Content uploaded by Laurel A. Murray
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Laurel A. Murray on Oct 16, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
118
FACING UP TO CLIMATE
CHANGE IN SOUTH ASIA
Mozaharul Alam and
Laurel A. Murray
2005
SERIES
GATEKEEPER
THE GATEKEEPER SERIES of the Natural Resources Group at IIED is produced
by the Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Livelihoods Programme. The Series aims to
highlight key topics in the field of sustainable natural resource management. Each
paper reviews a selected issue of contemporary importance and draws preliminary
conclusions for development that are particularly relevant for policymakers,
researchers and planners. References are provided to important sources and
background material. The Series is published three times a year and is supported by
the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), the Swiss
Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) and the Rockefeller Foundation.
The views expressed in this paper are those of the author(s), and do not necessarily
represent those of the International Institute for Environment and Development
(IIED), Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), the Swiss
Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), the Rockefeller Foundation, or
any of their partners.
MOZAHARUL ALAM is a Research Fellow at the Bangladesh Centre for Advanced
Studies where he is working on global environmental change and sustainable devel-
opment issues with a special focus on climate change impacts, vulnerability, adap-
tation and mainstreaming issues. He is also working on building the capacity of
least developed counties in South Asia in the above areas. Bangladesh Centre for
Advanced Studies, House 10, Road 16A, Gulshan-1, Dhaka 1212, Bangladesh.
Tel: +880-2 885 1237; Fax: +880-2 885 1417; Email: mozaharul.alam@bcas.net
LAUREL A. MURRAY is a Researcher in the Environment, Politics and Develop-
ment Group at the Department of Geography, King’s College London. She is
working on climate change policy and development, with a particular focus on
international environmental agreements and the negotiation process. Environment,
Politics and Development Group, Department of Geography, King’s College
London, Strand, London, WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom. Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1669;
Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2287; Email: laurel.murray@kcl.ac.uk
2● GATEKEEPER 118
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This paper provides an overview of the likely impacts of climate change on three of
the least developed countries in South Asia: Bangladesh, Bhutan and Nepal. In these
countries, climate change effects will include changes in temperature, distribution
of rainfall, sea-level rise, and an increase in the frequency and intensity of extreme
weather events. This will have direct impacts on climate-dependent activities in these
countries (such as agriculture, hydropower, forest management and nature conser-
vation). Adverse impacts of extreme events, particularly floods (riverine, coastal and
glacier lake outburst), droughts, salinity and cyclones are of particular concern. In
addition, climate change will have indirect, socio-economic consequences for health,
education and security. These least developed countries are most at risk because of
their high vulnerability and low adaptive capacity. Weak economies, inadequate
infrastructure, poor social development, lack of institutional capacity and high
dependence on natural resources all contribute to this vulnerability.
The most damaging impacts of climate change for all three countries will be to water
resources and agriculture. The agricultural sector is the major source of employ-
ment for all three countries and it will remain so in the near future. Loss of both
agricultural land and production will adversely affect people’s livelihoods, especially
among the rural poor. Within Bangladesh, the population living in coastal areas are
likely to be most at risk, whereas in Nepal, people living in the Terai plain and hilly
areas are most vulnerable. The western region of Bhutan is highly vulnerable to
glacier lake outbursts with potential impacts on hydropower and agriculture.
The authors highlight some potential adaptation measures and strategies for the
region to lessen the impacts of climate change, variability and extreme events. The
goal is to demonstrate that governments and donor agencies must recognise the
threat climate change poses to development prospects in South Asia, particularly
in LDCs, and ensure that adaptation measures are formulated and integrated into
the wider development agenda. Countries like Bangladesh have made it their goal
to reduce the number of people living below the poverty line by 50%, as stated in
the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper and Millennium Development Goals. Climate
change will jeopardise this noble ambition unless realistic adaptation measures are
devised. In addition to mainstreaming adaptation to national and sectoral devel-
opment policies and measures, other recommendations include: strengthening
community-based adaptation measures which build on local experiences and exist-
ing strategies for coping with extreme events; enhancing early warning systems and
preparedness; developing new agricultural varieties; adopting efficient water
resource management both in the winter and monsoon seasons; and inter-agency
coordination and cooperation.
FACING UP TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN SOUTH ASIA ● 3
FACING UP TO CLIMATE CHANGE
IN SOUTH ASIA
Mozaharul Alam and Laurel A.Murray
INTRODUCTION
The Third Assessment Report of Working Group II of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicted that climate change would impose
significant stress on resources throughout Asia. The Asian region is home to more
than 60% of the world’s population; natural resources are already under stress,
and the resilience of most sectors to climate change is poor. Many countries are
socio-economically dependent on natural resources such as water, forest, grass-
land and rangeland, and fisheries, and changes to these resources as a result of
climate change will have far-reaching implications. For example, food and fibre,
biodiversity, water resources, coastal ecosystems and human settlements in South
Asia are thought to be highly vulnerable to climate change. The impacts of
climate change are expected to vary significantly across the different sub-regions
and countries of Asia and certain countries will be able to cope better than others.
The Least Developed Countries (LDCs), which are already struggling to tackle
issues of poverty, health and education, are expected to be among the most
vulnerable to climate change and extreme events because of their lack of
economic strength, low level of institutional capabilities and greater dependence
on climate-sensitive resources. It is vital that realistic measures for adapting to
climate change are developed for these vulnerable countries and integrated into
their wider development agenda.
This paper summarises an assessment made of three South Asian LDC countries,
Bangladesh, Bhutan and Nepal (Alam, 2004a, b and c), carried out under the
fellowship programme of the Capacity Strengthening of Least Developed Coun-
tries (LDCs) to Adaptation to Climate Change (CLACC) project. This project
was implemented jointly by a group of Southern institutes under the leadership
of the International Institute of Environment and Development (IIED). The
assessment looked at climate change impacts on development and the integra-
tion of climate change adaptation policies. In this paper we first review the antic-
4● GATEKEEPER 118
ipated climate change impacts for these three countries and their implications
for development policies. We then highlight some potential adaptation measures
and strategies for the region to lessen the impacts of climate change, variability
and extreme events. Our goal is to demonstrate that governments and donor
agencies must recognise the threat climate change poses to development prospects
in South Asia, particularly in LDCs, and ensure that adaptation measures are
formulated and integrated into the wider development agenda.
REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
Geophysical context
Geophysical characteristics vary significantly among the three LDC countries
reviewed in this study (see map), ranging from Himalayan mountainous ecosys-
tems to low-lying coastal ecosystems. The coastal zones, floodplains and inner
mountainous areas with river valleys support most economic and cultural activ-
ity. Bangladesh is broadly divided into three geological land types: floodplain
(80%), Pleistocene terrace (8%), and Tertiary hills (12%). Bhutan’s land area
can be divided into southern foothills, inner Himalayas and higher Himalayas.
The southern foothills rise from the plains to a height of 1,500 metres but are
only about 20 kilometres wide. The inner Himalayas gradually rise to about
3,000 metres and contain the broad river valleys of central Bhutan, the economic
and cultural heartland of the country. The northern region comprises the main
Himalayan range of the high mountains. In Nepal, the Terai plain, the Siwalik
Hills, the Middle Mountains, the High Mountains (consisting of the Main
Himalayas and the Inner Himalayan Valleys), and the High Himalayas all have
distinguishing characteristics. The Terai region, where land is most suitable for
cultivation, lies below 610 metres, comprises 23% of the total land area and
contains 48% of the population (CBS, 2002).
Climatic context
South Asia’s climate encompasses a wide range of altitudinal zones and micro-
climatic conditions. These range from tropical to arctic, creating highly diverse
ecosystems. The region is characterised by very low to high temperatures, heavy
rainfall, often excessive humidity and marked seasonal variations. The
Himalayan mountain chain produces a more or less tropical climate through-
out the year in Bangladesh. In Bhutan, there is a wide range of altitudinal vari-
ation, from tropical to temperate, over a short distance. The climate of Nepal
FACING UP TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN SOUTH ASIA ● 5
changes from arctic to tropical along the 200km span from the northern to the
southern border. Rainfall in these three countries is concentrated in the
monsoon season with 60 to 90% of total rainfall occurring during
monsoon/summer time.
A map of the region. Source: ReliefWeb,www.reliefweb.int/
6● GATEKEEPER 118
Socio-economic context
The total population of these three South Asian LDCs is roughly 155 million
(Bangladesh: 131; Bhutan: 0.75; and Nepal: 23 million) with very low per capita
GDP, ranging from US$250 to 695 (UNDP, 2004). The population of the region
is increasing, with significant variation in urban and rural population growth. It
is estimated that the population of Bangladesh will be 170 million by the year
2020 (WB and BCAS, 1998). The population of Nepal is estimated to increase to
between 29.87 and 34.56 million by 2016 (MoEP, 1998).
The Human Development Index (HDI) provides a measure of the status of human
development within a country and represents life expectancy, literacy and stan-
dard of living (in terms of GDP per capita in purchasing power). Happily, all three
countries have shown an increase in their HDI. For example, the HDI for
Bangladesh has improved from 0.350 in 1980 to 0.509 in 2002, moving the
country from a low human development category to a medium development cate-
gory (UNDP, 2004). However, despite such improvement at the macroeconomic
level, Bangladesh still faces significant challenges in combating poverty, with 36%
of people living on US$1 per day.
In contrast, extreme poverty is relatively rare in Bhutan and few suffer from
hunger or homelessness. Life expectancy has risen from 37 years in 1960 to 66
years in 1997, while over the same period the proportion of the population with
access to safe water has risen from 31% to 63% (TPCS, 2000). Nevertheless, the
population still relies heavily on subsistence agriculture, and rural incomes and
agricultural productivity are low.
Despite its natural beauty and enormous potential for hydropower and tourism,
Nepal is one of the poorest countries with 82.5% of the population living below the
international poverty line of US$2 per day (World Bank, 2003). A Gini Coefficient
of 0.37 indicates that income distribution is highly uneven. In fact, some 38% of the
population survives on less than US$1 per day. The wealthiest 20% of the popula-
tion claims nearly 45% of total annual national income, while the poorest 20% can
claim only 7.6%. Aggregate funding from various international agencies constitutes
approximately 45% of Nepal’s entire government expenditure (World Bank, 2002).
Economic context
Overall, macroeconomic stability and economic growth are improving in these
three countries. GDP growth has increased steadily, ranging from 4 to 7%. Market
FACING UP TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN SOUTH ASIA ● 7
oriented economic reforms and deregulations in Bangladesh in the early 1990s
have led to a more secure macroeconomic environment. The average annual GDP
growth was 4.65% from 1991 through 1995 and rose to 5.49% from 1996
through 2000. The per capita Net National Income (NNI) rose from US$317 in
1995 to US$354 in 2000. Bhutan had an estimated GDP growth rate of 7.7% in
2002, higher than the 7.2% recorded in 2001. The per capita income of an average
Nepalese is approximately US$ 250 per annum. The size of the national GDP is
approximately US$5.5 billion with an annual average growth rate of 4.9%.
Agriculture and agricultural products contribute the greatest share of GDP in all
three countries. In addition, agriculture also provides a livelihood for nearly three-
quarters of the labour force. A heavy reliance on agriculture, as well as on other
climate-sensitive sectors such as hydropower and tourism, make the economies
in South Asia highly vulnerable to climate variability. The importance of other
sectors in the three countries varies depending on resource availability and differ-
ences in economic activities. For example, tourism and power contribute signifi-
cantly to economic growth in Nepal and Bhutan, respectively. On the other hand,
the service sector has become an important contributor to the GDP of Bangladesh.
DEVELOPMENT GOALS
Poverty alleviation and improved well-being are two common and overarching
development goals for all three countries. However, indicators, means, and strate-
gies for achieving these objectives differ considerably for each individual country.
Bangladesh’s Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) follows the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs)—to halve poverty by 2015, while Nepal’s Tenth Plan
seeks to reduce poverty by 8% (from 38% to 30% of the population) between
2002 and 2007. Nepal also aims for a 10% improvement in human development
indicators and a 6.2% increase in the economy. Gross National Happiness is
Bhutan’s overarching development philosophy. The country’s Ninth Plan has noted
that while Bhutan is prepared for change, it is essential to have a clear-cut perspec-
tive on the objectives and the guiding principles for change. The country’s devel-
opment goals place an emphasis on holistic development, advocating that growth
must be both social and economic and placing equal importance on spiritual,
emotional and cultural needs, on the one hand, and the material well-being of
society on the other.
Bangladesh’s poverty alleviation programme prioritises human resources devel-
opment and education. It is increasingly being recognised in Bangladesh that envi-
8● GATEKEEPER 118
ronmental concerns must be integrated, or mainstreamed, into all development
activities. Specific environmental actions required for sustainable development
also include community participation in local level planning and management of
local resources. In Bhutan, having accepted that the maximisation of Gross
National Happiness is a philosophy, the Government has identified four areas as
the main pillars for development: (a) economic growth and development; (b)
preservation and promotion of cultural heritage; (c) preservation and sustainable
use of the environment; and (d) good governance. Nepal’s strategy for achieving
its objectives is based on the “Four Pillars” of poverty reduction which are (a)
broad-based economic growth; (b) social sector development, including human
development; (c) targeted programmes for underprivileged groups; and (d) good
governance.
Development challenges
There are many driving forces in all three countries compelling people to over-
exploit their natural resources. These include poverty combined with rapid popu-
lation growth, high levels of unemployment or under employment, natural
disasters, low levels of education, and lack of institutional capability. Unplanned
agricultural practices and encroachment on forest areas for agriculture and settle-
ment also put increased pressure on resources. Unplanned or inadequate rural
infrastructure development and the growing demands of increasing urbanisation
are also devouring productive land. The major threat to Bangladesh agriculture
is that production is becoming less and less competitive. Overall, production costs
are increasing, making investment in agriculture less attractive, and thus affect-
ing total production. Furthermore, land degradation, extreme floods and poor
water availability in the dry season are undermining agricultural production and
food self sufficiency.
A major economic challenge for Bhutan stems from it being a least developed
economy with special structural constraints and vulnerabilities. The direct linkage
of the Bhutanese currency to the Indian rupee, combined with large inflows of
foreign aid and hydropower revenue, push up the wages of unskilled workers,
making exports (except from hydropower) less competitive and hampering efforts
to diversify the economy. Moreover, Bhutan faces unique challenges being a land-
locked country with a mountainous topography and scattered settlements, result-
ing in higher costs for social services and infrastructure development. This also has
increased pressure on the national budget, diverting resources from direct invest-
ment in production.
FACING UP TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN SOUTH ASIA ● 9
In Nepal, apart from an urgent need to address the issues of political stability,
domestic security and conflict mitigation, which obstruct poverty reduction and
economic growth, the main challenge will be to increase the performance of the
agricultural sector. In particular, poor farmers need both encouragement to change
their practices (for example, to diversify their crops) and improved access to agri-
cultural infrastructure and facilities such as water and credit. Furthermore, basic
social services in the rural areas urgently need to be improved. Enforcing existing
environmental laws would go a long way to curb environmental degradation, as
well as targeting polluting industries and assisting in their relocation.
Several studies have shown that coastal zone vulnerability would be acute due to the combined effects
of climate change, sea level rise,subsidence, and changes of upstream river discharge,cyclone, and
coastal embankments.There are four key primary physical effects (WB, 2000):
• The effect of
saline water intrusion
in the estuaries and into the groundwater would be stimulated by
low river flow, sea level rise and subsidence. Pressure of the growing population and economic
development will further reduce fresh water availability in future.The adverse effects of salt-water
intrusion will be significant on coastal agriculture and the availability of fresh water for public and
industrial water supply.
• The combined effect of higher sea water levels, subsidence,siltation of estuary branches, higher
riverbed levels and reduced sedimentation in flood-protected areas will impede drainage and will
gradually
increase waterlogging problems
.The problem will be aggravated by the continuous
development of infrastructure (e.g. roads), reducing further the limited natural drainage capacity in
the delta. Increased periods of inundation may hamper agricultural productivity, and will also
threaten human health by increasing the potential for water borne disease.
•
Disturbance of coastal morphological processes
would become a significant problem under a
warmer climate. Bangladesh’s coastal morphological processes are extremely dynamic, partly
because of the tidal and seasonal variations in river flows and run off. Climate change is expected to
increase these variations,with two main (related) processes involved:
• Increased bank erosion and bed level changes of coastal rivers and estuaries.
• Disturbance of the balance between river sediment transport and deposition in rivers, flood
plains, and coastal areas.
•
Increased intensity of extreme events
.The coastal areas of Bangladesh and the Bay of Bengal are
located at the tip of northern Indian Ocean and are frequently hit by severe cyclonic storms,
generating long wave tidal surges which are aggravated because the Bay itself is quite shallow.
Cyclones and storm surges are expected to become more intense with climate change.Though the
country is relatively well equipped in one aspect of disaster management, increased intensity of the
disasters implies major constraints to the country’s social and economic development.
Box 1:Coastal zone vulnerability in Bangladesh
10 ● GATEKEEPER 118
Improving governance and diminishing corruption is also a major requirement
for enhancing development in all three South Asian countries. Good governance
is an essential precondition for a fairer and more successful development policy
based on comprehensive civil service reforms to increase efficiency and account-
ability both at central and local levels.
IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
In the last decade, a number of studies have been carried out on climate change
impacts, vulnerability and adaptation measures for Bangladesh, Bhutan and
Nepal. Key climate change related studies include a) climate change country study
under US climate change study programme (Huq et al., 1999); b) initial national
communication to the United Framework Convention on Climate Change (DoE,
2002); and c) OECD studies on Bangladesh and Nepal in 2003 (Shardul et al.,
2003a and 2003b). Assessments for Bangladesh have also considered sea-level
rise, which is another important aspect of climate change in this country. The most
damaging impacts of climate change for all three countries will be to water
resources and agriculture, and through natural disasters such as floods, droughts
and glacier lake outbursts. These events already drastically affect crop produc-
tivity almost every year.
Water resources
Water related impacts of climate change and sea level rise are likely to be some of
the most critical issues for Bangladesh. Climate change is predicted to increase
both coastal (from sea and river water) and inland flooding (river/rain water) in
Bangladesh (Box 1). In addition, changes of the riverbed from sedimentation and
changes in morphological processes due to seasonal variation of water level and
flow will also be serious. A combination of development and climate change
scenarios indicates that the Lower Ganges and the Surma floodplains of
Bangladesh will be the most vulnerable. On the other hand, the north-central
region may become flood-free if the major rivers have embankments built—some-
thing which has been considered under some development scenarios. The possi-
bility of winter (dry season) drought will increase in certain areas.
There are numerous snow-clad mountains and glacial lakes in the northern region
of Bhutan. Increases in temperature caused by global warming will result in the
retreat of glaciers, increasing the volume of such lakes and ultimately provoking
glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs) with potentially catastrophic consequence.
The October 1994 flash flood on the Pho Chhu River following a glacial lake
FACING UP TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN SOUTH ASIA ● 11
outburst in the Lunana area was one such example. Impacts include disruption to
the quantity of river water used for hydropower generation; destruction of settle-
ments, infrastructure, and agricultural lands; and loss of biodiversity and even
human lives downstream.
In Nepal, geoscientists have also noted that the number and volume of GLOF
hazards is growing. Some of these floods have produced discharge rates of up to
30,000 m3/sec and can run for distances of 200 km (Richardson and Reynolds,
2000). In the past, these disasters have caused enormous destruction. The most
significant documented GLOF event occurred in Nepal in 1985 and resulted in
extensive damage. This GLOF caused a 10 to 15 metre high surge of water and
debris to flood down the Bhote Koshi and Dudh Koshi Rivers for 90 kilometres.
At its peak, 2,000 m3/sec was discharged; two to four times the magnitude of
maximum monsoon flood levels. It destroyed the Namche Small Hydel Project,
which was almost near completion at the time, and cost approximately NPR 45
million. Moreover, limited opportunities for safe and sustainable livelihoods in
the mountains mean that population densities are growing within the river valleys
where the vulnerability to GLOFs increases. The population growth means that
there are now more people exposed to GLOFs and other climate-related disas-
ters, and this is compounded by the expansion of infrastructure and settlements
in the vulnerable areas.
