hpg - food and agriculture organization border... · omore, gavin thomson, gabriel turasha, john...

ISBN:

hpgHumanitarian Policy Group

Mobile pastoral systems and international zoosanitary standardsDevising a compatible approach Robert J. Connor

April 2009



REGLAP Rep 1 cover.indd 1 8/4/09 12:05:21 pm

swamugi

REGLAP fcover 1.pdf

i

Contents

Preface iii

Acronyms v

Executive summary vii

1. Introduction

2. Features of production systems in the region 22.1 Rangeland as a resource 22.2 The importance of mobility 32.3 Reduced mobility and its consequences for pastoralism 32.4 Pastoralism and national economies 52.5 The increasing demand for livestock products 52.6 Boosting production 5

3. Livestock marketing from the region 6

4. Livestock policies within the region 9

5. Commodity based trade as an approach to promote livestock exports 11

6. Examples of successes in the region 14

7. Alternative policy options 16

8. Conclusions and next steps 17

References 18

REGLAP report 1 crc 8/4/09 3:10 pm Page i

swamugi

REGLAP report 1 crc.pdf

Humanitarian Policy GroupOverseas Development Institute111 Westminster Bridge RoadLondonSE1 7JDUnited Kingdom

Tel: +44(0) 20 7922 0300Fax: +44(0) 20 7922 0399Website: www.odi.org.uk/hpgEmail: [email protected]

About the author

Robert J. Connor is Managing Director of Anseris Limited and prepared this paper for VSF-Belgium.

Acknowledgements

The author is grateful to the many people who assisted the preparation of this paper. In particular, he wishes to thank Amos Omore, Gavin Thomson, Gabriel Turasha, John Morton, Karl Rich, Rob Allport and Tim Leyland, who generously shared information. He is indebted to numerous colleagues and farmers who, over many years, have enriched his understanding of livestock production in Africa. Special thanks are due to Kate Longley, Rob Allport, Sorcha O’Callaghan and Julie Flint, who provided valuable editorial guidance, and to Sylvia Wamugi for keeping him informed of the discussions on and content of the other papers in this series.

This report was commissioned by Oxfam GB as part of an ECHO-funded project entitled ‘Reducing the vulnerability of pastoral communities through policy and practice change in the Horn and East Africa’. The project is also known as REGLAP (the Regional Livelihoods Advocacy Project). The project was coordinated by Save the Children (UK). Other consortium members include CARE, Cordaid, VSF-B, the Overseas Development Institute, Reconcile and Cemiride. The views and opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily state or reflect those of the REGLAP consortium members.


swamugi

REGLAP fcover 1.pdf

iii

Mobile pastoral systemsHPG COMMISSIONED REPORT

This publication forms one of a series of six reports preparedunder the ECHO-funded project on ‘Reducing the vulnerabilityof pastoral communities through policy and practice change inthe Horn and East Africa’. The aim of the project is to raiseawareness among planners and policymakers about the fullpotential of pastoral systems to make a significantcontribution to the economies of the region. Each of the sixreports presents evidence-based research findings toovercome misconceptions and misunderstandings regardingparticular aspects of pastoral livelihoods, and highlightsappropriate policy recommendations that favour pastoralistsystems. The reports present evidence to help inform thinkingin order that policymakers can keep abreast of newopportunities and threats in the rangelands.

Understanding pastoralism and its future is the subject offierce debate. The term ‘pastoralism’ is used to describesocieties that derive some, but not necessarily the majority, oftheir food and income from livestock. For many decades,governments regarded pastoralism as ‘backward’,economically inefficient and environmentally destructive,leading to policies that have served to marginalise andundermine pastoralist systems. More recently, pastoralismhas come to be regarded by many as a viable andeconomically effective livestock production system, but thepolicies needed to reverse its historical marginalisation andaddress the chronic levels of poverty and vulnerability facedby many pastoralist communities have yet to be put in place.

We define pastoralists both in the economic sense (i.e. thosewho earn part of their living from livestock and livestockproducts) and also in the cultural sense, in which livestock donot form the main source of income, yet people remainculturally connected to a pastoralist lifestyle in which thesignificance of livestock is more cultural than economic. Basedon the evidence presented in these reports, we believe thatherding livestock over rangelands will remain part of a vitaland dynamic production system for many – but not all – wholive in the arid and semi-arid lands of the Horn and East Africa.Appropriate policies are required that support both theeconomic potential of pastoralism and pastoralist lifestylesthat depend on alternative livelihoods. As such, the seriesaims to help create a vision for development in the arid andsemi-arid lands (ASALs).

Mobile pastoralism constitutes a rational use of drylandenvironments, but this livelihood is undermined by lack ofaccess to basic services, inappropriate policies on land use,repeated humanitarian responses to emergencies (responsesthat fail to address root causes and structural issues),population growth and decades of economic and social

marginalisation. In order to realise the economic potential ofpastoralism and achieve projected growth in livestock sectors,governments will have to invest in pastoral production systems.An initial and vital step in this process will be adapting livestockand disease control policies to enable international trade frommobile pastoral systems. More specifically, the paper oncommodity-based trade proposes two options: 1) alignment ofdisease control policies with the standards of livestock marketswithin the region (which are more realistic and easier to attainthan the international standards set by the world animal healthorganisation); or 2) a certified compartmentalised productionsystem through which animals can be traced to their source, astrict animal health regime (which could be implemented bysupervised community animal health workers) in whichtreatments are recorded, and the slaughtering of animals (andremoval of all bones and lymphatic tissue) in abattoirs whichcomply with international standards, thus allowing for theexport of meat from animals produced in pastoral systemsanywhere in the world.

For those pastoralists still practicing their traditional way of life,as well as those who have lost their livestock and abandoned thetraditional pastoralist way of life, various forms of socialprotection will be essential. Many of these so-called ‘destitute’pastoralists have moved to urban settlements in search ofalternative livelihoods. Social protection can contribute towardseconomic growth involving ‘alternative’ livelihoods, but it isimportant that governments in East Africa should implementboth unconditional safety net programmes (i.e. that do notrequire productivity in exchange for resources) in pastoral areas,as well as providing basic social services and infrastructure.

Whilst social protection, service provision and support foralternative livelihoods can enhance the resilience of householdsand communities to the effects of recurrent disasters such asdrought, livestock disease and conflict, there is also the need toaddress the underlying causes of vulnerability to these shocks.Current emergency responses are designed primarily to savelives and often have the perverse effect of encouraging people toremain in places that cannot sustain them; decades of almostcontinuous food aid, water trucking and other last-resortemergency inputs have led to the mushrooming of settlements,associated degradation of the local environment and decreasedaccess to dry season pastures. More effective emergencyresponses require the ability to respond much earlier in thedisaster cycle through contingency plans and funds thateffectively protect different livelihood strategies beforehousehold assets become depleted. These issues are addressedin the paper on preparedness planning, which highlights theneed for a detailed understanding of livelihoods as part ofexisting early warning systems.

Preface

REGLAP report 1 crc 8/4/09 3:10 pm Page iii

swamugi


iv

HPG Commissioned Report HPG COMMISSIONED REPORT

The need for effective disaster risk management is paramountand reflected in the Regional Drought Decision (RDD)implemented by ECHO. The implementation of the action isheralding a new era of donor policy and partner practice. Thisinitiative is helping to release funds and enabling NGOpresence to be sustained when there is a need to rapidlytransfer resources within existing projects in a more timelyway as emergency threatens. We are already seeing somecases where new action has helped prevent predicted crisesfrom emerging. The gradual shift in donor policy and practicecontributes to a growing Community of Practice (CoP) thatwants to see a greater incorporation of preparedness,recovery and development planning in any emergencyresponse and vice-versa. This momentum must now bemaintained as a vital part of humanitarian action and riskreduction if exit strategies are ever to become a reality.

Responding to climate change will also require a long-termapproach to provide the investments necessary for appropriateand sustainable development, allowing pastoralists either toadapt to their changing environment, or to transition out ofpastoralism into alternative livelihoods. The paper on climatechange argues that this must be effected through a rights-based approach, to increase the integration of pastoralists intopolitical, social and economic systems at national and regionallevels, thus addressing the fundamental problems ofmarginalisation and weak governance that lie at the root of thechronic poverty and vulnerability of pastoral areas. Where

pastoral communities are currently associated with degradingrangelands, climate change should result in these communitiesbeing seen as custodians of these environments as policyadapts and politicians recognise the huge contribution thesemobile systems can make economically, socially and, especially,environmentally.

The overall message that emerges from this publication seriesis that pastoralists must be supported not only to maintain theextraordinary resilience inherent in their traditional way of life,but also to adapt and – for some – to create viable alternativelivelihoods in and beyond the ASALs. Concerns overpopulation growth, climate change, conflict and decliningproductivity of the natural resource base present very realchallenges for pastoralists in the Horn of Africa. Withoutsignificant support, levels of poverty, vulnerability anddestitution will rise due to the effects of marginalisation,recurrent drought and floods, conflict and livestock epidemics.Market development can help to realise the economicpotential of livestock and livestock products, such that mobilepastoral systems of production and management remain aviable option for some pastoralists. For others, support isneeded to allow for the adoption of alternative and diversifiedlivelihood options. The evidence presented by the currentseries encompasses broad views that relate to the futureviability of pastoralism, providing guidance in identifyingappropriate practical and policy interventions in the arid andsemi-arid lands of the Horn of Africa.

REGLAP report 1 crc 8/4/09 3:10 pm Page iv

swamugi


v


Acronyms

AU African Union

AU-IBAR AU Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources

BSE Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy

CAHW Community-based Animal Health Worker

CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme

CBO community-based organisation

Codex Codex Alimentarius

EAC East African Community

EC European Commission

ESALIA Eastern and Southern Africa Leather Industry Association

EU European Union

FAFS Framework for African Food Security

FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation

FMD Foot and Mouth Disease

GLCRSP Global Livestock Collaborative Research Support Program

HACCP Hazard Analysis & Critical Control Point

IGAD Intergovernmental Authority on Development

IGAD LPI IGAD Livestock Policy Initiative

ILRI International Livestock Research Institute

IPPC International Plant Protection Convention

KMC Kenya Meat Commission

LINKS Livestock Information Network and Knowledge System

LPI Livestock Policy Initiative

MAAIF Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industries and Fisheries (Uganda)

NEPAD New Partnership for Africa’s Development

NGO non-governmental organisation

OCHA UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

OIE World Organisation for Animal Health

PPLPI Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative

RVF Rift Valley Fever

SADC Southern African Development Community

SMS short message service

SOLICEP Somali Livestock Certification Project

SPS Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures

TADs Transboundary animal diseases

TBT Technical Barriers to Trade

REGLAP report 1 crc 8/4/09 3:10 pm Page v

swamugi

Page by Page Comparison

swamugi


vi


UN United Nations

UK United Kingdom

USAID US Agency for International Development

WISP World Initiative for Sustainable Pastoralism

WHO World Health Organisation

WTO World Trade Organisation

REGLAP report 1 crc 8/4/09 3:10 pm Page vi

swamugi


swamugi


vii


The Greater Horn of Africa is home to the world’s largestconcentration of traditional pastoralists. These pastoralistsutilise the vast, dry rangelands, where extensive grazing oflivestock provides the only viable means of agriculturalproduction. Their livelihoods are threatened by the region’srapidly growing human population, diminishing resources andincreasing environmental degradation. The future andsustainability of traditional pastoralism is also jeopardised bylong-standing marginalisation and unsupportive policiesamong most countries of the region.

In pursuit of their livelihoods, pastoralists move their livestockover wide areas of the dry and semi-arid lands, but with anincreasing trend towards agro-pastoralism as they adapt tomore sedentary lifestyles. The reduction in mobility leads toovergrazing, a trend that is exacerbated by policies thatencourage settlement; the provision of static schools andclinics; lack of secure land tenure; adaptation to agro-pastoralpractices; and the disruption of traditional migratory routes.

Throughout the region there is a concurrent increasingdemand for livestock products from the growing population.While the region is almost self-sufficient in meat, it importslarge quantities of dairy products and, with the notableexceptions of Sudan and Somalia; export earnings fromlivestock commodities are low. Reliable statistics for thesector are not readily available, which hampers planning.

This paper considers the scope for increased livestockproduction to enhance the sustainability of mobile pastoralsystems from the perspective of compliance with the zoosanitarystandards that apply to international trade.

The need to boost livestock production has been widelyrecognised: the ports of Djibouti and Berbera have new facilitiesto support the lucrative export trade from the region to theArabian Peninsula, but recurrent outbreaks of transboundarydiseases such as Rift Valley Fever (RVF) lead to import bans thathalt trade and have a devastating impact on the region’seconomy. The region’s livestock producers have to comply withzoosanitary standards to gain access to international markets,but the mobility of pastoralists – which is vital for their survival –impedes animal disease surveillance and traceability.

The productivity of pastoral systems is severely constrainedby the lack of infrastructure and communications; poorlyorganised markets; lack of access to credit; inaccessibleservices; and the widespread avoidance of official marketingchannels. The production of hides and skins in the regiongenerates large foreign exchange earnings, but there isgenerally little value addition from processing. Eritrea is a

notable exception since it bans the export of unprocessedhides, thereby creating opportunities for local employment.The region has huge potential for the production of camelmilk, but access to local and regional markets is very limited.Compliance with international sanitary standards represents asecond tier of constraints to the sector’s growth.

Livestock policies are generally unsupportive of pastoralists,who are often marginalised from mainstream socio-economicdevelopment and stigmatised as being resistant to‘modernisation’. There are encouraging initiatives in theregion to deliver improved services to livestock throughcommunity-based animal health workers, whose mobility canensure support for mobile pastoralists through the provisionof disease surveillance and control. However, across theregion as a whole private veterinary services that complementstate veterinary services have not developed sufficiently toprovide adequate clinical services or disease surveillance.

To prevent the spread of animal diseases through internationaltrade, the importation of live animals and livestock productsfrom countries where there have been outbreaks oftransboundary animal diseases is restricted.1 There continues tobe a focus on the establishment of disease-free zones, inspiredby examples like those in southern Africa. However, whether thisapproach will achieve compliance with international zoosanitarystandards is highly questionable. Political and economicpressures in southern African countries are forcing a review ofthis strategy, and the concept of a commodity-based approach totrade in livestock products has been proposed. The argumentrests on the fact that different products (or commodities) presentdifferent risks for the transmission of pathogens affectinganimals and humans (Thomson, Tambi, Hargreaves, Leyland,Catley, van’t Klooster & Penrith, 2004). The approach advocatedby these authors is risk-based: it requires the adoption ofappropriate strategies to mitigate the identified risks. Theconcept has gained ground in recent years: its suitability andpotential has been recognised in the Framework for African FoodSecurity of the African Union’s Comprehensive Africa AgricultureDevelopment Programme, and the World Organisation forAnimal Health (OIE) has indicated its agreement on the need tosupport commodity-based trade, with the proviso that thisshould be done in accordance with scientific principles and incompliance with international requirements, including thequality and sustainability of veterinary services.

Food safety standards are applied in the context of biosecurityand the control of animal diseases. Donaldson, Thomson and

Executive summary

1 Transboundary animal diseases (TADs) are highly contagious and canspread very rapidly across national borders; they cause high morbidity andmortality in susceptible animals and produce serious economic losses.

REGLAP report 1 crc 8/4/09 3:10 pm Page vii

swamugi


swamugi


viii


Leyland (in press) have proposed a commodity-basedapproach to trade in de-boned beef, from which lymph nodesand BSE-risk material have been removed. They argue thatthis product can be safely traded internationally, irrespectiveof the transboundary animal disease status of the place oforigin, since risks have been appropriately mitigated. Theseauthors also argue that further correct processing of such beefwould provide additional safety in terms of animal diseasesand human food safety. Although the OIE has accepted therationale of this commodity-based approach and hasundertaken to promote opportunities to develop newstandards for risk reduction to trade in livestock commodities(OIE/AU-IBAR, 2004), such standards are not yet in place.

Local value addition is an important consideration in thecommodity-based approach to trade in livestock commoditiesbecause, as with all products, the engagement of local labourin processing and packing, transportation and handling andother activities, such as marketing, can add value and increasecompetitiveness. Strategic interventions are necessary toenhance production from the region’s pastoral systems,improve access to regional and international markets in theMiddle East and further afield, and provide evidence of thebenefits of the commodity-based approach to trade inlivestock products. There are several initiatives in the region todevelop commodity-based trade in meat products: chilled, de-boned beef has been exported from Ethiopia and Somalia tothe Gulf States, and new markets are being explored by

traders elsewhere in the region. However, marketing remainsa neglected area.

For pastoralists to benefit from access to more lucrativemarkets, a series of coherent, supportive policies have to bedeveloped and implemented. Prejudicial views of pastoralismhave to be replaced by a constructive perspective thatgenuinely values the unique and important contribution thatpastoralist communities can make in safeguarding theenvironment, meeting growing local, national and regionaldemands for products of animal origin and supplying high-value, range-reared animals to value chains that could accesslucrative international markets. The challenge is to devisecompatible approaches for pastoralists in the Greater Horn ofAfrica to enable them to benefit from the new opportunitiesoffered by livestock commodity-based trade.

Present uncertainties, linked to a lack of clear policy andassociated market access constraints and seasonalfluctuations, represent unacceptable risk to livestock owners.They deter the adoption of improved practice (i.e. investment inproduction, timely sales and off-take and other vital drought-coping strategies). Clarity would have the effect of stabilising akey sector of the market through increased consistency andstability of the demand. Added value can also be expected fromprocessing and linked activities that will provide alternativeincome and employment opportunities for those adoptingalternative livelihoods, as well as stimulating the economy.

REGLAP report 1 crc 8/4/09 3:10 pm Page viii

swamugi


swamugi


1


Pastoral communities live in ecologically fragile areasvulnerable to drought and other hazards, often leading tohunger and poverty. Their resilience, tenacity and ability toutilise scarce resources are however vital strengths. Today,pastoralism in the Greater Horn of Africa2 faces two majorthreats. First, the region’s rapidly growing human populationplaces increasing demands on the natural resource base and is,simultaneously, spreading into and displacing pastoralists fromtheir traditional lands. (For more on this, see the accompanyingreport ‘Demographic trends, settlement patterns, and serviceprovision in pastoralism: transformation and opportunity’.)Second, diminishing resources and increasing environmentaldegradation are jeopardising the future and sustainability oftraditional pastoralism. Even though views have started to shifttowards greater recognition of pastoralism as a viable andeconomically productive system, policies continue tomarginalise and undermine pastoral systems.

The need for an urgent review of policies is self-evident. (Formore on this, see the accompanying report ‘Pastoralism, policiesand practice in the Horn and East Africa: a review of currenttrends’.) Pastoral systems have huge potential to contribute tonational and regional socio-economic development, meet thegrowing population’s increasing demands for livestock productsand reduce poverty. Realising this potential is dependent on theenhancement of production and trade in livestock commoditieswithin the region and internationally. This requires compliancewith international standards. As a prerequisite, policies areneeded that promote inclusion, reduce pastoralists’ vulnerabilityand address the chronic levels of poverty experienced by manypastoralist communities. (For more on this, see theaccompanying report ‘Getting it right: understanding livelihoodsto reduce the vulnerability of pastoral communities’.)

Additionally, pastoralism offers a way to address the pressingneed to halt – and even reverse – environmental degradation.The crucial role of pastoralists as custodians of arid environ-ments is widely recognized, and there is mounting concern that‘their stewardship is undermined by inappropriate policies andstrong competition over their natural resources’ (WISP, 2008). Inthese fragile areas, human activity and climate change con-tribute to desertification and land degradation, which preventsustainable development. Desertification has its greatest impactin Africa, where two-thirds of the continent is desert or drylands(United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, 2008).However, these degraded lands have the potential to reduceglobal warming, desertification and biodiversity loss bycapturing excess carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmospherethrough the natural biological process of photosynthesis (Lovell,

2008). The herding-style management of livestock, which allowsenough time for grassland to recover and regenerate, has apositive impact on rangeland, and this practice characterisestraditional mobile pastoral systems. However, even thoughpastoralism is the most common and adapted livelihood strategyin these areas it is under threat (Gerecke, 2006).

The ‘mobile pastoral systems’ that are the focus of this paper arecharacterised in economic terms by the contribution that live-stock and livestock-related activities make to household in-comes, and in socio-cultural terms by the connection that peoplehave to a pastoralist lifestyle, even though livestock might notprovide their main source of income. This latter group comprises‘adaptive’ or ‘dynamic’ pastoralists and includes those who haveadopted alternative livelihood strategies, sometimes as a resultof losing their livestock, often because of severe drought.

To achieve the projected growth of the livestock sectorsneeded to feed the growing populations in the region,governments need to invest significantly in pastoralproduction systems. The adaptation of existing livestock anddisease control policies to facilitate international trade frommobile pastoral systems represents an essential first step inthis process. This paper considers the scope for increasedlivestock production to enhance the sustainability of mobilepastoral systems from the perspective of compliance with thezoosanitary standards that apply to international trade.

Countries in the Greater Horn of Africa have a long tradition ofpastoralism, and livestock plays a central role in the region’slocal and national economies. The region’s low annual rainfallis also erratic, meaning that pastoralists depend on being ableto move freely with their livestock over wide areas to useresources when and where they become available (Davies,2008). This mobility is characteristic of pastoral productionsystems, and in the driest areas pastoralists are highly mobile.Pastoralists trade in livestock and livestock products and usethe income to buy cereals and goods. The traditional marketsfor livestock commodities that originate from pastoralsystems in the Greater Horn of Africa include the countries ofthe Arabian Peninsula and the Gulf.

The increasing global demand for livestock products,particularly in developing countries, has led to increasedproduction of foods of animal origin on a scale that has beensaid to constitute a ‘livestock revolution’ (Delgado, Rosegrant,Steinfeld, Ehui & Courbois, 1999). Although much of thegrowth in production has been achieved with poultry andswine (monogastric livestock) that require grain-based feed,this ‘revolution’ has also created opportunities for producersin developing countries, where ruminants mainly utilisenatural grasses (Delgado et al., 1999), as happens in the

1 Introduction

2 For the purpose of this paper, the Greater Horn of Africa is a term used toinclude Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania andUganda.

REGLAP report 1 crc 8/4/09 3:10 pm Page 1

swamugi


swamugi


2


Reliable data on the region’s pastoralist systems are notreadily available and there are discrepancies among data from different sources. Nevertheless, available dataconfirm the overriding importance of livestock as a resourcein the region, and the indispensible nature of pastoralism as a means to manage this resource. Although the picture is necessarily incomplete, the clear patterns that emerge

from a consideration of the sector should inform policydecisions.

2.1 Rangeland as a resource

The countries considered in this paper – Djibouti, Eritrea,Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda –

drylands of the Greater Horn of Africa, where livestock arecentral to the livelihoods of millions of people.

The following section of this paper outlines features of thepastoral production system. Section 3 examines existingpolicies and highlights specific aspects that require change. Thestatus of livestock marketing in the region is examined briefly in

Section 4, and an approach to promote livestock exports fromand within the region is discussed in Section 5. Section 6reviews examples of successful approaches to improve trade inlivestock commodities. The concluding section of the paperhighlights the opportunities that commodity-based tradepresents to increase the production of livestock commoditiesand improve access to important markets.

The Greater Horn of Africa (comprising the seven IGAD states – Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudanand Uganda – and Tanzania]

1 Karamojong cluster

2 Boran cluster

3 Somali cluster

4 Maasai cluster

Source: International Committee of

the Red Cross (2005).

3

2

4

1

Ethiopia

Djibouti

EritreaSudan

Tanzania

Somalia

UgandaKenya

Chad

2 Features of production systems in the region


swamugi


swamugi


3


collectively comprise the Greater Horn of Africa, with a totalpopulation of some 60 million people (see Table 1, p. 4). Theregion reputedly has the largest concentration of traditionalstockbreeders in the world, estimated by FAO (2000a) at 15–20million people, and by Davies (2008) at about 29m. Drylandscover 70% of the region (Kirkbride & Grahn, 2008), and lieoutside the major water basins where people are mainlydependent on rain for their survival. Mean annual rainfall is low,and although the region experiences two rainy seasons, rainfallis highly erratic and there are recurrent droughts. Under theseconditions, extensive grazing of livestock provides the onlymeans of agricultural production (Scoones, 1994).

Traditionally, the inhabitants of these lands have led a mobileexistence so that their livestock can utilise the new growth thatfollows periods of rain; they move their animals to other areasbefore the vegetation is excessively grazed and browsed, allow-ing it to regenerate. In the dry season, herders have traditionallymoved their animals to dry-season grazing reserves, which arenot grazed during periods of rainfall. Although parts of thedrylands have considerable potential for mineral exploitation,pastoralism and agro-pastoralism provide the livelihoods ofmillions of people. This way of life is under threat as pastoralistsare increasingly marginalised (Kirkbride & Grahn, 2008), eventhough livestock production is central to the economies of everycountry in the region.

2.2 The importance of mobility

The mobile pastoral lifestyle was historically well-established ineastern Africa; Somali herders, for example, moved their animalsthrough the adjoining arid and semi-arid lands of Ethiopia,Somalia, Djibouti and Kenya. The Maasai moved with theirlivestock through rangeland that straddles the borders of Kenyaand Tanzania, and Borani herders moved across the borderbetween Ethiopia and Kenya. With the establishment of modernnation states, pastoralists now cross international boundaries inpursuit of their livelihoods, and cross-border conflicts betweenpastoralist groups are common along these borders3 (Office ofthe President, GOK, 2006). For example, in north-east Ugandachronic conflict and cattle-rustling undermine the pastoralexistence (Turner, 2005; Bevan, 2008). The solution to theseconflicts requires international cooperation, which is an impor-tant part of the mandate of the Inter-Governmental Authority onDevelopment (IGAD). The situation in Somalia is complicated bythe prolonged lack of a central government, which for more than16 years has left millions of people chronically vulnerable tomalnutrition, poverty, disease and violence. The population isdependent on livestock and humanitarian aid for survival: thelivestock sector accounts for at least 40% of gross domesticproduct (GDP), and mobile pastoral systems provide the mainsource of Somali livelihoods (FAO, 2004).

The camel epitomises adaptation to dry conditions: it enablespastoralists to survive in otherwise uninhabitable parts of theregion, and is the most highly valued of all livestock. Somaliais renowned for its large camel population, which is believedto account for more than half the camel milk production in theworld (more than 435,000 metric tons per year (FAO, 2006)).

2.3 Reduced mobility and its consequences for

pastoralism

Livestock production in Uganda is mainly undertaken by small-holders and pastoralists, who together own 90% of cattle andmost other livestock (Turner, 2005). Uganda’s notional ‘cattlecorridor’ extends diagonally from the north-east to the south-west of the country. In the drier north-eastern districts, theKaramajong move extensively with their herds in search of waterand pasture, but in south-western Uganda, the Bahima people,who used to be mobile pastoralists, have mostly settled andtaken up mixed farming (Wurzinger, Ndumu, Okeyo & Sölkner,2008). Similarly, in Eritrea pastoralists are no longer highly mo-bile: most have become semi-sedentary, but still move throughthe lowland and coastal zones between wet-season grazinglands and dry-season grazing reserves (Dinucci & Fre, 2003).

In many parts of the region, the growing human populationhas spread from arable areas into former dry-season grazingreserves and people have started to cultivate the land, takingaway a strategically important resource from the pastoralists.In parts of Ethiopia, the pastoral production system is underenormous threat: pastoralists are becoming more sedentaryand arid and semi-arid rangelands that provide the resourcebasis for pastoral production system are becoming degradeddue to the reduction in mobility, leading to overgrazedrangeland (Kassahun, Snyman & Smit, 2008).

A similar trend is evident in Sudan, where between a third anda half of all households are reliant upon livestock for theirlivelihood (Fahey, 2007). Traditionally, livestock are movedseasonally along established stock routes that traverse largeparts the country (UNEP, 2007)4. More recently, in the face ofpolicies that have favoured crop production and as a result ofconflict in many parts of the country, pastoralists have beenmarginalised and displaced from their traditional grazinglands. Farming is expected to expand if Southern Sudan doesnot return to war, subjecting pastoralists to new competitionfor grazing land and water (World Bank, 2006).

The constraint on utilisation of rangeland in Tanzania is different.Although about 43% of the national cattle herd is managed inpastoral systems in the semi-arid and sub-humid rangelandsthat comprise nearly 30% of the country’s grazing area(Department of Pastoral Systems Development, 2008), tsetse flyinfestation – estimated to affect 40% of the country – limitsmobility and restricts the use of otherwise suitable grazing.

3 Some examples include: mutual armed raids between the Karimojong groupsin Uganda with the Kenyan Pokot and Turkana, the Dassanech and Nyangotomof South Omo in Ethiopia with the Turkana of Kenya; as well as violent crossborder conflicts between the Toposa (Sudan) and Turkana (Kenya); and theMurule in Mandera (Kenya) an the Marehan in Gedo (Somalia)

4 http://postconflict.unep.ch/sudanreport/sudan_website/index_maps.php?docid=662#anc662


swamugi


swamugi


4


Tab

le 2

: L

ive

sto

ck p

op

ula

tio

ns

(2

00

6)

Sp

eci

es

Dji

bo

uti

Eri

tre

aE

thio

pia

Ke

ny

aS

om

ali

aS

ud

an

Tan

zan

iaU

ga

nd

aTo

tals

Tota

l LU

Ca

me

l69

,000

75, 0

002,

358,

000

1,05

7,90

07,

000,

000

3,70

0,00

00

014

,259

,900

15,6

85,8

90

Ca

ttle

297,

000

1,95

0,00

035

,480

,000

12,4

30,3

005,

350

,000

39,3

00,0

0017

,700

,000

6,97

3,10

011

9,48

0,40

059

,740

,200

Go

ats

512,

000

1,70

0,00

018

,559

,730

10,1

29,4

0012

,700

,000

42,0

00,0

0012

,550

,000

8,03

4,00

010

6,18

5,13

010

,618

,513

Sh

ee

p46

6,00

02,

100,

000

23,6

33,0

109,

298,

500

13,1

00,0

0048

,500

,000

3,50

0,00

01,

648,

000

102,

245,

510

10,2

24,5

51

96,2

69,1

54

LU =

Liv

esto

ck U

nits

[con

vers

ion

fact

ors:

cat

tle

(0.5

), c

amel

s (1

.1),

she

ep &

goa

ts (

0.10

)So

urce

: FAO

STAT

(200

8).

Ava

ilabl

e at

: htt

p://

ww

w.fa

osta

t.fa

o.or

g/si

te/5

73/d

eskt

opde

faul

t.as

px?P

ageI

D=

573#

anco

r

Co

un

try

Tota

l a

rea

(km

2)

Tota

l

cou

ntr

y

po

pu

lati

on

‘00

0

Tota

l

po

pu

lati

on

in d

ryla

nd

‘00

0

% o

f to

tal

po

pu

lati

on

in d

ryla

nd

s

% o

f to

tal

po

pu

lati

on

un

de

r ri

sk o

f

de

sert

i-

fica

tio

n

Dji

bo

uti

22,0

0041

719

0na

0na

0na

585

00

0

Eri

tre

a12

2,00

064

416

139

182,

843

615

503,

084

2,98

797

122

Eth

iop

ia1,

133,

000

1,11

210

1,67

28

4,86

929

9,73

839

57,7

1916

,279

2829

Ke

ny

a59

1,00

023

64

320

31,

729

105,

109

5126

,459

7,15

827

27

So

ma

lia

642,

000

6,65

516

1,85

515

1,11

012

6822

9,82

23,

033

3196

Su

da

n2,

498,

000

3,87

24

4,59

318

8,85

122

5,69

312

26,1

4819

,137

7386

Tan

zan

ia94

0,00

00

na0

na1,

211

869,

346

2429

,172

10,5

5736

36

Ug

an

da

242,

000

0na

0na

0na

28

19,0

802

00

Tota

ls6,

190,

000

9,06

48,

579

20,6

1329

,961

172,

069

59,1

5334

Sour

ce: T

ERRA

STAT

Dat

abas

e, F

AO A

GLL

(200

3).

Avai

labl

e at

: htt

p://

ww

w.fa

o.or

g/ag

/agl

/agl

l/te

rras

tat/

#ter

rast

atdb

.

Tab

le 1

: P

op

ula

tio

n d

istr

ibu

tio

n i

n d

es

ert

s a

nd

dry

lan

d a

rea

s o

f th

e G

rea

ter

Ho

rn o

f A

fric

a

De

sert

Dry

lan

ds

Hyp

erar

idAr

idSe

mi-a

ridD

ry s

ub-h

umid

Po

pu

lati

on

‘00

0

Po

pu

lati

on

de

nsi

ty

Po

pu

lati

on

‘00

0

Po

pu

lati

on

de

nsi

ty

Po

pu

lati

on

‘00

0

Po

pu

lati

on

de

nsi

ty

Po

pu

lati

on

‘00

0

Po

pu

lati

on

de

nsi

ty


swamugi


swamugi


5


Consequently, although the country has large populations ofcattle and small ruminants (Table 2), earnings from livestock arerelatively low and rangeland degradation is a growing problem.

2.4 Pastoralism and national economies

Pastoral production systems vary within the region but are allof major economic importance. Kenya exemplifies the import-ance to the national economy of the drylands and theirassociated livestock. Some 70% of the country’s livestockpopulation is kept in arid or semi-arid areas, which compriseabout 80% of Kenya’s land area (Government of Kenya, 2004).Pastoralism directly employs and provides livelihoods to overthree million Kenyans and over 90% of wild game is found inthese areas. The combination of wildlife and pastoralism hasbecome a major tourist attraction, and even a few years agowas earning Kenya in excess of KShs 50 billion (equivalent toapproximately $625m annually (Government of Kenya, 2004)).

In marked contrast to other countries of the region, about 85%of Djibouti’s population of 700,000 are urban dwellers, partlybecause prolonged drought has driven them from the land(USAID, 2008). Livestock nevertheless continues to provide themain means of livelihood for 90% of Djibouti’s rural populationand for 33% to 50% of the entire population (IGAD LPI, 2007).

In Southern Sudan, significant numbers of agro-pastoralistsmanage their herds close to large urban centres, for exampleJuba, where markets for milk and other dairy products aredeveloping rapidly. The situation in Somalia is unique. About70% of the population is rural; more than half are pastoralistsand agro-pastoralists. Livestock products provide about 55%of their calorie intake (FAO, 2004).

2.5 The increasing demand for livestock products

The demand for animal products throughout Africa is increasingas a result of population growth and rising incomes. For thesereasons, it is projected that annual meat demand per capita inAfrica will double to 22kg/person by 2050 (Rosegrant &Thornton, 2008). At present, the region satisfies most of itsdemand for meat, but governments face the enormouschallenge of promoting increased production to match risingdemands (see Table 3, p. 6).

The demand for milk and dairy products in Africa is alsogrowing. Between 1990 and 2004, on average, the demand forthese products grew at 4% per year, but production onlyincreased by 3.1% (Ndambi, Hemme & Latacz-Lohmann, 2007).The increased demand arose mainly from population growth(2.8% per annum) and increased consumption of milk perperson (0.8% per annum). Figures from the region amplyillustrate this trend: Djibouti imports more than 80% of its milkrequirements, Eritrea 13.6%, Sudan about 2.5% and Kenya lessthan 1% (Table 3). There is a widening gap between productionand consumption, even though countries have relatively large

livestock populations. This situation creates opportunities forlivestock-keepers and pastoralists in particular, but posesserious challenges for policy-makers. Pastoral systems couldhelp to close this increasing gap. In these systems, milk ismainly consumed in the producers’ households; surplus milk isshared with neighbours or exchanged in barter, and is onlyoccasionally sold further afield.

2.6 Boosting production

The revival of the Kenya Meat Commission in 2006 wasexpected to boost the marketing of pastoralists’ livestock: itsfacilities have the capacity to process 1,000 livestock per day(The Standard, 5 May 2006), and it has partnered in a loanscheme for banks to encourage pastoralists to view theparastatal as a guaranteed outlet for their livestock (FarmAfrica5, 2008). Increased off-take would create opportunitiesfor increased earnings, poverty reduction and increasedexport income from livestock commodities, which are alreadyof great economic importance to the region.

Export earnings from livestock commodities contribute mostsubstantially to the national economy of Sudan (Table 4, p. 5).For Somalia, these exports reportedly accounted for 80% of allexports in normal years – millions of head of livestock wereexported – but this trade has been periodically interrupted bybans imposed by importing countries mainly because oflivestock disease. Sudan, which is reputed to have one of thehighest ratios of cattle to people in Africa (World Bank, 2006),also exports live animals, meat and leather to countries in theMiddle East, but outbreaks of Rift Valley fever severely curtailedtrade in 2000 and 2007. Umar and Baulch (2007) reported that,officially, only 41,565 animals were exported from Ethiopia in2003–2004; they estimate that, for 2005, at least 140,000animals were exported from two markets alone. Nevertheless,income levels are low and profit margins are small for most ofthe many thousands of individual traders and middlemen.

The regional infrastructure to support the export of livestockcommodities has improved in recent years. Djibouti providesan important transit route and quarantine point for livestockfrom the Horn of Africa being exported to Saudi Arabia. WhenSaudi Arabia lifted its five-year ban on the importation oflivestock from the Horn of Africa in December 2006, thelucrative trade from the region was revived. A modernquarantine facility was developed at the port of Djibouti toserve the needs of livestock traders in landlocked Ethiopia andnow competes with the Somaliland port of Berbera, wheremore modest investment was made to improve facilities forthe exportation of Somaliland’s livestock (afrol News, 2007).

2.6.1 Mobile pastoralism: a double-edged sword

A central feature of traditional pastoral systems of production isthe mobility that enables pastoralists’ herds to forage and utilise

5 Available at: http://www.farmafrica.org.uk/programme.cfm?programmeid=2&context=subject&subjectid=2.


swamugi


swamugi


6


The region’s large livestock population meets the subsistencerequirements of millions of pastoralists who derive their incomelargely from the sale of live animals and products such as milk,meat, hides and skins that they supply to urban centres withinthe region. It is difficult to obtain reliable data on productionfrom pastoral systems, largely because so much trade goesthrough unofficial channels but also because data are generallyaggregated for the sector as a whole. With the exception ofDjibouti, which imports significant quantities of beef, the regionis generally self-sufficient in meat production but, in commonwith many other African countries (Rich, 2008), the level ofexports of meat from the region is low (Table 4). In contrast,many countries in the region import significant volumes of milkto meet domestic demand (Table 3)

Camel milk is produced only in pastoral systems and high levelsof production are reported from Somalia and Sudan (FAO, 2006;6

Table 5). Camels are a vital source of milk in mobile pastoralsystems and in Kenya they are estimated to produce about 220mlitres annually (Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development,2007); Musinga, Kimenye and Kivolonzi (2008) reported anestimated yield of over 340m litres annually. Most of this milk isconsumed locally and there are few market outlets for surplusproduction, such that during the rainy season, when roadcommunications are disrupted, opportunities are lost to marketsurplus milk – estimated to be equivalent to a potential loss inincome for camel-keeping communities of KSh4bn annually(Musinga et al., 2008). Poor communications and the lack ofinfrastructure are fundamental constraints for pastoralists whorear their livestock in rangelands that are remote from majormarkets and urban centres, where the demand for livestockproducts is growing fast. In much of Africa, marketing is severelyconstrained by poor infrastructure and communications. Thesituation is further exacerbated by the lack of cooling, storageand processing facilities, which limits the pastoralists’ ability toadd value to the primary product.

In Tanzania, district councils run the primary markets but theyare generally poorly maintained and few function properly;central government is responsible for the country’s 13 secondaryand six border livestock markets (Ministry of Livestock Develop-ment, 2006). The impediments to the development of livestockmarketing are the inconsistent supply of quality animals and

inadequate market information, even though Tanzania has sevenmodern abattoirs and six meat processing plants: theseshortcomings have encouraged some traders to import meat(Ministry of Livestock Development, 2006). A non-governmentalorganisation (NGO) has started to work with groups ofpastoralists and livestock trade associations in Tanzania, in orderto improve their income and support sustainable livelihoods.7

The NGO provides training so that owners can prepare theirlivestock to meet the quality standards required by a privatecompany that buys livestock at a premium price – about 30%above the local market price (Turasha, 2008, personalcommunication). While this approach offers incentives topastoralist groups, it does not overcome the problems offrequent bans by importing countries due to disease outbreaks;the small number of export abattoirs; and the cumbersome andexpensive certification process. Although market demand in theMiddle East is large access is restricted by bans, and efforts arebeing directed at exploring regional markets in, for example,Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where there arefewer trade restrictions. Currently, some 400 sheep and goatcarcasses are exported to the DRC each month from the export-certified abattoir in Dodoma. Transport by road and sea takesthree weeks but there are considerable delays in transhipmentand the feasibility of airfreight is being assessed. A demandexists for ten tons per week, but limited access to creditconstrains the exporter’s capacity to supply the order. Theabattoir in Arusha is not export-certified: funding is being soughtto improve capacity and cold-storage facilities, and the NGO hasfacilitated visits for staff from Arusha to Dodoma, where themunicipal authorities have a progressive approach to meatprocessing and hygiene standards. Due to the proximity of theArusha facility to the Kenyan border, some support might beforthcoming from the Kenya Meat Commission, but this optionhas not been fully explored.

