| Literature DB >> 27371137 |
Uche T Okpara1, Lindsay C Stringer2, Andrew J Dougill2.
Abstract
This article examines lake drying and livelihood dynamics in the context of multiple stressors through a case study of the "Small Lake Chad" in the Republic of Chad. Livelihoods research in regions experiencing persistent lake water fluctuations has largely focused on the well-being and security of lakeshore dwellers. Little is known about the mechanisms through which lake drying shapes livelihood drawbacks and opportunities, and whether locally evolved responses are enhancing livelihoods. Here we address these gaps using empirical, mixed-methods field research couched within the framework of livelihoods and human well-being contexts. The analysis demonstrates that limited opportunities outside agriculture, the influx of mixed ethnic migrants and the increasing spate of violence all enhance livelihood challenges. Livelihood opportunities centre on the renewal effects of seasonal flood pulses on lake waters and the learning opportunities triggered by past droughts. Although drying has spurred new adaptive behaviours predicated on seasonality, traditional predictive factors and the availability of assets, responses have remained largely reactive. The article points to where lake drying fits amongst changes in the wider socio-economic landscape in which people live, and suggests that awareness of the particularities of the mechanisms that connect lake drying to livelihoods can offer insights into the ways local people might be assisted by governments and development actors.Entities:
Keywords: Adaptive behaviours; Climate variability; Lake depletion; Livelihoods; Small Lake Chad
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27371137 PMCID: PMC5055484 DOI: 10.1007/s13280-016-0805-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ambio ISSN: 0044-7447 Impact factor: 5.129
Fig. 1Map of the study area showing the average situation of Lake Chad in its ‘small state’ (2010–2015).
Source Modified from Magrin et al. (2015)
The different phases/states of Lake Chad over time based on Lake Chad Development Expert Group Review, 2014 (cited in Mekonnen 2016)
| Lake Chad phases | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attributes | Dry small | Small | Average/medium | Large/normal | Mega |
| Inflows from the Chari-Logone (km3/year) | <15 | 15–34 | 35–43 | >43 | >50 |
| Water level (m asl) | Dry northern basin | Different levels (<275) | 280–282 | >282.3 | >285 |
| Number of water bodies | Several | Several | One | One | One |
| Flooded area of the northern basin (km2) | 0 | 0–8000 | 9000 | 10 000 | >10 000 |
| Dominant landscape | Swamps and savannas | Swamps/marshes | Dune archipelago | Open water | Wide open water |
| Aquatic vegetation | ++ | +++ | ++ | + | + |
| Time period | Few years in the 1970s and mostly in the 1980s | 1973 to present, except for “Dry Small” periods | 1954–1972 | 1953–1954 | Before the 1950s |
| Estimated size (km2) | 500–1410 | 3000–14 000 | 18 000–22 000 | 22 000–25 000 | 340 000–400 000 |
Fig. 2Open surface area of Lake Chad (stacked area graph with arrows pointing at lake levels for each specific phase—highlighting the various shrinking phases from 1960 to 2010). Data received from the lake Chad Basin Commission in N’Djamena
Fig. 3Rainfall trends for Lake Chad south-eastern shore. The figure illustrates total annual rainfall for the study area with dotted line representing the average values (449 mm) for the 1960–2014 period. It reveals substantial inter-annual rainfall variability typical of the Sahel belt.
Source Statistics derived from climatological data obtained from the Directorate of Water Resources and Meteorology in N’Djamena
Characteristics of study villages and household surveys undertaken
| Villages surveyed | Household size Meana | Locationb | Estimatedc households | Number of household heads sampled |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Farming villages | 8.68 (4.79) | |||
| Miterine | Middle-distant | 93 | 40 | |
| Guitted | Near-to-road | 186 | 80d | |
| Fishing villages | 8.71 (3.41) | |||
| Kaesai | Remote island | 70 | 30 | |
| Basara | Remote island | 69 | 30 | |
| Kouri (Topio) | Remote island | 47 | 20 | |
| Pastoral villages | 8.80 (3.37) | |||
| Dandi | Near-to-road/forests | 70 | 30 | |
| Ngurutu | Remote camp | 23 | 10 | |
| (558) | (240) | |||
aValues in parentheses are standard deviations
bNear-to-road village is within vehicle access (120–130 km) from N’Djamena and have a central market and bus/fuel stations; the middle-distant village is a long way off the paved roads (about 150 km from N’Djamena), accessible through unmarked tracks by motor bikes; remote islands where the fishermen live are accessible by boat or canoe; vehicle or motor bike access to remote locations is difficult without a guide who is familiar with the rough terrain. Access is usually not possible during rainy seasons
cEstimates are based on personal communications with local chiefs
dGuitte is a ‘mixed’ village where majority of households engage in either farming and herding activities or both; income-source ranking enabled the selection of 40 farmers and 40 herders from the village
Fig. 4Trends of violence and fatalities in the Lake Chad region (1997–2014).
