Busie Thesis Defense

MULTI-CRITERIA LIVESTOCK ASSESSMENT FOR SUSTAINABILITY OF SMALLHOLDER FARMS IN KWA-

ZULU NATAL

NAME: BUSIE MAHLOBOSTUDENT NUMBER: 15435172SUPERVISOR: PROF K DZAMACO-SUPERVISOR: MS A.H DAVIDS AND PROF T SEIFERT

OUTLINE

• INTRODUCTION

• AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

• DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA

• METHODS & MATERIALS

• RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

• CONCLUSION

• RECOMMENDATIONS

• ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

INTRODUCTION

• Significant role of livestock:• Economic development

• It contributes US$1,4 trillion in global assets (Reid et al., 2008)

• Globally ~30% land surface is used for livestock (Steinfeld et al., 2006)

• And 70% of SA land is used for livestock farming

• Social stability and physical health• 80% of poor people around the world keep livestock

• 20% of these people are found in the tropics (McDermott et al., 2010)

• Environmental health

INTRODUCTION

• Ecological issues• Change in rainfall and increase in temperature = heat stress &

low performance

• Burning of biomass as grassland management tool• Impose danger on non-targeted organisms

• Contribute to air pollution

• Erosion

• Social issues• Lack of information = limit development

• Land ownership

• Economic issues • Low off take rate

• Low productivity = marginal profit

• Cost benefit analysis

AIMS AND OBJECTIVESAIMS

I. To evaluate social and economic sustainability of smallholder farmers in Umvoti municipality of Kwa-zulu natal (KZN) province;

II. To investigate production constraints experienced by smallholder farmers in Umvoti municipality, KZN province

OBJECTIVESI. To investigate the management practices employed

by smallholder livestock farmers in Umvoti municipality.

II. To determine the relative contribution of on–farm and off–farm activities to household livelihoods in Umvoti municipality in KZN province;

III. To assess the effects of livestock and rainfall on veld condition in Umvoti; and

IV. To analyze the effects of agricultural inputs and cropping patterns on soil minerals in Umvoti;

NULL HYPOTHESES

• Smallholder producers do not have any production constraints

• Smallholder farmers in Umvoti do not employ mixed livelihood strategies to minimize vulnerability against unforeseen natural or human–induced events

• Agricultural (crop and livestock) production do not make significant contribution to household livelihood of smallholder farmers at Umvoti municipality

• There is an association between social grants and livestock farming

STUDY AREA

• Umvoti is divided into11 wards and 7 wards belongs to the tribal authority

• The municipality occupies 2 509 KM2

• Population size = 103 092

• Altitude: 1340 to 1620 above sea level

• Annual rainfall: 730 to 1280mm

• The municipality is characterized by temperate climate

• Vegetation = Midlands Mist belt grassland

METHODS & MATERIALS

Social sustainability

• 19 villages were surveyed

• Structured questionnaire

• Data analysis• SAS Enterprise Guide 5,1

(2012) using descriptive statistics

• Microsoft Excel 2010 and 2013

Economic sustainability Ecological sustainability

• Ecological sustainability• Soil samples using soil auger (45cm deep)

• Full soil fertility analysis – BEM lab, Somerset west

• Rainfall historical data (weather south Africa)

• Veld condition (Botha, 2015)

• Data analysis = Statistical 12 software• To examine the effects of cropping patterns

and production inputs on soil mineral concentration

• Kruskal–Wallis Test = the significance differences between treatment means

• Fisher LSD = Multiple comparison treatments

• Household income

• Farming expenses & benefits

• Data collection:• Income sources & amounts

• Production inputs types

• Data analysis • SAS Enterprise Guide 5.1 software

• Asset investment = compounded interest (standard bank)

• Amount = P (1+) 2N

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

Lower31%

Primary35%

Secondary29%

Tertiary5%

Academic qualifications

Lower

Primary

Secondary

Tertiary

• Enseleni District KZN = 47% had education (Kunene &

Fossey 2006)

• 36% in Limpopo no formal education (Munyai, 2012)

• Official estimates of SA (2011) indicated that MP, LP & KZN has the highest no. of households with no education

