Indigenous food systems are highly productive, sustainable, and equitable. These systems preserve rich biodiversity, provide nutritious food, and are climate resilient (1). Indigenous people’s food systems are rooted in traditional knowledge and customary systems, which ensure their existence and well-being despite several challenges (2). Indigenous food systems are essential for food security and food sovereignty since they are founded on millennia of collected knowledge. These food systems are vital for cultural identity, spiritual well-being, and land stewardship. Indigenous Peoples are reviving their agro-ecological food systems because they are more resilient to climate change and provide more nutritious diets than modern food systems.¹ One such food system is the indigenous chicken production system (ICPS) which has several use values and ecosystem services (3–5).

The indigenous chicken production system (ICPS) is a climate resilient and sustainable food system in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), especially in fragile ecosystems (5–7). Indigenous chickens account for 80% of the chicken population in Africa (8), and in India, 35% of poultry products come from the indigenous chicken production system (7). Although their productivity is lower than that of intensively raised birds (9), indigenous chickens contribute to food and nutritional security, economic security, and ecological resilience (3, 5, 10). In Indian Himalayan Region (IHR), the indigenous chickens have been part of the indigenous food system of tribal and indigenous people for centuries (7, 11).

The Indian Himalaya Region stretches 2,500 km across 12 states and covers 53.7 Mha. This is ~17% of the country’s total geographical area. It is home to 52 million indigenous and tribal people. The IHR is a source of food, water, and energy for 1.5 billion people. There are five agroecological zones in IHR, ranging from cold arid to warm and humid. The mean annual precipitation ranged between 150 and 4,000 mm. The average annual temperature fluctuates between 8°C and 22°C (12). Environmental, biological, socio-cultural, and economic variations in the Himalayas have led to the evolution of diverse and unique indigenous food production systems involving crop species, and livestock (13). Indigenous people’s food has animal source food (ASF) to meet their dietary requirements. The indigenous chicken production system is an important enterprise for tribal farmers in the IHR (7, 11). However, of late indigenous food systems in the IHR are threatened by deforestation, climate changes, migration, the introduction of an intensive agricultural production system (14), changes in dietary habits, mono-cropping, commodity crops, soil degradation, and market decline.

Despite its enormous contribution to the nutritional and economic security of the Indian Himalayan Region, the indigenous chicken production system is poorly studied as a food system. There is no information available on the characteristics of the indigenous chicken production system in different agroecologies in the Indian Himalayan Region. Knowledge about the characteristics and management practices (including health and bio-security) of indigenous chicken and its role in food and nutritional security are therefore of value to academicians and policy planners to further improves upon the existing food system. Hence, the present study aims (i) to characterize the indigenous chicken production system in three different agro-ecologies (tropical, sub-tropical, and sub-temperate) of the Indian Himalayan Region along with health and biosecurity status, (ii) to identify the indigenous chicken market chain, (iii) to investigate the role of ICPS in food and economic security of households and (iv) to identify the challenges for increasing the system’s productivity on a sustainable basis.

The present study characterizes the indigenous chicken production system, along with its contribution to the food and economic security of the tribal communities in the Indian Himalayan region. The percentage of indigenous chicken units owned by women was higher in sub-temperate agro-ecology. It has previously been reported that in less developed regions, indigenous chicken is generally owned and managed by women (7, 17, 23, 24). In sub-temperate agro-ecology, the respondents had less education level. In contrast with the other two agro-ecologies, the sub-temperate agro-ecology is remote, rugged, sparsely populated, and less developed. The primary occupation of the majority of households is agriculture, and their landholding is less than 1 ha. In developing regions, native chicken rearing integrated with agriculture is a century-old traditional livelihood for the rural poor who earn their living on less than 2 ha of land (5, 6, 25, 26).

The total flock size was larger in sub-temperate agro-ecology. Similarly, Chicken-TLU was higher in sub-temperate agro-ecology. However, livestock types and livestock diversity was less in sub-temperate agro-ecology. In contrast to our findings, Haile and Biratu (27) reported that in Ethiopia, farmers in lowland areas keep a higher number of chickens per household than in midland and highland areas. The greater size of indigenous chicken flocks and the lower LDI in sub-temperate agro-ecology indicate a greater reliance on chicken for food and economic security. There is also the possibility that sub-temperate regions might have a higher scavenging feed resource, which could be the reason for the higher chicken population. In all ecologies, chicks make up about 35 to 40% of the flock. The cock to hen ratio ranged from 1.84 to 3.5 in different agro-ecologies. Nonetheless, the flock size per household was less than 50 in all three agro-ecologies. As per the FAO (28) classification, this is an extensive scavenging indigenous poultry production system. In sub-temperate regions, flock sizes tend to be larger, indicating higher genetic polymorphism and, therefore, a wider variety of phenotypic traits and they can serve as the reservoirs of indigenous chicken genetic resources (3). There is high genetic polymorphism in indigenous chickens and this increases with flock size (3, 4), particularly the number of cocks. Households in tropical and sub-tropical agro-ecologies have fewer indigenous birds because they rely on other livestock, as reflected by a higher livestock diversity index. Also, these agro-ecological regions are better connected to major towns in the region and therefore may have easy access to animal-source food. It was earlier reported that the flock size of indigenous chickens varies considerably within and across the regions. This is because of different factors like the purpose of rearing, the socio-economic status of households, etc. (23, 29).

