HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Authors: Claire Bedelian Stephen Moiko Mohammed Y Said
Donor Disclaimer: This work was carried out under the Collaborative Adaptation Research Initiative in Africa and Asia (CARIAA), with financial support from the UK Government’s Department for International Development and the International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada. The views expressed in this work are those of the creators and do not necessarily represent those of the UK Government’s Department for International Development, the International Development Research Centre, Canada, or its Board of Governors.
Citation: Bedelian, C., Moiko, S. and Said, M.Y (2019). Harnessing opportunities for climate-resilient economic development in the semi-arid lands: The Kenya southern rangelands beef value chain. PRISE Working Paper. Nairobi: Kenya Markets Trust. London: Overseas Development Institute.
Design & Layout: Boniface Gor | www.digimatt.co.ke
Photo Credits: Kenya Markets Trust Acknowledgments
1. We acknowledge the guidance of Dr Elizabeth Carabine (Overseas Development Institute, UK) and Dr Catherine Simonet (Overseas Development Institute, ODI) in implementing and interpreting the VC-ARID approach. Also, the wider PRISE research team members who conducted the country value chain analyses that have provided analytical insights for this study. These are Dr Denis Akouwerabou (Université Ouaga II, Burkina Faso), Dr Parfait Bako (Université Ouaga II, Burkina Faso), Samavia Batool (Sustainable Development Policy Institute, Pakistan), Dr Assane Beye (Université Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar, Senegal), Dr Simon Waguru Ndiritu (Strathmore University, Kenya), Fiona Bradshaw (independent researcher, UK), Dr Néné Dia-Ndiaye (independent researcher, Senegal), Dr Waoundé Diop (Université Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar, Senegal), Dr Sebastian Gollnow (Sustainable Development Policy Institute, Pakistan), Dr Fahad Saeed (Sustainable Development Policy Institute, Pakistan), Dr Issiaka Sombie (Université Ouaga II, Burkina Faso) and Dr Antoine Yerbanga (Université Ouaga II, Burkina Faso). 2. At ODI, we thank Eva Ludi, Nathalie Nathe, Helen Mountfort and Rajeshree Sisodia for programme and communication support. 3. At the Kenya Markets Trust, Nairobi, Kenya, we acknowledge the management team led by the CEO Mr Kamau Kuria and Head of Research, Mr Charles Warria for their guidance and support. We are also grateful for the technical support from the research and programme team, namely; Joseph Muhwanga, Robina Abuya, Abdikarim Daud and Dr John Wamahiu. 4. We are grateful to the County Government of Kajiado for giving us permission to carry out the research in Kajiado County. 5. We thank all our research participants, enumerators, workshop participants and community members in the study sites throughout Kajiado County, for giving their time to support this study.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN i LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ACC African Conservation Centre ASALs Arid and Semi-Arid Lands CARIAA Collaborative Adaptation Research Initiative in Africa CBD Central Business District CBO Community Based Organisation CCCF County Climate Change Fund CIDP County Integrated Development Plan FGDs Focus group discussions GDP Gross Domestic Product GeoCLIM Geospatial Climate software tool GRs Group Ranches ILRI International Livestock Research Institute IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change KIIs Key Informant Interviews KILP Kenya Livestock Insurance Program KLMC Kenya Livestock Marketing Council KMC Kenya Meat Commission KMT Kenya Markets Trust KNBS Kenya National Bureau of Statistics NDMA National Drought Management Authority NGOs Non-Governmental Organisations ODI Overseas Development Institute PRISE Pathways to Resilience in Semi-arid Economies RCPs Representative Concentration Pathways SORALO South Rift Association of Landowners TLU Tropical Livestock Units UAE United Arab Emirates VC-ARID Value Chain Analysis for Resilience in Drylands
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: ii THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction Kenya’s livestock sector is vital to the arid and and aims to identify climate change impacts, semi-arid lands (ASALs) of Kenya, and makes adaptation options and opportunities for a major contribution to the economy of 12% private sector investment in the beef value national GDP. The livestock sector is also a chain. We focus on the pastoralist livestock significant form of income and livelihood for system in Kajiado County, where livestock are people in Kenya. It is estimated that 80% of reared on communal or private land, and beef Kenya’s livestock are found in the ASALs, which enters the burgeoning Nairobi meat markets cover about 89% of Kenya’s land surface primarily for domestic trade. The research and support 38% of Kenya’s population. was carried out as part of the Pathways to The livestock sub-sector is one of the fastest Resilience in Semi-arid Economies (PRISE), growing agricultural sectors, its growth is linked a five-year, multi-country research project to increases in the demand for meat and that generated new knowledge about how other livestock products in the developing economic development in semi-arid regions world. There are thus untapped opportunities can be made more equitable and resilient for livestock development in Kenya, and to climate change. The paper follows the particularly in the ASALs to contribute to these Value Chain Analysis for Resilience in Drylands global demands. (VC-ARID), an innovative interdisciplinary approach to value chain analysis that takes Cattle are a major component of Kenya’s account of the specific characteristics of livestock sector and the most important semi-arid systems (Carabine and Simonet, source of red meat. In Kenya, the demand 2017; 2018). The approach is designed as a for beef and meat products is projected to tool to target adaptation and development grow due to a growing human population, investments to deliver inclusive climate- increased urbanisation and a growing middle resilient economic development. class. However, it is anticipated that Kenya’s domestic beef supply will not be able to meet The paper follows the VC-ARID approach to the growing per capita demand on beef, analyse the beef value chain in the Southern with an estimated short fall of domestic beef Rangelands of Kenya, using a common-three supply of approximately 20%. There are thus step methodology: opportunities for pastoralists in the ASALs to meet this expected and growing demand Step One: Map the value chain, including for meat if they are better integrated into its actors and linkages, and identify key the value chain. Nevertheless, the ASAL constraints. livestock sector faces a range of risks due Step Two: Identify climate risks at each stage to its high vulnerability to climate change, of the value chain. with implications for increased poverty and reduced food security. This will require Step Three: Identify adaptation and private significant investment in the ASAL livestock sector investment options for climate-resilient sector to adapt to these climate risks. value chain transformation. This working paper focuses on the livestock sector in the Southern Rangelands of Kenya
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN iii Methodology Two sites in Kajiado County were chosen to carry Kajiado County. To understand climate risk out the study: 1) Shompole and Olkiramatian along each stage of the value chain, we group ranches in Magadi Region, and 2) carried out a quantitative survey with 351 Meto in Namanga Region. Both sites are close producer households across the two study sites, to the border with Tanzania. In both sites, the and a qualitative analysis of climate risk with predominantly Maasai communities practise the full range of value chain actors identified extensive livestock keeping alongside small- in Step One, through a more comprehensive scale cultivation. The sites have high numbers set of KIIs and FGDs. of resident cattle, as well as large numbers of Tanzanian cattle that are trekked across In Step Three, findings from the household the border from Tanzania into Kenya. Both survey, KIIs and FGDs in Step Two were used sites house active primary livestock markets to identify and explore potential adaptation and are nearby to large secondary livestock options. These are options that address climate markets which feed the terminal livestock risk and also have an opportunity to upgrade markets in Nairobi and enter the Nairobi meat and transform the value chain. Adaptation chain. options were then shared and deliberated with stakeholders through a series of meetings Within the three-step VC-ARID methodological and feedback workshops to identify specific approach, a number of qualitative and feasible options for public and private sector quantitative methods were used. In Step investment. One, this included key informant interviews (KIIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs) The study used an extensive process of with the full range of actors in the beef value stakeholder engagement, from defining chain. Livestock and meat markets were the sector and value chain to work in, all mapped and visited. To investigate horizontal the way to identifying the evidence-based transformation and the links between tourism adaptation options. Stakeholders came and the beef value chain, we held interviews from national and county governments, the with tourism and conservation actors. These private sector, NGOs and civil society groups. methods were supplemented by an in-depth We held regular meetings and discussions with review of Kenya’s livestock value chain and stakeholders over the course of the project. guiding policy framework. Stakeholders also became active participants in the research through the KIIs and FGDs. In Step Two, to identify climate risk, we Towards the end of the project, feedback analysed historical trends in rainfall and meetings were held at the community level temperature in Kajiado County between in Meto, Olkiramatian and Shompole, at the 1960 and 2014, and then analysed projected county level in Kajiado, and at the national rainfall and temperature based on the three level in Nairobi. These meetings were used Representative Concentration Pathways to validate research findings and discuss the (RCPs) adopted by the IPCC Fifth Assessment identified adaptation options. Report. Using these climate RCP scenarios, we estimated the projected impact of climate change on cattle range and population in
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: iv THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Step One – Mapping the Value Chain Kenya’s livestock value chain is made up of mind, and there is wide interest and uptake three main red production systems: 1) pastoral of more commercially-oriented breeds such production in the ASALs, 2) private ranches in as Borana and Sahiwal. Market timing is the ASALs, and 3) dairy farms in the highland influenced by the availability of pasture and areas. Pastoral production makes up the vast water, an animal’s optimum body condition, majority of Kenya’s red meat production, with as well as cash needs to purchase food during approximately 80–90% of red meat consumed the dry season. Pastoralists thus raise livestock in Kenya produced by pastoralists, either for important risk mitigation benefits as well within Kenya or from neighbouring countries. as more market-oriented production. Access A significant portion of Kenya’s meat supply to markets however, can be a constraint for comes from livestock from neighbouring remote pastoralists who rely on traders and countries, suggesting that Kenya is unable to middlemen to access the market or for market meet its domestic demand for beef without pricing information. foreign imports, and is a meat deficit country. Almost all the production is consumed by the Livestock and meat traders and brokers act as domestic market, with only 1% being exported. important market connectors along the value chain. Traders may be full time traders or they Kajiado County’s beef value chain is may be producers who trade occasionally. predominantly made up of cattle extensively Livestock trading usually occurs every day reared on private and communally owned at the terminal markets, and on select days rangelands. Kajiado County forms part of at primary and secondary markets. Animals Kenya’s major meat production region. Along are trekked or trucked between markets, major livestock routes, cattle are trekked or with trucking the more preferred, although trucked from pastoral areas to primary and expensive option. This is especially in the dry secondary markets, and then to terminal season, when there is little grass to eat en markets in Nairobi. The main points along route to terminal markets and animals are the value chain consist of inputs, production, likely to lose body condition. trading, processing and domestic market. Inputs to the extensive pastoral production At the processing stage, meat is cut and beef value chain consist of water, pasture, processed into products such as mincemeat, feed, veterinary services, livestock breeds and particular meat cuts, and at high-end labour. In the pastoral drylands, availability processing facilities, sausages and other of inputs, such as water and pasture can be products that allow for value addition to the scarce, especially in the dry seasons. Cattle meat. However, most of the beef originating breeds consist of a mixture of indigenous, from Kajiado County ends up at low-end exotic and cross-breeds, where the indigenous informal slaughterhouses and slaughter slabs, Zebu cattle are well adapted to the drought with little processing or value-addition. Most conditions, although cross-breeding with slaughterhouses are found to be associated Sahiwal and Borana is an increasingly with the terminal markets in Nairobi, with common more market-oriented strategy to few facilities found at primary or secondary improve market off-take. markets or closer to the pastoral rangelands. Local to high-end butcheries also act as At the production stage, cattle are reared processors, and the latter may offer a range by pastoral and agro-pastoral producers of value-added products. in Kajiado County. However, many also originate from across the border in Tanzania. The domestic market ranges from low- Despite the long-term rhetoric that pastoral end wholesale meat markets, street stalls producers predominantly keep cattle for and butcheries to high-end butcheries, cultural reasons and like to accumulate large supermarkets, schools, hotels and other herds with little market off-take, we find there institutions. Meat quality and price varies is increasing commercialisation of cattle with the level of market sophistication and production in Kajiado. Producers are active in consumer. At the low end, markets target low buying and selling livestock with the market in income consumers and sell ‘hot meat’ that HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN v has been slaughtered on the day of purchase the increasing domestic demand for beef and is not refrigerated, forcing meat to be sold in Kenya. As a result, significant numbers of by the end of day. This type of meat makes up cattle are trekked in from across the border the majority of Kenya’s total meat sales in the from Tanzania. There are thus opportunities for value chain. At the high-end, markets target growth in Kenya’s cattle production. high income consumers and sell high margin, value-added meat products through a well- At multiple stages along the beef value chain developed cold chain including cold storage there are horizontal linkages with tourism. In and transportation facilities. This type of meat one of the field sites, wildlife conservancies makes up only a minority of Kenya’s meat act as important dry season grazing areas for sales in the value chain. wildlife and livestock, and provide benefits to pastoralists through employment and The value chain mapping identified a community-level benefits. Tourism can also number of inefficiencies along the beef value support improved road infrastructure that chain. These include a disconnect between benefits livestock trading and marketing, and pastoralists and the end markets due to many increases demand for high quality valued- actors involved in a single transaction resulting added beef products. There are examples of in high transaction costs, and minimal value horizontally and vertically integrated livestock chain addition and diversification of the meat enterprises that directly link producers beef product. These inefficiencies result in to the end markets, reducing the number of low returns to the pastoralist producer, who steps along the value chain. These enterprises bears most of the loss and receives the lowest also produce high quality value-added beef profit margins. This disincentivises producers to products for the high-end markets, generating produce animals for the market and results in a higher return for the pastoral producer. an insufficient volume of sales able to meet
Step Two – Assessing climate risk In Kajiado County, droughts have been study sites showed that in the communal occurring at increasing frequency and Olkiramatian and Shompole group ranches, intensity since the 1960s. From 2016–2018 producers commonly relied on extensive during the study period, Kajiado County, strategies, such as the mobility of livestock and like Kenya’s other ASAL counties, was settlements, whereas in privately owned Meto, experiencing drought conditions and producers relied on more intensive strategies, intermittent rainfall. Analysis of climate trends such as grazing within their own fenced land between 1960 and 2014 shows an overall parcels, providing inputs of water and fodder, decline in rainfall, and temperature increases and destocking livestock before drought. of almost 1.5oC. Analysis of projected climate changes, indicate further expected increases Drought was perceived to be the most in temperatures of between 1.00 oC to 1.59 important climate shock, followed by delay in oC by the 2030s depending on the climate the rainy season and out of season rains. In scenario, and an increase in the number 2009, a severe drought affected producers in of heavy rainfall events. The temperature both Magadi and Namanga regions, and this increases translate into a loss of 12.7–14.2% was soon followed by another more moderate of suitable cattle range (that above 30oC) by drought in the Magadi region between 2013 the 2030s, potentially affecting 74,000 cattle, and 2014. Migration was the overwhelming equating to KSh 2.9 billion. response to these droughts, often across borders into neighbouring counties or In the quantitative survey, producers clearly countries, followed by the purchase of feed perceived that there had been a change in and hay. To be better able to cope with the rainfall and temperature patterns in the future drought, producers thought better last 10 years. Accordingly, they perceived that pasture management, improved early these changes had affected their livestock, warning systems, and increased fodder and by decreasing herd size and quality, and hay stocking were key. During the study reducing milk production. In response, they period, the purchase of hay and fodder had taken a number of adaptation measures became increasingly common to cope with to cope with the changes, the most important the ongoing drought conditions. In terms being changes related to grazing and herd of service provision, producers were most management. Differences between the two satisfied with access to water for livestock,
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: vi THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN access to grazing, and market information there is a direct impact on infrastructure for and facilities, and least satisfied with disease marketing or distribution. surveillance and vaccination, early warning information, and credit and loans. Climate risk was found to be a major constraint to business. As climate shocks reduce the Climate shocks (such as drought, floods and supply and quality of cattle, the quality of beef a delay in the rains) present risk at each stage deteriorates, yet operational costs remain along the value chain: inputs, production, high. The absence of cold storage means meat trading, processing and domestic market. has to be sold on the day of slaughter, forcing These shocks present direct risks to the inputs further price reductions. Opportunities were and production stages, such as through a identified to process the lower quality meat reduction in pasture and water availability, into value-added products, although high increased mobility in search of resources, and meat prices and an absence of machinery increased livestock disease or death. After constrain even this option. At the end of the which, climate shocks are experienced as chain, lower-income consumers are priced knock-on effects (for example a reduction out of the market, whereas high-income in animals for trade or processing) until meat consumers pay a premium for the limited ends up at the end markets. Occasionally, quality beef that is available, usually sourced climate shocks directly affect trading and from commercial ranches and feedlots, or other stages along the chain, for example, if switch to white meat, which is cheaper.
Step Three – Identifying adaptation and investment options A number of adaptation and investment TRADING options were identified at each stage along the beef value chain. These were explored • Aggregation of producers and traders into and deliberated with stakeholders and actors livestock marketing groups or associations along the chain. These are options that address to strengthen their collective bargaining climate risk and also have an opportunity to power and facilitate trade. upgrade and transform the value chain. Key adaptation options include: PROCESSING AND DOMESTIC MARKET INPUTS • Investments in cold storage in the meat chain, that allow the development of a • The rehabilitation of heavily degraded cold chain to prevent meat being sold rangelands to increase pasture at reduced prices or wasted. availability for use during periods of normal production as well as during • Increased value addition to beef, drought periods. especially of low-quality beef readily available during drought (for the low- • The production or purchasing of hay end markets). or other sources of feed to maintain production and sustain cattle during • Vertically integrated private or drought periods. community livestock enterprises that create strong direct linkages between PRODUCTION pastoralists and end-markets (for the high-end markets). • Fattening of lean cattle in producer or trader groups, to convert them into market ready animals to sell at a profit. Recommendations The study makes the following provide capacity building and training recommendations: on marketing and value addition. 1. Migration is a fundamental adaptation 7. To avoid speculative pricing and enable strategy used by pastoralists during better price negotiations between drought. The Kajiado County producers and traders, the Kajiado government needs to maintain and County government can improve protect specific areas for livestock livestock marketing infrastructure such grazing, as well as livestock corridors as weighing scales. This should however that facilitate the mobility of livestock. be accompanied by a community sensitisation programme to understand 2. Pastoralists and farmers, supported by any avoidance on the use of such public and private investments, should infrastructure. Livestock marketing be encouraged to invest in hay and associations can also help to provide fodder production to provide pasture and share up to date information on during drought periods. Pasture can be pricing. used for domestic herds or sold on to other livestock owners. 8. Early warning systems play an important role in preparing communities for 3. The public and private sector should climate shocks. The National Drought support cattle breeding programmes Management Authority (NDMA) should that optimise a mix of climate-resilient establish early warning systems that are and commercially attractive traits. In in a form that is easily accessible to more arid areas, the most effective producers and traders in the pastoral breeds will be those that are more heat rangelands. tolerant rather than high performing commercially-oriented breeds. 9. Beyond the high-end meat channels, there is an absence of a well-developed 4. Support should be given to create and cold chain and a lack of cold storage maintain community-oriented livestock– facilities during transportation, wildlife conservancies as areas that processing and at the end markets. The provide dry season grazing for livestock. private sector should invest in cold Conservancies are horizontally and storage to avoid meat losses and vertically integrated with the beef value reduced prices for meat that has to be chain, and can support all stages of the sold by the end of the day of slaughter, value chain. as well as to allow time for processing 5. Access to finance is a constraint to and value addition. actors at all stages of the value chain. In 10. An opportunity that stood out in the particular, financial services should be value chain was the processing and better designed to cater for pastoral value addition of low-quality meat that production systems to help producers is especially prevalent during drought, and traders engage in activities such as into popular products such as sausages hay production and fattening. The and smokies. This requires the upgrading Kajiado County government should set of processing facilities and the up a County Climate Change Fund purchasing of the necessary equipment (CCCF) to finance climate change so processors and butchers can develop adaptation efforts, and a livestock new products for sale. insurance scheme to protect against drought-related mortality. 11. Pastoralist communities should be supported by the private sector to set 6. Livestock producers and traders should up vertically integrated livestock be encouraged to form livestock enterprises. These link the opposite ends marketing groups or associations to of the value chain and bring producers increase their participation in markets closer to markets and consumers. These and their collective bargaining power. enterprises can directly link producers The Kenya Livestock Marketing Council to high quality end markets and thus (KLMC) and the Departments for Trade provide them with greater profits and and Livestock should support producers share of added value along the chain. and traders to form these groups, and
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: viii THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments i
List of Abbreviations ii
Executive Summary iii
Table of Contents ix
List of Figures xi
List of Tables xii
CHAPTER 1 Background and Context 1
1.1 Introduction 02 1.2 Economic justification for selecting the sector 03 1.2.1 The Kenyan livestock sector 03 1.2.2 Meat consumption and demand: Opportunities 04 1.3 Climate change and variability: Risks 05 1.4 Context and study sites 06 1.4.1 Kajiado County 06 1.4.2 Study sites 08 1.5 Methodology 08 1.5.1 Step One 08 1.5.2 Step Two 09 1.5.3 Step Three 10
CHAPTER 2 Step One – Mapping the Value Chain 11
2.1 Step One description 12 2.2 Kenya livestock value chain 12 2.3 Kenya Southern Rangelands Beef Value Chain: Kajiado County 13 2.3.1 Inputs 15 2.3.2 Production 16 2.3.3 Trading 2.3.4 Processing 19 2.3.5 Domestic market 21 2.3.6 Consumers 22 2.4 Key constraints identified along the beef value chain 25 2.5 Tourism links to the beef value chain 26 2.5.1 Background 27 2.5.2 Olkiramatian/Shompole Conservancies and Tourism 27 2.5.3 Linkages between tourism and the beef value chain 28 29
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN ix TABLE OF CONTENTS 33 CHAPTER 3 Step Two – Assessing Climate Risk
3.1 Step Two description 34 3.2 Literature review of climate trends and shocks in Kajiado County, Kenya 34 3.3 Analysis of climate trends in Kajiado County 36 3.3.1 Historical changes in rainfall and temperature 36 3.3.2 Projected changes in rainfall and temperatures 37 3.3.3 Impacts of climate trends and shocks on livestock 39 3.4 Quantitative survey results: producer level 40 3.4.1 Household socio-economic characteristics 40 3.4.2 Household adaptation to climate change 43 3.4.3 Historical climate shocks: responses to the 2009 and 2013/14 droughts 47 3.4.4 Livestock extension services 51 3.5 Qualitative analysis of climate risk along the value chain 3.5.1 Climate shock – Drought 52 3.5.2 Climate shock – Delay in the rainy season 52 3.5.3 Climate shock – Floods 57 57
Step Three – Identifying adaptation and CHAPTER 4 59 investment options
4.1 Step Three description 60 4.2 Discussion of adaptation options 60 4.2.1 INPUTS: Rangeland Rehabilitation 60 4.2.2 INPUTS: The production or purchase of hay and fodder 61 4.2.3 PRODUCTION: Livestock fattening 64 4.2.4 TRADING: Aggregation of producers and traders into marketing groups 65 4.2.5 PROCESSING: Investments in cold storage in the meat chain 4.2.6 PROCESSING: Increasing value addition of low-quality meat 66 4.2.7 ALL STAGES: Vertically integrated livestock enterprises 66 67
CHAPTER 5 Conclusions and Recommendations 69
5.1 Summary and conclusions from analysis of Steps One to Three 70 5.2 Recommendations 71
75 CHAPTER 6 References
Appendices: 81
Appendix 1: Stakeholder engagement strategy 82 Appendix 2: Policy review 85 Appendix 3: Mapping the livestock routes 86
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: x THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Map of Kajiado County, showing study sites, households interviewed in 7 Step Two and protected areas and conservancies
Figure 2: Population growth rates in Kajiado County and other selected ASAL 8 counties compared to the national level from 1962 – 2009
Figure 3: Kenya Livestock value chain 13
Figure 4: Beef value chain map showing key markets in Magadi and Namanga 14 regions in Kajiado County
Figure 5: Schematic diagram of the Southern Rangelands beef value chain 14
Figure 6: Livestock routes and markets in Kajiado County 15
Figure 7: Livestock population trends of Kajiado County between 1997 and 17 2014
Figure 8: (Left) Truck carrying livestock in Kiserian; (Right) Pick-up Truck 21 converted to maximise the number of shoats carried
Figure 9: Meat sales channels of beef and shoat meat in Kenya 23
Figure 10: Meat kiosk at Burma meat market 24
Figure 11: Linkages between the tourism sector and the beef value chain 31
Figure 12: Temporal trends in annual rainfall for Kajiado County between 1960 36 and 2014
Figure 13: Temporal trends in: a) minimum, and b) maximum temperatures for 36 Kajiado County between 1960 and 2014
Figure 14: Spatial projections of maximum temperature changes in Kajiado 38 County based on RCPs2.6, 4.5 and 8.5 for the period 2030s, 2050s and 2070s
Figure 15: Potential impacts of temperature change on cattle range in Kajiado 39 County for the three RCPs 2.6, 4.5 and 8.5 and for the periods 2030s, 2050s and 2070s
Figure 16: Adaptation measures taken to changes in rainfall in the last 10 years 45
Figure 17: Adaptation measures taken to changes in temperature in the last 10 47 years
Figure 18: Satisfaction level of livestock extension services 51
Figure 19: Identified climate risks along the beef value chain in Kenya’s Southern 58 Rangelands
Figure 20: Adaptation and investment options along the beef value chain in 68 Kenya’s Southern Rangelands
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN xi LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Interviews and focus group discussions carried out during Steps One to Three 9
Table 2: Sample size and reference population for each group ranch and study region 10
Table 3: Details of the three main consumer buckets in Kenya and their market potential 25
Table 4: Perceived benefits of conservancies in Magadi area (% households) 29
Table 5: Perceived costs of conservancies in Magadi area (% households) 29
Table 6: Timeline of climate shocks for Kajiado County compiled from discussions with producers and 35 traders in field sites and from literature sources
Table 7: Annual average minimum and maximum temperature projections for 2030s, 2050s and 2070s 37 for Kajiado County
Table 8: Key socio-economic characteristics of households by study region and overall 40
Table 9: Households owning different types of livestock, by study region and overall (% responses) 41
Table 10: Mean number of livestock type owned per household, by study region and overall 41
Table 11: Perception of livestock herd size up compared to the previous year (2015), by study region 42 and overall (% responses)
Table 12: Household ownership of land, by study region and overall 42
Table 13: Size of land owned in either study region (acres) 42
Table 14: How rainfall changes in the last 10 years have affected livestock by study region and overall 43
Table 15: How temperature changes in the last 10 years have affected livestock by study region and 44 overall
Table 16: Adaptation measures taken to perceived changes in rainfall in the last 10 years by study 45 region and overall
Table 17: Adaptation measures taken to changes in temperature in the last 10 years by study region 46 and overall
Table 18: Livestock ever affected by the climate extremes since year 2000 (% households) 47
Table 19: Effect of drought on livestock production and income (% households) 48
Table 20: Main response to the named droughts in the study region 49
Table 21: Received an early warning before the drought struck (% households) 49
Table 22: Improvements (first and second answers) made since the 2009/2014 drought that make 50 livestock better able to deal with drought by study region and overall (% households)
Table 23: What more needs to be done to help reduce the impact of drought on livestock by study 50 region and overall (% households)
Table 24: Access to services now and before devolution by study region and overall (% respondents) 52
Table 25: Adaptation options for the beef value chain emerging from research findings and 62 stakeholder engagement in Kajiado County
CHAPTER ONE Background and Context 1.1 Introduction Pathways to Resilience in Semi-arid Economies VC-ARID follows a common three-step (PRISE) is a five-year, multi-country research methodology: project that generated new knowledge about how economic development in semi- 1. Step One: Map the value chain arid regions can be made more equitable and resilient to climate change. The PRISE 2. Step Two: Assess climate risks at each level project, ‘harnessing opportunities for climate- of the value chain resilient economic development in semi-arid 3. Step Three: Identify adaptation and private lands: adaptation options in key sectors’, aimed to identify opportunities for economic sector investment options for climate- transformation and diversification in semi-arid resilient value chain transformation. countries, in key sectors rooted in the semi- This working paper follows the VC-ARID arid lands – livestock and cotton (Carabine approach to analyse the beef value chain in and Simonet, 2017; 2018). the Southern Rangelands of Kenya. The main This working paper focuses on the livestock aims of this paper are thus to: sector in the Southern Rangelands of Kenya 1. Map the beef value chain, including its and aims to identify climate change impacts, actors and linkages, and identify key adaptation options and opportunities for private sector investment in the beef value constraints chain. 2. Identify climate risks facing livestock Kenya’s livestock sector is vital to the semi- producers and other actors at each stage arid lands of Kenya, and makes a major of the value chain contribution to the economy of 12% national gross domestic product (GDP) (Behnke and 3. Identify potential adaptation and Muthami, 2011). The beef value chain was investment options that help build the chosen as showing significant potential for resilience of the beef value chain. future economic growth, its national added To design and carry out the study we used an value, and large employment importance. extensive process of stakeholder engagement We focus on the pastoralist livestock system (see Appendix 1) throughout the research in Kajiado County, where livestock are reared period; from defining the sector and value on communal or private land, and beef chain to work in, to addressing issues and enters the burgeoning Nairobi meat markets priorities raised by stakeholders; and to identify primarily for domestic trade. priority evidence-based adaptation options This study recognises that there are two for climate-resilient economic transformation. pathways for climate-resilient economic Key stakeholders became active participants development in the semi-arid lands. First, in the research process as key informants, through the upgrading of the beef value participating in focus group discussions, and chain (vertical transformation), and second, joining field trips. through diversification within the sectors or The findings of this research are expected into tertiary sectors, such as tourism (horizontal to generate knowledge for stakeholders transformation). The study follows the Value and other decision-makers for the required Chain Analysis for Resilience in Drylands (VC- action needed for climate-resilient economic ARID) approach as described in Carabine transformation and diversification in the beef and Simonet (2017, 2018). VC-ARID is an value chain in the Southern Rangelands of innovative interdisciplinary approach to Kenya. The working paper provides a set value chain analysis that takes account of the of key adaptation options to help build the specific characteristics of semi-arid systems. resilience of value chain actors as well as It incorporates five key characteristics of promote economic transformation of the the semi-arid lands: production, climate beef value chain. We end with a number risk, seasonality, gender and informality. The of recommendations for policy-makers, approach is designed as a tool to target the private sector, NGOs and civil society, adaptation and development investments to promote climate-resilient economic to deliver climate-resilient economic development in Kenya’s livestock sector. development that is also inclusive.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 2 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 1.2 Economic justification for selecting the sector Kenya’s Vision 2030, the long-term goal of the agricultural sector is to achieve an development blueprint for the country, aims to average growth rate of 7% per year through make Kenya a middle-income country by 2030 commercialisation and modernisation of the (Rok, 2018a). Vision 2030 identifies agriculture sector (GoK, 2010). It aims to reduce people and livestock as one of the six priority sectors living below the absolute poverty lines to less with a high potential of spurring the country’s than 25%, to reduce food insecurity by 30%, economic growth and development. The and to increase the contribution of agriculture ‘Big Four’ development agenda launched to GDP as outlined in Vision 2030 (GoK, 2010). in December 2017, recognises the important roles that the livestock sector must play in Kenya’s GDP has increased in recent years, enhancing food and nutritional security to all estimated at US$ 74.94 billion in 2017 (World Kenyans, and in supporting value addition in Bank, 2018). In September 2014, Kenya the manufacturing sector (RoK, 2018b). crossed the threshold to become a lower- middle income country, making it one of the In 2017, the agriculture sector contributed largest economies in Sub-Saharan Africa. 31.5% to GDP (KNBS, 2018). The agricultural Kenya’s economy is growing, and there is sector is the backbone of Kenya’s economy an increasing middle class. Urban areas are and livelihood for most rural people. According growing almost twice as fast as rural areas; to the Agricultural Sector Development with an urban population growth rate of 4.3% Strategy 2010–2020, the sector accounts for and an overall population growth rate of 2.7% 65% of export earnings and employs 70% (UNDATA, 2018). These drivers are creating of people in rural areas (GoK, 2010). The an increased demand for food, including agricultural sector’s vision is for a food-secure livestock products (Delgado, 2005). and prosperous nation (GoK, 2010). The overall 1.2.1 The Kenyan livestock sector The livestock sector is one of the main and semi-arid lands (ASALs) where animals components of the agricultural sector. are primarily raised for meat production and Estimates of the contribution to the agricultural in the higher rainfall areas (the highlands) sector and to the national GDP vary. According where animals are raised primarily for dairy to the Agricultural Sector Development production. The ASALs (with an annual rainfall Strategy 2010–2020 (GoK, 2010), the livestock of less than 600 mm) cover about 89% of sector contributes 7% of the national GDP Kenya’s land surface and support 38% of and 17% of agricultural GDP, and accounts Kenya’s population (RoK, 2012). It is estimated for 50% of the agricultural labour force. that 80% of Kenya’s livestock are found in the However, a study by the Intergovernmental ASALs (GoK, 2010). The ASALs are thus the Authority on Development (IGAD) estimated major meat production regions in Kenya. that the contribution of livestock to national GDP is 12%, accounting for 43% of agricultural In developing countries, the livestock sub- GDP (Behnke and Muthami, 2011). This study sector is one of the fastest growing agricultural used revised estimates of Kenya’s livestock sectors (Thornton, 2010). Its growth is linked to population from the 2009 population census increases in the demand for meat and other and found a significantly higher estimate of livestock products due to population growth, the contribution of livestock to agricultural urbanisation and increasing incomes in the GDP of US$ 4 billion versus the official estimate developing world (Delgado, 2005). There are of US$1.6 billion1, an increase of 150%, showing thus opportunities for Kenya to keep up with, that previous estimates had underestimated and contribute to these global demands the contribution of livestock to the Kenyan for meat. There are untapped opportunities economy.2 for livestock development in Kenya, and particularly in the ASALs to develop meat. The livestock sector is a significant form of Although there is enormous livestock potential income and livelihood for people in Kenya. in the ASALs, development has been low Livestock keeping is a major economic and compared to the rest of the country. social activity for communities in the arid
1Using a 2009 exchange rate of US$ 1 = KSH 80 2The IGAD study used livestock figures from the 2009 Kenya human population census to derive the amount of physical product generated and value this according to producers’ prices. Previous government estimates by the KNBS use a commodity flow approach to estimating agricultural GDP that uses the recorded value, quantitative and prices for officially marketed agricultural commodities, so production is inferred from what is traded through official channels. These types of conventional GDP account can ignore some of the benefits people derive form livestock in subsistence-oriented economies, such as for large numbers of rural producers or pastoralists in Kenya. For example, when livestock is a component of household consumption, or when exchanges are not recorded or calculated in monetary terms. Much of the increase was due in particular to the contribution of milk production that is never marketed through official channels. HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 3 1.2.2 Meat consumption and demand: Opportunities Cattle are a major component of Kenya’s of domestic beef supply of approximately 20% livestock sector and the most important source including informal slaughter and consumption of red meat. Behnke and Muthami (2011) channels. estimate that in 2009, Kenyans consumed on average 15.25 kg of livestock meat per capita, As urban areas grow twice as fast as rural with beef accounting for 77% of the total areas in Kenya, there is an increasing demand consumption (11.77 kg per capita). A study by for meat in urban areas and consumption KMT (2014) extrapolated consumer demand rates are higher compared to rural areas of meat from 2013 to 2019, and estimated (KMT, 2014). Consumption of red meat (beef, that in 2014, 527,520 metric tonnes (MT) of goat and sheep) in Nairobi and Mombasa beef was consumed, representing 69% of all was estimated at 19.1 kg and 15.5 kg per meat consumed, and this was projected to capita per year, respectively, compared to increase to 612,124 MT by 2019. In comparison, the country average of 13.63 kg per capita sheep and goat meat represented 5% and 6% year (KMT, 2014). Nairobi (14%) and Mombasa of consumption by volume, respectively, and (3%) are red meat consuming hubs and drive other meats represented the remaining 20%. meat demand in Kenya, representing 17% of total volume consumed (KMT, 2014). Most In Kenya, the demand for beef and meat of the livestock sold and meat consumed in products is projected to grow due to a growing Nairobi comes from the pastoral communities. human population, increased urbanisation There is thus an opportunity for pastoralists to and a growing middle class (KMT, 2014). In meet this expected and growing demand if their projection from 2014–2019, KMT (2014) they are better and further integrated into anticipate that Kenya’s domestic beef supply the value chain and market inefficiencies are will not be able to meet the growing per capita removed. demand on beef, with an estimated shortfall
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 4 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 1.3 Climate change and variability: Risks The ASAL livestock sector faces a range of on the productivity of livestock, leading to risks due to its high vulnerability to changes the loss of livestock (Herrero et al., 2016). in climate and climate variability, with More intense rainfall events will also affect implications for increased poverty and the incidence of livestock diseases, such as reduced food security. Climate change Rift Valley Fever. Climate projections for the impacts in East Africa are already being ASAL, indicate that by 2030s, seven out of the felt, with increasingly frequent and severe 21 ASAL counties will have more than 50% of droughts and floods, more erratic rainfall their cattle above 30°C, the temperature at and higher average temperatures (IPCC, which cattle production will be affected by 2014). Recent evidence for the ASALs shows reduced feed intake and reproduction (Said an increase in temperature between 1960 et al., in review). The costs due to reduced and 2014, with five counties (Narok, Baringo, cattle productivity and the potential cattle Turkana, West Pokot and Elgeyo Marakwet) losses are likely to be significant. It is estimated surpassing the 1.5°C warming target (Said et that 1.7 million cattle will be affected, equal al., in review). Rainfall has declined in 15 out to a potential loss of between 34 and 68 billion of the 21 counties. Future trends3 show that Kenyan shillings (cattle prices between KSh increases in temperature will continue with 16 20,000 and KSh 40,000) (Said et al., in review). counties exceeding 1.5°C warming by 2050, as well as more intense rainfall in the short rainy Climate risk combined with growing rural season from October to December (Said et populations, a lack of infrastructure and al., in review). services, and rangeland fragmentation, will increase the vulnerability of the livestock Climate change is expected to have impacts sector. These drivers of change add to the on livestock feed and grazing systems, significant investment required in the ASAL including the composition, quality and livestock sector if it is to meet Kenya’s increased quantity of grazing pastures (Thornton et al., demand for meat and milk products, as well 2009). Increasing temperatures will result in as support national economic growth and the changes in grassland species composition livelihoods of millions of pastoralists and agro- and distribution, as well as affecting water pastoralists. availability for cattle with impacts on grazing regimes and availability of pasture (Thornton Section three provides a more detailed et al., 2009). In pastoral systems, the increased exploration of climate risk in the beef value frequency of climate shocks such as drought chain in Kajiado County as part of Step Two of and floods are likely to have significant effects the VC-ARID methodology.
3Climate projections based on Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 5 1.4 Context and study sites
The long rains fall between March and May 2,500m Altitude 1,250 Receives an estimated 2 1,250mm of rain per annum 21,901 km Kajiado Country (21,901 km2) is located in the southern section of the Eastern Great Rift Valley in Kenya Ngong Hills
The short rains fall between October and December
30–35 C Magadi being the lowestº point having high temperatures Lake Magadi 406,054 687,312 in 1999 in 2009 52% 500m POPULATION Altitude Receives less than 500mm rain per annum
10oC Mount Kilimanjaro has the lowest temperatures at 10 ºC
1.4.1 Kajiado County Kajiado Country (21,901 km2) is located in rainfall pattern is bimodal. The short rains fall the southern section of the Eastern Great Rift between October and December while the Valley in Kenya (Figure 1). Kajiado County is long rains fall between March and May. The an important supplier of livestock to Nairobi’s rainfall gradient increases with altitude; heavy burgeoning meat markets. Being adjacent to rains occur around the Ngong Hills, Chyulu Nairobi, Kajiado is well-placed to meet the Hills, Loitokitok and Ngurunman Escarpment extra demand for meat and milk products, which receive an estimated 1,250 mm, while if supported by a resilient and efficient beef Magadi receives less than 500 mm per annum. value chain. The close proximity to Nairobi Temperatures vary, with Magadi being the may give pastoralists in Kajiado a potential lowest point having high temperatures of advantage over pastoralists in other areas around 30–35oC, and highland areas at further away from Nairobi. Loitokitok on the slopes of Mount Kilimanjaro having the lowest temperatures at 10oC Most of Kajiado County lies in the semi-arid (GoK, 2013). The coolest months are between to arid zones (Bekure et al., 1991). Kajiado July and August, and the hottest between ranges from an altitude of 500 m at Lake November and April. Magadi to 2,500 m in the Ngong Hills. The
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 6 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Figure 1: Map of Kajiado County, showing study sites, households interviewed in Step Two and protected areas and conservancies.
Kajiado is a mix of communally-owned group growth rate is also linked to changes in land ranches and individual private parcels, with tenure from communal to private ownership 64% of the County now under individual encouraging the in-migration of people into land tenure (Moiko et al., 2019; Said et al., the county in search of opportunities (Moiko 2019). According to the Kenya census, the et al., 2019; Said et al., 2019). Being adjacent population of Kajiado County increased from to Nairobi metropolis, there is pressure on 406,054 in 1999 to 687,312 in 2009, and was the county as Nairobi continues to expand. projected to reach 1 million by 2017 (GoK, The towns of Ongata Rongai, Ngong and 2011). The county has an estimated annual Kitengela are the most urbanised and serve population growth rate of 5.3%, far higher than as residential areas for Nairobi’s working the national average growth rate of 2.6%. population. This high population growth Similar to other ASAL counties, the population rate creates increasing pressures for natural growth rate of Kajiado has increased at a resources in Kajiado, including pasture, water greater pace compared to national figures and land, as well as increasing the demand between 1962 and 2009 (Figure 2). for the consumption of livestock and livestock products. The high population growth rate is linked to in-migration and the rapid expansion of The county is one of the leading tourist urban centres, intensifying land use and destinations within Kenya due to a high wildlife expanding subsistence and commercial density and diversity within its national parks, agriculture. Kajiado has witnessed a number reserves, private conservancies and pastoral of land use changes, which include increasing ranches. These include Nairobi National Park, sedentarisation, expansion of settlements, the Athi Kaputiei ecosystem, the Amboseli cultivation and infrastructure development ecosystem, and the Southern Rift Olkiramatian (Ogutu et al., 2014). The high population and Shompole Conservancies.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 7 Figure 2: Population growth rates in Kajiado County and other selected ASAL counties compared to the national level from 1962–2009
1.4.2 Study sites This study was carried out in two field sites in primary livestock markets, and are situated Kajiado County: 1) Shompole and Olkiramatian near large vibrant secondary livestock Group Ranches (GR) in Magadi region; markets, Shompole market in Magadi, and Il and 2) Meto in Namanga Region (Figure 1). Bissil market in Namanga. They then feed the Shompole and Olkiramatian are GRs under terminal livestock markets in Nairobi and enter communal land ownership, whereas Meto is the Nairobi meat chain. Both sites are also a former group ranch that was subdivided situated close to the border with Tanzania, to individual private ownership, a process from where a large number of Tanzania that begun in 1978. Both sites are occupied cattle are trekked into Kenya and sold at the by predominantly Maasai communities primary and secondary livestock markets. where extensive livestock keeping is the main The cross-site comparison allowed the livelihood and economic activity. There is researchers to capture contrasting conditions some small-scale cultivation occurring in of communal versus private land ownership, both study sites, mostly dependent on rainfall, which is explored in analysis throughout the although in Shompole and Olkiramatian GRs, report, and also in an associated PRISE project there is irrigation from permanent river sources. that focuses on land tenure, climate change adaptation and investments in the semi-arid These sites were chosen because of their lands (Bedelian et al., in review; Moiko et al., high number of resident cattle that enter the 2019; Said et al., 2019). beef value chain and supply meat to Nairobi and beyond. They are sites with active local 1.5 Methodology A variety of qualitative and quantitative datasets, were used within the three-step VC- methods, and primary and secondary ARID methodological approach. 1.5.1 Step One Step One maps the beef value chain, and The full range of actors within the identifies the key actors and linkages along chain, including producers (male and the chain. This relied on a mixture of methods female), livestock traders, processors and including key informant interviews (KIIs), focus slaughterhouse managers, low-end and group discussions (FGDs), market observation high-end meat traders, butchery owners and and market mapping, and a literature and retailers, and consumers were interviewed policy review. using a guided set of questions tailored to
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 8 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN the different actors (see Table 1 showing with tourism lodge owners, conservancy KIIs and FGDs conducted). KIIs followed an managers, conservation NGOs, and the local opportunistic sampling strategy based on landowner association, South Rift Association snowball sampling. Some of the interviews of Landowners (SORALO). were more formal whereas others occurred more informally whilst visiting market places, Reports describing the Kenya livestock value slaughterhouses and other trading places. chain (KMT, 2014; USAID, 2012) were reviewed FGDs were held with livestock and meat and contextualised using information traders at the primary and secondary markets collected for Kajiado County, to produce a in the study sites, and terminal markets in map and description of the beef value chain Nairobi. From these discussions, the livestock for the Southern Rangelands. A policy analysis routes and main markets and slaughterhouses was carried to review the main policies guiding within the study sites were mapped. the livestock sector and beef value chain (see Appendix 2). National and county level To investigate horizontal transformation data on livestock and human populations, and diversification into strategies that link and land tenure trends were integrated from to the beef value chain, we looked at the complementary PRISE research and reports contribution of tourism to the livestock sector, (Moiko et al., 2019; Said et al., 2019). and the links between tourism and the beef value chain. This involved interviews
Table 1: Interviews and focus group discussions carried out during Steps One to Three Value chain actor Step One Steps Two and Three
No. of KIIs No. of FGDs No. of KIIs No. of FGDs
Producers 2 1 3
Female producers 1 1 3
Youth producers 2 3
Livestock traders in study sites 1 2 1 3
Livestock traders beyond study sites 2 1 2
Processors/slaughterhouses 2 3
Meat traders/Butchers/Retailers 2 8
Consumers 1 2
County council officers (at markets) 3 1
Other key informants 2 2
Tourism 4 1 3
1.5.2 Step Two Step Two assesses climate risk along each scenarios, we estimate the projected impact stage of the value chain. This is was carried of climate change on cattle range and out in three mains ways. population in Kajiado County. See Said et al., (2019) for a detailed methodology. Firstly, we analysed secondary data sources to understand climate trends and shocks in Secondly, to understand climate risk at the Kajiado County. We reviewed the literature producer level, a quantitative survey was to compile a timeline of major climate shocks carried out with 351 households across the in the county, and supplemented this with two study regions – Magadi and Namanga information gleaned from the KIIs and FGDs. (Table 2). The survey collected information on We analysed historical trends in rainfall and household characteristics, livestock and land temperature for Kajiado County between 1960 ownership, access to services, perceptions of and 2014, and also analysed the projected climate risk, and climate change adaptation rainfall and temperature for Kajiado County strategies. In Magadi region, households were based on the Representative Concentration sampled from Olkiramatian and Shompole Pathways (RCPs) adopted by the IPCC for its Group Ranches (GRs), and in Namanga Fifth Assessment Report. Using these climate region, households were sampled from
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 9 Meto subdivided GR. Sampling was random livestock markets, slaughterhouses, processors, from total household lists of each GR as butcheries and retailers in Nairobi, including comprehensively compiled by local informants the terminal market centres of Kiserian, using locally drawn maps detailing each GR. Dagoretti and Burma, as well as FGDs with Sampling occurred at approximately 20% of producers, traders, women and youth in each the reference population for each GR. The of the three study sites (Table 1). These built research was introduced to leaders in each upon the earlier interviews with value chain group ranch and local enumerators were actors in Step One and any new information recruited and trained to carry out the survey. was used to inform the value chain mapping The survey was carried out between July and in Step One. Questions on climate risk centred September 2016. Data were checked by field around perceived changes in climate in supervisors before being entered into SPSS v22 the last 10 years, how these changes had for analysis. More details related to analysis of affected their livestock production or business, the survey data are given in Step Two. and what measures had been put in place to cope with these changes. The KIIs and FGDs Thirdly, we carried out a qualitative analysis of were used to identify and explore potential climate risk with the full range of value chain adaptation measures and thus also covered actors identified in Step One. This consisted of Step Three of the approach. a more comprehensive set of KIIs and FGDs, including interviews with actors in a range of
Table 2: Sample size and reference population for each group ranch and study region
Group Ranch Study Households Total number of Sample Date of region sampled households in GR percentage of survey (sample size) (reference population population)
Olkiramatian & Magadi 170 827 20.6% July–Aug Shompole 2016 combined Olkiramatian Magadi 68 511 21.5% July–Aug 2016 Shompole Magadi 102 316 20.0% July–Aug 2016 Meto Namanga 181 973 18.6% Sept 2016 TOTAL 351 1800 19.5%
1.5.3 Step Three Step Three identifies adaptation and identified adaptation options for climate- investment options for promoting resilience resilient value chain transformation. This at different stages in the beef value chain. involved a wide variety of stakeholders, These are options that address both climate including representatives from county risk and also have an opportunity to upgrade government, local NGOs, producers and and transform the value chain. Findings trader groups, research organisations, the from the household survey, KIIs and FGDs media and civil society organisations. We in Step Two were used to explore potential held community feedback meetings at field adaptation strategies that were then shared sites; a joint meeting for Olkiramatian and and deliberated with stakeholders to identify Shompole GRs in April 2018, and one in Meto specific feasible options for public and private in June 2018. These were attended by men, sector investment. women and youth community members to verify research findings and discuss potential As part of our stakeholder engagement adaptation options. A wider PRISE project strategy (see Appendix 1), we carried out national stakeholder workshop was held in two Kajiado County stakeholder workshops Nairobi in April 2018, in which these findings in June 2017 and February 2018 to feedback were also shared and discussed. findings from Step One and Two and discuss
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 10 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN CHAPTER TWO Step One – Mapping the Value Chain 2.1 Step One description Step One maps the beef value chain, The beef value chain involves the range of identifying the different stages and key activities that are required to bring the final actors within the chain, and the vertical and product (that is meat) to the end markets horizontal linkages. A description of each and consumers, passing through the different of the value chain stages is given based on stages of production, trading, processing and information collected through the KIIs and distribution. Value chain analysis is a useful FGDS, as well as the literature. We identify approach to identify critical constraints and key constraints that limit efficiency in the beef inefficiencies within the chain where there value chain. At the end, an analysis of the links may be barriers to performance. between tourism and the beef value chain is presented. 2.2 Kenya’s livestock value chain Kenya’s livestock value chain is made up of sell livestock to local butchers or abattoirs, three main red meat production systems (KMT, before the meat reaches the consumer. For the 2014) (Figure 3). ASALs, the chain is more complex and involves pastoralists from both Kenya and neighbouring 1. ASALs – Pastoral production: Approximately countries, and private commercial ranches. 80–90% of red meat consumed in Kenya is Commercial ranching is particularly apparent produced by pastoralists, either within in Laikipia County, where a number of well- Kenya or from neighbouring countries. known private ranches are found, including Ol Pejeta, Borana and Sosian (Ndiritu and 2. ASALs – Private ranches: Another 2% comes Said, in review). In the ASALs, livestock may from livestock raised on ranches. pass through traders, cooperatives, ranches, domestic or export abattoirs, butcheries and 3. Highland – Dairy farmers: Dairy cattle also retailers, before meat reaches the consumer. contribute substantially to national supply, There are both domestic and export end and dairy farmers account for about markets. However, the Kenyan red meat 10–15% of Kenya’s red meat supply. value chain is primarily geared towards the domestic market. For highlands production, the chain is relatively simple, beginning with dairy smallholders, who Dairy farmers account for about 10–15% of Kenya’s red meat supply.
Approximately 80–90% of red meat consumed in Another 2% comes Kenya is produced 10-15% from livestock raised by pastoralists on ranches Highland Dairy farmers 80-90% 2% ASALs Pastoral production PrivateASALs ranches
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 12 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN E
Livestock Exporters
Export Meat Importers Abattoirs Exporters 1 C R C M - A C
Ranches Meat 2 Traders
Retailors P Livestock Abattoirs Traders 6
Dairy Farmers Butcheries 65 12
PRODUCTION COLLECTION FATTENING SLAUGHTER DISTRIBUTION
Figure 3: Livestock Value Chain (modified from KMT 2014) E -
The domestic market consumes approximately Kenya is thus currently unable to meet its 99% of production. Small volumes of meat (1%) domestic demand for beef without imports are exported by the Kenya Meat Commission from other countries, and is a meat deficit (KMC), private meat exporters and individual country. In 2012, there was an estimated ranches. Livestock and meat exports have shortage in domestic supply of 18% for cattle been minimal in recent years, at only US$ 4.7 and 19% for sheep (KMT, 2014). As the demand million in 2011, with the majority of exports continues to surpass the production of beef, going to UAE (31%) followed by Somalia (21%) Kenya has to increasingly rely on foreign and Tanzania (14%) (KMT, 2014). imports to meet the demand. This demand is projected to grow due to increasing Although Kenya’s pastoralists account for urbanisation and a growing middle class. the majority of Kenya’s meat supply (60–65% of the total), a significant portion comes It is argued that the deficit is due to Kenya’s from livestock from neighbouring countries livestock and meat value chains being (Tanzania, Ethiopia, Somalia and Uganda). inefficient, unorganised and poorly managed, Behnke and Muthami (2011) estimated that limiting Kenya’s competitiveness in the meat 22% of Kenya’s domestic beef, equalling sector (KMT, 2014; USAID, 2012). If the value 632,649 cattle, were imported into Kenya in chain is not improved it will have to increasingly 2009. rely on foreign imports to meet this demand.
2.3 Kenya Southern Rangelands Beef Value Chain: Kajiado County
In Kajiado County, the beef value chain in Figure 5. The main points along the chain is predominantly made up of pastoral consist of inputs, production, trading, producers extensively reared on private and processing and domestic markets. Each of communally owned rangelands. In the field these points on the chain are described in sites (Figure 1), there was no evidence of the following sections along with details of the ranching or dairy production. In the Ngong major actors within the chain. area of Kajiado County, there is some semi- intensive management of livestock on mixed Red outlines specific towns and/or primary farms targeting the dairy sector. In the rest and secondary markets relevant to the value of the report we focus on the pastoralism chain for both Magadi and Namanga. The production system found on extensive blue box shows a linkage between livestock systems. This consists of the live animal chain and other diversification strategies – including (cattle) and meat chain (beef). The chain is tourism, conservation, cultivation and the shown schematically in Figure 4 and illustrated nyama choma industry.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 13
Figure 4: Beef value chain map showing key markets in Magadi and Namanga regions in Kajiado County
Figure 5: Schematic diagram of the Southern Rangelands beef value chain
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 14 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN We concentrate on two major livestock routes areas to primary and secondary markets, and in the Southern Rangelands corresponding trucking from secondary markets to terminal to the field sites: 1) Shompole (field site: markets in Nairobi. However, trekking may also Olkiramatian and Shompole GR) to Nairobi be done from the secondary market to the (via Kiserian route); and 2) Namanga (field terminal markets. Appendix 3 shows a sketch site: Meto GR) to Il Bissil to Nairobi (via Kiserian map of Kajiado Livestock Market routes for or Isinya route) (Figure 6). Commonly, these Shompole and Namanga. routes are based on trekking from pastoral
Figure 6: Livestock routes and markets in Kajiado County. (Source: PROCASUR, 2012)
2.3.1 Inputs
Inputs to the extensive pastoral production Pasture for livestock takes the form of beef value chain include water, pasture, communally (Magadi) and individually feeds, veterinary services, livestock breeds (Namanga) owned rangeland. In Magadi, and labour (Figure 5). Water for livestock is where pastures are managed communally, supplied in different ways, including from there is active rangeland management by community boreholes, communal or private GR grazing committees and restrictions on water pans and wells, rivers and swamps. In grazing are placed on certain pastures for dry Olkiramatian and Shompole GRs in Magadi season use. The largest portions of Shompole Region, the permanent Ewaso Nyiro River and Olkiramatian GRs are used for grazing runs through the group ranches, ending in the during the wet season, and when permission swamps of Lake Natron. These GRs also border is granted by the grazing committee, livestock the Nguruman hills, the source of several are allowed to move to the dry season permanent tributaries (Sampu, Olobortoto and grazing zone. On the individually owned land Entasopia) and a valuable permanent source in Namanga, landowners manage their own of water for livestock, human and cultivation pasture resources and fence and exclude use. In contrast, Meto GR has no permanent other livestock. In both study regions, there is rivers, but several seasonal rivers that flow from some provision of fodder supplied to livestock the hills to the plains. The most prominent is the from crops grown in shambas, although Empukani stream, which provides water for a this is particularly evident in the cultivation few months after the long and short rains and zones of Shompole and Olkiramatian GRs. is relied upon for livestock watering. In Meto Availability of pasture is a major obstacle in GR, there is growing reliance on boreholes livestock production in both study regions, as and seasonal pans for water supply. evidenced by poor pasture availability and
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 15 persistent drought conditions during 2016– Namanga, where breed improvement has 2017. been going on for a number of years with the cross-breeding of selected breeding bulls Access to veterinary services in both field (particularly Sahiwal) to improve market off- sites in Kajiado County is poor with insufficient take. However, both sites showed the presence coverage of veterinary or animal health of and producer preference for improved services. Government provision of veterinary cattle breeds, as is also evident in other areas services is weak with few county veterinary of Kajiado (Nkedianye et al., 2011). Pastoralists officers considered available within the area. in the study regions widely spoke about an Livestock drugs are available from local agro- emerging preference to stock fewer animals vet shops and suppliers at the local weekly of higher quality breeds over a large quantity markets. However, these agro-vet shops are of lower quality animals. This was particularly often managed by unqualified personnel prevalent in Meto, in Namanga, where land and livestock drugs can be unsafely sold is subdivided and it is recognised that there is alongside foodstuff and other market goods. limited land and pasture available for livestock Moreover, there are commonly issues of grazing. In this area, pastoralists appeared to counterfeit drugs being sold to pastoralists. favour reducing their herd sizes of local Zebu Combined with poor knowledge of the and investing in a smaller number of more correct use of veterinary drugs, these factors commercially-oriented Sahiwal or Borana contribute to poor veterinary services in the breeds, or cross-breeds. In the absence of county. As a consequence, livestock diseases artificial insemination (AI) services (see Step can be a considerable constraint to livestock Two), breeding bulls are introduced into production. herds to service cows. Although more market- Cattle breeds in both sites are a mixture of oriented, the improved breeds are less indigenous, exotic and cross-breeds. Producers drought-resistant than indigenous breeds thus are investing in exotic or improved breeds and creating important trade-offs for increasing cross-breeding their local indigenous Zebu drought and climate-resilience (see Step Two cattle with Sahiwal and Borana for a higher for more discussion on climate-resilience of market price. This was particularly evident in breeds).
2.3.2 Production The main production system in Kajiado County and goats (shoats) increased significantly consists of pastoralist and agro-pastoralist by 39.9% during the same period (Ogutu et producers on rangelands held under al., 2016) (Figure 7). This is a trend reflected communal or individual ownership. Livestock more widely in the Kenya ASALs, and likely are individually owned, although they may linked to shrinking pastoral rangelands and be either individually managed or managed an increasing frequency and intensity of together with livestock herds belonging to kin droughts (Ogutu et al., 2016). Climate and or neighbours. recurrent drought is a considerable constraint to pastoral production and to the beef value Livestock trends in Kajiado County show a chain and is covered in further detail in Step decline in cattle population by 47.1% between Two. 1977 and 2014 whilst the population of sheep
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 16 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Figure 7: Livestock population trends of Kajiado County between 1997 and 2014 (Ogutu et al., 2016)
It is argued that pastoralists are not animals at the end of the rainy seasons when commercially oriented and livestock are animals have reached an optimal body kept as cultural assets to be sold only when condition and weight and can be sold for necessary (KMT, 2014). This argument tends to higher prices. However, livestock sales also see livestock marketing as mainly responding occur during the dry season due to the need to the cash needs of a household rather for cash to purchase grain or other foodstuff. than for profit-making opportunities, where At this point, animals have a poor body pastoralists will usually sell their animals when condition and lower weight and when sold as they are in most need of cash for school fees, a last resort during drought, fetch a low price. food purchases, health and veterinary costs, Pastoralists thus raise livestock for important but rarely with the market in mind (KMT, 2014). risk mitigation benefits as well as more market- The culturally-oriented pastoralist prefers to oriented production. accumulate their herds over time, selling only weak or old animals of low quality, which do Access to markets can be a constraint for not fetch a good price. pastoralists who have to then depend on traders and middle men to access the market. However, this trend is changing. Due to Distance to market is a challenge for more increasing commoditisation, lifestyle changes remote pastoralists. For example, it is a seven- and land tenure changes, pastoralists are day trek for producers in Magadi to reach increasingly keeping livestock with the market the livestock terminal market at Kiserian. This primarily in mind. There are thriving markets combined with a lack of pricing transparency in our study sites (especially Shompole and allows traders to offer unfair prices to Il Bissil markets), with pastoral producers pastoralists. Producers usually lack market actively involved in buying and selling of information on pricing which is controlled cattle. Wealthier individuals, especially by the traders. Producers sell their animals those involved in the livestock and meat from home or at the primary or secondary trade and connected to terminal markets, market to livestock traders and brokers. It are purchasing livestock for fattening to sell is estimated that in the live animal market, at a profit. As discussed above, there is an pastoral producers receive on average only increasing preference for stocking more 40–50% of the final sale price (40% for shoats, commercially-orientated breeds, especially 50% for cattle), estimated as a 5% return under private land tenure, that can raise on production, with traders receiving the higher prices at the market. remaining portion (MOLD, 2010). In the meat market, producers receive only 25–30% of the Market timing is influenced by pasture and final meat price in Nairobi, and 50% if sold to water availability. Pastoralists prefer to sell major local markets (MOLD, 2010).
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 17 There was limited evidence of organised for fattening or sale. Once market-ready, livestock marketing groups or fattening livestock were then sold and revenue shared groups in either study site, although this did amongst the group for their welfare needs (for occur informally among friends and relatives. example for educational or medical needs). Livestock fattening generally targets steers, Fattening was more common among traders since they are seen to give good returns. in Meto, but was highly dependent on access Olkiramatian producers discussed how to cash capital. informal family or friend-based groups might contribute money to purchase livestock
Tanzania cattle production Magadi and Namanga regions are situated and entered the meat markets to satisfy the on the border with Tanzania where a large increasing demand for meat in Kenya. There portion of cattle at the local markets originate were also opportunities for fattening these from Tanzania. Shompole market is situated animals for a period of 2–3 months before right on the border with Tanzania and a high sale, especially since they were relatively proportion of cattle from Tanzania enter cheaper to purchase. These uses of Tanzania Kenya’s beef value chain at Shompole cattle were more commonly perceived rather market. The influx of Tanzanian cattle to this than them being used to replace or add to market results in Shompole being the largest the herd since they were smaller, indigenous market on this route, and up to 800 cattle breeds, and considered inferior. However, the maybe traded on a market day in the wet exception to this was that they might also be season (Appendix 3: Table 1). During a visit to used for cross-breeding with exotic breeds. Shompole market in March, it was estimated by a county council officer that of the 375 There was some contention regarding the cattle at the market the previous week, 90 had large presence of Tanzanian animals in come from the surrounding Shompole GR, 115 the Kenya livestock markets. Many people from the surrounding Loita area (in Kenya) thought that Tanzanian cattle brought a lot of and 170 from Tanzania, thus estimating almost business into the Kenyan market and this was 50% of cattle were from Tanzania. Other viewed positively by different stakeholders in informants reported estimates of between 80– Magadi and Namanga study sites. Kenyan 90% of cattle at Shompole market originating traders were able to benefit as the cattle from Tanzania. from Tanzania were cheaper, and the group ranch and county council earned money In Namanga region, similar estimates of through the cess fees paid as animals entered between 70–80% of cattle at Namanga and the market (KSh 70 for cattle and KSh 50 per Meto livestock markets along the Namanga– shoat paid to the county council, and KSh 50 Nairobi livestock route were reported to be per cattle and KSh 30 per shoat to the group from Tanzania4 (Appendix 3: Table 2). The ranch). Producers and traders mentioned Namanga–Nairobi highway livestock route is that they would buy the cheaper Tanzania an important route that absorbs livestock from cattle as a means of restocking after droughts Tanzania and southern Kajiado as it moves or when in need of growing one’s herd. The towards Nairobi. The majority of livestock producers would add value to them by traded in this route are from Tanzania, but a breeding them with their own larger more good number of local livestock also join the valuable animals. Tanzania pastoralists and route at several trading centres along the traders explained that they liked to sell their Namanga–Nairobi highway trade route. cattle in Kenya to take home the Kenyan currency to exchange as it was of higher Producers and traders at study sites explained value compared to the Tanzanian currency, how cattle from Kenya and Tanzania and also to exchange cattle for other goods were easily distinguishable; the cattle from such as building material, diesel and certain Tanzania being smaller indigenous breeds foodstuffs. which raised a lower price compared to the larger and heavier cross-bred Kenyan cattle. However, others viewed the Tanzanian Prices between Kenyan and Tanzanian cattle cattle as disrupting and flooding the Kenyan can vary by US$ 50–100 at the market. It livestock markets with cheaper and lower was thought by some informants that most quality breeds, affecting the price of Kenyan of the Tanzanian animals went to slaughter livestock which as a result were also sold at
4It was discussed that the Tanzania livestock tax regime influenced livestock coming from Tanzania to Kenya. In May/June/July many livestock come into Kenya to be sold in Kenyan markets to escape a livestock tax that is imposed during July/August.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 18 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN a lower price. On the whole however, the largely acknowledged. Many recognised benefits of increased market activity brought that the Tanzanian cattle were coming to by the influx of Tanzanian cattle (to the Kenya according to supply and demand, county government and the group ranch and because there were not enough Kenyan due to cess collection; to value chain actors cattle for the market. These issues were such as traders and transporters from the also raised and debated during feedback increased trading activity, and to associated discussions with stakeholders (see Step Three). trading activities in food and materials) was
2.3.3 Trading Livestock traders and brokers act as important days as the animal moves from the primary market connectors along the value chain. market up through the secondary markets Traders buy cattle from producers at home or towards the terminal markets in Nairobi (see at primary or secondary markets, and move Appendix 3). Cattle may move from a primary them to terminal markets to sell to buyers. Small- or secondary market up to a terminal market scale primary (itinerant) traders purchase such as Kiserian or Dagoretti, but animals small numbers of cattle from pastoralists and are also just bought and sold between sell them to secondary traders. Secondary pastoralists, either at the market or at home, traders purchase larger numbers of cattle from and do not enter further markets along the producers and itinerant traders and sell them chain. The number of animals coming to the at the terminal markets. For example, large market fluctuates and was reported to be scale traders at Kiserian terminal market travel highest during the wet season when the price to, and buy livestock from, smaller traders of cattle was good. In the dry season, fewer and producers in the primary and secondary cattle would go to the market and producers markets in Shompole, Meto and Il Bissil. preferred not to sell their animals because of the lower condition and lower prices they Traders may be full time traders or even would receive. producers themselves. They may also be involved in other business or salary activities. Livestock brokers or middlemen are found at Traders mark-up the price of cattle as they sell the bigger markets, such as Shompole, and them on to other traders and slaughterhouses the terminal markets. These are not technically and can accrue good margins. If traders fatten value chain actors as they do not take cattle from a primary market, after a period of ownership of the livestock within the value maturation they later sell them to a terminal chain. They link livestock traders or producers market and earn a good margin. Livestock to butchery owners, meat suppliers or any traders deal with live animals and need to one in need of livestock. Their key advantage have sufficient capital to buy livestock. They is market information and the ability to link often sell livestock on credit to trusted meat sellers to buyers. Brokers negotiate between suppliers. pastoralists and traders and play an important price-setting role; they are often trusted Livestock trading occurs every day at the individuals known well by both the sellers and terminal slaughterhouses and on selected buyers. They usually do not have cash to pay days in the primary and secondary markets. for livestock and hence rely on buyers to pay Market days usually occur on subsequent
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 19 and give them a commission. Most livestock Traders may trek cattle from primary or dealers begin as brokers and graduate to secondary markets to terminal markets or become suppliers or traders. In the terminal transport them directly by truck. The use markets, new sellers or traders would find it of trucks to transport animals was widely difficult to sell their animals without going reported in both study regions, and was said through a broker, especially during periods of to have increased in recent years. Nowadays low supply and high demand (USAID, 2012). very few cattle are trekked from Shompole or Magadi to Kiserian, which used to be The more active and vibrant markets are more common in the past. When livestock associated with other business activities are trucked, a trader may occupy an entire going on, for example trading in other food truck or fill it along with other traders. Traders and household items, livestock drugs and also often use transporters (service providers) equipment, and women selling food and who own the trucks to carry the livestock from drink. distant livestock markets to terminal markets One complaint mentioned by producers at in Kiserian or Dagoretti (Figure 8). Transporters the market was the lack of weighing scales may also be herders who will trek livestock so sellers had to rely on traders in setting long distances for a fee. prices. Markets lack the equipment to weigh From Shompole market, about 5–10 trucks, livestock, so this is usually estimated by traders each carrying about 25 cattle, transport through visual estimation of the animals, often cattle to Kiserian or Dagoretti every Tuesday. underestimating the live weight and thus The cost is Ksh 1,000 per cow. The cattle setting a lower price. The seller’s ability to transported in trucks tend to be the heavy negotiate a good price is reduced, leading bulls, oxen and steers, where the condition to a loss on the side of the producer to the of the animal, and thus speed at which the advantage of the trader. Nevertheless, animals reached the market was an important livestock weighing scales have been installed factor. Trucking was generally the preferred 5 in certain markets, such as in Kiserian , but option which helped maintain the condition they are not used as traders prefer to visually of the animals, although its high cost was estimate the livestock weight, giving them limiting for some traders. If trucked, the cattle the advantage on price setting. This suggests arrive at Kiserian in good condition and are that the required solution is more than just the able to fetch a better price. Trekking cattle installation of infrastructure, but will require an to Kiserian was preferred for the small or low overall change in behaviour among traders value livestock, where loss of condition was and producers (see Step Three). not such an important factor in sales.
5We observed a weighing scale at Keekonyokie livestock market in Kiserian in April 2018. This was reportedly installed by SNV Netherlands in 2017. However, it lied disused as traders did not want to use it to weigh cattle and preferred to visually estimate the weight of the cattle they traded.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 20 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN There was a seasonal aspect reported in the and then trucked to Kiserian, considerably decision to trek or truck cattle to Kiserian. lowering the cost of transport services. During the wet season, trekking was more agreeable because there is plenty of grass The increase in the use of trucks to transport and water on route, and cattle are less likely cattle was said to be a major contributing to lose their condition. However, in the dry factor to the dying out of the Oldonyo-Nyokie season traders may be forced to use trucks as market on route from Magadi to Kiserian. This there is no grass to eat on their route to Kiserian used to be an active market but has recently and they might not survive the journey. During fizzled out. It is now largely used by women a field visit to Shompole, many cattle were to trade foodstuff and other merchandise. being trekked to Kiserian as at that time it was Livestock traders and middlemen travelling to thought enough grass and water were freely and from Kiserian and Shompole markets now available on route, and as such their weight bypass the market, unlike in the past when would not suffer. Alternatively, cattle were animals trekking had to stop there for a day trekked from Shompole to Magadi, along the of trading. poor stretch of road that was untarmacked,
Figure 8: (Left)Truck carrying livestock in Kiserian; (Right) Pick-up truck converted to maximise the number of shoats carried
2.3.4 Processing Processors purchase meat from and wholesale markets), and are the more slaughterhouses or from meat traders and common route for beef originating from our cut and process meat into products such as Kajiado study sites. Cattle are sold at the mincemeat, particular meat cuts and, at the terminal markets in Kiserian and Dagoretti to more high-end processing facilities, sausages, butchers and retailers, often via meat traders allowing for value addition to the meat. There and suppliers, and are then slaughtered at are two main types of processors or abattoirs the slaughterhouses associated with these in Kenya. The first are the high-end processors terminal markets. For example, at Kiserian usually owned by well-known consumer terminal market, the Kiserian and Keekonyokie brands such as Choice Meats, Quality Meat slaughterhouses, slaughter shoats and cattle, Packers or Alpha Fine Foods, that focus on respectively. premium quality fattened meat from quality breeds. These processors are large scale and A large proportion of cattle from our study are mainly found in Nairobi. They typically sites, and more broadly other livestock offer value added services and products that routes in Kajiado County (see Figure 6) and are then distributed to high-end butcheries, the southern rangelands, end up at the supermarkets and large retailers. Keekonyokie slaughterhouse in Kiserian. Keekonyokie is a community-owned and The second are the slaughterhouses, managed slaughterhouse established in slaughter slabs, and low-end butcheries that 1981 by a group of Maasai livestock keepers serve the informal market (local butcheries from the Keekonyokie section. Livestock are
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 21 slaughtered here and the meat is supplied Along the Namanga–Nairobi livestock route to outlets in Nairobi and its environs, offering there is no slaughterhouse at the Meto livestock crucial market access to pastoralists in the market, however there is a large one at Il Bissil Southern Rangelands. It has grown from market (Appendix 3). Thus, on this route, meat slaughtering approximately 35 cattle in 2005 to is transported to Nairobi as well as livestock. 150 cattle in 2018, and has helped pastoralists The slaughterhouse at Il Bissil livestock market get a 30% better price for their livestock (KII, slaughters twice weekly on Il Bissil’s two main Keekonyokie slaughterhouse). livestock market days, Monday and Friday. Approximately 200 cattle are slaughtered The slaughterhouse provides a slaughter weekly here, early in the morning at 2–3am to service to livestock traders, meat traders, allow meat to reach Burma wholesale market butchers and other retailers. It incorporates in Nairobi by 5am (KII, Il Bissil slaughterhouse). a meat processing unit, a cold storage room, In general, however, more livestock (approx. and also sells meat from an inbuilt meat 500 per week) are transported on from Il Bissil wholesale butchery directly to consumers. It to the terminal markets and slaughterhouses was estimated that about 25% of meat from in Kiserian, Kitengela and Dagoretti. The Keekonyokie leaves the slaughterhouse this slaughterhouse also slaughters animals for the way making it a profitable enterprise (KII, few butcheries in Il Bissil township. Keekonyokie slaughterhouse ). Although Keekonyokie slaughterhouse has a small Butcheries also act as processors. Local and meat processing unit which helps improve the high-end butcheries purchase carcasses from value addition of beef, few slaughterhouses slaughter slabs, slaughterhouses or wholesalers, have processors. Most abattoirs in comparison and process meat into mincemeat, deboned process meat in addition to slaughtering. meat, meat cuts and sausages. At the local butcheries there is minimal processing, but Along the Shompole to Kiserian route there mid to top end butcheries may offer a range are no slaughterhouses, except for a small of value-added products. slaughter house in Magadi owned by the Magadi Soda Company, which slaughters Profit margins for a butcher in Il Bissil were one or two cattle a day for the two butcheries about KSh 5,000–7,000 per cow, where they that serve the Magadi town. The butchery were buying a carcass for about KSh 35,000– owners purchase livestock at Shompole 45,000. Butcheries talked about the problems market and slaughter them at the small of high livestock prices and getting quality slaughter slab located on the outskirts of livestock to sell. Many butcheries are starting Magadi. The county council run the slaughter to sell ready-made cooked meat and have slab and there is a slaughtering fee of KSh a small side restaurant where consumers 100 per cow. There were talks to expand and could purchase cooked meat. The ready- improve the slab to increase its capacity and made meat trend has become popular with to allow meat rather than livestock to travel consumers because it avoids wasting time as to Kiserian. Due to the high volumes of cattle is common when having to wait for meat to passing through Magadi, it was thought there be prepared. was good potential for doing this.
2.3.5 Domestic market Meat may pass through a number of different and schedule. They either purchase livestock channels depending on the quality and price for slaughter or purchase meat from other of the meat. The meat trade and meat value suppliers. They also supply meat to external chain is mostly carried out in Nairobi. Actors in markets like Burma meat market. the meat chain include meat traders, meat suppliers, butchery owners, as well as traders Butchery owners obtain meat from traders and retailers that deal with offal and heads. and suppliers for sale to consumers. They also frequently buy livestock directly from Meat traders purchase livestock from the producers and convert them to meat. Butchers slaughterhouse and transport meat to obtain meat from the slaughterhouses and wholesale meat markets, butchers, processors processors either directly or through wholesale and supermarkets. Meat traders are able meat markets and meat traders. Butchers may to control prices according to supply and purchase cattle directly from markets and demand. Meat suppliers are meat traders who slaughter themselves or they use the slaughter supply meat to butchery owners, institutions, services offered by slaughterhouses and schools and hospitals on a pre-arranged price abattoirs. Butchers are thus both processors
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 22 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN and retailers working across different stages from about KSh 300–4506 per kg for low quality of the value chain. meat sold at local butcheries or meat markets, to KSh 500–600 per kg for standard meat, and From Kiserian, meat is sold to different up to KSh 1,200 per kg for high quality meat categories of retailers and consumers within cuts at the top end butcheries in Nairobi. Nairobi. Meat leaving the slaughterhouse supplies a number of butcheries, institutions, Butcheries are differentiated in terms of level of hotels and supermarkets, including wholesale sophistication and price structure. At the lower meat markets (for example Burma and City end, butcheries purchase ‘hot meat’ that has Market), large retail supermarkets (for example been slaughtered on the day of purchase Tuskys), low- and high-class butcheries, and is not refrigerated during transport or after schools, hotels and hospitals. Meat prices vary it reaches its final point of sale. The lack of across the different categories of meat buyers. refrigeration forces low price sales since meat Meat suppliers ordinarily negotiate supply must be sold by the end of the day. There is prices with buyers on the basis of the quality very little or no processing and value addition of meat required. Meat categories range to meat products in this category. Meat prices from low quality meat (targeting low class at this level are low (KSh 300-450 per kg). These hotels and Burma market), standard meat local butcheries (markets and street stalls) are quality (supplied to hotels and schools), high estimated to make up the majority of Kenya’s quality bull and oxen meat – lots of lean steak meat sales in the value chain at 53.7% of total (consumed by butcheries, supermarkets, and end consumer sales (KMT, 2014) (Figure 9). high-end hotels). Retail meat prices range
Figure 9: Meat sales channels of beef and shoat meat in Kenya (adapted from KMT, 2014)
One of the main low-end markets for meat which leases them to the meat traders. Kiosks sales is Burma meat market in Nairobi. Burma cover a range of functions and products market is the biggest and most active meat (Figure 10): meat wholesalers who sell on to market in Kenya, operating seven days a retailers to sell to consumers; different retailers week. It is made up of about 400 kiosks, from that sell different specialised products, such where processed or unprocessed meat is as deboned meat, intestines, heads, hoofs, sold to customers. Buyers visit the market to shoat meat and fish; and retailers that cook purchase meat, but others decide to have meat (roast, boiled or fried beef, shoats and it supplied to their shops. The meat kiosks are fish) for consumers who come to the market owned by the County Government of Nairobi, to purchase and eat cooked meat.
6For example, at the Keekonyokie slaughterhouse in 2018, the wholesale butchery attached to the slaughterhouse retailed meat at a low cost, of approximately KSh 300 per kg, with some seasonal fluctuations in price depending on supply and demand.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 23 Figure 10: Meat kiosk at Burma meat market Meat is supplied to Burma from slaughterhouses KSh 300 at Keekonyokie to as low as KSh 150 at around Nairobi, but also from more distant Burma, resulting in a large loss and distortion slaughterhouses far from Nairobi, such as in the value of beef. The low price of meat Namanga, Narok and Naivasha. Meat from available at Burma encourages many local Burma is sold to retailers and consumers butcheries to go to Burma to buy meat rather around Nairobi’s environs, but buyers from than directly from a slaughterhouse, distorting distant towns also frequent the market. Meat the price of meat. The meat market lacks prices are very variable and are determined regulation, hygiene and proper organisation by factors such as meat quality, time of day, (KII, Keekonyokie slaughterhouse ), although and demand and supply of meat in the there are government meat inspectors market. A kilogramme of quality meat with available to ensure that only safe meat is bone goes for KSh 350–400, while lower quality provided. meat may go for KSh 250–350. Meat prices are higher during the day, but fall dramatically At the middle-income level are the more towards the evening, as retailers try to sell evolved formal butcheries. These are larger before close of business. and are able to offer a greater variety of cuts and are able to store meat for sales in Burma market appears to be a market of subsequent days. For example, City Market last resort for many meat suppliers, since Meat Market is situated within the Nairobi many confess to supply to the market only central business district (CBD) and has about when they have no other alternatives. This is, 30 meat selling stalls. The stalls are owned however, not the case when livestock prices by the County Government and rented are extremely low, such as during droughts, to butchery owners who also act as meat when traders can break-even even with very traders. Unlike Burma, the stall operators low prices. Burma market is also a safety net for have meat supply arrangements with specific meat suppliers who need a place to dispose meat suppliers from different slaughterhouses extra meat or when their other better markets around Nairobi, including Kiserian. Although fail them. Burma’s strength is in its guaranteed stall owners generally have prearranged demand and sales, notwithstanding low supply chains, they often purchase at low prices. prices from other meat suppliers with good quality meat. Meat suppliers with good quality It was reported that Burma is badly managed, meat will thus often try the City Market first with inefficiencies causing a distortion of before ending up at Burma. Meat stalls at the meat prices (KIIs, KMT and Keekonyokie City Market are hygienic and target high-class slaughtherhouse). Burma’s meat market is consumers working in and around the CBD. renowned to be dirty with high quantities The stalls combine different types of meat such of rubbish dumped and meat known to be as beef, shoat meat, chicken and fish to cater ‘dirty’ and often left lying in the open. The to the varied needs of different clients. Meat value of beef per kilo can reduce from about prices at the City Market average KSh 550 per
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 24 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN kilogramme. There is also a section adjacent pay ranches in advance to fatten cattle and to the City Market, where cooked meat is refrigerate meat when it is delivered to the available for purchase. Formal butcheries are retailers. The major upmarket butchery brands estimated to make up 10.4% of total meat in Nairobi that are associated with quality meat sales in Kenya (Figure 9). products are Prime Cuts, Morendat Farms and Ol Pejeta. This market only accounts for about At the high-end, meat goes to supermarkets, 0.3% of total sales in Kenya (Figure 9). Hotels high-end butcheries, hotels and restaurants. and restaurants consume another 3% of These target high-end consumers and sell Kenya’s total red meat consumption, usually high margin, value-added red meat products. from branded processors such as Quality There is a well-developed cold chain including Meat Packers and Alpha Fine Foods. They sell cold storage and transportation facilities. value-added meat products which sell with Supermarkets service high-income consumers high margins. Purchasing decisions are based and stock a variety of products including on a supplier’s ability to provide consistent value-added products like sausages, burgers quality products at the volumes they require, and frozen ready meals. Some supermarkets and options to buy individual cuts of meat cater for both high- and low-income rather than whole carcasses, as per high-end consumers and offer a large product range. consumer preference. Supermarkets account for 3.2% of total meat sales in Kenya (Figure 9). High-end butcheries The remaining 29% of red meat is consumed offer high-end and export grade products that through entirely informal channels, including allows them to charge a premium compared informal and self-slaughter at home (Figure 9). to lower quality products. These butcheries
2.3.6 Consumers Consumers can be segmented according to a high percentage (9.6%) of the total meat their income levels, which determines their sales in value (Figure 10). In contrast, the meat preferences, willingness-to-pay and lowest income consumers represent the vast meat consumption behaviour (KMT, 2014). majority of the total population, yet have a The highest income consumers, although low meat consumption capita per year, and representing a low percentage of the proportionally represent a low percentage population, have a high meat consumption (60.7%) of total meat sales in value (Table 3). capita per year, and proportionally represent
Table 3: Details of the three main consumer buckets in Kenya and their market potential (KMT, 2014) Consumer Consumer segments % of total Meat consumption per Value of meat ‘bucket’ population capita per year consumed
Low income Low income and working 82.5% 13.2 kg (72%) 60.7% families
Middle Rising strivers and 15.5% 23.4 kg (23%) 29.7% income cosmopolitan professionals
High income Affluent Kenyans and 2% 32.7 kg (5%) 9.6% expat/tourists
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 25 Consumers may be loyal to particular meat meat. This was causing some change in the establishments that they regularly return demand from red to white meat. to, to purchase meat. Discussions with meat processors, revealed that consumers Consumer demand for meat was high at increasingly tend to like processed products, particular times of the year. For example, such as sausages, burgers and polony. These there was reported to be high demand for are the value-added products which can use meat during Christmas and other festivals lower quality animals, and thus could be sold and holidays. This was important in driving the at an affordable cost. Beef ‘smokies’ are an demand for meat at particular times of the example of a popular economy value-added year. Restaurants and hotels, more popular product that is roasted and sold at local with high-end consumers, were susceptible market stalls. to tourism downturns, where economic and political instability causes a decline in Mid- to high-end consumers and butchers tourists visiting Kenya. This has implications talked about an increasing preference for for businesses relying on sale to international white meat – fish and chicken – which were consumers. being considered the healthier option to red
2.4 Key constraints identified along the beef value chain This section gives a summary of the major of the potential value of the animal to constraints identified from mapping the traders and other value chain actors. Southern Rangelands beef value chain. 6. Minimal value addition or diversification 1. There is a disconnect between the of the meat product. This is incentivising pastoralists and the end market. There the supply of low quality meat sold are many actors (for example traders, cheaply in the Nairobi end markets. There middlemen and transporters) involved are limited meat processing facilities at in a single transaction, creating high slaughterhouses that constrain value transaction costs. The producer bears addition. most of the cost and receives the lowest profit margins. 7. Lack of a well-developed cold meat chain. The lack of refrigeration of meat 2. Livestock marketing information is poor means it must be sold on the day of and pricing is not transparent. Formal slaughter. This forces low price sales by pricing mechanisms such as weighing the end of the day and can incentivise scales are absent. This leads to a loss on the production of low quality meat over the side of the seller to the advantage high quality meat. of the traders due to informal and speculative pricing. If these constraints are addressed, Kenya’s beef value chain can become more 3. Limited fattening of livestock. There was competitive amongst its neighbours, reducing limited evidence of livestock fattening the need for the influx of Tanzania cattle, as groups to fatten livestock before sale well as providing better returns to its pastoral and produce higher quality of beef for producers. KMT (2014) summarise that the the market. greatest opportunity to capture additional value along the value chain is through 4. Absence of livestock marketing or reducing the excessive reliance on traders trading groups. There are few livestock and middlemen, so as to create stronger direct marketing or trading groups to engage linkages between pastoralists and abattoirs or and inform producers on marketing value-added products. Additionally, better issues. vertical integration along the value chain 5. The slaughterhouses are mostly between producers to consumers, with fewer concentrated in Nairobi. Cattle have steps along the value chain (especially in the to be trekked or trucked long distances meat trade) can increase efficiencies that to reach the end market and can lose translate to extra profits for pastoralists. condition en route. Producers lose much
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 26 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 2.5 Tourism links to the beef value chain This section looks at links between tourism areas), and also in the Northern Rangelands and the beef value chain, and the possible beef value chain in Laikipia (Ndiritu and Said, in ways that tourism can support the beef review). Using the beef value chain illustrated value chain. Tourism and conservation are in Figure 5, this study mapped the key links important components in the Magadi study to tourism identified through interviews and region where there is a high presence of focus group discussions. A case study is given wildlife, a number of tourism facilities and two of ‘Mara Beef’ – an innovative business model conservancy areas. Although this is not the supported by tourism, which shows horizontal case for the Namanga study region, this is and vertical integration of the beef value mirrored in many other areas of Kajiado and chain, directly linking producers to markets Narok counties in the Southern Rangelands and essentially reducing the number of steps (especially those adjacent to protected along the value chain.
2.5.1 Background Tourism is one of Kenya’s largest industries with economic opportunities for pastoralists. and a top earner of foreign exchange. In 2017, tourism generated KSh 119.9 billion (US$ However, a multi-site study in Kenya and 1.2 billion7 ) (KNBS, 2018). Although there are Tanzania Maasailand, shows that despite concerns over the fit between tourism and these opportunities, pastoralists tend to poor people’s livelihoods, including pastoral benefit little from tourism and conservation livelihoods, tourism can be a source of local incomes, except perhaps in the Maasai Mara economic development, and pro-poor in Kenya, where incomes are higher due tourism has been promoted to be able to to an exceptionally high tourism presence offer business and employment opportunities (Homewood et al., 2009). Problems relate to and improve infrastructure and markets for distributional issues where corrupt community the poor in remote rural areas (Ashley et al., level institutions may capture the higher 2001). Tourism also has the potential to have proportion of revenues (Thompson and a high multiplier effect in a local area if local Homewood, 2002), or when landowners people are employed and local businesses benefit directly at the individual level, elites supply tourists and tourism accommodation benefit most due to inequalities of the land and other services. subdivision process (Bedelian, 2012). Also, it is argued that the service side of the tourism There is a potential for communities living in industry (for example internal tour operators, areas rich with wildlife to benefit from tourism accommodation and transport services) opportunities. In Kenya, 65% of wildlife lives commonly gain 95% of the revenues from outside of formally protected areas, within wildlife, with only 5% filtering down to the the pastoral rangelands (Western et al., community level (Emerton, 2001; Norton- 2009). Pastoral lands therefore play a key Griffiths and Said, 2010). For these reasons, role in maintaining wildlife populations and tourism is considered a supplementary their migratory routes and habitat. In the East livelihood activity, and pastoralists are not African rangelands, wildlife and livestock have interested in substituting tourism for their lived side by side for millennia, and extensive current pastoral livelihood activities. Conflicts pastoralism is considered compatible between tourism and livestock also exist if with wildlife conservation (Western, 1982; tourism restricts livestock access to grazing Homewood and Rodgers, 1991; Reid, 2012). areas, or when wildlife is given preferential Periodic livestock grazing creates conditions access to pasture in conservation areas that are favourable for wildlife, and research (Bedelian, 2014; Bedelian and Ogutu, 2017). If shows that wildlife prefer to graze on nutrient this occurs during the dry season when forage rich pastures grazed by livestock (Reid et al., is diminished, it can exacerbate conflict. Also, 2003). Synergies between mobile pastoralism if pastoralists who live alongside wildlife, are and wildlife conservation keep rangeland not involved in, or benefiting from tourism on open and thus allow wildlife and livestock their land, they may also feel marginalised to coexist, allowing opportunities for tourism and become unsupportive of tourism or initiatives in pastoral land. Tourism can thus be conservation efforts. considered a potential diversification strategy
7Exchange rate US$ 1 = KSh 100
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 27 2.5.2 Olkiramatian/Shompole Conservancies and Tourism The Magadi area has traditionally had benefit communities through economic and significant wildlife populations. The area links social benefits, as well as livestock grazing. Amboseli and the Maasai Mara, both well- In Kenya, the number of conservancies has known tourism destinations with a high wildlife expanded rapidly over the last few years with presence. However, tourism in Magadi has approximately 160 conservancies present fallen short compared to its more prominent in 2016 (KWCA, 2016). The development of neighbours, and it is perceived that the conservancies can be positive for pastoral wildlife resources in the area are vastly livelihoods by improving income opportunities underutilised. Previous studies and initiatives and promoting sustainable land management. have recommended that the community However, if livestock are not well integrated should focus on establishing ecotourism into conservancy management plans and income-generating activities through private grazing strategies this can create conflict to sector partnerships (CDC, 2002). livestock-based livelihoods, and research has shown that conservancies that restrict The existing approach to tourism in Olkiramatian mobility and reduce grazing land can thus and Shompole –two high-end lodges, a tented create trade-offs for climate-resilient pastoral camp and a research centre – provides a livelihoods (Bedelian and Ogutu, 2017). diversified tourism product, and caters for different niche markets and a wide variety of Shompole Conservancy and Olkiramatian users. Preliminary discussions revealed that this Conservancy were set up in 1999 and 2004, increases the economic potential of tourism in respectively. As well as providing habitat the area, and helped improve its impact (KII, for wildlife and an area for tourism, the SORALO). Traditional ecotourism is subject to conservancies operate as dry season grazing wide fluctuations in visitor numbers, especially zones for livestock. They are often referred as a result of economic or political instability. to as the conservation or dry season grazing For example, in 2014, Kenya experienced zone in each group ranch as they are one of a dip in tourism due to recurrent insecurities the three land use zones found in each group and ensuing travel advisories. Furthermore, ranch (the other two being the settlement/ the post-election violence and subsequent wet season zone and the cultivation zone). global economic crisis in 2008 caused a 19% There are no permanent settlements inside drop in tourism in Kenya (Lumiti, 2009). This the conservancies, but temporary settlements highlights the fragility of the tourism industry. It may be used in the dry season. Livestock was perceived that research and education- and people are allowed to move to the based tourism are more buffered to this, as conservancy when permission is given by researchers compared to holiday tourists, the group ranch grazing committee, the are more likely to maintain their trips and thus designated committee that coordinates the provide a more regular and consistent tourism, seasonal livestock grazing movements. Times that is planned well in advance (for example are agreed at community meetings with the the resource centre has a number of regular group ranch members. Movement to the dry annual bookings from research groups) (KII, season grazing zones usually occurs around SORALO). August; however, movement can be delayed if there are good rains, or movement can occur Tourism however has not been smooth in earlier if there are particularly dry conditions. Magadi and the lodge and tented camp in There is a core area of the conservancy, Olkiramatian and Shompole are both relatively around where the tourism lodges are located, new and refurbished, after the lodges they that is reserved solely for wildlife use. replaced closed down. Tourism has also suffered conflict between the community Revenues from tourism are used to fund and a tourism operator. In 2011, the luxurious community projects such as education, Shompole Lodge closed down due to conflict health care and infrastructure. The focus on between the tour operator and the group women in the management of the resource ranch, and remains closed to this date. centre in Olkiramatian is positive as women can often be left out of tourism initiatives in Shompole and Olkiramatian group ranches pastoral areas (Bedelian, 2014). A recent study have both set up conservancies with the of Kenya’s tourism value chain showed that assistance of the African Conservation Centre there are limited tourism income and types of (ACC) and the South Rift Association of Land jobs available to women (Christian, 2015). Owners (SORALO). Conservancies provide habitat for wildlife, promote tourism, and can
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 28 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Conservancy benefits and costs To better understand the costs and benefits of were increased livestock predation (27.1%), conservancies to pastoralists in Olkiramatian competition with wildlife for grazing (17.1%) and Shompole GRs, producers and traders and reduced access to grazing land (21.2%) in the household survey were asked about (Table 5). Conservancies, thus had both their perceived costs and benefits of their positive and negative impacts for pastoral group ranch conservancy. As expected, dry livelihoods and production. Nevertheless, season grazing was the mostly commonly a high percentage of households did not perceived benefit (56.5%), and this was perceive any conservancy benefits (17.6%) followed by employment (15.3%) and or costs (24.1%), potentially indicating little community projects (7.1%) (Table 4). The most engagement with the conservancy. commonly perceived costs of conservancies
Table 4: Perceived benefits of conservancies in Magadi Table 5: Perceived costs of conservancies in Magadi area (% households) area (% households)
Primary benefit % households Primary cost % households (N = 170) (N = 170) Employment 15.3 Grazing fines 1.2 Dry season grazing 56.5 Reduced access to grazing land 21.2 School bursaries 2.4 Inter-community conflict 2.4 Competition with wildlife for grazing 17.1 Community projects 7.1 Increased livestock predation 27.1 Improved security 1.2 Increased wildlife disease 1.2 Improved governance 0 transmission Health services 0 Increased wildlife crop destruction 3.5 Other 0 Increased human injury due to 1.8 None 17.6 wildlife Other 0.6 None 24.1
2.5.3 Linkages between tourism and the beef value chain To explore the links between tourism and the during drought times. By providing sustainably beef value chain, each of the stages in the managed grazing land for both livestock and value chain were considered and linkages wildlife, the establishment of conservancies where tourism might influence or support the across Kenya is potentially improving the value chains or its actors identified. Some of linkages between tourism and livestock. the ways that tourism supports the beef value However, the extent to which livestock chain are outlined below and are illustrated in are truly integrated into conservancies, Figure 11. will determine how supportive they are of livestock. At the production stage, tourism At the Inputs stage of the value chain, linkages can provide alternative and diversified are shown through the provision or improved sources of livelihoods for pastoral producers access to sustainably managed grazing through employment in tourism or associated land. In Magadi, tourism helps to provide activities. sustainably managed grazing areas through conservancies, which also double up as the dry At the Trading stage, tourism provides season livestock grazing zones or grass banks linkages and services to the beef value chain during drought. Associated conservation through improved infrastructure and roads for networks assist in financing water points for better livestock production and marketing. livestock and human consumption, and in For example, tourism and the associated supporting herds through the introduction of conservation networks support community new breeds (for example through SORALO’s projects, and through improvements in Cattleman’s program8). infrastructure this can concurrently benefit the beef value chain. Roads improved for tourism At the Production stage, conservancies and tourists help to support the movement of provide access to pasture for livestock and livestock to markets or other grazing areas. thus support livestock production, especially
8The African Conservation Centre (ACC) and SORALO established the Cattleman’s Program to improve cattle productivity by introducing improved livestock breeds and rehabilitating grasslands. The Program is based in Mailwa former group ranch, close to Meto, in Kajiado County.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 29 At the Processing stage there are centralised purchasing systems for lodges. opportunities to promote ‘conservation They also include supply-related factors such beef’, using locally sourced beef that is as unreliable quantity and quality of local branded and sold at premium prices through production, high prices of locally produced value addition, enabling better margins for food, and environmental limitations. High-end pastoralists. This includes through privately- tourism establishments have guests with high owned slaughterhouses linked to tourism expectations over quality and types of food that buy local cattle and give better prices which limits the ability of linking tourism with back to producers (see Box 1 for the ‘Mara local producers (Pillay and Rogerson, 2013). Beef’ model), or through community-owned For these reasons, most tourism lodges in slaughterhouses (such as Keekonyokie Magadi end up sourcing non-local food, and slaughterhouse) branding ‘Conservation’ or use imported foodstuff and/or large suppliers ‘Maasai’ beef, and connecting this to hotels, in Nairobi. Discussions with the camp manager lodges and restaurants. at one camp in Shompole revealed that issues of reliability, variety and quality control, forced At the Domestic market stage, hotels, them to source food from Nairobi rather than lodges and restaurants, and the tourists that locally, due to poor supply, high variability, visit them, increase the demand and the low variety and an unknown use of drugs or consumption of beef that is locally produced pesticides. There was also concern over the by pastoralists in the rangelands. If tourism high levels of livestock drugs used locally, lodges are able to use locally sourced foods as well as the high uses of pesticides used (both meat and vegetable/fruits), this can on vegetables and fruit grown, especially be an important source of income for small- because there are no regulations to enforce scale food producers in the local area that a minimum use. Despite wanting to support bypasses a number of steps in the value chain the local community, the small scale and and creates vertical and horizontal linkages. inconsistent occupancy rates of their camp Most commonly, tourism lodges purchase made it easier to regularly drive in supplies their food, including meat, from wholesalers from Nairobi. For the reasons given above, and shops in Nairobi and other major towns. they preferred to buy their products from Thus, there exists an opportunity for sourcing Nairobi where product quality, and meat and this from local producers, creating a source vegetable tracing were better known. of income for local communities and direct linkages between tourism and agriculture In another example, a nyama choma (both pastoralism and cultivation). restaurant along the Magadi–Kiserian route, popular with weekend visitors from Nairobi, There are difficulties however in achieving has a policy of obtaining the goats and sheep this, and there are multiple constraints consumed at the restaurant from neighbouring acknowledged in trying to establish tourism– livestock keepers. The restaurant purchases a agricultural linkages (Pillay and Rogerson, significant number of animals per week and 2013). These include demand related factors has turned out to be an important local small such as tourist preferences for imported foods, stock market for families living close by. food health and safety considerations and
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 30 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Figure 11. Linkages between the tourism sector and the beef value chain.
Horizontally and vertical integrated livestock meat enterprises Some conservancies and associated tourism the value chain. A slaughterhouse and networks in areas with high wildlife and processor situated in the rangelands (Figure livestock presence, on both private ranches 11) eliminates the need for livestock transport and pastoralist-owned land, are establishing costs. The processor also allows for value- livestock meat enterprises. These link livestock addition of products that can generate production to the wildlife and tourism sectors, greater profit. The beef products are sold on thus being an example of horizontal integration. to high quality butcheries, restaurants and This includes the Mara Beef Company (Box 1) tourism lodges, thus providing access to high- in the Maasai Mara, Narok County, and the end markets. These outlets may be situated Linking Livestock to Markets programme in Ol in the rangelands thus providing a readily Pejeta Ranch, Laikipia County. available and accessible market for beef. All these factors increase the opportunity for the These enterprises directly link producers to pastoral producer to receive a better return markets and essentially reduce the number on his animal. of steps along the beef value chain, thus illustrating vertical integration. By providing These efforts provide a valuable link between a direct and guaranteed market for the sale tourism and the beef value chain, and have of cattle and beef, this reduces the number the potential to offer an approach that could of actors (that is the multiple livestock and be applied in other sites in the Southern meat traders, brokers or middlemen) and Rangelands. transactions (that is the series of livestock and meat markets passed through) along
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 31 Box 1: The Mara Beef Model
The Mara Beef Company is an innovative livestock meat enterprise situated on the edge of the Maasai Mara National Reserve in Narok County. It was set up in 2013 with the aim of promoting sustainable cattle and rangeland management and producing top quality beef for sale throughout Kenya. Mara Beef exists alongside the Enonkishu Conservancy established in 2009 and owned by 30 Maasai land-owning families. The conservancy is used for grazing and fattening the conservancy members’ cattle for slaughter. The conservancy is also home to numerous resident and migratory wildlife species.
The Mara Beef enterprise is owned and operated by investors, most of whom are not part of the conservancy land-owning families. The enterprise purchases livestock at standard live weight prices from the conservancy members as well as from pastoralists and farmers elsewhere. The conservancy follows a controlled livestock grazing management plan that is based on the Holistic Management approach developed by Allan Savory9. The conservancy has also established a livestock breeding programme, introducing the Borana cattle breed to support more commercially-oriented cattle production in the region.
Once the animals are fattened to a desired size, they are slaughtered and supplied to high level outlets and restaurants in Nairobi, and elsewhere in Kenya. The facility uses weighing machines when purchasing cattle to ensure farmers get fair prices for their animals relative to other markets. The slaughterhouse has refrigeration facilities and is able to provide value-added products such as aged meat as well as special cuts and sausages as desired by the market. Mara Beef targets the high-end market and thus is able to make good returns, a portion of which is shared among the members of the conservancy for use in conservation and community livelihoods projects.
The livestock–wildlife integrated management approach provides diversified income sources and thus promotes more resilient pastoral livelihoods. Mara Beef and Enonkishu Conservancy also established The Mara Training Centre in 2016, where communities from within and outside the Mara can come to learn sustainable rangeland management and livestock production. Since establishing the Conservancy, regular wildlife and vegetation surveys, show large increases in biodiversity and rangeland improvement.
9Holistic Management is a management system developed by Allan Savory that is used to improve grazing systems. Holistic grazing management is based on a system of rotational grazing that mirrors the behaviour of wild herds, and manages holistically the relationship between the land, animals and water (https://www.savory.global/holistic-management).
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 32 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN CHAPTER THREE Step Two – Assessing climate risk 3.1 Step Two description
Step Two assesses climate risk along each spatial comparator to investigate differences stage of the value chain. We first review and between the two study regions in terms of analyse climate trends and projections in land tenure and management: Magadi study Kajiado County, and the potential impacts region being under communal land tenure on cattle. Key findings on climate change and Namanga study region being under perceptions and adaptation strategies from private land tenure. Finally, a qualitative the producer level household survey are then analysis of climate risk (drought, delay in the given. Analyses are presented using study rains and floods) is presented for each stage region (rather than group ranch) as the main of the beef value chain. 3.2 Literature review of climate trends and shocks in Kajiado County, Kenya Meteorological drought is a recurrent impacts or responses given by participants are climate shock in Kenya. Kenya’s ASALs are summarised from across the study sites and experiencing an increasing frequency and are given alongside each climate shock. The intensity of droughts since the 1960s. Kajiado timeline is limited to those shocks as reported County has also suffered recurrent drought, by participants, going back 20 years to 1997. with increasing frequency in recent years. A longer climate timeline can be found in Since 1960, severe droughts in Kajiado have Carabine (2014). been reported in 1961, 1965, 1971, 1976, 1982, 1999–2000, 2004, 2006, 2008–2010 and The 2009 drought was perceived to be 2013–2014 (Ogutu et al., 2014; Nkedianye et particularly extreme, and was referred to al., 2011; Osano et al., 2013; Western, 2010). as the ‘the drought that decimated’ cattle. Droughts thus appear to be increasing in This drought was considered one of the frequency from what would occur once or worst droughts in living memory for many twice a decade in the 1960–90s, to every respondents. In the Amboseli ecosystem, three to four years since 1999. the drought was described as particularly acute, and as ‘a tipping point’ for Amboseli In contrast, 1962 and 1998 were extremely wet (Western, 2010); having impacts on the social, years due to the Indian Ocean Dipole and El ecological and cultural resilience of the Niño rains, respectively, and 1968 and 2001 Amboseli ecosystem (Carabine 2014). It is were also considered very wet years (Ogutu estimated that there were losses of cattle of et al., 2014). 84% in some areas in the ecosystem (Wangai et al., 2013). During 2017, Kajiado County experienced harsh drought conditions with the county The severity of drought impacts varies with experiencing poor and intermittent rains from rainfall and stocking rates. During drought, 2016 until the rains eventually came in early access to pasture resources becomes critical 2018. This caused many herds to migrate and herders often have to migrate further out of the county in search of pasture. The to find pasture. During the 2005 drought, drought was widespread in Kenya, affecting the Kitengela area in Kajiado County, 23 out of Kenya’s 47 counties (CDKN, 2017). experienced high livestock mortality rates In April 2017, the drought triggered a national despite the area experiencing above average emergency and 2.7 million people were rainfall compared to other areas (Nkedianye estimated to need food aid (CDKN, 2017). et al., 2011). This was explained to be partly due to the high immigration of large numbers Table 6 shows a timeline of climate shocks of livestock from far off drought-stricken areas experienced in Kajiado County, complied (Nkedianye et al., 2011). from focus group discussions and interviews with producers and traders in our field sites, as well as from literature sources. Key climate
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 34 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Table 6: Timeline of climate shocks for Kajiado County compiled from discussions with producers and traders in field sites and from literature sources
Year Climate shock and major Impacts References observations 2013/14 Drought – Olameyu le Experienced in Magadi region, but not Nkaresero (when people in Namanga. migrated to Enkaresero in Ewaso Nyiro and Ngurumani rivers Tanzania) dried up. People migrated to Tanzania. Livestock and crop diseases reported. 2009 Drought – When the The one that decimated cattle. Western, 2010; Matapato people Meto livestock migrated to Carabine, migrated to the Magadi Tanzania/Sonjo and Magadi Group 2014; area Ranches. Wangai et al., Magadi – Matapato people migrated 2013;
in. Osano et al., 2013
2004/05 Drought Cattle deaths. Nkedianye et Magadi – associated with bird flu, killed al., 2011 lots of doves and other birds. Meto – when people migrated to Nairobi and Kamba land. Lots of associated conflicts as people migrated to far away regions 1999/2000 Drought – Oshomoki Somali shifta were attacking people in Oldoinyo sampu – the Shompole/Olkiramatian areas. Kamorora (when people Presence of a government relief/food migrated to Oldoinyo aid programme. sampu – Kamorora).
1998 El-Nino rains – Olari loo Destroyed roads and bridges. Nkariak (The year of Human and livestock deaths due to floods). flooding. Diversion of the Ewaso Nyiro River.
Livestock diseases. Invasive plants spread. 1997 Drought – ‘Pee edungo Drying up of the Ewaso Nyiro River for Enkare Ngiro’ (drying up of the first time since the 1960s. the Ewaso Nyiro River). Lots of livestock deaths.
Since 2009, pastoralists in Magadi region the rains, resulting in few livestock deaths. In experienced another drought in 2013–14. Namanga, people explained that although This was reported by communities in Magadi, they did experience dry conditions and but not in Namanga region. Respondents depleted pasture, they were able to maintain in Magadi reported migrating with their their livestock in the area, and hence did not livestock to Tanzania in search of pasture, and classify this period as a drought. this sustained them until they returned after
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 35 3.3 Analysis of climate trends in Kajiado County This section provides an analysis of climate and spatial information for Kajiado County. trends and projections using the best available Full details of the methodology are given in meteorological data, modelling scenarios Said et al., (2019).
3.3.1 Historical changes in rainfall and temperature Rainfall and temperature data for Kajiado and a general decline in rainfall between 1960 County were extracted from the Geospatial and 2014 (Figure 12), although this decline Climate software tool (GeoCLIM) and was not statistically significant. The analysis regressed against time. The inter-annual indicates the average rainfall in 1960s was 689 variation of rainfall shows strong evidence of mm and this has declined to 564 mm by 2014. quasi-periodic oscillation in the annual rainfall
Figure 12: Temporal trends in annual rainfall for Kajiado County between 1960 and 2014 Both the minimum and maximum temperatures The trends show changing patterns of increased significantly in Kajiado County rainfall and temperature, contributing to the (Figure 13). The minimum temperature increasing frequency and intensity of drought increased by 1.39oC and the maximum as reported above. These patterns are also temperature by 1.48oC between 1960 and corroborated by the participants in our field 2014. These temperature increases are some survey (see below), where reduced and more of the highest observed in the ASALs (Ogutu variable rainfall, and increased temperatures, et al., 2016; Said et al., 2019). were widely perceived across study sites.
Figure 13: Temporal trends in: a) minimum, and b) maximum temperatures for Kajiado County between 1960 and 2014
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 36 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 3.3.2 Projected changes in rainfall and temperatures Said et al. (2019) analyse projected changes The projected changes in temperatures for in rainfall and temperature in Kajiado the three climate scenarios were analysed County based on the three Representative for three time periods 2030s, 2050s and 2070s Concentration Pathways (RCPs) – RCPs 2.6, to provide information on the expected 4.5 and 8.5. These are scenarios that describe magnitude of the climate response over each possible climate futures adopted by the time period. The projected temperatures IPCC for its fifth Assessment Report (AR5) in in Kajiado County show that there will be 2014 (IPCC, 2014). RCP 2.6 represents an a significant change in both the minimum optimistic projection characterised by a very and maximum temperatures for the three low concentration and emission levels of RCPs. On average, for RCP 2.6 the maximum greenhouse gases. RCP 4.5 scenario assumes temperatures will increase by 1.14oC in 2030s, that climate policies, in this instance the 1.26oC in 2050s and 1.10oC in 2070s. For the introduction of a set of global greenhouse RCP 4.5, maximum temperatures will increase gas emission prices, are invoked to achieve by 1.00oC in 2030s, 1.55oC in 2050s and 1.83oC the goal of limiting emissions. RCP 8.5 scenario in 2070s. The highest increase in temperature represents a pessimistic projection with high will be observed under the RCP 8.5 scenario. levels of concentration, and assumes no The maximum temperatures will increase by implementation of climate change policies. 1.35oC in 2030s, 1.99oC in 2050s and 3.10oC in 2070s (Table 7). Figure 14 shows the spatial Rainfall projections indicate changes to both variation in maximum temperature changes the annual and seasonal patterns of rainfall for each RCP and time period across Kajiado in Kajiado County. Projected rainfall for all County. The minimum temperatures follow RCPs indicates that the short rainfall period similar patterns but with higher values (Table (October–November–December (OND)) will 7). These projections have implications increase and be greater than the long rainfall for livestock production, as well as other period (March–April–May (MAM)), indicating agricultural production systems, which are a switch in the seasonal pattern of rainfall. explored further in the next section. Moreover, the number of heavy rainfall events are expected to increase, indicating an increase in extreme climatic events.
