Volume 2, Issue 2, March 2014, Page: 42-48
Social and Quality Attributes Influencing Consumption of Native Poultry in Eastern Uganda
James. Higenyi, College of Veterinary Medicine, Animal Resources and Bio-security, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda
John. David. Kabasa, College of Veterinary Medicine, Animal Resources and Bio-security, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda
Charles. Muyanja, College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda
Received: Feb. 15, 2014;       Published: Mar. 30, 2014
DOI: 10.11648/j.avs.20140202.15      View  3275      Downloads  239
Abstract
Poultry consumers in Uganda are increasingly interested in consumption of native chicken compared to duck and turkey meat. By far the most important driving force for selective consumption is preference. The aim of this study was to determine the factors that influence preference for consumption of native poultry in Butaleja and Tororo districts. A field survey of rural and peri-urban poultry consumers and food service providers was conducted through semi-structured interviews using questionnaires; and a total of 195 respondents were covered. The assessment parameters included: socio-economic factors, acceptability, purchase and consumption preference criteria, aversion reasons, choice and frequency of consumption and limitations. The results of survey revealed high acceptability of all native poultry meat types 80.35%. The main economic activity of consumers was non-salary employment 71.3%. The most significant (p<0.001) attributes that guided consumer purchasing behaviour and consumption were eating quality attributes 26.26% , product availability 26.74% and product size 50.62% . In addition, consumption preference for duck meat was very significantly (p<0.05) associated with location, tribe and religion. The use of the poultry products by food service providers was dependent on customer preference 65% and price 71.4%. The main reasons for aversion to use and consume the turkey and duck meat were: perception of sanitary conditions 44% and product unavailability 21.9%. Consumers frequently ate chicken 1 to 2 times 55.8% in a month and none at all for duck and turkey meat 73.7%. The main significant (p<0.001) limitations to frequency of consumption were product unavailability 57.32%and market price 42.51%. Consumer concerns of good health 52.8% and sensory quality 61.1% influenced their choices to buy and eat prepared poultry form. In conclusion, socio-economic factors, perception of quality cues and quality attributes influence purchasing and consumption preference. Therefore, sensitization campaigns on nutritional quality, modern production and value addition is necessary.
Keywords
Native Poultry Meat, Quality Attributes, Consumption Preference, Value Addition, Socio-Economic Factors
To cite this article
James. Higenyi, John. David. Kabasa, Charles. Muyanja, Social and Quality Attributes Influencing Consumption of Native Poultry in Eastern Uganda, Animal and Veterinary Sciences. Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014, pp. 42-48. doi: 10.11648/j.avs.20140202.15
Reference
[1]
Adzitey, F. (2012). Production potential and the physicochemical composition of selected duck strains: A mini review. Online Journal of Animal and Feed Research, 2(1):89-94
[2]
Asif, A.U., Khaskheli, M., Rajput, I.R., Rao, S., Faraz, S., Fazlani, S.A., Deurajani, K. and Umer, M. (2010). Examination of physical properties of goat meat. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 9 (5). 422-425
[3]
FAO (2002). Global Production and Consumption of Animal Source Foods. Presented at the conference “Animal Source Foods and Nutrition in Developing Countries” held in Washington, D.C.June 24-26.
[4]
FAO (2003). Good practices in planning and management of intergrated commercial poultry production in Southern Asia. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper 159.
[5]
FAO (2004). Small-scale poultry production. Technical guide, edited by E.B.Sonaiya & S.E.J.Swan.Rome.ISSN 1810-1119
[6]
FAO (2008). Poultry Sector Country Review. Uganda. FAO Animal Production and Health Division www.fao.org/avianflu//en/farmingsystems.html. Accessed on 6/3/2012
[7]
FAO (2009). The State of Food and Agriculture. http://www.fao.org/catalog/inter-e.htm. Accessed on 21/5/2012.
[8]
FAO (2009b). The role of poultry in peoples livelihoods in Uganda. Prepared by state, A.E., Birungi,P.B., Haan,N..Rome: AHBL-Promoting Strategies for Prevention and Control of HPAI. http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/a1690e/a1690e00.pdf. Accessed 6/10/2013.