The recent reinstatement of the KMC had several strategic aims,including providing pastoralists with an assured outlet,particularly during severe drought when they could sell theirsurplus stock (Kimonye, 2006). In addition to supplying the highdemand for meat and offal in Nairobi, the KMC aimed to exploitopportunities to export sheep and goat carcasses to countriesin the Middle East. However, Kimonye (2006) cited highoperational costs, low international prices and competition in

sparse grazing over large tracts of land. Paradoxically, this strongpoint is at the same time a serious weakness. Although pastoralsystems have tremendous potential to meet increasing national,regional and international demand for livestock commodities,

the movement of animals over large areas makes it difficult toachieve compliance with international trade standards related tozoosanitary requirements. Yet without this mobility environ-mental degradation rapidly ensues.

6 Available at: http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/themes/en/dairy/camel.html.

7 Supporting Sustainable Livelihoods In Tanzania Programme Report 2007–

2008.

3 Livestock marketing from the region


swamugi


swamugi


7


Tab

le 3

: E

xp

ort

/im

po

rt ‘

de

pe

nd

en

cy’

for

live

sto

ck p

rod

uct

s (

20

02

)

Not

e: 1

- D

ata

for

2000

.So

urce

: FAO

Liv

esto

ck S

ecto

r B

rief

s, 2

003,

200

4 an

d 20

05. A

vaila

ble

at: h

ttp:

//w

ww

.fao.

org/

ag/a

gain

fo/r

esou

rces

/en/

pubs

_sap

.htm

l.N

o da

ta fo

r So

mal

ia.

Exp

ort

s a

s %

of

pro

du

ctio

n

Imp

ort

s a

s

% o

f

con

sum

pti

on

Exp

ort

s a

s %

of

pro

du

ctio

n

Imp

ort

s a

s

% o

f

con

sum

pti

on

Qu

an

tity

exp

ort

ed

(me

tric

to

ns)

Qu

an

tity

imp

ort

ed

(me

tric

to

ns)

Exp

ort

s a

s %

of

pro

du

ctio

n

Imp

ort

s a

s

% o

f

con

sum

pti

on

Exp

ort

s a

s %

of

pro

du

ctio

n

Imp

ort

s a

s

% o

f

con

sum

pti

on

Exp

ort

s a

s %

of

pro

du

ctio

n

Imp

ort

s a

s

% o

f

con

sum

pti

on

Exp

ort

s a

s %

of

pro

du

ctio

n

Imp

ort

s a

s

% o

f

con

sum

pti

on

Mea

t, to

tal

07.

230

02,

363

169

0.14

0.03

1.2

0.03

0.03

0.21

00.

06

Bee

f &bu

ffalo

03.

940

010

680.

040.

020.

120

00.

040

0.01

Shee

p &

goa

t0

0.22

00

2,35

30.

020.

093.

040.

040.

130.

110.

010

Milk

equi

vale

nt0

81.6

71.

1613

.62

42,

519

0.07

0.35

02.

290.

012.

430.

020.

89

Pro

du

ctD

jib

ou

ti (

20

00

)E

ritr

ea

Eth

iop

ia (

20

00

)K

en

ya

Su

da

nTa

nza

nia

Ug

an

da

Tab

le 4

: C

om

pa

ris

on

of

tra

de

in

liv

es

tock

an

d l

ive

sto

ck p

rod

uct

s (

20

02

)

Bla

nk c

ells

rep

rese

nt n

o da

ta o

r no

com

para

ble

data

. No

data

for

Som

alia

.So

urce

: FAO

Liv

esto

ck S

ecto

r B

rief

s 20

03, 2

004

and

2005

. Ava

ilabl

e at

: htt

p://

ww

w.fa

o.or

g/ag

/aga

info

/res

ourc

es/e

n/pu

bs_s

ap.h

tml.

Exp

ort

s Im

po

rts

Exp

ort

s Im

po

rts

Exp

ort

sIm

po

rts

Exp

ort

s Im

po

rts

Exp

ort

s Im

po

rts

Exp

ort

s Im

po

rts

Exp

ort

s Im

po

rts

Tota

l val

ue

(mill

ion

US$

)24

6.5

347.

218

5.5

549.

13,

281

3,67

01,

963

1,71

51,

562.

92,

218.

469

7.8

1,58

8.8

Agr

icul

tura

l2.

113

2.9

1.5

57.6

563

390

370.

24,

78.2

77.9

250.

325

2.4

153.

3

% a

gric

ultu

ral

of t

otal

0.8

38.3

0.8

10.5

17.2

10.6

18.9

27.9

4.9

11.3

36.2

9.6

Live

stoc

k1.

517

.50.

32.

119

.12.

76

414

8.4

32.3

75.

59.

63.

4

% li

vest

ock

of t

otal

0.6

5.0

0.2

0.4

0.2

0.1

7.6

1.9

0.4

0.2

1.4

0.2

Pro

du

ctD

jib

ou

ti (

20

00

)E

ritr

ea

Eth

iop

ia (

20

00

)K

en

ya

Su

da

nTa

nza

nia

Ug

an

da

Co

un

try

Me

tric

to

ns

pe

r a

nn

um

Djib

outi

5,90

0

Erit

rea

5,10

0

Ethi

opia

123

,500

Keny

a25

,200

Som

alia

435,

150

Suda

n82

,250

Tanz

ania

0

Uga

nda

0

Tab

le 5

: C

am

el

mil

k p

rod

uct

ion

in

th

e G

rea

ter

Ho

rn o

f A

fric

a

Sour

ce: F

AO C

amel

milk

pro

duct

ion

in t

he w

orld

. A

vaila

ble

at:

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org.

agai

nfo/

foto

/200

6/fla

sh/c

amel

flash

.htm

l


swamugi


swamugi


the international market as major obstacles to the realisation ofthese opportunities. In addition, the existence of animaldiseases in Kenya reduced opportunities to export fresh beef toniche markets; competition from the informal meat sector wasanother factor since the prevailing consumer preference for thecheapest beef possible undermined efforts to achieve higherstandards.

With its very large livestock population, it might be expected thatEthiopia would export large quantities of livestock and livestockproducts, but only about 20% of trade passes through formalchannels compared with the estimated 80% of export trade thatgoes through unofficial, informal channels (Ministry ofAgriculture and Natural Resources, 2005). In his detailed reviewof cross-border trade in livestock in the Horn of Africa, Little(2007) estimated that more than 95% of all regional trade inlivestock is through unofficial channels. The burden of excessiveregulation on livestock trade acts as a major disincentive tolivestock owners and traders, who, rather than pay official localtaxes and permit charges, and a wide range of unofficialpayments or ‘taxes’ to government personnel and officers (Little,2007), engage in informal trans-border commerce. The reality isthat informal and formal market channels are two sides of a coin;they cannot be treated separately and policies should promotemeasures to include pastoralists and traders rather than exclude

them from mainstream economic activities. An approach isneeded that recognises stakeholder interests and interdepen-dence and facilitates the realisation of their potential synergy,instead of allowing or encouraging a divisive approach to theregulation of livestock trade.

Somalia depends on its exports of meat and live animals togenerate the foreign exchange needed to finance the country’simports of food and goods (Little, 1992). Most exports areconsigned to destinations in the Middle East, including Yemen,Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. In recent years, cross-bordertrade in live animal exports to Kenya has also been significant(Little, 2003). Exports of livestock commodities from Somaliaaccounted for 80% of its exports in normal years, when thecountry exported millions of head of livestock, particularlyduring the Haj, but exports have been periodically interruptedby bans imposed by importing countries mainly because oflivestock disease. After the imposition of bans, exports ofchilled meat increased to about 40,000 animal equivalents permonth: live exports of sheep and goats from Bossasso portaveraged more than 100,000 head per month in 2001 and 2002(FAO, 2004). Most chilled meat and live animal exports go to theUnited Arab Emirates (UAE). In common with other countries inthe region, the trade in live animals for export is constrained bypoor marketing infrastructure and insufficient facilities forfeeding and watering animals along routes to export markets.These conditions increase losses, increase costs and reduce thequality of live animals upon arrival at the destination markets(ILRI, in preparation). Removing this constraint is not as simpleas it might seem: Nobera (1998, cited by Little, 2007) pointedout that, in the face of insecurity in remote areas near

international borders, infrastructural development might attractthe attention of bandits and criminals.

Whereas pastoralists face immediate difficulties in marketingfresh milk and meat, and usually have to move live animals overlong distances to markets, they face less immediate limitationsin marketing hides and skins. Data on the production of thesecommodities from pastoral systems are not readily available,but aggregated data from each country in the region confirmthat hides and skins are an important source of foreignexchange earnings. Ethiopia, Kenya and Sudan have 60tanneries, which industry sources say generate combinedannual revenue of more than $135m (Table 6). The governmentof Eritrea has banned the export of raw hides, so that localindustry can add value to leather goods that are then exported.The poor quality of hides and skins reduces their value. InTanzania, for example, the main causes of the poor quality ofhides and skins include poor dressing and flaying; wounds anddisease; indiscriminate branding; and poor handling duringpreservation and storage (ESALIA, 2003).

In common with other farmers, pastoralists depend onreliable and timely information on livestock markets as abasis for their decisions. In many parts of the region,information on livestock markets is shared through informalnetworks that rely on personal contacts and cellular phones.The need to develop rural communications in the region isbeing addressed by the Livestock Information Network andKnowledge System of the Global Livestock CollaborativeResearch Support Program (LINKS/GLCRSP), which hasinitiated the development of an information system forlivestock marketing (Jama, Stuth, Kaitho, Ali & Kariuki, 2004).The initiative aims to provide almost real-time information onlivestock prices and forage conditions, disease, conflict andwater supply in selected markets in the pastoral regions of,initially, Kenya, Tanzania and Ethiopia. The system has a hubin Nairobi and uses the short message service (SMS) ofcellular telephones to send market data throughout extensiveparts of pastoral areas; this will encompass other countries inthe region as network coverage expands. This system alsoplays an important early warning role by assisting themonitoring of changes in trade by, for example, enablingcomparisons of trends in grain marketing that might indicatepotentially critical shortages of food. Supportive policies areneeded to complement these encouraging developments sothat the region’s undisputed potential can be more fullyrealised.

Currently, throughout the region, livestock commodities supplymainly domestic markets; although regional marketing oflivestock products from pastoral systems does occur on a dailybasis, most of it is through informal channels. The region’sconsiderable potential to supply international markets withlivestock commodities from pastoral systems is severelyconstrained by many factors, chief among them the lack ofnational capacities to meet international standards that – under

8



swamugi


swamugi


9


The potential to exploit opportunities to meet increasingdemands for livestock commodities within the region as wellas in international markets merits urgent policy attention.Livestock and pastoralism are inextricably linked and livestockpolicies have to be considered in the broader policyframework, not in isolation. There is a growing awareness thatpastoralists in many parts of the world have beenmarginalised (WISP, 2008) and generally unsupportive policyframeworks tend – in the views of pastoralists themselves – toadversely affect their attitudes (UN OCHA PastoralistCommunication Initiative, 2008). Minorities that occupy thelargest areas of land in the region have been excluded frommainstream national economies since colonial times(McSherry & Brass, 2007), and the centralisation of power anddecision-making has turned pastoralists into passive actors:the recent establishment of pastoralist parliamentary groupsin Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda provides a means to begin toredress this chronic imbalance (Morton, Livingstone & Mussa,2007). Despite signs that attitudes towards pastoralism mightbe shifting, a discourse prevails that portrays pastoralists aspeople who are unwilling to change and embrace a sedentarylifestyle (Davies, 2008; Kassahun, Snyman & Smit, 2008;

Kirkbride & Grahn, 2008), which itself is inimical to rationalnatural resource management in the drylands.

The example of Ethiopia is instructive. Livestock areenormously important in Ethiopia, where they contribute tothe livelihoods of between 60% and 70% of Ethiopians(Halderman, 2004), yet a strong bias against pastoralistspersists among central highlanders – a bias that does notacknowledge the relevance and importance of pastoralism.The central government’s strategy is to promote thesedentarisation of pastoralists along major rivers, whichconstitute natural dry-season grazing reserves, thus placingthem at greater risk of degradation. Its long-term developmentobjective for pastoral areas is to transform pastoralist cultureand livelihoods, which directly undermines the rationale ofpastoral management of the natural resource base. It appearsthat outdated thinking permeates the policy-making level andthe issue of land tenure for pastoral communities has notbeen effectively addressed (Devereux & Scoones, n.d.). This isof fundamental importance because the pastoral productionsystem depends on the availability of pasture, and yetpastoralists are denied the opportunity to manage this

present circumstances – are generally unachievable. Theapplication of stringent international standards to marketswithin the region curtails their development and expansion, andmore appropriate, affordable and practical rules and toolsshould be developed (as advocated by Schillhorn van Veen,2005 – discussed below) to manage the risk of spreading animaldiseases through trade and promote food safety and crossborder trade.

However, the first step towards achieving more effectivemarketing of livestock commodities from pastoral productionsystems in the region is the development of a coherent,supportive policy framework. Only then would it be possiblefor the millions of people who depend on livestock for theirliving to begin to realise their potential to achieve greaterearnings. The following section of this paper considers in moredetail livestock policies in the region.

Country Number of

Tanneries

Estimated

annual

export value

(US$)

Notes

Djibouti 1

Eritrea 5 252 5,400 2,476,333 140.5 632 1,475 2 & 3

Ethiopia 21 1,400 32,000 66,500,000 1,100 8,500 7,500 2

Kenya 18 3,300 6,300 45,000,000 1,800 2,000 3,000 4

Somalia 1

Sudan 23 1,875 30,000 27,733,000 4,000 15,000 13,500

Uganda 4 414 1,872 2,000,000 90% 70–80% 70–80% 6

Tanzania 6 n/a n/a 6,000,000 1,600 500 1,400 4 & 5

Table 6: Hides and skins: processing capacities, estimated export values and annual collections

Notes: 1: No data; 2: 2004 data; 3: Total ban on export of raw hides; 4: 2003 data; 5. Only 2 tanneries operational; 6: 2004/05 data; n/a – not availableSource: Eastern and Southern Africa Leather Industry Association (ESALIA). Available at: http://www.intracen.org/Appli2/Leather/AfricanPlatform/Default.aspx.

