Livestock adapting and coping - getting to the meat of the problem

Intro - “Adaptive capacity” is key for livestock having the ability to survive and thrive. The ability to adapt and cope is therefore increased by increasing the adaptive capacity of the livestock and their owners. Coping strategies include a suitable healthcare service for animals with surveillance and emergency systems in place. Despite uncertainty around the precise vulnerability of specific regions and their livestock, one can come to several assumptions based on the type of livestock production systems and the general characteristics of each type. Adaptation in its most common form is not conscious – in fact can be considered completely autonomous and actually just a natural reaction to the surrounding environment. Autonomous adaptations can often undermine the vital impacts institutions can have on livestock when undertaking deliberate adaptation schemes.  

Transhumance - One of these more autonomous phenomena is known as “Transhumance” which consists of the movement of livestock to more seasonally variable pastures to maximise the yield from the land and therefore their chances of survival. (Boscche, 555; 2008) This can be mirrored in rainfall patterns too. Eat and West Africa tend to follow relocating based on pasture richness. Northern and Southern Africa has been reported to be mainly based around rainfall patterns. I feel like both these reasons are interlinked as rainfall effects pasture density and vice versa. However, as the general trend of cattle numbers increases, competition for resources like food and water become scarcer. As a result the mechanism of moving cattle to other areas may be less successful if there are limited areas to move into. A strategy therefore would be to enhance the feed concentrations for food insecurities – water access remains a problem. (Lunde, 14; 2013)

Diversifying - Often diversifying or even moving towards other more reliable sources of income for pastoralists may be the answer – Maasai herders in Kenya moving towards crop farming as an alternate revenue stream is a prime example of this. However, moving towards crops as an income supplement has its drawbacks – they are a less geographically mobile resource and are therefore more susceptible to extreme weather events such as flooding or droughts. As a result the adaptive capacity is often lower than sticking with livestock. (Boscche, 555; 2008)

Technology - Adaptive capacity can be greatly increased by advancements in technology especially when looking at the issue of disease management. Aerial satellite maps of vegetation can be useful when predicting and visualising possible vector related disease outbreaks. Technology however is only good as the people operating and interpreting it thus high education and knowledge levels are vital to its success in order to then carry out suitable responses.

Socio political - Also finally, socio political factors have a large bearing adaptive capacity – political upheaval creates instability in communities and therefore limits scope to adapt. In order to cope and adapt communities need to maximise the resources available to them – instability ensures inefficient use of available resources and thus adaptive capacity is reduced. (Boscche, 556; 2008) Wealth also plays a large part in adaptive capacity as greater levels of wealth can afford greater investment in adaptive measures. Poverty obviously increases vulnerability to climatic fluctuations and therefore adaptive capacity is reduced.

Discussion - Taking into account all these variables therefore – one can easily see why the adaptive capacity of livestock is so variable between regions across Africa. Climatic effects, production systems and wealth vary.

Though difficult to gauge the scale of accountability climatic change can take for effects on livestock we can identify and therefore enhance adaptive capacities in specific areas in order to combat these effects. As discussed previously often the key to helping livestock are top down approaches such as governmental policies being implemented such as surveillance systems. (Boscche, 556; 2008) These systems can be used to identify key patterns of failure within the livestock industry and help pinpoint key areas of attention. One of which that has been identified is the need for community participation – the sharing of resources, communication and support will alleviate problems such as over grazing and desertification. Policies and participation both unite when it comes to keeping the data up to date and relevant. Policies can be authorised to update monitoring equipment and authorise more in depth research into the more direct impacts of climate change on livestock. To elaborate further – I feel like the evidence from recent more extreme climatic events like El Niño can help illuminate the more difficult to measure climatic fluctuations and their effects on animal health – surely the more subtle effects will mirror those of past more extreme historic events?

The use of integrated models in the context of vector borne diseases is vital to try and “clarify, quantify and qualify” the present and more importantly future effects of climate change on livestock health. These models will assist and aim to eradicate uncertainties around the links between climate change and livestock health – factoring in variables such as physical, biological and societal factors. However, we have no choice but to generalise data as in fact evidence shows the climatic effects on livestock depend very much on context. As a result, for the models to be effective they must be based on specific populations and their conditions. What is the best scale to acquire the most accurate data then? Nationally? Regionally? Well, research suggests regional would be preferable as more precision can be applied to results if said areas share the same climatic conditions as each other.

The easiest scenarios to observe and learn from are ones where long-term climate change is affecting livestock and production systems with low adaptive capacity which shows a more profound exposure/outcome relationship. (Boscche, 557 - 558; 2008) Case studies can be instrumental learning tools when used as exemplars – adaptations and responses, policy successes and failures and varying regions all help attempts at finding viable solutions to these issues.

Conclusion – To somewhat conclude this rather substantial discussion topic, I believe that the ability of African livestock owners to adapt can be seen as very limited due to the restrictive number and effectiveness of adaptation solutions. Limitations include financial resources, underdeveloped infrastructure, undeveloped technological solutions and unequal resource distribution. I think the development of a healthcare service for animals in Africa would be incredibly beneficial to adaptive capacity levels. It would help develop policy measures as well as boosting institutional support. (Boscche, 558; 2008) It would act as a coordinator for all the different avenues of help for these livestock farmers. Animal disease and vaccination programs protecting against RVF and AHS (for example) would definitely go some substantial way towards safeguarding against present and future climate variability.


Why the picture? I have chosen the picture this week to illustrate the sheer diversity of species in Africa - all of which will be affected by water and climate change in some form or another. I would like to inspire the readers of this blog to apply the same criteria that I have to the fishing and livestock industry and examine other species and the ways people interact with them, send them in to me or post in the comments and show off what has interested you! I will be fascinated by both differences and similarities.