Animal adaptive characteristics and herders’ perception of adaptation to climate
variability in pastoral systems in arid Kenya
S. O. Oseni1 and B. O. Bebe2
1
Department of Animal Sciences, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
2
Department of Animal Sciences, Egerton University, Njoro, Kenya
1
e-mail: [email protected]
Abstract
Successful implementation of intervention measures for climate change adaptation (CCA) in
arid lands requires that herders’ knowledge of the production environment, climate variability
and animal adaptive qualities in such environments are properly understood. Participatory
survey, focus-group discussions and key informant interviews were conducted as part of a
CCA study among pastoral communities in Kajiado and Malabot in the dry-lands of Kenya.
The objectives were to determine herders’ responses to climate variability and their perception
of characteristics related to animal survival and performance under marginal conditions. Key
questions raised in the group discussions and interviews include the ranking of critical
climate-related constraints associated with each of the multi-species of livestock kept,
frequency and episodic nature of extreme climatic events and its impact on livestock
management in arid lands, climate oscillations and herd dynamics, relative adaptability
ranking of livestock by herders, trait preferences and stock selection criteria among herders.
Generally, herders reported a diminishing trend in herd sizes, as a result of increased
frequency and prolonged incidence of droughts. Co- mmunal ranking of stocks in terms of
relative importance (in decreasing priority) were camels, goats, sheep and cattle (for Malabot)
and cattle, goats and sheep for Kajiado. These stocks displayed varied responses to different
climate scenarios including droughts, floods, heat stress, diseases and water resource decline.
Cattle and sheep were most vulnerable to droughts and associated impacts, including feed
resource shortage and water scarcity. In contrast, goats were vulnerable to heat stress (with
increasing cases of stillbirths and abortions) and increased susceptibility to diseases. All
stocks, except cattle were extremely vulnerable to flooding, resulting in total confinement for
camels and incidence of foot rot in sheep. Herders identified phenotypes among dams of Galla
goats and blackhead sheep displaying varying degree of adaption to extreme climatic
conditions. For trait preferences, animals with the following characteristics appeared to be
favoured by herders: low forage requirements (including the ability to utilize degraded
fodder), maintenance of body condition, trekking ability, and tolerance of infrequent watering.
Among the dams, trait preferences include maternal characters (including good amount of
‘first’ milk or colostrum), high kid/lamb survival rate and regular parturition interval. From
the foregoing, herders’ knowledge on animal management and adaptive characteristics in
harsh climates need to be carefully considered in the design of breeding and other
interventions strategies for pastoral communities in the dry-lands.
Keywords: Pastoral systems, Adaptive traits, Herders’ perception, Climate change, Dry-lands
Acknowledgements
2
Acknowledgements
This project was funded through the African Climate Change Fellowship Program (ACCFP).
The ACCFP is supported by a grant from the Climate Change Adaptation in Africa (CCAA),
funded jointly by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) of Canada and the
UK’s Department of International Development (DFID). The International START Secretariat
is the implementing agency in collaboration with the Institute of Resource Assessment (IRA)
of the University of Dar Es Salaam and the African Academy of Sciences (AAS).
Introduction
Climate change (CC) presents a unique challenge to pastoral systems globally, on account of their
livestock-based livelihoods that rely heavily on climate-sensitive resources, including water and
pasture. Pastoral systems in dry-land Africa are known to demonstrate a diverse range of adaptation to
the risks and uncertainties they face in daily life (Toulmin, 1994). Nomadic pastoralism remains one of
the indigenous strategies best adapted to climate disturbances, especially frequent drought in the dryland areas of Namibia and Botswana (Ericksen et al., 2008), implying that potentials exist in such
systems for meeting the challenges associated with CC. Sansthan and Köhler-Rollefson (2005)
presented further evidence that indigenous breeding practices by pastoralist communities, through
social and rational breeding mechanisms, have contributed to breed adaptation to harsh environments.
These authors also noted that breeding objectives among pastoral communities are often multi-faceted
and include the ability to survive in harsh environments. Thus, with CC and related drivers, indigenous
knowledge systems and traditions embedded in pastoralism could contribute towards building
resilience in such systems.
According to Drucker et al. (2007), the main effects of climate change are expected to be felt in
extensive livestock production systems. This implies that the stability and adaptive capacity of such
systems may be overwhelmed by the increased frequency of extreme weather events associated with
CC. In this regard, building resilience among pastoral communities in arid and semi-arid lands calls
for a comprehensive multi-stakeholder intervention programme that prioritizes measures that
contribute towards (a) strengthening the capability of pastoral systems to be more resilient to increased
frequencies of climate oscillations, and (b) harnessing indigenous knowledge systems in stock
selection, including knowledge of livestock genotypes with a high degree of rusticity and tolerance of
environmental stress (e.g. hyper-aridity, drought, hyper-humidity, floods, etc). According to
Hoffmann and Scherf (2006) and Hoffmann (2010), more research is needed in particular,
about the genetic and functional mechanisms of adaptive traits in stressful environments.
Main questions that are addressed in the current presentation include the following: (i) what animal
characteristics are related to their adaptability and survival under extreme climatic conditions? (ii) how
can these characteristics be measured and ranked? (iii) what are herders’ perceptions of animal
characteristics relating to their adaptation and survival in harsh environments? (iv) can herders identify
animal phenotypes within breeds and populations with extra adaptive qualities and fitness in such
environments?; (v) what are the indigenous knowledge systems in stock selection and management in
marginal lands? (vii) how can such knowledge systems contribute to the design of intervention
measures for building adaptive capacity and resilience in pastoral systems?
The objectives of this study are: (a) to understand and document herders’ strategies and response to
climate oscillations in a fragile ecology in arid and semi-arid lands, and (b) to document herders’
perception and knowledge with respect to animal characteristics relevant to survival and performance
in stressful environments. Outcomes of such a study will contribute to future recommendations for
breeding programmes related to CC adaptation in pastoral systems.
3
Methodology
Research Locations
Two locations in the dry-lands in Kenya were chosen for the study – (a) Malabot pastoral
communities in North Horr, Eastern Province, and (b) Ngurman pastoral communities in
Kajiado, in the Rift Valley Province. Some general characteristics of the study areas including
climatic region, population density, average rainfall and temperature are shown in Table 2.
The full cooperation and participation of local communities from project inception was sought
from the inception of the study, while the principle of ‘prior informed consent’ was applied
(Dossa et al., 2009). This principle states that: (i) target communities are involved as equal
partners, (ii) research objectives are explained as patiently and exhaustively as possible, (iii)
the views and concerns of herders are accommodated in the overall research plan, and (iv)
ultimately, research outcomes are shared with community members on a feedback basis.
Research Methods and Data Collection
Research methods embraced a participatory approach, following the guidelines presented by
FAO/WAAP (2008). These guidelines indicate detailed recording of production environment
descriptors, including geographic location, and a full description of the ‘management’ and
‘natural’ environments where animal are raised. For traditional communities in pastoral
systems, participatory research methods employed were as described by Waters-Bayer and
Bayer (1994). In general, such methods are useful in generating data on breeding objectives
and goals, breed and trait preferences, production system constraints, and the multitude of
functions and services that breeds provide for their keepers (Scherf and Tixier-Boichard
(2009). Data collection involved participatory survey methods, complemented with focusgroup discussions. Complementary procedures used to cross-check and validate findings
include key-informant interviews and reporting-back sessions with respondent communities
as described by Scherf and Tixier-Boichard (2009). Table 1 shows the description of main
topics covered in the survey questionnaire. Variables recorded covered the following: (a)
General information including herd sizes, dynamics, ownership patterns, including the
combination of livestock species kept, owned, shared and leased, and their distribution by age
classes and physiological status; relative importance of different livestock species (through a
ranking process); response strategies to climate variability and extremes; climate oscillations
and animal performance; relative vulnerability/adaptability ranking of the different livestock
species to climate oscillations (e.g. droughts and flooding); strategies for coping with droughts
(e.g. herd migration, de-stocking, species substitution, etc); novel animal management
techniques in marginal lands. (b) Adaptive traits, including all characteristics of livestock
relevant to adaptation to harsh environments, breeding practices under climatic extremes
(including a list of priority traits included in the selection criteria); indigenous knowledge in
stock selection; records of proxy-indicator variables for animal adaptation; traditional breed
characteristics in relation to survival in harsh environments, progeny history of dams (recall
method), etc. (c) Qualitative traits, including animal coat colour and texture, possession of
beard, wattles, horns, super-numerary teats, etc; (d) Animal morphology (e.g. body length,
height at withers and rump, chest and abdominal girths, etc), and rectal temperatures.
Data analyses:
(a) Data were summarized using Frequency Procedures of SAS (2004); (b) Herders’ responses
on traits related to animal adaptation are analyzed through the calculation of indices
representing weighted average of all rankings for each adaptive trait (Rowland et al., 2003).
(c) Outcomes of Focus-group Discussions were analyzed using Kendall’s Coefficient of
4
Concordance (Legendre, 2005) via SPSS (2005). This procedure determines, to what extent,
the views among herdsmen in a community, as well as between groups of communities are in
accord. (d) Data on animal morphology and herders’ ranking of traits related to animal
adaptation were analyzed using the Principal Component Analysis Procedure of SAS (2004).
These results are presented in a companion paper.
Results and Discussion
Figure 1 shows the “Boom and Burst” scenario, as coined by herders, describing the
fluctuations in herd sizes with oscillations in climate. Participants at FGD sessions agree that
there is a direct connection between climatic factors and herd sizes (of cattle, sheep and goats)
per household. Herders know that stable rains were associated with a “boom” in animal
numbers (herd sizes) per household while the onset of a drought resulted in a “burst” or
animal losses, the magnitude of which is determined by the duration of the drought. As
indicated in Figure 2, the goal of intervention measures is to minimize the effect of the “burst”
or animal losses through strategies that strengthen adaptive capacity and resilience of pastoral
systems to withstand the shocks of frequent climate oscillations. Thus, there is the need to
comprehend all the critical factors affecting or contributing to the “boom and burst” scenario,
so that suitable intervention measures can be implemented. In this regard, trends related to
herd dynamics, seasons and climate oscillations can be modeled through dynamic simulations
(e.g. ISEE Systems, 2009). The outcome of such modeling could guide the design and
implementation of sustainable intervention strategies geared towards building resilience to CC
in pastoral systems.
Table 3 shows the relative importance of the different livestock (e.g. camels, cattle, sheep and
goats) to herders and their livelihood base in Malabot and Ngurman communities. The two
herders’ communities ranked the stocks differently. In Malabot, camels were ranked as the
foremost livestock, largely due to their high drought tolerant capability, while goat and sheep
were ranked in decreasing order of importance, with cattle ranked the least (Kendall’s W =
0.71). In contrast, Kajiado herdsmen ranked cattle as the primary stock of importance, while
goats, sheep and camels followed in that order in decreasing magnitude of importance
(Kendall’s W = 0.75). In arid lands, the increase in the proportion of camels in herds is a
response strategy to environmental stress (Andersen, 2004). According to Hoffmann (2010,
citing Hoffmann, 2003), the use of multi-species and multi-breed herds is one strategy that
many traditional livestock farmers use to maintain high diversity in on-farm niches and to
buffer against climate and economic adversities. This author noted that such traditional
diversification practices are useful for adaptation to climate change while Seo and
Mendelsohn (2008) reported that a diverse livestock species portfolio contribute to the
resilience of smallholder farms in developing countries to climate change. Differences in
ranking of these multi-species livestock between regions are however, attributable to
variations in climatic factors between the regions. As shown in Table 2, while Ngurman
(Kajiado) is largely semi-arid and tropical, Malabot (Marsabit) is semi-desert and desert
(Kenya Atlas, 2004). Such regions were described by Krätli (2008) as the harshest and most
unpredictable environments in the planet, due to the extreme fluctuations in climatic factors.