Processing capacity (‘000) Annual collection level (‘000)

Hides Skins Hides Sheep skin Goat skin

4 Livestock policies within the region


swamugi


swamugi


10


essential input sustainably. As Morton and others (2007) havestated, ‘the intellectual basis of pastoral policy is still in flux,which increases the complexity of how it is incorporated intodevelopment policy and practice’.

Governments throughout the Greater Horn of Africa haveadopted a range of policies that have discouraged the mobilityof pastoralists: the establishment of schools, clinics and year-round water supplies has encouraged a more sedentarylifestyle, which has contributed to overgrazing of pasturesadjacent to these settled areas. Innovative solutions arerequired that will enable the provision of schools and clinicson a mobile basis, to ensure the delivery of effective educationand health services to pastoral communities (for more on this,see the accompanying report ‘Social protection in pastoralareas’). However, Tanzania’s livestock policy states: ‘TheDivision [of Pastoral Systems Development] is responsible fororganised pastoral movement and settlement, and for mod-ernising pastoral farming systems’ (Ministry of LivestockDevelopment and Fisheries, 2008). The meaning of ‘modern-ising’ is not defined. Alila and Atieno (2006) also advocatedthe designation of disease-free zones in Kenya as part of apackage of measures to enhance exploitation of the potentialof regional markets.

The concept of disease-free zones requires the maintenance offenced zones or compartments in which livestock are free ofspecified animal diseases, referred to as transboundary animaldiseases, which can be easily transmitted from country tocountry by infected live animals or products derived frominfected animals. The movement of all livestock from one zoneto another is strictly enforced to maintain a zone’s disease-freestatus. In a review of Tanzania’s agricultural sector, the NationalBusiness Council also stated the need to create disease-freezones to promote livestock export trade and, in the long term, to‘bring change in the traditional producers’ attitudes andpractices thereby increasing productivity’ (Mukami, 2003). Theapproach to ‘bringing change’ was not addressed but it ought,in line with good development practice, to revolve aroundparticipatory methods that promote dialogue between equals.Such an approach has been adopted with pastoralists inUganda, where, despite significant bureaucratic resistance tothe liberalisation and reformation of agricultural services,pastoralist organisations that engaged in concerted advocacyhad some success through participatory processes that helpedthem to influence developments within the overall economicframework (FAO, 2008). These examples indicate thatunsupportive discourse persists and they support the notionthat attitudes towards pastoral production systems will, at best,shift only slowly. In contrast, the Kenya government’s draftnational policy for the sustainable development of arid andsemi-arid lands in Kenya (Republic of Kenya, 2004) viewspastoralism positively; it presents a constructive view of the roleof pastoralists in the national economy and as custodians ofimportant natural resources. Evidence of the implementation ofthe policy is awaited.

Of the eight countries of the Greater Horn of Africa, four(Djibouti, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda) are members of theWorld Trade Organisation (WTO), and two (Ethiopia andSudan) are negotiating membership. Eritrea and Somalia haveno formal linkage to the WTO. Under the rules of the WTO,member countries agree to establish and apply science-basedregulation of animal and plant health and food safety, whichshould follow international standards, guidelines andrecommendations in establishing SPS measures. In the caseof animal health, the World Organisation for Animal Health(OIE) establishes zoosanitary standards that are included inthe Terrestrial Animal Health Code, which aims to assure thesanitary safety of international trade in terrestrial animals andtheir products. Seven of the Horn countries are members ofthe OIE and are represented by the chief veterinary officer; asenior veterinarian represents Somalia. Consequently, theseinternational arrangements frame the measures that eachcountry’s veterinary authority should apply to control animaldisease and support international trade. These measuresconstitute preconditions, which, in general, the region hasinadequate capacity to apply effectively, as the followingconsideration indicates.

Several southern African countries are cited as models formeeting OIE standards and successfully marketing beef andother livestock commodities internationally. The zoosanitarystatus of southern African countries has depended on themaintenance of fenced zones or compartments in whichlivestock are free of transboundary animal diseases, but thecontexts for both disease control and market access havechanged and the model is no longer as robust as it once was.8The establishment of disease-free zones has marginalised andexcluded adjacent communities whose production systems donot have the same disease-free status: livestock commoditiesfrom these latter zones have access to neither national norinternational markets. Consequently, the benefits of establishingsimilar zones in parts of the Greater Horn of Africa have to bequestioned.

• What benefits would accrue to pastoralists? • What disadvantages would pastoralists face? • What would be the costs of establishing and maintaining

such zones? • Would it be politically, economically or practically feasible

to fence and patrol such zones?

This latter question is of crucial importance because, at present,although policies in each country affirm the importance ofveterinary services, the capacity to deliver clinical, laboratoryand inspection services, particularly in far-flung rangelands,falls far short of requirements. To address this dilemma, underthe guidance of the African Union’s Interafrican Bureau forAnimal Resources (AU-IBAR), over the past decade livestockpolicies in the region have started to assimilate community-based animal health workers (or para-veterinarians) as an8 These changes and their impact are discussed in section 7, below.


swamugi


swamugi


11


Livestock production and trade within and from Africa havetremendous potential to grow but gaining improved access tomarkets is a precondition for increasing the efficiency oflivestock production by creating the necessary market ‘pull’.Access for livestock products into some of the growing marketsin Asia and the Pacific as well as the particularly lucrative

European Union (EU) market is limited by stringent technicalrequirements. The establishment of the WTO in 1995 led to thedevelopment of rules to facilitate and regulate trade. The CodexAlimentarius Commission sets global standards to ensure thesafety of food commodities, while the World HealthOrganisation (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organisation

essential element of service delivery (Catley & Leyland, 2002;Peeling & Holden, 2004; Allport, Mosha, Bahari, Swai, & Catley,2005).

Governments throughout the region have implemented reformsinvolving the privatisation of veterinary and other services, withthe aim of extending and enhancing service delivery andimproving animal disease surveillance. Despite widespreaddonor support, implementation has been slow and protracted.In all countries there has been resistance from governmentveterinary staff to changes that give them a stronger regulatoryrole but a diminished role in the delivery of the clinical servicesfrom which they derive significant income. They have frequentlycontinued to provide clinical services in direct competition withprivate practitioners. In some cases, such as artificialinsemination services in Kenya, services almost collapsedbecause the transition of service delivery from public to privatesector providers lacked coherent support (Ministry of Planningand National Development, 2003). While the lessons from thisexperience have informed the development of Kenya’s newnational livestock policy, Tanzania’s livestock policy does notexplicitly link the important complementary roles of privatesector service providers and government veterinary staff(Ministry of Livestock Development, 2006). Tanzania’s livestockpolicy states the need to create employment opportunities inthe sector; it also recognises that private sector serviceproviders, NGOs and community-based organisations (CBOs)are not well established, but the policy does not articulatespecific interventions to address these gaps (Ministry ofLivestock Development, 2006). Furthermore, the potential forgovernment (competent authority) accredited or licensedprivate sector inspectors or control bodies to performinspection, audit and certification functions – particularly inremote areas such as the rangelands that pastoralists use –appears not to have been addressed in the region as a whole.This is a policy issue that merits detailed discussion.

The challenge posed by demands for effective and efficientservice delivery in the agriculture sector as a whole is recognisedin Uganda’s Plan for Modernisation of Agriculture (PMA)(Government of the Republic of Uganda, 2005), and nationalpolicy initiatives address animal breeding and improved

livestock productivity. Implementation of government policiesrelated to the livestock sub-sector that began in the year2002/03 included a policy on the delivery of veterinary services;a national veterinary drugs policy – important in relation to drugresidues in livestock products; and a national animal breedingpolicy. The policy statement for Uganda’s Ministry of Agriculture,Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF) for the financial year2004/2005 recognised that the privatisation project had failedto attract many veterinarians due to the lack of a clear policy:while the central government advocated privatisation, districtauthorities recruited more public veterinary officers (Ministry ofAgriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries, 2004). Uganda is alsodeveloping policies related to animal feeds; hides, skins andleather development; pasture and rangeland; and vector (tsetseand tick) control. The need for coherence between policies isevident.

The preceding discussion has highlighted the importance ofpolicies that influence the availability of inputs into thepastoral production system in terms of land, feed (access tograzing) and the provision of services. The ease with whichpastoralists access markets is another area in whichsupportive policies are needed. In Kenya, the Kenya MeatCommission promotes off-take but pastoralists are remotefrom main markets and rely on middlemen and livestocktraders. The excessive burden of the regulated official market,as seen in Ethiopia, places pastoralists in a dilemma and manyresort to informal marketing networks that function on thetraditional basis of clans. In effect, this practice means thatproducers avoid the official channels through which theycould receive advice and guidance on disease controlmeasures, veterinary drug use, food safety requirements andmarket opportunities. To meet policy objectives of increasedlivestock production and marketing – such as the governmentof Ethiopia’s objective to increase meat exports from about8,000 tons in 2005–2006 to a target of 30,000 tons by 2008(World Bank, 2006a) – appropriate supportive measures areneeded that build on the strengths of pastoral productionsystems, provide support where it is needed and avoid furtherconstraining their development. Alternative approaches areneeded that meet the region’s requirements as practically,affordably and effectively as possible.

5 Commodity based trade as an approachto promote livestock exports


swamugi


swamugi


12


(FAO), the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) andthe OIE are responsible for the development of sanitary andphytosanitary standards. Trade in agricultural commodities isthus largely regulated by the Codex and SPS standards,compliance with which presents significant challenges toproducers in Africa. Under the terms of the WTO’s SPSagreement, members of the WTO have the right to take sanitaryand phytosanitary measures necessary to protect human,animal or plant life and health. The horticultural sub-sector,particularly in eastern Africa, has developed the capacity tosustain growing levels of exports to markets in Europe but, incontrast, there are relatively few examples of African countriessuccessfully exporting livestock products to the more lucrativemarkets and, even within Africa, the application of Codex andSPS standards limits market opportunities.

Africa’s livestock disease status is the worst of any continentand fear of the spread of animal disease is perhaps the keyobstacle to trade within and from the continent. There are twomain approaches to address this problem. In the first, majordiseases could be eliminated from countries or zones as aprecondition for trade – an approach that is advocated bycurrent international trading standards and has been thefocus of many development projects in Africa. The secondapproach would ensure that traded products (commodities)are rendered free of potentially dangerous infectious and non-infectious agents by adoption of commodity-specificproduction and processing standards. This latter approach ismore practical for Africa and is applied in nearly all othercommodity sectors globally. However, for historical reasons,commodity-specific standards have been poorly developed inthe animal health sub-sector and producers in developedmarkets have had little incentive to adopt a commodity-basedapproach because state veterinary services have maintainedeffective disease surveillance and control, which has achievedinternational zoosanitary requirements. The status quofavours producers in the richer, more developed countries,and places producers in the Greater Horn of Africa and otherdeveloping regions at a distinct disadvantage.

The long-standing approach to the prevention of the spread ofanimal diseases through international trade has been to restrictthe importation of live animals and livestock products fromcountries in which there have been outbreaks of transboundary9

animal diseases. The foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) virus is ahighly contagious pathogen of cloven-hoofed animals and is ofglobal economic importance (Thomson & Bastos, 2004); it isoften used as a model in discussions of animal disease control.Currently, entire countries, or zones within them, are listed aseither ‘FMD free’ if they meet specific, stringent biosecuritycriteria, or as ‘FMD infected’ (OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code,2008). The OIE produces guidance on measures that should beadopted to facilitate international trade and simultaneously

prevent disease transmission, but it is often difficult forexporters to comply with exacting standards designed toprotect importing countries.

Despite science-based logic and powerful rhetoric – see, forexample, Rweyemamu, Roeder, MacKay, Sumption, Brownlie, &Leforban, (2008) – the global eradication of most transboundaryanimal diseases (TADs) is not feasible. Since they lack the meansto control TADs throughout their territories, developing countriesare at a disadvantage and cannot trade internationally becausethey are not free from specific diseases. In this scenario, themajor criterion considered is the presence or absence in acountry of a disease in a susceptible population of animals andnot the presence or absence of a specified pathogen in a productof animal origin. This consideration gave rise to the concept of acommodity-based approach to trade in livestock products: theargument rests on the fact that different products (orcommodities) present different risks for the transmission ofpathogens of animals and man (Thomson, Tambi, Hargreaves,Leyland, Catley, van’t Klooster & Penrith, 2004). The approachadvocated by these authors is risk-based: it requires theadoption of appropriate strategies to mitigate the identified risksand is a concept that has gained ground in recent years.

The African Union’s New Partnership for Africa’s Development(NEPAD) is responsible for the development of an integratedagriculture plan for the continent. The goal is to attain a 6%growth rate in annual agricultural production by 2015, which willbe instrumental in alleviating poverty. AU Member States haveendorsed the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture DevelopmentProgramme (CAADP) and are committed to spending 10% oftotal public expenditure on agriculture and rural development.The important role of the livestock sector in contributing to theattainment of this goal is well recognised and is described in theCAADP Companion Document ‘Comprehensive Africa Agricul-ture Development Programme: Integrating livestock, forestryand fisheries subsectors into the CAADP’ (NEPAD, 2006). TheCAADP framework recognises that the development ofappropriate sanitary and technical standards, combined withimproved regional trade agreements within Africa, representsan important means to increase trade in livestock and livestockproducts. Improved access to markets would create thenecessary ‘pull’ for products and provide incentives forproducers, processors and traders. With such incentives,livestock production – a vital source of income for pastoralists inthe Greater Horn of Africa – would bene-fit and have aconsequent impact on the commodity chain and livelihoods. Forexample, the demand for crop residues and labour wouldincrease, and farmers would be encouraged to ‘finish’ animalsdestined for meat or sell relatively small amounts of milk forprocessing. The potential for enhanced trade in livestockproducts to contribute to increasing food supply wasrecognised in the draft CAADP Framework for African FoodSecurity (FAFS) (March 2008), which identified the need for‘immediate attention to commodity-based approaches to tradein livestock products’.

