Developing innovation capacity through effective research and development partnerships: A case study of moving from subsistence cattle raising to market-oriented beef production in Ea Kar, Daklak, Vietnam
Developing innovation capacity through effective research and development partnerships:
A case study of moving from subsistence cattle raising to market-oriented beef production in Ea Kar, Daklak, Vietnam
Truong Tan Khanh1, Werner Stür2, Nguyen Van Ha3 and Alan Duncan4
1: Tay Nguyen University, Buon Ma Thuot, Daklak, Vietnam. Email: tankhanh@dng.vnn.vn2: International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), P.O. Box 783, Vientiane, Lao PDR. Email:
w.stur@cgiar.org
3: District Extension Office, Ea Kar, Daklak, Vietnam
4: International Livestock Research Institute, PO Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Email:
a.duncan@cgiar.org
Electronic proceeding of Innovation Asia-Pacific Symposium, 4-7 May 2009 • Katmandu, Nepal
Website: http://www.prolinnova.net/iaps/symposium_papers.html
Abstract
This paper describes a research and development partnership between Tay Nguyen University,Daklak, the CIAT Forages Program and the district extension service of Ea Kar district, Daklak
province in Vietnam. This partnership started in 2000 and is still ongoing. It has the objective of
improving the livelihood of smallholder upland households and diversifying their income sources
through improved livestock production. During this partnership, cattle production in Ea Kar has
changed from a subsistence cow-calf raising system to a market-oriented beef production system.
This paper describes the innovation process from 2000 to 2008 detailing key events that contributed
to a rapid change from extensive to intensive livestock production at different stages of development.
It specifically considers the main research and development actors that made up the stakeholder
grouping and how this changed with time. It also examines the linkages and partnerships between
actors and the role of the policy/market environment in facilitating innovation at key stages of the
development process.
The paper identifies the key stakeholders involved in the development process including farmers,
farmer groups, district and commune extension offices, local governments, cattle traders, credit
providers and researchers from Tay Nguyen University, the National Institute of Animal Husbandry
and CIAT. The paper then explores how the roles of stakeholders and the nature of partnerships
changed from a tight grouping of research and development partners in the early stages of the
process to a wide and diverse grouping of actors, each fulfilling key roles in moving the livestock
system from subsistence to market orientation. As a result of this shift, livelihoods improved
significantly for around 10,000 households and this is quantified. Although this case study did not
explicitly pursue an innovation systems approach, many of the experiences outlined show how an
actor-oriented approach can enhance innovation capacity in a sustainable way. The study also
emphasises the key role that appropriate technological interventions play in enabling farmers to
engage in more market-oriented cattle production in Ea Kar.
Key words: Forages, livestock, partnerships, stakeholders, actor linkages, livelihood impacts
Introduction
Ea Kar is one of 13 districts in Daklak province in the central highlands of Vietnam. Agriculture in the
district accounts for 65% of GDP (Daklak Statistical Yearbook, 2007). The landscape is undulating
and partially mountainous. Agricultural land occupies 40% and forest land 52% of the land area.
More than 80% of the people in the district depend on mixed crop-livestock smallholder agriculture for
their livelihood. The average farm size is 1.3 ha (Daklak Statistical Yearbook, 2007). Hybrid maize
accounts for almost half of the agricultural land, coffee and fruit trees are cultivated in small pockets of
fertile red basaltic soils (16% of agricultural land), paddy rice occupy in valleys and other flat areas
(12% of agricultural land), and a range of other annual upland crops are also grown. Crop yields are
low and limited by infertile soils and a long dry season. Most, if not all, farms raise animals including
pigs, poultry and cattle. Farmers have limited access to grazing areas in mountainous areas.
Cattle production is an important agricultural activity for smallholder farmers in the district with 32% of
households raising cattle (> 10,000 households) and income from cattle production accounting for
approximately 40% of the total household income for these farmers (Khanh, 2004). Cattle are an
important part of the livelihood risk management strategy of smallholder households. Traditionally,
cattle were raised to supply draught power and to accumulate capital: farmers bought cattle whenever
cash was available and sold animals when funds for large expenses were needed. The cattle were
grazed on fallow crop land, along road sides and fields, and in nearby forest areas.
This paper describes a research project that started with a research and development partnership
between the CIAT Forages Program, Tay Nguyen University in Buon Ma Thuot, Daklak, and the local
government and extension service of Ea Kar district in Daklak province in 2000. It started as a simple
partnership and has since grown into a large, diverse group of stakeholders with each fulfilling a
different role in the innovation process. The overall objective of the partnership was and is to assist
small-scale upland farmers in Ea Kar to improve their livelihood by increasing household income and
by diversifying their income sources through improved livestock production. Since 2000, cattle
production in Ea Kar has changed from a traditional extensive grazing system to a market-oriented
beef production system.
Much has been written about the use of innovation systems perspectives in agricultural development
(World Bank 2006). The Four Element Innovation Capacity Analysis Tool usefully summarises the
main elements of an innovation systems perspective as analysing (1) Actors and the roles they play
(2) Patterns of interaction between actors (3) Habits and practices (institutions) and (4) The enabling
policy environment (World Bank 2006). While the current research and development effort did not
consciously set out to test the use of innovation systems approaches to enhance innovation, at least
in its early stages, many of the experiences outlined can be interpreted through an innovation
systems “lens” to allow lessons to be drawn. For example, without necessarily setting out to do so, the
development effort placed a strong emphasis on the actors involved in the livestock sector, their
interactions and their habits and practices, and how these interactions contributed to building
innovation capacity within the local livestock system. These elements are all emphasised in the
innovation systems framework (Hall, Sulaiman & Bezkorowajnyj 2007). The stakeholder group and
the interactions which defined it were central to the success of the development outcomes.
Furthermore, the role of the policy and institutional environment had a major bearing on key phases of
the development process; as the stakeholder group became mature it included local policy makers
and the behaviour of the group took account of the wider policy environment.
Methods
This case study first describes the research process of introducing forages and improved feeding
systems for cattle in Ea Kar. It then examines the impacts of forage adoption and other development
outcomes, and analyses the partnerships and linkages that were critical in enabling change. The
information presented is based on feedback from key partners, and draws on results from adoption
surveys, stakeholder analysis, actor linkage and market studies, and refers to project reports and
publications.
Results and discussion
The research process
2000-2002. Activities in Ea Kar district started in 2000 with a 3-year research project, the ‘Forages for
Smallholders Project (FSP)’, managed by the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) with
partners from Tay Nguyen University (TNU) and the National Institute of Animal Husbandry (NIAH)
(Table 1). The FSP had the objective of developing forage technologies with smallholder farmers and
built on earlier research by CIAT and a range of national partners throughout Southeast Asia that had
identified forage varieties suitable for different agro-ecosystems in the region (Horne and Stur, 1999).
In early 2000, CIAT and TNU formed a partnership with the Ea Kar district government extension
office to work with smallholder farmers in evaluating a small range of forage grasses and legumes for
integration into farming systems (Figure 1). Choosing the district extension office as a key local
partner was a natural choice for researchers as this office has the task of ‘transferring technologies to
farmers’. In participatory consultations, farmers had identified the lack of feed and the time required
for feeding cattle as major obstacles to improving cattle production. A small number of volunteer
farmers agreed to evaluate forages and feed them to their animals. The number of stakeholders
involved in the process was limited and easy to facilitate.
2003-2005. A 3-year follow-on project, the ‘Livelihood and Livestock Systems Project’ (LLSP)
continued to work with farmers to develop new feeding systems that utilised both local, traditional feed
resources and the new cultivated forages (Table 1; Figure 1). Ad libitum feeding of good-quality
fodder and supplementary feeding were introduced and tailored to different production systems such
as cattle fattening and cow-calf production systems. Activities expanded to more villages and
communes, and scaling out became a focus of the project. Increasingly, the project worked with
farmer groups, rather than individual farmers and with local organisations such as farmer and
women’s unions. Training of trainers involving district extension workers, commune extension
workers and key farmers, was a core activity. Other extension tools included cross visits, field days
and farmer training organised by extension workers. The LLSP also conducted a participatory cattle
market study which brought farmers and traders together to discuss constraints and opportunities for
improving marketing of cattle from Ea Kar. The range of partners and key stakeholders involved in
the forage and cattle activities had increased and included commune governments, commune
extension workers, farmer interest groups, and district farmer and women’s unions. The focus of the
project had moved to scaling out but with ongoing improvements in the current production systems.
