Economics of live goat marketing in Kalyana Karnataka region of Karnataka

Introduction

Goats were apparently the first species to be domesticated as livestock since 8000 B.C. in the region of Mesopotamia, which is today's Middle East. This region of domestication was also the cradle for one of the first civilizations, the Sumerians, and goats had a muscular impact on all segments of their life. The significance of this small but useful ruminant for the ancient people was also the reason for being acknowledged as a holy entity for worship at the side of gods and for its recognition in myths and legends. (Hatziminaoglou and Boyazoglu, 2004) [10] . Goat marketing system plays an important role in assuring better income and benefit for producers. The final price between the producer and goat trader also depends on the seasonality and social or religious event in the goat market, market players consider age, live weight, sex, breed etc. in calculating price of goat. Prices offered by butchers to sellers are determined by back calculation from the retail meat prices fixed by their government (Ahamad et al, 2019). Trekking animals to market is the most common mode of transport, particularly for livestock from distant areas due to inaccessibility of mechanized transportation or high transport costs (Gupta and Suresh, 2011) [9] . There are some suggestions reported by researchers to overcome constraints in marketing. Provisions should be made by governments and other stakeholders in the agricultural sector to access institutional credit through microfinance institutions and commercial banks sources. This could enable farmers to embark on large scale goat farming projects, obtain good quality breeding animals to increase production and profitability. Also, small size modern slaughterhouses to be established to provide technical knowledge. Goat farmers can earn the best profit through commercialization of goat production (Baruwa, 2013) [3] . Keeping the predominance of goat-based livelihoods in the study area and importance of marketing, the present study was taken up to understand the different market dimensions in goat marketing in KK region.

Materials and Methods

The study was conducted purposively in the state of Karnataka, taking advantage of the researcher's native status and deep familiarity with the region's geography, livestock farmers, and farming practices. Because the researcher is fluent in the local language, it was easier to build rapport swiftly with respondents, facilitating an in depth investigation combined with personal observations. In the Kalyana Karnataka region, the goat population is highest in Kalaburagi, followed by Bidar district. Therefore, the districts of Bidar and Kalaburagi were purposively selected for the study. The goat market occurs in several forms and the selected study area have many markets where, buying and selling of live goats is conducted. Three goat predominant and convenient markets from each selected district were identified for the study. Mailar, Aurad and Basavakalyan markets in Bidar district and Kalaburagi, Sannur and Kalagi markets in Kalaburagi were selected for cross sectional survey to collect data for the study. In the present study 10 sellers, 10 buyers or butchers and 5 middlemen were selected randomly from each identified market thus reaching to the sample size of 60 sellers, 60 buyers or butchers and 30 middlemen for gathering information on live goat marketing. The semi structured interview schedules were developed for data collection from the goat rearers (farmers) or sellers selling their goats, buyers (butchers) purchasing goats and middlemen. The data collected from the sample respondents were coded, tabulated, scored, and presented in the form of tables and graphs. The various need based statistical tools like frequency and percentages, mean, weighted mean score, ranking etc., were calculated and the inferences were drawn considering the results obtained.

Results and Discussion

Market Practices Followed by Goat Rearers Distance Traveled for Goat Sales: Table .1 shows that half of the goat farmers (50 %) travel 21-40 km to sell their goats. About 11.67 % travel more than 40 km, while 38.33 % travel less than 20 km. These findings align with those of Senthilkumar et al. (2012) [15] , who reported that many farmers traveled up to 20 km. [11] found many male lambs were sold at 3-4 months, Anand & Gurmej (2009) [2] observed lamb marketing at 4-7 months, and Pankaj & Singh (2008) [13] noted male kids sold at 3-6 months while female kids were retained for breeding.

Average Number of Goats

Average Market Weight of Goats:

The majority (66.67 %) of respondents estimated that goats are sold at 12-24 kg, followed by 28.33 % who said 4-12 kg, and 5.00 % who reported more than 24 kg. This corresponds with findings from Channappagouda et al. (2023) [20] that small ruminants are often marketed at an average weight of around 12.19 kg.

Updated Market Information:

None of the goat farmers reported receiving updated price information for goats in the market a result that echoes the findings of Senthilkumar et al. (2012) [15] , where farmers indicated they lacked adequate market intelligence.

Reasons for Selling Goats: table. 2 reveals when farmers were asked why they sold goats, farmers ranked meeting household expenses as the top reason (mean = 1.68), followed by agricultural needs (1.20), financial distress (1.02), culling old or unproductive goats (0.98), reducing flock size (0.65), feed/fodder shortages (0.53), purchasing other assets like land or animals (0.52), repaying loans (0.35), and replacing breeding stock (0.20). These priorities are similar to those identified by Dossa et al. (2007) [7] .

