Knowledge politics in participatory climate change adaptation research on agroecology in Malawi

14 Pages·2017·0.82 MB·English

Renewable Agriculture and Knowledge politics in participatory climate
Food Systems
change adaptation research on
agroecology in Malawi
cambridge.org/raf
Rachel Bezner Kerr1,*, Hanson Nyantakyi-Frimpong2, Laifolo Dakishoni3,
Esther Lupafya3, Lizzie Shumba3, Isaac Luginaah4 and Sieglinde S. Snapp5,6
Themed Content: Ag/Food
Systems and Climate 1DepartmentofDevelopmentSociology,CornellUniversity,262WarrenHall,Ithaca,NY14853,USA;2Universityof
Change Michigan,SchoolofPublicHealth(3846SPHI),1415WashingtonHeights,AnnArbor,MI48109,USA;3SFHC
Organization,P.O.Box36,Ekwendeni,Malawi;4DepartmentofGeography,UniversityofWesternOntario,London,
*Previousaddress:DepartmentofGeography, Ontario,Canada;5CenterforGlobalChangeandEarthObservations,MichiganStateUniversity,EastLansing,MI,
UniversityofWesternOntario,London, USAand6DepartmentofPlant,SoilandMicrobialSciences,MichiganStateUniversity,EastLansing,MI,USA
Ontario,Canada
Abstract
Citethisarticle:BeznerKerrR,Nyantakyi-
FrimpongH,DakishoniL,LupafyaE,Shumba ClimatechangeisprojectedtohavesevereimplicationsforsmallholderagricultureinAfrica,
L,LuginaahI,SnappSS(2018).Knowledge withincreasedtemperatures,increaseddroughtandfloodingoccurrence,andincreasedrain-
politicsinparticipatoryclimatechange
fall variability. Given these projections, there is a need to identifyeffective strategiesto help
adaptationresearchonagroecologyinMalawi.
RenewableAgricultureandFoodSystems33, ruralcommunitiesadapttoclimaticrisks.Yet,relativelylittleresearchhasexaminedthepol-
238–251.https://doi.org/10.1017/ iticsandsocialdynamicsaroundknowledgeandsourcesofinformationaboutclimate-change
S1742170518000017 adaptation with smallholder farming communities. This paper uses a political ecology
approach to historically situate rural people’s experiences with a changing climate. Using
Received:15July2017
theconceptoftheco-productionofknowledge,weexaminehowMalawiansmallholderfarm-
Accepted:29December2017
ers learn, perceive, share and apply knowledge about a changing climate, and what sources
Keywords: theydrawonforagroecologicalmethodsinthiscontext.Aswell,wepayparticularattention
Agroecology;climate-changeadaptation;
toagriculturalknowledgeflowswithinandbetweenhouseholds.Weasktwomainquestions:
coproductionofknowledge;gender;
Whose knowledge counts in relation to climate-change adaptation? What are the political,
participatoryresearch;politicalecology
social and environmental implications of these knowledge dynamics? We draw upon a
Authorforcorrespondence: long-term action research project on climate-change adaptation that involved focus groups,
RachelBeznerKerr,E-mail:rbeznerkerr@ interviews,observations,surveys,andparticipatoryagroecologyexperimentswith425farmers.
cornell.edu
Our findings are consistent with other studies, which found that agricultural knowledge
sources were shaped by gender and other social inequalities, with women more reliant on
informalnetworksthanmen.Farmersinitiallyrankedextensionservicesasimportantsources
of knowledge about farming and climate change. After farmers carried out participatory
agroecological research, they ranked their own observation and informal farmer networks
as more important sources of knowledge. Contradictory ideas about climate-change adapta-
tion, linked to various positions of power, gaps of knowledge and social inequalities make
it challenging for farmers to know how to act despite observing changes in rainfall.
Participatoryagroecological approaches influenced adaptation strategies used bysmallholder
farmers in Malawi, but most still maintained the dominant narrative about climate-change
causes, which focused on local deforestation by rural communities. Smallholder farmers in
Malawi are responsible for <1% of global greenhouse gas emissions, yet our results show
that the farmers often blame their own rural communities for changes in deforestation and
rainfall patterns. Researchers need to consider differences knowledge and power between
scientists and farmers and the contradictory narratives at work in communities to foster
long-term change.
Introduction
Climatechangeposesamajorchallengeandthreattosmallholderfarmersinsub-SaharanAfrica
(SSA),largelyreliantonrain-fedfarmingsystems(Niangetal.,2014).Recentassessmentsindi-
©CambridgeUniversityPress2018.Thisisan catethatinthecomingyears,SSAwillexperiencemoreerraticrainfallpatterns,increasedpeak
OpenAccessarticle,distributedunderthe andseasonalmeantemperatures,higherfrequencyandintensityofdroughts,aswellasoverall
termsoftheCreativeCommonsAttribution
reducedcropyields(Niangetal.,2014).Already,manysmallholderhouseholdsinSSAexperi-
licence(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by/4.0/),whichpermitsunrestrictedre-use, ence chronic food insecurity and persistently high levels of poverty (Von Grebmer et al.,
distribution,andreproductioninanymedium, 2015),whichhasbeenshapedbycolonialandpostcolonialpoliciesthatprivilegedcertaingroups,
providedtheoriginalworkisproperlycited. alongsideconflictsandneoliberalpolicieswhichhaveexacerbatedeconomicconditions(Bassett
andWinter-Nelson,2010).Climatechangewilllikelyexacerbatethealreadypoorstateoffood
securityintheregion.
