Climate Variability and Climate Change Impacts on ...

Climate Variability and Climate Change Impacts on Smallholder Farmers in the Akuapem North District, Ghana Kwadwo Owusu, Peter Bilson Obour, and Selina Asare-Baffour

Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conceptual Framework for Smallholder Farmers’ Vulnerability to Climate Change . . . . . . . Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Results and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . General Characteristics of Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Farm Sizes and Type of Crops Cultivated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Smallholder Perception of Climate Variability and Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Statistical Analysis of Annual Rainfall Variability and Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Non-climatic Factors That Make Smallholder Farmers Vulnerable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Strategies for Adaptation to Climate Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Institutional Support for Climate Change Adaptation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1792 1793 1794 1795 1797 1797 1798 1799 1800 1802 1803 1804 1804 1805

Abstract

Climate change is unequivocal and these changes have increased over the past few years. The recent vulnerability and prospect of climate variability and change impact, thus, warrants measures now to reduce the adverse impacts. This is especially important in relation to smallholder farmers whose activities provide large proportion of the food consumed in the developing world, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. A qualitative approach was used to collect data on the perceptions of smallholder farmers from three communities in the Akuapem North District in Ghana. The perceptions of the farmers about rainfall changes were compared with the empirical daily rainfall total data from the Ghana

K. Owusu • P.B. Obour (*) • S. Asare-Baffour Department of Geography and Resource Development, University of Ghana, Legon Accra, Ghana e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] # Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015 W. Leal Filho (ed.), Handbook of Climate Change Adaptation, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-38670-1_111

1791

1792

K. Owusu et al.

Meteorological Agency to corroborate changes in rainfall. By comparing the perceived changes in the rainfall of the district with the empirical data, it was identified that shifts in the rainfall regime was the main cause of crop failures in the study area but not decline in the annual rainfall total. Farmers being aware of changes in the rainfall have employed new stresses to improve their productivity. However, it was observed that non-climatic stresses such as low capital and absence of institutional support in the district have increased smallholder farmers’ vulnerability. Keywords

Adaptation • Akuapem North • Climate change • Climate variability • Ghana • Smallholder farmers • Subsistence agriculture • Vulnerability

Introduction Climate change is unequivocal according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as there is now ample evidence that the earth’s climate system is warming at an unprecedented rate leading to ice melting and sea-level rise (IPCC 2007). No wonder the impact of climate variability and change has taken a center stage in many scientific research worldwide (Hulme et al. 1999; TauliCorpuz and Lynge 2008). In the coming decades, global climate change will have an impact on all sectors of the global economy. But most impacts will fall on the agricultural sector, creating food insecurity and heightened water stress, most especially in the developing world (Ringler 2008; Nelson et al. 2009). Poor farmers who are (referred to as subsistence or smallholder farmers) and predominantly in the low-latitude developing countries living in remote and fragile environments are expected to become the most vulnerable (Altieri and Koohafkan 2008; IFAD 2008). According to IFAD (2010), by 2050 food production needs to increase by 70 % but the total arable area in developing countries may increase no more than 12 % mostly in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America. This implies that the burden of increasing food production rests on the shoulders of these farmers whose occupation would be most affected and who are also poor and technologically deficient to master effective adaptation. Morton (2007) describes smallholder farmers as rural producers, predominantly in the developing countries, who farm using mainly family labor and for whom the farm provides a principal source of income. Their activities depend directly on climatic factors while climate also indirectly affects the terrain and the environment on which they depend. Smallholder farmers are the backbone of the rural economy but bear the brunt of climate change impacts (IFAD 2009). Worldwide, there are 500 million smallholder farms supporting some 2 billion people. Smallholders provide up to 80 % of food consumed in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. Although it is held that some regions in the world will enjoy increase in agricultural production as a result of climate change (a slight increase in temperature could increase crop production in higher-latitude regions), the net impact of climate change on sub-Saharan Africa would be negative (Boko et al. 2007; Vermeulen 2011).

Climate Variability and Climate Change Impacts on Smallholder Farmers in the. . .

1793

Khamis (2006) stated that smallholders in Malawi have been exposed to tremendous drought and flood affecting food security and their livelihood. In Ghana, food security and rural incomes are under threat from unpredictable changes in rainfall and shifts in the rainfall regime (Owusu and Waylen 2009, 2013). The smallholder farmer in Ghana is facing the negative impacts also as a result of many non-climatic stresses that make him or her vulnerable. In developing countries in general, vulnerability of smallholder farmers to climate change impacts has been exacerbated by non-climatic stresses like population increase, low capitalization, rural–urban migration, health problems like HIV/AIDS and malnutrition, government policies, and market shocks (Morton 2007; Osbahr et al. 2008; Francis 2002). In Ghana in particular, lack of credit, lack of storage facilities, low levels of technology, lack of access to market, and land tenure complications which occasionally result in conflicts have heightened the smallholder farmer’s vulnerability to climate variability and change (Kunateh 2011). Such stresses have been exacerbated by the fact that smallholder activities in the country are mainly rain-fed. For example, the total arable land under irrigation in Ghana was reported to be less than 3 % (GIDA 2010; MOFA 2011). Climate change poses serious problems for these farmers to deal with since their main source of livelihood is being threatened through “crop failures and livestock death leading to economic losses, high food prices thereby undermining food security” (IFAD 2009). It is thus very important to assess how climate variability and change affect the living conditions of smallholder farmers since they are responsible for cultivating a greater chunk of arable lands in Ghana. Over the years, smallholders have learned to adjust to climate variability and change to increase agricultural sustainability (AAFRD 2005). However, the current speed and intensity of climate change and associated extremes are posing problems for smallholders and their capacity to adapt. This is more so as the prospect of adverse climate variability and change is not going to diminish in the very near future (Downing et al. 1997). This chapter investigates the impacts of climate change and its effects on the incomes and food security of the smallholder farmers in the Akuapem North District of the Eastern Region of Ghana. The adaptation strategies used by the smallholder farmers are also examined. The objectives are to assess smallholder farmers’ perception and knowledge on climate change and the related risks, to account for the factors other than climate which make smallholders vulnerable to climate variability and change, and, finally, to assess the various mechanisms used to reduce the effect of climate variability and change on their system of farming.

Conceptual Framework for Smallholder Farmers’ Vulnerability to Climate Change In this study, the conceptual framework proposed by Morton (2007) was adapted to understand the various ways in which climate change impacts on the livelihoods of subsistence farmers and how such impacts heighten their vulnerability.

1794

K. Owusu et al.

Fig. 1 Conceptual framework for climate change impacts on smallholder farmers (Source: Adapted from Morton 2007)

The framework distinguished between climatic and non-climatic stresses which integrate together to impact on smallholder farmers. Climate-related stresses such as droughts and floods affect farmers in diverse ways such as constraints on soil quality and inducing crops and animal diseases (Scoones et al. 1996; Lal 2000). The non-climatic stresses on the other hand include land fragmentation due to population growth, market failures, and prevalence of diseases affecting the health of farmers (Morton 2007). However, as indicated in Fig. 1, unlike Morton’s originally proposed framework, another impact propeller “institutional constraints” (such as public, private, and civil society support) was introduced. The reason for distinguishing between institutional constraints from non-climatic stresses is that, if well managed, institutional supports are able to cushion the impacts of both climatic and non-climatic stresses and vice versa (Agrawal and Perrin 2008). It must be pointed that the effects of the three (3) distinguishing stresses on smallholder farmers’ vulnerability depend on their sensitivity and resilience capacities (IPCC 2007). But in order to reduce such vulnerabilities, this study will examine the different livelihood adaptive and coping strategies that smallholder farmers adopt in order to reduce the risks and shocks of the stresses. The study also outlines the roles of institutions in climate change adaptation in the Akuapem North District of Ghana.

