Vimbai Gobvu
email: vgobvu@gmail.com

Sharai Ncube

Venancio E Imbayarwo-Chikosi

Robin Bourgeois

Prisca H Mugabe

Alexandre Caron

Preferred livestock interventions for small-scale livestock farmers in the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area: a demand-driven and systemic approach

Keywords: Livestock production, small-scale farming, scenario planning, participatory approach, bottomup approach, Transfrontier Conservation Area

In southern Africa, residents of Transfrontier Conservation Areas practice small-scale farming in semi-arid environments constrained by the presence of protected areas and extensive wildlife/livestock/human interfaces that come with conflicts and opportunities. Under these contexts, livestock production aims at supporting local livelihoods despite the harsh semi-arid environment and conflicts with wildlife. In order to promote local development and the well-being of TFCA residents, prioritization of livestock interventions adapted to the local context is needed. The objective of this study was to explore a methodology to list demand-driven interventions for livestock production (cattle, small ruminants and chicken) in a communal land in Zimbabwe. This study used the outputs of an anticipatory scenario-building workshop and individual questionnaires to establish possible and desired livestock interventions by local stakeholders. Results from both the co-elaborative scenario building workshops and the questionnaire survey had participants preferring almost the same interventions that were: restocking herds with breeds adapted to local production; training in livestock practices and production; support to marketing; feed development and value addition; loan schemes to invest in livestock housing and stockfeeds; and finally, animal health interventions to reduce the heavy disease burden. The individual questionnaire data specified preferred interventions for each domestic species. These demand-driven interventions provide a basis for future development projects in the area and avoid top-down approaches by development agencies that fail to address local needs and lack appropriation by local stakeholders necessary for the sustainability of the interventions.

Introduction

Mixed crop and livestock systems in southern Africa are the predominant form of agriculture and source of income, and produce more than 80% of food in the region [START_REF] Tui | Climate change impacts and adaptation for dryland[END_REF]. Extensive Livestock production systems (LPS) in sub-Saharan Africa are challenged by decreasing rangeland sizes, poor-quality livestock feed, diseases and pests [START_REF] Mupangwa | Intensification of conservation agriculture systems for increased livestock feed and maize production in Zimbabwe[END_REF]. Smallscale LPS are also characterized by constrained operational environment such as limited access to markets and veterinary services and negative impacts of climate such as unpredictable and variable rainfall and worsening droughts [START_REF] Oduniyi | Sustainability of livestock farming in south africa. outlook on production constraints, climate-related events, and upshot on adaptive capacity[END_REF][START_REF] Mogomotsi | Climate change adaptation strategies of small-scale farmers in Ngamiland East, Botswana[END_REF].

Livestock production interventions must be informed by the farmer needs as well as prevailing state and conditions of livestock production. For instance, changes in land use patterns following the land reform of the early 2000s have influenced livestock production patterns across Zimbabwe, whereby the national livestock herd sizes declined by about 20% for beef, over 83% for dairy, and 26 and 25% for pigs and small ruminants respectively. The productivity of smallholder cattle herds remains very low, with average calving rates of about 45% against a potential of 60%, and offtake rates of about 6% against a recommended 20% (GoZ, 2018). The Zimbabwe National Agriculture Policy Framework calls for the formulation of interventions that directly respond to the local people's needs and enhance the flow of investments that are critical to sustaining the growth of the agricultural sector with a decided focus on increasing agricultural productivity and production (GoZ, 2018). Successful transformation of the smallholder livestock sub-sector with increased output and productivity to meet the increased demand for animal protein and surplus for export, requires appropriate intervention modes. Information is required on vulnerability and adaptation that are context specific, while accounting for the main farming system components [START_REF] Tui | Climate change impacts and adaptation for dryland[END_REF].

Local communities have not always been consulted in social-change processes (Sandru, 2014[START_REF] Gobvu | Community-based performance indicators for monitoring and evaluating livestock interventions[END_REF] and as a result, development partners may not be appropriately informed of the community priorities. Community-based approaches have been suggested to identify and prioritize problems [START_REF] Khashtabeh | Investigation of participatory needs assessment to prioritize sustainable development indicators of rural communities using hierarchical analysis process[END_REF]. Participatory approaches to solving livestock production build a strong base for the intervention in the community [START_REF] Mubita | The importance and limitations of participation in development projects and programmes[END_REF]. In addition, they ensure that interventions are designed to respond to a demand-driven process and not parachuted in a top-down manner, that is not embraced by final beneficiaries. LPS interventions defined through a participatory approach should therefore produce interventions that are locally owned, context-relevant and adapted to local constraints.

In Zimbabwe, agro-pastoralist communities in Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCA) practice livestock production in the most semi-arid environments of the country characterised by rainfall variability and unpredictability. TFCAs were founded on the realization that natural resources that straddle international boundaries are a shared asset with the potential to meaningfully contribute to the conservation of biodiversity and the welfare and socio-economic development of rural communities (tfcaportal.org). In TFCAs, LPS farming communities live close to protected areas and experience human-wildlife conflicts including livestock predation by wild carnivores, competition between livestock and wild ungulates for forage and water and infectious (potentially zoonotic) disease that can be transmitted between wild and domestic animals [START_REF] Matseketsa | An assessment of human-wildlife conflicts in local communities bordering the western part of Save Valley Conservancy, Zimbabwe[END_REF]Caron et al., 2013). [START_REF] Cumming | Constraints to conservation and development success at the wildlifelivestock-human interface in southern African transfrontier conservation areas: a preliminary review[END_REF] summarized some of the development constraints in TFCAs as follows: weak legal frameworks and peoples' rights, land resource access rights, lack of sound spatial and temporal information on biodiversity, generally poorly developed local infrastructure, exclusion of those in a position to make positive contributions to TFCA development, negative attitudes to the processes and weak capacity for self-organisation and institution building at local levels and, stifled potential for local innovations and ownership of solutions to such problems. Therefore, to deliver efficient livestock production interventions, state and development agencies need to facilitate locally adapted and context relevant programmes.

