Literature Review On CSLS in SSA - PP

FUND FOR FUTURE CLIMATE-SMART LIVESTOCK SYSTEMS (CSLS)
Literature Review on Climate-Smart Technologies for Livestock Systems
Submitted by
Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources

Policy Analysis Network (FANRPAN)
141 Cresswell Road, Weavind Park
Private Bag X2087
Silverton 0127
Pretoria, South Africa
31 July 2023
Literature Review on Climate-Smart Technologies for Livestock Systems
CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS................................................................................ii

1 BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE....................................................................................1
1.1 Background................................................................................................................ 1
2 OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE TERMS OF REFERENCE...........................................2
3 COMMENTS ON THE TERMS OF REFERENCE.............................................................2
4 METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................... 2
4.1 Approach................................................................................................................... 2
4.2 Workplan.................................................................................................................... 3
i
Literature Review on Climate-Smart Technologies for Livestock Systems in Sub-Sharan Africa
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AFOLU Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use

CSA Climate-Smart Agriculture
CSLS Climate-Smart Livestock System
FANR Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources
FANRPAN Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
GHG Greenhouse Gas
SSA Sub-Saharan Africa
ii
1 INTRODUCTION
Livestock make a significant contribution to the livelihoods and resilience of communities in low and
middle-income countries, including sub-Saharan countries, while providing valuable nutritional
benefits. Demand for animal products and animal source foods is increasing rapidly in response to
population growth and an emerging affluent and urban population. At the same time, livestock are
responsible for about 14.5% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, accounting for 80% of GHG
emissions from the agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) sector. Therefore, a balanced
approach is required to make sure that livestock continue to provide the much-needed animal
source foods, especially for the poor and vulnerable, while making sure that such products are
produced in a way that minimises the overall output of greenhouse gas emissions 1. This will be
achieved by developing and deploying to scale, climate smart livestock systems in sub-Saharan
Africa. Climate-smart agriculture, as it pertains to livestock systems, is defined as an approach for
transforming and reorienting agricultural production systems and food value chains so that they
support sustainable development and can ensure food security under climate change (CTA, 2019) 2.
Climate-smart technologies for livestock systems aim to deliver both adaptation, ensuring adequate
levels of production in the face of climate change, while mitigating climate change by reducing
greenhouse gas emissions from livestock value chains. Such systems are also referred to as low-
carbon or low-emission livestock systems. Examples of climate smart livestock technologies include
the following1:
i) Measures aimed at improving productivity and resource use efficiency, e.g., improved
feeding, genetics, animal health, general husbandry, increased offtake, and information
technology;
ii) Intensifying recycling efforts and minimising losses from a circular bioeconomy through use
of crop residues, food waste, and agro-industrial by-products as animal feed and using
manure and slaughterhouse for fertilizer and production of biogas as green energy;
iii) Use of nature-based solutions for increasing carbon sequestration by reducing deforestation
for feed production and pastures but instead using regenerative grazing practices to restore
degraded land;
iv) Data analytics and decision-support systems, especially supported by ICTs; and
v) Policy measures to provide an enabling environment for value chain actors to switch to
climate-smart livestock technologies, for example use of subsidies, incentives and pricing
models, among others.
1
FAO. 2019. Five practical actions towards low-carbon livestock. Rome
2
CTA 2019. The Digitalisation of African Agriculture Report, 1st Edition, June 2019. Proud Press, The
Netherlands
1
3
This literature review covers Sub-Saharan African livestock production systems, the impact and
vulnerability SSA livestock systems to climate change, greenhouse gas emissions from livestock
systems in SSA, climate-smart technologies for livestock systems, business models for climate
adaptation in sedentary and pastoral livestock systems, and gender dynamics and considerations in
climate-smart livestock systems.
2 Contribution of Livestock to Livelihoods and the Economies of Sub-Saharan African Countries
The role of livestock in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) is integral to the region's socio-economic
development, impacting the gross domestic product (GDP), livelihoods, food security, and socio-
cultural dynamics.
2.1 Contribution to Gross Domestic Product
The livestock sector's contribution to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA)
is profound, both directly and indirectly. According to the African Development Bank (2018), the
livestock sector contributes an average of 30% to the agricultural GDP in SSA, playing a significant
role in the economic development of the region. Regional variances exist; in Eastern Africa, the
contribution ranges from 10-45% (Thornton et al., 2002). This variance is due to the diverse livestock
systems and agro-ecological zones, which influence the productivity and profitability of livestock
farming. In Southern Africa, livestock production is a crucial income source for rural communities
through the sale of meat, milk, and other products (Mapiye et al., 2020). The livestock sector in this
region is characterized by small-scale farmers who rely on traditional farming systems, with livestock
providing a significant portion of their income. For Central African countries like Cameroon, the
sector contributes about 3% of the country's GDP (Bayala et al., 2020). The livestock sector in
Cameroon is dominated by smallholder farmers, and it plays a crucial role in food security and
poverty reduction. Similarly, in West Africa, Nigeria's livestock sector represents about 3.1% of the
total GDP (Ayantunde et al., 2015). The livestock sector in Nigeria is a significant contributor to the
national economy, providing employment and income to millions of people. It also plays a vital role
in ensuring food security and improving the nutritional status of Nigerians (ADB, 2018).
4
Indirect contributions extend beyond the agricultural sector, creating employment opportunities
through the livestock value chain, including rearing, processing, transportation, and marketing,
especially in rural areas where alternative employment is scarce (FAO, 2019). Livestock also
contributes to agricultural productivity by providing a source of organic fertilizer in the form of
manure, enhancing soil fertility and improving crop production (Giller et al., 2011).
Figure 1 Livestock and Socio-economic Development in Sub-Saharan Africa. Source: FAO, 2002
2.2 Livelihoods and Food and Nutrition Security

Livestock plays a crucial role in poverty alleviation and income diversification for smallholder farmers
in SSA, providing the means for essential expenditures such as education, healthcare, and
agricultural inputs (Herrero et al., 2013; Mapiye et al., 2020).
Besides, livestock production is integral to food and nutrition security in SSA. Animal-source foods
provide essential nutrients critical for human health and development (Randolph et al., 2007; Grace
et al., 2018). The consumption of these foods positively impacts child nutrition, growth, and
cognitive development, particularly in rural areas where dietary diversity may be limited (Carlson et
al., 2015; Arimond & Ruel, 2004). In addition, livestock systems contribute to sustainable agricultural
5
practices through nutrient cycling, provision of organic fertilizer, and the provision of draft power
(Giller et al., 2011; Valbuena et al., 2012; Ayantunde et al., 2021).
The livestock sector also influences social, cultural, and gender norms. Women play key roles in
livestock management and milk processing, and their inclusion in decision-making processes can
enhance productivity, poverty reduction, and gender equality (Arega et al., 2021; Kamidi et al., 2018;
FAO, 2020).
Conflicts related to access and control over livestock resources, such as land use conflicts,
competition for grazing resources, and disputes over livestock ownership, significantly impact
communities (Njisane et al., 2020; Seré et al., 2008). Understanding and addressing these dynamics
is essential for the development of inclusive and sustainable livestock policies and interventions (Ly
et al., 2010).
3 Livestock Production Systems and Level of Production in Sub-Sahara Africa
3.1 Livestock products in SSA

According to the OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2021-2030, the livestock production sector in Sub-
Saharan Africa (SSA) is projected to witness a significant expansion of 26% over the next decade,
with poultry and milk production sectors leading the growth (Figure 1). By 2030, the region is
expected to add 2.9 million tonnes (Mt) of meat output, which includes 1.3 Mt of poultry, 740,000
tonnes of bovine meat, 650,000 t of ovine meat, and 260,000 t of pig meat.
Bovine and ovine production systems in the region are predominantly extensive, with growth
primarily driven by herd expansion rather than productivity gains (FAO, 2023). In the base period of
2018-2020, SSA accounted for 7% of global bovine meat output and 17% of the global bovine herd.
By 2030, the region's share in the global bovine herd is projected to increase to nearly 20%. Similarly,
SSA, which constitutes 14% of global ovine meat output and 24% of the global ovine herd, is
expected to increase its ovine meat production by 30% over the next decade, thereby increasing its
global output share to 15%. Despite these herd expansions, the land used for pasture purposes is
expected to remain almost unchanged by 2030.
Poultry production systems in the region, although still largely extensive, are witnessing a greater
degree of intensification, especially in countries such as South Africa, that produce surplus feed
grains. Feed intensity is anticipated to continue increasing across the broader SSA region as supply
chains modernise in countries such as Zambia and Tanzania. In countries where feed is used more
intensively, genetic improvements and better feed conversion over time are expected to reduce the
amount of feed required per animal, resulting in feed use growing marginally slower than meat
production at the regional level. Some feed use also accrues to fish production, which is projected to
increase by 13% by 2030 (FAO, 2023).
6
Figure 2. Livestock production in Sub-Saharan Africa. Source: OECD/FAO (2021), “OECD-FAO

Agricultural Outlook”, OECD Agriculture statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/agr-outl-
data-en.
3.2 Eastern Africa

3.2.1 Livestock production systems
Eastern Africa is recognized for its varied livestock production systems, shaped by geographical and
climatic variations, cultural practices, and resource availability. The two most dominant livestock
production systems are pastoralism and mixed crop-livestock production.
Pastoralism, a significant livelihood strategy, has been influenced by centuries of cultural and
socioeconomic evolution. Pastoralists have developed intricate knowledge and skills to adapt to
unpredictable climatic conditions and resource scarcity. This adaptation is demonstrated in their
mobility patterns, which optimize the utilization of natural resources, while minimizing drought-
related risks (Homewood et al., 2009; Mburu et al., 2015). This approach also promotes cultural
identity, social cohesion, and the preservation of traditional knowledge systems (Jahnke, 1982; Rege
& Gibson, 2003; Mwacharo et al., 2006; Galvin, 2009; Wilson et al., 2009).
7
Figure 3. Livestock production systems in Eastern Africa. (Source: Otte and Chilonda, 2002).
Mixed crop-livestock systems are an important component of Eastern Africa's agricultural
framework. Farmers adopt these systems to optimize land and labour use, growing staple crops
alongside rearing livestock, which facilitates resource recycling, increases resilience to climate
variability and diversifies income sources (Homewood et al., 2009; Tittonell et al., 2010; Herrero et
al., 2013).
The livestock species and breeds in Eastern Africa exhibit unique traits and adaptations to the
region's diverse environments. Indigenous cattle breeds, such as the Boran, Ankole, and Red Maasai,
are well-adapted to the region's harsh conditions and have high milk and meat production capacities
(Rege et al., 2003). These breeds possess traits such as heat tolerance, resistance to ticks and
diseases, and efficient utilization of low-quality forages. They play a crucial role in supporting the
livelihoods of pastoral communities and contribute to the region's food security and economic
development.
8
Sheep and goats, including the Red Maasai, Dorper, and Boer breeds, are important small ruminants
in the region (Mwacharo et al., 2006). They exhibit adaptations to arid and semi-arid environments,
resistance to common diseases, and good reproductive performance, making them valuable assets
for smallholder farmers. These breeds provide a source of income, protein-rich meat, and other
products, contributing to the resilience and well-being of local communities. Camels, known for their
ability to withstand water and feed scarcity, are primarily raised by pastoral communities, providing
milk, meat, hides, and transportation services (Wilson et al., 2009). They are well-suited to the arid
and semi-arid regions of Eastern Africa and are an important source of livelihood for many
pastoralists. The unique adaptations of these livestock species contribute to the diversity and
resilience of Eastern Africa's livestock production systems and offer opportunities for sustainable
and climate-smart livestock production.
Pig farming plays a significant role in Eastern Africa's livestock systems, offering efficient feed
conversion and high reproductive rates. Despite facing challenges such as disease management and
inadequate market linkages, studies show that improved practices can enhance pig productivity and
profitability (Seré, et al., 2008; Eshitera et al., 2012; Ouma et al., 2015; Mwambi et al., 2017).
The livestock value chains in Eastern Africa encompass the various stages involved in the production,
processing, distribution, and consumption of livestock products. These value chains play a crucial
role in enhancing market access, reducing post-harvest losses, and improving the competitiveness of
Eastern Africa's livestock sector. In the production stage, farmers engage in animal management
practices, including feeding, breeding, and healthcare. Access to productive inputs, such as improved
breeds, quality feeds, and veterinary services, is essential for optimizing productivity and profitability
(FAO, 2009; Ghimire et al., 2015). Farmers employ grazing management techniques,
supplementation with forages and concentrates, and veterinary interventions to ensure optimal
animal health and performance (Duguma & Janssens, 2021). Climate-smart practices, such as better
water and forage management, can enhance the resilience of livestock systems in the face of climate
variability (Lipper, et al., 2014; Nyasimi et al., 2017).
The processing and value addition stage involves transforming raw livestock products into processed
and marketable goods. In Eastern Africa, milk processing for dairy products, meat processing for
value-added meat products, and leather processing for hides and skins, are important value addition
activities (Asresie et al., 2015). These activities enhance product quality, shelf life, and marketability,
while generating additional income for farmers (Salami et al., 2010). Investment in processing
facilities and technologies is crucial to enhance value addition and ensure compliance with quality
and safety standards (Shiferaw et al., 2011).
The marketing and distribution stage connects livestock producers with consumers. Livestock
products from Eastern Africa are marketed through various channels, including formal markets, local
markets, and value chain partnerships (Kocho et al., 2011). Effective marketing strategies, such as
branding, certification, and market information systems, contribute to market access, price stability,
9
and consumer confidence (Markelova & Mwangi, 2010). Furthermore, partnerships between
farmers, processors, and retailers play a vital role in ensuring efficient distribution and reaching a
wider consumer base (Goedde et al., 2019). Collaborative efforts in the value chain promote market
linkages, improve market transparency, and create opportunities for value addition and income
generation throughout the livestock sector in Eastern Africa (Makoni et al.,2014).
The livestock sector presents significant growth opportunities due to the rising demand for high-
quality products, integration of technology, and regional collaboration efforts (Delgado, 1999; Salami
et al., 2010; Herrero et al., 2013; FAO, 2014; Asresie et al., 2015; Bingi & Tondel, 2015; FAO, 2015;
EAC, 2018).
Gender considerations are crucial in climate-smart livestock systems, given the significant roles
women play in livestock production (Beuchelt & Badstue, 2013). However, gender inequalities limit
women's access to productive resources and decision-making processes. Therefore, equitable
opportunities for women are necessary for sustainable development (FAO, 2011; Chesterman &
Neely, 2015; Wong, 2016; Lau et at., 2021).
Unlocking the full potential of Eastern Africa's livestock sector requires targeted interventions,
policies, and investments, enhancing access to productive inputs, promoting climate-smart practices,
improving animal health services, and strengthening value chain linkages (FAO, 2009; Shiferaw et al.,
2011; Ogutu et al., 2014; Williams et al., 2015; Dinesh et al., 2017; Mutamba & Ajayi, 2018; Aslam et
al., 2021; Mungai et al., 2021).
3.2.2 Livestock populations and products
Start by providing livestock populations and trends for the region or by country if you can get the
data for the 20 year period 2000-2020
Follow this with product trend over the period 2000-2020, preferably using graphs.
Over the past two decades, Eastern Africa has demonstrated a promising surge in livestock product
production. This steady increase in the volume of meat, milk, and eggs can be attributed to dynamic
factors such as population growth, evolving dietary preferences, and the incorporation of improved
production practices. Major countries in the region such as Ethiopia, Kenya, and Somalia have seen a
substantial rise in livestock production and have emerged as pivotal contributors to the region's
animal product supply (Herrero et al., 2013; FAO, 2020). Ethiopia had the largest number of cattle in
Africa as of 2020, roughly 70 million heads, 40 million sheep, 51 million goats, 8 million camels and
49 million chickens in 2020 (Central Statistics Agency, CSA, 2020a). In Kenya, chickens were the
largest species of livestock as of 2020. That year, there were around 59 million heads of chickens in
the country. Goats followed, with approximately 32 million heads. Moreover, Kenya had a total of
24.8 million heads of sheep and 22.8 million heads of cattle. In Somalia pastoralism and trade of
10
livestock remains the principal livelihood for the majority of Somalis and accounts for roughly 80% of
export earnings annually (Banerjee et al., 2021).
There is no narrative to support the table below. Also make sure you check the countries in the sub-
region – Mozambique is in Southern Africa.
3.3 Southern Africa

3.3.1 Production systems
Use the general information in the map first to describe systems
Follow with examples of specific countries but keep it short
Livestock production in Southern Africa exhibits diversity, featuring both commercial and
smallholder crop-livestock farming methods (Makate et at., 2018). In South Africa, the Bonsmara
breed, developed from Afrikaner, Hereford, and Shorthorn cattle crossbreeding, is noted for
adaptability, fertility, and superior meat quality (Van Marle-Köster et al., 2021). The Angus breed is
also popular, especially in beef production, for its marbling and meat tenderness (Niemand, 2020;
Van Marle-Köster et al., 2021). The Hereford breed, initially from the United Kingdom, is esteemed
for docility, adaptability, and efficient feed conversion (Spickett et al., 1989).
Namibia's expansive rangelands create ideal conditions for cattle farming. Notably, the Brahman
breed thrives due to its heat tolerance, insect resistance, and efficient utilization of low-quality
forage (Niemand, 2020; Nkosi et al., 2020). The traditional Afrikaner breed, well-adapted to the local
environment, is also prevalent (Van Marle-Köster et al., 2012).
11
Countries such as Zimbabwe, Malawi, and Zambia employ mixed crop-livestock farming in
smallholder systems, where goats are crucial (Mataveia et al., 2021). Indigenous goat breeds such as
the Matabele and Mashona are well-adapted to these harsh environments, displaying disease
resistance and efficient utilization of low-quality forage (Monau, 2018; Valbuena et al., 2019).
In the dairy sector, Holstein-Friesian and Jersey breeds are preferred for commercial dairy farming.
Holstein-Friesians, known for high milk production, are suitable for large-scale operations (Chawala
et al., 2020), while Jersey cattle produce superior milk components such as butterfat (Van Marle-
Köster et al., 2021).
In Southern Africa, the livestock value chain plays a critical role in supporting the region's agricultural
and economic development. The value chain encompasses the entire process, from production to
market and consumption of livestock products. In the production stage, commercial livestock
farming is predominant in South Africa, Namibia, and Botswana, where large-scale cattle production,
including beef and dairy farming, is practiced. Smallholder systems are common in Zimbabwe,
Malawi, and Mozambique, with a focus on mixed crop-livestock farming and small ruminant rearing
(Makate, 2019). Access to quality animal feed, veterinary services, and improved breeding and
management practices are essential for optimizing productivity and addressing challenges such as
disease outbreaks and low adoption of improved practices (Rich & Perry, 2011).
The processing and value addition stage in Southern Africa involves adding value to livestock
products through various activities such as slaughtering, meat processing, and dairy processing. This
stage enhances product quality, diversifies product offerings, and increases market value.
Strengthening processing infrastructure and capacity is crucial to support value addition activities
and meet market demands (Meissner et al., 2013). The marketing and distribution stage in Southern
Africa involves connecting producers with consumers. Formal and informal markets, as well as value
chain partnerships, are used to market livestock products. Strengthening market linkages, improving
market infrastructure, and enhancing market information systems are important strategies for
increasing market access, reducing post-harvest losses, and improving the competitiveness of
livestock products (McDermott et al., 2010).
The region faces challenges such as disease outbreaks that restrict livestock movements and market
access, inadequate infrastructure, and low adoption of improved breeding practices (Naziri et al.,
2015; Njisane, et al., 2020). Climate change exacerbates these challenges, affecting forage
availability and water resources (Njisane, et al., 2020; Naziri et al., 2015).
12
Figure 4 Livestock production systems in SADC. Source: Swinurai, 2016
However, there are opportunities for improvement. These include enhancing disease management
through increased investment in research and control measures, improving veterinary services and
strengthening extension services (Shiferaw et al., 2011; Naziri et al., 2015). Sustainable fodder
production, access to markets, credit, and training can also enhance competitiveness and
profitability (Hebinck et al., 2018; Shiferaw et al., 2011).
Women play significant roles in the region's livestock production, contributing to household food
security and income. However, gender inequalities limit their access to resources and decision-
making processes, requiring attention to achieve inclusive and sustainable livestock systems
(Grabowski et al., 2021). Gender considerations are crucial in promoting inclusive, sustainable
livestock systems, contributing to food security, poverty reduction, and economic development.
Southern Africa's livestock sector faces challenges related to disease control, resource access, and
climate change impacts. However, targeted interventions and investments can enhance productivity.
In Southern Africa, livestock production and animal product volume trends present a mixed picture.
While some countries, such as South Africa, Malawi and Namibia, have shown consistent growth and
development in the livestock sector, others struggle with challenges related to climate change,
resource scarcity, and disease outbreaks (Leichenko & O'brien, 2002). These issues have significantly
impacted production levels, thereby affecting the regional animal product supply (Mapiye et al.,
2015; Njisane et al., 2020). South Africa, Madagascar, and Zimbabwe have exhibited impressive
resilience, showcasing significant advancements in livestock production and emerging as influential
contributors in the regional market. However, starting from 2014, South Africa witnessed a
13
consistent annual decline of 1.2% in its livestock population, resulting in 14,073,499.96 heads in
2019. Conversely, during the same period, Zimbabwe observed a significant annual increase of 2.6%
in its livestock numbers, reaching 3,676,844.43 heads in 2019. Similarly, Madagascar experienced a
modest annual growth of 0.6% in its livestock population since 2014, with the number of heads
reaching 6,189,444.42 in 2019.
There is no narrative to support the table below. Also make sure you check the countries in the sub-
region – missing Mozambique.
3.4 West Africa

