Presented by Alan Duncan at the FAO West Africa Regional Workshop on Crop Residues, Dakar, 10-13 December 2012

1. Rapid livestock feed assessment
tools to support intervention
strategies: FEAST and Techfit
Alan Duncan
FAO West Africa Regional Workshop on Crop Residues, Dakar,
10-13 December 2012

2. Mixed systems
Interactions between crops and
livestock
Crop residues are substantial
component of livestock diets
Feeding of livestock needs to take
account of arable realities:
competition for land, free grazing in
off season etc.

3. Challenges to improved
feed supply
Food security
Land scarcity/tenure
Markets for livestock products
Free grazing
Traction a sink for feed

4. The way ahead
Things are changing
– Dwindling grazing resources forcing
other feed sources to be considered
– Urbanization leading to increased
demand for livestock products
– Improving infrastructure
– Are we about to see things moving?

5. Feed interventions often
do not work – why?
 Failure to place feed in
broader livelihood context
FEAST
 Lack of farmer design and
ownership
 Neglect of how
interventions fit the
context: land, labour, cash, Techfit
knowledge etc

6. FEAST
The problem

7. Feed assessment
 Conventionally focuses on:
– The feeds
– Their nutritive value
– Ways of improving nutritive value
 FEAST broadens assessment:
– Is livestock an important livelihood strategy?
– How important are feed problems relative to
other problems?
– What about labour, input availability, credit,
seasonality, markets for products etc.?

8. How does FEAST work?
• Overview of farming system and
livestock feed aspect
1. PRA • Milk marketing, veterinary services
Exercise • Major problems for livestock
production
• Quantitative information on crop-
2. livestock production, feed
Individual availability, feeding rations
farmer • Qualitative information - perception
survey on feed quality
3. Data • Enter data in FEAST template
analysis and • Based on result develop ideas for
developing intervention
interventions

9. PRA
 General description of farming system
– range of farm sizes,
– farm labour availability
– annual rainfall pattern
– irrigation availability
– types of animals raised by households.
 General description of livestock production
– the types of animals raised (% of households raising
these animals and average herd/flock sizes)
– the purpose of raising these animals (e.g. draught,
income, fattening, calf production)
– the general animal husbandry (including; management,
veterinary services and reproduction).
– Ease of access to credit
– How available are necessary inputs – plastic, urea,
concentrates etc
 Problem identification and potential solutions

10. Quantitative questionnaire
 Animals – livestock inventory
 Crops - yields and areas to derive crop residue availability
 Cultivated forages – yields and areas
 Collected fodder: proportion of diet
 Purchased feed
 Grazing: proportion of diet
 Contributors to household income
 Production.
– Milk production
– Sale of livestock
 Seasonality.
– Feed supply: overall seasonal availability
– What is fed in different months?

12. Sample output
Contribution of livelihood activities to household income (as a
percentage)
6%
6%
32%
Agriculture
14%
Livestock
Remmitance
Labour
Others
Business
20%
22%

13. More sample output
DM content of total diet
Crop residues
Purchased
5%
7%
Naturally Cultivated
occurring and fodder
collected 25%
33%
Grazing
30%

14. Final output
Feast report with some ideas for key
problems and solutions
Better links and understanding
between farmers, research and
development staff

15. www.ilri.org/feast

16. Techfit
The problem

17. What is your Feed
main problem

18. What feed
technologies Planted forage
have you got? Urea treated straw
Bypass protein
OK, let’s try
those

19. A solution

20. Techfit
A discussion support tool for
prioritizing feed technologies

21. The core concept
Key context attributes Key technology
attributes
Land Land
Labour Labour
Credit Credit
Input Input
Knowledge Knowledge

22. Matching context to
technology
Key context Key technology
attributes attributes
Land Land
Labour x Labour = Score
Credit Credit
Input Input
Knowledge Knowledge

23. Technology filter
Score the pre-selected technologies based on the requirement, availability and scope for
III. improvement of five technology attributes
Pre-select the obvious
TECHNOLOGY (5-6) based Scope for
FILTER Attribute 5: improve
on context relevance Attribute 1: Attribute 2: Attribute 3: Attribute 4:
(Technology Knowledge ment of
and impact potential Land Labour Cash /credit Input delivery attribute
options to /skill
s
address Total
Context Impact Total Requ Avail Requ Avail Requ Avail Requ Avail Requ Avail Score 1-5
quantity, Score
relevanc potential score Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 Score 1-3 (1 for
quality, e (score 1- (score 1- (context (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for (1 for less and
seasonality 6; low- 6; low- X impact) more; less; more; less; high; less; high; less; high; less; 5 for
issues) high)) high) 3 for 3 for 3 for 3 for 3 for low) 3 for 3 for low) 3 for 3 for low) 3 for more)
less) more) less) more) more) more) more)
Urea treatment
2 3 6 3 2 2 2 2 0
of straw
Supplement with
2 5 10 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 22
UMMB
By-pass protein
1 3 3 3 3 1 1 3 0
feed
Feed
conservation
4 3 12 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 41
(surplus)
(HAY)
etc
etc

24. Cost-benefit assessment
What does the technology cost?
– Inputs, labour, land etc?
What does the technology deliver?
– Enhanced milk yield, improved
reproductive performance, better growth
etc
Does it make sense?

25. Final output
Ideas for some promising feed
interventions that might work
Better understanding of why the
usual suspects often don’t work.

26. Links
http://fodderadoption.wordpress.com/
techfit/
http://fodderadoption.wordpress.com/
feast/