Progress on Community-Based Adaptation

Introduction

Adaptation to climate change has risen up the policy agenda in recent years. One growing proposal for doing adaptation is Community-based Adaptation to Climate change (CBA), which aims to build the capacity of local people to develop under, and adapt to, a changing climate. CBA generates adaptive strategies through participatory processes, building on existing cultural norms, and also addressing local development issues that make people vulnerable to the impacts of climate change in the first place. 

While still a relatively new approach to climate change adaptation, the CBA agenda has grown in size and significance over the past few years. There have been three international conferences on CBA since 2005, and projects are now in operation in vulnerable communities in both developing and also some developed countries. Yet, questions remain over: What is community-based adaptation to climate change (versus more general climatic variability?) How do we do it? Who or what adapts? How does CBA fit with larger scale adaptation policies and programs? This article looks at the progress that has been made on CBA over the past few years, and considers the challenges that remain for those engaged in CBA.  

1. CBA gets organised  

CBA emerged out of a growing recognition within the development community that those who were most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change are the poorest people, in poor communities, in the world’s poorest regions. Mainstream approaches to adaptation that operated in a top-down manner were limited in the extent to which they could assist the most vulnerable, given that such communities are often marginalised, living in remote areas, and often out of reach of government services.  Many NGOs began to work with local communities to identify not only which climatic factors were considered risks, but also the factors that made people vulnerable to these risks, and in doing so began to design community-driven initiatives that could help build the adaptive capacities of the most vulnerable (see box 1). 

In 2005, those working on CBA came together for the first International CBA Conference in Dhaka, Bangladesh, to share experiences and lessons on CBA. The conference was attended by more than 80 experts, policy makers, NGO representatives and grassroots practitioners who discussed the possible impacts of climate change on local communities, and how to enable them to adapt in the future. Experiences were shared, contacts made, and the CBA concept was formed.  

Two years later, the Second International CBA Conference was held. This time, the workshop was attended by 110 participants, including practitioners as well as some major donors, and representatives from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Field visits to vulnerable communities were included as part of the workshop so that participants could gain first hand experience of the ‘entry point’ for CBA. The CBA community began to organise themselves, and one of the outputs of the conference was the formation of a CBA network “The CBA Exchange” (www.cba-exchange.org) with an online platform through which tools, case studies and guidance could continue to be shared.  

The Third International CBA Workshop was held in February this year. This time over 140 participants were present, with interest so great that the conference was oversubscribed. Participants included representatives from governments, NGOs, community-based organisations, UN agencies, and major donors including headquarter representatives of the World Bank, DfID, SIDA, and FAO. The CBA Exchange was updated and formally launched, and participants as well as many others have since joined, and the network now has over 350 members and is rapidly growing.  

The Third CBA Workshop also established the Global Initiative on Community Based Adaptation (GICBA), cosponsored by IIED, CARE, OXFAM, ActionAid, TearFund and WWF. The initiative will reflect on ongoing action through promoting CBA nationally and globally; generate and share knowledge and experiences; and support the CBA-exchange website and international conferences. This knowledge sharing platform will be a forum for supporting and promoting a stronger voice on community based adaptation.  

2. Understanding CBA  

There has also been a rapid increase over recent years in understanding and knowledge on CBA. At the 2nd CBA Workshop, the task was to convince development practitioners working at the CBA level that climate change was relevant to them, and that vulnerability to climatic variability was the entry point for building adaptive capacity. However, as noted by Rahman and Jones reporting on the 2^nd CBA workshop, CBA discussions were “lacking in structure”, posing a problem for CBA practitioners, funding bodies and other interested parties who require signposts to distinguish good practice.[1]  

The report of the 3^rd CBA Workshop notes that discussions around CBA were more “nuanced” than at previous workshops.[2] The battle to convince of the value of CBA now largely won, discussions were much more constructive and focused on topics such as distinguishing CBA from community-based development; how to demonstrate the value of CBA, and develop indicators for monitoring and evaluation; scaling-up CBA and making it policy-relevant; and how to integrate climate science into CBA whilst maintaining a community-driven process. A working group of “terminology and concepts” was formed, which is continuing to work with the CBA-Exchange to develop and communicate its outputs.  

3. Donor interest  

Recognition of the value of CBA is no longer confined to NGOs and grassroots organisations; many major donors are interested in CBA and are actively engaging in the process. At the third CBA workshop, the FAO announce the possibility of providing some funding for CBA projects. A representative from UNDP also outlines a proposed CBA Fund Facility, in partnership with UN agencies, governments, civil society and private foundations, which would offer broader types of support to CBA-type activities that that currently available under the formal climate change finance mechanisms. UNDP has also recently taken a major decision to generate resources to support NGOs and CBOs in CBA through its Small Grants Program.  Other donors, including the World Bank, DfID, and SIDA, also expressed an interest in supporting CBA.  

