Globally, fisheries support livelihoods of over half a billion people who are exposed to multiple climatic stresses and shocks that affect their capacity to subsist. Yet, only limited research exists on the vulnerability of fisherybased livelihood systems to climate change. We assess the vulnerability of fishery-based livelihoods to the impacts of climate variability and change in two coastal fishing communities in Bangladesh. We use a composite index approach to calculate livelihood vulnerability and qualitative methods to understand how exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity measured by sub-indices produce vulnerability. Our results suggest that exposure to floods and cyclones, sensitivity (such as dependence on small-scale marine fisheries for livelihoods), and lack of adaptive capacity in terms of physical, natural, and financial capital and diverse livelihood strategies construe livelihood vulnerability in different ways depending on the context. The most exposed community is not necessarily the most sensitive or least able to adapt because livelihood vulnerability is a result of combined but unequal influences of biophysical and socio-economic characteristics of communities and households. But within a fishing community, where households are similarly exposed, higher sensitivity and lower adaptive capacity combine to create higher vulnerability. Initiatives to reduce livelihood vulnerability should be correspondingly multifaceted.

No abstract

To enhance understanding of the process of climate change adaptation and to facilitate the planning and implementation of sustainable adaptation strategies deeper consideration of the factors that impede adaptation is required. Barriers to climate change adaptation are, consequently, being increasingly reported. But, despite this progress, knowledge of barriers that hamper adaptation in developing countries remains limited, especially in relation to underlying causes of vulnerability and low adaptive capacity. To further improve understanding of barriers to adaptation and identify gaps in the state-of-the-art knowledge, we undertook a synthesis of empirical literature from sub-Saharan Africa focusing on vulnerable, natural resource dependent communities and livelihoods. Our review illustrates that: 1) local level studies that reveal barriers to adaptation are diverse, although there is a propensity for studies on small-holder farmers; 2) many of the studies identify several barriers to adaptation, but appreciation of their interactions and compounded impacts remains scarce; and 3) most of the barriers uncovered relate broadly to biophysical, knowledge and financial constraints on agricultural production and rural development. More hidden and under-acknowledged political, social and psychological barriers are rarely mentioned, unless captured in studies that specifically set out to investigate these. We finish our review by highlighting gaps in understanding and by suggesting future research directions, focussing on issues of social justice. We argue that research on barriers needs to start asking why these barriers emerge, how they work together to shape adaptation processes, who they affect most, and what is needed to overcome them.

In this paper, we explore the resilience and vulnerability of livelihoods within two different social-ecological dryland contexts of Botswana over the last 30 years. We drew on primary field data sources, including oral histories, livelihood surveys, ecological surveys, as well as documented evidence of environmental, socioeconomic, and institutional dynamics to identify a broad range of activities that combine to create a range of different household livelihood outcomes. We used this information as a starting point to assess the ways in which livelihoods have changed over time, and evaluated whether they have become more resilient or more vulnerable, and considered the factors that have contributed to these outcomes. In the context of dynamic dryland social-ecological systems, we applied a livelihood trajectory approach to explore the shocks and stresses that affect livelihoods and to elucidate the characteristics of livelihood strategies that contribute to increased resilience or vulnerability. We used a vulnerability framework as a means of framing discussion about vulnerability and resilience and as a means of identifying broader insights. The research identified "accumulator", "diversifier", and "dependent" households and the ways in which they move between these categories. More resilient livelihood trajectories can be achieved if the important role of formal and informal institutions is recognized.

Abstract. Combustion of fuels in the residential sector for cooking and heating results in the emission of aerosol and aerosol precursors impacting air quality, human health, and climate. Residential emissions are dominated by the combustion of solid fuels. We use a global aerosol microphysics model to simulate the impact of residential fuel combustion on atmospheric aerosol for the year 2000. The model underestimates black carbon (BC) and organic carbon (OC) mass concentrations observed over Asia, Eastern Europe, and Africa, with better prediction when carbonaceous emissions from the residential sector are doubled. Observed seasonal variability of BC and OC concentrations are better simulated when residential emissions include a seasonal cycle. The largest contributions of residential emissions to annual surface mean particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) concentrations are simulated for East Asia, South Asia, and Eastern Europe. We use a concentration response function to estimate the human health impact due to long-term exposure to ambient PM 2.5 from residential emissions. We estimate global annual excess adult (> 30 years of age) premature mortality (due to both cardiopulmonary disease and lung cancer) to be 308 000 (113 300-497 000, 5th to 95th percentile uncertainty range) for monthly varying residential emissions and 517 000 (192 000-827 000) when residential carbonaceous emissions are doubled. Mortality due to residential emissions is greatest in Asia, with China and India accounting for 50 % of simulated global excess mortality. Using an offline radiative transfer model we estimate that residential emissions exert a global annual mean direct radiative effect between −66 and +21 mW m −2 , with sensitivity to the residential emission flux and the assumed ratio of BC, OC, and SO 2 emissions. Residential emissions exert a global annual mean first aerosol indirect effect of between −52 and −16 mW m −2 , which is sensitive to the assumed size distribution of carbonaceous emissions. Overall, our results demonstrate that reducing residential combustion emissions would have substantial benefits for human health through reductions in ambient PM 2.5 concentrations.

No abstract

No abstract

Reducing deforestation can generate multiple economic, social and ecological benefits by safeguarding the climate and other ecosystem services provided by forests. Understanding the relative contribution of different drivers of deforestation is needed to guide policies seeking to maintain natural forest cover. We assessed 119 randomly selected plots from areas deforested between 2010 and 2017, in Tanzania. Through ground surveys and stakeholder interviews we assessed the proximate deforestation drivers at each point. Crop cultivation was the most commonly observed driver occurring in 89% of plots, compared to livestock grazing (69%) and charcoal (35%). There was evidence of fire in 77% of plots. Most deforestation events involved multiple drivers, with 83% of plots showing signs of two or more drivers. Stakeholder interviews identified agriculture as the primary deforestation driver in 81% of plots, substantially more than charcoal production (12%), timber harvesting (1%) and livestock (1%). Policy-makers in Tanzania have sought to reduce deforestation by reducing demand for charcoal. However, our work demonstrates that agriculture, not charcoal, is the main driver of deforestation in Tanzania. Beyond protected areas, there is no clear policy limiting the conversion of forests to agricultural land. Reducing deforestation in Tanzania requires greater inter-sectoral coordination between the agriculture, livestock, land, energy and forest sectors.