Encompassing countries such as Nigeria, Ghana, Senegal, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Côte d'Ivoire, West
Africa exhibits a broad range of livestock production systems, which include extensive pastoralism,
mixed crop-livestock farming, and urban-based livestock production. These systems play a pivotal
role in providing livelihoods, food security, and income generation for millions (Ayantunde et al.,
2015).
In this region, pastoralism is commonly practiced by nomadic or semi-nomadic groups such as the
Fulani and Tuareg (Sheik‐Mohamed & Velema, 1999). They rear cattle, sheep, goats, and camels,
constantly on the move in search of grazing lands and water resources (Ayantunde et al., 2015).
Additionally, mixed crop-livestock systems are prevalent in countries like Nigeria and Ghana. This
integration of livestock with crop farming fosters synergies in nutrient cycling and draft power for
agricultural activities (Zougmoré et al., 2016).
14
Figure 5 An agro-ecological map with the distribution of major livestock and crop production
systems in West Africa (Fernandez Rivera et al. (2004) in Ly, Fall and Okike (2010).)
Livestock production in urban areas usually operates on a smaller scale, with backyard poultry
farming and small ruminant rearing providing income for urban households (Ayantunde et al., 2015).
In West Africa, the livestock species majorly include cattle, sheep, goats, and poultry, contributing to
the region's meat, milk, and egg production. Indigenous breeds like the N'Dama, Sokoto Gudali, and
Lagune cattle are adapted to the region's diverse agro-ecological zones, showing traits such as heat
tolerance, disease resistance, and efficient nutrient utilization (Ayantunde et al., 2015; Zougmoré et
al., 2016). Poultry farming, especially backyard chicken production, is widespread, playing a critical
role in meeting protein requirements and generating income (Alemayehu et al., 2018).
In Western Africa, the livestock value chain is critical for supporting agricultural livelihoods and
contributing to economic growth. The value chain encompasses the different stages involved in the
production, processing, marketing, and consumption of livestock products.
In the production stage, Western Africa exhibits a mix of extensive pastoralism, mixed crop-livestock
systems, and urban-based livestock production. Pastoral communities, such as the Fulani and
Tuareg, practice extensive livestock rearing, mainly focusing on cattle, sheep, goats, and camels.
Mixed crop-livestock systems integrate livestock with crop farming, while urban-based livestock
production includes backyard poultry and small ruminant rearing (Ayantunde et al., 2015; Waters-
Bayer & Bayer 1992). Access to water resources, grazing lands, and improved production practices is
essential for optimizing productivity and addressing challenges related to disease outbreaks and
limited market access (Vanlauwe et al., 2014)
The processing and value addition stage in Western Africa involves adding value to livestock
products through activities such as meat processing, dairy processing, and poultry processing. Value
addition activities enhance product quality, diversify product offerings, and increase market value.
Strengthening processing infrastructure and capacity is crucial to support value addition activities
and meet market demands.
15
The marketing and distribution stage in Western Africa connects producers with consumers.
Livestock products are marketed through various channels, including formal markets, local markets,
and value chain partnerships (Webber & Labaste, 2009). Strengthening market linkages, improving
market infrastructure, and enhancing market information systems contribute to market access, price
stability, and consumer confidence. Partnerships between farmers, processors, and retailers play a
vital role in ensuring efficient distribution and reaching a wider consumer base.
However, livestock production systems in the region face several challenges such as limited access to
water, shrinking grazing lands, conflicts between pastoralists and sedentary farmers, disease
outbreaks, inadequate veterinary services, low adoption of improved animal husbandry practices,
inefficient value chains, limited market access, and post-harvest losses (Ayantunde et al., 2015;
Zougmoré et al., 2016).
Despite these hurdles, there are opportunities to enhance livestock production through targeted
interventions and investments. Implementing sustainable rangeland management practices, such as
rotational grazing and reforestation, can help combat land degradation and improve forage
availability for livestock (Ayantunde et al., 2015). Investing in veterinary infrastructure, capacity
building, improved disease control measures, strengthening market linkages, improving value
addition activities, and enhancing post-harvest handling and storage facilities can contribute to
increased market access, reduced losses, and improved profitability (Ayantunde et al., 2015;
Zougmoré et al., 2016).
In terms of gender dynamics, it is essential to address disparities and biases that limit women's
access to productive resources, services, and decision-making processes in the livestock sector.
While women in West Africa play significant roles in livestock production, they often face challenges
in accessing credit, land ownership, and training opportunities (Perez et al., 2015). Hence, promoting
women's empowerment and ensuring their equal participation in decision-making processes should
be integrated into climate-smart livestock systems (Kristjanson et al., 2014).
While the livestock sector in West Africa faces various challenges, targeted interventions and
investments can unlock its potential. By addressing conflicts, promoting sustainable resource
management practices, improving veterinary services, and strengthening market linkages, the region
can enhance livestock productivity, food security, and livelihoods. Moreover, integrating gender
considerations is essential for creating inclusive and sustainable livestock systems.
While Eastern Africa has experienced a robust growth in the volume of animal products, Western
Africa's progress has been comparatively more gradual. The region's production landscape is shaped
by diverse factors including climate variability, resource constraints, and issues related to the value
chain. However, in the face of these adversities, countries like Nigeria, Burkina Faso, and Mali have
shown a remarkable resilience, demonstrating substantial growth in livestock production and
16
becoming key players in the regional market. Since 2014, Nigeria Number of Livestock increased
1.8% year on year. With 26,924,618.8 Heads in 2019. As of 2020, live cattle in Nigeria, the count
reached approximately 20.95 million heads, following the generally increasing trend observed since
2010. Animal production in Nigeria has not been fully utilized, with the majority of livestock being
raised by farming households. The primary focus is on small ruminants such as goats (76 million),
sheep (43.4 million), and cattle (18.4 million). The northern region of the country is renowned for its
favorable ecological conditions for livestock rearing. Furthermore, besides the substantial number of
small and large ruminants, the poultry population amounts to 180 million (Awopegba et al., 2022).
Burkina Faso has witnessed a consistent annual growth rate of 2.3% in its livestock population since
2014. According to FAOSTAT data, in 2019, the country's total livestock count reached 8,988,212.84
heads. Similarly, Mali experienced a robust year-on-year increase of 4.7% in its livestock numbers
since 2014. Based on FAOSTAT data, the country's livestock count in 2019 stood at 12,448,956.99
heads.
There is no narrative to support the table below.
3.5 Central Africa
17
Figure 6 (Map of Central Africa)
The Central African region, comprising countries like Cameroon, Chad, the Central African Republic,
and the Democratic Republic of Congo, is characterized by a rich tapestry of livestock production
systems. These systems, molded by factors such as the cultural diversity of the region, varying
environmental conditions, and economic parameters, serve as the lifeline for local communities,
underpinning livelihoods and ensuring food security (Bayala et al., 2020; Ba et al., 2022).
Communities such as the Mbororo and Baggara, in Cameroon and in neighbouring areas of Central
African Republic, Chad, and the Democratic Republic of Congo participate extensively in livestock
rearing practices, with an emphasis on cattle production. Their systems lean on large tracts of
grazing lands, seasonal migratory patterns, and age-old herding practices, preserving a symbiotic
relationship with the ecosystem while ensuring the sustenance of their livestock ( Jahnke, 1982;
Kiema et al., 2022).
Concurrently, the region also observes mixed crop-livestock systems, where livestock is integrated
with crop farming to optimize resource use, leading to enhanced agricultural productivity. This
synergistic approach allows for organic matter recycling, provides draft power, and facilitates income
diversification (Bayala et al., 2020; Ba et al., 2022).
18
Further enriching this livestock landscape is the practice of agro-pastoralism, which amalgamates
crop production with the rearing of small ruminants, poultry, and pigs. The system fosters symbiotic
relations between livestock and crop farming activities, resulting in enhanced nutrient cycling,
effective pest control, and diversified livelihoods (Bayala et al., 2020; Jahnke, 1982).
The region houses a variety of indigenous livestock breeds. These include cattle breeds such as
Gudali, Adamawa, and Kuri, which have adapted to the region's unique environmental conditions,
exhibiting traits such as heat tolerance and resistance to local diseases (Bayala et al., 2020; Jahnke,
1982). The Djallonké and Bafia sheep breeds, along with the West African Dwarf and Sahelian goat
breeds, are also prevalent in the region. The region's poultry farming, predominantly backyard
chicken production, plays a critical role in supplementing household income and nutrition (Kiema et
al., 2022).
In Central Africa, the livestock value chain plays a significant role in supporting the region's
agricultural economy. The value chain encompasses the various stages involved in the production,
processing, marketing, and consumption of livestock products. In the production stage, a mix of
extensive pastoralism, mixed crop-livestock systems, and agro-pastoralism is practiced in Central
Africa. Pastoral communities, such as the Mbororo and Baggara, practice extensive livestock rearing,
mainly focusing on cattle. Mixed crop-livestock systems integrate livestock with crop farming, while
agro-pastoralism combines crop production with the rearing of small ruminants, poultry, and pigs
(Bayala et al., 2020; Jahnke, 1982). Access to quality feed, veterinary services, and improved
production practices is essential for enhancing productivity and addressing challenges related to
disease management and limited market linkages.
The processing and value addition stage in Central Africa involves transforming raw livestock
products into processed and marketable goods. Processing activities such as meat processing, dairy
processing, and leather processing contribute to value addition, product diversification, and
increased market value. Enhancing processing infrastructure, technology, and capacity is crucial to
support value addition activities and meet market demands (Yapatake Kossele & Shan, 2018).
The marketing and distribution stage in Central Africa connects producers with consumers. Livestock
products are marketed through various channels, including formal markets, local markets, and value
chain partnerships. Strengthening market linkages, improving market infrastructure, and enhancing
market information systems contribute to market access, price stability, and consumer confidence
(Yapatake Kossele & Shan, 2018; Trienekens, 2011). Furthermore, partnerships between farmers,
processors, and retailers play a vital role in ensuring efficient distribution and reaching a wider
consumer base.
Despite its diversity and potential, the region's livestock production systems grapple with several
challenges. These include limited access to quality animal feed, recurrent disease outbreaks such as
trypanosomiasis, Newcastle disease, and African swine fever, and inadequate veterinary services.
The low adoption of improved production practices and inefficient value chains also affect the
19
overall productivity of the sector (Moyo et al., 2007; Ba et al., 2022). Climate change impacts, such
as increasing temperatures and erratic rainfall patterns, exacerbate these challenges by adding
another layer of vulnerability (Bayala et al., 2020; Moyo et al., 2007).
To overcome these hurdles and leverage the opportunities inherent in the livestock sector, multi-
pronged interventions are necessary. These should aim at enhancing market access, developing
efficient value chains, improving post-harvest handling and storage facilities, and encouraging value
addition activities. Such measures can substantially increase the marketability and profitability of
livestock products (Ba et al., 2022; Kiema et al., 2022). Strengthening veterinary services through
disease surveillance, vaccination programs, and capacity building for livestock health professionals is
also crucial to improve productivity and resilience (Moyo et al., 2007; Kiema et al., 2022).
Overall, deep understanding of Central Africa's diverse livestock production systems, their inherent
challenges, and potential opportunities is pivotal for developing effective interventions and policies.
By strategically addressing the challenges related to feed availability, disease control, market access,
and value chain efficiencies, Central Africa has the potential to enhance livestock productivity,
improve food security, foster rural development, and contribute to socio-economic development in
the region.

Compared to other sub-regions, Central Africa's growth in livestock production and animal product
volume has been slower. The sector's development has been affected by issues such as political
instability, lack of adequate infrastructure, and limited market access (Korecki et al., 2015). Despite
these hurdles, countries like Cameroon, Central Africa Republic, and Chad have made commendable
efforts to boost livestock production and contribute to the regional animal product supply (Awa, et
al., 2003; Korecki et al., 2015). According to FAOSTAT data, since 2014, the number of livestock in
Chad has exhibited a steady annual growth rate of 5.9%, reaching a total of 32.2 million heads in
2020. Similarly, Cameroon has experienced a marginal year-on-year increase of 0.1% in its livestock
population since 2014. As of 2019, the country's livestock count stood at 4,742,024.27 heads. On the
other hand, the Central African Republic has witnessed a notable annual surge of 2.2% in its livestock
numbers since 2014. In 2019, the country's livestock population reached 3,406,461 heads.
There is no narrative to support the table below.
20
4 Volume and Trends of Livestock Products in Sub-Saharan Africa
21
Figure 7 (Cattle population in Sub Saharan Africa as of 2020, by country-in million heads). Source:
STATISTA
4.1 Factors Influencing Volume and Trends

The booming population in Sub-Saharan Africa, coupled with the swift urbanization, has been a
significant driver for the demand for animal products (Maja & Ayano, 2021). Rising urban
populations have triggered shifts in dietary preferences, leading to a higher demand for products
such as meat, milk, and eggs, thereby spurring livestock production (Randolph et al., 2007; Herrero
et al., 2013).
Government policies and institutional frameworks that foster investments, encourage research and
development, and facilitate market access have had a positive influence on livestock production.
Such supportive policies and initiatives have significantly contributed to the growth and
development of the livestock sector, creating a conducive environment for increased production
(FAO, 2019; Van Loon et al., 2020).
22
Despite the positive trends, the sector faces numerous challenges that affect the volume and trends
of animal products in Sub-Saharan Africa. Limited access to resources such as land, water, and feed,
hamper the expansion of livestock production (Van Loon et al., 2020). Additionally, climate change
impacts, such as unpredictable rainfall patterns and increased temperatures, pose challenges to
livestock farming, leading to reduced productivity. Disease outbreaks, inadequate infrastructure, and
weak value chains also form major obstacles in the growth of the livestock sector (Herrero et al.,
2013; FAO, 2019).
The past 20 years have seen an overall growth in the volume and trends of livestock products in Sub-
Saharan Africa, albeit with variations across sub-regions and countries (Otte et al., 2019). Eastern
Africa leads in growth, followed by Western, Southern, and Central Africa. Factors such as
population growth, urbanization, technological advancements, and policy support have largely
contributed to these positive trends (Otte et al., 2019; Awopegba., 2022). However, several
challenges need to be addressed to ensure sustainable and inclusive growth in livestock production
across the region. The insights derived from this literature review could prove valuable for
policymakers, researchers, and stakeholders involved in the development of the livestock sector in
Sub-Saharan Africa.
6.1.3 Water scarcity
Water scarcity is a common constraint for smallholder livestock production systems in SSA. Most
countries in SSA face severe water shortages and the problem will likely increase as human
populations and the demand for livestock products increase (Hoffman & Vogel, 2008). Smallholder
farmers, in dry ecological zones, are particularly vulnerable to the water scarcity challenge, largely
due to the existence of multiple environmental stressors, lack of adaptive capacity, poor governance,
and little or no investments in water resources (Halimani et al, 2021).
Water constraints are prevalent during the dry season and some reported challenges with access to
water include long walking distances to water sources, steep slopes, and poor-quality water
(Mutibvu et al, 2012). The unavailability or insufficient amount of drinking water negatively impacts
livestock productivity. For example, a study by Maloiy et al (2008) observed that dehydration, even
under ambient temperatures of 22 oC, severely reduced feed intake by 58% and digestibility of feed
by 4.6% in cattle, sheep, and goats. Ndlela et al (2019) reported that increasing the length of the
water deprivation period (6, 8, 12, and 24 h) impaired average daily gain, feed intake and feed
conversion efficiency for broilers of 14–25 days of age. Climate change will have a substantial effect
on water availability in the future. The IPCC projections show that the semi-arid and arid regions will
become warmer and drier (Hoegh-Guldberg, 2018). Not only will this affect livestock drinking water
sources, but it will also affect livestock feed production systems and rangeland productivity.
5 Gender Dynamics and Gender Considerations in Climate-Smart Livestock Systems
23
5.1 Eastern Africa

In Eastern Africa, climate change has significant impacts on livestock production, which
disproportionately affect women due to their central role in animal care and management (Kiptot et
al., 2018). Women's burdens escalate during periods of drought and water scarcity, when they must
fetch water for livestock over increased distances, impacting their time and energy availability for
other activities. Furthermore, climate-related diseases and pests predominantly affect women's
livestock, resulting in reduced productivity and income (Kamidi et al., 2016).
5.2 Southern Africa

Research in Southern Africa reveals that women actively mitigate climate variability impacts on
livestock, through practices like livestock breed diversification and fodder conservation (Mutenje et
al., 2019). Their knowledge and skills in animal husbandry enhance resilience and adaptive capacity
amidst climate challenges. Yet, gender inequalities limit their access to resources, information, and
decision-making power in livestock systems (Mugabe et al., 2018; Kristjanson,).
5.3 West Africa

In Nigeria, women's role in poultry production, especially in backyard systems, is significant (Eze et
al., 2017). However, limited access to credit, extension services, and market opportunities hinder
their ability to adapt to climate change and improve their livelihoods. Gender norms and cultural
practices also influence women's involvement in livestock-related activities and decision-making
processes (Adekunle et al., 2019).
5.4 Central Africa
4.1. Literature Review on Gender Considerations in Climate-Smart Livestock Systems

4.1.1. Current Research Landscape
Research on gender considerations in climate-smart livestock systems in Sub-Saharan Africa is

expanding, although it remains limited. Studies primarily focus on women's roles, contributions, and
constraints in livestock production under climate change, as well as gender-responsive strategies for
enhancing resilience and adaptive capacity. The interaction between gender, climate change, and
livestock value chains, emphasizing opportunities for promoting gender equality and women's
empowerment, has also been explored.
4.1.2. Gaps and Limitations in Existing Studies
Despite advancements, current literature lacks in-depth and context-specific studies that consider
the diverse socio-cultural contexts and local realities across Sub-Saharan Africa. Most research
predominantly highlights women's roles and experiences, with less attention given to men's
24
engagement and gender dynamics within livestock systems. There is also limited research examining
the intersectionality of gender with other social dimensions, such as age, ethnicity, and
socioeconomic status, and how these factors contribute to individuals' vulnerabilities and adaptive
capacities.
5. Conclusion
5.1. Findings Overview
The findings of this research confirm the significant role of livestock production systems in the socio-
economic development of Sub-Saharan Africa. They contribute considerably to GDP, offering income
and employment opportunities for rural communities and serving vital cultural and social functions.
However, the analysis underscored the importance of understanding gender roles within these
systems. Conflicts over natural resources and land-use planning emerged as challenges to
sustainable livestock production. Simultaneously, livestock's role in livelihoods and food security
through income diversification and dietary diversity enhancement was affirmed.
A trend analysis revealed significant growth in meat, milk, and egg production over the past two
decades. However, per capita consumption levels have remained low, indicating potential for further
development. Sub-regional and country-specific variations were noted, reflecting diverse socio-
economic, environmental, and cultural landscapes.
Gender dynamics within climate-smart livestock systems were investigated, revealing the differential
impacts of climate change on men and women in livestock-dependent communities. Despite facing
additional burdens and vulnerabilities, women demonstrated resilience and adaptive capacity
through their knowledge and skills. However, gender inequalities continue to persist, necessitating
gender-responsive strategies.
5.2. Implications for Research and Climate Smart Livestock Technologies
The literature review has provided valuable insights into the implications for research and the
development of climate-smart livestock technologies in Sub-Saharan Africa. Addressing the
challenges and harnessing the opportunities identified can contribute to the sustainability,
resilience, and productivity of livestock systems in the region.
One key implication is the need for further research and investment in climate-smart livestock
technologies. Climate change poses significant risks to livestock production, including increased
temperatures, erratic rainfall patterns, and the spread of vector-borne diseases. Research efforts
should focus on developing and promoting technologies that mitigate these climate-related risks
while enhancing productivity and sustainability. This includes exploring improved animal housing
and ventilation systems, water management strategies, disease-resistant livestock breeds, and the
integration of agroforestry and silvopastoral systems.
Gender considerations should be integrated into research and technology development processes.
Gender dynamics play a significant role in shaping livestock systems and determining access to
resources, decision-making processes, and benefits from livestock production. Research should
25
adopt gender-responsive approach to ensure that the specific needs, constraints, and opportunities
of women and men in livestock production are adequately addressed. This includes understanding
gendered division of labor, access to productive resources, and decision-making power, and
developing technologies and interventions that promote gender equality and women's
empowerment.
Participatory research approaches and stakeholder engagement are crucial. Engaging key
stakeholders, including farmers, pastoralists, researchers, policymakers, and extension workers, in
the research process ensures that interventions are relevant, acceptable, and sustainable.
Participatory approaches also foster collaboration, knowledge sharing, and innovation, leading to
context-specific interventions that meet the needs and aspirations of local communities.
Furthermore, collaboration and knowledge sharing among researchers, institutions, and countries
can enhance capacity building and accelerate the adoption of climate-smart livestock technologies.
6 Livestock and Climate Change in Sub-Saharan Africa: Impacts, Vulnerability and Climate
Hotspots
6.1 Impacts of climate change on smallholder livestock production in Sub-Saharan Africa

Smallholder livestock farmers in SSA rely on natural resources and are facing many challenges due to
climate change. Climate change is manifested by an increase in the frequency and intensity of
extreme events such as heavy precipitation, floods, heat waves, droughts, and other extreme
conditions, which have direct and indirect effects on livestock production. Evidence from the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) strongly suggests that the situation will become
worse and that the most vulnerable people will be severely affected (Hoegh-Guldberg, 2018) . This
section highlights current evidence on the impacts of climate change on smallholder livestock
production in SSA. The impacts of climate change on livestock production are organised under the
following subheadings: temperature/ heat stress, drought, water scarcity, floods, feeds and
diseases.
6.1.1 Temperature/heat stress