Against this backdrop, there is a need to share current knowledge and identify effective
strategies to help rural communities adapt to climatic risks. There is an extensive literature
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170518000017 Published online by Cambridge University Press
RenewableAgriculture andFoodSystems 239
on the human dimensions of climate change, yet gaps remain farms withstanddamageand recoverfaster(Altieriand Nicholls,
(Davidson,2016).Inparticular,relativelylittleresearchhasexam- 2017;Rogéetal.,2014).AstudyinMalawifoundthatmorediverse
ined the politics and social dynamics around knowledge and farmsthathadseveraldifferentcropsinonefieldhadimprovedsoil
sources of information about climate-change adaptation in quality,werebetterabletowithstandthestressofhighertempera-
Africa. Overall, we ask: tures under drought, and more stable yield over time (Snapp
etal.,2010).Recentpolicyadvocatescallformoreagroecological
1. Whose knowledge counts in relation to climate-change approaches to climate-change adaptation (De Schutter, 2013).
adaptation? Whilethereisincreasingpoliticalmobilizationrelatedtoagroecol-
2. What are the political, social and environmental implications ogy,therearefewempiricalstudiesthatuseagroecologicalmethods,
of these knowledge dynamics? particularlyinSSAandlimitedattentiontothepoliticalandsocial
dimensionsofagroecologicalapproaches(BellamySandersonand
We answer these questions by drawing upon the literature on Ioris,2017).
agroecology (e.g., Altieri et al., 2015; Snapp, 2017) and the Agroecologicalapproachesrelyuponbuildingfarmers’knowl-
co-production of knowledge (e.g., Fazey et al., 2010; Reyers edge, observations and capacity to experiment and adjust prac-
et al., 2015), with a political ecology analytical framing sensitive tices to specific agroecosystems. This highlights the urgent need
to historical context (Taylor, 2015). Empirical findings are pre- for rich and diverse sources of information in order to adapt
sented based on 4 years of participatory action research on both to the local environmental context and global climate
climate-change adaptation in Malawi, southern Africa. Malawi change. Many scholars of agroecological approaches suggest
offersacompellingcasestudy,beingoneofthecountriesexpected drawingonindigenousknowledgeisanessentialpartofagroecol-
tobemostaffectedbyclimatechange,andonewhereruralsmall- ogy(Altierietal.,2015).Recognizingthattherearemanyunequal
holderhouseholdsalreadystrugglewithpovertyandfoodinsecur- powerrelationshipsinherentinscientificandindigenouscommu-
ity (FAO, 2014; Von Grebmer et al., 2015). nities,manyresearchersadvocateforrespectfulcollaborationthat
recognizes both the vulnerability of many rural communities to
climate change, as well as the value of detailed observation and
Knowledgeco-production,agroecologyandclimate-change
local experience (Altieri et al., 2015; Snapp, 2017). Increasing
adaptation
attention has been put towards a knowledge coproduction
Recent scholarship on the politics of climate-change adaptation approach to manage social-ecological systems forclimate change
drawsattentiontothepoliticaldimensionsofadaptationstrategies, (Reyers et al., 2015), in ways that bring a plurality of knowledge
social inequalities and contradictory outcomes (Ribot, 2014; together to understand it and address it in an integrated way
Eriksenetal.,2015;Taylor,2015).Vulnerabilitytoclimatechange (Armitage et al., 2011). Limited attention, however, has been
canbeshapedbypeoples’relativepositioninsocietyandaccessto given explicitly to social differentiation, including race, class and
typesofknowledge(Ribot,2014;Eriksen etal.,2015). Dominant gender, within farming communities that can prevent access to
narrativesanddomainsofauthoritycandetermineadaptivestrat- knowledge for adaptation. Health status is another marker of
egiesinagiventimeandplace(Eriksenetal.,2015;Taylor,2015). social difference, and in the context of SSA, HIVaffected house-
Successful adaptive strategies are thought to lead to resilience, holdsstrugglewitharangeofinequalities,includinglossofland,
definedasanindividualorcommunity’scapacitytorecoverfrom exclusion from community development activities, greater nutri-
socio-ecologicalstresses(Folke,2006).Inthisstudywetakeapol- tionalneedsandoftensocialstigmaexplicitlylinkedtoHIVstatus
iticalecologyapproachtoresilienceandadaptation,inthatrather (Bryceson and Fonseca, 2006; Nyantakyi-Frimpong et al., 2016).
thantryingtoreproducesocialrelationsandprocessesthatmight Such inequalities have direct impacts on HIV positive farmers’
reinforce or worsen social inequalities, resilience produces new accessto knowledge alongside other agricultural resources.
socio-ecological forms, ones that are more just and sustainable Knowledge production as such is both a political as well as a
(Taylor,2015).Socialprocessesandrelationsthataffectthepoten- social act, and there has been increased interest in this messy
tial for adaptation and resilience– including forms of extraction, worldofnegotiatingmeaning,addressingtacitknowledge,uncer-
exclusion and marginalization—are often deeply gendered tainty,and acknowledgingthelimitations ofscientific knowledge
alongside other forms of social inequality (i.e., class, ethnicity). (Jasanoff, 2004; Rogers et al., 2013; Ribot, 2014). Jasanoff (2004)
Thusthisstudypaidexplicitattentiontogenderandotherforms developed the concept of the co-production of knowledge, in that
ofvulnerability—inthiscasepoverty,healthstatusandage. scienceandsocietyareco-producedandreflectpoliticalpoweras
Oneareaofcontestedknowledgeofclimate-changeadaptation well as technological progress. Coproduction of knowledge has
is that of appropriate agricultural strategies. Agroecology aligns been applied to socio-ecological systems and adaptation research
with political ecology approaches to resilience. A set of farming (Armitage et al., 2011; Reyers et al., 2015). In the agricultural
practices as well as a broader social movement (Altieri et al., sciences,adrivetowardssimplificationandstandardizationreflects
2015), agroecology relies on in-depth knowledge of crop, insect political and economic hegemonic corporate and state interests
anddiseaseecology,harnessingbiologicalprocesses,andincreased (Weis,2007),aswellasamodernizationparadigmthatfavorsuni-
agrobiodiversitywithattentiontointeractionswithadjacentnatural formity,rationalityandorder(Moseleyetal.,2016).InAfrica,this
landscapes (Snapp, 2017). Agroecological approaches include is an important context to consider, as the agricultural intensifi-
attention to social, economic and political dynamics that shape cation narrative has become dominant in many agricultural pro-
foodproduction,localknowledgeandbuildingfarmercapacityto grams and policies, which use modernization motifs and often
innovate as well as specific technical practices that draw on eco- draw on state power for implementation. Recent calls for a
logical principles (Altieri et al., 2015). Agroecological strategies ‘new’ Green Revolution in Africa often emphasize chemical and
showtransformativepotentialtoaddressresilience.Severalstudies purchasedinputs,irrigationandlinkingfarmerstoexternalmar-
ontheimpactsofdifferentfarmingpracticesontheresponsetohur- kets,reflectingthismodernizationimperativeoftheearlierGreen
ricanes and droughts found that agroecological methods helped Revolution with a new emphasis on genetically modified seeds
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170518000017 Published online by Cambridge University Press
