Volume 8, Issue 2, April Issue - 2020, Pages:193-200 |
Authors: Ja'far Mansur Al-Khaza'leh |
Abstract: The small ruminant sector contributes substantially to food security and the livelihoods of farmers in Jordan. Subsidy on feed for the livestock sector is considered to be an important policy for maintaining feed prices low, thus improving the livelihood of the households. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of feed subsidy removal on the economic success of small ruminant production in two production systems in northern Badia of Jordan. Data was collected by questionnaire survey administered to 120 small ruminant farmers. Gross margin (GM1 and GM2) and net benefit (NB) were used to measure the economic success of small ruminant production. GM1 constitutes cash revenue of sheep and goats, while GM2 additionally includes in-kind benefits (meat and milk consumption). NB comprises cash revenue, in-kind benefits and intangible benefits (insurance and finance). The feed price was significantly affected by feed subsidy removal (p<0.05). Feed subsidy removal negatively (p<0.05) affected all the parameters of the economic success of small ruminant production. GM1, GM2 and NB per farm with subsidized feed prices were significantly (p<0.05) higher than farms without subsidized feed prices in both production systems. A 36 % of farms with feed subsidy had a negative NB compared to 54% of farms without feed subsidy. Findings of current study revealed that under conditions of forage shortage in rangelands and high feed prices, feed subsidy removal has a negative impact on the parameters of the economic success of small ruminant production and can threaten the income and livelihoods of farmers. Keeping subsidies on the feed aimed at livestock keepers is a good policy to alleviate the detrimental impact on households. |
[Download PDF] |
Full Text: 1 Introduction In Jordan, sheep and goats play a considerable role in the economy, food security and livelihoods of farmers of rural areas (Al-Atiyat & Tabbaa, 2009; Al-Atiyat, 2014). Small ruminants are well adapted to the arid and semi-arid conditions of the country representing the highest proportion of livestock biomass, with an estimated population of about 3,063,120 head of sheep and 772,670 head of goats in 2017 (Department of Statistics, 2017). Small ruminants are raised under different production systems (Abu-Zanat et al., 2005; Alrousan, 2009). Two major production systems which used in the country are: transhumant production system (pastoral) which is the prevalent production system and the sedentary production system (agro-pastoral), which is practiced in the villages and peri-urban parts of the country. A sufficient provision of feed is necessary for livestock to ensure their production and health status. The scarcity of water resources, shortage of rangeland and feed are major constraints for small ruminant production in Jordan (Al-Karaki & Al-Momani 2011; Al-Khaza’leh et al., 2015a). In Jordan, pastures with low nutritional quality and poor biomass are inadequate for feeding small ruminant animals (Obeidat et al., 2014). Therefore, animals are supplemented with concentrates which are a shortage and costly in order to meet their nutrient needs (Alshdaifat & Obeidat, 2019). Moreover, the total yield of rained and irrigated barley production as a major concentrates in Jordan was 394,277 tons in 2016 (Ministry of Agriculture, 2016) which is not enough to feed livestock. Therefore, the Jordanian government depends on importing feedstuff from other countries, which in turn has a significant impact on Jordan's GDP (Ministry of Industry Trade and Supply, 2018). Price subsidy on feed is a prevalent policy in many developing countries like Jordan. The price of feed in Jordan for the livestock sector had been subsidized by the government for many years. Nevertheless, the subsidy on feed is one of the most existing volatile agro-economic policies in Jordan impacting its budgetary. The feed subsidy is an important instrument for the livelihood of farmers. Taking into account that feed price in Jordan is the greatest variable expenses in the sheep and goat industry, stopping feed subsidy could have a considerable effect on livestock production,incomes, expenses, profitability, the economic performance of small ruminants and thus on the sustainability of sheep and goat farming. The economic consequences of feed subsidy removal on sheep and goat farming were not adequately investigated in Jordan and hence there is a need for in-depth analysis including cost-benefits to determine the impact of subsidy removal on sustaining small ruminant production. In the light of this background, the objectives of the present study were to evaluate the economic performance of small ruminants and to analyze the impact of feed subsidy lifting on the economic success of small ruminant production in two production systems of Jordan. 