publication

Fact Check 7: Livestock Multi-functionality

View article

Factsheets (PDF) References (PDF)

Publication Type

Fact sheet

Publication year

2018

Authors

Salmon, Gareth

Themes

Economy Productivity

At a household level livestock have many functions

Livestock may contribute significantly to a country’s total agricultural production value¹. However, at the household level in low and middle income countries (LMIC), livestock can have an even greater impact due to the multiple functions they perform (including provision of traction, manure, insurance and finance)^{2, 3}. Evidence for this comes from a variety of scenarios and methodologies including ethnographic observations, participatory rural appraisals, interviews, focus groups and surveys, as well as reviews of past literature and modelling^4-8.

Balancing intensification with multiple functions

Livestock multi-functionality is recognised by researchers and practitioners through efforts to promote methods and indicators that assess the full contribution of livestock at the household and macrolevel^9-11. However, with continually rising demand for animal-source foods (ASFs)^{12, 13} there are examples of LMIC system intensification where objectives are focused on production, for instance examples in the Kenyan dairy sector¹⁴. Despite intensification, some smallholder systems are likely to retain multiple objectives and requirements from livestock, and a retained ability to adapt to varying conditions and scenarios¹⁵.

Human nutrition

The global importance of ASFs for human nutrition is well documented¹⁶. Rich in nutrients, ASFs can supplement diets and support cognitive development, particularly important for vulnerable groups and infants^17-20. ASFs also offer a resilient source of nutrition during seasonal or climatic fluctuations in the availability of plant-source foods²¹. In addition, livestock have a vital role in supporting many cropping systems and the nutrition sourced from these²². It is regularly quoted that “livestock products provide one-third of humanity’s protein intake”; this broad estimate, based on FAOSTAT²³ data, came from Steinfeld and colleagues in 2006²⁴. The same data illustrates regional variation in the contribution of ASFs to total human protein consumption (Figure 1.), with LMICs appearing to have a lower than average contribution. However, the likely exceptions to this, such as pastoralist communities and vulnerable groups which rely heavily on ASFs, should not be ignored^{25, 26}. In addition, FAOSTAT numbers are only as good as the reported data they are based upon.

Infographic: Contribution of ASFs to total human protein consumption in 2013

Figure 1. Contribution of ASFs (excluding fish and seafood) to total human protein consumption in 2013, based on FAOSTAT data²³.

Supporting crop production

Expert opinion suggests that around a third of land in LMICs is cultivated by livestock power (with hand and tractor accounting equally for the balance)²⁷. Whilst livestock are particularly important to certain crop systems (e.g. rice production in South and East Asia²⁸), at a global scale the contribution to cultivation is predicted to decrease to a fifth by 2030 (with tractor power becoming increasingly dominant). The method applied for these estimates does not account for diversity in practices within LMICs²⁷. Whereas reviews demonstrate significant variation. For instance within sub-Saharan Africa, livestock traction is common in Ethiopia and Madagascar, less common in Kenya and Tanzania, and rare in Rwanda, Burundi and Democratic Republic of Congo. Largely this variation can be explained by the size of farms, the topography of fields and the occurrence of appropriate crops²⁹.

Modelling demonstrates that mixed crop-livestock systems support a large proportion of the global human population and produce the majority of ruminant meat and milk³⁰. Within these systems, livestock are an important source of organic fertiliser. Despite potential for increasing shifts toward industrial livestock systems²⁹, in response to increasing product demand, crop-livestock systems are likely to remain important in meeting food security demands; particularly in the face of climate change³¹.

Financial assets, savings and insurance

The global value of livestock as financial assets is difficult to quantify; instead, this significant role in LMICs can be demonstrated through specific examples. When attempting to allocate greenhouse gas emissions to the variety of functions, beyond milk production, of Kenyan cattle, farmers were asked how they valued their animals. Almost all farmers referenced the value of cattle to cover any future expenses, or to access loans and credit³². Evidence of livestock being used to manage risk has also been observed in both Zambian and Zimbabwean livestock systems. When households experience drought, they sell animals. This was more likely in large herd households, and as farmers were able to purchase staple foods, the decline in body condition of the farmers and their families was reduced^{33, 34}.

Less tangible functions

Some non-market products can be valued economically. Home consumption, crop production, and even insurance, can be based on opportunity values^{35, 36}. Others remain difficult to quantify. For instance a fifth of surveyed farmers in Senegal said they kept cattle primarily as symbols of status³⁷. And almost all surveyed cattle farmers in Kenya mentioned prestige and dowry value as reasons for rearing cattle³². Some research also suggests that owning livestock can improve a woman’s income/status/ security, and thus contribute to closing gender gaps in LMIC communities^{38, 39}.

Something to consider

However uncertain we are about quantifying the different values and functions of livestock in LMICs, the importance of roles beyond meat, milk or eggs is unequivocal. With changes to the livestock sector driven by increasing populations and ASF demands, multi-functionality adds significant complexity that needs to be considered when designing interventions⁴⁰.