annette löf - stockholm resilience centre · exploring how social constructions impact adaptive...
TRANSCRIPT
More than meets the eye?
Exploring how social constructions impact adaptive capacity to climate change
Annette Löf
Natural Resource Management,Governance and Globalisation
Master Thesis 2006:6
More than meets the eye? Exploring how social constructions impact adaptive capacity to climate change
Annette Löf
Natural Resource Management, Governance and Globalisation
Master Thesis 2006:6
Supervisor: Victor Galaz
Co-supervisor: Sara Ahmed
Centre for Transdisciplinary Environmental Research, CTM Stockholm University
www.ctm.su.se
This thesis is written to fulfil the requirements of the Master Programme Natural Resource Management, Governance and Globalisation a transdisciplinary programme held by the Centre for Transdisciplinary Environmental Research, CTM, Stockholm University. The one-year programme has four course models and ends with the writing of a master thesis on a subject related to at least one of the course modules. 1. Philosophy of Sustainability Science Addresses the difficulties and opportunities in transdisciplinary environmental research. In lectures and seminars participants discuss methodological and epistemological issues such as explanations, causality, systems borders, and objectivity. Held by the Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology Course leaders: Agr.Dr Thomas Hahn and Dr. Annika Dahlberg 2. Natural Resource Management and Ecosystem Resilience Focuses on ecosystem capacity to generate life-supporting services, how different management approaches can affect this capacity, as well as which constraints and opportunities are offered by globalisation. Held by the Department of Systems Ecology Course leaders: Prof. Thomas Elmqvist and Dr. Maria Tengö 3. Ecosystem Management: Collaboration in Networks and Organizations Investigates the social capacity to develop adaptive governance including arenas for collaboration and conflict resolution. Held by the Centre for Transdisciplinary Environmental Research Course leaders: AgrDr. Thomas Hahn and Dr. Emily Boyd 4. International Governance of Natural Resource Management Uses a macro-perspective on governance. The actors and social-ecological drivers of international regimes are analysed, using case studies that provide a historical and institutional context. Legal as well as normative perspectives are discussed. Held by the Department of Economic History Course leader: Dr. Elisabeth Corell More information on the programme is available at http://www.ctm.su.se/ngg About The Centre for Transdisciplinary Environmental Research (CTM): CTM aims to catalyse environmental research and promote environmental education across the faculties. CTM is part of Stockholm University and complements the activities of the different academic departments. CTM is also in close cooperation with other Stockholm-based organisations and institutes conducting research in the environmental and sustainable development field. CTM turns science into knowledge by spreading information about natural resources and environmental issues. We also offer seminars and courses on environmental and sustainable development issues. Homepage: http://www.ctm.su.se
More than meets the eye? – Exploring how social constructions impact adaptive capacity to
climate change
Abstract To build adaptive capacity to climate change is one of the most fundamental and important challenges before humanity today. Yet, the knowledge of what determines adaptive capacity and how it is differentiated between groups and individuals is limited. By addressing adaptive capacity from a coupled resilience and social constructivist perspective, this paper is unique. The study explores how the social constructions of gender and caste impact adaptive capacity to climate change. The results show that these social constructions affect adaptive capacity not only by limiting or enabling access to resources, but also by impacting individuals’ social construction of reality. These findings could have important implications for climate change policy as well as for resilience theory, but need to be verified by more extensive research. Nevertheless I argue that resilience theory may well benefit from the addition of a social constructivist component in order to truly be able to address the complex dynamics that characterize social-ecological systems.
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Aim and research questions.......................................................................................... 5
2. Background ........................................................................................................................ 6 2.1 The context of climate change ..................................................................................... 6 2.2 The case: Avaniya village, Gujarat .............................................................................. 8
3. Theoretical context ........................................................................................................... 10 3.1 The essence of resilience theory................................................................................. 11 3.2 Resilience theory on adaptive capacity ...................................................................... 12 3.3 Social constructions – what are they? ........................................................................ 14 3.4 Social constructivism at a glance ............................................................................... 16
4. Method ............................................................................................................................. 18 4.1 Choosing indicators and material and data collection................................................ 18
Figure 1. Conceptual analysis scheme ......................................................................... 19 4.1.2 Caste and gender as social constructions ............................................................ 20 4.1.3 Choosing the site ................................................................................................. 21 4.1.4 The beginning of empirical work ........................................................................ 21 4.1.5 Designing the interviews..................................................................................... 21 4.1.6 Selection of interviewees and conducting the interviews ................................... 22 4.1.7 Validating interview data .................................................................................... 25
4.2 Qualitative data analysis............................................................................................. 26 4.2.1 RQ1 ..................................................................................................................... 26 4.2.2 RQ2 ..................................................................................................................... 27
4.3 Limitations of the study.............................................................................................. 27 5. Results .............................................................................................................................. 28
5.1 General findings ......................................................................................................... 28 5.2 How can the social constructions of gender and caste limit or enhance adaptive capacity to climate change with regard of access to resources and capitals? .................. 30 5.3 Can the social constructions of gender and caste be seen to limit or enhance adaptive capacity to climate change by influencing perceptions of ‘reality’?................................ 39
6. Analysis............................................................................................................................ 43 7. Conclusion........................................................................................................................ 47 8. Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... 49 Appendix Ι............................................................................................................................ 54
Interview list..................................................................................................................... 54
2
1. Introduction
The world in which we live has always been characterized by change and surprise, although,
for some this still seems to be an undisclosed fact. Admittedly or not, humans are an intrinsic
part of a dynamic world system, and have throughout history shaped, adapted to, and co-
evolved together with, a changing environment – most often, though not always, with success
(e.g. Diamond 2005). But the rules are changing and the current situation is placing
fundamentally new demands on the ability of human societies to adapt and recover. Today,
for the first time ever, is human agency the primary driver of global ecological change (MA
2005) while, simultaneously, the rate and scale of global change have reached unprecedented
levels (IGBP 2004). In short – the interdependency and connectedness of social and
ecological systems have never been more apparent. Ideally, one could draw the conclusion
that growing human impact would increase our options to transform and direct global
development. However, the unfolding of global events in the late 20th century rather points to
an increase in the vulnerability of human societies to natural hazards – a development
particularly evident in the world’s most ‘disaster-prone’ region, South Asia (Ariyabandu &
Wickramasinghe 2005). To address this vulnerability, one of the greatest challenges and most
important objectives for humanity today, it is imperative to build, enhance and add to the
understanding of adaptive capacity.
Although there are still those who argue for technical fixes and believe in the supremacy of
man over nature, academia has in the last decades witnessed the proliferation of more
adaptive approaches and sustainability-oriented science (e.g. Kates et al. 2001). Particularly
are the advocates for social-ecological systems approaches, which take uncertainty and
complexity as the starting point (e.g. Berkes & Folke 1998), currently gaining prominence
and increasing influence in policy agendas (Folke 2006). The latter, here labeled ‘resilience
theory’, provides theoretical point of departure in this thesis. Basically, resilience theory
offers one possible ‘scientific’ interpretation of how a sustainable development could be
realized (Folke et al. 2002a, 2002b). The theory’s primary concern is the extremely complex,
adaptive dynamics that characterizes linked social-ecological systems – the natural units of
analysis. Although resilience theory is here referred to as a single theory, this generalization is
tentative, as many internal differences exist. For instance, definitional incoherency still
hampers the applicability of theoretical key concepts, such as resilience and adaptive capacity
(Janssen & Ostrom 2006), and, as pointed out in a recent review article by some of the field’s
3
most prominent researchers: the understanding of social-ecological dynamics is still on a
rudimentary level, wherefore much of current theory should be seen as propositions rather
than hypotheses (Walker et al. 2006).
Resilience theory first developed in population ecology, and even though human-ecological
interactions early on were part of ecosystem analyses1, the theory suffers from a social
science deficit. Although the area is now developing rapidly, it is evident that theories on
ecosystem dynamics are not easily translated onto social-ecological systems. The difference is
the addition of inter-human interactions. Humans are irrational as well as conscious and
strategic actors, with varying preferences, values and worldviews and an ability to reflect
upon their behavior. As already mentioned, human agency is at present the most important
driver of global change. Thus, to further enhance our understanding of social-ecological
system dynamics, explicit focus needs to be directed at human agency in relation to a rapidly
transforming world. Why do we act the way we do? How can we learn to act differently? And
what limits or enhances our capacity to act? While these questions long have been debated in
the humanities and social sciences it is only recently they have been placed in the context of
resilience, wherefore the understanding of, and theory building on, these issues are limited.
Although social-ecological systems are heavily impacted and constricted by many structural
forces and influences, working across spatial and temporal scales (e.g. Young 2002), “it is
important to emphasize one element that many studies of systems dynamics lack: the concept
of agency.” (Moench & Dixit 2004:13 my emphasis)
Climate change has been identified as one of the key, contemporary challenges (e.g. IPCC
2001, MA 2005, ISET 2006), and policy discussions have moved from if to how social-
ecological systems may be affected (e.g. IPCC 2001). It is clear that minimizing carbon-
dioxide emissions is no longer sufficient: “adaptation is a necessary strategy at all scales to
complement climate change mitigation efforts” (IPCC 2001:8). This recent, qualitative shift in
the climate discourse emphasizing social and adaptive aspects alongside technical, mitigation
approaches echoes a core principle in resilience theory: to address today’s complex challenges
from an interlinked social-ecological system perspective. However, as concluded in the
proceedings of a recent international conference on climate change2 “the factors determining
1 In resilience theory, as oppose to many other strands of ecology, humans have not been considered external to ecological systems but as an intrinsic part of, and agent of change in, ecosystem dynamics (Folke 2006). 2 The International Conference on Adaptation to Climate Variability and Change, which I had the good fortune to attend, was held in New Delhi, India, 5-7 January 2006 and was organised by Institute for Social and
4
the adaptive capacity of different groups may be of fundamental importance but are poorly
understood” (ISET 2006:xiv).
Adaptive capacity is, in its pragmatic sense, a straightforward concept – it simply means the
capacity to adapt, taking into account external and internal barriers (i.e. a capacity that can be
realized in practice through either conscious or unconscious adaptation action). It is often,
however, used more complexly with implicit value statements and claims of, for instance,
adaptation to what, the scale of adaptation, what its determinants are, and what is to be
regarded as successful adaptation. On these matters theoretical opinions part, although
generally, much of the attention has been directed at increasing the flow of various capitals –
add financial or physical capital, increase the stock of social and human capital and adaptive
capacity will follow (e.g. IPCC 2001, Moench & Dixit 2004, Walker 2006). Although the
importance of resources and capitals cannot be underestimated, the structures, or social
constructions, that may restrain the ability of some and enable others to make efficient use of
available resources are equally important, but are nevertheless often neglected.
It is against this backdrop this thesis is situated. To enhance the understanding of adaptive
capacity is imperative. While acknowledging the rationale of, and need for, a resilience
perspective, this study addresses adaptive capacity from the unconventional approach of
social constructivism. Although elaborated on much further in the theory section, in summary,
it means a focus on social constructions (as oppose to material) and perceptions of ‘reality’ (as
oppose to an ‘objective reality’). The essence of social constructivism is that any ‘lived
reality’ is just as important to consider as any ‘objective reality’ and that knowledge about
reality is a communally created, social product (Berger & Luckmann 1987).
1.1 Aim and research questions The aim of this thesis is to contribute to further the understanding of adaptive capacity to
climate change by exploring how two social constructions, gender3 and caste, may impact
Environmental Transition (ISET) and Winrock International India with support from United States Environmental Protection Agency. 3 Gender is in feminist research commonly defined as a ‘social construct’ whereas sex is the term used to refer to the biological differences between men and women (Holmberg 2005). Gender construction and gender analysis are usually closely related to power analyses and have been recognised as important tools in assessing differential vulnerability (e.g. Bradshaw 2004). Although caste is hereditary it is not possible to distinguish any ethnic or genetic differences between people belonging to different castes (Oommen 2002). Although caste is more complex in that it is explicitly sanctioned by culture and religion, it is an equally powerful social construction: “caste as a social category is constructed on the basis of imagined attributes but casteism, that is the preferential treatment to one’s fellow caste men and caste discrimination based on the belief that some castes are inferior and others superior, are of great importance” (Oommen 2002:116).
5
adaptive capacity to climate change. Two aspects will be examined; first, how gender and
caste impact access to resources and capitals that could enhance climate adaptation, an
already admittedly important aspect. Second, inspired by social constructivism, if the social
constructions of gender and caste can be seen to influence perceptions of ‘reality’ that in turn
determine which adaptive strategies can be realized. In other words, taking into account
aspects of both external and internal determinants of adaptive capacity. The following two
broad research questions have been used to structure the empirical investigation and findings:
RQ1: How can the social constructions of gender and caste limit or enhance adaptive capacity
to climate change with regard of access to resources and capitals?
RQ2: Can the social constructions of gender and caste be seen to limit or enhance adaptive
capacity to climate change by influencing perceptions of ‘reality’?
The focus here on the social construction of gender is motivated as gender (i) is a universal
construct (though contextually specific), (ii) has been recognized as a determinant of
vulnerability to climate extremes (Mustafa 2003, Bradshaw 2004, Ahmed 2005), and (iii)
because few empirical studies on adaptive capacity and vulnerability to climate change
disaggregate the household as a unit (e.g. Ariyabandu & Wickramasinghe 2005). The focus
on caste is motivated as: (i) caste has been identified as a determinant of disparity yet without
being fully analyzed (Deshpande 2001), and (ii) on pragmatic grounds, as caste is a
particularly strong socio-cultural construction in the region where the study took place. Thus,
if social constructions do impact adaptive capacity it is likely to be demonstrated by this case.
The overall significance of the study is easily motivated, both empirically and theoretically, as
it answers to the need evoked in the climate change discourse of investigating differential
aspects of adaptive capacity, as well as to the social science deficit in resilience theory by
framing adaptive capacity to climate change from a social constructivist perspective.
