Livestock Services and the Poor: A global initiative - IFAD

58
Supply public support
through organizations
of poor people
LIVESTOCK SERVICES AND THE POOR
Prices are a
limiting factor
User payments
depend on
the benefits
Kenya, Ahuja et al. (2000) and Heffernan and Misturelli (2000)
found that prices for services are not a major concern for poor
livestock keepers. Their major concerns are access and good
quality services.
For services that are likely to require user payments in the
long term and for which the poor may face particular problems
in paying, the public sector should support development in such
a way that the capacity of livestock keepers to articulate their
needs and demand quality services is built up. One possibility
might be to channel public financing through producer
organizations or community institutions, which would either
provide services to their members, or contract them out to
private providers.
A return to free or subsidized public services cannot be
expected for services that are clearly private goods. Moreover,
informal payments are frequently the rule, even if services
are formally provided free of charge. The few services that
are provided free do not benefit poor livestock keepers, but
rather wealthier and more influential livestock keepers (Ahuja
et al., 2000).
The development of a payment system for ‘private good’
services, such as clinical veterinary treatments and artificial
insemination, that are affordable to the poor, but also financially
attractive for the service providers is a challenge. The studies
mentioned above also reveal that the expenditure of poor
livestock keepers on veterinary services is actually low, so the
prices do matter, though they may not be the main factor.
In the study on India, livestock keepers in the lowest wealth
category were about 30% less willing to pay for services relative to
livestock keepers in the wealthiest category in the same areas. In
the Kenyan case, only 13% of the livestock keepers mentioned
price as a major constraint, although a comparison revealed that
livestock keepers spent about 50% less than an ‘ideal’ calculated
expenditure. The difference is probably the result of a lack of
access combined with an inability to afford the services. The
practical experience in community-based systems seems to
confirm these results. Moreover, the ease with which user