According to Drucker et al. (2007), the effects of climate change are expected to be felt in extensive
livestock production systems, implying that the stability and adaptive capacity of such systems may be
overwhelmed by the increased frequency of extreme weather events associated with climate change.
5
Tables 4 and 5 (and Figures 3 and 4) show minimum and maximum herd sizes per household
respectively, before, and at the peak of the 2009 drought in Ngurman (Kajiado), based on the
outcome of the Focus Group Discussions. Cattle and sheep populations were worst affected
by the prolonged drought, as evidenced by a 66 – 75 % and 50 – 75% decline in herd sizes for
cattle and sheep respectively, when compared with goats that recorded 37 – 40 % decline.
According to participants at the FGD, the decline in goat populations was not attributable to
drought per se, but largely due to occasional outbreak of PPR and sale by herders to meet
domestic expenses heightened by the prolonged drought. Several authors (e.g. Gebremichael
et al., 2010) have presented reports showing that goats were less vulnerable to the impacts of
drought, when compared to sheep and cattle, due largely to their browsing ability.
Table 5 shows the ranking of climate-related constraints to livestock production in Malabot
and Ngurman pastoral communities. Pastoral communities ranked (in decreasing importance),
drought, epidemic and trans-boundary diseases (associated with climate oscillations and stock
movement across long distance often involving international boundaries), heat stress and
seasonal floods. These communities agree that the increasing frequency and extreme nature of
droughts and their attendant effects on the overall dynamics of livestock production is
assuming a very worrisome trend.
Tables 6 and 7 show the ranking of key climate-related constraints associated with each
species of livestock in Malabot and Ngurman communities respectively. For camels in
Malabot, the ranking of these constraints (in decreasing order) include diseases and parasites
associated with climate variability, feed resource shortage (especially during droughts), and
seasonal floods that totally inhibit stock movement to pasture areas. Specific climate-induced
constraints affecting other livestock species, (e.g. sheep, goats and cattle) in the two
communities are also presented. Such differences between livestock in the ranking of climaterelated constraints could explain herders’ rationale for keeping mixed herds under climate
uncertainty.
Figures 5 through 10 display the relative adaptability and vulnerability ranking of livestock
species to various climate-induced scenarios (e.g. drought, floods, heat stress, epidemic
diseases, feed and water resource decline) in arid areas. For drought (Figure 5), ranking by
herders indicate that among all the stocks, camels showed the highest degree of adaptability,
while sheep and cattle displayed maximum vulnerability score of -4, due largely to their
heavy reliance on pasture and water – which are highly sensitive to climate fluctuations.
According to Gebremichael et al. (2010), camels and goats were more drought-resistant than
cattle and sheep, while noting that the latter may do better in a year that is wetter than usual.
Similarly, for heat stress (Figure 6), camels were highly adapted while sheep, goats and cattle
showed varied degrees of vulnerability. All stocks however, displayed different vulnerability
levels to diseases associated with climate variability (Figure 7). Goats and camels recorded
the maximum vulnerability score of -4 for diseases. For floods (Figure 8), pastoralists noted
that cattle had some advantage, due to their ability to float in water channels, as indicated by
their high adaptability score of +3. All other stocks were extremely vulnerable. Herders noted
that during el nino rains and floods, camels and small ruminants are almost totally immobile
and thus, cannot have access to pasture areas, contributing to animal losses.
With regards to feed shortage (Figure 9), camels and goats recorded high adaptability scores
of +4 and +2 respectively, indicating an enhanced ability to cope during conditions of feed
resource shortage, induced by unfavourable climatic conditions (especially drought). In
contrast, sheep and cattle recorded maximum vulnerability scores of -4, showing the extreme
6
effect of feed shortage on these stocks. For water resource decline (Figure 10) however,
camels according to herders, showed enhanced capability to adapt, with a score of +4, while
goats, sheep and cattle recorded a vulnerability score of -2, -4 and -4 respectively.
