Published March 31, 2018 | Version v1
Publication Open

UNDERSTANDING FARMERS SEASONAL AND FULL YEAR STALL FEEDING ADOPTION IN NORTHERN ETHIOPIA

  • 1. Norwegian University of Life Sciences
  • 2. Mekelle University

Description

Adoption of stall feeding (SF) as well as choices of animals and seasons for its appli cation were assessed in northern Ethiopia in 2015 using a household field survey.The study was conducted in 21 communities to account for differences in agro ecology and to better understand the adoption process.A Heckman selection model was used to estimate adoption and extent of adoption based on a model of technology adoption within an agricultural household framework.A Poisson model was also applied to explain the number of SF adopting seasons.Further a multinomial logit model was estimated in order to reinforce understanding of the choices.The purpose of this study was to understand the driving factors of full or seasonal SF adoption and its intensity as well as animal and seasonal choices.The study results indicate that farmers actually practicing SF in a full year are 36% while those of actual seasonal adopters are 55.6%.The choice of animals allocated to SF include cow (40%), ox (31%) and other animals (29%) of the given sample indicating feeding cow under SF takes the largest share.Similarly, the choice for season were, 65% full year, 29 % wet (summer and autumn) and 6% dry (winter and spring), implying that more than half of the sample farmers practice SF the year round.Empirical results of this study showed that result is in favour of the Boserupian hypothesis indicating that small grazing land and large exclosure are associated with a higher probability of use of SF and with a higher number of SF adopting seasons throughout the year.In a similar vein, small average village farm size stimulated full SF adoption and SF adopting seasons, Availability of labour relative to farm size and a number of breed cows significantly increased the probability of using SF by 0.01% and 66% respectively.While animal shock appeared to have a marginal effect of 14%.The finding also revealed that factors such as access to information and early exposure increased the probability of SF adoption by 18% and 6%.Similarly, the positive marginal effect of real milk price is 15%.However, SF appears to be less attractive to those farmers with more herd size relative farm size and less crop residue.Regarding the intensity of SF adoption, while total labour time, farm size positively affect the extent of SF adoption, total herd size and grazing land ratio negatively influence farmers' extent of SF adoption in all seasons.

⚠️ This is an automatic machine translation with an accuracy of 90-95%

Translated Description (Arabic)

تم تقييم اعتماد التغذية المستقرة وكذلك خيارات الحيوانات ومواسم تطبيقها في شمال إثيوبيا في عام 2015 باستخدام مسح ميداني للأسر المعيشية. تم إجراء الدراسة في 21 مجتمعًا لمراعاة الاختلافات في البيئة الزراعية وفهم عملية التبني بشكل أفضل. تم استخدام نموذج اختيار هيكمان لتقدير التبني ومدى التبني بناءً على نموذج تبني التكنولوجيا ضمن إطار الأسرة المعيشية الزراعية. تم تطبيق نموذج بواسون أيضًا لشرح عدد مواسم تبني سان فرانسيسكو. علاوة على ذلك، تم تقدير نموذج لوجيت متعدد الحدود من أجل تعزيز فهم الخيارات. كان الغرض من هذه الدراسة هو فهم العوامل الدافعة لتبني سان فرانسيسكو الكامل أو الموسمي وكثافته بالإضافة إلى الخيارات الموسمية الحيوانية. تشير نتائج الدراسة إلى أن المزارعين الذين يمارسون سان فرانسيسكو فعليًا في عام كامل هم 36 ٪ في حين أن المتبنين الموسميين الفعليين هم 55.6 ٪. يشمل اختيار الحيوانات المخصصة لسان فرانسيسكو البقر (40 ٪) والثور (31 ٪) والحيوانات الأخرى (29 ٪) من العينة المعطاة التي تشير إلى إطعام البقر تحت سان فرانسيسكو يأخذ أكبر حصة .على نحو مماثل، كان الخيار للموسم، 65 ٪ سنة كاملة، 29 ٪ رطبة (الصيف والخريف) و 6 ٪ جافة (الشتاء والربيع)، مما يعني أن أكثر من نصف المزارعين عينة ممارسة سان فرانسيسكو على مدار السنة .وأظهرت النتائج التجريبية لهذه الدراسة أن النتيجة هي لصالح فرضية بوسيروبيان تشير إلى أن أراضي الرعي الصغيرة والإفرازات الكبيرة ترتبط باحتمال أكبر لاستخدام سان فرانسيسكو ومع عدد أكبر من مواسم اعتماد سان فرانسيسكو طوال السنة. على نفس المنوال، حفز متوسط حجم مزرعة القرية الصغيرة التبني الكامل لـ SF وتبني SF للمواسم، زاد توافر العمالة بالنسبة لحجم المزرعة وعدد من الأبقار المتكاثرة بشكل كبير من احتمال استخدام SF بنسبة 0.01 ٪ و 66 ٪ على التوالي. في حين يبدو أن الصدمة الحيوانية لها تأثير هامشي بنسبة 14٪. وكشفت النتيجة أيضًا أن عوامل مثل الوصول إلى المعلومات والتعرض المبكر زادت من احتمال تبني SF بنسبة 18 ٪ و 6 ٪. وبالمثل، فإن التأثير الهامشي الإيجابي لسعر الحليب الحقيقي هو 15 ٪. ومع ذلك، SF يبدو أنه أقل جاذبية لأولئك المزارعين الذين لديهم حجم قطيع نسبي أكبر وحجم مزرعة أقل وبقايا محاصيل أقل. فيما يتعلق بكثافة اعتماد سان فرانسيسكو، بينما يؤثر إجمالي وقت العمل وحجم المزرعة بشكل إيجابي على مدى اعتماد سان فرانسيسكو، ويؤثر إجمالي حجم القطيع ونسبة أراضي الرعي بشكل سلبي على مدى اعتماد المزارعين سان فرانسيسكو في جميع المواسم.

