By Hippolyte Dossa

1. Characterisation and Community-based Management of Farm Animal Genetic Resources in the Mixed Crop-livestock Farming System in Benin By Hippolyte Dossa PhD Project Proposal

2. Background

3. Total area: 112,620 km2 Arable land: 15% Human population: 7,0 m (Census 2002)

4. South more densily populated than North Source: FAO (2003)

5. Narrow coastal strip that rises to a swampy, forested plateau and then to highlands in the north. • Hot and humid climate blankets the entire country Source: Akker van der (2000)

6. Mainstay: rainfed subsistence agriculture - 60% human population and 40% GDP - Major crops: cassava, maize, beans, yams, palm oil and cotton • Average cultivated land per household : 0.4 to 12.7 ha (more than 90% of farms in the south and 80% in the north have land size < 3 ha) • Limited off-farm + credit + access to external inputs • Land degradation + low agricultural productivity • About 40% of rural people below poverty threshold (CORCEDO, 2001)

7. Tsetse flies constraint development production of large animals • Steady increases in livestock populations over last ten years • Data on poultry? Data from FAO (2003)

8. Small stocks (small ruminants and chicken) are widespread

9. Ownership and value of livestock among small farmers in Benin Poverty threshold in rural area = 56, 600 FCFA /adult/p.a. (IFPRI / LARES, 2001)

10. Threats to livestock diversity • Livestock important in livelihood strategies of the poor (savings, insurance, security, accumulation & diversification of assets, social & cultural functions) • Performance, adaptation & disease resistance of local genetic resources not fully recorded • Replacement or indiscriminate crossbreeding>>> genetic erosion (loss of genetic diversity; reduction of adaptive value)

11. Threats to livestock diversity (2) • Opportunities for efficient utilisation of livestock genetic resources for improvement of livelihood are being missed • Has the need been recognized to develop appropriate strategies and actions of conservation and utilisation of FAnGR by all stakeholders in Benin?

12. Conservation strategies • Ex-situ (Cryoconservation, live genebanks) • In-situ (on farm) • Criteria: - Uniqueness of breeds, traits - Economic importance - Cultural and historical values - Contribution to agrobiodiversity • „The knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities should be used for sustainable use of biological diversity“ (CBD, 1992) Art. 8-10 & 15 • Characterisation & community-based management AnGR

13. The Case of Small Ruminants

14. Small ruminants are non-pooled household resources 60% of owners are female Quick source of cash, security and insurance against hardship Offtakes mainly sold Religious and social & cultural functions

15. Management system • Farm buildings not designed for livestock

16. Limited supply of feed and water

17. Harsh environmental conditions • High temperatures and relative humidities • Disease outbreaks • Presence of parasites Peste des Petits Ruminants (PPR) Sarcoptic Mange

18. Monitoring of animal health: Limited control and treatment of diseases • Price of chemicals drugs • Reliance on traditional medicine

19. Existing breeds Goats Sheep Photo: Inrab Adapted from Maud (1980) & Meyer (2002)

20. Threats to local breeds • No systematic characterisation • Indiscriminate crossbreeding

21. Threats to local breeds (cont.) • Ongoing livestock improvement projects eg. substitution local goat by French alpin goat in South Benin (Heifer Project October 2003) www.perso.wanadoo.fr/heifer.france/pays_Benin.htm

23. Threats to local breeds (cont.) Market situation (Dossa, 2002)

24. Threats to local breeds (cont.) Market situation

25. Objectives of the study • Identify & understand smallholder objectives and breeding strategies in livestock production • Identify, evaluate and assess traditional knowledge & local practices • Develop community –based management strategies & actions using small ruminant as a pilot species

26. Conceptual framework Biophysical data Climate, Vegetation, Soil, Geography Socio-economic data Population density, Policies, Infrastructure, Services Cultural data Ethnicity, Religion Crop-livestock interactions Small ruminant production system Management practices (Feeding, health, breeding, marketing) Animal Genetic Variability (Phenotypic and genetic variation within & between populations) Productivity (Biological efficiency) Livelihood Contribution (Direct & indirect uses, economic efficiency) Community-based Management Strategies & Actions

27. Research questions and hypotheses • Question 1: How do small ruminants contribute to the livelihoods of smallholders and to the sustainability of mixed farming systems? • Hypothesis 1: Roles and overall productivity of small ruminants vary according to agro-ecological zones and existing communities, due to differences in local knowledge and management practices

28. Research questions and hypotheses (cont.) • Question 2: Under what conditions are farmers most likely to initiate a community-based management of small ruminants genetic resource such as it is able to begin functionning and move into a short-term and sustainable long-term phases? • Hypothesis 2: Farmers will develop a shared understanding and networks for reciprocal exchange that permit a sustainable, collective management of small ruminants genetic resources when provided with the necessary learning environments that enable them to share their experiences and viewpoints

29. Material and Methods

30. Study area • Coverage of three AEZ out of eight (north-south) • One location per AEZ could be selected on basis of: • Predominance of sheep and goats (MAEP-DE, 2002) • Accessability • Support of INRAB through R&D centres • Support of livestock development institutions (PDE) • Two villages per location could be selected based on: • Farmers organisations • Effective village authority system

31. Preliminary study phase • Agreement with the INRAB staff on the locations to be • surveyed • Explorative field visits & meetings with local authorities, • community leaders, politicians • Collection secondary data through • - Interpretation & analysis maps and satellites images • - Analysis of census data • - Key informants interviews • - Review available literature

32. Possible locations

33. Community action research (Adapted from Sultana andThompson, 2003; Fitzgerald, 2003) 1 Community identification 2 Participatory action planning 3 Implementation community plan 4 Participatory evaluation

34. Community action research: 1 Community identification Participatory resource mapping Key informants discussion Oral history with elders Direct observation Questionnaire interviews with random sample Flock characteristics & management practices Progeny history Ranking and scoring exercices Morphological measurement Key informants Focus group Wealth ranking

35. Community action research:2 Action planning Regular meetings

36. Community action research:3 Implementation • Farmer Field School: • Participants divided in small groups • Each group visit a flock of a group member • Observations guided by checklist • Discussions in each group • Plenary • Special topics using „expert farmer“ approach • Group dynamic exercises • Monthly visit to selected flocks by enumerators

37. Community action research:4 Evaluation • Random sample participants and non participants • Questionnaire survey and flock census • (before-after participatory action planning) • Assessment changes in: • Management practices: flock size, feeding, watering, disease control, mating control, breeding strategies • Actual effective population size (Ne) • Social capital: trust, harmony, cooperation, empathy, unity, empowerment

38. Data analysis • Information gathered through PRA analysed • Immediate feedback to farmers • Biophysical and socio-economic data integrated into GIS program using Arc view GIS software • Statistical analysis (e.g., ANOVA and logistic regression models, multivariate, PCA and cluster analyses;SPSS version 11.5)

39. Time schedule Could we start field work before October?)

40. Thank you for your attention!