1

Case study: Jamaica

Impact of climate change on Jamaican hotel industry supply chains and on farmer’s livelihoods

Authors: A. Eitzinger, P. Läderach, A. Benedikter, J. Gordon A. Quiroga, A. Pantoja, C. Bunn,

International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), Managua, Nicaragua and Cali, Colombia

Cali, Colombia, July 2011

2

1 Table of Contents

1. Summary and main findings ................................................................................................................. 8

2. Background ........................................................................................................................................... 9

2.1 Introduction of the research area ................................................................................................. 9

2.2 Introduction of "the case" .......................................................................................................... 10

2.3 Rationale for targeting the hotel industry .................................................................................. 10

2.4 General problems of the people in the area ............................................................................... 10

2.5 Introduction of supply chain ....................................................................................................... 11

2.6 New concept: i.e. JAMAI ............................................................................................................. 11

2.7 Challenges in general and for the "new concept” limits of JAMAI ............................................. 11

3. Challenges ........................................................................................................................................... 12

3.1 Impact of Climate Change on Agriculture ................................................................................... 12

3.2 Climate Change in Jamaica.......................................................................................................... 12

3.3 Weather changes ........................................................................................................................ 12

4. Our methodology ................................................................................................................................ 13

5. Assessment of observed changes and farmer’s perceptions ............................................................. 13

5.1 Results from focal workshops ..................................................................................................... 13

Farmers perception of historical climate ............................................................................................ 13 Farmers perception of natural capital ................................................................................................ 14 Farmers perception of physical capital ............................................................................................... 14 Farmers perception of human capital ................................................................................................ 15

5.2 Examples of farmer’s comments ................................................................................................ 15

Farmers Comments from Manchester................................................................................................ 15 Farmer Comment from St. Elizabeth .................................................................................................. 16 Farmer Comment from Douglas Castle .............................................................................................. 17 Farmer Comment from St. Mary ........................................................................................................ 17 Farmer Comment from Manchester ................................................................................................... 17

6. Climate change predictions for 2030 & 2050 ..................................................................................... 19

6.1 The summary climate characteristics for 2030 and 2050 ........................................................... 19

General climatic characteristics .......................................................................................................... 19 Extreme conditions ............................................................................................................................. 20 Climate Seasonality ............................................................................................................................. 20 Variability between models ................................................................................................................ 20

6.2 Regional changes in the mean annual precipitation (2030) ....................................................... 20

6.3 Regional changes in the mean annual temperature (2030) ....................................................... 21

3

6.4 Regional changes in the mean annual temperature (2050) ....................................................... 22

6.5 Coefficient of variation of climate variables ............................................................................... 22

7. Exposure of most important crops to climate change ....................................................................... 23

7.1 Measure of agreement of models predicted changes ................................................................ 24

7.2 Banana ........................................................................................................................................ 25

Current suitability ............................................................................................................................... 25 Suitability for Banana by 2030 ............................................................................................................ 25 Suitability for Banana by 2050 ............................................................................................................ 26 Change in suitability by 2030 .............................................................................................................. 26 Change in suitability by 2050 .............................................................................................................. 26

7.3 Ginger .......................................................................................................................................... 27

Current suitability ............................................................................................................................... 27 Suitability for Ginger by 2030 ............................................................................................................. 27 Suitability for Ginger by 2050 ............................................................................................................. 28 Change in suitability by 2030 .............................................................................................................. 28 Change in suitability by 2050 .............................................................................................................. 28

7.4 Tomato (Salad) ............................................................................................................................ 29

Current suitability ............................................................................................................................... 29 Suitability for Tomato (Salad) by 2030 ............................................................................................... 30 Suitability for Tomato (Salad) by 2050 ............................................................................................... 30 Change in suitability by 2030 .............................................................................................................. 30 Change in suitability by 2050 .............................................................................................................. 31

8. Availability and restrictions for agricultural production ..................................................................... 31

8.1 Land use ...................................................................................................................................... 32

8.2 Access .......................................................................................................................................... 32

8.3 Protection ................................................................................................................................... 33

8.4 Combined restrictions for agricultural production ..................................................................... 33

9. Vulnerability of farmer’s livelihoods to climate change ..................................................................... 35

9.1 Vulnerability Index ...................................................................................................................... 35

10. Sensitivity & adaptive capacity of Jamaican farmers to climate change ........................................ 37

10.1 Capital stock analysis .................................................................................................................. 37

10.2 Cluster analysis............................................................................................................................ 38

10.3 Site-specific vulnerability ............................................................................................................ 39

11. Estimated Carbon Footprint ........................................................................................................... 40

11.1 Tomato ........................................................................................................................................ 40

11.2 Lettuce ........................................................................................................................................ 40

4

12. Strategies to adapt to the changing climate ................................................................................... 41

12.1 Farmer and supply-chain actors suggestions .............................................................................. 41

Group I (institutions) ........................................................................................................................... 41 Group II & III (farmer) ......................................................................................................................... 41 Group I (institutions) ........................................................................................................................... 42 Group II (JAS)....................................................................................................................................... 43 Group I (institutions) ........................................................................................................................... 43 Group II (farmer) ................................................................................................................................. 43 Group III (farmer) ................................................................................................................................ 43

12.2 From research output recommended adaptation strategies ..................................................... 44

Crop production system...................................................................................................................... 44 Community’s vulnerability to climate change .................................................................................... 45

13. Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................... 46

14. References ...................................................................................................................................... 47

5

2 Table de Figures

Figure 1: study area. ..................................................................................................................................... 9

Figure 2: Analytical framework. .................................................................................................................. 13

Figure 3: Farmers perceptions of historical climate trend.......................................................................... 14

Figure 4: Farmers perceptions on natural resources. ................................................................................. 14

Figure 5: Farmers perceptions on physical capital road. ............................................................................ 14

Figure 6: Farmers perceptions on human capital road. .............................................................................. 15

Figure 7: Climate trend summary 2030 and 2050 for Jamaica. .................................................................. 19

Figure 8: Mean annual precipitation change by 2030 for 6 study sites in Jamaica. ................................... 21

Figure 9: Mean annual precipitation change by 2050 for 6 study sites of Jamaica. ................................... 21

Figure 10: Mean annual temperature change by 2030 for 6 study sites of Jamaica. ................................. 22

Figure 11: Mean annual temperature change by 2050 for 6 study sites of Jamaica. ................................. 22

Figure 12: Coefficient of variation for annual precipitation and temperature 2030 and 2050. ................. 22

Figure 13: Measure of agreement of models predicting changes in the same direction as the average of all models at a given location for 2050. ..................................................................................................... 24

Figure 14: Current climate-suitability for Banana. ...................................................................................... 25

Figure 15: Suitability for Banana by 2030. .................................................................................................. 25

Figure 16: Suitability for Banana by 2050. .................................................................................................. 26

Figure 17: Climate-suitability change for Banana by 2030. ........................................................................ 26

Figure 18: Climate-suitability change for Banana by 2050. ........................................................................ 26

Figure 19: Current climate-suitability for Ginger. ....................................................................................... 27

Figure 20: Suitability for Ginger by 2030. ................................................................................................... 27

Figure 21: Suitability for Ginger by 2050. ................................................................................................... 28

Figure 22: Climate-suitability change for Ginger by 2030. ......................................................................... 28

Figure 23: Climate-suitability change for Ginger by 2050. ......................................................................... 28

Figure 24: Current climate-suitability for Tomato. ..................................................................................... 29

Figure 25: Suitability for Tomato (Salad) by 2030....................................................................................... 30

Figure 26: Suitability for Tomato (Salad) by 2050....................................................................................... 30

Figure 27 Climate-suitability change for Tomato (Salad) by 2030. ............................................................. 30

Figure 28: Climate-suitability change for Tomato (Salad) 2050. ................................................................ 31

Figure 29: Availability by land-use. ............................................................................................................. 32

Figure 30: Road access in Jamaica (distance-costs) .................................................................................... 32

Figure 31: Protected areas with buffer-zones in Jamaica. .......................................................................... 33

Figure 32: Combined availability of land-use, access & protected areas in Jamaica.................................. 33

6

Figure 33: Vulnerability Index for 3 case studies ........................................................................................ 35

Figure 34: Exposure compared between 3 case studies ............................................................................. 35

Figure 35: Sensitivity compared between 3 case studies ........................................................................... 36

Figure 36: Adaptive capacitive compared between 3 case studies ............................................................ 36

Figure 37: Expected impact compared between 3 case studies ................................................................. 37

Figure 38: Spider diagram of sensitivity and adaptive capacity ................................................................. 38

Figure 39: Site-specific vulnerability by 2030 ............................................................................................. 39

Figure 40: Site-specific vulnerability by 2050 ............................................................................................. 40

Figure 41: Compared carbon footprint of tomato and lettuce ................................................................... 41

7

3 Table of Tables

Table 1: Table of suitability-change of all examined crops. ........................................................................ 23

Table 2: Table of climate-suitability versus availability of land, numbers in grey are changes in area. ..... 34

8

1. Summary and main findings

This document reports on the results of a

consultancy conducted for Oxfam GB to

systematically address the challenge of climate

change regarding farmers’ livelihoods and

supply chains.

In Jamaica the yearly and monthly rainfall will

decrease and the yearly and monthly minimum

and maximum temperatures will increase

moderately by 2030 and will continue to

increase by progressively 2050. The overall

climate will become more seasonal in terms of

variation throughout the year with temperature

in specific districts increasing by about 1.1 ºC by

2030 and 1.7 ºC by 2050 and more seasonal in

precipitation with the maximum number of

cumulative dry month keeping constant in 3

months.

Calculated crop suitability reports reveal varying

exposure to climate change. Through a

questionnaire we assessed SENSITIVITY and

ADAPTIVE CAPACITY of farmers by indicating

the use of and access to capital assets. Thus,

vulnerabilities were identified.

Vulnerability of small farmer is very high in

Jamaica because of their high sensitivity and

low adaptive capacity in three of five livelihood

assets (human, social and financial capital)

While farmers may build upon physical and

natural capital stock, “soft” assets like training,

organization or finance are severely lacking.

Notably, nearly all produce is marketed through

intermediaries, alternatives are rarely present.

The most vulnerable are characterized by their

remoteness due to an underdeveloped

infrastructure which leaves them entirely self-

dependent. An institutionalized arm’s length

principle along the supply chain is reflected by a

non-traceability of processes which in turn

inhibits organization at farm level and

sustainable financing.

Farmers are working on an individual basis, yet,

while they are willing to engage in communal

organizations, it is not put into practice as

farmer’s expectations of financial benefits are

not fulfilled. On the other hand, small-holder

supporting institutions require a higher level of

integration among the solutions they are

providing.

After analyzing the data and questionnaires we

went back to the farmer and supply-chain actor

and shared with them the results of potential

threats of a changing climate. In a participatory

process we jointly developed adaption

strategies. The three main strategies that supply

chain actors identified to balance the impacts of

Main research findings

Temperature increases by about

1.1 ºC by 2030 and 1.7 ºC by 2050

Rainfall decreases over the year

and the number of cumulative dry

months (draught period) keeps

constant in 3 months.

Vulnerability of small farmer is

very high

Area is facing a geographical shift

of some crops to higher altitudes

High threat on extreme weather

events

Farmer depend on intermediaries

Low human, social & financial

capital of many farmers

9

climate are (i) capacity building, (ii) information

sharing, Legislation and (iii) government policies

and organization building.

2. Background

2.1 Introduction of the research

area

Geography: Jamaica is a tropical island located

at 18˚N and 77˚W with a total land area of

11244km2. It is characterized by diverse

microclimates which makes it highly suitable for

a wide array of tropical crops. For example,

average temperature in the coastal zone ranges

from 22.0˚C to 30.3˚C. In contrast, the interior

mountainous regions experience average

temperature of about 18.9˚C. Similarly, some

mountainous areas, particularly in the eastern

section of the island receive more than 5080

mm (200inches) whilst coastal areas of the

south receives less than 889mm (35) inches

annually. Moreover, in the mountainous areas,

the persistence of clouds result in mean

sunshine averaging less than 6 hours per day in

contrast to the coastal zones where it is close to

8 hours, and cloud coverage is less persistent.

(Meteorological Service of Jamaica, 2011).

Figure 1: study area.

Micro Climate: As a result of these diverse

microclimatic conditions, farmers have long

been able to cultivate diverse crops across the

breadth of the island. For example, in the cool,

moist mountainous areas, that experience

limited sunshine such as the Blue Mountains,

coffee is the main crop grown by local farmers.

In contrast in the relatively warm, dry southern

and south-eastern coastal areas, where close to

8 hours of sunshine is experienced daily, green

vegetables such as lettuce and cabbage and

condiments such as scallion and peppers are

the popular crops.

Diverse Crops: Jamaica is presently

characterized by a dual agricultural system. This

involves large scale plantation style agriculture

existing side by side with small scale agriculture.

The former generally possess relatively large

plots of relative flat lands highly suitable for

mechanized agricultural production and is often

the source of the island’s traditional export

crops of sugar cane, banana and citrus. The

latter, on the other hand, often due to lack of

adequate resources, are forced to cultivate

crops on marginal plots (2-2.5 hectares) of

disjointed lands (Rhiney, 2009). Theses marginal

farm lands are often located in ecologically

sensitive areas, on steep slopes or on other land

that are generally less suitable for farming.

Agriculture currently contributes approximately

7% to Jamaica’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

Regardless of its relatively small contribution to

Jamaica´s GDP, the sector absorbs a

disproportionate 18% (over 220, 000 of the

1,239,000 people employed) of the countries

employed labour force (STATIN, 2011) and

provide a source of livelihood for thousands

more who depend on it indirectly. In rural

Jamaica, where agriculture is the main source of

livelihood, 25% of the population lives in

poverty, that’s 5% more than the national

average (CARICOM, 2011).

10

2.2 Introduction of "the case"

Local agriculture in Jamaica, like in other

Caribbean countries has traditionally been

targeted at the export market, which was

bounded by a very limited range of crops

(Rhiney, 2009). Consequently, the local market,

including the local tourism sector has been

largely ignored for a protracted period of time.

This has resulted in the local consumers, having

to resort to overseas suppliers to fill their

needs. Unfortunately, the overseas market

which many Jamaican farmers once depended

on are no longer viable destination for various

reasons, including the erosion of specially

protected markets, trade liberalization and

competition from other sources. This

development has seriously jeopardized the

livelihood of thousands of small farmers who

once depended on these export market for

their sustenance (FAO, 2004). As a result, many

farmers have now had to seek alternative

markets for their produce, including the local

market which they previously ignored.

Here stands another dilemma for the farmers

however. The same issue that confronted the

farmers in the overseas markets is now creating

obstacles for them in Jamaica, i.e., Jamaica is

also an open market subjected to the same

rules of free trade and trade liberalization as

the former markets of these farmers (Rhiney,

2009). As such the farmers have had to

compete with cheaper imports from overseas.

2.3 Rationale for targeting the

hotel industry

Jamaica imported approximately US$661

million worth of food in 2010. According to the

Minister of Agriculture in Jamaica, however, up

to 45% of the food that is imported could be

produced locally (Brown, 2011). In a bid to

overcome the lack of market access for the

farmers, several local and international

organizations have sought to develop a variety

of programs aimed at improving the farmers’

marketability. One of the latest initiatives being

developed is the establishment of a social

intermediary enterprise called JAMAI.

Spearheaded by Oxfam Great Britain, this

initiative will seek to provide farmers with

access to local markets, particularly in the local

hotel industry.

The hotel industry was targeted as a major

market for local agricultural products for

several reasons. Firstly, it is one of the sectors

highly responsible for Jamaica huge volume of

import. As a matter of fact, the largest hotels,

such as the all-inclusive chains that are so

popular with North American visitors, import

over 60% of their food (Pennicook, 2006).

Additionally, in 2011 Jamaica’s travel and

tourism industry is expected to contribute 24%

of Jamaica’s total GDP (WTTC, 2011), making it

the country’s largest earner of foreign exchange

(in contrast to agriculture’s 7%).

2.4 General problems of the

people in the area

Unfortunately, several problems currently

plague the local agricultural industry and will

ultimately thwart the farmers’ efforts to

present themselves as feasible and viable

source of supply of the hotels. Firstly, many of

the large hotels argue that the small farmers

that dominate the local agriculture industry

cannot guarantee a stable supply, quality or

price (McBain, 2007). The primary reasons for

these shortfalls are: the small size of production

units which does not facilitate economies of

scale; the high cost of inputs; competition from

11

cheaper food imports; and high level of

vulnerability to natural disasters. Additionally,

the farmers are not very organized and many of

them refuse to operate within a cooperative

that would allow them to overcome most of

these challenges that they face (McBain, 2007).

2.5 Introduction of supply chain

Many of the larger hoteliers lament that a single

small farmer is incapable of supplying any

significant portion of their needs and it is not

economically feasible for them (the hotel) to do

business with numerous small farmers.

Therefore, they prefer to deal with a limited

number individuals or organizations that can

supply them with the bulk volumes that they

require. In order to make themselves more

attractive as a viable alternative to the current

imports, local farmers thus need to have a

central point where produced can be collected,

graded, sorted and distributed to the hotels.

This has been the case in the Nevis where such

a project was established in the 1990s has and

born remarkable fruit for both farmers and

hoteliers (McBain, 2007). Oxfam has also

successfully established a linkage between

farmers and hotels in St. Lucia (Ostertag &

Rhiney, 2010). This has resulted in not only a

more stable and higher income for farmers, but

it has also been successful in supplying hotels

with a steady supply of quality goods. In

Jamaica, both the Super Clubs and Sandals all-

inclusive hotel chains, the two largest hotel

chains in Jamaica, have adopted similar

arrangements with farmers with the aid of the

Jamaica Agricultural Society. This too has

proven to be very beneficial for both the

farmers and the hotels (McBain, 2007)

2.6 New concept: i.e. JAMAI

As a result of the numerous challenges being

confronted by farmers, Oxfam has decide to

establish a social intermediaries to aid local

small scale farmers to overcome their

challenges of market access, particularly in the

hotel and restaurants affiliated with the tourism

industry. This new initiative, spearheaded by

Oxfam, will also provide, among other things,

technical assistance, and access to a wider array

of services that will seek to reduce the farmers’

level of vulnerability to the challenges that they

face. This new intermediary being proposed

will, among other things provide farmers with a

more reliable and secure system of selling their

goods. Additionally JAMAI with assist the

farmers in getting access to training on

sustainable agricultural practice that will

simultaneously improve yield and reduce

negative impacts on the environment. For the

benefit of the hotel industry, JAMAI will also

secure a steady supply of high quality products

at a relatively stable, predetermined price.

2.7 Challenges in general and for

the "new concept” limits of

JAMAI

The success of JAMAI initiative is highly

dependent on a number of socio-economic,

political and environmental factors. JAMAI

anticipates that they will be confronted with a

number of challenges, all of which are

surmountable with the aid of effective

communication between all stakeholders. Some

of these challenges include farmers cultural

preference in selling their goods haphazardly to

the highest bidder, farmers tendencies to shun

away from organized groups and to act

independently and the farmers lack of

education which would make it relatively

12

difficult to communicate with them in an

efficient manner. Many stakeholders that were

interviewed during the research also expressed

concerns that political interference and

victimization may be a major impediment to the

successful implementation of the project.

Another major challenge that is anticipated is

the negative impact that climate change will

continue to have on Jamaica’s small scale

farmers.

3. Challenges

3.1 Impact of Climate Change on

Agriculture

Agriculture systems around the world are

expected to be confronted with a myriad of

challenges as a result of the changing climatic

conditions. Chief among them are heat stress

associated with higher temperature and lower

moisture levels, concentration of rainfall

episodes into fewer days, resulting in higher

frequency of flash flooding and soil erosions

and increased incidence of pests and diseases

and consequently a drop in the yield of major

food crops by as much as a third (Nelson et al.,

2009). Unfortunately, these pending

catastrophes cannot be avoided in the short

term, thus it is imperative that mitigation and

adaptation strategies be implemented to cope

with these new stresses (Burton et al., 2006)

One of the primary aims of modern agricultural

practices is to increase the quantity of food

available to the world population. Ironically,

however, the methods of production currently

utilize is severely compromising the world’s

future food security. Recent research has

revealed that certain agricultural practices have

a substantial role to play in global warming. In

Latin America and the Caribbean, climate

change mitigation is still not considered in

mainstream policy (P. Smith et al., 2007).

3.2 Climate Change in Jamaica

It is strongly believed that small island

developing states (SIDS) such as Jamaica will be

amongst the first and most severely affected by

climate change and global warming (Simpson et

al., 2009). Firstly, simply by virtue of their

geographical location in the lower latitudes,

climate change is expected to have a more

pronounced effect such as extreme heat, longer

and more intense duration of drought and

increased outbreaks of pests and diseases

(Burton et al., 2006) . SIDS, such as the

Caribbean islands are believed to be amongst

the most vulnerable, due to their small size,

concentration of resources along the coast and

limited resources,(Gamble et al., 2010; IIED,

2011; Mimura et al., 2007; Simpson et al.,

2009).

With the continued warming of the planet,

Global Circulation Models (GCM) projects that

there will be an inevitable rise in sea level

globally by 1.5m-2m with a 1.5-2oC rise in

temperature, The Caribbean region, however, is

expected to have sea level rise 25% greater

than the global average (Vermeersen and

Lebrocq, 2004). According to Simpson et al.

(2009) a 1m rise in sea level could result in 2%

loss of agricultural lands, while 6m rise is likely

to have 12% loss in Jamaica. These losses may

be due to direct erosion or contamination of

the agricultural soil via salination.

3.3 Weather changes

Jamaican small scale farmers have long been

plague with numerous natural disasters such as

landslides, floods, hurricanes and droughts

13

(IIED, 2011). Agriculture nonetheless has been

able to thrive with the aid of fairly good

understanding of climatic patterns and the

farmers’ ability to adapt to these relatively

‘small’ changes. Unfortunately, the recent

changes in climatic conditions are too large for

farmers in Jamaica to adapt to. These changes

have substantially reduced farmers’ ability to

strategize their operations, making them

increasing vulnerable to the increasingly

unpredictable and unfavorable climatic events.

According to the International Food Policy

Research Institute (IFPRI), in a 2009 report,

climate change is very likely to cause a decline

in yields of the most important crops in

developing countries, ultimately resulting in an

increase in food prices (Nelson et al., 2009). This

development is bound to have detrimental

effects on local farmers’ livelihood as they

already lacked the technical, physical and

financial support that would allow them to cope

with the different types of stresses exerted on

them (Gamble et al., 2010)

4. Our methodology

Figure 2: Analytical framework.

We base our research on the commonly used

definition of vulnerability of the third

assessment report (IPCC 2001) as outlined in

the Working Group II report (McCarthy et al.

2001) in combination with the sustainable rural

livelihood framework of Scoones (1998).

Reviewing the state of the art of climate change

vulnerability research Hinkel (2011) found that

this approach is appropriate to identify

vulnerable peoples, communities and regions

when applied to narrowly defined local systems.

Read full text of our methodology in chapter 2

of the “Methodology” document.

5. Assessment of observed changes

and farmer’s perceptions

5.1 Results from focal workshops

To obtain farmers perceptions about climate

and its changes they observed during the last

decades we organized participatory workshops.

This workshop utilizes facilitators to guide the

discussion of a group of farmers to unearth the

necessary information. The entire discussions

took place with the aid of charts and the

farmers were asked to use beans and simple

signs to indicate the magnitude, volume,

frequency or intensity of specific variables.

See more details on the procedure in chapter 4

of the “Methodology report”.

Farmers perception of historical climate

One of the first exercises that were done

involved asking the farmers to illustrate

historical climatic change by assessing

favorability of rainfall, temperature and wind

over the years. With the aid of beans, the level

of favorability ascertained by indicating how

“good” or “bad” these climatic events generally

affected the production systems. Figure 3

shows high variability between years and

14

highlight how hurricanes, accompanied by

heavy rain periods caused crop failure in all

communities in the region.

Figure 3: Farmers perceptions of historical climate trend.

Farmers perception of natural capital

There was a general consensus amongst most

of the research sites that the quality of forests,

rivers and soils has declined over the past 20

years (Figure 4). Farmers expressed concern

that the very resources that they are so highly

dependent on, have been depleted to varying

degrees and is likely to get worst with the onset

of climate change.

Figure 4: Farmers perceptions on natural resources.

Farmers perception of physical capital

Figure 5: Farmers perceptions on physical capital road.

15

At first glance it would seems that distance to

markets and road access would not be a

problem on a small island like Jamaica. This is

this true for the better maintained northern

coastline. As this is the tourist area, the

government gives more attention to keep these

roads well maintained. Once you venture

towards interior areas of the island, the roads

become increasingly deplorable and in some

areas to the south of the island, the road

situation is extremely bad. In areas such as

Douglas Castle or Tangle River, the roads were

so bad that farmers claimed that intermediaries

have been coming less frequently to buy their

products because of the roads. Additionally,

they lamented that short distances of few

kilometers may take you few hours to get to

your destination (Figure 5).

Farmers perception of human capital

Figure 6: Farmers perceptions on human capital road.

