updated: 19 January, 2007
IFAD
Gender
International Fund for Agricultural Development

THEME: Access to animal traction could increase women’s production and reduce their workload, if existing constraints to adoption were overcome.

Zimbabwe-Agricultural Credit and Export Promotion Project A smallholder ploughing a plot in the communal area of Insukamini, Gweru district. He is benefiting from credit obtained from the Agricultural Finance Corporation which allows him to hire the draft oxen and additional labour. IFAD Photo by Horst Wagner An 1997 study conducted by IFAD/FAO/Government of Japan discovered that small farmers, including women, saw animal traction as a key solution to their problems. This view is common in all the countries studied: Burkina Faso, Senegal, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe. As men emigrate to take up salaried jobs, and women farmers lose access to male labour, an increasing number of women become interested in animal power, seeing it as particularly useful for land preparation and for making easier the other heavy work previously done by men.

In practice, however, the spread of animal traction technology has been slow in these countries, and in some areas it is even retreating. This slow spread does not seem to be a function of lack of demand, but of high costs, lack of credit, animal disease, the scarcity of feed for draught animals, problems in manufacturing of draught implements, limited availability of quality implements to farmers, and poor weather and soil conditions. In countries such as Zambia, high import duties on raw materials make it difficult for local manufacturers to compete with imports from Zimbabwe, where exports and steel are subsidized. In Uganda, animal traction has not spread much beyond the northern and eastern parts of the country because of the presence of the tsetse fly, cultural constraints and historical reasons. There has also been a very high rate of cattle death in Zambia from tick-borne disease. In Senegal, the Government made a major effort from the mid-sixties through the seventies to promote animal traction. However, the study notes that the credit schemes that made this expansion possible collapsed in 1980.

Women farmers in many discussion groups expressed keen interest in learning about animal traction. In Burkina Faso and Senegal, where women’s use of animal traction is more limited than men’s, the women consulted felt that all they needed was access to the technology and training to be able to use it. In some instances, they had never even seen such technology. As women in the Mubende District in Uganda said, "We have seen pictures of animal traction in our children’s school books, but that is all we know about it". In the Soroti area, where some women were already using animal traction, the groups noted that animal traction:

  • was faster;
  • allowed larger areas to be opened up;
  • reduced women’s workloads by transferring some of their work to animals;
  • turned the soil well and deep; and
  • increased production.

Evidence indicates that animal traction use can result in considerable time saved. In Zimbabwe, the study team collected data on the time spent per acre on weeding when using a hoe and when using an animal-drawn cultivator down the inter-row space. There were large differences. For instance, for maize, when the weeding was done by hand, it took two to four weeks per acre, whereas with animal traction, it took only two to four days per acre. There were also enormous time savings with groundnuts, millet and other crops.

Nonetheless, the special constraints observed in the adoption of animal traction by women farmers in these countries will need to be taken into consideration. These include:

  • Cultural taboos. For example, in much of western Uganda and in parts of Zambia, there are taboos against women’s working with cattle, and therefore against their using oxen. In the study areas, no taboos were found against donkeys, although such taboos do exist in Africa. Usually because of their lower cost and lower social status, donkeys are considered appropriate for use by women.
  • Gender-based ownership issues. It may be difficult for women to own oxen or horses, for cultural as well as financial reasons. Even if there are no explicit taboos against their use by women, bovines traditionally belong to men, and animal traction tends to be seen as men’s area of action. Ownership issues may also be associated with the animals’ feed. For instance, in Senegal, even if a woman manages to acquire a horse for traction purposes, she will have difficulty obtaining the peanut straw required to feed it, because this belongs to men and is prohibitively expensive. Therefore, in this case, the woman still has to rely on her husband (to provide the feed), resulting in a weakening of her ownership control.
  • Fear of oxen. One study group of women in Uganda noted that fear of oxen was something they needed to overcome. Such fear may simply be because of women’s lack of experience with such animals.
  • Weight of the animal-drawn implements. Women in Zambia and Zimbabwe who were more involved in using animal traction complained about the weight of the implements, especially the cultivator. However, lighter equivalents are available in some countries, such as Senegal, where even children use them.
  • Design of animal traction implements. The handles of many of the ox-drawn implements found in eastern and southern Africa were too high for women.
  • Lack of understanding or of operational skills. Women note the need for training, both for themselves and for the oxen. The majority of animal traction courses by extension services are available only to men.
  • Expense. Though not unique to women farmers, high costs can pose more problems for women because of their weaker access to credit. As an example of prices (in 1997), the rigid three-tine cultivator built by a factory in Senegal was found to cost approximately CFAF 48o000. A donkey could be bought for CFAF 12 000-30 000, which is much cheaper than a horse (CFAF 80 000-120 000) or an ox. The study notes that even donkeys and the lightweight cultivators are beyond the financial reach of most women farmers, unless their husbands cooperate in the purchase, and even then, longer-term credit is often needed.

Women do not have as much direct or indirect access to animal traction as men do, or as much as they would like to have. Animal traction has potential for increasing agricultural production and reducing women farmers’ workloads and thus their exhaustion. But any attempts at promotion among groups of women farmers will need to take account of social feasibility and economic viability. The study suggests that in countries such as Zambia and Uganda, men would be supportive, although this may vary by location. In general, animal traction for use by women is likely to be more socially acceptable in places where there is a high level of male out-migration, with a resulting weakening in restrictive taboos and gender-based division of labour.

Adapted from:

IFAD/FAO/Government of Japan. 1998. Agricultural Implements Used by Women Farmers in Africa. Rome.