| Livestock Research for Rural Development 17 (1) 2005 | Guidelines to authors | LRRD News | Citation of this paper |
The objective of this study was to understand the perception of agricultural producers in Colombia who currently do not own livestock about the role of cattle in alleviating poverty in their farms. Data came from direct survey interviews in 2002 with 143 farmers who did not own cattle in the five most important regions of animal production in Colombia to elicit their perception about the role of livestock as a pathway out of poverty. Selected regions were: Piedmont, Caribbean, the Coffee-growing region, the highlands of Antioquia, and the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie.
Most smallholders interviewed in the Piedmont had cattle in the past (85%), followed by producers in Antioquia (60%) and least in the Coffee-growing region (39%). The most important reason for selling their cattle in all regions was due to financial crisis and needed cash (ie., from 27% of smallholders interviewed in the Caribbean and the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie to almost 50% in the Piedmont). Most smallholders surveyed used the money from the sale of animals to pay health bills of family members, to pay off debts, and/or to use the cash to survive due to crop failure from extreme weather conditions (ie., drought or frost damage). The most striking result is that 76% of farmers in Antioquia to 97% of smallholders in the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie would like to own cattle if they had the opportunity. The most important reason for owning cattle in all regions was as a mechanism for savings and building capital. The second most important reason in all regions was to obtain milk and beef for family consumption, except in Antioquia where this issue was irrelevant. Other reasons for owning cattle were to reduce and diversify risk due to crop failure and to utilize manure as fertilizer. The preferred animal category to own in all regions was by far the milking cow, ranging from 52% of smallholders in Antioquia to 96% in the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie.
Results from this study show that cattle are perceived by small-holder farmers as a contribution to the improvement in the quality of life. The challenge is to develop novel mechanisms to provide smallholders with livestock, either through credit loans or thru the Fondos Ganaderos of Colombia, whose objective is to help small farmers who have production capacity but lack the resources to buy cattle.
Keywords: alleviation of poverty, cattle, Colombia, food security, livestock
The potential of livestock to reduce poverty is enormous. Livestock contribute to the livelihoods of more than two-thirds of the world's rural poor and to a significant minority of the peri-urban poor. The poorest of the poor do not have livestock, but if they can acquire animals, their livestock can help start them along a pathway out of poverty.
Roles of livestock keeping revolve around storing wealth, contributing to food and nutritional security, providing draught power, transport and manure, and serving traditional social functions. In some situations, the "livestock ladder" may allow the poor to progress from modest livestock holdings, such as a few poultry, to acquiring sheep and goats or pigs, or even cattle (ILRI 2003). Livestock production provides a constant flow of income and reduces the vulnerability of agricultural production.
The objective of this study was to understand the perception of agricultural producers in Colombia who currently do not own livestock about the role of cattle in alleviating poverty in their farms.
Data came from direct survey interviews during January to June of 2002 with 143 farmers who did not own cattle in the five most important regions of animal production in Colombia. The purpose of the interviews was to elicit the farmers' perceptions about the role of cattle as a pathway out of poverty. Selected regions were: Piedmont, Caribbean, the Coffee-growing region, the highlands of Antioquia, and the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie. The survey interviews were executed by 5 undergraduate students (ie.,one student per region) who received prior training. The survey instrument contained open-ended questions and lasted about one hour.
Land Use
Table 1 contains the average farm size and land use by farmers who do not own cattle. Mean farm size varied from 5.7 ha in the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie to 13.4 ha in the highlands of Antioquia. All farmers depended on both annual and perennial crops for most of their income although it varied significantly across regions. In the Coffee-growing region, producers depended mostly on coffee for their income whereas in the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie they depended on annual crops, mainly potatoes and broad beans (Vicia faba). In the Piedmont and Caribbean regions producers depended mostly on maize, cassava, and rice. Fruit production was the most important land use in Antioquia and a very important crop in the Piedmont and the Coffee-growing region.
|
Table 1. Farm size and land use by non-livestock owners in five regions of Colombia during 2002 |
|||||
|
Parameter |
Region |
||||
|
Piedmont (n=33) |
Caribbean (n=33) |
Coffee (n=23) |
Antioquia (n=25) |
Cundi-boyacense (n=29) |
|
|
Farm size, ha |
11.7 |
9.6 |
9.9 |
13.4 |
5.7 |
Annual crops |
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Maize |
0.5 |
3.1 |
0.1 |
0 |
0.1 |
|
- Rice |
1.0 |
0.3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
- Beans |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.2 |
|
- Other 1 |
0.8 |
2.2 |
0.3 |
0.9 |
3.2 |
Perennial crops |
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Coffee |
0 |
0 |
6.1 |
0 |
0.6 |
|
- Sugarcane |
0.1 |
0.1 |
0.2 |
0 |
0.1 |
|
- Fruits |
1.3 |
0.8 |
0.5 |
2.1 |
0.1 |
|
- Other 2 |
1.2 |
0.3 |
1.5 |
0 |
0 |
Pastures |
3.3 |
1.9 |
0.4 |
7.8 |
1.1 |
Forest |
3.2 |
0.9 |
0.9 |
2.3 |
0.4 |
|
1
Cassava in the Piedmont and
Caribbean; Onions and cassava in the Coffee region; Cassava, potatoes,
and broad beans (Vicia faba) in the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie |
|||||
Pastures were an integral part of land use in all farms, even though producers did not have cattle. This was specially the case in Antioquia, where 58% of farm area was planted pastures. The reason for this was because most farmers interviewed were coffee growers who during the early 90's switched production to fruits trees and fattening steers using intensive pasture rotation with high levels of N2 fertilization. All interviewed farmers who had steers had sold them due to negative economic returns and were currently fattening pigs. Pasturelands were abandoned as the farmers did not want to go back to coffee or other agricultural land use at the time the surveys were executed.
