Animal breeding for poverty impact:

1. achieving more with available technologies Animal breeding for poverty impact: Ed Rege & Karen Marshall

2. Context - demographics • One billion people involved in animal farming • Domestic animals supply 30% of total human requirements for food and agriculture • 70% (630 m) rural poor depend on livestock for livelihoods • Rapidly growing livestock markets create income-generating opportunities

3. Context – opportunities & challenges Opportunities • Livestock revolution: • Increased demand • Growing livestock markets • Expanding post-production value addition • Increased regional trade opportunities • Creative use of existing & emerging technology • e.g. AI, sexed semen, mobile telephony • Biofuel impacts: ‘Will ‘foraging livestock’ be more competitive?

4. Context – opportunities & challenges Challenges • Rapid changes in production systems, markets, policy, other institutions • Supermarket revolution • Creates longer value chain, and higher food quality standards (also employment opportunity!) • Climate change: demand for adapted genetics • New institutions and institutional arrangements are required (& emerging!) • NGOs, CBOs, private service providers e.g. agrovets), PPPs, etc Both public & private sector action is required for animal breeding to impact on poverty

5. ‘Breeding’ as used in the paper All actions intended to improve, produce, deliver and sustain genotypes, appropriate for the objectives of the target livestock keeper/producer

6. Focus of this paper - 1 • Crop-livestock (& cut-and-carry) systems where genetic interventions can make a difference • Pastoral & semi-pastoral systems in which adaptation is critical

7. Focus of this paper - 2 • Crop-livestock (& cut-and-carry) systems • Medium to high, reliable, rainfall • Individual/family enterprises • Limited land • Medium to high productivity breeds Focus • Productivity improvements • Appropriate genotypes and sustainable replacement strategies • Reliable services provision – e.g. AI, vet, credit

8. Focus of this paper - 3 • Pastoral & semi-pastoral systems • Large herds/flocks • Dictates of climate • Mobility • Indigenous breeds • Strong community values Focus • Restocking strategies (‘genetic maintenance’) • Breeding strategies emphasizing adaptive attributes • Sire exchange or sharing strategies – using community structures

9. Two short- to medium-term high potential impact areas (in all systems) • Identification and facilitating evaluation/testing of proven genotypes from elsewhere • Facilitating sustainable availability of ‘high demand genotypes’ (e.g. F1, ¾, 5/8 dairy heifers, crossbred gilts)

10. 8 main messages of the paper • 6 inconvenient facts • 2 opportunities for action ( high impact areas)

11. 1 Within-breed selection will NOT meet short- to medium-term needs for poverty impact • Slow progress versus rapid system changes • small herds, high mortalities, low fertility, long L etc. • lack of performance recording • lack of institutional frameworks & infrastructure • Multiple trait objectives: traits often have low h2 • due to trait complexity (e.g. disease resistance, other adaptive attributes) • also high environmental noise (VE)

12. Marker-assisted selection Multiple QTLs with small effects QTLs in experiments not applicable in field situations Lack of working breed improvement frameworks In dairy: only low to moderate improvements reported – without economic benefits (e.g. Spelman et al., 2007) Marker-assisted introgression, more promising but Requires significant time, resources & delivery infrastructure 2 New genomics approaches, such as marker-based selection, will have limited impact on smallholders Other breed-improvement alternatives not fully exploited, and may have higher probability of success

13. 3 Community-based approaches are over-sold • Top down ‘cooperatives’ are viewed with suspicion • ‘Pastoral model’ of collective animal management has a solid social basis & works well – is an opportunity! • Community based models for breeding are not well demonstrated – major institutional issues remain unresolved • Privately run nucleus as sources of breeding material – certified seed model? – need serious consideration • ‘Sire camps’ or ‘sire rotations’ or private AI overseen by self-created and regulated ‘groups’ hold promise

14. 4 Conservation approaches can propagate poverty • Keeping adapted, but low producing breeds, in changing systems is unattainable • Indigenous breeds in the hands of farmers should be facilitated to evolve at a pace commensurate with system changes • Farmers ready to exit livestock keeping should be facilitated to do so

15. 4 Conservation approaches can propagate poverty • Farmers and the private sector consider breeds/genotypes as a means of production – a technology • focus should be on making breeds ‘work for them’ • Breeds as a natural resource for future generations (i.e. conservation) should be a public sector responsibility • In situ conservation will only happen if: • breeds are supported by the market • farmers are compensated (by public sector) for keeping non-profitable breeds • Ex situ action is urgently needed for breeds at risk • public sector responsibility? • regional approach?

16. 5 Absence of perfect data/tools is NOT the major constraint: inaction IS! You can proceed by e.g. • Using available estimates of genetic parameters • Using qualitative measures / subjective scoring/ranking • Private sector (nucleus) breeding (akin to commercial seed model) • Breeding objectives based on farmer preferences, choice experiments, etc • Application of independent culling levels Start with manageable program and move towards more optimal situation as capacity / data builds

17. 6 Pro-poor animal improvement is NOT necessarily about breeding It should comprise: • Understanding system changes and implications • Providing knowledge to enable poor farmers to adapt to these changes • Providing access to relevant market information • Creating (policy) environments that enable the poor to participate along the livestock value chain • Facilitating/developing institutional arrangements (including private sector) that empower farmers to make and implement decisions Set the stage for genetic improvement (including introduction of alternative genetics)

18. Introduced genetics N’Dama in central Africa Sahiwal in Kenya; Buffaloes in humid areas of LAC Created genetics Dorper sheep Jamaica Hope Cuban Siboney Crossbred dairy cattle in highland Kenya (a fading opportunity?) 7 New genetics, introduced or created, can be a pathway out of subsistence Animal germplasm has been successfully imported from Asia & Africa to LAC: similar approaches could work in Africa

19. Opportunities: N’Dama in tsetse infested areas of eastern Africa Kenana and Butana for milk in other parts of Africa Brazilian ‘dairy’ zebu breeds (e.g. Gir, Guzera) into Africa and Asia Wider use of the Boran in Africa? 7 New genetics, introduced or created, can be a pathway out of subsistence Boran cattle

20. 7 New genetics, introduced or created, can be a pathway out of subsistence Requirements: • (On-farm) characterization to identify the most appropriate genotype • Use of technologies to assist introduction & on-going evaluation • Sustainable sources of breeding material – private sector role • Appropriate agreements, consistent with international conventions and other instruments

21. 8 Available reproductive technologies offer promise • Reproductive technologies can be used now, and support new technologies when available • AI services can provide appropriate breeding material to farmers – currently not fully exploited • Estrus synchronization to scale up operations • High demand for breeding females can be met through use of AI, sexed semen, IVET, via private sector CSM • dairy cattle in eastern Africa (e.g. Ethiopia, Kenya) • pigs in south-east Asia (e.g. Vietnam)

22. Concluding comments • Use old science in new ways and places • Use new science to address old problems • e.g. understanding co-evolution of livestock with environments • Match interventions to production system: understand systems • Researcher’s should act as catalysts and facilitators providing options to farmers to make decisions based on scientific evidence • Need for breeders to think out of the box!

24. Definitions • Animal breeding: all actions intended to improve, produce, deliver and sustain genotypes, appropriate for the objectives of the target livestock keeper • Certified seed model: Akin to crop agriculture – breeding material (‘seed’) sourced from commercial seed company every generation