4. Challenges for CBA

At the same time, donor interest in CBA raises many challenges for CBA practitioners. Some donors, such as the World Bank,[3] have called for a greater involvement of scientific assessments of climate change in CBA before using climate change funds for CBA,[4] raising questions over how far CBA is different from community-based “development” in general, and whether CBA is simply local responses to existing climate variability, rather than a proactive anticipation of future climate change. Perhaps then CBA should be funded through development assistance?  This raises its own challenges, since CBA may then be competing with other local development priorities. Moreover, climate change is an additional stressor on top of (albeit exacerbating) underdevelopment, so funding for adaptation should be additional to development assistance. 

Tools are being developed to improve the accessibility and relevance of downscaled modeled data to CBA, for example, the “Climate Change Explorer” has been created by the “WeAdapt” collaborative, which both displays output from multiple climate models downscaled to a station level, and also guides users to help use these data outputs in meaningful ways. An important element of this tool is its emphasis on the historical context of changes in climate in understanding future changes; long-term trends occurring in the present may in fact be more important for adaptation in many cases than projected change for 2050.[5] Tools such as the Climate Change Explorer are in their early stages of development and data is not yet available for all vulnerable regions.  Further, as is emphasized by the tool itself, there must be caution when drawing on the outputs of downscaled climate change models in designing appropriate CBA.  

From a CBA standpoint, climatic changes are acknowledged by trying to understand locally observed, and historic, patterns of change in ways that are meaningful to local people. For some, this represents a strength of the CBA approach; that the underlying “drivers” of vulnerability so dependent on the development context are the focus of CBA, and a much needed move away from an “impacts-based” approach. Yet if climate change projections are not brought in to CBA projects, then can they really be said to be addressing climate change, and hence be seen as legitimate approaches to climate change adaptation? As noted by one donor representative at the Third International CBA Workshop, “good development is not sufficient for adaptation.”[6]  

Another common concern is how to “scale-up” CBA. The contextual nature of CBA makes developing indicators or models for CBA problematic, risking the proliferation of a piecemeal approach that lacks clarity and fails to attract wider climate change and development investment. While there are an increasing number of examples of CBA case studies emerging,[7] do these local, community-based initiatives offer lessons for how to adapt to climate change at the national scale, or in other countries? The contextual nature of CBA makes developing indicators or models for CBA problematic, risking the proliferation of a piecemeal approach that lacks clarity and fails to attract wider climate change and development investment. According to some analysts, the institutional design of CBA lies in the local deliberations that can identify development needs and cultural preferences, rather than in assuming the same technologies or assumptions about livelihoods should apply in different places. There is a need to find better ways of drawing and communicating lessons in CBA, bearing in mind that, when scaling up, participatory approaches may be undermined. Following on, we need monitoring and evaluation frameworks that speak to donors demands whilst at the same time being accessible to communities so that they can access resources for CBA quickly and efficiently.  

6. Limits to CBA  

Finally, we need to be aware that existing approaches to CBA, which tend to be in situ and project based, implemented in response to current climatic risks, could be limited in their effectiveness over the longer term, and exposed to being undermined by future climate change impacts operating over a scale that cannot be addressed by isolated and piecemeal interventions. If current climate change policies fail to prolong atmospheric warming at just 2 degrees Celsius, and if warming approaches 4 or more degrees, then it is likely that large areas of land will, in time, be inundated with sea water. Relocation of villages would therefore be a reality. CBA that does not incorporate this level of climate change information or communicate likely scenarios at the community level, may discourage the kind of technological or engineering-based approaches to adaptation that CBA seeks to supplement. Perversely, this could lead to a situation where larger scale strategic adaptation options that respond directly to future climate change scenarios are alienated even more from the communities that they affect, because a lack of awareness of the need for such programs will make participation with local people problematic. There is therefore a clear need for CBA to engage in long-term adaptation strategies, and acknowledging that ‘good’ adaptation requires consideration of both the immediate and the long term vulnerability and climate change contexts, CBA practitioners must draw links to more strategic and wider climate change policies and measures. Ultimately, recognising the limits to CBA should signal even stronger action on mitigation.  

Box 1 : Community-Based Adaptation in Bangaldesh

Bangladesh is frequently cited as one of the most vulnerable countries to climate change,[8] because of its physical exposure to climate change impacts arising from its flat and low-lying topography and location on the coast at the top of the Bay of Bengal that makes it vulnerable to cyclones and tidal surges. Moreover, Bangladesh also suffers from a history of impoverishment, high population density, weak political governance and a reliance of many livelihoods on climate sensitive sectors, particularly agriculture and fisheries.[9] Many of the anticipated adverse affects of climate change, such as sea level rise, higher temperatures, enhanced monsoon precipitation, and an increase in cyclone intensity, will aggravate the existing stresses that already impede development in Bangladesh.[10]  

Bangladesh has for some time been recognized as a particularly vulnerable country by the international community, and has received disaster management and adaptation support in several sectors. Bangladesh has developed some capacity for dealing with the impacts of climate change at the national level, and policy response options have been mobilized that deal with vulnerability reduction to environmental variability in general, and more recently, to climate change in particular. At the same time, community-based adaptation responses are emerging both autonomously, and supported by NGOs and local partners.  

For example, in the coastal areas of southern Bangladesh, one further threat of climate change is increasing salinity – or the encroachment of salt water onto and beneath agricultural land. Saline water makes it difficult to grow crops historically irrigated by freshwater, and it can accelerate the deterioration of buildings. In Mongla district, near the mangrove forests of the Sunderbans, villagers are responding to the threats of salinity by building houses on raised platforms, and by installing sealed containers of freshwater often fed by rainwater. Some wealthier farmers are also converting old rice fields to fishponds, and using these to fatten crabs for local restaurants or for consumption in Dhaka, Bangladesh’s capital city.

Information about the authors

Jessica Ayers is a PhD candidate at the Development Studies Institute, London School of Economics (LSE), and a research consultant for the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). Her work focuses on the governance of adaptation to climate change, specifically the relationship between community-based adaptation, and wider climate change and development governance structures at the national and international level. Jessica also acts as an independent consultant for a variety of development and environment organisations working to improve policy and action on climate change adaptation, and has published numerous articles and chapters in peer reviewed journals, books, and popular publications on these issues. She is currently working for UNDP in Nepal on designing the National Adaptation Programme of Action. E-mail: j.m.ayers@lse.ac.uk

Saleemul Huq is currently working as Senior Fellow at International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). His work includes building negotiating capacity and supporting the engagement of the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) in UNFCCC ahead of COP15 including negotiator training workshops for LDCs, policy briefings and support for the Adaptation Fund Board. He is actively involved in research work related to vulnerability and adaptation to climate change in the least developed countries. Saleemul Huq has been the Lead Author of the chapter on Adaptation and Sustainable Development in the third assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He has also been the Lead Author of the chapter on Adaptation and Mitigation in the IPCC's fourth assessment report. E-mail:saleemul.huq@iied.org 

Tim Forsyth is Reader in Environment and Development at the Development Studies Institute, London School of Economics and Political Science. He has worked on environmental governance and livelhoods in Asia for 15 years. He is the author of Critical Political Ecology: The Politics of Environmental Science (2003), and Forest Guardians, Forest Destroyers: The Politics of Environmental Knowledge in Northern Thailand (with Andrew Walker, 2008). His work focuses on implementing global environmental policy in developing countries in locally empowering ways. E-mail: t.j.forsyth@lse.ac.uk 

Endnotes

[1] Jones, R., and Rahman, A. 2007. Community-based Adaptation. Tiempo 64 pp.17-19.

[2] IISD Reporting Services, 2009. A Summary of the Third International Workshop on Community-Based Adaptation to Climate Change. Community Based Adaptation to Climate Change Bulletin. IISD/IIED.

[3] IISD Reporting Services, 2009. A Summary of the Third International Workshop on Community-Based Adaptation to Climate Change. Community Based Adaptation to Climate Change Bulletin. IISD/IIED; Ayers and Huq, 2009

[4] IISD Reporting Services, 2009. A Summary of the Third International Workshop on Community-Based Adaptation to Climate Change. Community Based Adaptation to Climate Change Bulletin. IISD/IIED; Ayers and Huq, 2009

[5] (see http://wikiadapt.org/index.php?title=The_Climate_Change_Explorer_Tool for more information).

[6] IISD Reporting Services, 2009:7

[7] See for example the database of CBA case studies at www.cba-exchange.org

[8] Rahman, A. 1997. The South is Acting. Our Planet 9.3. Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies. Dhaka, Bangladesh; Ahmed, A, Alam, M, and Rahman, A. 1999. Adaptation to Climate Change in Bangladesh: Future outlook. In Huq, S, Karim, Z, Asaduzzuman, M and Mahtab, F (eds) Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change for Bangladesh. Kulwer Academic Publishers; Venema, H.D and Cisse, M. 2004. Seeing the Light: Adapting to climate change with decentralized renewable energy in developing countries. IISD. Canada.

[9] Ayers, J and Huq, S. 2008. The value of linking mitigation and adaptation: A case study of Bangladesh. Environmental Management. Springer, New York. Published online: 28 October 2008 doi:10.1007/s00267-008-9223-2

[10] Ayers, J and Huq, S. 2008. The value of linking mitigation and adaptation: A case study of Bangladesh. Environmental Management. Springer, New York. Published online: 28 October 2008 doi:10.1007/s00267-008-9223-2