article · International Journal of Natural Resource Ecology and Management
In the arid and semi-arid lands of lower eastern Kenya, livestock production serves as the main source of livelihood, yet conventional development projects have yielded modest economic returns. An evaluation of a Livestock Improvement Project in Mwala Sub-County examined its influence on household subjective well-being across 285 agro-pastoral households drawn from 45 farmer groups. Beneficiaries reported a relatively high average well-being score of 7.3 on a ten-point scale. Analysis demonstrated that subjective well-being was significantly and positively driven by improvements in livestock performance, access to agricultural credit, capacity building in livestock management, and active involvement in collective action. Consequently, livestock development initiatives in dryland areas achieve better livelihood outcomes when they combine technical livestock support with financial access, skills training, and group collaboration.
Evaluating development programmes through subjective well-being provides a broader measure of success than conventional economic returns alone. By demonstrating how credit access, training, and collective action enhance pastoralist life satisfaction, this research assists policymakers and non-governmental organisations in designing more effective, multifaceted interventions for vulnerable communities living in arid and semi-arid environments.
The findings inform the operational design of development programmes, microfinance services, and agricultural extension models targeting dryland livestock keepers. Rather than presenting a commercial product, the research provides applied empirical evidence that can be directly utilised by non-governmental organisations, agricultural lenders, and rural development agencies to structure bundled interventions combining credit facilities with group-based training.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
Livestock production remains the primary source of livelihood in the arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) of Kenya’s lower eastern region. Despite sustained investments by governments and non-governmental organizations, the economic returns from livestock development projects have remained modest, and poverty levels persist. This study evaluated the impact of a Livestock Improvement Project (LIP) on the subjective wellbeing of agro-pastoral households in Mwala Sub-County, Machakos County. Specifically, the study assessed household subjective wellbeing and examined its contributions to livestock performance, access to agricultural credit, capacity building in livestock management, and participation in collective action. A cross-sectional study was conducted to collect household information using a structured questionnaire. A sample of 285 households was selected through stratified random sampling from 1,100 project beneficiaries organized into 45 farmer groups. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics at a 95% confidence level (p ≤ 0.05). Household subjective wellbeing was relatively high ( M = 7.3, SD = 1.2) on a 10-point scale (1=low and 10 high). Regression results indicated that subjective wellbeing was positively and significantly influenced by livestock performance (β = 0.944, p < 0.001), access to agricultural credit (β = 0.748, p < 0.001), capacity building (β = 0.878, p < 0.001), and participation in collective action (β = 0.834, p < 0.001). The study concludes that the LIP had a positive impact on household wellbeing and recommends that future livestock interventions in ASALs integrate capacity building, access to credit, and collective action to enhance sustainable livelihood outcomes. The study contributes to livestock development literature by applying the subjective wellbeing perspective to project impact evaluation.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.11648/j.ijnrem.20261103.13
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