2007-2009. There was no active project in 2006 but local stakeholders continued to scale out forages
and improved feeding systems, and the collaboration between TNU and the district extension office
continued. In 2007, Ea Kar was included as a pilot learning site in the research project ‘Enhancing
livelihoods of poor livestock keepers through increasing use of fodder; Fodder Adoption Project (FAP)’
(Table 1; Figure 1). This project aims to strengthen the capacity of stakeholders to improve cattle
production and take advantage of market opportunities, and to better understand the processes
needed for adoption of fodders. It also worked with disadvantaged households, particularly in
indigenous communities, that had not yet taken advantage of the opportunities for improved cattle
production. By 2008, forage development and improved feeding systems had been scaled out to at
least some villages in all communes in Ea Kar. New stakeholders were actively engaged in
developing the cattle production sector. These included livestock traders, the District Agricultural
Bank which provided credit for cattle production to poor households, and other government
departments such as the policy and planning units. By this time traders were actively engaged with
farmers and other stakeholders, and were developing new markets for cattle from Ea Kar. In 2008,
the district established a Cattle Producers Association to foster the development of a trademark for
cattle and beef from Ea Kar.
Other government programmes and policies also had an influence on cattle development in Ea Kar.
In 1992, a national program designed to improve cattle breeds in Vietnam had been started and was
implemented by the national extension services. In Ea Kar, the district extension office was able to
offer improved Laisind bulls for breeding to villages and key farmers. Laisind is an improved local
breed (a stabilised cross between local and Red Sindhi), which farmers prefer over native cattle. From
2000, the national programme provided training in artificial insemination (AI) to extension workers and provided semen and equipment to the district extension office. From 2000 - 2004, farmers’ demand
for Laisind bulls and AI was limited. In 2005, demand grew sharply as farmers had stated to intensifytheir cattle production system and many had started to raise cattle in pens. In 2005, the district
extension office created an AI network, which has become very important in the production of high
quality crossbred cattle for fattening. Farmers need to pay for the AI service but semen is provided
free of charge by the national program. Another project, that evaluated the growth performance of
different cross-breeds, was conducted by NIAH. This project offered to inseminate Laisind cows
belonging to farmers with a range of exotic cattle breeds and measured performance of the calves
with the aim of selecting suitable breeds for the national AI program.
The development outcomes, 2000 – 2008
Changes in the production system
Farmers evaluating forages as part of the FSP from 2000-2002 found that growing small areas of
intensively managed grasses produced high yields of fodder, which saved them a lot of time as they
did not need to graze their cattle so long. Instead they used the cultivated forages to supplement and
feed their cattle. Growing and managing forages, particularly grasses, was relatively simple and
farmers quickly learnt to do this. By 2004, new forage-based cattle feeding systems had developed
as many farmers adopted pen feeding which proved to be a simple way of managing and feeding
cattle. Increasingly, farmers fed animals only cultivated grasses and found that cattle grew much
faster than before.
With time, two distinct cattle production systems emerged: (i) fattening of cattle for slaughter and (ii)
cow-calf production. Prior to 2000, cattle had been grazed only (Table 2). By 2007, a small
proportion of farmers had moved to semi-intensive and intensive production systems, particularly
those practicing fattening (Table 2). Daily weight gains of cattle in fattening systems were at least 600
g per day with some farmers reporting 800 g or more. This was much higher than the growth rates of
animals raised in traditional grazing systems, which often were less than 200 g per day. This higher
productivity made cattle production an attractive farm enterprise. Many farmers had started to fatten a
thin animal for 2-3 months using ad libitum feeding of nutritious, green grasses and then selling them
to traders for slaughter when fat. Some farmers were feeding 2 cattle at a time and so selling 8 or
more fattened cattle per year.
By 2005, some farmers had started to keep Laisind cows in pens and used improved Laisind bulls
and artificial insemination (AI) using semen of exotic breeds to produce high-quality Laisind and
crossbred calves. As farmers had access to cultivated forages, they were able to feed the larger
Laisind and crossbred calves more easily. By 2007, the herd composition had changed from mainly
local yellow cattle in 2000 to more than 50% Laisind / crossbred cattle (Table 3).
