Costs and Benefits of Beef Cattle Fattening Schemes in some Selected Areas of North West Tanzania

محورهای موضوعی : Camel

J.L. Malole ¹ (Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Chuo Kikuu, Morogoro, Tanzania)
R.J.M. Kadigi ² (Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Chuo Kikuu, Morogoro, Tanzania)
A.Z. Sangeda ³ (Department of Animal Science and Production, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Chuo Kikuu, Morogoro, Tanzania)

تاریخ دریافت : 1392/08/05 تاریخ پذیرش : 1392/11/26 تاریخ انتشار : 1393/09/10

کلید واژه: Net Present Value, average daily gain, beef cattle, net profit, tanzania,

چکیده مقاله :

This study highlights the costs and benefits of indigenous beef cattle fattening schemes in Shinyanga Urban and Kishapu Districts in Tanzania. Specifically, in this study the net profit (NP) for fatteners between beef cattle fattening schemes has been determined. The schemes were divided into two main categories, scheme 1 in which the animals were fed on cottonseed hulls (CSHL) based diets and scheme 2 on cottonseed cake (CSC) based diets.The survey was carried out using a sample of 144 respondents. The tools for data collection were structured questionnaire, interview, personal observation, communication, documentary reviews (e.g. from internet, libraries) and key informants. Data were analysed using descriptivestatistics and quantitative statistics and standard procedure of theassociation of official analytical chemists.Results show that the positive net profit was relatively higher in scheme 2 (Tanzanian shilling (TAS) 119512.87 / USD 76.03 per fed animal per quarter a year) than that in scheme 1 (TAS 92993, 90 / USD 59.17 per fed animal per quarter a year). This implies that the fattening business is more feasible, profitable and efficient for sustainable implementation in scheme 2. Furthermore, the average daily gains (ADG) of 1.5, 1.3 and 1.0 for Tanzania Short Horn Zebu (TSHZ) males, steers and females were higher than the 1.2, 1.0 and 0.9 for TSHZ males, steers and females in scheme 1, respectively. Additionally, the feed conversion ratios (FCRs) of about 5.0, 5.5, 6.3 for TSHZ males, steers and females in scheme 2 were lower than 7.2, 8.6, 8.6 for TSHZ males, steers and females in scheme 1. Therefore, scheme 2 was economically feasible, profitable and therefore is recommended for implementation and monetary support for improved income, livelihoods, poverty reduction and commercialisation of the beef industry.

چکیده انگلیسی:

این مطالعه هزینه‌ها و مزایای طرح گاو بومی پرواری در حومه شهر شینیانگا و کیشاپو در تانزانیا را بررسی می‌کند. به طور خاص، در این مطالعه سود خالص (NP) برای پرواربندها بین طرح‌های پرواربندی گاو مشخص شده است. طرح به دو دسته اصلی تقسیم شد شامل طرح 1 که در آن حیوانات پوسته پنبه دانه (CSHL) و در طرح 2 با جیره غذایی بر پایه کیک پنبه دانه (CSC) تغذیه شدند. نظر سنجی با استفاده از یک نمونه از 144 پاسخ دهنده انجام شد. روش جمعآوری دادهها بر پایه پرسشنامه، مصاحبه، مشاهده شخصی، ارتباطات، بررسی مستندات (به عنوان مثال از اینترنت، کتابخانه) و افراد مطلع بنا شد. دادهها با استفاده از آمار توصیفی و آمار کمی و روش استاندارد انجمن شیمیدانان تحلیلی رسمی مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. نتایج نشان میدهد که سود خالص مثبت نسبتاً در طرح 2 (شیلینگ تانزانیا (119512.87 76.03/USD (TAS) به ازای هر حیوانی پروار شده در سه ماهه از سال) از طرح 1 (TAS 92993، 90/ USD 59.17بر جیره حیوانات بر سه ماهه از سال) بالاتر بود. این نشان میدهد که حرفه پرواربندی در طرح 2، امکان پذیری، سودآوری و کارآمدی بیشتری برای اجرای پایدار دارد. علاوه بر این، متوسط افزایش وزن روزانه (ADG) 5/1، 3/1 و 0/1 برای گاو کوهاندار شاخ کوتاه تانزانیا (TSHZ) نر، گوساله و ماده به ترتیب بالاتر از 2/1، 0/1 و 9/0 برای نر TSHZ، گوساله و ماده در طرح 1 بود. علاوه بر این، ضریب تبدیل غذایی (FCRs) در حدود 0/5، 5/5، 3/6 برای TSHZ نرها، گوساله و ماده‌ها در طرح 2 کمتر از 2/7، 6/8، 6/8 برای نر TSHZ، گوساله و ماده در طرح 1 بود. بنابراین، طرح 2 به لحاظ اقتصادی امکان پذیر و سودآور است و در نتیجه برای بهبود درآمد، معیشت، کاهش فقر و تجاری سازی صنعت گوشت گاو، برای اجرا و پشتیبانی مالی توصیه می‌شود.

منابع و مأخذ:

Adekunle A.O. and Sunday O.K. (2010). Capital structure and firm performance: evidence from Nigeria. J. Econ. Finan. Admin. Sci. 25, 71-80.
AOAC. (1990). Official Methods of Analysis. Vol. I. 15^th Ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA.
Albert S., Wayne W. and Zappe C. (2008). Data Analysis and Decision Making with Microsoft Excel, 3^rd Ed., Business and Economics.
Ibrahim Y. (2006). Comparison of profitability and economic efficiencies between the native and culture-breed of cattle fattening farms in eastern parts of Turkey. Pakistan J. Biol. Sci. 9(6), 1061-1067.
Jansen H.G.R., Ibrahim M.A., Nieuwenhuyse A., Mannetje L., Joenue M. and Abarca S. (1997). The economics of improved pasture and Silvipastoral technologies in the Atlantic Zone of Costa Rica. Trop.Grassl. 31, 588-598.
Mafimisebi T.E., Onyeka U.P., Ayinde I.A. and Ashaolu O.F. (2006). Analysis of farmer-specific socio-economic determinants of adoption of modern livestock management technologies by farmers in Southwest Nigeria. J. Food Agric. Environ. 4(1), 183-18
MLFD. (2012). Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development. Baraza la Veterinari Tanzania. 
Moll H.A.J. (2005). Costs and benefits of livestock systems and the role of market and non market relationship. J. Agric. Econ. 32(2), 181-193.
Musemwa L., Chagwiza C., Sikuka W., Fraser G., Chimonyo M. and Mzileni N. (2007). Analysis of cattle marketing channels used by small scale farmers in the eastern cape province, south Africa. South African J. Agric. Ext. 34(1), 81-103.
Mwaniki R. (2006). Supporting SMEs development and the role of microfinance in Africa. Pp. 32-37 inProc. African Union Conf., Cairo, Egypt.
NRC. (1996). Nutritional Requirements of Beef Cattle, 7^th E. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.
Okoruwa V.O., Obadaki F.O. and Ibrahim G. (2005). Profitability of beef cattle fattening in the cosmopolitan city of Ibadan, Oyo State. Moor. J. Agric. Res. 6(1), 45-51
Perdana T. (2003). Competitive and Comparative Advantage of Beef Cattle Fattening in Bandung Regency. Research Institute. Padjadjaran University, Bandung.
Pica-Ciamara U., Lasciitti L., Otte J. and Zezza A. (2011). Livestock asset, livestock income and rural development cross-country evidence from household survey. Quart. J. Int. Agric. 44(1), 11-17.
Pluke J.M. and Schlink A.C. (2007). Managing water as a scarce resource in beef feedlots. Australasian Agrib. Rev. 15, 1-13.
Rao N.V., Al-Yahyaee K.H.M. and Syed L.A.M. (2007). Capital structure and financial performance: evidence from Oman. Indian J. Econ. Busin. 6, 1-23.
Sarma P.K. and Ahmed J.U. (2011). An economic study of small state cattle fattening enterprise of Rajbari district. J. Bangladeshian Agric. 9(1), 141-146.
Sharma S. (1998). Public investment: some measuring investments Nepal. Tribhuvan Univ. J. 21(2), 35-46.
Tawaf R. and Suryadi D. (2011). Responses of feedlot business to the beef market mechanism changed in West Java, Indonesia. Lucrări Ştiinţifice. 54, 87-92.
Umar A.S.S., Alamu J.F. and Adeniji O.B. (2008). Economic analysis of small scale cow fattening enterprise in bama local government area of Borno State. Nigerian Econ. J. 4(1),1-10.
URT. (2009). United Republic of Tanzania. Poverty and Human Development Report 2009, Government Printers, Dar es Salaam.