Farmer-Perceived Effects of Climate Change on Livelihoods in Wa West District, Upper West Region of...

Kusakari, Y. et al.

Paper:

Farmer-Perceived Effects of Climate Change on Livelihoodsin Wa West District, Upper West Region of Ghana

Yasuko Kusakari∗1, Kwabena Owusu Asubonteng∗2, Godfred Seidu Jasaw∗3,Frederick Dayour∗4, Togbiga Dzivenu∗4, Victor Lolig∗4, Samuel A. Donkoh∗4,

Francis Kwabena Obeng∗4, Bizoola Gandaa∗4, and Gordana Kranjac-Berisavljevic∗4

∗1Graduate Program in Sustainability Science – Global Leadership Initiative (GPSS-GLI),The University of Tokyo, Kashiwa-shi, Chiba, Japan

E-mail: [email protected]∗2United Nations University – Institute for Natural Resources in Africa (UNU-INRA), Ghana

∗3United Nations University – Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability (UNU-IAS), Japan∗4University for Development Studies (UDS), Ghana[Received February 2, 2014; accepted July 3, 2014]

The effects of climate change on people’s livelihoodsare perceived differently across various localities. Itis imperative to examine how farmers understand theeffects of climate change on their livelihoods. Theirviewpoints can help create strategies for responding toclimate and ecosystem changes in an appropriate andpractical manner. Such perceptions are insufficientlyunderstood in the Wa West District of the Upper WestRegion of Ghana, despite the increasing frequency andmagnitude of climate change’s effects. This paper firstexamines farmers’ perceptions about climate changein their communities in relation to available, conven-tional climate information. It also assesses farmers’livelihood activities during both the wet and dry sea-sons in the district and discusses the area’s pronenessto floods, droughts, and other types of climate changephenomena. This assessment reveals the challengesfaced by the farmers in the study area and the oppor-tunities to enhance their livelihoods.

Keywords: climate change, farmers, perceptions, liveli-hoods, Upper West Region, Ghana

1. Introduction1.1. Background

While there is much scientific evidence on the phe-nomenon of climate change globally [1], little researchattention has been dedicated to understanding how cli-mate change affects individuals’ livelihoods and how peo-ple perceive climate change in rural localities. It is there-fore imperative to examine how farmers perceive and un-derstand climate change and its effects on their liveli-hoods. This kind of analysis can potentially provide tar-geted strategies for responding to climate and ecosystemchanges in an appropriate and practical manner. The In-tergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in itsfourth report alerts that the warming of the global cli-mate system, mainly due to greenhouse gas emission, is

unequivocal [1]. It estimates that the global temperaturewill increase between 1.8◦C and 4◦C above the levels ob-served from 1980-1999 during the timeframe of 2090-2099, depending on how human societies continue to de-velop [1]. The report also states that changes in the cli-mate are not restricted to the rise in temperature, but canalso be detected in events such as heavier, more frequentprecipitation, an increase in the number of areas affectedby droughts, a greater number of tropical cyclones form-ing with higher intensity, and sea-level rising, among oth-ers [1].

Boko et al. (2007) assert that Africa is one of the mostvulnerable continents to climate variability and climatechange as a number of African countries are already fac-ing semi-arid conditions that are challenging to agricul-ture productivity [2]. In this respect, Ghana is not anexception. The Ministry of Environment, Science, andTechnology (MEST) of Ghana (2010) alerted the publicthat climate change is a threat to Ghana’s developmentprospects [3]. The ministry also identified various typesof climate change phenomena which Ghana has encoun-tered, such as clear signals of warming; uncertainty ofrainfall; increasing frequency, intensity, and duration ofextreme weather events (e.g, floods, droughts, storms),among others [3].

The global-level complexity of these phenomena can beclearly observed in the semi-arid regions of Ghana, par-ticularly in the Northern, Upper East, and Upper WestRegions. The devastating effects of climate change inthe northern part of the country, where poverty persists,have become an increasing concern [3, 4]. Various man-ifestations of climatic instability and change can be ob-served in northern Ghana, including floods that devastatelarge areas of near-ready grain fields, several episodes oflate rains during planting seasons, persistent droughts af-fecting large portions of the region, increasing tempera-tures, and declining precipitation [4, 5]. It has also beennoted that the north-south poverty divide is exacerbatedby climatic stress in the north, which lowers agriculturalproductivity and increases the pressure to migrate to the

516 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.9 No.4, 2014


south [3].While these trends and climate change conditions have

been observed mainly at the global, regional, national, andsub-national levels, Luni et al. (2012) emphasize that themanifestations of climate change as well as the adaptationstrategies and practices adopted by people are entirely lo-cal [6]. They also argue that the views of local commu-nities about ongoing climate change, its causes, and itsimpacts can be entirely different from the views of thescientific community [6-8]. Furthermore, while properclimate prediction and appropriate policy responses arecritical at the local level, developing countries, includingGhana, encounter challenges in implementing these mea-sures, thus resulting in limited options for locally suitedfeasible strategies to respond to climate change.

1.2. Objectives of This PaperAgainst this backdrop, this paper examines the case of

the Wa West District of the Upper West Region, Ghana.The objectives of this paper are as follows:

• To compare how farmers at the community leveland district stakeholders with conventional climatechange information perceive climate change;

• To assess both the livelihood/socio-economic activi-ties of farmers during the wet and dry seasons and theproneness of their livelihood activities to drought,flood, and other climate change phenomena; and

• To examine major climate change challenges fromfarmers’ perspectives in order to share the findingswith policy makers, development organizations, andother stakeholders who work to promote climatechange adaptation.

2. Conceptual Framework: Perceptions onChanging Climate from a Livelihood Per-spective

While perceptions are not necessarily congruent withreality, they must be considered in order to address socio-economic challenges. They have a close association withindividuals’ respective environments and link either di-rectly or indirectly with their attitudes, behaviors, andsubsequent outcomes.

In the field of psychology, Lindsay and Norman (1972)define perception as the process by which organisms in-terpret and organize sensation to produce a meaningfulexperience of the world [9]. Hartig et al. (2001) assumethat a person’s perceptions are based on experiences withnatural and other environmental factors that vary in theextent to which such perceptions are enabled [10]. Con-sequently, perceptions have gradually been recognized asa vital part of examining complex environments and rele-vant attitudes and behaviors in various disciplines.

In the area of climate change, studies about farmers’perceptions of climate change have increasingly been re-garded as important globally, particularly in Africa. These

studies have been used to understand how climate changeis perceived at local levels and to recommend plausibleadaptation strategies and public policies that match farm-ers’ experiences and capacities to adapt [6-8, 11].

The MEST of Ghana indicates that “the way in whichpeople experience climate shocks varies across differentsocial groups, geographic locations, and seasons of theyear, with men, women, and children all experiencing dif-ferent levels of hardships and opportunity in the face ofclimate change” [3]. These factors are also certainly af-fecting the livelihoods of people in various ways and withvarying intensities.

