| Literature DB >> 27390633 |
Chelestino Balama1, Suzana Augustino2, Siri Eriksen3, Fortunatus B S Makonda2.
Abstract
Climate change is a global and local challenge to both sustainable livelihoods and economic development. Tanzania as other countries of the world has been affected. Several studies have been conducted on farmers' perceptions and adaptation to climate change in the country, but little attention has been devoted to forest adjacent households in humid areas. This study assessed this gap through assessing forest adjacent households' voices on perceptions and adaptation strategies to climate change in Kilombero District, Tanzania. Data collection involved key informant interviews, focus group discussions and household questionnaires. Results showed that the majority of households perceived changed climate in terms of temperature increase, unpredictable rainfall, frequent occurrence of floods, increased dry spells during rainy season coupled with decreased water sources and emergence of new pests and diseases. The perceived change in climate has impacted agriculture productivity as the main livelihood source. Different coping and adaptation strategies are employed. These are; crop diversification, changing cropping calendar, adopting modern farming technologies, and increasing reliance on non-timber forest products. These strategies were positively and significantly influenced by socio-economic factors including household size, residence period, land ownership and household income. The study concludes that, there are changes in climatic conditions; and to respond to these climatic changes, forest adjacent households have developed numerous coping and adaptation strategies, which were positively and significantly influenced by some socio-economic factors. The study calls for actual implementation of local climate change policies and strategies in order to enhance adaptive capacity at household level.Entities:
Keywords: Climate change; Coping and adaptation strategies; Forest adjacent households; Non-timber forest products; Perceptions; Tanzania
Year: 2016 PMID: 27390633 PMCID: PMC4916080 DOI: 10.1186/s40064-016-2484-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Fig. 1A map showing location of study villages in Kilombero District, Tanzania
Some characteristics of Mpofu, Njage and Miwangani villages in the study area
| Characteristics | Mpofu | Njage | Miwangani |
|---|---|---|---|
| Geographical position | 08°12′57″S; 36°14′333″E | 08°15′26″S; 36°10′08″E | 08°11′06″S; 36°32′11″E |
| Mean altitude (m) | 295 | 312 | 272 |
| Populationa | 3123 | 3402 | 2545 |
| Average household size | 4.72 | 4.78 | 4.93 |
| Average land size (ha)/household | 1.32 | 1.30 | 1.77 |
| Crops grown | Main (banana, maize, rice); others (sesame, cocoa, sunflower, cassava) | Main (rice, banana, maize); others (sesame, cassava) | Main (rice, maize); others (sesame, cassava, banana) |
| Ethnic groups | Main (hehe, nyakyusa, bena, ndali); others (sukuma, makua, kerewe, gita, ndamba, pogolo, nyamwezi, haya, safa and kinga) | Main (hehe, bena, nyakyusa, ndamba); others (sukuma, pogolo, kerewe, gita, nyamwezi, chaga and matumbi) | Main (ndamba, pogolo, hehe, and sukuma); others (nyakyusa, ndali, luguru, bena, kinga and matumbi) |
aHousing and population census of 2012 (URT 2013b)
Sample size distribution in the study villages in Kilombero District, Tanzania
| Village | Number of households | Sampling intensity | Sample size (n) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mpofu | 714 | .1 | 70 |
| Njage | 868 | .1 | 87 |
| Miwangani | 581 | .1 | 58 |
| Total | 2163 | 215 |
Forest adjacent households’ perception on climate change in Kilombero District, Tanzania
| Indicator | Attributes | Response (%) n = 215 |
|---|---|---|
| Rainfall amount | Increase | 68 |
| Decrease | 27 | |
| No change | 5 | |
| Rain seasona | Delay in onset | 82 |
| Early cessation | 35 | |
| Rainfall intensity | High rains for a short time | 62 |
| Little rains for a long time | 23 | |
| Little rains for a short time | 11 | |
| No change | 4 | |
| Temperature | Increased | 75 |
| Decreased | 19 | |
| No changed | 6 |
aMultiple response analysis was applied to rain season variable
Effects of changing climatic conditions to forest adjacent households’ livelihoods in Kilombero District, Tanzania
| Climate change effect | Responses (%) n = 215 |
|---|---|