2. Background 2.1 The context of climate change While we simply have no choice but to adapt to climate change, it is uncertain who will need
to adapt to what and when, or how capacity is differentiated (e.g. IPCC 2001, Adger &
Vincent 2004), which makes this an interesting case for a study on adaptive capacity. In the
climate change discourse, adaptive capacity has been defined as the property of a system,
such as a community or a household, to adjust its behavior and system functions “in order to
6
expand its coping range under existing climate variability, or future climate conditions”
(Brooks & Adger 2004). Thus it means not only to cope, but also to take advantage of climate
change related opportunities (e.g. IPCC 2001). Here, climate change is defined as “any
change in climate over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human
activity” (IPCC 2001:3). Although natural variation is an inherent component of the climate
system, the latest report (Third Assessment Report 2001) issued by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) presents concluding evidence that the global climate is
significantly changing and that the negative impacts, which can largely be derived from the
continued burning of fossil fuels, are likely to multiply in the decades to come. Limited
understanding of climate feedbacks, inherent complexity and variability, and the impossibility
of controlling future human action and hence the effects of it, render climate change impacts
highly uncertain and impossible to forecast in detail. The case of climate change thus provides
telling support for approaches such as resilience theory, in which uncertainty and complexity
are inherently assumed.
Yet, some general trends of change have been identified. First, impacts of climate change are,
and will continuously be, different as well as differential on all scales (IPCC 2001). In terms
of exposure, it is projected that “developing countries stand to experience the most serious
impacts from climate change” (Huq 2005:3) and moreover “also have the lowest capacity to
adapt to them” (ibid.). The latter assumption of ‘developing’ countries’ relatively lower level
of adaptive capacity is based on the idea that adaptive capacity is determined primarily by
access to resources. On a country- or macro-level scale, this seems relevant and credible, as
restricted financial resources will limit possibilities to plan and implement strategic climate
adaptation. A lack of proactive, planned, and public adaptation makes autonomous adaptation,
i.e. the adaptive strategies people are pursuing, and are able to pursue on the local level, even
more important. But at lower scale-levels, access to financial resources is not necessarily the
most important enabling factor for adaptation action (Adger & Vincent 2004). “Autonomous
adaptations tend to be incremental and ad hoc, take multiple forms, occur in response to
multiple stimuli (usually involving a particular catalyst, rarely climate alone), and are
constrained by economic, social, technological, institutional and political conditions.”
(Schneider & Sarukhan, in IPCC 2001:89). Poor and marginalized groups, such as indigenous
peoples, women, elders and children are routinely identified as the most vulnerable and
having the least capacity to adapt (IPCC 2001; Adger et al. 2003, Huq 2005; Moench 2005),
not only to climate change but to all sorts of development challenges. While both appealing to
7
common sense as well as directing much needed attention to existing structural inequalities, I
claim that an uncritical embracement of such broad generalizations is likely to handicap
policy efficiency and deeper analyses by excluding other possible important factors. Worst-
case scenario, it becomes a principle for treating the symptoms rather than the underlying
cause. Vulnerability to climate change should therefore, just as adaptive capacity, be
contextually analyzed and understood.
The second general trend is that impacts will be of largely two types: (a) increased intensity
and occurrence of sudden disturbances and hazards (which are often perceived of as ‘natural
disasters’4), and (b) slowly changing variables (such as long-term changes in temperature and
precipitation). Although the impacts of slowly changing variables will likely be considerable,
it is the sudden disturbances, or point pressures, that directly and immediately will affect
development and livelihood strategies (IPCC 2001, Brooks & Adger 2004, Moench 2005).
2.2 The case: Avaniya village, Gujarat This case study on adaptive capacity to climate change is situated in India; a country
identified by the IPCC as in the high-end risk of exposure to climate change and alone
projected to hold almost a fourth of the world’s population by the year 2050 (Todaro & Smith
2003). The empirical work was conducted in Avaniya, a medium-size village (population app.
3000, 480 households (Utthan 2000)), in southern Bhavnagar district, in rural and coastal
Gujarat, a western Indian state. Although Gujarat, compared to other states is considered
relatively rich and ‘developed’, it has
been identified as one of India’s most
vulnerable regions to climate change,
particularly the coastal areas. The
reasons are biophysical exposure as
well as other external stressors (such
as negative impacts of globalization
and high dependency on agricultural
export). (O’Brien et al. 2004). All in
all, stressors in the region are plentiful
– droughts, floods, cyclones and
4 A natural event or hazard only becomes a ‘natural disaster’ when communities lack the ability to respond efficiently. A disaster is thus a social product rather than a natural condition, and can thus be mitigated or even avoided (e.g. Wisner et al. 2004).
8
earthquakes are frequently occurring, ecological degradation (e.g. groundwater overdraft, loss
of fertile soil and salinization) is extensive, and Gujarat is also plagued by severe ethnic and
religious tensions5 (e.g. Utthan 2003, Oxfam 2005). As in most rural Indian areas, caste
traditions are strong. The Indian caste system is however extremely complex; it has evolved
over thousands of years and can be perceived of as a functional and normative web of
connections, values and attributes. Basically, caste can be divided into four main groups,
Varna, and the sub-groups are called Jatis, of which there are literally thousands (Deshpande
2001). According to the Hindu traditional view, caste was closely related to profession and
served largely functional purposes, allowing for high mobility within and between castes
depending on skill. Over time however caste developed into an inherited trait, severely
limiting any kind of up-ward mobility (Oommen 2002). Although Gujarat has been referred to
as “the entrepreneurial hub of India” (Metha & Joshi 2002) and as such considered a hotbed
for high caste mobility (ibid.), there are other studies that, on the contrary, point to extensive
intercaste disparities and caste rigidity in Gujarat (Deshpande 2001) – an interesting
contradiction, which will be related to and addressed further in the results section.
Avaniya village is situated on the coast, just by the road connecting the two cities Bhavnagar
and Ghogha. Bhavnagar is a city with close to a million inhabitants and being only 10km
away, with buses running on a fairly regular basis, it offers a good commuting alternative for
work or school. The village is notoriously known for its poor water supplies and high content
of chloride in, and salinization of, the grounds (Utthan 2000). It has been part of an
international water supply and sanitation scheme (WASMO) for the past eight years and has
for the progress made been considered a ‘success-village’6. Farming and farm labor have
traditionally been the main sources of income, although alternative livelihoods such as labor
in, and setting up diamond cutting factories, are growing in popularity7. Many households
also keep livestock, such as buffaloes and goats, as a secondary source of livelihood. Women
have an outspoken domestic role, and are not expected to perform public functions. Purdah, a
5 Gujarat has become infamous for the ethno-religious riots of February 2002 when a Moslem mob was accused of setting a train carriage full of Hindu pilgrimages on fire, causing the death of fifty-eight people. This unleashed “a wave of retaliatory violence on the minority Moslem population in the region, leaving up to 2,000 dead and 100,000 homeless. Under the indulgent gaze of the state government, and against a backdrop of ransacked houses desecrated temples, at least 250 women and girls were brutally gang-raped and burned alive.” (On-line article by Ruth Baldwin, The Nation http://www.thenation.com.doc/20020930/baldwin20020916 ). Three years later Gujarat still struggles with the riot’s aftermath and many displaced Moslems still live in urban slum areas. 6 Pipeline water is now available in most households and the groundwater level, as well as water levels in wells, has been raised through the construction of small-scale check dams (Utthan 2003). 7 Result from the village workshop, see further the method section.
9
practice in which women are not allowed outside the house, is also practiced to quite some
extent in the region (Bassi 2005), particularly relating to the higher caste Darbar.
Darbar has traditionally been the ruling caste and are in majority in the village (≈43%),
followed by the middle caste Koli (≈36%) (Utthan 2000). The rest of the population belongs
to the Bharwad, Devipujaks, Kharak and Jatt castes (the latter a Moslem caste with only one
family in the village) (ibid.). Living conditions differ a lot in the village – some families live
in huts without electricity and water (sometimes even without four walls) whereas others live
in solidly constructed, several-story houses with TVs and fridges. The village provides
education in Gujarati (local tongue) up to 7th standard (13 years of age) in separate boys’ and
girls’ schools. Bhavnagar is geographically the closest alternative to continue on to high
school. Two rivers run through the village but are dry for 9-10 months of the year. During
monsoon however there is extensive problems with the rivers flooding and communication to
the village areas beyond the rivers is cut off.
In the climate change discourse there is a general agreement that “in the short term […] the
most likely changes will be in the frequency and severity of familiar recurrent hazards. The
capacity to adjust to such changes in frequency severity – and to support systems so that they
can adapt to the altered levels of hazard – will be critical.” (Brooks & Adger 2004:169; cf.
IPCC 2001, Huq 2005, Moench 2005, ISET 2006). Translated on coastal Gujarat and
Avaniya, it means that the likely impacts and most tangible effects of climate change can be
extrapolated from the climate extremes already occurring today, i.e., in this case: increased
intensity and frequency of floods, droughts and cyclones, and as a result, further reduced
availability and reliability of water resources.
3. Theoretical context
Thus far, the overall context and relevance of the study has been presented, whereas this
following section plunges deeper into the theoretical context of the two distinctly different
discourses that have inspired this study – resilience theory and social constructivism. The
ambition is to bring clarity to what resilience theory entails. But also to point to weaknesses in
the approach, to hypothesize how a social constructive perspective could contribute, and why
a combination of the two perspectives could be potentially difficult. To my knowledge, these
theories have not been coupled in analyses before.
10
3.1 The essence of resilience theory
Resilience can be defined as the capacity to cope with stress and the ability to reorganize after
disturbance without losing fundamental system functions. Resilience theory, on the other
hand, refers to the much larger and still expanding theoretical framework that has developed
from and around the resilience concept. When referring to this framework the terms resilience
discourse, resilience theory and resilience perspective will be used interchangeably.
Resilience as a concept first originated within ecology in early 1970s. Back then, it was an
alternative model for explaining ecosystem dynamics based on the idea of multiple basins of
attraction rather than the, at the time, hegemonic perception of ecosystems in stable single-
equilibrium states (Holling 1973; for a historical review of resilience see Folke 2006). In
essence it brought about the understanding that ecosystems do not behave linearly, i.e. they do
not respond to gradual change in a gradual way. A system can be exposed to stress or
disturbance during a long period of time, and although there may not be any immediately
noticeable effects, it is likely nevertheless to result in a loss of ecosystem resilience (the
capacity to adapt to future disturbances). When in such a state, even a small stress or
disturbance could result in abrupt and qualitative ecosystem change (possibly irreversible
(Scheffer et al. 2001)), and with likely negative consequences for the people and economies
depending on the ecosystem and the services it provides.
A basic logic behind resilience theory is that humans are dependent on ecosystems for their
development and survival, just as they are an inherent part of ecosystem dynamics. As a
consequence, neither social nor environmental problems can be addressed in isolation from
the interdependent social-ecological context in which they occur, which in turn makes
coupled, or linked, social-ecological systems (SES) the natural units of analysis. Although this
may seem evident, the perspective has long been ignored in both policy and research, which
in turn has caused many of the problems facing us today. A second logic, or theoretical pillar,
is that SES are complex adaptive systems. As such they are in constant flux, i.e. they are
dynamic, not stable. Complex adaptive systems are self-organizing; adaptation and interaction
between the system’s many comprising parts occur autonomously and the process outcome,
the emergent property, is larger than the sum of its parts. The more components and cross-
scale connections a system is comprised of, the more interactions will occur, resulting in an
increase of complexity and uncertainty of the process outcome (for a basic review on complex
adaptive systems theory see Manson 2000 or Naeslund 2004). Basically, what it means is that
11
change, uncertainty and complexity are inherent features of SES (Berkes & Folke, 1998;
Gunderson & Holling, 2002). Thus, ecological and social systems must be addressed in
tandem, are furthermore impossible to control and extremely difficult and complex to
manage. This makes social-ecological resilience a key – yet challenging – concept. As
humans are strategic and deliberate actors and thus can plan and direct their action, social-
ecological resilience is defined slightly different from ecosystem resilience:
“(a) the magnitude of shock that the system can absorb and remain within a given state, (b)
the degree to which the system is capable of self-organization, and (c) the degree to which the
system can build capacity for learning and adaptation.” (Folke et al., 2002b:7).
The key components here are learning and adaptation. Consequently, social-ecological
resilience can be seen as the flip-side of vulnerability (Kasperson & Kasperson, 2001) and
thus be regarded both as a dynamic emergent property of, and the normative management
objective for, social-ecological systems.
3.2 Resilience theory on adaptive capacity
With the above in mind, it is not surprising that adaptive capacity has been defined as the
ability to “manage resilience” (Walker et al. 2006). I.e. slightly different from the more
pragmatic definition on adaptive capacity presented here earlier, as it includes more explicit
theoretical preferences and value-statements. First, it contains a statement on what is to be
regarded as successful adaptation (i.e. to enhance system resilience). Second, it includes a
time-dimension, as social-ecological resilience by definition cannot be achieved in single
moment in time but is a long-term, on-going process. Finally it implies a systems-perspective
on adaptive capacity; focus is directed at the system rather than individuals.
Folke and others claim along similar lines that adaptive capacity is an intrinsic component of
resilience in SES (simply no resilience without adaptive capacity). Transformability, i.e. the
ability to actively transform and make use of inherent change and surprise as windows of
opportunity for consciously shifting development trajectories, has been a particularly
emphasized important component of adaptive capacity (e.g. Folke et al. 2002a, Folke 2006).
Which is similar from the climate change discourse.
What then, are, according to resilience theory, the important determinants of adaptive
capacity? On a general account it is claimed that resilience increases as diversity increases and
12
that favorable conditions for building adaptive capacity are created when there is system
learning; social and collective memory; social and institutional diversity and redundancy;
flexibility; access to resources and information; and interpretation and monitoring of
ecosystem feedbacks (e.g. Folke et al. 2002a, Folke et al. 2003). Drawing further on the
closely related bulk of literature on adaptive co-management (which, according to the
resilience discourse is the suggested management approach) focus becomes directed towards
the importance of institutions and collective agency. It has, however, also been suggested that
leadership, personal traits, combinations of different groups of actors (such as knowledge
generators, stewards, visionaries etc.), social networks and trust also are prerequisites for
building and enhancing adaptive capacity (Folke et al. 2005, Folke 2006). “The combination
of social roles of agent/actor and team/actor groups as part of social memory as well as their
diversity, overlapping functions, and redundancy provide resilience for reorganization, allow
for novelty and, thereby enhance adaptive capacity in the face of disturbance and crisis”
(Folke et al. 2005:455). All these claims, largely derived from a number of case studies, have
been proven relevant, but together they present a diffuse and rather complex picture. Where
does one begin? The obvious drawback of having a concept with too many determinants and
preconditions is that its applicability and explanatory strength decreases – i.e. it becomes
difficult to generalize from, and thus fears the risk of describing nothing but the particular,
and, furthermore, important causal mechanisms may become undetectable.
In essence, according to the resilience discourse, both resilience and adaptive capacity are
regarded as system properties, as well as normative ideals, and both are dependent on and
determined by a number of factors. The systems perspective of resilience theory is applied on
different scales, from the local to the global, but seldom on lower scale levels such as the
household or the individual. However, obviously individuals matter and are important to
consider. As one of the outspoken aims of resilience theory is to present a potential roadmap
towards sustainable development (Folke et al. 2002a), it is not only sustainability or
development per se that matters, but also how benefits and costs are shared and distributed
within the system. When adaptive capacity is exclusively perceived of in a systemic sense
these differential aspects are lost, internal power dynamics and inequalities become neglected,
and more importantly, the question remains on whose individual expense social-ecological
resilience is being managed. Thus, it paradoxically seems that the very strength of resilience
theory, the social-ecological systems perspective, can also be a weakness. This provides at
least a hypothetical reason why a social constructivist perspective – which focuses explicitly
13
on the individual, individual agency, and how individuals are part of creating and shaping
reality – could be seen as an important complement to resilience theory.
Although here it should be mentioned that, in a recent attempt to present adaptive capacity
somewhat more coherently and empirically translatable, Walker et al. (2006) do attempt to
apply the concept on the individual level. The attempt is rather traditional as they claim that
adaptive capacity is determined primarily by access to capital – natural, financial and social8,
and the institutional system (ibid.). As an alternative I would suggest simply to place the
pragmatic definition of adaptive capacity in the context of resilience, i.e. defining adaptive
capacity as the ability to adapt to foreseeable and unforeseeable events, taking into account
external and internal determinants. This way the basic logic of the resilience discourse is
drawn upon, without exclusively focusing on the macro-scale or ending up with uncritical
generalizations. The addition of the word unforeseeable in the definition implies (according to
the theoretical logic, e.g. (Folke et al. 2005, Walker et al. 2006)) that diversity, flexibility and
learning are key characteristics of adaptive capacity, as “dealing with uncertainty and
complexity in social-ecological systems is profoundly dependent on the ability of natural
resource users to learn and adapt from ecological surprises and crises.” (Galaz 2005:567).
Although limited in scope, and obviously not doing the discourse complete justice, it allows
for an analysis of adaptive capacity on macro- as well as individual and household scales.
With the possibility to make differential aspects explicit, it also enables for the analysis of
resilience as “a layered concept: ranging from the individual to the household, community,
ethnic group and even global level” (Glavovic et al. 2003:3).
3.3 Social constructions – what are they? Although social constructions and social constructivism are closely related, they need not be
linked by definition; it is possible to talk of social constructions without automatically
approaching it from a social constructivist platform (although it is impossible to do the
reverse) 9. When it comes to social constructions (or social constructs, the terms are often
used synonymously) the terrain is contested and ambiguous. Definitions differ depending on
what one claims is being constructed. In a review on the topic Sergio Sismondo identifies at
least four qualitatively different uses: “(a) the construction, through the interplay of actors, of
8 Social capital is an essentially contested concept, taken to include a number of variables such as trust, reciprocity, social networks etc., basically what makes societies function. 9 Berger and Luckmann (1966) ‘founded’ social constructivism, and as some claim, also of the concept social constructions (Sismondo 1993). However, since then both concepts have been developed and used differently and should therefore not be uncritically linked.
14
institutions, including knowledge, methodologies, fields, habits, and regulative ideals; (b) the
constructions by scientists of theories and accounts, in the sense that these are structures that
rest upon bases of data and observations; (c) the construction, through material intervention,
of artifacts in the laboratory; and (d) the construction, in the neo-Kantian sense, of the objects
of thought and representation.” (Sismondo 1993:516).
This thesis deals largely with an assessment of the first category of the four i.e. if, and if so
how, humans, individually and collectively, create and uphold social constructions that direct,
limit and/or enable behavior as well as influence perceptions of reality. For instance, it is not
only the social construction of gender per se that is of interest, but also how that social
construction is coupled with a construction of reality. This is a deliberate conceptualization to
further emphasize the links to social constructivism. Still however, there is a need to point out
what differentiates social constructions from norms and institutions, concepts that are
frequently used in for instance resilience theory.
Definitions of norms and institutions also vary considerably according to discipline and user.
Elinor Ostrom, a political scientist with a longstanding reputation in the field, define and
distinguish norms and institutions in the following way: “norms are shared and internalized
understandings by those involved about the “do’s and don’ts” involved in particular types of
situations”, whereas “the key aspect of all institutions are shared rules about what actions
individuals must take, must not take, or are permitted to take in particular settings” (Ostrom et
al. 2002:5). Thus, both norms and institutions are seen as constricting and directing human
behavior but institutions in a ‘stronger’ sense as they imply formal and informal rules rather
than just agreed upon understandings. They also seem to be limited in scope in the sense that
they apply to “particular settings” rather than being all-pervasive. It is quite common also that
norms are defined as part of institutions (e.g. North 1990). Although open for discussion, it is
my contention that the differences between institutions and norms, on the one hand, and social
constructions on the other are that (a) norms and institutions are limited in scale and scope
whereas social constructions are of a more general nature, and (b) although norms and
institutions constrict human behavior in the sense of “do’s, don’ts, ‘allowed’ and ‘not
allowed’ they do not necessarily influence perceptions of reality or actions and strategies that
are possible to pursue (as compared to preferably pursued). However, the separation between
15
these concepts is elusive and rather serves theoretical and analytical purposes than practical as
they are most often intimately linked as well as interdependent10.
Some practical examples derived from the fieldwork can however illustrate these differences
and place them in a relevant context. I define gender and caste as social constructions and as
such different from institutions and norms. In comparison, a norm in the context of gender
and caste could be that women of particular castes do not work outside the home once
married. An institution could be that women are not entitled to inherit land, whether the
institution is formalized or not. However the social construction of gender and caste includes
all these norms and institutions, they pervade all aspects of daily life, and determine the social
roles and positions that, as a social constructivist would claim, to a large extent influence both
perceptions of reality and the incessant social construction of reality. Focusing on social
constructions rather than limiting analyses to norms and institutions, could therefore result in
a more thorough exploration and deeper understanding of contextual limitations.
3.4 Social constructivism at a glance Social constructions, social constructivism, constructivism and social constructionism are all
terms being used more or less rigorously and interchangeably, with more or less defined
meaning (e.g. Sismondo 1993, Burningham 1998). “That there is no single social
constructionist position is now more obvious than ever.” (Stam 2001:294). In attempts to
separate between constructionism and constructivism (with or without the ‘social’ as a prefix),
Hacking (1999) and Demeritt (2001) define ‘contructionist’ approaches as attributable to the
varying social sciences’ uses, mostly on an epistemological level, and ‘constructivist’ to the
philosophical debate focused more on ontological (and epistemological) claims11. However,
this ‘disciplinary’ categorization seems not to be generally accepted nor used. Instead I have
chosen to use one term consistently – social constructivism. Maybe a choice that can be
criticized on the grounds of neglecting important differences, but as this is no theoretical in-
depth study, the limitation is valid as it minimizes potential confusion for the reader and helps
to focus on the general traits rather than getting lost in a definitional quagmire.
The essence of social constructivism is that knowledge of reality by definition is socially
constructed; “social constructionism rejects the idea that knowledge can be divorced from
10 For instance, institutions and institutionalisation are frequently used by Berger and Luckmann (1987), which further points to the concepts’ theoretical interrelatedness. 11 An ontological position refers to views about reality (what is real, what is not) whereas epistemology refers to knowledge about that reality (how do we know ‘reality’) (e.g. Stoker 1997:13).
16
social experience and access objectively an external reality” (Jones 2002:248). That there is
no objective knowledge of reality is an idea that has been around as long as any, although a
historical review would be too extensive to fit here. On a short note, it dates as far back as the
ancient Greeks, over history by Marx and Kant, to name just a few. Discourse-wise it is now
strongly associated with postmodernist thoughts, but the concept of a social construction of
reality was popularized by Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann in their influential work “The
social construction of reality – A treatise in the sociology of knowledge” (1966).
Berger and Luckmann’s main point is basically that there is no getting around the fact that
“reality is socially constructed and [it should be] analyzed the process in which this occurs”
(Berger & Luckmann 1987:13). They define ‘reality’ “as a quality appertaining to phenomena
that we recognize as having a being independent of our own volition (we cannot ‘wish them
away’), and […] ‘knowledge’ as the certainty that phenomenon are real and that they possess
specific characteristics” (ibid.). As true sociologists they contend that it is not up to the
researcher to assess the validity of any claims pertaining to ‘reality’; what is of real interest is
how ‘reality’ is constructed and how perceptions differ (op cit.). The logic behind, as well as
implications of, this claim has been nicely put by Oommen “the perceptions people hold about
social reality are equally important as social fact, in successfully tackling social problems”
(2002:116).
However, the theory’s basic premise has often lead social constructivists ending up in head-on
battles with ontological realists and anti-relativists. But a quick review of the critique of, and
responses from, social constructivism provides a rather consensual account: although social
constructivists all agree that ‘reality’ is epistemologically constructed (i.e. we cannot know
‘objective reality’) few, only the radical or strong social constructivists, take on a relativist
ontological stand (i.e. there is no ‘objective reality’) (Burningham 1998, Burningham &
Cooper 1999, Jones 2002, Nightingale & Cromby 2002).
Similarly, the question here is not if climate change exists in any ‘objective sense of reality’,
but to dig deep into the ‘subjective senses of climate change reality’. The rationale behind this
is simply an analogy of that above; any ‘lived subjective climate reality’ is just as real and
will have equally strong implications for agency and adaptation as will any ‘objective reality’.
It is still however controversial to approach issues such as climate change from a social
constructivist perspective. Environmentalists in general have voiced loud critique against the
uses of social constructivist approaches (Burningham 1998, Jones 2002). The logic employed
17
is the same as in the more general critique and due to ontological assumptions that “social
constructionists do not acknowledge the reality and independent existence of environmental
problems, and thus the approach cannot contribute to attempts to respond to those problems”
(Burningham 1998:537). The reply has yet again been that constructivists by definition do not
take a particular ontological stand and can therefore not be exempted from investigating
environmental problems on those grounds. On the contrary, seeing the complexity and value
dimensions of social-ecological problems such as climate change, it can be argued that a
social constructivist perspective is needed as a supposition-free methodology to uncover the
values and assumptions that are part of the problem (e.g. Burningham 1998, Demeritt 2002,
Jones 2002). “The existence and character of environmental problems, as well as to how best
to address them, are often contested. […] However, delineating the competing constructions
of a problem and understanding how these constructions have emerged and are maintained
can play an important part in resolving environmental disputes and moving towards the
development of solutions acceptable to all.” (Burningham 1998:559-560)
4. Method
This study on adaptive capacity to climate change is a qualitative case study based on
interviews. The aim is to explore how the social constructions of gender and caste can impact
adaptive capacity to climate change, focusing on both external and internal aspects by looking
at access to resources as well as a possible social construction of ‘reality’.
4.1 Choosing indicators and material and data collection On a general account it can be said that finding valid indicators of adaptive capacity is
difficult “as adaptive capacity is not directly measurable” (Brooks & Adger 2004:170). One
approach that previously has been used to assess adaptive capacity is to observe the
adaptation strategies already occurring at the local level (Adger & Kelly 1999, IPCC 2001,
Brooks & Adger 2004, Moench 2005). This method provides information on what options are
available in practice and preferable in the local context. For example, “experience with
adaptation to climate variability and extremes can be drawn upon to develop appropriate
strategies for adapting to anticipated climate change” (IPCC 2001:8) and “the main purpose of
participatory vulnerability assessments is to identify adaptation strategies that are feasible and
practical in communities” (Smit & Wandel 2006:1). Another somewhat more structural
approach that is commonly suggested, is to focus on institutional and governance aspects
and/or the various capitals available (e.g. IPCC 2001, Walker 2006). However both of these
18
approaches lack explanations on why people act the way they do, what hinders or enables
adaptation and if they would like to pursue other strategies that are currently not available.
The indicators one chooses will ultimately depend on how the concept is defined and what
aspects are emphasized. Thus the first step toward finding indicators of adaptive capacity has
thus already been made, as adaptive capacity has been defined as the ability to adapt to
foreseeable and unforeseeable events, taking into account both external and internal
determinants. In order to further translate the concept empirically, I have chosen to combine
the above-mentioned approaches (i.e. what strategies are already being pursued in response to
climate extremes, and what capitals (economic, physical, natural, social and human) are
needed to implement these strategies) with probing into the perceptions and feelings about
climate extremes, vulnerability and adaptive strategies. Drawing on the insights from
resilience theory: diversity, flexibility and learning will be used as criteria for analyzing
adaptive capacity to unforeseeable events. Climate change has in turn been operationalized
into three variables, floods, droughts and cyclones (see Background section).
Figure 1. Conceptual analysis scheme
Resources and capitals
External determinants
ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
Adaptive strategies
Attitudes and perceptions
Internal determinants
Financial
Physical
Natural
Human
Social
Vulnerability
Adaptation
Learning
Flexibility
’Reality’
Current Past
To assess adaptive capacity once ‘operationalized’, the technique used has primarily been
interviewing, semi-structured and structured (Kvale 1996). Although this is not a novel
strategy it is easily motivated as “the development of local-level indicators will benefit from
19
stakeholder participation: local people are generally the best equipped to identify factors that
facilitate and constrain their own adaptation” (Brooks & Adger 2004:171). To use qualitative
research interviewing as a main technique was a natural choice as it “attempts to understand
the world from the subjects’ points of view, to unfold the meaning of peoples’ experiences”
(Kvale 1996:1). Seeing in particular that this thesis aims at getting at differential aspects of
adaptive capacity and perceptions about reality “it is in fact a strength of the interview
conversation to capture the multitude of subjects’ views of a theme and to picture a manifold
and controversial human world” (Kvale 1996:7).
