This research was undertaken to determine the profitability of investing research funds into the Three Strata Forage System (TSFS) project, a cattle production project funded by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) and carried out in the village of Pecatu, Bali. The purpose of the project was to increase the production of cattle and productivity of the traitional farming system by introducing different grass, ground ground legumes, fodder shrubs and trees, and changing the pattern of land allocated to these forages. A TSFS plot foregoes 0.09 hectares of crop production to produce 0.09 hectares of grass and ground legumes (strata 1), 2000 shrubs (strata 2) and 42 fodder trees (strata 3) on the perimeter of a 0.25 hectare crop field. Cattle are fed exclusively with forages obtained from the plot, in contrast to the traditional system where cattle are tethered on marginal land and fed with feed obtained from other locations on the farm. The TSFS researchers have claimed that the TSFS will "not only increase the quantity and quality of the forages, but it could also increase the stocking rate [of cattle] and carrying capacity of the land, increase the soil fertility, reduce the soil erosion, increase the firewood supply, increase the farm income, induce other on-farm activities, and induce better ecological balance of the environment" (Nitis et al, 1989). In this study, the claims made by TSFS project researchers have been evaluated using financial analyses. Using data collected from farms in Pecatu, Bali, the values of TSFS production inputs are estimated from local market prices and regressions estimating farm production relationships. The results of the financial analyses were then used to infer the social welfare effects of the TSFS. The results of the analyses show that the TSFS plot incurs negative returns, relative to a traditional crop field. Elements of the TSFS system, such as improvements to the local ecosystem, are believed to have a minimal effect on the final estimates of the profitability of the plot and are excluded from the analysis. The large negative returns of the plot indicate that there are resource allocation costs associated with the transfer of high value crop land to the low value forage production advocated by the TSFS. The grasses and ground legumes introduced by the TSFS project were not familiar to farmers in Pecatu. However, the farmers were willing to experiment with the new varieties, with varying degrees of risk averseness and success in adoption (in accordance to the findings of Antle and Crissman (1990)). The tree and shrub forages of the TSFS were already known to farmers in Pecatu; the introduction of the TSFS did not appear to affect the use of tree fodder resources but may have increased the use of forage shrubs. The results of financial analysis of individual project forages indicate farmers have preferences for specific forage species. While farmers agreed to participate in the TSFS project due to financial incentives, they found they could reduce the costs of the TSFS by adopting profitable aspects of the TSFS, using a more flexible approach to land allocations and choice of forage species. As the shrubs, grasses and ground legumes are well-known throughout Asia, it appears that the only new management techniques introduced by the TSFS are the planting arrangement and feeding system - and these aspects have resulted in negative returns. Therefore, any positive welfare effects associated with the project are due to an increase in the rate of adoption of the forages included in the TSFS - although these effects are not large enough to offset the losses imposed by an inefficient allocation of land and labour resources to forage production. Reviewing all resource allocation effects of the TSFS, and given the size of the payments needed to obtain farmer participation it is clear that the net welfare effects are negative. Notwithstanding the optimistic claims of the project literature, the forages produced by the TSFS regime are not valuable enough to match the profitable crop activities they are supplanting. There is evidence to suggest that TSFS researchers have been prone to misjudge the true costs and benefits associated with the TSFS plot. This arises not only as a result of overly optimistic claims of project benefits and understated project costs, but a pervasive disregard for the rationality of traditional farmers. For future research projects, it is recommended that the funding agency, IDRC, require ex ante economic analyses, to determine the true social costs and benefits of a proposed technology. In this way, projects of net negative social value can be identified and improved before research resources have been allocated to the generate an inefficient technology. / Land and Food Systems, Faculty of / Graduate

