S13570-018-0113-9.Pdf

Omollo et al. Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice (2018) 8:9 Pastoralism: Research, Policy https://doi.org/10.1186/s13570-018-0113-9 and Practice RESEARCH Open Access Determinants of pastoral and agro-pastoral households’ participation in fodder production in Makueni and Kajiado Counties, Kenya Erick Ouma Omollo1*, Oliver Vivian Wasonga1, Mohammed Yazan Elhadi1,3 and William Ngoyawu Mnene2 Abstract Fodder production has been regarded as one of the suitable strategies for increasing feed availability for enhanced livestock production among pastoral and agro-pastoral communities in the drylands of Kenya. Previous studies indicate that factors determining participation in these practices vary from time to time and from one location to another. This study was conducted to assess the socio-economic and demographic factors influencing households’ participation in fodder production in Makueni and Kajiado Counties. Data was collected from 216 households through interviews using semi-structured questionnaire. Results indicate that gender of household head, education, social/development group membership and access to extension services were the most important factors influencing households’ participation in fodder production. There is need for technical support to the pastoral and agro-pastoral households towards starting and/or joining existing social groups, through which extension and training services can be offered. This would go a long way in enhancing fodder production in the arid and semi-arid lands of Kenya. Keywords: Demographic, Drylands of Kenya, Factors, Livestock, Socio-economic, Social groups Introduction most limiting factor to livestock production in ASALs of Livestock production is the main economic activity in the Kenya (GoK 2011) with far-reaching effects being low pro- arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) of Kenya (Kidake et al. duction of milk and meat (Mapiye et al. 2006; Chinogara- 2016) which supports over 14 million people and 70% of mombe et al. 2008), thus increasing vulnerability of the total country’s livestock population (MacOpiyo et al. pastoral livelihoods (Joosten et al. 2014). 2013). A common characteristic of the ASALs is low and Despite these challenges, livestock production still erratic precipitation associated with recurrent droughts shows a 60% potential to alleviate ASAL population from (Irungu et al. 2014;Gikabaetal.2014), making poor- poverty (GoK 2005;Irunguetal.2014). Being the most quality pastures a major constraint to livestock production important requirement for livestock production, availabil- (Food and Agriculture Organization 2005). Recently, fre- ity of high-quality feeds directly reflects success in quent droughts resulting from climate change, population livestock production (MacOpiyo et al. 2013). Need to in- increase and poor land use practices have significantly crease livestock productivity in the ASALs has led to high contributed to degradation and loss of natural pastures demand for better quality feeds, thus calling for better (Wasonga 2009; Munyasi et al. 2012; Koech 2014). Conse- production practices (Gitunu et al. 2003; Manyeki et al. quently, a lot of grazing lands have become bare and/or 2015). Fodder production technologies have therefore infested with invasive species (Kidake et al. 2016). As such, been introduced by the government of Kenya in the natural pasture degradation has been pointed out as the ASALs (Mnene et al. 2004). However, adoption of these technologies is dependent on a number of factors * Correspondence: [email protected] (Wanyama et al. 2003), which vary from region to region 1Department of Land Resource Management and Agricultural Technology, and from farmer to farmer (Singh et al. 2012). University of Nairobi, P.O. Box 29053-00625, Kangemi, Nairobi, Kenya Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Omollo et al. Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice (2018) 8:9 Page 2 of 10 A number of studies have been conducted on factors de- the households in these areas include enclosure of termining households’ participation in fodder production natural pastures to allow regeneration, and range in Kenya. For instance, in their study on factors influen- reseeding through over-sowing (Manyeki et al. 2015; cing adoption of fodder production among smallholder Kidake et al. 2016). These practices were adopted farmers in western Kenya, Wanyama et al. (2003)reported not only to provide feed for own livestock but also that adoption of fodder cropping was limited by lack of to earn additional income by selling hay and grass quality seed resources, input-output market problems and seed mainly to local livestock keepers and markets lack of credit facilities, as well as limited extension ser- (Mnene 2006; Omollo 2017). Fodder production in vices. Although a different study by Irungu et al. (1998) the areas is rainfall dependent, with preferred grass noted that adoption of Napier grass in the highlands of species including those that are drought resistant, Kenya was influenced by farmer education level, farm size, highly palatable and adapted to the local environ- years of experience in farming and membership in co- ments. Some of these grass species include Eragrostis operative group, they noticed that accessibility to credit fa- superba, Cenchrus ciliaris, Chloris roxburghiana and cilities did not have any significant effect on adoption of Enteropogon macrostachyus (Mnene et al. 1999; this particular grass species. Most past studies have re- Kidake et al. 2016). Also, these grass species are pre- ported that prior to adoption of a new idea, farmers learn ferred on the basis of their ability to self-reseed and a great deal on-farm about the performance and suitability become annual after the first year of establishment. of fodder technologies to their farming systems, livestock Farmers do not need to prepare land and apply fresh production practices and its sustainability (Lenné and seeds for some years until productivity starts to de- Wood 2004). In so doing, they learn about the potential cline. The main sources of grass seed are the Kenya benefits and risks that come with the technologies. There- Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization fore, fodder options attuned to farmers’ local context are (KALRO) and farmers’ own source - harvesting from likely to be adopted. Most other studies (Koech 2014; naturally growing grass to obtain startup seeds Mureithi et al. 2016; Wairore et al. 2015)havefocused (Omollo et al. 2017). The production is small scale mainly on the qualitative and quantitative benefits of fod- and dependent on own labour and use of locally der production, leaving only grey area on factors deter- available and cheap resources such as family labour mining household participation in fodder production. It is and ox plough during land preparation and other against this background that the current study was con- production activities. The farmers mainly plant grass ducted to assess factors influencing pastoral and agro- through seed broadcasting and control weeds by pastoral households’ participation in fodder production in uprooting sprouting unwanted plant (Manyeki et al. the southern drylands of Kenya. The results of this study 2015; Kidake et al. 2016; Omollo et al. 2017). are expected to play an important role in enhancing adop- These study sites are characterized by highly variable tion of fodder production technologies through identifica- and unpredictable rainfall patterns as well as more se- tion of areas that need policy interventions, thus vere and extended drought (Gikaba et al. 2014; Amwata enhancing livestock production for improved and reliable et al. 2015). They experience long rains from March to food and livelihood security in the ASALs of Kenya. May and short rains from October to December (Gikaba et al. 2014; Amwata et al. 2015), with annual rainfall ran- Study area ging from 300 to 1250 mm (Moss 2001; County Govern- The study sites were located in Makueni and Kajiado ment of Makueni 2013). The temperatures in these areas Counties in the ASALs of southern Kenya (Amwata range between 12 and 35 °C and are influenced by the et al. 2015). Makueni County falls between latitude season and topography (County Government of 1° 35′ and 30° 00′ S and longitude 37° 10′ and 38° Makueni 2013; Gikaba et al. 2014). 30′ E with an area of 7965.8 km2.KajiadoCounty Kajiado County is dominated by arid to semi-arid lies between latitude 1° 0′ and 3° 0′ S and longitude grasslands characterized by open grass plains, acacia 36° 5′ and 37° 5′ E with an area of 21,901 km2 woodlands, rocky thorn bush lands, swamps and (CBS 1981; Government of Makueni County 2013; marshlands (Ogutu et al. 2014). The main soils are Ogutu et al. 2014)(Figure1). The study areas were poorly developed and shallow clayey soils in the flood- purposively selected because of their active participa- plains; brown calcareous clay loams, sandy soils, ash tion in the Agricultural Research Supports Program and pumice soils in the higher elevations; and basement Phase Two (ARSP-II) that was started in 1998 to de- rock soils which

Load more