Environmental Strategies for Increasing Human Resilience to Climate Change in Sudan: A Tool” International Workshop on “Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change: From Practice to Policy” from May 11 –12, 2006 and the BASIC group meeting on May 13, 2006 at New Delhi, India By Dr. Balgis Elasha

AIACC-AF14 project The project emphasized links between current & future vulnerabilities & adaptive strategies Sectors Studied a ) Directly addressing: Agriculture sector: crop production, livestock, mixed crop-livestock Water resources Food security b) Indirectly addressing: Forestry Ecosystems: grasslands, forests Biodiversity . Evaluated adaptive strategies, emphasizing those that might lessen current vulnerabilities as well as longer term vulnerabilities to climate change.

Sources of Stress and Change a) The primary sources of stress and change addressed were: Climate variability and extremes: drought, low rainfall Fluctuation in seasonal stream flow (Khor Abu Habi) b) The secondary sources of stress or change addressed were: Land degradation, desertification Land use change Institutional change Policy change

Selected case studies Three case studies were conducted covering areas located in the West, Centre and Eastern Sudan between lat 10o –18oN). Namely: 1st. Case study Community-Based Rangeland Rehabilitation in Sudan in Geraigikh – West Central Sudan/ North Kordofan State 2nd. Case study / Khor Arba’at Rehabilitation Programme (KARP): Red Sea State- Eastern Sudan 3rd. Case study/ Water Harvesting Technique as a Coping Mechanism to Climate Variability and Change (Drought) / Western Sudan -North Darfur State

Criteria for selection of CSs Selected case studies that involve past or ongoing climate-related events that are representative of projected future climate change (e.g., prolonged drought). That involve climate-related events that are representative of experiences of neighboring Sahelian countries. That explore specific examples of community-level SL/EM strategies which have been applied & could be applied in Sudan and in other countries. Case studies that could explore specific examples of community-level SL/EM applications that are considered successful by government and/or civil society groups, and are confirmed as successful by the communities themselves. Case studies that involve clear research objectives, available data, and feasible fieldwork strategies.

Approach The AF-14 project was based on the following premises pre-eminent goal of adaptation should be to increase the coping capacity of vulnerable groups To do this, small-scale, community-level strategies will be needed alongside the large-scale, technical/structural approach Make use of methods that have been developed in separate fields of practice – sustainable livelihoods, natural resource management, disaster risk management . Those strategies which can accomplish added social and environmental goals (e.g., slowing desertification) – can diversify and strengthen national adaptation plans of developing countries, and development efforts in general.

Sustainable livelihood strategies in Sudan: lessons for climate change adaptation Basic definitions Sustainable Livelihood Conceptually, livelihoods connote the means, activities, entitlements and assets by which people make a living. The Brundtland Commission in 1987:Intrdoduced SL in terms of resources ownership, access to basic needs and livelihood security The IISD: “SL concerned with people's capacities to generate & maintain their means of living, enhance their well- being, and that of future generations. The definition used by the UK's (DFID): A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets & activities required for a means of living

Livelihood assessment Livelihood assessment is a way of looking at how an individual, a household or a community behaves under specific frame conditions. How to understand livelihood systems? Through analysis of the coping and adaptive strategies pursued by individuals and communities as a response to external shocks and stresses such as drought, civil strife and policy failures

Objectives of the case studies Generate informative background material on each community’s unique context, vulnerabilities, assets, coping strategies, etc.; Within each community, employ methods to measure community resilience to climate-related impacts, with and without the project measures; Employ policy analysis techniques to explore the relationship between community resilience-building activities and micro-, meso- and macro-scale policies, institutions and processes; and From the above, draw lessons for increasing community climate resilience that can be applied to adaptation and related processes.

The aim of the research activities: understanding the local context (i.e., geographic, socio-economic, development, etc) of the communities in which the particular SL/EM strategy has been implemented, uncovering the local response (e.g., changes in productive systems, allocation of resources, transitions to alternative livelihoods, etc) of households to the intervention. Collecting information on the local and national enabling factors such as land tenure systems and local institutions ( both quantitative and qualitative information will be sought through case studies).

Desk-based research: wide literature coverage, Research methodology Desk-based research: wide literature coverage, on-site fieldwork : involve a mixture of direct observation and intensive dialogue with representatives of the host communities, and to rely on Local informants; Interviews; Targeted questionnaires and; Participatory screening of results

Sources of information community groups, local, regional and international NGOs; government agencies; university departments and; bilateral and multilateral development agencies

Measuring adaptive capacity Community’s coping and adaptive capacities in the face of climatic variability and extremes (drought) is used as proxy for its level of coping and adaptive capacity for future climate change. Use of DFID SL model and notion of the five capitals (natural, physical, human, social and financial Within the SL framework the project employed the Livelihood Assets Tracking (LAST) system to measure changes in coping and adaptive capacity. Consultation with communities and households to develop indicators of community resilience and construct word pictures to assess their own vulnerability and coping capacity to a climate-related impact Employed in indicators development – word pictures (quality of life indices) are the main tool of the LAST system for gathering and reorganizing data

Sustainable livelihoods capital assets Natural capital Financial capital Physical capital Human capital Social capital

Dimensions considered Productivity Equity Sustainability

Special considerations Sustainability in this context is defined in a broad manner and implies: The ability to cope with and recover from shocks and stresses; Economic effectiveness; Ecological integrity, ensuring that livelihood activities do not irreversibly degrade natural resources within a given ecosystem; and Social equity which suggests that promotion of livelihood opportunities for one group should not foreclose options for other groups, either now or in the future

SL/EM measures considered SL/Environmental Management Measures (SL/EM): like rangelands management, , soil conservation, etc., each of which involves an array of specific measures (e.g., water harvesting, intercropping, livestock diversification, and establishment of shelter belts.

Preliminary list of generic indicators developed includes Land degradation (slowed or reversed); Condition of the vegetation cover (stabilized or improved); Soil and/or crop productivity (stabilized or increased); Water supply (stabilized or increased); Average income levels (stabilized or increased); Food stores (stabilized or increased); Migration (slowed, stabilized, or reversed

Social indicators Organizational set-up (local village committees) Role of village committees in the decision making process. Membership to organizations Sharing of responsibility

Policies and institutions Local level institution (community leaders, religious men, elites, local NGOs, Government agencies Polices related to relation : Taxes Market prices Incentives Land tenure

Sample of results From Bara case study Natural capital: Improved resource base (rangeland area, diversity of species and carrying capacity). Physical Capital: Improved water availability and quality. Improved food security situation (grains stores, grains mills) Financial Capital: Diversified income sources improved (sheep fattening, women gardens, poultry, cottage industries etc) Improved market access, local market linked to national and regional markets (favored by supportive policy)

Results Cont. Human capital: Social capital: Increased number of skilled labour Improved health conditions /education and awareness. Social capital: Social network and organization set up/ improved ability to mobilize community and to pRTICIPte in decision making. Improved social equity /marginal groups and women are well represented and participating in community development

Concluding remarks Tapping the SL Approach: What can it do for adaptation? Using this as a tool in adaptation assessment can help to: Enable national planning processes to effectively consider the most vulnerable groups; articulate unique local vulnerabilities Identify locally-relevant resilience-building options Build understanding of micro- and macro-level enabling conditions for adaptation Build local adaptation awareness and engage local actors e.g CBOs and NGOs (potential adaptation project implementers)

Thanks For more information on The Poject Visit AICC website www.start.org/Projects/AIACC_Project/aiacc.html