Previously, “livelihood” had predominantly been de-fined through the lens of income. In their work fromthe early 1990s, Chambers and Conway (1992) presenta comprehensive framework and define sustainable liveli-hoods as “a livelihood [that] comprises the capabilities,assets, and activities for a means of living” [12]. Theyfurther emphasize the vulnerability context, which en-compasses shocks, trends, and seasonality, by stating that“livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and re-cover from stress and shocks, maintain or enhance itscapabilities or assets and provide sustainable livelihoodsopportunities for the next generation; and which con-tribute net benefits to other livelihoods at the local andglobal levels and in the short and long terms” [12]. Car-ney (1998) also stresses that sustainable livelihoods entailthose activities that afford people the opportunity to copewith and recover from shocks and help them attain andmaintain a certain quality of life over generations [13].When considering the changing circumstances that maydirectly affect the state of poverty in Ghana, the MESThas also argues that such a “dynamic situation requirespolicy responses to climate change that look beyond in-come measurements to capture the full picture of vulnera-bility” [3]. It is a widely held view that smallholder farm-ers in Africa, including Ghana, encounter challenging cir-cumstances and that agriculture is one of the few liveli-hood options available to them. If investments in agri-culture simultaneously address growth and equity, liveli-hoods could be improved [14]. For many households indeveloping countries, particularly in rural areas, farmingon its own does not provide a sufficient means of survival,and livelihood diversification is necessary. Ellis (2000)defines rural livelihood diversification as the process bywhich rural households construct an increasingly diverseportfolio of activities and assets in order to survive and toimprove their standard of living [15]. Because of climatechange and its effects on farmers’ livelihoods in Ghana,further investment in agriculture and in diversifying liveli-hoods is increasingly becoming the key to addressing sus-tainable livelihoods. In order to promote such efforts, itis critical to examine farmers’ perceptions, as a one-size-fits-all approach does not necessarily reflect the diverseand complex situations that local communities encounter.

To comprehend the potential or even probable re-sponses by agriculturalists to global warming, an under-standing of how farmers form their perceptions of cli-mate change from the influences of actual climatic shifts,

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.9 No.4, 2014 517

Kusakari, Y. et al.

scientific information, and socio-cultural factors is re-quired [16]. A perception analysis performed by Buntinget al. (2013) illustrates how a household’s ability tocreate more resilient livelihood outcomes is influencedby environmental conditions and socio-economic institu-tions [17].

Naess et al. (2010) indicate that understanding localperceptions of climate changes is helpful because this un-derstanding: 1) can help identify more precisely what isrequired to strengthen local climate resilience; 2) aids inidentifying specific constraints that different actors andgroups face; 3) uncovers a more holistic appreciation ofadaptation in relation to particular socio-economic, polit-ical, or historical contexts; and 4) provides policy makerswith data about how climate change impacts are felt at thelocal level, the challenges and opportunities that peopleface in adjusting their livelihoods, and the assistance thatshould be provided [18].

3. Methodology3.1. Study Area

This study examines four communities in the Wa WestDistrict, which is located in the western part of the Up-per West Region of Ghana, approximately between lon-gitudes 9◦40′N and 10◦10′N and also between latitudes2◦20′W and 2◦50′W [19]. The district is bordered by theNadowli District to the north, Wa Municipality to the east,Sawla-Tuna-Kalba District to the south, and Burkina Fasoto the west. In 2004, Legislative Instrument 1751 carvedthe district out of the erstwhile Wa District, which wasthus divided into three administrative units, i.e., Wa Mu-nicipality, Wa East District, and Wa West District. TheWa West District is drained by the Black Volta River andits tributaries. The Black Volta River originates in Baoule(the south-west of Burkina Faso), forms the border be-tween Ghana and Burkina Faso and between Ghana andCote d’Ivoire, and finally joins Lake Volta in Ghana [20].

According to the National Population and HousingCensus, the Wa West District’s population in 2010 was81,348 (Male: 40,227; Female: 41,121) [21]. The mostpredominant ethnic group in the District is the Brifor, fol-lowed by the Waalas and Dagaabas [22].

This research was undertaken in 2013 as part ofa project titled “Enhancing Resilience to Climate andEcosystem Changes in Semi-Arid Africa: An IntegratedApproach (CECAR-Africa).” Four study communities,namely Baleufili, Bankpama, Chietanga, and Zowayeli,were selected through comprehensive selection processes,based on their agro-ecological, engineering, and socio-economic resilience/vulnerabilities under the CECAR-Africa Project in 2012. According to the 2012 populationprojection by the Wa West District Assembly, the popu-lations of the respective communities are as follows: 466(M: 248; F: 218) in Baleufili, 742 (M: 356; F: 386) inBankpama, 359 (M: 159; F: 200) in Chietanga, and 226(M: 128; F: 98) in Zowayeli [23].

Agriculture is the main livelihood activity in the lo-

cality. In the Wa West District, over 90% of the laborforce works in the agricultural sector [19], and agricultureaccounts for 80% of the district’s economy [22]. Agri-cultural activities in the District predominantly dependon rainfall as the main source of moisture for agricul-tural production. Only a limited number of communi-ties, predominantly those with support from developmentpartners, have community dams and reservoirs with wa-ter storage for dry season gardening. The majority offarming communities have very limited livelihood activ-ities available during dry seasons, thus exacerbating thepoverty situation. Other socio-economic activities com-mon in the study area include livestock rearing, poultrykeeping, shea butter processing, pito (local beer) brewing,charcoal making, fishing, and trading. Only few farmerspractice dry season irrigated farming.

The district falls within the Guinea Savannah agro-ecological zone. The area has two distinct seasons, a rainyseason that lasts from April to October and a dry seasonthat lasts for the rest of the year. Various manifestationsof climatic variation and change have been observed innorthern Ghana. The manifestations include floods thatdevastate large areas of near-ready grain fields, severalepisodes of late rains during planting seasons, persistentdroughts in large portions of the region, increasing tem-peratures, and declining precipitation [3-5]. Communitiesin the Wa West District are not exception to these impactsof climate.

3.2. Research Design and MethodsFor this research, a literature review, socio-economic

household survey, Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) atthe community level, and a plenary meeting with key lo-cal stakeholders of the Wa West District were conducted.The publications and existing secondary data that were re-viewed were published by the Government of Ghana, re-search institutions, and other agencies working in the ar-eas of climate change and livelihoods in northern Ghana.

A socio-economic household survey was carried outin all four study communities in May 2013. Basedon the number of households per community, 40% ofall households were randomly selected from a georef-erenced household database of the respective communi-ties. A total of 92 households, which included 35 house-holds (out of 86) in Baleufili, 32 households (out of 79)in Bankpama, 15 households (out of 37) in Chietanga,and 10 households (out of 25) in Zowayeli, was sam-pled. At each of the selected households, two adults ofthe opposite sex were interviewed, totaling 184 respon-dents. This socio-economic household survey adoptedsemi-structured individual interviews, which were con-ducted in local languages (Waale, Dagaati, and Brifori).Visual observations of some socio-economic characteris-tics, such as housing type, clothing, livelihood assets, nu-tritional status of family members, and reactions of inter-viewees to various questions, were also made throughoutthe interviews.

Subsequently, Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) werecarried out in August 2013 in all four study communities



in the Wa West District as a means of follow-up data col-lection. In each community, participants were groupedinto three categories: 1) community elders; 2) men (in-cluding male youth); and 3) women (including femaleyouth). This created 12 groups in total. The groups en-gaged in extensive discussions about climate and ecolog-ical changes and disaster governance at the local level.

In addition, the team facilitated the Wa West Districtstakeholders’ plenary meeting by discussing various is-sues relating to climate and ecological changes and dis-aster governance. Approximately 25 district-level stake-holders were drawn mainly from climate, disaster, andagriculture related institutions that operated in the Dis-trict, including the National Disaster Management Or-ganization (NADMO), Ministry of Food and Agricul-ture (MoFA), Environment Protection Agency (EPA),other Ministries/Departments/Agencies (MDAs), Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), and the Wa WestDistrict Assembly.

The data from the aforementioned surveys were sub-jected to quantitative analyses using means, ranking, fre-quencies, chi-square tests, and qualitative analyses usingdiscourse analysis.

4. Findings

Based on the data collected in the field through thesocio-economic household survey and FGDs, this sectionanalyzes various aspects of farmers’ perceptions aboutlong-term climate change (temperature, rainfall amount,and rainfall patterns); disasters (droughts, floods, andother types of disasters); and the possible causes and ef-fects of climate change on their livelihood activities.

4.1. Ranking of Critical Climate ChangesIn the Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), community

members were asked to rank 1) common disasters andclimate change trends; 2) disasters/climate changes thataffect their farms; and 3) disasters/climate changes thataffect their houses. The highest ranked climate changewas given a score of 10, the second highest was given a9, and so forth. All 12 groups perceived drought (totalscore: 120) to be the most common disaster in their com-munities. The second most highly ranked disaster/climatechange was storms (80). Three types of changes – rainfallamount, seasonal rainfall shift, and increasing tempera-ture – came in third place with 44 points, followed bybushfire (39) and flood (34).

The following table shows the top five disasters thatwere ranked as the most common disasters in the commu-nities. Scores of the three focus groups (i.e., a maximumof 10 for elders, men, and women, respectively) were ag-gregated based on the ranking, leading to a maximum of30 (Table 1).

The FGDs also asked the participants to rank the typesof disasters that affected their farms. As Table 2 shows,all 12 focus groups unanimously answered that drought,with a score of 120, was the most influential disaster

Table 1. Ranking of perceived occurrences of common dis-asters/climate change phenomena.

Baleufili Bankpama Chietanga ZowayeliMostcommon

Drought(30)

Drought(30)

Drought(30)

Drought(30)

Second Bushfire(26)

Storms (18) Storms (22) Flood (19)

Third Storms (23) Temperature(17)

Beginningof rain (19)

Storms (17)

Fourth Rainfallamount;Temperature;Beginningof rain (12)

Rainfallamount (16)

Temperature(15)

Rainfallamount (16)

Fifth Bushfire(13)

Flood (15) Beginningof rain (13)

Source: Field research/FGDs (2013)

Table 2. Ranking of disasters/climate change phenomenaaffecting farms most.


Drought(30)

Drought(30)

Drought(30)

Drought(30)

Second Storms (17) Flood (24) Flood (26) Storms (17)Third

Flood;Animals(13)

Bushfire(20)

Bushfire(14)

Annualrainfall (16)

Fourth Storms (18) Beginningof rain (13)

Flood (14)

Fifth Annualrainfall (11)

Annualrainfall (12)

Annualrainfall (12)

Bushfire(11)

Source: Field research/ FGDs (2013)

Table 3. Ranking of disasters affecting houses most.


Storms(30)

Storms (30) Storms (29) Storms (29)

SecondFlood;high Tem-perature(17)

Flood (18) High Tem-perature(17)

Flood (17)

Third Thunders/lightning (9)

Flood (10) Rainfall (9)

Fourth N/A High Tem-perature(8)

Low rainfallleads to foodshortage (9)

High Tem-perature (7)

Source: Field research/FGDs (2013)

that affected farming, the major livelihood activity. Othertypes of disasters/climate change phenomena that affectedfarming activities included floods (77), storms (52), lowannual rainfall (51), and bushfires (45). Some groups,whose farms were destroyed by monkeys, hippopotami,birds, and cattle, also expressed their concerns about thedestruction of crops by animals (23).

Similarly, the types of disasters that affectedhouses/buildings are displayed in Table 3. As shownbelow, storms (118) were regarded as the most commondisaster that affected houses, followed by flood (62),temperature (49), and low annual rainfall (18).


Kusakari, Y. et al.

Contrary to the rankings gathered at the communitylevel, the district-level stakeholders working in climateand disaster related areas ranked the disasters with thehighest to lowest magnitudes as follows: 1) bushfire,2) drought, 3) flood, 4) rainstorm, and 5) epidemics. Eventhough non-residential stakeholders live in the same dis-trict and work with these communities closely on a regu-lar basis, there is a disparity in how these groups perceivethese disasters and their impacts.

4.2. Farmers’ Perceptions About Long-TermChanges in Temperature, Rainfall Amount,and Rainfall Patterns

This study also analyzes respondents’ perceptionsabout different types of disasters and long-term changesin climate. This section outlines farmers’ perceptionsabout long-term changes, especially changes in temper-ature, rainfall amount, and patterns.

4.2.1. TemperatureIn total, 81.5% of all respondents indicated that they be-

lieved that the temperature had been increasing for a longperiod of time. It is notable that the percentage of womenwho believed that the temperature was increasing (95.7%)was higher than the percentage of men who held the sameperception (67.4%), as displayed in Table 4. A total of30.4% of the male respondents stated that the temperaturehad not changed over the long-term, and the percentageof those who opined that the temperature was decreasingwas minimal. The chi-square asymptotic values of 0.071(Male) and 0.038 (Female) show that, on a whole, therewere a 10% significant difference between the views ofmales and a 5% significant difference between the viewsof females across the communities over the changes intemperature.

A similar result was obtained from the FGDs. The ma-jority believed that the temperature had been increasing.They claimed that the temperature had been increasingbecause of changing rainfall patterns. Men in Baleufili,however, stated that the temperature had been decreasing.The male participants in Baleufile argued that deforesta-tion and the bareness of land increased the impacts of thewind and explained why temperatures were decreasing.

4.2.2. Rainfall AmountA total of 85.3% of the respondents held the perception

that the rainfall amount in their communities had been de-creasing over time. More men (91.3%) held this viewthan women (79.3%), as shown in Table 5. Among thefour communities, women’s views were 1% significantlydifferent, given the chi-square asymptotic value of 0.009.The men’s views were, however, not significantly differ-ent, given the chi-square asymptotic value of 0.401. Moremen in Zowayeli believed that the rainfall amount had in-creased (30.0%) or remained the same (10.0%) than theircounterparts in other communities did.

