Enhancing Climate Resilience in Dryland Mixed Crop–Livestock Systems Through Integrated Water Monitoring and Early Warning: A Perception-Based Exploratory Impact Assessment

Abstract

Drought remains a persistent challenge affecting agricultural and pastoral livelihoods, particularly in dryland mixed crop–livestock systems. Water Monitoring and Early Warning Systems (WM-EWS) have increasingly been promoted as tools for delivering climate information services and supporting drought-related decision-making. However, empirical understanding of how users perceive and engage with such systems in pastoral contexts remains limited. This study explores stakeholder perceptions regarding the usefulness and operational relevance of a WM-EWS implemented in the Borana zone of Ethiopia. A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining survey data from 71 purposively selected mixed stakeholders with qualitative insights obtained through focus group discussions and key informant interviews. Findings indicate that respondents widely reported using WM-EWS information for water-related decision-making and perceived the system as useful in supporting drought preparedness and adaptive responses. Participants associated WM-EWS use with perceived changes in areas such as livestock management, access to water-related information, and coordination among stakeholders. Respondents also reported adopting multiple coping strategies, including early livestock sales, strategic herd mobility, and engagement with external support mechanisms. Respondents perceived fewer conflicts over water resources and greater engagement from humanitarian actors following WM-EWS implementation. Overall, the study provides exploratory insights into stakeholder experiences, perceived usefulness, and operational relevance of user-centered WM-EWS in drought-prone pastoral systems. The findings contribute to understanding how pastoral communities engage with climate information services while highlighting the need for future research using objective and longitudinal approaches to assess system effectiveness more rigorously.

1. Introduction

Pastoral regions in the horn of Africa frequently face a drought crises that affects water availability for livestock-dependent communities [1,2,3]. In Ethiopia, the pastoral region is vulnerable to climate variability, which disrupts livelihoods and resource management [3,4]. The livestock sector plays a central role in the national economy, yet it remains highly vulnerable to climate-induced shocks [5]. However, this sector has been severely affected by climate change [3,6]. Moreover, pastoral community conflicts arise from water resources scarcity, and the ongoing drought has considerably affected this essential resource in the Borana zone, Ethiopia.

Recent evidence indicates that droughts in southern Ethiopia, especially in the Borana zone, are becoming more frequent and severe, resulting in widespread livestock losses [3,7,8,9,10]. Wakeyo [11] noted that the pastoral regions in Ethiopia frequently experienced livestock deaths due to the droughts of 2021–2022. In addition, Tegegne, Alemayehu [3] also reported that the drought condition in the Borana zone is expected to intensify in the future as a consequence of ongoing climate change. To alleviate this challenge, policymakers and other key stakeholders should have access to reliable climate data [12]. Thus, Water Monitoring and Early Warning Systems (WM-EWSs) are designed to deliver timely, user-centered information on water availability integrated with climate data, tailored to the needs of diverse stakeholders [13]. Implementing an efficient EWS is crucial for alleviating poverty and strengthening food security.

The WM-EWS should be context-specific and user-centered and designed by considering four interrelated elements: risk knowledge, monitoring and warning service, dissemination and communication of warnings, and response capacity [14,15]. Early Warning Systems (EWSs) have been increasingly recognized as potentially important tools for supporting poverty reduction and food security objectives by improving preparedness and access to timely information [5]. WM-EWSs designed for anticipatory action are intended to support preparedness efforts and may assist vulnerable populations in responding to drought-related risks before conditions intensify [16,17]. Therefore, WM-EWSs that offer real-time information on the availability of water are essential for pastoral areas’ sustainable growth [3,18].

Previous studies suggest that WM-EWS may support climate resilience by improving access to timely climate and water-related information that can inform preparedness and adaptive decision-making [19,20,21]. WM-EWS can also be used for anticipatory action and decision-making to alleviate climate shocks [22]. User-centered WM-EWS is widely regarded as an important component of drought preparedness and early response systems [1,18]. Studies showed that EWSs encouraged farmers in North China to adopt drought-resistant practices [23,24,25]. Moreover, utilizing EWSs helped Ugandan households become more food secure [26].

Studies reported that EWSs are still viewed as a one-way process and centralized [24,27,28,29,30]. The implementation of WM-EWSs is also constrained by a number of issues, including limitations in modeling the complexities of the climate system [27], lack of hydro-meteorological data density and accuracy [31], and a lack of indices for early onset and end of drought prediction [32].

Studies in Ethiopia have rarely explored stakeholder perceptions regarding the operational relevance and perceived usefulness of WM-EWSs in relation to natural disaster risk management. However, understanding how WM-EWS information is perceived and utilized in pastoral settings remains important, particularly given ongoing debate regarding the performance and contextual effectiveness of WM-EWS approaches [33,34]. Lumbroso and Brown [34] conducted stakeholders’ perceptions on the effectiveness of EWSs for reducing natural disasters in Africa, South Asia, and the Caribbean and reported that the participants had a low perceived effectiveness of EWSs. Thus, additional perception-based and context-specific assessments of EWS implementation are needed to improve understanding of stakeholder experiences, operational relevance, and information use in developing-country settings.

The Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT, in collaboration with various partner institutions, designed and deployed a WM-EWS grounded in a user-focused approach that can be accessed at “https://rangelandmonitoring.eiar.gov.et/” (accessed on 11 June 2026) to improve the resilience of Borana pastoralists. The WM-EWS delivers near-real-time insights on water availability to a wide range of stakeholders, including pastoral and agro-pastoral communities, enabling more informed and timely decision-making. Building on this, the present study explores stakeholder perceptions and reported experiences regarding the use of WM-EWS information for drought management and conflict-related decision-making in pastoral settings. This study is guided by a set of structured research questions that explore stakeholder perceptions regarding the operational relevance and perceived usefulness of the WM-EWS within the Borana pastoral system, with the full set of questions provided in the Supplementary Materials. Specifically, the study asks: (i) To what extent is the WM-EWS utilized by different stakeholders for decision-making related to water and livestock management? (ii) How do users perceive the system’s contribution to improving household resilience, livelihood outcomes, and drought preparedness? and (iii) What are the broader social and institutional implications of WM-EWS implementation, including its influence on conflict dynamics, gender participation, and engagement with development actors?

The usefulness and operational relevance of any EWS depend largely on user awareness, accessibility, and engagement with information services [35,36,37,38]. Climate and early warning information have been reported in some contexts as supporting agricultural and pastoral decision-making by providing timely information relevant to production planning and resource management [12,36,39]. Stakeholders may also perceive EWS information as relevant to livelihood diversification and locally based economic activities related to water management and agricultural services [12,38]. Similarly, access to timely and transparent information regarding water availability has been associated with improved communication and management of resource-related tensions in some pastoral settings [12,36,39]. EWS implementation may further influence engagement from humanitarian organizations and development partners by improving access to drought-related information and situational awareness. In pastoral systems, EWS information is also commonly used to support migration and livestock mobility decisions related to water and pasture availability [12,36].

