THE LIVESTOCK SECTOR IN SOUTHERN SUDAN

Results of a Value Chain Study of the Livestock Sector in Five States of Southern Sudan covered by MDTF with a Focus on Red Meat

By

The Netherlands Development Organization

Muli Musinga (musinga@aft.co.ke) Joseph M. Gathuma Obin Engorok Tesfaye H. Dargie

Final Report
Juba

November 2010

ii

Contents
Executive Summary Acknowledgements List of abbreviations 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Overview 1.2 Background . 1.3 Objectives 1.4 Approach and methodology .... 2. THE LIVESTOCK SECTOR IN SOUTHERN SUDAN: AN OVERVIEW 2.1 Overview 2.2 Global Context 2.3 The Population of Livestock in Southern Sudan 2.4 Livestock Production Clusters 2.5 Supply of Livestock and Livestock Products 2.6 Demand for Livestock and Livestock Products ... 2.7 Demand-Supply Gap .... 3. ORGANIZATION OF THE SECTOR 3.1 Overview 3.2 Production . 3.3 Product assembly and bulking 3.4 Transport and wholesaling 3.5 Live animal retail . 3.6 Processing: slaughtering and meat retail .. 3.7 Input supply .... 3.8 Service provision 4. LIVESTOCK SECTOR MAP 4.1 Overview . 4.2 Sector map. 67 4.3 Market channels . 5. THE RED MEAT VALUE CHAIN 5.1 Overview 5.2 Production 5.3 Assembly, transportation and wholesale . 5.4 Slaughtering and retail 5.5 Total value 80 6. POLICY, REGULATORY AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK 6.1 Overview 6.2 Policy framework 6.3 Regulatory Framework . 6.4 Institutional Framework iv xvi xvii 1 1 2 3 8 8 11 15 16 28 32 33 33 44 48 51 53 60 62 67 69 71 71 74 77

81 81 82 82 iii

7. SECTOR DYNAMICS 7.1 Overview 7.2 Driving forces 7.3 Sector nodes 8. KEY CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES 8.1 Overview 8.2 Key constraints 8.3 Opportunities 9. CHAIN DEVELOPMENT: POSSIBLE INTERVENTIONS 9.1 Overview 9.2 Possible interventions .

88 88 91 95 95 101 104 104

References Appendices
Appendix 1: List of key persons contacted during the study Appendix 2: Additional Tables and Figures Appendix 3: Study Instruments Appendix 4: Study Terms of Reference

iv

Executive Summary
Towards the end of July 2010, the Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries (MARF) awarded a contract to the Netherlands Development Organization (SNV) to carry out a Value Chain Analysis (VCA) of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan with a focus on cattle, goats and sheep. Undertaken with funding available within the framework of the Multi Donor Trust Fund (MDTF), the study was designed to cover the five states of Upper Nile, Jonglei, Unity, Central Equatoria and Eastern Equatoria. The main purpose of the study was to establish the key factors that contribute to costs of production and marketing, and identify opportunities for enhancing the sectors growth with the focus for meeting domestic demand for livestock and livestock products in the short-term, and exports to the region in the medium term. Specifically, the study would identify and map the interrelationships of all key players in the sector from production to the market; analyze the value added at each stage; identify key constraints and opportunities; assess market trends, and the regulatory and institutional environment under which the sector is operating; and recommend practical interventions required to build the competitiveness of the sector. Using the value chain analysis (VCA) research methodology, the study was carried out in the months of August and September 2010 by an interdisciplinary team of four Consultants from SNV and five senior officers from MARF. Both secondary and primary data was collected from the five states covering the whole livestock value chain from production to the market as well as the policy, regulatory and institutional framework under which the sector is operating. From a careful analysis and interpretation of information obtained from these sources, the following is a summary of key findings and observations: A. Size of the sector 1. Estimates by the FAO which are considered conservative, show that Southern Sudan has a cattle population of 11.7 million, 12.4 million goats and 12.1 million sheep. Considered separately (from the North), this would place Southern Sudan as the country with the sixth largest livestock herd in Africa with an asset value roughly estimated at SDG 7 billion. In comparison with the fairly low human population (of 8.26 million people), this high livestock population puts Southern Sudan as the country with the highest livestock per capita holding in Africa. This, coupled with the large land mass of 648,000 sq km most of which is suitable for livestock rearing, gives the sector an immense potential to sustainably meet the countrys domestic demand for livestock and livestock products; provide surpluses for exports into the region and internationally; and most importantly, generate sufficient incomes to permanently improve the livelihoods of the more than 80% of the population who currently depend on the sector. The livestock sector therefore stands out as, perhaps, the single most important area through which the livelihoods of the rural poor in Southern Sudan can be permanently improved. 2. There is a divergence in the estimates of the population of livestock between what is available at the policy level of MARF-GoSS (and other key partners such as FAO) and at the implementation level of MARF-State and County levels. Information from the five states visited during the study shows that the thinking on the ground is that the population of livestock is more than double the figures available at MARF-GoSS/FAO. Information from only the five States visited shows a cattle population of 13.9 million, 11.5 million goats, and 6.8 million sheep. The equivalent figures from the FAO estimates are 5.4m, 5.7m and 5.8 m cattle, goats and sheep, respectively. These are the figures the States are using for their planning (in Strategic plans) and for delivery of keys services such as vaccination and other health care services. A significant issue in this divergence of estimates is that at planning level, key policy institutions (including MARF-GoSS and FAO) are using estimates which are considered much lower at implementation level of States and Counties. In cases of vaccinations and other similar undertakings which require coordinated efforts, it is highly likely that this divergence of information is partly responsible for the low vaccination coverage reported in many States. This is an information gap that needs to be addressed urgently. Livestock population estimates generated from the 2008 Sudan Population v

and Housing Census availed to MARF by SSCCSE on request during the study have not helped the situation. Estimates from this source show a cattle population figure of up to 35.5 million, 20.8 million goats, and 27.3 million sheep. The SSCCSE did not apply the livestock questionnaire to all households covered during the human population census but rather applied it on a statistically generated sample of 500 households. This is what throws authenticity questions on the figures and makes the need for a livestock census in Southern Sudan to be still valid and urgent. 3. Although livestock production is widespread across the whole of Southern Sudan, there are some zones with significant concentrations of the population which make them possible to be considered as production clusters. These include the Greater Kapoeta region in Eastern Equatoria; Nyirol and Pibor Counties in Jonglei; Nasir, Baliet and Renk in Upper Nile; Panyinjar, Mayom and Leer in Unity; and Terekeka in Central Equatoria. Most of these areas are already showing emerging trends towards commercialization and present important points of leverage where targeted interventions could unlock bottlenecks in the sector and drive competitiveness. B. Demand and supply situation 4. An analysis of the current size and structure of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan shows that a total of 1.35 million cattle and 4.09 million shoats are available for supply into the red meat market annually without affecting the breeding stock and young herd. The actual number of animals sold annually is however estimated at 470,000 cattle and 2.45 million shoats. Out of this total, 173,000 cattle and 1.61 million shoats are slaughtered for meat while the remaining numbers are sold for restocking, social exchange or export to the North of Sudan as live animals. Total annual meat production is estimated at 41,124 metric tonnes with a retail value of SDG 0.61 billion. Beef production accounts for 46% of total meat production whereas the balance is accounted for by shoats. 5. Total milk production is estimated at around 550 million liters annually with a rough value of SDG 0.55 billion. It is however only about 10% of the milk that is sold (mostly in fermented form) and therefore the cash incomes to households are much lower, estimated at SDG 55.2 million. Milk production from goats and sheep is considered as negligible. 6. Slaughter produces a large number of hides and skins commensurate to the number of animals slaughtered an annual production of 170,000 hides and 1.6 million goat and sheep skins. From the prevailing market prices, the estimated value of hides and skins produced in Southern Sudan is SDG6.9 million. This value is however hardly realized due to the absence of a developed leather industry or an organized hides and skins trade. Under the current situation, hides and skins produced through slaughter are treated as mere by-products (almost close to waste) of the slaughter process that do not merit much attention. Discussions with hides and skins traders, butchery owners and operators of slaughter slabs show that it is only about 20% of the hides and skins produced which are marketed (with a value of SDG 1.38 million). The rest are generally wasted. 7. A summation of the estimated total value of production of livestock and livestock products shows that the income generated from the livestock sector in Southern Sudan currently stands at SDG1.43 billion annually. Meat production accounts for 43% of total production followed by milk (39%) and live animals sold for restocking or exports (18%). In relative terms, the value of hides and skins produced is currently insignificant accounting for only 0.5% of the total value of production. An analysis of the marketed value of production shows that only a small proportion of milk produced is marketed and so is the case of hides and skins. In view of marketed vi

production, meat accounts for almost two thirds of the total value (66%), live animals 28% and the balance is accounted for by milk (6%) and, hides and skins (0.2%). From a marketed value perspective, meat therefore stands out as the most important product of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan. 8. Despite the significant level of production currently achieved by the livestock sector, an analysis based on the total population of livestock and structure of the national herd shows that only a small proportion of the production potential of the sector is currently achieved. The biggest factor behind this low productivity is high mortality rates of both young and mature livestock. Estimates show that calf mortality in some regions is as high as 40 50 % while mature herd mortality goes as high as 10 15% in many areas. A similar pattern applies to shoats. Using the benchmark of tolerable mortality rates of 10% for calves and 3% for mature herd, estimates suggest that Southern Sudan could be losing 1.76 million cattle (both young and mature) and 5.1 million shoats annually through death, over and above the tolerable levels. This roughly works out to a SDG 1.2 billion loss that could be avoided. Other factors behind the low productivity levels include high abortion rates, stunted growth for calves/kids largely due to poor nutrition and health, and general low yields of milk and meat (carcass weight) attributable to inferior breeds kept and poor herding practices. On the whole, rough estimates suggest that the livestock sector in Southern Sudan could be operating at less 20% of its potential, even with current breeds. 9. An assessment of the current demand for livestock and livestock products in the country shows that the total consumption of cattle, goat and sheep meat currently stands at 41,124 MT, an equivalent of 173,000 cattle, 973,000 goats and 633,000 sheep annually. Over 95% of this demand is met through domestic supply, with modest volumes of live animals (about 17,000 cattle and 20,000 shoats from Uganda annually) and meat and meat products imported from the region and internationally. Projections show that this demand will continue growing rapidly driven by the underlying growth in population (of 2.43% pa), high rates of urbanization (for Juba estimated to be more than 20%), and rapidly increasing incomes (estimated to have grown from US$90 in 2004 to US$ 500 today). Besides the domestic demand for live animals for slaughter (meat), there is substantial demand for live animals among livestock keepers for herd build-up and re-stocking. Although a significant number of the transactions in this market do not go through established market infrastructure, the study estimates that a total of 270,000 cattle are sold to this market segment annually putting this as the largest outlet for livestock (especially cattle) among livestock farmers. In addition to these two market segments, there is also a small but consistent export of live animals to the North of Sudan largely through Bentiu in Unity (to El Obeid in the North), and Malakal, Renk and Manyo in Upper Nile all estimated at around 50,000 cattle and 20,000 shoats. 10. An overall assessment of the demand and supply situation shows that although there is significant demand for livestock and livestock products in Southern Sudan, the growth of the livestock sector cannot be sustained by the domestic market and therefore measures to address an export trajectory must start getting put in place. An analysis of the supply base of the sector shows that, even under current herd structures and production levels, the sector has an annual capacity to supply 1.3 million cattle and 4 million shoats. Out of this number, estimates show that only 470,000 cattle and 2.45 million shoats are sold, suggesting that only 35% of the available supply base can be absorbed through the current market outlets. Current production practices and available market infrastructure is currently structured to meet social needs and domestic demand. Significant changes will be needed to orient the sector to external markets.

C. Sector organization: key players vii

11. A mapping of the livestock value chain in Southern Sudan shows that the sector has many players. These include approximately 950,000 livestock farmers, 350,000 herders (two thirds of whom are children below 18 years of age), about 4,500 live animal traders, approximately 1,500 2,000 slaughter personnel; 2,000 4,000 butchery owners and about 500 owners of marketbased kraals who offer holding-ground facilities and services for livestock trade and distribution. Other important players include input suppliers, service providers, and local government personnel involved in facilitation of smooth operations of the market infrastructure and slaughter places. 12. An assessment of the interrelationships between different players and the various functions in the chain shows that there is a complete absence of players in research and development; there is a heavy dominance of the public sector (government, donors and NGOs) in the supply of animal health inputs and services; and the production segment has a large number of players, all applying traditional production practices which are poorly oriented to the market. At the distribution and marketing segments of the chain, analysis shows an evolving market infrastructure of primary, secondary and terminal markets which are important points of interaction between producers and other key players and could act as key geographical system nodes for leveraged interventions in the value chain. The markets are, however, quite few in number (167 in total) given the vastness of Southern Sudan and the nationwide distribution of livestock in all states in the country (which requires more than 500 primary markets). 13. Overall, a review of the interrelationships of the various players in the livestock sector shows a very low degree of coordination between players in different segments of the chain as well as low levels of organization among players in the same segment. Although some level of social organization among producers exists through the communal herding practices of cattle camps/kraals, there is fairly little formal organization for joint action. To a lesser degree, this can also be said of other segments in the chain. An important finding, however, is that some basic level of organization exists in most segments. Most markets have a butchers association and so are any major livestock markets with respect to live animal traders associations. These are however fairly informal and require significant capacity development to become effective stakeholder institutions for joint strategy and action for growing the livestock value chain. D. Value chain analysis 14. An analysis of the red meat value chain shows that the production segment is currently operating with negative margins. Although the production of livestock in Southern Sudan is highly unmonetized, the costs involved are real. In particular, the livestock must be herded, and diseases need to be prevented or treated once they affect the animals. Given prevailing disease prevalence and prices for drugs, the study estimates that it would cost SDG 25 per year to maintain the health of a bull (or cow). Current estimates show that only four cattle in a herd of 100 are sold per year, with the average age being 5 years. The implication of this is that although, to the farmer, selling a bull at the average prevailing prices of SDG 500 in primary markets seems like profitable, indeed, it means that the full price paid for four bulls is not even able to meet the annual cost of drugs for the herd, leave alone meet the needs of herders and provide for the family. Animal health and disease control must therefore constantly be supported through resources generated from outside the sector - crop cultivation, employment or transfers from salaried family members or the public sector (government or donors/NGOs). Given that the large proportion of herders are children, increased availability and accessibility of school opportunities (as Southern Sudan moves towards universal primary education), will also put pressure for actual monetization of the herding function. Since production is the foundational segment of the chain, it is here where the competitiveness of the chain must ultimately begin for the overall chain to be competitive. viii

15. An analysis of the bulking, transportation and wholesaling segment of the livestock value chain shows that transportation is the largest cost component accounting for 17.5% of the total value of the livestock landed at terminal markets and 42% of the overall value added at this stage. The two major components of this cost are taxes and other charges levied by various government departments (accounting for 49% of the transportation level costs) and, heavy fuel and vehicle maintenance costs due to the poor state of roads (accounting for 27% of the transportation costs). An analysis of all the costs incurred at the whole bulking, transportation and wholesaling segment of the chain shows that taxes account for 15.8% of the total value of livestock landed in terminal markets or 37.6% of the total value added at this stage. Taxes therefore stand as the single highest cost item in this stage. These taxes are charged at different points and by different arms of government: source markets by local governments; travel clearance with Veterinary departments; movement clearance with county administrations; roadblocks mounted by police, military, and local administrations; and customs departments. Some payments are receipted and therefore can be regarded as legal while others are not receipted and vary. The overall effect however is that the taxes cumulate to a major cost and the multiple charging points significantly slow down the travel time. This is an area that requires attention to improve on efficiencies and increase the competitiveness of the livestock value chain. Other important factors contributing to inefficiencies in this segment of the market are insecurity related to cattle raiding which have forced some trade routes to close down (especially where trekking is the only option), as well as poor state of access roads 16. An analysis of the meat processing function shows that the cost structures at this segment of the value chain are highly tilted in favour of high quality live animals. Larger bodied animals which give higher carcass weights give butchers higher margins even when their purchase prices are higher. At the Juba red meat market, for instance, there is a preference for Ugandan cattle and sheep as they give higher margins. The smaller body weights of local cattle and shoats (on average 125 kgs carcass weight) makes them uncompetitive to livestock from Uganda which have an higher average weight (of 220kgs carcass weight for cattle). Given prevailing prices, the cost per kilogram of meat at input level (purchase price of the live animal) is on average lower for Ugandan livestock (SDG 10.4 for local cattle while it is SDG 9.5 for Ugandan cattle). The bigger advantage is however in the larger number of units (volume advantage) and therefore, given constant costs (per animal) at slaughtering and meat retail, butchers end up making profits more than double when they sell meat from Ugandan livestock. On average, a butcher makes a gross margin of SDG 880 per Ugandan cattle and SDG 410 for local cattle. A similar scenario applies to shoats. Although the meat retail market is currently largely un-segmented (unclassified), where all meat (with bone) is currently going for SDG 14 in Juba, there are strong indications that quality conscious buyers will also prefer the Ugandan sourced meat. This is a competitive aspect of the market that must be eventually addressed at production level if the livestock sector in Southern Sudan is to be competitive, even in the domestic market. 17. The overall annual value of the meat value chain in Southern Sudan is SDG 626 million. Out of this value, 28% is created at the production level while live animal traders account for 26% of the value, processors comprising slaughter slabs/areas and butcheries 27%, and 5% for transporters. On the whole, approximately 12% of the value, an equivalent of SDG 75 million, goes to government in the form of direct taxes. A substantial amount of this money does not end up with government and is lost partly because the fees charged are imposed illegally by officials in the first place but also as a result of fraudulent recording and returns by revenue collection officials. E. Key constraints 18. The livestock sector in Southern Sudan has many constraints most of which are well known and what is required is for efforts for addressing them to be intensified and extended to cover areas where no interventions are currently underway. While there are many constraints facing the livestock sector, the key ones can broadly be said to be seven: low productivity; low product ix

quality and poorly developed quality assurance system; poor organization of actors; inadequate support infrastructure; poor market development; and an un-conducive macro-economic environment. 19. Low productivity stands out as perhaps the most significant constraint facing the livestock sector in Southern Sudan at the micro level. An analysis of the production segment of the value chain shows that at current levels of productivity, farmers are generally not breaking even. Milk productivity when computed to include all mature cows (both lactating and dry) per year is estimated to be less than 0.5 litres per day per cow. With regard to live animal production, the study shows that low birth/calving rates (partly attributed to high abortion rates), high calf (kid/lamb) mortality rates estimated to be as high as 50% in some states, and similarly high mature herd mortality rates (estimated to be 10 15%) all combine to bring down the natural herd increases in Southern Sudan to about 1 3% for cattle and 7 9% for shoats with some herds even experiencing negative growth rates. Besides the high loss rates resulting from high mortality, stunted growth for calves and yearlings are also implying longer periods taken before maturity with bulls reaching reasonable saleable weight at 5 years (instead of 3) and heifers getting mature for calving at 4 5 years instead of 2 - 3 years. Gross margin estimates made during the study show that for cattle, a producer with a herd of 100 heads must be able to produce to maturity at least 13 cattle heifers/bulls for the market every year for their livestock production ventures to breakeven. The factors contributing to low productivity are: (i) Breeds: Unlike the situation in neighbouring countries as well as in the North of Sudan, almost all livestock in Southern Sudan comprises of indigenous breeds which have remained unimproved for generations. Since the genotype of livestock sets the limits for productivity, the low yielding breeds found among farmers is one of the major constraints holding back the productivity of the livestock sector. This is a major area that must be addressed. Animal health: Key areas of animal health contributing to low productivity of the sector include: high abortion rates leading to low birth rates; high mortality rates for both young and mature herd; and poor animal health leading to low yields. The following have been highlighted as the main reasons behind these heavy losses: high prevalence of animal diseases; poorly developed disease control and management infrastructure; low availability and accessibility of adequately qualified animal health service providers; and poor animal husbandry practices among farmers. Feeding: Estimates made during the study show that within the bounds of the livestock breeds kept by farmers and the animal health delivery system in place, there is still a large proportion of productivity losses that are related to poor nutrition. This is attributed to poor grazing practices (few hours), poor pasture and water management; and lack of supplementary feeding particularly, essential mineral salts.

(ii)

(iii)

20. Low product quality and poorly developed quality assurance infrastructure: Poor quality of live animals and meat offered for sale cuts across the entire value chain, starting from production all the way to the time meat is sold to consumers in the red meat channels. Information obtained during this study has confirmed that there are seven main points in the value chain where meat quality is affected. From an analysis of the ways through which the quality of live animals and meat offered for sale is affected points at the following six factors as the ones behind the poor quality: poor husbandry practices; low adherence to quality standards including deliberate interference with quality assurance enforcement procedures; unavailability of appropriate (dedicated) transportation means for meat; and low levels of awareness of the importance of quality standards of meat by suppliers (producers and traders) as well as consumers. x

21. Poor commercialization: An analysis of the livestock value chain in Southern Sudan shows that although all other segments of the value chain are operating commercially, the foundational segment of the chain, production, is largely socially oriented. Lack of a business mindset and commercial orientation is making farmers to operate with little regard to basic business principles which form the basis for profitability due attention to inputs and outputs, and management of the process to ensure positive returns. Unless the production function is operating commercially, all supporting service areas are bound to have difficulties in commercial operation. These include inputs supply (especially animal health drugs and supplementary feeds); animal health and production services provision; and services related to product assembly. Again, without a capacity for these services to be provided to farmers on a commercial basis, their accessibility is bound to remain limited and therefore become a constraining factor to the growth of the sector. This vicious circle must be broken. 22. Accessibility of support services: The livestock sector requires many support services for it to achieve the levels of productivity required for competitiveness. These include technical services in animal health and production; technology related services for upgrading and value addition; business management and advisory services for profitable operations; and other business support services such as financial services. Without exception, the accessibility of these services among all key actors in the value chain is limited. Given the current status of the sector particularly in relation to disease control and management, and low productivity levels, the accessibility of services in animal health and animal production can however be singled out as perhaps the most constraining. 23. Poor market access: Market access is a key ingredient in building productivity and competitiveness of any value chain. Triangulation of information from various sources shows that Southern Sudan has only 167 livestock markets out of which 117 are primary markets that provide the basic points where farmers can trade their livestock. These are obviously few market points given the expanse of the country and the widespread production of livestock throughout the country. This situation means that there are many livestock production zones which have no access to livestock markets within a one-day trekking distance. Discussions with key informants show that for livestock markets to be considered somewhat adequate in number, most Payams would need to have a livestock market. Given that Southern Sudan has more than 500 Payams, the current number of primary markets can be said to be just about 25% of the number required. Besides just the number of markets, significant efforts are also required in improving the performance and efficiency of the markets. Poor road infrastructure is another key area that is constraining market access. 24. Un-conducive macro-economic environment: An enabling business environment has many components but some of the basic aspects include property rights and assurance of fair returns. The study identifies the following three main issues affecting the business environment in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan: Cattle raiding: Cattle raiding and the insecurity it causes stands out as perhaps the biggest threat and constraint to the livestock sector in Southern Sudan. No meaningful development of the sector can take place under the current uncertainties and actual costs imposed by this menace. It is an area of business environment that must be addressed for the efforts put in development of the sector to bear fruit. High and multiple taxation: High taxation at multiple points, particularly in the bulking and transportation segment of the value chain is imposing significant inefficiencies in the livestock sector. This is an area that needs to be addressed in several ways: overall reduction of tax burden (starting with removal of the illegal taxes), removal of multiple taxation points; xi

clarity on taxable amounts and removal of illegal taxes; and provision of services commensurate to the fees charged. Land tenure: A basic area that will need to be addressed as efforts towards commercialization of the sector are put underway relate to land tenure. Our understanding is that this is an issue at the top of government agenda to be dealt with after the outcome of the January 2011 referendum is known. The important thing for the livestock sector is to have a mechanism for close engagement and input into the deliberations that will shape the type of land policy that is eventually adopted in the country to ensure that it provides room for commercialization.

25. Poor organization of sector: Over 90% of primary actors in the livestock sector can be regarded as small-scale operators from the volume of produce they are handling as individuals be they producers or traders. For the value chain to be competitive and profitable, operators must act together particularly on all issues related to market access and penetration. The study revealed that producers and traders are, by and large, not organized and where some groupings exist, they are generally weak. Poor standards in animal husbandry and the costly product assembly process are largely attributable to poor organization of producers. This also applies to other segments of the value chain and, indeed, the entire chain as a whole. There have however been attempts in the past of bringing together players in the sector for joint action and, indeed, this is perhaps what is responsible for some of the positive developments that have led to increased commercialization of the sector at the retail and processing functions. Our view is however that the sector seems to be still operating without a coherent joint vision and strategy for development. This must constitute the starting point for any meaningful development of the sector and our view is that the analyses made under this study (and other related studies) provide a good basis for starting discussions geared at building consensus among players on the importance of working together for their common good.

F. Proposed Interventions
26. From a careful analysis of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan the study makes the following recommendations:

(i)

Adopt a value chain approach in development of the livestock sector The nature of the key constraints facing the livestock sector in Southern Sudan is that they are crosscutting and require a coordinated approach from all players in the value chain to be effectively addressed. Low productivity in the production segment affects profitability and competitiveness of all other segments of the value chain and so does quality of live animals produced and offered for sale in the market. On the same line, poor development of market infrastructure affects all players and so does the phantom of cattle raiding and the insecurity it imposes on the sector. For these issues to be effectively addressed, a coordinated approach is required from all core chain actors as well as all other players whose actions (or lack of actions) have an influence on performance of the sector. The value chain study has identified the various common and conflicting issues facing players in the different segments of the chain. It has also identified possible chain leaders, facilitators and leverage points for targeted interventions that can have systemic effects on the whole chain. What is now required is to bring together all key players in the sector to deliberate on these issues and develop a shared vision and strategy for development of the value chain. To do this, we recommend investment in a process that engages all key players in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan in development of a joint vision and strategy for the sector. While there are various ways of doing this, our assessment is that perhaps the best way is to have a xii

Livestock Month. During this period a series of engagement forums in all the states could be held culminating into a one-week forum at the national level where key issues of concern to the sector are given humble time for discussions and deliberations, borrowing from best practices elsewhere.

(ii)

Address information gaps for effective planning and monitoring of performance Effective planning and implementation of interventions geared at development of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan is heavily depended on availability of reliable information. The most glaring information gap relates to estimates of the population of livestock and its distribution across the country. This information is urgently required and it is therefore strongly recommended that efforts towards undertaking a national livestock census be expedited. Once this information has been generated, it is also recommended that a process of revision of information contained in this value chain report of the sector is undertaken. Beyond generation of the baseline data on livestock population in the country, an effective mechanism for generating periodic information on changes taking place in the sector need to be put in place. The study team notes that this is currently a major challenge that needs to be addressed in a coordinated manner, starting with establishment of the structures, setting up of the systems and development of the capacity of these structures for effective collection, compilation, synthesis and timely dissemination of reliable information. To fully harness the power of information in development of the livestock sector, the study team further recommends establishment of an effective knowledge management structure. At the moment, a market information system at MARF that tracks livestock prices and pasture developments in all states (CLIMIS) is doing a great job in generating and disseminating market information on the livestock sector. Many other types of information on the livestock sector in Southern Sudan are however still scattered and not readily available to different players in the sector. It is therefore strongly recommended that the scope of CLIMIS (or a similar structure) be expanded to become a full repository and resource centre for information on the livestock sector in the country. On the whole, the following are additional key areas showing significant information gaps that require urgent attention: Conduct value chain analysis of the livestock sector in the five remaining States (Western Equatoria, Lakes, Warrap, Western Bahr el Ghazal, and Northern Bahr el Ghazal) to provide a comprehensive picture of the livestock sector in the whole of Southern Sudan; Conduct value chain analyses of the other livestock value chains excluded in the scope of the current study. These include Milk; hides and skins (Leather); Poultry meat; Eggs; and Fish; Undertake further detailed analyses of the production segment of the value chain to ascertain birth and mortality rates as well as the full structure of costs at the production stage (both actual and implied) which must be taken into consideration as efforts geared at commercialization of the sector are considered; Undertake detailed design missions for each of the proposed interventions to determine, first and foremost, overall feasibility and workout details on the implementation process including quantification of resources and timelines; Conduct a detailed assessment of the livestock extension and service provision system to establish a reliable inventory of current status and identify a process through which an effective system for Southern Sudan can be developed; and

xiii

Undertake further review of the policy environment to provide background material for revision of the animal resources strategy and policy framework for effective coordination of the development of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan.

(iii)

Develop programs for increased productivity of the livestock sector Productivity in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan is low and, indeed, most producers are currently operating on negative margins (making losses) if all costs are taken into consideration. For the livestock sector in Southern Sudan to be competitive, productivity must be increased. According to the main factors contributing to low productivity, interventions need to target the following: Create awareness on the causes of low productivity and implications on overall returns; Improve delivery of animal health and animal production services among farmers; Support farmers endeavours to build their herds to a minimum economic size; and Improve farmer acquisition of high quality breeds. Design interventions for quality control and assurance The quality of livestock and livestock products offered in the market in Southern Sudan is generally low. An assessment of the points at which the quality of meat and other related products is affected shows that quality is a crosscutting issue in the value chain and must be addressed in an integrated manner. The analysis of leverage points in the sector however shows that one point at which the quality of meat and other livestock products can be influenced is at the policy and regulatory level through development of an effective quality standards and enforcement policy and legislative framework. Once the policy and legislative framework is in place, interventions targeted at supporting compliance by value chain players will be required. Part of this will include sensitization and awareness creation both among actors in the value chain where compliance is expected (such as slaughter areas and butcheries) but also among consumers for them to demand good quality and exercise their economic power in driving compliance. Beyond awareness however, some targeted support for workspace improvement for slaughter areas/abattoirs, butcheries and markets will be required, and so would support to the transportation function both for live animals to terminal markets as well as meat transportation from abattoirs to butcheries. Issues of skill and knowledge in quality control and assurance among these direct players will also be necessary. On the whole however, a significant part of the efforts in quality control and assurance is required in setting up an effective infrastructure for quality control and assurance. This requires significant capacity development both in terms of number of personnel as well as their skills and facilities for good performance. The other area of capacity development is enforcement which is currently the weakest part.

(iv)

(v)

Explore entry points for introduction of commercial livestock production There is no commercially oriented livestock production in Southern Sudan today. Yet it is only through a commercial orientation that the country can ever be expected to achieve its livestock production potential. At least three options for commercialization appear to be feasible:

Re-orientation of current traditional livestock producers towards a business mindset in their livestock production activities. The study has identified various entry points for this commercialization process. This includes a small but significant group of producers xiv

(estimated to number about 50,000 spread throughout the communities) who are well exposed, are literate, are easy to change and are significantly influential opinion leaders in their communities. These include livestock traders who already run successful businesses in the trading segment of the chain (or other business lines) but are not applying their business skills in their livestock production activities; political leaders (most Governors and commissioners included), and professionals involved in livestock production. Empirical experience from the psychology of change management applied in transformation of corporate culture suggests that the process will need to include the following four components: packaging of the commercialization offer in a way that those targeted can passionately believe in it; reinforcement of the systems for positive incentives (high productivity, access to markets, profitability); support for acquisition of the skills required to change; and identification and use of consistent role models/champions. In our assessment, this is the option that would have the highest impact over time, particularly in relation to a pro-poor development perspective. It is however bound to take time for significant results to be noticeable. The efforts must however begin now.

Introduction of large scale commercial livestock farming. For Southern Sudan to fully take advantage of the enormous opportunities in the livestock sector and truly become competitive at a regional and global level, the sector must be driven by a commercial segment where high productivity of high quality produce is possible. This could be through public-private-partnership arrangements in investing in large scale ranching and dairy farming (and other livestock production ventures such as poultry production). A possible starting point is for the government to consider partnering with private sector to re-start former government owned livestock production centres/farms in Kapoeta and elsewhere with a view to developing them into commercial operations. The private sector would work with government on a build-operate and transfer (BOT) basis. The government could also partner with large scale local producers through a support mechanism, to transform the existing farm in a high quality cattle production farm through improved farm management and animal husbandry.

Support for development of small-scale specialized commercial livestock production ventures. For red meat production, the assessment team notes that a significant opportunity for low-inputs feedlot developments modelled along the lines of the case of the Ethiopian feedlot industry exists. There is also significant opportunity for small-scale dairy production especially in peri-urban environments.

(vi)

Build the capacity of MARF at both GoSS and State levels The Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries (MARF) at both GoSS and State levels is a key player in the development of the livestock sector. Whereas the study team did not delve into detail in an assessment of the capacity of the Ministry to carry out its mandate in overseeing development of the sector, anecdotal information clearly points at significant capacity gaps that need to be addressed. These include staffing both in terms of number of xv

personnel as well as their skills and training; and facilitative resources for effectiveness. At the field level, one of the key constraints noticed is staff mobility.

(vii)

Develop programs for improved market access Market access remains a key constraint in the commercialization of the livestock sector. Required interventions in this area include support for continued development of livestock market infrastructure, improved access roads and control of the menace of insecurity.

(viii) Improve access to business support services

Increased accessibility of business support services in the livestock sector is required. These include technical services in animal health and production as well as other services geared at increasing the management skills of farmers and other players in the livestock sector. Other important services include improved accessibility of financial services. The government could consider supporting qualified veterinary professionals to establish enterprises to provide animal health services, as well as incorporating such enterprises in government led programmes aimed at increasing vaccination coverage.

(ix)

Support development of infrastructure for processing of livestock products and by-products It has been noted in this report that slaughter takes place under unhygienic conditions that pose a health risk to consumers. Meat selling outlets are also generally in a poor state of hygiene. Further, there are no facilities for processing hides and skins most of which currently go to waste. Potential interventions in this area include: Support to establishment of modern slaughterhouses: consideration should be made regarding development of model slaughterhouse designs for use by potential investors; Establishment of improved butcheries, with value addition e.g. producing meat cuts that could be supplied to high end markets that are currently importing such cuts; and Establishment of tanneries to process the large quantities of hides and skins currently going into waste. This could eventually lead to development of a viable leather industry.

xvi

Table E.1 Summary of key statistical information

Item Number

1.
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

General information
Land mass (square kilometres) Human Population (2008 population Census) Number of households Per cent of rural/urban population: Rural population Urban population Poverty: National Poverty line (in SDG per month) Population below poverty line Per cent of rural population below poverty line Per cent of urban population below poverty line Administrative units: States Counties Payams 648,000 8,260,490 1,284,856 84.8% 15.2% SDG 72.9 50.6% 55.4% 24.4% 10 79 514

1.6

2.
2.1 2.3

Size, structure & dynamics of livestock sector

Livestock population (FAO Estimates, 2009): Herd structure: Proportion of females in national herd Proportion of adult females in national herd Proportion of calves/kids and yearlings in national herd Proportion of adult males in national herd Estimated births: Cattle (calves/kids per year) Estimated mortality: Cattle (calves and adult stock) Estimated natural growth rate of national herd

Cattle
11,735,159 70% 49% 40% 11% 2,300,091 2,197,409 1% 1,348,087 4% 469,406 172,549 263,857 50,000 17,000 18,980 0.19 550 0.55 172,549 2.07

Shoats
24,487,644 60% 36% 48% 16% 8,815,551 6,464,737 10% 4,094,334 10% 2,448,764 1,606,029 842,735 20,000 20,000 22,144 0.42 .. .. 1,606,029 4.82

2.4 2.5 2.6

3.
3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10

Supply and demand for livestock and livestock products

Estimated number of livestock available for sale: (mature male + culled female) Estimated off-take rates (per year) Estimated number of livestock sold in a year Estimated number of livestock slaughtered per year: Cattle Estimated number of live animals sold for restocking/social exchange per year Estimated number of live animals exported per year Estimated number of live animals imported per year Annual meat production: Volume (in MT) Value (in SDG b) Annual milk production: Volume (in MT) Value (in SDG b) Annual production of hides and skins: Volume (in pieces) Value (in SDG m)

4.
4.1

Value added (red meat value chain)

Production costs (per average bull sold in 5 years) Stock acquisition (SDG) Herding (SDG) Animal health (SDG) Total cost (SDG) Margin average (SDG) Total value added at production stage by producers, input suppliers etc (SDG m) Total value added by live animal traders (SDG m) Total value added by transporters (SDG m) Total value added at slaughtering and meat retail (SDG m) Total value added by other players (SDG m) Total value added Total value added accounted for by taxes (SDG m) 33 204 125 362 138 175 (28%) 163 (26%) 31 (5%) 169 (27%) 13 (2%) 626 (100%) 75 (12%) 950,000 350,000 4,500 4,000 1,500 167 500 51 29 61 126 154 2,245 7

4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.7

5.
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8

Key Players

Estimated number of livestock farmers Estimated number of herders Estimated number live animal traders Estimated number of butchers Estimated number of persons engaged in slaughter process Estimated number of livestock markets Estimated number of slaughter slabs/areas Number of animal health service providers: (MARF, June 2009) Veterinarians Livestock Technicians Veterinary Assistants Stock Persons Animal Health Auxiliaries Community Animal Health workers Laboratory Technicians Source: Various see Tables in main document

xvii

Acknowledgements
The Netherlands Development Organization (SNV) and the study team would like to extend their sincere gratitude to the Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries (MARF) for initiating and funding this study through the Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF). This study on the livestock value chain analysis is a joint effort by MARF and SNV. The study required a lot of information from secondary sources; SNV acknowledges with gratitude the many documents and reports that were made available to the study team by MARF staff at GoSS, State and County levels. The cooperation of MARF staff at these levels during the information and data gathering phase of the study is also gratefully acknowledged. SNV and the study team would like to extend sincere gratitude to the livestock producers, livestock traders, middlemen/brokers, transporters, slaughterhouse/slab operators, butchers, livestock input providers, livestock service providers, livestock products consumers and others, who spared their time and willingly provided information and data that formed the basis of this report. The core study team comprised of four consultants from SNV and five senior officers from MARF, GoSS level. SNV gratefully acknowledges the immense contribution made by the MARF officers who included Mr. Noel Lamude Cypren, Mr. Samson Bringi Francis, Ms Neimat Taban, Mr. Gibson Joseph and Ms Eva Caesar. At each of the fives States visited during the study, the core study team worked with three officers drawn from the Department of Animal Resources who played a critical role in directing and coordinating data collection activities at each the States. We are most grateful to all of them. Many other individuals and institutions that have not been mentioned here made invaluable contributions without which this study would not have been possible. We thank them all. While this study was a joint effort between MARF and SNV, and many players participated in shaping the final outcome, the responsibilities for data collection, analysis and report preparation were solely in the hands of the Consultants. Any omissions or misstatements of facts and the views expressed in this document are therefore those of the consultants and should not be misconstrued to reflect the official position of MARF, SNV or any of the donors involved in MDTF, including the World Bank

Muli Musinga Joseph Gathuma Obin Engorok Tesfaye Haile Juba, Southern Sudan November 29, 2010

xviii

Abbreviations
AFID Agency for Inter-Regional Development AHA Animal Health Auxilliary ASARECA Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa AU African Union BQ Blackquarter CAHWCommunity Animal Health Worker CAPE Community-based animal Health and Participatory Epidemiology CBO Community-based Organization CBPP Contagious Bovine Pleuropneumonia CCPP Contagious Caprine Peuropneumonia CES Central Equitoria State CDOT Catholic Diocese of Torit CPA Comprehensive Peace Agreement DG Director General EC European Commission ECF East Coast Fever EES Eastern Equatoria State FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FMD Foot and Mouth Disease GMP Good Manufacturing Practices GoSS Government of South Sudan HACCP Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point HS Haemorrhagic Septicaemia IBAR Inter-African Bureau for Animal Resources IDP Internally Displaced People IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development IGAD Intergovernmental Authority on Development (formerly IGADD) IGADD Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Development (established in 1986) IIED International Institute for Environment and Development ILRI International Livestock Research Institute LESP Livestock epidemio-surveillance project LFDP Livestock and Fisheries Development Project LPMP Livestock Production and Marketing Model Project MAFAO Ministry of Agriculture/Food and Agriculture Organization (dairy demonstration farm) MARF Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries MASRA Magwi Action for Self Reliance Association M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MDTF Multi Donor Trust Fund NBHS National Baseline Household Survey NGO Non-Governmental Organization NICODO Nile Community Development Organization OIE Office International des Epizooties (World Organization for Animal Health) PACE Pan-African Control of Epizootics PMU Project Monitoring Unit PPR Pestes Petit des Ruminants SDG Sudanese Pound (Currency used in South Sudan exchanging at US$ 2.3788 as at Aug 17, 2010) SIFSIASudan Institutional Food Security Information for Action SVN Netherlands Development Organization SSCCSE Southern Sudan Centre for Census Statistics and Evaluation SSOPs Standard Sanitary Operation Procedures xix

SPCRPSudan Productive Capacity Recovery Program SPS Sanitary-phytosanitary TAD Transboundary Animal Diseases Ug Sh. Uganda Shilling (Currency used in Uganda) USAIDUnited States Agency for International Development VCA Value Chain Analysis VSF-B Veterinaires Sans Frontieres-Belgium VSF-CH Veterinaires Sans Frontieres-Swiss VSF-G Veterinaires Sans Frontiere-Germany WTO World Trade Organization

xx

1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview This report presents results of a Value Chain Analysis (VCA) study commissioned by the Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries (MARF) in July 2010 and implemented by the Netherlands Development Organization (SNV). Undertaken with funding available within the framework of the Multi Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) managed by the World Bank, the study was designed to cover the five states of Upper Nile, Jonglei, Unity, Central Equatoria and Eastern Equatoria. The study was undertaken by a core team of four Consultants from SNV and five officers from MARF-GoSS during the months of August and September 2010 and used a participatory approach that covered all key players in the livestock sector across the five states. Interviews were held with over 500 key informants including herders, livestock owners, input suppliers, animal health service providers, processors, traders, consumers; and officials of relevant government departments (GoSS, State and County levels), and development agencies involved in the livestock sector (see Appendix 1). Field work was carried out in all five states, in each, covering the State Capitals and at least 2 Counties. Border points with significant inflows or outflows of livestock to/from Southern Sudan were also visited. These included Nimule at the border with Uganda and currently the only major entry point for livestock into Southern Sudan; and Malakal, and Renk both in Upper Nile, and Bentiu in Unity State as the major off-take points for Livestock going to Northern Sudan. The study also involved a review of available secondary information on the livestock sector in Southern Sudan and other parts of the world. It is information from these sources that forms the basis on which this report has been prepared. The report is organized into 9 chapters. The introductory chapter provides a quick background to the study and lays out its objectives and the methodology adopted. Chapter 2 sets out an overview of the sector by assessing the size of the sector, and its current and potential supply of livestock and livestock products. It also explores the demand side and closes with an analysis of whether there exists a demand-supply gap. Chapter three looks at how the sector is organized and maps out all key players and their interrelationships in the sector, while Chapter four provides a summary of the organization of the sector in the form of the sector map. Chapter five goes into the core of the study to analyse the costs and value-added at each stage of the whole chain, from production to the time red meat is purchased by various categories of consumers. Chapter six explores the policy, regulatory and institutional framework under which the sector is operating while the sector dynamics, and key constraints and opportunities are covered in Chapters seven and eight, respectively. The final chapter, Chapter 9, provides the study teams thoughts on a way forward to a more commercialized and competitive sector. 1.2 Background Livestock is a key component of the livelihoods of the people of Southern Sudan with estimates showing that more than 80%1 of the total population depends on livestock as the main source of their livelihood. It is therefore imperative that any efforts targeted at improving the livelihoods of
1

MARF Animal Resources Sector Policy & Strategic Plan, 2006 - 2011.

the majority of the people of Southern Sudan must, of necessity, touch on the livestock sector. Like other sectors of the economy, due to the many years of war and conflict, the livestock sector is faced by many challenges including livestock diseases, lack of adequate water and pasture, lack of access to markets, and rampant cattle rustling (MARF-GoSS). To address the challenges facing the livestock sector, the Government of Southern Sudan (under the Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries) has received financing from the Multi-Donor Trust Fund administered by the World Bank toward the cost of Livestock and Fisheries Development Project. Part of the financing is directed at studies aimed at generating information to help in the design and implementation of appropriate development initiatives in the sector. So far, a baseline study of the five states targeted under MDTF has been undertaken and a monitoring and evaluation framework developed. As a third activity, the Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries made a decision to undertake a value chain analysis of the livestock sector (cattle, goats and sheep) in the Southern Sudan. From initial thinking, the focus of this study would be in growing towns like Rumbek, Awil, Wau, Bentuie, Kapoeta, Bor, Malakal and Juba towns. The cross-border markets with the North Sudan (Awil, Bentiu and Malakal through Renk) would also be studied to establish the key factors that contribute to the costs of production and marketing with particular emphasis on the services including veterinary and transport service inputs (e.g., truck) including lack of it and infrastructure bottlenecks, and identify opportunities for reductions in costs through either policies or technologies in order to increase incentives for higher off-taking. From a favourable review of earlier studies of the Livestock Value Chain carried out by the Netherlands Development Organization (SNV) in Eastern Equatoria in 2008, MARF made a decision that it would be useful to build on the value chain work already carried out in Eastern Equatoria, and for this reason, invited SNV to present a proposal for undertaking the value chain study to cover the five states of Upper Nile, Unity, Jonglei, Central Equatoria and Eastern Eqatoria. Through a consultative process which took quite some time, the focus of the study, its approach and methodology, and the various modalities for its implementation were thoroughly discussed and agreed on. This culminated into signing of the contract for the study on July 26, 2010. Per contract, the study was expected to be carried out over a period of 45 days in the months of August and September, 2010. The study team would include an interdisciplinary team of four consultants drawn from SNV combined with five counterparts drawn from MARF at the GoSS level and three MARF officers at each of the States to be covered under the study.

1.3 Objectives of the study

The overall objective of the study was to carry out a Value Chain Analysis of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan to identify key factors that contribute to costs of production and marketing, and identify opportunities for cost reduction geared at increasing competitiveness of the sector. It was expected that this information would give stakeholders a deeper understanding of what happens at the different stages of the livestock and red meat value chains to enable them better plan and programme development initiatives aimed at increasing productivity and competitiveness of the sector in Southern Sudan. The specific objectives of the study were to: (i) Undertake livestock sector mapping to establish the key chain actors and their functions, roles and relationships; 2

(ii) Collect data on trends in livestock population and production in the selected states in Southern Sudan covered under the MDTF; (iii)Assess existing markets in terms of traded volumes, organization, and seasonality in terms of supply, demand and prices; (iv)Evaluate market dynamics in terms of access to trading information, regulatory environment, socio-cultural constraints and determination of prices; (v) Assess existing marketing support infrastructure (abattoirs, slaughter houses, holding grounds, weigh bridges etc.) in terms of location and operational effectiveness; (vi)Assess existing suppliers of support services to the sector, the range and outreach of these services and point out any gaps that may exist in the services being provided; (vii) Assess the policy and regulatory environment with specific references on pastoral and agro pastoralist activities; (viii) Bring up a synthesis of the major opportunities and constraints affecting growth and competitiveness (particularly with the focus on improving productivity of pastoral and agro pastoralist) in the sub sector; (ix)Identify leverage points for targeted interventions to promote growth and competitiveness of the sector; (x) Identify opportunities and constraints to growth in the livestock sub-sector, including identifying the factors that drive behaviour of different actors in the value chain; (xi)On the basis of information and analysis drawn under (i) through (x), propose practical interventions that can be used to improve productivity and competitiveness of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan.

1.4 Approach and Methodology

In line with the Terms of Reference (ToR) provided by MARF (see Appendix 4), the study adopted the standard Value Chain Analysis (VCA) approach and methodology. We outline some conceptual and definitional aspects of this standard approach below before laying out the specific methods and instruments used in the study.

1.4.1 Conceptual note

The concept of value chain refers to the full range of activities required to bring a product from conception through the different phases of production, delivery to final consumers and final disposal after use. Each activity involves creating value, defined as the process of increasing the attractiveness of the product to the end user. First used by Prof. Michael Porter (of Harvard) in his management book on Competitive Advantage (in 1985), the concept was initially developed as a framework for analyzing activities through which firms create value and competitive advantage. At the firm level, each component of the production and distribution process must be run at optimal level if the organization is to gain any real competitive advantage in the market. Inefficiencies in one section means that other sections of the firm cannot operate optimally and ultimately affects the competitiveness of the firms product in the market. The application of value chains in development work is build around the recognition that activities performed by different firms or actors within a sub-sector in bringing a product to the consumer are interconnected in a similar way just as activities performed within an individual firm are interconnected. Each activity (performed by an actor) involves adding value and must be run optimally if the final product is to be competitive. Value chain analysis is focused on the amount of money a customer finally pays for a product. This price (value) flows upstream from consumer to all firms involved in bringing the product to the market. Value Chain Analysis focuses on 3

measurement of how this value is accumulated at each stage of the chain. A chain is therefore defined by the end product. In the case of the current study, the end product was defined as red meat currently retailing at SDG 14 per Kilogram (Kg) in Juba for beef (and slightly less in other towns) and SDG 20 25 per Kg for goat or sheep meat in Juba and other towns in Southern Sudan. Value Chain Analysis is one component of Value Chain Development which has the following six components: Chain/enterprise selection; Chain mapping and assessment (value chain analysis); Building chain engagement involving bringing together chain actors and other players to develop a common vision and strategy for enhancing productivity and competitiveness of the chain; Chain development involving various forms of upgrading which may involve processes, the product, functions or even upgrading the entire chain. Monitoring and evaluation, keeping in mind the overall results and purpose for which the chain development process is aimed at achieving; Learning and innovation. From this perspective, Value Chain Analysis is seen as part of a process geared at chain development and should feed from a selection process through which a specific chain (defined by the end product) has been selected. The VCA should then be conducted in a manner that it becomes a useful input to the process of bringing together key players in the chain to develop a joint vision and strategy for building the overall competitiveness of the chain. It should also provide sufficient material for making informed decisions on chain upgrading as well as provide information on the basis of which results of any interventions can be measured. To be carried out successfully, value chain analysis involves six steps: (i) Identifying different actors in the chain & mapping their inter-relationships a. who are the actors at each function? b. What/how many channels does the product take, players in each, end market? (ii) Analyzing the whole value chain, from production and the end market What functions are played by each actor? What value is added what steps does product take at each function, costs, margin and benchmarking with best practices or chains comparator countries (to assess how efficient); (iii) Identification of constraints and opportunities along the chain; (iv) Analyzing the market - trends, prices, competition; (v) Reviewing the business environment - regulatory and institutional framework; and (vi) Determining required interventions

1.4.2 Study Coverage

In accordance to the terms of reference provided by MARF, the study covered the five states (roughly) on the east bank of the River Nile (Upper Nile, Unity, Jonglei, Central Equatoria and Eastern Equatoria). Information of the livestock sectors shows that these States have approximately 46% of the livestock in Southern Sudan. Although with slightly less than half of the livestock population in the country, these States have a high concentration of key players in the sector, including traders in the terminal market in Juba, the Uganda (Nimule) livestock

import route, government and other development partners, as well as retailers and end consumers.

To cover all the key players in the value chain in the five States and conduct the analysis to the depth required as outlined in 1.4.1, it was important to identify the livestock chains to be focused on during the study. With strong participation of MARF counterparts, both GoSS and State levels (during a 2-day workshop held at the start of the study), the 5 main chains in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan (red meat, milk, hides and skins, chicken meat and eggs) were subjected to the following selection criteria to allow narrowing down to a manageable number (using Frank Lusbys competitiveness matrix): Market demand - profitability Outreach potential - number of farmers and actors in the chain Growth potential domestic, regional export Potential for leveraged interventions Gender/environmental considerations Resources/capital outlay Technology Organizational capacity Risks Constraints Return on investment/ payback period

From this analysis, the chain ranked highest was the one for Red Meat (Cattle, goat, sheep). With approval from MARF and other stakeholders present during an Inception meeting held on August 17, 2010, this is therefore the chain that was selected for the full chain analysis. In the context of Southern Sudan, it is also the most developed chain among the ones considered. At the production level and market end, it was however agreed that the study team would also cover all the other chains, particularly to give an indication of their potential. Given that milk and hides and skins are produced under the same production system to be assessed under the red meat chain, it was agreed that these two chains (milk, and hides & skins) would be given some higher weight in analyzing their potential. They would however not be fully analyzed from a value chain analysis perspective.

1.4.3 Key players covered during the study

Value Chain Analysis is a fairly standard procedure once the chain has been identified and the area of focus delineated. The first step is to identify all key players, both primary and secondary, and then determine the type of information to be sought from each. The following is an outline of the key players interviewed during the study.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

Input suppliers Service providers Producers (livestock owners, herders) Traders (primary, secondary & terminal markets) Exporters/importers Processors (slaughter slabs/areas; butcheries) Distributors (largely of imported meat and meat products) Hotels and restaurants Consumers (high-end; medium and low income) Government officials (GoSS; State; County) Development agencies (donors/NGOs) Total

Number interviewed 20 28 125 120 14 102 4 24 30 48 14 529

1.4.4 Type of information gathered and instruments used

Value Chain Analysis is methodologically a rapid appraisal research technique that relies on secondary sources of information complimented by primary data generated through focused group discussions, in-depth interviews and, in a few cases, individual actor interviews to obtain firm level data. It is not a sample survey whose reliability is built around the size of the sample and its representativeness. The VCA methodology heavily relies on comprehensiveness of coverage of actors and triangulation of information to obtain a general picture. Analytics are however drawn from factual data, generally obtained from a few actors to serve as an example.

Appendix 3 presents the instruments used to gather information, both from secondary sources as well as primary sources at each segment of the chain. The Appendix also includes some structured questionnaires for obtaining individual actor level data among producers and also among consumers.

1.4.5 Data collection, compilation and analysis

Data collection was done by the combined team of four SNV Consultants, five MARF-GoSS level counterparts and, at each state, a team of three MARF-State officials in total a team of 24 (see Appendix 5 for a full list). This comprised the core data collection team. In addition, enumerators and interpreters were hired at each state as the need arose. Two-day training for the core team was held at the start of the study (Aug 13-14, 2010) to ensure a common understanding on the value chain analysis methodology and agree on the field logistics and administration. For data collection purposes the study team (at SNV and MARF-GoSS level) was divided into two so that work in different states could be carried out simultaneously. The following are the dates during which work in the different states was carried out.

Activity 1. Central Equatoria State - Juba town: all actors - Nimule border point - Terekeka Primary market; producers 2. Unity State 2 Counties; all actors 3. Upper Nile State 2 Counties; all actors 4. Eastern Equatoria State 2 counties; all actors 5. Jonglei State 2 counties, all actors

Dates Aug 16 20, 2010 Aug 21 23, 2010 Sept 6 8, 2010 Aug 21 28, 2010 Aug 24 31, 2010 Aug 30 Sept 4, 2010 Sept 1 10, 2010

Team Team 1 & Team 2 Team 1 Team 2 Team 2 Team 1 Team 2 Team 1

For in-depth interviews and focus group discussions (FGD), each team member maintained field notes (summarized per interview). This information along with all secondary data and information from questionnaires were compiled at the end of the field work and analyzed by the SNV consultants for incorporation into the final report. 1.4.6

Stakeholder validation

Two results validation processes were incorporated into the study to improve on validity. At each of the states, debriefing sessions were held with senior officials of MARF at the end of the data collection exercise in the state in question. For some states, this was done with the State Ministers in charge of Animal Resources and other senior officials in the Ministry (e.g. Unity). In others, this was however not possible due to logistics and the team made the debriefing with the senior-most officials available. The second validation event, a stakeholder validation workshop, was held in Juba on September 24, 2010 once results from the data compilation and analysis process were out but just before the report preparation exercise was completed. This workshop was attended by over 30 key stakeholders who made useful comments which have been incorporated into in finalization of this report.

2 THE LIVESTOCK SECTOR IN SOUTHERN SUDAN: An Overview

2.1 Overview
This section provides an overview of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan by exploring the distribution of the main livestock species in the country, the production systems adopted and an assessment of current and potential supply and demand for livestock and livestock products in the country. While the focus of the study was the five states of Upper Nile, Jonglei, Unity, Central Equatoria and Eastern Equatoria (covered under MDTF), for purposes of contextualization, the section opens with a global overview in which Southern Sudan is seen as part of the greater Sudan and then narrows down to the context of Southern Sudan as a whole before focusing on issues within the five states. On the supply side, a key issue explored in the section is the existence of production clusters within which leveraged interventions can be targeted, while on the demand-side, the various segments of the market and prospects for growth within each are some of the key areas of focus.

2.2 The Global and Regional Context

Globally, there are six main species of livestock cattle and buffalos (usually classified as bovines), goats, sheep, pigs and chicken (H. Steinfeld et al, 2006). In terms of population, converted into comparable units (Livestock Units), estimates by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) show that cattle is the main livestock species accounting for almost 50% of the global population of the main livestock species followed by pigs (16.8%) and chicken (13.3%) in second and third places. This ranking however changes once production of various livestock products is considered. From the common product which all the six species produce (meat), Table 2.1 shows that pigs are the most important (40%), followed by chicken (30%) while cattle produce slightly less than a quarter (24%) of the meat supplied from the main livestock species. This reversal is made largely as a result of high productivity gains made in the production systems adopted for pig and chicken.
Table 2.1: Global population of main livestock species, 2008
Livestock species 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Cattle Buffalos Goats Sheep Pigs Chicken Total Number 1,382,241,378 188,306,103 867,968,573 1,071,274,348 941,212,507 18,554,765,000 Livestock units (LU) conversion rates 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.25 0.01 Livestock units Number Per cent 691,120,689 94,153,052 86,796,857 107,127,435 235,303,127 185,547,650 1,400,048,810 49.4% 6.7% 6.2% 7.7% 16.8% 13.3% 100.0%% Meat production M. tones Per cent 61,669,517 3,247,839 4,871,286 8,248,186 103,982,96 0 78,155,326 260,175,114 23.7% 1.2% 1.9% 3.1% 40.0% 30.0% 100.0%

Source: FAO Statistics Division, Aug 2010.

Chart 2.1: Population of main livestock species in the World, Sudan, 2008

Source: FAOStat, August, 2010

In the case of Sudan, estimates from FAO show that only three of the six main livestock species are of significant importance in the country. These comprise of cattle accounting for 59.3% of the population (in LUs), sheep (14.6%) and goats (12.3%). In addition, Sudan has also a large population of camels (numbering 4.4 million) accounting for 12.6% of the total livestock units in the country. Table 2.2 shows that in addition to these four main livestock species in Sudan, the country has also a sizeable population of chicken numbering over 41 million birds. In comparative terms however, these constitute a small part of the livestock sector both in terms of meat production and livestock units. No national data is available on the population of pigs but these are known to be of insignificant numbers. Sudan, just as many other parts of Africa, has no buffalo livestock herd. As will be discussed in subsequent sections of this report, data on the livestock sector specific to Southern Sudan is generally missing and what is available are mere estimates. In terms of the important livestock species, however, the general pattern for the whole of Sudan holds true for Southern Sudan other than the figures for Camels being much lower. The key livestock species in Southern Sudan are therefore cattle, goats and sheep.
Table 2.2 The population of different species of livestock in Sudan, 2008
Livestock species 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Number Livestock units (LU) conversion rates 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.25 0.01 Livestock units Number Per cent 20,700,000 0 4,310,000 5,110,000 415,020 30,535,020 4,400,000 34,935,020 59.3% 0.0% 12.3% 14.6% 1.2% 87.4% 12.6% 100.0% Meat production M. tones Per cent 340,000 0 188,900 152,000 27,000 707,900 48,262 756,162 45.0% 0 25.0% 20.1% 3.6% 93.6% 6.4% 100.0%

Cattle 41,400,000 Buffalos 0 Goats 43,100,000 Sheep 51,100,000 Pigs Chicken 41,502,000 Total Other Livestock species 7. Camels 4,400,000 Total Livestock companions 8. Donkeys 751,000 9. Horses 26,000 10. Mules 635

1.0

10

Source: FAO Statistics Division, Aug 2010.

Within the context of Africa, Sudan has the second largest livestock population following Ethiopia (see Map 1 and Table 2.3). The cattle herd is estimated to be 41 million (second in Africa after Ethiopia which has 49 million) while goat population is 43 million (also second in Africa after Nigeria which has 54 million). Sudan has however the leading population of sheep numbering 51 million (followed by Nigeria with 34 million). This big population of sheep has given Sudan a competitive edge in live animal exports of sheep which peaked at 1.8 million heads in 2002 but has now steadied to over 750,000 heads. Main export destinations are Saudi Arabia, Libya, Jordan, Egypt, UAE and Kuwait. Map 1: Cattle Population Distribution in Africa, 2008

11

Table 2.3 Livestock Population in Africa by Country, 2009 (in million)

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. Country Ethiopia Sudan Tanzania Nigeria South Africa Kenya Madagascar Burkina Faso Niger Mali Uganda Chad Cameroon Zimbabwe Somalia Egypt Guinea Angola Sierra Leone Senegal Zambia Morocco Namibia Botswana Others Total, Africa Total World Cattle 49.30 41.40 18.00 16.29 14.40 13.52 9.70 9.18 8.74 8.28 7.40 6.96 6.00 5.40 5.35 5.02 4.41 4.18 3.50 3.21 2.85 2.81 2.50 2.45 22.23 (8%) 269.96 (20%) 1,347.75 Goats 21.88 43.10 12.55 53.80 6.75 14.48 1.26 11.81 1.64 10.15 8.52 6.22 4.40 3.00 12.70 4.24 1.70 2.10 5.40 4.47 2.00 5.12 2.00 1.98 49.83 (17%) 291.10 (34%) 861.90 Sheep 25.01 51.10 3.55 33.87 25.23 9.91 0.72 7.48 10.19 9.50 1.75 3.30 3.80 0.61 13.10 5.02 1.42 0.35 4.70 5.24 0.20 17.08 2.70 0.30 51.49 (18%) 287.62 (27%) 1,078.18 Chicken 35.0 35.0 30.0 175.0 126.2 29.6 25.5 27.0 11.0 33.0 27.5 5.5 33.0 23.0 3.4 96.0 18.9 7.0 7.5 39.4 30.0 150.0 4.7 4.8 460.0 (32% 1,430.5 (7.8%) 18,398.4

Source: FAO Statistics Division, Aug 2010.

2.3 The Population of Livestock in Southern Sudan

In general terms, Southern Sudan does not have a reliable estimate of the population of livestock. This is however not an isolated case of livestock statistics only but applies to most other economic and social data other than what has recently been compiled by the Southern Sudan Centre for Census Statistics and Evaluation (SSCCSE) - the government Bureau for Statistics. One of the key activities of the Centre since its establishment in 2004 has been to prepare and conduct the 5th Sudan Population and Housing Census in 2008 as part of the provisions of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) of 2005. This has been the major preoccupation of the Centre until the results were released in 2009. The Centre has also conducted two other national surveys the Sudan Health Survey (2006) and the National Baseline Household Survey (2009) with information on consumption and poverty indicators. Besides information generated from these three sources, estimates of most other economic and social data are either missing or at best extracted from national statistics of the whole of Sudan. Due to the many years of war and conflict in the South, it is however generally understood that the national Sudan statistics have for many years not properly covered the South and therefore estimates built from national Sudan statistics are likely to be rough estimates with underestimate tendencies. In relative terms, however, in cases where such data is available, this constitutes the best there is available.

12

In the case of livestock, FAO has generated estimates of the population of the main livestock species in Southern Sudan based on information available for the whole of Sudan. From these estimates, the cattle herd in Southern Sudan stands at 11.7 million, while goat and sheep populations are slightly higher than 12 million each (see Table 2.3). In terms of comparable livestock units, however, cattle can still be considered as the main livestock species accounting for 70% of the stock while goats account for 14.7% and sheep 14.5%. Although chicken are kept in most communities throughout Southern Sudan, the numbers are generally small and, at a national level, chicken account for less than 0.5% of the livestock in Southern Sudan. From these estimates, Southern Sudan accounts for 27.2% of the total livestock population in the whole of Sudan.
Table 2.4 Livestock Population in Southern Sudan by State, 2009: FAO Estimates
State 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Cattle Central Equatoria Eastern Equatoria Jonglei Unity Upper Nile Sub Total Western Equatoria Lakes Warrap Western Bhar el Ghazal Northern Bhar el Ghazal Sub-Total 878,434 888,278 1,464,671 1,180,422 983,027 5,394,832 (46%) 675,091 1,310,703 1,527,837 1,247,536 1,579,160 6,340,327 (54%) 11,735,159 (28%) 41,400,000 Goats 1,153,283 1,132,541 1,207,214 1,754,816 439,741 5,687,595 (46%) 1,153,283 1,464,421 1,369,005 1,120,095 1,630,361 6,737,165 (54%) 12,424,760 (29%) 43,100,000 Sheep 1,265,977 1,025,297 1,400,758 1,487,402 640,209 5,819,643 (48%) 1,169,705 1,232,282 1,290,045 1,265,977 1,285,231 6,243,240 (52%) 12,062,883 (24%) 51,100,000

Total, South Sudan Total Sudan (2008 figures)

Source: FAO Livestock Population Estimates, Oct 2009; FAOStat, Aug 2010.

Map 2 and Table 2.4 show the distribution of livestock across the 10 States of Southern Sudan. They show that the highest population of livestock is in Northern Bhar el Ghazal, Warrap and Jonglei with these three States having almost 40% of the cattle population. Lakes, Western Bhar el Ghazal and Unity States have also large populations of livestock. Western Equatoria has the lowest livestock population in the country. Although not widely available, the livestock estimates by FAO can be considered as the official statistics for livestock in Southern Sudan at a national (GoSS) level. It is the information available at the Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries (MARF) GoSS (policy level). Discussions with the respective directorates of Animal Resources and Fisheries at each of the five states visited during the study however show that, at the State level, the estimated livestock population is considered much higher. These estimates are generally generated from vaccination campaigns. Table 3.5 shows that the State estimates are more than double for cattle and goats but fairly close to the FAO estimates for Sheep. A significant issue in this divergence of estimates is that at planning level, key policy institutions including MARF-GoSS and FAO are using estimates which are considered much lower at implementation level of States and Counties. In cases of vaccinations and other similar undertakings which require coordinated efforts, it is highly likely that this divergence of information is partly responsible for the lower vaccination coverage reported in many states. This is an information gap that needs to be addressed urgently. 13

Map 2: Distribution of Livestock Population in Southern Sudan, 2009

14

Table 2.5 MARF-State Estimates of Livestock Population in five States of Southern Sudan, 2010
State 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Central Equatoria Eastern Equatoria Jonglei Unity Upper Nile Total Cattle 2,780,000 2,500,000 2,678,000 3,500,000 2,400,000 13,858,000 (31.6%) (35.5%) (54.7%) (33.7%) (41.0%) (38.9%) Goats 1,200,000 (96.1%) 5,200,000 (21.8%) 1,718,000 (70.3%) 1,400,000 (125.3%) 2,000,000 (22.0%) 11,518,000 (49.4%) Sheep 1,100,000 (115.9%) 2,400,000 (42.7%) 350,000 (400.2%) 1,100,000 (135.2%) 1,800,000 (35.6%) 6,750,000 (86.2%)

Notes: Source:

Figures in brackets are FAO estimates as a percent of official MARF-State estimates State Directorates of Animal Resources; State Strategic Plans, 2009 2011.

During the National Population and Housing Census of 2008 carried out by the SSCCSE, a sample of 500 households was interviewed with regard to their livestock holding. Although this information has not been published yet, it is available at the Centre and public institutions can get it upon request. Through a request made by MARF, the study team was availed this information and the results of tabulations show a further divergence in the estimated population of livestock in Southern Sudan (see Table 2.6). These estimates suggest a livestock population of 35 million cattle, 21 million goats and 27 million sheep. This would put Southern Sudan, on its own, as the country with the second highest population of livestock in Africa. While this is plausible, a look at the distribution of livestock population in the various States suggest that the estimates made from the sample survey of only 500 households for the whole country may not be reflective of the actual situation on the ground. This further reinforces the urgency for a more comprehensive estimation of the livestock resources available in Southern Sudan.
Table 2.6 Livestock Population in Southern Sudan by State, 2008: SSCCE Computed Estimates
State 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Cattle Central Equatoria Eastern Equatoria Jonglei Unity Upper Nile Sub Total Western Equatoria Lakes Warrap Western Bhar el Ghazal Northern Bhar el Ghazal Sub-Total 1,333,768 15,964,247 8,487,911 1,828,848 1,609,631 29,224,405 (82.4%) 71,665 1,777,980 3,065,690 241,920 894,005 6,237,569 (17.2%) 35,461,974 (85.7%) 41,400,000 Goats 757,960 11,793,401 3,430,424 872,765 999,985 17,854,535 (85.8%) 50,272 530,298 1,377,243 82,066 621,693 2,948,741 (14.2%) 20,803,276 (48.3%) 43,100,000 Sheep 1,406,283 14,690,631 4,016,443 1,031,150 1,108,949 22,253,456 (81.5%) 303,772 846,906 1,977,304 206,902 783,539 5,043,025 (18.5%) 27,296,481 (53.4% 51,100,000

Total, Southern Sudan* Total Sudan (2008 figures)

Note: * Per cent figures are for livestock population for Southern Sudan as proportion of total for Sudan. Source: SSCCSE 2008 Population and Housing Census, computations based on livestock data released to MARF, Sept 2010

Although there are divergent estimates of the population of livestock in Southern Sudan, it is clear from all sources of information available that the livestock sector is large. Information gathered during the study suggest that the actual population is likely to be much higher than the FAO estimates but perhaps less than the MARF-State estimates. The estimates from the Population Census sample seem way too high. From the principle of conservativeness, the Livestock value chain study uses the estimates provided by FAO.

15

2.4 Livestock Production Clusters

Development theory and practice gives a lot of importance to the phenomenon of enterprise clustering in driving innovations, growth and, overall transformation and competitiveness of sectors. From information gathered during the study on key areas of livestock production in each of the five states up to the county level, Map 3 shows that Southern Sudan can be said to have emerging livestock production clusters. These are zones with significant numbers of livestock population and emerging trends towards commercialization. Map 3: Livestock production clusters in 5 States of Southern Sudan, 2010

The important production areas include the Greater Kapoeta region in Eastern Equatoria; Nyirol and Pibor Counties in Jonglei; Nasir, Baliet and Renk in Upper Nile; Panyinjar, Mayon and Leer in Unity; and Terekeka in Central Equatoria (see Table 2.7). These present important points where leveraged interventions could unlock bottlenecks in the sector and drive competitiveness.

16

Table 2.6 Estimated Cattle Population Distribution across Counties, by State, 2010
State Cattle Cattle

1.
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6

Central Equatoria
Terekeka Juba Morobo Kajo Keji Yei Lainya Sub-total 1,200,000 420,000 552,000 329,000 180,000 99,000 2,780,000 650,000 560,000 400,000 350,000 250,000 120,000 150,000 20,000 2,500,000 886,928 600,500 550,650 222,000 95,000 95,000 66,200 52,000 50,000 48,000 8,277 2,674,055

4.
4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9

Unity
Panyinjar Mayom Leer Mayiendit Koch Guit Rubkona Ruweng Abiemnom Sub-total Maiwut Nasir Longuchok Ulang Baliet Renk Melut Akoka Fashoda Manyo Panyikang Malakal Maban Sub-Total 650,000 640,000 350,000 340,000 330,000 320,000 320,000 300,000 250,000 3,500,000 57,000 253,000 35,000 40,000 320,000 1,000,000 40,000 30,000 170,000 110,000 165,000 150,000 30,000 2,400,000

2.
2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8

Eastern Equatoria
Kapoeta East Kapoeta North Kapoeta South Budi Torit Ikotos Lopa/Lafon Magwi Sub-Total

5. Upper Nile
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.1 3

3.
3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 3.11
Source:

Jonglei
Nyirol Pibor Fangak Bor Twic East Uror Ayod Akobo Pigi Duk Pochalla Su-Total

State Directorates of Animal Resources; State Strategic Plans, 2009 2011

2.5 The Supply of Livestock and Livestock Products

The potential supply of livestock and livestock products from the livestock sector in Southern Sudan to the various market segments is determined by seven main factors. At the base is the total population of livestock in the country from which immediate supplies can be made and future flows generated from its growth. Once the base is set, the number of animals available for supply (sale or any other form of exchange) at any one time and the potential for future supply are determined by the structure of the herd (female-male-calf/age mix) and its dynamics (birth, death, and off-take rates). This sets the number of livestock that can be categorized as breeders (and in the case of milk, as producers), the number that can be available for the red meat market (mainly bulls and old culled cows), and the supply pipeline for both breeding stock and that available for off-take. The dynamics of the herd and its productivity are also influenced by the type of breeds kept as well as the husbandry and management practices adopted by the owners. These five factors generally determine the potential supply. Once this is set, the actual supply depends on the owners decision to sell (commercial off-take), and the availability and accessibility of markets (including market infrastructure and supply routes). 17

Section 2.3 above established the population of livestock in Southern Sudan currently conservatively estimated to be 11.7 million cattle, 12.4 million goats and 12.1 million sheep (Table 2.3). Building on this base population, this section looks at the other six factors to establish the potential supply of livestock and livestock products from the sector in Southern Sudan as well as the volumes actually supplied to different segments of the market.

2.5.1 Breeds
Information available from literature suggests that, Sudan as whole, has about 20 breeds of cattle which can be put into two main groups the Zebu (including Kenana, Butana, Baggara, Murle and Nuba Mountains breeds); and Nilotic breeds (Rege et al 2001; Majok and Schwabe, 1996). In Southern Sudan, zebu is the main cattle breed kept in most of the states. The two common zebu varieties are the long-horned cattle kept by the Dinka and Mundari communities; and the shorthorned zebu cattle mainly kept by the Nuer, Murle and Toposa ethnic groups. The long-horned zebu cattle are generally big-sized with carcass weights of 160 200 kgs (and fairly comparable to the Ankole cattle imported from Uganda) while the short-horned zebu cattle are generally of small stature with carcass weights of around 125 kgs on average. Nilotic breeds are found in Upper Nile and Bahr el Ghazal while a few Baggara and Ambrero breeds (mainly imported from the North) are found in Unity State. Neglect of Southern Sudanese pastoral livestock by research, health care delivery systems and extension services under previous administrations dealt a major blow to improvement of productivity and reproductive performance and today it can be generally said that all cattle in Southern Sudan are of indigenous, unimproved varieties with low productivity both of meat and milk. To improve the productivity of these breeds, use of cross breeds (B. taurus x B. inducus) can be considered where environmental conditions allow to improve on growth rate and carcass quality. More research is needed in this area to evaluate performance of such crosses in different livelihood zones and under different management systems. Sheep and goats, commonly referred to as small ruminants, are traditionally kept alongside cattle since they are complementary in their resource requirements. These small ruminants are known as the poor mans cow because of their ability to provide sufficient products for the subsistence farmers own use and a little left for sale. The main breeds of goats include Nilotic, Southern Sudanese, Sudanese Nubian, Toposa and Yei. Local breeds of sheep include Mongola, Murle, Nilotic, Nuba Maned, Nuba Mountain Dwarf, Southern Sudanese, and Uda. Just like in the case of cattle, the sheep and goat breeds in Southern Sudan are all indigenous and unimproved, and generally of poor productivity both in terms of milk yield as well as low carcass weights for meat.

2.5.2 Herd structure

Discussions with cattle producers in cattle camps revealed that an average cattle herd would consist of 70% females and 30% males. This is consistent with pastoral herds elsewhere (Little, 2007). Of the females it is estimated that about 70% would be adults and 30% calves. Among the males, 35% would be adults while 65% would be calves and yearlings.

18

Chart 2.2: Structure of the national cattle herd

Source: MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis Study, Aug/Sept, 2010

2.5.3 Herd and flock sizes

Herd sizes are difficult to estimate since pastoral communities are always reluctant to disclose the actual numbers of their livestock. In Upper Nile, the western part of the State was reported to have smaller herd sizes of about 30-35 head of cattle than the eastern part which has herd sizes of about 50-60 head of cattle. Large flocks of small ruminants are found in the northern part (e.g. Fashoda). Herd sizes per individual owner are difficult to estimate as some of the livestock in these herds belong to relatives. In most areas cattle belonging to different individuals are kept together in cattle camps often for security reasons. In Jonglei State livestock are kept in cattle camps. Among the Dinka and Nuer communities, cattle are divided into Gol, with each Gol having about 30 head of cattle. A rich person would have 5 or 6 Gols (150-180 head), an average person 1 or 2 Gol (30-60) while a poor person would have no Gol; he would keep his animals with other people (e.g. relatives). A big cattle camp would have 300-400 Gols (9,000 12,000 cattle). When livestock are at permanent homes, they are kept in a special house (Luak) that holds a big herd belonging to one person. Among the Dinka and Nuer communities one Luak may contain 50-80 head of cattle. The Murle call it Korot. These groups/herds are commonly used for estimating herd sizes. Information obtained from Unity State indicates that poor households (comprising 40% of the population) would have 30-50 head of cattle, average income households (40% of the population) would have 51-250 while rich households (16% of the population) would have 251-500 head of cattle. About 4% of the households in this state are estimated to have no livestock at all. Table 2.8 shows herd sizes by wealth category in Eastern Equatoria State.

Table: 2.8 Herd sizes by wealth category and by county in Eastern Equatoria State.

19

County Kapoeta East Kapoeta South Kapoeta North Average (median) herd size - greater Kapoeta Budi Ikotos Torit Median herd size other counties

Cattle herd size for each wealth group Poor Medium Rich < 50 500 600 > 1,000 < 10 100 200 > 500 < 05 60 70 100 300 < 30 100 300 400 600 20 30 50 60 > 150 < 05 40 60 > 100 < 20 150 200 250 350 < 10 80 110 167

Source: SNV Sudan, Livestock Marketing Survey for EES State; 2009.

The average flock sizes in Jonglei State range from 30-50 sheep and goats, with goats accounting for about 60% of the flock. In the pastoral areas of Kenya, for example, it is generally accepted that 30 head of cattle is the minimum herd size to secure the livelihood of a pastoral household. Overall, synthesis of information from the study shows that the majority (75%) of livestock farmers in Southern Sudan have small herds of up to 50 cattle; 20% have herds of 51 200 cattle and it is only 5% of the farmers who have herds of more than 200 cattle (see Section 3.2.1.1).

2.5.4 Herd dynamics

The general expectation of livestock farmers, whether commercially oriented or not, is for their herds to grow so that if they take some out for sale or social exchange, they can at least be left with the same herd size they had before, if not more. The key factor that influences this natural growth is the balance between birth rates and mortality. Beyond the natural growth, other factors that affect the size of the herd are forced off-takes that may be occasioned by thefts or raids; and deliberate off-takes through sale/slaughter (commercial off-take) or social exchange, especially for dowry (social offtake). The converse of these off-takes also apply and size of a farmers herd could also increase through purchases for restocking, social exchange (receipt of dowry), and, although never openly acknowledged by farmers, through proceeds from raids/thefts. The livestock value chain study explored all these factors with the final aim being to determine the potential stock that could be available for commercial off-take. 2.5.4.1 Birth rates In a commercial environment, livestock farmers manage their breeding herd in a manner that each mature cow is able to calve down every year. This not only ensures optimum supply of steers (for beef) and heifers (for breeding or beef) but also of milk from the lactating cows in the case of dualpurpose herds. In the case of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan, this is however not the case. Information obtained during the study shows that the intervals for calving down are fairly long generally ranging from 1 - 2 years. Analysis of information generated from FGDs during the study show that out of the 70 females in a herd of 100 (i.e. 70% composition of cows in the herd), 30 would produce a calf in a year. In Upper Nile and Jonglei, a calving rate of 40-50% was reported while calving rates of 30 40% were reported in Eastern Equatoria and Unity. A major reason for the lower than normal calving rates is a high incidence of abortions. Discussions with livestock herders and owners held during the study suggest that diseases are the major contributory factor for the high abortions incidences. Other reasons include poor nutrition especially related to essential minerals and stress during dry spells. There are also high possibilities that the pasturing practices where herds are released from cattle camps at around 12.00 noon and brought back by 4.00 pm (with 1-2 hour trekking to pastures) and the practice of tethering (among many communities) may also be contributing to the low birth rates. 20

The case of shoats is also fairly similar to that of cattle. Although discussions with livestock keepers in the five states were not conclusive on the issue of birth rates, it was quite clear that there were high abortion rates, especially among goats. 2.5.4.2 Mortality rates Based on information obtained through Focus Group Discussions, in-depth interviews with key informants and a simple questionnaire administered to 120 households to supplement the information obtained from these other sources, the study team estimated an average calf mortality rate of 50% and a mortality rate of 15% in adult cattle across the five states covered during the study. Diseases such as pneumonia, trypanosomosis and fascioliasis (liver flukes) were reported to be the main causes of death in calves. The high mortality rate in both calves and adult cattle would imply low, and sometimes even negative, herd growth rates. Calving rate and mortality vary with the standard of management. Calf mortality can be higher in multipurpose herds where milk production for human use might be more important than rearing calves for beef. Striking a balance in pastoral herds is desirable since both objectives are important. High calf mortality affects herd composition since it causes an increase in the proportion of mature females. Under normal conditions, mortality rate should be kept below 10% for calves and 3% for older stock. Using this as a benchmark, the study estimates that Southern Sudan is currently losing 838,000 mature cattle and 2,498,000 mature shoats annually through deaths which are over and above the acceptable levels and could therefore be avoided through better husbandry practices and animal healthcare delivery systems. Given that 920,000 calves die above the 10% acceptable level of calf mortality and 2,645,000 kids/lambs die above the acceptable level, one can crudely say that Southern Sudan is annually losing 1.76 million cattle and 5.1 million shoats through death that could be avoided. In value terms, this roughly works out to a loss of SDG 1.2 billion. Improvement in delivery of animal health services in Southern Sudan to reduce the high levels of mortality noted above therefore merits serious consideration. 2.5.4.3 Herd natural growth rates Information obtained during the study on birth and mortality rates as discussed above suggests that the livestock herd in Southern Sudan is currently having a fairly low growth rate. Table 2.9 shows that it is highly likely that the cattle population is increasing at just around 1% per annum while the shoats population is growing at just around 10%. This compares unfavourably with herd growth rates in pastoral communities in neighbouring countries. Pastoral herds in other countries are known to show moderate but much higher growth rates than what information generated from the study suggests for Southern Sudan. A recent study among pastoral communities in Kenya estimated herd growth rates for cattle to be 11% and small ruminants as 40% (YAM/ACACIA, 2010). As will be discussed in subsequent sections of this report, this low natural herd growth rate may be, indeed, one of the logical explanations for the general reluctance of many pastoral communities to sell their livestock and the general pattern seen across all states of continuing efforts in restocking. Unless farmers are able to increase the calving (and kidding/lambing) rates and control mortality rates to a level that the herd has a sufficient natural growth to allow for off-take that does not mean reduction of herd sizes, livestock farmers will always be reluctant to sell their livestock and, instead, will keep on seeking ways of herd-build up through purchase or other unlawful means such as raiding and theft.

Table 2.9

21

Estimates of national herd/flock dynamics

Item Cattle 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 1.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8
Source:

Estimate Shoats 24,487,643 60% 40% 14,692,586 9,795,059 60% 40% 8,815551 100% 8,815,551 60% 5,289,330 20% 2,938,517 2,350,813 9.5%

Herd structure Total national herd Per cent of national herd female Per cent of national herd male Total national herd female Total national herd male Per cent of female herd mature Per cent female herd calves/kids & yearlings Total national herd, mature females (breeding herd/flock) Growth in national herd/flock Per cent of mature female giving birth in a year Total number of calves/kids given birth to in a year Calve/kid survival rate Number of calves/kids surviving in a year Adult cattle/shoat mortality rate Total number of mature cattle/shoats dying in a year Total increase in national herd/flock before off-take Natural annual growth rate in national herd
MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis Study, Aug/Sept, 2010.

11,735,159 70% 30% 8,214,611 3,520,548 70% 30% 5,750,228 40% 2,300,091 50% 1,150,046 15% 1,047,363 102,683 0.8%

2.5.4.4 Commercial off-take In a commercial livestock production system (for meat), sale or slaughter of livestock is the only main mechanism through which producers realize the value of their business. In essence, the business is profitable if proceeds from the number of animals sold during the year is higher than the total expenses incurred in maintaining the entire herd over the same period. In a situation where an economic size of the breeding stock has been achieved (given available resources), the producer optimizes profitability by making sure all the non-breeding stock [comprising mature bulls above the required number for breeding (2-4 per 100 cows); old cows for culling; and even heifers above the number required to replace culled cows and build-up breeding herd] are sold. To make sure that this saleable stock is as high as possible, the producer focuses on ensuring high birth rates (in cows, a calf every year), minimum mortality rates (maximum of 3% for mature herd and 10% for calves), and fast growth to saleable weight ensured through right genetic composition of the breed, good nutrition and health (attained within 3 years). These are the key supply factors for ensuring optimal off-take rates. In a herd structure similar to the one of Southern Sudan (with 70:30 female - male ratio; and 70:30 mature cow, female calves ratio) a producer with a herd of 100 would be expected to wean off 44 calves annually and, with good husbandry practices, be able to attain an off-take rate of 35-40% in three years. These off-take rates are common among commercial beef farms, especially in the developed world. The situation is different in pastoral systems where calving rates are generally lower, calf and mature herd mortality is higher and overall productivity is relatively low. Some pastoral systems in Africa are known to have commercial off-take rates for cattle of between 7 14% depending on the commercial orientation of the community, some even rising to 28% (Ocaido, M et al; Rodriguez L, et al; Negassa, A. et al). Off-take rates for small ruminants are generally much higher ranging from 34 36% in many pastoralist systems in Africa (Rodriguez, L et al). From an analysis of the herd structure and dynamics of the Southern Sudan livestock sector explored above, the Value Chain Analysis study estimates that out of the national cattle herd of 11.735 million, a total of 1,348,000 cattle could be currently sold without affecting the breeding stock. This represents a possible cattle off-take rate of 11.5%. From the analysis, the comparable figure for shoats is 4,094,000 representing 16.7% off-take rate capacity. The actual off-take rates are however much lower. 22

Following triangulation of information obtained during the study from various primary and secondary sources, the commercial off-take rate was estimated to be 4% for cattle and 10% for shoats. In Jonglei State, commercial off-take rate for cattle was estimated as 3-4 sold in a year in a herd of 100 (3-4%) while for sheep and goats it was estimated as 7 sold in a year in a flock of 100 sheep/goats (7%). In the Upper Nile State, cattle sales normally take place during times of famine, but only on a limited scale and usually, not economically-driven. In Unity State, the rich members of the community owning 200-250 head of cattle would sell 15 in a year. These are thought to represent about 16% of the community. The average livestock keepers (40% of the population) owning 150-200 head of cattle would sell 4-5 head in a year while the poor (40% of the population) owning 30-50 head of cattle would sell 2-3 in a year. Normally cattle are sold when they are very old cows, having chronic diseases, bulls are often exchanged with heifers for restocking; the heifers are normally bought from within the cattle camp. The following were cited as the main reasons for selling livestock: To buy food; To buy human drugs or pay hospital bills (medical reasons); To pay school fees; To build Luak. The estimated off-take rate of 4% for cattle and 10% for shoats would imply that a total 469,000 cattle and 2,449,000 shoats are sold or slaughtered annually in Southern Sudan (see Table 2.10 below). From the analysis of the number of livestock that could be sold/slaughtered (11.5% for cattle and 16.7% for shoats), this implies that 879,000 cattle and 1,645,000 shoats which could be sold or slaughtered are rolled over to the following year. Commercial off-take is therefore only 35% of the optimal level for cattle and 60% for shoats. In a way, this lower than optimal off-take level, could be said to represent a lost opportunity for livestock owners in Southern Sudan to earn SDG 555 million annually. Yet, it is important to remember that the optimal commercial off-take level estimated for Southern Sudan of 11.7% for cattle and 16.7% shoats is still much lower than what could be possible with better husbandry practices and animal healthcare system which ensure higher birth rates, reduce mortality rates and improve overall productivity. The study identifies five closely interlinked factors explaining why the commercial off-take rates are currently as low as they are in Southern Sudan: (i) Small herd sizes for majority of livestock farmers: Generally, livestock keepers will only sell stock once they have achieved a certain minimum herd size per their perceived needs. In a commercial environment, this minimum number is the break-even herd size plus a number over and above this that ensures profitability, given available resources. In a pastoral system where production is more socially oriented, the minimum herd is that which ensures household sustenance (especially through milk) and meets the households off-take needs (including dowry payment in the case of Southern Sudan). Estimates done in Northern Kenya among the Borana communities suggest the minimum herd size for household sustenance in that community is 30 cattle. Discussions held with key informants during the study suggest that the figure could be as high as 50 in the case of Southern Sudan. An analysis of the herd sizes in Southern Sudan shows that almost three quarters of all livestock owners in the country have less than 50 cattle, indeed for many, fewer than even 20. For the national herd of 11.735 million cattle the average herd size for the estimated 950,000 livestock keepers is merely 12 cattle. For the majority of these farmers, therefore, the key objective is to build their herd to the perceived minimum level. Selling only comes in as a painful last resort forced by emergency-type needs or in the case of sickly, infertile or very old cattle where the objective is to salvage to some value. It is therefore highly likely that the 23

seemingly large herd sizes seen in cattle camps or kraals are merely illusionary. The actual owners behind those large herds are many and most own just a few. A closely related factor to the high perceived minimum herd-size which most farmers are building towards is the general availability of pastures. In many comparable countries in Africa, pasture land/feed is a limiting factor which generally tones down farmers perception of a minimum herd-size, particularly among agro-pastoralists. In Ethiopia, for instance, where a large proportion of the livestock off-take is accounted for by agro-pastoralists in the highland areas, herd sizes are pretty small. Farmers generally need only 2 4 bulls mainly for ploughing and 2-3 lactating cows for milk supply. The bulls are generally sold off after every 2 -3 seasons and replaced with younger ones. Land pressure (pasture availability) also puts a ceiling in farmers perception of an optimal herd-size. In the case of Southern Sudan where pasture land is owned communally and generally available (even in dry seasons provided the herds are moved in search of pasture), individual farmers have a higher motivation to keep larger herds so as optimize their private benefits from the communally owned pasturelands. With continued availability of land for pastures, a strategy for increasing off-take rates would have to, first, address the need for herd-build up for the majority of farmers up to the minimum economic (and social) size. (ii)Low birth rates, high mortality and slow natural growth of herds: As discussed in Sections 2.5.4.1 3 above, high mortality rates for both young and mature stock, lower than normal birth rates and general slow maturity process (stunted growth in calves and yearlings) have all combined to mean that livestock farmers in Southern Sudan can hardly build-up their herds through natural growth. For higher off-take rates to be achievable, this is an area that must be dealt with. From current estimates of natural herd growth, there is a very high likelihood that even the off-take rates of 4% currently reported are leading to a general decrease in the national herd. What is widely reported by farmers throughout the States that they only sell their stock in cases of emergency or when old/chronically sick, is a reality. High herd mortality rates leave the majority of farmers with no stock to sell, and actually on the converse, with a high need for restocking. (iii) Demand for commercial off-take: In a commercial livestock production system, most operational transactions are conducted in monetary terms and the overall returns from the enterprise are measured in monetary terms. Commercial off-take is the only major means to generate revenue to meet operational expenses to generate a profit to the owner(s). In a pastoral system such as the case in Southern Sudan, most livestock keeping operations are not monetized and the returns to the owner also need not be monetized. Commercial off-take is therefore only desirable, when there is need for money to underwrite an immediate transaction. Livestock is therefore only sold to pay for hospital bills, to buy food or, for an increasing number of households, to pay for higher education for their children. Since most livestock keepers in Southern Sudan also cultivate food crops (unlike the case of pure pastoralists in other countries in Africa), the need to sell livestock to buy food is generally only during periods of food crisis. Opportunities for higher education are also generally low. The general socio-economic development is also generally low such that demand for other investment areas such as improved housing and transportation or investment on crop cultivation (mechanization, improved seeds, fertilizers etc) or off-farm enterprises is generally nonexisttent/low. A general absence of financial institutions in rural Southern Sudan also means that, as things stand, livestock perhaps represents the only widely known and available store of value. As livestock farmer, Elijah, who also runs a Pharmacy store in Leer County, Unity State, puts it; 24

 what do I do with the cash if I sell my livestock? .. Even profits from my pharmacy, I just buy cattle!.... This is a view shared by many livestock keepers in Southern Sudan. These are important underlying factors that drive commercialization and higher off-take rates in other countries. As will be discussed in Section 6, there are already nascent fundamental changes taking place in this area. Higher opportunities for basic education are already starting to put pressure on family-supplied herding labour (where children currently account for two thirds) and, as this continues as it is bound to, herding costs will start increasingly becoming monetized. Opportunities for higher education are also already increasing and so is the general socio-economic development in the country which is bound to increase the need for livestock farmers to sell part of their stock. What is required from an intervention perspective in this area is to ride on this underlying driving force to ensure that the commercialization process which is bound to pick up is not hindered by low herd growth rates, low productivity and lack of market orientation. and lack of supportive policies (iv)Poor market orientation and competition from social off-take: As will be discussed in Section 2.7, a major reason for many households in Southern Sudan to keep livestock is to be able to meet the social demand for livestock exchange during marriage (dowry). The study estimated that the social off-take for cattle is 7% while for shoats it stands at 3%. Although at a national level, this social off-take is like a revolving pool/fund of sorts that does not reduce the national herd, at the individual household level, the social off-take represents an actual reduction in stock during which commercial off-take can hardly take place. Until dowry payments get monetized (in livestock equivalents) as has happened in some countries in Africa, and the pressure goes down, social off-take will remain a key competing factor to efforts geared at improved commercial livestock off-takes. (v)Poorly developed market infrastructure and supply routes for market access: For farmers who want to sell their livestock, a key consideration is the accessibility of markets. As will be discussed in Section 3, some regions are extremely poorly served by essential market infrastructure, starting with livestock markets. In some states, primary livestock markets are only available in major towns and farmers have to trek their animals for several days to reach these markets. This is further complicated by the phenomenon of cattle rustling which has completely blocked some supply routes and left the regions with totally no market access. This is particularly the case in many parts of Jonglei although the situation can also be generalized for most other parts of Southern Sudan. It is particularly severe when combined with poor state of roads which make trucking expensive and in many cases impossible.

2.5.5 Main Livestock Supply Routes

Table 2.8 below shows the main livestock supply routes in the five states covered under the study. It shows that for consumption within Southern Sudan, there are two main supply routes the NimuleJuba route generally for imported livestock from Uganda which is currently supplying, on average, slightly over 300 cattle and 350 shoats every week; and the Kapoeta-Torit-Juba route. The KapoetaJuba route is traditionally an important livestock supply route into Juba but due to the poor condition of the road between Juba and Torit during the study, its importance seemed to have reduced significantly with suppliers only able to manage 2-3 trucks of livestock per week. For the main Juba terminal market, the Terekeka Juba route is also important. Most livestock from other parts of Central Equatoria (especially within the greater Juba County) are trekked into Juba, constantly trickling directly into the 8 slaughter areas within Juba mainly brought in by butchers. For Juba, the Bor-Juba route and the Pibor-Kapoeta-Torit-Juba route used to be important but they have currently 25

almost stopped functioning largely as a result of insecurity related to cattle raiding. These were mainly trekking routes. All other major towns have their supply routes. For exports into the North of Sudan, the main supply routes are Bentiu-El Obeid and Nasir-Renk-Judah-Kosti routes. Table 2.10 Main Livestock Trade Routes in Southern Sudan
State/Route 1. Eastern Equatoria Route Description Estimated Livestock Volume (number) Cattle Shoats 17,000 20,000 8,000 .. 3,564 2,744 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 36,000 20,000 .. 10,693 8,232 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 0

Soroti Gulu (Uganda)Nimule Juba Masindi Gulu Nimule Juba Narus Kapoeta Camp 15 Torit Juba Kotido Kitgum Tsertenya Torit 2 Central Equatoria Terekeka Juba 3. Upper Nile NasirRenkJudahRabak/Kosti in White Nile State Manyo (Wadakona, Umjalalah and Ayat) Rabak/Kosti in White Nile 4. Jonglei Akobo Nasir Renk Kosti Khartoum Jonglei Akobo Nasir Malakal Akobo Bor Duk Ayod Fangak Malakal Duk Twich East Bor Uror Ayod Figi Malakal Uror Bor Pibor Bor Pibor Juba Pibor Kapoeta Juba Bor Juba Unity Bentiu Rubkona El Obeid Source: MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis study, Aug/Sept, 2010

2.5.6 Estimated Supply of Livestock and Livestock Products

From the information laid out in sections 2.5.1 through 2.5.5 above regarding livestock breeds, herd structures and dynamics, as well as the supply routes available, the study has made estimates of the total supply of livestock and livestock products into the various market segments. Table 2.11 shows the computations and estimates for cattle and shoats. 2.5.6.1 Supply of live animals and red meat Under the current livestock production orientation and practices, only bulls and old or infertile cows are sold through established market outlets. Indeed, this production orientation is so culturally entrenched that it is common for veterinary officers carrying out ante mortem-inspections of cattle presented for slaughter (usually in the market at the point of sale) to reject cattle because they are cows or even worse, pregnant. The herd that can generally be considered as available for supply is therefore that constituting mature bulls (at least 2 3 years old) over and above the number required for breeding (usually 2 4 per 100 cows) or old cows that need to be culled.
Table 2.11 shows that although a total of 1.35 million cattle and 4.09 million shoats could be available for supply into the red meat market, only 469,000 cattle and 2.45 million shoats are actually sold. Out of this total, 173,000 cattle and 1.61 million shoats are slaughtered while the remaining are sold for restocking, social exchange or export to the North of Sudan as live animals.

26

Total annual meat production is estimated at 41,124 metric tonnes with a retail value of SDG 0.61 billion. Beef production accounts for 46% of total meat production whereas the balance is accounted for by shoats. Table 2.11 Estimated supply of livestock and livestock products, 2010
Item 1.0 2.0 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.3 3.4 3.5 Total national herd/flock (see Table 2.9) Growth in national herd (see Table 2.9) Estimated supply of livestock for red meat market Per cent of male national herd mature (bulls 3+ yrs; shoats 1+ yrs) Total number of mature bulls/shoats in national herd Number of bulls/he shoats required for breeding per 100 cows/flock Total number of breeding males required in national herd Total number of males available for sale (3.2 3.4) Per cent of adult female herd that can be culled in a year Total number of female herd that can be culled in a year Total stock available for sale to red meat market (3.5 + 3.4) Estimate Cattle 11,735,159 Shoats 24,487,643

35% 1,232,192 3 171,616 1,060,576 5% 287,511 1,348,087 4% 469,406 7% 821,461 3% 352,055 2% 234,703 172,549 18,980 10 189,800,000 172,549 20% 12 414,118 24,847,056 2,300,091 240 552.0 10% 55.2 1 55,200,000 496,800,000

40% 3,918,023 3 264,466 3,653,557 5% 440,777 4,094,334 10% 2,448,764 3% 745,429 3% 745,429 2% 496,953 1,606,029 22,144 19 420,731,174 1,606,029 20% 3 963,617 3,854,470 -

4.0
4.1 4.2

Commercial off-take
Estimated per cent of animals sold per year per herd Estimated total number of animals sold in a year

5.0
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6

Social off-take (exchange)

Estimated per cent of stock given away in a year for dowry Total number of livestock given away in a year for dowry Estimated per cent of stock lost in a year through theft/raids Total number of livestock lost through theft/raids Estimated number of stock bought by households in a year Total number of stock bought for herd build-up in a year

6.0
6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.1 0 6.1 1 6.12 6.1 3 6.1 4 6.15 6.1 6 6.17
Source:

Production of beef, milk and hides

Number of stock slaughtered per year (from consumption estimates by SSCCSE) Total red meat produced annually (in Metric Tons) Average price of red meat (beef SDG 814/kg; shoats SDG 18-25) Estimated total value of red meat produced (SDG) Number of hides and skins produced annually Estimated per cent of hides sold Average price of hides and skins sold (SDG) Estimated total value of hides sold (SDG) Estimated value of hides wasted (not sold) Number of lactating cows (see Table 2.9) Average annual milk production per cow (Kgs) Total annual milk production (in litres, million) Per cent of milk marketed Total milk marketed in a year (in litres, million) Average price of milk marketed (SDG/litre), farm-gate Total estimated value of milk sold (SDG) Total estimated value of milk consumed by producer households (SDG)
MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis Study, Aug/Sept, 2010.

2.5.6.2 Milk production

All milk produced in Southern Sudan comes from cattle breeds that are kept mainly by pastoralists and agro-pastoralists. The average milk yield in Southern Sudan from these unselected animals is 180 450 litres per annum. The Baggara breed in Unity State reportedly produces 8-10 litres of milk 27

per cow per day. The proportion of these higher milk yielding breeds is however very small and could be regarded as insignificant at a national level. Our observations in Upper Nile and Jonglei states during this study, however, revealed that the zebu breeds kept in these areas produce an average of 1 litre per cow per day, representing a lactation yield of 240 litres for a 240-days lactation length. This low level of productivity is attributable not only to the animals genotype but also to poor management. During visits to cattle camps, it was noted that livestock are kept at the camps until mid-day before being taken to pasture. Sometimes it takes 1-2 hours walking to pasture and similar time to return to the cattle camp. This leaves the livestock with only a few hours to graze. They are not provided with any feed or mineral supplementation. It is therefore hardly surprising that the milk yield is this low given the poor pasturing practices. Estimations based on the 240 litre average annual milk production per cow suggest that Southern Sudan is currently producing around 552 million litres of milk annually with a rough value of SDG 0.55 billion. It is however only about 10% of the milk that is sold and therefore the cash incomes to households are much lower estimated at SDG 55.2 million. Milk production from goats and sheep are considered as negligible. It is quite unlikely that alternative production systems e.g. planted pastures or intensive grain feeding, will emerge in Southern Sudan in the short and medium term. Therefore, increasing livestock production and productivity will depend on improving current production systems by introducing better range management strategies which in turn will necessitate secured access rights by herders to grazing lands and watering points. 2.5.6.3 Hides and Skins Slaughter produces a large number of hides and skins. Table 2.11 shows that an estimated 173,000 hides and 1.6 million skins all valued at SDG6.9 million are produced annually in Southern Sudan. This value is however hardly realized due to the absence of a developed leather industry or an organized hides and skins trade. Under the current situation, hides and skins produced through slaughter are treated as mere by-products (almost close to waste) of the slaughter process that do not merit much attention. Discussions with hides and skins traders, butchery owners and operators of slaughter slabs show that it is only about 20% of the hides and skins produced which are marketed (with a value of SDG 1.38 million). The rest are generally wasted. Partly because of the general lack of a market, large quantities of hides and skins are lost due to poor handling techniques, including poor flaying, treatment/preservation and storage. Poor flaying techniques result in holes that lower the quality, and thus the price of the commodity. Hides and skins from humped cattle and those bearing brand marks also attract lower prices. The initial treatment of hides and skins is often sub-standard; quite often, this involves drying under direct sunlight without any shade. Sometimes the hides and skins are dumped around the slaughter premises, leading to massive losses of the commodity. Where preservation takes place, it is in the form of salting. In some areas access to these salts is limited. The study team was unable to obtain exact statistics on the proportion of hides and skins wasted, either due to poor handling or lack of market outlets. A conservative estimate would however place this at 80%. Prices of hides and skins depend on the demand and quality of the product as well as the location of the market. Indicative prices obtained in the course of this study show that Juba offers the highest prices (SDG 12 per hide and SDG 3 per skin), followed by Bor (SDG 5 per hide and SDG 2 per skin). Renk appears to offer the lowest prices (SDG 2 per hide and SDG 1 per skin). 28

2.5.6.4 Total production A summation of the estimated total value of production of livestock and livestock products shows that the income generated from the livestock sector in Southern Sudan currently stands at SDG1.43 billion annually. Meat production accounts for 43% of total production followed by milk (39%) and live animals sold for restocking or exports (18%). In relative terms, the value of hides and skins produced is currently insignificant accounting for only 0.5% of the total value of production. An analysis of the marketed value of production shows that only small proportions of milk produced is marketed and so is the case of hides and skins (see Chart 3). In view of marketed production, meat accounts for almost two thirds of the total value (66%), live animals account for 28% and the balance is accounted for by milk (6%) and, hides and skins (0.2%). From a marketed value perspective, meat stands out as the most important. Within the meat segment, an interesting thing to note is that whereas cattle account for 70% of the livestock units in Southern Sudan and are therefore considered the main livestock species, shoats actually account for the bulk of meat production (69%) and the share of beef in total value of meat production is only 31%. In a lot of policy and operational level discourse of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan, shoats are many times subsumed. These constitute an important part of the total value of production and their prominence needs to be raised in deliberations relating to development of the sector.
Chart 2.3: Estimated total value of livestock production in Southern Sudan

Source: MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis Study, Aug/Sept, 2010

2.6 The Demand for Livestock and Livestock Products

The demand for livestock and red meat products in Southern Sudan may be categorized into the following six fairly distinct market segments: Live animals by rural households for dowry and other social purposes/functions; Live animals by rural households for restocking and herd build-up; Live animals for export, currently mainly to the North of Sudan; Red meat by rural households largely sold through rural butcheries and restaurants; 29

Ungraded/unclassified red meat by urban consumers; and High quality red meat and meat products by high end urban consumers (largely sold through high-end restaurants and supermarkets).

2.6.1 Demand for live animals for herd build-up and social exchange
Livestock (and particularly cattle) is deeply rooted in the lives, cultures and value systems of the people of Southern Sudan. Livestock is required for household sustenance (largely through milk and sale during adverse periods to buy food), for social exchange particularly in marriage (as dowry/bride price), and for storing wealth (which also confers social status). From the cultural value system of the people of Southern Sudan, every Sudanese man generally knows that he will need to raise the number of cattle required to get married (in many pastoral communities, to more than one wife) and to sustain his family through hard times. This awareness even deepens further if, once married, he gives birth to boys for he knows that, one day, these boys will need to get married too and, as a father, he will need to help them raise the required number of cattle to pay dowry. Although no data is available, given the age structure of the population of Southern Sudan, it is modest to expect that at least 100,000 marriages are conducted every year. The number of cattle paid as dowry per girl is highly variable from community to community and also from girl to girl. However assuming a conservative average figure of 30 cattle, this gives an annual demand for a whooping 3 million heads of cattle for marriage. Among many communities in Southern Sudan, dowry is not necessary paid in lump-sum but can be paid in instalments over several years. There is also an entrenched culture of contribution from relatives (largely for first wife), particularly the grooms father. A major burden of the dowry must however still come before marriage and be borne by the groom himself. Discussions held with young men (mainly herders) during the field study indicated that while it was possible to marry on loan (without paying) during the period of civil war, parents are now increasingly unwilling to extend this kind of credit and much of the agreed dowry needs to be raised upfront. From an estimate of the current herd sizes and income levels among the majority of households, the dowry that needs to be raised to get married is generally beyond their means and many men live with the burden of dowry debt, either current or imminent. In essence therefore, this social pressure has put a general tendency among households to look for mechanisms for building their herds wherever possible. This is particularly so when a household has lost part of their stock either through death (diseases/drought), dowry, selling to off-set household requirements (usually of emergency nature) or through theft and raids. It is the resources that are not there but the need is always there. Indeed, discussions with key informants on the livestock sector in Southern Sudan point at the need to fulfil demand for this social market segment that continues to fuel the phenomenon of cattle raiding in the country. Considering the current economic circumstances, this demand is unsustainable as it is not backed by ability to pay. Yet it is real and its needs must be met, many times, the end seemingly justifying use of unlawful means of meeting the demand. It is highly likely that, it is only until this pressure is addressed through demand side factors such falling dowry levels, extension of period of payment or increased earnings to back ability to pay, that measures to curb the phenomenon of cattle raiding and the insecurity it raises will have significant success. The study team made attempts to assess the number of livestock exchanged both through the market and informally (socially) to meet this demand. Our estimates are that this is the largest market segment for which the supply of livestock in Southern Sudan will continue to be structured to meet. Key distinguishing characteristics of this market is that the demand is for female stock (usually not black) and in large quantities. Although the heifer needs to be healthy, the key thing is to be able to raise as many as possible. Meat characteristics, particularly in relation to carcass weight are fairly unimportant considerations in the production systems adopted by livestock farmers to meet demand for this market segment. So long as the production systems of most livestock keepers are largely 30

oriented towards satisfying demand in this market segment, then livestock sold in other market segments (usually painfully as a last resort) will continue to have characteristics which are generally uncompetitive relative to those originating from producers who have a keen eye on the market.

2.6.2 Rural and urban red meat market segments

The Southern Sudan Centre for Census Statistics estimates that the average meat consumption in Southern Sudan is 4.745 kgs per person per year (NBHS, 2009). This is broken down into 1.095 kgs of mutton (sheep); 1.46 kgs of chevron (goat meat), and 2.19 kgs of beef (cattle). Given average carcass weights for sheep, goats and cattle produced in Southern Sudan, these consumption figures suggest an annual demand for slaughter of 623,678 sheep, 937,351 goats and 172,548 cattle for both rural and urban consumers. Key characteristics of this market segment are: It is currently un-segmented on basis of quality. Meat quality supplied to this market segment currently ranges from fairly low quality meat from old and sickly stock supplied by local farmers to fairly high quality meat supplied from imports of live animals from Uganda. The slaughter process, meat transportation and retail are however conducted under the same environment which can generally be described as in-hygienic and of poor food safety standards. Improvement in quality and food safety standards, and segmentation of supply points on these characteristics could significantly increase consumption. Price is a higher consideration than quality. Current prices (standing at SDG 14 in Juba) are considered by many customers to be too high and a limiting factor to their consumption patterns. A comparison of prevailing meat prices in Juba with those in neighbouring county capitals (Kampala, Nairobi and Addis Ababa) show that meat prices in Southern Sudan are generally 50% higher than in neighbouring countries. Potential for growth in rural markets is positive but limited to the extent that it is correlated to increases in rural incomes which are projected to grow modestly; Potential for growth in urban markets is extremely high driven by growth in base populations, rapid urbanization and fast growing incomes.
Table Estimated demand for red meat in Southern Sudan, 2010
Livestock Per person (in Kgs) Cattle Goats Sheep Total
Source:

Annual meat consumption National consumption per 2010 population projections (in Kgs) 2.190 18,980,353 1.460 12,653,569 1.095 9,490,177 4.745 41,124,099

Average carcass weight (in Kgs) 110 13 15

Estimated number of livestock required

172,549 973,351 632,678

SSCCSE, NBHS 2009; SSCCSE, Statistical Yearbook for Southern Sudan, 2009

2.6.3 Red meat for high end urban market:

Southern Sudan has a small but rapidly growing high income population. This comprises of senior civil servants, the business community and international aid workers largely based in Juba and the other major towns. This segment constitutes of savvy consumers with significant disposable incomes and consumption patterns and levels almost similar to those of the developed world. Using the average meat consumption of level 80 130 kgs per person per year for developed countries, it is possible to assume that the demand in this segment is roughly 6,900 MT of meat annually equivalent to about 34,500 Uganda-type cattle (of 200 kg carcass weight). This market is currently supplied from imports of quality/specialized cuts from neighbouring countries, served through highend supermarkets and hotels. Estimates show that less than 30% of demand is currently met and many customers have to make do with unclassified meat supplied through the domestic channel. 31

Key characteristics of this market segment include: Meat quality and differentiation (choice of cuts) is important; Hygiene and food safety standards are paramount; From a customer base, this segment is small but is growing fast; and Although price considerations are important, this is but not the key consideration. Meat quality, consistency of supply and food safety standards are issues given higher weight. This presents an opportunity for niche suppliers.

2.6.4 Live animals for export

Although Southern Sudan used to export significant numbers of livestock to neighbouring countries during the period of civil war, this trend has now reversed and the only exports are now largely to the North of Sudan, largely through Bentiu (to El Obeid) in Unity, and Malakal, Renk and Manyo in Upper Nile all estimated at around 50,000 cattle and 20,000 shoats annually. Characteristics of this market are: Animals must be of excellent health condition as they have to endure up to three-day travel by truck without feed or water; Traders currently have to go from cattle camp to cattle camp looking for cattle meeting this quality as most cattle generally presented to the market by farmers on their own are of poor quality (especially in relation to health); The demand is for large sized cattle and shoats; In the North, supplied livestock undergo quarantine process before proceeding to export abattoirs; Though currently taking small quantities, the growth potential for this market is enormous. World demand for red meat is rapidly growing (largest growth in China) and meat consumption is expected to double by 2050. Most of the meat is expected to come from developing countries. Chart 2.4: Livestock market segments

Source: MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis Study, Aug/Sept, 2010

2.7 Demand-supply gap

32

An analysis of the demand and supply situation in Southern Sudan shows that the domestic market is fairly small compared to the potential supply base. The current demand in the various market segments show that only 35% of the available supply base can be absorbed through the current market outlets. While domestic demand shows extremely high growth potential, projections show that it is still insufficient to sustain growth of the livestock sector and measures to address an export trajectory must start getting put in place. Current production practices and available market infrastructure is currently structured to meet social needs and domestic demand. Significant changes will be needed to orient the sector to external markets requirements, and even an increasingly quality conscious domestic market for red meat. Chart 4: Demand Supply gap

Source: MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis, Aug/Sept, 2010

33

3 SECTOR ORGANIZATION:
Key Activities and Players
3.1 Overview
The application of the concept of value chains in the field of development is centred on the recognition that the production and delivery of products to consumers within a market economy involves the interconnectedness of many actors, and if these players act with a common purpose and joint strategy, it is possible to improve the competitiveness of the whole chain and consequently, the returns accruing at each stage of the chain. The mapping of all key players in a chain and determining their interrelationships is therefore a central part of value chain analysis. This is the purpose of this section to outline all the key players in the livestock value chain in Southern Sudan, identifying the functions they undertake; assessing their suitability in undertaking those roles and functions; identifying any missing players; and overall, establishing the interrelationships between the various players. The section starts with an outline of all key players (both actors and enablers), the functions and roles they play in the chain, and the key constraints they face in their operations. It is also in this section that we cover the market infrastructure (and other structures) under which the actors interplay. The sector map depicting the interrelationships of the various players and further analysis of the market channels are presented in Chapter 4 while the analysis of the costs and value-added at each stage are left out in this section and covered in detail in Chapter 5.

3.2 Production
Production is the foundational segment of any value chain, and largely determines the extent to which the entire chain can grow and remain competitive. If fundamentals are not right in this segment, efforts made in enhancing efficiency and competitiveness at other levels of the chain are bound to bear insignificant impact on the whole chain. For most agricultural value chains in developing countries such as Southern Sudan where production is generally in the hands of smallholders, this is also where most players in the chain are found and, these normally constitute the main target group for development efforts targeted at improved livelihoods. For this reason, this report gives significant weight to production issues in its analysis.

3.2.1. Categorization and population of producers

The ultimate purpose of a value chain development initiative is to increase the competitiveness of the chain in the market and increase (or secure) returns to chain actors. An assessment of the extent to which the operations of key players are oriented to the market is therefore an important starting point in determining the kind of interventions that would be suitable in stimulating growth and competitiveness of the chain at that stage. The value chain study explored various ways in which livestock producers in Southern Sudan could be categorized from a perspective of possible value chain development interventions. Production systems adopted, scale of operation, commercial orientation and literacy levels of the producers were some of the possible categorizations explored. 3.2.1.1 Production systems Livestock producers in Southern Sudan are normally put into two main categories: pastoralists and agro-pastoralists. While in many countries, these two distinctions are largely based on the production systems adopted by the livestock keepers, this is not the case in Southern Sudan. In many other countries pastoralists are largely fully dependent on rangeland grazing for pastures, practice 34

seasonal/movements in search of pastures, and the families are nearly 100% dependent on the livestock for their livelihood, and crop cultivation is fairly limited, if any. In these countries, agropastoralists are distinct from the pure pastoralists in that they are fully sedentary with their livestock only let out for grazing and brought back to the homesteads in the evening; and there is high dependence (more than 50% of household income) on crop cultivation and use of crop residues (and other supplementary feeds) for their livestock. Herd sizes are also generally smaller among agropastoralists than among pure pastoralists. In Southern Sudan, these distinctions hardly exist . Nearly all livestock producers practice crop farming; nearly all do not use crop residues or other mechanisms of supplementary feeding and are fully dependent on rangeland grazing; nearly all have permanently established homesteads but their livestock occasionally move from the homestead (most for up to six months) in search of water and pastures. The main difference lies on whether it is livestock or crop cultivation which provides the main source of income and livelihood. Pastoralism is where at least 50% of the gross incomes for households come from livestock or its related activities2; while agro-pastoralism is where at least 50% of gross incomes of the households come from crop cultivation and other related activities and livestock is largely kept as a supplementary activity. Based on this distinction, the drawing line for who is a pastoralist and who is an agro-pastoralist is fairly thin in Southern Sudan. There are however some communities which are clearly agro-pastoralists (or even pure farmers) such as the Zande of Western Equatoria, while there are others who are clearly pastoralists such as the Toposa of Eastern Equatoria. For most others such as the Dinka, Nuer and Mundari, it is also clear that livestock is very important in the household livelihood equation but whether this contributes to more than 50% or not is not quite clear. There are no indigenous nomadic groups in Southern Sudan but nomads from the north (e.g. Baggara Arabs) and the Fulani from Western Africa cross seasonally into Southern Sudan (mainly Northern States) during which they supply local communities with live animals, meat and milk products usually in exchange for cash and other commodities. A third category of livestock keepers in Southern Sudan comprise of a small group that can be referred to as Peri-urban or urban livestock keepers who keep animals like equines (especially donkeys) which are used for transportation of goods and people, especially milk delivery. Cattle, sheep, goats, and chickens are also common in urban and peri-urban areas, and these are kept to help households meet immediate food and cash needs. Existing data from FAO and State MARF indicate that more than 85% of HHs in Southern Sudan are livestock producers - i.e. own at least one livestock. From among the livestock keepers, majority (47%) can be categorized as agro-pastoralists, 43% pastoralists and the remaining 10% as urban /periurban livestock keepers. From the population of households in Southern Sudan, these estimates would suggest that the country has a total of 1.1 million livestock farmers out of whom about 500,000 are agro-pastoralists; about 450,000 are pastoralists and the remaining are insignificant livestock keepers in the urban/peri-urban category. For purposes of the livestock value chain analysis study it is the estimated number of 950,000 livestock keepers engaged in pastoralism and agropastoralism who were considered as the main livestock keepers. The study did not delve into the category of urban/peri-urban livestock keepers given its orientation on red meat (from cattle, goats and sheep). All the States, except Western Equatoria, have a share of the three production systems with some having stronger presence of pastoralism than agro-pastoralism and vice versa (see Chart 3.1). From a value chain perspective where distinctions between categories within a chain actor group are built along the lines of whether there are structural differences or not (particularly in relation to production systems/processes), all livestock producers in Southern Sudan can be categorized as
2

IUCN, 2006

35

traditional to describe the production system they adopt. What may be the distinguishing factor may however be the size of herds and the income levels of producers.
Chart 3.1: Proportion of livestock producers in Southern Sudan as a percent of total number of households

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
UN S US JS EE S CE S NB GS WB GS WS WE S LS

P a s t o r a lis t s A g r o - p a s t o r a lis t s O t h e r liv e s t o c k p ro d u c e rs

N o n - liv e s t o c k p r o d u c e

Source: Source: SSCCSE; FAOSTAT; GTZ Study on Livestock Markets 2009; Computations

3.2.1.2 Scale of operation/herd sizes Herd sizes determine the wealth and social status of households in the community, and cattle herd sizes vary from 1 - 50 heads in the agro-pastoral counties of greater Equatoria to more than 500 heads in drier pastoral counties in greater Kapoeta, Upper Nile and Bahr el Ghazal. Average herd sizes vary from State to State, and even within a State, they vary from county to county. Among the Toposa ethnic group in the greater Kapoeta Counties, medium-sized herds vary from 100 300, large herds range from 400 to 600 heads of cattle and those considered poor own less than 30 heads of cattle. In other counties, where agro-pastoralism is more prevalent, medium-sized herds range from 80 110 heads of cattle; households with more than 160 heads of cattle are considered rich and those with less than 5 heads of cattle are considered destitute (see Table 2.9 in Chapter 2). On the whole, the Livestock Value Chain Analysis study distinguished the following three categories based on the size of herd: small scale producers as those with up to 50 heads of cattle; medium scale producers with between 51 200 heads of cattle; and large scale producers with more than 200 head of cattle. The small scale producers comprise the majority of livestock keepers in Southern Sudan with various sources estimating this category to comprise about 75% of the livestock keepers in the country. Those that can be referred to as medium scale, with between 51 and 200 heads of cattle, are estimated at 20% while those with more than 200 cattle account for about 5% or even less, of the total population of livestock keepers. Based on the 950,000 estimated figure of total number of livestock keepers in Southern Sudan (see Section 3.2.1), one can say that there are approximately 700,000 small scale producers with up to 50 heads of cattle; about 200,000 medium scale producers with 51 200 heads of cattle, and remaining 50,000 producers can be categorized as large-scale with herd sizes of over 200 head of cattle. 3.2.1.3 Literacy 36

In reflection of the generally low literacy levels in Southern Sudan estimated at 24% nationally (12% women, 37% men UNFPA, 2008; WRC, 2010), the majority of livestock producers in the country have little or no formal education. Estimates from Eastern Equatoria show that 77% of livestock owners have no formal education, 12% have only attained some level of primary education, 3% have junior secondary education and the remainder (8%) have completed secondary education with some (1%) having college education (Gathuma et al/SNV, 2008). With minor variations, this can be said to be the general literacy pattern among livestock producers in Southern Sudan. The majority of producers ranging up to 90% in some regions, have little or no formal education. It is however interesting that, although small in number, ranging from just 5 8%, there is a category of producers who can be described as having reasonable level of education. These will normally be professionals in different fields teachers, civil servants, NGO workers and politicians generally, the exposed and progressive members of the community, many of them holding important positions of influence. An assessment of whether there is a significant difference in the production systems and market orientation between the literate livestock owners and those with little education shows that the difference is quite minimal. The awareness levels are however different and indeed in some regions, the literate/more progressive farmers have made attempts to operate more progressively. In Unity State, for instance, the Governor who is estimated to have in excess of 3,000 head of cattle has introduced some higher milk-yielding breeds (Kenana and Baggara from the North) in his herd. In general, however, the higher awareness/exposure and attempts to change by literate and more progressive producers has not yet yielded any fundamental shifts in the practice. Regardless of literacy and exposure levels, all producers are generally operating on traditional production systems with little market orientation. The difference is however in the potential for change. Relentless interrogation of the question of commercialization of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan during the study persuasively points at this group (of literate/exposed producers) as the possible entry point for commercialization of the sector. Although, in proportion terms, these producers are few the actual number is significant (around 50,000) and are spread throughout the country, side-by-side with the other producers. Their influence in the communities as agents of change in the livestock sector could be significant. 3.2.1.4 Commercial orientation Southern Sudan has no category of livestock producers who can out-rightly be regarded as commercial farmers. In other countries, these would comprise ranchers, dairy farmers, feedlot owners (as in the case of Ethiopia) and in some countries (such as Somalia), even some pastoralists. In Southern Sudan, almost all producers keep livestock generally for family upkeep and other socioeconomic purposes (dowry, store of wealth, social status) and not for the explicit purpose of selling the live animal or their products. Discussions with various players in the livestock sector during the study, however shows that there is a small but increasing number of producers who already operate commercially in other segments of the value chain or in their other occupations. These comprise of livestock traders and butchery owners as well as livestock owners who also run other businesses in the communities (pharmacies, shops, restaurants etc). These are people with a commercial mindset when it comes to their other businesses and although the socio-cultural strings may still be holding them from re-orienting their livestock production to the market, with opportunity, most could start shifting towards commercialization. One could add to this category, the literate/progressive farmers discussed in Section 3.2.1.3. The line of argument followed here and in previous sections with regard to commercialization of the livestock sector would suggest that the entry point towards this endeavour is likely to be the nonpoor. This does not in any way imply that the non-poor should be the exclusive target group for value chain development initiatives geared towards commercialization. Far from it; what we see is an inclusive process that recognizes the interconnectedness of various players, including the 37

participation of champions, in building a common vision for joint action at each segment of the value chain.

3.2.2 Functions and roles of producers

The production function involves five closely linked but distinct functions. These include capitalization (acquisition of initial stock and herd build-up); breeding, pasturing/herding, healthcare, and general administration and management. 3.2.2.1 Herd acquisition / herd building The process of acquisition of initial capital for a business and subsequent injections are important from a competitiveness perspective for three main reasons. The purpose for building the capital base (investment) determines the orientation of the business and in many cases, the potential for growth. In a commercial livestock environment, an investor weighing options for returns in livestock production, will consider what product orientation to have (meat/milk), the breeds to acquire, and the production system to adopt to maximize returns. This is a time when advisory services grounded on market information and technological possibilities can make a major difference in the future of the business. Besides the purpose and orientation of the investment, the source of the stock is also important. In a commercial livestock environment, investors entering into production or building their stock will go to known breeders who specialize in raising stock with required market and production qualities. The amount of capital an investor has will also determine the length of time they take to build up their herd to the desired minimum economic size. In Southern Sudan, the main means for building up a herd for aspiring livestock producers are mainly social and generally driven by social considerations, and include the following: Proceeds from marriage of sister usually male siblings use these livestock for their own marriages; Inheritance usually after the parents die but also sometimes through gifts from the father; When a couple is newly married, the bride is offered a heifer or milking cow by the father-inlaw but the wife has no control over this cow it literally belongs to the husband; Sons also dig or raise grains in other ways that are battered with goats and eventually the goats are battered with cattle; and Wife can raise grain through digging or battering and this is then used to buy livestock this again is controlled by the husband. Among most communities, livestock ownership (particularly cattle) is the preserve of men, and women, even when they contribute to acquisition, have no direct control. Among the Nuer and Dinka of Upper Nile there is an adage in that a woman is married with both her hands and stomach to connote that, culturally, even what belongs to the wife belongs to the husband. If a man dies and leaves behind a widow with livestock, the brother (or other male kin) of the man takes over control of the livestock and will be a key decision maker over this livestock. While the methods listed above are the traditional ways of acquiring the initial herd and injecting further numbers besides natural growth, the livestock value chain analysis study established a fairly significant process of restocking through purchase. Indeed, as section 2.6 discussed, this constitutes the main market segment for which cattle are supplied. This is an extremely significant trend showing an increasing shift from traditional ways of re-stocking and herd build-up to one based on the market. Transactions here are commercial (unsubsidized) and quality (in terms of fertility, animal health and age) is a key consideration. This points to an opportunity that could be utilized to introduce new breeds through market mechanisms provided that livestock farmers view the quality of the breeds offered by the market as fitting within their quality specifications. 38

The study team makes note of the following as key intervention areas at this function area of production: Influence stock build-up investment decisions. The study estimates about 235,000 head of cattle and 500,000 shoats are bought each year by livestock owners for restocking (see Table 2.11 in Chapter 2). This represents a significant investment injection of over SDG 100 million into the livestock sector each year. Interventions targeted at influencing the decisions of farmers to commercially orient their investment decisions could overtime bear significant fruit in making the livestock sector more competitive. Intervention areas could include information and advisory services on market oriented livestock production, including breed selection and husbandry practices for optimal returns. Improve availability of good quality, high yielding breeds for re-stocking; At the moment farmers are restocking through the market, paying unsubsidized rates of between SDG 250 400 for good quality heifers or exchanging their bulls for heifers. The established livestock markets are generally geared towards the red meat market and the stock available at these markets are generally unsuitable for restocking (bulls, old cows, infertile heifers). Farmers planning to restock therefore have to go from neighbor to neighbor. The breeds within the community are generally the best they can get and no mechanism is currently available for supply of better quality breeds. This is with the exception of farmers in sections of Eastern Equatoria bordering Uganda who sometimes cross the border to purchase livestock for restocking. The demand for restocking (valued at over SDG 100 million) and a mind-set for quality in selection are important opportunities which interventions can build on to improve availability of good quality, higher yielding breeds (for both meat and milk) among livestock keepers. Support livestock producers desire for fast herd build-up: As discussed in Section 3.2.1.2, most livestock producers in Southern Sudan are currently operating with herd sizes much lower than the scale they desire and are, indeed below the economic size (as Chapter 4 will discuss). Support for herd build-up, particularly through increased accessibility of financial services, could go a long way in supporting this endeavour. This must, however, go side by side with interventions geared at ensuring availability of good, high yielding breeds; and adoption of husbandry practices that minimize mortality and optimize productivity. In Ethiopia, the growth of the rural finance sector which has 75% of its portfolio in agriculture (60% of it in livestock business) has played a major role in commercialization of the livestock sector. Farmers who purchase their livestock using credit are bound to start having a business mindset in operating their livestock enterprises.

3.2.2.2 Breeding In a commercial livestock environment, the breeding function involves maintaining an optimal breeding stock of right quality females (cows/shoats) and males (or using artificial insemination); management of the mating process to ensure maximum calving (kidding/lambing) rates of the desired breeds/quality (breed selection); health care of in-calf (pregnant) stock to minimize abortions and ensure safe delivery; and care of calves/kids to minimize calf/kid mortality and ensure fast growth. This is perhaps one of the most basic and critical functions of producers which, if well undertaken, can ensure high productivity and competitiveness of the enterprise. Discussions with livestock farmers and other key informants during the study strongly suggest that this function is taken lightly or even ignored by most livestock farmers in Southern Sudan. The continued presence of low quality breeds, high abortion rates and high calf mortality are all indications of the depth of this neglect and the price farmers and the whole sector continue to pay. Each of the areas identified above represent a potential point of intervention. No other intervention directed at other segments of the value chain will yield significant results among producers until this 39

area is thoroughly addressed. In a way, it can be said to be the make-or-break area in building productivity and competitiveness in the sector. 3.2.2.3 Herding management This function involves feeding, watering and provision of mineral supplements to the stock for optimal feed conversion and good health. Protection of the herd against theft, raids and attack by wild animals can be included as part of this function. In Southern Sudan, just like in many other livestock production systems, herding is the most visible and involving activity in livestock keeping. From a value chain perspective, it also brings in an additional set of actors at the production function - the herders - whose role and interrelationships in the chain need to be taken into account as initiatives for chain development are considered. All agro-pastoralist and pastoralist communities in Southern Sudan generally herd their livestock in the same way, and the general practices include: Dependence on family labour for the majority of households; Common practice for a herder raising livestock of a friend or relative not to receive any monetary payments, but rather, to derive benefits from milk and other livestock products of the herd such as milk; Where herding is paid for, especially around urban areas, the amount paid ranges from SDG 10 per month per cow or 100 - 150 SDG per herder. This figure was quoted in Malakal and parts of Central Equatoria; For security reasons and purposes of sharing labour, herding is generally done collectively in groups - cattle camps or kraals. Some cattle camps have upwards of 3,000 head of cattle, with some going up to 10,000, with between 30 80 families involved. Within the cattle camps, there are smaller herd units, in some communities, each having 2 3 families; Each herd of 100 cattle requires up to 3 herders. This would imply that Southern Sudan is likely to have about 350,000 herders. The age and composition of the herders is highly varied but in all cases children comprise of at least two thirds of the herders. Among the Toposa community of Easter Equatoria, two boys are paired with an adult; while in Unity State, some large cattle camps of about 5,000 head of cattle had 120 herders out whom only 4 were mature men, about 10 young men in their early 20s and the rest children (both boys and girls) as young as 4 years all the way to 15 16 years. This ratio would imply that over 230,000 children are involved in livestock production as herders. Whereas this is an important process through which their skills as future livestock producers are built and nurtured, their continued participation implies a trade-off with education. As opportunities for education become increasingly available, the already emerging strain on child-supply of herding labour will continue to intensify; Grazing in most communities normally starts at between 11am 12 noon and cattle are taken back to camp/kraal between 5- 6 pm. Most communities tether (tie/secure) their cattle, even the calves, although there are some who use kraal (with thorn fencing); All communities generally practice movement of livestock in search of pastures and water during dry months ranging from 3 6 months. Communities in low lying zones (flood plains) such as in Terekeka, however, move their livestock far from the settled areas during the rainy season and are back during the dry months (January May/June); Shoats and some lactating cattle are normally left at the homesteads to supply milk; To protect their herds from attacks (by raiders and sometimes wild animals), herders are usually armed. Arms used range from spears, bows/arrows to guns (mainly AK47), depending on the prevalence and severity of likely attacks. The study team notes the following as the main issues relating to herding: 40

(i) Few hours of grazing: With the exception of the Toposa community, almost all other communities release their stock from cattle camps/kraals as late as 12.00 noon. Given that many times available pastures require 1 2 hour trekking, and cattle have to be back to camp by 5.00 pm, this leaves the livestock with very little feeding time. In our assessment, livestock in most communities are not feeding enough, even when pastures are available. In the teams view this may be a major contributor to the low body weight and relative poor health of most livestock in Southern Sudan. This is an area that needs to be addressed. (ii)Absence of supplementary feeding: In all communities in Southern Sudan, no supplementary feeding of livestock is practiced. This includes total absence of provision of mineral licks and livestock keepers generally only depend on natural salt licks when available. (iii)Poor pasture and water management. Compared to many countries in Africa, Southern Sudan is extremely well endowed in pastures which, if well managed, can provide sufficient pastures for available current stock (and even more) without having to move cattle over large distances. This can also be said about water resources, which is indeed, many times the main reason for cattle movement during dry months. With sufficient attention, Southern Sudan can, over a short period, address the issue of water for livestock. (iv)Communal herding practices: Whereas the practice of herding livestock collectively has its advantages and can actually be seen as an opportunity with regard to farmer cooperation/organization for economies of scale, it stands out as perhaps one of the most serious obstacles in disease control and management. Given the currently prevailing livestock diseases (especially the contagious ones), it will be extremely difficult for Southern Sudan to control and manage diseases to the levels required for commercialization. (v)Livestock movements: The practice of cattle movements during dry seasons is another area that presents another major challenge in the control and management of livestock diseases. These movements (along with cattle raids) have been responsible for the spread of some diseases such as East Coast Fever (ECF) which until recently was confined only in some regions (of Central Equatoria) but has now spread to parts of Eastern Equatoria; Jonglei and even parts of Upper Nile. In Hiyala area of Eastern Equatoria, livestock farmers report that they lost a lot of their livestock during the last dry months after their cattle merged with others while grazing in Torit area. This season, they have made a resolve not to move their livestock, as in general their movement is more driven by search for water than for pasture. Farmers in many communities are aware of the challenge posed by cattle movement, and with support in water and pasture management, they would be happy to cut down on livestock movement to the bare minimum. (vi)Land tenure: Communal ownership of pasture lands poses a significant challenge to the question of commercialization of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan. For a market oriented, private sector-driven commercialization of the livestock sector to take root, the question of land tenure will have to be addressed. It is our understanding that this is an issue at the top of the governments agenda to be addressed after the January 2010 referendum. (vii) Impending herding labour shortage: In many communities throughout the five States visited during the study, livestock owners are starting to report shortage of herding labour as a key constraint. This strain is bound to increase as more education opportunities for children increase and more alternative employment opportunities for the youth continue to emerge. Mechanisms for livestock development within an environment devoid of surplus labour will therefore have to be found and increasingly adopted. 41

(viii) Cattle rustling and insecurity. Estimates made from information gathered during the study suggest that about 350,000 cattle and 750,000 shoats are lost annually through thefts and raids. In value terms the direct cost of this to farmers is estimated to be in the region of SDG 200 million annually. The cost to the sector (and the country at large) is however much higher when one considers the loss of life and the general insecurity and uncertainty it imposes on the business environment. Unconfirmed reports put the number of people killed through cattle rustling at 2,500 in 2009 and those displaced at 350,000 (May Ying Welsh, Al Jazeera, June 2010), without mentioning the number of households turned destitute. No significant private sector investment towards commercialization of the livestock sector can meaningfully take place under such an environment. This is therefore a fundamental national issue that must be dealt with to allow for an enabling environment for investment and growth of the sector. All these represent important areas of intervention. 3.2.2.4 Animal healthcare Animal health is a multi-faceted, all-round issue in livestock production that cuts across all other activities at production and the other segments of the value chain up to the time the animal is slaughtered. The breeds selected by the farmer need to be suitable for the area (in terms of susceptibility to common diseases/environmental conditions) and nutrition of both young and mature animals must be ensured for good health. The environment under which the animals are kept also needs to be hygienic and free from harmful elements. In terms of disease control and management, the animal healthcare function at production stage can, however, be said to include two sub-components: disease prevention and treatment once the animals get sick. Prevention will include vaccinations (both routine and strategic, when there is an outbreak) and control of both internal parasites (through de-worming) and external parasites. The treatment subcomponent includes detection of the problem, diagnosis and prescription, actual treatment, and aftercare. In a commercial livestock production system, all costs related to animal health are met by the owner and must therefore be minimized for the enterprise to remain profitable. Attention is therefore keenly paid to the preventive services which are known to be more efficient and cheaper than treatment. For Southern Sudan, the value chain study takes note of the following animal healthcare issues at the production stage: (i) Low adoption of preventive services: In-depth interviews and focus group discussions with producers and other key informants in the livestock sector show that only a small proportion of livestock owners across all the states routinely apply preventive animal healthcare services. De-worming which is generally supposed to be done twice per year hardly takes place. The effects of this can be visibly seen in the poor body condition of many livestock in cattle camps. There is also very low application of routine vaccinations against the common diseases CBPP, FMD, HS, and BQ/Anthrax for cattle; PPR and pox for shoats and CCPP for goats. The government policy is that routine vaccinations are the responsibility of farmers and government is only involved in strategic vaccinations once there is an outbreak. In the case of strategic vaccination carried out by the public sector (government/NGOs), information obtained during the study show fairly low coverage rates, many times much lower than the 70% threshold required for effectiveness. Given that some of the diseases which are endemic in many parts of Southern Sudan (such as FMD, CBPP/PPR) can only be effectively dealt with through vaccinations, it is therefore not surprising that farmers continue reporting extremely high mortality rates for both young and mature animals . This is particularly worsened by the 42

husbandry practices of collective herding and stock movements. These are issues that must be dealt with effectively for the livestock sector in Southern Sudan to operate competitively. With regard to the control of external parasites (especially ticks), the study team notes that the degree of adoption of preventive services may be much higher, with most farmers dealing with this through injectable drugs. The control of tsetse fly to prevent trypanosomosis is, however, carried out on a very small scale, forcing farmers in some areas (such as Budi in Eastern Equatoria) to almost completely abandon cattle keeping. At the heart of this low adoption rate of preventive services is low awareness by farmers regarding the importance of application of these services. Discussions with livestock farmers during the study strongly suggest that many do not know that these preventive services (especially vaccinations) are the only way of dealing with some of the major diseases decimating their herds/flocks such as CBPP/CCPP and PPR . The second issue is affordability and accessibility of the services. (ii)Self delivery of animal healthcare services by farmers: For many reasons, farmers in many parts of Southern Sudan rely on own knowledge to diagnose and treat their animals. A recent study in Eastern Equatoria shows that over 90% of livestock farmers in the State do self diagnosis and treatment. Only 2% use government animal health facilities while 3% get their services from community animal health workers (Farm Africa, 2010). This is the general pattern across the five states visited during the study and, perhaps, also in the whole of Southern Sudan. While it is undisputed that many livestock farmers have many years experience in livestock keeping and significant traditional knowledge on animal healthcare exists among communities, the study established that there are many cases where farmers misdiagnose a sickness or are not sure what it is and provide a wrong treatment or, quite often, the wrong dosage. (iii)Accessibility of services: As will be discussed in Section 3.7, although there have been significant efforts by the government and development agencies to increase the accessibility of animal health services, accessibility and quality of services is still a major challenge in Southern Sudan. With only 51 qualified veterinarians in the country (30 in Government and 21 in the NGO sector) against a population of 11.73 million cattle and 24 million shoats, there is still a long, long way to go before the recommended level of 1 veterinarian per 10,000 livestock units can be attained. Although the lower cadres of veterinary service providers are significantly higher, the level of coverage is still quite low. 3.2.2.5 General administration and management The administrative and management function of the livestock business at the production level is an area that is generally taken for granted and ignored. Yet it is here, more than in any other area, where the success of the business will be determined. This role is performed by the owner. In a commercial environment, the management function can be divided into two broad components strategic and operational. The strategic part would include such aspects as the vision and orientation of the business, setting of performance targets/plans, and monitoring to ensure adherence. The operational part would include resource deployment and management, cost control, and, sales and marketing. An analysis of the management of the livestock production function in Southern Sudan brings out the following main issues:

43

(i) General lack of a business mind-set: This is not an issue unique to producers in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan only but is a general characteristic of most smallholder producers (in crop and livestock farming) in many parts of Africa and other developing countries. A business mind-set in any endeavour means a constant awareness and drive towards making positive returns a constant awareness that proceeds from the enterprise must exceed inputs. In general terms, it means being able to value and track all inputs and also being able to value and track all proceeds from the enterprise. In an environment where most inputs and outputs are not monetized such as in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan (just as in many other subsistence type enterprises), it becomes difficult for people, even those who would otherwise be business savvy, to think and operate the enterprise in a business-like manner. This is the case of producers in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan. Although some have no business experience and orientation at all, there are some who are successful business people in other fields but generally all are managing their livestock ventures without a good idea of the actual costs they are incurring and whether they are making a positive return or not. As will be discussed in Chapter 5, for most producers proceeds from livestock sales are not even sufficient to meet the cost of healthcare for their herds alone. A business mind-set for producers will be the starting point in turning around the livestock sector from its subsistence, social orientation to a path of commercialization and improved competitiveness. (ii)Poor skills in animal husbandry: Most of the animal husbandry practices adopted by farmers have been acquired traditionally, passed from generation to generation. Whereas it is obvious that most of these have a good cultural reasoning behind them, there are many that are just poor animal husbandry practices and must be abandoned all together (such as the grazing hours) while others will need to be adjusted (such as collective herding). There are however many more areas where good animal production skills must be learned. In the study teams assessment, this is an area that has so far not been given due attention by the government and development agencies. Most efforts have so far been directed at animal healthcare issues. (iii)Low skills in business management: Besides the technical skills required for adoption of good animal husbandry practices, producers will also need to build their skills in managing the operation as a profitable venture. This includes basic skills in keeping track of inputs and outputs, effective planning for resource deployment (including finances) and setting realistic but ambitious targets for their businesses. (iv)Delegation of management functions to herders: Observations made during the value chain study showed that there is a high degree of delegation of management function from owners to herders, especially during dry periods when the animals are far from homesteads. While some level of delegation is desirable, it will be important that herders are also included in any initiatives geared at building the production and management skills of producers.

3.3 Product assembly and bulking

In a well developed livestock marketing system, the initial assembly of livestock takes place at primary markets where the majority of sellers are producers. While some livestock may be bought in these markets by farmers (for restocking) and other end users such as local butchers, the bulk of livestock is bought by traders or bulking agents of large-volume buyers who supply markets outside the hinterland of the primary market in question. In essence, the location of the market should be at such a distance that would allow producers to be able to reach the market within a few hours, sell the animal and be back within the same day. In the context of an extensive grazing system, this usually 44

means that the animals that can be offered for sale by farmers within such a short distance on a daily basis is generally small and therefore to allow for economies of scale, livestock assembly in these markets are done with some several days interval (usually a week). When markets are located much further, their inaccessibility becomes a disincentive for farmers participation and, where the demand is significant, this provides a business opportunity for local traders to emerge whose primary role is to buy livestock from farmer-to-farmer and assemble it in the primary market for sale. The case of Southern Sudan is somewhat mixed - in some aspects depicting a scenario of a poorly developed livestock marketing system, but yet in other areas, showing some significant levels of relative sophistication. Information generated during the study shows that the country is estimated to have a total of about 167 livestock markets (see Table 3.1). Although the distinction between primary, secondary and terminal markets is quite thin, it is clear that the bulk of them (70%) are primary, supplied mainly by producers. Given the nationwide spread of livestock production and the general expanse of Southern Sudan, these are quite few, roughly implying average service area of almost 5,000 sq km for each primary market. Distances to these markets are vast with some Counties having no livestock market at all (see Appendix 2) where farmers have to trek for 2 3 days to get to the markets. In such cases, the distance alone is a significant disincentive for commercial off-take. The development of a market infrastructure must therefore constitute an integral component of any initiative geared at commercialization and improved competitiveness of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan. Discussions with key informants suggest that, to be considered adequately served, each Payam in livestock production areas would need to have at least one livestock market. Given the number of Payams in Southern Sudan (see Appendix 2), this would imply a total of no less than 500 primary markets more than four times the number in place today. Table 3.1 Estimated Number of Livestock Markets in Southern Sudan by State Primary Secondary Terminal Total markets markets markets
8 2 8 21 12 7 20 14 6 19 117 4 1 3 2 3 2 6 5 1 8 35 8 1 1 1 1 1 2 15 20 4 11 22 16 11 27 20 7 29 167

State

Central Equatoria Eastern Equatoria Jonglei Unity Upper Nile Lakes Warrap Northern Behr el Ghazal Western Behr el Ghazal Western Equatoria Total

Source: Various, MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis Study, Aug/Sept, 2010.

Most of the established livestock markets in Southern Sudan operate every day of the week, including weekends. In some respects, this can be said to be a point of advancement since producers (as well as buyers) who miss on one day can wait for the following days market. In some cases, however, this works out to be a disadvantage in terms of bulking. Within the framework of the broad market infrastructure outlined above, the following are the main sub-components of the product assembly and bulking function: Sorting and grading; transportation; assembly and bulking; and holding/storage. (i) Selection, sorting and grading In Southern Sudan, selection, sorting and grading is not a well developed function in the livestock sector. The first level of grading takes place at the farm (cattle camp/kraal) level through the decision of the farmer on which animal to sell. In a situation where the market requires a certain 45

quality specifications, it is the responsibility of the farmer to select animals that meet these requirements to optimize the chances of selling the animal as quickly and at the best price as possible. From a long-term perspective, farmers would also be interested in establishing a good reputation in the market as suppliers of quality stock to improve their chances of being able to sell whatever volumes they produce in the future. Partly because of lack of a market orientation but also because quality standards in the livestock market in Southern Sudan are not well developed, farmers are currently selecting the worst quality stock for sale the chronically sick/almost dying, the old, the infertile. This is generally what is offered for sale in the market. Most of these are bought for the meat market those in the worse conditions, for the local meat market; the healthier ones, for the urban meat market where competition on the basis of quality is higher. Some segments of the market, however, require higher quality stock. These include the herd build-up/restocking market by rural households and the export market/red meat market that require significant travel time. The herd build-up market requires young, healthy and fertile heifers; while the export market requires large sized bulls of excellent health and body condition able to withstand 2-3 day trucking period without feed or water. These two markets can hardly find the quality specifications in the established livestock markets and buyers are forced to go to the producers, cattle camp-to-cattle camp, looking for the quality they require and persuading farmers to sell. In essence, traders wishing to buy a significant volume (say, a truckload of 14-16 or 30 33) have to spend several days, many times up to a week, before they can assemble the required volume. The first level grading in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan can therefore be said to be an area of inefficiency in the livestock value chain. From the current market segmentation, it appears that stock can already start getting offered in three grades low quality stock for local red-meat market; high quality breeding stock for restocking; and high quality stock for the export/large urban markets. With market development, these quality specifications could be further refined to target specific requirements of the market better. This is an area that requires attention. Unless a system for ensuring high quality stock is offered in the market is developed, the livestock sector will remain uncompetitive. Required interventions in this area include: general awareness among farmers (as first-level graders) of their role in offering quality stock in the market and how this affects the overall competitiveness of the chain; development of quality standards; and establishment of quality assurance mechanisms. Within the markets, secondary grading of stock is done though buyer selection and pricing. For butchers buying live animals for slaughter, some grading functions are conducted by veterinary officers who increasingly do ante-mortem inspections in the market to ensure that animals taken for slaughter meet basic health standards. At this point, sick animals (and in many cases healthy female stock) are rejected for slaughter. (ii) Transportation: Product assembly level transportation of livestock in Southern Sudan (as in many other parts of the developing world) involves trekking. Where farmers are responsible for taking the stock to the market as discussed in (i) above, the transportation function is undertaken by the farmer using unpaid family labour. In cases where traders are involved in purchase of live animals at the cattle camps, traders are the ones responsible for trekking the animals. The cost of trekking varies with distance, ranging from SDG 10 20 per head of cattle for - 1 day distances. In essence, traders 46

are not able to penetrate deep into the production zones and farmers located far have to trek their animals to the market themselves. From an assessment of the markets visited during the study, involvement of traders in purchase of livestock from cattle camps accounts for, perhaps not more than 10% of traded livestock. Farmers are therefore the main category of players involved in the assembly level transportation function. No monetary payment takes place and therefore farmers (and other players in the chain) may not fully appreciate the costs involved in this function and the value it adds, even when it takes 2 3 days to get to the market (and a similar time back home). This is another point of in-efficiency in the value chain that will largely be addressed through development of livestock markets closer to farmers. (iii)Holding/storage Livestock markets require facilities for holding live animals from the time they arrive at the market to the point they are bought and then, for those bought for other markets, until they are transported to the other markets. This function will involve some level of protection from wondering off (fencing/security), feeding and watering in the event that animals take long in the market, and provisions for healthcare. In most parts of Southern Sudan, livestock markets convene in the evenings at around 5.00 pm. This is structured this way to allow for farmers to get to trek their animals to the markets and to allow for grazing during the day (usually far from the market). This also allows buyers travelling from afar to make it to the markets. It may also be structured this way to allow butchers, who comprise an influential player in these markets, to buy stock as close to the slaughter time as possible (ante mortem inspections are conducted at this hour and slaughter done at dawn). The markets are also held on a daily basis. Estimates made during the study showed that from a combination of factors, the proportion of livestock sold each day varies from 30 60%. The quality of stock presented, the little time allowed for trading (generally 1 2 hours before it gets dark) and the laxity of buyers/sellers to quickly strike a deal due to the possibility of further interactions the following day are some of the factors attributed to the low market clearance levels. Anecdotal information generated during the study suggests that in some markets, it takes as many as 2 3 days for sellers to dispose of their animals. The system of market transactions necessitates the need for holding grounds. In almost all livestock markets in Southern Sudan, the trading ground/market is merely an open ground without any fencing. In some markets, however, kraals have come up for overnight stay of animals awaiting trading or transportation. In most cases, these are owned privately and a charge of SDG 2-5 is levied per head of cattle and SDG 1 2 for shoats. This cost covers overnight stay in the kraal (or yard in cases of tethering such as in Unity State) and herding. Some kraal owners charge this fee per day, while others charge it for the period the animal will stay until it is bought. Most livestock markets have only 1 2 kraals and therefore the number of kraal owners in Southern Sudan can be said to be no more than 500. Though relatively few, these offer important services and could be regarded as likely leverage points, particularly in the introduction of a livestock finishing business. This is already a commercialized segment of the chain and costs of animal feeding become significantly high during dry seasons when pastures near the markets dwindle. During these periods, supply of hey would minimize the need for animals to be taken far for feeding and open the way for longer hours of trading. Holding grounds are an important area of intervention. (iv)Assembly and bulking 47

The eventual product assembly and bulking takes place at the primary and secondary markets. The key players in these markets (besides the sellers) are traders and market officials from the local government. Primary and secondary markets have also a presence of end-buyers butchers, restaurant owners/operators (especially buying shoats) and households. Markets are generally organized in a way that there is a cattle section and a small ruminants/shoats section, each with different administration. Traders Information gathered during the study shows that most primary and secondary markets have at least 20 30 regular livestock traders. Although some of these traders have a presence in other markets, the daily nature of markets means that this overlap is quite minimal. One can therefore roughly estimate that Southern Sudan may have about 4,000 5,000 livestock traders. At the primary and secondary market levels, the key function played by traders is assembly and bulking of animals to economic volumes that can allow efficient transportation to end markets. From this perspective, these traders could be referred to as product assembly and bulking agents. An analysis of the volumes they handle individually suggests that most of them are small (businesswise), and with a coordinated value chain development of the sector, some of these could become commission agents of bulk buyers. The product assembly and bulking function involves selection/grading of stock to be purchased, payment of sellers, assembly of purchased stock and organization of transport services to a convenient point (usually secondary markets) which are easy to reach by bulk buyers. Most markets have a traders association, some formal, others fairly informal. Besides providing a unified front in dealing with authorities, these associations also serve an important function of transaction guarantees. At a fee, officials of the associations take details of both seller and buyer at each transaction to ensure traceability in the event of a problem such as discovery later on that the animal in question was stolen. These associations also allow for joint action in transportation, especially in the case of hire of trucks where pooling of resources is required or in the case of trekking where security is an important consideration. This is an important development in most markets and presents an important opportunity to be built upon in organization of the livestock value chain for a coordinated development. Market administration Each market has officials from the local government in charge of the trading floor. In some states such as Upper Nile and Unity among the states covered in the study, trading in most livestock markets was organized through an auction system where stock is publicly sold to the highest bidder, officiated by a local government representative. This has however generally collapsed in most of the areas visited and trading is done through private negotiations between buyer and seller. Secondary information suggests that the auction system is still functional in some states west of the Nile. In the markets visited during the study, each market has at least two officials from the local administration (a head and a deputy) whose main responsibility is to convene the market (start of trading), take record of all transactions, and collect local government taxes levied on each transaction, usually ranging from SDG 10 20 per cattle and SDG 2 5 per shoat. Although in essence, the fees levied per transaction are supposed to be service charges, there are hardly any services provided by the local government at the markets. This is generally a one way revenue collection avenue for local authorities. Given the public-good nature of holding grounds/markets, this is an area where significant improvements could be made in service delivery by local authorities in return for the fees collected. 48

An important observation here is also the likely role that local authorities could play in compilation and dissemination of market information. This is another area that could be strengthened. From our analysis, though, the quality of information generated from official records kept at the markets is currently fairly low, largely as a result of understatements to conceal the actual revenue collected each day. Overall the study takes note of the following issues at the product assembly and bulking function: Quality: The current organization and practices in this function generally allows for supply and trading of low quality animals. This is an area that must be dealt with if the competitiveness of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan is to be ensured. Efficiency: There are many areas which are currently allowing for inefficiencies. Markets are far and most producers have to trek for long hours sometimes stretching into days before they can reach markets. Organization of the markets is such that the markets do not clear within a day and both sellers and buyers have to take several days before all transactions are concluded. Emerging opportunities: Market points present important system nodes from where leveraged interventions could have a wide impact in the value chain. The presence of a few commercial players (kraal owners) providing rudimentary holding ground functions presents an important emerging trend that could be exploited to offer improved holding ground services. It could also be an important point for introduction of animal finishing (feeding/fattening) business. The presence of a large number of traders already showing a significant level of joint action could be used as an entry point for a coordinated value chain organization of the sector.

3.4 Transportation and wholesale

The transportation function from source markets to terminal markets is closely intertwined with bulk/wholesale trading of live animals. Transport organization and wholesaling is generally handled by bulk traders. These are organized according to the main supply routes. As discussed in Section 2.5.5 the main livestock supply routes in Southern Sudan are: the Uganda-Nimule-Juba and the Kapoeta-Torit-Juba routes for the Juba market; and the Bentiu/Rubkona El Obeid supply route for live animal exports to the North of Sudan. The Nasir Renk Rabak/Kotsi supply route to the North is also important, and so is the Terekeka Juba route. We explore into some detail the supply of livestock into the Juba market with respect to transportation and wholesaling functions of the chain. Triangulation of information obtained from various sources (source and terminal markets, slaughter houses and butcheries) during the study confirm that over 100 head of cattle and 150 shoats are slaughtered in Juba town every day in total around 40,000 cattle and 55,000 shoats annually. Chart 3.2 shows that the Uganda route accounts for 42% of cattle and 37% of shoats supplied into the market. Transportation in this route is by truck, on average carrying 14 16 cattle or 150 170 shoats. At times, a few shoats are included in the cattle trucks. The other important trucking route is the KapoetaTorit-Juba route accounting for 20% of cattle and 36% of shoats supplied in the Juba market. Trucks of similar carrying capacity as those used in the Uganda-Nimule-Juba route are used in this route. Livestock trucks from these routes are offloaded at two wholesale markets in Juba Juba Rajaf and Ngumbo Nyongki wholesale markets - both located in Juba County, Rajaf payam, and east of Juba town immediately after crossing the Nile Bridge. Livestock from various parts of Central Equatoria (Terekeka being the main) are generally trekked in small volumes directly to the 6 retail markets or slaughter areas located in various parts of Juba. Livestock from Jonglei (mainly Pibor) into Juba are also currently trekked. Supply from this route is 49

currently fairly irregular but when livestock is supplied, it is in volumes of about 100 150 cattle at a go with each batch brought in by 20 30 traders. In the past, livestock from Pibor used to be trekked into Kapoeta secondary livestock market in Eastern Equatoria and then trucked into Juba but insecurity related to cattle rustling has now made this impossible. Chart 3.2: Livestock supply into the Juba Terminal Market by source regions

Source:

MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis Study, Aug/Sept, 2010.

Estimates show that the Uganda route has about 50 - 70 bulk traders who work in groups with each cattle truck (of 14 17 heads) normally hired by between 2 4 traders and shoats trucks (150 170 shoats) by up to 10 traders. Most of these traders are Ugandans who source the livestock from secondary livestock markets in Soroti, Ankole Mbale and other parts of Uganda. Their normal turnaround time is 1-2 weeks with each trip taking 2 3 days. The Kapoeta route is estimated to have about 30 regular traders who operate in a similar manner as the Ugandan traders in pooling resources to hire trucks for transportation. In essence, although these traders are referred to as bulk traders, almost all are just small business people with significant working capital limitations that do not permit them to purchase and transport a full truckload of livestock individually. The trucks hired for transportation of livestock are general goods trucks (7-10 tonnes) which ,for the case of shoats, are temporarily locally modified to take several layers of the animals . Where trade flows permit (such as Juba Kapoeta route), the trucks are loaded with other goods on their way back. The Uganda route is however tricky since goods are generally more expensive in Juba than in Uganda and therefore there is hardly any goods to take back to Uganda. Payment for truck is generally negotiated and paid for per animal. Wholesaling at the Juba market can at best be described as chaotic, at times almost violent. As will be discussed in Section 3.2.4, the two wholesale markets in Juba are dominated by retail traders/brokers estimated to number over 500 who are organized along tribal lines and operate in a cartel-like manner. For instance, key informants say that Ngumbo Nyongki market has 170 Dinka Aliap brokers/traders; 150 Dinka Bor traders/broker, and 100 Muntari traders/brokers. Once a livestock truck arrives at the market, it is completely surrounded and each retail trader/broker tries to take possession of the number of livestock they can get hold of to negotiate a price with the bulk seller. For a cattle truck with only 14 17 heads, each bull sometimes ends up with more than one buyer who jointly negotiate a price with the bulk seller, jointly pay for it and also jointly sell it to share proceeds. Due to the large number of retail traders, wholesaling is almost instantaneous and within a few hours of arrival, the bulk suppliers are able to sell all their animals and get their money. 50

Their power to negotiate in face of the large cartel-like numbers of retail traders/brokers is however fairly limited. By their sheer numbers and organization, the retail traders do not allow direct contact between the bulk suppliers and final buyers butchery owners, hotels and restaurants operators. In summary, the transportation and wholesaling function by bulk traders involves the following subcomponents: Purchase of livestock from source markets, usually primary and secondary markets. This also involves some selection and grading to ensure quality meets market requirements; Identification and hire of suitable transportation means; Handling of clearance and forwarding issues at various livestock movement control points including border points (for Nimule route) and numerous roadblocks; Loading and off-loading at source and terminal markets, respectively; Any healthcare needs that may arise along the way; Security along the transportation route; and Wholesaling. The actual transporters/truck owners (estimated to number 30 on the Uganda route and about 10 on the Kapoeta route) are in turn responsible for: Provision of the truck for transportation including any temporary modification to carry as many livestock as possible since payment is per animal; Fuel for the truck; Salary and upkeep of truck driver and loader/assistant; Vehicle maintenance, including wear and tear; and Any insurance, clearance and charges related to the vehicle. The study team identifies the following key issues relating to transport and wholesaling function: (i) Multiple clearance checkpoints and roadblocks: Each of the supply routes has many roadblocks and check points. For instance, the Nimule-Juba route has at least 6 roadblocks, besides the border point, while the longer Bentiu El Obeid route has up to 15. Each checkpoint requires time to clear (sometimes up to 30 minutes) and requires payment. All these combine to introduce inefficiencies in the transportation function. (ii)Insecurity: Insecurity related to cattle rustling has completely cut out some livestock production zones by making livestock transportation and even bulking in markets completely impossible. The Bor-Juba route; Pibor-Kapoeta-Juba route and even some trekking routes within Central Equatoria have all been affected and so are many others across the country. (iii)Poor road infrastructure puts a heavy burden on transportation of livestock and is a key point of inefficiency in the livestock value chain. (iv)Organization of source and terminal markets: Poor development and organization of livestock source markets force bulk traders to have slow turn-around, each time taking 2-3 days to assemble the number of livestock they need for the terminal market. At the terminal market, bulk traders complain about the cartel-like behaviour of brokers/retail traders who make it impossible for the bulk traders to have a direct linkage with end buyers. Lack of loading ramps is also a major hindrance to quick turn around. (v)Accessibility of working capital finance for traders: Many traders operate with little capital that limits the volumes they can handle at any one time. Access to appropriately designed financial services would greatly ease this handicap. 51

(vi)Unavailability of suitable livestock transportation means and facilities on transit: Some supply routes require a 2-4 day transportation period for livestock. This is the case with the Uganda Nimule-Juba route as well as the Bentiu-Rubkona-El Obeid routes. The transportation trucks are not specialized for ferrying livestock and have no facilities for at least water. The animals are therefore transported the entire stretch with no feed and water. In El Obeid (North Sudan) there are facilities on the holding-ground that allow quick recuperation of the animals, including water, feed and healthcare. In Juba and other parts of the South, there are none. (vii) Livestock movement and the threat of disease transmission: While the situation is improving (such as establishment of veterinary inspection at Nimule border point) and there are ongoing efforts to establish livestock movement inspection points (especially at border points with the North), this is an area that requires action. The study team however notes that mechanisms should be put in place to make sure that these checkpoints and the issuance of livestock movement permits does not merely become an instrument for revenue collection and inefficiency in the transportation function.

3.5 Live animal retail

In most states in Southern Sudan, livestock purchase by end-users occurs in the primary, secondary and terminal markets without any mid-point that can be regarded as wholesale. This is with the exception of the Juba terminal market. Livestock retail in Juba is conducted through nine market outlets spread across various parts of the town in proximity to slaughter slabs/areas (see Table 3.2). As indicated in section 3.4 above, the main landing points are two - Juba Rajaf and Ngumbo Nyongki. Together, these two markets comprise the entry point for two thirds of the livestock supplied into Juba. Livestock supplied into these two markets by bulk traders from source markets is quickly bought by a large number of traders who then retail it overtime to other traders, butchers and restaurants within the same market or in the other livestock retail outlets within Juba town. The live animal retail function in Juba involves the following three main sub-components: immediate purchase from bulk suppliers; reserve management; and distribution. (i) Purchase from bulk traders: The main wholesale markets in Juba (and indeed all the retail markets as well) operate early in the morning (7.00 9.00 am) and in the evening (4.00 6.00 pm). The bulk suppliers bringing livestock from source markets many times arrive in Juba outside this strict band of time. Their interest is to offload and sell the livestock as quickly as possible. Through coordination, the livestock retail traders operating in these two markets are always aware of the time the livestock trucks arrive and are at hand to offload and purchase the livestock. The process normally involves offloading the animals, taking them into the holding ground (kraal) for registration (for customs/taxation purposes) and payment of required fees. For cattle, a fee of SDG 25 is charged (SDG 20 for customs; SDG 5 for the kraal) while for shoats the charge is SDG 7 (5 for customs; 2 for the kraal). Although this cost is supposed to be met by the bulk trader, the retail traders are normally the ones who pay this on behalf of the bulk trader and deduct it from the sale price. The immediate purchase of livestock from bulk buyers and offering them in the market at the convenient time for buyers is therefore an important role played by retail traders. (ii)Herding/storage and reserve management: Trucked livestock normally arrive in Juba extremely tired, hungry and thirsty after 2 - 4 day travel without feed or water. The first thing retail traders do once they have taken possession of the livestock is to make sure they 52

recuperate allow them to rest, then take them for grazing, watering and, if need be, animal healthcare. In addition to the immediate need for recuperation, retail traders also take care of the animals until they are sold to the end buyers (mainly butchers and restaurants), which sometimes takes up to six days. Over this time, the cattle are taken out each day for herding and are kept overnight in kraals at a fee of SDG 5 per head of cattle and SDG 2 per shoat per day. This service (overnight stay and herding) is provided by kraal owners but paid for by the retail traders. Retailers then present the livestock for sale in the market every day (early morning and late afternoon) to allow end buyers to purchase generally just what they require for the day. In this way, retail traders can be said to be the ones who manage the livestock reserves, evening out the fluctuating/periodic supply by bulk traders and the constant daily purchase needs of end buyers. Rough estimates indicate that Juba market has a pool (reserve) of about 500 cattle and 600 shoats at any one time which are offered for sale in the different retail markets every day (see Table 3.2). The daily slaughter requirement for Juba is around 100 120 cattle and 150 shoats (see Table 3.3 below) and therefore retailers can be said to be maintaining a reserve equivalent to about 4 days requirements. Table 3.2 Livestock retail markets in Juba with indicative number of traders and livestock volumes **
Market point Type of market (wholesale; retail) Number of retail traders Number of livestock supplied per market day (usually daily) Cattle Shoats Supply Sold Supply Sold 80 20 100 40 70 20 80 40 65 25 150 75 65 30 170 100 60 30 0 0 30 10 0 0 45 20 100 60 30 10 0 0 30 10 0 0 475 175 600 285

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
Note:

Juba Rajaf Gumbo Nyongki Customs Salkana Munuki Gundele (Kuber) Jebel Kujul Hai Mauna Gabard Total

Wholesale (75% from Uganda) Wholesale (75% from Uganda) Retail (60% from Gumbo/Rajaf) Retail (90% from Rajaf/Gumbo) Retail (80% Local; 20% Uganda) Retail (100% local animals) Retail (75% from Rajaf/Gumbo) Retail (50% from Rajaf/Gumbo) Retail (50% from Rajaf/Gumbo)

250 285 25 40 25 15 20 15 15 690

This Table should be interpreted with extreme caution as it presents a one day snapshot, each market at a time with significant possibilities of overlaps and double counting. It is merely presented here to give a rough idea. Source: MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis Study, Aug/Sept, 2010.

Partly because of the large number of retail traders in Juba estimated to be about 700, and the relatively low supply of livestock into the market which forces a scramble for those supplied, there is a constant trading of livestock among the retail traders themselves. Those who get livestock from the bulk suppliers normally pay, on average, SDG 1,500 for cattle from Uganda and SDG 1,000 1,200 for cattle from Southern Sudan. Shoats from Uganda generally go for SDG 120 while local ones are bought at SDG 100. These are considered favourable prices and a trader who did not get a chance to buy from the bulk traders can offer to buy from other retailers. Each time there is an exchange, a minimum of SDG 100 is added per head of cattle and SDG 20 per shoat. This is how retail prices for Ugandan sourced cattle are on average ranging from SDG 2,200 2,800 and shoats from SDG 180 220. Sometimes the livestock will change hands among retail traders up to 10 times, each time a margin added by the seller. Although retail traders are playing an important role, this speculative-like trading is an area that seems to be a major point of inefficiency in the livestock value chain. (iii) Distribution: As mentioned above, about two thirds of livestock supplied into Juba market lands at the main Juba Rajaf and Gumbo Nyongki wholesale markets. From here, it is retailers who take them to the seven retail markets. This involves trekking at a fee of SDG 10 per head 53

of cattle and SDG 2 for shoats. There is also a County administration roadblock just after the Nile River bridge into Juba where a charge of SDG 15 per head of cattle is charged.

3.6 Slaughtering and meat retail - processing

Slaughtering of animals and meat retail functions in all parts of Southern Sudan are generally undertaken as one process. The livestock normally belongs to the meat retailers (butchers/restaurants) who take them for slaughter at a fee and transport the carcasses for retail in their various outlets. In some countries, slaughter and meat retail are distinct functions with retailers (butchers) normally purchasing carcasses supplied from slaughter houses. Due to the close inter-linkage of these two functions in the case of Southern Sudan, the value chain study treated these two functions as one segment of the value chain processing. The meat processing function involves the following five closely interlinked sub-components: purchase of stock; transportation of live animals to slaughter areas and holding until slaughter; slaughtering; meat transportation; and meat retail. 3.6.1 Purchasing of live animals for slaughter Butchers normally purchase their stock from nearby markets although there are also some who travel to source markets to take advantage of price differences in terminal and source markets. At the purchase point the first major consideration of butchers is an assessment of the likely carcass weight of the animal once slaughtered in relation to the price the live animal is offered for. This is determined by the size of the animal and its general body condition. At the back of their mind, they know the prevailing meat price and they are able to quickly assess whether they will be able to make a positive margin given the offer price and likely carcass weight upon slaughter. Focus group discussions with butchers during the study show that this is the main consideration and other issues of quality generally take a back stage. Butchers acknowledge that the quality of animals offered for sale from local sources is generally low (old and sometimes in poor health) but also note that the income levels of their customers are fairly low, such that they cannot afford highly priced meat. The purchasing sub-component is considered as a most critical part in determining the ultimate profitability of the slaughtering and meat retail part of the value chain. It is therefore carried out by the owner himself almost all of them, men. No weighing machines are used, just visual assessment that requires significant experience. It also requires strong negotiation skills. As will be discussed in Chapter 5, the stock input cost is the highest cost component for butchers (accounting for over 70% of the meat price) and therefore butchers take seriously any option that can bring down the per unit cost of this component. At times, this includes travelling to source markets to purchase their stock there. Given the high transportation costs, however, the only major way of lowering per unit cost is through negotiation. This is easiest for animals that are not of high quality (old, sick) or where the buyer is in a hurry to sell. The study team also noticed that butchers who have higher liquidity (in terms of working capital) and are able to buy big bulls sold at over SDG 2,400 in Juba have an advantage because the competition is not very high for these big bulls and therefore they end up paying less per unit (of meat). 3.6.2 Transportation and holding of live animals for slaughter Due to the daily operation of livestock markets from where butchers get their stock, most butchers buy animals for slaughter on a daily basis, in the evening to minimize the cost of holding. Depending on the point of purchase, this may involve some trekking to the slaughter area where the animal will stay overnight for slaughter at dawn. A fee of SDG 5 is charged by kraal owners for overnight stay of cattle and SDG 2 for shoats. In some cases, however, a butcher may buy more animals than he 54

will need to slaughter the following day. Under such circumstances, the daily kraal fee also takes care of herding costs. As indicated in Section 3.3, all livestock markets in Southern Sudan have at least one player involved in provision of livestock holding services a kraal owner. In most cases all kraals are privately owned and the key service they provide is overnight stay (protection/security) and herding until the owners are ready to take their animals away for slaughter or to other markets. In the case of the slaughter function, the holding sub-component provides an excellent opportunity for growth of an animal feedlot (fattening) business. Kraal owners are already facing serious challenges of availability of pastures near market areas during dry seasons and therefore development of an animal feeds supply business would be a welcome opportunity. 3.6.3 Slaughtering The slaughter function involves three closely related but distinct activities: provision of an appropriate facility for the slaughter process; quality assurance; and actual slaughtering, flaying and evisceration. (i) Slaughter facilities All commercial centres and towns in Southern Sudan have at least one designated areas for slaughtering of animals. There are no official statistics on the number of slaughter areas in Southern Sudan but rough estimates from key informants place this figure at 500 1,000. Most of the slaughter areas are owned by the local authorities who charge a fee for use. The fee ranges from SDG 5 10 per head of cattle and SDG 2 3 for shoats. Taking the largest red meat market in Southern Sudan, Juba, as a case in point, Table 3.3 shows the number and status of slaughter areas in the town. Juba is served by at least 8 known slaughter areas spread in various parts of the town. Out of the eight, only one has a structure and the rest are merely open grounds. Available information also shows that only 6 of them are registered by the government department responsible for Veterinary Public Health (the Department of Veterinary Services) and it is only in these premises where meat inspection takes place. Although most cattle consumed in Juba are slaughtered in the 8 known slaughter areas, information from key informants indicates that there are many shoats that are slaughtered at restaurant premises or homes. The case of Juba closely represents the general pattern in the whole of Southern Sudan. Most slaughter areas are known and designated for that purpose by the relevant authorities but, for years, have operated without any proper facilities. More than 95% have no structure at all.
Table 3.3 Status of livestock slaughter areas in Juba and estimated volumes handled
Slaughter area/slab Type structure of Meat Inspection? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Registered? Number of animals slaughtered per day Cattle Shoats 35 50 20 0 25 25 20 35 4 15 11 0 5 0 2 0 122 125

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Juba Abattoir Salkana Munuki Army Suksita Customs Jebel Kujul Gumbo Gundele Gundele Kubri Kabo Total
Note:

Slab Open ground Open ground Open ground Open ground Open ground Open ground Open ground

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No

This Table should be interpreted with extreme caution as it presents a one day snapshot. Information was provided by key

55

Source:

informants and not from physical count and therefore there are possibilities of overlaps. It is merely presented here to give a rough idea. MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis Study, Aug/Sept, 2010

Key issues related to slaughter facilities include: Site location in relation to residential and commercial settlements; Availability of basic structural facilities (and utilities such as water) to ensure maintenance of acceptable hygienic and food safety standards; Ownership and management of facilities. All slaughter areas in Southern Sudan are publicly owned and managed. Experience from other countries shows that this is a function area that can be played by the private sector; Ethnic group-based use and control of slaughter facilities. Information gathered during the study shows that part of the multiplicity of slaughter areas in Juba (and a few other towns) is because some ethnic groups do not want to share the facilities with other groups. This is partly responsible for the disuse of the well constructed slaughter facility in Narus town, Kapoeta East, Eastern Equatoria. A quick reflection on the number of animals slaughtered in Juba of about 100 cattle and 150 shoats daily shows that this is a volume that can be handled by only one slaughter facility. This would allow for a good focus in provision of required facilities, utilities and services, including quality assurance.

(ii) Quality assurance The quality assurance sub-component in the slaughtering function is provided by local government officials from the Veterinary Department usually, Meat Inspectors. This therefore only relates to veterinary public health issues to ensure food safety and not other aspects of quality. Inspection is done at two stages before slaughter (ante mortem) and after slaughter (post-mortem). The ante-mortem inspection is conducted in the evening for animals to be slaughtered the following day. Because most markets where butchers buy their stock for slaughter convene everyday in the evenings, a practice in most parts of Southern Sudan has emerged where this inspection takes place at the market. This way, butchers are assured that the stock they have purchased meets the basic slaughter requirements. No fee is charged at this stage. Meat inspection is done after the animal has been slaughtered and, skin and internal organs removed, following which the meat is stamped and a meat inspection certificate issued. A fee of SDG 5 is charged per head cattle and SDG 2- 3 for shoats. The following are key issues at the quality assurance stage: Availability of meat inspection services: For Juba, the authorities responsible acknowledge that they do not offer services in 2 of the 8 known slaughter areas. As will be discussed in Section 3.7 (see Table 3.6), the number of qualified personnel is generally inadequate for the number of areas where slaughter takes place. Quality of inspection services: There is a general acknowledgement that the knowledge and skill level of meat inspectors is generally low. In most areas of Southern Sudan, meat inspection is carried out by personnel at the Community Animal Health worker level personnel trained at most for 2 weeks. This is an area that must be addressed. 56

Enforcement of quality standards: In general, poor enforcement of quality standards is an issue reported in all parts of Southern Sudan. In cases where there are issues of quality identified (especially those involving total condemnation of carcasses), the meat inspectors have very little power to enforce disposal. In some areas, threats on the meat inspectors make the inspectors unable to enforce the condemnation while in others, inducements make them overlook the condition of the carcass and the meat finds its way to butcheries for retail to unsuspecting customers.

On the whole, the study notes that the competitiveness of the livestock sector is strongly hinged on this point of the chain which, in our view, is taken quite lightly. Production and sale of high quality animals will not take place unless high quality standards are set and enforced. (iii)Slaughter The actual slaughter process involves three main activities actual killing of the animal (in many parts of Southern Sudan, done through cutting the throat); removing of the skin (flaying) and removal and cleaning of internal organs (evisceration). In busy slaughter areas (such as Juba abattoir in Salkana), each of these activities is carried out by different people. In many places, it is however carried out by the same set of people usually at least 3 per head of cattle. The number of players involved in slaughtering can therefore be roughly estimated at 2,000 3,000. Fees charged range from SDG 15 25 for cattle and SDG 5 for shoats. In some cases, butchers pay for the slaughter service by letting the service providers to keep the internal organs, usually along with the head, feet and hide/skin. Key issues at the slaughter stage include: High wastage of hides and skins through improper flaying. Part of this relates to the low demand for this commodity which makes it not necessary to be careful. Part of the reason behind the high wastage however also relates to working conditions, facilities and skills and knowledge of the people involved. This is an area that will need to be addressed if the high levels of wastage are to be reduced. Health certification of personnel involved in slaughtering and handling of meat; and General quality and food safety consciousness of slaughtering personnel. Lack of a commercial slaughter facility for the high end market is one major reason for importation of livestock products for the high end market in juba. 3.6.4 Meat transportation Meat transportation from slaughter areas to retail outlets (butcheries) is generally done using general transportation means available. There are no specialized means for transportation of meat in Southern Sudan. In large urban areas, motorized goods rickshaws are used while in others hand or animal-drawn carts are used. The transportation cost varies by distance and this is perhaps one of the reasons for the general tendency for slaughter areas to be located in close proximity to the final meat retail areas. In Juba, meat transportation to most destinations ranges from SDG 15 25 per head of cattle and SDG 5 for shoats. The key issue in meat transportation relates to safeguards for contamination. Most of the transportation means are not enclosed and it is therefore easy for meat to be contaminated through exposure to dust and other elements. The transportation means are also used for other goods (building materials, groceries, anything) and therefore, even with thorough cleaning, some possibilities for contamination exist. The study team notes this as another quality standards area that must be addressed by the relevant authorities. 3.6.5 Meat retail 57

Most meat consumed in Southern Sudan reaches final consumers through butcheries. The only exception is restaurants which buy live animals and do their own slaughter and high-end restaurants (mainly in Juba) which buy imported meat and meat products. Butcheries can therefore be said to be the main point at which the value chain interacts with consumers. For a red meat value chain, butcheries can therefore be considered as the last stage of the livestock value chain. Like the case of most other statistics in Southern Sudan, there is no official estimate of the number of butcheries in the country. Triangulation of information from various sources however suggests that it is highly likely that the country has 2,000 4,000 butcheries. Most markets/urban areas have an association of butchers. Each slaughter area has also information on the number of butcheries it supplies meat to. Butcheries also represent important buyers of livestock from each market and traders have a good idea of the number of butcheries. These are the sources used, coupled with secondary sources from Counties visited during the study. Once meat reaches the butchery, for those with weighing machines, the first activity is to weigh it to ascertain the weight so that they can monitor and assess the efficiency of the cutting activity at the end of the day. The meat is then hanged (put on display) and, as customers come, cut into required weights and packed (usually in poly-bags) for take-home. In some cases, the butchery owners are directly involved in the retail activity, usually handling customer relations and receiving payments while a butchery attendant does the cutting weighing and packaging. In some cases however the butchery owner may be busy in the live animal sourcing/purchasing activity and other issues related to the business (including other side businesses) and will have two attendants. In cases where the butchery owner does not trade the internal organs, head and feet (offals) for slaughter services, these parts are normally sold separately from the meat. Most butcheries will therefore have 1 2 attendants. The estimated number of actors in this category of butchery attendants could therefore be estimated to be anywhere in the region of 2,000 3,000. Meat retail in most parts of parts of Southern Sudan occurs in makeshift butcheries or in the open air (see photo below from an earlier study by SNV). Almost without exception (even in Juba), most have no electricity and water connection. Where trade occurs in the open air or in makeshift structures, the butcheries do not pay for the workspace other than taxes/charges paid to the local authorities. Where there are premises however, some butchers could be the owners while others are rented. This therefore introduces a third category of actors in the meat retail segment of the chain the landlords/owners of premises. As improvements in the structures of butcheries and the facilities required to make them suitable for meat retail are being considered, this is an important category of players that must be involved. Once clear guidelines on the kind of structure that can qualify as a butchery are set and proper enforcement mechanisms put in place, the development of these structures is something that can be done by the private sector or even by the local authorities and leased to butchers.

