 |  | Animal Traction in Rainfed Agriculture in Africa and South America (GTZ, 1991, 311 p.) | ||
 |  | B. Introduction | ||
|  | 1. Preliminary remarks | ||
| | 2. Procedure and methodology | ||
| | 3. About the authors | ||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Smallholder agriculture in the countries of the Third World is generally characterized by poor yields and a low level of mechanization. In contrast the agrarian sector of industrialized countries has undergone immense changes in recent decades. Yields in the area of crop production have been increased enormously by means of modern breeding methods as well as the application of artificial fertilizers and pesticides. An increasing mechanization of agriculture has led to an increase of labour productivity and a reduction of the typical seasonal labour peaks.
Attempts to transfer capital-intensive Western motor mechanization to the countries of the Third World have as a rule failed, since the transition from the hand hoe to the tractorized plow is only possible in very few regions under special conditions. In the search for new strategies many people have begun to reflect on elementary technologies; the term appropriate technology has become a buzzword. In this context animal traction has received considerable attention in many countries of the Third World. Numerous institutions are involved with the promotion of animal traction in these regions. It is dependent upon many factors, whether an endeavour to introduce draft animals is successful and draft-animal mechanization is accepted in farming practice above and beyond the experimental stations and projects. Frequently, projects that have failed in this area indicate an insufficient consideration of these limiting factors.
For the further development of animal traction it is necessary to precisely recognize the possibilities and limitations of their utilization. Here it is important to learn from previous experience, both in traditional draft-animal regions as well as in development projects and, thus create the preconditions for a constructive improvement or effective introduction of draft-animal mechanization. People concerned directly with animal traction or agriculture in regions having animal traction possess such experience, however as a rule this has not been documented or systematically evaluated. This problem is also pointed out by Dr. E. G. Norris. He deals with the example of Togo in describing the colonial and post-colonial development approaches to increase agricultural productivity (by way of introducing the harnessing of oxen): "Unfortunately, I have never met a development aid expert in the colonial archives of the former European powers or, for that matter, in the colonial archives of the now independent states of Africa; it is also wellnigh impossible for independent scholars to obtain access to reports on failed projects, indeed, some organizations refuse to allow their field workers to write critical reports. In this sense, recent records are not merely inaccessible, they do not even exist. I am less interested here in the various reasons why such projects fail but rather in the extraordinary perseverance, with one organization, whether French, German, American, whether colonial or post-colonial, after another perseveres and sets in motion the same solution for African agriculture without casting a glance into European or African archives and, what is worse, without asking their peasant clients whether any such efforts have been undertaken in the past." (Norris, 1988, pp 2 and 9)
The information network lacking here necessarily leads to an enormous waste of resources, aside from the insecurity of planning. Thus, a development input strewn with countless mistakes is perpetrate; the "rediscovery of the wheel" occurs on many occasions. The aim of this work is to compile experience from practice with animal traction and particularly experience with using draft-animal implements. In addition, some primary determining factors for the utilization of draft animals are presented. The treatise anticipates the closing of information gaps with regard to the following themes:
- conditions for applying animal traction,
- extent of draft-animal use,
- structure of farms keeping draft animals,
- degree of mechanization of the individual work operations,
- regional distribution of draft-animal implements,
- experience with animal-drawn implements.
Our considerations are limited to the use of spans in rainfed cropping in the tropics and subtropics. According to Ruthenberg and Andreae (1982) this is defined as cropping based upon natural precipitation and includes no measures for additional irrigation. Draft-animal use for irrigation cropping, in the post-harvest area as well as water raising is only treated superficially. The use of draft animals for transportation is also a subject of the work, but the techniques are not dealt with individually.
Aside from own experience obtained from stays overseas and an assessment of the literature, experience with animal traction in practice in rainfed cropping has been drawn upon on the basis of a survey. Two questionnaires were set up for this purpose. A general questionnaire (annex I) was directed to persons and projects working with agriculture in regions having draft animals. Another more detailed questionnaire (annex II) was directed only to persons and projects who are directly involved with animal traction. The questionnaires were distributed in the German, English, French and Portuguese languages. Contact was taken up with national and international organizations as well as projects and persons working with animal traction for execution of the survey. In addition, returnees from development agencies were personally written to or interviewed. Since experience has shown that little has been reported on the difficulties encountered with animal-drawn implements, it was important to personally contact as many respondents as possible. It must be explicitly pointed out that the basis for acquiring data has merely an exemplary character regarding some questions, due to the regional distribution of expertise contacted and the extent of the sampling (88 interpretable questionnaires, see annex III). The comparison of various regions however offers the possibility to obtain general information on the determining factors of draft-animal and implement use. The investigation can only be viewed as a beginning, which will have to be supplemented and completed by further endeavours. Animal traction in Asia would also have to be included in more detail.
This study supplements the publications already issued by GATE/GTZ, especially "Animal traction in Africa" by Peter Munzinger, "Harnessing and Implements" and "Animal-Drawn Wheeled Toolcarriers" by Paul Starkey. In order to complete our study as well as to provide a clearer understanding of the material, some of the themes treated unavoidably overlap.
The approach employed is to provide observations going beyond a pure assessment of the techniques involved of the developments in mechanization in complex agricultural farm systems. Therefore, Ruthenberg's farming systems sets the stage for this study and the work by Pingali et al. (1987) is expanded upon, on technical aspects and labour potential. Further knowledge is gained on the comparison between Africa and Latin America. The experience from research and extension service institutions in the countries concerned provides support for our work. which increasingly focus their research on production systems.
The general factors influencing draft-animal use and the utilization of implements (chapter C) as well as the requirements and experience resulting from this area of draft-animal husbandry (chapter D) is treated first. With this background, the following chapter E presents and interprets experiences with the utilization of animal-drawn implements. The case studies on West Africa (chapter F) and Brazil (chapter G) clarify the variations and difficulties that have resulted from the adaptation to differing given conditions. Important key aspects, which promote or limit the utilization of draft-animal mechanization, are elucidated by means of a comparison of various locations.
The study is based upon a survey reflecting the experience gained with animal traction in 32 countries in Latin America, Africa and Asia. The questions in a general section of the questionnaire followed a strict pattern; space was also provided for supplementary answers not covered by the questions and the respondents were requested to include further information in an accompanying letter. Primarily open questions were selected for ascertaining the constraints of implements. (see questionnaire annex I and II). 204 questionnaires (in four languages) were distributed and there were 107 responses, of which 88 were evaluated. The response rate of just over 50 % can mainly be attributed to the fact that we approached contacts personally. These "case studies" were supplied by specialists who are in part functioning as coordinators for animal traction in larger regions, and others who are in part working in a confined project, in which animal traction is not the main objective of the work. The information overlaps for some regions; in other regions the answers represents an entire country. The figures show estimated values for whole regions, which in some cases approximate the size of a country. The average values, especially in the chapter on labour productivity and distribution should be considered to be more of a tendency than as fixed values. However, they were adjusted to the entirety of the data in order not to show up trends, which were only arranged by the non-representative deviation factor of the questionnaire. In addition, publications as well as personal experience was drawn upon as much as possible.
Exclusively experience from Africa and South America (including the Dominican Republic) was assessed in the section on implements. Experience from Asia was also taken into consideration in the chapter on general influencing factors of draft-animal use and draft animals.
The statistics employed in the case studies, e.g. the FAO production yearbook, the agricultural census of IBGE in Brazil, the proportion of rural population or the cropland in terms of the status of draft-animal use, could not be scrutinized in detail by the study team. Thus, it was not evident as of what size of community the inhabitants were considered to belong to the urban population; also, occasionally the "carré" in West Africa were classified as farms. In these cases we had to base the work merely on the available data.
The original intention to compare the prices of the implements proved to be to expansive within the framework of this study. Of greater importance would have been the collection of more data from farm machinery outlets and artisans. A common basis of comparison however would have had to be created, e.g. in relation to a kilogram of maize, for the already compiled data (partially in FCFA in Togo and Senegal, in CZ $, with an inflation rate approaching 1000 % in Brazil and in DM for the answers provided by German experts). This proved to go beyond the framework of our study. Similarly, various investigations on the profitability of draft-animal use could not be taken into consideration.
A clear insufficiency consists in the fact that the survey is based upon the knowledge and opinions of researchers and advisors, but not the farmers themselves. Within the context of the study however we have queried farmers directly as much as possible. Also, data on implement performance not based on longer observations on the farms can result in distorted findings. In many cases measurements taken on research stations yield poorer results than with farmers who have command of the techniques. We were also aware that the assessment of some implements was dependent upon the personal experience of the individual advisor. For this reason, but also because, for example it does not help the development worker in Zambia to become informed about the special defects of Brazilian makes of machines, the study has been confined to generalizable aspects of design and maintenance. For our objectives it was important to classify the regions according to climate. Although the average precipitation as well as the duration of the dry season was queried it was found in the evaluation that the classification in terms of climatic zones was sufficient, for which the temperature (thermic differentiation) and the number of wet months (hygric differentiation) were adequately considered. It was important that the data could easily be worked out by computer. Thus, we decided upon the climate classifications of Troll and Lauer (Landsberg et al., 1966; Lauer, 1986), which in contrast to the system designed by Köppen (1931) is oriented towards the vegetative conditions. The project locations can also be more easily classified than with the system suggested by Walter (1979).
The selection of the case studies was carried out in such a manner that a comparison could be made between South American and African regions, and that various aspects of draft-animal and implement use could be treated on the basis of various development levels of animal traction (introduction in Togo, longer experience in Senegal, tradition in South Brazil) as well as climatic differences. In the end, the selection was determined by the limited project funding available and personal experience.
Heribert Schmitz (M.Eng. in Machine Building) worked as a consultant in the field of urban and traffic planning for four years and as co-worker at IPAT (Interdisciplinary Group for Appropriate Technology) in the faculty of International Agricultural Development at the Technical University of Berlin for seven years. In the latter position he assumed responsibilities as lecturer in Appropriate Technology and conducted research work in sustainable agriculture and mechanization; at present coordinator of the German Volunteer Service in Brazil.
Mathias Sommer studied Agriculture in Bad Kreuznach and International Agricultural Development at the Technical University of Berlin. Recently, he participated in the one year project management programme offered by the Center for Advanced Training in Agricultural Development (CATAD) at the Technical University of Berlin. He has worked several years as a Technical Adviser in the field of animal production in Cameroon and Togo.
Sabine Walter studied Agriculture in Göttingen and International Agricultural Development at the Technical University of Berlin. In addition to agricultural activities she has been learning Modern Dance in Berlin for several years.
Previous publication: Nicht-chemische Unkrautregulierung. Sonderausgabe Nr. 27, Stiftung Ökologischer Landbau, Bad Dürkheim, FRG
 |
 |
