Descripción de las clases u operaciones necesarias

friends 29 43 43 37

P-value (Chi-square) 0.309 0.643

7.6.2. Life history interviews

Throughout the life history interviews, respondents from Lesseyton and Willowvale spoke about what has prevented them from responding to shocks and stressors (Table 7.13). The issue of unemployment (HH25), lack of income (HH84, HH81, HH25), lack of education (HH25), poor health (HH79), drought and poor harvests (HH25), and crime (especially amongst the youth) (HH41) were recurring topics of conversations amongst the respondents when speaking about barriers to coping and adaptation. Respondents in Willowvale felt that the absence of electricity prevented development and income-earning opportunities in their community. Drought and the supply of water from the municipality were also seen as barriers which limited respondents’ use of natural and cultivated resources. In the conceptual framework of this study (Chapter 2, Figure 2.2) barriers, such as those identified by the respondents, have the potential to impede coping and adaptation or result in ineffective or

139 maladaptive responses which feedback into increased vulnerability. Many of the barriers identified within the life history interviews reiterate the barriers identified in the survey data (Figure 7.11) and reflect the sources of vulnerability identified in the PLA workshops (see Chapter 6, section 6.4; discussion in section 7.6.3.1).

Table 7.13. Personal narratives of barriers which have prevented respondents form coping and adapting to shocks and stressors

Households Theme: Barriers to coping and adaptation

HH84 Not getting enough money is the barrier. I have dreams and wishes but due to financial constraints I cannot fulfil.

HH81 I cannot plough my fields now that I do not have an income. Things will be much better when I finally get the old age pension. Lack of income is the barrier.

Unemployment. It worries me that I cannot do the things I want to do, that I could die not having achieved anything due to unemployment. I wish I could build a house for my family. This one is too small.

Water supply is the main concern. The taps have been locked; they say the dam is not clean. They will unlock the taps after the dam has been cleaned. The authorities have supplied us with Jojo tanks, but we cannot us that water for the crops. It is for domestic use only.

Education – the authorities need to build more schools closer to the community and there needs to be free education – no school fees,

everything supplied free to the learners.

Projects – such as community gardens. The authorities should supply everything and assist the community in these projects. They should work hand in hand with the community.

HH41 To see a stop to the drinking spree. Since young people are jobless they spend their time drinking and committing crime. If they could get jobs things would be better. They would have something keeping them busy.

Also if the taverns could close early while it is still daylight.

140 7.6.3 Discussion: categorising and comparing barriers

7.6.3.1 Overlap of shocks, stressors and barriers

Many of the barriers presented within this section have also been identified by the respondents as shocks and stressors (see Chapter 6). This shows that shocks and stressors can be thought of as barriers from a community perspective, and that it is not so easy to separate shocks, stressors and barriers from one another on the ground. The definition of a barrier (see Chapter 2, section 2.3.6; Jones, 2010; Productivity Commission, 2012) comprises of some form of prevention or limitation to using resources effectively in responding to shocks and stressors. For example, many of the shocks and stressors identified by the respondents, such as drought and illness, present a barrier to their productivity (ability to farm and use resources effectively). Studies of climate change adaptation amongst small-scale farmers in Kenya (Bryan et al., 2011), and Ethiopia and South Africa (Bryan et al., in 2009) showed similar barriers to adaptation. These included financial, biophysical (water insecurity), institutional and physical, and informational barriers. Other barriers found by Roncoli et al. (2010) were poor soil quality, poor roads (this is particularly apparent in Willowvale), pests and diseases, and corruption. Corruption also emerged as a stressor within the PLA workshops (see Chapter 6, section 6.4) and reiterates the potential overlap that may exist between barriers and stressors.

It is important to consider how a variety of barriers interact at different scales and how they may impact on different social groups (Shackleton, 2012). The inherent complexity in understanding barriers the impacts they have on different social groups is in itself a barrier to future research, and emphasizes the complex nature of understanding vulnerability within socio-ecological systems.

7.6.3.2 Combination of barriers

Barriers have the potential to overlap, interact and reinforce one another (Shackleton, 2012).

From the discussion around limits and barriers to adaptation by Jones (2010), it is evident that a household will seldom be affected by just type of barrier category (Figure 2.2 in Chapter 2), but rather experience a combination of barriers that prevent them from coping and adapting effectively (Productivity Commission, 2012). The literature identifies an array of barriers which impedes adaptation, namely accessibility to climate change information (Roncoli et al.,

141 2010), socio-economic context and position of households (Ziervogel et al., 2006), and the policy and institutional environment (Agarwal, 2008; Eakin, 2005).

In this study, climatic shocks, such as drought, present a natural barrier to the people of Lesseyton and Willowvale. Lesseyton had been worse hit by water shortages which had an impact on some of the households’ ability to cultivate crops. Respondents who owned livestock (particularly in Lesseyton) complained about the lack of grazing due to the impacts of drought.

Human and informational barriers, such as lack of knowledge (as seen in Table 7.11 and 7.12), financial resources and assistance needed to facilitate adaptation also play large roles in both Lesseyton and Willowvale. A study by Mandleni and Anim (2011) showed similar barriers to adaptation (see Table 7.11). It was found that majority of farmers interviewed had not responded to climate change due to a lack of information, particularly regarding climate change (see Table 7.11 and 7.12), and a lack of financial and physical capital such as agricultural inputs and property (Mandleni and Anim, 2011). The lack of basic services, infrastructure, and lack of physical capital and assets needed for farming (also stressors identified in Chapter 6) is a good example of how barriers can prevent a community from utilizing their resources to promote adaptation and improve the well-being of the community (Productivity Commission, 2012).

Financial barriers were frequently mentioned as barriers in both sites. In Willowvale, the lack of income was especially felt with regards to farming and cultivation as many respondents mentioned how they could not afford feed or medicine for their livestock (resulting in incidences of death or forcing households to sell their livestock), and pesticides and seeds to replant their gardens/fields, forcing respondents to buy majority of their food from the shops instead (see Chapter 5). Not being able to afford cattle or the hiring of a tractor has prevented households from being able to plough their fields, and water shortages have exacerbated the poor harvests. A study by Bryan et al. (2009) showed that lack of access to credit or money was the main barrier identified by farmers in South Africa. Without a good harvest to rely on for food or income generation, people are forced to migrate in search of employment.

However prolonged migration may not be the most appropriate form of adaptation and may exacerbate existing vulnerabilities such as the large dependency on government grants (Jones, 2010; United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 2009). Households limited financial resources and capacity to facilitate adaptation places high dependency upon the

142 government. However, the low levels of awareness and knowledge and capacity amongst the local governments themselves have forced the households in Lesseyton and Willowvale to continue relying on short-term reactive and maladaptive response strategies.

Social barriers, such as psychological, behavioural and institutional processes, will also play a large role in influencing how respondents respond to shocks and stressors (see Chapter 2, Table 2.2; Agrawal, 2008; Agrawal et al., 2009; Jones, 2010; Jones, 2011). Roncoli et al.

(2010) showed that participatory exercises highlighted the importance participants placed on improving human and organisational capacity, and training within their communities, suggesting that these are currently social barriers. This also emerged from the PLA workshops held in Lesseyton and Willowvale (see Chapter 6, section 6.4). Additional social and political barriers found by Roncoli et al. (2010), which were also highlighted by respondents in Lesseyton and Willowvale, included theft, crime, insecurity, violence and conflict and governance issues such as corruption and poor quality of services.

In addition to the informational barriers previously mentioned, traditional and cultural norms, such as the reliance placed on restrictive traditional or religious means of responding to shocks and stressors, which was seen by the women’s reliance in God to solve their problems (Chapter 6, section 6.4.1), and the limited authority given to women within a household, as well as the institutional inequalities that may exist between certain social groups (Jones, 2010), can impede adaptation and have the potential to become maladaptive.

7.7 Conclusion

This aim of this chapter was to explore the ways in which vulnerable households respond to the identified shocks and stressors (presented in Chapter 6). The data showed that the use of social and community capital proved to be an important response strategy and safety-net for coping with stressors and shocks. In both Lesseyton and Willowvale, seeking assistance from family, relatives or neighbours was the most common strategy (see Chapter 8, section 8.2.3).

The peri-urban setting of Lesseyton had a clear influence on how households responded to shocks and stressors in comparison to households in Willowvale, such as how caring for an ill/injured member had a larger impact on the respondents employment in Lesseyton, or how migration was a more common response strategy in Willowvale.

There were very few responses that were anticipatory or proactive in nature, which suggests that there is little planned long-term adaptation occurring but rather more reactive short-term

143 coping strategies are being used. Unemployment and having no income seemed to be the primary barriers households were facing, and stemming from this were other barriers such as crime and the inability to farm or cultivate crops. The lack of knowledge, physical and financial resources, and the assistance needed to facilitate adaptation are critical issues that need to be addressed in these communities in order for adaptation to occur in a manner that improves the respondents’ adaptive capacity and well-being in the future.

144