670

CLIMATE CHANGE AWARENESS, PREPAREDNESS,ADAPTATION AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES:FISHERFOLKS PERCEPTION IN COASTAL KERALA

Shyam S. Salim1*, Kripa, V2., Zachariah, P.U3., Nivedita Shridhar4

and Ambrose, T.V4.1Senior Scientist, Socio-Economic Evaluation and Technology Transfer Division, Central Marine Fisheries ResearchInstitute, Post Box No.1603, Ernakulam North P.O., Kochi-682018, Fax No: 0091-0484-2394909,2Principal Scientist and Head, Fisheries Environment and Management Division, Central Marine FisheriesResearch Institute, Post Box No.1603, Ernakulam North P.O., Kochi-682018.3Principal Scientist and Head, Demersal Fisheries Division, Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Post BoxNo.1603, Ernakulam North P.O., Kochi-682018.4Senior Research Fellow, Socio-Economic Evaluation and Technology Transfer Division ,Central Marine FisheriesResearch Institute, Post Box No.1603, Ernakulam North P.O., Kochi-6820184Senior Reseaerch Fellow, Demersal Fisheries Division, Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Post BoxNo.1603, Ernakulam North P.O., Kochi-682018.*Email: shyam.icar@gmail.com

Abstract: Coastal environments cover 8 per cent of the world’s surface, house 70 per cent of the human population,provide 90 per cent of the global f ish catch, and deliver 40 per cent of the estimated economic value derived fromecosystem goods and services. In addition to increasing population pressure and demand for marine protein,climate change is modifying coastal environments and increasing the vulnerability of marine-dependentcommunities around the world. Climate change is modifying the distribution, productivity of marine andfreshwater species thereby impacts the sustainability of f isheries and aquaculture, eventually on the livelihoodsof the communities that depend on f isheries. The effect of sea level rise means that coastal f ishing communitiesare vulnerable and are in the front line of the deleterious effects of climate change. Changing seawater temperatureand current flows will likely bring increases, decreases and shifts in the distribution of marine f ish stocks, withsome areas benef iting while others lose. These changes may have impacts on the nature and value of commercialf isheries. Many artisanal f ishers are extremely poor with social and political marginalization with limitedaccess to healthcare, education and other public services. With little capacity to adapt, the small-scale andmigrant f ishers are highly vulnerable to losses of natural capital consequent to climate impacts. The impacts ofclimate change going to affect economy as well the social standards of f isher folk with implications for foodsecurity and sustainablelivelihoods . Thus the climate change effects impact the environment, f ishery, social,economic and development drivers..Consequently, it is important to understand factors that contribute tovulnerability of coastal biological and human systems in order to develop sustainable adaptation pathways; anddevelop effective mechanisms and expertise to translate f indings into management guidelines and policy adviceaddressing natural, social and economic implications. Globally each government are looking for pragmatictime-bound strategies and plans for mitigation and adaptationThe climate changes impacts are global but adaptation and mitigation plans are location specific. The observed climatechange is a long term phenomenon process hence; the fishers need not be aware of the effects of climate change. Theyare affected with the immediate effects of cyclones, extreme weather events monsoonal fluctuations, loss in fishing day’setc. leading to their reduced income and livelihood. The primary stakeholders involved in the climate change mitigationplans aren’t equipped with climate change impacts and causal factors. The lack of awareness and knowledge leads tonon-participation of the primary stakeholders including f ishermen in the climate change mitigation processes.Considering climate change causes to be localized leading to global impacts it is prime important that the primarystakeholders are involved in the climate change adaptation and mitigation plans .The level of awareness, response to thedifferent domains of climate change are to be incorporated in the different strategies to equip the fishers in dealing withthe disaster preparedness and management. The proactive participation of the primary stakeholders- f ishers is aprerequisite in the development of the disaster management, adaptation and mitigation plans

Received on: 10 October 2013, accepted on: 12 December 2013

Journal of Aquatic Biology and Fisheries Vol. 2/2014/ pp. 670 to 681

671

The f ishers are believed to be unaware if not unwilling to participate in the climate change mitigation andadaptation due to their low level of awareness in the climate change dialogues and process. The perception of thef ishers will be important in the development of the mitigation plan. Their felt needs coupled with variedperception will be useful in developing and ensuring their proactive participation in the climate changemitigation plans. Variables that identify the demographic diversity of a community can help policy plannersunderstand the characteristics of the community they are working with and plan relevant adaptation strategies.The perception of the primary stakeholders- f ishers plays a major role in proactive participation in disastermanagement, adaptation and mitigation plans. It is under this context that the present study was conducted toassess the climate change Awareness, Preparedness, Adaptation and Mitigation (APAM) strategies of the costalf isher households in Alappuzha district of Kerala. Alappuzha district was selected based on the vulnerabilityassessment of f ive different parameters viz, demography, occupation, infrastructure, climate components andf ishery across the costal districts of Kerala. The different coastal villages were selected based on the differentsocio-economic parameters, number of families below poverty line, adult- child ratio, average family size, genderratio, literacy rate, dependency on f ishing activities, craft and gear inventories, participation in cooperatives andancillary activities.The objectives of the present study is to assess the socio economic prof ile and assess the awareness level of thef isher households in the context of climate change, to deduce the causal factors of climate change as perceivedby the f ishermen households and consequent vulnerability assessment impact of the f isher households , and todevelop a to develop a participatory awareness, preparedness , adaptation and mitigation (APAM ) framework forclimate change based on the outcome of the study which will enable the f ishers to play a major role in proactiveparticipation in disaster management plans and which has utilityin future climate change adaptation andmitigation research and development measuresThe study was conducted in Chethy , Thumboly and Arthungal f ishing villages of Alappuzha district and 971f isher households were selected . The study revealed that the perception of f ishers on the causal factors ofclimate change indicated that temperature followed by sea-level rise and cyclones. The level of awareness towardsthe climate change indicated that 75.07 per cent of the f ishers knew about climate change but only 67.35 per centof the f ishers were aware. The major sources of climate change knowledge were through media, informationexchange between family members, friends and village administration guidelines. The indigenous technicalknowledge related to climate change was available across the f isher households but weren’t tapped enough forthe adaptation process. There exists various alternative avocations but adequate knowledge and skill upgradationis required. The level of community involvement is minimal and the f ishers foresee improved awareness andtraining programmes for the future. The level of governmental support isn’t noteworthy for climate changeawareness and adaptation options. The APAM assessment will provide policy inputs for developing adaptationand mitigation plans. The study advocates the need for a bottom up approach in developing location specif icplans to ensure the livelihood of the f ishers and the sustainable development of the f isheries sector in theclimate change regime.Key words: Climate change, Vulnerability, Awareness, Preparedness, Stakeholders,Adaptation, Mitigation ,Management, Perception, APAM, Livelihoods,Community

INTRODUCTION

Climate change is the biggest global challengefacing mankind today; governments around theworld are looking for practical and time-boundplans to cope with the changing environment.The consequence of climate change isexperienced by both inland and coastal regions,but coasts being the transition zone between thelithosphere and hydrosphere are prone to morechanges than the other zones. Not only arecoastal regions geographically important, butthey are vital domains in terms of economy andbiology.  Sixty percent of the world’s 39metropolises with a population of over 5 million

are located within 100 km of the coast, including12 of the world’s 16 cities with populationsgreater than 10 million (IPCC 2001).

In developing countries, such as in India whereapproximately 20 per cent of its population livein coastal areas (TERI ,2008), f ishing is themajor source of livelihood.  It is unfortunate butevident that climate change is modifying thedistribution and productivity of marine andf reshwater species and is impacting thesustainability of f isheries and aquaculture,eventually having a profound effect on the

672

livelihoods of the communities that depend onf isheries. The effect of sea level change meansthat coastal f ishing communities are vulnerableand are in the front line of the detrimentaleffects of the changing climate. Change inphysical ocean parameters, such as seawatertemperature and current f lows will likely bringincreases, decreases and shifts in the distributionof marine f ish stocks, with some areasbenef iting while others are at lose. TheIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Changepredicts that as sea temperatures change, f ishnumbers will change and f ish will move todifferent areas, some species will go extinct inparticular areas, predators and prey will moveto different areas, disrupting food chains,wetlands and other low lying habitats where f ishreproduce will be covered by rising sea levelsand erratic weather may stop f ishers going tosea. (Adger et al., 2003).

These changes may have impacts on the natureand value of commercial f isheries. The fact thatmany artisanal f ishers are extremely poor andare often socially and politically marginalizedwith limited access to healthcare, education andother public services doesn’t help in thechanging environments. With little capacity toadapt, the small-scale and migrant f ishers arehighly vulnerable to losses of natural capitalconsequent to climate impacts. Thus leading toa situation where f isher folk are more susceptibleto climate change, thereby having a negativeimpact on the economy as well the socialstandards. The extent to which a community isimpacted negatively by the changes can bededuced from analyzing the vulnerability of theregion, thus vulnerability has emerged as acentral concept for understanding the impactsof climate change and natural hazards and fordeveloping adequate risk managementstrategies. Coastal vulnerability describes thesusceptibility of the natural system and of coastalsocieties (persons, groups or communities)towards coastal hazards. Assessing coastalvulnerability is an important prerequisite todetermine where there are areas of high risk,why they are at risk and what to do to reducethe risk (Brooks, 2005).

Vulnerability is a condition wherein the internalability or lack thereof to cope, recover and adaptto climate stress (Kasperson et al., 2003).

Studies on climate change impacts andvulnerability of social and ecological systemsperhaps have begun with the seminal work ofTimmerman (1981) who provided intellectualunderpinning for linking the concepts ofvulnerability, resilience, and climate change.IPCC 2001 concludes that the vulnerability is theextent to which climate change may damage orharm a system; it depends not only on a system’ssensitivity, but also its ability to adapt to newclimatic conditions. Of the major impacts ofclimate change projected in marine f isheries,sea-level rise and consequent changes in habitat,frequency of extreme events, variability in the catchand revenue are the most important(Vivekanandan, 2007, 2011). Kumar (2003)constructed a coastal vulnerability index byhypothesizing vulnerability as a function of impacton the district and the resistance and resilience ofthe district in responding to the impact itexperiences. Vijayakumaran (2008) approximateddirect scores were made for 39 factors under sevendimensions based on the information obtainedfrom the villages. The scores were subjected tofurther analysis for constructing the relativevulnerability prof iles of different villages adoptinga slightly modifying the model used by Patnaikand Narayanan (2005). Szlafsztein and Sterr (2007)formulated an index combining a number ofseparate variables that reflect natural and socio-economic characteristics that contribute to coastalvulnerability due to natural hazards. In the contextof the present paper vulnerability is def ined as thef ishers inherent inability or lack to cope with,recover from and adapt to climate stress.

The observed climate change is a chronic longterm phenomenon hence, the f ishers fail to beaware of the effects of climate change. They areaffected with the immediate effects of cyclones,extreme weather events monsoonalfluctuations, loss in f ishing days etc. leading totheir reduced income and livelihood. Theprimary stakeholders, namely the communitymembers, who are majorly f ishermen byprofession aren’t equipped with climate changeknowledge on impacts and causal factors ofchange. The lack of awareness and knowledgeleads to non-participation of the primarystakeholders including f ishermen in theclimate change mitigation processes.Considering climate change causes to be

673

localized leading to global impacts it is of primeimportance that the primary stakeholders areinvolved in the climate change adaptation andmitigation plans .Their level of awareness,response to the different domains of climatechange are to be incorporated in the differentstrategies to equip the f ishers in dealing withthe disaster preparedness and management.

The f ishers are believed to be not able to relateclimate change in its rightful context nor arethey able to visualize the integrated and chainevents and understand its synergistic nature;thereby the willingness to participate andcontribute is negligible in the climate changemitigation and adaptation strategies. Theperception of the f ishers is of utmost importancein the development of a localized climate changeaction plan, which would fulf il their felt needs.The varied perception will be useful indeveloping and ensuring their proactiveparticipation in the climate change mitigationplans. Variables that identify the demographicdiversity of a community can help managersunderstand the characteristics of thecommunity they are working with and planrelevant adaptation strategies. The objectives ofthe study are to develop a methodologicalframework for assessing the coastal vulnerability

of f isher households through developingextensive interlinking and tier based models ,toanalyze f ishers’ perception on climate changeeffects in comparison with real time data, todevelop a bottom up approach in climate changemitigation and adaptations involvingstakeholders’ participation.

Materials and methods

Kerala is one of the major coastal districts ofthe country with a coastline of 590 kmdistributed across 222 f ishing villages and 187landing centers. The marine f ish productionhas been over 6.6 lakh tonnes with the peopleinvolved the primary and secondary sectoramounting to around 2.1 lakhs. Kerala houses af ishermen population of around 6,10,165 with adensity of population 2740 people per f ishingvillage which is much higher than the countryaverage (1099) (Source: Marine f isheries census2010). There are nine coastal districts in Keralaviz, Thiruvananthapuram, Kollam, Alappuzha,Ernakulum, Thrissur, Malappuram, Kozhikode,Kannur and Kasaragod.

The vulnerability of the coastal households wasbased on the following f low diagram givenbelow. The assessment was based on thefollowing steps.

Fig. 1. Methodology – Vulnerability assessment of coastal households

674

Based on the above f low chart (Fig.1) theselection of the district was based up oncomputation of an index which was developedby Patnaik and Narayan (2005). The factorsconsidered were demography, occupation (bothmajor and minor), the infrastructure presentin that district, climate parameters and thestatus and plight of marine f isheries in thatparticular district. The next stage after decidingthe district, is to narrow down the study topotential villages. The villages were chosenbased on socio economic parameters, families’economic status, adult- child ratio ( whichdetermines the dependency), average familysize (nuclear/joint), the male female ration,literacy rate. Livelihood details such asdependency on f ishing activities, craft and gearsemployed was also taken into account. Thewillingness to cooperate and participate inancillary activities was also a key issue.

With the selection of the villages done, the studyfurther narrowed down to identifyinghouseholds for the research. This was based onsocio economic status, climate changeawareness, and perception, level ofpreparedness, existing mitigation plans, alternateavocation options, mobilization capacity andlevel of government support required andavailable.

The vulnerability indices were constructedusing PARS methodology, a conceptualframework was developed for assessing theclimate change vulnerability of coastallivelihoods. PARS-Parameter, Attribute, Resilientindicator and Score, the methodology providesprioritization and ranking of different impactsas perceived by the f ishers. The f rameworkallows adequate distribution between f ishing.The f ishers were asked to rank between 1 – 5indicating the severity of the vulnerability 5indicates very high, 4- high, 3- medium, 2- lowand 1- negligible/marginal. So each and everyparameters were again would lead to differentattributes and the attributes will lead to differentstatements or resilient indicators which will bebased up on different scores. The rank basedquotient technique was used to analyse thescores and the ranks were given in a way themost affected attribute will get the highestranking. PARS methodology was analysed using

Rank Based Quotient (RBQ) formula(Sabarathnam, 1988) which is given below.

VI=Vulnerability index =

(AI) is the average index for each source ofvulnerability, n is the number of source of

vulnerability and =n.

The values were measured for each statementand the analysis was done 125 statements whichare related to the climate change in the schedule.

This methodology is very much useful to f indout which parameter or which attribute of theparameter is the most vulnerable factor of thearea in terms of climate change on a f irst handanalysis itself. This kind of bottom up approachwould help the climatologists and policy makersto implement climate adaptation plans for thedistrict, state and f inally to the country.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The study was conducted for a period of 6months f rom May to November 2012 inAlappuzha district of Kerala and 971 f ishinghouseholds spread across three f ishingvillages.The results are discussed under thefollowing heads.

(i) Socio-economic profile

The socio economic prof ile collected includeages of the f ishers, educational standards of thef ishers , experience in f ishing( years) anddistance of houses from coastline (m).

The study on the age distribution of respondentsrevealed that the majority of them (520)belonged to the mid age group of 36 to 55 years.This was followed by older age group, i.e.; peoplebelonging to over 55 years of age (360) andf inally the young age group. The younger groupbeing in minority can probably be attributed tochange from traditional f ishing to other meansof livelihood.

675

The educational status of the respondents wascomputed, the results suggested that the literacyrate was very high (97.17 per cent), this provesthat the majority of the population are exposedto at least minimum level of education (primaryschooling). This further establishes the fact thatthere is a scope to induce climate changeknowledge into this society.

The experience in f ishing (in terms of years)was collected from the study site. The data wasclassif ied into three sub divisions, experienceless than 10 years, experience between 10 to 20years and f ishing experience greater than 20years. The results showed that the majority ofthe respondents (757) fell under the highlyexperienced group (> 20 years), followed by themid-level experience and f inally by experienceless than 10 years (46). This clearly indicates thatthe respondents rely to a greater extent onf ishing for their living.

