The pastoral and agropastoral systems of the Borana in southern Ethiopia are highly vulnerable to climate change and its impacts. Assistance to enable these smallholders to successfully adapt to future climate change in locally relevant ways can be usefully informed by the analysis and better understanding of past and ongoing adaptation. We conducted farm household surveys, focus group discussions, expert consultations and secondary data collation in 2012 in the Borana. The study employed a combination of Pressure-State-Response (PSR) framework to analyse how climate change put pressure on pastoral and agropastoral farming systems and livelihoods, and Pelling’s (2011) typological framework to analyse local adaptation responses. Results showed that pastoral and agropastoral households, their communities and institutions adopted a wide range of adaptation options primarily through adjusting their farming practices and diversifying into non-pastoral livelihoods. The smallholders primarily pursued a resilience approach to adaptation with short term goals intended to avoid system disruptions instead of long-term transformational approaches that significantly address the root causes of vulnerability. A range of barriers constrained local adaptive capacity and shaped routes for adaptation. Adaptation pathways that address critical barriers to adapt, integrate indigenous institutions into adaptation and link adaptation with local development process are necessary to bring long-term and non-marginal, major changes that reduce vulnerability and ensure co-benefit of improving livelihoods.
Agriculture in Ethiopia is an important economic sector upon which the majority of Ethiopians depend for food, feed and income. The sector is dominated by smallholder agriculture responsible for 80% of the employment, 90% of the total agricultural output and 95% of the total area under agricultural land use [
Perception of climate change and its associated impact is an important first step to adaptation [
Adaptations can be planned or unplanned, local or regional and involve adjustments through a variety of processes, practices and structures to actual or anticipated changes in climate [
Smallholder agriculture in pastoral and agropastoral production systems exhibit distinct characteristics, and presents unique opportunities and challenges for agricultural research and development as well as adaptation. The dryland ecosystems these agricultural systems inhabit offer two key features―a highly variable climate, and increasingly limited natural resources to which smallholders for generations have strived to adapt [
Pastoralism is highly valued livelihood style among traditional communities in drylands of Africa. The preference could be attributed to the ability of pastoralism to exploit prevailing ecological conditions and suitability to the socio-cultural structures of the society. Nevertheless internal and external pressures from both climate and non-climate factors are forcing pastoralist communities to transition into different livelihood systems. For example, Afar pastoralists in northern Ethiopia have moved into cultivation and non-pastoral livelihoods without detaching from the pastoral way of life [
There is a growing global interest in the role of rain-fed smallholder agriculture in ensuring food security, reduced poverty and rural development in Africa in the face of environmental changes. Climate change manifesting itself in terms of below average extremely low seasonal rainfalls leading to severe droughts and high temperature are key features. These changes raise the demand for more livestock water to substitute for loss due to dehydration and put increased evaporative demand on plants. There is deep concern about how this sector is positioned to withstand increasingly frequent and intense perturbations in the natural climate coupled with other external pressures from demographic changes (e.g. increased populations) and socio-economic changes associated with globalisation (e.g. weakening collective NRM regimes because of growing individualism) [
In Ethiopia, the agriculture sector enjoys strong political will and policy support to enhance its performance, address food insecurity, reduce vulnerability and adapt to climate change and its impacts. However, agricultural adaptation efforts often fail to significantly reduce vulnerability partly because of poor understanding of the local adaptive environment particularly with respect to available options and major barriers to adapt. Adaptation rather should be a continuous, progressive and iterative process [
The Conceptual Framework
The study employs a combined use of the Pressure-State-Response (PSR) model and Pelling’s typological framework to enhance our understanding of how climatic stresses put pressure on agriculture-dependent livelihoods and how these stresses are responded to in the middle of complex human-nature interactions (
In relation to the PSR framework, pressure can be any climatic or non-climatic factor that brings economic, social or environmental stress, harm or distress that alters the state of an adaptation unit [
The study also employed Pelling’s [
Location
The study area, Borana pastoral and agropastoral systems, is part of the Borana administrative zone situated in Oromiya Regional State, southern Ethiopia (
Climate
The study area exhibits four seasons crucial to the rainfed agriculture which shaped the transhumant lifestyle of the rural community. These are Bona the long dry spell from December to February, Gana the long rainy period from March to May, Adolessa the short dry spell from June to August and Hagaya the short rainy period from September to November. Rainfall has bimodal pattern of
distribution with increasing unpredictability which necessitates adaptation and risk management. With a total average of about 700 mm, the study area receives an average annual rainfall ranging from 350 mm around Wachile in Arero district to about 1100 mm in Moyale town in Moyale district on the border with neighbouring Kenya. The area on average gets 86 rainy days throughout the year distributed through the two rainy seasons.
