PROFITABILITY AND HOUSEHOLD INCOME CONTRIBUTION OF SMALL RUMINANTS TOSMALL-SCALE FARMERS IN BOTSWANA

Citation
A. Panin et M. Mahabile, PROFITABILITY AND HOUSEHOLD INCOME CONTRIBUTION OF SMALL RUMINANTS TOSMALL-SCALE FARMERS IN BOTSWANA, Small ruminant research, 25(1), 1997, pp. 9-15
Citations number
11
Categorie Soggetti
Agriculture Dairy & AnumalScience
Journal title
ISSN journal
09214488
Volume
25
Issue
1
Year of publication
1997
Pages
9 - 15
Database
ISI
SICI code
0921-4488(1997)25:1<9:PAHICO>2.0.ZU;2-T
Abstract
The primary concern of this study was to explore the economic importan ce of small ruminant enterprises to smallholder farmers in the study a rea. The analysis is based on 1991/1992 farm management survey data of 114 smallholder households. Budgetary and household income analytical methods were employed. The results show that the small ruminant enter prise is profitable and economically viable. It returned an average in come of P23.00 (US$11.27) per animal to the small ruminant owning hous eholds (P = Pula, the currency of Botswana; in 1992 P1.00 = US$0.49). Also, it provided a return of 34% on capital invested in the enterpris e. Its contribution of 15% to household income was substantial, exceed ing the contribution from crop production by more than 100%. These fin dings have important implications for the improvement of small ruminan t enterprises of smallholder farmers in Botswana. The study concludes that small ruminant enterprise is economically viable and contributes a substantial amount to total household income. The findings have cons iderable significance for policy-makers and farmers and can be used to guide the policy-makers to develop appropriate policy instruments to improve on the current situation of small ruminant enterprises. Such p olicies should address issues relating to research on small ruminants, provision of organised marketing outlets, credit and extension facili ties to owners of small ruminants. Also, making farmers aware of the f inancial benefits of small ruminants may convince them to consider it as a better alternative to crop production in the study area in terms of income generation. This will probably influence their decision on t he allocation of their limited resources to the competing alternatives . (C) 1997 Elsevier Science B.V.