The distance of houses from the coastline wasstudied; the results suggested that 476 houseswere within 0.5 km from the coastline, while458 houses were within 0.1 km f rom thecoastline. A meager number of 37 houses werefarther than 0.5 km from the coastline. Thenumbers clearly states that the f ishers arewilling to stay very close to the coast in spite ofthe threats it possesses.

(ii)Fishers perception on the causal factorsof climate change

An analysis was carried out to assess the f ishers’response to what could possibly be the causalfactors for climate change. The perception of

the f ishers towards the casual factors of climatechange indicated that temperature, sea level rise,ocean currents, landslides, orbital changes,cyclones ,industrialization, farming systems,habitat destruction ,urbanizations,transportation, pollution and wind wereconsidered as the causative agents of climatechange. The RBQ analysis was done and thescores obtained for each factors is representedin Fig 2

The f ishers responded that temperature (90.9)followed by pollution(64.2) and sea level rise(63.1) were the signif icant causal factors forclimate change. The analysis of the real time datafor the last 45 years, collected for the study areaalso had indicated that the temperature has risenby 0.05%, the increased pollutions due toemissions and discharge, a change in sea levelwas witnessed (-0.242%), and the wind speedshowed an increase with a zonal value of 0.539,meridonial value of 5.951 and scalar value of1.389 over the period.

Vulnerability assessment of the f isherhouseholds

Based on the Patnaik and Narayan model coastaldistrict vulnerability index was derived fordifferent coastal districts of Kerala. Theselection of the District was based on assessmentof coastal district vulnerability index estimatedfor different coastal districts (Table 2) of Kerala.

Alappuzha comprises three taluks ofKarthikapalli, Ambalapuzha and Cherthalaextending from Azheekal in south to Aroor innorth direction. The district harbours 30 coastal

Age ( years) Education Experience ( years) Distance of householdfrom the Sea (m)

Age Respondents Literacy Respondents Experience Respondents Distance RespondentsLess than35 91 (9.40) Illiterate 27

(2.83)Less than 10 46

(4.70)

Less than100 458

(47.20)

36-55 520 (53.50) Literates 944(97.17)

10-20 168(17.30)

101-500 476(49.10)

More than 55 360 (37.10) More than 20 757(78.00)

More than500 37

(3.80)

Table 1. Socio- economic prof ile of the f isher households

Figures in parenthesis indicate percentage to total

676

f ishing villages. The selection of different villagesof Alappuzha district was carried out based onthe indices derived using the different social andeconomic parameters like, number of f ishermenfamilies with due weightage given to traditionalf ishermen families, BPL families, Adult- ChildRatio, Average family size, sex ratio, literacy rate,full time f isher men, part time f ishermen, craftand gear used and number, cooperatives andancillary activities based. The vulnerability indexcalculated for each coastal district.Based on theindices three villages were identif ied viz,Arthungal and Chethy, which exhibited

vulnerability indices very high and also ThumbolySouth was selected considering the emergingpossibilities of alternate avocations and 971 f isherhouseholds were selected for the study.

PARS methodology was applied in an effort tounderstand the indicator factors of coastalvulnerability in the selected f ishing villages ofAlappuzha district and scale up the impacts,adaptations and mitigation plans of coastallivelihoods to the district level. The applicationof PARS methodology in this study helped toassess impact of climate change on the f ive

Fig. 2. Fishers response to climate change causal factors

District Demography Infrastructure Occupation Climate Fishery VITrivandrum 0.620 0.410 0.740 0.510 0.720 0.18Kollam 0.270 0.480 0.190 0.720 0.260 0.15Alappuzha 0.780 0.450 0.940 0.480 0.410 0.20Ernakulam 0.190 0.190 0.210 0.630 0.180 0.13Thrissur 0.110 0.450 0.040 0.560 0.140 0.12Malappuram 0.630 0.290 0.440 0.460 0.320 0.14Kozhikode 0.730 0.760 0.660 0.490 0.400 0.18Kannur 0.040 0.370 0.010 0.550 0.150 0.11Kasaragod 0.080 0.190 0.110 0.510 0.060 0.10

Table 2. Vulnerability assessment of coastal districts in Kerala

Fig. 2. Fishers response to climate change causal factors

677

different parameters considered. The study inthe selected f isher households in all the threevillages indicated that climate change has mostlyimpacted f ishery based on f ishers’ perceptionon different attributes followed by Economicand environmental factors in Chethy. InThumboly f ishing village, Environmentalimpacts and Economic impacts followed Fisheryimpacts, whereas Social impacts and economicattributes impacted Arthungal next to Fishery(Table 4).

The data on the composite villages indicated thatdata also f ishery is the most impacted parameteras a result of climate change followed byeconomic and environmental impacts. Social

impact is the least impacted parameters asperceived by the f ishers .

(iii) Fishers awareness on climate change

The f ishers’ awareness, preparedness andmitigation level was assessed. The results wereobtained based on their perception on climatechange and the existing socio economicconditions of their environment. The studypointed out that 75.1 % of the total respondentpopulation had heard about climate change,while an inadequate percent of 24.7 were awareabout climate change. The diff iculty indifferentiating between just hearing and beingaware of the issue was evident among the

Taluk -I Taluk -II Taluk -IIIKarthikappally (69.94) Ambalappuzha (64.31) Cherthala (75.91)Arattupuzha 71.67 Ambalappuzha 68.45 PunnapraNorth 84.06 Arthungal 86.19Kallikadu 70.33 Chettikad 65.96 Punthala 58.82 Azheekal 87.78Pallana 60.33 Kanjiramchira 51.92 Purakkad 65.81 Chennaveli 72.12Pathiyankara 61.14 Kattoor 67.76 Thottappally 57.14 Chethy 72.01Tharayilkadavu 80.66 Neerkunnam 65.80 ThumbolyNorth 53.17 Ottamassery 70.47Thrikkunnapuzha 77.34 Pollethai 73.83 ThumbolySouth 56.44 PallithodeNorth 67.88Valiazheekal 68.11 Punnaprasouth 56.70 VadakalNorth 75.67 PallithodeSouth 71.19VadakkalSouth 63.22 Thykal 79.67

Table 3. Vulnerability indices for f ishing villages in Alappuzha district

Parameters Chethy Rank Thumboly Rank Arthungal RankCompositedata

RankEnvironmental 52.27 III 61.43 II 47.33 V 53.68 IIIFishery 57.38 I| 63.06 I 60.12 I 60.19 ISocial 50.11 V 45.62 V 55.56 II 50.43 VEconomic 53.53 II 58.37 III 51.27 III 54.39 IIDevelopmentDrivers 50.45 IV 54.91 IV 49.80 IV 51.72 IV

Table 4. Climate Parameter Assessment across the coastal villages

678

respondents. This clearly demarcates thatclimate change wasn’t perceived in its rightcontext.

The respondent households were surveyed onthe key sources of information on climatechange. It was found that the major source ofinformation was the media, contributing to a44% , the f ishers received information throughaudio- visual media as well as print media.Friends and relatives were also considered tobe sources of information (41 %) as climateissues have been locally discussed among thef isher community. State governmentorganizations contributed to 21.5% asinformation sources. Around 37% of climatechange awareness among f isher folk wasattributed to the existing indigenous technologyknowledge, which is based on the wind, colourand nature of the sea. The fact that a largenumber of respondents have had a sea faringexperience of more than a decade, and have beenin the same profession of f ishing for severalgenerations aids in them understanding thechanging environment in better light.

The option of having alternate avocations wasminimal, only 12% of the respondents wereaware about the alternate jobs such as marketingof f ish, agriculture, livestock, dairy and coirindustry. Majority of the respondents beingtraditional f ishermen for generations are notwilling to look into other options, this may bedue to the attitude towards f ishing and the lackof knowledge on allied f ields. The studyindicates that there is scope for communityinvolvement and mobilization among therespondent f ishermen in terms of coordinatingactivities in response to natural hazards andevents, such as in the case of Indian oceantsunami of 2004 and several other cyclonicevents. The f ishers (72 per cent) found that thelevel of governmental support in providingknowledge, imparting training, construction ofseawall and providing alternative avocations wasinadequate

(iv)Development of Participatory Attitude,Preparedness, Adaptation and Mitigation( APAM)