240 RachelBeznerKerretal.
and a more dominant role of corporate actors (Moseley et al., poverty, shift more of their labor to other income-generating
2016). The agricultural intensification model is in stark contrast activities and away from farming (Bignami-Van Assche et al.,
to resilience studies in climate-change adaptation which call for 2011).
greateragrobiodiversity,flexibleapproachesthatreflectlocalcon- Akeyfeatureofpost-IndependenceMalawihasbeenincreased
text,abilitytolearnfrommistakes,workingacrossscalesandrec- alienation of customary land to the estate sector, as a means to
ognizing local knowledge (Altieri et al., 2015). Co-learning and support political allies and increase export tobacco production.
integrationoflayknowledge cansupportclimate-changeadapta- At the same time the state agricultural system provided modest
tion(e.g.,Fazeyetal.,2010).Whilethesestudiesillustratewaysto support to smallholders through extension, subsidized fertilizer,
integrate heterogeneous knowledge and how to address local accesstocredit,ruraldepotsandanationalseedprogram,primar-
unequal power dynamics, there are few studies that examine the ily focused on maize for maintaining food security and more
broader context within which farmers are negotiating and often benefitting men (Ellis et al., 2003).
engaged with co-learning for adaptation using agroecological Structuraladjustmentinthe1980s,imposedbytheIMFafter
methods. A political ecology approach to resilience using agroe- Malawifacedafiscalcrisis,ledtocutbacksinextensionalongside
cology might ask who has access to agricultural knowledge? the partial removal of subsidies, and fewer rural depots. Several
And what are the implications of an agroecological approach multinational companies entered seed and fertilizer sales. The
for political struggles and social inequalities, including gender, health system was also dramatically cut back, which had severe
related to knowledge? impacts on the HIV epidemic and AIDS-affected families.
Genderimplicationshavenotbeenfullyexploredintermsofdif- Under the first democratically elected President Muluzi in
ferentapproachestoknowledgeproductionandsourcesofagricul- 1994, sharp devaluation and subsidy removal required by the
tural advice. It has been well documented that women are often IMFandWorldBankledtothecollapseoftheagriculturalcredit
excluded from extension support, and that often the wealthiest system and combined with increased input costs, dramatic
farmers are the greatest recipients of extension services (World reductions in smallholder production (Peters, 2006). These
Bank and IFPRI, 2010; cited in Croppenstedt et al., 2013). The broader political economic shifts transformed the country from
net result of the gendered nature of agricultural science is that being maize self-sufficient in non-drought years, to one highly
women farmers often lack substantial technical information that dependent on donors and imported food aid. It was in this
mightassisttheminfarming,andtheirneeds,preferencesandcon- highly politicized and sensitive context that Bingu Wa
cernsaresystematicallyexcludedfromagriculturalresearchprior- Mthalika (re)introduced a larger agricultural input subsidy pro-
ities. This gender inequality has implications for women’s labor gram, which provided about 1.5 million households with one
andconsequentlylimitstheirexposuretoalternativeagroecological 50kg bag of subsidized fertilizer and hybrid maize seed
methods to improve household food security. In the context of (Chirwa and Dorward, 2013). The impact of this program is
Malawi,genderinequalityhashadsignificantimpactsonwomen’s widely debated, as reported increases in maize production are
accesstoknowledgeandotherresources(BeznerKerr,2017). contested (FAO, 2014;Messinaet al., 2017), andfoodinsecurity
and undernutrition remain high (Chirwa and Dorward, 2013).
Fertilizer subsidies, the involvement of private sector and gov-
Malawi: The historyof smallholder agriculture, extension
ernment institutions have thus varied markedly over the last
services and knowledge diffusion
three decades. One inadvertent outcome of increased tobacco
Malawihasacurrentpopulationof16.4million,over80%ofwho production (World Bank, 2017), alongside increased charcoal
liveinruralareasandrelyonagriculturefortheirfoodandliveli- production, has been associated deforestation.
hoods (FAO,2014;WorldBank,2017).An estimated 70%ofthe Thestandardmodelforagriculturaleducation,beginningwith
populationlivesbelowthepovertyline,withhigherratesinrural the colonial state to the present, isthat of the agricultural exten-
areas (World Bank, 2017). About one in three Malawian house- sion worker, who imparts expert knowledge to the farmer.
holds experience chronic food insecurity and calorie deficiencies National extension programs were significantly reduced during
(FAO, 2014). The majority of arable land in Malawi is devoted structural adjustment, with extension training programs shut
to maize production, and almost half of the Malawian diet con- down, transport and other incentives removed (CISANET,
sists of maize. Gender inequality is another crucial determinant 2013). The Government implemented the National Extension
of food insecurity. Rural women in Malawi generally have Policyin2000,whichemphasizedfarmerdemand,accountability,
unequal social status and roles, including high rates of domestic pluralism and coordination (Ragasa et al., 2015). Multinational
violence, limited control over resources and high workloads seed companies such as Pioneer and Monsanto partnered with
(NSOandICF,2017).Womenaretypicallyresponsibleforcook- international non-governmental organizations and the govern-
ing, child care, food processing, fuelwood and water collection ment topromote different technologies, using agriculturalexten-
and caring for the ill, and these multiple roles, combined with sion agents. The ‘Lead Farmer’ approach initiated more recently
limited control over decision-making leave women in a particu- still draws on this notion of expert knowledge, now deeply
larly vulnerable context in relation to climate change and food entwined with corporate sources of information and power
security (Bezner Kerr et al., 2016a). Another key marker of vul- (Chinsinga, 2011). The rise of the subsidy program, however,
nerability and social inequality is HIV status: approximately has overshadowed extension. A recent national survey found 40
10% of adults in Malawi are HIV positive, with adolescent girls percent of households reported extension services for maize
three times more likely to contract HIV than adolescent boys were worse compared with 5 years earlier (Ragasa et al., 2015).
duetoinadequateeconomic,social,educationalandlegalsupport National spending on public agricultural extension is estimated
(Underwoodetal.,2011).HIVpositivewomenareatgreaterrisk at <2% of the total agricultural budget in 2013, declining from
of food insecurity, nutritional and health concerns, alongside 19% in 2000, as the subsidy program has dwarfed other costs in
social stigma (Bryceson and Fonseca, 2006). There is evidence the Ministry of Agriculture’s budget (Ragasa et al., 2015).
that HIV positive women in Malawi experience higher rates of Typical extension strategies continue to be very hierarchical,
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170518000017 Published online by Cambridge University Press
RenewableAgriculture andFoodSystems 241
uneven, unresponsive to farmer needs and gendered (Chowa (Zea mays) as the dominant staple crop, other food crops
et al., 2013). grown at low density including finger millet (Eleusine coracana),
sweet potatoes (Ipomoea batatas), groundnut (Arachis hypogaea)
and tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) for about one-quarter of the
The case study sites
households. While tobacco is an important cash crop in both
The study took place in two sites: Ekwendeni catchment area in sites and in Malawi more broadly, an inadvertent outcome of
Mzimba District in the Northern region, and Traditional increased tobacco production, alongside increased charcoal pro-
Authority (TA) Simlemba in Kasungu District in the Central duction, has been associated deforestation (Zulu, 2010). We
region (Fig. 1). Both sites are mid-altitude (1000–1200m asl), chose these two research sites in part due to the evidence of fre-
sub-tropical ecosystems, with unimodal rainfall during the quent drought occurrences in these regions in the historical
months of December–April (700–1300mmyr−1). The typical record, and the limited agricultural and social research in the
cropping pattern of smallholders in both sites has been maize north and central regions compared with the south. Another
Fig.1.Thestudysites.Source:MapdrawnbyTheCartographicSection,DepartmentofGeography,WesternUniversity.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170518000017 Published online by Cambridge University Press
242 RachelBeznerKerretal.
majorreasonforselectionofthesesitesisalonger-termpartner- baseline survey, adaptation experiments, field visits and two sur-
ship with farmer groups. veys of households doing experiments (Table 2). Twenty-five
in-depthinterviewsandsixfocusgroupdiscussionsonfarmerper-
ceptionswereconductedin2009,andfollow-upinterviewswith25
Research methods
participants and three focus groups were conducted in 2013.
The overall project objective was to conduct participatory action Interview participants were selected using purposive, non-
researchwithfarmers(ofdifferentages,gender,foodsecuritysta- probability sampling methods based on variation in agroecosys-
tus and HIV status) to assess different adaptation strategies for tems,foodsecurity,age,genderandhealthstatus.Thefocusgroups
addressing climate change, health and food security. The research were conducted at six different sites and involved 10–15 mixed
design was quasi-experimental, case-control, pre-post longitu- groups of men and women. There were questions about rainfall
dinal trials in 31 villages by 425 farmers on different cropping, patterns, experiences during periods of drought, and crops grown
livestock, agroforestry and livelihood diversification strategies to in the past. Both the interviews and focus groups took between
improve food security and adaptation to climate change. one to one and a half hours. The interviews and focus groups
Villageswereselectedthroughrandomsampling.Purposive,non- wererecorded,transcribedandtranslated.Researchteammembers
probabilitysamplingmethodswerethenusedtoselectparticipat- carriedoutfieldvisitsperiodicallyandtookfieldnotes,whichwere
ing households within villages. Farmers were selected by village considered part of the dataset. Qualitative analysis was completed
membersbasedonhouseholdfoodsecurity(i.e.,low),HIVstatus byhand,withthefirstauthorsreadingthroughthedataandiden-
(ifknown)andage(toensureinclusionofyouth).Thereweresev- tifyingkeythemesandcontradictions,followingMilesetal.(2014).
