Documented authored by Ahmed E. Sidahmed (IFAD) and Abbas Kessaba (IFAD).

An invited presentation at the Seminar on Livestock Development Policies in East and Southern Africa, Mbabane Swaziland 27 July - 1 August 1997; Centre Technique de Cooperation Agricole et Rurale(CTA) ACP-EU Lome Convention Wageningen the Netherlands. Also published as IFAD Technical Advisory Division Staff Working Paper No. 26, June 1998.

Introduction

The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) was established as a follow-up to the recommendations of the 1974 World Food Conference with a mandate for rural poverty alleviation. A major objective of the Fund since it commenced operations in 1978 has been to develop approaches for mainstreaming the interests of the rural poor into government and donor-sponsored agricultural development projects and programmes. This task has proved quite complex and challenging because projects are unlikely to succeed or be sustainable without the full participation of the rural poor in project design and implementation. The lessons learned have also highlighted the fact that reducing the poverty of poor rural farmers who raise small herds and flocks is not an easy task, because smallholder livestock systems (sedentary or extensive) are subject to climatic, political and economic uncertainties. The presence of an enabling environment in terms of both a favourable policy framework and strong institutional capacity is also critical for the success of livestock projects and development programmes.

Improvement of the livestock subsector provides a strategic linkage between poverty reduction and IFAD's target groups, the rural poor. When local currencies are unstable and weakened by rising inflation, the strategy of herders and mixed crop/livestock farmers is to transfer capital to livestock. Under such circumstances, livestock ensures the stability of assets and is a means of savings at low transaction cost. As governments start to adopt structural adjustment programmes and follow liberal exchange rates, inflation rates decline, and an opportunity emerges to rationalize the investment in livestock in the market economy by enforcing strict reform measures such as widening the scope of the privatization of service delivery and the reduction of the public sector. Under such a situation and in the absence of policies favouring the poor, wealth shifts in favour of the rich, which exposes most smallholders to the risk of absolute poverty. In order to ensure a balance, IFAD participates in the reform process by investment opportunities that aim at improving the income-generating capacity and living conditions of the poor within the socio-economic and institutional framework of the evolving open and competitive market economies. Examples are IFAD's active partnership in the subsectors of Ethiopia, Mozambique, Namibia and Zambia.

Eastern and southern Africa forms most of sub-Saharan Africa's landscape (see Table 1). The rural poor raise livestock for subsistence and use e the surplus for cash to cover the cost of food, medicine, children's education, emergencies and other needs. Land traditionally owned by tribes and clans has been progressively transferred to the government or to private titles owned by the powerful and elites. The majority of the rural poor have been excluded from the policies and development decisions that affect crop and livestock production systems and which, to a great extent, have marginalized and excluded these communities from influencing the process of change. Yet, poor communities are held responsible for - and share the consequences of - the poor management, low productivity and continued deterioration of renewable resources.

Food security cannot be achieved in most of the rural areas of the two regions without improving the livelihoods of smallholder crop and livestock producers. Therefore, investment opportunities should respond to the needs and the structure of rural household members, men, women and children. This could be achieved by ensuring a regional outreach through a microeconomic focus, for example, the distribution of draught animals to poor farmers in Botswana and Zambia, aimed at assisting them to increase the areas under cultivation. On the other hand, projects focusing on small animals (small ruminants, poultry and pigs) can provide opportunities for women in Botswana, Mozambique, Namibia and Zambia to access and control production resources, thus leading to a direct increase in household incomes.

A good understanding of the above-mentioned issues was gained during two decades of experience in the development of flexible and innovative approaches aimed at improving the livelihoods of the rural poor. The lessons learned indicate that achieving sustainable progress requires the full participation of the rural poor, as well as close interaction, integration of activities and consensus among donors, national and regional governments and policy-makers. Experience has shown that micro-level reform cannot be sustained without the commitment of policy-makers and without achieving harmony with national and regional sectoral strategies and policies.

This background paper highlights some features of IFAD's livestock policies and programmes that have been developed during the design and implementation of the Fund's investment projects in the two regions.

Table 1. Eastern and southern Africa: population, livestock, climate, and the contribution of agriculture to GDP

	Human population (in millions)	Livestock units (in millions)	Climate		Contribution of agriculture to GDP
	1997	1997
High Income (GDP/Capita >USD 6 000
Mauritius	1.2	0.03	tropical, warm, dry winter, hot, wet summer		9.3%
Seychelles	0.07	0.01	tropical marine		3.6%
Subtotal	1.27	0.05
Upper-Middle Income (GDP/Capita USD 2 000-6 000)
Botswana	1.5	2.04	semi-arid		4%
Namibia	1.7	2.07	desert, hot, dry		15%
South Africa	42.3	14.51	mostly semi-arid		5%
Swaziland	1.03	0.57	tropical to near tropical temperature		12%
Zimbabwe	11.4	4.64	tropical, moderated by altitude
Subtotal	57.93	23.831
Lower-Middle Income (GDP/Capita USD 500-2 000)
Angola	11.18	2.98	semi-arid		12%
Burundi	6	0.44	equatorial		56%
Comoros	0.53	0.05	tropical marine		39%
Djibouti	0.43	0.25	desert, torrid, dry		3%
Eritrea	3.6	1.35	hot, dry along Red Sea; cooler, wetter highlands, semi-arid in western hills		19%
Kenya	28.8	16.78	tropical along coast to arid in interior		30%
Lesotho	2	0.68	cold, dry winters, hot, wet summers		14%
Madagascar	14.1	8.47	tropical coast, temperature inland, arid in south		33%
Malawi	9.6	0.70	tropical		45%
Mozambique	18.1	1.08	tropical to subtropical		33%
Sudan	32.6	22.83	tropical in south, arid desert in north		33%
Tanzania, United Rep. Of	29.5	12.06	tropical along coast to temperate in highlands		57%
Uganda	20.6	4.84	tropical, semi-arid in northeast		55%
Zambia	9.3	2.15	tropical		32%
Subtotal	186.34	74.66
Low-Income (GDP/Capita <USD 500)
Ethiopia	58.7	27.87	tropical monsoon		57%
Somalia	6.6	11.02	principally desert		66%
Rwanda	7.7	0.49	two rainy seasons; mild in mountains, with frost and snow possible		52%
Subtotal	73	39.369
Total	318.54	137.91

Livestock unit = cattle 0.8, sheep and goats 0.1, camels 1.1
Source: FAOSTAT database, at, June 1998.
CIA World Factbook, at, June 1998.