Herders’ perceptions of traits of animals that are relevant to their capability to adapt to
extreme climatic conditions are shown in Table 7. These characteristics include traits related
to: (1) general hardiness, and include (a) survival on low quality fodder, sparse vegetation and
degraded pasture, (b) good kid survival rates in harsh environments, (c) maintenance of body
condition during drought as exemplified by slow emaciation rate during feed and water
resource shortage, (d) phenotypic plasticity or ability to cope with climate-induced
environmental stress combined with the ability to respond favorably when conditions improve
(Hall, 2004), and (e) trekking ability; (2) Maternal traits, including good milk yield, high kid
weight at birth, which contribute to good kid survival rate, as well as proxy indicator variables
especially regular parturition intervals (McManus et al., 2008) and low rate of abortion and
stillbirth; (3) Other traits include foraging ability, as well as type and conformation traits.
Table 8 which shows the ranking of the afore-mentioned traits by herders indicate that the
most preferred adaptive traits in order of decreasing order of preference) include the
following: (1) animals with low fodder requirements, (2) dams with good or high kid survival
rate, (3) good maternal traits as listed above, (4) animals that can maintain good body
condition under climatic stress, while and (5) traits related to animal morphology and
conformation were ranked the least. The high priority given to animals with low fodder
requirements could be largely attributed to the fact fodder is a primary resource in livestock
production in pastoral systems that is highly sensitive to climate fluctuations. Fodder
requirement by cattle has been included in stock selection strategies by some pastoral
communities. According to Anderson (2004), pastoralists have adjusted their breeding
strategies to the deteriorated ecology by selecting for Ayuna, a cattle breed with lower
demands for forage than the typical Boran cattle.
Hoffmann (2008) suggested that simple methods are developed to characterize adaptive traits
in marginal lands. Such a step, in addition to other approaches including fostering
participatory planning and the development of breeding goals and the design of breeding
structures for community-based adaptation to climate change in pastoral systems will
contribute towards building adaptive capacity under climate uncertainty. Such steps will
however, require a clear understanding of indigenous knowledge systems with respect to trait
preferences and key animal characteristics related to their survival in stressful environments.
Ultimately, this will contribute to the strengthening the resilience of pastoral systems in the
face of climate change.
Conclusion
The following conclusions can be drawn from the study: (i) The connection between livestock
production, herd dynamics and climate oscillations was described by the “boom and burst”
scenario as coined by herders, which showed the intricate relationship between changes in
climate and herd sizes per household; (ii) The impact of prolonged drought in the study areas
showed that animal losses were most profound among cattle and sheep populations, reaching
about three-quarters of pre-drought herd sizes; (iii) Relative importance of the different
livestock species to herders in Ngurman (semi-arid and tropical) and Malabot (desert and
semi-desert) showed key differences between locations. In Malabot, camels were ranked as
7
the principal livestock, while in Ngurman, cattle were ranked as the foremost livestock; (iv)
the ranking of climate-related constraints affecting livestock production in dry-lands showed
the following order (in decreasing importance): drought, diseases (epidemic and transboundary) associated with climate oscillations, heat stress and seasonal floods. Details were
also presented on the ranking of specific climate-related constraints for each species of
livestock; (v) Ranking of animal characteristics related to their survival in the dry-lands by
herders showed the following order (in decreasing importance): animals with low fodder
requirements, good kid survival rate, maternal traits, maintenance of body condition during
environmental stress, and conformation traits; (vi) Relative vulnerability and adaptability
ranking of livestock to various climate-induced scenarios (e.g. drought, floods, heat stress,
water stress and diseases) showed differences among the livestock species, thus justifying the
rationale for keeping mixed herds by herders in the dry-lands.
