Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.
Parallel session : Forest landscape management to create resilience in the face
of climate change in West and Central Afri...
Outline
1. Research context
2. Research aim and questions
3. Materials & Methods
4. Research Key findings
5. Policy implic...
Research context: forest & CCA in Sahel
 Increase in the implementation of forest and tree
based interventions (land use options) at local level
o as livelihood ...
 Shed light on existing F&T-based
livelihood diversification strategies (land
uses options) with positive effects
towards...
 Identification of Liv. Divers. Strat.
implemented as land use options that build
on forest and trees ecosystem : conside...
Research Methodology
• Use of
Sustainable
Livelihoods
Framework
(SLF) as
theoretical
background
(Eakin and
Bojorquez 2008;...
Dimensions Components Indicators Explanation of indicators Measurement Sources
Assets-related
index
(50%)
Human Assets
(25...
Research Methodology
• Measuring
ADAPTIVE
CAPACITY
provided to
HHs: a scalar
that serves as
an aggregate
measure of the
po...
Research area and data
 Researches: socio-
economic (HH surveys,
FGDs, Interviews)
 Data collected :
o Household’s socio...
Key Research Findings
1. Pattern in the assets endowment sheds
light on:
o reduced flexibility that some households are
co...
Key Research Findings
2. Pattern in the land tenure:
o Trees planters households rely on the customary
tenure (customary p...
Key Research Findings
3. Pattern in production diversification, income generation:
0246
MD MG CW EC
0,00 10000,0020000,003...
Key Research Findings
3. Pattern in regulation services :
Parameters of
assessment (%)
RL MG CW EC Total
Soil Fertility co...
Key Research Findings
3. Pattern in sensitivity to climate variability:
Parameters of assessment (%) RL MG CW EC Total
LU’...
4. Household adaptive capacity index under each tree-based adaptation
strategy
Notes: RL = Reforested Lands; MG = Mango Pl...
Key Research Findings
 RL provides good ACI for HH:
o better diversification index in terms of products (available at
dif...
What policy implications?
 Improve access to land and secure land tenure at local
level: enabling conditions to help hous...
Adaptive capacity and tree-based livelihood
diversification strategies of smallholders in Central
Burkina Faso
With the
su...
Prochain SlideShare
Chargement dans…5
×