Mode of Transportation:

The preferred mode of transport was specially designed livestock vehicles (average score = 1.63), followed by two-wheelers (average = 0.80). None of the farmers reported transporting goats by foot, rail, or passenger vehicles. This is consistent with observations by Senthilkumar et al. (2012) [15] , who noted the dominance of vehicles (e.g., jeeps/trucks) for transporting small ruminants to market.

Price Fixation Criteria: According to Table .3, lumbar scoring is the most commonly used method for fixing the price of goats (average = 1.75), followed by age of the animal (0.82), purchase in lots (0.63), and body condition score (BCS) (0.25). While 75 % of farmers always use lumbar scoring, 58.33 % use age sometimes, 46.67 % use lot purchase sometimes, and a large majority (75 %) never use BCS. Notably, none of the participants priced goats based on live weight. By contrast, Dinakar et al. (2017) [6] found that most sheep rearers in Mandya preferred using actual weight for pricing (98.50 %), followed by physical appearance (49.50%) and lumbar score (13.50 %).

Sale Preference: Goat rearers expressed a clear preference for selling young male kids (3-12 months) (average score = 1.73), followed by spent/culled goats (1.60), adult bucks (1.08), adult females (0.50), and least preferred were young female kids (3-12 months) (0.13). This matches the findings of Singh et al. (2013) [16] , who reported that 70% of male goats were sold by 6 months, while females were retained longer for breeding. 4, shows that most middlemen (73.33%) visit 1-2 markets, and only a few (26.67%) visit 3-4 markets. This pattern is similar to findings by Dossa et al. (2007) [7] , who noted that most traders operate within a limited geographical radius.

Market practices followed by middlemen Number of markets visited for goat marketing: Table

Distance traveled for goat sale/purchase: According to Table 4, a large majority (83.33%) of middlemen travel less than 20 km, while only 16.67% travel more than 20 km to trade goats. This trend indicates the involvement of only local middlemen in the study area which might be because of smaller markets.

Average number of goats purchased at a time: Most middlemen (90.00%) acquire 1-2 goats in a single trip, while only 10.00% purchase 3-4 goats at once.

Average number of goats sold at a time:

The data show that 80.00% of middlemen sell 1-3 goats in a single transaction, whereas 20.00% sell 4-6 goats.

Updated market information: Table 5 indicates that none of the middlemen receive updated market price information. This lack of information flow aligns with studies like Senthilkumar et al. (2012) [15] , who reported that traders often feel handicapped due to poor market intelligence.

Profitable price fixation method: All (100.00%) of the middlemen in this study use the lumbar score method to set prices. None use live weight, and other methods like BCS (body condition score), age, and lot purchase are less common. This contrasts with findings by Dinakar et al. (2017) [6] , where most producers preferred pricing based on actual weight.

Price discovery mechanism: Table 5, reveals that negotiation is the universal method (100.00%) for price discovery among these middlemen. Methods like open auction, closed auction, or undercover deals are not used. Tadesse et al. (2022) [18] similarly reported that commission agents set prices through negotiation after gauging market demand and buyer willingness. 6, shows that specially designed livestock vehicles have the highest preference (average score 1.67) among middlemen, followed by twowheelers (average score 0.53). No middlemen reported using foot transport, rail, or passenger vehicles. This is comparable to observations by Senthilkumar et al. (2012) [15] , who noted that trucks/jeeps dominate transport for small ruminants in markets.

Mode of transportation: Table

Marketing channel:

The majority of middlemen prefer to purchase goats from farmers directly in the market, followed by buying from other middlemen, at farm gates, or via cooperatives. For selling, they most commonly sell to butchers, then other middlemen, farmers, or consumers; organized slaughterhouses are the least preferred. This aligns with findings by Ramesh et al. (2012) [14] , who also reported that middlemen are major players in rural goatmarketing chains.

Price fixation criteria: According to Table 6, lumbar score remains the top criterion for price setting, followed by body condition, age, and lot purchase. Similar patterns have been observed in other studies. For instance, Channappagouda (2019) [20] found that many goat traders value lumbar score over weight-based methods.

Market demand (from middlemen's view):

Middlemen report that demand is highest for young male kids (3-12 months), followed by spent/culled goats, adult females, adult bucks, and least for young female kids (3-12 months). This matches findings by Sabapara (2016) [19] , who noted that many goat rearers sell their kids by 7-12 months.

Reason for selecting this job: According to Table 7, the primary reason for becoming a middleman is extra earning, followed by hobby, employment, using existing knowledge/skills, and inheritance.

Market Practices Followed by Butchers

Profitable Price-Fixation Method: As shown in Table 8, the lumbar score method was used by all butchers (100 %) as their preferred way to fix prices, compared with other criteria such as body condition score (BCS), live weight, age, or purchase in lots. These results are consistent with findings by Channappagouda (2019) [20] . [15] reported that goat farmers came from a distance of up to 20 km.

