↓ Skip to main content

Multi-country investigation of factors influencing breeding decisions by smallholder dairy farmers in sub-Saharan Africa

Overview of attention for article published in Tropical Animal Health and Production, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
146 Mendeley
Title
Multi-country investigation of factors influencing breeding decisions by smallholder dairy farmers in sub-Saharan Africa
Published in
Tropical Animal Health and Production, September 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11250-018-1703-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

G. Mwanga, F. D. N. Mujibi, Z. O. Yonah, M. G. G. Chagunda

Abstract

Artificial insemination (AI) and selective bull mating are considered as robust methods for dairy cattle breeding. Globally, these methods have been used to enhance productivity and realize rapid genetic gains. However, these technologies have had low adoption rates in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Even though available evidence suggests that this is due to various infrastructural and technical challenges. There is limited information about what drives this low uptake of AI from a farmer's perspective. Therefore, the main objective of this study was to determine and characterize factors that influence the choice by smallholder farmers between bull service and AI for dairy cow breeding. Further, the relationships between the breeding choices and the bio-physical elements of dairy farming, mainly, farmer characteristics, household income levels, farm management practices, and institutional support structures, were investigated. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews from a total of 16,308 small-scale dairy farmers in Ethiopia (n = 4679), Kenya (n = 5278), Tanzania (n = 3500), and Uganda (n = 2851). The questionnaire was coded in an electronic form using Open Data Kit (ODK) platform to allow for real-time data entry and management. Descriptive statistics, chi-square test, and a t-test were used to evaluate the independent and dependent variables, while logistic regression and factor analysis were used to identify factors that influenced farmers' breeding decisions. Results showed that there was a significant difference in animal husbandry practices between farmers who used artificial insemination (AI) and those who practiced bull mating. The majority of farmers who used AI kept records, purchased more animal feeds, had more labor by hiring workers whose average wages were higher than those of bull service farmers. However, farmers who used AI pay more for services such as water access and breeding while their service providers had to cover long distances compared to farmers who used bulls. This indicates limited access to services and service providers for AI farmers. The ratio of AI to bull service users was even for Ethiopia and Kenya, while in Uganda and Tanzania, more farmers preferred bull service to AI. It was established that the factors that influence farmers' breeding decision were not the same across the region. Factors such as farmer's experience in dairy farming, influence of the neighbor, farmer's ability to keep records, and management practices such as water provision and availability of feeds had a significant association (p < 0.001) with AI adoption among dairy farmers. In contrast, large herd and large land size negatively influenced AI adoption. Institutional settings including cost of AI service and the distance covered by the service provider negatively affected (p < 0.001) the choice of AI as a breeding option. There was a high probability of continued use of a specific breeding method when there was a previous conception success with that same method. Based on the results obtained, we recommend that improvement of institutional settings such as the availability of AI service providers, as well as better access to services such as water, animal feed, and animal health provision, be treated as critical components to focus on for enhanced AI adoption. Most importantly, there is a need to avail training opportunities to equip farmers with the necessary skills for best farm management practices such as record keeping, proper feeding, and selective breeding.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 146 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 11%
Student > Master 15 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 4%
Other 24 16%
Unknown 60 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 18%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 9 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 4%
Other 29 20%
Unknown 60 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 December 2018.
All research outputs
#7,614,574
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Tropical Animal Health and Production
#166
of 1,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,832
of 340,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tropical Animal Health and Production
#4
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,384 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 340,739 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.