Crosscutting issues

In the foregoing, I addressed the specific and general objectives of this study. In this section, three issues are raised: relationship between livestock and food security, potential for commercialization of the smallholder production system, and potential for innovation of the system.

6.4.1. Relationship between smallholder livestock production and food security

The findings show that farmers’ concerns about household food security is a significant driver of current (non-commercial) practices as well as of the only modest changes in animal husbandry strategies that were observed. The joint technical and institutional constraints experienced by smallholder farmers induced low input use and risk avoidance behaviour (Chapter 2). On the other hand, declining soil fertility and getting manure that will accumulate from housing animals partly induced adoption of supplementation of crop residues (Chapter 4). Similarly, flock growth was pursued not for maximization of profit, but for insurance and capital stock (Chapter 5). The central role of food security in smallholder systems has been highlighted in a number of studies (Dorward and Kydd, 2004, Douthwaite et al., 2001, ICRA and NAES, 1993). For instance, the study that informed UWADEP (ICRA and NAES, 1993) was emphatic that food security is the primary objective of smallholder farmers in the Upper West Region. In this crop-livestock system and elsewhere in developing countries, livestock is kept and relied on to support crop farming (Animal Research Institute, 1999, Delgado et al., 2001). The present study shows that some farmers capitalized on changes in the context that threaten household food security in order to improve husbandry practices. One of the implications of this assertion is the need for joint development of crop and livestock enterprises in future interventions. The simultaneous development of crops and livestock to exploit their energy flows among the components of the farming system may be more appealing than either one alone.

123

Complementary changes in the farming system have been shown in the combination of food crop and commercial horticulture in the dry season. Unfortunately this study does not show major openings for complementarity of crops and livestock, thus confirming that food security is prioritized (Poole et al., 2013). This finding reflects on studies that argue that smallholder farmers are risk averse and hence interventions should aim for incremental improvement and help to secure the livelihood of the poor (Hella et al., 2001, Kristjanson et al., 2009, Udo et al., 2011).

6.4.2 Commercialization of smallholder livestock production system

The findings indicate that commercialization of smallholder livestock system is not currently appropriate for majority of smallholder farmers. The majority of smallholder farmers pursue the strategy of risk-avoidance rather than return maximization. They also abide by a normative rule that values crop production above animal husbandry. These characteristics of smallholder producers pose a challenge to those desirous of stimulating market-driven production of small ruminants in the study communities. This challenge is pertinent because the primary purposes for keeping livestock in crop- livestock systems are insurance and capital stock (Chapter 2). Once these purposes pertain, smallholder farmers select minimum investment in livestock husbandry as means to that end. Consequently, increased use of external inputs or intensification is inconsistent with the purpose for which majority of smallholder farmers keep livestock. Even the farmers characterized as positive deviants who increase resource allocation to livestock production such as herding and payment for veterinary services, and possess significantly larger herd sizes, sell proportionately fewer livestock in high- priced Christmas and Ramadan markets than non-positive deviants. Apparently, the PDs accumulate livestock assets for multiple purposes including walking bank, household food security, retirement benefit and prestige. The accumulation of livestock assets interrogates the drive towards commercialization which assumes that agricultural growth will translate into smallholder market participation (FAO, 2012, ILRI, 2011).

The assertion that there is a low probability that market production of small ruminants might emerge spontaneously is consistent with innovation systems studies that indicate that developments by smallholders and other actors are unlikely unless there are changes in the institutional arrangements in the broader environment in which smallholders and their production systems are embedded (Dormon et al., 2004, Klein Woolthuis et al., 2005, van Rooyen and Homann-Kee Tui, 2009). Also, the claim that

124 keeping livestock for subsistence purposes translates into low potential for commercialization reflects on the investment pattern between subsistence and cash crops. For instance, the commercial horticulture in the dry season in few communities shows that the farmers respond to interesting markets (Chapter 4). It also explains that if water shortage can be resolved more activities would likely spring up.

The findings of this study complement the argument that intensification of smallholder agriculture cannot be assumed even when demand is rising (Douthwaite et al., 2001, Savadogo et al., 1998). Changes are needed in the existing patterns of interaction, in the broadest sense. Thus, innovation of the smallholder small ruminant system requires changes in non-market institutions including re-organising veterinary service delivery, improving law enforcement and the organisation of water management.

6.4.3 ‘Below-the-radar’ innovation of smallholder livestock production systems

The findings show that the policy and development interventionists fall short in competencies to facilitate innovation of the smallholder small ruminant system. A number of local level or niche innovations were uncovered, but then, they have not been mainstreamed indicating the need for higher than farm and community level institutional innovations. The niche-level innovations included non-burning of bush and supplementary feeding in one community, flock growth and participation in high- value markets attained by the few positive deviant farmers, and organized household or community efforts to prevent livestock theft. However, local actors have been unable to resolve a number of the constraints including persistence of diseases, theft and lack of water during the dry season over the past twenty years (ICRA and NAES, 1993).

