The study was conducted in Mazabuka District, located in Zambia’s Southern Province (15.856° S, 27.748° E), a region characterised by mixed crop–livestock systems dominated by cattle, goats, and poultry alongside extensive sugarcane production. Zambia is broadly classified into three agro-ecological zones based on long-term rainfall patterns. Agro-ecological Zone I is the driest, receiving less than 800 mm of annual rainfall and accounting for approximately 12% of national precipitation. Zone II receives between 800 and 1,000 mm annually and contributes about 42% of total rainfall, while Zone III is the wettest zone, receiving 1,000–1,500 mm and accounting for roughly 46% of national rainfall (Makondo et al., 2014; Maulu et al., 2024). Mazabuka District falls within Agro-ecological Zone IIb, which is characterised by high interannual rainfall variability and recurrent drought events (Figure 1). Socio-economically, Mazabuka District is predominantly rural, with livelihoods largely dependent on smallholder agriculture, livestock rearing, and employment in the sugar industry. Livestock production plays a central role in household income generation, food security, draft power, and asset accumulation. The district exhibits marked income inequality, with commercial sugarcane estates co-existing alongside resource-constrained smallholder farmers who face limited access to markets, veterinary services, and financial credit. These socio-economic conditions, combined with climate variability, heighten household vulnerability to drought shocks and influence livestock management practices and market participation. Consequently, the district provides an appropriate setting for examining drought impacts on livestock production systems and associated market dynamics. These climatic conditions make the district particularly vulnerable to climate-induced droughts, thereby providing an appropriate setting for examining drought impacts on livestock production systems and associated market dynamics.

The study targeted small-scale livestock farmers registered with local agricultural authorities in Mazabuka District. From a sampling frame of 126 registered livestock farmers, a sample of 95 respondents was selected. The sample size was determined using the formula proposed by Yamane (1973), assuming a 95% confidence level, a 5% margin of error, and a population proportion of 0.5 to maximise statistical power.

where n is the sample size, N is the population size, and e is the margin of error.

A probability-based sampling approach was employed to ensure representativeness. The first household was randomly selected from the sampling frame, after which systematic sampling was applied by selecting every fourth household until the target sample size was reached. This approach balanced randomness with field practicality and is widely applied in farm-level socio-economic studies where complete household listings are available (Mulwanda et al., 2022).

Primary data were collected between April and June 2025 using a semi-structured questionnaire administered to household heads. The questionnaire captured information on household socio-demographic characteristics, perceived impacts of climate-induced drought on livestock production, effects on livestock market dynamics, and adaptation strategies and support needs. The questionnaire was pretested among a small group of livestock farmers in the study area to ensure clarity, internal consistency, and contextual relevance (Maulu et al., 2024; Hasimuna et al., 2025a, 2025b). Minor adjustments were made to improve question wording and sequencing prior to the main survey. Data collection was conducted through face-to-face interviews by the research team and trained research assistants, with questionnaires administered in English and translated into local languages where necessary. Verbal informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to interviews, consistent with local cultural norms and ethical research practice (Mphande et al., 2023; Mwamba et al., 2025). Data entry and management were facilitated using the Kobo Toolbox platform, which enhanced accuracy and data integrity. This study involved human participants through questionnaire-based interviews with livestock farmers. Prior to data collection, verbal informed consent was obtained from all respondents after explaining the purpose of the study and their right to decline participation, though none did. Participation was voluntary, and no personally identifiable information was collected. The study followed ethical principles applicable to social science and agricultural related research and posed minimal risk to participants (Mulwanda et al., 2022).

Quantitative data were analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 29 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Descriptive statistics, including frequencies and percentages, were used to summarise household characteristics, drought impacts, adaptation strategies, and support needs. Associations between demographic characteristics and perceived drought impact severity were examined using appropriate exact tests where contingency table assumptions were not met. Drought impact severity, measured as an ordinal outcome with three ordered categories (minimal, moderate, and severe), was analysed using ordinal logistic regression to identify factors associated with increasing severity of climate-induced drought impacts on livestock production. Predictor variables included livestock disease incidence, mortality, reduced productivity, grazing constraints, and water shortages. Prior to model estimation, predictors were assessed for multicollinearity, and model fit was evaluated using appropriate goodness-of-fit diagnostics. All statistical tests were conducted at a 5% significance level. Interview transcripts were first transcribed and read repeatedly to ensure familiarity with the data. The data were then coded by identifying meaningful units related to the study objectives. Similar codes were grouped into categories and further developed into themes representing key patterns in participants’ responses. These themes were interpreted in relation to the research questions and supported with representative quotations.

