International Journal of Agricultural

Science and Research (IJASR)

ISSN(P): 2250-0057; ISSN(E): 2321-0087
Vol. 7, Issue 6, Dec 2017, 437-442
© TJPRC Pvt. Ltd

IMPACT ON SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS AFTER INDUCTION OF

IMPROVED GOAT FARMING PRACTICES AMONG

TRIBALS OF ABU ROAD, RAJASTHAN

SUDEEP SOLANKI

Assistant Professor, Veterinary University Training & Amp; Research Centre(VUTRC) Sirohi

ABSTRACT

The aim was to study the socio-economic assessment of improved goat farming. The study, conducted as per the
MOU with MPOWER, adopted 6 villages, namely, Siyawa, Meen, Taleti, Jambudi, Deri and Surpagla of block Abu
Road, District Sirohi, Rajasthan. Of a total of 709 tribal goat rearers, 60 goat farmers belonging to Goat Breeder
Livestock Groups (GBLGs) were selected. Pradan NGO worked on the self-help groups of tribals, through MPOWER
project component. The study was undertaken after transferring technology programme of various improved goat
production practices, in the adopted villages. Majority of the selected respondent goat farmers learned more new skills on

Original Article
the use of mangers followed by the use of vaccines like, PPR, ET, FMD etc., managing housing for maintaining goats,
the use of salt, deworming of goats, feeding of colostrums to kids in time, keeping improved bucks, planting fodder
trees/grasses, using mineral mixtures, bathing goats to control ectoparasites, etc. Goat has been a ready cash generator,
increasing the family’s total income, increasing the profit/goat/annum, increasing awareness about commercial goat
farming and its advantages, increasing access to goat milk for family consumption and increasing employment through
goats, which are reported as socio-economic indicators by 100%, 100%, 90%, 93.33%, 86.66% and 100% selected
respondent goat farmers, respectively. Similarly, owning a bicycle, constructing house and goat shed, having a
television/radio, owning a scooter/motor cycle, mobile phone and jewellery, and children’s education which are reported
as the status of family’s assets by the 75%, 43.33%, 98.33%, 20%, 10%, 56.66%, 8.33% and 48.33% selected respondent
goat farmers, respectively.

KEYWORDS: Socio-economic Impact of Goat Practices, Adopted Villages & Goat Farming

Received: Oct 20, 2017; Accepted: Nov 12, 2017; Published: Dec 18, 2017; Paper Id.: IJASRDEC201758

INTRODUCTION

The Pradan NGO had taken extensive efforts, to transfer improved goat production practices to the end
users. Therefore, it was necessary to understand the impact of efforts taken in MPOWER project and also to
understand the impact of these practices in need-based research and development of appropriate production
systems. With this ideology in mind, an attempt was made to study the impact of socio-economic status after
introducing improved goat production practices in adopted villages of tribals, with the following objectives:

• To study skill improvement of selected goat farmers.

• To study socio-economic indicators of selected farmers.

• To study status of family assets of selected goat farmers.

www.tjprc.org [email protected]
438 Sudeep Solanki

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study was conducted in 6 adopted villages, viz., Siyawa, Meen, Taleti, Jambudi, Deri and Surpagla of block
Abu Road, District Sirohi, Rajasthan. All these villages are adopted by Pradan NGO, under MPOWER project.
The investigation was undertaken after transferring technology programme for improving goat production practices in the
adopted villages. After implementing this programme, 10 improved goat production practices, 6 social−economic
indicators and 8 improved family statuses were identified. The data were collected through personal interview using pre-
tested structured schedule. Collected data and statistical tools like frequency and percentage were used for logical
conclusion.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

This section presents the impact on the socio-economic status after inducting improved practices of goat
production in the adopted villages of tribals, with regard to the skills gained, socio-economic indicators and status of
family assets.

Practice Wise Skill Improvement in Improved Goat Production Practice

Ten goat rearing practices as recommended by Animal Husbandry Department, PradanNGO, were carried out in
six adopted villages. The data generated on this aspect are presented in table 1.

Discussion with Tribal Women about the Goat Farming

The Use of Manger for Feeding Goats

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.9857 NAAS Rating: 4.13

Impact on Socio-economic Status after Induction of Improved Goat 439
Farming Practices among Tribals of Abu Road, Rajasthan

Table 1: Skill Improvement in Improved Goat Production Practices (n=60)

S. N. Learnt more Skill on Frequency Percent
1. Use of manager for feeding 59 98.33
2. Use of vaccine like, PPR, ET, FMD etc. 59 98.33
3. Proper housing management for keeping goats 57 95
4. Use of salt in diet 52 86.66
5. De-worming of goats 50 83.33
6. Feeding of colostrums to kids in time 48 80
7. Keeping improved bucks 54 90
8. Planting/Keeping of fodder trees/grasses 49 81.66
9. Use of mineral mixture or khadia 46 76.66
10. Bathing of goats to control ectoparasites 44 73.33

As shown in Table 1, the majority of the selected respondent goat farmers learned more on the use of manger for
feeding (98.33%), followed by skilled use of vaccines like PPR, ET, FMD, and so on.

Anhalt (1994) reported that, the extension agents require the necessary skills x to understand farmers’ problems
and their willingness to follow effectively, the principles of science and good agricultural practices, thereby widening the
real choices available for the farmer families. This also enables the farmers to work under complex circumstances with
little supervision. The knowledge and the skills of farmers in these adopted villages seem to be poor especially in the areas
of bathing goats to control ectoparasites, preparing ghee using goat milk, using berseem culture, differentiating between
male and female, making of pelleted feed, and weeding in fodder crops. Trainability refers to a person’s ability to acquire
the skill, knowledge or behaviour necessary to perform a job at a given level and to achieve the outcome in a given time
(Robertson and downs, 1979).

Socio-economic indicators: Table 2 shows the socio-economic indicators of selected respondent goat farmers.

Table 2: Socio-economic Indicators of Selected Goat Farmers (n=60)

S. N Particulars Farmer %
1 Goat has been a ready cash riding depend on high cost private credit [AQ:
Please check the statement ‘Goat has been a ready cash riding depend on high
cost private credit’ for clarity.]. 60 100
2 Increased share of income from goat to family’s total income. 60 100
3 Increased profit/goat/annum. 54 90
4 Increased awareness about commercial goat farming and its advantages. 56 93.33
5 Increased access to goat milk for family consumption. 52 86.66
6 Increase in employment generation through goats. 60 100

It is clear from table 2 that minority of the selected respondent goat farmers reported that goats have been a ready
cash riding dependent. on high cost private credit[AQ: Please check the phrase ‘goats have been a ready cash riding
dependent. on high cost private credit’ for clarity.]. Goat rearing increased the family’s total income, it also increased the
profit/goat/annum, increased awareness about commercial goat farming and its advantages, increased access to goat milk
for family consumption and increased employment opportunity. Kumar and Singh (2005) also observed that the goat
rearing have become steadily important in the rural economy particularly in the arid, semi-arid and mountainous regions of
the country. Similarly, in goat rearing, family labour has been utilized efficiently (Kumar and Deoghare 2003).

Status of family assets: Table 3 presents the status of family assets of selected goat farmers.

www.tjprc.org [email protected]
440 Sudeep Solanki

Table 3: Distribution of Goat Farmers based on Status of Family’s Assets (n=60)

S. N. Particulars F %
1 Purchased bicycle. 45 75
2 Construction of house. 26 43.33
3 Construction of goat shed 59 98.33
4 Television / Radio. 12 20
5 Scooter / Motor cycle. 6 10
6 Children education. 34 56.66
7 Jewellery. 5 8.33
8 Mobile phone. 29 48.33

As seen in table 3, 75% of the selected goat farmers owned bicycle, 43.33% constructed their own homes and
98.33% constructed goat sheds, and 20% possessed television and radio which is much less then as showed by Soni, R. L.
et. al, 2011, but it was almost similar to the study of Braj M et al. (2008). The data show that, 27.41% farmers send their
children to English medium schools and 25.19% purchased mobile phones. Few respondents owned scooter/motor cycle,
jewellery. Acharya and Singh (1992), also highlighted the crucial role goats played, in improving the status of poor rural
households.

CONCLUSIONS

• The study indicated the majority of the selected goat farmers learned more skill on the use of vaccines like PPR,
ET, FMD etc., proper housing management for keeping goats, use of salt, deworming of goats, feeding colostrums
to kids in time, keeping improved bucks, planting fodder trees/grasses and using mineral mixtures.

• Soni et.al.(2011), also concluded that, in the case of socio-economic indicators, majority of the selected
respondent goat farmers depended on goats for making money by high cost private credit, increased share of
income from goat to family’s total income, increased profit/goat/annum and increased awareness about
commercial goat farming and its advantages. Braj et al.(2008), also showed that, due to the increased ready cash
availability, 81.93% of the selected respondents purchased bicycles as compared to 75% in this study. Most of the
selected goat farmers (98.33) had constructed goat shed as assets and (98.33) learned to feed goats in manger

REFERENCES

1. Acharya, R. M. and Singh, N. P. 1992. The role of goats in conversation of ecology and livelihood security. Pre-conference
proceedings, V international conference on goats, pp: 81-99.

2. Anhalt, C. H. 1994. Getting ready for the twenty first century: Technical, Change and institutional Modernization in
Agriculture World Bank, Washington, D. C.

3. Bimal. P. Bashir et al., Economics of Household Malabari Goat Farming in Northern Region of Kerala, International Journal
of Agricultural Science and Research (IJASR), Volume 6, Issue 3, May - Jun 2016, pp. 529-534

4. Braj M., Sagar L. R. And Singh,. K. 2008. Soc-economic impact of the improved goat farming practices in adopted villages.
Indian Res. J. Ext. Edu.,8 (1):36-38

5. Kumar, S and Singh, N. P. 2005. Economics of small Ruminant production in dry regions. National Symposium of RMSI on
“Augmenting Force Resources in Arid and semi-arid region: Long term strategies” at Jaipur on November 19-20, pp: 489-
498

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.9857 NAAS Rating: 4.13

Impact on Socio-economic Status after Induction of Improved Goat 441
Farming Practices among Tribals of Abu Road, Rajasthan

6. Kumar, S. And Deoghare, P. R. 2003. Goat production system and livelihood security of rural landless households. Indian
journal of small Ruminants, 9(1): 19-24.

7. Robertson, I. And Dawns, S. 1979. Learning and the prediction of performance. Development of Trainability Testing in the
United Kingdom, J. Appl. Psychol., 64:42-50.

8. Soni, R. L., Rajeev B. And Rathore, R. S. 2011. Soc-economic impact of the improved goat farming practices on tribal.
Raj.J.Extn. Edu., 19: 62-65

www.tjprc.org [email protected]