Source Extracted from the Armed Conflict Location and Event Database (ACLED) version 5 (http://www.acleddata.com/data/version-5-data-1997-2014/)
Descriptive statistics of asset variables for different livelihood groups derived from the survey data
| Asset variable | Livelihood groupa | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Farmers | Fishermen | Pastoralists | |
| Natural asset | |||
| Water (for livelihood activities): households reporting SLC as the nearest water source for livelihood activityb | 58 (72.5) | 78 (97.5) | 13 (16.3) |
| Land: household reporting unimpeded access to land | 75 (93.8) | 25 (31.3) | 14 (17.5) |
| Financial asset | |||
| Remittance: from members/relatives working elsewhere | 18 (22.5) | 36 (45.0) | 30 (37.5) |
| Credit: households reporting access | 24 (30.0) | 8 (10.0) | 15 (18.8) |
| Income: enough to cover important household expenses | 29 (36.3) | 19 (23.8) | 6 (7.5) |
| Social asset | |||
| Membership of social group | 36 (45.0) | 13 (16.3) | 27 (33.8) |
| Access to institutions (e.g. LCBC) for external support | 3 (3.8) | 2 (2.5) | 4 (5.0) |
| Group cooperation during challenges | 44 (55.0) | 53 (66.3) | 23 (28.7) |
| Human asset | |||
| Education: head started and/or completed primary school | 13 (16.3) | 20 (25.0) | 21 (26.3) |
| Experience in livelihood activity (mean in years) | 16.8 ± 12.7 | 14.2 ± 5.6 | 27 ± 8.1 |
| Access to health care when sick | 27 (33.8) | 7 (8.8) | 3 (3.8) |
| Household head (active age: 20–50 years) | 61 (76.3) | 65 (81.3) | 66 (82.5) |
| Household depending majorly on one agro-based activity | 64 (80.0) | 49 (61.3) | 64 (80.0) |
| Physical asset | |||
| Housing: traditional (non-flood resistant) house | 80 (100.0) | 80 (100.0) | 80(100.0) |
| Tools/equipment for livelihood activityc | 78 (97.5) | 75 (93.8) | 12 (15.0) |
| Access to well, borehole, piped drinking water | 72 (90.0) | 8 (10.0) | 23 (28.7) |
| Telecommunication: mobile phone | 72 (90.0) | 71 (88.8) | 79 (98.8) |
| Average livelihoods diversification index | 0.46 | 0.42 | 0.47 |
aValues in parentheses are percentages. Survey takes livelihood groups as the principal unit of analysis in line with the nature of the enquiry, therefore social differentiation within villages is not emphasised
bLocal people at the southeast shore exploit various SLC (Small Lake Chad) water bodies, which include permanent and seasonal ponds, receding channels, Lake’s open water and water flows coming in from the Chari River
cTools and equipment for livelihood activities are manual farming, fishing and herding tools
Contextual adaptive responses employed to deal with conditions affecting livelihoods. Compiled from household survey in the southeast shore of the Small Lake Chad
| Adaptive responsesa | Livelihood group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Farmers | Fishermen | Pastoralists | |
| Agronomic-related | Changes in timing of land preparation, including planting and harvest dates | ||
| Economic-related | ~13 % trade in crops after peak farming activities are over | Migratory fishing in groups | Collective livestock grazing and seasonal migration |
| Environment-related | Afforestation: ~21 % plant trees usually around the homesteadb
| ~12 % identified seasonal floods as suitable for increasing fish yield | ~16 % often culled disease-infected animals |
| Technology-related | Ground water harvesting and storage of water in wells is common | ~10 % cited using water from well occasionally for drinking | Well water is a backup against severe droughts; ~20 % harvest water along ground water channels |
aThe adaptive responses identified by respondents have been categorised into four here as agronomic (related largely to land and crop cultivations), economic (adjustments in behaviours to tackle the effects of low productivity), environmental (modifications in order to exploit the benefits of environmental changes either by tree planting, herd size reduction or exploiting seasonal floods), and technological (use of elements of local techniques in anticipation of future changes). A mix of strategies is common around the SLC
bTree crops planted are mostly mangoes, banana, apple, cashew and orange trees—those planted on farmlands have their lower branches pruned regularly to enable minimal penetration of sun rays in order to help soils retain water and to prevent crops from drying out
Fig. 5Annual flux of seasonal activities (based on Seasonal rainfalla, River flowb, Water level/floodc) observed during fieldwork at the south-eastern shore of Lake Chad, 2013–2014
Fig. 6Mean monthly rainfall of the Lake’s southern shore near N’Djamena (1990–2014).
Source Extracted from the World Bank Climate Change Knowledge Portal (2015) (http://sdwebx.worldbank.org/climateportal/index.cfm?page=country_historical_climate&ThisRegion=Africa&ThisCCode=TCD)