2.1 The importance of livestock in smallholder systems
2.2 Smallholder ruminant livestock production systems
Livestock are important in maintaining the livelihood of their keepers. The functions of livestock include:
Men and women raise ruminant livestock in a wide range of ecological and socio-economic contexts. In this section, we look at three main ruminant livestock production systems in which smallholders in developing countries are involved: nomadic pastoral systems, agropastoral systems and mixed crop–livestock farming. The livestock production systems are characterised by climate, the predominance of various livestock and crop species and the relative importance of livestock and crops to the farming system (De Boer et al. 1994). The main features of these basic systems are presented in Table 1 and explained below.
Table 1. The main ruminant livestock production and management systems of smallholders in developing countries.
System |
Contribution of livestock |
Influence of |
Resources |
Level of technology |
Linkages | |||
Climate |
Culture |
On farm |
Ex-farm |
Public sector |
Private sector | |||
Pastoral |
High: provides proteins, clothing, carpets, fuel, draft and fertiliser for rangelands |
Large |
Strong: generally travel as family and tribal units; tribal regulations important |
Ruminant stocks; Land: none Labour: family Capital: some |
Rangelands, crop residues of sedentary farmers |
Practice only traditional grazing methods; no improvements in feed and water resources |
Generally only with veterinary extension and tribal agents |
Between and within tribes, villages and traders |
Agropastoral |
High: provides proteins, clothing, carpets, fuel, draft and fertiliser for rangelands |
Large |
Strong: community living as related family and tribe |
Land: own or rented Labour: family and joint family Capital: some livestock |
Rangelands, crop residues of sedentary farmers; some purchased feed and forage |
Traditional, but contact with sedentary farmers has transferred some advances in technology |
Strong because of sedentary nature; depend on public sector institutions for various support services |
Strong mainly for obtaining credit, marketing and purchase of essential inputs |
Mixed crop–livestock |
High: provides proteins, clothing, carpets, fuel, draft, manure, capital accumulation and savings |
Large |
Weak |
Land: own or rented Labour: family or hired Capital: some Stocks: mainly ruminant and others |
Purchased inputs such as seeds, stock and fertiliser; hired draft animals, tractors |
Advanced and readily adaptable if demonstrated successfully |
Agricultural extension and research agencies, educational institutions, credit and co-operatives |
Markets, credit agents, transportation and communications |
Table 1. cont... |
||||||||
System |
Output |
Disposal of products |
Interactions |
Constraints |
Strengths |
Adoption of new technology |
Intervention strategy | ||
Crops |
Livestock |
Private sector |
Public sector |
||||||
Pastoral |
None |
Livestock products from sheep, goat, cattle and camel |
Home consumed, bartered between tribes and with villagers and sold to traders at fairs |
Practically none |
With other tribal groups and settlements that they frequent on their migrations |
Overstocking; uncontrolled animal health; little flexibility to account for risks (weather, raiding, prices etc.) |
Use marginal lands that have little alternative use; low dependence on public support |
Their wandering nature hinders the adoption of new technologies |
Expanding pastures and ranges; providing more water points; extension to limit stock numbers to prevent overgrazing all of which have largely failed |
Agropastoral |
Cereals, cash crops, fodder and fruits |
Livestock products from sheep, goat and cattle |
Partially home consumed, largely traded for cash; virtually no barter |
Practically none except where government agencies procure products such as wool |
With nomadic tribes, settlements, and established systems such as cereal mills and processing industries |
Careful planning necessary for allocation of scarce resources between crops and livestock production activities |
Diversify into crop production hedges against risks during fluctuations in weather, pasture etc. |
Readily adopted if available at affordable cost and seem profitable |
Introduction of irrigation for higher yields and consistency, better varieties, development of infrastructure and access to markets and processing industries and provision of inputs to increase yields |
Mixed crop–livestock |
Cereals, vegetables, cash crops, oil seeds and fodder |
Milk and products from sheep, goat and cattle |
Partially home consumed; most sold to private traders |
Sales to co-operatives, processing industries, marketing organisations and government procurement agencies |
Strong with private sector for supply of inputs and disposal of outputs; moderate with public sector for advisory services, community and local governments |
Weather dependent with unpredictable and fluctuating output; fragmentation due to division of inheritance; capital and labour-intensive |
Growing subsidiary crops and livestock averts risks; nearness of farms makes transfer of technology easier; by-products for animals are available |
Readily adopted because of ease of contact with relevant agencies and perceived gains |
Improvement of animal quality, reduction of overstocking, promotion of more efficient use of by-products and straws and by-products preservation |
Nomadic pastoralism, also known as range livestock systems, are more widespread and better documented in Africa than elsewhere. They are also common in harsh and diverse environments like the desert of West Asia and the High Andes of South America (Wilson 1995). Arid and semi-arid environments are subject to unpredictable seasonal and annual fluctuations in rainfall, and are unsuitable for crop production. Matching the highly limited seasonal pasture supply with the constant feed requirement of live stock is quite a challenge in these environments. Management of the animals therefore entails nomadism and transhumance, as well as the use of multiple species of animal with different feeding habits and production cycles, in a system without crops (Wilson 1995). Nomadic pastoralists move as a team (generally, they move at the household level or maybe two or three households, but not usually more than that) with varying degrees of co-operation and hostility amongst them. Productivity of the livestock depends on feed availability and herd sizes are increased and decreased according to pasture avail ability. Movement of animals from place to place prevents spread of diseases (Camoens 1985), but may also be a source of disease for sedentary herds, which come in contact with nomadic herds.
The livelihoods of nomadic pastoralists depend on raising livestock. The pastoralists obtain their main daily requirements—food, shelter, fuel and clothes—from livestock. Surplus stocks and animal products are traded for cash or exchanged (barter) for grain and services from non-pastoral systems. Livestock and their products provide more than 50% of total household revenue; this includes value of consumed products and cash (Wilson 1995). In Africa, milk provides more than 80% of the energy in human diets, with meat being of less importance (Jahnke 1982). Blood is consumed in some countries of East Africa, e.g. in Kenya. Although the pastoral system is unimportant in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) in terms of the proportion of agricultural population engaged in it (12%), it is important with respect to the percentage of grazing land devoted to it (35%) and the percentage of total ruminant animals associated with it (35%) (De Boer et al. 1994). The main source of feed is rangeland supplemented by grasses in the forest and by-products of sedentary farming systems. Nomadic pastoralism is a labour- and land-based system with little dependence on privately owned land, capital and technology.
The system has several constraints apart from water and feed that are occasionally in short supply. Communal land tenure inhibits control of stocking rates, since reduction in livestock holding by some members of the group will benefit others. Ingrained cultural attitudes prevent the adoption of new or improved technologies. Markets are generally very far from the production areas, served by poor infrastructure (Wilson 1995). Support services such as veterinary clinics and facilitation of inter-regional trade are almost non-existent.
The system develops from nomadic systems when livestock keepers settle around permanent sources of water and grow crops to supplement livestock production (Camoens 1985). This is induced by feed shortages due to reduction of grassland and difficulties in moving with large herds with expansion of crop production. Settlement forces animal keepers to reduce their herd sizes because it is difficult to manage large herds without shifting them around in search of food and water. An agropastoral system is defined as one in which between 10% and 50% of household revenue is obtained from livestock and its products (Wilson 1995). This system is found in the arid and semi-arid areas north and south of the equator, on the mainland of Africa, western Asia, India, Central and South America and also on some islands like Madagascar (Wilson 1995).