Though long term local climate data are not available to accurately examine potential changes in climate, existing limited data show that the study area exhibits high level of climate variability which is typical feature of dryland climates. The climate in the study is largely variable in terms of rainfall and temperature (
Air temperature in the study area has much less inter-seasonal and inter-annual variation as compared to rainfall which is similar phenomena to most of the sub-Saharan Africa [
Farming systems
Farming systems of the Boran lowlands are complex and heterogeneous pre-dominantly characterized by semi-arid pastoral and agro-pastoral systems. Small-scale extensive livestock production, particularly transhumant pastoralism is the pillar of the economy, and the main source of food and income for rural households [
The characterization of Boran pastoralists as 'livestock producers’ is arguable because of poor profit and market-orientation of the traditional agriculture. Rather they are classified as 'livestock keepers' because livestock production is
seen more as a way of life than a western world style profit oriented agribusiness. Poor access to agricultural input and output market is an important development challenge the rural community face. In the face of climate driven pervasive socio-economic and ecological changes, expanding drought-tolerant maize cultivation, increasingly popular camel and goat husbandry, and shrinking livestock holding per household characterize the dynamics in the farming system [
The focus group discussion showed that recurrent drought and resource-based conflicts are the two most critical climate-induced shocks and stressors smallholders face in the study area. Livestock and crop sales make the two most important livelihood activities (
The study employed farm household surveys, focus group discussions, expert consultations and secondary data collation to obtain both quantitative and qualitative data. The farm household survey employed a multi-stage sampling technique involving selection of five districts and twenty pastoral/agropastoral associations. Five districts were purposely selected from the ten districts of the Borana lowlands which represent diverse agro-climates and heterogeneous farming systems shaping adaptive responses. Within each district farm households were stratified into pastoral and agropastoral production systems (strata) depending on the predominant production system leading to stratification into pastoral (livestock production) and agropastoral (crop and livestock production) associations or villages. The strata are aligned with pastoral/agropastoral associations which are the lowest administrative units after district.
From each production system or association (stratum), two associations were randomly selected whereby each stratum was again represented by an equal size
Shocks (Stressors) | Rank | Livelihood activities |
---|---|---|
Recurrent drought | 1 | Livestock sell |
Resource-based conflict | 2 | Crop sales |
Bush encroachment | 3 | Off-farm employment |
Livestock disease | 4 | Livestock products |
Rangeland degradation | 5 | Petty trade |
of 24 randomly selected farm households. The sampling yielded a total sample size of 480 sampling units with households represented by their respective heads (all male due to local tradition) in the interview. The household interview was held using a semi-structured questionnaire pretested before the formal interview. The survey data, comprising farm and household attributes, was fed into, managed and analysed using an SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Scientists) program [
In addition to the household survey, a total of twenty focus group discussions were held representing equally ten pastoral and agropastoral production systems. In each of these focus groups, 6 to 10 farming community members with significant farming experience in the area were randomly selected to take part in the open discussion using a checklist. The focus groups reviewed and reflected on major farming system constraints, adaptation options and barriers identified in the farm household survey. The data obtained through focus group discussions on insights and experiences about adaptation options and their characteristics, and barriers were then summarized and described qualitatively to complement the quantitative data obtained from household interviews. In addition, informal expert consultations and discussions were made at zonal and district levels of agricultural development offices to get broader picture of agricultural adaptation in the study area. The data from consultations and supplement the data obtained from household survey and focus group discussions.
