|HOME | DECISION TOOLS | TSETSE FAQ | BAIT TECHNOLOGIES | ABOUT US | SEARCH|
Management and socio-economics of tsetse control
Livestock-owners not only need to be willing to pay (for pour-ons, or inputs for targets), but to be able to pay when payment is needed. Many livestock-owners have low reserves of cash, and are unable or unwilling to liquidate other assets when required to pay contributions to tsetse control.
Cashflow is a distinct problem, but is closely connected with other problems:
These different issues can best be disentangled by careful participatory investigation, during the programme design phase and during programme implementation. This will allow beneficiaries to discuss their beliefs and attitudes towards new technology and treatment/prevention. It will also determine what the sources of cash income and sources of credit (if any) are for cattle-owners. The use of seasonal calendars, either in an informal participatory manner, or through a more structured questionnaire survey, may gain an overall idea of the amount of cash that might pass through cattle-owners’ hands in a particular year, and will pick up information on particular seasonal peaks in cash income and in needs for cash, or demonstrate that such peaks are more random, e.g. tied to non-seasonal sales of animals or sudden needs for healthcare.
If resources permit, the most effective way for an outside agency to manage the problem of cashflow is to create a revolving fund. Typically, the external agency provides the first supply of the input free of charge, preferably to local institutions established or adapted to manage tsetse control. In the case of inputs for targets these are then used by the local institutions, in the case of pour-ons they are distributed to individual cattle-owners. In either case, payment can then be collected over a period of time by the agency or the local institution, and used to purchase further inputs. In principle, this arrangement can be managed indefinitely, provided that prices collected from beneficiaries anticipate increases in the market prices of the inputs. Such an arrangement has several advantages:
However, several points need to be taken into consideration: