Constraints perceived by the smallholder dairy farmers in adoption of bio-security measures

Introduction

Livestock plays significant role in the economy of the India. Livestock provides employment to about 8.8% of the total population of India [1] . It provides livelihood for landless individuals as well as small and marginal farmers, who make up 90% of the farming population [2] . Dairying is considered as one of the predominant subsidiary occupations of the rural people that plays an important role in the national economy by way of generating income and employment. Indian dairy enterprise is dominated by smallholder dairy farms, which maintain 85% of the country's total cattle population. Nearly 97% of these farms (73 million) have only 2 cows and contribute 72% of the milk produced in India [3] . Dairy sector provides food security and nutrition, livelihoods and economic growth, promotes One Health, it contributes to the conservation of biodiversity and genetic resources [4] . The total cattle population in the country was 193.46 million in 2019 which is an increase of 1.3% over the previous census [1] . India serves as a largest milk producing country in the world with a production of 239.3 million tonnes milk and Per Capita Availability of milk in India was 471 grams per day [1] .

The increasing urban population, changing food habits and social transformation has created more demand for livestock products leading to intensive livestock production and high livestock density and this poses a threat of zoonotic diseases for the human population [5] . Infectious illnesses also pose a significant economic danger to the dairy business. It significantly affects dairy herd health, production and farm revenues, both directly and indirectly. The implementation of measures that reduce the risk of introduction and spread of disease agents is needed to control the occurrence and spread of disease. They are called as bio-security measures. The adoption of a set of attitudes and behaviour towards bio-security measures by the people is vital to reduce risk in all activities involving livestock management and in preparation of their products [6] . Bio-security can be subdivided into external bio-security (bioexclusion), prevention of the introduction of pathogens into the herd and internal bio-security (biocontainment), limiting transmission of diseases within and between the farm [7] . Although, bio-security measures reduce the risk of livestock diseases, the diseases continue to exist in the livestock farms. Adoption of bio-security measures is not much practiced by the farmers. Poor on-farm adoption of www.extensionjournal.com recommendations to enhance strategies to decrease transmission of specific diseases is common [8] . Furthermore, participation rates in voluntary disease prevention and control programs are often below 30% [9,10] . Multiple factors hinder the adoption of the bio-security measures and the underlying causes need to be studied. Hence the study was designed with the following objective.

Objectives

To identify the constraints perceived by the smallholder dairy farmers in the adoption of bio-security measures.

Materials and Methods

The present study was conducted at Tiruchirapalli district of Tamil Nadu since it had the highest organized milk procurement in Tamil Nadu [11] . Among fourteen blocks of Tiruchirapalli district, Thuraiyur and Uppiliyapuram blocks were selected randomly. Focused Group Discussion was held with the Veterinary Assistant Surgeons of the selected blocks to identify most commonly occurring diseases and to select the study area. Thus mastitis and parasitic infection were identified as the most commonly occurring diseases and Sikkathambur and Venkatachalapuram villages of Thuraiyur and Uppiliyapuram blocks respectively to undertake the study. Also two focused Group Discussions were held with smallholder dairy farmers in the study area to identify most commonly occurring diseases. Laboratory testing of milk (TANUCHEK SCC kit) and dung samples (flotation and sedimentation techniques) to determine the prevalence of infection in the study area. Finally, mastitis and parasitic infection were identified as most commonly occurring disease to undertake this study. Smallholder dairy farmers who possessed 1 to 5 cattle utilizing family labour with limited land resources, producing milk for income, connected to milk processors for selling milk at the time of study were selected as respondents for the study [12,13,14] . Thus a total of 100 respondents were selected for the two villages identified. The constraints were listed by perusal of literatures, consultation with extension experts and subject matter specialists. The listed constraints were classified as sociopsychological, socio-economical, managemental and institutional constraints. Thus, seven socio-psychological constraints, five socio-economical, ten managemental and seven institutional constraints were identified. The respondents were requested to indicate the degree of perception of the constraints in a five-point continuum from most relevant to least relevant. The scoring procedure followed was as below The constraints were studied based on total mean score value and the total mean scores for all the statements were arranged in descending order to prioritize the constraints and ranked based on the total score obtained.

Results and Discussion

Constraints referred to the problems faced by the dairy farmers in the adoption of bio-security measures. The constraints perceived by the smallholder dairy farmers were listed below as the socio-psychological constraints, socioeconomic constraints, managemental constraints and institutional constraints. 2). This study showed that farmers had less awareness and knowledge on biosecurity measures, less sharing of knowledge among the farmers and not much importance given on bio-security measures. Managemental constraints as perceived by the farmers to adopt the bio-security measures (3.4). The farmers had difficulty in following the deworming schedule and lacked awareness and knowledge on bio-security measures which could lead to less adoption of bio-security measures. Similar results were reported that lack of knowledge about clean milk production was one of the major constraints perceived by members of Manipur (India) milk producer's cooperative union [15] and non-availability of timely treatment facilities, lack of knowledge of common contagious diseases, their prevention and control measures, lack of knowledge about hygienic milk production, lack of scientific housing and milking facilities and lack of knowledge about waste disposal practices were considered as most relevant constraints faced by dairy farmers of Uttar Pradesh [16] .

Socio-psychological constraints as perceived by the farmers to adopt the bio-security measures

Socio-economic constraints as perceived by the farmers to adopt the bio-security measures

Minimizing the incidence of mastitis has been established as a strategy to improve farmers' economic status, the wellbeing of animals and the quality of milk in the supply chain, as well as minimizing public health hazards linked with the use of antibiotics in animal production [17] . It could be observed from Table .4 that among the institutional constraints lack of veterinary influence or interest in promotion of bio-security (4.1) was perceived as the most relevant constraints followed by lack of adequate media publicity on disease control measures (3.6), limited access to get resources to adopt bio-security measures (3.6), weak extension system (3.5), lack of motivating agencies (3.4), lack of herd specific information (3.4) and lack of education to change attitudes (3.2). The farmers contact veterinarians only when treatment or artificial insemination is required for their animals and veterinarians also do not find time to elaborate on various information due to their busy work schedule in the dispensary. Considering all of the components of constraints in adoption of bio-security measures as depicted in Fig. 1, managemental constraints (3.7) was perceived as the most relevant constraints, followed by socio-psychological constraints (3.6), institutional constraints (3.5) and socio-economic constraints (3.4). This could be that management operations were carried out by the farmers on day-to-day basis was felt as a major constraint and they did not feel a need for adoption of bio-security measures and did not spend money or did not have any localite / cosmopolite contact as a reason for low socio-economic constraints. Overall constraint felt by the farmers (3.55) were from relevant to more relevant. This is in agreement with the results that lack of information, insufficient time and high cost perceived as most relevant constraints by the smallholder farmers [18] and the inadequate public policies on bio-security, high cost of bio-security measures and expensive laboratory charges, questionable efficacy of bio-security and lack of veterinary influence in promotion of bio-security were considered as the most serious constraints to adopt bio-security measures [19] .

Institutional constraints as perceived by the farmers to adopt the bio-security measures

Conclusion

The smallholder dairy farmers felt lack of veterinary influence or interest in promotion of bio-security measures which requires policy interventions in formulating strategies to implement extension activities on management and disease control awareness among farmers in addition to providing veterinary treatment services by the veterinary institutions. The dairy farmers felt the difficulty of following correct deworming schedule and lacked media publicity. Efforts need to be taken by the extension agencies to conduct training programmes, demonstrations, utilize mass contact methods, etc. regularly which will lead to imparting awareness and knowledge to the farmers on the bio-security measures, need for deworming, drug resistance and the economic and health benefits in cattle by adopting proper deworming schedule for increased adoption of biosecurity measures. The constraints of limited access to get resources to adopt bio-security should be taken into consideration by the policy makers and other stakeholders while developing appropriate strategies to minimize constraints to adopt bio-security measures.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgmentsThe authors like to thank the Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University for supporting the research work. [14]

References

1. BAHS. Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. 2024. https://dahd.gov.in/sites/default/files/2024-11/BAHS2024
2. Kumari A. Livestock income in rural households in India: An empirical analysis. Seminar paper. 2024. https://ies.gov.in
3. Moran J, Chamberlain P. Blueprints for Tropical Dairy Farming. CSIRO Publishing, Clayton, Victoria, Australia. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1071/9781486306473
4. FAO. Five ways the dairy sector can contribute to sustainable agrifood systems. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. 2022. https://www.fao.org/newsroom/story/Pour-on-thebenefits%21/
5. Tomley FM, Shirley MW. Livestock infectious diseases and zoonoses. Philosophical Transactions the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biol. Sci. 2009;364(1530):2637-2642.
6. Mee JF, Geraghty T, O'Neill R, More SJ. Bioexclusion of diseases from dairy and beef farms: Risks of introducing infectious agents and risk reduction strategies. Vet J. 2012;194(2):143-150.
7. Sayers RG, Sayers GP, Mee JF, Good M, Bermingham ML, Grant J, Dillon PG. Implementing biosecurity measures on dairy farms in Ireland. Vet J. 2013;197:259-267.
8. Hop GE, Velthuis AGJ, Frankena K. Assessing Dutch farmers' incentives to join a voluntary Johne's Disease programme. Wagen J Life Sci. 2011;58:57-64.
9. Nielsen SS. Dairy farmers' reasons for participation in the Danish control programme on bovine paratuberculosis. Prev Vet Med. 2011;98:279-283.
10. Policy Note. Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Fisheries and Fisherman Welfare Department. 2023-2024. https://cms.tn.gov.in/cms_migrated/document/docfiles/ dairy_e_pn_2023_24.pdf
11. Devendra C. Sustainable animal production from small farm systems in South-East Asia. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. 1993.
12. Morgan N. Smallholder dairy development: Lessons learned in Asia. FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand. 2009.
13. Yadav M. Smallholder cattle farmers' perception of climate change and their adoption measures -An exploratory study in central dry zone of Karnataka. MVSc thesis, Karnataka Veterinary, Animal and Fisheries University, Bidar, Karnataka. 2017.
14. Singh AS, Singh K, Chakravarty R. Constraints perceived by members of Manipur (India) milk producer's cooperative union in practicing improved dairy farming. J Dairy Food Home Sci. 2012;31(4):279283.
15. Singh AK, Gupta J, Singh M, Patel D. Constraints faced by dairy farmers in adopting good farming practices in Uttar Pradesh. Int J Agric Sci Res. 2017;7(4):123-130.
16. Hogeveen H, Huijps K, Lam TJGM. Economic aspects of mastitis: new developments. N Z Vet J. 2011;59(1):16-23.
17. Sri Lestari SV, Rahardja D, Sirajuddin S. Barriers to adopt biosecurity of smallholder farmers. IOP Conf Ser: Earth Environ Sci. 2022;1012:012020.
18. Budania H, Singh V, Rewani SK, Saini GR, Rajawat NS, Verma SK, et al. Constraints perceived by dairy farmers in biosecurity practices. Pharma Innovation J. 2022;11(7S):3120-3122.