Reactive Model Development

As suggested by Richmond (1993), sudden changes in the economic, political or environmental situation of individuals may cause them to undertake reactive migration. On this basis, the migration response of subsistence agriculturalists in Burkina Faso is considered to fall close to reactive on the continuum ranging from purely proactive to purely reactive migration. In developing a conceptual model of adaptation to climate change from which an ABM will be constructed, a more reactive approach to adaptation is therefore adopted by this thesis. The first proactive conceptual model presented here (the PACC) was constructed from the basis provided by Grothmann and Patt’s (2005) MPPACC. With insight provided by the proactive conceptual model developed from the MPPACC and a theoretical basis offered by the theory of planned

behaviour (Ajzen, 1991, De Jong, 2000), this thesis presents the conceptual agent-oriented model of reactive adaptation to climate change (RACC) (Figure 3.12).

Figure 3.12: Conceptual model of Reactive Adaptation to Climate Change (RACC).

The RACC model incorporates much of the external structure used in the PACC model with the most significant changes made to the process of individual cognition. As a result of the reactive nature of the model, the individual climate change risk appraisal process of the PACC has also been removed with only a social discourse on events contributing to individual cognition. By basing the RACC model on the theory of planned behaviour the central appraisal components of the PACC are replaced with the core of the theory of planned behaviour: the attitude toward adaptation behaviour; the subjective norm; and the perceived behavioural control. The model is also divided into clear external, social and individual components, as well as an additional household level to aid the process of translation into an ABM. As a result the RACC is intended to identify the external factors that contribute to a social discourse, the impact of this discourse upon the individual cognition behind adaptation, how the intention developed by an individual plays a part in household discussions on adaptation and, ultimately, results in an adaptation strategy which feeds back to affect the original community. While the PACC model did not

explicitly include a household level within its decision-making structure, the RACC incorporates such a level on the basis of the New Economics of Labour Migration (NELM) notion that migration be viewed as a family strategy aimed at both maximising expected earnings and reducing the risk of consumption failure by diversifying income sources across sectors or agro-zones (Lilleør & Van den Broeck, 2011). However, within the RACC, the primary level of decision-making power is left with the individual on the basis that the final decision to stay or go to a specific destination lies with the individual as opposed to the household.

The RACC model presents several advantages over both the PACC model and De Jong’s (2000) general model of decision-making when applied to the context of constructing an ABM of climate change migration. Although both the RACC and De Jong’s model are developed from the theory of planned behaviour, the RACC model presents a more explicit representation of the cognitive process undertaken by an agent. As a result, there is greater potential for translating the model into an ABM. Through consideration of the bounded rationality of humans, the RACC model develops the internal structure of individual cognition upon those aspects of an agent’s environment that they are likely to be able to understand and use. By breaking down the components involved in the cognitive process, the RACC model serves to both more explicitly represent cognition and simplify the process into just three core components. As De Jong (2000) identifies, although not actual reasons in themselves that would drive migration, variables such as age and gender are however important components for consideration. On this basis, the RACC model manages to incorporate such factors into the context within which they influence migration decisions by placing them as underlying determinants within the three core components of the model.

Limiting the components involved in individual cognition within the RACC model both reduces the complexity of the cognitive process and removes the proactive component of the PACC model: the climate change risk appraisal. In this context, the rationality of the individual in perceiving climate change is bounded by the information available to them. Unless an individual is exceptionally well informed about the climate of their locality, it is unlikely that they would have the capacity to undertake an informed individual climate change risk assessment that could lead to proactive adaptation.

Roncoli et al. (2002) suggest that a certain amount of forecast knowledge is shared amongst farmers in Burkina Faso. This knowledge is comprised of indicators that are used throughout the year to predict the coming wet season and include: dry-season temperatures; flower and fruit production of local trees; the direction and intensity of winds; and the behaviour of birds and insects. In the RACC model this information would contribute to the social discourse on climate change risks and adaptation strategies. When undertaking reactive adaptive behaviour, it is proposed that an individual is likely to undertake a process of acceptance or denial of the social discourse on risks and adaptation that is available to them. As such, in the RACC model, the social discourse plays an explicit part in shaping the attitude of individuals toward adaptation behaviours, the expectations of others and their perceived behavioural control.

Incorporating an explicit input from the social discourse on climate change, the individual cognition occurring in the RACC model is broken down into three central and simultaneously occurring components: the formation of attitudes toward different adaptation behaviours; the consideration of the expectations of others; and the perceived behavioural control/capacity to undertake adaptation. The attitude toward adaptation behaviours is formed on the basis of a series of beliefs about those behaviours. In the RACC model these beliefs are characterised by an individual’s previous experience of the behaviour (De Jong, 2000), their age, gender, ethnicity and status, and how these components are affected by the social discourse. The subjective norm component of the individual cognitive process represents the expectations of others and is developed from a series of normative beliefs. These beliefs are characterised by an individual’s age, gender, marital status, and dependants, as well as their household income and status and the societal norms that exist for the community.

As well as involving an individual’s perception about the expectations of others regarding a particular behaviour, the subjective norm component also incorporates the individual’s willingness to please the relevant others (Ajzen, 1991) to which they are connected. The final component of perceived behavioural control relates to the adaptive capacity of the individual and is constructed on the basis of a series of control beliefs. These control beliefs are characterised by components such as an individual’s assets, capital, social and institutional support, existing networks and access to resources. From these beliefs the individual constructs a perception of the ease/difficulty of performing a particular behaviour. As noted by Fishbein and Cappella (2006), perceived behavioural control is the same as Bandura’s (1999) concept of self-efficacy which Grothmann and Patt use as one of the internal mechanisms of the adaptation appraisal component of the MPPACC.

3.8 Conceptual Model Development

The nature of the RACC model as incorporating both individual cognition and the external factors that contribute-to, and result-from, that cognition allows it to form the basic structure that each agent in an ABM can be hypothesised to follow. The RACC model has been developed as a conceptual basis from which the impact of changes in climate upon human migration can be investigated. While it is possible that climate may be an important factor in causing migration within and from Burkina Faso, it cannot by any means be considered to be the only factor contributing to migration in that region. As such, the conceptual model must be both expanded to acknowledge the input of other contributing factors such as employment opportunities and narrowed in scope to focus on just one of the many manifestations of a changing climate. From the RACC model this thesis therefore presents the final development of the conceptual basis from which the AMARC models are developed. The resulting model of Migration Adaptation to Rainfall Change (MARC) is presented as Figure 3.13.

Figure 3.13: Conceptual model of Migration Adaptation to Rainfall Change (MARC).

The MARC model presents a number of developments over the RACC model. The most obvious of these are the narrowing of the climate component of the model to focus on rainfall variability and change and the addition of further structural components that can motivate migration both individually and in combination. Although the key structural component considered by the model is that of rainfall variability and change, the model presents those structural components (greyed) that may also cause migration but are outside the direct scope of this research. Within the individual cognition component of the MARC model a rainfall change impacts appraisal has been included that allows the individual to assess the impacts of the rainfall changes they are witnessing upon their livelihoods. In tandem with the cognitive biases and heuristics, avoidant maladaptation and reliance upon public adaptation components included in MARC, the rainfall change impacts appraisal is included in place of the climate change risk appraisal included in the PACC model seen as Figure 3.9. A further change seen in MARC is the reduction of the number of components included in each of the Theory of Planned Behaviour components included in the individual cognition component of the conceptual model.

An individual’s attitudes toward adaptation behaviours are, in the MARC model, restricted to being affected only by their age, gender and marital status. In the same way, their subjective norm is restricted to simply an assessment of the opinions of their peers, while perceived behavioural control is assessed on the basis of the individual’s assets and experience only.

Although the RACC model included further components that are important considerations, the MARC model is intended for direct translation into the AMARC models. As such, in the same way that bounded rationality limits the information that a modelled individual can use in the analysis of their surroundings, the components that can be incorporated into an ABM are limited to those for which comprehensive data is available and the desired complexity of the model permits.

The final developmental change made for the MARC model when compared to the RACC model is the more transparent inclusion of a social network at both the institutional level in the form of peers and at the household level in the form of family members. Along with an agent’s own personal experience, the agents with whom they are networked contribute to the individual’s destination selection when considering migration as an adaptation strategy in the face of rainfall change. The final outcome of the MARC model is, like the RACC, the development of a behavioural intention towards adaptation options. As a result of household level interactions regarding the planned outcome, a final behavioural action is decided upon and undertaken. If the final action involves migration away from the origin location, information of

this action then feeds back into the institutional level social discourse and plays a part in the later decisions of other agents.