Given the interconnected nature of pastoral systems, the study organized the assessment around four broad exploratory domains: (i) awareness and utilization of WM-EWS information; (ii) perceived effects on preparedness, livelihoods, and adaptive responses; (iii) social and institutional dimensions, including gender participation and conflict management; and (iv) knowledge sharing, participation, and community engagement. The detailed indicators presented in the questionnaire were treated as sub-components within these broader exploratory themes.

Prior to the implementation of the WM-EWS, pastoral communities in the Borana zone faced significant challenges related to limited and unreliable access to timely information on water availability and climate conditions. Decision-making regarding livestock movement, grazing, and water use was largely based on traditional knowledge, informal communication networks, and delayed or fragmented information sources. These conditions were commonly reported as contributing to reactive rather than anticipatory responses to drought conditions, potentially increasing vulnerability to livestock losses and resource competition. In addition, limited coordination among stakeholders and inadequate integration of Climate Information Services (CISs) further constrained effective drought preparedness and response. These pre-existing conditions underscore the need for structured, user-centered systems capable of providing real-time, actionable information to support informed decision-making in pastoral environments.

Despite the growing body of literature on EWSs in drought-prone regions, empirical understanding of how users perceive, engage with, and operationalize such systems in pastoral settings remains limited. Most existing studies focus on system design, climate modeling, or large-scale assessments, with relatively little attention given to user-centered, operational systems, and their real-world application at the community level. Thus, the main objective of this study is to assess the utilization and perceived effectiveness of a user-centered WM-EWS in supporting decision-making and enhancing adaptive responses in the Borana pastoral system. Specifically, the study aims to: (i) examine the extent to which the WM-EWS is accessed and used by different stakeholders; (ii) evaluate users’ perceptions of its contribution to household resilience, livelihood outcomes, and drought preparedness; and (iii) explore its broader socio-economic and institutional implications, including effects on resource management, conflict dynamics, and stakeholder engagement. The present study does not seek to establish causal evidence regarding WM-EWS effectiveness. Rather, it adopts an exploratory and perception-based perspective to understand how stakeholders interpret, utilize, and assess the operational relevance of WM-EWSs within a drought-prone pastoral context.

2. Methods

2.1. Description of Study Area

The Borana zone (Figure 1), known for its arid climate and vulnerability to drought, is the pilot study area for implementing WM-EWS. The study area covers approximately 44,203 km², inhabited by the largest pastoral population in Ethiopia’s Oromia region. Geographically, the study area is found between latitudes 3°30′ N and 5°25′ N and longitudes 36°40′ E and 39°45′ E, with elevations varying between 439 and 2473 m above sea level. Local livelihoods in the study area are largely based on low-input farming and livestock rearing, activities that are highly sensitive to climate variability and particularly vulnerable during periods of drought. In the Borana zone, the introduction of an EWS seeks to enhance the adaptive capacity of pastoral communities by providing up-to-date information on water conditions. By delivering timely and relevant insights, the system supports more effective herd management and guides pastoralists in deciding appropriate timing and destinations for livestock movement. Therefore, a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness and reliability of EWSs in building climate resilience in the Borana pastoral communities can enhance the functionality of EWSs and explore their potential for broader application in other pastoral regions.

A large proportion of the area, around three-quarters, is composed of lowland terrain and falls within arid to semi-arid climatic zones. Rainfall is highly erratic from year to year, and drought events occur frequently. The climate follows four seasonal phases: a prolonged dry period from December to February (Bega), a primary rainy phase between March and May (Belg), a relatively drier interval from June to August (Kiremt), and a secondary rainy period from September to November (Meher). Precipitation is mainly concentrated in the Belg and Meher seasons. Over the long term (1986–2017), annual rainfall averages about 638 mm, while temperatures generally vary between 20 °C and 30 °C, with typical mean highs near 29 °C and lows around 16 °C.

Land use is largely characterized by expansive rangelands that sustain pastoral and agro-pastoral systems, where livestock rearing serves as the main livelihood. In areas with comparatively better conditions, smallholder farming is practiced, focusing on drought-resilient crops such as maize and sorghum. The near-surface geology consists primarily of shallow soils overlaying weathered volcanic and sedimentary rocks, which play an important role in controlling water movement, groundwater recharge, and the availability of surface water in ponds and other sources. Human-induced pressures, including rising herd sizes, shifts in land use, and localized overuse of natural resources, are intensifying land degradation and water stress. Together, these climatic, environmental, and socio-economic factors heighten the region’s sensitivity to climate variability, highlighting the importance of integrated water monitoring and early warning approaches to support sustainable resource management and adaptation strategies.

2.2. Technical Architecture of Livestock Water Monitoring and Early Warning System

Drought in Ethiopia’s pastoral regions is worsening due to climate change, resulting in severe food insecurity for millions of pastoralists who depend on livestock for their livelihoods. With one of Africa’s largest livestock populations, Ethiopia struggles to fully benefit from these resources, further hindered by climate impacts. Accessing real-time information on water availability remains a significant challenge for pastoralists in remote areas. The aim of EWSs is to provide CIS regarding the seasonal patterns and variations in the waterpoint water levels so that Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), governmental organizations, humanitarian organizations, academia, and research institutions, and private and financial sectors can use the information for early warning and decision-making.

The implemented WM-EWS integrates several modules, including water monitoring, waterpoint profile, seasonal and sub-seasonal climate forecasts, pastoral and agro-pastoral advisory services, and migratory routes. The WM-EWS is designed as an integrated, multi-source decision-support platform that combines in situ observations, remote sensing data, climate forecasts, and community-based inputs to generate actionable advisories. The WM-EWS operates through four core functional components: (i) continuous monitoring of water availability using field observations and digital reporting tools, (ii) integration of seasonal and sub-seasonal climate forecasts, (iii) classification of water conditions into actionable categories (e.g., Good, Watch, Alert, Near Dry, and Seasonally Dry), and (iv) dissemination of advisory information through multiple communication channels. The system integrates these outputs with advisory modules that translate technical information into user-oriented messages disseminated through multiple channels, including SMS, community radio broadcasts, monthly bulletins, Community Information Centers (CICs), and digital platforms.

Forecasting within the WM-EWS is primarily driven by the integration of climate outlooks with current waterpoint status to provide early warning signals and anticipatory guidance. To ensure reliability, the system incorporates validation and quality assurance mechanisms, including cross-checking remote sensing outputs with ground observations, periodic field verification of waterpoint conditions, and iterative feedback from users and local experts. This integrated architecture enables the WM-EWS to provide timely, context-specific, and operationally relevant information, forming a robust basis for evaluating its effectiveness in supporting climate-resilient decision-making in pastoral systems.

This research seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of WM-EWS in building climate resilience in the Borana pastoral community. While the WM-EWS service is operating over the lowland regions in Ethiopia, this study presents and evaluates the system effectiveness over the Borana zone.

The conceptual framework presented in Figure 2 provides an overview of the WM-EWS operational structure and clarifies the exploratory perception-based scope of the present assessment. The framework illustrates the major information inputs, processing and dissemination pathways, stakeholder interaction processes, and the principal perception domains explored through the assessment. The framework also clarifies the analytical boundaries of the present study by distinguishing between operational WM-EWS functions and the perception-based exploratory nature of the assessment. The study therefore focuses on stakeholder-reported experiences and perceived operational relevance rather than independently verified drought, livelihood, or resilience outcomes.

The conceptual framework illustrates how hydroclimatic observations, climate forecasts, field-based monitoring, and local information sources are integrated within the WM-EWS to generate advisory information related to water availability, drought conditions, and pastoral resource management. Dissemination occurs through multiple communication pathways, including extension services, radio broadcasts, community information channels, and locally accessible advisory systems. The framework further identifies the principal domains explored in this study, including preparedness, livelihood planning, institutional engagement, and perceived socio-economic and operational dimensions.

The water availability statuses were classified into five categories based on their current condition as Good, Watch, Alert, Near Dry, and Seasonally Dry (

Table 1. Waterpoints condition classification for early warning and decision-making.

No.	Waterpoint Condition	Description
1	Good	The current water depth is more than 80% of the waterpoint water holding capacity
2	Watch	The current water depth is between 50% and 80% of the waterpoint water holding capacity
3	Alert	The current water depth is between 30% and 50% of the waterpoint water holding capacity
4	Near Dry	The current water depth is less than 30% of the waterpoint water holding capacity
5	Seasonally Dry	The current water depth is zero.

). Water availability is said to be in Good condition when the current water depth is greater than 80% of the maximum water depth. Water availability is in a Watch condition when the current water depth is between 50% and 80% of the maximum water depth. An alert condition means that the current water depth is between 30% and 50% of the maximum water depth. Water availability is near-dry status when the current water depth is less than 30% of the maximum water depth. Water availability is in a seasonally dry status when the current water depth is zero. This classification would help the pastoralists and agro-pastoralists to understand the water availability in each water pond and would aid in early warning and decision-making for livestock movement intervention.

Pastoral and agro-pastoral advisory services are also integrated into the WM-EWS that provide informative messages for users through various dissemination channels including televisions, short message services, monthly bulletins, radios, and CICs so as to update the users on any changes in the availability of water. Advisory messages enable users to make informed decisions in real-time by providing detailed information about each water body. From precautionary alerts to indications of seasonal scarcity, these advisory messages offer a clear view of the water availability, empowering users to adapt and respond appropriately. Advisory services promote greater awareness of local water resources and encourage more active participation in their conservation and responsible use.

The implementation of advisory services based on water availability not only informs users but also empowers their ability to make informed, strategic decisions regarding water. By knowing the status of each water body (Figure 3) and the implications of its status, the community can proactively respond to better manage their consumption and conserve this vital resource. Concise advisory messages have been co-developed for pastoral and agro-pastoral users to guide water-use decisions based on pond status. These include: (1) Good—the pond has sufficient water, and usage can be managed for multiple purposes; (2) Watch—water levels are declining, so non-essential use should be limited and guidance from the pond manager followed; (3) Alert—water is becoming scarce and should be reserved primarily for drinking and vulnerable livestock; (4) Near Dry—only minimal use for essential drinking is recommended; and (5) Seasonal Dry—the pond is depleted, and users are advised to request information on nearby alternative water sources by sending a “ponds” message.

2.3. Sample, Data Collection and Analysis

This study employed a mixed-methods exploratory design combining quantitative survey data with qualitative insights obtained through interviews and discussions with purposively selected respondents. The study participants were described as purposively selected mixed stakeholder respondents, comprising individuals with experience and familiarity relevant to WM-EWS and pastoral resource management (

Table 2. Respondent classification and sampling characteristics.

Respondent Category	Description	Selection Rationale	Role in Study
Technical experts	Individuals with technical knowledge of water management, drought response, or climate information systems	Purposively selected for technical and operational experience	Provide expert perceptions and system-level insights
Extension and field personnel	Agricultural, livestock, or development extension actors familiar with pastoral systems	Selected for practical engagement with pastoral communities	Provide implementation and operational perspectives
Local institutional stakeholders	Local government and institutionally engaged actors involved in drought management and planning	Selected based on involvement in resource governance	Provide institutional and policy-related perspectives
Mixed stakeholder respondents (overall sample)	Combined purposively selected participant group (71)	Expert-oriented exploratory sampling	Provide stakeholder perceptions regarding WM-EWS utilization and operational relevance

). These respondents included technical experts, extension personnel, local officials, and institutionally engaged stakeholders familiar with drought management and climate information services (Table 2).

A total of 71 mixed stakeholders (72% males and 28% females) were selected using purposive sampling based on their knowledge, experience, and involvement in pastoral resource management, climate information services, drought response, and WM-EWS implementation within the Borana zone. The respondent group included technical experts, local practitioners, and institutionally engaged individuals familiar with pastoral systems and WM-EWS operations. The purposive sampling approach was adopted to obtain informed perspectives regarding system utilization and perceived operational relevance rather than to generate statistically representative estimates of the broader pastoral population. The study therefore represents an expert-oriented perception assessment rather than a household survey or statistically representative population study.

Survey participants were identified in consultation with local institutions, including agricultural extension personnel, development agents, and community-level stakeholders familiar with local resource management conditions. Structured face-to-face interviews were conducted using a questionnaire consisting of both closed- and open-ended questions designed to capture stakeholders’ experiences, perceptions, and observations regarding WM-EWS use and related drought-management practices.

In addition to the survey, qualitative information was obtained through key informant discussions and contextual consultations to provide complementary insight into local experiences and system use. The data collection process was implemented between September and October 2025 following questionnaire preparation, respondent identification, field interviews, and data verification procedures.

For the data collection, the questionnaire and guiding discussion instruments used in this study were developed collaboratively through a participatory co-design process involving researchers, WM-EWS technical experts, government representatives, pastoral development practitioners, and other key stakeholders engaged in climate information services and drought risk management in the Borana context. The instrument was designed based on the study objectives, relevant literature on early warning systems and pastoral resilience, and operational information needs identified during stakeholder consultations.

To improve contextual relevance, clarity, and thematic consistency, the draft questionnaire was reviewed and refined through iterative consultations with technical experts and institutional stakeholders. The revised instrument was subsequently validated during stakeholder consultation workshops and high-level meetings conducted in Addis Ababa, Adama, and Yabello-Borana. During these workshops, participants reviewed the questionnaire structure, thematic coverage, wording clarity, and operational applicability, and feedback obtained from these discussions was incorporated into the final version of the instrument prior to data collection.

Several measures were implemented to minimize interviewer and facilitation bias during data collection. Data collectors and facilitators received orientation regarding standardized interview procedures, consistency in question delivery, neutrality during discussions, and avoidance of leading questions. Structured guiding questions and predefined thematic domains were used throughout interviews to maintain consistency across respondents and stakeholder groups.

