519
The step 1 on the ladder of adaptive capacity was characterised by households
that have small sizes of land, which cannot afford to buy inputs and mainly depend
on input subsidy and are mainly dependent on piece work from other people’s fields.
These households do not own livestock and rarely harvest from their fields. They
were categorised as households with the lowest capacity to adapt to climate change.
On the other hand, step 4 of the ladder of adaptive capacity was characterised by
households with reasonable sizes of land and can also afford to rent extra land from
the community. The households on this step can afford to buy inputs like fertilisers
and hybrid seeds and can hire labour from the community, especially from members
on step 1. Households on step 4 have livestock such as cattle and goats in addition
to chickens, and they mainly sell their agricultural produce in urban markets because
they can afford transport. They were categorised as households with the highest
capacity to adapt. The household characteristics kept on improving as you move up
the ladder. The members of the discussion groups unanimously agreed that people
who are considered to be vulnerable are those on steps 1 and 2; hence, the community vulnerability line was drawn on step 2.
Level of Adaptive Capacity by Sex of Respondents
The respondents were divided into three categories: women from female-headed
households, women from male-headed households and men from male-headed
households; however, the results were categorised into females and males, implying
that women were categorised together whether from male- or female-headed
households.
The results from the individual interviews showed that most female respondents
were on step 2, implying that they have little capacity to adapt to climate change,
while most of the male respondents were on steps 1, 2 and 3, implying that some
have little or no capacity to adapt, while others have capacity to adapt to some of the
climate change impacts and effects (Fig. 3). The reasons why most female farmers
were on steps 1 and 2 were: low access to resources such as land, low access to
information and technologies due to high illiteracy levels and limited access to
extension services.
However, when asked about their adaptive capacity in 2013, female respondents
indicated that they were on step 1 (22%) and step 2 (19%), while an equal number
of male respondents were on steps 1 and 2 (Fig. 4). These findings imply that most
male and female respondents have jumped up on the ladder from step 1 in 2013 to
either step 2 or 3 in 2018. In general, both female and male farmers have some
improved capacity to adapt to climate change than they were in 2013.
Although some households had moved up the ladder, the results showed that
most of the female respondents were still on steps 1 and 2 in 2018, implying that
they were below the community vulnerability line. This was different from male
respondents who had moved upward to step 3 in 2018. The increase in the level of
adaptive capacity for females was attributed to increased access to village saving
and loan groups that provide soft loans to buy agricultural inputs. But the males
Gender Differentiation in the Adoption of Climate Smart Agriculture Technologies…
The step 1 on the ladder of adaptive capacity was characterised by households
that have small sizes of land, which cannot afford to buy inputs and mainly depend
on input subsidy and are mainly dependent on piece work from other people’s fields.
These households do not own livestock and rarely harvest from their fields. They
were categorised as households with the lowest capacity to adapt to climate change.
On the other hand, step 4 of the ladder of adaptive capacity was characterised by
households with reasonable sizes of land and can also afford to rent extra land from
the community. The households on this step can afford to buy inputs like fertilisers
and hybrid seeds and can hire labour from the community, especially from members
on step 1. Households on step 4 have livestock such as cattle and goats in addition
to chickens, and they mainly sell their agricultural produce in urban markets because
they can afford transport. They were categorised as households with the highest
capacity to adapt. The household characteristics kept on improving as you move up
the ladder. The members of the discussion groups unanimously agreed that people
who are considered to be vulnerable are those on steps 1 and 2; hence, the community vulnerability line was drawn on step 2.
Level of Adaptive Capacity by Sex of Respondents
The respondents were divided into three categories: women from female-headed
households, women from male-headed households and men from male-headed
households; however, the results were categorised into females and males, implying
that women were categorised together whether from male- or female-headed
households.
The results from the individual interviews showed that most female respondents
were on step 2, implying that they have little capacity to adapt to climate change,
while most of the male respondents were on steps 1, 2 and 3, implying that some
have little or no capacity to adapt, while others have capacity to adapt to some of the
climate change impacts and effects (Fig. 3). The reasons why most female farmers
were on steps 1 and 2 were: low access to resources such as land, low access to
information and technologies due to high illiteracy levels and limited access to
extension services.
However, when asked about their adaptive capacity in 2013, female respondents
indicated that they were on step 1 (22%) and step 2 (19%), while an equal number
of male respondents were on steps 1 and 2 (Fig. 4). These findings imply that most
male and female respondents have jumped up on the ladder from step 1 in 2013 to
either step 2 or 3 in 2018. In general, both female and male farmers have some
improved capacity to adapt to climate change than they were in 2013.
Although some households had moved up the ladder, the results showed that
most of the female respondents were still on steps 1 and 2 in 2018, implying that
they were below the community vulnerability line. This was different from male
respondents who had moved upward to step 3 in 2018. The increase in the level of
adaptive capacity for females was attributed to increased access to village saving
and loan groups that provide soft loans to buy agricultural inputs. But the males
Gender Differentiation in the Adoption of Climate Smart Agriculture Technologies…