Understandably, natural disasters drastically reduce a farmer’s income. As far as
mitigation strategies are concerned our survey shows that marginal and small
farmers usually have little savings; so a large percentage of such farmers essentially
need to borrow in order to meet their expenses (see also Rajeev et al. 2006).
Economically better off friends and relatives often provide loans to the farmers in
distress. Alternatively, farmers seek wage labour in agriculture or other occupations
for their sustenance and of late, we have also observed that farmers with small land
holdings are working under NREGA programme. A few farmers who have small
business like petty shops fall back on the income earned from such non-farm
activities. The survey also revealed that about 15 % of farmers had to sell assets for
their sustenance. Figure 4 gives graphic details (bar chart) of the survival strategies
adopted by farmers after visitations of drought.
It is clear that the strategies adopted by farmers to cope during weather related
aberrations are rather weak, and a systematic approach to the problem is absolutely
necessary to ameliorate farmers’ distress. Developing non-farm activities is one
such option, and the problems related to this are discussed in the sequel hereto. In
32
68
Share of Households who got benefir During Drought
Not Received
Fig. 3 Share of households
who got benefited from
Government during drought.
Source Field Survey
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Sold Assets, 15.20
Borrowed for livelihood, 35.77
Taken up non farm activity, 12.46
Earned through Wage Labour,
25.46
Others, 11.12
Measures taken After Drought
Fig. 4 Means of survival after drought (shown in terms of percentage of farmers). Source Field
Survey
Climate Change and Uncertainty in Agriculture …
253
mitigation strategies are concerned our survey shows that marginal and small
farmers usually have little savings; so a large percentage of such farmers essentially
need to borrow in order to meet their expenses (see also Rajeev et al. 2006).
Economically better off friends and relatives often provide loans to the farmers in
distress. Alternatively, farmers seek wage labour in agriculture or other occupations
for their sustenance and of late, we have also observed that farmers with small land
holdings are working under NREGA programme. A few farmers who have small
business like petty shops fall back on the income earned from such non-farm
activities. The survey also revealed that about 15 % of farmers had to sell assets for
their sustenance. Figure 4 gives graphic details (bar chart) of the survival strategies
adopted by farmers after visitations of drought.
It is clear that the strategies adopted by farmers to cope during weather related
aberrations are rather weak, and a systematic approach to the problem is absolutely
necessary to ameliorate farmers’ distress. Developing non-farm activities is one
such option, and the problems related to this are discussed in the sequel hereto. In
32
68
Share of Households who got benefir During Drought
Not Received
Fig. 3 Share of households
who got benefited from
Government during drought.
Source Field Survey
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Sold Assets, 15.20
Borrowed for livelihood, 35.77
Taken up non farm activity, 12.46
Earned through Wage Labour,
25.46
Others, 11.12
Measures taken After Drought
Fig. 4 Means of survival after drought (shown in terms of percentage of farmers). Source Field
Survey
Climate Change and Uncertainty in Agriculture …
253