With growing human populations and consequent decreases in agricultural land holding sizes, crop/livestock farming systems are intensifying in East Africa, particularly when proximate to urban areas. As this occurs labour becomes relatively less constraining than land, dairy producers in high potential and high density areas are turning to cut and carry production systems which depend on labour to more intensively harvest fodder from available land. Some 70% of dairy producers in Kiambu, Kenya, for example, now grow napier grass to provide the primary basal feed for their cattle (Staal et al, 1998). A considerable variety of production strategies can be observed, however, even under relatively homogeneous high potential environments, suggesting a role for socioeconomic and resource factors in these producer decisions.
Soil fertility status has been observed to be in decline in Sub-Saharan Africa, presenting a serious threat to food security (Smaling, 1993; Shepherd and Soule 1998; Wortman and Kaizzi, 1998). For poor, smallholder farms where use of purchased inorganic fertiliser is often limited, manure becomes an important source of soil nutrients. Not only do livestock make an important contribution to income generation, but they may also contribute to the nutrient status of the land, not only by accelerating the rate of nutrient turnover, but also through importation of nutrients as purchased concentrates or fodder (Lekasi et al. 1998).
Preliminary analysis from the rapid appraisal in South West Uganda (1LRI/NARO/MAAIF (1996) suggest there is little evidence of strong incentives for adoption of more intensive dairy production technologies such as zero-grazing, in spite of an emphasis on such technology by some dairy projects (including USA1D (US Agency for International Development) and Land 0 Lakes). Returns to land and labour from the different production systems are similar, with some indication that the highest returns are available in fenced grazing systems. Thus, land availability and labour constraints appear to favour semi-intensive or extensive systems with improved or natural pastures, even when higher transport costs are included. Relatively high opportunity costs to labour may occur in the intensive peri-urban milk-shed, while variable costs of milk production may be low in the more extensive rural areas. Further, in the semi-intensive Southwest, substantial upgrading of the local cattle with dairy genes is observed, leading to greater production potential and the possibility for even higher levels of competitiveness. In the intensive milk-shed, continued development and high agricultural potential may raise the value of alternative agriculture activities and thus the opportunity costs of domestic resources, including land and labour. Further, if milk market supply becomes saturated, as is occurring increasingly during flush seasons when rainfall is high and feed resources abundant (ILRI/NARO/MAA1F 1996) leading to lower real farm gate prices for milk, low cash-input systems may be more viable. The same may be true if opportunity costs for labour increase with general national economic growth, current in the 5% annual range.
1.1 Goal of the Project
To improve the contribution of smallholder dairying to the sustainable livelihoods of resource poor farmers in Uganda
1.2 Purpose of the Project
The purpose of the present project is to develop and test methodologies that will allow comparison of the productivity and economic viability of contrasting dairy systems with a view to developing a greater understanding of these systems in order to;
• Provide information that decision makers can use to inform policy development
• Identify potential interventions that will improve nutrient management and
• Identify key characteristics of a farm that can be used to target extension messages
1.3 Activity framework
1. Carry out a review of secondary sources of information describing the systems where the project aims to work and of appropriate methodologies.
2. Carry out a structured characterisation survey of randomly-selected dairy households in the research sites, using a pre-tested questionnaire.
3. Carry out a longitudinal survey (regular visits over a period of at least 1 year) of a smaller sample of representative households, selected from the larger random sample
1.4 Accomplished activities
1. The reviews were completed by the 2 doctorate students registered at Makerere University under the supervision of the other members of the research team. The reviews are reported in the form of their PhD proposals.
2. The characterisation survey was completed in May 2002, and data entry commenced. The survey was carried out in three districts where dairy production is a key activity and included 303 households 70% of which owned cattle and 30% did not. Data collected during this survey was used to develop categories of dairy production systems.
3. Development of data collection schemes for the longitudinal survey.
4. Training of enumerators in collection of the longitudinal survey data.
5. Selection and mapping of longitudinal survey farms.
6. Initiation of data collection from farms.
7. Development and installation of database for entry of collected data.
8. Training of data entry assistants.
9. Initiation of data entry into database