Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T08:58:17.644Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Estimating farmers' preferences in selection of indigenous chicken genetic resources using non-market attributes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2011

H.K. Bett ,
R.C. Bett ,
K.J. Peters ,
A.K. Kahi  and
W. Bokelmann
H.K. Bett*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Livestock Sciences, Division of Animal Breeding in the Tropics and Sub-Tropics, Humboldt University of Berlin, Philippstr. 13, Haus 9, 10115 Berlin, Germany Department of Agricultural Economics and Social Sciences, Humboldt University of Berlin, Philippstr. 13, Haus 12, 10117 Berlin, Germany
R.C. Bett
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), P.O. Box 7023, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), P.O. Box 30709, Nairobi 00100, Kenya
K.J. Peters
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Livestock Sciences, Division of Animal Breeding in the Tropics and Sub-Tropics, Humboldt University of Berlin, Philippstr. 13, Haus 9, 10115 Berlin, Germany
A.K. Kahi
Affiliation:
Animal Breeding and Genetics Group, Department of Animal Science, Egerton University, P.O. Box 536, 20115, Egerton, Kenya
W. Bokelmann
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Social Sciences, Humboldt University of Berlin, Philippstr. 13, Haus 12, 10117 Berlin, Germany
*
Correspondence to: H.K. Bett, Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany. email: [email protected]
Get access

Summary

The objective of this paper was to estimate the farmers' preferences based on the non-market traits in selection, breeding and conservation of indigenous chicken. The study was carried out in four selected counties of Kenya. Data were collected using structured questionnaires with the use of multi-attribute elicitation techniques applied to 450 rural households. Conjoint analysis through an ordered probit model was used to analyse the data. The study identified traits preferred by the farmers based on their current low-input production circumstances. Using these traits, indigenous chicken can be selected for higher productivity and performance while retaining their diversity and adaptability. In general, the determination of the importance of various attributes elucidates to the stakeholders some valuable aspects that would assist them in overcoming some of the major constraints of indigenous chicken production in rural areas and at the same time provides vital information for selection, conservation and development of breeding programmes.

Résumé

Ce document avait pour objectif l'estimation des préférences des agriculteurs sur la base de caractères non marchands dans le choix, la sélection et la conservation des poules indigènes. L’étude a été réalisée dans quatre comptés choisis du Kenya. Les données ont été collectées en utilisant des questionnaires structurés, préparés par des techniques d’élicitation multi-attributs, soumis à 450 ménages ruraux. L'analyse conjointe par un modèle probit ordonné a été utilisée pour examiner ces données. L’étude a identifié les caractères préférés par les agriculteurs sur la base de la situation courante de production à faible apport d'intrants. En utilisant ces caractères, on peut sélectionner les poules indigènes pour une productivité et une performance plus élevées tout en gardant leur diversité et leur adaptabilité. En général, la détermination de l'importance d'attributs différents explique aux parties prenantes certains aspects précieux qui pourraient les aider à surmonter quelques-unes des principales contraintes de la production des poules indigènes dans les zones rurales et fournit, en même temps, des informations essentielles pour la sélection, pour la conservation et pour le développement des programmes de sélection.

Resumen

El objetivo de este trabajo fue estimar las preferencias de los ganaderos basadas en rasgos que no son importantes desde el punto comercial en la selección, la mejora genética y la conservación de razas indígenas de gallinas. El estudio se llevó a cabo en cuatro condados seleccionados de Kenia. Los datos se recopilaron por medio de cuestionarios con el uso de técnicas de obtención de múltiples atributos aplicados a 450 familias rurales. Se utilizó el análisis conjunto a través de un modelo Probit ordenado para analizar datos. El estudio identificó los rasgos preferidos por los ganaderos en base a sus circunstancias actuales de producción de bajos insumos. Por medio del uso de estos rasgos, los pollos indígenas pueden ser seleccionados para una mayor productividad y rendimiento, manteniendo su diversidad y adaptabilidad. En general, el hecho de determinar la importancia de varios atributos aclara a los interesados algunos importantes aspectos que les ayuden a superar algunas de las principales limitaciones de la producción aviar basada en razas indígenas en las zonas rurales, y, al mismo tiempo, proporciona información esencial para la selección, la conservación y el desarrollo de programas de mejora.

Keywords

genetic resourceindigenous chickennon-market attributepreferenceselection and conservationpoules indigènesressources génétiquesattribut non marchandpréférencesélection et conservationgallina indígenarecurso genéticoatributos no importantes desde el punto de vista comercialpreferenciaselección y conservación
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Genetic Resources/Resources génétiques animales/Recursos genéticos animales , Volume 49 , December 2011 , pp. 51 - 63
Copyright
Copyright © Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abdelqader, A., Wollny, C.B.A. & Gauly, M. 2007. Characterization of local chicken production systems and their potential under different levels of management practice in Jordan. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 39: 155–164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abdelqader, A., Wollny, C.B.A. & Gauly, M. 2008. On-farm investigation of local chicken biodiversity and performance potentials in rural areas of Jordan. Anim. Genet. Resour. Info., 43: 49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aini, I. 1990. Indigenous chicken production in South-east Asia. World Poult. Sci. J., 46: 51–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bett, R.C., Bett, H.K., Kahi, A.K. & Peters, K.J. 2009. Evaluation and effectiveness of breeding and production services for dairy goat farmers in Kenya. Ecol. Econ., 68: 2451–2460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birol, E. & Asare-Marfo, D. 2008. Impact of HPAI on Ghanaian rural poultry producers' incomes, controlling avian flu and protecting people's livelihoods in Africa and Indonesia. HPAI Research Brief. No. 1, DFID (available at http://www.hpai-research.net/docs/Research_briefs/IFPRI-ILRI/IFPRI_ILRI_rbr01.pdf).Google Scholar
Biswas, P.K., Uddin, G.M.N., Barua, H., Roy, K., Biswas, D., Ahad, A. & Debnath, N.C. 2006. Causes of loss of Sonali chickens on smallholder households in Bangladesh. Prev. Vet. Med., 76: 185–195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Biswas, P.K., Uddin, G.M.N., Barua, H., Roy, K., Biswas, D., Ahad, A. & Debnath, N.C. 2008. Survivability and causes of loss of broody-hen chicks on smallholder households in Bangladesh. Prev. Vet. Med., 83: 260–271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
CBD. 1992. Convention on biological diversity. CBD Secretariat. Montreal (available at http://www.biodiv.org/convention/articles.asp).Google Scholar
Cheng, K.M. & Burns, J.T. 1988. Dominance relationship and mating behavior of domestic cocks: a model to study mate-guarding and sperm competition in birds. Condor, 90: 697–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dana, N., van der Waaij, L., Dessie, T. & van Arendonk, J. 2010. Production objectives and trait preferences of village poultry producers of Ethiopia: implications for designing breeding schemes utilizing indigenous chicken genetic resources. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 42: 1519–1529.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drucker, A.G. & Anderson, S. 2004. Economic analysis of animal genetic resources and the use of rural appraisal methods: lessons from Southeast Mexico. Int. J. Agric. Sustain., 2: 77–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAO. 2009. Impacts of avian Influenza outbreaks on indigenous chicken genetic resources in Thailand. Prepared by Monchai Duangjinda, Kreingkrai Choprakarn, Surachai Suwanlee, Panrapee Amnueysit and O. Thieme. GCP/RAS/228/GER Working Paper No. 13. Rome.Google Scholar
Faustin, V., Adégbidi, A.A., Garnett, S.T., Koudandé, D.O., Agbo, V. & Zander, K.K. 2010. Peace, health or fortune?: Preferences for chicken traits in rural Benin. Ecol. Econ., 69: 1848–1857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fields, D. & Gillespie, J. 2008. Beef producer preferences and purchase decisions for livestock revenue insurance products. J. Agric. Appl. Econ., 40: 789–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Girma, T.K., Awudu, A. & Clemens, W. 2009. Valuing traits of indigenous cows in central Ethiopia. J. Agric. Econ., 60: 386–401.Google Scholar
Greene, W.H. 2002. LIMDEP version 8.0. Plainview, NY: Econometric Software, Inc.Google Scholar
Greene, W.H. 2003. Econometric analysis, 5th edn.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Grobbelaar, J.A.N., Sutherland, B. & Molalakgotla, N.M. 2010. Egg production potentials of certain indigenous chicken breeds from South Africa. Anim. Genet. Resour. Info., 46: 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gueye, E.F. 2002. Family poultry research and development in low-income food-deficit countries: approaches and prospects. Outlook Agric., 31: 13–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gueye, E.F. 2009. The role of networks in information dissemination to family poultry farmers. World Poult. Sci. J., 65: 115–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guhl, A.M. 1950. Heterosexual dominance and mating behavior in chickens. Behaviour, 2: 106–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Havenstein, G.B., Ferket, P.R. & Qureshi, M.A. 2003. Growth, livability, and feed conversion of 1957 versus 2001 broilers when fed representative 1957 and 2001 broiler diets. Poult. Sci., 82: 1500–1508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoffman, I. & Scherf, B. 2006. Animal genetic resources-time to worry?. In Mcleod, A., ed. The livestock report, pp. 57–74. Rome, Italy: Animal Production and Health Division, FAO.Google Scholar
Islam, M.A. & Nishibori, M. 2009. Indigenous naked neck chicken: a valuable genetic resource for Bangladesh. World Poult. Sci. J., 65: 125–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, R.S., Chen, X.Y. & Geng, Z.Y. 2010. Broodiness, egg production, and correlations between broody traits in an indigenous chicken breed. Poult. Sci., 89: 1094–1096.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamau, F.K. 2000. A Kenyan experience on R&D efforts linking crop and livestock improvement, NRM and human health. In Jabbar, M.A., Peden, D.G., Mohamed Saleem, M.A., Li Pun, H., eds., Proceedings of an IDRC–ILRI international workshop held at ILRI, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 11–15 May 1998. ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute), Nairobi, Kenya, 245 pp.Google Scholar
Kamuanga, M., Swallow, B.M., Sigué, H. & Bauer, B. 2001. Evaluating contingent and actual contributions to a local public good: Tsetse control in the Yale agro-pastoral zone, Burkina Faso. Ecol. Econ., 39: 115–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaudia, T.J. & Kitalyi, A.J. 2002. The Bangladesh model and other experiences in family poultry development: Commercializing rearing of village chicken in Kenya., INFPDE-Conferences International Network for Family Poultry Development (INFPD) (available at http://www.fao.org/AG/AGAInfo/themes/en/infpd/documents/econf_bang/add_paper12.html).Google Scholar
Kingori, A.M., Wachira, A.M. & Tuitoek, J.K. 2010. Indigenous chicken production in Kenya: a review. Int. J. Poult. Sci., 9: 309–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitalyi, A.J. 1998. Village chicken production systems in rural Africa: household food security and gender issues. Animal Production and Health Paper, No. 142. Rome, Italy: FAO.Google Scholar
Kondombo, S.R., Nianogo, A.J., Kwakkel, R.P., Udo, H.M.Y. & Slingerland, M. 2003. Comparative analysis of village chicken production in two farming systems in Burkina Faso. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 35: 563–574.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lancaster, K. 1966. A new approach to consumer theory. J. Political Econ., 74: 132–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louviere, J.J. 1994. Conjoint analysis. In Bagozzi, R.P., ed., Advanced Methods of Marketing Research. Blackwell, Oxford. pp. 223–259.Google Scholar
Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A. and Swait, J.D. 2000. Stated choice methods: analysis and application. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mack, S., Hoffmann, D. & Otte, J. 2005. The contribution of poultry to rural development. World Poult. Sci. J., 61: 7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Makokha, S.N., Karugia, J.T., Staal, S.J. & Oluoch-Kosura, W. 2007. Valuation of cow attributes by conjoint analysis: a case study of Western Kenya. Afr. J. Agric. Resour. Econ., 1: 95–113.Google Scholar
Maphosa, T., Kusina, J., Kusina, N.T., Makuza, S. & Sibanda, S. 2004. A monitoring study comparing production of village chickens between communal (Nharira) and small-scale commercial (Lancashire) farming areas in Zimbabwe. Livestock Res. Rural Dev., 16: 7 (available at http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd16/7/maph16048.htm).Google Scholar
McAinsh, C.V. & Kristensen, A.R. 2004. Dynamic modelling of a traditional African chicken production system. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 36: 609–626.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McAinsh, C.V., Kusina, J., Madsen, J. & Nyoni, O. 2004. Traditional chicken production in Zimbabwe. World Poult. Sci. J., 60: 233–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menge, E.O., Kosgey, I.S. & Kahi, A.K. 2005. Bio-economic model to support breeding of indigenous chicken in different production systems. Int. J. Poult. Sci., 4: 827–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MoLD. 2006. Livestock production annual report 2005. Nairobi: Government Printers.Google Scholar