Given the agro-ecological, institutional and socioeconomic contextual issues described above, this study taking place within the context of a development project, used an inclusive and participatory approach to identify demand-driven interventions for livestock production in a TFCA communal area in South-east Zimbabwe.

Material and methods

Study Site

Sengwe Communal Area is located in the Great Limpopo TransFrontier Conservation Area (GLTFCA) in the Southeast Lowveld of Chiredzi District, Zimbabwe, which lies at 21 o 33'S and 31 o 30'E. The specific study site, Ward 15, lies at the southern edge of Gonarezhou National Park buffered by the Malipati Safari Area to the South and Malilangwe Conservancy Trust towards the North. The average altitude is 392 m. Chiredzi District is in Agroecological Region V and is characterised by erratic rainfall and low mean annual rainfall of around 450mm [START_REF] Kupika | Local ecological knowledge on climate prediction and adaptation: agriculture-wildlife interface perspectives from Africa[END_REF][START_REF] Nyarumbu | Phenotypic and genetic characterisation revealed the existence of several biotypes within the Neorautanenia brachypus (Harms) CA wild accessions in South East Lowveld, Zimbabwe[END_REF] with high interannual rainfall variation [START_REF] Poshiwa | Wildlife as insurance against rainfall fluctuations in a semi-arid savanna setting of southeastern Zimbabwe[END_REF].

Minimum temperatures range between 4.3 and 21.1 °C and maximum temperatures range between 27.8 and 37.3 °C. Major soils are eutric vertisols, chromic luvisols and eutric fluvisols.

Colophospermum mopane trees dominate in the area. Livelihoods are crop-based, non-farm based and to a greater extent, cattle-based [START_REF] Murungweni | Climate-smart crop production in semi-arid areas through increased knowledge of varieties, environment and management factors[END_REF].

Study context and design

The Promoting Sustainable Livelihoods in TFCAs (ProSuLi) project recognised that the success of development programs is rooted in positive stakeholders' interactions, recognising the legitimacy and importance of their respective positions, needs and constraints and the need for negotiations in order to achieve a shared common vision of a sustainable project [START_REF] Caron | Social-ecological System Health in Transfrontier Conservation Areas to Promote the Coexistence Between People and Nature[END_REF]. ProSuLi objective was to promote sustainable livelihoods in 4 local communities living in the periphery of protected areas in Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Zimbabwe within the Great Limpopo TFCA and the Kavango-Zamabezi (KAZA) TFCA. This study applied two approaches namely: a co-elaborative scenario-building workshop [START_REF] Bourgeois | Using anticipation to unveil drivers of local livelihoods in Transfrontier Conservation Areas: A call for more environmental justice[END_REF] to support a group of local stakeholders/actors in producing plausible contrasted scenarios about the futures of livelihoods in the Sengwe site by 2038, followed by a planning workshop and a questionnairebased survey.

The co-elaborative scenario-building workshop was conducted in October 2018, with purposefully selected community representatives covering community livelihoods and support sectors. They were selected because they were expected to provide a range of different perspectives on livelihoods in the study areas, based on their knowledge and experience. A follow up workshop including other community members who were not part of the scenario building workshops helped in building legitimacy to the process. A questionnaire survey was conducted in September/October 2019 on sampled individual households to identify their preferred livestock interventions. The survey was conducted by an MSc student (the first author of this article).

Co-elaborative scenario building towards action

Participatory prospective analysis and the Futures workshop

The common method used for creating scenarios about alternative futures for local livelihoods in the ProSuLi project was a co-elaborative scenario building approach called Participatory Prospective Analysis [START_REF] Bourgeois | Foresight for all: Co-elaborative scenario building and empowerment[END_REF]. In Sengwe, it was implemented through a three-day Futures Workshop. It gathered 22 participants who were selected as "knowledge-broker" in order to provide diverse knowledge and perspectives. Participants included farmers from crop and livestock production groups, community based organisations, natural resources management groups, school committees, local traditional leaders, expert participants and government officials were purposively drawn from District government departments including agricultural extension (AGRITEX), veterinary services, gender and community development and local nongovernmental organisations. Farmers engaged in the co-elaborative workshops acted on behalf of the whole community, in ensuring validation of preferred interventions. The project team, including researchers and students from Zimbabwe, Mozambique and France facilitated the workshop. The workshop alternated plenary and group sessions taking the participants step-bystep from their perception of the future to the strategic tipping points connecting the future with the present. For detailed information about the methodological steps, see [START_REF] Bourgeois | Foresight for all: Co-elaborative scenario building and empowerment[END_REF][START_REF] Bourgeois | Using anticipation to unveil drivers of local livelihoods in Transfrontier Conservation Areas: A call for more environmental justice[END_REF].

The resulting scenarios are not predictions and do not intend to become blueprints for action. Their role is to widen the perception the participants have of the present by engaging in a stimulating reflection about the evolution of their environment, and what could happen to their livelihoods beyond usual basic trend analysis. As such they serve to "benchmark" the future, opening horizons, enabling people to think differently and becoming pro-active in TFCA management [START_REF] Bourgeois | Using anticipation to unveil drivers of local livelihoods in Transfrontier Conservation Areas: A call for more environmental justice[END_REF].

