Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
CGIAR Research Program 3.7 More meat, milk, and fish for and by the poor
Report of a Stakeholder Meeting
The Smallholder Pig Value Chain: An opportunity for growth
and poverty reduction
Metropole Hotel Kampala, 14th June 2011
1
Executive Summary
A stakeholder meeting was convened by the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) and the International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) on June 14th, 2011 in Kampala to review that status of efforts to develop the smallholder pig value chain in Uganda and the potential contribution of new activities being initiated by the CGIAR partners.
Stakeholders were drawn from three sectors: actors currently involved in the pig value chain (farmers, pig breeders, feed mixers, slaughtermen), development agents (veterinary service, NGOs, farm cooperatives and agricultural donors) and researchers (National Livestock Resources Research Institute [NaLIRRI], Makerere University, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences [SLU], ILRI, CIAT, and the Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa [ASARECA]).
The purpose of this meeting was to share information about ongoing work and solicit stakeholders’ perspectives on constraints and opportunities in smallholder pig production and marketing, and to introduce and receive feedback on CGIAR Research Program (CRP) 3.7 on Livestock and Fish and CRP4 Agriculture, Health and Nutrition, and a new project funded by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the European Commission (EC). With the shift of the CGIAR system to focusing on achieving impact with solution-driven research for development, analysis and improvement of selected value chains in targeted countries and commodities offers the opportunity to tangibly increase incomes and alleviate poverty, in this case among smallholder pig farmers and informal value chain actors in Uganda.
Participants were asked to share their perspectives on strengths and opportunities for enhancing the smallholder pig value chain and the challenges that might be faced. They were also asked to share information on what development activities and research are currently ongoing and what they perceived as opportunities for further research activities.
Based on presentations and discussions, pig production and pork consumption are seen to be increasing and the sector is considered dynamic and quickly growing. At present, the pig production value chain is poorly characterized and linkages between the various sectors are weak and poorly coordinated, with farmers, processors, retailers, consumers, researchers and development workers sharing little information. It was agreed that major opportunities exist to improve its efficiency and offer benefits to the poor.
These perspectives were also echoed during earlier field visits with farmers raising pigs in Kamuli and Masaka, a feed miller, butchers at the Wambizi slaughterhouse and at roadside pork joints.
Development actors highlighted several intervention strategies for improving smallholder pig systems that have proven successful. In general, their perceptions of research needed to improve smallholder pig productivity corresponded well to several of the areas of current research on feeds, breeding, husbandry and animal health. Research has largely ignored other issues, though, especially
2
with respect to processing technologies, management strategies and economic studies both on farm and along the value chain.
Feed resources for pigs emerged as one of the most important issues for participants who cited a general lack of appropriate year-round feeds, prohibitive costs of available feeds, lack of development of locally available forages and lack of knowledge of feed mixes (concentrates, forages) which could improve meat quality and husbandry practices.
Finally, the consensus of participants was that CRPs 3.7 had a positive role in contributing to their efforts and that the ILRI-CIAT collaboration could play a catalyst role for improving coordination and resource mobilization to promote development of the smallholder pig value chain.
3
The Smallholder Pig Value Chain: An opportunity for growth and poverty reduction
Stakeholder Meeting Report Metropole Hotel, Kampala, 14th June 2011
Introduction The International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) and the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) are partners in a new initiative in international agricultural research: the CGIAR Research Program on Livestock and Fish (CRP3.7). This program is proposing to focus its research capacity and efforts on a small set of selected animal product value chains to work with development partners in transforming the value chains to benefit the poor. Two of the selected value chains are located in Uganda, one based on smallholder pig production and the other on small-scale aquaculture. ILRI and CIAT are leading the work on smallholder pig production and have begun engaging with stakeholders and potential partners in Uganda as they await official approval and start of CRP3.7. As part of this engagement, the two Centers convened a stakeholder workshop to introduce CRP3.7 and a pilot activity planned with support from the European Commission (EC) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). This report presents the discussions held during the workshop and the main points that emerged.