9 Transboundary animal diseases (TADs) are highly contagious and canspread very rapidly across national borders; they cause high morbidity andmortality in susceptible animals and produce serious economic losses.


swamugi


swamugi


13


At their fifth meeting, in March 2008, the Ministers of Agricultureof the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa(COMESA) noted the potential value of adopting a commodity-based trade approach in enhancing trade in livestock products,and decided that member states should collaborate, as a matterof urgency, in the revision of international standards relating tolivestock trade. The ministers also decided that a technicalworking group should be established to develop a strategy toexploit commodity-based trade to the advantage of the region.Subsequent to the ministers’ meeting, a workshop was held inSouth Africa in April 2008 on ‘Transboundary animal diseasesand market access: the future of beef marketing in southernAfrica’, which concluded that trade options for producers living infoot-and-mouth disease control zones were critical if suchproducers were to be lifted out of poverty and marginalisation.Also in April 2008, a meeting of East African Community livestocktrade experts recommended action to improve market access forlivestock commodities.

Currently, the OIE addresses trade on a commodities basis inthe Terrestrial Animal Health Code (the Code) and importingcountries are advised to base their decisions on a scientificrisk analysis done in accordance with their obligations underthe SPS Agreement. The Code presents the OIE’srecommendations for each specific disease as science-basedmeasures related to the risk of transmission of the causalagent in various epidemiological scenarios pertaining to theimportation of commodities. Although the Code includesalternative approaches, such as testing or treatment ofproducts, or sourcing animals from disease-free countries,zones or compartments, its perspective is one of diseasecontrol rather than trade facilitation. The case for updatinginternational livestock standards to make them more trade-friendly without increasing the risk of disease spread has beenadvocated (Thomson et al., 2004).

In response to an increasing number of comments from OIEMembers, in September 2007 the OIE suggested the formationof an ad hoc expert group to examine scientific evidence thatboneless beef (de-boned, matured, pH-tested) may safely betraded regardless of the disease status of the exporting countryor zone. Furthermore, the OIE has indicated its agreement onthe need to support commodity-based trade, with the provisothat it should be done in accordance with scientific principlesand in compliance with other requirements of the Code,including the quality and sustainability of veterinary services.The OIE supports the commodity-based approach provided that

national veterinary services maintain effective surveillance ofanimal diseases, allowing the country to achieve improvementsin animal health and food safety. For the OIE, the ‘commoditybased approach’ cannot be dissociated from a country’sobligation to conduct appropriate surveillance for OIE-listedanimal diseases in their territory.

The application of SPS measures and Technical Barriers to Trade(TBT) has been shown to reduce the levels of exports from

developing countries to OECD countries (Disdier, Fontagné &Mimouni, 2008), and the argument has been advanced to makenew food safety tools and rules affordable and practical underlocally prevalent conditions (Schillhorn van Veen, 2005).However, in terms of food safety, adherence to hazard analysisand critical control point (HACCP) principles throughout the foodsupply chain is an inescapable requirement to ensure thathazards are eliminated at each appropriate stage of production;in this regard, governments and the food industry have majorroles to play (Dagg, Butler, Murray & Biddle, 2006) in ensuringthe availability of safe food for consumers, wherever they maybe. Concerns have been raised that the emphasis on compliancewith the stringent SPS and food safety standards would tend tomarginalise small-scale farmers (Hall, Ehui & Delgado, 2004). Inaddition, there is growing concern that the emergence ofinformal and private standards, such as EUREPGAP, createsanother series of obstacles with which would-be exporters haveto comply (Humphrey, 2008), and the complex synergy of public(international) and private standards can appear formidable. Thefood safety scares of recent years, including bovine spongiformencephalopathy (BSE) and dioxin residues, mean that ‘foodsafety and private voluntary standards will not disappear’(Humphrey, 2008), making it all the more important for Africancountries to develop the capacity to achieve compliance withthose standards that are necessary.

Food safety standards are applied in concert with HACCPprinciples, which are also applicable in the context ofbiosecurity and the control of animal diseases. Donaldson,Thomson and Leyland (in press) propose a commodity-basedapproach to trade in deboned beef, from which lymph nodesand BSE-risk material have been removed. They argue thatthis product can be safely traded internationally, irrespectiveof the transboundary animal disease status of the place oforigin, since risks have been appropriately mitigated. Theseauthors also argue that further processing of such beef,involving compliance with HACCP principles and therequirements for certification, would provide additionalsafeguards in terms of animal diseases and human foodsafety. Although the OIE has accepted the rationale of thiscommodity-based approach and has undertaken to promoteopportunities to develop new standards for risk reduction intrade in livestock commodities (OIE/AU-IBAR, 2004), suchstandards are not yet in place.

Local value addition is an important consideration in thecommodity-based approach to trade in livestock commoditiesbecause, as with all products, the engagement of local labourin processing and packing, transportation and handling andother activities such as marketing can add value and increasecompeti-tiveness. Currently, most livestock products from theregion are marketed locally and internationally with little valueaddition, a consideration associated with low earnings andlimited invest-ment by industrial enterprises in the livestocksub-sector. In contrast to the situation in the countries of theGreater Horn of Africa, Brazil has emerged as a major exporter


swamugi


swamugi


14


The control of rinderpest was rated as one of the notablesuccesses in African agriculture (Gabre-Madhin & Haggblade,2004) but, as Donaldson and others (in press) point out, theprevalence of other transboundary animal diseases – such asfoot-and-mouth – means that developing countries (includingmany in Africa) do not benefit from this success in terms ofimproved access to international markets. The TerrestrialAnimal Health Code includes recommendations forimportation of fresh meat from cattle (excluding feet, headand viscera) that originate from ‘FMD infected countries orzones, where an official control programme exists, involvingcompulsory systematic vaccination of cattle’. Veterinaryauthorities in importing countries are advised to require thepresentation of an international veterinary certificate thatshould attest that the entire consignment of meat complieswith a set of criteria including:

• The controlled movement of livestock in defined areas, forspecified periods (several months).

• Scheduled vaccination within specified timeframes.• Transportation to approved abattoirs that are designated

for export.• Health certification after inspections done before and after

slaughter.• Absence of FMD at disinfected slaughter premises.• Derivation of meat from satisfactorily matured, deboned

carcasses from which major lymph nodes have beenremoved.

These conditions cannot be widely achieved in pastoralproduction systems.

The traditional markets for livestock and livestock products inthe region are, however, well established, and suppliers of liveanimals and halal livestock products meet the large andgrowing demand from the Middle East. However, strategicinterventions are necessary to enhance production from theregion’s pastoral systems, improve access to regional andinternational markets in the Middle East and further afield,

and provide evidence of the benefits of the commodity-basedapproach to trade in livestock products.

Much of the trade in livestock in the region is not welldocumented: for example, traders in Kenya supply cattle toMauritius and meat to the Gulf States, while Tanzanianexporters supply live animals and meat to markets in theComores and Middle East (Turasha, personal communication).However, when outbreaks of disease occur, trade is disrupted,which can lead to new approaches, as shown by the growth inchilled meat exports from Somalia to the Arabian Peninsula inresponse to bans on live animal exports. ILRI (2008) used thevalue chain to provide an analytical framework for its study ofSomalia’s export trade in chilled meat. The costs and incomethat accrued to each key market actor – including livestockproducers, brokers, small-scale traders, agents for exporters,exporters and airfreight operators – were assessed. Thehighest costs were incurred at two points along the chain:first, in purchasing slaughter stock, which often involves aseries of transactions and, second, in airfreight charges toexport the chilled meat. The generally low profitability of theenterprise cast doubt on its long-term viability and theauthors identified the need for interventions to focus on theimprovement of production and marketing systems. They alsohighlighted the need for independent market informationrelated to sales contracts and outlets in destination markets,to orient the exporters’ business strategies.

Ethiopia also exports chilled meat to countries in the MiddleEast. Rich, Perry, Kaitibie, Gobana and Tewolde (2008) report-ed the outcome of a five-year feasibility study of a two-phasemodel for SPS certification for beef exports. Cattle werepurchased, screened for diseases, vaccinated and quaran-tined before entering a feedlot finishing regime. The systemaimed to provide long-term benefits through the supply ofhigher quality, certified meat free from disease agents. Richand his colleagues used a dynamic cost–benefit model toassess the feasibility of the system under various scenarios.They found that, given the prevailing high costs of inputs –

of livestock com-modities, helped along by its low-costresource base for agricultural production and major economicand agricultural policy changes that have encouragedinvestment in the sector. These have included the provision ofcredit, tax concessions and increased production of animalfeeds (Valdes, 2006). Similar co-herent initiatives could andshould support pastoral livelihoods and provide a frameworkfor the more rapid and widespread emergence of value chainsand process chains in the region’s farm-to-fork sector, whichwas a broad proposal made recently at a consultativeworkshop in Nairobi (Perry & Sones, 2008).

With the potential for pathogen transmission in mind, the safetyof commodities originating from compartments, i.e., discrete,biosecure areas, in the region should be evaluated carefully togenerate the evidence needed to inform policy on commodity-based trade in livestock products. However, the emphasisshould continue to be on the production of commodities thathave been derived from healthy animals that have been process-ed under hygienic conditions which meet good manufacturingpractice and food safety standards. The achievement of theseprerequisites requires an adequate skills base and sufficientcapacity at each stage of the farm-to-fork production chain.

6 Examples of successes in the region


swamugi


swamugi


15


particularly feed – the system was not economically viable forthe export of beef to markets in the Middle East: the averagefree on board (FOB) price was over $1,000 per ton more thanthe average cost, insurance and freight (CIF) value of Brazilianand Indian meat in Middle Eastern markets. Modifications tofeedlot rations reduced costs but, the authors concluded,further reductions through lower animal purchase prices andreduced margins could enhance competitiveness. Theseauthors found that the costs of SPS certification representedless than 5% of the breakeven value of the final product, andthey stated that Ethiopia had to find ways to improve itscompetitiveness by differentiating its product from those ofcompetitors, taking into consideration compliance with SPSand food safety standards.

Traceability of commodities is an aspect of food safety thathas to be addressed. It is also an essential element of animaldisease surveillance, or epidemio-surveillance. The CodexAlimentarius Commission defines traceability as ‘the ability tofollow the movement of a food through specified stage(s) ofproduction, processing and distribution’. Systems to identifylivestock and trace meat were developed in response to theproblem of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE): suchsystems provide reliable information on animals, includingtheir origin, sex, age, breed, movements and veterinarytreatments, and traceability systems have become vital toolsto enhance biosecurity and prevent the spread of diseases.

Landais (2001) described the traditional practice ofpastoralists around the world of marking their livestock bytechniques such as branding and ear notching. He pointed outthat these traditional systems for marking livestock aregenerally not used for health monitoring purposes but thatthey could be adapted, given due recognition, and mademandatory, as has happened in marking reindeer herds inNorway. In pastoral systems, where populations are highlymobile and animals are bought and sold several times beforeslaughter, traceability poses special challenges. The move-ment of livestock in areas where there is contact with wildanimal populations poses risks for the spread of disease andit is important to know where and when such movementsoccur to understand the epidemiology and to be able toquantify the risks of specified diseases, particularly trans-boundary animal diseases. In their review of livestockmovement and the international spread of infectious diseases,Fèvre, Bronsvoort, Hamilton and Cleaveland (2006) high-lighted the high risk of disease spread associated withinternational trade in livestock, and they concluded that, tominimise such risks, consideration might be given to stoppingtrade in live animals altogether. This argument favours acommodity-based approach to trade in livestock products,where specific hazards can be controlled during processing.Fèvre and others (2006) cautioned that a ban on trade in liveanimals might result in its continuation through unofficialchannels, much as occurs throughout the Greater Horn ofAfrica (Little, 2007), and it is, therefore, important that policies

are in place to encourage official and informal marketchannels to work closely together.

In Somalia, a project is in progress to support the developmentof livestock trade and marketing (Terra Nuova, n.d.). It involvesimproving support services operated by private sector actors:regulation is the role of accountable, competent rural insti-tutions, and mechanisms are being identified to improve qualitycontrol, formalise grades and standards and establish risk-basedcritical control points along mapped trade routes, all of themlinked to a livestock market information system. The projectaddresses product quality requirements (conformation and bodycondition scores) at terminal markets in Kenya (Mombasa,Nairobi and Kitui) and is piloting a traceability system for animalsthat uses a permanent, unique identification number for eachanimal, which is encoded in radio frequency identificationdevices (RFID) and linked to a database. The project’s mainactivities address key issues of compliance with SPS require-ments, namely certification, risk analysis, traceability and animalwelfare, and is part of the overall Somali Livestock CertificationProject (SOLICEP) – a joint initiative of the AU IBAR and the EU.Importantly, the project aims to strengthen the capacity of thenational authority to expand to other markets; it involves theSomaliland Chamber of Commerce in collaboration with theMinistry of Livestock and the municipalities of Hargeisa, Burcoand Gabiley, and Berbera port. The project collects a range ofmarket-related information, which is disseminated throughvarious channels including radio, newspapers, SMS telecom-munications and email lists.

There are examples of successful enterprises from other regionsin Africa. An enterprise in Mauritania has developed a range ofdairy products. The ‘Tiviski’ dairy buys camel, cow and goat milkfrom semi-nomadic livestock owners and processes the freshmilk into pasteurised milk, sour milk, cream, yoghurt andcottage cheese. Tiviski’s camel cheese was intended for exportas a niche product to the EU but, despite widespread interest incamel dairy products, the would-be exporter faces the twomajor obstacles of logistics (related to the cold chain) and thecomplex regulations governing the import of fresh dairyproducts, including a requirement for the exporting country tohave an EU-approved certification laboratory.

