Indian Journal of Science and Technology

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Demand for Public vs. Private Livestock Services in South India: a Double Hurdle Analysis


Affiliations
1 Deptt. of Animal Husbandry Statistics &Computer Applications, Madras Veterinary College, Chennai–600007, India
2 Veterinary University Training and Research Centre, Coimbatore – 641 035, India
3 Directorate of Extension Education, TANUVAS, Chennai – 600 051, India
 

The demand for public and private livestock services was measured by counts of utilisation, in southern peninsular State of India, Tamil Nadu for which the districts of the State were categorized as 'Livestock Developed' (LD) and 'Livestock Under Developed' (LUD) based on initial base line. A double process approach, that envisaged to distinguish the contact process (to access to specific provider or not?) from utilisation (given that the first answer was YES, how much was consumed? That is, whether the contact was by chance or by choice) was used to analyse the factors influencing the demand for public and private livestock services. The hurdle models for animal health care and bovine breeding services were estimated by employing a Probit model and a truncated-at-zero Poisson model. The analysis pointed out that the likelihood of availing services of public system would become low as the distance of the centre from home increased, leading the farmers to choose private animal health care services. The farmer whose dependency on livestock for livelihood is more had lesser probability of contacting public service provider which indirectly indicates the level of their faith on public system. The demand for public animal health care services was less in LD districts, while their demand was more in LUD districts. Contrastingly, the farmers in LD districts preferred AI at public centres, while their counterparts in LUD districts preferred private AI.

Keywords

Livestock Services, Demand, Hurdle Model, Animal Health Care, AI, Tamil Nadu
User

  • Ahuja V, George PS, Ray S, McConnell KE, Kurup MPG, Gandhi V, Umali D and De Haan C (2000) Agricultural services and the poor: Case of livestock health and breeding services in India, IIM, Ahmedabad; The World Bank, Washington, DC and Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, Bern. pp:1-48.

  • Beynon J, Akroyd S, Duncan A and Jones S (1998) Financing the future: Options for agricultural research and extension in sub-Saharan Africa. Oxford Policy Management, Oxford.

  • Fabbri D and Monfardini C (2002) Public Vs. private health care services demand in Italy. Working paper, Department of economics, Bologna, Italy. Pp: 1-21.

  • FAO (1998) Principles for rational delivery public and private veterinary services with reference to Africa.

  • GOI (1996) National livestock policy perspective: Report of the steering group. Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi.

  • Heineck G (2004) Religion, attitudes towards working mothers and wives' full-time employment: Evidence for Austria, Germany, Italy, the UK, and the US’ ÖIF. Working Paper No.39- 04. Department of Economics, University of Granada, Spain.

  • Holden S, Ashley S and Bazeley P (1996) Improving the delivery of animal health services in developing countries: A literature Review, Livestock in Development, Somerset, UK.

  • Leonard DK (1990) Research proposal on the organisation of animal health services in Africa. Paper presented at the international livestock centre for Africa. Addis Ababa.

  • Leonard, D.K., 1993. Structural reform of the veterinary profession in Africa and the new institutional economics. Development and Change, 24: 227-267.

  • Long S (1997) Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, Calif.

  • Mullahy J (1986) Specification and testing of some modified count data models. J. Econometrics. 33, 341-365.

  • Noronha KVMS and Andrade MV (2002) Social inequality in the access to health care services in Brazil. Discussion paper No. 172, Cedeplar/Face/Ufmg, Belo Horizonte. pp: 1-41.

  • Pigou AC (1946) The Economics of Welfare. 4th Ed. Macmillan.

  • Prabaharan R (2000) Livestock– research investment crucial. The Hindu Survey of Indian Agriculture, The Hindu, Chennai. pp:137–140.

  • Selvakumar KN, Meganathan N, Prabu M and Palanichamy V (2002) Assessment of research priorities for livestock sector in Tamil Nadu. Report submitted to National Center for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research, New Delhi; Department of AH Economics, Madras Veterinary College, Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai- 51. pp:1-38.

  • Tambi NE, Mukhebi WA, Maina WO and Solomon HM (1999) Probit analysis of livestock produces’ demand for private veterinary services in the high potential areas of Kenya. Agricultural Systems. 59, 163-176.

  • Umali DL, Feder G and De Haan C (1994) Animal health services: Finding the balance between public and private delivery. The World Bank Research Observer. 9(1), 71-96.


Abstract Views: 366

PDF Views: 87




  • Demand for Public vs. Private Livestock Services in South India: a Double Hurdle Analysis

Abstract Views: 366  |  PDF Views: 87

Authors

G. Kathiravan
Deptt. of Animal Husbandry Statistics &Computer Applications, Madras Veterinary College, Chennai–600007, India
M. Thirunavukkarasu
Deptt. of Animal Husbandry Statistics &Computer Applications, Madras Veterinary College, Chennai–600007, India
R. Arumugam
Veterinary University Training and Research Centre, Coimbatore – 641 035, India
C. Manivannan
Directorate of Extension Education, TANUVAS, Chennai – 600 051, India

Abstract


The demand for public and private livestock services was measured by counts of utilisation, in southern peninsular State of India, Tamil Nadu for which the districts of the State were categorized as 'Livestock Developed' (LD) and 'Livestock Under Developed' (LUD) based on initial base line. A double process approach, that envisaged to distinguish the contact process (to access to specific provider or not?) from utilisation (given that the first answer was YES, how much was consumed? That is, whether the contact was by chance or by choice) was used to analyse the factors influencing the demand for public and private livestock services. The hurdle models for animal health care and bovine breeding services were estimated by employing a Probit model and a truncated-at-zero Poisson model. The analysis pointed out that the likelihood of availing services of public system would become low as the distance of the centre from home increased, leading the farmers to choose private animal health care services. The farmer whose dependency on livestock for livelihood is more had lesser probability of contacting public service provider which indirectly indicates the level of their faith on public system. The demand for public animal health care services was less in LD districts, while their demand was more in LUD districts. Contrastingly, the farmers in LD districts preferred AI at public centres, while their counterparts in LUD districts preferred private AI.

Keywords


Livestock Services, Demand, Hurdle Model, Animal Health Care, AI, Tamil Nadu

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst%2F2009%2Fv2i2%2F29395