2.4. Water Monitoring and Early Warning Systems’ Impact Assessment Indicators

The questionnaire was structured to capture personal experiences through a combination of closed-response and open-ended items. It covered a broad set of themes, including familiarity with and use of the WM-EWS; preparedness and adaptive capacity; effects on livestock and crop production; livelihood and income-related changes; food access and nutritional conditions; gender-related outcomes and social dynamics; emergence of small business activities; trends in conflict occurrence; engagement of humanitarian and development actors; mobility and migration behaviors; levels of community participation and resilience; understanding of early warning information; and issues related to water availability and quality. In total, 48 questions were administered to provide a comprehensive assessment of how the WM-EWS contributes to strengthening climate resilience in the Borana zone.

Prior to each interview, participants were fully informed about the purpose of the study, how the information would be used, and their right to participate voluntarily. The section on awareness and utilization focused on determining how widely the system is recognized, the channels through which users became informed, and how frequently it is applied in practice. Data for this component were collected using both structured surveys and group discussions, allowing for a combination of numerical insights and detailed perspectives on user engagement.

Household preparedness and the resilience impact indicator involve examining the extent to which families have adopted proactive measures in response to water scarcity alerts. This can include surveys asking about changes in water storage practices, investment in alternative water sources, and adjustments in livestock management. Household preparedness and resilience indicators involve the ability to withstand drought conditions without significant livestock loss. Impact on improving access to nutrition and food security assessment looks at how the WM-EWS has influenced food security and nutrition levels within the community. Food security assessments examine how shifts in farming practices influence the variety of foods consumed and overall nutritional well-being.

The gender and social outcomes component explores how the WM-EWS has reshaped women’s participation in water governance and agricultural activities, with particular attention to shifts in decision-making roles, responsibilities, and overall empowerment linked to improved access to timely information. The study also examines the system’s influence on local economic activity by assessing whether it has supported the emergence or expansion of small businesses connected to water services, livestock inputs, and farming supplies.

The conflict dimension investigates whether access to reliable water information has helped ease tensions over scarce resources. This is evaluated by comparing reported conflict levels before and after the system’s introduction, complemented by qualitative insights from community leaders on evolving cooperation and resource-sharing practices. Another area of analysis considers the extent to which the WM-EWS has drawn interest and engagement from humanitarian agencies and development partners. In parallel, changes in pastoral mobility are examined to determine whether improved information has altered movement patterns in search of water.

Community-level outcomes are further assessed by examining how the system has encouraged collective action, participation, and adaptive capacity. The knowledge component evaluates improvements in understanding water and livestock management practices resulting from access to early warning information. Finally, the water-related dimension focuses on both availability and quality, including changes in access, such as travel distance to water sources and perceived improvements in water conditions. Taken together, these thematic areas offer a comprehensive perspective on the performance, long-term viability, and potential areas for strengthening the user-centered livestock WM-EWS.

2.5. Perception-Based Exploratory Impact Assessment Strategy

This study was designed as a perception-based exploratory assessment intended to document users’ experiences, perceptions, and observations regarding the implementation and use of the WM-EWS in the Borana pastoral system. The assessment was conducted as a perception-based exploratory study, drawing primarily on expert-based observations and experiences, while objective measurement of changes attributable to the WM-EWS was constrained by the absence of baseline surveys, counterfactual comparisons, randomized sampling frameworks, and longitudinal monitoring datasets. Consequently, the study does not attempt to establish causal relationships between WM-EWS implementation and observed livelihood, environmental, or socio-economic outcomes.

The analysis relies primarily on expert-based information obtained from purposively selected mixed stakeholders with practical experience and knowledge related to pastoral resource management, drought response, CISs, and WM-EWS implementation. The data therefore reflect subjective perceptions and expert-informed assessments rather than objectively verified measurements of impact. Reported improvements in areas such as livestock management, food security, conflict reduction, household income, and adaptive capacity should therefore be interpreted as perceived associations and experiential observations rather than statistically validated outcomes directly caused by the WM-EWS.

The study adopts an exploratory mixed-methods approach to better understand how users interact with the WM-EWS, how advisory information is utilized in local decision-making processes, and how stakeholders perceive the system’s usefulness in supporting drought preparedness and resource management. Given the complex and data-scarce nature of pastoral systems, the perception-based approach was considered appropriate for generating preliminary evidence and identifying key themes, opportunities, and implementation challenges associated with operational early warning systems in remote dryland environments.

Although perception-based assessments provide important contextual and operational insights, they are inherently subject to several limitations, including recall bias, response bias, expectation bias, and the influence of external socio-economic and climatic factors that cannot be isolated within the current study design. In addition, the purposive sampling approach limits the statistical representativeness of the findings and restricts broader generalization to the wider pastoral population. The assessment provides valuable expert- and user-based perspectives on the operational relevance, accessibility, and perceived usefulness of WM-EWS in supporting anticipatory decision-making under drought conditions.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Results

The mixed crop–livestock production system in the study area is primarily characterized by the rearing of cattle, goats, sheep, and camels, which are well adapted to the arid and semi-arid conditions of the Borana zone. Crop production, although limited by rainfall variability, mainly includes drought-tolerant crops such as maize, sorghum, and other locally adapted varieties cultivated for subsistence and supplemental income. The integration of livestock and crop production plays a critical role in household resilience, with WM-EWS information supporting decisions related to herd mobility, water access, and the timing of agricultural activities.

Findings from the expert survey suggest that stakeholder respondents perceived the WM-EWS as supporting multiple dimensions of climate resilience within the community. Mixed stakeholders commonly associated the system with improved household preparedness, adaptive decision-making, and enhanced access to timely information related to water availability and livestock mobility. Stakeholder respondents also associated WM-EWS implementation with perceived positive changes in areas such as food access, livelihood strategies, community participation, and resource management practices. These observations reflect participant experiences and interpretations rather than objectively verified or causally attributed outcomes (Figure 4).

This section presents descriptive findings based on respondents’ reported perceptions and experiences related to WM-EWS use in the Borana pastoral system. Findings are organized into four broad exploratory domains reflecting the study design: (i) respondent characteristics and WM-EWS awareness; (ii) perceived preparedness and resource-management dimensions; (iii) perceived livelihood and socio-economic dimensions; and (iv) social and institutional dimensions of WM-EWS use. Unless otherwise specified, findings represent perceptions reported by purposively selected stakeholder respondents familiar with WM-EWS and related drought-management systems.

3.1.1. Respondent Characteristics and Water Monitoring and Early Warning System Awareness

The respondent group consisted of purposively selected stakeholder participants familiar with pastoral resource management and WM-EWS operations. Most respondents originated from male-headed households and had an average age of approximately 49 years, while female-headed households represented a smaller but important proportion of the respondent profile. Educational attainment plays a crucial role in the agricultural context, as it enhances farmers’ capacity to understand and adopt new innovations, such as CIS and supports the uptake of sustainable practices aimed at reducing the impacts of climate variability and change [40]. All respondents possessed university-level education, reflecting the expert-oriented and purposively selected nature of the sample rather than the broader pastoral population.

