Alleviating poverty through beekeeping: lessons from

Madeleen Husselman Fiona Paumgarten

APIMONDIA, September 2009 • Project background • Introduction • Research objectives • Study sites • Study methods • Results • Lessons and recommendations Project background

• Center for International Forestry Research

• Funded by Sida

• July 2006 - June 30th 2009

• Main implementing partner: Forestry Dept.

• Key research topics: incomes producers, value chains, collective action, forest management, production technologies

• Outputs: scientific papers, policy briefs, extension manual, local research & demonstration apiaries Introduction: beekeeping in Zambia

• Conducive forest vegetation in most areas (Julbernardia and Brachystegia spp)

• Extensive support since colonial era (training and introduction of alternative technologies)

• Many beekeepers are members of groups and associations

• >20 000 beekeepers in the country

• High existing production: 700 metric tons exported Organic certification (NWP)

• Zambian Government has acknowledged the importance of the sector and initiated the development of a National Beekeeping Policy. Research objectives

• To describe the prevalence and importance of beekeeping in different parts of Zambia

• To assess the influence of technology, value chains and processing on incomes for producers

• To come up with recommendations for beekeepers and support agencies Study areas

Salujinga district

Lunchu

Chinyunyu Research methods

• Household and producer surveys 2007

• Value chain analysis 2007-2009 (producers, traders, processors, retailers, consumers, service providers)

• Hive trials – 3 districts – 15 beekeepers – 5 hive types; 3 replications per beekeeper – 12 months (June 2008 - May 2009)

• Scenarios (labour cost, market prices, processing) Results: BK in different areas

Mwinilunga Kapiri Chongwe

48% of hh 29% of hh <20% of hh Traditional Traditional/ Introduced >13 years introduced 3-5 years 6-10 years 100% bark hives 71% log 59% bark 33 mud (KTB) 41% wood (KTB) Hives poor Termites/ red Termites/ red quality ants ants Scarcity of trees Lack of inputs Low yields Bulk, export Bulk, domestic Local retail organic (and and export ESA (urban and rural) Fairtrade) Volume: 179kg Volume: 37kg Volume: 16kg Price:$0.45/kg Price:$0.81/kg Price:$2.90/kg liq. liq. liq. Income: $170/yr Income: $93/yr Income: $47/yr Results: Production technologies 1 Occupation rates hive trails, early May 2009

120%

100%

80% Kapiri 60% Mwinilunga Chongwe 40%

20%

0% Standard Adjusted Mud Bark Log TOTAL

Area x occupied on 01/06/2009 Hive type x occupied on 01/06/2009 Chi-Square Tests Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Asymp. Sig. Value df (2-sided) Value df (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 49.466a 2 .000 Pearson Chi-Square 21.830a 4 .000 Likelihood Ratio 52.732 2 .000 Likelihood Ratio 22.564 4 .000 Linear-by-Linear Linear-by-Linear 49.166 1 .000 2.269 1 .132 Association Association N of Valid Cases 225 N of Valid Cases 225 a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 36.00. minimum expected count is 21.60. Results: Production technologies 2

Individual beekeeper x hives occupied on 01/06/2009

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. Value df (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 81.303a 14 .000 Likelihood Ratio 97.085 14 .000 Linear-by-Linear 46.850 1 .000 Association N of Valid Cases 225 a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 7.20.

Kapiri Chongwe Mwinilunga Results: scenarios

• To determine the producer’s profit margin when selling 200kg grade 1 comb honey, bulk in the village, depending on:

– Market prices (e.g. increased competition buyers)

– Labour costs (e.g. alternative income sources)

– Processed vs. non-processed

Profit = (market price – breakeven price) x total volume sold

Breakeven price = (equipment costs + labor costs) / volume

Labour costs = total time invested x local wage Results: scenarios (average annual costs)

Traditional bark hive Adapted mud hive Modern wooden system system hive system Occupation rate 33% 80% 80% Average Y/hive 7.40kg 20kg 20kg % grade 1 honey 80% 95% 95% Average lifespan 4 years 10 years 10 years Total hives needed 102 13 13 Equipment (# x cost Veil, Knife Top bars, Swarm boxes Hives, Swarm boxes per unit)/ mean Queen cage, Knife, Veil Queen cage, Knife, Veil lifespan $2.17 $14.77 $58.77 Labour (annual) Making hives Making hives Baiting/ placing hives Baiting/ placing hives Baiting/ placing hives Inspections Inspections/ maintenance Inspections/ Transferring swarms Harvesting maintenance (shelter) Harvesting Transferring swarms Harvesting Time: 180 days/yr Time: 28 days/yr Time: 19 days/yr Results: scenario 1 (market price)

June 2009, Kapiri: June 2009, Kapiri: 100% domestic 300.00 100% domestic 250.00 200.00 150.00 100.00 bark 50.00 mud 0.00 wood -50.00 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60 -100.00 -150.00

Pure profit (200kg combPure profit honey) (200kg -200.00 Price per kg Oct. 2006, Mwin.: 60% export organic, Oct. 2008, Mwin.: 40% export Fairtrade 70% export organic, 30% domestic

Assuming a fixed daily wage of $1.00 for 8 hours work Results: scenario 2 (labor cost) Weeding, Kapiri: $1.20/day Brick layer, Mwin.: $2.20/day

200.00 100.00 0.00 0.20 0.60 1.00 1.40 1.80 2.20 2.60 3.00 -100.00 bark -200.00 mud -300.00 wood -400.00 Clearing land for agriculture, Mwin:

Pure profit (200kg comb)Pure profit (200kg -500.00 $1.00/day Domestic -600.00 worker, Lusaka Daily wage (USD) $3.00/day

Assuming a fixed market price of $0.70/kg comb honey (i.e. the 2008/2009 price in Mwinilunga) Results: scenario 3 (processing)

120 100 80 Comb ($0.70/kg) 60 Liquid ($0.70/kg) 40 Liquid ($0.80/kg) 20 Liquid ($0.90/kg) 0 Liquid ($1.00/kg) -20 bark mud wood Liquid ($1.10/kg) equivalent equivalent in liquid) -40 Pure profit (200kg combPure profit or (200kg -60 Beekeeping system

Assuming a fixed daily wage of $0.50 for 8 hours work; processing from comb to liquid is done traditionally using a sieve and buckets Lessons & recommendations

1. Main determining factor for occupation rates of hives is management • Adequate training and skills development is essential, especially when introducing technologies

2. Mud hives are the most preferred option (scenarios, beekeepers) • Traditional systems are too labour intensive; modern systems are too cash intensive… need to invest in developing appropriate technologies • Encourage experimentation and innovation instead of simply handing out equipment and ideas (appropriate technologies will develop locally)

3. Problems with red ants persist • Research and extension in pest control • Invest in increasing occupation rates rather than increasing number of hives Lessons & recommendations

4. Incomes for producers related to high volumes sold (comb > liquid) • Increase volumes of comb honey produced rather than encourage processing

5. Certification (organic and fair trade) does not increase the producer price, but does offer them a market where otherwise there would not be one • Promote diversification of markets, including local and regional (e.g. support processors and traders)

6. An increase in the number of buyers (2007-2009) has resulted in a drastic increase in the price paid to producers (30-80%) • Improve market access and business environment (e.g. build roads, develop market info systems) Concluding remarks…

• The role of beekeeping in rural livelihood systems varies between the three study areas. Due to the scale of production and the availability of large bulk buyers, incomes are highest in the remote Mwinilunga. Here, honey sales are the main source of cash income for approximately 50% of the households.

• Although the traditional bark hive system, which dominates in many parts of the country, plays an important role in preventing rural households from becoming poorer, the study shows that due to the high labor requirements, this system will not allow beekeepers to lift themselves out of poverty. In areas where livelihoods are more diversified and beekeeping is considered a business instead of a tradition, e.g. Kapiri, beekeepers prefer to adopt affordable modern technologies such as the mud hive system.

• Effective support strategies include trainings (i.e. to improve management and increase occupation rates) and market development.