The FGDs also revealed a similar pattern, with thedominant view being that the amount of rainfall had de-creased.

Table 4. Perceptions about temperature changes.

Male FemaleA B C A B C

Baleufili 62.9% 34.3% 2.9% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%Bankpama 81.3% 15.6% 3.1% 93.8% 6.3% 0.0%Chietanga 73.3% 26.7% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%Zowayeli 30.0% 70.0% 0.0% 80.0% 20.0% 0.0%Average 67.4% 30.4% 2.2% 95.7% 4.3% 0.0%

Source: Field research/Socio-economic Household Survey (2013)∗ A: Increased; B: Remains the same; C: DecreasedPearson Chi-Square Value (Male) = 11.61 Chi-Square Asym. Sig. (2-sided) 0.071Pearson Chi-Square Value (Female) = 8.44 Chi-Square Asym. Sig. (2-sided) 0.038

Table 5. Perceptions about rainfall amount.




Table 6. Perceptions about the unpredictability of rainfall.

Male FemaleMore

unpredic. Same Morepredict.

Moreunpredic. Same More

predict.Baleufili 91.4% 2.9% 5.7% 97.1% 0.0% 2.9%Bankpama 90.6% 3.1% 6.3% 81.3% 12.5% 6.3%Chietanga 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%Zowayeli 80.0% 0.0% 20.0% 80.0% 10.0% 10.0%Average 91.3% 2.2% 6.5% 90.2% 5.4% 4.3%

Source: Field research/Socio-economic Household Survey (2013)∗ A: More unpredictable; B: Same; C: More predictablePearson Chi-Square Value (Male) = 8.618 Chi-Square Asym. Sig. (2-sided) 0.196Pearson Chi-Square Value (Female) = 4.820 Chi-Square Asym. Sig. (2-sided) 0.567

4.2.3. Rainfall Patterns

For farmers in the study area, it is crucial that the be-ginning of the rainy season brings a sufficient amount ofrain in a high frequency so that they can sow their crops.Respondents lamented the increasing unpredictability ofrainfall, especially at the start of the rainy season. Morethan 90% of respondents shared this view. The FGDsalso proved that this perception was unanimous across allthe focus groups. Elders in Chietanga explained that theannual rainfall had been steadily decreasing, that it didnot rain at the right time required for farming, and that itrained very late. They noted that in the past, the rains usedto begin in March, while of late, they began to arrive asJune, and in 2013, they started in July. Such views werecommon across the communities. From Table 6, the chi-square asymptotic values of 0.567 and 0.196 imply thatthe views of men and women were not different acrossthe communities.



Table 7. Perceptions about the frequency of drought.




Table 8. Perceptions about the severity of drought.




4.3. Farmers’ Perceptions of Disasters4.3.1. Droughts

As discussed in Section 4.1, drought was the most com-monly perceived disaster with the highest magnitude inthe study areas. The respondents stated that, from theirviewpoints, both the frequency and severity of droughtsseemed to be increasing (Tables 7-8). While both menand women had similar views, with more than 80% ofmen perceiving that both the frequency and severity ofdroughts had increased, they formed a larger proportionof such respondents. Across the communities, Chietangahad the highest percentage, but all the respondents be-lieved that the severity of droughts had increased. FGDsalso proved the same pattern as all focus groups indicatedthat both the frequency and severity of droughts had in-creased, except men in Bankpama who stated that the fre-quency of droughts remained the same.

The asymptotic chi-square probabilities (0.141 for bothmale and female on frequency; 0.441 for male and 0.013for female on severity) suggest that, across the communi-ties, the views of women were 1% significantly differentand those of men were not significantly different.

4.3.2. FloodsPerceptions about floods were more divergent than per-

ceptions about other types of climate change effects anddisasters. Men tended to posit the increased frequencyand severity of floods more than women did, while morethan half of women believed that the frequency and sever-ity of floods had not changed (Tables 9-10).

Table 9. Perceptions about the frequency of floods.




Table 10. Perceptions about the severity of floods.




This result reverses the responses about droughts. Italso implies that because men farm closer to the BlackVolta River or its tributaries, they are less affected bydroughts and more by floods. On one hand, men, ashousehold heads, worry about floods destroying theirfarmlands and houses which they would have to rebuild.On the other, women need water for daily householdchores.

Among the four communities, Baleufili seemed to bethe least affected by floods, while Chietanga seemed to beaffected the most.

It is clear from the asymptotic chi-square probabilities(0.243 for male and 0.001 for female on frequency; 0.281for male and 0.001 for female on severity) that, across thecommunities, the views of women were 1% significantlydifferent and those of men were not.

Elders in Baleufili and men in Zowayeli stated thatboth the frequency and severity of floods had decreased,mainly because of the reduction in rainfall per year,whereas all the other focus groups stated that the fre-quency and severity of floods had been increasing.

4.3.3. Other Types of DisastersBesides droughts and floods, other types of disasters

and different types of climate change phenomena werediscussed by the respondents. Storms were particularlyaddressed in the communities’ rankings. More than threequarters of respondents (78.3%) stated that the frequencyof storms and their severity had increased. More mentended to state this. As men are responsible for recon-structing damaged houses and may also need to move


Kusakari, Y. et al.

Table 11. Perceptions about the frequency of storms.




Table 12. Perceptions about the severity of storms.




fallen trees on some occasions, their burden and the ef-fects on their livelihood activities may be strongly felt intheir responses.

However, the chi-square probability values of 0.251(Male) and 0.381 (Female) in Table 11 show that theviews of the respondents (both men and women) werenot significantly different across the communities. On theother hand, the values (0.034 for male and 0.076 for fe-male) in Table 12 show that the views of men were 5%significantly different while those of women were 10%significantly different.

All the focus groups in the four communities unani-mously stated that the severity of storms had increased.Similarly, the majority (11 out of 12 groups) indicatedthat the frequency of storms had also increased. Only menfrom Chietanga believed that the frequency had remainedthe same as it had been.

4.3.4. Comparison Among Major DisastersThree types of major disasters were compared by rating

the level of severity in the past and present. It was foundthat the severity of floods had not increased much, whilethe severity of droughts and storms was seen as greater inthe present than in the past, as displayed in Fig. 1.

4.4. Perceptions About the Causes of ClimateChange

Some people believed that various climate change phe-nomena (particularly increasing temperature, changingrainfall patterns, storms, and droughts) were linked to

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

F1 F2 D1 D2 S1 S2

Flood Drought Storm

Source: Field research /Socio-economic Household Survey (2013)∗ F1: Floods in the past, F2: Floods in the present; D1: Droughts in the past, D2:Droughts in the present; S1: Storms in the past; S2: Storms in the present

Fig. 1. Perceptions about changes in the severity of majordisasters in the communities.

environment-related causes such as bush burning, deser-tification, and deforestation through the felling of trees.Six focus groups in the three communities along the BlackVolta River (i.e., Bankpama, Chietanga, and Zowayeli)also linked the causes of floods to the opening of theBagre dam in Burkina Faso.

