A Case of Kaligandaki Basin, Nepal Rishikesh Pandey Douglas K - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

A Case of Kaligandaki Basin, Nepal

Rishikesh Pandey Douglas K Bardsley UoA, School of Social Sciences, GEP 5005 SA Australia Email: itsmehimalaya@gmail.com

1

Presentation Outline

 Study Context

 Human Ecology, Climate Change and Impacts, Adaptation Strategies and Barriers, and Livelihood

Outcomes and Vulnerability

 Research Problem  Objectives  Study Rationale  Theoretical Framework  Methodology



Study Area, methods, sample size, analysis

 Results  Discussions Conclusion

2

Study Context

Human Ecology, Climate Change and Impacts, Adaptation Strategies and Barriers, and Livelihood Outcomes and Vulnerability

3

Study Context …

• Higher warming trend and projections, Variability in

rainfall and increased erratic rainfall events, rapid retreat

• f glacier (Agrawala et al 2003; IPCC 2007a; Manandhar et al. 2011; NRC 2012; Pandey & Bardsley

2013; Schewe et al. 2011; Shrestha et al. 1999; Shrestha et al. 2000; Xu et al. 2007; Xu et al. 2009)

• Risk and hazards of snow - avalanche and Glacial Lack

Outburst Flooding, monsoon flooding, making densely populated downstream vulnerable

• Extinction of agro-biodiversity, tropical crops and vector

borne diseases at higher altitude (Malla 2008; LFP 2009)

• Resource degradation (Gentle & Marasani 2012)
• CC induced migration (Bardsley & Hugo, 2010)

4

5

Snow avalanche flood in Seti River (05/05/2012), market centre swept away, 70 people died Monsoon flood in Tarai

Highly erosive Trans-Himalayan Landscape

Study Context …

Research Problem

• Adaptation studies are just emerging in Nepalese

context, barriers are yet to explore

• Studies yet to cover heterogeneous Himalayan

environment through location specific studies

• Lack of integrated studies: Human / Social- Ecological

Implications (climate change, impacts, adaptation, barriers to adaptation, livelihood outcomes)

6

Objectives

 To explore the adaptation strategies adopted by

farming households

 To investigate adaptation barriers faced by the

studied communities

7

Study Rationale

 Severe impacts of CC in physical and anthropogenic

environments, yet, there exists adaptation deficit

 Many research findings and global development policies call

for adaptation (IPCC 2001; IPCC 2007b; IPCC 2014; Leary et al. 2007; Kyoto Protocol 1997;

Schneider 2009 ; UNFCCC 1992)

 Adaptation is required to respond the change and reduce the

impacts

 Local adaptation knowledge, interest, and efforts helps

effective adaptation (Adger 2006; O’Neill & Hulme 2009)

 Knowledge of adaptation barriers provides opportunity for

policy response that weakens the barriers and promotes adaptation

8

Figure 1: Theoretical Framework on Adaption to Climate Change and Social Ecological Sustainability Endogenous Factors

• Socio-economic and

Political Institutions

• Technology

(+) Adaptive Capacity (-) Social Ecological Sustainability Social Ecological Vulnerability Exogenous Factors (Climate Change) E x p o s u r e S e n s i t i v i t y Livelihood Systems Human Natural Financial Physical Social Response Drivers Pressures State of Changes Impact

Modified from Allen Consulting Group 2005; Atkins et al. 2011; Chambers & Conway 1992; Subedi 1995

Theoretical Framework ...

9

10

Methodology : Study Area

Methodology: Sample Size

11

Face-to-face interview with household heads

Places Female Male Total Number % Number % Number % Meghauli 47 30.7 106 69.3 153 42.5 Lumle 40 28.4 101 71.6 141 39.2 Mustang 19 28.8 47 71.2 66 18.3 Total 106 29.4 254 70.6 360 100

Guttman Scale and Score: peoples’ perceptions on climate changes, its impacts, adoption of adaptation strategies, and faced adaptation barriers were collected in unipolar scale of 1 (least) to 5 (most). These scales are treated as Guttmann scores later and calculated the proportion of general agreement

12

Place FGDs KIIs HTCs Crop

Calendar

Female Mixed Total Female Male Total Meghauli 2 7 9 7 26 33 2 4 Lumle 3 6 9 7 13 20 3 2 Mustang 2 4 6 7 15 22 2 3 Total 7 17 24 21 54 75 7 9

• PRA Field methods
• Focus group discussions
• Key Informants Interview
• Historical Timeline Calendar
• Crop Calendar

Methodology: Sample Size

• A total of 31 adaptation strategies were asked,
• A total of 9 adaptation barriers were asked

13

Adaptation to climate change

Several adaptation methods to climate change are proposed, and many of them are already practiced by the communities of the different parts of the world (Adger et al. 2007; Adger et al. 2005; Allison et al. 2009; Dovers 2009;

Gargi & Sejuti 2010; Hanak & Lund 2012; Kurukulasuriya & Rosenthal 2003; McIntosh et al. 2000; Moser & Ekstrom 2010; Mortimore 2010; Osbahr et al. 2008; Sivakumar 2011; Smit et al. 2000; Thomas et al. 2007; Yufang et al. 2012).

Suggested strategies from the literature are: farm management, infrastructural development, diversification and intensification of crop-livestock production system, landuse change, increase irrigation other inputs, crop-livestock insurance; change pricing policy and agricultural support policies, development and promotion of new crop varieties, livestock feeds, soil management, improve animal health, regulated distribution system, disaster management, and technological advancement

24.9 21.1 14.4 17.1 11.7 14.8 34.3 29.0 32.4 26.6 9.9 15.3 36.4 18.4 32.0 19.6 22.1 27.5 17.5 33.4 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 Changed Crop Varieties Adopted Drought Resistant Crops Change in Crop Calendar Changed Cropping Pattern Use of Mulch, Reduced Tillage Soil Control, Drainage Management Changed Farm Size Changed Landuse Type Slope Transformation Increased Irrigation Regulated Use of Water Rain Water Harvest Agro-Training, Educated Member Increased Agro-Input Specialized Livestock Changed Livestock Types and Size Changed Source of Fodder Regulated Use of Forest and Pasture Added Heating/Cooling Facilities Changed House Structure Pray to God Integrated Agriculture Crop-Livestock Insurance Advocacy and Campaign Received Food Aid /Subsidized price Changed Livelihood Options Migration for Agro-Activity Migration to Market Centre Migration to City Labour Migration Abroad Cropping System Farmland Management Irrigation, Farm Skills and Inputs Livestock Management Comfortable Living Multi-Functionalities Migration Proportion of General Agreement of Adoption

Figure 2: Proportions of General Agreement of Adoption of Strategies in Kaligandaki Basin, Nepal

Findings: Adopted Adaptation Strategies

14

Findings: Adopted Adaptation Strategies …

43.5 35.3 15.6 51.3 62.3 31.8 65.1 32.3 31.0 29.6 26.1 34.1 21.0 41.7 17.4 31.1 41.7 59.1 29.9 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 Changed Crop Varieties Adopted Drought Resistant Crops Change in Crop Calendar Changed Cropping Pattern Use of Mulch, Reduced Tillage Soil Control, Drainage Management Changed Farm Size Changed Landuse Type Slope Transformation Increased Irrigation Regulated Use of Water Rain Water Harvest Agro-Training, Educated Member Increased Agro-Input Specialized Livestock Changed Livestock Types and Size Changed Source of Fodder Regulated Use of Forest and Pasture Afforestation, Grass Seedling, Fodder Trees Plantation Added Heating/Cooling Facilities Changed House Structure Pray to God Integrated Agriculture Crop-Livestock Insurance Advocacy and Campaign Received Food Aid /Subsidized price Changed Livelihood Options Migration for Agro-Activity Migration to Market Centre Migration to City Labour Migration Abroad Cropping System Farmland Management Irrigation, Farm Skills and Inputs Livestock Management Comfortable Living Multi-Functionalities Migration Intensity Score of Adoption (%)

Figure 3: Proportions of General Agreement of Adoption of Strategies in Kaligandaki Basin, Nepal by types and Ecological Zones

Tarai Middle-Mountain Trans Himalaya

15

Findings: Adopted Adaptation Strategies …

16

Figure 4: Levels of Overall Adaptation

23.0 20.4 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 Overall Adaptation (Perceived by Respondent) Overall Adaptation (Average of All Adopted Strategies) Percent Strategies Not Adapted at All Little Bit Adapted Moderately Adapted Well Adapted Quite Well Adapted % of General Agreement

Source: Field Survey, 2013

Findings: Adopted Adaptation Strategies …

29.5 23.2 7.7 24.1 17.6 17.7 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 Tarai Middle-Mountain Trans Himalaya Tarai Middle-Mountain Trans Himalaya Overall Adaptation (Perceived by Respondent) Overall Adaptation (Average of All Adopted Strategies) Percent Not Adapted at All Little Bit Adapted Moderately Adapted Well Adapted Quite Well Adapted % of General Agreement

Source: Field Survey, 2013

17

Figure 5: Level of Adoption of Various Strategies by Ecological Zones

Findings: Adopted Adaptation Strategies … Figure 6: Crop Calendar across the ecological zones of Kaligandaki basin

18

Flood Control through Concrete wall in the Trans-Himalaya Flood Control Dikes and Retaining Wall along the Narayani River at Meghauli

Findings: Adopted Adaptation Strategies …

19

Findings: Adaptation Barriers

54.6 46.3 45.8 23.9 88.3 85.2 72.6 74.2 75.3 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 Percent of Respondents Barriers Little bit Occasionally Moderately Severe Profound General Agreement Figure 7: Adaptation Barriers Faced by the Studied Households of Kaligandaki Basin, Nepal

20

46.6 66.3 48.9 37.4 59.7 39.7 52.3 44.1 34.1 24.4 22.9 24.9 88.8 88.3 87.1 88.0 82.3 84.9 64.0 75.6 86.2 64.8 79.5 84.9 65.2 81.5 85.5

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 Tarai Middle-Mountain Trans-Himalaya Tarai Middle-Mountain Trans-Himalaya Tarai Middle-Mountain Trans-Himalaya Tarai Middle-Mountain Trans-Himalaya Tarai Middle-Mountain Trans-Himalaya Tarai Middle-Mountain Trans-Himalaya Tarai Middle-Mountain Trans-Himalaya Tarai Middle-Mountain Trans-Himalaya Tarai Middle-Mountain Trans-Himalaya Lack of Adaptable Variety Not Suitable Crop Varieties Lack of Irrigation Resource Conflict Lack of Short and Longterm Weather Forecast (In Percent) Insufficient Knowledge

• n

Adaptation Method (In Percent) Financial Limitations Lack of External Support (I/NGO, Development Agencies) Lack of External Support / Government Percent of Respondents Barriers Little bit Occasionally Moderately Severe Profound General Agreement

Figure 8: Adaptation Barriers Faced by the Studied Households Across the Ecological Zones Kaligandaki Basin, Nepal Findings: Adaptation Barriers

21

 Poor level of adaptation however, rich adaptation knowledge;

consistent to the strategies suggested by literature

 Lack of social learning and knowledge transfer,  Study agrees to: Adaptation process is determined by - technology,

resource availability and distribution, institutional structure, stock of human and social capital, access to risk spreading mechanism, ability

• f decision makers on risk management and peoples’ attribution to

stress or exposure to the change, willingness to innovate (Grothmann & Patt

2005; Gupta et al. 2010; Hansen et al. 2004; Moser 2005; O’Brien et al. 2004; Yohe & Tol 2002)

 Study agrees to: Having sound adaptive capacity not necessarily

translated into adaptation action since people feel powerless and are constrained by antecedent development (Adger et al. 2007; Adger & Vincent 2005; van

Aalst et al. 2008)

 Communities are undecided to adopt adaptation strategies because

CC they perceived is non-linear, and existing barriers challenge the

• utcome of adaptation strategies

Discussion and Conclusion

22

Thank You

Queries ??

23

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge to the University of Adelaide, School of Social Sciences, Discipline of Geography, Environment and Population for making this presentation possible at this conference.

24

Reference 25

• Adger, WN, Arnell, NW & Tompkins, EL 2005, 'Adapting to climate change: perspectives across scales', Global Environmental Change, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 75-76.
• Adger, WN 2006, ‘Vulnerability’, Global Environmental Change, vol.16, no.3, pp. 268-281
• Adger, WN, Agrawala, S, Mirza MMQ, Conde, C, O’Brien, K, Pulhin, J, Pulwarty, R, Smith, B, Takahasiki, K et al. 2007, Assessment of adaptation practices, options, constraints and

capacity’, in M Parry, O Canziani, J Palutikof, P van der Linden, C Hanson (eds.), Climate Change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability, Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 717–743.

• Adger, WN & Vincent, K 2005, 'Uncertainty in adaptive capacity', Comptes rendus - Géoscience, vol. 337, no. 4, pp. 399-410.
• Agrawala, S, Raksakulthai, V, Maarten van Aalst, M, Larsen, P, Smith, J & Reynolds, J 2003, Development and Climate Change in Nepal: Focus on Water Resource and

Hydropower, (COM/ENV/EPOC/DCD/DAC-2003,1/FINAL) Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Paris.

