BEFORE YOU READ THE ABSTRACT OR CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW, PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!
INFORMATION:
YOU CAN GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COSTS N5,000 ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08168759420
WHATSAPP US ON 08137701720
HARNESSING ARCHITECTURAL STRATEGIES FOR SUSTAINABLE WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THE DESIGN OF A MODEL DAIRY FARM KADUNA, NIGERIA
ABSTRACT
The existing designs of dairy farms have inadequately capture aspects of wholesome waste management in spatial design of process and elements of farmstead facilities designs. The effect of which may lead to cattle health and productivity impairment, negative environmental impact and impaired farm functionality. However, this research aim to assess existing design measures and considerations with regards to their effectiveness in addressing waste management issues on dairy farms in northern Nigeria with the view to develop a design framework for enhancing sustainable waste management in dairy farms designs. As literature reveals that neither agricultural engineers nor veterinarians are equipped enough with sufficient requisite in design understanding to produce a dairy farm design that achieves nexus between infrastructural requirement of cattle breeding, cattle health and welfare with sustainable development ideals: design remains an architects’ forte. Using qualitative research design and case study strategy, Nagari Integrated Dairies Ltd, Keffi; Niyya Farms Kaduna, and Lamda Farms, Kadunawere selected through purposive sampling to serve as case studies. Data gathered from the cases covered site planning considerations for waste management, facilities design considerations and design measures and considerations for waste handling as independent variables using observation as gathering technique. Data were assessed using a qualitative scale factor of good, fair and poor. Analytic induction of template analysis was used to analyse assessed data according to the design considerations implemented through variables and strategies which is portrayed using narrative analysis. Looking at the specific strategies, the result showed the need for waste treatment facility, considerations for integrated drainages/rainwater management at design stage, enhanced accessibility around and within farm facilities as the most crucial design needs. The need for a spatial design of farm from the site layout to the spatial design of unit facilities and the use of enveloping design elements on facilities were established. Finally, the crucial need for zoning facilities based on similar waste generation and the use of vegetation around farm premises were also established. This could guide architects designing dairy farms achieve an effective process through design for wholesome waste management on dairy farms using the design framework developed by the research.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Declaration………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. i
Certification…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ii
Acknowledgement…………………………………………………………………………………………………… iii
List of Plates………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. xii
List of Tables ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… xii
List of Figures ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… x
List of Appendices ………………………………………………………………………………………………… xv Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… iv
1.0 INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 1
1.1 Background to the Study ………………………………………………………………………………….. 1
1.2 Problem Statement …………………………………………………………………………………………… 5
1.3 Justification ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 7
1.4 Aim and Objectives ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 9
1.5 Research Questions ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 9
1.6 Motivation ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10
1.7 Scope ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 12
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ……………………………………………………………………………….. 14
2.1 Dairy Farm …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 14
2.2 Sustainable Waste Management on Dairy Farms …………………………………………….. 15
2.3 PRINCIPLES OF SUSTAINABLE WASTE MANAGEMENT ON DAIRY FARMS ………………………… 16
2.4 Hierarchy for Waste Management on Dairy Farms …………………………………………. 17
2.4.1 Considerations for Reducing Waste Generation ………………………………………………… 17
2.4.2 Considering Measures for Frequent Waste Evacuation ………………………………………. 21
2.4.3 Measures for Sustainable Waste Treatment ………………………………………………………. 24
2.5 DESIGN APPROACH TO WASTE MANAGEMENT ON DAIRY FARMS ………………………………… 32
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY …………………………………………………………………….. 34
3.1 Research Methods ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 36
3.2 Population ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 37
3.3 Sampling ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 38
3.4 Credibility of Research Findings …………………………………………………………………….. 38
3.5 Procedure for Data Collection ………………………………………………………………………… 39
3.6 Procedure for Data Analysis …………………………………………………………………………… 40
4.0 DATA PRESENTATION ……………………………………………………………………………….. 42
4.1 Nagari Farms, Keffi, Nasarawa State ………………………………………………………………. 42
4.1.1 Design Strategies for Waste Management on Nagari Farms ……………………………….. 43