Several countries in southern Africa (Botswana, Namibia,South Africa and Zimbabwe) are well-established exporters ofmeat products to international markets, including countries inthe EU. The future of beef marketing in southern Africa was thesubject of a workshop held in April 2008, which examinedtransboundary animal diseases and market access (Scoones& Wolmer, 2008). The zoosanitary status of southern Africancountries has depended on the maintenance of fenced zonesor compartments that are free of transboundary animaldiseases, but the contexts for both disease control and marketaccess have changed (as already mentioned: section 5). Thesechanges have arisen from the interplay of (1) politicalchallenges to patterns of land use that were defined during


swamugi


swamugi


16


Pastoral production systems have indisputable strengths andgreat potential: they are the sole means of production in theharsh environment that accounts for some 70% of theregion’s land surface area (Kirkbride & Grahn, 2008);pastoralists have unique skills and knowledge to manage therangeland resource sustainably; and, most importantly, theyown most of the region’s livestock. Existing and projectedmarket demands create opportunities for pastoralists toobtain increased incomes by supplying products of animalorigin that meet increasing demands from, in the firstinstance, the region’s expanding urban populations and,second, the growing demand for these products in morelucrative international markets. The critical issue is improvedaccess to these markets.

The potential for increased production is, however, seriouslyconstrained by weaknesses in the pastoral system. Generally,pastoralists do not have secure land tenure; conflict inpastoral areas is common; unofficial trade is a dominant wayof life for pastoralists; access to services and marketinformation is difficult; and infrastructural development in ornear pastoral areas is inadequate. Nevertheless, there areencouraging signs that development projects and privateenterprises are tackling these constraints constructively andsuccessfully. Furthermore, the OIE has made a commitmentto review regulations related to livestock commodities andassist in the development of new, commodity-specificstandards to facilitate international trade.

International sanitary (SPS) standards and the burgeoningarray of private standards undoubtedly threaten to stifle thepromising initiatives that are underway. The standards willremain, however, and could become more onerous. The onlyoption for the region is to engage in robust dialogue to

identify approaches to enhance food safety and animaldisease control. The positive impact that the application ofimproved food safety standards could have on the health ofconsumers within the region should not be overlooked orunderestimated. Similarly, there must be recognition of thesignificant potential for the region to develop its foodindustry to process livestock commodities, createemployment, add value and diversify the range of productsfor local, regional and international markets. There arealready canning and packing plants in the region; cateringfirms prepare and pack airline meals to internationalstandards; and the tourism and hospitality industry isvibrant.

Despite this optimistic perspective, other constraints are onthe horizon, notably that of ‘food miles’ (CTA, 2008) and theimpact of global food price rises and the ‘credit crunch’ oneating habits in the more lucrative markets. These factorsmight limit market options for some products but demand islikely to continue for niche products that have importantcharacteristics, i.e., they originate from sustainably manag-ed rangelands that capture carbon and mitigate climatechange; they contribute significantly to pastoralists’livelihoods; and they are derived from animals whosewelfare is fundamental to human survival in some of theharshest places on earth. These considerations echo thestatement:

Agriculture and rural development in Africa will

have to concentrate on more people-centred,

food-focused and environmentally sustainable

approaches if the development of African agri-

culture is to serve the long-term interests of the

majority of Africans (UK Food Group, 2008).

the colonial era, including the demand for land and access tomarkets by historically marginalised groups; (2) changes topreferential trade agreements; (3) the growth of competitionfrom Latin American exporters in meeting the growing demandfor red meat in urban Africa and Asia; (4) the rapid emergenceof public and private standards; and (5) reduced state supportfor veterinary services, which coincides with changing diseasepatterns resulting from changing production and land usesystems. In the face of these challenges, the red meat industryin southern Africa has to adapt and devise innovativeapproaches to disease control and market access. In this

respect, livestock production systems in the Greater Horn ofAfrica and those in southern Africa share very similarchallenges, which require coherent, co-ordinated responsesfrom the public and private sector. Commodity-based trade inlivestock products has to be seen in this context. There aresigns of innovation in the Greater Horn of Africa: Tanzanianpastoralists are being supported to access premium exportmarkets; beef from feedlot systems in Ethiopia and chilledbeef from Somali pastoralists are supplying markets in theMiddle East; and infrastructural development at the port ofDjibouti provides capacity to support livestock exports.

7 Alternative policy options


swamugi


swamugi


17


Opportunities exist for innovative approaches to integratepayments to pastoralist communities for enhanced carboncapture with interventions that improve animal identificationand traceability, and promote vaccination and diseasesurveillance at defined critical control points in therangelands.

The challenges that face pastoralists and their advocates inaccessing international markets for livestock commodities aredaunting but, given the imperatives that drive the debate, thepragmatic approach is for the phased, integrated develo-pment of the capacity needed to deliver high-quality productsto lucrative markets. Interventions should be made at severallevels; these should be well-coordinated to promote theemergence of a constructive discourse that would supportincreased access to markets in the region and internationally.

At the level of the pastoralists themselves, there should be asustained programme to educate and sensitise communitieson a range of issues and thereby increase their capacities andcompetencies. The approach should be embedded in the dailylives of pastoralists, to maximise the relevance ofinterventions, enhance the pastoralists’ understanding of thebenefits to them and promote the uptake of improvedpractices. For example, a programme on food hygienedelivered concurrently at schools, in health centres, in grazingareas by community-based animal health workers, at livestockmarkets and to traders could reinforce the links betweenhuman health – focusing on common problems such asdiarrhoea and infant mortality – and simple, hygienic product-handling practices, even while acknowledging that washinghands and utensils in arid areas is practically very difficult.Other simple interventions focused, for example, on thefinancial losses arising from branding and the poorpreparation and handling of hides and skins should be linkedto active dialogue with representatives of the leather industry,i.e. traders, tanneries and manufacturers of leather goods.Similar interventions centred on the role of branding and otherforms of animal identification to improve the traceability oflivestock should be delivered by community-based animalhealth workers, paraveterinary and veterinary personnel, withthe participation of traders and meat processors, following theexample of the SOLICEP project in Somalia. The broadapproach should be inclusive; it should engage stakeholdersalong the commodity chain and encourage and facilitatedialogue aimed at improving the quality of inputs and outputsat each stage of value addition. In this context, eachstakeholder group would immediately appreciate the benefitsthat would accrue from modified practice and cooperation.

The need for and roles of service providers – whether in theprivate or public sector – in the context of commodity chainsprovide valuable orientation by enabling the identification ofweaknesses and gaps. Animal vaccination and diseasereporting placed in the context of commodity chains elicits aconstructive discourse that is supportive of producers andqualitatively different from the well-rehearsed controllingdiscourse of state veterinary services.

The implementation of unequivocal, integrated policies thataim to create conducive conditions is the precondition for thesuccess of a concerted programme to promote the productionof livestock products from pastoral systems. Such a policyframework would necessarily include land tenure, theprovision of improved infrastructure and communications,investment in water sources and marketing support. Theurgent pressures on pastoral systems in the region require anaccelerated programme to ensure that there is an increasedemphasis on quality so that livestock products can competewith those from other regions, such as South America andEurope. Clearly the landed cost of African commodities mustalso be competitive. In this regard, regional economiccommunities and public and private trade associations haveimportant roles in supporting market research. Pastoralistsalso need support to scan markets for developments, such asthe European Commission’s green paper on standards, qualityand certification schemes (Commission of the EuropeanCommunities, 2008).

Livestock commodities from mobile pastoral productionsystems and international zoosanitary standards are notmutually exclusive. But for such commodities to comply withappropriate standards development initiatives will have to beguided by coherent, unambiguous policies that are matchedby the allocation of adequate resources for their timely andconcerted implementation.

It is evident that present uncertainties linked to a lack of clearpolicy and associated market access constraints and seasonalfluctuations represent unacceptable risk to livestock owners.This deters the adoption of improved practices (i.e.investment in production, timely sales and off-take and othercoping options that are all part of vital drought-copingstrategies). This initiative would have the effect of stabilisinga key sector of the market through increased consistency andstability of demand. Added value can also be expected fromprocessing and linked activities that will provide alternativeincome and employment opportunities for those adoptingalternative livelihoods, as well as stimulating the economy.

8 Conclusions and next steps


swamugi


swamugi


18


Afrol News (2007) Djibouti, Somaliland in Bitter Port Feud. Availableat: http://www.afrol.com/articles/23556; accessed 20/10/08.

Alila. P. O. and R. Atieno (2006). Agricultural Policy in Kenya: Issues

and Processes. A paper for the Future Agricultures Consortium work-shop, Institute of Development Studies, 20–22 March 2006, Universityof Nairobi. Available at: http://www.future-agricultures. org/EN/themes/policy_processes/policy_output.html; accessed 27/11/08.

Allport, R., R. Mosha, M. Bahari, E. Swai and A. Catley (2005) The

Use of Community-based Animal Health Workers To Strengthen

Disease Surveillance Systems in Tanzania. Office international desepizooties revue scientifique et technique 24 (3), 921–932.

Bevan, J. (2008). Crisis in Karamoja: Armed Violence and the Failure

of Disarmament in Uganda’s Most Deprived Region.

Catley, A. and T. Leyland (2001) ‘Community Participation and theDelivery of Veterinary Services in Africa’, Preventive Veterinary

Medicine, 49, 95–113.

Catley, A. and T. Leyland (2002) Overview: Community-based

Animal Health Workers, Policies, and Institutions. Available at:http://www.iied.org/pubs/pdfs/G02014.pdf; accessed 21/10/08.

Commission of the European Communities (2008) Green Paper on

Agricultural Product Quality: Product Standards, Farming

Requirements and Quality Schemes. Brussels, 15.10.2008.COM(2008) 641 final. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/quality/policy/consultation/greenpaper_en.pdf.

CTA (2008) Food Miles or Fair Miles. Spore, 133, February 2008, p.1. Available at: http://spore.cta.int/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=341&catid=10; accessed 15/3/08.

Dagg, P. J., R. R. Butler, J. G. Murray and R. R. Biddle RR (2006)‘Meeting the Requirements of the Importing Countries: Practicesand Policy for On-Farm Approaches to Food Safety’, in Animal

Production Food Safety Challenges in Global Markets. ReviewScientifique et technique. Off. Int. Epiz. 25 (2): 685–700.

Davies, J. (2008) ‘Turning the Tide: Enabling Sustainable Developmentfor Africa’s Mobile Pastoralists’, Natural Resources Forum, 32,175–184.

Delgado, C. L., M. W. Rosegrant, H. Steinfeld, S. K. Ehui and C.Courbois (1999) Livestock to 2020: The Next Food Revolution.(Discussion paper) Washington DC, Rome, Nairobi: InternationalFood Policy Research Institute (IFPRI); Food and AgricultureOrganisation of the United Nations (FAO); International LivestockResearch Institute (ILRI).

Department of Pastoral Systems Development, (n.d.). Available at:http://www.mifugo.go.tz/documents_storage/dpd.pdf; accessed10/10/08.

Devereux, S. and I. Scoones. (n.d.) Future Agricultures Debate – Too

Many People, Too Few Livestock: Pastoralism in Crisis. The Response:

‘The Crisis of Pastoralism?’. Institute of Development Studies, Sussex.Available at: http://www.future-agricultures.org/EN/e-debates/Pastoralism/pastoralism_ debate.html; accessed 27/11/08.

Dinucci, A. and Z. Fre (2003) Understanding the Indigenous

Knowledge and Information Systems of Pastoralists in Eritrea.Communication for Development Case Study 26. Rome: FAO.

Disdier, A-C., L. Fontagné and M. Mimouni (2008) ‘The Impact ofRegulations on Agricultural Trade: Evidence from the SPS and TBTAgreements’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 90, 2,336–350.

Donaldson, A. I., G. R. Thomson and T. J. Leyland (in press) ‘De-BonedBeef – An Example of a Commodity for Which Specific Standards

Could Be Developed To Ensure an Appropriate Level of Protection forInternational Trade’, Transboundary & Emerging Diseases.

Fahey, D. (2006) The Political Economy of Livestock and

Pastoralism in Sudan. IGAD LPI Working Paper No. 06 – 08. IGADLivestock Policy Initiative.

Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO)(2004) Somalia: Towards a Livestock Sector Strategy. Final Report.Report No.: 04/001 IC–SOM, 29 April 2004.

Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations InvestmentCentre Division. FAO/World Bank Cooperative Programme. Availableat: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/ SOMALIAEXTN/Resources/so_LS_final_rpt.pdf; accessed 20/10/08.

Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO)(2008) Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative (PPLPI). Available at:http://www.fao.org/AG/AGAInfo/programmes/en/pplpi/about.html; accessed 14/10/08.

Fèvre, E. M., B. M. de C. Bronsvoort, K. A. Hamilton and S.Cleaveland (2006) ‘Animal Movements and the Spread of InfectiousDiseases’, TRENDS in Microbiology, 14, 3, 125–131.

Gabre-Madhin, E. Z. And S. Haggblade (2004) ‘Successes in AfricanAgriculture: Results of an Expert Survey’, World Development, 32,5, 745–766.

Garnett, T. (2008) Cooking Up a Storm: Food, Greenhouse Gas

Emissions and Our Changing Climate, Food Climate ResearchNetwork. Centre for Environmental Strategy, University of Surrey.September 2008. Available at: http://www.fcrn.org.uk/frcnResearch/publications/PDFs/CuaS_web.pdf.

Gerecke, D. (2006) Support of the Platform to WDR 2008 and Latest

On-the-Edge Findings of the WDR 2008 Team. Global DonorPlatform for Rural Development. Donor Consultation Workshop onWDR 2008. Available at: http://www.donorplatform.org/content/view/6/117/; accessed 14/10/08.

Government of Kenya (2004) National Policy for the Sustainable

Development of Arid and Semi Arid Lands of Kenya. (5th Draft).December 2004. Available online at: eastafrica.usaid.gov/(S(q4sk4cmm4eenez45sv5fhu2y))/proxy/Document.1101.aspx; accessed10/10/08.

Government of the Republic of Uganda (2005) Plan for

Modernisation of Agriculture: Eradicating Poverty in Uganda.(Government Strategy and Operational Framework). Available at:http://www.pma.go.ug/pdfs/Plan%20for%20Modernisation%20of%20Agriculture.pdf; accessed 19/10/08.

