Search

In the Central and North Gondar Zone, climate change is causing a challenge for smallholder farmers to improve their living standards. Rural communities face different climate change variables which negatively affect their livelihoods. Hence, this paper investigates rural households' perception of climate change, its determinants and their indigenous mitigation strategies in response to the perceived impacts of climate change. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected through interviews, focus group discussions, key informant interviews and a review of different documents. To carry out the study, a multistage sampling procedure was employed. From each zone, study districts were selected purposively based on their economic activity and agroecological representativeness of the zone. A systematic sampling technique was employed to select 130 rural households. Primary data collected were analyzed by simple descriptive statistics and a logit regression model. The study results revealed that rural households did not similarly perceive climate change due to socioeconomic factors. Socioeconomic factors that significantly (at p≤0.05) determined rural households' perceptions of climate change were age, sex, educational status and access to extension services (at p≤0.01). The finding indicates that smallholder farmers used different indigenous mitigation strategies such as reforestation, minimizing deforestation, planting trees on their farmland and protection and tillage management practices for resolving climate change. According to the study, female-headed households participated less in agricultural training and had less access to information and restricted mobility outside the community to share information that help them to perceive climate change. Hence, equity issues should be considered for female-headed households and concerned bodies such as environmental protection experts and agricultural extension service providers should emphasize the upgrade of the farmer's capacity to mitigate climate change through indigenous knowledge for enhancing their living standard. In addition, development agents' facilitation of indigenous knowledge sharing among farmers should be emphasized to mitigate climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, we assessed responses of adaptation options to possible climate change scenarios on maize growth and yield by using projections of 20 coupled ensemble climate models under two representative concentration pathways (RCPs) 4.5 and 8.5 by means of a DSSAT model. Growth and yield simulations were made across present and future climate conditions using the hybrid maize variety (Shone). Subsequently, simulated yields were compared with farmer' average and on-farm trial yields. Results showed that on-farm trial yield (5.1–7.3 t ha−1) lay in between farmers' average yield (2.9–5 t ha−1) and water-limited potential yield (6.3–10.6 t ha−1). Maize yields achieved in farmers' fields are projected to decline towards mid-century and further towards the end of the century regardless of the adaptation options compared with baseline in low potential clusters. Results of a combination of adaptation options including February planting, use of 64 kg ha−1 N and conservation tillage provided yield advantage of 5.8% over the 30 cm till under medium GHGs emission scenario during mid-century period at Shamana. Mulching with 5 t ha−1 was projected to produce a 4–5% yield advantage in the Hawassa cluster during the mid-century period regardless of changes in tillage or planting window. Under a high GHGs emission scenario, over 13.4% yield advantage was projected in the Bilate cluster due to conservation tillage and June planting during the mid-century period. In the Dilla cluster, the use of 10 t ha−1 mulch, conservation tillage and early planting (February) would result in a 1.8% yield advantage compared with the control either in medium or high GHGs emission scenarios. Thus, the most promising and least risky practices among simulated strategies were the use of nitrogen and mulching in combination with tillage or planting date adjustment. However, adaptation options remained least promising and highly risky if not integrated with mulching or nitrogen use. Hence, the negative impacts of future climate change and subsequent yield gaps would be reduced by optimizing the application of nitrogen, mulch and their interaction with planting date and tillage in high and low potential areas of maize production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]