Acknowledgements:
(a) This project was funded through the African Climate Change Fellowship Program
(ACCFP). The ACCFP is supported by a grant from the Climate Change Adaptation in Africa
(CCAA), funded jointly by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) of Canada
and the UK’s Department of International Development (DFID). The International START
Secretariat is the implementing agency in collaboration with the Institute of Resource
Assessment (IRA) of the University of Dar Es Salaam and the African Academy of Sciences
(AAS); (b) Pastoral communities in Malabot and Ngurman in the dry-lands of Kenya for their
time and patience; (c) Prof. L. Nakhone and other Staff at Egerton University for their
warmth and contributions to the study; (d) Special appreciation to I. Turah for assistance with
the translation of Gabra terms to English.
References
Anderson, S. (2004). Environmental effects on animal genetic resources. Commission on
Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. Background Study Paper No. 28. FAO,
16 pp.
CGRFA (2009). Contributions of smallholder farmers and pastoralists to the development, use
and conservation of animal genetic resources. CGRFA/WG-AnGR-5/09/Inf.4.
Dossa, L. H., Wollny, C. and Gauly, M. (2007). Smallholders’ perceptions of goat farming in
southern Benin and opportunities for improvement. Trop. Anim. Health and Prod., 39:
49 – 57.
Dossa, L. H., Wollny, C., Gauly, M. and Gbego, I. (2009). Community-based management of
farm animal genetic resources in practice: framework for focal goats in two rural
communities in Southern Benin. Anim. Genet. Res. Inf., 44: 11 – 32.
Drucker, A.G., Hiemstra, S.J N., Louwaars, J.K. Oldenbroek, M.W. Tvedt, I., Hoffmann, I.,
Awgichew, K., Abegaz Kebede, S., Bhat, P.N. and da Silva Mariante, A. (2007).
Back to the future. How scenarios of future globalization, biotechnology, disease and
climate change can inform present animal genetic resources policy development.
Anim. Genet. Res. Inf., 41: 75 – 89.
Ericksen, S. (2008). Climate change in Eastern and Southern Africa. Impacts, vulnerability
and adaptation. Gechs International Project Office, eport 2008:2, University of Oslo,
22 pp.
FAO/WAAP (2008). Production environment descriptors for animal genetic resources. PED
8
Worksheet. Report of FAO/WAAP Workshop, Caprarola, Italy, 6-8 May, 2008, 97 pp.
Hoffmann, I. (2008). Livestock genetic diversity and climate change adaptation. In Livestock
and Global Climate Change. P. Rowlinson, M. Steele and Y.A. Nefzaoui (Eds.). pp. 76
– 80. BSAS Proceedings, Cambridge University Press.
Hoffmann, I. and Scherf, B. (2006). Animal genetic resources: time to worry? In: FAO
Livestock Report 2006, Pp 57 – 76.
Hoffman, I. (2010). Climate change and the characterization and conservation of animal genetic
resources. Animal Genetics, 41 (Suppl. 1), 32 – 46.
Isee Systems (2004). Introduction to Systems Thinking. STELLA Software, Isee Systems, 97
pp.
Kenya Atlas (2004). Kenya Primary Atlas, Revised Edition. George Philip and Sons Ltd., UK.
Krätli, S. (2008). Cattle breeding, complexity and mobility in a structurally unpredictable
environment: The Wodaabe Herders of Niger. Nomadic Peoples, 12(1): 11 – 41.
Lanari, M.R., Domingo, E., Perez Centeno, M.J and Gallo, L. (2005). Pastoral community
selection and the genetic structure of a local goat breed in Pantagonia. Anim. Genet.
Res. Inf., 37, 31 – 42.
Legendre, P. (2005). Species Associations. The Kendall’s Coefficient of Concordance
Revisited. J. Agric., Biol. and Env. Stat., 10(2): 226 – 245.
Mbuku, S.M. (2006). Characterization of the sheep and goat breeding practices of the
pastoral Gabra and Rendille communities in Northern Kenya. M.Sc. Thesis, Egerton
University, Kenya, 85 pp.
Rowland, J., Nagda, S. and Rege, E. (2003). The design, execution and analysis of livestock
breed surveys – a case study in Zimbabwe. A Report to the FAO, ILRI, 216 pp.