After the workshop, we applied a post-treatment of the data collected. All factors of change were classified as directly, indirectly or not linked to LPS based on their definition. Factors of change were also identified and distributed according to the STEEP classification [START_REF] Bowman | Strategy in practice[END_REF], namely social, technical, economic, environmental and policy dimensions.

From anticipation to action: a follow-up participatory workshop

A few months after the Futures workshop, a follow-up participatory workshop was organized with selected participants of the community in order to provide feedback on the outputs of the workshop, validate them and organize the way forward towards the selection of activities for the project. Participants were from local development trusts, local NGOs, community-based natural resource programme; community childcare workers, teachers form primary and secondary schools, local irrigation schemes, veterinary services, seed multiplication farmers, animal health care centre, farmers, religious leaders, agriculture extension services and headmen.

Questionnaire survey

After the co-elaborative scenario building processes, a survey was conducted on potential livestock interventions in order to consolidate the outputs of the participatory workshops. A questionnaire survey was implemented using semi-structured questionnaires to collect information on preferred livestock interventions. The questionnaire thematic areas were: demographic information, livelihoods activities, livestock kept and preferred livestock interventions. Structured interviews collected information on livestock species kept and preferred livestock interventions per species of livestock. Respondents were sampled from 9 villages of Sengwe ward 15, as initially selected by the ProSuLi project. This ward was chosen because of its past involvement in research and development projects with the team (such as the DREAM Project on Learning Platforms) and as a ward sharing a border with Gonarezhou National Park, the second largest park in Zimbabwe in the South-East corner of the country. Each village had around 25 households and for the 9 villages there were 225 households. It was assumed that half of the households (0.5) had livestock. The confidence coefficient was assumed to be 90% giving a z-value of 1.645. A 0.05 acceptable sampling error was also assumed. The sample size was calculated using the following Cochran's sample size formula [START_REF] Cochran | Sampling techniques[END_REF].

𝑛 = 𝑝(1 -𝑝) 𝑒 ! 𝑧 ! + 𝑝(1 -𝑝) 𝑁
Where p is the population proportion (50%), e is the acceptable sampling error (5%), z is the zvalue at reliability level of 0.90 (1.645) and N is the population size (225). The computation provided for a sample size of not less than 123 households. An additional three households were included from the outcome of the purposive sampling to create a final sample size of 126 households.

Sample size was calculated using the Cochran's sample size formula [START_REF] Cochran | Sampling techniques[END_REF], with an assumption that half of the households owned livestock (ZimVac, 2017) and this gave maximum variability, giving a p value of 0.5. Assuming a 90% confidence, and at least ±5% precision, a 90 % confidence level gives Z values of 1.645 [START_REF] Cochran | Sampling techniques[END_REF]. The studied population was 225 households and the survey sample size was adjusted, to 126 households, with 14 households per village across the 9 village in the ward. The survey purposely selected household heads for respondents.

Statistical Analysis

Data from the household survey were analysed with the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 25 (IBM Corp, 2017). Data were described using frequencies and means procedures of SPSS. Exploration of livestock numbers per household was done through the median because the frequency distribution of the data was skewed.

Results

Co-elaborative scenario building toward action

The Futures workshop

The workshop took place between the 22 and 24 October 2018 and was held in English, Shangaani and Shona at Malipati village, ward 15, Chiredzi district. Of the stakeholders that participated in the co-elaborative scenario-building workshop, 80% were male, reflecting male-domination in the societal structures of the community [START_REF] Gbaguidi | The representation of the African woman in male-dominated society: A study of Chinua Achebe's Things fall apart and Amma Darko's Beyond the horizon[END_REF].

Participants agreed to set the time horizon for this activity at 2038. Thirty-six factors of change were identified and distributed according to the STEEP classification [START_REF] Bowman | Strategy in practice[END_REF], namely social, technical, economic, environmental and policy dimensions. The participants selected five driving forces of local livelihoods in the area: LPS was regrouped with farming production systems as one of the five driving forces; others were "State of food secutiry / poverty"; "Governance capacity of the local community"; "Capacity to adapt to climate change"; "State of local culture and tradition" (Table 1).

Table 1: After vibrant debating the workshop participants finally concluded that they preferred the Bye Poverty! narrative (Box 1; See annex 1 for the full narrative of the Bye Poverty! narrative) as an acceptable future for 2038 that the project could take as a vision. Subsequent intra-community workshops were organised by participants of the workshop to feedback the experience and outputs of the workshop and validate the narrative chosen. The futures described in the five narratives are not predictions and are not intended to serve as blueprints for action. Their role is to widen the perception the participants have of the present by engaging in a stimulating reflection about the evolution of their environment and what could happen to their livelihoods, beyond usual basic trend analysis. As such they serve to "benchmark" the future, opening horizons and enabling people to think differently.

Follow-up participatory workshop

A follow-up participatory workshop was held on the 12 th and 13 2).

In addition to a list of theme and activities (Table 2), the LPS group listed also the material needed to complete these activities.

Socio-demographic information

Females represented 57.9% of respondents. The average household size was 7.21±3.54.

Respondents had an education up to primary level (49.2%) or secondary level (30.2%) while 20.6% did not attend school at all. Close to 60% of the respondents were aged between 41 and 60 years old, while 20% were older than 60 years and 20% younger than 31 years. The major source of income for households was livestock production (27.8%), followed by horticulture (23.8%) and minor sources of income being salary, pension or part-time work.

