Assessment of key attributes of traditional producers in the prospective geographical indication value chain of attapady black goat

Introduction

The Attapady Black goat, an indigenous breed from the Attapady hill tracts of the Western Ghats in Kerala's Palakkad district, has been developed and sustained by the local tribal communities viz., Irula, Muduga, and Kurumba. Traditionally reared under zero-or low-input extensive grazing systems in the forests of the Attapady hills, the breed is primarily valued for its superior meat quality, resilience, adaptability to harsh climates, and disease resistance. The unique breed, officially recognized as a registered breed by ICAR-NBAGR, is a strong candidate for Geographical Indication (GI) status. A geographical Indication (GI) is a sign used on products that conveys information about their geographical origin, and is useful in identifying the reputation, quality, or other characteristics essentially linked to that origin. GI value chains encompass territory and biodiversity, along with knowledge and practices, serving as both natural and cultural inputs for production. GIs enable indigenous producer organizations to market unique, non-generic products by creating a distinct territorial identity and reputation. GI differentiation benefits rural producers by helping them market final goods, including unprocessed quality fresh produce that is packaged and labeled. GI registration would provide legal recognition to groups of producers, but effective protection requires codified production rules and a governance system to ensure compliance. Such governance transforms the GI from a legal right into a mechanism that safeguards traditional practices, enhances product value, and upholds quality standards. Within this framework, the tribal producers of Attapady act as custodians of traditional knowledge, though they face challenges in fully realizing the economic benefits of potential GI protection. The study emphasizes their central role in the Attapady Black goat value chain, where their knowledge, sustainable management, and adaptive rearing practices preserve the breed's distinctive qualities and cultural significance.

Understanding the key attributes of these producers can support their collectivization within the local value chain, enabling them to organize and mobilize to enhance product value.

Materials and Methods

Ethical approval and informed consents

Study area

The study was carried out in the Attapady Block Panchayat of Palakkad district, Kerala, covering the Grama Panchayats of Agali, Pudur, and Sholayur (Figure 1).

Sampling and data collection

The case study (Yin, 2018) [16] , employed an exploratory research design (Stebbins, 2001) [12] and identified 200 respondent producers using key informant technique (Tremblay, 1957) [15] and snowball sampling (Parker, 2019) [9] . The sample comprised traditional goat keepers who reared Attapady Black goats in Attapady through extensive rearing systems and who possessed traditional knowledge of the production system. Data were collected through focus group discussions and personal interviews from 27 November 2023 to 23 October 2024. A checklist of questions on key producer attributes was developed, based on the conceptual framework of GI value chains (Larson, 2007) [7] , to elicit responses. The final sample included 10 focus groups with 75 participants and 125 direct interviews, yielding a total of 200 respondents. Multiple methods, including thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006) [3] of respondent narratives, observation, and literature review, and GIS applications such as Open Data Kit (ODK-Collect v2022. Responses to open-ended questions provided insights into the key attributes and demographics of producer-actors, including gender, age, landholding, household goat holdings, and traditional knowledge related to the Attapady Black goat production system. Location data for 193 tribal hamlets were collected through both primary sources (direct visits) and secondary sources (Integrated Tribal Development Project, Attapady), which were subsequently used for mapping the tribal hamlets of Attapady.

Results and Discussions

Figure 2 shows that women dominated among producers (64%). Figure 3 indicated that most producers were over 46 years (45%), followed by 31-45 years (38%) and 21-30 years (17%). As shown in Figure 4, the Irula community formed the majority (85%) of producers followed by Muduga (10%) and Kurumba (5%). Goat holdings ranged from 0 to 27 per household, averaging 4.77 goats (Figure 5), consistent with Aslam et al. (2012) who reported 3-5 goats per household among tribal keepers. It has been reported that the ethnic communities of Attapady comprise 44 percent of the population across 193 hamlets, including the Irula (26,536 people in 147 hamlets), Muduga (4,012 people in 27 hamlets), and Kurumba (2,813 people in 19 hamlets), (ITDP, 2024) [6] . Figure 6 shows that 90 per cent of producers sold goats within hamlets, and only 10 per cent local markets. Reasons for sales (Figure 7) included economic need (91%), seasonal demand (56%), and rituals or cultural events (48.5%). Most producers preferred intermediaries (79%) for marketing the goats, while 13 per cent used both intermediaries and direct sales, and only 8 per cent relied solely on direct sales (Figure 8). 1 summarizes the local knowledge and traditional practices associated with the production system documented in the study. The thematic analysis of respondent narratives from focus group discussions and personal interviews revealed that the traditional producers of the Attapady Black goat were found to play a crucial role as custodians of breed purity, applying indigenous technical knowledge, maintaining traditional rearing and healing practices, conserving local biodiversity, and safeguarding the reputation and integrity of the production system, also reported by Thomas et al. (2021) [14] .

Table 1: Indigenous knowledge and practices

Traditional rearing practices 1.

Goats reared on low/ zero input extensive rearing system 2.

Goats were sustained on natural grazing without concentrate feed 3.

Producers depended on forests for daily grazing the goats 4.

