Image Database Export Citations


Climate Science, Development Practice, and Policy Interactions in Dryland Agroecological Systems

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Twyman, Chasca
dc.contributor.author Fraser, Evan D.G.
dc.contributor.author Stringer, Lindsay C.
dc.contributor.author Quinn, Claire H.
dc.contributor.author Dougill, Andrew J.
dc.contributor.author Ravera, Federica
dc.contributor.author Crane, Todd A.
dc.contributor.author Sallu, Susannah M.
dc.date.accessioned 2011-10-26T19:35:56Z
dc.date.available 2011-10-26T19:35:56Z
dc.date.issued 2011 en_US
dc.identifier.uri https://hdl.handle.net/10535/7655
dc.description.abstract "The literature on drought, livelihoods, and poverty suggests that dryland residents are especially vulnerable to climate change. However, assessing this vulnerability and sharing lessons between dryland communities on how to reduce vulnerability has proven difficult because of multiple definitions of vulnerability, complexities in quantification, and the temporal and spatial variability inherent in dryland agroecological systems. In this closing editorial, we review how we have addressed these challenges through a series of structured, multiscale, and interdisciplinary vulnerability assessment case studies from drylands in West Africa, southern Africa, Mediterranean Europe, Asia, and Latin America. These case studies adopt a common vulnerability framework but employ different approaches to measuring and assessing vulnerability. By comparing methods and results across these cases, we draw out the following key lessons: (1) Our studies show the utility of using consistent conceptual frameworks for vulnerability assessments even when quite different methodological approaches are taken; (2) Utilizing narratives and scenarios to capture the dynamics of dryland agroecological systems shows that vulnerability to climate change may depend more on access to financial, political, and institutional assets than to exposure to environmental change; (3) Our analysis shows that although the results of quantitative models seem authoritative, they may be treated too literally as predictions of the future by policy makers looking for evidence to support different strategies. In conclusion, we acknowledge there is a healthy tension between bottom-up/qualitative/place-based approaches and top-down/quantitative/generalizable approaches, and we encourage researchers from different disciplines with different disciplinary languages, to talk, collaborate, and engage effectively with each other and with stakeholders at all levels." en_US
dc.language English en_US
dc.subject narratives en_US
dc.subject development en_US
dc.subject livelihoods en_US
dc.subject poverty en_US
dc.subject policy analysis en_US
dc.subject climate change en_US
dc.title Climate Science, Development Practice, and Policy Interactions in Dryland Agroecological Systems en_US
dc.type Journal Article en_US
dc.type.published published en_US
dc.type.methodology Case Study en_US
dc.subject.sector General & Multiple Resources en_US
dc.subject.sector Land Tenure & Use en_US
dc.identifier.citationjournal Ecology and Society en_US
dc.identifier.citationvolume 16 en_US
dc.identifier.citationnumber 3 en_US
dc.identifier.citationmonth September en_US

Files in this item

Files Size Format View
ES-2011-4261.pdf 78.61Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following document type(s)

Show simple item record