Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T11:38:51.505Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Structure and impact of cattle manure trade in crop–livestock systems of Vietnam

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Keenan C. McRoberts*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA
Charles F. Nicholson
Affiliation:
Department of Supply Chain and Information Systems, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
David Parsons
Affiliation:
School of Land and Food, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia Department of Agricultural Research for Northern Sweden, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden
Le Van Nam
Affiliation:
Huế University of Agriculture and Forestry, Huế City, Vietnam
Nguyen Xuan Ba
Affiliation:
Huế University of Agriculture and Forestry, Huế City, Vietnam
Quirine M. Ketterings
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA
Debbie J. R. Cherney
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA
*
*Corresponding author: kcm45@cornell.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cattle manure value chains play important biological and economic roles in smallholder crop–livestock systems in developing countries, but relative to other livestock products our understanding of the nature and impact of manure sales is limited. In regions with an active manure trade, farmers face a choice between manure use on-farm and sales, which affects nutrient flows and participant incomes. We analyzed the manure value chain operating in south-central Vietnam as an example of the function and role of manure trade in crop–livestock systems. Lowland cattle farmers sell manure through a network of chain participants, including small-scale collectors, lowland and highland traders, to pepper, coffee, dragon fruit and rubber farms in the central highlands and southeast coast. We collected and summarized quantitative data (e.g., manure-related labor, manure transactions, and fertilizer and manure use) gathered in semi-structured interviews with value-chain participants [lowland cattle owners (n = 101), traders (n = 27) and end users (n = 72)]. Lowland cattle owners were selected by stratified random sampling, and subsequent participants were identified in preceding interviews. One key finding concerns the seasonality of the manure value chain: most manure flowed between February and August (lowland dry season and period of peak highland demand) from lowland communes to highland coffee and pepper farms for use as organic soil amendments. Fewer sales occurred, at a lower price, to southeast coastal dragon fruit farms and rubber companies. Value addition to manure occurred via drying, bagging, collection, transport and composting. The presence of local traders facilitated market sales for smallholder cattle owners, and prices through the value chain generally reflected costs for value addition. The geographic distribution of cattle relative to agricultural land influenced the flow of manure, with net outflows from regions with higher animal density to regions with lower density and higher value crop production. Manure trade was an important source of supplementary income for farmers and a primary livelihood activity for traders. Value chain participant net incomes ranged from near US$100 yr−1 for lowland farmers to over US$13,000 yr−1 for traders, and returns to labor were just over US$0.50 h−1 for lowland farmers and US$2 h−1 for traders. The quantitative information generated during our descriptive assessment provides an important first step toward manure value chain improvement, indicates survey methods that can be applied in other areas, and identifies next steps necessary to evaluate chain evolution and resilience.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 
Figure 0

Table 1. Manure value chain participants interviewed in the study.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Map of study areas in Vietnam with whole country inset. Provinces are gray. Districts sampled are colored areas within provinces. Manure flow from sampled lowland communes to principal destinations is denoted by black arrows, and arrow width is proportional to flow size reported by lowland manure traders.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Probable manure flows (arrows), associated participants and prices (in boxes: pink = manure sources, green = traders, blue = end users), aggregated volumes (blue text) and steps (brown text) between lowland communes and highland (pepper and coffee farmers) or southeast coastal (dragon fruit farmers) destinations.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Livestock (cattle and water buffalo) density (animals ha−1 agricultural land) for districts in study provinces (Bình Định, Phú Yên, Gia Lai, Đắk Lắk and Bình Thuận) in 2012 (left) (Binh Dinh Statistics Office, 2013; Binh Thuan Statistics Office, 2013; Dak Lak Statistics Office, 2013; Gia Lai Statistical Office, 2013; Phu Yen Statistics Office, 2013) and for provinces in the south-central coast, Central Highlands and southeast in 2013 (right) (Socialist Republic of Vietnam General Statistics Office, 2014).

Figure 4

Figure 4. Distribution of land established in pepper in Gia Lai, Đắk Lắk and Bình Định districts (left), coffee in Gia Lai and Đắk Lắk districts (center) and dragon fruit in Bình Thuận districts (right) in 2012 (Binh Dinh Statistics Office, 2013; Binh Thuan Statistics Office, 2013; Dak Lak Statistics Office, 2013; Gia Lai Statistical Office, 2013).

Figure 5

Table 2. Livestock (cattle and water buffalo) density, manure demand for high-value crop production, local potential supply, district manure shortfall, OM and nutrients in potential shortfall and the percentage of that shortfall that could be covered by Nhơn Khánh (NK) and An Chấn (AC) Communes in manure-purchasing highland and southeast coastal districts.

Figure 6

Figure 5. Purchase and sale price least-squares means for manure value chain participants through the value chain. Error bars represent 1 SE of the mean. Means connected by the same letter did not differ.

Figure 7

Table 3. Least-squares means (LSM) and standard errors for returns to labor model (P < 0.0001, Power = 0.9989) and back-transformed LSM (geometric means) and 95% confidence intervals for log-transformed labor use model (P < 0.0001, Power = 1.0) and log-transformed total labor model (P < 0.0001, Power = 1.0) by actor (n = 101 for each model).

Figure 8

Table 4. Least-squares (geometric) means (LSM) and 95% confidence intervals for log-transformed net income from cattle manure model for manure value chain participants (n = 103, P < 0.0001, Power = 1).

Supplementary material: PDF

McRoberts supplementary material

McRoberts supplementary material 1

Download McRoberts supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 575.3 KB