Scholarlink

<p>Smallholder farmers in developing countries are highly vulnerable to climate change. However, there is a lack of empirical studies comparing the effectiveness of agroforestry (AF) and non-agroforestry (NAF) systems in building climate resilience in Ethiopia. This study evaluates the vulnerability and livelihood resilience of AF and NAF farmers using the Household Livelihood Resilience Approach (HLRA). Data were collected from 370 farmers through stratified random sampling. Temperature and rainfall trends were analyzed with the Mann–Kendall test, coefficient of variation, and Sen’s slope estimator. To assess livelihood resilience, the study compared five livelihood capital assets (financial, human, social, physical, and natural) between AF and NAF farmers. Results indicated that both AF and NAF farmers experienced increased temperatures and decreased rainfall over the past 20&#xa0;years, consistent with meteorological data. The exposure score revealed that AF farmers (0.39) had significantly lower exposure to climate change (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.001) compared to NAF farmers (0.50), with less exposure to yield declines, delayed rainfall onset, early rainfall offset, soil erosion, rising input prices, and livestock death. AF farmers (0.39) were also less sensitive (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.05) than NAF farmers (0.49) to factors like soil erodibility, food availability, energy security, and family health. AF farmers exhibited a 39.92% greater resilience in livelihood capital compared to NAF farmers, achieving better scores in financial, human, social, and natural capital. However, no significant difference was found in physical capital (<i>P</i> &gt; 0.05). The Livelihood Vulnerability Index (LVI-IPCC) analysis revealed that AF households experienced lower exposure (0.39), lower sensitivity (0.39), and higher adaptive capacity (0.52), leading to a lower vulnerability score (− 0.05) than NAF households (0.08). These findings highlight the crucial role of agroforestry in enhancing climate resilience, illustrating its potential as a scalable and sustainable adaptation strategy for smallholder farmers in Ethiopia and similar agricultural contexts globally. Policymakers should integrate agroforestry into climate adaptation and rural development strategies, ensuring support through incentives, extension services, and initiatives to build farmers’ capacity.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Agroforestry systems as livelihood resilience to climate change and variability: evidence from central escarpment of Ethiopia

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年6月24日

查看全文
  • Gadisa Demie,
  • Bohdan Lojka

摘要

Smallholder farmers in developing countries are highly vulnerable to climate change. However, there is a lack of empirical studies comparing the effectiveness of agroforestry (AF) and non-agroforestry (NAF) systems in building climate resilience in Ethiopia. This study evaluates the vulnerability and livelihood resilience of AF and NAF farmers using the Household Livelihood Resilience Approach (HLRA). Data were collected from 370 farmers through stratified random sampling. Temperature and rainfall trends were analyzed with the Mann–Kendall test, coefficient of variation, and Sen’s slope estimator. To assess livelihood resilience, the study compared five livelihood capital assets (financial, human, social, physical, and natural) between AF and NAF farmers. Results indicated that both AF and NAF farmers experienced increased temperatures and decreased rainfall over the past 20 years, consistent with meteorological data. The exposure score revealed that AF farmers (0.39) had significantly lower exposure to climate change (P < 0.001) compared to NAF farmers (0.50), with less exposure to yield declines, delayed rainfall onset, early rainfall offset, soil erosion, rising input prices, and livestock death. AF farmers (0.39) were also less sensitive (P < 0.05) than NAF farmers (0.49) to factors like soil erodibility, food availability, energy security, and family health. AF farmers exhibited a 39.92% greater resilience in livelihood capital compared to NAF farmers, achieving better scores in financial, human, social, and natural capital. However, no significant difference was found in physical capital (P > 0.05). The Livelihood Vulnerability Index (LVI-IPCC) analysis revealed that AF households experienced lower exposure (0.39), lower sensitivity (0.39), and higher adaptive capacity (0.52), leading to a lower vulnerability score (− 0.05) than NAF households (0.08). These findings highlight the crucial role of agroforestry in enhancing climate resilience, illustrating its potential as a scalable and sustainable adaptation strategy for smallholder farmers in Ethiopia and similar agricultural contexts globally. Policymakers should integrate agroforestry into climate adaptation and rural development strategies, ensuring support through incentives, extension services, and initiatives to build farmers’ capacity.