In this study, we triangulate between qualitative and quantitative data obtained from different social research data collection methods―individual and household interviews, focus group discussions and expert consultations. Triangulating information from different data collection methods allows for the validation and explanation of options and barriers to adapt, and development of a typology of adaptation responses. The classification assumes that, in the extreme, these strategies are different in terms of their adaptation vision or goal, timing of adaptation in relation to a risk to manifest itself into a hazard (phasing), degree of collaboration among actors and its immediate impact on the adaptation unit. The task was developed based on a framework of adaptation typology by Pelling [
The study has shown that smallholders in the Borana farming systems adopted a wide range of adaptation measures and tried to remain flexible to overcome what they perceived as changing climatic conditions. Supplementary feeding, off-farm employment and herd mobility to remote areas are the three most commonly used adaptive strategies smallholders and their communities pursued as responses to climate change (
below average extreme lows, its uneven seasonal distribution and increased temperature are key features of perceived climate change they responded to. Particularly, increasingly frequent as well as intense drought conditions continue resulting in scarcity of pasture and water resources challenging the sustainability of traditional pastoralism. Broadly, speaking, amid constraining barriers, smallholders responded to climate change mainly through adjustment of farming practices and shifting into non-pastoral livelihoods.
While adaptation options stated as most commonly used measures were closely similar across pastoral and agropastoral systems, there are few differences. More households are engaged in cultivation of food crops (e.g. maize and sorghum) and off-farm employment (e.g. petty trade) in predominantly agropastoral systems as compared to pastoral ones (
Adaptation options taken up were mostly reactive rather than proactive (
Characteristics | Production system | Overall mean | |
---|---|---|---|
Pastoral | Agropastoral | ||
Age of household head (years) | 48.3 | 51.5 | 49.9 |
Household size (number) | 7.6 | 7.3 | 7.4 |
Farming experience (years) | 21.6 | 24.1 | 22.8 |
Education level (school years) | 1.2 | 1.0 | 1.1 |
Livestock holding (TLU*) | 9.8 | 6.3 | 8.1 |
Private farm size (ha) | 0.9 | 1.9 | 1.5 |
Annual farm income ($US) | 500.4 | 423.4 | 461.9 |
Annual non-farm income ($US) | 229.5 | 209.8 | 219.7 |
Perception of climate change (%) | 98.0 | 96.0 | 97.0 |
*TLU = Tropical Livestock Unit.
Adaptation option | Adaptation vision | Phasing | *Degree of collaboration | Function | Origin or Source |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Livestock supplementary feeding | Resilience | Proactive/Reactive | Individual | Pools risk across space/time | Indigenous/Introduced |
Herd mobility to remote areas | Resilience | Proactive/Reactive | Individual/Collective | Pools risks across space/time | Indigenous |
Herd diversification | Transitional | Proactive | Individual | Spreads risk across animal groups | Introduced/Indigenous |
Livestock sell out (destocking) | Resilience/ Transitional | Reactive | Individual | Transfers risk across food chains | Indigenous/Introduced |
Cultivation of crops | Transitional | Proactive | Individual | Spreads risk across farm enterprises | Indigenous |
Water point maintenance and development | Resilience/ Transitional | Proactive/ Reactive | Collective | Pools risk across space/time | Indigenous/Introduced |
Get support from social safety-net | Resilience | Reactive | Collective | Pools risk across households | Indigenous |
Take part in Productive Safety Net Program | Resilience | Reactive | Individual/ Collective | Pools risk across livelihood options | Introduced |
Off-farm employment | Resilience | Reactive | Individual | Spreads risk across livelihood options | Indigenous |
Receive food aid from NGOs or government | Resilience | Reactive | Individual/ Collective | Reduces risk across households | Introduced |
*Individual refers to Individual farm households whereas Collective refers to group of households or communities.
of food crops (mainly maize and sorghum) envisage proactive adaptation to anticipated climate change as they get implemented before the next hazard manifests itself.