Translated Description (English)

Adoption of stable feeding (SF) as well as choices of animals and seasons for its application were assessed in northern Ethiopia in 2015 using a household field survey.The study was conducted in 21 communities to account for differences in agro ecology and to better understand the adoption process.A Heckman selection model was used to estimate adoption and extent of adoption based on a model of technology adoption within an agricultural household framework.A Poisson model was also applied to explain the number of SF adopting seasons.Further a multinomial logit model was estimated in order to reinforce understanding of the choices.The purpose of this study was to understand the driving factors of full or seasonal SF adoption and its intensity as well as animal seasonal choices.The study results indicate that farmers actually practicing SF in a full year are 36% those while of actual seasonal adopters are 55.6%.The choice of animals allocated to SF include cow (40%), ox (31%) and other animals (29%) of the given sample indicating feeding cow under SF takes the largest share.Similarly, the choice for season were, 65% full year, 29% wet (summer and autumn) and 6% dry (winter and spring), implying that more than half of the sample farmers practice SF the year round.Empirical results of this study showed that result is in favour of the Boserupian hypothesis indicating that small grazing land and large exclosure are associated with a higher probability of use of SF and with a higher number of SF adopting seasons throughout the year.In a similar vein, small average village farm size stimulated full SF adoption and SF adopting seasons, Availability of labour relative to farm size and a number of breed cows significantly increased the probability of using SF by 0.01% and 66% respectively.While animal shock appeared to have a marginal effect of 14%.The finding also revealed that factors such as access to information and early exposure increased the probability of SF adoption by 18% and 6% .Similarly, the positive marginal effect of real milk price is 15%.However, SF appears to be less attractive to those farmers with more herd size relative farm size and less crop residue.Regarding the intensity of SF adoption, while total labour time, farm size positively affect the extent of SF adoption, total herd size and grazing land ratio negatively influence farmers' extent of SF adoption in all seasons.

Translated Description (French)

Adoption of stall feeding (SF) as well as choices of animals and seasons for its appli cation were assessed in northern Ethiopia in 2015 using a household field survey.The study was conducted in 21 communities to account for differences in agro ecology and to better understand the adoption process.A Heckman selection model was used to estimate adoption and extent of adoption based on a model of technology adoption within an agricultural household framework.A Poisson model was also applied to explain the number of SF adopting seasons.Further a multinomial logit model was estimated in order to reinforce understanding of the choices.The purpose of this study was to understand the driving factors of full or seasonal SF adoption and its intensity well as animal and seasonal choices.The study results indicate that farmers actually practicing SF in a full ye are 36% while of seasonal actual adopters a 55.6% choice allocals of included SF (40%), ox (31%) and giving other (29%) of feed sampding indicing under SF takes the largest share.Similarly, the choice for season were, 65% full year, 29% wet (summer and autumn) and 6% dry (winter and spring), implying that more than half of the sample farmers practice SF the year round.Empirical results of this study showed that result is in favour of the Boserupian hypothesis indicating that small grazing land large and exclosure are associated with a higher probability of use of SF and with a higher number of SF adopting seasons throughout the year.In a similar vein, small average village farm size stimulated full SF adoption and SF adopting seasons, Availability of labour relative to farm size and a number of breed cows significativement increased the probability of using SF by 0.01% and 66% respectively.While animal shock appeared to have a marginal effect of 14%.The finding also revealed that factors such as access to information and early exposure increased the probability of SF adoption by 18% and 6% .Similarly, the positive marginal effect of real milk price is 15%.However, SF appears to be less attractive to those farmers with more herd size relative farm size and less crop residue.Regarding the intensity of SF adoption, while total labour time, farm size positivvely affect the extent of SF adoption, total herd size and grazing land ratio negatively influence farmers' extent of SF adoption in all seasons.