Table 7: Annual average minimum and maximum temperature projections for 2030s, 2050s and 2070s for Kajiado County (Said et al., 2019) RCP 2.6 RCP 4.5 RCP 8.5
Temperature 2030s 2050s 2070s 2030s 2050s 2070s 2030s 2050s 2070s increase
Maximum (oC) 1.14 1.26 1.10 1.00 1.55 1.83 1.35 1.99 3.10
Minimum (oC) 1.31 1.48 1.32 1.40 1.95 2.30 1.59 2.51 3.80
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 37 Figure 14: Spatial projections of maximum temperature changes in Kajiado County based on RCPs 2.6, 4.5 and 8.5 for the period 2030s, 2050s and 2070s (Said et al., 2019)
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 38 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 3.3.3 Impacts of climate trends and shocks on livestock The changes in rainfall and temperature herds when recovering from drought (McPeak reported above may help explain some of and Little, 2005). The switch to small stock is the trends in livestock populations reported also a common strategy where mobility is in Figure 7, which show a decline in cattle, increasingly curtailed (Dahl and Hjort, 1976) but large increase in shoats in Kajiado from and is expected to increase with climate 1977 to 2014 (Ogutu et al., 2016). Cattle are warming (Seo and Mendelsohn, 2008). The sensitive to fluctuations in rainfall, and as the switch is also a trend mirrored in other pastoral rainfall decreases, there is a corresponding areas in the southern rangelands, including the decrease in the number of cattle (Said et al., Maasai Mara (Ottichilo et al., 2000; Bedelian 2019). The opposite relationship is shown for and Ogutu, 2017). The diversification of herds sheep and goats. As rainfall decreases, there is thus an important strategy that pastoralists is a corresponding increase in the number of use to manage and cope with risk presented sheep and goats (Said et al., 2019). The general by a variable climate and to reduce their decline in rainfall shown in Kajiado between vulnerability to recurrent droughts. 1960 and 2014 may have thus favoured sheep and goats compared to cattle. Said et al. (2019) analyse the projected impacts of temperature changes on cattle Moreover, the significant increases in minimum range in Kajiado County based on the three and maximum temperatures in Kajiado may RCPs 2.6, 4.5 and 8.5 and the time periods have also favoured small stock over cattle. 2030s, 2050s and 2070s. Results show that The best temperatures for cattle production the impacts of increases in temperature on lie between 10oC and 30oC, and each cattle range varied across the RCPs and time increase of 1oC reduces their feed intake by periods, with the lowest range loss in RCP 2.6 3–5% (Thornton et al., 2015). Furthermore, and highest range loss in RCP 8.5 (Figure 15). the projected increases in temperature for For the 2030s, the range loss will vary between Kajiado in Table 14 show projected increases 12.7% and 14.2%, for the 2050s between 13.8% in temperature of between 1.00oC and 3.80oC and 18%, and for the 2070s between 13.5% depending on the climate scenario and time and 29.3% (Figure 15). It is estimated that period. This implies a potentially large impact by 2030, 74,000 cattle might be affected by on cattle production. extreme temperatures in the county, and the loss of these animals would represent a cost of The evident switch to small stock is likely linked approximately KSh 2.9 billion (Said et al., 2019). to the changes in climate and increasing intensity of droughts (Ogutu et al., 2016). These results have large implications for cattle Cattle have greater sensitivity to widening production in Kajiado County. The impacts of rainfall variability than shoats (Faye et al., climate shocks, including droughts and floods, 2012; Seo et al., 2009). Shoats have greater along the beef value chain are explored capacity to recover more rapidly from further in section 3.5, through exploration of droughts. The switch to small stock can also climate impacts with value chain actors. be explained by the lower feed requirements and shorter gestation time of small stock and the important role they play in rebuilding
Figure 15: Potential impacts of temperature change on cattle range in Kajiado County for the three RCPs 2.6, 4.5 and 8.5 and for the periods 2030s, 2050s and 2070s (Said et al., 2019) HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 39 3.4 Quantitative survey results: Producer level 3.4.1 Household socio-economic characteristics Table 8 shows the key socio-economic was higher in Namanga (44.8%) compared characteristics of the study households, across to Magadi (15.9%). It is not clear the reason the study region and overall. The vast majority for this difference, although it is possible of households surveyed were male-headed that respondents in Namanga had been (95.2%) with few female-headed households experiencing more intense drought conditions (4.8%). Livestock keeping was the primary than those in Magadi. livelihood activity for the majority of households (79.3%), and this was followed by cultivation The mean total household income for the last (16.2%). Few household heads had received three months was higher at US$ 985 in Magadi 10 any formal education (33.6%) although compared to US$ 765 in Namanga . In both this was much higher when considering all study regions, income from livestock was members of the household (87.4%), due to higher compared to any other activity, and children of the household head currently or reported at US$ 610 in Magadi and US$ 493 previously attending school. in Namanga. Income from livestock trading was considered separately, and was higher The percentage of households experiencing in Namanga (US$ 113) compared to Magadi transitory (occasional) and severe (throughout (US$ 74). the year) food insecurity during the last year
Table 8: Key socio-economic characteristics of households by study region and overall. Exchange rate US$ 1 = KSh 100 Household (HH) characteristic Magadi Namanga Total (N = 170) (N = 181) (N = 351) (% or SD) (% or SD) (% or SD) Male-/Female-headed HHs 161 (94.7)/9 173 (95.6)/8 (4.4) 334 (95.2)/17 (5.3) (4.8) Livestock as primary HH activity 140 (82.4) 138 (76.2) 278 (79.3) HHH education: Primary or 64 (37.6) 54 (29.8) 118 (33.6) above HH education: Primary or 148 (87.1) 158 (87.9) 306 (87.4) above HH suffered transitory or severe 27 (15.9) 81 (44.8) 108 (30.7) food insecurity in 2016 Mean HH size 10.14 (6.29) 9.80 (5.71) 9.96 (5.99) Mean HH livestock income 610.00 492.92 (596.57) (US$) (1150.93) Mean HH livestock trading 74.09 (512.51) 112.76 (438.43) income (US$) Mean HH other income (US$) 301.78 (486.31) 157.83 (268.45) Mean HH total income (US$) 985.31 765.01 (938.08) (1546.49) HH = household; HHH = household head
10Exchange rate US$ 1 = KSh 100 for the rest of the report
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 40 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Livestock ownership Almost all households owned livestock (Table to have encouraged a large population of 9). In Namanga, all households owned at shoats in the region compared to Namanga. least one cow, although this was lower for Sheep and goats have a better capacity to Magadi (85.9% of households). The ownership withstand drought conditions compared to of sheep and goats was inclusive of almost cattle, thus the higher presence in Magadi all households across both study regions. may be explained by the more arid conditions The mean number of livestock owned per found there compared to Namanga. household across the two study regions was 19.3 cattle, 58.8 sheep and 38.3 goats (Table It was also thought that there were favourable 10). conditions for sheep in Olkiramatian and Shompole GRs in Magadi, due to the presence We compared the differences in livestock of swamps and short grasses that sheep thrived ownership (cattle, sheep, goats, and overall upon. The Shompole swamp was thought to tropical livestock units (TLU11)) between the have encouraged a big population of shoats two study regions, and found that Magadi in the area. Access to the swamps is regulated households owned more of all livestock types and only allowed in the dry season. Cows are than Namanga households, although this was allowed access from June, and shoats only not significant for cattle (Table 10). The number allowed access from July. In a normal year, of sheep and goats was particularly high in grazing in the swamp is usually allowed until Magadi compared to Namanga. Situated around October–November when the short at a low altitude, Magadi experiences some rains fall, and livestock are then restricted of the highest temperatures and lowest again. rainfall in the county, and this was thought
Table 9: Households owning different types of livestock, by study region and overall (% responses)
Livestock type % Magadi % Namanga % Total (N = 170) (N = 181) (N = 351) Cattle 85.9 100 93.2 Sheep 98.2 99.4 98.9 Goats 98.2 98.9 98.6 Donkey -* 97.2 97.2
Table 10: Mean number of livestock type owned per household, by study region and overall No. of livestock type/ N Min Max Mean SD t Study region Cattle Combined 349 0 254 19.28 32.49 0.944 Magadi 168 0 254 21.01 38.90 Namanga 181 1 200 17.67 25.13 Sheep Combined 349 0 900 58.78 103.69 6.036*** Magadi 168 0 900 92.93 138.25 Namanga 181 0 200 27.08 30.87 Goats Combined 349 0 400 38.26 54.10 4.539*** Magadi 168 0 400 51.83 67.77 Namanga 181 0 300 25.66 32.64 Donkey* Namanga 180 0 20 4.51 3.51 TLU Combined 349 0 378 30.36 45.99 3.631*** Magadi 167 0 378 39.76 59.12 Namanga 181 2 190 21.69 26.39 *Data not collected for Magadi on donkeys *** Significant at p < 0.001 level
11Tropical livestock units (TLU) consider a range of livestock types and sizes in a standardized manner where one TLU=250kg. Cattle = 0.72 TLU and goats and sheep = 0.17 TLU (ILCA 1981; Grandin 1988).
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 41 When asked if they thought their livestock herds 12–13% of households in Namanga region. The were up or down compared to the previous reason for this difference is not clear, although year, only about 30% of households perceived it suggests that households in Namanga were their livestock herds to be up (Table 11). This experiencing a worse year for their livestock may be explained by the ongoing drought production compared to Magadi households. conditions households were experiencing This agrees with the perceived household during the study. When comparing across food insecurity across the two study regions, the study regions, approximately 50% of where Namanga households also reported households in Magadi region perceived their higher food insecurity compared to Magadi livestock herds to be up, compared to only households (Table 8).
Table 11: Perception of livestock herd size up compared to the previous year (2015), by study region and overall (% responses) Livestock type % Magadi % Namanga % Total (N = 170) (N = 181) (N = 351) Cattle 50.7 12.2 29.4 Sheep 47.6 13.4 29.7 Goats 47.6 13.4 29.9 Donkey -* 59.3 59.3
*Data not collected for Magadi on donkeys
Land ownership In Magadi region, Olkiramatian and Shompole size of plot owned was 9.24 acres (Table 13). group ranches are communal. However, In Namanga region, Meto group ranch is many households, especially in Olkiramatian, subdivided, a process that began in 1989. own small plots of cultivated land within the Almost all households (98.3%) reported owning group ranch’s cultivation zone. Over half a parcel of land in Meto or elsewhere. Only (55.3%) of households in Magadi owned a three households did not own land. The mean cultivated plot of land (Table 12). The mean size of parcel owned was 141.59 acres.
Table 12: Household ownership of land, by study region and overall Own land Magadi (%) Namanga (%) Total (%) (Cultivation plot) (GR parcel) Yes 94 (55.3) 178 (98.3) 272 (77.5) No 76 (44.7) 3 (1.7) 79 (22.5)
Table 13: Size of land owned in either study region (acres)
Study region N* Min Max Mean SD Magadi (cultivation plot) 93 0.10 210 9.24 21.75 Namanga (private parcel) 177 3.00 1810 141.59 240.24 *(One missing data on land size in each study region)
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 42 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 3.4.2 Household adaptation to climate change
Rainfall and temperature changes Respondents across the study regions felt For temperature, it was perceived that the strongly that there has been a change in the temperature had increased and become rainfall and temperature patterns in the last 10 hotter, but that there were now also large years, with rainfall and temperature changes variations in temperature than there were perceived by 96.6% and 91.5% of households, before. In Magadi, a greater number of respectively. For rainfall, it was perceived households perceived the temperatures had that the amount of rainfall had decreased increased compared to the high variations (43.1%), but almost just as common, was that in temperature (80.1% vs 13.0%) compared rainfall patterns had become unpredictable to in Namanga (53.1% vs 39.4%). Magadi is (38.4%). These findings were similar among the generally a more arid area than Namanga, two study regions. For example, one livestock with higher average temperatures, perhaps trader at Olkiramatian market explained that explaining these differences. One respondent it was not just that there had been an overall interviewed in Olkiramatian GR in Magadi, change or decrease in the amount of rain, but when asked how she perceived the changes that the seasonal patterns had changed, and in climate in the area, said, ‘now it’s always that rainfall patterns were less predictable, hot, there’s no hot and cold times as there less reliable and more variable. used to be’.
Effects of changes in climate on livestock For those households who reported these production (16.11%) was most commonly perceived changes in climate, 98.5% reported in Namanga, and decrease in and 83.8% of households perceived that herd size (32.78%) and decrease in grass these changes in rainfall and temperature quality (12.25%) and decrease in herd quality respectively, had affected their livestock. The (12.25%) in Magadi. The most common effects of these climate changes on livestock effect of changes in temperature reported are shown in Table 14 for rainfall and Table 15 was reduced milk production (18.01%), for temperature, in both study regions and decrease in grass quality (16.85%) and overall. decrease in water availability (16.67%). When disaggregated by study region, decrease in The most common effect reported due to water availability (20.10%) and reduced milk changes in rainfall was a decrease in herd production (15.98%) was most commonly size (23.87%) followed by a decrease in grass reported in Magadi, and decrease in grass quantity (18.73%) and quality (15.41%). When quality (21.03%) and reduced milk production disaggregated by study region, decrease (19.20%) in Namanga. in grass quantity (30.28%) and reduced milk
Table 14: How rainfall changes in the last 10 years have affected livestock by study region and overall
Effect on livestock Magadi (N = 302) Namanga (N = 360) Total (N = 662)
n (%) n (%) n (%) Decrease in grass quantity 15 (4.97) 109 (30.28) 124 (18.73) Decrease in grass quality 37 (12.25) 65 (8.06) 102 (15.41) Increased pests/diseases 28 (9.27) 11 (3.06) 39 (5.89) Decrease in water availability 32 (10.60) 26 (7.22) 58 (8.76) Decrease in herd size 99 (32.78) 59 (16.39) 158 (23.87) Decrease in herd quality 37 (12.25) 30 (8.33) 67 (10.12) Reduced milk production 14 (4.64) 58 (16.11) 72 (10.88) Reduced breeding 1 (0.33) 1 (0.28) 2 (0.30) Increase in grass quantity 8 (2.65) 0 (0) 8 (1.21) Reduction of pests/diseases 10 (3.31) 1 (0.28) 11 (1.66) Increase in water availability 5 (1.66) 0 (0) 5 (0.76) Increase in herd size 2 (0.66) 0 (0) 2 (0.30) Increase in herd quality 8 (2.65) 0 (0) 8 (1.21) Increased milk production 6 (1.99) 0 (0) 6 (0.91)
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 43
These results emphasise the effects of also show greater perceived impacts on reduced or variable rainfall on grass quality water availability and milk production. During and quantity, which in turn affect livestock drought, cows suffer reduced water and herd size and herd quality. The effects of pasture consumption, and this decreases their increased or large variations in temperature ability to sustain milk production.
Table 15: How temperature changes in the last 10 years have affected livestock by study region and overall
Effect on livestock Magadi (N = 194) Namanga (N = 328) Total (N = 522) n (%) n (%) n (%) Decrease in grass quantity 12 (6.19) 61 (18.60) 73 (13.98) Decrease in grass quality 19 (9.79) 69 (21.03) 88 (16.85) Increased pests/diseases 22 (11.34) 25 (7.62) 47 (9.00) Decrease in water availability 39 (20.10) 48 (14.63) 87 (16.67) Decrease in herd size 19 (9.79) 26 (7.93) 45 (8.62) Decrease in herd quality 25 (12.89) 32 (9.76) 57 (10.92) Reduced milk production 31 (15.98) 63 (19.20) 94 (18.01) Reduced breeding 6 (3.09) 2 (0.61) 8 (1.53) Increase in grass quantity 1 (0.52) 0 (0) 1 (0.19) Reduction of pests/diseases 9 (4.64) 0 (0) 9 (1.72) Increase in water availability 2 (1.03) 1 (0.30) 3 (0.57) Increase in herd size 1 (0.52) 0 (0) 1 (0.19) Increased milk production 1 (0.52) 0 (0) 1 (0.19) Other 6 (3.09) 1 (0.30) 7 (1.34) Adaptation measures taken due to changes in rainfall and climate The most common adaptation measures to group ranch, through setting up temporary changes in rainfall across the two study regions settlements for livestock and some members (Table 16; Figure 16) were changes in grazing of the household, especially those who tend management (28.9%) and destocking (18.8%). to livestock. This is a practice that almost Grazing management was considered exclusively occurs on communal land, unless differently in the two study regions due to permission for temporary settlement is granted differences in land tenure and management. from a land owner on private land. In Magadi, this was referred to as changes in the communal grazing management plans as In Namanga, the most common measures agreed by the group ranch, and the opening reported were changes in grazing up and moving to dry season grazing zones management (33.1%), similar to Magadi, as pasture was depleted. During droughts in but this was now followed by destocking these communal group ranches, pastoralists (27.9%) and storage/purchase of fodder respond and make collective decisions to (13.8%). The differences between the two utilise dry season pastures, and this provides study regions may possibly be explained a drought coping mechanism. In Namanga, by land management type, where mobility where land is individually-owned, changes in and changing settlement patterns are most grazing management referred to the system common and possible under communal land of paddocking, where individual land owners management (Magadi), and destocking and paddocked their fields and carried out purchasing fodder more common on the rotational grazing of their livestock, in effect privatised land (Namanga), where livestock dividing their land into different zones and production and mobility is more constrained rotating grazing among these zones whilst within the land available. For example, a leaving the other zones to recover. This is a reduction in herd size is a commonly reported system of grazing that is more commonly used outcome of land privatisation processes due on individually-owned land (as well as more to the restriction of mobility and reduced widely in larger scale ranches), although will access to pasture (Boone et al., 2005; Kimiti et be constrained by very small parcel sizes. al., 2018). The reduced availability of pasture creates the need for supplementation with In Magadi, the most common measures purchased fodder sources, as was commonly reported were changes in grazing witnessed in 2017 due to the ongoing drought management (23.3%), changes in settlement conditions. patterns (22.7%) and increased mobility (15.5%). Changes in settlement patterns refers Few reported not doing anything to adapt to the practice of moving settlements to (4.2% of responses). Amongst those not access and track different pastures within the adapting, this was predominately due to not knowing what to do (83% of households).
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 44 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Table 16: Adaptation measures taken to perceived changes in rainfall in the last 10 years by study region and overall Adaptation measures Magadi (N = 278) Namanga (N = 362) Total (N = 640) n (%) n (%) n (%) Increase mobility (distance and frequency) 43 (15.5) 5 (1.4) 48 (7.5) Change in grazing management 65 (23.3) 120 (33.1) 185 (28.9) Storage/purchase of fodder 12 (4.3) 50 (13.8) 62 (9.7) Change in water management 12 (4.3) 29 (8.0) 41 (6.4) Partial shift to other livelihoods 26 (9.4) 19 (5.2) 45 (7.1) Change in herd composition (livestock type) 7 (2.5) 13 (3.6) 20 (3.1) Change in cattle breed 4 (1.4) 13 (4.6) 17 (2.7) Destocking (reducing herd size) 19 (6.8) 101 (27.9) 120 (18.8) Change in settlement patterns 63 (22.7) 1 (0.3) 64 (10.0) Other 6 (2.2) 5 (1.4) 11 (17.2) Nothing 21 (7.6) 6 (1.7) 27 (4.2)
Figure 16: Adaptation measures taken to changes in rainfall in the last 10 years
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 45 The most common adaptation measures to Again, this was almost entirely reported to changes in temperature across the two study be due to not knowing what to do (98.1% of regions (Table 17; Figure 17) were changes households). in grazing management (19.29%), doing nothing (14.4%), and destocking (13.28%). There was a significant association between Looking between the two study regions, in the study region and the household adaptation Magadi, the most common responses were measures reported for both changes in rainfall 2 changes in settlement pattern (25.2%), doing (chi square x = 139.561, df (10), p = 0.000) and 2 nothing (20.9%) and increased mobility temperature (chi square x = 140.758, df (10), (17.0%), whereas in Namanga, these were p = 0.000). Overall, in the communal GRs in changes in grazing management (22.0%), Magadi, households rely more on extensive destocking (20.2%) and changes in water strategies such as the mobility of their livestock management (12.6%). These results are similar and settlements, which occur according to the to those for the rainfall changes, although group ranch organised system of movement, changes in water management in Namanga as well as mobility outside of the group ranch. replaced storage/purchase of fodder as the In contrast, in privately-owned Namanga, third most common measure. In Meto, many households rely more on intensive strategies households have built dams on their individual such as fencing and paddocking their land, parcels for livestock watering, and the need increasing inputs such as fodder and water for this no doubt accentuates because of and destocking animals before drought. This climate pressures. Mobility and changing is likely a reflection of the different systems of settlement patterns were still most important land tenure in the two study regions, where under the communal land tenure (Magadi), more extensive mobile pastoralism is practiced and changes in grazing management and under communal land tenure, and more destocking still most important under private intensive commercially oriented production land tenure (Namanga). There were more strategies emerge when land is privatised and responses to doing nothing to adapt (14.4%). individually-owned.
Table 17: Adaptation measures taken to changes in temperature in the last 10 years by study region and overall
Adaptation measures Magadi (N = 206) Namanga (N = 340) Total (N = 546) n (%) n (%) n (%) Increase mobility (distance and frequency) 35 (17.0) 15 (4.4) 50 (9.2) Change in grazing management 30 (14.6) 75 (22.0) 105 (19.2) Storage/purchase of fodder 4 (1.9) 29 (8.5) 33 (6.0) Change in water management 15 (7.3) 43 (12.6) 58 (10.6) Partial shift to other livelihoods 11 (5.3) 27 (7.9) 38 (7.0) Change in herd composition (livestock type) 4 (1.9) 32 (9.4) 36 (6.6) Change in cattle breed 6 (2.9) 12 (3.5) 18 (3.3) Destocking (reducing herd size) 3 (1.5) 69 (20.2) 72 (13.2) Change in settlement patterns 52 (25.2) 0 (0) 52 (9.5) Other 3 (1.5) 2 (0.5) 5 (0.9) Nothing 43 (20.9) 36 (10.6) 79 (14.4)
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 46 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Figure 17: Adaptation measures taken to changes in temperature in the last 10 years
3.4.3 Historical climate shocks: Responses to the 2009 and 2013/14 droughts This section explores key climate shocks 2000 (Table 18). Overwhelmingly, drought was affecting respondents and their responses experienced by almost all households in both to these shocks. Respondents were asked study regions (95.9% and 100%). Drought was whether their livestock had been affected by also ranked as the number one climate shock particular climate shocks – droughts, floods, by households. This was followed by delay in storms, delay in the rainy season, out of the rainy season (87.4% overall) and out of season rains and heatwave – since the year season rains (56.9% overall).
Table 18: Livestock ever affected by the climate extremes since year 2000 (% households)
Study region Drought Floods Storms Delay in Out of Heat the rainy season rains wave season Magadi (N = 169) 95.9 23.1 7.1 75.1 50.9 21.9 Namanga (N = 181) 100.0 7.7 18.8 98.9 62.4 66.9 Total 98.0 15.1 13.1 87.4 56.9 45.1
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 47 Drought is a regular occurrence in Kajiado as pastures thus resulted in little pasture to draw shown in the climate trends in Section 3.2. The upon in the subsequent drought of 2013–14. 2009 drought was perceived to be a harsh drought in both study sites causing the death Using the two droughts in Magadi (2009 and of many cattle, and was a drought widely 2014) and the 2009 drought in Namanga, experienced throughout Kajiado and other respondents were asked about the specific parts over Kenya. People lost most of their effects of these droughts on their livestock animals, and after this, people said how it was production and income (Table 19) and their like starting out again from the beginning, re- responses to these droughts (Table 20). building their livestock from scratch. As expected, the 2009 drought in Magadi and In Magadi study region, the more recent Namanga was perceived to affect livestock drought in 2013–14 was also perceived to be ‘severely’ or ‘a lot’ for almost all households – important, having affected many livestock 94% and 100% of households in Magadi and in the area. This drought however, was not Namanga, respectively. As noted above, reported in Namanga. In Magadi it was thought there were widespread livestock deaths that because of the huge losses of cattle across the county, and beyond, during this during the 2009 drought, the management of drought. In comparison, the effect of the 2014 grazing zones and the need to reserve pasture drought in Magadi on livestock was perceived in the communal group ranches had become as ‘severe’ or ‘a lot’ for 56% of households, relaxed. Poor management of the grazing with most households (41.6%) reporting ‘a little’ impact on their livestock. Table 19: Effect of drought on livestock production and income (% households) Severity of effect Magadi 2014 Magadi 2009 Namanga 2009 (N = 166) (N = 165) (N = 181) Severely 23.5 67.9 59.1 A lot 32.5 26.1 40.9 A little 41.6 4.2 0 Not at all 2.4 1.2 0 Do not know 0 0.6 0
The majority of households in Magadi and were in the neighbouring Amboseli ecosystem Namanga responded to the 2009 and 2014 (Carabine, 2014), cattle migrated towards droughts by migrating (Table 20). This was Magadi and into Tanzania, particular to particularly acute during the 2009 drought, areas inhabited by the Sonjo people. This was as people talked about migrating to access corroborated by discussions in Magadi, where pastures well beyond their group ranches or people referred to the drought as the time regions, often to neighbouring hills and usually the Ilmatapato Maasai (those found around inaccessible and difficult to reach places, Namanga region), migrated into their area. and often into Tanzania. The focus group In 2009, cattle from Magadi migrated shorter discussions revealed the different migration distances compared to Namanga, reportedly strategies employed by herders and livestock using the neighbouring hills and mountains, owners. In Namanga region, where pasture including the Nguruman Escarpment and conditions were particularly severe, as they Oldonyo Sampu in Tanzania.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 48 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Table 20: Main response to the named droughts in the study region Main response to the drought Magadi 2014 Magadi 2009 Namanga 2009 (N = 159) (N = 159) (N = 179) n (%) n (%) n (%) Relied on cultivation 4 (2.5) 4 (2.5) 0 (0) Migrated 86 (54.1) 99 (62.3) 140 (78.2) Destock 8 (5.0) 10 (6.3) 1 (0.6) Relied on other employment/livelihoods 5 (3.1) 8 (5.0) 0 (0) Bought pasture/fodder 27 (17.0) 17 (1.7) 25 (14.0) Cut seeds and trees for livestock 7 (4.4) 2 (1.3) 0 (0) Herd splitting 2 (1.3) 1 (0.6) 0 (0) Other 4 (2.5) 3 (1.9) 2 (1.1) Nothing 16 (10.1) 15 (9.4) 11 (6.1)
In comparison, during the 2014 drought in Only 20–30% of households in both study regions Magadi, it was widely reported that there reported receiving an early warning before had been a migration of herds into Tanzania, either the 2009 or 2014 drought (Table 21). a strategy that had helped reduce livestock Although the National Drought Management losses. However, there was also conflict with Authority (NDMA), which has offices in every the Tanzanian immigration department at this ASAL county, including Kajiado, is mandated time12. In Shompole, respondents commented to deploy an early warning system to help that movement and the grazing of pastures farmers and livestock keepers avoid climate was reciprocal, and during the time of the change related losses, many respondents did survey in July 2016, there were a number not indicate having received early warning of Tanzanian herds entering Kenya due to information. Early warning information was drought. This highlights the importance of most likely to come from friends or family, cross-border pasture sharing and drought community leaders, the national government refuges, across what used to be a once or the group ranch in the case of Magadi. unified territory for the Maasai people in pre- Early warning information was most commonly colonial times. relayed over the radio, and to a lesser extent during community meetings/barazas. In the In both Magadi and Namanga, the second case of the 2014 drought in Magadi, some most common response after migration was respondents reported getting early warning the purchase of feed and hay, often as far information through social media via their away as Kiserian or Kitengela, which was mobile phones. then transported to feed their livestock herds. This was a common response also witnessed In focus group discussions, producers and during the time of the study as drought traders said that timely early warning conditions worsened in Kajiado during 2017. information would enable them to decide on Producers purchased hay from farmers close their livestock off-take rates before drought, to the main towns and then transported it in order to reduce their herd losses. However, back to their livestock. without this information it was more difficult to plan when to sell animals.
Table 21: Received an early warning before the drought struck (% households) Got an early Magadi 2014 Magadi 2009 Namanga 2009 warning (N = 165) (N = 165) (N = 181) Yes 29.7 27.3 23.2 No 70.3 72.1 76.8 Do not know 0 0.6 0
12A similar conflict was highlighted in the media, where it was reported that over 1,300 Kenyan cattle were arrested in Tanzania and sold at an auction in October 2017 (http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/news/Magufuli-Kenya-cattle-diplomacy/2558-4177942-fkjac7z/index.html
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 49 Following the 2009 and 2014 droughts, dry times. For example, in Olkiramatian GR, respondents reported that certain settlements were no longer allowed in the improvements in livestock management had dry season grazing area and the GR became been made to enable livestock to better stricter on enforcing its grazing zones. Better cope with a subsequent drought (Table 22). access to water was another frequently cited Better pasture management was the most improvement, particularly in Namanga, where commonly reported improvement in both households reported having built private study regions. In Magadi, it was reported that dams on their land parcels to improve access the 2014 drought, when poor management to water for livestock. The stocking of hay or of grazing pastures had left little pasture fodder sources also increased, predominantly to be drawn upon when most needed, through purchase from elsewhere and encouraged Olkiramatian and Shompole transportation home. This was a growing GRs to place greater enforcement of their occurrence during the 2017 drought that was conservancies for use as a grass bank during witnessed during the course of the study.
Table 22: Improvements (first and second answers) made since the 2009/2014 drought that make livestock better able to deal with drought by study region and overall (% households) Improvement Magadi Namanga Total 1st 2nd 1st 2nd 1st 2nd (N=139) (N=123) (N=176) (N=176) (N=315) (N=299) Better access to water 14.4 15.4 44.9 11.9 31.4 13.4 Better pasture management 77.0 14.6 42.6 50.6 57.8 35.8 Early warnings 0.7 11.4 1.7 1.1 1.3 5.4 Better access to 0 0.8 0 0.6 0 0.7 insurance/credit Diversified incomes 0.7 30.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 13.0 Fodder/hay stocking 1.4 15.4 4.5 30.1 3.2 24.1 Other 0 4.1 4.5 2.3 2.5 3.0 None 5.8 8.1 0.6 2.3 2.9 4.7
To be better able to cope with a future in early warning systems that would create drought, producers thought that better more awareness on upcoming drought, and pasture management was key. The strategic increased fodder or hay stocking for drought management of the wet and dry season use, were also thought to be important in grazing zones in the communal group both study regions. In Namanga, respondents ranches would allow pastures to be reserved thought better access to livestock insurance for drought times, whereas in Namanga, and credit systems was needed to reduce paddocking and rotational grazing on the impact of drought, as these were rarely individual land parcels would help reserve available in both study regions (Table 23). areas for use during drought. Improvements
Table 23: What more needs to be done to help reduce the impact of drought on livestock by study region and overall (% households) Future needs Magadi Namanga Total (N = 139) (N = 176) (N = 315) Better access to water 9.35 15.4 12.7 Better pasture management 25.2 25.0 25.1 Early warnings 22.3 15.6 18.6 Better access to insurance/credit 6.1 21.6 14.8 Diversified incomes 15.2 7.9 8.9 Fodder/hay stocking 13.7 17.3 15.8 Other 6.1 2.3 3.3 None 1.5 0 0.7 Do not know 0.7 0 0.3
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 50 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 3.4.4 Livestock extension services Overall, there was low satisfaction with other services, however, some were still lacking: extension services reported by respondents livestock insurance and artificial insemination (Figure 18). Respondents were most satisfied (AI) were not available at all, except for one with access to water for livestock, access to household in Magadi reporting access to AI grazing, and market information and facilities, before devolution. Access to credit and loans and least satisfied with disease surveillance was also extremely limited. and vaccination, early warning information, and credit and loans. This is despite some These results corroborate with those above improvements in household access to livestock related to livestock’s ability to cope with extension services since devolution in 2013 drought, especially concerning the need for (Table 24). The greatest improvement was credit and loan systems, livestock insurance evident for market facilities, increasing from and early warning systems. These are therefore 23.7% to 42.2% after devolution in Magadi, important efforts that county governments and from 84.4% to 96.7% after devolution in could seek to improve. Namanga. There were minor improvements in
Figure 18: Satisfaction level of livestock extension services Table 24: Access to services now and before devolution by study region and overall (% respondents)
Livestock service (Total N) Magadi Namanga Total Now Before Now Before Now Before Drugs for livestock/deworming (N = 350) 92.9 92.3 99.4 99.4 96.3 96.0 Disease surveillance & vaccination (N = 351) 70.6 61.5 64.1 63.5 67.2 62.6 Artificial insemination (N = 351) 0 0.6 0 0 0 0.3 Access to grazing (N = 351) 89.4 89.3 82.3 81.2 85.8 85.1 Fodder & improved animal feed (N = 351) 0 0 71.3 60.8 36.8 31.4 Access to water for livestock (N = 351) 84.1 82.2 97.8 94.5 91.2 88.6 Early warning information (N = 351) 34.1 33.1 41.4 40.9 37.9 37.1 Credit and loans (N = 351) 5.3 1.8 0 0 2.6 0.9 Insurance for livestock (N = 351) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Market information (N = 351) 11.2 8.9 76.8 76.2 45.0 43.7 Market facilities (N = 350) 42.2 23.7 96.7 84.4 70.3 55.0
3.5 Qualitative analysis of climate risk along the value chain Analysis of climate risk along the value chain Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), in which is presented at each stage along the chain projections for East Africa indicate increasing – inputs, production, trading, processing temperatures and a widening variability in and domestic market. Key findings related rainfall and the increasing occurrence of to climate risk and impact are summarised extreme events (CDKN, 2014). This section across actors within each of these stages. discusses the impacts of drought along the The main climate risks identified here are beef value chain, but also highlights some ‘drought’, ‘delay in the rains’ and ‘floods’. of the different implications for delay in the These are the three climate shocks that were rains and floods. The gendered impacts are most commonly reported by respondents explained where these were raised. Figure 19 during the household survey. These climate gives an illustration of these climate risks and risks are also corroborated by the IPCC impacts along the beef value chain.
3.5.1 Climate shock – Drought Inputs The greatest risks identified due to drought at Droughts also impact cattle breed preference. the inputs stage of the value chain are the Producers in both study sites consistently reduction in pasture and water availability. A expressed preference for improved breeds, decrease in rainfall accompanied by raised keeping exotic Sahiwal and Borana breeds temperatures dries out grazing pastures, or cross-breeding them with the indigenous and grass gets grazed down to the ground, Zebu cattle. The Sahiwal was recognised as eventually leaving bare soil. The drought dries the optimal breed for the market – one that up natural water sources, resulting in little matures fast, has good milk yields, and raises water for livestock or human consumption. higher market prices because of their heavy This forces livestock to migrate further in search weight. However, there were trade-offs in of pasture or water, or necessitates bringing terms of their drought resistance; they are pasture (through fodder or hay purchases) heavy feeders that need lots of pasture; they or water (through water points or trucks) to would often need assistance to stand when livestock herds. weak; and they were heavy to lift. One of the gendered effects of droughts In comparison, the Zebu breed was viewed commonly reported was the longer distance as drought resistant, easily lifted when weak, that women have to walk to find water or and able to recover fast when given pasture. grass for weak animals during drought, or They are also more disease-resistant than the to cut bushes or tree branches to be used exotic breeds. However, they have lower as emergency livestock feed, or to collect milk production, a lower weight and thus firewood or water for cooking. This added to raise lower prices in the market. Cross-breeds their already heavy domestic workloads and were thus viewed as the best mix – bringing their duties in livestock care and management, together the benefits of both indigenous and notwithstanding any potential trading or exotic breeds, but reducing the maintenance business activities. Drought also contributes to required of the Sahiwal and Borana during environmental degradation when trees are drought. cut for use as feed for livestock.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 52 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Production The main impact of drought on production was that had large herds. One woman thought consistently reported to be a reduction in the that this was not yet happening, but it would quality and quantity of cattle. A reduction in happen naturally as drought would reduce inputs lead to a reduced quality and quantity herds, even if people did not want to reduce of cattle, and hence a decrease in livestock their herds themselves. production, and in severe circumstances, livestock death. As livestock become weak There were wider social impacts producers due to the reduced availability of inputs, they perceived beyond those directly related to also become too weak to be able to trek the livestock production. For example, children increased distances required to search for might have to drop out of school due to a pasture and water. lack of money to pay for school fees. A youth in Olkiramatian GR explained how the 2009 Those who have the financial resources to drought was particularly severe, killing both purchase hay or fodder, and transport it to livestock and people, and many children had their cattle, seek this as a coping strategy to drop out of school because of a lack of to avoid cattle further weakening or dying. funds or any supplementary source of income Livestock traders in Olkiramatian reported or livelihood activity. that during bad droughts, hay and feeds are purchased from as far as Kiserian market, Getting involved in other livelihood income a distance of approximately 70 km from activities when livestock were weak was Olkiramatian GR. The cost of purchasing hay considered difficult, as it was hard to raise in Kiserian was approximately KSh 300–400 the capital with livestock in weak conditions for a bale weighing 16–18 kg, and this price to invest in new activities. Furthermore, in had sharply increased over the last two years, discussions with producers it was argued no doubt because of the persistent drought that climate change prevented people from experienced during this period. planning, as they were not able to predict if a particular activity or investment would be Those who had access to a cultivation plot successful. Drought brought unpredictable could grow maize and other fodder crops risks and not knowing when it would strike which they were able to feed the residues, caused high levels of uncertainty and caution such as maize cobs, to cattle. The maize in starting new investments. For example, if a was used for human consumption and the producer bought livestock to fatten as a short- maize cobs used to feed livestock. Others term investment, an ensuing drought could might rely on certain trees and leafy plants to potentially result in a large loss of that money feed livestock, such as cordia or mathenge13 and investment. leaves. Considering the increased need to supplement livestock pasture, a woman in Gendered impacts were also raised at Olkiramatian commented that due to the this stage. During drought, cattle were persistent drought in the area ‘livestock have increasingly further away from home for become like people; you have to buy feed longer periods of time. This affected milk for them’. production and sales, which women usually have control over as opposed to livestock Some people spoke about the need for sales, which men have control over. A few change now that droughts were becoming milk cows usually remain at home for milking so regular. Recognising that droughts were whilst the rest of the herd migrate. However, in reoccurring they talked about how the severe droughts, even these few cows might community would need to find ways to reduce migrate, affecting women’s ability to provide the number of livestock and use funds in a milk for consumption or sale. Even if cows did different way to prevent big losses occurring remain at home, they would often be in too during each drought, especially for those poor a condition to produce much milk. Trading The impact of drought on local trading to more and more distant markets in search was explained by a number of traders and of livestock, especially to find those animals butchers spoken to across Kajiado County. that were still in good condition. Increasingly, Drought resulted in a reduced quality and as reported by traders in Kiserian, livestock quantity of animals going to the market, and traders would have to go as far as Migori, since there were fewer livestock going to the Kisii and Subukia (up to a day’s travel away) market this would drive up market prices. in search of livestock to purchase. As the Traders would have to travel further, perhaps drought progressed, livestock found in the 13Prosopis juliflora
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 53 markets were more likely to be of low quality cease trading activities, and concentrate on (young, skinny, immature), as opposed to the survival of their own herds. Trade capital good quality bulls, steers and oxen with good would then be used in sustaining their own meat content. herds, for example to purchase livestock feed or to pay any costs associated with the The reduced quantity of available livestock migration of livestock. Traders throughout would drive up the prices of animals, especially Kajiado talked widely about switching for those that were still in good condition. their trade from cattle to shoats, as shoats Livestock traders in Kiserian discussed how were able to better cope with drought and these market shortages have created space reduced pasture availability. Producers were for livestock to come from Tanzania to enter also bringing more shoats to the market than into the reduced Kenyan markets. However, cattle, so there was better potential in trading livestock which were in poor condition would shoats during drought. sell for low prices. Pastoralists destocking their herds once they were already in weak Another dynamic commonly mentioned condition, or destocking programmes that concerned the transportation of livestock flood the market and bring a high supply during trading activities. As discussed in Step of weak animals to the market, led to these One (Mapping the value chain), there is a animals being sold for low prices. Producers seasonal aspect in the transportation of cattle would also receive poor prices for these to terminal markets. During drought the use of weakened livestock. trucks to transport cattle increases, as cattle become too weak to trek long distances or These dynamics cause livestock supply may not be able to survive a potential seven- (especially of the good quality livestock) day trek to the terminal market, such as to be erratic and unpredictable, causing from Olkiramatian to Kiserian. Trucking also livestock trading activities to reduce during increases as livestock traders have to travel drought. Trading becomes riskier during further, to more distant markets, in search drought periods. One trader at Shompole of livestock to purchase. Traders in Kiserian market explained that even if he was able commented that livestock shortages had to find and purchase a healthy cow, the necessitated the use of trucks to transport ensuing drought and scarcity of pasture might livestock, but trucking is more expensive so this cause that cow to quickly weaken, reducing adds up to the costs of livestock. The increase the opportunity for profit when selling the in the trucking of livestock has opened up animal on. Olkiramatian traders reported that opportunities for transport service providers, trade also generally declines when livestock including lorry and pick-up owners, and can quality deteriorates as there is no market for be demonstrated in some of the customised emaciated animals. and innovate transportation methods of Due to the reduced profits and business, and livestock as shown in Figure 8. increased riskiness, traders said they might Processing As drought progresses it becomes increasingly The costs of processing were reported to difficult to find the bigger animals that meat increase during drought because of the high buyers demand. It becomes harder to source operational costs (for processors and contract the heavy cattle carcasses that processors slaughter) as there are few livestock coming and meat suppliers’ value, since livestock from the market. As the weight of an animal are sold before maturity. Meat quality decreases, the production costs increase, worsens (becomes lean and skinny) due to and this results in an adjustment in price, the diminished pasture availability. As meat which gets pushed on to the consumer. As the suppliers in Kiserian explained, as the quality number of animals slaughtered decreases, of meat deteriorates, it becomes almost profits also decrease. impossible to get sufficient quality meat to supply to high-end buyers, forcing many Processors are forced to buy meat at higher meat suppliers to quit the trade or switch to prices, but they cannot meet the demand supplying low quality meat. The decrease from customers as the supply of good quality in the quality of meat causes more meat to cows may be drastically affected. Many of end up at slaughter slabs and wholesale the main Nairobi processors (such as Choice meat markets (such as Burma and Dagoretti Meat) get their beef from the commercial markets). Contract slaughtering was also ranches. During drought the average live reported to increase when there is a high weight of these animals drops, for example, supply of low quality animals. from a usual carcass weight of 220 kg to 174 kg
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 54 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN as experienced by one processor during the quality meat into products such as sausages time of interview (March 2017). The minimum or samosas, where the meat content and weight that this processor was able to accept quality within these products can be lower. It before profit margins did not work was 175 kg, was thought that local consumers tend to like demonstrating how the drought was already the processed products –such as sausages, threatening business profits. burgers or the local ‘smokie’. These are value- added products which make use of low During drought the bone ratio to carcass quality beef, and can enable a greater value yield also decreases. One Nairobi processor to be captured by the chain. Processors use reported that the meat to bone ratio changes specialised machines to suck out the beef from 70%:30% to 66%:34%. The shelf life of the remnants from the bone. If the price of these meat also decreases as meat is closer to popular products is kept low, they can reach the bone, and becomes stale quicker. This a big market of local consumers, and provide requires meat to move more quickly through an avenue for the lower quality meat readily processing and end markets, so it can be sold available during drought (see adaptation before becoming stale. measures in Step Three). However, as one During droughts, larger processors said they processor explained, inefficiencies in current would not consider supply from pastoralists’ production and high prices of even the low cattle, as even their usual supplies from the quality beef, especially during drought, private ranches drop and they are not able pushed the prices of these products up. The to produce the required meat. Processors absence of processing equipment by smaller are not able to satisfy their clients with the scale processors or butchers also constrains particular cuts that are normally sought after. this option. Higher quality processors who do not want to Finally, drought also brings issues surrounding compromise on quality, have to consistently food safety, if cattle are too weak, they search among potential suppliers to find may die at the slaughterhouses before the right animals to maintain their product being slaughtered or processed. This can range. One large processor reported trying to compromise on hygiene standards. The lowest encourage feedlot farms for beef production, hygiene standards are found at the slaughter to maintain the supply of premium quality slabs, and this can be made worse during beef, even during drought periods (see drought as cattle are weak, more susceptible adaptation options in Step Three). to disease, and at a higher risk of death. One opportunity that stood out was for more processing and manufacturing of the lower Domestic market During drought, butchery owners explained the meat is drier, lighter and of poor quality. how it becomes difficult to find cattle, Therefore, a cow estimated (there is a lack of especially the good quality and heavy cattle weighing scales to know for certain) to be 280 carcasses. These are the carcasses that kg when purchased, may actually weigh only butcheries particularly like to put in their shop 250 kg after slaughtering. windows to attract passing customers. This deters customers who like to see and buy good Prices for the large, good quality meat carcases quality, fat, carcass meat. In the dry season, it become very expensive to buy, and butchers becomes hard to find this type of meat, and and other retailers are forced to pass on this in a drought, it becomes even more difficult. price increase to their customers (KII, butcher/ During interviews in early to mid-2017, many meat trader in City Market). In comparison, butchers spoke how business was slow and the poor-quality meat was also more difficult they could not find cattle meat because of to sell, as it was not desired by consumers. As the current and ongoing drought. Many had discussed above, there were opportunities to change to different suppliers as their usual to process this meat into sausages or other suppliers dried up, due to a shortage of cattle. products, to ensure a market for the lower quality meat. The quality of meat was also affected during drought: meat would become ‘drier’ due to In the market, one of the key constraints is the reduced fat content (KII, butchery owner the absence of cold storage to store meat. in City Market, Nairobi). Different butchery A meat trader in City Market discussed how owners (City Market and Il Bissil in Southern this was a constraint to his business, which was Kajiado) said that it becomes more difficult made worse during drought periods. Without to estimate the weight of a cow because refrigeration, meat had to be sold on the day of slaughter, and especially so for the lower
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 55 quality ‘drier’ meat that was reported to spoil in the short sales window in which hot meat faster, forcing drastic reductions in the price is fresh. If meat is not sold quickly enough, it of meat by the end of the day. This further is more likely that it will have to be sold at a reduced their already constrained profit reduced price before spoiling. Another issue margins experienced during drought. He related to the purchasing power of customers, wished to install a cold room at the market that may diminish during the dry season and share the cost with other retailers and (potentially due to reduced farming incomes kiosk owners. These retailers often have a cold or higher costs of foods), again affecting the display and a deep freeze, but no cold room to demand for meat. Thus, in the dry season, store meat hygienically and safely overnight. retailers may not be able to sell their meat There was only one cold storage room in City fast enough (Top end butcheries, Nairobi). Market, one of the main middle income meat September and October at the end of the dry markets catering for city workers in the central season, were recognised as a tough time for business district of Nairobi. Some butcheries businesses, where meat supply and demand were able to pay and store their meat in this was affected and butchers might be forced cold room at times. to reduce their trade. The need for a cold room was greater for the Consumer preference for meat was reported meat retailers than the meat wholesalers. to be influenced during drought, with For example, in Burma market, one female differences according to the income level of wholesaler said she did not need a cold room the consumer. Butchers described consumers as she sells the carcasses wholesale to retailers as being very selective concerning their meat by the end of the day. She and others in the choices, and if they did not find good quality ‘hot meat’ chain also believed that there is meat at a particular retailer, they would look not the demand for cold meat, or meat that elsewhere. Meat sellers thus have to buy good has been stored overnight, as people prefer quality meat even if it incorporates a loss to to eat fresh meat on the day of slaughter. She avoid losing their customers. Customers may also thought that cold storage would cause be loyal to particular butcheries or brands. the meat to lose weight overnight. In contrast, For example, one customer spoken to in City the meat retailer opposite her stall sold a Market had been using a particular butcher variety of boned and deboned meat cuts, there for the past 15 years, due to the assured and in the absence of a cold room or fridge, quality he always found. would use freezers to store meat overnight, bringing it out to defrost the next day and sell, It was explained that as prices of meat with implications for meat quality and food increased during drought, low end consumers safety. would switch to offal due to being priced out of purchasing beef cuts (Kiserian butchery). Butchers and other retailers described how it In comparison, it was reported that the mid- was the customer demand for beef that really to high-end consumers would switch to white drove their business and created fluctuations meat (fish and chicken) as this was cheaper. in business throughout the year. This was Increasingly, white meat is also advertised potentially more important than the seasonal as a healthier option, as was perceived by a aspect related to climate. For example, butchery owned in City Market. Thus, during demand for beef was particularly high around drought, these consumers switch to white key festivals and other celebrations such as meat, which is not as vulnerable to drought Christmas. December was a very popular and can be found at a lower price. Some time for beef consumption due to exams of these butcheries explained that due to and the closing of schools, and the Christmas the increasing emerging preference and festivities. In comparison, January and demand for white meat, they would now February were reported to be quiet times for stock more fish and chicken alongside beef business, as customers were not demanding and shoat meat. At the high-end butcheries, it as much meat. This dynamic often stood was reported that the highest end consumers, out as of greater concern among actors in whose decisions were less influenced by cost, the end markets, compared to the seasonal would pay a premium for the good quality dynamic related to meat supply in the wet beef that was available. These customers and dry seasons. This was reported at all levels have a high willingness to pay, and beef that of sophistication and pricing of the end meat serves this consumer segment comes almost markets. exclusively from the commercial ranches and feedlots. Customer demand for meat was important for retail businesses as they need to be assured that customers will buy their meat, especially
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 56 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 3.5.2 Climate shock – Delay in the rainy season After drought, a delay in the rainy season was As livestock herders wait in expectation of the the second most significant shock affecting rains, there is an acute undersupply at the livestock as reported by households in the livestock markets. The hope that rains will soon survey (Table 1). A delay in the rains referred fall, reduces the desire to take animals to the to a period waiting for the rains to come market, resulting in fewer animals available at before acting or deciding on what to do with the market. This reduces trading and causes livestock. With this climate shock there is the an increase in the prices of livestock at the expectation and hope that it will rain soon. It market. Livestock traders discussed how is linked to a change in the seasonal patterns during periods of rain, the trade in livestock so that rain does not fall when it is expected, was good, but this diminished during droughts although it may not change the quantity of and also in periods of uncertainty, such as rain that eventually falls when it does rain. when it was expected to rain soon. During This created a different dynamic to drought, these times, livestock producers keep hold but could have a high negative impact on of their livestock in the expectation that it will the value chain. Some of the main aspects of rain soon. this shock on the value chain are highlighted below. This results in fewer animals going for slaughter or for processing, increasing the costs of these As rains delayed, the inputs of forage and activities due to their lower through puts. It water decreased, causing forage to dry out. was thought that this could potentially create Although, not considered a drought at this a bigger impact to business than droughts, stage, the reduction of water and forage as trade and business effectively cease for a results in a weakened livestock condition, as period of time as livestock producers do not cows become skinny. At the production stage, sell their animals. This causes a reduced supply as livestock begin to experience resource of meat at the end markets, and a rise in the shortages, herders commonly increase their price of the little meat there is available. The mobility in search of pasture and water. This quality of the meat that does reach the retail can lead to resource conflicts, especially in market can be low due to the poor pasture key resource areas, such as at water points, conditions. Butcheries may be forced to close, swamps or other ‘wetlands in drylands’. and with little meat available at the consumer level, there is a switch to white meat. 3.5.3 Climate shock – Floods Another climate shock reported to have a At the inputs stage, a high rainfall event large impact on the beef value chain was causes flooding of pastures, which become flooding. This particularly related to the intense waterlogged and lose soil nutrients due to rainfall periods such as during El-nino that water run-off. Excessive rainfall can increase cause large floods and disrupt the movement the demand for drugs due to livestock disease of livestock and trucks. For example, the outbreaks. Access to inputs also becomes El-nino rains experienced widely in 1998, constrained because of the difficulties in the caused widespread flooding, destruction, movement of livestock, people or transport. increased livestock disease and death in the At the production stage, flooding can study areas (Table 13), and wider East Africa cause the emergence of infectious diseases region. However, more localised flooding among livestock, such as foot rot and Rift events occurring after short periods of intense Valley Fever. This combined with dampness, rainfall, also create difficulties in transport and low forage intake and reduced mobility, the movement of livestock between terminal causes decreased livestock productivity, and markets and rural areas. Floods are a risk potentially even livestock death. following any heavy rainfall event, although they are a particular risk following a drought At the trading stage, mobility issues may arise when the soil is unable to soak up the water, when trying to access livestock markets, as which then just runs off. Although flooding floods damage roads, bridges and even was not perceived as one of the top three market infrastructure. For example, a trader climate shocks reported by households, this at Olkiramatian market reported how at times study illustrates the risk of floods on the beef floods affect the only road from Magadi to value chain and the different dynamics and Kiserian so that this route becomes impassable impacts involved, due to the potential for and transport either way is cut off except by future extreme rainfall events given the rainfall foot. With the markets cut off, this effectively projections for Kajiado County (section 3.2). halts the livestock trade until the rains subside. This results in a reduced supply of animals
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 57 at the livestock market, and reduction in livestock due to the increased usage of drugs, trading activities. Livestock prices become often unregulated, to combat disease. For high because of the low supply reaching the example, in 2006/7, Kenya was banned from market. Traders in Meto reported that even exporting meat because of the presence of if roads are still passible, the transportation diseased and drug contaminated meat. costs for livestock (either trekking or trucking) increases. At the domestic market stage, there is a similar knock-on impact as with the other climate At the processing stage, a reduced supply shocks. The reduced supply of meat results of livestock results in an overall reduction of in high meat prices, which is often of lower business. Furthermore, slaughterhouses may quality. However, in the case of floods, the be forced to close because of the incidence fear of zoonoses and meat contamination is of disease, including zoonoses, and the fear more pronounced. This adds to the consumer of meat contamination. Another problem preference to switch to white meat. stems from the high drug residues found in
Figure 19: Identified climate risks along the beef value chain in Kenya’s Southern Rangelands
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 58 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN CHAPTER FOUR Step Three – Identifying adaptation and investment options 4.1 Step Three description This section draws out the adaptation Adaptation options at each point along measures that were identified by value chain the value chain are summarised in Table 25, actors in Step Two to discuss specific options along with the key stakeholder promoting for promoting resilience at different stages adaptation, the major barriers or opportunities along the beef value chain. These are options to implementation and the cost implications of that address both climate risk and have an the adaptation options. In the sections below, opportunity to upgrade and transform the we outline the main adaptation options that value chain. Selected adaptation options were were concentrated upon in discussions with explored and deliberated with stakeholders different stakeholders. We focus specifically on to identify specific feasible options for the private sector adaptation and investment public and private sector investment. These options. Figure 20 gives an illustration of the included a mixture of traditional pastoralist potential adaptation and investment options coping strategies, and more transformative along the beef value chain. adaptation options which would require public and/or private sector investment, and the correct enabling environment.
4.2 Discussion of adaptation options 4.2.1 INPUTS: Rangeland Rehabilitation A major challenge for producers in Kajiado production. Traditionally, degraded areas County is pasture availability. The availability were allowed to lie fallow until they restored of pasture is a fundamental input into the naturally, however, increased demands value chain that when reduced severely limits for pasture and weakened control over the rest of the chain. Pasture availability is pasture by traditional community institutions also particularly sensitive to climate change. have made this approach ineffective. In both the Magadi and Namanga study Rangeland management practices and regions, there are areas of rangeland that new technologies can support and enhance have become significantly degraded as a rangeland rehabilitation. Discussions with result of over utilisation and an insufficient SORALO, in Magadi revealed ongoing efforts period of restoration following drought periods. supported by the International Livestock These degraded areas do not support pasture Research Institute (ILRI) to fence and reseed development and contribute to increased degraded areas to allow for pasture and plant rain water run-off and loss of topsoil. This is regeneration. Another method experimented observable through wide spaces of barren in Amboseli by Justdiggit14, involves creating land, even during periods of rainfall, and deep depressions in the surface to slow and gullies created by running water evident across hold run off water. The retained water and the rangelands. Degradation is commonly soils create better conditions for grass and observed in areas prone to more intensive plant regeneration and lead to rangeland use such as around water points and along restoration. These types of interventions, livestock corridors. Rangeland degradation involving partnerships between community and diminished pasture availability thus has groups and external research or development direct implications for the number of livestock organisations, and county government, are that can be supported. important to continue to develop lessons for rangeland rehabilitation and to identify ways As a first intervention in many of the heavily for recovering large tracts of unproductive degraded rangelands, there is the need for rangelands in Kajiado and other similar ASAL the rehabilitation of the pasture land. This areas in Kenya. can help to restore unproductive rangeland areas into areas that can sustain livestock
14Justdiggit.org
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 60 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 4.2.2 INPUTS: The production or purchase of hay and fodder As an input into the beef value chain, we the public and private sectors can invest in to explore hay and fodder production drawing support the production of alternative feeds. upon the research findings with producers Hay is processed and then stored and fed to and traders, discussions with stakeholders, and animals during dry times. During drought, hay a visit to a farmer carrying out hay production can be drawn upon particularly to protect in Olooltepes along the Kiserian–Magadi sick or young animals, or the breeding stock in road (Box 2). There is currently a growing the herd. It can be used as an input to more demand for hay in Kajiado County following organised fattening systems, such as feedlots. the drought in 2017 and unpredictable rains It is currently used as feed for dairy cows in in the county. Many livestock keepers are some parts of Kajiado. turning to producing or purchasing hay or other fodder sources to sustain their livestock. Around Kiserian and Ngong, hay production Purchasing pasture or fodder was the second is becoming more common as the demand most common response to the 2009 and for hay is growing. Here there is increasing 2013/14 droughts reported by producers evidence of private sector investments by in Magadi and Namanga regions. Hay is pastoralists and farmers in hay production. Box the main livestock feed used by herders in 2 gives an example of a more commercially Kajiado during drought periods, but other oriented farmer producing hay along the sources of nutrition such as maize feeds are Kiserian–Magadi road. In the study sites of also used to feed weaker animals when hay is Namanga and Magadi, there were also not available. Hay and other fodder crops are farmers engaged in hay production in small likely to become more important inputs into scales, for domestic use, and at least one production into the region in coming years as large scale hay producer for commercial rainfall becomes increasingly unpredictable purposes. Local commercial hay production and temperatures rise. There is a growing would reduce the high costs entailed in the market for hay as droughts have become transportation of hay from towns such as more regular. In Kiserian, the price of selling Kiserian to remote centres. hay reached an all-time high in 2017, almost Challenges to hay production include the doubling from KSh 200–250 to KSh 350–400 per absence of capital, equipment and skills to bale during the most critical period of drought. carry out the activity, and the variability of Hay production helps to level out the rainfall, making it a potentially risky enterprise. variability in pasture production over the The loss of land through land sales and years. Investments in hay production during conversion into cultivated lands or other uses years of good rain can mean fewer shortages is also a growing hindrance to production when droughts do occur. Hay can be in some areas. For producers who purchase grown using natural pastures or other grass and then store hay for use as feed during species can be planted if preferred. There drought times, challenges include the high are also opportunities for pastoralists to use and increasing prices for purchasing hay, the alternative feed crops, for example those high costs of transport, and having adequate used specifically to finish off beef stock before storage facilities. sale in the market. This is an initiative that both 62 Table 25: Adaptation options for the beef value chain emerging from research findings and stakeholder engagement in Kajiado County THE KENYA SOUTHERNRANGELANDSBEEF VALUE CHAIN FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENTHARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES ECONOMICDEVELOPMENT INTHESEMI-ARIDLANDS:
Point on Main actors Potential adaptation options Key stakeholder in Major barriers or opportunities to Cost value chain promoting adaptation implementation implications
Inputs Public; Private Optimisation of breeds – indigenous, climate resilient Private/Public Access to breeds; balance of commercial Medium sector; breeds in arid areas; commercial breeds where vs climate goals Research better potential institutions; Rangeland rehabilitation – restoring degraded Private/Public External groups willing to partner with Medium Producers rangelands to levels where they can again support communities in range restoration livestock grazing Development of alternative feed and fodder Private/Public Sources of capital; lack of relevant skills; Medium sources lack of equipment and machinery Better provision of veterinary services to ASALs Public Poor networks to rural settings Medium Development of permanent water sources Private/Public High cost of development and High maintenance Hay production Private Sufficient land, start-up costs Medium Storage/purchase of feed/fodder Private Cost of setting up infrastructure and Medium making purchases Production Producers Livestock fattening where feed is available Private Dependent on sufficient pasture/fodder Low – medium Changing in grazing management (paddocking) Private – pastoralists Sufficient land Low Protecting dry season grazing areas (also through Private – pastoralists/ Difficult under private tenure; Low conservancies) conservancies conservancies only where wildlife Destocking of animals before drought Private – pastoralists Market access, cultural bias Low Trading Producers; Form livestock marketing groups/associations Private/Public Market access, increased bargaining Low Traders; power Brokers; Meat Use of trucking to transport livestock rather than Private Poor roads, impassable during floods; high Low traders; trekking vehicle purchase costs Transporters Switch to shoats during drought periods Private Environmental implications Low Switch to alternative businesses during drought Private – pastoralists Dependent on livelihood opportunities Medium periods Development of market and trading infrastructure Private/Public Traders may oppose this Medium (weighing scales) Processing Slaughter- Invest in cold room or cold storage Private Capital investment costs Medium – high houses; Production and equipment for processed meat – for Private Capital investment costs Medium – high Processors; example sausages or smokies Butcheries Encourage suppliers to set up feedlots Private High capital investment High Diversification of livestock products to include hides Private Need links to markets Medium and skins processing End market Wholesale Refrigeration units Private Capital investment costs Medium – high meat market; Direct links between producers and market – Private High start-up costs High Butcheries; marketing of ‘Maasai beef’ or ‘conservation beef’ Supermarkets Create links to expanding international markets Private/Public Setting up disease free zones High
Box 2: Case study of a commercial hay producer in Olooltepes, Kajiado
John is a hay producer with a large land parcel of about 1,000 acres along the Kiserian– Magadi road. He keeps a variety of beef and dairy cattle. He has about 200 mainly fleishviel dairy cows and also practices livestock fattening where he buys cheap mature cattle and fattens them for sale. He has subdivided his land into a number of paddocks of about 200 acres each. The cows are allowed to graze in rotation around the paddocks, but the milking dairy cows are given dairy supplements. The milk is sold to the local markets of Kiserian and Ongata Rongai and the beef cattle are sold to livestock traders in Kiserian livestock market. There is a small dam on the farm and two boreholes. Besides the water facilities, the farm has a dipping spray shed, a number of large hay stores, water tanks (including an underground one for roof rain water harvesting), staff quarters and stores. There is a lorry and a tractor, equipped with a trailer and hay cutting and bailing equipment. Besides livestock rearing, John cultivates about five acres of land, where he grows a variety of crops such as maize, beans, potatoes and peas, for home consumption and occasional sales. In addition, there are two acres of land which are used when necessary to plant maize for silage production. The silage is used to feed livestock during drought periods. John produces hay, which is utilised in the farm and frequently sold, especially after successive years of good rain and hay production. The grass type in the farm is natural pasture and no new species have been introduced. The area used for hay cutting is about 300 acres. The hay fields have been progressively improved through the removal of bush, shrubs and stones. Hay production happens in the allocated areas of the farm after every season of successful rains.