Livelihood activities among respondents reflected the mixed crop–livestock character of the Borana production system. Most respondents identified mixed crop–livestock farming as their principal livelihood activity, while smaller proportions reported specialization in livestock production, trade-related activities, or combinations of farming and trading.

Respondents reported that institutional access to CIS and agricultural innovation support had historically been limited prior to WM-EWS implementation. Nevertheless, many participants indicated familiarity with climatic variability and drought conditions through accumulated local experience and pastoral livelihood practice.

Awareness and use of WM-EWS were reported to be generally high among respondents. Nearly all participants indicated familiarity with WM-EWS, its information products, and advisory services. Respondents commonly reported obtaining information through multiple dissemination pathways, including CICs, monthly bulletins, extension networks, radio, and locally accessible advisory channels.

Of all stakeholder respondents, 32.4% learn about the WM-EWS through community meetings, 26.76% through NGOs, 16.10% through local authorities, 9.85% through CICs, and 4.22% through both local authority and community meetings. The mixed stakeholders surveyed received the CIS through pastoralist community of practices (32.40%), while 23.94% received the CIS through community meetings, 22.53% through CICs, 8.45% through indigenous knowledge, 7.04% through extension agents, and 1.41% through mobile SMS. Agricultural extension networks serve as a key channel through which smallholder farmers can obtain CIS [41,42]. However, the majority of the mixed stakeholders surveyed in this study reported less access to the extension agents.

The majority of stakeholder respondents have used the WM-EWS for decision-making regarding water use based on the advisory services provided by the digital platform. The key informants used the CIS for identifying the water pond with good condition, reducing livestock loss by destocking before the occurrence of severe drought, decision to use water for irrigation, identifying the area with good water condition as well as for destocking, and livestock movement planning. Community radio was launched following the survey, successfully delivering agro-pastoral and pastoral advisory services to residents. Respondents commonly reported that WM-EWS information increased awareness regarding drought conditions and water availability.

Although the high levels of agreement reported in this section may reflect positive experiences and familiarity with WM-EWS among participants, they may also partly be influenced by characteristics of the sampled stakeholder respondents, including prior knowledge of the system and relatively high educational attainment. Such conditions may contribute to favorable response tendencies commonly observed in expert-based and purposively sampled assessments.

3.1.2. Perceived Preparedness and Resource-Management Dimensions

Respondents commonly associated WM-EWS information with preparedness and resource-management activities under drought conditions. Many participants reported perceiving that access to climate forecasts and water-availability information supported planning related to livestock movement, grazing decisions, and drought response strategies.

Stakeholder respondents associated increased preparedness with perceived improvements in household capacity to respond to climate-related shocks and manage drought-related challenges. Survey findings indicate that stakeholder respondents widely perceived a decline in both livestock and crop losses, which they attributed to receiving timely and relevant information. Nearly all participants reported that WM-EWS information was useful for livestock management during climate-related shocks and was perceived as supporting efforts to reduce livestock losses.

The majority of the mixed stakeholders also perceived that they have significantly changed their drought preparedness strategies after receiving the WM-EWS. The majority of participants reported that WM-EWS information provided timely access to information on water availability and climate forecasts. Stakeholder respondents further perceived this information as useful for drought-related decision-making, livestock management, and community resource-sharing practices. The majority of stakeholder respondents cope with the droughts by moving livestock to distant watering and grazing areas, while other participants cope with drought by selling livestock before the drought intensifies, buying supplementary feed for livestock, and seeking support from NGOs/government.

A majority of stakeholder respondents reported perceiving improvements in livestock health, which they commonly associated with better water access and management practices informed by WM-EWS information. Stakeholder respondents also associated WM-EWS information with perceived changes in crop planning, crop selection, and crop-management decisions. Stakeholder respondents reported that WM-EWS information was useful for crop-related decision-making, including identifying planting periods, considering crop diversity, and making crop-selection decisions.

WM-EWS can influence migration patterns, in which most pastoral communities may follow more organized livestock movements based on water availability information. This strategic migration could reduce overgrazing in specific areas and enhance resource sustainability, allowing for better management of land and water resources. The majority of the mixed stakeholders surveyed observed a migration pattern change after the WM-EWS to search for water resources with good conditions. The mixed stakeholders reported that there is stable settlement after the WM-EWS implementation, and some of the community shifted to more drought tolerant goat production.

This survey also included questions designed to evaluate understanding of sustainable water management. Improved understanding of water conservation techniques and climate adaptation strategies can empower community members to implement more effective practices. A total of 87% of mixed stakeholders indicated that their understanding of effective water management practices was limited prior to the WM-EWS implementation, which decreased to 13% after implementation. After the WM-EWS implementation, the majority of the participants gained good knowledge about sustainable water management due to training and capacity building programs. Across these indicators, respondents primarily perceived WM-EWS as an information and preparedness tool supporting resource-related decision-making rather than as a standalone solution to drought vulnerability.

3.1.3. Perceived Livelihood and Socio-Economic Dimensions

Respondents reported perceiving a range of livelihood-related and socio-economic changes following WM-EWS implementation. Commonly reported areas included food access, livestock productivity, household livelihood planning, and small-scale economic activities linked to pastoral production systems.

The majority of the stakeholder respondents surveyed reported perceiving an increase in household income following the implementation of WM-EWS. Nearly half of the mixed stakeholders perceived that the CIS through the WM-EWS improved their economic return and livelihood by 11–20%, while 18.31% of the stakeholder respondents reported that the information improved their livelihood by 0–10%, 16.91% of the stakeholder respondents reported their livelihood increased by 21–30%, and 1.41% of the stakeholder respondents reported their livelihood improved by more than 30%.

Most mixed stakeholders perceived that access to WM-EWS information was associated with better livestock management and productivity outcomes. A total of 80.28% of the mixed stakeholders surveyed responded that there is a change in household income due to better livestock and crop management. The majority of the mixed stakeholders surveyed responded that there are better market opportunities for selling livestock and crops after the implementation of the WM-EWS. The majority of participants perceived improved income by selling their products at better prices because of more buyers as well as improved bargaining power.

The majority of the mixed stakeholders responded that WM-EWS has improved their access to food, while 28.17% responded there is no noticeable change in their household food access. The majority of the mixed stakeholders surveyed responded that their access to food has improved after the WM-EWS implementation due to the increase in the availability of livestock products like milk and meat, more income to buy food, and better crop yields.

Before the implementation of the WM-EWS, the majority of the mixed stakeholders surveyed rated their households’ access to nutritious food like milk and meat were poor. On the other hand, after the WM-EWS implementation, the majority of mixed stakeholders rated good access to nutritious food. A total of 43.66% of stakeholder respondents observed an increased consumption of fruits and vegetables in their households’ dietary habits after the WM-EWS due to the mixed crop-livestock systems, 22.53% of the stakeholder respondents observed an increased variety of foods in their households’ dietary, and 9.86% of the stakeholder respondents perceived improved meal quality.