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education is intended to provide students with a cross-subject, contextual learning experience. In order to more fully prepare our nation's students for entering the globally competitive workforce, STEM integration allows students to make connections between the abstract concepts learned in core subject classrooms and real-world situations. FFA and 4-H programs, by nature, are intended to provide students with hands-on learning opportunities where abstract core subject principles can be applied and more fully understood. Junior livestock projects through FFA and 4-H can provide rich connections for students between what they learn in school and how it is applied in the real world through their livestock project. Using a modified Delphi technique, this study identified STEM concepts associated with junior livestock projects. The study also examined whether STEM concepts should be integrated into the supervision of junior livestock projects and identified barriers which would prevent the incorporation of STEM concepts into local 4-H and FFA programming and instruction. The experts identified several (13 of 19) STEM concepts associated with junior livestock projects, four reasons local 4-H and FFA leaders/advisors should incorporate STEM concepts into their programming and instruction, and no barriers which would prevent local 4-H and FFA leaders/advisors from incorporating STEM concepts into their programming and instruction. This paper explores rationale regarding why STEM integration is important and makes recommendations for the integration of STEM concepts into the supervision of junior livestock projects.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of participatory and conventional approaches to livestock and irrigation project implementation in Zimbabwe’s Beitbridge and Mberengwa districts. The conventional livestock projects performed better than the participatory. Despite the breed for the participatory livestock projects being unsuitable for the environment, the farmers failed to utilize the drugs and surplus funding set aside for replacement of dead cattle. Farmer training was found to be of paramount importance in the establishment of the livestock projects in spite of the participatory approach used for the implementation of the projects. Also the technical backup and support for the livestock project beneficiaries is important to ensure early rectification of problems that may affect the smooth running of the projects as well as an opportunity to introduce new technical advice to boost production. Livestock projects take long period of time to establish, i.e. for the financial turn over to be realized. It takes long time for farmers in these projects to make investments from the proceeds of the livestock projects. For this reason, there is need for the number of beneficiaries for each pass-on livestock project to take into account the number of beasts at project establishment and also the number per each beneficiary group. However, the projects should still be encouraged as they will take full operation at a later stage and be of benefit to the rural disadvantaged who cannot access other means to own cattle, which in turn play a pivotal role in crop production (through draft power, manure provision) and cash earnings that indirectly ensures food security. Regardless of approach used, livestock projects should be strongly supported because the districts under study are prone to poor crop production and hence the cattle can be a source of income and food. Participatory irrigation projects performed better than the conventionally implemented, despite their small hectarages. This proved that farmer participation can greatly improve the efficiency of development work and eliminate many of the problems regarding proprietorship and enhance development activities at community level. Conventional irrigation projects were plagued by problems of mismanagement and theft as was reflected by poor performance and malfunction of the conventional Chingechuru and Chimwe-Chegato irrigation schemes. Fencing theft atChingechuru irrigation scheme had brought it to a stand still. However, the larger incomes associated with the conventionally implemented irrigation projects were the result of the larger areas under cropping for these projects. Production levels in participatory irrigation schemes were good. Adoption of most technical innovations in livestock projects was found to be associated with the conventional approach. Asset procurement was a function of the farmer’s accessibility to non-project income, like formal employment, and procurement of specific assets applied more to project type than the approach to project implementation. This study found that the approach used in implementation had a greater influence on the performance of irrigation projects than livestock projects.

No description available.

In Graaff-Reinet, domestic livestock farming and springbuck ranching are similar in that they both rely on the rangeland for their sustainability. However, as a consequence of repeated monotonous domestic livestock farming, resulting in compromised biological productivity and diversity, the rangelands have disintegrated. This, unfortunately, has placed the future sustainability of these rangelands and the livelihoods of the local people in an indeterminate state. In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in springbuck ranching for meat production as an alternative to domestic livestock farming in the area following (a) fears of worsening environmental challenges; (b) declining profitability in commercial domestic livestock farming and; (c) growing calls for the sustainable use of these rangelands for the benefit of future generations. The springbuck has emerged as a credible alternative to utilising the rangelands - as opposed to sheep - because of its promise to addressing the above challenges. This is in an attempt to tap into the multitude of benefits that the springbuck possesses (by virtue of being part of the natural capital of the area) that have a potential towards restoring ecological integrity by extenuating some of the detrimental effects of sheep farming on the rangelands and presenting opportunities for diversifying incomes. Yet, despite the general increase in interest, a resistance towards the uptake of springbuck ranching for meat production exists. The main contention is that springbuck meat production cannot out-perform the economic returns of wool sheep farming. This study attempts to address these concerns by investigating the profitability and economic sustainability of converting a sheep farm into a springbuck ranch in Graaff-Reinet. The study uses stochastic simulation to estimate the probability distribution of some key output variables, namely: net cash income, ending cash balance, real net worth and the net present value (NPV) in evaluating the profitability of converting a 5 000ha sheep-dominated farm into a springbuck-dominated ranch under three alternative scenarios. The use of stochastic simulation allows for the incorporation of downside risk associated with the production and marketing of wool, mutton and springbuck meat. The study uses stochastic prices and yields to calculate net returns variability. Incorporating scenario analysis helped to evaluate how alternative wool sheep-dominated and springbuck-dominated combinations would perform based on the probable outcomes of different assumptions in the various scenarios. By applying stochastic efficiency with respect to a function (SERF) criterion to the simulated NPVs, this study compares the profitability of alternative scenarios based on various risk aversion coefficients. The study finds that converting a 5 000ha wool sheep dominated farm into a springbuck dominated ranch could potentially be a more profitable investment than wool sheep farming over a 15 year planning horizon, in Graaff-Reinet. The SERF results indicate that for all scenarios tested, the best strategy of converting a wool sheep dominated farm into a springbuck ranch would be one which comprise a combination of 70% springbuck, 20% mutton and 10% wool production as the likely profitable enterprise mix. Using economic sustainability analysis, the study reveals that because of low costs in springbuck ranching, springbuck meat production enterprises are most likely to be more financially sustainable than wool sheep-dominated enterprises. This suggests that rangeland owners may be better off converting their wool sheep-dominated farms into springbuck-dominated ranches. Thus, as the call for more environmentally benign rangeland utilising economic-ecological systems intensifies, rangeland owners in the Eastern Cape Karoo have a practicable option. At the very least, there exists an option to broaden their incomes whilst promoting ecological restoration with springbuck meat production.