All animals have a thermal comfort zone, which is a range of ambient environmental temperatures
that are ideal for physiological functions (Du Preez et al, 1990). When temperature increases above
the upper critical temperature range, the animal begins to suffer heat stress (Du Preez et al, 1990).
Animals acclimate to heat by reducing feed intake, increasing water intake, and altering
physiological functions such as reproductive and productive efficiency and a change in respiration
rate (Du Preez et al, 1990). Evidence of the impacts of heat stress on livestock production in SSA is
discussed below.
26
An increase in air temperature, as associated with climate change, will have a direct effect on animal
performance (Renaudeau et al, 2012). These effects include decreased milk production, reduced
animal weight gain, a decrease in reproduction rate, and lower feed conversion efficiencies (Rust &
Rust, 2013). The effects of heat stress on livestock production will likely become an even bigger
problem under the projected future climate conditions. The IPCC predicts that by 2100, the increase
in global average surface temperature may be between 1.8° C and 4.0° C (Hoegh-Guldberg, 2018).
Most of the research on heat stress on livestock has been focused on dairy cattle, which are very
sensitive to heat stress (Du Preez et al., 1990). Nesamvuni et al. (2012) studied the impact of heat
stress on dairy cattle productivity and reproductive performance under projected future climate
conditions. They found that dairy cattle under IPCC A2 emission scenarios will experience a reduction
in milk productivity of about 10 - 25% and also a decline in their reproductive performance. In a
study conducted in West Africa, Rahimi et al (2020) predicted that by 2071 to 2100, around 22% of
the dairy cattle population in the region will experience around 70 days more of severe/danger heat
stress and milk production, under a pastoral management system is expected to decrease by 200–
400 kg/year in the same period.
Global studies have shown that heat stress has negative reproductive performance (breeding
performance, increased still-births, embryo mortality, reduced birthing rates, increase in age at first
calving), reduced milk yield and meat production, alters milk fat composition, and increases animal
mortality (Rojas-Downing et al, 2017). In poultry, temperatures above the thermal comfort zone of
18-24°C affect growth rate, body weight, meat quality, egg quality, egg production, semen quality
and fertility (Nawab, 2018) More studies are needed on the effects of heat stress on the nutritional
and metabolic processes of local breeds so that management practices can be adapted to increase
animal performance.
6.1.2 Drought
Droughts are another major challenge faced by livestock farmers in SSA due to climate change. The
IPCC defines drought as “a period of abnormally dry weather long enough to cause serious
hydrological imbalances” (Hoegh-Guldberg, 2018). The impact of drought on livestock production
includes feed shortages, water shortages, and decreased productivity, leading to increased livestock
mortality (Mapiye, 2018).
The African continent has experienced extreme drought events, most notably in the years 1972–
1973, 1982, 1983–1984, and 1991–1992 respectively, and in the recent past in 2001–2003 in
southern Africa as well as in 2015/2016 and 2010-2011 in East Africa (Ndlovu & Mjimba, 2021).
Countries in the Eastern horn of Africa, which includes Kenya, Somalia and Ethiopia, are now in the
third year of severe drought which is described as the worst 40 years (WFP, 2023). The general
drought-related impacts such as livestock, crop, and income losses are well known. For example, the
1991-1992 drought, which was experienced in most southern African countries, resulted in massive
livestock losses, for example, Zimbabwe lost more than 1 million cattle (Masih et al, 2014).
27
Furthermore, during the 2015–2016 drought, the price of cattle in high rainfall areas of Zimbabwe
ranged from $350–$450, but communities in drought-affected districts were selling cattle for as little
as $20 - $60 to buy food (Oxfam, 2022). In the eastern horn of Africa over 9.5 million livestock have
died since the current drought started (4 million in Ethiopia, 3 million in Somalia, and 2.5 million in
Kenya), eroding the primary source of livelihood, income, and nutrition for pastoralist communities
(WFP, 2023).
6.1.4 Floods
Flooding is the most destructive type of weather extremes that affects humans and their livelihoods
in SSA. Many smallholder farmers are affected by floods due to their high dependence on rain-fed
agriculture and their limited capacity to respond to climate-induced disasters, resulting in huge
economic impacts (Oxfam, 2022). Floods have both direct and indirect effects on livestock
production. They result in a direct loss of livestock through drowning and indirectly by destroying
infrastructure such as barns, dip tanks paddocks and disrupting routine management. For example,
during the 2009/2010 agricultural season, floods and cyclones damaged substantial areas of
agricultural production in southern and central Mozambique, resulting in the loss of livestock,
infrastructure, and crops needed for livestock production (Musemwa et al, 2012). In Kenya, the
2019-2020 floods destroyed 1 606 acres of fodder and more than 26 000 livestock were killed, while
in Nigeria, 5 036 972 livestock were killed during the 2012 floods (Reed et al., 2022). Other indirect
effects of flooding include an increase in livestock diseases, for example, Rift Valley Fever (Bett et al,
2019).
6.1.5 Feeds
Livestock feed is mostly composed of forages, grain, and/ or oilseed crops. However, the production
of these feedstuffs is directly affected by temperature, rainfall, and atmospheric CO 2 concentration,
which are all associated with climate change (Rojas-Downing et al, 2017). Some of the impacts of
climate change on the quality and quantity of feeds are discussed below.
Smallholder farmers in SSA are highly dependent on rain-fed agriculture. Reduced rainfall will result
in a decline in rangelands, crops, and forage productivity, and increase the price of livestock
feedstuffs (Lottering et al, 2021). In contrast, some parts of Africa are experiencing increasing
rainfall, which supports plant growth (Dunning et al, 2018; Lottering et al, 2021). However,
prolonged wet conditions may lead to flooding, waterlogging, soil erosion, and excessive leaching,
which may affect the form and structure of roots, and change leaf growth rate, which can lead to
crop failure and decrease total yield (Mutekwa, 2009).
The length of the growing season determines the duration and periods of available forages
(Thornton et al, 2009). Most smallholder farmers depend on forage from natural pastures, which is
the cheapest and easily available feed resource for ruminants. However, forage from natural
28
pastures is not always available due to seasonal fluctuations in both quality and quantity (Negawo et
al, 2017). Projections for 2050 indicate that the length of the growing season will decrease in much
of SSA and in some cases, this decrease will be severe (Hoffman & Vogel, 2008). This will affect the
growth, quantity and availability of forages and other feedstuffs.
Increased temperatures influence the availability, nutritional composition, and overall quality of
crops, forages, and rangelands (Thornton et al, 2009). For example, an increase in temperature not
only increases stress in plants but also increases the lignification of their tissues, which affects forage
quality, digestibility, and degradation rates (Hoffmann & Vogel, 2008). As CO 2 levels change, optimal
growth conditions for different species also change. For example, as CO 2 concentration rises, forage
quality will improve more in C3 plants than in C4 plants (Thornton et al, 2009). C3 plants have
greater crude protein content and digestibility than C4 plants (Thornton et al, 2009). The effects of
CO2 will be positive by inducing partial closure of stomata, reducing transpiration, and improving
some plants’ water-use efficiency (Rojas-Downing et al, 2017).
6.1.6 Diseases
Changes in rainfall patterns, frequent floods and droughts, and intense heat waves have substantial
effects on transmission patterns of infectious livestock diseases, depending on the geographical
region, land use type, disease characteristics, and animal susceptibility (Thornton et al, 2009).
Climate change influences livestock health through several factors, including the changes in
geographical ranges of vectors, hosts, and pathogens (Bett et al, 2017). Pastoralists, game, and other
animals are likely to respond to climate change by moving more frequently and widely, therefore,
aiding the spread of livestock diseases.
A survey conducted by CIAT on climate and livestock diseases in 54 countries in Africa showed that
vector-borne diseases, epidemics, and zoonotic diseases are especially sensitive to climate (Figure 1).
29
Figure 8. Disease trends in Africa for different disease categories (Source CIAT, 2017)
East Coast Fever (ECF) is one of the most important climate-sensitive diseases for which there is rich
data, based mainly on models, to describe the impacts of climate change (CIAT, 2017). The disease
affects cattle and it causes high mortality, morbidity, and other production losses (CIAT, 2017). ECF
is transmitted by Rhipicephalus appendiculatus (brown ear tick), widely distributed throughout
eastern, central, and southern Africa, but is absent from the Horn of Africa (CIAT, 2017). The tick is
mainly found in areas that have high precipitation and moderate temperatures. Under climate
change, the vector will decline in the western arid regions of Africa due to an increase in
temperature. The vector, hence ECF, will increase in the northern and eastern Cape provinces of
South Africa, Botswana, Zambia, and eastern DRC in the future due to enhanced rainfall and a
reduction in temperature (CIAT, 2017).
The potential impacts of climate change on smallholder livestock production are summarized in
Figure 2.
30
Figure 9. Impacts of climate change on livestock production (Source: Rojas-Downing et al, 2017)
6.2 Vulnerability of smallholder livestock systems to climate risks

In most SSA countries, smallholder farmers are highly dependent on rainfed agriculture and the
productivity of this sector is vulnerable to climate change. Climate change-induced shocks such as
drought, floods, and other extreme events negatively affect the livelihood of smallholder farmers
(OXFAM, 2022). Therefore, the concept of ‘climate change vulnerability’ helps us to better
comprehend the cause/effect relationships behind climate change and its impact on smallholder
livestock systems.
Vulnerability has become a useful concept in climate change literature due to its role in providing
information for the understanding, measurement, and evaluation of the conditions of communities
and people under climate-induced disasters (GIZ & EURAC, 2017). Vulnerability is a function of
exposure to climate shocks, the sensitivity of a system, and its adaptive capacity (Figure 3).
31
Figure 10. Determinants of climate change vulnerability (Adapted from GIZ & EURAC 2017)
Exposure is directly linked to current and future climate variability (Figure 3). Smallholder farmers in
SSA are exposed to extreme climatic events such as temperature increases, rainfall variability,
drought, cyclones, floods, water scarcity, and landslides. High temperatures, rainfall variability, and
drought are the major climate shocks in many countries (Tofu et al, 2022). Evidence from across
Africa suggests that the length of the growing season has shortened, and there is an increase in the
incidence of droughts and dry spells (Fisher et al, 2015).
Sensitivity is shaped by the natural and/or physical environment as well as the socio-economic
environment (Figure 3). Factors that cause smallholder agricultural communities in many SSA
countries to be particularly vulnerable to climate change include i) a high reliance on production
systems that are sensitive to climate change; ii) low and declining soil productivity; iii) land
degradation and a declining natural resource base; iv) the weakening of local institutions and
conventional social safety-net systems; v) an inadequate and dwindling capital resource base; vi) a
lack of timely access to inputs and output markets; and vii) a high prevalence of HIV/AIDS, malaria,
and other diseases (Rurindi et al, 2014).
Adaptive capacity refers to the capacity to adapt or to cope with climate change (GIZ & EURAC
2017). Because of high exposure and sensitivity to climate change, smallholder farmers are
vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change. For example, a study conducted in the Frances
Baard District Municipality of South Africa showed that up to 91% of smallholder livestock farmers
have a low adaptive capacity to climate change (Matlou & Bahta, 2019). These farmers often lack
access to information, technologies, and financial mechanisms that can help them cope with and
adapt to climate change.
6.3 Climate hotspots in Sub-Saharan Africa

There are several definitions of climate hotspots, but all have similar elements. For example,
Sherbinin (2014) refers to climate change hotspots as “regions that are particularly vulnerable to
32
current or future climate impacts, and where human security may be at risk.” De Souza et al. (2015)
define “hotspots” as areas where strong physical and ecological effects of climate change come
together with large numbers of vulnerable, poor, or marginalised people and communities.
Cochrane et al (2016) define climate change hotspots as regions where a strong climate change
signal is combined with a large concentration of vulnerable, poor, or marginalised people. The above
definitions of climate hotspots include an interplay of climate change exposure and societal
vulnerabilities. Most smallholder pastoral and agro-pastoral livestock systems in sub-Saharan Africa
are found in such climate hotspots, where the people are not only highly exposed to climate risk, but
also rely heavily on the environment to support their livelihoods.
6.3.1 Southern Africa climate hotspots

The Southern Africa sub-region is recognised as a climate hotspot due to climate change risks,
vulnerabilities, poor adaptive capacity, under-development, and marginalisation of the region
(Diffenbaugh & Giorgi; 2012; Nhamo et al, 2018). According to the IPCC, the region has been
experiencing a warming trend over the past few decades and is projected to become warmer and
drier as the level of global warming increases, making it a climate change hotspot (Hoegh-Guldberg,
2018 see also Engelbrecht & Monteiro, 2021). Climate modelling studies predict that by 2050, the
region’s average annual temperature is expected to increase by between 1.5°C and 3.0°C (Davis &
Vincent, 2017). This will negatively impact the livestock production due to heat stress and reduced
pasture productivity (Scholes & Engelbrecht, 2021).
Southern Africa has also been experiencing other extreme climatic events such as droughts, floods,
heatwaves, and tropical cyclones that are negatively impacting livelihoods, economies, and the
environment, in turn exacerbating existing vulnerabilities in the region (WFP, 2016). The frequency
and intensity of these extreme climatic events are predicted to increase as the level of global
warming increases (Engelbrecht & Monteiro, 2021). The frequency and severity of some climate
change-related natural disasters in Southern Africa are shown in Figure 4.
33
Figure 11. Frequency and severity of some climate change-related natural disasters in Southern
Africa (Source: Davis & Vincent, 2017)
Large areas of Southern Africa are susceptible to dry conditions and experience frequent and severe
droughts. The region experienced severe droughts (e.g., 1982-1983, 1991-1992, 1997-1998, and
2014-2015), which have been linked to the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phenomenon (WFP,
2016). The severe impacts of drought on livestock production include feed shortages, water
shortages, and decreased productivity, leading to increased livestock mortality (Nhamo et al, 2017;
Mare et al, 2018; Archer et al, 2021). Droughts are often accompanied by high temperatures and an
increase in high fire danger days.
Reduced rainfall is exacerbating regional vulnerabilities in areas which are already suffering from
water scarcity. Greater parts of the sub-region receive annual rainfall of less than 350mm, placing
them into the water-scarce category (Nhemachena et al, 2020). The southwestern part of the region
is more arid than other parts of the region, with parts of Botswana, Namibia, and South Africa having
a low rainfall index and a variability that exceeds that of the Sahel (USAID, 2015). Projections have
shown that the arid and semi-arid areas of Southern Africa are likely to get drier due to climate
change (USAID, 2015), increasing water scarcity in the region. The major river basins which are
critically important sources of water and livelihoods for people are also at risk. According to a study
by Abiodun et al (2019), the Zambezi, the Limpopo, and the Okavango River Basins are all identified
as major climate change hotspots in Southern Africa. These regions are expected to face increased
water scarcity and reduced agricultural productivity, posing significant challenges to food security
and socio-economic development.
Flooding is the most frequent of the two extreme events, occurring an average of once every two
years, with Malawi, Mozambique, Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Madagascar being the most
34
affected (Nhemachena et al, 2020). Flooding affects livestock due to direct mortality when animals
are washed away or secondary effects such as infectious disease and tickborne disease outbreaks
(Mutasa, 2022). For example, an outbreak of Rift Valley Fever has been reported in South Africa
following flooding in the Orange River region and Western Cape province (Bett et al, 2019).
Furthermore, floods can damage infrastructure such as fences and facilities and disrupt general
animal husbandry.
All countries in the Southern African sub-region have great exposure to climate change. However,
socioeconomically stronger countries such as South Africa, Namibia, Botswana and Mauritius, have a
very high adaptive capacity, mainly because of wealth, infrastructure availability and stable
governments, compared with their counterparts with weaker socioeconomic conditions (Davis &
Vincent, 2017).
6.3.2 West and Central Africa climate hotspots

It is not possible to generalise the impacts of climate change in the West Africa region because its
unique climate change and variability patterns vary not only across the region but also within
countries (Emetere, 2018). The region is mostly tropical, but the northern portion of West Africa, the
Sahel, is largely arid, with annual precipitation of less than 500 mm (Emetere, 2018). The Sahel is
particularly vulnerable to climate change and it has been described as a climate hotspot (Muller et
al, 2014, Oxfam, 2022). The region is already dry and warm, and estimates show the temperatures in
the Sahel are increasing 1.5 times faster than in the rest of the world (Diedhiou et al, 2018). Other
climate hotspots are the large river catchments of Congo and Niger (Muller et al, 2014).
Drought remains a challenge to the socioeconomic activities of the West Africa region, where
farmers and individual smallholder farmers depend mostly on rainfall for their activities (Ajayi & Ilori,
2020). Recurrent droughts are common features in the Sahel region, while countries that are outside
the Sahel have also been witnessing declining rainfall (Ajayi & Ilori, 2020).
According to the IPCC, West Africa will get wetter in the east but drier in the west, with significant
ramifications for agricultural productivity, growth and food systems in the region (Hoegh-Guldberg,
2018). In addition to drought, significant flooding was reported during the 2020/2021 rainy season,
affecting 1.4 million people in 15 countries of West and Central Africa (OCHA, 2022). The heavy rains
and floods continued to take a significant toll on human life, property, land, and livestock, killing 305
people, injuring 2,563, and displacing about 378,000 in 12 countries (OCHA, 2022).
West and Central African countries are vulnerable to climate change because of their low adaptive
capacity to climate shocks. For example, six of the world’s ten most vulnerable countries are in
Central and West Africa, namely Chad, Central African Republic, Guinea Bissau, Democratic Republic
of Congo, Niger, and Liberia (COP27, 2022). Vulnerability to the effects of climate change in
countries in West Africa relates to high dependence on rain-fed agriculture, environmental
35
degradation, poverty, food insecurity, rapid population growth, gender inequality, political
instability, and violent conflicts in the region (Brown & Crawford, 2009).
6.3.3 Eastern Africa climate hotspots

The greatest climate-related natural disasters in the Eastern Africa region include droughts, floods,
and landslides (UNESCO, 2022). Large areas of the region have been impacted by drought, with
negative effects on livestock production. Parts of Ethiopia, Kenya and Sudan are experiencing the
worst drought in more than 40 years (OCHA, 2022). At least 36.1 million people have been affected
by the drought, which began in October 2020, including 24.1 million in Ethiopia, 7.8 million in
Somalia, and 4.2 million in Kenya, while 8.9 million livestock have died due to drought (OCHA, 2022).
In addition to drought, the Eastern Africa region has also been experiencing severe flooding, which
have caused huge economic losses (UNESCO, 2022). For example, in 2021, South Sudan experienced
what has been described as the worst floods in 60 years. Other areas prone to floods include the
coastal regions of Somalia, Kenya, and Ethiopia, low-lying lands along Lake Victoria, and the low-
altitude areas of Sudan. In addition to drought and floods, landslides are frequent in Uganda and
Kenya. Tropical cyclones are not common in the region; however, northeastern Somalia occasionally
experiences tropical cyclones.
South Sudan is ranked as the most vulnerable country to climate change (Busby et al., 2013), more
so in arid areas which are more prone to natural disasters, especially in the Upper Nile and the
densely populated central equatorial region (UNESCO, 2022). Other areas prone to climate-related
natural disasters in East Africa include i) the densely populated central and eastern provinces of
Uganda; ii) coastal areas of Mombasa and Tana River Counties and the densely populated central
regions of Nairobi and Nyeri counties in Kenya; iii) the low adaptive capacity area of eastern Rwanda
and Al Jazirah, Kassala, North Kordofan, South Darfur and White Nile regions in Sudan; iv) Anseba,
Debub and Semienawi Keih Bahri provinces of Eritrea; v) the Central Equatorial and Upper Nile of
South Sudan; vi) and the states of Oromia and Somali in Ethiopia (UNESCO, 2022).
6.4 Contribution of Livestock to Climate Change

6.4.1 GHG Emissions from livestock production systems in Sub-Saharan Africa
Livestock is one of the major contributors to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Globally, livestock
(mainly from ruminants) emissions are estimated to be 14.5% of total anthropogenic emissions,
mostly through methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) (Gerber et al, 2013). The livestock-
production-related GHG emissions are mainly from the enteric fermentation of feed and animal
waste, including manure management. Although Africa produces the least livestock GHG emissions
compared to other continents, they contribute a large share of global GHG emissions due to their
low productivity and high emission intensity (Gerber et al, 2013). In Africa, methane emissions are
expected to increase due to increases in livestock populations (Herrero et al, 2008). However, Arndt
et al (2022) posit that full adoption of methane mitigation strategies can significantly reduce
36
methane emissions and meet the 1.5 ºC target by 2030, not 2050. Data analysed from FAOSTAT
(2020) on GHG emissions directly related to livestock production (gigagrams of CO 2 equivalent) from
2010 to 2020 in SSA are presented in Figure 5.
Southern Africa contributes <1% of global livestock emissions. The livestock CH4 emissions from
enteric fermentation are the second highest agricultural emissions after savanna fires, contributing
between 29% & 34% of the sectoral emissions. Enteric CH4 and manure management increased by
21% & 58%, respectively between 2000 & 2020 (FAOSTAT, 2020). Southern Africa has the lowest
livestock-related CH4 intensity across all the SSA region (Figure 5). There are several reasons why
Southern Africa seems to have a lower methane footprint compared to other Sub-Saharan African
sub-regions. Scholtz et al (2023) attribute this to improved livestock production efficiency, breed
selection programmes, and effective methane mitigating technologies. A report by CCARDESA (2021)
points out that the decline in livestock emissions in the Southern African regions is mainly due to a
decrease in cattle populations across the region following the El Niño related droughts since
2015/16, where livestock keepers have been responding by increasing their stocks of goats
(diversification of livestock species), which are more resilient in drought conditions. Other sources
indicate that the higher enteric methane emissions in Eastern, Western, and Central Africa
compared to Southern Africa are a result of the large share of extensive ruminant production in
these regions (Otte, 2019).
300 285
254
250 231 229
217
Animal product (CO2 eq/kg)
213
200 188
156
150
100
50
0
East Africa Central Africa Southern Africa West Africa
Subsaharan African region
2010 2020
Figure 12. Livestock production-related greenhouse gas emission intensities (gigagrams CO 2 eq/kg
protein) in sub-Saharan Africa (Source: FAOSTAT, 2020)
West Africa contributes 4% of global livestock emissions. Livestock enteric fermentation is the main
source of agricultural emissions, contributing between 68% and 74% of sectoral emissions, followed
37
by rice cultivation. Both enteric CH 4 and manure management increased by 46% between 2000 and
2020 (FAOSTAT, 2020). West Africa has the highest CH4 emission intensity. This is mainly because
livestock farmers in West Africa are mostly nomadic herders and agro-pastoralists (Seyoum, 1988)
using local breeds with low-quality feeds, causing greater CH 4 intensity.
Eastern Africa has an average CH4 emission intensity of 254 CO2 eq/kg). Emissions from enteric
fermentation increased by 98.7% between 2000 and 2020, while emissions from manure
management increased by 98.6% during the same period. This region is characterised by mainly
smallholder farmers, who experience various challenges, including problems with overgrazing, a lack
of infrastructure (very few milk collection locations and product manufacturers), little access to
credit, and difficulty transferring technical knowledge and skills to farmers (Balehegn et al, 2021).
Central Africa contributes 2.4% of global livestock emissions. Agricultural emissions are mainly from
livestock enteric fermentation, contributing between 45% and 64 % of sectoral emissions, and
closely followed by emissions from savanna fires. Enteric CH4 and manure management increased by
56% and 59%, respectively, between 2000 and 2020 (FAOSTAT, 2020).
Table 1 presents enteric methane emission factors for different species and subcategories in four
African countries. South Africa’s enteric fermentation CH 4 emission factors are higher than emission
factors for other African countries and largely resemble the factors for Europe and North America
(Tongwane & Moeletsi, 2020), because of higher liveweights than in other African studies (Goopy et
al, 2018).
Table 1. Enteric fermentation CH4 emission factors (kg CH4/head.year) for different cattle
subcategories in different locations of Sub-Saharan Africa
Species Subcategories South Africa Kenya Senegale Ethiopiaf Developin

a,b c,d
g
countries
IPCC
estimates
g
Beef cattle Mature cow 96.55 28.3 30.7 64.95 31

