Loss and Damage Case Study CCAFS - ACPC Presentation

Loss and Damage from the Impacts of Flood and

Drought in Mozambique

James Kinyangi, PhDProgram Leader, CCAFS East Africa

Loss and Damage

• Residual impacts that will not be addressed by adaptation

• Acute in developing nations given their underlying vulnerability

At the COP16 (decision 1/CP.16, paragraphs 25-29), Parties

recognizes the need to strengthen international cooperation and

expertise in order to understand and reduce loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate

change, including impacts related to extreme weather and slow onset

events.

Background

ACPC as part of its 2012 work programme under “Assessment of Risks, Vulnerability and Impacts

• Engaged with various institutions in Burkina Faso, Ethiopia and Mozambique

• Collaborated with two case studies conducted by the United Nations University, Kenya and The Gambia.

4

To investigate loss and damage from floods and

droughts among rural households living near the

Limpopo, Zambezi and Save rivers in Mozambique.

Objective

Contribute to efforts to bridge

the divide between science

and policy in

addressing the social

dimensions of climate change

Research Questions

Specific questions• What are the impacts of climate change on the society?• How does the impact of climate variability vary across HHs?• How do HHs deal with the impact of climate variability?• What kinds of losses and damages (costs?) are incurred as a result of

the impact of climate variability?• What kinds of losses and damages can be expected as a result of the

impact of climate variability in the next two to three decades?• What can be done to reduce loss and damage from climate change

and variability?

How does the impact of climate variability on society lead to loss and damage among households (HHs) in the study area?

Three main zones

• South - tropical dry savannah

• North - moderately humid

climate

• Centre - prone to floods, tropical

cyclones and loss and damage

from the impact of flood and

drought

Study Area

• 303 households were interviewed in four districts• Primary and secondary data was collected using both qualitative and quantitative

methods including; household survey, focus group discussions, key informant interviews

Methodology

District Districtpopulation

Province River Householdsinterviewed

Chibuto 191,682 Gaza Limpopo 57

Mabote 44,733 Inhambane Save 60

Caia 115,612 Sofala Zambezi 31

Mopeia 115,291 Zambezi Zambezi 155

total 467318 - - 303

• Main crops cultivated were maize, sorghum, rice and millet

93%

3%4%

Trends in Crop Production (respondent %)

Decrease No change Increase

99%

1%

Main Purpose of Crop Production (respondent %)

Consumption sell

Results

The impact from flood and drought can be estimated to

affect more than 99% of rural households, based on our

survey data.

Flooding and Drought

Flood and drought severely affected the households surveyed, with 86% of the households severely

affected by flood while 84% of the households were severely affected by drought

Impact Flood (%) Drought (%) Total (%)

Impacts on household

Not affected 1 0.5 0.6

Moderate 13 16 15.2

Severely affected 86 83.5 84.2

Impacts on livelihood

Crop production 100 100 100

Food prices 79 85 83

Livestock 31 37 35

Fishing 10 30 23

Houses/properties 37 1.4 12

Impacts of Flood and Drought on Household and Livelihood

12

Impacts of floods and droughts

Household Coping Strategies

Did drought affect household? 0.5% No

99.5% Yes

Adverse effect on• Crop production = 100%• Food price = 85%• Livestock = 30%• Fishing = 30%• House property = 1.4%

Adopted coping strategy?

10% No

90% Yes

What did you do?• Looked for extra income: 71%• Other: 37%• Sale of properties: 37%• Rely on help from others: 33%• Rely on help from organisations: 32%

How effective was it?• Still severe affects: 28%• Still moderate effects: 47%• No more negative effect: 22%• Situation improve: 2%

Did flood affect household? 1% No

99% Yes

Adverse effect on• Crop production = 100%• Food price = 79%• House property = 37%• Livestock = 31%• Fishing = 10%

Adopted coping strategy?

1% No

99% Yes

What did you do?• Help from organisations: 78%• Looked for extra income: 59%• Other: 33%• Rely on help from others: 27%• Sale of properties: 27%

How effective was it?• Still severe affects: 11%• Still moderate effects: 37%• No negative effect: 37%• Situation improved: 5.6%

Household Coping Strategies

• Looking for extra income

• Selling assets

• Relying on help from others

• Relying on help from organizations

• Undertaking other types of coping

strategies

Despite adopting coping strategies, 48% of households

reported that they still suffered the negative effects of

flood, while 77% indicated that their coping strategies did not

prevent adverse effects of drought

Coping Strategies

• Strengthening existing attempts to increase adaptive capacity, such as diversification of livelihood activities.

• The research community, policymakers, practitioners and communities need coordinated and planned actions to address vulnerability and loss and damage at community level

• Creating a global institutional framework to address loss and damage with adequate mechanisms to benefit smallholder farmers in vulnerable countries

• Linking science, policy and practice• Climate experts, policymakers and practitioners need to review risk reduction, risk

retention and risk transfer tools in the context of loss and damage based on experiences from vulnerable countries like Mozambique.

Conclusion

Thank you