IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i19p12655-d933890.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Characterization of Arunachali Yak: A Roadmap for Pastoral Sustainability of Yaks in India

Author

Listed:
  • Pranab Jyoti Das

    (ICAR-National Research Centre on Yak, Bomdila 790101, Arunachal Pradesh, India
    ICAR-National Research Centre on Pig, Rani, Guwahati 781131, Assam, India)

  • Aneet Kour

    (ICAR-National Research Centre on Yak, Bomdila 790101, Arunachal Pradesh, India)

  • Sourabh Deori

    (ICAR-National Research Centre on Yak, Bomdila 790101, Arunachal Pradesh, India
    ICAR RC for NEH Region, Umiam 793103, Meghalaya, India)

  • Safeeda Sultana Begum

    (ICAR-National Research Centre on Yak, Bomdila 790101, Arunachal Pradesh, India)

  • Martina Pukhrambam

    (ICAR-National Research Centre on Yak, Bomdila 790101, Arunachal Pradesh, India)

  • Sanjit Maiti

    (ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal 132001, Haryana, India)

  • Jayakumar Sivalingam

    (ICAR-Directorate of Poultry Research, Hyderabad 500030, Telangana, India)

  • Vijay Paul

    (ICAR-National Research Centre on Yak, Bomdila 790101, Arunachal Pradesh, India)

  • Mihir Sarkar

    (ICAR-National Research Centre on Yak, Bomdila 790101, Arunachal Pradesh, India)