• Age = 57

• Land ownership = communal owned

• Ethnicity = 96% black

• Gender of HHD• 53% males

• 47% females

DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

GENDER AND OWNERSHIP • Livestock was multiple owned

• 71% belonged to the household head

• The study also revealed that there is an association between gender and ownership• (p–value = 0.0052) = H0 was therefore rejected at 5% level

• The relationship between gender and ownership may be linked with religion or culture where sons have higher chance to inherit livestock from their parents than daughters

TYPES OF LIVESTOCK AND THEIR PROPORTIONS

• Cattle (87%), goats (78%) & 60% chickens

• Female animals were the st in all the species types• Cows (54%) and does (43%) of herd

• Median for cows (6,2) and does (5)

• A bull to cow ratio of 1:5,6 was recorded• The bull to cow ratio of the present study is in line with the rest of other literature:

• The bull to cow ratio of the present study is far less than the recommended standard breeding ratio for commercial farmers (1:20) in South Africa (Colvin & Jager, 1989)

IMPORTANCE OF LIVESTOCK

• Similar results were reported by Kunene & Fossey (2006) at Enseleni District KZN

• Musemwa et al. (2010) found that farmers in the Eastern Cape keep livestock income, food, ploughing and wealth status

• Kagira and Kanyari (2010) reported that farmers in Kenya keep livestock for:

• 1st Income

• 2nd Home consumption

• 3rd Cultural purposes i.e. funerals, wedding etc.

MANAGEMENT

• Adult men responsible for buying & selling livestock

• Boys are responsible for feeding

• Breeding natural

• 92% farm extensively

• 85% employ continuous grazing

• 22% practice supplementary feeding = poor BCS

PRODUCTION CONSTRAINS• Stock theft (54%)

• ~ R 600 million is lost from stock theft (Eastern Cape per year)

• ~45 000 cases of stock theft are reported per year

• Lack of affordable feed supplements

• Access to veterinary services

• Fencing materials

• Water

• Predation

• Reject the null hypothesis that smallholder agricultural producers do not have any production constraints

INCOME SOURCES

• Effects of social grants on livestock showed that• P = 0,38: Do no reject H0

• Hence no enough evidence against H0

• Fixed income (pension, wages, grants, home industry and gifts)

• Major livelihood strategy (55,3%)

Bar/Column Plot of Count of yesSpreadsheet64 3v*7c

Count of yes

60%

25% 25% 25%

15%

2% 0%

E p

ensi

on

A cr

ops

B li

vest

ock

D w

ages

/ sal

ary

C h

ome

indu

stry

G o

ther

F sa

les

from

man

ure

source of income

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

PRODUCTION COSTS AND ASSET INVESTMENT

• Livestock• Additional animals (46,3%) & lobola (37,1%)

• Supplementary feed (1,6%)

• Crops • Machinery & equipment (47,3%)

• Modern seeds (21,1%)

• Household expenses• Loan (61,2%)

• Electricity (38,8%)

• Net values• Livestock (-R14 418,6)

• Crops (R310,2)

• Household (R23 694,3)

• Asset investment• Cattle (R78 173.8 ± 12852.1) with large contributions from cows (67%)

• Goats (R18 234.1 ±2535.1); Does (69%)

ANNUAL RAINFALL AT GREY TOWN (UMVOTI MUNICIPALITY)

• No significant change in rainfall

• Rainfall decreases with very small amounts

• A decline of 40mm and increase in day temperature has been reported in MP, NC and LP

• The rainfall of SA is erratic and uneven with high incident of drought

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

f(x) = − 2.34561403508772 x + 795.566666666667R² = 0.00959588735262407

Annual rainfall at Greytown (Umvoti Municipality)

Year

Rai

nfal

l (m

m)

SOIL CONDITION

• 8.3% of respondents indicated a very poor soil

• 34.7% of respondents indicated that the soil is good

• Most of the soil samples were acidic • pH: 4.3 to 7.1 and NB for controlling soil chemistry and biological processes

• Affect the availability of trace minerals

• Vegetation of KZN is sour = acidic soil and is associated with high rainfall (>600 mm) and high altitude (>1 400 m) (Palmer & Ainslie, 2006)

• Nutrient mining was not a problem (farmers were employing some kind of soil fertility management)

• Soil acidity can be addressed through liming

THE IMPACT OF PRODUCTION INPUTS IN

SOIL CARBON

• There was no evidence against the null hypothesis that:

• Carbon (C) %, pH (KCl), stone %, Copper (Cu), Zinc (Zn), Manganese (Mn), Boron (B) and Iron (Fe) have diff. effects on soil C.