Study Area The Akuapem North District is one of the administrative districts in the Eastern Region of Ghana and is located in the southeastern part of the region. Akropong, the district capital, is roughly 58 km from Accra. The district lies between latitude 5 50 North and 6 80 North and longitude 0 40 West and 0 190 West. It shares boundaries to the northeast with Yilo Krobo, north with New Juaben Municipal,


1795

southwest with Akuapem South Municipal, and in the west with Suhum-KraboaCoaltar District. The Akuapem North District covers a land area of about 450 km2, representing 2.3 % of the total land area of the Eastern Region (Ghana Districts. com 2006) (see map of district in Fig. 2). The vegetation of the district is made up of a mixture of forest and shrub. Geologically, the district is dominated by rocks of the Precambrian era, the Togo and Birimian series. Its terrain is mountainous and hilly ranging between 381 and 488 meters but the highest peak reaches 500 m above sea level. It has mean daytime temperature ranging between 24 and 30 C and night temperature between 13 C and 24 C. Rainfall in the district is bimodal (with a mean value of 1,270 mm). The major rainy season usually comes between May and August and the minor peaks in October. The physical factors, especially geology and climate, have greatly influenced the demographic and economic activities in the district. According to the 2010 Population and Housing Census, Akuapem North District has a population of 136,483 (Ghana Statistical Service 2012). The population is composed of different ethnic groups dominated by the Twi- and Guanspeaking people as well as Ewes and Krobos settlers. The less rocky nature of soils in the district and the relatively high annual rainfall totals (compared to the dry Accra plains) make farming very conducive. This might account for why majority of the inhabitants, especially those who live in rural communities within the district, are smallholder farmers. The main crops grown in the area are maize (Zea mays), yam (Dioscorea spp.), cassava (Manihot esculenta), plantain (Musa species), vegetables, and fruits. Few of the people are also engaged in the production of cocoa on small-scale basis. Nontraditional products such as mushrooms and snails are also produced to serve the nearby urban markets in Accra.

Methodology Sixty (60) structured and open-ended questionnaires were directly administered to smallholder farmers from three communities in the Akuapem North District, namely, Adukrom, Akropong, and Bipoase. The questionnaires were structured into themes to capture respondents’ background information (age, educational attainment, and sources of household income), knowledge and perception about climate variability and change, climatic and non-climatic factors that increase farmers’ vulnerability, adaptive strategies, and the roles of public and private institutions in supporting climate change adaptation in the district. The farmers who were interviewed were selected purposively and this was based on the size of their farms and long period of at least 10 more years of farming. A farm size of less than 0.4 ha (1 acre) to a little above 1.2 ha (3 acres) was established as a measure of a smallholder farmer. The technique was achieved by seeking advice from the local agriculture extension officers in the study communities who helped to identify smallholder farmers in their respective communities. Appointment was sought with each of the farmers who consented to participate in the survey.

Fig. 2 Administrative map of Akuapem North District

1796 K. Owusu et al.


1797

Home visits were made to the farmers during which the questionnaires were administered. The researchers also visited few farms within the vicinities of the communities which provided them the opportunity to observe and understand some of the effects of climate change and adaptation practices of the farmers discussed in the interviews. The fieldwork lasted for a period of three (3) months. In all, twenty (20) respondents were interviewed from each of the three communities, adding up to a total of sixty (60) participants. Deliberate efforts were made to ensure that participants of different gender, age, and educational backgrounds were reached. Chi-square (χ 2) goodness of fit test was used to test the hypothesis that respondents’ perceptions about causes of climate change differed across their socioeconomic characteristics. A significant level of 0.05 was used for the computation. Daily rainfall data from 1965 to 2011 was obtained from the Ghana Meteorological Agency (GMet) for the Koforidua station to facilitate the analysis on the spatial pattern of rainfall amount and distribution in the district. The data were of high quality with only 3 years (1976, 1998, and 2005) having missing values and were therefore excluded from the analyses. Data of total annual rainfall covering the 44 years between 1965 and 2011 were utilized. The 44 years were then divided into two 22-year periods as P1 (1965–1987) and P2 (1988–2011). The division was based on the acceptable notion that the pre-1980s were wetter periods than the post-1980s in West Africa (Owusu and Waylen 2009). The means and standard deviations were calculated for P1 and P2. In addition to the mean and standard deviation, changes in the variances and means of rainfall distribution for P1 and P2 were computed using F- and t-tests. The F-test was first performed to determine the appropriate type of t-test to be performed. From the F-test, it was indicated that the difference in variance between P1 and P2 was not statistically significant, shown by F > F critical (2.23 > 2.08). Based on the results, a t-test of two samples assuming equal variance at α value of 0.05 was tested using the formula: T ¼ Y1 Y2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1=N1 þ 1=N2 Sp where N1 and N2 are the sample sizes for P1 and P2, Y1 and Y2 are the sample means, and sp is the pooled standard deviation.

Results and Discussion General Characteristics of Respondents In total, equal numbers of male and female smallholder farmers were interviewed. The average age of respondents from Bipoase was the highest (58 years) and the lowest occurred in Akropong (47 years). All the respondents have lived in their respective communities for more than 20 years and have at least 10 years of farming experience. Educational attainment of respondents in all the three communities is generally low and this reflects the general pattern of low education in rural Ghana

1798

K. Owusu et al.

Table 1 Socioeconomic characteristics of respondents Percentage of respondents Background characteristics Adukrom (n = 20) Akropong (n = 20) Gender Male 55 45 Female 45 55 Total 100 100 Average age (years) 55 47 Average number of years of 15 17 farming Highest level of education No formal education 35 25 Primary 25 15 Middle school/JHS 15 30 Secondary school 15 25 Tertiary 10 5 Total 100 100 Household income (source) Average annual income GH $ 1,200 GH $ 1,500 from farm Average annual income GH $ 500 GH $ 250 from nonfarm Exchange rate 18 June, 2014: US$ 1 = GH $ 3

Bipoase (n = 20) 50 50 100 58 23

45 30 10 5 10 100 GH $ 700 GH $ 400

(Ghana Statistical Service 2012). As already mentioned, the farmers interviewed practice subsistence system of agriculture. The farms serve two important roles: provide household source of food and income. The average annual household income from farm among respondents from Adukrom and Akropong was relatively higher (GH $ 1,200 and GH $ 1,500, respectively) than those from Bipoase because these communities have access to large market centers which enable farmers to sell some of their farm products. The respondents also get some proportion of their incomes from nonfarm sources, namely, petty trading, craftsmanship, and remittances (details shown in Table 1).

Farm Sizes and Type of Crops Cultivated Farm sizes in the Akuapem North District are generally small with majority ranging between 0.4 ha (1 acre) and 1.2 ha (3 acres). This is attributed to many factors including the subsistence nature of farming and the complexities of land tenure system in the area as described by a cross section of the farmers who were interviewed. It was highlighted that farmlands are family owned and distributed among family members which results in land fragmentation. This does not promote mechanization or commercial farming. Table 2 shows the distribution of farm sizes of farmers interviewed during the survey.


1799

Table 2 Average farm sizes of respondents interviewed from the three communities Farm size (in hectares) Small (1.2) Total

Location Adukrom (n = 20) 7 (35 %) 4 (20 %) 9 (45 %) 20 (100 %)

Akropong (n = 20) 7 (35 %) 9 (45 %) 4 (20 %) 20(100 %)

Bipoase (n = 20) 10 (50 %) 5 (25 %) 5 (25 %) 20 (100 %)

Total (N = 60) 24 (40 %) 18 (30 %) 18 (30 %) 60 (100 %)

A large proportion of farmers (40 %) had their farm sizes averaging less than 0.4 ha as against 30 % who also had their farm sizes ranging between 0.8 and 1.2 ha. Another 30 % of the farmers cultivate above 1.2 ha. These statistics on farm sizes of respondents give an indication of the subsistence nature of farming as alluded to earlier. In view of this, farmers within the three study communities are largely engaged in crop production as the main preoccupation is to feed themselves and their families. The findings indicate that maize (Zea mays), cassava (Manihot esculenta), plantain (Musa species), and vegetables like okra (Abelmoschus esculentus), tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum), and pepper (Capsicum spp.) dominate the type of crops cultivated by the farmers. It is, however, worth noting that majority of the farmers cultivated about two or three crops simultaneously between cassava, maize, plantain, and tomatoes. Also, all farming activities are rain-fed, meaning that any anomaly in rainfall amount or distribution could have significant impact on agricultural production in the district.