With regards to land use, the largest proportion of farms with forests were found in the Piedmont and the lowest in the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie, which makes sense since the former is the agricultural frontier while the latter has been under agricultural production for the longest period of time.
Table 2 contains the proportion of smallholders who had cattle in the past and the main reasons for selling or not owning cattle in 2002. Most smallholders interviewed in the Piedmont had cattle in the past (85%), followed by producers in Antioquia (60%) and least in the Coffee-growing region (39%).
|
Table 2. Proportion of farmers who had cattle in the past and main reasons for selling or not owning livestock in five regions of Colombia during 2002 |
|||||
Parameter |
Region |
||||
|
Piedmont(n=33) |
Caribbean (n=33) |
Coffee (n=23) |
Antioquia (n=25) |
Cundi-boyacense (n=29) |
|
|
Non-cattle farmers who had cattle in the past, % |
84.8 |
42.4 |
39.1 |
60.0 |
52.2 |
|
Reason for selling or not having cattle today, % |
|||||
|
Due to financial crisis |
48.5 |
27.3 |
34.8 |
28.0 |
27.5 |
|
Not enough land to keep cattle |
18.2 |
18.2 |
0 |
4.0 |
27.6 |
|
Owning cattle was a bad experience |
9.1 |
6.1 |
4.3 |
24.0 |
0 |
|
Cattle died of disease |
0 |
3.0 |
0 |
0 |
13.7 |
|
Cattle was robbed |
0 |
3.0 |
0 |
4.0 |
6.9 |
|
Low profitability |
6.0 |
0 |
0 |
8.0 |
0 |
|
Security problems |
12.1 |
6.1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Other |
6.0 |
0 |
0 |
4.0 |
3.4 |
|
Reasons for not owning cattle today but had it in the past, % |
|||||
|
Not enough land to keep cattle |
12.1 |
51.5 |
39.1 |
8.0 |
37.9 |
|
Not enough money to buy cattle |
12.1 |
51.5 |
4.3 |
0 |
34.5 |
|
Requires high investment and agriculture is preferred |
0 |
3.0 |
13.0 |
16.0 |
6.9 |
|
Does not like to own cattle |
3.0 |
0 |
13.0 |
8.3 |
0 |
|
Not enough knowledge on how to manage cattle |
0 |
6.1 |
0 |
0 |
3.4 |
|
Security problems |
3.0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Producers who currently own livestock other than cattle, % |
72.7 |
100.0 |
52.2 |
36.0 |
69.0 |
|
Average inventory and species of livestock other than cattle, number |
|||||
|
Laying hens / broilers |
35.0 |
25.0 |
11.5 |
0 |
9.5 |
|
Pigs |
3.0 |
10.0 |
4.0 |
30.0 |
0 |
|
Sheep |
0 |
0.3 |
0 |
0 |
1.8 |
|
Goats |
0 |
0 |
2.3 |
0 |
0 |
|
Ducks |
0 |
4.4 |
0 |
0 |
0.1 |
The most important reason for selling their cattle in all regions was due to financial crisis and needed cash (ie., from 27% of smallholders interviewed in the Caribbean and the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie to almost 50% in the Piedmont). Most smallholders surveyed used the money from the sale of animals to pay health bills of family members, to pay off debts, and/or to use the cash to survive due to crop failure from extreme weather conditions (ie., drought or frost damage).
The second most important reason for selling cattle in smallholder farms in Antioquia was due to low profitability (32%) when producers switched from coffee to fattening steers under intensive grazing during the 90's. In other regions the second most important reason was because of limited amount of land, especially in the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie, the region with the smallest farm size.
Other reasons for selling cattle was due to security problems (12% of smallholders in the Piedmont and 6% in the Caribbean regions), others because owning cattle was an unpleasant experience (9% in the Piedmont, 6% in the Caribbean, and 4% in the Coffee region), and another reason mentioned was due to cattle rustling (3% of smallholders in the Caribbean, 4% in Antioquia, and 7% in the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie).
Even though smallholders surveyed did not own cattle, most of them had in their farm other species of livestock, ranging from 36% of farmers in Antioquia to 100% in the Caribbean. The most common livestock species owned was poultry (both laying hens and broilers), ranging between 9.5/farm in the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie to 35/farm in the Piedmont. The only region where poultry was not found on farms was in Antioquia.