Mtileni, B.J., Muchadeyi, F.C., Maiwashe, A., Phitsane, P.M., Halimani, T.E., Chimonyo, M. & Dzama, K. 2009. Characterisation of production systems for indigenous chicken genetic resources of South Africa. Appl. Anim. Husb. Rural Dev., 2: 18–22.Google Scholar
Muchadeyi, F.C., Sibanda, S., Kusina, N.T., Kusina, J. & Makuza, S. 2004. The village chicken production system in Rushinga District of Zimbabwe. Livestock Res. Rural Dev., 16: 6 (available at http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd16/6/much16040.htm).Google Scholar
Mwacharo, J.M., Jianlin, H. & Amano, T. 2006. Native African chicken: valuable genetic resources for future breeding improvement. J. Anim. Genet. (Jpn), 34: 63–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mwalusanya, N.A., Katule, A.M., Mutayoba, S.K., Mtambo, M.M.A., Olsen, J.E. & Minga, U.M. 2002. Productivity of local chickens under village management conditions. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 34: 405–416.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nielsen, H.M. & Amer, P.R. 2007. An approach to derive economic weights in breeding objectives using partial profile choice experiments. Animal, 1: 1254–1262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norris, D. & Ngambi, J. 2006. Genetic parameter estimates for body weight in local Venda chickens. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 38: 605–609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olawunmi, O.O., Salako, A.E. & Afuwape, A.A. 2008. Morphometric differentiation and asessment of function of the Fulani and Yoruba ecotype indigenous chickens of Nigeria. Int. J. Morphol., 26: 975–980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olwande, O.P., Ogara, W., Okuthe, S., Muchemi, G., Okoth, E., Odindo, M. & Adhiambo, R. 2010. Assessing the productivity of indigenous chickens in an extensive management system in southern Nyanza, Kenya. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 42: 283–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Omondi, I., Baltenweck, I., Drucker, A., Obare, G. & Zander, K. 2008. Economic valuation of sheep genetic resources: implications for sustainable utilization in the Kenyan semi-arid tropics. Trop. Anim. Health Prod., 40: 615–626.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ondwasy, H., Wesonga, H. & Okitoi, L. 2006. Indigenous chicken production manual. Technical Note Series. Nairobi, Kenya; Kenya Agricultural Research Institute.Google Scholar
Ondwassy, H.O., Nenkare, J., Ligono, W. & Nelima, K. 2000. Improved management packages for indigenous farmers in Ileho and Lubao sub-locations of Ileho Division, Kakamega District. Nairobi, Kenya: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development.Google Scholar
Ouma, E., Abdulai, A. & Drucker, A. 2007. Measuring heterogeneous preferences for cattle traits among cattle-keeping households in East Africa. Am. J. Agric. Econ., 89: 1005–1019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pease, D. 1990. How to evaluate Highland Cattle. Talk was given at the Annual General Meeting of the Canadian Highland Cattle Society held August 1990, Quebec (available at http://www.cruachan.com.au/evalu.htm).Google Scholar
Pica-Ciamarra, U. 2009. Livestock-poverty linkages in Latin America. Livestock Res. Rural Dev., 21: 11 (available at http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd21/1/pica21011.htm).Google Scholar
Queiroz, S.A. & Cromberg, V.U. 2006. Aggressive behavior in the genus Gallus sp. Rev. Bras. Ciência Avícola, 8: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramnath, V., Rekha, P.S. & Sujatha, K.S. 2008. Amelioration of heat stress induced disturbances of antioxidant defense system in chicken by brahma rasayana. Evid. Based Complement Alternat. Med., 5: 77–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Randolph, T.F., Schelling, E., Grace, D., Nicholson, C.F., Leroy, J.L., Cole, D.C., Demment, M.W., Omore, A., Zinsstag, J. & Ruel, M. 2007. Invited review: role of livestock in human nutrition and health for poverty reduction in developing countries. J. Anim. Sci., 85: 2788–2800.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rauw, W.M., Noordhuizen-Stassen, E.N. & Grommers, F.J. 1998. Undesirable side effects of selection for high production efficiency in farm animals: a review. Livestock Prod. Sci., 56: 15–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reta, D., Nigussie, D. & Alemu, Y. 2006. Marek's disease vaccination opened the door to rear indigenous chickens of Ethiopia under confined management. Intl. J. Appl. Res. Vet. Med., 4: 121–127.Google Scholar
Roessler, R., Drucker, A.G., Scarpa, R., Markemann, A., Lemke, U., Thuy, L.T. & Valle Zárate, A. 2008. Using choice experiments to assess smallholder farmers' preferences for pig breeding traits in different production systems in North-West Vietnam. Ecol. Econ., 66: 184–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruto, E., Garrod, G. & Scarpa, R. 2008. Valuing animal genetic resources: a choice modeling application to indigenous cattle in Kenya. Agric. Econ., 38: 89–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scarpa, R., Ruto, E.S.K., Kristjanson, P., Radeny, M., Drucker, A.G. & Rege, J.E.O. 2003. Valuing indigenous cattle breeds in Kenya: an empirical comparison of stated and revealed preference value estimates. Ecol. Econ., 45: 409–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solomon, D. 2003. Growth performance of native and white Leghorn chickens under scavenging and intensive system of management in Ethiopia. Livestock Res. Rural Dev., 15: 11 (available at http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd15/11/deme1511.htm).Google Scholar
Sonaiya, E.B. & Swan, S.E.J. 2004. Small scale poultry production: technical guide. Rome, Food and Agriculture Organization (available at ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/008/y5169e/y5169e00.pdf).Google Scholar
Swatson, H.K., Nsahlai, I.V. & Byebwa, B. 2001. The status of smallholder poultry production in the Alfred district of Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa: priorities for intervention. Paper presented at the Livestock Community and Environment. Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the Association of Institutions for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
Sy, H.A., Faminow, M.D., Johnson, G.V. & Crow, G. 1997. Estimating the values of cattle characteristics using an ordered probit model. Am. J. Agric. Econ., 79: 463–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tadelle, D., Alemu, Y. & Peters, K.J. 2000. Indigenous chickens in Ethiopia: genetic potential and attempts at Improvement. World Poult. Sci. J., 56: 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tadelle, D., Kijora, C. & Peters, K.J. 2003a. Indigenous chicken ecotypes in Ethiopia: growth and feed utilization potentials. Int. J. Poult. Sci., 2: 144–152.Google Scholar
Tadelle, D., Millon, T., Alemu, Y. & Peters, K.J. 2003b. Village chicken production systems in Ethiopia:1. Flock characteristics and performance. Livestock Res. Rural Dev., 15: p1 (available at http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd15/1/tadea151.htm).Google Scholar
Tano, K., Kamuanga, M., Faminow, M.D. & Swallow, B. 2003. Using conjoint analysis to estimate farmer's preferences for cattle traits in West Africa. Ecol. Econ., 45: 393–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Dach, S.W., Sommer, R. & Wenger, R. 2007. The livestock revolution: an opportunity for poor farmers? InfoResources Focus. No. 1/07. Zollikofen, Switzerland Schlaefli & Maurer AG (available at http://www.inforesources.ch/pdf/focus07_1_e.pdf).Google Scholar
Woolliams, J.A. & Toro, M.A. 2007. What is genetic diversity? In Oldenbroek, K., ed. Utilization and conservation of farm animal genetic resources. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Yang, K.T., Lin, C.Y., Huang, H.L., Liou, J.S., Chien, C.Y., Wu, C.P., Huang, C.W., Ou, B.R., Chen, C.F., Lee, Y.P., Lin, E.C., Tang, P.C., Lee, W.C., Ding, S.T., Cheng, W.T.K. & Huang, M.C. 2008. Expressed transcripts associated with high rates of egg production in chicken ovarian follicles. Mol. Cell. Probes, 22: 47–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yoo, S.-H. 2005. Analysing household bottled water and water purifier expenditures: simultaneous equation bivariate Tobit model. Appl. Econ. Lett., 12: 297–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zander, K.K. & Drucker, A.G. 2008. Conserving what's important: Using choice model scenarios to value local cattle breeds in East Africa. Ecol. Econ., 68: 34–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zander, K.K., Drucker, A.G. & Holm-Müller, K. 2009. Costing the conservation of animal genetic resources: The case of Borana cattle in Ethiopia and Kenya. J. Arid Environ., 73: 550–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar