Simelton talking toolkit
•Descargar como PPTX, PDF•
0 recomendaciones•217 vistas
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (12)
Destacado
Similar a Simelton talking toolkit
Similar a Simelton talking toolkit (20)
Más de World Agroforestry (ICRAF)
Más de World Agroforestry (ICRAF) (20)
Simelton talking toolkit
- 1. The Talking Toolkit for Facilitating Farmer Groups on the Role of Trees for Adaptation Elisabeth Simelton¹, Bac Viet Dam¹, Robert Finlayson², Rodel Lasco³ World Agroforestry Centre ¹Viet Nam, ²Indonesia, ³Philippines Contact: e.simelton@cgiar.org
- 2. The project Objectives Viet Nam 21 villages Philippines 24 villages • Document the role of trees and agroforestry for adapting to extreme weather events and climate change • Support local government making adapted land use plans
- 3. The approach Cost & Benefit Analysis Participatory Land Use Scenarios Focus Group Discussions Household Surveys Dialogues Role of Trees Land Use Plans
- 4. The Talking Toolkit • • • • • • Identify the key issues Exposures, impacts Mapping hazard areas Farming system sensitivity Coping and adaptation strategies Perceptions of climatic changes http://worldagroforestry.org/regions/southeast_asia/vietnam/products/tools/talking-toolkit
- 5. Exposures and Suitability of trees 1. List key exposures & definitions 2. List key crops and trees 3. Rank each crop/tree against the exposure Cold spell Drought Flood Storm Maize Cassava Melia Acacia Bamboo Rice …
- 6. Exposures and suitability of trees 1. List key exposures & definitions 2. List key crops and trees 3. Rank each crop/tree against the exposure
- 7. Differing perceptions of impacts maize lime/orange Tree dies 5 cassava Mangletia/Bodhi bamboo Production declines 4 Not 3 affected 2 Production increases 1 Positive interaction 0 Leaders Farmers Leaders Farmers Leaders Farmers
- 8. Key findings • Gender – Awareness • Coping – Adaptation • Limits to agroforestry adoption 40:66
- 9. Recommendations • Consider climate-smart land use planning as an ongoing dialogue among local stakeholders and scientists • Raise awareness of the interaction effects to better utilise the functions of trees • Compare the risks and costs for not adapting with available adaptation strategies
- 10. Keep Talking Use the Toolkit ! • http://worldagroforestry.org/regions/southea st_asia/vietnam/products/tools/talking-toolkit Read our blogs ! • http://www.wca2014.org/how-to-find-theright-tree-for-the-right-place/#.UvCd0dGIrGE Cite our work ! • Lasco RD, Delfino RJ, Catacutan D, Simelton E, Wilson DM. 2014. Climate risk adaptation by smallholder farmers: the roles of trees and agroforestry. In: Mbow C, Neufeldt H, Minang PA, Luedeling E, Kowero G, eds. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 6:8388 Contact: E.Simelton@cgiar.org
- 11. The project Objectives Vietnam 21 villages 661 households Philippines 24 villages 1542 households • Document the role of trees and agroforestry for adapting to extreme weather events and climate change • Support local government making “Climate-Smart” land use plans
Notas del editor
- My name is Elisabeth Simelton and the title of my presentation is ….With me on this work are also my colleagues at the World Agroforestry Centre: Dam Viet Bac - VN, Robert Finlayson - Indo and Rodel Lasco - Phil. AbstractAs agroforestry is gaining ground as a Climate-Smart practice, we discovered that very little was documented on the role of trees for farmers’ coping and adaptation strategies. Furthermore, “participatory tools” for this purpose were missing or needed revamping. Results from 660 households in northern and northcentral Viet Nam show an astounding 2/3 of women and 1/3 of men had never heard of ‘climate change’ – although they are exposed to multiple hazards on an annual basis. This affected how we work and talk about adaptation. Here we present a selection of participatory tools developed specifically to identify the role of agroforestry and trees as coping strategies during extreme weather events and for identifying adaptation options. Next we present key results from focus group discussions and how these are used for local landuse planning. The tools are available online as living document for further use by agroforesters.
- Before I talk about The Talking Toolkit, let me just explain the background.We discovered that for Southeast Asia there were little documentation on THE ROLE OF TREES AND AGROFORESTRY for adaptation to climate change and extreme weather events. So the projects aim to document these roles of trees and support local governments to incorporate adaptation in their land use plans. The projects are implemented in Vietnam and the Philippines. In Vietnam we have combined both projects, in the Philippines the two objectives are divided. In my presentation today I will quickly show the APPROACH, THE TOOLKIT - in particular two tools - and show some results from Vietnam.
- Briefly about the approach. “dialogues” have been fundamental throughout this process. That means open dialogues between us as scientists and local stakeholders (in particular farmers, leaders, planners, and development organisations, local industries) – to get approval and understanding. We started with focus group discussions, which is what I will focus this talk about… with guided topic guides and exercises about specific questions..The FGD informed our household surveys – to make the survey more context specific.With feedback from the FGD and HH Survey we worked with local leaders and new farmer groups to derive a future scenario that includes climate change, socioeconomic changes to design agroforestry systems that they believe are “climate-smart”, i.e. ensure livelihoods/food security, are adapted and perhaps also meets mitigation objectives. We make a CBA of the adapted systems that is presented to leaders as decision support for adapted, or, Climate-Smart Land Use Plans.
- To understand the fundamental problems and design a better household questionnaire, we designed ten participatory tools to facilitate focus group discussions. These tools are now used by other research and development organisations, and universities for training students. We always start by avoiding talking about CC & weather, and the first tool “Challenges for making a livelihood from agriculture & forestry” – a problem-tree – to find out what other non-climate/weather-related challenges the farmers face. This is to get a picture of the local context, to understand how big “problem” weather is among all other challenges they face, and start to get a picture of how they perceive weather/climate. These tools are published online, the website is at the bottom here, and today, I will concentrate on two tools and then show some results from this work.
- Because of this agroforestry audience, I will concentrate on two tools to quickly rank the suitability of specific crops, or varieties, and trees during a weather impact.How do we do this?Exposures – First, the group lists all weather exposures and the definitions of these. It is important to define the exposures because it is easy to confuse exposure with impact and it is important to make the farmers/leaders aware of this. And the impact may depend on that the sensitivity of a farming system has changed, e.g. by changing crop variety. Suitability of trees – Next, list all crops and trees. If there are many trees, you may have to prioritise or split the crops between focus groups. Do varieties if this is important. It can also be wild trees and plants that you may want to consider to bring into agroforestry systems. Then the groups do the ranking. We had 5 ranks (tree dies, production/quality reduced, not affected, production/quality increase, tree or crop does well and has positive interaction effects – i.e. useful in agroforestry systems). The important thing here is not so much the ranking as the arguments and discussions and explanations for the rank. At the feedback, the rankings can be adjusted.
- Cont. (4) The idea here is to look if households or villages have a lot of crops that all are sensitive to one type of exposure. Then combine species to reduce the total sensitivity (select those that are yellow and green) and diversify the risks (for each species with a red or orange rank, mix it with another one that is yellow or green). (5) How we used it: To facilitate the adapted land use plans, we averaged the ranks the administrative level. (6) Alterations: Divide into groups of women and men, farmers and leaders… I will come back to this…
- The tree-ranking matrix exercise was an interesting example of the perception of risk, and how this may vary between farmers and leaders, those who make the land use plans… Here is an example of how farmers and leaders perceive the risk of cold spells, droughts and flooding for maize, cassava, bamboo, lime/orange and Mangletia/Bodhi trees. Same ranking as before. For example, farmers ranked the all the crops and trees as more sensitive to flooding than the leaders, while leaders rated the droughts higher. It was particularly interesting that leaders rated the two key prioritised species, lime/orange and maize lower than the farmers. One reason of course is that farmers are experts on their area but leaders may average over a larger administrative area. Farmers are risk averse and leaders more optimists.
- First, some examples of results that we get from the focus groups and HH-survey. I will show some key findings for Vietnam. Gender awareness of climate change. In Vietnam 40% of women, 66% of men HAD HEARD ABOUT CC. Doesn’t mean they can explain. But this affects how we talk about climate change, and adaptation.Exposures. The majority of farmers in both our project sites were impacted frequently and multiple exposure to cold spell > drought > cold rain > hot spell > flooding > storm. In terms of the roles of trees and agroforestry for adaptation: We could divide the coping and adaptation strategies:Coping strategies were reactive -Annual crops give immediate response; High-cost and unsustainable if exposure worsens/ repeats Adaptation strategies were proactive - Low-cost, no-regret. Addressed multiple risks.. So what is limiting the adoption of agroforestry and trees for adaptation? 1. The roles of trees and intercropped systems – mainly economic. In some cases: watershed protection but rarely to reduce impacts of natural hazards. 2. Limitations. Limited experience and expertise in agroforestry and CC hesitation, underutilised functions of treesMarketability - a requirement for adoption Specifically in Vietnam: Shortage of forestland/garden area; Food security policy restricts land use (and adaptation); Limited species selection for reforestation; Degenerated germ-plasm of indigenous speciesLeaders and farmers rank crops and differently.
- Based on our studies I want to give two recommendationsStart the land use planning as a dialogue between farmers and local leaders – to get everyone on board and avoid misunderstandings and misadaptationThe costs for not adapting should not be underestimated. These could be balanced with the available adaptation options.
- LastlyKEEP TALKING!!
- Before I talk about The Talking Toolkit, let me just explain the background.We discovered that for Southeast Asia there were little documentation on THE ROLE OF TREES AND AGROFORESTRY for adaptation to climate change and extreme weather events. So the projects aim to document these roles of trees and support local governments to incorporate adaptation in their land use plans. The projects are implemented in Vietnam and the Philippines. In Vietnam we have combined both projects, in the Philippines the two objectives are divided. In my presentation today I will quickly show the APPROACH, THE TOOLKIT - in particular two tools - and show some results from Vietnam.