4.1.2 Caste and gender as social constructions A justification of the choice of caste as a one of two social constructions being examined in
the study is needed. Choosing a case where social constructions are likely to be particularly
strong, could introduce research bias. Had the dependent variable been social constructions
rather than adaptive capacity as is in this case, the research design had also been flawed and
indeterminate. However the choice of caste here is an intentional selection on the explanatory
variable and is therefore not biased. The only potential problem with selecting on the
explanatory variable is that generalization becomes more difficult. However, as gender is also
examined this becomes less of a problem. (cf. King et al. 1994:129-139)
In the result and analysis sections I have categorized castes in three different groups: low,
middle and high castes. The categorization is, on the one hand, subjective but little more than
a simplified version of how caste is differentiated in the local context of Avaniya. Although
the caste scale is highly correlated with wealth, its basis is heritage and ancestry. Recalling
from the background section, the majority of people in the village belong to Darbar and Koli,
which are labeled high and middle caste respectively. Although some of the Koli families are
relatively well off compared to the mean, Kolis in general, are in several of the interviews
with Darbar families referred to as ‘the poorer’. Devipujaks (low caste) previously belonged
to the so called ‘untouchables’ (untouchability is since half a century forbidden but is still
practiced in rural areas to some extent (Oommen 2002)) and in the local caste system they are
still at the bottom of the scale. Two other castes have also been included among ‘low castes’,
Bharwad and Jatt. Both Jatts and Bharwads by tradition work with husbandry or as
pastoralists; they are in minority and are considered ‘lower’ than Kolis because of their
profession12. Jatt is Moslem caste (there was only one Jatt family in the entire village), which
12 Part of this information was also retrieved from an unpublished sociological report on the area: http://www.sociology.ed.ac.uk.sas.papers/panel20_tambs.rtf accessed 2006-07-15
20
renders them a lower status, and does not formally count as a scheduled caste, but as a
scheduled tribe, though firmly embedded in the caste system.
4.1.3 Choosing the site The village where the study was conducted was chosen on both pragmatic and strategic basis.
The fieldwork was carried out in cooperation with an NGO, Utthan13, and was hence
geographically restricted to the area in which they are operating. The strategic criteria used for
selecting the site were a) climate traits, i.e. both a drought and flood prone site, and close
enough to the coast to be exposed to cyclones, and b) size, i.e. small enough to be able to do a
comprehensive study. Furthermore, the village Avaniya was also selected on the basis of
being one of few villages where a Disaster Preparedness Committee was in place, which lead
me to assume higher than average levels of adaptation and preparedness, and at best a
possibility of finding a ‘success case’ to draw on for further research.
4.1.4 The beginning of empirical work The empirical work started out with field visits to build rapport and to get a sense of social-
ecological dynamics. I had formal and informal conversations with Utthan-staff about
Avaniya, as well as with their local contacts in the village. In order to achieve a greater
understanding of village dynamics and to present myself, I organized a village workshop
(informed by participatory rural appraisal techniques)14 to discuss with villagers, both men
and women, young and old, of different castes and professions, on the broad themes: climate
impact today and historically; projected climate impacts for the region; and perceptions of the
differential aspects of current vulnerability and adaptive capacity (i.e. from their perspective
who are most vulnerable and what do they themselves think are the most important resources
and skills needed for successful adaptation).
4.1.5 Designing the interviews The first interview set that was conducted was semi-structured, or open-ended interviews,
developed from the conceptual scheme presented in figure 1. As it is difficult to assess
adaptive capacity without taking vulnerability into account, it was designed to assess the
broader themes of a) current vulnerability to climate change, b) current adaptive strategies, c) 13 Utthan is an Indian NGO (non-governmental organization) active in the state of Gujarat working towards initiating sustainable processes of empowerment among disadvantaged communities with special attention provided to women. The organization was founded in 1981 and has been active in the Bhavnagar district for the past decade. For more information about Utthan see: http://www.ngoindia.com/utthan/14 To get as broad a participation as possible and interaction with all partakers at the workshop I used for instance participatory techniques of drawing and scaling (Mukherjee 1994) not to exclude those illiterate. The flows of information were mutual as this opportunity was seized not only to understand their perceptions, but also to inform the participants on climate change and to stress the need of preparedness.
21
access to economic, physical, natural, social and human capital and which capital and
resources were considered important, d) the respondents’ problem perceptions of the village at
large and climate events in particular, and e) the respondents’ perceptions of vulnerability and
adaptive capacity and attitude on learning and flexibility.
Interview questions were then developed for each of these themes. For example, questions
regarding capitals focused on the access to various capitals and if any capitals important in
general, and for adapting to floods, droughts and cyclones in particular, were lacking; if they
were part of any organizations and received information on climate related matters; and if
strategies were shared with the community at large. Questions on adaptive strategies were
mainly focused on what the interviewees were doing to adapt to these phenomena and why;
how this was learnt, what they had been doing in the past, what they could do but chose not to
etc. Questions aimed at assessing internal determinants were focused on problem and reality
perceptions, their attitude towards learning and changing livelihoods strategies, what
interviewees thought of their own and others’ vulnerability and capacity to adapt. The more
detailed design of the questions was influenced by the information gathered from the
workshop, Utthan conversations and village visits.
After having conducted the first set of interviews, a second, more structured, interview-set
was designed to follow up on key themes but allowing for a larger number of observations,
than continuing deep interviewing would have. Although, particularly regarding the first set,
semi-structured is a key word as the outcomes of the different interviews were highly
dependent on, and influenced by, the interviewees.
4.1.6 Selection of interviewees and conducting the interviews The selection of the interviewees was strategic as “random selection and assignment have
serious limitations in small-n research” (King et al. 1994:115). Guided by the results from the
workshop on the villagers’ perceptions of climate change vulnerability and adaptive
capacity15, the Disaster Preparedness Committee and Water Committee (Pani Samiti) of the
village made a list with the ten most vulnerable households (least capacity to adapt) and ten
least vulnerable (highest capacity to adapt) in the village. Caste, type of household (for
instance woman-headed or widow-household) and location in the village were specified as
15 What stood out most clearly from the workshop discussions was that vulnerability to climate change impacts seemed to be highly correlated with type of house (raw house or strongly constructed), location of house in the village, and poverty. Adaptive capacity was related to education, wealth, diversity of livelihoods, and smaller-sized families.
22
further tools for selection. Interviewees were then selected on the basis of getting as broad
representation as possible, i.e. from all castes, all locations and different types of households.
Particular attention was given to households labeled ‘not vulnerable’ but that were situated in
a ‘vulnerable’ location in the village, as this was likely to imply a higher adaptive capacity.
The deep interviews took between 1 and 4 hours to conduct, with a mean around 2 ½ hours. In
total, 13 deep interviews in the village and 1 interview with the area representative from
Utthan were conducted. As the language spoken is Gujarati I had a female translator16 along
with me at all the field visits and all interviews, doing simultaneous translation. All interviews
were recorded on mp3-player and all but one took place at the interviewees’ homes (or
temporary homes as in two cases) to get as much information as possible on their relative
standard of living. All interviews were transcribed (as close to the interview occasion as
possible). During the interview I tried to stay as neutral as possible (i.e. not to start any
normative discussions with the interviewees unless they explicitly asked me questions) but
after the interviews we often had informal conversations where we could discuss more freely
on value-statements (such women should not learn to swim or read) and where I could inform
on for instance their rights, what facilities and services they were entitled to from the village
but that they did not know of etc. The fieldwork took place from late January to mid-March,
with most interviews conducted in mid-February to mid-March. This time of the year is
summer (i.e. no rain wherefore lands and rivers are dry), which possibly could have affected
the answers to questions on floods and droughts (if the land is dry it may be easier to
remember other dry periods as oppose to floods in monsoon).
One particular objective was to conduct interviews with women only, to be sure to get to
important gender differences as men tended to dominate the interviews when present (a rough
estimation is that men spoke 4/5 of the time in the gender-mixed interviews). This turned out
to be a problem as many women were reluctant to give their opinions when their men were
not at home, or when no such reluctance existed and the interview started, male members of
the household often came home, joined in and took over. To find privacy was difficult overall;
usually during the interviews there were many people present (neighbors, children, and others
that could not fight their curiosity), the number of people present ranged from an average of 5
up to 20. Even attempts to vary the weekdays and time for the deep interviews (to better suit
the women and less the men) were without success, and considering the male domination in
16 Venu was a PhD-student in Comparative English literature from Bhavnagar.
23
the mixed interviews, the deep interview selection is, from a gender perspective, therefore
somewhat biased. Neither when judging on the caste variable is the selection optimal seeing
that there are twice as many middle-caste interviews as there are low-caste interviews. One
reason for this is that the list the selection was based on, was dominated by Koli and Darbar
households, which in turn could be explained by their dominance in the village in real
numbers (2/3 of the population).
Table 1. Deep interviews (in village)
Low caste Middle caste High caste Total
Male 0 1 1 2
Female 0 2 0 2
Mixed 3 3 3 9
Total 3 6 4 13
When the deep interviews started feeling saturated, i.e. not much new surfaced during the
interviews, a preliminary analysis of the results was made and the more structured interview
set developed. I carried out 15 more structured interviews (though neither these interviews
were rigorously structured), which on average took 45 minutes (ranging from 25 minutes to
70 minutes). These interviews were not recorded but transcribed on the spot. The selection of
interviewees was continuously strategic but based mostly on visual impressions rather than
pre-existing demographic knowledge of the households. A more thorough and informed
selection had been preferable but was not possible due to time constraints. To balance the
previous bias, the primary objective was to get interviews with women only – and this time it
proved easier as the interviews were shorter (the men of the households simply did not make
it back to the house in time if they tried). As location and type of house had indeed shown to
be important factors for climate change vulnerability, these criteria were again used in the
selection. As it was not possible to use caste directly as a selection criterion (one cannot ‘see’
which caste a person belongs to), I tried also here selecting on location to indirectly get a
broad caste sample (as caste and location of house is strongly correlated). However, once the
interviews started I found in several cases where I thought the family would belong to a lower
caste, that they in fact belonged the lower ends of a middle caste. Unfortunately due to time
constrictions I could not make up for this selection bias.
24
Table 2. Structured interviews (in village)
Low caste Middle caste High caste Total
Male 0 3 1 4
Female 2 2 3 7
Mixed 0 3 1 4
Total 2 8 5 15
In total, the material selection is comprehensive and includes over 50 hours of recorded
interviews and an additional 50 pages of notes taken directly. In relation to the population of
Avaniya, most castes are included, albeit unevenly, and approximately 10% of the village
households have been heard at either interviews or the workshop.
Table 3. All interviews Low caste Middle caste High caste Other* Total
Male 0 4 2 - 6
Female 2 4 3 1 10
Mixed 3 6 4 - 13
Total 5 14 9 1 29
* Female area representative from Utthan
Each interview has been coded, i.e. given a number from 1-29. The code list, complemented
with some basic household information (caste, gender, location of house) is included in
Appendix I.
4.1.7 Validating interview data Validating data in the sense of triangulating it with other methods or secondary sources to get
support for claims or interpretations is not the only important validation process, although a
valuable one when the selection is small or biased. When it comes to interview data,
validation is important to make sure that comments or claims have not been misinterpreted,
but also to provide the interviewee with another chance to elaborate on themes and points the
researcher single out as important. Here such validation occurred through a number of ways;
important questions were asked several times during the interview (slightly rephrased),
responses were repeated and asked if interpreted correctly, and some time after the interview
(between five and 10 days) I returned to the interviewees and held informal conversations and
asked them about key points and any ambiguities I had found while transcribing.
25
4.2 Qualitative data analysis
The aim of a qualitative data analysis is not to present a statistical or a quantitative measure,
or in this case neither to compare the relative importance of social constructions with access
to capitals in regard to adaptive capacity to climate change. The aim is to get to the deeper
meanings – the qualitative aspects of the interview data.
Thus the analysis has been based on the recorded and transcribed conversations, but also other
general impressions and feelings; I have tried to get to ‘what is said between the lines’ rather
than looking only at concrete verbal formulations. For example, one respondent answered the
question if he felt vulnerable to floods with ‘not particularly’ – however when probed deeper
into, it became clear that he had a very difficult history with floods and had little or no
capacity to cope “only God can decide if I will live or die the next flood17”. His reason for
answering ‘not particularly’ was that he felt vulnerable to most events, floods included.
Throughout the analysis I have looked for the occurrence of themes or statements (both within
and between interviews) and the more frequent something has been addressed the more
important I have deemed this finding. In the material I have also particularly searched for
contrasting opinions.
4.2.1 RQ1 The first general assessment (what came out of the workshop, the interviews and
conversations at large) was to see which resources or capitals that were seen as important to
be able to adapt to climate change in this local context. Secondly I looked at the access to
these capitals from a gender and caste perspective. As much as possible I tried to find
instances where it could be made certain that the explaining variable was caste or gender
respectively, rather than a variable such as poverty, location or type of house. However this
was difficult as these are commonly interdependent and correlated.
Resources have been broadly categorized in five separate (yet overlapping) categories. The
classification is more a heuristic tool aimed at providing an easier outline rather than being
important in itself (as the purpose is not to assess the relative importance of any category
against the others). The five capital categories are a) financial (money, insurances, formal and
informal loans, sources of credit), b) physical (type of house, location of house, wells, birth
certificates, warning system), c) natural (land, firewood, fodder, grain, water) d) social 17 From interview (7), for more information see list in the appendix.
26
(networks, influence, trust of Panchayat, other and own caste community, participation in
formal and informal organizations), and e) human (skills, education). On a secondary basis
these were assessed against the criteria of diversity and flexibility (if for instance livelihood or
adaptation is dependent on only one source, this would imply a relatively lower level of
adaptive capacity than if there are many sources to draw from).
4.2.2 RQ2 To assess the second research question I searched the material for comments such as: ‘we
cannot’, ‘I cannot’, ‘this is not possible’, ‘how could I do that’ etc. as well as for utterances
about reality. A particular objective was to find instances where resources were available to
pursue a strategy but the respondent nonetheless felt it was ‘non-pursuable’. To make my case
here I have also asked about peoples’ perceptions about ‘real climate events’, floods, droughts
and cyclones. Seeing that it is still a relatively small society, both geographically and
population-wise, it could be assumed that people would share at least similar perceptions
about climate events, for instance if droughts and floods occur and how often. Important
aspects of adaptive capacity that have been assessed here are also the attitudes towards
adaptation and learning – if positive, flexible and open for new ideas, it likely implies a higher
capacity to deal with both foreseeable and unforeseeable events.