SAS. 2004. SAS/STAT User’s Guide (Release 8.03). SAS Inst. Inc., Cary NC, USA.
Scherf, B. and Tixier-Boichard, A. (2009). Production environment recording. Anim. Genet.
Res. Inf., 44:7-10.
Sansthan, L.P and Köhler-Rollefson, I. (2005). Indigenous breeds, local communities. Life
Initiative, LPPS. 66 pp.
SPSS (2005). Statistical Package for Social Sciences. SPSS-PC, Version 15. SPSS Inc.,
Chicago, IL., USA,
Thornton, P.K., Jones, P.G., Owiyo, T.M., Kruska, R.L., Herrero, M., Kristjanson, P.,
Notenbaert, A., Bekele, N., and Omolo, A. (2006). Mapping Climate vulnerability and
poverty in Africa. Report of the DFID. ILRI, 200pp.
Toulmin, C. (1994). Tracking through drought: Options for de-stocking and re-stocking. In: I.
Scoones (Ed.). Living with uncertainty. New Directions in Pastoral Developments in
Africa, pp 95 – 115. Intermediate Technology Publications, 1994.
Waters-Bayer, A. and Bayer, W. (1994). Planning with pastoralists: PRA and more – review
of methods focused on Africa. GTZ Division 422 Working paper, 99 pp.
9
Table 1. Main topics included in the Questionnaire
_________________________________________________________________
Topic
Description
Herd sizes and dynamics
Stocks of animals (e.g. cattle, sheep, goats and camels) kept, owned
and shared; herd composition and dynamics under different climate
scenarios (e.g. droughts and floods).
Climate change impact
and herders perception of
adaptation
Herders’ perception of climate impact and variability, in relation
to animal survival and performance, relative vulnerability and adaptability ranking of livestock to various climatic conditions (e.g.
drought, floods, heat stress, diseases)
Herders’ perception of
animal characteristics
related to their survival
in marginal lands.
Animal adaptive characteristics, animal traits (e.g. biometric, survival
morphological, functional and performance-related) that
contribute to their adaptation to harsh conditions induced by climate
oscillations, listing and ranking of animal traits related to adaptation.
Stock selection and management
Stock ownership and sharing patterns, communal breeding schemes,
indigenous knowledge in stock selection and management in extreme
environments.
Other
Institutional support systems pertaining to adaptation to climate
impact (e.g. early warming), role of ICT in disseminating climate
information, etc
______________________________________________________________________
10
Table 2. Characteristics of the study areas in the dry-lands of Kenya
___________________________________________________________________
Feature
Malabot/North Horr
Ngurman/Kajiado
___________________________________________________________________
Province in Kenya
Eastern
Rift Valley
Population density (Persons/Sq Km)
3
27
Climate region
Semi-desert and desert
Semi-arid and tropical
Rainfall (mm/year)
100 - 250
250 - 1000
Temperature (0C)
27.8
---__________________________________________________________________
(Source: Kenya Atlas, 2004)
11
Table 3. Herd sizes (range) before and during droughts in Kajiado*
______________________________________________________________________
Stock
Herd Sizes
Herd Sizes at the
%
Before Drought
Peak of the Drought
Decline
_______________________________________________________________________
Cattle
30 – 200
10 – 50
66 – 75
Sheep
20 – 800
10 – 200
50 – 75
Goats**
50 – 800**
30 – 500**
37 – 40**
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
*
From Focus group Discussions with pastoralists in Ngurman
Fluctuations in herd sizes for goats not attributable to the effect of drought per se, but due largely to
(a) outbreak of PPR and (b) seasonal trends in marketing /sale of goats by herders, as the need arises
_______________________________________________________________________
**
12
Table 4. Relative importance of different livestock to herders’ livelihood in Malabot and
Kajiado.
