This document summarizes the aims and methods of the CCCEP (Climate, Crop and Climate Epidemiology) project, which integrated local and scientific knowledge on climate change vulnerability in dryland systems. The project used participatory research across multiple case studies to develop both qualitative and quantitative understandings of vulnerability. Frameworks and modeling approaches were developed to analyze exposure, impact and adaptation across spatial and temporal scales. The process of developing narratives, models and recommendations helped stimulate discussion and identify potential policy interventions. While tensions exist between scientific and local knowledge, the project found value in communication across approaches to better understand system dynamics and identify actions at local to national levels.

1. www.cccep.ac.uk Closing the Loop: Climate Science, Development Practice & Policy Interactions in Dryland Agro-Ecological Systems Andy Dougill, Evan Fraser, Claire Quinn, Lindsay Stringer & Chasca Twyman

3. Better linking of scientific & local-level knowledge perspectives into adaptation policy / decision-making

5. Vulnerability Framework Fraser 2007, Climatic Change, 83(4)

6. Exposure – Impact - Adaptation COUNTRY + REGIONAL FIELD Spatial scale CENTURY DECADE SEASON FOOD SUPPLY Crop-Climate Models Temporal scale FOOD DISTRIBUTION Economic models Statistical models ACCESS TO INPUTS/FOOD Agent-Based Mod Decision Model PRA

7. Closing loops - Tools COUNTRY + REGIONAL FIELD Spatial scale CENTURY DECADE SEASON Large-area crop models + climate / climate change simulations Temporal scale Statistical methods to ID socio-economic characteristics Participatory methods to ID adaptation strategies

8. Identifying sensitivity to drought Sensitive Crop Failure Index Minor crop loss Major crop loss Increasing vulnerability Resilient Minor drought Major drought Drought Index See Simelton et al., 2009. Env Sci & Policy, 12, 438 -452.

9. 2. Interview experts or stakeholders to establish a narrative that explains the system 3. Analyse narrative using a flow chart or “mind map” 4. Reflect & make policy / practice recommendations Conventional social sciences Quantitative modelling 5. Explore each relationship within the system through expert focus groups to quantify whether relationships are linear or non-linear, their slope etc. 6. Run different simulations of the model to explore scenarios 1. Establish problem and boundaries of agro-ecosystem

10. Example Case Study: Kalahari Rangelands

11. Pastoral Botswana

12. Bush Encroached System

13. Reed & Dougill, 2010. JAE, 74(1), 149-155

14. Market growth Government policy to privatize land More private land - Income Ability to move cows to neighbour Imported feed Rainfall Forage Establishing bore holes - Number of cows Bush encroachment Increased grazing densities From 8 researcher & policy-maker interviews post environmental & participatory projects – linked to development of rangeland management guides

15. Model quantification post 3 expert focus groups with follow-up’s to discuss & show – linked to village level livestock no’s

16. The effect of “Agricultural Best Management” scenario to help reduce impact of climate change 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 Limited change Private herd Best Management A significant rise Baseline Relative Value Communal herd Best Management Baseline Time in “Model Iterations” ~ years

17. Pro-poor land reform scenario Private herd Land reform A significant drop Land reform Communal herd Relative Value Land reform A significant rise Baseline Time in “Model Iterations” ~ years

18. Implications of this model Enacting pro-poor land reform is more effective at helping communal farmers maintain incomes in light of climate change than promoting agricultural best management Privatisation retains maximum national-level herd size though inequitable distribution Outputs of model used to stimulate discussion & to guide local-level field research Best management guides produced & their value to be quantified

19. Benefits of Process at Multiple Scales Across Diverse Case Studies Participatory processes at local level led to decision-making tools & actions, but also fed into District & National scale modelled generalisations Explanatory narratives can give explanation & provide situated accounts of relationships between livelihoods, ecosystem services and policies Storylines (& no’s) aim to stimulate, provoke & communicate vision of possible futures. The process leads to learning & interpretation of greater value than predictions produced Natural angst in quantification leads to dangers in communications on key policy interventions identified

21. Process of narratives into models helps policy-makers to better understand system dynamics and complexity, though uncertainties in developing to predictive models (=> use as ‘throw-away’ models)

22. Consistent simplified framing of vulnerability proved appropriate across range of approaches & case studies => can bring insights across multiple scaleswww.cccep.ac.uk