The second most common species found was pigs, ranging from 3/farm in the Piedmont to 30/farm in Antioquia, where farmers who had fattening steers switched to pigs. Other species found were sheep, goats, and ducks, but these were not common. These livestock assets provide smallholders with high quality protein (meat and eggs) for household consumption to complement the grain-based diet they have.
Table 3 shows the subjective perceptions about the role of cattle ownership from the perspective of smallholder farmers who do not own cattle. The most striking result is that 76% of farmers in Antioquia to 97% of smallholders in the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie would like to own cattle if they had the opportunity.
|
Table 3. Subjective perceptions about the role of cattle ownership by agricultural producers who did not own cattle in five regions of Colombia during 2002 |
|||||
Parameter |
Region |
||||
|
Piedmont(n=33) |
Caribbean (n=33) |
Coffee (n=23) |
Antioquia(n=25) |
Cundi-boyacense (n=29) |
|
|
Farmers who would like to own cattle today, % |
84.8 |
87.9 |
82.6 |
76.0 |
96.6 |
|
Reason for owning cattle, % |
|
|
|
|
|
|
To obtain milk and beef for family consumption |
51.5 |
87.8 |
30.4 |
0 |
58.6 |
|
A mechanism for savings and building capital |
54.5 |
100.0 |
47.8 |
74.0 |
86.2 |
|
To reduce and diversify risk due to crop failure |
15.2 |
3.0 |
8.7 |
8.0 |
51.7 |
|
To use manure as fertilizer |
9.1 |
0 |
8.7 |
0 |
34.5 |
|
Preferred animal category to own, % of farmers |
|||||
|
Milking cow |
81.8 |
84.9 |
47.8 |
52.0 |
96.5 |
|
Female calf |
6.1 |
0 |
8.7 |
24.0 |
31.0 |
|
Male calf |
0 |
0 |
26.1 |
0 |
27.6 |
|
Steer |
15.2 |
6.1 |
17.4 |
0 |
13.8 |
|
Bull |
9.1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
31.0 |
|
Desirable amount of animal category to own, number |
|||||
|
Milking cow |
8.4 |
13.2 |
2.3 |
9.4 |
5.8 |
|
Female calf |
1.4 |
0 |
0.3 |
2.5 |
1.6 |
|
Male calf |
0 |
0 |
1.8 |
0 |
1.5 |
|
Steer |
0.6 |
0.6 |
7.4 |
0 |
0.3 |
|
Bull |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0.4 |
|
Necessary conditions to own cattle, % |
|
|
|
|
|
|
More land |
21.2 |
78.8 |
39.1 |
4.0 |
75.9 |
|
Availability of credit |
42.4 |
63.6 |
56.5 |
28.0 |
17.2 |
|
Security |
18.2 |
6.1 |
0 |
8.0 |
0 |
|
Improve farm infrastructure |
18.2 |
3.0 |
8.7 |
24.0 |
17.2 |
The most important reason for owning cattle in all regions was as a mechanism for savings and building capital. The second most important reason in all regions was to obtain milk and beef for family consumption, except in Antioquia where this issue was irrelevant. Other reasons for owning cattle were to reduce and diversify risk due to crop failure and to utilize manure as fertilizer. This was specially the case in the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie (Table 3) where most farmers grow broad beans and potatoes and the risk of frost damage is significant and where manure from cattle can be an important source of fertilizer and organic matter.
The preferred animal category to own in all regions was, by far, the milking cow, ranging from 52% of smallholders in Antioquia to 96% in the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie. In addition, when smallholders were asked to express the desired amount of animals they would like to own, again, the milking cow was the animal category with the highest number.
When smallholders were elicited about the necessary conditions to own cattle, the most frequent answer was availability of credit in the Piedmont, the Coffee-growing region, and Antioquia, whereas the most frequent answer in the Cundiboyacense altiplanicie and the Caribbean was to have more land as a condition to own cattle. Other important conditions to own cattle were to have the adequate infrastructure and, to a lesser extent, to improve the security conditions in rural areas.
Results from this study show that cattle are perceived by small farmers as a contribution to the improvement in the quality of life. The milking cow is one of the factors that contributes the most to well-being due to the role it plays within the farm: supply of milk and beef for household consumption, utilization of labor with low opportunity cost, security against crop failure, liquidity against financial crisis, as collateral for informal credit, and as a protection against inflation (Estrada 1995).
Smallholders who had sold their cattle in the past, sold them mainly for these same reasons. The challenge is to develop novel mechanisms to provide smallholders with livestock, either through credit loans or thru the Fondos Ganaderos of Colombia, whose objective is to help small farmers who have production capacity but lack the resources to buy cattle.
Estrada R D 1995 Incidencia de las políticas económicas en la conservación de los recursos naturales de la zona andina. Consorcio para el Desarrollo Sostenible de la Ecoregión Andina (CONDESAN). Red de Pastizales Andinos (REPAAN). Quito, Ecuador.
ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute) 2003 Livestock, a pathway out of poverty: ILRI's strategy to 2010. Nairobi.
Received 30 September 2004; Accepted 8 December 2004