDD),whic h isdivide d ineigh t teams: veterinaryservices , animal breeding,nutritio nan d range improvement,marketin gservices , tsetsean d trypanosomiasis,articifia l insemination laboratory services and rangelandsprojects . The livestock state farmsar eunde r the authorityo f theMinistr yo f State FarmsDevelopment .
TheMinistr yo fAgricultur e recognized the importancean d potential of the livestock sector inEthiopi aan d therefore commissioned in198 3a "Livestock SectorReview " studyt oa nAustralia n consultancy company. This studydefine d thenatur ean d sizeo f the country's livestock resources,determine d thepotentia l fordevelopment ,an d identified a serieso fdevelopmen tprojects . The resultsar e available inth e formo fa mai n reportan d 14annexe so nparticula r aspectso f the livestock industry (AACM, 1984). The study identifiedmajo r gaps in knowledge,an durge d togiv e amajo r priority inth e future tofar man d PeasantsAssociatio n level studiest odevelo pa nadequat edat a base. On thebasi s ofavailabl e information,i tidentifie dnutritio n andhealt h as themajo r constraints ofEthiopia' s livestock industry.
Earlier efforts to reviewth elivestoc k industryo f Ethiopiawer e madeb yMarouse k eta l (1969)an d theEthiopia nScienc ean d Technology Commission (1978). Livestock projects inEthiopi a financedb y theWorl d Bank before 1980wer e largely failuresdu e toth e civilunres tdurin g the 1970san dpoo rprojec tdesig n (WorldBank , 1985a). The First Livestock Development Project supported commercial dairydevelopmen t aroundAddi s Abeba. The Second Livestock Development Project involved the establishmento f slaughter facilities,an d stock routes forlivestock , butwa s onlypartl ycompleted . TheThir d Livestock Development Project focusedo n the improvement of rangelandmanagemen tan do f veterinary services inpastora l areas. The FourthLivestoc k Development Project has started in198 7an d ismor eoriente d towardsth eneed so f small farmers and consistso f sub-projectst oimprov eveterinar y services,marketing , fodderproductio nan d informationo n farming systems (AACM,1984 ;Worl d Bank, 1985a).
Although theEthiopia nMinistr yo fAgricultur ewa s established at thebeginnin g of thiscentury , itwa sno tunti l theearl y 1950stha t attemptswer emad e totransfor m traditional peasantagriculture . Most of these attemptshav e focused onth ecroppin g systeman duse d the"package " approach. Themajo r componentso f thepackag eprogramme shav e included fertilizers,improve d seeds,far mcredits ,marketin g facilities,bette r toolsan d implements,an d improved storagefacilities .
Thebasi cai mo f thepackag e approachwa s toaccelerat e agricultural developmentb yconcentratin g inputsan dactivitie s in geographicallydelimite d regions (Stahl,1973) . A partial inventory of these regionaldevelopmen tproject swa s compiled byGetahu n (1977). The first comprehensive packageprojec testablishe d inEthiopi a was theChilal oAgricultura l DevelopmentUni t (CADU). Thisprojec t began in196 7an dwa s financed jointlyb y theEthiopia n and Swedish Governments and continuedunti l 1974. Itinclude d research,extensio n and marketing activities aswel la s credit and input supply schemes for smallholders (Nekby,1971 ;Bengtsson , 1983). Itsmai n impactwa s to show that 50 significant increases incerea lyield swer e feasible through theus e of fertilizer. Farmer extension serviceswer ea n integralpar to f CADU's activities. Other similar projectswer e started inlate ryears ,bu t it was realized that implementing themthroughou t thewhol e countrywoul d notb e feasiblebecaus e of thehig hmanpowe r needsan d costs involved. Then,a snow ,Ethiopi aha d insufficienthighl yqualifie d staff to service adequately theneed so fmillion so f farmers. Thesepackag e programmes also fostered regional economic inequalitiesan d large landowners benefited disproportionally (Stahl,1973 ;Tecle ,1975 ;Lele , 1980;Whyt e andBoynton ,1983 ;Dejene , 1987).
Asa resulto f thesedisadvantages ,th eminimu mpackag e programmes (MPPs)wer e initiated. In197 1th eExtensio nan dProjec t Implementation Department (EPID)wa sestablishe d inth eMinistr yo fAgriculture ,wit h thegenera l aimo f increasing theproductio n ofpeasan t farmersb y the distribution of fertilizer and improved seedsan d credit. The programmes were fundedb y theWorl d Bank througha credit fromth e IDA (International DevelopmentAssociation) . Mosto f the target farmers for theseprogramme swere ,however ,locate d close toall-weathe r roadsan d therefore onlya mino r fractiono fth epopulatio nwa s reached. Furthermore,th eMPP shav e concentrated on crop improvement. Therewa s also littleattemp t toadop t thepackag e toth evaryin g ecological and social conditionso f thecountry . During the70s ,th eactivitie so fMP P were severely constrained by thedisruption san d securityproblem s associatedwit h thepost-revolutio n period (WorldBank , 1981b). TheMP P programmeswer e revived during theearl y '80sbu ta nassessmen t of their impactha sa sye tno tbee nmade . Todate ,littl eattentio nha sbee n givent oimprovin g thewhol e farming systemb ydevelopin gth e livestock component asa n integralpar to f the farm. TheMP Pprogramm e emphasises theproductio n ofbasi c food-stuffs,an d livestock development isgive n lowpriority .
CADUwa s renamed theArs i Rural DevelopmentUni t (ARDU) following the 1975Agraria n reform. AlthoughARD U isstil l theonl y integrated ruraldevelopmen tprogramm e inEthiopi awit h theobjectiv e of increasing theproductivit yo fpeasan t farmers,sinc e theearl y80 s itsprogramme s have concentrated on thepromotio no f cooperativesan do n the gradual transformation of individual small farms intocooperative s (Dejene, 1987).
Todat e themos t significant contribution of CADU/ARDU to agricultural production isth epackag eprogramme ,whic h includes the dissemination ofhighe ryiel dvarietie so fwhea t andbarley ,an d mineral fertilizers,o ncredit . Yieldso f the farmers involvedhav e increased from 600kg/h a in 1966 to200 0kg/h a forbarle y (Dejene, ibid). Dejene (1985)foun d however only 11%o f sampled householdsi nth eare a tob e using fertilizer togetherwit h improved seeds. The impacto fARDU' s livestock projectswa s found tob e limited tovaccinatio n programmes,an d the improvement ofdair y cattleo n cooperatives. Only fewpositiv e resultshav ebee nobtaine d inth earea so fplan tprotection ,wate r development,an d the improvement of farm implements. Suchprogramme s are perhaps too resourcean dmanpowe r demanding for sustained impact. 51
3.3. A Case Study: Researcho na Smallholde rMixe d FarmingSyste m in theBas oan aWoren aWered a of theEthiopia nHighland s
3.3.1. Background Field researcho na smallholdermixe d farming system inth e Ethiopianhighlands ,reporte d inthi sstudy ,aros e from thenee d for farm managementdat a thatwoul dquantif y thecontribution so f the livestock enterprise to theoveral l farming system. The researchwa sundertake n within the framework of thehighland sprogramm eo f the International Livestock Centre forAfric a (ILCA). ILCAha s followed a systems approach to research since itsinception ,an dha sundertake n field studies ineac h of themajo r ecological zoneso f sub-SaharanAfrica ,i.e. ,arid , semi-arid, sub-humid,humi d andhighlan d zones. An overviewo fFS R at ILCAan d of the resultsachieve d isprovide db yGryseel s eta l (1986a). The objectiveso f ILCA'sSystem sResearc hwer e todiagnos e constraints to increased animalproduction ,develo pprototyp e technologiesunde r farm conditions,develo p researchmethodologies ,monito r technologyadoption , and tohel p thesystem s research capacitieso fnationa l institutions.
ILCA'shighland sprogramm e started in197 7wit h the general objective toundertak e research thatwoul d provide thedevelopmen t basis for increasedagricultura l production inth eAfrica nhighlands . The initial focuso f the researchwa s inth ecentra l Ethiopianhighlands , particularly inth ehig hpotentia l zone (ILCA,1978 ;Getahun , 1978a). As indicated inpreviou s sections,Ethiopi a alone accounts for 50%o f Africa'shighlan d area. The countryals oha sth e largest livestock herd of Sub-SaharanAfrica .
The choice of thehig hpotentia l cereal/livestock zonewa s justified because of thehig hhuma nan d livestockdensities ,an d because its ratiohuman/livestoc k populationwa smuc hhighe r thanelsewhere . In-depth informationo nsuc ha farming systemwoul dprovid e adequate quantitative evidence onth eprocesse s ofbot h crop-livestock interactionsan d competitionbetwee n theseenterprises . Results obtained herewoul dhav ebroa d relevance toothe rhighlan dareas .
Within thehig hpotentia l cereal/livestock zone,Getahu n (1978a) identified fourdistinc t regions: Centralhighlands ,Arsi-Bal e highlands andmassif ,Hara rhighland san dnortheaster nhighlan dvalleys . ILCA decided to focus its initialeffort so nth ecentra lhighland sbecaus e it was the largesto f the four regions,an d itcontaine d almost 5millio n cattle,o r 25%o f thehighlands 'total . Inaddition ,it sgeographi c proximity toAddi sAbeba ,wher e ILCA'sheadquarter s islocated ,wa sa particular advantage inminimizin g the logistical and security problems for the staff involved.
Within thecentra lhighland s ILCAselecte d two studyarea s for its field research,eac ha ta differen t altitude: the firstare a layaroun d Debre Zeit,5 0k m southo fAddi sAbab a ata naltitud e of 1800m ,whil e the second layaroun d DebreBerhan ,12 0k mnortheas t ofAddi sAbab a ina n altitudeo f 2800m (Figure 3.3.). Research stationswer e established in both areas (Gryseelsan dAnderson , 1983a). Ineac h of these areasa rapidbaselin e surveywa sundertake n toprovid e an initial understanding of the farming system. The resultso f these surveysar e reported in TelahunMekonne nan dGetache wAssamene w (1978)an dTelahu n Mekonnen (1978). 52
Figure 3.3.: Locationo f theBas oan dWoren aWered a
ETHIOPIA
The specific objective of thehighland s researchprogram , as stated ina documen to f theBoar d ofTrustee so f ILCA (ILCA,1978 )was : "Tobrin g together available technologies ina rangeo f farming systems thatwil l increaseanima lproductivit y andprofitabilit y inth e Highlands." However,i twa s felt thatdependenc e onavailabl e technology shouldno tb e seen inabsolut e terms,bu t technology should beuse d asa first stept oth e identification of constraints. As experience of the effectso favailabl e technologieswoul d come in,ne wconstraint swoul d be identified,an db e the subjecto f further research. A number of assumptionswer emad e thatprovide d the forman doperatin g conditions for theHighland s Program. Theywer e summarized as follows (ILCA, ibid):
" (i) Smallholder farming for theproductio n of subsistence cropswil lb e theprevailin g system for the foreseeable future inth eEas tAfrica nHighlands . 53
(ii) There isa nurgen tnee d tomaintai n andbuil du p soil fertility. (iii) Animaldraugh twil l remaina n integralpar t of Ethiopian Highland farm system. (iv) Improved forageproductio nan dbette r genetic capabilities are thebasi s for the improvement of livestock output. (v) Improved forageproductio n onarabl e land ispossibl e only whenbasi c subsistence requirements are fulfilled. (vi) There isa growin gdeman d fordair yproduct san d an increasing interest among smallholders instartin g dairy farming. (vii) Sheepar ea n important feature inth eHighland so f Ethiopia and there isconsiderabl e scope for increased output,agai n if fodderproductio n and genetic potential canb e improved. (viii) At present there isa certai namoun to funder-utilisatio n of labour inmos tpeasan t communities,a t certain timeso f theyear. " Theprogramm e consisted ofa combination of farming system studies, including on-farm technology testing and appraisal,an d station-based researchwhic h focusedo nke yelement so f the traditional farming system. TheHighland sProgramm e staff consisted ofa team leader (initially ananima l scientist,a ta later stagea n agricultural economist),a nanima l scientist,a forageagronomis t and an agricultural economist. Theautho r of thisstud ywa s theagricultura l economist of the team,an dha doveral l responsibility for surveywor k and on-farm researchactivities .
The initial baseline survey resultsonl ygav e aver ygeneral , mainlyqualitativ e description of the local farming systemso fDebr eZei t andDebr e Berhan. Itwa s felt thatmor e in-depth studieswer e necessary tomor e adequately identify the constraints to these farmingsystems . Thiswoul d help to identifyne wopportunitie s fordevelopmen t aswel l as any special problemsan d processes likely tooccu rwit h the adoption of innovations ina peasan teconomy . Routinedat a collectionswit h a group of control farmerswer e setu p ineac h studyarea . These farmerswoul d servea sa control groupagains twhic h innovation introduced ata later stage couldb eevaluated ,an d at the same timeprovid e detailed information on theproductivit y and theworking so fa subsistence farming system.
Inlat e 1978,thre e PeasantsAssociation s of theTegule t andBulg a Awrajaprovide d ILCA'sHighlan d Programmewit h 280h a of land fora research sitenea r DebreBerhan . ThisAwraj a covers 7844 km ,an d hasa ruralpopulatio n ofaroun d 530,000people, organize d in76 1 Peasants Associations (PA's)havin g a total farmermembershi po f 126,000 farm families. Itsprincipa lurba n centre isDebr eBerhan ,whic h hasa population ofapproximativel y 22,000inhabitants . 54
TheAwraj ai sdivide d into1 2Weredas . TheILC Astatio ni s located inth eBas oan dWoren aWereda . The ruralpopulatio no f this Wereda isorganize d in10 0PA' Swit ha registeredmembershi po f just under 20,000far mfamilies . Detailso nth eWered aar egive ni nTabl e 3.2.
Table3.2 . Characteristicso fBas oan dWoren aWered a
Numbero fpeasan tassociations : 100 Size (excl.Debr eBerha n town): 105,040h a Number ofhouseholds : 21,604 Totalpopulatio n (excl.Debr eBerhan) : 105,124peopl e - Populationdensity : 100peopl epe rk m
Agean d sexdistributio no fmember so fpeasant sassociation s (1980)1 /
Age: 18-28 29-39 40-48 49-59 60-69 70-79 Total
Male 3418 4267 3444 3104 2265 1438 17936 (90%) Female 240 241 374 370 407 260 1892 (10%)
All 3658 4508 3818 3474 2672 1698 19828 % total 18 23 19 18 13 9 (100%)
1/ Householdhead sonly . Datawer e collected from recordsfro mth e localMinistr yo fAgricultur eoffice .
Thisstud y reportso nth eoutcom e ofth e research findings inth e Basoan dWoren aWereda . Theautho r joined ILCA inFebruar y1979 ,a t which time research inth eDebr eZei tare aha dalread ybee n initiated. Theorganizatio no f field researchi nth eBas oan dWered awa sunde r the principal responsibilityo f theauthor .
3.3.2. Objectiveso fth eFiel dResearc h
Theobjective so fth e field researchwer ea sfollows :
(i) Toprovid ea quantitativ e andqualitativ edescriptio no f theproductio n systemaroun d the ILCADebr eBerha n station inorde r toclarif ycausa l relationsbetwee n itscomponent s soa st oyiel d information toenable :
- identificationan danalysi so ffactor slimitin gth e productivityo f thefarmin g system;an d
- evaluationo fth elikel y impacto falternativ e technological interventions.
(ii) Toquantif y the rolean d contributiono flivestoc k intha t production system. 55
(iii) Toprovid ebaselin e information againstwhic h the results ofon-statio n and on-farm experimentation could be evaluated. (iv) Toapprais e the feasibility of introducing improved technology related toth e livestock sub-system and to assess its impacto n farm incomean d on theproductivit y of thewhol e farm.
3.3.3. ResearchDesign ,Dat aCollection ,an dDat aAnalysi s ILCA'sstatio na tDebr e Berhan issurrounde d by landbelongin g to fourdifferen t PAs: Milki,Karafino ,Korgmargfia ,Faj ian d Bokafia (Figure 3.4). These fourassociation swer e choosena sth ebasi s for the sample selection of the farmers involved inth e studyo n the traditional farming system. During the firstyear ,6 0 farmers (15fro m each association)wer e randomly selected fromth epopulatio n listso f these associations,a sthe ywer e kepta t thedistric t office of the local Ministryo fAgriculture . After oneyea ro fdat a collection, the sample sizewa s reduced to4 2 farmersbecaus eo foperationa l difficulties. The sample farmswer e locatedwithi n aneigh t km radiusaroun d the ILCA station,o ru p totw ohour so fwalk . The fourPA' sar e somewhat different interm so fecolog yan dpopulatio ndensity . Size and populations of eacho f thesePA sar egive n inTabl e 3.3. Toensur e full cooperation of the sample farmers inth edat a collection,meeting swer e organized regularlywit h the farmers themselves,th e chairmen and secretaries of thePA s concerned, extensionworker san d government officials. Farmerswer e invited at leastonc ea yea r toa field day organized at theDebr eBerha n Station,a twhic h theywer e briefed on ILCA's research activities,an dwer e given lunch,a 'certificate for cooperation inagricultura l research'an da presen t thatwoul d not affect their agricultural productivity, sucha sa numbrella ,a ropeo r abucket . Inadditio n to farmingsystem s researchactivities ,th e Highland Programme had on-station research activities on important components such as forage andpastur e agronomy,botto m landutilizatio n anddraugh t power usage (ILCA, 1981b).
Table 3.3.: Sizeo fHuma nan d Livestock Populations of the 4Sampl e PAs 1/ Size N° Total N° N°otherN ° N° N° N° Name of PA (ha) FamiliesPop . OxenCattl e SheepGoat s Equines Poult Milki 720 210 1005 364 793 1567 92 502 501 Karafino 640 132 603 140 340 721 - 195 n.a. Faji-Bokafia 800 273 965 137 350 1383 38 532 n.a. Korgmargfia 680 250 834 406 831 1333 47 593 479 1/ Sizea sestimate d in197 9b y chairmeno f thePAs . Livestock populationswer e estimated in198 2o n thebasi s of PArecords . ! i I ! î 1 o< D <£
The information on sizeo fPA sa s reported inTabl e 3.3 was obtained fromth e chairmeno f the respective PAs. Subsequent measurements using landus emap san d aerial photographs showed the real size of threeou to f the fourPA s tob ealmos t twice thisestimat e (see Annex 3.3). According toth e land reformproclamatio n noP A isentitle d tocontro lmor e than 800h ao f land. Theunderestimatio n by the chairman wasprobabl ydu e toa fearo fgovernmen t imposed redistribution. It would alsoexplai nwh y theestimat e by theChairma n of theKarafin o Association,whic hha s real sizeo fonl y67 6ha ,wa scorrect . Approximately 51%o fth eare ao f the four PAsca nb e classified as arable cropland, 29%a spastur e landan d 20%a s rockyupland . Pasture land islocate dmostl y (75%)o nth emoderat e slopes,whil e approximately 25% islocate d inth ewe tbottomlands . Thedistributio n of land use according toP A isgive n inAnne x 3.4. All PAshav ea relatively equal proportion ofwe tpasture . Faji-Bokafiaha sa substantially higher fractiono fdr ypasture ,bu tles sarabl e land. Both Faji-Bokafia and Milkihav e amuc hgreate r proportion ofuplan d (26%an d 28% respectively) thanKarafin o (19%)an d Kormargfia (18%). Routinedat a collectionswer e setu p from1 0farmer s ineac h of theMilki ,Korgmargfia ,Faj i and Bokafia,an dKarafin oPAs ,whil e 12 farmerswer e fromKorgmargfia . The surveyscovere d thusapproximatel y 5% of the farmer population ofeac hP A sampled. Inthi sstudy , farmers in the sample are referred toa s 'controlfarmers' . The sizeo f thedat a samplepe ryea rpe r PA isgive n inAnne x 3.2. Datawer e collected froma total of 91differen t smallholders and thedat a setavailabl e for in depth analysis consisted of 237 farmer/years. Fourdat a collectors,al l high school graduates,wer e recruited for theactua ldat a collection. Theywer e givena n in-depth training on theobjective s of the survey, the use of thequestionnaire s andbasi c techniques formeasurin g and observation. Supervisionwa s givenb y theautho r and one Ethiopian field agricultural economist. Thedat awer e collected throughweekl yvisit s (onhorsebac k orb ywalking )t oth e farmersan d through direct observation. Outputsan d inputswer emeasure d byweighing ,usin g portable scales. Foreac h farmer,loca lweigh tunit san d containers such as 'Kuna' (for grain), 'Kurbet' (forha yo r straw), 'Tassa' (for butter), weremeasure d inkg/equivalen t foreac hcro po r livestock product. This allowed fora precis e estimateo fquantitie s of inputsan doutput s if on-farmdirec tmeasuremen twa sno tpossible . Inventorieswer e taken in April,a t the starto f themai n cultivation season. Routine data collectionwa sundertake n from197 9unti l 1984. Certaindat awer e only collected forpar t of thisperiod . The followingdat awer e collected: (a) Inventories of land holdings (including area cultivated, fallow landan d pasture land), plot sizes,stoc kholdings , toolsan d equipment,an d demographic data. (b) Detailed input-output data onbot h cropan d livestock production by labour category and farmoperation . In particular: - labour by activity,b y type,ag e and sexo fworkers ; - animaldraugh tpowe rusag ean d cultivationdetails ; 58 - material inputst oth ecroppin genterpris e sucha s seeds and fertilizer,b ycro pan dplot ; - material inputst o the livestock enterprises sucha s feed concentrates,veterinar y suppliesan dgrazin g timepe r animaltype ; - breedingan danima lhealt hrecords ; - outputso f grain,stra wan d residuesfro m the cropping enterprise,an dproductivit y (milk,mea t andothe r livestock products)o f thelivestoc k enterise; - weightso fdraugh toxe nan dmilkin g cows; - disposal ofcrop san d livestock,suc ha sconsumption , salesan d gifts; - basic agronomic informationo n seeding,weedin g and harvestingdates ,cro pdiseases ,fertilize r response,etc ; - household economy information,consumptio nan d expenditure patterns,us eo f cash income andenerg yuse ; - sociological/demographic information on family sizes,tas k responsibilities,observanc e of religiousholiday san d fastingperiods ;an d - market informationo ncrop san d livestock. Everyyea r around 20%o f the farmerswer e replaced inth esample . Thiswa sdu e to factors sucha smigration ,dat a collection fatigue,th e joining ofa cooperative ordeath. A detailed listo f farmers inth e sample,a swel l asth edat a collected annually isgive n inAppendi x 3.1. Thedat awer e tabulatedo ncompute r entry formatsan ddirectl yentere d on a Hewlett-Packard-3000computer . The initialdat aevaluatio nan danalysi swa sdon eusin g Statistical Package forSocia l Sciences (SPSS)a sdevelope d byNi e eta l (1975). Thisprogramm e calculated means,frequenc ydistributions ,an d standarddeviation s for themai nparameters . The Statistical Analysis System (SAS,1985 )packag ewa suse d toverif y the statistical significance of resultso f comparative studies. Thedat awer e also analyzed by least squareprocedure s (Harvey, 1977). Suchprocedure s adjust forunbalance d sampledesig nan dallo wvali d comparisonso f unequal population sizes. The choiceo fdat a analysis toolswa s taken after close consultationwit h ILCA'sbiometrician san d computer programmers. The studyo f thetraditiona l farming systeman d the identification of constraints took place from 1979 to 1984. Itha d been intended to phase out routinedat a collectiona t the end of 1983. However, this latter yearwa sa poo r cropyear ,an ddrough t and frost caused lowgrai n yields. The incidenceo f crop failurewa swidesprea d throughout the country,causin g faminean dhardshi p forman ymillion s of ruralpeople . 59 Although mosto f thedat aanalysi sha dbee ncompleted , itwa sdecide d to continuedat acollectio n inth e traditional system foron emor eyea r until1984 . Theproces so f farmsurvey s led toth e identification ofa number ofpromisin g newtechnologies ,tha twer e subsequently testedwit h farmers belonging to the samePeasan tAssociation swher e thepreviou s farm studiesha dbee nundertaken . Inorde r toprovid e acontro l group against which theeffect so f these innovations couldb e evaluated, somedat a such as informationo n livestock holdings,lan dus ean dproductivity , and marketprice swer e also collected until 1985. Theobjectiv e of these on-farmverificatio n trialswa s toevaluat e the suitability ofne w technologies ina farmenvironment ,t ostud y the effecto f this technology on farmincom ean dproductivity , toapprais e adoption problems and togiv eguideline s tocomponen t research. 60 Annex 3.1 Specificationo fDat aCollecte d inFar mSurvey sa tBas oan d WorenaWered a Frequencyo fdat a Year of Typeo fDat a collection 1/ collection 1. Familysiz ean d composition A 1979-85 2. Inventoryo f landholdings,plo tsize s and farmasset s A 79-85 3. Livestock holdingan d composition TM 79-85 4. Consumption,sale san dpurchas e ofgrain s and livestock products TM 80-84 5. Market surveyo fcrops ,livestoc k and livestock products TM 79-85 6. Material inputsan doutput scro pan d livestock production TY 79-85 7. Croppingpatter n TY 79-85 8. Labour inputsan ddraugh tanima lusag e W 79-81 9. Milkproductio n fromcow s W 82-84 10. Livestock feed record TM 82-84 11.Weight so fcow san doxe n TM 83-84 12.Breedin gan dhealt h records TM 82-84 13. Farm incomean dexpense s W 79-84 14.Weight san dheight so f familymember s 2M 82-84 15.Tim eallocatio no fhousehol d members W 81 1/A =onc ea year ; TM twicea month ;W weekly;2 M= ever y 2 months Annex 3.2 Sizeo fDat aSampl e (No.o fFarmers/PA )1 / Year PeasantsAssociatio n 79 80 81 82 83 84 Total Faji/Bokafia 10 10 9 8 9 8 54 Karafino 12 12 11 8 11 10 64 Korgmargfia 10 11 11 11 11 9 63 Milki 9 9 9 9 10 10 56 Total 41 42 40 36 41 37 237 1/ Numbero f farmerspe rPeasant sAssociatio n forwhic h recordso f sufficientqualit y foranalysi swer eavailable . 61 Annex 3.3 Areao fLan dUs eo fSampl ePA sb ySourc eo fEstimat e(ha ) PeasantsAssociatio n Fajl/Bokafla Karafin^_o^ Korgmargfia Milki MapChairma n MapChairma n MapChairma n MapChairma n Pasture 676 320 194 240 406 453 300 200 Arable 788 352 382 360 777 227 806 580 Upland 371 120 100 40 235 329 100 Total 1835 792 676 640 1418 680 1435 880 Source: Gigliettian dSteva n (1986). Annex 3.4 Land-Useo fSampl ePA s(1984 ,% o fTota lArea ) Faji/Bokafia Karafino Kormargfia Milki Total(Ha) LandUs eClas s Wetpastur e 7 8 7 8 394 Drypastur e 30 21 22 13 1182 Arable land 37 52 53 51 2523 Croppeduplan d 6 4 1 5 229 Uplandwastelan d 20 15 17 23 1036 Total 100 100 100 100 5364 Source: Giglie >tti and Stevan (1986). 62 4. RESOURCEALLOCATIO NB YSMALLHOLDE R FARMERS INTH EBftS OAN DWOREN A WEREDA ~~_ 4.1. Introduction TheBas oan dWoren aWered a islocate d inth ehig hpotentia l cereal/livestock belto fth eEthiopia nhighland s (AmareGetahun , 1978a). Throughout thisbelt ,th e farmingsyste m isbase do n smallholder rainfed agriculture,annua lcrop splante db ybroadcaste d seed, rudimentary implements (sicklesan dhoes )an do xdraw nwoode nploughs . Landus e is dominatedb yth eproductio no fcereals ,pulse san d livestock. Mosto f thisproductio n isfo r subsistenceconsumptio nb yth e farmhousehold . A generaldescriptio no fthi straditiona lagricultura l system isgive ni n Huffnagel (1961),Cossin s (1973),Westpha l (1975),Getahu n (1978b), Makonnen (1978)an dGryseel san dAnderso n (1983a). The factorsaffectin genterpris e choicean d farmerdecisio nmakin g ofa nEthiopia nhighlan d smallholder are illustrated inFigur e 4.1. The purposeo fthi sschemati cmode l ist oillustrat e thecomplexit y ofth e agricultural systemfro mth epoin to fvie wo fth esmallholder . Themode l distinguishesbetwee nthos e factorswhic h canb econsidere d as essentiallyunde r thecontro lo f thesmallholder ,an d thoseunde rwhic h Figure 4.1.: MainFactor s InfluencingEnterpris eChoic ean d Productivity ofa nEthiopia n Smallholder (cu> AVAILABILITY^ lOF INPUTS J /'C'JLTURA ' SOCIOLOGICAL k>^^>-^ ^CONSTRAINTS. ('POST HARVEST} y^ PRICES J TOTAL 6 SEASONAL SUBSISTENCE FARM LABOUR NEEDS FOR SMALLHOLDER PRODUCTION EXPANSION FROM OF LIVESTOCK /^ COMMUNALE- ( FARM L MOLDINGS FF-FARM "\ —( LABOUR r*~ ' ' '\* WORK ] ^OBLIGATIONS/ N- CR*UNITlE5y X/IREWOOpy | DISEASE ' SUBSISTENCE FUEL f*— JEEDS_J#- ~tz \POP\ 'ULATION J /^AOËSSTON _fc/ AND USE OF V—- *\ COMMUNAL } V GRAZING y ally beyond control of smolll lion of linkog« or influença Source: Adapted fromGryseel san dAnderso n (1983a). 63 heha slittl eo rn ocontrol . Itfocuse sprimaril yo nth e factors affectingenterpris e choicewithi na mixe d smallholder farmsettin gan d the relationshipsbetwee nth esmallholde r and thePeasant sAssociatio n (PA)o fwhic hh e isa member . The linksdescribe d inthi smode lar e applicable toth e farmingsituatio ni nth eBas oan dWoren aWereda . Aselsewher e inth eEthiopia nhighlands ,lan d inthi sWered a is allocatedb yth eExecutiv eCommitte e ofth ePeasant sAssociatio no fwhic h the farmer isa member . The sizeo fth e individualholdin g isdetermine d primarilyb yth e sizeo fth esmallholders 'family ,an d the total land areaan dmi xo flan dqualitie savailabl e toth ePA . Plotsallocate d toa smallholder inon eyea rar eno tnecessaril yallocate d tohi magai ni n subsequentyears . Usuallyth ecroplan dallocate d isth esam eever yyear , butchange soccu r frequently infallo wo rpastur e landwhic h isuse d for grazingan dhaymaking . Occasionally somecroplan d isre-allocate d to allowfo rne wP Amember so rth eestablishmen to fa produce rcooperative . Mosto fth epastur e landwithi na nassociatio n iscommuna lwit hn o restrictions toacces sfo rlivestoc k ownedb ymember so fth eparticula r PA. The carrying capacityo fth ecommuna lpasture si scontinuousl y exceeded,causin govergrazin g and strongly reducedpastur e productivity (Jutzie t al, 1987c). Inaddition ,huma npopulatio npressure sar e .graduall y.expanding—the~are aunda rcultivation ,thereb y shortening the fallowcycl ean d reducingthe„availabl epastur earea . Thislead st o declining soil fertilityan d landproductivity . Theabilit yo f theloca l farming systemt osustai n foodproductio n forth eexpandin gpopulatio n willprogressivel ydiminis h (Gryseelsan dAnderson , 1983b). The choiceo fenterpris e combinationsb ya nEthiopia n smallholder islargel ydetermine d byth eland ,labour ,capita lan dmanagemen t resourcesh eha savailable ,hi sow nindividua lan dhousehol dneed san d preferences,an da numbe r ofexogeneou s factorsove rwhic hh eha sn o directcontro l sucha sgovernmen tpolicie so rmarke tprices . Theallocatio no f resourcesb y smallholder farmers inth eBas oan d WorenaWered a isdescribe d inth e followingsections . 4.2. ProductionEnvironmen tan d Ecology 4.2.1. Physiographyan dSoil s Thepredominan t topographical featureo fth eBas oan dWoren a Wereda isa dissecte d stonyhighlan d plateau (2,500-3,000m inaltitude ) including somedepression swit h seasonaldrainag edeficiencies . Some ventsan dcon e remmantsoccur ,develope d inpyroclastic s (DePauw ,1987) . The soilso f theare aar edevelope d inalkalin ean dolivin ebasalti c parentmateria lwhic h explains theverti cpropertie sa sa commo nfeature . According toth emos t recentsoil sassociatio nma po fEthiopi a (DePauw , 1987; Bruggeman,1987 )th epredominan t soilunit scoverin g 90%o fth e areaare : Stonydar k cracking clays:Verti cCambisols ,Verti c Luvisolsan d Vertisols,ston yphas e Dark crackingclays : ChromicVertisols ,Pelli cVertisols ,Verti c Luvisolsan dVerti c Cambisols Deepdar k cracking clays: PellicVertisol san dChromi cVertisol s (pondeddrainage ) 64 Inapproximatel y 10%o fth eare aothe r soilsunit sar e found such as: Undifferentiatedver yshallo wsoil swit h rockou tcrops : Lithosols,Eutri cRegosol s (stonyphase ) Stonybrownis hfriabl ecla yloam san d sandycla yloam sdevelope d onvolcani c rock: EutricNitosols ,Chromi cLuvisols ,Orthi c Luvisols (stonyphase ) - Darkbrow nfriabl ecla yloam san d sandycla yloam sdevelope d on pyroclastic deposits: CalcicChernosems ,Luvi cChernosem ,Hapli c Phaeosemsan dLuvi cPhaeozem s Ananalysi so fth emos t importantphysica lan dchemica l properties of these soilsindicate stha tth eagronomi cpotentia lo fth eare a is relativelyhig h (JozefDeckers ,persona lcommunication) . The soils moisture storagecapacit y ishig hi nth edee psoils . Organicmatte r content inth epredominan t soilunit s rangesfro m1 t o3% . Thesoil sar e slightlyaci dwit hP h ranging from4. 8 to6.34 . Soilso nth eslope shav e amarke ddeficienc yo fphosphorus ,whil e inth ebottomland sth emai n constraint tocro pcultivatio n iswaterloggin g andpoo r internaldrainag e ofth eprofile t Thisnecessitate sdelaye dplantin g and suboptimalus eo f theclimati cgrowin gperiod . A reviewo fth esoi lan dagronomi c factors influencing fodderproductio n inth eEthiopia nhighland sha sbee nmad eb y Ahmad (1984). 4.2.2. Agro-Ecological Characteristics Rainfall inth eare a isbimodal ,wit h shortrain s (belg)occurin g fromFebruar yt oMay ,an d thelon g rains (meher)fro mJun et oSeptember . According toprobabilit y calculationso fth egrowin gperiod s (DePauw , 1987)th efirs tgrowin gperio dallow sfo ra shor tmaturin gcro po f3 monthscycle ,plante d inFebruary/Marc ha tth eearliest . A second crop canb eplante d inJuly ,wit ha 3. 5 to5. 5month sgrowin gcycle ,dependin g onth esoi lmoistur estorag ecapacit y (texture,profil edepth) . The growingperio d characteristics inth eBas oan dWoren aWereda ,estimate d onth ebasi so f1 7year so fprecipitatio n recordscollecte db yth e metereologicalstatio no fth eMinistr yo fAgricultur ea tDebr eBerhan , arepresente d inFigur e4.2 . Figure 4.2.: GrowingPerio dCharacteristic sa tDebr eBerha n Precipitation 400 300 200 Potential Evapotranspiration y 'S. (PET) 100 1/2 PET J M M J SN Source: Goebel and 0denyo(1984) 65 Data recordeda tth e ILCfiDebr eBerha nstatio n (altitude 2780m a.s.l.)indicat ea naverag eannua l rainfallo f96 3m m from197 9t o1984 . Almost 72%o f thisamoun t fellbetwee nJul yan d September (Figure4.3) . Duringth esam eperio d therewa sa nannua laverag eo f9 7raindays . Of the sixyea r surveyperiod ,onl y fourha d sufficient rainfalldurin g Februaryan dMarc h toallo wfarmer st ogro wa cro pdurin g theearl y "belg"season . Duringth emai n rainyseaso n rainfallwa sver yreliable . The coefficiento fvariatio n (CV)o ftota lannua l rainfalldurin gth e studyperio dwa sonl y10% . Figure 4.3.: Distributiono fRainfal la t ILCAResearc hStatio na tDebr e Berhan (mmpe rmonth ,1979-1954 7 320 280 240 E200- E 160- 120 so^ 55 54 40 25 11 11 \\ month TheDebr eBerha nare aca nb e included inth esub-alpin e climatic regionwhic h isgenerall y cool. Meandail y temperaturedurin g theperio d of197 9t o1984,wa s12. 8C . Temperaturesa t0. 5m ranged froma naverag e minimumo f6 C t oa naverag emaximu mo f20. 4C . Theaverag eannua l solar radiationwa s 3,198 hours,wit h themaximu mvalue s registered between November andJanuary . Night frostsoccurre d frequently fromOctobe r to January,an d therewer eo naverag e 21fros tnight seac hyear . Temperaturesa t0. 5m droppe da slo wa s- 8C . Ofparticula r importance forcro pyield swa sth etimin go f firstfrost . 66 Harvesting of cropsgrow ndurin g themai n rainyseaso n starts mid-October. This isals oth eperio ddurin gwhic h the firstligh t frosts occur. Ifther e isheav y frost,i tcoincide swit h the stagedurin gwhic h grain cropsmature ,thereb ydamagin g thesee dan d severely reducing yields. Meteorological records from197 9 to198 4ar e summarized inTabl e 4.1. Thetabl eals oinclude sfo reac hyea ra nestimat eo f thelengt ho f bothth e shortan dmai ncro pgrowin gperiod . These estimateswer e derived fromth eapplicatio no f awate rbalanc emode lwhic h assumed maximumwate r storageo f 50m m inth etopsoi l (Henricksenan dDurkin , 1985). Although theanalysi s suggeststha tth eWered aexperience sa mea n growingperio ddurin g themai n cropping seasono f 144days , inpractic e thelengt ho fthi sperio dwa struncate db y frostsi nOctober ,resultin g ina cro pgrowt hperio dwhic h couldb ea sshor ta s9 0days . Table 4.1.: Meteorological RecordsDebr eBerha n (1979-1984) 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Mean Total rainfall (mm) 961 1068 981 1009 897 861 963 N°rai nday s 72 96 109 106 101 96 97 Meanma xt (at .5m) 18.9 19.9 20.0 19.8 20.4 18.8 18.1 Absolutemi n t (at .5m) -7.0 -7.0 -8.0 -6.0 -5.0 -7.0 N.A. 1/ N° frostnight s 16 16 38 13 23 22 21 Dateo f firstfros t 13.10 24.10 7.11 19.10 24.10 7.10 N.A. 1/ Estimated length short growingperio d (days) 51 15 66 48 93 0 45 Estimated lengthmai n growingperio d (days) 168 150 129 135 114 168 144 1/N.A .= no t applicable Source: Compiled fromunpublishe d datao f the ILCADebr eBerha n Station,Showamar e (1983,198 4an d 1985), andAnderso ne ta l (1986). Cropcultivatio nwa sals o seriously constrainedb yhailstorm s that usuallyoccurre ddurin g themont ho fJuly ,whe nmos t cropsar e planted. Thisaffecte dgerminatio n ratesnegatively . Of the studyare a 29.4%ca nb econsidere d aspastur e land,51.3 % asarabl e landan d 19.3%a sno tarabl euplan d (Stevanan dGiglietti , 1986). Otherwise classified, ingeneral ,29 %o fth e studyare a is located on seasonallywe tbottomland , 47%o n slopesan d 24%o nth euplan d plateau. About threequarte r of thepastur e area islocate d onslopes , and thedominan tplan t species isAndropo n abyssinica. Onequarte r of the totalpastur e area isi nth e seasonallywe tbottomlands . The dominantplan t speciesher ear etodropon distachy s and Trifoliumspp . On thearabl e lando f the slopes,cerea l andpuls e cropsar e grown (seesectio n 4.4.). Othervegetatio n ismainl y erbaceous and a few bushes sucha sRos aabyssinic aan dPermisetu msphocelatum . 67 On theupland s thevegetatio n ranges fromerbaceou st owoody . The most commonerbaceou splant sar e Permisetu msphocelatum ,Andropo n abyssinica,Medicag opolymorpha ,Alo e berfiina,Salvi a spp.,Trifoliu m pichisemollian dGuizoti ascabra . Someo f thecommo n shrubby andbush y speciesar e Hypericum revolutum,Thymu s shimperi,Clemati s spp.,an d Lasiocorys stochydiformis. Some scattered treessuc ha sHageni aabyssinica ,Acaci anegri i and Cupressus spp.testif y thatsom eo f theorigina lvegetatio nwa shighlan d forest. Most treesar enewl yplante d of theEucalyptu sspp . Farmers themselvesdistinguis hamon g threebasi c land classes for cropproduction : productive aredda ("Lern"),les sproductiv e aredda("Le m Ketaf")an dunproductiv eyemed a ("Taff")(Gryseel san dAnderson , 1983). Land isinclude d ina particula r classaccordin g toth enatura l environment,exposur e to frost,soi l fertility,an d the typeo f crop grown. Productive aredda land (around 30%o fare a cultivated)usuall y liesclos e toth ehomestea d on thehillside . It iswel l drained, comparatively fertile,les sexpose d to frostan d isusuall y cropped once a year during either thebel go rmehe r seasons. Ash andmanur ear e applied tothi slan d class,an d the fallow fraction isminimal . Horse beans,whea t and sometimesbarle yar e grown,an d thegrai n isuse d as seed for cropso nal l land classes. Average cropyield sar ehighes t on thislan d class,reflectin g the factorsmentione d aboveplu s generally more intensive cropmanagement . Grazing isactivel y restricted on productive areddaplots . Land inth eles sproductiv e aredda class (13%o fare a cultivated) ismor e exposed to frostan d lesswel l drained,wit hoccasiona l water logging problems inth elowe rparts . Barley,hors ebeans ,fiel d peas, lentilsand linseedar egrown ,agai ndurin geithe r thebel go rmehe r seasons. Theyemed a land class (57%o fare a cultivated)consist s of the seasonally floodedbottomland ,an d ismos texpose d tofrost . Iti s usuallyuse d forcroppin g onlydurin g thebelg ,whe n flooding isno ta severeproble mand frost incidencei slowest . Barley,whic h isearl y maturing and relativelywate r tolerant,i salmos t theonl y cropgrow n on thislan dclass . 4.3. Family Sizean d Composition Almost all farmers inth e survey sample belonged toth eAmhar a tribe. Only 12%wer eOromo' so forigin . Allwer emember so f the ChristianOrthodo x churchwhic h hasCopti corigins . Of those sample farmerswh ower ealread yworkin g in theperio d before the land reform60 % hadbee n tenants,18 %landowners ,17 %landowne r aswel l as tenant,an d 5% hadbee n landlesslabourers . Theaverag e ageo f sample farmerwa s 47years ,th eyounges t being 17an d theoldes t 90. It isliksl yhoweve r that thesedat a are inaccurate,i nvie wo f theabsenc eo fbirt h recordsan d thedependenc e on recall. Probably,th eaverag e ageo f sample farmers issomewha t lower 68 than indicated. Around 10%o fhousehol d headswer e female,an d 12%o f the sample farmerswer esingle . Theaverag e family size ofcontro l farmerswa s 4.6 people per household, consisting of 2adult san d 2.6 children. In termso fAdul t Equivalent (AE),th emea nhousehol d sizewa s 2.97AE/Far mwit h a standard deviation of .8. AnA Ewa sdefine d as1 foreac hadul tove r 15year s of age, .5fo reac hchil dbetwee n 10an d 15year sol d and .25fo reac h child between 6an d 9year sold . Inabou t 40%o fth e samplehouseholds ,ther e wasals o anadditiona lmembe r of the family (grandchild,grandparents ,o r other relative)livin g in. Therewer e slightlymor e females (52%)tha n males (48%)i nth eoveral lhousehol d sample. Overall,ther ewa s only very little inter-year variation inaverag e family sizeo r male/female ratio. Whereas in197 9onl y 12%o fth e sample farmers reported tohav e somedegre e of literacy, thispercentag e increased to 30%i n1984 . For mosto f these farmers,literac y waslimite dhoweve r toth eabilit y to distinguish a fewcharacter so f thealphabet ,o r the reading ofa few words. The increase inliterac y rates isassociate dwit h anationa l government campaignpromotin g literacy. Nevertheless,i n198 3onl y18 % of control farmers sent their children to school,12 %le tthe m participate inelementar y literacy classes,whil e in70 %o f families childrendi dno t receivea formal type ofeducation . Informal surveys indicateda hig hdegre eo f child mortality among sample farm families with roughly 20%o f childrendyin gbefor e theyattaine d theag eo f four. 4.3.1. CapitalAsset s Farmershav ecapita l assets forus edirectl y or indirectly in agricultural production. These canb e categorized ashouse san dbarns , ploughing tools,equipmen t forharvestin g and threshing, grain containers and trees. Themea nvalu e of these capital assetswa s 698Bir r per household. Likeelsewher e inth eEthiopia nhighlands ,settlement s inth e DebreBerha nare aar eclustere d onhil l tops. Usuallyaroun d 3t o4 family relatedhousehold shav e their livinghouse sadjacen t toeac h other,surrounde d bya stonewall . This isdu e tosocia l and security reasons. Manyo fth e farmplot sar e locatedaroun d thehom e compound. Usuallya farmerwil l haveo nhi scompoun d adwellin g house,a crop granary and a livestock shade. Dwellinghouse sar ebuil t of stoneswhic h are inampl e supplyan d collected fromth evicinity . The fencesaroun d thehomestea d areals oo f stone andaroun d 40t o5 0meter slon g in perimeter. Grain storesar eusuall y builto fwoode nwall splastere dwit hmu d and grass roofs. Fumegationo f stored grain isno tpractised . Storage wastesdu e topest san dhole s ingranarie sar e reported by farmers tob e highbu t remaina sye t unquantified. Within a fencedhomestea d livestock shadesar e common. They are intended toprotec t animalsa tnigh t frompredator s sucha shyenas . Animals are not segregated by sexwhe nkep t inlivestoc k shades. Unweaned calvesar e separated fromthei r damsan dmilkin g of cows is usuallydon ehere . 69 Control farmersha d oneo r twodwellin ghouse seac hwit h an averagevalu e of 270Birr . Justove r 51%ha d onedwellin ghouse ,33 %ha d twoan d 16%thre eo rmore . Theyusuall y alsoha d a store,value d at 18 Birr. About 63%o f farmersha d one,13 %ha d twoo rmore ,bu t 22%di d not have any. Most farmersha d a livestock shade (meanvalu e 90Birr) , but 22% did nothav e one,67 %ha d one and 11%ha d two. All farmersha d a fence around thehomestead ,value d onaverag e at 76Birr . Total capital value of these fixed assetsaverage d 623Birr/farm ,an d farmers reported a meanmaintenanc e costo f 14Bir r peryear . Only 43%o fhouse swer e lesstha n1 0year sold ,an d 20%wa s even more than 20year sold . Only 6% of themha d acorrugate d metal sheet as a roof,instea d of the traditional grass roof. An oxdraw nploug h ('maresha'),a nancien tard , isgenerall yuse d for seedbedpreparation . Itbreak s the soil clodbu tdoe sno t invert the soil. The systemo fploughin gha sbee ndescribe d elsewhere (Gryseels et al, 1984;Goe ,1987) . A complete seto fmaresh a consistso f ameta l plough tip,a yoke ,a woode nbea man d leather straps. Except for the metal tipwhic h isproduce d by theblacksmith ,th e resto fa maresha' s partsar emainl yhom emade . A leatherwhi p isuse d tolea d theoxen . Other implementsowne d by farmers forus e inlan dpreparatio nwer e shovel,doma ,ho e and guiemekeskesha . The latter isuse d tobrea k soil clodsafte r soilburnin g (seesectio n 4.4.2). Theaverag e value of ploughing toolsowne dwa s 25Bir r per farm. Mosto f theequipmen t was very old (67%mor e than 5year sold )an d inherited from theparents . Harvesting isdon eusin g a sickle tocu t the cropstalks . After the cutting,th eproduc e istransporte d toth ehomestea d for threshing. The crop stalksar e thenheape d ona threshing floor,whic h isusuall y prepared with stamped eartho r cowdung . Animalwil l bedrive naroun d on the crop stalks to separate the grain from the straw. Farmerswil l then startwinnowing ,b y tossing the grain intoth e air toallo w thewin d to separate thegrai n from thechaff . During winnowing,a liada (woodenshovel )o rmens h (woodenpitchfork )wil l be used. The averagevalu eo fharvestin gan d threshing equipmentwa s 10 Birr per farm. Once thecro p isthreshe d andwinnowed , thegrai nwil l be stored incontainer smad e ofdrie dmu dmixe dwit h strawan dmanure . Someo f these containerswil l alsob euse d asa measur e toweig h grains. The local nameso f the containersar edebignet ,kuna ,enkib ,gurzigne ,eni k and included also sacksan dmeta l barrels. The averagevalu e of these containerswa s 40Birr/farm . Although historically DebreBerha nwa s forested, it isno w denuded due to longperiod s of settlement andus eo f firewood for energy purposes. Treesar e owned collectively by thePA . Treesar e cut for fuel and building purposes. The EthiopianGovernmen t hasa n active reforestation programme,encouragin g PA'san d farmers to reforest. Germination isdifficul t due to frost and the longdr y season. At the ILCAstation ,onl y 10%o f the seedlings planted grew tomaturit y (Woldeab Woldemariam,Persona l Communication). Themai n trees found in theare a were Eucalyptus spp. 70 4.4. Farmholding,Lan dUs ean d Land Productivity 4.4.1. Farmholding Between197 9an d198 4th e sizeo fth eaverag e landholding excludingpasture s inth estud y areawa s 3.28ha ,o fwhic h 2.35 hawa s cultivated arable landan d .93h a fallow. Tothi sshoul db eadde d pasturearea swhic horiginall ywer emostl ycommunal . In198 0however , thePA' sstarte dt oindividuall y allocate someo fthes epasture sfo r haymaking. At firstthi sallocatio nwa sgive nt osmal lgroup so fn omor e thanfiv e farmers,bu ta sfro m198 1o na n individualbasis . Since198 1 anaverag eo f2.2 5h ao fpastur e landwa sallocate d tofarmer si n additiont oth earabl eland . Thisincrease d the sizeo fth eaverag e holding to5.8 9 hao flan d in1984 . Average farmsize sar e illustrated inTabl e4.2 . Table 4.2.: FarmSiz ean dLan d UsePatterns ,1979-198 4 (ha) 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 (n=60) (n=42) (n-42) (n-42) (n-42) (n-42) Average farmsiz e ofwhic h 3.84 4.63 6.37 5.20 5.23 5.89 Belg cultivated 0.31 - 0.13 0.18 0.36 - Meher cultivated 2.05 2.30 2.21 2.19 2.01 2.39 Fallowlan d 1.03 0.90 1.24 0.55 0.58 1.08 Pasture land 0.42 1.40 2.76 2.25 2.25 2.39 Homestead 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 Thesiz eo fth eholdin gvarie dconsiderabl yaccordin g tofamil y size, localpopulatio ndensit yo fth eassociations ,soi l fertilityan d the political influenceo fth e individual farmer. About 25%o f farmers cultivatedles stha n1. 6 ha (Group I), 50%cultivate dbetwee n1. 6 and3 ha (Group II), 18%betwee n 3an d 4h a (GroupIII )an d 7%mor e than4 h a (GroupIV) . Thestratificatio no f farmsaccordin g toare acultivate d is illustrated inFigur e 4.4. The underlying reasonsfo r thedifference s in area cultivated relatet oth eavailabilit yo fdraugh tanima lpowe r ando f humanlabour . Average familysiz ewa s 3.15 inGrou p I,4.6 1 inGrou pII , 4.95 inGrou p IIIan d 5.38 inGrou pIV . More sophisticated statistical analysisha showeve r illustrated thatth edominan tcausa l factorwa sth e ownershipo foxen . (Seesectio n 4.10.). Because oflo wsoi l fertility,a substantia l proportion ofarabl e landtha ti sregularl ycultivated ,wa slef tfallow . Duringth estud y period,th eare a leftfallo wo n individual farmsaverage d25% . Individualpastur e landaccounte d forapproximatel y 30%o f farmsize . Lesstha n 50%o fth e farmlan d consisted thuso f regularly cultivated cropland. The totalare a croppedb y control farmersvarie d only little fromyea r toyear ,wit ha maximu.T ideviatio n of5% . 71 Figure 4.4.: FrequencyDistributio no fAre aCultivate db yContro l Farmers 60 50 if) § 40 o 10- <1.6 ha 1.6<3 ha 3<4 ha => 4h a area cultivated In1980 ,whe npasture swer eallocate d individuallyfo rth efirs t time,th esmalles tholding , includingpastur ean dfallo w land,wa s0. 7h a whileth elarges tholdin gwa s9. 5ha . Between these extremes,holding s were statistically normallydistributed ,wit hth emoda l sizecategor y being3. 5t o4 ha . Inth efollowin gyear ,a simila r picture emerged, althoughth emaximu m sizeo fholdin g fell from9. 7t o7. 7ha . The coefficiento fvariatio n (CV)o fth esiz eo findividua lholding sdurin g the studyperio d rangedpe reac hyea rbetwee n3 3an d41% . Holdingsa t Karafinower e somewhat smaller thani nth eothe r 3associations . Farmers fromKormargfi aha dth elarges taverag e farm size,becaus e this associationha dmuc hmor epastur e land. Themea nare a cultivated annuallywa s2. 2h ai nKormargfia ,2. 3h ai nKarafino ,2. 4h ai n Faji/Bokafiaan d2. 8h ai nMilki . Farmholding swer e fragmented inthre eo rfou r parcels,subdivide d ino naverag e1 1plot s (rangingu pt o20) . Fragmentation arises fromth e PA strategyo fallocatin gdifferen t land classesamon git smembe r farmers. Theaverag e plot sizewa s2,10 0m . Plotswer eo naverag e52 5 meters fromth ehomestea dwit h singleplot su pt o3,50 0m distant . 72 4.4.2. Land Productivity forCro p Production Farmersgro wcrop sdurin g bothth e'belg 'an d'meher 'seasons . Themajo r crops thatar egrow nbarle y (Hordeumvulgare) ,whea t (Triticum spp.), horsebean s (Vicia faba), fieldpea s (Pisum sativum), lentils (Lensesculenta )an dlinsee d (Linumusitatissimum) . Thesear eal lcrop s suitablefo rthi shig haltitud e environment. Different specieso fbarle y (white,blac kan dmixed) ,an dwhea t (emer,whit ean dblack )ar egrown , and farmerskep t several landraceso feac ho fth emajo r cerealswhic h theyuse dunde r specific production conditions. Forbarle yfo rexampl e someo fth eloca l landraceswer e SenefeGebes ,Houge ,Kesali ,Feres e Goma,Gall aGebes ,Workey ean dFerk e Gebes. Whenth e'belg ' rainfallwa sconsidere d reliablean dsufficient , most farmersplante da cro pdurin g thisperio do fearl y rains between Februaryan dMay . Duringth estud yperiod ,a bel g cropoccurre d four yearsou to fsix . Onaverage ,onl yabou t2,70 0m 2o flan dpe rfarme rwa s sown. Becauseo fth eirregularit yo frainfall ,farmer swil lno tris kt o loose seed,an dman y farmersals olac k timelyacces st osufficien t draught power. Therewa sindee da significan t impacto fownershi po f oxeno nth esiz eo f'belg 'are a cultivatedb ycontro l farmers (P<.05). Itappear sals o that farmersse tthemselve sa "targe tarea "o flan d that willb ecultivate d annually,an dtha tth egreate rth e'belg 'area ,th e lessi splante d duringth emehe r season. Thisma yb eassociate dwit ha lacko fmarke t incentivesfo rth efarme rt oproduc emor e thanth e subsistence needso fhi sfamily . Almostal llan d (between8 4an d92% )o f'belg 'plot swa splante d withbarley . Some farmersals o grewsom ewhea to rhors e beans. The proportiono ffarmer sgrowin ga bel gcrop ,th eare a sownan dth edominan t cropplante dar epresente d inTabl e4.3 . Table4.3 . Proportiono fFarmer sGrowin g 'Belg'Crop san dSiz eof'Belg ' Areas Sown Meanbel g %o ffarmer s Meanare a Maxare a barley area (m2)l/ growing sown (m2)2/sow n(m2 ) 1979 3183 73 4341 8139 90 1980 n.a.3/ n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 1981 1382 52 2638 5066 84 1982 2249 76 2952 5143 85 1983 3994 90 4414 10772 92 1984 n.a.3/ n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 1/ meanare ao fal lfarmer s 1/ mean areao ffarmer sgrowin g belg crop 1/ N.A.= no tapplicabl ea sn o'belg 'cro pwa sgrow ndurin g thatyear . Thehighes tproportio no ffarmer sgrowin ga bel g cropan dth e largestmea nare a sownwa sfoun d in1983 . During thatyea r therewa sa n unusually long 'Belg'growin g periodo f9 3days . 73 All farmersgro wcrop sdurin g themene r season. Thedominan t crop isagai nbarley ,bu twhea tan dhors ebean sar e importantalso . Mainly breadwhea t isgrow nan doccasionall yduru mwheat . Other cropsgrow nar e fieldpeas ,lentils ,linseed ,temenz e (atyp eo fmixe dbarley )an d oats. The shareo fbarle yi nth ecroppin gpatter ndecline d rapidlyfro m73 %i n 1979t o46 %i n1984 . Thiscorresponde dwit h the rapid increase inth e areaplante dwit hwhea t (becauseo fhig hgros smargins) ,th eemergenc e of oats (Avenasativa )a sa crop ,an d thegrowin g importance oflinseed . The croppingpatter no fcontro l farmersfro m197 9t o198 4i spresente d in Table4.4 . Table 4.4.: AnnualCroppin gPatter no fContro lFarm s (1979-1984)1 / 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Barley 72.9 70.6 62.9 57.7 55.9 45.7 Wheat 5.1 8.5 9.7 10.0 10.4 12.1 Horsebean s 12.2 12.4 14.8 14.8 12.0 11.0 Fieldpea s 3.8 5.6 5.9 5.6 3.8 2.6 Linseed 4.1 1.3 3.2 7.3 7.8 11.0 Lentils 1.9 1.2 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.0 Temenze - .4 0.8 0.9 1.8 1.2 Oats - - 1.1 2.3 7.0 15.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1/ In% o fcultivate d land,combinin gbot hbel gan dmehe rseasons . Oats (Avenasativa )wer e firstgrow na t ILCA's research stationa t DebreBerha n forexperimenta l purposes,an dwer eals o introduced intoth e croppingpatter no fon-statio n ILCAresearc h farmers. These research farmersgre wthes eoat smainl yt ob euse da sgree n feedo rha y for ILCA's dairy cows. Gradually, farmersoutsid eth e stationstarte dadoption .Tw o control farmers (5%)wer egrowin goat si n1981 ,7 (17%)i n1982 ,1 7 (40%) in198 3an d 33 (79%)i n1984 . Theaverag eare a sownpe r farmerwa s4,62 0 m2 in1984 . The reasons forthi srapi d spreado foat swer ediscusse d inJutz i andGryseel s (1984aan d b), butca nb e summarizeda sbette r resistance to aphids,bette r tolerance tofros tan dwaterlogging ,an d lesslabou r intensive landpreparatio nwhe n compared tobarley . Theoa tgrain sar e used forhuma nconsumption . Linseedha sals o rapidly gained importance,du e toit sdrough t tolerance characteristics,an d itshig hgros smargin . Average annual cropyield sar epresente d inTabl e 4.5. Therewa s nosignifican tdifferenc ebetwee nyield sobtaine ddurin g thebel gan d meher seasons. Innorma lyear s allcrop sexcep t lentilsan d linseed yieldedbetwee n60 0an d 800kg/ha . Lentilsan d linseedar elo wyieldin g crops thatproduce d onaverag e20 0kg/ha . Therewa sa hig hvariatio n in cropyield sbetwee n farmersbot h forcereal s (CV= 46%)an dpulse s (CV= 70%), and therewer e significantdifference s incro pyield sbetwee n PeasantsAssociations . Thedifference s inproductivit y between 74 individual farmerswithi na P Acoul db eattribute d todifference s in resourcesavailable ,ecologica l environment,managemen t skillsan d labour inputs (Gryseelsan dDurkin ,1985) . Betweenassociations ,cro pyield s variedmainl ybecaus eo fthei rdifferen tecologica l endowmentsan d characteristics. Table 4.5.:Averag eGros sCro pYield sdurin gBel gan dMehe r Seasons (1979-1954kg7H¥ ) 'Belg' 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Mean Barley 720 _ 500 710 705 _ 660 Wheat 400 - - 580 500 - 495 Horsebean s 335 - - - - - n.a. Fieldpea s 350 - - - 445 - n.a. Lentils 70 560 560 470 415 'Meher' Barley 840 870 575 775 330 1000 732 Wheat 850 960 550 670 590 610 705 Horsebean s 1270 1000 640 520 530 770 788 Fieldpea s 1000 640 520 530 210 800 617 Lentils 360 240 80 160 240 170 208 Oats - - 500 900 500 805 676 Linseed 200 175 100 300 200 355 222 Using thesam edata ,Henrickse nan dDurki n (1985)showe d that therewa sa direc tcorrelatio nbetwee ncro pyield san d lengtho f growing period. This isillustrate d inFigur e 4.5. The importance ofthi s finding istha tcro pyield scoul d increaseconsiderabl y ifway san dmean s canb e found toexten d thegrowin g season (forexampl e through strategic irrigation inputs),o rb yusin g cropvarietie stha thav ea shorter maturityperiod . The seed ratesaverage d 155kg/h a forbarley ,15 3kg/h a forwheat , 240kg/h afo rhors ebeans ,18 1kg/h afo r fieldpeas ,4 0kg/h a forlinsee d and 73kg/h afo r lentils. These seed ratesar ever yhig hcompare d to recommended ratesb yth e Institute ofAgricultura lResearc h (IAR, 1979). Asa result,ne tcro pyield s (afterdeductin g the seed input)wer e substantially lower thangros syield s (Table 4.6.). Horsebean swer e the highestyielder ,an d therewa sn osignifican tdifferenc ebetwee naverag e yieldso fbarley ,oat san dwheat . Seed ratesdi dno tdiffe r significantly acrossPAs ,bu tdiffere d among individual farmerswithi n aP Aan dwer e strongly influencedb yth e year ofcultivation . Thecoefficien t ofvariatio no f seedus e ona pe r habasi swa s 34%fo rcerea l seed and62 %fo rpuls e seed. Thesehig h seed ratesca nb eexplaine db yth enes dt ocompensat e forlosse scause db y birdsan d rats,th eston ynatur e ofth e fields,poo rviabilit y of seed, hailstormsa ttim eo fgerminatio nan d the inefficiency ofbroadcastin g seeds. Stone covero fman yplot sexceed s60 %(Goe ,1987 )whil e substantial savingso f seedcoul dprobabl yb emad eb y rowplantin g rather thanbroadcastin g (Schepan d Jutzi,1985) . High seed ratesar eals o associatedwit ha farmer strategyt o reducewee d infestation (AnnStroud , personalcommunication) . 