This PowerPoint helps students to consider the concept of infinity.
Social Consequences of the Changing Landscape for Mixed Livestock Production Systems
1. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Social Consequences of the Changing
Landscape for Mixed Livestock
Production Systems
International Conference on
‘Livestock in a Changing Landscape’
Bangkok, Thailand 28 November 2006
A. Costales, U. Pica-Ciamarra & J. Otte
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
2. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Outline
• The Changing landscape
• Mixed Crop-livestock
Production Systems
• Stylized Development
Paths & Case Studies
• Summary & conclusions
3. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
The Changing Landscape
4. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Interlocking ‘Drivers’ of Change
• Growing & changing
demand for meat &
milk products in DCs
• New technologies in
production and
processing
• National and
international market
liberalization and
integration
TheChangingLandscape
5. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Opportunities and Threats
• Expanding markets –
opportunities for livestock
producers
• Demanding markets
(product quality and food
safety) – exclusion of some
producers from market (and
sector!)
TheChangingLandscape
6. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Responses to the Changing Landscape
Initial conditions:
1. Agricultural / livestock
sector in the economy
2. Resource endowments
(land, labour, capital)
3. Economic-institutional
framework
TheChangingLandscape
Highly
differentiated
Food staples +
export crops
Food staplesOutput mix
ImportantNot importantNot important
Scale
economies
International
National /
Domestic
Subsistence
Market
orientation
LowModerateHigh
Share of
labour in
agriculture
LowModerateHigh
Share of
agriculture in
GDP
Globalizing
Agriculture
Modernizing
Agriculture
Traditional
Agriculture
7. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Responses to the Changing Landscape
TheChangingLandscape
Production systems:
1. Extensive production
systems
2. Mixed crop- livestock
production systems
3. Intensive production
systems
8. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Responses to the Changing Landscape
TheChangingLandscape
Production systems:
1. Extensive production
systems
2. Mixed crop- livestock
production systems
3. Intensive production
systems
9. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Mixed Crop- Livestock
Production Systems
Crop-Livestock Farms
10. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Characteristics
• Predominantly small farms
• Livestock contribute to
! income
! food
! draught
! savings
! insurance
! social status
• (Informal) traders
• Processors / wholesalers /
retailers
MixedCrop-livestockProductionSystems
11. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Predominance of Small Farms
100456.1Total
3.314.8>10
3.013.85-10
8.840.32-5
11.753.31-2
73.2334.0<1
Prop’n of farms
w/n class
(%)
No. of farms
w/n class
(mio)
Farm size
class
(ha)
Remark: variations of
‘average’ farm size:
! SSA: 1.6 ha.
! Asia: 1.6 ha.
" China,
Bangladesh:
<1/2 ha
! LAC: 67 ha.
Source: Von Braun, 2005
MixedCrop-livestockProductionSystems
12. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Mixed Farms and Livestock Production
Mixed farms
contribution to total
livestock output (%) –
world regions
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
milk milk milk milk pig pig
Kenya Ethiopia India Pakistan Vietnam Philippines
MixedCrop-livestockProductionSystems
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
Milk Ruminant
meat
Pig &
Poultry
Eggs
SSA
NENA
S&SEA
LAC
OECD
Small mixed farms
contribution to total
livestock output (%) –
selected countries
13. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Employment & Market Share (Milk)
MixedCrop-livestockProductionSystems
Employed persons
/1000 litre of milk output
- small (informal) / large
(formal) ratio
Share (% out of total) of
informal employment
and marketed milk
0
2.5
5
7.5
10
Small-to-Large farm
employment
Informal-to-formal chain
employment
India
Pakistan
Kenya
Ethiopia
n.a
0
25
50
75
100
Share of
employment (%)
Share of
marketed milk (%)
India
Pakistan
Kenya
Ethiopia
Tanzania
Bangladesh
n.a.
n.a.
14. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Impact of the Changing
Landscape on Mixed Systems
Three Stylized Pathways
of Livestock Sector Development
15. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
‘Stylized’ Development Pathways
LivestockSectorDevelopmentPathways
1. Positive, equitable
livestock development
path
2. Livestock sector
stagnation / involution
3. Positive but in-equitable
development path
16. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
1. Positive & Equitable Path
• Growth leads to
broad-based rural
production and rural-
to-urban processing
and distribution
systems
! consumption linkages
! production linkages
• Decentralized rural
industrialization,
exploiting rural labour
and entrepreneurial
skills
Case study: India dairy
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Dairy
farms
Milch
animals
per farm
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Crossbred
Buffalo
Local
LivestockSectorDevelopmentPathways
17. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
2. Stagnation / Involution
• Rural production systems
are disconnected from
growing markets
! weak / no production
linkages
! weak / no consumption
linkages
• Anti-agriculture ‘biased
policies’
! macroeconomic
! sector policies
! infrastructural
Case study: Zambia dairy
5
6
7
8
9
10
3200
3300
3400
3500
3600
3700
3800
90 92 94 96 98 00 02
Milk per capita consumption
urban population (mio)
urbanpopulation,million
percapitamilkconsumption(kg/year)
0
25
50
75
100
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
tons(.000)
Milk production
Milk net imports
LivestockSectorDevelopmentPathways
18. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
3. Positive but Inequitable Path
• Small modern sector
benefiting from LCL
! production linkages
! concentration of
production
! food safety/quality
• Large traditional sector
excluded from benefits of LCL
! weak production linkages
! consumption linkages
! at the extreme, forced out
of the sector
1990
66.3
33.7
Formal
Informal
Case study: Brazil dairy
1998
56.5
43.5
Formal
Informal
Share of formal/informal marketed milk
-5,000
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
tons(.000)
Milk production
Milk trade
LivestockSectorDevelopmentPathways
19. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Summary
Drivers
1. Positive
pathway
2. Stagnation /
involution
3. Inequitable
pathway
Large farms
Small farms
Formal supply
chain
Informal supply
chain
Urban
consumers
Rural
consumers
Small subsistence
farms
Informal supply
chain
Rural
consumers
Large farms
Small farms
Formal supply
chain
Urban
consumers
LivestockSectorDevelopmentPathways
out of business
20. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Summary & Conclusions
21. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Summary
• (Small) Mixed farms are and will
remain pervasive
• (Small) Mixed farms significantly
contribute to livestock output &
rural employment
• LCL different impacts on mixed
farms possible:
! positive, equitable
development path
! stagnation / involution
! positive but inequitable
development path
Summary&Conclusions
22. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Conclusions
• Small mixed farms can be
competitive
• Large & small farms / supply
chains can co-exist
• Smallholder based (livestock)
industrialization is possible
• Equity & growth are not mutually
exclusive
• ‘Equitable’ livestock technical &
institutional policies
Summary&Conclusions
23. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
References & Further Reading
Staal, S.J., A.N. Pratt, and M.Jabbar. (2006). A Comparison of Dairy Policies and Development in
South Asia and East Africa. Country Case Studies from South Asia and East Africa – Kenya, Ethiopia,
Pakistan and India. ILRI, Nairobi. PPLPI Working Paper (forthcoming), FAO, Rome.
Haggblade, S., P. Hazell and T. Reardon. (2005). The Rural Non-Farm Economy: Pathway Out of
Poverty or Pathway In?“.IFPRI, ODI and Imperial College London. Proceedings from the Research
Workshop on The Future of Small Farms, June 26-29, 2005, Withersdane Conference Centre, Wye,
UK.
Nagayets, O. (2005). Small Farms: Current Status and Key Trends. IFPRI, ODI and Imperial College
London. Proceedings from the Research Workshop on The Future of Small Farms, June 26-29, 2005,
Withersdane Conference Centre, Wye, UK.
For more information please visit the PPLPI website:
www.fao.org/ag/pplpi.html
www.fao.org/ag/againfo/projects/en/pplpi/publications.html
24. A Living from Livestock
Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative
Thank you!