gssc - 2015 - orissa
TRANSCRIPT
44THTH International Conference International Conference OnOn
MANAGEMENT OF SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOOD SYTEMSLIVELIHOOD SYTEMS
G Global Social Science Conference - lobal Social Science Conference - 20152015
February 14-17, 2015 Venue: OUAT, Bhubaneswar, India
DETERMINANTS OF GROUP CHARACTERISTICS ON DETERMINANTS OF GROUP CHARACTERISTICS ON SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOOD IMPROVEMENT OF SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOOD IMPROVEMENT OF
SMALLHOLDER DAIRY GOAT FARMERS IN KENYASMALLHOLDER DAIRY GOAT FARMERS IN KENYA
Presented By
Daniel Ochieng’ OsewePh.D. Scholar,
M.P.K.V., Rahuri,Maharashtra State, India
Email: [email protected]
Daniel.O.Osewe, W.Ochola and P.B.Kharde
Background Information: Republic of KenyaBackground Information: Republic of Kenya
Location: East Africa
Independence: 1963 (Britain)
Capital city : Nairobi
Off language : English &
Kiswahili
Currency : Kenya shilling
Source: KNBS. 2013: Economic SurveyKenya
Figure 1.1 Map of Kenya showing admin units & study area
Source: http://www.info.org. Accessed on 6/5/2014
Total Area 581,309 km2
Arable Land 271,000km2
(46.70%)
Water Body 2.3%
Population 44 M
Density 67.2per km2
Admin Unit 47 CountiesNyando district, Kisumu County
INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION• 85 % of the world’s 460 million farms are small-
scale (SCC, 2009) • Groups are an integral part of modern
organizations. • They are present everywhere, from the shop
floor to the highest levels of management. - Sir John Kiln
Groups has played an important role in the devpt. of the rural Kenya e.g. KCC (World Bank, 2013; IFAD, 2013)
They contributes significantly to Kenya’s rural They contributes significantly to Kenya’s rural development – 24% (FAO, 2004)development – 24% (FAO, 2004)
…………..ct’d..ct’d
Shared interest and goals achievementsShared interest and goals achievements Satisfaction of individual & groups needsSatisfaction of individual & groups needs Economies of scale in purchase of farm Economies of scale in purchase of farm
inputsinputs
Negotiation of markets and prices on behalf Negotiation of markets and prices on behalf
of group membersof group members
Linkages to financial institutionsLinkages to financial institutions
Social securitySocial security
Organizational & enterprise skills Organizational & enterprise skills
developmentdevelopment
Fig. 1.2: Group development Fig. 1.2: Group development stagesstages
Source: LIFE, 2005
Dairy Goats Contribution to Livelihood Dairy Goats Contribution to Livelihood Improvement of Smallholder Farmers in KenyaImprovement of Smallholder Farmers in Kenya
• Fits well into smallholder Fits well into smallholder
farming systemsfarming systems
• Easier to work with than Easier to work with than
large ruminantslarge ruminants
• Are quite prolificAre quite prolific
• Products are easy to Products are easy to
marketmarket
• Demands largely Demands largely
unfulfilledunfulfilled
• Increased global Increased global
influencesinfluences
Integrated goat mgt for food security & income: livelihood improvement
Sweat potato plot
Napier grass plot Raised slated barn for ease of disposal& utilization of animal waste
…………continued
Some dairy group officials at their milk bar
A youth has been contracted by a group to transport milk to market
A milk bar attendants at one of the groups marketing point
Biogas production: Biogas production: Mr. Chege preparing Mr. Chege preparing breakfast and light meals for family relieving breakfast and light meals for family relieving
their mother to attend to other productive duties their mother to attend to other productive duties
Health attributes of goats milk to Health attributes of goats milk to livelihood improvementlivelihood improvement
• Reaction to Inflammation – e.g. bowel
inflammation (Edward, F. 2011)
• Environmentally Friendly – requires less space
& feed
• Metabolic agent – esp for iron & zinc
(Barlowska, 2011)
• Bio-availability - easier to digest and
assimilates
• Lower in Fat – best diet for people with obesity
•
………….Ct’d.Ct’d
• Calcium-rich
• Anti-Mucousal – less allergy & excess mucous
production
• Ultra-nourishing – Associated with vigour,
flexibility and vitality.
• High in Fatty Acids – Nutritionally wholesome
than cow milk
• Less toxic than Cow’s Milk – Has no
bovine growth hormones as well as
bovine somatotropin hormones common
in cow milk
• May Boost Immune System - Has trace
mineral, selenium, which keeps immune
system strong and functioning normally
………….Ct’d.Ct’d
Conc. of minerals in milk from various animal speciesConc. of minerals in milk from various animal species
Source: Barlowska, J. et al. 2011
Concentration
(mg/100 g)
Cattle Sheep Buffalo Human Camel Goat
Calcium 122 195 - 200 112 33 114 to 116
134
Phosphorous 119 124 - 158 99 43 87.4 121Potassium 152 136 –
14092 55 144 – 156 181
Magnesium 12 18 – 21 8 4 10.5 – 12.3
16
Sodium 58 44 – 58 35 15 59 41Zinc 530 520 –
747410 380 530 – 590 370
Concentration
(μg/100 g)
Cattle Sheep Buffalo Human Camel Goat
Zinc 530 520 – 747 410 380 530 – 590 370Iron 80 72 – 122 161 200 230 – 290 60Iodine 2.1 10.4 7 2.2Selenium 0.96 3.1 1.52 1.33
17
Study circle extension Study circle extension strategystrategy
Swedish cooperative centre (SCC) introduced a group strategy known us Study Circle (SC) in Nyando district in 2002The programme was implemented by Livelihood improvement and Family empowerment (LIFE) projectThe program used high value genotypes such as Saanan, British Alpine & Toggenburg goats on a pass-on model
By 2005 - 19 SC groups had been established
with 595 members
The strategy was effective in improving group
members livelihood.
Goat productivity increased from 0.5-4 litres/
day
However, determinants of group
characteristics on livelihood of group members
had not been studied
………Ct’d
OBJECTIVEOBJECTIVE
The study investigated the
determinants of group
characteristics on livelihood
improvement of smallholder
farmers in Nyando district, Kenya
METHODOLOGY
The study was conducted in Nyando district, Kenya
Data was collected from 110 respondents using a pre-tested interview schedule (92% responses).
Analysis was done using multiple linear regression
Four group characteristics namely, longevity, gender composition, networking patterns and cohesiveness were analyzed
FINDINGS
Distribution of respondents by Distribution of respondents by gendergender
Group longevityGroup longevityGroup size (n)
Minimum 15.0
Maximum 45.0
Mean 23.0
Period of existence (yrs)
Minimum 5.0
Maximum 19.0
Mean 11.0
Period a member remained in group (yrs)
Minimum 4.0
Maximum 18.0
Mean 8.5
Study circle network Study circle network patternspatterns
Net
wor
k le
vels
(%)
Cohesiveness of the study circleParameter SC (n = 50)
Number Percent
Type of Group
Formal 47 94
Informal 3 6
Total 50 100
Time remains a member
Below 5 yrs 7 14
5– 10 yrs 31 62
11 – 15 yrs 10 20
Above 15 yrs 2 4
Total 50 100
Frequency of group meetings
Never 1 2
Rarely 1 2
Frequently 42 84
Very frequently 6 12
Linkages with institution e.g.MFI
Never 1 3
Rarely 18 37
Frequently 24 47
Very frequently 7 13
Total 50 100
Test of HypothesisTest of HypothesisHo1. There is no significant relationship between group
characteristics and l livelihood improvement of smallholder farmers in Nyando District.
S/No Independent variable Correlation coefficient
(‘r’ values)
1 Longevity of group-0.360
2 Cohesiveness -0.176
3 Gender composition-0.114
4 Networking patterns0.208
R square (R2) = 0.078
CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS
These factors contributed 7.8% (R = 0.078) of livelihood improvement These factors contributed 7.8% (R = 0.078) of livelihood improvement of group membersof group members
Network patterns had positive correlation with livelihood Network patterns had positive correlation with livelihood improvement of membersimprovement of members
Group characteristics such as longevity, gender composition, Group characteristics such as longevity, gender composition, cohesiveness had negative correlation with livelihood improvement cohesiveness had negative correlation with livelihood improvement of group membersof group members
Group characteristics, in themselves therefore, cannot be used to predict livelihood of groups members. Others factors need to be considered along them
Barłowska, J., M. Szwajkowska, Z. Litwi´nczuk, and J. Kr´ol. 2011. Nutritional value and technological suitability of milk from various animal species used for dairy production. Comprehensive Reviews in
Food Science and Food Safety. Vol.10.
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), 2013. Enabling poor rural people to overcome poverty in Kenya. Rome, ItalyKenya National Bureau of Statistics. (KNBS) 2009. Republic of Kenya, NairobiLivelihood Improvement and Family Empowerment (LIFE) Project. 2005. Annual Report, Nyando District, Kenya.Swedish Cooperative Centre. (SCC) 2009. Agricultural cooperatives and farmers organizations - role in rural development and poverty reduction . Stockholm, Sweden.World Bank. 2001. Poverty Trends and Voice of the Poor (4th ed., Pp. 2-57). Poverty Reduction and Economic Management. The World Bank
Group, Washington DC.
31
Thank you,,,,,,,,, “Asanteni sana”