• Allen Consulting Group 2005, Climate change risk and vulnerability: Promoting an efficient adaptation response in Australia, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, Australia
• Allison, EH, Perry, AL, Badjeck, MC, Adger, WN, Brown, K, Conway, D, Halls, AS, Pilling, GM, Reynolds, JD, Andrew, NL & Dulvy, NK 2009, 'Vulnerability of national economies to

the impacts of climate change on fisheries', FISH AND FISHERIES, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 173-196.

• Atkins, JP, Gregory, AJ, Burdon, D & Elliott, M 2011, ‘Managing the marine environment: Is the DPSIR framework holistic enough?’, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, vol.

28, no. 5, pp. 497-508.

• Bardsley, DK & Hugo, GJ 2010, ‘Migration and climate change: examining thresholds of change to guide effective adaptation decision-making’, Popul Environ, vol. 32, pp. 238–262,

DOI 10.1007/s11111-010-0126-9.

• Chambers, R & Conway, G, 1992, ‘Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st century, IDS Discussion paper, no. 296, Institute of Development Studies, University
• f Sussex. Brighton, UK.
• Dovers, S 2009, 'Normalizing adaptation', Global Environmental Change, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 4-6.
• Gargi, B & Sejuti, B 2010, 'Adapting to climate change in Himalayan cold deserts', International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 426-448.
• Gentle P & Maraseni TN 2012, ‘Climate change, poverty and livelihoods: adaptation practices by rural mountain communities in Nepal’, Environmental Science & Policy, vol. 21, pp.

24-34.

• Grothmann, T & Patt, A 2005, 'Adaptive capacity and human cognition: The process of individual adaptation to climate change', Global Environmental Change, vol. 15, no. 3, pp.

199-213.

• Gupta, J., et al., 2010. The Adaptive Capacity Wheel: a method to assess the inherent characteristics of institutions to enable the adaptive capacity of society. Environmental

Science & Policy 13 (6), 459–471 Available at (accessed 21.11.2010).

• Hanak, E & Lund, JR 2012, 'Adapting California’s water management to climate change', CLIMATIC CHANGE, vol. 111, no. 1, pp. 17-44.
• Hansen, J., S. Marx and E. U.Weber, 2004: The role of climate perceptions, expectations, and forecasts in farmer decision making: The Argentine pampas and south Florida. IRI

Technical Report 04-01. International Research Institute for Climate Prediction, Palisades, New York. [http://iri.columbia.edu/outreach/publication/report/04-01/report04-01.pdf].

• IPCC 2001, Climate Change 2001: Working Group II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, IPCC 3rd Assessment Report, Viewed 17 May 2012

<http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/wg2/index.htm>

• IPCC 2007a, Climate change 2007: the physical science basis, summary for policymakers, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC Secretariat, Geneva.

• IPCC 2007b, Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Summary for Policymakers, Working Group II Contribution to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change, Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC Secretariat, Geneva.

• IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Summary for Policymakers. Working Group II Contribution to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change, Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC Secretariat, Geneva. (APPROVED SPM – Copyedit Pending).

• Kurukulasuriya, P., Rosenthal, S., 2003. Climate change and agriculture: a review of impacts and adaptations. Climate Change Series Paper No. 91, World Bank, Washington, DC.
• LFP 2009, ‘Impact of climate change on forests and livelihoods: issues and options for Nepal’, Livelihood Forestry Programme, Kathmandu.
• Malla, G 2008, ‘Climate change and its impact on Nepalese Agriculture’ The Journal of Agriculture and Environment, vol., 9, pp. 62-71.
• Manandhar, S, Vogt, DS, Perre, SR & Kazama, F 2011,’Adapting cropping systems to climate change in Nepal: a cross-regional study of farmers’ perception and practices’, Reg

Environ Change, vol. 11, pp. 335–348, DOI 10.1007/s10113-010-0137-1.

Reference 26

• McIntosh, R.J., J.A. Tainter and S.K. McIntosh, Eds., 2000: The Way the Wind Blows: Climate, History, and Human Action. Columbia University Press, New York, 448 pp.
• Moser, S., 2005: Impacts assessments and policy responses to sea-level rise in three U.S. states: an exploration of human dimension uncertainties. Global Environ. Chang., 15,

353-369.

• Moser, SC & Ekstrom, JA 2010, ‘A framework to diagnose barriers to climate change adaptation’, PNAS, vol. 107, no. 51, pp. 22026–22031, doi/10.1073/pnas.1007887107.
• Mortimore, M 2010, 'Adapting to drought in the Sahel: Lessons for climate change', Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 134-143.
• NRC (2012) Himalayan glaciers: climate change, water resources, and water security. Committee on Himalayan Glaciers, Hydrology, Climate Change, and Implications for Water

Security; Board on Atmospheric Studies and Climate; Division on Earth and Life Studies; National Research Council. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.