Forest grazing averaged 5 to 9 hours a day 5

Goats were housed overnight in sheds at the hamlets, with minimal feeding 6.

Diet varied: with fresh herbs in rains, dry shrubs and leaves in summer 7.

Water sourced from perennial rivers and forest streams 8.

Sheds were kaccha, built with bamboo, wood, thatch, and mud; a few were semi-pucca with stone, bamboo, or asbestos 9.

Natural breeding of goats, with mating managed through experience Traditional healing practices 10.

Herbal pastes made from plants like Keezharnelli and Kolakatta combined with Black goat milk and Poomparuthi to goat urine, to treat diseases like jaundice (Sinha, 1991) [11] 11.

Herbal mixture using bark of trees like Ellappala and Kolakkatta danchi used with milk of black goat, for external application or oral consumption for curing headache (Sinha, 1991) [11] 12.

Goat milk applied externally to treat eye infections (Padmanabhan and Sujana, 2008; Hazarika et al., 2018) [8,5] Indigenous knowledge has been pivotal in sustaining the Attapady Black goat production system, especially through extensive rearing and natural breeding practices. [13,1,10] .

Conclusion

The indigenous producers are central to sustaining the Attapady Black goat production system, ensuring breed purity, conserving biodiversity, and applying indigenous knowledge. Women predominated among goat producers, most of whom were older adults. The Irula community formed the majority with Muduga and Kurumba also represented. Producers typically sold goats within their hamlets, driven by economic, seasonal, or cultural reasons, and primarily relied on intermediaries for marketing.

Traditional practices included extensive low-input rearing, grazing in forests, natural breeding, using locally constructed overnight shelters, and ethno-veterinary care with medicinal plants. Goat milk was primarily for feeding kids and for herbal remedies to treat ailments such as jaundice, urinary tract infections, respiratory problems, eye infections, and parasitic infestations. These findings highlight the pivotal role of traditional producers as custodians of both the breed and associated indigenous knowledge.

Acknowledgement

The authors sincerely thank the Department of Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Extension, College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Kerala Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Thrissur, as well as the Nodal Officer of Attapady and the Project Officer of ITDP, Attapady, for their support and permissions. Special gratitude is extended to all respondents for their time and cooperation, which were vital to the study's completion. I sincerely thank Sri. P. Anup Krishna and Sri. Sriram A. for their valuable guidance and support in applying GIS techniques.

Funding

The study was financially supported by Kerala Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Pookode, Wayanad, Kerala.

References

1. Aggarwal RA, Dixit SP, Verma NK, Mathew S, Kumar D, Ahlawat SP, et al. Genetic Diversity in Attappady breed of Indian goat as analyzed with Microsatellite markers. Korean Journal of Genetics. 2006;28(3).
2. Aslam MK, Mathew J, Saseendran PC, Rajkamal PJ, Mohan SK. Effect of management intervention on livestock production in tribal households of Attappady. Animal Science Reporter. 2012;6(4):151-155.
3. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology. 2006 Jan 1;3(2):77-101.
4. Glaser BG and Strauss A. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine Publishing Company, Chicago, 1967, p. 271.
5. Hazarika S, Das S, Sarma H, Sharma HK. Application of Cow and Goat Urine in Traditional Systems of Medicines: A Brief. Int. J. of Pharmaceutical and Biological Archives. 2018;9(4):197-203.
6. ITDP [Integrated Tribal Development Project]. Status report on tribal development and natural resource use in Attapady region. Integrated Tribal Development Project, Agali; 2024.
7. Larson J. Relevance of geographical indications and designations of origin for the sustainable use of genetic resources. Global Facilitation Unit for Underutilized Species (GFU), Geographical indications, biodiversity and development, Rome; 2007, p. 95.
8. Padmanabhan P, Sujana KA. Animal products in traditional medicine from Attappady hills of Western Ghats. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge. 2008;7(2):326-329.
9. Parker C, Scott S, Geddes A. Snowball sampling. SAGE research methods foundations; 2019 Sep 9.
10. Radhika G, Alex R, Joseph J, Raghavan KC, Ajithkumar S. Genetic and environmental factors affecting incidence of floppy kids in native and crossbred goats of Kerala. F1000Research; 2012 Aug 24, p. 3.
11. Sinha S. Tribal Thought and Culture: Essays in Honour of Surajit Chandra Sinha. Concept Publishing Company; 1991.
12. Stebbins RA. Exploratory research in the social sciences. Sage; 2001 May 14.
13. Stephen M, Raja TV, Sosamma I. Survey and characterization of Attappady Black goats of Kerala, India. Animal Genetic Resources/Resources génétiques animales/Recursos genéticos animales. 2005 Apr;37:4352.
14. Thomas M, Radhika G, Aravindakshan TV, Thirupathy R, Raji K, Shynu M. Genome-wide scan for selection signatures for litter size in goat breeds of Kerala. Indian Journal of Small Ruminants (The). 2021;27(1):11-18.
15. Tremblay MA. The key informant technique: A nonethnographic application. American anthropologist. 1957 Aug 1;59(4):688-701.
16. Yin RK. Case study research: Design and methods. 6 th Ed., Vol.5, Sage Publications, Los Angeles; 2018, p. 319.