13 The Interaction Between Cultivation and Livestock Production in Senmi-Arid Africa R.L. McCowN, G. HAVAAND, and C. DE HAAN 13.1 Introduction Although the majority of people in semi-arid Africa sustain themselves primarily by growing crops, this means of production is not pri:uticed by all, nor is it the sole means practiced by the majority. Because of inadequate rainfall and high evaporation rates, average crop yields are low, and the risk of crop failure Traditionally the inhabitants of is high. these regions have relied on domestic grazing animals to supplemenr their food supply. The ultimate degree of this embodied in pure pastoralism: dependence is however, semi-arid Afica has a wide variation, both in the nature and range of the degree of economic dependency on livestock. From the title of this chapter, the reader might reasonably expect a survey of current importance of livestock the in the agricut,iral regions of semi-arid Africa. even if we had the African experience But and relevant literatuie at our command attempt such a survey, it is to unlikely that this would be the most useful contribution. Instead, an attempt sort of is made to isolate the different types relationship or linkage that of characterize the interaction between cultivation livestock production and to consider and the conditions under which each linkage be expected to occur. Eight can cases from summer rainfall, semi-arid zones (Fig. 13.1) are described which of Africa demonstrate various configurations of existing production systems, linkages in together with the conditions under which developed. Finally, the trends they have in the forms of linkages from an evolutionary standpoint are considered. The aim here is not to provide a historical account, rather to consider what forms but are likely to emerge under different ecological, political, and economic conditions. This provides a basis for discussion pertaining to future livestock-cultivation interaction. 13.1.1 Basic Differences Between the Two rroduction Systems In the semi-arid regions of Africa, crop production and animal to take place in different management production tend units, typically belonging to different ethnic groups. This dichotomy is, however, far from some crops, and most farmers keep absolute: most pastoralists grow some animals. Variation in the balance struck between the two activities and the nature and degree of interdependencies between the activities must be viewed as different forms of adaptation. Understanding the Patterns of variation in these forms in space and time requires, in addition to 298 R. L McCown et a]. 2 1 ""-2-' ""f3 ..... 6 ,J77 4 5 Fig. 13.1. Locations of selected cases of systems of production involving linkages between cultivation and livestock. /,Western Senegal, 2,Bambara Lands; 3. The Mossi Gourma Region: 4, Lands: 5. Hausaland: 6. Bokoro Area; 7, Western Darfur; 8, Harar Province inforriaiion on environmental conditions, an appreciation of the major differences between the two production systems. A comprehensive comparison of the characteristics of these systems is given by Barth (1973). The following comparisons are pertinent for this geographic region. 1.Both systems require the same busic kinds of production factors: land (fields, pastures). capital (seed, herds), ani labor. 2. In neither system does the right to use of land usually require capital expenditure. (In this geographical region, grazing rights are almost universally free. The situation with respect to cultivation rights is more variable, but purchase or rent of land is exceptional. 3. The amount ofcapital required for subsistence in pastoralism is high relative to that in agriculture. This is related to the difference in the annual rates of returns on seed (10-50 x ) and on animals (0.1-1 x.in terms of reproduction). 4. In agriculture, labor is invested in the land, and the requirements are highly seasonal; in pastoralism, labor is invested in the herd, and the requirements are relatively constant. 5. Agriculture is labor-intensive, with increase in labor during the peak requirements periods providing the greatest marginal returns; pastoralism is capital-intensive, with increasc irherd size providing greatest marginal returns. There are three implications of these basic differences that are particularly important in the context of adaptive forms of iner-dependencies. First, the opportunity for investment of surplus income is greater under pastoralism. Here, investment and growth take place automatically through the process of production and are prevented only by a decision to slaughter, sell, or exchange the animals. In contrast, investment and growth in agriculture are possible only where institutions exist for converting surplus products to the critical factor of production, labor. Even when a labor market exists, the normal labor requirements are so seasonal in agriculture that the opportunity for increasing labor supply when the need is critical is usually very limited. A further implication resulting from differences in critical factors ofproduction is that considerable growth in pastoralism can take place with only modest increase in labor. (It takes one herder, commonly a child, to tend one animal or to tend 20 or 30.) Cliarly, there is ample stimulation for cultivators to invest in pastoralism if it is ecologically and politically feasible. Second, economic viability in the two production systems is very different due to the difference in value of capital required for production. In a pastoral unit, The Interaction Between Cultivation and Livestock Production in Semi-Arid Africa 299 consumption needs can be satisfied not only by livestock products like milk and wool, but also by dJict consumption of animals or by goods exchanged for livestock. A pastoral unit eventually falls below the viability level when loss satisfaction ofconsumption due to needs exceeds the reproduction rate. In an agricultural unit it is sometimes necessary to consume next year's seed. Although social institutions may exist that facilitate assistance in such situations, the high value animals makes their of availability (e.g., by loan) impractical. In contrast, replacement of seed is relatively easy. Since the supply of the critical factor of agricultural production, labor, is retained, full-scale production can be resumed as soon as weather conditions permit. A third implication of the differences between the two production that sLcurity in times systems is of adversity is greater with pastoralism. In periods capital must when be consumed, the enterprise with large capital requirements with large capital reserves. isthe one Not only is investment often difficult in agriculture, there are also serious constraints to saving capital (products). Traditional on-farm methods of storing grain in this region are unable to exclude grain insects, and grain preservation for periods of years has been impossible. In the light of these differences between agricultural and pastoral systems, it isto be expected production that successful farmers in semi-arid regions might invest su-plus in livestock, and that unsuccessful pastoralists might resort to farming. In the discussion of various types of interdependencies which follows the importance of both forms of adaptation can be seen. 13.2 Linkages Between Crop and Livestock Production 13.2.1 Interactions When Agricultural and Pastoral Production Take Place in Different Management Units Historically, the interactions between pastoralists and agricultural agriculturalists involving economic consequences can be classified as nonexistent, negative. Examples positive, or are given here of each class. as well as some indication trends in the of recent nature and importance of each interaction, or linkage. 13.2.1.1 No Supporting Linkage In this case, pastoralists and agriculturalists are self-sufficient units, i.e., pastoralists rely the on animal products and the agriculturalists have a protile based on agricultural consumption products. Traditional relations between Masai and Kikuyu might illustrate this situation, but because of pacification and expanded consumption profiles resulting from improved communication and education, unlikely it is that distinct examples could still be found today. 13.2.1.2 Ecological Linkage In this case, the practice of one activity influences the other through on the ecosystem. For example, its effects during the dry season natural forage is in short supply, and the quality isnormally very low. The residues of most crops, which are 300 R. L. McCown et al. of little or no value to the cultivator, provide a superior diet for the pastoralist's herds. At the same time, manure deposited on the fields as the cattle graze is beneficial for the subsequent crop. The occurrence of this symbiotic relationship is widespread and varied in its ecological and economic complexity. in its simplest form, pastoralists camp near an agricultural area and herd their animals on the fields during the day. The benefits to the cultivator in terms of manure may be insignificant, but the trampling in of residues, breaking up of ridges, and stripping of stalks to be used later as building materials are considered beneficial (van Raaij, 1974:57). To deposit useful amounts of manure. animals must be corralled for several nights on a field and allowed to graze surrounding areas during the day. An empirical example with an additional feature is given in the Western Darfur case, discussed below, where Acacia athida trees are grown in the cultivated fields. Their pods,