Cultural barriers to climate change adaptation: A case study from NorthernBurkina Faso

Jonas Østergaard Nielsen *, Anette Reenberg

Department of Geography and Geology, University of Copenhagen, Øster Voldgade 10, DK-1350 Copenhagen K, Denmark

Global Environmental Change 20 (2010) 142–152

A R T I C L E I N F O

Article history:

Received 11 December 2008

Received in revised form 2 October 2009

Accepted 8 October 2009

Keywords:

Climate change

Adaptation

Cultural barriers

Sahel

Fulbe

A B S T R A C T

Human adaptation to climate change is a heterogeneous process influenced by more than economic and

technological development. It is increasingly acknowledged in the adaptation to climate change

literature that factors such as class, gender and culture play a large role when adaptation strategies are

either chosen or rejected at the local scale. This paper explores adaptation strategies by focusing on

livelihood diversification in the face of the most recent of recurrent droughts in the Sahel. It is shown that

for Fulbe, one of the two main ethnic groups in the small village in Northern Burkina Faso studied, culture

acts as a major barrier to embracing four of the most successful livelihood strategies: labour migration,

working for development projects, gardening, and the engagement of women in economic activities.

� 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Global Environmental Change

journa l homepage: www.e lsev ier .com/ locate /g loenvcha

1. Introduction

The importance of adaptation to climate change is increasinglyemphasised (Pielke et al., 2007). Adaptation has become part of thediscourse of global warming and is now widely recognised as afundamental and necessary response to the threat posed by theclimatic changes that will occur, or are already occurring, due topast and present carbon emissions (IPCC, 2007; UNFCCC, 2007).Human adaptation to a changing environment is not a newphenomenon, but a sense of urgency has entered the scene andresearchers, policy makers, and civil society have engaged ‘‘in arace against time to understand how adaptation can be facilitated,supported, and ultimately sustained, in societies at risk fromclimate change impacts’’ (Coulthard, 2008, p. 479). This is sobecause adaptation is understood as a modification of behaviourbelieved to either alleviate adverse impacts or to realise newopportunities in response to observed or expected changes inclimate and associated extreme weather events (Adger et al., 2004,2007).

New studies dealing with real-world adaptation practices andprocesses have, however, noted a number of significant limitationsto adaptive capacity of human societies – i.e. the ability or potentialof a system to respond successfully to climate variability andchange. It has been shown that adaptive capacity is influenced by

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +45 3532 4163; fax: +45 3532 2501.

E-mail addresses: jon@geo.ku.dk (J.&. Nielsen), ar@geo.ku.dk (A. Reenberg).

0959-3780/$ – see front matter � 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.10.002

not only economic and technological development, but also bysocial norms, values and rules (Klein and Smith, 2003; Robledoet al., 2004; Brooks and Adger, 2005; Næss et al., 2005; Tompkins,2005; Ford et al., 2006; Adger et al., 2007; Coulthard, 2008), andthat these adaptive responses vary between individuals andbetween and within communities, regions and countries (O’Brienet al., 2006). Adaptive capacity is, in other words, ‘‘highlyheterogeneous within a society or locality’’ (Adger et al., 2007,p. 729) and often influenced by factors such as class, gender, health,social status and ethnicity. Despite these insights, cultural barriersto adaptation to climate change are not well researched (Adgeret al., 2007, 2009).

A current challenge in adaptation research is thus to recogniseand explain ‘‘varied sensitivities’’ to climate change exhibited bydifferent groups of actors and the consequences of these foradaptation at the local level (Adger and Brooks, 2003, p. 179). Theaim of this paper is to show how one of these sensitivities, culture,presents a barrier to adaptation to climate change in the smallSahelian village of Biidi 2 in Northern Burkina Faso.1 In thiscommunity the approaches to adaptation have been veryheterogeneous between the two major ethnic groups present inthe village territory: Rimaiibe and Fulbe.

1 Barriers are here understood as the conditions or factors that render adaptation

difficult as a response to climate change and are as such contrasted to limits, which

render adaptation ineffective and ‘‘largely insurmountable’’ (Adger et al., 2007, p.

733).

J.Ø. Nielsen, A. Reenberg / Global Environmental Change 20 (2010) 142–152 143

The paper examines adaptation to climate change by focusingon livelihood diversification, which is shown to be a key adaptivestrategy in the village as this negates the negative impact ofdrought and climate variability on rain-fed agriculture. In recentyears, a number of studies on livelihood diversification have beenpublished (Ellis, 2000; Barrett et al., 2001; Carswell, 2002;Elmqvist and Olsson, 2006; Wouterse and Taylor, 2008), allemphasising that off-farm work constitutes a significant part ofobserved livelihood diversification in rural communities and hasincreased over time in importance in sub-Saharan Africa (Bryce-son, 1996, 2002). Similarly, Mortimore (1998) noted that whilethere are often few on-farm diversification strategies in the Sahel,off-farm strategies seem to be swelling in number, indicating thatrural livelihood diversification is increasingly non-agricultural.This move away from a dependence upon rain-fed agriculture forsustaining a livelihood for households and individuals is clearlyobserved in Biidi 2. There, the four most important livelihooddiversifications employed are: (1) labour migration to Abidjan,Cote d’Ivoire, (2) working for development projects, (3) gardens,and (4) women’s economic activities (Nielsen and Reenberg, 2009;Reenberg, 2009). All of these aim to negate the negative impact ofdrought and climate variability by providing households andindividuals with sources of income and food other than rain-fedagriculture.

Initially Fulbe in Biidi 2 did not have to engage in thesestrategies as their livelihood was based on cattle. The last 30 years,however, many Fulbe have in general forsaken pastoralism in orderto engage in other livelihood activities (De Bruijn and Dijk, 1995;Hampshire, 2004). In Biidi 2 pastoralism is still part of the land usesystem, but rain-fed agriculture constitute the economic mainstayof Fulbe households. This paper investigates how contemporaryFulbe strategies are created in a setting of Fulbe cultural valuesplayed out in a wider historical and political context defined by theend of slavery, political legislation, and the arrival of internationaldevelopment projects. The Fulbe preference for living in the bush,their notion of personal freedom and integrity, their occupational

Table 1Synthesis of methods applied, themes and temporal span covered, and quantitative de

Methods Data characteristics

Themes covered Data

Participant observation Daily life Aug

FebrLivelihood diversification

Household composition, earnings and practices

Ethnic/cultural differences and perceptions

Role of agriculture

Cattle ownership

Impact of projects

Semi-structured

interviews

Economic, cultural, biophysical changes over time Aug

FebrCause of changes

Adaptive response to changes over time

Historical developments/events

Ethnic/cultural differences and perceptions

Climate perceptions

Questionnaire survey Biophysical, agricultural, and livelihood

changes over time

Dece

and

Causes of changes

Adaptive response to changes over time

Climate perceptions

Household composition, earnings and practices

Focus group interviews Economic, cultural, biophysical changes over tune Dece

andCauses of changes

Adaptive response to changes over time

Climate perceptions

Ethnic/cultural differences arid perceptions

GPS measurement Household location within village territory Nov

andSize of fields

specialisations and their link to existential group identity (Ries-man, 1977) will be highlighted as cultural barriers to climatechange adaptation among Fulbe.

The paper will start with a brief methodological overview andan introduction to the setting and the climate in Biidi 2 over the last40 years. The four dominant livelihood diversification strategies inthe village will be presented followed by an analysis of the currentcultural barriers to pursue these among Fulbe.

2. Methodology

This study draws on ethnographic research carried out in thevillage of Biidi 2 between August 2007 and February 2008.Participant observation, semi-structured interviews, focus groupinterviews, and questionnaire interviews were the main methodsused.

