Abstract
Despite a growing body of evidence that highlights the economic, social and environmental benefits of mobile pastoralism, few governments are ready to tolerate mobility and many policy makers promote knowingly or inadvertently the policies of sedentarization. This production system seems not to be clearly understood by many and has been characterized as backward, environmentally destructive and economically unsustainable; and the view is that it should be replaced with more sedentary forms of livestock production or other beneficial land uses. The overriding question is whether sedentary livestock keeping is more productive and utilizes fewer resources and less space than the mobile pastoral system. This study carried out a comparative cost-benefit analysis of the two production systems in selected villages of Kiteto and Karatu districts. The aim was to come up with credible data to test this hypothesis. Two alternatives were compared in terms of their net present value (NPV) to test a null hypothesis. The alternative with an NPV greater than zero or higher than its alternative was accepted to be more viable compared with the one with an NPV less than zero or less than its alternative. Whenever the NPV of the sedentary production system in the analysis was shown to be greater than zero and/or greater than the NPV of the mobile pastoral production system the null hypothesis was accepted and vice versa. The study was conducted in Makame village of Kiteto District and Dofa village of Karatu District. Makame village represents a mobile pastoral production system while Dofa village represents a sedentary production system. The study employed a quantitative approach using a household survey in the two villages. The comparative cost-benefit analysis was carried out using monetary values derived from the livestock unit statistical approach. The findings have revealed that the average cost of maintaining a mobile pastoral and sedentary production systems are TSh90,096,333 and TSh112,295,200, respectively. The cost-benefit ratios are 1:0.5 for a mobile pastoral production system and 1:0.25 for the sedentary one.
Uma análise comparativa sobre o custo-benefício do steel frame e da alvenaria estrutural em um projeto condominial. / A comparative cost-benefit analysis of steel frame and structural masonry in a condominium project
