Skip to main content

Table 2 Overall relative importance of livestock benefits, results obtained by proportional piling

From: A participatory epidemiological study of major cattle diseases amongst Maasai pastoralists living in wildlife-livestock interfaces in Maasai Mara, Kenya

Village Benefits
Milk consumption Meat consumption Income Bride price Social status Investment Employment Draught power Hides
Zone 2a Md (Mn-Mx) 23 (17-30) 11 (10-16) 33 (32-50) 10.5 (7-20) 6 (4-14) _d_ 21 (0-21) 3 (1-6) 3 (3-3)
N 4 4 4 4 3   1 4 2
Zone 1b cMd (Mn-Mx) 20 (6-32) 6.5 (2-9) 34 (23-68) 14 (5-18) 7 (1-12) 17 (0-17) 12 (4-21) 4 (1-9) 3 (2-3)
N 8 8 8 7 8 1 6 6 4
Total Md (Mn-Mx) 21 (6-32) 8 (2-16) 33 (23-68) 11 (5-20) 7 (1-14) 17 (0-17) 12 (4-21) 3 (1-9) 3 (2-3)
N 12 12 12 11 11 1 7 10 6
  1. n, number of FGDs that contributed data to that benefit. Median scores for investment and employment as a benefit was not compared between villages, gender and zones due to few cases
  2. aArea with low to moderate cattle-wildlife interactions
  3. bArea with intense cattle-wildlife interactions
  4. cMd, median; Mn, minimum; Mx, maximum
  5. dDash (-) means that the benefit was not mentioned hence not included in proportional piling