| High risk of floods on agricultural fields | 99 |
| Wilting of crops due to moisture stress | 77 |
| Settlements destructions due to floods | 14 |
| Increased outbreak of human diseases | 24 |
| Increased outbreak of pests and diseases in crop and livestock | 18 |
| Drying of rivers and dams | 13 |
| Increased wild fires on forests and grasslands in prolonged dry season | 3 |
| Roads destructions due to floods | 4 |
Fig. 2Total annual rainfall (mm) recorded between 1980 and 2010 in Kilombero District, Tanzania
Fig. 3Average maximum and minimum temperature (°C) recorded between 1990 and 2010 in Kilombero District, Tanzania
Developed forest adjacent communities strategies against dry spell effects in Kilombero District, Tanzania
| Strategies | Responses (%) (n = 215) |
|---|---|
| Crop diversification | 85 |
| Changing cropping calendar | 80 |
| Adopting modern faming technologies | 63 |
| No adaption option | 8 |
Main crops (traditional and non-traditional) grown in Kilombero District, Tanzania
| Crops grown | Responses (%) (n = 215) | |
|---|---|---|
| Common names | Botanical names | |
| Traditional crops | ||
| Paddy |
| 89 |
| Maize |
| 89 |
| Banana |
| 52 |
| Coconut |
| 1 |
| Non-traditional crops | ||
| Sesame |
| 20 |
| Cassava |
| 22 |
| Sweet potatoes |
| 17 |
| Cocoa |
| 3 |
| Groundnuts |
| 2 |
| Pigeon peas |
| 13 |
| Cow peas |
| 4 |
| Sunflower |
| 3 |
Developed strategies for managing changing climatic conditions in Kilombero District, Tanzania
| Coping strategy | Responses (%) (n = 215) |
|---|---|
| Casual labour | 20.2 |
| Use of NTFPs | 17.3 |
| Selling livestock | 6.2 |
| Remittance | 2.8 |
| Petty trade | 5.6 |
| Selling rice and buying maize | 1.1 |
Use pattern of priority NTFPs by households in Kilombero District, Tanzania
| Use pattern | Priority NTFPs | Annual average collection per household |
|---|---|---|
| Subsistence | Firewood | 116.53 ± 4.63 (77) |
| Medicinal plants | 5.53 ± 0.35 (47) | |
| Thatch grass | 31.33 ± 1.71 (63) | |
| Trade | Firewood | 292.8 ± 14.27 (23) |
| Medicinal plants | 16.39 ± 2.72 (15) | |
| Thatch grass | 40.06 ± 1.66 (54) |
Unit for firewood and thatch grasses is head load, equivalent to 16.55 ± 3.33 and 14.12 ± 3.19 kg, respectively; while for medicinal plants is kg; numbers in parenthesis are respondent frequencies (%)
Types of NTFPs as adaptation to climate change effects by gender in Kilombero District, Tanzania
| NTFPs | Responses (%) (n = 215) | |
|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | |
| Wild mushrooms | 54 | 46 |
| Construction materials (thatch grass, withies, ropes, poles) | 12 | 13 |
| Firewood | 14 | 15 |
| Edible fruits | 3 | 3 |
| Edible tubers | 14 | 10 |
| Medicinal plants | 3 | 4 |
| Malala [ | 53 | 27 |
| Ukindu ( | 13 | 23 |
Socio-economic factors influencing climate change adaptation strategies in Kilombero District
| Independent variables | One–three adaptation strategies | More than three adaptation strategies | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β | SE | Wald | t | Sig. | Exp(β) | Β | SE | Wald | t | Sig. | Exp(β) | |
| Intercept | .490 | .776 | .399 | 1 | .528 | − | −20.921 | 4.939 | 17.940 | 1 | .000 | − |
| Age (X1) | −.038 | .016 | 5.819 | 1 | .016* | .963 | −.045 | .127 | .124 | 1 | .725 | .956 |
| Household size (X2) | .400 | .081 | 8.569 | 1 | .003* | 1.269 | .400 | .332 | 1.451 | 1 | .228 | 1.492 |
| Residence period (X3) | .007 | .012 | 6.815 | 1 | .009* | 1.031 | .007 | .097 | .005 | 1 | .941 | .993 |
| Education level (X4) | .464 | 3.059 | 1.235 | 1 | .266 | .629 | 16.251 | 3.059 | .000 | 1 | .998 | .000 |
| Land ownership (X5) | 16.399 | .000 | 1.023 | 1 | .312 | .575 | 16.399 | .000 | .000 | 1 | .000* | 1.325 |
| Household income (X6) | .017 | .042 | 3.093 | 1 | .049* | 1.031 | .067 | .097 | .005 | 1 | .941 | .993 |
| Forest access rules (X7) | −.002 | .385 | .000 | 1 | .996 | .998 | −1.655 | 7.261 | .000 | 1 | .998 | 1.5397 |
Cox and Snell R2 = .261, Nagelkerke R2 = .342, β = regression coefficients which stand for the odds ratio of probability of success to the probability of failure, SE = standard error of the estimate, Wald statistics = Wald statistics denotes relationship between dependent and independent variables; df = degree of freedom, Sig. = significance or P values, Exp(β) = odds ratio (probability of success over probability of failure)
* Statistically significant at P < 0.05 level