During the workshops many farmers highlighted

in the discussion, that education is very

important for them and it is not related to social

status. Thus, it is normal in Jamaica for a small

farmer and his family to have the same

education level as the richer medium or large

scaled farmer, because they have the ability to

send their children a university.

Nonetheless, the fact remains that many small

farmers remain in farming, because they would

not be able to get another job because of their

age lack of professional qualification. During

questionnaire interviews we often found that,

that smallholder farmers are elderly people,

without high education level and depend on the

economical support of their abroad children,

who are studying in Kingston or even live in the

US. Actually on the family capital we didn’t get a

clear respond during the workshops, it seems

that Jamaican farmer tend to live and work

individually (Figure 6).

5.2 Examples of farmer’s

comments

During the field work many farmer told us their

personal stories and what kind of problems they

are facing in their daily business, most of them

are climate related. The following comments

shows facts and situations from different

regions.

Farmers Comments from Manchester

“Since last year a new disease is affecting the ginger, this year already 25% of farmers stopped cultivating their fields”

16

Ginger farmer, Jamaica, Manchester, Lower Christiana, 2010.

Jamaica used to have its own variety of ginger,

which was a smaller tuber but adapted very

well on local soil and climate conditions. Around

20 years ago a variety from China was

introduced, because the yield is higher than the

local variety. The disease currently affecting

ginger is only affecting the ginger from China,

the original Jamaican ginger is not affected.

“I call it the Ginger valley, best conditions for Ginger in Jamaica, this year I started producing in Greenhouse to protect against diseases; but costs are high”

Ginger farmer, Jamaica, Clarendon, Top Alston, 2010.

Early adopters are always trying out new

technologies and many ‘trial and errors’ to learn

have been done on Jamaican greenhouse

farming. Advantages are clear: controlled micro

climatic characteristics, pest exclusion and

accurately measured nutrition intake ends up

into higher yield. Disadvantages are higher

production costs, investment is needed to start,

experience and knowledge not to fail and

threats through hurricanes have to be

calculated.

Temperature inside a greenhouse is

approximately 3 °C higher than outside, that

fore greenhouse are found more up on the

mountains in Jamaica, but even cooling systems

powered by renewable energies like solar

panels were tested and could be implemented,

but would hardly work for a large scale farming

at the moment.

Farmer Comment from St. Elizabeth

“In the past we installed irrigation systems, but when there is drought, there is still not enough water”

Farmers co-operation, Jamaica, St. Elizabeth, Beacon, 2010.

In this drought-stricken area, there is even a

sophisticated pipe system with planned water

supply to several communities to assure food

security for Jamaica, because the parish St.

Elizabeth provides a large part of Jamaican’s

fresh vegetables and fruits. Unfortunately,

however this is not always sufficient, especially

in El Nino years when drought-like conditions

17

are exacerbated and the farmers lack the

necessary resources to adapt.

Farmer Comment from Douglas Castle

“Input costs for vegetable production are very high, this year a heavy rain destroyed all my lettuce in just 3 days”

Young farmer, Jamaica, St. Ann, Douglas Castle, 2010.

Douglas castle used to be a vegetable supplier

of the hotel industry on the northern coast.

Climate variability is treating them hard and

road access has also become also a big problem,

and fewer intermediaries come by to pick up

their products. Additionally, their investments

to meet the high standards force them to

increase inputs in order to optimize harvested

output.

Farmer Comment from St. Mary

“Recently we started with a greenhouse for hot-pepper seedlings to protect against excess rainfall & insects”

Farm co-operation, Jamaica, St. Mary, Fort George, 2010.

Greenhouse farming is a good way to nurse

seedlings during the first growth. In Fort Jorge

farmers have founded a cooperative and they

are renting land together to supply the close

hotel industry.

“We have no transportation, the road is bad, a lot of holes, if higglers (intermediaries) are not coming, we leave it on the field”

Farmer, Jamaica, St. James, Summervile, 2010.

Farmer told us repeatedly that they leave their

produce to rot in the field, because nobody

came by to purchase them.

Furthermore, they don’t have their own transport facilities. Thus, when road access gets worse, even less intermediaries come to purchase their produce and eventually, even productive lands can get unused as there is no means to get the produce to the market.

Farmer Comment from Manchester

“I work only by myself. I don’t know how much I spend on farm-inputs. I just sell when higglers

18

come by”

Farmer in a Mini-market, Jamaica, Manchester,

Lower Christiana, 2010.

Unfortunately, some farmer think like this and

they are not much willing to work together with

other farmer, even when that could be an

advantage to be not so much dependent from

intermediaries.

19

6. Climate change predictions for 2030 & 2050

In order to predict climate change we used historical climate data from www.worldclim.org database

(Hijmans et al., 2005) as current climate. Variables included are monthly total precipitation, and monthly

mean, minimum and maximum temperature. To generate the future climate we downloaded and

downscaled Global Circulation Model (GCM) data from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

(IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report.

See detailed information (“current climate”, “Future climate”) in chapter 3 of Methodology-document.

6.1 The summary climate characteristics for 2030 and 2050

Figure 7: Climate trend summary 2030 and 2050 for Jamaica.

Results are based on 19 GCM Models from the 4th IPCC assessment (2007), A2 scenario (business as

usual)

General climatic characteristics

• The rainfall decreases from 1846 millimeters to 1763 millimeters in 2050 passing through

1787 in 2030

20

• Temperatures increase and the average increase is 1.7 ºC passing through an increment of

1.1 ºC in 2030

• The mean daily temperature range increases from 7.2 ºC to 7.3 ºC in 2050

• The maximum number of cumulative dry months keeps constant in 3 months

Extreme conditions

• The maximum temperature of the year increases from 29.1 ºC to 30.9 ºC while the warmest

quarter gets hotter by 1.7 ºC in 2050

• The minimum temperature of the year increases from 18.7 ºC to 20.3 ºC while the coldest

quarter gets hotter by 1.6 ºC in 2050

• The wettest month keeps constant with 298 millimeters, while the wettest quarter gets

drier by 18 mm in 2050

• The driest month gets drier with 58 millimeters instead of 62 millimeters while the driest

quarter gets drier by 9 mm in 2050

Climate Seasonality

• Overall this climate becomes more seasonal in terms of variability through the year in

temperature and more seasonal in precipitation

Variability between models

• The coefficient of variation of temperature predictions between models is 1.4%

• Temperature predictions were uniform between models and thus no outliers were detected

• The coefficient of variation of precipitation predictions between models is 6.2%

• Precipitation predictions were uniform between models and thus no outliers were detected

6.2 Regional changes in the mean annual precipitation (2030)

21

Figure 8: Mean annual precipitation change by 2030 for 6 study sites in Jamaica.

The edges of the boxes indicate the mean maximum and mean minimum values and the ends of the line

the maximum and minimum values. The mean maximum and mean minimum values are defined by the

mean + or – the standard deviation.

The mean annual precipitation decreases in 2030 on average by 59 mm and in 2050 by 79 mm. In 2030

Dumfries will have larger decrease in precipitation than others (Figure 8) and in 2050 Douglas Castle

(Figure 9). We observed the smallest decrease in precipitation for 2030 in Beacon and Tangle River and

for 2050 in Dumfries.

Figure 9: Mean annual precipitation change by 2050 for 6 study sites of Jamaica.

6.3 Regional changes in the mean annual temperature (2030)

22

Figure 10: Mean annual temperature change by 2030 for 6 study sites of Jamaica.

The mean annual temperature will increase progressively. The increase by 2050 is between 1.6 and 1.7

ºC (Figures 11) and for 2030 between 1 and 1.1 ºC (Figures 10).

6.4 Regional changes in the mean annual temperature (2050)

Figure 11: Mean annual temperature change by 2050 for 6 study sites of Jamaica.

6.5 Coefficient of variation of climate variables

CV precipitation 2030 CV precipitation 2050 CV temperature 2030 CV temperature 2050

Figure 12: Coefficient of variation for annual precipitation and temperature 2030 and 2050.

The coefficient of variation (CV) for 2030 and 2050 climate variables ranges between 0 and 20%, and

may therefore be accepted as reliable (Figure 12).

23

7. Exposure of most important crops to climate change

What means exposure to climate change?

To determine Exposure to climate change we used most identified crops from the focal group

workshops and undertake a participatory analysis of the current and future biophysical suitability of

crops under a changing climate. We use a mechanistic model based on the Ecocrop database (FAO, 1998

available at http://ecocrop.fao.org/ecocrop/srv/en/home) to spatially predict crop suitability without

having prior knowledge or data available. The model essentially uses minimum, maximum, and mean

monthly temperatures, and total monthly rainfall to determine a suitability index.

See more detailed description in the Methodology report on chapter 3.

Table 1: Table of suitability-change of all examined crops.

Table 1 shows results of 14 crops and their climate suitability. Models indicate for most crops values of

suitability between 80 and 100 which means excellent growing conditions on current climate data. For

2030 predictions shows suitability values between 60 and 80. Suitability is still very good and keeps

excellent for banana, cucumber, sweet potato (low), tomato (low) and zucchini. For 2050 suitability is

predicted with ongoing decline and cabbage, carrot, irish potato, orange and yellow sweet potato (high)

end up between 40 and 60, which indicates at least as suitable. Values below 40 on climate-suitability

Exposure to climate change

Exposure is the character, magnitude and rate of climate change and variation.

24

e.g. ginger end up in marginal conditions for crop development and would not be with sufficient

productivity. The right two columns show change in suitability as de anomaly between future and

current crop suitability. Most affected crops are cabbage, carrot, ginger, sweet potato (high) and tomato

(high) with 25% up to 47% declining climate suitability.

7.1 Measure of agreement of models predicted changes

Figure 13: Measure of agreement of models predicting changes in the same direction as the average of all models at a given location for 2050.

The Measure of agreement of models predicting changes in the same direction as the average of all

models at a given location is generally high (Figure 13).

In the following section we present a more the detailed analysis of the three crops of highest interest.

Find maps of all crops on data collection disk!

25

7.2 Banana

Current suitability

Figure 14: Current climate-suitability for Banana.

Currently, the main banana production areas are located in lower regions and coastal areas (Figure 14).

According to the Ecocrop model, the most climate-suitable areas for banana cultivation are

concentrated in the western section of the island, south western, south central. There are also excellent

climatically suitable areas in the north western section of the island, with a narrow strip along the north

coast connecting the equally suitable eastern end of the island.

Suitability for Banana by 2030

Figure 15: Suitability for Banana by 2030.

26

Suitability for Banana by 2050

Figure 16: Suitability for Banana by 2050.

Change in suitability by 2030

Figure 17: Climate-suitability change for Banana by 2030.

Change in suitability by 2050

Figure 18: Climate-suitability change for Banana by 2050.

27

By 2030, there will be slight increase in overall climate suitability of banana with more inland (Figure 15),

mountainous region gaining suitability of approximately 13%. By 2050, there will be significant changes

in overall suitability, with more inland, mountainous region gaining suitability, particularly in the west-

central region (Figure 16). Overall, suitability will increase by approximately 18% from current status by

2050 (Table 1, Figure 18). Along the south-central coastline, however, small areas of less suitable zones

will begin to emerge.

7.3 Ginger

Current suitability

Figure 19: Current climate-suitability for Ginger.

Currently, the main ginger production areas are located close to Christiana, in the Top Alston area.

According to the Ecocrop model, the most climatically suitable areas are concentrated in the interior

regions of the island, mainly in the mountainous zones (Figure 19). With a few minor exceptions, the

coastal zones are almost completely devoid of suitable climate for ginger.

Suitability for Ginger by 2030

Figure 20: Suitability for Ginger by 2030.

28

Suitability for Ginger by 2050

Figure 21: Suitability for Ginger by 2050.

Change in suitability by 2030

Figure 22: Climate-suitability change for Ginger by 2030.

Change in suitability by 2050

Figure 23: Climate-suitability change for Ginger by 2050.

29

The climatic suitability of ginger will decline significantly (27%, see Table 1) by 2030, with the declines

expected to be concentrated in the western and eastern interior of the island (Figure 22). Large sections

of the center of the island however improve in suitability by this time, though this was not sufficient to

off-set the overall decline. By 2050, zones barely suitable for the cultivation of ginger increase

dramatically (47%) all over the island, while zones suitable for the cultivation of ginger shrink drastically,

with the main area still remaining in towards the interior, mountainous zone, though with a much

smaller area. Suitability also increases, in small mountainous regions towards the eastern end of the

island (Figure 23).

7.4 Tomato (Salad)

Current suitability

Figure 24: Current climate-suitability for Tomato.

Currently, the main Tomato production areas are located in St. Elizabeth parish. The areas suitable for

the cultivation of tomatoes are the almost exactly same as the areas unsuitable for ginger (Figure 24 and

19). According to the Ecocrop model, the most climatically suitable areas are concentrated towards the

coast and the lower elevation of Jamaica. Suitability tends to decline towards the interior and higher

elevations.

30

Suitability for Tomato (Salad) by 2030

Figure 25: Suitability for Tomato (Salad) by 2030.

Suitability for Tomato (Salad) by 2050

Figure 26: Suitability for Tomato (Salad) by 2050.

Change in suitability by 2030

Figure 27 Climate-suitability change for Tomato (Salad) by 2030.

31

Change in suitability by 2050

Figure 28: Climate-suitability change for Tomato (Salad) 2050.

By 2030, tomato suitable zones expand dramatically (16%, see Table 1), advancing towards higher

altitudes (Figure 27). However most of the highest altitudes remain climatically unsuitable for the crop.

By 2050, tomato suitable zones have continued its expansion towards the interior mountainous regions

and would have increased by 23% overall. However, most of the highest altitudes remain climatically

unsuitable for the crop (Figure 28).

8. Availability and restrictions for agricultural production

In order to highlight the important role of land availability for agricultural production systems we

analyzed as a next step the three main influencing factors for land availability:

Land use

Access (road distance)

Protection

As most important factor for availability of land for agricultural production we analyzed land use (Figure

29) and categorized water bodies and populated areas as not available for agriculture. Areas of currently

covered by forest or perennial crop systems such as coffee are classified as available but needs a land

use change and would be theoretically available. However it is not recommended to clear forest in order

to generate cultivating areas. Remaining areas indicated as white areas available and currently occupied

even as cropland, pastureland and areas with low vegetation or wasteland.

The second factor to determine availability is accessibility or also called distance-costs. We calculated

the distance of each geographical location (each pixel on the map) and its distance to the closest road in

distanced categories; distance accessible < 500m, inconvenient access 500-1000m, costly access >

1000m (see Figure 30). If the distance to the next road is higher, distance costs are also high.

32

Last we used protected areas as barrier for availability for agricultural extension and calculated areas

inside protected areas and within a distance of 2 Kilometers around protected areas (Figure 31).

8.1 Land use

Figure 29: Availability by land-use.

8.2 Access

Figure 30: Road access in Jamaica (distance-costs)

33

8.3 Protection

Figure 31: Protected areas with buffer-zones in Jamaica.

8.4 Combined restrictions for agricultural production

Combining the three availability factors we obtain weighted restrictions as result map (Figure 32) and

can further discuss highly favorable land for agricultural production with positive and negative change in

crop suitability as exposed areas to climate change to develop adaptation strategies

Figure 32: Combined availability of land-use, access & protected areas in Jamaica.

34

Table 2: Table of climate-suitability versus availability of land, numbers in grey are changes in area.

In Table 2 climate suitability and restrictions to land availability in 1000 hectares are combined. For 2030

and 2050 it can be observed that most of the available land is facing a negative suitability change. With

the exception of corn and tomato, all crops are having their highest suitability lost up to -40 for 2030

and -70 in 2050 in available areas.

The consequence of this fact is, that farmer will tend to extend their production areas to higher

altitudes, most of which is currently occupied by forests and will therefore not contribute to mitigate

further climate change.

35

9. Vulnerability of farmer’s

livelihoods to climate change

9.1 Vulnerability Index

To compare vulnerability between regions a

vulnerability index has been constructed. It is a

function of the exposure by the year 2030, the

sensitivity and adaptive capacity, and the

households’ expected impact of climate change.

Vulnerability index = Exposure + Sensitivity +

Adaptive Capacity + Expected Impact

These components together describe the

abstract concept of vulnerability in a

comprehensive way. The data for our index

originates from the suitability modeling exercise

and our sustainable livelihood assessment.

Additionally, we make use of information about

the motivation to adapt (“expected impact”)

that we derived during our household survey.

All 4 variables have equal weights. Data has

been transformed to a 1 to 3 ordinal scale,

where 3 refers to high resilience and 1 to a high

vulnerability. Thus, the index ranges from 4 –

high vulnerability – to 12 – high resilience. For

details on the methodology, please refer to the

accompanying methodology report.

Figure 33: Vulnerability Index for 3 case studies

As can be seen from the box plots overall

vulnerability is highest in Jamaica. This result is

confirmed as statistically significant by Oneway-

Anova and t-Test statistics. While the means

point to a ranking of the countries in terms of

vulnerability, the whiskers make clear that this

is deceptive. Colombia and Jamaica share a

similar range of vulnerability. This means that in

both countries inequality could be an issue.