We also found that locally adopted options featured two important features: 1) inherently resilience or transitional modes of adaptation, and 2) reliance on indigenous knowledge and local resources (
In view of current level of vulnerability, it appears that a predominantly resilience approach to adaptation involves low degree of intervention and does little to adequately reduce vulnerability to current and anticipated climate change and ensure co-benefit of improving rural livelihoods. Further to that, it possibly undermines long term adaptation suggesting temporal trade-off with short term resilience approaches, and increases the risk of maladaptation as these resilience measures are often autonomous and ad hoc. The strong preference for resilience can be partly attributed to the weak adaptive capacity of households and communities subject to recurrent climate stresses that eroded resources available for future adaptation. Studies noted that the high costs and risks (economic, social, cultural, etc.) associated with transformative actions tend to make it difficult for resource-poor farmers to pursue transformational adaptation [
On the other hand, few adaptation options such as cultivation of moisture-stress tolerant food crops (such as maize and sorghum) and herd diversification with addition of drought-tolerant species (such as goats and camels), adopted in turn would lead to transitional goals resulting in incremental changes through minimal reconfiguration of the system. Such measures go beyond an attempt to maintain functional persistence, and involve moderate reform, restructuring of activities and incumbent livelihood systems [
Moving into diversified livelihood systems however has become a necessity and not a free choice to moderate harm from both climatic and non-climatic stresses. Diversification of livelihood activities includes the shift into non-farm employment areas such as traditional mining and charcoal production. Though such practices are temporary measures taken to overcome critical drought impacts such as food insecurity, diversification of livelihoods should be an adaptation strategy that needs to be explored further as a long term response to anticipated climate-induced risk. It is difficult to accurately decouple the effects of climate change and non-climatic factors (e.g. population pressure) in the Borana but the effects of climatic stresses such as droughts is perceived to be far more significant for participants in triggering adaptive action as indicated on the ranking of stressors in
On the other hand, climate change adaptation measures identified in the Borana lowlands primarily draw on indigenous knowledge and local resources. Our study indicates that indigenous measures play key role in responding to climate change especially as external support for local adaptation is limited. Measures such as herd mobility, social safety-net, cultivation and sale of livestock (destocking) are key examples (
While adaptation is intended to reduce or avoid vulnerability, the study indicates that some measures tend to result in unintended outcomes and increase vulnerability across time and/or space. Given the spatial and temporal complexity of climate change problems and responses, adaptive actions that bring successful results in one instance may increase vulnerability elsewhere and/or at another time [
Although traditional pastoralism has been a preferred and major livelihood source, the study has shown that smallholders have demonstrated the tendency to increasingly get involved in non-pastoral livelihoods as means of livelihood diversification. For example, many pastoralists who previously specialized in livestock keeping are now combining cultivation of crops into agricultural practice which is also the case for many African dryland systems [
The majority (87%) of the farmers felt that barriers to adapt to climate change exist. The other smallholders (13%) consider that there is no compelling reason that prevents adaptation. The impediments cited by the majority of farmers are extremely diverse, including natural, economic, social and institutional factors. Adaptation barriers were in descending order of the percentages of respondents that identified each barrier; limited finance, expertise and weather/climate information, shortage of labour and land, poor government support, access to market and irrigation and finally conflict among neighbours (
A range of socio-cultural, institutional, financial, technological and natural factors play restricting roles that may limit adaptive capacity, prescribe adaptation pathways and may lead to undesired outcomes [
Participants underlined that there is limited government support to facilitate local adaptation. For instance, there have been divergent views between state and indigenous institutions on land tenure systems. The state promotes the privatization of user rights, a stance which contravenes the traditional rules of collective resource governance in the study area. The divergence has weakened the capacity of indigenous resource governing institutions that regulate access to resources which have traditionally supported collective action to adapt at the local level [
In general, the challenge now for policy is to overcome these barriers, and successfully integrate local needs and priorities with external interventions in
both adaptation and development planning. Particularly, abovementioned barriers are putting significant limits to adaptation leading to adaptation deficits in the area which necessitate interventions that appropriately target and address each barrier. Improving access to credit services to overcome financial barriers, provision of technical support to overcome knowledge gap and putting in place downscaled climate information services can be important areas of immediate focus to enhance local adaptive capacity. In this regard, governments, the private sector, NGOs and community organizations have different roles to play in addressing these barriers, improving adaptive capacity, narrowing adaptation deficit and reducing vulnerability to climate induced risks.
