Leveraging IoT-Enabled Biodiversity Monitoring for Sustainable Livelihoods: An Assessment of Rural Community Adaptation Strategies

Rural communities in Turkana County, Kenya, continue to experience the adverse impacts of terrestrial biodiversity variability, resulting in loss of livestock, reduced productivity, and deteriorating livelihoods. In the digital age, Internet of Things (IoT) technologies present promising opportunities for real-time biodiversity monitoring, data sharing, and informed community-based decision-making. The study leveraged IoT-enabled biodiversity monitoring to explore how localized, real-time terrestrial biodiversity data can be communicated and utilized by rural pastoralists to enhance livestock productivity and promote sustainable livelihoods. The study assessed the extent to which rural households have access to IoT technologies, examined how communities utilize IoT-based terrestrial biodiversity data to sustain their livelihoods, and evaluated the effects of employing such data on the adoption of adaptive livelihood strategies. The research was guided by the Innovation Diffusion and Technology Adoption theories to link user adoption, technological practice, and biodiversity data utilization. A mixed-methods approach was employed, integrating quantitative and qualitative data from a sample of 384 households drawn from a target population of 164,519. Data collection tools included questionnaires, focus group discussions, and key informant interviews, while inferential statistics and path analysis were used to determine relationships and variable contributions to leveraging IoT enabled biodiversity monitoring for sustainable livelihoods. The findings revealed that smartphones and radios are the most cost-effective and practical IoT tools for pastoral communities to access real-time biodiversity data and pastoral advisory information. Evidence indicated that IoT-based biodiversity monitoring enhances adaptive capacity, strengthens livelihood assets, and improves long-term sustainability. The study established a framework for developing a request–response IoT- enabled biodiversity monitoring tool illustrating the relationship between biodiversity data utilization and livelihood outcomes. This research adds to the growing discourse on digital sustainability and offers policy recommendations for integrating IoT-enabled biodiversity systems into Kenya’s rural development and climate adaptation frameworks.

Internet of Things (IoT), Terrestrial Biodiversity, Livelihood Strategies

1. Batchelor, S., & Scott, N. (2001). The role of ICTs in the provision of agricultural information for smallholder farmers. DFID. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bhavnani, A., Chiu, R. W. W., Janakiram, S., & Silarszky, P. (2008). The role of mobile phones in sustainable rural poverty reduction. World Bank ICT Policy Division. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Chambers, R., & Conway, G. R. (1992). Sustainable rural livelihoods: Practical concepts for the 21st century (IDS Discussion Paper 296). Institute of Development Studies. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Chapman, R., & Slaymaker, T. (2002). ICTs and rural development: Review of the literature, current interventions and opportunities for action. Overseas Development Institute. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Chapman, R., Slaymaker, T., & Young, J. (2001). Livelihoods approaches to information and communication in support of rural poverty elimination and food security. Overseas Development Institute. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Chapman, R., Blench, R., Kranjac-Berisavljevic, G., & Zakariah, A. B. T. (2004). Rural radio in agricultural extension: The example of vernacular radio programs on soil and water conservation in Ghana. ODI Agricultural Research and Extension Network Paper No. 127. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. De Haan, L. (2000). Globalization, localization, and sustainable livelihood. Sociologia Ruralis, 40(3), 339–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9523.00149 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Department for International Development (DFID). (1999). Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets. DFID. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Department for International Development (DFID). (2005). Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets: Framework and principles. DFID. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Department for International Development (DFID). (2009). Sustainable livelihoods and poverty elimination. DFID. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Duncombe, R. (2006). Using ICTs to support sustainable livelihoods in rural Africa: A framework for analysis. ICT Research Centre, University of Manchester. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Duncombe, R. (2012). Understanding the impact of mobile phones on livelihoods in developing countries. Development Policy Review, 30(5), 567–588. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14677679.2012.00592.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Ellis, F. (2000). Rural livelihoods and diversity in developing countries. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Gebrehiwot, K. G., Mesfin, S., & Nyssen, J. (2016). Farmers’ perception of land degradation and soil and water conservation in South Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Land Degradation & Development, 26(5), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.2298 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Greenberg, S. (2005). The role of ICTs in rural development in South Africa. Human Sciences Research Council. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Haidar, I. (2009). Sustainable livelihoods and poverty reduction: The role of ICTs. Journal of Development Studies, 45(3), 397–414. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Kollmair, M., & St. Gamper, S. (2002). The sustainable livelihoods approach. Development Study Group, University of Zurich. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Lang, T., & Barling, D. (2012). Food security and food sustainability: Reformulating the debate. The Geographical Journal, 178(4), 313–326. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4959.2012.00480.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. May, J. (2010). Information and communication technologies and rural development in South Africa: A case study of the Telecentre movement. HSRC Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. McNamara, K. (2003). Information and communication technologies, poverty and development: Learning from experience. World Bank Institute. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Parkinson, S., & Ramirez, R. (2006). Using a sustainable livelihoods approach to assessing the impact of ICTs in development. The Journal of Community Informatics, 2(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.15353/joci.v2i3.2531 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Scoones, I. (2009). Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(1), 171–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150902820503 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Swift, J., Toulmin, C., & Chatty, D. (2001). Pastoralism and dryland farming systems in sub-Saharan Africa: Current and future prospects. ODI. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Vongvisouk, T., Broegaard, R. B., Mertz, O., & Thongmanivong, S. (2014). Rush for cash crops and forest protection: Neither good nor bad for the environment. Science of the Total Environment, 478, 337–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.01.073 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Smart Iot Device for Weather And Health
• Merlarchive: A Web-Based Academic Hub for UDM With AI-Powered Natural Language Processing
• Enhanced Social Network Security System: Integrating Biometric Authentication for Improved User Verification and Privacy Protection
• Smart Budget Allocation in Public Policy: A Data-Driven Approach for Equitable Resource Distribution
• Decision Support System for Faculty Selection, Promotion, and Reclassification Using Predictive Analytics