Search

The development of horse-drawn reaper-binder helped peasants to speed up grain harvesting operations. In the paper, the mechanical architecture, the mechanical power transmission and the main mechanisms of an old McCormick animal-drawn reaper binder are described. A detailed functional analysis of the various mechanisms of the machine, the finger bar mower, the packer system, the needle actuation system, the knotter and the bundle discharging system, is performed. The in-depth knowledge of these historical solutions, also from a functional point of view, can be the starting point for a modern redesign of new appropriate machines.

In this paper authors designed, fabricated, cost estimated and experimentally studied the animal powered mechanical device to establish micro industry for electric generation to charge the batteries for home lighting, cooking food and minor irrigation at rural areas where grid power is not available and population rely on kerosene, wood and diesel pump-set for light, cooking food and irrigtion. Although animals have been using for domestic works since beginning of mankind, but the electricity generation by animal power is a novel technology. This invention provides animal powered mechanical device to charge the batteries. It has unique features of using animal power as prime mover for electric generator. Animal energy in the form of high-torque low-speed can be converted into low-torque high-speed through speed increaser to energize the electric generator. The electricity generated is stored in the batteries of different capacity and used for lighting, coocking and minor irrigation. This equipment is emission free, low cost and has long life. Also this equipment needs less maintenance and any person can run either skilled or unskilled.

New agricultural technologies bring multiple impacts which are hard to predict. Two changes taking place in Indian agriculture are a transition from bullocks to tractors and an associated replacement of manure with synthetic fertilisers. This paper uses primary data to model social, environmental and economic impacts of these transitions in South India. It compares ploughing by bullocks or tractors and the provision of nitrogen from manure or synthetic urea for irrigated rice from the greenhouse gas (GHG), economic and labour perspective. Tractors plough nine times faster than bullocks, use substantially less labour, with no significant difference in GHG emissions. Tractors are twice as costly as bullocks yet remain more popular to hire. The GHG emissions from manure-N paddy are 30 % higher than for urea-N, largely due to the organic matter in manure driving methane emissions. Labour use is significantly higher for manure, and the gender balance is more equal. Manure is substantially more expensive as a source of nutrients compared to synthetic nutrients, yet remains popular when available. This paper demonstrates the need to take a broad approach to analysing the sustainability impacts of new technologies, as trade-offs between different metrics are common.

Animal can be very important for carrying domestic water and fuel, reducing drudgery (particularly for women) and reducing time that can be used in other productive or socially important tasks. Foods production, distribution and rural trade are also assisted through animal-powered transport (on-farm, marketing, riding, pack transport. Animal power can also be used for water-lifting, milling, logging and land excavation and road construction Animal power requires little or no foreign exchange. Money invested in animal power circulates within rural areas, helping to revitalize rural economies. While motorized power also brings many benefits, animal power is normally more available and affordable to people in rural areas and fragile environments. The use of farm animal traction is actually on the increased in many countries, it should be included in educational curricula in secondary schools, polytechnics and universities in Nigeria. Government agricultural activities mostly focused on tractor power. There is no need for increased effort towards animal traction since it is a more affordable farm power. The paper aimed at drawing the attention of Extension agents, researchers, decision-makers and teachers on the need to bring animal power topics to focus.

Ein Ziel der Arbeit war die Ermittlung von Einsatzvoraussetzungen (Anforderungsprofile, Belastungsmomente) und bestehenden Qualifizierungsansätzen (Ausbildungsvorgaben, Leistungsüberprüfungen) von Pferden in PGI. Ein weiteres Ziel bestand in der Erarbeitung von Vorschlägen für ein standardisierbares Qualitätsmanagement für diese Pferde (Skizzierung einer Ausbildungsrichtlinie und Leistungsprüfung für Pferde in PGI, einer Trainer-Lizenz „PGI“ für Anbieter sowie von Ergänzungen in den Ausbildungsrichtlinien für Pferdewirte/Pferdewirtschaftsmeister und von interdisziplinären Kooperationsmöglichkeiten). Pferdegestützte Interventionen (PGI) werden in Deutschland zunehmend angeboten und in Anspruch genommen, auch im Sinne von pferdegestützter Therapie. Die genauen Bedingungen und erforderlichen Voraussetzungen sind wenig und oft unzureichend untersucht. Erkenntnisse aus der Veterinärmedizin, (Verhaltens-) Biologie und aus der Pferdeausbildung erlauben aber den Rückschluss, dass Unterschiede hinsichtlich Anforderungsprofil und Belastungsmomenten zwischen einem Pferd in PGI und einem Reitpferd bestehen, die in den bisherigen Zusatzqualifikationen für Interventionsleiter von PGI unzureichend berücksichtigt werden. Deshalb wurden 252 deutsche Anbieter zu ihrer Betriebsstruktur (21 Fragen) und zu ihren Pferden (27 Fragen) befragt. Diese Umfrage hatte eine hohe Rücklauf- (53 %) und Antwortquote (87 %) und zeigte, dass es sich bei den Anbietern mehrheitlich um Kleinunternehmer (geringe Anzahl an Mitarbeitern (∅ 1–3) und begrenzte Anzahl an Pferden (∅ 6)) handelt. Sie verfügen zusätzlich zu ihrem Grundberuf über eine hippologische Zusatzqualifikation und sind für Klient und Pferd gleichermaßen verantwortlich. Es wird vorgeschlagen, bewährte Methoden der Pferdeausbildung und -prüfung für die PGI weiterzuentwickeln. Das ist u. a. aus Sicherheits- und Tierschutzgründen erforderlich, weil die Belastung der Pferde in der PGI besonders groß ist, bei durchschnittlich 2,3 Bezugspersonen und 3,7 Einsätzen à 48,6 Minuten mit je 2,5 nicht kompetenten Klienten. Darüber hinaus erscheint es sinnvoll, eine Trainer-Lizenz „PGI“ einzuführen und inhaltliche Ergänzungen in den Richtlinien der Ausbildungsberufe im Pferdebereich vorzunehmen. Zudem würde die Mehrheit (51 %) die Einführung einer Leistungsprüfung für Pferde in PGI begrüßen und 35 % halten eine intensivere Prüfung der Qualifikation der Anbieter für sinnvoll., One aim of this study was to investigate the emphasis (requirements, stresses and strains) and the actual qualifying (training guide, performance test) of horses in EAI. Another aim was to work out proposals for a standardizable quality management for those horses (development of a guideline for the utilisation and training as well as a performance test for horses in EAI, an instructor licence “EAI” for suppliers, additions to the education guidelines within the horse-related apprenticeships and opportunities for interdisciplinary cooperation). In Germany Equine Assisted Interventions (EAI), also within the meaning of “Therapeutic Riding”, are increasingly being offered and used. Needed requirements and conditions are little and often insufficiently investigated. But considering the knowledge of veterinary medicine, (behaviour) biology and horse-training, differences in the requirements and stresses and strains between horses in EAT and saddle-horse could be determined, which are only inadequate incorporated into the existing additional qualifications for intervention director of EAT. In order to assess conditions and credentials of the utilization of horses in EAI, 252 German suppliers of EAI were asked about their operating structure (21 questions) and their horses (27 questions). This survey is marked by a high return (53,5 %) and response rate (∅ 87 %) and showed that the majority of the providers are small business owners (at a small number of employees (∅ 1–3) and a limited number of horses (∅ 6)). They have got a basic profession and additional hippological qualification and are equally responsible for client and horses. It is proposed to continue to develop proven horse training programs and performance tests for horses used in EAI. This is necessary in regard of safety aspects during the intervention as well as animal welfare, because of the high level of demands of the horses and the heavy burdens while they are employing in human health programs (∅ 2,3 caregivers and 3,7 inserts à 48,6 min with 2,5 non-competent clients each). Likewise an instructor licence “EAI” and substantial amendments in the guidelines of horse-related apprenticeships should be established. Furthermore, the majority (51 %) would welcome an introduction of a performance test for horses in EAI. And 35 % have the opinion, the supplier´s qualification have to be tested more intensively.

Since colonial times the crop livestock integration concept has been a leading development model in francophone West Africa. So far, it has failed in certain aspects, such as cultivation of fodder crops, intensification of cereal production through animal traction, and sedentarisation of mobile livestock keepers. Three major flaws in the concept have been identified, that are partly responsible for the reported failure: neglect of the farm (household) context, neglect of the financing role of livestock, neglect of competition for land and labour. Whether crop livestock integration can remain the leading development model in a situation of high population growth, has been explored through the following research question:"Is crop livestock integration or mixed farming a suitable model for farming systems development, leading to guaranteed food security and socio-economic survival for all social entities of the rapidly increasing population in Sahelian countries, without endangering their resource basis?"The contextPhysical contextIn the study area, the village Kaïbo Sud V5, Province Zoundwéogo, Burkina Faso, resources and their use appeared to be heterogeneous. Scenario studies with SHARES, a model at the level of Kaïbo Sud V5, and HOREB, a model at the level of an average farm in Zoundwéogo province, indicated that self-sufficiency in grain can not be achieved under currently applied crop and animal production technology in average rainfall years. External inputs in the form of inorganic fertiliser and/or concentrate feed for livestock are needed to compensate unavoidable nutrient losses, and a cart is needed to allow intensive management of crop residues and manure.Agricultural knowledge systemIn Burkina Faso, policy makers, research and extension appear to follow the transfer of technology model, a top-down approach leading to development of technologies that are not necessarily addressing farmers' needs. Research is either curiosity-driven or guided by objectives of policy makers. Extension only reaches a limited number of farmers, hence the progressive farmers approach dominates their relations. Farmers generally adopt proposed technologies, either because they have the means to introduce the innovations or because the proposed innovation suits them best. Only farmers that adopted technologies were contacted subsequently, and in turn, those farmers actively asked research and extension for solutions to their problems. Only when they were recognised as a constituency of the policy makers, they could influence the research agenda. Resource-poor farmers and mobile livestock keepers are neither recognised as a constituency nor possessed the means to innovate, hence they hardly benefit from research and extension.Farming systems developmentA framework situating discrete farming systems in the development perspective of mixed farming, has been designed. The framework ranges from separate specialised low external input (LEIA) systems, through integrated and mixed farming systems without or with external inputs, to specialised high external inputs (HEIA) farming systems. Observed farming systems in Burkina Faso could be classified within the proposed framework. Policy makers, driven by the objective to settle and control mobile herdsmen and to constrain crop producers to permanent fields, aimed at mixed farming systems for everyone. The recent sustainability debate appears to support their promotion of mixed (LEIA) farming systems because they are assumed to reduce nutrient losses. Mobile Fulani herdsmen engage in crop production only, when forced by circumstances, such as drought or animal diseases, leading to severe losses in livestock, making continuation of their former way of life impossible. Mixed farming is a poverty-induced option for them and therefore not attractive. For Mossi crop producers, on the contrary, wealth is the drive towards mixed farming, cattle being needed to support the associated technologies, such as animal traction and use of manure. Resource-poor farmers going into mixed farming have to apply labour-intensive techniques (their only resource) and, because of their low purchasing power, they cannot afford external inputs and have no option but to (over) exploit the environment. High external input (HEIA) farming should avoid pollution of the environment.Ecologically, both HEIA and LEIA can have negative effects on natural resource quality. Socio-economically, high agricultural production per unit area, based on the use of external inputs will lead to larger scale production and lower prices. Resource-poor farmers cannot follow this development and run the risk of being expelled from farming. Economically, HEIA farming is only sustainable when cash crops are cultivated or when high prices can be guaranteed. Around cities, capital intensive production systems can exist, because of the high purchasing power of the urban population and because of the short producer-consumer lines. In rural areas, farming systems that do not rely on high-quality infrastructure and use labour-intensive techniques, achieving moderate production levels are most suitable, guaranteeing local self-sufficiency in food. Production for export should be based on industrially organised systems using high levels of external inputs and capital. To aim at a variety of farming systems, each addressing specific societal needs, seems a more suitable strategy than to aim at the mixed farming system proposed in the model.Financing role of livestockIn the mixed farming model, the role of livestock was limited to the supply of manure and animal power for crop production, and to value crop residues. For farmers in Burkina Faso and elsewhere in West Africa, livestock plays an important role as capital asset, to cover (emergency) cash needs. In farming systems where crop production depends on erratic rainfall, as in West Africa, livestock can be used to transfer surpluses from years with abundant rainfall to years with deficiencies. Livestock production was negatively affected by this buffer function, because emergency (premature) sales are associated with losses due to foregone offspring and foregone live weight. Emergency sales further restricted revenues, when livestock had to be sold in periods with low market prices. Sales of livestock for financing purposes also negatively affected performance of the farming system as a whole, in terms of foregone manure and animal traction, limiting crop production.For financing, farmers preferred livestock to other means, even though taking a loan with a savings and credit co-operative was cheaper. Accessibility, security, liquidity and profitability were all more favourable for livestock than for any of the alternatives examined. The fact that a pledge of 150 % of the credit is needed for a loan from a co-operative, was a major constraint for resource-poor farmers. Financing through livestock was therefore more attractive than taking a loan with a co-operative or any other source.Animal tractionAnimal traction has been presented as a key element of crop livestock integration. It appears to be associated with larger farm sizes, larger areas of cash crop and higher livestock numbers, hence with wealthier farmers. In Zoundwéogo province and Kaïbo village, animal traction could develop as there were sufficient animals to serve all households and to cultivate total current crop area. Additional efforts should be made to increase training of bullocks and transfer of bullocks from Fulani livestock keepers to Mossi crop producers is needed. Bullocks appeared too weak for the tasks asked from them, resulting in short working days of 2-3 hours. Output per animal might be increased through introduction of heavier animal breeds or additional animal feeding. Timeliness of seeding and weeding might also be improved by using additional bullocks. The scope for improvement is limited as any solution depends on purchasing power of the farmer and availability of inputs.Natural resource basisMossi and Fulani herds appeared to use the village territory in different ways, dictated by animal species, production objectives and season. Current high population growth leads to an expanded area under crops, for food production, and consequently reduced grazing area in the rainy season. Crop residue management, as proposed in the crop livestock integration model, leads to increased control over this feed resource by Mossi crop producers. As a result, room for the traditional feeding strategy, applied by Fulani and consisting of mobility and tracking changes in vegetation, becomes limited. The quantity (area) of animal feed becomes limiting, especially in the rainy season. In the post-harvest, dry season, both quantity and quality of animal feed becomes limiting because crop residues are no longer available and their animals thus have to rely on low quality grasses from the natural vegetation. Options for Fulani herds were further restricted by excluding them from the use of village wells in the dry season. Fulani have either to leave the village territory more often and for longer periods, or to accept lower animal production. When Mossi specialised crop producers become mixed farmers, the number of animals in their system increases. When Fulani become mixed farmers, their livestock will reside more permanently on the village territory. Larger livestock numbers and smaller grazing area increase risks of degradation, especially because specialist feeders such as goats and sheep will be forced to accept a more general diet, resulting in diet overlap between formerly complementary feeders. Population growth and subsequent urbanisation has been shown to lead to increased demands for firewood that has to be provided from village territories. Degradation of the natural resources in village territories and a decrease in feed resources for browsers can be the result.ConclusionThe crop livestock integration model, and especially the mixed farming model, has only limited applicability as goal for farming systems development. In Burkina Faso, the majority of the farming population consists of resource-poor farmers, incapable to adopt technologies associated with mixed farming, because they lack the purchasing power to acquire ploughs, draught bullocks, inorganic fertilisers, etc. Mixed farming as a comprehensive development model therefore fails, although several of its components are (at least partially) adopted by a variety of farmers. The concept of restricted nutrient losses through intensive management of manure and crop residues appeared, for instance, valid, but, because of unavoidable losses during (re-)cycling, external inputs are needed to guarantee sufficient food production for the rapidly growing population. Moreover, exchange of crop residues and manure between specialised farming systems, has the same potential for nutrient cycling as mixed farming, but may be preferred because of advantages associated with labour distribution. Constraints for farming system development, especially for crop farmers, can be alleviated by creation of an optimal farm environment, such as a sound financial infrastructure, an agricultural knowledge system addressing farmers needs, a professional infrastructure to provide inputs and to guarantee marketing of outputs, fair farm-gate prices for agricultural products, etc. Attractive prices for meat and milk, infrastructure for veterinary care, grazing rights protected by law and limiting crop production in designated grazing areas and corridors, etc. are needed to facilitate mobile animal production. Technology development should already take its impact on the environment into account. Research and extension should stimulate participation of resource-poor farmers and mobile livestock keepers in technology development and support development of a range of farming systems, in terms of inputs and outputs, because together they can address the variety of societal needs.

Since colonial times the crop livestock integration concept has been a leading development model in francophone West Africa. So far, it has failed in certain aspects, such as cultivation of fodder crops, intensification of cereal production through animal traction, and sedentarisation of mobile livestock keepers. Three major flaws in the concept have been identified, that are partly responsible for the reported failure: neglect of the farm (household) context, neglect of the financing role of livestock, neglect of competition for land and labour. Whether crop livestock integration can remain the leading development model in a situation of high population growth, has been explored through the following research question:"Is crop livestock integration or mixed farming a suitable model for farming systems development, leading to guaranteed food security and socio-economic survival for all social entities of the rapidly increasing population in Sahelian countries, without endangering their resource basis?"The contextPhysical contextIn the study area, the village Kaïbo Sud V5, Province Zoundwéogo, Burkina Faso, resources and their use appeared to be heterogeneous. Scenario studies with SHARES, a model at the level of Kaïbo Sud V5, and HOREB, a model at the level of an average farm in Zoundwéogo province, indicated that self-sufficiency in grain can not be achieved under currently applied crop and animal production technology in average rainfall years. External inputs in the form of inorganic fertiliser and/or concentrate feed for livestock are needed to compensate unavoidable nutrient losses, and a cart is needed to allow intensive management of crop residues and manure.Agricultural knowledge systemIn Burkina Faso, policy makers, research and extension appear to follow the transfer of technology model, a top-down approach leading to development of technologies that are not necessarily addressing farmers' needs. Research is either curiosity-driven or guided by objectives of policy makers. Extension only reaches a limited number of farmers, hence the progressive farmers approach dominates their relations. Farmers generally adopt proposed technologies, either because they have the means to introduce the innovations or because the proposed innovation suits them best. Only farmers that adopted technologies were contacted subsequently, and in turn, those farmers actively asked research and extension for solutions to their problems. Only when they were recognised as a constituency of the policy makers, they could influence the research agenda. Resource-poor farmers and mobile livestock keepers are neither recognised as a constituency nor possessed the means to innovate, hence they hardly benefit from research and extension.Farming systems developmentA framework situating discrete farming systems in the development perspective of mixed farming, has been designed. The framework ranges from separate specialised low external input (LEIA) systems, through integrated and mixed farming systems without or with external inputs, to specialised high external inputs (HEIA) farming systems. Observed farming systems in Burkina Faso could be classified within the proposed framework. Policy makers, driven by the objective to settle and control mobile herdsmen and to constrain crop producers to permanent fields, aimed at mixed farming systems for everyone. The recent sustainability debate appears to support their promotion of mixed (LEIA) farming systems because they are assumed to reduce nutrient losses. Mobile Fulani herdsmen engage in crop production only, when forced by circumstances, such as drought or animal diseases, leading to severe losses in livestock, making continuation of their former way of life impossible. Mixed farming is a poverty-induced option for them and therefore not attractive. For Mossi crop producers, on the contrary, wealth is the drive towards mixed farming, cattle being needed to support the associated technologies, such as animal traction and use of manure. Resource-poor farmers going into mixed farming have to apply labour-intensive techniques (their only resource) and, because of their low purchasing power, they cannot afford external inputs and have no option but to (over) exploit the environment. High external input (HEIA) farming should avoid pollution of the environment.Ecologically, both HEIA and LEIA can have negative effects on natural resource quality. Socio-economically, high agricultural production per unit area, based on the use of external inputs will lead to larger scale production and lower prices. Resource-poor farmers cannot follow this development and run the risk of being expelled from farming. Economically, HEIA farming is only sustainable when cash crops are cultivated or when high prices can be guaranteed. Around cities, capital intensive production systems can exist, because of the high purchasing power of the urban population and because of the short producer-consumer lines. In rural areas, farming systems that do not rely on high-quality infrastructure and use labour-intensive techniques, achieving moderate production levels are most suitable, guaranteeing local self-sufficiency in food. Production for export should be based on industrially organised systems using high levels of external inputs and capital. To aim at a variety of farming systems, each addressing specific societal needs, seems a more suitable strategy than to aim at the mixed farming system proposed in the model.Financing role of livestockIn the mixed farming model, the role of livestock was limited to the supply of manure and animal power for crop production, and to value crop residues. For farmers in Burkina Faso and elsewhere in West Africa, livestock plays an important role as capital asset, to cover (emergency) cash needs. In farming systems where crop production depends on erratic rainfall, as in West Africa, livestock can be used to transfer surpluses from years with abundant rainfall to years with deficiencies. Livestock production was negatively affected by this buffer function, because emergency (premature) sales are associated with losses due to foregone offspring and foregone live weight. Emergency sales further restricted revenues, when livestock had to be sold in periods with low market prices. Sales of livestock for