2 Materials and Methods 2.1 The study area and production systems The study was carried out in the northern Badia of Jordan east of the Mafarq governorate. The term "Badia" refers to desert or arid region, dwelled by Bedouins or Badu. The northern Badia constituted 36% of the total area of Jordanian Badia (km2=71,474 which constitutes 80% of the total area of Jordan). The study area is characterized by transhumant production system (pastoral,the herders practice two major patterns of seasonal mobility: towardeast ‘‘al tashreeg’’ to benefit from grazing on the vegetation during late winter and early spring and back toward west ‘‘al taghreeb’’ after that) and sedentary production system (agro-pastoral). The northern Badia has arid climate and it has been affected frequently by drought cycles, receiving atotal annual rainfall of about 116 mm. Therefore, water and pasture biomass availability in the study area are low. Sheep and goats are the predominant animal species representing the major small ruminant production systems in the northern Badia. According to secondary data obtained from the study region's agricultural offices in 2017, the livestock population in the study area is estimated to be about 366,940 head of sheep, 61,210 head of goats, 3,020 head of cattle, 1,130 head of camels. The same secondary data showed that in 2017, the total population of sheep and goats keepers was 3,150. For the same year, the small ruminant population in the study area constituted 12% sheep and 7.9% goats of the total population of sheep and goats in Jordan, respectively. 2.2 Sampling and data collection For this study, a list of all small ruminant keepers and their livestock holdings in each village within administrative unite of the study area was obtained from local officials of the Ministry of Agriculture. Farmers, who kept at least 10 adult animals in the flocks, were identified from the list of farmers and systematic random sampling at the third name was used to select 120 farmers for the interview by the assistance of key informant. In general, 5 farmers were replaced by the next one during conducting the actual questionnaire survey. Accordingly, a sample of 62 farms was assigned for transhumant production system and 58 farms for sedentary production system. Data were collected between December 2017 and March 2018 using a structured questionnaire format. Suitability of questionnaire survey to the farmers in the study area regarding the language and the logical flow was assured before conducting the actual questionnaire survey. The questionnaires captured information regarding socio-economic variables, livestock holdings, animal productivity, input and output parameters and annual production costs and revenues generation in the last 12 months. In addition to the survey method, secondary data on the number of small ruminants and small ruminant keepers, water and feed prices were obtained from water and agricultural offices of the study area. Moreover, climate data including amount of rainfall and temperature in the study area were acquired from Meteorological Department of Jordan. 2.3 Economic performance of small ruminant production The major variable costs (VC) from small ruminant production comprised purchased feedstuff cost, stubble grazing cost, water cost, veterinary cost, hired labor cost and transportation cost. Stubble grazing cost included fees for rented land for grazing. Hired labor cost included the wage payment given for either the continuous or seasonal herders. Transportation costs comprised costs for water, feed and animal transport. The annual costs of housing and machinery were not considered in the study due to depreciation and simplicity of material used in animal housing.Veterinary costs included expenses on medications and vaccinations. In the present study, the cash revenues (CR) from small ruminant production included the sale of animals, milk and dairy products. For home consumption, the unit price of each product was estimated based on the farm gate price. In-kind benefits (IK) comprised the values of meat and milk consumption. The monetary values of manure, wool and hair were negligible not considered in the calculations because most of farmers in the study area did not market or use them. Intangible socio-economic benefits of goat production included financial (F) and insurance (I).The financial benefit of flock per household was valued as follows : (number of animals owned X respective market price of animals) X interest rate of the finance (3.6%, based on Central Bank of Jordan monthly reviews 2016/2017). The insurance value of flock per household was estimated as follows: (average monetary values of the flock per household) X the insurance factor (3.6%, based on Central Bank of Jordan monthly reviews 2016/2017). The economic parameters (in JD farm−1 year−1) were valued by using the following equations: |
Abu-Zanat MM, Migdady HA, Tabbaa MJ (2005) Production systems of small ruminants in middle Badia of Jordan.Dirasat: Agricultural Sciences 32:205-214. Abu Zanat MMW, Tabbaa M (2004) Effect of drought on feed resources and performance ofsmall ruminants in the Northern Badia of Jordan. Dirasat: Agricultural Sciences32:347-354. Al-Atiyat RM (2014) Role of small-scale dairy sector in food security and poverty alleviation. Food, Agriculture and Environment12:427-433. Al-Atiyat RM, Tabbaa MJ (2009) Role of livestock in poverty alleviation and food security: A review study. In: Proceeding of Jordan Society of Scientific Research, Amman, Jordan. Al-Karaki GN, Al-Momani N (2011) Evaluation of Some Barley Cultivars for Green Fodder Production and Water Use Efficiency under Hydroponic Conditions. Jordan Journal of Agricultural Sciences 7:448-457. Al-Khaza’leh J, Reiber C, Al Baqain R, Valle Zárate A (2015a) Drinking water sources, availability, quality, access and utilization for goats in the Karak Governorate, Jordan. Tropical Animal Health and Production 47:163-169. Al-Khaza’leh J, Reiber C, Al Baqain R, Valle Zárate A (2015b) A comparative economic analysis of goat production systems in Jordan with an emphasis on water use. Livestock Research for Rural Development 27 (5), http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd27/5/khaz27081.html, accessed on 01 February 2020. Alrousan L (2009) Goat production in Jordan. Proc. the 24th Ann. Goat Field Day, Langston Uni., Oklahoma, USA, pp. 33-40. Alshdaifat SN, Obeidat BS (2019) The impact of feeding corn dried distillers grains with solubles on milk yield and composition in lactating Awassi ewes and digestibility and N partitioning in Awassi ewe lambs. Italian Journal of Animal Science 18:522-529. Al-Tabini R, Al-Khalidi K, Al-Shudiefat M (2012)Livestock, medicinal plants and rangeland viability in Jordan’s Badia, through the lens of traditional and local knowledge. Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice 2: 1-16. Bergmann R, Ludbrook J, Spooren WPJM (2000) Different outcomes of the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test from different statistics packages. The American Statistician 54: 72-77. Central Bank of Jordan (2017) Publication and statistics, statistical database, interest rate structure for 2016/2017. Amman. Jordan. Department of Statistics (2017) Statistics by sector, agriculture, surveys, livestock for 2016-2017.http://www.dos.gov.jo, accessed on 01 March 2019. Jetter C (2008) An assessment of subsidy removal effects on and future sustainability for livestocksector of in the Northern Jordanian Badi. Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection. Paper 7.2019.https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/isp_collection/7/, accessed on 01 October. Kristjanson P, Tyner WE (1992) Impacts of feed ingredient subsidy removal and concurrent trade liberalization in Tunisia. Agricultural Economics 7: 331-339. Ministry of Agriculture (2016) Statistical annual report 2016, Amman, Jordan. Ministry of Industry trade and supply (2018) Annual report 2018, Amman, Jordan. Obeidat BS (2018) Influence of corn-dried distiller’s grain with solubles on growth performance and blood metabolites of Awassi lambs offered a concentrate diet. Italian Journal of Animal Science17:636-642. Obeidat BS, Awawdeh MS, Kridli RT, Al-Tamimi HJ, Ballou MA, Obeidat MD, Abu Ishmais MA, Al-Lataifeh FA, Subih HS (2014) Feeding corn silage improves nursing performance of Awassi ewes when used as a source of forage. Animal Feed Science and Technology 192:24-28. Obeidat B, Shdaifat M (2013) Partial substitution of barley grain with ProsopisJuliflora pods in lactating Awassi ewes’ diets: effect on intake, digestibility, and nursing performance. Small Ruminant Research 111:50-55. SAS Institute (2012) Base SAS® 9.3 Procedures Guide: Statistical Procedures, Second Edition. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC, USA.
|