Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) is a perennial dicotyledonous plant belonging to the Euphorbiaceae family, native to South America and naturalized in tropical regions for its starchy tuberous roots and high-protein foliage [1]. In the agrosylvopastoral landscape of Burkina Faso, this crop has undergone a structural transformation, establishing itself as a strategic component of resilience in the face of seasonal shifts [2]. Its phenological plasticity, coupled with an intrinsic tolerance to water stress, allows it to express potential yields ranging between 30 and 40 t/ha depending on genotypic performance [3][4]. However, the optimization of this productivity under real-world conditions is limited by complex biotic and anthropogenic constraints that are often underestimated.

The agronomic paradox of cassava lies in its strategy of maintaining foliage cover during the critical phase of the dry season. While the senescence of cereals (millet, sorghum) and wild grasses drastically reduces fodder availability, cassava persists as one of the few sources of green biomass in village territories [5]. Although the plant synthesizes cyanogenic glucosides as a chemical defense mechanism [6], this protection proves insufficient against livestock pressure. This chlorophyll persistence transforms plots into attractive resource islands, exposing the crop to open-access grazing (vainepâture), a post-harvest free-space management practice in the Sudanian-Sahelian zone [7][8]. The impact of this animal intrusion directly affects plant physiology. Repeated browsing induces severe defoliation that disrupts the interception of photosynthetically active radiation and alters carbon remobilization toward storage organs. This imbalance compromises starch accumulation and drastically reduces the harvest index [9]. Beyond the agronomic impact, this phenomenon generates major social externalities. The degradation of social cohesion between farmers and herders is often linked to the scarcity of common resources and inadequate land access rules [10]. The expansion of off-season crops such as cassava mechanically reduces transit corridors and traditional grazing areas, exacerbating the risks of land-use conflicts [11][12]. Despite the importance of these issues for food security, research in Burkina Faso has primarily focused on varietal selection [13] or post-harvest processing procedures [14]. There is a deficit of scientific knowledge regarding the efficiency of rudimentary physical barriers generally erected by producers to protect their farms. Indeed, securing plots imposes transaction and investment costs that weigh heavily on the gross margin of farming operations. The lack of technical and financial data regarding these protection systems, in the face of widespread standing capital losses linked to open-access grazing, constitutes a major barrier to investment in the value chain.

This study aims to fill this gap by analyzing the dynamics of interactions between cassava cultivation and pastoral pressure in the production zones of Burkina Faso. The objective is to evaluate the adaptation strategies and organizational innovation levers necessary for the sustainable intensification of this sector.

The SPHINX V.5 software was used to create the questionnaire. Collected data were analyzed using SPSS Statistics 20.0 software. Data processing relied on descriptive statistical analysis applied to quantitative data to characterize regional trends in agricultural resilience.

Field survey results showed high heterogeneity in cassava farm protection practices across the three regions: Djôrô, Guiriko, and Tannouyan, within the scope of the surveyed cooperatives. Table 1 shows the distribution of different cassava crop protection practices. A wide disparity in protection methods exists across the three regions of Burkina Faso, along with a very uneven organization of technical options. The survey reveals that among the 111 surveyed farms, 64 have no protection measures in place, representing 57.7% of the sample. This predominance demonstrates a structural vulnerability in the analyzed cassava agricultural protection systems, in a context where safeguard mechanisms are crucial to minimize damage caused by pests, stray animals, or various rural invasions. Protected farms (42.3%) rely essentially on simple and accessible methods, mainly based on live hedges. Results by region highlight distinctly different protection profiles.

In the Djôrô zone, protection conditions are markedly better as no farm is unprotected (0%). Data analysis reveals a predominance of cereal stalk fences (41.9%) (Figure 1), followed by cassava stalk fences (22.6%) (Figure 2). Other methods remain uncommon but varied: earth wall (12.9%) (Figure 3), sisal (9.7%) (Figure 4), wire mesh (6.5%) (Figure 5), and thorny plants and barbed wire (3.2% each). In this region, the use of accessible local resources is widely adopted by producers.

In the Guiriko region, 87.2% of farms (34 out of 39) benefit from no protection. Uncommon devices observed include wire mesh (7.7%), barbed wire (2.6%), and thorny plants (2.6%), while all other methods are entirely nonexistent. In this region, these results denote limited investment capacity, restricted access to protection means, or the absence of a perceived need to protect crop fields in the face of varying animal roaming episodes. The near-total absence of plant or traditional solutions, unlike Djôrô, also highlights a lack of integration of endogenous security practices.

The Tannouyan region is at an intermediate level, with 73.2% of farms benefiting from no protection (30 out of 41 farms). However, this region is characterized by a higher use of black nylon netting (17.1%) (Figure 6), as well as wire mesh (7.3%) and barbed wire (2.4%). A gradual use of more contemporary materials is observed, even though their integration remains restricted in volume and model. A total absence of plant-based practices (such as the use of cereal or cassava stalks) also indicates increased dependence on purchased materials.

Comparative analysis of the different methods indicates that plant-based solutions (cereal and cassava stalks) are extensively practiced in the Djôrô region, constituting over 60% of methods used there. Conversely, modern approaches (mesh and nylon) are scarce and more frequently observed in the Tannouyan region, with a marginal presence in Guiriko.

These findings show a marked disparity in the adoption of agricultural protection technologies for cassava fields among the evaluated sample.

Figure 1. Dry millet stalk fencing in Ouatinaow, Djôrô region.

Figure 2. Dry cassava stalk fencing in Ouatinaow, Djôrô region.

Figure 3. Earthen wall associated with a trench in Gourpwô, Djôrô region.

Figure 4. Sisal fence in Ouatinaow, Djôrô region.

Figure 5. Wire mesh fencing in Ouatinaow, Djôrô region.

Figure 6. Black nylon mesh fencing in Takalé-kôkô, Tannouyan region.

Table 1. Distribution of different cassava crop protection practices.

The study highlighted heterogeneity in protection methods for Manihot esculenta Crantz farms, characterized by a predominance of unprotected farms (57.7%) across the three regions of Burkina Faso. This reflects vulnerability in cassava production against pressures such as animal roaming. This situation confirms recent trends observed in Sub-Saharan Africa, where agricultural systems remain dominated by low-investment strategies heavily dependent on economic and institutional constraints [16].

The importance of traditional methods, such as barriers made of cereal and cassava stalks, demonstrated the prominent place of internal approaches in risk management. These methods align with a constrained optimization approach, where producers prioritize locally available resources. Akanmu indicates that local resources remain a dominant trait of agricultural systems in Africa, in connection with constraints on access to financing, technologies, and information [17]. However, even when available, the impact of these solutions is often restricted and ephemeral, raising questions about their viability amid growing tension over natural resources. According to research conducted in Burkina Faso, the adoption of agricultural methods is strongly linked to socio-economic factors such as education level, access to information, farm size, and membership in farmer groups [18]. Furthermore, Sana et al. proved that access to technologies and information is a crucial factor in agricultural innovation processes [19]. These results help understand the differences noted between the analyzed regions. Moreover, studies carried out in West Africa highlight that agricultural innovation adoption processes exhibit high heterogeneity and are influenced by local adaptation dynamics [20]. This variability indicates that agricultural systems do not progress linearly, but rather through complex processes frequently constrained by structural factors.

Compared to more intensive agricultural systems, the results underline a persistent lag in adopting protection technologies. Despite their demonstrated potential to increase productivity and resilience, the use of sustainable agricultural practices and protection technologies remains globally limited in Sub-Saharan Africa, as revealed by Sithole and Olorunfemi [16]. In addition, pest and constraint management studies demonstrate that current methods remain frequently scattered and ineffective for smallholders [21]. However, recent advances such as wire mesh fencing have shown significant potential to optimize crop defense [22]. Nevertheless, their deployment remains restricted in the analyzed situations, highlighting the importance of financial and technology access restrictions.

The baseline assessment drawn in this study underscores the urgent need to rethink support for smallholders facing worsening climatic conditions. Since the high cost of protection and irrigation equipment constitutes a substantial financial barrier for the majority of farmers, new partnership opportunities must be explored to break the low-productivity cycle.

In this regard, contract farming could emerge as a promising strategic solution to lift these financial and technical bottlenecks. Drawing on the vertical coordination theory developed by Key and Runsten [23], integrating perimeter security into partnership agreements between producers and processing units would transform an individual constraint into a shared responsibility. As suggested by Eaton and Shepherd [24], this model offers the possibility of pooling systemic risks and pre-financing essential protection infrastructure (live hedges, fences), which are often beyond individual financial reach.

This approach, which will be the subject of subsequent studies to evaluate its impact on yield and income stability, offers a concrete perspective for transforming cassava from a subsistence crop into a secure, competitive, and resilient industrial sector in Burkina Faso. Such a transition would help overcome the inaccessibility of warrantage mechanisms for this root crop by using contracts as an effective substitute for traditional material collateral.

The study highlights a wide disparity in crop protection methods within Manihot esculenta Crantz production systems among surveyed cooperative-affiliated producers in Burkina Faso, with a majority of unprotected farms reflecting structural vulnerability. The exclusive use of traditional methods, while aligned with local realities, is insufficient to ensure effective and sustainable protection. The observed differences attest that adoption trends are largely determined by agroecological, socio-economic, and institutional factors. The emergence of intermediate solutions in various regions indicates gradual technological progression, albeit hindered by financial restrictions and limited access to extension services. These results emphasize the need to strengthen agricultural policies by facilitating access to adapted protection technologies, improving producer support, and sustaining local innovation. Accounting for methodological limitations regarding sample scoping, this research highlights the crucial role of crop defense as a tool to improve productivity and resilience in Sub-Saharan agricultural systems.

Conceptualization, A.K.H. and U.S.; methodology, I.Z.; software, P.B.; validation, A.K.H., I.Z., W.M.B., and U.S.; formal analysis, U.S.; investigation, A.K.H.; resources, A.K.H.; data curation, P.B.; writing original draft preparation, I.Z.; writing review and editing, W.M.B.; visualization, A.K.H., I.Z., and W.M.B.; supervision, U.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.