4.3 Limitations of the study A part from the limitations that have already been mentioned, there are number of other
concerns. The biggest one relates to how much that actually can be generalized from a single
and highly specific case. However, as this study is explorative in the sense that it brings
together two different and not previously coupled discourses, to start with one case is
recommendable. Although this means that the implications of the study on the theoretical
level will be mere propositions, it is equally true that all theoretical development must start
somewhere. Perhaps it can be further justified by recalling that resilience theory in itself is in
a ‘propositional’ stage and it is actually the case that much of the theory has been developed
from results on single case studies (for instance the case Kristianstad Vattenrike has had great
impact for the theoretical development) (e.g. Olsson et al. 2004). It does however remain a
serious weakness. Second it must be stated that as the selection of interviewees is biased,
particularly there being too few low caste households interviewed, it is not possible to make
any certain claims either on the local scale. However, interesting findings can still be made
and used as a basis for further research. Also, just to make a note of it; translator influence is a
classic bias in doing interview studies. Furthermore, how I was introduced and presented in
27
the village has been shown to impact results; respondents have a tendency to want to ‘answer
right’ or ‘strategic’ depending on their situation and how they situate the researcher. For
instance, it is likely that some people exaggerated their situation and poverty because I was
introduced as a partner to Utthan that has been involved (though only to a small extent) in
relief projects. Another source of bias is that once in the village, I was introduced to other
villagers by the local NGO-contacts, equally the local politicians. These people turned out to
be quite corrupt and it is possible that interviewees who saw us as ‘connected’ felt reluctant to
speak freely. Pointing in the opposite direction however is that many did voice severe
criticism and claims of local political corruption.
5. Results
The results are presented in three sections; first one with the general findings and thereafter
one section on each of the two research questions. After quotes or references to
interviews/interviewees their respective code is given e.g. (6, 17, 24). However, sometimes
names and other basic information are also stated directly after a quote.
5.1 General findings The interviews and the workshop showed that among the households included in the study,
there was a widespread concern about floods, droughts and cyclones. Of the 28 responding
households 13 worried over or feared floods, 20 worried over or feared droughts, and 24
worried over or feared cyclones. The households that directly expressed that they had
experienced big losses (such as house collapse, forced to migrate, or severe accidents) were 9
due to floods, 3 due to droughts (as impacts of droughts are more indirect and long-term this
is likely reflected in the relatively low number) and 11 due to cyclones. Whereas almost all
responding households feared cyclones, it was mainly those involved with animal husbandry
and the land-owning farmers (who exclusively are of high or middle caste, and of which a
majority of the 13 included in the study lived in the Old town) that expressed concern over
droughts whereas the landless laborers (all of which live in more flood exposed areas) tended
to worry more about floods.
Despite the obvious fear of these familiarly reoccurring phenomena, only two (10, 15) of the
28 households included in the study stated that they had adaptive strategies to deal with
cyclones. In both cases they used retrofitting techniques to make their houses cyclone-proof.
None of the households belonging to any of the lower castes expressed any strategies to deal
28
with either floods or cyclones. In total, only 12 of 28 households expressed any explicit
strategies to deal with floods. It was interesting to note that only five (all Kolis) of the 13
households that identified themselves as vulnerable to floods were among these 12. The most
common strategy was to construct solid houses and to use cement rather than mud (2, 10, 12,
15, 22). Other strategies ranged from purchasing plastic sheets “so that we can cover our
things if the roof leaks” (21) and providing “solid shelter for the harvested grain” (24), to
building houses on heights or pillars (13, 26, 28)18. Two households built walls to protect
their houses (1, 11), and one household built a wall to protect their farm:
“To prepare for floods we construct a wall near our house so that the water cannot come inside. […] We dig and take sand from here, from the farm, and then we bring it to our home and construct it so that water cannot come inside. In advance we bring some bricks and then if the water is increasing we build such a wall.” (Ravjibhai, male, farm manager, Koli, living in Jodphara)
– Is there any other action you take before a flood? Is there anything you do in flood season that you do not do in other seasons?
– No such preparations are needed, if it rains heavily, like cats and dogs we can think something like that. We don’t do preparations.
– And what do you do when it is raining heavily do you secure any property? – We don’t do anything in the house. – Do you do anything in the farm? – We construct a solid fencing between two farms. Our farms and other farms.
(3, Jayabhai, male, land-owning farmer, Koli, living in Old town)
The bulk of adaptation to floods and cyclones seemed to occur ad-hoc as a majority, when
asked explicitly, answered in line with the following quotes: “we do nothing before, we just
run away when the water comes from everywhere” (28, Shakorubhai, male farm laborer, Koli,
living in Jodphara), “We do nothing. On the spot we just run away from our houses. Run here
and there is all we can do, we don’t even wait for our children.” (17, Shanuben, female
laborer, Devipujak). Even the village Disaster Preparedness Committee (DPC) focused on
mitigation rather than preparation. The following extract from a conversation with a DPC-
member provides a telling example:
- What is your ordinary work to prepare for disasters? 18 Two Koli households stated employing this strategy, one successfully and one without the intended effect: “We built our house on a height but it is still knee-high with water” (Savhjibjhai, male, farm labourer, Koli, living in Jodphara); and “Both my brothers families are living here near my house and they got some problems in the last flood. The water came into their houses up to knee-high level. So I thought, when I would build my house I will build it on a height. And I have taken much care while constructing this home. My house is very good, two years ago at the cyclone I called up my whole family and told them to stay here because my home is so safe. […] It is built on columns; it is kind of retrofitting.” (Batukbhai, male, farmer and owner of diamond-cutting factory, Koli, living in Navapura)
29
- Nothing. - How often do you meet? - Every month. - What do you talk about at these meetings? - We talk about preparations. - Give me an example of a preparation. - When there was an earthquake we used to tell people that there can be an earthquake
at any time, so be prepared and keep your things together at a safe place so that you can run away if you wish to. We used to tell these things in earthquake times.
- Is there anything you have done to prepare for floods or cyclones? - It is not fixed, a flood can come at any time so what can we prepare?
(Pravinsihn, male, land-owning farmer, Darbar, living in the Old town)
For droughts it was mainly the land-owning Koli and Darbar farmers that had outspoken
strategies (13 of 15). All expressed more or less the same adaptive strategies, i.e. stocking
food, grains and fodder that could last up until a year. Four of them (of which three were
Koli) also mentioned livelihood diversification as a drought strategy (i.e. not to rely solely on
farming). The only two land-owning farming households that could present no strategies was
a Darbar widow that owned one acre of land but whose brother’s in law decided over the land
(16) and a Darbar housewife who was not sure if her husband had any strategies or not (29).
Although, all farmers with a larger land holding are automatically insured by their crop-loans
and several mentioned this as a necessary security.
When comparing overall responses from the interviews, a diversification of livelihood did not
immediately correlate with a perception of the household’s lesser vulnerability or more
adaptive capacity. On the contrary, the households that had the largest diversification of
livelihoods also expressed higher levels of vulnerability in general. To own land for farming
combined with employment in diamond cutting was a common combination and seemed to
lessen, at least the current, perceptions of vulnerability as well as lived negative impacts
considerably. This finding is interesting because it shows that it is not livelihood
diversification per se, but rather the quality of diversity that matters.
5.2 How can the social constructions of gender and caste limit or enhance adaptive capacity to climate change with regard of access to resources and capitals? Without stating the obvious, the findings from this study support the already researched claim
that women and lower castes are made more vulnerable due to a restricted access to resources
(e.g. Mustafa 2003, Bradshaw 2004, Ahmed 2005, Ariyabandu & Wickramasinghe 2005). It
was however interesting to note that of all interviews, only in four cases were women
30
explicitly identified as being more vulnerable or having lesser capacity to adapt to floods,
droughts or cyclones. All others stated that women and men have the same capacity and
opportunities to deal with these events “it is all the same, we all sit together” (23, Koli, male
laborer), “it is the same, there is no difference between men and women” (27, Koli, female
laborer). In the case of caste however, the opposite was true; almost all used caste a
differentiating category to separate between high and low vulnerability, and high and low
capacity to adapt. This was made obvious not least at the workshop and from the list prepared
by the village communities where none of the households that were identified as least
vulnerable (high capacity to adapt), belonged to any of the lower castes, just as none of the
most vulnerable households (low capacity to adapt), belonged to the higher Darbar caste. Koli
households were however mentioned in both categories. This is an indication of that the social
construction of caste is admittedly correlated with disparity whereas the social construction of
gender is on a less conscious level – albeit with equally real consequences. This is true
because, implicitly, both men and women of all castes (though not in all interviews)
mentioned or pointed to various ways in which the social construction of gender impede
adaptive capacity in regard to access to capital, as this extract shows:
– There is no difference in how women and men are affected. – Is there any difference in how women and men can prepare? – Only that women would do the household work and men would work in the
farm to save the seeds. – […] What is the best strategy to deal with floods, droughts and cyclones? – Male members would know. We don’t have that responsibility on our
shoulders so how would we know? Male members do the work, we are not suppose to go out so we don’t know.
– Is there skill or practice you would like to learn? – Stitching, but women are not allowed to go out to learn anything.
(29, Nainaba, female, housewife, Darbar, living in Old Town)
Economic capital: Although not the only important resource, it cannot be disputed that
financial resources, and cash in particular are important sources for basic livelihood resilience
and for adapting to climate events and coping with the unexpected (e.g. Moench 2005). From
a gender perspective, women’s access to financial capital was however limited; in the cases
where households were mixed (26 of the 28 cases, 2 widows of the four widows included in
the study were living on their own), men controlled the economy completely (i.e. women had
no access to money or ability to decide on household purchases) in 10 cases (of which 8 were
Darbar). In 4 households had women outspoken access to smaller amounts of cash if they first
told their husband how they would use it and he then sanctioned it. Only in 5 of the 26
31
household interviews, was it explicitly stated that men and women together decided on how to
spend money and had a shared access to household cash (1 (Koli), 10 (Koli), 13 (Darbar), 22
(Koli), 24 (Karak Patel), 27 (Koli)). “Women decide over money, we tell our husbands what
to buy […] unless the matter is serious, then our men will decide” (1, Valuben, Koli, laborer).
Another interesting finding was that the poorest households I came across in the village (a
subjective judgment based on their relative standard of living, e.g. clothes, food and property,
dependency on others’ good will for their survival, and the stories told during the interviews)
were the two single-widow households, one Koli and the other Bharwad. Overall social
security for widows in the village seemed to be limited; none of the four widows I met
received full or even part of what they said was their entitled pensions; they claimed that
systematic corruption deprived them of their legal right to pension, but they all felt powerless
and thought they could do nothing about it (5, 16, 18, 27).
“I’m a widow but I’m not getting any pension. I’m not entitled to; our village is dominated by Darbar so they never give us any pension. But whom can I tell? The government is giving pension money but it is not reaching us. The local Panchayat is not giving it.” (27, Lakuben, Koli laborer).
“Panchayat and the employees of the government posted here are very corrupt; they are taking my widow pension of 500rs/month. There are many widows who never get their pensions, no one gets all of it. I have told the Panchayat many times to help me get my pension but they are not doing anything.” (16, Mayaben, Darbar, cook at the school).
“As I am a widow I get a pension. I get 400rs/month and some others get 500rs/month. I don’t know why it is different. But it is not fixed; sometimes I get even less and some months I get nothing at all. Everyday I have to go ask for 10-20rs in credit to buy food, sometimes the shopkeeper gives and sometimes he doesn’t. The Panchayat people are not doing good work. I have told them but they are not doing anything.” (18, Punaben, Bharwad)
Although I have searched for secondary sources on the topic I have not been able to find any
official documents stating that all widows are entitled to a 500rs widow pension/month as was
claimed by the widows. When informally approaching Panchayat-members on the topic, they
simply stated: “everyone in the village gets what they are entitled to”.
Both accessibility of formal and informal loans, and sources of credit were identified in the
interviews (as has been in other related research, see e.g. Moench & Dixit 2004) as important
in dealing with climate events, as well as to prepare for them. It was positive to discover that
all households interviewed stated that they had access to some sort of credit sources for food
(either in the village or in Bhavnagar city) in case of community or household crises.
32
However once again, women’s access was more limited (though not in the same extent as
above) as women in six households had no personal knowledge on how to access these
sources, e.g. “I don’t know, but our men most be knowing. They must be going, but they
don’t inform us ladies.” (29, Nainaba, Darbar, housewife).
Whereas the land-owning Koli families and all Darbar households had enough security to
apply for formal loans at the bank or from the farming cooperative (and all farm-owners did
on yearly regular basis) the poorer Koli families and lower castes households lacked this
opportunity due to a lack of security or documentation. “The bank won’t lend us. We don’t
have any birth certificates or any kind of document to put behind the loan so that is why they
won’t give it. It is an official government kind of work and they need evidence that we don’t
have.” (8, Mustafa Ibrahim, Jatt). However, all households but one included in the study had
informal ways of getting smaller loans from caste fellows, their employer or from the richer
Darbar families. The exception was again one of the single-living widows, but it was also
seemingly a conscious decision:
– Can you ever borrow money from friends or anyone else? – No. How could I pay back? That’s why I never borrow. Never. – Do you have anything you could sell? – Nothing at all. I buy some things, some food from the shop for the cost of only
5-10rs. And if anyone would ask to buy firewood then I would sell to them to get money.
(5, Hariben, Koli, widow)
Recently a women’s savings group started in the village, but only two of the 28 households
had ever heard of it and when informally talking to an organizing member of the group it was
thus far only open for Darbar women.