75 Figure 4.5.: Effecto fLengt ho fGrowin gPerio do nCro pYield s inBas o andWoren aWered a Viciofab a Barley Fieldpea s LentiI s * O * A Crop yield (kg/ha) 1250 - * (1983) (1931) (1S82) (1980) (1984) (1979) 1000 * O * * * O O 750 O * * * O 500 * * O A 250 1 A * A A , A. 1 i 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 Length of growing period (days) Source: Adapted fromHenrickse nan dDurki n (1985) Table4.6. : AverageNe tCro pYield s (1979-1984,kg/ha )1 / 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Mean Barley 675 720 425 620 175 855 578 Wheat 670 800 400 530 455 480 556 Horsebean s 975 755 730 630 465 540 682 Fieldpea s 780 460 350 355 50 555 425 Lentils 240 175 40 90 165 95 134 Linseed 155 135 60 265 160 310 181 Oats - - 420 780 420 725 586 1/ Meher seasononl y 76 Although cropyield svaria dbetwee nPA's ,ther ewa sn ounifor m pattern indifferentia l productivities. Farmers fromMilk iha d the highestyield so f cerealsan d pulses fouryear sou to f six,bu t the lowestdurin g theothe r twoyears . Karafinoha d the opposite result, with thebes tyield sdurin g two outo f sixyears ,bu tth elowes t during theothe r fouryears . Theyield s ofKarafin oma y indicate comparably good soil fertility levelsbu thig hexposur e to frost. Giglietti and Stevan (1986)hav e reported onth eagro-ecologica l conditionso f the four PA'san d listed themos t importantecologica l parameters affecting crop productivity. Theparameter swit hpositiv e effect on crop production werewester n exposure,moderat e gradient,drainage ,soi l structure and depth of soilprofile . Thoseparameter swit hnegativ e effect on crop productionwer e erosion,sout heaster nexposure ,stee pgradient , waterlogging, stoniness,structureles s soilan d frost liability. Weed infestationwa sa seriousproblem ,particularl y byCyperu s and Songanagrass . Many farmersals o reported cropdamag e or complete lossdu e to insect attacksan dnatura lhazard s sucha s frostan dhail . On average 30% of the farmers reported insectattack so n their cropseac hyear . Aphidshav ebee n identified asa majo r causeo fdamag e tobarle yan d wheat. Croppest san ddisease soccu r regularly,especiall y onhors e beans,barle yan dwheat . Themai npest s affectinghors e beansar e chocolate spot (Botrytis spp.), rust (Puccinia spp.)an dworms . Wheat is mainly affected by rusts (Puccina spp.), loose smut (Ustilago tritici), and leafblatc h (Septoria tritici). Soil fertility of cropland ismaintaine d through the rotation of cereal cropswit h pulses,th e incorporation of fallowperiod s inth e rotational cycle,th eoccasiona l useo fchemica l ornatura l fertilizers, and soilburnin g or guie. On the slopes theusua l crop rotationis : Year 1 Barley Year 2 Barley,whea t or oats Year 3 Pulse (horse beanso r field peas) Year 4-12 Fallow The introductiono f a fallowperio d inth ecroppin g cycle allows the soil to recover its fertilityb ynatura lmeans . Most of the longer term fallowswer e located on the communal landan duse d for grazing. Depending on the typeo f cropland, fallowma y lastu p to8 year s onAredd a non-productive land. On theYemed a land, the fallowperio d may lastu p to2 0years ,an d crop rotation issomewha t different. It often takes the following form: Year 1 Barley Year 2 Barley Year 3-20 Fallow Yemeda land ishighl y exposed to frost and flooding and therefore considered less suitable forpuls e crops. Soilburnin g or guie (see following sections)i spractise d particularly on thisyemed a land. 77 Fannersoccasionall yus esurplu smanur ean dashe so nth eAredd a productive landnea rth ehomestead . Grainsproduce d fromthi s landwil l usuallyb euse da ssee dfo rth efollowin gcrop . Onlya smal l fractiono f themanur eproduce d isuse da sa fertilize ro nth eland . Hosti suse da s fueli nth ehousehold . Theus eo fminera l fertilizersi nEthiopi awa sfirs t evaluated throughnationwid e trialsconducte d in196 6b yth eFreedo m fromHunge r Campaign Fertilizer Programme (Ministryo fAgriculture , 1968). The trials revealed thatth emajo r graincrop s respondedwel lt oth e applicationo fnitroge nan dphosphoru si nmos to fth ehighlan dareas . Ureaan ddiammoniu mphosphat e (DAP18-46-00 )wer e recommendeda ta rat e of5 0kg/h aan d10 0kg/h afo rwhea tan dbarle y respectively. Mineral fertilizeri sdistribute d inEthiopi a throughth ePeasant s Associations. Shortter mcredi to fmaximu mon ecroppin g seasonfo rth e purchaseo ffertilizer si savailable . Ifa farme rdoe sno trepa yth e loan,th eP Aa sa whol ewil lb edenie d fertilizer duringth efollowin g yearunti lth eloa ni ssettled . Thissituatio nca ncontinu efo rman y years. Around DebreBerhan ,onl yDA Pha sbee navailable . Farmersi nth e Weredahav ebecom e familiarwit hth eus eo fminera l fertilizer through theeffort so fth eextensio nagenc yo fth eloca lbranc ho fth eMinistr y ofAgriculture . Although only2 %o fth efarmer s interviewed for the Tegulatan dBulg abaselin e survey (TelahunMakonnen ,1978 )reporte dt o haveuse dminera l fertilizersdurin gth e5 year sprecedin gth esurvey , the resultso fsubsequen t field research indicateda muc hhighe r frequencyo fminera l fertilizerus eamon g farmers. Theproportio no f farmersusin gminera l fertilizersan dth eaverag equantitie suse dpe r farmerar egive ni nTabl e 4.7. Thetabl eals o includesa nestimat eo f theproportio no fcontro l farmersusin g 'guie'(Se enex t page). Table 4.7.:Proportio no fFarmer sUsin gMinera l Fertilizeran dAverag e QuantityUse dPe rFirme r (1979-1984) %o ffarmer susin g av. qt. used %o f farmers mineral fertilizer (kg/farm; using'guie ' 1979 68 71 n.a. 1980 76 70 54 1981 69 52 64 1982 40 47 59 1983 76 45 10 1984 14 43 52 Theproportio no ffarmer susin gminera l fertilizers declined annually. Various factorshav e contributed tothi sdeclin e sucha sth e highnomina l costo ffertilizer ,lo wfertilize r responses,lo w cost/benefit ratios,th eris kavsrsio nstrateg yo ffarmers ,an dlo w outputprices . Fertilizer responseo fbarle yan dbenefi t cost ratiosar e reportedi nTabl e 4.8. Invie w of thelo wamoun to ffertilize r used during thatyear ,198 4was exclude d fromth etable . Avalue/cos t ratio 78 (VCR)o fgreate r than10 0indicate stha tth e return fromth eapplicatio n of fertilizerwa sgreate r thanit scost . AVC Ro fles stha n20 0i s generally considered asbein g toolo wfo r farmerconditions ,an dwil l discourage fertilizeruse . Onlydurin g 1979wa sth ebenefi to f fertilizerus e substantiallyhighe r thanth ecos to f itsapplication . Duringthre eou to f fiveyear sth eadditiona l returnwa s farbelo w fertilizercost . Table 4.8.: FertilizerRespons e ofBarle yan dVCR s (1979-1983) 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Barleyyiel dwit hDA P 127 1058 767 884 435 Barleyyiel dn o fertilizer 742 897 584 734 259 % increase 52 18 31 20 68 Value/cost ratio1 / 241 26 43 102 55 1/ Calculated asrati oo fextr a returndu e tofertilize rus e toth ecos t of fertilizer application. Outputprice suse dwer e freemarke t pricesa tDebr eBerha nmarket . Almostal l fertilizerwa suse do nlan d sownt obarle yan dwheat . The rateso fapplicatio nvarie d between 50an d7 5kg/ha . Thetota lus e of fertilizer bycontro l farmersdecline d from2,80 0k g in197 9t o 1,400 kg in1983 ,an dt oonl y25 0k gi n1984 . Thecos to f fertilizer during the studyperio dwa sa s inTabl e 4.9. Thepric e isdetermine dannuall yb yth eEthiopia nGovernment , through theMinistr yo fAgriculture . Thepric e increased sharply from .65Bir r to1.1 6 Birrpe rK gdurin g 1981,an dwa sgraduall y reducedt o .84Birr/K g in1984 . Table 4.9.: Costo fMinera l Fertilizer atDebr eBerha n (1979-1984) 1/ Price (BirrAg) 1979 0.55 1980 0.85 1981 1.16 1982 0.89 1983 0.81 1984 0.84 1/ Theonl y fertilizer availablewa sDAP . Most farmersappl yo non eo r twoparcel so flan da traditional soilmanagemen tpractic eknow na ssoi lburnin go r "guie". Exceptdurin g 1983,mor e than 50%o f farmersapplie d 'guie'o na tleas ton eplo t (Table 4.7). During 1983,th enumbe r of farmersusin ggui edroppe d substantiallybecaus eo funusuall y good 'belg'growin g conditions. This practice isa traditiona l formo f fertilization toimprov esoi l 79 propertiesan dnutrien tavailability . Variousauthor s (TesfayeTessem a andDagnatche wYirgou ,1973 ;Mesfi nAbebe ,1981 ;an dRoorda ,1984 )hav e studied guiepractice san dthei r effectso nlan dproductivity . The practice isa sfollows : Aftera plo tha sbee n fallowfo rsom eyear s (upt o1 5year safte r a previousguie )th e fieldsar e plougheda tth ebeginnin go f thedr y season,durin gOctober-November . The topsoil isthe nlef tt odr yunti l January. Justbefor e thestar to fth ebel gshor t rainyseason ,i.e . January/February,th efield sar eploughe dagai nu pt o1 0time si n cris-crossdirection st odislodg e thesod . The remainingaggregate sar e crushed and theloos etopsoi l and surfacevegetatio nmounde d inheap s witha woode n spade. Thenumbe r ofheap s rangesfro m85 0t o1,639 ,wit h amea no f1,23 0 heapspe rh a (MesfinAbebe ,1981) . Themound sar e spaced at2 t o3 m intervalsove r theplots . Thenco wdun g isinserte d intoon e sideo f themoun d towardsth ecentre ,ignite dan d leftburnin g for 3t o8 days. InJune ,befor e theonse to fth emai n rains,th eburn t soili s spreadove r the fieldan dploughe dagain . Although fewauthor shav e studied theparticula r effectso ncro pyields ,i ti sgenerall ybelieve d thatsoilburnin gresult s inhig hyield so fbarle y (upt o3 0quintal spe r ha)i nth efirs tyea ro fcultivation ,bu tthe yar edrasticall y reduced in the secondyear ,whil e inth ethir dyea r thelan d isofte nn olonge r cropped and left fallowfo ru pt o1 5year s (Roorda,1984 ;Tessem aan d Yirgou, 1973). Thepositiv eeffec to ncro pyield so fgui eappear s tob eth e instant releaseo fnutrient ssuc ha sphosphorus ,nitrogen ,potassium , calciuman dmagnesium . Thephysica lpropertie s inth esoi lar eals o improved throughchange s insoi l structurewhic h intur nimprove s drainage aerationan dwate rpercolatio n (Roorda,1984) . Soilburnin g alsosterilize s themicrobia lpopulatio n inth etopsoi lan ddestroy swee d seeds,thereb yhelpin gwee dcontrol . Itsdisadvantage s are thelos so forgani cmatte ran ddehydratio n oflatti c clays,whic h leadst ochange s incla yminerology . Guie isals o verylabou r intensive. Surveys resultsindicat ea naverag elabou r input ofalmos t three timestha to fnon-gui eplots . Farmers thereforeapplie d guieo nonl ya fewplots . Although soilburnin gcause shig hcro pyield s inth e short term, long fallowsar enecessar yafterward s (onaverag e 13year s inth e survey) toallo wth esoi lt o restoreth eorgani cmatte r lost inth eprocess . The EthiopianGovernmen t isactivel ydiscouragin g thepractise san d theuse r canb e fined 30Birr . Inpractic ever yfe wfine shav eactuall ybee n levied. Availabledat aals oindicat ea substantial impacto fplantin g dateso ncro pyields . Thehighes tyield shav ebee nobserve dwhe ncrop s were planted duringwee k 25an d 26fo rbarle yan d fieldpea san dwee k 27 forwheat . Thisi sbecaus e theearlie rplantin gca ntak eplace ,th e longer thegrowin gperiod . The affecto fplantin gdat eo n theyiel do f barley ispresente d inTabl e 4.10. Theoptima ldat e ranges fromwee k 24 towee k 26,afterward syiel d levelsdro p substantially. 80 Table 4.10.: Effecto fPlantin g Dateo nBarle yYield s Plantingwee k Barleyyiel d (Kg/ha) 1979 19ÔÔ 1981 19 695 _ _ 20 925 - - 21 941 473 219 22 1033 609 363 23 914 671 484 24 1121 1038 532 25 1224 1042 853 26 704 1036 1120 27 781 816 928 28 792 701 431 With respectt oth eharvestin gdate ,th egenera l indicationi s thatth eearlie rth eharves tca ntak eplace ,th ehighe rth egrai nyield . The risko ffros t incidencean dresultin g risko fcro p failure increases as frommi dOctober . 4.4.3. Land Productivity forFodde r Production Themajo r sourceo fanima l feedi nth eEthiopia nhighland si sfro m cropby-product s (Jutzie tal ,1987c) . AtDebr eBerhan ,ther ei s proportionally muchmor epastur e land thanelsewhere ,an da greate r percentageo ffee d intakei sfro mgrazing . Themos t importantcro pby-produc ti sth estra wseparate d fromth e grainafte r threshing. Thestra wi suse da sa supplementar y feedfo r livestock,mainl yfo roxe nbefor san dafte r theyhav eworked ,an dcow si n milk. Notal lstra wi sequall y valuable: cereal strawha sa muc hhighe r proteinan denerg yconten ttha n pulsestraw . Onlycerea l strawshav ea commercial value. Yield levelso fgrai nan dstra wca nb erelativel y independent. Thisdegre eo findapendenc ei spresumabl y determinedb yth e stageo fplan tdevelopmen ta twhic hpoo r growing conditions strike. If frosto ra ninsec tattac k occurs,o ri fther ei sa nearl yen do frainfal l thenbot hgrai nyiel dan dstra w yieldsar ereduced . Ifthes e events happena tflowerin go rsettin g stage thenonl ygrai nyiel dwil lb e affected. Average strawyield sar egive ni nTabl e4.11 . Table 4.11.: AverageAnnua l StrawYield s (1979-1984 kg/ha) 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Barley 1000 1125 860 1150 580 1285 Wheat 1150 1315 870 925 910 920 Oats - - 800 1250 900 1160 Horsebean s 1500 1370 1450 775 565 815 Fieldpea s 1225 900 100 150 340 1505 Lentils 450 400 150 290 285 325 Linseed 460 240 190 510 370 590 81 The grain/straw ratioi so naverag e between0.6 5an d0.72 . This isillustrate d inTabl e 4.12. Strawyield sar ealmos t alwayshighe r than grainyields . Lentilsan dlinsee dproduc e proportionally thehighes t amounto fstraw ,whil e strawan dgrai nyield so fhors ebean sar ealmos t equal. Thegrain/stra w ratiowa slowes ti n1983 ,an dhighes ti n1984 . Table 4.12.: Grain/StrawRati o Estimates (1979-1984) 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Mean Barley 0.84 0.78 0.57 0.67 0.57 0.78 0.72 Wheat 0.74 0.73 0.63 0.72 0.65 0.65 0.69 Oats - - 0.53 0.72 0.55 0.69 0.65 Horsebean s 0.85 0.73 0.66 1.10 0.94 0.94 0.87 Fieldpea s 0.82 0.60 0.53 0.55 0.62 0.53 0.69 Lentils 0.80 0.60 0.53 0.55 0.84 0.52 0.64 Linseed 0.43 0.73 0.53 0.59 0.54 0.60 0.57 Strawoutpu tpe ryea r averaged between1,20 0k g(i n198 3whic hwa s a verypoo r agricultural year)t o2,35 0k gi n1984 . Between7 0an d85 % of strawproduce d isfro mcerea l crops. Working oxenan dcow si nmil k are givendail y rationso fstraw ,whic hi susuall ya mixtur eo fdifferen t kinds. Somepuls e straw (horse beans,lentils ,fiel dpeas )wil lb emixe d withinth ecerea l straw. Generally,puls e strawalon ei sno tfe dt o livestock. Strawi sfe di nadditio nt ohay ,produce d fromth eindividua lan d communal pastures. Surveysb yILC A (Jutzie tal , 1987c)hav e indicated thatth eaverag eha yproductio n frompastur e areaswa s60 0k gdr y matter/ha,whil eth eD Mequivalen to fpastur e production grazed freshb y animalswa s2,50 0kg/ha . Haypasture sar eheavil y overgrazedwhic hha sa substantial effecto nyield . Jutzie ta l (Ibid)hav e shown thatto o frequent grassofftak e leadst oa reductio ni nD Myiel do f50% . Yields ofheavil y grazed grasslands therefored oprobabl yno texcee d1,50 0 DM/ha. Thequalit yo fhay ,stra wan dintak e fromnatura l grazing that wasfe dt olivestoc ko nsmallholde r farmsi nth eBas oan dWoren aWered a isno tsignificantl y differenta sindicate d inTabl e4.13 . Table 4.13.: WorenaWered a Hay Straw Grass Drymatte r (DM) 34 84 90 Digestibledr ymatte r (DDM) 57 54 56 Crudeprotei n (CP) 6.6 5.11 6.25 Grossenerg y (MJAg DM) 18.09 17.8 19.18 Source: Goe(1987 ) Approximately 40%o ffee d intakeo flivestoc kwa sfro m cereal straw,whil e 60%wa ssupplie db yroughag e fromnativ epastur ean dbrows e grazing. Control farmersharveste dha yfro m their individuallyallocate d pasture areas. Each farmerharveste d approximately 4050m ofhay ,whic h 82 yielded onaverag e 1135k gD Mo fha ype r farm. Thiscorresponde d toa meanyiel d of 2.8 Tonnes/DM/ha. Ashuma npopulatio n pressures inth eWered a gradually expand the area cultivatedwit h crops,fallo wcycle sar e shortened and the available pasture areas reduced. Inth e longer term,suc hpressure s lead to declining soil fertility and landproductivity ,an d an increasing dependence of livestockupo n cereal crop residues for feed supply. A declining soil fertilitywil l alsocaus e a reduction of theproductio no f crop residueshowever ,an d increasing thedemand so navailabl e feed supplies. Thiswoul dnegativel y affectanima l nutrition. 4.5. Livestock Holdings,Managemen t and Productivity 4.5.1. Background Almostal l farmers,excep tdivorce d orwidowe dwomen ,o ryoun g men,ow nlivestoc k and a typical herd contains cattle,sheep ,equine san d poultry. Livestock areprivatel y ownedan d therear emechanism s to transfer theownershi po fanimal s fromparent s tochildre neve n before thedeat ho f theparents . Boys aregive n sheepwhil e theyar e still youngherders ,s otha tthe ywil lultimatel yhav ea her do f theirow na t the timeo fmarriage . The familieso fbot hth ebrid ean d groomma y give animalsa sa weddin g present to thene whousehold . Interm so fmonetar yvalu eo r contribution to agricultural production,cattl ear e themos t important species. Their prime role is to supplydraugh tpowe r for cropcultivation ,an dmanur ewhic h ismostl y dried anduse da shousehol d fuel. DebreBerha n cattlear eo fth e highland/shorthorn zebutyp e (Alberroan dHailemariam , 1982aan db) . There issubstantia l intercrossing. This isprobabl ydu e toth e fact thatBas oan dWoren aWered a isa zone throughwhic hman yanimal s fromth e Debre Sinaare apas so n theirwa y toth emarke t ofAddi sAbaba . Sheepar eo f the "Menz" type,whic h isa n indigenousbreed . They arenumericall y themos t importantspecie s inth e farmherd . Sheep,an d occasionally goats,ar e keptmainl ya sa secondary investment anda source ofcas h intime so fneed . Theyar eals oth edominan t source of meat,an d supplymanur e forfuel . Donkeysar eo f localbreed san dwidel yuse d aspac kanimals . Horses areuse d forhuma ntransport . Poultryar e scavengers,an d kept foreg gproduction ,hom e consumption and asa sourceo f cash. Beekeeping isno t practised inth earea ,becaus e ofhig haltitud e and low temperatures. 4.5.2. Livestock Holdings Average livestock holdingsbetwee n 1979-1984 and the equivalent animal unitsar e given inTabl e 4.14. The overall average holding consisted of 1.23 oxen,1.5 0 cows, 1.74 young heifers oryoun g bulls, 0.6 mature bulls,1.1 1 calves,4. 6 young sheep,6.3 9 adult sheep,0.1 4 goats, 0.45 young donkeys,1.1 6 adultdonkeys ,1.4 6 horseso rmules ,an d 2.72 poultry. Statistically, thedistributio n of livestock holdings across holdingswa snormal . 83 Groupedb yspecie sth emea nfar mholdin g consistedo f6.1 8cattle , 11.16 small ruminants,2.8 3equine san d2.7 2poultry . Livestock holdings inth eDebr eBerha nare aar elarge r than reported elsewhere (Ministryo f Agriculture,1977 ,Ardu ,1978 ,Mukassa-Mugerwa , 1981). Thisca nb e explainedb yth emuc h larger feed resources thatar eavailabl e from pasturesan dfallo w land,a scro pproductio ni sproblemati c becauseo f the incidenceo ffros tan dothe recologica l factors. Becauseo fth ehig h altitude locationo fth eDebr eBerha narea ,anima ldisease s except liverflukear eno ta majo r problem. Theproductivit yo fgrai n cropsha sa substantia l effecto nth e sizeo flivestoc k holdings. Aftera poo r agricultural year (sucha s for example 1983), farmerswil l sellthei r livestockt ogenerat e cashfo r the purchaseo ffoodgrains . Small ruminants soldwer e generallyyoung . This confirmsth efinding so fGala le ta l (1979)who ,o nth ebasi so fa surve y that covered1 3market si nth eEthiopia nhighlands ,estimate d that82 %o f sheepmarkete dwer emil k tooth lambs. Aftera goo dharvest ,farmer swil l purchaseadditiona l animals. Thedynamic so fth eclos e interaction betweenth eproductivit yo fcrop san dth esiz eo flivestoc k enterprises iswel l illustrated inFigur e4.6 . Figure 4.6.: CropYiel dan dHoldin go fSmal lRuminant s (1979-1985) barley yield 120Û1 number of small ruminants 1000 O \- C 800 O' J* T> 600 u a n +>> 400 a> c 200 84 Cropsar eharveste d at theen d ofth eyear ,an d asdat a are compiledo na pe r annumbasis , there isa lageffec to fon eyea r in reflecting changes inth e size ofth e small ruminantholding . Data collection started in197 8an d followed ayea r duringwhic h therewa s a general crop failure inth e regiondu e todrought . Farmers sold a substantial part of their stock,whic hwer e therefore ata lowleve lwhe n this study started. Livestock holdings gradually increased from 1979 to 1981, then remained relatively stablean ddecline d sharply after 1983. Poorer farmers,whic hhav ea relatively larger shareo f small ruminants, will be first to sell stock,particularl y young sheep. During this initial crisisperiod ,mor ewealth y farmersma y still buy stock to take advantage ofdeclinin g prices,provide d theyhav e sufficient feed available. Table 4.14.: Mean Livestock Holdings ofContro l Farmers (No.o f Animals/Farm, 1979-1984) 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 (n=60) (n=42) (n=42) (n=43) (n-42) (n=42) Mean Oxen 1.18 1.02 0.83 1.19 1.71 1.40 1.23 Cows 1.33 1.43 1.52 1.70 1.67 1.48 1.50 Heifers/young bulls 1.30 1.62 1.83 2.05 1.45 2.16 1.74 Bulls 0.56 0.74 0.64 0.49 0.67 0.52 0.60 Calves 0.88 0.98 0.83 1.16 1.71 1.09 1.11 Total cattle: 5.25 5.79 5.65 6.59 7.21 6.65 6.18 Young sheep 2.55 4.57 5.05 5.16 5.40 4.86 4.60 Adult sheep 4.80 5.21 8.73 6.81 7.38 5.38 6.39 Goats 0.12 0.12 0.21 0.12 0.26 - 0.17 Total small ruminants: 7.47 9.90 13.99 12.09 13.04 10.24 11.16 Young donkeys 0.35 0.50 0.50 0.56 0.69 0.66 0.54 Adult donkeys 1.07 1.09 1.02 1.21 1.31 1.26 1.16 Horses/mules 1.04 1.21 1.19 1.19 1.17 1.00 1.13 Total equines: 2.46 2.80 2.71 2.96 3.17 2.92 2.83 Poultry 2.38 1.90 2.26 3.00 3.50 3.29 2.72 For the farmer,th emai nobjectiv e of thecattl e enterprise ist o reardraugh t oxen. Almost alloxe nar e reared on the farm. Support stock iskep t to timelygenerat e replacements. Oxen constitute only20 % of the cattle herd,an d foreac ho x therear e four to five support cattle. It ist ob enote d that therewer e more heifers thanyoun g bulls (ratio 1-1.2),mor e ewes than rams (ratio 1-7.8),an dmor e female than maledonkey s (ratio 1-1.7). Horseswer e mostlymare s (50%),colt s (31%) or stallions (19%). Muleswer e rare. Goatsals ower e ofmino r importance. 85 Most farmersha da tleas ton eox ,on ecow ,a heife ro ryoun gbull , a fewsheep ,a donke yan dsom epoultry . About 20%o ffarmer sdi dno t have oxen,28 %ha done ,an donl y 52%ha dtw oo rmore . About80 %o f farmersha da tleas ton ecow ,an dalmos tal lfarmer sha dshee pan d poultry. Roughly 66%o ffarmer sha dmor e than five sheepan dthre e quarterso ffarmer sha da donkey . Only2 %o fsampl e farmsha dn o animals. Thesewer ever ypoo r farmers,usuall ydivorce do rwidowe d women. Thedistributio no flivestoc k holdingsi sillustrate d inTabl e 4.15. Therewa sonl y little changei nth edistributio no flivestoc k holdingsi nbetwee nyears . Table 4.15.: Distributiono fLivestoc k Holdings (Mean 1979-1984) %o fFarmer s Noo x 20 Oneo x 28 Twoo rmor e oxen 52 Oneo rmor e cows 80 Oneo rmor ebull s 48 Oneo rmor e sheep 89 Fivet otwent y sheep 66 More than twenty sheep 14 Oneo rmor edonkey s 77 Oneo rmor ehorse s 54 Oneo rmor epoultr y 98 Noanimal s 2 Inorde rt oallo wfo rcomparisons ,an dgive nth esimilarit yo fth e feedbase ,i ti susefu lt oconver t animalso fdifferen t sizesan dspecie s into common referenceunits . Fortropica l animal production,th e Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU),o r"Unit éd ebétai l tropical"i scommonl y takent ob ea nanima lo f25 0k gliveweigh t (Jahnke,1982) . However, such a conversion factor doesno ttak e intoaccoun t that feed requirementsar e moredirectl ydetermine db yth emetaboli cweigh t rather thanth e liveweight. Themetaboli cweigh to fa nanima lca nb ecalculate da sM W= L W' wherebyM W= metaboli cweigh tan dL W= Liveweigh t (Maynarde tal , 1979). The conversion proceduresuse dfo rDebr eBerha n livestock holdings aregive ni nTabl e4.16 . Table 4.16.: Conversion Proceduresfo rMetaboli cWeigh tan dTL UHoldin g Livestocktyp e LW (kg) TT70-7 5 TLU LW Oxen/bulls 275 67.53 1.1 Cows 200 53.18 0.80 Heifers 125 37.38 0.50 Immaturemale s 150 42.86 0.60 Calves 50 18.80 0.20 Sheep 22 10.16 0.09 Goats 22 10.16 0.09 Horses/mules 200 53.18 0.80 Donkeys 90 29.22 0.36 86 Using theprocedure s ofTabl e 4.16., theaverag e livestock holding per farmdurin g the studyperio dwa s estimated at6.9 2 TLU. This figure ranged from 5.90 in197 9 to7.9 2 in1983 . Both 1977an d 1978wer e extremely bad cropyear s forcingman y farmers tosel l livestock. The figure of 5.90 of 1979wa s thusa belo waverag e inventoryvalue . Since 1979, the sizeo f theher dha sbee ngraduall y building up, reaching the peak of 7.92 TLU/farmearl y 1983. Thegrowt h rateo f theher d averaged 8%pe ryea r during thisperiod . During 1983,cro pyield s faileddu e to drought and frost. Many farmers sold livestock,especiall y sheep,an d the average holdingdecline d to7.1 1 TLU in1984 . Totalmetaboli cweigh t ranged from 429.63 kgpe r farm in197 9 to 592.97k g in1983 ,declinin g to 528.85 in1984 . Themea n metabolic weight during the studyperio dwa s 518 kg/farm. Theaverag eher d and flock structurewa sa s inTabl e 4.17. Oxen constituted 20%o f theherd , cows24% ,an dbull s 10%. Flocks consisted of 44%ewes , 36%lamb san donl y 5% rams. Table 4.17.: Herd and Flock Structure Herd Composition (%) Oxen Bulls Cows Immatures Calves 20 10 24 28 18 Flock Composition (%) Ewes Rams Lambs Young stock Castrated male 44 5 36 12 3 Immature animalsmad eu p 46%o f the cattle herd and 48%o f the flock. The low fraction ofoxe n inth e cattleher d indicates that the area islikel y tob e self sufficient inoxen . For eachox ,ther e are four backup stock. As a ruleo f thumb,a regionwher e theproportio n of oxen inth e cattle herd ishighe r than 30%,ca nb e considered a deficit area (Sandford,persona l communication). Sucha nare aneed s to import oxent o satisfy itsneed s for animal power. The averagevalu e of the livestock herdwa s 1,614 Birr per farm. While 2%o f the farmersdi d notow nan y livestock, themaximu m value owned by any farmerwa s 4,170 Birr. Therewa sa strong positive correlation between cultivated area and livestock holding. Thiswa s already reported byGryseel s and Assamenew (1985). When livestock holdingswer e converted into livestock weights foreac h groupo f farms,averag e liveweight per farmwa s 855k g inGrou p I,1,67 7 kg inGrou p II,1,90 0 kg inGrou p IIIan d 2,645k g in Group IV (Figure 4.7.). 87 Figure 4.7.: Liyeweighto fLivestoc k Holdingb yFarme ran dAre a Cultivated Ó2ÜÜ- 2800- 2645 K\\WS > 2400- ^ E o 2000 - 1900 \\^NX 1677 .y'i6oo- ^^ 1 \v\V\\ — 1200- 855 800- $^ 400- s \\V NN^XN VSV ^ o- ^ SS^ ^ \$S^ <1.6h a 1.6<3h a 3<4h a => 4h a area cultivated This stratificationwa sunifor macros sth edifferen t livestock holdings. Thenumbe ro fcattl e ranged from4. 3i nGrou pI t o10. 7 in Group IV, small ruminants from6. 1t o18.3 ,an dequine s from1. 8t o4. 7 per farm (Figure 4.8.). Inothe rwords ,th ehighe rth enumbe ro fanimal s owned,th elarge r the area cultivated,an dvic eversa . The reasonfo rthes e correlationsar etwofold . Themor e cattlea farmer owns,th emor edraugh t powerh eha sa thi sdisposal ,enablin ghi m to cultivatemor e land. Theextr a land cultivated intur nproduce smor e cropby-product s sucha sstraws ,whic har eth emajo r sourceo fanima l feed. Thisextr a feedallow smor eanimal st ob ekept . Theimpac to f area cultivatedo nth eproductio no fcerea l strawsi sillustrate di n Figure 4.9. Farmerso fGrou pI produc epe ryea ro naverag e76 8k g dry mattero fcerea l straw,Grou pI I1,38 5kg ,2,07 5k gi nGrou p IIIan d 2,090k gi nGrou pIV . 88 Figure 4.8.: Livestock Holdingb yFarme ran dAre a Cultivated k\| <1.6 no £x3 1.6<3 ho Y/\ 3<4 ho NSSy =>4 ho smoll ruminants Source: Gryseelsan dAssamene w (1985) Figure 4.9.: Productiono fCerea l Strawb yFarme ran dAre a Cultivated 2100 .6<3 he 3<4 he area cultivated 89 4.5.3. Livestock Husbandry Livestock ofmixe d speciesar eherde d and grazed duringmos t of theday . An analysiso fgrazin g records indicatesn o significant difference between grazing time ofdifferen t livestock species,excep t oxendurin gwork . Ingeneral ,livestoc k are kept ina "kraal"nex t ot thehomestea d atnight ,an ddrive nou t toth epasture san d stubble at between 8an d 9a.m . Theyar e herdedb yyoun gboy san d girlso fag e between 5an d 12. Animalsar e keptgrazin gunti l justbefor e sunset,o r about 8 to1 0hour spe rday . After the cropharvest ,cattl ean d equinesar eneede d for threshingan dgrazin g time forthes especie s reducesaccordingly . During thisperiods ,thes eanimal swil l grazeonl y 4t o6 hour spe rday . There isn o significant difference inth e time theanimal s graze on individually allocated grazing land,an d on thecommuna l grazingland . Onaverag e animalsgraz e 49%o f the time on theprivat e grazing land,49 % on the communal land,an d 2%o f stubblegrazin g of individual cropland. Therear e strong seasonalpattern s inth eus eo fgrazin g land. Frommid-Februar y tillearl yJun emos to f thegrazin g iso n communal land,whil e frommid-Jul y till earlyDecembe r the grazing iso nth e individually allocated land. Thisca nb eattribute d toth e type of land. Communal grazing land isusuall y located inth ebottomlan dwhic h is seasonally floodeddurin g themai n rainyseason . The animals evenmov e toth ehillsides ,whic h aremostl y individually allocated. Hay ismad e fromlat eSeptembe r toNovembe r fromth e individual pasture land. Because of labour shortages,ha y cutting is frequently done late,resultin g in rapidlydeclinin gha yquality . Stubble grazing occursafte r theharves t fromth e end ofOctobe r till January,an d some after thebel gharves t inJune . Working oxenan d cows inmil k get supplementary feeding atnight . Themai n feed typesar ebarle yan dwhea t straw,gras shay ,gree n grass fodder,sal t licks (Amole salt), and "atela" (residue frombee r brewing). Theyar e also fed grass fromweeding sdurin g September,an d ifther e isa belg crop,i nMay . Salt isgive ndurin g the rainy season inJul yan d August. Working oxenge t thehighes t amounto fha yan d straw. The difference with theamoun tgive n tolactatin g cows is statistically significant (P<0.01). Hay ismainl y givendurin g thedr y season. Straw is fedmostl ydurin g the rainyseaso no fbel g andmeher . Very little straw isgive ndurin g thedr y seasonbecaus e farmers think animalswil l require toomuc hwate r then. Livestock arehoweve r allowed toea t straw from the threshing areadurin g the threshing period. Salt lickso r "amole"sal t isonl y given occasionally. Whenever a localbee rbre w ("Telia")i smade ,th e residueknow na s "atella" isgive n toworkin g oxen,cow s inmil k andcalves . Farmersar e critically shorto f feed at theen d of thedr y season and thebeginnin g of the rainy season. Hay supplieswil l be depleted, thepasture shav eno tye tpicke du p theeffect so f the rains,an d the demand for feedparticularl y foroxe n ishig hbecaus e of the start of the working season. As a result,animal s rapidly lostweigh tdurin g the dry season. Whereas themea noxe nweigh twa s27 5kg ,thi sdecline d to24 0k g 90 inJuly ,bu t increasedt o29 4k gdurin gDecembe rwhe ncro pby-product s andha ywer eplentifu lavailable . Givena naverag eholdin go f7.6 6 TLUo ra naverag e liveweighto f 1,915 kg,th emea n feed requirement is4 8k go fD M feeda day ,o r atota l of 17,478k go f feeda year . Totalproductio ni na norma lyea rwil lb e approximately 1,700 kgo fcerea l straw,1,20 0k go fhay ,an d2,50 0k g fromnatura lpastures ,o ra tota lo f5,40 0k go f feed. Only 31%o fth e theoretical requirementsar e thusmet ,assumin g feed requirementst ob e 2.5%o fbodyweight . Farmerswit h smallholding shav e surplusfee d however. This isillustrate d inTabl e 4.18. Farmerswit h 1-4 livestock have substantiallymor e feedtha n required,whil e farmershavin gmor e than1 1 livestock facea majo r shortagewhic hgive sa feedbalanc e according toth e sizeo fth e livestock holdings. Farmerswh od ono thav e sufficientfee dwil lpurchas e strawan dha yo nth emarket ,o rwil lgiv e outanimal s in "Ribi"arrangements . Table 4.18.: FeedBalanc e (% FeedAvailable/Fee dRequired )1 / 1980 1981 1982 1983 Farmerswit h1- 4 livestock 179 259 326 319 Farmerswit h 5-10 livestock 112 155 87 257 Farmerswit h 11-20livestoc k 55 104 55 76 Farmerswit hmor e than2 0livestoc k 42 58 38 39 1/ Feed requirementestimate da s2.5 %o fbodyweigh t inD Mequivalent . Feedavailabl ewa sestimate d asaggregat e inD Mequivalen to f cereal strawan dha yproduced ,an destimate d feedavailabilit y fromgrazing . 4.5.4. Livestock Productivity 4.5.4.1. Cattle Themea nweigh to fadul t femalecattl ewa s20 0+ 34k g1/ ,an d the meanbodyweigh to fworkin goxe n27 5+ 43kg . This isTes stha n reported byAlberr oan dHail eMaria m (1982aan db )an dMukass a (1982). The average ageo f cowso ncontro l farmswa s9. 5 years. Of these,67 %wer e rearedo nth e farm,29 %wer epurchase dan d 4%gifts . Cowsar ekep tt o produce replacementoxe nan dmilk . Averagemil k offtakeha sbee n estimated at29 2+ 2 7k g fora lactatio n lengtho f6. 5months . Agea t firstcalvin gwa s6 1month so r fiveyear san don emonth . Calfmortalit y ratewa s 21.7%. The surveyals o indicated thato f the calvestha tdied ,10 %di d soa tth eag eo f lesstha n1 month ,16 %betwee n 1 to2 months ,48 %a tth eag eo f 3t o6 month san d 26%betwee n6 month s and 1year . The farmersstate d the causest ob e 13%du e tobloat ,16 % 1/ Figurespresente dar emea nan d standarddeviation . 91 duet ofee d shortage,19 %diarrhoea ,6 % footan dmout hdiseas e and in47 % the reasonwa sno tknown . Theoveral lcalvin g intervalwa sestimate d at 23months : 27month sbetwee n firstan d second lactation,2 2month s between secondan d third,2 0month sbetwee nthir dan d fourthan d2 2 monthsbetwee n fourthan d fifthlactation . The lengtho flactatio nwa s between 6an d 7months . Dailymil kyield s ranged froma naverag eminimu m of0. 6 kg/dayt oa naverag emaximu mo f2. 3 kg/day. Cowswer e servedb ynatura lmatin gan da t randomdurin ggrazin gb y bullso floca l zebubreed . Thereappear st ob en oshortag e ofmatur e bulls. The ratiobetwee ncow san dmatur ebull swa s2.5:1 ,whic h iswel l belowth ebull' scapacity . Thehighes tconceptio n rateswer e observed betweenDecembe ran dJanuary ,whe n feed supplies inth epasture sar e plentyan dwhe ncro p residuesar eavailabl e fromthreshin gactivities . Calvingoccur smainl y fromSeptembe r toNovember ,afte r themene r rains (seeFigur e 4.10.). Figure 4.10.: Seasonalityo fCalvin g (% ofCalve sBorn/Month ) 20 15 O -Q l/) 0) >1 0 o o o „ s ' \ \ 5- wN NN w x\\ N ^N \\N \ V N^ NN month 92 Calfbirt h andweanin gweight swer e notmeasure d inth e survey, buthav ebee nestimate d byMukass a (1981)unde r similar conditions tob e 21an d 46k g respectively. Preweaning averagedail ygai n (ADG)wa s estimated at 92g pe r kg. Yearlingweigh twa s 59kg ,givin g apos t weaningAD Go f 146gAg - Weaning isdon eusuall ya t 3t o6 month so f age. Calvesar e fedb y suckling themother . Theamoun to fmil k consumed by the calfwa sno tmeasured . No reliableestimate s are available inth e literature althoughMukass a (ibid)o n thebasi so f personal communications estimates ita ta nextr a 1.21 ofmil k for every one recovered forhuma n consumption. Thiswoul d bring total lactation yield to64 2kg . Invie wo f the competitionbetwee n the calfan d the farmer's family for thedam' smilk ,th ecal f isofte n sentt ograz e in thepasture searlie r thandesirable ,increasin g the risk forexposur e to disease andparasites . Using the conversion ratesdevelope d by Montsma (1962), who estimatedmil k consumptionb y calveso n thebasi so f calf growth,cal f intake could be estimated at 196k go fmilk . Meanmil k production of local Zebucow sca nthe nb eestimate d at 488k gpe r lactation. Entiremale s tob euse d asdraugh toxe nar e castrated at 4t o5 yearso f agewhe n theyar ephysicall ymature . Then theyhav e aworkin g lifeo f 5t o6 years ,an d theyar e replaced at theag e of 10o r11 . Invie wo f thehig haltitud e locationo f theBas oan dWoren a Wereda, infectiousdisease sar eno ta majo r constraint to livestock production inth earea . Since 1982,animal sar evaccinate d against rinderpestb yextensio n agentso f theMinistr y ofAgriculture . Themajo r animal healthproblem sar e infestation of endo-parasites sucha s liverfluke,lungwor man d intestinalworm ,cause db ywaterin g the animals atwate r spots in seasonally flooded orwaterlogge dbottomlands . Liverfluke (Fasciol ahepaticia ) isa n important factor causing mortality of sheepan dyoun g cattle. Infection isacquire d by grazing on swampy areasan dborder s of temporarypond san d streams (Gemechuan dMamo ,1979 ; Erich, 1983),whic h represent thehabita t of the intermediate snailhost . The intensity of liverfluke infestation ingrazin g animals ismos t acute duringOctobe r andNovember . Erich (Ibid)observe d that liverfluke was acquired fromth e firstda yo fgrazin g onbottomlan d areaswit h favourable snailhabitats . Occasional outbreaksoccu r of infectious diseases sucha sblac k leg,anthrax ,pasteurolosis ,an d footan d mouth disease. Thewate r requirements of animalsma yvar y considerably according toth e climate and ecology, livestock speciesan d age,th e typeo f feed rations available and theproductivit y ofanimal s for thevariou s purposes theyar euse d (Williamson and Payne,1978 ;Maynar d et al, 1978). Assuming aminima l requirement of 30litre so fwate r perTLU ,an d given the average holding of6.9 2 TLU,th eaverag e herdwil l require 208 litres everyday . The herdsboywil l let theanimal swate r once or twice ada y depending on thedistanc e tob e covered. According toSteinfel d (1984) the correlationbetwee ndistanc e and frequency ofwaterin g is significant. For theDebr eBerha narea ,h e found thata s froma distance 93 of 1,600 m, farmerschang e froma waterin g twicepe rday-patter n toonc e aday . The frequency ofwaterin gb y classo f cattlean db y season is indicated inTabl e 4.19. Table 4.19.: Frequency ofWaterin g byClas so fCattl ean db y Season( %o f Farmers) Season Type of cattle Watering frequency Dry season Belg Meher Once/day 49 47 12 Cow Twice/day 47 49 16 Not restricted 4 4 72 Once/day 49 29 12 Working oxen Twice/day 47 67 16 Not restricted Source: Steinfeld (1984) The information presented inTabl e 4.19. suggests that there isn o significantdifferenc e inth ewaterin g ofcow san doxe ndurin g thedr yo r meher seasons. However,mor e attention isgive n toworkin g oxen during thebel g season. Thisma yb edu e tobette r carebecaus e ofth e importance of land preparationwhic h requires theoxe n ingoo dworkin g condition. Springsan d riversar e themai nwate r sourcesdurin g the day and belg season. During themehe rmos therd s obtaindrinkin gwate r from naturaldepression s around thehomesteads . 4.5.4.2. Small Ruminants Sheepar enumericall y themos t important species, Per farmther e areo naverag e 11sheep ,agains tonl y 6.2 cattle,2. 8 equinesan d 2.7 poultry. Sheepar ealmos texclusivel y fromth e "Menz"bread . Small holder farmershav evariou sobjective swit h the sheepenterprise . First theyar e themos t important source of investment,securit yan d cash income. Some farmershav elarg e flocksan dhav eu pt o4 5sheep . Sheep arepurchase d and sold according toth ecas h flowsituatio n andneed s of the farmer. Around 40%o f the farmers cash income from trade inanimal s canb e attributed to the saleo f sheep. Second, sheepprovid e the farmer familieswit hmeat . Onaverag e each farmer family slaughtersa sheep three timesa year . Third, sheepar e important for the supplyo fmanure . During thedr y season it iscollecte d from thenigh t shelter of the flock,mixe dwit h cattlemanur e andprepare d intodun g cakes that are used as fuel inth ehousehold . During the rainy season themanur e collected isofte nwe t andmixe dwit hmu dwhic hmake s itdifficul t tous e as fuel. It isthe nuse d tofertiliz e cropland. During theda y sheepar e grazed andherde dwit h the other livestock species. At night theyar ebrough t back toth ehomestea d for protection against predators. Farmerswit h small flockskee p their sheep with other livestock but farmerswit h larger flocks (more than 10 sheep) mostly keepthei r flocks separately fromothe r species. Pregnant ewes arehouse d separately during the last fewweek s ofpregnancy . 94 Themai n feed source for sheep isnativ epastur e grazing,an d like theothe r livestock species thisca nb ebot ho n individual and communal pasture land,o n fallow land and on stubble fields. Grazing isdon e for 8-9 hourspe rday ,wit hpe r 75%o f flocksonc epe rda ywaterin g at mid-day (Steinfeld, 1984). Only inperiod so f severe feed stresswil l sheepb egive n some hay or straw supplement. Heavilypregnan t ewesma yoccasionall y get a supplement inth e formo f "atela"waste ,ha yo r straw,o r small amounts ofgrain . Themai ndisease sar e liverfluke,coenurus ,diarrha e and anthrax. Most farmerswil l occasionally treat sheepagains t liverfluke and lungworm. However,ofte n thedrug sar eno tavailable ,o r the farmers lack cash for thepurchase . Liverfluke isth edominan t cause of sheep mortality. Most farmershav ea t leaston e ram runningwit h the flock throughout theyear . Mating isb ynatura l service. Ramsar e usually used for service for the first timea tabou t 12month so f age,an d taken outo f service for castration or for sale at theeruptio n of the second pair ofpermanen t incessors,usuall y atabou t 2yea r (Agyemang et al, 1985). Exceptionally good ramsar eno t takenou to f serviceunti l about fouryea r ofage . Most farmers castrate the ramsa ta nag e thatvarie s from the appearance of the secondpai r ofpermanen t incessors toth eappearanc e of the fourthpai r of incessors,o rbetwee n 2an d 4year so fag e (Ibid). Castration isdon e for thepurpos e of fattening animals,i norde r to fetcha highe r pricewhe n sold. Supplementary feed isprovide d inth e last fewweek sbefor esale . An importantaspec t of sheepmanagemen t inth eBas oan dWoren a Wereda isth eexistenc eo f "Ribi"arrangements ,i.e .multipl e ownership, or a separation ofmanagemen t andownershi po fanimals . Farmerswh o do nothav e sufficient feedwil l lend femaleanimal s tofarmer swit h surplus feed. The recipient farmerwil lmanag e the animal,an dwil l receive half theoffsprin g return. Usually sheeponl yar eexchange d inRib i systems, althoughoccasionall y cattlear eexchange d also. Approximately 47%o f farmsha d at leaston eRib i animal. Farmerswit h smaller flockshav e proportionally moreRib ianimals . As the sheepbree d iso f theMen z type,i tdoe sno tproduc ewoo l buthair . Only fewfarmer shav e the skill toshea r sheep,an d this task istherefor emostl y performed bycraftsme n from theMen z area,wh opa y farmersBir r 0.15 foreac h sheep sheared andwh ous e thehai r for craftingpurposes . Themai n reason fora farmer tohav ehi s sheep sheared ist ohav e itcleane d fromexterna l parasites sucha s ticks,an d mud. Theproductivit y of sheepo nth e 42contro l farmsdurin g 1983 and 1984wa sa s inTabl e 4.20. 95 Table 4.20.: SheepProductivit y 1983 1984 N N Lambing% 259 119 198 123 Ewemortalit y 31 14.1 14 9.0 Lambmortalit y 71 27.5 42 21.0 Sheepmortalit y 89 18.0 55 15.1 Lambingpercentag eo fth eshee pfloc kowne db ycontro l farmerswa s 119% (i.e.1.1 9lamb sbor npe rew epe ryear) . Thisfigur e increasedt o 123% in1984 . Thissligh t increasema yhav ebee ndu et obette r feed availability resulting fromhighe r rainfalldurin g1984 . Thepea k lambing seasonwa sfro mSeptembe rt oNovembe ran d relativelyequall ydistribute d duringth eres to fth eyea r (Figure 4.11). Conception ratesincrease dbetwee nApri lan dJune . Figure 4.11.: Seasonalityo fLambin g (Lambing %/Month) 20 \\ \ - \ \ \xX 15 k^ t^ \\ \\" x\\ i\\\ en ^ •J" 9.5 kxN t a k^ ^ fl K\\ kv^ ^ !\k '\\^ I v k' ! 1 k\N KN iN'-C \v i\> Nk ,R, > w .k^i X-N ikyi R>NK\ N "T -£ month 96 Controlled breedingwa sno tpractised . Mortality ishighes t during thedr y seasonbecaus e of cold temperatures and feedstress . DuringOctobe r toJanuar ynigh t temperaturesma ydro p toa slo wa s- 7 C, causing substantial lambmortalit y due topneumonia . This seasonality of mortality is indicated inTabl e 4.21. In198 4 therewer e no short rains and theperio d February toMa ywa sexceptionall y dry,causin g severe feed shortagesan dhig hmortalit ydurin g thatperiod . Table 4.21.: Seasonality ofMortalit y of Sheepan d Lambs (% of Flock, 1983-1984) 1983 1984 Period Lambs Sheep Lambs Sheep Feb.- May 7.0 6.3 11.6 6.8 June- Sept . 6.0 3.5 4.4 3.1 Oct. -Jan . 14.5 8.2 5.0 5.2 Total 27.5 18.0 21.0 15.1 Sheepmortalit ywa s lowest fromJun e toSeptembe r due toth e availability of feedan d thewarme rweathe rdurin g thisperiod . Themai n causeo fmortalit y of sheep isliverfluke . On thebasi so f discussions with farmers,an dveterinar y staffo f theMinistr y ofAgriculture , iti s estimated that70 %o f sheepmortalit y isdu e toliverfluke . On the basis of tracer lambexperiments ,Eric h (1983)observe d thatal l sheep infected with liverflukedie dwithi n 16-25week safte r thebeginnin g of the experiment. 4.6. Labour Usean d TimeAllocatio n 4.6.1. Introduction Thehuma n labour required tooperat e farmholding saroun d Debre Berhan ischaracterize d by strong seasonality for cropproduction ,whil e remaining relativelyconstan t for livestock production. Almost all labour issupplie d byth e familyhousehold ,excep tdurin gpea k periodso f field activities,mainl ydurin gharvesting ,whe nextr a labourma y be hired. Farmersals oofte nexchang e labour,b yassistin g eachothe r on alternate,days . Allphysicall y ablemember so f thehousehol d participate infar mwork . Tasksca nb e grouped as labour for crop production (seedbedpreparation ,planting ,weeding ,harvestin g and transport of the produce toth ehomestead , threshing,winnowin g and storing), livestock production (milking, feeding,herding ,shearing ,manur e collection,bar n clearing,ha ymakin g and forageproduction , etc.), marketing, domestic chores,far mmaintenanc e and communal farmwork . As indicated in Section 4.1.,th eaverag e family size is4. 6 people,consistin g of2 adult san d 2.6 children,o r 2.9Adul t Equivalents (AE). There issom e specialization by age and sex. Fieldwor k for crops ismostl ydon e by adultmales . Women and childrenassis t inth eweedin g and harvesting of crops, aswel l as inth e transport of theproduce . Livestock labour is supplied mostlyb ywome nan dchildren ,wh oals operfor mmos to f the household tasks. 97 4.6.2. Labour Inputsi nCro pProductio n The farmwor k schedulefo rfiel d cropsi sdictate db yth e agricultural calendarwhic hi sstrongl y influencedb yth edistributio no f precipitation. Seedbedpreparatio n startswit hth eonse to fth esmal l rainsan dcontinue s tillen do fJun ewhe nmos tcrop sar eplanted . The peak labourmonth sar edurin gth eharves tperio d fromNovembe rt o January. Duringth ethre eyear so ffiel dcollectio no flabou rdata , therewa slittl evariatio ni nth eaverag eamoun to flabou r suppliedt o cropproductio ndurin gth emehe r season: 873hours/far mdurin g 1979,90 9 hours/farmdurin g198 0an d89 1hours/far mdurin g 1981. Thisi s illustrated inFigur e4.12 . Figure 4.12.: Distributiono fLabou r Inputsfo rCro pProductio n (Hours ofLabou rpe rFar mpe r Month) Labour inputsfo rcro p production (Debre Berhan, 1979-81) 1979 1980 1981 1981 (Meher) (Meher) (Belg) (Meher) 200 Hours/farm 180 160 140 «V «V «\ 120- - During the period of data collection there was only one belg season, in 1981, and on average of 72 hours of labour per farm was used during this early season of crop production. However, there were variations between farms and between PAs as indicated in Table 4.22. 98 Table 4.22.: Labour Inputsi nCro pProductio n (1979-1981) 100 Crops forth emene r seasonar eplante d fromth een do fMa ytil l earlyJuly . Usuallybarle y issow nearl yJune ,hors ebean san d field peasmid-June ,lentil sen do fJun e toearl yJuly ,whea tearl yJuly ,whil e for linseed there isa sprea d inmoda lplantin gdate s fromth een do fMa y toth een do fJun e (Table 4.26.). Table 4.26.: Modal PlantingWeek sfo rMajo r Crops 1/ Barley Wheat Horsebean s F.peas Lentils Linseed rangemod e rangemod e rangemod e rangemod e rangemod e rangemod e 1979(M) 19-32 21 21-31 27 19-30 25 21-28 25 24-31 27 19-28 19 1980(M) 19-28 24 23-29 27 21-28 25 21-28 24 23-28 26 21-26 26 1981(B) 10-15 12---- ______1981(B) 20-30 24 21-30 28 21-29 26 22-29 24 24-30 27 20-26 21 1/ Valuesar ewee knumber so ftim eo fplantin gfo rth emehe r (M)an dbel g (B)seasons . Except for linseed,ther e islittl e interannualvariatio no nth emoda l valueo f theplantin gweek . Thisconfirm sobservation s thatth e timing of theonse to fmai n rainsha sbee n similar throughout1979-81 . The labour requirements for thebel gcroppin g seasonar e small,a s onlya limitedare ao flan d isbein gcultivate d (onaverag e250 0m2 / farm). Landpreparatio no fbel gcrop ,almos texclusivel ybarley ,i s plantedmid-Marc han dharveste d aroundJuly . Unlessth e farmer isshor t ofgrain ,h ema yno tthres hth ecro punti lDecember-January , together with themehe rcrops . Harvestingo fth ecrop si sdon ewit h sicklest ocu tth ecro p stalks. The cutting isusuall ydon eb yadul tmen ,whil e adult females andchildre nhau l theunthreshe d cropwit hdonkey st oa stalking ground near thehomestead . Table 4.27.: ModalHarvestin gWeek s forMajo r Crops 1/ Barley Wheat Horsebean sFiel dpea s Lentils Linseed rangemod e rangemod e rangemod e rangemod e rangemod e rangemod e 1979(M)38-5 2 42 41-54 49 40-51 46 43-50 44 41-50 43 40-50 47 1980(M)42-5 9 45 46-57 50 44-51 47 40-50 43 43-51 46 48-59 52 1981(B)25-2 9 27---- ______1981(M)45-5 3 46 47-56 50 45-55 47 45-53 46 45-48 46 50-56 52 1/ Valuesar ewee k numberso fth etim eo fharvestin g for themehe r (M)an d belg (B)seasons . Theharvestin g ofbarle y isusuall y frommid-Octobe r toearl y November,fiel dpea sa tth een do fOctober ,lentil san dhors ebean searl y tomid-November ,whea ta tth ebeginnin g ofDecembe r and linseed towards theen do fth esam emont h (Table 4.27.). Threshingo fcrop s isdon e 101 after harvesting,an dcontinue s throughoutJanuar yan dFebruary . However, farmerswh oar eno ti nimmediat enee do fgrain ,ma ydela yth e threshingt oavoi dth esocia l obligationo flendin g graint opoo r neighbourso rrelatives ,o rfro m fearo fexhibitin gwealt han dtherefor e havingt opa yhighe rtaxes . Table 4.28.: MonthlyDistributio no fLabou r Inputsfo r Crop Production byActivit y (Hrs/Farm,Mea n 1979-1981)1 / Seeding and Harvesting Threshin g Month S.B.P.2 /Gui e fertilizing Weeding and transport and storing Total 1 17 1 _ _ 71 59 148 2 29 8 - - 16 58 111 3 44 5 3 - 4 11 67 4 40 4 1 - - 1 46 5 24 10 - - - 34 6 9 14 43 - - 66 7 1 3 51 1 10 66 8 - - 12 7 4 23 9 4 - - 26 - 30 10 28 - - 13 5 46 11 18 - - - 66 2 86 12 4 - - - 145 26 175 Total 218 45 110 47 321 157 898 1/ Duringth eperio do fdat a collection,ther ewa sonl yon ebel g season. the figuresar etherefor et ounderestimat e labour inputsfo ryear swit ha belg season. 2/ S.B.P.= seedbe d preparation. Themonthl ydistributio no flabou r inputspe ractivit yi s presented inTabl e 4.28. Someo fth eseedbe dpreparatio nan dploughin g starts immediately afterth eharvest ,whe nth esoi l still contains some moisturean dca neasil yb eploughed . Mosto fth eploughin gi sdon ea t theonse to fth eearl y rainsi nMarch . Guiepreparation sar ei nMay / June. Theplantin go fmene r cropsi spredominatel y donedurin gJun ean d July,whil e belg cropsar eplante di nMarch . Only littleweedin gi s carried out,mainl ydurin g September. Thebul ko flabou r inputsar e for harvestingan dtranspor twhic h takesplac e fromNovembe rt oJanuary . Childrenan dadul tme nwil l thenb equit e busy threshing,winnowin gan d storing. Thebusies tmonth sar eDecembe ran dJanuary ,whil eAugus ti s themont hwit hth elowes tactivity . Although adultmale sprovid emos to fth elabou r incro p production, femalesassis tmainl ywit hth eharvesting ,an dchildre nwit h theharvestin gan dthreshing . During harvestingswhe n available family labour supplieswil lno tb esufficien tfo rth eneeds ,additiona l labour ishired ,o rassistanc e sought throughexchang e systems. Eachyear , around50 %o fth efarmer shire d some labourfo rcro pproduction . The costo fhirin g labouri saroun d Birr 2/dayi nadditio nt oprovidin g lunch. Labourwa shire dfo ra naverag e totalo f7 day spe ryear , costing Birr1 4pe rfar mpe ryear . Around twothird so fth ehire d labourwil lb e for harvestingan dthreshin g activities,an dpredominantl y forplot s plantedwit hbarle y (73%),hors ebean s (13%)an dwhea t(8%) . 102 Table 4.29.: Useo fFemale ,Child ,Hire dan d ExchangeLabou r (Hrs/Farm) Female Child Hired Exchange Seedbed preparation 13 5 17 Guie - 8 3 5 Seedingan d fertilizing 1 10 5 9 Weeding 14 7 6 3 Harvestingan d transport 49 49 31 44 Threshing and storing 8 30 8 14 Total 72 108 58 92 Farmerswil lassis teac hothe rwit hexchang e labourdurin gth e busyperiod so f seedbedpreparatio nan dplantin ga swel l asdurin g harvesting and threshing. Theus eo ffemale ,child ,hire dan dexchang e labour ispresente d inTabl e 4.29. Correlationanalysi sha s indicated thatther e issom eeffec to f familysiz eo nth eare acultivated ,bu tno ta strongone . There isa significanteffec thoweve ro f labour inputspe rh ao n theproductivit y of wheatan dbarle y (P<0.05). Thenon-significanc e oflabou r inputsa sa causalvariabl e ofth eproductivit y ofpulses ,i sprobabl y linked toth e strong impactfros tha so nth eyiel do fpulses . Pulseyield sar ever y variable asa resulto f frost incidence,thereb ydistortin g thepositiv e effectso f labourinputs . Correlationanalysi sha sals oshow n thatthos e farmswit h the highest labour inputsals ohav e thehighes tamoun to fgrai nproduction . Labour inputsd ono tdiffe r significantlyb yth e sizeo f farms. Smaller farmsd ono tus emor e labour ona pe rhectar ebasi stha n largerfarms . Culturalan d religious factorslimi tth efiel dwor k ofthi sCopti c Christian farmers,wh oobserv ebetwee n 150an d 200religiou sholiday s eachyear . These restrictionsmostl y relate toan yactivit y that involvesth ebreakin go fth e soil. Around DebreBerhan ,15 7Saints 'Day s arebein gobserve d annuallyno t including Sundays,o nwhic h fieldwor k mayals ono tb eperformed . The incidenceo fchurc hholiday s ispresente d inTabl e 4.30.an d Figure 4.13. Thenumbe r ofnon-workin gday sdu et o religious factors includingSunday saverage sapproximatel y 180day seac h year. Themonth swit h thelarges tnumbe ro fSaints 'Day sar eJuly , Augustan d September (Hamle,Nehas ean dMeskerem) . Thisma yexplai nwh y solittl eeffor twen t intoweedin g of fieldcrops . Farmersbeliev e that ifthe ywor k ona religiousholida yGo dwil lpunis h themwit hhail , drought orothe r hazards. The restrictions thatappl ydurin g these religiousday sar eno tunifor man dver ymuc hdepen d onth eview so fth e localpriest . Duringcertai nday sonl ythos e activitiesar eprohibite d which involvebreakin g the soil,whil e forexampl eha ycuttin gan d livestock production areno taffected . Onothe r days,al l agricultural labour activitieswil l beprohibited . Ingeneral ,livestoc k production ismuc h lessaffecte d by religious restrictions thancro pactivities . 103 Table 4.30.: Saints'Day san dReligiou sHoliday si nth eBas oan dWoren a Wereda2 / Months1 / Saintnam e M T H T T Y M M G S H N P Ledet a h w w w w w w w h w w/h w w Perrekelitos h h w w w w w w w w w/h w w Bahta h/w 4/ w w w w w w w w w h h h Hawaria. w w w h h w w w w/h h h w w Abo* v h h h h h h h h h h h h w Eyesus w w h w h w w w w w w w Sellassie* h h h h h w w w w h h h Abakiros h/w w w w w w w w w w w/h h Ababorsema w w w w w w w w w w w w Meskelyesus h w w w w w w w w w h w Kidistahanna h w w w h w w w w w h h Michael* h h h h h h h h h h h h Egziarab* h h h h h h h h h h h h Aregaye h/w w w w w w w w w w w/h h Cherkos w w w w w w w w w w w w Kidenemeheret w w w w w w w w w w h h Estifanos h w w w w w w w w w w h Hawaria w w h w h w w w w h h h Gebriel* h h h h h h h h h h h h - w w w w w w w w w w w h Mariam* h h h h h h h h h h h h - w h w h w w w w h w w w Giorgis* h h h h h h h h h h h h Abatekle w w w h w w w w h w h h Markoriyos w w w w w w w w h w w/h w - w w w w w w w w h w w w Medhanealem* h h h h h h h h h h h h Amanuel h w w h w w w w h w w/h w Balewold* h h h h h h h h h h h h Yohanis w w w w w w w h w w w w N ofholiday s 15 11 11 14 13 9 8 15 11 22 18 1 1/ M- Meskere m (September),T » Tikem t (October),H = Heda r (November), T= Tahesa s (December),T = Ti r(January) ,Y = Yekati t (February),M = Magabit (March),M = Miyazi a (April),G - Ginbo t (May),S - Sene (June),H = Haml e (July),N = Nehas e (August),P = Pagume . Ethiopia followsth eJulia nCalenda rwhic hconsist so f1 2month so f3 0day s andon emont h 'pagume'o f5 days ,o r6 day si na lea pyear . EthiopianNe wYear sDa yi so nth eequivalen to f1 2Septembe ro fth e Gregoriancalendar . 2/ w= workin gday ,h = holiday ,Sunday sar eno tincluded . 3/ *obligator yholiday sfo ral lfarmers . 4/ h/wholida yo rwor kdependin go nth eview so fth eloca lpriest . 