95
length for decision-making. The study notes that, whenever workshops and other participatory paths are used, local power dynamics should be taken into account as they shape information flows and exchanges between farmers. This observation was also made by Roncoli (2011), who assessed cultural styles of participation in farmers’ discussions of seasonal climate forecasts in Uganda.
The literature reviewed has shown that socio-economic and institutional factors are major determining factors influencing access and use of information on climate change and variability for adaptation. Other factors such as attitude, experience, effective information dissemination and commitment also influence access to and use of information and knowledge for farm level decision-making.
96
Burkina Faso farmers were poor access to credit, capital, inadequate fertilizers and soil infertility.
Hisali, Birungi and Buyinza (2011), in their study on farmers’ adaptation to climate change in Uganda, discovered that the age of the household head, access to credit, extension facilities and security of land tenure were the elements promoting adaptation to climate change and variability. Nhemachena and Hassan (2007), who studied the micro-level analysis of farmers’ adaptation in South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe, discovered that access to credit, free extension services, farming experience, mixed crop and livestock farms, private property and perception of climate change were important determinants of the choice of farm level adaptation.
Mertz, Halsnas, Olesen and Rasmussen (2009), in their study on adaptation to climate change in developing countries, reason that if farmers have a secure income and a diversified food supply, they are less likely to be poor and to experience hunger as they will be able to respond to stresses by allocating resources differently. They indicated that the state farmers are in before the adverse effects of drought are experienced is what makes people vulnerable.
As a result the condition hampers their capacity to adapt to potential future stress factors. The authors raised a pertinent question, which demands precautions when handling adaptation.
The study shows that adaptation actions in response to a certain stress such as drought can itself exacerbate vulnerability, making farmers dependent on credit schemes to purchase drought-resistant crops and crop varieties. A complete crop loss not only causes hunger but leaves farmers with debts they are unable to repay.
Apata et al. (2009) found that in south western Nigeria, farmers’ decisions to adapt to climate change and variability have been greatly influenced by farming experience and access to education. The study emphasises the critical role of education and information dissemination in enhancing awareness and implementing adaptation measures. Other factors mentioned to promote adaptation to climate change and variability were an increase in temperature, farm size, intercropping of cereal/legume, mulching and zero tillage. The study discovered that factors such as climate change and related frequency of droughts, household size, age and sex all had no significance effect on adaptation.
A different perspective was found in Zimbabwe by Mutekwa (2009), whose research showed that farmers’ adaptive capacity regarding climate change was undermined by several factors.
97
This ranged from limited understanding of the nature and consequences of climate change, farm members’ health status (particularly in relation to HIV/AIDS), unemployment that is supposed to both complement and supplement agricultural incomes, and poor rural infrastructure. This study collected data through interviews, questionnaires, a literature review and desk-based research. However, Deressa et al. (2008) found that adaptation was greatly affected by lack of information to farmers and to financial barriers. Deressa indicated other factors influencing adaptation to be education level, gender, age, wealth, access to extension and credit, climate change and variability, agro-ecological settings and social capital.
Jonge (2010) researched irrigation and farmers’ perception of adaptation to climate change in Riverland, South Australia. The study found that lack of financial incentives, dependency on commodity prices and lack of knowledge on adaptation options and future water availability were the major obstacles in adaptation to climate change and variability. The study highlights providing incentives which will minimise financial risks for farmers at individual level as the best adoption practice to enhance adaptation. Agrawal (2008) reviewed the role of local institutions in adaptation to climate change and noted that local governance and institutions greatly influence adaptation to climate change and variability. It has an effect by mediating between individuals and collective efforts to climate impacts. This shapes adaptation outcomes, structure impacts and vulnerability and acts as a link for delivery and distribution of external resources to support adaptation efforts. The study observed that vulnerability to climate change and variability is socially and institutionally constructed. Thus, for adaptation to be successful, local rural institutions should be promoted this will ensure adaptive capacity to local people who are vulnerable to climate change and adaptation.
The review of local institutions by Agrawal (2008) cautioned that most National Action Plans for Adaptation (NAPA) lacked a link between local institutions, local people and national policies towards adaptation to climate change and variability. The study showed that NAPA had concentrated more on providing technical and infrastructural assistance to people than on ensuring local institutions and local people were in place to accommodate the innovations.
The authors stressed the need to carefully examine local institutions before they are assisted on matters related to adaptation. The analysis will ensure that the resources allocated reach their targeted local populations and not only influential or wealthy people.
98
Ziervogel and Downing’s (2004) in a study conducted in Lesotho found that lack of information dissemination, poor institutional co-ordination and stakeholders’ involvement were among the major barriers to achieving an effective climate change and adaptation plan.
The study found that, despite stakeholders’ expressing their willingness to use forecast information, there were no mechanisms for them to efficiently and effectively receive and use the information disseminated. The study pointed out that information disseminated to farmers was not meeting the needs of users, as most farmers preferred normal forecast information, while the information provided was being dealt with by disaster management and drought warnings.
Roncoli (2006) reviewed ethnographic and participatory approaches to research regarding farmers’ responses to climate predictions. The study identified various barriers related to farmers’ culture which might also contribute obstacles of adaptation to climate change and variability. Roncoli observed that the language used in communicating information on climate might contribute to incredibility and the inaccuracy of information. This is caused by the misinterpretation of concepts, religion, beliefs and past experiences. The study also observed that farmers’ surrounding environment and complexities of farmers in decision- making greatly influenced their ability to use information for adaptation to climate change and variability.
Roncoli (2006) observed that flexibility in ease of use of innovations allowed a farmer to respond rapidly. Examples were labour saving technologies and the availability of credit for climate change and variability. With regards how socio-economic and institutional factors influencing adaptation to climate change and variability, the study found that, in developing countries, seed, labour shortage and inputs shortages, inadequate land and credit, size of the family, politics and inadequate funding from the government weakened extension services.
These services are essential agents in spreading information on climate change and variability to farmers. Attributes such as complexity, information format, communication sources and social system norms have been well elaborated in the Diffusion of Innovations theoretical framework.
In the USA, Coles and Scott’s (2009) found that farmers’ low levels of risk tolerance, poor marketing and uncertainty of seasonal forecast information on climate change and variability production were key factors affecting their decision to use seasonal information on climate
99
change and variability. Farmers instead continued to rely on their past experience and short range forecasts and continued to avoid using seasonal forecast information on climate change and variability in order to tolerate risk. The study revealed that Arizonan farmers’ decisions to adapt took into consideration short-term seasonal forecasts, while also considering economic factors. It was observed that current and projected commodity prices still influenced the decision-making of farmers.
In India, Dhaka, Chayal and Poonia (2010) discovered that adaptation was promoted by experience, extension advice and environment awareness. Other factors which influenced adaptation were the size of the land and ownership, age, innovativeness and exposure to media. Similar results have been found in Tanzania by Lema and Majule (2009) and Ethiopia by Deressa et al. (2008), by Ingram, Roncolli and Kerishen (2002) in Burkina Faso and Mutekwa (2009) in Zimbabwe. In Tanzania, Mongi, Majule and Lyimo’s (2010) study indicated that adaptation was influenced by farmers’ level of education, livelihood activity and age. Slegers (2008) observed that that adaptation measures were influenced by farmers’
ability to respond, access to credit and the attitude of the role-players.
Contrary to many developing countries’ findings on climate change and variability, Coles and Scott (2009) found that farmers’ access to information on climate change and variability was not a principal limiting factor in improving production decisions. Instead, farmers’
experience was being utilised as an adaptive strategy. The study observed that wealthier farmers used Seasonal Climate Forecasts (SCFs) more than poor farmers.