Participants The participants invited to the meeting represented actors at various stages in the pig production value chain as well as interested researchers and development actors. Actors in the value chain included farmers, pig breeders, feed mixers and representatives of small-scale businesses currently involved in the pig sector in Uganda. Development actors included District Veterinary Officers, NGO officers involved in pig production projects, representatives from farming cooperatives and agricultural donors. Researchers included scientists involved in research on constraints to pig production such as epidemiologists investigating diseases (African Swine Fever [ASF], cysticercosis), feed and forage scientists, breeders and genetists, and agricultural economists. In all, 31 people attended; their names and contact information are included as Appendix 1 of this report.
Objectives of the Meeting The objectives of the meeting were twofold:
• To share information on current research and development efforts to promote small holder pig value chain activities and
• To review what is currently being done, what is working, challenges that are being faced and to look at whether a coordination of collective efforts would be beneficial to moving this initiative forward.
4
Context of CGIAR Research Programs and new IFAD-EC project Tom Randolph presented the concept of the proposed Livestock and Fish CRP, which provides the context for the IFAD-EC project “Catalysing the emerging pig production value chains in Uganda to increase rural incomes and assets”. He also emphasized that this project would be the first of many activities to be undertaken over the next 6-10 years, starting with characterization of the smallholder pig value chain.
A related CGIAR Research Program, CRP4: Agriculture for Improved Nutrition and Health, was also discussed. It will work at the interface of the agriculture, health, and nutrition sectors to improve the nutritional benefits of agriculture while reducing the health risks. CRP4 will also be pertinent to development of the smallholder pig value chain as it plans activities on assessing and managing meat-borne disease, neglected zoonoses such as cysticercosis, and diseases emerging as the result of intensification.
The participants were then asked if they had any questions regarding the planned implementation of the IFAD-EC project or the two CRPs.
Stakeholders’ Views
Some issues raised in response:
• As the Ministry has not been very actively involved in meat safety (pork inspection), would this project represent an opportunity to establish more effective and increased number of slaughter slabs?
• There is a need to ensure, as pork production increases incomes in the project areas, that household human food security is not jeopardized in favour of pig food security. In addition, the gender component of the project must be closely analysed so that as the project is seen to be successful, the income generating activities are not taken over by men, potentially also jeopardizing household food security.
• The particular points along the value chain must be closely analyzed in order to determine which one will have the greatest impact on improving incomes for the poor, and will therefore be the catalyst.
The pig value chain in Uganda The consultant agricultural economist, John Jagwe, presented some of the early results of a scoping study which is being undertaken by ILRI, the World Bank and FAO to improve livestock statistics for decision making, particularly focusing on production systems for dairy, beef, chicken, egg, pork and goat. It is hoped this scoping study will also generate a good amount of data to guide the design and implementation of the smallholder pig value chain project and other potential opportunities. Some of the data intended to be captured include quality and safety attributes, the type of consumer buying particular pork products, growth prospects by product type and constraints to growth in supply.
5
Some of the preliminary observations presented include:
• 60-70% of all pork consumed in Uganda is consumed in urban/peri-urban areas • The value chain currently producing this pork consists primarily of pig farmers →
traders/transporters → road side outlets (butchers and pork joints) → consumers • At present, processors involved in the high-end market which retails bacon, pork chops,
sausages, frankfurters, smokies, etc. in large supermarket chains are very few and this retailing constitutes a very small segment of market consumption
• The price of pork in the rural areas is lower than that of the urban areas • Some traders/transporters have modified vehicles specifically to cater for transportation of
pigs.
Some of the challenges found were poor compliance with quality and safety standards, frequent loss of pigs to disease, lack of adequate feeds and poor quality, low prioritisation of pork industry by government and under-developed value chains.
Preliminary findings also indicate trends in growth; an increase in the number of people keeping pigs and changing lifestyles and consumption patterns have led to an increase in demand for and consumption of pork, and an increase in the number of retail outlets selling pork.