Respondents reported that access to climate and water information was perceived as useful for planning certain livelihood-related and small-scale economic activities, although such activities are influenced by broader socio-economic and institutional conditions. The majority of the mixed stakeholders (88.73%) surveyed responded that small enterprises have started after the WM-EWS implementation. The mixed stakeholders survey reported that small enterprises that have been started after the WM-EWS implementation include livestock-related small enterprises, crop-based services small enterprises, and small-scale irrigation around the water ponds. Before the WM-EWS implementation, 87% of the participants reported poor access to water for livestock. After its implementation, the majority of stakeholder respondents (62%) reported that they have good access to water for their livestock.

3.1.4. Social and Institutional Dimensions of WM-EWS Use

Respondents reported perceiving several social and institutional dimensions associated with WM-EWS use. These included women’s participation in resource-related decision-making, conflict management, humanitarian engagement, knowledge sharing, and community participation.

The majority of the mixed stakeholders surveyed responded that WM-EWS has an impact on women’s participation in decision-making regarding water management. Stakeholder respondents reported perceiving greater participation of women in water and livelihood-related decision-making following WM-EWS implementation, including involvement in crop and livestock management and community activities. Moreover, the mixed stakeholders surveyed reported that women’s participation has improved in decision-making with more involvement in different activities, such as animal and crop husbandry, roles in community leadership, and decision-making over household finances, and livestock/crop management. The findings suggest that respondents viewed access to climate and water information not only as a technical resource but also as a mechanism potentially influencing participation in local decision-making processes. Reported increases in women’s involvement may therefore reflect broader social dimensions of information access and institutional engagement rather than solely technical system characteristics.

The majority of the mixed stakeholders reported that access to resources like land near water pond areas for small enterprises opportunities has been created for women after the WM-EWS implementation, while some of the respondents reported financial support (credit) opportunity created for women and more opportunity of training programs tailored to women’s involvement in decision-making in water management.

This survey assessed the frequency and nature of conflicts related to water resources use. Several stakeholder respondents indicated that access to timely information has facilitated better resource management and cooperation among community members. Before the WM-EWS implementation, 43.66% of the stakeholder respondents surveyed observed that conflicts arise sometimes over water resources, 25.53% observed that this happens rarely, 5.63% observed conflicts often, and 4.22% observed conflicts very often. Most mixed stakeholders perceived that conflicts over water resources became less frequent following the implementation of the WM-EWS.

The participants observed the reduction in conflict over water resources due to facilitated community agreements for shared resource use, real-time information on alternative water resources, and avoiding overcrowding of water pond areas. Mixed stakeholders commonly perceived fewer conflicts over water resources following WM-EWS implementation and associated these changes with improved access to information on water availability and alternative water sources.

WM-EWS can attract increased attention from humanitarian organizations and development partners. Several mixed stakeholders surveyed reported increased engagement of humanitarian organizations and development partners following WM-EWS implementation. Stakeholder respondents perceived this engagement as reflected in greater collaboration related to water management, drought response, and agricultural resilience activities. Many participants further associated humanitarian involvement with increased awareness of water-related challenges, improved access to resources, and expanded training and capacity-building opportunities. These findings reflect stakeholder perceptions regarding institutional engagement and collaborative support following WM-EWS implementation.

WM-EWS can influence migration patterns, in which most pastoral communities may follow more organized livestock movements based on water availability information. This strategic migration could reduce overgrazing in specific areas and enhance resource sustainability, allowing for better management of land and water resources. Thus, this survey focused on understanding migration patterns related to resource availability.

The majority of the mixed stakeholders surveyed observed a migration pattern change after the WM-EWS to search for water resources with good conditions. The mixed stakeholders reported that there is stable settlement after the WM-EWS implementation, and some of the community shifted to more drought tolerant goat production.

This survey also included questions designed to evaluate understanding of sustainable water management. Improved understanding of water conservation techniques and climate adaptation strategies can empower community members to implement more effective practices. A total of 87% of participants indicated that their understanding of effective water management practices was limited prior to the WM-EWS implementation, which decreased to 13% after implementation. After the WM-EWS implementation, the majority of the participants gained good knowledge about sustainable water management due to training and capacity building programs.

WM-EWS is likely to foster a culture of resilience and community engagement. Moreover, increased participation in community meetings and decision-making processes could lead to ongoing improvements in the WM-EWS, ensuring it remains relevant and effective in addressing local needs. This survey assessed the community’s participation in decision-making and resilience-building activities. Regarding the involvement of the community in WM-EWS activities, the mixed stakeholders surveyed rated it as low (36.62%), high (30.98%), moderate (21.13%), and very high (11.27%).

The majority of mixed stakeholders (69.01%) observed that increased awareness has encouraged the community to participate in WM-EWS activities, 15.49% of the mixed stakeholders reported that training programs enhanced the participation of the community in WM-EWS activities, 14.08% of the stakeholder respondents observed both the training and awareness programs enhanced the participation of the community in WM-EWS activities, and only 1.41% of the stakeholder respondents observed that incentives improved the participation of communities in project activities.

The majority of mixed stakeholders surveyed (92%) observed that WM-EWS has helped them to better cope with droughts and other climate related challenges. A total of 32.39% of the mixed stakeholders surveyed requested more training to improve their understanding of interpreting the CIS, 30.98% of the mixed stakeholders requested the expansion of WM-EWS, 22.53% of the stakeholder respondents wanted to integrate more information related to better access to markets into the WM-EWS, and the remaining 7.045% of the stakeholder respondents requested both the expansion of WM-EWS to integrate more information and more training.

3.2. Discussion

An important consideration emerging from the findings relates to the consistently high levels of agreement reported across several indicators, particularly regarding preparedness, awareness, and perceived system usefulness. While these responses may reflect favorable operational experiences and familiarity with WM-EWS among respondents, they also warrant careful interpretation because uniformly positive response patterns are relatively uncommon in perception-based studies [43,44]. The purposive selection of respondents, their prior familiarity with WM-EWS and climate information systems, and their relatively high educational and institutional engagement may have influenced how the system was interpreted and assessed [43,45]. In addition, perception-based assessments are often shaped by social desirability tendencies, confirmation effects, and interviewer-related influences [44]. Accordingly, the results should be understood as perceptions of a relatively informed and institutionally engaged stakeholder group rather than as representative community-wide assessments or independent verification of WM-EWS effectiveness.

3.2.1. Perceived Usefulness and Operational Relevance of WM-EWS

Respondents generally perceived the WM-EWS as operationally relevant for drought-related planning and pastoral resource management. Rather than interpreting these findings as evidence of objectively verified system effectiveness, the results are more appropriately understood as reflecting how stakeholders experienced, interpreted, and valued climate and water information within their operational context. This distinction is important because perception-based assessments capture user experiences and system legitimacy rather than independently measured impacts.