Smallholder Perception of Climate Variability and Change The survey also shows that the participants have different knowledge and understanding about climate change. Respondents’ knowledge, however, did not vary significantly ( p < 0.5) across their age, level of education, and the number of years of farming experience. Some of the common attributes of climate change outlined by the respondents were excessive heat, drought conditions, irregular onset and cessation of rainfall, and too much rainfall. In terms of causes of climate change, wide variations of explanations were given by the respondents. According to 20 % of the respondents, climate change is due to deforestation and bushfires. Another 15 % believed that climate change is a sign of the end of the world. The majority of the respondents (50 %) associated climate change to the anger of ancestors. According to them, this is a vivid signal that “our ancestors do not like our modern way of life.” The rest of 15 % attributed climate change to anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases. The responses of the farmers differed significantly ( p > 0.5) according to their level of educational attainment and number of years of farming. All the farmers appreciated that the climate is really changing and this has affected agriculture. However, 85 % of the farmers who have long period of farming experience

1800

K. Owusu et al.

(10 or more years) appreciated the phenomenon of climate variability and change as they were able to compare present climatic conditions with those that used to pertain over the past decades. The main climatic changes and variations these farmers stressed on were excessive heat, dryness, and too much rainfall leading to wilting of crops or even unable to till their lands. According to the farmers, beside rainfall variations and changes, temperatures have also increased, particularly, during the dry seasons in the last decade. The temperature increases perceived by the farmers are consistent with observations by Minia (2004) and Agyeman-Bonsu et al. (2008). According to Agyeman-Bonsu et al. (2008), temperature in Ghana has increased by 1 C since 1960. Realization of changes in rainfall was as a result of its unpredictable patterns during these few years, leading to high incidence of crop failures. The rain either delays than the expected time, lasts within a very short period during the planting season, or falls in torrent. All these have negative effects on agriculture production. To this end, it was necessary to compare the changes in rainfall over the years as recorded in the memories of the participants to the empirical rainfall data obtained from the GMet.

Statistical Analysis of Annual Rainfall Variability and Changes The mean and standard deviation of annual rainfall totals were calculated for the two periods. P1 has mean of 1,373.9 and standard deviation of 256.6. And for P2, the mean and standard deviation are 1,340.7 and 171.8, respectively. It was determined that there has been a slight reduction in mean annual rainfall from P1 to P2. The 22-year average for P1 was 1,373.9 mm, while that of P2 was 1,340.9 mm. The standard deviation had, however, decreased from 256.6 in P1 to 171.8 in P2. This seems to imply that the rainfall in P2, even though low, is less variable on the year to year basis. In order to confirm the observation made by the farmers that the frequency of dry spells has increased in the last two decades, the length of dry-spell days during the major rainy season from 1965 to 2011 was calculated using the statistical software Instat Plus version 3.36. Dry spells were defined as the number of consecutive non-rainy days after the start of the rainy season (Tadross et al. 2009; Ratan and Venugopal 2013). Figure 3 shows that dry spell of 10 days or more are more frequent in P2 (1988–2011) as compared to P1 (1965–1987) which confirmed the observations made by the older farmers that rainfall frequency has slightly decreased in the last decades. The implications of these findings also support the long-known fact that annual rainfall totals have less agronomic significance than intra-seasonal variability. Before probing further into monthly analysis of the rainfall distribution, a test for statistical significances in the differences in means and standard deviation of the mean annual rainfall totals was made. The t-test indicates that the means of rainfall between P1 and P2 in Akuapem North District are not significantly different, shown by tcalc < ttable (0.50 < 2.02) as illustrated by the means for the two periods although P2 shows a slight decline.


1801

Length of Dry Spell during the Major Rainy Season 1965-2011 Length of Dry Spell (days)

25 20 15

y = 0.0161x + 8.1462

10 5 0 1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990 Years

1995

2000

2005

2010

Fig. 3 Length of dry spell during the major rainy season

Monthly Rainfall as a Percentage of Annual Total 1965-2011 Monthly Percentage of Annual Rainfall

18.0 16.0 14.0

P1(%) P2(%)

12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Fig. 4 Monthly rainfall total as percentages of the annual rainfall totals in P1 and P2

Guided by the farmers’ assertion that rainfall has changed in the district resulting in crop failures and the fact that the annual rainfall total was not significantly different for the two periods, further probe was made to ascertain the rainfall distribution at the monthly level. The monthly rainfall total as percentages of the annual rainfall totals was calculated for the two 22-year periods as shown Fig. 4. Figure 4 shows that rainfall distribution and amount in the district for P1 and P2 have mostly increased for the major rainy season, March to June in P2. The decrease in rains appears to occur in the minor season, July to August for P2. This pattern of minor season rainfall declines has been observed by Owusu and Waylen (2012) and by a cross section of the respondents who were interviewed