eral different sets of intervention activities (Table 1). The searchfor negative cases,ordisconfirming evidence,isaway
After training on agroecological principles, each household tovalidatedatafindings inqualitative findingsand can be crucial
selectedseveralstrategiestotest,includingsomeofthefollowingele- fordelvingintothemeaningsofagivenphenomenon(Antinetal.,
ments:(1)integrationoftrees(useoffruittreesand/oragroforestry); 2015).Aninitialcodingsystemwasdevelopedusingaprioricon-
(2)soilfertilityand/orconservationstrategy;(3)cropdiversification, cepts such as ‘climate-change perceptions’ and additional codes
includinglegumeintercropsand(4)livelihooddiversification,such were added using emic concepts, that is those based on the
as dry season gardens, small livestock and bee-keeping (Fig. 2). participants’understanding(suchas‘chatting’asasourceofinfor-
These strategies were generated through a co-production process, mation).Preliminaryfindingsweresharedanddiscussedwithpar-
which involved a combination of scientific review, dialogue, input ticipating farmers as aform of respondentvalidation.
fromfarmersandjointdecision-makingbyscientistsandparticipat- Across-sectional baseline survey was done in 2010 with 1213
ingfarmers.Alistofpotentialstrategieswasdrawnfromaliterature randomlyselectedhouseholds.Trainedenumeratorsaskedrespon-
review on climate-change adaptation, and then augmented with dents questions about perceptions of rainfall patterns, drought
ideas from villages during a series of community dialogues at the occurrence, flooding, temperature and responses to weather
village level. Participating households reflected and consulted on changesaswellasdemographicandfarminginformation.Thissur-
possible experiments before meeting again with the project team veywasusedtocompileclimate-changeperceptions,currentfarm-
in smaller groups for more detailed discussions, leading to a final ing practices and possible adaptation strategies. The dataset also
listofpreferredexperiments.Participatinghouseholdsmetmonthly includes quasi-experimental, case-control, pre-post longitudinal
todiscusstheirexperiments.Inaddition,thegroupsparticipatedin trialsin31villagesby425farmersondifferentagroecologicalstrat-
different educational activities to raise awareness and discussions egiesto improve food securityand adaptation to climate change.
aboutsourcesofsocialinequality,suchasgenderandhealthstatus, A survey of all participating households was conducted in
and waysto reduce thisinequality. February2011and2013toassesschangesinagriculturalpractices,
Thislongitudinalparticipatoryresearchstudyinvolvedmultiple food security, knowledge, dietary diversity and other social and
data collection procedures, including interviews, focus groups, a environmental variables. Data was entered into STATA 11 and
Table1.Projecttimelineandactivities
2000–2008 Previousparticipatoryresearchbytheteamonlegumediversification.Usedsmallgroupdiscussionstohavedialoguesaboutdifficult,
complexhouseholdandcommunityfactorsthataffectedfoodsecurityandnutritionandlimiteduseoflegumediversification.Learned
abouttraditionalknowledgerelatedtoagroecology,andparticularsocialinequalitieswhichshapedpeople’sabilitytousedifferent
agriculturalmethods,includingHIVpositivepeople,highlyfoodinsecureandyouth.Theresearchteamdecidedtofocusonagroecological
methodsandparticipatoryactionresearch,includingattentiontosocialinequalities
2009 Focusgroupdiscussionsandinterviewsonfarmingpractices,socialinequalitiesandexperienceswithdroughtsandchangingrainfallpatterns
July2010 Beganparticipatoryactionresearchproject.Theoverallobjectivewastoconductparticipatoryactionresearchwithfarmers(ofdifferentages,
gender,foodsecuritystatusandHIVstatus)toassessdifferentadaptationstrategiesforaddressingclimatechange,healthandfood
security.Metwithprospectivevillagesthathadbeenselectedrandomly,todiscussthepossibilityoftheproject.Carriedoutabaseline
surveyonperceptionsofclimatechange,farmingpracticesanddemographicinformation.
2011 Farmersbeganparticipatoryactionresearchonagroecologicalmethods,includingdifferentcropping,livestock,agroforestryandlivelihood
diversificationstrategiestoimprovefoodsecurityandadaptationtoclimatechange.Conductedbaselinesurveywithallparticipatingfarm
households,andcarriedoutin-depthinterviewswithfarmers
2011–2014 Supportedfarmersdoingexperiments.Heldmonthlymeetingstoassessexperimentsandreflectonresults;carriedoutannualparticipatory
workshopswithfarmerstoshareexperiencesandreflectonresults.Conductedresearchactivities,e.g.interviews,focusgroupsandsurveys
2013 Conductedinterviewswith30government,civilsocietyanddonorrepresentativesonclimate-changeadaptationstrategies
2014 Heldpolicyworkshopwithgovernmentrepresentatives,internationalandnationalorganizationstodiscussclimate-changeadaptation
strategies
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170518000017 Published online by Cambridge University Press
RenewableAgriculture andFoodSystems 243
Fig.2.Examplesofagroecologicalpracticestestedbyparticipatingfarmers.
descriptiveanalysescarriedout.Alltestsofsignificancewerecalcu- access this long-term meteorological data in both the Mzimba
latedusingt-testsforcomparingtwoproportions. and Kasungu districts in Malawi, a challenge highlighted by
In what follows, we focus on mixed methods data illustrating other researchers who have assessed climate-change perceptions
how farmers described their views about climate change, as well in the country (Sutcliffe et al., 2016).