Djenontin ins 20150708_1500_upmc_jussieu_-_room_307

210 vues

Publié le

CFCC

Publié dans : Sciences
  • Soyez le premier à commenter

  • Soyez le premier à aimer ceci

Djenontin ins 20150708_1500_upmc_jussieu_-_room_307

  1. 1. Parallel session : Forest landscape management to create resilience in the face of climate change in West and Central Africa Ida Nadia S. Djenontin, Houria Djoudi, Mathurin Zida (CIFOR) Paris, July 07-10, 2015 Adaptive capacity and tree-based livelihood diversification strategies of smallholders in Central Burkina Faso
  2. 2. Outline 1. Research context 2. Research aim and questions 3. Materials & Methods 4. Research Key findings 5. Policy implications
  3. 3. Research context: forest & CCA in Sahel
  4. 4.  Increase in the implementation of forest and tree based interventions (land use options) at local level o as livelihood diversification strategies for a sustainable management of land resources (Reij et al. 2005; Kabore and Reij 2004) o to overcome changes in natural resources and support adaptation efforts of local communities Research context: forest & CCA in Sahel Research-based evidence to mainstream & strengthen the ongoing adaptation processes at farm household level Need of adequate F&T- based strategies with potentialities to help reducing household’s vulnerability and adaptive capacity better understanding of the AC of smallholder households engaged in specific livelihood diversification strategies (land use options) is important to feed and improve policy interventions
  5. 5.  Shed light on existing F&T-based livelihood diversification strategies (land uses options) with positive effects towards both HH and ecosystem resilience  Question: What adaptive capacity the existing F&T-based livelihood diversification strategies (land uses options) provide to help increase: o social resilience of local communities? o ecological resilience for sustainability of forest resources? Research aim and questions
  6. 6.  Identification of Liv. Divers. Strat. implemented as land use options that build on forest and trees ecosystem : considering some criteria : o importance for Burkina Faso’s climate policies (NAPA, NAP, FIP); o importance for ecosystem-based adaptation approach; o level of management, and the frequency of implementation o relevance to analyse synergies between mitigation & adaptation; o gender sensitivity Research work materials Mango plantations (n=29) Cashew plantations (n=31) Eucalyptus plantations (n=31) Forest Lands restoration (n=38)
  7. 7. Research Methodology • Use of Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) as theoretical background (Eakin and Bojorquez 2008; Bryan et al. 2015) • Building an analytical framework of household’s adaptive capacity index (ACI)  Integrated approach to define and select indicators at a HH scale (Yohe and Tol 2002; Sietchiping 2007; Vincent 2007; Hahn et al. 2009; Adger (2004 & 2006) ; Brooks et al. 2005; Haddad 2005; Pelling and High 2005; Alberini et al. 2006) o Combination of sub-aggregate and sub- composite indexes o Aggregate adaptive capacity index (ACI) is calculated
  8. 8. Dimensions Components Indicators Explanation of indicators Measurement Sources Assets-related index (50%) Human Assets (25%) Age of household Head (20%) Age of the head of households implementing the diversification strategy Each strategy records its average actual value for this continuous variable Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (DFID 2000); Yohe and Tol (2002); Sietchiping (2007); Vincent (2007). Household size (20%) Number of persons living permanently in households who implement the diversification strategy Each strategy records its average actual value for this continuous variable Household Marital status: Polygamous status (20%) Percentage of polygamous households using the diversification strategy Each strategy takes score 1 if its average percentage is < to that of the whole sample and takes score 2 if > Education level: Primary level (20%) Percentage of households with primary education who implement the diversification strategy Each strategy takes score 1 if its average percentage is < to that of the whole sample and takes score 2 if > Literacy (20%) Percentage of literate households using the diversification strategy Each strategy takes score 1 if its average percentage is < to that of the whole sample and takes score 2 if > Social Assets and Institutions (25%) Membership of Association (25%) Percentage of Membership of association of households who develop each diversification strategy Each strategy takes score 1 if its average percentage is < to that of the whole sample and takes score 2 if > Yohe and Tol (2002) Adger (2004) Adger (2006) Pelling and High (2005); Sietchiping (2007); Vincent (2007). Number of Social groups around NRM (25%) Number of agriculture and forestry cooperative groups to which households implementing the diversification strategy belong to. Each strategy records its average actual value for this continuous variable Number of other Social groups (Credit, sensitizing…) (25%) Number of credit groups, sensitizing groups or other social groups to which households implementing the diversification strategy belong to. Each strategy records its average actual value for this continuous variable Institutional rights over the land on which the strategy is implemented (tenure security) (25%) Percentage of households with a legal tenure over the land that houses the strategy (legal tenure according to the official law.) Each strategy takes score 1 if its average percentage is < to that of the whole sample and takes score 2 if > Physical Assets (25%) Number of Livestock-Cattle (20%) Number of cattle owned by households who implement the diversification strategy Each strategy records its average actual value for this continuous variable Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (DFID 2000); Vincent (2007). Number of small ruminants (20%) Number of sheep and goats owned by households who implement the diversification strategy Each strategy records its average actual value for this continuous variable Means of Transportation: Number of Bicycle (20%) Number of bicycle owned by households who implement the diversification strategy Each strategy records its average actual value for this continuous variable Production asset 1: Number of Plough (20%) Number of plough owned by households who implement the diversification strategy Each strategy records its average actual value for this continuous variable Production asset 2: Number of Donkeys (20%) Number of donkey owned by households who implement the diversification strategy Each strategy records its average actual value for this continuous variable Natural Assets (25%) Total land size owned (100%) Hectares of farm owned by households who implement the diversification strategy Each strategy records its average actual value for this continuous variable Strategy outcomes-related index (50%) Production diversity (25%) Products diversity (100/3%) The number of products harvested by households who implement the diversification strategy. Each strategy records its actual value for this variable. e.g. When households, who develop a strategy, harvest in average 3 products, the value recorded for the strategy = 3. - Yohe and Tol (2002) Framework for calculation of the household’s adaptive capacity index
  9. 9. Research Methodology • Measuring ADAPTIVE CAPACITY provided to HHs: a scalar that serves as an aggregate measure of the potential to cope with climate variability and change (Yohe and Tol 2002)  Aggregate adaptive capacity index: 𝐴𝐶𝐼 = 𝐴𝐶𝐼𝐴 + 𝐴𝐶𝐼𝑆 Assets-related index (ACIA): 𝐴𝐶𝐼𝐴 = 𝑊𝐴 × 𝐴𝐶𝐼𝑖 4 𝑖=1 (2i) Strategy-related index (ACIS): 𝐴𝐶𝐼𝑆 = 𝑊𝑆 × 𝐴𝐶𝐼𝑗 4 𝑗=1 (2ii)  Indicators index (ACI): 𝐴𝐶𝐼𝑖 𝑜𝑟𝑗 = 𝑄𝑖 𝑜𝑟 𝑗 × 𝐴 𝑘 𝑃𝑘 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑠 𝑘=1 (3)
  10. 10. Research area and data  Researches: socio- economic (HH surveys, FGDs, Interviews)  Data collected : o Household’s socio- economic characteristics, o Livelihood assets, o Strategy-related outcomes (Income, Production diversification, regulation services), o Perceptions on the sensitivity of promoted interventions to climate risks.  Statistical Analyses (Average value of the indicators; preliminary composite index for some variables ) Central-West and Centre of Burkina Faso : 4 provinces Kadiogo, Kourweogo, Oubritenga, and Ziro (Figure above). The region of the Centre (500-600 mm of rainfall) === regular droughts (Reij et al. 2005) Central-West (600-800 mm of rainfall) === opportunities for forest and trees related-activities (Ouedraogo et al. 2010).
  11. 11. Key Research Findings 1. Pattern in the assets endowment sheds light on: o reduced flexibility that some households are constrained with when opting to diversify their livelihoods and adapting themselves.: o main constraints === total land owned as well as the physical capital indicators (livestock , transportation means, production factors) o particularly, households implementing eucalyptus plantations strategy are very limited in lands area Strategy Mean Std. Dev. Min Max F a Prob. a RL (38) 11.91 6.71 4.5 35 4.8 0.0034 MG (29) 11.79 6.94 2.5 36.5 CW (31) 12.30 8.88 2 36.5 EC (31) 7.41 4.86 2.6 25 TOTAL (129) 10.90 7.17 2 36.5