1802

K. Owusu et al.

from the three communities. Although the reduction has been very slight, the effects could be very crucial for agronomical activities by increasing crop failures during the minor rainy season in the district. This is because, unlike the major rainy season that spans a period of about 5 months, the bulk of rain in the minor rainy season only occurs in 2 months (September and October). The results of the monthly analysis seem to be in tandem with the views of older farmers in the study area that tie the high risk of crop failure in recent decades to changes in the rainfall regime rather than declines in the mean annual totals. The implication is that because produce from farms serves as the main source of household food and income, crop failure has significant adverse impacts on food security and household poverty in the study communities.

Non-climatic Factors That Make Smallholder Farmers Vulnerable Apart from climatic factors of increasing temperatures and variation in the rainfall pattern, non-climatic but socioeconomic factors were also identified as major challenges impacting negatively on the smallholder farmers and making them vulnerable to climate variability and change. Notable among these factors are poverty and inadequate funds. According to the farmers, the most important constraint to their activities is inadequate capital to enable them pay for hired labor and buy fertilizers, pesticides, and other farming equipment. There are no banks or government agencies ready to loan money to the smallholder farmers in the district. As a result, they are unable to expand the sizes of their farms to increase production for home consumption and for the market due to land fragmentation and tenure complications. Another constraint they mentioned was scarcity of labor. According to the district migration data, emigration predominantly of the youth from the district has increased to more than 10 % since the past decades (Assan 2007; Akuapem North District Assembly 2012). The participants explained that most of the youth in the communities keep emigrating in search of greener pastures elsewhere in response to increased crop failure and loss. A low price of farm products is another constraint that increases farmers’ vulnerability to climate change and variability in the district. Sixty (60) percent of the farmers interviewed, predominantly those from Bipoase, explained that they do not have direct access to large market to sell their produce because of poor road transportation network and the higher cost they have to incur to convey their goods to the market. Instead, they trade directly with middlemen who come to them to do the buying, usually on the farm. These middlemen come with their own prices, which are very low, but since the farmers have no other alternatives, they accept the prices to prevent their products from going bad. The middlemen then sell the produce at very high prices in the urban markets. According to the farmers, although they do the hard work, they are the least profit beneficiaries. Less profit means they are unable to save some of their earning against unforeseen events. This problem together with those already discussed makes farmers less resilient


1803

and more vulnerable to climate change impacts, especially during prolonged drought or excessive rains leading to crop failures.

Strategies for Adaptation to Climate Change The effects of climate change are likely to increase risk among smallholder farmers in Akuapem North District. According to the farmers interviewed, because climate change is a phenomenon that may persist for a long time, they have over the years put into place some measures that enable them cope and adapt to both adverse climatic and non-climatic stresses which increase their vulnerability. The adaptation practices are summarized in Table 3. The most common adaptation practices are using indigenous planting techniques predominantly, doing watering, planting more resistant varieties of crops, and adjusting to rainfall variability, especially during the minor season. The farmers also engaged in on-farm activities like rearing of animals to supplement their household income, particularly during climate failures. Thirteen percent (13 %) of the farmers who have friends and relatives living outside the local community receive remittances to pay for labor and save some as a form of collateral against unexpected events. They, however, mentioned that such supports are sometimes unreliable because the amount and frequency of remittance depend on conditions in the source region. Table 3 Frequency distribution of main adaptation strategies (N = 60) Class of adaptation strategy Small-scale businesses

Specific adaptation practice (i) Rearing of farm animals

Adjustment to variations in rains

(ii) Sale of bushmeat and fruits (iii) Making of gari, cassava dough, and palm oil (iv) Engage in driving and carpentry work to supplement farm income (i) Diverting from farming activities and resuming when farming conditions become favorable (ii) Waiting for the rains to come before planting begins (late planting) (iii) Early planting of seeds before rains (i) Depending on family labor to carry out farm activities

Family support/ remittances

Indigenous methods

(ii) Depending on financial support of family members in the urban areas (i) Watering of plants such as tomatoes

Frequency 10

20

8

22

(ii) Planting of crop varieties more resistant to drought conditions (iii) Rainfall harvesting for watering vegetables Total

