Hüttner K, Leidl K, Pfeiffer D U, Jere F B, Kasambara D
EpiCentre, Massey University, PB 11-222 Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Trop Anim Health Prod. 2001 May;33(3):201-18. doi: 10.1023/a:1010362704698.
The social background, farm characteristics, indicators of income and self-evaluation returns of 96 randomly selected users of a Basic Animal Health Service (BAHS) programme in northern Malawi were compared with those of 96 matched past-users and 96 non-users, respectively. All 288 farms were visited between July and October 1997. Data analysis was performed using univariate and multivariate techniques. The results showed that, on average, BAHS users had larger cattle herds (16.3) than part-users (14.7) or non-users (12.4). Similarly, the annual yields of crops were higher for users compared to either of the other groups. Users occupied better houses and owned a larger number of farm and household items than did part-users or non-users. A third of all farmers were engaged in additional income generation to lessen the risk of poverty. However, analysis of the livestock management and the educational background of the farmers suggested that usage of the BAHS programme was not only determined by already existing 'wealth'. Improved livestock husbandry and management measures, which do not require capital investment, were more frequently applied by users compared to either of the other groups. Non-users and part-users had attained a lower level of education, were less open towards improved farming methods and felt less knowledgeable than BAHS users. The average straight-line distances from farms using BAHS to their respective village animal health worker (2.2 km) or veterinary assistant (2.9 km) were similar but varied according to ecological zone. Intensified extension and awareness meetings in villages will be required to get more non-users involved in BAHS.
对马拉维北部基础动物健康服务(BAHS)项目的96名随机挑选的用户的社会背景、农场特征、收入指标和自我评估回报,分别与96名匹配的过去用户和96名非用户进行了比较。在1997年7月至10月期间走访了所有288个农场。使用单变量和多变量技术进行了数据分析。结果表明,平均而言,BAHS用户拥有的牛群规模(16.3头)大于部分用户(14.7头)或非用户(12.4头)。同样,与其他两组中的任何一组相比,用户的作物年产量更高。与部分用户或非用户相比,用户居住的房屋更好,拥有更多的农场和家庭用品。三分之一的农民从事额外的创收活动以降低贫困风险。然而,对农民的牲畜管理和教育背景的分析表明,BAHS项目的使用不仅取决于已有的“财富”。与其他两组中的任何一组相比,用户更频繁地采用了不需要资本投资的改良畜牧业和管理措施。非用户和部分用户的教育水平较低,对改良耕作方法的接受度较低,并且感觉自己的知识不如BAHS用户丰富。使用BAHS的农场到各自村庄动物健康工作者(2.2公里)或兽医助理(2.9公里)的平均直线距离相似,但因生态区域而异。需要在村庄加强推广和宣传会议,以使更多非用户参与BAHS。