Participant observation was chosen as a means to facilitaterapport with the people being studied, the collection of dataregarding sensitive topics, and insights about daily activities andperceptions (Bernard, 2002). The insights obtained wereexplored further in semi-structured interviews. Sixty-five suchinterviews were conducted with older, middle-aged and youngmen and women covering all socio-economic and ethnic groupsin the village. Twelve focus group interviews were made,differentiated by age, gender, ethnicity and social standing.The focus groups, consisting of older men and women, ofdifferent ethnicity, were repeated over time and coveredhistorical developments in order to map social memoryparticularly regarding livelihoods and climate changes (McIn-tosh, 2000). All semi-structured interviews and all focus groupinterviews were digitally recorded. Observations and conversa-tions during participant observation were written down innotebooks. A questionnaire interview with 50 out of a total of 104heads of households, again stratified to cover all social groupingswithin the village was also conducted. Table 1 summarise themethods used and the issues explored.

nsity.

acquisition time Temporal span covered Quantitative density

ust 2007 until

uary 2008

Contemporary issues Constant presence in the village

and the surrounding bush

ust 2007 until

uary 2008

Pre-1950 65 conducted

Past 50 years Differentiated according to age,

gender, social status, ethnicity,

place of residence

Contemporary issues

mber 2007

January 2008

Past 40 years 50 out of 104 heads of

households interviewedContemporary issues

mber 2007

January 2008

Past 50 years 12 conducted

Contemporary issues Differentiated according to

age, gender, social status,

and ethnicity

ember 2007

January 2008

Current Total field acreage

Mapping of all household

Fig. 1. Map of Burkina Faso showing the location of Biidi 2.

J.Ø. Nielsen, A. Reenberg / Global Environmental Change 20 (2010) 142–152144

The semi-structured interviews, the focus group interviews,and the questionnaire, were structured in such a way that for eachcategory of questions, the respondents were asked to assess thecurrent situation (e.g. main income source; number of animals;field size; etc.), then describe the main changes (if any) to theseover the past 50 years and finally, assess the main causes of thesechanges (if any). No explicit indication of the focus on climatefactors was presented for respondents at this stage in order tominimize biases in the answers. At the end of the interviews, thefocus group discussions, and the questionnaire, the respondentswere asked to assess their perception of climate change generallyand the perceived impacts of this on a range of livelihoodparameters. When impacts were assessed as negative, therespondents were asked to explain their adaptive actions torespond to these impacts. All interviews were conducted in Fulani,the local language, with the help of interpreters.

3. Biidi 2

Biidi 2 is located approximately 14 km south-west of Gorom-Gorom, the provincial capital of Oudalan Province (see Fig. 1).Oudalan belongs to the drier part of the Sahelian zone of BurkinaFaso, which receives around 400 mm of precipitation annually. Thelandscape in the region is dominated by vast, ancient pediplains,cut by temporal rivers and two longitudinal E–W oriented dunesystems superimposed on the pediplain (Reenberg and Fog, 1995).

Biidi 2 is, like many other villages in this region, situated on oneof these dunes, and surrounded by more or less continuous fields.The fields are mainly located on the pediplains and millet, sorghumand cowpeas are grown (Rasmussen and Reenberg, 1992;Reenberg and Paarup-Laursen, 1997). The dune is rimmed on itssouthern side by gardens. Traditionally agriculture, pastoralism,and some gardening have been the major components of the locallivelihood strategies. In recent decades, however, additionalcomponents have been added to the livelihood portfolio as it willbe discussed in the following section.

Three ethnic groups currently inhabit Biidi 2: Rimaiibe,numbering 302 individuals, Fulbe, 167, and Wahilbe, 116 (as ofJanuary 2008). Of these, 246 are under the age of 15, constituting42% of the total population. Wahilbe, who are blacksmiths,constitute a kind of professional ‘caste’, separating them fromthe two other groups (see also Riesman, 1977); they are not dealtwith in this paper. Many of the people ‘belonging’ to the villageterritory actually live in the surrounding bush and the villagecentre itself is populated almost exclusively by Rimaiibe andWahilbe. Only one Fulbe household, consisting of seven individuals,is located within the village centre. Fig. 2 illustrates this spatiallocation of Fulbe habitation in relation to the village centre.Comparison with population enumeration done in the village in1995 by Reenberg and Paarup-Laursen (1997) shows that thevillage has had an annual population growth rate of 3.8% sincethen.

Biidi 2 was founded some 125 years ago by Fulbe coming fromthe north, bringing with them their slaves, the Rimaiibe.2

Traditionally, Rimaiibe children were born into a family ownedby a Fulbe family. With no social standing besides that of slave, theywere viewed and categorised alongside other types of wealth likecattle and material goods and they were often removed from theirfamily by their Fulbe owners around the age of 6–8 years, and boyswere put to work in the gardens or fields, and girls began domesticwork (see also Riesman, 1977, 1992; Bolwig and Paarup-Laursen,1999). They worked alongside other Rimaiibe who minded theirmasters’ children and small domestic animals, prepared and

2 In Fulani, the word for slave is diimaajo, in plural, rimaiibe. Rimaiibe also means

‘‘those who have not given birth’’.

cooked food, or engaged in other labour intensive tasks like houseconstruction. Both Fulbe and Rimaiibe elders stated in interviewsthat they were not paid for this, although they were given food andclothing. According to the villagers, slavery was made illegaltowards the end of the colonial period, but it was not until the coup

d’etat by Thomas Sankara in 1983 that the practice was fullyabandoned in the village.

4. Climate

Concern about climate change and its impact on humanpopulations in the Sahel since the 1970s was an immediateresponse to these most recent of recurrent drought periods(Nicholson, 1978; Watts, 1983; Brook, 1993; Webb, 1995; MaCann,1999; Rain, 1999). Averaged over 30-year intervals, annual rainfallin the Sahel fell by between 20 and 30% between the 1930s and the1950s and the three decades following the 1960s, promptingHulme to state, much in accord with Nicholson (1978), that ‘‘[t]heAfrican Sahel therefore provides the most dramatic exampleworldwide of climatic variability that has been directly andquantitatively measured’’ (2001, p. 20).

No meteorological records for Biidi 2 exist, but in the nearestlarger town, Gorom-Gorom, monthly rainfall data have beencollected since 1955 (see Fig. 3). This dataset indicates that theregion has gone through much the same change as the rest of theSahel: the wet 1950s and 1960s were followed by a prolonged dryspell lasting from the early 1970s until the 1990s. The generaltrend seen elsewhere in the Sahel towards more rain in the late

Fig. 2. Map showing the village territory and the placement of Fulbe households in the bush and in relation to the village centre. The households were mapped by GPS in the

course of field work in 2007. The spatial location of Fulbe households in the bush is closely related to Fulbe notions of freedom and personal integrity. For Fulbe, the bush is a

space free from the social constraints they feel exist in the village. Consequently, 19 out of 20 (only 16 are captured in the map) Fulbe households in Biidi 2 are located in the

bush. This spatial preference has major consequences for Fulbe engagement in labour migration, development work, and women’s economic activities.

J.Ø. Nielsen, A. Reenberg / Global Environmental Change 20 (2010) 142–152 145

1990s and early 2000s is also evident in the dataset from Gorom-Gorom (Nicholson, 2005; OECD, 2006).

Despite the general improvement in rainfall in recent years,both Rimaiibe and Fulbe are very concerned about the current inter-annual and inter-seasonal fluctuations (Table 2). Generally, thevillagers perceive rainfall to be less predictable today than 40 yearsago and to have a larger number of ‘false starts’ making itextremely difficult to know when to sow crops. The villagersperceive the rainy season is shorter with more dense periods ofrain, often resulting in either flooding or drought. Interestingly, thevillagers argue that more intense rainfall in August make the bush‘‘green’’. Temperatures during both the cold and the hot season arealso said to have risen in recent years. The wind is likewiseperceived to have increased, causing more pronounced movementof sand, filling up river beds and destroying crops. Besides drought,

Fig. 3. Annual rainfall in Gorom-Gorom, 1955–2006. The graph illustrate that the genera

1960s is followed by a prolonged dry spell lasting until the early 1990s. The general trend

Gorom. The greater inter-annual rainfall variability noted by the villagers in Biidi 2 is capt

driest year 2004. Source: Direction de la Meteorologie, Burkina Faso.

flooding and the movement of sand, the villagers mentiondegradation of the soil, the disappearance of plants, trees, wildfauna and watering holes, and growing problems with pests asconsequences of climatic alterations; all of these factors make rain-fed agriculture difficult.

5. Livelihood diversification

Ethnic variations are known to be an important factorinfluencing agricultural strategies (Reenberg and Fog, 1995). Butin Biidi 2 no large differences between Fulbe and Rimaiibe exists.Evaluation given by local informants in interviews stresses thatagricultural and pastoral strategies have become more uniformover the last 30 or so years. This conform well with the picture ofFulbe observed across the Sahel who has in general abandoned

l rainfall trend seen in the Sahel is mirrored in the study region: the wet 1950s and

towards more rain in the Sahel in the 1990s and early 2000s is also seen in Gorom-

ured in the graph. Note, for example, that the wettest year on record is 2003 and the

Table 2Perception of climate change in Biidi 2 the last 40 years based on household questionnaire interviews. N = 50 (Nielsen and Reenberg, 2009).

More/longer Stable Less/shorter Do not know

Rainfall

Rainfall during rainy season 16 (32%) 3 (6%) 31 (62%) 0 (0%)

Length of rainy season 13 (26%) 3 (6%) 30 (60%) 4 (8%)

Break between rainfalls in rainy season 37 (74%) 0 (0%) 7 (14%) 6 (12%)

Rainfall intensity 18 (36%) 0 (0%) 30 (60%) 2 (4%)

Inundations 31 (62%) 1 (2%) 15 (30%) 3 (6%)

Wind

Strong winds during rainy season 38 (76%) 3 (6%) 2 (4%) 7 (14%)

Length (time) of strong winds during rainy season 36 (72%) 3 (6%) 3 (6%) 8 (16%)

Strong winds during dry season 38 (76%) 4 (8%) 4 (8%) 4 (8%)

Length (time) of strong winds during dry season 34 (68%) 3 (6%) 3 (6%) 10 (20%)

Movement of sand due to wind 45 (90%) 0 (0%) 5 (10%) 0 (0%)

Temperatures

During the dry season 46 (92%) 2 (4%) 2 (4%) 0 (0%)

During the rainy season 35 (70%) 6 (12%) 9 (18%) 0 (0%)

During the hot season 48 (96%) 0 (0%) 2 (4%) 0 (0%)

During the cold season 36 (72%) 0 (0%) 14 (28%) 0 (0%)

J.Ø. Nielsen, A. Reenberg / Global Environmental Change 20 (2010) 142–152146

pastoralism in order to engage in other livelihood activities andmainly rain-fed agriculture (De Bruijn and Dijk, 1995; Hampshire,2004). Former times’ differences between Fulbe, who dependedmainly on livestock, and Rimaiibe, who depended on milletcultivation, has thus gradually disappeared and developed into amore homogenous pattern in which both groups are nowpermanently settled in and around the village and equally engagedin millet cultivation and livestock (see also Reenberg and Fog,1995; Reenberg and Paarup-Laursen, 1997).

Even in the best of years, however, the harvest meets onlybetween 7 and 9 months’ requirement for food, and this only for thelargest and most efficient households. In 2007 and 2008, to mentionthe two most recent campaigns, the household with the largest fieldsand the best access to labour power only produced enough cereals tocover the households’ need for 7 months and 2 months, respectively.The low yield combined with the intensive demand for labour(sowing, weeding and harvesting) have resulted in four Rimaiibe

households giving up rain-fed agriculture altogether and many moreare thinking about doing the same because ‘‘it is simply not worththe effort’’, as it was often expressed in interviews.

Over the last 30 years Rimaiibe have continuously responded tounreliable outcomes from rain-fed agriculture by diversifying theirlivelihoods, as a consequence off-farm livelihood strategiesrepresent today the mainstay of their income. A large number ofstrategies are present in the village. Both Fulbe and Rimaiibe rated,however, in semi-structured and focus group interviews, migra-tion, development work, gardening and small-scale commerce asthe most important. Hence, in the 43 interviews in which theinterviewee were asked to weigh the most important strategiesthese four were unanimously mentioned. In the twelve focus groupinterviews the result was the same. This, the intervieweesexplained, is due to the income which these strategies generatevis-a-vis others like fishing, brick making, and fire wood collecting.Moreover, the stability and dependability over time of thesestrategies were mentioned as important factors.

It is hard to assess precisely the actual income generated byengaging in these off-farm livelihood strategies due to a lack ofaccounting and secrecy of earnings, but most Rimaiibe householdsin general seem to earn enough money to buy food to last thewhole year.3 In addition to food, the money is used for clothing,

3 Rimaiibe often stated in daily conversation and in interviews that ‘‘we earn

enough to buy food until next harvest’’. Most households buy millet immediately

after harvest from more fertile regions of Burkina Faso and store this in granaries

next to their huts.

medicine, tools, animals, commercial activities and to meet socialobligations like marriage, baptisms and funerals. The growingimportance of livelihood diversification over the last 30 years issupported by comparison with a study done in Biidi 2 in 1995 byReenberg and Fog (1995), who note that in the early 1990s, off-farm strategies only rarely supplemented agricultural production,whereas today, they are common among the Rimaiibe.

For Fulbe, the situation is rather different. They have notdiversified to the same extent despite being just as involved inrain-fed agriculture as Rimaiibe – i.e. Fulbe and Rimaiibe householdmembers are equally engaged in sowing, weeding and harvesting,they have similar total field acreage (see also Reenberg and Fog,1995) and, according to the villagers, the same crop productionoutcome. In line with Rimaiibe, none of the 20 Fulbe heads ofhouseholds in Biidi 2 considered the harvest sufficient and manymentioned, when asked to rate the most important problem forhousehold well-being, the lack of food. It should be noted thatthere is growing awareness among primarily young Fulbe men inthe village that a strict Fulbe identity and the continued emphasison agriculture may be a hindrance to their economic betterment(see also Bolwig, 1999, p. 147). Some of the young Fulbe menmention that migration, working for development projects,gardening and small-scale commerce are good ways to betteryour position, and although these strategies are not perceived asparticularly attractive due to cultural reasons, many of them areconsiderably getting involved as ‘‘the millet do not last’’. A similarprocess was also observed among other groups of Fulbe in NorthernBurkina Faso (see Buhl and Homewood, 2001; Hampshire, 2006).

5.1. Labour migration

Rimaiibe is well known to have a long history of labourmigration (Bolwig, 1999). However, the drought in the beginningof the 1970s and its prolonged aftermath played a significant rolein consolidating the importance of labour migration seen in Biidi 2as well as in the rest of Sahel over the last 30–40 years (Cleveland,1991; Findley, 1994; David, 1995; De Bruijn and Dijk, 1995; Cordellet al., 1996; Rain, 1999; Hampshire and Randall, 1999, 2000;Mortimore and Adams, 2001; Henry et al., 2004; Hampshire, 2006).Almost all young Rimaiibe men left after the drought for Abidjan,Cote d’Ivoire, to earn money, primarily for food, and labourmigration became very important for household survival.

The importance of labour migration has been consolidated, andeach year, after the agricultural activities have ended in Novemberand December, a large proportion of Rimaiibe men leave. Hence in

J.Ø. Nielsen, A. Reenberg / Global Environmental Change 20 (2010) 142–152 147

December 2008, ten youths between 15 and 25 years left, followedin the beginning of January by three more, for a total of 36% of thisage group. Among the men aged between 25 and 35, seven out of25, or 28%, left. And among the men older than 35 years, eight outof 50, or 16%, left. Two other Rimaiibe aged 24 and 28 were alreadyin Abidjan, living in a small rented room. The value of thisaccommodation is closely related to its location near a marketplacewhere all the Rimaiibe men from the village work, loading and off-loading trucks and buses during the day. At night, they all work asprivate security guards. During this 24-h working day, onlyinterrupted by slow periods in the marketplace, during which theyreturn to the room to sleep, the men explained they earn betweenUS$5 and US$30 per day. The average amount the men returnhome to the village with after 6 months, after all expenses such asfood and transport have been paid, is around US$200 to US$300.4

This money is used to meet social obligations, to buy food, clothes,medicine, gardening tools and seeds, but is also reinvested incattle, small stock and small commercial activities.

