Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:14:13.551Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessment of institutional capacities of the Gambia Indigenous Livestock Multipliers’ Associations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2015

O. F. Olaniyan ,
N. N. Fall-Diop ,
B. Faye ,
A. Secka ,
O.B. Smith  and
M. Kebbeh
O. F. Olaniyan*
Affiliation:
International Trypanotolerance Centre, PMB 14, Banjul, The Gambia
N. N. Fall-Diop
Affiliation:
West African Rural Foundation, Sacré Cœur 3 VDN – Villa 10075 Dakar, Sénégal
B. Faye
Affiliation:
West African Rural Foundation, Sacré Cœur 3 VDN – Villa 10075 Dakar, Sénégal
A. Secka
Affiliation:
International Trypanotolerance Centre, PMB 14, Banjul, The Gambia
O.B. Smith
Affiliation:
International Trypanotolerance Centre, PMB 14, Banjul, The Gambia
M. Kebbeh
Affiliation:
West African Rural Foundation, Sacré Cœur 3 VDN – Villa 10075 Dakar, Sénégal
*
Correspondence to: O. F. Olaniyan, International Trypanotolerance Centre, PMB 14, Banjul, The Gambia. email: ofolaniyan@hotmail.com
Get access

Summary

This exploratory study aims to understand and improve the performance of Gambia Indigenous Livestock Multipliers’ Associations (GILMA – Fulladu and Saloum) as a way of enabling them to better respond to the challenges faced in fulfilling their institutional responsibilities. Using participatory institutional diagnosis, the GILMA members and experts were able to examine their associations and to stimulate collective reflection as a means of making the associations more efficient and effective. The findings of this diagnosis showed that functioning of both GILMAs was closely linked to the operations of their technical partners. This resulted to GILMAs which clearly lack defined vision and mission. Main issues to address include capacity development of GILMA's executive committee in terms of institutional management, group facilitation, participatory planning, effective strategies for partnership and ownership. Overall, this study developed pathways for revitalizing GILMAs into vibrant and self-sustaining indigenous ruminant livestock multipliers’ associations that can effectively carry out specific roles and responsibilities within the three-tier Open Nucleus Breeding Scheme of the International Trypanotolerance Centre.

Résumé

Cette étude exploratoire a été menée pour comprendre et améliorer la performance des Associations Gambiennes de Multiplicateurs de Bétail Autochtone (Gambia Indigenous Livestock Multipliers’ Association/GILMA Fulladu and Saloum) et leur permettre ainsi de mieux relever les défis de l'accomplissement de leurs responsabilités institutionnelles. Grâce au diagnostic institutionnel participatif, les membres de GILMA et les experts ont pu examiner les bases fondamentales des associations et stimuler une réflexion collective pour les relancer et les rendre plus efficaces et efficientes. Les résultats de ce diagnostic ont montré que le fonctionnement de deux GILMAs était étroitement lié aux opérations des partenaires techniques avec des membres qui identifiaient leur mission et leur vision par rapport aux activités de leurs partenaires. En conséquence, les GILMAs ont manqué d'identité précise et indépendante. Les principaux problèmes à régler, à cet égard, incluront le développement des capacités du comité exécutif de chaque GILMA en gestion organisationnelle et planification participative ainsi que des stratégies efficaces de partenariat et d'appropriation. Dans l'ensemble, cette étudie a balisé les voies pour revitaliser les deux GILMAs en associations dynamiques et autonomes de multiplicateurs de bétail ruminant autochtone qui peuvent s'acquitter efficacement de rôles et responsabilités spécifiques dans le système d'amélioration génétique à noyau ouvert à trois-niveau du Centre International sur la Trypanotolérance.

Resumen

Con este estudio exploratorio, se pretende conocer y mejorar el trabajo de las Asociaciones de Criadores de Ganado Autóctono de Gambia (GILMA – Fulladu y Saloum), con el fin de permitirles dar una mejor respuesta a los desafíos a los que se enfrentan en el cumplimiento de sus responsabilidades institucionales. Al usar un diagnóstico institucional participativo, los miembros y expertos de GILMA fueron capaces de examinar sus asociaciones y de incentivar la reflexión colectiva, como modo de hacer las asociaciones más eficaces y eficientes. Los resultados de este diagnóstico mostraron que el funcionamiento de ambas GILMAs dependió estrechamente de las acciones de sus colaboradores técnicos. De ello se deduce que las GILMAs claramente carecen de una visión y una misión definidas. Entre las principales cuestiones a abordar se incluye el desarrollo de las capacidades del comité ejecutivo de las GILMAs en términos de gestión institucional, facilitación de grupos, planificación participativa y estrategias eficaces para la asociación y la propiedad. En términos generales, este estudio marcó vías para la revitalización de las GILMAs como asociaciones dinámicas y autosostenibles de criadores de rumiantes autóctonos, capaces de desempeñar eficazmente roles y responsabilidades específicos dentro del Esquema de Selección de Núcleo Abierto de tres niveles del Centro Internacional de Tripanotolerancia.