Physical and natural capital: There was a clear correlation between high caste and flood-
protected houses, due to both location (no one living in the Old village reported any
vulnerability to floods or previous losses due to floods) and stronger constructions. The
following historical anecdote illustrates the role that caste can play in limiting access to safe
homes:
Other castes than Darbar were living in this area [the old town] but as they grew in population we told them to migrate to another place and live there. We helped them to select the place, but they went themselves. As their population was increasing they also found that it was not good for them to live here with us. They wanted to live freely, in freedom. And they were feeling that if they were living with Darbar then some day they would have to work for us Darbar. Now they are living in Jodphara and Navapura. They
33
wanted to live freely, individually and independent. But they are doing nothing, just taking rest. Lazy people they are. (Jilubha, farmer, Darbar elder, living in Old Town)
Thus, caste as a social construction indirectly led to an increase in vulnerability for the people
that had to move from the Old village to much more exposed areas in the village, i.e. Jodphara
and Navapura. Particularly the residents of Jodphara become isolated during floods in
monsoon as the area is surrounded by two rivers; the people residing there are then cut off
from the rest of the village where schools, shops and medical care is located, as well as from
the main road, the only way in and out of the village.
A part from living in strong houses in good geographical locations, it was clearly stated that
owning farmland enhanced the capacity to adapt to climate change impacts. For instance,
there was a clear correlation between landowning and self-sufficiency (which could possibly
be labeled ‘social response diversity’). Four households of the interviewed 28 were very much
relying on one external source of help to be able to deal with the climate events (such as
specific credit, loans, gifts, government aid etc.), (i.e. they could not cope without it, ‘without
it we would die’), and six more households regarded one source as particularly important. Of
these not one owned land. Of all households included in the study there were fifteen
landowners, and their holdings ranged from one acre to almost 20 acres in size. According to
Utthan, landowning is concentrated in the hands of Darbar – it is estimated that Darbar
families own 70% of the land around Avaniya (informal interview Utthan) and the majority of
the rest belongs to upper class Kolis. The interview data would support this claim as all
Darbar households included in the study owned land, and the remaining landowning
households were Kolis, with the exception of two; the Jatt family who had grazing land for
their husbandry, and a Devipujak salt worker who had a small holding:
“Actually we live here [in the salt farm] but in the monsoon we cannot work here so we shift to Avaniya. So we don’t own this house, it belongs to this people, the salt farm, and we shift to our own house during monsoon. And I have three acres of land in Avaniya, but we are six brothers so we share the land. I get only few lumps of the land to live there, nothing more. We are six brothers, what can we do? Two brothers sow this year some crop, then next year another two brothers sow the crop and then another 2 brothers… It is on rotation basis.” (9, Hirabhai)
Rural Indian women, and poor women in particular are systematically discriminated
compared to men when it comes to owning private property (c.f. Agarwal 1997). In Gujarat
and Avaniya for instance, women do not inherit or own land. “Everything will go to my son,
34
nothing for my daughter. […] It is our tradition that daughters before and after marriage never
ask for anything.” (12, PM Gohil, Darbar, land-owning farmer). ”When I became a widow I
moved back to the village and my father gave me a small piece of land for security. But now
my brothers have taken the land, it is not mine any longer and they don’t help me.” (16,
Mayaben, Darbar widow). The relative disadvantage can also be exemplified by the hardship
experienced by Hariben, one of the single-living widows:
– When my house collapsed in last monsoon the government came here and they noted my position and the cost of my house to give me money. But it is now in the government office here in Avaniya and nobody is giving it to me. Nobody has come here to give me the money. […] Once my son came here, he went to the office to get the money but then the government people were not there. After that my son never appeared here again to go to the office to get the money.
– Why can you not try to get the money yourself? – On the paper it says the signature of my son, so I cannot go. But actually they
should give the money to me, not to my son. It is my house. But they are not doing this.
(5, Hariben, Koli, widow)
A large marriage dowry is often the only security women have (which is also supported by the
fact that more than a third of all households in the study (10) stated marriages as their primary
household expense and one of few cases where the family was forced to take loan).
– Could anything force you to take a loan? – Marriage only, for a marriage we have to take a loan or borrow money.
(22,Ghitaben, female, Koli farm laborer).
However, when facing large expenses such as children’s’ marriages or natural calamities,
such as floods and droughts, many households are forced to sell their belongings, and the
things they sell first are often the female ornaments, leaving the women without own personal
security. “I use to wear ornaments before, but as my children got married I had to sell them or
give them all. Everything we had to sell and give them for their marriage [she points to empty
holes for earrings and nose-rings, her bare neck, arms and feet].” (5, Hariben, Koli, widow).
Few people in the village have private wells (Utthan 2000), and in the only ones included in
this study belonged to Darbar or upper class Koli. Whereas no Darbar families express any
problems with water reliability or quality, many of the Kolis and Devipujaks point to water
irregularity and severe problems with finding water when the communal supply from the
overhead tank stops:
35
– We have a water connection in the house, but sometimes it doesn’t appear, or in very less quantity and slow.
– If the water is not coming, what do you do? – In the farm area. Always it is the women that go. It is hard work. We carry as
much as we can, on our heads, sometimes 15-20 kilos. If the owner says no, ‘you cannot collect water from here’ we have to go again very far. It depends on the owners’ of the farms mood. […] If we go in numbers, continuously for two to three days, then they will say no after two days. ‘You are not allowed to fetch water from here. Go somewhere else’. Because the connection of the water is the owner’s connection, it is their personal property, so they can say no.
(1, Valuben, Koli, farm laborer)
Firewood, which is an essential resource in everyday life for most rural households in India
(Agarwal 1997) and also can be used an alternative source of income, was the only natural
capital that was mentioned often in the interviews. Only three of the 28 households had CNG
(compressed natural gas), two Darbar and one Koli household. However, firewood had
become increasingly more difficult to find as more and more wasteland in the village area had
been, or was going to be, converted into cropland. This places a heavy burden particularly on
women, as they are the ones collecting the wood (only in one household of the study did men
help in collecting firewood). Whereas the lower caste families expressed the greatest concern,
the only households claiming not having any problem at all finding firewood were the land-
owning farmers and their farm partners, or farm managers, that are allowed to take firewood
from and around the fields of the landholding.
Social capital: Social capital, albeit complex is considered a particularly important
component of adaptation. Trust, social networks and leadership are particularly emphasized
components (Folke et al. 2005, Walker et al. 2006). Overall, the level of trust in the village
seemed to be high, both within and between caste communities. Despite the relatively hard
lives many lead, it was common (occurred in more than half of the interviews) with
statements like the following: “The village is like our mother and father.” (4, Khatabhai,
laborer, Devipujak), “As I am born and brought up here I find everything with Avaniya good.
It is my temple. I like this place, I want to be here only.” (7, Ghuzabhai, pond watchman,
Devipujak). Even the most exposed widow who had to beg and rely on everyday credit to get
by, expressed a great sense of trust from her caste fellows (18). 16 households of the 26 cases
in which the information was available, explicitly stated a high trust also in the Panchayat, the
local government, (despite that four of these households paradoxically also claimed that the
Panchayat was not doing a good job), and an additional three households moderately trusted
36
the Panchayat. It was consistently the lower and middle caste households that had no trust in
the Panchayat. Another finding from the interviews was that the village had many social,
political and economic, formal and informal organizations (e.g. local government, committees
and groups, farmers cooperatives). However, none of the lower caste families in the study
were part of any organization (although as reminder, the selection was limited) and neither
were any of the women that were formally interviewed. Of the eight households that were
part, or members of any organization, or regularly attended meetings of any kind, five were
Darbar (and three of these were the only cases in the study where a household was member in
several organizations, i.e. both the Panchayat, Pani Samiti and the Disaster Preparedness
Committee) and the other three were Koli. Although Indian law states that women, minorities
and ‘previous untouchables’ are to be given seats in the Panchayat (Agarwal 1997) it was hard
to find evidence that this was working in practice. For instance, the current Sarpanch (head of
local government) was a Darbar lady, but her role in practice can be questioned as only two of
all respondents knew that she was currently the Sarpanch, the most important local political
person. “The Sarpanch of our village is Kishorbhai. He is Darbar, Darbar people are powerful
people.”
– Our Sarpanch, the president of the Panchayat, she is a lady. And as she cannot work hard, everything is upon me, I have to do the work.
– Why is it that she cannot fulfill her duties as the Sarpanch? – Maybe she is not trained, or she doesn’t have that much of skill. It is because it
is compulsory, on a rotation basis we must have a female Sarpanch. That’s why she is there. Otherwise she would not have been the Sarpanch.
(12, PM Gohil, Vice Sarpanch, farmer, Darbar, living in Old Town)
Another interesting finding was that the problem perceptions of Darbar families corresponded
very well with the local government agenda and the external actor Utthan’s problem
perception of Avaniya. It did not correspond at all however, with the problem perspective
presented by low or middle caste families. This could imply a lack of good leadership, as
there are no common visions and that despite formal rotational basis of political positions, the
actual leadership-role remains concentrated in the hands of more or less one family19. Which
in turn would have negative consequences also for diversity.
Human capital: According to statistics for the region the male literacy rate is close to 60%,
whereas for women the figure barely reaches 40% (Bassi 2005). This was supported by my
19 The Gohils (the most influential Darbar ’family’) were for instance represented in all village committees and the local government. PM Gohil, the vice Sarpanch was also the most important person for external contacts with for instance Utthan.
37
findings where results were consistently lower for women than for men. In the 18 cases where
it was applicable (not all households knew or wanted to answer all questions and sometimes
the questions asked provided other answers than anticipated), less than half (8) of the women
were literate whereas the figure for men was more than ¾ (13 of 17). Two thirds of the
women had attended school or sent their girl children to school, compared to 4/5 for men and
boys. Whereas Koli and lower caste women often can neither read nor write, have little or no
education, Darbar women are often equally or more educated than their male counterparts.
“The girls go more to school than the boys. The girls are more intelligent and educated, and
they are better at studying.” (2, Jilubha, Darbar elder). But figures on literacy and schooling
only tell part of the truth, as once Darbar women marry, they become more restricted than is
the case with lower caste women: “I would love to teach, give tuition classes, but my husband
says no. I have almost completed my last year of diploma in commerce. […] But my husband
says no, he says ‘you don’t have to work, you don’t have to do anything’. He doesn’t like.”
(Kiranba, Darbar, newly married).
If you ask me about my community especially [i.e. Darbar] the women never work, they never even go out. It is just the men in our community that work. Our women only work at the house, to cook and look after the house, nothing else. The Chief Minister of Gujarat gave a speech that women should be liberated and should have the right to live freely, not having to hide their faces with clothes, whether Moslem or Hindu. That is no good. He should not speak in that way; women should have some courtesy and manner and at least some restriction to move around. (Jilubha, Darbar elder)
All Darbar households included in the study with one exception supported this; Darbar
women are not allowed to work or learn any new skills (even though some of them very much
wanted so). The exception was the Darbar widow: “It is only my sons that work. But I am a
cook at the school, but it is for pocket money only. Even though my son is telling no, then
even I go, because it is tedious to sit alone without any work. I keep on thinking: I am a
widow, not a good birth, what can I do on this earth? To stop this thinking I involve in this
kind of work, even though my son says no.” (16, Mayaben, Darbar widow).
However, inequalities in individual freedom were not only present amongst the Darbar caste:
– Will you teach your children to read and write? – Yes we will. – All the children, also the girls? – No not the girls. – You don’t think that girls might also need to read and write, read signs for
instance?
38
– Boys go to the city, maybe they will have some job there, but we won’t allow the girls to go there so we don’t find it important to teach them. Or for them to study.
– […] Do you know how to swim? – Male members know, but not the females. – Would it be a good thing to also teach the girls? – God will save them, and how could a whole family swim together? We leave
that up to God. (Mustafa Ibrahim, salt farm worker and shepherd, Jatt, living in Salt farm)20
In summary: The social construction of gender roles have been shown to impact access at
least to the following capitals; economic: cash, influence on purchases, wealth, pensions,
formal and informal loans, knowledge on credit sources; physical and natural: access to and
inheritance of land, private property, using dowries and ornaments as a first hand buffer,
firewood; social: organizational participation, political influence; human: literacy, schooling,
individual freedom, opportunity to learn, flexibility, skills such as swimming.
The construction of caste has been shown to impact access at least to the following capitals
economic: cash, formal loans, women’s savings groups, high dependence on external sources
for livelihood and survival; physical and natural: flood protected houses, access to safe places
and locations, access to land, documents such as birth certificates, wells, water reliability,
firewood; social: organizational participation, political influence, trust in local politicians;
human: literacy, schooling, individual freedom, flexibility.
In conclusion, there is no doubt that the social constructions of caste and gender limit adaptive
capacity to climate change by restricting access to various resources on a number of levels.
Although caste is also strongly correlated with other possible explanatory variables such as
location of house, livelihood, wealth, influence and power, I have presented several instances
where it is clear that caste is directly determining access to vital resources.
5.3 Can the social constructions of gender and caste be seen to limit or enhance adaptive capacity to climate change by influencing perceptions of ‘reality’? When asking villagers about their problem perceptions the responses varied a lot, which is not
so surprising considering the varying type of lives people in the village lead. However, it is
remarkable that the local politicians and committee members (of which a clear majority are of
the high caste Darbar, many even belong to same family) were unaware of these differences 20 This seemed to be a reoccurring problem as in several other interviews it was also stated that men learn how to swim, not women, and women themselves sometimes laughed at the question if I asked them if they could swim.
39
and the perceptions and problems other castes and households face. For instance, Panchayat
and Pani samiti members (water committee) claimed reassuringly that “there is no such
problem like floods in our village” (12, PM Gohil, vice Sarpanch, land-owning farmer,
Darbar) even though it was presented here earlier that 13 households feared floods and nine
had experienced severe losses as a result of floods. It was equally reassuring claimed that
there was no longer any problems with water in the village (12) while eight of the respondents
from lower and middle castes identified water provision and quality to be the main problem in
the village. As already has been reported, Avaniya is to a large extent dominated by a small
Darbar elite, politically and economically. This fact is acknowledged by most (all low caste
households and eight of the Koli households mentioned Darbar as the most important and
influential people in the village). “Darbar people are powerful, they decide everything, and we
have no power” (26, Savhjibhai, farm laborer, Koli) One influential Darbar elder explained
the logic in the following way:
We care for each and every person, it is in our caste, culture and manner that our caste is the ruling caste. Our ancestors were ruling Gujarat and Bhavnagar and Avaniya. […] If Darbar people are there they [other castes] can settle down, we can rule because we still feel we have that right. In addition they are also helping us, it is always both ways. A peacock looks beautiful with its feathers but not without; the people are the feathers and we are the peacock. It is the rule of the world. (Jilubha, Darbar elder)
Although this statement is on the radical side and no other Darbar households included in the
study expressed their domination equally strong, it does explain to some extent why the
unequal access to power and influence is not questioned but taken for granted. The social
construction of caste becomes part of the lived reality.
