livelihoods approaches and climate change
Post on 21-Aug-2015
695 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Relevance of livelihoods to understanding CC• Climate change will directly affect livelihoods of very high
proportion of people in developing countries• Increased poverty arising from damaged livelihoods will also
make many more vulnerable to climate-related hazards• Using a livelihoods approach helps to identify climate
impacts on livelihoods and through hazards – a key approach
• The next slide is a preliminary attempt to track impacts of climate change on primary and secondary livelihoods. It is simplified in that it covers only climate change “trends” in temperature and precipitation, along with “shocks” (using the SLA terminology). It does not include slow-onset issues (sea-level rise, salinisation, ENSO, glacier melt and disruption of water flows and supplies)
Climate Trends
& Shocks Primary livelihood impacts Secondary Impacts
Precipitation regimesVariabilityExtentIntensity
Crop yields, income & subsistenceCrop range – shifts in agro-economic zones;Land use changes;Land cover changes;Forest changesIrrigation impacts – changes in amount, extent, seasonality, quality… Food crops and nutritionFood and cash crops and food supply & cash incomeImpacts on traded crops, livestock, fodder, grazingHuman needsDrinking waterConflicts
Changes in crop, pasture, income etc have impacts on security, crime, MigrationChanges in government revenue and foreign exchange leads to changes in welfare spending, foreign trade, food importsEffects on debt repaymentsTourism-related livelihoodsNational parks and game reservesCoast and island holiday destinationsEmployment impacts of changes in HEP outputRevenue and balance of payments impacts of HEP output
FloodsDroughts
Temperature regimesVariabilityExtentExtremes of hot and coldHumidity and human rangeDesiccationWildfires & set fires
StormsFrequency;Precipitation;Wind speed extremes;Extend Tropical Cyclone range
Crop yields, income & subsistence;Loss of employment;Loss of home, tools, livestock
Landslides etc.GLOBs (Glacial Lake Outbursts)
Crop yields, income & subsistence;Loss of employment, home, tools, livestock
Sea Level rise:Floods; Saline intrusion
Crop yields income & subsistence;Loss of employment;
Diseases & pestsExtent & range of vectors & infectious agents;Seasonal variability;Intensity;
Human diseases: infectious, parasitic;Crop and post-harvest – pests; infectious viral and bacterial, fungal;Livestock diseases: infectious, parasitic;Forest diseases & pests;
Possible impacts on new diseases;Different sources of food for survival
What’s wrong with the SLA approach?
• It uses the word sustainable…• There is no such thing as “Natural capital” etc –
problems with the conceptualisation of the other capitals too...
• One person’s good social capital is another persons negative capital…
• Increasing assets for some people may reduce assets of others
• Donors can focus on some assets and ignore others that are less able to influence but are more important
• Not enough stress or acknowledgement of power relations – power affects the availability of assets and the movement of assets between groups
• Not adequately included by many when using SLA
• Allocation of production assets (used for livelihoods)– Land; access to water; gender;
• Distribution of income• Welfare provision• Social protection – including for disasters
Power determines access to assets and income
What does development mean?• The “space” in which we can engage in people-centred
development is constrained by power• Trying to improve human welfare that is not being achieved
through the workings of “normality”• It is working against the operation of market forces, many
governments and private power• Development is trying to do something where existing
structures of power:– Don’t have the capacity (where aid may help?)– Don’t know how to do it (SLA approaches may help?)– Not interested (little respect for rights of poor)– Against their interests (will lose out if there is change)
• Next slide: agencies that are really interested in people-centred development are not powerful in the global arena
Hierarchies of influence…
2006 US$ millions
GNP of USA 13,000,000
Foreign Direct Investment 1,200,000
Official Development Assistance 104,421
EU Common Agricultural Policy farm subsidies
53,000
USA spending on pets 34,000
Oxfam International 640
Banking and credit crises.. ?????
US costs of wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, “on terror”, per annum
80,000
What can a revised (S)LA approach be use for?
• Disaster risk reduction– Disasters are fundamental factor in destroying assets
AND transferring assets from poor to rich
• Adaptation to climate change– Adaptation needs to happen for
• Trends in temperature, precipitation– Associated health risks to people, crops, livestock
• Shocks – in existing and new locations, increased frequency and/ or intensity
• Slow-onset and lasting changes – SLR, glaciers and water supply, ENSO
• Uncertainty, dealing with the unexpected
• All these require strengthened and diversified livelihoods
At Risk “Access model”See Chapter 3 in
At Risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and
disasters
Chapters 1-3 free to download at:http://www.unisdr.org/eng/library/Literature/7235.pdf
Basically, a household political ecology model. Next slide:Before (left side) and After (right side) hazard impact
Based on the interaction of the hazard environment with the vulnerability of people and livelihood. This can be adapted for a climate change analysis of livelihoods
top related