asthe importance of agroecologyas aclimate-change adaptation
strategy.Wecomplementin-depthfarmeraccountswithdescrip-
Results
tivefindingsfromthesurveys.Itisimportanttoacknowledgethat
in assessing local perceptions of climate change, a more rigorous The Results section has been organized into four sections. First,
approachwouldhavebeentocomparelocalsubjectiveviewswith we describe the general characteristics of the sample. Next, we
the long-term meteorological data. However, we were unable to describe farmers’ perceptions and ideas about climate change,
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170518000017 Published online by Cambridge University Press
244 RachelBeznerKerretal.
Table2.Overviewoffieldworkmethodsandsampling
Dataacquisition
Method Themescovered time Samplesize Samplingapproach
In-depthinterviews 1. Perceptionsofclimatechange 2009and2013 50 Purposivesampling
2. Existingadaptationstrategies
3. Cropsgrowninthepast
Focusgroupdiscussions 4. Localperceptionsofclimatechange 2009and2013 NineFGDs,with∼80 Purposivesampling
(FGDs) 5. Mainworriesconcerningagriculture participantsintotal
6. Climaticandnon-climaticstressors
Survey 1. Socio-demographics 2010 1213households Randomsampling
2. Perceptionsofrainfallpatterns
3. Droughtoccurrence
4. Agriculturalpractices
2Surveysoffarmers 1. Experimentingwithvariousmethodstoimprove 2011and2013 306farmers(2011)and Villagesselectedat
doingagroecological foodsecurityandadapttoclimatechange 352farmers(2013)in random;farmersselected
experiments 2. Surveytoaccesschangesinagriculturalpractices, 31villages usingpurposivesampling
foodsecurity,dietarydiversity,andsustainable
landmanagementpracticesbetween2011to2013
and how these perceptions differ by gender. The following sec- early chizimalupya rains, and an earlier end to the rainy season.
tions describe sources of agricultural information, while the last A higher percentage (96%) of those who had lived in the area
sectionoutlineschangingdominantnarrativesonclimatechange. for longer than 10 years reported noticing that chizimalupya
rains had changed over the years relative to both those who had
lived in the area for a period of between 5–10 years (91%) and
General household characteristics
<5 years (88%). These differences were statistically significant.
Atotalof306and352participatinghouseholdsweresurveyedin Duringthefocusgroupsin2009,participantswerealsoasked
2011and2013,respectively.Thegeneralhouseholdcharacteristics toindicatewhendroughtshadoccurredintheircommunities.We
are presented in Table 3. Almost a quarter of the respondents thought that the focus groups would be preferred for identifica-
(24%) were separated, divorced, widowed and living without a tion of drought years since participants could confirm and add
spouse. The survey respondents reported farming as the most toeachother’smemoriesofdrought.Interestingly,therewascon-
common income source. siderable variation in the experience of drought throughout the
500 square kilometer region (Fig. 3). When describing severe
droughts, people described patterns of migration, eating foods
Farmers’ perceptions and ideas about climate change
normally considered unacceptable, tremendous social upheaval
In2009,focusgroupdiscussionsandinterviews,respondentscon- and loss:
sistently indicated that the start of planting rains began later in
the season finished earlier. They also said that rains that used ‘Ourparentssuffered,theyhadtogotoNkhataBay…wheretheytook
to come before the planting rains (and had a special name) no cassava.’(FocusGroup6Aug2009)
longer come or rarely occur. Older people indicated that it has ‘1998–99wastheworstbecausepeoplewerejusteatingbananasandother
unknownfoods,manypeopledied.’(FocusGroup1Aug.2009)
beenoveradecadesincetheserainscame.Weverifiedthisinitial
‘2002wastheworst.Wewereeatingmaizehusks.’(FocusGroup4Aug.
findingbyaskingyoungpeopleiftheyremembertheserains,and
2009)
found consistently that they did not know or remember these
rains. As one older woman noted during afocus group:
These experiences suggest that at the time of the start of the
research, many members of these rural communities lacked
‘Therainshavechangedalot.Evenafterharvesttherainswouldcome,
knowledge of alternative crops, forest foods, storage options, col-
calledChisindiranthamba[secondrains].Thenone[rain]usedtocome
lective action and other options for households during drought.
inSeptember,wewouldcallitChizimalupya(rainthatputoutthebush
The lack of knowledge and preparation led to high costs for
fires).AfterthattherewasChikukulanyuni,thatwashedtheashesaway.
Thentherewastheplantingrains.Theseearlyrainsstoppedin thelate these households during previous droughts of recent memory,
1980s.’(Focusgroup4,August2009). and there was room to build up social resilience and knowledge
of different adaptation strategies prior to and during droughts.
Somepeoplealsosaidthattherainsarestoppinginthemiddle Inthefollow-upsurveyin2013,about50%oftherespondents
of the rainy season more frequently, and are not as heavy at the reportedhavingexperienceddroughtsinthepast3years.Slightly
beginning of the season as they used to be. The initial survey of less than half of the farmers (47%) indicated that the climate is
over 1000 respondents in the area showed similar perceptions. changingslowly,aboutone-thirdperceivedrapidclimatechange,
The majority of respondents perceived a decline in the total while<1%offarmersindicatedthattheclimateisnotchangingat
amount of rainfall, a reduction or complete cessation of the all. These findings are similar to climate-change perceptions
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170518000017 Published online by Cambridge University Press
RenewableAgriculture andFoodSystems 245
Table3.Generalhouseholdcharacteristics reported among smallholder farmers in other parts of southern
Africa (Gbetibouo, 2009).
Baselinesurvey Finalsurvey We also asked about people’s views on the underlying causes
Variable 2011(n=306) 2013(n=352)
of climate change. In the initial survey, deforestation was more
Averageage 47years 49years commonlyconsideredasthemajorcauseofclimatechangecom-
pared with other perceived causes, mentioned by 46.4% of
Averagehouseholdsize 5.6 5.9
respondents compared to greenhouse gas emissions (2.6%).
Gender However, there were significant differences between men and
Male 38.85% 41.15% women,withmoremen(57.8%)thanwomen(39.5%)attributing
climate change to deforestation. Attribution of climate change to
Female 60.7% 57.4%
God’swillwasamorecommonresponsefromthosewithprimary
Maritalstatus ornoformaleducationthanfromthosewithsecondaryorhigher
Monogamousmarriedandliving 58.95% 59.95% education in both men and women. These views were also more
withspouse commonamongbothwomenandmenwhohadlivedinthearea
for more than 10 years.