Livestock ownership across households was generally greater for small stock, with 91.2% of households owning a mean flock size of 15 chicken (and up to 36); 94.4% of households owning a mean of 15 goats (and up to 35). Cattle were owned by 78.6% of households with a mean herd size of 11 (up to 25). Only 8% of the respondents owned sheep while 37.3% had donkeys which they kept only for draught power. The main reasons for keeping cattle were social security (e.g., in case of an unexpected need of money for burial, health issues), milk production and to a lesser extent for draught power.

Preferred livestock interventions

The most mentioned domestic species requiring intervention were cattle (93.8%), poultry (98.1%) and goats (95.4%), with much less mentions for donkeys (21%) and sheep (10%).

Figure 1 presents, for each species, the most cited interventions. For cattle, the most cited interventions revolved around animal health in terms of access to drugs and vaccine as well as the capacity to organise dipping and dosing against important vectors (e.g., ticks) and parasites (e.g., gastro-intestinal parasites). The next important mentioned interventions were revolving around feeding and access to water, especially during the dry season during which both these natural resources are scarce. For goat production, health issues linked with access to drugs and vaccines were largely the most cited, with issues related to restocking (with locally adapted breeds) and access to water being less cited. For chicken, restocking was the most cited intervention, followed by access to drugs and vaccines and training on chicken production systems. The most preferred intervention for sheep was dipping and dosing (4%) followed by drugs and vaccines (3%). For donkeys, the most preferred intervention was dipping and dosing (13%) followed by water access and training.

Discussion

In this study, in the context of a research-action and development project, we intended to identify activities that could promote local livelihoods in a semi-arid environment of Zimbabwe in the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area.

Relation between methodologies

This study demonstrates two separate processes for community inquiry whereby the co-elaborative scenario building process and the follow-up workshops used collective discussions and consensus among the participants while the survey focused on the individual views of respondents. To support the long-term sustainable management of GLTFCA, the co-elaborative scenario building process gave room for the community to build sustainable development pathways through desired pathways and futures while the survey probed deeper into the perspectives of the individuals. The participatory process did not provide activities detailed to the domestic species under consideration (i.e., cattle, goat, chicken, sheep and donkey) while the questionnaire survey and FGD helped identifying interventions at species level. With a year between the two processes, they reflected similar views on livestock health and alimentation (i.e., pasture and water) as pillars to LPS, especially for cattle and goat production. The main difference between activities identified through the working group and through the questionnaire was on the value chain (e.g., building abattoir, create paddock) and marketing aspects (e.g., create feedlots for direct slaughter) and also more technical options for supplementary feeding (e.g., silage making) of LPS. The co-elaborative working group was a more diverse group of stakeholders including governmental services (e.g., veterinary services), with higher levels of education and exposure to market-oriented interventions.

In addition, the fact that locally, livestock markets are heavily constrained and almost non-existent (beside between inter-adjacent villages) due to the difficulty to access the area (i.e., more than 100 kms of dirt and sometimes difficult road to join the main district town) may have limited the capacity of interview respondents to project themselves into marketing. Another hypothesis could be that the attendance to participatory workshops provided participants with a better capacity to project themselves into the future and consider LPS in a more progressive way.

Multiple qualitative and quantitative methods hold distinct advantages over single method evaluations but their value is not in the number of methods used, but in how each method matches the evaluation questions [START_REF] Odendaal | Multiple and mixed methods in formative evaluation: Is more better? Reflections from a South African study[END_REF] These are all illustrated across the various LPS interventions selected by the communities. It is hard to imagine farming without the tight integration of crops and livestock in smallholder agriculture [START_REF] Melesse | Understanding Farmers' Trait Preferences for Dual-Purpose Crops to Improve Mixed Crop-Livestock Systems in Zimbabwe[END_REF] and the livelihood systems are complex and coupled with human/natural systems [START_REF] Senda | Modeling climate change impacts on rangeland productivity and livestock population dynamics in Nkayi District, Zimbabwe[END_REF]. Overall, [START_REF] Tui | Climate change impacts and adaptation for dryland[END_REF]

Relevance of identified interventions

The importance of managing animal health in this district has been scientifically investigated, especially in the context of the wildlife/livestock interface due to the presence of protected areas and the risk of pathogen spill-over between wild and domestic populations and even to humans in the case of zoonoses (Caron et al, 2013;de Garine-Wichatitksy et al., 2013;[START_REF] Miguel | Contacts and foot and mouth disease transmission from wild to domestic bovines in Africa[END_REF][START_REF] Gadaga | Living at the edge of an interface area in Zimbabwe: cattle owners, commodity chain and health workers' awareness, perceptions and practices on zoonoses[END_REF]. A highly listed intervention was dipping livestock in diptanks, village infrastructures that allow livestock to be immersed in a water pool in which an anti-tick chemical molecule has been diluted. This helps to fight against tick infestation and tick-borne diseases (e.g., theileriosis, babesiosis, anaplasmosis), the diseases with the most impact on cattle mortality in the area. Dosing is the intervention that allow to treat animals against intestinal parasites (e.g., nematodes). In the study area, during the time when research was undertaken, dipping frequency was irregular due to lack of dipping chemicals (normally provided by veterinary services). There was also an issue of lack of water at dipping sites due to the difficulty to access water, the distance of water sources (especially during the dry season) and the quantity of water needed for each dipping (several thousand litres to counteract the evapotranspiration happening in the multiple thousand litres diptank). [START_REF] Sungirai | Shifts in the distribution of ixodid ticks parasitizing cattle in Zimbabwe[END_REF] mentions that interruptions to dipping in communal areas are usually due to long distances from homesteads to diptanks which makes it difficult for them to present cattle frequently for dipping and also issues of drought which cause diptanks become non-functional due to lack of water [START_REF] Sungirai | Shifts in the distribution of ixodid ticks parasitizing cattle in Zimbabwe[END_REF]. In the study area, there were no dipping systems for goats and sheep, but only dipping and vaccination programs for cattle.