104 Themea nnumbe ro fdays i na yea r thatcontro l farmersdi dno t performan yagricultura l activitywa s70+4 . Thelo wvalu eo fth e standard deviation indicates thatalmos tal lfarmer s followedth e restrictions ina simila rmagnitude . Theincidenc ean dimpac to f religiousholiday so nagricultura l productioni sals odiscusse db yKiro s (1976). Figure 4.13.: Incidenceo fReligiou sHoliday sPe rMont h 25- X religious holidays other days (including Sundays) 20- 15- 10- Ä o -o o •" 'S v a> -c JZ c I 1 4.6.3. Labour Inputsi nLivestoc k Production Labour inputst olivestoc k production consistso feffort s related tomilkin g cows,bar n clearing,manur e collection, sheep shearing, livestock butchering,an dherding ,feedin gan dwaterin go fth eanimals . Themai n labour inputsi nlivestoc k productioni nsmallholde r farmingi nth eDebr eBerha nare aar esummarize d inTabl e 4.31. Themea n monthly labour inputi s44 9hrs/farm , ranging from40 2hour si nFebruar y 105 to52 1hour si nDecember . Thepea k labourmonth s relatedt o livestock productionar e fromOctobe r toDecembe rwhe nha y isharvested . During the resto f theyear ,th elabou r flowi srelativel yeven . Overall, livestock labour inputsaverag e 15ma nhour spe rday ,assumin gn oqualit y differencebetwee nchil dan dadul tlabou r input. Labour inputsar e somewhat lowerdurin gth e rainyseaso n (14hrs/day )becaus e of reduced herdingan d increased stallfeeding . Herding Thedominan t labour inputt olivestoc k production isth eherdin g ofanimals . FromNovembe r toMay ,the ygraz e inth ebottomland swhic h are floodeddurin g the rainyseason ,an do nth e stubble fieldsafte r harvestingha stake nplace . FromJun et oOctober ,animal sgraz eo nth e upland pasturesan d thewast e land. Herding isdon eb yyoun gchildren , asfro mth eag eo f6 . Usuallythi swil lb e the responsibilityo fth e sons,althoug hdaughter sma yassist . Inever yhousehold ,a tleas ton e personwil lb eassigne d thespecifi cdut yo fherding . Many familieshav e ahire dbo yo rgir lespeciall ywhe nthe yd ono thav echildre no fthei r own,o r ifthe yar econsidere dwealthy . Oftenthes eher dboy so r girls (moreboy stha ngirls )hav ea family relation toth ehousehold ,althoug h occasionally theyma yals ob e refugeechildre nfro mdrough t stricken areaso roriginatin g fromver ypoo r families. Herdboy san dgirl sar e agedbetwee n6 an d 17,an dear nbetwee n2 0an d 70Bir rpe ryea r in addition tofoo dan d somegrai n ifthe yar eno t related toth efamil y household. When theyar e relativeso fth ehousehold ,the ywil lusuall y only receive food,lodgin gan d clothes,an doccasionall ya sheep . Herding takesabou t 9hour sa day . Itstart sa t8 a.m . and continues till 5p.m . During thedr yseaso nherdin gwil lb e somewhat longer than inth ewe tseason . ManureCollectio nan dDun g Preparation During theherding ,manur edropping swil lb ecollecte d andheaped , while theanimal sar ewatched . Theseanima lwaste sar ethe ntransporte d toth ehomestead . Control farmersundertoo k thisactivit yo naverag e 4 timesa wee k and theproces so fcollectin gmanur e takes1 1/ 2 hoursa day. Onceth emanur e istransporte d toth ehomestead ,i twil lb e processed intodun gcakes . Thisi sdon eb ymixin g theanima lwaste swit h water, strawan d grass,shap e itint ocak e form (ofbetwee n 400an d 500 gramseach )an d leti tdr y inth esun . Thepreparatio no fdun g cakei s anexclusivel y femaleactivity ,o fwife san ddaughters ,bu tusuall yno t bymothers . Sometimesdun gcak emakin g isdon ecollectively . Themakin g ofdun gcake s takesabou ton ehou ra day ,an daroun d 20piece sar emad e perhour . An importantaspec to fdun g cakepreparatio n isth emixin go f the dungwit hwater . Steinfeld (1984)ha sestimate d thato naverag e 28 litreso fwate r perda yar euse d forthi sactivity ,o ra consumptio no f 4.4 litreso fwate r perperso npe rday . Control farmerscollec twate ro naverag e four timesa day . Females carry95 %o fth ewate rused . Thewate r istransporte d ina locallymad e jar ("ensira")mad eo fclay ,an dwhic h iscarrie do nth e 106 back of thewome nwit h thesuppor to fa rope (Steinfeld, ibid). Theonl y caseswher emale swer e involved inwate r collectionwa swhe nth ewif ewa s disabled,o rwhe nthe ywer edivorce d orwidowed . Theaverag edail ytota l amounto fwate r carried forhousehol dpurpose s fromth e source (mainly springs, riverso rnatura lpond so rwate r holesdurin g themeher )t oth e homestead is8 0litres . Themea ndistanc ewalke dwa s 575m oneway ,an d theactivit y tooka naverag eo f12 8minute sa day . According to Steinfeld,ther e isn ocorrelatio nbetwee nth edistanc e fromth e homestead toth ewate r sourcean d theamoun to fwate ruse d forth e variouspurposes ,excep t inth ecas eo fdun gcakes . Water consumption forth epreparatio no fdun gcake sincrease swit hdecreasin gdistanc e to watersource . Cleaning,Feedin gan dMilkin g Another predominantly femaletas k isth ecleanin go fth ebarn . This isdon eb ywife san ddaughters ,an d takeson ehou rpe rda ydurin g thedr y season,an d 1.30 hoursdurin g thewe t season. Thetas k takes longerdurin g the rainyseaso nbecaus emor emanur e isbein gproduce d and because thebar nwil lb edirtier . Thehan d feedingo fanimal s isdon eb yth ehousehol dhead , assisted byhi swif ean d children. Iti sdon etwic ea da yan d ittake s on 3-4minute seac htim et oprovid e the feed. Cowsi nmil k andworkin g oxenar eprovide d additional feed,i nth e field,an d thisthe ntake sa n averageo f1 hou ra day . Equinesar ehandfe donl yonc e inth eevening , takingals o3- 4minute sonly . Sheepar eno thandfed ,excep t occasionally when theyar ebein g fattened forsale . Themilkin go fcow si sdon eprimaril yb ywomen ,althoug h onon e farm infou r thehousehol d headals oundertake sthi sactivity . Ittake s between 5-10minute seac htim ean d isdon e twicea day . Onlyver y few control farmers sellmil k influi d form. Themil ko f localcow si s partlydirectl y consumed,an dpartl yprocesse d intobutte ran dcheese . Theprocessin g ofmil k isdon eonc eo rtwic ea wee kb yth ewome n (wives anddaughters) . Ittake sbetwee n 1.30 hoursan d2.3 0 hours forbutte r makingan da nadditiona l 30minute st omak echeese . There isa direc t correlationbetwee nth e sizeo fth ecattl eholdin g and thetim e spento n milk processing. Theprocessin go fflui dmil k intobutte ran d cheese in theEthiopia nhighland si sdescribe di nO'Mahone y andEphrai mBekel e (1985). Feed Harvesting Oneo f themos tlabou r intensive activitiesassociate dwit h livestock production isth eharvestin go fhay . Thisactivit y takesplac e fromlat eSeptembe r toen dDecember ,whic h isth emos t labour intensive period at the farma si tcoincide swit h theharvestin g ofth emehe r grain crops. After theha y iscut ,b ymean so fa sickle,i ti slef t todr y in the field forabou ta week . Thedrie dha ywil l thenb ebundle d and transported bydonke yt oth edwellin ghous e for storage. Farmerswh oar e shorto f labour,eithe r hire extra labourdurin g thisperiod ,o rdela y the cutting or thetranspor t ofha y till theyfinis h theharves to fgrai n crops. Surveyshav e indicated that thecutting ,stackin gan d transport ofha y takesabou t16 0hrs/ha ,o rbetwee n20 0an d 300hour spe r farm. Farmerswh odela yth eharvestin g andcuttin go fhay ,suffe ra penalty inth e reducedqualit yo f thehay . Proteinconten tdecline s rapidly,whe ncu tafte rearl yOctober ,althoug hth eenerg yconten tma y 107 initially increase. DuringOctobe r there isa trade-off therefore betweenprotei nan denergy ,bu ta s fromNovembe r thequalit yo fbot h declines (Goe,1987) . Farmerswh oar e shorto f labour arethu spenalize d inth equalit yo fhay . Only fewcontro l farmersgre wspecia lpurpos e fodder crops,othe r thanhay . Oats,whic har eusuall y regarded asa fodder crop,ar e grown predominantly forhuma nconsumption . Butchering Butchering ofanimal s isa mal e task,an d associatedwit hmajo r festivalsdurin gwhic hmea t isconsumed . Animals areusuall y soldalive , andar eno tnormall y slaughtered for saleo fth emeat . Efforts associatedwit hbutcherin g should thereforeno tb ecounte d fora labour inputs related tolivestoc k production,rathe ra shousehol dactivities . Control farmersslaughte r between 2an d9 shee pa year ,an dman yhav e oncea yea ra "kircha"o r communal slaughter ofbovine . Insuc ha system,a grou po f8 t o1 0 farmerspurchas ea no xo rothe rbovine , slaughter theanima l anddivid e themeat . Table 4.31.: Labour Inputs inLivestoc k Production (Hrs/Farm) Months Activity Jan Feb Mar Apr May JuneJul yAu g SeptOc t Nov Dec Herding 1/ 295 266 295 285 295 255 263 263 255 263 285 295 Manure collection/2 4 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 Dungpreparatio n3 /3 1 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 Water collectionJ / 22 20 22 21 22 21 22 22 21 22 21 22 Barn cleaning 5/ 31 28 31 30 31 45 47 47 45 47 30 31 Hand feeding 6/ 19 18 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 Milking 434444444444 Milk processing 7/ 15 15 15 15 15 19 19 19 19 19 15 15 Hay cutting ------80 80 80 Total 441 402 441 428 441 417 429 429 417 509 508 521 Assumptions: 1/ Assuming 8.5 hrs/daydurin g thewe t seasonan d9. 5 hrs/daydurin g thedr y season,an donl yon eherder . 2/ Assumingmanur e collection isdon e 4time sa wee k and takes 1.5 hourseac h time. 3/ Dungpreparatio n takesabou ton ehou r perday . ~A/ Onlywate r collection fordun gpreparatio n istake n intoaccount . Animals arebein gwatere ddurin gherding . Otherwate r collection ismainl y for household purposesan dno t included intabulation . 5/ Barn cleaning takeson ehou r perda ydurin g thedr y season,an d 1.30 hour during thewe t season. 6/ Assuming 8minute spe rda y inth ebarn ,an don ehou r ada y for 6month sa year of additional handfeeding ofworkin g oxenan d cows inmilk . 7/ Milk processing isdon eo naverag e 1.5 timesa wee k takingeac h time 2.5 hours. Invie wo fhighe rquantitie so fmil k thatar ebein g produced during thewe t season,labou t inputswil lb ehighe rdurin g thisperiod . 108 Theothe r tasksinvolve d inlivestoc k production require relativelymino r labour inputs. Theyca nb eclassifie d aseffort s related tobreeding ,shee pshearing ,anima lhealth ,an d calfcare . Mosto f thematin go fanimal swil lb ea t random inth e field. Occasionally,a farmerma ytak ea stallio nt oa stu d farmt oproduc e a mule offspring,o rbrin ga co wt oa P Abul lstation . Sheepshearin g isusuall ydon eb yspecialis t shearerswh o come down fromth eMen zare aan dwh owil lpa yth e farmerbetwee n10-2 0cent s per sheepfo r itshair . Only fewfarmer sgiv edrug st othei ranimals ,excep t forth e occasionalvaccinatio no rtreatmen tagains twor minfestation . Calvesar eusuall ythethere d and lookedafte rb yth ewive san d daughterswhil e theyar ecleanin g thebar no rundertakin g household activities. Thedistributio no flabou r inputs forcro pan d livestock production ispresente d inFigur e 4.14. Whereaslabou r inputsfo r cropproductio n arehighl yseasonal ,thos e for livestock are relatively eventhroughou t theyear . Figure 4.14.: Distributiono fLabou r Inputs forCro pan d Livestock Production Labour inputs crop and livestock production Crops Livestock Total 7Qn Hours/Farm 600-• 500-• s 400 300 n 200-• A 1 A 'A As 100-• U A A i II II a A Jan Feb MarcIIh Apri l May June July Aug JSept Oct Nov Dec Month 109 4.6.4. Other Labour Inputsi nFar m Production Labour inputs into farmwork ,othe r than those relateddirectl y to cropan d livestock production, relate toth emarketin g of cropan d livestock products,a swel l as liveanimals ,maintenanc e activities on the farman d peasant associationwork . A special survey carriedou tdurin g 1981o nth e time allocation of control farmers,ha shighlighte d thelabou r inputsassociate dwit h these enterprises. Household headsvisite d themarke tdurin g 48days o f that year,worke d 33days for theassociatio n andha d 71days durin gwhic h predominantly work at the farmwa s carried out. This isillustrate d in Table 4.32. Household headswen to naverag e on 48differen tdays toth e market, fora totalo f 308hours ,o r 6.4 hourseac h time. Their wives visited themarke t 25days , taking anaverag e of 5.6 hourseac htime . Adultme nspen t substantiallymor etim eo n fieldwor k than children and adult females (Table 4.33.). Table 4.32.: TimeAllocatio n ofHousehol d Heads (1981) Activity Days Fieldwor k own land 116 31.8 Exchange labour 27 7.4 Marketing 48 13.2 Associationwor k 33 9.0 Holidays 1/ 70 19.2 Other activities 2/ 71 19.4 Total 365 100.0 1/ Holidaysar edefine d herea sday sdurin gwhic hn o agricultural activitywa scarrie dout . 2/ These includemakin g fences,constructio n ofbarns ,handicraft ,etc . Table 4.33.: TimeAllocatio n toFiel dWor k byDifferen t FamilyMember s TT98TT Familymembe r Totalday s Totalhour s Hours/day Adultmal e 116 754 6.5 Adult female 19 102 5.4 Child 50 180 3.6 Each farmer isals o required tosuppl y labour toth e Peasant Association withwhic h he isaffiliated . The survey indicated that on average 33day shav e beenuse d for thisactivity . The labour isuse d for planting trees,makin g contour bunds,assis t aged ordisable d or enlisted farmers. Thisamoun t has increased sharply since 1981. During1984 , farmersworke d onaverag e more than twoday seac hwee k for the association,o ra total of 132day s (Table 4.34.). 110 Table 4.34.: AssociationWor k ofContro l Farmers (1984) Typeo fwor k Frequency Total/year Terracing 2day sa wee k 80 Treeplantin g 7day sa yea r 7 Irrigationwor k 22day sa yea r 22 Communal farmwor k 6day sa yea r 6 PAbar nconstructio n 9day sa yea r 9 PAha ymakin g 1da ya wee k (Oct.-Dec.) 8 4.6.5. Returns toLabou r inCro p Production Inorde r tobette runderstan d the rationale of farmers in choosing certain crops inth ecroppin gpattern ,i ti sinterestin g toloo k at the returns tolabou r interm so f grainproduction . During 1979-1981,th e average amount ofgrai nproduce d peruni to f labour inputwa s 2.03 kg/hour. Thehighes t return farmersobtaine dwa s2.2 8 kg/hour in1979 , compared to2.2 4 kg/hour in198 0an d1.5 6 kg/hour in1981 . All labour (family,hire d and exchange)an d typeso fgrai n (grossoutput )wer e aggregated inth e calculation. The cropsgivin g thehighes t returnwer ehors ebean san d field peas (2.76an d 2.71 kg/hour respectively),whil e barley andwhea t gave a returno fonl y 1.9 kgpe rhou r of labour input. Oatsyielde d 2.55 kg/hour but conclusions aredifficul t given the fact thatonl yon e year ofdat awer e available. The return tolabou r ofdifferen t crops for the period 1979-1981 ispresente d inTabl e 4.35. Only results from themehe r seasonar e included. Overall the return tolabou r tocro pproductio n inmonetar y terms was 0.89 Birr/hour in1979 ,1.0 9 Birr/hour in198 0an d 0.86 Birr/hour in 1981. Thiswa s calculated bydividin g thegros soutpu t ofeac h cropb y the aggregated inputo f familyan d exchange labour. Table 4.35.: Returnst oLabou r forDifferen t Crops (1979-1981) Crop Grainproductio npe rhou r of labour input (kg/hr) 1979" 1385 1981 Mian Field peas 3.81 2.69 1.64 2.71 Wheat 1.99 2.19 1.53 1.90 Horse beans 3.29 2.58 2.41 2.76 Lentils 0.93 0.88 0.42 0.74 Barley 2.13 2.20 1.39 1.91 Linseed 0.87 1.12 0.51 0.83 Temenze n.a. 1.55 1.17 1.36 Oats n.a. n.a. 2.55 2.55 Ill 4.6.6. Returns toLabou r inLivestoc k Production Total labour inputs inlivestoc k productionwer eestimate d ata n averageo f 5,383hour spe r farmpe ryear . As arguedbefore ,w ehav e assumed noqualit ydifference sbetwee n labour inputs. There isfo r examplen oevidenc e tostat e thatmal eadul t labourwoul d doherding , manure collectiono rbar ncleanin gmor e efficiently thanchildren . Labour inputsi nlivestoc k productionar emainl y suppliedb y femalean d child labour,wit h lowopportunit y costs. Inth ecalculation s itwa s assumed that therewoul db e little inter-annualvariatio n inlabou r inputs for livestock production. Givena mea n livestock holding of 6.92 TLU, themea nlabou r input is77 8hours/TLU . The grossmargi n resulting fromlivestoc k production (excluding intermediate products)average s74 4Birr/farm/year . Thiswoul d indicate that the returnt o labour averagesaroun d 0.14 Birr/hour. When thevalu e ofdraugh tpowe r andmanur ear e included, return tolabou r increases to 0.18 Birr perhour . Although this isles stha nth e returns tocro p labour,livestoc k labour inputsar emainl y suppliedb ywoma nan d children andhav e lowopportunit y costs. Livestock productionwoul db edifficul t for farmerst oundertak e inth eabsenc eo fwoma nan d children. The labour required for livestock productionwoul d thencompet ewit h labour required for cropproduction . Livestock productionprovide s substantial opportunities foremploymen to f surplusfamil ylabou r resources. 4.7. Use ofAnima l DraughtPowe r Themos t important contributioncattl emak e toagricultura l production isi nth e formo fdraugh tpower . Oxenar euse d for seedbed preparation,plantin g and cropthreshing . Sometimes theyar e alsouse d for the transport of theproduc e from the field toth ehomestead . Ifa farmerha s insufficient oxen tohi sdispositio n for seedbedpreparation , hewil l sometimesus ea youn gbul la sa substitute. All cattleexcep t calves,an d adultequine sassis t inth ethreshing . Donkeysar euse d as pack animals totranspor tagricultura l produce fromth e field toth e homestead and toth emarket . During theperio d ofdat a collection,th emea nanima lpowe r input for cropproductio nwa sapproximatel y1,04 4 hourspe r farm:95 9hour s fromcattl ean d 85 fromequines. Of the95 9hour s fromcattle ,90 0wer e fromoxe n (450ox-pai r hours), and 59fro mothe r cattle (bulls,heifer san d cows). Almost all of the8 5hour sprovide db yequine swer e fromdonkeys ,othe r equines accounted for less than10 %o f thisinput . Theus eo fanimal s forcro pproductio naccordin g toactivit y is presented inTabl e 4.36. Therewa s little inter-yearvariation ,althoug h between farmsther ear evariation saccordin g tolabou r inputan d crop productivity. TheC Vo fanima lpowe r inputsbetwee n farms rangesa s from human labour inputs,betwee n 25an d 30%. Thedistributio n of animal power inputsdurin g theyea r ispresente d inFigur e 4.15. As therewa sonl y onebel g seasondurin g theperio d ofdat a collection,th eanima lpowe r inputsdurin g thistim ema yb e somewhat underestimated. 112 Table 4.36.: Animal Power Inputfo rCro pProductio nb yActivit y (Hours/Farm,1979-19BT T 1979 1980 1981(B) 1981(M) Mean/year Seedbed preparation 423 388 26 467 435 Seedingan dfertilizin g 235 200 21 211 222 Harvestingan dtranspor t oxen 2 2 1 4 3 donkeys 42 38 5 33 39 Threshing oxen/other cattle 333 294 29 249 299 donkeys/other equines 48 43 1 46 46 Total 1083 965 83 1001 1044 Almosttw othird so fth eanima lpowe r inputi sfo rploughin g (seedbed preparationan dseeding) . Weeding isdon eb yhan d without assistance fromanimal san dtherefor eno tinclude d inTabl e4.36 . The inputs fromdonkey sa spresente d inTabl e 4.36.ar eonl yfo r thetranspor to fproduc e fromth efiel dt oth ehomestead . Tothi s should beadde dth etim edonkey swal k fromth ehomestea dt oth emarke tt o transportdun g cakes,grai nan dstra woffere db yth efarme rfo rsale . Almostal lfarmer sg ot oth eloca lmarke ta tDebr eBerha nonc ea week . On average thisi sa 2.3 0hour s trip,o r5 hour s round trip. Oncea month theyals og ot oChacha ,a nearb yvillag ea ttw ohour swal ko ra 4 hours round trip. The total animal time inputfo rmarketin gca nb eestimate da t30 8 hourspe rdonkey . Givena naverag eholdin go f1. 2matur edonkey spe r farm,th emea ndonke y inputfo rmarketin gwil l average 380hour spe rfar m peryear . Donkeysar eals ouse dt otranspor tha yfro mth epastur et oth e homestead,whic hwil l takeo naverag e4 0donke yhour spe rfarm . The total input fromdonkey s therefore averages approximately50 0 hourspe rfar mpe ryear . Donkeys carry loadso fbetwee n1 5an d5 0k geac h time,dependin g onth etyp eo fproduce . Typicaldonke y loadsa smeasure ddurin gth e surveyperio dwer ea si nTabl e4.37 . Table 4.37.: Weighto fDonke y Loadb yCommodit y Sizeo floa d Straw1 / Hay Manure1 / Grain Small 30 15 35 20 Medium 35 20 40 35 Large 40 25 47 50 1/ Farmersexpres s loadso fstra wan dmanur e in"Kurbet "bu tthes ewer e reconverted ink gequivalent sfo rth epurpos eo fthi stable . 113 Aha yloa dwil lnormall yno tb emor e than2 5k gbecaus ei ti smor e voluminous thanothe r crops. Maledonkey s carryheavie r loadstha n femaledonkeys . Farmersbeliev e thata stron gmal edonke yca ncarr yu p to10 0k gove ra shor tdistance . However,a sindicate d previously farmershav emor e femaletha nmal edonkeys . Theaverag e animal power inputfo rcro pproductio ni saroun d45 7 hourspe rha . (Table 4.38.). PA5 (Karafino )ha ssubstantiall y lower animal power inputspe rfarm ,becaus eo fth esmalle r sizeo fth eare a cultivated. Therei sn osignifican tdifferenc eo fanima lpowe r inputs perh abetwee nth edifferen t associations. Table 4.38.: Ai limalPowe r Inputsfo r CropProductio n byP A (1979-1981) Yea r (hours/farm) Year (hours/ha) 1979 1980 1981 PA (n=60) (n-42) (n-42) Mean 1979 1980 1981 1/ Mean 4 978 1185 1182 1115 453 456 462 457 5 850 732 908 830 500 407 513 473 6 1359 954 1118 1144 576 430 383 463 7 1114 1031 1178 1108 530 357 413 433 Mean 1075 975 1096 1049 515 412 443 457 1/ Thefigur efo r198 1i sa weighe d aggregateo fbel gan dmeher . Table 4.39.:Anima l Power Inputspe rCro p (Hours/Ha,Mea n 1979-1981) Horse Field Activity Barley Wheat beans peas LentilsLinsee d Temenze Seedbed preparation (oxen) 222 162 108 92 158 53 190 Seedingan d fertilizing (oxen) 92 103 102 96 97 80 98 Harvestingan d transport oxen 1 1 2 2 donkeys 16 12 20 18 8 9 8 Threshing oxenan dothe r cattle 132 143 132 83 52 59 177 donkeysan dothe r equines 17 20 26 42 8 4 18 Total 480 441 390 333 323 205 491 Barleyan dtemenz e (whichi sa typ eo fbarley )ar eth ecrop s requiringmos tanima l power. Almosttw othird so fth eanima l inputi s allocatedt oseedbe d preparationan dseeding . Pulses require less power for seedbed preparation. Lentilsan dlinsee dar elo wyieldin g crops,an d 114 therefore require significantly lessanima lpowe r forthreshin gan d transporto fth eproduce . Thepea kworkin gmonth s foranimal sar e fromDecembe r toMarch , when threshing coincideswit h seedbedpreparation . Thisi sillustrate d inFigur e 4.15.,whic h illustratesth e seasonaldistributio no fanima l power inputs. During thestud yperio d from197 9t o1981 ,anima lpowe r inputsaverage d 87hours/month , ranging from16 7hour s inDecembe r to only4 hour si nAugust ,whic hi sth eslac kperiod . Asther ewa sonl yon e belg seasondurin g thestud yperiod ,th eanima lpowe r inputsma yb e somewhatunderestimated . Themajo rus eo fanima lpowe r for thebel g crop isdurin g themont ho fMarch ,fo rploughin gpurposes . Farmersdela ymos t ofth ethreshin go fbel gcrop stil lth eharvestin go fmehe rcrops ,an d thenbul kbot hharvests . Fewfarmer s rentoxen . Ifthe yar e shorto f power theyusuall yus elabou ran ddraugh toxe nexchang e systems. Only during 1984,whic h followeda nextremel yba ddrough tyear ,som e farmers rentedoxen ,a ta cos to f 5Bir rpe ro xpe rday ,includin g theo x handler. Figure 4.15.: Distributiono fAnima l Power Inputsfo rCro pProductio n (Hourspe rFarm ,Mea n1979-81 ) Belg Meher Hours/farm Belg (1981):8 1hour s Meher (mean197 9- 1981 ) •101 0hour s Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Month 115 Overall,draugh t animalshav e sparecapacitie s toperfor m additionalwork . Theyar eonl yuse d 50-70day spe ryear . The gross energetic efficiency ofoxen ,define da senerg y inth e formo fwor k accomplished asa percentag e ofenerg y consumed formaintenanc e andwor k onworkin g days, rangesbetwee n 11an d15 1 (Gryseelsan dAnderson , 1983a). 4.8. Subsistence FoodEconom yan d Marketing 4.8.1. Nutrition andHealt h Farmersi nth eBas oan dWoren aWered aar e subsistence oriented and their agricultural output islargel y consumedb yth e farm family,wit h someadditiona l production for cash tosupplemen t the familywit h consumer items. This isth e second stage inth etransitio nproces s from a non-monetary productionuni t tocommercia l farminga sdescribe d by Fisk (1975). Barley,wheat ,hors ebeans ,lentil san d fieldpea sar e themajo r foodgrain s consumed. Home consumption of livestock products islimited , but theyar ewit h liveanima l sales themajo r source ofcash . The staple foodo f the studypopulatio n is "injera"an d "wot". This isth edominan t food typeo f themember s ofth eAmhar aan dOrom o tribes. Their foodhabit shav ebee nextensivel ydescribe d elsewhere (ENI, 1980;Westphal ,1978) . "Injera" isa porous ,sou rpancake ,a few millimetres thick and 40t o4 5c m indiameter . AtDebr eBerha n "injera" ismad eo fbarley ,o r ina mixtur ewit hwhea t or oats. The ingredients of "wot",th ehighl y spiced saucewhic haccompanie s the "injera",depend s onwha t isavailable ,fastin g requirementsan d local tastes. Meat"wot " ispreferred ,bu tmos t farmersca naffor d itonl yo n feastdays . The consumptionhabit so f the farmers inth eWereda ,a s inothe r Amhara communities,ar e stronglydetermine d by the fasting ruleso f the Coptic ChristianOrthodo x church,t owhic hal l farmersbelong . These fasting rulesprohibi t theconsumptio n of foodcontainin g animal protein (except fish)o nWednesday s and Fridays,an ddurin g long fastingperiods , such asth eeigh tweek sbefor e Easter and the second and thirdwee k of August. The fastenperiod so f the198 1 calenderyea r are tabulated in Table 4.40. Thisyea r is representative ofothe ryears . As indicated in thistable ,som e fastingperiod sar eobligatory ,other sar eoptional . Farm familiesaroun dDebr eBerha nar e confined toa vegetaria n diet for at least 139day seac hyear ,an d for thedogmati cbeliever s this total canb e ashig ha s22 1day spe ryear . Childrenbelo wth eag e of 10 are excluded from this rule. During fastingperiods ,farmer s alsod o not takebreakfast . Thisofte nweaken s their physical conditiondurin g critical periodso f theagricultura l season,particularl y during the period ofploughing . Previous research on thenutritiona l effectso f fasting inEthiopi a (Knutsson and Selinus,1970 )ha sobserve d reduced energy intakesdurin g fastingperiods . 116 Table 4.40.: FastingPeriod so fChristia nOrthodo xChurc h (1981) A. Obligatory fastingday s Nameo f fast Starting date Endingdat e N of fastingday s Wednesdays 52 Fridays 52 Nenewe 16Februar y 18Februar y 3 Hudade (Abye) 2Marc h 26Apri l 55 Feleseta 7Augus t 22Augus t 15 Total TTT Double countingWednesdays-Friday s -22 Non-fastingWednesday san dFriday safte r Easter -16 Total obligatory fastingday s 139 B. Optional fasts Tsege 5Octobe r 14Novembe r 40 Gena 24Novembe r 7Decembe r 44 Hawariat 8Jun e 12Jul y 35 Double countingo fWednesday san dFriday s -37 Optional fastingday s 82 On fastingdays ,th e "wot"i smad e ofpulse s (peas,beans , lentils)an d spices. Home consumption ofanima lproduct s islimite d by the lowproductivit y oflivestoc k and thenee d tous e thema sa principal sourceo fcash . Approximately 55%o f thevalu e of livestock production (including saleso f liveanimals )i smarketed . Sheepaccoun t formos t household meatconsumption . Muttonan dbee f isalmos texclusivel y from homeproduced sheep,whil e thebee f issometime spurchased . Veal andpor k areno t consumedb yAmhara . Control farmersslaughtere d anaverag eo f 4.4 sheepa yea r for meat consumption,wit ha rangeo f 2t o9 pe r family. Only few (12%)o f theanimal s slaughteredwer emature ,th emajorit ywer e lambs (34%)o r otheryoun g stock (54%). Almostal lmea t consumptionwa s related to major religious festivals sucha sEaster ,Christmas ,Epiphany ,Meske l and theen do f the short fasti nAugust ,o r toothe r celebrations sucha sth e NewYea r andweddings . About 75%o fth eslaughter s takeplac edurin g the monthso fApri l (for Easter),Septembe r (forNe wYea r andMeskel )an d January (forChristma san d Ephiphany). Theamoun to fpurchase d meat consumed isnegligible . Assuming anaverag eweigh to f 15k gpe r slaughtered animal,an da dressin gpercentag e of 40%,th eaverag e consumption of sheepmea taverage d 26k go raroun d 9k gpe r adult equivalentpe ryear . Milk isusuall yprepare d intobutter ,an d control farmers consume onaverag e 0.5 litreo fbuttermil k permonth . Theconsumptio no fegg s is limited to religious festivalsan daverage s 18egg spe r household per 117 year (Wagenaar-Brouwer,1986) . Almostal l consumptiono flivestoc k products isfro mhom eproduction . Beef isconsume d rarely. Oncea year , farmersparticipat e ina "Kircha,"bu tfo rth egrou po fcontro l farmers theaggregat enumbe r ofbovine sslaughtere d formea tconsumptio nwa sonl y 4 or 5animal spe ryear . The consumptiono fpoultr y islinke d to religious festivals,bu taverage sonl yon eo r twochicke na year . Thedominan t sourceso f food inth eDebr eBerha nare aar e cereals andpulses . Barleyan dhors ebean sar eth emos t important food items consumed. Other grainconsume d arewhea t (forbread) , oats,lentils , fieldpea san d sorghum. All thesegrain sexcep t sorghumar ehom e produced. Consumptiono fgrain s includesus e forbee rmaking . On average 102k go fgrain spe r farmar euse dever yyea r forthi spurpose . During 1981,th eaverag egrai nconsumptio npe rperso npe rda ywa s62 2 grams,consistin go f40 1gram so fcereal san d 21gram so fpulses . Monthlygrai nconsumptio nvarie d seasonally,wit h thehighes t intakes recordeddurin gApril ,an dth elowes tdurin gAugus tan dSeptember . Iti sdifficul t topresen ta nannua lprofil eo f food consumption andproductio n flowso fDebr eBerha n farmfamilies . Therear e substantial inter-annual flows,an dconsumptio nbehaviou r isstrongl y affectedb y farmerexpectation sabou tth ecomin gharvest ,croppin g pattern,marke tprices ,politica ldevelopment san d thegrai nsuppl yo f thepreviou scro pyear ,i nadditio nt oth eyiel do fth eearl yseaso nbel g crop. Table 4.41. isbase do nactua l figuresfo rth eaverag e farmdurin g 1981. The table illustratestha t21 %o fgrai nproductio n isuse d for seed,66 %fo rhom econsumption ,4 %fo r salesan d 9%balanc e that isbein g used asa food reserve. Iti st ob enote d that198 1 followeda ver ygoo d cropyear ,an dals oha da bel g season. Table 4.41. istherefor e tob e considered as representative ofa "good"year . Table 4.41.: GrainProductio nan dUs ePe r Farm (1981Kg/Farm ) Graintyp e Production Seed Home Net sales 1/ Balance Barley 987 204 628 47 +108 Wheat 182 39 148 4 - 9 Horsebean s 445 77 343 11 + 14 Fieldpea s 82 35 24 1 + 22 Lentils 4 3 1 - - Linseed 7 2 1 - + 4 Tamenze 24 3 2 - + 19 Total 1731 363 1147 63 +158 % 100 21 66 4 9 1/ Net salesequa l total salesminu spurchase so fth egrai ndurin g the year. After goodharvests ,farmer s replenish their food stockst omak e up for shortfalls inba dyears . During thestud yperio d farmersproduce d inal lyear sexcep t one (1983)sufficien t cerealsan dpulse s fromthei r owncroppe d land tohav ea modes t surplusove ran dabov eminimu m family foodneeds . 118 Farmers also report the regular purchase ofextr a grains tomak e up for shortfallsdurin g theyea r forhom e consumption,bee rmakin g or seeduse . On average justove r 100Bir r peryea rwer euse d for this purpose. Thenutritiona l statuso f the ruralpopulatio n inEthiopi a has beendescribe d as "characterized by lowlevel so fenerg y intake" (Miller et al, 1976). Mostnutritiona l studies inEthiopi ahav ebee nundertake n Before the 1975lan d reform,whic h substantially altered farming conditions throughout thecountry . A more recent study (ENI,1980 ) indicated thenationa l averagedail yenerg y intake tob e only67 %o f the requirement,whil e theoveral l protein intakewa s156 %o f the requirement. The findings ofth e study suggesttha tpeopl eus e their excessprotei n for energypurposes . FAO (1987b)ha sestimate d that nationally inEthiopi a theaverag e calorie intakeamount s to73 %o f requirements. Fromth ehousehol d data collected fromth eDebr eBerha n farm families,averag edail yenerg y intakepe r capita fromgrain swa s estimated at2,45 0kil o calories. Thiswa s supplemented byenerg y from fats,an d fromoccasiona l smallquantitie s ofmil k andmeat . The average dailyprotei n intakewa saroun d 90gram spe rhea d (Gryseelse t al, 1984b). These calculationswer e based on coefficients estimated-byAgre n andGibso n (1968)an dAgre ne ta l (1975). Theenerg y intake corresponds more or lesst o the requiremento f2,40 0K cala sse tb yWH O (1973), while theprotei n intake iswel l above the requirements. Intakes appeared high comparedwit hnationa l estimateso f 1704kil o calories,an d 57gram so fprotei npe rhea d asestimate d by FAO (1987b). Thenutritiona l statuso f control farmersa smeasure d byheigh t forweigh t standards isillustrate d inTabl e 4.42. Table 4.42.: Proportion ofHousehol d Members inVariou s Categories Height forWeigh t (December 1982) >100% 90-99% 80-89% 70-79% <70% (N) Adultmal e 7 41 46 4 1 68 Adult female 26 35 33 4 1 57 Boys 5-18 yrs. 36 36 25 3 - 36 Girls 5-18 yrs. 22 46 18 13 - 46 Children 5yrs . 49 23 21 6 - 47 Average (%) 26 36 31 6 1 Source: Gryseels,Wagenaa r andAnderso n (1984b). Weightsan dheight s ofal lmember so f 40household swer e taken in December 1982. Weightswer e compared to referenceweight sa t given lengths. For childrenu p to 5year s of age the standard of the National Centre forHealt h Statistics (WHO,1979 )wa suse d and for older children and adults theHarvar d standard (Stuartan d Stevenson, 1959). 119 According theth e reference standards,abou t 7%o f thetota l samplepopulatio n aremoderatel y toseverel ymalnourished . Malnutrition (weightbelo w80 %o f referenceweigh t 5-18 yearsa tgive nweight )occur s most frequently for girlsage s 5-18 years. Thehighes tproportio no f the population (68%)wa s found inth ecategor ybetwee n 80an d 99%o f the established standard. Themea nweigh to fadul tme nwa s 58.5+5.8kg . Although thesedat ad ono t suggest seriousnutritiona l deficiencies inth e studyarea ,cautio n is required inth e interpretation of this information. Therear e substantial seasonalvariations . The survey reportedupo n inTabl e 4.43.wa sundertake n inDecembe rwhe nmos t cropsha d justbee nharvested . Itca nb eexpecte d that theprevalenc e of malnutritionwil l behighe r inth epreharves tperio d (July-October). Wagenaar-Brouwer (1986)foun du pt o 40%stuntin g inchildre no f control farmers. Control farmersan dthei r familieswer e founddeficien t also innutrient s sucha s riboflavin (vit.B2) ,ascorbi c acid (vit.C ) and ritivoc (vit. A). Little information isavailabl eo nth ehuma nhealt h situation in the studyarea . Recordso nth enumbe r ofpeopl etreate d forcertai n diseases fromth eDebr eBerha nhospita l indicate thatgastriti s isth e mostprevalen tdiseas e followedb yuppe r respiratoryinfections , pneumonia,gastro-entiti san d rheumatism (Gryseels etal , 1984). Dysentries,coliti san dveneria l diseasesar eals omajo r healthproblems . 4.8.2. Marketing 4.8.2.1. Introduction Although farmersar e subsistenceoriented ,the y regularyvisi t markets to sello rpuchas egrains ,livestock ,livestoc kproducts , clothes,implements ,energ y sources (dungcakes ,parafin eoil ,etc.) , cropby-product s and consumer items. Themarke tals operform sa n important social functionwher epeopl emee tan ddiscuss . Theprincipa lmarke t isa tDebr eBerha n townwher e therear e two marketday seac hweek ,th emajo r oneo nSaturday san da mino r oneo n Wednesdays. Separate sitesar eprovide d for livestock and cropproducts . Most farmersals og o toChach amarke tever yTuesday . Themarket sar ea meetin gplac ebetwee n farmers,townfolk , wholesalers and retailers. Farmersca n sellgrain seithe rdirectl y to consumersa t themarket ,t o retailerso r tomiddleme nwh o intur n transport theproduct s toothe rurba ncenters ,mainl yAddi sAbaba . An important role isals oplaye d bygovernmen t purchasing agentswh obu y the produce atofficia l ratesan d transfer itt oth eAgricultura l Market Cooperation (AMC),whic h sells intur nt oth ekebel e shops inurba n centers. Livestock are solda s liveanimal swhic har eoffere d for sale within a closeyar d specificallyallocate d for thatpurpos e by the municipality. Priceso f livestock and livestock productsar eno t subject togovernmen tcontrol . 120 4.8.2.2. Government Impacto nMarketin g The EthiopianGovernmen t hasa regulating function inth e marketing of crops,wit h theobjectiv e of stabilizing prices,an d to organize a fairdistributio n of foodgrain samon g consumers. The system operates primarily through theAM Cwhic ha tth e regional level coordinates closelywit h theWered aMinistr y ofAgriculture ,Wered a Administration,Wered aOi l and Pulse Export Corporation, Transport Corporation and theWered a PeasantAssociations . These organizations forma regional committeewhic horganize s the supplyo fgrain s toAMC . TheAM C setsa grai nquot a for the countrya sa whole ,whil e the different committeesdecid e on thequot a that ist ob e supplied regionally,b y eachawraj aan d eachwereda . At thewered a level,a quota isallocate d toeac h service cooperative,whic h intur ndistribute s this quota among themembe r PeasantsAssociations . Inadditio n toa quot a for service cooperatives,a quot a isals ogive n toeac hofficiall y registered wholesale dealer of thearea . TheExecutiv e Committee ofeac hpeasant sassociatio n intur n determineso n thebasi so f itsquot aho wmuc hgrai n ist ob esupplie d by each farmer individually. Although inprincipl e each farmerwithi n an associationwil l beaske d to supplya similar amount of grain,i n practice theexecutiv e committeewil l also take intoaccoun t factors such as family sizean d crop stand indecidin g on individual allocations. The PAha s the right toenforc e or impose a fine oneac h individual farmer not fulfilling hisquot a or refusing tosel l thiscropshar e to theP Aa t AMC'sprices . Fines canamoun t tou p to 50Bir r per farmer. The grain collected byeac h PA istransporte d to the service cooperative or wholesaler,wher e it isbein gpicke du pb yAMC ,wh opay s theSC' san d merchants 5Birr/quinta l more than theofficia l purchase price from farmers. Thepractic eha s ingenera ldiscourage d farmerst oproduc emus h grainbeyon d their subsistence familyneeds . During the 1984 cropyear ,th equot a set for theBas o andWoren a Woredawa s seta t16,27 5quintals . Thisquot awa sdistribute d between 10 wholesalers and 17SCs ,comprisin g a total of7 7PAs . Although there are 103PA sorganize d in2 2SC s inth eWoreda , 5 SCsan d 26PA swer e labelled asdrough t affected anddefici t areaswhic hwoul d not produce sufficient grain for sale. These PAswer e excluded from supplying quotas. ILCA'scontro l farmersar eorganize dunde r theFaj ian d Bokafia S.C.,whic h comprises the PA'so f Kormargfia,Milki , Fajian dBokafia , Karafino,Tebass e andAtoberet . During 1984,the ywer e tosuppl y a total of 400quintal s ofbarle y toAMC ,a t theofficia l farmgat eprice . Each farmerwa s to supply 38k go fgrai n tohi s respective PAwh o forwards them toth e S.C. Inaddition ,wholesaler swer e tobu y 474quintal s of grains from farmersan d sell it toAM C at theofficia l prices. Farmers cannegotiat e priceshowever ,an dmerchant swil l oftenpa y purchase priceswhic h are substantially higher than theAM Cpric e they receive. The loss issee n asa hidde n tax tokee p their operating licence. Official and freemarke t pricesdiffe r strongly, as illustrated inTabl e 4.43.,whic h reportso nprice spai ddurin g December 1985,durin g the harvest,whe n grainprice sar eusuall y low. Farmgat e pricespai d byAM C were nevertheless onlybetwee n 25%an d 50%o f consumerprices . 121 December198 5 (Birr/qt) Barley Wheat Horsebean s Fieldpea s 1. Pricepai d tofarmer s byAM C 28 34 25 36 2. AMCpurchasin gpric efroi r wholesalers andSC' s 32 39 30 40 3. Pricepai d tofarmer s bywholesaler s 65 95 75 70 4. Wholesalerspric et o retailers 95 125 100 75 5. Retailerspric e to consumers 98 142 n.a. 80 TheBas oan dWoren aWered a isno tconsidere d aproductiv eare a for graincrops . The incidenceo fhai lan d frost,lo wsoi l fertility,an d recurrentdrough t inth elowe raltitud earea s severelyaffect scro p yieldsan d the region regularlyha sa grai ndeficit . Thequot a system which came intoeffec tdurin g 1982,work sbot hways . Duringyear s that the region isconsidere d tohav ea deficit ,AM Cwil l sell cropsa tth e officialprice st oth eS.C's ,whic hwil l intur nsuppl ygrai nt o farmers inneed . During1983 ,AM C supplied totota lo f41,00 0quintal so fgrai n toth e region. The impacto fth equot a systemo nincom eo fcontro l farmersi s negligible,a sonl ya mino r (lesstha n5% )proportio no fthei r grain production isaffected . Inou rcalculation sw ehav etherefor eworke d with freemarke tprice sa sthe yoccu r atth eDebr eBerha nmarket . There isn o regulating functionfro mth eGovernmen to nth eprice s of livestock and livestock products. Farmersca nfreel yoffe r their animals for salea tth emarket ,provide d thata nentranc e taxo f1 Bir r perbovine ,an d 0.25 Birrpe r small ruminant isbein gpai da tth emarke t yard. 4.8.2.3. Marketingo fCrop s Immediately after thethreshin go fth egrai ncrops ,a farmerwil l sellsurplu sgrai na tth emarket . Usuallythi swil lb ebetwee n 50an d 100kg . As theyea rprogresses ,an ddependin go nhi scas hneeds ,h eo r hiswif ewil l sell smallquantitie so fgrai nt oenabl e thepurchas e of consumeritems . Cropprice s fluctuate seasonally,wit ha pea k inth e rainyseaso n aroundJul ywhe ncrop sar ebein gplanted . Thelowes tprice soccu r at harvesting and threshing time fromNovembe r toJanuar ywhe nmarke t suppliesar emos tabundant . Pricesdi dno t fluctuatemuc hannuall ybetwee n 1979an d 1983. As from198 4th ecountr ywa snationall yhi tb ydrough t andwidesprea d food shortages,an da s frommid-198 4 this reflected ina sharp increase in foodprice sa t theDebr eBerha nmarket . Average annual consumer prices for themajo r crops from197 9t o198 4ar epresente d inTabl e4.44 . 122 Table 4.44.: MeanConsume rPrice sfo rMajo rCrop sa tDebr eBerha nMarke t 1979-1984 (Birr/quintal) 19791 /198 0 1981 1982 1983 1984 Barley 46 52 52 54 52 75 Wheat 75 89 80 83 79 97 Horsebean s 36 41 38 41 39 62 Fieldpea s 43 49 47 47 47 71 Lentils 68 95 78 68 76 127 Linseed 105 90 101 114 94 103 1/ Market survey started inMa y1979 . Seasonalpric evariation s fordifferen t cropsar e illustrated in Table 4.45. Thedat aar ebase do nmea nprice sa tth eDebr eBerha nmarke t as recordedbetwee n 1979an d 1983 forth emajo r crops. Because Ethiopia's food shortagesle dt over y sharp increaseso fcro pprice s during 1984,thi syea rwa sexclude d fromth ecalculations . Table 4.45.: Monthly Consumer Prices of Major Crops atDebr e Berhan Market (Mean1979-1983 , Birr/quintal) Barley Wheat Horsebean s Fieldpea s Lentils Linseed January 45 79 36 42 68 96 February 45 76 35 43 73 95 March 46 74 36 46 73 88 April 47 74 36 46 74 88 May 52 79 38 52 77 96 June 57 83 39 48 77 93 July 56 84 41 48 80 97 August 53 86 45 50 87 105 September 55 85 43 49 84 111 October 54 83 42 47 81 101 November 55 88 40 47 79 112 December 49 85 38 45 75 105 Pricesgenerall ypea kdurin g themonth so fJune ,Jul yan dAugus t when cropshav e tob eplante dan d the result ishig hdeman d for seed,an d arelowes t inDecembe rwhe nharvest s leadt oa shar p increaseo fmarke t supplies. Theonl yexceptio n islinsee dwher eprice s remainedver yhig h evendurin gharves tperiods ,du e toconsecutiv e failureso fth ecro pi n 1981an d1982 . Strawan dha yar eals oimportan t commoditiestrade d atth eDebr e Berhanmarket . Onlycerea l straws (barley,wheat ,an d oats)ar eo f commercialvalue . Thepric eo fstra wan dha y isrelate d tofee d availability inth e region. Theaverag eannua lpric e from1979-198 4o f strawan dha y isillustrate d inTabl e 4.46. There isn opric e difference betweenbarley ,whea to roat sstraw . Often theyar e solda sa mixture . 123 Table 4.46.: Priceso f Strawan dHa ya tDebr eBerha nMarke t (1979-1984, BirrAg) 1979 1/ 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Straw 0.06 0.08 0.07 0.13 0.12 0.22 Hay 0.11 0.12 0.10 0.14 0.15 0.24 1/ Market survey started inJul y1979 . Priceso f strawan dha y increased rapidlydurin g 1982,an d even more in198 4a sa result ofdrought . Themarke tpric e ofha yan d straw isusuall yexpresse d in "kurbet"equivalen tbu thav ebee nconverte d to "kg"units . There isals o substantial seasonalvariation s inth epric e of strawan d hay,a s illustrated inTabl e 4.47.whic h reports on average monthly prices for theperio d 1979-1983. 1984wa sexclude dbecaus e of theunusua l price rises related toth eeffect so fwidesprea d drought. Table 4.47.: Monthly Prices ofStra wan dHa ya tDebr e Berhan Market (Mean 1979-1983,Birr/Kurbet ) Straw Hay January 2.27 2.19 February 2.35 2.27 March 2.16 2.15 April 2.07 2.41 May 2.83 3.15 June 3.16 3.36 July 3.19 3.10 August 3.32 3.25 September 3.14 2.67 October 3.14 1.83 November 3.19 2.04 December 2.72 2.03 1/ One Kurbeto f strawaverage s 30k gan do fha y2 3kg . Thepric e ofha y islowes t fromOctobe r toDecembe r whenha y is being made on thepastures ,an d ishighes t fromMa y toAugus t which coincideswit h the rainy season. This issomewha t contradictory to earlier arguments thatnutritiona l constraints aremos t severe during the dry season fromJanuar y toMay . However,ha yan d strawar e predominantly fed toworkin g oxenan d cows inmilk . Farmers runou to f stocks of straw and hay inApri l at theen d of thedr y season,bu twhe n the feed requirements ofoxe n increasebecaus e of the starto f theworkin g season thedeman d for feed for thewor k oxen cannotb eme tb y available stocks and farmershav e topurchas e hay and strawa t themarket . Inaddition , the rainsd ono thav e an immediate effect onpastur e productivity. Pasture production and quality doesno tpea k untilAugust . Thepric e of straw remainshig hunti l earlyNovember ,whe n the first crops are harvested and threshed, leading to increased supplies of straw toth e market. 124 4.8.2.4. Marketingo fLivestoc k andLivestoc k Products Thetrad e inliv eanimal s isofte nclosel ylinke d toevent si n cropproduction . Whencro pharvest s fail,farmer swil lmak eu p forth e shortfall infoo dstock sb ysellin ganimal san dpurchas e foodgrain in return. Theproces so fsellin g livestock isa selectiv e one. As food and seed grainstock sar edepleted ,smal l ruminantsar e sold first,the n young cattlean dequines ,the ncows ,an d finallydraf toxen . The complete cyclewil lonl yoccu rhoweve r insituation so fgenera l crop failurean d foodshortages . Usually,a farmerwil l sellyoun g small ruminantst ogenerat e cash tobu y seedgrain ,o rconsume r items. Oxenar eusuall y rearedo nth e farm,an dpurchase d atth emarke tonl y intime so facut eneed . During the studyperiod ,ther ewa slittl evariatio n fromyea r toyea r inth e priceo fanimals ,a sillustrate d inTabl e 4.48. Themea nannua lpric e ofa workin go x ranged from28 9Bir r in198 0t o33 8Bir r in198 3bu t remained relatively stable forothe r typeso flivestock . Table 4.48.: Livestock PricesDebr eBerha nMarke t (1979-1983, Birr/Animal) 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Ox 323 289 323 322 338 Cow 186 156 165 167 177 Ewe 20 22 27 24 25 Ram 56 64 64 62 70 Donkey (mature) 45 44 52 54 54 Mare 108 84 81 89 78 Priceso f livestock fluctuate seasonally. Thepric eo foxe n rises sharplya tth e starto fth eworkin g season inApri lan d remainshig h throughout thisperiod ,a sdeman d ishig han d supplylimite d (Table 4.49.). Table 4.49. MonthlyLivestoc k Pricesa t Debre BerhanMarke t (Mean 1979-1983, Birr/Animal) Ox Cow Ewe Ram Donkey Mare January 299 165 23 63 45 82 February 289 156 23 63 49 75 March 298 154 22 68 52 90 April 326 163 29 74 53 73 May 325 166 24 69 56 93 June 329 168 25 69 55 90 July 346 171 24 60 57 99 August 343 179 23 62 51 105 September 330 195 26 62 58 92 October 310 176 26 62 50 n.a. November 314 161 23 61 56 80 December 303 164 23 62 53 76 125 Theprice so f cowswil l increasedurin g the rainyseaso nalso , because of goodpastur e growthan dpositiv e effectso nmil k production. Thepric eo f sheep (ewesan d rams)i sclosel y linked to the incidence of religious festivals. During thewee k before Easter (April),Ne wYea r and Meskel (September)celebrations ,price swil l risedramaticall y fora few days,becaus e of thehig hdeman dparticularl y forurba n consumption. The number ofanimal s offered at themarke twil l bemor e thandoubl e during suchperiods . Prices ofequine sar eunifor m throughout theyear ,an d trade inthos e animals islimited . Fluctuations ofequin eprice sar e relatedmor e todifference s inqualit y thant oexterna levents . Animalsar enormall y soldaliv et oothe r farmerso r totrader so r butchers. Meata sa commodity isno t solda tth e livestockmarket . About 65%o f themil k produced at the farm isprocesse d intobutte r and partly sold,partl yhom e consumed. Butterprice spea kdurin gApril-May , at theen d of thedr y seasonwhe nmil k production islowest . The period also coincideswit h theen d of the fastingperio d and the Easter celebrations. An important livestock commodity for trade ismanure . It issol d inth e formo fdun gcakes ,an d accounts fora substantial proportion of cash income. Thepric eo fdun gcakes ,expresse d inKurbet , has remained relatively stabledurin g the studyperiod , ranging froma n average of 1.50 Birrdurin g 1980t o1.6 8 Birrdurin g 1983. Therewer e some seasonal fluctuations and thepric eo fdun g cakes increased by 15-20%durin g the rainy seasonwhe n thedeman d forhousehol d fuel is high. Hidesan d skinswer e alsotrade d on themarket . Their prices fluctuated little. Eggprice s increase sharplywit h the incidence of festivities. Average yearlyprice so flivestoc k productsar egive n in Table 4.50. Table 4.50.: Price ofLivestoc k Productsa tDebr eBerha nMarke t (1979-1983,Birr/YeàT T 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Butter (kg) 8.6 8.0 9.2 8.2 9.4 Eggs (n for 1Birr ) 11.2 9.9 10.7 10.1 9.1 Hides (cattle) 17.2 16.1 19.2 17.3 18.6 Skin (sheep) 6.2 5.9 6.0 6.2 5.1 4.9. Farm incomesan dGros sMargin s 4.9.1. Cash Incomes Section 4.8.illustrate d that farm families inth eDebr e Berhan area are subsistence oriented and that onlya small proportion of farm production issold . Comparatively, ahighe r proportion of livestock production than fromgrai nproductio n was sold. 126 Table 4.51.: Cash Income from FarmSource s (1979-1984,Birr/farm ) Source 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Cropan dcro p by-products 27 77+15 97+18 50 14 28 Livestockproductio n 99 155+24 162+40n .a. 1/ 112 29 Milk 56+24 60+4 - Butter 47+15 25+5 15 Eggs 5+1 10+3 2 Manure 32+6 49+9 10 Sheepski n 15+3 18+3 2 Net saleo f liveanimal s2 / 132 257+65 270+57 274 222 488 Total 257 489+80 529+75 324 348 545 % of incomefro m livestock 90% 84% 82% 85% 96% 95% 1/ During198 2an d198 3th esal eo flivestoc k productswer eno t recorded. 2/ Netsal eo fliv eanimal s calculateda sdifferenc ei nvalu eo fanimal s soldan dpurchased . Note: Onlydurin g198 0an d198 1wer eth edat ao fsufficien tqualit yt o enableth eestimatio no fstandar ddeviations . Theoverwhelmin g proportiono fcas h incomeo fcontro l farmers originated fromth esal eo flivestoc kan dlivestoc k products. Duringth e studyperio d 1979-1984,th eproportio no fcas h incomesoriginatin g from livestock averaged 89%. Thisi sillustrate di nTabl e4.51 . Onlydurin g198 0an d198 1wer edat a collectedi nsufficien t detail toenabl eth equantificatio no fcontributio no feac ho flivestoc k productst ocas h income. Cash incomeaverage d50 9Bir rpe rfar mpe r year,o fwhic h 83%originate d fromth esal eo flivestoc kan dlivestoc k products. About 52%o fcas h incomewa sfro mth etrad eo fanimals , 31% fromth esal eo flivestoc k products. Manurealon e accounted foraroun d 25%o fth esal eo flivestoc k products,an ddair yproduct sfo rjus tove r 50%. Farmerswit h small livestock holdingsderive da proportionall y higher fractiono fthei r cash income fromlivestock ,tha n farmerswit h large livestockholdings . The tradei nanimal si sth edominan t sourceo fcas h income. Sheep accountfo rabou t 40%o fthi s tradevalue . Thedistributio no fcas h income resulting fromtrad ei nanimal saccordin gt odifferen t animal speciesi spresente di nTabl e4.52 . 127 Table4 . 52.: Cash Incomefro mAnima lTrad e (1980-1983,Birr/farm ) 1980 1981 1982 1983 Mean % Cattle 144 97 143 93 119 46 Sheep 74 139 81 110 101 40 Equines 38 30 48 16 33 13 Poultry 1 4 2 3 3 1 Total 257 270 274 222 256 100 Cash incomesar ehoweve rno tnecessaril ya prox yfo rwealth . As cropyield s fail, farmersar eforce dt osel lanimal st opurchas e food grain. Thecas h incomeo fa nindividua l farmerma ytherefor e increase, while therei sa declin ei nhi swealth . Most farm familiesals oobtai n income from non-agricultural sources: fromoff-far mwork ,th esal eo fdrink s (tejo rtella) , saleo f handicrafts,herdin gb ychildren ,th esal eo fsan do rgri no rfro m gifts. Themonetar yamount s involvedi nthes e incomeswer egenerall y small although largevariation swer eencountere d between farmers. Some farmers rent their servicesa scraftsme no rother sma ysel lwood . Forth eyear s 1980an d198 1non-agricultura l income averaged10 3Bir rpe rfar mpe ryea r (Table 4.53). Table 4.53.: Off-FarmCas h Income (1979-1981,Birr/farm ) 1979 1980 1981 Off-farmwor k 53 31 22 Gifts 17 37 5 Other 48 34 63 Total 118 102 90 Average cash incomes frombot hagricultura lan dnon-agricultura l sourcesfo rcontro l farmersca ntherefor eb eestimate da t59 0Bir r during 1980an d61 8Bir r during1981 . Farmersals oobtai nadditiona l cash sources fromloan san d"ekub" . "Ekub"i sa typ eo f"forced " saving,whereb ya grou po fpeopl e contribute a givensu mo fmone ya tgive n intervals (weekly, fortnightlyo rmonthly ) toa coordinato r ofth egroup . Themone y collected iswo ni na dra wb y oneo fth emember swh oi sthe n lockedou tfro m subsequent drawsunti l everyone inth egrou pwin sa draw . Theproces s then startsagain . Almostal lfarmer saroun d DebreBerha n contributet oa tleas ton e"ekub " scheme. During197 9the ycontribute d6 8Bir ra yea rt oeku bschemes . Thisi si nfac ta savin g from theirow nresource san ddoe sno tconstitu e anadditiona l income. Farmers alsoborro w regularlyt opa yfo rseed , major purchases,o rsocia l occasions sucha sweddings ,funeral so r baptisms. 128 Most of theavailabl e cash incomewil l beuse d for thepurchas e of animalsan d grains. Only in198 0wer edat a sufficiently reliable and detailed toenabl e thebreakdow n ofhousehol d expensesa s inTabl e 4.54. Expenditures perhousehol d averaged 444Bir rdurin g thatyear . Table 4.54.: Household Expensesan dPurchase s (1980,Birr/farm ) Birr/farm Grain purchase 108 Livestock products 20 Stimulants (coffee,tea ) 28 Vegetables 18 Incense 19 Ingredients brewing 5 Clothes 125 Association fees 18 Church fees 7 Gifts 17 Entertainment 18 Fertilizer 54 Others 7 Total 444 Almost 30%o fhousehol d expenseswa s for thepurchas e ofclothes , while 25%wa s for thepurchas e ofgrain . During 1984,a yea rwhic h followed a situation ofwidesprea d crop failure and grain shortages,th e average proportion of cashexpenditur e spento n foodgrain swa s58% . Farmerswhic h owned twoTL Uo r less, spent 94%o f their cash expenditures on foodgrains . Poorer farmers (i.e.wit h smalllivestoc k holdings) spent thusa proportionall y higher fractiono fhousehol d incomeo n the purchase of foodgrain. Thepurchas e costo fagricultura l toolsan d other equipmentwa sno t included intabl e 4.54. Farmershav e toals opa ya land taxo f 20Bir r peryear ,an d an income taxo f 10Birr/year . In addition theypa ya monthl y contribution toth ePeasan tAssociatio n of .50Bir rpe r adult and .25Bir r per child. 4.9.2. GrossMargin san dValu e of Production As onlya smallproportio no f farmproductio n isbein g marketed, it isimportan t toloo k atgros smargin s inevaluatin g the profitability of the farm. Thegros smargi no f cropswa s 278Birr/h a and ranged from 224Birr/h a in197 9 to35 9Birr/h a in1982 ,an d 214Birr/h a in1983 . Wheat, temenzean d oatswer e themos tprofitabl e crops. Invie wo f the unusualpric e increaseso f 1984,an d the resulting strongeffect so f farm grossmargins ,th e latter yearwa s excluded from thetabulation . The average farmgros smargi nwa s 307Birr/ha ,takin g intoaccoun t the gross marginso f fallowan d pasture land (Table 4.55.). 129 Table 4.55.: GrossMargin so fMa j arCrops , Fallowan d Pasture (1979-1983, Birr/Ha) 1/ 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Mean All crops 224 356 237 359 214 278 Barley 202 356 232 377 200 273 Wheat 537 633 385 530 462 509 Horse beans 176 283 246 274 146 225 Fieldpea s 202 165 135 145 14 132 Linseed 95 173 57 317 149 158 Lentils 158 131 25 78 119 102 Temenze - 543 489 667 125 456 Oats - - 43 118 136 99 Teff - - 43 118 136 99 Fallow2 / 110 120 100 140 150 124 Pasture 3/ 385 420 350 490 525 434 All farm 211 329 259 392 342 307 Assumptions forth ecalculations : 1/ Grossmargi ncalculate d as ((cropyiel dx outpu tprice )- (seedus ex seedprice )- (fertilizerus ex fertilizer price)- (costhire d labour+ hire d traction)+ (yieldo fcerea l strawx price). Formehe r crops,outpu tpric euse dwa s theaverag e farmgat epric e betweenwee k 46-58whic h isth eharves tperiod . Seedpric ewa s average farmgat epric ebetwee nwee k 20-28whe n cropsar ebein g planted. Forbel gcrops ,see dpric ewa s theaverag e fromwee k 8-13, and foroutpu tvalu e theaverag epric e fromwee k 25-31. For thevaluatio no f strawan dhay ,th emea nannua lmarke tpric ewa s used. Only strawo fbarley ,wheat ,tef fan doat swa sassume d tohav e commercialvalue . 2/ Averageha yyiel d fromfallo wlan dassume d 600kg/ha . 3/ Average pastureyiel dassume d2,50 0kg/h aan dvalue da tpric eo fhay . Theaverag egros smargi nfo r livestockwa s74 4Birr/farm , Annual grossmargin s from livestock aregive ni nTabl e 4.57. Table 4.56.: GrossMargin s fromLivestoc k (1979-1983,Birr/farm ) 1/ 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Oxen 80 68 56 80 115 Cows 190 223 237 265 261 Heifers/y.bull s 48 58 66 74 52 Bulls 28 37 32 24 23 Calves 11 13 11 15 22 Young sheep 13 23 25 26 27 Adult sheep 171 188 314 245 266 Goats 4 4 8 4 8 Donkeys 39 43 41 48 54 Poultry 17 11 14 18 21 Total 601 668 804 799 849 1/ Excluding thevalu eo f intermediateproduct s sucha sdraugh t power andmanure . 130 The assumptionsan dmethodolog yfo rth ecalculation si n Table 4.56.ar epresente d inTabl e4.57 . Table 4.57.: GrossMargi n PerUni to f Livestock (Birr/Animal )1 / Return Ox Cow Heifer Y.bull s Calves Lambs Ewes Donkey Progeny2 / 37 18 15 Milk 3/ 68 Meat V 40 30 19 22 7 3 15 Manure 5/ 35 30 16 19 6 2 4 12 Hide/skîn 1 1 1 1 1 2 Wool 1 Total return 76 166 36 42 14 5 39 27 Cost Vet. expenses 2 2 1 1 1 — 1 Hired labour 2 2 1 1 .50 - Purchased feed 5 6 1.50 Totalcos t 9 10 2 2 1 - 3 - Netvalu e 67 156 34 40 13 5 36 27 1/ Excluding intermediateproducts . 2/ Assuming calving rateo f50% ,lambin g rate120 %an dfowlin g rate 50%. 3/ Assumingmil k offtakeo f30 0kg/lactation ,calvin g interval2 years , milk price0.4 5BirrAg - 4/ Offtake rateo fcattl e 10%,an do fshee p 34%. Meatvalue da t1. 5 Birr/kg. Average liveweighto x= 27 5kg ,cow s= 20 0kg ,heife r= 12 5 kg,youn g bull- 15 0kg ,calve s» 5 0kg ,lam b- 1 0kg ,ewe s= 3 0kg . Mortalityo fshee passume d17% . 5/ Manure production1 %o fbod yweigh ti nD Mequivalent ,assumin g30 % lossesan dpric eo f0.0 5BirrAg - Correlation analysisha sshow n that therei sn osignifican t difference betweenth egros smargin/h ao fcrop saccordin gt oare a cultivatedpe rfarm ,far msize ,o rsiz eo flivestoc k holding. Although therear eclearl ywid edifference si ncro pproductivit y betweenfarms , the causal factor appearst ob emanagemen t rather than resource availability. Overall farmgros smargi nwa sestimate db ycombinin g cropan d livestock enterprises. Livestock providesmos to fth egros smargi no f the farm. Theoveral l grossmargi npe ryea r averaged 1,403Birr ,o f which65 9Bir r (47%)wa scontribute db ycro pproductio nan d74 4Bir r (53%)b ylivestoc k production. During 1983,a poo r cropyear ,th e contribution from livestockwa sa shig ha s62% . Annualan dmea n gross marginsar eillustrate d inTabl e4.58 . 131 Table 4.58.: FarmGros s Margin byEnterpris e (Bi rr/Farm) Origin 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Annual average Crops 529 823 569 858 514 659 Livestock 601 668 804 799 849 744 Total farmG M 1130 1491 1373 1657 1363 1403 Crops (%) 47 55 41 52 40 47 Livestock (%) 53 45 59 48 62 53 Theannua l returnt olabou ri ncro pproductio nwa s0.8 9Birr/hou r during198 0an d0.8 6Birr/hou r during 1981. Theretur nt olabou ri n livestock production,assumin gn oannua lvariatio ni nlabou r inputswa s 0.11 Birr/houri n1979 ,0.1 2Bir ri n1980 ,0.1 5Bir ri n1981 ,0.1 5Bir r in198 2an d0.1 6Bir ri n1983 . The contributiono flivestoc k tofar m income rises furtheri fth e valueo fdraugh tpowe ri stake n intoaccount . Thisi sillustrate di n Table 4.59. Thecos to fha yan dstraw ,whic har eproduce db yth ecro p enterprisear etake n intoaccoun ti nth ecalculations . Table 4.59.: Annual Gross Margin Including IntermediateProduct sPe r UnitLivestoc k Enterpr] Lse (Birr/Animal) Returns Ox Cow Heifer Y bull Calf Lamb Ewe Donkey Progeny 1/ 37 18 15 Milk 2/ 68 Meat3 / 40 30 19 22 7 3 15 Manure 4/ 35 30 16 19 6 2 4 12 Hide/skin 1 1 1 1 1 2 Draught 5/ 180 90 30 Wool 1 Totalvalu e 256 166 36 132 14 5 40 57 Costs Vet. expenses 2 2 1 1 1 1 Hired labour 2 2 1 1 50 - Hay 18 19 9 12 5 - 50 - Straw 23 24 11 15 3 l' 5 Totalcos t 45 47 22 29 9 - 3 5 Netbenefi t 211 119 14 103 5 5 37 52 Assumptions: 1/ Calving rateo f50 %an dcal fvalu eo f7 4Birr , Also assuming lambing rateo f120 %an dlam bvalu e1 5Birr . 132 2/ Milk offtake30 0kg/lactation ,calvin g interval2 year san dmil k price0.4 5Birr/kg - 3/ Offtake cattle 10%. Meatpric e1. 5Birr/k gL.W . Weighto fo x= 27 5 kg,co w- 20 0kg ,heife r» 12 5kg ,youn g bull= 15 0kg ,cal f= 5 0kg . Offtake sheep 34%,mea t price1. 5Birr/kg . Weighto flam b» 1 0kg , ewe= 3 0kg . 4/ Manure output1 %o fbod yweigh tD Mequivalent ,30 %losse san dpric e of0.0 5BirrAg . 5/ Draught powervalu epe ro xestimate da tequivalen to f0. 6h ao f crops,o r18 0Bir rpe rannum . Youngbul lvalue da t50 %o fthi s value. Annual donkey transport valueda t6 0tonsA m at0.5 0Bir r each. Horseswer eno ttake n intoaccoun ti nth ecalculation s because theyd ono tdirectl y contributet oagricultura l production. Theyar e mainlyuse d fortranspor to fpeople . The incorporationo fintermediat e products increasedth evalu eo f the grossmargi no fth elivestoc k enterpriseb yapproximatel y 32%, and raisedit scontributio nt oth eoveral l farmgros smargi nt oabou t60% . Thisi sillustrate d inTabl e4.60 . Table 4.60.: FarmGros sMargin s Including Intermediate Products (Birr/Farm) Origin 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Average Crops 529 823 569 858 514 659 Livestock 831 858 1079 1046 1103 983 Totalfar mG M 1360 1681 1648 1904 1617 1642 Crops (%) 39 49 34 45 32 40 Livestock (%) 61 k 66 55 68 60 The total grossvalu eo ffar mproductio n averaged Birr 2,570pe r farmpe ryea r between197 9an d1983 . Thegros svalu eo fproductio n(GVP ) was calculateda sth etota lvalu eo fcro pan dlivestoc k products produced onth efarm ,no ttakin g intoaccoun tproductio n costs. GVPwa sestimate d asoutpu tmultiplie db yth emea nweekl y price duringth eyear . Intermediateproduct swer eno ttake n intoaccount . About 54%o fGV Poriginate d fromcro pan dcro pby-product san d46 % fromlivestoc k products (Table 4.61.). The subsistence natureo fth etraditiona l farming systema tDebr e Berhani shighlighte db yrelatin gth eannua l cash incomet ogros svalu e ofproduction . Therati oo fcas h incomet oGV Pwa s14 %i n1979 ,18 % in 1980,18 %i n1981 ,13 %i n198 2an d12 %1983 . Onaverag e only 15%o f productionwa sthu smarketed . 133 Table 4.61.: GrossValu e ofProductio n (Birr/Farm ,1979 - -1983) Origin 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Mean Crops 828 1644 1585 1257 1610 1385 Livestock 1004 1042 1288 1265 1326 1185 TotalGV P 1832 2686 2873 2533 2936 2570 Crops (%) 45 61 55 50 55 54 Livestock (%) 55 49 45 50 45 46 4.10. Roleo fLivestoc k and Interactionswit hCro pEnterpris e 4.10.1. Introduction As indicatedpreviously ,th emajo r functionso fcattl ear et o providedraugh tpowe r forcro pproduction ,manur e for fuelan dmil k and meat fordirec thom econsumption . Small ruminants,almos tonl ysheep , arekep t for investmentan d security. Cattlean d sheepals ogenerat e the majorpar to fcas h income,ar ea n important sourceo fprotei nan d calories,an d supplyhide san dskins . Donkeysprovid e foralmos tal ltranspor to fagricultura l inputs andoutputs . Horseshav eonl ya limite d functioni nth eagricultura l systembu tth etranspor to fpeople . Poultryproduc eegg san dmea t for cashan dhom econsumptions . Previous sectionshav ealread yquantifie d the individual contributionso feac ho fth elivestoc k speciest o agriculturalproduction . Thissectio nwil lhighligh tho weac ho f these functions interactswit h thecro penterpris e and illustrateth e efficiencyo fusin glivestoc ka sa stor eo fwealth . 4.10.2. DraughtPowe r andGrai nProductio n Throughoutmos to fth eEthiopia nhighland slan d istille dusin ga pairo f indigenouszeb uoxe nwhic hpul lth elocall ymad e traditional plough,th e "maresha." Themajorit yo f smallholder farmersow neithe r oneo rn ooxe nan dus e rental,exchang eo rloa narrangement s necessary for timelycultivation . Detailso fthes earrangement s aregive ni n Gryseelse ta l (1984b)an dGryseel san dJutz i (1986aan d b). Nationally, around 29%oF~Ethiopia nfarmer shav en ooxen ,34 %hav eone ,29 %two ,an d only8 %hav ethre eo rmor eoxe n (Ministryo fAgriculture , 1980). Those farmerswit hon eo xnormall yente r a "mekanajo"agreemen t whereby twofarmer swit hon eanima l eachagre e topai r their animalsfo r work onalternat e days. Thedrawbac k ofthi sstrateg y istha t thetim e available forplantin g iss oshort ,tha t thedraugh t capacityi s insufficient toallo wbot h farmers toso wa tth eoptima l time. A two week difference inplantin g timema ymak ea differenc e ofu p to50 %i n theyiel d obtained (Table 4.10.). 134 Those farmerswh od ono thav eeve non eo xente ra "kollo" agreement first,whereb y they renton eo x foron eyea r inretur nfo r between 200an d 300k go fgrain ,t ob epai dafte r thenex tharvest . These "kollo"oxe nar emostl yowne db ytrader swh o invested inoxe n duringa drough tperiod . Poorer farmersente r a "domegna", "yemoyaltegna"o r "balegn"agreemen twhereb y labour isgive nt oanothe r farmer inretur nfo r theus eo fhi soxen . Theusua larrangemen t ist o work twoday s forever yda yo foxe nuse . Farmerswh oar eno tonl yto opoor ,bu tals oto owea k towor k have noalternativ ebu tt ous ea "megazo"agreement . The farmerwit hn ooxe n therebyask sanothe r farmer toploug hhi slan dan doffer sa certai npar t (30t o70% )o fth eyiel d inreturn . A fewfarmer sborro wa youn gbul lan d train itt owork . At the endo f thecroppin g seasonth eanima l isreturne d toth eowner . Thisi s calleda "yegeraffi"agreement . Some farmersals ohav e"wonfel " agreementswhereb yoxenles s farmersoffe r grazing land inretur n forth e useo foxen . Inth eBas oan dWoren aWereda ,20 %o fcontro l farmersdi dno thav e oxen,whil e 28%onl yha done . About 52%o f farmerswer e thusdependen t upon rental,exchang e or loanarrangement s toobtai n sufficientoxe nfo r land cultivation. Farmerswit hon eo xuse d "mekanajo"arrangements . Those farmerswh odi dno tow noxe nuse d labour exchange systems toobtai n theus eo fa nox ,an dthe npaire d itwit ha "mekanajo"ox . Thosewit hn ooxe nordinaril y gained accesst opair so foxe nfo r cultivationfro mnearb yrelatives ,wherea sfarmer swit hon eo x tended to securea secondo xt ofor ma pai r fromneighbour san dno tnecessaril y relatives. Farmers inth eWered ano townin goxe nar eusuall yyoun gan dnewl y established,o rwidowe d ordivorce dwomen . Withinth e four Peasants Associationsunde r study,ther ear ea tota lo f2 9farmer s (4%o f population),wh od ono thav ean y ruminantlivestock . About 45%o fthes e livestock-less farmersar ewomen ,althoug honl y 10%o fth ehousehol d heads inth e fourPA sar efemale . Mosto f theseoxenles s female farmerswil lus e"megazo " arrangements toovercom e the shortageo fdraugh tpowe r and labour availability. Thelan d islease d toa farmerwit h sufficientoxe nan d whowil l cultivate (ploughing,seedin gan dharvesting )crop so ntha t land. Cropyield swil lb e sharedbetwee nbot hfarmer san dvariou s agreementsar e inoperation : "Yekul," "Sisso"o r"Erbo. " "Yekul": Thisleas eagreemen t ismostl y inus e forth e fertile areddaproductiv e land. Itspecifie stha thal fo fth eproduc ewil l be given toth elan downe r andhal f toth eoxe nowner . "Sisso": Onaredd ano nproductiv e land theagreemen twil l be "sisso"whic h specifiestha t twothird so fth eproduc ewil l begive nt o theoxe nowne r andon e third toth e landowner . 135 "Erbo": Onyemed a land theagreemen twil l be "erbo"whic h specifies thatthre equarter so f theproduc ewil l begive n toth eo x owner and onequarte r toth elan downer . The impacto fdraugh t power availability on cropproductio n inth e Baso andWoren aWered aha sbee n reported byGryseel se ta l (1986b), Gryseelsan d Durkin (1986), andAnderson ,Gryseel sancTDurki n (1986). For thispurpose ,th e surveydat a reported inthi s studywer e analyzed by least squareprocedure s (Harvey, 1977). Combined analyseswer emad ewit h the followingparameter s asdependen tvariables : area cultivated, seed use, andyield spe rh aan dpe r farm. Theanalysi swa sdon e separately for cereal andpuls eproductio nbecaus e theyhav edifferen t labour requirements and grossmargins ,a swel l asdifferen t feedvalues . The statistical model included the randomeffec t of farmer within PAan d the fixed effectso fPA ,yea r ofplanting ,numbe r ofoxe n owned at time ofplanting , fertilizer used,an d interaction terms foryea r by ox ownershipan d PAb yyea r ofplanting . Household size (expressed as adult equivalents)an d livestock holding excluding oxen (expressed as tropical livestock units)wer euse d ascovariates . The levelo f oxenownershi pha d a significant effect (P<0.01)o n both theyiel dpe rh a and totalare a cultivated of cereal production. Themea nare a cultivatedwit h cerealswa s 1.76 habu t farmersownin g two ormor e oxen cultivated onaverag e 32%mor e land tocereal s than farmers owningn ooxen . Farmersownin g oneo xcultivate d an intermediate area. The overall least squaresestimat e ofmea nne tcerea lyiel d (after deducting the seed input)wa s 516kg/ha . Cerealyield spe rh a of farmers with twoo rmor e oxenwer e onaverag e 35%greate r than those of farmers owning nooxe nan d 14%highe r than those of farmerswit h one ox (Table 4.62). The increment intota l cerealproductio n per farm (after deducting the seed input)du e toownin g one ox rather thann oo xwa s estimated at 266k gpe r farm;th e incrementdu e toownin g the second oxwa s estimated at18 6k gpe r farm. Figure 4.14.graph s the least squaresestimate so f total cereal areape r farmb yyea r forthe^thre elevel so foxe nownershi p specified in themodel . The graph showsth epositiv e impacto fgreate r oxen ownership ontota l farm cereal area. The effect oncerea l area cropped ofownin g a pair asoppose d ton ooxe nwa sgreates t in197 9whe n farmerswit h apai r sowed 77%mor e land than thosewithou t oxen. Thedifference swer e also substantial in198 0 (+26%), 1982 (+26%)an d 1984 (+65%). Theyear swit h the largestdifferences ,197 9an d 1984,bot h followed ayea rwhe n therewa sa shortmai ngrowin g season. In1978 ,th e area recorded the lowest rainfall for 20years ,an d although therewer e good rains inJanuar y and February of the followingyea r (1979)farmer s with twooxe nuse d their oxen tomaximiz e theare a theypu tunde r cropt o makeu p for the shortfall of 1978. The farmers owning nooxe nwer e severely constrained inth eare a theycultivate d as theyha d towai t until the farmerswit h anoxe npai r satisfied their ownneed s forpower . In1984 ,farmer s suffered from failure of the 1983 seasonan d therewer e no short rains. Thus in197 9an d 1984 farmerswit h twooxe n ploughed extra land tomak eu p for thepreviou sba dyear ,an d sooxenles s farmers were again penalized. 136 Figure 4.16.: Area Cultivatedwit h Cereals forThre e Levelso f Oxen Ownership (Ha/Farm) 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 year Source: Gryseelse ta l (1986b) Twomai n factorsaffecte d theavailabilit y ofdraugh tpowe r for oxenless farmers inanyon eyear . Thesewer e theoutcom e of the previous croppingyea r and theduratio n of the short rains. Ifeithe r of these factors applied, theoxenles s farmerwil l cultivate lessare aa sa consequence ofdeferre d access todraugh t power. Inyear swit h effective rains fromFebruar y toMa y the soil ismor eeasil yploughed , themos t demanding cultivations canb edon e before Junean d individual power shortages canb eovercom e ina mor e timelyway . Also,earl y rains produce better pasture growth sooxe nar e fitter forwor k inthes eyears . Ifbot h these factorsappl y thenegativ e production effect of limited oxenownershi p is compounded. The successful cropyear so f 1980an d 1982 togetherwit h good short rains in198 1 and 1983enable d all farmers to cultivate approximately equal areas tocereal s irrespective ofoxe nownership . However, 1981an d 1983prove d tohav e poor long rains,an d grain yields per hawer e substantially reduced (Table 4.62). 137 Table 4.62: Least SquaresEstimat eo fGros sCerea lYiel d (kg/ha)fro m the Interaction ofYea ran dLeve l ofO xOwnershi p Zero — — 79 538 582 796 80 664 916 873 81 411 600 623 82 389 804 740 83 409 317 558 84 965 792 968 Mean 563 668 (+19%) 760(+14 % Farmerswit hn ooxe nha d substantially loweryield spe rh a than farmerswit h twoo rmor eoxen ,excep t in1984 . During thatyear ,ther e wasn o 'belg'season ,an doxenles s farmerswer eno tabl e tocultivat e sufficient landdurin g the 'meher'season . Theywer edesperat e for grain after three consecutiveyear so f lowcro pyields ,an d therefore extensivelyuse d 'guie'o r soilburnin g onthei r land. Thispractic e dramatically increased averageyield spe rha . As 'guie'i smuc hmor e labour intensive thanth eusua lmetho d of landpreparation , oxenless farmers reduced theirare aunde r cultivationwit hcereals ,use d only the most productive land,an d leftplot so flowe r soil fertility fallow. Table 4.63.: Least SquaresEstimate so fTota lNe t Cereal Production from the Interaction ofLeve lo fOxe nOwnershi p andYea r (Kg/Farm, 1979-1984) 17 Level ofoxe nownershi p Year Zero 1 2 1979 550 830 1313 1980 774 1396 1408 1981 466 889 786 1982 670 1169 1121 1983 692 463 741 1984 1179 1184 1675 Overall 722 988 (+37%) 1174 (+19%) 1/ Netyields , i.e.afte r deductiono f seedinputs . Table 4.63.an d figure 4.17 are illustrative of the impacto n whole net farmcerea lproductio n of increased oxenownership . Forth e studyperiod , farmersownin gon eo xproduce d onaverag ea nestimate d37 % (266kg )mor e cereals than farmerswit hn ooxen . Farmerswit h twooxe n had a further 19% (186kg )advantag e over farmerswit h nooxen . Overall, farmerswit h twooxe nar e shownt oproduc e 63%mor egrai n than farmers withn ooxen . 138 Figure 4.17.: TotalNe t FarmCerea l Production forThre eLevel so fOxe n Ownership (Kg/Farm) 1750 1500- 1250 £ u O 000 J* 750 500 250 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 year Therewa sn o significant impact ofo xownershi po n theproductio n ofpulses . Themai n influenceso npuls eproductivit y arose fromth e differences incroppin g environment as regards frost risk and differences between farmerswithi n aPA . Farmerswit hmor e oxen canals ocultivat ebel gcrop smor e easily. Farmerswit h twoo rmor e oxen could ploughbetwee n twoan d three times more landdurin g thebel g season than farmerswithou t oxen. This is illustrated inTabl e 4.64. Table 4.64. Belg Plantingsan dO xHoldin g (m2/Farm) Number ofOxe nOwne d Year 0 I 2 3+ 1981 741 1771 1957 1912 1982 839 1908 2586 2520 1983 1803 3145 4934 4607 Mean 1128 2275 3159 3013 139 Therewa sn ostatistica l evidence that farmerswit hn ooxe n planted cropslate r than farmerswit hon eo rmor eoxen . Therewer en o significantdifference s inplantin gwee ko fbarle ybetwee n farmers owning zero,one ,two ,o rmor e thanthre e oxen. Thisma yindicat e that impact ofplantin gwee k oncro pyiel d iss ohig h that farmersprefe rt o optimally cultivate a smaller area rather thantr ya large r areabu twit h severepenaltie so ncro pyields . The relevanceo fth eimportanc eo fth eavailabilit y oftimel y access todraugh tpowe r onare a cultivated andtota l farmgrai n productionha sbee n confirmed forothe rarea si nth eEthiopia n highlands instudie sb yITAD/AI DBan k (1986),Gryseel se ta l (1986b)an dDejen e (1985an d 1987). 4.10.3. Livestock forSecurit yan dInvestmen t The secondmos t important functiono fcattle ,bu tth emajo r objective farmershav ewit hth eshee penterprise ,i sit sus efo rsecurit y and investment. Animalsar epurchase dan dsol daccordin gt oth ecas h flowneeds ,an da sa storeo fwealth . Farmersconside r livestock tob ea more reliable storeo fwealt h thanothe r alternatives sucha sban k deposits. Iti sals oa ninvestmen twhich iseas yt oconver t intocash . Despite thelo wproductivit yo flivestoc k inthi s traditional system, this investment isa soundone . Theannua l rateo fretur nt o investment inlivestoc k ofloca l breedsca nb eestimate d at25 %fo rshee pan d31 % for cattle. This figurewa scalculate dusin ga methodolog y first developed byUpto n (1985). Themetho d issimplifie da si ttake sonl yth emajo r livestock products intoaccount ,i.e .mea t forsheep ,an dmil k andmea t forcattle . Themode l couldhoweve r easilyb eexpande d totak e intoaccoun t other livestock commodities. Theshee pmode l (Table4.65. )follow s theUpto n method. Thecattl emode l (Table 4.66.)wa smodifie d toenabl eth e incorporationo fmil k intoth emodel . Theassumption smad e forth e calculationo fth eannua l rateo fretur nar ebase do nth etechnica l parametersa scollecte d inth esurvey . The rateo fretur nt oinvestmen t inlivestoc k canb econsidere da s being attractive,an dfarmer swil l invest their surpluscas h inth e purchaseo fanimals . Thisoccur sparticularl y after good harvestswhe na substantial parto fth ecro pca nb emarketed . Oxenar epurchase d when theyar erequire d forfar mproduction ,jus tbefor ean ddurin gth e ploughing season. After thever yba dharvest so fth e198 3cro pseason ,almos tal l farmers soldanimal sdurin g 1984. A totalo f26 4ruminan t livestockan d 39 chickenwer e soldb yth e4 2contro l farmersdurin g thisperiod . The timingo fth esal ean dth enumbe r andtyp eo flivestoc k involved is illustrated inTabl e4.67 . 140 Table 4.65.: AnnualRat eo fRetur nShee pEnterpris e A. Average littersiz e 1.00 B. Parturition interval 300day s 1.00x365 C. Annual reproductive rate 1.22 300 D. Survival ratet othre emonth s 0.72 E. Survival rate fromthre e totwelv emonth s 0.90 F. Survival rate0 t otwelv emonth s (DxE) 0.65 G. Effective lambing rate (CxF) 0.79 H. Liveweighta ttwelv emonth s 15k g I. Productivity: liveweightproductio npe rew e (GxH) 11.85k g J. Numbero fewe spe r ram 16 K. Mortalityo fbreedin gstoc k 0.18 L. Meanpric epe rk g liveweight 1.2 Birr M. Pricepe radul tew e 30Bir r N. Pricepe radul t ram 40Bir r P. Grossoutpu tpe rew e (IxL) 14.11Bir r Q. Costo few emortalit y (KxM) 5.40 Birr R. Costo f rammortalit y (KxN) 7.20 Birr S. Breeding stockdepreciatio n(0+-= ) 5.85 Birr T. Costo fveterinar y care,fee dan dlabou r 3.00 Birr U. Netoutpu tpe rew epe ryea r (P-S-T) 5.26 Birr V. Capital investmentpe rew e (M+N/J) 32.30Bir r W. Annual rateo f return (U/Vxl00) 16.28% Table 4.66.: AnnualRat eo fRetur nCattl e Enterprise A. Calving interval 690day s B. Annual reproductive rate (365/A) 0.53 C. Survival ratet otwelv emonth s 0.78 D. Effective calving rate (BxC) 0.41 E. Liveweighta t1 2month s 75k g F. Liveweightproductio npe r cow (DxE) 31k g G. Number ofcow spe rbul l , 3 H. Mortalityo fbreedin g sto<*k 0.10 I. Meanpric epe rk gliveweigh t 1.50 Birr J. Pricepe r cow 180Bir r K. Pricepe rbul l 250Bir r L. Grossmea toutpu tpe r cow (Fxl) 47Bir r M. Grossmil k productionpe r cow 292k g N. Annualmil k production (MxD) 120k g O. Milk pricepe r litre 0.50 Birr P. Grossvalu emil k output 60Bir r Q. Totalgros soutpu tpe rco w (P+L) 107Bir r R. Costo fco wmortalit y (HxJ) 18Bir r S. Costo fbul lmortalit y (HxK) 25Bir r T. Breeding stockdepreciatio n (RxS/G) 26Bir r U. Costso fveterinar y care,fee dan d labour 47Bir r V. Netoutput/cow/yea r (Q-T-U) 34Bir r W. Capital investmentpe r cow (J+K/G) 263Bir r X. Annual rateo f return (V/Wxl00) 12.92% 141 Table 4.67.: Livestock Sales (1984) Total % of Total Jan-March April -June July-Sept Oct-Dec sold holding purch. Cattle 29 22 17 7 75 27 18 Sheep 39 63 44 31 177 41 29 Goats 3 2 5 90 Equines 3 2 1 1 7 6 3 Chicken 15 10 5 30 22 41 Total ruminants 71 90 64 39 264 Meanpe r holding 1.7 2 .14 1.52 0 .92 6.28 Animalsar e soldaccordin g toth ecas h flowneeds ,an dth e opportunityo fmakin gprofits . When farmershav e tomak emajo r expenditures foreithe rhousehol do f farmpurposes ,shee po ryoun gcattl e willb e soldaccordin gt oneed . The saleo flivestoc k isa selective process. Smallstock (lambs,shee pan dgoats )ar esol d first,the nyoun g cattlean dequines ,the ncows ,an d ina finalan ddesperat e stage,oxen . Thisnee d forcas hi susuall yt opurchas e foodgrainafte rpoo rharvests , forhousehol d expenditures,t obu yfar minput ssuc ha sseeds ,o r topa y for social obligations sucha sweddin gparties . Mostsale stak eplac e fromApri lt oJune . Livestock isa riskyfor mo fcapital ,a si tca nb elos t through thedeat ho fanimals . The "edir"institutio n isa n insurance systeman d servest oreduc eth e risko flos sfo rth eindividua l farmers. "Edir"i s a groupo f farmerswh ohav ecommitte d themselves tomutua l support for specificexpenses . Thisma yconsis to fth ecollectio no fa certai n amounto fmone y fromth emember s incas eon eo fthe mlose san ycattle ,o r whenon eha sexpense si nconnectio nwit ha funeral . The "edir"ha sa formalorganizationa l structure,an dha sbetwee n 30an d 50members . Most farmersals oparticipat e in "awchachin"agreements . Thisi sa no x insurance systemwhereb yth emember-farmer scontribut ea certai namoun t ofmone ywhe non eo fthe mloose sa no xfo raccidenta l reasons. 4.10.4. Crop-livestockInteraction s Inmixe dagricultura l systems,clos e interactionsoccu rbetwee n thecro pan d livestock enterprises. Thegenera lnatur eo fthes e interactions and the implications for farming systems researchhav ebee n reviewedb yMclntir ean dGryseel s (1987). Linkagesbetwee nbot h enterprises canb ecompetitiv e for resources (e.g.land ,labou ran d capital),o r complementary (manure for fertilizer,draugh tpowe r forcro p production). The strongpositiv e correlationbetwee n cultivated areaan d livestock holdingwa salread yhighlighte d insectio n4.5.2 . This correlationwa scause d byth ecumulativ e effectso fdraugh tpowe ran d feedavailability . Although itwa s shown that thenumbe r ofanimal so f 142 differentspecie sincreas ea sth eare acultivate d increase,o na pe r hectarebasis ,th ecorrelatio n isinverse . Small farmscarrie d proportionallymor e livestock. Farmso fles stha n1. 6 hao f cultivated land carriedo naverag e74 3kg/ha ,thos ebetwee n1. 6 and 3h a carried 593 kg/ha,betwee n3 an d 4h a 571kg/ha ,whil e larger farmscarrie d 558 kg/ha. Thishighe r stocking ratewa s reflected inal l species (Table 4.68.). Table 4.68.: StockingRate sAccordin g toCultivate dAre a (No.o f Livestock/Farm/Ha ) Groupso ffarmer s Small cultivating Cattle ruminants Equines Lesstha n1. 6 ha (I) 3.74 5.30 1.57 Between 1.6 and 3h a (II) 2.23 3.71 1.02 Between 3an d 4h a (III) 2.01 3.64 1.02 More than4 h a (IV) 2.26 3.86 0.99 Although thedifferenc e instockin g ratewa shighl y significant (P<0.01)betwee nGrou p Ian d theothe r groups,ther ewa sn o statistically significantdifferenc ebetwee nGroup s II,II Ian d IV. Thisma y indicate that farmerslimi tthei r livestockholdin g tofee davailabilit yan d maximumstockin grate . Table 4.69.: MeanCultivate dArea ,Fallo wArea ,Pastur eArea ,an d Productivity ofCerea l Strawso fDifferen tFarme rGroup s 1/ I II III IV (n=52) (n=109) (n=41) (n=16) Meanare acultivate d (ha/farm) 1.15 2.83 3.33 4.74 Mean falloware a (ha/farm) 0.56 0.88 0.95 0.91 Meanpastur e area (ha/farm) 1.23 '1.7 6 1.23 1.94 Meanproductivit y cereal straw (kg/ha) 668 489 623 441 1/ GroupI refer st ofarmer scultivatin g lesstha n1. 6 ha,Grou pI I cultivatebetwee n1. 6 and 3ha ,Grou p IIIbetwee n 3an d 4ha ,an d GroupI Vmor etha n4 ha . Thedat aar emea n results forth eperio d 1979-1983. Thehighe r stocking rateo fGrou pI i scause db y thegreate r feed availability (Table 4.69.). Farmerso fGrou pI hav eproportionall ymuc h more land fallowtha nothe r farmerGroups . The ratiofallo warea/are a cultivated is49 %i nGrou p I,31 %i nGrou p II,29 %i nGrou p IIIan d19 % inGrou p IV. This isdu e toa lac k ofdraugh tpowe r ando flabou r availability. The ratioarabl e land (areacultivate d+ fallowland )t o pastureare awa s 72%i nGrou p I,47 %i nGrou p II,29 %i nGrou p IIIan d 34% inGrou p IV. The shortageo fdraugh tpowe r isillustrate d byth e meano xholdin g ofeac hGroup : 0.39 inGrou p I,1.3 8 inGrou p II,1.6 0 inGrou p IIIan d 2.56 inGrou pIV . 143 Theaverag e familysiz ewa s 3.15 inGrou pI ,4.6 1 inGrou pII , 4.95 inGrou pII Ian d 5.38 inGrou pIV . Theavailabilit yo f family labour increasesthu swit hhighe r farmsizes . Insectio n4.8. ,i twa salread y illustrated thatth edominan tpar t ofcas hincom eoriginate d fromtrad ei nanimal san dth esal eo flivestoc k products. Themor eanimal s farmersown ,th ehighe r their cash incomean d thehighe r theproportio n thati sderive d fromlivestoc k production. Althoughgrai n salesincrease dwit hgreate r oxholdings ,th eoveral l contributiono fcro pproduct st ocas h income remained limited toles s than15 %o f farmproduction . The relationo xholdin gan dgrai nsale si s illustrated inTabl e4.70 . Table 4.70.: GrainSale sb yO xHoldin g (Birr/Farm) N ofoxe nowne d 1980 1981 1982 1983 0 50 44 0 0 1 54 66 52 12 2 76 81 57 22 3+ n.a. 140 114 32 Table 4.70 clearly illustratesth estron gcorrelatio nbetwee no x holdingan d grain sales. Indrough tyear s sucha s1983 ,almos tn ograi n wassold . Cash income isprimaril yuse d forth epurchas eo fhousehol d items and clothes,bu tals ot obu ycro pinputs . Theonl ymarketabl e crop inputsar eseed ,labou ran dminera l fertilizer. Seedgrainan dlabou rar e predominantly supplied byth e farman donl ya mino rpreparatio n is purchased. Farmerswit hmor eanimal sar emor elikel y tous eminera l fertilizer,becaus eo f theirhighe r cashavailability . Only 3%o f farmersownin g 0-4 livestock (GroupI )us eminera l fertilizer,bu tthi s increasest o61 %i nGrou pI I (5-10livestock) ,61 %i nGrou pII I (11-20 livestock)an d81 %i nGrou pI V (moretha n2 0livestock) . Asalmos tn o fertilizerwa suse ddurin g 1984,thi syea rwa sexclude d fromth e tabulations (Table 4.71.). Table 4.71.: FertilizerUs eb yLivestoc k Holding Quantityo ffertilize ruse d % offarmer susin g (kg/farm) Mean 1979198 0198 1J98 2198 3 Mean 1979198 0198 1 1982198 3 I 3 12 25 0 0 0 47 50 45 - - - II 61 54 90 50 33 80 47 73 53 77 4 27 III 66 84 78 67 36 67 54 54 75 56 53 31 IV 81 89 78 90 67 81 61 83 79 47 42 54 Thequantitie so fminera l fertilizer appliedb ythos e farmers using it,wer eno t significantlydifferen tbetwee n farmergroups . 144 Farmerswit hlarge r livestock holdingsals ohire d significantly more labour forcro pproduction . Farmerso fGrou pI hire do naverag e only 2Birr/yea r oflabou r forcro pproduction ,farmer so fGrou pI Ian d Group IIIfo r7 Birr/year ,whil e farmerso fGrou pI Vannuall yhire d for more than1 5Bir r oflabour . Asa resulto fth egreate r fertilizeruse ,farmer sownin gmor e animalsgenerall yha dhighe r cropyields ,althoug hth eeffec twa sno t significant foral lyears . Figure4.18 . illustratesth e indirecteffect s oflivestoc kholding so nth eproductivit yo fbarley ,whic h isth emajo r crop. Theeffec twa ssignifican t in1979 ,198 0an d 1982 (P<0.5). During 1981an d 1983fros t reduced cropyield sconsiderabl y and thepositiv e effectso ffertilize rus ewer egreatl ydiminished . Figure 4.18.: MeanCro pYield sb yLivestoc k Holding 1200 0t o4 livestoc k 5t o1 0livestoc k 11t o2 0livestoc k >20livestoc k 1979 1983 As livestock holdings increase,manur eproductio n increasesalso . A substantial portion isdrie dan duse da s fuel,whil emos to fth e remainder issold . Althoughquantitativ eevidenc e isno tavailable , discussionswit h farmers indicated thatsurplu smanur ewoul db euse da s fertilizer onth earedd aproductiv e land. Infertilize r trials 145 throughout theEthiopia nhighlands ,NFI U (1987)foun d stronggrai nyiel d responses to relatively low (10tonnes/ha )manur eapplications . 4.11. Major Constraints toa n Increase ofFar mOutpu t 4.11.1. Introduction Farmers inth eBas oan dWoren aWered aar e subsistence oriented and theiroveral l objective ist oproduc e sufficient food todail y feed their family. Theygenerall yposses sa hig h levelo f traditional agricultural skills,an dus e their resourceseffectively . Farmproductivit y isver y low,whe n comparedwit h thatobtaine d insimila r ecological zones elsewhere inth eworl d primarilybecaus eo f thelac k of technical progress. Farmerpractice shav e remainedbasicall yunchange d for centuries. Inpreviou s sections itwa s showntha tdurin gnorma lyear s just sufficient food isproduce d to fulfill the subsistence requirement. When cropsproductio n fails,farmer sbecom ehighl ydependen tupo nth esal e of livestock togenerat e sufficient cash topurchas e foodgrain forth e family. Livestock are sold selectively,accordin g toth e rolethe ypla y in farmproduction . Ifcro p failureoccur so na regional scale,th e farmers' termso f tradewil l rapidlyworsen ,a sth eprice so nth e livestock market collapsedu e tooversupply ,whil e grainprice s increase sharplybecaus e of theaccelerate d demand and the limited amounto f grainso noffer . Ifsuc ha situation isprolonged ,thi sproces send s in destitutionwhe n the farmer andhi s familyar e forced toleav e their homesteads insearc ho fassistanc eelsewhere . During thewidesprea ddrough tan d famineo f1984-8 5 thisproces s was common throughout thenorther nEthiopia nhighland s (Gryseelsan d Jutzi, 1986a). AlthoughDebr eBerha nwa sals oaffecte db ydrought ,i t didno thav e the famine consequences facedb yothe rarea so f the country. Although grainprice s increased sharply livestock priceskep t relatively stabledu e to thevicinit yo fAddi sAbab awher e incomesha d notbee n affected bydrought ,an d theactivitie s of traderswh opurchase doxen , speculatingo n substantialprofit sonc e thedrough twoul db e finished. Theproductio n system inth eWered a isfragile ,an d theabilit y of farmers toproduc e sufficient food for their familywil l comeunde r increasingpressure . The rapidpopulatio n growtho f2.8 %p.a .(FAO , 1986d)tha toccur s inth eEthiopia nhighlands ,lead st odiminishin g farm sizes,encroachmen t of cropping land intograzin g areasan dothe r less fertile areas,an d a lesseningo f theabilit y the sustain food production. Given their lowcas h incomes,farmer slac k investment capital formajo r improvements in theproductivit y of their crop land as forexampl e through irrigation. Lowcos tway s andmean snee d tob e found to increase to productivity of this smallholder farming system toenabl e food production tokee ppac ewit hpopulatio ngrowth . Sucha n improvement inth e system isa tpresen t constrainedb y anumbe r afactor s thatlimi t the productivity ofbot h thecro pan d livestock enterprise. These factors are listed in the following sections. Theywer e identified through our ownanalysi so f the farmingsystem ,an d individualdiscussion swit h farmersan d officialso fPAs . 146 4.11.2. FactorsLimitin g theProductivit y ofCro p Enterprises LowSoi l Fertility andHig hRate so f Erosion of SlopyLan 3 Onth e slopes,soil sar e stronglydeficien t innitroge n and phosphorus. Of thearabl e land,aroun d 30%i scontinuousl y kept as fallowwhil e anadditiona l 20%i skep tunde r pasture. Long fallow periods,ofte nbetwee n 3an d 15years ,ar e common. The lengtho f these fallows isgraduall y reducing, reflectingpopulatio n growth. Inth e absence of frosto rhailstorms , crop responses to phosphorus fertilization canb esubstantial . The rateso ferosio nar ehigh ,an d causedb y the rapid rateo f deforestation. Theeffect so fwin dan dwate r erosionar e particularly devastating. PoorDrainag e ofVertisol s About70 %o fth ecroplan d inth eWered a iso nsoil swit hverti c properties. These soilshav e ahig hcla yconten t and are fertile,bu t they arepron e towaterloggin g anddifficul t toplough . Because of the waterlogging problems thechoic eo fcrop s isrestricte d to relatively low yielding speciesan d land racestoleran t of surplusmoisture . The problem ofwaterloggin g also causes the farmer tokee pa substantial part ofhi s land aspastur e because of thedifficultie s ingrowin g foodcrops . Hailan d Frost,an dShor tGrowin g Season Hailstorms occur frequentlydurin g June and July,a twhic h time most cropsar eplanted . Thisofte naffect sgerminatio n ratesan d the earlygrowt h of theplant . Farmers theneithe rhav e toplan tagain ,o r theywil l suffer greatly reducedyields . Night frostsoccu r frequently fromOctobe r toJanuary , the harvest period, severely affectingyields . The lowyield so f 1983 (netgrai n yields less than 300kg/ha )wer e almost entirelydu e tofrost . The incidence of frostan d the longdr y season restrict theplan t growingperio d toa maximu m of 120days . HighSee d Rates Seed ratesvar ybetwee n 150an d 260kg/h a for themajo rcrops . This issubstantiall y higher than the recommended rates (IAR, 1979). The high seed ratesar edu e toth e stonynatur e of the land,th e incidence of birdsan d rats,a swel l ashai l storms,an d thepractic e of seed broadcasting rather than rowplanting . As a result,a farmeruse s on average 350k go r 20%o fhi s totalproductio n for seedpurposes . CropPest san d InsectAttack s Insects sucha saphid s cause considerable damage towhea t and barley. Themai n croppest s are chocolate spot,rus tan dsmut . 147 4.11.3. Factors Limiting theProductivit y of Livestock Enterprises Livestock Functionsan d Farmer Objectives Livestock productivity inth e smallholder farming systemo f the DebreBerha nare a islo wfo r finaloutput ssuc ha smil k andmeat ,bu t high interm so f intermediateproduct s sucha sdraugh tpower , investment and security,transpor t and fuel. Theprincipa l constraint toth e development of livestock productionwit h theai mo f increasing offtakeo f meatan dmilk ,i sth e importance givenb y the farmerst othes e intermediateproducts . Cattlear e thedominan t specieso fth eher d (57%o f themea nTL U holding)an d the farmersbreedin g objective for cattle ist oproduc e oxen for cropcultivation . Oxenconstitut e 20%o f thecattl eherd ,th e rest arebac ku p stock that form the reproductive apparatus. Immaturesmak e up to 46%o f thecattl eherd . Only 24%o f thecattl eher d aremilkin g cowsan d offtake formea twa sonl y 9% per annum. Small ruminantshav ea highe r offtake ratebecaus eo f their role ascas h generatorsan d theirhighe r rateo f reproduction. Theyar e however only 22%o f theTL Uholding . Equinesprovid e transportonly , while theyar e 21%o f theTL Uholding . Consequently, themea nannua l outputpe r farm is24 0k go fmea t and 123k go fmilk . For thiscalculatio n anofftak e rateo f 9% for cattlean d 34%fo r sheep,a mil k production of 292k gpe r lactation and aneffectiv e calving rateo f 42%wa s assumed. PerTL Uo f 250kg ,th emea nannua l outputo f finalproduct s is therefore only 31k go fmea tan d 16k go fmilk . The corresponding figures forTropica lAfric aa sa whol e are 18.5k go fmea tan d 56k go f milk. Meatproductio n foruni tTL U isconsiderabl y higher,an dmil k production substantially lower in theWered acompare d toelsewher e in Africa. Thedominan t farmer objective ist o fulfill the subsistence food requiremento fhi s family. The staple food consistso fcereal san d pulsesan d the intermediate functionso f livestock, i.e.t o serve asa n input inth ecro penterprise ,ar e therefore ofoverwhelmin g importance to the farmer. Theproductivit y of livestock inthes e intermediate functions ismor e related tonumber s than tooutpu tpe runi tanimal . Jahnke (1984)illustrate d thiswel lb y stating: "Two leanoxe n canb euse d forploughin g by the traditional method,on e faton e isuseless . The farmerwh o ownstw o small sheep can sellon e intime so f strifean d isstil l leftwit hon eunlik e the farmer whoonl yown son ebi g sheep. Two smalldonkey s transport almost twice as mucha son ebi gone . Themor eanimal sar ekep to nth egrazin gdurin g the day themor emanur e canb e collected inth eevening. " Asa result farmerswil lbuil du p theirher d and flock size to maximize the fulfillment of these intermediate functions. Most grazing iscommuna l and there isn olimi t toth enumbe r ofanimal sa farmer can bring to thepasture . AsJahnk e (1984)point sou t "thelarge r an 148 individual'sher d thelarge r thebenefit s tohimself, whil e thedecreas e inproductivit y due toovergrazin g isshare db yall. " The optimum carrying capacityo fpasture s isalmos tcontinousl yexceeded ,an d improvemento fpasture so ro fanima lproductivit y isver ydifficult ,i f not impossible,unde r thislan d tenure system. The inherent tendency forovergrazin g increases the relative dependence of farmerslivestoc k upon cereal crop residuesan d stubble,a s individual livestock holdingsincrease . Thedominan t importance ofth e intermediate functionso f livestock,an d the inherent tendencyo f farmerst o increase their livestock holdingsbeyon dwha t available feed resourcesallo w for other thanmaintenanc e requirements,i sth emajo r constraint toth e improvement of theproductivit y ofmil k andmea tpe ranimal . InadequateAvailabilit y ofDraugh t Power Thenumbe r ofoxe nowne d isa strongdeterminan t in smallholder grainproduction ,throug h theeffect so nare acultivate d andgrai nyield s per hectare. About 52%o f the farmersd ono tow n thetw ooxe npresentl y required for cultivationan dar edependen to n rentingo r exchange arrangements toobtai nadditiona l oxen for cultivation. Minimumpowe r cultivation systemsar e therefore tob edeveloped ,tha t reduce the dependenceupo ndraugh tanimal savailable . AnimalNutritio n Therear e severe shortageso fanima l feed at theen d of thedr y seasonan d thebeginnin g of themai n rains. Themos t criticalmonth sar e fromApri l toJune ,whe nvirtuall yn ogras s islef to n thepastures ,an d when the rainshav eno tye t stimulated plantgrowth . The farmer's stocks ofha yan d strawar ealmos tdepleted ,whil e feeddemand spea k during this periodo fploughin g and seedbedpreparation . The lack of feed combined with highenerg ydemand s results in rapidweigh t losso fdraugh t animals during thisperiod . There isn oconclusiv e evidencehoweve r that this weight loss results in reducedpowe r output (Astatkee t al, 1986b). Feedstuffsa tDebr eBerha n (pasture,ha yan d straws)hav e a low digestibility ofbetwee n 40an d 50%. The conversionefficienc y of feed intoliveweigh t gain islow . Protein levelsar ewel l belowth e requirements. Almost all feed isuse d formaintenanc e requirementsan d very little isavailabl e forproduction . Thisnutritiona l stress causes lowgrowt h rates,poo r fertilityan dhig h calfmortality . Iti s necessary todevelo ptechnologie stha tincreas e feedan dprotei n availabilitydurin g thedr y season,an d improve thedigestibilit y of local feedstuffs. An improvement inth equalit yo f crop residueswoul d increase crop-livestock interactions. LowGeneti c Potential of ZebuBree d Averagemil k offtakeo fZeb ucow sa tDebr eBerha n isonl y 292k g for a lactationo f 6 to7 months ,an dwit h acalvin g interval of 22 months. Studiesa tth e Institute ofAgricultura l Research (IAR, 1976) have indicated however thateve nwit h improved feedingpractices , productivitywil l increaseonl ymarginally . The introduction of higher yielding breedsha s tob e considered. 149 AnimalHealt h Themajo ranima lhealt hproblem sconstrainin g animal production areparasiti cdiseases ,causin g substantial productionlosses , particularly inyoun g stock. Liverflukeparticularl y isthough t tob e responsible forabou t 50%o fmortalit yo fsheep . Itals oaffect smil k production,draugh tpowe routput ,fertilit yan dgrowth . Cheaphealt h packagesan dappropriat emanagemen t strategiesar e necessaryt o alleviate thisimportan tconstraint . Marketing All control farmersar emember so fth eChristia nOrthodo x church, whichobserve sa tleas t14 0fastin gday seac hyear ,durin gwhic h consumptiono fanima lprotei nexcep t fish isprohibited . Asmeat ,an d milk offtake arepresentl y low,ther e isn oseriou smarketin g constraint atpresent . However,i foutpu to fmil k andmea twer e toincreas e considerably,marketin gproblem swoul doccur . Thedevelopmen t of small scalean d lowcos tprocessin g technologieswoul d thenbecom e anecessity . LowReproductiv e Performance Calving intervalso floca lcow saverag e 22months, whil e lambing percentagesaverag e 119%. Thesear elo wcompare d toresult sobtaine d on-station (IAR,1976) . Through improved feedingan dhealt hpractices , reproductiveperformanc ecoul d increase considerably. 4.11.4 Institutional Constraints LandTenur e Ethiopian smallholder farmershav eusers 'rights ,no towners ' rightsove r thelan d theytill . Theyd ono thav e securityo fownership , andhav en oguarante e thatthe ywil lnex tyea rhav eacces st oth esam e land they till thisyear . Asa result,farmer sar ediscourage d to invest inlan d improvements. A greater security inlan dtenur e isnecessary . Pasturesar emostl ycommuna lan dacces s forgrazin g isrestricte d to animalso f farmersbelongin g totha tparticula r association. This createsa n inherent tendency forovergrazing ,a sfarmer scanno t "herd around"an d tryt ofin dhighe rproductivit ypasture s inothe rPA's . Price Policies Governmentmarke t intervention reducesth eamoun to fgrai n farmers can sella tfre emarke tprices . Atpresent ,les stha n 5%o ffar m productiono f theBas oan dWoren aWered a issol d toAM Ca tofficia l governmentprices . Ifth egovernmen twer e toincreas e thisshar e however,farmer sma yb ediscourage d toproduc eabov e subsistenceneeds . Socio-cultural Constraints Farmers inth eWered aar emember so f theChristia nOrthodo x church whichobserve saroun d 180religiou sholiday sdurin gwhic h iti sno t allowed towor k on theland ,i nadditio n toth e14 0fastin gday sdurin g 150 which reducedenerg y intakeoccurs . Incro pproduction ,th eeffect so f this labour constraint areparticularl y strongdurin gAugus tan d September, resulting inalmos t totalneglectio no fweeding . Since the socialist resolutiono f 1974,farmer sals ohav e to fulfill communal obligations fora tleas t 2day seac hweek ,whic h reduces theamoun to f time theyhav eavailabl e for farmwork . During 1984an d 1985, thegovernmen t launched avillagizatio n programwhic h further reduced theamoun to f time farmersha davailabl e foragricultura l labour. Whenevaluatin gne wtechnologies ,thei r labour requirements therefore need careful consideration. 151 TECHNOLOGICALOPTION S FORON-FAR M VERIFICATION 5.1. Introduction Technological change isth ebasi s foragricultura l development. To overcome themajo r constraints to increasing theproductivit y of a smallholder farming system,ne w technology,whic h reduces the cost of output per unit of input,i st ob e introduced. Production technology can bedefine d as "allmethod swhic h farmers,marke t agents and consumers use tocultivate ,harvest ,store ,process ,handle ,transport ,an d prepare food cropsan d livestock for consumption" (Horton, 1986). New farm technology either has tob edeveloped , or already exists elsewhere and canb e transferred, eventually after modification to suit local conditions. Inorde r toensur e thegeneratio n ofappropriat e technology for aparticula r subsistence farming system ina targetarea , several major general concerns have tob emet . Thene w technology must address a priority problem asperceive d by the target farmer, itmus tb e low-cost and simple touse , it ist ohel p overcome amajo r constraint to increasing farm output and itha s tob e compatiblewit h overall government objectives for theparticula r areaan d farmpopulation . The suitability of aparticula r technology for large-scale dissemination can bedetermine d through ane x ante appraisal, followed by on-farm verification. Both these stepsar enecessar y inorde r tominimiz e the risk of failure andwaste d efforts associated with attempts to introduce inappropriate technology. As FSR studies have ahig h degree of location specificity, effortsmus tb emad e toensur e that technology tested hasa wide applicability throughout the target zoneo r canb eeasil y adapted to local conditions (Menzan d Knipscheer, 1981). In the choice of improved technology for theBas o andWoren a Wereda,adequat e attentionwa s also given toa numbe r of other important concerns. As farmerswer e subsistence oriented, innovations had to improve the efficiency of resourceus ewithou t jeopardizing the reliability of food supply. Landwa s scarce and itsdistributio n was under the control of the PA,s o individual farmersdi d nothav e the capacity to increase the sizeo f their landholdings . The incidence of frostdurin g theperio d that cropsar ematurin g severely limited the technological options to improve cropproductio n in the area. As ILCA's mandate was to improve livestock production, the choice of improved technology had tob eoriente d totha tparticula r sub-system. In addition,give n the international nature of ILCA'swork ,an y technology choosenwoul d alsohav e tob eo f relevance beyond the study area to other areas of thehighlands . The linkagesbetwee n thevariou s components being researched by ILCAar e illustrated inFigur e 5.1. The lowcas h incomes of the farmersnecessitate d innovations with limited cash requirements. Similarly, cultural restrictions on labour utilization highlighted thenee d for innovationswhic hdi d not create additional demand for labour,particularl y of adult males,durin g the peak periods ofJune-July , and October-December. Inorde r tob e relevant, innovations would have tohel p toovercom e one or more of the constraints discussed in Section 4.11. The choicewa s limited to those innovationswhic h did not require a radical change of existing management practices,an dwer e profitable given existing market prices. As 152 discussed inSectio n 2.2,i twa sfel t that innovations could onlyb e introduced successfully ifthe y involved onlya gradua l change from existing farmingpractices . Figure5.1 . LinkagesAmon nong thg ePrincipa l Components Being Researchedb y the ILCAHighland ighlj s Programme Increased manure production Higher cash income Larger or Higheryieldin g Increasedo r fewer oxen and more timely largercow s traction power Improved soil Improved fertility animal feed Use of supplies Increased better human food implements T~T supply Expansiono f cropcultivatio n into wet bottomlands Improved and more timely Improved farm Widened rotation, cultivation productiono f productivity foragecrop s Lowerlabou r requirement forweedin g Source: Adapted fromGryseel san dAnderso n (1983a) Technologies relevantt oth elivestoc k componento fth efarmin g systemwoul d forthes e reasonshav et orelat et oa nincreas e ingeneti c potentialo floca l breeds,a nimprovemen t inth eefficienc yo fdraugh t power usage, improvements infee d availability and/or animal nutrition, wayst oovercom e marketing problems,o rstrategie st oreduc e liverfluke infestation. Themai n target speciesha dt ob ecattl ean dsmal l ruminants becauseo fthei r importance toth efarmin g systeman dthei r relevance toILCA' swork . Inth echoic eo fa technology , particular emphasisha dt ob egive nt oth eopportunitie s toenhanc e crop-livestock interactions inth efarmin g system. 153 5.2. AnOvervie wo fPossibl eIntervention s 5.2.1. DraughtAnima lUsag e Theus eo fdraugh tanimal s iscommo n throughout theEthiopia n highlands,wher e itha sbee na traditiona l practice forman ycenturies . As indicated inearlie r sections,betwee n fouran d sixmillio ndraugh t oxen,an dabou t fourmillio ndonkey sca nb e found inth ecountry . The useo fanima lpowe r islimite dhoweve r tolan d cultivation,threshin gan d for transporto fgoods . Animalsar e rarelyuse d foralternativ e functions. Effortst oimprov edraugh tanima lusag e inth eEthiopia n highlands focused initiallyo n thedevelopmen to f implementst o replaceth e "maresha"b ymor eefficien tprimar ycultivatio n tools. These attempts wereundertake nb yFA Odurin g the '50s,b y theChilal oAgricultura l DevelopmentUni t (CADU)durin g thelat e sixtiesan dearl yseventies ,an d by ILCAi nth eearl yeightie s (CADU,1970 aan d 1971;ILCA ,1982b ;Astatk e andMatthews ,1981 ,1982 ,198 3an d 1984). Mosto fth eeffort s related to thedesig nan d testingo fmouldboar dploughs . Incontras t toth e "maresha"whic h onlybreak s the soil,mouldboar d ploughs invertth e soil, and cultivate ata muc hgreate rdepth . ILCAtrial sshowe d that cultivation timecoul db e reducedb yu pt o50 %whe nth e "maresha"wa s replaced bya mouldboar dploug h (Astatkean dMatthews ,198 3an d 1984). Cropyield swer eno tsignificantl ydifferen ta sa resulto fbette r cultivation. Unfortunately, theexperimenta ldesig no fthes e trialsdi d notallo w fora nassessmen to fyiel d effectso fearl yplantin gdates ,a s thesewer e similar foral ltrials . The impacto f faster cultivationwa s thereforeno tadequatel yassessed . Other tillage implements testedwer e harrowsan d spring-tine cultivators. Noneo fthes e implementswer e adopted by farmersa tan yscal e (Dejene,198 5an d 1987). Theywer e too expensive andno twithi nth emean so fcas hpoo r farmers. Inaddition , theywer e tooheav yt ob epulle db yoxe no floca lbreeds ,whic hunde r farmcondition shav eaverag eliveweight so fbetwee n23 0an d 300kg . Such oxendevelo p insufficientdraugh tpowe r tooperat eheav ymeta l implements efficiently. The implementswer eals odifficul t tomaintai nan d the advantageso ffaste r andmor eefficien tcultivatio ndi dno toutweig h the costs involved. ILCAexperimente dals owit h theus eo fanima ldraw nmeta l mouldboardplough s for improvingdrainag e onwaterlogge d soils. Various drainage treatmentswer e tested,includin g theus eo f ridgean d furrow, ditchan ddyke ,an da combinatio no fbot h (Gryseelsan dAnderson , 1983a). Cropyield s increased considerablya sa resulto fsurfac edrainage ,bu t the costo fth e implementsuse d farexceede d theadditiona l return generated by thehighe ryield . Inaddition ,fo rthes eexperiment s ILCA used crossbred oxenwhic har e larger andmor epowerfu l thanoxe no f local breeds,a sth elatte rha d insufficientdraugh tpowe r capacity. The effectso f improved surfacedrainag e oncro pyield swa sals o demonstrated byAbeb e (1982). Jutzi eta l (1987a)hav e recentlydevelope dmodification s ofth e traditional Ethiopianploug h formakin g raisedbroadbed san d furrows to facilitate surfacedrainag e onheav ycla y soils (vertlsols),an d forus e inth econstructio no f terraces for soilconservation . Both implements 154 canb edraw nb ya pai ro floca lZeb uoxen . For theDebr eBerha nare ath e broadbed and furrowtechnolog y iso fparticula r importancea si t facilitateswee d controlan denhance ssurfac edrainage ,resultin g in better cropgrowth . Raisedbroadbed s (20c mhighe r and 120c mapart )an d furrows canb emad ea ta rateo f0. 4 to1. 2 ha/ox-pairworkin g 7hour sa day. Theyield so fwhea tan dtef fgrow no ndraine d farmers'field si n theDebr eZei tare awer eabou t80 %an d 25%highe r respectively thanthos e on traditionally cultivated, flatlan d (Jutzie tal ,1987b) . AtDebr e Berhan,th edrainag eeffec to fth ebroadbe dand -furrowsyste mallowe d to more thandoubl e thedr ymatte rproductio no f Italian ryegrassan doat s (Jutzian dHaque ,1984) . Thebroadbe d and furrowtechnolog y ispresentl y being tested ina national-wid everificatio nprogramm eundertake nb yILC A incooperatio nwit h IAR,th eMinistr yo fAgriculture ,Alemaya hUniversit y and ICRISAT (Jutzie tal , 1987b) . A large scaleextensio nprogramm e is inpreparation . Theprojec t isa mode l of interinstitutional cooperation betweennationa l agricultural researchan ddevelopmen t institutesan d international centres (Jutzian dAbebe ,1987) . Ifsuccessful ,th e projectma yhav ea dramati c effecto nfoo dproductio n inEthiopia . Vertisolscove r about8 millio nh a inth eEthiopia nhighland san d comprise 18%o fal larabl esoils . Althoughthe yar epotentiall yver y productivesoils ,the yar epron et owaterloggin gan ddifficul tt oploug h (Debele, 1983). Of the8 millio nh ao fhighlan dvertisols ,onl y 1.9 millionh aar ecurrentl ycropped . The remainder aremainl yunde r native pasture. Because ofwaterlogging ,crop so nvertisol sar eusuall y planted towards theen do f the rainsan d themajo rpar to fth ecro pgrowt h then occurso nth e residualmoistur e stored inth e soil. Thekey st o increased foodan d feedproductio n fromvertisol sar eeffectiv e surface drainagean dearl ycro pplantin g inth e rainyseaso ns otha tth e full lengtho fth egrowin gperio d canb eexploite d (Jutzian dGoe , 1987). Constraintanalysi so f thefarmin g system inth eBas oan dworen a Wereda reportedupo n inthi sstud y showed the strong impacto fth e availability ofdraugh tpowe ro n smallholder grainproduction . A shortageo fdraugh toxe n isa critica l constraint throughout the Ethiopianhighland s (Ministryo fAgriculture ,1980 ;Dejene ,1985) . Asa resulteffort swer emad eb yILCA' shighland sprogramm e todevelo pminimu m power systems for cropcultivation . Particular considerationwa s given toth edesig no fa single-o x plough. Sucha ploug hwoul denabl e farmers whichowne donl yon eo xt ocultivat e landwit h theirow n resources,an d to reducethei rdependenc yupo nborrowin go r rentingagreement st oobtai n the twooxe nhithert oneede d forcultivation . Indu e course,suc ha singleo xploug hwa sdevelope db y ILCA'shighlan dprogramm ean d the resultsobtaine d on-stationwarrante d the initiationo fon-far m verification trials (Gryseelsan dAstatke , 1982). Inadditio n toth edevelopmen t oflo wpowe r input cultivation systems,th e ILCAhighlan d programme alsotrie d tofin dalternativ e uses ofdraugh tanimals . Itha dbee n showntha toxe nwer eonl yuse d 50t o7 0 daysa yea r fordraugh tpowe rpurposes ,primaril yploughin gan d threshing. Ifalternativ euse scoul db e found forthes eanimals ,i t would raise theirproductivity , resulting inimprove d farmprofitabilit y and ahighe r intrinsic capitalvalu eo fth eanimal s (Anderson, 1983). ILCA focused itseffort so nth eus eo fdraugh t oxenfo rpon d excavating. Althoughwate r shortagewa sno ta critica l constraint as sucht o farmproductio n inth eDebr eBerha nare a (Steinfeld, 1984), ILCA 155 felt that theavailabilit y ofwate r supplies forbot h livestock and the farmhousehol dwa sa majo rproble m inman yothe r areaso f the highlands (Bishawan dGebr eMedhin , 1983). An improvemento fwate r supplieswoul d alsob enecessar y toenabl e the introduction ofhighe ryieldin g and exotic livestock breeds. The soilsan d topography of thehighland swer e well suited to smallscale daman dpon d construction (ILCA,1983b) . The DebreBerha nare awa s chosena sa pilo tare a for thedevelopmen t and testing of improved technology for thisactivity . Prior attempts to constructpond s inth eEthiopia n highlandsb y theMinistr y ofAgricultur e hadmad eus e ofengin edrive nmachinery ,o ro fhan d labour only. Given theheav ynatur e ofmos tEthiopia n soils,th e lattermetho d involved excessive humandrudgery . Theus e oftractor san dothe r engine driven machinerywa s costly,an d theequipmen tdifficul t to findan d to maintain. ILCA therefore introduced animal drawnmeta l scoopswit h a nominal capacity of 0.15 m3,a sizematche d toth edraugh tpowe r available from pairedworkin g oxeno f indigenousbreeds . The costo fa scoop ranged from20 0 to 300Birr . During 1983,a 7,00 0m 3pon dwa s excavated at the DebreBerha n research station todetermin e the technical parameters of the scoopsdraw nb yoxen . A pair ofoxe ncoul dexcavat ea naverag e of 10 m3o f earthdurin g a sixan d ahal fhou rworkin gda y (AbiyeAstatke , 1984). Thepowe r requirements of these scoopswer e similar tothos e of a "maresha"plough . The costo fpon d excavationusin gdraugh t oxen averaged 1Birr/m3 ,whic h compared favourablywit ha costo f 5Birr /m 3 for fuel engineequipmen t (Anderson, 1983). Farmerso f theBas oan dWoren aWered a showed enthousiastic interest inth epon d technology during fielddays organize d by ILCAa t theDebr eBerha n station. Memberso f theKormargfi a and Faji and Bokafia PA'sagree d tocooperat ewit h ILCAan d extension agents of the local Ministry ofAgricultur e ina pilo t programme ofpon d construction. Work onon epon d ineac ho f these PAsbegu n inth e 1984dr y season,a yea r duringwhic h severedrough t substantially reduced animal feed supplies available. Thewor k was therefore haltedbecaus e farmerswer e concerned thatb yworkin g their oxeno n thepon d theywoul d subsequentlyb e less fit toundertak e theprimar y task of land cultivation atth e end of the dry season. Work restarted however after theharves t inDecembe r 1984 and bothpond swer e completed byMarc h 1985. Onepon dwa s completed in 79an d theothe r in7 6workin g days. Bothhav e acapacit y of approximately 7,000m 3 each (ILCA, 1984). Individual farmerso f the PAs concernedworke d on thepond swit h theiroxe n fora naverag e total of 17 days,and ,o naverage ,eac h farmer onlyonc eever y sevendays . Therewa s noconflic twit h the labour requirements ofothe r farmactivitie s (Whalen andAnderson , 1985). During the subsequent rainy season,th epond s rapidly filledwit hwate rmainl y through runoff. Thepond swer e intended toserv evariou spurposes : toprovid e drinkingwate r for both thehousehol d and livestock, to stockwit h fish inorde r toprovid e anadditiona l protein source,an d to irrigate small areaso fhig h returncrops . Todat e farmershav euse d thepond sonl y forhousehol d and livestock water needs. Soa s topreserv e thewate r quality, thewate r is hand-pumped intoa water-throug h fromwhic h theanimal s candrink . Animals areno tallowe d todrin k directly from theponds ,i norde r to 156 avoid thempollutin g thewater . Thepond sar eprotecte db y fences,an d treeshav ebee nplante daroun d theponds . Householdwate r iscollecte d using jarsan d transported toth ehomestea db ychildre ncarryin g these jarso nthei rback so rusin gdonkeys . Fishconsumptio n isa tpresen t toone wa cultura lpractic e forth e ruralpopulatio na tDebr eBerhan ,an d thestockin go fpond swil l thereforeb eundertake na ta late r stage. The irrigationo fcrop susin g pondwate r isno tye ta feasibl eoption . The sizeo fth epond s is insufficient forth ewate rneed so flan d irrigation. Inaddition , irrigation requiresa lo wcos tsyste mt otransfe r thewate r toth e fields. Further investigationsar enecessary . Thesenee d tocente ro n wayso f releasingwate r fromth epon d toth e fieldb ygravity ,an do nth e waterneed so f strategic,rathe r thanyear-roun d irrigationinputs . Possibleoption s forth elatte rwoul db e toexten d thegrowin gperio do f graincrop sb ybridgin g thega pi ngrowin g conditionsbetwee nth e "belg" rainsan dth e "meher"rains ,o ralternatively ,b yextendin g thegrowin g seasona tth een do fth emai n rainyperio d toensur eadequat e grain development,o rb yensurin gadequat ewate r supplies fora shor t season crop inth edr yseason . TheEthiopia nMinistr yo fAgricultur eha sgive n strongsuppor t to a dissemination ofth escoop stechnology ,an db yth emiddl e of198 7 approximately 3,000scoop sha dbee ndisseminate d throughout thecountr y tointereste d PAs (ILCA,1987b) . ILCAha sproduce d atechnica lmanua l forbuildin gpond swit hanima lpowe r (Astatkee tal , 1986a). Aspon d construction isonl y feasiblea tth eP Ao rcommunal , rather thanth e smallholder level,i ffall ssomewha toutsid e the scopeo f thisstudy . Verylittl e researchha sbee ncarrie dou ti nEthiopi ao nth e developmento f thetranspor t functiono flivestock . Someeffort swer e undertakenb yCAD Uo nth edevelopmen t ofo xan ddonke ycart s (CADU, 1970a)bu tthe ywer e tooexpensiv ean dno tadopte db y farmers (Dejene, 1985an d 1987). Onepossibl e interventionwoul db eth eus eo f sledges whichma yb emor eappropriat e for the rugged terraino fth eEthiopia n highlandsbu tt odat en oeffor tha sbee n reported inthi sfield . 5.2.2. ImprovedBreed s 5.2.2.1. Cattle Cattleo f indigenousZeb ubreed sar econsidere d tohav ea lo w geneticpotentia l formil kan dmea tproductio n (Glenne t al, 1963;IAR , 1972an d 1976;ILCA ,1981c ;Schaa re tal ,1981 ;AACH ,T58T ;Ministr yo f Agriculture, 1986c). IARparticulaFIy~na sundertake n several studies to assess thecharacteristic s andpotentia l of four typeso fZeb ucattle , i.e.Borana ,Horro ,Bark aan d Fogera. Theassessment swer emad eo n growth rate,reproductiv eperformanc ean dproductio npotentia l formea t andmilk . Evenwit h improvedmanagement ,th eaverag emil kyiel d ofeac h of thesebreed sdi dno texcee d 700k gpe r lactation (Kebede,1987) . As itwa sconsidere d that improvement through selectionwoul d be toocostl yan d toolength ya proces s inEthiopia ,researc han d development efforts focusedo nth e introductiono fhighe ryieldin g breeds and crossbreeds. The firstexoti cbreed swer e imported intoth e country 157 inth e 50sb ymainl y commercialdair y farmslocate d aroundAsmar aan d AddisAbaba . Pureexoti canimal s required toohig ha managemen t level for smallholders,an dexperimentatio n soonstarte dwit h theus eo f crossbred cattle. The firsteffort s tointroduc e crossbreddair ycattl e (usingmainl y Friesianbu tals oJerse ysire san dArss i Zebubreeds )wer e undertakenb yCAD U (CADU,1970b ;Brannin ge tal , 1980;Schaa re t al, 1981; Swenssone tal ,1981) . Resultso ftH iBreedin gwor k indicatedmea n milkyield so f HÜ9~kgfo ra lactatio nlengt ho f27 2day s for theArss i Zebubreed ,whil e thecrossbre d cowyielde d2,37 4k gi na lactation period in41 1day s (Kiwuwae tal , 1983). Theprojec twa sa combinatio n ofbot hscientifi c experimentation andon-far mdevelopmen twork . The programmemad ea substantia l impact inArss i province,an d todayove r 5,000crossbre d dairycow sca nb e found inth earea . Unfortunately only very fewfar mmanagemen tan deconomi cdat aar eavailabl e toapprais e the impacto f thesedair ycow so n farmproductivity . Since thephasin g out ofCADU ,th eEthiopia nGovernmen tha s focused itseffort so nth e development ofdair yproductio n inth eare ao ncooperativ e farms. Almost allcrossbre ddair yheifer s fromgovernmen t ranchesar e supplied to cooperatives. IARstarte da long-ter mbreedin gprogramm e in1972 ,comparin gth e productivityo fdifferen texoti cbreed s fordifferen t levelso fcrossin g underdifferen tenvironmenta l conditions (IAR,197 2an d 1976;Kebede , 1982). Other institutions involvedwit hcrossbreedin g activitieswer e the College ofAgricultur e atAlemayah ,an dth eagricultura l schoolsan d collegesa tJimma ,Amb oan dDebr eZei t (Wagnere tal , 1969b;Debr eZei t Agricultural Research Station, 1982). TheMinistr y ofAgricultur e through itsAnima l Resources Departmentha sals opromote ddair yproductio n throughcrossbreeds . The AddisAbab aDair yDevelopmen t Project,wa s financedb y theWorl d Bank and implemented between197 2an d 1978. Mosto fth e farms involvedwer e commercial innature ,an dwer e laternationalized . Theactivitie swer e disrupted throughuncertaintie sassociate dwit h the post-revolutionary period (WorldBank , 1985a). A financial analysiso fsom eo fthes e project farms (Gryseels,1979 )indicate d thatsmal l farmsha dlowe r production coststha nth elarge r commercial farms. Although several effortswer e thusundertake n tointroduc e crossbreddair ycow so n smallholder farms,far mmanagemen tdat a toasses sthei rproductivit yan d impacto n farmincom ear escarce . Effortst ointroduc e improvedbreed so n smallholder farms inth e Ethiopianhighland shav e focused ondair yproduction . Therear ea sye t only fewactivitie st oimprov ebee fproduction . IARdoe sno thav ea clearlydefine dbee f cattle researchprogramme ,althoug h somebee f production studieshav ebee nundertaken . Borana cattlehav ebee n identified asbein g theloca lbree dwit hmos tpotential ,bu tth e development ofa nationa l researchprogramm eha sbee n impededb yth elac k ofnationa lpolic yguideline san d coordination (Gebrewold, 1987;Jepse n and Creek,1971 ;Obradovi can dHaile , 1971). IARha sundertake n some studies toevaluat eweigh t gainso f localbreed sunde r different feeding conditions,i nwhic hgain so fu p to0. 9 kgpe rda ywer e recorded. Feed conversion efficiency calculated ask go f feed consumedpe r kgo f liveweight gainwa s11. 9k gfo rBoran aan d 12.7k g forArss i (IAR, 1976). Some researchwa sals oundertake no nth eproductivit y ofcrossbred s for beefproductio n (Wagnere tal ,1969a ;IAR , 1976). 158 Although results indicate thatsubstantia l productivity gains can bemade ,n oeffort swer emad e to introducebee fproductio n at the smallholder farmlevel . This isbecaus e inth eEthiopia n highlands no breed iskep texclusivel y forbee fproduction ,whic h isfo r smallholders onlya secondary activitiy. Inaddition ,availabl e pricesan d price ratioshav eno tbee n conducive for the introduction of improved beef production. Beefprice s inEthiopi a rangeuniforml y around 1.5 Birr per kg liveweight,wit h nopremiu m forquality . Farmerswil l occasionally fattena nol d cowo r ox for salearoun d particular festivities,bu tn o systematic effortha sye tbee n undertaken toasses s theprofitabilit y of such fattening activities. Smallholder beef production exists to someexten t inHarargh e province,bu t this situation isver y location specific because of theparticula r ecology, breed andmarketin g situationo f thearea . ILCAha sevaluate d theus e ofcrossbre d oxen fordraugh tpurposes . Theus e of crossbred oxenwoul db e linked toth eprospec to fwidesprea d introduction ofdair yenterprise susin g crossbred cows (Gryseelsan d Anderson, 1983a). Male offspringwoul d be reared asdraugh tanimals . Crossbred oxen candevelo p substantiallymor edraugh t power,bu t also have higher feed requirements. This is illustrated inTabl e 5.1. Table 5.1. DraughtPowe r Developed and FeedConsume d bya Pai r ofLoca l and aPai r ofCrossbre dOxe n 1/ Average Draught Ox MeanWeigh t Speed Force Draught Power- Hay Concentrates Breed (kg/ox) (m/sec) (kg) Developed (kW) (kg/ox) (kg/ox) Local 337 .75 84 .63 7.4 2.8 Cross 523 .92 110 1.02 11.1 4.9 1/ Measurementswer emad edurin g ploughing forpon d construction witha 'maresha'. Theanimal swer e ILCAoxe n fromth eDebr e BerhanStation . Speedan d draughtpowe r developed were estimated ona pe rpai r basis,whil eweight san d feed intakes were estimated ona pe rhea dbasis . Theha yha d 6.8 megajoules (MJ)o fmetabolisabl eenerg y (ME)pe r kgo f dry matter (DM),an d the concentrates had 10.1M J ofMEA g DM. TheD M fractionswer e .90fo rha yan d .85fo rconcentrates . Animalswer e feda d libitum. Source: Adapted fromAstatk e (1984). Draught power output of crossbred oxenha sbee n reported by Astatke (1984). At the ILCA research station inDebr e Berhan,weight s of crossbred oxenwer e onaverag e 55%highe r thanthos eo foxe no f local breeds. When pulling the local 'maresha'plough ,crossbre d oxen developed 23%highe r speed, 31%highe r draught force and 62%mor e draught power. Theyals o consumed 50%mor e hay and 75%mor e feed concentrates however (Table 5.1.). Recent evidence has indicated that local oxen 159 appear tohav elowe renerg yneed stha ncrossbred s (Sollere t al,1986 ) andtha tbree dha sa significan taffec to nforc ebu tno to npowe r (Astatkee tal , 1986). Todat ea neconomicall yviabl e systemo fusin g crossbred oxen fordraugh ta tth e smallholder levelha sno tye tbee n developed. 5.2.2.2. SmallRuminant s AlthoughEthiopi aha son eo fth elarges therd so fsmal l ruminants inAfrica ,relativel y little researchha sbee nundertake n toimprov e the productivity ofit sbreeds . Asgoat sca nb efoun dmainl y inth e lowlands,the yfal loutsid eth escop eo fthi sstudy . Sheepar emostl yconcentrate d inth ehighlands ,an dSho aprovinc e aloneaccount sfo r 29%o fEthiopia' s sheeppopulatio n (AACM,1984) . Many breedshav ebee n identifiedalthoug hhighlan d sheepar e typically fat tailed. Mosto fthes ear eo fth eMen zbreed ,bu tothe rbree d typesar e theAbel eGuzai ,th eRashaidi ,th eTueu ran d theArssi-Bale . Onlya t veryhig haltitude s isa wool yundercoa tdevelope d beneath theoute r hairycoverin g (Ministryo fAgriculture , 1975). Little isknow n regarding theproductivit yo floca lshee pbreeds . In1975 ,IA Rinitiate da researchprogramm e tostud yth eperformanc e characteristicso fsom eo fth edomesti cbreed s inth ecountry . Flocks were established onexperimen t stationsan d themajo r productivity parametersmeasure d (Wiener, 1975). TheMinistr yo fAgricultur e in197 1establishe da sheepbreedin g stationa tDebr eBerhan ,a twhic hMen zan dAwass i breedsar ebein g crossedwit h exoticanimal so fMerino ,Hampshire ,Cowedal ean dRomne y breeds. Crossbred ramsar ebein gproduce d anddistribute d toproduce r cooperatives throughout thecountry . By1982 ,approximatel y 800 crossbred ramsha dbee ndistributed ,bu tmos t farmers reject crossbred sheep. Theyd ono tlik eth e flavouro fit smeat ,it scolou ran dit s conformation (AACM, 1984). ARDUha sals oundertake nexperimentation s on crossbreeding ofshee pan d studieso nth eperformanc eo floca lbreeds, particularlyArssi . The impacto fshee pcrossbreedin gprogramme sha sbee nalmos tnil , and iti sno wacknowledge d priorityshoul db egive nt o selection programmes among indigenousbreeds ,an d strategiest oimprov eth e nutritiono f small ruminants (Awgichew, 1987). Sheep researcheffort si n Ethiopia havebee nlittle ,uncoordinate d andno t sustained over long periodso ftim e (Agyemang,1985) . Asalmos tn o researchha dbee n undertakeno nth eproductivit yo fth edominan t sheepbree d inth e highlands,i.e . theMenz , ILCAinitiate d in197 9 studies tofil l this gap. Informationwa s collected onthei r reproductivean d productive performance,an d simplemanagemen t innovations sucha simprove dhousing , strategicdrenchin g againstliverfluk e infestation,an d supplementary feeding indr yperiod swer e introduced (Agyemange tal , 1984). The analysiso f thedat a showed that,wit h theexceptio no f the twinning rate,productivit yparameter so fMen z sheepwer e similar tothos eo f other sheepbreed s inth ecountr y (Agyemang, 1985). Although the initial resultsobtaine d atth eDebr eBerha n experiment stationwit h improvedhousin gan ddrenchin gwer e encouraging, itwa s feltb y ILCAtha t itwa s tooearl y foron-far m followu p 160 verification trials. The improved housingwa sto oexpensiv e for resource poor farmers,an d thedrug sneede d fordrenchin gwer eno t regularly available inth ecountry . ILCAi scontinuin g its researchon sheep productivity incooperatio nwit hth eEthiopia nMinistr yo fAgriculture . The researchprogramm e focuseson the incidenceo fmultipl ebirths ,a selectionprogramm e for ramsan d strategies toimprov enutritio n (ILCA 1986, 1987b). 5.2.3.Anima l Feedan dNutritio n Themai nanima l feed resources inth ehighlan d farming systemar e roughage fromnatura lpastur ean dbrowse ,an d crop residues. Their relative importance inoveral l feed intake islargel ya functiono fhuma n populationpressure son availabl e land (Jutzie tal , 1987c). Pasture researchwa s initiated inEthiopi a inth emi d 60s (Gebrehiwet, 1987). Manyagronomi c andmanagemen t trialshav e sincebee n conducted,bu t resultsar e inconclusivean d todat en o technology suitable for smallholder conditionsha sbee ndeveloped . Inth eBas oan d WorenaWereda ,a s inman yothe rhighlan d pastures,th eslo wgrowt h isdu e towaterloggin g and lowtemperatures . Many studieshav e focused on responseo fpastur egrowt h to fertilizer application. Theapplicatio no f nitrogen significantly increased drymatte ryield, whil e theapplicatio n ofphosphoru s improved protein content (IAR,1982 aan d b; IAR,1983 ; Haile, 1983). The costo f fertilizer applicationan dunfavourabl e benefit-cost ratios,cause s this technology tob ebeyon d themean so f the smallholderhowever . ILCAha s investigated theeffect so f forage legumeoversowin g and soil ripping to improveaeratio nan d acceleratenutrien tmineralizatio n ona nAndropogo n longipespastur e atDebr eBerha n (ILCA, 1982a). No effectson yield so rqualit yhav ebee n recorded. According toJutz i et al (1987c), thisca nb e seena sevidenc e of theecologica l stabilityö ï thesenatura lpastur e environments. The sameauthor sals o investigated theeffect so fovergrazin g onpastur eyield ,usin gpo t experiments. It was showntha tovergrazing ,simulate d through frequentofftakes , drastically reduceddr ymatte r production. Inputso fnitroge n fertilizer couldno tb e transformed intohighe rbiomas sproductio nb y thegrasse s if theywer eexploite d tooheavily . Jutzi eta l (1987c)conclude dthat : "Nativepastur e isgenerall y confined tosoil swit h rather severe contraints forplan tgrowth . Thegrasslan dvegetatio nha sadapte d itself tothes e specific conditions. Noevidenc eha sye tbee nproduce d that exoticgermplas mperform sbette r than thesehighl y specialized pasture communitiesunles smajo r changes inth ephysica l or chemical conditions of these soilsar eundertake n (sucha sdrainag eo rheav y fertilizer inputs)an dunles sgrasslan dmanagemen tpractice sar e changed". Major productivity gainsma yb e obtained from improved management ofnativ e Ethiopian clovers. Dramatic responseso fdr ymatte r production tophosphoru s applicationhav ebee n reported (Akundabweni,1984 aan d b; Jutzi andHaque ,1984) . Given the communal nature ofpastures , introduction of improved pasturemanagemen t techniqueswil l bea difficult process,whic hwil lhav e tob eundertake na t theP Alevel . 161 Manyeffort shav e alsobee nundertake n toproduc e fodder onarabl e land. As land isscarce ,thes e forage cropsmus tb e sufficiently high yielding toprovid e returnspe rh a comparablewit h forage crops (Gryseels andAnderson , 1983a). For thehighe r altitudearea s sucha sDebr eBerha n only fodderoat s (Avena sativa)an dvetche s (Viciadasycarpa )hav e proven suitablean d acceptable tosmallholde r farmers (Gryseelsan dAnderson , 1983a;Gebrehiwet ,1987 ;Jutz i et al, 1987c). Oatsan dvetc har eusuall y grown ina mixture . Thebenefi toï~vetc ha sa legume inth emixtur e is twofold: it improves thequalit yo f the feedb y increasing protein content,an d fixesatmospheri cnitroge n inth e soil. Thisorgani c nitrogenwil l bemineralize d and transferred at leastpartl y toth e subsequentnitrophilou s crop. Experimental resultsa tDebr e Berhan showeddr ymatte ryield so foat san dvetc hmixture s tob e 1.17 tonne/ha under zero fertilizer inputs,an d 2.25 tonne/ha if 46kg/h ao f phosphorus wasapplie d (Jutzie t al, ibid). Theus e ofoats/vetc hmixture s appeared promising,an dwarranti Bth e initiationo fon-far m trials inth eBas o and WorenaWereda . A substantial proportiono f feed intake inth eEthiopia nhighland s isfro m theus e of cropby-products . Variouseffort shav e been undertaken toimprov e thequalit y ofthes e residuesb y supplementation with feed concentrates,molasse/ure amixtures ,o r clovers (IAR,1976 ; ILCA, 1982ban d 1983b;Presto nan dLewis ,1984 ;Preston ,1985) . No economically profitable technologyha sye temerge d thatha sprospec t of widespread adoptiona t thesmallholde rlevel . Encouraging resultshav ebee n obtainedwit h theus e of forage legumes in rotationwit h food crops. Nitrogen fixation of forage legumes in sub-SaharanAfric aha sbee n recorded atbetwee n 62an d 290k g nitrogen/ha/year (Haquean dJutzi ,1984b) . Forage legumesoffe r thus low costopportunitie s for improving soil fertilityan d sustaining food crop yields (Haque et al, 1986). Themos t importantplan tnutrien t limiting legumegrowt h inth e Ethiopianhighland s isphosphoru s (Jutzian dHaque ,1984) . ILCAha s initiated a two-stage researchprogramm e onlegum e germplasm. During the firstphas e environmental,nutritiona l andbiologica l factors limiting legume growthan dnitroge n fixationar e investigated,an d thebes t performing legumes selected. Ina second phase,"bes tbet "legume swil l be integrated incroppin g systems (Jutzie t al, 1987c). Ifway sca nb e found to introduce forage legumes inth ecroppin g cycle,i tma y lead toa substantial increase incro pyield swhil e simultaneously expanding fodder supply. Suchtechnologie swoul db eo fparticula r importance inarea s sucha s theBas oan dWoren aWereda ,wher e extended fallowsar eno w necessary to regenerate soil fertility levels tosuppor t subsistence cropping. Todat ehowever ,ther e isa serious lack of information regarding theeconomic so f improved forageproductio n (Gebrehiwot, 1987). 5.3. An ex-ante Evaluation ofPropose d Interventions Of the technological optionsavailabl e fora likely improvement of the farming systemaroun d DebreBerhan ,i nlin ewit h the specifications discussed inSectio n 5.1., twower e selected for on-farmverification : single oxploughin g and the introductiono f crossbreddair y cows. Itwa s feltb y ILCA thatbot h these technologiesha dmajo r potential for 162 increasing theproductivit yo f resourcepoo r smallholders,an d that on-farmexperience s gaineda t inth eBas oan dWoren aWered awoul d beo f substantial relevanceelsewher e inth ehighlands . Both singleo xploughin gan d improveddair yproductio naddresse d a major constraint tofar mproducivit y inth eEthiopia nhighlands . The shortageo ftimel ydraugh tpowe r isa majo rproble m facedb ya majorit y of smallholder farmers. Nationally,aroun d29 %o fEthiopia n farmershav e nooxen ,34 %hav eone ,29 %tw oan donl y8 %hav ethre eo rmor e oxen (Ministryo fAgriculture ,1980) . Inth eArs i region,a shortage ofoxe n was themos t seriousproble m facedb yth emajorit yo f farmers (Dejene, 1985). Availableevidenc e indicated thatsmallholde r dairyproductio nwa s alsoa nattractiv edevelopmen toption . The introductiono f crossbred cowswa slikel yt olea d toa rapid increase inmil kproductio nan d farm cashincome . Bothtechnologie sprovide d substantial opportunities fora n enhancement ofcrop-livestoc k interactions. Progressively lesslan dwil l beavailabl e inth e futuret ofarmer st okee poxe nan dthei r attendant stock. Becauseo fpopulatio npressure so nlan d resources,a conflict between cropan d livestock production isenerging . Widespreadus eo fa singleo xcoul ddramaticall y reduceth enumbe r ofoxe nan dthei r attendantbreedin gan d replacement stockneede d tosuppor t food crop production,thereb y increasing the resourcesavailabl e foreac hworkin g animal. Thiswoul d allowfo ra reduction ingrazin gpressures ,lowerin g the risko fenvironmenta l degradation,an da nimprovemen t inth e nutritional statuso f remaining oxen. Moretimel ycultivatio no f larger areaso flan dwoul d alsolea d toincrease d foodcro pproductio nan d allow morebalance d cereal/pulse rotations tob epractise d (Gryseelse t al, 1984b). Improveddair yproductio nwoul d improve farmincom eand -allow the farmer topurchas eadditiona l inputsfo rcro pproduction . As such, therewoul db ea positiv e spillover froma n improvemento f livestock production toth eproductivit yo fth ecro penterprise s (Gryseelsan d Anderson, 1983b). Fewothe r technologieswer eavailabl e thatwarrante d on-farm testing inth estud yarea . At theILC Aresearc hstation ,positiv e resultsha dbee nobtaine dwit h theevaluatio no f improvedpotat o varieties. Averageyield so fbetwee n 30an d 40tonne spe rh awer e recorded. Theexperiment s faced severeproblem so fpotat obligh t however,a swel la swit hpotat o storage (WoldeabWold eMariam ,persona l communication). Therewa sals oonl ya limitedmarketin gdeman d for potatoes inth eare aan d labourdemand s forpotat oharvestin g appeared competitivewit h thoseo fcrops . Although theagronomi cpotentia l for potatoproductio n inth eare a isundoubtedl yhigh ,i twa sto oearl yt o involve farmers inth e researchprocess . Effortswer eundertake n tofin d shortmaturin g cropvarietie st o overcome the frostproblem . Experimental resultswit h the improved barleyvarietie sobtaine dwer eunsuccessful ,an d therewa sn oapparen t superiority over localvarieties . Noalternativ e livestock technologieswer eavailabl e thatwoul d havea reasonable chanceo fbein gadopte db y farmers. Given thelac k of veterinarydrug san d thehig hcos to fbette rhousing ,th e initiationo f 163 on-farm research to improve sheepproductio nwa sno ta feasibleoption . Sheep fattening trialswer e stillunde r experimentationa t theDebr e Berhan station,an dproblem swer e encountered inth edevelopmen to f an appropriate feeding systemtha twa s sustainable at the farmer level. The introductiono fbee fproductio n throughcattl e fatteningwa sals ono t feasiblebecaus e thelac k ofan appropriat e feeding systeman d of favourablemarke tprices . Despiteman yyear so fexperimentation ,th eonl y forage species thatwer e suitable foron-far m introductionwer eoat san dvetch . Although experimentsha d showntha tnativ e clovers fromth e Ethiopian highlandsha dpotentia l forha yproductio non bottomlan d sites subject to waterlogging,moderat e inputso fP fertilizerwer enecessar y forgoo d production. Theus eo fclover soutsid e theirnorma lhabitat swoul d also require inoculationwit happropriat e rhizobia (Kahuranangaan dTsehay , 1984). As thesebottomlan dpasture sar eusuall y communal,th e introductiono f clover specieswoul d have tob e initiated at the Peasants Associationlevel . With respectt o initiating improvements inanima l traction techniquesothe r thansingl eo xploughing ,availabl eoption sb y 1983wer e few. The costo f improved implementswa shig han dth e impacton crop yields insignificant. Experiences inth eArss i regionals o indicated that theadoptio n rateo f improved implementsdevelope db yCAD Uwa s negligible. The introductiono fcrossbre d oxenwa sno t feasible as their highdemand s for feedwoul dno tb eadequatel y offsetb y theadvantage so f fastercultivation . Invie wo fth e lack ofappropriat e alternatives,singl eo x ploughing and crossbreddair ycow swer e the technologies selected for on-farm testing. Theywer e thebes t solutionso f those technologies readilyavailabl e in198 3whe n thediagnosti cphas ewa smovin g towardsa "designan d testing"phas eo f the researchprocess . Bothtechnologie sha d firstbee nteste da t ILCA's researchstatio n atDebr eBerhan . Thiswa sa riskneutra lenvironmen thowever ,a s ILCA could easilyabsor b thecos to f the inputs involvedan d carryth e risk of eventual failure. On-station researchwa s conductedusin g resources whichwer e farbeyon d thoseavailabl e toth e smallholder sucha shig h quality feed,veterinar y inputs,an dgoo dmanagement . Before disseminationo f these technologies toth ecommunit y at large throughth e Ministry'sextensio n services,an intermediatephas e ofon-far m verificationwa s thereforenecessary . As apreliminar yphas e tothis ,an e xant eevaluatio n ofth e proposed interventionswa sundertaken . An exant eanalysi s seeks to evaluate theanticipate d orexpecte d impacto f these interventions (Zandstra, 1985). The impactca nb e specified both inbiologica l and economic terms. Invie wo fth edifficultie s and risksassociate d with testing improved livestock production systems (DeBoer ,1983 ;Fitzhug h et al, 1982), exant eanalysi s iso fparticula r importance inestimatin g tne potential benefitso fne w technology, tominimiz e the risk of failure for farmers involved inth everificatio n trials. Various techniqueshav e beenuse d fore xant e analysis,an d theapproache s canb egroupe d as partial orwhoT i farmbudgeting ,linea rprogrammin gan d system simulation (Hardaker,1979 ;Eiche r andBaker ,1982 ;D eBoer ,1983 ;Simpson , 1985). 164 Simulationmodel susuall yasses sanima lperformanc eunde r different feedinglevels ,an d giveprim eemphasi st obiologica l relationships. In viewo f thenatur eo fth etechnologie sunde r consideration,i twa s felt thata budgetin gan d linearprogrammin g approachwoul db eparticularl y useful. Farmbudgetin g isa techniqu e tosho wth eanticipate d consequences,i nterm so fselecte dmeasure so fperformance ,o fchange si n farmmethod so rorganizatio n (Dillonan dHardaker , 1980). Budgetsca nb e constructed ona whole-far mbasis ,o r forparticula r sectorso f the farming system. Linearprogrammin g (LP)i sa computer-base d procedure todetermin e theoptima lvalu eo fa linea r functionsubjec tt oa seto fconstraints . Theapproac hha sfrequentl ybee nuse d for farmplanning . The application ofL Pt oAfrica n smallholder agricultureha sbee n reviewedb yEiche ran d Baker (1982). The firstapplicatio nwa sb yClayto n (1961)i na studyo n theeffec to f resource constraintso nth eprofitabilit y oftypica l farms inth ecentra lprovinc e ofKenya . Heyer (1971)late r refined the approachan dundertoo k ane xant eanalysi so fth eintroductio no fcas h crops inth etraditiona l farmingsystem . Themos tfrequen tus eo fL Pha s beenfo rth e identificationo fconstraint so nsmallholde r farming,th e derivationo fnormativ e supplyan d inputdeman d functions,estimate so f frontierproductio n functions,evaluatio n ofth eprofitabilit yo fne w technologies,an d identificationan devaluatio no fmanagemen t strategies (Eicheran dBaker ,1982) . Although linearprogrammin g isa usefu l tool,i tals oha s limitations. Dillonan dHardake r (1980)hav epointe d toth eassumptio n oflinearity ,o f theimplicatio n thatal lactivitie san d resourcesar e infinitelydivisible ,an d theassumptio no f riskneutrality . However, recentdevelopment s inprogrammin g techniques (Hazellan dNorton ,1986 ) haveprovide dway san dmean st oovercom e theselimitations . AnL Pmode l isusefu l inillustratin g the interactions ina farming system,specifyin gdat aneed san d togiv e indicationso nth e sensitivity ofth eeffect so fparticula r interventions toa chang e in valueo fa rangeo f factors,suc ha sa chang e inmarke tprices . AsL Pmodel sar enecessaril ybase do nhistorica ldata ,thei r predictive capacity issomewha t limited. The futureallocatio no f resourcesb y farmersi sno tnecessaril ydetermine db yhistorica l patterns. LPmodel so fsmallholde r agriculture inth eEthiopia n highlands havebee nconstructe db ySisa y (1983)an dMel a (1985). Bothauthor s howeverexclude d livestock production fromthei rmodel . Usingdat a collected by ILCA,Leithman-Fru h (1983)use d anL P approach tomode l thetraditiona l farming system inth eDebr e Zeitarea , and tosimulat e theeffect so fpossibl e interventions. Themodel' s resultsshowe d that the introductiono fa crossbre d cowcombine dwit ha n improvementpackag e forcro pproductio n thatconsiste d of fertilizer applicationan d improvedmanagement ,allowe d fora n increase incas h incomeo f 531compare d totraditiona l farms. Sheals o illustrated that, inth eDebr eZei tsituation ,th e introductiono fa one-o xploughin g 165 systemwoul dno tb eprofitable ,becaus e theavailabl e land resources couldno tb ecultivate d ontim ean dwoul d thereforeno tb e fully utilized. The timeavailabl e tofarmer s forlan d cultivation ismuc h shorter atDebr eZei ttha n inth eBas oan dWoren aWered ahowever ,an d these results could thereforeno tb eextrapolated . Around DebreZeit ,becaus e soilsar eheav yan d rainfall isessentiall yunimodal ,cultivatio n forth e maincrop sha st ob edon ewithi na ver y limitedperio d ofofte nles stha n threemonths . Inth eBas oan dWoren aWereda ,rainfal l ismor euniforml y distributed over theyea r and soilsar elighte r thana tDebr eZeit ,s o thatploughin g canb edon ealmos tyea r round. Thebenefit so fsingl eo x ploughing canb eestimate d onth ebasi so fsectio n4.10 . The increment intota l cerealproductio ndu et oownin gon eo x rather thann oo xwa s estimated at26 6k go rapproximatel y 186Bir rpe rannum . The increment due toownin g thesecon do xwa sestimate d at18 6kg ,o r13 0Bir rpe r annum. Forth epurpos e ofthi sstudy ,a simpleL Pmode lwa s constructed tosimulat e thetraditiona l farming system inth eBas oan dWoren a Wereda (Gryseelsan dAnderson ,unpublished) . Insubsequen t runs,change s toth eexistin g livestock enterprisewer e simulated. Thematri xwa sa singleperio ddeterministi cmode lo fa representative farm inth earea . Itcomprise d a seto fproductio n activitiesdurin g the "belg"an d "meher"seasons ,o fbot hth ecrop san d livestock sectorso f thefarmin g system. Thematri xwa scompose d of3 9 activities subject to3 5constraints . Theactivitie s included the productiono fbarley ,wheat ,hors ebeans ,fiel dpeas ,oats ,ha yan d straw. Theyals o included livestock production,particularl yth e husbandryo foxen ,cows ,donkey san d sheep,whil emanur ewa suse dbot ha s household fuelan d tosel l forcash . Oxenan ddonkey swer euse d for draughtpurposes ,whil e cowsproduce dmil k and replacementoxen . Only cattleproduce dmanur e for fuelan d sale. Theanimal swer e fedo n pastures,cro pby-product san dhay . Workingoxe nan dcow s received approximately 45%o fthei r feed fromcerea l strawan dhay . Three landclasse swer e specified:arable ,pastur e and fallow land. Feed supplywa sdetermine d by three seasonso fth eyear ,i.e .dr y season (October toJanuary) ,earl y "belg"rain yseaso n (Februaryt oMay ) and thewe t "meher"seaso n (Junet oSeptember) . Strawan dha ycoul db e purchased ineac h season if required,an d suppliescoul db e transferred fromon e seasont oanother . Thisallowe d feed surplusesan ddeficit s to bebalance dacros sth ethre e feedseasons . Thelabou r supplyconstraint s were specified corresponding toth esam e timeperiod sa sth eperiod suse d tospecif yth e feed supplyperiods . Foreac h season 700hour so fhuma n labour and 720hour so fox-tim ewer e available. Donkeyscoul db euse d for 2000hour spe ryear . Arable landavailabilit ywa s restricted to maximum 4h adurin g the "meher"seaso nan d 0.5 hadurin g the "belg" season. A non-arablepermanen tpastur e supplywa s specified atmaximu m1 ha. A crop rotation schemewa s introduced and inth e "meher"seaso n farmers couldplan ta maximu mo ftw oyear so f cereals foreac hyea r of pulses. Inth e "belg"season ,a ratioo f fouryear so fcereal st oon e year ofpulse swa sassumed . Foreac hthre eyear so fcereals ,on eyea ro f fallowingwa snecessary . A family subsistence constrainto f80 0k go f cerealsan d 200k go fpulses ,th eaverag eannua l consumption,wa s specified. 166 Manyo fth eactivitie s inth ematri xhav ea zerogros smargi n coefficient. Inth ecas eo fth emai nseaso nbarle ycro p forexample ,th e enterpriseuse sland ,produce sgrai nan d straw,an dutilize slabou r in twoseasons ,an doxe ntim ea swel la sdonke ytim e forbot hgrai nan d strawproduction . Oxena swel la scow sar e fedo npasture ,stra wan d hay. Sheepan ddonkey sderiv e their intakemainl y frompastures ,bu t receiveoccasionall y someha yo r straw. Thevecto r reflectsth e reality thatth e traditional enterpriseuse sn opurchase d inputs. By disaggregatingeac henterprise ,th e impacto noptima l organisation could beeasil yexamine db ymanipulatin g constraintso rmarke tprices . The specificationo fth elivestoc k activitywa ssuc htha tth e keepingoxe nactivit ywa sonl y feasible ifa loca lco wenterpris ewa s also included. Themode lallowe d foroxe nt ob e rentedo na dail ybasis . Theproductio nparameter suse d inth emode lwer e specified asobserve d in thesurveys . Thematri xwa scompose d of 39activities ,subjec t to3 5 constraints. Theobjectiv e functionwa sspecifie das : MAXJ = 0.0 BARLEY+ 0.0WHEA T+ 0. 0 HORSEBEANS+ 0.0 FIELDPEAS+ 0.0OAT S+0. 0 FALLOW+0. 0 PERMPASTUR E+0. 0 STRTF 12+ 0.0 STRTF 13+ 0.0 HAYTF 31+ 0.0 HAYTF 32+ 0. 0 BARLEYTF + 0.0WHEATT F+ 0.0 HORSEBEANTF+ 0. 0 FIELDPEAT F+ 0.0 BARBELG +0.0 HORBEANBEL G+0.7 9 SELLWHEA T+0.5 2 SELL BARLEY+0.4 7 SELLFIELDPE A+0.3 9 SELLHORSEBEAN S 5- 0.10 BUYHAY1 - 0.10 BUYHAY2 + 80. 0KEE POXE N+ 0.0. OXBELG+ 0. 0O XMEHE R+ 0.0 5 SELLMANURE -0.6 3 ROBEL- 0.63 ROMEH- 10. 0DONKE Y- 0.0MARKE T+ 42.0SHEE P+ 103.0 LOCCOW- 0.50 SELLMILK- 0.12 BUYSTR 1- 0.12 BUYSTR 2- 0.12 BUYSTR 3+ 0.0MANFUEL . Followingdefinition swer eused : MAXJ = MaximizeGros sMargi n BARLEY,WHEAT ,HORSEBEANS ,FIEL DPEAS ,OAT S= Productio no f these respectivecrop s inth emai n 'Mener'season ,o narabl e land ina cro p rotationsystem . Expressed inha . FALLOW= Compulsor y fallowingo farabl elan d toreflec tcurren t lowsoi l fertility (ha) PERMPASTUR E= Permanen tpastur eo ncurrentl ynon-arabl e land (ha) STRTF12 ,STRT F1 3= Transfe r ofstra w fromon e feed seasont oth e other season (kg) HAYTF 31,HAYT F 32= Transfe r ofha y fromon e feed seasont oth e other season (kg) BARLEYTF,WHEATTF ,HORSEBEANT Fan dFIELDPEATF : Transfer activity ofgrai no f respective cropt oth e subsistence requirement row (kg) 167 BARBELG,HORBEANBEL G= Barle yan dhorsebea nproductio n inth e short rain 'belg'seaso n (kg) SELLWHEAT ,SEL LBARLEY ,SEL L FIELDPEAS ,SEL LHORS EBEAN S= Sale of graino f respective crops fromthei r supplypool s (kg) BUYHAY 1,BUYHA Y2 ,BUYHA Y3 = Ha ypurchas e inth e respective periods (kg) KEEPOXE N= Enterprise fixing costsan dbenefit so f keeping apai r ofoxe n (pair) OXBELG= Workin g apai r ofoxe ndurin g the 'belg'seaso n (pair hour) OXMEHER= Workin g apai r ofoxe ndurin g the 'meher' season (pair hour) SELLMANURE= Saleo fmanur e cakes (kg) ROBEL= Renta l ofox-pair s forus e in 'belg'seaso n (pair hour) ROMEH- Renta l ofox-pai r forus e in 'meher'seaso n (pair hour) DONKEY= Enterpriseo fkeepin gdonke y (head) MARKET= Marketin g enterprisewhic huses donke y time (hrs) SHEEP= Sheepkeepin g enterprisedefine d ona ew eplus follower basis (head) LOCCOW» Keeping ofa local cowplu s followers inorde r toprovid e replacementoxe n for KEEPOXENactivit y (head) SELLMILK » Sale of farmproduce dmil k (kg) BUYSTR 1,BUYST R 2,BUYST R 3= purchas e of straw forus e inth e respective feedperio d (kg) MANFUEL = Burning ofhom eproduce dmanur e cakesa sa source of household fuel (kg) Thebasi c solutiono f thematri x gave theoptima lmi x of enterprises for a representative farm inth eBas oan dWoren aWereda . The enterprisemi xwhic hmaximise d totalgros smargi n fromth e resources available toth eaverag e farmer,gav ea totalannua l grossmargi no f 946 Birr. The optimal enterprise included 1.97 local cows, 40sheep ,an d one ox. Donkeys should be rented,an d barley shouldno tb e grownunles s its grossmargi n increasesb y approximately 50%. Therewa s surplus straw fromJun e toSeptember . Bothmehe r and belg cropswer e growno nal l available arable land. Themode l results illustrated critical feedconstraints , particularly during thedr y season from February toMay . The results also showed thenee d for rental oxendurin g themehe r season,an d 168 indicated that therewa s room fora nexpansio n of sheepholdings . Labour availibilitywa sno ta majo r constraint,an doutsid e themai n cultivation season,ther ewa s surplusoxe n time. Manurewa suse d as necessary forhousehol d fuel,an d surplusmanur ewa s sold forcash . Themode lwa s thenexpande d to simulate the likely impacto f the introduction ofa crossbred cowo n farmproductivity . The production parameters involvedwer eestimate d on thebasi so f resultsobtaine d at theDebr eBerha n station,an dpreviou sexperience s of theprogramm e at Debre Zeit (Gryseelsan dAnderson , 1983a). Theanticipate d costsan d benefits ofa crossbred cowenterpris ewer e firstestimate d ina budget presented inTabl e 5.2. Total returnso f theenterpris ewer e estimated at 1,195 Birr/annum,an d thecost sa t 325Birr/annum . Thene tbenefi t of the introduction ofa crossbred cowcoul d thereforeb eestimate d at87 0 Birr per annumpe r cow. Thisamoun twoul db e additional toth e returns fromth e traditional farmenterprise . Using themethodolog y described insectio n 4.10., theannua l rate of returno fa crossbred cowcoul d furtherb eestimate d at 110%pe r annum. Thebasi c LPmode lwa s thenadapte d toallo w for the incorporation of a crossbred cowi nfar moperations . The farmer grewa mixtur e of oats andvetch ,which wa s fedbot ha sgree n feedan da shay . Grassha yan d strawo fothe r cerealswer e also fed toth eco wan d followers. Total grossmargi n (TGM)increase d from 946t o207 3Birr ,o ra n increaseo f82 % toth eTG M obtainedwit h the traditonalenterpris emix . Rodriguezan dAnderso n (1985)modifie d andexpande d thisbasi c model toallo w for the incorporation of risk,t otes ta modificatio n ofa traditional ox-pair cultivation system toa singleo xploughin g system, and toevaluat e the incomevariatio n impactso fchange s in livestock technologies. Theobjective s of the studywer e toanalyz e the roleo f livestock enterprisesa sa risk reducing option,an d toevaluat e the impacto fcrossbre d cowsan d singleo xploughin g on farm activities withina stochasticenvironment . The singleo x technologywa s specified as requiring 50%les s feed butprovidin g only 50%o f theanima ldraugh t powerusuall yprovide d by theox-pair . Themode lmad eus eo fa 'risk-aversion scalar'i nth e objective functionan dproduce d a seto f solutions fordifferen t levels of risk ranging from0 t o3 ,wit h 0.5 as intervals. Resultsar e summarized inTabl e 5.3. Itwa s shown thata single oxploughin g strategyyielde d ahighe r mean farm income,bu ta larger standard deviationo fne t farm income relative toth eox-pair . For example,a ta riskaversio n levelo f 0.5 the lowestne t farm incomeunde r theo xpair swa s 86Bir r (252minu s SD of 166)whil e itwa s 459Bir r (647minu s 188)unde r the singleo x technology. Thehig hmea nne t farm income of the single ox systemwoul d bea sufficient advantage tooffse t the increasedvariation s ofne t farm income. Thedifference s inth e standard deviation ofne t farm income were caused by shifts inth e croppingpattern ,whic h reflected different attitudes in risk aversion. Differentials inmea nne t farm income could partlyb eattribute d tolivestoc k sales. The losso fmanur edu e to the adaptiono f the singleo x technologywa smor e thanoffse tb y the improvement ofanima l power efficiency. 169 Table 5.2. Expected Costsan dReturn so fa Crossbre d CowEnterpris e in theBas oan dWoren aWered a (Birr/Cow) costs a/ returnsb / Item Amount Item Amount 1. Forage 115 1.Mil k production 850 2. Feed concentrates 100 2.Dun g 73 3. Veterinary care 20 3.Surplu smale s 22 4. Housingan d tools 30 4.Surplu s females 170 5. Breeding 10 5.Residua lvalu e 80 6. Labour 50 Total costs 325 Total returns 1,195 a/ Assumptionsa sfol ] Lows: 1. Cashcost s for forageproductio nar eoat san dvetc hsee dan d fertilizer;10 0k goat sa t3 0Birr ,2 0k gvetc ha t5 Birr ,an d 100k g DAPa t8 0Birr . 2. 1,000 kgo favailabl e feedconcentrate s at0.1 0 Birr/kg. 3. Veterinary carea t2 0Birr/annum . 4. Improved housingan d toolssuc ha smil k cansan dbucket sdepreciate d over 5years . 5. Breeding services supplied at1 0Birr/year . 6. Additional labourneede destimate d at2 5manday sa t2 Birr/day . b/ Assumptionsa sfollows : 1. Milk production is1,70 0 kg/year andvalue d at0.5 0 BirrAg- 2. Dungproductio no fco wan d followersestimate d at2 k gdr ymatte r equivalentpe rday ,afte r allowing forlosses ,an dvalue d at 0.10 Birr/day . 3 and 4. Assuming calvinginterva l of1 4month san d 50%males/female s ratio. Male calves solda t 1yea r ofag ea t12 0Birr ,an d rearing costsassume d at 30Birr . Cows rear theirow n replacements. Each cowproduce sa naverag eo f 5calve sove ra 6 yea rproductiv ecycle . Oneo fth e female calves iskep ta sa replacement,an dmortalit y is assumed at20% . Thisallow s for 1.5mal ecalve san d 1.5 female calves tob e solddurin g the6 yea rperiod . Surplusheifer sar e sold at1 8month so fag ea t80 0Birr/head . Rearing cost isassume d at12 0 Birr. 5. Residualvalu eestimate d atmea tvalu eo f 400k ga t1. 2 Birr/kg. Source: Adapted fromGryseel san dAnderso n (1983a). 170 Table 5.3. Meanand Standar dDeviatio n (SD)o fNe tFar mIncom e Correspondingt oAlternativ e Livestock Technologies (Birr/Farm) Traditional Singleo x Crossbredco w Riskscala r Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD 0 335 166 749 226 1,887 67 0.5 252 166 649 188 1,854 67 1.0 188 84 557 178 1,820 67 1.5 155 52 507 64 1,787 67 2.0 129 52 475 64 1,753 67 2.5 104 52 444 61 1,719 67 3.0 78 52 413 61 1,687 67 Source: Rodriguezan dAnderso n (1985) The introductiono fa crossbre dco wincrease dne tfar m income dramatically. Thecro pmi xwa sslighte d changedi nfavou ro f"belg " crops,t oreflec tth ehighe r labour costdurin gth edr yseason . The resultso fth emodel swer e strongly suggestiveo fth ehig h profitabilityo fbot hpropose d interventions. Itwa stherefor e decided to initiateon-far m trialswit ha grou po ffarmer si nth earea ,i norde r to testth etechnologie sunde r fannerconditions . Such trialsallo wfo rth etestin go ftechnologie sunde r farmers' conditions,a nappraisa lo fth eappropriatenes so fne wtechnolog yt oth e circumstanceso ffarmers ,an da verificatio no fth eresult sobtaine da t the research station. Farmers'circumstance sar eal lth efactor s that influence farmers'decision sabou ta technolog y sucha sth enatura lan d economicenvironment ,an dth efarmers 'goals ,preference san dresourc e constraints (CIMMYTEconomic s Staff, 1984). Ifa technolog yi s appropriatet ofarme r circumstances,the nadoptio nb yth efarme r should follow. Theevaluatio no ftechnolog ybase do nfarme r criteriama ydiffe r significantly fromtha to fresearchers . Informationgenerate db yon-far m researchwoul d alsob eimportan ti nguidin gexperiment-statio n research, and enablea clea r specificationo fdesire d technologycharacteristics . 171 INTEGRATIONO FCROSSBRE DCOW SAN DFORAGE SI NTH EFARMIN GSYSTE M 6.1. Introduction Theproductivit yo floca lZeb ucattl e formea tan dmil k production islow . Their genetic capacity forincrease dmil kproductio n islimited , evenwit h improved feedingan dmanagement . A major increaseo fmil k productivity inth eshor tter mca nonl yb eachieve db yth e introduction ofhighe ryieldin gbreed so rcros sbreed so fcattle . Inth eabsenc eo f suitable local stock,thes ewil lhav et ob eexoti cbreed so forigin . In thelon gterm ,ther ema yb e scope forth edevelopmen t througha selection processo fth egeneti cpotentia lo f localZeb ubreeds ,bu tthi swil l requirea substantia l andlon gter m researcheffor t (AACM,1985 ;Kebede , 1987). TheEthiopia nGovernmen tha sa programm e forcrossbreedin g of Friesiansire san dBora n cows. Thisresult si ncrossbre dprogen y that are substantially larger thanth eloca l cows,wit ha highe rmil kan dmea t productivitywhil emaintainin g a relative tolerance tocondition so f sub-tropicalclimates . The favourable climatic andenvironmenta lconditions ,th e orientationtoward smixe dagriculture ,th eexistenc eo ftraditiona l dairy production,th eaccessibilit y tourba nmarkets ,an d thelikel y profitability suggested asubstantia lpotentia l forth edevelopmen to f smallholder dairyproductio n inth eBas oan dWoren aWereda . Experiences elsewhere inth eEthiopia nhighland s (Branninge tal , 1980;Gryseel san d Anderson,1983a )ha d showntha t introducing crossbred cattlefo r smallholderdair yproductio nwa s feasible,an dwoul db ea poten tmean so f raisingne t farmincom ean d familywelfare . Itwa s thereforedecide d to initiateadaptiv e researcho nth e integrationo fcrossbre ddair ycow si n the traditional farming systemo fth eWereda . Theobjective so fth e researchwer e tomonito r theperformanc eo fcrossbre d cowsunde r smallholder conditions,t ostud yadoptio nproblems ,t oapprais e the impacto f increasedmil kproductio no n farmproductivit yan d income,an d tous e the resultst oguid ecomponen t research. 6.2. Materialsan dMethod s Since1979 ,ILC Aoperate d anumbe ro f researchfarm sa tit s experiment stationa tDebr eBerhan . These farmswer emanage dan d operated byILC Aemployee so na fixe d salaryplu sa nannua lbonu sa spar t ofa n incentive scheme. Inadditio nt oprovidin ga direc tmean so f assessing thetechnica lan dbiologica l feasibilityo fa rangeo f alternative enterprise combinations,th e research farmsserve da sa clearinghous e formor e innovative enterpriseswhic hmigh t laterb e introduced toth e farmingcommunit y (Gryseelsan dAnderson , 1983a). Studieso nth eproductivit yo fcrossbre d cowswer e the initial focuso f the station research. Itwa s felthoweve r thatth estatio necolog ywa s not fully representative ofth eare aunde r study. The research station islocate d ina 'yemeda'lan dclas sarea ,an dwa shighl y frost-prone. Cropswer e extensivelydamage d by frost,an d forageproduction ,wit h fertilizer application,average d only2 t/ha . Average annualmil kyiel d ofth e crossbre d cows,adjuste d forcalvin g interval,wa s 1700k g+ 510 inth e firstlactation ,wit ha rangeo f90 0t o3,00 0k g (Gryseelsan d Anderson, Ibid). 172 research farmswer ever ydependen tupo n inputswhic hwer eno t farm produced,suc ha sfee dconcentrates . Also itwa s felttha tgive nth e "riskneutral "statu so fth e farmersinvolved ,th etechnolog ywa sno tpu t under adequate test. A decisionwa s therefore takent otes tth e technologywit h traditional farmerso fth esurroundin g area. A field daywa sorganize da tth estatio nt odiscus sth ecrossbre d cowan d forage technologywit h control farmers,loca lgovernmen tofficial san d extension agents. ILCAstaf fpresente d preliminary findingso fth etechnology ,th e likelyeffect so nfar mproductivity ,an d theadoptio nproblem stha tma y occur. InJul y198 2twent y farmers,al l residentso fon eo fth e four surrounding PAsdecide d topurchas eon ecrossbre d cowfro mILCA . In mid-1983,a nadditiona l 17farmer spurchase d acow ,an danothe r three farmers joined the research inearl y 1984. Thecow swer e solda t 1.5 Birr/kgliveweight ,50 %o ncas hdow npayment ,an d 50%o ncredit . They were Friesian-Boran crossestha twer eproduce d at ILCA research stations ofbot hDebr eZei tan dDebr eBerhan . Theyha d 75%exoti cblood ,a sth e sirewa sa purebre d Friesianbul lan dth eda ma 50 %Friesian-Bora ncross . Theirmea nweigh twa s 385kg ,an d theywer e solda ta naverag eo f 578 Birr each. Previousexperience s inth eArss i region (Kiwuwae t al, 1983) had showntha tth eperformanc eo f75 %wa s slightlysuperio r totEi to f 50%crosses . Farmersparticipate d ina grou ptrainin g coursebefor e theanimal s weredelivered . Thetrainin g consisted oflecture so n forageproduction , dairyhusbandry ,anima lhealth ,an deconomics/marketing ,an dwer e given by ILCAstaff . Each farmer signeda lette r ofunderstandin gwhic h included a replacementguarante e ifth eco wwoul dproduc e lesstha n70 0 kgo fmil kdurin g the firstlactation ,provide d thatth elo wyiel dwoul d notb edu et oobviou smismanagemen tb y thefarmer . Thelette ro f understanding alsoinclude da promis e thatfarmer swoul dparticipat e in thedat acollectio nprocedure s setu pb y ILCA,an dtha tthe ywoul d not sello rdispos eo fth eco wwithou ta writte nagreemen t fromILCA . Disputeswoul db e referred toth eExecutiv eCommitte e ofth ePA . The 40dair ytes t farmers (DTF)wer emember so f thefou rPA' so f theprio r study. Eight (20%)wer e fromFaji-Bokafino ,6 (15%)fro m Karafino,2 4 (60%)fro mKormargfi aan d 2 (5%)fro mMilki . The location ofth eDT Fi sillustrate d inFigur e 3.4. EightDT Fwer epreviou s control farmers. The relativelyhig hproportio n fromKormargfi a canb e explained by thehighe r availabilityo fanima l feed (pasturean d fallow)an d the easier access towate r sources thatexist s intha tPA . Inaddition , during 1983Korgmargfi awa s theonl yP Awit ha mil k collection centreo f theDair yDevelopmen t Enterprise (DDE). Thecrossbre d cowenterpris ewa s wholly farmermanaged . ILCA'sinpu twa slimite d toth eprovisio no f technicaladvic ean dveterinar y inputs,th esuppl yo f forage seedsan do f occasional supplementarywhea tbra n ("frushka"). Farmerswer eadvise d to produce special foragecrops ,grow na sa mixtur ebetwee noat s (Avena sativa)an dvetc h (Viciadasycarpa) ,o n0. 5 hao fland . All farmers adopted thisdair yhusbandr ypackag ea tthei row n riskan d expense. They themselvesdecide dwhethe r orno tt oaccep t ILCA'srecommendation s and paid casho r through shortter mcredit s formateria l inputs received from ILCA. Breeding serviceswer eprovide d by ILCA'spurebre d Friesianbul l that residedo n station. Although itwa s realized thathal fbre dbull s 173 would havebee npreferabl e soa st ostabiliz e the levelo fexoti c blood inth eprogeny ,th eavailabl ehal fbred s lacked libidoan d proved unsuitable forbreedin gpurposes . Inorde r tomonito r theperformanc e ofthes e crossbred cowsan d to study the impacto n farmproductivit y and income,dat a collection started immediately after thedistributio no f theanimals . Structured questionnaireswer euse d forthi spurpos e and the information collected was similar toth e typeo fdat a thatwer e gathered fromcontro lfarmers . Data analysiswa sundertake nusin g similarprocedure s as for control farm data and included routineso f theStatistica l Programme for Social Sciences (Niee tal ,1975) , HarveysLeas t Squares (Harvey,1977 )an d StatisticalAnalysi s System (SAS, 1985). Theperformanc e of theDT Fwa scompare dwit h theproductivit y of control farmers. For thatpurpose ,dat a collection on control farms continued during1985 . The following sectionpresent s resultsobtaine d from198 3 to1985 . 6.3. Results 6.3.1. Background Information onDair yTes t Farmers Themea nag eo fDT Fwa s 42years ,slightl y lesstha ncontro l farmers. About 44%ha d abasi cdegre e ofliteracy . The average household sizewa s 5person s (CV39% )o fwhic h 52%wer emal ean d48 % female. Therewa sn o significant difference between testan d control farmers interm so f family sizean d composition. Themea nvalu e of farmasset sowne d byDT Fwa sestimate d at 1019 Birr. Thiswa s significantly (P<0.01)highe r thano f control farmers where thisvalu e averaged only69 8Birr . DTFha dmor edwellin g houses and stores. Thehighe r assetpositio n allowed DTF tob e less risk averse,an d facilitated anearl yadoptio no f technology. 6.3.2. FarmHoldings ,Lan dUs ean d Productivity The sizeo f farmholdin g and pattern of landus e ofDT Fwa s similar andno t significantly different from thato fcontro l farmers. Theaverag e farmsiz ewa s 5.2 ha,o fwhic h 2h a (38%)wa s cultivated and 3.2 ha (62%)pastur e or fallowland . The statistical distribution of holding sizeswa s skewed slightly toth e righta sabou t 51%o fDT F owned more than 5h a of land. Thiswa smainl ydu e however tolarg e pasture holdings,a sth edistributio n ofare a cultivatedwa s similar totha to f control farmers. About 21%o fDT F cultivated lesstha n 1.6 ha,69 %cultivate d between 1.6 and 3h ao f land and only 10%cultivate d more than 4ha . Of the cultivated area 35%wa so naredd a productive land,2 %o naredd a less productive land,an d 63%o nyemeda . The average farm size andpattern s of landus edurin g theyear s of the study are presented inTabl e 6.1. 174 Table 6.1.: FarmSiz ean dLan dUs ePatter nDT F (1983-1985) 1983 1984 1984 (n-37) (n=40) (n-40) Mean farmsiz e 5.1 5.3 5.2 Land cultivated 1.9 2.1 2.0 Fallowlan d 2.5 2.5 2.5 Pasture land 0.7 0.7 0.7 Thecroppin gpatter no fDT Fwa sals o similar totha to f control farmers. A slightlyhighe rproportio no f landwa s sownt ooat san d vetch,s oa st oproduc e sufficient fodder for thecrossbre d cows. The amounto f forage crops sownwa showeve rwel lbelo wILCA' s recommendations of 0.5 hape r farm. Oats,vetc ho ra mixtur eo foat san dvetc hwer e growno na naverag e that ranged from247 0m in198 3t o 5040m during 1985. A substantial fractiono fth eoat swer eharveste d asgrai nan d used forhuma nconsumptio nhowever . Thecroppin gpatter no fDT F is illustrated inTabl e 6.2. Table 6.2.: Cropping PatternDT F (Meher Seasons1983-1985 ,% Cultivate d "Area a)) 1983 1984 1985 Barley 54 50 60 Wheat 7 6 7 Horsebean s 12 2 10 Fieldpea s 3 1- Linseed 8 5 6 Lentils 111 Oats 10 16 16 Vetch - 2 - Oatsan dvetc h 3 6- Fenugreek 2 11 - Total 100 100 100 Well over 50%o fal l cultivated landwa s sownwit hbarley ,an d between 13an d24 %t ooats ,vetc ho ra mixtur e ofboth . The proportion of land sownt ocereal saverage d around 70%,whil e 30%wa s sownt o pulses. Theus eo fminera l fertilizer byDT Fwa s similar totha to f control farmers. During 1983,78 %o fDT Fapplie dminera l fertilizer or 29ou to f 37farmers . Almost all farmers (97%)use d fertilizer onbarle y plotswit ha mea napplicatio n rateo f8 6kg/ha . Some (23%)als oapplie d fertilizer tothei rwhea tplots ,wit h anapplicatio n rateo f 68kg/ha . OnlyDA P fertilizerwas applied . The incidenceo fdrough tan d frostcause d 1983t ob ea ver ypoo r cropyear . Yieldswer ever y lowan dgrai n responsest o fertilizer 175 applicationalmos tzero . Asa result ,onl y7 ou to f3 9 (15%)o fDT F applied fertilizersdurin g1984 . During198 5als oonl ya lo wproportio n (15%)applie dminera l fertilizer. Farmersha dclearl ybecom e risk averse. Seed rateswer e similart othos eapplie db ycontro l farmers(se e Section 4.4.). Grossan dne tcro pyield so fDT Far epresente di nTabl e 6.3. Table 6.3.: Grossan dNe tCro pYield sDT F(1983-1985 ,kg/ha )1 / Grossyiel d Netyiel d 1981 1§84 1985 1983 19~8T~ 1985 Barley 366 1167 593 199 1915 439 Wheat 493 680 566 341 518 427 Horsebean s 666 695 549 376 424 306 Fieldpea s 220 354 - - 169 - Linseed 174 456 42 - - 10 Lentils 142 - - 37 - - Temenze 544 624 898 367 488 738 Oats 418 587 358 323 443 249 1/ Netcrop syield sar ecalculate da sgros sgrai noutpu tminu ssee d inputs. Cropyield swer eno tsignificantl ydifferen tbetwee nDT Fan d control farmers. Acompariso no fne tcro pyield so fbot h farmgroup sfo r the studyperio di sgive ni nTabl e6.4 . Table 6.4.: NetYield s Maj 1983 1984 1985 Barley CF Ï75 855 464 DTF 199 1015 439 Oats CF 420 725 411 DTF 323 443 249 Wheat CF 455 480 388 DTF 341 518 427 Horsebean s CF 465 540 709 DTF 376 424 306 Fieldpea s CF 50 555 338 DTF - 169 n.a. 1/ CF= contro l farmers,DT F= dair y testfarmers . 176 Therewa sn osignifican tdifferenc ebetwee nC Fan dDT F in proportionso f farmersusin gminera l fertilizer (Table 6.5.). The low profitabilityo f fertilizerdiscourage d itsuse . Table 6.5. FertilizerUs eb yC Fan dDT F( % of FarmersUsing ) 1983 1984 1985 CF 76 14 19 DTF 78 18 15 Theproductio no fcultivate d fodderwa slow . ILCA recommended thatfarmer sshoul dgro woat san dvetc h ina mixture ,bu tfarmer sfel t thatmanagemen to fthi smixtur ewa sver ydifficult . Vetchmature dwel l before theoat swhil eharvestin gwa sno tye tpossible . Undersowing practisesals ofailed . Averageproductio nwa sbetwee n1 an d 3t/DM/h a during 1983an d 1984bu t farmersthe nstoppe dgrowin gvetch . Although oatsgre wwel l inthi senvironment ,mos t farmersharveste d ita sa cerea l anduse d ita sa grai nfo rhuma nconsumption . After thecro p failureso f 1983,an dth enationa lgrai nshortag eo f 1984,thi swa sa rational strategy. The foragecrop swer emainl yuse da shay ,althoug h justunde r50 % of farmersals o served ita sgree n feed. All farmersfe d concentrates andgras sha yt oth ecrossbre d cows. Theproportio no f farmersofferin g feedstuffso fdifferen ttype si sgive n inTabl e 6.6. Table 6.6.: Feedstuffso fDifferen t Types Offered toCrossbre d Cow(s% ofFarmer sGiving ) 1983 1984 1985 (n=l7) (n-30) (n=35) Greengras s 83 100 100 Concentrates (wheatbran ) 100 100 86 Vetchha y 11 - - Vetchgree n >_ - - Greenoat s 47 57 43 Oatsha y 77 63 52 Straw 94 93 100 Grassha y 100 100 100 Worts 65 77 67 Barley (residues) 77 70 69 6.3.3 . Livestock Holdingsan c 1Productivit y Inadditio nt oth ecrossbre d cowenterprise ,DT Fha d livestock holdingso f similarbreed san d specieso f control farmers. These consisted of localZeb ucattle ,shee po fmen zbreed ,donkey san dhorses . Holdingso fDT Fwer e somewhatlarge r thanthos eo f controlfarmers , reflecting theirhighe rwealt hstatus . 177 Livestock holdings inTL Uequivalen twer e significantly different betweenDT Fan dC F (P<0.05)durin g 1983an d1984 ,bu tno tdurin g1985 . Thiswa spartl ydu et oth egreate rnumber so ffarmer sparticipatin g in the study. The initial groupo f test farmerswer e relativelywealth y and comparatively less risk averse. Thesecon d groupo ffarmer sha d significantly smaller livestock holdingsan d capitalassets ,an d joined onlyafte r theyha dobserve d thebenefit so f the technologywit h the earlyadopters . Inaddition ,livestoc k holdingso fDT F declined significantlydurin g thestud yperiod , reflecting forced salest o generate cash topa y theloa nobtaine d fromILC Afo rth epurchas eo f the cow,an d feedan d food shortagesdurin g thedrought so f 1983an d1984 . The sizeo f livestock holdingso fbot hC Fan dDT Far epresente d in Table 6.7. Theaverag eholding so fDT Fdecline d throughout the study period from11. 2TL Ui n198 3t o8. 5 TLUi n1985 . Thisdeclin e occurred inal l three species. Exceptdurin g 1984,ther ewa sn o significant difference insiz eo fholdin g of small ruminantsbetwee nC Fan dDTF . Equineholding swer e significantlydifferen thowever ,reflectin g the higherwealt h statuso fDTF . Table 6.7.: Livestock Holdingso fC Fan dDT F (TLUEquivalen tpe r Farm, 1963-1985)1 / 1983 1984 1985 CF DTF t2 / CF DTF t CF DTF t TLU 8.8 11.2 2.79** 8.1 10.5 2.87** 8.1 8.5 0.48 Cattle 4.9 5.7 1.71* 4.7 5.2 1.01 4.5 4.0 0.86 Small ruminants 1.9 2.3 1.18 1.6 2.2 2.72** 1.7 2.1 1.38 Equines 2.0 3.2 3.39** 1.8 3.1 3.62** 1.9 2.4 1.61 1/ Allvalue so fC Fan dDT Far eexpresse d inTL Uequivalents . Livestock holdingso fDT Fexclud e crossbredanimals . 2/ The t-test ison etailed . Theasteris k indicates significance level: * indicates P<0.05,* * indicatesP<0.0 1an d ifn oasteris k the difference isno t significant. Themea n livestock holding bytyp eo fDT Fwa sa si nTabl e 6.8. All DTFha da tleas ton eox ,an d60 %ha d two. Theyals okep ta t leaston e local cow. Theproductivit y of livestock of localbreed so f DTFwa sno t significantlydifferen t fromtha to fanimal sbelongin g toCF , asth ehusbandr y and feeding systemswer e similar. Themea nweigh t ofa matur e crossbred cowwa s 378+18kg . Daily drymatte r requirements,estimate d at2.5 %o fbod yweigh t couldb e estimated atapproximatel y 9k gpe rda yo r 3285k gpe ryear . Themea namoun to f feedgive n toth e crossbred cowsenterpris e is presented inTabl e 6.9. 178 Table6.8. : MeanLivestoc kHoldin go fDT Fb yTyp e (1983-1985)1 / 1983 1984 1985 Ox 1.5 1.4 1.3 Cow 1.9 1.6 1.4 Heifer 0.9 1.0 0.5 Bulls/immaturemale s 1.7 1.2 0.9 Calves 1.7 1.4 1.2 Total cattle 7.7 6.6 5.3 Lamb 4.6 5.5 5.6 Ram 0.8 0.7 0.6 Ewe 6.6 5.7 5.9 Castrated sheep 0.4 0.5 0.1 Young stock 1.6 0.6 1.5 Goats 0.4 0.6 0.4 Totalsmal l ruminants 14.4 13.6 14.8 Donkeys 2.1 1.8 1.8 2.2 2.1 Horses/mules 2.3 4.0 3.9 Totalequine s 4.4 3.5 3.0 Poultry 4.0 1/No t includingcrossbre d livestock Table6.9. : FodderAmount sFe dt oCrossbre dAnimal s (Kg/Farm) 1983 1984 1985 Greenfodde r 665 1477 959 grass 471 1223 864 oats '194 254 95 Dryfodde r 2124 3468 4411 grassha y 1650 2747 3698 oatsha y 227 194 202 vetchha y 34 - - cereal straw 213 527 511 Feed concentrates 284 565 217 Residues 59 169 119 attella 29 119 57 barley 30 43 55 others - 7 7 179 Assuminggree n foddert ohav ea dr ymatte requivalen to f25% ,dr y foddero f80% ,fee dconcentrate s95 %an d residues70% ,the ntota lD M feed offeredwa s 2176k g in1983 ,487 1k gi n198 4an d 4058k g in1985 . Feed requirements inD Mequivalen tdurin g thisperio d (calculateda t2.5 %o f bodyweigh to f theaverag eannua l inventory)amounte d to375 9k g in1983 , 4517k g in198 4an d 4991k gi n1985 . Maintenanceneed so f crossbred livestockwer eme t in1984 ,bu t in198 3onl y 58%an d in198 5an d81 %o f feed requiredwa savailable . Thedefici twa sme tb ypastur egrazing . Cowswer eals ogive nsmal lamount so fsal tfo rminera lsupplementation . DTFgav especia l caret oth ecrossbre d cows. Theywer ekep t separate fromth eanimal so f localbreed . Crossbred cowswer egraze d outdoors fora naverag eo f 5hours/day ,tethere db yth ewif ean dth e children. About90 %o fgrazin gwa sdon eo nth e individualgrazin gland , 8%o ncommuna l landan d 2%o ncro pstubbles . Thecrossbred swer eno t mixedwit hothe ranimal so fth eherd . Thecrossbre danimal swer eals o kept separatelydurin ghan d feeding. All crossbredanimal swer evaccinate db y ILCAagains trinderpest , contagiousbovin epleuro-pneumoni a (CBPP)an dblac k leg. Vaccines against footan dmout hdiseas ewer eno tavailable . Everymont hth e cows weredrenche d forprotectio nagains t liverflukean dworms . Farmers complained aboutth esusceptibilit yo fcrossbre danimal st oliverfluke . Bloatwa sals oa majo rproblem ,a swel la smastitis . Themea nholdin go fcrossbre danimal so fDT Fwa sa si nTabl e 6.10. Table6.10. : Holdingso fCrossbre dCattl e (meanpe r Farm,1983-1985 ) 1983 1984 1985 Cow 1.0 1.0 1.0 Heifer 0.0 0.1 0.4 Calf 0.7 0.8 0.8 Youngbul l 0.0 0.2 0.4 Bull 0.0 0.0 0.02 Total crossbredcattl e 1.7 2.1 2.62 f TLUequivalen t 1.65 1.98 2.19 All DTFha don ecrossbre dcow ,an dusuall ya tleas ton efollower . Herdgrowt h ratei nterm so fTL Uequivalen twa s20 %i nth e firstyear , and 11%i nth e secondyear . 6.3.4. Productivityo fCrossbre dCow s 6.3.4.1. ReproductionCharacteristic s Meanag ea t firstcalvin gwa s986+2 2day swit ha C Vo f 11%. The meanag eo fheifer sa t firstservic ewa s 719+23day s (CV=17%). Theoveral l calving interval (CI)wa s 424+15days . Betweenth e firstan d second lactationC Iwa s 377+35days ,an d 470+33day sbetwee n secondan d thirdlactation . 