The pastoralism system in South-Western Ethiopia: The practices, constraints, and determinants in Itang Special district, Gambella Region

Abstract

Pastoralism is used as a livelihood strategy across pastoral areas in Ethiopia, as it is in other parts of the world. However, studies on the pastoralism system in the Gambella Region of Ethiopia appear outdated. Therefore, a study was conducted to assess the current state of pastoralism in the Gambella Region of Ethiopia and identify the challenges faced by pastoralists. The study area and participants were then chosen using purposive and simple random selection approaches. Data from 156 respondents was collected using a mixed strategy, which included focus group discussions and an interview schedule. The result showed that 67.3%, 23.7%, and 9% of the respondents used the transhumance, nomadic, and semi-pastoral systems. Moreover, resource conflict (64.7%), floods (62.8%), livestock raiding (68%), poor infrastructure (65.4%), livestock diseases (64.1%), inadequate social services (50.6%), ignorance of the pastoral system (63.5%), and expansion of farm land (71.8%) were identified as the main constraints. The model result revealed that credit access, livestock size, household labor, and education status positively influenced pastoral practices, while dependency ratio, water access, and pasture access negatively affected pastoral practices in the study area. Therefore, pastoral practices were differently influenced in the study area.

Keywords:

• pastoralism
• pastoral practices
• constraints
• determinants and itang special district

Public Interest Statement

Pastoralism is the only vital mean for livelihood sustainability in pastoral areas of the world. It involves the production of livestock through various production systems. The pastoral households become mobile across several settings. And yet, the pastoral lifestyle was not given much concentration in many countries. The government, non-governmental organizations and civil society’s organizations are not providing different intervention mechanisms to solve the problems of pastoral households. Then, the people residing in pastoral areas are experiencing exploitation than gaining benefits. Hence, the policies interventions are needed to improve the living standard of the pastoral households in developing countries particularly Ethiopia.

1. Introduction

Pastoralism is a traditional form of rearing animals where livestock, such as cattle, sheep, and goats, are raised on natural grasslands. According to Dong (2016), pastoralism is a traditional form of animal husbandry involving the mobile herding of cattle. Abdulkadr (2019) describes pastoralists as people who make their living largely from herding livestock. Gifford-Gonzalez (2005) explains that pastoralists structure their settlement and mobility strategies to meet the dietary requirements of their livestock. Blench (2001) defines pastoralism as a branch of agriculture dealing with livestock production. IFAD (2008) highlights pastoralism as a method of living on more dynamic lands through animal rearing. The three main types of pastoralism are nomadic, transhumance, and semi-pastoral (Abdulkadr, 2019, Abdulkadr). Nomadic pastoralism involves constantly moving livestock herds in search of grazing land, while transhumance pastoralism involves seasonal movements between different grazing areas. Semi-pastoralism, on the other hand, combines aspects of sedentary agriculture with livestock herding. Each type of pastoralism has its own unique practices and is adapted to specific geographic regions and environmental conditions.

In such a case, pastoralism is mostly practiced on the world’s grasslands, which cover roughly a quarter of the planet’s surface (Follet & Reed, 2010). Ethiopia’s rangelands, which make up over 60% of the country’s total area, are the main sources of feed for cattle (Borona Lowland Pasotal Development Pastoral Development programmed BLDP, 2004). The pastoral system is located in lowland plains, which are flat areas of land at low elevations and have a scant, unpredictable climate with erratic rainfall and high temperatures (Angassa, 2007). About 40% of the nation’s entire livestock population is raised in rangelands, along with 75% of the goats, 25% of the sheep, and nearly 100% of the camels (Mengistu, 2004). The rangelands in Ethiopia are crucial for livestock grazing and serve as important habitats for wildlife (Abule et al., 2005). These regions are home to parks, sanctuaries, and reserves that contribute to the conservation of biodiversity.

Pastoral communal areas make up approximately 61% of Ethiopia’s total land mass, with more than 29 nationalities and ethnic groupings spread over the country’s 122 districts (Abduselam, 2019). In many locations, pastoralists are responding to new economic opportunities and improved access to modern communication (African Union AU, Department of Rural Economy and Agriculture DREA, 2010). Almost four million people and 14 percent of Ethiopians in Afar, Somalia, Oromia, SNNPR, Benishangul-Gumuz, Dire Dawa, and Gambella rely on the pastoral system for income (Abduselam, 2019; Nejimu & Hussein, 2016). According to a study by Abdulkadr (2019), pastoralism accounts for around 20% of Ethiopia’s domestic exports, 90% of live animal exports, and 80% of the country’s yearly milk supply.

Pastoralism faces several challenges in Ethiopia. There are high population trends, long-term resource conflicts, and reduced access to grazing lands and drinking water due to climate change and animal diseases (Abduselam, 2019). Similarly, pastoralists live in communities that are marginalized, remote, and underdeveloped. Furthermore, pastoral communities face shortages in essential services such as healthcare, education, energy, roads, and communication. The illiteracy rate is extremely high in areas where many children in pastoral areas are not attending school (UNICEF, 2014). They also have limited access to agricultural extension services, loans, and insurance (Abduselam, 2019).

However, there are few specific studies on Ethiopia’s pastoralism system. Previous studies have focused on different aspects of pastoralism in Ethiopia. For example, Abduselam (2019) examined the relationship between pastoralism and development policy, while Mohammed (2015) explored pastoral development pathways. Other studies have investigated pastoralists’ resource access (Eyasu, 2008), the benefits and challenges of the pastoralism system (Abdulkadr, 2019), and the potential future scenarios for pastoral development (Peter et al., 2010). There is a shortage of studies that comprehensively examine pastoral practices, constraints, and determinants across different regions of Ethiopia, such as the Gambella region and the Itang Special District.

Therefore, the consequences of not studying the pastoralism systems in Itang Special District could be detrimental. Without this knowledge, policymakers may not fully understand the needs and challenges of pastoralists, leading to ineffective policies and interventions. Additionally, the well-being of the people in the region continues to suffer. This lack of understanding could perpetuate cycles of poverty and inequality. Moreover, the absence of research on the constraints and determinants of pastoralism may hinder the identification of opportunities for sustainable development and resource management in the region.

Thus, it is crucial to prioritize the study of pastoralism and its constraints and determinants to ensure inclusive and informed decision-making that benefits both pastoralists and the wider community. Overall, the study of pastoralism can provide valuable insights and guidance for promoting inclusive and sustainable development in the region. By understanding the specific challenges faced by pastoral communities, researchers can identify effective strategies to mitigate these threats. This benefits the livelihoods of pastoralists and contributes to the resilience and stability of the region. By understanding the unique needs and challenges faced by pastoralists, policymakers and researchers can develop targeted interventions and policies that better support their way of life. Furthermore, the knowledge gained from studying pastoralism can inform broader conservation efforts, as it provides insights into the delicate balance between human activities and the natural environment.

Accordingly, understanding the practices of the pastoralism system and its constraints and determinants in Itang Special District is paramount. The objectives of this study were to describe the dominant forms of pastoralism practices, assess the constraints of pastoralism practices, and examine the determinants of pastoralism practices in Itang Special District.

2. Research methodology

2.1. Description of the study area

This study was conducted in Itang Special District, which is situated 45 kilometers from the regional capital city of Gambella, Ethiopia. Its neighboring zones or regions are the Anuak Zone in the south and southeast, the Nuer Zone in the west, and the Oromia Region in the north. The district has a latitude and longitude of 08°12′N 34°16′E/8.200°N 34.267°E within the Gambella regional location. In the Gambella region, the district is a sparsely populated area. The Itang special district has only 42,000 residents, including 21,411 men and 20,589 women (Alemseged & N, 2014). Approximately 8,744 households were counted in Itang district. This population has resulted in 4.8 people per household and 8213 dwelling units.

The local economy in this pastoral area is diverse across the district. People in this district rely on a mixed-production system that combines crop and livestock production. Livestock-based farming has become the primary source of income for many people. In pastoral areas, there are many common livestock activities (mainly fishing, cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, beekeeping, etc.). This community’s livestock production system is traditional. With their indigenous breeds, pastoralists practice free-range production. Pastoral communities thrive in favorable environmental conditions. Throughout these pastures, many water sources, spontaneous trees, wild animals, fish, and bees can be found. The Baro-Akobo River provides abundant water throughout the year. The pastoral lands, on the other hand, are overlooked in terms of policy in this district. In pastoral areas, project interventions and fundamental developmental services are lacking.

2.2. Sampling techniques and sample size determination

2.2.1. Sampling techniques

This study has developed various sampling techniques to gather data on the practices and lifestyles of pastoralism. Three-stage sampling methods were used to choose the study venues and research participants. A three-stage sampling technique is a method used in statistical research to select a representative sample from a larger population. This technique is commonly used in research studies to ensure whether representative samples are obtained or not. The first stage involved selecting Itang Special District through purposive sampling. This is because it is well-known for livestock production, has three tribes in the area, and lacks research on the pastoralism system. In the second stage of the sampling technique, the four Kebele (lowest administrative units) (Puldeng, Pulkod, Waar, and Wathgach) were chosen through a simple random technique. Finally, the sample respondents were chosen using a simple random sampling process. This was done by drawing a table of random numbers obtained from the sample frame of each kebele. The main respondents were the heads of households.

2.2.2. Sample size determination

A sufficient sample size of the population is needed for this study. This sample size determination will ensure that the findings and conclusions drawn from the study are representative of the larger nomadic population and can be used to inform conservation efforts. Mathematical methodologies were used to determine the sample households for this inquiry. Among these methods, Arsham (2007) sample size determination: n = (0.25)/SE² at 95% and 4%

Where n=sample size0.25=constant numberSE2 (4%) =standard errorAs a result, this study’s sample size is (0.25/4%t) ² = 156.

2.3. Data collection methods

This research used mixed research approaches with quantitative and qualitative data. It has collected both primary and secondary data. Focus group discussions and interview schedules were used to collect primary data. The close-ended questions were used for the interview schedule, which every respondent read. In the focus group discussion, there were open-ended questions applied during the time of data collection. In this study, there was one focus group discussion in each kebele. Each group contained eight participants. Among the participants were Kebele chairpersons, women, and youth. The ideas of each participant were requested for each question. On the other hand, the secondary data was then collected through document analysis. Those data were obtained from reports, journals, conferences, and dissertations and theses. They were collected from various parts of the world.

2.4. Methods of data analysis

The quantitative data of this study was summarized using percentages and frequencies. Furthermore, a multinomial logit model was employed to investigate the factors that influence pastoral practices in the study area. Pastoral activities in the study area were divided into three categories: nomadic (moving between various locations), transhumance (moving between two permanent locations), and semi-pastoral (living in one fixed area). Besides, qualitative data collected through observation and focus group conversations was recorded, categorized, and grouped into interrelated topics for easy discussion.

2.5. Definitions of variables

2.5.1. Dependent variable

The pastoral practices are the response variable of this study, which is a categorical variable (transhumance, nomadic, and semi-pastoral practices). Hence, the transhumance, the nomadic, and the semi-pastoral practices were coded 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The transhumance pastoralists are the people who move between two permanent locations; the nomadic pastoralists are those moving between more than two different locations; and the semi-pastoralists are the people who stay in one particular location throughout the year.

2.5.2. Independent variables

The independent variables are the factors that determine the pastoral practices in the study area. Hence, 14 independent variables were theorized to influence the pastoral practices in the study areas. Thus, the relationships between these variables and pastoral practices are summarized in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Variables hypothesis

Variables	Description and Measurement	Nature	Sign
Household labor	HHL (1=Yes & 0=No)	Dummy	-
Marital status	MAS (1=Single, 2=Married, 3=divorce and 4= widow)	Dummy	+
Credit Access	CA (1=Yes & 0=No)	Dummy	+/-
Pasture access	PA (1=Yes & 0=No)	Dummy	+
Household size	HSI (Measure in Number)	Continuous	+
Cultivated land size	CLSI (Measure in hectare)	Continuous	+
Livestock size	LSI (measure in TLU)	Continuous	+
Veterinary services	AVS (1=Yes & 0=No)	Dummy	+
Educational status	EDS(1=illiterate,0=literate)	Dummy	-
Access to Information	AI(1=Yes & 0=No)	Dummy	+/-
Dependency ratio	DR (Number)	Continuous	+
Water access	WA (1=Yes & 0=No)	Dummy
Age of Households	AG (measure in Year)	Continuous	+
Market access	MA (measure in kilometer)	Dummy	+/-

3. Ethical consideration

Ethical considerations were taken during the time of data collection in this study. The concerns of respondents before data collection were requested. Similarly, the aim of this study was explained to the respondents during data collection. Furthermore, confidentiality was also maintained during the analysis.

4. Results and discussions

4.1. Pastoral system practice

4.1.1. Transhumance

Transhumance is the act of migrating between the two settings across the district. The perception of pastoralists to move between the two locations becomes high in pastoral areas. The pastoralists are using the practice of transhumance in the study area. The pastoralists use transhumance practices in the study area. The result showed that about 67.3% of pastoralists used the transhumance practice as their way of life in the study area (Table 2). This shows that many people use the transhumance system. The entire household usually migrates between Baro River Bank and Woodlands in the study area. Abduselam et al. (2020) pointed out that about 71.5% of pastoralists used transhumance practices in the Somali Region.

Table 2. Pastoral practices

Pastoral Practices	Frequency	Percentage
Transhumance	105	67.3
Nomadic	37	23.7
Semi-pastoral	14	9

According to the focus group discussion, many stakeholders have motivated pastoralists to use transhumance practices in the district. For example, local government policies acknowledged the influence of the transhumance system on environmental conservation in the district. The people showed that any rangeland left by the mobile communities is regenerated rather than permanently settled. Finally, the result of the focus group discussion showed that the availability of range resources (water and pasture), crop cultivation, seasons of mobility, and customary practices contributed to the transhumance in the study area.

4.1.2. Nomadic

The nomadic system is one of the pastoral practices used by the pastoralists in the study area. These are the people who migrate across the various locations in the study area. Thus, some pastoralists are exercising the nomadic practice across different settings. They hardly ever use the nomadic practice in the study area. The result showed that about 23.7% of pastoralists used the nomadic practice in the study area (Table 2). This shows that people used a nomadic system across the Itang district. Abduselam et al. (2020) finding indicated that only about 8.9% of pastoralists used the nomadic system in the Somali region.

Of course, the awareness of some pastoralists of the need to be involved in the nomadic system becomes habitual. A particular community credited the roles played by the nomadic system to livestock production. The result of the focus group discussion indicated that the pastoral system increases cattle reproduction, milk volume, and calving stages in the study area. When the people moved to areas where water and pasture were available, their herds could produce many products in the district. The result of the focus group discussion showed that the grazing areas, water sources, disease outbreaks, intensity of rainfall, conflict, and cattle raiding contribute to the nomadic practices in the study area.

4.1.3. Semi-pastoral

Pastoralist semi-pastoral is one of the pastoral practices used in the study area. This practice requires permanent settlements in which the people live. This system is used where people settle in single, permanent locations. So, there is motivation among the pastoralists towards this practice in some pastoral areas. The result showed that about 9% of pastoralists used semi-pastoral practices in the study area (Table 2). This entails that a small number of people use the sedentary system across the district. Abduselam et al. (2020) estimated that about 19.6% of pastoralists used sedentary systems in the Somali region.

