Adaptation to climatechange has many stumbling blocks. During the survey, farmers mentioned a number of barriers to adaptation emanating from different social, eco- nomic and institutional situations (Figure 7). The most important factor mentioned as barrier to adaptation by the surveyed farmers is lack of information (which accounts 22.5%) about climatechange and adaptation strategies. This is attributed to various fac- tors including lack of institutional support mechanisms and failure to mainstream the issue of climatechange in the public extension system of the country. Lack of informa- tion was also identified as the main barrier to adaptation by a survey in the Nile Basin of Ethiopia (Deressa et al. 2009). Lack of farm inputs including seed (20.7 percent), chemical fertilizer (3.6 percent) and oxen (8.1%) are mentioned by the respondents as the second most important impediments. Out of the three farm inputs mentioned by the framers, the problem emerging from lack of seed (20.7 percent) outweighs the other two while the problem from lack of drought oxen rests as the second most important barrier. According to 17.1 percent of the sampled respondents, shortage of land plays a key role in diminishing their potential to adapt to climatechange. An independent sample t-test showed that these respondents have significantly (p < 0.05) lower average land size compared to the rest of the respondents who did not mention shortage of land as a major barrier. The surveyed farmers also mentioned lack of money (14.4 per- cent) as another important climatechangeadaptation barrier. This result further Table 3 Marginal effects from the multinomial logit model
Objectives of actors and action processes focus on goals of adaptation. Action is interconnected with the scale and decision-making unit. Understanding the scale and unit of adaptation decision-making reveals the diverging goals of adaptation to climatechange. These goals will differ within a sector, a society, between nations and, most intractably, between different generations. However, the goals of adaptation are not clearly stated explicitly. For some agents adaptation concerns conservation of status quo, while for others the current situation is undesirable and hence adaptation is about progress. The goal of adaptation will likely depend on who or what is adapting. Developed institutions and wealthier societies or individuals may seek to maintain their current state or standard of living through adaptation, whilst developing countries may be aiming to continue developing and enhance the standard of living of their citizens. For those on the margins of society, the immediate priority will be to secure their livelihoods or protect their assets from climatechange effects and other risks. In ecosystems, successful adaptation is demonstrated by survival of the species in a changing environment, but not necessarily the survival of an individual. These divergent goals for adaptation emerge from different attitudes to risk to disposition, and to the adaptive capacity of future generations. There is a variation due to optimistic or pessimistic views of individuals, or community, or society or nation.
being more focused on adaptation processes. However, other recently completed research projects aimed at identifying adaptation in practice have also found that processes are more easily identified than actual outcomes, with some authors again concluding that it may be a result of adaptation being a policy very much in its infancy (Tompkins et al., 2005). That said, interviewees have documented several examples of practical measures, including a limited analysis of costs and benefits. These include the impacts of climatechange on historic buildings, 4 options for making golf courses more sustainable (different species of grass, water resource management, etc.) and the use of green roofs. Interestingly, this final option was not originally introduced to combat climatechange even although it can be regarded as an innovative adaptation option for the urban environment – green roofs not only retain rainfall hence helping to slow surface run-off rate but can also cool the microclimate, absorb dust and pollution, and contribute to urban biodiversity. Taking Stuttgart as an example, the introduction of green roofs in the 1980s was as much to do with “environmental concerns of the time, such as acid rain” as well as being attributed to the German psyche i.e. “if you take from nature you have to give something back”. The high take-up of green roofs in Stuttgart can substantially be attributed to the comprehensive local policy regime which includes a combination of development control, subsidies and permeability taxes (an innovative portfolio of instruments with the potential for replicability elsewhere).
demonstrate how disease control in arable crops can make a contribution to both climatechange mitigation and sustainable arable crop production. Climatechange will affect both growth of agricultural crops and diseases that attack them but there has been little work to study its combined effects on crop-disease interactions to guide strategies for adaptation to climatechange. For example, it may take 10-15 years to develop a new fungicide and it is important to identify future target diseases now. As examples, the impact of climatechange on UK epidemics of phoma stem canker and light leaf spot on winter oilseed rape and fusarium ear blight on winter wheat is investigated by combining weather-based disease models, crop growth models and simulated weather for different climatechange scenarios. It is predicted that climatechange will increase the risk of oilseed rape phoma stem canker and wheat fusarium ear blight epidemics but decrease the risk of light leaf spot epidemics by the 2050s. Such predictions illustrate unexpected, contrasting impacts of climatechange on complex plant-disease interactions in agricultural and natural ecosystems. They can provide guidance for government and industry planning for adaptation to effects of climatechange on crops to ensure future food security.
The term adaptation means any adjustment, whether passive, reactive or anticipatory, that is proposed as a means for ameliorating the anticipated adverse consequences associated with climatechange (Sowunmi and Kintola, 2009). Climatechangeadaptation approach is a response to climatechange that seeks to reduce the vulnerability of social and biological systems to relatively sudden change and thus offset the effects of climatechange (Henfrey, 2018). Adaptation to climate is the process through which people reduce the adverse effects of climate variability on their agricultural activities, health and well-being and to take advantage of the opportunities that their climatic environment provides (Bancy, 2000). There are two main types of approaches of adaptation which are autonomous and planned adaptations. The autonomous adaptation approaches are the reaction of a farmer to changing precipitation patterns, in that the farmer changes crop or planting/sowing dates. Autonomous adaptation refers to the action taken by farmer in response to changing conditions in their immediate environment, irrespective of any policy-base decisions. The planned adaptation approaches or measures are conscious policy, options or strategies, frequently multi-sectoral in nature that is involving various stakeholders (government, private sectors etc.) to jointly achieve a policy outcome, aimed at facilitating specific adaptation, etc. deliberate crop selection and distribution strategies across different agro-climatic zones and substitution of new crops for old ones. Planned adaptation describes the result of policy base-decisions. Based on an awareness that conditions have changed or are about to change and that some type of action is required to achieve, maintain, or return to a desired state. Example building sea walls in anticipation of a rise in sea level. Planned adaptation is a long-term strategy as a major structural changes to overcome adversity of the impacts of climatechange (Reilly, 1999).
concentrations of proteins and most essential nutrients such as zinc and iron. It is fortunate that there are potential adaptation options to reconfigure existing agricultural systems and offset negative impacts of climatechange. Observations have demonstrated that trends in global carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions, atmospheric CO 2 concentrations, sea-level rise and
We thank the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP) for support. We thank L. Ziska from USDA, A. Bloom from UC Davis, B. Kimball from USDA and D. Lobell from Stanford University for helpful comments on an earlier draft of our manuscript. We thank R. Richards from CSIRO Australia for discus- sions on potential wheat traits. We acknowledge the contribution of J. Johnson, University of Georgia, C. Griffey, Virginia Tech, S. Har- rison, Louisiana State University, D. Van Sanford, University of Ken- tucky, R. Sutton, Texas A&M, D. West, University of Tennessee for providing different information on AGS2000, USG3120, VA12W ‐ 72, and GA06493 ‐ 13LE6. S.A., B.K., and B.L received support from the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) through the Glo- bal Futures and Strategic Foresight project, the CGIAR Research Pro- gram on ClimateChange, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) and the CGIAR Research Program on Wheat. A.M. received support from the EU Marie Curie FP7 COFUND People Programme, through an AgreenSkills fellowship under grant agreement no. PCOFUND ‐ GA ‐ 2010 ‐ 267196. PM, A.M., D.R., and D.W. acknowledge support from the FACCE JPI MACSUR project (031A103B) through the metapro- gram Adaptation of Agriculture and Forests to ClimateChange (AAFCC) of the French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA). L.X. and Y.Z. were supported by the National High ‐ Tech Research and Development Program of China (2013AA100404), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31271616), the National Research Foundation for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China (20120097110042), and the Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD). F.T. and Z.Z. were supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41571088, 41571493 and 31561143003). R.R. received support from the German Ministry for Research and Education (BMBF) through project SPACES ‐ LLL
This article reveals how several assemblages can be identified in urban climatechangeadaptation. This means that multiple under- standings of future climate issues and how to respond to these exist side by side. This implies that multiple understandings of the role of homeowners exist in this urban context. Some assemblag- es construct a reality where homeowners play an important role through installation of SUDS in and around their homes; others es- tablish the public system as being able to solve the problems more efficiently. At the moment the development in Copenhagen moves towards a perception of cloudbursts as the largest future climate challenges. This means that economy and policy resources are lead towards large connected and collective cloudburst managing solu- tions. In this process homeowners are left with a very reduced role. It is in other words important in an assemblage analysis not only to acknowledge the diversity of actors, knowledges and imagined futures but also the processes through which some assemblages may become dominant. From this realization we argue in favour of not letting one construct of problems and solutions in relation to climatechangeadaptation push away the others all together, as the present multiplicity of urban green assemblages has the po- tential to create a more resilient city with the capacity to respond to a broader scope of climatechange and environmental issues. Furthermore, in the move towards reducing the role of private homeowners, the potential benefits of involving urban citizens in
National practices vis-à-vis local climatechange policy, however, show differences in the uptake between adapta- tion and mitigation strategies. This study focuses on the Netherlands, a country which was for a long time con- sidered a front-runner in (and exporter of ) environmen- tal policy, especially in the 1990s . The country's climatechange policy history goes back to the late 1980s when the Dutch government developed its first climatechange policy actions based on the attention drawn to the climatechange issue in the 1987 Brundtland report. The policies included programs for local governments to formulate and implement their own climatechange ac- tion plans. Implementation seemed to proceed success- fully: in 2010, a national survey found that local climate policies had been adopted by the vast majority of local governments throughout the country. However, this is a false impression, as revealed by further insights into the adaptation-mitigation distribution. Whereas climatechange mitigation policies have indeed been widely adopted , the same cannot be said for the adoption of adaptation strategies, which varies strongly across municipalities in the country and is on average rather low . This is surprising for a highly flood-prone country, with plenty of experience with extreme weather events and their horrendous impacts, like the 1953 North Sea flood, which killed hundreds of citizens.
of the respondents perceived and adapted to climatechange. There were different adaptation options viz. sorjan method, crop rotation, saline tolerant varieties, crop diversification, mini pond, adjusting planting time, to name a few introduced for agricultural activities and also enhancing agricultural production and improving soil health. In the study area, problems farmers were ranked using Problem Confrontation Index (PCI), which showed that “lack of available water” (PCI-291) ranked 1 st “shortage of cultivable land” (PCI-287) 2 nd , and “unpredicted weather” (PCI-284) 3 rd . The adaptation options were measured by Adaptation Strategy Index (ASI) method, which ranked “sorjan method” (ASI-287) first, “Crop rotation”(ASI-242) 2 nd , and “saline tolerant varieties” (ASI- 232) 3 rd , the tree being attractive adaptation options in the study area. About 86% of the respondents followed Boro rice-Vegetables-T. aman cropping pattern. There were some barriers to adaptation measures like lack of irrigation facilities (94% of respondents), lack of knowledge (90%) and poor soils (90%) on the top. For water harvesting adaptation options farmers benefited from diverse assistance in digging mini-pond in crop field, water reserve in narrow canal in crop field. However, due to the introduction of innovated adaptation techniques the said threats have been mitigated to a greater extent. And, this has become possible only for the coordinated support from the government, development partners (NGOs, WB, FAO) and local people.
A strong institutional framework is central to the mainstreaming and co-ordination of climatechangeadaptation policy responses across government departments, critical infrastructure providers and a range of stakeholders. The draft ClimateChange Bill is attempting to put in place such a structure through its proposed Expert Advisory Body and sub-committees. It is vital that these bodies have the structures to properly implement policies and measures on a cross-sectoral and cross-departmental level and in a manner which adequately takes into account business risks and opportunities and national competitiveness concerns. To provide confidence and visibility for the enterprise sector, at least one member of the Advisory Body should possess strong business and economic competitiveness expertise.
reactive responses to current climate impacts not cov- ered in our survey. They could be supported with tax incentives and technical solutions and government agen- cies should work with communities to address their needs. From the other predictors only gender was asso- ciated with either autonomous adaptation action, with women appearing to be less adaptive. The majority of study participants had adapted to extreme weather con- ditions by cooling off in air conditioned places, reducing physical exertion or using a fan. These autonomous adaptation actions are reactive in nature, more so than proactive and thus does not capture anticipatory (proac- tive or planned) adaptive intentions. The survey instru- ment was initially designed to capture anticipatory adaptation as well by asking respondents if they adapted their home to climatechange. For example: have you installed an A/C, insulation, insect screens, eliminated mosquitoes breeding sites, etc. However, due to low fre- quency responses these questions were eliminated from the analysis; thus the results apply to autonomous adap- tation only and not to long-term impacts. Other studies that did not specifically examine the psychological con- structs of the HBM have shown that adaptive behaviour to climatechange may be more strongly linked to fac- tors such as, environmental attitudes, political affiliation and attitudes towards scientists [39-41]. The relative dif- ferences in predictors of our mitigation and adaptation outcomes might in part be due to the wording of the survey questions. Nevertheless, health as a communica- tion frame can be used to complement other strategies to augment the public response .
Support to smallholders to assist them in adapting to climatechange needs to be relevant and informed by improved understanding of the local options for and barriers to adaptation. This study employed a mixed methods research approach to systematically examine elements of adaptation in the pastoral/agropastoral systems of Borana in south Ethiopia, a region vulnerable to the vagaries of climate. In particular, a combination of the Pressure-State- Response (PSR) and Pelling’s typological frameworks was used to analyse adaptation to climatic stimuli and its effects. We conducted farm household surveys, focus group discussions and expert consultations in the region in 2012. Results of the study showed that pastoralists/agropastoralists and their communities adopted various adaptive measures primarily through adjusting farming practices and diversifying into non-pastoral livelihoods. Farm households and communities mostly relied on indigenous methods of adaptation for which local knowledge and resources including indigenous institutions played a pivotal role. Moreover, the smallholders pursued resilience measures (mainly intended to avoid major system disruptions) and transitional adaptation (resulting in incremental changes) rather than transformational approaches that ensure long-term adaptation goals. Shortage of financial resources, inadequate technical assistance and limited policy support were found to be major barriers limiting and shaping adaptive capacity. Our overall assessment is that adaptive capacity of Borana pastoral/agropastoral systems is low and vulnerability remains high. Therefore, adaptation pathways that promote long-term adaptation, address key barriers and build on local resources are urgently required to reduce vulnerability and improve livelihoods in these fragile agricultural systems.
Fiji has a high level of exposure to natural disasters, being positioned in both the ‘Ring of Fire’, in which most of the world’s most devastating earthquakes, volcanic activities and tsunamis occur, and the Pacific cyclone belt. The United Nations University produced a World Risk Index, which in 2011 ranked Fiji 19th out of 173 countries for risk of natural disasters. This index combines the components of exposure to natural hazards such as storms, floods, earthquakes, droughts and sea level rise; susceptibility in terms of the likelihood of suffering harm through public infrastructure, nutrition and general economic conditions; capacities arising from governance, medical services, social and economic security to reduce negative consequences; and capacities for long-term adaptation to future events and climatechange (United Nations University Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU), 2011). An average of 10% of the Fijian population is directly affected by disasters each year, and in the 37 years to 2009, there were 124 natural disasters. Half of these were tropical cyclones, one-third floods, and 8% earthquakes. Tropical Cyclone Bebe in 1972 left more than 20% of the population of Fiji homeless (Lal et al., 2009).
Agriculture is one of the main economic activities in the world, with its significance magnified es- pecially among the world’s poor. This paper seeks to explore how climatechange would impact on the agricultural sector and consequently food security. Agricultural activities in most developing countries entirely depend on rainfall patterns, on the contrary, climatechange has emerging as an environmental challenge with adverse impacts expected on food security. This is mainly through incidences of changes in water availability, floods and drought. For example, changes in tempera- ture and precipitation including drought affects crop and livestock yield, hydrologic balances, in- put supplies and other components of agricultural systems. Equally important, environmental de- gradation is one of the drivers of climatechange that further undermines sustainability of agri- culture. Climatechange is real and already taking place. According to the inter-governmental pan- el on climatechange (IPCC), warming temperatures are projected to cause more frequent and more intense extreme weather events such as heavy rain storms, flooding and tropical storms and in some cases drought in many parts of the country. Agriculture is one of the most climate sensi- tive sectors, with projections that 800 million people are currently food insecure. Additionally, it has the potential to undermine advances in poverty reduction and sustainable development. Thus, fundamental changes in agricultural systems are needed because climatechange poses new and serious challenges for farmers hence food insecurity. Most important, agricultural adaptation and mitigation pathways need to be developed so as to avoid further threat on food security.
Under the EU's 7th Framework Program for Research / FP7 (2007-2013) climatechange remains a key priority including research on climatechangeadaptation. A number of projects funded under FP 7 will contribute to the improvement of the assessment framework by improvement of the understanding of the climate system and its processes, the quantification of climatechange impacts on human and natural systems (including extreme events), and to the identification and assessment of mitigation and adaptation options including their costs. These research projects also serve as a knowledge basis for the development and support of international climate policies as well as policies on e.g. disaster reduction (including hydrometeorological hazards). Most relevant FP7 (and still ongoing FP6) projects: ClimateCost: Full costs of inaction and adaptation of climatechange; CLIMSAVE: Climatechange integrated assessment methodology for cross-sectoral adaptation and vulnerability; RESPONSES: European responses to climatechange: deep emission reductions and mainstreaming of mitigation and adaptation; MEDIATION: Methodology for effective decision-making on impacts and adaptation; CCTAME: Climatechange, Terrestrial adaptation and mitigation; ClimateWater: Bridging the gap between adaptation strategies of climatechange impacts and European water policies; ACQWA: Assessing climatic change and impacts on the quality and quantity of water; IMPRINTS: Improving preparedness and risk management for flash floods and debris flow events; CLIWASEC: Cluster - Climate-Water-Security; CIRCE: ClimateChange and Impact Research: the Mediterranean Environment; WATCH: Water and Global Change ANIMALCHANGE An integration of mitigation and adaptation options for sustainable livestock production under climatechange
Research suggests that health is the human dimension that will suffer most the consequences of climatechange. The World Health Organization (WHO 2009) identified health hazards emanating from climatechange as death from thermal extremes and weather disasters, vector-borne diseases, higher incidence of food-related and waterborne infections, photochemical air pollutants and conflicts driven from depleted natural resources. Earlier, the IPCC (2007) had summed that food, water, industry and settlements will be affected by climatechange, consequently worsening the health status of millions of people by increasing deaths, disease and injury because of heatwaves, floods, storms, fires and droughts. The International Federation of the Red Cross (IFRC) (2014) called for more evidence on localised partial perceptions and responses to climatechange- induced hazards. It further commented that disaster prevention encounters difficulties where local knowledge, culture and beliefs are unexplored. Similarly, Lotz-Sisitka and Urguhart (2014) reiterated the need for specific and localised knowledge and capacity needs on climatechange. Most studies at local levels have concentrated on establishing the impact of climatechange, adaptation and mitigation efforts as well as response to climatechange impacts, thereby limiting evidence on community understanding of climatechange-induced health hazards and their coping strategies (Munaku & Percyslage 2010). This is so despite the signalised importance of community knowledge regarding climatechange (Maibach, Nisbet & Weathers 2011).
doomed to extinction while whole island nations threatened by inundation. Regrettably, even our best efforts are unlikely to stabilize temperatures at anything less than 2 o c above preindustrial temperatures warming that will require substantial adaptation (World Bank, 2010). In particular, sub-Saharan Africa suffered from natural fragility (two-thirds of its surface area is desert or dry land) and high exposure to droughts and floods; which are forecast to increase with further climatechange. Notably, the region’s economies are highly dependent on natural resources while biomass provides eighty percent of the domestic primary energy supply. Therefore, inadequate infrastructure could hamper adaptation efforts with limited water storage despite abundant resources. Similarly, water is the major vulnerability in North-Africa (word’s driest region) where per capita water availability is predicted to halve by 2050 even without the effects of climatechange. Here, the increased water scarcity combined with greater variability will threaten agriculture; and vulnerability is compounded by a heavy concentration of population as well as economic activity in flood-prone coastal zones.