• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Enhancing farmer’s resilience toward droughts: perspective from northwestern region of Bangladesh
 

Enhancing farmer’s resilience toward droughts: perspective from northwestern region of Bangladesh

on

  • 445 views

Umma HABIBA, Rajib SHAW, Yukiko TAKEUCHI

Umma HABIBA, Rajib SHAW, Yukiko TAKEUCHI

Kyoto University, Japan

Statistics

Views

Total Views
445
Views on SlideShare
439
Embed Views
6

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

1 Embed 6

http://conftool.grforum.net 6

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Enhancing farmer’s resilience toward droughts: perspective from northwestern region of Bangladesh Enhancing farmer’s resilience toward droughts: perspective from northwestern region of Bangladesh Presentation Transcript

    • Enhancing Farmer’s Resilience toward Droughts:Perspective from Northwestern Region of Bangladesh Umma Habiba, Rajib Shaw and Yukiko Takeuchi Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Overview of the Presentation 2BackgroundObjective of the study❑Methodology❑Results❑ConclusionKyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management 2 Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Impacts of Drought in Bangladesh 3o Annually affected area: 12.49 million hectares of cultivable T-aman crop in kharif season 9.32 million hectares of rabi crops in rabi seasono Yield reduction: 45 to 60 % in T-aman and 50 to 70 % in rabi crops Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Drought in Bangladesh 4oMajor droughts occurred in Bangladesh are 1973, 1978, 1979, 1981, 1982, 1992, 1994, 1995, 2000, 2006 and 2009oDrought mostly appear in pre-monsoon (March-May) and post-monsoon season (October-November) Pre-kharif season: Kharif season: Rabi season: 16 March-30 June 1 July-15 October 16 Oct-15 March Pre-Kharif, Kharif and Rabi drought-prone areas of Bangladesh (Source: Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC), 2010) Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Causes of Drought in Bangladesh (1) 5 Avg. 2,300mm Around 1,000mm Avg. 1,329mm Annual average total rainfall (mm) from 1991-2008 Monthly mean rainfall (mm) distribution in drought-prone area (Source: Bangladesh Meteorological Department, 2011)Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Causes of Drought in Bangladesh (2) 6 Dry season: November- May (of 7 months) Monsoon season: June - October (of 5 months) Rainfall and evapotranspiration in the study area (Source: Bangladesh Meteorological Department, 2011) Depth of groundwater table (m) 2008% of irrigation coverage Depletion of groundwater depth Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Drought Risk Management Actions in Bangladesh 7 Drought risk management practices At institutional At infrastructure At community and household Level (Physical) level (Social) level Crop diversification, Governmental activities- Change cropping pattern, EWS, relief , demonstration Establishment of irrigation channel through deep tube other income generating program activities well (DTW) NGO activities Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Research Objectives 8To develop a tool that is able to measure the socio-economic, institutional and physical resilience of a drought affected area•To find out drought impacts on farmers livelihood and existing adaptive practices to cope with it•To document adaptive practices, and suggest policy and actions links Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Development of SIP Approach (1) 9•How to measure resilience on the basis of socio-economic, institutionaland physical aspect of a drought affected area? SIP approach: 3 dimensions, 11 primary indicators and 55 secondary indicators Analysis: Weighted Mean Index ands Average Weighted Mean Index SIP Approach Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Development of SIP Approach (2) 10➪ SIP approach consist of - 3 dimensions - 11 primary indicators Literacy rate - 55 secondary indicators Knowledge about drought Having predictability Taking preventive measures S Awareness about drought Collaboration  Co-ordination School/college I Highlighting drama Community leader/imam Electricity supply P  Fuel supply Dam Water reservoir Drought warning systemKyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Upazila Level Resilience Assessment (Study details) 11 o Conducted at: upazila level (sub-district) in Rajshahi and Chapai Nawabganj o Key aim of the study: N To measure the socio-economic, institutional Bholahat Chapai Nawabganj and physical resilience of a drought affected Gamastapur area Shibganj Nachole o Methodology: Develop SIP approach Tanore Baghmara Rajshahi Nawabganj Mohanpur Godagari o Sample no: 14 (14 upazilas of two district) Durgapur