Heifer 65.36 23.0 7.7 45.54
Young bulls 82.36 30. 8.3 57.15
Mature bulls 87.51 53.9 29.0 67.96
Young castrates 76.14 14.4 18.33
Mature Castrates 87.51 29.6 62.74
Calves 33.28 15.7 4.7 6.0 46
Dairy cows Mature cow 94.32 77.59
38
Heifer 55.90 39.86

Young bulls 73.29 42.08
Mature bulls 91.01 49.09
Calves 39.48 4.49
Sheep Breeding rams 10.5 5.0 6.79 5.0
Breeding ewes 5.79 4.7 6.95
Young rams 8.25 9.45
Young ewes 4.59 7.87
Weaners 4.12 4.4 8.22
Lambs 2.79 4.4 7.63
Goats Breeding bucks 10.5 4.7 6.56 4.0
Breeding does 8.48 3.6 7.06
Young bucks 7.65
Young does 5.94
Weaners 5.02 3.1 9.58
Kids 3.69 3.0 3.41
a,
Tongwane & Moeletsi, 2020; Du Toit et al., 2017; Goopy et al., 2018; Goopy et al., 2021; e Ndao
b, c d
et al., 2020; fWilkes et al., 2020; gDong et al., 2006
6.4.2 Projections of livestock GHG-related emissions
The total methane emissions and emission intensities from ruminant livestock are presented in
Figures 6A and 6B, respectively. The graphs show that the largest emissions come from Eastern
Africa, the region with the largest numbers of animals, and growth is projected to increase, largely
from pastoral and smallholder mixed systems (Herrero, 2014). These systems will contribute
significantly to the production of milk and meat in the future.
While methane emissions are projected to increase by 2050 (Figure 6A), the GHG intensities of
livestock production are expected to diminish significantly over the same period (Figure 6B). The
results clearly show that the GHG efficiencies of livestock production in SSA could be doubled and in
some parts tripled, if sustainability criteria and technological change were driven by economic
growth (Herrero, 2014).
39
Figure 13. A) Total Methane emissions from enteric fermentation and manure management; (Million
tonnes of CO2Eq. (Source. Herrero et al. (2014)).
40
Literature Review on Climate-Smart Technologies for Livestock Systems in Sub-Saharan Africa
B.
Figure 14. B) Greenhouse gas efficiencies per unit of protein produced for all livestock products and
by region and scenario to 2050 (Million tonnes of CO 2Eq. (Source. Herrero et al. (2014)).
6.5 Gender dynamics and gender considerations in climate-smart livestock

systems
It is well known that women smallholder farmers are more vulnerable to climate change than men
as they tend to be more dependent on agriculture and natural resources and have less diversified
livelihoods (FAO, 2023). Women are already affected by several societal issues that make them more
vulnerable to climate shocks. FAO (2020) recognise that the following key issues have an impact on
women:
i) denial of land rights and land tenure security,
ii) biased government attitude towards women,
iii) lack of access to information and new knowledge,
iv) lack of credibility and access to market and financial services,
v) very limited share of political power and presence in lobbies, and
vi) lack of opportunity for their voice to be heard.
Climate change will likely intensify these inequalities and increase the vulnerability of women.
Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) programmes that are gender-sensitive are examples of effective
strategies that help smallholder farmers build resilience since they improve access and agency to
information, resources, markets, improve agricultural yields and household incomes, while
enhancing national food security, securing health, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions (FAO,
2021).
41
Case study on gender- 7 Climate-Smart Livestock Technologies

responsive climate-smart
agriculture The climate-smart livestock approach is a comprehensive
A pilot project under FAO’s approach that works towards sustainable livestock production
Mitigation of Climate systems that fully support as much as possible: livestock
Change in Agriculture productivity and sustainable incomes, building resilience and
(MICCA) was initiated in adaptive capacity and mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
Kenya in 2011. The project while at the same time reducing the environmental footprint of
focused on small-scale livestock production systems (Dejene, Terefe, Belay, Amha, &
female and male dairy Demissie, 2022; Palombi & Sessa, 2013). Climate-smart livestock
farmers, to integrate CSA approach seeks to develop technical, policy and investment
into the farming system and conditions to achieve sustainable livestock production under a
improve farm and milk changing climate (Giro & Kumar, 2022). The approach integrates
productivity, income, and the three pillars of sustainable development by jointly addressing
livelihoods. The women food security and climate challenges. Climate-smart livestock
received training in CSA creates livestock systems that are resilient to climate change and
practices, after which they offer efficient emission mitigation potential without compromising
collectively decided to livestock productivity, food security and livelihoods (FAO, 2021).
establish a tree nursery. The main principle of climate-smart livestock is efficient use of
Sales of indigenous tree natural resources and protecting livestock production systems
seedlings, tea cuttings for from adverse environmental impacts. The approach takes into
planting material, consideration production systems and value chains and how they
ornamental trees, and contribute to the climate solutions.
garden flowers gave them a
financial stepping-stone for A climate-smart livestock approach looks at strategies, innovations
investing in dairy and technologies to prevent climate change (‘mitigation’), as well
production. This as adjust to climate change as it is already taking place
intervention was proven to (‘adaptation’) (Thornton et al., 2019). The Intergovernmental
be successful as they were Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) defines climate change mitigation
able to improve production, as the anthropogenic intervention to reduce the sources or
feed storage, and dairy enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases (Ipcc, 2014). Climate
cattle management. This change adaptation as defined by IPCC refers to the adjustment in
also allowed them to access natural or human systems in response to actual or expected
credit, which enabled them climatic stimuli or their effects which moderates harm or exploits
to make further investments beneficial opportunities. According to P. J. Gerber, Henderson,
in their agricultural and Makkar (2013), some of the ways to reduce emissions from
enterprises. The women livestock production and increase resilience to climate change will
reported that they could pay include; increasing livestock productivity and enhancing natural
their children’s school fees resource use efficiency, increasing carbon sequestration, better
without difficulties. They integration in the circular bio-economy and adoption of specific
could also make regular adaptation measures. Therefore climate-smart livestock
contributions to the National technologies are formulated around the ideas of increased
Health Insurance Fund. The
42programme also revealed
that the participants gained
improved nutrition and
adopted sustainable food
practices such as
composting and building
livestock productivity, enhancing natural resource use efficiency, increasing carbon sequestration,
better integration in the circular bio-economy and adoption of specific adaptation measures (Giro &
Kumar, 2022). The technologies are discussed below with examples from Sub-Saharan Africa.
7.1 1.1 Technologies to improve livestock productivity

Livestock productivity is measured as the ratio of outputs to inputs in a livestock production system
(FAO, 2021). Improving livestock productivity per animal or group of animals will lead to both
improved food security and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Production efficiency will lead to less
emission per unit of livestock product. Productivity gains can arise from an increased number of
animals born and raised per breeding animal per year, increased growth rate and market weights of
animals intended for slaughter, or increased amount of livestock products per animal per year (Food
& Nations, 2018). Besides increasing outputs, livestock farmers can decrease the inputs and maintain
productivity levels. Improving livestock productivity is an important climate-smart livestock strategy
that can reduce emissions per unit of livestock product by 20 to 30% (Opio et al., 2013). Climate-
smart livestock technologies that can contribute to improved productivity include improving animal
nutrition, genetic selection and breeding, improving fertility parameters, improved animal health
care and improved lifetime performance (FAO, 2021). Increasing livestock productivity enhances
adaptive capacity and contributes to climate change mitigation as well as improving rural livelihoods
and food security (Brandt, 2018).
71.1.1 Animal nutrition

Animal nutrition plays a critical role in improving livestock productivity. Proper nutrition and
nutrition management both in terms of quantity and quality are important for production, fertility,
disease prevention and lifetime productive performance. Underfeeding or imbalanced feeding leads
to an increase in absolute emissions and higher emission intensities. Some of the nutrition related
climate-smart livestock technologies that have been tried or are under development in Sub-Saharan
Africa include: formulating balanced feed rations with higher quality feed ingredients; fodder
cultivation and storage; integration of forage legumes into arable crops; improving feed conversion
rates and forage digestibility; precision feeding; better grassland management; supplementation
with concentrate feeds, feeding agri-food industry by-products; using feed additives and fodder tree
cultivation.
Formulating balanced feed rations

Feeding balanced feed rations can result in increased productivity and reduced cost of feeding.
Reduced feeding cost can contribute to improved incomes and while improved productivity
contributes to reduced emissions per unit of product. Feeding according to animal’s requirements
for maintenance, reproduction and growth can significantly increase animal production efficiency
and reduce greenhouse gas emission intensity. Definite predefined proportions of feed to meet
maintenance and production requirements of animals reduce feed waste and guarantees improved
productivity. Emissions per feed intake are reduced. By feeding protein close to the animal’s
requirement, ammonia and nitrous oxide emissions from manure can also be reduced. In Tanzania,
43
smallholder dairy farmers have been trained on improved dairy feeding using computer based
approaches (Notenbaert, Pfeifer, Silvestri, & Herrero, 2017). Increased milk yields of 15-30% have
been realised.
Fodder cultivation and storage

Extensive cultivation and storage of high biomass forages will lead to improved availability of animal
feed and increased animal productivity (Tulu, Gadissa, Hundessa, & Kebede, 2023). Feed will
continuously be available to sustain livestock production. Cultivation and storage of high biomass
fodder alleviates livestock feed shortages, increases nitrogen use efficiency and minimises
greenhouse gas emissions (Conant & Paustian, 2002; Peters et al., 2012). Fodder cultivation and
storage improves fodder and feed supply and quality which most likely increases productivity and
reduces greenhouse gas emission intensity but not absolute emissions (Rao et al., 2014). Fodder
cultivation and storage has been promoted in some Sub-Saharan African countries through practices
such as cultivation of nutritious forage grasses and legumes and fodder conservation practices such
as silage making and hay making (Otte, Pica-Ciamarra, & Morzaria, 2019). In Kajiado county, Kenya,
adaptation pioneers are using irrigation to grow animal feed in the form of high yielding perennial
fodder varieties and store it for their animals rather than relying only on natural pastures (Ericksen &
Crane, 2018b). The practice has been extensively promoted through development projects. In
Tanzania, as part of the research for development project MilkIT, smallholder dairy farmers were
trained on improved feeding practices which included silage and hay making (Shikuku et al., 2017).
Milk yields significantly increased from 6.6 to 13.6 litres of milk per cow per day. Through the
FAO/INERA collaborative project, women farmers in Western Burkina Faso were trained on silage
production using locally available herbage such as grasses and cereals (Bayala, Kalinganire,
Tchoundjeu, Sinclair, & Garrity, 2011). Feeding dairy cows on the silage supplements resulted in a
tenfold increase in milk production. Farmers quickly adopted the silage production technology not
only to successfully feed livestock during the dry season but also as an income generating
opportunity through the sale of silage. In Kenya and Rwanda, selected drought tolerant and low soil
fertility adapted Brachiaria grasses are being integrated into mixed smallholder crop-livestock
systems (S van Dijk, Tennigkeit, & Wilkes, 2015). This has resulted in improved forage availability.
Brachiaria based rations are fed to dairy cows and beef cattle. Milk and meat production improved
significantly and also environment benefits under communal feedlots conditions using cut-and carry
forage systems were realised. The growing of Napier grass and maize for silage production in the
smallholder dairy systems of Kenya resulted in improved milk yields and reduced emissions (Ericksen
& Crane, 2018b). Milk yields and greenhouse gas emissions were calculated for baseline feed
scenarios which were based on low quality grasses and compared to scenarios after introducing
Napier and maize silage. In Ethiopia, perennial grass species like Bracharia grass, Napier grass, Desho
grass, Buffel grass and Rhodes grass together with annual legume species like Alfalfa, Lablab,
Cowpea and Desmodium species are being promoted as climate-smart forage and fodder production
practices (Ericksen & Crane, 2018b). In West Africa, the fodder bank technology has been developed
and introduced to about 27,000 smallholder farmers covering an area of about 19,000 ha (Amole &
Ayantunde, 2019). The main species that were promoted were Vigna unguculata (cowpea), Dolichos
lablab, Macroptilum atropurpureum (Siratro), Panicum maximum, Cenchrus ciliaris, Chloris gayana,
44
Cajanus cajan, Leucaena leucocephala, Stylosanthes and Brachiaria riziziensis. Most of the adoption
was concentrated in the sub-humid zone. Significant improvement in livestock productivity was
realised after the introduction of the fodder bank technology. In Burkina Faso, an extensive
cultivation of the high biomass grass, Brachiaria ruziziensis, was introduced to farmers in Burkina
Faso under a project to promote the use of this grass as livestock feed (Amole & Ayantunde, 2016).
Intercropping with forage legumes

Intercropping forage legumes with cereals offers a potential for increasing forage and consequently
livestock production in Sub-Saharan Africa. This intercropping has been shown to improve both the
quantity and quality of fodder and crop residues leading to better system efficiency and reduced
emissions. Legumes have a potentially significant role in enhancing carbon sequestration. The role of
legumes in supplying nitrogen through fixation is beneficial in terms of the overall greenhouse gas
balance (Hassen, Talore, Tesfamariam, Friend, & Mpanza, 2017). Legumes are likely to have a role to
play in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from ruminant systems. An approach to reducing
methane emissions of current interest and supported by some initial evidence is the use of tannin
containing forages and breeding of forage species with enhanced tannin content. Tannins can act as
anti-methanogenic compounds with potential to reduce absolute emissions (Tulu et al., 2023).
Legumes will contribute to increased animal productivity through improved protein supply and
reduced emissions. In the Eastern Cape of South Africa, farmers have been trained on grass-legume
intercropping and integration of forage legumes into arable crops (Abegunde, Sibanda, & Obi, 2019).
The technology has been extensively adopted with farmers realising improvements in animal live
weight gains.
Improving feed quality

Improving feed quality improves feed conversion ratios through technologies that improve
digestibility of feeds which greatly reduces the amount of feed required per unit of animal product
(Behera et al., 2019). Reducing the amount of feed required per unit of output has the potential to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions and farm profits. Better feed digestibility also leads to better
animal and herd performance. Improvements in feed digestibility can be achieved through the
processing of locally available crop residues through technologies like urea treatment and by
supplementation of diets with better quality green fodder such as multipurpose leguminous fodder
trees where available (Sangameswaran & Ramesh, 2021). Urea treatment of crop residues improves
quality and digestibility and hence reduces enteric methane emissions. Another way of improving
forage quality is to manipulate the physical structure of feeds so as to increase intake, for example,
by making feed blocks or by chopping poor-quality crop residues to increase their intake (Ayal &
Mamo, 2023). Besides feed improvement, feed efficiency can be increased by developing breeds
that grow faster, are more hardy, gain weight more quickly, or produce more milk. Changing forage
species can equally contribute to improvement in forage quality in extensive systems and this can
substantially increase feed efficiency and production. Reductions in greenhouse gas emissions
intensity of 30% are considered possible when feed quality is improved (Giro & Kumar, 2022). Feed
efficiency can also be increased by improving herd health through better veterinary services,
preventive health programmes and improved water quality (Rath, 2022). Feeding livestock with
45
processed Mucuna seed rations was reported to be highly successful in Burkina Faso (Kassam,
Kueneman, Kebe, Ouedraogo, & Youdeowei, 2009). Sheep fed on feed including boiled Mucuna
seeds increased their weight by at least 35%, and milk production in goats was significantly
increased. Through adopting this processing technique, farmers were able to significantly increase
their farm revenue from the sale of fattened animals as well as the production and distribution of
Mucuna seeds to neighbouring farmers.
Precision feeding
Precision feeding is about getting the right nutrients to the right animal at the right time. Accurate
prediction of animal requirements and accurate feed analyses go hand-in-hand with minimizing feed
waste, maximizing production and minimizing greenhouse gas emissions per unit of animal product
(Takacs-Gyorgy & Takács, 2022; Williams, Wilson, Wynn, & Costa, 2021). Not overfeeding protein
can reduce ammonia and nitrous oxide emissions from manure. Precision feeding would likely have
an indirect effect on enteric methane emission through maintaining a healthy rumen and maximizing
microbial protein synthesis, which is important for maximizing feed efficiency and decreasing
methane emission per unit of product (Makkar, 2016). The animal’s needs change during their
lifetime and cycles of reproduction and feeding according to requirements reduces feed cost.
Understanding an animal’s needs on a daily basis can result in major resource efficiency gains
(Banhazi et al., 2012). Precision feeding will increase feed efficiency and productivity and
consequently can improve production system profitability. Customized balanced feeding can
increase productivity and reduce emission intensity and also nitrogen excretion which results in
reduced manure emissions. However, precision feeding requires advanced technological facilities to
precisely monitor the animal’s needs and this can hinder the adoption of the technology in resource
poor smallholder livestock production systems of Sub-Saharan Africa.
Grassland and grazing management

Grassland and grazing management are key climate smart livestock technologies under pastoral and
agro-pastoral production systems (Gaitán, Läderach, Graefe, Rao, & Van der Hoek, 2016). Grazing
can be optimized by balancing and adapting grazing pressures on land. This optimization can
increase grassland productivity and deliver mitigation and adaptation benefits. By optimizing the
grazing pressure on land and by improving grasslands for animal feed, grasslands will become
productive and provide feed with a better nutritional quality for livestock. Grasslands provide the
majority of animal feed intake in extensive systems and grass growth is very sensitive to rainfall and
drought in Sub-Saharan Africa (Notenbaert et al., 2017). Improved grassland management is a key
adaptation measure given rainfall variability and increasing temperatures which increase moisture
evaporation from grassland soils. Well managed grasslands will enhance the quality and digestibility
of forages which results in reduced emissions (Thornton & Herrero, 2015). Reduced overgrazing will
also contribute to improved rangeland forage supply and an increase in soil carbon sequestration.
Soil carbon sequestration results when grazing pressure is reduced as a means of stopping land
degradation or rehabilitating degraded lands. In these cases, enteric emission intensities can also be
lowered, because with less grazing pressure animals have a wider choice of forage, and tend to
select more nutritious forage, which is associated with more rapid rates of live weight gain. By
46
restoring degraded grassland, these measures can also enhance soil health and water retention,
which increases the resilience of the grazing system to climate variability . One of the main strategies
for increasing the efficiency of grazing management is through rotational grazing, which can be
adjusted to the frequency and timing of the livestock’s grazing needs and better matches these
needs with the availability of pasture resources (Notenbaert et al., 2017). Rotational grazing allows
for the maintenance of forages at a relatively earlier growth stage. This enhances the quality and
digestibility of the forage, improves the productivity of the system and reduces emissions per unit of
live weight gain. Increasing livestock mobility, a traditional strategy of nomadic and transhumant
herders in many parts of East, West and Central Africa for matching animal production needs with
changing rangeland resources, can also be a grazing management practice that significantly
enhances the resilience of livestock systems to climate change (Zannou et al., 2021). In the
Mazabuka area of Zambia and through the Solidaridad project, farmers have adopted a communal
rotational grazing system where they have agreed on planned rotational grazing systems (Maseko,
2021). The practice has resulted in reduced overgrazing and improved animal live weights as well as
improved milk yields. The Northern Rangelands Trust in Kenya has promoted rangeland
management through the management of 2 million hactares of rangelands (Brandt, 2018). Grazing
management plans are developed and supported by grazing coordinators to ensure that rotational
grazing practices are adopted. The practice resulted in increased carbon sequestration which was
estimated using a model developed for savannahs.
Supplementation with concentrates