Adoption of Forages
Adoption of cultivated forages by households increased rapidly between 2001 and 2005 and more
that 2400 households were growing forages by 2007 (Figure 2).
In 2007, the mean area of forages grown by farmers was 900 m2 (Table 4), which was only a small
portion of the total farm size of approximately 1.3 ha. The overall forage adoption rate was 23% of
households raising cattle in Ea Kar (Table 4). Forage adoption varied considerably by cattle
production system: 96% of households fattening cattle had adopted cultivated forages, while only
19% of households using cow-calf systems were using cultivated forages.
Changes in cattle population and cattle markets
The cattle population in Ea Kar more than doubled between 2003 and 2005 to approximately 28,000
animals (Figure 3). This compares to a much lower annual average increase of the cattle population
for Daklak province of 7% for the same period (Daklak Statistical Yearbook, 2007). The cattle
population has remained stable since 2005, but traders estimated that the sale of animals has
increased from approximately 8000 animals in 2005 to 15,000 animals in 2008 (sales estimates by
the main cattle traders in Ea Kar during a feedback meeting). These figures confirm the intensification
of cattle production that has taken place during this period, and show the enormous gains achieved
by developing improved feeding and management systems with a range of actors.
As farmers produced fatter, higher-quality animals, traders started to look for new markets for cattle
and beef from Ea Kar. In 2004, almost all cattle produced in Ea Kar were sold for local consumption
in Ea Kar and neighbouring districts; essentially none were sold outside Daklak province. By 2008,
50% of cattle from Ea Kar were sold outside the province to city markets in Ho Chi Minh City, Da Lat
and Nha Trang, 35% to Buon Ma Thuot City, the provincial capital of Daklak, and only 15% of cattle
were sold for slaughter within Ea Kar and neighbouring districts (unpublished data from a recent cattle
market study, 2008). This was an enormous shift in markets and market requirements for cattle.
Cattle sold to city markets needed to be young (2-3 years of age), have a high body weight of at least
300 kg and be in very good body condition. These specifications can only be met with well-fed
Laisind or crossbred cattle; local cattle have a smaller adult body weight.
The district government has recognized improved cattle production as an effective way to increase
incomes and reduce poverty, and has actively promoted cattle development in Ea Kar. It has
released policies on investing in forage and cattle development; initiated a cow distribution scheme for
poor and indigenous households to enable them to participate in cattle development; and established
farmer extension clubs to disseminate forage and cattle production technologies throughout the
district.
Livelihood impacts
Cattle production based on improved forage-based feeding systems provided significant economic
benefits to farmers. An economic study conducted in 2005 showed that the annual net return for
fattening cattle using cultivated forages grown on 1,200 m2 was US$ 511; this compared to US$ 90 if
the same area had been planted with coffee (Khanh and Ha 2006). In cow-calf production, cultivated
forages reduced the time required to feed and manage cattle and so increased the return to labour
from US$ 0.20 per hour in traditional grazing systems to US$ 0.73 for farmers that had planted
forages. Achieving these livelihood benefits required only a small area of cultivated forages; these
ranged from 500 m2 per cow in cow-calf production, where cows were supplemented with cultivated
forages, to 850 m2 per animal in fattening systems, where all the feed was supplied from cultivated
forages. Additionally, early adopters benefited from being able to sell forage seed and planting
material to farmers who started later.
Stakeholder dynamics
The geographical spread of project activities, the main stakeholder groups and their linkages are
shown in Figure 4 for three of the years of project activities. The thickness of lines indicates the
strength of the relationship between stakeholder groups e.g. (Biggs & Matsaert 2004). In 2002, the
project was a relatively simple research and development partnership of researchers, extension
workers and key farmers. The main communication flows were between researchers from CIAT +
NIAH and TNU, and between researchers from TNU and the district extension workers, and between
district extension workers and key farmers. Researchers did interact directly with key farmers but the
farmers’ main contact was with the district extension workers. This was a simple and easily managed
partnership.
