Annual Report of the League for Pastoral Peoples, 2000/2001

Livestock Development for Food Security or for Famine: Policy Makers have the Choice

by Ilse Köhler-Rollefson

There are many ways of keeping livestock. Pastoralists are at one end of the spectrum. They graze their herds on natural vegetation or possibly crop by-products, utilizing arid or barren stretches of land that cannot be put to any other productive use. The breeds they keep can survive droughts and feed shortages, cope with harsh environments, and are resistant to diseases. These traits are more important than productivity and enable pastoralists to survive in their inhospitable environments. Because of the relatively low meat and milk yields of their animals, these production systems are generally perceived as backward and in need of change to raise their productivity.

At the other extreme of the animal husbandry spectrum is the intensive production of poultry, pigs, and cattle with huge numbers of eggs, fantastic daily weight gain and huge milk yields. Such animals and production systems generate a plentiful supply of food, thereby nurturing people and preventing hunger. This is a commonly held belief, even among animal husbandry professionals.

Yet, closer analysis reveals that this argumentation is deeply flawed. The enormous amounts of meat and milk produced by high yielding animals devour equally enormous inputs. This starts with their feed requirements often composed of grain that could be directly consumed by people. In addition, such high yielding animals, because of their lack of general fitness and because of crowded husbandry conditions, need antibiotics, hormones and other feed supplements to remain healthy. Money has to be spent on housing and creating artificial environments, therefore it is a capital intensive enterprise. There are toxic effluents bad for the environment and, last but not least, animal welfare considerations.

Due to the traumatic experiences with Mad Cow Disease and FMD during the past months, there is now considerable political will in Europe for checking the excesses of intensive livestock production and instead supporting more sustainable, extensive and even ”organic” animal husbandry systems. Unfortunately, at the same time, the same production systems that have fallen into disrepute here because of human health and animal welfare concerns, are on a huge expansion course in developing countries. Because of increasing urbanization and a burgeoning middle class, the demand for meat and milk products in developing countries has already risen immensely and is expected to approach the per-capita consumption levels of the developed countries by 2020. This phenomenon is referred to as the ”Livestock Revolution”. It is a development that has garnered the attention of several international organizations, including the FAO, ILRI and DFID. These agencies are concerned about its possible effects on small farmers and fear that they will be squeezed out of the market by these capital intensive enterprises and loose their livelihoods. But up to now there is a notable absence of concrete suggestions for how to utilize the demand for livestock products so that it benefits the rural poor. 

How to achieve ”Sustainable Food Security for All by 2020” was the topic of an international conference organized by IFPRI, the International Food Policy Research Institute of the CGIAR, held in Bonn from September 4-6, 2001. Strangely enough, although IFPRI analysts themselves have coined the term ”Livestock Revolution” and have identified livestock as the largest subsector of agriculture, this issue with its huge implications for food security, employment and the environment was not on the official agenda of the September gathering. A variety of questions were posed and discussed, such as ”How committed are we to solving hunger?”, ”Why have we made so little progress?” and ”Whose responsibility is it to end hunger?”. But the conference hardly touched livestock. Thus it was left to the NGOs to bring the ”Livestock Revolution” to the attention of the media and the general public. 

Their verdict is clear: Stop subsidizing the export of industrialized animal production to the developed world and instead support these countries to pursue endogenous livestock development that builds on local feed supplies and animal genetic resources. Such measures will not only protect the livelihoods of millions of smallholders and pastoralists, but also ensure sufficient cereal supply to eliminate the justification for genetically modified crops.

Mission

LPP provides technical support services and advocacy for pastoral societies and other small-scale livestock keepers to help them pursue their own vision of development and to stand their ground in the face of unfavourable policy environments and alienation of their pasture grounds. LPP’s mission goes beyond people by considering the well-being of human’s domesticated animals as a secondary but important focus of its work. It seeks to promote the concept of endogenous livestock development relying on indigenous knowledge and institutions, local animal genetic resources and feed. 

Background

LPP was established in 1993 by a small group of veterinary and other concerned professionals confronted with the crisis situation of camel pastoralists in Rajasthan. Efforts to alleviate their situation set into motion a mutual learning process and a series of measures such as action research, projects related to animal health (including ethnoveterinary approaches) and marketing, as well as training and capacity-building. This has resulted in the establishment of an independent local organization (LPPS), which now represents a key partner and provides infrastructural support for activities in India.

Philosophy

Taking our cues from pastoralists we believe in the interconnectedness between the well-being of people and their domesticated animals. By conceptualising animals as machines, industrialized animal production systems sever one of the few remaining links between humans and the natural world. We regard animals as fellow creatures on this planet and not as subjects.

President: Dr. Christiane Herweg (c.m.herweg@t-online.de)

Vice President: Dr. Juliane Bräunig (j.braeunig@bgvv.de)

Project Coordinator: Dr. Ilse Köhler-Rollefson (gorikr@t-online.de)

Treasurer: Dr. Evelyn Mathias (evelynmathias@netcologne.de)

Membership

The League presently has 23 members (including the board members).

Contact address

League for Pastoral Peoples and Endogenous Livestock Development
Pragelatostrasse 20
64372 Ober-Ramstadt
Germany

Tel. +49-6154-53642
Fax +49-6154-53642
Email info@pastoralpeoples.org
Web www.pastoralpeoples.org 

Lokhit Pashu Palak Sansthan
Mailing address PO Box 1, Sadri 306702, District Pali, Rajasthan, India

Visiting address LPPS Training Centre, Butibag, near Mammaji ka Dhuni, Alsipura, via Rajpura, Sadri 306702, District Pali, Rajasthan, India

Tel./fax +91-2934-285086; email lpps@sify.com

Bank account

Membership account no. 28004273, donations account no. 28004893 at Sparkasse Darmstadt, Bank Code 50850150. Donations are tax-deductible.

Registration

The League for Pastoral Peoples was registered as a non-profit society at the County Court Darmstadt (VR 2337) on 15 March 1993.

LIFE Initiative

”LIFE” stands for Local Livestock For Empowerment of Rural People and is a movement for supporting rural communities through the conservation and development of indigenous livestock breeds and species. The following activities were undertaken under this banner last year: 

At the request of NRInternational, Ilse Köhler-Rollefson undertook a scoping study on ”Pastoralism in India” in cooperation with Prof. Vijay Sharma from the Indian Institute of Management in Ahmadabad. 

Exploratory visit to Pakistan

2020 Vision Conference

The following activities in India were undertaken in close cooperation with our partner-organization Lokhit Pashu-Palak Sansthan (LPPS):

Collaboration with other organizations

Note of thanks

Just for once we would like to express our gratitude to all those people who support the work of LPP so generously – some for years, to mention for example family Stürz from Wembach, Germany and Bettina Haas from Darmstadt, Germany. 

Recommendations passed by the participants of the International Conference and Workshop on Local Livestock Breeds for Sustainable Rural Livelihoods, Udaipur and Sadri, 1-4 November, 2000

Acknowledging the diverse roles of indigenous animal breeds for sustainable rural livelihoods in India (for food security, soil fertility, draught power, as social and cultural asset, source of income and saving etc), especially in marginal areas,
being conscious of the threat to domestic animal diversity, (due to government policies, economic pressures, increasing poverty, cultural erosion etc., and
concerned about the lack of awareness in all spheres of stakeholders,

we recommend:

1. Policy changes concerning

2. Concerted actions by NGOs, CBOs and communities, including:

3. Changing/expanding research towards the needs of poor livestock keepers 
towards achieving: