Appendix-1 Methodology for Evaluating an Adaptation Option (Manandhar 2012)

Appendix-1 Methodology for evaluating an adaptation option (Manandhar 2012)

Agricultural land use incorporating apple trees in cultivable areas is chosen as the most plausible adaptation option for the mountain people of Mustang in the KGRB (section 3.5). However, there is a lack of scientific basis to permit determination of whether or not to implement integration and/or expansion of apple cultivation. In this study, the land evaluation framework given by FAO (1976) is used. This study suggests considering biophysical, economic and social components while analyzing suitability of land for a specific use. All three components are briefly explained below.

Biophysical suitability assessment: Biophysical suitability refers to the fitness of a given type of land for a defined use. Three main criteria and ten indicators are used to evaluate biophysical suitability of apple cultivation in Mustang. The criteria, indicators, their description and relevant references are presented in Table A.1. After establishing the criteria and indicators, land suitability is classified into four classes: (i) highly suitable (S1); (ii) moderately suitable (S2); (iii) marginally suitable (S3); and (iv) not suitable (N). The classes and value ranges are finalized after a thorough review of available literatures; inputs from horticulturists, government staff, local experts; and discussion with local residents of the study area. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) is used to estimate the weights of the various indicators. A land suitability score (LSS) is calculated by aggregating all the indicator class values with the AHP-driven weights using GIS in a way similar to linear combination methods:

Land Suitability Score (LSS) =)

where n is the number of indicators, Xi is the indicator class value and Wi is the weight of the ith indicator. Based upon the LSS, biophysical suitability is classified as highly suitable (S1) where LSS = 3.1-4, moderately suitable (S2) where LSS = 2.1-3, marginally suitable (S3) where LSS = 1.1-2 and not suitable (S4) when LSS ≤ 1. The suitability map is overlaid with the administrative boundaries to show specific locations where an apple crop will be suitable.

Economic suitability assessment: Before making any recommendations on the economic suitability of expanding apple cultivation, comparative economic assessment among several cropping options is essential. Economic suitability here refers to the ability of crop (single land use) to gain profit compared to other crops (other land use options). The following two indicators are used to assess the economic suitability in this study:

(i) The Benefit-Cost (B-C) ratio: A monetary value is assigned to each input (cost) and output (benefit) resulting from different land uses and the B-C ratio is calculated as:

where Bt and Ct are the land use-specific benefits and costs incurred over the years; and t is the time period. If the B-C ratio is greater than 1, the land use is deemed worthwhile and can be implemented.

(ii) Net Present Value (NPV): The NPV of a specific land use is calculated as

where Bt and Ct are the land use-specific benefits and costs accrued over the years; t is the time period; and r is the discount rate. If the NPV is positive, the particular land use is considered worthwhile. Economic indicators are calculated for the various land uses indicated in Table A.2 and compared.

Social suitability assessment: If there is a lack of social acquiescence, then the land cannot be considered suitable for apple cultivation. Therefore, social suitability assessment is an important aspect in the land evaluation process. Seven relevant social suitability criteria and nine indicators are shown in Table A.3 and are considered in this study. Descriptive statistics such as frequency and percentage are used for data analysis.

TableA.1 Details of the criteria and indicators used for biophysical suitability assessment of apples

Table A.2 Most common land uses (cropping patterns) in Lower Mustang

Table A.3 Selected social suitability criteria for apple cultivation