[9]
FAO (2010). Poultry Meat and Eggs, agribusiness hand book. www.eastagri.org. Accessed on 4/3/2012.
[10]
FAOSTAT (2009). Top production indigenous poultry meat. http://faostat.fao.org. Accessed on 5/12/2011. Fletcher, D.L. (2002). Poultry meat quality. World’s poultry Science Journal 58(2):131-145. Doi:10.1079/WPS20020013
[11]
Gossard, M.H. & York, R. (2003). Social Structural influence on meat consumption. Human Ecology Review, 10(1):1-9
[12]
Groom, G.M. (1990). Factors affecting poultry meat quality. CIHEAM- Options Mediterranneennes; 206-209 Science Journal, 65:116
[13]
Herrmann, R. & Roder, C. (1995). Does food consumption converge internationally? Measurement, empirical tests and determinants. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 22(3): 400-414.
[14]
Huang, K.S. (1998). How Economic Factors Influence the Nutrient Content of Diet. Prepared for presentation at the 1998 American Agricultural Economics Association Annual meeting in the Salt Lake City.
[15]
Kerry, J., Kerry, J., and Ledward, D. (2002).Meat processing, Improving quality. Woodhead Publishing Limited and CRC Press LLC. www.woodhead.publishing.com
[16]
Kyarisiima, C.C., Nagajja, F.A., Magala, H., Kwezera, H., Kugonza, D.R. and Bonabana, J.W. (2011). Percieved tastes and preferences of chicken meat in Uganda. Livestock Research for Rural Development 23 (11).
[17]
Kusina, J.F. & Kusina, N.T. (1999). Feasibility study of agricultural and household activities as they relate to livestock production in Guruve District of Mashonaland Province with emphasis on poultry production. Report for the Household Agricultural Support Programme (HASP),Zimbabwe, sepetmber 1999.
[18]
Mugga, R. (2006).Ugandan industry thriving, Word Poultry.22, 8
[19]
Northcutt, J. K. (2009). Factors Affecting Poultry Meat Quality. http://www.thepoultrysite.com/articles/1312/factors-affecting-poultry-meat-quality.Accessed on /9/2012
[20]
Nurul. H., Ooi.J.L., Yong.C.P. and Tina.N. (2010). Effect of Chicken and Duck Meat Ratio on the Properties of Sausages. International Journal of Poultry Science, 9(6).550-555.
[21]
Oteku, I., Igene, J.I. and Yessuf, I.M. (2006). An Assessment of the Factors Influencing the Consumption of Duck Meat in Southern Nigeria. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition,5(5).474-477.
[22]
Santiago, A. (2002). Biological, Nutritional, and Processing Factors Affecting Breast Meat Quality of Broilers.
[23]
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Ruttan, V. W., Socolow, R. H. and Sweeney, J. L.(1997b). Consumption as a problem for environmental science. In P.C. Stern, T. Dietz, V. W. Ruttan, R.H. Socolow and J. L. Sweeney (eds.). Environmentally Significant Consumption: Research Directions, 1-11. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press.
[24]
Taylor, C., Dodd, T. and Barber, N. (2008). Impact of wine education on developing knowledge and preferences: An exploratory study. Journal of Wine Research, 19(3): 193-207
[25]
UBOS (2009). Uganda Bureau of Statistics report 2009. Kampala, Uganda. Unpublished report.
[26]
UBOS (2010). Statistical abstract, 2010. Uganda Bureau of Statistics. Kampala, Uganda.
[27]
USAID (2010). Parternership for Safe poultry in Kenya (PSPK) Program. Value chain analysis of poultry in Uganda.
[28]
Waskar, V.S., Devangare, A.A.1., Gosavi, P.P.1., Ravikanth, K.2., Maini, S.2.and Rekhe, D.S. (2009). Meat Quality Attributes of broilers supplemented with Herbal Toxin binder Product. Veterinary World, 2 (7): 274-277
[29]
WHO (2001) .World Health Organisation surveillance programme for control of foodborne infections and intoxications in Europe. Seventh report, 1993-1998. In: Schmidt K. and Tirado C. (Ed). Federal Institute for Health Protection of Consumers and Veterinary Medicine (BgVV), Berlin, Germany, pp. 415, 422-423.
Browse journals by subject