Translated Description (Spanish)

Adoption of stall feeding (SF) as well as choices of animals and seasons for its appli cation were assessed in northern Ethiopia in 2015 using a household field survey.The study was conducted in 21 communities to account for differences in agro ecology and to better understand the adoption process.A Heckman selection model was used to estimate adoption and extent of adoption based on a model of technology adoption within an agricultural household framework.A Poisson model was also applied to explain the number of SF adoping seasons.Further a multinomial logit model was estimated in order to reinforce understanding of the choices.The purpose of this study was to understand the driving factors of full or seasonal SF adoption and its intensity as well as animal and seasonal choices.The study results indicate that farmers actuallying SF in a full year are 36% while those of actual seasonal are 55.6%. Inclusive th the driving factors of the driving SF adoption of full or seasonal SF adoption and its intensity as well as animal and seasonal choices.The study results indicate that that farming SF that farming a farmers actuallying SF in a full ye a full year are are are 36% while are those of actual seasonal seasters are. 55.6% thome of a and the animation thome thome are the animated coasonal adoptions of the animate thost of the animation of the animation of the coasons of the coasters of the coasters of the animation of the coasters of the animation of the full under SF takes the largest share.Similarly, the choice for season were, 65% full year, 29% wet (summer and autumn) and 6% dry (winter and spring), implying that more than half of the sample farmers practice SF the year round.Empirical results of this study showed that result is in favour of the Boserupian hypothesis indicating that small grazing land and large exclosure are associated with a higher probability of use of SF and with a higher number of SF adopting seasons throughout the year.In a similar vein, small average village farm size stimulated full SF adoption and SF adoping seasons, Availability of labour relative to farm size and a number of breed cows significantly increased the probability of using SF by 0.01% and 66% respectively.While animal shock appeared to have a marginal effect of 14%.The finding also revealed that factors such as access to information and early exposure increased the probability of SF adoption by 18% and 6% .Similarly, the positive marginal effect of real milk price is 15%.However, SF appears to be less attractive to those farmers with more herd size relative farm size and less crop residue.Regarding the intensity of SF adoption, while total labour time, farm size positively affect the extent of SF adoption, total herd size and grazing land ratio negatively influence farmers' extent of SF adoption in all seasons.

Files

RAAE_1_2018_Hadush.pdf.pdf

Files (1.2 MB)

⚠️ Please wait a few minutes before your translated files are ready ⚠️ Note: Some files might be protected thus translations might not work.
Name Size Download all
md5:1047e627adf17ff6b358d384e131206a
1.2 MB
Preview Download

Additional details

Additional titles

Translated title (Arabic)
فهم تبني المزارعين للتغذية الموسمية والمستقرة لمدة عام كامل في شمال إثيوبيا
Translated title (English)
UNDERSTANDING FARMERS SEASONAL AND FULL YEAR STABLE FEEDING ADOPTION IN NORTHERN ETHIOPIA
Translated title (French)
COMPRENDRE LA SAISON DES AGRICULTEURS ET L'ANNÉE COMPLÈTE DE L'APPROVISIONNEMENT DES ÉTABLES EN ETHIOPIE DU NORD
Translated title (Spanish)
UNDERSTANDING FARMERS SEASONAL AND FULL YEAR STALL FEEDING ADOPTION IN NORTHERN ETHIOPIA

Identifiers

Other
https://openalex.org/W2800769065
DOI
10.15414/raae.2018.21.01.23-39

GreSIS Basics Section

Is Global South Knowledge
Yes
Country
Ethiopia

References

  • https://openalex.org/W1526274266
  • https://openalex.org/W1965593808
  • https://openalex.org/W1967949645
  • https://openalex.org/W1973437968
  • https://openalex.org/W1987698895
  • https://openalex.org/W2005029869
  • https://openalex.org/W2013233745
  • https://openalex.org/W2016800961
  • https://openalex.org/W2019366816
  • https://openalex.org/W2020068677
  • https://openalex.org/W2024018775
  • https://openalex.org/W2040256412
  • https://openalex.org/W2042714520
  • https://openalex.org/W2046626598
  • https://openalex.org/W2050334893
  • https://openalex.org/W2063887155
  • https://openalex.org/W2074536320
  • https://openalex.org/W2082279774
  • https://openalex.org/W2083138876
  • https://openalex.org/W2088718814
  • https://openalex.org/W2102386218
  • https://openalex.org/W2104565412
  • https://openalex.org/W2116578738
  • https://openalex.org/W2120892531
  • https://openalex.org/W2139871816
  • https://openalex.org/W2149807395
  • https://openalex.org/W2156995959
  • https://openalex.org/W2281528595