Paba Puthia - 9 from Rajshahi district Charghat Legend Study area - 5 from Chapai Nawabganj district) Bagha District boundary oTarget group: Upazila Nirbahi Officer (UNO) Upazila boundary o Data collection period: 6 Jan- 19 Feb, 2010 Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Upazila Level Resilience Assessment (Key results) 12 B- Socio-economic A- Overall Bholahat Bholahat Gamastapur Gamastapur Nachole Shibganj Nachole Shibganj Tanore Baghmara Tanore Baghmara Nawabganj Mohanpur Very high Godagari Nawabganj Mohanpur Durgapur Very High Godagari High Durgapur Puthia High Paba Puthia Medium Paba Charghat Medium Low Charghat Low Bagha Very low Very Low Bagha D- Physical C- Institutional Bholahat Bholahat Gamastapur Gamastapur Nachole Shibganj Nachole Shibganj Tanore Baghmara Tanore Baghmara Nawabganj Mohanpur Nawabganj Mohanpur Godagari Godagari Very High Durgapur Very High Durgapur Puthia High Paba Puthia High Paba Charghat Medium Charghat Medium Low Bagha Low Bagha Very Low Very Low Resilience levels of Rajshahi and Chapai Nawabganj districts Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Farmers’ Adaptive Practices towards Drought 13Conducted at: Village levelAims: To enhance drought resilience at farmer’s level through adaptive practicesTarget Group: FarmerNo of Questionnaire : 718 farmers from those two district 358 farmer from irrigated village 360 farmer from non-irrigated villageData Collection Period: 2 October- 26 November, 2010 Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Impacts of Drought on farmer’s Livelihood 14 Impacts of Drought Key points:Sample no:Irrigated village: 358 Agriculture as well as daily life and health were badlyNon-irrigated village: 360 affected by drought Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Farmer’s Adaptive Practices towards Drought 15 Sample no: Adaptive Practices Irrigated village: 358 Non-irrigated village: 360 Legend: 1. Agronomic practices 2. Water Harvesting 3. Water resources exploitation 4. Crop intensification 5. Alternate crops cultivation 6. Other income generating activities 7. Others Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Formulation of Drought Adaptive Practices (DAP) 16 16Dimensions Primary Secondary Indicators Selection of Drought Adaptive options indicators from Secondary IndicatorsSocio- Education ■ Literacy rate ■ Knowledge about drought ■ Having predictability ■ Having predictability and awareness ■ Taking preventive measure ■ Awarded about drought ■ Taking preventive measureeconomic Health ■ Access to safe water ■ Time period having access of safe water ■ Extent ■ Primary health care facility of diseases ■ Primary health care facility ■ Recovery Usage ■ Food consumption ■ Reserved food grain ■ Migration ■ Changing occupation ■ Non agricultural farming Social capital ■ Social cohesion ■ Participation ■ Water related conflict ■ Build consensus ■ Acceptance of leader Economic ■ Income source ■ Other income generating activities ■ Use of savings ■ Other income generating activities aspect ■ Sell off assets, land or livestocks ■ Credit, subsidy ■ Use of savings ■ Sell off assets, land or livestocksInstitutional Policy ■ Incorporation into plan ■ Effectiveness of the plan ■ Support by GO ■ Public awareness program and NGO ■ Water management activities ■ Public awareness program Management ■ Collaboration ■ Co-ordination ■ Community leader/imam ■ School/college ■ Highlighting dramas ■ Community leader/imam Co-ordination ■ Training ■ Demonstration ■ Credit/loan ■ Aids ■ Aids ■ SubsidyPhysical Infrastructure ■ Electricity supply ■ Fuel supply ■ Dam ■ Water reservoir ■ Drought ■ Electricity supply (Alternative development warning system energy sources) ■ Water reservoir ■ Drought warning system Irrigation ■ Irrigation system ■ Irrigation facilities (DTW, STW, over head tank etc) ■ Supplemental irrigation ■ Supplemental irrigation ■ Dependency on rainfall ■ Rain water harvest Land use ■ Built up area ■ Vegetative area ■ Water bodies ■ Drought tolerant ■ Drought tolerant crop crop ■ Fruit tree plantation ■ Fruit tree plantation Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Prioritized Drought Adaptive Practices (DAP) 17 17 (At Community Level) Name of the most prioritized Drought Adaptive Practices: 1.Dairy farm/ community savings and credit system 2. Received information from TV, radio 3. Community health care service 4. Establish dairy farm 5. save money 6. Sell agricultural goods 7. Extension worker 8. Public awareness program 9. Cash/ electricity Key points: 10. Establish drought information center More than 50% of the farmer’s in both 11. Vegetable gardeningirrigated and non-irrigated areas agreed 12. Establish mango orchard 13. Use of plastic pipe with these 13 DAP. Moreover, 80% of 14. Dredge the river and use