• O’Brien, K., R. Leichenko, U. Kelkar, H. Venema, G.Aandahl, H. Tompkins,A. Javed, S. Bhadwal, S. Barg, L. Nygaard and J.West, 2004: Mapping vulnerability to multiple stressors:

climate change and globalization in India. Global Environ. Chang., 14, 303-313.

• O’Neill, SJ & Hulme, M 2009, ‘An iconic approach for representing climate change’, Global Environmental Change, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 402-410.
• Osbahr, H, Twyman, C, Adger, NW & Thomas, DSG 2008, 'Effective livelihood adaptation to climate change disturbance: Scale dimensions of practice in Mozambique', Geoforum,
• vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 1951-1964.
• Pandey R & Bardsley, DK 2013. Human Ecological Implications of Climate Change in the Himalaya: Pilot Studies of adaptation in Agro‐ecosystems within two villages from Middle

Hills and Tarai, Nepal. Proceeding of Impacts World 2013, International Conference on Climate Change Effects, Potsdam, May 27‐30. Available at: http://www.climate-impacts- 2013.org/files/wism_pandey.pdf

• Schewe, J, Levermann, A & Meinshausen, M 2011, ‘Climate change under a scenario near 1.5 °C of global warming: monsoon intensification, ocean warming and steric sea level

rise’, Earth System Dynamics, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 25-35.

• Schneider, S 2009, ‘Climate change mitigation and adaptation’, presentation gave at the University of New South Wales, Australia on 16th March, viewed 12 March 2012,

<http://www.ausinnovation.org/articles/smart-series-climate-change-adaptation-and-mitigation.html>

• Shrestha, AB, Wake, CP, Dibb, JE & Mayewski, PA 2000, ‘Precipitation fluctuations in the Nepal Himalaya and its vicinity and relationship with some large scale climatological

parameters’, International Journal of Climatology, vol. 20, pp. 317-327.

• Shrestha, AB, Wake, CP, Mayewski, PA & Dibb, JE 1999, ‘Maximum temperature trends in the Himalaya and its vicinity: an analysis based on temperature records from Nepal for

the period 1971 – 94’, Journal of Climate, vol. 12, pp. 2775-2789.

• Sivakumar, MVK 2011, 'Operational Agrometeorological Strategies in Different Regions of the World', in ASe al. (ed.), Challenges and Opportunities in Agrometeorology, Springer

Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 551-571.

• Smit, B, Burton, I, Klein, RJT & Wandel, J 2000, 'An Anatomy of Adaptation to Climate Change and Variability', CLIMATIC CHANGE, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 223-251.
• Subedi, BP 1995, ‘Population and environment in the context of satiable development in Nepal’, Population Monograph of Nepal, GoN/NPC/CBS, pp. 403-437.
• Thomas, DSG, Twyman, C, Osbahr, H & Hewitson, B 2007, 'Adaptation to climate change and variability: farmer responses to intra-seasonal precipitation trends in South Africa',

CLIMATIC CHANGE, vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 301-322.

• van Aalst, M.K., T. Cannon, and I. Burton, 2008: Community level adaptation to climate change: The potential role of participatory community risk assessment. Global Environmental

Change-Human and Policy Dimensions, 18 (1), 165-179.

• Xu, J, Grumbine, RE, Shrestha, A, Eriksson, M, Yang, X, Wang, Y, & Wilkes, A 2009, ‘The melting Himalayas: cascading effects of climate change on water, biodiversity, and

livelihoods’, Conservation Biology, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 520–530, DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01237.x

• Xu, J, Shrestha, A, Vaidya, R, Eriksson, M & Hewitt, K 2007, ‘The melting Himalayas: Regional challenges and local impacts of climate change on Mountain ecosystems and

livelihoods’, ICIMOD Technical Paper , ICIMOD, Kathmandu.

• Yohe, G. and R.S.J. Tol, 2002: Indicators for social and economic coping capacity - moving toward a working definition of adaptive capacity. Global Environ. Chang., 12, 25-40.
• Yufang, S, Jianchu, X, Andy, W, Juliet, L, Qiaohong, L, Yao, F, Xing, M & Grumbine, RE 2012, 'Coping with climate-induced water stresses through time and space in the mountains
• f Southwest China', Regional Environmental Change, vol. 12, no. 4, p. 855.