Stakeholder’s Views
The following represented some areas that stakeholders felt could be incorporated into the study if they were not already being looked into:
• As pork is considered “the other white meat” this presents an opportunity to alert consumers to the health benefits of eating pork. Also need to look into consumer preferences with respect to fat content of meat.
• Need to know what percentage of pork is produced in urban areas vs rural areas and also what percentage is consumed inside the home vs outside. Are there any data on where pork produced in rural areas is sold if they cannot access urban markets?
• Do consumers have preferences with respect to which retail outlets they buy pork from based on food safety standards?
• Is there any evidence to link clinical disease in humans with pork meat safety issues?
The session concluded with the point made that the Uganda Livestock Census conducted in 2008 states that 1 out of every 5 rural households keeps pigs (mainly 1 or 2 pigs tethered or free range) and 80,000 tonnes of pork is consumed annually yet very little is known about how the sector works. There is tremendous opportunity to influence exponential gain if knowledge is applied correctly to segments of the value chain.
Current perspectives on the smallholder pig value chain The next sections of the meeting focused on the perspectives of different groups of people in pig raising and pork production by analysing the perceived strengths and opportunities and the
6
weaknesses and challenges (threats). Each category of stakeholder was asked in turn to share its views.
Perspectives of actors within the value chain
Strengths/opportunities
• Food that is not used for humans can be fed to pigs, including maize bran, sweetpotato vines and cassava leaves.
• Uganda’s population is projected to reach 65 million by 2020; this could result in increased demand for pork products (Livestock Revolution).
• There are many advantages to raising pigs over other livestock: pigs are easy to feed; women prefer to rear pigs; there is a ready market and proven demand; pigs do not take vast amounts of land (especially if zero grazed); pigs grow fast, have high fecundity and short generation intervals which can result in quick generation of cash for farmers and require few veterinary inputs.
• Existing abattoirs are working below capacity and there is potential to introduce new ones into neglected areas.
• Nutritional benefits of pork over red meats can inform consumers’ choices adn therefore further increase demand.
• There is great potential in the already dynamic informal sector to enhance breeding potential and pig production in general and there are already good breeds within Uganda such as Camborough, Landrace and Large white.
• Significant numbers of scientists and students are interested in researching better feeds for pigs and there are potential feeds not yet exploited.
• As most processed pork products currently sold in high-end supermarkets in Uganda originate from Kenya, there exists great potential for Uganda to set up a domestic processing industry which could extend to the region.
Weaknesses/threats (challenges)
• There has been little investment to date in the pork industry, few institutions established in national systems to support it and low prioritisation of the sector by government in development plans.
• There are few scientists currently working on the pig value chain and the current curriculum at Makerere does not include many courses on pig production.
• The available feeds are not good and in some cases limited to one brand only. • Attention needs to be paid to make sure that humans and pigs do not compete for same
feed resources. • Farmers do not know how much their pigs are worth, breeds are inconsistent and animals
are not raised in a structured manner to ensure consistency of product. • There is a lack of organized markets and farmers tend to get exploited by middlemen.
7
Box. Perspectives from stakeholders in the field
Preceding the workshop, a team from ILRI, CIAT, IFAD and the EC had visited actors involved in the smallholder pig value chain in Kampala, Kamuli and Masaka areas. The following are perspectives collected from people met during those visits:
Woman farmer – Kamuli: Basic improvements in pig husbandry promoted by VEDCO have permitted farmers to turn pig raising into a semi-commercial enterprise and significantly increase incomes. Sourcing a steady supply of feed can be a challenge, and reliance on local traders sometimes does not offer the best prices.
Woman farmer – Masaka: The majority of pig keepers continue to raise local pigs as before, allowing them to free range. The pigs do not grow well, have problems with disease and often must be kept tethered to avoid crop damage and problems with neighbours.
