Achieving sustainable production of eggs by family poultry production systems that meet both environmental health and welfare standards is a complex endeavour. Humans have been raising different species of poultry for thousands of years across many different agroecological zones. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has identified four different family poultry production systems: small extensive, extensive, semi‐intensive, and intensive. Each of these systems varies in terms of inputs, outputs, gender dimensions, poultry health and welfare, and environmental impacts. This paper addresses key issues associated with the production of family poultry eggs in support of both improved maternal and child nutrition and sustainable, nutrition‐sensitive agricultural practices. It provides an overview of the history of poultry raising; characteristics of the different family poultry production systems; challenges and solutions to poultry production in low‐ and middle‐income countries; poultry husbandry (including breeds, nutrition, and shelter); infectious disease prevention and control in line with national and international animal health regulations; and food safety (microbial pathogens, toxins, and egg storage). To ensure that bird, human, and environmental health can flourish, it is essential for interdisciplinary research and development teams to work in collaboration with communities to ensure the long‐term environmental and economic sustainability of family poultry production enterprises that are a good fit with local circumstances.

In Zambia's Luangwa Valley, highly variable rainfall and lack of education, agricultural inputs, and market access constrain agricultural productivity, trapping smallholder farmers in chronic poverty and food insecurity. Human and animal disease (e.g. HIV and Newcastle Disease, respectively), further threaten the resilience of poor families. To cope with various shocks and stressors, many farmers employ short-term coping strategies that threaten ecosystem resilience. Community Markets for Conservation (COMACO) utilizes an agribusiness model to alleviate poverty and food insecurity through conservation farming, market development and value-added food production. COMACO promotes household, agricultural and ecological resilience along two strategic lines: improving recovery from shocks (mitigation) and reducing the risk of shock occurrence. Here we focus on two of COMACO's poultry interventions and present data showing that addressing health and management constraints within the existing village poultry system resulted in significantly improved productivity and profitability. However, once reliable productivity was achieved, farmers preferred to sell chickens rather than eat either the birds or their eggs. Sales of live birds were largely outside the community to avoid price suppression; in contrast, the sale of eggs from community-operated, semi-intensive egg production facilities was invariably within the communities. These facilities resulted in significant increases in both producer income and community consumption of eggs. This intervention therefore has the potential to improve not only producers’ economic resilience, but also resilience tied to the food security and physical health of the entire community.

ObjectiveTo investigate the association between livestock ownership and dietary diversity, animal-source food consumption, height-for-age z-score, and stunting among children living in wildlife “buffer zones” of Zambia’s Luangwa Valley using a novel livestock typology approach.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study of 838 children aged 6–36 months. Households were categorized into typologies based on the types and numbers of animals owned, ranging from no livestock to large numbers of mixed livestock. We used multilevel mixed-effects linear and logistic regression to examine the association between livestock typologies and four nutrition-related outcomes of interest. Results were compared with analyses using more common binary and count measures of livestock ownership.ResultsNo measure of livestock ownership was significantly associated with children’s odds of animal-source food consumption, child height-for-age z-score, or stunting odds. Livestock ownership Type 2 (having a small number of poultry) was surprisingly associated with decreased child dietary diversity (β = -0.477; p<0.01) relative to owning no livestock. Similarly, in comparison models, chicken ownership was negatively associated with dietary diversity (β = -0.320; p<0.01), but increasing numbers of chickens were positively associated with dietary diversity (β = 0.022; p<0.01). Notably, neither child dietary diversity nor animal-source food consumption was significantly associated with height, perhaps due to unusually high prevalences of morbidities.ConclusionsOur novel typologies methodology allowed for an efficient and a more in-depth examination of the differential impact of livestock ownership patterns compared to typical binary or count measures of livestock ownership. We found that these patterns were not positively associated with child nutrition outcomes in this context. Development and conservation programs focusing on livestock must carefully consider the complex, context-specific relationship between livestock ownership and nutrition outcomes–including how livestock are utilized by the target population–when attempting to use livestock as a means of improving child nutrition.