Characterization of Husbandry Practices, Adoption and Impact of Village Poultry Technology Packages In the Central Oromia Region, Ethiopia
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2015-12
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Addis Ababauniversity
Abstract
This study was conducted in three selected agro-ecologies to characterize the husbandry
practices, adoption and impact of village poultry technology packages in the central Oromia
Region, Ethiopia. Using multi-stage random sampling method, 180 technology participants were
selected. Structured questionnaire, field observations and focus group discussions were
employed to collect quantitative and qualitative information. Chemical composition of feed
samples was analyzed using proximate analysis. Descriptive statistics was used to evaluate the
husbandry practices of the technology. Binary logistic regression was employed to assess the
determinant factors of technology adoption. Ranked variables were analyzed using NPAR1WAY
Wilcoxon procedures. Logit model propensity score matching procedures was used to assess the
impact of the technology. Scavenging chicken production system with some feed supplement
was dominantly practiced by technology participants. Overall about 44.6%, 38.7% and 16.7%
local, exotic and crossbred chicken breeds were kept in the production systems, respectively. A
mean of 17.8(2.50), 13.4(2.17) and 11.2(1.25) chicken were owned per household in the
highland, mid-altitude and lowland agro-ecologies, respectively. Most of the respondents
(65.6%) practiced crossbreeding of these 59.4% conducted uncontrolled breeding. The
supplement feeds had very good CP and ME contents but home mixed ration I had lower CP
content. About ½ of the respondents constructed separate chicken house. However, during
housing, 68.3% didn’t consider the space requirements of the chicken. Newcastle disease was the
major challenging and killing disease in the study areas. Respondents received a mean of
4.7(0.80) pullets with cockerel and 10.1(1.25) pullets for the technology but their demands were
xx
64.0(6.11) and 97.9(16.27) pullets with cockerels and only pullets, respectively. Technology
inputs dissemination was not well organized. Improved chicken breed adoption was better as
compared to other technology elements. Respondents residing in the mid-altitude agro-ecology
were better adopters of improved chicken feeds and feeding, housing, healthcare and water
provision. Bovan Brown chicken breed adoption was higher (26.1%) than other chicken breeds.
The adoption of pullets with cockerels technology form was higher (22.2%) than the rest forms.
The overall adoption status of the technology was 39.4%. The adoption level of the technology
was categorized as low level. The overall technology adoption was significantly influenced by
extension (P<0.001), healthcare (P<0.05) and training (P<0.001) services. The distance of
veterinary clinics, unavailability of appropriate chicken feeding and watering equipment were the
major limitations that negatively influenced the technology adoption. More of the covariates
included in the model less likely influenced the probability of adoption. Adopters significantly
(P<0.001) benefited from the technology by 68.5% and could produce 101 more eggs/layer/year,
consumed 18 more eggs/household/year and got 168.65 Birr more income/layer/year as
compared to non-adopters. In conclusion, to improve the husbandry practices of the technology
package, more focus should be given to mothers. To improve the adoption status of the
technology, technology inputs distribution should be well organized and more efforts are needed
from concerned organizations, professionals and farmers. To increase the farmers’ decision of
technology adoption, more attention should be given to inputs supply, extension, healthcare and
training services. Moreover, technical, financial, managerial and market supports are majorly
needed.
Keywords: Adoption; Agro-ecology; Determinants of adoption; Husbandry practices; Impact of
the technology; Village poultry package
Description
Keywords
Adoption, Agro-ecology, Determinants of adoption, Husbandry practices, Impact ofthe technology, Village poultry package