Agro pastoralists raise animals and grow crops, with livestock as their main source of livelihood and subsistence, with strong market orientation for livestock products. Agropastoralists have a fixed or semi-fixed abode. Management of ruminant livestock is by herding on rangelands closer to settlements and migration with animals during certain times of the year is common. Hardy and adaptable crops like millet and sorghum, vegetables, fruits and some cash crops are cultivated. Agropastoral farming systems are labour-intensive with some dependence on privately owned land, capital and technology (Camoens 1985).
There is a moderate to strong link between crop and animal production in agropastoral systems. Cattle are sometimes used for draft power and are important suppliers of milk. Goats and sheep are mainly kept for meat production, but their milk and fibre (wool and hair) also contribute significantly to household subsistence and cash income. Animal droppings are used as fertiliser, and hides and skins are used to make household items. The main sources of animal feed after harvest are crop by-products and stubble. Links with formal institutions are weak. The inflows of extension and animal health care services for example, are minimal. Links with informal institutions are, however, moderately strong as these institutions provide food, and sometimes credit, feed and farm inputs and are the main outlets for crops and livestock sales. The family provides the main labour for livestock rearing; labour input from outside is occasionally used during peak periods such as herding during the cropping season when greater control on animals may be required.
Mixed crop–livestock farming refers to livestock production that takes place in arable areas or areas with arable potential (Jahnke 1982). It is practised in semi-arid, subhumid and humid ecological zones. These zones have moderate to high rainfall. Crop production both for subsistence and cash generation is the major activity of this system, with livestock playing a supportive role.
There is a strong linkage within the system between crop and livestock production. Crops provide by-products and unmarketable surpluses which livestock convert into high value products. Livestock help clear stubble, trample wet fields, and provide manure and draft power for cultivation. In these systems livestock serve as living banks for capital accumulation and provide milk and proteins. The system is labour-intensive, with some dependence on capital and land (rented, share-cropped or owned), and is receptive to new technology (Camoens 1985). Partial or total confinement is the common livestock management technique. Sources of animal feed are farm-grown pastures, crop by-products and residues, grasses around settlements, communal grazing lands, cut-and-carry feed from forest and irrigated canals and concentrates. Livestock productivity varies from region to region depending on the importance of crops to the system and the availability of labour and capital for livestock-related activities.
The sedentary nature of farmers in mixed systems and the relatively well-developed infrastructure in most locations give room for strong links with formal institutions and easy access to markets. Research and extension agencies provide services and advice to the farmers and have led to the adoption of new technologies (Camoens 1985).
Mixed crop–livestock farming in the highlands, favoured by good and suitable climate, has higher agricultural productivity and also supports higher population density. The ecological conditions are suitable for the introduction of high yielding plant and animal breeds, such that in the highlands modern improved techniques, semi-improved farms and traditional systems co-exist. The largest population of exotic breeds of cattle, sheep and goats is found in the highlands of Africa and the semi-arid areas of South Asia compared to other agro-ecozones. In the improved mixed farming systems livestock, rather than crops, account for a higher proportion of farm income. Mixed farming systems are common in the highlands of eastern (Ethiopia, Kenya, parts of Uganda and Tanzania) and central (Rwanda, Burundi and parts of Zaire) Africa, in a large part of Asia and in the Andean region of Latin America (Jahnke 1982; Sere et al. 1996). A significant proportion of highlands are also found in southern Africa including Madagascar, but are relatively unimportant in western Africa because the higher arid highlands have closer land use characteristics to the arid lowlands, than to the remaining African highlands (Jahnke 1982).
The highlands have the highest ruminant livestock densities of all ecological zones; all ruminant livestock species are represented here. Meat and milk production have acquired a significant level of commercialisation via the introduction of new technology. The highlands show special trends with regards to feeding regime, land tenure system and herding arrangement used in characterising livestock management (Jahnke 1982). Smallholder feeding regimes range from extensive grazing to stall-feeding. High human population pressure and environmental limits on the growth in livestock population have given rise to individualised forms of land tenure and intensification of mixed farming. The specific mixed crop–livestock system prevailing in a given region/location depends on the level of development.
The distinctions made among the different ruminant production systems are aimed at making the discussion more focused. The role of women in ruminant livestock production is better documented in sub-Saharan Africa than in any other region of the developing world, probably because women constitute a greater proportion of the population economically involved in agriculture. However, the information is not always analysed and is rarely used for planning. Furthermore the statistics on employment of women in agriculture are inadequate (Martins 1990).
Gender division of labour in nomadic pastoral societies varies across regions. Grandin et al. (1991) describe gender division of tasks and responsibilities in the nomadic pastoral livestock production system practised by the Maasai of Kenya in East Africa. Their findings indicate distinct age and sex division of work. Men are largely the decision makers for livestock production, and are in charge of general herd management. Their management responsibilities require constant attendance at markets and other gathering places to obtain information on range conditions, water availability and incidence of diseases. Men make initial decisions on when to move, where to move to, and who to herd the stocks. They accompany the herders (young men and hired labour) to ensure that the right paths are taken. This trains the young men as future herders. Men also oversee watering to make sure that animals, particularly the young ones, get sufficient water. They organise other men to maintain and repair water points and pay hired labour when necessary. Men also take care of the dips, carry out most of the dipping and supervise spraying of animals. In the evening they inspect animals returning home to ensure that none are missing or sick, that they have been well-grazed and if any is about to give birth. They search for any missing animals. Men perform minor veterinary procedures and castration and buy and administer veterinary drugs. They decide, after consulting other family members, which animals to slaughter or sell and when.
The Maasai women retain primary responsibilities for dairy-related activities. They are responsible for milking, processing of milk and marketing of surplus milk and dairy products. In areas where they are restricted in mobility by pregnancy and raising children, religion etc., women take care of stock kept near the camp, requiring particular attention such as pregnant cows, newly born calves, injured and sick animals. Women ensure that calves have ample suckling time and supply fodder to them. They also provide sick animals with water. Maasai pastoral women also play a significant role in animal disease control. Their close contact with the cows via milking enables diseases to be spotted early. The actual treatment of the animals is done by men and herd boys; women take part only when need arises. Women inspect animals in their subhousehold to ensure that all have returned from grazing and are healthy. Any problems are reported to the household head. Women also sell and purchase small ruminants. Owning small ruminants gives prestige and offers security.
Children in the society carry out most of the routine animal husbandry work; they do all the herding and much of the work around the homestead. Children aged 6–7 years herd small stock. This is a demanding job, as the animals move a lot and are easily lost or attacked by predators. Older children (8–9 years) herd calves which is less arduous than herding small stock. Boys (aged 11 years and older) herd cattle, which is mainly a supervisory activity as animals know their way around and set the pace. Herders merely keep the animals from straying and protect them from predators. Girls herd mostly small stock and calves. Cattle herding is seen to be too strenuous for girls, especially if they have to walk long distances. Herding small stock and calves permits girls to return to the homestead in time to help prepare food and carry out other domestic chores. The girls also assist in milking and watering of animals. It is also common in Maasai pastoral societies for girls to join boys and young men in the cattle camps for long periods. Children who attend school herd during the weekend.
Herding and watering of animals dominate overall labour requirements in nomadic pastoral systems. In Maasai society, children do 92% of the herding, spending an average of 4.5 hours a day on this activity. Men supervise 74% of the watering, dipping and spraying and spend an average of 2.3 hours a day doing so. Women do most of the milking (81%) with some help from older girls, who carry out 18% of this activity. Women and children spend an average of 1.2 and 0.4 hours a day, respectively, milking cows. In all, boys, girls, men and women spend on average 5.8, 6.8, 5.5 and 2.6 hours a day, respectively, on livestock-related work. The average number of hours devoted to livestock management and milking per day by each age/sex group indicates that girls spend the most time on livestock-related work and women the least.
In addition to animal husbandry tasks, Maasai pastoral women are responsible for the daily and time consuming tasks of childcare, food preparation, and water and fuel collection. They spend an average of 6 hours a day on these domestic chores. Women also build and maintain homes which involves dismantling the houses, loading them on donkeys for transportation and rebuilding them at the next camp.
The division of labour described above (Grandin et al. 1991) is observed in most nomadic pastoral societies in semi-arid Africa. Examples include the Borana of Ethiopia (Coppock 1994), the Fulani nomads of Niger (FAO 1979) and the Baggara and Fulani nomads of South Dafur in Sudan (Kerven 1987).
Similarly in North Africa and the Middle East, women in nomadic systems take care of the animals, milk, process milk into butter and cheese and weave tents, in addition to other household chores (Kandiyoti 1990). Among the Ahaggar Tuareg group of people who keep camels and small ruminants in the southern Algerian desert, women take an active part in livestock production. They are responsible for supervision, hygiene, choice of grazing land, herding and milking of sheep and goats while men look after the camels (Bourgeot 1987). Nomadic women in Somalia graze cattle, sheep and goats, whilst men are responsible for the camels (Martins 1990).
Gender division of labour in nomadic pastoral society is not very rigid; when necessary, women assist in herding and watering, and men in milking. For example, the keeping of animals is a man’s job among the Fulani in Atakora, Benin. Men and boys milk, graze and look after the animals. Apart from the elderly, all men in the family milk their animals, with the assistance of girls and women who keep the calves away from the cows. Women use a small proportion of the milk for making cheese; butter is rarely made. Besides cattle, sheep and goats are kept and are regarded as savings accounts for medium financial needs (Bierschenk and Forster 1987, cited in Martins 1990). The varying degrees of milking between men and women in the Fulani societies have been explained as being influenced by the distance that the cattle have to cover in the respective societies. The lesser the nomadic life, the more milking women undertake (Dupire 1963). There may also be some differences due to religion, for example, the Fulani pastoralists in West Africa being mostly Muslims, may have differences with the Maasai.
Livestock are the central means of survival for pastoral nomads. Access to livestock and their products is therefore indispensable for the economic, social and cultural survival of these households. Access to livestock by different household members in nomadic pastoral systems is a complex issue. This point is confirmed by the fact that different household members often have varying degrees of claims to the same animals (Joekes and Pointing 1991). The dual role of livestock as a source of subsistence and basis of wealth and prestige reflects entitlements of different household members to livestock and its products, based on their responsibilities and acquisition through several means.
Men are generally associated with animals as herd managers and are generally considered owners of cattle, with women and children having usufruct privileges. Women, however, do own livestock. Small ruminants kept by nomadic households are more the property of women than men (Waters-Bayer 1988). They are acquired via gifts from their fathers and husbands at marriage, through dowries and bride prices, and via purchase with proceeds from brewing, sale of milk and dairy products and wage labour. Generally, women do not inherit cattle from their husbands or fathers. Inheritance laws in most pastoral societies differ based on local culture and religious traditions, and are in most cases discriminatory to women. Girls, like boys, obtain animals from their parents during special occasions and through inheritance. Based on gender division of responsibilities, women keep small stock as a source of cash for general family expenses (such as buying food), for paying of school fees, for health care and for investment (Martin 1990). Although men own most of the cattle, they do not make major decisions, such as sale of cattle, in isolation; other household members, particularly women are consulted.
Women are generally associated with animals as milk managers. In most pastoral societies, they milk the cows and know how much milk to extract for household use and how much to leave for the calves for their survival and growth. Women allocate the milk and its products to different uses: for home consumption, exchange and marketing. The amount of milk and dairy products marketed depends on the number of milking cows, the number of people in the household, marketing possibilities, prices of milk and dairy products, and the need to buy cereals and other non-dairy food products.
The Borana women of southern Ethiopia (Coppock 1994), for example, are responsible for milking of animals, selling of milk and buying of provisions for the family. Revenue from women’s sales of dairy products contributes 20% of the annual household income of the Borana in southern Ethiopia (Holden and Coppock 1992). The Borana men in northern Kenya own the cattle and are responsible for them. Women are in charge of the calves and small ruminants, milk the cows, process the milk and use the proceeds as they deem necessary (FAO 1979).
The nomadic women in South Dafur in Sudan own some cows but milk all the cows belonging to the family and decide how much milk is used for making buttermilk and ghee for home consumption and for sale, how much milk is given to children, and how much is left for men and guests. The decision is based on the quantity of milk available, the number of children in the family and the possibility of processing surplus milk for sale. Men make decisions on the sale and slaughter of cattle (Kervin 1987). In contrast to the Fulani women in Benin and the Borana women in northern Kenya and southern Ethiopia, the Maasai women in Kenya give money from milk sales to their husbands (FAO 1979).
Among the Ferwan Tuareg in Air, Niger, social status (servant, master) is more important than gender; the wife of the head of the family owns more animals than the man of lower status. In better-off families, men of lower status milk animals under the supervision of senior women. Women distribute the milk from all the cows in the herd among family members. When a man dies, his animals are passed to his son(s), while women who usually own fewer animals pass them on to their sons and daughters in equal numbers. Men sell their animals to buy cereals (mostly millet) for the family. Only when women own more animals than men, are their animals sold to purchase millet (Oxby 1987). Animals from the bridegroom’s family are given to the bride’s family as dowry among the Tuareg. The animals belong to the father or the eldest brother, but the offspring are passed to the bride for whom dowry was paid and her children, but remain with her father’s herd. The bride also receives animals from her family and husband which are kept in her husband’s herd for family use (Spiro 1984).
Fulani households in Atakora, Benin, have different budgets. Income from different sources, men from sales of cattle and women from sales of milk and dairy products, are used to meet different family needs—men for larger expenses and women for continuous expenses. Women own a few cattle, acquired at their birth or during the first year of their lives. When the girl gets married, these animals remain with her father or brothers to safeguard family linkage and solidarity. The animals are inherited by the woman’s sons, in the event of death (Bierschenk and Foster 1987, cited in Martins 1990).
Men and women have varying degrees of ownership, access, rights of disposal (e.g. sale, transfer) and use of incomes from sales of livestock and their products. However, this is more to do with shared responsibilities towards meeting family welfare given household resource endowments and needs, rather than control per se.
Summary: Gender roles in pastoral societies |
Gender division of labour in pastoral societies (nomadic and sedentary) is distinct but not very rigid. Men are decision makers for livestock production and herd management. Women are responsible for vulnerable animals, milking and dairy-related activities, while children herd. When necessary, women assist in herding and watering, and men in milking. |
Gender division of labour and participation in decision-making processes are influenced by the value and uses of animals and their products. If the animals serve purposes that are within the domain of women’s responsibilities, such as feeding the family, women will have greater influence on decisions regarding the animals. Women participate less in decision making regarding animals such as draft oxen that are mostly used by men for ploughing (Martins 1990). Men are responsible for the general welfare of livestock, such as animal care, breeding and herd movements. They organise access to grazing fields and water points. Men accompany younger herders when the risk of crop damage by cattle is high and carry out irregular tasks like building fences for cattle enclosures. Men also buy and sell livestock and assist in milking.
In most societies, milking, processing of milk, allocation of milk to different uses and care of pregnant cows, newborn calves and animals suffering from diseases or injury are the duties of women. They contribute to animal disease control by detecting sickness early because of their close contact with cows and calves during milking. An abrupt drop in the milk yield is an indication of ill health (Bruggeman 1994). Young men herd, water, protect and milk animals. Girls assist in milking, milk processing, watering the animals and food preparation. Children of both sexes do herding, tying, milking and watering of small ruminants kept around the house.
According to Kandiyoti (1990), in the agropastoral systems in North Africa and the Middle East, gender division of labour is based on the main crop grown, the number and type of livestock kept, the development and market orientation of the region, the availability and demand for hired labour and the economic situation at home.
Vabi (1991) examined the division of tasks and responsibilities among the Fulani agropastoralists in south-western Nigeria and north-western Cameroon. Male children are responsible for 68% and 46% of intra-seasonal movements of animals in south-western Nigeria and north-western Cameroon, respectively. Male household heads herd in only 21% and 31% of the observed cases in south-western Nigeria and north-western Cameroon, respectively. In south-western Nigeria 37% of male household heads milk cows compared with 24% in north-western Cameroon. Compared to the 56% of the Fulani respondents in south-western Nigeria who indicated that boys milk cows, only 19% of the respondents in north-western Cameroon indicated that boys do this task. Of the Fulani grazers in southern Nigeria and north-western Cameroon, 76% and 74%, respectively, confirmed that their wives were responsible for processing milk. Furthermore, 54% of the grazers in south-western Nigeria and 32% in north-western Cameroon indicated that their wives sell dairy products.
Although there are similarities in gender division of labour in agropastoral societies, some differences exist. There are few cases among pastoralists, in which milking is not primarily the task of women. Women belonging to the upper caste of the Ankole in Uganda are barred from milking. Milking of cows among the camel-owning nomads is a man’s job and the milking of small ruminants is seen as a woman’s task (Dahl 1987). Among the agropastoralists in central Nigeria (Waters-Bayer 1988) and the Beja of Sudan (Morton 1990), it is mostly the men and the boys who milk the cows and allocate the milk to different uses. In agropastoral societies with insecurity problems, such as in Dodoth County, northern Uganda, animals are kept far away from the homestead and are herded by male warriors. Under these circumstances, milking and distribution of milk is the responsibility of men.
In the agropastoral systems of southern Africa men look after the cattle, clear the land and plough, while women take on other work in the field; both men and women look after ruminant animals. Women are also involved in cattle rearing and their knowledge of cattle is at par with that of their husbands or sons. Men and women are interdependent in agriculture (Peters 1985).
In addition to animal husbandry, agropastoralists do some cropping to reduce the necessity of selling cattle to buy cereals. In the agropastoral system in central Nigeria, men, who in addition to hired labour and older sons undertake crop cultivation activities, manage the plots. Women help in planting, applying fertiliser and weeding. All family members harvest grain, but women and girls carry most of the harvest home. Women do post-harvest work, though the men construct granaries and help in crop storage. Women also keep small kitchen gardens where they grow various vegetables, condiments, shrubs and trees bearing edible leaves and fruits. They work on their gardens with the help of their children and hired farm boys.
Besides crop and livestock production, men and women are involved in different income generating activities. Men generally make ropes for sale, keep small roadside shops, practice as specialists in traditional medicine and work as wage labourers. Women undertake minor income generating activities such as petty trade in commodities (salt and kerosene), and make handicrafts. They also generate income from food processing. Women’s other tasks include childcare, food preparation (the most time-consuming household activity) and other domestic chores such as fetching water and firewood. Children, mostly girls, assist women with domestic chores.
Agropastoral systems generally evolve out of pastoral systems and thus they have certain features in common. These involve a wide range of customary accesses to livestock and their products as well as to land and labour; and are dependent on individual responsibilities. Contrary to the popular belief that men are the sole livestock owners, women also own livestock and are active in acquiring them.
Among the agropastoral Fulani in central Nigeria, animals belong to men, women and their sons. Women own 27% of all cattle (Waters-Bayer 1988). Women acquire 41% of the cattle from their fathers and 3% from mothers as gifts, they purchase 8% and obtain 48% from offspring. Ownership of livestock is regarded as a source of security and independence, enabling individual household members to meet their obligations, determined by culture. Household members, particularly men and women, jointly make decisions regarding disposal of livestock. Animals cannot be sold, slaughtered or transferred to another herd without seeking women’s opinions in the agropastoral system of central Nigeria.
The settled Fulani women in Nigeria are responsible for all milk processing and marketing and decide on the quantity of the milk to be kept for consumption and for sale. They market milk only in the form of cheese and butter and collect income in the form of cash; very little exchange of milk for grain takes place. Marketing is seen as an economic and social activity. Only a handful of wealthy Fulani women and strictly Muslim women sell their milk using female intermediaries. The money they earn is used for everyday necessities and sometimes to buy small ruminants (Waters-Bayer 1986). Revenue from dairy products contributes substantially to household income. In central Nigeria this revenue accounts for 33.3% of total cash income from cattle herds (Waters-Bayer 1985). The majority of the household earnings come from animal sales by men and a small amount comes from sale of manure. Women use most of the proceeds from sales of dairy products to purchase vegetables, fruits and seasonings, and to supplement home grown cereals. Similar findings on women’s use of milk, its products and milk revenues are reported in the system in central Chad, where women use revenues from milk and dairy products to purchase additional food items. These women use the remainder of the milk, butter and cheese revenue to buy goods for themselves and their children and to invest in small stock (Bruggeman 1994).
Women in the agropastoral systems in northern Africa and the Middle East are free to move in the countryside, but are restricted to their neighbourhoods in towns and can only go to the market if accompanied by a man. Women come in contact with monetary matters through men and have limited access to resources (Kandiyoti 1990).
The fact that women from the agropastoral systems in Central Nigeria and Chad allocate milk, dairy products, and their incomes to different uses, does not necessarily imply control, as would be implied by the collective household model, but rather fulfilment of agreed responsibilities towards making provisions for their households.
Summary: Gender roles in agropastoral systems |
Men and women have varying degrees of ownership, access, rights of disposal and use of incomes from sale of livestock and their products. Women generally sell milk and dairy products and use the proceeds to pay for small regular purchases of food and household items. Men sell live animals and livestock products and use the proceeds to meet unexpected and large family expenses, e.g. medical treatment, school fees and purchase of grains. The varying degrees of access to resources and benefits by different household members is more to do with shared responsibilities towards meeting family welfare, given households resource endowments, needs and gender division of labour, rather than control per se. |
Gender is an important dimension in labour allocation in mixed crop–livestock production systems. Both men and women do a large number of tasks related to animal production, with some degree of variation in involvement from region to region. These tasks include harvesting and transportation of feed (green grasses/weeds, fodder, forages etc.), chaffing of fodder, feeding and milking of animals, cleaning of cattle sheds and sale of milk products through formal and informal channels. Milk processing is primarily the work of women. Children of both sexes graze animals while men make decisions about breeding of animals and marketing. A few examples will be given below to illustrate these points.