Keywords

AssociationbreedingGILMAindigenousmultipliermultiplicateurélevageGILMAassociationautochtoneCriadorSelecciónGILMAAsociaciónAutóctono
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Genetic Resources/Resources génétiques animales/Recursos genéticos animales , Volume 57 , December 2015 , pp. 119 - 126
Copyright
Copyright © Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akpo, E., Vissoh, P.V., Tossou, R.C., Crane, T., Kossou, D.K., Richards, D.K., Stomph, T.J. & Struik, P.C. 2012. A participatory diagnostic study of the oil palm (Elaeis guineensis) seed system in Benin. Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 60(63): 15–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosso, N.A. 2006. Genetic improvement of livestock in tsetse infested areas of West Africa. Animal Breeding and Genetics Group, Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University, The Netherlands. (Doctoral dissertation) (ISBN:90-8504-333-6).Google Scholar
Dekkers, J.C.M., Gibson, J.P., Bijma, P. & van Arendonk, J.A.M. 2004. Design and optimization of animal breeding programmes, Iowa State University, United States of America (available at http://www.anslab.iastate.edu/Class/AnS652X/chapter1.pdf).Google Scholar
FAO 2007. Global Plan of Action for Animal Genetic Resources and the Interlaken Declaration. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy (available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a1404e/a1404e00.htm).Google Scholar
Grimble, R. 1998. Socioeconomic methodologies best practice guidelines: Stakeholder Methodologies in natural resources management. Chatham, UK, Natural Resources Institute.Google Scholar
Hazel, L.N., Dickerson, G.E. & Freeman, A.E. 1994. Symposium: selection index theory: then, now and for the future. Journal of Dairy Science, 77: 3236–3251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ITC 2012. Joint Mission Report to GILMA, International Trypanotolerance Centre, Gambia, 7 pp. (Unpublished).Google Scholar
Jackson, S.E., Joshi, A. & Erhardt, N.L. 2003. Recent research on team and organizational diversity: SWOT analysis and implications. Journal of Management, 29(6): 801–830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahi, A.K., Rewe, T.O. & Kosgey, I.S. 2005. Sustainable community-based organizations for the genetic improvement of livestock in developing countries. Outlook on Agriculture, 34(4): 261–270.Google Scholar
Kahi, A.K., Wasike, C.B. & Rewe, T.O. 2006. Beef production in arid and semi-arid lands: Constraints and prospects for research and development. Outlook on Agriculture, 35(3): 217–225.Google Scholar
Madalena, F.E., Agyemang, K., Cardellino, R.C. & Jain, G.L. 2002. Genetic improvement in Medium to low-input systems of Animal Production: Experiences to date. In: Proceedings of the 7th World Congress of Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, 19–23 August 2002, Montpellier, France, 331–341.Google Scholar
Messer, N. & Townsley, P. 2003. Local institutions and livelihoods: Guidelines for analysis. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy (available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/y5084e/y5084e00.HTM)Google Scholar
Olaniyan, O.F. & Hiemstra, S.J. 2012. N'Dama cattle conservation: the potential roles of artificial insemination and national policy. International Journal of Research on Engineering, IT and Social Science, 2(10): 14–25.Google Scholar
Rewe, T.O. 2004. Development of breeding objectives for production systems utilizing the Boran Breed in Kenya. Egerton University, Njoro, Kenya. 101 pp. (MSc thesis).Google Scholar
Rewe, T.O. 2009. Breeding objectives and selection schemes for Boran cattle in Kenya. Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Universität Hohenheim, Germany. (PhD thesis).Google Scholar
Sölkner, J., Nakimbugwe, H. & Valle Zárate, A. 1998. Analysis of determinants of success and failure of village breeding programmes. In: Proceedings of 6th World Congress of Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, 11–16 January 1998, Armidale, Australia, 273–280.Google Scholar
Sun, Q. 2007. Rebuilding common property management: A case study of community-based natural resource management in rural Guizhou, China. Wageningen University, The Netherlands. (PhD thesis).Google Scholar