Across several indicators, respondents associated WM-EWS information with improved awareness of drought conditions, preparedness planning, and decision-making related to water access, livestock management, and crop production. These perceptions suggest that respondents valued the system not only for its forecasting function but also for its perceived role in reducing uncertainty and supporting anticipatory planning. Similar observations have been reported in climate-services and the early warning literature, where users often assess system value according to usability, timeliness, trust, and decision relevance rather than technical forecasting performance alone [38,46].

Earlier evaluation frameworks frequently emphasized forecasting skill and technical accuracy as primary indicators of performance. More recent literature, however, recognizes that technically robust systems do not necessarily translate into effective decision support if information is inaccessible, poorly communicated, or disconnected from local institutional realities [38,47]. Vaughan and Dessai [38], for example, argue that climate information services derive value not solely from predictive capability but also from how information is organized, delivered, and interpreted by intended users. Similarly, Tall et al. [37] emphasize that accessibility, legitimacy, and user engagement are central determinants of whether climate services become operationally meaningful.

Respondents frequently emphasized the practical value of timely water and climate information, suggesting that the WM-EWS was perceived primarily as a decision-support tool. Such perceptions are consistent with evidence from African climate-service initiatives where stakeholders often value information systems because they support planning, improve preparedness, and enhance confidence in decision-making processes [46,48]. Consequently, the usefulness reported in this study should be interpreted as an important dimension of WM-EWS utilization and stakeholder experience rather than as direct evidence of objectively verified drought resilience or livelihood improvement.

EWS demonstrates that system performance remains highly context-dependent [47,48,49]. Technical forecasting capacity alone rarely guarantees effective early action. Information must be communicated through trusted channels, interpreted appropriately, and linked to institutional, social, and livelihood capacities capable of responding to emerging risks [47,50]. In many drought-prone settings, climate information is only one component of decision-making and often interacts with existing knowledge systems, social networks, and institutional arrangements [48,49]. The findings therefore contribute to understanding how stakeholders perceived and used WM-EWS information within operational settings rather than establishing causal effectiveness.

3.2.2. Interpreting Variation and Uncertainty in Stakeholder Perceptions

Information-related outcomes, including awareness of drought conditions, access to water information, and preparedness planning, received particularly high levels of agreement. Such responses are not unexpected because these outcomes are closely aligned with the immediate functions of the WM-EWS and are therefore more directly observable by respondents [48,51]. Information access and preparedness planning are often among the most visible and immediate experiences associated with climate information systems, making them easier for stakeholders to identify and evaluate.

By contrast, broader livelihood indicators, including food security, migration, livelihood diversification, and household well-being, are shaped by multiple interacting factors extending beyond climate information alone [52,53,54,55]. This distinction is analytically important because respondents may more readily perceive short-term informational and planning benefits than complex and longer-term socio-economic outcomes. In pastoral systems, household decisions are rarely determined by a single source of information. Rather, they emerge through interaction among environmental conditions, market dynamics, conflict, herd characteristics, and institutional constraints [53,55].

Respondents may perceive climate and water information as useful for mobility-related decisions, yet pastoral movement patterns are also influenced by grazing availability, social relations, security conditions, and resource governance structures [53,56]. Krätli and Schareika [56] describe pastoral mobility as an adaptive strategy characterized by managing uncertainty rather than responding to environmental signals alone. Similarly, Catley et al. [53] emphasize that pastoral decision-making is embedded within broader livelihood systems and institutional environments. Consequently, migration or resource-use outcomes cannot be attributed solely to WM-EWS information.

While respondents may associate preparedness and information access with improved livelihood conditions, these outcomes are influenced by broader socio-economic and institutional processes operating beyond the scope of WM-EWS [52,57]. Lemos et al. [52] describe this as the “usability gap”, where information may be scientifically credible and valued by users but still encounter structural constraints limiting translation into measurable livelihood outcomes. Such perspectives suggest that climate information contributes to adaptation through interaction with institutional and economic systems rather than through deterministic causal pathways.

Interpretation of the findings therefore involves several forms of uncertainty. Because the study relied on stakeholder perceptions rather than longitudinal monitoring or objective impact indicators, it is not possible to determine the extent to which reported experiences correspond to independently measurable resilience outcomes. Furthermore, concepts such as preparedness, usefulness, and resilience may be interpreted differently according to respondents’ institutional role, professional background, and previous engagement with WM-EWSs [38,52]. These uncertainties reinforce the exploratory nature of the assessment and underscore the importance of cautious interpretation.

3.2.3. Socio-Institutional Dimensions of WM-EWS Use

The findings further suggest that perceptions of WM-EWSs are embedded within broader socio-institutional contexts rather than reflecting technical system performance alone. Respondents frequently associated WM-EWSs with improved communication, institutional engagement, and coordination related to drought preparedness and water management. These perceptions indicate that information systems may function not only as forecasting tools but also as institutional platforms that influence how stakeholders interact, exchange information, and organize responses to emerging risks.

This interpretation aligns with the broader literature emphasizing that climate and EWSs operate within social and institutional environments where technical performance and governance processes interact closely [50,58,59]. Cash et al. [58] argue that knowledge systems become influential when information is perceived as credible, salient, and legitimate by intended users. Similarly, Meadow et al. [50] emphasize that co-production and stakeholder engagement are critical for improving both uptake and practical relevance of climate information services.

The socio-institutional dimensions identified in this study are particularly relevant within pastoral systems. Decisions related to livestock mobility, drought response, and resource allocation are often shaped by governance structures, institutional trust, customary systems, and social organization rather than information alone [53,60,61]. Consequently, the perceived usefulness of WM-EWS may depend not only on forecast quality but also on whether dissemination mechanisms are trusted, advisory products are locally relevant, and institutions possess sufficient capacity to respond effectively.

Respondents also reported perceptions of increased collaboration involving humanitarian organizations and development actors following WM-EWS implementation. These findings should be interpreted cautiously. Greater institutional engagement may not necessarily reflect the influence of WM-EWS alone but may instead emerge through interaction with broader development initiatives, drought response mechanisms, and institutional visibility of climate-related challenges [62,63]. EWSs often serve as information-sharing and coordination platforms that facilitate institutional dialogue and situational awareness rather than acting as direct drivers of organizational participation [63,64].

Similarly, perceptions related to women’s participation and community coordination require careful interpretation. Respondents associated access to information with greater participation and communication regarding drought planning and resource management. However, gender inclusion and community engagement are complex social processes shaped by local norms, governance arrangements, and broader institutional interventions [65,66,67]. Improved access to information may support participation, but it does not independently guarantee empowerment or equitable decision-making outcomes.

These findings therefore reinforce an important insight emerging from climate-services information systems operate within institutional ecosystems where social legitimacy, trust, and governance structures interact with technical performance [58,59,68]. Positive perceptions of WM-EWSs may consequently reflect confidence in information channels and institutional processes as much as confidence in forecasting capability itself.

