Abstract
Decision makers need actionable information on the factors that inhibit household adaptation to climate variability and other changes, especially those changes reinforcing environmentally unsustainable livelihood strategies. In this paper, we show how a combination of quantitative and qualitative data can help assess current livelihood vulnerability and the social and institutional obstacles facing specific population groups that lock in risk and undermine opportunities. Detailed analysis of current household economies in two case study communities (one in Uganda and one in Kenya) in the Lake Victoria Basin, East Africa, was combined with a qualitative, intersectional exploration of constraints on income adaptation and diversification. Quantitative household economy analysis showed low levels of household disposable income overall and additionally, poor returns on investment from enterprises typically controlled by women. Qualitative research highlighted changes in gender roles driven by women's entrepreneurial responses to reduced household income from traditional agricultural and natural resource-based activities. However, due to unequal access to finance and culturally mediated norms and expectations, many women's enterprises were small scale and insecure. The broader political economy context is one of limited national investment in education and infrastructure, further constraining local opportunities for human and economic development. The approach described here was directed by the need to understand and quantify economic vulnerability, along with the cultural and institutional constraints on adaptation, as a basis for making better adaptation policies and interventions to build resilience over the longer term.
Highlights
Miller et al (2010) have called for the conceptual insights that have emerged from these discipline-based approaches to adaptation, to be “translated into operational assessment methodologies, guidelines, and procedures that are accessible to practitioners and decision makers.”
The approach described in this study was directed by the need to understand and quantify the economic, as well as the cultural and institutional constraints on adaptation, as a basis for actionable policies and interventions and was designed to address the immediate problem: “What information do local policy and decision makers need to reduce vulnerability and enhance resilience?” To ensure that these measures are timely, proportionate, and well-targeted we show how a combination of disaggregated quantitative and qualitative data can be assembled by local teams to assess current vulnerability and adaptive capability
Our focus in this paper has been on the immediate question: “What information do local policy makers need to reduce vulnerability and enhance resilience?” We have shown how quantitative household economy analysis can be combined with qualitative information generated through participatory social science methods, to provide policy relevant information on adaptation and resilience
Summary
Adaptive capacity is influenced by actors’ abilities to capitalize on available opportunities that ease the planning and implementation of adaptation as well as constraints that make adaptation processes more difficult for both human and natural systems (Klein et al, 2014). Whilst average disposable incomes per adult equivalent are almost twice as high in NB compared with BS in all but the richest quartile, the cost of living was higher in NB and it would be wrong to assume that this community is better able to cope with shocks Data from both sites provides strong evidence of the income constraints that limit adaptation options for most households. Quantitative data of the kind we have described is needed to better understand current constraints on adaptation and income diversification, and to model potential future climate impacts on human populations (Enenkel et al, 2020), as well as the short term implications of natural disasters and other hazards It provides evidence of risk exposure among different sections of the population, potentially reducing opportunities for “elite annexation” of adaptation policies by wealthier groups, that may result in an increased gap between poor and rich (Eriksen et al, 2021). This has budget implications—should new seed varieties be subsidized? It has implications for private sector seed distributors and for public-private partnerships in this area
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