But are there different ‘realities’? On asking if the respondents had experienced or feared
floods, droughts and cyclones, the answers truly ranged from ‘no never’ to ‘every year’. To
me it was surprising that perceptions were so contrasting in such a relatively small village:
– Have you experienced any floods in your home? – Not here, but far from this place. (Khatabhai, laborer, Devipujak, living in Hudko) – Have you experienced any floods? – In last monsoon there was a flood and water was everywhere. It also came to
our house and my daughters’ house […]. Because of the flood my daughters’ house collapsed and when she was doing some work on that another wall collapsed over her and broke her spine.
(Ghuzabhai, pond watchman, Devipujak, living in Hudko )
40
– Have you experienced any floods? – Yes many times. Once the water was very high, five feet. – When was this? – In 1982. – When was the most recent flood? – There has been no recent flood. (Nanjibhai, farmer, Koli, living in the Old town)
These are not the only quotes I could have used, there are dozens more, but they serve to
prove the point: families living in the same, or adjoining, parts of this small village present
completely different perceptions of what could be assumed to be an ‘objective’ or real event.
They express contrasting perceptions of reality. Discovering these contradictions was the
inspiration for applying a social constructivist perspective in this study; moving only a few
hundred meters in the village at times felt like kilometers and arriving at an entirely new place
depending on the stories I was told. I therefore present the concluding result already: people
do socially construct their realities and this can be shown to place effective limitations on the
ability to adapt climate change impacts. Although not all differences in the construction of
realities can be explained by caste or gender (there are of course other factors that influence
also and individual differences), it is clear that these social constructions in particular enhance
differences between people’s adaptive capacity.
I will present some examples to make my case more clear. This first one shows how both
gender and caste acts as determinants of adaptation when capital is not the limiting factor. It
also illuminates the, often, double vulnerability experienced by women:
– Do you have any shelter where you can go in case of a flood? – No. – You cannot use the village shelter? – It is good if they make a place here, in our area. Because if men of Darbar
[highest caste] are there, ladies of our community cannot go while they are there. We cannot go and we do not prefer to go while men of Darbar are there.
– So you need a place here in your community? – Even in other communities male and female cannot sit together, because it is
our culture, our conduct and our code. It is better if they make a place here. – Even in an emergency, even if you are loosing your life you think about this? – Yes, why not?
(4, Khatabhai’s wife, housewife, Devipujak, Hudko)
This woman was not the only one to make the same point; the two other women that were
interviewed from the lower castes expressed similar thoughts, e.g. “if Darbar people are there,
our women cannot go” (18). This illustrates in a very concrete way that individual agency is
41
limited by a socially constructed reality. These women do not question this ‘fact’, they do not
see the incoherency in rather risking your life in a flood when you cannot swim, than breaking
the fictive and socially constructed barrier between different castes, and between men and
women. Not everyone were as affected by the social construction as the case presented above,
the Darbar widow who worked is one example. Even though she according to her caste should
not work, and even though it was going against her son’s will, she still broke that mental
barrier (though not without ‘apologizing’ for it). However, a few cases where the social
construction of ‘reality’ is as tangible as above, and which could have such dire
consequences, is a qualitative finding enough to call for further research and investigation.
Although not necessarily implying that women construct ‘reality’ more often than men do, the
empirical findings showed that gender as a social construction to a much higher extent limited
women’s ability to actively adapt to climate change impacts than it did men’s. During
interviews it is the women that to a much larger extent express ‘mental limitations’, by the
constant use of utterances such as “I cannot”, “I don’t know, we are illiterate”, “I am stupid”,
“people don’t want us in committees, if we were literate then maybe” as a cause for not being
able to, for instance, pursue a climate change adaptation strategy. It is also expressed by the
fact that women were much more reluctant to present their opinions in the interviews “Let’s
wait for my husband, lets wait for him. I don’t know anything, how can I answer your
questions?” (3, Laduben, Koli, Old village). In fact, every woman that took any active part in
any interview, at least once expressed a sense of inferiority either as woman compared to a
man, as low caste compared to a higher caste, or both, either outright “I am stupid, I don’t
know” or subtler “we are illiterate, we don’t know”. Although some of the men of lower
castes also phrased themselves this way, it was in a much lesser extent and in most cases only
after their wives or mothers had already made the statement.
One interesting finding was however, that women to a larger extent expressed a positive
attitude towards learning than men, although for the Darbar women with the oft-added “but
my husband will not allow”, or “as I am a Darbar how could I?” This brings us to the more
complex social construction of caste. One trend that I believe is distinguishable is that caste
acts more limiting in the ends of the scale than in middle. It shows primarily when comparing
attitudes between different castes. The low caste families (with one exception, see below) in
general expressed a sense of inertia and fatalism, and kept on repeating the need for external
help “We are not literate; we don’t know how to earn money. If you people tell us how to earn
42
money it would be better. If government would help, then it is good.” (4, Khatabhai, laborer,
Devipujak). The middle caste families in general expressed a much more open attitude
towards learning new skills “we would learn!” (Valuben, Koli, laborer), “I would love to learn
how to stitch”(Asha, housewife, Koli) and had much more entrepreneurial skills and ideas
than did the lower castes. It is again worth noting that the Koli families were the ones that to a
much larger extent expressed active adaptive strategies to floods. Some of the Darbar families
thought and acted progressively to a certain extent but were overall more rigid “farming is
what we do, that is enough, there is no need for any other” (12, PM Gohil, Darbar). In the
background section, two competing studies, on caste rigidity and caste mobility respectively,
were referred to. One possible explanation to their discrepancy could be that the study that
emphasized Gujarat as caste-flexible (Metha & Joshi 2002) drew primarily on empirical cases
where people of Koli castes were the entrepreneurs. The other study (Deshpande 2001) had an
outspoken attention directed at the comparison of low and high castes relative standard of
living. Thus, maybe the caste system as practiced in Gujarat allows for high mobility in the
middle of the scale, whereas the further towards the ends it becomes more rigid.
Finally, the exception, that could support the rule, is the Moslem Jatt family. As they are
Moslem they are less deeply embedded in the caste system, and they also lived on a separate
location, a few kilometers away from the village and without any close neighbors. Their
attitude resembled the openness of the middle caste, rather than the lower caste in which they
are here categorized. Only a couple of times did they express statements such as: “we are not
well informed, we are not educated so if the forest department would curse us we don’t know
which officer or which official to meet or how to proceed, how to get our rights. We know
that one day we have to migrate.”(8, Mustafa Ibrahim, Jatt). The difference is that they
acknowledge their rights and make prevailing power inequalities explicit rather than just
accepting the situation as it is. As they are in the periphery of the caste system, it would
support the proposition that caste is a strong determinant of the socially constructed reality.
6. Analysis
As the ‘analysis’ has occurred throughout all parts of the thesis, the purpose of this section is
primarily to provide an overview and link to back to the theoretical context; in essence, to
present the study’s greater implications. The first obvious conclusion, although neither
revolutionary nor unexpected, is that gender and caste matter. But rather than just mimicking
43
previous research that has come to the same conclusion, this study shows that gender and
caste may matter also for other reasons than are commonly explored.
The most basic aspect of this case study’s empirical results is that women and men, and high
and low castes respectively, do not share an equal access to resources and capitals. Women
were found to be disadvantaged compared to their male counterparts in almost all aspects
examined. Also the lower castes have much more restricted access to financial (e.g. loans,
savings), physical (e.g. safe houses, safe locations, land, property), natural (e.g. firewood,
water), social (e.g. organizations, influence, information) and human capital (e.g. literacy,
skills), than do higher castes. While most households did identify access to capitals as the
most important resource for adapting to climate change, a vast majority of the interviewed
households yet stated explicitly that there were no gender differences in coping and adapting
to climate change impacts. Caste-bound disparity was however frequently recognized.
Although all differences in access to resources cannot be derived directly from the social
constructions of gender or caste (as there are also other co-correlated explanatory variables,
e.g. poverty), this study has however presented a number of findings where the direct linkages
cannot be disputed. Furthermore, in several cases these gender and caste-related limitations in
access to resources can be shown to have had direct and negative effects on both
vulnerability, and the capacity to adapt to climate change impacts. Therefore, the second
conclusion is that, although not necessarily conscious or acknowledged; the social
constructions gender and caste impact adaptive capacity to climate change by restricting
access to vital resources, both in general and in particular.
This case study further demonstrates that a socially constructed ‘reality’ can place equally
effective limitations on the individual capability to adapt as can access to resources. Several
conflicting ‘realities’ were found to coexist within the same limited social-ecological system
and these could, at least to a large extent, be seen as a direct result of the social constructions
of gender and caste. Thus, this study emphasizes the importance of individual agency, the
social construction of ‘reality’ and the highly differential nature of adaptive capacity.
If validated by further research, these findings and conclusions can have important
implications both for theory and policy. In the context of vulnerability and adaptation
research, and climate change policy, the dominant focus on resources as determinants of
adaptive capacity is challenged (cf. IPCC 2001), as the instrumental ‘resource’-approach does
not fully succeed in capturing the complex interplay between individual agency, structural
44
forces and a changing environment. In the case of this study, albeit important, capital per se,
or even access to capital is not enough to ensure efficient use or adaptive action. I.e. even
when capital and resources are available we need to be able to actively draw on these, and this
needed agency is restricted by individual traits (cf. Krishna 2001) as well as the individual’s
construction of ‘reality’. In summary, this would call for more agency-oriented perspectives
and a more contextual approach of adaptive capacity to climate change (as well as pragmatic
as I argue below).
For resilience theory these findings would also have several implications. The first obvious
implication, which was argued for already in the theoretical review section, is that adaptive
capacity is a differentiated concept. No matter how important to consider social-ecological
systems as a unit, we must never forget about the individual people and households that are
part of, and comprise, those systems. Even if applied to a social-ecological system on the
local scale it is insufficient, yet important, to learn if the system as a whole has a high or low
level of adaptive capacity. Because in order to talk of a ‘theory of sustainable development’
(Folke et al. 2002a, Folke et al. 2003) it absolutely imperative to identify how vulnerability
and adaptive capacity is differentiated, to make certain that those already at the bottom of the
scale are enabled to efficiently adapt. Also in resilience theory is there thus a need to balance
the systems perspective with a stronger focus on the individual.
Other important implications concern the theory’s assumptions on some of the key aspects of
adaptive capacity, i.e. learning and flexibility (e.g. Folke et al. 2005, Walker et al. 2006).
“Learning through experimentation and innovation is necessary to develop and test
knowledge and understanding for coping with change and uncertainty. The capacity to adapt
and to manage resilience requires learning and the ability to make sense of things, especially
in arenas of collaborative learning, using a combination of various sources of information and
knowledge.” (Walker et al. 2005:8). The theoretical tendency to oversimplify aspects of
learning (which seems to be shared across disciplines, “learning is often just expected to
happen” (Fazey et al. 2005)), has already been critiqued. For instance, Galaz (2005) points to
the ‘politics’ of learning; i.e. how social conflict and strategic behavior among actors may
hamper the learning process. While it may seem self-evident, these aspects have previously to
a large extent been omitted and ignored. However, the underlying assumption also here is that
while individuals are acknowledged having different stakes and preferences that impact
strategic behavior and adaptation, they share a common perception of ‘reality’. But this case
45
study, where people do not experience events in the same way, or at all – some say for
instance that they are impacted by floods every monsoon season, whereas others haven’t
experienced floods at all (even though floods do occur frequently in the region), challenges
the assumptions of automatic and collective learning, whether affected by strategic behavior
or not, at yet another level. Applying a social constructivist perspective, or explicitly
addressing contextual social constructions, however provides an approach to deal with this
complexity.
Furthermore, the social constructions of both gender and caste have been shown to inhibit
flexibility and as such negatively affect adaptive capacity. As social constructions are deeply
embedded in cultural, social and political practices, change thus comes about slowly.
Therefore can social constructions be defined as slowly changing variables, a sort of cultural
‘conservatism’ (Walker et al. 2006). In the context of a rapidly transforming world and the
undisputed need for enabling autonomous adaptation, this further emphasizes the need of
actively addressing social constructions.
Although not in the scope of this essay, employing a social constructivist perspective can
further help illuminate and address a system’s power dynamics and structural inequalities. An
example from this case is the way in which the Darbar community set the agenda for
collective agency and external actors; their ‘reality’ became the collective ‘reality’ and set the
reference for action.
Overall, there is a need to balance the systems perspective with a stronger focus on individual
agency and to make explicit the differential aspects of adaptive capacity and resilience.
Human agency, the most important driver of global ecological change, needs to be better
understood, particularly in the light of the growing importance of autonomous adaptation.
Although this study is contextually very specific, it does not eat into the underlying
importance of the message communicated – that social constructions matter. Even though
caste may not be a universal social construction, gender is, although it will be different in
different contexts. There are also other types of social constructions, such as cultural roles or
rigid religious practice. Although the terminology is impeded by its connotations to
postmodernism, it may serve as a conceptual tool to contextualize studies on adaptive
capacity and to analyze what social practices are likely to impact adaptation and management
processes.
46
To sum up, although institutional and governance aspects are considered important in
resilience theory (e.g. Folke et al. 2004, Walker et al. 2006) they don’t explicitly address the
role of social constructions. And there is a need to explicitly address social constructions as
powerful determinants of social-ecological system dynamics. To truly enhance adaptive
capacity some of these constructions must even be challenged and deconstructed – although
such a normative endeavor will be highly controversial. Social constructions and institutions
are often mutually reinforcing and interdependent, and moreover change slowly. So alongside
targeted efforts there is also a need for pragmatic solutions that take these constructions as a
natural point of departure. For instance, resources and capital are needed to enhance adaptive
capacity, and the unequal access, which is impacted by social constructions of gender and
caste, to these resources needs to be targeted. Building safe houses in all caste communities or
by holding separate meetings for men and women are two very basic suggestions to address
the problem from a social constructivist sensitive perspective, yet this is not currently
practiced to large enough extent.21 To me it was surprising that even basic caste related
limitations were not automatically considered. In my opinion much could be learned from
combining resilience theory with a social constructivist perspective in the effort of trying to
build adaptive capacity in a world of transformations.