Respondents mentioned issues of lack of funds to purchase dosing chemicals. [START_REF] Hove | Ixodid ticks infesting domestic goats in communal land areas of Zimbabwe[END_REF], mentions that despite the prevalence of ticks on goats, as well as of the pathogens they transmit, their control by the state-run veterinary services is minimal and tick control mostly targets cattle.

Other respondents would not mention the need for dipping and dosing goats and this may be due to the mistaken perception that goats are resistant to disease [START_REF] Poku | Analysis of the current status of small-scale sheep and goat production by farmers of different age groups in the Jirapa and Lambussie districts, Ghana[END_REF]. According to [START_REF] Tavirimirwa | Communal cattle production in Zimbabwe: A review[END_REF], diseases and parasites are major constraints to communal cattle production and are endemic in most Zimbabwe communal areas. The situation is worsened by the unavailability and high cost of drugs and inadequate veterinary officials [START_REF] Mutibvu | Constraints and opportunities for increased livestock production in communal areas: A case study of Simbe, Zimbabwe[END_REF]. A survey by [START_REF] Mlambo | Strengthening the pluralistic agricultural extension system: a Zimbabwean case study[END_REF] showed that most of the cattle farmers have poor access to veterinary extension services except for contact with the dip attendants during dipping days.

Competition for rangeland and access to water is also prevalent as water is distributed along the main River (i.e. Mwenezi River) that delineates the border between the communal land and the Gonarezhou national park. During the dry season, a few pools of water remain in the riverbed to water wild and domestic ungulates and constrain livestock pasture to a few kilometres around those pools Zengeya et al. (2014;[START_REF] Gadaga | Living at the edge of an interface area in Zimbabwe: cattle owners, commodity chain and health workers' awareness, perceptions and practices on zoonoses[END_REF]. A report by Zimbabwe Resilience Building Fund, (2017) showed that the trekking distance for water for livestock in Chiredzi district was above the normal 2km.

Drought has also been a recurrent phenomenon in the area. [START_REF] Masikati | Improving the water productivity of integrated crop-livestock systems in the semi-arid tropics of Zimbabwe: an ex-ante analysis using simulation modeling[END_REF] mentions that seasonal deficiency in feed quality and quantity particularly during the second half of the dry season is the major constraint to communal livestock production. Poor management of rangelands, and rangeland fires also limit the availability of fodder [START_REF] Tavirimirwa | Communal cattle production in Zimbabwe: A review[END_REF]. Livestock benefit from improved feed supply through larger quantities and improved quality of crop residues [START_REF] Tui | Climate change impacts and adaptation for dryland[END_REF]. The different importance implied in the preference for feed intervention among cattle and goats could be due to the perception and observation that herbaceous grazing becomes more limited for cattle compared to goats, which can forage more efficiently on the predominant woody vegetation. Poultry, on the other hand rated higher in the feed intervention partly because this species needs feed to be brought to them. This supports the well documented LPS constraints in these contexts (Van Rooyen and Homann-Kee Tui, 2009;[START_REF] Chatikobo | Participatory diagnosis and prioritization of constraints to cattle production in some smallholder farming areas of Zimbabwe[END_REF][START_REF] Tui | Climate change impacts and adaptation for dryland[END_REF] For poultry, the most preferred intervention was restocking. This could be because of the higher representation of women in the survey and the fact that women are usually in charge of the management of chicken compared to men who are more in charge of cattle in local livelihoods [START_REF] Assan | Gender disparities in livestock production and their implication for livestock productivity in Africa[END_REF][START_REF] Njuki | Women, livestock ownership and markets. Bridging the gender gap in Eastern and Southern Africa[END_REF]. Women are aware of the contribution of livestock production to their livelihoods and engage in decision making and management of poultry [START_REF] Senda | Gendered livelihood implications for improvements of livestock Water productivity In Zimbabwe[END_REF][START_REF] Mcainsh | Traditional chicken production in Zimbabwe[END_REF]. After restocking, the most listed intervention for poultry was access to drugs and vaccines. This The most preferred intervention for donkeys was dipping and dosing. There were no dipping and dosing practised for donkeys in the area as donkeys were viewed as animals of less importance and some would say they find their own means of survival somehow. The very low economic value of donkeys and their capability to withstanding poor treatment contributes to them receiving poor management [START_REF] Muvirimi | A farming systems approach to improving draft animal power in sub-Saharan Africa[END_REF]. Donkeys are an important asset for traction power and transport, have high drought tolerance compared to cattle, play a critical role in providing draught power for smallholder farmers but their potential is not fully utilized [START_REF] Maburutse | Communal livestock production in Simbe, Gokwe south district of Zimbabwe[END_REF][START_REF] Hagmann | Use of donkeys and their draught performance in smallholder farming in Zimbabwe[END_REF].

Research-action for development

Deployment of bottom-up studies across different types of production systems provides the evidence base needed making it possible to consider the perspectives of livestock farmers first in order to better inform interventions [START_REF] Duckett | Scenario planning as communicative action: Lessons from participatory exercises conducted for the Scottish livestock industry[END_REF]. Different organisations working in the Sengwe Communal Area have previously come up with livestock interventions for cattle restocking programs, goats and chickens restocking using 'improved' exotic breeds. Most of these interventions have been imposed in a top down manner and had sustainability challenges due to lack of community involvement and buy-in in project selection and design [START_REF] Silvius | Sustainability in project management: A literature review and impact analysis[END_REF]. For example, a Brahman restocking programmes through pass-on schemes (World Vision, Heifer International, and SEDAP) brought in Brahman breeds for restocking without much consulting local community about their preferred performance traits or interventions (pers.

Comm., local farmers). The local community complained of the Brahman being less droughttolerant than their local breeds. The Brahman pass-on scheme also could have led to genetic dilution as most participants ended up with cross breeds with more local and adapted breeds.

Today, the community has mostly Brahman crosses, and the loss of their hardy indigenous breeds is felt. A considerable number of livestock development programs have failed and reasons for the failures include limited involvement of farmers who are the final beneficiaries, in both planning and implementation, leading to ineffective development programs [START_REF] Duguma | Participatory definition of breeding objectives and implementation of community-based sheep breeding programs in Ethiopia[END_REF]. Any development endeavour needs to be aligned to the specific goals of the target communities and production environments. This gives them ownership of the project and there are high chances that they may continue with some project aspects even after project duration [START_REF] Silvius | Sustainability in project management: A literature review and impact analysis[END_REF].

Conclusion

After the definition of LPS interventions in the LPS working group, the four working groups gathered, discussed and negotiated about the activities that the ProSuLi project could implement given the available funds. In Ward 15, it was decided to invest in two solar-powered boreholes in two different villages associated with new small-scale irrigated nutrition gardens and linked to diptanks in order to easily fill them with water. The boreholes would also be linked with the primary and secondary schools to provide water for school consumption. Capacity building was also provided on LPS as requested but also on the governance around boreholes and irrigation scheme governance and the sustainability of these systems. Given the participatory approach used in this project, we believe that the LPS and other interventions identified and implemented for some of them will provide more appropriation by and capacity of local stakeholders to promote the sustainability of these activities beyond the lifespan of the project.

Additional material

A1 B3 C1 D1 E1 Chaitemura Chavakuseva -Bye poverty! In 2038, there is a mix of local and foreign culture with good governance, empowered local leaders and cross-cutting inclusiveness in land use allocation. Due to the adoption of solar energy, there is well adapted irrigation which promotes mixed farming using adapted livestock breeds and crop varieties with high value markets. As a result, the level of poverty has been reduced to 30%. The poor are vulnerable groups (women, orphans and elders) scattered around the park.

The realisation of worsening land degradation has been promoted by an increased acceptance by the community of letting outsider experts and ordinary people to come and live and work amoung the community, bringing with them a lot of knowledge and expertise for natural resource management. The community has however remained careful to let only positive outside influence. This openness has led to people to collectively decide on adopting solar energy for household uses as well as powering irrigation pumps. A bonus benefit of this has been the cleaner air which is not polluted by wood smoke. Collective problem analysis by the community has made them realise that the problem of water availablity has been caused by extremely high demand for water by livestock, wildlife and human beings. In response to this, collective action has led to wise use of water bodies by planned and mutually agreed allocation of water for livestock, wildlife, and human use, without overcrowding the water bodies. This has led to marked reduction in conflicts between commercial agriculture and wildlife. Before this, National Parks and the local communites were always quarrelling about livestock encroachment into Gonarezhou National Park in search of forage and water on one hand, and, wildlife encoaching onto the agricultural fields, devouring livestock and harming the humans. In 2038, this situation has greatly declined and the only illegal poaching for food is pronounced amoung the remaining very poor women, elders and orphans who are scattered along the Parks boundaries. At least now there is not the organized criminal poaching by big cartels as used to happen twenty years ago. Wildlife is managed by the GNP authorities with consultation of the local leaders who adequately and effectively represent their constituencies.

Large livestock have almost disappeared and small livestock raised on zero grazing is in good health. This has come by through leaders and ordinary people having extensive discussions about what type of livestock production would be beneficial, considering the changing climate. Agriculture is a focal investment area and is supported by agribusiness development. The area is generally prosperous due to investment from outside through joint venture between local farmers and supply chains and remittances from migrants. Value chain development is very vibrant for small livestock and small grain development in areas such as animal health services, grain processing, animal products processing and marketing. Wealthy people are successful farmers and local agribusiness owners and traders. The local governance stuctures enables women and previously disadvantaged groups to negotiate and participate freely and fairly in business ventures. Outmigration of young unskilled people has reduced as it is now luctrative to stay locally and engage in agribusiness. The area has been connected to the national grid through public investment to support agriculture and agri-business.

There is a good all-weather tar road that connects the production areas to the Beitbridge-Harare highway from Malipati. Another one leads to the entrance of the Gonarhezou national park. These roads are maintained by the government but with very strong input of ideas and even resources by the local community who are well organised. Other roads under the responsibility of the local community remain untarred but the community always willingly collectively organises labour and some money to fix the road to make it passable during the rainy season. This is because their local business is so vibrant that they do not want bad roads to compromise their livelihoods.

Traditional farming knowledge and skills remain among the majority of the people but due to influx of experts and knowledgeable people, the farmers are capable of collectively deciding to adopt improved farming skills and technologies. Due to their exposure to the outside world through education, young local farmers have engaged in zero grazing and greenhouse farming after gaining technical knowledge and skills elsewhere. A technical centre for advanced farming has been built in the districti. Local youths who excel in high school are increasingly accessing higher education outside Malipati, but many of them return to live and work at home after graduation.

Most people have access to primary education where local culture and traditions are taught. Physical access to primary schools has greatly improved with school dropouts at high school level being only ten percent of what they used to be twenty years ago. Malipati village has a secondary school. Local education has greatly improved due to increased access to and adoption of ICT. Literacy is aligned on an economic divide between young local farmers and entrepreneurs with market-oriented technical training in agriculture and agri-business and a majority of people educated in the local culture and traditions. A generation of hard-working young agri-preneurs has emerged while most of the people remain deeply influenced by the local culture and traditions. This is actually good because the community through its good local governance is quite empowered to speak out against and block negative outside influence but collectively and inclusively discusses any new ideas. Chronic food insecurity is no longer very common.

A powerful relay antenna operating 24/7 has been built in Malipati village offering the possibility to highspeed connection to those who can afford it. At least 75% of the community actually affords this highspeed connectivity. There is pronounced use of internet communication mainly used for agriculture business activities such as communicating with the market, organizing for marketing activities as well as synchronizing local collective production with outside lucrative markets.

The population has remained stable and is no longer just concentrated along the tar road and the borders of the park but is concentrated in many clusters of activity which are focused on agribusiness activities. Demography policies are mainly very localised and focus on local visions of equity and progress. Primary health services is now widely accessible everywhere in Sengwe. Malipati has a well serviced health centre and people travel outside Malipati only for major medical issues.

Overall, the land use policy is determined at the central level of the government and implemented by the local land agency of the government. Local community members are actively consulted and engaged in improved land use practices. There is now synchrony between national government land use policies and local community practices.

  and into the area (number of people, who move in and out of the area) Ec State of transport infrastructure Quality and distribution of transportation networks Ec I Accessibility to and from the area How easy it is to reach and leave which parts of the area Ec Type of energy and access Who has access to energy and what type of energy T Attitude/behaviour of people Individual attitude and behaviour of people locally S I State of local culture and traditions The place of the local culture and traditions in the local society S D Place of men and women in the society Place of men and women in the society S I General level of education The level of literacy of the people I n the area (including who and also distribution) S I Nature of people relationship The nature of the local social links between people S I Density and distribution of the population Who and how many live where S I State of health of people Who is healthy, where, who is not healthy, why S State of food security / poverty Who is food insecure, how many and where S I Demographic policy The public means used to regulate the number of people living in the area S I Note: in bold the 6 driving forces (both "Types of farming systems" were merge by participants as one driving force; the "Dim." column indicates the related STEEP dimension as follows: S=Social, T=Technical, En=Environment, Ec=Economic, P=Political; the last column "Link to LPS" indicate the factors of change that are directly (D) or indirectly (I) linked to LPS. Thirteen out of 35 (37,1%) factors of changes were directly linked to LPS and 15 (42,9%) were indirectly linked to LPS which together indicated that 28 factors of change (80%) for local livelihoods were directly or indirectly linked to LPS. In order to identify the five driving forces to build the frame of the future scenarios, participants engaged in a reflection on the interconnections between the different factors. A voting process took place where each participant was allocated dots of different colours to indicate on a board the factors that were the most influenced by the others and the factors that were the most influential on the others. Based on this voting process, participants selected five driving forces of local livelihoods in the area: LPS were regrouped with farming production systems as one of the five driving forces; others were "State of poverty"; "Governance capacity of the local community"; "Capacity to adapt to climate change". For each driving force, different future states were proposed and discussed in common. Future states (in 2038) could be desired or not desired states. The three future states that were used for the driving force LPS + farming production systems were: 1. Mixed farming prevails with irrigated crop farming; new adapted breeds and varieties (for animals and crops); local farmers are practising the use of adapted breeds of livestock with higher market value; 2. No more farming, nor livestock systems (because of an environment and a climate incompatible with farming and livestock keeping; 3. Zero grazing and livestock production systems concentrated on chicken and rabbits associated with greenhouse farming. In plenary and subsequent validation sessions, participants collated 5 plausible contrasted scenarios based on the future states of the 5 driving forces, and code-named them as : Selfish Pain, The Male Power, Laissez-faire Kills, Bye Poverty!, A Big One for a Few Ones (Box 1; English versions chosen by the participant based on vernacular expressions). Full narratives resulted from the inclusion all the remaining 30 factors of change into the synopsis. This process was that initial narrative were written by the project team and later validated by local stakeholders through participatory feedback and comment sessions.

Box 1 :

 1 Full narrativesChaitemura Chavakuseva -Bye poverty! In 2038, there is a mix of local and foreign cultures with good governance, empowered local leaders and cross-cutting inclusiveness in land use allocation. Due to the adoption of solar energy, there is well-adapted irrigation which promotes mixed farming using adapted livestock breeds and crop varieties with high-value markets. As a result, the level of poverty has been reduced to 30%. The poor and vulnerable groups (women, orphans and elders) scattered around the park. Mazvakemazvake -Laissez-faire kills: In 2038, an individual culture prevails and people do whatever they want, affecting the governance capacity of the local community and leading to infighting for leadership. The power struggle deviates people from adapting to climate change. As a consequence farming has collapsed. A very disturbing situation exists whereby ninety Matimba Avanuna -The male power: In 2038, local culture and traditions are central to the society, taught at school. The governance capacity of the local community is characterised by abuse of power by maledominated leaders and corruption in land allocation. People are resisting to adapt to climate change. As a result there is no more farming activities and livestock! Therefore 90% of the population is living in poverty throughout the whole area, except for the 10% who are either employed or have their own business. A big one for a few ones: In 2038, the local culture and traditions are central in the local society and people's lifestyles entice them to resist to adapt to climate change. A top down governance system has taken over the capacity of governance of the local community and land use allocation. It is supporting agricultural activities based on zero grazing at small scale with small livestock (rabbits, chicken…) and greenhouse/rooftop farming. 60 % of the population remain poor, particularly women, children, elder men and the unemployed. Poverty is spread across the villages. Selfish pain: In 2038, the local culture and traditions have been erased, leading to chaotic fight for power and unclear land use allocation. Ninety percent of the population has first become poor due to no more farming and livestock products. This resulted in everyone abandoning the area, leaving it with no capacity to adapt to climate change.

  th of April 2019 to plan the way forward following the co-elaborative scenario planning. Participants included local development trusts, local NGOs, community-based natural resource programme; community childcare workers, teachers form primary and secondary schools, local irrigation schemes, veterinary services, seed multiplication farmers, animal health care centre, farmers, religious leaders, agriculture extension services and headmen. After feedback on the Futures workshop, questions about the process and discussion about the Bye Poverty! scenario, participants decided to create four thematic groups namely: Governance and advocacy; Livestock production Crop production; Ecotourism to identify activities to be implemented under the project Each thematic group had to come up with activities to start the pathway towards the desired scenario in 20 years. Group committees were created with d membership based on interests and also the need for equitable representation. During day 2 of the workshop, groups discussed and presented possible activities in a plenary session where collective decision was reached (Table

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure 1: Preferred livestock interventions per domestic species in Sengwe

  could have been because during the study, an outbreak of what was suspected to have been Newcastle disease killed a lot of birds and left many homes with very few to no birds (Madzinga B., personal communication, November 2019). Respondents had no prior knowledge about (Newcastle) vaccination for poultry and requested interventions on training on health management of poultry. Only poultry interventions had mention of shelter, presumable due to their higher vulnerability to predation. In implementing their project; "Strengthening resilience to enhance food security and nutrition of vulnerable rural communities to cope with recurrent shocks and stressors in Chiredzi district", the Mwenezi Development Training Centre have implemented interventions on developing poultry shelter for the local communities (MDTC, 2022).

Table 2 :

 2 Sub-themes and activities identified by the livestock production system thematic group

	Objective				Sub-theme	Activities
	Desired state: Mixed farming	Production	• Bringing in adapted breeds of cattle, goat and
	prevails	with	local	farmers		chicken
	practising the use of adapted breeds		• Building of a small-scale abattoir in Malipati
	of livestock with higher market		• Setting-up revolving fund for farmer to
	value
					Supplementary	• Silage making
					feeding	• Planting of pasture grasses
						• Hay cutting
					Animal husbandry	• Create feedlots for direct slaughter
						• Create paddock to control breeding
					Animal health	• Organise regular dipping for tick control

  . The anticipatory and participatory workshops enabled local stakeholders to have a more multi-sectorial approach of LPS. Linking the 35 other factors of change with LPS and observing that 80% of them were directly or indirectly linked to LPS demonstrated the importance of LPS in local livelihoods but also that some interventions could have multiple impact for local livelihoods beyond LPS (e.g., state of food security, distribution of wealth, Table 1). The creation and subsequent discussion of 'what if' learning narratives during the workshops enabled participants to consider creative and novel alternative livestock interventions. The Bye Poverty! narrative indicated the importance of livelihood systems which integrate local cultures, good governance, empowered local leaders, mixed farming with integrated livestock and cropping production systems, high-value markets and poverty reduction.

  demonstrated that the sustainable development scenario consistently addressed institutional failures and motivated productivity-enhancing, environmentally sound technologies and inclusive development approaches. Proposed interventions in our study focused on improving solidarity within the livestock sector through improved planning and formal communication networks between farmers.

  In addition, the local stakeholders are now prepared to discuss with external interventions (development or state projects) about their priorities in terms of LPS interventions. farming systems in Zimbabwe: a stakeholder-driven integrated multi-model assessment. Climatic

	Change, 168(1-2), p.10.
	Van Rooyen A. and Homann-Kee Tui, 2009. Promoting goat markets and technology
	development in semi-arid Zimbabwe. Tropical and subtropical agroecosystems, Volume 11, Issue
	1
	Zengeya, F.M., Murwira, A. and De Garine-Wichatitsky, M., 2014. Seasonal habitat selection and
	space use by a semi-free-range herbivore in a heterogeneous savanna landscape. Austral
	ecology, 39(6), pp.722-731.
	Zengeya, F.M., Murwira, A., Caron, A., Cornélis, D., Gandiwa, P. and de Garine-Wichatitsky, M.,
	2015. Spatial overlap between sympatric wild and domestic herbivores links to resource
	gradients. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 2, pp.56-65.
	Zimbabwe Resilience Building Fund. 2017. ECRAS Annual Report.
	Zimbabwe Vulnerability Assessment Committee (ZimVAC) 2017 Rural Livelihoods Assessment
	Report.

Acknowledgements

This study was designed and implemented within the EU-ProSuLi project and conducted within the framework of the Research Platform Production and Conservation in Partnership (www.rppcp.org). We appreciate the continued support from farmers in Sengwe communal land who participated in the study. We would also like to extend our sincere gratitude to veterinary and extension officers for their overwhelming support. This study would not be possible without their cooperation. A special mention goes to Pastor Steven Chauke who was our local site coordinator and interpreter.

Funding

This study was funded by the European Commission under the EU-ProSuLi project, FED/2017394-443.

Data accessibility

In Annex 2 & 3 attached to the publication, the database and the Futures workshop report, can respectively be found.

Conflict of interest disclosure

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.