180 6.3.4.2. Production Characteristics Themea n lactationyiel dwa s1843+11 2k gan dincrease d from 1715+255k gi nfirs t lactation (n=23)t o1970+24 3k gi nsecon d lactation (n=32), Lactationyiel do fcow scalvin gi ntH edr yseaso n (n=27)wa s 1553+249 kg,an d2132+24 4k gfo rthos e calvingi nth ewe tseaso n (n=28). Yet,becaus eo fth ehïg h standard errors,thes edifference swer eno t statistically significant. MeanAAM Y1 /wa s 1660+126 kg,an dwa s1708+31 5k gfo rth efirs t lactationan d1611+29 9k gi nth esecon d lactation. Althoughth emean so fmil kyield sappeare dt ob estrongl y influencedb yyea ro fcalving , seasono fcalving ,an dcal f sex,thes e differenceswer eno tfoun dt ob estatisticall y significantusin g HLSQ procedures. The average lactation lengthwa s332+2 0days ,an dincrease d from 280+48day si nfirs tlactatio nt o385+4 5day si nsecon d lactation. The lactation lengthwa sstrongl y correlated with lactationnumbe r (P<0.05). Duringth efirs t lactation,58 %o fcalve sbor naliv ewer e female, and 42%wer emales . Duringth esecon d lactation 40%wer e femalesan d60 % males. Themea nbirt hweigh to fcalve swa s28+0.7 4k g(n-41) , ranging from27.8+0.9 9k gfo rfemal e calvest o29+1.0 7k gfo rmal e calves. There wasa significan t effecto fag eo fda mo nbirt hweights . Mean birth weightso fdam sles stha nfou ryear sol dwa s3 1kg ,whil eonl y2 6k gwhe n theda mwa smor e than fouryear sold . Overall calfmortalit ywa sestimate da t16 %(n=118) ,an dwa s distributeda s58 %mal e calvesan d42 %femal ecalves . Abortion occurred in4 %o fpregnancies . Therewa sn osignifican t difference incal f mortality accordingt olactatio n number. Ofth ecal fdeath s20 %occurre d withinon emont h after birth,40 % betweenth esecon dan dthir dmonth ,10 % betweenth efourt han dsixt hmont han d25 %betwee nth esevent hmont han d oneyear . Theproductio n resultspe rlactatio nar esummarize d inTabl e6.11 . Table 6.11.: Mean ProductionResult so fCrossbre d Cowsb yLactatio n Number LactationNumbe r 1 2 (N=39) (N=32) Age atfirs tcalvin g (days) 986+22 n.a. Lactationyiel d (kg) 1715+255 1970+243 AAMY (kg) 1708+315 1611+299 Lactationlengt h (days) 280+48 385+45 Lactationyield/da y (kg) 5.49+0.49 5.34+0.37 Calving interval (days) 377+35 470+33 Lactation yield 1/ AdjustedAnnua lMil k Yield (AAMY) x36 5 Calving interval 181 Milk productionpe r cowpeake d justafte r themai n rains (August- September)whe ngras sgrowt h on thepasture swa s lush. Itals o peaked during theBel g rainso fApri l andMay . During 1984 therewer e no Belg rains. The fluctuations inmonthl ymil k productionar e illustrated in Table 6.12. Table 6.12.: MonthlyMean so fMil k Productionpe r Cow (Kg/Month,1983 - 1985) 1983 1984 1985 January 137 191 154 February 155 180 113 March 175 187 131 April 187 150 128 May 188 139 128 June 179 162 109 July 146 194 129 August 185 200 171 September 196 211 170 October 208 215 177 November 182 182 140 December 188 172 130 Mean 180 183 140 Milk productionwa scorrelate dwit h rainfall,a s shown in Figure 6.1. Milk yields stronglydecrease d towards theen d of thedr y season, reflecting feedshortages . Cowswer emilke d twicea day ,onc e inth emornin g and once in the evening. Letdow nwa s stimulated by the calf,whic hwa s then taken away and fed froma bucket . Calveswer e feda mea no f 336+16 kgo fmil k until weaning atbetwee n threean d sixmonths . ILCA's advicewa s to rear calveswit h four litreso fmil k perda ydurin g the firstmonth ,thre e litres/day during the secondmonth ,an d twolitres/da y during the third month,o fwhic hhal fwa s tob eoffere d inth emornin g andhal f inth e evening. After weaning, calves started grazingwit h the crossbred cow. Itappeare d thatmal e calves received slightlymor emil k than female calves. Themil k fromcrossbre d Friesian-Boran cowsha d a lower butterfat content than thato f local Zebu cows. Butterfat content ofmil k produced by crossbred cowso fDT Faverage d around 4%,wit h a range from 3.2 to 4.8%dependin g on the typeo f feed intake,an dwate r availability (EphraimBekele ,persona l communication). This comparedwit h an average fat contento f 5.3%o fmil k of local cows (O'Mahoney and Peters, 1987). 182 Figure6.1. : MonthlyMil kProductio no fCrossbre d Cowsan dMonthl y Rainfall Rainfall (mm) Milk (kg) Rainfall (mm/month) Milk (kg/cow) 500T 250 400 ••200 300-- 150 200-• ••100 100-- Jan'83 Jan'84 Jan'85 Dec.1985 6.4. FarmIncome san dGros sMargin s 6.4.1. Marketing DTFar e subsistence farmersan dalmos tal lgrain sproduce dwer e consumed onth e farm. Onlya mino r fractiono f farmgrai nproductio nwa s marketed. Each farmerha d tosuppl yannuall yapproximatel y 50k gt oth e AMCa tofficia lgovernmen tprice svi a theServic eCooperativ e ofwhic h hewa sa member . DTF soldmos to fth emil kproduce db y thecrossbre d cowst oth e DairyDevelopmen t Enterprise,throug h itscollectio ncentre so n theDebr e Berhan-AddisAbeb a road. Milkwa sdelivere donc e inth emornin gt othes e collection centres. Itwa s immediately checked forqualit yb y theDD E staff,an d ifmil kwa sno tconfor m tostandar d itwa s rejected. Farmers were paid 0.45 Birr/litredurin g 1983an d 1984,an d 0.50 Birr/litre during 1985. Paymentswer emad e twicea mont h incas ha tth e collection centres. Abouton e thirdo fDT F soldals oprivately ,mostl yo ncontrac t basist ourba nconsumer si nDebr eBerha ntown . 183 Approximately77 %o fth emil ko fcrossbre d cowswa ssold ,whil e 13%wa shom e consumed (ineithe r liquid formo rprocesse d into butter), and 10%o fproductio nwa sfo rcal f consumption throughbucke t feeding. (Table 6.13.). Farmers frequently soldth emil ko fcrossbre d cows,whil e keepingth emil ko fth eloca l cowsfo rprocessin g intobutter . Thiswa s donebecaus eo fth ehighe r butterfatconten to fmil ko fZeb u cows. Table 6.13.: Disposalo fMil k Production fromCrossbre d Cows (Kg/Farm) 1983 1984 1985 Mean % Production 1518 1764 1499 1594 100 Sales 1147 1285 1240 1224 77 Home consumption 252 252 119 208 13 Calf consumption 119 227 140 162 10 6.4.2. GrossMargin san dIncome s 6.4.3. Cash Incomes Total cash incomeso fDT Fwer eo naverag e 120%highe r than those of control farmers. Thiswa spredominatel ydu et ohighe rmil k sales. During198 3th eincreas ei ncas h incomewa s148% ,durin g198 4i tamounte d to82% ,an dt o149 %durin g198 5(Tabl e 6.14). Therewa sn osignifican tdifferenc e betweenDT Fan dC Fi ncas h income fromsource sothe r thanmil k sales. 1984 followeda nextremel y poor agricultural year,durin g which cropyield s failed. Control farmersha dt osel la substantia l proportion of their stockt ogenerat e casht oenabl eth epurchas eo ffoo dgrain . DTFha da relativel y higher income stability throughmil k sales,an dwer e not forcedt osel la sman yanimals . Table 6.14.:Cas h Incomeso fDT Fan dContro l Farmersb ySource , (1983-1985,Birr/Farm ) 1983 1984 1985 Sourceo fsale s Control DTF Control DTF Control DTF Grain 14 10 17 6 25 82 Cropby-product s 0 0 12 3 17 62 Milk 57 516 0 578 29 620 Manure - - 10 12 29 3 Other livestock products 55 70 19 20 53 51 Trade inlivestoc k 221 268 488 373 259 211 Totals 347 864 546 992 412 1029 184 6.4.4. Effectso nGros sMargin s 6.4.4.1. CropGros sMargi n DTFan dcontro l farmersha dsimila r croppingpattern san dcro p yields. Theyals o similaramount so fcro pinputs . Grossmargin s obtainedi ncro pproductio nwer e therefore similaran ddi dno tdiffe r significantlybetwee nDT Fan dCF . (Table 6.15.). Estimateso fgros s marginsan dvalu eo fproductio nwer emad eo nth ebasi so fth emethodolog y andassumption sreporte dupo ni nSectio n4.9.2 . Table6.15. : GrossMargi npe rCro po fDT Fan dC F(1983-1985 ,Birr/Ha ) 1983 1984 1985 CF DTF CF DTF CF DTF Barley 200 212 1243 1160 385 385 Wheat 462 430 882 877 364 358 Oats 136 125 1080 923 341 201 Temenze 125 130 763 865 363 482 Horsebean s 146 164 584 482 239 42 Fieldpea s 14 15 503 129 262 - Lentils 119 95 128 - 31 - Linseed 149 136 330 419 85 - Grossmargin spe rh ai n198 3average d21 4Bir rfo rcontro l farms and19 3Bir rfo rtes t farms,whil edurin g198 4the ywer eestimate da t56 9 Birrfo rcontro l farmsan d56 8Bir rfo rDTF . During 1985,gros smargin s decreasedt o18 5Birr/h afo rC Fan d18 4Birr/h afo rDTF . AsDT F cultivateda somewha tsmalle rare atha nCF ,overal lgros smargin spe r farmo fDT Ffro mcro pproductio nwer e somewhatlowe r (Table 6.16.). Grossmargin svarie dwidel ybetwee n198 3an d198 5becaus eo fth ecombine d effectso fcro p failure,nationa l foodshortage san drapi dmarke tpric e increases. Grossmargi npe runi tare awa sestimate do nth ebasi so f cultivatedan dfallo wland . Table6.16. : GrossMargin sfro mCro pProductio nfo rDT Fan dC F (1983-198.3 ,Birr/Farm ) 1983 1984 1985 CF DTF CF DTF CF DTF Grossmargi n (Birr/farm) 631 849 2519 2207 898 817 Grossmargi npe r unitare a (Birr/ha) 214 193 569 568 185 184 Grossvalu eo f production (Birr/farm) 1610 2140 2578 2368 2118 1878 185 6.4.4.2. GrossMargi n fromTraditiona l Livestock Production DTFha d somewhatlarge r livestock holdingstha nC Fan da sn o significantdifferen tdifference swer eobserve d inth eproductivit yo f livestock ofloca lbreeds ,thi stranslate d intohighe rgros smargin so na per farmbasi s (Table6.17.) . Themethodolog yapplie d forth e calculationo fgros smargin swa sa si nsectio n4.9.2 . Thedifference s were statisticallyno tsignifican texcep tdurin g1984 . Table6.17. : GrossMargi no fC Fan dDT Ffro mTraditiona l Livestock Production (1983-1985,Birr/Farm ) 1/ 1983 1984 1985 CF DTF t2 / CF DTF t 2/ CF DTF t2 / GM 77778 8 919166 1.5 41.5 4 675 816785 1.86818 * 1.8668*0 668 -0.13 GM I 1101103 1233 1235 1.15 9 1.19 974112 976 41.5112 66 1.59967 911 -0.69 GVP 13213266 149 14999 1.3 11.3 1 1188136 11848 136 1.449 1.41209 1109 2 -0.72 1/ GM= Gros sMargin ; GM I» Gros sMargi n includingth evalu eo f intermediate products; GVP= Gros sValu eo fProduction . 2/ T-test ison etailed . Asterisk reflectsdegre eo fsignificance . If * thenP<0.05 . Ifn oasteris k thenth ecorrelatio n isno t significant. 6.4.4.3. GrossMargi n fromCrossbre d CowEnterpris e Economicanalysi so fa smallholde rdair yenterpris ewithi na subsistence setting requiresmakin ga numbe ro fassumptions . Some inputs arehom eproduce dan doutput sar eofte nconsume d athom e indifferen t forms. There isn o readilyavailabl emarke t for someo fth e inputso r outputs. Iti sdifficul t toassig na nappropriat evalu e toa female heiferwhic h isno tye tpregnan tan dwhic hha sno tye t started toproduc e milk. Toevaluat e theeconomic so fth ecrossbre d cowenterpris e gross marginanalysi swa sused . Thereturn so fth eenterpris e includedmil k output,manur eproduction ,sale so fcalves ,weigh tgain so f followers,a projectedvalu e for futuremil kproductio no fheifer san d the residual valueo f thecow . Thecost sinclude dbot hfres han dconserve d fodder, feedconcentrates ,residues ,healt hcar ean dveterinar yservices , depreciation ofspecia lhousin gan d tools,breedin g services,th eus eo f hired labour and thecos to fmarketing . For theanalysis ,onl yfarm s with completedat a recordswer e takenint oaccount . Over the threeyea r period,16 %o f farmscoul dno tb e included inth eanalysis ,becaus e of incompletedat arecords . 186 Table 6.18.: AverageCos to fFee dpe rFar mpe rYea rb yFee dType ,fo r theCrossbre dCo wEnterpris e 1983 1984 1985 Kg Birr Kg Birr Kg Birr Green fodder 1/ 665 27 1477 66 959 24 - grass 471 1223 864 - oats 194 254 95 Dry fodder 2/ 2124 159 3468 347 4411 419 - grassha y 1650 2747 3698 - oatsha y 227 194 202 - vetchha y 34 - cereal straw 213 527 511 Concentrates 3/ 284 74 565 147 217 56 Residues 4/ 59 4 169 17 119 14 - attelTa 29 119 57 - barley 30 43 55 - others 7 7 Average total feed cost 264 577 513 1/ Assuming freshcu tgras sha d25 %D Mconten tan dvalue da t1/ 3 ofha y cost. Green foddera tmarke tvalu e "asis "i nth e field before cuttingan dmarketin g andcalculate d at4. 4 centsAg during 1983, 4.5 centsAg during 1984an d 2.5 centsAg during1985 . 2/ Dry foddera smarke tvalu e "asis "befor e cuttingan d excluding marketing cost,i.e . 50%o faverag eha ycos to nmarket . Costpe rk g calculated as7. 5 centsdurin g 1983,11. 5cent sdurin g 1984an d 9.5 centsdurin g1985 . 3/ Feedconcentrat e at2 6 centsAg. 4/ Residue cost7 centsA g in1983 ,1 0centsA g in198 4an d 12 centsAg in1985 . Costwa sassume da t70 %o fmarke tvalu ebecaus eo f transportexpenses . The incomplete recordswer edu et oth e replacement ofth eco wo r heifer incas eo finsufficien tmil kproductio no r infertility,o r ifth e farmer joined the researchonl y inth emiddl eo fth eyea r inwhic h case only6 months 'record swer eavailable . During 1983,1 7ou to f2 0 (85%)o ffarm sha d complete records,3 0 outo f 37 (81%)i n198 4an d 35ou to f 40 (87%)durin g1985 . Themajo r costo fth ecrossbre d cowenterpris ewa s feed. Table 6.18.present s theaverag e costo f feedpe r farmpe r feedtype . Thecos to f feedwa s26 4Birr/far mdurin g 1983,57 7Birr/far m during1984 ,an d 513Birr/far mdurin g 1985. The sharp increase inprice s of strawan dha ydurin g 1984wa sth emajo r causal factor forth e substantial increase infee d cost,i nadditio n toth eexpansio no fth e sizeo fth ecrossbre dholdin g throughnatura lgrowth . 187 Table6.19. : Costsan dReturn so fCrossbre d CowEnterprise ,1983-198 5 (Birr/Farm) Returns 1983 1984 1985 Milk sales 1/ 516 578 620 Milk consumption 1/ 113 113 60 Calf sales - 7 19 Weightgain so ffollower s2 / 236 216 277 Manure 3/ 37 42 53 Residualvalu eo fco w4 / 100 100 100 Subtotal 1002 1056 1129 Costs Feed cost 5/ 264 577 513 Veterinarycar e 6/ 20 20 20 Calfmil k 7/ 68 98 87 Marketingexpense s 8/ 20 20 20 Breeding 9/ 10 10 10 Housingan dtool s10 / 15 15 15 Subtotal 397 740 635 Grossmargi n 605 316 494 1/ Milk salesan dconsumptio nvalue da tDD Epric eo f 0.45 Birr in198 3 and 1984,an d 0.50Bir r in1985 . 2/ Weightgain so f followersestimate d aschang ei nliveweigh to f crossbred cattle fromth ebeginnin go fth eyear ,an dvalue da t 1.5 Birr/kÇ- 3/ Manureamoun tcalculate da s1.5 %o fmea nannua l liveweight. A DM contento f40 %wa sassumed ,an donl y85 %o fmanur ewa scollected . Manurewa svalue da t0.0 5Birr/k gDM . 4/ Cows rearthei row n replacementsan d canb esol dafte ra 6 yea r productive lifea t60 0Birr . 5/ Feedcost sa si nTabl e6.17 . 6/ Veterinarycar eexpense sinclud eth eimpute dvalu efo rservice sgive n byILCA . 7/ Milkgive nt ocalve svalue da si n1/ . 8/ Marketingexpense s imputeda t1 0cents/da yfo r20 0day sa year . 9/ Breedingcos timpute do nth ebasi so fA I costi nAddi sAbaba . 10/Housin gan d toolsvalue da t15 0Bir ran d fullydepreciate d over 10 yearswit hn o residualvalue . 188 Grossmargin so fth ecrossbre dco wenterpris ear etabule d inTabl e 6.19. Thegros smargi namounte d to60 5Bir r in1984 ,31 6Bir r in198 5 and 494Bir r in1986 . Theadditiona l labour requirementso fth e enterprise couldusuall yb eprovide db y thewif ean dchildren . The enterpriseadde dabou t1 hou rdail yt olabou r requirements,fo rmilking , calfcare ,bar ncleaning ,marketin go fmil k andextr ahan d feedingo f the cowan dhe r followers. Theanimal swer eusuall y tetheredaroun d the homestead orgraze db yon eo f thechildren . Thislabou rha da low opportunity cost. About31 %o f farmers rentedadditiona l labour for the crossbred cowenterprise ,mainl y forfee dcollectio n (14%),ha y cutting (11%)o rherdin g(6%) . Themajo r labour inputt oth ecrossbre dco wenterpris ewa s for grasscuttin gan dha ypreparation . About64 %o f farmers reported that childrenwer emor e involved infar mtask sa sa resulto f the introduction of crossbred cows. Moretha n50 %o f farmers'wife s reporteda significant increase inth eamoun to ftim eneede d fordun gpreparation . Onth ebasi so fTabl e6.19. ,productio ncost so fmil k ofDT Fcoul d beestimate da s2 6cents/litr e in1982 ,an d 42cents/litr e in198 4an d 1985. The rapid increase inproductio n costswa sdu e toescalatin g feed prices. Themil k priceb yDD Ewa s .50Birr/litre . 6.4.4.4. Overall FarmGros sMargi n Overallgros smargins ,combinin gth ecrop ,an d livestock enterpriseswer e significantlyhighe r forDT F thanfo rcontro l farmers (P<0.05). The crossbred cowenterpris eadde d substantially tofar m income. This isillustrate d inTabl e6.20 . Table6.20. :Overal l FarmGros sMargi nDT Fan dContro l Farmers (1983 1985, Birr/Farm) 1983 1984 1985 Control Test Control Test Control Test Crops 631 849 2519 2207 898 817 Livestock traditional 778 1093 657 996 680 960 crossbred 605 316 494 Total 1409 2547 3176 3519 1578 2271 Theoveral lgros smargi no fDT Fwa s81 %highe r thantha to f control farmers in1983 ,11 %i n198 4an d 44%highe r in1985 . The crossbred cowenterpris eprovide d 32%o fth eDT Fgros smargi n in1983 ,9 % in198 4an d 22%i n1985 . The198 4 resultsar edistorte d becauseo f the unusual price riseso fgrain sdurin g thatyea ra sa resulto fwidesprea d drought. Theprofitabilit yo fth ecro penterpris e cantherefor eno tb e assessed on thebasi so f theunusua lpric e ratiosdurin g thatyear . 189 6.4.5. Effecto nHuna nNutritio n Wagenaar-Brouwer (1985)di dno tfin d significantdifference s in nutritional statusbetwee nDT Fan d control farmers. The increased milk offtakedi dno t lead toa substantially higher familymil k consumption as most of themil kwa s sold. During themai n rainy seasonmil k consumption ofDT F increased slightlyt oovercom e seasonal foodshortages . Although on-farmconsumptio n ofcereal san dpulse sappeare d higher on test farms, thiswa s largelydu e toth egreate r family size. Thehighe r cash income wasuse d for thepurchas e of clothes,househol d items,an d food. Greater amountso fdair yproducts ,coffee/suga r and alcoholwer e also being consumed. 6.5. Constraints toDair y Development 6.5.1. Background Theperceptio n by DTFo f thecrossbre d cowsan d their likely impacto n familywelfar ewa s studied intw ospecia l surveys. Onewa s undertaken in198 4a tth e starto f thetrials ,an don e in198 7mor e than 12month safte r theen d of routinedat a recording. During 1984,al l farmers indicated satisfactionwit h the crossbred cow (listing asmai n advantages thehighe r incomean d the regular cash flow,th e increase in social statusan d theavailabilit y ofmil k for children),bu t also pointed toproblem s faced inmanagin g thisdair yenterprise . Themai n constraint related toth e shortage of feeddurin g thedr y seasonan d the lack of feed concentrates,th edifficult y ofobtainin gveterinar y care in theabsenc e ofILC Aan d the lack of sufficientwater . The surveyo fApri l 1987wa sundertake n about 15month safte r the formal endo f routinedat acollection . Of the 40DTF ,thre eha d left their respective PA'san dha dmigrate dwhil e twofarmer sha d sold their cows. A total of 35DT Fwer e interviewed. Allexpresse d their great appreciation for the crossbred cowenterpris e as itha d significantly increased their income. Almost 29%ha dalread y sold crossbred offspring at substantial pricese.g. , six farmers solda n1 8mont hol dheife r ata n average 300pric e ofBirr ,o ralmos t 50%o f theorigina l purchase price of thecow . Themajo rproblem s farmers facedwit hcrossbre danimal s related to availability of feed,mil k conservation andmarketing ,an d lack of disease resistance. 6.5.2. Feed Almost all farmerscite d the shortage of feeda s their major problem inmanagin g theco wenterprise . Theproble m is confounded becausemos t farmersar eoverstocke dwit hanimal so floca lbreeds , despite the fact that89 %o fDT F solda t leaston e local bovine to reduce feeddemands . Farmersha dbee nadvise d togro w forage crops toproduc e sufficient highqualit y feed for thedair y cows. Thewidesprea d drought 190 in 1983 and 1984 led to sharp increase in foodprice s throughout the Ethiopian highlands. DTF preferred tous e their arable land to grow food crops. Inaddition , growing oatsan d vetch ina mixtur e proved difficult. Theproportio n of oatsan d vetch in feed intake declined from 29% in 1983 to 17%i n 1984 toonl y 10%i n 1985. The proportion of oats and vetch indr y fodder decreased from 12%i n 1983 to 7% in 1984 and 4% in 1985. Cowswer e fedmainl y on grass and hay from pastures, and feed concentrates. The concentrates were initially provided by ILCAan d farmers became very dependent on them. Themai n feed constraint occurred from February toJul y particularly when therewer e noo r only scarce early rains, such as in 1984. The peak shortages occurred inMay , June and early July. Milk yields declined dramatically during this period. During the 1987 survey, only 11%o f farmers stilluse d concentrates asa feed for their animals, as the supplywa s difficult. About 88%wer e growing oats for fodder again however. Invie w of the farmers' reluctance togro w forage crops on arable land, researchwil l have to consider an increase in the productivity of pastures, orway s to improve the feeding value of cropby-product s and hay. ILCA should continue its research on theproductivit y of 'trifolium' species in theWereda . Ifa successful technology could be developed and introduced on farms thiswoul d allow for a shortening of the fallow cycle and increase fodder productivity. ILCA is also undertaking experimental reserch at theDebr e Berhan station to assess the effects ofmolasse/ure a blocks asa n animal feed supplement on milk production. Initial results obtained showhighl y significant effects of adding urea to feed intake onmil k yields. Milk yields decreased dramatically during thedr y season. Crossbred cows have higher water requirements whichwer e often difficult to fulfill andwate r stress appeared tob e amajo r problem. The construction of ponds by the local PA'sma y alleviate this problem. 6.5.3. Marketing Farmers in the Baso andWoren a Wereda are located near milk collection centres of theDair y Development Enterprise. The system of milk collection doesno t always operate efficientlyan d frequent breakdowns occur. In the absence of a collection system, farmers face severe problems in themarketin g ofmilk , particularly during fasting periods. Although there are alternative outlets inDebr e Berhan town, the absorption capacity is limited and themarketin g costs are high. About 77%o f DTF reported themarketin g of milk tob e amajo r constraint. They also complained of thedistanc e of DDE collecting centres to their farms. More than 50%o f farmers reported problems with the coagulation of milk. If the crossbred cow technology is tob e extended toa wide r population, themarketin g problem will have tob e addressed. The milk collection points are not available beyond Debre Berhan town, and are accessible only to farmers living nearAddis-Debr e Berhan road. The 191 majorityo f Ethiopianhighlan d farmersliv emor e thanon eda y round trip walk fromall-weather-roads . For these farmers,way san dmean swil l have tob e found toproces s liquidmil k intoproduct s sucha sbutte r and cheese,t oexten d thestorag e capacity. ILCAha s initiated research in thisare a (O'Mahoneyan dBekele ,1984 ;O'Mahone yan dPeters ,1987) . This research should focuso n the femalemember so f thehousehold , since they areprimaril y responsible formil k processing. Themajo r economic problem isth e lowpric eo fmilk . The costo f productionwa s 42cent sdurin g 1984,compare d toth epric eo f 45cents / litrealthoug h thepric ewa s increased to 50cent si n1985 . The profitability of theenterpris e isrelativel y low,particularl y because of feed costs. About 30%o f the farmsha dnegativ e grossmargin swhe n milk production onlywa s considered. Thegovernmen t should consider either an increase inth emil k priceo ra subsidyo n inputs. Itshoul d alsoconside r linking theoutpu tpric e toth ebutterfa t contento f the milk,an da premiu m tob epai d formil k supplieddurin g thedr yseason . 6.5.4. Disease Almostal l farmersencountere d diseaseproblem swit h their crossbred cattle. Themajo r problemswer e liverfluke (listedb y 97%o f DTFa sth emajo rhealt h constraint),bloatin g (duet oa toohig h fraction of greengras s inth ediet) ,wor m infestationan d footan dmout hdisease . As ILCAprovide d veterinary services,unti l 1985healt hproblem swer e never amajo r contraint toth e farmers. Veterinarydrug swer e difficult toobtai n for farmers. TheMinistr y ofAgricultur e isusin g its veterinary resources tosuppor tdair yproductio n inServic eCooperatives . Experiencesa tDebr e Zeit (Gryseelsan dD eBoodt ,1986 )hav e shownth e negative consequences ofa lack ofextensio n serviceso n crossbred cow productivity. The susceptibility todiseas e isparticularl y detrimental tocalves . Waysan dmean shav e tob e found to reduce thehig h level of calfmortality . 6.5.5. Breeding Thecow sprovide d by ILCAt oDT Fha d a75 %fractio no f exotic blood. As the ILCAbul lwa s à purebred Friesian,th eprogen ywa s87.5 % exotic. Although Kiwuwae ta l (1983)ha d reported superior performance of threequarte r breds,thi sfindin gwa sno t confirmed by thisstudy . It was felttha t the cowso fDT Fha d excessive feeddemands ,an d thatmil k yieldswer ebelo w thepotentia l ofcrossbre d animals. Thehig hleve l of exoticbloo dwa snotabl y responsible for the susceptibility todiseas e andhig h calfmortality . Similar problemswer eexperience d inth eDebr e Zeitare a (Gryseels andD eBoodt , 1986). Artificial insemination (AI) serviceswer eno tavailable ,an d thehalfbre dbull s tested by ILCA lacked libido. Farmerswer e advised tous e localbull sbu talmos tal lo f the DTF refused to follow thispractice . About 77%o f farmersar eno wusin g a purebred Friesianbul l from thePA . Theyd ono twan t their beautiful white "ferenzi"co w tob e served bya nanima l of localbreed . Asa resultal l farmershav eoffsprin gwit ha nexoti cbloo d level far above what isadvisable . Efforts should bemad eb y theMinistr yo fAgricultur e toprovid e alternative breeding services,eithe r through theprovisio n at theP A levelo f suitablehalfbre d bulls,o r throughA I services. 192 6.6. Discussion The crossbred cowtechnolog y isviabl e andprofitable ,an d all DTF expressed their satisfactionwit h theenterprise . They cited the high income,th e regular cash flow,an d thegreate r amountso fmil k and manure as itsmai nadvantages . A crossbred cowyield sabou t 6time s asmuc h milk asa cowo f localbreed . The crossbred cowenterpris e added onaverag e almost 50%t o the farmgros smargi n andprovide d income stabilitydurin gpoo r cropyears . Yet,hig h feed costs,exacerbate d by the rapidpric e riseso fha y and straydu e toth edrought ,hav eha d strongnegativ e influences on profitability during 1984. Asa result,approximatel y 30%o f farmersha d negative grossmargins . Toensur ewidesprea d adoptiono f this technology, theeconomi c returnneed s to further increase. This could be doneb y on-farmmil k processing intomor eprofitabl e products such as butter and cheese,an db yusin g thecow sa sdraugh t animals. An ex-ante evaluation ofkeepin g thecrossbre d cows forwor k aswel l as formil k production,usin g the linearprogrammin g modeldiscusse d insectio n 5.3, indicated that farmgros smargi nwoul d increasewit h a further 27%. In theadaptio n of themodel ,th eassumptio nwa smad e that feed requirements of cowswoul d increasewit h 10%,whil e theirmil k yieldswoul d decline by 20% duringworkin g periods. Promising resultswit h theus eo f crossbred cowsa sdraugh tanimal shav ebee nobtaine d inth eDebr e ZeitAre a (Gryseelsan dAnderson , 1985). Inaddition ,durin g theseearl yyears ,ILC Aha dprovide d farmers with substantial assistance inth e formo fextensio n advice,veterinar y carean d forage seeds. Iti sye t tob e seenho wwel l farmerswil l perform inth eabsenc eo f ILCAan dhavin g to relyo ngovernmen t extension services. The resultso f the surveyundertake n in198 7wer e encouraging, and farmers clearly copedwel lwit h thegradua lwithdrawa l of ILCA. Only a minor fractiono f farmersuse d feed concentrates,an dmos tDT F relied on farmgrow n fodder tofee d the crossbred animals. Ifthi s situation canb e sustained,the n iti slikel y thatdair yproductio nwil lprov e to bea nefficien tvehicl e foragricultura l development of theDebr e Berhan area. 193 7. THEUS EO FSINGL EOXE NFO RCRO P CULTIVATION 7.1. Introduction The impacto fth eavailabilit yo fdraugh tpowe ro nfar m grain productionha sbee nhighlighte d inSectio n 4.10.2. Itwa sshow n that farmerswit htw oo rmor eoxe nproduce do naverag e 63%mor e grain than farmerswit hn ooxen ,an d19 %mor e than farmerswit hon eox . Thiswa s linkedt oth etraditiona l practicet ocultivat ewit hpaire d oxen. Those farmers thatd ono tow ntw ooxe nar edependen tupo n rentingo rborrowin g arrangementst oobtai nth enecessar y animals. Allfarmer swit h less than twooxe nus e"mekanajo "arrangement st oobtai nth esecon d animal. Those farmerswit hn ooxe n first renton eo xi nexchang efo rlabour ,a ta rat e oftw odays 'wor k forever yda yo foxe nused . Theshortag eo fdraugh t power duringth eploughin g seasoni son eo fth emajo r problems confrontinga majorit yo fsmall-holde r farmers throughoutth eEthiopia n highlands.Thi s situationhighlighte dth enee dt odevelo p cultivation systems requiring lesspowe rpe runi tare a cultivated. Thenee dfo rtw o animalst opul lth eploug hwa schallenge dan di twa sdecide dt o experimentwit hth eus eo floca l Zebuoxe na ssingl edraugh tanimals . 7.2. Materialsan dMethod s During 1982,ILCA' sHighland s Programme developeda yok ean d harnessan da modifie d versiono fth eloca lwoode n "maresha"ploug h suitable forus eb ya singl eo xo floca lbreed . Thetraditiona l neck yokedesigne d fora pai r (Figure 7.1.)wa sreplace db ya simple , "invertedV"-typ e yokean da swingletre e joinedb ytw otrace smad eo f nylon rope. A singlemeta l skidwa sattache d underth eshortene d beamt o overcometh etendenc yo fth emodifie d "maresha"t openetrat et ogroun da t anobliqu e rather thana nacut eangl e (Gryseelse tal , 1984b). Figure 7.1.: Traditionalan dModifie d Yokean d'Maresha 'Ploug h Figure 1. Tradilionsl maresha and neck yokt Figure 2. Wooden yoke designed (or single Source: Gryseelse ta l (1984b) 194 Noparticula r technicaldifficultie swer eencountere d during the on-station trialsa tDebr eBerhan . These trialswer edon ewit hwel l fed oxenan dorganize d informally. A single ox couldcultivat e some 60-70% of theare aploughe d bya pai r ina da y ifa restwa sgive n regularly. Deptho f cultivationwa s slighly shallower thanwit ha pai r ofoxe nan d thetraditiona l "maresha",bu tth edesire ddept hcoul db e achieved by making extrapasses . Thewor k outputo f thesingle swa s considered tob e adequate towarran t on-farmverificatio n of theon-statio ntests . A fieldda ywa sorganize d during February 1983a t theDebr e Berhan station todemonstrat e thene wcultivatio n technique. Farmerso f the four surrounding PAs,a swel l as localgovernmen t officialsan d extension workers,a totalo fabou t8 5people ,attended . After the demonstration by ILCAstaff ,farmer swer e invited totr yploughin gwit h the singleox . Manydi d so,an dalthoug h thegenera l consensuswa s thatthi s modification of the traditional systemcoul dhav e itsbenefits ,farmer s were doubtful about theabilit y of localoxe nt owor k singly for extended periods. After a lengthydiscussio no n theadvantage san d possible drawbackso f singleo xploughing ,farmer swer e invited totr y this adaptationo f thetraditiona lmetho do n theirow n farms. Theywer e tod o thisa t theirow n riskan dexpens ebu t ILCAwa s togiv e technical advice and assist inth etrainin g of theanimal s towor k singly. For thosewh o didno twan t tomodif y the implement themselves,ILC Aoffere d to sell the singleo xploug han dyok ea t cost,o rBir r 10,t ob epai d immediately after thenex tharvest . At theen do f thefiel dday ,1 9 farmersha d volunteered totes tth emodifie d "maresha"o n their ownfarms . ILCAhel d training sessions,i nwhic h thevoluntee r test farmers were assisted in retraining theiro xpreviousl yuse d ason eo fa pair . Mostoxe nadapte dwithou tdifficulty ,whil e othersneede du p to 2days ' retraining towor k asa singleanimal . InApri l 1983,thes e farmers started their land cultivation. To monitor theperformance ,impac tan dadoptio nproblem so f the new technology,a dat a recording systemwa s initiated. The farmers testing the singleo x systemwer evisite d twiceweekl yan ddat awer e collected on landholdings ,croppin gpatterns ,input san doutput sb yplot ,cultivatio n details,draugh t animalusage ,adoptio nproblem s related toth e singleo x technology, livestock inventories,an d family sizean d composition. The datawer e collected by 12thgrad eenumerator s thatha d previous experience in fielddat acollection . The objectiveso f theon-far mverificatio n trialwere : - tomonito r theadoptio nan dassociate d problemso f the single ox technology; - tostud y theeffec to f thistechnolog yo n farmproductivity ; - tous e the results to formulate guidelines for further component research. Thedat a recording continued for three cultivation seasons: 1983, 1984an d 1985. Whereas 19 farmerswer emonitore d during 1983,thi s number increased to 35 in198 4an d 40 in1985 . During 1985,dat a 195 collectionwa s limited tomeasuremen t of theare a cultivated with single oxen. Itwa s feared that farmers felt "obliged" toparticipat e inth e trialbecaus e of the frequentvisit sb yenumerators . Itwa s also felt thatgive n the slowprogres s ofadoptio n tooman ydat awer e being collected, thatwer e not strictly necessary for technology evalution. Data recordingwa s stopped completely at theen d of the 1985 cropping season. Nomonitorin gwa sundertake ndurin g 1986bu tearl y 1987 each single ox farmerwa svisite d onceagai n toverif y theus eo f the technology. Theavailabl e datawer e evaluated andanalyze dwit h anHewlett - Packard 67han d calculator thatwa s loadedwit h statistical programmes for analysis ofvariance . Farm sizesan d their distribution were calculated using SPSSprogramme s on iLCA'sH P 3000mainframe . Invie w of the resultsobtained ,mor e in-depth statistical analysiswa sno t considered necessary. 7.3. Results The singleo x farmers (SOF)a tDebr eBerha nwer egenerall y young and innovative. Theirmea nag e ranged from 32year s in198 3t o3 4year s in1985 . About 55%wa selementar y literate,a somewhathighe r fraction thancontro l farmers. Their average family sizewa s 4peopl e per household, significantly (P<0.05)smalle r than thehousehol d size of control farmers(CF) . The farmsiz eo f SOFwa s significantly smaller thano fCF ,an d averaged 4h a including pasture and fallowland . Theare a cultivated annuallype r farmwa s significantly (P<0.01)smalle r thanC Fan d averaged 1.4 hadurin g 1983,1. 5 hadurin g 1984an d 1.6 hadurin g 1985. Control farmerscultivate d onaverag e almost 1h amor edurin g the corresponding periods. Of the SOF,57 %cultivate d lesstha n 1.6 ha,compare d toonl y25 % ofCF . Almost 39%o f SOF cultivated between 1.6 and 3ha ,compare d to 50% ofCF . Theunderlyin g causal factor for thedifferenc e inare a cultivated between SOFan d CFwa s theavailabilit y ofdraugh tpower . Only 26%o fSO Fha d twoo rmor e oxen,whil e 68%ha d onean d 6% did not haveoxen . Adoption of the singleo xploughin g systemwa sextremel y slowan d itsus e limited toa mino r factiono f thearabl e land. ,Themea nare a per farmploughe d by single oxenwa s 910m in1983 ,117 0m in198 4an d 1655 m in1985 . Thiscorresponde d to7 %o f theare a cultivated in1983 ,8 % in198 4an d 10%i n198 5 (Table 7.1.). Table 7.1.: Useo f Single Ox Ploughing System (1983-1985,Are a Per Farm) 1983 1984 1985 Tr?l9) (n=35) TrS30) meanare a (m ) 910 1170 1655 % ofal l cultivated land 7 8 10 maximum use (m ) 2800 3000 5100 CV (%) 43 48 43 196 Farmersuse d the singleo x systema s from the second ploughing, andmainl y onlighte r soilsnea r thehomestead . Cerealsonl ywer e grown onplot sploughe dwit h singleoxen ,particularl y barley,whea t and oats. Barleywa s thedominan t crop,an d accounted for two thirdso f these plots. Overall croppingpattern s ofSO Fwer e similar tothos e ofCF . Theaverag e cultivation depthobtaine dwit ha single oxwa s 14c m during the secondploughin g and 15.8 cmdurin g the third ploughing. During seeding themea ndept h obtainedwa s 14.7c mdurin g the second pass, 14.7 cmdurin g thethir dpas san d 15.3c mdurin g the fourth pass. These cultivation depthswer e not significantly different to those obtainedwit hpaire d oxen. With a single ox ittoo k onaverag e 135hour s tocomplet e all the cultivations onon eh a ofland ,o r 35%mor e time thanth e 100hour s required bya pai r ofoxen . Iti st ob enote dhoweve r that the first cultivation onmos t ofth e "singleo xplots "wa sdon ewit hpaire doxen , so the cultivation time issomewha tunderestimated . Thedifference s in cultivation timebetwee n plotsploughe dwit h singleoxe nan d plots ploughedwit hpaire d oxenwer e significant (P<.01). Theywer edu e to the slower speedan dpowe routpu to f singleanimals. Cropyield swer e slightly higher onplot s cultivatedwit h single oxencompare d toth eplot so nth esam e farmploughe dwit h paired oxen (Table 7.2.). Table 7.2.: CropYield so nPlot sPloughe d bySingl e and Paired Oxen (Kg/Ha) 1/ 1983 1984 Single Pair Single Pair Barley 445 350 1180 1040 Oats n.a. n.a. 775 625 1/ Yields reported aregros san d include seeduse . During 1985 crop yieldswer eno tmeasured . Thedifference s incro pyield sbetwee nplot sploughe d by single andpaire d oxenwer eno t significant. Farmersuse d single oxeno nwel l drained landnea r thehomestea d with soilso fhighe r fertility,henc e the higher averageyields . Therewa sn oevidenc e toconclud e thatth e higher yieldswer edu e toearlie r plantingdate so r to reduced ox trampling. Seedus ewa sals ono t significantly different betweenplot sploughe d by single orpaire d oxen. Themea nweigh t ofoxe nuse d as singleswa s 281+18kg . This weightwa sno t significantly different fromoxe nowne db ycontro l farmers thatha d amea nweigh t of 275kg .I twa s significantly (P<0.01)differen t fromoxe n at ILCA'S research stationa tDebr eBerhan . Themea nweigh t of station oxenwa s 343+23 kgo r approximately 25%mor e than theweigh t of farmers'oxen . TheHighe r weight of stationoxe n isdu e toth e better feeding regime,managemen t andhealt h care. 197 Theweigh to f oxenuse d as singlesvarie d dramatically throughout theyea r and ranged from24 2k gdurin gJuly ,whe nwor k output peaked and animal feed supplieswer e short,t o 315k g inNovembe rwhe n the animals wereno tworke d and feed suppliesplentiful . 7.4. Discussion Theutilizatio nan dadoptio no f the singleo xploug hha sbee nmuc h belowexpectations . Although constraintanalysi sha d strongly indicated that reducing thenumbe r ofanimal s required for land cultivationwoul d have amajo r impacto n theavailabilit y ofgrai na t the smallholder level, thetechnolog yneve r really "catched on". Farmerswer e interested,praise d thebenefit s of thene wtechnolog ydurin g individual discussions and fielddays , indicated theywoul dus e the singleo x ploughing system inth e future,ye tneve r reallydi d so,excep t for trials ona modes t scale. Thenumbe r of farmersusin g the system remained amino r fractiono f the farmpopulation ,an deve n these test farmers limited itsapplicatio n toon eo r twoplots . Someo f the inital reasonso f thenon-adoptio nwere : - Cultural barrierspreventin g farmers fromadoptin g this radical change intillag emethod . - Risk aversionb y the farmerswh o feared long term detrimental impacto n thehealt ho f theox . - Theweaknes s ofman yo f theoxen .Abou t 60%o f farmers'oxe n weighed lesstha n29 0kg ,an d couldno tdevelo p sufficient power and speed topul l theploug h to farmers'satisfaction . However,ther ewa sn oevidenc e that farmerswit hheavie r oxen ploughed greater areaso fland . - Farmers complained about labourbottleneck sbecaus e of the governmentvillagizatio nprogramm ean dP Acommuna lactivities . As a result theyface d labourbottleneck s invie wo f the limited timeavailabl e forploughin gan d the slownesso f the singleo x system. The speedo fa singleo xdurin g ploughing wasapproximatel y 20-30% slower,an d theanima l needed frequent restperiods . An oxworkin g singlyneede d tob e rested for 15 to2 0minute safte r every 1.30 hour ofwork ,an d couldwor k a maximum of 4.30 hoursa day ,compare d to7- 8 hoursworke d bya pair. - Manyplot s inth eBas oan dWoren aWered ahav ea hig h stone coverwhic hnegativel y affectedwor k outputo f singleoxen . DuringMarc h 1987,an dmor e thanon eyea r after routine data recording hadbee nphase d out,a follow-up surveywa sundertake n to study theus e of single oxena tDebr eBerha ndurin g 1986. Itha d been felt that farmersha dparticipate d in theverificatio n trial to "please"ILCA , and in thehop e ILCAwoul d assist themwit h othermatter s (sucha s the supplyo f concentrate feeds,veterinar ydrug so rpolitica l security) in return. 198 A totalo f 32farmers ,al lo fwho mwer epreviou s SOF,wer e interviewed. The remaining 8 farmersha deithe rmigrated , joined military service,o r could notb e reached. Only 31%o f them (n=10)ha d used singleoxe ndurin g thepreviou s 1986croppin g season,o na n average of 1550m of land, ranging from 500m to400 0m . Alluse d itfo r the planting of cropsan do nth e lighter soilsnea r thehomestead . The singleo x systemwa s foundbeneficia l for theplantin g phase,a s farmers didno thav e towai t fora "mekanajo"arrangemen t and farmers recognized the importance ofearl yplanting . About 69%o fSO Fdi dn o longerus e the singleo x system. Almost two thirdso f them found their land tob e too stonyo r slopy,whil e77 % found theploughin g tob e toodifficul t foron eox . Othermajo r problems thatwer e causing thenon-adoptio no f thene wtechnolog ywer e the lack of feed (27%o f respondents), theyok e causedwound s (27%o f respondents), and 23%o f respondents said that theyha d stopped their trialsbecaus e they thought ILCAha d stopped itsresearch . About 36%o f farmersencountere d difficultieswit h themeta l skid attached toth eplough . Thisski d isrequire d fordept h control but it tendst obecom e loosened fromth ebea mafte r someuse ,particularl y on stony land. Most farmersd ono thav e themean s to retighten the connection,an d therefore once theski dbecome s tooloos e the singleo x plough isn o longeroperative . A large scaleon-far mverificatio n of thesingl e ox technology was introduced in198 4 through ILCA'sox-see dprojec twhic hattempte d to provide appropriate inputs inorde r tohel p farmers indrough t and famine strickenarea so f theEthiopia nhighland s toproduc e their own food. The project involved theprovisio no f foodai dand ,o na creditbasis ,seed , oneo x anda singleo xploug h toa totalo f 1800 farmerswh oha d either losto rha dha d to sell theiroxe ndurin g thedrought . Themai n development objectivewa s toassis tdrough t effected families inth e target areast o re-establishagricultura l production (Gryseelsan dJutzi , 1986a and b). Draughtanimal sar ea majo r factor inbringin g about post drought recovery inanima l power based farming systems. Theprojec t also aimed atintroducin g single oxploughin g in sucharea swher e severe shortageso fanima l power existed. The resultso fth eprojec t (Gryseelsan dJutzi ,1986b ) indicated that theprovisio n ofa no x tothes e farm familieswa so f crucial importance inhelpin g themt o regenerate their farming system,b y enabling timely land cultivation. Theutilizatio n rateo f the singleo x ploughwa smuc hbelo wexpectations . The implementwa sno tuse d for inital tillagebecaus e itwa s considered toopowe r demanding, particularly on thehar d anddr y soils,fo ron eanimal . Farmers instead resorted to 'mekanajo'agreement swit hneighbourin g farmers. The single oxploug hwa suse d by some~farmers (althoughonl yo non eo r two test plotso fo naverag e 1000m )fo r second and thirdploughing san d for seed covering. Only farmerswher e routinedat a recordingwa sundertake nuse d thene wtechnology , thereby suggesting that these felt "obliged" to ILCA to showthei r interest in the technology, asa signo f gratitude for the assistance in supplying foodai d and farm inputs. Farmers reported that their soilswer e tooheavy ,th eoxe n tooweak ,an d the land too slopy for theus e ofa single ox for cultivation. 199 One important structuralweaknes so f the singleo x systemappeare d tob e thepoo r stabilityo f the singleo xuni t ascompare dwit h the traditional "maresha"which ha sa solidbea m firmlyattache d toa rigid doublenec kyoke . The rigidyok eallow sa teamo fpaire d oxent o stabilize eachother ,particularl y on stonylan dan d steep slopes. In addition,th esoli dbea mprovide s the farmerwit hgoo dhandlin g ability when guiding theploug h throughth esoil . Thebea mals ogive sth e farmer firmcontro l over theoxen ,particularl ywhe n turningaroun d after a pass,an dmake s iteasie r tolif tth eploug hwhe nencounterin g large stoneso rafte r apass . Incontrast ,th e loose connectiono f the single oxploug hove r the swingletree and the ropet o theyok edoe sno t provide much stability,eithe r incontrollin g theoxen ,o r inguidin g theplough . Moreover,whe n turningaroun d after apass ,a farmersmus t lift the full weight of theploug hhimself, whil ea tth e same timeensur eno t to entangle the rear legso fth eo xwit h the ropes (Samuel Jutzi,persona l communication). Farmersclearl yprefe r the inconvenience of "mekanajo"an d labour exchange agreements toobtai nadditiona l oxen,rathe r thanth esingl e ox technology. Similar findingswer e experienced inth eDebr e Zeitarea . The advantageso f thistechnolog yd ono t sufficiently outweigh its structuraldeficiencies . The research findings indicate thatth e single oxploughin gma yb eo fus e for seed coveringoperations, bu t isunlikel y to replace theus eo fpaire d oxen for landcultivation . The resultso f ILCA'sstatio n researchbefor e theon-far mverificatio n stagesar e tob e considered biased,becaus e theywer eundertake nwit hoxe n thatwer e substantiallyheavier ,o nlan d thatwa seas y toploug hwit hn o stone cover,an d for trialso fa limiteddemonstratio nduration . The hypothesispu t forward atth estar to f the research,tha t singleo x ploughingwoul d bea attractiv e alternative toth etraditiona l system of paired oxen,coul dno tb evalidate d forth eBas oan dWoren aWereda . The researchmerit s tob e continued however,bu tparticula r emphasis should be given toa clear identificationo f thecondition sunde rwhich the technologyma ywor k effectively. As 31%o f farmerswer e stillusin g the technology to someextent ,rejectio n isonl ypartial . Onehypothesi s is thatth e technologyca nb eapplie do nligh t soils,wit h limited stone cover,an do nmoderat e slopes. Iti s recommended thatthi sbasi c informationwoul db egenerate d throughon-statio nexperimenta lwork . Renewedemphasi s should alsob egive n to researcho nwor k outputo f single crossbred oxen incompariso nwit hpaire d localoxen . Asa spillover fromdair ydevelopmen t inth earea ,larg enumber so f crossbred maleswil lbecom eavailabl e inth eBas oan dWoren aWereda . These could be reared asdraugh tanimals . The feeddemand so fa pai r of crossbred oxenar en odoub texcessiv e for the resourcesavailabl e toa smallholder farm,bu t thepossibilitie s of introducing single crossbred oxenmeri t further investigation. 200 SUMMARYAN DDISCUSSIO N 8.1. Summary Foodproductio npe rcapu ti nsub-Sahara nAfric aha s steadily declineddurin gth elas ttw odecades ,leadin g toincreasin gpovert yan d widespread food shortagesfo rman ymillion so fpeople . Thebul k of agricultural output insub-Sahara nAfric a isproduce d on smallholder subsistence farms,man yo fwhic hbot hgro wcrop san dkee plivestock . Productivity increasesar eurgentl yneeded ,bu tagricultura l research effortst odat ehav e focusedmainl yo ncroppin g systems,becaus e ofthei r importance for food supply. Yet,livestoc k areo fcrucia l importance toagricultura l and economicdevelopment . Theyar ea majo r sourceo fhig hqualit y food, provide substantial inputsint ocro pproduction ,generat e incomean d employment,an dprovid ea formo f securityan dinvestment . Theproductivit yo flivestoc k insub-Sahara nAfric a interm so f milk andmea tha sbee nth elowes to fan yworl d region. Increases in livestock outputhav ebee nlargel ydu e toa numeri cexpansio no fnumbers , rather thanyiel dpe ranimal . Theoutcom eo flivestoc k development projectsi nsub-Sahara nAfric aha sbee ndisappointing . A major causeo f the low returnt oinvestmen t inlivestoc k developmentha sbee n inappropriate projectdesign ,whic hha s resulted froma lac k ofadequat e understanding oflivestoc k production systems. There is increasing evidence thattraditiona lpastoralist smanag e their resources efficiently.T odat e researcheffort shav e failedt oidentif y technical innovations thatcoul d substantially increaseth eproductivit yo f pastoral systems. Thegrowin g realization thati nth eshor t runonl y changes ingovernmen tpolicie sca nlea d toa substantia l improvemento f thewelfar eo fpastoralists ,ha sdraw ngreate r attention toth eproblem s andopportunitie so flivestoc k inmixe d farmingsystems . Themajorit yo flivestoc k inAfric aca nb e foundo nmixe d smallholder farms,whic hpractic e cropan danima lhusbandr y in association. The roleo flivestock ,an dth einteraction sbetwee nth e cropan d livestock componentso fthes e farming systemshav ebee npoorl y understood. Duringth elat e70s ,i tbecam e increasingly clear thati n agricultural researchhig hpriorit ywa st ob egive nt oacquirin gbasi c knowledgeo nth econtributio no f livestock toth eproductivit y ofmixe d smallholder farmingsystems . Thehighland shav eth ehighes tdensit yo fbot hth ehuma nan d livestock populationso fan yecologica l zone insub-Sahara nAfrica . Although thiszon eaccount s forles stha n 5%o fth etota llan dmas so f thecontinent ,i tcontain salmos t 20%o fth ehuma nan d 17%o fth e ruminantlivestoc k population. Almostal l livestock inth ehighland s can be found onmixe d smallholder farms. Becauseo f the favourable climatic conditions,th ehighlan d zone issee na shavin g thehighes tpotentia l for livestock development ofal lecologica l zoneso nth econtinent . Thisstud yha s reviewed the roleo flivestoc k onmixe d smallholder farms inth eEthiopia nhighlands . Ethiopiaaccount s for 50%o fth e Africanhighlan d landmassan dha sth elarges tlivestoc kher do fan y 201 country on thecontinent . Mixed farming systemswit ha hig h levelo f crop-livestock integrationar epredominant . Researchexperience s gained inthi scountr ywoul db eo f relevanceelsewher e insmallholde r systems of thehighland so f sub-SaharanAfrica . The field research for thisstud ywa sundertake n inth eBas oan d WorenaWereda ,a nare anea rDebr eBerhan ,12 0k mnorth-eas to f Ethiopia's capital cityAddi sAbaba ,a ta naltitud eo fapproximatel y 2,800m above sea level. Datawer e collected through farmmanagemen tan d household economic surveysfro ma totalo f 170traditiona l smallholder farms, located in fourdifferen tpeasant sassociation so f theBas o andWoren a Wereda. The informationwa sobtaine d throughdirec tmeasurement , observationan dweekl y formalinterviews . The study took a farming systemsapproac h toth e research. This approachview s the farm ina holisti cmanne r and isfocuse d on theneed s of small farmers. The researchha d twophases : adiagnosti c phase duringwhic h thetraditiona l farming systemwa s studied and its constraints identified,an da desig nan d testingphas edurin gwhich two promising technologieswer e tested infarme rmanage d on-farmtrials . Only fewfarmin g systems research studiestha t focuso n the livestock component of smallholdermixe d farming systemsha d previously beenundertake n inth eAfrica nhighlands . Littlewa s thusknow no nho w tobes t approachon-far m researcho n livestock production,an d this study therefore provided aparticula r methodological challenge. Thediagnosti cphas ewa sundertake n from197 9 to1984 . During thisphas edetaile d informationwa sobtaine d through routinedat a collectionan d special purpose surveyso n family sizean d composition; size of farmholdings ,lan dus e and landproductivity ; sizean d composition of livestock holdings,thei rmanagemen t andproductivity ; labourus ean d time allocation;us eo fanima ldraugh tpower ;marketin g and farm income. Household informationo n consumption,nutritio nan d time allocationwa sals ocollecte d and reportedupon . TheBas oan dWoren aWered a is representative of thehighe r altitude areaso f theEthiopia nhighlands ,an d located inth ehig h potential cereal-livestock zone. The farming system isbase d on smallholder rainfed agriculture,annua l cropsplante d bybroadcaste d seed, rudimentary implementsan d ano xdraw nwoode nplough ,th e 'maresha'. Landus e isdominate d by theproductio no f cereals,pulse s and livestock. Frost,hai l anda shortgrowin g season severely limit agricultural productivity. Themai ncro p isbarley ,bu twheat ,oats , horsebeans ,fiel dpeas ,lentil san d linseed areals ogrown . The average farm size is3.2 8 ha ofwhich 2.35 ha iscultivate d arable land and .93 ha fallow. Approximately 30%o f theare acovere db y the four Peasants Assocationswa spastur e land,which wa spredominantl y communal. Themea n livestock holdingpe r farmconsiste d of 1.23 oxen,1. 5 cows, 3.45 other cattle,11.1 6 sheep,1.7 0 donkeys,1.1 3 horses ormules ,an d 2.72 poulty. Almost all livestock were of localbreeds . Widevariation s in livestock ownershipwer eobserved . Farmersproduce dpredominantl y for subsistence consumption andonl y 15%o f farm outputwa smarketed . Itwa s shown that livestock areo f crucial importance inth e farming systemo f theBas oan dWoren aWered a and that therewa sa hig h level of crop-livestock integration. During theyear s of the survey 202 livestock provided onaverag e 89%o f farmcas h income,53 %o f farm gross margin and 46%o fgros svalu eo fproduction . Tradeo fanimals , particularly cattlean d sheep,wa s themai n source ofcas h income. The mainoutput so f cattlewer e intermediateproducts ,use d as inputs into the cropenterprise ,suc ha sdraugh tpowe r for land cultivation and crop threshing,an dmanur e for fertilizer andhousehol d fuel. When these intermediate functionswer evalued , livestock contributed onaverag e60 % of the farmgros smargin . Livestock generated a substantial amounto f employment,particularl y forwome nan d children. Labour inputs for livestockproductio nha d little seasonalvariation . Theavailabilit y ofanima ldraugh tpowe rwa sa strong factor in determining farmgrai nproduction . The levelo fo xownershi pha d a significant effecto nbot h theyiel d perh aan d totalare a cultivated of cereal production. Themea n areacultivate d with cerealswa s 1.76 ha, but farmersownin g twoo rmor eoxe n cultivated onaverag e 32%mor e land tocereal s than farmersownin gn ooxen . Farmersownin g oneo x cultivated an intermediate area. Mean cerealyiel dwa s 516kg/h abu t theyiel d per hao f farmerswit h twoo rmor eoxe nwa so naverag e 35%highe r than those of farmersowin g nooxen . Overall,durin g the studyperio d farmerswit h twooxe nproduce d on average 63%mor e cereal grains thanfarmer swit hn ooxen . The increment due toownin g oneo xwa sestimate d at 266kg ;th e incrementdu e toownin g the secondo xwa sestimate d at 186kg . Itwa sals o shown that inan yon e year the availability ofdraugh t power foroxenles s farmerswa s affected by twomai n factors: theoutcom e of thepreviou s croppingyea r and the duration of the shortrains . Livestock were alsoo fprim e importance inprovidin g security and investment. Animalswer e purchased and soldaccordin g toth efarmers ' cash flowneeds ,an da sa storeo fwealth . Despite the lowproductivit y of livestock,th e investmentwa s shown tob e sound. Theannua l rateo f return to investmentwa s estimated at 16%fo r sheepan d 13%fo rcattle . Cattle and sheepprovide d manurewhic hwa smostl ydrie d anduse d for fuel,o r sold for casho n themarket . Donkeysprovide d almost all transport ofagricultura l inputsan doutputs . The linkagesbetwee n the cropan d livestock enterpriseswer e clearly illustrated andquantified . A strongpositiv e correlation was foundbetwee n cultivated areaan d livestock holding,cause db y the cumulative effectso fdraugh tpowe r and feedavailability . Farmerswit h moreanimal swer e alsomor e likely tous eminera l fertilizer,an d tohir e additional labour. Approximately 40%o f livestock feed intakewa s supplied by cropby-products ,particularl y cerealstraws . Themai nconstraint s tocro pproductivit ywer e lowsoi l fertility and high rateso f erosiono narabl e land on slopes,seasona l waterlogging and insufficient surfacedrainag e onmos t of the cultivated land, particularly on soilswit h verticproperties ,an dhai l and frost incidencewhic h caused a shortgrowin g season. Livestock productivity in the smallholder farming systemo f the Basoan dWoren aWered awa s shown tob e lowfo r finaloutput s sucha smil k andmeat ,bu thig h interm so f intermediate products sucha s draught power, investmentan d security,transpor t and fuel. The principal 203 constraint toth edevelopmen t of livestock productionwit h theai mo f increasingofftak eo fmea tan dmil kwa s the importance givenb y farmers tothes e intermediate functions,a sher dan d flock sizeswer e built up accordingly. Inaddition ,pasture sar ecommuna l anda sa result the optimum carrying capacityo f thesepasture swa salmos t continuously exceeded. This inherenttendenc y for overgrazing increased the relative dependence of livestock upon cereal crop residuesan d stubble for feed intake. Forapproximatel y 50%o f farmersi nth earea ,a principa l constraint to increasing farmoutpu twa s inadequate availability of draughtpower . Pooranima l nutritiondurin g thedr y season,a low geneticpotentia l of localbreed s formil k andmea tproduction ,an d animal healthproblems ,particularl y thehig h incidence ofliverfluke , were identified asmajo r constraints toa n increase inlivestoc k productivity. On the institutional side,majo r constraintswer e found tob e the systemo f land tenure inwhich farmershav eusers 'right s rather than owners' rightsove r thelan d they till,governmen tpric epolicies ,an d thehig h incidenceo f religiouschurc hholidays . Duringan dafte r thisdiagnosti cphase ,effort swer emad e to specify thedesirabl e characteristics of improved technology for the farming system. A reviewwa smad eo f relevant research resultsobtaine d elsewhere inth eEthiopia nhighlands ,an don-statio n researchwa s initiated ona numbe r ofpossibl e interventions. Two technologies related tolivestoc k productionwer eparticularl y promising: theus e of crossbreddair y cows formil k production,an d theus eo f single oxen instead of thetraditiona l pair for land cultivation. Both technologies hadbee n tested on-station,an d their likely impacto n theproductivit y of the farmingsyste m inth eBas oan dWoren aWered awa sevaluate d ex ante througha linearprogrammin gmodel . Theencouragin gan dpositiv e results obtained led toth e initiation in198 3o f farmermanage d on-farm trials inth e samepeasant sassociation swher e thediagnosti c studiesha d been undertaken. Each technologywa s tested byabou t 40 farmers,an d its adoptionan d impactmonitore d overa threeyea r period from198 3 to1985 . Farmerswh opurchase d a crossbred cowwer eencourage d togro wa mixtur e ofoat san dvetch ,s oa st oproduc e sufficient fodder. The cowswer e crossesbetwee n Friesianan dBora nbree d typesan dha dbee nproduce d at the ILCADebr eBerha n station. Farmersparticipate d ina group training coursebefor e theanimal swer edelivered . All farmersparticipate d in thetria la tthei row n riskand expense . ILCA'sinput sconsiste d of the provisiono f technical advicean d someveterinar y inputs,th e supplyo f forage seedsan do foccasiona l supplementarywhea tbran . Farmerspai d cash or through short termcredit s formateria l inputs received by ILCA. Theproductivit y ofdair y test farmswa s comparedwit h thato f control farmers in the samearea . Although family size,far mholding s and landus epattern s ofdair y test farmerswer e similar to thoseo f control farmers,the yha d significantly higher farmassets ,allowin g them tob e less risk averse. Meanmil kyield s of crossbred cowswer e 1,843 kg inth e first lactationan d 1,970 kg inth e second lactation,o r approximately sixtime sthos eo f cowso f localbreeds . The average lactation lengthwa s 332day san dmil k productionpe r cowpeake d just after themai n rainswhe n grassgrowt ho n thepasture swa s lush. Milk 204 productionwa s strongly correlatedwit h rainfall. Meanbirt hweight s of calveswer e 28k gan d calfmortalit ywa sestimate da t16% . Therewa sn odifferenc e incro pyield sbetwee nbot h farmers groups,no r inth eproductivit y of livestock ofloca lbreeds . Approximately 77%o f themil k of crossbred cowswa s sold,mainl y to themil k collection centres of theDair yDevelopmen t Enterprise,whil e 13% of themil kwa shom e consumed,an d 10%fe d tocalves . Cash incomes of dairy test farmerswer e onaverag e 120%highe r than thoseo f control farmers. Theoveral l farmgros smargi no fdair y farmerswa so n average 50% higher thantha to fcontro l farmers. The regularity ofmil k sales allowed fora stable farm incomedurin gpoo r cropyears . The profitability of thedair yenterpris ewa snegativel y influenced during 1984a sa resulto funusuall y stronggrai npric e risesdurin g thatyear , causedb y thedrough t and famine situation thatexiste d inth e country. As a result,fee dprices ,a swel l asgrai nprices ,ros e dramatically. Theeconomi c returno f thedair y enterprisedurin g theperio d of the on-farm trialwa s thusles stha nwha t couldb eexpecte d during normal years. Nevertheless,a followu p surveyundertake n in198 7 indicated that87 %o fdair y test farmers stillha d their crossbred cows,an d all expressed their satisfactionwit h theenterpris ewhic hha d significantly increased their income. Theycite d thehig h income,th e regular cash flow,an dth ehighe ryield s ofmil k andmanur e asth emai nbenefit s of the crossbred cowenterprise . Major constraints alsoexiste d with the availability of feeddurin g thedr y season,marketin g ofmil k during the main fastingperiod ,occasiona l disease problems,an d the lack of appropriate breeding services. Ifth e EthiopianGovernmen t can supply sufficient extension services,the n smallholder dairyproductio n onth e basiso f crossbred cowswil lb ea nefficien tvehicl e for agricultural development inth eBas oan dWoren aWereda . The second technology thatwa s tested through on-farm verification trialswa s theus e of single oxen,rathe r than the conventional pair,fo r land cultivation. Almost 50%o f the farmers inth eBas oan dWoren a Wereda dono tow n twooxe nan dar edependen tupo n renting or borrowing arrangements toobtai n thenecessar y animals tofor ma pair . During 1982,ILCA' shighland sprogramm edevelope d ayok e and harnessan da modifie dversio no f theloca l 'maresha'ploug h suitable for use bya singleo xo f localbreed . On-station trials showed thatwellfe d oxen could cultivate some 60-70%o f theare aploughe db ya pai r ina da y ifa restwa sgive n regularly. Thewor k output of the single oxenwa s considered adequate towarran t on-farmverificatio n of the station experiments. Farmerswer e introduced to thene wtechnolog y through a series of field days. During the firstyea r of theon-far m trial,1 9 farmers participated and this increased to 35i n the second,an d 40 farmers in the thirdyear . Theperformanc e of single ox farmerswa s monitored through farmmanagemen t surveys,an d the resultscompare dwit h those of control farmers inth earea . Single ox farmerswer e generallyyoun g and had smaller holdings than control farmers. Adoption of the single ox technologywa s slow,an d themea nare a cultivated by singleoxe nwa s 910 m2 in 1983,1,17 0 m2 in198 4an d 1,655 m2 in1985 . This corresponded to respectively 7%,8 %an d 10%o f total area cultivated by the farmers 205 involved during thoseyears . Themaximu mare aploughe db ya single ox on an individual farmwa s 5,100 m2. Farmersgenerall yuse d thesyste m as from the second or thirdploughing ,an dmainl yo n the lighter soilsnea r thehomestead . Thecultivatio ndepth sobtaine dwer eno t significantly different fromthos eobtaine dwit hpaire d oxen. Croppingpattern so f singleo x farmerswer e similar tothos eo f control farmers. Cropyield s were somewhathighe r onplot sploughe dwit h singleoxen ,bu t the differencewa sno t significant statistically. Weightso f the farmer-owned oxenwer e significantly below thoseo f research station oxen. Weightso f oxenuse d as singlesvarie d substantially throughout theyea r andwer e lowestdurin g themont ho fJul ywhe nwor k outputpeake d and animal feedwa s in shortsupply . Theutilizatio n and rateo fadoptio no f the single oxploug h has beenbelo wexpectations . Initially, itwa s felt thatth e slowprogres s wasdu e tocultura l barriers,th eweaknes so fman yoxen ,labou r bottlenecks,an d thehig h stone covero fman yplots . More thana yea r after the formalen do f themonitorin g ofth e single ox farmers,a follow-up surveyo nth eadoptio no f the technology wasundertaken . Approximately 31%o f single ox farmerswer e stillusin g the technology,o n anaverag eo f 1,550 m2o f land. Alluse d it for seed covering only,an do n the lighter soilsnea r thehomestead . Farmers felt that the singleo x systemwa sparticularl ybeneficia l for the planting activities, invie wo f thecrucia l importanceo f timely planting. Those farmersn o longerusin g single oxen said they found their land tob e too stonyo r slopy (66%), and theploughin g tob e toodifficul t for oneo x (77%). Othermajo r problems citedwer e thelac k of feed (27%), theyok e causingwound s (27%), anddifficultie swit h themeta l skid attached to theploug h (36%). The single ox technologywa sals oteste d inlarg e scale verification trials indrough tan d famine strickenarea so f the Ethiopian highlands. Adoption of thetechnolog ywa sequall y slowan d below expectations. An important structuralweaknes so f the single ox system appeared tob e thepoo r stabilityo f the singleo xuni ta scompare d to the traditional "maresha". The research findingsindicate d that single oxploughin gma yb eo fus e for seed coveringoperations, bu t itwa s unlikely to replace theus e ofpaire d oxen for land cultivation. For both the crossbreddair y cowan d singleo x technologiesguideline s for further experimental workwer e outlined. 8.2. Transferability ofResult s Themos t important outputo f thisstud yha sbee n thewealt h of information generated on theallocatio no f resourcesb y smallholder farmers inth eEthiopia nhighlands . Themulti-yea r farm leveldat abas e thatwa s generated isunique ,an d canprovid e a solid support for the planning ofagricultura l development activities throughout the cereal-livestock zone. The time seriesdat a canb e further explored for ananalysi s ofparticula r factorswher e inter-year effectsar e likely to be important,suc ha s for example farmers'strategie s toensur e food security for thehousehold ,o r the impacto n crop-livestock interactions of thevariabilit y incro pyields . 206 The resultsan d informationobtaine d inth e studyar eo f relevance elsewhere insmallholde r farming systems inth eAfrica nhighlands . As McDowell andHildebran d (1980)observe d fora particula r system inth e Philippines " ...tokno wan dunderstan d the interaction ofth e system....ist ofee l familiarwit h itwhereve r iti sfound" . The farming systemstudie d inth eBas oan dWoren aWered ai s similar totha to fothe r areas inth eEthiopia nhighland swher eo x ploughing isbein gused ,i.e .th ehig han d lowpotentia l cereal/livestock areaswhic h cover 67%o fth eEthiopia nhighlan d area,an dwhic h contain twothird so f itshuma nan d livestock populations. Iti sals o representative ofth e farming system inlarg epart so fMadagascar ,Keny a and Zimbabwe. Theexperience sgaine d inth estud yar eo fbroa d relevance toothe rarea so fth eAfrica nhighland swit hperhap sdifferen t environments,bu twher e thesam eproble mclasse sar eprevalent ,suc ha s the lacko fdraugh tpower ,shortag eo fanima l feed,lo wcas h incomean d lacko f food security. The findingso fShumb a (1983)fo rexampl e indicate that inth ecommuna l areaso fZimbabw e livestock playa nequall y important role insmallholde r farming systemswit h respectt odraugh t poweran d cash incomea si nth eEthiopia nhighlands . TheBas oan dWoren aWered awa suniqu e init shig haltitud e environment,an d theproble mo f frost relatively locationspecific . However,a sth eQuinquennia l ExternalRevie wo fILC A (TAC/CGIAR,1982 ) observed ina reviewo fth eprogramm e " ...although thefarmin g systems approach involveslocatio n specificity,th edemonstratio no f theapproac h isvaluabl e toencourag enationa lprogramme st ofollo wsuit ,whil e researcho nadopte d technologies canhav ea zona l importancean d transferability". Recently,th enumbe r ofFS Rstudie s inEthiopi aha sgrow n rapidly. Staffo fth e Instituteo fAgricultura l Researchhav ebenefitte d froma serieso f IAR-CIMMYTin-countr y trainingworkshop shel d from198 5t o 1987. Farming systems researchha sno wbecom e institutionalized inIA R and thereha sbee na rapidexpansio n inth enumbe ro f studiesundertake n (Mekuriaan dFranzel ,1987) . TheMinistr yo fAgricultur e in198 7undertoo k a serieso f farming systems surveysthroughou t theEthiopia nhighlands ,wit hparticula r emphasiso nth e livestock componento fth emixe d farming system,unde r theFourt hLivestoc kDevelopmen t Project fundedb y theWorl dBank . Thewidesprea d adoptiono fth eFS Rapproac h inEthiopi a is encouraging. Itwil l substantially improve thedat abas eneede d for agriculturaldevelopmen t planning. Itwil lals oallo w fora n identification ofdifferen t farming systemswithi nsimila r agro-ecologicalzone san da clea r specificationo f recommendation domains withineac ho fthos eagro-ecologica l zones. Thedevelopmen to f technologies canthe nb emor eeasil y focused towardsth eneed so f particular targetgroup so ffarmer swithi na give n recommendationdomain . Iti st ob enote d thatagro-ecologica l zonesi nEthiopi a arever y heterogeneous,an d that farmer resourceendowment sma ydiffe r signifcantlywithi n similar agrc-ecologicalzones . 207 The farming systems approach to research is rapidly adopted in the national agricultural research programmes ofhighlan d countries of sub-SaharanAfrica . Countries that have recently institutionalized a systems approach in their programmes include,i nadditio n to Ethiopia, Zimbabwe,Rwanda ,Madagasca r and Kenya. The relevance of theapproac hwa s confirmed by the recentAfric a Study of FAO (FAO,1986a )whic h strongly recommended theus e of resource and socio-economic surveys for the identification ofpilo t livestock development areasan d programmes,an d through their implementation, of replicable examples. For themountai n regionso fEas tAfrica ,th e FAO study recommended togiv ehig h priority toanima l traction and smallholder dairydevelopmen t asarea s foraction . Thedat abas e gathered and experiences gained inthi s study has been ofvaluabl e assistance toothe r organizations and to Ethiopian authorities in itsdesig n ofagricultura l development programmes during theperiod s ofdrough t and famine (TAC/CGIAR, 1986). Thedat a and information gatheredwer e alsobasi c reference material forus e by the various groups thathav e recently assessed the situation of agriculture and livestock production inth eEthiopia n highlands (AACM,1984 ;FAO , 1986d). 8.3. Evaluation of Methodology As only fewon-far m studies of the livestock component of smallholder mixed farming systems havebee nundertake n elsewhere in the African highlands, it is important that the experiences gained in this research project bedocumente d soa s toassis t ILCA,nationa l research institutes and other agencies inth eplannin g and appraisal of future research anddevelopmen t activities. At the timeo f thebeginnin g of this study,onl y little experience was available insub-Sahara nAfric awit h farming systems-oriented research on the livestock component ofmixe d crop-livestock agriculture. The topicha s since received farmor e attention,an d hasbee n the subject of severalworkshop s and conferences (Butler Flora,1984 ;Nordblo m et al, 1985; Kearl, 1986). The farming systems approach hasbee nusefu l in identifying the major constraints to increasing farmoutput ,an d inprovidin g a solid understanding of farmers'circumstance s anddecisio n makingprocesses . Thisknowledg e isessentia l for thedevelopmen t of relevant technology for the improvement of smallholder subsistence farming systems throughout sub-SaharanAfrica . The failure of themajorit y of livestock projects in this regionha s shown that little "modern" technology isavailabl e that has substantial advantages over traditional methods,an d that there is little scope for the transfer ofwester n technology to subsistence farming systems,give n theeconomi c and ecological conditions facing producers (Gryseels et al, 1986a). Technology development for subsistence farming systemswil l have tob ebase d ona solid understanding of the functioning of traditional agriculture and the processes of farmers'decisio n making. Thisunderstandin g canonl y be provided through a farming systems approach,whic h can then guide research onparticula r components of the farming system, tob e undertaken on-station under experimental conditions, for thedevelopmen t of relevant 208 technologies. Suchan approac hallow s fora clea r specificationo f desired technology characteristics,th edevelopmen to f impact-oriented technologiesan d theevaluatio no ftechnolog yon th ebasi so ffarmers ' criteria. An inherentadvantag e ofth e farming systemsapproac h isals o that itallow snon-quantitativ e variables,suc ha s informationon inter-household processesan d farmerdecisio nmakin g tob e taken into account inth edesig no fne wtechnology . Thispoint sa t the same time to a possibledange r ofth eapproach ,i.e .an over-relianc eon enumerator s fordat a collection. These tend tofocu son th e "quantitative" rather thanth e "qualitative"aspect so f farmers'decisio nmaking . The research reported inthi s studyha scontribute d toth e identificationo f farmers'constraint san d specificarea sfo r experimental research. iLCA'shighland sprogramm e in198 5wa s restructured subsequentlyan d implemented by fourmajo r problemdrive n and impactoriente d sub-programmes (ILCA, 1986): - soil/plantnutritio nan d agronomy - animalpowe r for improvedmanagemen to fdee pblac k clay soils - sheepproductio nusin g indigenousbreed s - smallholderdair yproduction . Theaccumulatio no fbaselin edat aha sbee na long-termprocess , i.e. from197 9t o1984 . This isan approac h that resourcepoo r national instituteswoul d finddifficul tt o replicate. Rapid ruralappraisa l strategies (Carruthersan dChambers ,1981 ;Collinson ,1981 ;Beebe ,1985 ) area nattractiv ealternativ e inorde r tob ea scos teffectiv ea s possible,particularl y foragencie stha tar e shorto fmone y and staff. Rapid ruralappraisa l techniquesar eusefu l foran initial analysiso f theconstraint st oa farming system. Thenex t step,th e identificationo fdesire d technolody characteristics,i son e that requireshowever ,experience d and technically skilled staff. There isn o short-cut toexperience ,althoug h trainingcourse san dworkshop s can substantially shortenth elengt ho f timenormall yneede d for "learningb y doing". One inherentdange r of rapidappraisa l techniques istha t inexperienced staffma yop t for inappropriate technologieswhic hma ygiv e short termproductivit ygain sa t the farmlevel ,bu twhic hca nb e detrimental tolon g termagro-ecologica l stabilityo fth e regiona sa whole and toth e sustainabilityo f the farming system. But,a sNorma n and Collinson (1985)hav eobserved ,thre eprinciple smus tb e emphasised indesignin g costan dtim eeffectiv emethods : minimize the time required tomov e through thedifferen t research stages (diagnostic,desig nan d testing),maximiz e the returnsb ymakin g resultsmor ewidel yapplicabl e bydefinin gtarge tgroup so f farmers inbroa d terms,an db e open to taking secondbes t solutionso r thebes to f those readilyavailable . A good analysiso f theeconomic so f farming systems researchan d of the costsassociate dwit h intensive aswel l asextensiv emethod so fdat a collectionha sbee nprovide db yMclntir e (1984). Stroud (1985a and b) hasdevelope dusefu lguideline s for themethodolog y ofon-far m experimentation. Long-termdat a collection isvaluable ,however ,i narea s forwhic h anadequat edat abas e isno tye t available,t oenabl e analysiso f factors 209 where inter-year effectsar e likely toprov e important. The impacto f the short rains,an do fdraugh tpowe r availability on smallholder grain production inth eBas oan dWoren aWereda ,woul dhav ebee ndifficul t to quantifyadequatel y inth eabsenc eo fmulti-yea rdata . Time seriesdat a arenecessar y toenabl e theestablishmen t ofa firmplannin g basis for developmentactivities . Inth e specification of thedat aneed s for thisstudy ,mor e attention shouldhav ebee ngive n toth enee d fora nadequat e measurement ofbot h thequantit yan dqualit yo f feed intakeo f livestock,s oa s to enable theestablishmen t of seasonal feedprofile s for particular livestock species. Insufficient attentionwa sals ogive nt o issues related toanima lhealth . As a result the incidencean d impacto f liverfluke on theproductivit y of sheepcoul d notadequatel yb e documented,althoug h it islikel y tob e the singlemos t important factor limiting output from sheepproduction . Thistyp eo fdat ama yhav e tob e collected however bymor e classicaldisciplinar yapproaches . Thehars hhig haltitud e environmento f theBas oan dWoren aWered a negatively influenced theproductivit y of crops. Thehypothesi s that increases inlivestoc k productivitywoul d lead tohighe r cashincomes , which intur nwoul dallo w farmerst obu yadditiona l crop inputsan d enablehighe r cropyield scoul dno tentirel yb evalidated . Because of frost incidence,th eus eo fminera l fertilizerwa sa riskyventur e given thecas houtlay s involved. The impacto f frosto n cropgrowt han d yields alsonegativel y affected strawproduction ,an dhence ,fee d availability. A major studyo n thenatur e of crop-livestock interactions in smallholder farming systems indifferen t ecological zoneso f sub-SaharanAfric a is currentlybein gundertake nb y ILCAi ncooperatio nwit h theWorl d Bank. The choiceo f theBas oan dWoren aWered a asa research sitewhic h would be representative ofbroa d areaso f thehighland swa sno toptimal . Only inver y fewarea so fAfric a iscro pgrowt h socurtaile d by low temperaturesa s inth e studyzone . Theare aprovide d a good example of an integrated crop/livestock farming system,bu t theopportunitie s for increased interactionbetwee nbot h system componentswoul dhav ebee n substantiallyhighe r inth eabsenc eo f frost. It isals o recognized that because ofth edifficultie s incro pproduction ,livestoc k holdings inth e Basoan dWoren aWered aar e larger,an d thecontributio n of livestock to farmcas h incomehighe r thanelsewher e inth eEthiopia nhighlands . This doesno talte r theconclusion san dobservation smad e inth e study. Gryseelse ta l (1986b)an dGryseel s (1987)hav emad ea comparative study on the impacto fo xholding so n farmgrai nproduction ,an d the contributiono f livestock tofar m income,betwee nth eDebr eBerha n and Debre Zeitarea so f theEthiopia nhighlands . TheDebr e Zeitare a is intensively cultivatedwit halmos tn o land left fallowan d representative ofEthiopia' s largemediu m altitude zone. The supplieso foxe ndiffe r markedly between thetw oareas ,bu t the impacto fo xownershi po n farm grainproductio nwa s similar,althoug ha tDebr e Zeit therewa sn o significantdifferenc e inyield s perh ao n thebasi so fo xownership . The contribution of livestock to farmcas h incomewa s 34%an d to farm grossmargi n (not including intermediate products) 45%a tDebr eZeit . Cooperation from farmers,peasant sassociation san d government officialswa sexcellen t throughout the research. Thiswa sn odoub t largelydu e toth ecar e thatwa s takenb y ILCA staff inkeepin g these 210 groups fully informed ofth e researchproces san dprogress ,an db y regularlyorganizin g fieldday sa twhic hongoin g researchactivitie swer e discussed. On-farmtrial swer e initiated aftera relativelybrie fperio d (lesstha nsi xmonth s inth ecas eo fth esingl eo xtechnology )o f on-station testing. Itwa s felttha tthi swa s justified inorde r to economizeo nscarc e resourcesan dbecaus e therewa s sufficient confidence among researcherstha tth etechnolog ywoul db e robust. With thebenefi t ofhindsight ,th esingl eo xtechnolog y shouldhav ebee n testedunde rmor e rigorouscondition son-station ,s oa st oenabl ea muc hcleare r specificationo fth econdition sunde rwhic hth etechnolog y couldb euse d byth etarge tfarmers . Itwa sunfortunat e thatonl ycow swit h 75%exoti cbloo dwer e available for theon-far m trials. Thesecow shav ehighe r feed requirementsan d lessresistanc e todiseas e than 50%crosses . Butther e isa limited supplyo fcrossbre d cowsi nEthiopia ,an d thoseproduce d on governmentbreedin g ranchesar eallocate d firstt oproduce rcooperatives . Inaddition ,onl ycow so fFriesia nbreed swer eavailable . Iti slikel y thatcrosse swit hth eJerse ybree dwoul db emor eadapte d toth eBas oan d WorenaWered a conditions. Jerseycrossbreed shav ehighe rbutterfa t yieldspe runi to fmetaboli cbod yweigh ttha nFriesian san dar ewel l adapted totemperat ean d tropical conditions (IAR,1976 ;Kiwuw ae t al, 1983;Ministr yo fAgriculture ,1986) . Thisbree dwoul d thereforeb eo f higher relevance inarea ssuc ha sth eBas oan dWoren aWereda ,wher emil k marketing isa constraint ,an dwher ebuttermakin gi sa traditional practice. TheEthiopia nGovernmen t (Ministryo fAgriculture ,1986 )ha s recentlypublishe d apolic y forcattl ebreedin gwhic hencourage s the introductiono fcrossbre ddair ystoc k onpeasan t farms. Theexoti cbloo d levelo f such stock shouldhoweve rno texcee d62.5 %an d theus eo f Friesiana swel la sJerse ybreed si s recommended. Inth emixe d farming systemo fth ehighlands ,Governmen t efforts inth eare ao fcattl ebreedin gwil l focuso ndair yproduction ,whil eth e developmento fbee fproductio nwil lb eprimaril y concentrated onth e pastoral systems inth elowlands . Inth e researchphase ,relativel y littleemphasi swa sgive nt oth e exant eevaluatio no fth epropose d on-farm interventions. Onlyver y few suitable technologieswer eavailabl e forth earea ,an d therewa sn onee d fora "ranking"o r "priorization"o fvariou salternatives . A rigorous model allows fora nassessmen to fth eexpecte d benefits (forexampl e througha nestimat eo fth eexpecte d netpresen tvalue )o fa ne w technology,an d indicatesth emechanism sho wfar mproductivit ywil lb e affected. Alternative technologies canthe nb e rankedaccordingl y toth e sizeo fth ebenefi t streamthe yar eexpecte d togenerate . Modelsca n also illustrate theanticipate dbottleneck s inth e farming system in regard toinpu tan doutpu t flows. Mclntirean dSeyou m (1986)hav e developed aher dmode l foreconomi canalysi so fcattl eproductio nwhic h allows for simulationo f interventions sucha sanima l supplementation. During theon-far m trials,no tenoug heffor twa spu ti n encouraging the farmers inproducin ghom egrow nfodder . ILCAinitiall y assisted the farmers inovercomin g feed shortagesb ysupplyin g feed 211 concentratesan d this created adependency . AS feed concentrates were cheap,farmer sneglecte d their forage cropsan dwhe n ILCAinterrupte d the supply of concentrates,a fodder "crisis"emerged . Milk yields dropped sharply,whil e farmers tried toorganiz e their own cooperative supply of feed concentrates from theDebr e Zeit feedmill . Thisprove d difficult because of thegovernmen t policy togiv epriorit y toth e supply of cooperatives. Farmers subsequently gavemor e attention toth e production of forage crops. Throughout the research process,ther ewa s a close cooperation between ILCA and officialso f theMinistr y ofAgricultur e and extension agents. Thiswa susefu l and essential toenabl e continuous interaction and feedback on the research experiences gained. As the ILCA field research activities phased out,th eMinistr y ofAgricultur e officials were fully informed of the resultsobtained , and took responsibility for the follow-up of the technology adoption process. Thisensure d a relatively smooth transition from the research toth eextensio n phase,a s the research resultsobtaine d in this studyprovide d abasi s fora major smallholder dairy development project for thearea . The single ox technology isbein g tested further by theMinistr y ofAgricultur e and cooperating NGO'si ndifferen t areaso fth eEthiopia nhighlands , particularly within the framework ofpost-drough t recoveryprojects . 8.4. Implications for Future Research Smallholder dairydevelopmen t isbecomin g amajo r theme in government extension programmes throughout the Ethiopianhighlands . Variousproject shav e beenprepare d for implementation by theMinistr y of Agriculture (AACM, 1985). The research resultsobtaine d in this study hasprovide d useful background information for theprojec t design. Back up research activities areneede d todevelo p lowcos t technologies for milk processing toovercom e themarketin g constraints particularly during the fasting season. Encouraging resultshav e beenobtaine d by ILCA (O'Mahoney and Peters,1987 )bu t the research isongoing . Research is alsoneede d toimprov e the feed resources available. Although oats and vetch are apromisin g feed resource, farmers seem reluctant to grow forage cropso narabl e land. Ways andmean shav e tob e found to improve thenutritiv evalu e of crop residues. Although theus e ofmolass e urea blocks as feed supplementation appears promising (Preston,1985 ;ILCA , 1987), thepractica l difficulties of organizing theirdistributio n to farmers haveno tye tbee novercome . Theprofitabilit y of thedair y enterprise would increase drastically if the crossbred cows could beuse d simulataneously forwor k andmil k production. Initial resultso f on-farm trialsa tDebr e Zeit and ofex-ant e modelling (Gryseels andAnderson , 1985)wer ever y encouraging and hasbee n complemented byon-statio n experimental work (ILCA, 1987b). On-stationwor k should alsob eundertake n toasses s the productivity of 25%crosses . Although milk production of such breeds will undoubtedly bewel l below that of 50%crosses ,the y are likely to have amuc h higher disease resistance. Inarea swher e extension support isno t readily available, suchbreed s could make aver y valuable contribution tomil k production. Research isals oneede d as to the labour demands associated with improvedmil k processing, particularly with respect toth e femalemember s of thehouseholds . 212 Themajorit yo fEthiopia n smallholdersliv e farawa yfro m all-weather roads,wit hn o readyacces st omarket san dextensio nservice . For thesefarmers ,researc heffort s should focuso n further exploiting thepotentia l ofloca lZeb ubreeds ,particularl y through improved nutrition. Oneo f themajo rconstraint st oa n increase inlivestoc k outputo n smallholder farmsi sth eshortag eo fanima l feed. Despiteman yyear so f researcho npastur ean d forageproduction ,onl y littleprogres sha sbee n made indevelopin gappropriat e technologies thatar eadopte db y smallholders. Inth eEthiopia nhighlands ,forag eproductio n competes with foodcrop s forarabl e land. Insituation swher e land isscarce , forage researchers shouldhav ea nawarenes so fth eparticula r needsan d preferenceso f subsistence farmers,an d focusthei r research activities accordingly. Foreac htarge t farming systeman decologica l zone feed profilesshoul db eestablishe d fordifferen t livestock species,tha t clearly illustrate seasonal feeddemands ,an d seasonal feedsupply . This would then illustrate thegap san dhel pforag e researcherst ospecif yth e desired foragecharacteristics . A selectionstrateg yfo r forageswoul d thengiv eadequat eattentio n toconservatio nqualit yo fparticula r forages,selec t forgrowt ho n residualmoistur ewit hdee p rooting species soa st omak e foragesavailabl e intoth edr y seasonwithou tnee d for supplementary irrigation,a balanc ebetwee n forageswhic hca nb egraze d also,a soppose d toonl ycu tan d carry,an d tolabou rdemand so f forages toensur etha tlan dpreparatio nwoul dno t interferewit h thoseo ffoo d crops (Mclntirean dDebrah ,1986) . Alleycroppin g techniqueshav ea particularlyhig hpotentia l inthi s regard. TheILCA/IAR/ICRISA Tprojec t onvertiso ldevelopmen t alsooffer s substantial scopefo ra n increasei n theproductio no f feedbiomas sthroughou t theEthiopia nhighlands . More investigationsar e required todetermin e theprecis e conditionsunde rwhic h singleoxe nca nb euse d forcultivatio npurposes . A possible future rolei so n light soils,wit ha limite d stonecove ran d witha slopeo f lesstha n10% . Theprim eus eo f singleoxe nwoul d befo r seed coveringpurposes ,whic hwoul dallo wearlie rplantin gdates . The experiencesgaine d indevelopmen tproject s since198 6shoul db e systematically analyzed toenabl edefinit e conclusionst ob edraw na st o thelikel y futureo f thetechnology . TheHighland sReclamatio n Study (FAO,1986d )calculate d that,i fsingl eoxe nwer e to replaceth e traditional pair fortillage ,an d iffee d resourcess orelease dwer e to beuse d for small ruminantproduction ,tha tfo rth ehig hpotentia l cereal/livestock zoneth eannua l internal rateo f returno fsuc ha project couldb eestimate d at12% . Giventh e impacto fdraugh tpowe r availabilityo ngrai nproduction ,cultivatio n systems requiring less draughtpowe rhav e tob edeveloped . Theanalysi so fth eeffect so f draughtpowe r availability ongrai nproductio na s reported inthi sstudy , focusedo nth ewithin-yea r effectso fo xownership ,no to nth eprocesse s bywhic h livestockwealt h isaccumulated . Ina dynami cperspective , draughtpowe rma yals ob ea neffect ,rathe r thana caus eo flo wfar m incomes. Thisaspec tmerit s further investigation. Another issueworth y ofadditiona l researcheffort s relatest oth ene tbenefit sassociate d with anexpande dus eo foxe n inEthiopia . Highpriorit y shouldb egive n toresearc ho n sheepproductio n using localbreeds . Studiesshoul d focuso nselection ,nutritiona l 213 improvement,an d thedevelopmen t of lowcos thealt hpackages . The Ethiopianhighland shav e asubstantia l potential for thedevelopmen t of sheepproduction ,an d thelucrativ emarket s inth eMiddl eEas tar enear . ILCAha s recordedver ydramati c increases inshee pproductivit yb y introducing legumes intoshee pbase ddiet s (ILCA,198 6) . ILCAha sobtaine d encouraging resultswit h indigenous species of clovers,e.g . Trifolium ruepellianum,Trifoliu mburchellianu m and Trifolium tembenze,an dway san dmean s shouldb e found to introduce these on communal pastures,throug ha cooperative programmewit h thePA' s involved. Root cropssuc ha sfodde rbee tan d turnipma yhav e some potential also inthes ehig haltitud e zones,bu t initial resultsa t ILCA's research stationwer eno t toopromising . Attention isals ot ob e given tocro p response studieso fmanure , andearl yplantin g trials. Only fewstudie sar e currentlyavailabl e that provide this important information. A strategy for livestock development inth ehighland sneed s to focus firsto n the intermediate functionso f livestock, i.e.b y improving theefficienc y ofanima ldraugh tpowe rutilisation ,an dencouragin g the useo fmanur e for fertilizer instead of fuel. Sucha strategy should also focuso n thedevelopmen to fmil k production through the introduction of crossbred cows. The improvemento f sheepshoul d receivehig h priority if lowcos t technological improvementsar eavailable ,bu t inth e short term theemphasi s should beo n the researchneede d todevelo p these technologies. Thepolic y implicationso f the findingso f this study on theeffect s ofox-ownershi par e important. Major cropping areaso f Ethiopiad ono thav e sufficient ox-rearing capacityan dar e reliant on inflowso foxe n fromarea so f relative surplus. As a result,her d structuresdiffe rmarkedl ybetwee n regions. Policymaker swil lhav e to appraise thepossibilit y of introducing ruralcredi t schemest oallo w resource-poor farmerst opurchas eoxen . Proper targeting ofth e recipientso f suchcredit swil l bevital . If theEthiopia nGovernmen twant s to increase theofftak e ofmeat , effortswil l have tob eundertake n to reduceher d sizean d improve the nutritional statuso fth e remaininganimals . Invie wo f thehig h return that the farmerobtain seve nunde r traditionalmanagemen t from investing inadditiona l animals,thi spropositio n isunlikel y to receive the necessary cooperationo f thetarge tfarmers . 214- LISTO FABBREVIATIONS ,ACRONYMS ,SIGN SAN DUNIT S AACM = AustralianAgricultura lConsultin gan dManagemen tCompan yPty , Ltd. (Australia) AAMY « AdjustedAnnua lMil kYiel d ACIAR - AustralianCounci l for InternationalAgricultura l Research (Australia) ADG - Averagedail ygai n AE = Adultequivalen t AMC = AgriculturalMarketin g Corporation ARDD = AnimalResource sDevelopmen tDepartmen t (Ethiopia) ARDU = ArsiRura lDevelopmen tUni t (Ethiopia) ARNAB = AfricanResearc hNetwor k forAgricultura l By-Products a.s.l. = above sealeve l BBF = Broadbedan dFurro w Birr = EthiopianCurrency ,on eUS $ 2.07Bir r C » DegreesCentigrad e CA - CentralAfric a CAB = CommonwealthAgricultura lBureau x (London) CADU - ChilaloAgricultura l DevelopmentUni t (Ethiopia) CF = Control Farmer CGIAR = ConsultativeGrou po n InternationalAgricultura l Research (Washington, D.C.) CI = Calving Interval CIMMYT =•= InternationalMaiz ean dWhea t ImprovementCentr e (Mexico) CP = CrudeProtei n cv = Cultivar CV - Coefficiento fVariatio n DAP - Di-ammoniumphosphat e DDA » DairyDevelopmen tAgenc y (Ethiopia) DDE = DairyDevelopmen tEnterpris e (Ethiopia) DDM = DigestibleDr yMatte r DM = DryMatte r DTF = DairyTes tFarme r EA = EasternAfric a EB = EthiopianBir r EHRS = EthiopianHighland sReclamatio nStud y ENI = EthiopianNutritio n Institute EPID = Extensionan dProjec t ImplementationDepartmen t (Ethiopia) ERR = EconomicRat eo fRetur n FAO = Foodan dAgricultur e Organisationo fth eUnite dNation s (Rome) FSP = Farming Systems Perspective FSR = Farming SystemsResearc h FSSP = FarmingSystem sSuppor tProjec t (U.S.A.) 215 g = Grams GD = Growingday s GDP = GrossDomesti c Product GM = GrossMargi n GMI = GrossMargi n Including Intermediate Products GNP = GrossNationa l Product GTZ = Gesellschaft fürTechnisch e Zusammenarbeit (FRGermany ) GVP » GrossValu eo f Production ha Hectare HLSQ HarveysLeas t Squares HP Hewlett-Packard HPCL HighPotentia lCereal-Livestoc k Zone HPPL HighPotentia l Perennial-Livestock Zone IAR Institute ofAgricultura l Research (Ethiopia) IBRD International Bank forReconstructio nan dDevelopmen t (World Bank,Washington ,D.C. ) ICARDA International Centre forAgricultura l Research inth eDr y Areas (Syria) ICRISAT International CropsResearc h Institute forth eSemi-Ari d Tropics (India) IDA International DevelopmentAssociatio n (World Bank) IDR Instituteo fDevelopmen t Research (Ethiopia) IDRC International DevelopmentResearc hCentr e (Canada) IFPRI International FoodPolic yResearc h Institute (U.S.A.) ILCA International Livestock Centre forAfric a (Ethiopia) ILRAD International Laboratory forResearc h onAnima l Diseases (Kenya) ISAR Institutde s SciencesAgronomique sd uRwand a (Rwanda) ISNAR International Service forNationa lAgricultura l Research (Netherlands) kg Kilograms km- Kilometers knT Square kilometers kw kilowatt LP = Linear Programming LPCL = LowPotentia l Cereal-Livestock Zone LU = Livestock Unit LW = Liveweight 2 metres Z3 squaremetre s ! cubicmetre s m Megajoules M.J. millimetres mm Ministry ofAgricultur e MOA MinimumPackag eProgramm e (Ethiopia) MPP Michigan StateUniversit y (U.S.A.) MSU 216 N = Nitrogen N.A. = Notapplicable/No t Available M.W. - Metabolic Weight NFIU - National Fertilizer and InputsUni t (Ethiopia) NFSD » New Farming Systems Development OFR = On-Farm Research P = Phosphorus p.a. = Per annum PA = Peasant Association PC « Producer Cooperative PET » Potential Evapotranspiration pH = Measureo facidit y (<7(/Alkalinity (>7) Qt - Quintal (100kg ) RRC = Relief andRehabilitatio n Commission (Ethiopia) SA = SouthernAfric a SAS = StatisticalAnalysi s System SC = Service Cooperative SD » Standard Deviation SOF - SingleO x Farmer SPAAR - Special Programme forAfrica nAgricultura l Research spp - Species SPSS - Statistical Package for the Social Sciences SSA « Sub-SaharanAfric a TAC « TechnicalAdvisor y Committee of theCGIA R TGM = TotalGros sMargi n TLU - Tropical Livestock Unit USAID » United StatesAgenc y for International Development (U.S.A.) US$ - United States Dollar VCR - Value/Cost Ratio WA - WesternAfric a WHO » World Health Organisation WSARP - Western SudanAgricultura l Research Project 217 REFERENCES AACM (AustralianAgricultura l Consultingan dManagemen t Company Pty. Ltd.). 1984. Livestock SubSecto r Review.Fou rvolumes . Ministry ofAgriculture ,Ethiopia . AACM (AustralianAgricultura l Consultingan dManagemen t CompanyPty . Ltd.). 1985. DairyRehabilitatio nan dDevelopmen tProject . Project PreparationReport . Ministryo fAgriculture ,Ethiopia . Abate,Alul aan dTesfay eTeklu . 1979. LandRefor man d Peasant Associations inEthiopia . A case studyo f twowidel y differing regions. Working Paper,Worl d Employment Programme Research, International Labour Office,Geneva . Abate,Alul aan d Fassil Kiros. 1980. AgrarianReform , Structural Changesan dRura lDevelopmen t inEthiopia . Working Paper,Worl d Employment Programme Research,Internationa l LabourOffice , Geneva. Abebe,Mesfin . 1981. SoilBurnin g inEthiopia . Ethiopian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 3(1):pp . 57-73. Abebe,Mesfin . 1982. Useso f Improved Seed-bed and Fertilizers asa n Alternative toSoi lBurnin g or "Guie". Ethiopian journal of Agricultural Sciences 4(1):pp .1-9 . Abebe,M. ,Mekuri aM .an dGebremeskel ,T . 1984. Statuso fAgricultura l Research inEthiopia . In: ACIAR (AustralianCentr e for InternationalAgricultura l Research). Proceedingso f the Eastern Africa-ACIARConsultatio n onAgricultura l Research,18-2 2Jul y 1983, Nairobi,Kenya . Aggrey-Mensah,W . 1985. Cost-BenefitAnalysi so fAlternativ e Strategy Proposals forReclaimin g andDevelopin g theHighlands . Ethiopian HighlandsReclamatio n Study, Working Paper 18. FAO/Ministryo f Agriculture,Addi sAbeba . Agren,G . andGibson ,R . 1968. FoodCompositio nTabl e forUs e in Ethiopia. CNURepor tNo .16 . SIDA, Stockholm. Agren,G. , Eklund,A .an d Lieden,S.A . 1975. FoodCompositio nTabl e for Use inEthiopi a II. EthiopianNutritio n Institute/SIDA,Addi s Abeba. Agyemang,K . 1985. An overviewo f sheep research inth e highlands programme. Mimeograph HighlandsProgramme ,ILCA ,Addi sAbeba . Agyemang,K. ,Anderson ,F.M . andWoldea bWoldemariam . 1984. Preliminary Evaluation ofReproductiv e and Productive Performance of Indigenous Sheepa tDebr eBerba nResearc h Station. Mimeograph HighlandsProgramme ,ILCA ,Addi sAbeba . 218 Agyemang,K. ,Negussi eAkalework ,Voorthuizen ,A . andAnderson , F.H. 1985. A rapid surveyo f sheepproductio n inth e traditional sector ofDebr eBerhan ,Ethiopia nHighlands . In: Wilson,R.T . andBourzat ,D . (eds). Small Ruminants inAfrica nAgriculture . Proceedings ofa conferencehel d at ILCA,3 0Sept .- 4Oct . ILCA, AddisAbeba . Ahmad,N . 1986. Soilan dAgronomi c Factors Influencing Fodder Production inth eEthiopia nHighland s ofEas tAfrica . PSDWorkin g PaperNo .B4 . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Akundabweni,L . 1984a. Native Cloverso f theEthiopia nHighlands : the backwood champions. ILCANewslette r 3(1):pp .5-6 . ILCA,Addi s Abeba. Akundabweni,L.M.S . 1984b. Forage Potential ofSom eAnnua l Native Trifolium Species inth eEthiopia nHighlands . Ph.D.Thesis ,Sout h Dakota StateUniversity ,Brookings . Alberro,M .an dHail eMariant ,S . 1982a. The Indigenous Cattle of Ethiopia,par t 1. WorldAnima l Review 41:pp .2-10 . Alberro,M .an dHail eMariam , S. 1982b. The Indigenous Cattle of Ethiopia,par t 2. WorldAnima l Review 42:pp .27-3 9 Amir,P .an d Knipscheer,H.C . (eds). 1987. On-FarmAnima l Research/Extensionan d itsEconomi cAnalysis . Proceedings ofa WorkshopJanuar y 19-23. Winrock International,Arkansas . Anderson,F.M . 1983. A Strategy for SmallholderWate r Development in theEthiopia n Highlands. Mimeograph Highlands Programme. ILCA, AddisAbeba . Anderson, F.M. 1984. DraughtAnima l Power inAfrica : AnOverview . In: FAO. Animal Energy inAgricultur e inAfric a andAsia . FAOAnima l Production andHealt h PaperNo .42 . FAO,Rome . Anderson,F.M . and Dillon,J.L . 1985. Farming SystemsResearc h at the International Agricultual Research Centersan d other International Groups. In: Remenyi,J.V . (ed). Agricultural systems research fordevelopin g countries: proceedings ofa n international workshophel da tHawkesbur yAgricultura l College,Richmond , N.S.W.,Australia ,12-1 5Ma y 1985. ACIARProceeding s No.11 . ACIAR,Canberra . Anderson,F.M. , Gryseels,G . andDurkin ,J.W . 1986. Factors affecting smallholder grainproductio n inth eEthiopia nhighlands . Paper presented at theOAU/SAFGRA D international drought symposium on foodgrai nproductio n in the semi-arid regionso fAfrica ,Nairobi , 19-23May . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Anteneh,A . 1984. Trends inSub-Sahara nAfrica' s Livestock Industries. ILCABulleti n 18:pp .7-15 . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Arsi RuralDevelopmen tUni t (ARDU). 1978. Rural Population,Lan d Utilisation Practices and Livestock Survey. Ardu PublicationNo . 13,Assella . 219 Assamenew,Getachew . 1977. TheOrganisatio n of theMea tMarke t inAddi s Abeba. Special StudyEconomic s Programme. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Astatke,Abiy e andMatthews ,M.D.P . 1981. ProgressRepor t of Cultivation Trialsa tDebr eZei tan d DebreBerhan . Mimeograph Highlands Programme. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Astatke,Abiy e andMatthews ,M.D.P . 1982. ProgressRepor t of Cultivation Trialsa tDebr e Zeitan dDebr eBerhan . Mimeograph Highlands Programme. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Astatke,Abiy e andMatthews ,M.D.P . 1983. 1982Progres sRepor to f the Cultivation Trialsan dRelate d CultivationWor k atDebr e Zeit and DebreBerhan . Mimeograph HighlandsProgramme . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Astatke,Abiye . 1984. Theus eo fanima l power inwate r conservation works. M.Sc.Dissertation . Cransfield Institute of Technology, Silsoe College,Bedford ,U.K . Astatke,Abiy e andMatthews ,M.D.P . 1984. 1983Progres sRepor t of the Cultivation Trialsan d Related CultivationWor k atDebr eZei tan d DebreBerhan . Mimeograph Highlands Programme. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Astatke,Abiye ,Bunning ,S .an dAnderson ,F.M . 1986a. Building Ponds withAnima l Power in theEthiopia n Highlands. Manual. International Livestock Centre forAfrica ,Addi sAbeba . Astatke,Abiye ,Reed ,J.D . andButterworth ,M.H . 1986b. Effect of diet restriction onwor k performance andweigh t losso f local Zebuan d Boranx FriesianCrossbre d Oxen. ILCABulleti nNo .23 : pp. 11-14. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Atherton,J.S . 1984. TheEvolutio n ofa Dono rAssistanc e Strategy for Livestock Programs inSub-Sahara nAfrica . In: Simpson,J.R . and Evangelou,P . (ed). Livestock Development inSub-Sahara nAfrica : Constraints,Prospects ,Policy . Westview,Boulder ,Colorado . Awgichew,Kassahun . 1987. The Statuso f Sheepan dGoa tResearc han d Development inEthiopia . In: Kebede,B .an d L.J. Lambourne(ed) . TheStatu so fLivestock ,Pastur e and ForageResearc h and Development inEthiopia . Proceedings of theWorksho phel d in AddisAbeba ,8-1 0 January 1985. Institute ofAgricultura l Research,Addi sAbeba . Beebe,J . 1985. RapidRura lAppraisal :Th eCritica l FirstSte p ina Farming SystemsApproac h toResearch . FSSPNetworkin g PaperNo . 5. FSSP,Universit y of Florida,Gainesville . Bellete,Solomon . 1979. An EconomicAnalysi s of Small-Holders Agriculture inth eCentra l Highlandso fEthiopia : A System SimulationApproach . Ph.D.Thesis ,Orego n State University. Bengtsson,B.M.I . 1983. Rural Development Research andAgricultura l Innovations. Department ofPlan tHusbandr yRepor t 115,Swedis h University ofAgricultura l Sciences,Uppsala . 220 Bernsten,R.H . 1982. Analytical approaches to farming systems research with anemphasi so nanima l production. In: J.C. Fine and R.G. Lattimore.Livestoc k inAsia : Issuesan d Policies.IDRC ,Ottawa . Bernsten,R.H. , Fitzhugh,H.A . and Knipscheer,H.C . 1984. Livestock in Farming SystemsResearch . In: Cornelia Butler Flora(ed) . Proceedings ofKana sStat eUniversity' s198 3 Farming Systems Research Symposium. Animals inth e Farming System. Paper No.6 . Kansas StateUniversity ,Manhattan . Bishaw,Makonne n andGebr eMedhin ,Zenebech . 1983. Some socio-economic factors related to ruralwate ruse . Instituteo f Development Research,Researc hRepor tNo .18 ,Addi sAbeb aUniversity ,Addi s Abeba. Branning,E. ,Meskel ,L.B. ,Schaar ,J . and Swensson,C . 1980. Breeding activities of theEthio-Swedis h integrated and development project. WorldAnima lRevie w No.36 : pp.26-34 . Breman,H . andd eWit ,C.T . 1983. Rangeland productivity and exploitation inth e Sahel. Science 221:p .134-137 . Brown,L.H . and Cochemé,J . 1973. A studyo f theAgroclimatolog y of the Highlandso fEaster nAfrica . TechnicalNot eNo .125 . World Meteorological Organization,Geneva . Bruggeman,H.Y . 1987. Physiography and SoilsMa po fEthiopia . LandUs e Planning andRegulator y Department,Ministr y ofAgriculture ,Addi s Abeba, (inpress ) Brumby,P.J . 1982. Foreword. In: H.E. Jahnke. Livestock Production Systems and Livestock Development inTropica lAfrica . Kieler Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk,Kiel ,Wes t Germany. Brumby,P.J . 1986. ILCAan d Food Production inAfrica . WorldAnima l Review No.60 :pp . 33-37. Brumby,P.J . andGryseels ,G . 1985. Stimulating Milk Production in Milk-Deficit CountriesO fAfric a andAsia . In: A.J. Smith(ed) . Milk Production inDevelopin g Countries. Proceedingso f the conferencehel d inEdinburg hfro m2- 6Apri l 1984,organize db y the Centre forTropica lVeterinar yMedicine ,Universit y of Edinburgh. Brumby,P.J. , Gryseels,G .an d Stewart,R.A . 1985. The International Livestock Centre forAfric a (ILCA): Objectives,Structure , Achievements and Prospects. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture 24(1): pp.48-62 . Butler Flora,C . (ed). 1984. Proceedings ofKansa s State University's 1983 Farming SystemsResearc h Symposium. Animals in the Farming System. PaperNo.6 . Kansas StateUniversity ,Manhattan . Byerlee,D . and Collinson,M . 1980. Planning Technologies Appropriate toFarmers . Concept and Procedures. Economics Program,CIMMYT , ElBatan ,Mexico . 221 Carruthers,I .an dChambers ,R . 1981. RapidAppraisa l forRura l Development. AgriculturalAdministratio n 8(6):pp .407-422 . Casley,D.J . andLury ,D.A . 1982. Monitoring andEvaluatio no f Agriculture andRura lDevelopmen t Projects. Published for the World Bank by theJoh nHopkin sUniversit y Press,Baltimore . Central Bureauo f Statistics (CBS). 1977. Integrated Rural Survey. Ministry of Financean dPlanning ,Nairobi ,Kenya . ChilaloAgricultura l DevelopmentUni t (CADU). 1970a. Implement Research Section. ProgressRepor tNo .2 .CAD UPublicatio nNo .53 ,Asella . ChilaloAgricultura l DevelopmentUni t (CADU). 1970b. Animal husbandry activities 1966-1970. CADUPublicatio nNo .56 ,CADU ,Asella . ChilaloAgricultura l DevelopmentUni t (CADU). 1971. Implement Research Section. ProgressRepor tNo .2 .CAD UPublicatio nNo .79 ,Asella . Chudleigh,P . 1976. Theus e of classification anddescriptio n ofanima l production systems inth e formationo fprioritie s for agricultural research inKenya . Agricultural Systems 1(4): pp.281-299 . CIMMYTEconomic sStaff . 1984. The Farming SystemsPerspectiv e and Farmer Participation inth eDevelopmen t ofAppropriat e Technology. In: CK. Eicher andJ.M . Staatz (eds). Agricultural Development in theThir dWorld . JohnHopkin sUniversit y Press,Baltimor e and London. Clayton,E.S . 1961. Technical andEconomi cOptim a inPeasan t Agriculture. Journal ofAgricultura l Economics No.14 : pp.337-377. Cleave,J.H . 1974. African Farmers: LabourUs e inth eDevelopmen t of SmallholderAgriculture" ? Praeger Publishers,Ne wYork . Collinson,M.P . 1972. FarmManagemen t inPeasan tAgriculture . A Handbook forRura l Development Planning inAfrica . Praeger Publishers,Ne wYork . Collinson,M.P . 1981. A LowCos tApproac h toUnderstandin g Small Farmers. AgriculturalAdministratio n 8(6):pp .433-450 . Collinson,M.P . 1982. Farming SystemsResearc h inEaster nAfrica : The Experience ofCIMMY Tan d SomeNationa lAgricultura l Research Services,1976-81 . MSU International Development Paper No.3, Michigan StateUniversity , EastLansing . Collinson,M.P . 1984. EasternAfrica n Farming Systems and Some Indicationso fResearc h Priorities. In: ACIAR (Australian Centre for InternationalAgricultura l Research). Proceedings of the EasternAfrica-ACIA R Consultation onAgricultura l Research, 18-22 July 1983,Nairobi ,Kenya . Collinson,M.P . 1987. Potential andPractic e inFoo d Production Technology Development: Easternan dSouther nAfrica . In: J.W. 222 Mellor,CL . Delgadoan dM.J .Blacki e (eds). Accelerating Food Production inSub-Sahara nAfrica . JohnHopkin sUniversit yPress , Baltimore. Congresso fth eUnite d States. 1984. AfricaTomorrow : Issuesi n Technology,Agricultur ean dU SForeig nAi d- A Technical Memorandum. Officeo fTechnolog yAssessment ,OTA-TM-F-31 , Washington,D.C . Constable,M . 1984. Resources forRura lDevelopmen t inEthiopia . EthiopianHighland sReclamatio nStudy . WorkingPape r17 . FAQ/Ministryo fAgriculture ,Addi sAbeba . ConsultativeGrou po nInternationa lAgricultura lResearc h (CGIAR). 1981. SecondRevie wo fth eCGIAR . Washington,D.C . Cook,R.H . 1985. Methodological Summaries: Criteria forEvaluation . In: Nordblom,T.L. ,Awa d ElKari mHami dAhme d andPotts ,G.R . (eds). 1985. ResearchMethodolog y forLivestoc k On-FarmTrials : proceedingso fa worksho phel da tAleppo ,Syria ,25-2 8Marc h1985 . ICARDA/IDRC,Ottawa . Copland,J.W . (ed). 1985. DraughtAnima lPowe r forProduction . Proceedingso fa ninternationa lworksho phel da tJame sCoo k University,Australia ,10-1 6July . ACIARProceeding s SeriesNo . 10,Canberra . Cossins,N . 1973. StillSlee pth eHighlands : A Studyo fFar man d Livestock Systems inth eCentra lHighland so fEthiopia . Livestock andMea tBoard ,Addi sAbeba . Cossins,F . 1985.Woo lProcessin g inEthiopia . MimeographHighland s Programme,ILCA ,Addi sAbeba . Cossins,N.J . 1985. TheProductivit yan dPotentia lo fPastora lSystems . ILCABulleti nNo .21 :pp .10-15 . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Crotty,R . 1980. Cattle,Economic san dDevelopment . Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux,London . Dahl,G . andHjort ,A . 1975. HavingHerds : PastoralHer dGrowt han d Household Economy. Departmento fSocia lAnthropology , Stockholm. Debele,Berhanu . 1983. TheVertisol so fEthiopia :thei rproperties , classificationan dmanagement . In: FifthMeetin go fth eEaster n AfricaSub-Committe e forSoi lCorrelatio nan dLan dEvaluation . December 1983,Wa dMedani ,Sudan . World SoilsResource sReport s No. 56. FAO,Rome . DeBoer ,A.J . 1977. A Classification Scheme forAfrica n Livestock Production Systemsan d ItsUs e forResearc hResourc eAllocation , ProgramDesig nan d ProjectMonitoring . Occasional EconomicsPape r No. 7. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . DeBoer ,J . 1982.Livestoc k Development: TheAsia nExperience . In: J.C.Fin ean dR.G .Lattimor e (eds). Livestock inAsia : Issues andPolicies . IDRC,Ottawa . 223 DeBoer ,J . 1983. Designo fAlternativ e Crops- Livestock Systems for AsianFarmers . Paperpresente d toWorksho po nCrop s- Livestock Research,Apri l 25-28, IRRI,Philippines . Debre ZeitAgricultura l Research Station. 1982. ProgressRepor to n MajorResearc hActivitie sJul y1980-Jun e1981 . DebreZeit , Ethiopia. Dejene,Alemneh . 1985. SmallholderPerception s ofRura lDevelopmen t and Emerging Institutionsi nArss i Region Sinceth e Ethiopian Revolution. DevelopmentDiscussio nPape r 192. Harvard Institute for InternationalDevelopment ,Harvar dUniversity ,Cambridge . Dejene,Alemneh . 1987. Peasants,Agrarian Socialis man dRura l ~—Developmeni i_tJ _i"*-'- nEthiopia ;-pia T .Westvie' Westvie"" w Specia J-1 "'---l StudieJ---— «•s=o n Africa . WestviewPress ,Boula e aer,Colorad o Delgado,C.L . 1979. The southernFulan i farming system inUppe rVolta : A model for the integrationo f cropan d livestock production in theWes tAfrica n savanna. AfricanRura l Economy PaperNo .20 . Department ofAgricultura l Economics,Michiga n StateUniverstiy , EastLansing . Delgado,C.L .an dChandrashebha r G.Ranada . 1987. Technological Change andAgricultura l LaborUse . In: J.W.Mellor ,C.L .Delgad o and M.J.Blacki e (eds). Accelerating FoodProductio n inSub-Sahara n Africa. JohnHopkin sUniversit yPress ,Baltimore . DeMontgolfier-Kouevi ,C . 1976. The Livestock Situation inEthiopia . Mimeograph,ILCA ,Addi sAbeba . DeMontgolfier-Kouevi ,C .an dVlavonou ,A . 1983. Tendances et perspectivesd e l'agriculture etd e l'élevagee nAfriqu e Sub-Saharienne. Rapportd eRecherch eNo.l . Centre International pour l'Elevage enAfriqu e (CIPEA),Addi sAbeba . DePauw ,E . 1987. Agro-Ecological ZonesMa po fEthiopia . LandUs e Planning andRegulator yDepartment ,Ministr yo fAgriculture ,Addi s Abeba, (inpress ) Dersch,D . 1985. Theproductivit yo f indigenous Zebucow sunde r traditional smallholdermanagemen t conditions inth eDebr e Berhan area of theEthiopia nhighlands . Dipl.Ag . Ing.Dissertation , Universityo fGöttingen ,Göttingen . DeWilde ,J.C . (ed). 1967. Experienceswit hAgricultura l Development in TropicalAfrica .Tw ovolumes .Joh nHopkin s Press for theWorl d Bank,Baltimore . Dillon,J.L . andHardaker ,J.B . 1980. FarmManagemen tResearc h for Small Farmer Development. FAOAgricultura l ServicesBulleti nNo . 41. FAO,Rome . 224 Dillon,J.L . andAnderson ,J.R . 1984. Concept and Practice of Farming SystemsResearch . In: AustralianCentr e for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR). Proceedings of the Eastern Africa-ACIARConsultatio n onAgricultura l Research,18-2 2Jul y 1983, Nairobi,Kenya . Doran,M.H. ,Low ,A.R.C .an d Kemp,R.L . 1979. Cattlea sa Store of Wealth inSwaziland : Implications for Livestock Development and Overgrazing inEaster nan d SouthernAfrica . AmericanJourna l of Agricultural Economics 61(1): pp.41-47 . Eicher,CK . 1982. FacingU p toAfrica' s Food Crisis. ForeignAffair s 61(1): pp.151-174 . Eicher,CK . andBaker ,D. C 1982. Research onAgricultura l Development inSub-Sahara nAfrica : A Critical Survey. MSU International Development Paper No.l.Michiga n StateUniversity , East Lansing. Erich,Jacinta . 1983. Investigations on Fascioliasis inth e Ethiopian HighlandsAroun d DebreBerhan . Tracer LambExperiments . Report ofa studyperio d at ILCA. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . EthiopianNutritio n Institute (ENI). 1980. FirstRoun d Nutritional Survey. ENI,Addi sAbeba . Ethiopian Science andTechnolog y Commission. 1978. Proceedings of the Workshopo nth eApplicatio n of Science and Technology toth e Development of theLivestoc k Sector ofEthiopi ahel d atNazret , March 22-24. ESTC,Addi sAbeba . Fafchamps,M . 1985. LabourUs ean d Productivity and Technological Change inAfrica n SmallholderAgriculture . SynthesisReport . Job and SkillsProgramm e forAfrica ,Internationa l Labour Organization,Addi sAbeba . Fielding,D . 1987. DonkeyPowe r inAfrica n Rural Transport.Worl d Animal ReviewNo .63 :pp .23-30 . Fine,J.C .an d Lattimore,R.G . (eds). 1982. Livestock inAsia : Issues and Policies. IDRC,Ottawa . Fisk,E.K . 1975. TheRépons eo fNonmonetar y ProductionUnit s to Contact with theExchang e Economy. In: L.G. Reynolds. Agriculture in Development Theory. YaleUniversit yPress ,Ne wHave nan dLondon . Fitzhugh,H.A . andByington ,E.K . 1978. SystemsApproac h toAnima l Agriculture. WorldAnima l Review No.27 :pp .2-6 . Fitzhugh,H.A. , Hart,R.D. ,Moreno ,R.A. , Osuyi,P.O. , Ruiz,M.E .an d Singh,L . (eds). 1982. Research onCrop-Anima l Systems. Proceedings ofa Worksho porganize d byCATIE/CARDI/Winroc k International, April 4-7,Turrialba ,Cost aRica . Food andAgricultur e Organization of theUnite d Nations (FAO). 1976. Integration ofLivestoc k with CropProductio n ata Small Farm Level. Report of the ExpertGrou po nLivestoc k Programmes for Small Farmersan dAgricultura l Labourers inAsi a and FarEast . FAO, Bangkok. 225 Food andAgricultur e Organization of theUnite dNation s (FAO). 1978. Report on theAgro-Ecologica lZone sProject . Vol.1 : Methodology andResult s forAfrica . FAO,Rome . Food andAgricultur e Organization ofth eUnite dNation s (FAO). 1981. Agriculture: Toward 2000. Economican d Social Development SeriesNo .23 . FAO,Rome . Food andAgricultur e Organization of theUnite dNation s (FAO). 1983a. The State of Food andAgricultur e 1982. FAOAgricultur e Series No. 15. FAO,Rome . Food andAgricultur e Organization of theUnite dNation s (FAO). 1983b. EthiopianAgricultura l ResearchProject . PreparationReport . FAO/WorldBan k Cooperative Programme. InvestmentCentre . FAO, Rome. Food andAgricultur e Organization of theUnite dNation s (FAO). 1984a. Animal Energy inAgricultur e inAfric aan dAsia . FAOAnima l Production and HealthPape rNo .42 . FAO,Rome . Foodan dAgricultur eOrganizatio n of theUnite dNation s (FAO). 1984b. Reporto f the FAOExper tConsultatio n on Improvingth e Efficiency of Small-scale Livestock Production inAsia : A SystemsApproach , held inBangko k 6-10 December 1983. FAO,Rome . Food andAgricultur e Organization of theUnite dNation s (FAO). 1985. FAQProductio nYearbook . FAO,Rome . Food andAgricultur eOrganizatio n of theUnite dNation s (FAO). 1986a. AfricanAgriculture : TheNex t 25Years .FAD ,Rome . Foodan dAgricultur eOrganizatio n of theUnite dNation s (FAO). 1986b. Atlas ofAfrica nAgriculture . AfricanAgriculture : TheNex t 25 Years. FAO,Rome . Food andAgricultur e Organization of theUnite dNation s (FAO). 1986c. ApportsPublic sau xpay se ndéveloppemen tdan sl e secteur de l'élevage. Evolution etventilation . Comitéde sproduits : Groupe Intergouvernemental sur laviande . Douzième session 26-30 janvier,FAO ,Rome . Food andAgricultur e Organization of theUnite d Nations (FAO). 1986d. HighlandsReclamatio nStud yEthiopia . FinalReport . Report in twovolume sprepare d for theGovernmen t ofEthiopia . FAO,Rome . Food andAgricultur e Organization of theUnite dNation s (FAO). 1987a. The FifthWorl d FoodSurvey . FAO,Rome . Food andAgricultur eOrganizatio n of theUnite dNation s (FAO). 