Supplementation with concentrate feeds provide more digestible nutrients than roughages which
increases the digestibility of the feed and generally improves animal productivity. Improvements in
digestibility and animal productivity will result in reduced emissions. The suitability of this approach
as a climate smart livestock technology depends on access to and availability of feed and potential
competition with direct human consumption. In Kenya, small holder farmers have adopted
concentrate supplementation to feed their dairy cows (Kashongwe, Bebe, Matofari, & Huelsebusch,
2017). A 15-40% increase in milk yields has been realised. In Kenya and Ethiopia, smallholder dairy
farmers are supplementing feed with urea-molasses blocks and this could reduce emission
intensities by 6 to 12% in dairy systems in Kenya and between 20 to 27% in Ethiopia (Ericksen &
Crane, 2018b).
Use of agro-industrial by-products.
The available agro-industrial by-products from agriculture and agro-industries which are suitable for
feeding animals like fruit pulp waste, vegetable waste, brewers’ grain waste and oil cakes can be
used as feed to meet the nutritional requirements of animals (Bedingar & Degefa, 1990). Agri-food
industry by-products are high nutrient density animal feeds which are highly digestible (Swidiq, Jolly,
Emmanuel, & George, 2012). Feeding agri-food industry by-products results in improved animal
productivity and lowered emissions (Amata, 2014). The use of agro-by-products as animal feed has
been promoted across Sub-Saharan Africa with levels of utilization varying across the region
(Bedingar & Degefa, 1990). In West Africa, the commonly used by-products include groundnut cake,
palm kernel cake, fishmeal, cotton seed cake and molasses. Use of agro-byproducts as animal feed
47
has been increasing in West Africa with groundnut cake being the most utilized. The use of molasses,
cottonseed cake and palm kernel cake has also been increasing sharply and most of this increase
maybe due to increasing awareness of the feeding values of these by-products as a result of many
feeding experiments and livestock development which are taking place in West Africa. East Africa
leads the rest of Sub-Saharan Africa in using cottonseed cake as an animal feed. Molasses,
groundnut cake and sunflower cake are also used but at relatively lower levels. Of the four regions,
Central Africa is the smallest producer of agro-byproducts and their utilization as animal feed is very
low. Southern Africa is third in overall agro-byproduct production and utilization as animal feed.
Molasses is the most commonly used in Southern Africa together with cottonseed cake, groundnut
cake and sunflower seed cake. In Uganda, livestock farmers in the Lake Victoria basin have adopted
the use of maize brain as livestock feed (Swidiq et al., 2012). However, adoption rate has been
hampered by lo availability of the agro-industrial by-product. In the South-Kivu area of Eastern DR
Congo, smallholder livestock farmers are utilizing about six agro-industrial by-products as animal
feed (Mutwedu et al., 2022). These include rice bran, palm kernel cake, maize bran among others.
Feed additives
Feed additives are animal biotechnological approaches that include probiotics, plant derived extracts
as well as enzymes such as methanogen-specific enzymes that can reduce variability in nutrient
utilization, reduce emissions and improve animal productivity (S van Dijk et al., 2015). Feed additives
can selectively inhibit microorganisms in the rumen and lower enteric emissions. However, the
challenge with feed additives is their affordability and availability to smallholder livestock farmers.
Biotechnology products are being promoted as feed additives in Ethiopia (Thornton et al., 2019).
Feed additives being promoted include antibiotics, enzymes, probiotics and prebiotics. Feed
additives can be crucial for optimization of livestock performance which contributes to improved
productivity. The practice of using feed additives to mitigate enteric methane production is more
prominent in developed countries of the world where ruminant livestock are kept in well managed
production systems and generally fed diets that are very high in digestibility and nutrients. The
results of this practice are an efficient production (milk or meat) relative to the amount of methane
emitted. Methane-reducing feed additives and supplements inhibit methanogens in the rumen, and
subsequently reduce enteric methane emissions. Methane-reducing feed additives and supplements
can be synthetic chemicals, natural supplements and compounds, such as tannins and seaweed fats
and oils.
Agro-forestry
Agroforestry or silvo-pastoral practice which is the growing of leguminous fodder shrubs with the
aim of improving crop productivity and providing fodder for livestock is important in the context of
climate-smart livestock systems (Partey, Zougmoré, Ouédraogo, & Thevathasan, 2017). Agroforestry
is important both for climate change mitigation (carbon sequestration, improved feed and
consequently reduced enteric methane) and for adaptation in that it improves the resilience of
livestock production systems to climate variability by using trees to intensify and diversify
production and buffer farming systems against hazards. Shade trees reduce heat stress on animals
and help increase productivity. Trees also improve the supply and quality of forage, which can help
48
reduce overgrazing and curb land degradation. Leguminous fodder shrubs have high nutritive value
and can help improve the diets of ruminants while they can also sequester carbon. Forages from
fodder shrubs can effectively replace some of the concentrates and part of the basal diet of
ruminant livestock leading to improved productivity and reduced emissions. Agroforestry
interventions to support livestock in East Africa have been adopted in Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and
Rwanda (Dawson et al., 2014). More than 200000 small-scale dairy farmers in highland regions have
adopted calliandra as a planted fodder tree. Farmers use calliandra as a substitute for dairy meal or
as a supplement to a basal diet including crop residues, Napier grass and natural grasses. One
kilogram of dried calliandra leaf is estimated to contain the same amount of digestible protein as the
same weight of dairy meal. Adoption of calliandra as a feed has resulted in increased milk yields as
well as an increased demand for fodder-tree seed which has resulted in the evolution of networks of
small-scale seed dealers to support supply. In the Rift Valley of Kenya, there has been promotion and
encouragement of natural regeneration of fodder trees that are also of value for ethno-veterinary
treatment (Ericksen & Crane, 2018b). The Sahel agroforestry network covering Burkina Faso, Mali,
Niger and Senegal has introduced promising tree and herbaceous species that can be used as fodder
banks taking into account soil conditions and rainfall patterns (Grovermann et al., 2023). Some of the
leguminous fodder shrubs that have been tested and proven as ruminant feed and have a high
potential for improving soil fertility and that may be used in conservation agriculture include
Gliricidia sepium, calliandra, Leucaena trichandra, Leucaena diversifolia, Chamaecytisus palmensis
(tree lucerne), sesbania and Faidherbia albida. Fodder trees have been traditionally used by farmers
and pastoralists in extensive systems in West Africa but fodder shrubs such as calliandra and L.
trichandra are now being used in more intensive systems, increasing production and reducing the
need for external feeds. In Kenya under the East Africa Dairy Development project, incorporation of
fodder shrubs and herbaceous legumes into mixed-farming systems has been intensified (Karanja,
Kiptot, & Franzel, 2017). This has resulted in increased dairy productivity that has resulted in a
reduction in the number of dairy cows per household and subsequently a reduction in the overall
methane emissions. The fodder shrubs are planted along soil conservation terraces thereby assisting
in reducing soil erosion.
7.2 1.2 Genetic selection and breeding management

Genetic selection and breeding management has potential as a climate smart livestock technology,
contributing to both mitigation and adaptation (Hoffmann, 2010). Breeding management is a key
strategy to increase livestock productivity by improving traits such as live weight gain and milk yield
or fertility (Passamonti et al., 2021). Well-designed selection and culling strategies, cross-breeding
programmes and artificial insemination programmes can all contribute to increased productivity and
reduced emissions. Cross-breeding programmes can contribute to adaptation, food security and
mitigation at the same time (Amole & Ayantunde, 2016; Boettcher et al., 2015). Small-framed
animals are generally more resilient to climate risks such as drought, while large-framed breeds can
be more productive when feeding conditions are good. Selection of higher yielding animals within
the herd can further contribute to improving animal and herd production efficiency. Traits to be
49
improved are overall productivity in terms of meat and milk production, fertility, efficiency (low
residual feed intake), and resilience to diseases and climatic stress. Crossbreeding of productive with
indigenous and adapted species, the deliberate selection of males for reproduction and avoiding
inbreeding are relatively simple but effective measures, especially in extensive and mixed crop-
livestock smallholder systems. There is also evidence that cross-breeding programmes can deliver
simultaneous adaptation, food security and mitigation benefits through the development of
composite breeds which have demonstrated greater heat tolerance, disease resistance, fitness and
reproductive traits compared with pure breeds. In general, cross-breeding strategies that make use
of locally adapted breeds, which are not only tolerant to heat and poor nutrition, but also to
parasites and diseases, may become more common with climate change. In mixed farming and
intensive systems, artificial insemination can be an option to increase the genetic potential of
animals. More productive breeds generally have lower greenhouse gas emission intensity, even
though emissions per head may be higher (Alcock & Hegarty, 2011). Breeding males can be replaced
with productive females which also reduces greenhouse gas emission intensity at the herd level The
conservation of animal genetic diversity can be adopted as a long-term strategy to ensure that
farmers have access to the best animals for each environment. Adaptation to climate change can
also be fostered by switching livestock species, shifting to species that can adapt to a changing
climate or diversification of livestock species (Amole & Ayantunde, 2019). Cattle farmers in the
Eastern Cape of South Africa have been promoting and strengthening the use of local breeds like the
Nkone which are adapted to local climatic stress and feed resources. Improvement of local genetics
is also being done through cross-breeding to produce better productive composite breeds like the
Bonsmara which are also heat and disease-tolerant. The Samburu cattle herders of northern Kenya,
a traditionally cattle-keeping people, adopted camels as part of their livelihood strategy (Ericksen &
Crane, 2018a). This switch allowed them to overcome a decline in their cattle economy, which, from
1960 onwards, had been affected by drought, cattle raiding and animal disease. The Fulbe herders in
Nigeria, faced with a shortage of grass in the semi-arid zone have switched to keeping the Sokoto
Gudali cattle breed, which copes well with a diet of browse, instead of the Bunaji breed (Blench,
1999). In Burkina Faso, livestock farmers have adopted diversification of their livestock species and
transhumance practice as adaptation strategies in the face of a changing climate (Amole &
Ayantunde, 2016). Diversification in West Africa takes advantage of the different production
attributes and uses of livestock species, with camels providing transport in addition to milk and
meat, goats providing rapid rates of post-drought herd recovery, sheep providing seasonal income
opportunities related to Islamic festivals, and camels and cattle providing prestige and social status
in some communities. Although cattle remain their most important species, the small ruminants are
becoming more and more important because they are less vulnerable to warming and they require
less water and food. The small ruminants play an important role in their livestock system by allowing
them to meet their immediate social and economic needs. Among the Fulani, the principal pastoral
ethnic group in West Africa, there has been a shift from cattle to small ruminants (Fratkin, 2013).
Agro-pastoralism has also been adopted as an alternative to shifting from cattle to small ruminants.
7.3 1.3 Animal health management
50
Improving animal health services, including disease prevention and management has a strong impact
on the efficiency of livestock systems, food security and adaptation to climate change (Chilonda &
Van Huylenbroeck, 2001). Animal diseases harm not only the animals themselves but also
productivity levels; farmer livelihoods and food supplies. Well managed, protected livestock can live
longer, healthier lives and thus be more productive. Preventive measures such as vaccinations,
deworming and access to veterinary services are ways that can be used to ensure animal health and
productivity. Establishing strong animal health institutions, formulating dedicated policies and
initiating research programmes focused on animal diseases are essential to improve livestock
efficiency and increasing the preparedness against new disease risks including those resulting from
climate change (McDermott & Arimi, 2002). Proper animal health services will lead to an increased
lifetime productive performance. Animal disease surveillance, early warning and rapid response is a
key climate change adaptation option in smallholder livestock production systems (Di Nardo,
Knowles, & Paton, 2011). Disease prevention and control measures can lower morbidity and
mortality of livestock and increase their productivity. Preventative and curative programmes to
improve animal health and productivity such as improved hygiene and sanitation and animal
movement control will lead to increased productivity and reduce greenhouse gas emissions (Houdijk,
Tolkamp, Rooke, & Hutchings, 2017; Kipling et al., 2021). A sick or worm-infested animal is an
unproductive animal: it produces little meat or milk but it still emits greenhouse gases. Animal health
is also a critical issue because veterinary control measures limit farmers’ access to markets and thus
their incentives for adopting climate-smart practices. Health livestock support sustainable livestock
systems and ecosystems, build resilience of communities to cope with current and future threats (P.
Gerber, Vellinga, Opio, & Steinfeld, 2011). Several countries in Southern Africa control contagious
livestock diseases such as foot and mouth disease (FMD) through geographical zoning, where animal
movement is controlled creating disease free zones (Maingi & Njoroge, 2010; Perry et al., 2003;
Scoones et al., 2010). Commodity-based trade (CBT) is emerging as an approach to address
phytosanitary management in beef trade in Southern Africa. CBT relies on ensuring that each specific
beef supply chain is disease-free, rather than whole geographical areas. CBT can also have benefits
for wildlife and biodiversity conservation. CBT has been implemented in biodiversity hotspots, so
that livestock production can be compatible with conservation goals. In Kenya, a regular deworming
programme has contributed to improved livestock productivity (Maingi & Njoroge, 2010).
Deworming could reduce emission intensities by 8 to 20%.
7.4 1.4 Improved lifetime productive performance

Improving lifetime productive performance or longevity per animal or per group of animals will
reduce greenhouse gas emissions as fewer animals will be required for the same amount of produce
(De Vries & Marcondes, 2020; Rufino et al., 2009). The number of young animals kept as
replacement stock can also decrease for the same amount of produce. Productive performance is
also improved through improved reproductive efficiency (Garoma, 2014). Increased reproductive
efficiency results in reduced emission intensity. Increasing lifetime performance is achieved by
focusing on the general animal husbandry improvements. Technologies like artificial insemination
51
can contribute to improved herd productive performance. Such technologies have been adopted by
smallholder livestock farmers across Sub-Saharan Africa. In Senegal, artificial insemination has been
adopted among small holder dairy producers of Thies and Diourbel regions (Amole & Ayantunde,
2019). In Burkina Faso, peri-urban dairy farmers of Bodo-Dioulasso have adopted artificial
insemination as a way of improving reproductive efficiency. In Kenya, adoption of artificial
insemination has been promoted through dairy hubs (Omondi, Zander, Bauer, & Baltenweck, 2017).
7.5 1.5 Regenerative grazing management

One of the most clear-cut mitigation benefits in regenerative rangeland and grassland management
arise from soil carbon sequestration that results when grazing pressure is reduced as a means of
stopping land degradation or rehabilitating degraded lands (Teague & Barnes, 2017; Wiltshire &
Beckage, 2022). In these cases, emission intensities can also be lowered because with less grazing
pressure, animals have a wider choice of forage and tend to select more nutritious forage which is
associated with increased animal productivity (Chomba, Sinclair, Savadogo, Bourne, & Lohbeck,
2020). By restoring degraded rangelands and grasslands, these measures can also enhance soil
health and water retention which increases the resilience of the grazing system to climate variability.
The potential for carbon sequestration and improved livestock productivity mainly focuses on
grasslands, legumes and fodder trees which can be used for regenerative rangeland and grassland
management. The Herding 4 Health (H4H) model under Conservation International and Peace Parks
Foundation in Southern Africa seeks to transform livestock production for communities and nature
conservation using herding and livestock management to regenerate rangeland ecosystems and
enhance climate change resilience in livestock systems (Suzanne van Dijk, Wassie, & Wilkes, 2022).
The model is based on conservation agreements with affected livestock communities that agree on
site-specific good practices defined by scientific and traditional knowledge. The practice involves
collective grazing and/or corralling that is managed by professional herders called ‘‘eco-herders’’.
The practice has resulted in enhanced carbon sequestration and improved livestock productivity. In
Ghana, farmers have been trained on the benefits of regenerative agriculture and the technology
has been extensively adopted (Lunn-Rockliffe et al., 2020). Adoption of the technology has resulted
in the restoration of degraded lands and increased livestock productivity. In the Kalo ranch of Central
Africa, biomass and forage quality improvement has resulted in increased carrying capacity (Lecomte
et al., 2015).
1.6 Technologies that promote the integration in the circular bio-economy.
A circular bio-economy minimizes the leaks of energy and materials from the system by recirculating
them in the production system (Muscat et al., 2021). Better livestock integration in the circular bio-
economy will contribute to reduced losses and lead to overall decrease in greenhouse gas emissions.
Crop residues and agro-industrial by-products which are considered as wastes can contribute nearly
30% of the total livestock feed intake in smallholder livestock production systems of Sub-Saharan
Africa (Valbuena et al., 2012). Livestock play a key role in adding value to these products. Climate
smart livestock solutions that are related to better livestock integration include: increased feed and
food crop productivity through manure; reduced food and feed waste and improved manure
52
management. Livestock manure contributes up to 23% of gross nitrogen input in mixed crop-
livestock systems in developing countries and use of manure can contribute to both increased crop
productivity and reduced manure emissions (Ryschawy, Choisis, Choisis, Joannon, & Gibon, 2012).
Increased feed crop productivity can result in increased availability of crop residues which can be
used as fodder for livestock (Abegaz, 2005). Prevention and reduction of wastes, combined with
alternative uses of food waste, including food recycling can help reduce the environmental impact of
livestock production systems. Feeding food waste to animals is a sustainable solution and brings
more co-benefits by reducing waste streams, greenhouse gas emissions and supporting a circular
bio-economy (Amole & Ayantunde, 2016). Manure management can also offer climate smart
livestock options that are linked to the principles of a circular bio-economy. Animal manure contains
most of the essential micro-and macro-elements required for plant growth and represent a valid
alternative to other fertilizers that release greenhouse gaes. Manure is managed through its storage,
processing and application to crops or its use as a feed in anaerobic digesters. The way manure is
managed has a bearing on its greenhouse gas footprint (Ndambi, Pelster, Owino, De Buisonje, &
Vellinga, 2019). Manure management climate smart options relevant for smallholder livestock
farmers can include regulating animal protein intake, manure storage, composting and biogas
systems (Petersen et al., 2013). Different methods of manure management, storage and use can
significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Methane production is reduced under aerobic
conditions so it is preferable to leave manure on the pasture in grazing systems. In grazing systems,
emissions can be further reduced by aiming for a uniform distribution of manure and urine and by
restricting grazing when conditions for nitrous oxide formations are favourable. If manure is stored,
measures to limit emissions are to reduce nitrogen content in manure, reduce storage time and
create aerobic conditions during storage. When manure is applied to soils, mitigation measures
include applying it when crop nutrient demands are high and avoiding application immediately
before rainfall. An integrated manure management system results in reduced manure emissions
(Petersen et al., 2013). In South Africa, the Bronkhorstspruit Biogas Plant has become a commercially
viable biogas plant that has demonstrated the reduction of waste and manure emissions through
biogas production (Khatri-Chhetri et al., 2021). The biogas plant is located in proximity to one of the
country’s largest beef production sites. The manure from the feedlots is used as the plant’s
feedstock, complemented by waste from the abattoirs located in the same area. The electricity
produced by the plant is sold to BMW which runs a production plant nearby and pays a premium
price as part of their sustainability plan to promote clean energy sources. The project has been met
with high interest domestically and regionally and has already been replicated at the Cape Dairy
Biogas Plant. Farmers in Burkina Faso are being encouraged to collect crop residues of several
leguminous plants including Mucuna, cowpea and soybean for incorporation into livestock feed
rations during the dry season. This has led to improved dry season availability of feeds for livestock
(Amole & Ayantunde, 2016). In Niger, to exploit the benefits of urine and to minimize nutrient
losses, corralling livestock on fields has been extensively promoted (Schlecht & Buerkert, 2004).
About 13% of fields are reportedly corralled in South Western Niger. More widespread corralling of
animals on cropland that returns urine could greatly reduce nutrient losses from mixed farming
systems. In Mali, litter and household wastes, left-overs from animal feed, groundnut shells and
sometimes animal dung are mixed as compost from June to March and are transported to the field
53
in March or April (Amole & Ayantunde, 2016). In Burkina Faso, manure is either collected from
households and applied in the fields or applied through direct corralling of the livestock (Scherr,
Shames, & Friedman, 2012). To promote composting in Mali, there has been a Presidential
Programme for production of compost, and each year a national target is agreed upon during the
Farmers’ Day. In Kenya, zero-grazing dairy units are being promoted to facilitate efficient
management of cattle manure and the installation of biogas units (Mwirigi, Makenzi, & Ochola,
2009). This would lessen the burden on women herding livestock and fetching fuel wood, and the
time saved would enable them to become involved in other economic activities. In Madagascar,
converting manure to biogas is considered as a better option for manure management as it provides
the added benefits of an alternative energy source with fewer negative health impacts from cooking,
heating, and lighting (Haladová, Cundr, & Pecen, 2011). However, the option has not been
extensively promoted.
7.6 1.7 Livestock product marketing

Since greenhouse gas emission intensity is measured as greenhouse gas emissions per unit of
livestock product output, increasing marketing rates can reduce greenhouse gas emission intensity
(Cardoso, 2012). Access to markets and incentives are essential for increasing off-take rates. If off-
take rates are higher, the average age of animals in a herd is younger, and young animals convert
forage and feed into body weight faster than older animals. Market-oriented production systems can
therefore be more resource efficient (Cardoso, 2012). Increasing off-take rates increases the
efficiency of the production system and reduces emission intensity. From an adaptation perspective,
keeping younger and small framed animals increases the chances of animal survival in the event of
climate shocks like droughts. Younger and smaller framed animals have lower feed requirements
and can survive periods of reduced feed supplies. In Namibia, communal farmers have adopted the
oxen versus the weaner approach is selling their animals (Enkono, Kalundu, & Thomas, 2013). Selling
animals at younger age would mean reducing absolute herd emissions. Under the weaner system,
traditional cattle farmers in Namibia sell weaners and tollies to feedlots in South Africa. By contrast,
in the oxen system, weaned calves are retained and raised to two or more years of age, by which
time they should have reached slaughter weight and sold to abattoirs. In weaner systems, most
cattle are cows and replacement heifers, so a greater proportion of greenhouse gas emissions are
from productive animals while in the oxen system, there are more growing males and fewer
productive cows. Because calves convert forage and feed to weight gain more efficiently than older
animals, in years of normal precipitation, maintaining a higher proportion of younger animals in the
herd can increase the efficiency with which limited forage resources are used. Climate change is
likely to constrain the availability of good quality forage and water resources, so increasing feed use
efficiency will become increasingly important. In Kenya and Ethiopia where fattening operations
which are linked to thriving export markets have been created, a combination of lower slaughter age
and improved feed quality has reduced emission intensities by 34% in cattle and 40% in sheep and
goats; with lower age at slaughter having the major impact (Ericksen & Crane, 2018a).
54
7.7 1.8 Decision-support systems that build adaptive capacity to climate risks
Smallholder livestock farmers will have to adapt to a changing climate and climate variability.
Weather forecasting and early warning systems are crucial for building adaptive capacity as they
allow farmers to take necessary preventive measures to protect the animals from bad weather
conditions like heat waves, cold waves, floods, cyclones, droughts and climate related disease
outbreaks (Giro & Kumar, 2022). The use of weather forecasting and early warning systems are a
potentially effective option for climate change adaptation in smallholder livestock producers. A wide
array of specific adaptation options which can climate proof smallholder livestock production
systems are available and these include: minimising heat stress; insurance and early warning
systems and animal health surveillance and rapid response. Effects of heat stress can be minimised
through adjusting the environment, nutritional and watering strategies, selection for thermal
tolerance and switching of livestock species. The use of insurance and early warning systems can be
potentially effective adaptation options when preventive measures fail (Mugabe, Mwaniki, Mamary,
& Ngibuini, 2019). Livestock insurance schemes that are weather indexed can be run by private
players or as public-private partnership approaches to index-based livestock insurance in which the
public sector underwrites a share of the risk. Climate change could lead to additional indirect
impacts from the increased emergence of livestock diseases, as higher temperatures and changed
rainfall patterns can alter the abundance, distribution and transmission of animal pathogens.
Understanding the complex interactions between pathogens, vectors, hosts and climate is
challenging and the ability to predict the effect of climate change on diseases is crucial to disease
outbreak preparedness and response. Animal disease surveillance, early warning and rapid response
is key for animal health authorities and policy makers to develop and prepare policies and
preventive measures to assist livestock farmers to adapt to changing veterinary issues due to climate
change. Weather indexed insurance schemes based on satellite imagery are being piloted in several
areas of drought-prone northern Kenya and this has resulted in farmers recovering after losing
livestock due to severe droughts (Barrett et al., 2020). A similar weather-indexed livestock insurance
scheme has also been piloted among the Borena pastoral farmers of Ethiopia (Amare et al., 2019).
The insurance scheme is complemented by early warning systems which use traditional systems
cross-referenced against the Gada calendar’s prediction of drought.
7.8 1.9 Challenges to scaling climate-smart livestock technologies

7.8.1 1.91 Hardware barriers
These barriers include access to equipment, inputs and services and the problems associated with
infrastructure. Adoption of climate smart livestock technologies requires the use of certain
machinery or equipment like equipment for land preparation for fodder cultivation. Access to inputs
such as equipment for fodder production, seed and fertilizer, or breeding services like artificial
insemination is often insufficient, unreliable and/or expensive. The reach of veterinary services is
often insufficient, and a lack of proper extension services hinders farmers from making the best use
of inputs. The lack of infrastructure under both pastoral and agro-pastoral livestock systems is
considered one of the most important barriers to the development of the livestock sector in Sub-
55
Saharan Africa. Poor infrastructure has implications for the entire value chain, including the lack of
access and high cost of inputs, post-harvest losses, and higher prices for consumers. In relation to
the risk of increasing drought frequency, water points are an important infrastructure for adaptation
in both pastoral and agro-pastoral livestock systems.
7.8.2 1.9.2 Human capacity and cultural barriers

