Research priorities for climate adaptation and resilience in smallholder livestock systems in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review

1 Introduction

Climate change has emerged as one of the most significant threats to agricultural sustainability and rural livelihoods worldwide (Descheemaeker et al., 2016; Salako and Adenuga, 2026). Increasing temperatures, prolonged droughts, erratic rainfallpatterns, and extreme weather events are affecting agricultural production systems at an unprecedented scale and frequency (Slayi et al., 2024a; Herrero et al., 2014). The livestock sector is particularly vulnerable because its productivity depends heavily on climate-sensitive resources, including water, feed, and ecosystem services (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2023; Thornton et al., 2009). Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) is considered one of the world's most climate-vulnerable regions due to its high dependence on rain-fed agriculture, widespread poverty, environmental degradation, and limited adaptive capacity (Niang et al., 2014; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2023). Over 80% of agricultural land in SSA relies directly on rainfall, making food production highly sensitive to droughts and erratic precipitation (Ayanlade et al., 2022). Consequently, climate change and climate variability poses a substantial threat to livestock production systems and the livelihoods of millions of rural households that depend on them.

Climate change and climate variability are related but distinct concepts that influence livestock production systems in different ways. Climate variability refers to short- to medium-term fluctuations in climatic conditions, including seasonal and interannual variations in rainfall and temperature. In contrast, climate change refers to long-term shifts in climatic patterns that are largely driven by anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2023). Smallholder livestock systems in Sub-Saharan Africa are exposed to both phenomena. Long-term increases in temperature associated with climate change interact with recurrent droughts, floods, and seasonal rainfall variability to reduce feed availability, water resources, animal productivity, and the resilience of livestock-dependent households (Herrero and Thornton, 2013; Zenda, 2025; Herrero et al., 2021). Recognizing this distinction is important for understanding both the immediate climatic risks faced by farmers and the long-term adaptation strategies required to build resilient livestock production systems. Smallholder livestock systems constitute a critical component of agricultural production and rural development in SSA (Akinyi et al., 2021; Gwaka and Dubihlela, 2020). Livestock contributes significantly to household income, food and nutritional security, employment generation, asset accumulation, and socio-cultural functions among rural communities (Herrero and Thornton, 2013; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2018). Smallholder farmers predominantly rear cattle, goats, sheep, and poultry under extensive and semi-intensive production systems that rely heavily on communal rangelands and seasonal rainfall (Herrero et al., 2016). However, climate change and climate variability have increasingly disrupted these systems through reduced forage availability and quality, water scarcity, increased incidences of livestock diseases and parasites, and accelerated rangeland degradation (Rojas-Downing et al., 2017; Godde et al., 2021). These challenges have resulted in lower livestock productivity, increased mortality rates, poor reproductive performance, and heightened livelihood vulnerability among smallholder farming communities (Thornton et al., 2009; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2023).

Given these challenges, considerable attention has been directed toward building the resilience of smallholder livestock systems. Resilience refers to the capacity of systems to anticipate, absorb, adapt to, and recover from climatic disturbances while maintaining essential functions and productivity (Bashiru and Oseni, 2025; Folke et al., 2010). Numerous adaptation strategies have been promoted to enhance resilience among smallholder livestock producers, including the use of indigenous and locally adapted breeds, diversification of livestock species, feed conservation and supplementation, sustainable grazing management, integrated crop-livestock systems, water harvesting technologies, and community-based natural resource management approaches (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2019; Nyong et al., 2007; Thornton and Herrero, 2015). Furthermore, the concept of Climate-Smart Agriculture has gained prominence as an integrated framework that seeks to improve productivity, strengthen adaptive capacity, and reduce vulnerability to climate change while promoting environmental sustainability (Slayi et al., 2024b; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2013; Lipper et al., 2014).

Despite the growing body of literature on climate change adaptation and livestock resilience, the available evidence remains fragmented and unevenly distributed across geographical locations, production systems, and thematic areas. Existing studies have predominantly focused on documenting the impacts of climate change and describing adaptation practices, with relatively limited emphasis on evaluating the effectiveness of interventions and identifying critical knowledge gaps that constrain resilience-building efforts (Herrero et al., 2016; Rojas-Downing et al., 2017). Emerging areas such as climate-resilient livestock genetics, digital technologies and precision livestock management, climate-sensitive disease surveillance systems, gender-responsive adaptation strategies, and integrated policy frameworks remain underexplored in the context of smallholder livestock systems in SSA (Godde et al., 2021; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2023). The lack of a consolidated evidence base on future research priorities limits the design of targeted interventions and evidence-based policies required to strengthen the resilience and sustainability of smallholder livestock systems in the region. For example, the African Union's Climate Change and Resilient Development Strategy and Action Plan that seeks to harmonize the continent's approach to climate change over the next

decade, setting out the guiding principles, priorities and action areas for enhanced climate cooperation. However, this plan needs updated evidence-base to prioritize vulnerable regions in the continent. Systematic reviews provide a rigorous and transparent approach for synthesizing existing evidence, identifying research trends and knowledge gaps, and establishing future research agendas (Page et al., 2021). Therefore, this systematic review aims to synthesize evidence on adaptation strategies in response to climate change and climate variability in Sub-Saharan Africa and identify evidence gaps and priority research areas necessary for building climate-resilient and sustainable livestock production systems. By providing a comprehensive synthesis of current knowledge and future research needs, this review is expected to inform researchers, policymakers, development agencies, and other stakeholders seeking to enhance the adaptive capacity and long-term resilience of smallholder livestock systems in Sub-Saharan Africa. This article is structured as follows: the immediate section describes the research methodology and is followed by the presentation of the results. After the results, discussion of the key findings and conclusion follows.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Study design

This study employed a systematic review to synthesize the available evidence on climate change adaptation strategies, resilience interventions, and emerging research priorities for smallholder livestock systems in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines (Page et al., 2021), which provide a transparent and reproducible framework for identifying, screening, selecting, and synthesizing relevant literature. Knowledge production (journal articles, books, etc) in the 21st century has significantly increased and meaningful summary of it is challenging. Systematic reviews fill such gap by providing a scientific summation of the findings.

2.2 Review framework

The review was guided by the Population–Exposure–Outcome (PEO) framework, which is widely used in environmental and public health systematic reviews to formulate research questions and develop search strategies (Bettany-Saltikov, 2012). The framework comprised:

• Population (P): Smallholder livestock production systems and livestock farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa.
• Exposure (E): Climate change and climate variability, including droughts, rising temperatures, erratic rainfall, floods, and extreme weather events.
• Outcome (O): Climate adaptation strategies, resilience interventions, barriers and enabling factors, knowledge gaps, and priority research areas.

The PEO framework was selected in preference to the conventional PICOS framework because this review sought to synthesize evidence on environmental exposures and adaptation outcomes rather than evaluate specific interventions against defined comparators. Since most included studies were observational, qualitative, or mixed-methods investigations, the Intervention and Comparator components required under PICOS were not applicable. The review sought to answer the following question:

“What are the priority research areas required to strengthen the resilience of smallholder livestock systems under climate change and climate variability in Sub-Saharan Africa?”

2.3 Literature search strategy

A comprehensive literature search was undertaken using two multidisciplinary bibliographic databases (Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection), which provide extensive coverage of agricultural, environmental, and climate science literature. To improve the completeness of the search, backward citation searching was conducted by screening the reference lists of all eligible studies to identify additional relevant publications that were not retrieved through the electronic database searches. This supplementary search strategy enhanced the comprehensiveness of the review but was not intended to minimize publication bias. The search strategy combined controlled vocabulary and free-text terms using Boolean operators (AND, OR), truncation symbols, and database-specific search fields. The principal search string was: (“smallholder livestock” OR “livestock production systems” OR pastoral^* OR agropastoral^* OR “mixed crop-livestock”) AND (“climate change” OR “climate variability” OR drought OR “global warming” OR “extreme weather”) AND (adaptation OR resilience OR “climate-smart agriculture” OR “adaptive capacity”) AND (“Sub-Saharan Africa” OR Africa) AND (“research priorities” OR “knowledge gaps” OR “future research” OR “future directions”).

Search terms were refined iteratively following preliminary searches to maximize sensitivity and specificity.

2.4 Eligibility criteria

Studies were selected according to the following predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria (Table 1).

Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria used for study selection.

2.5 Study selection

All retrieved records were exported into Zotero (Version 7.0) for reference management, where duplicate records were identified and removed.

The study selection process consisted of three sequential stages:

• Title screening;
• Abstract screening; and
• Full-text eligibility assessment.

Title screening, abstract screening, full-text assessment, data extraction, and quality appraisal were independently undertaken by two reviewers (M.S. and L.Z.). Disagreements at each stage were resolved through discussion and consensus. Where consensus could not initially be reached, the full article was re-examined jointly until agreement was achieved. The complete study selection process is presented using the PRISMA 2020 flow diagram.

2.6 Data extraction

A standardized data extraction form was developed and pilot-tested to ensure consistency and accuracy prior to data collection. Information extracted from each eligible study included the author(s), year of publication, country of study, study objectives, study design, livestock species investigated, production system, reported climatic stressors, adaptation strategies, resilience outcomes, barriers to adaptation, enabling factors, recommendations, and identified knowledge gaps. Following data extraction, all records were reviewed and cross-checked to verify completeness, consistency, and accuracy before being synthesized for thematic analysis.

2.7 Quality assessment

The methodological quality of the included studies was independently assessed by two reviewers (M.S. and L.Z.) using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) Version 2018 (Hong et al., 2018), which is suitable for evaluating qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies. The appraisal evaluated the appropriateness of the study design, adequacy of sampling procedures, validity and reliability of data collection methods, suitability of analytical approaches, and completeness of reporting. Any disagreements between the two reviewers were resolved through discussion until consensus was reached. The quality assessment was undertaken to evaluate the methodological rigor of the included studies and to inform interpretation of the findings. No studies were excluded based on quality scores to ensure a comprehensive synthesis of the available evidence.

2.8 Data synthesis

Given the heterogeneity of study designs, geographical contexts, livestock production systems, and reported outcomes, a narrative thematic synthesis was undertaken rather than a meta-analysis, following the guidance of Popay et al. (2006) for conducting narrative synthesis in systematic reviews. This approach is appropriate where quantitative pooling is not feasible because of substantial methodological and contextual heterogeneity among included studies. Extracted findings were organized into five overarching themes:

• Climate change and climate variability impacts on smallholder livestock systems.
• Adaptation and resilience strategies.
• Barriers and enabling factors influencing adaptation.
• Evidence gaps in current knowledge.
• Priority research areas for climate-resilient livestock systems.

An inductive coding approach was used to identify recurring concepts and emerging themes across studies. Similar findings were grouped into broader thematic categories to facilitate comparison and synthesis. To identify future research priorities, recommendations and knowledge gaps reported in individual studies were extracted, coded, and grouped according to thematic similarity. Priority areas were subsequently classified into five domains:

• climate-resilient livestock genetics;
• sustainable feed and rangeland systems;
• animal health and climate-sensitive disease surveillance;
• socioeconomic and institutional resilience; and
• digital technologies and climate policy innovations.

2.9 Reporting

The results are presented using descriptive summaries, evidence synthesis tables, conceptual frameworks, and thematic diagrams to illustrate research trends, adaptation strategies, knowledge gaps, and proposed future research priorities. The review adhered to PRISMA 2020 reporting standards to ensure methodological transparency, reproducibility, and scientific rigor.

