Livelihood and production strategies of livestock keepers and their perceptions on climate change in the Central Peruvian Andes

Highlights

• Keeping different livestock is a strategy to increase economic resilience.

• Farmers identified climate change as a major production constraint.

• Off-farm employment contributes substantially to the farmers´ income.

Abstract

Harsh climatic conditions have always marked the living conditions of smallholders in the Peruvian Andes. Nowadays, farmers see their livelihoods more and more challenged by environmental and economic changes. These factors result in adaptations of their livelihood strategies that can be classified in on-farm production and income-generating strategies. The study's objective was to investigate income-generating and production strategies of livestock keepers in the Central Andes of Peru. Farmers' perceptions of their livestock and perceived effects of climate change were investigated. Therefore, 46 livestock farmers from the provinces of Pasco and Daniel Carrión were interviewed. Most farmers diversify their livestock, keeping llamas, alpacas, sheep, and cattle in different combinations at once. Only a few farmers are specialized and keep alpacas in high numbers. A diversified production strategy decreases vulnerability regarding environmental and economic shocks. The main reasons for changing the herd compositions were economic and environmentally caused reasons such as a lack of pasture and declining prices for sheep wool. All farmers see climate change as a production constraint, and the ones that can afford it have already tried to cope via the adoption of diverse adaptation strategies. Farmers seem to plan a shift towards a higher number of llamas as they are considered to be more resistant to changing climate. However, the market for llama products is small, and prices are low, so farmers cannot rely on sufficient incomes by only keeping llamas. More than half of the farmers work in non-farm activities. Farmers experience a high economic pressure to look for work outside their farms. Investments in infrastructure, better extension services, and capacity-building programs should be taken to support farmers to improve their livelihood. These strategies can help ensure that farmers are offered a perspective for their future in the High Andes.

Introduction

Livestock production systems in developing countries are heterogeneous and dynamic and are undergoing dramatic changes due to various drivers (Thornton et al., 2009). The interactions of these drivers and the magnitude of impact on livestock production is still not well understood (Thornton et al., 2009, Escarcha et al., 2018). Various authors emphasized that there are still knowledge gaps on how climate change will impact different livestock production systems and which adaption strategies should be implemented (Escarcha et al., 2018, Herrero et al., 2015, Weindl et al., 2015).

Globally rangeland production systems are under high pressure due to climate change and 74% of rangeland are projected to experience a declined productivity (Goode et al., 2020). Herrero et al. (2015) further explained that their contribution to global food supply is not high, but they cover most of the land and play a key social role especially in extensive production systems. According to the ICCP report, the Andes are particularly affected by climate change with severe consequences for livestock farming, as reduced rainfall impacts grazing land productivity (ICCP, 2021). As an unstable climate with many frost episodes does not favor crop farming in the high Andes, livestock husbandry is crucial (Anderson, 2003, Trejo, 2004).

In their systematic review Escarcha et al. (2018) identified five production areas reported to be affected mainly by climate change: feeds, diseases, economics of households, production (e.g. reduced milk production), and water and land usage. Furthermore, the authors listed already identified adaptation strategies and highlighted that most of these strategies are only incremental adaptation strategies, but no transformational ones. This means that livestock keepers make smaller adjustments in their current practices, but don´t change fundamentally their livelihood strategies.

In the ICCP report It has been recognized that adaptation is a multi-scale process that needs to consider not only different sources of knowledge but also societal and cultural values, objectives and risk perceptions of different involved actors (IPCC, 2014). Huggel et al. (2015) argue that adaptation strategies are always place- and context-specific and that the participation of local governments and communities are important in this process. Nevertheless, the limited capacity of vulnerable groups to respond and adapt has been reported as a major concern (Vidaurre de la Riva et al., 2013). The lack of reliable climate data for remote mountains areas is an additional problem for planning and decision-making (Salzmann et al., 2009).

The role of local knowledge has been recognized as important to adapt to changing situations (Nassef et al., 2009, Newsham and Thomas, 2011, Herreo et al., 2016, Carrasco-Torrontegui et al.,), but with ongoing changes this knowledge will be less accurate and useful and new scientific knowledge has to be generated to support farmers (Kirkland, 2012). In the same line, Paerregaard (2018) argues that participation of local communities and their viewpoints and experiences have to be included in formulating adaptation strategies. It has been widely recognized that adaptation is a multi-scale process that needs to consider different sources of knowledge and societal and cultural values, objectives, and risk perceptions of different involved actors (IPCC, 2021). Accordingly, it is essential to adequately consider the diversity of motivations for ecosystem change, management, protection, or restoration (Muhar et al., 2017). These motivations, in turn, are context-sensitive and rooted in different understandings of human-nature relationships (Braito et al., 2017).

Scoones (1998) identified three main livelihood strategies for rural communities: Agricultural intensification/extensification, livelihood diversification, or migration. Through processes of intensification or extensification, communities can either earn more from agriculture and livestock, or they can diversify to a range of non-farm income activities, or they migrate to urban areas. Non-farm activities must be understood as complementary to agriculture; both are linked through investment, production, and consumption throughout the rural economy (Davis et al., 2010).

The traditional farming system in the Andes is based on diversification of resource exploitation to minimize risks, increase resilience, and assure farmers' survival in the harsh mountainous climate. Adaptation to stress and shock is an important dimension of family welfare (Valdivia, 2001). Tichit and Genin (1997) showed in their study that different factors affect the herd structure in a mixed sheep-llama production system in Bolivia. Besides ecophysiological differences between llamas and sheep, historical developments of communities, economic opportunities and socio-ecological aspects also play a role.

Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the income-generating and production strategies of small livestock keepers in two provinces the Central Peruvian Andes, which differ in altitude and market access. Besides, farmers' choices and perceptions of livestock species and the perceived effects of climate change were studied.