_____________________________________________________________________
Rank (mean rank)a
Malabot
Kajiado
Livestock
(n = 98)
(n = 100)
Camels
1.30 (1)
4.00 (4)
Goat
2.63 (2)
1.93 (2)
Sheep
2.68 (3)
2.61 (3)
Cattle
3.41 (4)
1.46 (1)
b
***
Kendall’s (W)
0.71
0.75***
______________________________________________________________________
a
The lower the rank, the greater the importance of the livestock to the herdsmen
b
W ranges between 0 (no agreement) to 1 (complete agreement). Higher values of W connote
a higher degree of concordance among the respondents from the same community
______________________________________________________________________
13
Table 5. Ranking of key climate-related constraints affecting livestock production in the drylands
Climate-related constraint
Drought
Epidemic diseases
Heat stress
Seasonal floods
Rank (mean rank)a
Malabot
(n =98)
1.30(1)
1.76(2)
2.98(3)
3.96(4)
Kajiado
(n=100)
1.10(1)
1.98(2)
2.98(3)
3.93(4)
Kendall’s (W)
0.90***
0.93***
_________________________________________________________________
a
The lower the rank, the greater the importance of the livestock
b
W ranges from 0 (no agreement) to 1 (complete agreement), implying
that higher values of W connote a higher level of concordance among
herders in the ranking.
*** P < 0.001
14
Table 6. Ranking of climate-related constraint by livestock species in Malabot
_____________________________________________________________________
Ranking of constraints_____________________
1st
2nd
3rd
_________________________________________________________
Livestock
Camels
Diseases and parasites
Feed resource shortage
Floods
Goat
Diseases and parasites
Feed resource shortage
Water decline
Sheep
Feed resource shortage
Feed resource shortage
Water decline
Cattle
Feed resource shortage
Water stress
Heat stress
______________________________________________________________________
15
Table 7. Listing of traits that are related to the ability of animals to survive in extreme
environments in arid lands in Malabot
______________________________________________________________________
Categories
Traits
______________________________________________________________________
1.
General hardiness
a. Survival on low quality fodder, sparse vegetation and degraded
pasture,
b. Good kid survival rates in harsh environments,
c. Maintenance of body condition during drought as exemplified by
slow emaciation rate during feed and water resource shortage,
d. Phenotypic plasticity or ability to cope with climate-induced
environmental stress combined with the ability to respond favorably
when conditions improve (Hall, 2004), and
e. Trekking ability;
2.
Maternal traits,
a. Good milk yield,
b. high kid weight at birth, which contribute to good kid survival rate,
as well as
c. Regular parturition intervals
d. Low rate of abortion and stillbirth;
3.
Other traits include
a. Foraging ability,
b. Type traits
c. Conformation traits.
__________________________________________________________________________
16
Table 8. Ranking of traits that are related to the ability of animals to survive in extreme
environments in arid lands in Malabot
_____________________________________________________________________
Rank (mean rank, n= 50)a
Trait
Low fodder requirement
1.33 (1)
High kid survival rate
2.45 (2)
Maternal traits
2.87 (3)
Body condition / phenotypic plasticity
3.65 (4)
Animal morphology /conformation
4.70 (5)
Kendall’s (W)b
0.68***
____________________________________________________________________
17
Figure 1. “Boom and Burst Scenarios” describing fluctuations in herd sizes with climate
oscillations
18
Figure 2. “Boom and Burst Scenarios” describing the goals of intervention measures to reduce
the impact of environmental stress occasioned by drought
19
Figure 3. Minimum herd sizes per household before, and at the peak of the 2009 drought in
Ngurman, Kajiado.
20
Figure 4. Maximum herd sizes per household before, and at the peak of the 2009 drought in
Ngurman, Kajiado.
21
Figure 5. Relative vulnerability and adaptability ranking of livestock to drought
22
Figure 6. Relative vulnerability and adaptability ranking of livestock to heat stress
23
Figure 7. Relative vulnerability and adaptability ranking of livestock to floods
24
Figure 8. Relative vulnerability and adaptability ranking of livestock to disease epidemics
induced by climate fluctuations
25
Figure 9. Relative vulnerability and adaptability ranking of livestock to water resource
decline.
26
Figure 10. Relative vulnerability and adaptability ranking of livestock to feed resource
shortage