"He Who Relies on His Brother's Property Dies Poor": The Complex Narratives of Livestock Care in Northern Tanzania.

Background: Endemic zoonoses have important impacts for livestock-dependent households in East Africa. In these communities, people's health and livelihoods are severely affected by livestock disease losses. Understanding how livestock keepers undertake remedial actions for livestock illness has the potential for widespread benefits such as improving health interventions. Yet, studies about livestock and human health behaviours in the global south tend to focus on individual health choices. In reality, health behaviours are complex, and not solely about individualised health experiences. Rather, they are mediated by a range of "upstream" factors (such as unequal provision of services), which are beyond the control of the individual. Methods: This paper presents qualitative research conducted from 2014 to 2019 for a study focused on the Social, Economic, and Environmental Drivers of Zoonoses in Tanzania (SEEDZ). Qualitative data were collected via focus group discussions, community meetings, informal interviews, formal in-depth interviews, observations and surveys that addressed issues of health, disease, zoonotic disease risks, and routes for treatment across 21 villages. Thematic analysis was carried out on in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. Conceptual analyses and observations were made through application of social science theories of health. Findings: Livestock keepers undertake a range of health seeking strategies loosely categorised around self and formal treatment. Two key themes emerged that are central to why people make the decisions they do: access to resources and trust in health care providers. These two issues affect individual sense of agency which impacts their ability to act to improve livestock health outcomes. We suggest that individual choice and agency in veterinary health seeking decisions are only beneficial if health systems can offer adequate care and health equity is addressed. Significance: This study demonstrates the value of in-depth qualitative research which reveals the nuance and complexity of people's decisions around livestock health. Most importantly, it explains why "better" knowledge does not always translate into "better" practise. The paper suggests that acknowledging and addressing these aspects of veterinary health seeking will lead to more effective provision.

Classification and characterisation of livestock production systems in northern Tanzania.

Livestock keepers in sub-Saharan Africa face a range of pressures, including climate change, land loss, restrictive policies, and population increase. Widespread adaptation in response can lead to the emergence of new, non-traditional typologies of livestock production. We sought to characterise livestock production systems in two administrative regions in northern Tanzania, an area undergoing rapid social, economic, and environmental change. Questionnaire and spatial data were collected from 404 livestock-keeping households in 21 villages in Arusha and Manyara Regions in 2016. Multiple factor analysis and hierarchical cluster analysis were used to classify households into livestock production systems based on household-level characteristics. Adversity-based indicators of vulnerability, including reports of hunger, illness, and livestock, land and crop losses were compared between production systems. Three distinct clusters emerged through this process. The ethnic, environmental and livestock management characteristics of households in each cluster broadly mapped onto traditional definitions of 'pastoral', 'agro-pastoral' and 'smallholder' livestock production in the study area, suggesting that this quantitative classification system is complementary to more qualitative classification methods. Our approach allowed us to demonstrate a diversity in typologies of livestock production at small spatial scales, with almost half of study villages comprising more than one production system. We also found indicators of change within livestock production systems, most notably the adoption of crop agriculture in the majority of pastoral households. System-level heterogeneities in vulnerability were evident, with agro-pastoral households most likely to report hunger and pastoral households most likely to report illness in people and livestock, and livestock losses. We demonstrate that livestock production systems can provide context for assessing household vulnerability in northern Tanzania. Policy initiatives to improve household and community well-being should recognise the continuing diversity of traditional livestock production systems in northern Tanzania, including the diversity that can exist at small spatial scales.

Maternal, newborn and child health needs, opportunities and preferred futures in Arusha and Ngorongoro: hearing women's voices.

BACKGROUND: With the approaching sunset on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), Tanzania continues with its final national push towards achievement of MDG #4 and MDG #5. The Mama Kwanza Socio-economic Health Initiative (MKSHI) was introduced in the hope of contributing to improving maternal, newborn, and child health in Arusha and Ngorongoro. The MKSHI project is a holistic, inter-sectoral approach to maternal, newborn, and child health which aligns with the Government of Tanzania's Vision 2025. At the project onset, a baseline assessment was conducted to launch ongoing benchmarking, monitoring, and evaluation of the project's impacts and implications. The aim of this baseline assessment was twofold. First it was to determine the state of maternal, newborn, and child health in the two project sites. Second it was to ensure that a baseline of key indicators was established as well as identification of unique indicators relevant to the populations of interest. RESULTS: The baseline study was a mixed methods approach to identify maternal, newborn, and child risk factors and indicators in the two target sites. This paper focuses on the qualitative methods and findings. The qualitative component included a series of five community dialogue meetings and thirty-seven individual/dyad interviews with women, providers, and stakeholders. Initially, community meetings were held as open dialogues on maternal, newborn, and child health issues, opportunities, and preferred futures. Individual/dyad interviews were held with women, providers, and stakeholders who held unique information or experiences. Both community dialogue and interview data was analysed for themes and guiding or critical comments. Three over-arching findings emerged: What took you so long to come? How do we know what you know? and How will it change for our daughters? CONCLUSIONS: Participant voices are vital in ensuring the achievement of local and global efforts and preferred futures for maternal, newborn, and child health services. This study contributes to the inclusion of women in all aspects of the planning, implementation, and delivery of maternal, newborn, and child health services in the target areas and beyond.