Some climate models predict an increase in rainfall intensity, which may increase
runoff, enhance soil erosion on cleared land and accelerate sedimentation in the
existing water supplies or reservoirs. Not only will this reduce the potential of a
catchment to retain water, but it will also cause water quality to deteriorate. A
reduction in the average flow of snow fed rivers, combined with an increase in
peak flows and sediment yield, would have major impacts on hydropower gener-
ation, urban water supply and agriculture.
Agriculture
The agricultural sector is the major source of employment for all three countries
and will remain so in the coming decades. Loss of both agricultural land and
production will adversely affect people’s livelihoods, especially among the rural
poor. Under a severe climate change scenario (a 4 degree centigrade temperature
rise, increased evaporation of 22%), the potential shortfall in rice production in
Bangladesh could exceed 30%, while that for wheat and potato could be as high
as 50 and 70%, respectively (Karim, 1996). Even under a moderate climate change
scenario the crop loss due to salinity intrusion could be 0.2 Mt annually (Habibul-
lah et al., 1999). The anticipated drop in agricultural production, when coupled
with losses in other sectors, will have a deep impact on the development prospects
for these South Asian countries, severely threatening food security. The ultimate
impact of loss of food grain production would be to use hard currency to increase
food imports.
For Bhutan, a temperature increase of 20C would shift the cultivation zone for
crops sensitive to low temperatures into higher elevations. Although this may seem
a positive spinoff, the steep slopes at this altitude are unsuitable for agriculture.
Related cropping patterns would be affected and there is likely to be further degra-
dation of hill ecosystems.
Nepal has a high dependency on agriculture and over 80% of all water in the
country is used for irrigation. Higher temperatures, increased evapo-transpiration
and decreased winter precipitation may bring about more droughts. Studies in
Southwest Asia show that decreased winter snowfall on glaciers does indeed
decrease the spring/summer runoff. This has already caused severe droughts in
Iran and Pakistan in areas that depend on water from mountain sources (Subbiah,
2001). A similar pattern would severely affect irrigation and farming livelihoods
in Nepal. The land that can be cultivated varies by location and season, since the
vast majority of surface water irrigation systems in Nepal depend on the water
flowing at its source (USCSP, 1997). In some cases, the winter cropping area is
only 20% of the cultivable area during the summer.
Some predict some positive impacts on agriculture from climate change and its
causes, such as increased temperatures and higher carbon dioxide levels. While these
may have positive impacts on crop yields, this is only where moisture is not a
constraint. For example, the apparent increase in Boro yield in Bangladesh as a result
of increased carbon dioxide would be constrained by moisture stress. A 60% mois-
ture stress on top of other effects might cause as high as a 32% decline in Boro yield,
instead of having an overall 20% net increase (Karim et al., 1999). It is feared that
moisture stress would be more intense during the dry season, which might force
Bangladeshi farmers to reduce the area for Boro cultivation altogether. Warmer
temperatures may also increase the occurrence of extreme events or pests, again
offsetting any potential benefits. Both crops and livestock would be affected by an
increase in disease or alien/invasive pests. An increase in temperature, despite a
reduction in humidity, can reduce the ability of farmers to work. As a result, low-
12 ● GATEKEEPER 118
income rural populations that depend on traditional agricultural systems or on
marginal lands are particularly vulnerable to climate change and livelihoods will be
at risk.
MAINSTREAMING ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE
The overall impacts of climate change will be far-reaching. Countries such as
Bangladesh have made it their goal to reduce the number of people living below the
poverty line by 50%, as stated in the PRSPs and Millennium Development Goals.
Climate change will jeopardise this noble ambition unless realistic adaptation meas-
ures are devised. Moreover, climate change may have other, more indirect conse-
quences for these countries. Following past extreme events, the poverty driven rural
population has migrated to urban centres. Such large-scale inter-community migra-
tion is likely to increase social unrest and exacerbate existing conflict situations.
National and international agencies are beginning to recognise the extent to which
climate change will affect development in South Asia. The next step is to make a
shift from policy to action and develop realistic adaptation strategies that are inte-
grated into existing development initiatives. Current and planned development
projects could either increase or reduce the vulnerability of communities to climate
variability, depending on how well they consider climatic impacts. To ensure the
success of both climate change and development programmes, adaptation meas-
ures must be mainstreamed into existing development strategies, across all levels
and sectors. This will require the participation and cooperation of different stake-
holders, including government policy-makers, implementing agencies, develop-
ment partners, the private sector and communities.
In Bangladesh, Bhutan and Nepal, government initiatives and donor projects still
pay little attention to climate change, instead focusing on one-off extreme weather
events such as floods, droughts and cyclones. However, while Bangladesh’s
National Water Policy (NWP) and National Water Management Plan (NWMP)
do not mention climate change explicitly, they will, nevertheless, aid in the adap-
tation to climate change through emphases on:
• Developing early warning and flood-proofing systems to manage floods and
droughts (both expected to increase under climate change).
• “Comprehensive development and management of the main rivers through a
system of barrages” to help sustain dry season flows and regulate monsoon
FACING UP TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN SOUTH ASIA ● 13
14 ● GATEKEEPER 118
flooding. This is also synergistic with adaptation measures for the water sector
as it will help reduce salinity concerns in the Sundarbans during the dry season
and enhance their resilience under climate change and sea level rise.
• Regional co-operation among co-riparian countries; a good institutional adap-
tation response.
It is important to note that several donors and governments are in fact actively
engaged in projects to reduce the risk of GLOFs (Box 2); however, over the next
decade these activities must be scaled up. In the case of Bhutan and Nepal, several
strategies mention the mitigation potential within the forestry and hydropower
sectors to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change, but
the focus of these LDCs should be on adaptation. Ignoring the importance of
climate induced impacts and the need for adaptation will hinder progress towards
overall growth and sustainable development.
Concluding remarks
Each country has identified a number of measures to reduce adverse impacts of
climate change. Noteworthy interventions include:
• improving observation, forecasting and early warning systems
• establishing hazard and vulnerability mapping
• fostering community involvement and awareness raising
Nepal is starting to reduce the risks of GLOFs by draining water from glacier lakes using siphons or
pumps, cutting drainage channels for periodic water release, and building flood control measures
downstream (Rana
et al
., 2000). With the support of The Netherlands, the government began a
project to drain the Tsho Rolpa glacial lake by three metres, which reduced the risk of a GLOF by
20%. A channel was cut into the moraine, and a gate was constructed to allow water to be released
as necessary. The four year project cost US$3.2 million. Nepal’s Tenth Plan aims to improve the
country’s ability to use existing water resources to provide farmers with year-round irrigation. An
advantage of large hydropower reservoirs is that these reservoirs can provide dependable flows for
electricity generation, supplement water supplies for domestic and agriculture uses during the dry
season, and if properly designed, play a role in flood management. However, these possible benefits
must be carefully weighed against the environmental impacts and the enhanced GLOF risks.
Box 2:Reducing the risk of GLOFs in Nepal
• improving operation and maintenance of existing water infrastructure
• improving irrigation efficiency
• developing varieties of crops and livestock with greater resilience to limited
arable land and extreme conditions
• creating community-based forest management and afforestation projects
Countries have also identified physical adaptation measures, including engineer-
ing projects, to reduce vulnerability, particularly to reduce flood impacts and
improve drainage conditions. These are typically more expensive measures that
address a specific problem, but they can also produce multiple uses and benefits.
A World Bank study (World Bank, 2000) on Bangladesh identified physical meas-
ures including full flood protection and controlled flooding, augmentation of
surface water, desalinisation, tidal basin management, construction of water infra-
structure etc.
There are also institutional issues to be addressed for enhancing effectiveness of
strategies and measures with cross-cutting benefits. Specifically, the region needs
to:
• increase public awareness
• improve inter-departmental coordination
• establish regional collaboration
• enhance collaborative research and training
• set-up international partnerships, capacity building, and assistance
The National Adaptation Programmes of Action to Climate Change (NAPA) in
all three South Asian countries are the first attempt to bring together different
stakeholders, including the government and civil society, to discuss adverse
impacts of climate change and formulate nation-wide strategies for addressing
adaptation. For example, Bangladesh’s NAPA process has brought together key
sectoral agencies such as the Water Resources Planning Organisation and
FACING UP TO CLIMATE CHANGE IN SOUTH ASIA ● 15
Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council with non-government organisations
like the Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies (BCAS) to formulate the plan.
NAPAs will also need to review existing strategies for coping with climatic stresses
and investigate how these current strategies can be strengthened and built upon.
For the least developed countries, the NAPA process can be an important oppor-
tunity, not only to address vulnerability and adaptation to climate change, but
also to marry adaptation and development agendas. Lastly, many projects are
currently being carried out in all three South Asian countries that provide win-
win opportunities for developing measures for climate adaptation and develop-
ment (Box 3). Such initiatives should be encouraged, and continuous persuasion
of policy makers in all government branches is needed.
16 ● GATEKEEPER 118
The Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme (CDMP) is a collaborative effort by the
Bangladesh Government, United Nations Development Programme, the UK Department of
International Development and a host of disaster management stakeholders to design a programme
built upon critical lessons learned over the past decade. The programme advocates a policy and
management shift from relief and recovery operations to a more holistic approach of forecasting and
community preparedness.The components will address the mainstreaming of disaster management
within development and investment programmes;the strengthening of community institutional
mechanisms; expanding preparedness programmes to cover existing and new hazards; implementing a
skill development programme to raise the standard of disaster management efforts at all levels; and
studying the key urban risk management challenges.The CDMP takes into consideration the
vulnerability of the poor and common people from climatic events like flood and cyclone and long-term
climate change impacts.
Box 3:Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme, Bangladesh
REFERENCES ● 17
REFERENCES
Alam, M. 2004a. Bangladesh Country
Assessment Report on Adverse Impacts of
Climate Change on Development:
Integrating Adaptation into Policies and
Activities, July 2004. In press.
Alam, M. 2004b. Bhutan Country
Assessment Report on Adverse Impacts of
Climate Change on Development:
Integrating Adaptation into Policies and
Activities, July 2004. In press.
Alam, M. 2004c. Nepal Country Assessment
Report on Adverse Impacts of Climate
Change on Development: Integrating
Adaptation into Policies and Activities, July
2004. In press.
CBS. 2002. A Statistical Pocket Book of
Nepal. CBS, Kathmandu.
DoE. 2002. Initial National Communication
in Response to United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change. Department
of Environment, Ministry of Environment
and Forests, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Habibullah, M., Ahmed, AU. and Karim, Z.
1999. Assessment of food grain production
loss due to climate induced soil salinity: a
case study. In: S. Huq, Z. Karim, M.
Asaduzzaman and F. Mahtab (Eds.)
Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate
Change for Bangladesh. Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Karim, Z., 1996. Agricultural vulnerability
and poverty alleviation in Bangladesh. In:
TE. Downing (Ed.) Climate Change and
World Food Security. NATO ASI Series, 137.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Hiedelberg.
Karim, Z. Sk Ghulam, H. Ahsan, A. U.
1999. Climate Change Vulnerability of Crop
Agriculture. In: S. Huq, Z. Karim, M.
Asaduzzaman and F. Mahtab (Eds.)
Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate
Change for Bangladesh. Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
MoEP. 1998. Website of Ministry of
Environment and Population, Nepal.
http://www.mope.gov.np/population/
population.php
Rana, B., Shrestha, AB. Reynolds, JM.
Aryal, R., Pokhrel, AP. and Budhathoki, KP.
2000. Hazard assessment of the Tsho Rolpa
Glacier Lake and ongoing remediation
measures. Journal of Nepal Geological
Society 22: 563-570.
Richardson, S. and Reynolds, J. 2000. An
overview of glacial hazards in the
Himalayas. Quaternary International 65/66
(2000): 31-47.
Huq, S., Karim, Z., Asaduzzaman, M. and
Mahtab, F. (eds). 1999. Vulnerability and
Adaptation to Climate Change for
Bangladesh. Kluwer Academic Publishers,
The Netherlands.
Shardul, A., Tomoko, O., Ahsan Uddin, A.,
Smith, J. and van Aalst, M. 2003a.
Development and Climate Change in
Bangladesh: Focus on Coastal Flooding and
the Sundarbans, OECD, Paris.
Shardul, A., Vivian, R., Maarten, Van Aalst,
Larsen, P., Smith, J. and Reynolds, J. 2003b.
Development And Climate Change In Nepal:
Focus on water resources and hydropower.
OECD, Paris.
Subbiah, 2001. Climate Variability and
Drought in Southwest Asia. Asian Disaster
Preparedness Center, Bangkok.
TPCS. 2000. Bhutan National Human
Development Report: 2000: Gross National
Happiness and National Development-
Searching for the Common Ground. The
Planning Commission Secretariat, Royal
Government of Bhutan.
UNDP. 2004. Human Development Report:
2004. United Nations Development Program
(UNDP), Oxford University Press, New
York.
18 ● GATEKEEPER 118 REFERENCES
USCSP. 1997. Country Study Team–Nepal.
1997. Climate Change Vulnerability and
Adaptation: Nepal Water Resources.
Prepared as part of the US Country Studies
Program, Washington, DC.
