Community-Based Management of Small Ruminants in Benin: Interim Report

1. Community-Based Management of Small Ruminants in Benin: Interim Report September 13, 2005 Hippolyte Dossa, PhD Fellow Georg-August University of Göttingen, Germany

2. Specific Aspects of the Current Study Within the ILRI-BMZ Project Activity 1: Identification of communities, priority indigenous breeds/species Activity 2: Community-based research action leading to the development and establishment of frameworks for community based management Activity 3: Analysis of the economic, market and policy factors Activity 4: Capacity building

3. Overview of the Presentation • General background • Objectives • Study area in Benin • Methodology • Code of conduct • Selection of villages • Identification of the villages • Results of the completed activities • Perspectives

4. Objectives • Characterize the husbandry system • Characterize phenotypes of local breeds • Identify farmers breeding goal and strategies • Develop a framework of participatory community–based management (CBM) breeding programs

5. N S Study Area Dassa (Centre): 7°46’N and 2°10’E 37.4 inhabits/sq km Agriculture, livestock and trade Cotton growing zone Toffo (South): 6°50’N and 2°5’E 122.0 inhabits/sq km Agriculture, livestock, and trade Particularly noted for palm oil and banana production

6. Methodological Approach Situational analysis Stakeholder analysis & household census Accessing relevant data & local knowledge Community dialogue: Problem census & prioritization Participatory action planning Development of Framework for CBM (incl. development of institutions & rules & monitoring plans) Implementation of action plan & rules Participatory monitoring & evaluation of outcomes

7. The “Prior Informed Consent “ Concept is applied • Communities are involved as equal partners • Research objectives are explained transparently and exhaustively ------------------------------------------------------------------- • Results are shared with communities • Concerns expressed by communities with respect to AnGR are considered • Actions and activities that compromise rights of the communities are avoided

8. Selection of Villages • Contact with local administrations • Four villages preselected in each location • Rapid Rural Appraisal (incl. direct observations, focused group discussions) • Four villages (Dassa C1 and C2; Toffo S1 and S2) retained based on following criteria: • Accessibility in all seasons • Pristine (not over researched) • Interest of communities (participation)

9. Identification of Communities:Resource Mapping

10. Identification of the Communities:Wealth Ranking Aims • Understand local criteria of well being • Identify households and informants from different socio-economic groups Method: Individual card sorting exercise done with 3 to 4 key informants • List of all households drawn by local authorities • List cross checked separately by each informant • Local criteria and terms for well being (WB) and number of WB groups defined by each informant • Households ranked by the informant

11. Example of Local Criteria for Well-being: Village C1 • Size of landholdings • Size of plantation of cashew tree • Possession of car and/or motorbike • Type of dwelling • Possession and number of houses in urban area • Number of wives and children • Capacity to send their children to school • Ownership of cattle herd and/or oxen • Possession of mills • Food availability and consumption • Frequency of employment by others in cropping activities

12. Characteristics of the Poorest : Example of the Village C1 • Clay dwelling with thatched roof • Face frequent food shortage • Few children (max. 5) • Children do not reach secondary school • Have no land ownership or land size <1 ha • Frequently employed by other families in cropping activities • Children live in foster homes • Daughters are involved in forced marriage

13. Rich Households keep more Livestock Species than poor Households

14. Regardless of Location and Wealth, Chicken and Goat are the Species kept by the Majority of Households

15. Cattle and Pig are more Kept in the Centre than in the South

16. Goat Types of Benin • There are generally considered to be two types of goats in Benin: the Sahel type and the West African Dwarf type (Meyer, 2002) Distribution of West African Dwarf goat Distribution of Sahel goat

17. Goat Types of Benin (Cont.) • Up to know, no comprehensive morphological studies • Assumption: 47% of all goats in Benin are West African Dwarf (Wilson, 1991) • Hypothesis: There are different ecotypes of West African Dwarf goats in Benin and that they can be characterized through quantitative and qualitative traits

18. Material and Methods • 21 locations • 1268 mature female goats • Body measurements • Qualitative traits: incidence of wattles, ear position, incidence of beard, supernumeray teats • Semi structured questionnaire: local name, parturition histories

19. Spatial Differentiation of Goat Ecotypes by Phenotype Other variables measured: Thorax depth, rump height, body length, heart girth, tail length, neck length, horn length.

20. Up to 6 Types of Goats are Known by Farmers • Main discriminating criteria (perception of farmers) included: - Length of legs - Length of ears - Presence or absence of wattles

21. Local Name of Goat Types in Dassa and Toffo Very short legged type S1 & S2: Gbò Akètè C2: Gbò Gli or Gbò wlèkè wlèkè C1: Erèwo Idégbé Local average legged type S1 & S2: Gbòkoungbo, Gbòassaga C2: Gbò koun or gbagba C1: Erèwo guiga or Erèwo lakoun

22. Local Name of Goat Types in Dassa and Toffo (Cont.) Long legged type from North Benin S1 & S2: not mentioned C1 & C2 : NordGbò or Djabadjaba Long legged type from Sahel S1& S2: Haoussa Gbò, Ayògbò C2: Haoussa Gbò, Fulani Gbò C1: no specific name

23. Local Name of Goat Types in Dassa and Toffo (end) Crossbred long legged type from North Benin with Local average legged type (F1) S1 & S2: not mentioned C1: no specific name C2 : no specific name Goat with wattles S1: not mentioned S2: Gbò akandokò C2: no specific name C1 : Erèwo Oludé

24. Reproductive and Productive Traits are Equally Important for Farmers ª W= Kendall’s Coefficient of Concordance, *** P<0.001

25. Formal Markets do not play any Role in Breed Stock Acquisition

26. Irrespective of the Location, Sale and Ceremonies Purposes are the Main Reasons for Offtakes ª W= Kendall’s Coefficient of Concordance, *** P<0.001

27. Diseases rank high as a Major Constraint ª W= Kendall’s Coefficient of Concordance, *** P<0.001

28. Conclusion • The participatory approach has: • Allowed better understanding of farmers’ perspectives • Fostered active participation of farmers from all socio-economic groups in the ongoing research • Different goat phenotypes have been identified throughout the country • Farmers’ perceptions of constraints, goat types and traits have been identified and are valid for the research locations

29. What‘s Next? 1 Participatory planning • Development of breeding goals • Complete and comprehensive list of breeding goals • Commitment on the goal values and predictors with the farmers • Definition and planning of breeding strategies • Identification potential breeding animals and flocks • Development plans to avoid inbreeding/indiscriminate crossbreeding • Development improvement schemes (testing and selection against breeding goals) • Training of farmers: record keeping, improved management, etc. 2 Implementation of the breeding strategies 3 Participatory monitoring and assessment

30. Thank You For Your Attention

31. General Background • Poor characterisation of breeds: performance data and information on adaptation & disease tolerance scanty • No breeding programme for local breeds • Indiscriminate crossbreeding • Risk status: • local goat = critical • local sheep = unknown (DAGRIS, 2004)

32. Group n Mean SD Median Richest 17 8.6 7.8 7.0 Rich 21 10.8 6.8 10.0 Poor 21 8.2 7.9 6.0 Poorest 16 4.4 1.9 4.0 Total 75 8.2 7.0 6.0 Pr> F value 0.051 The Average Household Flock Size of Goat is Not Affected by Wealth

33. Farmers’ Preference is for the Local Goat with Average Legs Length *The number of types kept by a farmer ranges from 1 to 3 in Dassa while in Toffo all respondents keep only one type.

34. Irrespective of the Village, The Major Disease is The Peste des Petits Ruminants (PPR)