ON
“Assemble knowledge on perceptions, incentives, constraints and collective action schemes affecting adoption of climate change adaptation strategies at Kabe watershed”
BY: DERBEW KEFYALEW (PROJECT FACILITATOR)
DECEMBER 2012
DESSIE, NORTHEAST ETHIOPIA
13
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Objectives 2
1.2 Approaches/methodology 2
1.3 Participants 2
2. Result and discussion 3
2.1. Farmers’ knowledge on crop and livestock production 3
2.2. Farmers’ knowledge on water and natural resource management 4
2.3. Farmers’ knowledge on collective action schemes 5
2.4. Existing knowledge on socioeconomic 6
2.5. Perception of farmers on climate change 7
3. Possible climate change adaptation strategies and options 8
3.1 Crop and livestock related 8
3.2 Water and natural resource management 8
4. Conclusions 10
5. References 11
Table of Figures
Table 1: Livelihood incentives and constraints in relation to crop and livestock at Kabe watershed 3
table 2: farmers’ knowledge on the potential and constraints of water resources 4
Table 3: Farmers’ Knowledge on natural resource management 5
TABLE 4: Existing farmers’ knowledge on socioeconomic issues 6
13
1. Introduction
Countries, regions, economic sectors and social groups differ in their degree of vulnerability to climate change (Bohle et al., 1993). This is due partly to the fact that changes in temperature and precipitation occur unevenly, and that resources and wealth distributed unevenly. Because of these characteristics, some communities are more exposed and more sensitive to the adverse effects of climate change than others are.
According to IPCC (2007), climate change is today a major threat to sustainable development, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, that anticipated being most vulnerable because of low adaptive capacity and high dependency on climate sensitive resources such as water resources and ecological systems. In many cases these communities have adapted their farming, livestock rearing, and other income generating activities to achieve successfully some degree of sustainability despite their climate vulnerability (Mortimore and Adams, 2001; Blanco, 2006; Nyong et al., 2007). Hence, societies have a long record of adapting to the impacts of weather and climate change through a range of practices that include crop diversification, irrigation, water management, disaster risk management, and insurance.
Therefore, it is important to consider the social context in which local knowledge are developed to implement an adaptation policy because adaptation to climate stress is a local process (Locatelli, 2011). Local people have often suffered from wide spread of poverty and vulnerability caused by climate change and variability. This reduces their potential to adapt and resilience to the changing environment. Besides, climate change poses novel risks often outside the range of experience, such as impacts related to drought; heat waves, accelerated glacier retreat and hurricane intensity (Kpadonou et al., 2012).
This is, for instance, the case of Kabe watershed, where people live in dry land ecosystems that is already fragile. The communities in the area live in precarious ecological conditions, naturally characterized by recurrent drought that threatens their socio-economic well-being. It is, therefore, important to understand better the knowledge of local communities on the potential and constraints they have on climate change to draw appropriate or desirable options to coup climate change and variability. Hence, developing adaptation strategies to reduce climate vulnerability and secure livelihoods is an immediate priority for local people.
1.1 Objectives
i. To identify farmers’ knowledge on livelihood basis/incentives, constraints and collective action schemes affecting climate change adaptation strategies at Kabe watershed
ii. To devise options and appropriate incentive mechanisms to adapt climate change and variability.
iii. To enhance local partnership and collective action measures.
1.2 Approaches/methodologies
Open discussion with the community held twice to gather general issues. Focus Group Discussion (FGD) (Figure 1) and key informant interview with semi-structured checklist (Annex 1) used to generate in-depth qualitative information. Personnel observation and transect walk also used to verify the facts and gather additional information.
Figure 1. Focus Group Discussion and key informant interview at Kabe watershed
1.3 Participants
Participants of the study included South Wollo Zone Agriculture Office (1 male), Woreilu Woreda Administration Office (1 male) and Wollo University (5 male), Sirinka Agricultural Research Center (SARC) (7 male and 1 female), Woreilu Woreda office of Agriculture (3 male). Besides, 215 female and 438 male community representatives and four Kebele DAs (3 male and 1 female) also participated.
2. Findings and discussion
2.1. Farmers’ knowledge on crop and livestock production
According to the Woreda Office of Agriculture, crop and livestock are equally important sources of livelihoods for the local communities in Woreilu Woreda in general, and in Kabe watershed in particular. According to the discussion with the community, cereals (wheat and barley) and pulse crops (faba bean and field pea) are the major crops grown in the area (Table 1). The farmers in Kabe watershed have been able to produce a minimum 0.5 t ha-1 and a maximum of 1.5 t ha-1 of barley. However, the occurrence of recurrence drought and flood due to erratic and unreliable rainfall are major causes of low crop production in the area. Besides, lack of improved crop varieties, poor farming practices and crop diseases like yellow rest on wheat, root rot on garlic and water logging on faba bean considered as the major challenges of crop production.
Table 1. Livelihood incentives and constraints in relation to crop and livestock at Kabe watershed.
Livelihood base (incentives) / Main Problems/constraints· Cereals: wheat and barely
· Pulse: faba bean and field pea
· Spices: fenugreek
· Vegetables: carrot, potato & garlic
· They used to harvest crop two times a year, i.e. during the main season (July-September) and the short rainy season/belg (March-April).
· Free grazing used to serve as the main feed source.
· Crop by-product and hay also serve as fodder source.
· Improved animal breeds not introduced yet.
· Small ruminants, particularly sheep, are predominant.
· Dairy production is not common for market purpose
· Fattening is rarely practiced
· Both male and women involve in animal rearing
· Beekeeping practice is scant / · Poor soil fertility
· Unreliable and erratic rainfall
· Crop pest and disease
· Lack of improved seed varieties
· Poor farming practice
· Recurrent drought, erosion, and flooding
· Drying of water sources (streams, springs and ground water)
· Lack of access to market information
· High price of inorganic fertilizers (DAP and Urea)
· Low productivity of local breeds
· Shortage of animal feed
· Lack of improved forage varieties
· Incidence of animal disease
· Lack of veterinary services
· Limited access to market
The area has a bimodal nature where they receive rain during the main season or Meher (July to August) and during the short rainy season or belg (March to April). Nevertheless, the rainfall is unreliable, erratic and insufficient particularly during the short rainy season in recent years. As a result, farmers are not able to produce crop during this season almost for the last ten years.
Although livestock in Kabe watershed plays a great role in fulfilling their food gaps during the crop failure, the poor performance of local breeds, lack of animal fodder and prevalence of animal diseases constrained its productivity (Table 1). Free grazing, crop by-product and hay used to serve as the main feed source in the area.
2.2. Farmers’ knowledge on water and other natural resources management
Kabe watershed has water potential of both surface and ground water sources as the area previously called Legegpra in Oromifa, means “water tower”. However, according to the farmers view availability and amount of water decreased from time to time due to the occurrence of frequent drought and deforestation.
Table 2. Farmer’s knowledge on the potential and constraints of water resources at Kabe and the surrounding areas.
Existing knowledge on water resources / Constraints· The area has different water sources
· Un protected springs and ground water used for potable water supply
· Very few hand-dung wells developed by the Woreda water desk but most of them are not functional
· Traditional irrigation practiced at a smaller scale.
· No attempt was made to develop irrigation canal and night storage dam
· No irrigation technologies introduced yet
· Water harvesting structures has not been practiced
· No training was given by any organization on the utilization of water resources / · The existing water is not well developed to supply irrigation during the short rainy season
· The community forced to fetch water together with animals from springs and rivers for drinking purpose.