• Production inputs had equal effects on the soil minerals

• However, inputs had diff. effects on soil Na.

• The use of manure is encouraged because it does not decrease soil carbon higher than the use of fertilizer

Input type N Mean Std. Dev Std. Error P value F test

Total Carbon% 17 1.602 0.638 0.154 0.46 0.92

Manure 6 1.648 0.6760 0.310    

Combination 5 1.490 0.637 0.285    

Fertilizer 3 1.233 0.264 0.152    

None 3 2.070 0.600 0.346    

Production input1; LS MeansCurrent effect: F(3, 13)=3.7229, p=0.04 Kruskal-Wallis p=0.06

Effective hypothesis decompositionVertical bars denote 0.95 confidence intervals

manure combination fertilizer none

Production input1

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Na

a

ab

bb

Inputs had different effects on Sodium (P<0.05)

EFFECTS OF CROPPING PATTERNS ON SOIL CARBON

Cropping pattern1; LS MeansCurrent effect: F(2, 14)=5.0408, p=0.02 Kruskal-Wallis p=0.03

Effective hypothesis decompositionVertical bars denote 0.95 confidence intervals

Mixed Mono & rotational Mixed & rotational

Cropping pattern1

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

2.2

2.4

2.6

Car

bon

%

a

ab

b

RANGELAND CONDITIONArea Annual grazing capacity (ha/ LSU) Browse capacity (ha/ goat) Rangeland condition (%)

Emahlabathini 5 8 55

Etsheni area 16 4,5 45

Nqoleni 23 3,5 40

Ndimakude 14 4,5 40

Emadekeni 6 4,5 55

Kwasenge 6 4,5 55

Dambe/ Nophethu 12 4,5 40

Dimane/ Emakhabeleni 12 4,5 40

Dakeni 12 4,5 40

Sibuyabe 23 3,5 40

Kranskop 4 0 60

CONCLUSION

• Umvoti smallholder farmers experiences numerous production constraints from educational training to practical farming skills which led to the rejection of the null hypothesis

• Land degradation is caused by other factors other than a decline in rainfall• Domestic animals (overstocking rate)

• Veld fires or fire as a management tool

• Wild animals

• Livestock ownership in rural communities of Umvoti is male dominated (53%) which led to the rejection of H0 at 5% significant

• Farmers need to be assisted in addressing water scarcity, lack of fencing equipment and rangeland degradation

• Women and youth participation to agriculture need to be improved to reduce hunger and unemployment rate

CONCLUSION

• Smallholder livestock farmers in Umvoti employs mixed livelihood strategies to minimise vulnerability against unforeseen natural or human–induced events (H0= rejected)

• Fixed income such as pension, wages and grants were seemingly ranked the most important source of income than income from agricultural practices

• The use of livestock as a form of investment especially cattle, cows accumulates more cash savings because of their high density and price

• Asset investment holds a greater promise of accumulating cash mainly in rural areas where banks are not easily accessible, and helps this households avoid inflation

CONCLUSION

• The use of fertilizer decreases carbon sequestration • -effect on soil health

• Acidification and eutrophication

• Mixed livelihood strategies does improve the sustainability of smallholders by using other income sources to sustain farming

• Production constraints could decrease overall farm performance i.e. theft and deaths represent economic loss

• We also concluded that profit is not sufficient to judge the productivity of smallholders because the purpose of keeping livestock in rural areas is multifunctional in nature

RECOMMENDATIONS

• Coming up with ways to address production constraints, especial theft and access to veterinary services

• Further studies could consider investigating the dynamics of rangeland nutrients availability that are important for livestock performance and the palatability index of the rangeland.

• More research is required on coming up with sustainability assessments that best fit South African conditions

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

• I will like to give thanks to ALL lectures for laying a foundation that enabled me to accumulate knowledge on the subject

• Ms. A. Davids

• Prof. K. Dzama

• Prof. S. Thomas• For their support and availability in critical times of writing up my thesis

• Prof. M. Kidd (Dept of Statistics and Actuarial Sciences University of Stellenbosch• Cobus Botha (Pitermaritzburg: Agricultural scientist in Natural Resource)• Joe Matsapola (Weather South African )