Climate change,multiple stressors and human vulnerability: a systematic review

We systematically reviewed current climate change literature in order to examine how multiple processes that affect human vulnerability have been studied. Of the 125 reviewed articles, 79 % were published after 2009. There are numerous concepts that point out to stressors other than climate change that were used in reviewed studies. These different concepts were used interchangeably, and they illustrate processes that act on different scales. Most widely used concepts included non-climatic (40 % of the articles), multiple stressors (38 %) and other factors (37 %). About 75 % of the studies either acknowledged or carefully analyzed the social and environmental context in which vulnerability is experienced. One-third of the studies recognized climate change-related stressors as the most important, one-third argued that stressors other than climate are more important, and the rest of the studies did not analyze the relative importance of the different processes. Interactions between different stressors were mentioned in 76 % and analyzed explicitly in 28 % of the articles. Our review shows that there are studies that analyze the social context of vulnerability within climate change-related literature and this literature is rapidly expanding. Reviewed studies point out that there are multiple interacting stressors, whose interlinkages need to be carefully analyzed and targeted by policies, which integrate adaptation to climate change and other stressors. In conclusion, we suggest that future studies should include analytical frameworks that reflect dissimilarities between different types of stressors, methodological triangulation to identify key stressors and analysis of interactions between multiple stressors across different scales.     

Assessing social vulnerability to climate change in Samoa

Climate change severely impacts on the natural and socio-economic systems of the Pacific Islands. Samoa, a small insular state of the region, is characterized by widespread awareness of climate change reflected by its leading international role. This also makes Samoa a potentially exemplary reference for the Pacific Islands. Against this backdrop, the overall aim of this article is to investigate the notion of social vulnerability and measure its dimensions in Samoa through a specific index: the Samoa Social Vulnerability Index (SSVI). The SSVI may yield better understanding of the characteristics and dynamics of social vulnerability, as well as information for fostering adaptation strategies in Samoa and in the Pacific Islands. In particular, the article first outlines the major vulnerabilities to climate change in Samoa and then analyses the composite notion of social vulnerability. On this basis, the article methodologically specifies, designs and constructs the SSVI. Afterwards, it uses such index for measuring the dimensions of social vulnerability in Samoa’s districts. Finally, some considerations are made concerning the policy relevance of the SSVI and its potential regional role.     

Combining qualitative and quantitative understanding for exploring cross-sectoral climate change impacts, adaptation and vulnerability in Europe

Climate change will affect all sectors of society and the environment at all scales, ranging from the continental to the national and local. Decision-makers and other interested citizens need to be able to access reliable science-based information to help them respond to the risks of climate change impacts and assess opportunities for adaptation. Participatory integrated assessment (IA) tools combine knowledge from diverse scientific disciplines, take account of the value and importance of stakeholder ‘lay insight’ and facilitate a two-way iterative process of exploration of ‘what if’s’ to enable decision-makers to test ideas and improve their understanding of the complex issues surrounding adaptation to climate change. This paper describes the conceptual design of a participatory IA tool, the CLIMSAVE IA Platform, based on a professionally facilitated stakeholder engagement process. The CLIMSAVE (climate change integrated methodology for cross-sectoral adaptation and vulnerability in Europe) Platform is a user-friendly, interactive web-based tool that allows stakeholders to assess climate change impacts and vulnerabilities for a range of sectors, including agriculture, forests, biodiversity, coasts, water resources and urban development. The linking of models for the different sectors enables stakeholders to see how their interactions could affect European landscape change. The relationship between choice, uncertainty and constraints is a key cross-cutting theme in the conduct of past participatory IA. Integrating scenario development processes with an interactive modelling platform is shown to allow the exploration of future uncertainty as a structural feature of such complex problems, encouraging stakeholders to explore adaptation choices within real-world constraints of future resource availability and environmental and institutional capacities, rather than seeking the ‘right’ answers.     

