geoinformatics & geostatistics: an overview · improved fodder management, crops and water pans as...

a S c i T e c h n o l j o u r n a lResearch Article

Mwaura et al., Geoinfor Geostat: An Overview 2013, S1http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2327-4581.S1-005

International Publisher of Science, Technology and Medicine

Geoinformatics &Geostatistics: An Overview

All articles published in Geoinformatics & Geostatistics: An Overview are the property of SciTechnol, and is protected by copyright laws. Copyright © 2013, SciTechnol, All Rights Reserved.

Assessment of Adaptation Strategies and Knowledge on Climate Change among Pastoralists and Agro-Pastoralists in Fafi and Dadaab EcosystemsMwaura J1*, Tura I1 and Raude J1

AbstractThe study assessed Adaptation strategies and Knowledge on climate change among pastoralists and agro-pastoralists in Fafi and Dadaab ecosystems. The study area is located Bura to the South, Tana River to the South West, Garissa to the West, Republic of Somalia to the East and Wajir to the North. The area; home to over half a million refugees, falls within arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) and is incredibly vulnerable to climate change and variability. The study indicated escalated impacts of climate change and variability; poor technology adoption hence increased vulnerability. The geo-information spawned showcase resources inherent in the ASALs and the potential to sustainably galvanize them for actualization of national policies for less emission and upped livelihoods among pastoralists and agro pastoralists. Methodology used included desktop review, sampling, data collection, and field study. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 17 and Landsat satellite 5Thematic mapper for 1986 and Landsat 7 enhanced thematic mapper for 2010. In all, 322 household questionnaires were administered and 300 respondents consulted through Focus Group Discussions and Key informants’ interviews. All respondents were Muslims, ninety-eight % Somali; mostly, pastoralists. Majority had low or no education earned below US$60 a month but had considerable knowledge on climate change prior to the study. Based on this knowledge, several spontaneous coping measures were in place and interest for sustainable adaptation was high. However adaptation is hampered by drought, biting poverty, invasion by Prosopis, stringent land tenure system, inadequate skills, illiteracy, lack of disaster warning preparedness and ignorance. Data generated from the study will benchmark enhancement of climate change adaptation for up-scaling and dissemination to ASAL areas. Additionally the geo-information will sensitize and inform various pertinent policies for better decision making given the declining agricultural productivity due to climate change and variability.

KeywordsClimate change; Vulnerability; Adaptation; Greenhouse gases; Pastoralists

*Corresponding author: Mwaura J, Kenya Agricultural Research Institute- Garissa. P.O Box 230-70100, Kenya, Tel: +254723388479; E-mail: [email protected]

Received: March 04, 2013 Accepted: April 25, 2013 Published: May 04, 2013

IntroductionUpwards of 15% of global carbon emissions is from agriculture

sector with about 14 % from livestock production and forest cover loss but the sector is also carbon sink through carbon sequestration, soil and land use management, and biomass production [1] Impacts of climate change exert undue pressure on agricultural production in Africa where a range of climate models predict temperature increase of 3°C to 4°C by the turn of 21st century which is 1.5 times the global mean response [2]. Faced with this pressure communities in the study area spontaneously turn to changed livestock breed, drought tolerant improved fodder management, crops and water pans as adaptation options. The study assessed such strategies and Knowledge on climate change among pastoralists and agro-pastoralists in Fafi and Dadaab where ecosystems are under severe impacts from climate change and variability with serious effects on agricultural productivity. Unlike mitigation which received attention since the last quarter of the last century, adaptation found attention only in 2001 in Morocco, during the seventh Conference of Parties (COP 7) where key funding mechanisms were established i.e. the Adaptation Fund (AF), the Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF) and the Least UNFCCC [3].

The study area is part of the Arid and Semi Arid lands (ASALs) and the climatic impacts add to already difficult resources management challenges [4]. Worse still, climate change is projected to have extensive impacts on ecosystems and species particularly in the ASALs [5]. In view of this, assessment of adaptation strategies is vital given the importance of adaptation both in the short and longer terms to tackle impacts of global warming as adverse effects would occur even if drastic cuts were made on emissions. The reason for this is that global warming effects linger on from past emissions. Inevitably greater rate and extent of adaptation will be needed given that the human-induced climate change threatens to exponentially push ecosystems beyond their natural adaptive capacities which will invariably raise adaptation costs [6]. As overall goal for Arid and Semi Arid Lands (ASALS) and high risk disaster zones, Kenya’s Vision 2030 aims to safeguard the state of environment for economic growth and to specifically reduce losses arising from floods and droughts [7]. The geo-information generated in the study highlighted resources inherent in the ASALs and the potential to sustainably spur them for actualization of national policies for less emission and upped livelihoods among pastoralists and agro pastoralists.

Objectives The overall objective was to assess adaptation strategies in place,

knowledge on climate change among pastoralists and agro pastoralists as well as community vulnerability, disaster preparedness, causes, and perceptions on invasive vegetation and resultant degradation.

Literature ReviewKey issues around which the study process revolved were:

adaptation, knowledge, vulnerability, disaster preparedness and degradation occasioned by invasive vegetation. A brief discussion on each follows:

Citation: Mwaura J, Tura I, Raude J (2013) Assessment of Adaptation Strategies and Knowledge on Climate Change among Pastoralists and Agro-Pastoralists in Fafi and Dadaab Ecosystems. Geoinfor Geostat: An Overview S1.

• Page 2 of 9 •Special Issue 1 • 005

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2327-4581.S1-005

Adaptation

Motivation for adaption stems from increased vulnerability and paltry adaptive capacities notable in the study area. It is made even more crucial by the fact that shocks currently experienced would linger on given that greenhouse gases remain in the atmosphere long after initial emission [8]. Adaptation, unlike mitigation, acquired consideration only in 2001 in Morocco, during the seventh Conference of Parties (COP 7) where key funding mechanisms i.e. the Adaptation Fund (AF), the Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF) and the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) were established [3]. Within adaptation are many possible responses such as change in crop management practices, choice of fields, planting dates, crop varieties, livestock feeding and health [7].

IPCC (2001) [9] define adaptation as adjustment in natural or human systems responding to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities. It can be carried out in response to (ex post) or in anticipation of (ex ante) changes in climatic conditions [6] and entails a process by which measures and behaviors to prevent, moderate, cope with and take advantage of the consequences of climate events are planned, enhanced, developed and implemented [9-12] place relevance of adaptation at two levels of actors: the first being actors directly exposed to climate risks and need to know whether, how much, and when to invest in strategies, second actors at national and global level in quest of awareness on investment on adaptation to inform funding. Adaptation can be anticipatory or planned and autonomous. Anticipatory adaptation, aims to reduce risk by increasing adaptive capacity via changing crop types and varieties for different seasons, as well as migration for animals to better pasture (US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [8] and it has the potential to increase the marginal benefits and decrease the costs of reactive adaptation [9]. It takes place before impacts of climate change are observed requiring conscious intervention to prepare for potential climate change impacts [13]. Adaptation can be explained as natural and human based on the systems in which it takes place, which occasions autonomous and planned adaptations. It is assumed that unlike in planned adaptation which is carefully planned and informed by awareness of potential climate change, autonomous takes place rather spontaneously [11]. A key difference between planned adaptation and autonomous adaptation is that the former can be reactive and anticipatory – taking place before or after an event but autonomous is reactive. As it is, Fafi and Dadaab communities engage in autonomous adaptation mainly in a quest to survive thaws from poverty and climatic change which motivate the study so as to inform participatory consensus apt policy formulation.

Justification

Justification for adaption is informed by the fact that farmers in the study are suffer impacts of climate change and that that would linger on even with mitigation given that Greenhouse gases remain in the atmosphere long after they are produced and that related impacts will be more devastating in developing countries as they have less capacities to adapt [14]. Also, the study aimed to fill a knowledge gap in that scarce evidence exists as to whether pastoralists and agro pastoralists are aware of climate change impacts and what if they do. Yet the successes of adaptation strategies would largely correspondent to the level of awareness and support from stakeholders particularly the farmers themselves, extension, faith-

based organizations and non-government organizations. The two districts were chosen to represent the 80% of Kenya total land area which are ASALs and are prone not only to draught but to floods even though rainfall is low ranging between 300 and 500 millimeters annually [15]. The ASALs fall in the fragile Agro-Ecological Zones (AEZ) V to VII where rainfall is generally poor, evapotranspiration is high and soils are shallow and thin on organic matter [16] and households in the study area having limited adaptation options at their disposal [17]. As a result, efforts to facilitate adaptation are needed to enhance the resilience of the agriculture sector, for food security, and poverty reduction [18]. Studies by Riungu GM, Otengo J and Bryan et al. [4,17] highlight climatic challenges to livelihoods and at the same time poor technology adoption. The areas also have high poverty index, low literacy levels, poor investments in economic infrastructure, among other factors that may affect the adaptive capacity, hence the assessment.

MethodologyFirstly desktop study was done based on reports, documents

and other materials from government at national, regional and district levels (district development plans, environmental impact assessments, audits, and technical and census data) Other sources were UN agencies and NGOs. Field study consisted of quantitative and qualitative interviews, focus group discussions and community meetings in sampled settlements and surrounding areas. Fafi and Dadaab districts have six divisions; Bura, Galmagalla, Jarajilla, Dadaab, Dertu and Liboi. From each division, a location was randomly selected and data collated and triangulated through use of household questionnaires, Focus Group Discussions (FGD), literature review, observation, photos and Land Sat images. The area was covered by Landsat satellite 5Thematic mapper for 1986 and Landsat 7 enhanced thematic mapper for 2010 and Landsat bands 4, 3, 2 and 3, 2, 1 were used to create the false color and the true color composite respectively (RGB color format) for the years 1986 and 2010 the month of January. For vegetation cover analysis the near infrared band 4 is mostly used as it discriminates the various types of vegetation in question. In image classification the false color composite for both 1986 and 2010 were used in order to create the Land cover map for the study areas. Cloud cover due to low altitude within the study area is a limitation to the analysis as Landsat satellite sensor is optical and therefore unable to penetrate the clouds (see results discussion)

As for household survey, sample size ratio was 1:4 given n=200HH per site. Locally-based volunteers with survey experience were trained to administer the quantitative household survey in the sampled sites, under the supervision of the team leader and special ecosystem scientist, and completed 300 questionnaires in total. The household questionnaire was introduced through pilot test, semi-structured, in-depth questions. Focus group discussions were used to triangulate information on specific key issues that required further attention or cross-checking. The 9 locations in Fafi were sampled to identify one location as a sample. For each site a focus group discussion, and sample key informants interviews were held. The questionnaire and checklists for FGD and key informants were translated from English to Somali by a trained enumerator.

The data from the quantitative questionnaires were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 17. In applying SPSS each respondent was put in one row on the data sheet with each question having one column and taking up one variable. The




responses were stored as numbers e.g. 1-5 and ‘value labels’ ascribed text labels to the numbers. Where questions required ranking, each option took up a variable. This way a general percentage-wise response to all questions was generated. A particular challenge was the need to validate potentially biased information, and this was addressed through careful cross-checking between data supplied from different sources. Research activities undertaken and the structure into which each activity fell are highlighted in Figure 1.

Background Information and the Study AreaFafi and Dadaab districts have a population 148,043 persons

(52,831and 95,212 respectively) in an area 23,106.5 km2 (16,325 km2 Fafi and 6,781.4 km2 for Dadaab) Arable land in Dadaab is 190,000 ha with only 7,190 ha cultivated and no irrigated land [19]. The district has annual mean rainfall of 81.7mm and has mineral deposits Gypsum, Clays and Gemstone [20]. Annual rainfall in Fafi is 300mm and poverty index is 68 % with food insecurity at 65 % and both districts exuding high illiteracy levels: Fafi at 92% [21]. The two districts represent two parliamentary constituencies i.e. Lagdera and Fafi which are vast and sparsely populated with vast environmental degradation [22]. The area has low school enrolment, culminating in significant low literacy levels. Other challenges include increased livestock diseases, inadequate infrastructure for marketing and value addition and biting poverty. The area is largely flat rising from a low of 90 m to about 200 m above sea level. The major physical feature and source of water in Fafi is the River Tana forming western boundary. Merti aquifer sourcing from Aberdares through Uaso Ng’iro River is on the north and eastern outlay of Dadaab district. The soils in the area are characteristically black cotton and alluvial soils with

patches of sandy soil towards the coast and hold great potential for development (Table 1).

Rainfall and water loss

In an average rainfall year, it is estimated that 42% of the precipitation falling on Dadaab and Fafi districts is evaporated directly back into the atmosphere with only about 1% of the annual precipitation recharges aquifers and the remaining 57% runs off to become stream flow (Annual PDA Report, 2010) Thus, the declining precipitation (Figure 1) that is currently captured directly for human use as fresh water in aquifers and surface water represents only a small proportion of the annual precipitation received. But management of the rangeland vegetation can redirect these percentages and is very critical to sustaining ample water for Dadaab and Fafi districts. This means that the untenable felling of trees for charcoal and firewood, and other forms of degradation particularly around the refugee camps need to be curtailed through apt policies whose formulation this study aid (Figure 2).

Ecosystem degradation

The ecosystems in the study area are severely degraded by human activities such as felling trees for firewood and charcoal, more so in the refugee camps in Dadaab and Jarajira divisions which in effect exacerbated degradation of the already fragile ecosystem. Wood Fuel provides upwards of 85% in the area but, uncontrolled settlements and indiscriminate grazing has contributed to the worsening trend of environmental degradation [20]. The vegetation in the area comprises largely of woody trees and shrubs on which camels and goats browse and to some extent grazers as well, but there is no gazetted forest. Some of the vegetation provides fodder way into dry period through seed pods and fallen leaves. However, the area is invaded by the prolific Prosopis vegetation particularly in the riparian of River Tana and in areas with significant population distribution.

Population density- trends and effects

As shown in Table 2, population in Fafi and Dadaab is sparsely populated with concentration around main town centers Bura and Dadaab. Key informants interviews indicated that refugee camps in Dadaab and Jarajira (Fafi) are irresistible pull-factors given the low food prices, ready market for livestock and related products, availability of jobs, schools and better medical care. However, refugee settlement in the area were said to exacerbate deforestation, increased human and livestock diseases and insecurity.

As indicated on Table 2, high population settlement gravitates around Dadaab (119,391) and Jarajira (66,559 divisions owing to influx of refugees and in turn attracted Kenyans to settle all around the camps for better life as discussed earlier. This means that any adaptation strategies must of necessity factor-in the refugee-driven scenario and stakeholders around town centers as captured in the workshop objectives.

Field

Problem structuring/formulation

Meetings with stakeholders

Research objectives

Research objectives

Research questions

Data analysis-results

Data collection Formal intro to local authorities, recruit and train enumerators. Pilot test, Sampling and HH survey, secondary data, PRA tools i.e. transect walks, observation

Data analysis Data cleaning, data input, employ statistical packages, SPSS, incorporate statistician skills

Methods

Discussions and interpretation

Conclusions and recommendations

Literature

revie

Pre

-

Field

Post Fiel

Figure 1: Research Structure.

District Area Km2Arable Land (Ha)

Cultivated Land (Ha)

Irrigable Potential

(Ha)

Irrigated (Ha) Dominant Soils

Dadaab 6,781 190,000 7,190 0 0 Sandy/loam, clay/loam

Fafi 16,325 110,000 1,840 4,000 140 Sandy/loam, Clay/loam

Table 1: Land use Potential in Fafi and Dadaab Districts.

Source: PDA, 2010 Annual Report




Key Study Results Key Study Results The study assessed key issues through desktop review, sampling,

data collection, field study and analyzed the data collated using SPSS version 17 and Landsat images. The issues assessed were; adaptation strategies in place, knowledge on climate change among pastoralists and agro pastoralists, community vulnerability, disaster preparedness and threats and opportunities from vegetation cover. Results on each of the issues is described and presented later in the paper.

Bio-Data of RespondentsIn Fafi and Dadaab districts three locations in the three divisions

of each district were randomly selected and 322respondents (212 for Fafi and 110 for Dadaab) were interviewed with 65% of the respondents between 20-49 years of age. The three locations from each district are representative of vital unique demographic and

biophysical features in the district. High level of illiteracy abound as 80% have never been to school and only a paltry 13% have attained some primary school education.

Respondents economic activity

As global climate change escalates, the risk of floods, droughts increases and global temperatures prolong drought and localized flooding more so in mid-latitudes and semi-arid lands in developing countries [14]. The climatic changes adversely affect vulnerable farmers more so in ASALs and economic activities and development is central to adaptation to climate change as poverty is central to both development and adaptation, and does exacerbate vulnerability to weather variability as well as climate change [23]. Upwards of 48% of the local community depended on livestock as their main economic activity, 15% carried out both livestock and other business whereas 5% depended on sale of fuel wood and charcoal production. Focus group discussions held in the sites established that by other business (besides livestock) respondents in the study meant production and sale of tomatoes, onions, bananas, capsicum, fodder and water melon as well as retail shop, food kiosks, sale of milk and Miraa (Ghat) vendor, and butchery. These farm activities take place in the riparian of River Tana in Fafi district. On-farm fodder production and the agriculture activities apply to agro pastoralists as pastoralists depend on natural pasture and migrate once faced by extreme event and buy fodder only for the weak animals left behind as the rest migrate (Figure 3).

Perceived Causes of Climate Change 45% indicated that the cause of climate change is the will of

God (Amri ya Mwenyezi Mungu). This strong belief would impede

Garissa Rainfall 1959-2010; Temp (Min)1967-2009) Source: Kenya Met Dept

32.5

33

33.5

34

34.5

35

35.5

36

Garissa Maximum temp

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Garissa Minimum temp

Rainfall: Fitted equation : TotRain = 417.5 -1.515 * Year -Confidence level is 61.76%

Temperature: Fitted equation : MaxTemp =37.7 - 0.0016 * Yearlevel is 27.69%

Figure 2: Rainfall Min and Max temperature trends.

Table 2: Population Distribution and Density in Fafi and Dadaab, per Division.

Division Population (2008) Land Area (km2) Density

Fafi District

Bura 17,161 5,775.2 2.97Jarajilla 66,559 8,859.9 7.50Galmagalla 11,920 1690.00 7.05Total 96639 16,325.1 5.86Dadaab DistrictDertu 15,013 1,595.8 9Liboi 18,083 3,245.5 6Dadaab 119,391 1,940.1 62Total 6,781.4 25.6

Source: District Statistical Office Garissa 2009)




adaptation but for a commonly cited old Somali adage “you have to trust God but you tether your camel” meaning people must do something for themselves and leave the rest to God. These responses assume a high religious connotation and the solution need take cognizance and mount appropriate approaches to implement relevant adaptation. Culture influence action as Adger et al. [24] contend in their review of history, sociology and psychology of risk to adaptation in which they hold that limits to adaptation are inherent to society and hence dependent on ethics, knowledge, attitudes to risk and culture. Adger raises pertinent issues which underpinned the study in Fafi and Dadaab namely, Islam-oriented cultural values versus adaptation and climatic foretelling. For instance climate foretelling is unpopular among Muslims as is seen to play God and the study had to engage experienced local elders to circumvent it by use of culturally acceptable concepts while remaining relevant to the study. Other causes of climate change were cited as deforestation, particularly in Boni forest and 0-50 km around refugee camps.

Observed Climate Change ShocksAs for observed shocks, 38% cited increased livestock deaths, 17%

indicated crop failure while 8% indicated increased and unpredictable droughts. The three shocks have direct bearing on occurrence of drought which is the extreme event of concern in the area. The shocks worry local community with 82% admitting to the resultant diminishing quality of life and its attendant costs such as forced migration to Boni forest and Kipini areas by the Indian Ocean. In view of this adaptation is desirable not just because it increases resilience, but for co-benefits it offers in form of agricultural productivity and emissions reduction for socio-economic development [17]. In addition, subsequent discussions with key informants established that other observed shocks are erratic rainfall (traditionally started in April for the short rains October for the long rains but today turned erratic). Others are increased human and livestock diseases incidences and type. This high response portends both despondency and good hope for preffered adaptation strategies as stakeholders are ready to opt out of the unsavory situation occassioned by climate change and variability. Also it is an opportunity for synergistical partnerships and apt networking among local, national and international stakeholders (Table 3 and Figure 4).

Knowledge on Climate Change Among Pastoralists and Agro Pastoralists

Clearly most of the pastoralists and agro pastoralists 85% had

basic knowledge on climate change and attendant shocks prior to the study upon which spontaneous adaptation options were mounted over time. The community understands climate change to mean decrease in rainfall, increased temperature and drought- that re-occurs unpredictably. The knowledge on climate change and variability was acquired through mosque meetings 15%, FM radio and national KBC radio 37%, traditional disaster tellers 15% chief’s baraza 15% and group meetings14% in that order of preference with 39% receiving the info daily. This response instructs that subsequent initiatives to expand knowledge on climate change, adaptation and implementation be suitably coded to fit conveyance through these two forms of media. Being about 100% Muslim, respondents had conflicting views on traditional disaster tellers as source of climate change knowledge with some preferring to deny their existence while others admitted to their existence and influence on the community. However, most key informants confirmed that traditional disaster tellers have significant influence in the community and that they usually compare past and present as well as patterns of stars, flowering of specific vegetation, unique sounds from hyena and kites to fore tell onset, intensity or demise of extreme events. Further, respondents demonstrated awareness that the occasional drastic change from prolonged drought to sudden heavy downpour affects animal health.

Climate Change ShocksSeven climate change shocks namely: drought, invasion from

Prosopis, floods, loss of pasture and livestock, refugee-driven deforestation degradation and biting poverty. Pair Wise Ranking was the main tool used to rank the shocks and corresponding adaptation strategies supported by stakeholders’ expertise. It is noteworthy that

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Freq

uenc

y

Occupation

1. Livestock alone 2. Livestock and business 3. Firewood/Charcoal 4. Salaried employment 5.Crops and livestock 6. Student 7. Others

Figure 3: Income activity and sources.

80.21%

9.36%

10.42%

Fafi District

Agree

Disagree

Don't know 79.01%

9.88%

11.11%

Dadaab District

Agree

Disagree

Don't know

Figure 4: Climate shocks diminished quality of life.

District

S/N CC observation Fafi Dadaab Total

1. Increased livestock deaths 70 36 106

2. Crops failure 32 11 43

3. Decreased vegetation cover 6 1 7

4. Scarcity in water availability 18 5 23

5. High temperatures 12 26 38

6. Increased diseases (Human and livestock) 11 8 19

7. Erratic rainfall 10 3 13

8. More floods 3 0 3

9. Increased pests 5 1 6

10. More droughts 18 8 26

Total 185 99 284

Table 3: Observed Climate Shocks.




the ranking accorded to both the shocks and the preferred adaptation strategies differed from one site to the other. The six sites from where the study collated data were Galmagalla, Bura, Jarajira, Alikune, Kulan and Saredho.

Poverty, pasture and livestock loss, food insecurity and refugee-driven vegetation loss were ranked top climate change shocks. In the two districts, the location sites most affected by the climate shocks (herein referred to as environmental hot spots) were identified as Geresweno, Guyo, Wermerer, Khumamato, Saretho and Bulla Lagdera. Some of these sites e.g. Saredho village is 50 km West of Dadaab refugee camp sites was listed as environmental hot spot owing to refugees-driven deforestation. The district is graced with arable land most of which is under-utilized (Table 1).

Assessment of Adaptation Strategies Fafi and Dadaab districts are part of 80% of Kenya total land that

are ASALs prone not only to draught but to floods even though rainfall is low ranging between 300 and 500 millimeters annually [15] Given the shocks, communities in the area spontaneously take to water pans, fodder, change of livestock breed, migration, and drought tolerant crops as adaptation strategies. The need for adaption is triggered by the adversity prompted by impacts of climate change and particularly because that would linger on despite mitigation given that greenhouse gases remain in the atmosphere long after they are produced and that its impacts are more devastating in developing countries as they have less adaptive capacities [14]. Unlike mitigation which received attention since the last quarter of the last century, adaptation found attention only in 2001 in Morocco, during the seventh Conference of Parties (COP 7) where key funding mechanisms i.e. the Adaptation Fund (AF), the Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF) and the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) were established [3]. Adaptation includes many possible responses such as change in crop management practices, choice of fields, planting dates, crop varieties, livestock feeding and health [17].

Preferred adaptation strategies in the study area were conservation

of pasture, water harvesting improved livestock breed and planting trees on own land-15 and 18% respectively particularly trees with co-benefits such as fodder, fruit trees and green fertilizers in the riparian of River Tana. Others were early warning and disaster management. Given that land in the region is communally owned, key informants confirmed that “own land’ on which respondents preferred to plant/nurture natural pasture meant riparian area, group farms, individual plots in town centers and institutional land. As for improved livestock as an adaptation strategy, focus group discussions explained that preferred breed was white Galla goat and camel as they are browsers, shift to Boran breed as it has more beef hence more income and reduction of livestock numbers in that order (Tables 4 and 5).

Threats and Opportunities from Vegetation CoverThe fragile ecosystems countenance threats as well as opportunities

for adaptation, skills acquisition and learning for pastoralists and agro pastoralists. Among the environmental opportunities include sustainable control and gainful management of the invasive Prosopis juliflora. Although communities in arid areas invaded by Prosopis view it negatively and many favor its total eradication the plant has significant environmental and economic gains such as charcoal, fodder, carbon sequestration and soil stabilization. Other benefits drawn from Prosopis include reduction of wind speed and evaporation by 22%, higher total nitrogen and available phosphorus, and lower soil pH than soils in the adjacent open field [25]. Also standing biomass of understory plant species are five times lower under the Prosopis canopy and Organic carbon and total nitrogen concentrations in soils under Prosopis were 13% and 45% higher than in the open areas [26].

Attempts to manage Prosopis otherwise are widely regarded as exorbitant ventures costing US$24 billion in the USA and US$10,000 to reclaim a hectare in Mauritius [27,28]. Prosopis was introduced in the region following the concern about deforestation, desertification and fuel wood shortages in the late 1970s and early 1980s as it does survive where other tree species have failed [29].

To assess vegetation cover in the past 40 years, the study compared

Flood Refugee Influx Poverty Food Insecurity Sust. Mngt. Of ProsopisPasture

LossLivestock

Loss Total Rank

Flood 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Refugee Influx 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Poverty 1 1 0 1 0 1 4 1

Food Insecurity 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2

Sust. Mngt. Of Prosopis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pasture Loss 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2

Livestock Loss 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2

Table 4: Climate Change shocks.

H2O harvesting Plant more tree Improved livestockDrought tolerant

crop Early warning Total Rank

H2O harvesting 0 0 0 1 1 2

Plant more tree 1 1 0 0 2 1

Improved livestock 0 1 0 0 1 2

Drought tolerant crop 0 0 0 0 0 0

Early warning 0 0 0 1 1 2

Table 5: Preferred Adaptation Strategies.




perceptions from stakeholders and Landsat images (1986-2010) and both data are presented here below. The period was selected based on the high rating from stakeholders indicating that refugees, whose entry into Kenya commenced in earnest in 1991, bear greater blame for deforestation and other forms of environmental degradation. Besides household survey, the area was covered by Landsat satellite 5Thematic mapper for 1986 and Landsat 7 enhanced thematic mapper for 2010 and Landsat bands 4, 3, 2 and 3, 2, 1 were used to create the false color and the true color composite respectively (RGB color format) for the years 1986 and 2010 the month of January. For vegetation cover analysis the near infrared band 4 is mostly used as it discriminates the various types of vegetation in question.