Smallholders in the Borana lowlands, at least in the foreseeable future, will continue to depend on rainfed agriculture as a primary source of livelihood for which they face considerable uncertainty due to prevalent climate perturbations and eroded ability to adapt. The dependency presents the need to urgently and successfully deal with multiple internal and external pressures to significantly reduce vulnerability to changing climate manifesting itself through increased temperature and more frequent/intense droughts already felt by participants. In this study, we explored smallholder climate change adaptation options and barriers, using combination of PSR model and Pelling’s [
Smallholders generally responded to climatic stresses through adaptation by adjusting farming practices and shifting into non-pastoral livelihoods. Adaptation envisioned resilience and transitional goals while transformational approaches that bring deeper changes that meaningfully address vulnerability are virtually non-existent. They preferred to emphasize reducing or avoiding system disruptions, and ensuring continuity of pre-existing production and livelihood systems. Such an approach potentially undermines long term adaptation by diverting efforts and resources needed for future adaptation. Adaptation also featured transitional approach embracing incremental modes of adaptation resulting in minor, non-major changes which could be attributed to limited adaptive capacity. Despite efforts to adapt, there is little or no evidence that adaptation significantly contributed to vulnerability reduction and livelihood improvement. This suggests the need to change course and transform the current coping capacity of smallholders into longer term sustainable adaptive capacity and integrate adaptation into development planning. There were also experiences where adaptive measures implemented in one location were likely to increase vulnerability in another resulting in maladaptation underlining the importance of considering to proactively addressing risk of maladaptation in future adaptation efforts.
Our study indicates that vulnerabilities of smallholder agriculture and livelihoods in Borana are sizeable. Adaptation approaches that envisage resilience and transitional approaches do not seem to robustly address the vulnerability challenge that uncertain climate poses. The focus on these two approaches also undermines long term adaptation and sustainable development in the study area. Detrimental impacts of recurrent and severe droughts witnessed in recent decades suggest that the Borana may not be able to continue with the status quo in highly variable environment to achieve significant vulnerability reduction and livelihood improvement goals. Along with shrinking recovery periods, the complex and interacting set of barriers are responsible for already low and eroding adaptive capacity. In the face of climate uncertainty and weak adaptive capacity of smallholders, responses can explore low-cost and no-regret adaptation options and pathways that can potentially deal with wide range of future climate scenarios and associated climate-induced risk in the medium to long terms.
Adaptive responses in agriculture should encourage major and purposeful proactive actions that successfully respond to potential impacts of climate change while ensuring co-benefit of livelihood improvement. Beyond reducing vulnerability and risk, adaptation should also seek opportunities and build the future adaptive capacity of actors. Climate change adaptation responses must be integrated into policies and development programs to actively promote local livelihoods and help reduce vulnerability addressing the shortcomings of conventional adaptation and development pathways. Further research is required to identify innovative adaptation pathways that promote locally relevant transformational change to significantly reduce vulnerability and improve livelihoods while upholding the needs and priorities of the local community.
We are grateful to Borana farm households and communities who devoted their precious time to respond to our questions during the household interview and focus group discussions. Our special thanks also go to district level experts who assisted us in facilitating the consultation and fieldwork, and enumerators for their courage to conduct interviews during the fieldwork. We also extend our thanks to the National Meteorology Agency of Ethiopia for its support in providing historical weather data and University of Tasmania for its financial support to this study.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
Debela, N., McNeil, D., Bridle, K. and Mohammed, C. (2019) Adaptation to Climate Change in the Pastoral and Agropastoral Systems of Borana, South Ethiopia: Options and Barriers. American Journal of Climate Change, 8, 40-60. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajcc.2019.81003