Woman farmer – Masaka: Support from Kamuzinda Farm has led to basic improvements in backyard pig systems for a number of households working with either indigenous or improved breeds, and provided an important supplementary source of income for key expenditures, especially for education costs. Marketing is not a problem given the constant demand from Kampala.
Commercial feed miller: The mill targets pig producers with single maize/fish feed product, but demand mostly limited to larger commercial piggeries and market remains small. Sourcing raw materials of adequate quality is a recurrent problem and results in less than half production capacity especially in the dry seasons hence having to sell products at high price. Lack of enforcement of quality standards gives small local feed millers unfair advantage in making cheap but sub-standard mixes.
Wambizi slaughterhouse cooperative: This is the largest pig slaughterhouse in Kampala, run by a farmer cooperative. The leaders of the cooperative said that while demand is high for their pork products, they have difficulty sourcing animals and work at only 50% capacity. The market is segmented, with smaller pigs going to pork joints and the largest ones going to processors. Many byproducts (e.g. blood) are simply thrown out. There appear to be issues around how value of animals is determined: dressed weight versus live weight. The cooperative recognizes the need for better slaughter technology to improve their performance and profitability.
Large urban butchery and pork joint operator: The urban pork market has grown remarkably fast from almost nothing over the past 20 years. This butchery handles 2 tonnes of pork/day, of which an important share is sold in the operator’s own pork joints at the same location. It has evolved strategies for segmenting the different qualities of pork (fat content, boar tainted meat, size of cuts). Pig supply is a challenge.
Small roadside butchery and pork joint: A typical operator handles 2 pigs/day, mostly the smaller local pigs. Demand is steady, but sourcing pigs can be a challenge. There are perceived advantages to relocating to a centrally placed slaughterhouse in town to have better infrastructure and services.
8
Perspectives of development agencies
Strengths and opportunities
• Government has included pigs in its Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) as a means of alleviating poverty for smallholder farmers, particularly focusing on generating employment for youth and women.
• As pigs can be sold at any time, they can be used to meet emergency or unforeseen household expenses and can also be used to pay school fees, sold to buy cattle and to upgrade homesteads. They can also be sold early if feed availability becomes a problem.
• In times of climate change exerting pressure on farmers, pigs can be used as integral part of a diversified crop and livestock farming strategy.
• Pigs do not tend to be rustled by neighbours so farmer is not as vulnerable to livestock theft as perhaps with cattle.
• Agencies are already looking at generating bio-gas from pig manure. • Opportunities exist to support both the informal (which currently has the largest current
market share) and formal markets. • Pigs are well suited to a “pass it on” scheme as they have high fecundity and short
generation intervals, something which agencies are already exploring.
Weaknesses and threats (challenges)
• It is difficult to access funding or assistance from government regarding development of pig value chain.
• The risk exists that as the value chain develops and is seen as successful, women and the poor may be pushed out by men and commercial enterprises. There is a need to advocate for the smallholder farmer and not lose sight of main beneficiary of improving pig value chain.
• Inbreeding of pigs at village level and a current lack of good breeds readily available to farmers means pigs are sometimes sold before time and farmers are not aware of proper breeding strategies to realize most gain.
• Need to ensure that if non-traditional feeds become available they are geared towards providing fastest growth and good quality of pork meat.
• Transport of pigs from rural areas to markets is a concern because of poor road infrastructure.
• Need to focus on housing and transport issues for pigs to ensure biosafety, not just feeds for pigs.
• District officers may need more training on pig production as they might lack expertise currently.
• There are more slaughter slabs being built for cattle but this is not occurring for pigs. • The perception that pigs are a zero input livestock and therefore require little care or money
needs to be overcome if pig rearing is to be successful. While pig rearing can require fewer inputs, some veterinary inputs are necessary if disease constraints which may prolong growing time and create human food safety issues are to be addressed.
9
• Programs distributing pigs such as “pass it on” initiatives need to be aware of disease risk transmission from farm to farm (this has happened for both clinically and sub-clinically affected pigs).