Every day, some pastoralists undergo semi-pastoral practice in the study area. They have changed their inclination to a crop-livestock production system across the district. They use mixed crop and livestock production to increase production and reduce exposure to floods, diseases, inflation, and thieves in the study area. The result of the focus group discussion showed that marketing and crop cultivation contribute to a sedentary way of life in the study area. The government of Ethiopia implements the policy of sedentary behavior in pastoral areas, which changes the practices of some pastoralists.

4.2. Constraints of pastoral system

4.2.1. Farming land expansion

There are many challenges from the pastoral practices in Itang District. The pastoral system faces enormous farm land expansion all year round across the district. The expansion of agricultural land is introduced where the main grazing areas or water points exist. Approximately 71.8% of pastoralists have reported the constraint of farm land expansion in the study area (Table 3). This indicates that many people face the problem of cultivated land expansion into the rangeland. It reduces access to grazing areas and access from water points, speeds up the conflict, and poisons livestock with insecticides. Gebeye (2016) showed that large-scale commercial agriculture forced pastoralists to leave their main livelihood system. However, some pastoralists have not faced the problem of agricultural land expansion in the district. The result showed that about 28.2% of pastoralists have indicated the limited constraint of farm land expansion on pastoral practice in the study area (Table 3). This implies that there are some people who continue to work around the large agricultural investment farm in the study area.

Table 3. Farm land expansion and resources conflict

Constraints		Frequency	Percentage
Farm land expansion	Yes	112	71.8
	No	44	28.2
Resources Conflict	Yes	101	64.7
	No	55	35.3

4.2.2. Resources conflict

The conflict of resources is the critical constraint in the pastoral areas of the district. The pastoral communities fight among themselves and with farmers about the water and grazing areas. About 64.7% of the pastoralists have reported that the resource conflict affects the pastoral practices in the study area (Table 3). This shows that conflict has affected many people in the study area. Dawit (2007) indicated that the conflict of resources challenges the pastoral system. On the other hand, some other pastoralists don’t face the constraints of resource conflict in the district. About 35.3% of pastoralists have indicated that the limited constraints of resources conflict with pastoral practice in the study area (Table 3). Some pastoral communities are located in vast rangelands.

4.2.3. Livestock raiding

Livestock looting is a widespread phenomenon in pastoral areas. Youth, livestock traders, restaurant owners, and pastoralists’ themselves are participating in raiding livestock. About 68% of pastoralists have reported the constraint of livestock raiding in the study area (Table 4). This indicates that livestock raiding becomes rampant among pastoralists across the study district. Dawit (2007) showed that livestock raiding constrains the livelihood of pastoralism. Though raiding is prevalent, some pastoralists have not faced that problem in the study area. The result showed that about 32% of pastoralists indicated that livestock raiding doesn’t affect pastoral practice in the study area (Table 4).

Table 4. Livestock raiding and prevalence of floods

Constraints		Frequency	Percentage
Livestock raiding	Yes	106	68
	No	50	32
Prevalence of floods	Yes	98	62.8
	No	58	37.2

4.2.4. Prevalence of flood

The river flood is commonly occurring in the lowlands areas of the district. This mainly happens during the summer and autumn seasons across the district. About 62.8% of pastoralists have reported that floods affect pastoral practices in the study area (Table 4). This shows that many people face the problem of the prevalence of floods in the study area. Dawit (2007) revealed that the flooding of rivers is disastrous to pastoral production. Still, some pastoralists have not faced the problem of floods in the district. About 37.2% of pastoralists have indicated the limited constraints of floods on pastoral practice in the study area (Table 4).

4.2.5. Extensive livestock diseases

The outbreak of livestock diseases is a gigantic dare for pastoral practices in the study area. The pastoral system faces enormous livestock diseases, particularly mouth and foot diseases, in the study area. About 64.1% of pastoralists have reported the constraint of farm land expansion in the study area (Table 5). This shows that many people face the problem of livestock disease outbreaks in the district. Berhe and Adaye (2007) found that major diseases deterred the basic contribution of pastoralism. In contrast, diseases are not problematic for some people in the district. The result showed that about 35.9% of pastoralists have indicated the limited constraint of extensive livestock diseases on pastoral practice in the study area (Table 5). The public sector delivers veterinary services to pastoralists when needed.

Table 5. Extensive livestock diseases and insufficient social services

Constraints		Frequency	Percentage
Extensive livestock diseases	Yes	100	64.1
	No	56	35.9
Insufficient social services	Yes	79	50.6
	No	77	49.4

4.2.6. Insufficient social services

The lack of social services condenses the pastoralism system across the district. In pastoral areas, there is a shortage of schools, health, and veterinary services. About 50.5% of pastoralists have reported the constraint of insufficient social services in the study area (Table 5). This implies that many pastoralists lack social services in the study area. Berhe and Adaye (2007) revealed that pastoralists suffer from social developmental interventions. But not all pastoralists have limited social services in the district. Some of them have no problem with social services across the district. About 49.4% of pastoralists have indicated that the insufficiency of social services is not a constraint on pastoral practice in the study area (Table 5). During migration, the government provides services to pastoral communities, such as veterinary services.

4.2.7. Lack of infrastructure

There are scanty roads, telecommunications, irrigation canals, and electricity in the district. The development of infrastructure activities exists where people are put in a single village. About 65.4% of pastoralists have reported the constraints of poor infrastructure in the study area (Table 6). This suggests that the lack of infrastructure affected the production of pastoralism across the district. Jenet et al. (2016) showed that poor access to infrastructural interventions constrains pastoral production. Conversely, particular pastoralists have not faced the lack of infrastructure in the district. The result showed that about 34.6% of pastoralists have indicated that a lack of infrastructure doesn’t affect pastoral practice in the study area (Table 6). People still continue the activities even though there are insufficient social services across various settings.

Table 6. Lack of infrastructure and pastoral system ignorance

Constraints		Frequency	Percentage
Lack of infrastructure	Yes	102	65.4
	No	54	34.6
Pastoral Ignorance	Yes	99	63.5
	No	57	36.5

4.2.8. Pastoral system ignorance

The public neglects the pastoral system in the study area. Both the government and farmers don’t encourage the pastoral system in different settings. The result indicated that about 63.5% of pastoralists have reported the constraint of high ignorance in the study area (Table 6). This shows that many pastoral communities face the problem of negligence in the study area. It reduces the morale of pastoralists toward pastoralism. Mohammed (2015) stated that governmental negligence toward pastoralism deters the production system. However, some pastoralists have not considered ignorance a constraint on pastoral production. The same result revealed that almost 36.5% of pastoralists have not faced public ignorance in the study area (Table 6). They stated that pastoral ignorance is not a big matter in their lifestyle.

4.3. Determinants of pastoral system

4.3.1. Multicollinearity diagnosis

The multicollinearity among the discrete explanatory variables was checked. The study results showed that there was no collinearity problem among discrete variables. The results of the discrete independent variables showed that the contingency coefficient was below one (Table 7). As a rule of thumb, when the contingency coefficient value was less than one, there was no collinearity problem. Thus, the coefficients of contingency results among the discrete variables are less than one (Table 7).

Table 7. Multicollinearity diagnosis of the discrete explanatory variables

Variable	HHL	MAS	CA	PA	AVS	AI	EDS	WA
HHL	1
MAS	0.132	1
CA	0.010	0.231	1
PA	0.123	0.261	0.132	1
VS	0.152	0.031	0.110	.203	1
AI	0.200	0.212	0.214	.260	0.213	1
EDS	0.162	0.012	0.357	.122	0.202	0.011	1
WA	0.160	0.018	0.316	.052	0.101	0.132	0.331	1

The multicollinearity among the continuous explanatory variables was tested. The result showed that there were no multicollinearity problems detected in these variables. The VIF results showed that the values of all continuous variables were below 10 (Table 8). The results of the multicollinearity diagnosis are briefly shown in Table 8.

