Sustainability 2009, 1, 1366-1387; doi:10.3390/su1041366
Negotiating Uncertainty: Jamaican Small Farmers’ Adaptation
and Coping Strategies, Before and After Hurricanes—A Case
Study of Hurricane Dean
Donovan Campbell 1 and Clinton Beckford 2,*
1 Department of Geography and Geology, University of the West Indies, Mona, Kingston 7, Jamaica;
2 Faculty of Education, University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Avenue, Windsor, ON, N9B 3P4, Canada
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org;
Tel.: +1-519-253-3000 Ext. 3804; Fax: +1-519-971-3694.
Received: 29 October 2009 / Accepted: 10 December 2009 / Published: 16 December 2009
Abstract: In recent years, Jamaica has been seriously affected by a number of extreme
meteorological events. The one discussed here, Hurricane Dean, passed along the south
coast of the island in August 2007, damaging crops and disrupting livelihood activities for
many small-scale farmers. This study is based on detailed ethnographic research in the
southern coastal region of St. Elizabeth parish during the passage of Hurricane Dean, and
explores the ways in which small farmers negotiate the stressors associated with hurricane
events. The study employed a mix methods approach based on a survey of 282 farming
households. The paper documents coping strategies employed by farmers in the immediate
period of Hurricane Dean to reduce damage to their farming systems, and highlights the
positive correlation between farmers’ perceptions of hurricanes and degree of damage to
local farming systems. In addition, through an analysis of socio-economic and
environmental data, the paper provides an understanding of the determinants of adaptive
capacity and strategy among farmers in the area. The study indicated that despite high
levels of vulnerability, farmers have achieved successful coping and adaptation at the
Keywords: hurricanes; adaptive capacity; coping strategies; St. Elizabeth; food security
Sustainability 2009, 1
Between 2002 and 2007, Jamaica experienced a series of debilitating meteorological hazards which
ravaged the small farming sector of the economy. The most extreme of these occurred between 2004
and 2007, beginning with the passage of Hurricanes Charley and Ivan in 2004. This was followed by a
seven month drought, which began in late 2004 and extended well into 2005. This extended dry spell
spawned several costly bush fires. The 2005 season brought more devastation with the passage of
Tropical Storm Wilma and Hurricanes Dennis and Emily. While 2003 and 2006 were comparatively
quiet, the ubiquitous vulnerability to meteorological hazards was again emphasized when Hurricane
Dean struck the island followed by flood events which were triggered by two weeks of continuous
rainfall associated with the passage of tropical Storm Noel. These events severely disrupted livelihood
activities for many small farmers in the country.
Extreme events are nothing new to Jamaica and Jamaican farmers. Small resource-poor farmers in
rural areas are often plagued with many interrelated and complex problems that they have to negotiate
on a daily basis in order to survive. The literature on the subject generally points to small farmers as
being very adaptive and resilient. Indeed, some scholars go as far as to describe farmers as professional
specialists at survival and as such, a relatively large number of contemporary studies on small farmers
focus on phenomenological aspects of the system.
This paper adds to this focus by documenting the adaptive strategies of farmers in the immediate
period of Hurricane Dean. It highlights the positive correlation between farmers’ perceptions of
hurricanes and degree of damage to farming systems. Also, through an analysis of socio-economic and
environmental data, the paper provides an understanding of the determinants of adaptive capacity and
coping strategies among farmers in the area. The cognitive processes underlying the decision-making
and behavior of farmers in relation to adaptive capacity and resilience, is also highlighted. It is
important to note that while resilience explains the ability of an organization, ecological system,
household or nation to recover quickly from a disaster  , it is useful to assess the concept within the
context of dynamic responses to disturbances and future modifications of adaptive capacities that
accompany the recovery process .
Adaptation studies enable the identification and development of community-specific adaptive
measures and practices. It has been argued that the “aim [of community-specific adaptation studies] is
not to score adaptation or measure relative vulnerabilities, nor quantify the impacts or estimated effects
of assumed adaptation. Rather, the focus is to document the ways in which systems or communities
experience changing conditions and the processes of decision-making in this system that may
accommodate adaptations or provide means of improving adaptive capacity” . Similarly, this paper
does not assume the behavior and experiences of farmers during the climatic event; rather it provides a
‘bottom-up’ approach to identifying these experiences empirically and by so doing, employs the
knowledge used by community members to negotiate the pertinent climatic conditions.
The effects of these recent meteorological events on domestic food production in Jamaica are well
documented . However, because farm-level adaptation is pivotal in translating climatic challenges
and agricultural responses into changes in production, prices, food supply and welfare, this paper adds
a different dimension to the existing analyses by providing a detailed understanding of what farmers do
to buffer the impacts of a hurricane event. This is important because hurricanes are ubiquitous to the
Sustainability 2009, 1
area and pose a constant threat to households, communities and societies that are dependent on
agriculture for their livelihood. The knowledge of what farmers do in response to these events can aid
in the expansion process of adaptation options and the improvement of resilience within the sector
as a whole.
2. Contextualizing Coping and Adaptation Strategies
Based on the projected impacts of climate change, many scholars have agreed that the efficient and
effective adaptation of those countries, communities, households and individuals deemed to be most
vulnerable should be prioritized. There is an urgent need to understand the dynamism of coping and
vulnerability in the context of developing future adaptation measures. In light of this, a growing body
of scholarship has emerged in recent times with the thrust towards providing an understanding of
peoples’ adaptation to extreme events and climate change [5-7]. Yet only a small number of these
studies focus on coping strategies as the ‘blueprint’ for future adaptation options.
A coping strategy may be defined as a temporary action undertaken in response to a known
threat . Adaptation, on the other hand, may be understood to be “an adjustment in the ecological,
social or economic systems in response to observed or expected changes and their effects and impacts
or take advantage of new opportunities” . In relation to crop production, it has been posited that
“coping strategies are risk spreading in nature and are designed to mitigate the negative impacts of
poor seasons and usually fail to exploit the positive opportunities of average and better than average
seasons. In addition, farmers often over-estimate the frequency of negative impacts of climate
variability, and underestimate the positive opportunities” . The authors suggested that in order to
enhance the adaptive capacity of agricultural communities and stakeholders, their ability to cope with
challenges and opportunities to current climate variability must first be understood.
Other researchers have cautioned, however, that coping strategies are not easily identified in rural
areas where the diversification of income activities is a characteristic livelihood feature . The
coping strategies of some individuals represent the livelihood strategies of others. The use of
qualitative information geared towards establishing an understanding of ‘normal’ behavior is
recommended by the author to correctly interpret coping strategies. While acknowledging the
importance of coping strategies in enhancing people's resilience to external stresses and shocks, the
author pointed out that these strategies enable individuals to cope with a crisis and that care should be
taken when reinforcing them, so as not to perpetuate a cycle of coping and subsistence. The goal of
policy makers, should be focused on reducing people's need to have to 'cope' by implementing longer
term measures geared towards strengthening productive capacity. These sentiments are no doubt valid
but do not acknowledge that what might initially be a coping strategy could become an adaptation
Coping strategies are devised by farmers to buffer short-term stresses and shocks within their
farming systems and often exist alongside more long-term adaptive strategies. By definition adaptive
strategies are more sustainable than coping strategies and are better suited to deal with longer-term
changes . The ability of farmers to cope with or adapt is fundamentally determined by their
livelihood assets . Generally, the more stable and diverse the asset base of farmers is the more
equipped they will be to respond to atypical climatic conditions  and vice-versa. Coping strategies
Sustainability 2009, 1
may be considered the ‘blueprint’ for future adaptation to increased climate variability and change. As
opposed to many coping strategies, adaptation is often seen as ‘a continuous stream of activities,
actions, decisions and attitudes that inform decisions about all aspects of life and that reflects existing
social norms and processes’ .
Some researchers have alluded to the place and context-specific nature of agricultural
adaptations . The importance of farm-level decision-making in the adaptation process is
increasingly being acknowledged [5,14] and the human factor is playing a more dominant role in
improving our understanding of the practice. Farm-level adaptation and decision-making is also
important because exposure to extreme events such as hurricanes often lie outside the coping range
(the conditions that a system can deal with, accommodate, adapt to, and recover from)  of a
system. Coping ranges are not static  and are sensitive to economic, social and political changes
Adaptation can also be ineffectual and unsustainable, thus making a situation worse for a farmer
and his/her neighbours. For example, while the spraying of crops with fungicide and insecticide after
the hurricane often prevents an outbreak of plant diseases, it may often lead to environmentally
unsustainable practices. The sustainability of adaptation is dependent on the heterogeneity of adaptive
capacity across different stakeholders . However, these and other attempts reflect the willingness
and intent of farmers to do whatever they can to protect their farms including the homestead.
Successful adaptation depends on how that ‘action meets the objectives of adaptation, and how it
affects the ability of others to meet their adaptation goals’ . Effective adaptation should be ‘robust
to uncertainty’ and flexible (i.e., ability to change in response to altered circumstance) .
The idea by some scholars that adaptation to future climate will be determined by current
individual, community and institutional behaviour partly in response to current climate  is
supported here. Employing local knowledge, defined as “dynamic and complex bodies of know-how,
practices and skills that are developed and sustained by peoples/communities with shared histories and
experiences”  available to them, as well as other strategies, small-scale farmers in southern St.
Elizabeth have demonstrated a determination to confront new and unfamiliar circumstances. The
vulnerability of small-scale food producers operating in marginal economic, political and
environmental conditions as well as the differences in coping strategies are important signposts for
future adaptation policies.
3. Trends in Caribbean Hurricane Activity
Hurricanes are the most prevalent meteorological hazards that occur in the Caribbean [18,19]. The
global hurricane belt includes all tropical oceans between latitudes 40 degrees south to 40 degrees
north except the southern Atlantic. However, some researchers suggest that ‘all portions of Latin
America (including Central America and South America) south of 10 °N had a less than 1% chance of
a hurricane strike per year. The annual likelihood of hurricane activity increased farther from the
equator to a maximum of >20% northeast of The Bahamas’  It has been noted that because of its
geographical conditions, the Caribbean region is prone to such natural events of severe intensity .
Such susceptibility to natural events is not uniform throughout the region and some countries are
more vulnerable than others. The Greater Antilles (Cuba, Haiti and Jamaica) have been identified as
Sustainability 2009, 1
the most disaster prone group in the Caribbean and along with Pacific islands with unstable economies
and weak political and institutional development, are heavy losers to repeated natural shocks . This
finding is supported by other research which found that the northern Caribbean including Jamaica,
Cuba, Hispaniola, Puerto Rico, The Bahamas, Turks and Caicos Islands and the Cayman Islands, has
high inter-annual variability of hurricane occurrence with a mean strike rate of 1 per year; while the
southern Caribbean experiences a much lower strike rate of 0.4 hurricane strike per year .
Analysis of the long-term climatic data has indicated two major trends within the region. Firstly, it
has been shown that the climate of the Caribbean region is changing [24,25]. Specifically, the region
has experienced a rise in surface air temperature that is in excess of the global average. Also, “the
extreme inter-annual temperature range is decreasing; the number of very warm days and nights is
increasing while the number of very cool days and nights are decreasing” . They also found the
maximum number of consecutive dry days to be decreasing and the number of heavy rainfall events to
Research also indicates some relationship between the nature of hurricanes and Sea Surface
Temperatures (SST) . Specifically, ‘an increase in sea surface temperature may affect the
maximum speed of hurricanes but it is uncertain what effect it will have on average speeds or
hurricane frequency, and there is no evidence that the area affected by hurricanes will increase’ .
Changes in Sea Surface Temperature have been attributed to the El Nino event . The El Nino event
was also found to influence hurricane landfall activity in the region .
Figure 1. Number of hurricanes, categories and intensities.
The years 1995–2007, witnessed an increase in the occurrence of these events. Between 1995
and 2000 the ‘North Atlantic experienced the highest number of hurricanes in reliable record. In the
last 6 years there has been a doubling of overall activity for the entire basin, a 2.5 fold increase in
major hurricanes and a five-fold increase in hurricanes affecting the Caribbean’ . The Atlantic
basin was especially active in 2003 with 16 tropical storms, 7 hurricanes and 3 major hurricanes. There
is also evidence of an increase in the intensity of hurricanes, with an overall increase in the number of
Sustainability 2009, 1
category 4 and 5 hurricanes since 1970 (Figure 1). This argument is strongly supported by research
indicating that major storms in both the Atlantic and the Pacific since the 1970s have increased in
duration and intensity by about 50 percent .
The aforementioned positive correlation between sea surface temperature and hurricane intensity is
not convincing enough to some scientists who strongly believe that, natural cycles of ocean circulation
are responsible for the amount and intensity of tropical cyclones in the Atlantic basin [31-33]. For
example, there was no statistically significant correlation found between SSTs and average tropical
cyclone intensity in either ocean basin during the 1950 to 2005 period . However, ‘Changes in both
the mean and the variability of climate, whether naturally forced (e.g., cycles of ocean circulation), or
due to human activities (global warming), pose a threat to crop production globally’ . The aim here
is not to try to settle the debate as to what is causing these changes, but rather to submit an
understanding of how local farmers are coping with these changes and the implications they have for
food production and security.
Implications for Domestic Food Production
Jamaica is a small, open, commodity-export and tourism dependent economy. Despite this reliance
on tourism, agriculture still remains central to the economy [35,36]. Agriculture, forestry and fishery
provide around 20% of total employment, but make a relatively small contribution to GDP—
accounting for 5.5% in 2006 . Jamaica has two agricultural systems operating parallel to each
other. Producing food as cash crops for export is the primary goal of large-scale farmers while small
farmers produce mainly for the local market. Small farmers account for most domestic production and
some exports, while having been historically confined to small plots on steep marginal land in the
rugged interior [38,39] while the flat fertile lands are mainly for export crop production mainly sugar
cane and bananas.
Since the mid-1990s the sector has been hit by meteorological phenomena such as hurricanes,
floods and droughts. Between 2002 and 2007 the agricultural sector was affected by approximately 12
extreme weather events; seven hurricanes, two dry spells and three extended periods of heavy rains.
Total damage incurred to the sector has been estimated at US$285.7 million . The cumulative
effects of this increase in extreme events can be a push beyond the coping range of a system—resulting
in an inability to adapt or recover [3,40].
Extreme events often manifest themselves as shocks and stresses within the context of rural
livelihood  and can seriously hamper food security. Food security is defined as the “physical and
economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences
for an active and healthy life”  at the household, community and national levels.
Shocks are climatic events that deviate significantly from normal or average conditions
(e.g., hurricanes, floods and droughts) and stresses are more gradual changes in the climate
(e.g., a few months of above or below normal rainfall) . These shocks and stresses usually
fluctuate over space and time and contribute significantly to patterns of household vulnerability .
Stresses and frequent shocks also pose a serious threat to the sustainability of domestic food
production. As such, one basic concern here is food security. A 2002 study of the impact of climate
variability on food security in Southwestern Cameroon concluded that ‘increased year to year variation
Sustainability 2009, 1
of climate and changing local factors can markedly affect income from agricultural production, cost to
consumers, and food scarcity’ .
Figure 2. (a) Atlantic hurricane tracks 1980–2008; (b) Hurricanes and Tropical Storms that
affected Jamaica 1980–2008.
Note: The hurricane tracks in Figures 2a and 2b were obtained from NOAA Coastal Service Center
(http://hurricanes.csc.noaa.gov/hurricanes/) and modified using ArcGIS computer software.
Whether or not it influences the nature of hurricanes (its frequency, intensity or duration), changes
in climate variability will affect food production at all scales [34,45,46]. Within the context of a
Sustainability 2009, 1
changing Caribbean climate, small farmers are, and will be increasingly, vulnerable to these external
stresses and shocks . Some crops could become marginalized, and might require increasing and
careful use of irrigation systems as a result of decreases in water availability via increasing
evapotranspiration  while others could surpass their critical temperature threshold  leading to a
retardation in growth and productivity.
Already marginalized due to structural biases against them , Jamaican small farmers are
especially susceptible to these natural events. However, the impact of hurricanes on agriculture is
usually a function of the strength, frequency and duration of the event as well as the level of
preparedness and damage reducing tactics of farmers-that is, his or her experience and socio-economic
endowment. According to official data nine of Jamaica’s fourteen parishes are over 70 percent rural
and agriculture is the main source of livelihood for an estimated 65 percent of the people .
Hurricanes can therefore seriously increase the extent of rural poverty in Jamaica, increase
vulnerability, and inflate food insecurity. With adaptation, however, “vulnerability can be reduced and
there are numerous opportunities to be realized” . It is against this background that the case of
Hurricane Dean is discussed.
4. The Case of Hurricane Dean
Hurricane Dean was the 9th most intense Atlantic hurricane ever recorded and the third most intense
ever to make landfall. Dean was also the first Atlantic hurricane in 15 years to make landfall at
Category 5 intensity (Hurricane Andrew in 1992 was the last storm to do so). The storm developed on
August 13, 2007 and dissipated on August 23, leaving behind significant damages to some Caribbean
and Central American countries. The storm passed Jamaica August 19 and wreaked havoc on the
Estimates from the Planning Institute of Jamaica [PIOJ] suggest that the agricultural sector suffered
J$9 billion of damage from Hurricane Dean, with major sub-sectors like banana J$4 billion, domestic
agriculture J$1 billion and sugar J$2 billion, the worst hit . The Office of Disaster Preparedness
and Emergency Management (ODPEM) further estimated that 75% of the country’s vegetable crops
were destroyed and that 60% of housing for livestock was affected. In St. Elizabeth, one of the
principal food producing regions in the country, the damage was estimated to be over J$90 million.
Three years ago, the same parish incurred an estimated J$105 million loss due to Hurricane Ivan
A detailed ethnographic approach was combined with qualitative and quantitative data gathered
from a wider survey of 282 farming households in four communities (Potsdam, Top Hill, Southfield
and Flagaman) in southern St. Elizabeth to investigate the nature of farming in the area, impacts of
recent climatic events and adaptive strategies as well as farmers’ perceptions to these events. A
questionnaire survey was administered to farmers within these four communities which form an
altitudinal transect from the Potsdam region located at the top of the Santa Cruz Mountain to the
low-lying Flagaman area (See Figure 3).
Sustainability 2009, 1
Figure 3. The study area.
St. Elizabeth parish is known as the bread basket of Jamaica mainly due to food production in the
southern coastal area. The area is the main fruit and vegetable producing region in the country. Crops
such as broccoli, yellow squash, melons, cabbage, tomato, sweet pepper, condiments and carrots
feature prominently throughout the region. The modal farm size reported by farmers is 2 acres. The
area is characterized by a low average annual rainfall (from 650 mm to 800 mm per annum) and
insecure water supply yet the parish still manages to be a major source area for domestic food.
Farming practices in the area developed as an adaptation to these challenging environmental and
agro-climatic conditions. Farmers have reported that these conditions have changed significantly over
the years. Specifically, farmers suggest that the rainy season is increasingly characterized by
unpredictable shorter periods with torrential rainfall. For a system that is entirely dependent on the
quality of the rainy season, these changes are obvious setbacks to crop production.
The sample was selected randomly at a 10 percent confidence interval from a self-generated
sampling frame. The sampling frame was generated from sketch maps of each community which
highlighted roads and counted and numbered all the houses (Table 1). A random number table was
then used to select the houses until the required number for each community was reached.
Table 1. The study sample.
Community No. of counted houses
Top Hill 472
Sample at 10% confidence interval
Sustainability 2009, 1
The occurrence of Hurricane Dean during the period of this survey provided a unique opportunity to
observe and investigate first hand, the behavior of farmers before and after the event. With the short
warning about the arrival of the hurricane, a short questionnaire was created in the field to analyze
(i) the awareness of farmers to the event, (ii) their perceptions and attitudes, (iii) source of information
about the hazard and (iv), preparation for the hurricane with an emphasis on the damage-reducing
strategies they put in place.
A total of 50 farmers were interviewed during the immediate period of the hurricane (two days
before and two days after). It should be noted that 40 of these farmers were part of the broader study
of 282 farmers. A convenience sampling technique was also employed for a further 10 farmers who
were not part of the wider sample. All farmers that displayed or indicated that they planned to do
something on their farms to reduce the impact of Hurricane Dean were also revisited after the event.
4.2. Pre-Hurricane Dean
Before the hurricane, farmers were asked about their awareness of the threat of Hurricane Dean,
how seriously they took the threat and their plans to reduce or mitigate its impact on their farms. Two
days before the hurricane struck, 27% of the farmers were unaware of the looming threat of Hurricane
Dean. Of the 73% that were aware of the threat, 57% found out about it from other people
(word-of-mouth), 20% television, 15% radio and 8% read about the hurricane in the newspaper. The
threat of Hurricane Dean was taken seriously by 63% of the sample (those who indicated they strongly
agree or agree that the hurricane would hit Jamaica); a further 34% did not take the threat seriously
while 3% were unsure. The results also showed that only 36% of the sample indicated they would do
something on their farm to reduce the impact of the hurricane. The remaining 64% felt there was
nothing they could do to save their crops.
Crop Protection Measures
Sampled farmers were asked about methods used to protect crops from the hurricane. An
examination of the responses revealed that about 60% modified or adjusted their farming practices in
accordance with the prevailing climatic constraints. Farmers spent more time securing their
homesteads than protecting crops both before and after the hurricane (73% of the sample). This
reinforces the fact that the house is an important part of the production space of farmers. Not only is
the house a refuge for the farmer and his or her family when a hurricane threatens, but it is also a place
to protect farm animals and store produce. As a result, farmers will endeavor to protect their houses to
as a matter of priority. This represents an adaptive strategy firmly enshrined in the cultural ecology of
domestic food farming systems in Jamaica. Plates 1a and 1b show the strategy employed by one farmer
to protect his house from Hurricane Dean. The farmer covered his house with a thick canvas material
which he bound together with binding-wire and braced with board against the gradient of the hill.
Sustainability 2009, 1
Plate 1. Strategy employed by one farmer to protect his house from Hurricane Dean.
(Photographs by Donovan Campbell).
The main damage-reducing strategies of farmers during the immediate period of Hurricane Dean
were the protection of nurseries, (re) transplanting, crop bracing, lowering yam sticks, cutting trenches,
spraying crops as well as the harvesting and storage of produce (See Table 2). These strategies are
primarily dependent on (i) the stage of crop growth (ii) type of crops grown (iii) terrain (iv) scale of
production and the availability of labour and (v) age, health and experience of the farmer.
Table 2. Damage-reducing strategies of farmers before and after Hurricane Dean.
STRATEGIES FARMERS (%)
Before Hurricane Dean
Protection of nurseries
Harvesting and storage
After Hurricane Dean
Post hurricane harvesting and Plant restoration
Relocation of farm plot
Scale down production
Farmers tried their best to protect their nurseries from the anticipated damaging effects of Hurricane
Dean. Using corrugated roof sheeting, wood, blocks and grass, some created either roof-like (Plate 2a)
or tomb-like structures (Plate 2b) over nursery beds to protect them from excessive winds and rain.
Farmers who had seedlings in trays took them inside their house. Of the 50 farmers surveyed, 20 had
Sustainability 2009, 1
active nurseries (4 in trays and 16 in seedbeds) and 75 percent (15 farmers) of this total took steps to
protect them. Seedbeds represent the traditional way of nurturing seedlings in Jamaica, while trays are
a modern and more efficient way to do so. However, it is clear that some farmers still prefer the
old-fashioned way primarily because of the high cost of seedling trays and the treated organic matter
that is required. Overall, efforts by farmers to protect nurseries proved effective as there were no
observed or reported cases of damage to seedlings under these structures.
Plates 2. (a) Roof-like and (b) tomb-like structures to protect seedlings. Photographs by
(Re)transplanting was performed by one farmer in the study area who was trying it for the first time
as a hurricane precaution. The farmer carefully lifted his two weeks old tomato plants, put them in a
box, sprayed the leaves with (leaf) fertilizer and brought them inside his house. After hurricane Dean
passed he replanted the tomato plants. The farmer mentioned that he saw another farmer in the parish
of Manchester doing it just before Hurricane Ivan in 2004 and it worked so he was trying it for himself
to see the outcome. Re-transplanting can negatively affect the growth and development of any plant as
it offsets the intake of vital micro-nutrients that often results in the wilting and dying of plants.
Therefore, an observation of the plants’ development until it reaches maturity is necessary before any
reliable conclusions can be made about the effectiveness of the strategy. It will be interesting to see if
this strategy spreads in this community and become a viable adaptation strategy. Its use by this farmer
also raises interesting questions regarding a sentiment often expressed about local/traditional
knowledges which holds that they are localized and spatially un-transferable.
Plant bracing and lowering yam sticks
Crops such as sweet pepper and yam are difficult to protect when they reach a certain stage of
growth as they should neither be covered nor uprooted. One sweet pepper farmer operating on a
hillside decided to use crotch-sticks to brace the plants against the gradient of the hill (Plate 3a). The
farmer’s experience with Hurricane Ivan was the real motivation behind this strategy. According to
Sustainability 2009, 1
him, it was the wind from Hurricane Ivan that did the most damage to his crops and so he is using the
crotch-sticks to try to support the plants. The farmer did not lose all of his crops but he attributed this
more with the ‘mercies’ of Hurricane Dean than the crotch sticks. A yam farmer did something equally
simplistic to save his entire garden; he uprooted the yam sticks and placed them on the ground
(Plate 3b). According to him it is better the yams ‘fight’ on the ground rather than in the air, which
simply means than their chances of survival were better on the ground. Left standing the sticks would
be snapped or blown over by hurricane strength winds. This is very unique approach which has not
been reported before and is not a feature in the main yam farming communities in Jamaica perhaps
because of the difference in scales of production. It would be interesting to see how farmers in the
main yam growing areas would assess the feasibility of this approach as a response to hurricanes.
Plate 3. (a) Lowering yam sticks; (b) Plant bracing. Photographs by Donovan Campbell.
Pre-Wet season strategies
Some farmers with fields on hillsides as well as in low-lying flood prone areas cut or cleared
trenches on their farms to channel water away from their crops. Hillside farming is common in the
Potsdam community, especially on lower slopes, and while steeper slopes may be in bush or guinea
grass, they are part of the overall farming system. Cutting trenches to help control soil erosion is quite
common on the steeper-sloping areas of southern St. Elizabeth’s farming system. These trenches are
cut across slope gradient. Some farmers also use stone lines across the contour to help control soil
erosion due to torrential rainfall. In addition to cutting trenches, 41% of the sample indicated that they
would spray their crops with either leaf fertilizer, (20:20:20 NPK) or diathane (fungicide) or a
combination of both to enhance the resilience of their crops to extreme rainfall.
Harvesting and storage
The decision-making process of farmers is complex and often seems to run counter to what
conventional wisdom might define as being logical. For example, if a hurricane threatens the island
and a farmer has mature produce on his or her farm, then the logical thing to expect is that he would
harvest and store them until after the event. However, to arrive at decisions such as these, farmers
often “put historical experiences into perspective and to evaluate alternative management strategies for
making improved decisions to take advantage of good years whilst minimizing the losses during the
Sustainability 2009, 1
poor years” . For example, based on a history of near-misses from hurricane, some farmers did not
believe Dean would hit and that pre-harvesting would affect the quality of farm produce. This
manifestation of gamblers’ fallacy is common in the response of people to disasters. With the impact
of Hurricane Ivan still lingering in their minds, however, other farmers did not hesitate to harvest and
store produce in preparation for the advent of Dean. This is an example of adaptation but the different
responses by farmers emphasize that adaptation can be uneven and non-uniform over small
One of the many incentives to harvest and store produce before a hurricane is that farmers usually
get good price immediately following the event. Data gathered from the wider sample indicated that
after Hurricane Ivan, the price for carrot tripled (from J$40 to J$120/lb [US$1 = J$68]) and tomato
quadrupled (from $50 to $200/lb). Of the 50 farmers sampled, 25% indicated that they would harvest
and store produce (5 of these farmers were observed doing so) while 6% said they will not do so
because Hurricane Dean will change its course just like most of the other near misses Jamaica has
experienced in the past. See Plates 4a and 4b.
Plate 4. (a) Pre-hurricane harvesting; (b) Storage of Pre-harvested Tomatoes. Photographs
by Donovan Campbell.
5. Post-Hurricane Dean
Adaptation is a continuous process of adjustment that seeks to provide an adequate compromise
between losses and gains. The process has to make sense to the farmer within the context of his/her
livelihood. In this sense, adaptation is usually “the result of individual decisions influenced by forces
internal to the farm household and external forces that affect the agricultural system at large” . After
Hurricane Dean the efforts of farmers were mostly geared towards restoring their livelihoods to a state
of normalcy. Some farmers utilized financial resources (e.g., savings) available to them to restart
production and restore damaged properties. However, the majority of farmers surveyed reported
limited financial assets and as a result had to depend on other forms of capital (physical, human and
social) in their restoration efforts.
Sustainability 2009, 1
Table 3. Percentage crop loss to Hurricane Dean.
Crop loss Frequency Percent
Hurricane Dean struck at a time when farmers usually start preparing for the rainy season (August
to November). Thirty six percent of the sample reported that they had lost 100% of their crops
(See Table 3) compared to 70% of the wider sample that claimed they lost all their produce to
Hurricane Ivan in 2004. During the immediate period following Hurricane Dean, some farmers
employed a number of strategies to cope with the changes. Most common among these were: (i) Post
hurricane harvesting and plant restoration, (ii) relocation of farm/plot (iii) scaled down production.
5.1. Post Hurricane Harvesting and Plant Restoration
In the aftermath of Hurricane Dean, farmers identified marketable produce which they harvested
and tried to sell immediately. Not surprisingly, all 50 farmers sampled indicated that the price for
produce was better in the immediate period after Hurricane Dean than for the period preceding the
hurricane. News reports indicated that there was a 300% price increase in vegetables such as tomato,
carrot and sweet pepper in many parts of the island after the hurricane.
In addition to harvesting, farmers were also interested in the ‘rehabilitation’ of crops. With little
Government relief available, they turned to a range of tried and proven traditional or customary
agronomic practices to salvage crops and mitigate losses. These included, weeding, moulding,
mulching, fertilizing and manuring, spraying, and watering. Sweet potato, scallion and beetroot were
identified by farmers as the easiest crops to revive, while tomato, melon, sweet pepper and cabbage
were included among the hardest. The crops experiencing the worst damage were identified as carrot,
yams, tomatoes, melons, and scallions.
5.2. Relocating Farm Plots
Farmers are generally hesitant to change the location of their farm plots. Chief among the factors
which explain this attitude are; land availability and tenure; indigenous technical knowledge—
specifically knowledge of environmental conditions such as soil type, rainfall and pest and insect
behavior; type of crops being cultivated; distance from homestead; access to road and water; and the
availability of labour. In the aftermath of Hurricane Dean, only 3 farmers indicated their intention to
relocate farm plots. Two of the three farmers were cultivating on hillsides and planned to move to the
foot of the hill where eroded topsoil and fertilizers and manure applied had accumulated.
Sustainability 2009, 1
5.3. Scaled down Production
Sampled farmers were asked whether or not they would scale down production as a result of the
impact of Hurricane Dean. More than 70% of the farmers indicated that they will scale down
production as a short term measure. One of the major contributing factors to the scaling down of
production as explained by farmers, was a sudden increase in fertilizer prices in the immediate
aftermath of both Hurricane Ivan in 2004 and Hurricane Dean in 2007. The scaling down of production
occurs both in terms of land area and number of crops cultivated. In terms of land area, the decrease
was about 25% of the total area under cultivation before the Hurricane.
Through a natural process of vegetation succession, land taken out of crop production in the area
typically reverts to the growth of guinea grass (Panicum Maximum) which is a ubiquitous feature of
farming systems in the area where it is used as mulch and is a profitable if unsustainable alternative to
crop production in the area. Some farmers have also indicated their intentions to give up farming
altogether while others have been reduced to the growth of a single cash crop which increases their
vulnerability. Others have been reduced to working for richer farmers at an average rate of $US15 per
day. These changes can have serious implications for sustainable livelihoods and food security.
6. Relief Efforts and Recovery
It has been argued that the ‘period of recovery, is an important factor that is given little attention
and is especially important because of the nature of the annual hurricane season and possible trends as
a result of anthropogenic climate change’ . The period of recovery is fundamentally a function of
the socio-economic and political factors (such as effective government policies to assist affected
persons after a disaster) as well as the health and well-being of the affected. The degree of damage to
the environment (e.g., the erosion of valuable top soil and destruction of road networks) can also affect
the recovery time of farmers. Governments can help to shorten the recovery time by working with
farmers to understand their needs as well as to facilitate the implementation of community-specific
policies geared towards increasing resilience. This means that robust adaptive measures must be in
place. This has scarcely been the case in Jamaica, and the reported experiences of farmers is replete
with statements of discontent about the disorganized and inappropriate relief strategies of the
government after both Hurricanes Dean and Ivan.
Recent research documented a poorly orchestrated relief effort by the Ministry of Agriculture
through the Rural Agricultural Development Authority (RADA) for farmers after Hurricane Ivan
in 2004 when farmers were given a J$5,000 coupon (<US$70), redeemable only against carrot seeds
supplied by a single large Jamaican agro-processing company, and regardless of a farmer’s particular
cropping specialty . According to the researchers ‘Farmers reported that the registration
arrangements for assistance were chaotic, requiring them to travel out of the area to nearby towns, and
the registration system was so loosely managed it allowed persons who were not farmers to claim
The relief effort after Hurricane Dean was quite similar to that described for Hurricane Ivan.
Farmers lamented the loose and poorly managed relief efforts by the Ministry (through RADA) that
did not ensure that the worse affected and most vulnerable farming households got assistance.
Sustainability 2009, 1
Assistance was in the form of fertilizers and farmers got on average 1–3 bags, regardless of the size of
their farms. Over 84% of the respondents were not visited by RADA after Hurricane Dean and 74%
did not receive any assistance from the government. This suggests quite clearly that farmers were in
essence left to fend for themselves as they attempted to recover.
While typical relief efforts in farming communities in Jamaica scarcely build resilience and in many
cases create dependency it is difficult to overstate its importance in accelerating the recovery process
in the immediate aftermath of a disaster. Recent literature has stressed the importance of assisting
affected persons after a disaster not just to return to ‘normalcy’ but to build capacity so they will be
better able to respond and cope in the future . This is the essence of adaptability. However, poorly
organized and inadequately financed relief efforts also impinge on farmers’ ability to recover from
such shocks and stresses .
The Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change Third assessment Report highlighted the
important role governments have to play in the post hurricane adaptation process. If they are well
organized and prepared, the adaptive capacity of the most exposed sectors will improve. However, ‘a
disorganized and unprepared government will mean a lower adaptive capacity for a country’ . It is
clear from this study and previous work that the agriculture sector was improperly prepared for both
Hurricane Ivan and Dean along with other recent climatic events. While most farmers (43%) indicated
that they planned to seek assistance from their families and friends to restart production after Hurricane
Dean, an important 38% were depending on government assistance to do so (Figure 4). The fact that
most farmers depend on family members and friends for support after the disaster reinforces the
importance of social capital—the ‘features of social organization such as trust, norms and networks
that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions’  as a critical
component of rural livelihood and adaptation.
Figure 4. Source of assistance to restart production.
Sustainability 2009, 1
While acknowledging the importance of social capital, literature on the subject also argues that
‘strong bonding ties are associated more with survival than development and are often observed in
recovering from natural disaster and conflict’ . Therefore, while social capital helps farmers to
recover from natural disasters, it is hardly associated with an improvement in their standard of living.
Put another way strong bonding ties are helpful in coping but not so much in adaptation. However,
there is also literature arguing that the presence of ‘bonds’ (strong kinship network) can increase the
adaptive capacity by providing economic, managerial and psychological help . The presence of
bonds and ties with these communities also provides fertile ground for governmental intervention to
facilitate the development of agrarian policies and rural programs.
To further compound the difficulties faced by farmers, the passage of Hurricane Dean was
followed by a two-week rainfall event produced by Tropical Storm Noel that caused severe flooding,
water-logging, and destruction of crops. The continuous disruption of livelihood activities by
successive extreme events amplifies the plight of these farmers who operate in a relatively marginal
Data collection in the study area in the period leading up to Hurricane Dean, during the passage of
the hurricane and in the period immediately after, provided a rare opportunity to observe and
investigate the response of farmers to the threat and subsequent devastation and assess the adaptive
capacity in the area. The response of farmers and farm families was to a large degree dependent on
their awareness of the impending storm and their “assessment” of the credibility of the threat. Farmers
who took the threat seriously prioritized the security of the homestead which is considered to be
central command of farm operations even though it may not be a farm plot. They then used a variety of
customary practices to secure their cultivated fields. These practices were largely based on local and
traditional agro-ecological knowledge learned through years of observations and farm level
experimentations. These innovative and mostly rudimentary measures proved to be fairly effective in
minimizing crop loss and damage.
The farmers in the study displayed strong adaptive and coping capacities in the aftermath of the
storm. This was remarkable as Hurricane Dean was the most recent in a series of debilitating cyclonic
episodes over the last four or five years from which they were still recovering. Many were resolved to
pick up the pieces and move on often temporarily scaling down their operations. For some being hit
while they were down was more overwhelming prompting contemplations to quit farming. The study
emphasized the role of farmers’ personal resourcefulness, ingenuity and resilience in coping with
natural disasters and everyday hurdles in a challenging farming environment where risk and
uncertainty are ubiquitous and their livelihoods are never secure. Left to their own devices before and
after the storm, they drew on community and personal strength and a fatalistic philosophy in which
disasters are treated as simply realities of life. The importance of this attitude as an important piece of
adaptation is intangible and very difficult to quantify but should not be underestimated.
The study also underscored the urgent need for more State institutional support for the agricultural
sector in general but for the small-scale food producing sector more specifically. Governments in the
Caribbean have tended to invest in disaster planning systems which focus on mitigating loss of lives.
Sustainability 2009, 1
We argue very strongly that strategies to protect rural livelihoods must also be incorporated. Given the
importance of agriculture to rural livelihoods, the Jamaican economy, and national food security, steps
should be taken to moving beyond helping farmers to cope in the aftermath of a shock event to
building adaptive capacities in rural farming communities. This could include a special warning
system in deep rural communities where communication challenges could reduce awareness of an
impending storm. Agricultural extension services must be expanded and intensified to include hazard
mitigation education for farmers and rural dwellers. Investments in modern agricultural storage
systems and facilities and education around proper storage of fresh farm produce are also critical. State
relief efforts and support must be better coordinated and significant to assist farmers in rehabilitation
and restoration efforts after a disastrous event. Central to this should be a system to allow farmers to
affordably access state provided loans and grants as they recover from natural disasters. Studies should
be conducted to research the most appropriate crops for the region in the context of climatic variability
and environmental change. Finally, farmers should be involved in the development of any disaster
management plan for the sector.
1. Comfort, L.; Wisner, B.; Cutter, S.; Pulwarty, R.; Hewitt, K.; Oliver-Smith, A.; Fordham, M.;
Peacock, W.; Krimgold, F. Reframing disaster policy: the global evolution of vulnerable
communities. Environ. Hazard. 1999, 1, 39-44.
2. Holling, C. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1973, 4,
3. Smit, B.; Wandel, J. Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Global Environ. Change
2006, 16, 282-292.
4. McGregor, D.F.M.; Barker, D.; Campbell, D. Environmental change and Caribbean food security:
recent hazard impacts and domestic food production in Jamaica. In Global Change and Caribbean
Vulnerability: Environment, Economy and Society at Risk; McGregor, D.F.M., Barker, D.,
Dodman, D., Eds.; The University of the West Indies Press: Kingston, Jamaica, 2009;
5. Smit, B.; Skinner, M. Adaptation options in agriculture to climate change—a typology. Mitig.
Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2002, 7, 85-114.
6. Vincent, K. Uncertainty in adaptive capacity and the importance of scale. Global Environ. Change
2007, 17, 12-24.
7. Adger, N.; Huq, S.; Brown, K.; Conway, D.; Hulme, M. Adaptation to climate change in the
developing world. Prog. Dev. Studies. 2003, 3, 179-195.
8. Thomas, D.; Osbahr, C.; Twyman, W.; Adger, N.; Hewitson, B. Adaptive: Adaptation to Climate
Change amongst Natural Resource-Dependent Societies in the Developing World: Across the
Southern African Climate Gradient; Technical Report 35; Tyndall Centre for Climate Change
Research, University of East Anglia: Norwich, UK, 2005.
Sustainability 2009, 1
9. Ziervogel, G.; Taylor, A.; Thomalla, F.; Takama, T.; Quinn, C. Adapting to Climate, Water and
Health Stresses: Insights from Sekhukhune, South Africa; Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI):
Stockholm, Sweden, 2006; Available online: http://www.napa-pana.org/private/modules/
knowledgebox/io/file.php?entry=1200&field=31 (accessed on 5 July 2008).
10. Cooper, P.; Dimes, J.; Rao, K.; Shapiro, B.; Shiferaw, B.; Twomlow, S. Coping better with
current climatic variability in the rain-fed farming systems of sub-Saharan Africa: an essential
first step in adapting to future climate change? Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2008, 126, 24-35.
11. Lambert, R.J. Monitoring local food security and coping strategies: lessons from information
collection and analysis in Mopti, Mali. Disasters 1994, 18, 333-343.
12. Chambers, R. Vulnerability, Coping and Policy; IDS Bulletin 20; Institute of Development
Studies, University of Sussex: Brighton, UK, 1989.
13. Adger, N.; Arnell, N.; Tompkins, E. Successful adaptation to climate change across scales. Global
Environ. Change 2005, 15, 77-86.
14. Brklacich, M.; McNabb, D.; Bryant, C.; Dumanski, J. Adaptability of agricultural systems to
global climate change: a Renfrew County, Ontario, Canada, pilot study. In Agricultural
Restructuring and Sustainability; Ilbery, B., Chiotti, Q., Rickard, T., Eds.; CAB International:
Wallingford, UK, 1997; pp.185-200.
15. Smit, B.; Burton, I.; Klein, R.; Wandel, J. An anatomy of adaptation to climate change and
variability. Climatic Change 2000, 45, 223-251.
16. Jones, P.; Horton, E.; Folland, C.; Hulme, M.; Parker, D.; Basnett, T. The use of indices to
identify changes in climatic extremes. Climatic Change 1999, 42, 131-149.
17. Beckford, C.; Barker, D. The role and value of local knowledge in Jamaican agriculture
adaptation and change in small-scale farming. Geogr. J. 2007, 173, 118-128.
18. Potter, R.; Barker, D.; Conway, D.; Klak, T. The Contemporary Caribbean; Prentice Hall: Boston,
MA, USA, 2004.
19. Poncelet, J. Disaster management in the Caribbean. Disasters 1997, 21, 267-279.
20. Pielke, R., Jr.; Rubiera, J.; Landsea, C.; Fernandez, M.; Klein, R. Hurricane vulnerability in Latin
America and the Caribbean: normalized damage and loss potential. Nat. Hazard. Rev. 2003, 4,
101-114; Available online: http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/Landsea/NHR-Cuba.pdf (accessed on 3
21. Charveriat, C. Natural Disasters in Latin America and the Caribbean: An Overview of Risks;
Inter-American Development Bank Working Paper No. 434; Inter-American Development Bank:
Washington, DC, USA, 2000; Available
ENVNatDisastLACeline.pdf (accessed on 3 August 2009).
22. Pelling, M.; Uitto, J. Small island developing states: natural disaster vulnerability and global
change. Environ. Hazard. 2001, 3, 49-62.
23. Spence, B.; Katada, T.; Clerveaux, V. Experiences and Behaviour of Jamaican Residents in
Relation in Hurricane Ivan; Japan International Cooperation Agency: Tokyo, Japan, 2005.
24. IPCC. Climate Change: The Scientific Basis Contribution of Working Group I to the Third
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Houghton, J., Ding, Y.,
Griggs, D., Noguer, M., van der Linden, P., Dai, X., Maskell, K., Johnson, C., Eds.; Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2001.
Sustainability 2009, 1
25. Peterson, T.; Taylor, M.; Demeritte, R.; Duncombe, D.; Burton, S.; Thompson, F.; Porter, A.;
Mercedes, M.; Villegas, E.; Fils, R.; Tank, A.; Martis, A.; Warner, R.; Joyette, A.; Mills, W.;
Alexander, L.; Gleason, B. Recent changes in climate extremes in the Caribbean region J.
Geophys. Res. 2002, 107, 4601.
26. Lugo, A. Effects and outcomes of Caribbean hurricanes in a climate change scenario. Sci. Total
Environ. 2000, 262, 243-251.
27. Chen, A.; Taylor, M. Investigating the link between early season Caribbean rainfall and the EL
nino+1 year. Int. J. Climatol. 2002, 22, 87-106.
28. Tartaglione, C.; Smith, S.; O’Brien, J. ENSO Impact on Hurricane Landfall Probabilities for the
Caribbean; Center for Ocean–Atmospheric Prediction Studies, The Florida State University:
Tallahassee, FL, USA, 2003.
29. Goldenberg, S.; Landsea, W.; Mestas-Nuñez, A.; Gray, W. The recent increase in Atlantic
hurricane activity: causes and implications. Science 2001, 293, 474-479.
30. Emanuel, K. The dependence of hurricane intensity on climate. Nature 1987, 326, 483-485.
31. Global Hurricane Intensity NOT Increasing. World Climate Report, 27 February 2007; Available
increasing/ (accessed on 5 September 2008).
32. Kossin, J.; Knapp, K.; Vimont, D.; Murnane, R.; Harper, B. A globally consistent reanalysis of
hurricane variability and trends. Geophys. Res. Let. 2007, 34, L4815.
33. Swanson, K. Impact of scaling behavior on tropical cyclone intensities. Geophys. Res. Let. 2007,
34, L18815, doi: 10.1029/2007GL030851.
34. Slingo, J.; Challinor, A.; Hoskins, B.; Wheeler, T. Introduction: Food crops in a changing climate.
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. 2005, B360, 1983-1989.
35. Beckford, C. Decision-making and innovation among small-scale yam farmers in central Jamaica;
a dynamic, pragmatic and adaptive process. Geogr. J. 2002, 168, 248-259.
36. Timms, B. Development theory and domestic agriculture in the Caribbean: recurring crises and
missed opportunities. Carib. Geogr. 2009, 15, 101-117.
37. Country Profile: Jamaica; Economist Intelligent Unit: London, UK, 2007.
38. Barker, D. Dualism and disasters on a typical island: constraints to agricultural development in
Jamaica. Tifdschr. Econ. Soc. Geogr. 1993, 84, 332-340.
39. Weis, T. Restructuring and redundancy: the impact and illogic of neoliberal agricultural reforms
in Jamaica. J. Agrar. Chang. 2004, 4, 461-491.
40. Jones, R. An environmental risk assessment/management framework for climate change impact
assessments. Natural Hazards 2001, 23, 197-230.
41. Ziervogel, G.; Calder, R. Climate variability and rural livelihoods: assessing the impact of
seasonal climate forecasts in Lesotho. Area 2003, 35, 403-417.
42. Trade Reforms and Food Security: Conceptualizing the Linkages; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2000.
43. Francis, E. Making a Living: Changing Livelihoods in Rural Africa; Routledge: London,
44. Molua, E. Climate variability and effectiveness of farm-level adaptation options: the challenges
and implications for food security in southwestern Cameroon. Environ. Dev. Econ. 2002, 7,
Sustainability 2009, 1 Download full-text
45. Huntingford, C.; Lambert, F.; Gash, J.; Taylor, C.; Challinor, A. Aspect of climate change
prediction relevant to crop productivity. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. 2005, B360, 1999-2009.
46. Parry, M.L.; Rosenjzweig, C.; Iglesias, A.; Livermore, M.; Fischer, G. Effects of climate change
on global food production under SRES emissions and socio-economic scenarios. Global Environ.
Change 2004, 14, 53-67.
47. Quarterly Gross Domestic Product; STATIN: Kingston, Jamaica, April–June 2004.
48. Assessing the socio-economic and environmental impact of Hurricane Dean. In Proceedings of
the Conference on Climate Change: Impacts on the Caribbean, Kingston, Jamaica, 6
49. Jamaica: Agricultural Sector Took Beating from Hurricane Dean; Jamaica Information Service:
Kingston, Jamaica, 2007; Available online: http://www.reliefweb.int/rwarchive/rwb.nsf/
db900sid/EMAE-76HR4S?OpenDocument (accessed on 8 October 2007).
50. Huda, A.; Packham, R. Using Seasonal Climate Forecasting in Agriculture: A Participatory
Decision-Making Approach; Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research: Canaberra,
51. Ferdinand, I.; Parker, E. Hurricane Risk Reduction Strategies in the Windward Islands; Coventry
Centre for Disaster Management, Coventry University: Coventry, UK, 2005.
52. Mustafa, D. Reinforcing vulnerability? Disaster relief, recovery, and response to the 2001 flood in
Rawalpindi, Pakistan. Environ. Hazard. 2003, 5, 71-82.
53. Vincent, K. Uncertainty in adaptive capacity and the importance of scale. Global Environ. Change
2007, 17, 12-24.
54. Putnam, R.; Leonardi, R.; Nanetti, R. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy;
Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 1993.
55. Pelling, M.; High, C. Understanding adaptation: what can social capital offer assessments of
adaptive capacity? Global Environ. Change 2005, 15, 308-319.
© 2009 by the authors; licensee Molecular Diversity Preservation International, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative
Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).