These include technical knowledge and skills and cultural practices. Many farmers are unaware of
climate smart livestock practices. Limited access to extension services, especially for women, is
common in the Sub-Saharan African region. Extension workers have received little training on
climate change, climate smart agriculture or livestock, and a lack of funding for extension services
limits the ability of technicians to work directly with livestock keepers. Culture can provide
opportunities as well as barriers for the adoption of climate smart livestock practices. In some
countries in the Sub-Saharan African region, significant numbers of cattle are owned by people living
and working in urban areas, who have no interest in the productivity or environmental impacts of
their herds. Gender issues often remain a significant barrier to the adoption of climate smart
livestock practices. Women often have less access to resources such as land or inputs, lack
ownership of cattle and have limited access to extension services. The labour burden of women
reproductive activities like childcare further limit women from engaging in extension training
activities.
7.81.9.3 Organisational and policy barriers

These include land tenure, access to credit and insurance mechanisms and lack of policy support. In
mixed crop-livestock systems, small farm sizes and diversified activities can make investments in
improved technologies or practices economically nonviable. In communal land tenure systems, there
can be high transaction costs to establishing and implementing improved grazing management
systems. Grazing management schemes based on social arrangements in the absence of fencing
infrastructure can be difficult to adopt. Customary land tenure laws and norms can be especially
unfavourable for women, limiting their access to credit and extension services. Intensification,
sustainable land management and efficient processing technologies often require considerable up-
front investments. Many farmers lack access to financial resources and are unable or unwilling to
seek credit to finance otherwise profitable investments. Investing financial, labour and natural
resources in new technologies and practices always implies risks, which are often too significant for
resource poor producers. Insurance against natural disasters affecting livestock could alleviate this
barrier, but there are few such schemes in the Sub-Saharan African region. Livestock sector policies
in Sub-Saharan Africa both provide support to and constrain development opportunities for livestock
keepers. Livestock management policies and marketing policies have particularly strong impacts on
producers’ access to markets, and thus on the incentives they have for improving rangeland and
livestock management.
7.81.9.4 Conflicts associated with livestock

Competition for resources, cultural differences and land tenure systems can drive conflicts between
livestock farmers and crop farmers. Competition for water and grazing land between pastoralists and
56
crop farmers is a problem in East, West and Central Africa. Nomadic pastoralists are always in
conflicts with sedentary agro-pastoralists and under such circumstances it will be difficult to adopt
climate-smart technologies. Overgrazing and unsustainable agricultural practices also contribute to
land degradation, further exacerbating conflicts. Addressing these conflicts and challenges will
require an integrated approach that considers environmental, economic and social factors.
7.81.9.5 Challenges in quantifying adaptation and mitigation benefits

To harness climate finance for investment to support adoption of climate-smart options, adaptation
and mitigation benefits need to be quantified. If the climate-smart benefits are quantified, farmers
can feel encouraged to adopt some of the technologies. There is need for adoption of proper
scientific tools that can be used to quantify the benefits.
7.9 Gender dynamics and gender considerations in climate-smart livestock

systems
The roles and the rights of women livestock keepers are often overlooked, and development is
frequently skewed towards the interest of men, yet women are responsible for most sedentary care
of livestock and play an active role in on-farm livestock duties and in the marketing of products
(milk). Efforts to build resilience in livestock keeping communities therefore requires particular
emphasis on building the resilience of women and enabling them to adapt to climate change.
7.10 Business models for climate adaptation in pastoral and sedentary

livestock systems: Review
Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) is classified as one of the most vulnerable regions to climate change and its
impacts (Ofori et al., 2021). However, adaptation measures are continually being put in place for SSA
to deal with the risks and shocks posed by climate change and variability (Akinyi et al., 2021).
Appropriate business models is one of the strategies for enhancing the successful adoption of
climate adaptation technologies in sedentary and pastoral livestock systems.
Business models defined

Business models describe how organizations create value, select customers, assign processes and
enter markets (Centobelli et al., 2020; Osterwalder et al., 2005). Business models are basically the
organization’s plan for making a profit. In the context of climate adaptation, business models are an
approach to proportional distribution of opportunities and costs for an equitable adaptation process
(Larosa & Mysiak, 2020). Climate adaption practices should provide optimal net benefits at minimal
risk, and ultimately provide the farmer with improved welfare and livelihood opportunities. Business
models for climate adaptation in livestock systems should articulate of the value proposition, key
resources needed to create the value, organization of the livestock system to create value and
farmer’s retention of financial value as they put into practice various adaptation innovations.
57
Climate adaptation business models

Ruden et al., (2020) proposes a climate adaptation business model that permits lucrative financial
returns for investments made in making livestock systems more sustainable. The model gives a
comprehensive technical assistance center which involves financial planning support and fundraising
for inefficient livestock farms to transit into diversified and sustainable production systems. The
systems entail intensified livestock production with agricultural crops and plantations, and
restoration and conservation of ecosystems, which is an adaptation technology. Though the study
was done in Columbia, Ruden's et al., (2020) model can be adopted and engineered to fit the African
context as the study region offers value in meat and milk under extensive livestock systems.
Long et al., (2017) adopts the extensively used Business Model Canvas (BMC) to illustrate critical
issues for business models of Climate Smart Agriculture technological innovations as shown in figure
1. Business models for CSA technological innovations (BMfCSATIs) deal with barriers associated with
development and adoption of climate adaptation technologies in livestock systems (Long et al.,
2017). Barriers in sedentary and pastoral livestock systems include low resource base, competing
with established technologies, new customer and distribution channels and uncertainty (Ayele &
Dedecha, 2021). Therefore there is need for pastoral and sedentary farmers to challenge dominant
norms. It is crucial for providers (livestock value chain stakeholders) of adaptation technologies to
develop captivating value propositions and strategic cost structures.
Figure 15: Critical issues for business models for climate-smart agriculture technological
innovations (Long et al., 2017).
58
Table 1 narrows down to research work that has been done in Sub Saharan Africa to feed into
climate adaptation business models in sedentary and pastoral livestock systems. These have proven
to be viable when key partners and key resources are put in place.
Table 2: Climate adaptation business models studied in Sub Saharan sedentary and pastoral
livestock systems
Researcher(s) Study area Challenges Business Model(s) Objective

(Tully & Kenya Pastoralists’ poor Inclusive business Providing pastoralists with
Shapiro, 2014) access to capital, model (where training on holistic land and
markets and proper pastoral farmers resource management
extension services were involved and Improve pastoralists’ access to
consulted) capital and markets
(Baltenweck et Kenya, Women’s poor Gender-inclusive Increasing women’s
al., 2022) Uganda access to inputs business models participation in livestock or
(where women are livestock products marketing
participants and and its associated benefits and
beneficiaries of the outcomes, focusing on low- and
adaptation and middle-income countries
business plans) &
private-public
partnerships
(Kebebe, 2019) Ethiopia Failure of Innovative business Facilitate the coordination of
smallholder models knowledge, skills, inputs,
sedentary livestock services and output markets in
farmers to benefit livestock value chains.
from of agricultural
technologies and
economic
opportunities
Case study of feed production as climate adaptation strategy

The growing demand for animal-source foods in the face of climate change exerts pressure on
livestock feed, which accounts for over 60% of production costs (Makkar, 2016). Most extensive
livestock systems in SSA have successfully made value by producing feed from agricultural by-
products. Organic waste is utilized as substrate for maggot production, and such forms of feeds offer
adaptive capacity to feed shortages posed by climate change. Insects as a feed source offer feed
conversion efficiency, lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and have lesser water and land use
demands when compared to conventional sources (Babarinde et al., 2021; Heuel et al., 2021; Okello
et al., 2021). Producer-driven business models, where farmers own the livestock businesses give the
farmers provision for retention of financial value when use of non-conventional feeds is adopted.
59
Animals’ nutritional requirements are met at a reduced cost and sustainable means, hence
profitable livestock production to the farmer when there is a proper costing structure and ease of
market access.
Conclusion
Climate adaptation strategies such as crop-livestock integration, purchasing and providing