Fulbe did not to the same extent establish a tradition for labourmigration in the 1970s and 1980s as they had built up large herdsof cattle during the wetter 1950s and 1960s. They dealt with theshortage of food in the 1970s and early 1980s largely by sellingcattle. Among Fulbe in Biidi 2, this lesson is very important, andthey continue to place heavy importance on cattle as an‘‘insurance against bad times’’ as they often stated it. This isexemplified in their emphasis on the practice of transhumance,which takes place between December and June each year.5 Of the41 Fulbe men between 20 and 50 years of age in the village, 17, or42%, practiced transhumance in December, 2008. As labourmigration takes place during the same period, only three Fulbe

men left for Cote d’Ivoire.A substantial number of the cattle that Fulbe bring on

transhumance do, however, not belong to them but to Rimaiibe.6

The selling of cattle to deal with the food shortage experiencedin the aftermath of the droughts left many Fulbe in Biidi 2 withvery little or no cattle. 35% (7 out of 20) of Fulbe households inBiidi 2 has currently no cattle and in all but three households thenumber of cattle has dwindled over the last 20 years. 4 Fulbe

households own only one or two cows. Rimaiibe pays Fulbe totake their cattle on transhumance but this salary is minimal incomparison to the income which can be earned on labourmigration. Moreover, Rimaiibe men use the money earned whilein Abidjan to buy cattle and consequently they have manage, incontrast to most Fulbe, to enlarge their herds. The continuedpractice of transhumance among Fulbe thus seems to beconnected to other variables than economy; a point to whichwe will return.

5.2. Working for development projects

In the aftermath of the drought and famine of the 1970s andearly 1980s, a plethora of development projects, the majority ofwhich owed their existence to international aid, entered BurkinaFaso, in particular the northern part, as this was perceived to be themost vulnerable to food shortage (Atampugre, 1997). The impetusfor these organisations and for governmental aid was the desire to

4 This estimate is based on interviews with men having been to Abidjan within

the last 5 years.5 Taking a herd of cattle often southward towards the end of the dry season in

order to find pasture and water.6 The cattle are pooled together and a herd taken on transhumance therefore

often consist of cattle owned by different men. It was relatively hard to establish the

exact composition of these herds. However, in the herds taken by 7 out of the 17

men going the branding on the cattle was recorded. In all of these herds the majority

of cattle belonged to Rimaiibe. In subsequent interviews this trend was confirmed

except in 5 herds which consisted exclusively of Fulbe owned cattle.

alleviate the problems of poor socio-economic infrastructure andfood and livelihood security (Batterbury and Warren, 2001). Theearly development efforts focussed on ‘modern’ technical inter-ventions designed to boost and transform agricultural andrangeland productivity, but for various reasons these failed (seeVivian, 1994; Carney, 1998), and the focus shifted to reforms inwhich issues of gender, cultural pluralism, better targeting of aid,and support to local institutions became important (Carney, 1998;Samoff, 2004).

In Biidi 2, the impact of development projects was first feltaround 1992–3, and since then, there have been around 20projects carried out in the village. The projects arrive each year atthe end of the agricultural season. The lengths of time a projectstay in the village depend on its scale and aim. The larger projectslike PLCE/BN work in the village over many years (up to 5 years)and are often involved in major undertakings such as plantingtrees and bushes to fixate the dune or constructing dikes in thefields against surface water and soil run-off.7 Other projects stay ashort time, providing ‘only’ advice or small goods like buckets andclassroom materials.

Rimaiibe explicitly attribute enormous importance to projectslike PLCE/BN because many of them provide salaried work. In Biidi2 a ‘development project committee’ consisting of a president anda treasurer is in charge of the payment of these salaries. Everyvillagers employed by a particular project is listed by name andeach day the president record who worked. This list is copied andhanded over to a local representative of the project in question andsome time later the money arrives to the village. The treasurer thenredistribute this money according to days worked and age. Theprojects pay very similarly and on average around US$3 for 1 day’swork.8 They employ local people (male, female, and children) foraround 30 days a year. Children under 18 are paid half the salary ofadults over 18 years of age. As project employment, however,collide in time with labour migration, school and transhumance itis often only two or a maximum of three household members thatare de facto available to work for projects during a given year.Rimaiibe households thus commonly earn around US$150 a yearworking for projects, meaning that this activity rates only secondto labour migration as a source of cash revenue in the village. Themoney is used for food and to reinvest in other economic activities.All Rimaiibe households but 3 out of 64 engaged in this activity in2007 and 2008.

Fulbe engagement with projects is almost non-existent.Transhumance is part of the explanation, as it takes place at thesame time of year, but Fulbe are often unaware of the presence ofprojects in Biidi 2 during the initial and most crucial phase in whichthe project workers, in collaboration with the villagers, define theproblems, find solutions, and hire the people needed to realise theprojects. A major reason behind the absence of Fulbe is that theproject workers always come to the village centre and Fulbe bycultural tradition live in the surrounding bush and are thereforerarely around when ‘staff’ are hired. Fulbe often mentioned ininterviews and during daily conversations that their reluctance towork on projects might become less pronounced if the projectscame to them in the bush. They acknowledge, however, that this isunlikely to happen ‘‘as the projects only want to help the villageand Rimaiibe’’. Not surprisingly, only three Fulbe men and nowomen worked on projects during the study period, interviewsrevealed that this trend was mirrored in past Fulbe engagement inprojects.

7 Programme de Lutte Contre l’Ensablement dans le Basin du Niger.8 This estimate is based upon actual observations of payment of development

work salary in the village by the first author and interviews with development

representatives and villagers.

J.Ø. Nielsen, A. Reenberg / Global Environmental Change 20 (2010) 142–152148

5.3. Gardens

Blessed with the constant presence of groundwater justbelow the land surface, the gardens are supplied by smallwells from which the owners fetch water for cash crops liketomatoes, potatoes, watermelon and onion, sold at the nearbymarkets in Tassmakat and Gorom-Gorom.9 The importance ofthe gardens is hence twofold. On the one hand, they arerelatively independent of rainfall variability and drought, and onthe other, they enable production of crops which have acommercial value.

Most villagers go to the market sporadically, but they generallytry to go to one of the markets every week particularly during theagricultural off-season where most garden products are produced.Normally, only one person represents the household at the marketand on an average market day she (it is often the women that go)makes between US$3 and US$4, averaging around US$100 a year ahousehold.10 The money is used for food and reinvested in thegardens and in other economic activities such as animals andsmall-scale commerce. The importance of gardens is clearlyillustrated by the fact that four Rimaiibe households have givenup rain-fed agriculture altogether over the past 8 years in order toconcentrate full time on the gardens, something many more arealso thinking of doing because ‘‘the gardens don’t depend on therain’’, as it is always argued.

The ownership of gardens is, however, not evenly distributedbetween the two ethnic groups. Of the 62 old and well-establishedgardens in the village, only four are currently worked and ownedby Fulbe. The major reason behind this state of affairs is to be foundin post-colonial legislation and the end of slavery.

The coup d’etat by Thomas Sankara in 1983 initiated anumber of progressive ideas (Wilkins, 1989). He championedwomen’s rights, anti-corruption initiatives, and the breakdownof the rigid hierarchical structures keeping village chiefs andcertain ethnic groups, mainly the Mossi, in power. This discoursewas heard by the Rimaiibe in Biidi 2, and there, as in the rest ofBurkina Faso, Sankara sparked people’s imagination (Skinner,1988; Wilkins, 1989; Malley, 1999). More important for Rimaiibe

in Biidi 2, however, was a concrete piece of legislation called theAgrarian and Land Reorganization (RAF), enacted in 1984, whoseprincipal effect was to declare that all land belonged to the state(Faura, 1995, p. 5–6; Lund, 1999; McCauley, 2003, p. 8). The ideawas to give ‘land to the tiller’, through usufruct rights, clearingthe way for the use and benefit of land by the ones currentlyworking it (McCauley, 2003). As the slaves were working in thegardens, Rimaiibe now had the rights to the gardens and theproducts they produced, and they have held on to them eversince. Ten new gardens have been established over the last 10years, all by Rimaiibe, and in a new garden project givingaway small garden plots, only two out of 36 plots were taken byFulbe.