58

Photo 1: Common meat retail structures in Southern Sudan

Source: Gathuma J. et al, SNV Livestock Marketing Supply Chain Survey of EES, 2008

The organization of the meat retail function in most markets is a closely coordinated activity among butchery owners. In most cases, the number of butcheries is higher than the number of animals that can be slaughtered and consumed within a day. Even for the largest market, Juba, estimates show that there are more butcheries than the number of livestock slaughtered and sold in a day (see Table 3.4). Since most butcheries have no electricity connection and therefore no possibility for meat preservation (through refrigeration), butchers work in a rotational manner that ensures that there is no excess supply of meat than can be consumed in a day. The associations also set the price for meat, which many times, is discussed with local authorities before it is changed. Butchery owners are however quick to clarify that it is not that the local authorities have price controls, but that there is always pressure from the public to keep prices low and it is therefore good practice to involve the local government in making decisions that affect meat prices. Meat prices in Southern Sudan currently range from SDG 10 14 for beef and SDG 18 25 for shoats.

59

Table 3.4 Estimated number of butcheries in Juba

Butchery area/market 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.
Note:

Number of butcheries Cattle 46 25 20 24 14 14 14 12 7 4 4 3 4 3 3 10 207

Konyo Konyo New Customs Old Customs Gudele Suk Melisia Suk Libia Juba town Tong ping Gabat St. Kizitos Suk Sita Malakia Suk Ardep Suk Ajar Buluk Others Total

Number of carcasses sold per day Shoats 20 9 18 13 7 9 6 8 4 4 5 2 3 3 2 9 122

10 0 5 0 5 0 7 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 42

This Table should be interpreted with extreme caution as it presents a one day snapshot. Information was provided by key informants and not from physical count and therefore there are possibilities of overlaps. It is merely presented here to give a rough idea. Source: MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis Study, Aug/Sept, 2010.

The study team takes note of the following as the main issues at the meat retail segment of the livestock value chain: Poor hygiene, food safety standards and low meat quality: Without exception, all butcheries in Southern Sudan are currently operating under conditions of poor hygiene and food safety standards. Yet, without exception all of them report that they have trading licenses from the local authorities and have certificates obtained from the relevant public health offices (after paying up to SDG 1,300) for operating butcheries. The issue therefore seems to be something to do with the public health standards and their enforcement. Without clear and strictly enforced standards, it will not be possible to significantly improve the quality of meat. This not only poses a public health hazard but, in our assessment, is a significant constraint to meat market development in the country. Discussions with high-end consumers show that the low and un-assured quality of meat in the market is a key factor that makes them avoid (to the extent possible) locally supplied meat. The middle and high income market segment in Southern Sudan is rapidly growing and the local livestock sector will not be able to fully benefit from this growth unless the quality of meat retailed through local butcheries is improved. More niche outlets largely dealing in imported meat and meat products will continue entering the market and expanding. As we have emphasized in various sections of this report, the biggest impact of continued trade in low quality meat will be continued production and supply of low quality livestock and livestock products that cannot compete both in the domestic and regional markets. Meat quality is therefore a leverage point for the whole sector and it starts with clarity on the standards and their enforcement. Market segmentation: The current operation of most butcheries is that none can be categorized as dealing in high quality meat and specialized cuts. The only differentiation is on steak vs meat on bone on the one hand; and beef vs shoat meat on the other. This is an area of market development that appears to present an opportunity for overall chain growth.

60

Butchers association: The study notes that some level of coordination among players at the meat retail stage is already happening. What is required is to enhance this coordination, expand it to cover other players and re-orient it towards a value chain development strategy. Workspace development for butcheries: Closely tied to the issue of meat quality (and hygiene) is the issue of workspace, including rights (tenure), basic infrastructure (drainage, and access to basic utilities of water and electricity where possible), and actual workspace/structure. Skills and knowledge of meat retail operators: Some level of quality standards at meat retail level relates to mere lack of appreciation of the need for adherence to basic hygiene and quality standards. Besides basic appreciation, there is also an issue of knowledge and skills of maintaining these standards. Access to financial services: Most butcheries are currently operating with significant working capital constraints and point at inaccessibility of financial services as a key constraint. Access to locally available financial services through which butchers can build a capital base through saving little-by-little and borrowing at times of need could strengthen this important segment of the livestock value chain and get it on a path towards increased competitiveness.

3.7 Input supply

The critical inputs and services required at this time in the development of the livestock industry in Southern Sudan, considering the type of animals and their level of production, are capacity building of the industry stakeholders (livestock producers and traders), provision of veterinary drugs, vaccines and other animal health services, research and extension services and access to information. 3.7.1 Supply of drugs The supply of veterinary drugs in Southern Sudan is currently handled by Government, Nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector. The value chain study explored each of these channels. (i) Government supply This is a key area of the mandate of the Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries (MARF) where execution is carried out through the corresponding ministries in each state. The state veterinary services distribute drugs and vaccines, mainly during times of emergency disease outbreaks. The Directorate of Veterinary Services obtains these drugs and vaccines mainly from FAO. It also buys these inputs from Khartoum, using its own funds. Reports obtained from the field in the course of this study indicate that the drugs and vaccines received by the states and counties are inadequate and in some areas are able to cover only about 20% of the livestock population. Table 3.5 shows vaccination figures for 6 counties of Upper Nile State for the period January to April, 2010. A lot of resources and efforts are expended in mounting vaccination campaigns capable of reaching these numbers. The truth, however, is that compared to the estimated population of livestock in these counties (see Table 2.9 in Chapter 2), these figures suggest a coverage level below the minimum threshold required to make the vaccinations worthwhile. This is the general characteristic of vaccination campaigns in most parts of Southern Sudan.
Table 3.5 Number of vaccinations in selected Counties in Upper Nile: January-April 2010

61

County Manyo Fashoda Panyikang Malakal Renk Maban Total

HS 32,400 6,300 15,000 700 1,500 55,900

Sheep/goat pox 70,600 4,500 2,400 4,250 47,200 1,500 130,450

Anthrax 17,100 1,100 3,000 1,100 7,100 900 30,300

CBPP 5,700 400 20,100 2,620

PPR 25,600 2,000 5,000 53,000 85,800

BQ 13,900 1,000 1,850 2,400 19,150

Total 165,300 15,300 57,350 6,050 111,400 2,400 357,800

Source: Department of Veterinary Services, Malakal, Upper Nile State, Aug, 2010.

(ii) Private sector supply of veterinary drugs The budding private sector in Southern Sudan plays an important role in supplying veterinary drugs, albeit on a small scale. Drug suppliers in Juba There are 2 private veterinary pharmacies in Juba, namely Tuli Veterinary Pharmacy and Juba Veterinary Pharma for Trading Investment Co. Ltd., South Sudan. Tuli pharmacy retails veterinary pharmaceuticals. It stocks mainly antibiotics, anthelmintics (dewormers) and acaricides. The pharmacy faces some constraints in procurement of drugs; these include: Transport problems causing delays in procurement of drugs; High cost of drugs in Kampala; Illegal taxes within Uganda; Inadequate access to affordable credit. To address these constraints, there is need to improve access to affordable credit and to formulate favourable policies to promote the private sector. Juba Veterinary Pharma for Trading Investment Co. Ltd., South Sudan is a distributor of veterinary drugs. The drugs are sourced mainly from China, and some from Germany. The pharmacy stocks mainly antibiotics, particularly Pro-Strep and Oxytetracycline. Although the company is registered as a distributor, individual livestock owners are the main customers. Vet Works also buys drugs from the company. The demand for drugs was said to be low; this was partially attributed to lack of promotion of the Pharmacy. Drug suppliers in Upper Nile State-Malakal There is only one pharmacy selling veterinary drugs in Malakal, namely Nasir Drugstore/ Pharmacy; in addition, there are 2 kiosks selling small quantities of drugs. Local demand for veterinary drugs appears to be low; for example, a 50x50 ml box of ivermectin may take 1 year to sell. However, during the dry season Arabs from the North move southwards with their livestock; they buy large quantities of drugs. The main customers are CAHWs. Drug suppliers in Unity State 62

There are 4 private veterinary drug shops in the state which were established by VSF Swiss. However many other drug shops also sell veterinary drugs. The private pharmacies obtain their drug supplies from Khartoum. Livestock owners and CAHWs are the main customers. The private pharmacies stock common drugs such as oxy-tetraracycline, Abendazole, Ivermectin and trypanocidal drugs. Drug supplies in Eastern Equitoria State A veterinary pharmacy at Narus in Kapoeta East County supported by the Catholic Diocese of Torit (CoDT) supplies drugs in the 3 counties of Kapoeta, namely Kapoeta East, Kapoeta North and Kapoeta South. In other counties human pharmacies are reported to be supplying the drugs. The pharmacy in Narus stocks the common veterinary drugs such as Oxytetracycline, Albendazole, Ivermectin and tryponocidal drugs that can treat the common diseases which are prevalent in the state. Most of the drugs are imported from Kenya. Private supplies originate from Khartoum, Kampala and Nairobi. All local supply points reportedly experience supply chain difficulties. The pharmacies are run by non veterinary professionals. 3.7.2 Quality of drugs

In an earlier study by LESP (2009) the quality of inputs was reported as varying according to supply sources. All pharmacy operators reported that the inputs from Nairobi were of the best quality followed by those from Kampala. However, the quality of inputs from Khartoum was reported to have recently begun to show some improvement. There appears to be no statutory requirement or formal mechanism for routine inspection of animal health inputs. The quality of some inputs (e.g. veterinary drugs) from some sources is therefore questionable. There is need to establish a quality control mechanism to protect the interests of consumers of these products, and in particular the health of the national herd as well as consumers of livestock products. 3.7.3 Animal feeds Livestock production in the 5 states involved in this study, and indeed in the rest of Southern Sudan, is dependent almost exclusively on grazing open pasture on communal land. Hardly any supplementation using high protein commercial concentrates is practised. However, some form of supplementation, using crop residues, takes place mainly in areas where crop farming predominates, e.g Magwi County in Eastern Equitoria State and Renk County in Upper Nile State. In such areas, supplementation takes the form of grazing livestock on crop farms after harvest. There were no reports of commercial hay or mineral supplementation. Consequently, there were no animal feed suppliers. As the human population increases, however, so will be the demand for livestock products such as meat, milk and eggs. The management of the livestock resources is bound to change in order to meet this anticipated demand. Trends towards peri-urban livestock production are expected to emerge; growth of a feed industry, either through importation and distribution or manufacturing using local materials, will be a consequence of this trend.

3.8 Service providers

63

A vibrant livestock sector requires many types of services. Some of these are specific to the sector and could be referred to as technical services while others are general for smooth and efficient operations of any business. The most critical technical services for a livestock sector include: animal health services; animal production services; and animal breeding services. The general services include business management skills training and advisory services; accounting services; and financial services, to mention but a few. The general characteristic of the services industry in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan is that it is poorly developed and heavily driven by the public sector comprising government and the donor community. The value chain study focused on the technical services of which the main one in the case of Southern Sudan is animal health care . 3.7.1 Animal health services

Animal health service providers include community animal health workers, certificate and diploma holders of animal production and health, veterinarians and animal scientists. The Government of Southern Sudan (GoSS) has established ministries and their respective Directorates and departments. The MARF State level structures have been established to varying levels; similarly, County structures have been or are in the process of being established. Structures at Payam and Boma levels have not yet been fully established. The Directorate of Veterinary Services is responsible for coordination of policy and all animal health activities at GoSS and State levels; this includes those undertaken by the public sector (government) as well as those undertaken by the private sector, NGOs and other development agencies. The Directorate holds annual coordination meetings with the key players in animal health. Table 3.6 shows the number of animal health services providers in Southern Sudan as at June 2009. Discussions with key informants in the livestock sector indicate that although there have been some improvements since June 2009, the general picture depicted in Table 3.6 largely remains true. Overall, there is a general shortage of qualified personnel in all States and although significant strides have been made in training and development of community animal health workers, there are still shortages even at this level . A lot more effort is required in developing qualified personnel at higher cadres.
Table 3.6 Animal health personnel in the States as at June 2009
State Veterinarians In Govt Upper Nile Unity NBG WBG Lakes EES WES CES Jonglei Warrap Total 6 3 1 6 3 3 1 3 2 3 31 NGOs and UN 4 3 2 0 2 3 0 2 2 2 20 Technicians Vet assistants 3 2 4 22 3 8 4 8 7 0 61 Stock person 18 8 11 27 14 12 8 12 8 8 126 AHAs CAHWs Support staff 12 56 14 19 22 0 30 57 11 15 236 Lab technicians 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 1 1 0 7

22 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 1 0 29

32 6 18 15 21 13 12 2 18 17 154

320 119 196 107 330 271 240 240 189 233 2245

Source: MARF-GoSS Files, September 2010.

Three levels of training of front-line animal health service providers have been established, comprising of training for CAHWs (2 weeks), AHAs (4 months) and stockpersons (7 months). Vaccinators are trained on-site for one to two days. 64

We present a quick review of the current situation at each of the five states covered under the value chain study: (i) Eastern Equatoria Eastern Equitoria has 4 veterinarians, all in Government employment. These are supported by 4 stockpersons, 6 animal production officers, 4 Veterinary Assistants and 7 Animal Health Auxiliaries (AHAs). In addition, there are 181 CAHWs trained and supported by the Catholic Diocese of Torit (CDoT). NGOs supporting the livestock sector in Eastern Equitoria include CDoT, Vetworks and Land O Lakes, Farm Africa, SNV, VSF-Belgium, FARM Sudan (USA ID) and ADRA (ii) Unity Unity State has 6 veterinarians - 3 in Government and 3 in the NGO sector. These are supported by 4 AHAs at state level and one in each county, and 15 CAHWs per county. VSF-Swiss is currently the only NGO operating in Unity State. It has employed 4 veterinarians. There are an estimated 350 lower cadre animal health service providers (Stock persons/AHA/CAHWs) in the State. Two projects are in progress; these are the Livestock and Fisheries development project and the Emergency Veterinary Support Project. The focus is on delivering affordable animal heath services and capacity building for the government livestock extension systems. The projects train and support CAHWs, establish veterinary drug shops and support milk and fishery groups. (iii)Upper Nile Upper Nile State has 10 public sector veterinarians, 4 of whom are at the State capital (Malakal) and the others at county level. Although Upper Nile State is better staffed with veterinarians than most states, the shortage in this cadre of staff nevertheless means that not all counties have a veterinarian. There are 2 NGOs offering animal health services through CAHWs in Upper Nile VSG Germany and VSF-Belgium. VSF-Germany provides veterinary services through CAHWs. In Upper Nile a project financed through MDTF started in April 2010 in 6 counties, namely Melut, Manyo, Renk, Malakal, Fashoda and Panyikang. The organization trained 21 CAHWs in these counties. The project ended at the end of August 2010. VSF-Belgium: The organization has been involved in a livestock programme involving delivery of veterinary services in 5 counties in Upper Nile State, namely Longuchuk, Nasir, Maiwut, Ulang and Baliet, since 2007. Some 66 CAHWs have been trained through the programme. There are other local NGOs/CBOs that offer limited livestock services in Upper Nile through government and CAHW delivery system. These include IRD and FAR. The Indian military contingent of the UN (Indbatt) also has a veterinary wing in Malakal County that offers diagnostic and clinical (treatment) services for pastoral herds. (iv)Jonglei The expansive Jonglei State has only one veterinarian who is located at the State capital (Bor), 2 stockpersons and 64 CAHWs. 65

VSF-G is supporting the State MARF in provision of livestock services. Current activities in the sector include: Promoting primary (CAHWs) animal health-care delivery systems; Disease control through vaccinations; Extension services-disease control, disaster preparedness; Milk hygiene training; Provision of milk cans to a milk association. The project operates in 5 counties in Jonglei State, namely Duk, Twic East, Bor, Pochalla and Pibor. Two (2) CAHWs per Payam in the 5 counties have been trained. A milk association has been formed with assistance of the project. During vaccination campaigns, the government procures vaccines (from FAO); VSF-G assists in vaccination. Clearly, this level of staffing is grossly insufficient in a state where livestock keeping is a major source of livelihood. The staffing shortfall is bound to compromise service delivery. (v) Central Equatoria Central Equitoria State is served by 6 veterinarians, 4 of whom are at the State capital and 2 in the counties. These are assisted by slightly over 300 personnel, 240 of them in the cadre of Community CAHWs. 3.8.3 Key issues in service delivery The capacity of the key players (i.e. the government, private sector and pastoralist institutions) in livestock production and marketing service delivery appears to be inadequate. Some of the service providers lack training in new technologies and skills. Some of the shortfalls in extension service delivery emanate from shortage of qualified manpower arising from the many years of civil war. In addition, shortfalls in resource allocation have resulted in inability of the available service providers to reach the livestock owners who need their services. The Directorate of Veterinary Services, which is responsible for animal health including clinical, quality assurance, diagnostic services and animal health inspection and certification, continues to have inadequate staffing and linkages at state and county levels. Most of the services are currently being offered by NGOs and FAO, often with little or no reference or supervision from the states or MARF. The FAO assists MARF in procurement of vaccines, provision and maintenance of the cold chain and logistical support, particularly with regard to transport of the vaccines and personnel during vaccination campaigns. Lack of sufficient resources has constrained MARFs capacity to absorb all the trained CAHWs. Although CAHWs are active in certain locations and at different levels, the gap in coverage is below acceptable levels considering the importance of the national herd. The highest level of coverage was found in Unity State. Inadequate access to inputs, however, hampered effective service delivery. In Upper Nile and Jonglei states, VSF-B and VSF-G have been striving through MTDF to bridge this gap. However, the gains were reported as marginal considering the magnitude of the needs. Knowledge and technology transfer, and community capacity building which is a key element in the success of the developmental initiatives in the livestock sector, has been hampered by insufficient capacity for involvement in stakeholder-pastoralist/agro-pastoralist extension services. The contributory factors that need to be addressed include: 66

Transfer of knowledge and skills through enhanced extension services; Efficient utilization of the natural resources for livestock production; Control of infectious and non-infectious livestock diseases that have serious socio-economic implications; and Marketing of livestock and livestock products such as milk, hides and skins.

Extension service delivery for livestock would be more effective in pastoral/agro-pastoral areas if implemented using participatory, community-based approaches. The current supply of veterinary drugs needs careful assessment. While some of the NGOs have instituted cost recovery mechanisms, others have continued to offer free or heavily subsidized services. The latter has tended to create a dependency syndrome and to inhibit the growth of the budding private sector. To address this anomaly the evolving policy and legal framework should facilitate the implementation of a cost recovery policy while facilitating and supporting private sector development. MARF is, however, expected to continue offering free or subsidized vaccinations against economically and /or socially disruptive animal diseases and pests, initially through credible NGOs, CBOs and cooperatives.

67

4 LIVESTOCK SECTOR MAP OF SOUTHERN SUDAN

4.1 Overview
This section builds on information generated in the two previous sections to present a summary of the organization of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan in the form of a map for the sector. The map outlines all the players in the sector, their interrelationships and the various functions they perform in the value chain from production to the delivery of the product to final consumers in the different market segments. In essence though, it is merely a simplification of what is a complex reality but helps to identify all key players and the main leverage points for the sector where targeted interventions could affect the entire value chain. The map also identifies the various market channels in the sector and their current size in terms of volume of trade and concentration of players. Beyond the snapshot status of each channel captured in the map, the section also presents a brief narrative of each market channel and the prospects for growth, in a sense, to indicate where efforts could have the highest payoffs. 4.2 The Sector map Figure 1 overleaf summarizes the interrelationships of the players in the livestock value chain in Southern Sudan according to the functions and roles they play as well as the points of interaction. Some of the key observations from the summary shown in the map include the complete absence of players in research and development; heavy dominance of the public sector (government, donors and NGOs) in the supply of animal health inputs and services; a production base with a large number of players, all applying traditional production practices which are poorly oriented to the market. At the distribution and marketing segments of the chain, the map shows an evolving market infrastructure of primary, secondary and terminal markets which are important points of interaction between producers and other key players and could act as key geographical system nodes for leveraged interventions in the value chain. The markets are, however, quite few in number, given the vastness of Southern Sudan and the nationwide distribution of livestock in all states in the country. Another key system node in the value chain presented in the map is the slaughter slabs/areas through which more than 80% of the meat consumed in Southern Sudan goes. These are important points at which quality standards particularly those related to food safety could be introduced and enforced. Border points for imports of live animals and livestock products as well as those for exit of animals (currently only to the North) are also important system nodes. In terms of players, the map shows that the livestock sector in Southern Sudan has approximately 950,000 livestock farmers, 350,000 herders (two thirds of whom are children below 18 years of age), about 4,500 live animal traders, approximately 1,500 2,000 slaughter personnel; 2,000 4,000 butchery owners and about 500 owners of market-based kraals who offer holding-ground facilities and services for livestock trade and distribution. All these are private sector players. Other important players include input suppliers, service providers, and local government personnel involved in facilitation of smooth operations of the market infrastructure and slaughter places. For increased competitiveness of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan, all these players, in addition to other government and development agency enablers must work together.

Figure 4.1: Red Meat Sector Map of Southern Sudan

68

Market

Rural households Red meat; Restocking

Export (mainly North)

Unclassified urban red meat consumers

High-end urban red meat consumers

L.A exporters (100 200)

Exporting

Processing

Rural slaughter slabs/areas (300- 400)

Urban slaughter slabs/areas (100 - 200)

Terminal Markets
Wholesaling

Bulk-terminal market suppliers (500 800)

(Total = 15; 8 in Juba town)

Secondary Markets
County & State level (35)

Assembly

Primary markets (117)

Primary markets (County & Payam level

Border points

In put Supply

Production

Small-scale pastoralists and agro-pastoralists (<50 cattle) 75% of producer = 700,00 farmers; 40 % of total herd = 500,000 cattle Traditional prod system

Medium & large-scale pastoralists: (51- 200 = 20%; ( > 200 = 5% Trad. Prod. system

High quality producers (in Uganda) Improved breeds

Live animal importers (70 100)

Bulking

Rural Traders (3,000 3,500)

Processed meat & meat products (imported)

-Vaccines FAO (GoSS; Donors) - Vet drugs MARF; NGOs; Private Drugstores - Heifers for restocking (other farmers no selection) - Ropes for tethering

Research

No one doing R&D; MAFAO Potential

CH1 (50%) CH2 (15%) CH3 (10 %) CH4 (20%) CH5 (5%)

Source: MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis Study, Aug/Sept., 2010

69

Importers of processed meat & meat products (5 - 10)

Transporting

L.A Retail

Live animal retailers (700)

High end supermarkets & Restaurants (<50)

Rural butcheries

Urban Butcheries

Retailing

(1,000 2,000)

(1,000 2,000)

4.3 Market Channels

As discussed in Chapter 2, Figure 4.1 shows that the livestock (red meat) value chain in Southern Sudan has five main market channels. Live animals to rural households for restocking; Live animals for export to the North; Unclassified (mixed quality) meat to rural households; Unclassified (mixed quality) meat to urban consumers; and High quality imported meat and meat products to urban high-end market.

4.3.1 Channel 1: Live animals to rural households for restocking and herd build-up As discussed in Chapter 2, live animals sold directly from farmer to farmer for restocking comprises the biggest volume of trade in livestock is Southern Sudan, accounting for about 50% of the livestock sold in the country. Most of the livestock transacted in this channel is for breeding purposes, mainly heifers. Due to the general knowledge among livestock farmers that animals sold in the market are of low quality, households seeking to buy heifers for stock build-up source these directly from farmers. Most of this trade is therefore not captured through the established market system. Part of the trade, mainly for temporary holding in the case where the need is dowry payment, may however also occur through the market. A recent livestock marketing study by GTZ in five states of Southern Sudan (west of the Nile) showed that 30% of livestock sold in primary markets were purchased by farmers. An assessment of the demand for livestock in this channel shows significant prospects for growth. As discussed in Chapter 2, there is a very strong desire and active demand for herd build up among livestock keeping households in Southern Sudan. This demand is currently driven by social considerations which are likely to continue holding ground for sometime in the foreseeable future. Estimations suggest that about three quarters of livestock keepers have a herd size they consider smaller than what they would like to have and will therefore take every opportunity to increase this number through purchases. Chapter 3 also gave a strong exposition of how critically important it is that mechanisms for introducing higher quality breeds are found. In other words, support for continued growth in this channel in terms of upgrading of breeds available for sale (and transaction through the market) is of high significance for improved commercialization and competitiveness of the sector in medium and long term. On the whole, this channel can generally be regarded as an inputs channel for supply of breeding stock. It is therefore expected that its share of total volume of trade in live animals will increasingly go down as the sector becomes more commercially oriented. It is currently a fairly short channel, with few players and limited prospects for value addition. Prices offered are also fairly low. Value chain interventions targeted at this channel should therefore aim at altering its growth trajectory to one of providing high quality breeds for commercially oriented livestock production among farmers. This, the quality of the stock traded is expected to be the driving force and not volumes as is currently the case. 4.3.2 Channel 2: Unclassified mixed quality meat to rural consumers The rural meat market currently accounts for about 15% of the volume of animals traded in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan. Consumers in this market are rural households who buy meat from butcheries for consumption in their homes or consume it in cooked form in local rural restaurants. Estimates of per capita meat consumption in Southern Sudan show a lower than average consumption in other developing countries, largely as a reflection of poverty levels in rural areas. Southern Sudan is however one of the countries with highest growth rates in per capita incomes. Anecdotal information triangulated from various sources suggests that per capita incomes have grown from a GDP per capita of USD 90 in 2004 to about USD 500 in June 2010, largely driven by oil 70

revenues. Whereas these incomes have not yet seeped through to most rural households with 55.4% of the rural population living below the national poverty line of SDG 72.9 per month, all indications are that there will be continued growth in rural incomes in the medium and longer term. This is expected to combine with the projected continued growth in rural population from natural growth and returnees to provide a strong base for growth of the rural meat channel. This channel will continue to be important but cannot be expected to drive the growth of the livestock sector in the country. The channel is not likely to put sufficient pressure for improvements in quality and it is also not likely to grow fast enough to absorb the potential supply of livestock and livestock products from the large population of livestock in the country if the high mortality rates are addressed and higher herd productivity ensured. 4.3.3 Channel 3: Live animals for export The live animals for export channel currently accounts for about 10% of livestock traded in Southern Sudan. The current outlet is to the North of Sudan. Regardless of the outcome of results of the January 2011 referendum on Southern Sudan (i.e whether Southern Sudan separates from the North or not), the demand for live animals in the North will continue in the near term. The continued growth in demand for meat internationally and the fact that the bulk of supply to meet this increased demand must come from developing countries also presents immense potential for growth of this channel. To take advantage of this potential, enormous efforts must however be put in development of the sector to address issues of productivity, quality and quality assurance, market orientation (including improved off-take rates) and overall competitiveness. Although there are persuasive arguments in favour of development efforts targeted at the sector being focused on the domestic market in the short and medium term, our considered opinion is that the export market will ultimately be the driver for growth in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan. Important pillars for preparing the sector towards this trajectory in the medium and long term need to start getting laid now. And this is not contradictory to the efforts required to develop the local market both to meet current supply gaps but also for import substitution. They involve building a strong foundation for high productivity of quality livestock and livestock products on the one hand, and setting up a support physical and institutional infrastructure that is not only able to ensure this growth but also provide the quality assurance required for international trade in livestock and livestock products. 4.3.4 Channel 4: Unclassified mixed quality meat to urban consumers The urban meat market currently accounts for about 20% of the traded livestock in Southern Sudan. From a value chain development perspective it is however the most developed channel with the largest number of market players. This is the channel with the highest growth prospects in the short and medium term, largely buoyed by rapidly growing urban population and incomes. The growth trajectory in this channel however strongly suggests that differentiation of meat on the basis of quality will have to occur in the short term for the growing demand to be addressed from local supply of meat. 4.3.5 Channel 5: High quality meat and meat products to high-end urban consumers This channel is currently the smallest estimated to account for 2 5% of the consumption of red meat and meat products in Southern Sudan. Supply is currently from imports of high quality meat from neighbouring countries (mainly Kenya and Uganda). Efforts made towards development of Channel 4 to address quality and food safety standards are expected to feed into this channel. Growth prospects in this channel are extremely high but expected to remain of a niche nature due to the overall size of the sector which is expected to remain small in terms of the population of consumers.

5
71

RED MEAT VALUE CHAIN ANALYSIS

5.1 Overview
The red meat livestock value chain in Southern Sudan currently involves five distinct value-adding activities which go into the production of live animals and their delivery to various market segments, some in the form of meat, others in the form of live animals. These activities include production; assembly and bulking of live animals into primary and secondary livestock markets; transportation to terminal livestock markets; wholesale and retail of live animals in terminal markets; and processing in the form of slaughter and meat retail. This section builds on the two previous chapters which explored the actors involved in each of the five segments, the functions they perform and their interrelationship to look at the costs incurred and the overall value-added at each stage. The section is analytical by nature and unpacks the specific activities carried out at each segment to assess the extent to which they are undertaken optimally and the extent to which room for improvement exists. A key purpose of the section is to identify the type of interventions required at each chain segment which, if well implemented, could spur growth and increase competitiveness of the overall value chain.

5.2 Production
Discussions in Chapter 3 outlined the five broad sub-activities of the production segment of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan herd acquisition; multiplication through breeding; herding; healthcare; and management. One of the conclusions made in chapter 3 with respect to the production segment of the value chain is that it is generally un-monetized. Although there are actual efforts and resources expended in undertaking the various sub-activities, most are not paid for in pecuniary terms. The only area where expenses are paid for in monetary terms is in animal healthcare but even here, some of the expenses are subsidized and therefore the price paid for the service does not fully reflect the full cost. An additional complication in this area is that many farmers do not actually undertake animal healthcare as would be required they do not carry out de-worming, vaccination or even treatment of sick animals fully. From this perspective, no meaningful value chain analysis of the production segment can be done without imputation of costs for the various activities performed and not paid for. Table 5.1 presents rough estimates of imputed costs of herd acquisition, herding and animal healthcare. The costs related to administration and management are not computed because in a simplified business operations scenario, it is assumed that owner managers/entrepreneurs should be paid from the margins generated from the business (profits).

5.2.1

Herd acquisition

For an investor wishing to enter into commercial livestock production for meat, s/he can choose to purchase the minimum size of breeding herd required to break-even or purchase a smaller number of breeding herd and build it over time. The second option, however, means having a large amount of working capital to operate for several years until the number of breeding herd required for break-even has been reached. Assuming a herd of 100 cattle with the same structure as the national herd in Southern Sudan, our computations indicate that, for a well managed herd with a calf per year calving rate and minimized calf and adult mortality that allows at least 80% of calves to reach maturity at age 3, then the investment cost of herd acquisition is approximately SDG 33 per cattle produced, whether it is sold or retained in the herd for breeding (see Table 5.1). 72

Table 5.1 Imputed production cost and revenue estimates

Item/assumption

1.
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9

Investment cost (herd acquisition)

Number of mature breeding cows in a herd of 100 Number of mature breeding bulls in a herd of 100 Cost of a breeding heifer bought at farmer level (in SDG) Cost of a breeding bull bought at farmer level (in SDG) Total investment in breeding herd (in SDG) Number of calves per cow over lifetime Number of calves over life of breeding cows Number of calves surviving to maturity (3 years) from base breeding herd (80% survival rate) Average investment cost per mature heifer/bull produced (1.5/1.8) SDG 49 2 250 300 12,850 10 490 392 33 3 100 3,600 36 480 4.8 4,080 40.8 5 204

2.
2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.1 0

Herding costs
Number of herders required for herd Imputed monthly salary per herder (in SDG) Imputed salary for herders per year Average imputed salary expenses per cattle in a herd of 100 per year Food expenses of herders per year (one bag of sorghum per 4 months @ SDG 160) in SDG Average herder expenses per cattle in a herd of 100 per year (in SDG) Total herding costs per year (in SDG) Average herding costs per cattle per year (in SDG) Average age at sale for cattle (in years) Average total herding costs per cattle sold at age 5 (2.8 x 2.9)

3.
3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.5 3.6

Healthcare
Vaccinations per cattle: if twice per year De-worming with Albendozole 2 times per year per cattle External parsites control with Ivermectine 9inclusive of syringe/needle + CAHW costs) Disease management: oxy ttc, 2 SDG, 1 SDG for syringe/needle; CAHW, 2SDG twice a year Total cost of healthcare per year per cattle Total cost of healthcare per cattle for 5 years Total cost of healthcare for herd of 100 per year 2 4 5 14 25 125 2,500 342 6,580 500 4 2,000 (4,580) (1,145) 13 13% 39 19,500

4.
4.1 4.2

Total costs
Total direct production costs per cattle sold at 5 years (investment + herding + healthcare costs) Total annual production costs per herd of 100 cattle

5.
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5

Revenue
Average selling price per average five year bull at primary markets Average number of cattle sold in a year Total revenue per farmer from sale of cattle per year Gross profit (loss) per farmer who sells 4 bulls from herd of 100 Gross profit (loss) per farmer who sells 4 bulls from herd of 100

6.
6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4

Breakeven off-take
Number of cattle required to be sold in a year to break-even at current average prices Implied break-even off-take rate Possible number of cattle that can be matured in 3 years in a herd of 100 (80% survival rate) Possible sales per year given possible off-take rate

6.5
6.6 6.7

Possible gross margin with good management and optimal off-take

Implied cost per unit production cost per cattle (inclusive of investment costs) (SDG) Possible gross margin per cattle sold under commercial environment with current prices (SDG)

12,920
202 298

Source: MARF/SNV Livestock Value Chain Analysis Study, Aug/Sept., 2010

5.2.2 Herding
Only herding costs related to imputed salaries for herders and actual food upkeep cost estimates for herders obtained during the study are included. From the computations, total herding costs per year per cattle works out to SDG 40.8. If the bull/cow is herded for five years before being sold, then this brings the cost of herding to SDG 204 for the 5 years. Improved productivity that enables 73

bulls/heifers to reach saleable weight in three years would cut down on this cost. Similar cuts could also come in labour efficiency that ensures that a herd of 100 does not need to be herded by 3 people. This would however imply a different grazing/animal feeding arrangement and a different insecurity situation. 5.2.3 Healthcare Healthcare cost estimates are built on the basis of existing disease prevalence and disease calendars of the five states visited. Table 5.1 shows that the provision of all required healthcare areas would, on average, cost a farmer SDG 25 per cattle per year. This works out to SDG 125 per year for 5 years. Again, farmers can cut down on this cost by keeping the cattle for a shorter time before sale. The other area is through an improvement in the overall disease incidence environment. This touches on alterations of current traditional herd management practices where stock movement and mixing with herds that may not be kept under good healthcare systems is reduced; as well as better national animal disease surveillance and healthcare delivery system at the national level. 5.2.4 Break-even analysis An analysis of the costs incurred in the production segment of the red meat value chain shows that producing a bull/cow for sale in five years costs the farmer, on average, SDG 362. If this bull/cow is sold at SDG 500, the farmer makes a margin of SDG 138 on that bull/cow (see Figure 5.1). Figure 5.1: Red Meat Production Value Chain at the farm level

Herder imputed salary SDG 180

Herder Food& provisions SDG 24%

Grazing 0%

Watering 0%

Minerals 0%

Acquisition of breeding stock raising or purchase SDG 33 (7%)

Herding SDG 204 41%

Health care SDG 125 25%

Margin SDG 138 28%

Key areas to watch: Better yielding breeds Reduce calf and adult mortality Increase maturity rate to 3 yrs Improve off-take rates

Treatment SDG 70

Parasites SDG 45

Vaccines SDG 10

Advice SDG

Source: MARF/SNV Livestock VCA for Southern Sudan, Aug/Sept 2010

Although herding is normally not costed in the management practices of livestock farmers in Southern Sudan, it actually comprises the highest cost area followed by healthcare. An analysis of current cost structures in Southern Sudan shows that although farmers may think that they make profits when they sell a bull/cow they are actually currently operating with negative margins. For a herd of 100 cattle, a farmer needs to sell at least 13 bulls/cattle to be able to cover all 74

the costs related to production. For the average off-take rate of 4% and prevailing prices, a farmer selling four bulls at an average of SDG 500 in primary markets, it means that the total revenue from the four bulls (SDG 2,000) is not even enough to meet the annual cost of drugs for the herd, leave alone meet the needs of herders and provide for the family. Animal health and disease control must therefore constantly be supported through resources generated from outside the sector - crop cultivation, employment or transfers from salaried family members or the public sector (government or donors/NGOs). Quick estimation shows that the break-even herd size for a livestock producer applying good husbandry practices of a calving rate of 1 per year is 27 where 13 are mature breeding cows. With lower productivity of a calf every 1 - 2 years as is the current practice, pushes the required herd size to about 50 (i.e. herd of 40 for 1 year calving interval and 54 for 2 year calving interval). Even though farmers do not cost labour and other expense areas and they also do not incur all the costs they are supposed to incur if they were managing the health of their livestock properly, it is clear that at current productivity levels, off-take rates and prevailing prices for live animals, most farmers are not making a profit. Although most do not know this for a fact, they have a strong feeling that things are not working well, even towards meeting the social reasons for which most keep the livestock. Since the production segment is the foundational segment of the chain, it is here where the competitiveness of the chain must ultimately begin for the overall chain to be competitive. Efforts must be made towards ensuring that farmers are able to break-even and operate profitably if the chain is to be competitive. Key areas that must be addressed include: herd sizes; breeds, herd productivity/maturity, healthcare management, mortality rates, and overall improved husbandry practices.

4.3 Product assembly transport and wholesale

An analysis of the bulking, transportation and wholesaling segment of the livestock value chain shows that transportation is the largest cost component accounting for 17.5% of the total value of the livestock landed at terminal markets and 42% of the overall value added (see Figure 5.2). The two major components of this cost are taxes and other charges levied by various government departments (accounting for 49% of the transportation level costs) and, heavy fuel and vehicle maintenance costs due to the poor state of roads (accounting for 27% of the transportation costs). As discussed in Chapter 3, an overall analysis of this segment of the chain shows that poor physical infrastructure, insecurity and, high and multiple taxation are key constraints limiting competitiveness of the whole value chain: Insecurity: Domestic supply to markets is currently highly constrained by insecurity brought about by cattle raiding on trade routes. Animal trekking, generally a low cost option of getting livestock to markets especially primary and secondary markets has now almost completely stopped on most routes. This has particularly affected trade from Jonglei into Juba (Bor Juba; and Pibor Kapoeta Juba) as well as parts of Central Equatoria. High and multiple taxation: An analysis of the all costs incurred at the whole bulking, transportation and wholesaling segment of the chain shows that taxes account for 15.8% of the total value livestock landed in terminal markets or 37.6% of the total value added at this stage. Taxes therefore stand as the single highest cost item in this stage. These taxes are charged at different points and by different arms of government: source markets by local governments; travel clearance with Veterinary departments; movement clearance with county administrations; roadblocks mounted by police, military, and local administrations; and customs departments. Some payments are receipted and therefore can be regarded as legal while others are not receipted and vary. The overall effect however is that the taxes cumulate to a major cost and the multiple charging points significantly slow down the travel time. This 75

is an area that requires attention to improve on efficiencies and increase the competitiveness of the livestock value chain. Poor road infrastructure: Some routes are impassable during the wet season and therefore completely blocking supply (e.g. Juba Torit road has made Kapoeta livestock into Juba to almost dry up). This adds cost of transportation and compounds traders vulnerability to insecurity.

Figure 5.2: Live animal bulking, transportation and wholesaling value chain into Juba market
Heavy burden on fuel, repairs and maintenance of trucks due to poor road condition

Fuel & Maintenance 26.6%)

Labour costs 8.9%

Taxes
48.5%

Margin
16.1%

Input value
SDG 750 cattle SDG 70 shoats (58%)

Sourcing 2.9% (Taxes 1.4%)

Transportation 17.5% (Taxes 6.1%)

Wholesale 7.7% (Taxes 5.7%)

Margin 13.7%

Taxes account for 15.8% of the total value and 37.6% of total value-added at the bulking, transportation and wholesaling stage of the chain. Key points of taxation include source markets, border points, multiple roadblocks and terminal markets. Both transporter and trader Source: MARF/SNV Livestock VCA for Southern Sudan, taxed Aug/Sept 2010

76

Total value: SDG 1,350 cattle; SDG 115 shotas

Table 5.2 Live animal assembly, transport and wholesaling chain: Cost analysis
Item Numule Route Cattle Shoats 15 800 12,000 160 70 11,200 Kapoeta route Cattle Shoats 15 700 10,500 160 70 11,200 Total/average

1.0
1.1 1.2 1.3

Input Value
Number of animals/truck Average price Total cost of purchases 44,900

2.0
2.1 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 2.15 2.2 2.2.1. 1 2.2.1.2 2.2.2 2.2.2. 1 2.2.2. 2 2.2.2. 3 2.2.2.4 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5 2.3 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.2 2.3.6 2.3.

Value Added costs

Sourcing costs Source market charges (cess) Assembly & bulking costs Livestock movement permit costs Other sourcing costs Total sourcing costs Transportation Trucking charges per animal Total trucking charges Border charges/roadblocks Uganda border charges/animal Sudan border clearance/animal Border Vet clearance charges Total border charges/animal S. Sudan roadblock charges Total transportation charges Total transportation charges/animal Wholesaling (end market) Market fee per animal (taxes) Kraal fee Other terminal market related fees Total costs for wholesaling Total Value added costs per unit .. .. .. .. .. 160 2,400 0 50 25 75 140 3,665 244 20 5 0 25 269 1,069 16,035 1,500 22,500 431 6,465 4 1,616 .. .. .. .. .. 15 2,400 2.75 11 4 18.75 140 5,540 35 5 2 0 7 42 112 17,920 120 19,200 8 1,280 10 128 20 15 0 0 35 140 2,100 160 2,260 150 20 5 0 25 210 910 13,650 5 6 0 0 11 12 1,920 160 2,080 13 5 2 0 7 31 101 16,160 8,820 440 2,510 1,015 4,125 600 13,545 1,100 1,185 0 0 2,285

4,400 1,580 0 5,980 21,810

3.0
3.1 3.2

Total costs
Total cost per unit Total cost per truck 66,710

4.0
4.1 4.2

Revenue
Average selling price Total revenue (per truck/trip)

1,200
18,000

110
17,600 77,300

5.0
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.3

Gross margin/profit
Gross margin per animal Gross margin per truck Average number of traders per truck Gross margin per trader

290
4,350 4 1,088

9
1,440 10 144

10,590
10,590 28 378

6.0
6.1 6.2 6.3

Total Value Added (2.3 +5.1)

Value added as % total value Per cent costs Per cent margin

700
46.7% 17.9% 28.7% 53.3% .. 10.7% 0.3% 28.7% 7.0%

50
41.7% 35.0% 6.7% 58.3% .. 12.5% 1.7% 6.7% 20.5%

500
41.7% 17.5% 24.2%

40
36.4% 28.2% 8.2%

32,400
41.9% 28.2% 13.7%

7.0
7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6

Breakdown of Total Value

Input value Sourcing/bulking Transportation Wholesaling Margin Taxes

58.3%
1.3%% 11.7% 0.4% 24.2% 4.2%

63.6%
5.5% 10.9% 1.8% 8.2% 10.0%

58.1%
2.9% 17.5% 7.7% 13.7% 15.8%

77

4.4 Processing: Slaughtering and Meat Retail

An analysis of the meat processing function shows that the cost structures at this segment of the value chain are highly tilted in favour of high quality live animals. Table 5.3 shows that larger bodied animals which give higher carcass weight give butchers higher margins even when their purchase prices are higher. At the Juba red meat market, there is a preference for Ugandan cattle and sheep as they give higher margins. The smaller body weights of local cattle and shoats (on average 125 kgs carcass weight) makes them uncompetitive to livestock from Uganda which have an higher average weight (of 220kgs carcass weight for cattle). Given prevailing prices, the cost per kilogram of meat at input level (purchase price of the live animal) is on average lower for Ugandan livestock (SDG 10.4 for local cattle while it is SDG 9.5 for Ugandan cattle). The bigger advantage is however in the larger number of units (volume advantage) and therefore, given constant costs at slaughtering and meat retail per animal (regardless of weight), butchers end up making profits more than double when they sell Ugandan livestock. On average, a butcher makes a gross margin of SDG 880 per Ugandan cattle and SDG 410 for local cattle. A similar scenario applies to shoats. Although the meat retail market is currently largely un-segmented (unclassified), where all meat (with bone) is currently going for SDG 14 in Juba, there are strong indications that quality conscious buyers will also prefer the Ugandan sourced meat. This is a competitive aspect of the market that must be eventually addressed at production level if the livestock sector in Southern Sudan is to be competitive, even in the domestic market. Figure 5.3: Slaughtering and meat retail value chain, Cattle, Juba
Hygiene & food safety standards generally low throughout this segment of the chain

Labour (52%)

Transport (24%)

Rent (15%)

Input value
SDG 1,650 (10.Kg beef) SDG 207 (13/kg shoats)

Sourcing 1.4%

(65.0%)

Slaughtering 2.2%

Retailing 4.3%

Margin 27.0%

Key consideration is size of cattle with Labour (71%) in mind the eventual carcass weight. Cattle from Uganda are generally preferred due to bigger size as most weigh around 220 kgs compared to local cattle which, on average weigh 125 kgs (carcass weight). Source: MARF/SNV Livestock VCA for Southern Sudan, Aug/Sept 2010

Meat insp (9%)

Taxes (19%)

Butchers make money through volumes number of carcasses &weight of each carcass

78

79

Table 5.3 Slaughtering and meat retail chain analysis: Juba town Item
1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.5 2.0 2.1.0 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 2.1.5 2.2.0 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5 2.2.7 2.3.0 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 2.3.5 2.3.6 2.3.7 2.3.8 2.3.9 2.3.10 2.4 3.0 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 5.0 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.3 7.4 7.5 Input Value Number handled (Volume) Average purchase price Total purchase cost Average cost per Kg of meat Value-added Expenses Sourcing costs Market tax (upon purchase) Transportation (trekking) to slaughter Road block charges (bridge) Kraal fee herding until slaughter Total sourcing costs Slaughter related costs Ante-mortem inspection fee (market) Slaughter fee Cleaning/washing offals Meat Inspection (Stamp) County/Payam charges/taxes (slab) Total slaughtering costs Butchery/retail costs Meat transportation Butchery attendant meat Butchery attendant offals Rent: daily charge Packaging materials Utilities (water, electricity) County/Payam charges (taxes) State Taxes (Medical, trading) paid yearly Other retail related costs Total meat retail costs Total value added costs/day Total costs (1.3 +2.4) Revenue Average Carcass weight (Kgs) Price per Kg (SDG) Total meat sales/day (SDG)/unit Income from other edibles /unit Total sales/day (SDG) Gross Margin/profit (SDG) Total Value added (2.4 + 5.0) Value added as % total value (5.0/3.5) Costs (%) Margin (%) Breakdown of Total Value Input value Sourcing value added Slaughtering value added Meat retail value added Margin Taxes Ladu Gudele Cattle 1 1,140 1,140 11.4 Modi S. Libya Cattle 1 1,100 1,100 8.5 Sallah Ahamed Suk Sita Cattle Shoats 1 1,300 1,300 11.8 5 150 750 10.3 Temim Omar Suk Sita Cattle U Cattle K 1 2,400 2,400 10.9 1 1,870 1,870 11.8 Ediris K.Konyo Cattle U Shoats 1 1,600 1,600 8.9 7 261 1,830 15.25

0 0 0 15 15 0 20 5 5 0 30 20 60 20 20 0 10 0 0 130 175 1,315 100 14 1,400 170 1,570 255 430 27.4% 11.2% 16.2% 72.6% 1.9% 7.6% 16.3% 1.6%

20 20 0 10 50 0 20 5 3 20 48 20 80 15 10 0 20 0 0 145 223 1,323 130 14 1,820 129 1,949 626 849 43.6% 11.5% 32.1% 56.4% 1.8% 6.4% 32.2% 3.2%

0 3 15 12 30 0 5 40 5 10 60 25 20 0 5 18 0 2.5 0.5 0 71 161 1,461 110 14 1,540 150 1,690 229 390 23.1% 9.5% 13.6% 76.9% 0.8% 2.7% 4.0% 13.6% 2.0%

0 10 0 10 20 0 50 0 15 10 75 25 20 0 5 12 0 2.5 0.5 0 65 160 910 14.6 20 1,460 65 1,525 615 775 50.8% 10.5% 40.3% 49.2% 0.7% 3.3% 4.1% 40.3% 1.8%

0 12.5 15 12 39.5 0 5 40 5 10 60 20 35 0 5 18 0 2.5 0.5 0 81 180.5 2,580.5 220 14 3,080 160 3,240 659.5 840 25.9% 5.6% 20.4% 74.1% 0.8% 1.4% 2.4% 20.4% 1.0%

0 12.5 15 12 39.5 0 5 40 5 10 60 20 35 0 5 18 0 2.5 0.5 0 81 180.5 2,050.5 158 14 2,212 160 2,372 321.5 502 21.2% 7.6% 13.6% 78.8% 1.0% 1.9% 3.3% 13.6% 1.4%

0 10 20 8 38 0 5 30 5 25 111 20 20 0 25 19.5 0 0 2 0 86.5 235.50 1,835.5 180 14 2,520 120 2,640 804.50 1,040 39.4% 8.9% 30.5% 60.65 1.4% 4.2% 3.3% 30.5% 2.2%

0 14 14 28 56 0 0 0 14 0 14 35 20 0 25 19.5 0 0 2 0 101.50 171.5 2,001.5 17.1 25 3,000 0 3,000 998.5 1,170 39.0% 5.7% 33.3% 61.0% 1.9% 0.5% 3.4% 33.3% 1.0%

Source: MARF/SNV Livestock VCA Study of Southern Sudan; Aug/Sept, 2010

80

Table 5.3 continued .. Slaughtering and meat retail chain analysis: Juba town Item
1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.5 2.0 2.1.0 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 2.1.5 2.2.0 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5 2.2.7 2.3.0 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 2.3.5 2.3.6 2.3.7 2.3.8 2.3.9 2.3.10 2.4 3.0 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 5.0 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.3 7.4 7.5 Input Value Number handled (Volume) Average purchase price Total purchase cost Average cost per Kg of meat Value-added Expenses Sourcing costs Market tax (upon purchase) Transportation (trekking) to slaughter Road block charges (bridge) Kraal fee + herding until slaughter Total sourcing costs Slaughter related costs Ante-mortem inspection fee (market) Slaughter fee Cleaning/washing offals Meat Inspection (Stamp) Vet County/Payam charges/taxes (slab) Total slaughtering costs Butchery/retail costs Meat transportation Butchery attendant meat Butchery attendant offals Rent: daily charge Packaging materials Utilities (water, electricity) County/Payam charges (taxes) State Taxes (Medical, trading) paid yearly Other retail related costs Total meat retail costs Total value added costs/day Total costs (1.3 +2.4) Revenue Carcass weight (Kgs) Price per Kg (SDG) Total meat sales/day (SDG)/unit Income from other edibles /unit Total sales/day (SDG) Gross Margin/profit (SDG) Total Value added (2.4 + 5.0) Value added as % total value (5.0/3.5) Costs (%) Margin (%) Breakdown of Total Value Input value Sourcing value added Slaughtering value added Meat retail value added Margin Taxes Paul K.Konyo Cattle -U 1 2,800 2,800 9.3 Gabriel Jebel Cattle Kabo 1 1,150 1,150 8.5 Khalid J. Town Shoats 3 177 530 11.0 Manyeng Tongping Cattle U 1 1,500 1,500 8.7 Total Cattle -UG 4 2,267 8,300 9.5 Cattle Local 5 1,312 6,560 10.4 shoats 15 207 3,110 12.90 Total

17,970

0 0 0 4 4 0 20 40 5 19 84 20 50 10 20 21 0 0 3.5 0 124.5 212.5 3,012.5 300 14 4,200 100 4,300 1,287.5 1,500 34.9% 4.9% 29.9% 65.1% 0.1% 2.0% 2.9% 29.9% 0.7%

0 20 0 8 28 0 5 35 3 20 63 25 120 10 10 15 0 0 3.5 0 183.5 274.5 1,424.5 135 14 1,890 180 2,070 645.5 920 44.4% 13.3% 31.2% 55.6% 1.4% 3.0% 8.9% 31.2% 1.5%

0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 3 16.5 34.5 7.5 0 0 15 5 0 0 2.3 0 29.8 64.30 594.30 16 18 864 0 864 269.70 334 38.7% 7.4% 31.2% 61.3% 0.0% 4.0% 3.4% 31.2% 2.5%

0 10 20 10 40 0 0 0 5 20 25 30 30 0 15 10 0 0 3.5 0 88.5 153.50 1,653.50 172 14 2,408 0 2,408 754.50 908 37.7% 6.4% 31.3% 62.3% 1.7% 1.0% 3.7% 31.3% 2.0%

0 32.5 77.5 34 144 0 30 110 20 74 234 90 135 15 65 68.5 0 4.5 9.5 0 387.5 765.5 9,065.5 872 14 12,208 380 12,588 3,522.5 4,288 34.1% 6.1% 28.0% 65.9% 1.1% 1.9% 3.1% 28.0% 1.5%

0 55.5 30 87 172.5 0 55 125 18 60 258 110 315 45 50 51 0 35 4.5 0 610.5 1,041 7,601 633 14 8,862 789 9,651 2,050 3,091 32.0% 10.8% 21.2% 68.0% 1.8% 2.7% 6.3% 21.2% 1.5%

0 24 14 38 76 0 65 0 32 26.5 123.5 67.5 40 0 45 36.5 0 2.5 7.3 0 198.8 398.3 3,508.3 241 22 5,324 65 5,389 1,880.7 2,279 42.3% 7.4% 34.9% 57.7% 1.4% 2.3% 3.7% 34.9% 1.5%

0 112 121.5 159 392.5 0 150 235 70 160.5 615.5 267.5 490 60 160 156 0 42 21.3 0 1,196.8 2,204.8 20,174.8 1,746 26,394 1,234 27,628 7,453.2 9,658 35.0% 8.0% 27.0% 65.0% 1.4% 2.2% 4.3% 27.0% 1.5%

Source: MARF/SNV Livestock VCA Study of Southern Sudan; Aug/Sept, 2010

81

4.5 Total Value

Overall, inefficiencies in the supply chain of red meat to urban markets are making livestock farmers to get only a small proportion of the total value of the red meat value chain. From the current supply of live animals for slaughter and consumption as red meat, the overall value of the sector is estimated at SDG 626.4 million annually. Only SDG 175.4 million accounting for 28% of the total is currently going to producers.

82

6 POLICY, REGULATORY AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

6.1Overview
Policy, regulatory and institutional factors are a key determinant of the business environment under which enterprises within a specific value chain operate which, in turn, determines the growth potential and overall competitiveness of the value chain. This section explores the policy, regulatory and institutional framework under which the livestock sector (and particularly the red meat value chain) is currently operating. The purpose is to identify any stifling factors that may need to be addressed (or taken into account) on the one hand, as well as supportive aspects that present opportunities for growth and vibrancy of the value chain. 6.2 Policy Framework The Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries (MARF) Animal Resource Sector Policy 2006 states the mission, goal and mandate of the Ministry and defines its core as well as non-core functions. The core functions are mainly coordination and supervision actions and implementation of non-contestable activities. The non-core functions are defined by the policy as those that will either be carried out by the States or are best performed by the civil society or beneficiaries or are outsourced from the private sector. The core functions of MARF include: Establishment and staffing of MARF institutional structure and the associated institutions (statutory boards and institutes); Formulation, implementation and monitoring (tracking) of sector-wide policies and the supporting legal framework. MARF is expected to continuously review the policy and legal frameworks to make sure that they remain relevant to the evolving production systems and social and economic realities in Southern Sudan; Coordination of the provision of animal health services including surveillance and disease reporting, mass vaccination, control of animal movement and the control of economically and socially important diseases and pests; Provision of quality assurance services for animal health and production inputs, including semen and embryos, produce, products and implements / tools, and animal products, coproducts and by-products. Included in quality assurance services is the provision of live animals, meat, milk, honey and hides and skins inspection and certification; Facilitation and provision of extension and research services and setting a sector wide research and training agenda. MARF research institutions will also provide genetic characterization and conservation services; Establishment of animal resources, disease and livestock marketing information management system (IMS) and a system for tracking food security; Promotion of rational utilization and conservation of range resources; When appropriate, promotion of breeding, production and marketing of emerging livestock including ostriches, snakes for venom production, crocodiles, guinea fowls, pigeons, wild geese and ducks among others; Facilitation and implementation of sector wide projects and programmes. 83

The above list notwithstanding, MARF is responsible for maintaining oversight of services offered, quality and quantity of products , and qualifications of the various service providers. The above functions set an enabling policy environment for the private sector and accord the states direction and flexibility to effectively define their livestock development agenda. The scope of the policy areas encompasses all essential activities for a comprehensive animal health delivery system. The policy also spells out clearly the strategic direction for the sector with ample room for amendments or improvement as deemed necessary. The study teams observations, however, show that there are some gaps in policy implementation. For example, provision of quality assurance and certification services is lacking; this has contributed to poor hygiene in slaughter-slabs and butcheries. 6.3 Legal Framework Several statutes are essential for efficient and effective provision of animal health services for Southern Sudan products to attain the standards required by the regional and international markets including those that regulate and / or govern the: Veterinary practitioners - Veterinary Surgeons and Para-veterinarians; Meat and slaughter facilities; Poultry and pig production and their products; Emerging livestock; Pest Control Products and Cattle Cleansing; Hides, skins and leather development; Animal feeds and feed inputs; Fertilizers of animal origin; Animal welfare; Animal identification and traceability; Veterinary drugs and chemicals; Pests and animal and zoonotic diseases control; Dairy development; Animal breeding and multiplication; Animal production and marketing; Grazing and grazing lands. It is important that the existing and proposed statutes be rationalized to be supportive of marketoriented livestock production and health while encouraging private sector investment and development. To promote growth in the livestock sector, which must in the long run be private sector driven, the evolving legal framework needs to provide for protection of property rights, develop a land tenure system that promotes private sector investment in livestock and livestock related enterprises, enforces contractual agreements, and provides and enforces quality standards. It is understood that MARF has developed several Acts and presented them to the Minister for legislation, which is pending. 6.4 Institutional framework In order to achieve its goals and objectives, there is need for MARF to develop new institutional partnerships with stakeholders and other key players in the livestock sector. The strategies to be adopted to develop new institutional partnerships with the private sector, civil society and livestock traders and producers include: 84

Establishment of strategic partnerships with states, NGOs, cooperatives, associations and Southern Sudanese farmers union to develop cattle, poultry, sheep, goats and bees selection and multiplication stations, which would improve and commercialize selected breeds and lines. These stations would be handed over to boards of management trustees which would include local communities, state and county representatives; Establishment of strategic partnerships with NGOs, cooperatives and associations, which can offer clinical, laboratory, disease control, disease surveillance, inspection and certification and extension services on behalf of MARF and states; Clearly defining the roles and reporting relationships of the various stakeholders in the animal industry, including service providers, user associations, statutory boards and training and research institutions; Providing an enabling environment for the private sector to invest and operate. Existing regulations and licensing procedures were to be reviewed to reduce bureaucracy while increasing efficiency in the market; Establishment of a strong monitoring, evaluation and readjustment units that would train MARF and state personnel and beneficiaries involved in project monitoring, evaluation and adjustment and ensure that both implementers and beneficiaries understand their respective roles in the programmes / projects; Establishment of IMS at MARF and state levels with databases of animal and range and flood plains resources, disease and pest occurrence and distribution and projects and programmes being undertaken in Southern Sudan. The units would collect, analyze and distribute monthly disease and pest occurrence and distribution reports and liaise and exchange disease occurrence information with veterinary authorities in the north and neighbouring countries.

It has, however, been noted that many of these strategies are yet to be fully implemented. There were also indications that some NGOs working at county level fail to send reports to State MARF as required. These issues need to be addressed.

Government
Responsibilities of the Directorates of Animal Resources, MARF The MARFs main role is to act as a catalyst for the development of animal resources by developing policies and legal framework that are supportive of market-oriented animal resources production and marketing while encouraging the private sector, cooperatives and communities to invest in the sector. It is also the responsibility of MARF to backstop states in all issues pertaining to the sector, including programmes and projects cutting across states, referral laboratories, research, extension, foreign trade, quarantine, emergency preparedness and response and surveillance and control of economically and socially important diseases. Responsibilities of the states Activities in each of the states are coordinated at State level. The State animal resources authorities are charged with the responsibility of coordinating ministrys policies and strategies, supervision of programmes and projects and monitoring and evaluating progress at state level. Responsibilities of counties Counties in all States are responsible for implementing and coordinating programmes and projects at the grass-roots levels. The county offices also act as frontline agents for MARF, continuously assessing farmers needs and challenges. Through the efforts of county officials, farmers, CBOs, cooperatives and associations / groups are expected to be made part of the extension and MARF decision making process. 85

Information gathered in the course of this study, however, reveals that service delivery at county level is inadequate. This is mainly attributed to inadequate resources available to the counties. There appears to be a problem regarding the flow of resources from the states to the counties that needs to be addressed. In addition, coordination between GoSS MARF, states and counties appears to be week; this often leads to poor disease reporting. There is therefore need to build strong linkages between the 3 levels of government, and even down to the payam level. 6.4.1.1 Quality Assurance: With reference to meat, milk, and hides and skins, quality assurance refers to planned and systematic pattern of all actions (inspection and certification from production through the quality slaughter or processing facilities to the marketing outlets) necessary to provide adequate confidence that the animal product optimally fulfils public health requirements and reduces the risk of human infection to the unavoidable minimum i.e. that it is good quality, wholesome and disease-free. The aim of MARF is to introduce internationally acceptable national standards for sanitation, hides and skins, meat, milk and hygiene to be enforced in all value addition facilities and plants where animal derived products are processed in order to ensure the safety of the public and enable Southern Sudan animal products access regional and international markets. The strategies to be adopted to strengthen veterinary public health and quality assurance include: Establishment of minimum standard designs for slaughter facilities, milk processing plants and tanneries to be adopted by the states and private developers. Manufacturers and processors will be encouraged by law to use the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) method or any other acceptable quality assurance procedure in their processing facilities including slaughter facilities; Provision of health inspection and certification services for live animals, hides and skins, meat and milk; Establishment of quality assurance laboratories for animal health and production inputs including equipment and tools. MARF may also opt to contract a private sector laboratory to provide the services; Development of strategies to combat zoonotic diseases including RVF, brucellosis, tuberculosis, avian flu, cysticercosis and rabies. MARF is expected to provide rabies vaccines for use in pets and companion animals while laying strategies to control and prevent the occurrence and spread of other zoonotic diseases. A major hurdle in meeting ambitious export related objectives is attaining international standards. These standards are set by importing countries, usually guided by the Sanitary-phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The animal health standards within the SPS Agreement are determined by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) and food safety standards are determined by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, jointly managed by the FAO and WHO. The OIE puts emphasis on national or regional eradication of serious transboundary animal diseases (TAD) and if national eradication is not feasible, then the OIE advocates establishment of either disease free zones or compartments of production that are free of disease. Freedom from disease is determined according to criteria and pathways stipulated by the OIE and importing country inspection teams. This requires emphasis on reliable surveillance of transboundary diseases and reporting systems. Attainment of internationally acceptable hygiene and slaughterhouse standards and freedom from drug residues and other contaminants will determine access to regional and international markets for meat and meat products. 86

Our observations in slaughter-slabs and meat selling establishments (butcheries) in Juba as well as state capitals and county headquarters visited during the study showed that these facilities are in a very poor state of hygiene. Food hygiene and safety standards in slaughter-slabs and butcheries are very low. Furthermore, meat inspectors are not adequately trained. This calls for capacity building of all players involved in the livestock and livestock products marketing chain, with emphasis on slaughterhouse/slab workers, butchers/meat vendors and meat inspectors, as well as livestock traders. There should also be encouragement/enforcement of use of protective clothing by slaughterhouse/slab workers and butchers. The survey team noted that there was no quality control for the meat sold in the local markets in the 5 states covered by the study. It also appeared as if there was no strict system of formal licensing of slaughterhouses/slabs or any health certification of the meat trade. Indeed, the team learnt that some of the slaughter premises in Juba were not licensed and that no meat inspection services were provided to these facilities. There is therefore urgent need for development of a legal framework to regulate meat hygiene and food safety, particularly with regard to foods of animal origin.

6.4.2 Development agencies

Table 6.1 below presents a summary of some of the main development agencies with ongoing development programs in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan.
Table 6.1

Organisation FARM Africa

States EES, CES

SNV EES CES JS

Services Community Based Animal Health Services (CBAHS): Through training Community Animal Health Workers (CAHWs), establishing drug shops and cold chains and strengthening government monitoring of CBAHS delivery mechanisms Livestock marketing: Improving marketing infrastructure Livestock products: Improving quality and safety of animal products through building slaughter slabs and hygienic butcher shops. Technology development: Introduction of innovative development technologies through farmer participatory research methodologies Natural resources management through land use mapping and planning Resources based conflicts: Through improved natural resource management Capacity building: Of government extension officials on participatory methods and technical skills for coordination, planning, assessment, monitoring and evaluation Value chain analysis and development (VCA/VCD) Organisational and institutional strengthening: Of public and private sector livestock value chain actors (e.g. local government, local NGOs, producer groups traders etc) through promoting multi-stakeholder platforms, resources mobilisation, training, mentoring and coaching. Livestock production: Through enhancing capacity for livestock development services, mobilisation of producers, market linkages and access to information and new technologies Livestock marketing services: Through market studies, VCA,

87

Diocese of Torit (DoT)

Vet Works

FAO

VSF Belgium

VSF Germany

producers mobilisation, , marketing infrastructure rehabilitation, market linkages, access to market information, value chain capitalization EES Animal health services: Disease control, vaccination and treatment, training CAHWs, constructing private pharmacies for CAHWs Veterinary public health: Support to meat inspection, slaughter facilities etc Livestock and livestock products marketing: Through marketing information services and other market studies Producer mobilisation: Including issues related to cattle rustling; Sensitisation of pastoralists Livestock marketing: support to cooperative development; market information services; producer group strengthening Animal health: Treatment and vaccination services; training of CAHWs; All the Two components SPCRP and the emergency unit support ten activities in: States Training CAHWs Supplying vaccines and cold chain facilities Food security through SIFSIA Emergency response to livestock disease Supplying drugs, vaccines and cold chain Global project in controlling Avian influenza and Rift Valley Fever Food security collection, analysis, documentations and dissemination of agricultural production and marketing related information through SIFSIA project SPCRP - focusing on the States West of the Nile in capacity development\ Involves conducting office building, furnishing, training and supplying agricultural inputs. CES Animal Health Services: Training of CAHWS; Provision of JS livestock drugs; Disease surveillance UNS Veterinary public health: Pubic awareness on zoonosis Livestock products: Dairy production especially in urban areas Poultry development: working with small scale producers Institutional capacity development: Policy development especially on the control of animal health UNS Animal health services: Provision of livestock drugs; Community-based livestock services; Livestock vaccination and treatment services; Animal draught: Oxen and donkey ploughing Emergency: Emergency veterinary services Veterinary public health: Meat hygienic and handling Livestock Marketing: support to livestock products production, processing and marketing; Business development services in livestock and livestock products Beekeeping. Poultry: Production and management of poultry and poultry products;

88

VSF Suisse

UNS

Animal health services: training of CAHWs; disease

ADRA

UNS

community-based and participatory methods for disease surveillance; Training: farmer field schools training, Livestock products processing and marketing of livestock products Animal Health: supply of veterinary drugs Emergency services: restocking; emergency livestock services.

89

7 SECTOR DYNAMICS
7.1Overview
This section builds on the cross-cutting issues and discussions covered in Sections 2 through 6 to focus on the various factors shaping the current state of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan today and its likely trajectory in the coming years. It reviews the forces driving current developments and narrows down to emerging nodes in the value chain which can be targeted for leveraged interventions geared at increasing competitiveness of the sector.

7.2Driving Forces
Driving forces refer to those factors that are at the root of sub-sector or sector dynamics the positive or negative changes taking place within the sector which are responsible for contraction, stagnation or expansion of various channels. These factors often relate to market demand, technological change, and barriers to market entry, input supply, and profitability level of different markets or product niches, risks or policies. From a careful analysis of the general dynamics of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan, the study identified five main driving forces behind the current status of the sector, some of which may continue shaping its trajectory into the coming years.

7.2.1 Socio-cultural entrenchment of livestock production

Livestock production in Southern Sudan is deeply rooted in the cultures, values and ways of life of most communities in the country. This is the major underlying driving force responsible for the widespread distribution of livestock in most parts of the country, regardless of the agro-ecological zone. Some of the important aspects of livestock production which are defined from the cultural entrenchment include: Motivation of livestock production: The main reasons for keeping livestock include household sustenance (particularly provision of milk for the young and old), social exchange especially in payment of dowry, and as a store of wealth (and the status symbol this confers). From this perspective, every household needs to keep livestock and therefore there is a tendency for every household to be culturally driven to keep livestock. This is the reason behind the large estimated population of livestock keepers in Southern Sudan accounting for 85% of the population of households. From a value chain development perspective, this can be said to be a positive driving force which is expected to continue pushing households to remain in livestock production. The social motivation for keeping livestock which puts selling livestock (commercial off-take) as a last resort can however be regarded as a negative driving force. It is this aspect which is partly responsible for the low commercial off-take rates and the low quality of stock offered for sale (the sick, old, infertile). Number of livestock kept: From the social motivation of livestock production, households need to keep as many animals as is possible. It is not what the herd is able to produce in terms of milk, other products or even sales (turnover), but how large a herd one has. In almost all communities of Southern Sudan, a household with less than 30 heads of cattle is considered poor. The general tendency for every household is therefore to build their herd to at least the minimum number required to get out of the category of the poor. This, along with the enormous demand for livestock for social exchange in payment of dowry, is the driving force for ongoing efforts in herd build-up through out all communities in Southern Sudan. To the extent that this underlying force is creating a strong demand among farmers for herd build-up 90

to a certain minimum economic size, then this can be regarded as a positive force which development efforts for the sector can be build upon. To the extent that this drives farmers to just go for numbers without consideration of the quality and productivity, it is then something that needs to be altered. Type of livestock: There are cultural inclinations to what species and type of livestock can be kept. At the broad level, this defines why most communities in Southern Sudan do not keep pigs (other than a few communities such as in Maban County in Upper Nile where the main livestock is pigs), the cultural centrality of cattle among the livestock species kept, and the general relegation of poultry as a side activity (for women). Among the common species kept (cattle, goats and sheep), there are also cultural preferences of the types/breeds, some going as far as skin colour definitions of what is good and what is bad or even taboo. This is a cultural aspect that will need consideration as efforts of introducing higher yielding breeds are put underway. Who is involved in what part of livestock production: From a cultural perspective, the roles and responsibilities of different members of the family in livestock production are determined. In most communities, herding labour comes from children (for some communities both boys and girls but in some, boys only) with supervision and direction from older men. This is the reason why children below 18 years of age (some as young as four years) comprise at least two thirds of herding labour. As education opportunities continue increasing, this will be an area that will be under pressure. Production practices adopted: Traditional practices among most communities in Southern Sudan designate crop cultivation zones (near homesteads) and open communal grazing lands. The communal herding practices and seasonal movements in search of pasture and water are some of the deeply entrenched cultural practices. As was discussed in Chapter 3, these practices pose a major challenge in disease control and management. From the teams assessment some of these practices continue taking place, at times, merely because it is the traditional way things are done and not necessarily out of need. In some zones, pastures (albeit dry) are available throughout the year and with some level of management (and supplementation from crop residues), farmers can actually retain their animals close home. In some instances also (such as in Leer, Unity State), it is noted that many farmers have only a few animals (not more than 20) which could mean that, with good pasture management, it is possible to avoid the communal herding and seasonal movements which they still practice.

On the whole, the cultural entrenchment of livestock production is regarded as a positive force in that it has built a strong culture of livestock production throughout Southern Sudan which is responsible for the large population of livestock in the country and continues to push farmers to increase their stock. This is likely to continue holding true into the foreseeable future and development initiatives need to take advantage of this. The negative aspects relate to the social orientation and continued adoption of traditional practices that stifle productivity and commercialization of the sector. These are areas that must be addressed. The cultural ingrain-ment of these practices however mean that initiatives targeted at these areas must delve into the realms of psychology of change management to be effective.

7.2.2 Pervasive cattle rustling/raiding

The phenomenon of cattle raiding which has increasingly become widespread in the whole of Southern Sudan (even among communities which traditionally did not practice cattle raiding) has shaped the livestock sector in the following five main ways: 91

Distribution of livestock breeds/types: Cattle raiding has been partly responsible for the spread of the various breeds of livestock among communities that raid against each other. Spread of livestock diseases: Some diseases, such as East Cost Fever (which was largely confined to parts of Central Equatoria) are said to have now spread into Eastern Equatoria, Jonglei and now into parts of Upper Nile through raiding. Arming and counter-arming of communities: incidences of cattle raiding which many communities consider not adequately dealt with through government law enforcement and justice systems have left many communities with no point of recourse other than to just arm themselves in readiness for the attackers. As communities intensify their arms build-up, the attackers are also getting more and more sophisticated with some incidences of use of RPGs (rocket propelled grenades) reported. This arms race/build up is an expensive affair in livestock production and worse still, it does not solve the problem but rather seems to escalate it. Cut-off of livestock supply routes and pasture lands: Due to the risk of cattle rustling and the insecurity it imposes, some supply routes are no longer accessible and so are some pasture lands. This also means that some zones are also cut off from any government or development agency interventions. Risk and uncertainty: cattle raiding and the insecurity it poses has imposed significant risk and uncertainty in many parts of Southern Sudan that makes serious private sector investment in the sector impossible.

Discussions with key informants in the livestock sector show that pervasive cattle rustling in Southern Sudan is a recent phenomenon that has become widespread during the period of peace (after the CPA of 2005) and it was largely non-existent during the war. Whereas this phenomenon is in itself a force that has negatively shaped the current status of the livestock sector, there are some people who see the driving force behind it as the cultural pressure for payment of dowry and herd build-up. Whatever the case, it is an issue that must be dealt with for commercialization and improved competitiveness of the sector to take place.

7.2.3 Low general socio-economic development

The low general socio-economic development in the country has been a major factor shaping the status and practices adopted in the livestock sector. The general absence of financial institutions and low monetization of the rural economy has generally meant that livestock has remained the main store of wealth and medium of exchange. The low socio-economic development, particularly in rural areas has also meant that livestock has generally been one of the only few investment options available to households. Poor road infrastructure has meant general inaccessibility of markets while low educational standards have also meant low skill levels and low infiltration of modern practices in livestock production. The low socio economic development has been the main force behind the general stagnation of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan in the past.

92

As Southern Sudan enters into a period of rapid socio-economic development which has already started being witnessed in the country since 2006, it is expected that general development of the rural economy will become a driving force for important changes in the sector, particularly towards monetization and commercialization.

7.2.4 Rapidly increasing demand for livestock and livestock products in Juba and other urban areas
There has been a rapid increase in the demand for livestock and livestock products in the major urban areas in Southern Sudan. The factors behind this have been rapid population increases in urban areas (urbanization) driven by rural-urban migration, returnees and natural growth rate on the one hand; and rapidly increasing incomes largely driven by oil revenues. For some urban areas, such as Juba, unconfirmed estimates suggest population growth rates in excess of 50% annually while incomes have more than quadrupled in the last 5 years. This rapid growth in urban population coupled with increased incomes have combined to build up an enormous demand for most products and services in Southern Sudan which, without a matching supplying base, has pushed prices for most products higher than in most countries in the region. For livestock, the higher prices for live animals (and meat) in Juba compared to Kampala and Nairobi has pushed a reversal of the once vibrant export of live animals to these countries to the current situation of imports from Uganda. As discussed in Chapter 5, the rapidly increasing demand for livestock and livestock products in urban areas is bound to remain the key positive driving force in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan.

7.2.5 Increasing educational opportunities for children

School-age children comprise more than two thirds of the herding labour force in Southern Sudan. Inaccessibility of education opportunities for these children has in the past ensured availability of unpaid family labour for herding and other livestock production activities. Improved availability of education opportunities as Southern Sudan moves towards universal primary education is starting to bear pressure on this labour pool and is bound to be an important driving force in commercialization of the herding function. As this pressure builds up it is expected that farmers will start looking at mechanisms for making the herding function as efficient as possible as well as generating a regular income from the livestock so as to meet the likely recurring monthly herding costs from paid labour. As children go to school, it is also expected that the pressure for selling livestock to meet education costs (especially related to higher education) will also increase. In our view, this is an important underlying force that is likely to shape the future commercialization of the livestock sector. Communities which adjust favourably to this force will increasingly commercialize and become more competitive; those that dont will increasingly become marginalized.

7.3

Leverage points

A leverage point within the context of value chains or sub-sectors refers to a system node where a small number of one category of players interacts with a large number of other players in the value chain. These points therefore become easy entry points through which interventions that influence the entire value chain can be made. The study identified the following geographical and policy related potential leverage points: 93

7.3.1 Geographical nodes

The livestock sector in Southern Sudan has four main geographical system nodes: production clusters; market infrastructure nodes; institutional infrastructure nodes; and other physical infrastructure nodes.

7.3.1.1 Production clusters Although livestock production is widely spread in all states of Southern Sudan, there are some easily discernible zones which have high concentrations of livestock populations. These include the
greater Kapoeta region in Eastern Equatoria; Nyirol and Pibor Counties in Jonglei; Nasir, Baliet and Renk in Upper Nile; Panyinjar, Mayon and Leer in Unity; and Terekeka in Central Equatoria for the fives states visited during the study. Although the scope of the study did not allow for us to delve deeply into the issue of clusters, there were strong indications that within each of these broad production clusters, some further delineation of specific zones with high production concentration can be done. In some of these areas, some trends towards commercialization are already emerging which could be leveraged upon. While the clusters pointed out here relate to beef production based on existing production systems, the study team notes that specific production clusters could also be identified for potential dairy production, commercial ranching (for beef) or even poultry.

7.3.1.2 Market infrastructure nodes Chapter 5 summarized the interrelationships of various players in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan and the key points of interaction. Some of the main points of interaction are the market infrastructure points involving primary, secondary and terminal livestock markets; the holding grounds, and the slaughter areas. Efforts directed at further development of this infrastructure, particularly in relation to depth of reach and increased efficiency, would be expected to have system wide impact in building the competitiveness of the sector.

7.3.1.3 Institutional infrastructure nodes There are several institutional points of leverage in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan but, perhaps the most important relates to training institutions for animal health and livestock production personnel. The main institution involved in this is Marial Lou in Lakes State. Strengthened capacity for this institution to increase the outflow of qualified personnel for the livestock sector is an area that would have wide impact in the whole value chain. Yet, it is also clear that this institution alone is not sufficient to ensure sufficient supply of qualified personnel for all cadres. Other institutions need to be identified and supported accordingly.

94

Other important institutional leverage points include capacity development of disease surveillance and response structures within MARF (GoSS and state) as well as the machinery for disease control and management.

The socio-cultural institutional infrastructure provided by tribal chiefs as well as the social leverage provided by locally elected leaders (including Governors) are also important nodes for leveraging efforts directed at social change of livestock producing communities.

7.3.1.4 Road infrastructure

Most roads in Southern Sudan are in poor condition and therefore, the road infrastructure can be said to be a major constraining factor in the commercialization and competitiveness of the sector. While this is true for the whole country and broad based efforts must continue being put in opening up the country, there are some roads that can be regarded as infrastructure leverage points. This is particularly so for those roads connecting rapidly commercializing production clusters. The case of the Kapoeta-Torit-Juba road falls into this category, particularly the Juba-Torit section can be regarded as an important leverage point in opening up the entire Kapoeta-Torit-Juba route which is heavily constrained and almost drying up due to this section.

7.3.2 Policy and regulatory nodes

The relatively short period of time during which Southern Sudan has been peaceful (Just five years since the CPA) means that almost all areas of policy and regulations related to building a conducive environment for development in general and the livestock sector in particular, are required. The study team however singles out the following five areas as perhaps the most critical as it relates to building the competitiveness of the livestock sector:

7.3.2.1 Livestock development policy framework The current livestock (animal resources) sector development policy framework was developed in 2006. The key purpose at this point was to set a framework for laying the foundation for institutional structures for coordination of the sector. While the policy framework has generally served the country well, significant lessons of experience have been generated in the implementation of the policy framework over the last couple of years. Some of the sticky areas relate to clarity of responsibilities and coordination in implementation of activities between GoSS and State levels as well as between different government departments and other development partners. Other aspects relate to low focus on animal production issues vis a vis animal health issues; issue of breed improvement, and many other areas related to improved productivity of the sector. Besides these areas, there is the question of building improved capacity (both human & resource-wise) in implementation. Revision of the livestock policy framework with a view to strengthening its comprehensiveness and coherence for

95

efficient implementation is therefore an area that could have a system wide impact on the whole sector.

7.3.2.2 Decisive policy and regulatory framework for control of cattle rustling Cattle rustling and the insecurity it imposes in the country is perhaps one of the biggest threats, not just for livestock development, but perhaps to the entire nation state of the whole of Southern Sudan. No meaningful commercialization and competitiveness of the livestock sector (and indeed the rest of the economy) can be achieved with the current state of insecurity and the continued escalation of arms in the hands of civilians. This is an area that must be dealt with from the highest levels of policy. A clear policy and regulatory framework for control and enforcement of mechanisms for eliminating this menace would have a significant impact on the whole sector.

7.3.2.3

Policy and regulatory issues related to quality standards

A major observation that has been made in all chapters of this report relates to the centrality of adherence to high livestock quality standards in building a competitive livestock sector in Southern Sudan. Quality issues not only touch on safeguarding public health but are also at the core of building productivity and competitiveness. Setting and enforcement of clear standards on production, processing and trade in livestock and livestock products will have a far reaching impact on the entire livestock sector. Part of the enforcement mechanism will also require consumer awareness on the need to demand high standards in the quality of livestock products offered in the market.

7.3.2.4 Land policy The land tenure system in Southern Sudan will have overarching implications on the possibilities of private sector-driven commercialization of the livestock sector in the country. Analysis of the livestock sector shows that it is hardly possible to commercialize the sector under the current practices of communal grazing rights. For effective private sector-driven disease control and management of the production systems which is at the core of building productivity and competitiveness of the sector, individual producers will need to have some control on the grazing lands. This is particularly so once development of a dairy sector dependent on a sedentary lifestyle and high degree of pasture management is introduced. It would also apply in the case of adoption of high quality beef production systems such as ranching. The core of this is a land tenure system that permits private ownership (even if on a short-term basis, such as in the case of lease arrangements).

7.3.2.5 Research and development The poor state of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan in terms of breeds and productivity is partly as a result of the many years of neglect on research and development by the Khartoum government. A 96

clear supportive policy framework that allows rapid strides in research and development will have transformational effects on the livestock sector in Southern Sudan in both medium and long-term. This is a central pillar for building the competitiveness of the sector.

97

8 KEY CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES

8.1Overview
Estimates made in Chapter 2 of this report clearly indicate that the livestock sector in Southern Sudan is big, both in terms of the number of producers as well as the population of livestock currently estimated at 11.7 million cattle and 24 million shoats with an asset value of around SDG 7 billion. Despite the enormous potential of the sector, discussions presented in Chapters 2 through 5 have shown that only a small proportion of the potential of the sector is currently exploited and, indeed, the core players in the value chain, the producers, are currently operating with negative margins if all the costs they incur are taken into account. The reasons behind this poor development of the livestock sector are many and varied, and most have been highlighted in passing throughout all earlier sections of this report. This section sets a basis for development of value chain interventions in the sector by pulling together into one section all the main constraints affecting the livestock value chain and putting them into broad clusters that enable meaningful design of interventions. The section also looks at the current opportunities within the value chain which could be taken advantage of in the design of practical interventions for the sector. 8.2 Major Constraints The constraints facing the livestock sector can be conventionally put into five broad categories based on the value chain functional area they are mainly manifested in production; product assembly and distribution; processing and value addition; marketing; and cross-cutting policy level issues affecting the whole sector. From a value chain perspective where emphasis is put on the interconnectedness of actors in all segments of the value chain, it is however realized that issues at one segment of the value chain are manifested in other segments and are therefore issues of the entire value chain. To emphasize this value chain view of issues, we discuss the key constraints facing the livestock value chain without necessarily grouping them into the conventional functional areas mainly because of their cross-cutting nature. We however highlight which areas they are affecting and the pivot points from where they should be addressed. While there are many constraints facing the livestock sector, the key ones can broadly be said to be seven. These are low productivity; low product quality and poorly developed quality assurance system; poor organization of actors; inadequate support infrastructure; poor market development; and an un-conducive macro-economic environment.

8.2.1 Low productivity

Low productivity stands out as perhaps the most significant constraint facing the livestock sector in Southern Sudan at the micro level. An analysis of the production segment of the value chain shows that at current levels of productivity, farmers are generally not breaking even the inputs they expend, whether monetized or not are higher than the returns they are getting either in the form of live animals or milk and other livestock products. Milk production is estimated at 1 2 litres per lactating cow over a lactating period of 6 8 months. When this is considered against the 1 - 2 year calving intervals, the average milk production per cow per day, usually computed for both lactating and dry mature cows, works out to less than 0.5 98

litres. Although the value chain study did not delve much into an analysis of the cost structures specific to milk production, this level of productivity is obviously much lower than the 5 7 litres per cow per day required for break-even among milk producers in neighbouring countries. For many households with small herds, the milk produced per day is not even enough to meet household milk consumption needs. For those with surpluses mainly because of large herds, the volumes are generally fairly small that they can hardly be assembled economically for marketing. This is the very reason behind the low capacity utilization at NICODO the only milk processing initiative in the five states visited which must continue receiving external support for it to operate. With regard to live animal production, analysis made in Chapter 2 shows that low birth/calving rates (partly attributed to high abortion rates), high calf (kid/lamb) mortality rates estimated to be as high as 50% in some states, and similarly high mature herd mortality rates (estimated to be 10 15%) all combine to bring down the natural herd increases in Southern Sudan to about 1 3% for cattle and 7 9% for shoats with some herds experiencing negative growth rates. Besides the high loss rates resulting from high mortality, stunted growth for calves and yearlings are also implying longer periods taken before maturity with bulls reaching reasonable saleable weight at 5 years (instead of 3) and heifers getting mature for calving at 4 5 years instead of 2 - 3 years. Gross margin estimates made in Chapter 5 have shown that for cattle, a producer with a herd of 100 heads must be able to produce to maturity at least 13 cattle heifers/bulls for the market every year for their livestock production ventures to breakeven. Discussions made in Chapters 2 through 5 have identified the following 3 factors as the key reasons behind the low productivity: (iv) Breeds: Unlike the situation in neighbouring countries as well as in the North of Sudan, almost all livestock in Southern Sudan comprises of indigenous breeds which have remained unimproved for generations. Since the genotype of livestock sets the limits for productivity, the low yielding breeds found among farmers is one of the major constraints holding back the productivity of the livestock sector. This is a major area that must be addressed. Animal health: Key areas of animal health contributing to low productivity of the sector include: high abortion rates leading to low birth rates; high mortality rates for both young and mature herd; and poor animal health leading to low yields. In Chapter 2 (see 2.5.4.2) we estimated that animal diseases are currently imposing an extremely heavy loss to the livestock sector estimated at around SDG 1.2 billion annually through mortality rates which are higher than acceptable levels of 3% for mature stock and 10% for young ones (calves/kids). The following have been highlighted as the main reasons behind these heavy losses: (vi) High prevalence of animal diseases; Poorly developed disease control and management infrastructure; Low availability and accessibility of adequately qualified animal health service providers; and Poor animal husbandry practices among farmers.

(v)

Feeding: Estimates made during the study show that within the bounds of the livestock breeds kept by farmers and the animal health delivery system in place, there is still a large proportion of productivity losses that are related to poor nutrition. This is attributed to poor grazing practices (few hours), poor pasture and water management; and lack of supplementary feeding particularly, essential mineral salts. 99

8.2.2 Low product quality and poorly developed quality assurance infrastructure Poor quality of live animals and meat offered for sale cuts across the entire value chain, starting from production all the way to the time meat is sold to consumers in the red meat channels. Information obtained during this study has confirmed that there are seven main points in the value chain where meat quality is affected (see Table 8.1). From an analysis of the ways through which the quality of live animals and meat offered for sale is affected points at the following six factors as the ones behind the poor quality: poor husbandry practices; low adherence to quality standards including deliberate interference with quality assurance enforcement procedures; unavailability of appropriate (dedicated) transportation means for meat; and low levels of awareness of the importance of quality standards of meat by suppliers (producers and traders) as well as consumers.
Table 8.1

Value chain points where meat quality is affected

Point in value chain Management on farm/range Transport to market Livestock market Meat quality and hygiene factor Underfed, malnourished animals exhibit slow growth rate and produce poor quality, tough meat. Diseases that reduce growth rate and often result in emaciated carcasses that produce poor quality meat. Zoonotic diseases that affect human health. Long distance trekking or trucking, without feed or water en-route, cause stress that lowers glycogen levels, thus negatively affecting the keeping quality (i.e. shortening the shelf-life) of meat derived from such animals. Lack of grazing and watering facilities for animals that are not bought immediately results in weight loss and stress that will ultimately affect meat quality negatively. Poor environmental hygiene exposing animals to diseases, some which could be zoonotic. Poor environmental hygiene; unhygienic slaughtering process without observing Standard Sanitary Procedures (SSOPs), Good Manufacturing Practices (GMA) or Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points (HACCP). This exposes carcasses to microbial contamination that reduces the shelf-life of the meat; it is also a potential health hazard. Poor environmental hygiene and unhygienic handling of meat that expose the meat to microbial contamination, reducing its shelf-life as well as posing a health risk to consumers. Poor, unhygienic meat storage and handling practices, particularly in low-market restaurants, that expose consumers to health risks. Tolerance to low quality standards, perhaps due to lack of awareness regarding quality and potential health risk of consuming contaminated meat.

Slaughterhouse/slab

Butcheries/meat selling points Hotels and restaurants Consumer

Meat quality is central to expansion of the current market channels for fresh meat and must therefore constitute an important element of efforts made towards better exploitation of the sectors potential. Successful interventions must however focus on the supply and demand side as well as policy and regulatory aspects related to setting of acceptable standards and their enforcement.

8.2.3 Poor commercialization

An analysis of the livestock value chain in Southern Sudan shows that although all other segments of the value chain are operating commercially, the foundational segment of the chain, production, is largely socially oriented. Lack of a business mindset and commercial orientation is making farmers to operate with little regard to basic business principles which form the basis for profitability due attention to inputs and outputs, and management of the process to ensure positive returns. In our assessment of the production function (in Chapter 3), farmers are not exactly aware of the various input cost areas and how these relate to overall productivity of their operations. Such input areas include animal health and nutrition (minerals) in control of the high abortions rates; good 100

management practices and inputs required in control of the high calf mortality rates; the importance of good pasture management, better herding practices and feed supplements (especially minerals) in ensuring high yields; and the place of effective preventive animal health services (such as vaccinations, de-worming and control of external parasites). In the same way, farmers are also not keenly aware of the output levels they must get from their herds for the production operations to be deemed profitable (even if the output is not sold and is used for household upkeep or for social exchange). Unless the production function is operating commercially, all supporting service areas are bound to have difficulties in commercial operation. These include inputs supply (especially animal health drugs and supplementary feeds); animal health and production services provision; and services related to product assembly. Again without a capacity for these services to be provided to farmers on a commercial basis, their accessibility is bound to remain limited and therefore become a constraining factor to the growth of the sector. This vicious circle must be broken. An assessment of the key factors behind the low levels of commercialization of the livestock production segment of the chain points at the following as the key areas that must be addressed: Traditional way of doing things: Most farmers, even those exposed and successfully operating other lines of business, continue operating their livestock production ventures without a business mindset basically because that is the way things are done and they have not spared a moment to think about it, leave alone question it. This is a common phenomenon among traditional subsistence oriented production systems in most developing countries and the starting point is a change of mindset among development agents. For development agents comprising government officials, development agencies, and other opinion leaders to influence commercialization, they must first and foremost be convinced that this s the way to go. In our assessment, many do not see this as the foundational issue that must be addressed in the livestock sector if the enormous asset base it presents is to be truly useful to the owners and the economy in general. This is a point that was recently echoed by the Vice President of Southern Sudan:
As the people of southern Sudan are pastoralists and agro-pastoralists, unless the attitude of pastoralists is streamlined towards accepting commercialization of their livestock, the cattle in Southern Sudan will have no positive impact on economic growth in the region
Dr. Riek Machar, Vice President, Government of Southern Sudan; Sept 2010

Awareness: Beyond just a simple lack of a business mindset, lack of awareness is a key factor in the low commercialization of the sector. Largely because the production function is generally un-monetized, most farmers are not aware whether they are making a loss or not. In our view, this is the starting point for any efforts targeted at commercialization of the sector. This not only applies to the farmers alone but also among change agents in the livestock sector. Any support institution working in the sector needs to know the kind of cost structures the production function is facing and be convinced that the production function must operate with positive margins for the entire livestock sector to operate sustainably. In this study, we have attempted to quantify the costs incurred by farmers, whether monetized or not and the overall output that must be generated for the enterprise to make economic sense. This is an area that needs to be verified and validated, and then the results used in creating awareness among development change agents and farmers. Knowledge and skills: Operating a commercial enterprise requires both technical and business skills. The low levels of education and training among livestock producers has a 101

contributory effect on the low commercialization of the sector and this is an area that will need to be addressed. Scale of operation/ herd sizes: Commercialization of any enterprise requires a certain minimum threshold of operation for viability. Rough estimates done in Chapter 5 suggest that the minimum cattle herd for breakeven in Southern Sudan is 26, assuming adoption of good practices. Under the current practices however, the minimum herd size goes as high as 50 cattle. Estimates on herd sizes in the sector show that most farmers in the sector are operating below this minimum threshold for commercialization. Indeed, the simple average of 12 cattle per farmer means that, given current productivity levels, the livestock sector as a whole is operating below the minimum threshold for viability. Yet, with different cost structures (efficiencies) and productivity levels, this is a herd size that can be built upon to ensure reasonable positive returns. Communal ownership of pastures and herding practices: An issue that the study team kept on posing to key informants is the extent to which the livestock sector can commercialize under current communal operations. Although there were varied opinions, the overall conclusion was that it will be extremely difficult for farmers to achieve significant levels of commercialization under current communal pasture management practices and herding practices particularly with respect to control and management of diseases; and high productivity related to good feeding practices. This is an area that must be addressed for improved commercialization of the livestock sector to take place.

Key options in commercialization of the sector include interventions geared at increased commercial off-take rates among traditional livestock producers; support for establishment of large-scale commercial livestock farms (ranches both public and private); support for establishment of smallholder commercial livestock production ventures particularly in dairy or feedlots in areas with good market access. These options are explored further in Chapter 9.

8.2.4 Accessibility of support services

The livestock sector requires many support services for it to achieve the levels of productivity required for competitiveness. These include technical services in animal health and production; technology related services for upgrading and value addition; business management and advisory services for profitable operations; and other business support services such as financial services. Without exception, the accessibility of these services among all key actors in the value chain is limited. Given the current status of the sector particularly in relation to disease control and management, and low productivity levels, however, the accessibility of services in animal health and animal production can however be singled out as perhaps the most constraining. Significant efforts have been put in increasing the supply of animal health services and the result is that most areas in Southern Sudan are now fairly well covered by community level animal health workers. What is now required is to ensure utilization of services of this cadre of service providers among farmers. From our assessment, both supply and demand-side factors are limiting utilization of services. The key supply-side factors include need for improved technical skills and knowledge; marketing and business skills to operate as viable businesses; and access to working capital for acquisition of drugs and facilitation of mobility. On the demand side, significant efforts need to be put in stimulation of demand among farmers (largely awareness of the need to use services) and awareness creation of the availability of services provided by the service providers. An important cross-cutting issue (affecting both demand and supply) that must also be addressed is the continued distortion of the service provision market by government and development agencies. So long as there are free (or subsidized) services available in the community, it will be difficult for service providers to operate viably within the same community. In the same way, so long as service providers know 102

that they can be hired by government/development agencies to provide services to farmers for free, then this will always remain the easier option. Besides the lower cadre of community animal health workers, all levels of service providers are in short supply and efforts must continue for increased supply. The assessment of the study team is that most of the ongoing efforts have focused on animal health and much less on issues of animal production. In our view, this is an area that requires a lot more attention to be in tandem with efforts in animal health. It is also in this area where issues of building the business management skill base for producers and their overall mindset towards commercialization can be addressed. These are critical areas that, unless addressed, even efforts made in increased accessibility of healthcare services will not bear significant payoffs. Discussions made in Chapter 3 through 5 pointed at the need for financial services in facilitating improved efficiencies and commercialization of the various segments of the value chain. At production level, there is significant demand for financial services for acquisition of high quality breeds for building a viable scale herd size as well as working capital for smoothening operations. At all trading levels, accessibility of working capital finance was pointed out as a key constraint in limiting scale of operation among live animal traders as well as butchery owners. This is an area that needs to be addressed if the livestock value chain is to build the levels of productivity required for competitiveness in both the domestic and regional markets.

8.2.5 Poor market access

Market access is a key ingredient in building productivity and competitiveness of any value chain. The study notes three aspects of market access that must be addressed: Market infrastructure: Estimates made in Chapter 3 suggest that Southern Sudan has only 167 livestock markets out of which 117 are primary markets that provide the basic points where farmers can trade their livestock. These are obviously few market points given the expanse of the country and the widespread production of livestock throughout the country. This situation means that there are many livestock production zones which have no access to livestock markets within a one-day trekking distance. Discussions with key informants show that for livestock markets to be considered somewhat adequate in number, most Payams would need to have at least one livestock market. Given that Southern Sudan has more than 500 Payams, the current number of primary markets can be said to be just about 25% of the number required. Besides just the number of markets, significant efforts are also required in improving the performance and efficiency of the markets. For instance availing watering points, loading ramps and holding areas have potential to increase efficiency in the markets. Other aspects of improved efficiency include exploration of mechanisms for increasing the number of trading hours and frequency of markets to make sure that the markets are effective bulking points where traders do not have to wait for 2 3 days to be amble to assemble the number of livestock they need. Road infrastructure: Road infrastructure is the other important component of market access that must be addressed for improved supply chain efficiency and overall competitiveness of the value chain. Market development: Discussions made in Chapter 2 have shown that the supply potential of the current size of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan is much bigger than the current demand for live animals and red meat in the domestic market. As efforts for increasing the productivity of the livestock sector are put in place and begin paying off, the current market channels will need further development. Domestic processing of meat, further development of high-quality meat and meat products, initiatives towards increased consumption of meat from 103

the 4.5 kg annual per capita consumption level, and opening up of external markets are some of the areas that will require market development. In our view, although the need for market development may not be immediate, the laying of the blocks for this development needs to be done in the immediate term. These critical building blocks relate to quality and quality assurance infrastructure.

8.2.6 Un-conducive macro-economic environment

An enabling business environment has many components but some of the basic aspects include property rights and assurance of fair returns. The study identifies the following three main issues affecting the business environment in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan: Cattle raiding: As discussed in various sections of this report, cattle raiding and the insecurity it causes stands out as perhaps the biggest threat and constraint to the livestock sector in Southern Sudan. No meaningful development of the sector can take place under the current uncertainties and actual costs imposed by this menace. It is an area of business environment that must be addressed for the efforts put in development of the sector to bear fruit. High and multiple taxation: High taxation at multiple points, particularly in the bulking and transportation segment of the value chain is imposing significant inefficiencies in the livestock sector. This is an area that needs to be addressed in several ways: overall reduction of tax burden (starting with removal of the illegal taxes), removal of multiple taxation points; clarity on taxable amounts and removal of illegal taxes; and provision of services commensurate to the fees charged. Land tenure: A basic area that will need to be addressed as efforts towards commercialization of the sector are put underway relate to land tenure. Our understanding is that this is an issue at the top of the agenda to be dealt with after the outcomes of the January 2011 referendum are known. The important thing for the livestock sector is to have a mechanism for close engagement and input into the deliberations that will shape the type of land policy that is eventually adopted in the country to ensure that it provides room for commercialization.

8.2.7 Poor organization of sector

Over 90% of primary actors in the livestock sector can be regarded as small-scale operators from the volume of produce they are handling as individuals be they producers or traders. For the value chain to be competitive and profitable, operators must act together particularly on all issues related to market access and penetration. The study revealed that producers and traders are, by and large, not organized and where some groupings exist, they are generally weak. Poor standards in animal husbandry and the costly product assembly process are largely attributable to poor organization of producers. This also applies to other segments of the value chain and, indeed, the entire chain as a whole. There have however been attempts in the past of bringing together players in the sector for joint action and, indeed, this is perhaps what is responsible for some of the positive developments that have led to increased commercialization of the sector at the retail and processing functions. Our view is however that the sector seems to be still operating without a coherent joint vision and strategy for development. This must constitute the starting point for any meaningful development of the sector and our view is that the analyses made under this study (and other related studies) provide a good basis for starting discussions geared at building consensus among players on the importance of working together for their common good.

104

8.3Opportunities
The livestock sector in Southern Sudan has many opportunities for growth and transformation and, in itself, also presents many opportunities for investment by both the business community interested in financial returns and social investors interested in increased household incomes and socio-economic transformation of communities. The value chain study identifies the following four as some of the key opportunities in the sector: large production base; suitable agro-ecological environment; unmet local and regional demand; and opportunities related to the likely birth of the new nation of Southern Sudan.

8.3.1 Large production base

A large production base already exists in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan. This comprises of a large population of approximately 950,000 farmers with a strongly entrenched interest and experience in livestock production and with a per capita livestock holding higher than in any other part of Africa. The livestock population is large estimated at 11.7 million cattle and 24 million shoats with a herd structure (of 70% female) suitable for high productivity. Efforts targeted at the sector can therefore not only bear fruit in the immediate and short term period but also be spread among many actors, many of them poor but with an actively yearning to get out of poverty. Further analysis of the production base shows that the sector is currently organized in a manner that there are clearly discernible geographical nodes from where leveraged interventions can be targeted. From a socio-economic investment perspective, the large production base presents an excellent opportunity for development agencies to reach large numbers of the poor through this sector without expending significant resources and time in building the households asset base first. For the business community, the large population of livestock and the supply base for live animals and livestock products presents enormous opportunities. In Chapters 2 and 3, we discussed some of the untapped business opportunities. For instance, the supply of animal health drugs at the estimated SDG 25 per cattle stands out as a SDG 300 million a year business opportunity that is hardly unexploited while for hides and skins, already a significant potential for development of a leather industry exists.

8.3.2 Suitable agro-ecological environment

Southern Sudan has perhaps one of the most suitable agro-ecological environments for livestock production in the world. The expansive pasturelands and water resources combine with the low human population to make Southern Sudan a country with the potential of becoming one of the leading livestock producers in the world.

8.3.3 Unmet local and regional demand

The livestock sector has a number of market channels with rapidly expanding domestic demand and enormous export potential. The domestic demand for meat and meat products is rapidly increasing in rural areas and even more so in urban areas, driven by rapidly increasing urbanization, rising incomes and changing urban consumption habits skewed towards eating in restaurants. The export potential is also high, especially in the medium and long-term once key issues in livestock disease control and management; and quality assurance issues are addressed.

8.3.4 Availability of government resources for investment

The significant resources available to the Government of Southern Sudan (mainly from oil revenues) and the devolved nature of government through State and County level distribution of resources for implementation of development programs presents an important opportunity for investment in areas with high social and economic returns. For the government, the livestock sector presents one of the areas where its resources can have immediate to long-term impact in changing the lives of its people. 105

For development agencies, the livestock sector presents an excellent opportunity where investment of donor funds through carefully crafted interventions can leverage the efficient use of huge resources from government.

8.3.5 Opportunities presented by the expected rebirth of the new nation of Southern Sudan.
Many potential players in the development landscape of Southern Sudan have been in a state of wait and see for the last few years waiting to see how the January 2011 referendum on separation of Southern Sudan from the North goes. While this has been an adverse situation for development efforts, the forthcoming referendum presents an excellent opportunity to end this state of wait and see and open the doors for long-term engagements and planning horizons for players. It is a good opportunity for the government to lay a firm foundation for development of the livestock sector and the rest of the economy through implementation of well articulated interventions.

106

9 CHAIN DEVELOPMENT: POSSIBLE INTERVENTIONS

9.1Overview
This section concludes discussions on the livestock value chain in Southern Sudan by highlighting the study teams thoughts on areas of possible interventions. These recommendations are drawn from a value chain development perspective which recognizes the interconnectedness of various players in a chain and the need for joint vision and strategy in optimizing operational efficiencies and valueaddition at each chain segment as a basis for building the overall competitiveness of the chain. Discussions on possible interventions explored in this section are therefore suggestive in nature and are highlighted for purposes of constituting a starting point for discussions by stakeholders in the value chain towards identification of a joint vision, strategy and action plan for development of the sector. As discussed in Chapter 8, the areas of possible interventions discussed in this section are developed to directly address the key constraints holding back growth and competitiveness of the livestock value chain while at the same time taking advantage of the various opportunities in the sector. The proposed interventions are in no way exhaustive but, in our view, constitute some of the critical areas that deserve most attention in turning around the livestock sector in Southern Sudan towards commercialization and competitiveness.

9.2Proposed Interventions
From a careful analysis of the key constraints and opportunities facing the livestock sector in Southern Sudan, the study team recommends the following nine areas of intervention:

9.2.1 Adopt a value chain approach in development of the livestock sector

The nature of the key constraints facing the livestock sector in Southern Sudan is that they are crosscutting and require a coordinated approach from all players in the value chain to be effectively addressed. Low productivity in the production segment affects profitability and competitiveness of all other segments of the value chain and so does quality of live animals produced and offered for sale in the market. On the same line, poor development of market infrastructure affects all players and so does the phantom of cattle raiding and the insecurity it imposes on the sector. For these issues to be effectively addressed, a coordinated approach is required from all core chain actors as well as all other players whose actions (or lack of actions) have an influence on performance of the sector. As a starting point, the value chain study has identified the various common and conflicting issues facing players in the different segments of the chain. It has also identified possible chain leaders, facilitators and leverage points for targeted interventions that can have systemic effects on the whole chain. What is now required is to bring together all key players in the sector to deliberate on these issues and develop a shared vision and strategy for development of the value chain. To do this, we recommend investment in a process that engages all key players in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan in development of a joint vision and strategy for the sector. While there are various ways of doing this, our assessment is that perhaps the best way is to have a Livestock Month. During this period a series of engagement forums in all the states could be held culminating into a one-week forum at the national level where key issues of concern to the sector are given ample time for discussions and deliberations, borrowing from best practices elsewhere. The length of period for this initial engagement can be varied but in our view, it needs to be sufficient for coverage of all the ten states and culminate into a national forum. The period also needs to be long enough for the 107

intensive sensitization and awareness campaigns through median and other means to have an impact on the targeted audience. As a minimum, this process of grassroots-to-national level engagements should address the following issues in detail: Cattle rusting and insecurity; Land tenure and communal herding practices; Productivity and competitiveness of the livestock value chain (all value chain specific issues including stifling nature of multiple taxation in the sector); and Traditional social orientation of the sector and the need for commercialization. The nature of the initial engagement is that it should lead to the following key outputs: sector organization into regional and thematic working groups of key stakeholders; joint strategy for addressing key issues in the value chain; and follow-up action points for continued engagement.

9.2.2 Address information gaps for effective planning and monitoring of performance
Effective planning and implementation of interventions geared at development of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan is heavily depended on availability of reliable information. The most glaring information gap relates to estimates of the population of livestock and its distribution across the country. This information is urgently required and it is therefore strongly recommended that efforts towards undertaking a national livestock census be expedited. Once this information has been generated, it is also recommended that a process of revision of information contained in this value chain report of the sector is undertaken. Beyond generation of the baseline data on livestock population in the country, an effective mechanism for generating periodic information on changes taking place in the sector need to be put in place. The study team notes that this is currently a major challenge that needs to be addressed in a coordinated manner, starting with establishment of the structures, setting up of the systems and development of the capacity of these structures for effective collection, compilation, synthesis and timely dissemination of reliable information. To fully harness the power of information in development of the livestock sector, the study team further recommends establishment of an effective knowledge management structure. At the moment, a market information system at MARF that tracks livestock prices and pasture developments in all states (CLIMIS) is doing a great job in generating and disseminating market information on the livestock sector. Many other types of information on the livestock sector in Southern Sudan are however still scattered and not readily available to different players in the sector. It is therefore strongly recommended that the scope of CLIMIS (or a similar structure) be expanded to become a full repository and resource centre for information on the livestock sector in the country. On the whole, the following are additional key areas showing significant information gaps that require urgent attention: Conduct value chain analysis of the livestock sector in the five remaining States (Western Equatoria, Lakes, Warrap, Western Bahr el Ghazal, and Northern Bahr el Ghazal) to provide a comprehensive picture of the livestock sector in the whole of Southern Sudan; Conduct value chain analyses of the other livestock value chains excluded in the scope of the current study. These include Milk; hides and skins (Leather); Poultry meat; Eggs; and Fish; Undertake further detailed analyses of the production segment of the value chain to ascertain birth and mortality rates as well as the full structure of costs at the production stage (both actual and implied) which must be taken into consideration as efforts geared at commercialization of the sector are considered; 108

Undertake detailed design missions for each of the proposed interventions to determine, first and foremost, overall feasibility and workout details on the implementation process including quantification of resources and timelines; Conduct a detailed assessment of the livestock extension and service provision system to establish a reliable inventory of current status and identify a process through which an effective system for Southern Sudan can be developed; and Undertake further review of the policy environment to provide background material for revision of the animal resources strategy and policy framework for effective coordination of the development of the livestock sector in Southern Sudan.

9.2.3 Develop programs for increased productivity of the livestock sector

Productivity in the livestock sector in Southern Sudan is low and, indeed, most producers are currently operating on negative margins (making losses) if all costs are taken into consideration. For the livestock sector in Southern Sudan to be competitive, productivity must be increased. According to the main factors contributing to low productivity, interventions need to target the following: (i) Create awareness on the causes of low productivity and implications on overall returns The teams assessment is that although farmers and other players in the livestock sector are aware that productivity is fairly low, there has hardly been any quantification of how low it is, the various factors contributing to this and the overall effect of this on profitability. The current main culprits for the low productivity are high abortion rates, high mortality for young and mature livestock, poor status of nutrition brought about mainly by poor animal husbandry practices, and rearing animals of low genetic potential. The result of this is that the natural growth for herds is low (and sometimes negative) and the overall implication is that farmers are making losses in their livestock production ventures. There is a general tendency for farmers to feel that the state of affairs is beyond their control and external support is required in dealing with these issues. From an articulation of the specific points at which low productivity is determined, however, the assessment of the study team is that a significant portion of the state of affairs in terms of low productivity is attributable to just mere lack of awareness on simple things which if practiced consistently can significantly improve on productivity. (ii) Improve delivery of animal health and animal production services among farmers. Significant efforts have been put in developing animal health service providers. These efforts are bearing fruit in terms of the number of service providers, particularly at the lowest level of community animal health workers (CAHWs). There is an urgent need to develop animal health manpower at higher levels (veterinarians, stock persons, AHAs) to oversee improved delivery of services. Efforts must also be put towards improving usage of services. Both supply and demand-side interventions are required in this area. On the supply side, efforts must continue being put on building the technical skill of providers for them to be effective (and create confidence among users on the value of their services), their business mindset and management skills in operating as profitable enterprises; and working capital base for successful operations. On the demand side, efforts are required in stimulating the demand for the services among farmers as well as addressing the crowding out effect posed by continued provision of free or subsidized services by the public sector (government and NGOs). Another area that needs serious consideration is investment in disease control, surveillance and reporting systems, with community participation, in order to reduce livestock losses and improve productivity. This is critical for the viability of pastoral livelihoods. In addition to improved access to animal health services, the study team notes that there is need to pay attention to issues related to animal production which hitherto appears to have 109

been neglected. In our view a lot of issues related to low productivity may be attributed to the overall animal husbandry/management systems practices applied by farmers. (iii) Support farmers endeavours to build their herds to a minimum economic size Estimates done during the value chain study suggest that although the communal/traditional herding systems practiced in Southern Sudan give an illusion of large herd sizes, in actual fact most livestock farmers in the country have herds which are below the economic size. For the available breeds and prevailing costs structures, the estimated minimum economic herd for cattle is 26. For farmers to operate profitably, they need to move towards this minimum herd size as quickly as possible. Interventions for acquisition of initial stock and build up through natural growth are required. These include development of the market for breeding stock, increased accessibility of financial services for herd build-up and adoption of good husbandry practices to ensure fast natural growth. Improve farmer acquisition of high quality breeds The livestock breeds in Southern Sudan are generally of low genetic potential, contributing to low productivity as evidenced by the long time taken to reach maturity, low milk yield and low body weight. Various short, medium and long-term interventions are possible in this line. The starting point is however an assessment of the viability of possible options. Possible options include importation of breeding stock, directly as live animals or even in the form of embryo transfer technology which is fairly well practiced in the region (including the North of Sudan); breed selection programs for locally available breeds; crossbreeding with higher yielding breeds and establishment of research and development farms for breeding. Performance trials of the various breeds/cross-breeds under different agroecological/livelihood zones should be considered.

(iv)

9.2.4 Design interventions for quality control and assurance

The quality of livestock and livestock products offered in the market in Southern Sudan is generally low. An assessment of the points at which the quality of meat and other related products is affected shows that quality is a crosscutting issue in the value chain and must be addressed in an integrated manner. The analysis of leverage points in the sector however shows that one point at which the quality of meat and other livestock products can be influenced is at the policy and regulatory level through development of an effective quality standards and enforcement policy and legislative framework. Once the policy and legislative framework is in place, interventions targeted at supporting compliance by value chain players will be required. Part of this will include sensitization and awareness creation both among actors in the value chain where compliance is expected (such as slaughter areas and butcheries) but also among consumers for them to demand good quality and exercise their economic power in driving compliance. Beyond awareness however, some targeted support for workspace improvement for slaughter areas/abattoirs, butcheries and markets will be required, and so would support to the transportation function both for live animals to terminal markets as well as meat transportation from abattoirs to butcheries. Issues of skill and knowledge in quality control and assurance among these direct players will also be necessary. On the whole however, a significant part of the efforts in quality control and assurance is required in setting up an effective infrastructure for quality control and assurance. This requires significant capacity development both in terms of number of personnel as well as their skills and facilities for good performance. The other area of capacity development is enforcement which is currently the weakest part.

9.2.5 Explore entry points for introduction of commercial livestock production

110

There is no commercially oriented livestock production in Southern Sudan today. Yet it is only through a commercial orientation that the country can ever be expected to achieve its livestock production potential. At least three options for commercialization appear to be feasible:

Re-orientation of current traditional livestock producers towards a business mindset in their livestock production activities. The study has identified various entry points for this commercialization process. This includes a small but significant group of producers (estimated to number about 50,000 spread throughout the communities) who are well exposed, are literate, are easy to change and are significantly influential opinion leaders in their communities. These include livestock traders who already run successful businesses in the trading segment of the chain (or other business lines) but are not applying their business skills in their production activities; political leaders (most Governors and county Commissioners included), and professionals involved in livestock production. Empirical experience from the psychology of change management applied in transformation of corporate culture suggests that the process will need to include the following four components: packaging of the commercialization offer in a way that those targeted can passionately believe in it; reinforcement of the systems for positive incentives (high productivity, access to markets, profitability); support for acquisition of the skills required to change; and identification and use of consistent role models/champions. In our assessment, this is the option that would have the highest impact over time, particularly in relation to a pro-poor development perspective. It is however bound to take time for significant results to be noticeable. The efforts must however begin now.

Introduction of large scale commercial livestock farming. For Southern Sudan to fully take advantage of the enormous opportunities in the livestock sector and truly become competitive at a regional and global level, the sector must be driven by a commercial segment where high productivity of high quality produce is possible. This could be through public-privatepartnership arrangements in investing in large scale ranching and dairy farming (and other livestock production ventures such as poultry production). A possible starting point is for the government to consider partnering with private sector to re-start former government owned livestock production centres/farms in Kapoeta and elsewhere with a view to developing them into commercial operations. The private sector would work with government on a buildoperate and transfer (BOT) basis. The government could also partner with large scale local producers through a support mechanism, to transform the existing farm in a high quality cattle production farm through improved farm management and animal husbandry.

Support for development of small-scale specialized commercial livestock production ventures. For red meat production, the assessment team notes that a significant opportunity for low-inputs feedlot developed modelled along the lines of the case of the Ethiopian feedlot industry exists. There is also significant opportunity for small-scale dairy production especially in peri-urban environments.

9.2.6 Build the capacity of MARF at both GoSS and State levels
111

The Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries (MARF) at both GoSS and State levels is a key player in the development of the livestock sector. Whereas the study team did not delve into detail in an assessment of the capacity of the Ministry to carry out its mandate in overseeing development of the sector, anecdotal information clearly points at significant capacity gaps that need to be addressed. These include staffing both in terms of number of personnel as well as their skills and training; and facilitative resources for effectiveness. At the field level, one of the key constraints noticed is staff mobility.

9.2.7 Develop programs for improved market access

Discussions in Chapter 8 showed that market access remains a key constraint in the commercialization of the livestock sector. Required interventions in this area include support for continued development of livestock market infrastructure, improved access roads and control of the menace of insecurity.

9.2.8 Improve access to business support services

Increased accessibility of business support services in the livestock sector is required. These include technical services in animal health and production as well as other services geared at increasing the management skills of farmers and other players in the livestock sector. Other important services include improved accessibility of financial services. The government could consider supporting qualified veterinary professionals to establish enterprises to provide animal health services, as well as incorporating such enterprises in government led programmes aimed at increasing vaccination coverage.

9.2.9 Support development of infrastructure for processing of livestock products and by-products
It has been noted in this report that slaughter takes place under unhygienic conditions that pose a health risk to consumers. Meat selling outlets are also generally in a poor state of hygiene. Further, there are no facilities for processing hides and skins most of which currently go to waste. Potential interventions in this area include: Support to establishment of modern slaughterhouses: consideration should be made regarding development of model slaughterhouse designs for use by potential investors; Establishment of improved butcheries, with value addition e.g. producing meat cuts that could be supplied to high end markets that are currently importing such cuts; and Establishment of tanneries to process the large quantities of hides and skins currently going into waste. This could eventually lead to development of a viable leather industry.

112

References
1. AFID and MASRA (2009). Livestock marketing for food security in Southern Sudan. A Report for FAO/EC. 2. Aklilu, Y. Irungu, P. and Alemahehu Reda (2002). An Audit of the Livestock Marketing Status in Kenya, Ethiopia and Sudan. A Report for OAU/IBAR PACE. 3. Alternative Program Solutions (2009). Roles and responsibilities of the public and private sectors in the provision of animal health services in Southern Sudan. A Study Report for LESP/VSF-Belgium/MARF. 4. AU/IBAR and NEPDP (2006). Kenya Livestock Sector Study: An Analysis of pastoralist livestock products value chains and potential external markets for live animals and meat. 5. de Jode, H. (2010) (Editor). Modern and mobile: The future of livestock production in Africa. Publishers: IIED and SOS Sahel UK 2010. 6. Dr. Charles Komakech (2010-personal communication). 7. Field, C. R. (2005). Where there is no Development Agency. A manual for pastoralists and their promoters. NR International, Aylesford, Kent, UK. 260 pp. ISBN 0-9546452-4-3. 8. Gathuma, J.M., Emilio, A. and Arasio, R.L. (2008). Livestock marketing survey for Eastern Equitoria State. A Report for SNV, Netherlands Development Organization, Juba, Sudan. 9. Gathuma, J.M., Jiji, B. and Emilio, A. (2009). Livestock production chain survey for Eastern Equitoria State. A Report for SNV, Netherlands Development Organization, Juba, Sudan. 10. Government of Southern Sudan (GOSS) (2010). GOSS Growth Strategy-2010-2012. Final Draft Report. 11. GOSS/MARF (2010). Markets and Rangelands Performance. Southern Sudan Livestock and Fisheries Bulletin, Volume 1 and 2. A Publication of GOSS/MARF. 12. Hartfield, R. and Davies, J. (Editors). (2006). Global Review of the Economics of Pastoralism. Paper for World Initiative for Sustainable Pastoralism. IUCN, Nairobi, 2006. 13. IGAD (undated). Key issues for livestock and pastoralism in Sudan. Policy Brief. Based on The political economy of livestock and pastoralism in Sudan. Dan Fahey, 2007. Livestock Policy Initiative. 14. King, A. and Mukasa-Mugerwa, E. (2002). Livestock marketing in Southern Sudan with particular reference to the cattle trade between Southern Sudan and Uganda. A Consultancy Report for OAU/IBAR PACE Community-based Animal Health and Participatory Epidemiology Unit (CAPE). 15. Little, P.D. (2007). Cross-Border Livestock Trade in Eastern Africa: Myths, Realities, and Challenges. Presentation for USAID, June 21, 2007, Nairobi, Kenya. 16. MARF (2006). Animal Resources Sector Policy and Strategic Plan. 17. Muriuki, H.K. (2010). Dairy Specialist Final Report to MARF, August, 2010. 18. SNV (2010). ASARECA research. Draft Report. 19. SSCCSE (2010). Poverty in Southern Sudan; Estimates from National Baseline Household Survey (NBHS), March 2010. 20. Steglich, M. (2009). LPMP Livestock Production and Marketing Assessment: Baseline assessment on livestock marketing and production. Draft Report. 21. YAM/ACACIA (2010). A Feasibility Study on the Establishment of a Central Abattoir in Northern Kenya. A Consultancy Report for Ewaso Ngiro North Development Authority.

Appendices
Appendix 1: List of key persons contacted during the study Appendix 2: Additional Tables and Figures Appendix 3: Study Instruments Appendix 4: Study Terms of Reference

Appendix 1: List of Key Officials Contacted During the Study

S/N Name 1. Adam Abdulaziz 2. Ahmed Akasha 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. Peter Mawa Santo More Alfonce Keny Khamis Wani H.K. Muriuki Charles Lado Antene Yimenu Havis Mohamed Yagub Musa Ibrahim Ahmed Dr. Taban Tereka Dr. Charles Komakech Alex Mati Stephen M. Kimondiu Dr. Samuel Malinga Dr. George Otieno Gergi Aluom Maker Ali Bashir Awad Yasin Thomas Awin Akol Ajak Akol Chol Agor Arow Chajok Joseph Dr. Adol Apollo Achiek Organization Private trader, Juba Akasha Trading Enterprises, Juba Tuli Pharmacy, Juba Juba County Butchers Union, Juba. Juba County Butchers Union, Juba Juba County Butchers Union, Juba Private Consultant, Juba NICODO Dairy, Juba Dammit Pharma for Trading & Investment, Juba Market 6 (Army/Ishlak), Juba Suk 6 Butchers Association, Juba. GoSS MARF, Juba Gulu Veterinary Office, Uganda Terekeka County HQ, CES FAO, Malakal VSF-Germany, Upper Nile State VSF-Germany, Upper Nile State Bor, Jonglei State. Jadhara Butchery, Malakal, Upper Nile State Nasir Drugstore, Malakal, Upper Nile State. Malakal, Upper Nile State. Malakal, Upper Nile State. Zero Market, Renk, Upper Nile State. Zero Market, Renk, Upper Nile State. Zero Market Renk, Upper Nile State. Judah Border Point, Renk, Upper Nile State. State MARF, Jonglei State Responsibility/activity Hides & skins trader Hides & skins trader Manger, Tuli Pharmacy Member, Finance Committee chairman Member Consultant, MARF, Juba Manager Manger Butcher Chairman Deputy Director, Disease & Vector Control District Veterinary Officer Deputy Executive Director, Terekeka Field Veterinarian, MDTF Veterinarian, MDTF Project Manager, USAIDOFDA Butcher Pharmacy owner Butcher Livestock trader Livestock trader Livestock trader Livestock trader Rate Collector Remark

28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66.

Chol Deng Gutnyin Makuach Mun Kem Samuel Mawel Anyot Majok Aywen Merch Madding Alier Tot Puy Majok Dr. Dominic Peter Awol Michael Laban Mohamed Ahmed Omerio Richard James Omorou Ibrahim Abdalla Monitor Gore Sanitno Lado Peter Mashod John Maliah Ruot James Mathok John Jahn Zeidan Mohammed Hussein Ibrahim Ali Ahmed Hassan Stephen Nyang Kaujock Gabriel Jada Stephen Kai Toul Toar Deng Dual Ruandial Ker Ruai Behita Muluan
Stephen Kai Toul Toar Deng Dual Ruondial Ker Ruai Behita Moluan Grace Abino Night Abass Siama Ofis Susan Sida Yolanda Baby Kaltuma Abdulahi Emmanuel Sara Gebre Medihin

State MARF, Jonglei State State MARF, Jonglei State Bor Butchers Association, Jonglei State. Bor Butchers Union, Jonglei State. Bor, Jonglei State Bor County, Jonglei State. Chairman Butcher

Livestock trader Assistant Commissioner, Animal Resources MARF, Renk County, Upper Director of Animal Resources, Nile State Renk VSF-Germany, Malakal, Upper Nile State. Ugandan Trader Livestock trader Ugandan trader Livestock trader Ugandan trader Livestock trader/transporter Juba Butcher Juba Livestock trader Juba Livestock trader Juba Tax Collector Unity State Rubkona County Veterinary Director Unity State Rubkona County Veterinary Officer Unity State County Fisheries Unity State Pharmacy owner Rubkona, Unity State Rubkona, Unity State Rubkona, Unity State Leer County, Unity State Leer County, Unity State Unity State Unity State Unity State Unity State Unity State Unity State Unity state Unity State Eastern Equitoria State Eastern Equitoria State Eastern Equitoria State Eastern Equitoria State Eastern Equitoria State Unity State Unity State Unity State Butcher Butcher Veterinary Pharmacy owner VSF-Swiss staff CAHW Trader Consumer Consumer Consumer Trader Consumer Consumer Consumer Consumer Consumer Consumer Consumer Consumer Hotel and restaurant consumer Hotel and restaurant consumer Hotel and restaurant consumer 4

67. 68. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89.

Mohammed Alfadel Francis Wani Bachular Buchu

Sejo Osaru Martin Odeki

Christopher Musambe John Euele

Eastern Equitoria State Eastern Equitoria State Eastern Equitoria State Eastern Equitoria State Torit, Eastern Equitoria State.
Kapoeta, Eastern Equitoria State Kapoeta town, Eastern Equitoria State

Hotel and restaurant consumer Hotel and restaurant consumer Hotel and restaurant consumer Pharmacy owner
Pharmacy employee Butcher

James John Peter Atem Arcangelo Jima Birro Paulo Lokoriyo Lino Pero Poulo Nurgoho Marko Lokeno Mandela Lokeno Peter Machot Martin Gore William Wuor Mohammed Ahmed Emmanuel Soka Ibrahim Abdallah Samuel Loku Majak

Kapoeta town, Eastern Equitoria State Kapoeta town, Eastern Equitoria State Kapoeta, Eastern Equitoria State Narus, Eastern Equitoria State Narus, Eastern Equitoria State Narus, Eastern Equitoria State Narus, Eastern Equitoria State Narus, Eastern Equitoria State Juba, Central Equitoria State Juba, Central Equitoria State Juba Juba Juba Juba Juba

Butcher Butcher Vet A commissioner Trader Trader Trader Trader Trader Kraal owner Trader Broker Bulk trader Secondary trader Retailer Trader

Appendix 2: Additional Tables

Table A2-1: Distribution of Livestock Markets in Southern Sudan, by state
State 1. Warrap County 1.1 Twic 1.2 Gorial East 1.3 Tonj South 1.4 Tonj East 1.5 Gogrial West 1.6 Tonj North Sub-Total 2.1Rumbek Centre 2.2 Rumbek North 2.3Cueibet 2.4 Wulu 2.5 Rumbek East 2.6 Yirol East 2.7 Yirol West 2.8 Awerial Sub-Total 3.1 Nzara 3.2 Yambio 3.3 Nagero 3.4 Mundri East 3.5 Ezo 3.6 Ibba 3.7 Mundri West 3.8 Tambura 3.9 Mvolo 3.9 Mambe Sub-Total 4.1 Aweil Centre 4.2 Aweil East 4.3 Aweil North 4.4 Aweil South 4.5 Aweil West Sub-Total 5.1 Wau 5.2 Jur River 5.3 Raja Sub-Total Total, Western States 6.1 Kapoeta East 6.2 Kapoeta South 6.3 Torit 6.4 Budi Sub-Total 7.1 Terekeka 7.2 Juba Name of market points Wunrok, Turalei Mayen rual, Lietnohm, Luanyaker, Mangol Tonj town, Thiet Romic, Ngapagok, Wunlit Nyokthiang, Kuajok, Gogrial, Alek, Akon, Panliet, Mankuac Aliek, Pankot, Akop, Warrap town, Marial Lou, Alabek, Rualbet, Lurcuk, Kirik RLCA, Malith Maper Cueibet Wulu Barpakeny Nyang Yirol, Aang Boungok, Kalthok Nzara, Sangua, Ringasi, Nagugu Yambio, Nabiapai, Pazuo Namutina Lui, Jambo, Lanyi Ezo, Mungu Konyokonyo, Ibba, Madebe Mundri, Karika, Bari, Amadi Syubu, Kpatanayo, Mupai, senakporo
Lessi, Yeri

Number 2 4 2 3 7 9 27 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 11 4 3 1 3 2 3 4 4 2 3 29 4 5 2 5 4 20 3 3 1 7 94 1 2 1 1 4 2 14

2.

Lakes

3.

Western Equatoria

Maridi, Mudubaiy, Nbaika Aweil, Alok, Bau, Udhaba Mangar Angui, Wanyjok, Malualkon, Malualbai, Madhol Mayom, Maper Dut Thou Panthou, Tarwang, Malek Alel, Ayii, Rangmankuok Kuac Rac, Amothic, Mager, Wedwel Lokoloko, Nazareth, Eastern bank Marialbaai, Rocroc dong, Tharkweng Raja

4.

Northern Bhar el Ghazal

5.

Western Bhar el Ghazal

6.

Eastern Equatoria

Narus Kapoeta town, Kemp 5 Torit town Camp 15 Terekeka, Tali Juba Rajaf, Gumbo Nyongki, Munuki, Gudele Abuba, Camp Mundari (Old customs); Jebel; Kor William (Army); Salkana (Juba town) Lirya; Lobonok; Mangala; Ganji; Rokon; Wunduruba; Loka Yei town Kayaya (Kimba) Wudu (Kangapo II); Mere; Mondikolok

7.

Central Equatoria

7.3 Lainya 7.4 Yei 7.5 Morobo 7.6 Kajo Keji

1 1 1 3

8.

Unity

9.

Jonglei

10 .

Upper Nile

Sub-Total 8.1 Mayom 8.2 Leer 8.3Mayiendit 8.4 Panyijar 8.5 Ruweng 8.6 Rubkona 8.7 Quit 8.8 Koch 8.9 Abyeimnom Sub-Total 9.1 Old Fankak 9.2 Khorflus 9.3 Ayod 9.4. Duk 9.5 Wuror 9.6 Nyirol 9.7 Akobo 9.8 Pochala 9.9 Pibor 9.10 Bor South Sub-Total 10.1 Renk 10.2 Manyo 10.3 Luakipiny/Nasir 10.4 Maiwut 10.5 Malakal 10.6 Fashoda 10.7 Melut 10.8 Maban 10.9 Ulang 10.10 Bailet 10.11 Panyikang Sub-Total Total, Eastern States

Mayom Central Auction; Mankien; Wankai; Ruathnyibol; Riak Leer; Peling; Adok Mayiendit Panyijar; Ganyiel; Nyial Pariang Rubkona; Bentiu Central market; Nyaldeu Quit Riel; Koch; Mirmir; Bou Abyeimnom

Ayod Duk Nyirol Akobo Pibor Bor Renk Zero market; Tebeg; Duglawen Omjalala; Ayat; Wodakona Nasir Maiwut Malakal Melut Ulang

20 5 3 1 3 1 3 1 4 1 22 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 3 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 16 72

Grand Total

167

Appendix 2 Table A2.-2: Distribution of Livestock Markets by state, country and payam
Sate 1. Upper Nile 1. County Renk 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 3. 5. 7. 9. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. Payam Chemmedi Geger Jalhak North Renk South Renk Adhidwoi Kaka Magenist Wedakona Dethok Kodok Kodok Town Lui Bimachuk Galdora Melut Paloch Panomdit Wunamum Banashowa Boung Jinkuata Jinmakda Khor El Amer Jekow Jotoma Kigila Maiwut Olang (Oleng) Pagak Dingkar Jikmir Kiech Kuon Kuerenge-Ke Mading Maker Nasir Roam Dajo Guelguk Longochuk Malual Pamach Wudier Doma Kurmuot Human Population Total # of population households 11,587 1,839 39,649 6,293 17,436 2,768 37,618 5,971 31,461 4,994 137,751 21,865 6,000 952 9,143 1,451 4,825 766 18,042 2,864 38,010 6,033 5,512 875 9,103 1,445 6,909 1,097 14,994 2,380 36,518 5,797 4,148 658 7,075 1,123 14,554 2,310 16,215 2,574 5,703 905 1,547 246 49,242 7,816 11,409 1,811 11,233 1,783 6,722 1,067 9,621 1,527 6,253 993 45,238 7,181 16,408 2,604 15,742 2,499 2,748 436 10,870 1,725 16,306 2,588 17,388 2,760 79,462 12,613 13,992 2,221 28,614 4,542 36,738 5,831 23,093 3,666 31,791 5,046 11,183 1,775 43,695 6,936 20,896 3,317 210,002 33,334 4,433 704 10,225 1,623 8,907 1,414 13,695 2,174 14,836 2,355 9,070 1,440 63,166 10,026 19,075 3,028 28,539 4,530 Livestock markets # of markets (P;S;T;R) 1 (P) 1 (S) 1 (S) 3 1 (P) 1 (S) 2

7.

Manyo

12. Fashoda (???)

1 (P) 1

17. Melut

1 (P)

24. Maban (???)

1 1 (P)

11. Maiwut

1 (P)

18. Luakipiny/Nasir

1 (S) 1

27. Longochok

1 (P)

34. Ulang

3. 4.

Ulang Yomding Abwong Adong Akoka Akotweng Gel Achiel Kuel Nyongkuach Nyongrial Rom Wunthow Central Malakal Eastern Malakal Lelo Northern Malakal Ogot Southern Malakal Anakdiar Dheteim Pakang Panyidwoi Panyikang Tonga

39. Baliet

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 70 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1.

50. Malakal

57. Panyikang

7.

Jonglei

12 1. Old Fankak

Manajang Mareang Old Fangak Paguer Phom Alam Atar Belewach Kadak Korwai Mareng Nyainthokmalual Wuonlam Ayod Korwai Kuach-deng Mogok Pagil (Pagiel) Pajiek Wau Ageer Dongchak Padiet Pagak Panyang Payuel Karam

7. Khorflus

16. Ayod

24. Duk

31. Wuror

18,810 18,620 85,044 4,022 9,533 4,759 3,796 1,876 967 6,356 8,943 5,074 2,684 48,010 11,633 24,037 5,743 34,900 6,212 43,958 128,483 3,009 3,599 4,602 14,244 8,180 11,793 45,427 964,353 35,620 20,457 16,265 23,259 14,529 110,130 6,608 21,758 7,167 6,552 20,318 11,448 18,585 6,632 99,068 15,913 15,006 10,513 10,488 24,065 31,562 31,735 139282 9,337 10,864 18,846 6,816 15,143 4,582 65,588 28,071

2,986 2,956 13,499 638 1,513 755 603 298 153 1,009 1,420 805 426 7,621 1,847 3,815 912 5,540 986 6,977 20,394 478 571 730 2,261 1,298 1,872 7,211 153,072 5,654 3,247 2,582 3,692 2,306 17,481 1,049 3,454 1,138 1,040 3,225 1,817 2,950 1,053 15,725 2,526 2,382 1,669 1,665 3,820 5,010 5,037 22,108 1,482 1,724 2,991 1,082 2,404 727 10,411 4,456

1 (P) 1 1 (P)

1 (S) 1

1 (P) 1 15 1 (P)

1 (P)

1 (P) 1

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 40. Nyirol 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 72 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Motot Pathai Payai Pieri Puolchuol Tiam Wuror Chuil Nyam Bor Pading Pulturuk Thol Waat Alali Barmach Bilkey Buong Dengjok Diror Nyandit Walgak Adongo Akiela Burrator Omiela Pochalla Buma Gumuruk Kiziongora Lakuangole Marow Miwono Pibor Verteth Ajuong Kongor Lith (Lieth) Nyuak Pakeer (Paker) Anyidi Baidit Bor Jalle Koinyang Makuach

47. Akobo

56. Pochala

62. Pibor

71. Twic East

77. Bor South

13. Unity

11 1. Pariang

Aliiny (Aliny) Biu (Biew) Jamjang Nyeel Pariang Wethen

23,718 34,617 22,746 18,455 14,915 20,604 15,393 178,519 9,883 12,522 38,811 20,648 12,299 14,511 108,674 4,156 24,847 35,797 9,330 17,163 13,366 25,499 6,052 136,210 25,212 6,437 3,644 6,972 23,936 66,201 6,151 31,684 9,312 44,997 3,768 1,261 44,168 7,134 148,475 14,760 22,180 10,712 21,121 16,576 85,341 24,882 51,532 61,716 13,506 40,058 29,412 221,106 1,358,602 13,654 14,817 19,036 6,424 12,501 12,600

3,765 5,495 3,610 2,929 2,367 3,270 2,443 28,336 1,569 1,988 6,160 3,277 1,952 2,303 17,250 660 3,944 5,682 1,481 2,724 2,122 4,047 961 21,621 4,002 1,022 578 1,107 3,799 10,508 976 5,029 1,478 7,142 598 200 7,011 1,132 23,567 2,343 3,521 1,700 3,353 2,631 13,546 3,950 8,180 9,796 2,144 6,358 4,669 35,096 215,651 2,167 2,352 3,022 1,020 1,984 2,000

1 (P)

1 (P)

1 (P)

1 (S) 1

1 (S)

1 9

1 (P)

10

7. 9. Abiemnhom 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Wunkur Abiemnhom Aworpiny Manjoga Panyang Bieh Kuerbuone Kueryiek Mankien Ngop Pup (Pub) Riak Ruathnyibuol Wangbuor I Wangbuor II Wangbuor III Wangkei Bentiu Town Budaang Dhorbor Kaljak Ngop Nhialdiu Panhiany Rubkona Wathjaak Guit Kedad Kuach Kuerguini Niemni Nyathoar Wathnyona Boaw Gany Jaak Kuachlual Norbor Ngony (Nyony) Pakur Adok (Leer) Bou Dok (Leer) Guat Juong Kang Padeah Pilieny Yang Bor Dablual (Daplual) Luom Maai (Mai) Pabuong

14. Mayom

27. Rubkona

37. Guit

45. Koch

46. Leer

55. Mayendit

3,411 82,443 5,089 2,861 2,935 6,127 17,012 3,039 19,370 5,588 22,971 2,412 3,578 20,911 13,727 1,294 3,400 5,473 18,952 120,715 41,328 6,287 1,951 4,191 1,753 18,581 2,525 20,003 3,617 100,236 6,266 3,802 10,407 4,303 1,664 3,416 3,146 33,004 19,222 3,304 13,674 10,277 3,189 19,595 5,602 74,863 10,872 4,167 17,827 3,968 3,513 4,806 5,262 2,607 53,022 4,525 7,351 7,165 3,075 230

541 13,086 808 454 466 973 2,700 482 3,075 887 3,646 383 568 3,319 2,179 205 540 869 3,008 19,161 6,560 998 310 665 278 2,949 401 3,175 574 15,910 995 603 1,652 683 264 542 499 5,239 3,051 524 2,170 1,631 506 3,110 889 11,883 1,726 61 6 2,830 630 558 763 835 414 8,416 718 1,167 1,137 488 37

1 1 (P)

1 1 (P) 1(P)

1 (P) (1 (P)

1 (P) 5 1 (S)

1 (P) 1 (S) 3 1 (P)

1 (P) 1 (P)

1 (P) 3 1 (P) 1 (S)

1 (P) 3 1 (P)

11

6. 7. 8. 9.

Rubkuay Thaker Tharjath Tutnyang Ganyliel Kol Mayom Nyal Pachaar Pachak Pachienjok Panyijiar Thoarnhoum Tiap 73 Lobone Magwi Mugali Nimule Pageri Pajok Bur Himodonge Hiyala Ifwotu Imurok Kudo Torit Arihilo Burgilo Imehejek Kurumi Lohutok Longiro Marguna Pachidi (Pacidi) Chumakori Karukomuge Lomeyen Mosingo Najie Paringa Jie Katodori Kauto Lotimor Mogos Narus Natinga Kapoeta Town Longeleya Machi One Machi Two

65. Paynijar

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

4. Eastern
Equatoria

1.

9 Magwi

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 1. 2. 3. 4.

8.

Torit

16. Lafon/Lopa

25. Kopoeta North

32. Kapoeta East

40. Kapoeta South

15,089 8,932 3,081 4,335 53,783 5,620 4,713 4,078 13,865 6,956 3,916 2,700 2,026 3,103 3,746 50,723 585,801 13,177 41,778 25,771 38,181 29,576 21,343 169,826 13,449 8,030 21,120 7,785 6,138 9,561 33,657 99,740 15,444 13,733 14,803 6,985 29,178 10,215 7,798 8,005 106,161 14,453 24,740 16,082 12,202 12,616 22,991 103,084 8,576 23,922 51,323 13,800 31,814 27,489 7,073 163,997 16,449 12,512 19,197 13,793

2,395 1,418 489 688 8,537 892 748 647 2,201 1,104 622 429 322 493 595 8,051 92,984 2,092 6,631 4,091 6,060 4,695 3,388 26,957 2,135 1,275 3,352 1,236 974 1,518 5,342 15,832 2,451 2,180 2,350 1,109 4,631 1,621 1,238 1,271 16,851 2,294 3,927 2,553 1,937 2,003 3,649 16,363 1,361 3,797 8,147 2,190 5,050 4,363 1,123 26,031 2,611 1,986 3,047 2,189

1 (P)

2 1 (P)

1 (P)

1 (P)

3 22

1 (S/T)

1 (P)

1 (S)

12

5. 46. Budi 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Pwata Kimotong Komori Loriyok (Kemp 15) Lotukei Loudo Nagishot Napak Nauro Hatire Ikotos Imotong Lomohidang North Lomohindang South Losite 53 Gameiza Muni Nyori Reggo Rijong Tali Terekeka Tindilo Tombek Bungu Dolo Ganji Gondokoro Juba Town Kator Lirya Lokiliri Lobonok Mangala Munuki Northern Bari Rejaf Rokon Tijor Wonduruba Kenyi Kupera Lainya Mukaya Wuji Lasu Mugwo Otogo Tore Yei Town Gulumbi Kimba

55. Ikotos

11. Central Equatoria

1.

8 Terekeka

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2.

11. Juba

28. Lainya

34. Yei

40. Morobo

17,519 79,470 13,750 17,413 9,778 13,363 12,087 6,015 14,059 12,734 99,199 5,789 21,626 11,370 14,710 15,132 16,022 84,649 906,126 7,796 17,835 11,234 19,832 8,747 30,387 20,770 15,659 8,136 140,396 2,737 14,132 2,689 6,522 82,346 64,130 5,949 8,215 8,980 11,016 83,719 39,810 15,604 5,684 8,132 12,748 372,413 19,086 22,370 25,941 10,563 11,355 89,315 15,676 21,735 28,986 23,778 111,268 201,443 31,523 31,767

2,781 12,614 2,183 2,764 1,552 2,121 1,919 955 2,232 2,021 15,746 919 3,433 1,805 2,335 2,402 2,543 13,436 143,830 1,237 2,831 1,783 3,148 1,388 4,823 3,297 2,486 1,291 22,285 434 2,243 427 1,035 13,071 10,179 944 1,304 1,425 1,749 13,289 6,319 2,477 902 1,291 2,023 59,113 3,030 3,551 4,118 1,677 1,802 14,177 2,488 3,450 4,601 3,774 17,662 31,975 5,004 5,042

1 (P/S)

1 (P) 1 (P)

2 (T) 2(T)

1 (T) 1 (T) 1 (P) 1 (T) 1 (P) 1 (P) 10

1 (P)

1 (P) 1 1 (P)

13

3. 4. 5.

Lujulo Panyume Wudabi Kangapo One Kangapo Two Lire Liwolo Nyepo 45 Alel Ameth-aguok Rumameer Mijak Abyei Ajak-kuac Akoc Aweeng Pannyok Turalei Wunrok Akon North Akon South Alek North Alek South Alek West Gogrial Kuac North Kuac South Riau Nyang Pathuon East Pathuon West Toch East Toch North Toch West Akop Alabek Aliek Warrap Awuul Kirik Man-loor Marial-lou Pagol Rual-bet Ananatak Makuac Malual-cum Maparah Mayen Pagor Palaal Paliang

46. Kajo Keji

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

21. Warrap

1.

6 Abyei

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 3. 5. 7. 9. 11. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

7.

Twic

8.

Gogrial West

18. Gogrial East

25. Tonj North

7.

Tonj East

16,786 11,414 12,113 103,603 44,788 53,389 31,438 43,732 23,075 196,422 1,103,592 9,393 10,143 14,196 4,420 14,731 52,883 10,463 32,356 26,664 37,705 46,764 50,953 204,905 22,126 31,336 18,087 32,254 12,281 28,496 51,268 26,843 21,230 243,921 4,470 20,857 25,732 23,349 21,075 7,800 103,283 17,578 26,450 20,566 5,769 18,059 16,163 21,261 11,929 14,957 12,490 165,222 16,486 11,279 12,177 8,380 11,639 3,459 11,839 11,191

2,664 1,812 1,923 16,445 7,109 8,474 4,990 6,942 3,663 31,178 175,173 1,491 1,610 2,253 702 2,338 8,394 1,661 5,136 4,232 5,985 7,423 8,088 32,525 3,512 4,974 2,871 5,120 1,949 4,523 8,138 4,261 3,370 38,718 710 3,311 4,084 3,706 3,345 1,238 16,394 2,790 4,198 3,264 916 2,867 2,566 3,375 1,893 2,374 1,983 26,226 2,617 1,790 1,933 1,330 1,847 549 1,879 1,776

1 1 (P)

1 14

14

9. Pan-nhial 10. Paweng 11. Wun-liit 19. Tonj South 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 52 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 38 1. 2. 3. 4. Jak Thiet Wath-alel Tonj Manyang-ngok

7 52. Northern BEG

1. Awiel North

Ariath Malual Centre Malual East Malual North Malual West Baach Madhol Malual-bai Mangar-ton I Mangok Wunlang Yargot Mangar-tong II Ayai Gakrol Nyieth Nyocawany I Panthou Tar-weng Tiar-aleit Wathmuok Nyocawany II Achana Aweil Town Ayat Centre Ayat East Ayat West Gomjuer Centre Comjuer East Gomjuer West Mariem East Mariem West Abul Achana Aroyo Bhar Mayen Chei South Nyalath

7. Awiel East

16. Awiel South

26. Awiel West

37. Awiel Centre

58. Western BEG

1.

5 Raga

Ere Raga Ringi Uyujuku

9,795 6,508 13,369 116,122 7,469 19,576 14,485 30,180 14,885 86,592 972,928 14,592 19,182 47,400 32,053 15,900 129,127 79,462 56,072 47,076 17,259 28,596 39,183 29,807 12,466 309,921 7,020 7,858 8,580 8,884 13,019 5,774 10,683 10,716 1,272 73,806 1,529 59,217 6,732 16,558 5,313 22,057 12,621 11,588 15,974 14,628 166,217 2,383 2,309 4,180 20,311 8,182 4,462 41,827 720,898 8,760 26,308 10,798 8,474 54,340

1,555 1,033 2,122 18,432 1,186 3,107 2,299 4,790 2,363 13,745 154,433 2,316 3,045 7,524 5,088 2,524 20,496 12,613 8,900 7,472 2,740 4,539 6,220 4,731 1,979 49,194 1,114 1,247 1,362 1,410 2,067 917 1,696 1,701 202 11,715 243 9,400 1,069 2,628 843 3,501 2,003 1,839 2,536 2,322 26,384 378 367 663 3,224 1,299 708 6,639 114,428 1,390 4,176 1,714 1,345 8,625

15

6.

Jur River

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 15 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 1. 3. 5. 7. 9.

Kangi Kuajena Marial Bai Rocrocdong Udici Wau Bai Bagari Besseila Kpaile Wau North Wau South

13. Wau

63. Lakes

3 1.

Cueibit

Abiriu Citcok Duony Malon Pec Ngap Pagor Aloor Madol Malueeth Maper Mayen Wun-rieng Amongpiny Jiir Malek Matangai Mayom Bargei Domoloto Makundi Wulu Akot Atiaba Cueicok Maleng-agok Pacong Paloch Aduel Abang Aluakluak Anuol Geng-geng Ghar (Gher) Mapuordit Yirol Adior Lekakendu Malek Pagarau Tinagau

8.

Rumbek North

15. Rumbek Centre

21. Wulu

26. Rumbek East

34. Yirol West

42. Yirol East

18,838 42,586 22,475 14,786 16,704 12,382 127,771 19,569 7,732 5,726 53,712 64,581 151,320 333,431 27,206 16,594 9,086 41,388 13,171 10,310 117,755 5,620 8,195 10,410 2,527 13,016 3,642 43,410 19,627 46,254 6,863 70,534 10,272 153,550 13,364 8,475 7,883 10,828 40,550 17,638 16,085 23,922 6,240 24,048 6,920 27,970 122,832 21,709 15,221 12,143 15,747 4,796 20,948 12,626 103,190 14,055 14,017 9,910 13,814 4,496

2,990 6,760 3,567 2,347 2,651 1,965 20,281 3,106 1,227 909 8,526 10,251 24,019 52,926 4,318 2,634 1,442 6,570 2,091 1,637 18,691 892 1,301 1,652 401 2,066 578 6,890 3,115 7,342 1,089 11,196 1,630 24,373 2,121 1,345 1,251 1,719 6,437 2,800 2,553 3,797 990 3,817 1,098 4,440 19,497 3,446 2,416 1,927 2,500 761 3,325 2,004 16,379 2,231 2,225 1,573 2,193 714

16

11. Yali 43. Awerial 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 49 1. 3. 5. 7. 1. 1 3 5 7 9 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 1. 2. 3. Abuyong Bun-agok Dor Magok Nile Paluk Alel I Alel II

70. Western Equatoria

8 1.

Tambura

Mupoi Namutina Source Yubu Tambura Nagero Basukangoi Nzara Centre Ringasi Sakure Sangua Andari Bagidi Bariguna Ezo Centre Naandi Yangiri Bangasu Gangura Li-Rangu Nadiangere Yambio Town Ibba Centre Madebe Manikakara Maruko Nabanga Kozi Landili Mambe Maridi Ngamunde Bagori Bahr El Grindi Dari Kokori Lessi Mvolo Yeri Amadi Bangolo Kotobi

9. 2.

Nagero Nzara

3.

Ezo

10. Yambio

16. Ibba

22. Maridi

28. Mvolo

36. Mundri West

11,110 67,402 8,893 5,901 11,064 763 2,768 10,270 5,284 2,098 47,041 695,730 4,459 13,918 12,065 24,923 55,365 10,077 7,160 30,754 2,214 14,946 10,638 65,712 11,472 4,901 6,528 31,644 10,096 16,222 80,861 14,646 16,504 11,068 4,158 105,881 152,257 11,542 12,125 5,836 3,926 8,443 41,869 6,161 4,188 7,673 55,602 8,837 82,461 4,955 8,404 4,847 5,092 4,356 10,312 10,168 48,134 2,434 5,541 10,632

1,763 10,699 1,412 937 1,756 121 439 1,630 839 333 7,467 110,433 708 2,209 1,915 3,956 8,788 1,600 1,137 4,882 351 2,372 1,689 10,430 1,821 778 1,036 5,023 1,603 2,575 12,835 2,325 2,620 1,757 660 16,807 24,168 1,832 1,925 926 623 1,340 6,646 978 665 1,218 8,826 1,403 13,089 787 1,334 769 808 691 1,637 1,614 7,640 386 880 1,688

17

Total

15,368 2,439 33,975 5,393 41. Mundri East 1. Kediba 14,395 2,285 2. Lakamadi 5,257 834 3. Lozoh 14,566 2,312 4. Minga 4,996 793 5. Witto 9,104 1,445 48,318 7,670 10 47 619,029 98,259 10 79 514 8,260,490 1,311,189 Source: Various: Statistical Yearbook for Southern Sudan 2009, SSCCSE, March 2010; Sate Statistics.

4.

Mundri

18

Appendix 3: Study Instruments

A-1.1: Main Guide for Information to be collected at Each Stage
Actors/players/ function
1. Production/ producers

Information

Source
Govnt GoSS, States; Devt partners

Who

1.1 Total number of producers South Sudan by State/County; In the 5

states of focus what are the key production clusters (down to Payam /if possible down to Boma) level describe/mark zones to allow a map to be developed of areas of concentration/ clusters; - Categorization of producers by: production systems; product focus; herd size (small, medium, large); communities; gender 1.2 Total number of livestock South Sudan by state/county; by areas of concentration (identified clusters should have 60%+ of animals); production systems; herd size (small/medium/large); Are there variations in breeds/types? - For milk production estimates (cattle), of these, how many are female, how many lactating; - for meat production estimates (potential) herd age de-aggregation/ structure, proportions of young, mature, old 1.3 Herd composition & dynamics - Hard composition: male/female; age - Number of live births (birth rate); Number of abortions is it an issue? - Calve death rates; adult death rates - Number lost through theft/raids - Voluntary off-take rates: slaughter; dowry; market 1.4 The production chain: - How do farmers acquire their livestock; how much does it cost? - Who does what & how much does it cost (including gender breakdown) grazing; watering; milking; disease control/management - routine (vaccination, de-worming), treatment etc. Is there special care for young ones; delivery?) - What inputs are used how much do they cost? - On average how much (& how long) does it cost to keep a cow/sheep; goat to maturity (off-take) 1.5 How much meat does a mature (bull/cow/goat/sheep produce range - What influences weight? - What is required to ensure optimal weight gain? - What efforts (if any) are being put to increase production by who? - Market off-take rates what are current market off-take rates? to what market channels; & at what prices; what influences market off-take rates? seasonal variations - What constraints/ challenges do farmers face? - What efforts are farmers/others making to address these? - What opportunities exist in this area? 1.6 How much milk does a cow under each of the systems/ breeds produce? - range - What influences production? - What is the current average production per farmer by category - Seasonal variations breakdown the year - What is the quality of milk produced factors?

Govnt GoSS, States; Devt Partners

- Secondary - Primary

-FGD with producers; - Triangulate from lit; key informants

FGDs with producers, primary; Triangulate with key informants, lit; small sample

- FGDs - key informants - literature - Small sample

19

What happens to the milk that is produced? - proportion consumed at home - proportion sold o Where, by who, for how much? Identify all channels Get farm-gate prices for different channels Who are the players in each channel? - Is any milk wasted? What contributes to this? - What can be done to improve situation? - What efforts are taking place? - What is the average volume of milk sold per farmer by category - What average earnings by category What specific costs do farmers incur in producing milk - Specific costs related to production explicit & implicit - What is the value added? (each component of production chain) 1.7 Overall, for both Meat & Milk what are the key constraints facing farmers? production; marketing; others. - What can be done to address them? - What initiatives are taking place? By who? What results? 1.8 What opportunities exist in area for enhancing livestock production? - To what extent are these opportunities exploited? - What is holding back utilization of opportunities? - What needs to be done? 1.9 Farmer organization - Any farmer organizations? for what? - Membership - Strength/issues 1.10Support institutions working with farmers -

FGDs

- FGDs - Key informants - FGDs

-FGDs - Key informants - FGDs - Key informants

2. Bulking traders/ markets

2.1 How many Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Livestock markets are there in South Sudan/ States of study focus; - What is the structure of each market organization/managements - Costs to farmers & traders (levies/taxes) - Facilities/services provided - Volume of animals handled (frequency/daily/weekly give an annual figure) - What issues/challenges - Efforts being done to address challenges - What opportunities exist/ extent of exploitation of these opportunities

2.2 What is the estimated number of traders at different levels for each of the
channels? How many categories can they be put in? (including gender) - Producers to local points of bulking/ Primary markets - Local bulking points/primary markets to Secondary markets - Secondary to tertiary/end markets - Nairobi distribution point to consumers retail outlets 2.3 What is the estimated volume handled by each category of traders? - Live animals - Milk 2.4 What specific roles/functions do these traders play - Any grading? - Bulking? - Transportation? - Holding - Processing? 2.5 What is the value added by traders? - Purchase price per category of traders

FGDs FGDs

FGDs

20

- Selling price - What costs do they incur? (break down transport chain) - What margins (average animal/volume handled) 2.6 How do traders interact with farmers? - Direct to individuals farmers - Through farmer organizations - Agents 2.7 What are the requirements of the market supplied by the various categories of readers? - Quality; volume; timing; consistency; pricing; packaging (milk) etc - To what extent are traders currently meeting these market requirements? - What are the problem areas? o Production volumes of supply; quality? o Handling o Storage/ holding o Transportation o Etc 2.8 What are the views of traders on production/marketing issues facing farmers? - Productivity? volumes? - Quality? - Pricing? - Organization? 2.9 Overall, what are the key constraints/challenges facing the livestock value chain in the views of traders? at what level/ - How should these be addressed? - What are the traders doing anything to address these? What other initiatives are taking place? 2.10What opportunities exist for building the livestock value chain? - To what extent are these opportunities exploited? - What is holding back utilization of opportunities? - What needs to be done? 3.1 How is the transport function for Livestock organized? - trekking versus trucking; how many (including gender) - Are there specific transporters for livestock or this function is more played by traders? - How many transporters per channel - What are the transportation means - What volumes are handled by each type of transporter 3.2 Identify the full transport chain per channel - farmer to bulking point (primary market) - bulking point to distribution point (Secondary market) - Secondary markets to end markers - Importers from neighbouring countries to end markets; - Secondary markets/tertiary markets to export market - End market to consumers - What is the value added at each segment of the chain - Overall transportation cost 3.3 What are the key constraints faced in transportation - How can these be addressed? - What initiatives are taking place? 3.4 What opportunities exist & how can these be exploited? 4.1 How many categories of processors; what numbers of each - Butcheries? - Slaughter houses/slabs - Abattoirs - Any other processors?

FGDs

FGDs

FGDs

FGDs

FGDs

3. Transporters

- Key informants - FGDs

FGDs

FGDs FGDs Indepth interviews;

4. Processing

21

5. Market

4.2 Organization of operations: - Sourcing of supply suppliers; volumes; prices - Production inputs; workforce; costs; volumes - Marketing - markets, supply organization, volumes, prices 4.3 What is the value added by the processors? what functions - specific segments of the chain; - Costs incurred under each - Input prices - Output prices - Value added 4.4 How is the market demand for livestock products handled by processors - what segmentation - what requirements for each market segment - What segments are the focus of the processor? - What market segments have the highest growth potential 4.5 What are the key requirements for the processors to operate a profitable business in these market segments? - Volumes; - Quality - Consistency in supply - Production organization - Market organization 4.6 What constraints/challenges is processor facing in meeting these requirements? - Supply production at farmer level; bulking, transportation - Production - Market penetration - Other areas 4.7 What needs to be done address these constraints? - efforts in the past - current efforts - additional initiatives 4.8 What opportunities exist for expanding & increasing the competitiveness of the livestock value chain? - what is limiting the sub-sector from exploiting these opportunities - what needs to be done & by who? 4.9 Key players & the roles each must play 5.1 What are the different market segments for Livestock in South Sudan? - Own consumption slaughter/dowry) - Rural - households live for restocking/ slaughter at home (festivities); meat/milk households; rural restaurants/institutions (meat/milk) through butcheries - Urban market o High end Hotels/institutions? o Middle & low end - Export which countries 5.2 What is the estimated demand in these markets? - what volumes - what prices 5.3 What are the requirements of these markets - Volumes; - Quality - Consistency in supply - Prices - Timing - Etc 5.4 To what extent is demand in these markets met currently - who supplies the markets (& how); from where? - with what volumes, quality, prices - what are the gaps? - What is required to address these gaps

Indepth interviews; Indepth interviews

Indepth interviews;

- Indepth interviews;

Indepth interviews;

- Indepth interviews; - Indepth interviews;

- Literature - Key informants

- Sec & prim information - Sec & prim information

- various

22

6. Market Consumers

5.5 What opportunities does the market (various segments) offer for expansion of the livestock value chain? - What needs to be done? By who? - Past & ongoing initiatives? - Further work required 6.1 What segmentation of consumers? - High income - Middle income - Low income - Export 6.3 Current consumption patterns (per capita consumption estimates) - volumes/ value; - trends 6.5 To what extent is there a demand/ supply gap?

Sec & prim

Secondary Secondary overall; primary preferences FGDs; Secondary - Key informants Each inst visited

6.6 What needs to be done to address demand supply gap 7. Development agencies 1.1 How many are the key institutions supporting development of the livestock value chain in South Sudan - & specifically States of focus? 1.2 Background of institutions involvement in chain: - How/why/for how long? - Specific areas of focus 1.3 Obtain further background information on sector which the institution may have e.g. population of livestock; players; traders; market segments; demand; prices; etc 1.4 What issues are constraining the sub-sector/value chain? - Production - Distribution - Processing - Marketing 1.5 Institutions involvement in addressing these issues - who else is doing what? - What further initiatives are required? 1.6 What opportunities exist for further development of the sub-sector/ value chain? - what needs to be done to exploit these? - What initiatives are ongoing? - What further initiatives are required? 8.1 Structure of sector population of farmers; producers - key issues faced; - current initiatives - Opportunities 8.2 Policy & regulatory direction

8. Government GoSS; State

23

A-1.2: Producer level Instrument pull-out

Livestock Value Chain for South Sudan Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries, GoSS Producer households Questionnaire
Name of enumerator: State Name of respondent: 1. Livestock kept: 1.1 Breakdown of species by sex Species Cattle Goats Sheep Camels Pigs Donkeys Chicken Other (specify) 1.2 Cattle composition Female 0 6 months (calves) 7 months - 3 years 3 5 years 6 10 years 11 + years Number lactating Number dry 1.3 Herd dynamics (last 12 months) Cattle Number at the start of the year Number born (last 12 months) Number Died: Calves/young Mature Number sold Number slaughtered Number given away for dowry Number given to herders Number given away for other reasons Number bought Number received as dowry/other Number lost (through raids/theft) Total today Sheep Goats Male Date County Payam Age: Boma Years in livestock keeping:

Total number

Female

Male

2. Production cost estimates 2.1 2.2 Number of herders: Total _____________ 2.3 Category of herders: Family __________; hired: __________; other ______ 2.4 What costs have you incurred in livestock keeping over the last 12 months?

24

Cost item Restocking (specify #) Herders: Salaries for herders Food for herders Other costs for herders Animal health: Drugs Other costs Feeds (specify _______) Watering (specify_____) Minerals Other (specify________) Total

Price per unit (if applicable)

Total cost last 12 months

3. Milk production and sales 3.1 Total number of mature cows in herd: ______________________ 3.2 Number of cows lactating during last 12 months: _____________ 3.3 Number of cows currently lactating: ________________________ 3.4 Volume of milk currently produced per day (in litres): __________________ 3.5 Use of milk produced: Herders ______lts; household ______lts; Sold ____ lts 3.6 Price of milk sold: SDG _______/litre; total (last 12 months) _____________ 3.7 Main buyers of milk: _________________________________________ 4. Livestock sales for the last 12 months 4.1 Number sold, prices and markets
Livestock type Cattle Sheep Goats Chicken No. sold Average Price (SDG) Total earned SDG Name of market/ type of buyer Time it takes to market (hrs) Taxes paid per animal sold (SDG)

4.2

Who buys your livestock? (Tick)

1. Small-scale (itinerant) livestock trader ( ), 2. Broker/intermediary ( ), 3. Shopkeeper ( ), 4.largescale livestock trader ( ) , 5. Butcher ( ), 6. Cooperative ( ), 7. Individual livestock keepers ( ), 8. Other (specify)__________________________________________.

5. Challenges/opportunities/ suggestions 5.1 What are the key challenges you face in livestock keeping? 5.2 Are there any initiatives that are being made in addressing these challenges? If so, which are these? Are they working or something needs to be done to improve? If so, what needs to be done? 5.3 In your view, what are the key areas that initiatives aimed at developing the livestock sector in your area should focus on?

25

A-1.3: Consumer Level Instrument Pull-out

Livestock Value Chain for South Sudan Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries, GoSS Hotels &Restaurants; Institutions & Supermarkets
Name of enumerator: __________________________________ 1. Date: __________________

Name of enterprise: _______________________________________ Year started

___________ 2. Name of respondent: _______________________________________ Position

______________ 3. Please indicate the following with regard to the livestock products you deal in: Volume handled per month (indicate units kgs; pcs, etc) Purchase price (per unit/kg) Where do you Country buy?

Livestock product

Beef Goat meat Sheep meat/mutton Pork Bacon Sausages Chicken meat Milk: Fresh

Long life Powdered Sour/Yoghurt

Eggs Other (specify)

4. 5. 6.

Please explain to us why you buy from the sources you have indicated above: Are there any challenges you face in getting your supplies? If any, please explain; Is the current supply able to meet your requirements? (volume; quality; timeliness etc)

7. How is the current demand for the products you deal in? Do you see any growth prospects? If so, in which areas/products?

26

8. What do you see as the key areas that initiatives aimed at developing the Livestock sector in South Sudan should focus on?

27

Livestock Value Chain for South Sudan Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries, GoSS
Consumer Households Questionnaire
Name of enumerator: __________________________________ 1. 2. 3. Date: __________________

Name of respondent: _______________________________________ Number of members in household : ___________________________ Please indicate the following regarding the livestock products you consume in your household Volume consumed per month (indicate units kgs; liters; pcs Purchase price (per unit/kg) Where do you buy Country of origin

Livestock product

Beef Goat meat Sheep meat/mutton Pork Bacon Chicken meat Milk Fresh

Long life Powdered Sour/Yoghurt

Eggs Other (specify)

4. Are you satisfied with the current supply of the various livestock products you need for your household? If not, please explain? (probe on quality, hygiene, prices) 5. Are there some livestock products you are currently not consuming due to supply challenges? If so, which are these and what is the problem? 6. What do you see as the key areas that initiatives aimed at developing the Livestock sector in South Sudan should focus on?

28

Appendix 2: Terms of Reference

Terms of Reference (TOR) for Livestock Value Chain Analysis for Southern Sudan
Title of the position: Employment type: Reporting Lines: Location: International Consultant for Livestock Value Chain Analysis Short Term Consultancy Director General of Planning, Investment and Marketing, MARF/GoSS Juba, Southern Sudan

A: INTRODUCTION The Government of Southern Sudan (GoSS) has received financing from the Multi-Donor Trust Fund (administered by the World Bank) toward the cost of Livestock and Fisheries Development Project, and intends to apply part of the proceeds for studies through consulting services. The Ministry of Animal Resources Fisheries (MARF) would like to engage the services of SNV-The Netherlands Development Organization to undertake a value chain analysis of the livestock sector (cattle, goats and sheep) in the Southern Sudan. The The focus of this study would be in growing towns like Rumbek, Awil, Wau, Bentuie, Kapoeta, Bor, Malakal and Juba towns. The cross-border markets with the North Sudan (Awil, Bentiu and Malakal through Renk) would also be studied to establish the key factors that contribute to the costs of production and marketing with particular emphasis on the services including veterinary and transport service inputs (e.g., truck) including lack of it and infrastructure bottlenecks, and identify opportunities for reductions in costs through either policies or technologies in order to increase incentives for higher off-taking. Livestock keeping is an important activity throughout Southern Sudan. Livestock are the main source of livelihoods of more than 80%3 of the total population of Southern Sudan. The main cattle producing areas are; Upper Nile, Eastern Equatoria, Jonglei, and parts of Bahr El-Ghazal States. Livestock are generally central to identities and beliefs of the southern Sudanese tribes. The main livestock kept by Southern Sudanese are as follows: cattle, sheep, goats, donkeys, horses or camels and poultry to a smaller scale. Very few or no piggeries are kept in South Sudan. In Southern Sudan because of the many years of war and conflict, livestock production and marketing are faced with a number of challenges such as livestock diseases, lack of adequate water and pasture, lack of access to markets, high taxes and rampant cattle rustling are some of the main challenges. B: OBJECTIVES The MARF team will implement value chain analysis (hereafter VCA) of livestock in the major production States. More specifically:

Building on existing value chain work on livestock done in Eastern Equatoria, the team aims to construct integrated value chains of production, marketing, and processing (meat) for the South to identify factors to improve incentives for higher livestock production/off-take rates (including cost drivers in marketing/transportation, export competitiveness) and incentives for producing livestock products rather than selling live animals (including export competitiveness). The team will conduct original livestock VCA in the major States in Southern Sudan to identify opportunities for enhancing the sub-sectors growth. The focus is largely on meeting domestic/Juba demands in the near term, but will also look at market integration with neighboring countries such as Uganda or Kenya as well as marketing to the North.

FAO Household food security survey 1992.

29

C: DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES The Consultants shall do everything necessary to assist the MARF and the World Bank to achieve the objectives stated above; and in doing so shall carry out all necessary tasks, including but not necessarily limited to the following:

(i) collect and analyze field data to build value chains for the production and marketing of
cattle and goats in Southern Sudan with preference for internal trade as well as the border areas of Eastern Equatoria (Uganda or Kenya border), Upper Nile, Western Bahr El Ghazal and Unity States (ii) generate and compile historical and current information on livestock production and marketing in the South- baseline data that can enable stakeholders to improve their programming in livestock development (iii)generate information from the field to describe and understand the following: a. Total supply chain from producer, trader, processor to retailer or exporter including cost margins at each stage of the chain. b. Domestic market structure and flows from producer to retailer or exporter. c. Destination of sales for example to wholesalers, retailers, consumers, concentration of sales amongst major buyers, number of buyers/traders... etc. d. Taxes and fees collected e. Main barriers to domestic, trade, exports and investments. f. Policy recommendations to remove barriers and increase value added in the supply and marketing chain. g. Means of transportation and costs. h. Employment to include distinguishing permanent, temporary staff, gender and ethnicity. (iv)review the dynamics of the internal trade in live animals and meat within the states in response to both internal and external demands (v) identify and analyse weaknesses, constraints and opportunities in the livestock value chain in the 5 states including infrastructure and services inputs (vi) come up with a way forward for the value chains and recommendations for potentially viable approaches to improving livestock production and marketing in the 5 states And normally conclude with: (x) regularly and routinely liaise with (xi) report on the status of the services as described below. D. Task: Data Collection and Analysis: Update the existing field data (for example, SNVs study Livestock Marketing Survey for Eastern Equatoria State) for production and marketing costs and value-added (price paid to producers, price paid by the ultimate buyers, all marketing/transport related charges (transport, taxes, feeding costs, veterinary charges) to major domestic markets and f.o.b. points for cross border trades that include inter States and across the borders.. Collect data for more detailed cost breakdown for marketing and transport (e.g., cost components in charges paid to service providers such as transport/trucking services, such as labor, fuel, equipment, and their profit margins). Collect data (estimation) for production costs and value-added. Compare value chains between cattle originated from outside Southern Sudan and domestically produced cattle in Juba and Yambio markets. Collect original data on time required for production, marketing/transportation, etc for each stage in the integrated chain.

30

Assessing policies or technologies for reducing costs and increasing values and improving incentives for production/off-taking and marketing.

E. Coverage (some adjustment may be required upon consultation with the team): Building an integrated value chain of production and marketing, and processing for cattle and a selected small ruminant. o Cattle production chain: Herders in villages in Jonglei and Eastern Equatoria (in and around Bor, Narus and Kapoeta).

o Cattle marketing chain Route 1 (domestic sales): Village around Jonglei>

Kapoeta > Torit and Juba. Note: This route must include a segment where the data for two alternative modes of transportation, namely stock routes and truck transportation, are collected in parallel so that one can compare the two alternative directly in terms of cost and time between the same set of start and end locations of the segment.

o Cattle marketing chain Route 2 (potential exports): (Villages around

Narus > Narus > Lokichingo, Kenya where abattoir is located). Note: This route can consist of both stock routes and truck transportation. No need to have direct comparison between stock routes and truck transportation.

o Cattle marketing chain Route 3 (imports from Uganda): (Markets in

Uganda such as Mbarara, Kigumba, and Msindi > Nimule > Juba. Note: This route can consist of both stock routes and truck transportation. No need to have direct comparison between stock routes and truck transportation. The result will be compared with Route 1 to Juba.

o Cattle marketing chain Route 4 (sales to North): (Villages around Awil and
Bentuie F. Data Collection Points Narus or Ikotos/Nimule (including data for flows to Kenya or Uganda) Kapoeta (comparing trucking and trekking to Torit and Juba markets) Wau (incl comparison between South and North) Awil and Bentiu (incl. comparison between internal market and with the North) Juba (incl. comparison between domestic vs. imports from Uganda)

E. Location The lead consultant will be based in Juba with field visits to all selected states. The different team will be in the different states led by a team leader. F. Reporting and Supervision The MARF/ GoSS DG of Planning, Investment and Marketing, Dr John Kanisio, based in Juba, Southern Sudan, will ensure the overall coordination and guidance of the consultancy team. He will provide the team with necessary information and services with regard to this contract and payment. On the substance of the work, the consultancy team will work under the general guidance given by the Technical Committee comprising DGs of MARF and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of GoSS. At state level, the team will work closely with relevant stakeholders on this mission.

31

G. Deliverables
The consultancy team will submit to MARF and the World Bank hard and soft copies of the detailed work plan within 5 days of signing the contract. The team is expected to submit to MARF and the World Bank four (4) detailed reports of the findings of the livestock value chain analysis. The reports will be in English and will remain the property of MARF. Hard and soft copies will be submitted to MARF. A report which contains the following: Description on the methodology used for data collection Completed value chain information (cost, time, value added) based on the template, preferably in Excel format. Analysis on some key features of the completed value chains, including analysis on cost drivers (identification of key segments and activities, or types of inputs, which drive up the overall production and marketing costs) Identification of policies or technologies for reducing costs and improving incentives for production/off-taking, marketing, and processing

1. Timeline and Number of Days Field work preparation Workshop with MARF and data collectors Inception Report Data collection and analysis Report draft due Report final Total 45 days of work based on the above timeline. 2. Payment Arrangement All costs related to the implementation of this work will be covered by the MDTF-SS. All travel arrangements will be made by the consultant. Payment for the consultancy is arranged in three terms as follows: May 15-17 May 20. May21 May15 to June 30, 2010 July 15 July 30

20 % of the total after the work plan is approved and contract signed with MARF. 30 % of the total after the Value chain training report is submitted 50 % at completion of the final report

3. REPORTING AND OTHER DELIVERABLES The Consultant shall provide an Inception Report and a Final Report. In addition, the Consultant may provide Papers on the findings of various aspects of the services including those of all short term interventions annex to the Final Reports. The Final Report shall first be presented in Draft form 10 days after return from the field and then finalized to accommodate

32

comments from MARF Technical Team and the World Bank. The other reports shall be submitted in final form. Comments on all draft reports will be provided within 15 days of receipt, after which it shall be assumed there will be no further comments for accommodation in finalizing the report. The final report will be ready 7 days after receipt of comments. The reports shall be submitted directly and simultaneously to both the MARF and the World Bank, in the form 6 hard copies together with electronic copies in both pdf and Microsoft office formats (the latter to facilitate use of the data). The Inception Report shall confirm the mobilization and operational status of the Consultant, the Consultants contact details, the confirmed real time (dated) work schedule/work plan; and any changes the Consultant wishes to be considered to the TOR due to initial findings. The Inception Report shall be submitted 1 week after the Consultant signs the contract agreement. Papers shall be presented at the conclusion of any particular task or to present any significant finding or proposal throughout the period of the services. Papers shall also be presented in respect of all short-term interventions. The short-term intervention papers shall, as a minimum, document: the initial intervention work plan and TOR objectives; the methodology followed; the achievements against the work plan and TOR; the resource inputs; any subsequent TA recommended; and the Implementing Agency staff involved. Final Report shall be formatted with specific sections on the various objectives and tasks as defined under the TOR. With Papers and Key Correspondence presented in the Annexes. The Reports shall be submitted within the last week of the period covered. All the reports: (i) shall be written such that they stand alone, without the reader needing to refer to other documents; (ii) shall include a dated Cover Letter with the distribution list, and shall note key issues of interest in the report for managements attention; (iii) shall also include a Table of Contents and a meaningful Executive Summary amounting to approximately 10% of the report length; and (iv) with the exception of color photographs, the reports shall be formatted for monochrome printing and copying.

4. EXTENT OF THE SERVICES The overall period for which these services are required is two calendar months. With the sole exception of the resources, facilities, equipment, vehicles and everything else specifically identified below as to be provided by the Client the Consultant shall provide all the resources, facilities, equipment, vehicles and everything else necessary to carry out the tasks required under these services and to satisfactorily achieve the objectives of these services. The Consultant firm or organization must have: (i) a minimum of five years of successful experience of similar activities in developing countries, ideally within the framework of a sector-wide approach; (ii) specific experience in promoting value chain analysis, policy development, management systems, and informational campaigns would be desirable; (iii) proven ability to work simultaneously at both national and sub-national levels and to collaborate with Ministry personnel, local officials and other stakeholders to resolve difficult program implementation issues; and (iv) demonstrated abilities in the areas of coordination; formulation of guidelines and directives; procurement; financial management; and communication and reporting. The Consultants key professional staff shall include not less than:

33

a Livestock Economist: with not less than 10 years experience in the livestock sector with (i) a recognized degree in Animal Production or Marketing or related fields preferably with specialization in pastoralism; (ii) not less than 7 years post-graduate experience relevant to this assignment; (iii) not less than 3 years post graduate experience in the same or similar position to that being proposed; (iv) not less than 3 years post graduate similar or associated project experience in developing countries. An Economist: with not less than 5 years specific knowledge and experience of Value Chain Analysis, livestock development. A demonstrated understanding of livestock marketing in pastoral communities in particular and elsewhere will be added value. A social scientist with good understanding of capacity development and social issues in relation to livestock development.

All key professional staff shall be fully computer literate in word processing, spreadsheets and database management; and shall be fluent in the written and spoken use of the contract language, which is English. DUTIES OF THE CLIENT The Ministry of Animal Resources and Fisheries will provide the Consultant with the following: (i.e. equipment, vehicles, office facilities, utilities, office services - photocopying etc., counterpart staffing, visas, tax exemption, furnishing of documents the Consultant may need to discharge its functions, key reports, liaising with other ministries etc)

34