Based on the vulnerability assessments of theselected households in the coastal district ofAlappuzha in Kerala, it was found that the level

of awareness was quite low, but there doesexists an avenue for signif icant institutionalmechanisms which could facilitate in bringingabout an environment which will be amenableto climate change education for the future.Based on the study conducted, it was necessaryto develop a methodological framework whichwould provide a panacea to the issue of low levelawareness on climate change among the f ishersin developing countries such as India. Thus anAPAM framework was developed, which wouldact in four different levels, namely inculcatingand improving the awareness, increasing thepreparedness, providing adaptation options anddeveloping mitigation strategies, thereby theAPAM frameworks functions with four keyelements of Awareness, Preparedness,Adaptation and Mitigation.( Fig.3)

The APAM framework functions on the principlethat local solution developed and practiced canact as a precursor in addressing globalchallenges. The f ramework demands aparticipatory approach with the differentelements and approaches , outlined in leadingto suggestive outcomes, The APAM frameworkinvolves three signif icant climate change agentsviz., government ,society and individuals. . Thegovernment as the apex agency could providemacro level policy guidelines, appropriatebudgetary allocations and timely logistic supportfor the effective execution of the plan . Villageis the largest institutional system in the countryrepresented by the people, which can bringparadigm changes within a society.Villages withthe support of local governmental bodies(Gramasabha) as well as non-governmentalorganizations can see to that the framework isdutifully carried out. The onus of the Climatechange rests with the micro climate agents,namely the individuals, who are the torchbearers of the society whose individual rationaldecision making would determine carbonfootprints at household level , eventually leadingto establishment a green community andeconomy with future incentives and tradeoffs..

The approaches of the APAM f rameworkoverlap, with gestation period. All the approachesleads to aninclusive change within theknowledge skill and attitude of the differentclimate change agents. This includesdeveloping a positive attitude towards climate

679

change as an opportunity ensuringsustainablelivelihoods analysis as in the case ofthe present study where redeployment of f isherwho live at very close proximity to the sea andwho are reluctant to relocate in spite of the seaposing a threat to their lives and property as theirliving solely depends on f ishing. The othersignif icant approaches include mobilizing thecommunity through micro level organizationssuch as NGOs and SHGs. Harnessingindigenous knowledge leading to greentechnologies which may not providedetrimental effect on the environment are tobe identif ied and developed . Alternateavocations which are available within the villageor in close proximity are to be identif ied for thebenef it of the f isher households in enhancingtheir skills and knowledge.

Tradeoffs and off sets are innovative approachestowards climate change for a society, benef icialmechanisms such as CDM (clean developmentmechanism), and carbon credits are all effectivemeans of luring the society for their proactiveparticipation to go green. One of the mostimportant tool in the APAM framework is theforecasting, as forecasting helps deciding for the

future scenarios. Forecasting can be achievedthrough various methods such as risk analysis,statistical predictions, GIS and other decisionsupport systems. Climate change is a complexissue and requires the intervention ofdepartments pertaining to technology, sciencesand social science. Therefore linkages in APAMframework requireliaising across variousdepartments as well as ministries and other non-governmental agencies.

The approaches lead to development of villageclimate information system, which helps inclimate data base management in addition todeveloping climate news and intelligence. TheAPAM framework helps in evolving climatecommunities, who are self-reliant and acts askey informants, innovators and progressiveleadersin the climate adaptation and mitigationprocess. The outcome also visualizes greenf ishing and blue carbon economy wheredeveloping energy eff icient craft and gear ,value additions , better management practices,by catch reduction etc,. APAM also ensures thatthe community develops its won adaptation andmitigation plans which are location specif ic andimplemented on a consensus building approach.

Fig. 3. Participatory APAM framework

680

CONCLUSION

The study indicated that socioeconomic prof ileincluding age, education and experience of therespondent households were congenial in theirproactive participation in the climate changeadaptation and mitigationstrategies and plans.However it was alarming to f ind that 96.30 percent of the respondent households lived within500 m from the coastline .Huge efforts arerequired in persuading them to relocate towardssafer areas consequent to sealevel changes andinundation.

