Coping Strategies in Livestock-dependent Households in East and Southern Africa: A Synthesis of Four Case Studies

Abstract

Integrated assessment seeks to combine models of the ecological as well as the social system to allow different scenarios to be tested in terms of their likely impacts on ecological functioning and household wellbeing. We outline such work undertaken in four case studies in East and southern Africa: pastoralist communities in northern Tanzania, agro-pastoralists in southern Kenya, communal and commercial ranchers in South Africa, and mixed crop-livestock farmers in western Kenya. Results from these case studies are synthesised to test the hypothesis that households' capacity to adapt in the face of increasing external stresses is governed by flexibility in livelihood options. The results support this hypothesis. There is considerable variation in how households in these places cope with external stresses. Options include intensification, diversification, and increasing off-farm economic activities, and these depend on household objectives and attitudes as well as on access to natural resources, inputs and output markets. The results also indicate that generally it is the poorer households that can gain the most from implementing such options for coping and managing risk. Quantifying likely household and ecosystem impacts of different options is a crucial step in targeting appropriate technology, policy and adaptation interventions in the face of considerable system changes. We conclude with some research needs to improve integrated assessment tools that may allow us to represent more realistically the highly complex decision-making milieu of householders in subSaharan Africa who are dependent on ecosystem goods and services for a large part of their livelihoods.

Identifying drivers of household coping strategies to multiple climatic hazards in Western Uganda: implications for adapting to future climate change

“…Therefore short-term the effects of sudden shocks are common place. For example, drawing on savings, consuming food stocks, and selling livestock amongst other strategies are undertaken depending on the context of both the shock and household (Oyekale and Gedion 2012;Thornton et al 2007;Chuku and Okoye 2009). Investigations into coping and adaptation are often differentiated between risk management approaches focuses on hazard-coping strategies and adaptation considering the impacts of climate change (Agrawal 2008).…”

Going for gold: transitional livelihoods in Northern Ghana

“…As Elmqvist and Olsson (2006, p. 168) explain, 'Drylands comprise some of the most dynamic regions of the world and diversification can be imperative for the livelihoods and survival of the population'. In these settings, there is little disputing that poorer households have the most to gain from diversification (after Thornton et al, 2007).…”

“…These circumstances, they further argue, potentially make specialization of production units and trade a more viable option. Drawing upon research conducted in four different pastoral communities in Southern Africa, Thornton et al (2007) reached similar conclusions, using their findings to underscore 'the importance of understanding different households' objectives and attitudes', as well as to argue that whilst 'all the case studies can be looked at within a common analytical framework, no common household model can be applied across all sites and all household types, as the objectives associated with livestock management range from profit maximisation to the sociocultural and steadfastly noneconomic' (p. 470). These observations reinforce claims made earlier: of the importance of not drawing sweeping conclusions about the drivers of livelihood diversification in rural sub-Saharan Africa, and the need to assess situations on a case-by-case basis, something which, to date, scholars have failed to do.…”

Adaptation of agriculture to climate change in semi-arid Borena, Ethiopia

“…How the negative effects associated with climate change can be reduced depends on a favourable institutional environment to alleviate these constraints, thereby increasing the capacity of farm households to adopt effective adaptation practices (Di Falco et al 2011;Jones et al 2010; Thornton et al 2007). Many householders in ASALs are unable to test new adaptation practices such as new crop varieties, drought-tolerant livestock and reducing soil degradation due to their low capacity to invest, lack of inputs and access to information (Bryan et al 2013).…”

“…The practices analysed in this study should increase the capacity of the farm household to cope with and adapt to climate-related risks, and we call them 'adaptation options'. The listed adaptation options compare well with options for dry lands found in the literature (Bryan et al 2013;Fratkin 1991;Little et al 2001;Rufino et al 2013;Thornton et al 2007). Before eliciting households' responses on adaptation options, we sought to know what household understood by 'climate change' through a focus group discussions (FGDs).…”