Second, it should be ensured that national fiscal, planning and implementation
mechanisms towards enhancing resilience and reducing disaster risk target vulnerable communities and groups. Relevant government departments and agencies such
as the Ministry for Finance, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Ministry
for Food and Agriculture that have clear mandates and defined roles within the
national development agenda should be responsive and proactive in this regard.
Third, there should be efforts to promote alternative livelihood options in order to
reduce the negative effects of climate variability on vulnerable groups and particularly women, elderly and the youth. A key element of such efforts should be to
diversify from primary economic sectors such as agriculture, livestock and forestry,
as many studies have shown that the ongoing climate variability and change reduce
the capacity of semi-arid ecosystems to supply such ecosystem services that are
essentially the basis of local livelihoods (Boafo et al. 2014; Armah et al. 2011). This
would require coordinated policy actions between the national and local government, as well as with broader stakeholder groups from the private sector, civil
society and international organizations and donors.
Fourth, a practical approach towards disaster prevention and reduction could be
to integrate ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) approaches into community resilience adaptation and disaster risk-reduction strategies. EbA approaches, with their
strong focus on landscapes and ecosystem services, could provide multiple benefits
to enhance the rather low socioeconomic, ecological and engineering resilience of
the vulnerable local communities, while directly contributing to several SDGs
including SDG1 (no poverty), SDG2 (zero hunger) and SDG15 (life on land). Due
to their multi-functionality EbA approaches could also reduce the investments
needed for disaster response, thus offering cost-effective solutions to enhance
resilience to climatic hazards.
6.5 Conclusions
This chapter presented the results of a community resilience assessment to floods
and droughts using a bottom-up participatory approach that elicited the perceptions
of different groups in semi-arid Ghana. The results suggest that community resilience is consistently low between the studied groups and localities, as well the
individual dimensions and elements of resilience. This overwhelming agreement
clearly shows that local communities and households in the studied areas (and semiarid Ghana more generally) are far from capable to withstand the negative outcomes
of climatic hazards, now and in the future. Considering the ongoing climate change
and variability, it becomes ever so urgent to improve their resilience across all
studied dimensions (i.e. ecological, engineering, socioeconomic), and underlying
elements. Such a holistic understanding and bottom-up evaluation of community
resilience are imperative to assist the design and implementation of effective intervention strategies. This is not the least because bottom-up approaches can capture
better the experiences and needs of local communities that have intimate experience
214
Y. A. Boafo et al.
mechanisms towards enhancing resilience and reducing disaster risk target vulnerable communities and groups. Relevant government departments and agencies such
as the Ministry for Finance, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Ministry
for Food and Agriculture that have clear mandates and defined roles within the
national development agenda should be responsive and proactive in this regard.
Third, there should be efforts to promote alternative livelihood options in order to
reduce the negative effects of climate variability on vulnerable groups and particularly women, elderly and the youth. A key element of such efforts should be to
diversify from primary economic sectors such as agriculture, livestock and forestry,
as many studies have shown that the ongoing climate variability and change reduce
the capacity of semi-arid ecosystems to supply such ecosystem services that are
essentially the basis of local livelihoods (Boafo et al. 2014; Armah et al. 2011). This
would require coordinated policy actions between the national and local government, as well as with broader stakeholder groups from the private sector, civil
society and international organizations and donors.
Fourth, a practical approach towards disaster prevention and reduction could be
to integrate ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) approaches into community resilience adaptation and disaster risk-reduction strategies. EbA approaches, with their
strong focus on landscapes and ecosystem services, could provide multiple benefits
to enhance the rather low socioeconomic, ecological and engineering resilience of
the vulnerable local communities, while directly contributing to several SDGs
including SDG1 (no poverty), SDG2 (zero hunger) and SDG15 (life on land). Due
to their multi-functionality EbA approaches could also reduce the investments
needed for disaster response, thus offering cost-effective solutions to enhance
resilience to climatic hazards.
6.5 Conclusions
This chapter presented the results of a community resilience assessment to floods
and droughts using a bottom-up participatory approach that elicited the perceptions
of different groups in semi-arid Ghana. The results suggest that community resilience is consistently low between the studied groups and localities, as well the
individual dimensions and elements of resilience. This overwhelming agreement
clearly shows that local communities and households in the studied areas (and semiarid Ghana more generally) are far from capable to withstand the negative outcomes
of climatic hazards, now and in the future. Considering the ongoing climate change
and variability, it becomes ever so urgent to improve their resilience across all
studied dimensions (i.e. ecological, engineering, socioeconomic), and underlying
elements. Such a holistic understanding and bottom-up evaluation of community
resilience are imperative to assist the design and implementation of effective intervention strategies. This is not the least because bottom-up approaches can capture
better the experiences and needs of local communities that have intimate experience
214
Y. A. Boafo et al.