Animal Genetic Resources - Convention on Biological Diversity

More documents

Recommendations

Info

52 G. Gandini et al. Table 5. Economic role and activities of the farm, by breed. Lower area, breed comparisons. Country Breed N Economic role of the farm Farm income/family income (%) No. of external workers Income shares from farm activities (%) Income share from local cattle (%) High Medium Low Minimal Mean SD <strong>Animal</strong>s Mean Non-feed crop Mean Forestry Mean Other Mean Mean SD Belgium BEBM 23 87.0 8.7 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 89.4 0.0 0.0 10.6 68.2 30.56 BEPR 18 94.4 0.0 5.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 97.8 0.0 0.0 2.2 87.2 26.30 Estonia EEEN 30 60.0 10.0 20.0 10.0 5.3 13.56 85.8 2.0 0.7 11.5 38.6 37.07 Spain ESAN 31 58.6 13.8 17.2 10.3 1.0 2.07 95.0 0.6 0.2 4.2 79.3 28.97 ESAS 31 37.0 18.5 33.3 11.1 0.3 1.14 91.7 7.6 0.0 0.7 70.3 35.78 Finland FNES 30 86.3 0.0 3.3 10.0 0.2 0.40 75.8 12.4 2.4 9.4 29.1 29.44 FNWS 31 83.9 12.9 0.0 3.2 0.1 0.18 89.5 1.0 5.7 3.8 59.6 38.66 France FRFE 19 57.9 26.3 15.8 0.0 0.1 0.32 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.8 36.33 FRVI 15 40.0 26.7 26.7 6.6 0.3 0.56 82.7 0.0 0.0 17.3 44.3 41.40 Ireland IEKE 20 20.0 10.0 35.0 35.0 0.1 0.00 89.0 4.2 4.2 2.6 46.1 35.06 Italy ITMO 26 80.8 7.7 3.8 7.7 1.0 2.96 92. 4.7 0.0 3.1 44.3 39.59 ITRE 30 73.3 23.3 3.4 0.0 0.3 0.83 95.5 4.5 0.0 0.0 65.6 35.34 Nedherland NLDR 21 23.8 14.3 14.3 47.6 0.5 1.63 44.7 0.7 0.2 54.3 32.3 37.71 NLGW 22 81.8 18.2 0.0 0.0 0.8 2.57 83.7 7.8 0.0 8.6 61.0 34.44 NLMR 24 91.6 4.2 0.0 4.2 0.1 0.00 96.4 0.3 0.0 3.3 81.5 31.58 Total 371 66.6 12.6 11.5 9.3 0.8 4.24 87.6 3.4 1.0 8.1 57.4 38.27 BEBM BEPR EEEN ESAN ESAS FNES FNWS FRFE FRVI IEKE ITMO ITRE NLDR NLGW NLMR BEBM BEPR EEEN af abf ESAN f ESAS aceg cg acef cd FNES acf bcdf acg bcdfg defg FNWS d dfg adf fg cdg bcdf FRFE deg fg abe f c bcdfg d FRVI fg befg a be cef cdg deg e IEKE df dfg adg dg cdf bcg g dg de ITMO f f a cfg bcd d eg dg ITRE e f aefg cg bcdeg d beg dg f NLDR efg befg abeg beg bcefg bcdeg bdefg beg be bde beg befg NLGW ac bcf acfg bcf bg dfg cd bcg ceg dg bcefg NLMR abfg fg cg bcdf df f efg dfg f f fg bcef Note: Presence of letters corresponds to significant differences between breeds (
Motives and values of local cattle farmers 53 from other types of income. The percentage of income from animal food products is above 83 percent in all breeds, except for FNWS, where 12.4 percent of the income derives from non-feed crops, and NLDR, where 3.5, 12.8, 10.5 and 5.0 percent of the income derives respectively from work services for other farms, from grazing as landscape management, from tourism services and from welfare and education services. It might be worthwhile to create opportunities to exchange ideas, and to promote institutional support in order to foster multifunctionality in other breeds as a tool to increase their productivity and sustainability. Farmers were also asked to identify the percentages of the production from either the local breed or the total herd (in the case of the presence of two or more breeds on the farm) sold as raw material on the farm, as processed material on the farm, to the local market or to the industry. For the local breed, on average most (39.9 percent) of the production is sold to industry, followed by local markets (25.4 percent), on farm as raw material (9.6 percent), and on farm as processed material (5.9 percent). Additional investigations are needed to understand the role of both industry and the local market on farmer profitability, which seems to vary from case to case. In some cases, the industry guarantees a good promotion of the breed product (e.g. Spanish breeds); in other cases the local market adds value to the product (e.g. Italian breeds). When we consider the total herd production, the percentage sold to industry increases to 44 percent and quotas sold on farm decreased by half. Besides information on farmers and their farms, our survey aimed to understand the values and motives of farmers for keeping their local breed, their perception of the attitude of society towards them for continuing to farm local breeds instead of turning to mainstream ones, and farmers’ plans on the size of their herds. Figures 1 to 7 report on these aspects. Farmers (Figure 1) were asked to identify and rank the three main reasons for keeping their local breed from among the following: tradition (of the farm and of the farming area), multifunctionality (i.e. opportunities for multifunctional farming, including tourism, production of niche products, vegetation management), external support (presence of economic incentives or conservation programmes), functional traits, social value (including image value for the farm, link to other people who have such breeds or values, bringing pleasure to the family) and other reasons. Across all breeds, as the first reason the most frequent answer was functional traits (36 percent) strictly followed by tradition (35.4 percent), which was the most frequent answer in eight breeds (BEPR, EEEN, FNWS, FRFE, FRVI, ITMO, IEKE, NLDR). In ESAS, the most frequent first reason was external support (30 percent); in IEKE farmers indicated with equal frequency (35 percent) tradition and presence of external support. When tradition was given as the first reason, the second reason was functional traits in five breeds (BEPR, EEEN, FNWS, IEKE, ITMO), tradition again in two breeds (FRFE, FRVI), and multifunctionality or social value, with equal frequency, in one breed (NLDR). In addition, Figure 1. Three main motivations of farmers to keep the local breed.
Page 1 and 2:
47 ANIMAL GENETIC RESOURCES 2010 IS
Page 3 and 4:
Editor-in-Chief B. Scherf Editors S
Page 5 and 6:
Animal Gen
Page 7 and 8: Animal Gen
Page 9 and 10: 2 I. Hoffmann and B. Scherf Technic
Page 11 and 12: 4 I. Hoffmann and B. Scherf Table 2
Page 13 and 14: 6 I. Hoffmann and B. Scherf Table 4
Page 15 and 16: 8 I. Hoffmann and B. Scherf Strateg
Page 17 and 18: 10 I. Hoffmann and B. Scherf in 201
Page 19 and 20: 12 D. Pilling diseñar clasificacio
Page 21 and 22: 14 D. Pilling Diversity Information
Page 23 and 24: 16 D. Pilling other management prog
Page 25 and 26: 18 D. Pilling
Page 27 and 28: 20 D. Pilling the Shire (reaching a
Page 29 and 30: 22 D. Pilling socio-demographic and
Page 31 and 32: 24 J.A. Woolliams et al. Palabras c
Page 33 and 34: 26 J.A. Woolliams et al. communitie
Page 35 and 36: 28 J.A. Woolliams et al. happening
Page 37 and 38: 30 J.A. Woolliams et al. Acknowledg
Page 39 and 40: 32 E. Martyniuk et al. actualizacio
Page 41 and 42: 34 E. Martyniuk et al. to monitor c
Page 43 and 44: 36 E. Martyniuk et al. of the three
Page 45 and 46: 38 E. Martyniuk et al. Table 2. Set
Page 47 and 48: 40 E. Martyniuk et al. Table 3. Sta
Page 49 and 50: 42 E. Martyniuk et al. CBD. 2003b.
Page 53 and 54: Motives and values of local cattle
Page 57: Motives and values of local cattle
Page 67 and 68: Marketing products from local lives
Page 79 and 80: 74 P.J. Boettcher and O. Akin sobre
Page 81 and 82: 76 P.J. Boettcher and O. Akin Figur
Page 87 and 88: 82 P.J. Boettcher and O. Akin 5. Wh
Page 91 and 92: Economics of AnGR conservation and
Page 93 and 94: Economics of AnGR conservation and
Page 97 and 98: Options and legal requirements for
Page 107 and 108: Role of protected areas in conservi
Page 109 and 110:
Role of protected areas in conservi
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
116 P.J.K. McGowan Picture 1. Red j
Page 121 and 122:
118 P.J.K. McGowan Analysis of the
Page 123 and 124:
120 I.U. Köhler-Rollefson et al. t
Page 125 and 126:
122 I.U. Köhler-Rollefson et al. W
Page 127 and 128:
Animal Gen
Page 129 and 130:
European issues on AnGR 127 Europe
Page 131 and 132:
European issues on AnGR 129 Table 2
Page 133 and 134:
European issues on AnGR 131 collect
Page 135 and 136:
European issues on AnGR 133 and the
Page 137 and 138:
European issues on AnGR 135 nationa
Page 139 and 140:
Animal Gen
Page 141 and 142:
Recent Publication 139 organization
Page 143 and 144:
Animal Gen
Page 145 and 146:
Animal Gen
Page 147 and 148:
Animal Gen
Page 149 and 150:
148 Instructions for contributors
Page 151 and 152:
Animal Gen
Page 153 and 154:
Instructions pour les auteurs 153 L
Page 155 and 156:
156 Instrucciones para los autores
show all

Animal Genetic Resources - Convention on Biological Diversity

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?