Is indigenous chicken rearing still profitable for the rural poor? - A case study of Jinaighati of Sherpur District in Bangladesh
Authors: Sarker Subhash, C. , M Akteruzzaman, , Bhuiyan A. K. F. H. 
Published: October 2023

The aim of this study is to assess the profits of indigenous chicken rearing under better management practices at household level in Jinaghati upazila of Sherpur district. A total of 220 farm households surveyed taking 110 each from project and non-project households during January to February 2015 by interview a structured questionnaire. It is evident that the number of chicken per project and non-project households was 15.13 and 10.89 respectively of which 55.45% project and 35.00% non-project household had separate housing for chicken. Maximum family members both project. and non project households were educated in primary level. About 25.0% project and 18.18% non-project household provide purchased feed and most of the both households arranged special laying management for chicken and hatched eggs by natural hatching system. Evidence also showed that 98.18% project households had training whereas only 2.00% in case of non-project households. The annual costs of production per bird were Tk. 149.32, Tk. 53.75, and Tk. 31.95 on full cost, variable cost and cash cost basis respectively in project household whereas Tk. 141.62, Tk. 54.80 and Tk. 19.71 respectively for the non-project household. The annual net return per bird over full cost, variable cost and cash cost basis were Tk. 277.71, Tk. 373.29 and Tk. 395.08 of the project household and Tk. 244.02, Tk. 330.84 and Tk. 365.94 for the non-project households. Profit from chicken rearing per household per year was accounted Tk. 4184.87 on full cost basis, Tk. 5630.92 on variable cost and Tk. 5977.63 on cash cost basis in project household. On the other hand, the net return per year was accounted Tk. 2649.87 on Full cost basis, Tk. 3595.37 on Variable cost and Tk. 3985.03 on cash cost basis for the non project household. The benefit cost ratios (BCR) were 1.86, 6.95 and 12.37 on full cost, variable cost and cash cost respectively in project household and 1.72, 6.04 and 18.57 for the non-project households. Results. from the regression analysis showed that the co-efficient of housing, human labour, feed, equipment, transportation and flock size were positive and significant at 1.0% level implying that one unit increase for these inputs, keeping other factors constant, would result with an increase in profit per year by 0.214, 0.44, 0.157, 0.150, 0.194 and 0.144 unit, respectively in project households. In non-project household the co- efficient of housing cost, labour cost, marketing charge and age of the chicken keepers. were positive and significant at 5.0% and 1.0% level implying that one unit increase for these inputs, keeping other factors constant, would result with an increase in profit per year by 0.230, 0.496, 0.430 and 0.158 units. The training to the rural people for rearing indigenous chicken and management, feed and flock size were strongly influenced on the profitability of indigenous chicken rearing in addition of having poultry shed and purchased feeds fed to them.