In the low-rainfall areas of the Mashreq and Maghreb regions, small ruminants represent the principal economic output, contributing a large share of the income of farmers and nomadic or semi-nomadic herders. The region has experienced a substantial increase in animal numbers over the last two decades, driven by a rising demand for animal products and subsidized feed price (barley). The contribution of natural grazing as a proportion of total feed resources in many countries declined. Not only are rangeland resources insufficient to meet current demand, but the absolute level of feed resources is falling due to overgrazing, removal of vegetation through ploughing (often for fuelwood), and soil erosion. In most countries of the region, traditional local institutions governing access to grazing lands have been disrupted, resulting in a system of open access, but with no corresponding regulatory mechanism to control the extent and intensity of grazing.
Technical solutions to some of these problems are available, but their adoption has been slow. The recent market reforms that some governments implemented – such as the removal of subsidies and subsequent changes in relative input and output supplies and prices – are expected to have an impact on increased offtake and productivity per animal unit. Against this background, M&M Phase II focused on adaptive research of technologies and management practices, so as to provide the policy and institutional support for wider adoption of improved production and resource management practices.
The objective was to develop productive and sustainable production systems
based on small ruminants, through the integration of feed and livestock
production, both within and across arable and rangeland production systems.
This would improve the incomes and welfare of farmers and pastoralists
in the low-rainfall areas of the Mashreq and Maghreb regions, while meeting
national demands for small ruminant products and conserving the natural
resource base.
Agro-ecological characterization
This involved compilation of a database; definition of the agro-climatic framework; evaluation of agricultural risk; definition of the terrain framework; integration of the framework and definition of agro-ecological zones; extension of the frameworks to land use and production systems; and land suitability evaluation of the defined agro-ecological zones.
Property rights research
This included evaluation of existing property rights; identification of links between property rights, resource use, and productivity; comparative analysis of institutions in rangeland management; assessment of community water property rights; and property rights and institutional options in rangeland improvement.
Policy research
Elements studies ranged across market transformation studies and agricultural sector models; community and household studies, with model and risk analysis; marketing studies; improvement of barley productivity; inclusion of forage crops in rotations; crop management within rotation systems; optimizing utilization of forage crops; community-based production of pasture and legume seed; improvement of weedy follows; and production of other on-farm feed resources.
Alternative feed resources
Following inventories of available alternative feed sources, specific potential feeds were evaluated, including urea or ammonia treated straw; utilization of agricultural and industrial by-products as feed; stubble grazing supplementation; and use of spineless cactus (Opuntia spp.) as animal feed.
Management of small ruminants
After initial surveys of small ruminant production systems in the M&M area, with modelling to rank livestock production constraints, an assessment was made of micronutrient deficiencies. The current status of genetic improvement in the region was reviewed, with monitoring of improved rams and breeds; improved small ruminant fertility; and diagnostic studies of animal health.
Rangeland and marginal land rehabilitation
Activities included characterization and mapping of rangelands; critical appraisal of past and ongoing rangeland development projects; testing methods of rangeland rehabilitation; community-level marginal land rehabilitation; and community seed production of range species.
Monitoring of technology transfer
Economic evaluations were made of the performance of the technologies tested, through monitoring of technology adoption; evaluation of the effectiveness of technology transfer mechanisms; and impact assessments.
Human resources capacity building and institutional strengthening
During the course of the project, use was made of specialized networks; short-term sabbaticals; training of technical staff and farmers; study tours, workshops and seminars; and extension and communication components to strengthen institutional capability.
- Although not yet ended, it is clear that significant achievements have resulted from the project’s activities.
- Methodological guidelines have been developed for community-level participatory agro-ecological characterization.
- Following comparison of rangeland management options in Morocco, Tunisia and Jordan, it could be shown that, in rangelands, existing property rights systems were failing to provide an appropriate balance between individual and social interests in the control and management of common pastures.
- Land tenure type has been shown to influence investment in crop lands.
- Community models were developed in Morocco, Algeria and Jordan.
- Policy reforms and technologies were analysed using models to evaluate their impacts on community management of natural resources, and welfare and income distribution. Studies at community level looked at removal of subsidies, drought relief programmes, liberalization of prices, credit, rangeland taxation and the new technologies promoted by M&M (feed blocks, barley, use of Atriplex spp., etc.).
- A number of technical packages appropriate to low-rainfall areas (barley production, forage legumes, and forage mixtures (barley+vetch; triticale+peas or vetch; oat+vetch)) were developed and validated.
- Improved rams, ram effect, early weaning, adjusting feeding calendars to reproductive period, and improved animal nutrition all proved to be good techniques in helping improve small ruminant productivity in low-rainfall areas.
- Feed blocks (from agro-industrial and farm by-products), spineless cactus and urea-treated straw were validated as alternative sources of feed for livestock during harsh conditions. These technologies were widely adopted by farmers and communities.
- Planting fodder shrubs (mainly Atriplex) and spineless cactus, alone or in alley cropping with barley or forages, on private rangeland, was successfully promoted and adopted by farmers.
- Guidelines for adoption studies and impact assessment; adoption studies for many technologies and impact assessment, and cost–benefit analyses were elaborated for most technologies.
- From 1999 to 2002, more than 14 000 persons from the eight participating countries participated in M&M activities.
- Introduction of a community approach clearly is one of the more important achievements. It can be stated with certainty and objective confidence that the community approach targeted as the main vehicle of programme delivery by the M&M programme has been successfully adopted by practically all member countries, with varying progress. The interrelationship between the different elements of community development and objectives on the one hand, and programme delivery actions and modalities on the other hand, are schematically presented in Figure 1.
- The community approach has achieved the following:
- It facilitated closer links with local and central governments and institutions.
- It started to enhance the bargaining power of the community in input purchases and output marketing.
- It gave confidence to members that they can organize and manage activities such as range management, cooperatives and processing with little or no support from the government.
- It gave the communities increased (collective) insight and vision with regard to the innovative conceptualization of development opportunities and options.
- It enabled some communities to qualify for loans by offering collective guarantees and securities, which they would not be able to obtain individually.
- Potentially, the growth (horizontal and vertical) of communities would probably lead to the creation of pressure groups, who should be able to achieve and gain more. That would depend on the evolution of efficient and dedicated management, on the emergence and sustenance of truly democratic communities and on the development of self-confidence enhanced by progressive achievements.
- The more policy and political support is given to the process of community institutionalization, the more will it prove to be an effective vehicle of change and sustainable development.
- There are indications that intra- and inter-country exchange of visits among communities may enhance the purpose and the process of institutionalization, as well as the functional abilities of these institutions.
- The community approach seems to be compatible with the intention and drive by many countries of the region to adopt decentralized forms and patterns of governance. The more policy and political support given by governments to these institutions, the more mutual gains and support can be released. Since these communities provide the main platforms for socio-economic models as part of the M&M programme, the data generated by these models can provide invaluable guidelines for national planners.
- In some-communities there might be conflicting interests and objectives, e.g. between crop and livestock farmers regarding the use of marginal communal land (Iraq). In Morocco, it is relatively easier to introduce the community approach in the barley livestock system areas, where land is privately owned, than in the rangeland–livestock system, where it is customarily owned and used. This is perhaps related to socio-economic inequities, which may be difficult to reconcile.
- Increasing demand for mowers, balers and other machinery has been reported.