Many respondents also believed that traditional spir-itual causes influenced climate change phenomena. Inall four communities, some people argued that disastersand climate changes were due to the abandonment of thegods, which was caused by the sins of the people and theirbreaking taboos that made the gods/deities angry. Sometaboos they mentioned included fighting in the bush;spilling blood in the bush because of quarrels withoutmaking the necessary pacifications; having affairs openlyin the bush; and felling particular types of trees, suchas mahogany (Swietenia mahagoni), dawadawa (Parkiabiglobosa), and shea (Butyrospernum) trees, which arebelieved to have the power to bring rain. These be-liefs were particularly strong among those practicing tra-ditional religions, and some of the respondents who be-longed to other religions (e.g., Islam, Christianity) alsobelieved the same to a certain extent. It was quite commonfor people to practice religious rituals and prayers thataimed to mitigate the effects of extreme weather events(e.g., drought) by “calming the anger of gods/deities,” asstated by respondents. Women in Bankpama said thatthese changes indicated that the world was coming to anend. They also stated that the use of akpeteshie (an alco-holic drink), instead of fowls and other traditionally rec-ognized items for sacrifice and the appeasement of deities,may also have led to the disastrous phenomena.

District stakeholders argued that there was a clear linkbetween disasters and the behaviors of local residents. Forexample, they mentioned that indiscriminate tree fellingled to droughts and/or rainstorms and that bad farmingpractices led to floods. They also noted connections link-ing livelihoods, cultural practices, and disasters. Bush-fires, for example, were sometimes caused by hunting ac-tivities, cigarette smoking, charcoal burning, honey har-vesting, and “fire friends” who intentionally set dry grasson fire.



4.5. Perceptions About the Effects of ClimateChange on Livelihood Activities

4.5.1. Livelihood Activities Affected by ClimateChange

As shown in Fig. 2, a total of 83.7% of respondents(Male: 94.6%; Female: 72.8%) stated that farming is thelivelihood activity which is affected by droughts the most.The remaining male respondents (5.4%) answered thatlivestock rearing was the most severely affected liveli-hood activity. Women referred to a more diverse group oflivelihood activities that are affected by such phenomena.Apart from farming, other mentioned activities includedshea butter processing (9.8%), pito brewing (6.5%), andlivestock rearing (5.4%). Other activities mentioned wereakpeteshie distillation, charcoal burning, dawadawa (fer-mented locust beans) processing, food vending, and pettytrading. The major effects of droughts on farming, as nar-rated by the respondents, included low crop yield, croploss, low agricultural productivity, and food insecurity.

With respect to floods, farming was again the mostseverely affected livelihood activity according to 87.0%of the respondents (Male: 94.6%; Female: 79.3%). Othertypes of livelihood activities, particularly those of women,were also found to be highly vulnerable to floods, asshown in Fig. 3. Floods negatively affected farming ac-tivities by causing the destruction or loss of crops throughsubmersion or washing them away, resulting in low yieldand low agricultural productivity. Floods affected sheabutter processing by making it difficult to pick and dryshea nuts, washing fruits away, and causing the low yieldof shea nuts from shea trees. Charcoal burning was alsodifficult in the midst of floods. Floods affected livestockrearing by destroying pens and hencoops and causing thedeath of animals due to transmitting foot rot disease. Asa consequence of the low yield of sorghum, millet, andother crops, their prices hiked, leading to low patronageand low sales of some local businesses such as pito brew-ing and food vending. While these effects were mostlynegative, three male respondents also mentioned that theycaught more fish during or after floods, which were con-sidered as a positive effect.

4.5.2. Susceptibility of Crops to Drought

As community members make a living from farming inagrarian communities, the level of susceptibility of theircrops to major disasters is a critical factor for farmers toconsider in order to sustain their livelihood activities. Re-spondents were asked to give a score on a 1-3 scale toeach of the major crops they grew according to the levelof their susceptibility to disasters by location in the low-land or upland. Droughts and floods in particular werethe two types of disasters chosen for this scoring becausethese were identified as the most common disasters af-fecting farms. (See the ranking in Table 2.) The resultsfor lowland crops are shown in Table 13, and those forupland crops are shown in Table 14. In addition to theprovided numerical rankings, the color brown is used to

94.6%

72.8%

9.8%

6.5%

5.4%5.4%5.4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Male Female

Others

Livestock

Pito brewery

Shea bu�er processing

Farming

Source: Field research/Socio-economic household survey, 2013

Fig. 2. Livelihood activities most affected by droughts.

94.6%79.3%

5.4%4.3%

3.3%3.3%3.3%

2.2%1.1%1.1%

2.2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Male Female

nil

Grinding mill

Livestock

Charcoal burning

Food vending

Fishing

Pito brewery

Shea bu�er processing

Farming

Source: Field research/Socio-economic household survey, 2013

Fig. 3. Most affected livelihoods activities by flood.

show a high level of susceptibility, and green shows a lowlevel of susceptibility.

The data show that whilst upland crops are suscep-tible to droughts (average: 2.25), they are resistant tofloods (1.81). Similarly, lowland crops are susceptibleto floods (2.48) but can stand drought conditions (1.89).Farmers stated that some key crops (e.g., maize, cowpeas,and Bambara beans) were susceptible to both drought andfloods, while other crops were perceived to be more sus-ceptible to particular types of disasters (e.g., millet wasperceived to be more susceptible to droughts than floods).Furthermore, the location of farming (i.e., lowland andupland) was noted as a key factor determining the level ofseverity for each type of crop.

5. Conclusion

5.1. Summary of FindingsAs discussed in the previous sections, the majority

of respondents in the study communities observed thatlong-term climate change has had many effects, particu-larly on their livelihood activities such as farming. Manyfarmers in these communities noticed changing climatetrends, particularly the increasing unpredictability of rain-fall (90.7%), decreasing rainfall amount (85.3%), and in-


Kusakari, Y. et al.

Table 13. Level of susceptibility of low land crops.

Lowland crops

Susceptibility todroughts

Susceptibility tofloods

Total

Score Ranking Score Ranking Scoremean

Totalranking

Lowland Cowpea 2.32 1 2.82 4 2.57 1Lowland Maize 2.28 2 2.77 5 2.53 2Lowland Groundnut 2.06 6 2.88 2 2.47 3Lowland Bambara Beans 2.10 3 2.75 6 2.43 4Lowland Tomatoes 2.00 7 2.83 3 2.42 5Lowland Millet 2.10 4 2.63 8 2.37 6Lowland Sorghum 2.08 5 2.61 9 2.35 7Lowland Soya Beans 2.00 7 2.64 7 2.32 8Lowland Pepper 1.94 10 2.42 10 2.18 9Lowland Okra 1.72 13 2.37 11 2.05 10Lowland Cotton 1.00 14 3.00 1 2.00 11Lowland Mango 2.00 7 - 2.00 11Lowland Yam 1.83 12 2.07 12 1.95 13Lowland Rice 1.92 11 1.86 13 1.89 14Lowland Cassava 1.00 14 1.00 14 1.00 15Average: 1.89 2.48 2.17Source: Field research /Socio-economic Household Survey (2013)

Table 14. Level of susceptibility of upland crops.

Upland crops

Susceptibility todroughts

Susceptibility tofloods

Total

Score Ranking Score Ranking Scoremean

Totalranking

Upland Cowpea 2.62 3 2.16 1 2.39 1Upland Maize 2.64 2 1.92 7 2.28 2Upland Tomatoes 2.50 4 1.96 4 2.23 3Upland Rice 2.70 1 1.72 10 2.21 4Upland Sorghum 2.36 7 1.96 6 2.16 5Upland Groundnut 2.32 9 1.96 5 2.14 6Upland Bambara Beans 2.12 12 2.06 2 2.09 7Upland Yam 2.41 6 1.74 9 2.08 8Upland Millet 2.45 5 1.67 13 2.06 9Upland Pepper 2.20 11 1.86 8 2.03 10Upland Soya Beans 2.33 8 1.71 11 2.02 11Upland Okra 2.30 10 1.68 12 1.99 12Upland Cotton 1.50 13 2.00 3 1.75 13Upland Cassava 1.00 14 1.00 14 1.00 14Average: 2.25 1.81 2.03Source: Field research /Socio-economic Household Survey (2013)

creasing drought frequency (84.8%) and severity (83.7%).However, all types of climate change phenomena were

not necessarily perceived in the same way even withinthe same locality. Variations were observed in differentgroups based on gender, age group (elders and youth),community, and livelihood activities in which they are en-gaged. Some of the reasons respondents gave to justifytheir perceptions (e.g., types of trees which are consid-ered to bring rain; traditional taboos which are believed tocause various changes) departed from the ideas providedby conventional scientific researchers. There was also a

difference between the perceptions of community mem-bers and those of other key stakeholders such as district-level actors, which was seen in the different rankingsgiven by these groups to major disasters and other typesof climate change phenomena.

While some views of the respondents about the causesof climate change were in line with scientific findings,others believed in the link between certain types of cli-mate change and traditional beliefs.

With respect to the effects of climate change onlivelihood activities, farming was the livelihood activity



most severely affected by droughts (83.7%) and floods(87.0%), which led to the destruction or loss of crops, lowyield, and low agricultural productivity.

5.2. ImplicationsIt has been proven that the perceptions of the ma-

jority of respondents about climate change and its ef-fects, particularly the increasing unpredictability of rain-fall, decreasing rainfall amount, and increasing number ofdroughts, were in agreement with scientifically observedtrends and phenomena. However, there were also varia-tions in perceptions across different groups. In situationswhere the views of community members were differentfrom those of scientists, it should not be considered thatcommunity members’ views are wrong. Rather, it needsto be understood that, depending on the situation, per-ceived (or felt) effects are created because of certain fac-tors, as discussed above. It also needs to be noted that,even within a small community, there can be a range ofdifferent perceptions about climate change and its effects.Therefore, external stakeholders should not judge the sit-uation of a community by interacting with a limited num-ber of people in that community. Rather, they need to tryto comprehend diverse conditions that may coexist withina locality.

5.3. RecommendationsBased on the aforementioned findings, the following

recommendations have been drawn for policy makers,government and non-governmental actors, academia, andother key stakeholders in the area of climate change adap-tation and disaster management.

• Farmers’ perceptions are complex; moreover, theyplay key roles in determining which coping strate-gies and adaptation measures that farmers will adopt.Diverse conditions need to be understood, with par-ticular attention given to different groups and variouscharacteristics such as gender, farm location, croptype, and religious belief.

• MoFA and research institutions should further ex-plore resilient varieties of crops for both lowland andupland farming.

• MoFA, NGOs/CSOs, and other development part-ners should help promote a shift from food crop va-rieties that are susceptible to climate change to vari-eties that are more resilient.

• Perceptions about the effects of climate change oftenhave a close link to the actual increase of burdensplaced on people’s livelihood activities by climatechange. This could be one entry point for exploringcoping and adaptation strategies. In addition, fur-ther investigation of relationships between percep-tions and the livelihood activities may contribute toenhancing resilience and livelihoods simultaneously.

• Coping and adaptation strategies are a critical areafor possible further research. It is necessary to ex-plore appropriate and practical measures, which canhelp identify feasible solutions to challenges thatfarmers in the study area encounter – with close at-tention to perceptions of diverse local stakeholders.

AcknowledgementsWe would like to thank the following individuals and institu-tions for their cooperation, support, and information: commu-nity members in the four communities (Baleufili, Bankpama, Chi-etanga and Zowayeli); the Wa West District Assembly and de-centralized Ministries/Departments/Agencies (MDAs), includingthe Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MoFA), National DisasterManagement Organization (NADMO), and other MDAs; the Up-per West Regional Coordinating Council/Regional Planning Coor-dinating Unit (RCC/RPCU); and Research Assistants – Baalong-buro Richard, Mujeeb Adams, Akpem Benedict, Romanus Ziem,and Seyram Loh. We also thank JICA and JST for their financialsupport of the project.

References:[1] IPCC, “Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of

Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,” (Eds. Core WritingTeam, R. K. Pachauri and A. Reisinger), Geneva: IPCC, 2007.

[2] M. Boko, I. Niang, A. Nyong, C. Vogel, A. Githeko, M. Medany,B. Osman-Elasha, R. Tabo, and P. Yanda, “Africa. Climate Change2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution ofWorking Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergov-ernmental Panel on Climate Change,” M. L. Parry, O. F. Canziani,J. P. Palutikof, P. J. van der Linden, and C. E. Hanson (Eds.), Cam-bridge UK; Cambridge University Press, pp. 433-467, 2007.

[3] Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (MEST) ofGhana, “Ghana Goes for Green Growth: Discussion document –Summary” Accra: MEST, pp. 8-15, 2010.

[4] A. J. Stanturf, M. L. Warren Jr., S. Charnley, S. C. Polasky, S. L.Goodrick, F. Armah, and Y. A. Nyako, “Ghana Climate ChangeVulnerability and Adaptation Assessment,” NW: USAID, 2011,http://www.encapafrica.org/documents/biofor/Climate%20Change%20Assessment Ghana %20FINAL.pdf [accessed January 31,2014]

[5] G. T. Yengoh, F. A. Armah, E. E. Onumah, J. O. Odoi, “Trendsin Agriculturally-Relevant Rainfall Characteristics for Small-ScaleAgriculture in Northern Ghana,” Journal of Agricultural Science,Vol.2, No.3, pp. 3-16, September 2010.

