Viability of Hay Production as a Drought Resilient Climate-smart Strategy for the Pastoralist Systems of Kajiado

Abstract

Arid and semi-arid lands (ASAL) in Kenya account for over 83% of the country's land area, hosting over 70% of livestock and 85% of wildlife populations. Pastoralism is the primary livelihood practised in Kenya's rangelands. However, these rangelands' productivity and resilience to support pastoralism has worsened because of climate change, natural disasters, and land use changes leading to shrinking of communal grazing lands and disruption of traditional grazing migration routes. Climate vulnerability from cyclic climate variability in ASAL has led to drought and flood disasters, resulting in limited fodder, water, and tree cover for animal shelters. The Kenyan government has implemented climate-smart interventions, including hay production to mitigate climate variability. However, the financial analysis of growing hay as a private business in arid areas has not been well studied, potentially jeopardizing the success of the government's hay programs. This the study aims to examine the viability of growing hay as a sustainable drought resilience intervention in Kenya's arid and semi-arid areas, focusing on Kajiado County. The study methodology involved a desktop review of existing policies that support hay production in Kenya and Kajiado County, followed by a cost-benefit analysis of 23 hay farms spanning from 3 to 400 acres. The analysis compared two cultivation practices: (1) buying machinery, irrigating, and building permanent hay stores, and (2) hiring machinery, doing rain-fed growing, and building permanent or temporary hay stores. The study also conducted a purposeful sampling of hay farmers, hay marketers, and pastoralists and administered a survey to 354 pastoralists, including 25

key informants. The study found that the annual hay production deficit in Kajiado Central County is about 2,580,000 bales, valued at approximately KES 902 million. The survey showed that 86% of livestock keepers purchased hay only during the severest three months of drought. In contrast, farmers were growing hay annually, incurring operating costs, then storing the hay for two to three years, awaiting a drought to sell. The cost-benefit analysis indicated that farms buying machinery, irrigating, and building permanent hay stores were not profitable. In contrast, those hiring machinery, doing rain-fed growing, and building permanent or temporary hay stores were profitable, with 400-acre farms reaching a 23% return on investment (ROI) in the third year. Hay farms below 100 acres producing less than 4250 bales per year at a sale price of KES 180 per bale were unprofitable. The study provides practical recommendations that can help improve the viability of hay production as a private enterprise and encourage its adoption among pastoralists in the ASAL. These recommendations include actionable frameworks under existing policies, establishing strategic hay reserves, and promoting low-technology hay production methods. Moreover, the study recommends training commercial hay producers, encouraging feed diversification among pastoralists during droughts, and offering hay vouchers or subsidies directly to farmers. Although Kenya’s legal instruments and institutions support droughts disasters, the study found a significant disconnect between policy implementation and outcomes. Therefore, the government needs to bridge this gap to ensure that the recommended policies and strategies are effectively implemented and yield the desired results.