Small Livestock -Big Opportunity for Rural Poor and Women

(Experience of PRADAN)

PRADAN has been working in the poorest districts of India for the last 30 years.

Picture the Change | Change the Picture

1

Professionals with head and heart are

the key drivers

Development needs more human resource than material

PRADAN’s Outreach

Old districts in PRADAN’s outreach

Districts added to Outreach last year

150 Most Backward Districts as identified by the Planning Commission, India under the Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF)

India’s Poorest Areas PRADAN’s Areas Of Operations

40 out of 43 districts PRADAN operates in are identified as backward

under the BRGF

Conscious effort to work in the poorest areas of the country – Eastern & Central tribal belt…

• 400 PRADAN professionals work with 2.5 million people across 7 poorest States• 97% of these people belong to SC, ST and OBC

Immerse Team within Communities

Set up Self-Help Groups

Design and Pilot Livelihood & women empowerment Solutions

Create Linkages for Improved Governance, Women empowerment, Scale and Sustainability

Withdraw once Community is Empowered and Self-Sufficient

1

2

3

4

5

Enter anendemic poor district

Ensure that communities can sustain development and change independent of

PRADAN

PRADAN’s ApproachPicture the Change | Change the Picture

4

...through a patient approach that is sustainable, replicable and where the poor themselves are the drivers of change

Some back ground• Livelihoods strengthening efforts mostly do

not reach the poorer people:– Economically poor-food insecure– Socially disadvantaged-women, destitute, dalits– Physically challenged- physically challenged, old– Resource poor-e.g. landless

• Agriculture and livestock are integral to rural farming system but Livestock unlike agriculture gets low attention

Target was to develop a model to suit the poorest section and can be rolled out in scale

Some realities

• Small livestock (Indigenous poultry bird and goats) keeping is an age old practice by most rural women

• High significance for rural community: rituals, crisis management, food & nutrition security, guest treatment etc.

• Often termed as ATM, Poor women’s cow etc.• Frequent disease outbreak and very high mortality• Low priority and capability of livestock department• In spite of high mortality and high risk poorer families continue to

rear these livestock

Factor criticality analysis in small livestock rearing

Key Factors

Regular vaccination

De-worming

Proper night shelter

Feeding practices

Initial mother stock

Breeding

Medication service

Predation

Marketing

Caring practices

Insurance

Total

Current situation

0

0

1

1

1

0.5

0.5

1

0

1

0

7 (22%)

Criticality (1-5 scale)5

3

3

3

3

2

4

3

1

3

2

32 (100%)

SGSY focus

0

0

3

1

2.5

1.5

1

1

0

2

1

13 (41%)

Taking up agriculture inside

a river

The Model

• Net annual income targeted at Rs 30-40,000• The unit size: 4-5 hen units with flock size of 50-100

and 2-4 mother goats with herd size of 8-15• Enough flexibility- easy to adopt by poorer families• Building on existing stock, local breed- gradual

shifting to intensive level• Primarily depends on available local resources for

feed and other requirements• Low investment and low dependence on external

support

Promotion of small livestock together ?

• It is less attended by formal system• They are often complementary• Sustainability of service system-in small scale• Rearing related know-how are mostly similar• Most family keep those together in small scale• Opportunity varies from area to area• Significant income to the family

Factor criticality analysis in small livestock rearing

Key Factors

Regular vaccination

De-worming

Proper night shelter

Feeding practices

Initial mother stock

Breeding

Medication service

Predation

Marketing

Caring practices

Insurance

Total

Current situation

0

0

1

1

1

0.5

0.5

1

0

1

0

7 (22%)

As per the model

Initial period Afterward

5 5

3 3

1.5 3

2 3

1 3

1.5 2

3 3

1.5 2

0 1

2.5 3

0 0

21 (66%) 28 (88%)

Criticality (1-5 scale)5

3

3

3

3

2

4

3

1

3

2

32 (100%)

SGSY focus

0

0

3

1

2.5

1.5

1

1

0

2

1

13 (41%)

5-Key interventions• Regular de-worming and vaccination

• Supplementary feeding

• Improved shed

• Improved Breeding practices

• Basic care & hygiene

1. Regular de-worming and vaccination

Vaccination calendar

2. Supplementary feeding

3. Care & hygiene

4. Improved shelter

5. Improved breeding practices

5. Improved breeding practices

Economics of BYP

1 hen – 4 month- 6-7 birds1 hen- 1 year- 20 birds4 hens- 1 year- 80 birds

Production and Return

80 birds @250 = Rs 20000

4 goats @ 5000 = Rs 20,000

4 hen and 2 mother goat

Annual income- Rs

40,000

Impact assessment April’12 to April’13 (Covering 1213 families In Patna block, Keonjhar, Odisha)

Control village (One village-98 families)

Treated village (8 villages-1115 families)

Average figures (Per HH) Before After growth Before After growth

Poultry population 4.55 4.46 -2% 9.56 22.41 134%

Goat population 1.63 2.11 29% 2.94 5 70%

Chicks per hen 2.94 2.86 -3% 3.5 4.9 40%

Kids per doe 0.81 0.69 -15% 0.73 1.09 49%Poultry bird mortality(%) 65 23

Goat mortality(%) 20.6 6.3

Benefit realization in one year period (Both poultry birds and goats) (Sample size 1115 families)

Average benefit realized Amount (Rs.)

Average Income realised from sale & consumption 5,324

Income equivalent of stock increase in poultry birds 1,542

Income equivalent of stock increase in goats 4,220

Total Average benefit realized 10,886

Spread

• PRADAN- 24 teams – About 50,000 families• NRLM-various state missions- Jharkhand &

Odisha• Many other NGOs have initiated this model

Key impact areas

5-Key result areas

– Women Empowerment: cash in the hand of women

– Addresses Nutrition security of women and children

– Supports and fosters Children Education

– Significant annual income enhancement- Rs 25-40,000 – Suitability for Poorest of Poor : Anybody can do (ABCD)

Key approach• The CAHW (Community animal health worker) are the key person

in this whole model• Each village should have one CAHW to provide vaccination, de-

worming and primary health care services to the farmers• One CAHW can provide services to about 100 to 200 families on

payment basis• The SHG federation identify, train and support the CAHWs for the

quality delivery of the services• The SHG federation will establish system for the smooth supply of

inputs like vaccines and ensuring cold chain • Minimum unit-2/3 GPs, covering about 2000 families by about

10-15 CAHWs

Challenges• Establishing cold chain in remote areas• Access to quality vaccines• Ensuring payment to service providers• Restriction from department• Establishing self sustaining model in places where

the scope for poultry birds is low• Regularising vaccination process once the disease

is controlled

USP (Anybody can do- including the Poorest)

• Minimal investment both time and money• Can be done along with existing engagements• Can support most families in an area (inclusive)• Less vulnerable to climate change & natural disasters• Low dependence of external support-can be expanded

by community• Highly replicable in different community and

topography• Can be done in scale- carpeting activity