In all three study regions, households prefer to rear indigenous chickens mainly because of their adaptability and survivability, meat and egg taste, and scavenging ability. Indigenous chickens have developed through natural selection in adverse climatic conditions and therefore have accumulated high genetic diversity, making them hardy, resilient to disease, and high survivability (4, 5, 9, 17, 30). The climatic conditions are harsh in sub-temperate agro-ecology and therefore, adaptability and survivability were the main preference criteria for indigenous birds. Native chicken is also preferred because it requires less feed and inputs, produces more eggs, and grows faster. Previous studies have documented that indigenous people prefer native birds because their meat and eggs are tastier, and needed for traditional ceremonial meals (23, 24, 31, 32).

The majority of households rear indigenous chickens for eggs and meat. The management includes a temporary chicken coop for night shelter built with locally available materials. Indigenous birds have multifaceted uses unlike commercial broilers and layers, and they are preferred for egg and meat production (3). Similarly, Kumaresan et al. (11) and Singh et al. (14) reported that indigenous people preferred local birds because of their lean and hard meat. Meat and eggs from indigenous chickens constitute a high-quality food source, densely packed with essential macro-and micronutrients, and play a significant role in the nutritional security of the rural poor (5). Native chickens produce stronger flavored meat with a firmer texture than broiler meat, which makes them highly preferred by traditional communities (29). Households in all agro-ecologies used on-farm production as their primary source of chicken feed, while sub-temperate regions had the highest levels. This is in agreement with earlier reports (5, 11, 33). Traditionally, indigenous chickens live mainly on scavenging and receive minimal supplementary feeding from kitchen waste or household farm produce (5, 11, 23). Besides, scavenging helps indigenous chicken to express their natural behavior, which enhances their welfare.

The present study found that indigenous chickens are a vital part of traditional communities’ food system, particularly in harsh sub-temperate agro-ecology. The larger flock size in sub-temperate agro-ecology translates into higher egg production and higher egg consumption per household, especially by children compared to other agro-ecologies. The HHDS was also higher in sub-temperate agro-ecologies indicating better food security of the households. Similarly, households in sub-temperate agro-ecology sold and consumed higher numbers of adult birds. Economically, the annual income from indigenous chickens was higher in sub-temperate agro-ecology. In Bangladesh, the rearing of indigenous chickens fetches the highest benefit–cost ratio of 1.71 as compared to commercial broilers (1.22) and commercial layers (1.11) (34). Dumas et al. (18) reported that addressing health and management constraints of indigenous chicken resulted in significant increases in households’ income, food security, and physical health of the community. It has been previously noted that the indigenous chicken production system economically empowers rural communities, regularly supplies the family with readily available animal source food, and generates income (17, 35, 36). Snively-Martinez and Quinlan (37) and Dumas et al. (18) reported that as the flock size of the household increases and reliable productivity is achieved, the purpose of keeping native chickens shifts to sources of income. Owing to the short generation interval, indigenous chicken production quickly generates income and enhances the socio-economic status of households (17). Self-reliant indigenous chickens can be sold quickly to buy food and cover school, clothing, and medical expenses (28, 35, 38). Native chickens convert scavenging feed resources and kitchen scraps into high-quality protein and these birds do not directly compete with humans for food (5), which is advantageous from a food security standpoint. Hatching percent and chick survivability up to 6 weeks were better in all three agro-ecologies. Desta (3) reported that indigenous hens are excellent mothers, and in this production system, artificial hatchery and brooding facilities are absent.

In the sub-tropical region, the majority of households sold chicken and eggs in local markets, whereas the home and the local market were almost equal sale points for households in the tropical and sub-tropical regions. In the study region, the weekly market operated in a small town, a big village, or a cluster of three to five small villages. Local residents sell agricultural, vegetable, and chicken produce (live chickens and eggs) in these markets (39). These markets attract buyers from outside the regions, mostly traders and businessmen who purchase these items and resell them in major towns at a premium price. There was a higher proportion of chicken and eggs purchased through middlemen in tropical and subtropical regions. In contrast, the majority of sub-temperate households sell directly to consumers. Tropical and sub-tropical regions are better connected to major towns and have a well-developed transportation system, making them accessible to middlemen and traders. In all agro-ecologies, there was a higher demand for indigenous chicken produce in winter and the majority of respondents reported getting a fair price for poultry and eggs. Although there is no clear-cut seasonality of chicken products in the study regions, the higher demand during winter may be because of the festive season, as the majority population is Christian and November to January is the festive season. The fair price may be because of the high demand for meat and eggs from indigenous chickens, because of their suitability to local taste preferences and perceived health benefits (5, 29, 40). Jin et al. (41) reported that the meat of indigenous chicken in Japan fetches two to five times higher prices compared to broiler meat. Also, the marketing chain was short in all the study regions, and households directly sold to consumers, which maximized their profits.