5.4. Women’s work

The role of women constitutes another important livelihooddifference between the two groups. Rimaiibe women have becomevery economically active since the 1980s and in only six of the 64Rimaiibe households in Biidi 2 did women not to some extentparticipate in the cash economy during the study period. This wasdue to old age. Asked about the reason behind this development,households unanimously mentioned the increased resilience of thehousehold due to the cash income generated by women; in some

9 The word biidi means in Fulani ‘old wells’ or ‘constant presence of water’.10 This estimate is based on interviews with women and men regularly attending

the markets.

Rimaiibe households, women now contribute up to half the totalincome or more.11 Generated by the women working for projectsand/or engaging in small-scale commerce such as selling mats,food, garden produce and small domestic animals, the cash is usedto buy food, medicine, clothes, jewellery, and to invest in animals,education, seeds or other material for their gardens, looms, orhouses. Among Fulbe, women in only two out of 20 householdsengaged substantially in any form of work aimed at earning cash.

6. Cultural pathways of adaptation

These four means of livelihood diversification have beeninstrumental for enhancing Rimaiibe’s ability to cope with theclimate change experienced in Biidi 2 over the last 30–40 years.Considering that the diminishing importance of rain-fed agricul-ture and the growing dependence on cash due to the lack andvariability of the rain is equally crucial for the Fulbe that are settledin Biidi 2, a very pressing question becomes why Fulbe have notlatched on to these strategies to the same extent. The explanationfor this has already been sought in Fulbe’s traditional anchoring in apastoral culture with its emphasis on transhumance despite themnot having large herds, and in wider contextual factors such as thedevelopment projects emphasis on working with those present inthe village, and new legislation on changing land ownership.Clearly, these factors are important with regard to the strategiesembraced by Fulbe and highlight that adaptation to climate changeis rarely undertaken in a ‘‘stand-alone fashion’’ (Adger et al., 2007,p. 737).

During fieldwork it became clear, however, that another factorwas at play and that this to a very large extent shaped Fulbe

reluctance to engage in labour migration, development work,gardening and women’s work. Fulbe were in no way prevented byeither the projects or Rimaiibe from embracing these strategies andit puzzled them (and us) why this does not take place. Why, forexample, do Fulbe simply not move to the village or, at the veryleast, make sure they are informed of the arrival of new projects?Why do they not clear land to make gardens, or turn up in largernumbers when project organisers ‘hand out’ garden plots? Why dothey not go on labour migration in larger numbers instead oftranshumance? And why do Fulbe women not, like their Rimaiibe

counterparts, engage more actively in economic activities, therebyenhancing their household’s resilience?

These questions became even more pressing as Fulbe were allvery aware of the benefits these strategies gave Rimaiibe as thiscould be observed on a daily basis; Rimaiibe are generally perceivedby Fulbe to be richer, better fed, dressed and educated, and to havemore animals. Fulbe often stated that this is because Rimaiibe ‘‘dowhat they do and earn money’’. Money they invest in food, clothes,cell phones, motorbikes, education, gardening tools, farm equip-ment, and animals, ‘‘and that is why they do better than us’’, as itwas stated by two older Fulbe women in an interview.

In the following, we will aim at explaining Fulbe’s lack ofengagement in strategies, which they are not prevented fromundertaking and clearly seeing the material benefits of, in terms ofcultural barriers among Fulbe.

6.1. Living in the bush

A major hindrance to the engagement by Fulbe in labourmigration, development work, and women’s work is theirpreference to live in the bush (ladde) in small isolated households(see Fig. 2). This preference is closely related to Fulbe notions offreedom and personal integrity. For Fulbe, the bush is a space free

11 Women’s income was established through interviews with both men and

women. The buying power of women could also be observed at the market.

J.Ø. Nielsen, A. Reenberg / Global Environmental Change 20 (2010) 142–152 149

from the physical and social constraints they feel exist in thevillage (wuro) and is subsequently seen as a place of individualfreedom. Unlike the village, the bush is moreover a place whereself-control and endurance are required as you depend for survivalupon your ability to control your bodily needs, often through lackof food, water, and sleep. Living in the bush captures in these waysthe central Fulbe notions of ndimaaku (personal integrity;worthiness) as it is there you can maintain your integrity withoutdisturbance from the constraints imposed by village life and proveyour worthiness by surviving and thriving in the bush (see alsoRiesman, 1977; De Bruijn and Dijk, 1994; Bolwig, 1999). Whenasked about why they preferred to live in the bush, Fulbe

accordingly always gave personal freedom as the major reason:‘‘Out here I am free. . . I don’t have to worry about what myneighbours does, where my animals are, I just have to look aftermyself and my family’’. Permanent villages are moreoverhistorically made up of separate slave hamlets (debeere) in whichRimaiibe live in large patrilineal compounds, which furtheralienates Fulbe and discourages them from moving to the village.Living next to your former slaves is simply not desirable and isconnected to a great degree of semteende (shame) and is thereforeonly done if you have lost your ndimaaku and hence ‘‘have becomelike the slaves, depending upon others’’, as it was very oftenexpressed in interviews and during daily conversations.

The unwillingness of Fulbe to live in the village represents adilemma. All Fulbe interviewed mentioned that there are greateconomic advantages to living in the village vis-a-vis the bush.These advantages were all related to the increased importance oflivelihood diversification due to the lack and variability of the rainand how village residence facilitates this diversification. Fulbe dogo on labour migration (see Hampshire, 2006) but not to the sameextent as Rimaiibe – something already partly connected to theirpractice of transhumance – but another major reason is that livingin small isolated households in the bush makes it harder for themen to migrate because, as Hamiidou, a middle-aged Fulbe fatherof five, said ‘‘us men are expected to protect our wife and children’’.In the village, men from a debeere can leave for Abidjan if a cousin,brother, uncle or other male relative from the debeere stays behind.This is not possible for Fulbe, since the men who can be sparedprefer to herd livestock and because leaving a household isolatedin the bush without male protection is considered dangerous.

The importance for male labour migration and other gainfulactivities of having others close by is mirrored in women’s work. Inthe village, the women belonging to a debeere spend most of theirday together. A large part of the day is spent on preparing food,which is very labour intensive. But the women often assist eachother in pounding millet, freeing time for other chores. Similarly,they help mind each other’s children and small domestic animals,again freeing time. Often, the free time created by workingtogether is utilised by the women to make mats and sauce, work intheir gardens and fields and for development projects, tend to theiranimals, and go to the market, where they sell their gardenproduce, animals, food, and/or mats. Because Fulbe women live inisolation from other households, they cannot combine forces to thesame extent. They spend most of their day preparing food andlooking after their children, which leaves them very little time toengage in economic activities like their Rimaiibe counterparts (see,however, Buhl and Homewood, 2001). Fulbe women lament thissituation to some extent and would like to be more active ineconomic activities. This is related to the power vis-a-vis theirhusbands. Fulbe women see Rimaiibe women gain power throughtheir growing economic importance in the household, but they alsosee the reduced vulnerability of the household resulting from suchactivities. Fatimata, a young Fulbe woman with three smallchildren, captured these sentiments: ‘‘They [Rimaiibe women]do not always have to ask their husbands for money and they [the

husbands] listen to them because they have money. . . they also eatbetter because they can buy food’’. Fulbe men acknowledge bothaspects, particularly the former. Fulbe men see the growing powerof the Rimaiibe women as a confirmation of the moral and personalweakness of Rimaiibe men as people ‘‘easily manipulated andpushed around’’, and their reluctance towards living in the villagemust thus also be seen in this light.

6.2. Appropriate work and ethnic identity

Fulbe and Rimaiibe are not only defined by cultural traits, butalso by occupational specialisation. Occupation is thus closelyrelated to ethnicity and contrasting occupations are a verycommon way to illustrate ethnic differences in Biidi 2 and in thisarea generally (see also Riesman, 1977, pp. 116–117). Crucially,this process of differentiation based upon occupation is related byFulbe in Biidi 2 to other stereotypical traits such as body posture,skin colour, perceived intelligence, physical endurance andbehaviour. This means that not only is occupational transgression,or doing the work of another ethnic group, a challenge to ethnicstatus but also a potential embracement of psychological andphysical stereotypes deemed ‘non Fulbe’ (see Coulthard, 2008 for asimilar argument from India).

For Fulbe, it is among their ex-slaves that one finds most clearlyexpressed everything that is the opposite of what they perceivethemselves to be (see also Hampshire, 2004), and therefore doingthe work of the slaves presents an existential challenge. Labourmigration, working for development projects and in the gardensare by Fulbe viewed as slave work, requiring a number of bothmental and physical attributes that they do not see themselves ashaving or desiring. In contrast, Fulbe view Rimaiibe as perfectlysuited for this type of work. Fulbe describe Rimaiibe as black, short,stocky and physically strong, making them very suited to bendingover and working hard in the sun. Fulbe in Biidi 2 often stated ininterviews and during daily conversations that Rimaiibe are lessintelligent and therefore perceived to be suited to do repetitivework all day without getting bored or frustrated. In contrast, Fulbe

view themselves as upright, slender, refined, light-skinned andcultivated (see also Riesman, 1977, p. 127), traits which,according to Fulbe in Biidi 2, make them incompatible with thetype of work required in the gardens, projects and on labourmigration, as such work is rightly understood to take place in thesun, requiring a lot of bending over, lifting and pushing. To do thistype of work was therefore often deemed beneath Fulbe andshameful (semteende).

The Fulbe lack of engagement in development projects issimilarly associated with Fulbe understandings of themselves.The projects do neither exclude Fulbe nor target Rimaiibe, butFulbe in Biidi 2 see projects as the extended arm of a centralgovernment of which they have been suspicious ‘‘since the firstwhites arrived here’’ (see also Lund, 1999). This suspicion,interviews revealed, was to a large degree due to the abandon-ment of slavery during both the colonial and post-colonial periodand the resulting undermining of Fulbe access to labour andgardens, but also to the fact that Fulbe view themselves as a freeand independent people unaccustomed to and uneasy aboutbeing subjected to ‘‘foreign rule’’ (Lund, 1999). Again, the Rimaiibe

were used as a contrasting image and Fulbe explain theirengagement with projects as a result of them being used to be‘‘bossed around’’ and told what to do ‘‘because they are slaves’’. Towork for others, and in particular on projects where the work isalways extremely physical and repetitive therefore does notappeal to Fulbe in Biidi 2 as it equates them with their formerslaves. Accordingly, they often ridicule the three Fulbe menactually working for projects by treating them like slaves, tellingthem to fetch or do things.

J.Ø. Nielsen, A. Reenberg / Global Environmental Change 20 (2010) 142–152150

6.3. The most Fulbe of work: transhumance

This Fulbe love of freedom epitomised in their preference to livein the bush and their rejection of acting like slaves by working forprojects and doing menial and repetitive work like gardening andlabour migration, is also captured in that most Fulbe of work,transhumance (Riesman, 1977, p. 70), which is the occupationalspecialisation associated with Fulbe in this region (Milleville, 1991;Raynaut, 1997; Hampshire, 2006).

Transhumance has in the past turned out to be a successful wayfor Fulbe to deal with the transient biophysical setting of northernSahel as it negate localised drought. Over the last 20 or so years,however, Fulbe in Biidi 2 mentioned that practicing transhumanceis becoming increasingly difficult, less necessary, and not the mostefficient way to increase the herd.

The difficulty associated with transhumance is, according toFulbe, that the traditional destinations and particularly the ‘‘land ofthe Mossi’’ – as the central plateau of Burkina Faso is called in Biidi 2– is becoming increasingly cultivated and populated, restrictingaccess to watering holes and grazing areas (see, however, Breuserset al., 1998). Stories told by Fulbe returning from the ‘land of Mossi’often pivots around conflicts with Mossi farmers and they areconsequently looking for other places to go. However, Fulbe do notreally need to go. The bush surrounding Biidi 2 provides enoughfodder and water for their cattle: ‘‘The bush is green and here isenough water. I don’t need to take my cattle to the land of theMossi, but I still go despite problems [with Mossi farmers]’’.

Moreover, Fulbe, like Layya just quoted, acknowledge thatengaging in livelihood diversification strategies and particularlylabour migration enables Rimaiibe men to buy and keep cattle, i.e.to augment their herds. A group of older Fulbe men stated in a focusgroup discussion that ‘‘Rimaiibe men come home from Abidjanwith enough money to buy cattle. It is good to have cattle. In harshtimes they can be sold, but many Rimaiibe men do not even do that.They make more money in other ways and their herds grow’’. Thisview is echoed by young Fulbe men. They similarly argue thatlabour migration and other income generating strategies result inlarger herds and they regret that practicing transhumance preventthem from participating in these activities as they collide in time:‘‘Going to Abidjan and transhumance both takes place afterharvest. That is unfortunate, really, for we can see how Rimaiibe

men our age make a lot more money than us. Money they ofteninvest in cattle. Cattle are the best way to deal with problems. Theycan always be sold. That was how our fathers dealt with the bigdroughts when we were small’’.

Fulbe are, in other words, well aware that transhumance iscurrently associated with difficulty, not strictly necessary, and notan advantageous economic activity as it vis-a-vis labour migrationfor example do not augment the herd or prevent the selling ofcattle to buy food; yet they continue to do it. Abdoulaye, a youngFulbe man, captures why: ‘‘We like it; it is pulaade [to act like aFulbe]’’. Being in the bush with the animals, often far from home,provides freedom, solitude, independence and the means by whichthe men become alert, cunning and enduring; psychologicalattributes all deemed quintessentially Fulbe and associated withndimaaku and the more encompassing concept of pulaaku, or Fulbe

identity. They also perceive their build as physically suited forwalking with the cattle. ‘‘We are built to do it’’, was a frequentlygiven explanation, followed by ‘‘and we are the ones that knowcattle’’. Fulbe perceive themselves as experts on cattle, and theytake great pride in their knowledge of them, mainly gained whileon transhumance. While Fulbe do not consider their closerelationship with cattle during transhumance as being the causeof their ‘‘cultural and psychological peculiarities’’ (Riesman, 1977,p. 119), they often use their knowledge about cattle to distinguishthemselves from Rimaiibe. Because Rimaiibe today have as many

cattle (if not more) as Fulbe and maintain that they too know aboutcattle even though they do not go on transhumance, transhumancehas taken on more importance as a distinguishing occupation forFulbe. Fulbe maintain that transhumance provides them with a wayto ‘‘know the cattle’’ in its most intimate details, setting them apartfrom Rimaiibe, who are ‘‘ignorant about cattle’’ because they do notto the same extent go on transhumance. Transhumance representsin this way, like many of the other activities that Fulbe do or do notdo, aspects of what being Fulbe is all about, as it encapsulatescertain psychological and bodily traits deemed Fulbe and reinforcesthe differences between Fulbe and Rimaiibe. Fulbe in Biidi 2 areconsequently reluctant to give up on transhumance mainly due toexistential and cultural reasons, despite the fact that transhu-mance is associated with difficulties, not strictly necessary, andstands in the way of often more economically viable strategiessuch as labour migration.

In sum, Fulbe are well aware of the potential benefits of labourmigration, development work, women’s work and gardens, as theydaily observe how these strategies benefit Rimaiibe by providingthem with cash so crucial for household survival, but they areunwilling to fully embrace these strategies because they entailattributes deemed ‘non Fulbe’. In this way, Fulbe can be viewed asbeing culturally prevented from pursuing more lucrative pathwaysof adaptation, as the available or successful adaptation strategies tothe most recent climate change in Biidi 2 appear ill-suited to Fulbe

norms and values, which, in turn, can be viewed as cultural barriersto adaptation.

