ArticleScientific reports2024
Merging adoption of natural climate solutions in agriculture with climatic and non-climatic risks within an (intra)gendered framework.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The extant research on climate variability shares significant theoretical contributions to vulnerability and risks. However, the literature mostly focuses on technical solutions to climate extremes which undermines efforts to identify and solve the dynamics within gender groups in using agricultural-based natural climate solutions (NCS) to address climatic and non-climatic risks. With this in mind, this study implements both quantitative and qualitative approaches including household surveys, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions to investigate the adoption of NCS within gender groups to address climatic and non-climatic risks in three selected communities (Katanga, Dakio, and Zonno) in the Bolgatanga East District of Upper East Region of Ghana. The Relative Importance Index (RII) was used to rank the key climatic and non-climatic risks confronting smallholder farmers in the district. Male and female smallholder farmers affirmed that there has been variation in the climate compared to their childhood. The results indicated climate change-induced erosion (RII = 0.268) as the highest climatic risk among male smallholder farmers. Increased bushfire (RII = 0.263) was the highest climatic risk affecting female smallholder farmers. The findings show that the high cost of farm inputs (RII = 0.505) is the highest non-climatic risk among the male smallholder farmers whereas inadequate credit facilities (RII = 0.295) affected most of the female smallholder farmers. In adapting to the climatic risks, both male and female smallholder farmers with no formal education plant early maturing crop varieties and cover crops on their farmland. Others engage in traditional non-farm activities such as weaving by using renewable materials with reduced ecological footprints to address non-climatic risks. The male and female smallholder farmers with post-secondary education typically resort to temporal migration during the dry season to work on non-farm jobs. Acknowledging the intra-gendered adoption of NCS among marginalized farming households; not only protects against maladaptation but also improves local-level resilience and climate risk management in Ghana.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.