Responses of food production systems to climate change:sensitivity and vulnerability

Climate warming has prolonged the optimization of crop-growing seasons,shortened actual growth periods,and changed crop-planting boundaries.It also has boosted crop yields in certain regions while compromising crop quality and affected the occurrence of meteorological disasters and pest diseases damage,which has resulted in reduction in grain yield.Crop production systems will evidence more sensitivity to climate change in future;for example,with an increase of 1°C in temperature,the average growth period will be shortened by 17 days for winter wheat and 7-8 days for maize and rice.Of course regional differences will exist.Climate change will threaten crop yield stability and affect crop quality.Vulnerability will be addressed in regard to extreme climatic events,which include reducing exposure and improving adaptive capacity,because the exposure of rain-fed agriculture is greater than that of irrigated agriculture.Therefore,we propose three suggestions to reduce the vulnerability of crop production systems to climate change.First,strengthen the evaluation capacity construction of sensitivity,which includes(1)refining and improving all types of evaluation indicator systems and models;(2)innovating and developing evaluation methods and tools;and(3)combining field observation and case studies,so that(1)the impact of climate change and sensitivity can be assessed scientifically;(2)uncertainty in the study can be identified and reduced;and(3)improved understanding of climate systems and their changes,climate change impact,and sensitivity will be achieved.Second,strengthen adaptive capacity construction for crop production systems,which includes(1)rebuilding existing farmland infrastructure to improve meteorological disaster defences;(2)adjusting agriculture structure and adopting new crop varieties with enhanced resistance;(3)popularizing water-saving technology and dry farming technology;and(4)further researching interdisciplinary theories and methods.Third,strengthen function construction for natural and social s     

Assessing coastal vulnerability to climate change: comparing segmentation at global and regional scales

Recent concerns about potential climate-change effects on coastal systems require the application of vulnerability assessment tools in order to define suitable adaptation strategies and improve coastal zone management effectiveness. In fact, while various research efforts were devoted to evaluate coastal vulnerability to climate change on a national to global level, fewer applications were carried out so far to develop more comprehensive and site-specific vulnerability assessments suitable to plan possible adaptation measures at the regional scale. In this respect, specific indicators are needed to address climate-change-related issues for coastal zones and to identify vulnerable areas at the regional level. Two sets of coastal vulnerability indicators were selected, one for regional and one for global studies, respectively, concerning the same features of coastal systems, including topography and slope, geomorphological characteristics, presence and distribution of wetlands and vegetation cover, density of coastal population and number of coastal inhabitants. The proposed set of indicators for the regional scale was chosen taking into account the availability of environmental and territorial data for the whole coastal area of the Veneto region and was based on site-specific datasets characterized by a spatial resolution appropriate for a regional analysis. Moreover, a GIS-based segmentation procedure was applied to divide the coastline into linear segments, homogeneous in terms of vulnerability to climate change and sea-level rise at the regional scale. This approach allowed to divide the Veneto shoreline into 140 segments with an average length of about 1 km, while the global scale approach identified four coastal segments with an average length of about 66 km. The performed comparison indicated how the more detailed approach adopted at the regional scale is essential to understand and manage the complexities of the specific study area. In fact, the 25-m DEM employed at the regional scale provided a more accurate differentiation of the coastal area's elevation and thus of coastal susceptibility to the inundation risks, compared to the 1-km DEM used at the global level. Moreover, at the regional level the use of a 1:20,000 geomorphological map allowed to differentiate the unique landform class detected at the global level (e.g., fluvial plain) in a variety of more detailed coastal typologies (e.g., open coast eroding sandy shores backed by bedrock) characterized by a different sensitivity to climate change and sea-level rise. Accordingly, the information provided by regional indicators can support decision-makers in improving the management of coastal resources by considering the potential impacts of climate change and in the definition of appropriate actions to reduce inundation risks, to avoid the potential loss of valuable wetlands and vegetation and to plan the nourishment of sandy beaches subject to erosion processes.     

Livelihood vulnerability to climate change: a case of farm households in Northeast Vietnam

Environment, Development and Sustainability - This study investigates the livelihood vulnerability to climate change of farm households in Northeast Vietnam. Data for the study is based on a survey...     

