An indicator framework for assessing livelihood resilience in the context of social–ecological dynamics

Livelihood resilience draws attention to the factors and processes that keep livelihoods functioning despite change and thus enriches the livelihood approach which puts people, their differential capabilities to cope with shocks and how to reduce poverty and improve adaptive capacity at the centre of analysis. However, the few studies addressing resilience from a livelihood perspective take different approaches and focus only on some dimensions of livelihoods. This paper presents a framework that can be used for a comprehensive empirical analysis of livelihood resilience. We use a concept of resilience that considers agency as well as structure. A review of both theoretical and empirical literature related to livelihoods and resilience served as the basis to integrate the perspectives. The paper identifies the attributes and indicators of the three dimensions of resilience, namely, buffer capacity, self-organisation and capacity for learning. The framework has not yet been systematically tested; however, potentials and limitations of the components of the framework are explored and discussed by drawing on empirical examples from literature on farming systems. Besides providing a basis for applying the resilience concept in livelihood-oriented research, the framework offers a way to communicate with practitioners on identifying and improving the factors that build resilience. It can thus serve as a tool for monitoring the effectiveness of policies and practices aimed at building livelihood resilience.

Resilient Adaptation to Climate Change in African Agriculture

Africa’s agriculture faces varying climate change impacts which mainly worsen production conditions and adversely affect its economies. Adaptations thus need to build the resilience of farming systems. Using “resilient adaptation” as a concept, this study analyses how adaptations at farm and policy/institutional-levels contribute to the resilience of Sub-Saharan African agriculture. The developed tool, “the Resilience Check”, provides socio-economic data which complements existing adaptation tools. The underlying development gaps such as insecure property rights, poverty, low self-organisation, inadequate climate data and infrastructure limit resilient adaptations. If farmers could implement recommended practices, existing measures and improved crops can address most impacts expected in the medium-term. However, resource use efficiency remains critical for all farm management types. Development-oriented adaptation measures are needed to provide the robust foundations for building resilience. Reaching the very poor remains a challenge and the externally driven nature of many interventions raises concern about their sustainability. The study recommends practical measures such as decentralising various services and integrating the action plans of the multilateral environmental agreements into one national action plan.

Adapting public agricultural extension services to climate change: Insights from Kenya

This paper analyses the adaptiveness of the Public Agricultural Extension Services (PAES) to climate change. Existing literature, interviews and group discussions among PAES actors in larger Makueni district, Kenya, provided the data for the analyses. The findings show that the PAES already have various elements of adaptiveness in its policies, approaches and methods of extension provision. However, the hierarchical structure of the PAES does not augur well for self-organisation at local levels of extension provision, especially under conditions of abrupt change which climate change might trigger. Most importantly, adpativeness presupposes adaptive capacity but the lack of resources in terms of funding for extension, limited mobility of extension officers, the low extension staff/farmer ratio, the aging of extension staff and significant dependence on donor funding limits the adaptiveness of the PAES. Accordingly criteria and indicators were identified in literature with which an initial assessement of the adaptiiveneess of PAES was conducted. However this assessment framework needs to be improved and future steps will integrate more specific inputs from actors in PAES in order to make the framework operational.