7. Conclusion

Considering the growing political, academic and local aware-ness of the necessity of adaptation to climate change, under-standing that adaptation is defined by ‘varied sensitivities’exhibited by different groups of actors is crucial. Adaptation toclimate change will never be a homogenous process agreed uponby all parties, but one influenced by factors such as class, genderand culture, to mention but a few. Acknowledging this must be afirst step for researchers, policy makers and civil society ifadaptation at the local level is to be facilitated, supported andunderstood.

This paper has attempted to illustrate this heterogeneity inadaptation to climate change by focusing on livelihood diversifica-tion as both a process by which ‘‘rural households construct anincreasingly diverse portfolio of activities and assets in order tosurvive and to improve their standard of living’’ (Ellis, 2000) and assomething determined by culture. It should be noted, however,that the chosen approach, based on in-depth analysis of one village,limits the generalisability of the data for the wider region. Indeed itseems that Fulbe in other parts of the region are embracing thestrategies rejected in Biidi 2 (Buhl and Homewood, 2001;Hampshire, 2006). Hence, cultural barriers to adaptation can onlybe understood in context, which requires that the scale and agencyof decision making is defined. This is generally much lessproblematic at the micro-scale, where the range of agents,contexts and interests are less diffuse (Adger et al., 2009). Thisdoes not, however, mean that place-based, micro-scale andcontext-specific studies may not provide insights of a moregeneric nature about conditions that enhance or constrain adaptivecapacity (Adger et al., 2007, p. 729). Indeed, understanding thegeneral importance of the role of culture in adaptation to climatechange probably depends upon micro-scale and context-specificstudies due to the contextual nature of culture (see, for example,Tompkins, 2005; Coulthard, 2008).

In Biidi 2, Rimaiibe have taken advantage of the arrival ofdevelopment projects, the labour power of women and the wells inthe gardens and increased their labour migration in order to better

J.Ø. Nielsen, A. Reenberg / Global Environmental Change 20 (2010) 142–152 151

cope with the biophysical uncertainty caused by the most recentSahelian droughts. Among Fulbe, livelihood adjustments are lessprominent. Reluctant to embrace the diversification strategies oflabour migration, development work and gardening, they haveeffectively cut themselves off from three major adaptationstrategies available in the village. While the traditional Fulbe

preference for transhumance coupled with specific historicaldevelopments (the end of slavery, land legislation and the focus ofdevelopment projects on helping the village) have been stressed toplay a part in their decisions, the argument in this paper has beenthat the main reasons behind the persistence of this prioritizationare cultural. In particularly, the Fulbe adherence to the traditionalconcepts of ndimaaku (personal integrity; worthiness), semteede

(shame) and pulaaki (Fulbe-ness) have been shown to be crucialsince the livelihood diversification options of labour migration,gardening, and working for development projects all challengethese concepts in substantial ways. Adaptation for Fulbe thuspresents an existential challenge as the livelihood strategiesavailable confront their cultural self-image and singularity quiteprofoundly. Choosing against contemporary pathways of adapta-tion by Fulbe is in this light highly understandable.

Acknowledgements

The field research was funded by a Danish Ministry of ForeignAffairs Research Grant (Grant 104.Dan.8-914). This study was partof the African Monsoon Multidisciplinary Analysis (AMMA)project. Based on a French initiative, AMMA was built by aninternational scientific group and is currently funded by a largenumber of agencies, especially from France, UK, US and Africa. Ithas been the beneficiary of a major financial contribution from theEuropean Community’s Sixth Framework Research Programme.Detailed information on scientific coordination and funding isavailable on the AMMA International web site: http://www.amma-international.org. Helpful comments given by threeanonymous referees are gratefully acknowledged. I would like toextend my thanks to the villagers of Biidi 2.

References

Adger, N.W., Dessai, S., Goulden, M., Hulme, M., Lorenzoni, I., Nelson, D., Naess, L.-O.,Wolf, J., Wreford, A., 2009. Are there social limits to adaptation to climatechange? Climatic Change 93, 335–354.

Adger, N.W., Brooks, N., Bentham, G., Agnew, M., Eriksen, S., 2004. New Indicators ofVulnerability and adaptive Capacity. University of East Anglia, Tyndall CentreFor Climate Change Research Technical Report, 7. Available online: http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/research/theme3/final_reports/it1_11.pdf.

Adger, W.N., Brooks, N., 2003. Does global environmental change cause vulner-ability to disaster? In: Pelling, M. (Ed.), Natural Disasters and Development in aGlobalizing World. Routledge, London, pp. 19–42.

Adger, W.N., Agrawala, S., Mirza, M., Conde, C., O’Brien, K., Pulhin, J., Pulwarty, R.,Smit, B., Takahashi, K., 2007. Assessment of adaptation practices, optionsconstraints and capacity. In: Parry, M.L., Canzaini, O.F., Palutikof, J.P., van derLinden, P.J., Hanson, C.E. (Eds.), Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation andVulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth AssessmentReport of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge Uni-versity Press, Cambridge, pp. 717–743.

Atampugre, N., 1997. Aid, NGOs and Grassroots Development: Northern BurkinaFaso. Review of African Political Economy 24, 57–73.

Barrett, C.B., Reardon, T., Webb, P., 2001. Nonfarm income diversification andhousehold livelihood strategies in rural Africa: concepts, dynamics, and policyimplications. Food Policy 26, 315–331.

Batterbury, S., Warren, A., 2001. The African Sahel 25 years after the great drought:assessing progress and moving towards new agendas and approaches. GlobalEnvironmental Change 11, 1–8.

Bernard, H.R., 2002. Research Methods in Anthropology. Qualitative and Quanti-tative Approaches. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek.

Bolwig, S., 1999. Livelihood Practices and Land Use in the Sahel. Labour Allocationand Adaptive Capability among the Fulani Rimaybe in Northern Burkina Faso.Ph.D. Thesis. Department of Geography, University of Copenhagen, Denmark,Unpublished.

Bolwig, S., Paarup-Laursen, B., 1999. Nature, work, culture: labour utilisation inagriculture and off-farm employment among the Fulani in northern BurkinaFaso. Danish Journal of Geography 2, 27–41.

Breusers, M., Nederlof, S., Van Rheenen, T., 1998. Conflict or symbiosis? Disentan-gling farmer-herdsman relations: the Mossi and Fulbe of the Central Plateau,Burkina Faso. The Journal of Modern African Studies 36 (3), 357–380.

Brook, G., 1993. Landlords and Strangers: Ecology, Society, and Trade in West Africa,1000–1630. Westview Press, Boulder.

Brooks, N., Adger, W.N., 2005. Assessing and enhancing adaptive capacity. In: Lim,B., Spanger-Seigfred, I., Burton, E., Malone, E.L., Huq, S. (Eds.), Adaptive PolicyFrameworks for Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp.165–182.

Bryceson, D.F., 1996. Deagrarianization and rural employment in sub-SaharanAfrica: a sectoral perspective. World Development 24, 97–111.

Bryceson, D.F., 2002. The scramble in Africa: reorienting rural livelihoods. WorldDevelopment 30, 725–739.

Buhl, S., Homewood, K., 2001. Milk selling among Fulani women in northernBurkina Faso. In: Hodgson, D.L. (Ed.), Rethinking Pastoralism in Africa. Gender,Culture, and Myth of Patriarchal Pastoralist. James Currey Publishing, Oxford,pp. 207–226.

Carney, D. (Ed.), 1998. Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: What Contribution Can WeMake? Department for International Development, London.

Carswell, G., 2002. Livelihood diversification: increasing in importance or increas-ingly recognised? Evidence from Southern Ethiopia. Journal of InternationalDevelopment 14, 789–804.

Cleveland, D.A., 1991. Migration in West Africa: a savannah village perspective.Africa 61, 222–246.

Cordell, D.D., Gregory, J.W., Piche, V., 1996. Hoe and Wage. A Social History of aCircular Migration System in West Africa. Westview Press, Boulder.

Coulthard, S., 2008. Adapting to environmental change in artisanal fisheries—insights from a South Indian Lagoon. Global Environmental Change 18, 479–489.

David, R., 1995. Changing Places? Women Resource Management and Migration inthe Sahel. SOS Sahel, London.