Halderman, M. (2004) The Political Economy of Pro-Poor Livestock

Policy-Making in Ethiopia. Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative. PPLIWorking paper No. 19. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organisation ofthe United Nations.

Available at: http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/programmes/en/pplpi/home.html.

Hall, D., S. Ehui and C. Delgado (2004) ‘The Livestock Revolution,Food Safety and Small-Scale Farmers: Why Do They Matter to UsAll?’, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17: 425–444.

Humphrey, J. (2008) Private Standards, Small Farmers and Donor

Policy: EUREPGAP in Kenya. IDS Working paper 308. July 2008.Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Brighton.

IGAD Livestock Policy Initiative (2007). Pro-Poor Livestock Policy in

the Small Desert Entrepôt of Djibouti. Policy Brief. Available at:http://www.igad-lpi.org/publication/docs/policybriefs/Djibout_2007.pdf; accessed 20/10/08.

References


swamugi


swamugi


19


IGAD Livestock Policy Initiative (2007) Annual Report. 25 January,2008. Available at: http://www.igad-lpi.org/publication/Reports.htm.

ILRI (in preparation) Improvement and Diversification of Somali

Livestock Trade and Marketing. The structure, operation and

profitability of Somali’s chilled meat export trade: constraints on,

and opportunities for, improving its competitiveness. RevisedVersion. September 2008.

Jama, A., J. Stuth, R. Kaitho, A. Ali and G. Kariuki (2004) The Application

of Emerging ICT in Livestock Marketing in Rural Areas of Eastern

Africa. Available at: http://www.ictes2004-gstit.edu.et/session%20VI_fullpapers/Application%20of%20Emerging%20ICT%20in%20Livestoke%20Marketing%20in%20Eastern%20Africal.pdf; accessed21/10/08.

Kassahun, A., H. A. Snyman and G. N. Smit (2008) ‘Impact ofRangeland Degradation on the Pastoral Production Systems,Livelihoods and Perceptions of the Somali Pastoralists in EasternEthiopia’, Journal of Arid Environments, 72, 7, 1265–1281.

Kimonye, J. (2006) Kenya Meat Commission Managing

Commissioner’s Presentation to the Kenya Pastoralist Week. 2006.Available at: http://www.marsgroupkenya.org/multimedia/?StoryID=150476&p=Ministry+of+Livestock+Development&page=6.

Landais, E. (2001) ‘The Marking of Livestock in Traditional PastoralSocieties’, Rev. sci. tech. Off. int. Epiz., 2001, 20, 2, 463–479.

Little, P. D. (2003) Somalia: Economy Without State. Oxford: JamesCurrey Publishers; Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.

Little, P. D. (2007) Unofficial Cross-Border Trade in Eastern Africa.Presented at the FAO workshop on ‘Staple Food Trade and MarketPolicy Options for Promoting Development in Eastern and SouthernAfrica’, 1–2 March 2007. FAO. Rome, Italy.

Lovell, T. (2008) What Does Carbon Look Like in Nature? Powerpointpresentation. Available at: www.soilcarbon.com.au/case_studies/pps/08TL_SCCPPP_En.pps; accessed 14/10/08.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Dryland Systems.Chapter 22, pp. 623–62. Available at: http://www.millenniumassessment.org/documents/document.291.aspx.pdf; accessed16/08/09.

Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (2004) Policy

Statement for the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and

Fisheries. Vote 010/142. Budget Financial Year 2004/2005. Presentedto Parliament for the Budget Debate by Dr Kisamba Mugerwa (MP),Minister of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries, 30 June 2004.Available at: http://www.foodnet.cgiar.org/scrip/docs&databases/ifpriStudies_UG_nonScrip/pdfs/Government_of_Uganda/MAAIF_Policy_Statement_2004-05.pdf.

Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources (2005) Policy

Processes in Livestock Health and Marketing. Ministry ofAgriculture and Natural Resources. Federal Democratic Republic ofEthiopia. In collaboration with Institute of Development Studies UK;AU-IBAR Institutional Policy Support Team; UNOCHA PastoralistCommunication Initiative. UNOCHA Pastoralist CommunicationInitiative, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. UNOCHA, April 2005.

Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development (2006) National

Livestock Policy (Revised draft edition). January 2006. Republic ofKenya.

Ministry of Livestock Development (2006) National Livestock Policy.

Ministry of Livestock Development, United Republic of Tanzania.December 2006. Available at: http://www.mifugo.go.tz/policy_and_planning/policy.php; accessed 9/11/08.

Ministry of Livestock Development (2008) Department of Pastoral

Systems, Government of the United Republic of Tanzania. Availableat: http://www.mifugo.go.tz/about_us/index.php.

Ministry of Planning and National Development (2003). Kenya

Economic Recovery Strategy for Wealth and Employment Creation:

2003 – 2007. Prepared by the Government of Kenya, June 2003.Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/KENYAEXTN/Resources/ERS.pdf; 31/10/08.

Morton, J., J. K. Livingstone and M. Mussa (2007) Legislators and

Livestock: Pastoralist Parliamentary Groups in Ethiopia, Kenya and

Uganda. Gatekeeper Series 131. International Institute forEnvironment and Development: London.

Mukami, P. (2003) Recommendations on Major Problems and

Bottlenecks Impending Investments in the Sector. Tanzania NationalBusiness Council. Agriculture investors round table working group:review of the agriculture sector. Management and DevelopmentAssociates, Dar es Salaam. Available at: http://209.85.135.104/C/Documents%20and%20Settings/Administrator/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/UFI/www.madatz.com.

Musinga, M., D. Kimenye and P. Kivolonzi (2008) The Camel Milk

Industry in Kenya. Final Report. Results of a Study Commissioned by

SNV To Explore the Potential of Camel Milk From Isiolo District To

Access Sustainable Formal Markets. Resource Mobilisation Center. 26November 2008. Available at: http://www.ebpdn.org/resource/resource.php?lang=en&id=1076; accessed 23/12/08.

OIE (2008) Terrestrial Animal Health Code 2008. Available at:http://www.oie.int/eng/normes/Mcode/en_sommaire.htm.

OIE/AU-IBAR (2004) Implementation of Animal Health Standards:

The Quest for Solutions. Proceedings of the seminar 11–13 October2004. Cairo, Egypt. OIE, Paris, p. 220.

Office of the President (2006) National Policy on Peace Building

and Conflict Management. Civil Society draft 1. June 2006.Government of Kenya.

Otte, J. and P. Chilonda (2003) ‘Classification of Cattle and SmallRuminant Production Systems in Sub-Saharan Africa’, Outlook on

Agriculture, 32, 3, 1, 183–90.

Kirkbride, M. and R. Grahn (2008) Survival of the Fittest: Pastoralism

and Climate Change in East Africa. Oxfam Briefing Paper, August 2008.Oxfam International. Available at: http://www.oxfam.org.

McSherry, B. and J. N. Brass (2007) The Political Economy of Pro-

Poor Livestock Policy Reform in Kenya. IGAD LPI Working Paper No.04 – 08. IGAD Livestock Policy Initiative. Available at: http://www.igad-lpi.org/publication/docs/IGADLPI_WP04_08_Kenya.pdf.

Ndambi, O. A., T. Hemme and U. Latacz-Lohmann (2007) ‘Dairying inAfrica – Status and Recent Developments’, Livestock Research for

Rural Development, 19, 8. Available at: http://www.cipav.org.co/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=64.

NEPAD (2006) Companion Document. Comprehensive Africa

Agriculture Development Programme: Integrating Livestock,

Forestry and Fisheries Subsectors into the CAADP.FAO, Rome.

Peeling, D. and S. Holden (2004) ‘The Effectiveness of Community-based Animal Health Workers, for the Poor, for Communities and forPublic Safety’, Revue scientifique et technique. Officeinternationale des Epizooties, 23, 1, 253–276.

Perry, B. and K. Sones (2008) Strengthening Demand-Led Animal

Health Services in Pastoral Areas of the IGAD Region. IGADLivestock Policy Initiative. Working Paper No. 09 – 08.

Rich, K. M. (in press) What Can Africa Contribute to Global Meat

Demand: Opportunities and Constraints.

Rich, K. M., B. D. Perry, S. Kaitibie, M. Gobana and N. Tewolde(2008) Enabling Livestock Product Exports from Ethiopia:

Understanding the Costs, Sustainability and Poverty Reduction

Implications of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Compliance. Final reportfor the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Texas A&M UniversitySanitary and Phytosanitary Livestock and Meat Marketing Program.April 2008. ILRI, Nairobi, USAID and Texas A&M University.

Rosegrant, M. W. and P. K. Thornton (2008) ‘Do Higher Meat andMilk Prices Adversely Affect Poor People?’, id21 Insights (72): 4.


swamugi


swamugi


20


Rweyemamu, M., P. Roeder, D. MacKay, K. Sumption, J. Brownlie andY. Leforban (2008) ‘Planning for the Progressive Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease Worldwide’, Transboundary and Emerging

Diseases, 55, 73–87.

Schillhorn van Veen, T. W. (2005) ‘International Trade and FoodSafety in Developing Countries’. Food Control 16, 491–96.

Scoones, I. and W. Wolmer (2008) Foot-and-mouth Disease and

Market Access: Challenges for the Beef Industry in Southern Africa,

Transboundary Animal Disease and Market Access: Future Options

for the Beef Industry in Southern Africa, Working Paper 1, Brighton:Institute of Development Studies. http://www.steps-centre.org/ourresearch/vetscience.html.

Swift, J. (1988) Major Issues in Pastoral Development with Special

Emphasis on Selected African Countries, Rome: FAO.

Terra Nuova/ILRI (n.d.) Improvement and Diversification of Somali

Livestock Trade and Marketing Project (LTMP). Available at:http://www.au-ibar.org/documents_public/solicepInception%20Terra%20Nuova-ILRI.pdf; accessed 21/11/08.

The Standard (2006) ‘Kenya Meat Commission Revival Welcome’.22 June 2006. Available at: http://kenyanewsonline.blogspot.com/2006/06/kenya-meat-commission-revival-welcome.html; accessed17/10/08.

Thomson, G. R. and A. D. S. Bastos (2004) ‘Foot-and-mouthDisease’, in Infectious Diseases of Livestock, 2nd edition, pp 1324-1365. Edited by J. A. W. Coetzer and R. C. Tustin. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Thomson, G. R., E. N. Tambi, S. K. Hargreaves, T. J. Leyland, A. P. Catley,G. G. M. van ’t Klooster and M. L. Penrith (2004) ‘International Trade inLivestock and Livestock Products: The Need for a Commodity-basedApproach’. Veterinary Record 155, 429–33.

Thomson, G. R., B. D. Perry, A. Catley, T. J. Leyland, M. L. Penrith andA. I. Donaldson (2006) ‘Certification for Regional and InternationalTrade in Livestock Commodities: The Need To Balance Credibilityand Enterprise’. Veterinary Record, 159, 53–57.

Thornton, P. K., R. L. Kruska, N. Henninger, P. M. Kristjanson, R. S. Reid,F. Atieno, A. N. Odero and T. Ndegwa (2002) Mapping Poverty and

Livestock in the Developing World. A report commissioned by the UKDepartment for International Development, on behalf of the Inter-Agency Group of Donors Supporting Research on LivestockProduction and Health in the Developing World. International Live-stock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya. Available at: http://www.ilri.org/InfoServ/Webpub/Fulldocs/Mappoverty/index.htm.

Turner, R. L. (2005) Livestock, Liberalization & Democracy:

Constraints and Opportunities for Rural Livestock Producers in a

Reforming Uganda, PPLPI Working Paper 29. November 2005.Available at: http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/projects/en/pplpi/publications.html; accessed 21/10/08.

UK Food Group (2008) More Aid for African Agriculture: Policy

Implications for Small-scale Farmers. Available at: http://www.ukfg.org.uk/more-aid-for-african-agriculture.php#a http://www.ukfg.org.uk/more-aid-for-african-agriculture.php#a.

Umar, A. and B. Baulch (2007) Risk Taking for a Living: Trade and

Marketing in the Somali Region of Ethiopia. Addis Ababa : UNOCHA Pastoralist Communication Initiative. Available at: http://www.pastoralists.org.

United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (2008)Regional Profiles – Africa.

Available at: http://www.unccd.int/regional/africa/menu.php;accessed 14/10/08.

UN OCHA PCI (2007) 21st Century Pastoralism: Strategies and Ideas

for Pastoralism in the Future. Editor: Andrew Heavens. AddisAbaba: UN OCHA Pastoralist Communication Initiative. Available at:http://www.pastoralists.org.

Valdes, C. (2006). Brazil’s Booming Agriculture Faces Obstacles,Amber Waves. Available at http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/November06/Features/Brazil.htm; accessed 27/11/08.

WISP (2008) The World Initiative for Sustainable Pastoralism.Available at: http://data.iucn.org/wisp/; accessed 14/10/08.

World Bank (2006) Final Project Proposal on a Proposed MDTF

Grant to the Government of Southern Sudan: Livestock and

Fisheries Development Project. 12 October 2006 . Available at:http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTAFRMDTF/Resources/5_Livestock_and_Fisheries_FPP_Oct_12.pdf; accessed 20/10/08.

World Bank (2006a) Agriculture and Achieving the Millennium

Development Goals. Report 32729-GLB, Agriculture and RuralDevelopment Department. World Bank, Washington DC.

World Resources Institute (2007) Watersheds of the World: Global

Maps10. Dryland Area by Basin. Water Resources eAtlas 1. Availableat: http://earthtrends.wri.org/pdf_library/maps/watersheds/gm10.pdf; accessed 10/10/08.

Wurzinger, M., D. Ndumu, A. M. Okeyo and J. Sölkner (2008)‘Lifestyle and Herding Practices of Bahima Pastoralists in Uganda’.African Journal of Agricultural Research, 3, 8, 542-548, August2008. Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJAR.


swamugi


swamugi



Mobile pastoral systems and international zoosanitary standardsDevising a compatible approach Robert J. Connor

April 2009




swamugi

REGLAP fcover 1.pdf