Introduction: The occurrence of landslides and floods in East Africa has increased over the past decades with enormous Public Health implications and massive alterations in the lives of those affected. In Uganda, the Elgon region is reported to have the highest occurrence of landslides and floods making this area vulnerable. This study aimed at understanding both coping strategies and the underlying causes of vulnerability to landslides and floods in the Mt. Elgon region.Methods: We conducted a qualitative study in three districts of Bududa, Manafwa and Butalejja in the Mt. Elgon region in eastern Uganda. Six Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and eight Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) were conducted. We used trained research assistants (moderator and note taker) to collect data. All discussions were audio taped, and were transcribed verbatim before analysis. We explored both coping strategies and underlying causes of vulnerability. Data were analysed using latent content analysis; through identifying codes from which basis categories were generated and grouped into themes.Results: The positive coping strategies used to deal with landslides and floods included adoption of good farming methods, support from government and other partners, livelihood diversification and using indigenous knowledge in weather forecasting and preparedness. Relocation was identified as unsustainable because people often returned back to high risk areas. The key underlying causes of vulnerability were; poverty, population pressure making people move to high risk areas, unsatisfactory knowledge on disaster preparedness and, cultural beliefs affecting people’s ability to cope.Conclusion: This study revealed that deep rooted links to poverty, culture and unsatisfactory knowledge on disaster preparedness were responsible for failure to overcome the effects to landslides and floods in disaster prone communities of Uganda. However, good farming practices and support from the government and implementation partners were shown to be effective in enabling the community to lessen the negative effects disasters. This calls for high impact innovative interventions focused in addressing these underlying causes as well as involvement of all stakeholders in scaling the effective coping strategies in order to build resilience in this community and other similarly affected areas.Key words: Coping, Underlying causes, Floods, Landslides, Mt. Elgon, Uganda

Introduction: Despite existing policy actions on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), many community members in Bududa still continue to settle in high-risk areas re-zoned for nonsettlement. There seems to be an apparent information asymmetry on expectations between the community and Government. The challenge then is ‘how to consult communities and seek their opinion in an adequately representative unbiased way’. This paper sets out to explore policy options on resettlement management as a DRR approach and how engaging with communities in a public discourse using the Deliberative Polling (DP) approach; to obtain their opinions and insights on these policy issues, revealed underlying challenges to policy implementation. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted in Bududa in eastern Uganda with fourteen group discussions; comprising 12-15 randomly assigned participants of mixed socio-economic variables. Trained research assistants and moderators collected data. All discussions were audio taped, transcribed verbatim before analysis. Data were analyzed using latent content analysis by identifying codes from which sub-themes were generated and grouped into main themes on policy options for resettlement management. Results and Discussion: We used Deliberative Polling, an innovative approach to public policy consultation and found that although the community is in agreement with most government policy options under resettlement management, they lacked an understanding of the rationale underlying these policy options leading to challenges in implementation. The community members seemed uncertain and had mistrust in government’s ability to implement the policies especially on issues of compensation for land lost. Key Words: Policy, Deliberative Polling, Climate change, risk-reduction, landslides, Uganda

Background: Globally, the incidence of disasters is rising. Uganda is one of several countries experiencing an upturn in adverse climate events. Although Uganda's government has implemented several strategies to mitigate land-use and population pressure-related climate adversity in high-risk zones, communities have not responded to them sufficiently, implying a resilience gap. The objective of this study was to describe the concerns and misconceptions impeding community uptake of climate risk mitigation policies in a rural area in Eastern Uganda. Methods: The study was conducted in Butalejja and Bududa districts in the Mt. Elgon region of Eastern Uganda that is prone to recurrent land-slides and floods. The design was a qualitative study, consisting of 15 small group discussions per district, nested within a Deliberative Poll®. Key government of Uganda policy options on sustainable settlement and family planning were presented to participants who then discussed them with the guidance of a moderator. Results: Not only were participants distrustful of how the land from which they are evacuated would be managed, but they also resented being resettled in unfamiliar places with substantially different topography, low soil fertility, and at a great distance from their ancestral sites and social networks. A latent theme from the data was the pervasive expectation by communities to be assisted by government in all areas of their livelihood needs. Key barriers to Family Planning included lack of safety guarantees, helplessness in the event of a side effect, failure by communities to link family size to resource constraints, and feelings of entitlement to assistance among people with large families. The misconceptions were fueled by a large information asymmetry between the community members and the policy makers. Conclusion: Lasting solutions to climate risk in rural communities will require continuous information-driven dialogue between community members and implementers to address major misconceptions and information asymmetries regarding risk mitigation policies.