De Bruijn, M., Dijk, H.V., 1994. Drought and coping strategies in Fulbe society in theHayre (Central Mali): a historical perspective. Cahiers d’Etudes Africaines 34,85–108.

De Bruijn, M., Dijk, H.V., 1995. Arid Ways: Cultural Understandings of Insecurity inthe Sahel. Thela Publishers, Amsterdam.

Ellis, F., 2000. Rural Livelihoods and Diversification in Developing Countries. OxfordUniversity Press, Oxford.

Elmqvist, B., Olsson, L., 2006. Livelihood diversification: continuity and change inthe Sahel. GeoJournal 67, 167–180.

Faura, A., 1995. L’Appropriation Privee en Milieu Rural: Politiques Foncieres etPratiques Locales au Burkina Faso. 59. International Institute for Environmentand Development, London.

Findley, S.E., 1994. Does drought increase migration? A study of migration fromRural Mali during the 1983–1985 drought. International Migration Review 28,539–553.

Ford, J.D., Smit, B., Wandel, J., 2006. Vulnerability to climate change in the Arctic:a case study from Arctic Bay Canada. Global Environmental Change 16, 145–160.

Hampshire, K., Randall, S.C., 1999. Seasonal labour migration strategies in the Sahel:coping with poverty or optimizing security? International Journal of PopulationGeography 5, 367–385.

Hampshire, K., Randall, S.C., 2000. Pastoralist, agropastoralist and migrants: inter-actions between fertility and mobility in northern Burkina Faso. PopulationStudies 5, 247–261.

Hampshire, K., 2004. Fulani. In: Ember, C.R., Ember, M. (Eds.), Encyclopaedia ofMedical Anthropology. Health and Illness in the World’s Cultures. Kluwer, NewYork, pp. 656–664.

Hampshire, K., 2006. Flexibility in domestic organization and seasonal migrationamong the Fulani of Northern Burkina Faso. Africa 76, 402–426.

Henry, S., Schoumaker, B., Beauchemin, C., 2004. The impact of rainfall on the firstout-migration: a multi-level event-history analysis in Burkina Faso. Populationand Environment 25, 423–460.

Hulme, M., 2001. Climatic perspectives on Sahelian desiccation: 1973–1998. GlobalEnvironmental Change 11, 19–29.

IPCC, 2007. Working Group II Contributions to the Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change Fourth Assessment Report. Climate Change 2007: ClimateChange Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability.

Klein, R.J.T., Smith, J.B., 2003. Enhancing the capacity of developing countries toadapt to climate change: a policy relevant research agenda. In: Smith, J.B., Klein,R.J.T., Huq, S. (Eds.), Climate Change, Adaptive Capacity and Development.Imperial College Press, London, pp. 317–334.

Lund, C., 1999. Politics in a Sahelien town; Dori and the art of alliance. DanishJournal of Geography 2 (special issue), 15–26.

MaCann, J., 1999. Climate and causation in African History. The InternationalJournal of African Historical Studies 32, 261–279.

Malley, R., 1999. The Third Worldist Moment. Current History (November), 359–369.

McCauley, J.F., 2003. Ploughing ahead: the effects of agricultural mechanization onland tenure in Burkina Faso. Journal of Public and International Affairs 14, 2–27.

McIntosh, R.J., 2000. Climate history and human action. In: McIntosh, R.J., Tainter,J.A., McIntosh, S.K. (Eds.), The Way the Wind Blows: Climate, History, andHuman Action. Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 141–180.

Milleville, P., 1991. Les systemes de culture. In: Claude, J., Grouzis, M., Milleville, P.(Eds.), Un espace sahelian. La mare d’Oursi. Burkina Faso. Orstom, Paris, pp.143–155.

J.Ø. Nielsen, A. Reenberg / Global Environmental Change 20 (2010) 142–152152

Mortimore, M., 1998. Roots in the African Dust. Sustaining the Drylands. CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge.

Mortimore, M., Adams, W.M., 2001. Farmer adaptation, change and ‘Crisis’ in theSahel. Global Environmental Change 11, 49–57.

Nicholson, S., 1978. Climatic variation in the Sahel and other African regions duringthe past five centuries. Journal of Arid Environments 1, 3–24.

Nicholson, S., 2005. On the question of the ‘‘recovery’’ of the rain in the West AfricanSahel. Journal of Arid Environment 63, 615–641.

Nielsen, J.Ø., Reenberg, A., 2009. Temporality and the problem with singling outclimate as a current driver of change in a small West African Village. Journal ofArid Environments, doi:10.1016/j.jaridenv.2009.09.019.

Næss, L.O., Bang, G., Eriksen, S., Vevatne, J., 2005. Institutional adaptation to climatechange: flood responses at the municipal level in Norway. Global Environ-mental Change Part A 15, 125–138.

O’Brien, K., Eriksen, S., Sygna, L., Næss, L.O., 2006. Questioning complacency: climatechange impacts, vulnerability, and adaptation in Norway. Ambio 35, 50–56.

OECD, 2006. The Ecologically Vulnerable Zone of Sahelian Countries. Atlas onRegional Integration in West Africa. Sahel and West Africa Club, ECOWAS,and OECD, Paris.

Pielke, R., Prins, G., Rayner, S., Sarewitz, D., 2007. Climate change 2007: lifting thetaboo on adaptation. Nature 445, 597–598.

Rain, D., 1999. Eaters of the Dry Season. Circular Labor Migration in the West AfricanSahel. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.

Rasmussen, K., Reenberg, A., 1992. Satellite remote sensing of land use in northernBurkina Faso—the case of Kolel village. Geografisk Tidsskrift 92, 86–93.

Raynaut, C., 1997. Societies and Nature in the Sahel. Routeledge/SEI Global Envir-onmental Series, London.

Reenberg, A., Fog, B., 1995. The spatial pattern and dynamics of a Sahelian agro-ecosystem. GeoJournal 37, 489–499.

Reenberg, A., Paarup-Laursen, B., 1997. Determinants for land use strategies in aSahelian agro-ecosystem—anthropological and ecological geographical aspectsof natural resource management. Agricultural Systems 53, 209–229.

Reenberg, A., 2009. Embedded flexibility in coupled human-environmental systemsin the Sahel: talking about resilience. In: Hastrup, K. (Ed.), The Question ofResilience. Social implications of environmental changes. The Royal DanishAcademy of Sciences and Letters, Copenhagen.

Riesman, P., 1977. Freedom in Fulani Social Life. An Introspective Ethnography.University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Riesman, P., 1992. First Find Your Child a Good Mother. The Construction of Self inTwo African Communities. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick.

Robledo, C., Fischler, M., Patino, A., 2004. Increasing the resilience of hillsidecommunities in Bolivia. Mountain Research and Development 24, 14–18.

Samoff, J., 2004. From funding projects to supporting sectors? Observation on theaid relationship in Burkina Faso. International Journal of Education Develop-ment 24, 397–427.

Skinner, E.P., 1988. Sankara and the Burkinabe revolution: charisma and power localand external dimensions. The Journal of Modern African Studies 26, 437–455.

Tompkins, E.L., 2005. Planning for climate change in small islands: insights fromnational hurricane preparedness in the Cayman Islands. Global EnvironmentalChange Part A 15, 139–149.

UNFCCC, 2007. Climate change: impacts, vulnerability and adaptation in developingcountries. A Report by the United Nations Framework Convention on ClimateChange.

Vivian, J., 1994. NGOs and sustainable development in Zimbabwe: no magic bullets.In: Ghai, D. (Ed.), Development and Environment: Sustaining People andNature. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, pp. 167–193.

Watts, M., 1983. Silent Violence: Food, Famine and Peasantry in Northern Nigeria.University of California Press, Berkeley.

Webb, J., 1995. A Desert Frontier: Ecology, Society, and Trade in West Africa, 1000–1600. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.

Wilkins, M., 1989. The death of Thomas Sankara and the rectification of the People’sRevolution in Burkina Faso. African Affairs 88, 375–388.

Wouterse, F., Taylor, J.E., 2008. Migration and income diversification: evidence fromBurkina Faso. World Development 36, 625–640.