Knowledge politics in participatory climate change adaptation research on agroecology in Malawi

Abstract

Climate change is projected to have severe implications for smallholder agriculture in Africa, with increased temperatures, increased drought and flooding occurrence, and increased rainfall variability. Given these projections, there is a need to identify effective strategies to help rural communities adapt to climatic risks. Yet, relatively little research has examined the politics and social dynamics around knowledge and sources of information about climate-change adaptation with smallholder farming communities. This paper uses a political ecology approach to historically situate rural people's experiences with a changing climate. Using the concept of the co-production of knowledge, we examine how Malawian smallholder farmers learn, perceive, share and apply knowledge about a changing climate, and what sources they draw on for agroecological methods in this context. As well, we pay particular attention to agricultural knowledge flows within and between households. We ask two main questions: Whose knowledge counts in relation to climate-change adaptation? What are the political, social and environmental implications of these knowledge dynamics? We draw upon a long-term action research project on climate-change adaptation that involved focus groups, interviews, observations, surveys, and participatory agroecology experiments with 425 farmers. Our findings are consistent with other studies, which found that agricultural knowledge sources were shaped by gender and other social inequalities, with women more reliant on informal networks than men. Farmers initially ranked extension services as important sources of knowledge about farming and climate change. After farmers carried out participatory agroecological research, they ranked their own observation and informal farmer networks as more important sources of knowledge. Contradictory ideas about climate-change adaptation, linked to various positions of power, gaps of knowledge and social inequalities make it challenging for farmers to know how to act despite observing changes in rainfall. Participatory agroecological approaches influenced adaptation strategies used by smallholder farmers in Malawi, but most still maintained the dominant narrative about climate-change causes, which focused on local deforestation by rural communities. Smallholder farmers in Malawi are responsible for <1% of global greenhouse gas emissions, yet our results show that the farmers often blame their own rural communities for changes in deforestation and rainfall patterns. Researchers need to consider differences knowledge and power between scientists and farmers and the contradictory narratives at work in communities to foster long-term change.

Farmer Participatory Research Advances Sustainable Agriculture: Lessons from Michigan and Malawi

“…This is potentially a weakness in that little is known about the preferences and practices of other farmers. At the same time, it builds social capacity, as indicated by the persistence of farmers’ engagement with colearning groups facilitated by MBTs at earlier research sites in Malawi (Bezner Kerr et al, 2007, 2018).…”

“…Means, SDs, and t ‐test characterization along with visualization through radar charts have also proven useful (Snapp et al, 2018). Such simple characterization has formed the basis for discussing the performance of SA technology with a wide range of stakeholders in Malawi, where SA tradeoffs have been shown to vary depending on the farmers’ household position and gender, farmers’ perceptions of risk, and the environmental context (Bezner Kerr et al, 2018; Sirrine et al, 2010).…”

“…An early iteration of the FPR process was conducted in Northern Malawi over 2000–2010, which providing initial findings that helped design the technologies assessed in this project (Bezner Kerr et al, 2018). Through a reflection process facilitated by FPR and sharing the results with stakeholders, it became clear that interest in some technologies, such as fertilizer trees, was almost nil (Table 1).…”

“…Such SA options were associated with steep tradeoffs in terms of labor and risk (Sirrine et al, 2010). What proved to be more acceptable to farmers were crop diversification options; these included extra early maturing crop genotypes and the opposite growth habit: very long duration late maturing crop types (Bezner Kerr et al, 2018; Snapp et al, 2018). In our study, a pigeonpea–maize intercrop was a promising SA technology, as a technology with minimal maize yield tradeoffs and a number of environmental benefits such as extended soil cover and an organic N source (Fig.…”

Pathways for the Amplification of Agroecology in African Sustainable Urban Agriculture

“…Furthermore, the political approach to ecology adopted in Malawi is also relevant to agroecology and climate change. A study examining the concept of coproduction of knowledge analyzed how small farmers know, perceive, share, and apply knowledge of a changing climate and which resources they access for agroecological methods in this context [27]. In Mali [28], the cultivation of perennial cereals has allowed farmers to spend less on seeds.…”