https://www.journalajaees.com/index.php/AJAEES/issue/feed 2026-11-04T09:36:27+00:00 Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociolo [email protected] Open Journal Systems <p><strong>Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics &amp; Sociology (ISSN: <a href="https://nsl.niscpr.res.in/ISSNPROCESS/issnassignedinfo.jsp">2320-7027</a>)</strong> aims to publish high quality papers (<a href="https://journalajaees.com/index.php/AJAEES/general-guideline-for-authors">Click here for Types of paper</a>) in all areas of ‘Agricultural Extension, Economics &amp; Sociology research’. By not excluding papers based on novelty, this journal facilitates the research and wishes to publish papers as long as they are technically correct and scientifically motivated. The journal also encourages the submission of useful reports of negative results. This is a quality controlled, OPEN peer-reviewed, open-access INTERNATIONAL journal.</p> <p><strong>NAAS Score: 4.73 (2026)</strong></p> https://www.journalajaees.com/index.php/AJAEES/article/view/3041 2026-11-04T09:36:27+00:00 Viator Nkeshimanav [email protected] Gérard Nishemezwe

<p><strong>Background:</strong> In areas of intensive crop–livestock interaction, uncontrolled livestock movement may damage cultivated fields and contribute to disputes. Burundi has adopted legislation promoting permanent animal confinement. This study examined associations between reported zero-grazing use and household perceptions of reduced farmer–herder conflicts in Ngozi Commune.</p> <p><strong>Methods:</strong> A cross-sectional household survey conducted in 2025 included 384 respondents from seven administrative zones and 19 localities. Study information was obtained through questionnaires, interviews with officials and observations. Descriptive summaries, association measures and exploratory logistic regression were used. Historical accounts of animal straying and changes in conflict were elicited retrospectively rather than obtained from independently observed longitudinal records.</p> <p><strong>Results:</strong> Among 384 respondents, 363 (94.5%) reported that zero-grazing had helped reduce conflict; 107 (27.9%) reported personal involvement in farmer–herder conflicts. Animal straying was retrospectively reported at 85.4% for the earlier period and 9.4% for the later period, a 76.0-percentage-point descriptive contrast. In exploratory regression summaries, adoption was associated with perceived conflict reduction (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 11.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.21–31.9), while reported access to livestock buildings (aOR = 20.3; 95% CI 8.45–48.8) and fodder (aOR = 4.76; 95% CI 1.62–14.0) were associated with adoption. Positive views of the system were reported by 88.0%; fodder shortage (88.8%) and theft (85.7%) were prominent perceived constraints.</p> <p><strong>Conclusion:</strong> Zero-grazing was associated with favourable perceptions of conflict reduction and livestock confinement in this surveyed population. The cross-sectional, self-reported evidence does not establish the causal effect of legislation or confinement on conflict incidence. Improving access to fodder and practical livestock infrastructure warrants consideration alongside further prospective evaluation.</p>

2026-11-04T00:00:00+00:00 Copyright (c) 2026 Author(s). The licensee is the journal publisher. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.