1987b. CountryTables . Basicdat a on theagricultura l sector. Economic and Social PolicyDepartmen t FAO,Rome . Friedrich,K.H. , Slangen,A.V.E. ,Belette ,S . 1973. Initial Farm Management Survey 1972-73. Institute ofAgricultura l Research, AddisAbeba . 226 Fresco,L . 1984. ComparingAnglophon ean dFrancophon eApproache s to Farming SystemsResearc h and Extension. Paper prepared for the FourthAnnua l Conference on Farming SystemsResearc h at Kansas StateUniversity ,Octobe r 1984,Manhattan ,Kansas . Galal, E.S.E.,Awgiche wKassahun ,Kebed eBeyene ,Gojja m Yohannesan d O'Donovan,P.O.B . 1979. A studyo n fattening Ethiopian sheep:I . Performance ofhighlan d lambsunde r feed-lotconditions . EthiopianJourna l ofAgricultura l Sciences,1(1) :pp . 93-98. Galal,E.S.E. ,Taylor ,M.S. ,Tsadik ,T.T .an dGojja mYohannes . 1981. Dry seasongrazin g of lambso n cultivated pasture and their subsequent finishingperformance . Ethiopian Journal of Agricultural Sciences,3(1) :pp .15-29 . Gebrehiwet,L . 1987. The Statuso fPastur e and ForageResearc h and Development inEthiopia . In: Kebede,B .an d L.J. Lambourne (eds). TheStatu so fLivestock ,Pastur e and ForageResearc h and Development inEthiopia . Proceedingso f theworksho phel d in AddisAbeba ,8-1 0 January 1985. Institute ofAgricultura l Research,Addi sAbeba . Gebrewold,Alemu . 1987. The Statuso fBee fCattl eResearc h inEthiopia . In: Kebede,B .an d Lambourne,L.J . (eds). The Statuso f Livestock,Pastur e and ForageResearc han dDevelopmen t in Ethiopia. Proceedings of theworksho phel d inAddi sAbeba , 8-10 January 1985. Instituteo fAgricultura l Research,Addi sAbeba . Gemechu,Bahr uan d EphraimMamo . 1979. A Preliminary Survey of Bovine Fascioliasis inEthiopia . Ethiopian Journal ofAgricultura l Sciences.Vo l 1(1):pp .5-lT i Getahun,Amare . 1977. Raising theproductivit y ofpeasan t farmers in Ethiopia. Journal of theAssociatio n forth eAdvancemen t of Agricultural Science inAfric a 4(1):pp . 27-40. Getahun,Amare . 1978a. Zonationo f theHighland so fTropica lAfrica : TheEthiopia n Highlands. Working Paper. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Getahun,Amare . 1978b. Agricultural Systems inEthiopia . Journal of Agricultural Systems 3(4):pp .281-294 . Getahun,Amare . 1980. Agro-Climatesan dAgricultura l Systems in Ethiopia. Agricultural Systems 5(1):pp . 39-50. Getahun,Amare . 1984.Stabilit y and Instability ofMountai n Ecosystems inEthiopia . MountainResearc h and Development 4(1):pp . 39-44. Getahun,Amar e and Kirkby,R . 1987. TropicalAfrica n Mountain Environments and their Farming Systems. Paper presented at the InternationalWorksho po nMountai nAgricultur e and CropGeneti c Resources,Kathmandu , February16-19 . Ghose,A.K . 1985. Transforming FeudalAgriculture : Agrarian Changes in Ethiopia Since 1974. The Journal ofDevelopmen t Studies 22(1): pp. 127-149.- 227 Giglietti,R . and Stevan,M.R . 1986. Agro-EcologicCharacteristic s of Four PeasantAssociation s around ILCAResearc h Station ofDebr e Berhan. Report ofa post-graduat e trainingperiod . ILCA,Addi s Abeba. Gilbert,E.H. ,Norman ,D.W . andWinch ,F.E . 1980. Farming systems Research: A CriticalAppraisal . MSURura l Development PaperNo . 6. Departmento fAgricultura l Economics,Michiga n State University,Eas tLansing . Glenn,J.C. , Tessema,S. ,Mziray ,P .an dHolland ,G.L . 1963. Preliminaryobservatio no nth emil kproductio no fBoran a type cattle inEthiopia . East-AfricanAgricultura l and Forestry Journal.No .28 :pp .221 . Goe,M.R . 1983.Curren t Status ofResearc h onAnima l Traction. World Animal Review No.45 :pp .2-17 . FAO,Rome . Goe,M.R . 1987. Animal Traction on Smallholder Farms inth e Ethiopian Highlands.Ph.D .Dissertation ,Dept .Anima l Science,Cornel l University, Ithaca,N.Y . Goe,M.R .an dR.E .McDowell . 1980. AnimalTraction : Guidelines for Utilisation. Cornell InternationalAgricultura l Development. Mimeograph No.81 . CornellUniversity , Ithaca,Ne wYork . Goe,M.R . andGryseels ,G . 1983. Animal Traction: A Technology for Smallholder Farmer. "TheCourie r EEC-ACP"8(2) :pp . 56-58. Goebel,W. A andOdenyo ,V.A.O . 1984. Assistance toLand-us e Planning, Ethiopia. Agroclimatic resources inventory for land-use planning. Technical report two inthre evolumes . AG:DP/ETH/78/003 . FAO, Rome. Goericke,F.V . 1979. Social and Political Factors Influencing the Application ofLan dRefor mMeasure s inEthiopia . Research Centre for InternationalAfrica n Development,Verla g Breitenbach, Saarbrücken. Governmento fEthiopia . 1975. A Proclamation toProvid e for the Public Ownershipo fRura l Lands. ProclamationNo .31 ,Addi sAbeba . Grandin,B.E . 1987. Pastoral culture and rangemanagement : Recent lessons fromMaaisailand . ILCABulleti n 28: pp.7-13 . ILCA, AddisAbeba . Groenewold, H.H. 1983. SomeObservation s onLivestoc k inAsia . Mimeograph. FAO/WorldBan k Cooperative Programme. FAO,Rome . Griffin,K .an d Hay,R . 1985. Problems ofAgricultura l Development in SocialistEthiopia : An overviewan d a suggested strategy. The Journal ofPeasan t Studies 13(1): pp.37-66 . Gryseels,G . 1979. A FinancialAnalysi s of Some Smallholder DairyFarms . Reporto n theDD ADair y Project. Mimeograph, ILCA,Addi sAbeba . 228 Gryseels,G . andAstatke ,A . 1982. On-FarmEvaluatio n of Improved Technologies: TheUs eb y Smallholders ofa Single IndigenousO x for CropCultivation . Research Protocol,Highland sProgramme , ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Gryseels,G . 1983a. Livestock inFS R forSmallholde rAgriculture : ILCA'sHighland s Programme. In: Government of theRepubli c of Rwanda and the International Service forNationa l Agricultural Research. Report ofa Semina r onAgricultura l Research inRwanda : Assessment andPerspectives .ISNAR ,Th eHague ,Netherlands . Gryseels,G . 1983b. LaRecherch e Zootechnique auRwanda . Consultant's Report to the IBRD. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Gryseels,G . andAnderson ,F.M . 1983a. Research on Farman d Livestock Productivity inth eEthiopia nHighlands . Initial Results 1977-1980. ILCAResearc h ReportNo.4 . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . GryseelsG . andAnderson ,F.M . 1983b. Farming SystemsResearc h in ILCA'sHighland sProgramme . FarmingSystem sSuppor tProjec t Newsletter 1(3):pp .7-10 . FSSP,Universit yo f Florida, Gainesville. Gryseels,G . 1984. On-farmanima l traction research: Experiences in Ethiopiawit h theIntroductio no f theUs eo fSingl eOxe n for Crop Cultivation. In: CorneliaButle r Flora (ed). Proceedings of KansasStat eUnivesity' s 1983Farmin g SystemsResearc h Symposium. Animals inth eFarmin g System. PaperNo.6 ,Kansa sStat e University,Manhattan ! Gryseels,G . andGoe ,M.R . 1984. Energy Flowso n Smallholder Farms in theEthiopia n Highlands. ILCABulleti n 17:pp .2-9 . ILCA,Addi s Abeba. Gryseels,G . andWhalen , I.T. 1984. Incorporating Nutritional Goals into InternationalAgricultura l Research. An ILCAperspective . In:Pe r Pinstrup-Anderson,Ala nBer gan dMarti n Forman (eds). InternationalAgricultura l Researchan dHuma nNutrition . IFPRI/UN Administrative Committeeo nCoordination . Sub-Committee on Nutrition. IFPRI,Washington ,D.C . Gryseels,G. ,Wagenaar ,M .an dAnderson ,F.M . 1984a. The Impacto n Incomean d HumanNutritio n of Improving Livestock Production in Smallholder Subsistence Farming Systems: A Case Study from the EthiopianHighlands . Paper presented at the IFPRI/SCNWorksho p on Economic andNutritio nRelate d Programan d Policy Implicationso f Shifts fromSemi-Subsistenc e toCommercia lAgriculture : TheNee d forResearch . AirlieHouse ,Virginia ,3- 5 December. ILCA,Addi s Abeba. Gryseels,G. ,Astatke ,A. ,Anderson ,F.M . andAssamene wG . 1984b. The Use of SingleOxe n forCro pCultivatio n inEthiopia . ILCA Bulletin 18: pp.20-25 . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . 229 Gryseels,G . 1985. Someconsideration sabou t livestock inth e diagnostic phaseo fFSR . Background paper prepared forth e "NationalOrientatio nWorksho po n Farming SystemsResearc h in Ethiopia",organize d by the Instituteo fAgricultura l Research 23-26 September. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Gryseels,G . andAnderson ,F.M . 1985. TheUs eo fCrossbre d Dairy Cows asDraf tAnimals : Experiences fromth eEthiopia nHighlands . In: T.L.Nordblom ,A.K.H .Ahme d andG.R . Potts (eds). Research Methodologyfo r Livestock On-FarmTrials . Proceedings ofa workshophel da t ICARDA,Aleppo ,Syria ,25-2 8March . IDRC, Ottawaan d ICARDA,Aleppo . Gryseels,G . andAssamenew ,G . 1985. LinksBetwee nLivestoc k and Crop Production inth e EthiopianHighlands . ILCANewslette r 4(2):pp . 5-6. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Gryseels,G . 1986.Difficultie s inEvaluatin gOn-Far m Experiments with Livestock: examples fromth eEthiopia nhighlands . In: Steve Kearl (ed). Livestock inMixe d Farming Systems: Research methodsan dpriorities . FSSPNetwor k ReportNo.2 . Proceedings of the ILCA/FSSPWorksho po n "Livestock inmixe d farming systems" held at ILCA,24-2 7Jun e 1985. FSSP,Universit yo fFlorida , Gainesville. Gryseels,G . andDurkin ,J . 1986. Some factorsaffectin g grain production inth eEthiopia nhighlands . Workingdocument , HighlandsProgramme ,ILCA ,Addi sAbeba . Gryseels,G . and Jutzi,S . 1986a. Regenerating Farming Systems after Drought: ILCA'sOx/See d Project. ILCANewslette r 5(1): pp. 1-3 ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Gryseels,G . and Jutzi,S . 1986b. Regenerating Farming systems after Drought: ILCA'sOx/See d Project,198 5Results . Mimeograph HighlandsProgramme . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Gryseels,G . and DeBoodt ,K . 1986. Integration ofCrossbre d Cows (Boranx Friesian)o n Smallholder Farms inth eDebr e ZeitAre a of the EthiopianHighlands . MimeographHighland s Programme,ILCA , AddisAbeba . Gryseels,G. ,Mclntire ,J . andAnderson ,F.M . 1986a. Researchwit h a Farming SystemsPerspectiv e at ILCA. ILCABulleti n 25:pp . 17-22. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Gryseels,G. ,Anderson ,F.M. , Durkin,J . andAssamene wGetachew . 1986b. DraughtPowe r and Smallholder GrainProductio n inth e Ethiopian Highlands. ILCANewslette r 5(4):pp .5-7 . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Gryseels,G . 1987. The roleo f livestock inth egeneratio n of smallholder farm income in twodistinc tvertiso l areas of the Central Ethiopianhighlands . Paper presented atth e ILCA/ICRISAT/Governmento fEthiopi a conference on 'Livestock and the ImprovedManagemen to fDee pBlac k Clay Soils (Vertisols) in Sub-SaharanAfrica' ,3 1Augus t - 4Septembe r 1987,ILCA ,Addi s Abeba. 230 Haile,Astatke . 1977. Resultso fexperiment s inforag e cropsan d pasturemanagemen t inth ehighland s of Ethiopia 1971-76. IAR Forage andRang eBulleti nNo .1 .IAR ,Addi sAbeba . Haile,Astatke . 1983. Ecological factors influencing pasture growth and plant selection criteria inth ecentra l highlands ofEthiopia . EthiopianJourna l ofAgricultura l Sciences 5(1):pp . 50-63. Haque, I.an dJutzi ,S . 1984a. Effectso f Improved Drainage and Fertilization onth eGrowt h of ItalianRyegras san dOat so na Soil withVerti c Properties atDebr eBerhan ,Ethiopia . ILCANewslette r Vol. 3(4):pp . 5-6. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Haque, I.an d Jutzi,S . 1984b. Nitrogen Fixation by Forage Legumes in Sub-SaharanAfrica : Potential and Limitations. ILCABulleti n20 : pp. 2-13. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Haque, I.,Jutzi ,S .an dNeate ,P.J.H . (eds). 1986. Potential of Forage Legumes inFarmin g Systemso fSub-Sahara nAfrica . Proceedings ofa workshophel da t ILCA,Addi sAbeba ,Ethiopia ,16-1 9 September 1985. I1CA,Addi sAbeba . Hardaker,J.B . 1979. A Reviewo f Some FarmManagemen t Research Methods for Small-Farm Development inLDC's . Journal ofAgricultura l Economics 30(3): pp.315-327 . Hardaker,J.B. ,Anderson ,J.R . andDillon ,J.L . 1984. Perspectives on Assessing the Impactso f ImprovedAgricultura l Technologies in Developing Countries. Australian Journal ofAgricultura l Economics 28(2). Harrington, L.W. and Tripp,R . 1984. Recommendation Domains: A Framework forOn-Far mResearch . EconomicsProgra mWorkin g Paper 02/84. CIMMYT,Mexico . Harrison,P . 1987. TheGreenin g ofAfrica : Breaking Through inth e Battle forLan dan d Food. An International Institute for Environment andDevelopment-Earthsca n Study. Paladin Grafton Books,London . Harvey,W.R . 1977. User'sguid e toleast-square s andmaximu m likelihood computer program. Ohio StateUniversity , Colombus. Hawkesworth,D.L . (ed). 1984. AdvancingAgricultura l Production in Africa. Proceedings ofCAB' sFirs tScientifi c Conference,Arusha , Tanzania,12-1 8 February 1984. CommonwealthAgricultura l Bureaux, Slough U.K. Hazell,P.B.R . andNorton ,R.D . 1986. Mathematical Programming for EconomicAnalysi s inAgriculture . Macmillan Publishing Company, NewYork . Henricksen,B.L .an d Durkin,J.W .1985 . Moisture availability, cropping period and theprospect s forearl ywarnin g of famine inEthiopia . ILCABulleti n 21:pp .2-9 . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . 231 Heyer,J . 1971. A LinearProgrammin gAnalysi so fConstraint so nPeasan t Farming. FoodResearc h InstituteStudie s 10(1): pp.55-68 . Hoben,A . 1979. Lessons froma Crtica l Examinationo fLivestoc k Projects inAfrica . AIDProgra mEvaluatio nWorkin gPape rNo .26 . USAID,Washington ,D.C . Horton,D . 1986. Assessing the Impacto fInternationa lAgricultura l Researchan dDevelopmen tPrograms . WorldDevelopmen t 14(4): pp. 453-458. Hrabowszky,J.P . 1981. LivestockDevelopment : Toward 2000wit h special reference todevelopin gcountries . WorldAnima lRevie w No.40 : pp. 2-16. FAO,Rome . Huffnagel,H.P . 1961. Agriculture inEthiopia . FAO,Rome . Humphrey,J.M . 1980. TheClassificatio no fWorl d LivestockSystems . StudyPrepare d for theAnima lProductio nan dHealt hDivision . FAO, Rome. InformationTechnolog yan dAgricultura lDevelopment/Agricultura l and IndustrialDevelopmen tBan kEthiopi a (ITAD/AIDBank) . 1986. Draftoxe nevaluatio n study report. AddisAbeba . Institute ofAgricultura lResearc h (IAR). 1969. HolettaResearc h Stationprogres s report forth eperio dApri l 1969t oMarc h1970 , IAR,Addi sAbeba . Instituteo fAgricultura l Research (IAR). 1972. Progress report forth e periodApri l 1971- Marc h 1972. IAR,Addi sAbeba . Instituteo fAgricultura l Research (IAR). 1976. Resultso f experiments inanima lproduction ,1966/67-75 .Anima l ProductionRepor tNo .1 . IAR,Addi sAbeba . Instituteo fAgricultura l Research (IAR). 1979. Handbook forCro p Production inEthiopia . IAR,Addi sAbeba . Instituteo fAgricultura l Research (IAR). 1982a. Animal Science,Forag e andRang eManagemen tDepartmen tprogres s report,198 0 toMarc h 1982. IAR,Addi sAbeba . Instituteo fAgricultura l Research. 1982b. Animal Science,Forag ean d RangeManagemen tDepartmen tprogres s reportApri l 1981 toMarc h 1982. AddisAbeba ,Ethiopia . Institute ofAgricultura l Research. 1983. Animal Science,Forag ean d RangeManagemen tDepartmen tprogres s reportApri l 1982t oMarc h 1983. AddisAbeba ,Ethiopia . InternationalAgricultura l ResearchCenter s (iARCs). 1987. Proceedings ofth eWorksho po nFarmin g SystemsResearch ,17-2 1 February1986 , ICRISATCenter ,India . International CropsResearc h Institute for theSemi-Ari dTropics ,India . 232 International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1978. Animal Production Systems inth ehig hpotentia l highlands of tropical Africa. Workingpape r Highlands Programme.ILCA ,Addi sAbeba . International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1979a. Non Tariff Barriers FacingBee f Tradean d their Impacto nExport s from TropicalAfrica . ILCABulleti n No.5 :pp .4-9 . ILCA,Addi s Abeba. International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1979b. Trypanotolerant Livestock inWes tan dCentra lAfrica . Monograph 2. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1980a. Economic Trends. Livestock Production Prospects forTropica lAfric a inth e Year 2000. ILCABulleti n No.10 ,ILCA ,Addi sAbeba . International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1980b. Pastoral Development Projects. Report ona worksho po n theDesig n and Implementationo fPastora l DevelopmentProject s for Tropical Africa,Addi sAbeba ,25-2 9 February. ILCABulleti nNo .8 , ILCA, AddisAbeba . International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1981a. Animal Traction inSub-Sahara nAfrica . ILCABulleti nNo .14 .ILCA ,Addi s Abeba. International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1981b. ILCA Research 1980. ILCABulleti nNo .13 . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1981c. Dairy Development. ILCABulleti n 11. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1982a. ILCAAnnua l Report 1982. ILCA,Addi sAbeba ,Ethiopia . International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1982b. Debre Berhan Research StationAnnua l Report 1981. ILCA,Addi sAbeba ,Ethiopia . International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1982c. ILCAAnnua l Report 1981. ILCA,Addi sAbeba ,Ethiopia . International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1983a. Pastoral SystemsResearc h insub-Sahara nAfrica . Proceedings of the IDRC/ILCAWorksho phel d at ILCA,21-2 4March . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1983b. ILCAAnnua l Report 1983. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1984. ILCAAnnua l Report 1984. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1986. ILCAAnnua l Report 1985/86. ServingAfrica nAgriculture . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . 233 International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1987a. ILCA's Strategy and Long-Term Plan. AddisAbeba . International Livestock Center forAfric a (ILCA). 1987b. ILCAAnnua l Report 1986/87. A year ofprogres s and change. ILCA,Addi s Abeba. International Service forNationa lAgricultura l Research (ISNAR). 1987. Reviewo fResearc h ProgramManagemen t andManpowe r Planning at the Institute ofAgricultura l Research inEthiopia . TheHague , Netherlands. Jahnke,H.E . 1982. Livestock Production Systemsan d Livestock Development inTropica lAfrica . KielerWissenschaftsverla g Vauk. Kiel,Wes t Germany. Jahnke,H.E. ,an dGetache wAsamenew . 1983. An assessment of the recent pastan dpresen t livestock situation inth eEthiopia nhighlands . EthiopianHighland s Reclamation StudyWorkin g PaperNo .7 . FAQ/Ministryo fAgriculture ,Addi sAbeba . Jahnke,H.E . 1984. Livestock Development in theFramewor k ofa Highland Reclamation Study. EthiopianHighland sReclamatio n Study.Workin g Paper 16. FAO/Ministryo fAgriculture ,Addi sAbeba . Jahnke,H.E. ,Kirschke ,D . and Lagemann,J . 1987. The Impacto f Agricultural Research inTropica lAfrica . A Studyo f the Collaboration between the International andNationa l Research Systems. CGIARStud yPape rNo .21 . World Bank,Washington ,D.C . Jasiorowski,H.A . 1973. TwentyYear swit hN o Progress? World Animal Review No 5:pp .1-5 . Jepsen,O.J .an d Creek,M.J . 1976. Comparative fattening performance of twotype so f cattle inEthiopia . World ReviewAnima l Production 12(1):pp .83-89 . Jolly,A.L . 1952. "Unit Farms". TropicalAgricultur e Trin. 29:pp . 172-179. Jones,W.I .an d Egli,R . 1984. Farming Systems inAfrica . TheGrea t LakesHighland s of Zaire,Rwand aan d Burundi. World Bank Technical PaperNo .27 . World Bank,Washington , D.C. Jutzi,S .an dGryseels ,G . 1984a. Farmers Switch toOat s inth e EthiopianHighlands . ILCANewslette r 3(3):pp .3-4 . ILCA,Addi s Abeba. Jutzi,S .an dGryseels . 1984b. Oats,A NewCro p inth e Ethiopian Highlands. PGRC/E-ILCAGermplas mNewslette r No.5 .Plan t Genetic Resource Centre,Addi sAbeba . Jutzi, S.an dHaque ,I . 1984. Someeffect so f Pan dN/ P fertilization on threeAfrica n clovers (Trifolium tembense,T . rueppellianuman d T. steudneri)o na P-deficieh t vertisol. ILCANewslette r3(2) : pp. 5-6. 234 Jutzi, S.an d Goe,M.R . 1987. DraughtAnima lTechnologie s for the Intensification ofSmallholde r Crop-Livestock Farming inth e EthiopianHighlands . Mimeograph, ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Jutzi,S .an dAbebe ,Mesfin . 1987. ImprovedAgricultura l Utilisation of Vertisols inth eEthiopia n Highlands. An Interinstitutional Approach. In: International Board forSoi lResearc han d Management Inc. (IBSRAM). Management ofVertisol s Under Semi-AridConditions . Proceedingso f the FirstRegiona l Seminar onManagemen t ofVertisol sUnde r Semi-AridConditions , 1-6 December 1986,Nairobi . Jutzi,S. ,Anderson ,F.M . andAstatke ,Abiye . 1987a. Low-cost modifications of the traditional Ethiopian tineploug h for land shapingan d surfacedrainag e ofheav y clay soils: Preliminary results fromon-far mverificatio n trials. ILCABulleti nNo .27 : pp. 28-31. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Jutzi,S. ,Assamenew ,Haque ,I. ,Tedla ,A . andAstatke ,A . 1987b. Intermediate technology for increased foodan d feed production fromdee pblac k clay soils inth eEthiopia n highlands. Paper presented at theFAO/SID ASemina r on Increased Food Production through Low-Cost Food CropsTechnology ,hel d 1-17 March,Harare , Zimbabwe. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Jutzi,S. ,Haque ,I .an dTedla ,A . 1987c. Theproductio n ofanima l feed inth eEthiopia nhighlands : potentialsan d limitations. Paper presented at the FirstNationa l Livestock Conference,Marc h 11-13, IAR,Addi sAbeba . Kahurananga,J . and Tsehay,A . 1984. PreliminaryAssessmen t of Some Annual Ethiopian Trifolium Species forHa y Production. Tropical Grasslands 18(4): pp.215-217 . Kearl,S . (ed). 1986. Livestock inmixe d farming systems. Research Methodsan d Priorities. Proceedings ofa worksho phel d at the International Livestock Center forAfrica ,Addi sAbeba ,Ethiopia , 24-27Jun e 1985. ILCA/FSSP,Universit y ofFlorida . Kebede,Beyene . 1987. The Statuso fDair yResearc han dDevelopmen t in Ethiopia. In: Kebede,B . and L.J. Lambourne (eds). The Status of Livestock,Pastur e and ForageResearc h andDevelopmen t in Ethiopia. Proceedings of theworksho phel d inAddi sAbeba , 8-10 January 1985. Institute ofAgricultura l Research,Addi sAbeba . Kebede,Beyen e and Lambourne,L.J . (eds). 1987. The Statuso f Livestock Pasture and ForageResearc h andDevelopmen t inEthiopia . Proceedings of theworksho p held inAddi sAbeba ,8-1 0 January 1985. IAR,Addi sAbeba . Kiros, FassilG . 1976. An estimate of theproportio n of the potential work-year allocated to socio-culturalobservance s in rural Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal ofDevelopmen t Research 2(2):pp . 15-28. 235 Kiwuwa,G.M. , Trail,J.C.M. ,Kurtu ,M.Y. ,Worku ,G. ,Anderson ,F.M . and Durkin,J . 1983. Crossbred dairycattl eproductivit y inArss i Region,Ethiopia . ILCAResearc hRepor tNo .11 ,ILCA ,Addi sAbeba . Kjaerby, F. 1983. Problemsan d Contradictions inth eDevelopmen t of Ox-Cultivation inTanzania . ResearchRepor tNo .66 . Scandinavian Institute ofAfrica n Studies,Uppsala . Knipscheer,H.C . 1985. Definition ofResearc h Problems. In: Nordblom, T.L.,Ahmed ,A.K.H .an d Potts,G.R . (eds). 1985. Research Methodology forLivestoc k On-Farm Trials: Procceedings ofa workshophel d atAleppo ,Syria ,25-2 8March . IDRC.Ottaw aam d ICARDA.Aleppo . Knutsson,K.E .an d Selinus,R . 1970. Fasting inEthiopia . An Anthropological andNutritiona lStudy . TheAmerica nJourna l of ClinicalNutritio n 23(7): pp.956-969 . Leander,L . 1969.A Case Study ofPeasan t Farming inth eDigel u and YelomaAreas ,Chilal oAwraja ,Ethiopia . CADUpublicatio nNo .22 . ChilaloAgricultura l DevelopmentUnit ,Addi sAbeba . Lebbie,S.H.B . 1984. Food Security inAfric a- Th eRol e of Farm Livestock. In: A.O.Tantaw y (ed). Proceedings of theAFA A Fifth General Conference on Food Security inAfrica ,Swazilan d 22-28 April. Association of Facultieso fAgricultur e inAfrica ,Rabat . Leithmann-Fruh,G.A . 1983.Scop e ofQuantitativ eAnalysi so f Development Strategies inSubsistence-Oriente dFarms . TheCas eo fSmallholde r Development inth eEthiopia nHighlands" ! Marchaiun d Natzenbacher Wissenschaftsverlag, Krefeld. Lele,Uma . 1975. TheDesig n ofRura lDevelopment . Lessons fromAfrica . Published for theWorl d Bank by theJoh nHopkin sUniversit yPress , Londonan dBaltimore . Lele,Uma . 1984. RuralAfrica : Modernization,Equit yan d Long-Term Development. In: CK. Eicher and J.M. Staatz (eds). Agricultural Development inth eThir dWorld . John Hopkins University Press,Baltimor e andLondon . Makonnen,Telahun . 1978. Agriculture inTegula tan d Bulga. Socio-Economic Study ofSubsistenc e Farmers. HighlandsProgramme , ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Makonnen,Telahu n andGetache wAssamenew . 1978. Traditional Agricultural Systems inAd a District,Ethiopia . Mimeograph, ILCA, AddisAbeba . Marousek,G.E. ,Vrooman ,C.W. , Thompson,L.I .an dBroadbent ,E.E . 1969. Development of the EthiopianLivestoc k Industry. Report No.7. Stanford Research Institute ,Menl oPark . Maynard, L.A., Loosli,J.K. , Hintz,J.F. ,Warner ,R.G . 1979. Animal Nutrition. 7th Edition,M cGra wHil l Pub.,Ne wDelhi . 236 Maxwell, S. 1986a. TheRol eo fCas eStudie s inFannin g Systems Research. AgriculturalAdministratio n No.21 :pp .147-180 . Maxwell, S. 1986b. FoodAi d toEthiopia : Disincentive effectsan d commercialdisplacement . Instituteo fDevelopmen tStudies , University ofSussex . McCown,R.L. ,Haaland ,G . and DeHaan ,C . 1979. The Interaction Between Cultivation and Livestock Production inSemi-A ri dAfrica . In: A.E. Hall,G.H .Cannel l andH.W .Lawton . Agriculture in Semi-Arid Environments,Springer-Verlag ,Ne wYork . McDowell,R.E . 1978a. AreW e Prepared toHel pSmal l Farmers in Developing Countries? Journal ofAmina l Science 47(5): pp. 1184-1194. McDowell,R.E . 1978b. FactorsLimitin gAnima l Production inMixe d Farm Systems. Paperpresente d at theConferenc e on "Integrated Crop andAnima l Production toOptimiz e Resource Utilisation on Small Farms inDevelopin g Countries",Oct .18-23 ,Rockefelle r Foundation Conference Center,Bellagio ,Italy . CornellUniversity ,Ithaca . McDowell,R.E . 1979. Improvemento fLivestoc k Production inWar m Climates. W.H.Freema nan dCompany ,Sa nFrancisco . McDowell,R.E .an dHildebrand ,P . 1980. Integrated Cropan dAnima l Production: Making theMos to fResource sAvailabl e toSmal l Farms inDevelopin g Countries. Proceedingso fa conference organized by theRockefelle r Foundation,Bellagi oOctobe r 18-23, 1978. Working PaperRockefelle r Foundation,Ne wYork . Mclntire,J . 1984. SurveyCost san d Rural EconomicsResearch . In: P.J. Matlon,Cantrell ,R. , King,D . andBenoit-Cattin ,M . (eds). Coming FullCircle : Farmer's Participation inth eDevelopmen t of Technology. IDRC,Ottawa . Mclntire,J . 1985. Allocation ofLivestoc k Research Resources in Sub-SaharanAfrica . ILCABulleti nNo .22 :pp .2-8 . ILCA,Addi s Abeba. Mclntire J. 1986. On theAllege d Difficulties ofOn-Far mResearc hwit h Livestock. In: Kearl,S . (ed). Livestock inMixe d Farming Systems. ResearchMethod san d Priorities.FSS PNetwor k ReportNo . 2. Proceedings of the ILCA/FSSPWorksho p held at ILCA,Jun e 24-27 1985. FSSP,Universit y of Florida,Gainesville . Mclntire,J . and Seyoum,E . 1986. HerdMode l for EconomicAnalysis . Mimeograph Livestock EconomicsUnit ,ILCA ,Addi sAbeba . Mclntire,J . and Debrah,S . 1986. ForageResearc h inSmallholde r and PastoralProductio n Systems. Paper presented at theARNA B Workshop on "TheUtilizatio n of CropResidue s andAgro-Industria l By-Productswit h Special Emphasis onTechnologie sApplicabl e to Small-ScaleAfrica n Farmers",Blantyre ,Malawi ,Augus t31 - September 5. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . 237 Mclntire,J . andGryseels ,G . 1987. Crop-Livestock Interactions in Sub-SaharanAfric a and their Implications for Farming Systems Research. ExperimentalAgricultur e 23(6): pp.235-243 . Mekuria,M .an d Franzel,S . 1987. Farming SystemsResearc h inth e Institute ofAgricultura l Research,Ethiopia : Evolution,Impact , Issues. FSSPNewslette r 5(3):pp .16-20 . FSSP,Universit y of Florida,Gainesville . Mela,Awole . 1985. An EmpiricalApproac h forEstablishin g Research Priorities for SmallholderAgricultur e inEthiopia : An Economic Analysis. Ph.D.Thesis ,Universit y ofWales ,Aberystwyth . Mellor,J.W. , Delgado,C.L .an dBlackie ,M.J . (ed). 1987. Accelerating Food Production inSub-Sahara nAfrica . JohnHopkin s University Press,Baltimore . Menz,K.M . and Knipscheer,H.C . 1981. Location Specificity Problem in Farming SystemsResearch . Agricultural Systems 7:pp .95-103 . Merrill-Sands,D . 1986a. TheTechnolog yApplication s Gap: Overcoming Constraints toSmall-Far mDevelopment . FAOResearc h and Technology PaperNo .1 . FAO,Rome . Merrill-Sands,D . 1986b. Farming SystemsResearch : Classificationo f Termsan d Concepts. ExperimentalAgricultur e 22(2): pp.87-104 . Miller,D.S. ,Baker ,J. , Bowden,M. , Evans,E. ,Holt ,J. , McKeag, R.J., Meinertzhagen,I. ,Mumford ,P.M. , Oddy,D.J. , Rivers,J.P.W.R. , Sevenhuysen,G. , Stock,M.J. ,Watts ,M. ,Kebede, A. , Wolde-Gabriel,Y .an dWolde-Gabriel ,Z . 1976. The Ethiopia Applied Nutrition Project. Proc.R . Soc.Lond .B 194,23-48 . Ministry ofAgricultur e (Ethiopia). 1968. Fertilizer Demonstrations 1967/68. Freedom fromHunge r Campaign,FA OFertilize r Programme. MOA Extension Service,Addi sAbeba . Ministry ofAgricultur e (Ethiopia). 1975. National Policyo n Sheep Research and Development. Reportprepare d bya Technical Committee. AddisAbeba' . Ministry ofAgricultur e (Ethiopia). 1977. Report on the Small-Scale Agricultural SampleCensu s1976/77 .Vol .I : LandUtilizatio n and CropProduction . Vol.11: Livestock and Poultry. Statistics Section,Plannin g and Programming Department,Addi sAbeba . Ministry ofAgricultur e (Ethiopia). 1979. Area,Productio n andYiel d of Major Crops for theWhol e Country andb yRegio n in1974/7 5- 1978/79. AddisAbeba . Ministry ofAgricultur e (Ethiopia). 1980. Distribution ofLan d and Farm Inputsamon g the Farmers ofEthiopi awit h Special Reference to the Distribution ofTractio n Power. AddisAbeba . Ministry ofAgricultur e (Ethiopia). 1986a. Farming SystemsSurveys : Resultsan dAnalysi s for Central Zone. Agricultural Advisory Team,Workin g PaperNo .14 . Agricultural DevelopmentDepartment , AddisAbeba . 238 Ministryo fAgricultur e (Ethiopia). 1986b. FarmModel s andBudget s for theMai n Farming Systems inCentra l Zone. Agricultural Advisory TeamWorkin g PaperNo .23 . Agricultural Development Department, AddisAbeba . Ministry ofAgricultur e (Ethiopia). 1986c. Cattle Breeding Policy of Ethiopia. Animal and FisheryResource sDevelopmen t Main Department,Addi sAbeba . Mitchelhill,B.K . 1986. Farmer Land Classifications and Their Implications. Agricultural Development Department,Ministr y of Agriculture,Addi sAbeba . Montsma,G . 1962. Observations onMil k Yield,Cal fGrowt h and ConversionRate ,o nThre eType s ofCattl e inGhana . II.Effect s ofPlan e onNutrition . TropicalAgricultur e Trin. 39:pp . 123-129. Mukassa-Mugerwa, E. 1981. A Study ofTraditiona l Livestock Production inAd a Districto f Ethiopia. Mimeograph. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Munzinger,P . (ed). 1982. Animal Traction inAfrica .GTZ ,Eschborn . Musangi,R.S . 1971. The roleo f ruminant livestock inmixe d farming in TropicalAfrica . In: Paperspresente d toth eConferenc e on Agricultural Research and Production inAfric a September 1971. Supplement toVolum e 2o f theJourna l of theAssociatio n for the Advancement ofAgricultura l Sciences inAfrica ,Addi sAbeba . National Fertilizer and InputsUni t (NFIU). 1987. Analysis of theMaiz e Trialsan d Fertilizer Recommandations Based onEPI DDat a (1971-1974). NFIUWorkin g PaperNo .17 . Ministry ofAgriculture , AddisAbeba . Nekby,B . 1971. CADU. An Ethiopian Experiment inDevelopin g Peasant Farming. PrismaPublishers ,Stockholm . Nestel,B . (ed). 1984. Development ofAnima l Production Systems. World Animal Science,A2 ~ Elsevier,Amsterdam . Nestel,B. ,Pratt ,D.J. , Thome,M . and Tribe,D . 1972. Animal Production andResearc h inTropica lAfrica . Reporto f theTas k ForceCommissione d by theAfrica n Livestock Sub-Committeeo n the Consultative Groupo n International Agricultural Research. CGIAR, World Bank,Washington ,D.C . Newcombe,K . 1984. An Economic Justification forRura lAfforestation : TheCas eo fEthiopia . EnergyDepartmen t PaperNo .16 . World Bank,Washingto nD.C . Nie,N.H ,Hadla i Hull,C , Jenkins,J.G. , Steinbrenner,K .an d Bent,D.H . 1975. SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. Second edition" McGraw-Hill,Ne wYork ! 239 Nordblom,T.L. ,Ahmed ,A.K.H ,an dPotts ,G.R . (eds). 1985. Research Methodology for Livestock On-FarmTrials : Procceedings ofa workshophel da tAleppo ,Syria ,25-2 8March . IDRC,Ottaw a and ICARDA,Aleppo . Norman,D.W . 1978. Farming SystemsResearc h toImprov e the Livelihood of Small Farmers. AmericanJourna l ofAgricultura l Economics60 : pp.813-818 . Norman,D.W . 1980. The Farming systemsResearc hApproach : Relevancy for theSmal l Farmer. MSUDevelopmen t PaperNo .8 . Michigan StateUniversity ,Eas tLansing . Norman,D . and Collinson,M . 1985. Farming SystemsResearc h inTheor y andPractice . In: J.V. Remenyi (ed).Agricultura l Systems Research forDevelopin g Countries: proceedings ofa n internationalworksho phel d atHawkesbur yAgricultura l College, Richmond,N.S.W. , 12-15May . ACIARproceeding sNo.11 . ACIAR, Canberra. Obradovic,0 .an d Haile,A . 1971. Studieso n thePotentia l ofBoran a Cattle. In: Paperspresente d toth eConferenc e onAgricultura l Research and Production inAfric a September 1971. Supplement to Volume 2o f theJourna l of theAssociatio n for theAdvancemen t of Agricultural Sciences inAfrica ,pp .303-308 .Addi sAbeba . O'Donovan, P.B., Gebrewold,A. ,Kebed eBeyen ean dGalal ,E.S.E . 1978. Fattening studieswit h crossbreed s (EuropeanX Zebu)bulls : 1. Performance ondiet so fnativ eha yan d concentrates. Journal of Agricultural Science 90:pp .425-429 . O'Donovan, P.B. 1980. Cattleproductio n inEthiopia . IARAnima l ScienceBulleti nNo .9 . IAR,Addi sAbeba . O'Mahoney, F.an d EphraimBekele . 1985. Traditional Butter Making in Ethiopia and Possible Improvements. ILCABulleti nNo .22 :pp . 9-14. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . O'Mahoney, F.an d Peters,K.J . 1987. Options forSmallholde r Milk Processing inSub-Sahara nAfrica . ILCABulleti nNo .27 :pp .2-17 . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Pingali,Prabh u L.,Bigot ,Y .an d Binswanger,H . 1986. Agricultural Mechanization and theEvolutio no f Farming Systems in Sub-Saharan Africa. JohnHopkin sUniversit y Press,Baltimore . Pinstrup-Anderson,P . 1983. IncorporatingNutritiona l Goals into the Designo f InternationalAgricultura l Research. Foodan d Nutrition Bulletin 5(3):pp .47-56. Powell,J.M . 1986. Manure for Cropping: A case study fromCentra l Nigeria. ExperimentalAgricultur e 22:pp . 15-24. Powell,J.M . and Taylor-Powell,E . 1984. Cropping by Fulani Agropastoralists inCentra lNigeria . ILCABulleti n 19:pp . 21-27. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . 240 Preston,T.R . and Lewis,K.G . 1984. TheUs eo fLiqui d Urea-Molasses Mixture forth eDrough t Feedingo fLivestock . Mimeograph, ILCA, AddisAbeba . Preston,T.R . 1985. Molassesa sa nAnima l Feed/Supplement with particular reference toEthiopia . ForageNetwor k inEthiopi a Newsletter No.7 :pp .14-19 . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Prince Leopold Instituteo fTropica lMedicine . 1982. TropicalAnima l Production forth eBenefi to fMan .Proceeding so fth e International Colloquim 17-18December . PrinceLeopol d Institute ofTropica lMedicine ,Antwerp . Rahmato,Dessalegn . 1984. AgrarianRefor m inEthiopia . Scandinavian Institute ofAfrica n Studies,Uppsala . Relief andRehabilitatio n Commission (RRC). 1985. The Challenges of Drought. Ethiopia'sDecad e ofStruggl e inRelie f and Rehabilitation. RRC,Addi sAbeba . Remenyi,J.V . (ed). 1985. Agricultural systems research for developing countries: proceedings ofa n internationalworksho phel d at HawkesburyAgricultura l College,Richmond ,N.S.W . 12-15May . ACIARProceeding sNo .11 . ACIAR,Canberra . Revilla,I.M .an dAmir ,P . 1986. On-FarmLivestoc k Research: A Partial Annotated Bibliography. Winrock International,Arkansas . Rodriguez,G . andAnderson ,F.M . 1985. FarmRisks : A studyo fa mixe d farming system inhighlan d Ethiopia. Paper presented at the IFPRI/DSEWorksho po n Sourceso f IncreasedVariabilit y inCerea l Yields,26-2 9Novembe r 1985,Feldafing ,Wes tGermany . ILCA,Addi s Abeba. Roorda,R.M.M . 1984. Effects of soilburnin g ("guie")o n physics-chemical properties of soils inSheno ,Debr eBerha n and Chachaarea so fEthiopia . Dissertation submitted toth eNationa l Agricultural College,Deventer ,Th eNetherlands . Ruthenberg,H . 1980. FarmingSystem s inth eTropics . Third Edition. ClarendonPress ,Oxford . Sandford,S . 1981. Reviewo fWorl dBan k LivestockActivitie s inDr y TropicalAfrica . IBRD,Washingto nD.C . Sandford,S . 1983. Management of Pastoral Development inth eThir d World.Oversea sDevelopmen tInstitute ,London ,i nassociatio nwit h JohnWile yan d sons,.Chichester . Sandford,S . 1986. Livestock and Food Production inSub-Sahara nAfrica . Mimeograph, ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Sands,M.W . 1983. Role ofLivestoc k on Smallholder Farms inWester n Kenya: Prospects for aDua l Purpose Goat. Ph.D.Thesis ,Cornel l University, Ithaca. 241 Sargent,M .W. ,Lichte ,J.A. ,Matlon ,P.J . andBloom ,E . 1981. An Assessment ofAnima l Traction inFrancophon eWes tAfrica . African Rural EconomyWorkin g PaperNo .34 ,Michiga n State University, EastLansing . Sarma,J.S .an dYeung ,P . 1985. Livestock Products inth eThir dWorld : PastTrend san d Projections to199 0an d 2000. ResearchRepor tNo . 49. International Food PolicyResearc h Institute (IFPRI), Washington,D.C . SAS Institute Inc. 1985. SASUser' sGuide : Basics,Versio n 5Edition . SAS Institute Inc.,Cary ,Nort hCarolina . Schaar,J. , Brännäng,E .an dMeskel ,L.B . 1981. BreedingActivitie s of theEthio-Swedis h IntegratedRura lDevelopmen t Project:Mil k Productiono f Zebuan d Crossbreed Cattle. WorldAnima lRevie w37 : pp. 31-36. FAO,Rome . Schep,P .an dJutzi ,S . 1985. A performance comparison ofbroadcas t and row-plantedwhea t crops inth eEthiopia n highlands. Mimeo. Highlands Programme,ILCA ,Addi sAbeba . Schneider,H.K . 1984. Livestock inAfrica n Culture and Society: A Historical Perspective. In: J.R. Simpsonan d P. Evangelou(ed) . Livestock Development inSub-Sahara nAfrica .Constraints , Prospects,Policy" ! Westview Press,Boulder ,Colorad o Shaner,W.W. ,Philipps ,P.F . and Schmehl,W.R . 1982.Farmin g Systems Researchan dDevelopment : A Guidr'"-- ' —n —'~ —-—•--•- Westview Press,Boulder ,Colorad o Showamare,Mesere t (ed). 1983. ClimaticRecord s for ILCAResearc h Sites. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Showamare,Mesere t (ed). 1984. ClimaticRecord s for ILCAResearc h Sites. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Showamare,Mesere t (ed). 1985. ClimaticRecord s for ILCAResearc h Sites. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Showamare,Mesere t (ed). 1986. ClimaticRecord s for ILCAResearc h Sites. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Shumba,E.M . 1985. Animal andHuma nPowe r inCommuna lAgriculture . Zimbabwe ScienceNew sVol .19(3-4) :pp . 32-34.Harare . Sidahmed,A.E. ,Onim ,J.F.M .Mukhebi ,A.W. ,Shavulimo ,R.S. ,D eBoer , A.J. and Fitzhugh,H.A . 1985. On-FarmTrial swit h Dual-purpose Goatso n Small Farms inWester nKenya . In: Nordblom,T.L. ,Ahmed , A.K.H.an d Potts,G.R . (eds). 1985. ResearchMethodolog y for Livestock On-Farm Trials: Proceedings ofa worksho phel d at ICARDA,Aleppo ,Syria ,25-2 8March . IDRC,Ottaw a and ICARDA, Aleppo. Simmonds,N.W . 1985. Farming SystemsResearch . A Review. World Bank Technical Paper Nr.43 . World Bank,Washingto n D.C. 242 Simpson,J.R . and Evangelou,P . 1984. Livestock Development in Sub-SaharanAfrica . Constraints,Prospects ,Policy . Westview Press,Boulder ,Colorado . Simpson, J.R. 1985. World Livestock Systems: EconomicAnalysi s and Project Planning. Draft. University of Florida,Gainesville . Sisay,Asefa . 1983. AnAnalysi so fResourc eAllocatio n ina Household FarmEconomy : Cases fromChilal o Province,Ethiopia . Ethiopian Journal ofDevelopmen tResearc hVol . 5-7 (2). Institute of DevelopmentResearch ,Addi sAbeb aUniversity . Sisay,Seleshi . 1980. Agricultural Systems inEthiopi a- A Review Article. Agricultural SystemsNo .5 :pp .29-38 . Slikkerveer,L.J . 1986. Ethiopie. Landendocumentatie Nr.3 . Koninklijk InstituutVoo r deTropen ,Amsterdam . Soller,H. ,Reed ,J.D . andButterworth ,M.H . 1986. Intake and utilisation of feedb ywor k oxen. ILCANewslette r 5(2):pp .5-7 . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Special Program forAfrica nAgricultura l Research (SPAAR). 1987. Guidelines forStrengthenin g NationalAgricultura l Research Systems inSub-Sahara nAfrica . World Bank,Washington ,D.C . Sprague,H.B . 1976. Combined Crop/Livestock Farming Systems for Developing Countrieso f theTropic san d Sub-Tropics. Technical SeriesBulleti nNo .19 . Office ofAgriculture ,Technica l AssistanceBureau ,Agenc y for InternationalDevelopment , Washington,D.C . Stahl,M . 1973. Political Contradictions inAgricultura l Development: A studyo f theMP Pproject s in southernEthiopia . Research Report 14, Scandinanvian Institute ofAfrica n Studies,Uppsala . Steinfeld,H . 1984. The impacto f storingwate r inexcavate d pondso n water constraints. Report ofa studyperio d at ILCA. Technical University,Berlin ,Wes tGermany . Stommes,E .an d Seleshi Sisaye. 1979. TheAdministratio n of Agricultural Development Programmes:A look at the Ethiopian Approach- Part 1. AgriculturalAdministratio n 6(3):pp . 221-239. Stotz,D . 1983.Productio n Techniquesan dEconomic so f Smallholder Livestock Production Systems inKenya . FarmManagemen t Handbook ofKeny aVolum e IV.. Ministr yo f Livestock Development,Nairobi . Stroud,A . 1985A . On-FarmExperimentation : Conceptsan dPrinciples. Teachingnotes ,CIMMY TEaster nAfrica n EconomicsProgramme , Nairobi. Stroud,A . 1985b. Guidelines forUsin gOF EMethodolog y inCrops , Livestock andAgroforestr y Experimentation. Teachingnotes , CIMMYTEaster nAfrica n Economics Programme,Nairobi . 243 Stuart,H.C .an d Stevensen,S.S . 1959. Growthan dDevelopment .In : Nelson,W.E . (ed). Textbook ofPediatric s7t hedition . Saunders, Philadelphia. Swensson,C , Schaar,J. , Brännäng,E .an dMeskel ,L.B . 1981. Breeding Activitieso fth eEthio-Swedis hIntegrate dRura l Development Project:Reproductiv e Performance ofZeb uan dCrossbree dCattle . WorldAnima lRevie w38 : pp.31-36 . TechnicalAdvisor yCommitte eo fth eConsultativ eGrou po n International Agricultural Research (TAC/CGIAR). 1978. Farming Systems Researcha tth e InternationalAgricultura lResearc hCenters . TAC Secretariat,FAO ,Rome . TechnicalAdvisor yCommitte eo fth eConsultativ eGrou po n International Agricultural Research (TAC/CGIAR). 1982. Reporto f theTA C Quinquennial ReviewMissio nt oth e International Livestock Centre forAfric a (ILCA). TACSecretariat ,FAO ,Rome . TechnicalAdvisor yCommitte eo fth eConsultativ eGrou po n International Agricultural Research (TAC/CGIAR). 1986. Reporto f theSecon d ExternalProgra mRevie wo fth e International Livestock Center for Africa (ILCA). TACSecretariat ,FAO ,Rome . TechnicalAdvisor yCommitte eo fth eConsultativ eGrou po n International Agricultural Research (TAC/CGIAR). 1987. Sustainable Agricultural Production: Implications for International Agricultural Research. DraftReport . TACSecretariat ,FAO ,Rome . Tecle,Tesfai . 1975. AnApproac h toRura lDevelopment : A CaseStud yo f theEthiopia nPackag eProjects . RuralAfrican aNo .28 :pp . 87-105. MichiganStat eUniversity ,Eas tLansing . Tegegne,Teka . 1984.Agraria nTransformation :Th eEthiopia nExperience . Mimeograph. FAO,Rome . Tessema,Tesfay e andDagnatche wYirgou . 1973. SoilBurnin g "Gye": its problemsan dpossibl e solutions. MiscellaneousPublication sNo . 35. Collegeo fAgriculture ,Debr eZei tAgricultura l Experiment Station,Ethiopia . Toulmin,C . 1984. TheAllocatio no fResource st oLivestoc k Research in Africa. LPUWorkin g PaperNo .3 . ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Trail,J.CM. ,Murray ,M .an dWissocq ,Y . 1984. The Trypranotolerant LivestockNetwor k inWes tan dCentra lAfrica . ILCABulleti n18 : pp. 16-19. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Trail,J.CM. , Sones,K. ,Jibbo ,J.M.C , Durkin,J. , Light,D.E .an d Murray,M . 1985. Productivityo fBora ncattl emaintaine d by chemoprophylaxisunde r trypanosomiasis risk. ILCAResearc hRepor t 9. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . Tuiza,E.G .an dAmir ,P . 1986. Glossaryo fOn-Far mLivestoc k Research Terms. Draftworkin gpaper . Winrock International,Arkansas . 244 Upton,H . 1985. Returns fromSmal lRuminan t Production inSout hWes t Nigeria. Agricultural Systems No.17 :pp .65-83 . USAID. 1982.Africa nBurea uLivestoc k DevelopmentAssistanc e Strategy Paper. Agriculture andRura l Development Division,Washingto n D.C. Vaidyanatman,A . 1983. Estimating Employment Potential inAnima l Husbandry. Databas ean dmethodology . AGDPWorkin g Paper,FAO , Rome. Valdes,A. , Scobie,G.M .an d Dillon,J.L . (eds). 1979. Economics and theDesig n of Small-Farmer Technology. IowaStat e University Press,Ames ,Iowa . Van Eeghen,M . 1984. Trifolium Tembense: Exploratory studyo n its valuea sa fodder crop. Reporto fa studyperio d at ILCA. Agricultural University,Wageningen . Vandemaele,F.V . 1977. TheRol eo fAnima l Production inWorl d Agriculture. WorldAnima l Review No.21 :pp .2-5 . Vincent,W.H . 1977. Economic conditions inAd aWereda ,Ethiopi a during the cropping seasono f 1975-76. Working paper,Institut eo f Development Research,Addi sAbeb a andMichiga n State University, East Lansing. Von Kaufman,R. , Chater,S .an dBlench ,R . (ed). 1986. Livestock SystemsResearc h inNigeria' s Subhumid Zone. Proceedings of the Second ILCA/NAPRISymposiu mhel d inKaduna ,Nigeria ,2 9Oc t- 2 Nov 1984,ILCA ,Addi sAbeba . Wagenaar-Brouwer,M . 1986. Nutritionan dhealt ho f Ethiopianmixe d smallholder farmers in relation toth eus e of crossbred cows. Preliminary results. Draftpaper . Highlands Programme,ILCA , AddisAbeba . Wagner,D.G. , Holland,G.L . Mpges,T . 1969a.Cros sbreedin g studies with Ethiopian beef cattleusin g imported semen. EastAfrica n Agricultural ForestryJourna l 34(4). Wagner,D.G. ,Wells ,M.E. ,Hollan d G.L.an dTeshom eWond eAfrash . 1969b. Development ofcolleg edair ycrossbreedin g studies. Experimental StationBulleti nNo . 52,Colleg e ofAgriculture ,Alemayah . Ward,G.M . 1974. Livestock Productiono nSmal l Farmsa sa Contribution toEconomi c Development. In: Biggs,H.H . and Tinnermeier,R.L . (eds). Small FarmAgricultura l Development Problems. Colorado StateUniversity , FortCollins ,Colorado . Westphal,E . 1975. Agricultural Systems inEthiopia . Centre for Agricultural Publishing andDocumentation ,Wageningen . Whalen,I.W .an dAnderson ,F.M . 1985. A noteo n farmers'perception s of small scalewate r development using oxen excavatedponds . MimeographHighland s Programme. ILCA,Addi sAbeba . 245 Wharton,CR . 1969. SubsistenceAgriculture : Conceptsan d Scope. In: CR. Wharton (ed). SubsistenceAgricultur e and Economic Development.Aldine ,Chicago . Wheeler,R.O . 1982. Problemsan dProspect s for Increasing Livestock Production through improvedProductio n Systems. In: Ted J. Davis (ed). IncreasingAgricultura l Productivity. Proceedings of the ThirdAnnua lAgricultura l Sector Symposium. World Bank Technical Paper No.l,Worl d Bank,Washingto n D.C. Whyte,W.F .an dBoynton ,D . (eds). 1983. Higher Yielding Human Systems forAgriculture . Cornell University Press,ithaca T Wiener,G . 1975. TheCattl ean d SheepBreedin g Research Programme at IAR. FAO,Rome . Williamson,G . andPayne ,W.J.A . 1978. An Introduction toAnima l Husbandry inth eTropics . TheEnglis h LanguageBoo k Society and Longmans,Longma n Inc.,London . Wilson,T.R . 1984. Livestock Production inCentra lMali : Long-Term Studieso nCattl e and Small Ruminants inth eAgropastora l System. ILCAResearc hRepor t 14,ILCA ,Addi sAbeba . Winrock International. 1978. TheRol eo fRuminant s inSuppor to fMan . Winrock International Livestock Research and Training Center, Morrilton,Arkansas . World Bank. 1981a. Accelerated Development inSub-Sahara nAfrica : An Agenda forAction . Washington,D.C . World Bank. 1981b. Ethiopia. SecondAgricultura l Minimum Package Project. StaffAppraisa l Report. NorthernAgricultur e Division ReportNo .177 4b-ET . Washington,D.C . World Bank. 1981c.Economi cMemorandu mo n Ethiopia. ReportNo .355 2 b-ET. Country ProgramsDepartment . Washington,D.C . World Bank. 1983. Ethiopia: Reviewo f Farmers Incentives and Agricultural Marketing and Distribution Efficiency. AddisAbeba . World Bank. 1984a. Towards Sustained Development inSub-Sahara nAfrica : a jointprogramm e ofaction . World Bank,Washington ,D.C . World Bank. 1984b. Ethiopia. Recent Economic Developments and Future Prospects. ReportNo .468 3a-E T intw ovolumes . EasternAfric a Regional Office. Washington,D.C . World Bank. 1985a. The Smallholder Dimension ofLivestoc k Development. A Reviewo fBan k Experience (intw ovolumes) . Operations Evaluation Department,Repor tNo .5979 . Washington,D.C . World Bank. 1985b. Ethiopia and theWorl d Bank. Mimeograph, Information and PublicAffair s Department,Washington ,D.C . 246 WorldBank . 1986a. Easternan dSouther nAfrica nAgricultura lResarc h Review. WorldBank, Washington ,D.C . WorldBank . 1986b. WestAfric aAgricultura lResearc hReview .Worl d Bank,Washington ,D.C . WorldBank . 1987. WorldDevelopmen tRepor t1987 . OxfordUniversit y Press,Ne wYork . World HealthOrganisatio n (WHO). 1979. Measuremento fNutritiona l Impact.WHO ,Geneva . Zandstra,H.G. ,Price, E.C. ,Litsinger ,J.A .an dMorris ,R.A . 1981. A Methodology forOn-On-Far r mCroppin g SystemsResearch . IRRI,Lo s =Banos ,Philippines "Hili ' . Zandstra,H.G . 1982. Experienceswit h researcho ncrop-anima lsystems . In: Fitzhugh,H.A. ,Hart ,R.D. ,Moreno ,R.A. ,Osuyi ,P.O. , Ruiz, M.E. andSingh ,L . (eds). 1982. Researcho nCrop-Anima lSystems . Proceedingso fa Worksho porganize db yCATIE/CARDI/Winroc k International, April 4-7,Turrialba ,Cost aRica . Zandstra,H.G . 1985.Th edesig nan dtestin go f improved livestock technology formixe d farms. Discussionpape rprepare d forth e FSSPNetwor kWorksho p "AnimalTractio n ina Farmin gSyste m Perspective", 4-8March ,Togo .FSSP ,Florida . Zegeye,T. ,Mulugetta ,M .an dDixon ,J . 1979a. FarmingSystem sProjec t SurveyBak oMixe dFarmin gZon e (October-November 1977). IAR, AddisAbeba . Zegeye,T. ,Mulugetta ,M .an dDixon ,J . 1979b. FarmingSystem sProjec t SurveyHolett aRe dSoi lMixe d FarmingZon e (December1977-Januar y 1978). IAR,Addi sAbeba . Zegeye,T. ,Mulugetta ,M .an dDixon ,J . 1979c.Farmin gSystem sProjec t SurveyBed i FarmingZon e (November 1977). IAR,Addi sAbeba . 247 SAMENVATTING Deproductivitei tva nve e inAfrik a ten zuidenva nd e Sahara behoort totd e laagste terwereld ,wa td eproducti eva nvlee s enmel k betreft.D e resultatenva nveeteeltprojecte n zijne rmeesta l ontgoochelend. Eenbelangrijk e redenvoo rd e lage investeringsopbrengsten isvaa k het slechteprojectontwerp ,te ngevolg eva nee n onvoldoende kennisva nd e relevanteveeproductiesystemen . InAfrik a ten zuidenva n de Sahara treftme nhe tmeest eve eaa no pkleinschalig e boerderijen,waa r zowelaa nveeteel tal saa ngewasteel tword t gedaan.D e role nhe t belang vanve e indergelijk e "gemengde"landbouwsysteme n end e interacties tussend evee -e ngewascomponenten ,zij nno gonvoldoend e bestudeerd. Van allebelangrijk e ecologische zones inAfrik a ten zuidenva nd e Sahara hebbend ehooglande nd ehoogst edichthei dva n zowelmense nal s dieren.Vrijwe l alhe tve e indez e zonevind tme no pgemengd e kleinschaligebedrijven .Ongevee r 50%va nd eAfrikaans e hooglanden bevindt zich inEthiopie .He tlan dheef too kd egrootst eveestape l ophe t Afrikaanse kontinent.I ndi tproefschrif tworde nd e role nhe tbelan gva n vee inhe t gemengde kleinschalige landbouwsysteemva nd e Ethiopische hooglandennagegaan . Inhe tonderzoe k voordi tproefschrif twer d gebruik gemaaktva n een landbouwsysteembenadering. Hetonderzoe k werduitgevoer d inhe t kader vanhe tHooglandenprogramm a vanhe t 'International Livestock Center for Africa' (ILCA).D enoodzakelijk eveldgegeven swerde nverzamel d ind e periodeva n 1979 tot 1985doo rmidde lva nenquête snaa r het boerderijbeheere nd e economische aspectenva nhe thuishoude nbi j 170 traditioneel werkende boerenui tvie rverschillend eboerenassociatie s van hetBas oe nWoren adistrict .Dez e streek isrepresentatie fvoo rd e hoogste gebiedenva nd e Ethiopische hooglanden.He tbevind t zich inee n granen-veeteeltzone.He tlandbouwsystee m ise rafhankelij k vand e regen. Het isgebaseer d opkleinschalig e overlevingslandbouw,me t jaarlijkse gewassenwaarva nhe t zaaigoedbree dword tuitgestrooi dme td ehand ,e n primitievewerktuige nwaaronde rd e 'maresha',ee n traditionele houten ploeg,getrokke ndoo r een spanossen .He tonderzoe k toontaa nda tve e van cruciaal belang isi ndi t landbouwsysteem enda te ree nhog egraa d van integratie bestaat tussengewas -e nveeteelt .Ve e zorgtvoo rhe t grootste deelva nhe tgeldelij k inkomene nd ebrut omarge sva nd eboerderij . Rundvee levertvoora l intermediaire productendi eal s inputworde n gebruiktvoo r gewasteelt,zoal s trekkrachtbi jd ebewerkin gva nhe t land enhe tdorsen ,o fmeststo fo md evruchtbaarhei d vand ebode m teverhogen . Hetkunne nbeschikke nove rdierlijk e trekkracht ophe texact e ogenblik datd enoo d hieraanbestaat ,i see n significante factor inhe tbepale n vanhe t graanproductieniveau opd eboerderij .Veehouderi j creëertoo k een belangrijke hoeveelheid arbeid en isva nprimordiaa l belang als zekerheid enal sbro nva n investering. Schapenworde nverkoch tnaa r gelangd e behoefte aan cashgel d en gekochto m rijkdomo p te slaan.Ezel s zorgen voor vrijwel hetgehel e transportva n landbouwproductenva ne nnaa r de boerderij. Deproductivitei t vanve e islaa gwa tbetref t eindproducten, maar ze ishoo gme t betrekking tot intermediaire producten.Ee naanta l elementen inhe toverheidsbeleid , inhe teigenlijk e productieproces en in religieuze en culturele gebruiken,vorme nee nbelemmerin gvoo r een verhogingva nd eboerderijproducti e .Z eworde nal s zodanig 248 geïdentificeerd enbesproke n inhe tproefschrift .He tbelan gda t boeren hechtenaa nd e intermediairefunctie sva nve evorm td e grootste hinderpaalvoo r deontwikkelin gva nd eveeteel t ind e Ethiopische hooglandenal sme nee nverhogin gva nd evlees -e nmelkproducti e voorop stelt. Debeschikbar e onderzoeksresultaten i.v.m.ee n aangepaste technologievoo r deverbeterin g vand eveeproductivitei t ind e Ethiopische hooglandenworde n indi tproefschrif tbesproken .O phe t ILCA proefstation teDebr eBerha nwerde nee naanta lmogelijk e interventies in hetproductiesystee m vanhe tBas oe nWoren adistric tonderzocht .Twe e techniekenleke nveelbeloven d voor eenverbeterin g vand eveeteel t op kleinschalige bedrijven :he tgebrui k vangekruis tmelkve e (BoranX Fries)voo rd emelkproducti e enhe tgebrui kva nee nnieu w ontwikkelde 'een-osploeg' .Positiev e resultateno phe tproefstatio n enee n ex-ante evaluatie doormidde lva n een lineairprogrammatiemode l leidden tothe t opzettenva ndoo r deboe r zelfbeheerd e proevenme tdez e nieuwe technieken.D e testboerenware nafkomsti gui tdezelfd e boerenassociaties waar eerder dediagnosestudie sware nondernomen .D e resultatenva n de testboerenwerde nvergeleke nme td eproductivitei tva nander eboere ndi e diendenal scontrolegroep .D egekruist emelkkoeie nproduceerde n beduidend meermel k dand eautochton e koeien,d e technologiewer d zonder grote problemenovergenome n end e inkomensva nd ebetrokke n testboeren lagen significant bovendi eva nd e controleboeren.D e belangrijkste belemmeringen voor eenmee rverspreid e overnameva ngekruis tmelkve e in de regiozij n :ee ntekor taa nvoe r tijdenshe tdrog e seizoen,ee n gebrek aanmogelijkhede n totcommercialisati e vand emel kvoora l tijdensd e langevastenperiode ,ziekteprobleme n methe tgekruist eve e ent eweini g aangepaste fokmogelijkheden.Indie nd eEthiopisch e regering echter voldoendevoorlichtingsfaciliteite n kanorganiseren ,bied td e ontwikkelingva nd ekleinschalig emelkveehouderi j goedeperspectieven . Deander e techniek,di eme tboere nwer d getest,wa she tgebrui k vand e 'een-osploeg 'bi jhe tbewerke nva nhe t land.He tgebrui k end e adoptie vandez e aangepaste ploegdoo rd eboere nwa slaag .D e onvoldoende stabiliteitva ndez eploeg ,i nvergelijkin gme td e traditionele ploegdi e door tweeosse nword tgetrokken ,blee k eenbelangrijk e strukturele zwakheid tezijn .D eonderzoeksresultate n tonenaa nda tee n 'een-os ploeg'weliswaa r nuttigka n zijnbi jhe tbedekke nva nhe t zaaigoed,maa r dathe tonwaarschijnlij k isda t zehe t traditionele systeemme t twee ossenka nvervange n tijdensd eeerst eploegbeurten . Ind e conclusieva ndi tproefschrif tword t eenevaluati e gemaakt vand emethodologi eva nhe tonderzoe k enword td eoverdraagbaarhei d van debereikt e resultatennagegaan .D egevolgtrekkinge n vandez e studievoo r verder onderzoek inverban dme t landbouwe nveeteel t ind e Ethiopische hooglandenworde n eveneensbesproken . 249 CURRICULUMVTTA E GuidoGryseels ,gebore no p1 1augustu s195 2t eUkke l (België),volgd e lagere nmiddelbaa r onderwijs inhe tSint-Victo r Instituut teAlsember g enbehaald e in196 9he tDiplom aHoge r MiddelbaarOnderwij se nhe tMaturiteitsgetuigschrift . Vervolgens studeerdehi jeconomisch ewetenschappen , richtingeconomisch eontwikkeling ,aa nd eKatholiek eUniversitei t te Leuven.I n197 5behaald ehi jhe tdiplom ava nLicentiaa t ind e EconomischeWetenschappe n eni n197 6da tva nDoctorandu s ind e EconomischeWetenschappen . In197 6verkree ghi jaa ndezelfd e universiteit ookhe tBijzonde rDiplom a ind eAudio-Visuel e Communicatiemedia (Radio,Fil me nTelevisie) . In197 7e n197 8studeerd ehij ,me tbehul pva nee nbeur s verleend onderhe tAustralian-Europea nAward sProgramme , landbouweconomie aand eUniversit yo fNe wEnglan dt eArmidal e (Australie)e nbehaald ee rhe tDiplom ao fAgricultura lEconomics . Begin197 9tra dhi ji ndiens tbi jhe t International Livestock Centre forAfric a (ILCA)me t standplaatst eAddi sAbeb a (Ethiopie).Hi jwa se rwerkzaa mal slandbouweconoo m inhe t onderzoeksprogramma voord ehooglande ne nhiel d zichvoora lbezi gme t hetbestudere nva ntraditionel e landbouwsystemen ind e Ethiopische hooglanden.I n198 3wa shi joo k co-directeurva nhe t 'Séminairesu rl a Conceptionde sProjet sd'Elevage 'da tdoo r ILCAwer dgeorganiseer d in samenwerkingme the tEconomi eDevelopmen t Institute (EDI)va nd e Wereldbank teWashington ,D.C. . In198 4wer dhi jbi j ILCApersoonlij k assistentva nd edirecteu r generaale n in198 6onderdirekteu rva nhe t Department ofOutreach .Tijden s zijnverblij fbi jILC Abereidd ehi j ditproefschrif tvoor .Tusse n198 3e n198 5onderna mhi joo k verscheidene zendingeni.v.m .he tevaluere n vanveeteeltonderzoe k naarRwand ae nBurund i inopdrach tva nd eWereldban k enhe tUnite d NationsDevelopmen tProgramm e (UNDP). Sindsme i198 7i sGuid oGryseel si ndiens tbi jhe tFAO ,d e landbouw-e nvoedselorganisati e vand eVerenigd eNaties, t eRom e (Italie).Hi ji se rwerkzaa mal sSenio rAgricultura l ResearchOffice r ind edivisi evoo rOnderzoe k enTechnologi eOntwikkeling ,mee rbepaal d bijhe t sekretariaatva nd eTechnisch eAdviescommissie ,he tTAC ,va n deConsultatiev e Groepvoo r Internationaal Landbouwonderzoek,d e CGIAR.