Valuation of communal area livestock benefits, rural livelihoods and related policy issues

Dovie, Delali B.K.; Shackleton, Charlie M.; Witkowski, E.T.F.

doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.004

Cited by 90 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, importantly, the cattle population in the southern site grew about five times more than the growth in the number of cattle owners during the same period. Notwithstanding, the increase of 168% in cattle had been reported previously for a six-year period in a specific village in Bushbuckridge (albeit a period immediately after the severe drought of 1992) (Dovie et al, 2006), which was similar to our findings, mainly due to an increase in herd size rather than numbers of livestock owners (Scogings et al, 1999;Shackleton et al, 2005). Herd accumulation in communal systems when optimal conditions prevail, may thus act as a form of insurance against adverse events (McPeak and Barrett, 2001).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Our approximation of the proportion of households owning cattle was lower than reported by others (Barrett, 1991;Shackleton et al, 2005;Moll, 2005;Dovie et al, 2006), especially in the South, where people appeared less inclined to practice agriculture compared to, for example, the northern site. Supporting evidence comes from the lower proportion of cattle-owning households, the smaller cattle to owner ratio, and the less than one third of a hectare of land cultivated per household.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 68%

“…Regardless, no association between mortality or calving rates and the area of subsistence cultivation available (Mukhebi et al, 1991) could be detected in this study. The actual utilisation of crops as supplementary fodder appeared to be low as noted by Scoones (1992a) and Dovie et al (2006) previously and buying of supplementary fodder was not common either.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…The benefits of livestock, cattle in particular, are not restricted by their financial value, and include various direct-use benefits such as meat, milk, manure, draught power, transport, and hides (Barrett, 1991;Scoones, 1992b;Swanepoel et al, 2000;Shackleton et al, 2005, Dovie et al, 2006. Much of the financial value of cattle is locked up as potential value, such that the animals act as a living savings account (Randolph et al, 2007;Shackleton et al, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Livestock have the further advantage over crops that they can be utilised at any time during the year (Vandamme et al, 2010). Although a number of studies have been conducted within the communal livestock farming area along the western boundary of the KNP (Swanepoel et al, 2000;Dovie et al, 2003Dovie et al, , 2006Shackleton et al, 2005;Nthakheni, 2006;Stroebel et al, 2008Stroebel et al, , 2011, none of these considered the heterogeneity within the larger area explicitly, since they mainly focused on individual communities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Heterogeneity in a communal cattle-farming system in a zone endemic for foot and mouth disease in South Africa

Schalkwyk¹,

Clercq²,

Pus³

et al. 2016

Geospat Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In South Africa, communal livestock farming is predominant in the foot and mouth disease control zone adjacent to the Greater Kruger National Park (KNP), where infected African buffaloes are common.During routine veterinary inspections of cattle in this area, a large amount of production and demographic parameters were being recorded. These data were collated for a five-year period (2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007) in three study sites to better understand the temporal dynamics and spatial heterogeneity in this system. A decreasing gradient from South to North with respect to both human and cattle population densities was observed. Rainfall and human population density alone could explain 71% of the variation in cattle density. Northern and central sites showed an overall decrease in total cattle numbers (15.1 and 2.9%, respectively), whereas a 28.6% increase was recorded in the South. The number of cattle owners in relation to cattle numbers remained stable during the study period. Only 4.0% of households in the South own cattle, compared to 13.7 and 12.7% in the North and Centre. The overall annual calving rate was 23.8%. Annual mortality rates ranged from 2.4 to 3.2%. Low calf mortality (2.1%) was recorded in the North compared to the South (11.6%). Annual off-take in the form of slaughter averaged 0.2, 11.7, and 11.0% in the North, Central and South sites, respectively. These figures provide valuable baseline data and demonstrate considerable spatial heterogeneity in cattle demography and production at this wildlife-livestock interface, which should be taken into consideration when performing disease risk assessments or designing disease control systems. IntroductionA large area next to the Kruger National Park (KNP) and its adjoining private and provincial nature reserves (APNR) in South Africa, is used for communal farming of both livestock and crops. Although the World Animal Health Organisation (OIE) considers South Africa to be free from the foot and mouth disease (FMD) in areas where vaccination is practised, the KNP and APNR are endemic for FMD (Brückner et al., 2002;Vosloo et al., 2002;Scoones et al., 2010), and this is due to the presence of the reservoir host of the disease, the African buffalo (Syncerus caffer) (Vosloo et al., 2006). To this end, a fence was erected around the KNP in the 1960s (Joubert, 2007;Scoones et al., 2010), and compulsory, weekly cattle inspections and bi-to tri-annual vaccination against FMD takes place at government livestock inspection points (IPs) within the area directly adjacent to the infected zone (the so-called protection zone with vaccination). Livestock in the remainder of the protection zone (protection zone without vaccinaCorrespondence: Ockert Louis van Schalkwyk, Office of the State

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 68%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Heterogeneity in a communal cattle-farming system in a zone endemic for foot and mouth disease in South Africa

Schalkwyk¹,

Clercq²,

Pus³

et al. 2016

Geospat Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Socioeconomic Value of Savannas

Twine

2019

Savanna Woody Plants and Large Herbivores

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human–Carnivore Coexistence on Communal Land Bordering the Greater Kruger Area, South Africa

Lagendijk

Gusset

2008

Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to assess the potential for coexistence between rural people (living adjacent to a protected area) and predators (from the same area) ranging onto communal land. Ninety members of local communities bordering Manyeleti Game Reserve, which is contiguous with Kruger National Park, South Africa were interviewed. Respondents expressed diverging attitudes toward predators, which were more favorable among participants with higher education. Negative views were particularly due to fear of human and livestock losses, especially to lions, Panthera leo. Lions were thought to be the most abundant predator both within and outside the reserve. Lions were also the best known predator and were most often held responsible for killing livestock. Despite these livestock losses and a lack of conservation education, most participants voiced favorable opinions about large carnivore conservation, as predators were considered an integral part of the respondents' natural heritage. Thanks to this cultural tolerance and also because of a largely accepted management policy regarding predator control, large carnivores and people can coexist in the vicinity of Kruger National Park.

show abstract

Valuation of communal area livestock benefits, rural livelihoods and related policy issues

Cited by 90 publications

References 16 publications

Heterogeneity in a communal cattle-farming system in a zone endemic for foot and mouth disease in South Africa

Heterogeneity in a communal cattle-farming system in a zone endemic for foot and mouth disease in South Africa

Socioeconomic Value of Savannas

Human–Carnivore Coexistence on Communal Land Bordering the Greater Kruger Area, South Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About