There are regional and tribal differences in Togo and in Ghana in the division of labour in traditional livestock farming, particularly in the herding of cattle and small ruminants. The satisfaction of social and economic needs is viewed as the aim of traditional livestock production in Togo (Cheaka et al. 1989, cited in Martins 1990). Abu (1990) looked into the socio-economic conditions of people keeping livestock in northern Ghana. He noted variations in division of labour in livestock production between tribes.
Women in Burundi carry out a more significant part of agricultural work than their husbands though men, as owners of the farm business, regard women’s work as assistance (Schorry-Klinger 1990, cited in Martins 1990). Men make decisions on goat keeping, after consultation with their wives. Gender division of labour regarding goat keeping is not strict, but it is usually the men and the boys who herd and women clean the sheds. Men are more involved in tasks regarding keeping of crossbred goats.
In the Ethiopian highlands, women are more involved in cattle production than in arable farming. They clean cow sheds, milk the cows, look after calves and sick animals, cut the grass and supervise feeding and grazing of cows, make dung cakes, butter and cheese and sell these products once or twice a week. Women distribute the milk to different uses. Men feed the oxen and take the animals for veterinary treatment when need arises. Joint decisions by husband and wife are made on the purchase and sale of livestock. Boys, and sometimes girls, generally graze ruminant livestock. During the rainy season, women assist in keeping the animals away from growing crops (Whalen 1984). In Debre Birhan, the average daily amount of time women spend on livestock-related activities are: 23 minutes in milking, 1.25 hours in cleaning the barn, 1.5 hours in collecting dung, 1 hour making dung cakes and 1.75 hours every other day in processing milk (Giglietti and Steven 1986). The same study noted children spending an average of 9 hours a day herding and watering animals and collecting dung.
In Kafr al Bal in the Nile Delta, women are responsible for rearing small ruminants, as well as milking cows and small ruminants, milk processing and sale of dairy products (Zimmermann 1982). These women water cows and buffaloes, cut clover or tether the animals in shady places and prepare dung cakes for fuel. The wife of the head of the household and her daughters-in-law form part of the household. The wife of the head of the household does simpler tasks such as separation of milk, processing and sale of butter and cheese. The daughters-in-law undertake the harder and more difficult jobs such as caring for small ruminants, milking, watering stock, feeding and tethering of animals. Sale of milk within the farming community is seen as the inability to feed children, but the disposal of milk in the form of gifts is acceptable. The family consumes most of the butter and women sell cheese and surpluses of butter to female shopkeepers. Both men and women clean the sheds. Men decide on the purchase and sale of cattle and maintain contacts with co-operatives and the veterinary department. Gender division of labour in cattle farming is different in other parts of the Nile. Here, men take care of the cows, milk and sell most of the milk to the dairy, while women process cheese.
In the Aswan region in Egypt, Khafagy and Sholkami (1987) report that women are hardly involved in agricultural tasks; their ruminant livestock production activities include cleaning of sheds, milking, preparing manure and butter. In wealthy villages, where most of the men work outside the villages, fresh milk is sold and butter and cheese are purchased. In poorer villages, women prepare cheese and butter. Women only engage in income generating activities that can be done at home, mostly poultry keeping. Men raise, sell and purchase small ruminants while boys and girls herd and collect fodder; women traditionally do not engage in fodder collection.
Division of labour in Turkey is based on honour: men who carry out women’s tasks are made fun of. Women undertake household chores, stable work, and work in the fields while men assist in driving tractors and ox carts. In Turkey, women manage milk cows. Men help out in the cow shed if there is an expensive high-yielding cow involved or if the shed is equipped with modern technology (Kromka and Kruel 1990, cited in Martins 1990). Azmaz’s (1990, cited in Martins 1990) investigation in the same region indicates that women are almost exclusively responsible for milking and selling of surplus milk as well as attending to cows.
In their study of gender differences in livestock production management in the Chitwan District of Nepal, Tulachan and Batsa (1994) estimated the daily labour contribution of men and women to livestock production activities. Women’s labour makes up more than 80% of the total labour spent in different livestock raising activities. The average daily hours spent by women farmers in the collection of green grasses/weeds and tree fodder is 3.9 hours, while men spend less than an average of 3 hours daily on the same activities. The time women spend in collecting feed fluctuates by season depending on the intensity of crop production activities. Feeding is done mainly by women, who spend approximately 2 hours daily on this activity. Men sometimes help, but do not contribute more than 40 minutes daily on feeding. Grazing and cleaning of animal sheds are predominantly women’s tasks, with occasional assistance from men. Women prepare concentrates and feed them to lactating animals. Women exclusively do milking during the lean season. Men assist in milking during the crop production season, when women’s labour is in high demand. Purchase of manufactured feed (during the dry months) and marketing of raw milk is the responsibility of men.
The findings of Paris (1992) in Nepal reveal the important roles played by women in dairy and how they vary across regions. In the mid-hills of Nepal, the proportion of livestock activities carried out by women are feeding concentrate to large animals (66%), grazing animals (55%), collecting fodder from grassland or forest (53%), cleaning animal sheds (52%) and feeding fodder to large animals (34%). Feeding concentrates to animals recorded the highest share of women’s labour in the lowlands of Nepal (54%), followed by cleaning of animal sheds (50%), feeding fodder to large animals (42%), milking of large animals (38%) and grazing of animals (25%). The percentages refer to share of men’s and women’s total labour for each operation.
In the Ahmedabad and Udaipur districts of India, rich families hire labour to carry out most of the animal husbandry operations. Women of middle income high caste families undertake indoor jobs like milking and feeding, while out-door jobs such as sale of milk, taking animals for artificial insemination or treatment are done by men or hired labour. In the tribal families, women carry out all the management operations (cleaning, feeding, watering, milking, grazing and management of bullocks), except in a few tribes such as those found in Udaipur District where men undertake operations like milking, collection of fodder, feeding, watering, calving and administration of medicine (Rangnekar et al. 1992, cited in Dhaka et al. 1993).
Women account for 33% of the total labour input in the various operations of dairy enterprises in the Karnal District of Haryana State and 32% in Nadia District of West Bengal. Female participation is high in butter and cheese production, collection and chaffing of fodder/grasses, cleaning of cattle sheds and feeding of animals. The preparation of milk products recorded the highest share (100%) of women’s labour input in dairying as a percentage of total labour, followed by cleaning of cattle-sheds (80%), collecting and cutting of grass fodder/grasses (32%) and feeding of animals (25%) in Karnal District. Similar results were recorded in Nadia District, with the labour contribution of women being highest in preparation of milk products (86%), followed by feeding of animals (60%), chaffing of fodder/grasses (57%) and cleaning of cattle-sheds and animals (44%) (Dhaka et al. 1993).