4.2 Niyya Farms, Kaduna …………………………………………………………………………………….. 55
4.2.1 Design Strategies for Waste Management on Niyya Farms, Kaduna ……………………. 56
4.3 Lamda Farms, Kaduna …………………………………………………………………………………… 64
4.3.1 Design Strategies for Waste Management on Nagari Farms ……………………………….. 65
5.0 DATA ANALYSIS …………………………………………………………………………………………. 76
5.1 COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF THE DESIGN STRATEGIES FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT ON
Nagari Farms, Niyya Farms and Lamda Farms ……………………………………………………. 76
5.1.1 Indicative Measure of Efficiency of the Design Approach Implemented as it Impacts the Hierarchy for Sustainable Waste Management on Nagari Farms, Niyya Farms and
Lamda Farms ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 78
5.2 Summary of Findings ……………………………………………………………………………………… 89
5.3 Evolution of Design Framework ……………………………………………………………………… 90
5.3.1 Site Planning Considerations for Holistic Design Framework for Achieving
Sustainable Waste Management on Dairy Farms ………………………………………………………. 93
5.3.2 Facilities Design and Construction Considerations for Holistic Framework for
Achieving Sustainable Waste Management on Dairy Farm ………………………………………… 97
5.3.3 Integrated Design Considerations for Holistic Design Framework for Achieving
Sustainable Waste Management on Dairy Farms …………………………………………………….. 100
6.0 MODEL DAIRY FARM, KADUNA DESIGN PROPOSAL/REPORT …………… 103
6.1 Brief Formulation …………………………………………………………………………………………. 103
6.2 Site Selection ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 106
6.2.1 Site Selection Criteria …………………………………………………………………………………… 106
6.2.2 The Site ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 111
6.3 Site Analysis …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 111
6.3.1 Accessibility and Site Surroundings ………………………………………………………………. 112
6.3.2 Vegetation and Topography ………………………………………………………………………….. 113
6.3.3 Micro-Climate Analysis ……………………………………………………………………………….. 113
6.3.4 S.W.O.T Analysis on Site …………………………………………………………………………….. 113
6.4 Brief Development ………………………………………………………………………………………… 114
6.4.1 Space Schedule/Design Guide ………………………………………………………………………. 114
6.5 Concept Development …………………………………………………………………………………… 115
6.5.1 Relationship Matrix ……………………………………………………………………………………… 116
6.5.2Spatial Flow …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 117
3Zoning………… ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 118
6.6 Application of “The Holistic Design Framework for Achieving Sustainable Waste
MANAGEMENT ON DAIRY FARMS” ON THE PROPOSED MODEL DAIRY FARM, KADUNA ……… 118
6.6.1 Site Planning ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 119
6.6.2 Facilities Design ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 122
6.6.3 Integrated Design Considerations ………………………………………………………………….. 129
7.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ………………………………………………………………… 132
7.1 Summary ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 132
7.2 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 134
7.3 Recommendations ………………………………………………………………………………………… 135
7.4 Contributions to Knowledge …………………………………………………………………………. 137
7.5 Research Limitations ……………………………………………………………………………………. 137
7.6 Areas for Further Research ………………………………………………………………………….. 137
REFERENCES ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 139
APPENDICES …………………………………………………………………………..147
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This chapter establishes the background of study, presents the problem statement which usesEllis and Levy (2008) Template for Crafting a Problem Statement (what: who; how, where and when: who; why: who) as a guide. It states the aim of the research and enumerates objectives through which the aim is achieved. The chapter also justifies the problems the research sets out to address and give motivations behind the research as an endeavour. Lastly, the chapter presents a highlight of the study style adopted and gives the structure of the entire work.
1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
“Agriculture remains the key driving force for economic growth in most African countries” (Köster and Wolff, 2012). According to Onwualu (2012), agriculture is one of the dominant sectors in Nigeria, as the country is blessed with a favourable climatic condition, richness of soil types and abundant water resources. The high population density provide great potentials for farming in Nigeria.
Dairy farming is anagricultural livestock typology with two main parts: the production of raw milk from dairy livestock on one hand and the processing and distribution of milk products on the other (Russell, 1985; Igwe, 2002 in Osotimehin,Tijani and Olukomogbon, 2006).Dairy products provide the most important nutritional requirements for human body building as well as tissues repairs (Osotimehin et al., 2006). However, the dairy sector in Nigeria has been a sleeping giant (Köster and Wolff, 2012).Over the years, Nigerian governments have instituted different motivating policies in terms of import licensing, import prohibition, import tariffs and foreign exchange control on milk products to encourage dairy farming. Regardless Nigeria meets less than 50% of its domestic need for dairy products making the country the largest importer of dairy products in West Africa, and the import have been rising steadily in recent years (Akinyosoye, 2005).
Unwholesome waste management on dairy farms leads to the breeding of multifactorial disease that affects the health and welfare of dairy cattle and thereby milk yield (Noordhuizen and Cannas, 2009). According to Tongel and Broucek (2010), inefficiency inwaste management on dairy farms result in environmental hygiene concerns which could manifest as lameness and mastitis that affects cattle legs by chronic foot legions and inflammation of udders respectively; these causes pain on the cattle and thereby affects milk productivity and reproduction. Lameness in dairy cow is a hoof/foot rot health condition causing digital dermatitis (hairy heel warts) caused by infectious agents such as Fusobacterium necrophorus and Bacteroides melaninogenicus from decomposed wet environment of a dairy cow which results in higher production losses, lower fertility, and greater culling rates (Garcia, 2010; Hamilton,Moore, Esau, Haupstein, Anderson, Skerritt, and Norris, 2010; Cook, 2004).Mastitis is a bacterial infection affecting the mammary udder of a dairy cow. It is associated with impairment of welfare due to the pain, it is the most costly endemic disease in dairy herds as it transpire into economic loss components in terms of loss in milk production, treatment costs, extra labor and premature culling of chronically infected cows (Hogan and Smith, 2003; Huirne et al., 2002 in Noordhuizen and Cannas, 2009).A study by Junaidu, Salihu, Tambuwal, Magaji and Jaafaru(2011) shows that mastitis is a common problem among cattle on dairy farms in Nigeria with about Fifty two (52%) occurrence per anum, while lameness prevalence is at the rate of around (58%) per anum. A study shows that lameness and mastitiscould affects milk yield by decreasing it to 7liters per day from 23liter per day (Okaiyeto,Ernest, Danbirini and Kudi, 2012; Tongel and Broucek, 2010).
The high quantity of waste from dairy farms raise the level of pollutants that creates major environmental problems (Ogundele and Jegede, 2011; Pretty, 2007). According to Loehr (1984), by cumulative average, a cow is responsible for the production of 14 and 18 tonnes per year of manure and urine respectively. An idea about quantity of wastewater produced from a typical dairy farm is shown in a report by New South Wales Dairy Effluent Subcommittee of 1999. It shows that a typical ranges in water use per cows on dairy farms is reported as 11 to 56 L day–1 per cow. While Rogers and Alexander (2000) reports that the water use isat a range of 4 to 138 L day–1 per cow (Birchall, Dillon and Wrigley,
2008).Manure is the major source of odour and other greenhouse gases like ammonia
(NH3), carbon dioxide (CO2), hydrogen sulphide (H2S), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide
(N2O) on dairy farms (Battye et al., 1994 in Topper, Brandt, Adviento-Borbe, Lascano, Heinrichs and Wheeler, 2008). In a study by Jacobson, Bicudo, Schmidt, Wood-Gay, Gates and Hoff (2003), dairy farms has odour emitting potential of about 1.3 – 3.0 OU m-3 against poultry which emits 0.3 – 3.5 OU m-3.While as for greenhouse gas emissions, ammonia concentrations in livestock section of a dairy farm range from 5 – 15g NH3 m-2 day-1 depending on the flooring (Jacobson et al., 2003), nitrous oxide is within the range of 0.4 – 26g N2O AU-1 day-1 depending on waste management system adopted (Esfandiari, Khosrokhavar, Sekhavat, 2011). While Hydrogen sulphide is at around 0.09 – 0.25g H2S m-2 day-1 and methane goes up to about 70kg CH4 animal-1 year-1(Schiefler, 2013).
Animal wastes is probably the largest sectoral source of water pollution, contributing to eutrophication, ―dead‖ zones in coastal areas, degradation of coral reefs, human health problems, emergence of antibiotic resistance and many others. These pollutants indicates freshwater shortage, scarcity and depletion, with 64 percent of the world’s population expected to live in water-stressed basins by 2025 (Hubbard,Lowrance, Vellidis and DavisCarter,1991; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2006; FitzGibbon,
Kato, Summers, Vargas, Simons, Zhang and Menke, 2005; Government of Western Australia Department of Water, 2012).
Waste from livestock are responsible for an estimated 55 percent of erosion and sediment around the world (Van Breemen et al., 1982; Speirs and Frost, 1987; Roelofs et al., 1985;
Speirs and Frost, 1987in Jacobson et al., 2003; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2006). Waste from livestock play an important role in the current biodiversity crisis, as they contribute directly or indirectly to drivers of biodiversity loss, at the local and global level. It is estimated that a loss of species is running at 50 to 500 times higher than background rates found in the fossil record; these are linked to changes in habitat, climate change, invasive alien species, overexploitation and pollution (El-Haggar 2007; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2006).
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on dairy farms and its climate change concern have received little attention until recently as it becomes a priority for most sectors of the economy: industrial agriculture inclusive (Birchall et al., 2008). There are numerous sources of odour with pollution potentials on dairy farms. These odours are a composite of over 170 trace compounds, including greenhouse gases (Birchall et al., 2008: Herbut and Angrecka, 2014: Zhao, Combs, Rausch, Manuzon, Brugger, Arnold and Imerman, 2008). Common air emission sources on dairy farms are mainly animal housing/manure harbouring areas, feeds processing and waste handling areas (The State of Victoria, 2010; Jacobsonet al., 2003). Reidhead (2010) found that each cow on average is responsible for 1,500 lbs of GHG per year or about 1,395 pounds CO2 equivalent per year. Also, dairy farms emits 37 percent of anthropogenic methane (with 23 times the global warming potential (GWP) of CO2). It emits 65 percent of anthropogenic nitrous oxide (with 296 times the GWP of CO2), the great majority from manure, and also responsible for almost two-thirds (64 percent) of anthropogenic ammonia emissions, which contribute significantly to acid rain and acidification of ecosystems (Calker,Rudi, Alfons and Mauser, 2005; Sleinfield, Berber and Hillary, 2006; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2006).
The challenges of waste management on dairy farms emanates from inefficient design approach, inadequate infrastructure and management systems,inadequate use of modern technology and construction of standard cattle and milking facilities (Adeneye, 1991 as cit. Osotimehin et al., 2006; Ugwu, 2010). In a study by Ugwu (2010), waste management on dairy farms in Nigeria are in part responsible for low milk production and environmental impact.
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT
Most architectural designs of dairy farms do not adequately capture the aspect of proper waste management (Cook, 2002). The situation of elusive waste management on dairy farms is affirmed pointing at design flaws in achieving good spatial design and standard farmstead facilities (Shete and Shinkar, 2013; Osotimehin et al., 2006; Abubakar and Ismail, 2012; Ogundele and Jegede, 2011; Cook, 2002): dairy farms in Nigeria are no exception to these inadequacies (Junaidu et al.,2011; Ugwu, 2010). Waste (amount of manure and urine) in cattle environment forms a predictor index for cattle health and welfare impairment throughbreeding of harmful pathogens responsible for environmental mastitis (inflammation of udders) and lameness (chronic foot legions): aside the immense pain endured by the animals, these health impairment also reduce milk yield (Noordhuizen and Cannas, 2009; Tongel and Broucek, 2010; Chaiudhari and Dhoble, 2010; Abubakar and Ismail, 2012). More so, environmental degradation also arise resulting from pollution andgreenhouse gas emissions caused by unwholesome waste management from dairy farms through water, air and soil pollution and also decrease in biodiversity, climate change and increased global warming potentials(Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United
Nations, 2006; Sorathiya,Fulsoundar, Tyagi, Patel and Singh,2014; Reidhead, 2010; Sleinfield et al.,2006; Abubakar and Ismail, 2012; El-Haggar, 2007). While there could be a number of factors at play and different stakeholders involved in addressing issues of waste management on dairy farms, Cook and Nordlund (2004) and Cook (2002) recommends that more research is needed on the designs of dairy farms to ascertain implications and consequences of design decisions on waste management process, on-farm activities and animal welfare. With the need for more dairy farms to produce more dairy products on the rise; the animal welfare and productivity, environmental degradation impact from flaws in existing designs of dairy farms in proper waste management still prevalent on dairy farms; and studies recommending the need for more research on dairy farm designs in addressing waste management issues, this research look into dairy farm designs with the view on how architectural design should proffer primary solution through spatial organization and standards in architectural design modalities to achieve a dairy farm design that offers a wholesome process for waste management.
1.3 JUSTIFICATION
Nigeria is a potential market for 1.3 million tons per annum of milk valued at about $3 billion (USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, 2007). Biu (2011) established that there is a tremendous demand for dairy products in the Nigerian Market, mostly in urban areas. While Osotimehin et al. (2006) found that Nigeria has the potential of being a major milk producer in Africa.According to Ugwu (2010), the climatic condition and topographical features of most places in Nigeria are favorable for small, medium and large-scale dairy farming.
Waste management systems affects animal operations economically and also environmentally (Sorathiya et al., 2014). According to Abubakar and Ismail (2012), theinadequacy of waste management techniques on dairy farms cause adverse environmental problems and other health problems on cattle through breeding pathogens. According to Chaiudhari and Dhoble (2010) and Shete and Shinkar (2013), ineffective waste management on dairy farms is a consequence of poor farm design, operation and waste treatment system.
Environmental protection is seen as the major problem facing the world today (El-Haggar, 2007). The Kyoto protocol has gain more political recognizance in terms of environmental safety and climate change thereby reiterating the need for a more sustainable approach to human activities (Saunders and Barber, 2008). Livestock agriculture is in spotlight of need to minimize their waste impact on the environment through pollution control and reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural sector (FitzGibbon et al., 2005; Reidhead, 2010; Herbut and Angrecka, 2014; Zhaoet al., 2008). Global production of milk is projected to grow from 580 to 1,043 million tonnes from 1999/01 to 2050, this impliesthat the environmental impact per unit of livestock production must be cut by half, just to avoid increasing the level of damage beyond its present level (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2006).
It is necessary for any establishment to treat its waste so that it complies with environmental protection regulations. The impact of waste disposal on the environment is significant since it contaminate air, soil, and water (El-Haggar, 2007). According to Ngumah et al. (2013), records show that Nigeria ranks number 8 in the world in greenhouse gasses emission (13% of world emission). About 28.8% of these emissions comes from untreated organic wastes, such as those from a dairy farm. Abubakar and Ismail (2012) affirms that there is pressure in many parts of the world to ascertain how livestock waste should be handled in order to curtail its impacts.
Birchall et al. (2008) found that under some state acts, designers are required to consider safety in their designs. They are tasked with ensuring a design that practically eliminate or reduce any adverse effect on the users and the environment. Also according to Horn (1998), designers have an overriding responsibility to protect local and global planetary systems through designs that are oriented in protecting and eliminating all pollution activities. On that note, Fatah (2012) propagates an eco-design approach which considers designing built environment with special consideration for the impact of the design and the buildings on the planet Earth from an ecological standpoint; environmental friendly architecture in both design process as well as the structure that results from the design process.
1.4 AIM AND OBJECTIVES
The aim of the research is to assess existing design measures and considerations with regards to their effectiveness in addressing waste management issues on dairy farms in northern Nigeria with the view to develop a design framework for enhancing sustainable waste management in Nigerian dairy farms.
The research thus intends to achieve the aim through the following objectives:
To investigate design strategies for waste management on dairy farms Nigeria.
To determinethe impacts of such design strategies for waste management on dairy farming in Nigeria.
To determine the effectiveness of a design framework for enhancing sustainable waste management for large scale dairy farms design.
To bring to the fore the applicability of this framework through the proposed design of a model dairy farm in Kaduna.
1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The study intends to answer the following research questions:
What are the design strategies for waste management used on dairy farms in northern Nigeria?
To what extent are design strategies effective in enhancing sustainable waste management on dairy farms in northern Nigeria?
How effective could a design framework be in enhancing sustainable waste management on large scale dairy farms?
How best can design strategies be incorporated at design stage to enhance sustainable waste management on dairy farms?
1.6 MOTIVATION
Dairy farms in Nigeria mostly use breeds of cattle from the temperate regions owing to the fact that indigenous breeds of the tropics are generally characterized by low genetic potential for milk production. Also, the climatic difference with credible potentials for leading to diseases and reduced milk production necessitate keen considerations for conducive cattle environment (Ogundipe and Adeoye, 2013). In an interview with Prof.
Jerome Gefu, the Executive Director of National Animal Production Research Institute (NAPRI), the acute difference in milk yield between the indigenous breeds and the exotic breeds was explained. An example is the institutes’ tregian exotic breed that yield up to 35liters of milk per day against a bunaji indigenous that yields around 5liters of milk per day. However, the major challenge for the exotic breeds he noted is the need of the exotic breed for better management, need for cooler space, good environment and feeding
(Sa’idu, 2014). While Junaidu et al. (2011) submits that the economic implications of environmentally caused health and welfare issues of dairy farms are as important as they are so far not properly addressed on Nigerian dairy farms.
Architectural professionals have to accept the fact that as a society’s economic status improves, its demand for architectural resources increases (Kim and Rigdon, 1998). Looking at the goals of sustainable designs, architectural solutions that guarantee wellbeing and coexistence is needed. Thus Fatah (2012) opines that architects and building designers can play a major role in promoting sustainability and ethical responsibility for the future generations and bio-system through responsible approach of design towards nature and earth, and it is the participation of architecture in to the living system through its understanding and integrated design approach.
Flaws in design features can lead to welfare and health outcomes on dairy cattle like traumatic injuries, sore feet, environmental mastitis and lameness (Dairy Farmers of Canada, 2009: Birchall et al., 2008). As a result of good environment, dairy cows can maintain good productivity throughout the year which implies more farm profitability (Gay, 2009). While Samer (2010) highlights that design flaws in housing designs in dairy farms increases heat stress which dramatically decreases milk yield and thereby leads to economic deficiency of the farm. Improving the environment in which dairy cattle are reared is of major concern in terms of housing, providing comfort and other environmental factors, stating that without improving the environment, low animal productivity is inevitable (Ikhatua, 2000; Prabu, 2013).
Respect for environment and sustainable development is part of the agenda of President
Muhammadu Buhari administration (thenationonlineng.net, 2015). In a UN General Assembly address of 2015, President Muhammadu Buhari reaffirms Nigeria’s strong commitment which reflects African consensus to the adoption of a legally binding universal agreement to mitigate climate change through contributing in reducing greenhouse gas emissions worldwide and that Nigeria will continue to champion the core principles and goals of the new sustainable development agenda in hopes that the next conference of parties will eventually become a global milestone to combat and cushion the dire impacts of climate change (IBTimes Staff Reporter UK, 2015). To this end, developments in Nigeria need to depicts political will for championing sustainable development ideals, a good example been the waste management issues on dairy farms.
According to Jacobson et al. (2003), unfortunately design of waste management process and implied environmental conditions regarding dairy farms are either not well understood or documented. While veterinarians don’t have the necessary skills for design and
construction of dairy farmstead; they are more into the health, behaviour and welfare of the cattle. Agricultural engineers are mainly concerned with cost and other non-health related issues of dairy farmstead (Cook, 2002), proper dairy farms design thus falls on the architect whose design integrates all stakeholders and their respective peculiarities in coming up with a viable design. This research thus intends to find the actual state of dairy farm designs through the strategies used as means for waste management under the spectrum of architectural designs.
1.7 SCOPE
Looking at the nature of the research, this section sets a purview of consideration for the work. The concept of the work however is a qualitative study of the architectural strategies for waste management used on case farms within northern Nigeria region within the time range of the research. The choice of the geographical location to be covered is strengthened by RIM (1992) in Blench (1999), stating that most states in northern Nigeria are suitable for dairy farming, also a wide conception that agriculture is the most dominant economic drive of northern Nigeria owing to the availability of favourable land and climatic conditions for agriculture. Therefore, the research chose Nassarawa and Kaduna States as representative study areas.
However, the research limits the nature of waste to be considered using the Federal
Government of Nigeria’s efforts to control and manage wastes from dairy and animal facilities in the country through enacting laws in section 20 of the 1999 Constitution as amended proffer the legal framework for waste management in Nigeria (Dixon, 2012;
Ijaiya, 2013), the research thereby considers Regulation 2.E (Confined Livestock Feeding
Industry) and Regulation 2.G (Dairy Industry) that names the waste of these industries as Biological Oxygen Demand (manure, effluent, waste water and wash water) and greenhouse gases emissions among others. To that end, the research relies on Cook and Nordlund (2004) and Cook (2002) recommendations that design is the key to waste management issues on dairy farms. And also,Abubakar and Ismail (2012) and Sorathiyaet al.(2014) to limit points of emphasis to how architectural strategies in dairy farms is used to enhance waste management on dairy farms and curtail its health and environmental degradation impacts.
HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERIAL(S)
After paying the appropriate amount (#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to
08068231953 or 08168759420
(1) Your project topics
(2) Email Address
(3) Payment Name
(4) Teller Number
We will send your material(s) after we receive bank alert
BANK ACCOUNTS
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 0046579864
Bank: GTBank.
OR
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 3139283609
Bank: FIRST BANK
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL:
08068231953 or 08168759420