World Bank and BCAS. 1998. Bangladesh
2020: A Long-run Perspective Study, The
World Bank and Bangladesh Centre for
Advanced Studies (BCAS). The University
Press Limited, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
World Bank. 2003. World Development
Report 2003: Sustainable Development in a
Dynamic World. Oxford University Press,
New York.
World Bank. 2002. World Development
Indicators. CD Rom. World Bank,
Washington, DC.
World Bank. 2000. Bangladesh: Climate
Change and Sustainable Development.
Report No. 21104-BD. Rural Development
Unit, South Asia Region, The World Bank
(WB), Dhaka.
SUBSCRIPTIONS & BACK ISSUES ● 19
SUBSCRIBING
TO THE
GATEKEEPER
SERIES
To receive the Gatekeeper
Series regularly, individuals and
organisations can take out a
subscription. Subscribers
receive nine Gatekeeper papers
a year. Subscriptions are free.
For more details or to subscribe
contact: IIED,3 Endsleigh
Street, London,WC1H 0DD,
UK. Email gatekeeper@iied.org
Tel: +44 020 7388 2117;
Fax +44 020 7388 2826,or
complete the online order form
at http://www.iied.org/
OTHER IIED
PUBLICATIONS
For information about IIED’s
other publications,contact:
EarthPrint Limited,Ord ers
Department, P.O. Box 119,
Stevenage, Hertfordshire SG1
4TP, UK
Fax:+44 1438 748844
mail to:
orders@earthprint.co.uk
There is a searchable IIED
bookshop database on:
http://www.iied.org/
bookshop/index.html
1. Pesticide Hazards in the
Third World:New
Evidence from the
Philippines. 1987. J.A.
McCracken and G.R.
Conway.
2. Cash Crops, Food Crops
and Agricultural
Sustainability. 1987.
E.B. Barbier.
3. Trees as Savings and
Security for the Rural
Poor. 1992. Robert
Chambers, Czech Conroy
and Melissa Leach. (1st
edition, 1988)
4-12 Out of Print
13. Crop-Livestock
Interactions for
Sustainable Agriculture.
1989.Wolfgang Bayer
and Ann Waters-Bayer.
14. Perspectives in Soil
Erosion in Africa:
Whose Problem? 1989.
M. Fones-Sondell.
15-16. Out of Print
17. Development Assistance
and the Environment:
Translating Intentions
into Practice. 1989.
Marianne Wenning.
18. Energy for Livelihoods:
Putting People Back
into Africa’s Woodfuel
Crisis. 1989. Robin
Mearns and Gerald Leach.
19. Crop Variety Mixtures in
Marginal Environments.
1990. Janice Jiggins.
20. Displaced Pastoralists
and Transferred Wheat
Technology in Tanzania.
1990. Charles Lane and
Jules N. Pretty.
21. Teaching Threatens
Sustainable Agriculture.
1990. Raymond I.Ison.
22. Microenvironments
Unobserved. 1990. Rob-
ert Chambers.
23. Low Input Soil
Restoration in
Honduras: the
Cantarranas Farmer-to-
Farmer Extension Pro-
gramme. 1990. Roland
Bunch.
24. Rural Common
Property Resources:A
Growing Crisis. 1991.
N.S. Jodha.
25. Participatory Education
and Grassroots
Development:The Case
of Rural Appalachia.
1991. John Gaventa and
Helen Lewis.
26. Farmer Organisations in
Ecuador: Contributions
to Farmer First
Research and Devel-
opment. 1991. A.
Bebbington.
27. Indigenous Soil and
Water Conservation in
Africa. 1991. Reij. C.
28. Tree Products in
Agroecosystems: Econ-
omic and Policy Issues.
1991. J.E.M. Arnold.
29. Designing Integrated
Pest Management for
Sustainable and
Productive Futures.
1991. Michel P.Pimbert.
30. Plants, Genes and
People: Improving the
Relevance of Plant
Breeding. 1991. Angel-
ique Haugerud and
Michael P. Collinson.
31. Local Institutions and
Participation for Sus-
tainable Development.
1992. Norman Uphoff.
32. The Information Drain:
Obstacles to Research
in Africa. 1992.
Mamman Aminu Ibrahim.
33. Local Agro-Processing
with Sustainable Tech-
nology: Sunflowerseed
Oil in Tanzania. 1992.
Eric Hyman.
34. Indigenous Soil and
Water Conservation in
India’s Semi-Arid
Tropics.1992. John Kerr
and N.K. Sanghi.
35. Prioritizing Institutional
Development:A New
Role for NGO Centres
for Study and Devel-
opment. 1992. Alan
Fowler.
36. Out of Print
37. Livestock, Nutrient
Cycling and Sustainable
Agriculture in the West
African Sahel. 1993.
J.M. Powell and T.O.
Williams.
38. O.K.,The Data’s Lousy,
But It’s All We’ve Got
(Being a Critique of
Conventional Methods.
1993. G. Gill.
39. Homegarden Systems:
Agricultural Character-
istics and Challenges.
1993. Inge D.Hooger-
brugge and Louise O.
Fresco.
40. Opportunities for
Expanding Water Harv-
esting in Sub-Saharan
Africa:The Case of the
Teras of Kassala.1993.
Johan A.Van Dijk and
Mohamed Hassan
Ahmed.
41 Out of Print
42. Community First:
Landcare in Australia.
1994. Andrew Campbell.
43. From Research to
Innovation:Getting the
Most from Interaction
with NGOs in Farming
Systems Research and
Extension. 1994. John
Farrington and Anthony
Bebbington.
44. Will Farmer
Participatory Research
Survive in the
International
Agricultural Research
Centres? 1994. Sam
Fujisaka.
45. Population Growth and
Environmental Recov-
ery: Policy Lessons from
Kenya.1994. Mar y
Tiffen, Michael
Mortimore and Francis
Gichuki.
46. Two Steps Back,One
Step Forward:Cuba’s
National Policy for
Alternative Agriculture.
1994. Peter Rosset and
Medea Benjamin.
20 ● GATEKEEPER 118 BACK ISSUES
47. The Role of Mobility
Within the Risk
Management Strategies
of Pastoralists and
Agro-Pastoralists. 1994.
Brent Swallow.
48. Participatory
Agricultural Extension:
Experiences from West
Africa. 1995.Tom
Osborn.
49. Women and Water
Resources: Continued
Marginalisation and
New Policies.1995.
Francis Cleaver and Diane
Elson.
50. New Horizons:The
Economic, Social and
Environmental Impacts
of Participatory Water-
shed Development.
1995. Fiona Hinchcliffe,
Irene Guijt, Jules N.
Pretty and Parmesh Shah.
51. Participatory Selection
of Beans in Rwanda:
Results, Methods and
Institutional Issues.
1995. Louise Sperling and
Urs Scheidegger.
52. Trees and Trade-offs:A
Stakeholder Approach
to Natural Resource
Management. 1995.
Robin Grimble, Man-
Kwun Chan, Julia
Aglionby and Julian Quan.
53. A Role for Common
Property Institutions in
Land Redistribution
Programmes in South
Africa. 1995. Ben
Cousins.
54. Linking Women to the
Main Canal: Gender and
Irrigation Management.
1995. Margreet Zwart-
eveen.
55. Soil Recuperation in
Central America: Sust-
aining Innovation After
Intervention. 1995.
Roland Bunch and Gabinò
López.
56. Through the
Roadblocks:IPM and
Central American
Smallholders. 1996.
Jeffery Bentley and Keith
Andrews.
57. The Conditions for
Collective Action: Land
Tenure and Farmers’
Groups in the Rajasthan
Canal Project. 1996.
Saurabh Sinha.
58. Networking for
Sustainable Agriculture:
Lessons from Animal
Traction Development.
1996. Paul Starkey.
59. Intensification of
Agriculture in Semi-Arid
Areas: Lessons from the
Kano Close-Settled
Zone, Nigeria. 1996.
Frances Harris.
60. Sustainable Agriculture:
Impacts on Food
Production and Food
Security. 1996.Jules
Pretty,John Thompson
and Fiona Hinchcliffe.
61. Subsidies in Watershed
Development Projects
in India: Distortions and
Opportunities. 1996.
John M. Kerr, N.K.Sanghi
and G. Sriramappa.
62. Multi-level Participatory
Planning for Water
Resources Development
in Sri Lanka. 1996.K.
Jinapala, Jeffrey D.
Brewer, R. Sakthivadivel.
63. Hitting a Moving Target:
Endogenous Dev-
elopment in Marginal
European Areas. 1996.
Gaston G.A. Remmers.
64. Poverty, Pluralism and
Extension Practice.
1996. Ian Christoplos.
65. Conserving India’s
Agro-Biodiversity: Pro-
spects and Policy
Implications. 1997.
Ashish Kothari.
66. Understanding Farmers’
Communication Net-
works: Combining PRA
With Agricultural
Knowledge Systems
Analysis. 1997. Ricardo
Ramirez.
67. Markets and
Modernisation: New
Directions for Latin
American Peasant
Agriculture. 1997. Julio
A. Berdegué and Germán
Escobar.
68. Challenging
‘Community’ Definitions
in Sustainable
Management:The case
of wild mushroom
harvesting in the USA.
1997. Rebecca McLain
and Eric Jones.
69. Process, Property and
Patrons: Land Reform
In Upland Thai
Catchments. 1997.
Roger Attwater.
70. Building Linkages for
Livelihood Security in
Chivi, Zimbabwe. 1997.
Simon Croxton and
Kudakwashe Murwira.
71. Propelling Change from
the Bottom-Up:
Institutional Reform in
Zimbabwe. 1997. J.
Hagmann, E. Chuma, M.
Connolly and K. Murwira.
72. Gender is not a
Sensitive Issue:
Institutionalising a
Gender-Oriented
Participatory Approach
in Siavonga,Zambia.
1997. Christiane
Frischmuth.
73. A Hidden Threat to
Food Production:Air
Pollution and
Agriculture in the
Developing World. 1997.
F. Marshall, Mike
Ashmore and Fiona
Hinchcliffe.
74. Policy Research and the
Policy Process:Do the
Twain ever Meet? 1998.
James L. Garrett and
Yassir Islam.
75. Lessons for the Large-
Scale Application of
Process Approaches
from Sri Lanka. 1998.
Richard Bond.
76. Malthus Revisited:
People, Population and
the Village Commons in
Colombia. 1998. Juan
Camilo Cardenas.
77. Bridging the Divide:
Rural-Urban Inter-
actions and Livelihood
Strategies. 1998. Cecilia
Tacoli.
78. Beyond the Farmer Field
School: IPM and
Empowerment in
Indonesia. 1998. Peter A.
C. Ooi.
79. The Rocky Road Towards
Sustainable Livelihoods:
Land Reform in Free
State, South Africa.1998.
James Carnegie, Mathilda
Roos, Mncedisi Madolo,
Challa Moahloli and
Joanne Abbot.
80. Community-based
Conservation:
Experiences from
Zanzibar.1998. Andrew
Williams,Thabit S.
Masoud and Wahira J.
Othman.
81. Participatory Watershed
Research and
Management: Where
the Shadow Falls. 1998.
Robert E. Rhoades.
82. Thirty Cabbages:
Greening the
Agricultural ‘Life
Science’ Industry. 1998.
William T. Vorley.
83. Dimensions of
Participation in
Evaluation: Experiences
from Zimbabwe and the
Sudan. 1999. Joanne
Harnmeijer, Ann Waters-
Bayer and Wolfgang
Bayer.
BACK ISSUES ● 21
84. Mad Cows and Bad
Berries. 1999. David
Waltner-Toews.
85. Sharing the Last Drop:
Water Scarcity,
Irrigation and Gendered
Poverty Eradication.
1999. Barbara van
Koppen.
86. IPM and the Citrus
Industry in South
Africa. 1999. Penny
Urquhart.
87. Making Water
Management
Everybody’s Business:
Water Harvesting and
Rural Development in
India. 1999. Anil Agarwal
and Sunita Narain.
88. Sustaining the Multiple
Functions of
Agricultural
Biodiversity.1999.
Michel Pimbert.
89. Demystifying
Facilitation in
Participatory
Development. 2000.
Annemarie Groot and
Marleen Maarleveld.
90. Woodlots,Woodfuel and
Wildlife: Lessons from
Queen Elizabeth
National Park, Uganda.
2000.Tom Blomley.
91. Borders, Rules and
Governance:Mapping to
catalyse changes in
policy and management.
2000. Janis B. Alcorn.
92. Women’s Participation
in Watershed
Development in India.
2000. Janet Seeley,
Meenakshi Batra and
Madhu Sarin.
93. A Study of
Biopesticides and
Biofertilisers in
Haryana, India. 2000.
Ghayur Alam.
94. Poverty and Systems
Research in the Drylands.
2000. Michael Mortimore,
Bill Adams and Frances
Harris.
95. Forest Management and
Democracy in East and
Southern Africa:
Lessons From Tanzania.
2001. Liz Alden Wily.
96. Farmer Learning and
the International
Research Centres:
Lessons from IRRI.
2001. Stephen Morin,
Florencia Palis, Karen
McAllister, Aida Papag,
and Melina Magsumbol.
97. Who Benefits From
Participatory Watershed
Development? Lessons
From Gujarat,India.
2001. Amita Shah.
98. Learning Our Way
Ahead: Navigating
Institutional Change
and Agricultural
Decentralisation. 2001.
Clive Lightfoot, Ricardo
Ramírez, Annemarie
Groot, Reg Noble, Carine
Alders, Francis Shao, Dan
Kisauzi and Isaac Bekalo.
99. Social Forestry versus
Social Reality:
Patronage and
community-based
forestry in Bangladesh.
2001. Niaz Ahmed Khan.
100. Global Restructuring,
Agri-Food Systems and
Livelihoods. 2001.
Michel P. Pimbert,John
Thompson and William T.
Vorley with Tom Fox,
Nazneen Kanji and Cecilia
Tacoli.
101. Social Networks and the
Dynamics of Soil and
Water Conservation in
the Sahel. 2001.
Valentina Mazzucato,
David Niemeijer, Leo
Stroosnijder and Niels
Röling.
102. Measuring Farmers’
Agroecological
Resistance to Hurricane
Mitch in Central
America. 2001. Eric
Holt-Giménez.
103. Beyond Safe Use:
Challenging the
International Pesticide
Industry’s Hazard
Reduction Strategy.
2001. Douglas L.Murray
and Peter L.Taylor.
104. Marketing Forest
Environmental Services
– Who Benefits? 2002.
Natasha Landell-Mills.
105. Food Security in the
Context of Crisis and
Conflict: Beyond
Continuum Thinking.
2002. Benedikt Korf and
Eberhard Bauer.
106. Should Africa Protect
Its Farmers to Revitalise
Its Economy? 2002.
Niek Koning.
107. Creating Markets with
the Poor:Selling Treadle
Pumps in India 2003.
Frank van Steenbergen.
108. Collaborative Forest
Management in
Kyrgyzstan:Moving
from top-down to
bottom-up decision-
making. 2003. Jane
Carter, Brieke Steenhof,
Esther Haldimann and
Nurlan Akenshaev.
109. The Contradictions of
Clean: Supermarket
Ethical Trade and
African Horticulture.
2003.
Susanne Freidberg.
110. Risking Change:
Experimenting with
Local Forest
Management
Committees in Jamaica.
2003.Tighe Geoghegan &
Noel Bennett.
111. Contract Farming in
India: Impacts on
women and child
workers. 2003. Sukhpal
Singh.
112. The Major Importance
of ‘Minor’ Resources:
Women and Plant Biodi-
versity. 2003.Patricia
Howard.
113. Water For All:
Improving Water
Resource Governance in
Southern Africa. 2004.
Emmanuel Manzungu.
114. Food Industrialisation
and Food Power:
Implications for food
governance. 2004.Tim
Lang.
115. Biodiversity planning:
Why and how should
local opinions matter?
2004. Sonja Vermeulen.
116. Laws,lore and logjams:
Critical issues in Indian
forest conservation
2005. Madhu Sarin.
117. Adapting to Climate
Change in East Africa:
A strategic approach
2005.Victor A. Orindi and
Laurel A. Murray.
118. Facing up to Climate
Change in South Asia.
2005. Mozaharul Alam
and Laurel A. Murray.
22 ● GATEKEEPER 118 SUBMITTING PAPERS
SUBMITTING PAPERS TO THE
GATEKEEPER SERIES
We welcome contributions to the
Gatekeeper Series from researchers and
practitioners alike. The Series addresses
issues of interest to policy makers
relating to the broad area of sustainable
agriculture and resource management.
Gatekeepers aim to provide an informed
briefing on key policy issues in a
readable, digestible form for an
institutional and individual readership
largely comprising policy and decision-
makers within aid agencies, national
governments, NGOs and research
institutes throughout the world. In
addition to this primary audience,
Gatekeepers are increasingly requested
by educators in tertiary education
institutions, particularly in the South, for
use as course or seminar discussion
material.
Submitted material must be of interest to
a wide audience and may combine an
examination of broad policy questions
with the presentation of specific case
studies. The paper should conclude with
a discussion of the policy implications of
the work presented.
Style
Gatekeepers must be short, easy to read
and make simple, concise points.
■ Use short sentences and paragraphs.
■ Keep language simple.
■ Use the active voice.
■ Use a variety of presentation
approaches (text, tables, boxes,
figures/illustrations, bullet points).
■ Length: maximum 5,000 words
Abstract
Authors should also include a brief
summary of their paper – no longer than
450 words.
Editorial process
Please send two hard copies or an
electronic version of your paper. Papers
are reviewed by the editorial committee
and comments sent back to authors.
Authors may be requested to make
changes to papers accepted for
publication. Any subsequent editorial
amendments will be undertaken in
consultation with the author. Assistance
with editing and language can be
provided where appropriate. All
illustrations and graphs, etc. should be
supplied separately in their original
format (e.g. as jpeg files) as well as being
embedded within documents. This will
allow us to modify the images where
necessary and ensure good reproduction
of the illustrations in print.
Papers or correspondence should be
addressed to:
Gatekeeper Editor
Sustainable Agriculture and Rural
Livelihoods Programme
IIED, 3 Endsleigh Street,
London WC1H ODD,
UK
Tel:(+44 020) 7388 2117;
Fax:(+44 020) 7388 2826;
e-mail: gatekeeper@iied.org
THE NATURAL RESOURCES GROUP (NR Group) at IIED was set up as a
way to bring together the work on natural resources being done by different
parts of the institute, and to serve as a fertile ground for going beyond
departmental or sectoral boundaries on these issues.The NR group comprises
the following programmes at IIED: Sustainable Agriculture and Rural
Livelihoods;Forestry and Land Use; Biodiversity and Livelihoods; Climate
Change; Strategies, Planning and Assessment; and Drylands. The NR Group
works on a gamut of natural resources issues,including water, assessment of
natural resources, co-management, international conventions, and urban issues.
The Group seeks to explore the development of socially and environmentally
aware natural resources management through policy research, training and
capacity strengthening,networking and information dissemination,and advisory
services.
The SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL LIVELIHOODS
PROGRAMME coordinates the editorial process for the Series.The Programme
seeks to enhance and promote understanding of environmental health and equity
in agriculture and food systems. It emphasises close collaboration and
consultation with a wide range of institutions in the South. Collaborative
research projects are aimed at identifying the constraints and potentials of the
livelihood strategies of the Third World poor who are affected by ecological,
economic and social change.These initiatives focus on the development and
application of participatory approaches to research and development;resource
conserving technologies and practices; collective approaches to resource
management; the value of wild foods and resources; rural-urban interactions;
and policies and institutions that work for sustainable agriculture.
The NR group receives funding from the Swedish International Development
Cooperation Agency.
ISSN 1357-9258
International Institute for Environment and Development
3 Endsleigh Street, London WC1H 0DD
Tel: (+44 020) 7388 2117
Fax:(+44 020) 7388 2826
E-mail: sustag@iied.org
Website: http://www.iied.org/