3 Results

3.1 Study selection

The systematic search identified 1,284 records from Scopus (n = 812) and Web of Science (n = 472). Following the removal of 254 duplicate records, 1,030 articles were retained for title and abstract screening. Of these, 872 studies were excluded because they did not meet the eligibility criteria, leaving 158 articles for full-text assessment. After full-text screening, 94 studies were excluded for reasons including irrelevant study focus, lack of climate change and climate variability or livestock resilience outcomes, studies conducted outside Sub-Saharan Africa, or insufficient methodological detail. Consequently, 64 studies were included in the final qualitative synthesis. The study selection process is illustrated in the PRISMA flow diagram (Figure 1).

3.2 Characteristics of included studies

The included studies were published between 2000 and 2025, with a marked increase in publications after 2015, reflecting growing scientific interest in climate change adaptation and livestock resilience. The studies covered 21 countries across Sub-Saharan Africa, with the highest representation from Ethiopia, Kenya, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Botswana, and Uganda. Most studies employed cross-sectional surveys, mixed-methods approaches, or qualitative case studies, while fewer studies adopted longitudinal or experimental designs. Agro-pastoral production systems were the most frequently investigated, followed by pastoral and mixed crop–livestock systems. Cattle were the dominant livestock species studied, followed by goats, sheep, and poultry. A summary of study characteristics is presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Characteristics of studies included in the systematic review (n = 64).

Source: Author analysis of literature retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science.

3.3 Geographical distribution of included studies

The geographical distribution of studies revealed a strong concentration of evidence from East and Southern Africa, particularly Ethiopia, Kenya, South Africa, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe (Table 3). In contrast, relatively few studies originated from Central Africa and Francophone West Africa, highlighting important regional evidence gaps that warrant greater research investment.

Table 3. Geographical distribution of studies included in the review (n = 64).

3.4 Methodological quality assessment

The methodological quality of the 64 included studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) Version 2018. Overall, the evidence base demonstrated moderate to high methodological quality. Forty-three studies (67.2%) satisfied all five MMAT criteria, 15 studies (23.4%) met four criteria, while six studies (9.4%) met three criteria. Common methodological limitations included inadequate justification of sampling procedures, limited reporting of non-response bias, and insufficient discussion of study limitations. No studies were excluded on the basis of quality assessment; however, these methodological limitations were considered during interpretation of the evidence. Detailed MMAT scores for individual studies are provided in Supplementary Table 1.

3.5 Climate change and climate variability impacts on smallholder livestock systems

Across the reviewed studies, drought emerged as the most frequently reported climatic stressor, followed by rainfall variability, increasing temperatures, and extreme weather events. These stressors affected livestock production through multiple interconnected pathways. Feed scarcity resulting from declining pasture productivity was the most consistently reported impact. Reduced forage quantity and quality, together with increasing water shortages, contributed to declining livestock productivity across different production systems. Several studies also reported increased incidences of heat stress, altered disease distribution, higher parasite burdens, and increased livestock mortality during prolonged drought periods. Climate-induced rangeland degradation, characterized by bush encroachment, soil erosion, declining carrying capacity, and reduced biodiversity, further constrained livestock production. Collectively, these impacts resulted in reduced milk production, lower growth rates, poor reproductive performance, and increased livelihood vulnerability among smallholder farming households (Table 4).

Table 4. Major climate change and climate variability impacts reported in smallholder livestock systems.

Source: Author analysis of literature retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science.