Abstract

Highland pastoralism provides economic sustainability to the tribal livelihoods and is endemic to the yak-rearing tracts of India. Transhumant pastoralists of Arunachal Pradesh (in India) have centuries-old deep socio-religious and economic connections with this unique bovine species. As a result of their conservation efforts, Arunachali was recognized as the first and is still the lone breed (to date) of yaks in the country. A survey was conducted on the pastoral production system in the region to enable the phenotypic characterization of yaks and to understand the prevailing husbandry practices. Arunachali yaks are medium-sized bovines that are predominantly black with dense and long hairs hanging down the body and are docile in temperament. They have a convex head with horizontal ears and distinctly curved horns with pointed tips. The average milk yield is 0.98–1.04 kg milk/day with 7.45% fat and 11.5% SNF and the peak milk yield/day is 1.1–1.6 kg. The average ages of clipping of coarse hairs and down fibres are 12–18 months and 12 months, respectively, with average yields of 1.5 kg and 0.5 kg/clipping/animal, respectively. Value addition of yak milk and fibre presents a unique opportunity for the economic rejuvenation of yak pastoralism. However, winter feed scarcity, inbreeding, extreme climate events and the non-availability of essential services are still major challenges for yak production in the country. Our findings acknowledge that pastoral sustainability is critical for the conservation of yaks and yak rearing. This calls for pastoralism-centric governance and research efforts in the highlands to curb the declining population and to put Indian yaks on the road to sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Pranab Jyoti Das & Aneet Kour & Sourabh Deori & Safeeda Sultana Begum & Martina Pukhrambam & Sanjit Maiti & Jayakumar Sivalingam & Vijay Paul & Mihir Sarkar, 2022. "Characterization of Arunachali Yak: A Roadmap for Pastoral Sustainability of Yaks in India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-20, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:12655-:d:933890
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/12655/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/12655/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Greiner, Romy & Bliemer, Michiel & Ballweg, Julie, 2014. "Design considerations of a choice experiment to estimate likely participation by north Australian pastoralists in contractual biodiversity conservation," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 34-45.
    2. Smith, Kevin & Barrett, Christopher B. & Box, Paul W., 2000. "Participatory Risk Mapping for Targeting Research and Assistance: With an Example from East African Pastoralists," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(11), pages 1945-1959, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Donghao Guo & Hua Pu, 2025. "Evaluation of the Genetic Resource Value of Datong Yak: A Cultivated Breed on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-14, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chèze, Benoît & David, Maia & Martinet, Vincent, 2020. "Understanding farmers' reluctance to reduce pesticide use: A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    2. Alex Coletti & Peter Howe & Brent Yarnal & Nathan Wood, 2013. "A support system for assessing local vulnerability to weather and climate," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 65(1), pages 999-1008, January.
    3. Yang, Xiaoke & Chen, Qiuhua & Lin, Nenmei & Han, Mengzhu & Chen, Qian & Zheng, Qiuqin & Gao, Bin & Liu, Fengbo & Xu, Zhongyue, . "Chinese consumer preferences for organic labels on Oolong tea: evidence from a choice experiment," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 24(3).
    4. Sriwastava, Ambuj & Reichert, Peter, 2023. "Reducing sample size requirements by extending discrete choice experiments to indifference elicitation," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    5. Tyllianakis, Emmanouil & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Ziv, Guy & Chapman, Pippa J. & Holden, Joseph & Cardwell, Michael & Fyfe, Duncan, 2023. "A window into land managers’ preferences for new forms of agri-environmental schemes: Evidence from a post-Brexit analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    6. Cortés-Capano, Gonzalo & Hanley, Nick & Sheremet, Oleg & Hausmann, Anna & Toivonen, Tuuli & Garibotto-Carton, Gustavo & Soutullo, Alvaro & Di Minin, Enrico, 2021. "Assessing landowners’ preferences to inform voluntary private land conservation: The role of non-monetary incentives," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    7. Lizin, Sebastien & Van Passel, Steven & Schreurs, Eloi, 2015. "Farmres' Perceived Cost of Land Use restrictions: A Simulated Purchasing Decision Using Dscrete Choice Experiments," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212054, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Bennett, Michael T. & Gong, Yazhen & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2018. "Hungry Birds and Angry Farmers: Using Choice Experiments to Assess “Eco-compensation” for Coastal Wetlands Protection in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 71-87.
    9. Alison C. Cullen & C. Leigh Anderson & Pierre Biscaye & Travis W. Reynolds, 2018. "Variability in Cross‐Domain Risk Perception among Smallholder Farmers in Mali by Gender and Other Demographic and Attitudinal Characteristics," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(7), pages 1361-1377, July.
    10. Hansen, Kristiana & Duke, Esther & Bond, Craig & Purcell, Melanie & Paige, Ginger, 2018. "Rancher Preferences for a Payment for Ecosystem Services Program in Southwestern Wyoming," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 240-249.
    11. Raviv, Orna & Tchetchik, Anat & Lotan, Alon & Izhaki, Ido & Zemah Shamir, Shiri, 2021. "Direct and indirect valuation of air-quality regulation service as reflected in the preferences towards distinct types of landscape in a biosphere reserve," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    12. Doss, Cheryl & McPeak, John & Barrett, Christopher B., 2008. "Interpersonal, Intertemporal and Spatial Variation in Risk Perceptions: Evidence from East Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1453-1468, August.
    13. Greiner, Romy, 2015. "Motivations and attitudes influence farmers' willingness to participate in biodiversity conservation contracts," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 154-165.
    14. Dekker, Thijs & Hess, Stephane & Brouwer, Roy & Hofkes, Marjan, 2016. "Decision uncertainty in multi-attribute stated preference studies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 57-73.
    15. Bram Tucker & Donald R. Nelson, 2017. "What does economic anthropology have to contribute to studies of risk and resilience?," Economic Anthropology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(2), pages 161-172, June.
    16. Que, Sisi & Awuah-Offei, Kwame & Weidner, Nathan & Wang, Yumin, 2017. "Discrete choice experiment validation: A resource project case study," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 39-50.
    17. Erwin WAUTERS & Frankwin van WINSEN & Yann de MEY & Ludwig LAUWERS, 2014. "Risk perception, attitudes towards risk and risk management: evidence and implications," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 60(9), pages 389-405.
    18. Barrett, Christopher B. & Luseno, Winnie K., 2004. "Decomposing producer price risk: a policy analysis tool with an application to northern Kenyan livestock markets," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 393-405, August.
    19. Xiaoke Yang & Yuanhao Huang & Mengzhu Han & Xiaoting Wen & Qiuqin Zheng & Qian Chen & Qiuhua Chen, 2021. "The Differential Effects of Physical Activity Calorie Equivalent Labeling on Consumer Preferences for Healthy and Unhealthy Food Products: Evidence from a Choice Experiment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-16, February.
    20. Herring, Matthew W. & Garnett, Stephen T. & Zander, Kerstin K., 2022. "Producing rice while conserving the habitat of an endangered waterbird: Incentives for farmers to integrate water management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:12655-:d:933890. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.