7. Conclusion
The results of this case study show that in the community, in which this study took place,
there is a widespread concern over climate change related impacts. It has also been shown that
gender and caste impact in adaptive capacity to climate change – also for reasons other than
are commonly explored. The social constructions of gender and caste impact adaptive
capacity to climate change not only by influencing access to resources, but also through the
process of a social construction of ‘reality’, placing effective limitations on the ability to
realize adaptation action. Adaptive capacity is internally as well as externally determined and
extremely differentiated; and this is a complexity that needs to be addressed. A key point that
I would like to communicate is that to truly address complex social-ecological dynamics, it
may be necessary to pay greater attention to the lived or ‘socially constructed’ reality as
oppose to a so called ‘objective’ reality. Thus, to further enhance our understanding of social-
ecological system dynamics I argue that more focus should be directed at human agency, and
21 There is a practice among NGOs of holding separate meetings for men and women when it comes to outspoken gender issues (such as domestic violence, or women’s savings groups) but not on more general matters. However, my own experience is a testament to how difficult it can be to increase female participation.
47
how individual and communities socially construct their ‘realities’ in relation to a rapidly
transforming world. If resilience and adaptive capacity are exclusively treated as system
properties, this may conceal and even reinforce unequal power structures. If resilience theory
will continue to gain ground in the policy landscape there is thus a need to re-evaluate the
application of concepts, otherwise it may result in negative consequences for development
and policy inefficiency. Only then can resilience theory start making claims of mapping the
way towards the complex landscape of sustainable development.
48
8. Acknowledgements There are many people in different parts of the world who have helped and supported me
along this journey – without you all this study could never have realized – and I owe you all
many thanks! I am particularly grateful to my supervisor Victor Galaz for much needed
inspiration, help and support; and Sara Ahmed, my co-supervisor in India for all your help
and for making me feel so welcome and at home in Ahmedabad. My warmest thank you to all
the people of Avaniya and everyone at Utthan organisation in Bhavnagar and Ahmedabad,
particularly Nafisa, Koshik and Bharat! Venu, of course, without you I would have gotten
nowhere! Thank you for being such a good friend and support. Also thank you to Marcus
Moench and Ayaya Dixit who helped me get to India in the first place. To all my newfound
friends at IIM Ahmedabad, particularly Nisha, Anshuman, Prabal and Priyanka, who provided
me with invaluable help, advice and friendship – without you it wouldn’t have been nearly as
good! Also thank you to Akhil and Ishan who both went to lengths to help me and make me
feel welcome! Of course I couldn’t have done this without all support and help from my
beloved family and friends back home, especially Albert, Marie and little Freja – thanks for
being there!
This study was supported by a Minor Field Study (MFS) scholarship provided by SLU,
Uppsala, and Sida (Swedish International Development Aid Agency).
49
References:
Adger, W.N. and Kelly M.P., 1999. Social vulnerability to climate change and the architecture of entitlements. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 4, 253-266 Adger, W.N., Huq, S., Brown, K., Conway, D. and Hulme, M., 2003. Adaptation to climate change in the developing world. Progress in Development Studies 3:3, 179-195 Ahmed, S., (ed) 2005. Flowing Upstream: Empowering Women through Water Management Initiatives in India. New Delhi: Foundation Books Pvt. Ltd. Ariyabandu, M., M. and Wickramasinghe, M., 2005. Gender Dimensions in Disaster Management – A Guide for South Asia. (Indian edition) New Delhi: Zubaan Bassi, N., 2005. Participatory approach towards water-security. A case study on community managed Ghogha Village Water Supply and Sanitation Project. Dissertation report. Accessed online 2006-07-20: http://www.wasmo.org/eng/internship-details.shtm Berger, P. and Luckmann, T., 1987 (reprint from 1966): The social construction of reality – A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd. Berkes, F. and Folke, C., (eds) 1998, Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Bradshaw, S., 2004. Socio-economic impacts of natural disasters: a gender analysis. Santiago, Chile: United Nations Publications (Serie Manuales) Brooks, N. and Adger, N., 2004. “Assessing and Enhancing Adaptive Capacity”. GEF. Accessed online: http://www.undp.org/gef/undp-gef_publications/publications/apf%20technical%20paper07.pdf Burningham, K., 1998. A noisy road or a noisy resident?: a demonstration of the utility of social constructionism for analysing environmental problems. Sociological Review Burningham, K. and Cooper, G., 1999. Being Constructive: Social Constructionism and the Environment. Sociology. Vol. 33:2, pp. 297-316 Crawford, S. and Ostrom, E., 1995. A Grammar of Institutions. American Political Science Review, Vol.89:3, pp.582-600 Demeritt, D., 2002. What is the ‘social construction of nature’? A typology and sympathetic critique. Progress in Human Geography. 26:6, pp. 767-790 Deshpande, A., 2001. Caste at Birth? Redefining disparity in India. Reveiew of Development Economics. 5(1), pp.130-144 Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y., 2005. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. 3rd Edition. Sage Diamond, J., 2005. Collapse: how societies choose to fail or succeed. New York: Penguin Group Fazey, I., Fazey, J. and Fazey, D., 2005. Learning More Effectively from Experience. Ecology and Society. 10(2), online-version available at: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss2/art4/
50
Folke, C., Carpenter, S., Elmqvist, T., Gunderson, L., Holling, CS. and Walker B., 2002a. Resilience and Sustainable Development: Building Adaptive Capacity in a World of Transformations. Ambio 31:5, 437-440 Folke. C., Carpenter, S. Elmqvist, T., Gunderson, L., Holling C.S., Walker, B., Bengtsson, J., Berkes, F., Colding, J., Danell, K., Falkenmark, M., Gordon, L., Kasperson, R., Kautsky, N., Kinzig, A., Levin, S., Mäler, K.G, Moberg, F., Ohlsson, L., Olsson, P., Ostrom, E., Reid, W., Rockström, J., Savenije, H and Svedin, U., 2002b. Resilience and Sustainable Development – Building Adaptative Capacity in a World of Transformations. Stockholm: Edita Norstedts Tryckeri AB Folke, C., Colding J. and Berkes F., 2003. “Synthesis: building resilience and adaptive capacity in social-ecological systems”. In Navigating Social-Ecological Systems – Building Resilience for Complexity and Change, pp.352-387, eds. Berkes, F., Colding, J. and Folke C. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Folke, C., Hahn, T., Olsson, P. and Norberg, J., 2005. Adaptive Governance of Social-Ecological Systems. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour.2005.30, pp.441-473 Folke, C., 2006. Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Article in press Funtowicz, S.O. and Ravetz, J., 1992. Three types of risk assessment and the emergence of post-normal science. In: Krimsky, S. and Golding, D. (eds.), Social theories of risk. London Galaz, V. 2005: Social-ecological Resilience and Social Conflict: Institutions and Strategic Adaptation in Swedish Water Management. Ambio Vol.34, No. 7, pp.567-572 Glavovic, B., Scheyvens, R. and Overton, J., 2003. Waves of Adversity, Layers of Resilience: Exploring the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach. Accessed online 2005-11-20: www.scholar.google.com Gunderson, L. and Holling, C.S., (eds) 2002. Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington D.C: Island Press Hacking, I., 1999. The social construction of what?. Cambridge: Harvard University Press Holmberg, A. 2005. Kön – en fråga om makt. Stockholm: Forum Syd Huq, S., 2005. Adaptation to Climate Change: A paper for the International, Climate Change Taskforce. Available online: www.ippr.org IGBP 2004. Global Change and the Earth Systems: A Planet Under Pressure. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag IPCC, McCarthy, J., Canziani, O., Leary, N., Dokken, D., White, K., (eds) 2001. Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. IPCC, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press ISET 2006. Proceedings of the International Conference on Adaptation to Climatic Variability and Change. Published on-line: http://www.winrockindia.org/adaptivestrategies.pdf Janssen, M. and Ostrom, E., 2006. Resilience, Vulnerability, and Adaptation: A Cross-Cutting Theme of the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Program. Article in press Jones, S., 2002. Social constructionism and the environment: through the quagmire. Global Environmental Change, 12, pp. 247-251
51
Kates, R.W., Clark, W., Corell, R., Hall, M., Jeager, C., Lowe, I., McCarthy, J., Schnellhuber, J., Bolin, B., Dickson, N., Faucheux, S., Gallopin, G., Grübler, A., Huntley, B., Jäger, J., Jodha, N.S., Kasperson, R.E., Mabogunje, A., Matson, P., Mooney, H., Moore, B., O’Riordan, T. and Svedin, U., 2001. Sustainability Science. Science. 292:5517, pp. 641-642 Kasperson, R.E and Kasperson J.X., 2001. Climate Change, Vulnerability and Social Justice. Stockholm Environment Institute. Available online: www.sei.se King, G., Keohane, R. and Verba, S., 1994. Designing social inquiry: Scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton: Princeton University Press Kvale, S., 1996. Interviews – An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. London: Sage Publications, Inc. Krishna, A., 2001. Moving From the Stock of Social Capital to the Flow of Benefits: The Role of Agency. Journal of World Development. Manson, S., 2000. Simplifying complexity: a review of complexity theory. Geoforum, 32, pp.405-414 Metha, D. and Joshi, B., 2002. Entrepreneurial Innovations in Gujarat. AI & Soc. 16, pp.73-88 Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Washington DC: Island Press. Moench, M. and Dixit. A., (eds.) 2004. Adaptive Capacity and Livelihood Resilience: Adaptive Strategies for Responding to Floods and Droughts in South Asia. Institute for Social and Environmental Transition, Boulder, Katmandu: Format Printing Press Moench, M., 2005. Water, Climatic Variability and Livelihood Resilience: Concepts, Field Insights and Policy Implications. Draft. Swedish Water House, Policy Paper I. Mukherjee, N., 1994. Participatory Rural Appraisal: Methodology and Applications. New Delhi: Ashok Kumar Mittal Mustafa, D., 2003. Reinforcing vulnerability? Disaster relief, recovery, and response to the 2001 flood in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. Environmental Hazards 5 (2003), pp.71-82 Naeslund, B., 2004. Systems Complexity in a nutshell. Manuscript. Dept. Systems Ecology, Stockholm Univeristy. Nightingale, D. and Cromby, J., 2002. Social Construction as Ontology. Theory and Phsycology. Vol. 12(5), pp. 701-713 North, D., 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. New York: Cambridge University Press O’Brien, K., Leichenko, R., Kelkar, U., Venema, H., Aandahl, G., Tompkins, H., Javed, A., Bhadwal, S., Barg, S., Nygaard, L. and West, J., 2004. (Article in press) Mapping vulnerability to multiple stressors: climate change and globalization in India. Global Environmental Change Olsson, P., Hahn, T., and Folke, C., 2004. Social-ecological transformations for ecosystem management: the development of adaptive co-management of wetland landscapes in southern Sweden. Ecology and Society. In press
52
Oommen, T., 2002. Race, Religion, and Caste: Anthropological and Sociological Perspectives. Comparative Sociology. Vol.1:2, pp.115-126 Ostrom, E., Gibson, C., Shivakumar, S. and Andersson, K., 2002. Aid, Incentives and Sustainability: An Institutional Analysis of Development Cooperation. Stockholm: Sida, Sida Studies in Evaluation 02/01 Oxfam 2005. Multi-Sector Damage Assessment Report: Gujarat Floods July 2005. Report issued by Oxfam, Ahmedabad Scheffer, M., Carpenter, S., Foley, J.A., Folke, C. and Walker, B., 2001. Catastrophic shifts in ecosystems. Nature 413, pp.591-596 Schneider, S. and Sarukhan, J., 2001. Overview of Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability to Climate Change. In Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. McCarthy et al., (eds) pp.76-103 Sismondo, S., 1993. Some social constructions. Social Studies of Science, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 515-553 Smit, B. and Wandel, J., 2006. Adaptation, Adaptive Capacity and Vulnerability. Article in press. Stam, H. J., 2001. Introduction: Social Constructionism and Its Critics. Theory and Pshycology Vol.11(3) pp.291-296 Stoker, G. and Marsh, D., (eds) 1997. Theory and methods in political science. New York: St. Martin’s Press, Inc. Utthan 2000. Ghogha regional water supply and sanitation project – Bhavnagar. Non-published document. Utthan 2003. Annual Progress Report. Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Walker, B., Gunderson, L., Kinzig, A., Folke, C., Carpenter, S. and Schultz, L., 2006. A Handful of Heuristics and Some Propositions for Understanding Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems. Ecology and Society.11(1):13 Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T. and Davis, I., 2004: At Risk. Second Edition: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerabilities and disasters. New York: Routledge. Young, O., 2002. Institutional Interplay: The Environmental Consequences of Cross-Scale Interactions, pp.263-292 in National Research Council (Ostrom, Dietz, Dolsak, Stern, Stovich and Weber eds.) 2002: The Drama of the Commons Washington DC: National Academy Press
53
Appendix Ι
Interview list Interview # Type22 Gender Caste Location of
house 1 1 Female Koli Jodphara 2 1 Male Darbar Old town 3 1 Mixed Koli Old town 4 1 Mixed Devipujak Hudko 5 1 Female Koli Navapura 6 1 Mixed Darbar Hudko 7 1 Mixed Devipujak Hudko 8 1 Mixed Jatt Salt farm 9 1 Male Devipujak Salt farm 10 1 Mixed Koli Navapura 11 1 Mixed Koli Jodphara 12 1 Mixed Darbar Old town 13 1 Mixed Darbar Old town 14 1 Female - - 15 2 Male Darbar Hudko 16 2 Female Darbar Hudko 17 2 Female Devipujak Hudko 18 2 Female Bharwad Hudko 19 2 Mixed Koli Navapura 20 2 Male Koli Navapura 21 2 Mixed Koli Navapura 22 2 Mixed Koli Wadlo 23 2 Mixed Koli Wadlo 24 2 Female Karak
Patel23Old village
25 2 Female Darbar Old town 26 2 Male Koli Jodphara 27 2 Female Koli Jodphara 28 2 Male Koli Jodphara 29 2 Female Darbar Old town
22 Type of interview refers to if the interview was open-ended (1), or more structured (2). 23 Karak patel is counted as a high caste
54