3.6 Adaptation strategies for climate resilience

The reviewed literature identified a broad range of adaptation strategies adopted by smallholder livestock farmers to reduce climate-related risks. The most reported strategy was the utilization of indigenous and locally adapted livestock breeds due to their superior tolerance to drought, heat stress, and endemic diseases. Feed-related interventions included fodder conservation, strategic supplementation, utilization of crop residues, and cultivation of drought-tolerant forage species. Farmers also implemented grazing management practices such as rotational grazing, controlled stocking rates, seasonal mobility, and opportunistic destocking during drought periods. Water management interventions included rainwater harvesting, borehole development, construction of communal water points, and improved water storage facilities. In addition, several studies reported increasing integration of crop and livestock enterprises as a strategy for improving resource use efficiency and household resilience. Institutional interventions such as climate information services, extension support, farmer cooperatives, and community-based natural resource management were also reported, although their adoption remained inconsistent across countries (Table 5).

Table 5. Climate adaptation strategies identified in the reviewed literature (n = 64).

Source: Author analysis of literature retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science.

3.7 Barriers and enabling factors influencing adaptation

Despite widespread adoption of adaptation measures, numerous constraints limited their effectiveness. Economic barriers were the most frequently reported and included limited access to financial resources, credit facilities, and agricultural inputs. Institutional challenges included inadequate extension services, weak veterinary support, insufficient climate information, and poor infrastructure. Social factors such as insecure land tenure, gender inequality, low educational attainment, and limited access to markets further constrained adaptive capacity. Conversely, enabling factors included indigenous knowledge systems, strong community networks, government and non-governmental support programmes, improved access to extension services, and participation in farmer organizations, all of which enhanced resilience among smallholder livestock producers (Table 6).

Table 6. Barriers and enabling factors influencing climate adaptation.

Source: Author analysis of literature retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science.

3.8 Evidence gaps and research priorities

The synthesis revealed considerable variation in research emphasis across thematic areas. Most studies concentrated on documenting climate change and climate variability impacts and describing adaptation practices, whereas relatively few investigated the long-term effectiveness of adaptation interventions or evaluated transformative resilience strategies. Five major research priorities emerged consistently across the reviewed literature. The first relates to climate-resilient livestock genetics, with limited evidence available on adaptive traits, genomic selection, and breeding strategies suitable for climate change and climate variability conditions. The second concerns sustainable feed and rangeland systems, particularly drought-resilient forage species, ecosystem restoration, and precision grazing management. The third priority involves animal health and climate-sensitive disease surveillance, including predictive modeling of disease outbreaks and emerging livestock health risks associated with climate change. The fourth relates to socioeconomic and institutional resilience, with limited evidence on gender-responsive adaptation, youth participation, livelihood diversification, and governance systems. Finally, substantial research gaps were identified in digital agriculture and policy innovations, including precision livestock farming, early warning systems, climate information services, artificial intelligence, and integrated climate policy frameworks for smallholder livestock systems (Table 7).

Table 7. Priority research areas identified from the reviewed literature (n = 64).

Source: Author analysis of literature retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science.

3.9 Trends in climate resilience research

Analysis of publication trends demonstrated a progressive shift in research focus over the past two decades. Earlier studies primarily documented climate impacts on livestock production, whereas more recent research has increasingly examined adaptation strategies and resilience-building approaches. Nevertheless, research addressing transformative adaptation, digital technologies, climate-smart livestock systems, and integrated policy solutions remains comparatively limited. Overall, while significant advances have been made in understanding climate vulnerability and adaptation within smallholder livestock systems, important knowledge gaps persist in emerging areas essential for strengthening long-term resilience under future climate change scenarios (Figures 2 and 3).

4 Discussion

This systematic review synthesized evidence on adaptation strategies, constraints, and emerging research priorities for climate-resilient smallholder livestock systems in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The findings highlight three key insights: (i) climate change exerts multifaceted pressures on smallholder livestock systems through feed, water, health, and productivity pathways; (ii) adaptation responses are largely locally driven, incremental, and resource-constrained; and (iii) there is a clear imbalance in the literature, with strong emphasis on documenting impacts and coping strategies, but limited attention to advanced, transformative, and future-oriented research areas such as genetics, digital technologies, and predictive systems.

4.1 Climate change and climate variability impacts and system vulnerability

This review demonstrates that climate change and climate variability is undermining the resilience of smallholder livestock systems in Sub-Saharan Africa through multiple, interconnected pathways. Rather than acting independently, climatic stressors interact to amplify production risks and reduce the adaptive capacity of livestock-dependent households. These findings reinforce broader regional assessments indicating that livestock systems in SSA are among the world's most climate-sensitive agricultural systems because they rely heavily on rain-fed rangelands and natural grazing resources (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2023; Thornton and Herrero, 2015; Bahta and Myeki, 2021). The dominance of drought across the reviewed studies highlights its role as a primary driver of system vulnerability, particularly in arid and semi-arid environments where forage production and water availability are highly climate-dependent. Importantly, the synthesis suggests that climate change should be viewed as a systems challenge rather than a collection of isolated stressors. Declining rangeland condition, reduced feed availability, increasing disease risks, and lower livestock productivity create reinforcing feedbacks that progressively erode household resilience. Consequently, adaptation strategies targeting only one component of the production system are unlikely to achieve long-term resilience. These findings support growing calls for integrated climate adaptation approaches that simultaneously address livestock nutrition, water resources, animal health, rangeland management, and institutional support (Zhou et al., 2022; Godde et al., 2021; Thornton and Herrero, 2015).

4.2 Nature of adaptation strategies: predominance of incremental responses

The findings indicate that adaptation within smallholder livestock systems remains predominantly incremental, reflecting both the resource constraints faced by farmers and the limited availability of institutional support. Most adaptation measures are designed to reduce immediate climate-related risks rather than transform production systems to withstand future climatic conditions. Similar conclusions have been reported by Thornton and Herrero (2015), Escarcha et al. (2018), and Godde et al. (2021), who argue that adaptation across SSA has largely remained reactive, with relatively limited investment in transformative innovations capable of enhancing long-term resilience. The continued reliance on indigenous knowledge and locally adapted practices demonstrates their importance in supporting household resilience under increasingly variable climatic conditions. However, the review also highlights the limited integration of emerging technologies such as climate information services, precision livestock management, digital decision-support tools, and livestock insurance schemes. This gap suggests that technological innovation alone will not strengthen resilience unless accompanied by improvements in extension services, infrastructure, access to finance, and supportive policy environments. Future adaptation efforts should therefore promote a transition from short-term coping strategies toward transformative approaches that integrate technological innovation with strengthened institutional and governance systems.

4.3 Structural barriers limiting adaptation effectiveness

A key finding from this review is that adaptation constraints are predominantly structural rather than behavioral. Limited access to credit, weak extension services, inadequate veterinary infrastructure, and poor market access significantly reduce the effectiveness of otherwise viable adaptation strategies. Land tenure insecurity and gender inequalities further exacerbate vulnerability, particularly among women and youth who often have limited control over productive resources. These findings align with resilience theory, which emphasizes that adaptive capacity is shaped not only by ecological conditions but also by institutional and socioeconomic contexts (Slayi et al., 2026; Bonilla-Cedrez et al., 2023; Folke et al., 2010). The persistence of these barriers suggests that enhancing resilience in smallholder livestock systems requires more than technical interventions; it demands systemic changes in governance, institutional support, and service delivery.

4.4 Evidence gaps and under-researched domains

One of the most important contributions of this review is the identification of clear evidence gaps that should guide future research. While substantial literature exists on climate impacts and traditional adaptation strategies, several critical domains remain underexplored. First, climate-resilient livestock genetics and adaptive traits in indigenous breeds are insufficiently studied despite their potential to enhance long-term system resilience. Second, emerging technologies such as precision livestock farming, digital early warning systems, and climate-smart decision-support tools remain largely absent from smallholder contexts. Third, there is limited integration of livestock disease dynamics with climate variability, despite increasing evidence that climate change is altering disease distribution patterns in SSA. In addition, socioeconomic dimensions such as gendered adaptation, youth engagement, and social protection mechanisms are underrepresented in the literature. This is particularly concerning given that vulnerability is unevenly distributed across social groups. Finally, policy-oriented research remains fragmented, with limited evidence on how livestock systems are integrated into national climate adaptation frameworks.