Distance Traveled for Goat Purchase:

Source of Purchase:

According to Table 9, butchers most often buy goats directly from farmers in nearby markets, followed by purchasing at the farmers' farm gates. Least common is buying via middlemen in the market. None of the butchers in this study sourced goats from middlemen delivering to their shops or from their own farms. This aligns with Nepali et al. (2007) [12] , who showed that wholesalers, butchers, and farmers are all involved in the goat marketing chain.

Price-Fixation Criteria: As per Table 9, butchers prefer the lumbar score method, followed by BCS, age of the animal, and purchasing in lots. None use live weight as a basis for pricing. This contrasts with Dinakar et al. (2017) [6] , whose study among Mandya sheep rearers indicated a strong preference for actual weight-based pricing (98.50%), followed by animal outlook (49.50%) and lumbar score (13.50%). 9, shows that butchers largely use specially designed livestock vehicles (average score = 1.67) to transport animals, with two-wheelers (average score = 0.47) being a distant second choice. No butchers reported using foot transport or passenger vehicles. This pattern aligns with the findings of Senthilkumar et al. (2012) [15] , who found that trucks and jeeps predominate in transporting small ruminants to markets.

Mode of Transportation: Table

Purchase Preference

Table 9, reveals that butchers most commonly prefer to purchase adult female goats, followed by young male kids (3-12 months), spent/culled goats, adult bucks, and lastly young female kids (3-12 months). These preferences are similar to those reported by Sabapara (2016) [19] , who found that many goat rearers sell their kids between 7-12 months.

Goat Purchase Statistics as Perceived by Butchers Weight ranges:

References

1. Ahmad W, Ahmed T, Ahmad B. Hedonic pricing of goat characteristics at the market level: the case of Pakistan. Int Food Agribus Manag Rev. 2019;22(4):483-497.
2. Anand J, Guremj S. Phenotypic characterization of Nellore sheep in its native tract. Project Progress Report. 2009.
3. Baruwa OI. Empirical analysis of costs and returns to goat production under tropical conditions. J Livest Sci. 2013;4(1):44-50.
4. Tirupati (AP): Sri Venkateshwara Veterinary University; 2019.
5. Biradar C, Sharma GRK, Veeranna KC, Suresh J, Punyakumari B. Small ruminants' market orientation in Karnataka: farmers' perceptions. J Exp Zool India. 2023;26(1):431-434.
6. Dinakar HP, Satyanarayan K, Jagadeeswary V, Veeranna KC, Jayashankar M. An exploratory study on marketing pattern of Mandya sheep in Karnataka. Int J Livest Res. 2017;8(10):90-95.
7. Dossa LH, Rischkowsky B, Birner R, Wollny C. Market potential for the local Djallonké goat in Southern Benin: empirical evidence from two rural markets. Livest Res Rural Dev. 2007;20(5):65.
8. Gupta DC, Suresh A, Sethi D. Economics of sheep and goat rearing in semi-arid region of Rajasthan. Indian J Small Rumin. 2011;17(2):215-221.
9. Hatziminaoglou Y, Boyazoglu J. The goat in ancient civilisations: from the Fertile Crescent to the Aegean Sea. Small Rumin Res. 2004;51(2):123-129.
10. Porwal K, Karim SA, Sisodia SL, Singh VK. Socioeconomic survey of sheep farmers in Western Rajasthan. Indian J Small Rumin. 2006;12(1):74-81.
11. Nepali MB, Tiwari MR, Sapkota S, Poudel HP, Acharya BR, Gautam S. Marketing constraints to goats in the Western Hill of Nepal. J Nepal Agric Res. 2007;8:95-102.
12. Pankaj L, Singh PK. Goat marketing practices in Southern Rajasthan. Indian J Small Rumin. 2008;14(1):99-102.
13. Ramesh D, Meena HR, Meena KL. Analysis of small ruminant market system in different agro-climatic zones of Southern India. Vet World. 2012;5(5):288-293.
14. Senthilkumar S, Ramprabhu R, Pandian A. Small ruminant marketing practices in southern Tamil Nadu: a case study. Indian J Small Rumin. 2012;18(1):129-131.
15. Singh MK, Dixit AK, Roy AK, Singh SK. Goat rearing: a pathway for sustainable livelihood security in Bundelkhand region. Agric Econ Res Rev. 2013;26:7988.
16. Thaware KC. Goat marketing: channels and constraints in Maharashtra. Artha Vijnana. 2011;53(2):182-192.
17. Tadesse T, Dese D, Dabassa A, Bacha K. Diversity, distribution, and phenotypic characterization of cultivable wild yeasts isolated from natural forest. F1000Research. 2025;14:105. doi:10.12688/f1000research.160250.3.
18. Sabapara GP. Feeding management practices of dairy animals in coastal areas of Navsari district of India. Livestock Research International. 2016;4(2):88-93.
19. Channappagouda B, Sasidhar PV. Livestock service delivery in Karnataka: perceptions and reflections of veterinarians. International Journal of Livestock Research. 2018;8(3):172-181.