In the Punjab Province of Pakistan, the important factors that influence the gender division of labour in livestock production are the place where the animals are kept, the size of the area being farmed and the caste of the family. The material value of the animals and their use impinge on the decision-making powers in cattle farming. Women are involved in all cattle-farming tasks if the animals are kept in the farmyard; larger farms do not involve women in these tasks. The more valuable the animals, the smaller the possibility that women will make decisions on their purchases and sales. If the animals serve a purpose which is in the women’s realm of responsibilities, e.g. feeding the family, her influence on decision making is greater than with animals that fulfil purely farming purposes, such as draft oxen (Adelt 1984, cited in Martins 1990).
A study of the participation of men and women in feeding and milking livestock in male and female headed households in Bangladesh show that women participate more in all activities in both households types (Paris 1992). Women and children are closely associated with the management of small ruminants—goats and sheep—in Bangladesh farming families. Rearing of goats is an effective means for poverty alleviation in Bangladesh. It has been observed that with 7–8 goats given to a poor farm family using grazing and cut-and-carry feeding systems, poverty could easily be alleviated (Saadullah et al. 1998). Keeping of goats in Sri Lanka is traditionally a task for women. Adults (both men and women) and children undertake herding. Men and boys cut and carry fodder in the evening when girls and women are cooking (Schmitt 1990, cited in Martins 1990).
Gender division of labour in livestock farming in South-East Asia is similar to that described in other regions. Men are principally responsible for large animals and women for small ruminants. According to Petheram and Basuno (1986), the involvement of family members in small ruminant production varies across villages and households. Women, however, generally take care of feeding, herding and cleaning of small ruminants. Women do not have much say when decisions are to be made regarding sale or purchase of animals, but they are responsible for making day-to-day decisions on livestock production. In Santa Barbara in the Philippines, men are responsible for buffaloes and cattle, but women also contribute towards their care (Paris 1987). In Indonesia, women’s contribution to animal husbandry varies by farm area, with their participation growing with increasing farm size (Paris 1992).
In Peru, women are responsible for grazing of animals with the help of children; they gather fodder, look after animals, select and sow seeds and weed. The men are responsible for ploughing, branding of livestock, purchase of agricultural products and harvest of crops. Gender division of tasks and responsibilities is not strict. Though women take care of animals and men take care of crops, decisions on crop and livestock production overlap and influence each other. When men are absent women carry out their tasks. Women are described as ‘shepherds’ in Latin America; they spend about 38 hours a week looking after cows (McCorkle et al. 1987; Fernandez 1988). Women in both Peru and Indonesia play significant roles in treating veterinary problems and in marketing animals (McCorkle et al. 1987).
Summary: Gender division of labour in mixed farming systems |
Gender division of labour varies across regions. Both men and women take part in livestock management. However, women generally contribute more labour inputs in areas of feeding, cleaning of barns, milking, butter and cheese making and sale of milk and its products than men and children. Children herd animals. |
In intensified mixed farming, different household members are responsible for different tasks in livestock production. Their traditional animal husbandry responsibilities and access to resources and livestock products are subject to negotiation and change over time with intensification (introduction of new technologies). Technological change and market orientation of smallholder dairying, for example, affect the basis of gender division of labour and access to resources and benefits. This section focuses on the extent to which gender roles have changed under intensification of smallholder mixed crop–livestock production systems.
Livestock innovation in mixed systems involves the introduction of high-yielding cows, complementary feed production and feeding strategies, and management technologies for the production of dairy products, mainly fresh milk for sale. Intensified dairying has been shown to potentially raise milk production and household incomes (Walshe et al. 1991; Thomas-Slayter and Bhatt 1994; Pankhurst 1996; Baltenweck et al. 1998; Shapiro et al. 1998). This is an improvement welcomed by everyone in the household, but the welfare consequences of technological change to different household members are not the same in the short term. The Green Revolution in Asia increased labour demand (employment) for both men and women (Conway 1997). There have also been structural changes where the labour burden and income opportunities of women have been reduced in the short run, but alternative opportunities arise over time. The labour contributions of individual family members to intensified dairying are a function of the gender division of labour defined partly by culture and tradition, and the specific nature of the dairy technology adopted. It has been reported that where intensified dairying is associated with hand feeding (stall feeding), the extra labour burden falls disproportionately on women (Chavangi 1983; Whalen 1984; Mullins et al. 1996).
Thomas-Slayter and Bhatt (1994) examined the effect of intensification of dairying in Ghusel, a village in Nepal, and noted some benefits to the households involved and gender-based inequalities. The introduction of the Small Farmers’ Development Program (SFDP) and integration of livestock producers into the cash economy through dairy initiatives and milk sales increased dairy activities and altered the roles and responsibilities of rural men and women. SFDP and the National Dairy Corporation facilitated dairying by providing credit and an assured milk market, respectively. These provisions resulted in an intensification of the traditional system requiring additional inputs of capital and labour. Thomas-Slayter and Bhatt (1994) report that, buffalo keeping and milk sales increased the well-being of many households in Ghusel village through improved access to cash and increased food security; these activities also increased inequalities in gender roles and responsibilities. Under the new initiative, buffaloes are stall-fed and women, with the help of girls, undertake all activities relating to their care. This involves a variety of time-consuming and laborious tasks such as collecting feed, cleaning stalls, milking, collecting fodder and feeding the animals. Scarcity of fodder and fuel wood in the village resulted in women and girls travelling longer distances and spending much time collecting forage for animals and household needs. In addition to livestock tasks, women with the assistance of girls, undertake daily chores—cooking, washing, cleaning, child rearing, agricultural work, tending kitchen gardens etc. According to Thomas-Slayter and Bhatt (1994), the new initiative increased women’s workload, lessened their mobility and leisure and even resulted in girls dropping out of school. Women acknowledged the economic benefits accruing to the members of the household as a whole, but cited little personal gains from these activities.
The involvement of men in traditional livestock production is largely marginal in village. With the new initiative, young men and boys have more responsibilities for buffalo care. Male involvement was traditionally centred on monetary transactions and crisis situations demanding external assistance, such as calling for veterinary assistance or transporting of livestock. Faced with high financial stakes in terms of initial investment and potential income, men are taking a more active role in buffalo production. Since milk quantity is affected by fodder type and availability, men are slowly becoming involved in some aspects of buffalo management (Thomas-Slayter and Bhatt 1994).
The workload of women in India increased with the introduction of crossbred cows (Muylwijk 1995), which require more feeding and care than local cows. The livestock activities women perform include milking of animals, harvesting and bringing fodder, feeding and watering of animals, cleaning of sheds, preparation of dung cakes, processing of milk, marketing of dairy products and animal health care (Dhaka et al. 1995; Muylwijk 1995). Seventy-five per cent of the daily harvesting and transportation of fodder is done by women with the help of children. Women, by virtue of being responsible for feed mixing, know how to influence the quality of cow’s milk in relation to the products. The work of women, though not usually calculated in monetary terms, is economically important because of scarcity of feed. Rural women in India are known to be working 14–15 hours a day (Muylwijk 1995). Men’s livestock-related activities include purchasing of concentrate and fodder and taking animals for treatment and artificial insemination.
In the mixed farming system in Kenya, intensified dairying usually takes the form of zero grazing where water and fodder are stall-fed to cattle, a labour-intensive operation. Maarse (1995) in her study of gender differentiated impacts of intensified dairy farming on socio-economic position of smallholders in five districts (Kiambu, Meru, Migori, Nandi and Vihiga) of Kenya found that women provide 32% of all labour related to dairy farming. Women contribute more labour than men in areas like grass cutting, manure application, feeding animals, general cleaning, milking, fetching water, heat detection and follow-up, and sale of milk. Men contribute about 23% of the total dairying labour, and participate more than women in planting Napier and fodder trees, buying dairy inputs and spraying animals. Hired workers handle 33.3% of the overall dairy farming activities, contributing most in the following areas: grass cutting, Napier weeding, manure application, feeding animals and buying dairy inputs, thus complementing women’s labour activities. Children contribute 5% of the total dairy labour, assisting in water collection, sale of milk and application of manure. Mullins et al. (1996) reported similar findings from the Coast Province of Kenya, where women supplied 48% of the total labour input in dairy farms. An earlier study reported women as contributing 85% of the total labour to zero-grazing units of smallholder farms in western Kenya (Chavangi 1983). Women’s high labour contribution corresponds both to their traditional roles as agriculturalists and milkers in Kenya. Their crop responsibilities also increased because of shifts in the cropping pattern to accommodate fodder cultivation.
Unlike in Kenya, the role of women in intensified mixed farming in Holetta, Ethiopia, is relatively small with average weekly labour contribution of 2.7 hours, compared with 10.7 hours from men and 24.7 hours from children (Shapiro et al. 1998). Men and children provide much of the additional labour required for intensified dairying.
Studies reviewed in this section point to the same general conclusion: women’s labour contribution to intensified dairying is substantially higher than that of other individuals, the exception being in Ethiopia, where children’s labour supply is the highest (Shapiro et al. 1998). Where women may be contributing more labour to intensified dairying, men’s labour may be higher in other activities. Unless total labour allocation and relative burden are examined, the implication of higher women’s labour in dairying cannot be fully understood. Differences in the labour contribution of family members to intensified dairying can be explained by the traditional roles of women in crop and livestock production and the nature of the technology adopted, for example open grazing or stall feeding. Women’s labour demand is more likely to increase where the technology is labour-intensive and where gender division of labour entails women performing much of the livestock-related activities. It is generally observed that women invariably do milking, feeding, watering and cleaning of animals. This has significant short-run implications for introduction of new ruminant livestock technologies.
A concern of many researchers and policy makers involved in ruminant livestock production in mixed systems and the introduction of new technologies is the issue of access to benefits and its impact at the household level. In most traditional dairy production practices, women are responsible for milk allocation and use part or all of the incomes from sale of dairy products to purchase goods for the family. The important concern is whether introduction of new dairy technologies brings intra-household changes in resource and outcome allocation, and how the household as a whole is affected.
In northern Ghana, ethnic traditions prevent women from owning cattle, e.g. in one tribe women can only keep animals after the birth of two children. Division of labour in livestock production also varies between individual tribes (Abu 1990, cited in Martins 1990).
Women own very few animals in the Southwest Province of Cameroon: 0.1% of the goats, 0.15% of all sheep and no cattle (Kerenge 1984). One possible cause of the low proportion of female livestock owners is the restriction of livestock ownership due to sociocultural and economic factors—women have other numerous diverse tasks, and may not have time for keeping livestock.
In Kenya, Luo women have no possibility of taking charge of cattle owned by the family (Chavangi 1983). A woman may buy cows but if she separates from her husband, the cattle remain with him.
In Kafr al Bal in the Nile Delta, sales of dairy products by women contribute to one-third of the family income. This money is spent on every day needs, while proceeds from harvests are spent on larger purchases (Zimmermann 1982).
In 50% of the zero-grazing dairy units in the five districts of Kenya studied by Maarse (1995), husbands are the main decision makers in relation to land use for cash crop and fodder production. Decisions concerning dairy management such as watering, feeding, milking, cleaning animal sheds, spraying/dipping, hiring employees, selling milk and using dairy incomes are made by women. Men make more decisions in the buying and selling of cows and land. Women in 66% of the households studied made decisions regarding use and appropriation of milk. Husbands and wives receive 33% and 45%, respectively, of the incomes from milk sales. Eighty-five per cent of the respondents (both men and women) indicated that their financial status and family welfare improved after the adoption of zero grazing. An earlier study of small farms in Kenya (Chavangi 1983) showed women contributing 85% of work input required in intensified cattle production. In Bahati Division of Nakuru District in Kenya, the roles of women in livestock production are reported to have increased with intensified dairying (Waiganjo and Maina 1998).
In the traditional crop–livestock systems in the Ethiopian highlands, women milk, process and sell milk and dairy products. Revenue from the sale of butter and cheese is the main source of income for women (Whalen 1984). With the introduction of crossbred cows, men take the milk to the collection points and receive money from it. Though women contribute the least labour to intensified dairy activities, the milk and dairy incomes they collect are higher with intensive dairy than with traditional cattle farming, although the milk incomes collected by men are significantly higher than those of women. Incomes collected by men are largely spent on food and other items for the family (Shapiro et al. 1998). This implies that there are different responsibilities and shared tasks and a lot of flow or exchange of resources and outcomes among family members in the Ethiopian highlands. In this region, selling products and collecting incomes does not mean control of income, and changes in roles played by different family members do not necessarily imply loss of control.
Commercialisation does not lead to women losing access to dairy income in eastern Africa (Maarse 1995; Shapiro et al. 1998). In Ghusel village in Nepal, intensified dairying brought mixed blessings. It led to greater economic security for families through increased milk and livestock sales and employment at dairies, but at the same time circumscribed the lives of women in ways previously unexpected. While acknowledging the economic benefits accruing to the family as a whole, women in Ghusel village complained about the increased workload from the new livestock initiative. According to Kandiyoti (1990), women in South Asia—Pakistan, India, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka—have no or limited rights to inherit land and other assets like animals and their access to production resources is minimal.
The traditional right of disposal of the proceeds from milk was taken over from Turkish women when project activities were introduced—the setting up of milk collection places which were under male management (Azmaz 1990, cited in Martins 1990). In north-west Jordan the course of commercialisation has reduced the importance of women in preparing and marketing dairy products (Martins 1990).
Gender division of labour and issues of access to resources and benefits in smallholder livestock production systems in developing countries can be understood better if studies are done using appropriate analytical frameworks or household models consistent with the socio-economic context in which the producers operate. Furthermore, information on gender and ruminant livestock production is more meaningful if gender division of labour, responsibilities and access to resources and benefits in the whole farming system are fully understood.
Summary: Effects of intensification of livestock production in mixed farming on gender roles and access to resources |
Technological change and market orientation of smallholder dairying affect the basis of gender division of labour and access to resources and benefits. It generally increases the workloads of men, women and children, particularly that of women. Food purchases are reported to have increased and the economic security of the household improved as consequences of intensification, though men, in most regions, collect most of the milk income from the formal marketing institutions. |
As indicated earlier, ruminant animals are an important source of livelihood for millions of smallholder farmers in developing countries, but their productivity remains low (Akhter et al. 1995). For example, Asia has 96% of the world’s buffalo and 30% of its cattle, but supplies only 17% of the world’s milk (FAO 1990, cited in Paris 1992). The low productivity is explained by both biological and socio-economic constraints. Constraints such as unavailability and high cost of exotic breeds and commercial feed, lack of market access and unstable livestock and livestock product prices, and access to veterinary services and drugs are gender neutral. Studies and experiences in the field indicate that there are some obstacles like lack of capital and access to institutional credit, workload and lack of technical skills and access to extension services that may affect women more than men. Factors such as low literacy level, sex stereotyping of roles and socio-cultural factors, e.g. early marriages, seclusion, childcare and other reproductive chores obstruct women from getting access to productive resources (Tarfa and Ogunwale 1998). Constrained access to productive resources further limits participation of women and their efficiency in ruminant livestock production.