3.2.4. Implications for Future WM-EWS Research and Evaluation

The present study contributes to growing discussions concerning how WM-EWS and climate-information systems are assessed within drought-prone pastoral settings. Rather than validating system effectiveness causally, the findings provide insight into stakeholder experiences, perceived usefulness, and operational relevance within a specific institutional and environmental context.

The findings also highlight the need for more rigorous and complementary evaluation approaches. Perception-based evidence offers important understanding of legitimacy, usability, and stakeholder experience, yet it is less suited to establishing measurable impacts [27]. The broader EWS literature increasingly advocates mixed-methods and multi-dimensional evaluation frameworks that combine technical performance, user perceptions, and institutional effectiveness [47]. Future evaluations would therefore benefit from integrating perception-based approaches with longitudinal monitoring, comparative assessment, and objective indicators related to drought outcomes, livestock productivity, mobility patterns, and livelihood conditions.

Future research may also benefit from engaging more diverse respondent groups. The present assessment primarily reflects views of relatively informed stakeholders. Inclusion of household-level pastoral users, women, youth, and less institutionally engaged populations could provide a more comprehensive understanding of how WM-EWS information is interpreted and utilized across different social and livelihood contexts [53]. Such approaches may help identify differences in access, trust, and information usability that are less visible within expert-oriented samples. The findings suggest that the value of WM-EWS may lie not solely in technical forecasting capability but also in its perceived capacity to facilitate information access, coordination, and preparedness within drought-prone pastoral systems. Understanding these dimensions remains important for designing more inclusive, trusted, and operationally relevant climate-information services while simultaneously strengthening future evaluation approaches capable of assessing longer-term and objectively measurable outcomes.

3.3. Limitations and Future Research Directions

This study has several limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings. First, the assessment relied primarily on perception-based information obtained from purposively selected key informants with experience related to WM-EWS implementation and pastoral resource management. Consequently, the findings reflect subjective experiences and perceptions rather than objectively measured impacts. In addition, the absence of baseline data, control groups, counterfactual comparisons, and longitudinal monitoring datasets limited the ability to quantitatively assess changes attributable to the WM-EWS over time. Therefore, the reported improvements in areas such as livelihood conditions, food access, livestock management, and conflict reduction should be interpreted as perceived associations rather than statistically verified impacts.

The purposive sampling approach used in this study also limits the representativeness of the findings. Mixed stakeholders were selected based on their experience and knowledge of pastoral systems and WM-EWS implementation, resulting in a sample composed primarily of relatively informed participants. While this approach provided valuable operational and system-level insights, it may not fully capture the perspectives and experiences of the broader pastoral population, particularly marginalized groups and less formally educated community members. As such, the findings should be interpreted as exploratory and indicative rather than broadly generalizable.

The respondent profile represents an additional limitation affecting interpretation of the findings. Because participants were purposively selected and generally possessed relatively high educational attainment and prior familiarity with WM-EWSs and climate information systems, the sample may not adequately reflect the diversity of experiences and perceptions present within broader pastoral communities. Furthermore, perception-based responses may be influenced by recall bias, expectation bias, and social desirability bias. External factors such as climatic variability, humanitarian support, market dynamics, and institutional interventions may also have shaped stakeholder respondents’ perceptions independently of the WM-EWS. Consequently, the findings should be interpreted as reflecting the views of a relatively informed respondent group rather than as representative estimates of pastoral populations more generally.

The findings of this study should also be considered in light of existing research that highlights both the potential and limitations of EWS. For example, Lombroso [34] emphasized that while EWS can improve access to information, their effectiveness is often constrained by factors such as limited user trust, challenges in communication, and difficulties in translating warnings into actionable responses. Similar studies have also highlighted issues such as uncertainties in climate forecasts, which can affect the reliability and perceived usefulness of system outputs [15]. Limited connectivity and communication infrastructure in remote pastoral areas can also restrict timely dissemination and uptake of information. In addition, factors such as user trust, understanding of probabilistic forecasts, and institutional coordination play a critical role in determining the effectiveness of EWSs [19]. These challenges highlight that while WM-EWSs offer valuable decision-support potential, their effectiveness depends not only on technical design but also on socio-economic, institutional, and infrastructural conditions. Despite these limitations, the study provides valuable exploratory insights into how pastoral stakeholders perceive and utilize WM-EWS information in operational decision-making contexts. The findings contribute to the growing literature on CISs and EWSs in pastoral areas and highlight the importance of user-centered dissemination approaches. Future research should incorporate objective indicators, baseline measurements, household-level surveys, and longitudinal or quasi-experimental study designs to enable more rigorous evaluation of WM-EWS effectiveness and long-term impacts.

4. Conclusions

This study explored stakeholder perceptions and reported experiences regarding the operational relevance and perceived usefulness of the WM-EWS within the Borana pastoral system of southern Ethiopia. The findings indicate that respondents generally perceived WM-EWS information as useful for improving awareness of drought conditions, supporting preparedness-related activities, and informing resource-management decisions associated with water availability, livestock management, and livelihood planning. Respondents also reported perceived improvements in information access, coordination, and communication related to drought preparedness and pastoral resource management.

Participants further perceived positive changes in several livelihood-related and institutional dimensions, including preparedness planning, access to climate and water information, participation in local resource-management activities, and engagement with drought-response processes. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously because they reflect stakeholder perceptions and reported experiences rather than independently verified livelihood, resilience, or economic outcomes. Many of the reported changes are influenced by broader climatic, socio-economic, institutional, and governance factors that cannot be isolated within the present study design.

The study also highlights the importance of considering the socio-institutional context within which climate and water information systems operate. Respondents frequently associated the WM-EWS with improved communication, institutional engagement, and information dissemination processes, suggesting that the perceived value of such systems may depend not only on technical forecasting capabilities but also on accessibility, trust, institutional coordination, and local relevance of advisory information.

At the same time, interpretation of the findings should consider several methodological limitations. The study relied on purposively selected stakeholder respondents who were generally familiar with WM-EWSs and related climate information systems, and the assessment was based primarily on perception-oriented evidence rather than longitudinal or objective outcome indicators. Consequently, the findings should not be interpreted as causal evidence of WM-EWS effectiveness or as representative of broader pastoral populations. Rather, the study provides exploratory insight into how stakeholders experience, interpret, and operationally utilize climate and water information within a drought-prone pastoral context.

Despite these limitations, the study contributes to growing discussions concerning the role of climate and water information systems in pastoral drought management. The findings provide a context-specific insight into stakeholder experiences and perceived operational relevance of WM-EWS within the Borana system and may help inform future research and evaluation efforts related to climate information services in pastoral environments.

Future research would benefit from integrating longitudinal monitoring, objective drought and livelihood indicators, and more diverse respondent groups, including household-level pastoral users and less institutionally connected populations. Such approaches would help strengthen understanding of WM-EWS performance, information utilization, and longer-term implications for drought preparedness and pastoral resource management.