financing purposes also negatively affected performance of the farming system as a whole, in terms of foregone manure and animal traction, limiting crop production.For financing, farmers preferred livestock to other means, even though taking a loan with a savings and credit co-operative was cheaper. Accessibility, security, liquidity and profitability were all more favourable for livestock than for any of the alternatives examined. The fact that a pledge of 150 % of the credit is needed for a loan from a co-operative, was a major constraint for resource-poor farmers. Financing through livestock was therefore more attractive than taking a loan with a co-operative or any other source.Animal tractionAnimal traction has been presented as a key element of crop livestock integration. It appears to be associated with larger farm sizes, larger areas of cash crop and higher livestock numbers, hence with wealthier farmers. In Zoundwéogo province and Kaïbo village, animal traction could develop as there were sufficient animals to serve all households and to cultivate total current crop area. Additional efforts should be made to increase training of bullocks and transfer of bullocks from Fulani livestock keepers to Mossi crop producers is needed. Bullocks appeared too weak for the tasks asked from them, resulting in short working days of 2-3 hours. Output per animal might be increased through introduction of heavier animal breeds or additional animal feeding. Timeliness of seeding and weeding might also be improved by using additional bullocks. The scope for improvement is limited as any solution depends on purchasing power of the farmer and availability of inputs.Natural resource basisMossi and Fulani herds appeared to use the village territory in different ways, dictated by animal species, production objectives and season. Current high population growth leads to an expanded area under crops, for food production, and consequently reduced grazing area in the rainy season. Crop residue management, as proposed in the crop livestock integration model, leads to increased control over this feed resource by Mossi crop producers. As a result, room for the traditional feeding strategy, applied by Fulani and consisting of mobility and tracking changes in vegetation, becomes limited. The quantity (area) of animal feed becomes limiting, especially in the rainy season. In the post-harvest, dry season, both quantity and quality of animal feed becomes limiting because crop residues are no longer available and their animals thus have to rely on low quality grasses from the natural vegetation. Options for Fulani herds were further restricted by excluding them from the use of village wells in the dry season. Fulani have either to leave the village territory more often and for longer periods, or to accept lower animal production. When Mossi specialised crop producers become mixed farmers, the number of animals in their system increases. When Fulani become mixed farmers, their livestock will reside more permanently on the village territory. Larger livestock numbers and smaller grazing area increase risks of degradation, especially because specialist feeders such as goats and sheep will be forced to accept a more general diet, resulting in diet overlap between formerly complementary feeders. Population growth and subsequent urbanisation has been shown to lead to increased demands for firewood that has to be provided from village territories. Degradation of the natural resources in village territories and a decrease in feed resources for browsers can be the result.ConclusionThe crop livestock integration model, and especially the mixed farming model, has only limited applicability as goal for farming systems development. In Burkina Faso, the majority of the farming population consists of resource-poor farmers, incapable to adopt technologies associated with mixed farming, because they lack the purchasing power to acquire ploughs, draught bullocks, inorganic fertilisers, etc. Mixed farming as a comprehensive development model therefore fails, although several of its components are (at least partially) adopted by a variety of farmers. The concept of restricted nutrient losses through intensive management of manure and crop residues appeared, for instance, valid, but, because of unavoidable losses during (re-)cycling, external inputs are needed to guarantee sufficient food production for the rapidly growing population. Moreover, exchange of crop residues and manure between specialised farming systems, has the same potential for nutrient cycling as mixed farming, but may be preferred because of advantages associated with labour distribution. Constraints for farming system development, especially for crop farmers, can be alleviated by creation of an optimal farm environment, such as a sound financial infrastructure, an agricultural knowledge system addressing farmers needs, a professional infrastructure to provide inputs and to guarantee marketing of outputs, fair farm-gate prices for agricultural products, etc. Attractive prices for meat and milk, infrastructure for veterinary care, grazing rights protected by law and limiting crop production in designated grazing areas and corridors, etc. are needed to facilitate mobile animal production. Technology development should already take its impact on the environment into account. Research and extension should stimulate participation of resource-poor farmers and mobile livestock keepers in technology development and support development of a range of farming systems, in terms of inputs and outputs, because together they can address the variety of societal needs.

Auf dem Hintergrund der starken Bevölkerungszunahme in Entwicklungsländern sind gezielte Maßnahmen erforderlich, um die Versorgung der dortigen Bevölkerung mit Lebensmitteln zu verbessern. Die Nutzung von Zugtieren für landwirtschaftliche Arbeitsprozesse bietet gegenüber der Handarbeit die Möglichkeit, die Produktivität in der Landwirtschaft zu steigern. Mit der Einführung von Göpeln können Nacherntearbeiten, wie beispielsweise das Schälen von Reis und das Mahlen von Getreide, mechanisiert werden. Im Rahmen dieser Arbeit wurden drei verschiedene Göpelsysteme untersucht und hinsichtlich ihrer Eignung für den Einsatz in Entwicklungsländern miteinander verglichen.