Search

Climate risks and vulnerability continue to disproportionately affect the urban poor given their constrained adaptive capacity. This paper examines the urban poor's perceptions and vulnerability to climate change in Kampala. Data was collected from a proportionate sample of 534 respondents drawn from households that were randomly selected from the city's informal settlements and interviewed using a structured questionnaire. Six focus group discussions and 15 key informant interviews were conducted whose participants were purposively selected because of their knowledge and experiences. Quantitative data was analyzed using chi-square tests while content analysis was used to analyze qualitative data from key informant interviews and focus group discussions. A total of 96.6% of the households were aware of climate change, mainly perceived as rising temperatures and reduction in rainfall. Floods (53.4%) and droughts (27%) were the most commonly experienced climate risks, with the former considered more frequent and severe. Perceptions and vulnerability to climate risk varied with incomes, education level, marital status, main occupation, housing conditions and length of stay. Individuals with less wealth and education, employed in informal business and having insecure housing tenure were most vulnerable to flooding than they are to drought. The sensitivity of the urban poor communities is heightened by ecosystem degradation, poor access to urban infrastructure, utilities and services. With socio-economic attributes highly associated to climate change vulnerabilities, incorporating social dimensions and exchange of information between the vulnerable communities, planners and decision makers is necessary to inform the city's adaptation policy and building long-term urban resilience. Partnerships are necessary between the urban authorities, communities, civil society and donors/financiers to improve housing and livelihoods in slums settlements. At the same time, strengthening co-production of climate information services, building climate change awareness, restoration of critical ecosystems and a broader inclusive adaptation planning are avenues for building resilient urban poor communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While methodological choices are critical for solution-oriented adaptation research, the current debate on these is underdeveloped and characterized by simple dichotomies such as bottom-up and top-down as well as vaguely defined concepts such as vulnerability. Adaptation challenges and approaches for addressing them are more diverse than these labels suggest. This paper addresses this deficit by developing a diagnostic framework that helps to identify approaches suitable for addressing a given adaptation challenge. The framework was developed out of the necessity to discuss diverse approaches from natural science, social science and practice in a set of adaptation case studies conducted within the European funded MEDIATION project. Based on these case studies complemented by the literature, we iteratively abstracted typical adaptation challenges researched, typical approaches taken, and empirical, theoretical and normative criteria applied for choosing a particular approach. Our results refine the methodological debate by distinguishing between the three general adaptation challenges of identifying adaptation needs, identifying adaptation measures and appraising adaptation options. Adaptation challenges are further classified according to private and public interest involved, individual or various types of collective action involved, data/model availability, decision-making time horizon, etc. For each type of challenge and approach, we give examples and discuss salient issues. Our results point to the opportunity to apply institutional and behavioural research to support the identification of measures and possibly avoiding barriers in practice. The diagnostic framework also serves as the basis for the forthcoming guidance for assessing vulnerability, impacts and adaptation to be published by the UNEP programme of research on climate change vulnerability, impacts and adaptation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature that examines the nexus of climate risk and armed conflict tends to be based on quantitative datasets and focuses on the causal relationship between the two issues. A limited number of studies consider the human dimensions of this nexus, but this literature has not been the subject of a synthesis. This article reviews the research examining the climate risk and armed conflict nexus, with specific emphasis on field studies and qualitative research. It aims to synthesize key findings emerging from the literature in order to shed light on the human dimensions of this nexus. Our analysis focuses on two broad themes: exposure and response. Exposure varies according to regional particularities and across locations while gender and weak political institutions are significant determinants in further increasing vulnerability. Response to the experience of the climate risk and armed conflict nexus consists primarily of various forms of migration. We also draw attention to specific directions for future research efforts to better understand the human dimensions of the climate-conflict nexus. This includes methodological considerations, attention to the anticipated aggravation of geopolitical realities through climate risk, and the identification of countries having a high climate risk index, and which are experiencing ongoing armed conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vulnerability assessment is fundamental for informing adaptation to climate change policy. The aim of this study is to evaluate the vulnerability of rural subsistence farmers in Uganda to climate risk. A mixed methods approach used semi-structured and guided interviews, and participatory techniques to explore perception, livelihood response and socio-economic status. Perception of climate risk varied, with wealthier farmers perceiving drought as highest risk, whilst poorer farmers perceived extreme heavy rainfall. Farmers implemented many general livelihood coping and anticipatory responses (54.7 %) to perceived impacts from drought, rainfall variability and extreme heavy rainfall. Examples included food storage, livestock maintenance and planting drought-resistant varieties. Other responses (45.3 %) were specific to individual climatic events, and farmers had no response to cope with rainfall variability. Climate risk was not the only driver of vulnerability. Soil infertility, pests and diseases, and economic instability also sustained decreasing trends in income. Adaptive capacity of households differed with external and internal attributes of sensitivity. Farmers with more land, education, access to governmental extension, a non-farm livelihood, larger households and older age had more capacity to buffer shock through increased assets and entitlements than poorer farmers who were more likely to engage in opportunistic behaviour like casual labouring. Few livelihood responses associated with perceived threat from the climate indicating response to a broader range of stressors. Conclusions determined inequality in livelihood response as a fundamental driver in households' ability to cope and adapt to climate risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]