Approximately 9% to 15% of adult birds died in the last year across the three agro-ecologies. Sambo et al. (29) reported higher mortality in the wet and winter season in native chickens because of infectious diseases. Mortality because of diseases is common in densely inhabited areas where flocks are frequently intermixed, birds are relatively numerous and health prophylaxis and bio-security are least applied. Households have scant knowledge of health and bio-security applicable to chicken farms. The indigenous chickens were in regular contact with family members, especially children, which increased the chance of spreading zoonotic diseases, particularly Salmonella infection (6, 42). Households mostly used poultry litter as farmyard manure. Although high mortality was not reported in the last year in the study area, households reported large-scale mortality in the past among indigenous chickens in the entire village. It was earlier reported that the most common cause of high mortality among village chickens was Newcastle disease (28, 43). During our study, it was also observed that some households reared broilers and improved birds, which might have spread infectious diseases to indigenous chickens. Small-scale chicken growers may choose not to implement bio-security measures because of a lack of awareness of the potential risks or a belief that the benefits do not outweigh the costs (38).

In the present study area, predators, non-availability of chicks, diseases, and non-availability of vaccines were critical production constraints reported by households. Predation is a significant constraint of indigenous chicken production systems, particularly in forest areas, and leads to significant flock loss. Desta (3) argues that as prey animals, indigenous chickens form the local food chain system, and predation is an unavoidable threat. The indigenous chicken production system does not have artificial hatcheries and, for replacement stock, households rely on self-production of chicks. In this system, a hen typically lays eggs then incubates, hatches, and broods the chicks and this cycle takes 105 to 140 days (44) which limits the production of eggs and therefore the number of chicks. Improvement in day-old chick supply to better match farmers’ demand would benefit village chicken production (29). Few households reported diseases as the major constraint. Indigenous chickens are hardy, resilient, and evolved in tandem with the production ecosystem (3, 43). In an earlier study, Scherf (45) reported that the Tanzanian chicken landrace “Mwanza” possesses enhanced tolerance to New Castle Disease. However, further studies are needed to substantiate the disease resistance traits of these ecotypes. Feed, marketing, and poultry housing were the least regarded as constraints in the study area by the households. This indicates the wide range of natural feed resources available in the region.

The present study characterized the indigenous chicken production system in three different agro-ecologies of the Indian Himalayan region. It also evaluated its contribution to the food and economic security of the tribal populations. Indigenous chickens are an important part of traditional communities’ food systems, particularly in sub-temperate agro-ecology. The ICPS is an extensive scavenging production system. Households in all agro-ecologies use on-farm production as their primary source of chicken feed. In most cases, women are responsible for poultry rearing, which indicates its role in women’s empowerment. The greater size of indigenous chicken flocks and the lower LDI in sub-temperate agro-ecology indicate a greater reliance on chicken for food and economic security. The larger flock size in sub-temperate agro-ecology translates into higher egg production and subsequently higher egg consumption per household, especially by children. The HHDS was also higher in sub-temperate agro-ecology, indicating higher food security of the households. Economically, the annual income from the indigenous chicken was higher in sub-temperate agro-ecology. In all three study regions, households prefer to rear indigenous chicken mainly because of their adaptability and survivability, meat and egg taste, and scavenging ability. The marketing chain was short in all the study regions and households directly sold chickens and eggs to the consumers, which maximized their profits. Households have little knowledge of health and bio-security applicable to the chicken farm. Predators, non-availability of chicks, diseases, and non-availability of vaccines were critical production constraints reported by the households.

The study indicates the significant contribution of ICPS to the food and nutritional and economic security of traditional communities in the fragile agro-ecologies of the Indian Himalayan Region. Considering its multiple-use values and ecosystem services, there is an urgent need to address its critical constraints to further improve its productivity. Also, the climate-resilient traits and genetic diversity of these ecotypes need to be studied through genomics for future use in specific breeding programs. Policy intervention is needed to prevent the genetic erosion of indigenous chicken genetic resources in these areas due to the introduction of exotic chicken germplasm. Depending on the ecosystem’s carrying capacity, some households can be promoted to small-scale semi-intensive ICPS, which will increase incomes and meet growing demand. This will enhance the economy of scale. Furthermore, the health and bio-security aspects of ICPS need to be strengthened to maximize its gains.

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

The animal studies were approved by Institute Animal Ethics Committee, ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalaya, India. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent was obtained from the owners for the participation of their animals in this study.

MS, NP, RP, and RM: conceptualization. MS, RY, RK, SDe, and VS: methodology. MS, NP, VS, and JC: formal analysis and investigation. MS, SB, and RP: writing—original draft preparation. MS and SDo: writing—review and editing. MS: funding acquisition. HK and VM: supervision. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

This work was supported by Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi through ICAR-Poultry Seed Project, ICAR Nagaland Centre (PIMS Code: OXX01915).

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.