[6] P. Luni, K. L. Maharjan, and N. P. Joshi, “Perceptions and Realitiesof Climate Change among the Chepong Communities in Rural Mid-Hills of Nepal,” in Journal of Contemporary India Studies: Spaceand Society, Vol.2, pp. 35-50, Hiroshima: Hiroshima University,2012.

[7] E. Simelton, C. H. Quinn, N. Batisani, A. J. Dougill, J. C. Dyer,E. D. G. Fraser, D. Mkwambisi, S. Sallu, and L. C. Stringer,“Is rainfall really changing? Farmers’ perceptions, meteorologi-cal data, and policy implications,” Climate and Development, 2013,DOI:10.1080/17565529.2012.751893.

[8] S. A. Legesse, “Farmers perceptions and adaptation to climatechange in Ethiopia,” IEEE Potentials, 2013.

[9] P. H. Lindsay and D. A. Norman, “Human information processing:an introduction to psychology,” New York: Academic Press, 1972.

[10] T. Hartig, F. G. Kaiser, and P. A. Bowler, “Psychological Restora-tion In Nature As A Positive Motivation For Ecological Behavior,”Environment And Behavior, Vol.33, No.4, pp. 590-607, Sage Pub-lications, July, 2001.

[11] J. S. Juana, Z. Kahaka, and F. N. Okurut, “Farmers’ Perceptions andAdaptations to Climate Change in Sub-Sahara Africa: A Synthesisof Empirical Studies and Implications for Public Policy in AfricanAgriculture,” Journal of Agricultural Science, Vol.5, No.4, 2013.

[12] R. Chambers and G. Conway, “Sustainable rural livelihoods: prac-tical concepts for the 21st century,” IDS Discussion Paper, No.296,Brighton, IDS, pp. 7-8, 1992.

[13] D. Carney (Ed.), “Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: What Contribu-tion Can We Make?,” London: Department for International Devel-opment, 1998.


Kusakari, Y. et al.

[14] C. Ashley and S. Maxwell, “Rethinking Rural Development,” De-velopment Policy Review, Vol.19, No.4, pp. 395-425, 2001.

[15] F. Ellis, “Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries,”New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

[16] D. M. Diggs, “Drought Experience and Perception of ClimaticChange among Great Plains Farmers,” Great Plains Research, AJournal of Natural and Social Sciences, Paper 1, 1991.

[17] E. Bunting, J. Steele, E. Keys, S. Muyengwa, B. Child, and J. South-worth, “Local Perception of Risk to Livelihoods in the Semi-AridLandscape of Southern Africa,” in Land 2013, Vol.2, pp. 225-251.

[18] L. O. Naess, M. Sullivan, J. Khinmaung, P. Crahay, and A. Otzel-berger, “Changing Climates Changing Lives: Adaptation Strategiesof Pastoral and Agro-Pastoral Communities in Ethiopia and Mali,”ACF International, IDS, Tearfund, IER, A-Z COUNSULT, ODES,2010.

[19] Wa West District Assembly (WWDA), “Wa West District Medium-Term Development Plan 2006-2009,” Wechiau: WWDA 2007.

[20] FAO, “Irrigation potential in Africa: A basin approach,” 1997, avail-able at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/w4347e/w4347e0u.htm [ac-cessed January 31, 2014]

[21] Ghana Statistical Service (GSS), “2010 Population and HousingCensus,” Accra, GSS, 2010.

[22] Wa West District Assembly (WWDA), “Wa West District Medium-Term Development Plan 2010-2013,” Wechiau: WWDA, 2012a.

[23] Wa West District Assembly (WWDA), “Wa West District AssemblyPopulation Projection for 2012 based on 2010 Census,” Wechiau,WWDA, 2012b.

Name:Yasuko Kusakari

Affiliation:Graduate Program in Sustainability Science,Global Leadership Initiative (GPSS-GLI), TheUniversity of Tokyo

Address:5-1-5 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa City, Chiba 277-8563, JapanBrief Career:1998- Tutor, Japan Overseas Cooperation Volunteers (JOCV), CommunityDevelopment Officer, Magomero College, Malawi2005- Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) Expert, Project forBasic Training for Reintegration of Demobilized Soldiers in Eritrea2006- Programme Officer, United Nations Development Programme(UNDP), Ghana2009- Research Fellow/Socio-Economist, Institute for Natural Resourcesin Africa (UNU-INRA), United Nations University, Ghana2014- Ph.D. Student, GPSS-GLI, The University of TokyoSelected Publications:• Y. Kusakari, “Climate Change Impacts, Vulnerabilities and Adaptation inUpper West Region of Ghana,” in D. B. K. Dovie (Ed.),CCPOP-GHANA2012 Conference Proceedings “At the Crossroads:Climate Change, Population and Africa Development,” Legon, Universityof Ghana, pp. 33-44, 2013.• Y. Kusakari, “Feasibility of Poverty Reduction through Local CapacityDevelopment: Assessment of a Sustainable Livelihoods Program in RuralMalawi,” Ithaca: Cornell University, 2004.• Y. Kusakari and M. Yajima, “Resource Book for Rural Development inMalawi,” Lilongwe, JICA/JOCV, 2001.Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations:• Japan Society for International Development (JASID)

Name:Kwabena Owusu Asubonteng

Affiliation:Institute for Natural Resources in Africa (UNU-INRA), United Nations University

Address:Annie Jiagge Road, University of Ghana Campus, Legon-Accra, GhanaBrief Career:2007- Sustainable Land Management Project, Ghana2009- APERL GIS Training and Research Centre, KNUST SunyaniCampus, Ghana2011- Geo-Information Analyst, UNU-INRA, GhanaSelected Publications:• A. T. Koomson and K. O. Asubonteng, “Collaborative governance inextractive industries in Africa,” United Nations University Institute forNatural Resources in Africa, Accra, 2013.Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations:• Ghana Institute of Professional Foresters (GIPF)

Name:Godfred Seidu Jasaw

Affiliation:Institute for Advanced Study of Sustainability(UNU-IAS), United Nations University

Address:53-70 Jingumae, 5-chome Shibuya-ku, Tokyo 150-8925, JapanBrief Career:2009- Lecturer/Researcher, University for Development Studies, Ghana2013- Ph.D. Student, Institute for Advanced Study of Sustainability(UNU-IAS), United Nations UniversitySelected Publications:• G. S. Jasaw, A. Iddrisu, and E. Bagson, “An Assessment of thePerformance of Local Economic Development (LED) at the Local Level –Case of Sissala East District in Ghana,” European Journal of SocialSciences, Vol.36 No.4, pp. 537-543, 2013.• D. Awunyor-vitor, I. Shaibu, and G. S. Jasaw, “Urban Households’Willingness to Pay for Improved Solid Waste Disposal Services in KumasiMetropolis, Ghana,” Urban Studies Research, Vol.2013, Article ID659425, 8pp., 2013, http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/659425• S. Z. Bonye and G. S. Jasaw, “Traditional Coping Mechanisms inDisaster Management in the Builsa and Sissala Districts of NorthernGhana,” European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol.25, No.2, 2011.Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations:• University Teachers’ Association of Ghana (UTAG)



