Author
Abstract
This article examines the contribution of urban livestock keeping to food security in Arusha city, taking the case study of Daraja Mbili, Sombetini and Sokoni One; random sampling was applied in the selection of the wards. The main focus was identifying the main urban livestock kept in the study area, to examine the contribution made by the different farming categories, and to investigate the relationship between livestock keeping and food security in the areas selected. The sample selected was 200 households of different ages and genders, and snowballs and judgemental were applied. Data was then collected using questionnaire, interviews, observation and focused group discussions. The information was processed and filtered for analyses. Analyses tools used were SPSS and Microsoft excel. Different types of livestock kept at the study area were identified, examined and analysed. It was observed that there is a positive relationship between urban livestock keeping and food security. In other words, urban livestock keepers had potential benefits in keeping dairy cows, goats, sheep, doves and ducks. The result stipulated the contribution of each variable examined. Dairy cows had much contribution than others, milk production surpassed by average of 1-15 litres per day. Large amount of milk produced is 11-20 litres with 40.4 %, followed by 1-10 litres with 24.8 %. Milk was sold and other portion used by family members. The price of one litre of milk was sold by 1600/=Tsh, therefore a farmer was able to collect more than 100,000/=Tsh per day, which has significance in food security attainment. The contribution of other livestock like goats, sheep and poultry like chickens and ducks is highly considered to supplement life cost. Several challenges of production were encounted, though many opportunities if properly utilised may reduce or remove some of the food insecurity issues. The government is therefore consulted to support small livestock keepers in terms of the market of their produce and medical treatment when some diseases attack but also supervising the hygiene of the product since some of the farmers are not well equipped with skills of keeping animals, i.e. they use their traditional styles.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bcp:journl:v:9:y:2025:issue-9:p:55-66. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dr. Pawan Verma (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://rsisinternational.org/journals/ijriss/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.