· Water born disease is common
· There is no support by other organization to develop the water resources
· Poverty also hindered the community to cover the cost needed for it by themselves
Springs, shallow wells and rivers are main sources of water for both irrigation and drinking purposes. Since, the communities fetch water from unprotected water sources together with animals; water borne diseases are very common in the area. Traditional irrigation is practice at a smaller scale but no attempt was made to introduce irrigation technologies and develop or upgrade irrigation canal yet. The community has limited knowledge on irrigation management and training has not been given by any organization yet. Farmers are well aware of the situation of natural resources and the challenges to manage the resources. According to the farmers perception, vegetation coverage is decreased from time to time particularly indigenous tree species are becoming scarce in the area (Table 3). Because of vegetation degradation, high rate of soil erosion and flooding became evident in the area. Reafforestation efforts could not be as expected in the upstream part of the watershed partly due to poor survival rate of seedlings which in-turn caused by severe frost, lack of adaptable tree seedlings and poor management. On the other hand, plantation of eucalyptus trees practiced at the backyard, farmland and hillsides of the watershed mainly for economic benefit. Gully formation at the mid and downstream and loss of top soil at the upstream of the watershed is common when the rain comes. Physical Soil and Water (SWC) activities have given emphasis so far without the integration of biological measures. The existing physical structures have also exposed to damage due to free grazing and poor quality of structures.
Table 3. Farmer’s knowledge on the potential and constraints of vegetation cover and land management at Kabe and the surrounding areas.
Existing knowledge on Natural Resource Management / Constraints§ Vegetation coverage decreased
§ Indigenous tree species are lost
§ The area is highly degraded
§ High Soil erosion and flooding
§ Only physical SWC structures practiced
§ Plantation of eucalyptus tree practiced at the back yard, farm land and hill sides for economic benefit
§ Active gully formation is a common phenomena / § Planted tree seedlings are not survived due to frost and poor management
§ Little attempt have been made SWC measures
§ Existing SWC structures damaged due to free grazing and low quality of standard
2.3. Farmers’ knowledge on collective action schemes
Collective action occurs when more than one individual is required to contribute to an effort in order to achieve an outcome. People living in rural areas and using natural resources engaged in collective action on a daily basis. This is when they plant or harvest food together; use a common facility for marketing their products; maintain a local irrigation system or patrol a local forest to see that users are following rules; and meet to decide on rules related to all of the above (Adger, W.N. etal., 2007).
The communities in Kabe watershed used to discuss in-group on a matter that needs a common consensus and understanding on a regular basis. Particularly, elders and religious leaders (Sheik) are influential in conflict resolution and management. There were conflicts occurred on the use of common resources like grazing land and irrigation water but solved on time without causing severe problems. Local community organization like Idir is the main local institution used to support and resolve conflicts.
Therefore, considering existing local knowledge for community organization and conflict resolution to reach a consensus on common natural resource management like to stop free grazing from the contact of man and animal through awareness creation and establishing by-laws would be crucial for sustainable natural resource management.
2.4. Existing knowledge on socioeconomic
Similar with the highland moisture deficits areas of the Amhara region, the food security status of the people in Kabe watershed, Woreilu woreda is repeatedly under threat due to natural disasters such as drought, land degradation, population pressure, and subsistence agricultural practices. As depicted in Table 4, land holding is very small and there is no access to additional income generating activities other than agriculture like non-farm and off-farm activities in the area. Due to this reason, farmers are unable to diversify their livelihoods and become more susceptible to drought and other shock like extreme poverty. Therefore, introduction of non-farm and off-farm activities to diversify their livelihoods, improving agricultural productivity through the introduction of available and appropriate technologies and knowledge are vital to alleviate poverty caused by climate change and variability. Road accessibility is poor within and to the nearby town and other NGO who are focused on research and development initiatives are not involved yet in the watershed.
Table 4. Existing farmers’ knowledge on socio-economic issues
Existing knowledge on socioeconomic issues / Constraints§ Land holding is very low
§ Population is increasing
§ Majority of the community supported by Safety Net Programme to compliment their livelihoods
§ One primary school and one health post serve the watershed community
§ Two health extension workers implement the rural health extension package of the government
§ There is difficulty in road accessibility within and to the nearby town
§ Non-farm activities are not practiced except few practice in pottery
§ Very few farmers complement their livelihood by remittance
§ No other NGO involved in any development and research interventions within the watershed / § Farmers are susceptible to drought and other shock due to extreme poverty
§ Unable to diversify their livelihoods due to lack of additional income sources
2.5. Perception of farmers on climate change