title of the presentation - united nations university

1

Evaluating rural coping and adaptation measures

in the context of water-related risks in the VMD

Presentation PhD thesis

Maria Schwab

WISDOM PhD Scientific Seminar June 12th 2013

United Nations University – Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS)

Geographisches Institut der Universität Bonn

Supervisors: PD Dr. Jörn Birkmann and Prof. Dr. Klaus Greve

Folie 2 WISDOM PhD Seminar 12th June 2013 – Maria Schwab

Mu

ltip

le t

emp

ora

l sca

les

Mu

ltip

le s

pat

ial

scal

es

Mu

ltip

le d

imen

sio

ns

Vulnera-

bility

Exposure

Susceptibility

Capacity of response

Coping /

Adaptation

Governmental

Households

Evaluation

Policy-makers

Households

2

WISDOM I

Vulnerability Assessment

From Vulnerability Assessment to an Adaptation Evaluation


Mu

ltip

le t

emp

ora

l sca

les

Mu

ltip

le s

pat

ial

scal

es

Mu

ltip

le d

imen

sio

ns

Vulnera-

bility

Exposure

Susceptibility


Coping /Adaptation

Governmental

Households

3

WISDOM I


WISDOM II

Adaptation evaluation




4

Vulnerability

Exposure

Susceptibility


Coping /

Adaptation

Governmental

Households

Evaluation

Policy-makers

Households

Dif

fere

nt

tem

po

ral a

nd

sp

atia

l sca

les

Mu

ltip

le d

imen

sio

ns

WISDOM Water-Related Information System for the Sustainable Development of the Mekong

Delta

WISDOM I


WISDOM II

Adaptation evaluation


Research area

5


6

RQ1: How vulnerable are households in the context of water-related risks and

how is this vulnerability interlinked with coping and adaptation processes on site?

RQ2: How are decisions made and strategies evaluated?

RQ3: Which coping and adaptation strategies are most promising for different

stakeholders and timescales?

Evaluation

Research questions


Perception hazard & vulnerability

Goals & preferences

Hazard

Vulnerability

Inputs

Outputs

Outcomes

Impacts on vulnerability

Process

Selected evaluation approaches

Input-Output-Outcome

Behavioural change

Process- based

CBA

Present evaluation

Analytical sub-components

Analytical com-ponents concep. framework

Evaluation approaches

Components included in eval. approach

Legend Ris

k

con

text

D

ecis

ion

-m

aki

ng

Im

ple

men

-ta

tio

n

Ou

tco

mes

&

Imp

act

s

Source: author, evaluation classification mainly based on Silva-Villanueva (2011)

Analytical components of the research framework

Risk assessm.

Methods

Households

Government

Hamlet Commune

District Province

Household level

Participatory group discussions

In-depth interviews

Householdsurvey

Literature/Report collection and review


Risk context

9


Elevation, salinity isohaline & protective infrastructure

10

Folie 11 WISDOM PhD Seminar 12th June 2013 – Maria Schwab 11

Decision-making


Risk perception - Government

12

Level Commune Production

system

Rank salinity

risk

(most

severe year)

Rank flood

risk

(most

severe year)

Commune

(group

discussions)

Ngoc Bien Rice 1 (2010/2011) - -

Don Xuan Rice 1 (2010/2011) - -

Aquaculture - - 1 (2003)

Kim Son Sugarcane 3 (2010/2011) 3 (2010/2011)

Level Institution

District (interviews)

Farmer’s Association 1 (2010/2011) 4 (general)

DARD 1 (2010/2011) 2

Province (interviews)

DARD 1 (2010/2011) 2

Source: Focus group discussions and interviews with authorities 2012, M. Schwab


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

tota

l am

ou

nt

of

men

tio

nin

gs (

for

18

se

lect

ed s

trat

egie

s an

d n

=31

3)

What was the main reason for applying this strategy?

Reaction to past events Adaptation to expected future risks both

Risk perception - Households (motivational energy)

13

Source: Household survey 2012 (n=313), M. Schwab


Perceived capacity of response and susceptibility

Households showed little awareness and know-how when it comes to:

Susceptibility of crops

Quality of the embankment

Little trust in the own know-how and capabilities

Both government and households see lack of formal education as a major barrier, especially for Khmer people

People often think that they don‘t have the know-how to change the product

Awareness and perception of only few adaptation options

Particularly in areas where households have little risk specific experience (salinity intrusion in rice producing areas)

14


Implementation

and Impacts


Impact on vulnerability – Household strategies

Many coping strategies applied which were meant to provide compensatory financial resources. These reduced capacity of response in the long-run, though. E.g.:

Selling productive assets

Buying more food and inputs on credit / taking a loan

Several strategies changed susceptibility of households

Seasonal migration increases number of income sources

WS-rice production increases susceptiblity to salinity intrusion substantially

Only few exposure reducing strategies applied Selling land

16


Few coping options applied

Compensation payments

Early warning

More adaptation with a focus on and preference for exposure reducing activities

Building a dike

Dredging the canals

Little support to increase agency, awareness and the belief in the own capacities

Many training classes but salinity and flooding play merely a minor role

17

Impact on vulnerability – Governmental strategies


Source: Household survey ; M. Schwab 2012

Subjective evaluation of government strategies

18

Scoring of most important governmental strategies according to selected criteria

*only hh who were affected by a policy measure evaluated

the respective strategy.

,00

,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

Ave

rag

e o

f a

ll g

ove

rnm

en

t str

ate

gy e

va

lua

tio

ns

(fo

r 1

5 s

ele

cte

d s

tra

teg

y o

ptio

ns*;

ma

x.

va

lue

of

3)


Evaluation criteria

19

Research area All communes

(mean value)

Kim Son

commune

Don Xuan

commune

Ngoc Bien

commune Tra Cu district

Tra

Vinh

Prod. type focus Sugar cane Aquaculture Rice Rice/ Sugarcane Rice

Stakeholder group Hh Gov. Hh Gov. Hh Gov. Hh Gov. DARD FA* DARD*

*

Evaluation criteria Scoring of relevant criteria for decision-making (total of 25 points) Ranking

Impact on Hh-Income/

productivity 8,3 6,2 9 8,8 11 4 5 7 7,5 6 2

Farmer Implement. 2,3 2,2 7 2,5 0 3 0 1 1,3 8

Food security 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0

Environment 0 2,1 0 1,3 0 2 0 3 1,3 7

CC-proof 0 0,4 0 1,3 0 0 0 0 0

Nr of beneficiaries 4,0 4,8 6 7,5 3 3 3 4 3,8 5 3

Costs 2,0 2,0 0 0 6 4 0 2 5 2 1

Accountability 1,3 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 1

Participation 1,0 3,9 0 3,8 0 6 3 2 1,3 3

Competence 1,7 0,3 0 0,0 0 0 5 1 0

Implentation time 4,3 2,0 2 0 5 3 6 3 3,8 4

Total of given points 25 25 25 25*** 25 25 25 25 25*** Rank Rank

Nr of participants 61 31 13 10 33 11 15 10 1 2 2

* FA= Farmers’ Association; ** Irrigation Department of DARD Tra Vinh; *** In the discussion 100 points instead of 25 were distributed which is why 25 points represents 100/4 points

Source: Group discussions with commune authorities and households; M. Schwab 2012


Concluding remarks

Folie 21

Conclusion

Long-term oriented planning and a system of continuous quantitative

data collection on local level exists which also addresses the context

of water-related risks but:

More transparency in terms of data sources and collection

More integrative and flexible scenarios / planning needed

Risk perception is high but there is low trust in the own capabilities

and little awareness of new adaptation options

Strengthen the capability of households to take situation-specific

and more sustainable decisions

Integrate more risk-specific awareness raising and capacity

building in training classes

Promote more risk-specific strategies

21

Folie 22

Stakeholder goals and the consequences of applied measures are often divergent leading to lower acceptance of measures and potential conflicts

Evaluations should not only consider target group but also stakeholders on other spatial, social and temporal scales

More stakeholder involvement and consideration of the opinions in public decision-making

Interest in and awareness of stakeholder preferences can facilitate dialogue and mutual understanding

Evaluations of projects such as CBA or EIA exist but:

Integration of less-regarded criteria and stakeholder specific evaluation can be beneficial in many cases

Important to know the range of options (quality of one strategy has to be seen against the background of potential alternatives)

22

Folie 23

Literature

DONRE Tra Vinh (2011): Báo cáo đánh giá tác động của BĐKH lên kinh tế-xã hội tỉnh Trà Vinh và đề xuất các giải pháp ứng phó. Evaluation on CC impacts to socio-environmental situation in Tra Vinh. Department for Natural Resources and Environment. Tra Vinh, Vietnam.