supplementary feed (fodder, crop residues, concentrate), herd destocking and diversification of
livestock species/types are being commendably implemented in sedentary and pastoral livestock
systems (Mengistu & Hassen, 2017) . However, successful business models in these livestock systems
are impaired by poor access to lucrative markets and livestock regulatory networks, minimal market
intelligence and poor cost structures. There is need for more research based economic impacts of
climate adaptation technologies as proved by cost benefit analysis.
60
References
Adekunle, S. O., Adegbite, D. A., & Adepoju, O. O. (2019). Analysis of gender roles in livestock
farming among rural communities in Ogun State, Nigeria. International Journal of Agricultural Policy
and Research, 7(3), 80-87.
Alemayehu, T., Bruno, J. E., Getachew, F., & Dessie, T. (2018). Socio-economic, marketing and gender
aspects of village chicken production in the tropics: A review of literature. ILRI Project Report.
Arega, D. A., Manyuchi, B., & Akuja, T. E. (2021). The Role of Women in Livestock Management and
Their Participation in Pastoral Decision Making: An Assessment from Ethiopia. Women &
Environments International Magazine, 103/104.
Arimond, M., & Ruel, M. T. (2004). Dietary diversity is associated with child nutritional status:
evidence from 11 demographic and health surveys. The Journal of nutrition, 134(10), 2579-2585.
Aslam, A., Vashist, A., Cosgrove, B., ter Braak-Forstinger, C., Wollenberg, E. K., Papp, R., & Newman,
R. (2021). Mainstreaming gender-smart investing to accelerate the transformation of food systems
under a changing climate: Strategies to unlock climate returns by leveraging gender equality.
Asresie, A., Zemedu, L., & Adigrat, E. (2015). The contribution of livestock sector in Ethiopian
economy. A Review Advances in Life Science And Technology, 29.
Awa, D. N., Njoya, A., Ndomadji, J. A., Onana, J., Asongwed-Awa, A., Tama, A. C. N., ... & Maho, A.
(2003). Livestock production systems in the semi-arid savannah of the Central African sub region. In
Savanes africaines: des espaces en mutation, des acteurs face à de nouveaux défis. Actes du
colloque, Garoua, Cameroun (pp. 13-p). Cirad-Prasac.
Awopegba, T. M., Fayose, C. A., & Adeboye, K. A. (2022). Crop Management Innovations For Climate
Change Resilience In The Post-Pandemic Era: A Review. International Journal of Agriculture and
Environmental Research, 8(6), 752-764.
Ayantunde, A. A., Asse, R., Said, M. Y., & Fall, A. (2015). Transhumant pastoralism, sustainable
management of natural resources and endemic ruminant livestock in the sub-humid zone of West
Africa. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 17(5), 1049-1062.
Ayantunde, A. A., Pali, P., & Kadi, H. K. (2021). Pastoralists' perceptions of feed and forage scarcity in
semi-arid West Africa. Pastoralism, 11(1), 1-14.
Ayantunde, A., De Leeuw, J., Turner, M. D., & Said, M. (2015). Challenges of assessing the
sustainability of (agro)-pastoral systems. Livestock Science, 182, 30-40.
Ba, M. S., Djendoubi, M. R., Diop, O. M., & Bakhoum, M. (2022). Characterisation of the extensive
pastoral systems in the Sudano-Sahelian zone of West Africa: The case of Ferlo in Senegal. Land Use
Policy, 107, 105576.
Banerjee, R., Cullis, A., Flintan, F., & Wiggins, S. (2021). Impact of COVID-19 on livestock exports from
Somalia and the Horn of Africa. Enterprise Development & Microfinance, (1), 4-18.
Bayala, J., Zougmore, R., Ky-Dembele, C., Bationo, B. A., Buah, S., Sanogo, D., & Somda, J. (2020).
Towards developing scalable climate-smart village models: approach and lessons learnt from pilot
research in West Africa. ICRAF Working Paper No. 304. World Agroforestry Centre.
61
Beuchelt, T. D., & Badstue, L. (2013). Gender, nutrition-and climate-smart food production:
Opportunities and trade-offs. Food Security, 5, 709-721.
Bingi, S., & Tondel, F. (2015). Recent developments in the dairy sector in Eastern Africa. Briefing note
of the European Centre for Development Policy Management, 78, 19.
Carlson, G. J., Kordas, K., & Murray‐Kolb, L. E. (2015). Associations between women's autonomy and
child nutritional status: a review of the literature. Maternal & child nutrition, 11(4), 452-482.
Chawala, A. R., Mwai, A. O., Peters, A., Banos, G., & Chagunda, M. G. (2020). Towards a better
understanding of breeding objectives and production performance of dairy cattle in sub-Saharan
Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. CABI Reviews, (2020).
Chesterman, S., & Neely, C. (2015). Evidence and policy implications of climate-smart agriculture in
Kenya. CCAFS Working Paper.
CSA (Central Statistical Agency) (2020) Agricultural Sample Survey. Report on Livestock and Livestock
Characteristics. Volume II. Statistical Bulletin 587. Addis Ababa, 9-11.
Delgado, C. L. (1999). Sources of growth in smallholder agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa: The role of
vertical integration of smallholders with processors and marketers of high value-added items.
Agrekon, 38(sup1), 165-189.
Dinesh, D., Campbell, B. M., Bonilla Findji, O., & Richards, M. B. (2017). 10 best bet innovations for
adaptation in agriculture: A supplement to the UNFCCC NAP Technical Guidelines. CCAFS Working
Paper.
Duguma, B., & Janssens, G. P. (2021). Assessment of livestock feed resources and coping strategies
with dry season feed scarcity in mixed crop–livestock farming systems around the gilgel gibe
catchment, Southwest Ethiopia. Sustainability, 13(19), 10713.
EAC. (2018). EAC livestock development strategy. East African Community.
Eshitera, E. E., Githigia, S. M., Kitala, P., Thomas, L. F., Fèvre, E. M., Harrison, L. J., ... & Maingi, N.
(2012). Prevalence of porcine cysticercosis and associated risk factors in Homa Bay District, Kenya.
BMC veterinary research, 8(1), 1-6.
Eze, J. I., Mmom, P. C., Obianuju, E. O., & Ekwe, M. C. (2017). Gender roles in poultry production and
rural development in Imo State, Nigeria. International Journal of Development and Sustainability,
6(3), 932-945.
FAO. (2009). The state of food and agriculture 2009: livestock in the balance. Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations.
FAO. (2011). The state of food and agriculture 2010–2011: women in agriculture: closing the gender
gap for development. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
FAO. (2014). The state of food and agriculture 2014: innovation in family farming. Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
FAO. (2015). The future of livestock in Africa: opportunities and challenges in the face of uncertainty.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
62
FAO. (2019). Regional overview of food security and nutrition in Africa 2018. The Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
FAO. (2020). The state of food and agriculture 2020. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations.
FAO. (2023). Projected Growth and Changes in Livestock and Aquaculture Production in Sub-Saharan
Africa: A 2030 Perspective. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Galvin, K. A. (2009). Transitions: pastoralists living with change. Annual Review of Anthropology, 38,
185-198.
Ghimire, S. R., Njarui, D. M., Mutimura, M., Cardoso Arango, J. A., Johnson, L., Gichangi, E., ... &
Djikeng, A. (2015). Climate-smart Brachiaria for improving livestock production in East Africa:
Emerging opportunities.
Giller, K. E., Witter, E., Corbeels, M., & Tittonell, P. (2011). Conservation agriculture and smallholder
farming in Africa: The heretics’ view. Field Crops Research, 114(1), 23-34.
Goedde, L., Ooko-Ombaka, A., & Pais, G. (2019). Winning in Africa’s agricultural market. McKinsey &
Company.
Grabowski, P. P., Djenontin, I., Zulu, L., Kamoto, J., Kampanje-Phiri, J., Darkwah, A., ... & Fischer, G.
(2021). Gender-and youth-sensitive data collection tools to support decision making for inclusive
sustainable agricultural intensification. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 19(5-6),
359-375.
Grace, D., Dominguez-Salas, P., Alonso, S., Lannerstad, M., Muunda, E., Ngwili, N., ... & Otobo, E.
(2018). The influence of livestock-derived foods on nutrition during the first 1,000 days of life. ILRI
Research Report 44. International Livestock Research Institute.
Hebinck, P., Lent, P. C., & Wiskerke, J. S. C. (2018). Rural development and the construction of new
markets. Routledge.
Herrero, M., Grace, D., Njuki, J., Johnson, N., Enahoro, D., Silvestri, S., & Rufino, M. C. (2013). The
roles of livestock in developing countries. Animal, 7(Supplement s1), 3-18.
Herrero, M., Thornton, P. K., Notenbaert, A. M., Wood, S., Msangi, S., Freeman, H. A., ... & Van de
Steeg, J. (2013). Smart investments in sustainable food production: revisiting mixed crop-livestock
systems. Science, 327(5967), 822-825.
Homewood, K., Kristjanson, P., & Trench, P. C. (2009). Staying Maasai? Livelihoods, conservation,
and development in East African rangelands. Springer.
Jahnke, H. E. (1982). Livestock production systems and livestock development in tropical Africa.
Kieler Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk.
Kamidi, R. E., Schellenberg, I., You, M., Mirzayeva, A., & Rischkowsky, B. (2018). Women’s
empowerment in livestock value chains in low and middle income countries: A systematic review.
Livestock Research for Rural Development, 30(11).
Kiema, A., Bayala, J., Somda, J., Sangare, S., & Bacye, B. (2022). Perceptions of climate change and its
impact on livelihoods in the Sahelian zone of Burkina Faso, West Africa. Journal of Environment and
Earth Science, 2(4), 63-74.
63
Kiptot, E., Mureithi, S., & Chege, L. (2018). Gender roles and climate change vulnerability in pastoral
communities: A case study of Laikipia District, Kenya. Journal of Sustainable Development, 11(4),
109-124.
Kocho, T., Abebe, G., Tegegne, A., & Gebremedhin, B. (2011). Marketing value-chain of smallholder
sheep and goats in crop-livestock mixed farming system of Alaba, Southern Ethiopia. Small Ruminant
Research, 96(2-3), 101-105.
Korecki, Z., Staňková, M., & Cabicarová, M. (2015). Changing the level of food security due to
changes in the level of safety in Central Africa. In ICABR 2015: 10. International Conference on
Applied Business Research (pp. 507-521).
Kristjanson, P., Waters-Bayer, A., Johnson, N., Tipilda, A., Njuki, J., Baltenweck, I., ... & MacMillan, S.
(2014). Livestock and women’s livelihoods. Gender in agriculture: Closing the knowledge gap, 209-
233.
Lau, J. D., Kleiber, D., Lawless, S., & Cohen, P. J. (2021). Gender equality in climate policy and practice
hindered by assumptions. Nature climate change, 11(3), 186-192.
Leichenko, R. M., & O'brien, K. L. (2002). The dynamics of rural vulnerability to global change: the
case of southern Africa. Mitigation and adaptation strategies for global change, 7(1), 1-18.
Lipper, L., Thornton, P., Campbell, B. M., Baedeker, T., Braimoh, A., Bwalya, M., ... & Torquebiau, E.
F. (2014). Climate-smart agriculture for food security. Nature climate change, 4(12), 1068-1072.
Ly, C., Fall, A., & Okike, I. (2010). The Livestock Sector in Need of Regional Strategies. Livestock in a
changing landscape: experiences and regional perspectives, 27.
Maja, M. M., & Ayano, S. F. (2021). The impact of population growth on natural resources and
farmers’ capacity to adapt to climate change in low-income countries. Earth Systems and
Environment, 5, 271-283.
Makate, C. (2019). Effective scaling of climate smart agriculture innovations in African smallholder
agriculture: A review of approaches, policy and institutional strategy needs. Environmental science &
policy, 96, 37-51.
Makate, M., Nelson, N., & Makate, C. (2018). Farm household typology and adoption of climate-
smart agriculture practices in smallholder farming systems of southern Africa. African Journal of
Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 10(4), 421-439.
Makoni, N., Mwai, R., Redda, T., van der Zijpp, A. J., & Van Der Lee, J. (2014). White gold:
Opportunities for dairy sector development collaboration in East Africa (No. 14-006). Centre for
Development Innovation, Wageningen UR.
Mapiye, O., Chikwanha, O. C., Makombe, G., Dzama, K., & Mapiye, C. (2020). Livelihood, food and
nutrition security in Southern Africa: what role do indigenous cattle genetic resources play?.
Diversity, 12(2), 74.
Markelova, H., & Mwangi, E. (2010). Collective action for smallholder market access: evidence and
implications for Africa. Review of policy research, 27(5), 621-640.
Mataveia, G. A., Visser, C., & Sitoe, A. (2021). Smallholder goat production in Southern Africa: A
review. Goat Science-Environment, Health and Economy.
64
Mburu, B. K., Kung’u, J. B., & Muriuki, J. N. (2015). Climate change adaptation strategies by small-
scale farmers in Yatta District, Kenya. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 9(9),
712-722.
McDermott, J. J., Staal, S. J., Freeman, H. A., Herrero, M., & Van de Steeg, J. A. (2010). Sustaining
intensification of smallholder livestock systems in the tropics. Livestock science, 130(1-3), 95-109.
Meissner, H. H., Scholtz, M. M., & Engelbrecht, F. A. (2013). Sustainability of the South African
Livestock Sector towards 2050 Part 2: Challenges, changes and required implementations. South
African Journal of Animal Science, 43(3), 289-319.
Monau, P. I. (2018). Phenotypic and genetic characterisation of the indigenous Tswana goat
population in Botswana (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pretoria).
Moyo, S., McDermott, J., Herrero, M., Steeg, J., Staal, S., & Baltenweck, I. (2007). Development of
livestock production systems in Africa: Challenges and opportunities. Animal production and animal
science worldwide: WAAP book of the year, 15-26.
Mungai, E. M., Ndiritu, S. W., & Da Silva, I. (2021). Unlocking Climate Finance Potential for Climate
Adaptation: Case of Climate Smart Agricultural Financing in Sub Saharan Africa. In African Handbook
of Climate Change Adaptation (pp. 2063-2083). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Mutamba, M., & Ajayi, O. C. (2018). A business case for engaging the private sector in climate-smart
solutions for smallholder farmers. CTA.
Mwacharo, J. M., Okeyo, A. M., Kamande, G. K., & Rege, J. E. O. (2006). The small East African
shorthorn zebu cows in Kenya. I: Linear body measurements. Tropical Animal Health and Production,
38, 65-74.
Mwambi, P., Mufunda, J., Mwaba, P., Kasese-Chanda, N., Mumba, C. M., Kalumbi, T., ... & Mazaba,
M. L. (2017). Cutaneous anthrax outbreak in Chama District, Muchinga Province, Zambia, 2016 as
history repeats itself.
Naziri, D., Rich, K. M., & Bennett, B. (2015). Would a commodity‐based trade approach improve
market access for Africa? A case study of the potential of beef exports from communal areas of
Namibia. Development Policy Review, 33(2), 195-219.
Niemand, M. (2013). Feedlot performance of the Drakensberger in comparison with other cattle
breeds: A Meta-analysis (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pretoria).
Njisane, Y. Z., Mukumbo, F. E., & Muchenje, V. (2020). An outlook on livestock welfare conditions in
African communities—A review. Asian-Australasian journal of animal sciences, 33(6), 867.
Nyasimi, M., Kimeli, P., Sayula, G., Radeny, M., Kinyangi, J., & Mungai, C. (2017). Adoption and
dissemination pathways for climate-smart agriculture technologies and practices for climate-resilient
livelihoods in Lushoto, Northeast Tanzania. Climate, 5(3), 63.
Ogutu, C., Kurwijila, L. R., & Omore, A. O. (2014). Review of successes and failures of dairy value
chain development interventions in Tanzania.
Otte, J., Pica-Ciamarra, U., & Morzaria, S. (2019). A comparative overview of the livestock-
environment interactions in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 6, 37.
65
Ouma, E. A., Dione, M. M., Lule, P. M., Pezo, D. A., Marshall, K., Roesel, K., ... & Jagwe, J. (2015).
Smallholder pig value chain assessment in Uganda: Results from producer focus group discussions
and key informant interviews. ILRI Project Report.
Outlook, A. E. (2018). African Development Bank Group. Access mode: www. afdb.
org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Publications/African_Economic_Outlook_2018_-_EN. pdf.
Perez, C., Jones, E. M., Kristjanson, P., Cramer, L., Thornton, P. K., Förch, W., & Barahona, C. A.
(2015). How resilient are farming households and communities to a changing climate in Africa? A
gender-based perspective. Global Environmental Change, 34, 95-107.
Randolph, T. F., Schelling, E., Grace, D., Nicholson, C. F., Leroy, J. L., Cole, D. C., ... & Ruel, M. (2007).
Invited review: Role of livestock in human nutrition and health for poverty reduction in developing
countries. Journal of animal science, 85(11), 2788-2800.
Rich, K. M., & Perry, B. D. (2011). The economic and poverty impacts of animal diseases in
developing countries: new roles, new demands for economics and epidemiology. Preventive
veterinary medicine, 101(3-4), 133-147.
Salami, A., Kamara, A. B., & Brixiova, Z. (2010). Smallholder agriculture in East Africa: Trends,
constraints and opportunities (p. 52). Tunis, Tunisia: African Development Bank.
Seré, C., van der Zijpp, A., Persley, G., & Rege, E. (2008). Dynamics of livestock production systems,
drivers of change and prospects for animal genetic resources. Animal Genetic Resources/Resources
génétiques animales/Recursos genéticos animales, 42, 3-24.
Sheik‐Mohamed, A., & Velema, J. P. (1999). Where health care has no access: the nomadic
populations of sub‐Saharan Africa. Tropical medicine & international health, 4(10), 695-707.
Shiferaw, B., Hellin, J., & Muricho, G. (2011). Improving market access and agricultural productivity
growth in Africa: what role for producer organizations and collective action institutions?. Food
security, 3, 475-489.
Spickett, A. M., De Klerk, D. G., Enslin, C. B., & Scholtz, M. M. (1989). Resistance of Nguni, Bonsmara
and Hereford cattle to ticks in a bushveld region of South Africa.
Thornton, P. (2002). Mapping poverty and livestock in the developing world (Vol. 1). ILRI (aka ILCA
and ILRAD).
Tittonell, P., Muriuki, A., Shepherd, K. D., Mugendi, D., Kaizzi, K. C., Okeyo, J., ... & Vanlauwe, B.
(2010). The diversity of rural livelihoods and their influence on soil fertility in agricultural systems of
East Africa–A typology of smallholder farms. Agricultural systems, 103(2), 83-97.
Trienekens, J. H. (2011). Agricultural value chains in developing countries a framework for analysis.
International food and agribusiness management review, 14(1030-2016-82778), 51-82.
Valbuena, D., Erenstein, O., Tui, S. H. K., Abdoulaye, T., Claessens, L., Duncan, A. J., ... & van Wijk, M.
T. (2012). Conservation agriculture in mixed crop–livestock systems: scoping crop residue trade-offs
in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Field crops research, 132, 175-184.
Van Loon, J., Woltering, L., Krupnik, T. J., Baudron, F., Boa, M., & Govaerts, B. (2020). Scaling
agricultural mechanization services in smallholder farming systems: Case studies from sub-Saharan
Africa, South Asia, and Latin America. Agricultural systems, 180, 102792.
66
Van Marle-Köster, E., Visser, C., & Berry, D. P. (2013). A review of genomic selection-Implications for
the South African beef and dairy cattle industries. South African Journal of Animal Science, 43(1), 1-
17.
Van Marle-Köster, E., Visser, C., Sealy, J., & Frantz, L. (2021). Capitalizing on the potential of South
African indigenous beef cattle breeds: a review. Sustainability, 13(8), 4388.
Vanlauwe, B., Coyne, D., Gockowski, J., Hauser, S., Huising, J., Masso, C., ... & Van Asten, P. (2014).
Sustainable intensification and the African smallholder farmer. Current Opinion in Environmental
Sustainability, 8(0), 15-22.
Waters-Bayer, A., & Bayer, W. (1992). The role of livestock in the rural economy. Nomadic Peoples,
3-18.
Webber, C. M., & Labaste, P. (2009). Building competitiveness in Africa's agriculture: a guide to value
chain concepts and applications. World Bank Publications.
Williams, T. O., Mul, M. L., Cofie, O. O., Kinyangi, J., Zougmoré, R. B., Wamukoya, G., ... & Campbell,
B. M. (2015). Climate smart agriculture in the African context.
Wilson, R. T., Amsel, L., & Hirsch, L. (2009). Livestock and food security with special reference to the
developing countries. Food science and security. Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers, Inc, 231-251.
Wong, S. (2016). Can climate finance contribute to gender equity in developing countries?. Journal
of International Development, 28(3), 428-444.
Yapatake Kossele, T. P., & Shan, L. J. (2018). Economic security and the political governance crisis in
central African republic. African Development Review, 30(4), 462-477.
Zougmoré, R., Partey, S., Ouédraogo, M., Omitoyin, B., Thomas, T., Ayantunde, A., ... & Jalloh, A.
(2016). Toward climate-smart agriculture in West Africa: a review of climate change impacts,
adaptation strategies and policy developments for the livestock, fishery and crop production sectors.
Agriculture & Food Security, 5(1), 1-16.
Pamela
References
Abiodun, B.J., Odoulami, R.C., Sawadogo, W., Oloniyo, O.A., Abatan, A.A., New, M., Lennard, C.,
Izidine, P., Egbebiyi, T.S. and MacMartin, D.G., 2021. Potential impacts of stratospheric aerosol
injection on drought risk managements over major river basins in Africa. Climatic Change, 169, pp.1-
19.
Ajayi, V. O., & Ilori, O. W. (2020). Projected drought events over West Africa using RCA4 regional
climate model. Earth Systems and Environment, 4, 329-348.
Archer, E. R. M., Landman, W. A., Malherbe, J., Maluleke, P., & Weepener, H. (2021). Managing
climate risk in livestock production in South Africa: How might improved tailored forecasting
contribute?. Climate Risk Management, 32, 100312.
Arndt, C., Hristov, A.N., Price, W.J., McClelland, S.C., Pelaez, A.M., Cueva, S.F., Oh, J., Dijkstra, J.,
Bannink, A., Bayat, A.R. and Crompton, L.A., 2022. Full adoption of the most effective strategies to
67
mitigate methane emissions by ruminants can help meet the 1.5 C target by 2030 but not
2050. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(20), p.e2111294119.
Balehegn, M., Kebreab, E., Tolera, A., Hunt, S., Erickson, P., Crane, T. A., & Adesogan, A. T. (2021).
Livestock sustainability research in Africa with a focus on the environment. Animal Frontiers, 11(4),
47-56.
Bett, B., Lindahl, J., & Delia, G. (2019). Climate change and infectious livestock diseases: the case of
rift valley fever and tick-borne diseases. The Climate-Smart Agriculture Papers: Investigating the
Business of a Productive, Resilient and Low Emission Future, 29-37.
Brown, O., & Crawford, A. (2009). Climate change and security in Africa. Climate change and security
in Africa.
Busby, J. W., Smith, T. G., White, K. L., & Strange, S. M. (2013). Climate change and insecurity:
mapping vulnerability in Africa. International Security, 37(4), 132-172.
CCARDESA (2021), GHG Mitigation through Climate-Smart Agriculture in Southern Africa: Scaling
Climate-Smart Livestock Systems.
https://www.ccardesa.org/sites/default/files/ickm-documents/Mitigation%20Brief_Scaling
%20climate-smart%20livestock%20systems_0.pdf
CIAT, 2017 Climate and Livestock Disease: assessing the vulnerability of agricultural systems to
livestock pests under climate change scenarios
https://unfccc.int/files/documentation/submissions_from_non-party_stakeholders/application/
pdf/516.pdf
Cochrane, L., Cundill, G., Ludi, E., New, M., Nicholls, R.J., Wester, P., Cantin, B., Murali, K.S., Leone,
M., Kituyi, E. and Landry, M.E., 2017. A reflection on collaborative adaptation research in Africa and
Asia. Regional Environmental Change, 17, pp.1553-1561.
Davis, C. L., & Vincent, K. (2017). Climate risk and vulnerability: A handbook for Southern Africa.
De Souza, K., Kituyi, E., Harvey, B., Leone, M., Murali, K. S., & Ford, J. D. (2015). Vulnerability to
climate change in three hot spots in Africa and Asia: key issues for policy-relevant adaptation and
resilience-building research. Regional Environmental Change, 15, 747-753.
Diedhiou, A., Bichet, A., Wartenburger, R., Seneviratne, S.I., Rowell, D.P., Sylla, M.B., Diallo, I., Todzo,
S., Touré, N.D.E., Camara, M. and Ngatchah, B.N., 2018. Changes in climate extremes over West and
Central Africa at 1.5 C and 2 C global warming. Environmental Research Letters, 13(6), p.065020.
Diffenbaugh, N. S., & Giorgi, F. (2012). Climate change hotspots in the CMIP5 global climate model
ensemble. Climatic change, 114, 813-822.
Dong H, Mangino J, McAllister T, Hatfield J, Johnson D, Lassey K, de Lima M, Romanovskaya A (2006)
Chapter 10: emissions from livestock and manure management. In ‘IPCC guidelines for national
greenhouse gas inventories. Vol. 4: agriculture, forestry, and other land use’. pp. 10.1–10.87. (IPCC:
Paris, France)
https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/pdf/4_Volume4/V4_10_Ch10_Livestock.pdf
68
Dunning, C. M., Black, E., & Allan, R. P. (2018). Later wet seasons with more intense rainfall over
Africa under future climate change. Journal of Climate, 31(23), 9719-9738.
Du Preez, J. H., Giesecke, W. H., & Hattingh, P. J. (1990). Heat stress in dairy cattle and other
livestock under Southern African conditions. I. Temperature-humidity index mean values during the
four main seasons. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research, Volume 57, 77-87
Du Toit, C. J. L., Van Niekerk, W. A., & Meissner, H. H. (2013). Direct greenhouse gas emissions of the
South African small stock sectors. South African Journal of Animal Science, 43(3), 340-361.
Goopy, J. P., Onyango, A. A., Dickhoefer, U., & Butterbach-Bahl, K. (2018). A new approach for
improving emission factors for enteric methane emissions of cattle in smallholder systems of East
Africa–Results for Nyando, Western Kenya. Agricultural Systems, 161, 72-80.
Goopy, J. P., Ndung’u, P., Onyango, A. A., Kirui, P., Butterbach-Bahl, K. (2021). Calculation Of New
Enteric Methane Emission Factors For Small Ruminants In Western Kenya Highlights the
Heterogeneity Of Smallholder Production Systems. Anim. Prod. Sci., 6(61), 602.
Gerber, P.J., Steinfeld, H., Henderson, B., Mottet, A., Opio, C., Dijkman, J., Falcucci, A. and Tempio,
G., 2013. Tackling climate change through livestock: a global assessment of emissions and mitigation
opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
Emetere, M. E., Akinyemi, M. L., Ojewumi, M. E., & Muhammad, B. M. (2018). exploring the
challenges confronting the West Africa climate system. International Journal of Engineering &
Technology, 7(3), 1881-1887.
Engelbrecht, F., & Monteiro, P. (2021). Climate Change: the IPCC's latest assessment
report. Quest, 17(3), 34-35.
FAO. 2023. The status of women in agrifood systems. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc5343en
FAO. 2021. Climate-smart agriculture case studies 2021 – Projects from around the world. Rome.
https://doi.org/10.4060/cb5359en
Fisher, M., Abate, T., Lunduka, R. W., Asnake, W., Alemayehu, Y., & Madulu, R. B. (2015). Drought
tolerant maize for farmer adaptation to drought in sub-Saharan Africa: Determinants of adoption in
eastern and southern Africa. Climatic Change, 133, 283-299.
GIZ and EURAC 2017: Risk Supplement to the Vulnerability Sourcebook. Guidance on how to apply
the Vulnerability Sourcebook’s approach with the new IPCC AR5 concept of climate risk. Bonn: GIZ.
Goopy, J. P., Onyango, A. A., Dickhoefer, U., & Butterbach-Bahl, K. (2018). A new approach for
improving emission factors for enteric methane emissions of cattle in smallholder systems of East
Africa–Results for Nyando, Western Kenya. Agricultural Systems, 161, 72-80.
Halimani, T., Marandure, T., Chikwanha, O. C., Molotsi, A. H., Abiodun, B. J., Dzama, K., & Mapiye, C.
(2021). Smallholder sheep farmers’ perceived impact of water scarcity in the dry ecozones of South
Africa: Determinants and response strategies. Climate Risk Management, 34, 100369.
Herrero, M., Havlik, P., McIntire, J., Palazzo, A. and Valin, H. 2014. African Livestock Futures:
Realizing the Potential of Livestock for Food Security, Poverty Reduction and the Environment in
Sub-Saharan Africa. Office of the Special Representative of the UN Secretary General for Food
69
Security and Nutrition and the United Nations System Influenza Coordination (UNSIC), Geneva,
Switzerland, 118 p.
Hoegh-Guldberg, O., Jacob, D., Bindi, M., Brown, S., Camilloni, I., Diedhiou, A., Djalante, R., Ebi, K.,
Engelbrecht, F., Guiot, J. & Hijioka, Y., 2018. Impacts of 1.5 C global warming on natural and human
systems. Global warming of 1.5° C.
Hoffman, T., & Vogel, C. (2008). Climate change impacts on African rangelands. Rangelands, 30(3),
12-17.
Lottering, S., Mafongoya, P., & Lottering, R. (2021). Drought and its impacts on small-scale farmers in
sub-Saharan Africa: a review. South African Geographical Journal, 103(3), 319-341.
Maloiy, G. M. O., Kanui, T. I., Towett, P. K., Wambugu, S. N., Miaron, J. O., & Wanyoike, M. M. (2008).
Effects of dehydration and heat stress on food intake and dry matter digestibility in East African
ruminants. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Molecular & Integrative
Physiology, 151(2), 185-190.
Mapiye, O., Makombe, G., Mapiye, C., & Dzama, K. (2018). Limitations and prospects of improving
beef cattle production in the smallholder sector: a case of Limpopo Province, South Africa. Tropical
Animal Health and Production, 50, 1711-1725.
Mare, F., Bahta, Y. T., & Van Niekerk, W. (2018). The impact of drought on commercial livestock
farmers in South Africa. Development in Practice, 28(7), 884-898.
Masih, I., Maskey, S., Mussá, F. E. F., & Trambauer, P. (2014). A review of droughts on the African
continent: a geospatial and long-term perspective. Hydrology and earth system sciences, 18(9),
3635-3649.
Matlou, R. C., & Bahta, Y. T. (2019). Resilience of smallholder livestock farmers in South
Africa. Stockfarm, 9(8), 14-15.
Müller, C., Waha, K., Bondeau, A., & Heinke, J. (2014). Hotspots of climate change impacts in sub‐
Saharan Africa and implications for adaptation and development. Global change biology, 20(8),
2505-2517.
Musemwa, L., Muchenje, V., Mushunje, A., & Zhou, L. (2012). The impact of climate change on
livestock production amongst the resource-poor farmers of third world countries: a review. Asian
Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 2(393-2016-23881), 621-631.
Mutasa, C. (2022). Revisiting the impacts of tropical cyclone Idai in Southern Africa. In Climate
Impacts on Extreme Weather (pp. 175-189). Elsevier.
Mutekwa, V. T. (2009). Climate change impacts and adaptation in the agricultural sector: The case of
smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 11(2), 237-256.
Mutibvu, T., Maburutse, B. E., Mbiriri, D. T., & Kashangura, M. T. (2012). Constraints and
opportunities for increased livestock production in communal areas: A case study of Simbe,
Zimbabwe. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 24(9), 165.
Nawab, A., Ibtisham, F., Li, G., Kieser, B., Wu, J., Liu, W., Zhao, Y., Nawab, Y., Li, K., Xiao, M. and An,
L., 2018. Heat stress in poultry production: Mitigation strategies to overcome the future challenges
facing the global poultry industry. Journal of thermal biology, 78, pp.131-139.
70
Ndao, S., Traoré, E. H., Ickowicz, A., & Moulin, C. H. (2020). Estimation of enteric methane emission
factors for Ndama cattle in the Sudanian zone of Senegal. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 52,
2883-2895.
Ndlela, S. Z., Moyo, M., Mkwanazi, M. V., & Chimonyo, M. (2019). Responses of gut morphology,
serum biochemistry, and quality of breast meat to water deprivation in broilers. Canadian Journal of
Animal Science, 100(1), 59-68
Ndlovu, T., & Mjimba, V. (2021). Drought risk-reduction and gender dynamics in communal cattle
farming in southern Zimbabwe. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 58, 102203.
Negawo, A. T., Teshome, A., Kumar, A., Hanson, J., & Jones, C. S. (2017). Opportunities for Napier
grass (Pennisetum purpureum) improvement using molecular genetics. Agronomy, 7(2), 28.
Nesamvuni, E., Lekalakala, R., Norris, D., & Ngambi, J. W. (2012). Effects of climate change on dairy
cattle, South Africa. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 7(26), 3867-3872.
Nhamo, L., Ndlela, B., Nhemachena, C., Mabhaudhi, T., Mpandeli, S., & Matchaya, G. (2018). The
water-energy-food nexus: Climate risks and opportunities in southern Africa. Water, 10(5), 567.
Nhemachena, C., Nhamo, L., Matchaya, G., Nhemachena, C. R., Muchara, B., Karuaihe, S. T., &
Mpandeli, S. (2020). Climate change impacts on water and agriculture sectors in Southern Africa:
Threats and opportunities for sustainable development. Water, 12(10), 2673.
OCHAM 2022. Global humanitarian overview https://2022.gho.unocha.org/appeals/southern-and-
east-africa/
environment interactions in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 6, 37.
OXFAM 2022. Hunger in a heating world How the climate crisis is fuelling hunger in an already
hungry world
Rahimi, J., Mutua, J. Y., Notenbaert, A. M., Dieng, D., & Butterbach-Bahl, K. (2020). Will dairy cattle
production in West Africa be challenged by heat stress in the future?. Climatic Change, 161(4), 665-
685.
Reed, C., Anderson, W., Kruczkiewicz, A., Nakamura, J., Gallo, D., Seager, R., & McDermid, S. S.
(2022). The impact of flooding on food security across Africa. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences, 119(43), e2119399119.
Renaudeau, D., Collin, A., Yahav, S., De Basilio, V., Gourdine, J. L., & Collier, R. J. (2012). Adaptation
to hot climate and strategies to alleviate heat stress in livestock production. Animal, 6(5), 707-728.
Rojas-Downing, M. M., Nejadhashemi, A. P., Harrigan, T., & Woznicki, S. A. (2017). Climate change
and livestock: Impacts, adaptation, and mitigation. Climate risk management, 16, 145-163.
Rurinda, J., Mapfumo, P., Van Wijk, M. T., Mtambanengwe, F. V., Rufino, M. C., Chikowo, R., & Giller,
K. E. (2014). Sources of vulnerability to a variable and changing climate among smallholder
households in Zimbabwe: A participatory analysis. Climate Risk Management, 3, 65-78.
Rust, J. M., & Rust, T. (2013). Climate change and livestock production: A review with emphasis on
Africa. South African Journal of Animal Science, 43(3), 255-267.
71
Scholes, R., & Engelbrecht, F. (2021). Climate impacts in southern Africa during the 21st
Century. Report for Earthjustice and the Centre for Envrionmental Rights. Global Change Instiute,
University of Witwatersrand.
Scholtz, M. M., Jordaan, F. J., Thuli Chabalala, N., Pyoos, G. M., Joel Mamabolo, M., & Neser, F. W.
(2023). A balanced perspective on the contribution of extensive ruminant production to greenhouse
gas emissions in southern Africa. African Journal of Range & Forage Science, 40(1), 107-113.
Sherbinin, A. (2014). Climate change hotspots mapping: what have we learned?. Climatic
change, 123, 23-37.
Thornton, P. K., Herrero, M. T., Freeman, H. A., Okeyo Mwai, A., Rege, J. E. O., Jones, P. G., &
McDermott, J. J. (2007). Vulnerability, climate change and livestock-opportunities and challenges for
the poor. Journal of Semi-Arid Tropical Agricultural Research.
Thornton, P. K., van de Steeg, J., Notenbaert, A., & Herrero, M. (2009). The impacts of climate
change on livestock and livestock systems in developing countries: A review of what we know and
what we need to know. Agricultural systems, 101(3), 113-127.
Tofu, D. A., Woldeamanuel, T., & Haile, F. (2022). Smallholder farmers’ vulnerability and adaptation
to climate change induced shocks: The case of Northern Ethiopia highlands. Journal of Agriculture
and Food Research, 8, 100312.
Tongwane, M. I., & Moeletsi, M. E. (2020). Emission factors and carbon emissions of methane from
enteric fermentation of cattle produced under different management systems in South
Africa. Journal of Cleaner Production, 265, 121931.
UNESCO, 2022. Climate Change Vulnerability Hotspots in Eastern Africa. UNESCO Regional Office for
Eastern Africa, Nairobi, Kenya
USAID 2015. Climate Change Risk Profile Southern Africa
https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pa00mtz5.pdf
WFP 2016, Climate Change In Southern Africa https://docs.wfp.org/api/documents/WFP-
0000129074/download/?_ga=2.71306774.400214068.1689371356-1453202527.1681467920
WFP 2023 Drought Response in the Horn of Africa Situational Report #3
https://reliefweb.int/report/ethiopia/wfp-regional-bureau-eastern-africa-drought-response-horn-
africa-situational-report-3-march-2023
Wilkes, A., Wassie, S. E., Tadesse, M., Assefa, B., Abu, M., Ketema, A., & Solomon, D. (2020).
Inventory of greenhouse gas emissions from cattle, sheep and goats in Ethiopia (1994-2018)
calculated using the IPCC Tier 2 approach.
World Bank Group (2015) Gender in ClimateSmart Agriculture Module 18 for the Gender in
Agriculture Sourcebook
https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/654451468190785156/pdf/99505-REVISED-
Box393228B-PUBLIC-Gender-and-Climate-Smart-AG-WEB-3.pdf
 Showman
References
72
Abegaz, A. (2005). Farm management in mixed crop-livestock systems in the Northern Highlands of
Ethiopia: Wageningen University and Research.
Abegunde, V. O., Sibanda, M., & Obi, A. (2019). Determinants of the adoption of climate-smart
agricultural practices by small-scale farming households in King Cetshwayo District Municipality,
South Africa. Sustainability, 12(1), 195.
Alcock, D., & Hegarty, R. (2011). Potential effects of animal management and genetic improvement
on enteric methane emissions, emissions intensity and productivity of sheep enterprises at Cowra,
Australia. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 166, 749-760.
Amare, A., Simane, B., Nyangaga, J., Defisa, A., Hamza, D., & Gurmessa, B. (2019). Index-based
livestock insurance to manage climate risks in Borena zone of southern Oromia, Ethiopia. Climate
Risk Management, 25, 100191.
Amata, I. (2014). The use of non-conventional feed resources (NCFR) for livestock feeding in the
tropics: a review. Journal of Global Biosciences, 3(2), 604-613.
Amole, T. A., & Ayantunde, A. A. (2016). Climate-smart livestock interventions in West Africa: a
review. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security Working Paper.
Amole, T. A., & Ayantunde, A. A. (2019). Options of making livestock production in West Africa
“climate-smart”.
Ayal, D., & Mamo, B. (2023). Smallholder Farmers Adoption of Climate Smart Livestock Production:
Practices, Status and Determinants in Hidebu Abote Woreda, Central Ethiopia.
Banhazi, T. M., Lehr, H., Black, J., Crabtree, H., Schofield, P., Tscharke, M., & Berckmans, D. (2012).
Precision livestock farming: an international review of scientific and commercial aspects.
International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 5(3), 1-9.
Barrett, A. B., Duivenvoorden, S., Salakpi, E. E., Muthoka, J. M., Mwangi, J., Oliver, S., & Rowhani, P.
(2020). Forecasting vegetation condition for drought early warning systems in pastoral communities
in Kenya. Remote Sensing of Environment, 248, 111886.
Bayala, J., Kalinganire, A., Tchoundjeu, Z., Sinclair, F., & Garrity, D. (2011). Conservation agriculture
with trees in the West African Sahel–a review. ICRAF occasional paper, 14, 57.
Bedingar, T., & Degefa, G. (1990). Trends in agro-byproducts and their feeding potential in sub-
Saharan Africa: ILRI (aka ILCA and ILRAD).
Behera, R., Rai, S., Sathpathy, D., Sahu, A., Karunakaran, M., Talokdar, A., . . . Mandal, A. (2019).
Climate smart livestock production. Innovative Farming, 4(1), 015-018.
Blench, R. (1999). Traditional livestock breeds: geographical distribution and dynamics in relation to
the ecology of West Africa (Vol. 67): Overseas Development Institute London.
Boettcher, P. J., Hoffmann, I., Baumung, R., Drucker, A. G., McManus, C., Berg, P., . . . Naves, M.
(2015). Genetic resources and genomics for adaptation of livestock to climate change. Frontiers in
genetics, 5, 461.
73
Brandt, P. (2018). Climate-smart livestock production at landscape level in Kenya. Wageningen