As forage and livestock activities expanded to more communes, the number of stakeholders and the
complexity of managing relationships increased. By 2005, the district extension office and the district
government had become major stakeholders managing scaling out and cattle development. The
district extension office had become the ‘hub’ of interactions with key stakeholders in the district.
These included the district government, commune extension workers and farmer groups, as well as
the relationship with the research group. The district government provided important political,
financial and administrative support and facilitated linkages with commune governments and district
farmer and women’s unions. Researchers continued to be an essential stakeholder by working with
the district extension office and farmer groups to improve production systems and providing training
and methodological support for scaling out, but the ‘key connector’ or innovation facilitator was the
district extension office. Commune extension workers had emerged as an important stakeholder
group connecting with farmers groups and interacting with the district extension office in scaling out
and training. Building capacity of commune extension workers and farmer groups had become an
important activity conducted by the district extension office and was supported by TNU. This included
both technical training on forages, animal nutrition and livestock husbandry and on approaches for
working with farmers to evaluate new technologies and methods and tools for scaling out. The main
interface between farmers and the extension service had moved to commune extension workers,
supported by the district extension office.
By 2008, the complexity of interactions had increased further with more communes and villages
joining activities, and additional key stakeholders including livestock traders, agricultural banks and
district departments such as planning and policy. The district extension office remained the ‘key
connector’ of activities and researchers continued to provide support through on-farm research, M&E
of forage and cattle developments and market studies to assist the district extension office and district
government in decision-making. The district government facilitated access to credit for poor
households through the Agricultural Bank. Traders developed new markets beyond Ea Kar and
Daklak, and interacted with the district extension office and farmers. As more stakeholders became
major participants in livestock development and the capacity to evaluate and scale out new
technologies increased, the importance of researchers as an essential component of livestock
development, declined. The importance of building capacity of commune extension workers and
farmers continued. CIAT and TNU continued to provide training of district and commune extension
staff in methods such as market studies, household surveys and M&E.
Excellent inter-personal relationships were crucial to establishing and maintaining effective working
relationships and their importance cannot be overstated. Key inter-personal relationships existed
between people at CIAT and TNU, TNU and the District Extension Office, and the District Extension
Office and the District Government, and between the District Extension Office and farmer leaders and
livestock traders. The dynamics and culture of interactions depended largely, but not exclusively, on
these inter-personal relationships. This dependence on key people represents a considerable risk of
interruptions should one or more leave the project. Fortunately, the dependence on particular
stakeholders reduced with time as more stakeholders were engaged in cattle development and the
stakeholder group became self-sustaining.
Finally, what was driving the partnership? Clearly, effective stakeholder relationships and building the
capacity to innovate and scale out improved livestock technologies were important factors but would
any of these have occurred without having a strong technical intervention as an entry point? In this
case, forages provided farmers with significant and immediate benefits and this motivated farmers
(and extension workers and the local government) to invest in livestock development. In this case,
simple introduction of an effective fodder technology provided the basis for subsequent development
of an effective stakeholder group which allowed innovation within the cattle sector to unfold.
Conclusions
This case study showed that a small research project with a good technology and an effective
research and development partnership can contribute significantly to improving livelihoods of
smallholder farmers provided the vision for development moves beyond simple promotion of the
technology to include facilitation of wider stakeholder interactions and consideration of the market and
policy conditions within which the technology is introduced. Taking this wider vision of “building
innovation capacity” was effective in this case, in developing a self-sustaining stakeholder group
which continually responded to changing circumstances with new innovations.
Forage technologies enabled farmers to transform a marginal livestock production system into a
profitable farm enterprise and provided the entry point for changing and improving cattle production in
Ea Kar. Forages provided immediate benefits to farmers and paved the way for farmers, extension
workers and local government leaders committing to livestock development. Without such an ‘engine’,
the commitment of stakeholders to working together may not have developed.
There was reciprocity between participants. Early local government support and participation ensured
that project activities contributed to the livestock development ambitions of the district government
while, at the same time, the project helped shape the livestock development strategy of the district.
Personalities of individuals were important at all levels. For example, excellent inter-personal
relationships between key stakeholders developed and were a crucial component of the effective
working partnership that developed in the project. This development of trust among actors was central
to the development effort. The Ea Kar district extension office became the ‘central hub’ connecting
stakeholders, and this may not have been possible with a different set of people. This transfer of
responsibility from the project(s) taking the lead in development towards a permanent stakeholder
taking the lead was important for sustaining the stakeholder group as projects came and went. This
helped to avoid the oft-repeated project cycle syndrome where development is successful while the
project is in place but falters once the project comes to an end. This building of innovation capacity
emerged without conscious effort to apply any particular innovation systems theory. However, it did
place strong emphasis on the actors involved in the livestock sector, their interactions and their ways
of working (institutions). Furthermore, keeping one eye on the policy environment (e.g. local
government initiatives to introduce improved cattle) was an important element of success.
Commonalities in objectives and commitment were important. Key stakeholders shared the vision of
improving livelihoods of smallholder farmers, were highly motivated and enjoyed learning and working together.
There were many stakeholders who contributed to a successful outcome during the process of
development of cattle production systems in Ea Kar. The stakeholder matrix grew in both number and
complexity as the project moved from forage research to livestock development and scaling out.
Researchers continued to contribute significantly to the development but were only one among many
stakeholders who influenced the final outcome.
Relevant research and training significantly contributed to the improvement of the stakeholders’
capacity to innovate.
Finally, this case study spans a period of 9 years. Clearly, building innovation capacity for successful
smallholder livestock development takes time.
Acknowledgements
This case study would not have been possible without the support, hard work and endless efforts of a
large number of individuals and the support of their organisations over a long period. We would like
to thank researchers and development practitioners involved in previous projects, particularly Peter
Horne, Le Hoa Binh and Ralph Roothaert for their contribution to forage development in Ea Kar. We
would also like to thank CIAT, NIAH and TNU for their support, the Asian Development Bank for
funding the FSP and LLSP projects, and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)
for funding the on-going FAP project. We are particular grateful to the Vice-Chairman of Ea Kar, Kieu
Thanh Dzung for his continued support, to all extension workers, farmers, local government and other
stakeholders in Ea Kar who have contributed significantly to forage and livestock development in Ea Kar
References
Biggs,S. & Matsaert,H. Strengthening poverty reduction programmes using an actor-oriented
approach: examples from natural resources innovation systems. 134, 1-23. 2004. Overseas
Development Institute. ODI Agriculture Research and Extension Network Network Papers.
Daklak Statistical Year Book (2007). Statistical Publishing House, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Daklak Statistical Year Book (2008). Statistical Publishing House, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Hall,A., Sulaiman,R. & Bezkorowajnyj,P. Reframing technical change: Livestock Fodder Scarcity
Revisited as Innovation Capacity Scarcity. 2007. International Livestock Research Institute
(ILRI), United Nations University (UNU-MERIT), International Crops Research Institute in teh
Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA) on behalf of
the System-wide Livestock Programme (SLP) of the Consultative Group on International
Agricultural Research (CGIAR).
Horne, P and Stür, W. (1999). Developing forage technologies with smallholder farmers – how to
select the best varieties to offer farmers in Southeast Asia. Published by ACIAR and CIAT.
ACIAR Monograph No 62. 80pp.
Khanh, T.T., Ha N.V., Phengsavanh, P., Horne, P. and Stür, W. (2006). The contribution of livestock systems to livelihood sustainability in the central highlands of Vietnam. In: Towards sustainable livelihoods and ecosystems in mountainous regions. Proceedings of an International
Symposium, 7-9 March 2006, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Khanh,T.T. (2004). Report of participatory market appraisal 2004. LLSP Working document.
Khanh, T.T., Stur, W. and Ha, N.V. (2008). "Planted forages – enabling improved smallholder cattle
production in Ea Kar, Daklak, Vietnam”. Proceeding of “The 13th Animal Science Congress of
the Asian - Australasian Association of Animal Production. Theme: Animal Agriculture and the
role of small holder farmers in a global economy”. Hanoi - Vietnam September 22-26, 2008.
World Bank. Enhancing Agricultural Innovation: How to Go Beyond the Strengthening of Research
systems. 1-118. 2006. Washington, World Bank. Agriculture and Rural Development Series.
7:41 AM |
Category: |
0
comments
Comments (0)