Grothmann, T.; Patt, A. (2005): Adaptive capacity and human cognition: the process of individual adaptation to climate change. In Global Environmental Change Part A 15 (3): 199‐213.

HMI Tra Vinh (2012a): Tóm tắt tình hình khí tượng thủy văn năm 2010, 2011 trên địa bàn huyện Trà Cú, tỉnh Trà Vinh. Summary of the hydrometeorological situation in Tra Vinh in 2010 and 2011. Hydrometeorological Institute Tra Vinh. Tra Vinh, Vietnam.

HMI Tra Vinh (2012b): Xâm nhập mặn 2010-2012. Salinisation 2010-2012. Hydrometeorological Institute Tra Vinh. Tra Vinh, Vietnam.

Jacob, J.; Mehiriz, K. (2012): Elements of a frame of reference for evaluating adaptation to climate change: The RAC-Québec case. Centre Des Recherche et D'Expertise en Evaluation (Research Report).

Silva Villanueva, P (2011): Learning to ADAPT: monitoring and evaluation approaches in climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction - challenges, gaps and ways forward. Strengthening Climate Resilience Discussion Paper 9. IDS (Institute of Development Studies). Brighton. http://community.eldis.org/.59d49a16/Learning-to-ADAPT.pdf (accessed: 29 Oct 2012).

UNFCCC (2010): Synthesis report on efforts undertaken to monitor and evaluate the implementation of adaptation projects, policies and programmes and the costs and effectiveness of completed projects, policies and programmes, and views on lessons learned, good practices, gaps and needs. Nairobi work programme on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change. Nairobi, Kenya.

Tra Vinh Economic Zone Authority (2012): Phân khu chức năng khu kinh tế Định An. Functional areas of Định An economic zone. Tra Vinh, Vietnam.

Turner, B. L.; Kasperson, R. E.; Matson, P. A.; McCarthy, J. J.; Corell, R. W.; Christensen, L. et al. (2003): A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. In Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 100 (14): 8074-8079.

23

Folie 24

Thank you for your

attention and feedback!

[email protected]

Inputs

Outputs

Process

Cognitive variables

Imp

lem

enta

tio

n

Ou

tco

mes

Environmental influences outside the place

Adaptation/Coping process

Individual decision-making

Susceptibility


Human influences outside the place

Exposure

Risk context

Vu

lner

ab

ility

Perturbations, stresses, stressors H

aza

rd

Perception of hazard and

vulnerability

Legend

Analytical components

Analytical sub-components

Main influences between sub-components

Place

Agent

Region/World

Imp

act

s

Adaptation/Coping intention

Avoidant maladaptation

Var

iab

ility

&

chan

ge

Var

iab

ility

&

chan

ge

Outcomes (different groups)

Outcomes (multiple scales)

Impacts (ultimate effects)

Source: author, based on Turner et al. (2003); Grothmann & Patt (2005); Jacob & Mehiriz (2012) ; UNFCCC (2010)


Vulnerability framwork

26

Source: own draft based on {Turner 2003 #890}

Objective capacity of response

Adaptation incentives/barriers

Reliance on other

agent‘s actions

Risk experience appraisal

Cognitive biases &

heuristics

Risk appraisal

Perceived susceptibility

Adaptation/Coping

appraisal

Response efficacy

Perceived self-efficacy

Adaptation/ Coping intention

Avoidant

maladaptation

Appreciated adaptation/coping options

Perception

Adaptation/ Coping

Perceived hazard exposure

Enab

ling /

im

pedin

g

Social discourse on natural hazards, climate change and adaptation/coping options

Perception

Goals & preferences

Perception

Individual cognition

Perception

Source: author, based on Grothmann & Reusswig (2004); Grothmann & Patt (2005)


Process

28

Inputs

• Resources required for the imple-mentation of activities

Process

• Main processes + activities to implement adaptation

Outputs

• Immediate products + services provided by activities

Outcomes

• short-/ medium-term effects generated by outputs

Impacts

• long-term changes in social-ecological system

Staff

Time

...