With regards to vegetation cover, 52% indicated that ecosystems in Fafi and Dadaab were now barer than was the case 40 years ago. This view was supported by Landsat observations which indicated that the most affected resources in the study area are land, vegetation and river systems. Major changes were observed in the 0-50 km around Dadaab and Fafi refugee camps and their built-up area but more so in Dadaab, which is visible in the 2010 classified image not yet set up in 1986. Additionally, refugee camps were observed to sit along Merti aquifers and this has impacted negatively on water resource rating the change at 8 in the rating scale. But some vegetation cover was visible along River Tana in Fafi and Merti aquifer in Dadaab and 82% indicated Prosopis was dominant. This prolific invader had remarkable disadvantages to include disease caused by its thorn prick 27%, decreased fodder 22%, increased poverty 37%, food insecurity 37% and colonization of otherwise arable riparian and biodiversity-rich range lands 14%. However Prosopis was found useful for making furniture, fodder, creating micro climate, firewood, fencing and carbon sink. Most changes in vegetation in Dadaab and Bura areas were depleted at the rate of 0.1 along waterways in 1986 and 0.2 in 2010 on the rating scale attributing to percentage change of 88.70 (also shown in the Land cover change Figure 5).

Total grand change in vegetation is shown in the Figure 5 is 88.70% within 24 year time period (1986-2010) with only 12% of the vegetation cover in 1986 remaining unchanged to any land cover class. 274 km2 of the Vegetation in 1986 changed to bare ground in 2010, 1836 km2 changed to built-up area. Only 1.3 km2 of the bare ground in January 1986 has change from bare ground land cover class to vegetated land cover class in 2010 January. 25 km2 of the river system changed to bare ground, 1.25 km2 to vegetate both indigenous and riverine vegetation, showing that the width of the river has reduced by 26.32 km2. In 1986 the bare ground area in square kilometers was 91.39 and in 2010 the value stands at 393 km2.The percentage change in the bare ground is 62.517 rated at 6 in the rating scale in the Difference map. Degradation value in Fafi area is lower than the degradation value in Dadaab due to population increase stretching the resources. From the assessments it is clear that vegetation cover had greatly reduced, there was increase in bare ground area, as well as a chunk of River Tana riparian changing to bare ground. The reasons for the change include increased deforestation and other forms of ecosystem degradation on ecosystems particularly 0-50 km around the refugee camps in Dadaab and Fafi.

Disaster ManagementEven though the ministry of agriculture has a monthly bulletin on

disaster management and forewarning, 63% were unaware and so did not relate to it despite the fact that 62% in Fafi indicated drought was

the extreme even that occurred more frequently and was more erratic (Table 6) Inductive interviews with key informants indicated that the negative response indicated poor or no participatory approach in designing and implementation of the existing disaster management plan and poor communication.

Discussions and Way ForwardResults from the baseline study indicate that the rangelands in

the target areas are severely damaged, and the livelihoods of rural and pastoral communities have deteriorated over time. Clearly, droughts and floods in the area are responsible for poor and inadequate pasture resulting in loss of livestock body condition, death and diseases, soil nutrient leaching and actual vegetation decimation, mass migration of animals and people, and damage to infrastructure. Past adaptation assessments indicate low awareness as many people at the grassroots still cannot differentiate between climate change impacts and problems caused by local environmental degradation. Adaptation strategies in both Fafi and Dadaab ecosystems largely depend on water from River Tana and Merti aquifer with sources at Mt Kenya and Aberdares respectively. An outcome of the study clearly points out to a rangeland that is in an unhealthy state, has increased runoff with high nutrient and sediment content, and will not maintain as much soil moisture which is needed for the production of crops and local plant species required by livestock and wildlife. Better methods of rainwater harvesting and conservation are some of the strategies identified through participatory methods as a way of utilizing surface water.

The area is characterized with no permanent lakes and rivers other than the laggas, remoteness and poor distribution of water points during the dry season results in overgrazing of pasture lands surrounding River Tana in Fafi district. As such, the main purposes of the recommended surface water development is to increase the storage capacity of natural ponds to extend their period of utilization, and to create new surface water reservoirs in order to better the rangeland resources. Many of these available technologies are not widely implemented or are not seen as feasible by both pastoralists and agro pastoralists. This can be attributed to ignorance, illiteracy, poor skills and other constraints identified by the farmers during the baseline study.

ConclusionOverall the study indicated that Fafi and Dadaab ecosystems exude

severe environmental degradation compounded by drought, floods and over reliance on livestock farming against impacts of changed land uses and climate change. In Dadaab the impacts on the natural capital is mostly felt within 0-50 km radius of the refugee camps but distances currently expand beyond. The study assessed adaptation strategies in a bid to inform pertinent policies in support of the vulnerable pastoralists and agro pastoralists to enhance their adaptive capacity to drought and or floods. Based on the results, the adaptive capacity can be achieved through changed breeds and crop varieties, enhanced access to management of water resources and promotion of sustainable runoff concentration methods that are more resilient to climate change. Climate change is likely to extend periods of drought and make them more frequent, putting more stress on water resources and increasing competition between humans and wildlife. Methods and initiatives would need to be presented in a manner that is culturally sensitive, noting that about all respondents in the study




Figure 5: Land cover class change in Percentage table1986-2010.

Figure 6: Annexure: Map of study area.




were Muslims. Also apt policies would need to address untenable felling of trees particularly around the refugee camps, insecurity and escalating poverty index. The study intended that the environmental hot spots identified will provide opportunities for collaborative implementation of proven technologies to spur opportunities for further research and synergy building in Fafi and Dadaab ecosystems.

Annexure: Map of study area Figure 6.

References

1. IFPRI (2009) Agriculture and climate change. An agenda for negotiation in Copenhagen.

2. Herrero M, Ringler C, van de Steeg J, Thornton P, Zhu T, et al. (2010) Kenya: Climate variability and climate change and their impacts on the agriculture sector. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington DC.

3. Adger WN, Huq S, Brown K, Conway D, Hulme M (2003) Adaptation to Climate Change in the Developing World, Arnold. Progress in Development Studies 3: 179–195.

4. Riungu GM, Otengo J (2009) Climate Frontlines. The drying of the Tana Delta, Kenya. A global forum for indigenous peoples, small islands and vulnerable communities.

