Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
ClimateKG
Search
Search
English
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
IPCC:AR6/SRCCL/Chapter-5
(section)
IPCC
Discussion
English
Read
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
In other projects
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==== 5.3.5.3 Community-based adaptation ==== <div id="section-5-3-5-3-community-based-adaptation-block-1"></div> Community-based adaptation (CBA) builds on social organisational capacities and resources to address food security and climate change. CBA represents bottom-up approaches and localised adaptation measures where social dynamics serve as the power to respond to the impacts of climate change (Ayers and Forsyth 2009 <sup>[[#fn:r646|646]]</sup> ). It identifies, assists, and implements development activities that strengthen the capacity of local people to adapt to living in a riskier and less predictable climate, while ensuring their food security. Klenk et al. (2017) <sup>[[#fn:r647|647]]</sup> found that mobilisation of local knowledge can inform adaptation decision-making and may facilitate greater flexibility in government-funded research. As an example, rural innovation in terrace agriculture developed on the basis of a local coping mechanism and adopted by peasant farmers in Latin America may serve as an adaptation option to climate change (Bocco and Napoletano, 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r648|648]]</sup> ). Clemens et al. (2015) <sup>[[#fn:r649|649]]</sup> indicated that learning alliances provided social learning and knowledge-sharing in Vietnam through an open dialogue platform that provided incentives and horizontal exchange of ideas. Community-based adaptation generates strategies through participatory processes, involving local stakeholders and development and disaster risk reduction practitioners. Fostering collaboration and community stewardship is central to the success of CBA (Scott et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r650|650]]</sup> ). Preparedness behaviours that are encouraged include social connectedness, education, training, and messaging; CBA also can encompass beliefs that might improve household preparedness to climate disaster risk (Thomas et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r651|651]]</sup> ). Reliance on social networks, social groups connectivities, or moral economies reflect the importance of collaboration within communities (Reuter 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r652|652]]</sup> ; Schramski et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r653|653]]</sup> ). Yet, community-based adaptation also needs to consider methods that engage with the drivers of vulnerability as part of community-based approaches, particularly questions of power, culture, identity and practice (Ensor et al. 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r654|654]]</sup> ). The goal is to avoid maladaptation or exacerbation of existing inequalities within the communities (Buggy and McNamara 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r655|655]]</sup> ). For example, in the Pacific Islands, elements considered in a CBA plan included people’s development aspirations; immediate economic, social and environmental benefits; dynamics of village governance, social rules and protocols; and traditional forms of knowledge that could inform sustainable solutions (Remling and Veitayaki 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r656|656]]</sup> ). With these considerations, community-based adaptation can help to link local adaptation with international development and climate change policies (Forsyth 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r657|657]]</sup> ). In developing CBA programmes, barriers exist that may hinder implementation. These include poor coordination within and between organisations implementing adaptation options, poor skills, poor knowledge about climate change, and inadequate communication among stakeholders (Spires et al. 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r658|658]]</sup> ). A rights-based approach has been suggested to address issues of equality, transparency, accountability and empowerment in adaptation to climate change (Ensor et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r659|659]]</sup> ). In summary, institutional measures, including risk management, policies, and planning at global, national, and local scales can support adaptation. Advance planning and focus on institutions can aid in guiding decision-making processes and foster resilience. There is evidence that institutional measures can support the scaling up of adaptation and thus there is reason to believe that systemic resilience is achievable. <span id="tools-and-finance"></span>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to ClimateKG may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
ClimateKG:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
IPCC:AR6/SRCCL/Chapter-5
(section)
Add languages
Add topic