Table 8. Variance inflation factor for continuous independent variables

Variables	R^2	VIF
LSI	0.12	1.17
CLSI	0.11	1.01
MDI	0.23	2.12
HSI	0.15	1.02
AG	0.22	1.05
DR	0.32	1.11

4.3.2. Determinants of pastoral practices

In this study, 14 explanatory variables were postulated to contribute to pastoralism system practices in Itang Special District. Among those, seven of them were statistically significant for pastoralism practices in the study area. The multinomial model showed that livestock size, households’ labor, dependency ratio, educational status, pasture access, water access, and credit access were statistically significant (Table 9).

Table 9. The results of the multinomial logit model

Var	Transhumance				Nomadic				Sedentary
	B	Wald	Sign	Exp(B)	B	Wald	Sign	Exp(B)	B	Wald	Sign	Exp(B)
HHL	−.02	.32	.62	.46	−.23	.21	.15	.65	.42	.54**	.02	.59
MAS	.05	.71	.16	.12	.44	.54	.11	.37	.36	.55	.32	.75
CA	−.32	.14	.31	.65	−.11	.22	.22	.58	.21	.43***	.01	.68
PA	−.12	.32***	.01	.52	−.21	.11**	.02	.76	−43	.39	.15	.78
HIS	.20	.17	.22	.34	.45	.37	.42	.39	.19	.02	.37	.54
CLSI	1.4	.23	.43	.65	.11	.43	.41	.35	.26	.43	.27	.44
AVS	.44	.26	.40	.57	.63	.35	.26	.76	.48	.33	.21	.55
LSI	.14	.19**	.05	.89	.23	.15**	.03	.77	−.33	.11	.12	.47
AI	−.04	.11	.32	.29	.16	.52	.45	.66	.38	.27	.39	.69
DR	−.22	.93**	.05	.79	−.67	.17**	.0.03	.34	.12	.20	.41	.99
AG	.04	.27	.44	.25	.54	.02	.33	.74	.42	.51	.38	.95
MDI	.28	.13	.48	.78	.22	.19	.31	.58	.72	.012	.18	.43
EDS	−.89	.41	.16	.98	.47	.23	.11	.89	.22	.81***	.01	.59
WA	−.03	.32**	.03	.83	−.63	.18**	.02	.95	−.38	.12	.46	.72
Cons	.12	.34	.43	.78	.00	.12	.47	.85	.17	.68	.87	.45

** And *** represent the variables that are statistically significant at 5% and 1%.

4.3.2.1. LSI (Livestock Size)

Livestock size is one of the determinants of pastoral practices among the pastoralists in Itang Special District. The model result showed a significant positive association between livestock size and transhumance and nomadic at 5% in the study area. This disclosed that the increase in livestock size would increase the pastoralists’ decision toward transhumance and nomadic practices across the district. The estimate indicated that increasing livestock would increase the probability of the pastoralists’ decision to transhumance and nomadic by 89% and 77%, respectively, in the study area. The pastoralists with greater livestock are involved in nomadic and transhumance. Abduselam et al. (2020) indicated that livestock size influences pastoral production.

4.3.2.2. HHL (Household Labor)

The households’ labor is one of the determinants of pastoral practices in Itang Special District. As expected, the households “labor positively influenced the pastoralists” decision to adopt sedentary practice at 5% in the study area. This meant that the availability of labor increased the probability of sedentary practice in the study area. This showed that as access to labor increases, the probability of sedentary practice will increase by 59% in the study area. So, some people with tasks can’t go on a long trek. Teketel et al. (2021) showed that households’ labor determines pastoral production.

4.3.2.3. DR (Dependency Ratio)

The dependency ratio is one of the factors that were posited to determine the pastoral practices in the study area. The dependency ratios negatively determined the transhumance and nomadic practices at 5%. This proved that the increase in dependency ratios decreased transhumance and nomadic practices. The estimate indicated that the decrease in dependency ratio by one person would increase the probability of pastoralists toward transhumance and nomadic by 79% and 34%, respectively. This is due to the fact that older people and children are not able to walk long distances. Abduselam’s et al. (2020) result showed that the dependency ratio influences pastoral production.

4.3.2.4. EDS (Educational Status)

Educational status is one of the determinants of pastoral practices in the study area. The educational status of pastoralists positively influenced the sedentary system, at 5% across the district. This indicated that an increase in educational status would increase the probability of sedentary practice in the study area. Thus, it was shown that increasing education by one grade would increase the choice of sedentary practice by 59% in the study area. These people used to follow their work and school activities. Amenu and Jiregna’s (2019) results indicated that educational status influences pastoral production.

4.3.2.5. PA (Pasture Access)

Pasture access is one of the hypothesized determinants of pastoral practices in the study area. The pasture access was negatively associated with transhumance and nomadic practices at 1% and 5%. This showed that as pasture access for pastoralists decreased, transhumance and nomadic practices increased. The result estimated that the decrease in pasture access would increase the probability of transhumance and nomadic practices by 52% and 76% in the study area. The pastoralists can find other locations with better grazing areas. Amenu and Jiregna (2019) showed that pasture access determines pastoral system practices.

4.3.2.6. CA (Credit Access)

Credit access is one of the hypothesized determinants of pastoral practices in the study area. Credit access was positively associated with sedentary practice at 1% in the study area. This showed that as credit access increased, sedentary practices would increase across the district. The result indicated that the increase in credit access would increase the probability of sedentary practice by 68% in the study area. People may struggle to start new businesses. Teketel et al. (2021) showed that credit access influences pastoralism practices.

4.3.2.7. WA (Water Access)

Water access is one of the hypothesized determinants of pastoral practices in Itang Special District. Access to water was negatively associated with transhumance and nomadic practices at 5% in the study area. This exposed that the decrease in water access would increase the probability of transhumance and nomadic practices by 83% and 95%, respectively. The pastoral communities usually search for available water points for their livestock. Abduselam et al. (2020) showed that the water shortage determines the pastoral production system.

5. Conclusions

Pastoralism is a system of herding animals through mobile and settled areas across the Itang district. These people use their mobility to rear their large livestock across various settings in the region. The three kinds of pastoral practices found in the study area are transhumance, nomadic, and semi-pastoral practices. The resource conflict, prevalence of floods, livestock raiding, lack of infrastructure, extensive livestock diseases, insufficient social services, pastoral ignorance, and expansion of farming land were the basic constraints of pastoralism practices in the study area. Moreover, credit access, livestock size, dependency ratio, water access, pasture access, household labor, and education status were the main factors that influenced pastoralism practices in the study area. As such, various actions need to be taken to solve the problems in the study area. The governmental organizations should provide the basic infrastructure and social services to the pastoral areas; provide the veterinary services and capacity-building training to the pastoral areas; and provide the rangeland services, credit services, job opportunities, and damage insurance to the pastoralists.

Author contributions

Mr. Chayot Gatdet contributed to article data collection, analysis, interpretations, writing the first draft, study concepts, readings of the article, and revising the comments.

Competing interests

The authors have no financial conflict for the publication of this article.

Acknowledgement

The author acknowledged the data collectors, respondents, focus group discussion participants, district chief administrator, and Kebele chairman.

Data availability statement

The access to data is restricted due to privacy.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

There is no funding source from this article.

Notes on contributors

Chayot Gatdet

Chayot Gatdet is PhD candidate in Rural Development and Food Security at University of Gondar. He held his M.Sc degree in Rural Livelihood and Food Security. His research areas are pastoralism, livelihood, food security, agricultural extension and sustainable development. The author has engaged in different Ethiopia research conferences. He has published nine journal articles and one book from 2021-2022.