Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T18:58:56.202Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Motives and values in farming local cattle breeds in Europe: a survey on 15 breeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 November 2010

G. Gandini ,
L. Avon ,
D. Bohte-Wilhelmus ,
E. Bay ,
F.G. Colinet ,
Z. Choroszy ,
C. Díaz ,
D. Duclos ,
J. Fernández  and
N. Gengler
...Show all authors
G. Gandini*
Affiliation:
Department VSA, University of Milan, Via Celoria, 10, 20133 Milan, Italy
L. Avon
Affiliation:
Institut de l'Elevage, Paris, France
D. Bohte-Wilhelmus
Affiliation:
Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands (CGN), Wageningen University and Research Centre, Lelystad, The Netherlands
E. Bay
Affiliation:
Animal Science Unit, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, University of Liege, Gembloux, Belgium
F.G. Colinet
Affiliation:
Animal Science Unit, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, University of Liege, Gembloux, Belgium
Z. Choroszy
Affiliation:
National Research Institute of Animal Production, Poland
C. Díaz
Affiliation:
Departamento de Mejora Genética Animal, INIA, Madrid, Spain
D. Duclos
Affiliation:
Institut de l'Elevage, Paris, France
J. Fernández
Affiliation:
Departamento de Mejora Genética Animal, INIA, Madrid, Spain
N. Gengler
Affiliation:
Animal Science Unit, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, University of Liege, Gembloux, Belgium
R. Hoving-Bolink
Affiliation:
Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands (CGN), Wageningen University and Research Centre, Lelystad, The Netherlands
F. Kearney
Affiliation:
Irish Cattle Breeding Federation, Bandon, Ireland
T. Lilja
Affiliation:
MTT Agrifood Research Finland, Jokioinen, Finland
A. Mäki-Tanila
Affiliation:
MTT Agrifood Research Finland, Jokioinen, Finland
D. Martín-Collado
Affiliation:
Departamento de Mejora Genética Animal, INIA, Madrid, Spain
M. Maurice-van Eijndhoven
Affiliation:
Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands (CGN), Wageningen University and Research Centre, Lelystad, The Netherlands
M. Musella
Affiliation:
Department VSA, University of Milan, Via Celoria, 10, 20133 Milan, Italy
F. Pizzi
Affiliation:
IBBA-CNR, Lodi, Italy
K. Soini
Affiliation:
MTT Agrifood Research Finland, Jokioinen, Finland
M. Toro
Affiliation:
Departamento de Producción Animal, ETS Ingenieros Agrónomos, Madrid, Spain
F. Turri
Affiliation:
Department VSA, University of Milan, Via Celoria, 10, 20133 Milan, Italy
H. Viinalas
Affiliation:
Estonian Agricultural University, Estonia
S.J. Hiemstra
Affiliation:
Centre for Genetic Resources, the Netherlands (CGN), Wageningen University and Research Centre, Lelystad, The Netherlands
*
Correspondence to: G. Gandini, Department VSA, University of Milan, Via Celoria, 10, 20133 Milan, Italy. email: [email protected]
Get access

Summary

Within the EURECA project (Towards self-sustainable EUropean REgional CAttle breeds), we interviewed a total of 371 farmers of 15 local cattle breeds in eight European countries. Besides collecting data on farmers, land use, herd composition and economic role of cattle, we aimed at understanding farmers' motives and values in keeping local cattle. The most frequent first reason to keep the local breed was productivity, followed by tradition. When comparing the local breed with a mainstream breed, only in four breeds was productivity considered the same, while in three breeds more than 50 percent of farmers valued the local breed as more profitable. The local breed was valued as always superior or the same on functional traits. Farmers were asked which type of appreciation they thought representatives of various stakeholders had on their local breed: a positive appreciation was observed in 33 percent of farmers. On average across breeds, 39 percent of farmers expect to increase the size of their herd in the next few years and 5 percent plan to give up farming. The degree of dependence of farmers on economic incentives was estimated by asking farmers their expected behaviour under three scenarios of change of subsidies. Most farmers demanded activities for promoting local breed farming. The results are discussed in terms of breed sustainability and conservation.