4.5 Toward a research agenda for climate-resilient livestock systems

The synthesis of evidence gaps points to the need for a more forward-looking and transformative research agenda. Five priority research domains emerge from the literature:

• Climate-resilient genetics and breeding systems, focusing on adaptive traits in indigenous livestock.
• Sustainable feed and rangeland systems, including drought-resilient forage species and landscape restoration approaches.
• Animal health and climate-sensitive disease systems, incorporating predictive modeling and surveillance.
• Socioeconomic and institutional resilience, addressing inequality, governance, and livelihood diversification.
• Digital and policy innovations, including climate information systems, insurance mechanisms, and integrated livestock policy frameworks.

This framing shifts the discourse from reactive adaptation to proactive resilience building and aligns with global calls for transformative adaptation in agricultural systems.

4.6 Implications for policy and practice

The findings have important implications for policymakers, researchers, and development practitioners. First, interventions should move beyond promoting isolated adaptation practices toward integrated, systems-based approaches that simultaneously address feed, water, health, and institutional constraints. Second, strengthening extension systems and climate information services is essential for improving the uptake of adaptation strategies. Third, investment in research and innovation, particularly in livestock genetics, digital technologies, and climate-sensitive disease systems, is urgently needed to close existing knowledge gaps. Furthermore, policies should explicitly recognize the heterogeneity of smallholder systems and ensure inclusive adaptation strategies that consider gender, youth, and resource-poor households. Without such inclusivity, adaptation interventions risk reinforcing existing inequalities.

4.7 Limitations of the review

This review is subject to several limitations. First, only Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched, although these databases provide extensive multidisciplinary coverage of agricultural and environmental research. Relevant studies indexed exclusively in agriculture-specific databases such as CAB Abstracts or AGRICOLA may therefore have been missed. Second, the review included only English-language peer-reviewed publications, potentially excluding relevant evidence published in other languages or gray literature. Finally, heterogeneity in study designs precluded quantitative meta-analysis.

5 Conclusion

This systematic review synthesized evidence on climate change and climate variability impacts, adaptation strategies, and research priorities for smallholder livestock systems in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The findings demonstrate that climate change continues to exert significant pressure on livestock-based livelihoods through increased feed and water scarcity, rangeland degradation, disease dynamics, and declining animal productivity. Although smallholder farmers employ a range of adaptation strategies, these are largely incremental, locally driven, and constrained by structural and institutional limitations. A key outcome of this review is the identification of persistent evidence gaps that limit the development of effective, scalable, and transformative adaptation interventions. In particular, limited attention has been given to climate-resilient livestock genetics, digital and precision livestock technologies, climate-sensitive disease surveillance, and the socioeconomic dimensions of adaptation such as gender, youth inclusion, and governance systems. These gaps highlight the need to move beyond descriptive studies of climate impacts toward more forward-looking and solution-oriented research. The study proposes five priority research areas that are critical for strengthening resilience in smallholder livestock systems: climate-resilient genetics, sustainable feed and rangeland systems, animal health and disease surveillance, socioeconomic and institutional resilience, and digital and policy innovations. Addressing these areas requires interdisciplinary collaboration, stronger investment in livestock research systems, and improved integration of scientific and indigenous knowledge.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that Generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fclim.2026.1924189/full#supplementary-material

Supplementary material Supplementary material at the source

Footnotes

Edited by: Rajiv Kumar Srivastava, Texas A and M University, United States

Reviewed by: Obert Tada, University of Limpopo, South Africa

Purna Khand, Pokhara University, Nepal

Birhanu Hadush, Mekelle University, Ethiopia

Animut Andualem, Bahir Dar University, Ethiopia