Assessing biodiversity vulnerability to climate change: testing different methodologies for Portuguese herpetofauna

Assessing biodiversity vulnerability to future climate change is essential for developing robust adaptation strategies. A number of vulnerability assessment methodologies have been developed, from bioclimatic envelop models to more complex approaches that also consider biological traits and population status. However, the lack of comparative studies leaves the user to choose among the different methodologies without much guidance. This study applied three vulnerability assessment approaches to the Portuguese herpetofauna: (I) impact assessment approach based on bioclimatic models; (II) integrated vulnerability assessment approach, adding the evaluation of adaptive capacity to approach I; and (III) integrated vulnerability assessment and validation based on expert consultation. Results showed disagreement between the different approaches for 19 % of the species studied. Most differences were found between approach III and the two other approaches. All approaches showed advantages and limitations, the choice of a methodology being ultimately dependent on the study goals. Approach I has proven efficient to capture general vulnerability patterns. Approach II, although presenting results similar to approach I, allows for the identification of key factors affecting the species adaptive capacity and may be useful in tailoring adaptation measures. Approach III further allows us to identify knowledge gaps and to evaluate vulnerability when data availability or quality is reduced. Further, because this approach is based on an expert workshop, it has proven a perfect means to build on the vulnerability assessment results to identify indicator species and prioritize specific adaptation options.     

Climate change and coastal vulnerability assessment: scenarios for integrated assessment

Coastal vulnerability assessments still focus mainly on sea-level rise, with less attention paid to other dimensions of climate change. The influence of non-climatic environmental change or socio-economic change is even less considered, and is often completely ignored. Given that the profound coastal changes of the twentieth century are likely to continue through the twenty-first century, this is a major omission, which may overstate the importance of climate change, and may also miss significant interactions of climate change with other non-climate drivers. To better support climate and coastal management policy development, more integrated assessments of climatic change in coastal areas are required, including the significant non-climatic changes. This paper explores the development of relevant climate and non-climate drivers, with an emphasis on the non-climate drivers. While these issues are applicable within any scenario framework, our ideas are illustrated using the widely used SRES scenarios, with both impacts and adaptation being considered. Importantly, scenario development is a process, and the assumptions that are made about future conditions concerning the coast need to be explicit, transparent and open to scientific debate concerning their realism and likelihood. These issues are generic across other sectors.

Climate change in a regional context: relative vulnerability in the Australasian skier market

The concept of relative vulnerability allows for comparisons between analogous units in a regional context. It is utilised within tourism studies to consider how climate change might affect demand and perceived attractiveness of destinations relative to their competitors. This paper examines Australian tourists travelling to New Zealand’s ski fields, responding to the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC) assertion that, “tourist flows from Australia to New Zealand might grow as a result of the relatively poorer snow conditions in Australia” (Hennessy et al. 2007: p 523). This travel flow is not a new phenomenon; however, it is forecast to increase as climate change impacts upon Australia’s natural and man-made snowmaking capacity with implications for the viability of the ski industries in both Australia and New Zealand. The Queenstown Lakes Region (South Island, New Zealand) serves as the field area for this study. The empirical research utilises a qualitative methodology for which in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with New Zealand ski industry representatives and Australian tourists during the southern hemisphere winter season of 2011. Findings suggest that the social context of vulnerability creates difficulty in forecasting the outcomes and behaviours associated with relative vulnerability. While tourism representatives’ focus on snow reliability and availability to conceptualise relative vulnerability, Australian tourists are influenced by a broader range of factors including their own travel experience. This paper demonstrates a clear need to move beyond a focus on snow reliability to consider the broad range of factors that contribute to regional variations in vulnerability. In doing so, it confirms the critical importance of situating relative vulnerability within a social context.     

Climate change vulnerability and resilience: current status and trends for Mexico

Climate change alters different localities on the planet in different ways. The impact on each region depends mainly on the degree of vulnerability that natural ecosystems and human-made infrastructure have to changes in climate and extreme meteorological events, as well as on the coping and adaptation capacity toward new environmental conditions. This study assesses the current resilience of Mexico and Mexican states to such changes, as well as how this resilience will look in the future. In recent studies (Moss et al. in Vulnerability to climate change: a quantitative approach. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Washington DC, 2001; Brenkert and Malone in Clim Change 72:57–102, 2005; Malone and Brenkert in Clim Change 91:451–476, 2008), the Vulnerability–Resilience Indicators Model (VRIM) is used to integrate a set of proxy variables that determine the resilience of a region to climate change. Resilience, or the ability of a region to respond to climate variations and natural events that result from climate change, is given by its adaptation and coping capacity and its sensitivity. On the one hand, the sensitivity of a region to climate change is assessed, emphasizing its infrastructure, food security, water resources, and the health of the population and regional ecosystems. On the other hand, coping and adaptation capacity is based on the availability of human resources, economic capacity, and environmental capacity. This paper presents two sets of results. First, we show the application of the VRIM to determine state-level resilience for Mexico, building the baseline that reflects the current status. The second part of the paper makes projections of resilience under socioeconomic and climate change and examines the varying sources and consequences of those changes. We used three tools to examine Mexico’s resilience in the face of climate change, i.e., the baseline calculations regarding resilience indices made by the VRIM, the projected short-term rates of socioeconomic change from the Boyd–Ibarrarán computable general equilibrium model, and rates of the IPCC-SRES scenario projections from the integrated assessment MiniCAM model. This allows us to have available change rates for VRIM variables through the end of the twenty-first century.     