University and Research,
Cardoso, L. A. (2012). Environmental and economic impacts of livestock productivity increase in sub-
Saharan Africa. Tropical animal health and production, 44, 1879-1884.
Chilonda, P., & Van Huylenbroeck, G. (2001). A conceptual framework for the economic analysis of
factors influencing decision-making of small-scale farmers in animal health management. Revue
scientifique et technique-Office international des épizooties, 20(3), 687-700.
Chomba, S., Sinclair, F., Savadogo, P., Bourne, M., & Lohbeck, M. (2020). Opportunities and
constraints for using farmer managed natural regeneration for land restoration in sub-Saharan Africa.
Frontiers in Forests and Global Change, 3, 571679.
Conant, R. T., & Paustian, K. (2002). Potential soil carbon sequestration in overgrazed grassland
ecosystems. Global biogeochemical cycles, 16(4), 90-91-90-99.
Dawson, I. K., Carsan, S., Franzel, S., Kindt, R., van Breugel, P., Graudal, L., & Lillesø, J.-P. B. (2014).
Agroforestry, livestock, fodder production and climate change adaptation and mitigation in East
Africa: issues and options.
De Vries, A., & Marcondes, M. (2020). Overview of factors affecting productive lifespan of dairy cows.
Animal, 14(S1), s155-s164.
Dejene, S. W., Terefe, T., Belay, B., Amha, Y., & Demissie, T. D. (2022). Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA)
Training Guide.
Di Nardo, A., Knowles, N., & Paton, D. (2011). Combining livestock trade patterns with phylogenetics
to help understand the spread of foot and mouth disease in sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and
Southeast Asia. Revue Scientifique et Technique-OIE, 30(1), 63.
Dijk, S. v., Tennigkeit, T., & Wilkes, A. (2015). Climate-smart livestock sector development: the state of
play in NAMA development. CCAFS Working Paper.
Dijk, S. v., Wassie, S. E., & Wilkes, A. (2022). The relevance of livestock MRV in East and Southern
Africa.
Enkono, S., Kalundu, S., & Thomas, B. (2013). Analysis of factors influencing cattle off-take rate and
marketing in Ndiyona constituency of Kavango region, Namibia. J. Agric. Ext. Rural Dev, 5(9), 201-206.
Ericksen, P. J., & Crane, T. A. (2018a). The feasibility of low emissions development interventions for
the East African livestock sector: Lessons from Kenya and Ethiopia.
Ericksen, P. J., & Crane, T. A. (2018b). The feasibility of low emissions development interventions for
the East African livestock sector: Lessons from Kenya and Ethiopia. ILRI Research Report.
FAO. (2021). Climate-Smart Livestock Production. In: FAO Bangkok, Thailand.
Food, & Nations, A. O. o. t. U. (2018). World Livestock: Transforming the Livestock Sector through the
Sustainable Development Goals: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Fratkin, E. (2013). Seeking alternative livelihoods in pastoral areas. In Pastoralism and Development
in Africa (pp. 217-225): Routledge.
74
Gaitán, L., Läderach, P., Graefe, S., Rao, I., & Van der Hoek, R. (2016). Climate-smart livestock
systems: an assessment of carbon stocks and GHG emissions in Nicaragua. PloS one, 11(12),
e0167949.
Garoma, S. (2014). Reproductive and productive performance of kereyu Sanga cattle in Fentalle
district of Oromia region, Ethiopia. Journal of Cell and Animal Biology, 8(2), 28-33.
Gerber, P., Vellinga, T., Opio, C., & Steinfeld, H. (2011). Productivity gains and greenhouse gas
emissions intensity in dairy systems. Livestock Science, 139(1-2), 100-108.
Gerber, P. J., Henderson, B., & Makkar, H. P. (2013). Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions in
livestock production: a review of technical options for non-CO2 emissions: Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
Giro, A., & Kumar, N. (2022). Climate Smart Livestock System; Review. Journal of Agricultural
Research Pesticides and Biofertilizers, 3(1).
Grovermann, C., Rees, C., Beye, A., Wossen, T., Abdoulaye, T., & Cicek, H. (2023). Uptake of
agroforestry-based crop management in the semi-arid Sahel–Analysis of joint decisions and adoption
determinants. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7, 1042551.
Haladová, D., Cundr, O., & Pecen, J. (2011). Selection of optimal anaerobic digestion technology for
family sized farm use–Case study of southwest Madagascar. Agricultura tropica et subtropica, 44, 3.
Hassen, A., Talore, D. G., Tesfamariam, E. H., Friend, M. A., & Mpanza, T. D. E. (2017). Potential use of
forage-legume intercropping technologies to adapt to climate-change impacts on mixed crop-
livestock systems in Africa: A review. Regional Environmental Change, 17, 1713-1724.
Hoffmann, I. (2010). Climate change and the characterization, breeding and conservation of animal
genetic resources. Animal genetics, 41, 32-46.
Houdijk, J., Tolkamp, B., Rooke, J., & Hutchings, M. (2017). Animal health and greenhouse gas
intensity: The paradox of periparturient parasitism. International Journal for Parasitology, 47(10-11),
633-641.
Ipcc, A. (2014). IPCC Fifth Assessment Report—Synthesis Report. IPPC Rome, Italy.
Karanja, E., Kiptot, E., & Franzel, S. (2017). The volunteer farmer-trainer approach three years after
the exit of the East Africa Dairy Development Project: a case study of four dairy producer
organizations in Kenya. ICRAF, Nairobi http://www. worldagroforestry. org/output/volunteer-farmer-
trainer-approach-three-years-after-exit-east-africa-dairy-development.
Kashongwe, O., Bebe, B., Matofari, J., & Huelsebusch, C. (2017). Effects of feeding practices on milk
yield and composition in peri-urban and rural smallholder dairy cow and pastoral camel herds in
Kenya. Tropical animal health and production, 49, 909-914.
Kassam, A., Kueneman, E., Kebe, B., Ouedraogo, S., & Youdeowei, A. (2009). Enhancing crop-livestock
systems in conservation agriculture for sustainable production intensification: a farmer discovery
process going to scale in Burkina Faso (Vol. 7): Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations (FAO).
75
Khatri-Chhetri, A., Leonard, E. S., Wollenberg, E. K., Dittmer, K., Costa, C., & Shelton, S. W. (2021).
CCAFS’s Low-Emissions Development (LED) research and engagement impact on innovation and
scaling-up mitigation options in agriculture. CCAFS Working Paper.
Kipling, R., Bannink, A., Bartley, D., Blanco-Penedo, I., Faverdin, P., Graux, A.-I., . . . Østergaard, S.
(2021). Identifying key parameters for modelling the impacts of livestock health conditions on
greenhouse gas emissions. Animal, 15(1), 100023.
Lecomte, P., Duclos, A., Juanes, X., Ndao, S., De Crem, P., Vigne, M., & Blanfort, V. (2015). Climate
Smart livestock development in natural and improved savannas of an extensive ranch in Central
Africa (RDC).[P37].
Lunn-Rockliffe, S., Davies, M., Moore, H., Wilman, A., McGlade, J., & Bent, D. (2020). Farmer led
regenerative agriculture for Africa.
Maingi, N., & Njoroge, G. (2010). Constraints on production, disease perceptions and ticks and
helminths control practices on dairy cattle farms in Nyandarua District, Kenya. Livestock Research for
Rural Development, 22(8), 138.
Makkar, H. P. (2016). Smart livestock feeding strategies for harvesting triple gain–the desired
outcomes in planet, people and profit dimensions: a developing country perspective. Animal
Production Science, 56(3), 519-534.
Maseko, S. (2021). The impact of climate-smart technology adoption on farmers’ welfare in Northern
Zambia.
McDermott, J. J., & Arimi, S. (2002). Brucellosis in sub-Saharan Africa: epidemiology, control and
impact. Veterinary microbiology, 90(1-4), 111-134.
Mugabe, P. A., Mwaniki, F., Mamary, K. A., & Ngibuini, H. (2019). An assessment of drought
monitoring and early warning systems in Tanzania, Kenya, and Mali. Current Directions in Water
Scarcity Research, 2, 211-219.
Muscat, A., de Olde, E. M., Ripoll-Bosch, R., Van Zanten, H. H., Metze, T. A., Termeer, C. J., . . . de Boer,
I. J. (2021). Principles, drivers and opportunities of a circular bioeconomy. Nature Food, 2(8), 561-
566.
Mutwedu, V. B., Bacigale, S. B., Mugumaarhahama, Y., Muhimuzi, F. L., Munganga, B., Ayagirwe, R. B.,
. . . Manyawu, G. (2022). Smallholder farmers’ perception and challenges toward the use of crop
residues and agro-industrial byproducts in livestock feeding systems in Eastern DR Congo. Scientific
African, 16, e01239.
Mwirigi, J. W., Makenzi, P. M., & Ochola, W. O. (2009). Socio-economic constraints to adoption and
sustainability of biogas technology by farmers in Nakuru Districts, Kenya. Energy for Sustainable
Development, 13(2), 106-115.
Ndambi, O. A., Pelster, D. E., Owino, J. O., De Buisonje, F., & Vellinga, T. (2019). Manure management
practices and policies in sub-Saharan Africa: implications on manure quality as a fertilizer. Frontiers in
Sustainable Food Systems, 3, 29.
Notenbaert, A., Pfeifer, C., Silvestri, S., & Herrero, M. (2017). Targeting, out-scaling and prioritising
climate-smart interventions in agricultural systems: Lessons from applying a generic framework to
the livestock sector in sub-Saharan Africa. Agricultural systems, 151, 153-162.
76
Omondi, I. A., Zander, K., Bauer, S., & Baltenweck, I. (2017). Understanding farmers’ preferences for
artificial insemination services provided through dairy hubs. Animal, 11(4), 677-686.
Opio, C., Gerber, P., Mottet, A., Falcucci, A., Tempio, G., MacLeod, M., . . . Steinfeld, H. (2013).
Greenhouse gas emissions from ruminant supply chains–A global life cycle assessment : Food and
agriculture organization of the United Nations.
environment interactions in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. Frontiers in veterinary science, 6, 37.
Palombi, L., & Sessa, R. (2013). Climate-smart agriculture: sourcebook: Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
Partey, S. T., Zougmoré, R. B., Ouédraogo, M., & Thevathasan, N. V. (2017). Why promote improved
fallows as a climate-smart agroforestry technology in sub-Saharan Africa? Sustainability, 9(11), 1887.
Passamonti, M. M., Somenzi, E., Barbato, M., Chillemi, G., Colli, L., Joost, S., . . . Vajana, E. (2021). The
quest for genes involved in adaptation to climate change in ruminant livestock. Animals, 11(10),
2833.
Perry, B. D., Randolph, T. F., Ashley, S., Chimedza, R., Forman, T., Morrison, J., . . . Tebele, N. (2003).
The impact and poverty reduction implications of foot and mouth disease control in southern Africa
with special reference to Zimbabwe.
Peters, M., Rao, I. M., Fisher, M. J., Subbaraoa, G. V., Martens, S., Herrero, G., . . . Hyman, G. G.
(2012). Tropical forage-based systems to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.
Petersen, S. O., Blanchard, M., Chadwick, D., Del Prado, A., Edouard, N., Mosquera, J., & Sommer, S.
G. (2013). Manure management for greenhouse gas mitigation. Animal, 7(s2), 266-282.
Rao, I., Peters, M., van der Hoek, R., Castro, A., Subbarao, G., Cadisch, G., & Rincón, A. (2014).
Tropical forage-based systems for climate-smart livestock production in Latin America. Rural, 21, 48.
Rath, B. (2022). Climate Smart Livestock Management System: Livestock Advisories to Negate the
Impacts of Climate Change. In Impact of Climate Change on Livestock Health and Production (pp. 27-
33): CRC Press.
Rufino, M. C., Herrero, M., Van Wijk, M., Hemerik, L., De Ridder, N., & Giller, K. E. (2009). Lifetime
productivity of dairy cows in smallholder farming systems of the Central highlands of Kenya. Animal,
3(7), 1044-1056.
Ryschawy, J., Choisis, N., Choisis, J., Joannon, A., & Gibon, A. (2012). Mixed crop-livestock systems: an
economic and environmental-friendly way of farming? Animal, 6(10), 1722-1730.
Sangameswaran, R., & Ramesh, K. (2021). Exploring the Strategies for Climate Smart Livestock
Production in India: Opportunities and Challenges. Climate Change and Environmental Sustainability,
9(1), 101-106.
Scherr, S. J., Shames, S., & Friedman, R. (2012). From climate-smart agriculture to climate-smart
landscapes. Agriculture & Food Security, 1, 1-15.
Schlecht, E., & Buerkert, A. (2004). Organic inputs and farmers' management strategies in millet
fields of western Niger. Geoderma, 121(3-4), 271-289.
77
Scoones, I., Bishi, A., Mapitse, N., Moerane, R., Penrith, M.-L., Sibanda, R., . . . Wolmer, W. (2010).
Foot-and-mouth disease and market access: challenges for the beef industry in southern Africa.
Shikuku, K. M., Valdivia, R. O., Paul, B. K., Mwongera, C., Winowiecki, L., Läderach, P., . . . Silvestri, S.
(2017). Prioritizing climate-smart livestock technologies in rural Tanzania: A minimum data approach.
Agricultural systems, 151, 204-216.
Swidiq, M., Jolly, K., Emmanuel, Z., & George, L. (2012). Utilization of crop residues and agro-
industrial by-products in livestock feeds and feeding systems of Uganda. International Journal of
Biosciences, 2(4), 82-89.
Takacs-Gyorgy, K., & Takács, I. (2022). Towards climate smart agriculture: How does innovation meet
sustainability? Ecocycles, 8(1), 61-72.
Teague, R., & Barnes, M. (2017). Grazing management that regenerates ecosystem function and
grazingland livelihoods. African Journal of Range & Forage Science, 34(2), 77-86.
Thornton, P. K., Enahoro, D. K., Njiru, N. M., Wijk, M. T. v., Ashley, L., Cramer, L., . . . Graham, M.
(2019). Program for climate-smart livestock systems. Country stocktake: Ethiopia.
Thornton, P. K., & Herrero, M. (2015). Adapting to climate change in the mixed crop and livestock
farming systems in sub-Saharan Africa. Nature Climate Change, 5(9), 830-836.
Tulu, D., Gadissa, S., Hundessa, F., & Kebede, E. (2023). Contribution of Climate-Smart Forage and
Fodder Production for Sustainable Livestock Production and Environment: Lessons and Challenges
from Ethiopia. Advances in Agriculture, 2023.
Valbuena, D., Erenstein, O., Tui, S. H.-K., Abdoulaye, T., Claessens, L., Duncan, A. J., . . . van Rooyen, A.
(2012). Conservation agriculture in mixed crop–livestock systems: scoping crop residue trade-offs in
Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Field crops research, 132, 175-184.
Williams, T., Wilson, C., Wynn, P., & Costa, D. (2021). Opportunities for precision livestock
management in the face of climate change: a focus on extensive systems. Animal Frontiers, 11(5), 63-
68.
Wiltshire, S., & Beckage, B. (2022). Soil carbon sequestration through regenerative agriculture in the
US state of Vermont. PLOS Climate, 1(4), e0000021.
Zannou, O. M., Ouedraogo, A. S., Biguezoton, A. S., Lempereur, L., Patrick Yao, K., Abatih, E., . . .
Farougou, S. (2021). First digital characterization of the transhumance corridors through Benin used
by cattle herds from Burkina Faso and associated risk scoring regarding the invasion of Rhipicephalus
(Boophilus) microplus. Transboundary and emerging diseases, 68(4), 2079-2093.
78

Literature Review On CSLS in SSA - PP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Literature Review On CSLS in SSA - PP

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Literature Review On CSLS in SSA - PP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FUND FOR FUTURE CLIMATE-SMART LIVESTOCK SYSTEMS (CSLS)

Literature Review on Climate-Smart Technologies for Livestock Systems

Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS................................................................................ii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AFOLU Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use

2 Contribution of Livestock to Livelihoods and the Economies of Sub-Saharan African Countries

2.1 Contribution to Gross Domestic Product

2.2 Livelihoods and Food and Nutrition Security

3 Livestock Production Systems and Level of Production in Sub-Sahara Africa

3.1 Livestock products in SSA

Figure 2. Livestock production in Sub-Saharan Africa. Source: OECD/FAO (2021), “OECD-FAO

3.2 Eastern Africa

3.2.2 Livestock populations and products

3.3 Southern Africa

Follow with examples of specific countries but keep it short

Figure 4 Livestock production systems in SADC. Source: Swinurai, 2016

3.3.2 Livestock populations and products

3.4 West Africa

3.4.2 Livestock populations and products

There is no narrative to support the table below.

3.5 Central Africa

Figure 6 (Map of Central Africa)

3.5.1 Livestock production systems

3.5.2 Livestock populations and products

4 Volume and Trends of Livestock Products in Sub-Saharan Africa

4.1 Factors Influencing Volume and Trends

5 Gender Dynamics and Gender Considerations in Climate-Smart Livestock Systems

5.1 Eastern Africa

5.2 Southern Africa

5.3 West Africa

5.4 Central Africa

4.1. Literature Review on Gender Considerations in Climate-Smart Livestock Systems

Research on gender considerations in climate-smart livestock systems in Sub-Saharan Africa is

4.1.2. Gaps and Limitations in Existing Studies

5.2. Implications for Research and Climate Smart Livestock Technologies

6.1 Impacts of climate change on smallholder livestock production in Sub-Saharan Africa

6.1.1 Temperature/heat stress

6.2 Vulnerability of smallholder livestock systems to climate risks

6.3 Climate hotspots in Sub-Saharan Africa

6.3.1 Southern Africa climate hotspots

6.3.2 West and Central Africa climate hotspots

6.3.3 Eastern Africa climate hotspots

6.4 Contribution of Livestock to Climate Change

Species Subcategories South Africa Kenya Senegale Ethiopiaf Developin

Beef cattle Mature cow 96.55 28.3 30.7 64.95 31

Heifer 55.90 39.86

et al., 2020; fWilkes et al., 2020; gDong et al., 2006

6.4.2 Projections of livestock GHG-related emissions

6.5 Gender dynamics and gender considerations in climate-smart livestock

Case study on gender- 7 Climate-Smart Livestock Technologies

7.1 1.1 Technologies to improve livestock productivity

71.1.1 Animal nutrition

Formulating balanced feed rations

Fodder cultivation and storage

Intercropping with forage legumes

Improving feed quality

Grassland and grazing management