Thesis Abstract of AGS Students

Nara Kaophong (1992)

Small scale backyard pig production in mixed crop-animal farming systems has been a controversial issue in Thailand. Because past studies have indicated low economic efficiency and contribution to market price fluctuations from small-scale producers, national policy has discouraged such farmers from raising pigs. This study addresses the contradiction between poor economic performance and persistent widespread pig-raising on small farms.

The research aims to identify the social, economic, and technical components of small-scale backyard pig production in villages in Mae Taeng district, Chiang Mai province, northern Thailand. The term "backyard" is used to describe those pig farmers who raise pigs as only a minor activity on their farms, using low inputs and little management effort.

Data was gathered through formal and informal surveys on farmers' objectives, management knowledge, and scale of production. Likert's attitude scaling measured the degree of profit-orientation in farmers' motives for raising pigs. A subsample of farmers kept daily records of all expenses and income from pig production, and daily weight of feed intake. Pigs were also weighed at monthly intervals.

Results indicated that farmers' economic standing (reflected in landholding) and objectives in pig- raising influenced their management practices. With few rice by-products from their small farms, low-resource farmers had to buy more pig feed, and netted lower profits. Farmers with larger paddy areas could reduce feed costs through use of rice by-products. Backyard farmers allocated few labor hours and little capital to pig-raising, in comparison to crop activities.

The majority of backyard pig farmers perceived their pig-raising as a means of saving cash and expressed attitudes towards pig-raising that were less profit-oriented. They used low inputs and minimized feed costs by reducing high quality commercial feeds. The feed conversion efficiency of their pigs varied with the feed type given: a diet of complete feed and vegetables proved the most biologically efficient in this group (average feed conversion ratio = 4.63), while other diets gave feed conversion ratios in the range of 5.60 to 7.27. Feed cost per one kilogram of weight gain was lowest for the diet of complete feed and vegetable (13.54 Baht), with the other diets ranging from 15.75 to 19.31 Baht. Overall production costs were also lowest for diets including vegetables (19.83 Baht). Cost and return analysis indicated low profits, but again diets with vegetables had higher net cash benefits (205 Baht), higher benefit to cost ratios (1.08), and a higher return to capital (1.18) than diets without vegetables (149 Baht, 1.01 and 1.11 respectively).

A second group of backyard producers presented their attitudes towards pig-raising as districtly more profit-oriented than the other farmers. By using improved management and high quality complete feed, these "semi-commercial producers" achieved greater production and economic efficiency, as well as higher profits. Their pigs' feed conversion efficiency was the best of all groups (FCR = 3.58), however their feed cost per one kilogram weight gain was also the highest (20.01 Baht). Production costs were higher than the first group (21.16 Baht per kg) but they also received higher cash profit (3.11 Baht per kg). High net cash benefits (256 Baht) demonstrated high profitability. The semi-commercial group had benefit to cost ratios slightly higher than the other groups, except when labor costs were excluded. In this case, the adjusted BCR for semi-commercial group was 1.16, against 1.2 for vegetable diets. Returns to capital (1.15) were the same as the average of the first group, but actually lower than the RTC for vegetable diets (1.18). Gross margins were higher for production systems using high quality feed, larger proportion of farmers' own crop by-products, and herd sizes of 6 to 10 pigs.

Although a more commercial orientation would be more profitable, the required cash inputs make it less feasible for most backyard farmers, who nevertheless achieve their aims of saving money. Small adjustments in management practices and breed selection can improve benefits for these farmers.

Back to Thesis Topics