Polygamousmarriedandliving 13.2% 16.5%
withspouse
Marriedandheadinghousehold; 0.95% 3.1% Sources of agricultural information
spouseliveselsewhere
Inthebaselinesurveyin2010,accesstoanagriculturalextension
Separated/divorced/widowed, 24.35% 17.05%
livingwithoutspouse was reported by 67% of respondents, with a statistically signifi-
cantly higher percent of men (73%) than women (63%) stating
Nevermarried 1.75% 0.85%
that they had access to agriculture extension in the last 5 years
Education (Fig. 4). In the 2011 survey with participating farmers, people
were asked their top two sources of information, which they
Noschooling 10.3% 6.55%
usedintheirfarming,andthemajoritylistedextensionagentsfol-
Someprimaryeducation 57.85% 57.35%
lowedbyfarmergroups(Fig.5),despiteonly37%reportingbeing
Completedprimaryeducation 17.4% 22.45% visited by extension agents the previous year, and even fewer of
those whowerewomen farmers.
Somesecondaryeducation 10.45% 8.5%
Anotherwaytostudyflowsofinformationwastoaskwhether
Completedsecondaryeducation 3% 3.4% people ‘chatted’ informally with others about farming. Most
Post-secondary 1.15% 0.3% respondents (79%) chatted informally and (75%) said that they
usedinformationfromtheirchattingintheirfarming,sometimes
Sourcesofincome
oroften.Themajorityofpeoplechattedwithaneighbororfriend
Farming 59% 70%
mostoften,followedbyvillageleadersandthenfamilymembers.
Ganyu(casuallabor) 15% 10% Thesesourcesofinformalknowledgesharingwerealsogendered:
Sellingfarmproduce 16% – menweremorelikelythanwomentochatwithvillageleadersand
extension agents (Fig. 6). Interestingly, husbands and wives were
Smallbusiness 12% 15%
notchattingwithoneanother:inthenorthernsite,92%offarm-
Saleoftobacco 8% – ersdid notdiscuss farmingwiththeirspouse, while75%did not
Saleoffirewood 2% – chat with their spouse in the central site. Farmers chatted with
other members of farmers’ groups in 35% of households in the
Brewingbeer 2% –
north, and 12% in the central site. These different gendered
sources of agricultural information and flows of knowledge
point to potential relations of exclusion from key adaptation
Fig.3.ReportedOccurrenceofDroughtsandSeverityofDroughtinnorthernMzimba Fig.4.Accesstoagriculturalextensionservicesbygender,baselinesurvey(n=733)
villageareas.Note:oneisleastsevereandfouristhemostsevere.Datasource:Focus AccesstoagriculturalextensionvariedsignificantlybygenderusingChi-Squaretests,
Groups(n=6),August2009;(∼80peopleinfourvillageareas). Pvalue=0.005.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170518000017 Published online by Cambridge University Press
246 RachelBeznerKerretal.
Fig.5.Reportedsourceofinformalsharingaboutfarm-
inginformationforbothsites,andwhethertherespond-
enteverusedtheinformation(2011and2013surveys).
Data source: 2011 survey of participating smallholder
farmers(n=292respondents)and2013survey(n=302
respondents)inKasunguandEkwendeni.
strategies.Unequalaccesstoextensionservicesandfarmergroups Kerretal.,2016b).Whenaskedwhatwasthemostimportantway
mightreinforceunequalgenderdifferencesinkeyresources,such they learned farming information, agricultural extension agents
asseeds,fertilizerandothertechnicalinputsthatextensionwork- werenamedasthemostimportantsourcein<10%ofhouseholds,
ers,farmergroupsandothergroups(e.g.NGOs,seedcompanies) a significant change in 2 years (Fig. 5). The knowledge sources
mayprovideaccessto,throughthesepreviouslyestablishedsocial also appeared to change, with more people reporting chatting
networks and information flows. withtheirspouseoraparticipatingfarmer,andfewerpeoplechat-
Beginningin2011,the425farmerparticipantsbeganexperiment- ting with the extension agent (Figs. 6 and 7).
ing with different agroecological practices of their choice, using a Learning about agroecological practices using participatory
farmer participatory research approach and farmer-to-farmer researchmethodsempoweredfarmerstoexperimentwithdifferent
teaching.Farminghouseholdsalsoparticipatedinvillagegroupsto practices which they thought might increase their resilience. In
share ideas, had farmer exchanges, and had training on various interviews and meetings, they spoke articulately about the ways
topics, including climate change. As part of the project, therewas in which soil moisture was better retained when organic matter
anemphasisongenderequityandsocialinclusionmorebroadlyin such ascrop residues wasadded, helping thecrop togrowbetter
trainingandactivities. and survive dryspells.Theyalso described having areduced risk
After 2 years, therewas a significant increase in food security of food insecurity from growing a greater diversity of crops and
and dietarydiversity,withmany farmers reporting using arange sharingthisinformationwithneighboringvillages(Box1).
of agroecological practices including crop diversification, incorp- Both men and women participated in these practices and
orationoforganicmaterialintothesoil,andagroforestry(Bezner expressed these ideas. The increased emphasis on farmer knowl-
edgesharingandongenderequityseemedtohavesomeeffecton
increasedsharingbetweenspouses(Figs.6and7).Therewasalso
the perception that more vulnerable households, particularly
those who had an HIV positive member, were more readily
includedincommunityactivitiesbecausetheyhadbeenexplicitly
includedinthe‘climate-changeexperiments’.Therewasawilling-
ness to help these households by other farmers, and a sense of
hope that if these households could improve their situation,
then others could too. Several respondents indicated that this
shift in thinking about the possibilities for change led to greater
community collaboration (Project data, unpublished field
notes). HIV positive respondents indicated that the project
approachprovidedconsiderablesupportfortheirspecificcircum-
stances (Nyantakyi-Frimpong et al., 2016). In this sense the pro-
ject’sinitiativestoaddressstructuralinequalitiesrelatedtogender
andhealthstatusthroughawarenessraisingandexplicitaccessto
Fig.6.Reportedfrequencyofuseofinformationacquiredthroughinformal‘chatting’ inputs and information for these groups had significant impacts
withothersaboutfarming.(*%changeisstatisticallysignificantformen,Pvalue on their potential to use adaptation strategies—in keeping with
<0.05;∧%changeisstatisticallysignificantforwomen,Pvalue<0.05.)Datasource: Taylor’s (2015) call to ‘produce ourselves differently’ for truly
2011surveyofparticipatingsmallholderfarmers(n=292respondents)and2013sur-
vey(n=302respondents)inKasunguandEkwendeni. transformative climate-change adaptation efforts.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170518000017 Published online by Cambridge University Press
RenewableAgriculture andFoodSystems 247
Fig. 7. Mostimportant way farmers reported learning
new farming information (farmers ranked the two
most important sources of information) 2011 & 2013
surveys.(*%changeisstatisticallysignificantformen,
Pvalue<0.05;∧%changeisstatisticallysignificantfor
women,Pvalue<0.05.).Datasource:Sourcesofagricul-
turalinformationbasedona2011surveyofsmallholder
farmers(n=292respondents)and2013survey(n=302
respondents) inKasungu andEkwendeni.The agricul-
turalfieldassistantsanddemonstrationtrialsarepart
ofMalawigovernmentextension.
Changing dominant narratives on climate change
BOX1CasestudyvillageC.
Atthestartofthisresearchproject,theauthorsobservedverylit-
tle discussion by the government about climate change.1
(cid:129) ‘Wehavebeengrowingsoyaandthishadhelpedthechildrento
Throughout the study, the Government of Malawi increased dis-
behealthierthantheywere.Wealsoplantedmanydifferent
cussion about climate change and the need foradaptation, likely
typesoftreestohelpimprovethesoil.Manyofusalsoaddedpig
in part due to increased donor interest due to the heavy reliance
manuretothesoilwhichhelped.’(malefarmer1).
of the government on an international support (Gabay, 2015).
(cid:129) ‘Westartedgrowingcassava,whichweuseforfood,weeatboth The government’s focus, however, was to increase monitoring of
thetubersandtheleaves.’(malefarmer2).
rural dwellers who used the forest for charcoal, fuelwood and
(cid:129) ‘Weimprovedthesoils.InoticedthatwhereIgrewsoyaand
other forest products. There was increased policing of forest
buriedtheresidue,I’venoticedachangeinhowthemaizewas
areasandanincreaseindiscussionofdeforestationatthenational
doing.Aftergermination,wewouldhavetoapplyfertilizer.Now level. The government also began promoting ‘drought-tolerant’
itgrowswithoutapplying,andwe’regettingbiggeryields.’
crops, mainly different hybrid varieties of maize, as a form of
(womanfarmer1).
climate-change adaptation (Fig. 8). There was little discussion
(cid:129) We’velearnedtogrowfingermillet.ThisseasonI’vegrownfinger
ofothercausesofclimatechange,suchastheuseofcars,electri-
milletandnowIgrowthemilletinridges,insteadof
city,norwasthereacknowledgementoftherampantdeforestation
broadcastingitaftercuttingdowntheforest,whichweusedto
ofstateforestsandsaleabroad,apracticewhichhaddramatically
do.NowIamgettingbiggeryields(malefarmer3).
increased under the government of Bingu Mthalika, or the
(cid:129) Thetimesarechangingandtherainsareunpredictable,anditis
increased deforestation for agricultural production due in part
goodtohavemanycropsincasemaizefails…Weare
to the fertilizer subsidy (Zulu, 2010).
experimenting,andwe’reteachingwhatwe’velearnedtoothers.
At the end of the study we examined perceptions of climate
Welearnedfromfellowfarmersinanothervillagewhoarealsoin
change,andfoundthat,whiletherewasanincreaseinthepropor-
theproject’(malefarmer1).
tionofpeoplenaminggreenhousegasesasthemajorcauseofcli-
(cid:129) Thegroupmetregularly,andmetwithfournearbyvillagesto
mate change (to 10% of households), the majority of people
shareseedandknowledgeabouthowtogrowfingermillet
continuedtonamedeforestationastheprimarycause,withtobacco
withoutcuttingdownforestedareas:‘Whenweharvested,wesat
productionandrelatedcuttingoftreestocuretobaccothesecond
downandaskedothervillageheadmen,whoinyourvillage mostcommon,andGod’swillthethirdmostcommonreasonlisted.
wouldbeseriousaboutusingthisseed?Theheadmengave
Agreaterpercentageofmalerespondentsattributedclimatechange
names,10pervillage,infourvillages,andwetoldthosepeople,
to deforestation compared with female respondents (Table 4). In
‘youhavetobeseriousaboutthissoyoucanpaybacktheseed
addition,asignificantproportionofmalerespondents(33%)com-
andcontinuehelpingotherpeople…Whenwedidthiswetalked
paredtofemalerespondents(17%)namedtobaccoproductionas
tothewholevillageaboutclimatechangeandourmethods—
theunderlyingcauseofclimatechange.
andthenweaskedthevillageheadmenforthenamesofserious
During in-depth interviews with farmers in 2013, we asked
people.Then,wegaveseedandtaughtthosepeople.’(Village
their views about the underlying causes of climate change and
headman,VillageC).
Source:Authorfieldnotes,June25,2013 1Informal observation based on television and radio speeches of the government.
SeveraloftheauthorsresidepermanentlyinMalawi.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170518000017 Published online by Cambridge University Press