It is worthy of note how changes from minimum to moderate investment in livestock husbandry occurred in the study area. First, the crop residue supplementation adoption by farmers and successful flock growth by positive deviants were responses to changes in the surrounding conditions namely increased livestock theft and declining soil fertility. Similarly, sustaining the livestock farmer group after cessation of intervention activities (i.e. ARI-MoFA project) was driven by food security concerns. Thus, farmers selected intervention outcomes that there were useful to resolving the constraints they cared about. This implies that interventions may capitalise on changes in the biophysical and institutional contexts in order to enhance the likelihood of achieving useful outcomes for farmers.

125

Secondly, the study showed that self-organization by communities was key to resolving a number of institutional constraints. For example, in the few communities where an increase was observed in the demand and use of public veterinary services, groups of farmers self-organized to create access to veterinary services. Also in the community where most households kept cattle, livestock theft was dealt with through self-organization. The community leaders (consisting of the chief, the earth priest, the head of Fulani herdsmen, and leaders from various sections of the community) established an informal rule backed with sanctions in the early 1970s and also organized watchdogs to minimize livestock theft. Again, in the community where demand-driven sales were relatively high, the cooperative society (established as a church-based group) bought food during the harvesting period from its members and resold this to anyone in the community when needed, with only a modest price mark- up and so the community members were not compelled to sell animals under distress.

The pattern in the self-organized examples is that the people worked together to collectively solve problems that were relevant to each household. Thus, they were characterized by shared purpose and collective action, which resulted in useful outcomes for all. This implies that in communities where there exist established self- organized groups, the potential to sustain development initiatives could be exploited by interventionists.

A general principle that has been demonstrated by the self-organization in this study is that social organizational arrangements are a necessity in resolving institutional constraints. However, there are no self-organized groups in place at higher-than- community levels, for example, district, regional and national levels to work together to address corresponding institutional constraints. These constraints include weak structure of veterinary services, livestock theft, annual bush burning, and absence of transparent mechanisms at the district assembly level for provision of community water facilities. Especially, water access in the dry season seems to be a very basic and primary problem. Yet it has not been sufficiently addressed in the last 20 years (ICRA and NAES, 1993). Other Sahelian countries like Burkina Faso seem to have done so given their success in livestock production and marketing in urban centres like Kumasi and Accra in Ghana.

A way forward may lie in sensitizing and facilitating existing groups at the various levels to appropriate and resolve institutional constraints hindering livestock development in Northern Ghana. This study suggests that the structures at the district

126 assembly and regional levels that are responsible for development coordination could provide a forum for addressing institutional constraints in livestock development.

Our recommendation for employing existing groups complements a gap analysis of public veterinary service in Ghana conducted by World Organization of Animal Health (OIE) consultants (Diop et al., 2012). Diop et al (2012) reported that there is no regular formal interaction among the entities that make-up the animal health and production system and hence recommended the formation of a livestock development forum (or innovation platform) to fill the gap at the national level. The present study shows, given the structural problems in the veterinary services delivery system, a forum will require working on equity of the participants including veterinarians, drug store operators, farmers and Fulani herdsmen recognizing each other’s expertise. This may motivate the actors to play complementary roles at each level and foster joint achievement for desirable outcomes.

The recommendation for a more inclusive approach to livestock development is consistent with a co-creation approach which entails shared purpose and diverse stakeholders working together in order to achieve useful outcomes in the long-term for all. A key requirement for successful co-creation is trust among parties and once a shared purpose is attained by stakeholders working together, it enhances not only development of a single enterprise but other enterprises as well (Leeuwis, 2004, Merchant, 2012).

6.5 Reflections on methodology

This study was guided by social science research principles (Neuman, 2000). At the conceptual level, the point of departure was an assumption or an idea perceived to be a ‘cause’ or solution to a problem of societal importance (i. e. institutions hinder innovation and smallholder market participation). The introductions to the thesis chapters demonstrate that various aspects of the idea were also important to the scientific community by relating them to the relevant literature. The multiple methods (qualitative and quantitative interviews, documents reviews, and direct observations) employed aimed at finding evidence to ascertain the initial assumption. The analytical tasks involved probing for patterns, with respect to the research questions, in the salient recurrent and concurrent concepts in the data that were collected.

127

Interview data dominated the accounts in all four empirical chapters (i.e. Chapters 2 to 5). However, I complemented the interview data with direct observation data which provided deeper insight on how institutions affect actions and practices of smallholder livestock producers in this study. Instances of experiences of direct observations were summarized in the narratives: Fulani herdsmen were observed at drug store purchasing veterinary drugs (likely for self-medication) (Chapter 3), a positive deviant farmer providing common salt to a flock of sheep to supplement nutrient intake (indicating increased investment in livestock husbandry) (Chapter 5), manure accumulated in sheep pens and spreading it on farm lands around homestead to improve crop yield, and smallholders who sold their rams that were weighed in a previous month due to concerns about theft (Chapter 4). Apparently, diverse institutions prompted the actions of the herders and smallholder farmers. Thus, triangulating the reconstructions of experiences as in interviews and direct observation of practices enhanced the quality of the study (Atkinson, 2013).

My data collection focused mainly on farmers and their experiences with interventions during the last 20 years. To understand co-creation processes similar investments for data collection should be made in partners like scientists, MoFA staff and other stakeholders. This process of information gathering should start from the scoping study all the way through.