60

1804

K. Owusu et al.

Institutional Support for Climate Change Adaptation In a typical rural setting like Akuapem North District, three major forms of institutions could be identified, namely, public, private, and civic institutions (Agrawal and Perrin 2008). In terms of public or government support, it was found out that although there are national climate adaptation strategies and programs, these have not trickled down to rural communities like Akropong, Adukrom, and Bipoase where the research was conducted. This is evident from the fact that there is presently no government policy intervention like sensitization and education program on climate change adaptation that can guide farmers to know what and when to plant in order to reduce the risk of climate failures. For instance, there are no seasonal forecasts given to the farmers during the cropping seasons. Farmers who were interviewed were ignorant of the existence of any national climate change adaptation program in the country. The farmers indicated that about a decade ago, the government used to distribute farm implements like cutlasses, hoes, and small funds for farmers in the district. However, these were not specifically to support climate change adaptation, but rather it was to help expand and sustain the breadbasket to reduce the risk of food insecurity in the district. Also the farm materials and funds were not for free but have to be repaid in installment. For instance, at Akropong it was reported that some years ago, they received loans from the government in aid to boost up their production levels. Unfortunately, most farmers were unable to honor their debt because that year happened to be one of the most unfavorable farming years (high temperatures and low and sporadic rainfall). With such bitter memories, when respondents were asked if they will like to receive loans in the future, the majority were reluctant because of the fear of going through the same sour experience which will end them and their families up in jails because of inability to repay such loans. At present, there is no private or civil society organization in the district that is into climate change adaptation to help the smallholder farmers. Similarly, none of the study communities has a civic institution like smallholder farmers’ cooperatives that is focused on assisting members to cope in the event of crop failures due to variability and climate change.

Conclusion and Recommendations In general, climate variability and change have adverse effects on smallholder farmers in Akuapem North District. Vulnerability and low resilience of farmers to climate variability and change impacts has been exacerbated by multiple non-climatic factors. Autonomous and reactive types of adaptation are the major strategies for adapting to the impacts of climate variability and change. So far, there have not been any planned and anticipatory types of adaptation assistance such as institutional support from the government, private businesses, and civil society organizations to help farmers in the district. The following are recommended to help reduce farmers’ vulnerability and increase their resilience to the impacts of climate variability and change.


1805

There is the need to strengthen their adaptation capacities mainly through institutional assistance in the form of government, NGOs, and cooperative bodies. These could help provide financial support to smallholder farmers to enable them adapt and increase output. The study, however, revealed that provision of loans for farmers to boost farming may not be successful because the farmers expressed their unwillingness to receive loans, citing past experiences and the possibility that crop failures could prevent them from paying back the loans. Educating the farmers through outreach extension programs about climate change and its effects and cost-effective adaptive strategies such as water management would enable farmers cope with long periods of droughts and early rainfall cessations. Also, there is the need to improve farmers’ access to certain farming equipment like pumping machines, tractors, and spraying machines among others to help them increase their output within a short period of time. This will ensure that the scarcity and high cost of labor is substituted for by the farming equipment. A key strategy in achieving this goal will be through the formation of smallholder association.

References Agrawal A, Perrin N (2008) Climate adaptation, local institutions, and rural livelihoods. In: Paper prepared for the social dimensions of climate change, social development department, March 5–6. The World Bank, Washington, DC Agyeman-Bonsu W, Minia Z, Dontwi J et al (2008) Ghana climate change impacts vulnerability and adaptation assessments. Environmental Protection Agency, Accra Akuapem North District Assembly (2012) Demographic characteristics of Akuapem North District. Available at http://akuapemnorth.ghanadistricts.gov.gh/?arrow=atd&=65&sa=4582. Accessed 2 May 2013 Alberta Agriculture, food and Rural Development (AAFRD) (2005) Agriculture adaptation to climate change in Alberta: focus group result. AAFRD, Edmonton Altieri AA, Koohafkan P (2008) Enduring farms: climate change, smallholders and traditional farming communities. Third World Network (TWN). Juta Print Assan JK (2007) Effects of rural out-migration and remittance culture on livelihood diversification and innovation in Ghana, an unpublished article, Department of Geography, The University of Liverpool, UK Boko M, Niang I, Nyong A et al (2007) Africa. Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability, contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK Downing TE, Hulme M, Ringius L et al (1997) Adapting to climate change in Africa. J Mitigat Adapt Strat Global Change 2(1):19–44 Francis E (2002) Making a living: changing livelihoods in rural Africa. Can J Afr Stud 36 (1):148–150 Ghana Districts.com (2006) Akuapem North District: physical characteristics. Available at http:// www.ghanadistricts.net/districts/?r=5&_=65&sa=6625. Accessed on 6 Jan 2013 Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) (2012) 2010 Population and housing census. Summary report of final results. GSS, Accra GIDA (2010) National irrigation policy, strategies and regulatory measures. Available at http:// mofa.gov.gh/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/GHANA-IRRIGATION-DEVELOPMENTPOLICY1.pdf. Accessed 28 Sept 2011 Hulme M, Barrow EM, Arnell NW et al (1999) Relative impact of human induced climate change and natural climate variability. Nature 397:688–691

