37
edge and skills to assist them in dealing with the
impact of this phenomenon. Participants attributed this low level in their capacity to respond to
climate change as (1) climate change education
not being integrated in the education system, (2)
a lack of expertise in curriculum development in
relation to climate change education, (3) unskilled
trainers and teachers delivering climate change
education, (4) an absence of a national policy on
climate change and (5) limited financial resources
within SVG to implement climate change education programmes. They also attributed this to the
decline in youth and community organisations
and social networks in their communities that are
involved in climate change adaptation and other
community self-help activities. They concluded
that the level of capacity on climate change that is
provided through the education and training at
community and national levels is minimal and
non-existent.
The mapping exercise also indicated that the
perception of climate change threat varies within
SVG depending on the local context, and the
risks identified by the participants are not the
same everywhere. This suggests that a single
strategy is unlikely to work and there would be a
need for locally adapted solutions. Over the
years, commercial gains and the profit motive
have influenced resource exploitation and developmental efforts and did not consider the environmental consequences of such actions. This
disconnect has continued for centuries and has
exposed the country to risks. There is local
knowledge to deal with calamities and climatic
stresses which can be used for adaptation, but
harnessing this knowledge, maintaining it and
passing it on to the next generation will be a
major challenge. However, it does not appear that
there is a process to make use of this knowledge
for the local benefit.
As well as being able to identify and verify the
climate stressors impacting on small island communities through stakeholder participation, the
participatory mapping exercise provided opportunities for building friendship, respect and partnership among the various members of the
communities. It provided opportunities for persons of different ages, gender, social classes and
geographic locations to meet to collectively discuss the issues confronting the communities and
devise strategies to address these issues. Some
participants met for the first time to explore the
critical issues that affect their communities. At
the initial stage of their consultation, they selected
a co-facilitator to facilitate the session and a
scribe to assist with taking the minutes of the
meeting. They discussed a set of ground rules to
manage the process of deliberation including (1)
respecting the views of others, (2) raising your
hand if you want to make an input into the discussion, (3) allowing a person to complete their contribution to the discussion before interjecting
their views and (4) respecting the opinions of the
facilitators at all times and only speaking when
permission was granted.
Despite all the rules, there were instances
when the discussion became heated as participants began to take sides supporting as well as
criticising each other. It was amazing to observe
persons who had not seen each other before walking across the map on the ground to hug each
other when they made a point that they felt
echoed their views on an issue. There was an
instance in Vermont Valley when a mature woman
was describing her ordeals due to flooding; she
became so emotional and was about to cry when
the rest of the group gathered around her to provide support. This gesture empowered her to
complete her story and was not uncommon
throughout the mapping process. Participants
from one village agreed to visit other villages to
work with residents to implement drought and
pest-resistant cropping techniques to assist farmers. There were also occasions where residents
who successfully implemented river defence
strategies to protect their households and villages
agreed to travel to other villages to work with
them and share their knowledge of how to implement these strategies.
Besides providing information on climate
pressure/stressors affecting the community, one
can conclude that the participatory mapping exercise brought additional benefits to the community. Participants of the mapping exercise were
empowered when the government officials and
community leaders selected them to represent
Section 1: The Participatory Mapping Process
edge and skills to assist them in dealing with the
impact of this phenomenon. Participants attributed this low level in their capacity to respond to
climate change as (1) climate change education
not being integrated in the education system, (2)
a lack of expertise in curriculum development in
relation to climate change education, (3) unskilled
trainers and teachers delivering climate change
education, (4) an absence of a national policy on
climate change and (5) limited financial resources
within SVG to implement climate change education programmes. They also attributed this to the
decline in youth and community organisations
and social networks in their communities that are
involved in climate change adaptation and other
community self-help activities. They concluded
that the level of capacity on climate change that is
provided through the education and training at
community and national levels is minimal and
non-existent.
The mapping exercise also indicated that the
perception of climate change threat varies within
SVG depending on the local context, and the
risks identified by the participants are not the
same everywhere. This suggests that a single
strategy is unlikely to work and there would be a
need for locally adapted solutions. Over the
years, commercial gains and the profit motive
have influenced resource exploitation and developmental efforts and did not consider the environmental consequences of such actions. This
disconnect has continued for centuries and has
exposed the country to risks. There is local
knowledge to deal with calamities and climatic
stresses which can be used for adaptation, but
harnessing this knowledge, maintaining it and
passing it on to the next generation will be a
major challenge. However, it does not appear that
there is a process to make use of this knowledge
for the local benefit.
As well as being able to identify and verify the
climate stressors impacting on small island communities through stakeholder participation, the
participatory mapping exercise provided opportunities for building friendship, respect and partnership among the various members of the
communities. It provided opportunities for persons of different ages, gender, social classes and
geographic locations to meet to collectively discuss the issues confronting the communities and
devise strategies to address these issues. Some
participants met for the first time to explore the
critical issues that affect their communities. At
the initial stage of their consultation, they selected
a co-facilitator to facilitate the session and a
scribe to assist with taking the minutes of the
meeting. They discussed a set of ground rules to
manage the process of deliberation including (1)
respecting the views of others, (2) raising your
hand if you want to make an input into the discussion, (3) allowing a person to complete their contribution to the discussion before interjecting
their views and (4) respecting the opinions of the
facilitators at all times and only speaking when
permission was granted.
Despite all the rules, there were instances
when the discussion became heated as participants began to take sides supporting as well as
criticising each other. It was amazing to observe
persons who had not seen each other before walking across the map on the ground to hug each
other when they made a point that they felt
echoed their views on an issue. There was an
instance in Vermont Valley when a mature woman
was describing her ordeals due to flooding; she
became so emotional and was about to cry when
the rest of the group gathered around her to provide support. This gesture empowered her to
complete her story and was not uncommon
throughout the mapping process. Participants
from one village agreed to visit other villages to
work with residents to implement drought and
pest-resistant cropping techniques to assist farmers. There were also occasions where residents
who successfully implemented river defence
strategies to protect their households and villages
agreed to travel to other villages to work with
them and share their knowledge of how to implement these strategies.
Besides providing information on climate
pressure/stressors affecting the community, one
can conclude that the participatory mapping exercise brought additional benefits to the community. Participants of the mapping exercise were
empowered when the government officials and
community leaders selected them to represent
Section 1: The Participatory Mapping Process