The present study aimed to assess the extent of knowledge and understanding of brucellosis in smallholder dairy farmers and identify practices at the farm and household level that might pose a risk for humans contracting brucellosis. Between February and June 2015 a cross-sectional study was conducted among smallholder farms (n = 420) in five districts of Punjab and two districts of Sindh province. Farmers were interviewed using a questionnaire to obtain information on farmers’ knowledge about brucellosis and the potential risks for contracting the disease that are present for dairy farmers and their families. Logistic regression and ordinal logistic models were used to investigate potential predictors for risky behaviours. The results show almost all farmers (97%) were not aware of the modes of transmission of brucellosis. Relating to risk, the majority (66%) of the farmers’ families were reported to consume raw milk and its products, live in shared housing with animals (49%) and not cover hand cuts during contact with animals (74%). All farmers performed at least one risky practice on a regular basis for brucellosis transmission from animal to human. A multivariable analysis highlighted that the respondents with no formal education and those who had not heard of the disease displayed greater risky behaviour. Poor understanding of the disease, presence of multiple risky practices on farm and at the household, and incorrect perception supports the need for an educational awareness program in order to ensure uptake of improved practices.

A cross‐sectional study was conducted to estimate the seroprevalence of bovine brucellosis in smallholder farms in seven regions in Pakistan, identify herd and individual level risk factors for seropositivity and assess the level of engagement of farmers with risk factors. In total, 1063 cattle and buffalo belonging to 420 herds in seven districts were sampled. The Rose Bengal test (RBT), indirect enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (I‐ELISA) and competitive enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (C‐ELISA) were used for the serological diagnosis of bovine brucellosis on all the serum samples. The associations between herd‐and animal‐level risk factors and seropositivity were investigated using logistic regression analyses. In addition, herd management practice scores, created to quantify the number of management practices undertaken that pose a risk for Brucella transmission, were calculated and compared between seropositive and negative herds within each district. Overall herd and animal prevalence were estimated to be 16.2% (95% CI, 13–20%) and 8.7% (95% CI, 7.2–10.6%), respectively, across all districts sampled. Herds with a history of last trimester abortion were found to be more likely to be positive than herds without such history (OR = 2.06, 95% CI, 1.09–3.89), providing validation of our findings and identifying that clinical disease is occurring in this region. It was also identified that herds with five to eight buffalo (OR = 3.80, 95% CI, 1.69–8.49), and those with more than eight buffalo (OR = 3.81, 95% CI, 1.51–9.58) were more likely to be positive for Brucella than those with less (one to two and three to four) buffaloes present in the herd. The presence of other domestic animals at the farm and purchasing animals in last year were found to have no association with seropositivity. The findings of this study support the need for the development of targeted intervention strategies specific to the disease status of each district.

The provision of effective extension services to smallholder farmers across both developing and developed countries remains a challenge worldwide. The objective of the study is to demonstrate the impacts of improved extension services on awareness, knowledge, adoption rates and perceived benefits of smallholder dairy farmers in Pakistan. An extension program was developed and implemented in five districts of Punjab (Okara, Pakpattan, Jhelum, Kasur and Bhakkar) and two districts of Sindh (Thatta and Badin) provinces. The extension program involved the provision of research-based information on a monthly basis to smallholder farming families (FF = 523) over a 4-year period. The extension program was primarily a knowledge transfer-based system, but also relied on farmer engagement and feedback to help drive research and topics for discussion. No financial incentives were provided to the farmers for their participation. A ‘whole-family approach’ was used in the extension program, where comprehensive interdisciplinary training on the whole dairy-farming system was provided to the males, females and children of the farming household. To encourage greater participation and support different learning strategies, several information transfer media were used (including group discussions, one-on-one visits, practical demonstrations, problem-based learning techniques and videos). To assess the impact of this extension program on farms involved, data on farmer awareness, knowledge, adoption and their perceived benefits were collected using a mixed-method approach from three different groups of farmers; registered (IMPreg = 179) farmers directly involved in the extension program, non-registered (IMPnon-reg = 116) farmers indirectly benefiting from the program and traditional (IMPtrad = 104) farmers not associated with any project activities. Overall awareness, knowledge and adoption rates relating to seven different recommendations in the extension program were significantly (P < 0.05) higher in the registered farmers than in the non-registered and traditional farmers. The perceived benefits of the adopted recommendations varied between the different extension messages, but farmers described that they observed increases in milk production, improvements in animal health (body condition and morbidity) and labour efficiency (time savings). These results suggest that adopting improved extension services using a whole-family approach we can significantly achieve higher adoption rates, leading to on-farm benefits to smallholder dairy farmers and their families.