Timing The hay is cut just before the onset of the dry season when the grass is still fresh and has not lost much moisture. The timing of cutting is important because if cut with a lot of moisture, the hay might rot, yet if too dry then the grass would have lost most of its nutritional value. In a normal year, cutting occurs in May and June. The hay is cut, collected and bailed using a specialised tractor. The hay is stored in specially made stores that are well aerated, waterproof, and covered to prevent direct contact with wind and sun. Exposure to the weather can lead to loss of nutritional value and deterioration of the hay.
Yields John largely produces hay for home consumption. The yields of hay vary depending on the amount of rains received and how well the cutting is done. Approximately 350– 400 bales, weighing 16–18 kg each are harvested from an acre of land. In a normal year, he can accumulate about 50,000–70,000 bales in storage. The selling price of a bale of hay is determined by the going price in Kiserian market. In December 2017, this was between KSh 370–400 per bale. John sells his hay to select known buyers, mainly dairy farmers, and occasionally other pastoralists.
Challenges The main challenge that John faces is the unpredictability in rain patterns. Unpredictable rainy seasons make it difficult to determine when to sell the stored hay or when not to. If he sells the hay and the rains fail, he would end up with nothing for his own livestock. However, if he does not sell and the rains fall, he will not have enough space for storage. In March 2017, John sold most of his stock of hay expecting to replace it after the long rains, however the rains failed and John did not have enough hay for his livestock, forcing him to purchase it at high prices. Other challenges he has faced include thefts of hay, high costs of purchasing and maintaining machinery, a lack of skilled labour, and losses incurred when hay was not properly stored or knotted.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 63 4.2.3 PRODUCTION: Livestock fattening This study found limited evidence of livestock Tanzania that regularly flood the markets in fattening, with it being mostly carried Namanga and Magadi regions. These animals out by wealthier and better-connected can be bought cheaply, and are perceived livestock traders. Fattening was limited by as more drought-tolerant, and have the the availability of land and also cash to potential to add weight through fattening invest in purchasing lean livestock. Fattening even when pasture availability is more limited was however recognised as an important than for other more commercially oriented adaptation option for both traders and livestock breeds. producers, and one that was expected to increase as people’s access to cash income Although the practice of fattening is increased. It was also perceived to be a good profitable, it is challenging due to the need option for those who want to pursue livestock to have enough good pasture, which is investment opportunities. Livestock fattening not always available. Large scale traders, was most prevalent among traders, who especially those with sizeable land parcels, would more frequently buy livestock to fatten may purchase lean animals and fatten them and sell on at a profit. Traders with enough for sale in their own butcheries. This is however capital and access to sufficient pasture, not a common practice since few traders own reported fattening reduced quality animals land for fattening purposes. Moreover, even and converting them into market ready those owning land, face the same production profitable animals. Livestock fattening can constraints due to drought, creating the be done by either individuals or groups, and livestock shortages in the markets in the first as found in the field sites in Step One, family instance. There is also the risk that livestock or friend groups may fatten livestock and use can be lost to disease or climate change the funds for welfare or business goals. hazards while being fattened up. Fattening thus requires well-planned and managed With sufficient inputs, livestock fattening can pasture availability, with the possible provision generate high returns on capital from cheap of hay or fodder inputs. animals after a period of three months of fattening. When carried out in groups, costs Although more restricted in its reach, feedlot can be shared, and thus provide a good option livestock fattening may emerge and grow for livestock producers or trader associations to in importance in coming years, especially get involved in. Livestock generally targeted if drought conditions continue to make it for fattening are steers, since they give good difficult to obtain good quality livestock. An returns on the investment. Fattening is a example of this is a feedlot farm in Kitengela. strategy that traders perceived useful for riding The proprietor buys drought-affected cattle over bad periods in trade, such as in drought in livestock markets at reduced prices and seasons, to protect their trading capital for puts them through an intensive feeding and use when business situations normalised. Thus, fattening regime for three months. They are rather than engaging in trading during bad then sold to the market as finished animals at trade months, traders would invest in cheaper premium prices. The feeds used are purchased animals to sell off at a profit after fattening. from Pioneer Feeds, a feeds producer in Nyeri, There are opportunities for producers and Central Kenya. traders to purchase the lean steers from
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 64 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 4.2.4 TRADING: Aggregation of producers and traders into marketing groups There was little evidence of organised livestock Livestock marketing associations also support marketing groups operating in the study sites. livestock traders’ by facilitating trade and Producers are widely dispersed and there is a lowering marketing costs. They can support lack of collective action that can strengthen livestock traders’ access to markets, provide their bargaining power in the value chain. The access to transport for trucking livestock, and absence of marketing groups or associations provide market information. An important reduces the opportunity for producer-based benefit for livestock traders is facilitating negotiations for market access and for access to credit and loans, as this can be a more price-informed transactions. Marketing limiting factor to livestock trading. groups or associations offer the potential to increase the participation of small scale The Kenya Livestock Marketing Council producers in formal markets, and acting as (KLMC) and the Departments for Trade and a group improves their market bargaining Livestock could help to form these groups so power further than if they were to act alone. livestock producers and traders are able to Marketing associations provide horizontal access larger and more organised markets, linkages and there are economies of scale as and improve their marketing and business producers can bring their cattle together to skills. This can help to create a more supportive sell. They can also provide transport services enabling environment, by supporting the reducing the costs of transport. There are also delivery of extension services, such as access vertical linkages as the associations group to market and pricing information, credit their animals for contracts or sales. This can and loans, feeds, and veterinary services, all reduce the need for middlemen or brokers. especially important during climate shocks.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 65 4.2.5 PROCESSING: Investments in cold storage in the meat chain One of the key constraints identified in the quantity of meat was reduced, and meat was meat value chain was the lack of cold said to have a reduced shelf-life (the meat storage facilities by processors, butchers and being drier and closer to the bone). retailers. This was mainly a problem at meat markets and low-end butcheries. ‘Hot meat’ Private sector investment opportunities thus that is not refrigerated, needs to be sold on exist to improve these market inefficiencies, the day of slaughter. This forces reduced price involving refrigerated transportation, sales by the end of the day as sellers become installation of cold storage rooms at processors desperate to sell their meat. Some retailers (for and wholesalers, and refrigeration units at retail. example Burma and City Market) use freezers This would aid in the development of a more to store meat overnight, with implications for widely used cold meat chain which would meat quality and food safety. allow meat to be stored and not consumed on the day that it is slaughtered, reducing This drop in the price of meat encourages low meat wastage. This would also allow time for quality meat at the market rather than high meat processing and value addition to create quality meat. Meat markets such as Burma higher quality meat products. Limitations thus serve as a disincentive to produce better include the high start-up investment costs and quality animals as low value low quality meat the continued need for electrical supply. At is preferred. The market thus serves against Keekonyokie slaughterhouse in Kiserian, they a shift in behaviour change in pastoralists’ use biogas developed as a by-product from livestock production to produce better quality slaughtering to generate electrical power for animals for the market. This can be made the cold storage room. worse during droughts, when the quality and
4.2.6 PROCESSING: Increasing value addition of low-quality meat An option that was raised through discussions meat was prioritised by meat traders. Meat with processors, meat traders and retailers was suppliers have started to look for markets to creating value-added products, especially supply readily available low quality meat, those that can use the low quality meat readily which they cannot sell in butcheries. These available during drought, but at the same markets include schools, hospitals, army time, widely desired by consumers. These barracks and Burma market in Nairobi. Such include products such as sausages, samosas markets help traders to also deal in cheap and smokies. Smokies, a pre-cooked sausage, and easily available animals in addition to the costs just KSh 25 and has been a very popular expensive high quality animals that they need branded product by Farmer’s Choice, sold to stock in butcheries. This boosts revenues, widely by street vendors and food stands. especially where sale values are high. As low cost products, these value-added products feed into the lower end markets and There is thus a market for low quality meat, and thus potentially reach a large percentage of one that could potentially be strengthened total meat consumers (as opposed to high- by value addition to products that reflect priced meat products that end up at the top- consumer preference and have the potential end markets). As estimated by KMT (2014), 54% to produce a high return. This would require of Kenya’s total red meat sold is purchased investment in specialised processing machines through low-end butchery stalls and meat in butcheries and processing units beyond the markets. main large scale processors to make particular products for uptake at the local level. Creating alternative markets for lower quality
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 66 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 4.2.7 ALL STAGES: Vertically integrated livestock enterprises One of the greatest opportunities to capture An important factor in this model is the use additional value along the beef value chain of rangeland processors that allow livestock is through reducing the reliance on traders to be slaughtered at source, rather than and middlemen and creating stronger direct transported to towns and capital cities. This linkages between pastoralists and processors reduces transport costs and also improves the and end markets. Traders and middlemen are condition of animals as they do not have to important sources of information, such as early trek or truck long distances. Another important warning and livestock pricing information. factor is negotiating regular orders with However, numerous traders along a single buyers (supermarkets, shops and high quality transaction result in high transaction costs butchers) to sell the branded meat products. and low profit margins to pastoralists. Better vertical integration along the value chain In rangeland areas, which are also sites for brings producers closer to consumers, with wildlife and tourism, these enterprises have fewer steps in the value chain (especially in horizontal linkages to conservancies (livestock the meat chain) and can increase efficiency dry season grazing areas) and tourism facilities, that translates to extra profits for pastoralists. It as is the case for Mara Beef, and also Ol Pejeta also better integrates the pastoralist livestock in Laikipia. Livestock grazed and sourced in directly into selling and processing livestock and around the conservancy are used as a for orders rather than by force during times of source of cattle for the beef enterprise, but need. Step One gave an example of vertical cattle can also be sourced from well beyond integration in the Mara Beef model found on the conservancy, as in the case of Mara Beef, the edge of the Maasai Mara in adjacent due to the increasing demand for cattle to Narok County. meet the market demands. Tourism facilities in rangeland sites can then directly purchase There are opportunities for private sector meat from neighbouring areas, providing investment in market integration based good markets to local livestock keepers, on growing customer awareness for good rather than purchasing meat from Nairobi. quality meat. There are also opportunities to brand beef, similar to as branded in the Mara This requires a high capital investment, and Beef enterprise, as ‘conservation beef’ or so far, has only been implemented on a small ‘Maasai beef’. These enterprises can provide scale through private enterprise and grant producers a more reliable and consistent funding (for example in the case of Mara market and help them secure higher prices for Beef, and Ol Pejeta). However, possibilities their cattle. These enterprises link communities exist for community-owned enterprises to to high value markets in cities. The marketing adapt this idea – for example, Keekonyokie and distribution systems are more predictable, slaughterhouse have interests to develop reliable and can gain higher prices. By linking high quality branded products, using beef the opposite ends of the value chain, it brings from pastoral rangeland cattle to supply producers closer to markets and customers, to high quality markets ( KII, Keekonyokie and more closely links supply and demand. slaughterhouse).
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 67 Figure 20: Adaptation and investment options along the beef value chain in Kenya’s Southern Rangelands CHAPTER FIVE Conclusions and Recommendations 5.1 Summary and conclusions from analysis of Steps One to Three This study aimed to identify the climate stages along the value chain that present change impacts, adaptation options and opportunities for tourism to better support opportunities for private sector investment the beef value chain. In select examples, in the beef value chain in Kajiado County in horizontally and vertically integrated livestock the Southern Rangelands of Kenya. Kajiado meat enterprises link cattle production to County is an ASAL county that forms part of tourism, and provide a direct and guaranteed Kenya’s major meat production region. In market for the sale of pastoralists’ cattle. These Kajiado, livestock are predominately reared enterprises produce high quality value-added extensively on rangelands by pastoralists and beef products for the high-end markets. agro-pastoralists. Due to a growing demand for meat in Kenya, there are opportunities Climate change presents a significant risk to for producers in the Southern Rangelands to the beef value chain. Similar to other ASAL benefit from this demand by increasing their counties, Kajiado is highly vulnerable to the production of animals for the market. Despite impacts of climate change, with temperature the long-term rhetoric that pastoral producers increases between 1960 and 2014 almost o predominately keep cattle for cultural reasons reaching the 1.5 C mark. Climate projections and like to accumulate large herds with indicate further expected increases in o o little market off-take, there is an increasing temperatures of between 1.00 C to 1.59 C by commercialisation of cattle production in the 2030s depending on the climate scenario. Kajiado. Producers are active in buying and These increases translate into a loss of 12.7– selling livestock with the market in mind, and 14.2% of suitable cattle range (that above o there is a wide interest and uptake of more 30 C) by the 2030s, potentially affecting 74,000 commercially-oriented breeds such as Borana cattle, equating to KSh 2.9 billion. Producers and Sahiwal. clearly perceived there had been a change in the rainfall and temperature patterns in However, inefficiencies in the beef value chain the last 10 years, which had affected their currently limit pastoralists profit and share of livestock production. In response they had added value along the chain. Inefficiencies taken a number of adaptation measures to identified include the disconnect between cope with the changes, the most important pastoralists and the end markets and being changes related to grazing and herd consumers due to the high number of actors management. Differences between the two (including numerous traders, middlemen and study sites showed that in the communal transporters, at multiple potential market sites) group ranches of Olkiramatian and Shompole, along a single transaction, resulting in high producers commonly relied on the mobility transaction costs. There is also minimal value of their livestock and settlements, whereas in chain addition and diversification of the beef privately-owned Meto, adaptation strategies product. These inefficiencies result in low were more centred on grazing within their returns to the pastoralist producer, who bears own land pastures, providing inputs of water most of the loss and receives the lowest profit and fodder for livestock, as well as destocking margins. Low profit margins disincentivise livestock before drought. producers to produce animals for the market. This contributes to an insufficient volume of Drought was perceived to be the most important sales able to meet the increasing domestic climate shock experienced by producers. In demand for beef in Kenya. To fill this gap, 2009, a severe drought affected producers significant numbers of cattle are trekked in in both Magadi and Namanga regions, and from Tanzania. There are thus opportunities this was soon followed in 2013/14 by another, for growth in Kenya cattle production more moderate drought, experienced in the and significant potential revenue earning Magadi region. Responses to these droughts opportunities. was similar across the two regions: migration was the overwhelming response, often Horizontal linkages exist between the beef crossing borders into neighbouring counties or value chain and tourism. There are synergies countries, where reciprocal grazing rights are between livestock and wildlife in the form of then established. Mobility therefore represents conservancies that also act as important dry a primary climate change adaptation season grazing areas. Conservancies provide response, particularly for communities under important benefits for pastoral producers communal land tenure, but also for those in through livestock grazing, as well as through private land tenure systems when faced with employment and other community level harsh drought conditions. To be able to better benefits. Numerous linkages exist between cope with future drought, producers thought tourism and the beef value chain at multiple better pasture management, as well as more
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 70 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN fodder and hay stocking was key. In terms of adaptation options were identified at each service provision, early warning systems and stage of the value chain. Key adaptation access to insurance and credit systems were options include: identified as being important for livestock to cope with drought although these were poorly INPUTS provided in both study regions, indicating • The rehabilitation of heavily degraded definite opportunities for improvement. rangelands to increase pasture Beyond the inputs and production levels, availability for use during periods of climate risks associated with different climatic normal production as well as during shocks (drought, floods and a delay in the drought periods. rains) are felt at each stage along the beef • The production or purchasing of hay value chain. These climate shocks present or other sources of feed to maintain direct risks to the inputs and production production and sustain cattle during levels of the value chain, after which indirect drought periods. impacts are experienced as knock-on effects along the rest of the chain, until meat ends PRODUCTION up at the market. Occasionally, climate shocks can directly affect trading and further • Fattening of lean cattle in producer stages up the chain, for example if there is or trader groups, to convert them into a direct impact on infrastructure involved in market ready animals to sell at a profit. marketing or distribution. Although retailers perceived their businesses to be driven largely TRADING by customer demand, a reduced supply of • Aggregation of producers and traders livestock (particularly of good quality animals) into livestock marketing groups or during climate shocks was a major constraint associations to strengthen their collective to business. With fewer good quality animals bargaining power and facilitate trade. available, the quality of beef deteriorated, but operational costs remained high, so profits PROCESSING and DOMESTIC MARKET decreased. Moreover, limited value addition to the beef reduces the opportunity for profit • Investments in cold storage in the meat from the lower quality meat available. At chain, that allow the development of a the end of the chain, low income consumers cold chain to prevent meat being sold were priced out of the market, middle income at reduced prices or wasted. consumers would switch to other meat • Increased value addition to beef, products, whereas high income consumers especially of low quality beef readily pay a premium for the limited quality beef available during drought (for the low- that was available, usually sourced from end markets). commercial ranches and feedlots. • Vertically integrated private or Following discussions with stakeholders, a community livestock enterprises that number of key adaptation and investment create strong direct linkages between options for the beef value chain emerged. pastoralists and end markets (for the These are options that address climate risk high-end markets). and also have an opportunity to upgrade and transform the value chain. A number of 5.2 Recommendations 1. Maintaining mobility Migration is a fundamental adaptation protecting communal land holdings from strategy used by pastoralists during drought. land subdivision. Group ranch subdivision is The Kajiado County government needs to often done without reason other than to meet maintain and protect specific areas for livestock the interests of small groups of well positioned grazing (especially dry season grazing areas), individuals who seek to gain from subdivision. It as well as livestock corridors that facilitate is also important to protect other public lands, the mobility of livestock. In communal group such as forests, swamps and hills, which act ranch areas, this would involve support to as important drought refuge areas. In private remain under communal land tenure, as this land tenure areas, mobility can be sustained best facilitates mobility and maintains open by preserving local public roads and other range. The preservation of pasture areas in corridors to facilitate movements into and out communal areas would be achieved through of private lands. Such passageways are often
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 71 grabbed or obstructed by private interests. are challenging due to hostile receptions, Physical planners at the Ministry of Lands conflict with host communities, arbitrary would need to ensure that such passages arrests, and the confiscation of livestock. This are created when land subdivision plans happens because movement is commonly are created. Overall, this would include the uncoordinated and lacks proper guiding development of land use plans that maintain regulations. It is thus necessary to create and develop livestock routes, including where an institutional framework through which livestock need to cross highways, railways and coordinated livestock movements and a other large infrastructure. This also includes sharing of grazing resources can happen the support to integrated livestock–wildlife between counties and countries. The conservancies that act as dry season grazing Department of Livestock at the county zones for livestock. government and the NDMA should take the lead in creating such a framework. Increasingly, livestock are forced to move beyond county and country boundaries in search of pasture. Such movements
2. Fodder production To provide pasture during drought periods, droughts, while allowing producers to make pastoralists and farmers should be encouraged good returns on investments. At the most basic, to invest in hay and fodder production in natural pasture can be set aside, cut and areas that are suitable. To facilitate the baled for hay, and then stored appropriately development of hay and fodder enterprises, for use in dry periods. Group ranches can public and private sector investment would allocate and reserve specific communal be required in seed development, start- grazing areas for this, whereas private land up and machinery costs, and in technical owners can apportion an area of land for training. Such enterprises can be used for hay production. In areas not suitable for hay domestic pasture use, but also to make production, having a reliable and affordable products available to sell in the market for market for purchasing hay would greatly assist other livestock owners. These enterprises in responding to droughts. would help reduce the risks and exposure to
3. Breeding to maintain climate resilience More attention should be paid to drought most effective breeds will thus be those that resilience in livestock breeds, particularly in are more heat tolerant. the more arid areas that receive less rainfall. There is temptation to go for improved breeds, In areas which can support them, cross- since these are more commercially oriented, breeds that optimise a mix of commercially but this might just not be feasible in some oriented traits from exotic breeds with drought areas. This will vary on location, temperature resistance from indigenous breeds can be and the amount of rainfall, but breeds should suitable. This should be supported by both be used according to these factors, and with public and private investment in partnerships knowledge of the increasing climate variability with key scientific institutions, such as ILRI, who to come. Climate projections show increased are researching drought tolerance in cattle minimum and maximum temperatures are breeds. expected in Kajiado County (Step Two). The 4. Support to integrated livestock–wildlife conservancies Support should be given to create and exist on communal land, however, they can maintain community oriented livestock– also be applied on subdivided land, as is wildlife conservancies as areas that provide the case in neighbouring Narok County. dry season grazing for livestock. This would Conservancies offer horizontal integration with include recognition of conservancies as a producers in the beef value chain, but also viable form of land use to maintain livestock provide a number of other linkages as shown production as well as wildlife conservation. in Step One. They may also be associated with Conservancies help to reduce vulnerability to private sector livestock enterprises that allow drought as well as facilitate wildlife/livestock vertical integration and value-addition within coexistence. In the study sites, conservancies the beef value chain.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 72 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 5. More finance opportunities including access to climate finance and livestock insurance Access to finance was identified as being institutions set aside a portion of their annual important to allow livestock to cope with budgets and dedicate it to climate change drought, however, its provision was very limited issues. Global climate change institutions, to actors in the value chain. More support such as the Green Climate Fund and other from financial institutions and the provision of organisations, have mechanisms of donating opportunities for value chain actors to access to these funds when they are established. In financial services and credit systems that Kenya, five counties, Wajir, Makueni, Garissa, are better designed for pastoral production Isiolo and Kitui, have already piloted and systems, can help producers and traders to established these funds. During engagement engage in hay production or in the fattening with county government stakeholders, of animals. Few banks give unsecured loans PRISE researchers advised Kajiado County to individuals and small businesses, and do government on establishing a CCCF not recognise livestock as collateral, only and including it in the County Integrated recognising land or buildings as ways to obtain Development Plan (CIDP) 2018–2022. credit. Livestock insurance is another financial service There needs to be more opportunities for that would provide useful cushioning to tapping into national and global climate pastoralists against drought. The government finance. There was a perceived lack of climate plans to roll out livestock insurance services financing mechanisms to support some for pastoralists through the Kenya Livestock of the practical solutions and innovations Insurance Program (KILP) in a number of being discussed and developed, such as in counties in Kenya, following successful pasture conservation or value addition (KII, implementation in pilot counties in northern Keekonyokie slaughterhouse ). One identified Kenya. Stakeholders at a Kajiado County mechanism was through setting up a County stakeholder workshop expressed a desire for Climate Change Fund (CCCF) for Kajiado a livestock insurance scheme to be set up in County. The CCCF provides a framework for Kajiado. This creates opportunities for private setting funds aside to address climate change sector insurance providers to partner with the challenges and support preventive and government in enabling these schemes. adaptive measures. The fund requires that
6. Encourage the formation of livestock marketing associations Livestock producers and traders should be vulnerability to drought and other climate encouraged to form livestock marketing shocks. The Kenya Livestock Marketing groups or associations to increase their Council (KLMC) and the Departments for participation in markets and their collective Trade and Livestock should support producers bargaining power. These can support more and traders to form these groups, and provide price-informed transactions as well as provide capacity building and training on marketing access to livestock extension services and and value addition. financial services. This can help reduce their
7. Improved livestock pricing information Access to pricing information is a constraint negotiations between producers and traders. in livestock marketing. Live cattle price However, to avoid them lying redundant as information is not readily available to in the case of Keekonyokie livestock market, producers, so their ability to negotiate a fairer these would need to be accompanied by price is reduced. Formal pricing mechanisms greater awareness raising and a community at livestock markets are absent because of sensitisation programme on the use of such a lack of weighing scales and other livestock infrastructure, as well as an overall behaviour marketing infrastructure to measure the weight change between trader and producer of an animal. As explained by producers, this negotiations. leads to a loss on the side of the seller to the advantage of the traders due to informal and Better price discovery mechanisms that inform speculative pricing. Local governments can producers and traders of livestock prices at improve livestock marketing infrastructure remote and distant markets will also help them to include weighing scales, at a minimum at to be able to better exploit these markets. If the secondary markets, to inform better price producers are able to receive better prices for their animals, this can incentivise them to
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 73 produce animals more strategically for the stationed in strategic markets to provide price market. Price discovery mechanisms could information using an information system with be coordinated by livestock marketing communication between markets. associations and use resource persons
8. Improve early warning systems During the 2009 and 2013/14 droughts in Although NDMA already has an early warning Kajiado, there was limited reported access system in place, including in Kajiado, this to early warning information by producers in is not always available to the people who the study sites. Early warning systems, where really need it due to timings and methods correct and functional, can play an important of dissemination. NDMA should establish a role in preparing communities for the impact pastoral focused early warning system that of climate shocks. Providing communities is easily accessible to producers and traders with early warning information and advising in the rangelands. Efforts should be taken to them on the possible measures to take, would ensure that critical early warning information help to reduce losses from climate change, or is shared to those who need it, and is in a form even help them to benefit from such changes. that they can easily access and understand.
