Upload
zelia
View
24
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Rapid livestock feed assessment tools to support intervention strategies: FEAST and Techfit. Alan Duncan and Ben Lukuyu. Mixed systems. Interactions between crops and livestock Crop residues are substantial component of livestock diets - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Rapid livestock feed assessment tools to support
intervention strategies: FEAST and Techfit
Alan Duncan and Ben Lukuyu
Mixed systems
Interactions between crops and livestock
Crop residues are substantial component of livestock diets
Feeding of livestock needs to take account of arable realities: competition for land, free grazing in off season etc.
Challenges to improved feed supply
Food securityLand scarcity/tenureMarkets for livestock productsFree grazingTraction a sink for feed
The way ahead
Things are changing– Dwindling grazing resources forcing
other feed sources to be considered– Urbanization leading to increased
demand for livestock products– Improving infrastructure
– Are we about to see things moving?
Feed interventions often do not work – why?
Failure to place feed in broader livelihood context
Lack of farmer design and ownership
Neglect of how interventions fit the context: land, labour, cash, knowledge etc
FEAST
Techfit
FEASTThe problem
Feed assessment
Conventionally focuses on:– The feeds– Their nutritive value– Ways of improving nutritive value
FEAST broadens assessment:– Is livestock an important livelihood strategy? – How important are feed problems relative to other
problems?– What about labour, input availability, credit,
seasonality, markets for products etc.?
How does FEAST work?• Overview of farming system and
livestock feed aspect• Milk marketing, veterinary services• Major problems for livestock
production
1. PRA Exercise
• Quantitative information on crop-livestock production, feed availability, feeding rations
• Qualitative information - perception on feed quality
2. Individual farmer survey
• Enter data in FEAST template• Based on result develop ideas for
intervention
3. Data analysis and developing interventions
PRA General description of farming system
– range of farm sizes,– farm labour availability– annual rainfall pattern– irrigation availability– types of animals raised by households.
General description of livestock production– the types of animals raised (% of households raising these
animals and average herd/flock sizes)– the purpose of raising these animals (e.g. draught, income,
fattening, calf production)– the general animal husbandry (including; management,
veterinary services and reproduction). – Ease of access to credit– How available are necessary inputs – plastic, urea,
concentrates etc Problem identification and potential solutions
Quantitative questionnaire Animals – livestock inventory Crops - yields and areas to derive crop residue availability Cultivated forages – yields and areas Collected fodder: proportion of diet Purchased feed Grazing: proportion of diet Contributors to household income Production.
– Milk production – Sale of livestock
Seasonality. – Feed supply: overall seasonal availability– What is fed in different months?
Sample output
32%
22%
20%
14%
6%
6%
Contribution of livelihood activities to household income (as a percentage)
Agriculture
Livestock
Remmitance
Labour
Others
Business
More sample output
Crop residues5%
Cultivated fodder
25%
Grazing30%
Naturally occurring and
collected33%
Purchased7%
DM content of total diet
Final output
Feast report with some ideas for key problems and solutions
Better links and understanding between farmers, research and development staff
www.ilri.org/feast
Techfit
The problem
What is your main problem
Feed
What feed technologies
have you got?Planted forage
Urea treated strawBypass protein
OK, let’s try those
A solution
TechfitA discussion support tool for
prioritizing feed technologies
Key context attributes
Land
Labour
Credit
Input
Knowledge
Key technology attributes
Land
Labour
Credit
Input
Knowledge
The core concept
Key context attributes
Land
Labour
Credit
Input
Knowledge
Key technology attributes
Land
Labour
Credit
Input
Knowledge
x = Score
Matching context to technology
Technology filter
Scope for improvement of attribute
s
Context relevance (score 1-
6; low-high))
Impact potential (score 1-6; low-high)
Total score
(context X impact)
Requ Score 1-3
(1 for more; 3 for less)
Avail Score 1-3
(1 for less; 3 for
more)
Requ Score 1-3
(1 for more; 3 for less)
Avail Score 1-3
(1 for less; 3 for
more)
Requ Score 1-3
(1 for high;
3 for low)
Avail Score 1-3
(1 for less; 3 for
more)
Requ Score 1-3
(1 for high;
3 for low)
Avail Score 1-3
(1 for less; 3 for
more)
Requ Score 1-3
(1 for high;
3 for low)
Avail Score 1-3
(1 for less; 3 for
more)
Score 1-5 (1 for
less and 5 for
more)
Urea treatment of straw
2 3 6 3 2 2 2 2 0
Supplement with UMMB
2 5 10 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 22
By-pass protein feed
1 3 3 3 3 1 1 3 0
Feed conservation (surplus) (HAY)
4 3 12 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 41
etcetc
III.
TECHNOLOGY FILTER
(Technology options to
address quantity, quality,
seasonality issues)
Pre-select the obvious (5-6) based
on context relevance and impact potential
Score the pre-selected technologies based on the requirement, availability and scope for improvement of five technology attributes
Attribute 1: Land
Attribute 2: Labour
Attribute 3: Cash /credit
Attribute 4: Input delivery
Attribute 5: Knowledge
/skill
Total Score
Technology list
Pre-filter Main filter
Score
Cost-benefit assessment
What does the technology cost?– Inputs, labour, land etc?
What does the technology deliver?– Enhanced milk yield, improved
reproductive performance, better growth etc
Does it make sense?
Final output
Ideas for some promising feed interventions that might work
Better understanding of why the usual suspects often don’t work.