By Dr. Solomon Mengestu Addisu Abera Solomon Abeyi Fantahun Dereje May, 2012 EIAR
description
Transcript of By Dr. Solomon Mengestu Addisu Abera Solomon Abeyi Fantahun Dereje May, 2012 EIAR
ByByDr. Solomon MengestuDr. Solomon MengestuAddisu AberaAddisu AberaSolomon AbeyiSolomon AbeyiFantahun DerejeFantahun Dereje
May, 2012May, 2012EIAREIAR
ByByDr. Solomon MengestuDr. Solomon MengestuAddisu AberaAddisu AberaSolomon AbeyiSolomon AbeyiFantahun DerejeFantahun Dereje
May, 2012May, 2012EIAREIAR
Application of TechFit for Prioritization of Feed Technologies in Application of TechFit for Prioritization of Feed Technologies in
Smallholder Beef Production SystemSmallholder Beef Production System
2
No. Variables Weredas
Adama Arsi Negele
Kechema Kuriftu Ali-Weyo Kersa-Ilala
1 Land size 2 ha 1.5 ha 2 ha 2 ha
2 House hold 6 6 7 10
3 Cropping Season 3 2 2 3
4 Irrigation no yes no No
5 Labour 50 46 50 45
6 Crops grown Tef, wheat, maize, barley, beans and peas
Tef, wheat, maize, barley, beans
Tef, wheat, maize, barley
Tef, wheat, maize, potato
7 Fodder crops Grown
Leucaena, Napier grass, Sesbania sesban
Napier grass, fodder beet, alfalfa and Sesbania sesban
vetch No
8 Livestock Cattle, sheep, goats, donkey and poultry
Cattle, sheep, goats, donkey, Horse and poultry
Cattle, sheep, goats, donkey, Horse and poultry
Cattle, sheep, goats, poultry donkey and
9 Source of Income 100% 100% 100% 100%9.1 Agriculture 47 74 44 25
9.2 Livestock 35 26 37 57
9.3 Labour 18 0 0 18
9.4 business 0 0 19 0
Overview of the production system Overview of the production system
Introduction
Adama and Arsi Negele Area
Feed scarcity is a major problem that limits animal productivity,
Improvement in livestock productivity can be achieved by alleviating feed constraints,
Issue• Farmers
– Feed a constraint– Intervention needed
• Researchers– Technology options– Basket of technologies available
The aim is to select the best bet feed technologies for particular site/selected villages of in Arsi and Adama Districts
What is Techfit?A tool used to prioritize of feed technologies at
site-levelTechFit is used to filter among the available
technologies and prioritize best bet technologies from the available ones
Involves combining scores of technology and context attributes to arrive at an overall score for how a technology is likely to fit a particular context.
The tool it is still under refinement, for more use
METHODOLOGY
Adama District Kechema Wonji Kuriftu Arsi Negele
District Ali Wayo Kersa Ilala
Both Districts located in the Rift Valley
METHODOLOGY
Adama Arsi Negele
Kachema Wonji Kuriftu Ali Weyo Kersa Ilala
Proximity to woreda capital Presence of Smallholder beef fattening activities
SitesSelected
Selection criteria
No. of Participants
Wereda
Adama Arsi Negele Total
Kechema Kuriftu Ali-Weyo Kersa-Ilala
Male 15 11 15 15 56Female 5 9 7 5 26
Total 20 20 22 20 82
Numbers of participants from all kebeles.
• Group discussion with farmers:
• Kechema 20 (15 men and 5 women)• kuriftu 20 (11 men and 9 women)• Aliweyo 22 (15 men and 7 women)• KersaIlala 20 (15 men and 5 women)
PRAExercisePRAExercise
• Scoring of the 5 tributes• Work with the farmers
Assessment of the 5 tributesAssessment of the 5 tributes
• Follow the steps given in the Techfit technology filtering excel sheet
• Ideas for Interventions select technologies based on score
Filtering of TechnologiesFiltering of Technologies
8
Methodology of The TechFit Tool
• This preliminary study was conducted to score the context of farmers vis a vis land, labor, availability of cash, input delivery system, and skill of the farmer for technology adoption and demand of the technology for the above listed attributes.
Match farmers’ context to technologyScore for technology attribute
Score for context attribute
Land X Land =
Labor X Labor =
Credit X Credit =
Input X Input =
Knowledge X Knowledge =
If technology demands land => low score for landIf farmers do not have or very small land holding => Low score for land
• Potential technologies were filtered using farmers context and technology attribute scores
• Check list was used to collect information about the context attributes of farmers and the farmers gave scores to the context attributes
• The collected data were fitted to TechFit template to rank the technologies. Ref: Excel Sheet
• Feed technologies were evaluated based on 5 major attributes: land, labor, credit, input delivery system, and farmer skill.
III. TECHNOLOGY FILTER (Technology options to address quantity, quality, seasonality issues)
•Pre-filter available Technologies based on context relevance and impact potential
•Context relevance (score 1-6; low-high) X Impact potential (score 1-6; low-high) = Total score (context X impact)
13
Results and discussion
TechFit-Beef Value ChainTechFit-Beef Value Chain
No Technology options Pre-select the obvious (5-6) based on context relevance and impact potential
Scope for improvement of attributes 1-5
Total Score Rank
Context relevance (score 1-6; low-high))
Impact potential (score 1-6; low-high)
Total score (context X impact)
Score 1-5 (1 for less and 5 for more)
A Improvements of crop residues
1 Machine chopping of residues
20 I
2 Hand chopping of residues
12IV
3 Generous feeding of CRs
18 II
4 Generous feeding of CRs
14 III
5 Feeding of home grown legume residues
11V
6 Feeding of bought in legume residues
Technology filter• Technology options to address feed problem (list
of technologies)After short listing first 3-4 technologies based on
the Rank, go for cost benefit analysis of the selected ones
• Pre-filter– Context relevance X Impact potential score
Cost benefit analysis
• What does the technology cost?
• What does the technology deliver?
• Is it worthwhile?
Description Technology 1 Technology 2 Technology 3 Technology 4
Cost
1
2
3
Total
Benefits
1
2
3
No technologies Total score (context X impact)
Scope for improvement of attributes
Total score
Rank
123456
No technologies Total score (context X impact)
Scope for improvement of attributes
Total score
Rank
123456
No technologies Total score (context X impact)
Scope for improvement of attributes
Total score
Rank
123456
Table 2 cont’d
No Technology options Pre-select the obvious (5-6) based on context relevance and impact potential
Scope for improvement of attributes 1-5
Total Score Rank
Context relevance (score 1-6; low-high))
Impact potential (score 1-6; low-high)
Total score (context X impact)
Score 1-5 (1 for less and 5 for more)
A Improvements of crop residues
1 Machine chopping of residues
20 I
2 Hand chopping of residues
12IV
3 Generous feeding of CRs
18 II
4 Generous feeding of CRs
14 III
5 Feeding of home grown legume residues
11V
6 Feeding of bought in legume residues
Final output
• Indentify promising feed technologies that are likely to work
• Better understanding of why and why not technologies work or do not work