The study indicated that f ishers’ response toclimate changes was in consonance with realtime changes in the environment, with regardto temperature rise, rate of pollution, the changein wind pattern as well other ocean parameters.Unfortunately the f isher folk could not attributethese changes to climate change, thus revealinga lack of climate change awareness amongstthem. It was also deduced that the long termeffects of climate change weren’t felt muchamong the f isher household. The f ishers couldonly realize immediate issues such as loss inf ishing days and erratic monsoon resultantwhich in turn leads to economic losses.

The level of awareness is low (24.7 per cent)which indicate that the f ishers couldn’t correlateenvironmental changes consequent to climatechange to their livelihood however the possibilityof exploring institutional mechanism with theconcerted efforts and intervention of stategovernment bodies, line departments, non-governmental organizations is high, thereforeproviding pathways for high rate of awarenessamong the f ishing community. This could beachieved through a bottom up approachinvolving primary stakeholders ie; the f isher folkand their governing bodies, along with thecommunity as this will adequately positionthem to be better informed and aware aboutclimate change.

There is need to improve on the awareness ofthe f ishers knowledge to climate change byinvolving them in the disaster preparedness andplanning process. Thus s a bottom up approachinvolving the primary stakeholders along withthe community will adequately position themto climate change adaptation and mitigation by

augmenting their traditional knowledge. Thealternative avocations available across thedifferent f ishing villages need to bestrengthened in order to negate the differentrisks and uncertainties of climate change andin ensuring a climate change informed f ishersin the future. The APAM model framework,developedprovides a development plan tocomprehensively integrate the elementsof theAwareness, preparedness, adaptation andmitigation strategies in transforming individualsand societies to climate change informed f ishersor climate leaders.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors are thankful to the Director,CMFRI for his guidance and support. The studywas conducted with f inancial support f romNICRA project.

REFERENCES

Adger, W.N, Huq, S., Brown, K., Conwaya,D. and Hulmea, M. 2003. Adaptation toclimate change in the developing world.Progress in Development Studies 3(3):179–195

Brooks, N., Adger, W.N. and Kelly, P.M. 2005.The determinants of vulnerability andadaptive capacity at the national level andthe implications for adaptation. GlobalEnvironmental change, 15: 151-163.

IPCC. 2001. Climate change 2001: the scientiûcbasis. Contribution of working group I tothe third assessment report of theIntergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Kasperson, J.X., Kasperson, R.E., Turner II, B.L.,Schiller, A., Hsieh, W.H. 2003. Vulnerabilityto global environmental change. In:Diekmann, A., Dietz, T., Jaeger, C., Rosa,E.S. (Eds.), The Human Dimensions ofGlobal Environmental Change. MIT,Cambridge, MA.

Kumar, K. 2003. Vulnerability and adaptationof agriculture and coastal resources in Indiato climate change. EERC Working PaperSeries NIP-4, Madras School of Economics,Chennai.

681

Ministry of Agriculture, Krishi Bhavan, NewDelhi and CMFRI, Kochi 2012. MarineFisheries Census 2010 Part II. Kerala.CMFRI;Kochi, Kochi.

Patnaik, U. and K. Narayanan, 2005.Vulnerability and Climate Change: Ananalysis of the eastern coastal districts ofIndia. Paper presented at the InternationalWorkshop on Human Security and ClimateChange, Oslo, 21-23 June 2005.

Sabarathanam V. E. 1988. Manuals of FieldExperienceTraining for ARS Scientists.Hyderabad: NAARM.

Szlafsztein, C. and Sterr, H. 2007.A GIS-basedvulnerability assessment of coastal naturalhazards, State of Para, Brazil. Journal ofCoastal Conservation, 11(1): 53–66.

Timmerman, P. 1981. Vulnerability, resilience,and the collapse of society. Toronto:Institute for Environmental Studies.Environmental Monograph1.

V ivekanandan, E 2007. Impact of climatechange on marine f isheries.Seafood ExportJournal, 37 (4). pp. 5-9.

V ivekanandan, E 2011 . Marine F isheriesPolicy Brief-3; Climate change and IndianMarine F isheries.CMFRI SpecialPublication, 105: 1-97.

V ijayakumaran, K. 2008. Developingvulnerability indices - the art of encapsulingthe obvious -Winter School on Impact ofClimate Change on Indian Marine Fisheriesheld at CMFRI, Cochin 18.1.2008 to 7.2.2008.