Even in the vulnerable Jamaica households exist

that are very resilient, although on average

households are as vulnerable as the worst of

ones in Colombia.

See more detailed description in the

Methodology report on chapter 4.

First, we discuss the accumulated result of our

Index, then we present findings on its

components.

Figure 34: Exposure compared between 3 case studies

For the construction of the vulnerability index

the change in suitability has been seperated

into terciles of equal number of cases. The

graph however shows the original values as this

provides additional information. The box plots

show that Jamaica and Colombia exhibit similar

variation in direct climate change impacts, while

Guatemala will experience homogenically a low

36

impact. Differences exist mostly in the means of

Colombia and Guatemala and Jamaica. Here,

Jamaica is clearly the worst affected. This result

is confirmed as significant by Oneway-Anova

and t-Test statistics. In comparison with the

other two regions Jamaica sticks out because of

its comparatively large range of impacts. While

few changes are expected in Guatemala and

even a slightly positive direct impact of climate

change in Colombia is possible, in Jamaica

households predominantly experience a

negative impact on their main cultivars.

Figure 35: Sensitivity compared between 3 case studies

In terms of sensitivity all three countries show

the same range of probability of indirect

impacts. A clear difference only exists in the

means. Colombia shows a higher resilience on

average. This result is confirmed as significant

by Oneway-Anova and t-Test statistics. The

difference in sensitivity between Guatemala

and Jamaica is not significant. In the chapter

that discusses the results of our sustainable

livelihood assessment the reasons for this result

are discussed in more detail (see next section).

Figure 36: Adaptive capacitive compared between 3 case studies

Similar to the results of sensitivity the box plots

and a comparison of means using Anova and

repeated t-Tests show a higher resilience of

Colombia, compared to the other two focus

regions, including Jamaica. Interestingly, the

range of adaptive capacity is nearly the same

for all three countries, such that the difference

can only be observed in the means. No

differences exist between the least prepared

and best prepared households of the three

focus regions. However, weaknesses and

strengths result from different livelihood assets.

In the chapter that discusses the results of our

sustainable livelihood assessment the reasons

are discussed in more detail (see next section).

37

Figure 37: Expected impact compared between 3 case studies

The data about expected impacts has been

transformed onto a 1 to 3 scale such that data

falls into terciles of equal size. This results in the

odd shape of the box plots. Jamaica has the

lowest mean with 1.76 compared to Colombia

(2.02) and Guatemala (2.22). Differences in

means are statistically significant between

Jamaica and Guatemala. Also a small effect

exists between Colombia and Jamaica. Thus, it

may be concluded that Jamaica is the least

prepared to climate change when regarding the

motivation to adapt. The respondents in the

survey do not appear to be particularly

concerned about climate change or variability,

nor do they seem to know much about this

phenomenon.

Taking all results together, Jamaica is the worst

off country both in terms of direct impacts and

its capacity and motivation to adapt. The

probability of indirect impacts is just as high as

in Guatemala. The latter is less vulnerable to

climate change than Jamaica because

respondents exhibit a high motivation to adapt

even though this may not be necessary as our

direct impact models suppose. As for our

sustainable livelihood analysis differences

between Guatemala and Jamaica are not

statistically significant, and thus may have

occurred due to chance. On average our

vulnerability index proposes equal capital

access in the two countries. The respective

chapter 9 that discuss the sustainable livelihood

assessment in more detail provide more detail

on individual differences. However, a strategy

to prepare Jamaican farmers to climate change

will, in addition, need to consider the

pronounced heterogeneity of production and

thus difference in direct impacts, as well as the

low awareness of the problem at hand.

10. Sensitivity & adaptive capacity of

Jamaican farmers to climate

change

What is the sensitivity and adaptive capacity of

a System to climate change?

10.1 Capital stock analysis

Difficult credit access

Very low presence of organizations

No access to education of some households

A subgroup of resilient households exists

The spider diagram of the modes of the

different forms of capital separated into

sensitivity and adaptive capacity suggests a

Sensitivity to climate change

Sensitivity is the degree to which a system

is affected, either adversely or

beneficially, by climate variability or

change. The effect may be direct (e.g., a

change in crop yield in response to a

change in the mean, range or variability of

temperature) or indirect (e.g., damages

caused by an increase in the frequency of

coastal flooding due to sea-level rise).

Adaptive capacity

Adaptive capacity (in relation to climate

change impacts), the ability of a system to

adjust to climate change (including

climate variability and extremes), to

moderate potential damages, to take

advantage of opportunities, or to cope

with the consequences.

38

clear result. In this diagram “1” represents a low

vulnerability and “3” a high vulnerability; i.e. a

value of three for adaptive capacity is a high

adaptive capacity, a value of one means a low

adaptive capacity. In contrast, for Sensitivity “3”

stands for a low sensitivity and “1” for a highly

sensitive form of capital.

Figure 38: Spider diagram of sensitivity and adaptive capacity

Given this ranking the diagram suggests that

farmers in Jamaica are sensitive to climate

change for certain forms of capital. Two of the

five forms of capital receive a mode of “3”,

meaning that the most frequent answer has

been such that it fell into the highest category.

The other three capital forms however, reveal a

high sensitivity. In terms of adaptive capacity,

physical capital and natural capital also display a

good adaptive capacity. The three most

sensitive forms of capital, human, social and

financial capital received predominantly low

scores in the survey. Thus, while the physical

and natural capital does not appear to be

vulnerable, all other forms require more

attention.

In many ways the reasons for the low financial

capital are similar to those in that can be found

in Guatemala (see the respective chapter in the

country report Guatemala). Farmers state that

their income is affected by a changing climate

through lower quality and quantity. Credit

design is tolerable but in contrast to Guatemala

hardly accessible for most farmers. This makes

the picture for adaptive capacity worse for

Jamaica, as certification and alternative

technologies are equally inaccessible.

The result for social capital is dominated by the

same determinants as in Guatemala: An

absence of any form of organizations from

many parts of the study area. Unfortunately,

however, even though only a few household

participate in organizations, they still do not

receive services. Thus, sensitivity is high and

adaptive capacity is low.

Human capital is seen to be sensitive as

knowledge about markets is underdeveloped

and most households do not keep records of

their economic activities. The picture for the

other indicators, such as market orientation is

generally mixed. Thus, while resilient household

exist, the vast majority appears to be

unprepared to changes in their economic

environment. At the same time the results for

adaptive capacity hint in a similar direction.

While training is available to some at good

quality, others do not even have access to basic

education. As the majority of indications points

towards a lack of adaptive capacity this is seen

to be low, despite the existence of a subgroup

that has a high human capital.

10.2 Cluster analysis

Cluster analysis over the data from the

questionnaire resulted in three groups in

sensitivity and four in adaptive capacity.

However, 2 of the three groups in sensitivity are

not very distinct. Rather one group sticks out as

very resilient. Therefore here only two groups

39

are presented: the sensitive majority and the

resilient minority. The situation is similar for

adaptive capacity. Rather than distinct groups

the cluster are along a continuum from low

capacity to high adaptive capacity. Therefore

here characteristics of the most vulnerable and

the most prepared households are presented. It

has to be noted though, that the group with

high sensitivity is large compared with the low

sensitivity group. This is not as clearly

distinguishable for adaptive capacity, even

though the majority of households is located at

the vulnerable end of the distribution.

Sensitivity:

– High sensitivity:

No organizations present so that also

no one is a member

Water supply is irregular, of bad quality

and no official authority is in charge of

it

Water is collected from roofs or comes

from a river

Houses are wooden

Management of chemical waste is not

specified

This does not mean that they do not

use chemicals, although this is the case

for some households

No falls in production rate are reported

(bad management?)

– Low sensitivity

Many organizations present

Long term presence

Participation in organizations

Sowing plans developed

Credit access

Training in market systems

Adaptive capacity

– Low adaptive capacity

No activities received of accessible

No education

No training

No assistance

No crop alternatives

Low or no management

– High Adaptive capacity

No travel time to market/water

Member in multiple organizations

Good management

Training received

Certification

Credit access

Own a truck

10.3 Site-specific vulnerability

For the analysis of site specific vulnerability we

employ the IPCC’s standard definition of

vulnerability. It is a function of the exposure as

crop to climate suitability change by the year

2030 or rather 2050, the sensitivity and

adaptive capacity of the farm system.

Vulnerability = Exposure + Sensitivity – Adaptive Capacity

Similar to our Vulnerability Index based analysis

we derive proxies for sensitivity, adaptive

capacity and exposure based on our household

survey data. We mapped results to show which

farmer are highly vulnerable to a changing

climate. (Please note that in order to map

vulnerability we had to change the scale in

comparison to previous chapters).

Figure 39: Site-specific vulnerability by 2030

40

On the horizontal axis Exposure is plotted as

crop to climate suitability change (1 low and -3

high); the vertical axis shows Sensitivity rated

from 0 (low) to 3 (high); the size of the bubbles

indicates the Adaptive Capacity and low

Adaptive Capacity is classified as big size and

high capacity to adapt to a changing climate are

shown as small bubbles. The background color

of the chart shows the vulnerability in traffic

light colors. Red means high vulnerability and

green low. Significant attention must be given

to those big sample points in the upper left red

colored corner; these are those with maximum

Vulnerability to predicted climate change.

Mapped survey sample points show clearly, that

for 2030 the vulnerability of Guatemalan frozen

vegetable farmers is still balanced (Figure 39),

by 2050 the majority of them move towards the

left corner into higher Vulnerability (Figure 40).

Figure 40: Site-specific vulnerability by 2050

11. Estimated Carbon Footprint

The carbon footprint of a product presents the

total sum of all greenhouse gas emissions

caused by a product’s supply-chain expressed in

kg Co2e per kg product. In this chapter the aim

is to calculate a comprehensive carbon dioxide

equivalent footprint for tomato and lettuce.

For more details on the methodology see

chapter 6 of the Methodology report.

During the field work we conducted necessary

data to calculate the on farm carbon footprint

via the Cool Farm Tool. At some point there is

to say, that most farmer in Jamaica are roughly

taking records and reliable data directly from

the farmer are very difficult to collect. In most

cases the interviewer depends on expert

knowledge from technicians of agricultural

development organizations, which gave us an

average application of fertilizer and pesticides,

no information on residue management and

farm management. Most farmer in the region

don’t have own transport and do not use

energy on the field and for primary processing.

11.1 Tomato

It is very difficult to compare results within

tomato production, as for this crop, the

cultivation methods and parameters such as

yields vary widely. Within this report open field

production has been compared to ones

imported from the Netherlands.

11.2 Lettuce

The lettuce carbon footprint results for open

field production are almost equal between the

assessed one and the results obtained from the

literature, which is 0.15 and 0.26 kg CO2e/kg

lettuce respectively. When it comes to

comparison of these two values with UK

greenhouse production, the emissions are 10 to

17 times higher at the primary production

stage.

41

Figure 41: Compared carbon footprint of

tomato and lettuce

More detailed and with other case studies and

crops compared results can be find in the

carbon footprint report from our contributor

Soil & More International.

12. Strategies to adapt to the

changing climate

After analyzing collected data during the first

field work phase we went back to the

communities and presented preliminary results

of their vulnerability to climate change to

farmer and supply-chain actors and asked them

to think about what could be done and what

adaptation strategies they have in mind.

See detailed approach of conducted workshops

in chapter 5 of Methodology report.

12.1 Farmer and supply-chain

actors suggestions

CHRISTIANA WORKSHOP

During the workshop we formed four groups, in

the following section their individual

recommended adaptation strategies are lined

out:

Group I (institutions)

In this group participated producers from the

Christiana Potato Growers association, the

Forestry Department, Jamaica Agriculture

Society (JAS)

At the beginning they started the brainstorming

to collect all ideas that came to mind:

Survey of the community (Farmer population,

Age of farmers & gender, Crops grown, Size of

farm, Terrain, land usage); marketing; disease /

pests; migration of youth; finance (availability &

access); organizations of farmers (groups);

praedial larceny; training – groups approach;

farm inputs vs. costs; pesticides usage; crops &

Livestock; land preparation (method); quality &

quantity of crops; sustainability & viability;

rainfall patterns.

Group II & III (farmer)

Farmer from Manchester parish

Brainstorming results from farmer’s side:

Reap before the hurricane season; have proper

storage tanks for drought period (store crops);

change the planting season (avoid drought); cut

gutters around the plots (take off excess water);

mulching of yam yields; build green houses (to

protect from rain, frost, diseases); rebuild the

soil (animal manure).

42

In the second part they compiled 3 main

adaptation strategies out of the collected ideas:

Group I (Institutions)

1. Organization of farmers in groups to

give power (strength), sense of

belonging , unity & cooperation

2. Train and educate farmers through

dissemination of information to

influence behavioral change in best

cultural practices and use of adaptable

technology

3. Quality, quantity and sustainability to

enhance long term productivity &

viability to maintain standards and

practices that are environmentally

friendly

Group II (Farmers from Manchester)

1. Change the planting season according

to crops. Reap before hurricane season

2. Have storage tanks for drought period.

Mulching of crops

3. Rebuild and preserve the soil

Group III (Farmers from Manchester)

1. Financing at organizational level to

invest in tools for the community and

land titles

2. Soil Management: Test soils

(organizations) to better respond to

changing climate conditions

3. Information and training about green

housing to produce all year long (RADA

and others)

3 main strategies from Christiana workshop

Training & education

Organization & financing

Adapting to changing seasons and

extreme weather events & long term

focus on sustainable production

KINGSTON WORKSHOP

Group I (institutions)

Participants: Women's resource & outreach

center, Portland 4-H clubs, Ministry of

Agriculture – forestry department

Brainstorming outcome:

Strengthening of RADA/JAS & NGO’s (capacity

building) – Oxfam; organize farmers; sensitize to

effects of climate change; localized workshops

& trainings; how their actions effects climate

change; benefits of agro-forestry (not cutting

down to cultivate vegetables; legislation (laws,

policies), zoning by government; incentives for

farmers doing land husbandry practices;

irrigation system & water catchments;

greenhouse for vegetables; building structure to

support farm organizations (technology

transfer, marketing, financing, training)

In the second they compiled 3 main adaptation

strategies out of the collected ideas:

1. Structuring & capacity building

(farm organizations, RADA & JAS

supported by Oxfam, Public-Private-

Partnerships (PPP’s) including Hotel

industry, marketing & financing)

2. Training & infrastructure development

(sensitizing, land husbandry practices,

Greenhouse, irrigation & water

catchments)

3. Legislation & Policies

( zoning, incentives for agro-forestry)

43

Group II (JAS)

Different authorities from JAS (Jamaica

Agriculture Society)

Outcome and 3 main strategies:

1. Training and education policy:

Awareness building for training at farm

level; group training; practical

demonstrations of practices, e.g. testing

kits

2. Soil MGMT and farming practices:

Soil analysis (determine nutrition,

suitability for crops); preventing

erosions (contour); crop rotation

3. Government policy:

Monitor and stipulate land usage;

Subsidize e.g. soil testing

3 main strategies from Kingston workshop:

Structuring, capacity building & training

Farming practices & infrastructure

development

Legislation & government policies

MONTEGO BAY WORKSHOP

Group I (institutions)

Participants: Representatives from RADA (Rural

Agricultural Development Authority) & JAS

(Jamaica Agriculture Society).

Outcome and 3 main strategies:

1. Policy: Land tenure system (titles);

enforce marketing system; improve

access to credit; infrastructure

development

2. Org. & capacity building: organization of

farmers, focus on solution of similar

problems; awareness building, identify

problems & solutions; training, better

access + useful assets

3. Adaptable technology: Greenhouse /

protected agriculture (shed-house);

irrigation / rain water harvesting;

mechanization; seed banks / crop

diversification; “renewable farming”

(e.g. biogas, ethanol)

Group II (farmer)

Participants: farmer from the St. James Parish

Outcome and 3 main strategies:

1. Soil management (reduce use of

pesticides & weedicides)

2. Greenhouse for seedlings to protect

against excess rainfall & insects

3. Use different planting practices for

different seasons

Group III (farmer)

Participants: farmer from the St. James Parish

Outcome and 3 main strategies:

1. Educating & information sharing

(preserving the watershed areas, soil

conservation practices)

2. Government needs to develop &

implement a national land policy

(finance access)

3. Wider scope of training and feedback

from the relevant agencies (skill training

especially those at risk, technology

wise)

3 main strategies from Montego bay

workshop:

Governmental policy to facilitate

financing & improve marketing

Implementation of sustainable

technologies & practices

Organization, information sharing &

capacity building

44

12.2 From research output

recommended adaptation

strategies

Crop production system

As main result from analyzing fourteen crops on

their biophysical suitability to predict future

climate conditions can be stated, that average

climate-suitability of most common crop is

slightly declining by 9%. While others decrease

their suitability quite seriously by 2050,

especially gingers, a variety of sweet potato

which is more often grown in higher altitudes,

carrots and cabbage. Others are gaining

suitability, like cucumber, banana, zucchini and

tomato (variety often known as salad).

On farmer’s perceptions, in recent year’s

damages caused by extreme weather events

occurred mostly as a direct consequence or

following hurricanes and have affect their

production. To protect crops from this damage

Agroforestry Systems could play an important

role (CIAT, 2010), as well as natural wind

curtains or moving of production systems for

crops like banana to topographically more

protected inland areas, mainly because they get

more suitable in these areas as well.

As agroforestry system for example, the

Quesungual Slash & Mulch Agroforestry System,

coming originally from the southwestern of

Honduras includes the principles: No slash and

burn; permanent soil cover; Minimal

disturbance of soil; efficient use of fertilizer.

Application of these Quesungual principals can

result in significant benefits for farmer:

increased resilience to extreme natural events;

increase in productivity by improving soil and

water; surpluses of mayor staple foods;

availability of firewood; reduced greenhouse

gas emissions and increased carbon

sequestration; conservation of local

biodiversity.

Additionally to some of recently started

initiatives to manage climate risk caused by

extreme weather events could be given more

attention. For example evacuation container for

agricultural inventory and for saving seedlings,

building shared infrastructure and storage

facilities.

3 main strategies from workshops

Education, training, capacity

building, information sharing,

research

Legislation & government policies,

marketing, financing

Infrastructure development,

organization, sustainable

implementation

45

Community’s vulnerability to climate

change

Presented results in chapter nine shows that

farmers in Jamaica are sensitive to climate

change for certain forms of capital. In many

ways the reasons for the low financial capital is

the fact that their income is affected by a

changing climate through lower quality and

quantity. Credit is hardly accessible for most

farmers and certification and alternative

technologies are equally inaccessible.

The result for social capital is dominated by the

absence of any form of organizations from

many parts of the study area. Therefore only a

few households participate in organizations,

however, they do not receive services from

these organizations. Thus, sensitivity is high and

adaptive capacity low.

Human capital is seen to be sensitive as

knowledge about markets is low and most

households do not keep records of their

economic activities.

Adaptation strategies for impacts on

livelihoods

Funding and accompanying of

community organizations

Training and awareness building

of communities for climate

change.

Building alliance along value-chain

Strengthening of local capacity to

countered with adaptation

strategies

Knowledge sharing and best

practice learning from climate

similar areas.

Adaptation strategies for crop

production systems

Crop variety sampling for

improved climate-suitability

Greenhouses for seedling nursery

Evacuation container to protect

them in an emergency

Diversify crops: e.g.: yam vs.

dasheen

Irrigation system to control water

stress

Small, enclosed farming systems

(greenhouse, water reservoir,

renewable energy) to control

harvest season (glut/shortage)

Alternative crops for highly

exposed crops to climate change

Introduce Agroforestry systems:

e.g. Quesungual System

Low carbon agriculture to

mitigate climate change

46

13. Conclusion

In Jamaica the yearly and monthly rainfall will

decrease and the yearly and monthly minimum

and maximum temperatures will increase by

2030 and will continue to increase progressively

by 2050.

The implications are that the distribution of

suitability within the current production areas

will change and for some crops quite seriously

by 2050.

The biggest threat at the moment is the risk for

damage from extreme weather events like

hurricanes. Initiatives exist to manage these

risks but needs more attention and concrete

actions.

Vulnerability of small farmer is very high in

Jamaica because of their high sensitivity and

low adaptive capacity in three of five livelihood

assets (human, social and financial capital)

There are many possibilities to adapt to a

changing climate. The winners will thus be

those who are willing to adapt to an evolving

climate.

Checklist further actions against

climate change in Jamaica

Choose the best adaptation

strategies against climate

change

Learn to manage the risk

associated with climate

variability.

Implement and adjust

adaptation strategies together

with policy makers

Start mitigating to reduce the

adverse affects of climate

change by reducing emissions

47

14. References

Bamber, J., Riva, R. E. M., Vermeersen, B. L. A., & Lebrocq,

A. M. (2004). Reassment of the Potential Sea-Level

Rise from Collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet.

Science, 324, 901-903.

Brown, I. (2011, March). Jamaica can Replace 45% of

Imported food with local Produce. Jamaica

Observer. Kingston. Retrieved from

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/Ja-can-

replace-45--of-imported-food-with-local-produce--

says-Tufton.

Burton, I., Diringer, E., & Smith, J. (2006). ADAPTATION

TO CLIMATE CHANGE: International Policy Options.

CARICOM. (2011). Agriculture Development Profile:

Jamaica. Retrieved March 10, 2011, from

http://www.caricom.org/jsp/community/donor_co

nference_agriculture/agri_profile_jamaica.jsp.

CIAT, (2010) Quesungual Slash and Burn Agroforestry

System: An Eco-Efficient Option for Rural Poor. Cali:

International Center for Tropical Agriculture.

FAO. (2004). FAO and SIDS: Challenges and Emerging

Issues in Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. The

Inter-regional Conference of Small Island

Developing States. (pp. 1-34).

Gamble, D. W., Campbell, D., Allen, T. L., Barker, D., Curtis,

S., Mcgregor, D., et al. (2010). Climate Change,

Drought and Jamaican Agriculture: Local

Knowledge and Climate Records. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers, 1-38.

Hijmans, R. J, S. E Cameron, J. L Parra, P. G Jones, and

Andy Jarvis. 2005. Very high resolution interpolated

climate surfaces for global land areas. International

Journal of Climatology 25, no. 15: 1965-1978.

Hinkel, Jochen. 2011. “Indicators of vulnerability and

adaptive capacity”: Towards a clarification of the

science-policy interface. Global Environmental

Change 21, no. 1 (February): 198-208. doi:

10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.08.002.

IIED. (2011). RV Ag & CC Jamaica IIED-Oxfam Lit & Data

Review Initial Draft Aug 2010+PL.

McBain, H. (2007). Caribbean Tourism and Agriculture:

Linking to Enhance Development and

Competitiveness. Studies and Perspectives,

2(March), 44.

McCarthy, J. (2001). Climate Change 2001: Impacts,

Adaptation, and Vulnerability: Contribution of

Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of

the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Cambridge, UK; New York, USA: Cambridge

University Press.

Meteorological Service of Jamaica. (2011). Climate.

Retrieved April 5, 2011, from

http://www.metservice.gov.jm/temperature.asp.

Mimura, N., Nurse, L., McLean, R., Agard, J., Briguuglio, L.,

& Sem, P. G. (2007). Small Islands. Change (pp. 687-

716).

Nelson, Gerald C, Rosegrant, M. W., Koo, J., Robertson,

Richard, Sulser, T., Zhu, T., et al. (2009). Climate

Change: Impact on Agriculture and Costs of

Adaptation. Food Policy (pp. 1-30).

Ostertag, C., & Rhiney, K. (2010). Stage one of JAMAI

Feasability Study: Initial Proposed Business Model

for JAMAI.

Pennicook, P. (2006). The All-Inclusive Concept:

Improving Benefits to the Jamaican Economy. In K.

Hall & R. Holding (Eds.), Tourism: The Driver of

Change in the Jamaican Economy (pp. 31-38).

Kingston: Ian Randle Publishers.

Rhiney, K. (2009). (Re) defining the Link?: Globalization,

Tourism and the Jamaican Food Network. In D.

McGregor, D. Barker, & D. Dodman (Eds.), Global

Change and Caribbean Vulnerability: Environment,

Economy and Society at Risk? (Vol. 11, pp. 237-

258). Kingston: UWI Press.

Scoones, Ian. 1998. Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A

Framework for Analysis. IDS Working Paper 72.

Simpson, M. C., Scott, D., New, M., Sim, R., Smith, D.,

Harrison, M., et al. (2009). An Overview of

Modelling Climate Change Impacts in the Caribbean

Region with Contribution from the Pacific Region.

Barbados.

Smith, P., Martino, D., Cai, Z., Gwary, D., Janzen, H., Kymar,

P., et al. (2007). Agriculure. Climate Change 2007:

Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the

Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change (pp. 497-540). Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

48

STATIN. (2011). Labour Market & Earnings. Retrieved

April 8, 2011, from

http://statinja.gov.jm/LabourForceByIndustryGrou

p.aspx#.

WTTC. (2011). Travel and Tourism Economic Impact

2011: Jamaica (pp. 1-20). London. Retrieved from

http://www.wttc.org/bin/pdf/original_pdf_file/ja

maica.pdf.