Cooperatives and Mixed Farming
38. The importance of mixed farming has been steadily declining in producer cooperative farms. From among the existing producer cooperatives, only some 29% practice traditional mixed farming, maintaining the crop and livestock associations under one management unit and the horizontal integration between the two enterprises through the use of draft oxen. About 70% are engaged exclusively in crop production, but maintain the horizontal integration of crop and livestock productions. The remaining 1% operate specialized livestock enterprises. Draft oxen alone account for about 87% of the livestock population in producer cooperative farms (PPD/MOA, 1984). The large oxen population reflects the prevailing strong emphasis on crop production resulting in the negligence of conventional livestock development activities such as dairy, sheep, etc. In view of this, it will not be an exaggeration to generalize that livestock development in PCs (with some exceptions) has been reduced to oxen keeping. Even oxen have been losing their multiple function in terms of transport and threshing services. In addition, the widespread mismanagement of crop residues and nonuse of manure for fertilizer, probably due to cost considerations in collection and distribution, have impeded the crop-livestock integration effort.
39. Development finance institutions should also help more in furthering the idea of feasible integration. For example, in some cooperatives where crop and livestock enterprises are promoted side by side, their financial viabilities are evaluated independent of each other without proper account of their economic interaction (complementary and/or supplementary relationships) within the context of a mixed farming concept.
40. There is a general impression that mixed farming can be more easily reinforced at smallholders level, in comparison to cooperatives, for several reasons: animal power can provide at least triple functions - traction, threshing and transport. At the same time, proper utilization of crop residues, rotation with fodder crops and fallowing will substantially reduce the burden on the natural pasture. Additionally, effective use of manuring would reduce the demand for fertilizer. All these in general have not been promoted in producer cooperatives probably due to the relative ease with which alternatives (e.g. tractors motorized transport, fertilizer etc.) are made available to them as a matter of government policy.
Cooperatives and Pasture Land Availability
41. Crop production has been and will probably remain the primary activity of PCs for a long time to come. Crop land allotment of about 2.5 ha. per household member is more or less a standard in PCs so long as arable land is available. In contrast, no pasture land is allocated to individual members. The common practice is, as indicated earlier, that pasture land adequate enough to support PC owned animals is first set aside to the cooperatives and the rest is left for communal grazing for non-PC members. Measurement of pasture land is a rare practice and hence very few cooperatives know precisely the size of their holdings. This is further compounded by the absence of livestock inventory. Consequently, determination of the optimal carrying capacity of the available pasture land is becoming increasingly difficult. In these circumstances, both physical and financial plans in this sector have been mostly based on intelligent guesses. In other respects, service cooperatives (SCs) often claim to have abundant grazing land in their PAs in order to obtain livestock credit. Appraisals of loan requests should consider that individual farmers tend to maximize their benefit from the communally held grazing land without being much concerned about its conservation.
Breeding Policy
42. In recent years, some effort has been made in the genetic improvement of the local dairy animals through cross breeding. However, there has, hitherto been no concrete and binding breeding policy with regard to the choice of the exotic breed types to be crossed with the indigenous animals and the corresponding exotic blood level of the crosses. A study proposal by the Ministry of Agriculture regarding such policy has been submitted for decision by government but has yet to receive formal approval.
43. The study proposes Friesian and Jersey crosses with local Zebu (Borana, Arsi, Horro, Barka, Fogera) with exotic blood levels, of 50-75% to smallholders. The choice of the Friesian and Jersey breeds will be contingent upon, among other factors, feed availability and the potential market for liquid milk. Jersey crosses will be the choice where these constraints appear insurmountable at least in the short-run. (AFRD, 1986).
44. So far Friesian crosses with Borana and Arsi are the foundation stocks in cooperative dairy farms. The Arsi crosses are less popular in regions other than Arsi mainly due to their poor productivity (on average 3 Its/day) and bad temper, though some experts argue that their low feed requirement offer a great advantage. The partial supply of Arsi crosses in the IFAD supported cooperative dairy farms and in the Finnish supported smallholder dairy farms (both in Shoa region) has already resulted in a mounting dissatisfaction. As part of the promotional effort, in-calf heifers (Borana x Friesian and Arsi x Friesian) supplied to cooperatives are highly subsidized; unfortunately, availability of heifers has proved to be a major constraint.
Marketing and Pricing Policy
45. There has been some but much less strict and direct government interventions in the marketing and pricing of live animals and livestock products of the peasant and private commercial sectors. The prevailing primary market government price for cattle is Br. 1.40-1.50 per kg liveweight. Cooperatives and smallholders within a 100 km radius of Addis Ababa are expected to deliver their milk to the collection centers of the Dairy Development Enterprise (DDE) at Birr 0.50/lt. In the face of far better open market prices (up to Birr 0.85/lt.), and most importantly, the alternative of getting into the high-priced cooking butter market, the government's fixed milk price can hardly be expected to continue to attract many smallholders and private commercial dairy farmers to deliver to the DDE. The present average daily throughput of the Shola milk processing plant in Addis Ababa is in the region of 25-30,000 Its/day as against a theoretical capacity of 60,000 Its/day. Given the idle capacity of the plant and the concurrent unsatisfied demand for milk in Addis Ababa, a review of milk marketing and pricing policy appears imperative.
Farmer Participation
46. PCs have in general had limited opportunity and authority to participate in deciding what is economically, socially and culturally good for them. The outstanding factors hindering farmers' participation include the following:
(i) most obviously, government intervention is based on a top-down development approach which has led to the imposition of ideas, frequent coercion and virtual control. The participation at the grassroots level has hardly been more than a token gesture;(ii) PCs are as a rule organized on a large scale (e.g. in 1986 there were 1021 members in the Yetnora Producers Cooperative in Gojjam region) and communications and decision-making have become too bureaucratised, creating serious management problems;
(iii) lack of incentives: the remuneration system based on labour points accumulated does not induce higher labour productivity and as a result the enthusiasm for active participation is very low;
(iv) fixed grain prices and the mandatory quota system have inhibited committed participation;
(v) insecure landholding rights have above all contributed to the generally apathetic attitude which the members of most cooperatives have adopted;
(vi) financial irregularities and misappropriations which seem to be widespread undermine the confidence of the members in their cooperatives.
47. In this context, cooperative dairy enterprises have presented particular and specific problems in farmer participation. Generally, since the collectively managed enterprises in this case have been imposed rather than based on farmer demand, may tend to regard them as government managed projects rather than their own. Farmers also have a perception that the dairy farms create increased competition for scarce crop land while net returns are not sufficiently attractive in terms of the higher risk they face with the greater susceptibility of cross-brads to diseases and the uncertainty of adequate supplies of concentrate feed. In many instances producer cooperative members think that dairying can better be operated under individual smallholder management even where the natural feed resource base and health care are on a more modest scale.