5. Fischlin A, Midgley GF (2007) ‘Ecosystems, their properties, goods, and services’, in Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 211–272.

6. Parry M., Nigel Arnell, Richard Tiffin, Tim Wheeler, Pam Berry, et al.(2009)Costs of adapting to climate change significantly under-estimated. London, UK.

7. GoK. (2007) Kenya Vision 2030.

8. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2013).

9. IPCC (2001). Third Assessment Report. Working Group II. Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Chapter 18: Adaptation to Climate Change in the Context of Sustainable Development and Equity Contents.

10. UNDP (2005) Human Development Report - International cooperation at a crossroads- Aid, trade and security in an unequal world. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).

11. Willows RI, Connell RK (Eds) (2003). Climate adaptation: Risk, uncertainty and decision-making. UKCIP Technical Report. UKCIP, Oxford.

12. Agrawala S, Fankhauser S (2008). Economic aspects of adaptation to climate change: costs, benefits and policy instruments. OECD, Paris, France.

13. Smith JB, Ragland SE, Raucher RS, Burton I (1997) Assessing Adaptation to Climate Change: Benefit-Cost Analysis. Report to the Global Environment Facility, prepared by Hagler Bailly Services, Inc., Boulder, CO, USA.

14. IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working

Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

15. Kabubo-Mariara J, Karanja FK (2007) “The Economic Impact of Climate Change on Kenyan Crop Agriculture: A Ricardian Approach”. World Bank, Development Research Group and the Sustainable Rural and Urban Development Team.

16. FAO (1998) Wetland characterization and classification for sustainable agriculture. Regional Office for Africa.

17. Bryan, Elizabeth, Ringler, Claudia, Okoba (2011) Agricultural management for climate change adaptation, greenhouse gas mitigation, and agricultural productivity: Insights from Kenya. IFPRI, Washington DC.

18. FAO (2010) An ecosystem approach to sustainable crop production intensification: - a conceptual framework.

19. Provincial Director of Agriculture, North Eastern Province, Kenya) Annual Report (2010).

20. GoK (2008) Ministry of State for Planning, National Development and Vision 2030- Fafi district Development Plan 2008-2012.

21. GoK (2009) Kenya Bureau of Statistics. Government of Kenya Census, 2009.

22. KACCAL (2009) Adaptation to Climate Change in Arid and Semi-Arid Lands.

23. World Bank (2010) World Development Indicators.

24. Adger WN, Dessai S, Goulden M, Hulme M, Lorenzoni I, et al. (2009) Are there social limits to adaptation to climate change? Climatic Change 93: 335-354.

25. El-Fadl MA (1997) Management of Prosopis juliflora for use in agro forestry systems in the Sudan. Thesis. Tropical Forestry Reports - Department of Forest Ecology, University of Helsinki.

26. Chore KH (2004) The effects of Prosopis juliflora (Oc) Hyne and Acacia tortilis (Forsik) trees on under storey plant species and soil properties on Njemps Flats, Baringo District Kenya. University of Nairobi, Kenya.

27. Felker P (1996) Commercializing mesquite, leucaena, and cactus in Texas. In: J. Janick (ed.) Progress in new crops. ASHS Press, Alexandria, VA 133-137.

28. Dulloo ME, Kell SP, Jones CG (2002) Conservation of endemic forest species and the threat of invasive species: Impact and control of invasive alien species on small islands. Int For Rev 4: 277-285.

29. Zeila A (2005) Baseline survey on Prosopis in 3 districts of Kenya. Centre for Sustainable Development Initiatives (CSDI) for the Drought Management Initiative (DMI) and Arid Lands Resource Management Project (ALRMP II) Nairobi, Kenya.

District

Extreme events Fafi Dadaab Total

1. High temperature 1 12 13

2. Drought 100 62 162

3. Livestock death 31 8 39

4. Elnino and floods 17 8 25

5. Increased intensity of erratic wind 5 2 7

6. Increased diseases type and number 4 0 4

7. Crop failure 2 0 2

Total 160 92 252

Table 6: Most extreme events experienced.

Submit your next manuscript and get advantages of SciTechnol submissions

50 Journals 21 Day rapid review process 1000 Editorial team 2 Million readers More than 5000 Publication immediately after acceptance Quality and quick editorial, review processing

Submit your next manuscript at ● www.scitechnol.com/submission

Author Affiliation Top1Kenya Agricultural Research Institute- Garissa. P.O Box 230-70100, Kenya

http://unfccc2.meta-fusion.com/kongresse/090601_SB30_Bonn/templ/ply_page.php?id_kongresssession=1783&player_mode=isdn_realhttp://unfccc2.meta-fusion.com/kongresse/090601_SB30_Bonn/templ/ply_page.php?id_kongresssession=1783&player_mode=isdn_realhttp://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/3840/climateVariability.pdf?sequence=8http://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/3840/climateVariability.pdf?sequence=8http://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/3840/climateVariability.pdf?sequence=8http://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/3840/climateVariability.pdf?sequence=8http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/seagrant/ClimateChangeWhiteboard/Resources/Uncertainty/climatech/adger03PR.pdfhttp://www.glerl.noaa.gov/seagrant/ClimateChangeWhiteboard/Resources/Uncertainty/climatech/adger03PR.pdfhttp://www.glerl.noaa.gov/seagrant/ClimateChangeWhiteboard/Resources/Uncertainty/climatech/adger03PR.pdfhttp://www.glerl.noaa.gov/seagrant/ClimateChangeWhiteboard/Resources/Uncertainty/climatech/adger03PR.pdfhttp://www.climatefrontlines.org/en-GB/node/206http://www.climatefrontlines.org/en-GB/node/206http://www.climatefrontlines.org/en-GB/node/206http://www.climatefrontlines.org/en-GB/node/206http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch4.htmlhttp://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch4.htmlhttp://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch4.htmlhttp://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch4.htmlhttp://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch4.htmlhttp://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch4.htmlhttp://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/adaptation.htmlhttp://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-frontmatter.pdfhttp://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-frontmatter.pdfhttp://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-frontmatter.pdfhttp://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-frontmatter.pdfhttp://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-frontmatter.pdfhttp://www.econbiz.de/en/search/detailed-view/doc/all/the-economic-impact-of-climate-change-on-kenyan-crop-agriculture-a-ricardian-approach-kabubo-mariara-jane/10003618518/?no_cache=1http://www.econbiz.de/en/search/detailed-view/doc/all/the-economic-impact-of-climate-change-on-kenyan-crop-agriculture-a-ricardian-approach-kabubo-mariara-jane/10003618518/?no_cache=1http://www.econbiz.de/en/search/detailed-view/doc/all/the-economic-impact-of-climate-change-on-kenyan-crop-agriculture-a-ricardian-approach-kabubo-mariara-jane/10003618518/?no_cache=1http://www.econbiz.de/en/search/detailed-view/doc/all/the-economic-impact-of-climate-change-on-kenyan-crop-agriculture-a-ricardian-approach-kabubo-mariara-jane/10003618518/?no_cache=1http://www.econbiz.de/en/search/detailed-view/doc/all/the-economic-impact-of-climate-change-on-kenyan-crop-agriculture-a-ricardian-approach-kabubo-mariara-jane/10003618518/?no_cache=1http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/X6611E/X6611E00.HTMhttp://www.fao.org/docrep/003/X6611E/X6611E00.HTMhttp://bibleaves.library.illinois.edu/catalog/C36988http://bibleaves.library.illinois.edu/catalog/C36988http://bibleaves.library.illinois.edu/catalog/C36988http://bibleaves.library.illinois.edu/catalog/C36988http://www.undp.org/content/kenya/en/home/operations/projects/environment_and_energy/Adaptation_to_Climate_Change/http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development-indicators/wdi-2010http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development-indicators/wdi-2010http://research.fit.edu/sealevelriselibrary/documents/doc_mgr/338/Global_Social_Limits_to_CC_Adaptation_-_Adger_et_al._2008.pdfhttp://research.fit.edu/sealevelriselibrary/documents/doc_mgr/338/Global_Social_Limits_to_CC_Adaptation_-_Adger_et_al._2008.pdfhttp://research.fit.edu/sealevelriselibrary/documents/doc_mgr/338/Global_Social_Limits_to_CC_Adaptation_-_Adger_et_al._2008.pdfhttp://research.fit.edu/sealevelriselibrary/documents/doc_mgr/338/Global_Social_Limits_to_CC_Adaptation_-_Adger_et_al._2008.pdfhttp://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/19980607681.html;jsessionid=EEA5B482AE8D7A75D199CB4F966E2A43http:/www.cabdirect.org/search.html?q=do%3A%22Tropical+Forestry+Reports+-+Department+of+Forest+Ecology%2C+University+of+Helsinki%22http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/19980607681.html;jsessionid=EEA5B482AE8D7A75D199CB4F966E2A43http:/www.cabdirect.org/search.html?q=do%3A%22Tropical+Forestry+Reports+-+Department+of+Forest+Ecology%2C+University+of+Helsinki%22http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/19980607681.html;jsessionid=EEA5B482AE8D7A75D199CB4F966E2A43http:/www.cabdirect.org/search.html?q=do%3A%22Tropical+Forestry+Reports+-+Department+of+Forest+Ecology%2C+University+of+Helsinki%22http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/19980607681.html;jsessionid=EEA5B482AE8D7A75D199CB4F966E2A43http:/www.cabdirect.org/search.html?q=do%3A%22Tropical+Forestry+Reports+-+Department+of+Forest+Ecology%2C+University+of+Helsinki%22http://www.researchkenya.org/?ID=9423&search=Njemps+Flats%2C+Baringo+District%2C+Kenyahttp://www.researchkenya.org/?ID=9423&search=Njemps+Flats%2C+Baringo+District%2C+Kenyahttp://www.researchkenya.org/?ID=9423&search=Njemps+Flats%2C+Baringo+District%2C+Kenyahttp://www.researchkenya.org/?ID=9423&search=Njemps+Flats%2C+Baringo+District%2C+Kenyahttp://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/proceedings1996/v3-133.htmlhttp://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/proceedings1996/v3-133.htmlhttp://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/proceedings1996/v3-133.htmlhttp://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/proceedings1996/v3-133.htmlhttp://www.csdikenya.org/baselineprosopissurvey.htmhttp://www.csdikenya.org/baselineprosopissurvey.htmhttp://www.csdikenya.org/baselineprosopissurvey.htmhttp://www.csdikenya.org/baselineprosopissurvey.htm

TitleCorresponding authorAbstractKeywordsIntroductionObjectives Literature ReviewAdaptation Justification

MethodologyBackground Information and the Study AreaRainfall and water lossEcosystem degradationPopulation density- trends and effects

Key Study Results Key Study Results Bio-Data of RespondentsRespondents economic activity

Perceived Causes of Climate Change Observed Climate Change ShocksKnowledge on Climate Change Among Pastoralists and Agro PastoralistsClimate Change ShocksAssessment of Adaptation Strategies Threats and Opportunities from Vegetation CoverDisaster ManagementDiscussions and Way ForwardConclusionFigure 1Table 1Figure 2Table 2Figure 3Table 3Figure 4Table 4Table 5Figure 5Figure 6Table 6References

geoinformatics & geostatistics: an overview · improved fodder management, crops and water pans as...

Documents