9. Improved cold room storage Beyond the high-end meat channels, there should invest in cold storage to give meat a is an absence of a well-developed cold longer shelf life. This will be especially important chain for beef. There is a lack of cold room in drought periods to avoid meat being sold at storage and refrigeration facilities during reduced prices or thrown away. Cold storage transportation, meat processing, and at the also allows time for extra meat processing to end markets (meat markets and butcheries). produce value-added meat products. This study recommends that the private sector
10. Value addition in the meat chain – especially using low quality meat The development of value-added products and reflect consumer preference. This could was seen as an opportunity in the beef value create a market for lower quality meat chain that allows for diversification of the meat that is especially prevalent during drought. product, increase incomes to value chain This requires the upgrading of processing actors – including pastoralists, processors facilities and the purchasing of the necessary and retailers – and respond to consumer equipment so processors and butchers can preference. One opportunity that stood develop new products for sale. By using low out was the development of value-added quality meat, they are a good option during products such as sausages and smokies that droughts, when the quality of meat reduces. use lower quality meat, but are still demanded 11. Development of more profitable private sector vertically integrated businesses For better links between producers and partnership, producers could also appreciate the end markets, the development of a larger share of the profits beyond the reliable private sector enterprises that link pastoralist markets and good prices they get for selling cattle to high value markets in cites, can their animals. These could potentially be set provide producers with higher and more up through climate financing mechanisms, reliable incomes. These vertically integrated and supported by training in business and enterprises link the opposite ends of the value marketing skills. There are opportunities for chain and bring producers closer to markets branding of products, such as ‘conservation and consumers. Mara Beef is an example of beef’ or ‘Maasai beef’ that would attract a private enterprise based in the rangelands and tap into growing customer awareness that links livestock to high-value markets and for good quality beef. This type of branding is horizontally linked to conservancies and could potentially also open up international tourism in the Mara area of the Southern export markets in countries where consumer Rangelands. preferences for environmentally- or climate- friendly products draw a premium. If pastoralist communities as well as individual private investors can be facilitated to set up these types of enterprises, or do so in
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 74 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN CHAPTER SIX References Ashley, C., Roe, D. and Goodwin, H. (2001). Initiative. Raising Risk Awareness project. Pro-poor tourism strategies: Making tourism work for the poor: A review of experience. Christian, M. (2015). Kenya’s tourist industry Pro-poor tourism report No. 1. ODI/IIED. and global production networks: gender, race and inequality. Global Networks, DOI: Bedelian, C. (2012). Conservation and 10.1111/glob.12094 ecotourism on privatised land in the Mara, Kenya: The case of conservancy land leases. Conservation Development Centre. (2002). Land Deal Politics Initiative, Working Paper 9. Realising the Economic Development and Poverty Alleviation Potential of Nature in Bedelian, C. (2014). Conservation, tourism and Magadi. Ol Donyo Nyoike, Ol Keri, Olkiramatian pastoral livelihood: Wildlife conservation in the and Shompole Group Ranches. A report for Maasai Mara, Kenya. Unpublished PhD thesis. DFID, Nairobi. University College London. Dahl, G. and Hjort, A. (1976). Having herds: Bedelian, C. and Ogutu, J. O. (2017). Trade- Pastoral herd growth and household offs for climate resilient pastoral livelihoods economy. Stockholm: University of Stockholm, in wildlife conservancies in the Mara, Kenya. Department of Social Anthropology. Pastoralism, 7:10 Delgado, C. (2005). Rising demand for meat Bedelian, C., Moiko, S. and Atela, J. (in review). and milk in developing countries: implications Land tenure influences livestock management for grasslands-based livestock production. In: and climate change adaptation in pastoralist Grassland: a global resource (ed. McGilloway communities in Kajiado County, Kenya. D. A.), pp. 29–39, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers Behnke, R. and Muthami, D. (2011). The contribution of livestock to the Kenyan Deloitte. (2006). Kenya Livestock Sector study: economy. IGAD LPI Working Paper 03-11. An analysis of pastoralist livestock products Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: IGAD Livestock Policy market value chains and potential external Initiative. markets for live animals and meat. AU-IBAR & NEPDP Bekure, S., De Leeuw, P. N., Grandin, B. E. and Neate, P. J. H. (1991). Maasai herding: an Emerton, L. (2001). The nature of benefits analysis of the livestock production system of and the benefits of nature: why wildlife Maasai pastoralists in Eastern Kajiado District, conservation has not economically benefited Kenya. ILCA Systems Study Report No.4, communities in Africa. In: Hulme, D. and Nairobi: ILCA Murphree, M. (Eds.), African wildlife and livelihoods: the promise and performance Carabine, E. (2014). Resilience in the of community conservation, pp. 208–226. rangelands? Responses to change in the Oxford: James Currey. Amboseli social-ecological system of Kenya. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of FAOSTAT. (2016). Kenya livestock population Geography, University of Sheffield. estimates. http://faostat.fao.org/ Carabine, E. and Simonet, C. (2017). Value Faye, B., Chaibou, M. and Vias, G. (2012). Chain Analysis for Resilience in Drylands (VC- Integrated impact of climate change ARID): Identification of adaptation options in and socioeconomic development on the key sectors. London, UK. evolution of camel farming systems. British Journal of Environment and Climate Change Carabine, E. and Simonet, C. (2018). Value 2: 227–244. Chain Analysis for Resilience in Drylands (VC- ARID): Identification of adaptation options GoK. (2010). Agricultural sector development in key sectors. VC-ARID synthesis report, strategy 2010–2020. Government of Kenya. Pathways to Resilience in Semi-Arid Economies (PRISE). London, UK. GoK. (2011). Kenya 2009 Population and Housing Census. (Nairobi, Kenya). Central CDKN. (2014). The IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Bureau of Statistics. Ministry of Finance and Report: What’s in it for Africa? Climate and Planning. Development Knowledge Network/Overseas Development Institute, London, UK. GoK. (2013). Kajiado County Integrated Development Plan 2013-2017. County CDKN. (2017). The drought in Kenya, 2016– Government of Kajiado 2017. Climate and Development Knowledge Network and World Weather Attribution
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 76 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Grandin, B.E. 1988. Wealth and pastoral dairy rationality in pastoral production: Evidence production: a case study of Maasailand. from Northern Kenya. Human Ecology. Human Ecology, 1(16), 1–21. 33(2):171–97. doi:10.1007/s10745-005-2431-Y Herrero, M., Addison, J., Bedelian, C., Carabine, McPeak, J. and Little P. D. (2005). Cursed if E., Havlík, P., Henderson, B., Van De Steeg, J. you do, cursed if you don’t: The contradictory and Thornton, P. K. (2016). Climate change processes of sedentarization in northern and pastoralism: Impacts, consequences and Kenya. In: As pastoralists settle, ed. E. Fratkin adaptation. Revue scientifique et technique and E. Roth. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic (International Office of Epizootics), 35(2), 417. Publishers. Homewood K., Kristjanson, P. and Chevenix Mitchell, J., Keane, J. and Laidlaw J. (2009). Trench P. (2009). Staying Maasai? Livelihoods, Making success work for the poor: Package Conservation and Development in East tourism in Northern Tanzania. ODI/SNV African Rangelands. Springer: New York. Moiko. S., Bedelian. C., Said. M.Y., Abuya R. Homewood, K. and Rodgers, W. A. (1991). and Atela., J. (2019): Land use transformation Maasailand ecology: pastoralist development in Kajiado county, Kenya: Implications of a and wildlife conservation in Ngorongoro changing climate. KMT PRISE Policy Brief Conservation Area, Tanzania. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Moiko, S. (2009). “Since we Have this Land Together”; A Pastoral Community in Institutional ILCA 1981. Introduction to the East African Management of Communal Resources. The range livestock systems study. ILCA Working Case of Okiramatian Group Ranch, Kenya. Document No. 23. Nairobi: ILCA. Presented at The American Anthropological Association’s Annual Meetings, 2009 IPCC. (2014). Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate MOLD. (2010). An overview of livestock sub- Change. sector in Kenya. Perspectives, opportunities and innovations for market access for pastoral Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth producers. Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Edenhofer, O., Mwangi, M. (2016). Diverse Drought R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Spatiotemporal Trends, Diverse Etic-Emic Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, Perceptions and Knowledge: Implications P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, for Adaptive Capacity and Resource S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and Management for Indigenous Maasai J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Pastoralism in the Rangelands of Kenya. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, Climate, 4(2): 22. NY, USA. Nassef, M., Anderson, S. and Hesse, C. (2009). KMT. (2014). Kenya livestock and meat market Pastoralism and climate change: enabling analysis for cattle, goat and sheep. Kenya adaptive capacity, Humanitarian Policy Markets Trust/I-DEV International. Group, Overseas Development Institute, London. KNBS. (2015). Fact and Figures 2015. Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. Ndiritu, S. W., and Said, M. (in review). Harnessing opportunities for climate-resilient KNBS. (2018). Economic survey 2018. Kenya economic development in semi-arid lands: National Bureau of Statistics/Ministry of Adaptation options in the beef value chain in Devolution and Planning. Laikipia County, Kenya. PRISE Working Paper. KWCA. (2016). State of Wildlife Conservancies Nairobi: Kenya Markets Trust. in Kenya. Summary Report 2016. Kenya Wildlife Nkedianye, D., de Leeuw, J., Ogutu, J. O., Conservancies Association. Said, M. Y., Saidimu, T. L., Kifugo, S. C., Kaelo, D. Lumiti C. (2009). ‘Kenya: Tourism figures drop S. and Reid, R. S. 2011. Mobility and livestock by 19%’ East Africa Business Week, 23 May mortality in communally used pastoral areas: 2009. Accessed at: http://allafrica.com/ The impact of the 2005–2006 droughts on stories/200905251045.html livestock mortality in Maasailand. Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice 1(17):1–17. MALF. (2015). Economic Review of Agriculture. Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries. Norton-Griffiths, M. and Said, M. (2010). ‘The future for wildlife on Kenya’s rangelands: An McPeak, J. (2005). Individual and collective economic perspective’, in du Toit J., Kock R.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 77 and Deutsch J. (eds), Wild Rangelands. Wiley- Republic of Kenya. www.mtp3.go.ke Blackwell. Republic of Kenya. (2018b). The 2018 Budget Ogutu, J. O., Hans-Peter P., Mohammed Y. S. Policy Statement. Creating jobs, transforming and Kifugo, S. C. (2014). Herbivore Dynamics lives – “The Big Four” Plan. February 208. The and Range Contraction in Kajiado County National Treasury. The Republic of Kenya Reid, Kenya: Climate and Land Use Changes, R. S. 2012. Savannas of our birth. Berkeley, CA: Population Pressures, Governance, Policy and University of California Press. Human-wildlife Conflicts. The Open Ecology Journal, 7, 9–31 Sacco, V., Flintan, F. and Moiko, S. (2012). Olkiramatian Group Ranch, Kajiado District, Ogutu, J. O., Piepho, Hans-P, Said, M. Y., Kenya Ojwang, G. O., Njino, L. W., Kifugo, S. C. and Wargute, P. W. (2016). Extreme wildlife Said, M. Y., Ogutu, J. O., Bedelian, C., Moiko, declines and concurrent increase in livestock S., Muhwanga, J., Abuya, R. and Carabine, E. numbers in Kenya: What are the causes? (in review). Projected climate change impacts PLoSONE 11(9):e0163249.doi:10.1371/ journal. on cattle in Kenya’s arid and semi-arid lands pone.0163249. based on RCP 2.6, 4.5 and 8.5. Osano, P. M., Said, M. Y., de Leeuw, J., Said, M.Y., Bedelian, C., Moiko, S., Muhwanga, Moiko, S. S., Kaelo, D., Schomers, S., Birner, J., Atela, J. and Abuya, R. (2019): Projected R. and Ogutu, J. O. (2013). Pastoralism and climate change and its potential impact on ecosystem-based adaptation in Kenyan cattle in Kajiado county: PRISE Research Brief. Maasailand. International Journal of Climate Nairobi: Kenya Markets Trust Change Strategies and Management 5(2): Seo, S. N. and Mendelsohn, R. (2008). 198–214. Measuring impacts and adaptations to Ottichilo, W. K., Grunblatt, J., Said, M. Y. and climate change: A structural Ricardian model Wargute, P. W. (2000). Wildlife and livestock of African livestock management. Agricultural population trends in the Kenya rangeland. In: Economics 38: 151–165. Wildlife conservation by sustainable use, ed. Seo, S. N., Mendelsohn, R., Dinar, A. and H. H. T. Prins, J. G. Grootenhuis and T. T. Dolan. Kurukulasuriya, P. (2009). Adapting to climate Dordrecht: Springer. change mosaically: An analysis of African Pillay, M. and Rogerson, C. M. (2013). livestock management by agroecological Agriculture-tourism linkages and pro-poor zones. The B.E Journal of Economic Analysis & impacts: The accommodation sector of urban Policy 9(2): 1–37. coastal KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Applied Thompson M. and Homewood K. (2002). ‘Elites, Geography, 36: 49–58 entrepreneurs and exclusion in Maasailand’, PROCASUR 2012 Case 3: Linking community Human Ecology 30(1):107–138. slaughterhouses to urban markets: Kajiado Thornton, P. K. (2010). Livestock production: County, Kenya. recent trends, future prospects. Philosophical Reid, R. S., Rainy, M. E., Ogutu, J., Kruska, R. Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: L., Kimani, K., Nyabenge, M., McCartney, Biological Sciences, 365(1554), 2853–2867. M., Kshatriya, M., Worden, J. S., Ng’ang’a, L., Thornton P., Van de Steeg J., Notenbaert Owuor, J., Kinoti, J., Njuguna, E., Wilson, C. J. A. and Herrero M. (2009). The impacts of and Lamprey, R. H. (2003). People, wildlife and climate change on livestock and livestock livestock in the Mara ecosystem: The Mara systems in developing countries: a review of Count 2002. Nairobi: International Livestock what we know and what we need to know. Research Institute. Agric. Syst., 101 (3), 113–127. doi:10.1016/j. Republic of Kenya. (2012). Vision 2030: agsy.2009.05.002. Development Strategy for Northern Kenya Thornton, P. K., Boone, R. B. and Ramirez- and Other Arid Lands. Office of the Prime Villegas, J. (2015). Climate change impacts Minister. Ministry of State for Development of on livestock. CCAFS Working Paper no. 120. Northern Kenya and other Arid Lands. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Republic of Kenya. (2018a). The Third Medium Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Term Plan (2018-2022) for Vision 2030. The UNDATA. (2018). Kenya Country Profile http:// Ministry of Devolution and Planning. The data.un.org/en/iso/ke.html
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 78 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN USAID. (2012). End market analysis of Kenyan Western, D. (1982). The environment and Livestock and Meat. A Desk Study. MicroREPORT ecology of pastoralists in arid savannas. #184. Development and Change, 13, 183–211. Wangai, P., Muriithi, J. K. and Koenig, A. Western, D. (2010). The worst drought: Tipping (2013). Drought related impacts on local or turning point? Swara, 2: 16–22. people’s socioeconomic life and biodiversity conservation at Kuku Group Ranch, Southern World Bank. (2011). Kenya’s tourism: polishing Kenya. International Journal of Ecosystem, the jewel. The World Bank. 3(1): 1–6. World Bank. (2018). Kenya, The World Bank Western, D., Russell, S. and Cuthill, I. (2009). The Data. https://data.worldbank.org/country/ status of wildlife in protected areas compared kenya to nonprotected areas of Kenya. PLoS ONE, 4(7), e6140.
Appendices
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 81 Appendix 1: Stakeholder engagement strategy At the initial stages of the project the keep engaged; 3) engaged and build researchers developed a list of potential awareness; and 4) build partnership. The partners to engage with at national, county strongest relationships were developed with and the local levels (Table A1.1). The different stakeholders in this fourth category, with partners were classified into four different frequent communications and meetings, categories of engagement dependent feeding back of results and findings, carrying on their sphere of influence and ability to out joint field activities, and in collaborative impact the project: 1) keep informed; 2) learning.
Table A1.1: Stakeholders/Partners for PRISE – Project 3 in Kajiado
Engaged and build awareness Build partnerships 1. Magadi Soda Foundation 1. South Rift Association of Land 2. National Climate Change Owners (SORALO) Directorate 2. Dupoto e Maa 3. Ministry of Lands, Housing & Physical 3. Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock Planning and Fisheries (Kajiado County and 4. Ministry of Environment, Natural National Government) Resources and Regional 4. National Drought Management Development Authorities Authority (NDMA) – Kajiado Office 5. Mainyoito Pastoralists Integrated 5. Kenya Livestock Marketing Development Organization (MPIDO) Council (KLMC) – Kajiado 6. Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) 6. Livestock Marketing Associations 7. African Conservation Centre (LMAs) – Kajiado 7. Abattoirs/Processors, Traders, Ranches, Conservancies (Along Magadi and Namanga livestock routes)
Keep engaged Keep informed 1. Ministry of Industrialization and 1. Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Enterprises Development Research Institute (KALRO) 2. Community agribusiness service 2. ASAL Parliamentary Group providers 3. ASAL Stakeholders Forum (ASF) 3. Kenya Tourism Board (KTB) 4. Nazarene University – Pastoral and 4. Livestock/crop insurance Rangeland studies 5. University of Nairobi – Centre for 5. Ewaso Ngiro South Development Sustainable Dryland and Ecosystem Authority Services (CSDES) 6. IGAD Climate Prediction and 6. Micro-Enterprises Support Programme Application Centre (ICPAC) (MESPT) 7. Kenya Meteorological 7. I-CAN Project Department –(KMD)
Table A1.2 gives a summary of our key our largest Kajiado County level stakeholder stakeholder groups, communication workshop bringing together 22 stakeholders strategy and key messages. We held regular from the county government, civil society meetings, roundtables, and informal visits and organisations, NGOs, CBOs, local Chiefs, discussions with stakeholders over the course private sector and research organisation. of the project. In June 2017, we carried out This was one of the main forums through
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 82 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN which we discussed adaptation options in Community business enterprise and local the beef value chain. The workshop was a actors – there was regular engagement with joint PRISE workshop with Project 5, which these actors, who we also drew up upon as has interrelated research on the role of land value chain actors in our field study and value tenure in contributing to climate-resilience in chain analysis. In Kiserian, one of the main semi-arid areas. A subsequent workshop was terminal markets for livestock in the southern held in Kajiado in February 2018 to feedback rangelands, we developed a relationship with findings from all PRISE projects operating in a climate change adaptation innovator and Kajiado County. At the community level, we strategist at Keekonyokie slaughterhouse. We held workshops in April 2018 and June 2018, also engaged with Mara Beef, a commercial at Olkiramatian/Shompole GRs, and Meto livestock enterprise associated to tourism respectively, to validate the research findings and conservation in Narok County. These and discuss identified adaptation options. community and private enterprises positioned A PRISE national level workshop was carried within the beef value chain, informed the out in Nairobi in June 2018 to discuss findings research design and direction, shared from PRISE projects in Kenya with national knowledge and experience, and facilitated and county government stakeholders, NGOs, the research project. They also sought research institutions, private sector, civil society feedback on PRISE findings, including on and the media, amongst others. climate and livestock trends. Engaging with stakeholder groups The PRISE team have close links to private actors in the field sites and in Kiserian. We had Outlined below is a summary of how we repeated engagement with traders, butchers, engaged with particular stakeholders in each commercial farmers and other private sector of our stakeholder groups actors in these sites, where we shared research Government (national and county) findings, sought information and discussed stakeholders – There was strong and regular adaptation options. engagement with the Kajiado County Immediate civil society, NGOs, and other local government. The engagements mainly groups: We developed relationships with a involved the Ministries of Lands, Physical number of civil society and local groups at the Planning and Housing; and Agriculture, county and local levels, these included Dupoto Fisheries and Livestock. In these Ministries, all e Maa, MPIDO, Elongo O Losho, and the South the Departments in the Ministry of Lands were Rift Association of Landowners (SORALO). involved, while in the Ministry of Agriculture, We developed a significant relationship and the Department of Livestock and Veterinary partnership with SORALO throughout the Services were involved. Consultative meetings project. SORALO helped facilitate research were held with relevant County Executive at the field sites, introducing the PRISE team Committee Members and at least two briefing to the communities, and also providing sessions with the County Governor. The National logistics, accommodation, enumerators Drought Management Authority (NDMA) and and maps, to help in carrying out research. National Lands Commission (NLC) officers There were demands for PRISE research in the county were also involved. In these findings and we carried out collaborative engagements, we shared and presented research activities during the research period. PRISE research methodologies and findings. SORALO also facilitated introduction to other Participants showed appreciation for, and local stakeholders, including local tourism demands for, research findings and climate- and conservation actors. We organised a related information. In the later stages of the feedback session with SORALO in November project, PRISE data and research findings were 2017 to feedback summary results and do an being used by county planners in developing assessment of selected adaptation options. the County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP), which guides the development Civil Society and NGOs played critical roles in interventions of the county government for the PRISE county stakeholder meetings held the next five years. in Kajiado in June 2017 and February 2018, through providing suggestions and insights At the national level, there was engagement during presentations and discussion of PRISE with officials at the Ministry of Lands. This research findings. involved officers at the Land Use planning section of the Ministry as well as those in the National Land Commission (NLC).
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 83 Table A1.2: Summary of key messages and communication strategies with key stakeholders
Stakeholder What do you want What’s important Communication What is your from stakeholders? to stakeholders? strategy for enhancing stakeholder support?
Government Enhanced Sustainable land Evidential reports Information (national and appreciation of use planning and /papers and sharing, county levels) and climate change zonation. policy briefs consultative policy challenges and showcasing and strategy development bottlenecks facing Enhanced challenges, planning forums actors (Ministries, livestock and tourism livestock opportunities and with local NDMA) value chain production and bottlenecks in legislators, line development. tourism livestock and ministry and promotion. tourism value Government Consultative chain Authorities’ creation of enabling development. officials. policy environments and intervention programmes that support livestock and tourism value chain development.
Community, Active participation Sustainable Regular local Regular business enterprises in developing a natural resources meetings and participatory and local actors current situation (pasture, water informational consultative (Group ranches, analysis and better and wildlife) booklets (some in meetings with abbatoirs, livestock understanding of management local languages). group ranch marketing livestock and tourism and preservation. leaders, local agencies) sectors, and creating business actors, strong partnerships in Enhanced livestock designing and incomes from marketing implementing any livestock and associations intervention tourism. and other programmes. actors
Immediate civil Strong partnerships Effective and Situation and Regular society and other and collaboration in sustainable strategy reports consultation local interest identifying and climate smart and groups (SORALO, tackling climate programmes and engagements MPIDO, MSF, change threats, risks interventions that (collaborative DUPOTO, ACC) and challenges promote livestock fundraising and currently faced in sector and tourism implementation) livestock production development forums with and marketing and partner civil in tourism societies and development. other interest groups.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 84 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Appendix 2: Policy review The most important policies concerning the extension, food security and farm animal beef value chain are outlined below. genetic resources. The policy recognises the ASALs in livestock production, where the major Sessional paper No 8 of 2012 – National Policy activity in these areas is livestock production for the Sustainable Development of Northern at both subsistence and commercial levels, Kenya and other Arid Lands, ‘Releasing Our and that the livestock subsector constitutes an Full Potential’. This is a development policy important source of foreign exchange, and document for the pastoral regions of Kenya, contributes to food security and family income. prepared by the Ministry for Development The policy also acknowledges that outside of of Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands the ASALs, the livestock sector is an important and adopted by the Kenya Parliament in source of family income and food security. 2013. The National Policy was formulated The policy guides the development of the to spearhead improvement in the living livestock subsector, through among others, the standards of the communities in the ASAL promotion of sustainable range management counties which are prone to natural disasters practices, value addition of products, support particularly drought. The ASAL counties to livestock-based industries and effective have for long been marginalised and have disease control. Recognising the potential of the poorest development indicators in the the ASALs in livestock production, the policy country such as malnutrition, low literacy gives options for the economic exploitation of levels, no access to potable water, poor these areas, the role of government and the mobile phone coverage, poor road networks institutionalisation of communities in livestock and insecurity among others. The ASAL policy and rangeland planning. aims to provide a coherent development framework to promote development in the Kenya’s Vision 2030 – Kenya’s development ASAL areas and manage climatic shocks blueprint for 2008–2030 identifies the livestock in the region. The broad objective of the subsector as one of the priority sectors with ASAL policy is to improve standards of living a high potential of spurring the country’s for the local population by integrating the economic growth and development. This areas into the mainstream national economy included developing Disease-Free Zones and and supporting social development in an livestock processing facilities to enable Kenya environmentally sustainable manner. The four meat, hides and skins to meet international specific objectives of the policy are: marketing standards. 1. Providing a coherent framework for Agricultural Sector Development Strategy promoting ASAL development in Kenya (ASDS 2010–2020) – This strategy provides a framework for transforming agriculture into 2. Enhancing a better appreciation by a modern and commercially viable sector, stakeholders of the different livelihood addressing challenges of food and nutritional systems of pastoral communities in ASAL security, poverty reduction and high costs of areas inputs. 3. Providing the platform for attacking the The Country Integrated Development Plans causes of poverty in the ASAL regions (CIDPs) – These are developed by each and contributing to attaining the MDGs county government to identify projects, plans in respect of hunger and programmes to be implemented by 4. Articulating sector priorities for the county or state. These are valuable to intervention towards creating wealth land use planning and provide a framework and employment (jobs) while reducing for coordinating government projects and poverty and vulnerability to drought reduce the potential for conflicting land among other natural disasters. use activities between government sectors. Kajiado developed a CIDP soon after the National Livestock Policy – Sessional Paper county government was created (2013– No. 2 of 2008 – This is the most recent policy 2017), and this was revised (2018–2022) document on livestock, and covers key by the newly formed government in 2017. issues relating to livestock nutrition, feeds, Investments by counties show potential inputs, animal diseases and pests, livestock emerging opportunities for the beef sector, marketing, food safety, veterinary services, through investments in roads, and improved infrastructure such as abattoirs.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 85 Ending droughts emergencies framework 1. The Kenya Meat Commission Act 1950 (EDE) – The paper seeks to create ‘a more – The Kenya Meat Commission (KMC) conducive environment for building drought was established in 1950 through an resilience’. It will do this primarily by investing act of parliament with the objective to in the critical foundations for development purchase cattle and small stock and to (such as infrastructure, security and human acquire, establish and operate abattoirs. capital) and by strengthening the institutional In the mid-1980s market liberalisation and financing framework for drought risk initiatives affected the marketing of management with the new National Drought livestock products and this partly led to Management Authority at its core. The paper the collapse of KMC. In 2006, KMC re- commits the government to end drought opened with the objective to promote emergencies within ten years. The EDE strategy the meat industry in Kenya for domestic aims at creating a conductive environment and export markets. It currently exports for building resilience in the ASALs in line with goat and lamb meat to the Middle East, the ASAL policies through the following pillars: Tanzania and Uganda. 1. Peace and security 2. The Meat Control Act 1977 – An act of parliament to enable control to be 2. Climate-proofed infrastructure exercised over meat and meat products, 3. Human capital and over slaughterhouses where meat is processed, and to provide for import 4. Sustainable livelihoods and export control over meat products. 5. Drought risk management 3. Animal Diseases Act 1965 – An act of parliament to provide for matters 6. Institutional development and relating to diseases of animals. knowledge management. Other acts and laws relevant to meat and meat products in the beef value chain
Appendix 3: Mapping the livestock routes
Figure A3.1: Sketch of Kajiado Livestock Market Routes (Shompole/Magadi and Namanga Routes)
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 86 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN Table A3.1: Primary and Secondary livestock markets along Shompole–Kiserian livestock route (source this research) Livestock Market Livestock type Livestock Exit markets Comments market day catchment (volumes) area
Pakaase Monday Cattle, shoats Oldoinyo Shompole, Olkeri Market closest to Tanzania. Sambu and Tanzania traders also bring Pinyiny in agricultural produce to trade. Tanzania
Shompole Tuesday Cattle Mt Gelai in Trucked to Nairobi (Kiserian and Vibrant and most significant market Dagoretti) terminal markets or in the areas. 85–90% are thought to (300–800), Tanzania, other major Kajiado markets, come from Tanzania. Traders come trekked through local markets to shoats Pakaase from terminal markets. Also, Kiserian market, important cross border trading (400–2,000) point of construction materials and Shompole agricultural produce. and
Olkiramatian
GRs
Olkeri Sunday Mostly shoats Olkeri Trucked to Also holding grounds for livestock from Shompole as they wait for Kiserian and Kariobangi, trekked trucks to Kiserian/Kariobangi. to Magadi and through to Kiserian
Olngousa Wednesday Cattle and shoats Shompole, Trucked or trekked to Kiserian Minimal trading, rather a resting, (Magadi) watering and loading point for Olkeri livestock en route to Kiserian/Dagoretti. Olkiramatian Wednesday Cattle and shoats Olkiramatian Oldoinyo-onyokie and trekking to and Kiserian Shompole GRs
Oldoinyoonyokie Thursday Mostly cattle Oldoinyo- Trekked to Oltepesi and through Market almost dead now as onyoki, to Kiserian livestock are mostly trucked Olkiramatian, through to Kiserian these days. Magadi,
Shompole
Oltepesi Most days Shoats and Oldoinyo- Trekked to Kiserian Donkeys sold to Kiserian, Rongai. donkeys Onyokie,
Oltepesi,
Loodoiariak,
Emboliei, Eremit
Olepolos Weekends Mostly goats (30 Olepolos Terminal market Popular nyama chama hotel for locality Kenyans and tourists. The hotel Country Club and per weekend) purchases local livestock only. holidays
Olepolos Saturday Mostly shoats and Olepolos, Kiserian Trade in shoats for sale in local butcheries. Market fizzling out due some cattle Ol’oishobor, to close proximity to Kiserian. Il’ngarooj
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN 87 Table A3.2: Livestock markets and slaughterhouses along the Namanga–Kiserian and Nairobi route (source this research) Livestock Market Livestock Livestock Livestock exit Meat end Comments market day type catchment markets markets (volumes) area
Namanga and Tuesday Cattle Across nearby Il bissil Namanga Majority of slaughterhouse border in town, and livestock are (200–300), Tanzania, Burma, from Tanzania Namanga shoats Nairobi (70%). locality (500–800)
Meto Wednesday Cattle Across nearby Trekking to Il bissil Slaughter Large market. border in (road is very slab 80% from (600–800), Tanzania, poor) provides Tanzania. 25 km shoats Meto locality shoat meat from Namanga– to Meto Nairobi main (1,500) town road.
Torosei Cattle Local area Trekked to Small market and Elangata Ewuas away from main shoats and Il bissil road.
Elangata Saturday Cattle Local area, Trekked to Slaughter Popular market Ewuas Kiserian slabs for for other (150–300), Shompole shoats for merchandise. shoats local area
(400–600)
Il bissil, Friday Cattle Meto, Trucked to Burma and Large and (and Kiserian and other vibrant market and (1,000+), Namanga, some Dagoretti. Nairobi along main slaughterhouse local Trekked to shoats Torosei outlets, and Namanga– trading Kajiado, local area Nairobi road. on (2,000+) Isinya, Kiserian, Monday) Kitengela, Emali
Sajiloni Saturday Cattle Local area Kajiado, Isinya, 15 km east of and Emali Kajiado. shoats
Kajiado and Cattle Il bissil, Isinya Nairobi, Small market. slaughterhouse and Kajiado Sajiloni, shoats town Elangata Ewuas and local area
Isinya and Cattle Kajiado, Il bissil Isinya, Along the main slaughterhouse and and local area Kitengela road, positioned shoats and Nairobi where the Kitengela and Kiserian routes split.
Kitengela and Cattle Kitengela Big town along slaughterhouse and and many main road with a shoats Nairobi large market for outlets meat.
HARNESSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE-RESILIENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE SEMI-ARID LANDS: 88 THE KENYA SOUTHERN RANGELANDS BEEF VALUE CHAIN
CONTACT US
+254 20 2588343 +254 722 201233
[email protected] www.kenyamarkets.org
14 Riverside, Cavendish Block, 2nd Floor, Suite B, Riverside Drive.