Lessons from smallholder pig value chain development The following section deals with what is currently seen to be working within the pig industry in Uganda, as perceived by two NGOs: VEDCO (Volunteer Efforts for Development Concerns), a development agency working with rural households in Uganda on agriculture and livelihoods, and Kamuzinda Farms, a pig farm promoting smallholder production in the Masaka area.
VEDCO described in part their approach to pig rearing for smallholder farmers:
1. Careful selection of farmers for pig production interventions. Farmers apply are short listed farmers interviewed at their households and interest in pigs (including their previous experience) assessed. Criteria assessed also include the availability of on-farm feeds. Households selected must be crop farming households.
2. Training in pig production is carried out using a modular approach. 3. Improved housing implemented for improved bio-security. This is cost-shared by the farmer,
which ensures that farmers have an investment in the enterprise being successful. 4. Start-up kits (around feed and health) are supplied to the farmer, to demonstrate how
important feed and health issues are. 5. Business plans (termed ‘Involvement plans’) are developed, including targets. 6. Children are involved in the enterprise. 7. Direct beneficiaries get a number of inputs (2 x pigs, cement, starter kits etc) which is paid back
to other farmers (pig pass-on) rather than VEDCO. Selection of the receiving farmers is by the farmer groups, though VEDCO will then become involved with training of these farmers.
8. VEDCO engages a specialist with technical expertise in pig production to oversee the programme.
9. Lessons learnt have fed back into the design of the programme. An example of this is in modifying the programme from initially giving out pigs, cement, feeds and following the pig for a full year to now giving out starter feeds and vet supplies at the start, stressing again the importance of veterinary inputs and farmers’ knowledge of disease and animal health (particularly ASF).
Kamuzinda Farms described their approach:
1. Have established a demonstration centre where farmers can observe and replicate back on their farms.
2. Provide access to a good pig breed (Camborough). 3. Availing pig production information to farmers, through bi-annual meetings. 4. Would like to avail feeds to farmers through feed storage facilities. 5. Working on providing ready markets. Organise farmers to collect porkers, which are
slaughtered by the farms, and transported to Kampala markets.
10
6. Have distributed a number of male pigs (one per every 10 families) so that farmers have access to boars.
7. Continuing research on pig growth
Some of the challenges that exist are:
8. It is difficult to ensure meat safety and quality when transporting from remote areas to Kampala without a refrigerated truck.
9. The market pays better prices for premium versus ordinary pork, but farmers to not know how to produce a premium product.
10. Need slaughter slabs close to where pigs are reared. 11. Need to be trained and able to grade pork accurately.
The different models and approaches were briefly characterized as:
• VEDCO improves pig productivity on-farm through the use of social groups • Kamuzinda Farm supports farmers and improved productivity by providing a set of services
around improved breeds, information and marketing opportunities, while ensuring sustainability by running itself as a business.
• Wambizzi Cooperative Society is developing a farmer co-operative model for marketing, in conjunction with government officials
The perspective of research (what has been or is currently being researched and what are the results of this research)
Pig production/husbandry
Makerere University
1. Investigating weaning strategies appropriate to the Ugandan context, including best times and weights to wean and what types of feed to be given to maximize production cycle.
2. Looking at performance of improved breeds, focusing on cross breeding as most farmers do not keep pure breeds.
3. Characterization of production system and basic feeds in mid-western Uganda has been carried out.
4. Researching nutritional value of locally available feeds, including performance of bran vs grain, introducing fermentation to grain to improve digestibility and the use of fresh forage.
5. Ongoing project on genetic diversity of pigs
Other research priorities identified include:
• Understanding impact, prevalence and pathology of ASF in Uganda – potential collaboration with South African universities
• Establishing a central market for pigs • Establishing a national breeding programme
11
• Research on seasonal availability and quality of feeds
Animal Health
SLU
Research on ASF is currently being undertaken in collaboration with scientists from SLU and Makerere, working with ILRI and the Ministry, focusing on:
1. How ASF is maintained within the country (changes in cycle times and roles of reservoirs in wild pigs)
2. Research to date has included work in work on > 20 outbreaks only during the last 10 months in > 10 districts (in North, South, East and West) investigating risks of wild pigs to domestic pigs and establishing the economic impact of the disease.