A critical reason for the slow growth in livestock production in developing countries is the low rate of adoption of available improved livestock technologies (Jabbar and Ehui 1998). This is due mainly to limited capital and access to institutional credit. Credit has been shown to play a major role in the rapid expansion of improved crop technology in developing countries (Malik et al. 1991, cited in Freeman et al. 1998). Many farmers know about livestock technologies and the potential higher benefits they offer compared to current practices. But the intensity of adoption remains low, because improved technologies require initial investments and recurring expenditure which are significantly higher than those required for traditional ownership and management.
In developing countries, access to formal credit for animal production is limited compared to that for crop production (Devendra et al. 1997; Freeman et al. 1998). Livestock credit for example, accounts for under 10% of total agricultural credit in Ethiopia, Uganda and Kenya and few smallholder livestock farmers have access to this credit because of the method and criteria used by the credit institutions to screen applicants. The loans available are limited, thus requiring rationing, and are short term. Short-term loans are not suitable for livestock enterprises, which require longer periods than crops to generate income and capacity for repayment (Freeman et al. 1998).
Women farmers are particularly constrained in raising animals due to lack of capital and access to institutional credit. Potential borrowers in Ethiopia, Uganda and Kenya are required to show existing infrastructure for livestock operations before loans can be approved. Creditworthiness of potential borrowers determined by observable characteristics such as wealth or social standing, is also used in place of collateral security (Freeman et al. 1998). Both of these conditions are unfavourable to smallholders, particularly women who cannot meet the requirements. They often resort to informal loans, borrowing at interest rates higher than those prevailing in conventional financial settings. This makes it impossible for women who cannot afford the high interest rate to be engaged in improved livestock activities.
Women in the Philippines borrowed 77% of the loans from informal sources and used part of the money for purchasing animals (Paris 1992). Farmers’ (household heads’) co-operatives get credit for agricultural inputs at interest rates lower than those of private banks. Women farmers do not have access to such credit since they are not formally organised into co-operatives and do not have collateral such as land titles to qualify for credit from banks.
One of the formal institutions providing credit to the rural poor, particularly to women, for self-employment is the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh. It exemplifies one micro-lending strategy to overcome social customs restricting women from seeking wage employment and assist very poor women to earn an income and participate in the local economy (Jansen and Pippard 1998; Khandker 1998). It issues loans without collateral, and thus reaches women, one of the most disadvantaged groups in the rural society. In 1986, women made up 74% of the members and accounted for 69% of outstanding loans of Grameen Bank (Hossain 1988). Major activities financed by the Grameen Bank are non-crop agricultural activities, such as raising milk cows, cattle fattening, cattle and goat trading etc. In 1986, 46% of the loans were taken for livestock and poultry raising (Hossain 1988). A loan utilisation index was computed to determine extent of loan utilisation, using data collected from the Dinajpur District in Bangladesh, in 1995. The results showed 79.8% of borrowers with high loan utilisation scores. Younger women and those with small families had the highest loan utilisation (Chowdhury et al. 1998). Results indicate that involvement in credit has improved the relative well-being of women (Osmani and Sinha 1998).
In regions where women are the main dairy operators, such as in the intensified dairying enterprises in Kenya, their inability to obtain necessary credit due to lack of collateral can be a serious drawback to raising the productivity of dairy production.
Culture and tradition define most of women’s roles in the agricultural sector. In most societies, their role as primary caregivers may limit the time women have to spend on non-reproductive activities including livestock production. Women in the agricultural sector are heavily involved in home production activities, which involve childcare, food preparation and hauling of water and fuel. Women in Africa have been observed (Quisumbing 1994) to spend up to 2 hours a day on childcare, 3 hours on food preparation and 2 hours fetching water. In rural Asia, food-processing activities take 2–3 hours a day (Quisumbing 1994). In Bangladesh, women may spend about 6 hours fetching water (McGuire and Popkin 1990, cited in Quisumbing 1994). Pregnancy and cultural seclusion may also limit the participation of women in livestock and other activities outside the home.
Traditional responsibilities and new development initiatives sometimes add to women’s workload. Vishwanathan (1989, cited in Rangnekar 1992) indicated that in some areas of India, women work 14–16 hours daily. Women were also noted to be handling labour-intensive and low-output jobs. Although livestock development increases milk yields and cash flows, it also requires better attention and additional labour in carrying out new tasks such as stall feeding, barn cleaning and fodder collection—jobs in which women contribute significant amounts of labour. This leaves women with little time to participate in extension and training to improve their knowledge and skills. Migration of men from rural areas in search of supplementary income is common in many livestock production systems. Women and children are left behind to share the agricultural tasks of the departed male member. Women are a stable work force in agriculture, lacking only opportunities to improve their operational skills. The de facto female-headed farm is a typical situation where women are overworked, both in on- and off-farm wage activities to increase household income (Xuto and Bell 1992).
An important factor that enhances agricultural productivity is the extent to which farmers and farm workers have access to training and extension services (Overholt et al. 1985). Studies (e.g. Cloud 1985) show positive effects of training on technology adoption and agricultural productivity. Women are rarely targeted for livestock-related training and extension services. Information and training programmes are generally directed to men. Why women are not targeted can be explained by the following assumptions: (i) information given to men is automatically passed to their wives; (ii) women are less literate than men and will not understand the proposed technology; and (iii) women are very occupied with housework (Paris 1992). Training given to women is often on activities related to home economics rather than on improving agricultural production.
In the study done by Maarse (1995) among Kenyan dairy farmers, 69% of those first exposed to information regarding the zero-grazing technology were men, while only 19% were women, yet women undertake most of the dairy operations. Similarly, though women are involved in the management of crossbred cows in some areas of the Ethiopian highlands, only one-third of the surveyed women acknowledged receipt of extension advice. The remaining two-thirds of the women had never attended a demonstration or field day programme. Women felt the information they had about improved dairying was inadequate; the main source was from their husbands. The surveyed women expressed a desire for more advice, especially on disease control and feeding (Whalen 1984).
A study carried out in Kano State, Nigeria, showed that women respond promptly and positively to any opportunity that enables them to participate in development. Integration of women into development of processing technologies in Kano facilitated their access to agricultural inputs, supervised credit and training, and improved their social and economic domains (Tarfa and Ogunwale 1998).
These constraints (lack of capital and access to institutional credit, competing use of time, poor technical skills and lack of access to extension services) further limit women’s participation and efficiency in ruminant livestock production and in their contribution to food production. Gladwin and McMillan (1989) make the point that without helping women to farm, there can be no realistic turnaround in Africa’s food production. To alleviate the food crisis currently facing developing countries, particularly Africa (Winrock International 1992), animal husbandry needs to be more productive to contribute its potential. This requires training men as well as women in ruminant livestock husbandry.
Summary: Constraints to women’s participation in livestock production |
Constraints to livestock production such as lack of capital and access to institutional credit, competing use of time, poor technical skills and lack of access to extension services affect women more than men, and may further limit the participation of women and their efficiency in ruminant livestock production. |
