2. The performance of the livestock sector in sub-Saharan Africa over the last two decades has been disappointing. During the 1960s African meat production from ruminant livestock grew slightly faster than the human population but milk output grew slower. In the 1970s the performance worsened and both meat and milk output grew at only half the rate that the human population did, and the growth in output that did occur was almost entirely the result of increases in livestock numbers rather than in yields per head (Anteneh, 1984). This poor performance by the livestock sector was fairly uniformly spread across the different regions of sub-Saharan Africa with only meat production in central Africa (which is small in absolute terms) showing much favourable divergence from the general pattern. However, the performance in some individual countries was considerably better than average.
3. What were the causes of this poor performance? Not very much of it can be attributed simply to poor rainfall since the Sahelian drought occurred towards the beginning of the 1970s and the process of recovery from it should have enhanced rather than depressed rates of growth in output.
4. The inadequate development, through research, of technology to improve livestock production undoubtedly had something to do with the poor performance. So, probably, did inadequate levels of investment in the livestock sector, although we should bear in mind that much of the investment in livestock projects which did take place was extremely unsuccessful, yielding low or even negative rates of return. A higher rate of investment by itself might not have boosted output very much.
5. There is a growing consensus that a major factor in the poor performance has been the prevalence of inappropriate government policies which either positively hindered or, at least, failed adequately to assist livestock development. This growing consensus derives partly from a wider consensus that Africa's agriculture sector as a whole has suffered from inappropriate policies, and partly from the amassed experience of a large number of individuals with detailed knowledge of livestock development efforts in particular countries who believe that these efforts were frustrated because they were carried out against a policy background which made their failure almost inevitable. In illustration of this one can refer to a review of more than 30 livestock projects in Africa financed by one major donor. In the case of more than 75% of these projects inappropriate government policies were judged to be major constraints on the projects' success.
6. Neither a general consensus nor the beliefs of sundry individuals of themselves, prove that it was policies rather than other factors which were at fault and a number of those who make policies in the livestock subsectors of African countries strongly believe that often it is not the policies themselves but their inadequate or inefficient implementation that lies at the heart of the problem. Insufficient support from donor agencies is also often blamed. However, when the policy is from the start administratively and politically unfeasible it is clearly the fault of its makers not of its executors and financiers. Some of the policies that have been officially adopted required for their success a level of domestic and external financing that was disproportionate to the countries, resources and foreign support, as well as a willingness to offend powerful interest groups which was politically unrealistic to expect. In other cases policies may have been realistic at the time of their formulation but were rendered obsolete by unpredictable changes in political or economic conditions.
7. In the past there has been a lack of firm evidence, based on research, either that government policy can be effective, (for good or evil), in influencing events in the livestock field or that the results of alternative policies are sufficiently clear and predictable to enable sensible choices between alternatives to be made. Some such evidence is now being accumulated through work being done at ILCA's Policy Unit. For examples von Massow (1984) found that in the case of the majority of countries of sub-Saharan Africa for which the relevant data are available, less than two thirds of the changes in commercial dairy imports could be explained in terms of the factors which are normally cited as the main determinants, i.e. human population growth or changes in per caput income or domestic dairy production. The remaining changes have to be explained by other factors amongst which government policies are probably the most important. Anteneh (1985) has identified the decline in the quality of veterinary services that arises from a policy which permits the staff costs of such services to rise above the level of 50% of total operating costs.
8. In brief, the performance of sub-Saharan Africa's livestock sector has been poor, and a major, but not the only, contributory factor seems to have been inappropriate government policies. A revision of policies is in the case of many countries an indispensable condition for improved performance of their livestock sectors, although a revision of policies by itself is not the only thing required.