Some results include: ASF affects both smallholder farmers and larger piggeries; indications are that healthy pigs act as carriers and distribution of health carrier pigs might have contributed to outbreaks; movements of wild pigs onto farmlands at night may play a role in transmission, but has yet to be quantified.
ILRI
1. Research on ASF at ILRI began about 6 years ago and has focused on diagnostic kits 2. Disease surveillance capacity has been enhanced by training of Veterinary and Wildlife Services
on diagnostics and epidemiology in 5 East African countries 3. Study carried out on disease epidemiology in Kenya: virus type and cause of outbreaks; and
establishing role of wildlife in disease transmission. Found that wart hogs and bush pigs can be infected and that wart hogs have been primarily responsible for disease
4. Findings show that >90% of smallholder pigs carry either internal or external parasites but efficacy of products and farmers willingness to treat has not been evaluated.
Veterinary and Public Health
Makerere
1. Research into Taenia solium cysticercosis: associated risk factors; efficacy of available vaccines; association with neurocysticercosis; is the disease rendering pigs unfit for consumption?
2. No current research on “blue pork” in Gulu region or harbouring of ectoparasites causing jiggers – need funds to do this.
ILRI
1. Looking at pigs as a reservoir for trypanosomaiasis: a study in Kenya has revealed that 11% of pigs were positive for tryps and that 40% of those positive were carrying human infective parasite, in sites where tryps has not been found for years
2. A study in western Kenya found that 55% of pigs sampled prior to slaughter were positive by Ag ELISA for cysticercosis but that 0% were identified as positive by meat inspectors – the extrapolation of this figure by literature review and data could mean that 6% of pork meals are infective for those who eat the pork.
12
3. The Ag ELISA has been developed into a lateral flow penside diagnostic test which is manufactured in Kampala. Its efficacy and usefulness needs to be evaluated.
4. Research being done looking at pig movements: how often do they come into contact with pit latrines; what distances do they walk during a day? Results indicate free range pigs walk 6 km per day indicating a lot of feed energy expended.
5. Research in north-east India and Vietnam being done into what impact the smallholder pig sector is having on human health across 250 pork-borne diseases and chemical hazards; what resources and level of legislation and regulation is needed to appropriately address the risk?
6. Research in Vietnam has shown that although smallholder produced meat potentially has high hazard risk, the extent to which these are passed on to humans depends largely on food safety practices and in some cases, meat produced in formal sector can present greater risk. Risk is partly a function of short and direct supply chains vs long and complicated production chains.
Feeds
CIAT
1. Work is ongoing on monogastric forage in Colombia looking at legume leaves (cowpeas, soybeans) and shrubs; looking at replacement value of these forages compared to formal rations. Work is also being done on looking at how to silage home grown forages and addition of materials to increase nutritional value.
2. Better methods of testing the nutritive and digestive properties of feeds focusing on rapid tests.
3. There is limited work undertaken on pig feeds in Uganda; the focus has been on the dairy industry but a proposal has been developed with Makerere to look at feed concentrate value chain in Uganda; how to reduce costs and increase availability of concentrates and how to combine with local feed resources.
Iowa State University
1. Trying to raise funds to look at correct feeds for pigs in Uganda but hampered by temporary relocation of technical expert for a year to Washington, DC.
Despite a considerable amount of research ongoing, there are still many segments of the value chain that have not been considered, including processing and on-farm economics.
Critical Issues and the Way Forward The next section of the meeting involved group work aimed at identifying the critical issues for development actors and researchers. What are promising successes to be built upon? Do development actors think research is being done on the critical issues? What challenges are researchers being informed of by other actors and what kind of research is critical to addressing them?
13
Development Actors
Promising Successes for Development Interventions
• Pass the gift (roll on) with its multiplier effect of pig distribution (the approach) • Transforming the smallholder from free ranging to zero grazing confined systems (important
in improving animal health and production), housing • Improving on farm production of animal feed as opposed to external or purchased feed • Use of paraprofessional or community based people who can offer community based
extension services • Establishing farm demonstrations or model farms, quantifying the economics of farm
operations to be able to provide tangible evidence of increased farm incomes and cost/benefit analysis of typical smallholder pig production unit
• Mobilising farmers into farm associations/cooperatives or groups with legal status to increase their bargaining powers and increase dissemination.
Opportunities for Research
• Investment in to producing sufficient fodder for the whole year, to ensure consistent supply of animals for slaughter
• Feed mills (with credit facilities) to play a role in reducing cost of feed and ensuring good feed quality
• Bulking of produce to bring it to market centers, slaughter and grade at source (slaughter slabs), establish cold storage/transportation chain
• Establish units to process by-products (blood, bone meal) close to slaughter slabs • Use of equity funds to mitigate in high costs of credit to investors in the value chain
especially if there is lack of access to cheap credit • Establish community breeding centers to avoid inbreeding and poor quality animals • Capacity building for farmers in animal husbandry health and meat inspection • Advocate for enforcement of regulatory standards of food health and safety, feed
regulations and standards • Advise smallholders on husbandry practices on their farms using an integrated approach.
What issues should researchers being working on?
• Establishing a platform for information sharing to get information on what researchers are doing, what the farmers need
• Regular stakeholder meetings to remind researchers on what else needs to be done and get informed on what has been done (feedback on the progress of research)
• Research on local feed formulation based on locally available materials • Researchers to continually appreciate and strengthen the role of development partners in
the dissemination of research results • Economic research at farm level/value chain and also development of business plans for
farmers and the private sector, including feed producers (very important in the value chain especially for growers and older pigs)---based on growth stages (Average Daily Gain [ADG] and Feed Conversion Ratio [FCR])
14
• Research on the important diseases and simple bio-safety practices viable on the farm • Research on consumer preferences • Socio-economic research to understand gender issues in the value chain, and the role of the
enterprise in improving livelihoods.
Research Actors Feeds Research Issues
1. Assessment of food sources that are locally available or could be introduced, and the nutrient value of these foods (inclusive of molasses, brewers byproduct, leaf meal, fruits, abattoir waste, cultivable fodder, fish waste) and their potential to compete with human food resources
2. How to combine feed resources, considering regional and seasonal differences in feed availability, at both the farm and commercial level
3. Different pig feed requirements at different stages of their life (age, pregnancy / lactation, etc.) and for different breeds
4. Biotech solutions to increase food nutrition 5. Understand / develop the feed value chain
Breeds Research Issues
1. Organisation of community based breeding schemes to avoid inbreeding and increase genetic potential of the animals, including looking at potential for crossing wild and domestic pigs to improve disease resistance; introducing foreign breeds (Chinese).
2. How do the different genotypes perform (production level, disease resistance / resilience) – requires a means of genotype (breed) identification
3. Is pig artificial insemination a viable option (although transmission of ASF via semen is a concern)
4. Socio-economic aspects of keeping pig breeds, by system (peri-urban, rural, etc.) i.e. low input / low output system with the local breed versus high input / high output system with the Large white / Landrace breeds.
Health Research Issues
1. ASF transmission dynamics/triggers of outbreak. Where is the reservoir and what are the roles of wildlife and pig movements? What is actual impact of ASF? Efficacy and use of a vaccine for ASF – blanket vaccination of pigs or use only when outbreak occurs?
2. Impact of diseases other than ASF (cysticercosis, other helminths, mange, parasites) on pig production and identification of control strategies.
