olStudent Title: Munck, Serna, Sandberg OL 341 Assignment 2

Student Date: September 27, 2010

Online Learning: OL 341 From the Ground Up for Adaptation. Center for Sustainable Development
http://www.csd-i.org/

Assignment 2. What’s your theory of a solution?

Part 1.
Searching for project activities; a list of colleagues and websites that you consulted for potential activities.

We referred to the documents and websites:

● “Quesungual Slash & Mulch Agroforestry System: An Eco-Efficient Option for the Rural Poor” from the International
Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT).
● Herforth, A. (2010). Nutrition And The Environment: Fundamental To Food Security In Africa. Chapter 7. Cornell
University Press.
● CIAT. Eco-Efficient Agriculture for the poor. Retrieved September 26, 2010, from
http://www.ciat.cgiar.org/Newsroom/Pages/challenges_innovations.aspx

● http://www.eldis.org.

Consulted with Fernando Moretti with UN Food program in Guatemala.

Part 2.
Problem Statement:
(Problems and underlying causes) The 14 families living in the Caña Brava community are threatened by (1) food
shortages caused by lack of consistent access to water for agricultural activities, and lack of knowledge of appropriate
agricultural techniques, water management, and soil conservation. The food shortages contribute to (Negative
Impacts) (a) chronic under-nutrition that affects (b) individual/familiar participation in economic activities, commuity
development and community organization. This leads to a reduction in the ability of the 14 families to (c) organize the
community and potentially improve living conditions for all.

Part 3.
Project Outline: Problem list combined with potential interventions/activities/solutions that I chose

(Problem 1). Food shortages

● Soil and water use program (Solution to underlying cause: lack of knowledge of appropriate agriculture
techniques, water management, and soil conservation.)
○ (Activity 1). Workshop(s) on soil conservation, water management, and eco-efficient agricultural
techniques.
○ (Activity 2). Workshop(s) on eco-efficient agricultural techniques.
○ (Activity 3). Mentoring and follow program: implementation of eco-efficient agricultural techniques.

● Development of water harvesting and storage system (Solution to underlying cause: lack of consistent access
to water for agricultural activites.)
○ (Activity 1). Implement water harvesting and storage system.
○ [Activity 1]. Awareness workshops and demonstrations on establishing water harvesting and storage
systems in the village
○ [Activity 2]. Work/speak with local designers and material providers to design appropriate harvesting
systems
○ [Activity 3]. Develop a program to facilitate the provision of these harvesting systems
○ [Activity 4]. Provide training workshops and follow-up in the construction/installation, use and
maintenance of harvesting systems

Part 4.
Goal Statement:
The 14 families living in the Caña Brava community will be able to enjoy (Solutions) (1) year round food security
through he implementation of a water storage system, improved agricultural techniques, and more efficient soil and
water usage, leading to (Positive Impacts) (a) improved nutrition, (b) increased individual/familiar participation in
economic activities, commuity development and improved community organization. This leads to a increase in the
ability of the 14 families to (c) organize the community and potentially improve living conditions for all.
(Problem 1). Food shortages
● Soil and water use program (Solution to underlying cause: lack of knowledge of appropriate agriculture
techniques, water management, and soil conservation.)
○ (Activity 1). Workshop(s) on soil conservation, water management, and eco-efficient agricultural
techniques.
○ (Activity 2). Workshop(s) on eco-efficient agricultural techniques.
○ (Activity 3). Mentoring and follow program: implementation of eco-efficient agricultural techniques.

● Development of water harvesting and storage system (Solution to underlying cause: lack of consistent access
to water for agricultural activites.)
○ [Activity 1]. Awareness workshops and demonstrations on establishing water harvesting and storage
systems in the village
○ [Activity 2]. Work/speak with local designers and material providers to design appropriate harvesting
systems
○ [Activity 3]. Develop a program to facilitate the provision of these harvesting systems
○ [Activity 4]. Provide training workshops and follow-up in the construction/installation, use and
maintenance of harvesting systems

Literature review:
1. List of scientific papers about the proposed project activities:

IIED (2009) Participatory learning and action, community-based adaptation to climate change, V. 60,
London, IIED.

Sherwood S. and Bentley J. (2009) Katalysis: helping the Andean farmers adapt to climate change. in:
Participatory learning and action 60, Community-based adaptation to climate change, London,
IIED.

Oxfam GB (2010) Climate Change adaptation: enabling people living in poverty to adapt, Oxfam research
report, Oxford.

Kato E et al (2009) Are soil and water conservation technologies a buffer against production risk in the
face of climate change? Insights from Ethiopia’s Nile basin. Washington, DC: IFPRI discussion
paper No. 871.

Pandey D, Gupta A and Anderson D (2003) Rainwater harvesting as an adaptation to climate change. Current Science
85(1), july 2003. Available at www.ias.ac.in/currsci/jul102003/46.pdf [Accessed October 7th, 2010]

2. Summary of main findings related with the project activities:

IIED’s contributor scholars and practitioners highlight adaptation to climate change in poor rural communities as a
community-based action. From lessons drawn from several experiences, CBA ‘should seek to empower people to plan
for and cope with the impacts of climate change’ (IIED 2009: 13).

Adaptation to climate change also ‘needs to start with communities’ expressed needs and perceptions, and to have
poverty reduction and livelihood benefits, as well as reducing vulnerability to climate change and disasters’ (ibid).
Keeping that in mind, the community-based approach to climate change must involve building adaptative capacity’ as
Oxfam GB (2010: 35) stresses in its approach, as well as ‘addressing the factors that limite adaptative capacity’ (ibid).

The activities envisaged for the team to address the current and potential food shortage as consequence of climate
change seem to be in line with those above statements, as the approach taken involves building local capacity through
knowledge sharing.

The planned workshops on soil conservation water management and agricultural techniques must be open to
incorporate indigenous traditions and techniques already applied, even those that have not being used in order to
make room for more ‘modern’ technologies. As IIED stresses, CBA should ‘focuses technologies already in use by local
farmers’ and introducing new technologies only after local alternatives have been exhausted and after careful cost
benefit analysis (IIED 2009: 74). Even new introduced technologies should be tailored and ‘ targeted at the needs of
the poorest and most vulnerable people, including women, favouring small-scale technologies that can be taken up and
adapted locally’(Oxfam GB 2010: 28).

The Katalysis project experience with Andean farmers living in semi-arid areas acknowledges the missed opportunities
for farmers’ improvement because of knowledge gaps (IIED 2009:75). The Katalysis successful experience helped rural
people to ‘bridge those [knowledge] gaps so that they may creatively manage their own resources in response to the
growing threat of climate change’ (pp.75). Actions aimed at regenerating micro-catchments were put in place with
positive results, including soil, land and water management. A research on rainwater catchment systems points out
that ‘Traditional systems would become more efficient if scientific attempts are combined to enhance the productivity
of local knowledge (Pandey, Gupta and Anderson 2003: 55).

Some of the techniques recommended for soil conservation and water management are: ‘trench building to control
erosion, improve soil fertility, and enhance groundwater recharge; crop management; afforestation and rural energy
management, e.g. a ban on tree-felling, instead planting shrubs and grass to meet household fuel needs; livestock
management and pasture/fodder development, e.g. grazing restrictions leading to the natural regeneration of grass
and shrubs.’ (IIED 2009: 32). All those actions increased water availability in soil and well levels, fodder availability and
milk production as well as some initial vegetable gardening. The history in several parts of the world also reveals that
water harvesting systems were built as a strategy of coping with unexpectedly long dry seasons (Pandey, Gupta and
Anderson 2003). However, as Kato et al point out (2009), ‘one-size-fits-all’ water management and soil conservation
techniques are proven inadequate and there is a need for choosing the most effective ones according to physical and
cultural conditions.