Admin.

Training

...

# classes

# particip.

...

Skills

Motivation

...

Well-being

Environm.

...


Changing risk –

Industrial zone plans for the year 2020

29

Functional areas of Định An economic zone planned for the year 2020 (total size: 15 403 ha)

Source: translated and complemented draft, data and cartography Tra Vinh Economic Zone Authority (2012)


Source: Household survey (n=98); M. Schwab 2012

Subjective evaluation of government strategies

30

,00

,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

Mea

n v

alu

e o

f ea

ch s

trat

egy'

s sc

ori

ng

(on

ly h

h w

ho

w

ere

affe

cted

by

the

resp

ecti

ve p

olic

y sc

ore

d it

)

Income effect Proportion of beneficiaries Long-term effect

Implementation time Reliability Competence

Participation

Scoring of most important governmental strategies according to selected criteria


Source: Household survey (n=98); M. Schwab 2012

Subjective evaluation of household strategies

31

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90 B

uild

em

ba

nkm

en

t

Rep

air

em

ba

nkm

en

t

Re

pro

du

ce

Pu

mp

wa

ter

Red

uce

fe

rtili

ze

r/m

ed

icin

e

Incre

ase fe

rtili

ze

r/m

edic

ine

Ta

ke

ch

ildre

n o

ut o

f sch

oo

l

Fo

od

on

cre

dit

Fe

rtili

ze

r o

n c

red

it

Ta

ke

a lo

an

(A

gri

ba

nk)

Se

ll la

nd

Inve

st in

asse

ts

intr

od

uce 3

rd s

ea

so

n

Ch

an

ge

cro

p c

ale

nd

ar

Ch

an

ge

cro

p

Mig

ratio

n to

HC

MC

Work

ing fo

r M

y P

ho

ng

Incre

ase s

co

pe

of o

ff-f

arm

…

Up

gra

de

ho

use

Inve

st in

liv

esto

ck

Bu

ild s

ma

ll g

ate

in %

of a

ll re

sp

on

da

nts

wh

o m

en

tio

ne

d th

at it w

as

a r

ele

va

nt d

isa

dva

nta

ge

of th

e s

tra

teg

y

Costs

Income

Implementability

Time

Environment

Long-term effects

Other

Figure 14: Most important disadvantages of selected strategy options


Perceived advantages and disadvantages

32

0,0

20,0

40,0

60,0

80,0

100,0

Costs

Inco

me

Imp

lem

en

tab

ility

Tim

e

En

viro

nm

en

t

Lo

ngte

rm

Oth

er

Costs

Inco

me

Imp

lem

en

tab

ility

Tim

e

En

viro

nm

en

t

Lo

ngte

rm

Oth

er

Advantages Disadvantages

Perceived advantages and disadvantages of introducing a 3rd rice season

% of all relevant respondents who mentioned these criteria as relevant (n=98)

Source: Household survey 2012, M. Schwab

Average variable costs:

SA: 1.564.806 VND/cong

AW: 1.561736 VND/cong

WS: 1.225.567 VND/cong

(after only 2 months in most

cases!) „it affects the

environment because the

land cannot rest“

“The costs are high but

the increased income

from a third rice

season would

compensate for that”

“There is no effect on the environment”.

“The income can increase because the

returns are higher than in the other

seasons”.

“The work is harder [than for the

other seasons] because of the

pumping”.

“The output prices were high so that we

chose to produce another season of rice”.

Example:

Growing winter-spring rice


Scoring of evaluation criteria

33

Evaluation criteria for household

strategies Scoring of relevant criteria for decision-making (total of 25 points)

Households

Average

Xoai Rum hamlet Bau Sau hamlet Sa Van A

hamlet

Sugar cane Aquaculture Rice

Income 10 8 11 12

Costs 7 10 6 5

Environment 1 0 0 4

Food security 0 0 0 0

Implementation time 1 1 0 2

Autonomy/Implementability 1 0 1 2

Flexibility 2 6 0 0

Long-term impact 2 0 5 0

Climate Change proof 0 0 0 0

Risk 1 0 2 0

Total of ascribed points 25 25 25 25

Number of participants 61 13 31 15

Figure 2: Identification and scoring of relevant evaluation criteria in household decision-making Source: Group discussions and authority interviews; M. Schwab 2012


Production steps

Preparing land

Planting/sowing

Caring

Harvest

Salinity destroyed rice

Duration salinity

Severity - low

Severity - middle

Severity - high

Seasonal calendar for rice production (2011)

Summer-Autumn

Juni

Rice

prod.

(BGA)

Winter-spring season

Period of Salinity

Salinity

(BGA)

January February March April Mai

Explanation: The figure describes the timing of the production steps and the occurrence and duration of salinity intrusion for ten households in Ba Giam A (BGA) hamlet (Don Xuan commune). Every field marks one week of the year 2011. The black frames

illustrate the period between the earliest beginning and latest ending of a step/phase. The shaded fields show the period between the average beginning and ending of a step/phase.

Source: Production centred interviews, M. Schwab 2012

Production process


Source: Key informant household interviews 2012, M. Schwab

Contribution margin calculations

-5.000.000 VND

- VND

5.000.000 VND

10.000.000 VND

15.000.000 VND

20.000.000 VND

25.000.000 VND

30.000.000 VND

35.000.000 VND

40.000.000 VND

Shri

mp

(in

d.)

Suga

rcan

e (a

vera

ge)

Suga

rcan

e (s

mal

l)

Suga

rcan

e (s

mal

l)

Suga

rcan

e (s

mal

l)

Suga

rcan

e (s

mal

l)

Ric

e (b

ig)

Ric

e (s

mal

l)

Suga

rcan

e (s

mal

l)

Suga

rcan

e (s

mal

l)

Ric

e (s

mal

l)

Shri

mp

(n

at.)

Suga

rcan

e (s

mal

l)

Ric

e (a

vera

ge)

Ric

e (s

mal

l)

Ric

e (s

mal

l)

Ric

e (a

vera

ge)

Shri

mp

(n

at.)

Ric

e (b

ig)

Ric

e (b

ig)

Ric

e (s

mal

l)

Ric

e (s

mal

l)

Suga

rcan

e (a

vera

ge)

Ric

e (a

vera

ge)

Ric

e (s

mal

l)

Suga

rcan

e (s

mal

l)

Shri

mp

(n

at.)

Costs, Turnover and Contribution margin in 2011

Costs/cong in VND

Turnover/cong in VND Contribution margin/cong in VND

Folie 36

Institutions, Interconnectivities and the differential

distribution of costs and benefits

36

Climate Change

Socio-Econonmic Changes

Vu

lner

abili

ty

Salinity Vulnerability Tra Cu

Exposure: Suscept.: Capacity of resp.:

Salinity Vulnerability Tra Cu

Exposure: Suscept.: Capacity of resp.:

Tieu Can

Exposure:

Suscept.

Cap. of resp.: Sluice gate

Dyke

Tieu Can Tra Cu

2011/2012

Sluice gate

Dyke

Tieu Can Tra Cu

2010/2011

Sluice gate operated by informal stakeholders (unclear institutional regulation )

Institutionalisation of the operation

Sluice gate

Dyke

Tieu Can Tra Cu

Sluice gate

Dyke

Tieu Can Tra Cu

2012/2013


Stakeholder preferences and priorities

37

Pairwise comparison

Agricultural training class

Vocational training classes

Loan for production

Upgrade the dyke

Operation of sluice gate

Agricultural training class

Vocational training classes

223

89

Loan for production

115 99

197 213

Upgrade the dyke

93 65 128

218 247 183

Operation of sluice gate

91 81 127 172

220 231 183 136

Source: Household survey 2012, M. Schwab

title of the presentation - united nations university

Documents