Other Research Issues
1. Decision support tool for pig production (e.g. at what feed cost price would you reduce the number of pigs held)
2. Processing, value addition, and use (sale) of byproducts 3. Human health: cysticercosis, food safety, haemorrhagic fever and emerging diseases, safety
issues around the use of byproducts
15
4. Marketing: direct marketing versus the use of a middleman (including for the informal sector) 5. Value chain analysis to identify the main constraints 6. Less smelly faeces, as enabler of peri-urban production (environmental pollution) 7. Standards – what do market outlets (e.g. supermarkets) require 8. Impact of policies / policy environment 9. Consumer preferences 10. Safety of the meat – risk assessment, risk management and risk communication 11. Gender and equity, in relation to market development 12. Profitability of the farm from the production side (quantified figures) 13. Processing of pork products and product diversity.
Can we all work together to transform the pig value chain into a viable opportunity to increase incomes for smallholder farmers? The meeting concluded with the participants being asked to assess whether they felt that ILRI had a legitimate role as a catalyst and collaborator in the Livestock and Fish CRP. It was stressed that the CRP would play a role in helping to coordinate the efforts of various actors, in both individual contributory and complementary roles. The objectives of the IFAD project were reiterated to the participants and they were asked to assess the appropriateness of the strategy. There were no comments from the floor on this issue. The participants were then asked to comment on whether they felt there was sufficient interest to continue sharing information and form an informal action group on collaboration.
Participants responded by stating the following:
1. Different means of sharing information must be employed that all can access, ie, web platforms and face to face meetings and communication.
2. Some major stakeholders such as representatives from the Ministry of Agriculture are not present at this meeting. In order for the project to be feasible, these actors must be involved from inception as part of planning and information sharing.
3. CIAT and IITA should be closely involved in the IFAD project, for nutritive analysis both for animal and human feeds.
4. Look at other networks and platforms for lessons learnt and potential replicability – a smallholder dairy information platform exists (EADD) and UGONET (Uganda goat network)
5. Must ensure that collaboration is formalized with Memorandi of Understanding (MoUs); this will protect all actors and address issues of intellectual property rights.
The meeting was concluded by thanking all participants on behalf of ILRI and CIAT for their attendance and contributions.
16
Annex: Participant List
No Name Organisation Email Address
1. Amine Belhamissi IFAD [email protected]
2. Baldwin Zimmer EC advisor [email protected]
3. Ben Lukuyu ILRI [email protected]
4. Brigitte Maass CIAT, Nairobi [email protected]
5. Charles Waiswa Veterinary public health, Makerere University
6. David Mutetikka active pig farmer + feed mixer, Makerere University
7. Delia Grace ILRI [email protected]
8. Denis Muhangi Makerere University [email protected]
9. Dorothy Mukudi Masindi Iowa State University [email protected]
10. Edward Okoth ILRI [email protected]
11. Edward Ssewannyana NaLIRRI Director of Research
12. Eric Fevre ILRI [email protected]
13. Fred Kabi Makerere University [email protected] or [email protected]
14. George Ntibarikure CNFA Inc. [email protected]
15. Gideon Nadiope VEDCO, Livestock Development Officer
16. Jean Ndikumana ASARECA [email protected]
17
No Name Organisation Email Address
17. John Jagwe Consultant, ILRI-FAO-World Bank Data project
18. Kadumukasa Kironde Superior Farms [email protected]
19. Pontiano Nyombi Kamuzinda Farm [email protected] or [email protected]
20. Kabuye Matia K Active farmer, Makerere University
21. Karen Marshall ILRI [email protected]
22. Karl Stahl SLU [email protected]
23. Katie Downie Consultant, ILRI [email protected]
24. Lawrence Mayega District Veterinary Officer, Masaka
25. Malu Ndavi Consultant, IFAD [email protected]
26. Nancy Rapando, Programme Director, VEDCO
27. Phil Toye ILRI [email protected]
28. Robin Buruchara CIAT Kampala [email protected]
29. Tom Randolph ILRI [email protected]
30. Tonny Aliro District Veterianry Officer, Gulu
31. Simon Lubega Wambizzi Cooperative Society Limited
32. Zachary Nsadha Veterinary public health, Makerere University