1806

K. Owusu et al.

IFAD (2009) Climate change: building smallholders resilience. Available at http://www.ifad.org. Accessed 2 Oct 2011 IFAD (2010) Climate change strategy. Available at http://www.ifad.org. Accessed 28 Sept 2011 International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) (2008) Climate change and the future of smallholder agriculture. Available at http://www.ifad.org. Accessed 2 Oct 2011 IPCC (2007) Climate change (2007) synthesis report, contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. IPCC, Geneva Khamis M (2006) Climate change and smallholder farmers in Malawi. Available at www. actionaid.org.uk/doc_lib/malawi_climate change_report.pdf. Accessed 18 Sept 2011 Kunateh AM (2011) Climate change threatens Ghana’s food security. The Ghanaian Chronicle. Available at http://www.ghanaian-chronicle.com/climate-change-threatens-ghana%E2%80% 99s-food-security/. Accessed 29 Dec 2011 Lal R (2000) Soil. Science 165(1):57–72 Minia Z (2004) Climate scenarios developed for climate change impacts assessment in Ghana. The Netherlands Climate Change Studies Assistance Program (NCCSAP). Phase 2 – Part 1. EPA, Accra Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MOFA) (2011) Agriculture in Ghana: facts and figures. Statistics Research and Information Directorate (SRID), Accra Morton JF (2007) The impact of climate change on smallholders and subsistence agriculture. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC Nelson GC, Rosegrant MW, Koo J et al (2009) Climate change impacts on agriculture and costs of adaptation. Research report, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC Osbahr TCH, Adger NW, Thomas GSD (2008) Effective livelihood adaptations to climate change disturbance: scale dimensions of practice in Mozambique. Geoforum 39(6):1951–1964 Owusu K, Waylen PR (2009) Trends in spatio-temporal rainfall variability in Ghana, (1951–2000). Weather 64(5):115–120 Owusu K, Waylen PR (2012) The changing rainy season climatology of mid-Ghana. Theor Appl Climatol 112(3–4):419–430 Owusu K, Waylen PR (2013) Identification of historic shifts in daily rainfall regime, Wenchi, Ghana. Climatic Change 117:133–147 Ratan R, Venugopal V (2013) Wet and dry spell characteristics of global tropical rainfall. Water Resour Res 49(6):3830–3841 Ringler C (2008) Climate variability and change impact on water and food outcomes. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, DC Scoones I, Chibudu C, Chikura S et al (1996) Hazards and opportunities; Farming livelihoods in dryland Africa: lessons from Zimbabwe. Zed, London Tadross M, Suarez P, Lotsch A, Hachigonta S, Mdoka M, Unganai L, Lucio F, Kamdonyo F, Muchinda M (2009) Growing-season rainfall and scenarios of future change in southeast Africa: implications for cultivating maize. Climate Res 40:147–161 Tauli-Corpuz V, Lynge A (2008) Impact of climate change mitigation measures on indigenous peoples and on their territories and lands. In: Submitted to the United Nations Economic and Social Council, Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues Seventh session, 21 April2 May 2008, New York Vermeulen S (2011) The economies of climate change: potential impact on the agricultural industry in sub-Saharan Africa. Available at http://www.consultancyafrica.com. Accessed 30 Sept 2011)