109
Security (CCAFS). A combination of different participatory tools was used, including the indicators, as shown in Table 6.3. In each community, 20–25 participants
gathered at a central location in the village for the workshop. Each workshop concluded with an in-depth discussion of main problems, root causes and threats identified during the assessment, areas of higher vulnerability and land degradation, and
potential solutions, interventions and development organizations.
The following priority actions were proposed in the two villages, aimed at
improving the communities’ resilience and that of their landscape in the face of
socio-ecological and climate changes:
• Restore the ecosystem
• Discourage encroachment on forests, springs, and wetlands through the enforcement of relevant government regulations and policies
• Educate and create awareness on the advantages of diverse foods and
landscapes
• Document and preserve community knowledge
• Build capacity of local leaders to lead and groups to network/cooperate
• Support communities to acquire new technologies and innovate
• Diversify sources of income
Six broader themes were identified to categorize the indicators for the scoring
exercise (see Table 6.4). Among these, one of the most outstanding differences
between Yamba and Kwang’wenda villages is in the first theme, “Landscape/ecosystem diversity and health components.” Kwang’wenda village scored 2.7 (average score) in this section against 4.0 (high score) for Yamba village. This was
explained by the fact that most forest patches in Kwang’wenda village have been
cleared, reducing the tree cover and also the once-numerous springs to only one,
causing a general scarcity of water. According to participants, temperatures have
risen and rain patterns have been affected, partly attributable to general land degradation and climate change. Crops such as coffee and bananas no longer do well in
Kwang’wenda village as it is now too dry and warm for these crops. Yamba village,
on the other hand, has suffered much less land degradation. The village has a forest
next to it and much of the land still has good tree cover. However, there are reports
of forest and spring encroachment by cultivators and illegal timber harvesting,
which residents see as a real threat to the ecosystem. The expected future trend follows a similar pattern. Kwang’wenda participants felt that the situation would only
improve slightly (average score 2.7) as the state of the ecosystem is bad and the rate
of recovery is bound to be slow. In Yamba village, the future looks optimistic (average of 4.2).
The participatory tools used in this study, including landscape mapping, listing
of landscape and agrobiodiversity components and main food sources, seasonal calendars, and use of the indicators, also showed a similar association between landscape and species diversity on the one hand and people’s perceptions of resilience
and risks on the other hand, meaning that people’s higher perceptions of landscape
and species diversity associate with higher resilience and reduced risks.
6 Lessons Learned from Application of the “Indicators of Resilience…
Security (CCAFS). A combination of different participatory tools was used, including the indicators, as shown in Table 6.3. In each community, 20–25 participants
gathered at a central location in the village for the workshop. Each workshop concluded with an in-depth discussion of main problems, root causes and threats identified during the assessment, areas of higher vulnerability and land degradation, and
potential solutions, interventions and development organizations.
The following priority actions were proposed in the two villages, aimed at
improving the communities’ resilience and that of their landscape in the face of
socio-ecological and climate changes:
• Restore the ecosystem
• Discourage encroachment on forests, springs, and wetlands through the enforcement of relevant government regulations and policies
• Educate and create awareness on the advantages of diverse foods and
landscapes
• Document and preserve community knowledge
• Build capacity of local leaders to lead and groups to network/cooperate
• Support communities to acquire new technologies and innovate
• Diversify sources of income
Six broader themes were identified to categorize the indicators for the scoring
exercise (see Table 6.4). Among these, one of the most outstanding differences
between Yamba and Kwang’wenda villages is in the first theme, “Landscape/ecosystem diversity and health components.” Kwang’wenda village scored 2.7 (average score) in this section against 4.0 (high score) for Yamba village. This was
explained by the fact that most forest patches in Kwang’wenda village have been
cleared, reducing the tree cover and also the once-numerous springs to only one,
causing a general scarcity of water. According to participants, temperatures have
risen and rain patterns have been affected, partly attributable to general land degradation and climate change. Crops such as coffee and bananas no longer do well in
Kwang’wenda village as it is now too dry and warm for these crops. Yamba village,
on the other hand, has suffered much less land degradation. The village has a forest
next to it and much of the land still has good tree cover. However, there are reports
of forest and spring encroachment by cultivators and illegal timber harvesting,
which residents see as a real threat to the ecosystem. The expected future trend follows a similar pattern. Kwang’wenda participants felt that the situation would only
improve slightly (average score 2.7) as the state of the ecosystem is bad and the rate
of recovery is bound to be slow. In Yamba village, the future looks optimistic (average of 4.2).
The participatory tools used in this study, including landscape mapping, listing
of landscape and agrobiodiversity components and main food sources, seasonal calendars, and use of the indicators, also showed a similar association between landscape and species diversity on the one hand and people’s perceptions of resilience
and risks on the other hand, meaning that people’s higher perceptions of landscape
and species diversity associate with higher resilience and reduced risks.
6 Lessons Learned from Application of the “Indicators of Resilience…