Name:Frederick Dayour

Affiliation:Department of Community Development, Uni-versity for Development Studies (UDS)

Address:Wa, Upper West Region, GhanaBrief Career:Lecturer in the Department of Community Development, University forDevelopment Studies, GhanaSelected Publications:• F. Dayour, “Are backpackers a homogeneous group? A study ofbackpackers’ motivations in the Cape Coast-Elmina conurbation, Ghana,”European Journal of Tourism, Hospitality and Recreation, Vol.4, No.3,pp. 69-94, 2013.Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations:• Ghana Geographical Association (GGA)• Association of American Geographers (AAG)• Green Life (US Based)

Name:Togbiga Dzivenu

Affiliation:Centre for Disaster Research and Education, University for DevelopmentStudies (UDS)Address:University for Development Studies, Wa, Upper West Region, GhanaBrief Career:1997-2007 Lecturer, UDS Wa campus2007- Executive Director, Centre for Disaster Research and Education,UDS Wa campus

Name:Victor Lolig

Affiliation:Faculty of Agribusiness and CommunicationSciences, University for Development Studies(UDS)

Address:Nyankpala, Northern Region, GhanaBrief Career:2002- Senior Research Assistant, UDS, Tamale, Ghana2007- Lecturer, UDS, Tamale, GhanaSelected Publications:• G. S. Jasaw, Y. A. Boafo, and V. Lolig, “Factors Influencing theAdoption of Mucuna Pruriens as a Land Conservation Strategy, EvidenceFrom Northern Ghana,” Journal of Science, Technology and Environment,Vol.4, Issue 1, Article ID 3000230, Revision 1, 11pp., 2014.Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations:• Association for International Agricultural and Extension Education(AIAEE)• Ghana Science Association (GSA)• University Teachers’ Association of Ghana (UTAG)

Name:Samuel A. Donkoh


Address:Nyankpala, Northern Region, GhanaBrief Career:1998- Senior Research Assistant, UDS, Tamale, Ghana1999- Lecturer, UDS, Tamale, Ghana2012- Senior Lecturer, UDS, Tamale, GhanaSelected Publications:• J. Amikuzuno and S. A. Donkoh, “Climate Variability and Yields ofMajor Staple Food Crops in Northern Ghana,” African Crop ScienceJournal, Vol.20, Issue Supplements 2, pp. 249-360, 2012.• S. A. Donkoh and J. A. Awuni, “Farmers’ Perceptions and Adoption ofImproved Farming Techniques in Lowland Rice Production in NorthernGhana,” pp. 1-16, 2011,http://addis2011.ifpri.info/files/2011/10/Poster 1A Samuel-Donkoh.pdf• S. A. Donkoh and J. A. Awuni, “Adoption of Farm ManagementPractices in Lowland Rice Production in Northern Ghana,” Journal ofAgriculture and Biological Sciences, Vol.2, No.4, pp. 183-192, 2011.Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations:• African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE)• Ghana Science Association (GSA)• Ghana Association of Horticulturists (GAH)• University Teachers’ Association of Ghana (UTAG)

Name:Francis Kwabena Obeng


Address:Nyankpala, Northern Region, GhanaBrief Career:2007-2010: Senior Hall Tutor, Nyankpala Campus, UDS2008-present, Coordinator, Postgraduate Programmes2010-present, Head, Department of Agricultural Extension, RuralDevelopment and Gender Studies2013-present, Vice Dean, Faculty of Agribusiness & CommunicationSciencesSelected Publications:• F. K. Obeng, “Impact of Climate Variability on Soil MoistureAvailability in North Eastern Ghana: Implications for AgriculturalExtension and Rural Development,” International Journal of Agri Science,Vol.4, No.2, pp. 109 - 118, February, 2014.• J. Padgham, T. Devisscher, C. Togtokh, L. Mtilatila, E. Kaimila, I.Mansingh, F. Agyemang-Yeboah, and F. K. Obeng, “Building SharedUnderstanding and Capacity for Action: Insights on Climate RiskCommunication from India, Ghana, Malawi and Mongolia,” InternationalJournal of Communication, Vol.7, pp. 970-983, 2013.Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations:• Ghana Science Association (GSA)• Ghana Institute of Horticulturists (GIH)• Northern Ghana Climate Change Working Group


Kusakari, Y. et al.

Name:Bizoola Gandaa

Affiliation:Faculty of Agriculture, University for Develop-ment Studies (UDS)

Address:Nyankpala, Northern Region, GhanaBrief Career:Lecturer/Researcher, University for Development StudiesSelected Publications:• K. B. Gordana and B. Z. Gandaa, “Business opportunities in safe andproductive use of waste in Tamale,” Sustaining Financing for WASH andUrban Agriculture (UA), Vol.26, pp. 47-51, 2013.

Name:Gordana Kranjac-Berisavljevic

Affiliation:University for Development Studies (UDS)

Address:UDS, P.O. Box TL 1350 Tamale, GhanaBrief Career:1991- Research Officer and Lecturer, University of Ghana, Legon, Ghana1995- Lecturer, UDS, Ghana2007- Assistant Professor, UDS, Ghana2013- Professor, UDS, GhanaSelected Publications:• G. Kranjac-Berisavljevic and B. I. Abdulai, “Recent floods in NorthernGhana: implications related to ecology, livelihood and development,”Ghana Engineer, Vol.5, No.1, pp. 13-17, 2009.• G. Kranjac-Berisavljevic, B. Osman-Elasha, W. P. Shah, and J. M. R.Stone, “Climate Change Chapter,” pp. 46-52, in: McIntyre, Herren,Wakhungu, Watson (Eds.), “Agriculture at Crossroads, Synthesis Report,”Int. Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology,UNDP, FAO, UNEP, UNESCO, The World Bank, WHO, GEF, IslandPress., 2009.• M. Grum, E. A. Gyasi, C. Osei, and G. Kranjac-Berisavljevic,“Evaluation of best practices for landrace conservation: farmerevaluation,” Bioversity Int., Rome, Italy, p. 23, 2008.• E. A. Gyasi, G. Kranjac-Berisavljevic, E. T. Blay, and W. Oduro,“Managing Agrodiversity the Traditional Way,” Lessons from West rAfrica in Sustainable Use of Biodiversity and Related Natural Resources,p. 266, UNU Press/Tokyo, 2004.Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations:• Ghana Institution of Engineers (GIE)• Ghana Institution of Agricultural Engineers (GIAE)• Ghana Science Association (GSA)• World Association of Soil and Water Conservation (WASWC)


Farmer-Perceived Effects of Climate Change on Livelihoods in Wa West District, Upper West Region of...

Documents

Transcript of Farmer-Perceived Effects of Climate Change on Livelihoods in Wa West District, Upper West Region of...