Climate change perceptions and adaptations of smallholder farmers in Eastern Kenya

Several studies have indicated the importance of understanding farmers’ perceptions of risks associated with climate change, the adaptation strategies they employ and factors that affect adaptive capacity. This study aimed to understand smallholder farmers’ perceptions of climate change, adaptation strategies and adaptive capacity in the semiarid Matungulu Sub-County, Eastern Kenya. A participatory approach, using three climate roundtables, was conducted to enhance community participation and understanding of climate change issues. The study showed that farmers’ perceptions concerning climate change are influenced by past experiences of weather extremes that have affected production levels and farm incomes. The farmers have made strategic responses to manage risks posed by climate change. However, they face several challenges in adaptation such as inadequate technical knowledge, low financial resources and inadequate land size. Further, the study showed that climate roundtables is a successful participatory approach that can give effective insights for smallholder farmers to understand agricultural vulnerability, climate change and their adaptation strategies.     

Livelihood vulnerability to climate change in the mountains of Northern Vietnam: comparing the Hmong and the Dzao ethnic minority populations

Environment, Development and Sustainability - Livelihoods of ethnic minority populations living in the mountains of Northern Vietnam are highly vulnerable to climate-induced natural hazards....     

Putting vulnerability to climate change on the map: a review of approaches, benefits, and risks

There is growing demand among stakeholders across public and private institutions for spatially-explicit information regarding vulnerability to climate change at the local scale. However, the challenges associated with mapping the geography of climate change vulnerability are non-trivial, both conceptually and technically, suggesting the need for more critical evaluation of this practice. Here, we review climate change vulnerability mapping in the context of four key questions that are fundamental to assessment design. First, what are the goals of the assessment? A review of published assessments yields a range of objective statements that emphasize problem orientation or decision-making about adaptation actions. Second, how is the assessment of vulnerability framed? Assessments vary with respect to what values are assessed (vulnerability of what) and the underlying determinants of vulnerability that are considered (vulnerability to what). The selected frame ultimately influences perceptions of the primary driving forces of vulnerability as well as preferences regarding management alternatives. Third, what are the technical methods by which an assessment is conducted? The integration of vulnerability determinants into a common map remains an emergent and subjective practice associated with a number of methodological challenges. Fourth, who participates in the assessment and how will it be used to facilitate change? Assessments are often conducted under the auspices of benefiting stakeholders, yet many lack direct engagement with stakeholders. Each of these questions is reviewed in turn by drawing on an illustrative set of 45 vulnerability mapping studies appearing in the literature. A number of pathways for placing vulnerability mapping on a more robust footing are also identified.     

Linking global drivers with local and regional change: a social-ecological system approach in Chilika Lagoon,Bay of Bengal

Global scale drivers such as international markets for shrimp can trigger large changes at local and regional scales. But there is also a poorly appreciated reverse process, operating from the bottom up, with potential for triggering changes at higher scales. Thus, effects of drivers can be seen as a two-way process in which global drivers and local and regional drivers can potentially impact each other. Here, we argue that not only can global drivers impact the sustainability of local and regional social-ecological systems, but sustainability at higher scales can also be impacted by changes at the scale of local and regional social-ecological systems. Using Chilika, a large lagoon on the Bay of Bengal, Odisha State in India as a case, we show that traditional small-scale capture fisheries supporting 150 fisher villages with some 400,000 people were marginalized by aquaculture development for tiger prawn and by state-driven hydrological interventions, with impacts on the ecology of the lagoon. These changes, in turn, contribute to global poverty and food insecurity, making it difficult for India to meet international targets such as millennium development goals. The marginalized fisherfolk become part of environmental justice and other social movements. With large parts of the lagoon converted into a virtual monoculture for the production of tiger prawn, changes in Chilika (a Ramsar site) contribute to wetland habitat loss at the global scale, and biodiversity losses, possibly including IUCN red-listed species.     

A gender approach to understanding the differentiated impact of barriers to adaptation: responses to climate change in rural Ethiopia

While adaptation has received a fair amount of attention in the climate change debate, barriers to adaptation are the focus of a more specific, recent discussion. In this discussion, such barriers are generally treated as having a uniform, negative impact on all actors. However, we argue that the precise nature and impact of such barriers on different actors has so far been largely overlooked. Our study of two drought-prone communities in rural Ethiopia sets out to examine how female- and male-headed households adapt to climate change, particularly focusing on how a variety of barriers influence the choice of adaptation measures to varying extents. To this purpose, we built a conceptual framework based on the Sustainable Livelihood Approach. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions with male- and female-headed households, community leaders and local extension workers. Our findings suggest that gender-based differences in the choice of adaptation measures at the household level are driven by cultural, social, financial and institutional barriers. Barriers to adaptation—particularly when interacting—have a differentiated impact upon different actors. This outcome hints at the need for donors and policymakers to develop intervention strategies that are sensitive to this fact.     

Elevation change and the vulnerability of Rhode Island (USA) salt marshes to sea-level rise

Salt marshes persist within the intertidal zone when marsh elevation gains are commensurate with rates of sea-level rise (SLR). Monitoring changes in marsh elevation in concert with tidal water levels is therefore an effective way to determine if salt marshes are keeping pace with SLR over time. Surface elevation tables (SETs) are a common method for collecting precise data on marsh elevation change. Southern New England is a hot spot for SLR, but few SET elevation change datasets are available for the region. Our study synthesizes elevation change data collected from 1999 to 2015 from a network of SET stations throughout Rhode Island (RI). These data are compared to accretion and water level data from the same time period to estimate shallow subsidence and determine whether marshes are tracking SLR. Salt marsh elevation increased at a mean overall rate of 1.40 mm year^?1 and ranged from ?0.33 to 3.36 mm year^?1 at individual stations. Shallow subsidence dampened elevation gain in mid-Narragansett Bay marshes, but in other areas of coastal RI, subsurface processes may augment surface accretion. In all cases, marsh elevation gain was exceeded by the 5.26 mm year^?1 rate of increase in sea levels during the study period. Our study provides the first SET elevation change data from RI and shows that most RI marshes are not keeping pace with short- or long-term rates of SLR. It also lends support to previous research that implicates SLR as a primary driver of recent changes to southern New England salt marshes.     

Synthesis of ecosystem vulnerability to climate change in the Netherlands shows the need to consider environmental fluctuations in adaptation measures

Climate change impacts on individual species are various and range from shifts in phenology and functional properties to changes in productivity and dispersal. The combination of impacts determines future biodiversity and species composition, but is difficult to evaluate with a single method. Instead, a comparison of mutually independent approaches provides information and confidence in patterns observed beyond what may be achieved in individual approaches. Here, we carried out such comparison to assess which ecosystem types in the Netherlands appear most vulnerable to climate change impacts, as arising from changes in hydrology, nutrient conditions and dispersal limitations. We thus combined meta-analyses of species range shifts with species distribution modelling and ecohydrological modelling with expert knowledge in two respective impact studies. Both impact studies showed that nutrient-poor ecosystems and ecosystem types with fluctuating water tables—like hay meadows, moist heathlands and moorlands—seem to be most at risk upon climate change. A subsequent meta-analysis of species–environmental stress relations indicated that particularly endangered species are adversely affected by the combination of drought and oxygen stress, caused by fluctuating moisture conditions. This implies that adaptation measures should not only aim to optimise mean environmental conditions but should also buffer environmental extremes. Major uncertainties in the assessment included the quantitative impacts of vegetation-hydrology feedbacks, vegetation adaptation and interactions between dispersal capacity and traits linked to environmental selection. Once such quantifications become feasible, adaptation measures may be tailor-made and optimised to conserve vulnerable ecosystem types.     

Supporting climate change vulnerability and adaptation assessments in the Asia-Pacific region: an example of sustainability science

Sustainability is achieved only when there is full reconciliation between: (1) economic development; (2) meeting, on an equitable basis, growing and changing human needs and aspirations; and (3) conserving the limited natural resources and the capacity of the environment to absorb the mulitple stresses that are a consequence of human activities. The linkages between climate and sustainability are examined in the context of both the wider Asia-Pacific region and local level climate risks and adaptation responses. These findings are used to underpin and illustrate several implications for sustainability science. Climate change is seen as both an impediment to increasing sustainability and as an opportunity, though in most cases the former far outweighs the latter. Assessments of climate change vulnerability and risk are shown to be of critical importance because they inform decisions as to where resources for adaptation are best invested. They also show whether global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions need to be strengthened because of limits to adaptation. In practice, adaptation takes place at many levels, essentially ranging between tangible interventions at community and enterprise level and national and international efforts to strengthen the enabling environment for adaptation. It is informative to undertake regional assessments of adaptation, even though most adaptation interventions need to reflect local conditions, including local adaptive capacities. The foregoing findings, based in part on a series of regional and local case studies, lead to several recommendations for further research that will help reduce barriers to implementing responses that reduce climate related risks, including adverse consequences for sustainability. The recommendations relate to such themes as making optimum use of predictive capabilities, characterising the linkages between climate change and sustainability, implications of the required rates and magnitudes of adaptation, institutional responses that enhance adaptive capacity, use of new and traditional technologies, the multiple dimensions of social responsibility, and enhancing the enabling environment for adaptation at the community and enterprise level. If these recommendations are acted upon they will, in turn, help address much needed improvements in quantifying the costs and benefits of adaptation, prioritising adaptation options, assessing sustainable development tradeoffs, and monitoring the success of adaptation initiatives. Such improvements will have even greater utility if they are incorporated into user-friendly decision support tools for adaptation.     

From global sustainability research matrix to typology: a tool to analyze coastal and marine social-ecological systems

An attempt is made to develop a coastal and marine social-ecological typology. An explicitly regional focus is taken to explore how a regionally grounded, multi-scale analysis may support multi-level local to global sustainability efforts. A case study from Indonesia exemplifies this approach. Social-ecological sustainability problems, caused by drivers at different earth system levels, lead the way into the proposed typology. A social-ecological system consists of a biogeophysical territory, an identified issue and the associated social agents. It can extend across disciplines as well as across spatial and institutional levels and scales. A global sustainability research matrix, which is based on ecozones and problem types, can thus be constructed and serves as a research-driven multi-level typology. The regional application links directly to stakeholder agendas at the problem level. It is argued that some of the central functions of coastal and marine social-ecological systems are resource provision, livelihood access, and storm and erosion protection, which need special attention in a coastal and marine social-ecological typology, as exemplified in the Indonesian case study used. This contribution is an exploratory research to propose steps toward such a typology. It is extended to the social-ecological subsystems—natural, social, governance—and applied to additional cases. A two-dimensional, hierarchical typology is proposed as a tool to analyze, compare and classify coastal and marine systems. A policy typology is added to assess changes. A governance baseline is assumed to foster normative sustainability goals. A subsystems appraisal typology is meant to evaluate action results. Finally, unresolved methodological questions are discussed.     

Toward sustainable adaptation to future climate change: insights from vulnerability and resilience approaches analyzing agrarian system of Iran

There is no certainty that adaptation to climate change is sustainable, and new approaches to assess current climate change adaptation trajectories are sorely needed. In this paper, we review the farmer-focused approaches (typical of vulnerability approaches) and agro-ecosystem-focused approaches (typical of resilience approaches). We propose that a combination of the two may be a better way to conceptualize sustainable adaptation to future climate change within an agro-ecological system. To test our hypothesis, we use the case study of Iran, a land that has shown both tremendous resilience and vulnerability in its agro-ecological system. We explore the changes that have occurred in the Iranian farming system and their implications for farmers’ resilience to climate change through an integrated lens combining vulnerability approaches and resilience approaches. During the previous five decades, we describe how Iranian peasants have become small farmers, the land tenure system has changed from a traditional landlord-sharecropping system to family farms, and the quantity and quality of the agro-ecological resources have changed considerably. Our integrative approach provides important insights for both research and policy. We show that combining the two approaches can have far-reaching implications for farmers’ adaptation to future climate change knowledge, policy, and practice since one approach aims to decrease farmers vulnerability and the other approach aims to build resilient agro-ecosystems.