Ethical considerations were carefully observed throughout the study to protect the rights, dignity, and welfare of all participants. Prior to data collection, ethical approval was obtained from the relevant institutional authorities. All participants were fully informed about the purpose of the study, the procedures involved, and their right to decline participation or withdraw at any time without any negative consequences. Informed consent was obtained before administering questionnaires and conducting interviews. Confidentiality and anonymity were ensured by not recording participants’ names or identifying information and by storing all data securely. The collected data were used strictly for academic purposes, and participants were assured that their responses would be treated with honesty, respect, and confidentiality.

The demographic information of livestock farmers in Mazabuka District (Table 1) revealed that the majority of farmers in the district were male (68%), while females were 32%. The age distribution revealed that the largest proportion of farmers (42%) was aged between 46–60 years, followed by those aged 31–45 years (35%). Farmers who were above 60 years constituted 13%, while the youngest group (18–30 years) represented 11% of the respondents. In terms of level of education among livestock farmers, secondary education was the most common level of education attained (48%), followed by primary education (31%), tertiary education (15%), and no formal education (6%). Experience in livestock farming was fairly distributed, with 34% having 11–20 years of experience, while farmers with 5–10 years and 11–20 years of experience were both 31%. Only 4% livestock farmers had less than 5 years of farming experience.

The type of Livestock kept by livestock farmers in the present study varied (Figure 2). The most commonly kept livestock per farmer were goats (98%), followed by cattle (95%), sheep (56%), and poultry (53%), while pigs were the least kept by only 7% of the livestock farmers.

Several impacts of climate-induced droughts on livestock in Mazabuka District were recorded among the farmers covered in the study (Figure 3). The majority (96%) of farmers reported that they experienced water shortage for livestock consumption. Followed by reduced grazing pasture areas (95%), an increase in incidence of livestock disease cases (78%), high mortality rates (52%), and reduced milk and meat production (66%). Only 1% of the farmers reported not being impacted significantly by the drought conditions.

The relationship between the impact that livestock farmers faced and the severity of climate-related droughts on livestock production being severe was assessed using Ordinal logistic regression analysis (Table 2). The indicated that increased livestock disease incidence, higher mortality rates, and reduced milk or meat production were significantly associated with higher levels of perceived drought impact severity among livestock farmers impacts (p = 0.981 and p = 0.278, respectively). In contrast, water shortages and reduced grazing availability were not significantly associated with increasing severity levels. The observed large coefficient estimates for some predictors likely reflect sparse-data effects and strong clustering of severe outcomes among affected households; therefore, results are interpreted as associative rather than causal relationships. Increased livestock diseases (p = 0.001), higher mortality rates (p = 0.003), and reduced milk or meat production (p = 0.001) were all significantly associated with droughts, having severe impacts on livestock production.

The Impact of drought on livestock production, which led to a reduction in the price of dairy products in Mazabuka District, are shown in Figure 4. Results indicate that the majority of farmers (96%) perceived that climate-induced drought led to poor body condition of their livestock. Additionally, 35% recorded a reduction in livestock demand from buyers on the market, while 12% of farmers cited an increase in the cost of feed and accessing water.

Several adaptation strategies were reportedly adopted by livestock farmers in Mazabuka District (Figure 5). The majority adopted migrating livestock to better grazing areas (32%) or reducing herd size (31%). Some farmers reported buying supplementary feed and drilling boreholes for water (16%) while another 5% reported not taking any adaptation measures to prevent the effects of the droughts. The reduced number of farmers adopting strategies such as buying feed and drilling boreholes was mainly attributed to high costs involved and limited access to financial resources, making them less feasible for most smallholder farmers compared to low-cost options like migration and herd reduction.

The impact of climate-induced drought was significantly associated with the age group of livestock farmers in Mazabuka District (χ² = 18.646; p = 0.005; Table 3). Severe impact was most frequently reported among livestock farmers aged 46–60 years (33.7%) than those aged 31–45 years (29.5%). In contrast, only 6.3% of livestock farmers aged 18–30 years and 11.6% of those above 60 years perceived climate-related drought to have had severe impact. Impact among other age groups was more moderate and was reported to be by 8.4% of livestock farmers aged 46–60 years, 5.3% of those aged 31–45 years, 2.1% of those aged 18–30 years, and 1.1% of those above 60 years. Minimal impact was reported solely among younger livestock farmers aged 18–30 years (2.1%). Due to small expected cell counts in some categories, exact tests were applied to assess the association between age group and perceived drought impact severity.

Livestock farmers in Mazabuka District pleaded for support to increase resilience against climate-induced drought (Table 4). The majority of livestock farmers pleaded to be trained in climate-smart agriculture (77%) or to be provided with Government subsidies to enable them have access to feed and water (76%). Additionally, other forms of needed support cited by livestock farmers included insurance against livestock losses 55%, improved veterinary services (46%), and better market access (43%).

The findings indicate that livestock production in Mazabuka District is predominantly undertaken by male farmers, a pattern consistent with previous studies from Zambia and the wider Southern African region (Machina and Lubungu, 2019; Odubote et al., 2023). This gender imbalance reflects entrenched socio-cultural norms that shape access to productive resources. In many rural settings, men retain greater control over land, livestock assets, and financial capital, enabling sustained engagement in livestock production relative to women (Munawar et al., 2013; Lubungu and Birner, 2021; Njiru et al., 2026). Such structural disparities have implications for equitable participation in climate adaptation initiatives and access to institutional support.

The age distribution of respondents was skewed toward the 46–60-year category, supporting earlier evidence that middle-aged farmers form the backbone of livestock production systems in Zambia (Hichaambwa and Jayne, 2014; Kapende, 2024). This cohort typically combines accumulated experience, financial capacity, and social networks that are critical for managing livestock under increasing climatic variability. However, the limited involvement of younger household members in livestock decision-making raises concerns about generational renewal and long-term sector sustainability, particularly under escalating climate stress.

Educational attainment among respondents was largely concentrated at the secondary school level, contrasting with findings by Wezi et al. (2023), who reported primary education as the dominant level among livestock farmers in other regions of Zambia. Limited progression to tertiary education may be linked to early involvement of youth in herding and farm labour, often during school-going years, which constrains long-term educational advancement (Mwaura et al., 2025). This has direct implications for farmers’ capacity to interpret climate information, adopt climate-smart technologies, and engage effectively with formal extension and insurance schemes. Most respondents reported 10–20 years of livestock farming experience, suggesting that entry into the sector often occurs after households accumulate sufficient capital and social standing. While this reflects stability within the farming population, it also underscores barriers to entry for younger or resource-poor households. Goats, cattle, poultry, and sheep were the most commonly kept species, consistent with previous studies in Southern Province (Wezi et al., 2023; Bwalya et al., 2024). These species are favoured for their adaptability to drought-prone environments, tolerance to feed scarcity, and cultural and economic significance. In this context, resilience is understood as the capacity of livestock species to withstand climatic stressors and disease pressures while maintaining productive functions, a critical attribute under recurrent climate-induced droughts.

The study identified water scarcity and reduced grazing availability as the primary drought-related constraints affecting livestock production in Mazabuka District. This finding aligns with evidence from across sub-Saharan Africa indicating that prolonged droughts severely limit both the availability and quality of drinking water and forage resources for livestock (Tulu et al., 2024; Sintayehu et al., 2025; Ngongolo and Gayo, 2025). Declining pasture productivity and degradation of rangelands during extended dry periods reduce dietary intake and compromise animal hydration, with cascading effects on health and productivity (Giridhar and Samireddypalle, 2015; Ludgate et al., 2025).

Beyond these immediate constraints, increases in livestock diseases, mortality rates, and reduced productivity emerged as the strongest predictors of perceived drought severity. Similar patterns have been reported by Ngongolo and Gayo (2025), highlighting that while water and feed shortages are widely recognised, it is the downstream biological and economic consequences that farmers experience as most severe. Compromised nutrition weakens immune responses, increases susceptibility to disease, and elevates mortality risk, ultimately translating into reduced marketable output and income losses (Bett et al., 2017; Dzavo et al., 2019). These findings underscore the interconnected nature of climatic, biological, and economic stressors within livestock-based food systems.

In response to drought conditions, most livestock farmers reported reducing herd sizes or migrating animals to areas with better grazing. These strategies are consistent with adaptation patterns observed in other drought-prone regions of Southern and Eastern Africa (Abazinab et al., 2022; Dzavo et al., 2019). Herd reduction lowers pressure on limited feed and water resources and may reduce disease transmission, while migration enables access to higher-quality forage, supporting animal body condition and market value (Gardner et al., 2002; Næss and Bårdsen, 2013; Kupczyński et al., 2024). However, these strategies are not without trade-offs, as herd reduction constrains overall production potential and migration can disrupt breeding cycles and limit access to veterinary services. The adoption of more anticipatory measures, such as feed conservation, fodder banks, and livestock insurance, remained limited. Barriers include high upfront costs, limited access to credit, insecure land tenure, and inadequate technical knowledge for forage production and storage (Abazinab et al., 2022; Dzavo et al., 2019). Although index-based livestock insurance schemes have been piloted in Zambia, uptake remains low due to affordability concerns, limited awareness, and mistrust of payout mechanisms. Consequently, farmers favour immediate, low-cost coping strategies despite their limited long-term sustainability under recurrent drought conditions.

The analysis further indicated a significant association between drought impacts and farmer age, with middle-aged farmers experiencing heightened vulnerability. This group often manages larger herds and has greater financial exposure, making drought-related losses particularly consequential. Their production systems may also be less flexible than those of smaller-scale operators, constraining rapid adjustment during extreme climatic events. However, farmers overwhelmingly expressed the need for training in climate-smart agriculture, government support for feed and water, and access to livestock insurance. This reflects recognition that knowledge, inputs, and risk-transfer mechanisms are essential for building resilience in livestock systems, consistent with findings from Ethiopia and Eswatini where extension services and insurance improved adaptive capacity (Kalimba and Culas, 2019; Singh and Hlophe, 2017). The expressed willingness to engage with insurance schemes suggests an opportunity for policy interventions that address affordability, trust, and institutional design. While this study identifies farmer-reported priorities for strengthening drought resilience, the findings should be interpreted in light of the study’s cross-sectional and perception-based design. The analysis does not provide quantitative estimates of the effectiveness, costs, or long-term sustainability of proposed adaptation measures. As such, the policy implications presented here should be viewed as indicative and exploratory, highlighting areas for targeted intervention and future empirical evaluation rather than definitive policy prescriptions.

While this study provides valuable insights into the effects of climate-induced drought on livestock production and market dynamics in Mazabuka District, several limitations warrant consideration. First, the reliance on cross-sectional, self-reported data captures perceptions at a single point in time and may be influenced by recall bias or recent climatic events. Longitudinal studies integrating household surveys with climatic, hydrological, and production data would better capture temporal variability and recovery trajectories.

Second, the study focused primarily on livestock producers and did not incorporate perspectives from traders, processors, or other value-chain actors. This limits a comprehensive understanding of how drought shocks propagate through livestock markets. Future research adopting a value-chain lens would enhance understanding of price formation, supply stability, and income distribution under climatic stress.

Third, although adaptation strategies were identified, their effectiveness, costs, and long-term sustainability were not quantitatively assessed. Experimental or quasi-experimental studies evaluating climate-smart livestock practices, insurance mechanisms, and targeted feed and water subsidies across varying drought intensities would strengthen the evidence base for scaling up interventions. Addressing these gaps will support the design of integrated, policy-relevant strategies that enhance drought resilience, safeguard livestock-dependent livelihoods, and strengthen sustainable food systems in Zambia and comparable drought-prone regions.