  12. 12. Key Research Findings 2. Pattern in the land tenure: o Trees planters households rely on the customary tenure (customary power provides the basic land rights to allow investments: Braselle et al. 2002) o RL households are moving to legal tenure with NGO’s efforts to help acquire legal tenure over their lands to assure their investments (secure tenure has a positive effect on agro-forestry: Wunder and Verbist 2003) ==Ccl: overlapping of the traditional and legal land rights. o trees are often managed at the local level under customary agreements (USAID 2010; CRS 2014). o customary tenure determines access rights to resources and actually discriminates between social categories (Brockhaus et al, 2012).
  13. 13. Key Research Findings 3. Pattern in production diversification, income generation: 0246 MD MG CW EC 0,00 10000,0020000,0030000,0040000,0050000,0060000,0070000,00 HH under RL HH under MG HH under CW HH under EC ALL HH HH under RL HH under MG HH under CW HH under EC ALL HH WOMEN Income/Ha 4830,44 20890,46 16889,51 2486,59 11683,22 MEN Income/Ha 28600,82 48855,75 62381,19 33386,97 52011,59 Average Total number of harvested products from the strategy by HHs Income /ha (FCFA) generated from the tree-based adaptation strategy
  14. 14. Key Research Findings 3. Pattern in regulation services : Parameters of assessment (%) RL MG CW EC Total Soil Fertility conservation Not at all 0.00 0.00 0.00 61.30 14.70 Slightly 2.60 13.80 12.90 35.50 15.50 Moderately 5.30 44.80 32.30 3.20 20.20 Strongly 92.10 41.40 54.80 0.00 49.60 Fisher’s exact = 121.6756 Pr = 0.000 Ecosystem regeneration Not at all 0.00 3.40 0.00 22.60 6.20 Slightly 5.30 10.30 12.90 61.30 21.70 Moderately 13.20 44.80 45.20 9.70 27.10 Strongly 81.60 41.40 41.90 6.50 45.00 Fisher’s exact = 82.9678 Pr = 0.000 Erosion reduction Slightly 10.50 17.20 9.70 67.70 25.60 Moderately 10.50 51.70 41.90 22.60 30.20 Strongly 78.90 31.00 48.40 9.70 44.20 Fisher’s exact = 60.0826 Pr = 0.000 Households’ perception on ecosystem services provided by the promoted land uses
  15. 15. Key Research Findings 3. Pattern in sensitivity to climate variability: Parameters of assessment (%) RL MG CW EC Total LU’s sensitivity to early rains Strongly negative 0.00 10.30 6.50 0.00 3.90 Negative 10.50 24.10 29.00 19.40 20.20 No effect 39.50 10.30 19.40 19.40 23.30 Positive 36.80 41.40 25.80 29.00 33.30 Strongly positive 13.20 13.80 19.40 32.30 19.40 Fisher's exact = 21.5977 Pr = 0.051 LU’s sensitivity to late rains Strongly negative 0.00 10.30 9.70 9.70 7.00 Negative 34.20 62.10 51.60 45.20 47.30 No effect 26.30 20.70 29.00 38.70 28.70 Positive 28.90 6.90 0.00 6.50 11.60 Strongly positive 10.50 0.00 9.70 0.00 5.40 Fisher's exact = 29.2352 Pr = 0.002 LU’s sensitivity to droughts Strongly negative 44.70 27.60 16.10 25.80 29.50 Negative 28.90 62.10 58.10 61.30 51.20 No effect 7.90 6.90 16.10 9.70 10.10 Positive 5.30 3.40 6.50 3.20 4.70 Strongly positive 13.20 0.00 3.20 0.00 4.70 Fisher's exact= 21.2185 Pr = 0.046 LU’s sensitivity to winds Strongly negative 15.80 44.80 22.60 29.00 27.10 Negative 47.40 44.80 54.80 19.40 41.90 No effect 21.10 6.90 22.60 48.40 24.80 Positive 7.90 3.40 0.00 0.00 3.10 Strongly positive 7.90 0.00 0.00 3.20 3.10 Fisher's exact = 31.1667 Pr = 0.001
  16. 16. 4. Household adaptive capacity index under each tree-based adaptation strategy Notes: RL = Reforested Lands; MG = Mango Plantations; CW= Cashew Plantations; EC= Eucalyptus Plantations Key Research Findings any significant difference among HHs less endowed in assets Adaptive capacity Indexes RL MG CW EC Assets-related Index (ACIA) 4.336 4.330 4.091 3.014 Diversification strategy- related Index(ACIS) 0.670 0.381 0.463 0.241 Overall AC Index 5.006 4.711 4.554 3.255 High ACI Low ACI Relatively good ACI
  17. 17. Key Research Findings  RL provides good ACI for HH: o better diversification index in terms of products (available at different times during the year); o income for both household head and his wives = gender disparity in income generation is low; o less sensitive to climate risks.  EC provides low ACI for HH. o considerable disparity in income generation between household head and the wives, o small scale plantations perceived sensitive to climate risks especially when they are young, o low product diversity.  Fruit trees == relatively good ACI o generally higher economic gain o low products diversification than the RL o perceived as highly sensitive to climate risks. need to consider the overall environment al and biodiversity loss
  18. 18. What policy implications?  Improve access to land and secure land tenure at local level: enabling conditions to help households increase land-based liv. divers. strat. and assure investments on lands  Integration of vulnerability and adaptive capacity analysis to implement ecosystem based interventions  Enhance integration of FLR as a part of land use plans o To enhance climate resilience of livelihoods by increasing AC of communities & individuals THANK YOU
  19. 19. Adaptive capacity and tree-based livelihood diversification strategies of smallholders in Central Burkina Faso With the supports of And the collaboration of

×