of riverthe farmer’s highlighted only 3 DAP that water is the topmost prior adaptive practices 15. Use of diesel Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Framework for Drought Risk Management Policy and Actions 18 Process Assessment Level SIP Approach 3 dimensions Upazila Level Resilience 11 primary indicators (Sub-district level) Assessment 55 secondary indicators Key Interviews (14) Drought Resilience Mapping 15 drought adaptive options Farmer’s level 60 prioritized drought adaptive 81 barriers to adopt (Irrigated village practices practices at community level & Non-irrigated Solution for Irrigated area Non-irrigated area Irrigated Non- village) area irrigated enhancing I& F L CL I &F L CL area Key Interview s Drought 15 15 15 15 40 41 (718) Resilience Irrigated Development of Drought Adaptive Practices (DAP) village(358) 30 drought adaptive practices at community level Non-irrigated village (360) Focus Group Discussion (4) Sustaining Drought National level Community Resilience Local level through Workshop(2) Implementation National level (1) Local level (1) Kyoto University Drought Policy School of Globaland Disaster Management International Environment Graduate Framework Environmental Studies
    • Conclusions 19 SIP approach highlights that physical measure such as irrigation alone can not solve the drought problem. It gives emphasis on the execution of institutional role towards drought such as translating drought risk reduction policy at local to national level, effective water management activities, and networking among GOs, NGOs and other institutions The DAP, as the outcome of farmer’s adaptive practices, requires institutionalization and broader stakeholders dialogue to strengthen the linkage between community and national government The drought risk management policy and action framework developed in this study brings together both community and national government in identifying time frame and responsibilities, thus strengthening the link between the DAP to national policy Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Thank you very much for your kind attentionKyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Dimension and Indicators used for SIP Approach Dimensions Primary Secondary indicators indicators Socio- Education ■ Literacy rate ■ Knowledge about drought, economic and awareness ■ Having predictability ■ Taking preventive measure, ■ Awareness about drought Health ■ Access to safe water ■ Time period having access of safe water ■ Extent of diseases ■ Primary health care facility ■ Recovery Usage ■ Food consumption ■ Reserved food grain ■ Migration ■ Changing occupation ■ Non agricultural farming Social capital ■ Social cohesion ■ Participation ■ Water related conflict ■ Build consensus ■ Acceptance of leader Economic ■ Income source ■ Other income generating activities ■ Use of savings ■ Sell off assets, land or live stocks ■ Credit, subsidy Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Dimension and Indicators used for SIP ApproachDimensions Primary Secondary indicators indicatorsInstitutional Policy ■ Incorporation into plan ■ Effectiveness of the plan ■ Support by GO and NGO ■ Water management activities ■ Public awareness program Management ■ Collaboration ■ Co-ordination ■ School/college ■ Highlighting dramas ■ Community leader/imam Co-ordination ■ Training ■ Demonstration ■ Credit/loan ■ Aids ■ SubsidyPhysical Infrastructure ■ Electricity supply ■ Fuel supply ■ Dam ■ Water development reservoir ■ Drought warning system Irrigation ■ Irrigation system ■ Irrigation facilities (DTW, STW, over head tank etc ■ Supplemental irrigation ■ Dependency on rainfall ■ Rain water harvest Land use ■ Built up area ■ Vegetative area ■ Water bodies ■ Drought tolerant crop ■ Fruit tree plantation Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies
    • Farmer’s prioritized and recommendedPractices (DAP) (3) 23 Formulation of Drought Adaptive Drought Adaptive Pra 23 Selection and Prioritization of Drought Adaptive Practices For the prioritization of each drought adaptive practice 3 adaptive practices were proposed at the farmer’s level. Another prictice was kept in blank for the farmer to find out any additional option coming from them For example: Taking preventive measure •What kind of preventive measures are taken to face drought during the drought period? (Prioritize or rank actions, 1= most important, 2= important and 3= least important) A1. A2. A3. A4. Individual and Changing cropping Cultivate diversified Stored food family level pattern crops A1. A2. A3. A4. Community savings Establish grain bank Establish dairy Community level and credit system farm Kyoto University International Environment and Disaster Management Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies