Henny Osbahr

Resilience and vulnerability: complementary or conflicting concepts?

Resilience and vulnerability represent two related yet different approaches to understanding the response of systems and actors to change; to shocks and surprises, as well as slow creeping changes. Their respective origins in ecological and social theory largely explain the continuing differences in approach to social-ecological dimensions of change. However, there are many areas of strong convergence. This paper explores the emerging linkages and complementarities between the concepts of resilience and vulnerability to identify areas of synergy. We do this with regard to theory, methodology, and application. The paper seeks to go beyond just recognizing the complementarities between the two approaches to demonstrate how researchers are actively engaging with each field to coproduce new knowledge, and to suggest promising areas of complementarity that are likely to further research and action in the field.

Developing adaptation and adapting development

Climate change is upon us. The fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change clearly describes the evidence of a changing climate (IPCC 2007a,b). Although scientists disagree about the extent to which these changes will happen, they do agree that there have been and will be changes in average climatic conditions, there will be changes in the frequency and intensity of weather hazards, already variable climates will become less predictable, and there is considerable uncertainty about the distribution and impact of these changes. Actions to reduce the human contribution to the changing climate are slowly happening, but they so far seem too few and too limited to make a significant difference to the climate change scientists predict. What has become clear is that people from all countries, from all income levels, and irrespective of capacity to do so, will have to adapt to these changes. The development and climate research communities have much to learn from each other in helping people with these adaptations.

Evaluating Successful Livelihood Adaptation to Climate Variability and Change in Southern Africa

This paper examines the success of small-scale farming livelihoods in adapting to climate variability and change. We represent adaptation actions as choices within a response space that includes coping but also longer-term adaptation actions, and define success as those actions which promote system resilience, promote legitimate institutional change, and hence generate and sustain collective action. We explore data on social responses from four regions across South Africa and Mozambique facing a variety of climate risks. The analysis suggests that some collective adaptation actions enhance livelihood resilience to climate change and variability but others have negative spillover effects to other scales. Any assessment of successful adaptation is, however, constrained by the scale of analysis in terms of the temporal and spatial boundaries on the system being investigated. In addition, the diversity of mechanisms by which rural communities in southern Africa adapt to risks suggests that external interventions to assist adaptation will need to be sensitive to the location-specific nature of adaptation.

SUPPORTING AGRICULTURAL INNOVATION IN UGANDA TO RESPOND TO CLIMATE RISK: LINKING CLIMATE CHANGE AND VARIABILITY WITH FARMER PERCEPTIONS

This paper investigates farmers’ perceptions of climate change and variability in southwest Uganda and compares them with daily rainfall and temperature measurements from the 1960s to the present, including trends in daily rainfall and temperature, seasonality, changing probability of risk and intensity of rainfall events. Statistical analyses and modelling of rainfall and temperature were performed and contrasted with qualitative data collected through a semi-structured questionnaire. The fieldwork showed that farmers perceived regional climate to have changed in the past 20 years. In particular, farmers felt that temperature had increased and seasonality and variability had changed, with the first rainy season between March and May becoming more variable. Farmers reported detailed accounts of climate characteristics during specific years, with recent droughts in the late 1990s and late 2000s confirming local perceptions that there has been a shift in climate towards more variable conditions that are less favourable to production. There is a clear signal that temperature has been increasing in the climate data and, to a lesser extent, evidence that the reliability of rains in the first season has decreased slightly. However, rainfall measurements do not show a downward trend in rainfall amount, a significant shift in the intensity of rainfall events or in the start and end of the rainy seasons. We explore why there are some differences between farmers’ perceptions and the climate data due to different associations of risk between ideal rainfall by farmers, including the amount and distribution needed for production, meteorological definitions of normal rainfall or the long-term statistical mean and its variation, and the impact of higher temperatures. The paper reflects on the methodological approach and considers the implications for communicating information about risk to users in order to support agricultural innovation.

Responses to climate change: exploring organisational learning across internationally networked organisations for development

Drawing from the organisational learning and governance literature, this paper assesses four internationally networked governmental and non‐governmental organisations in the UK addressing climate change. We analyse how those concerned understand the climate change crisis, what mechanisms are put in place to address information flows, and what evidence there is of learning through sharing information between the organisational headquarters and their regional offices. The most striking finding is the evidence of learning that largely depends on ad‐hoc informal processes and shadow networks.

The implications of rural perceptions of water scarcity on differential adaptation behaviour in Rajasthan, India

Water scarcity is one of the most critical issues facing agriculture today. To understand how people manage the risk of water scarcity and growing pressures of increased climate variability, exploring perceptions of risk and how these perceptions feed into response behaviour and willingness to adapt is critical. This paper revisits existing frameworks that conceptualise perceptions of environmental risk and decision-making, and uses empirical evidence from an in-depth study conducted in Rajasthan, India, to emphasise how individual and collective memories, and experience of past extreme events shape current definitions and future expectations of climatic risks. In doing so, we demonstrate the value of recognising the role of local perceptions of water scarcity (and how they vary between and within households) in constructing social vulnerability. This expanded understanding of risk perception is critical for incentivising individual adaptation and strengthening local adaptation pathways.