Why Goat Farming in Northern Communal Areas of Namibia Is not Commercialised: The Case of Ogongo Constituency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Namibia, goat products are not found in the formal markets include retail shops. This is despite several attempts by the government of Namibia to promote goat products in the formal sector. At household level however, goat meat is a delicacy. This study therefore seeks to provide possible reasons for the unavailability of goat products in Northern Namibia focussing on the supply side of the goat market. A structured survey questionnaire was employed among 75 goat farmers in Ogongo Constituency, Omusati Region in North Central Namibia. The data sought included production, offtake and marketing of goats as well as challenges faced. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data and multiple linear regression was employed to determine the factors influencing offtake rate. The offtake rate (percent of goats sold) was estimated as 2.8% from the data, which is very low. The offtake rate was significantly influenced by age of the head of household (p<0.01), education level of the household head (p<0.01) and marital status (p<0.01). On the other hand, goat production was affected by other challenges such as unavailability of marketing infrastructure, diseases, grazing shortages, and frequent droughts. The implications of these findings on policy include provision of incentives to farmers to sale as well as providing marketing infrastructure. Thus the study recommends the sensitization of communal farmers on economic potential of selling goats to alleviate poverty and to improve livelihoods through income generation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".