Résumé

Dans le cadre du projet EURECA, nous avons interviewé au total 371 éleveurs de 15 races locales bovines dans huit pays européens. En plus de collecter des informations sur les éleveurs, leur exploitation, la composition du troupeau et l'importance économique des bovins, nous avons également cherché à comprendre les motivations des éleveurs à garder de telles races. La raison principale la plus fréquemment citée était la productivité, suivie par la tradition. Les races locales étaient aussi comparées aux races principales, dans seulement quatre cas la productivité était considérée comme équivalente, et dans trois races plus de 50% des éleveurs ont jugé leur race locale plus rentable. Pour les caractères fonctionnels, la race locale était toujours considérée supérieure ou égale. Nous avons aussi demandé aux éleveurs comment ils pensaient être vus par différentes parties prenantes concernant leur race locale: une appréciation positive a été indiquée par 33% des éleveurs. En moyenne, 39% des éleveurs envisagent d'augmenter leur cheptel dans les années à venir, 5% d'arrêter l'élevage. Le degré de dépendance des éleveurs vis-à-vis des subventions a été estimé en leurs demandant leur réaction face à trois scénarios de changement dans ces subventions. Beaucoup d'éleveurs sont demandeurs d'actions visant à promouvoir l'élevage des races locales. Les résultats sont discutés en termes d'élevage durable et de conservation.

Resumen

371 ganaderos de 15 razas locales de 8 países Europeos se entrevistaron dentro del proyecto EURECA. Además de recoger datos sobre los ganaderos, el uso del terreno, la composición de las ganaderías, y su papel económico, buscamos entender los motivos por los que los ganaderos explotan estas razas y el valor que les dan. La razón principal más frecuente fue la productividad, siendo seguida por la tradición. Cuando los ganaderos compararon la raza local con la raza dominante, la productividad se consideró igual solo en cuatro razas y tres razas se consideraron más rentables por más del 50% de los ganaderos. Las características funcionales de estas razas fueron consideradas siempre iguales o superiores. Para el 33% de los ganaderos existe una apreciación positiva a sus razas por parte de distintos stakeholders. El 39% espera aumentar el tamaño de su ganadería en los próximos años mientras el 5% va a dejar la actividad. La dependencia a los subsidios se estimó explorando la reacción de los ganaderos ante tres escenarios de variaciones de las ayudas. La mayoría de los ganaderos reclamó actividades de promoción de la explotación de sus razas. Los resultados se discuten en términos de sostenibilidad y conservación.

Keywords

animal genetic resources for food and agriculturebreed comparisonsbreed valuesconservationlocal cattleressources génétiques animales pour l'alimentation et l'agriculturecomparaison des racesvaleurs des racesconservationbovin localrecursos genéticos animales para la alimentación y la agriculturacomparación entre razasvalores de las razasconservaciónganado vacuno autóctono
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Genetic Resources/Resources génétiques animales/Recursos genéticos animales , Volume 47 , July 2010 , pp. 45 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2010

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

DGARNE. 2009. Evolution de l'économie agricole et horticole de la région Wallonne 2007–08 (available at http://agriculture.wallonie.be/apps/spip_wolwin/IMG/pdf/rapport2007.pdf).Google Scholar
EFABIS. 2009. European Farm Animal Information System (available at http://efabis.tzv.fal.de).Google Scholar
EURECA. 2009. www.regionalcattlebreeds.eu.Google Scholar
FAO. 2007. The state of the world's animal genetic resources for food and agriculture. edited by Rischkowsky, B. & Pilling, D.. Rome, FAO.Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B. 2006. Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qual. Inq., 12(2): 219–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gandini, G., Maltecca, C., Pizzi, F., Bagnato, A. & Rizzi, R. 2007. Comparing local and commercial breeds on functional traits and profitability: the case of Reggiana Dairy Cattle. J. Dairy Sci., 90(4): 2004–2011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gandini, G. & Villa, E. 2003. Analysis of the cultural value of local livestock breeds: a methodology. J. Anim. Breed. Genet., 120(1):1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GENRES. 2009. http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/envir/biodiv/genres/call_en.htm.Google Scholar
SAS. 2004. Qualification Tools Users' Guide, Version 9.1.2. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USAGoogle Scholar
Signorello, G. & Pappalardo, G. 2003. Domestic animal biodiversity conservation: a case study of rural development plans in the European Union. Ecol. Econ., 45(3):487–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar