Climate change adaptation: factors influencing Chinese smallholder farmers’ perceived self-efficacy and adaptation intent
- 768 Downloads
Understanding how individuals perceive their ability to adapt to climate change is critical to understanding adaptation decision-making. Drawing on a survey of 483 smallholder farmer households in the Loess Plateau region of China, we examine the factors that shape smallholder farmer perceptions of their ability to adapt to climate change and their stated intent to do so. We apply a proportional odds ordered logistic regression model to identify the role that determinants of adaptive capacity play in shaping smallholders’ perceived self-efficacy and adaptation intent. Our study provides further evidence that self-efficacy beliefs are a strong, positive predictor of adaptation intent. Our study suggests that human capital, information and technology, material resources and infrastructure, wealth and financial capital, and institutions and entitlements all play an important role in shaping smallholder perceived self-efficacy, while state-society dependencies may reduce smallholder perceived self-efficacy. In addition, our study suggests that perceiving climate change risks and impacts do not necessarily lead to an intention to adapt. Overall, our findings highlight the importance of incorporating both the objective determinants of smallholders’ adaptive capacity and their subjective perceptions of these objective determinants into future climate change adaptation programs and policies in order to facilitate adaptive actions. Identifying factors that cause individuals to have a low estimation of their adaptive ability may allow planned adaptation interventions to address these perceived limitations and encourage adaptive behavior.
KeywordsAdaptive capacity Climate change Climate perception China Smallholder farmers
This research was partially funded by Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University (NWAFU) through the 111 project of Chinese Ministry of Education (No. B12007). The authors are grateful to Drs. Pute Wu, Delan Zhu, Youke Wang, Xining Zhao, Xiping Liu, Yubao Wang from NWAFU for their support for this research. The authors also thank Chunyan Qi, Mengying Sun, and several other NWAFU undergraduate and graduate students for their assistance during fieldwork. Finally, we would like to thank our anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments, which significantly strengthened the paper.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Adger WN, Agrawala S, Mirza MMQ et al (2007) Assessment of adaptation practices, options, constraints and capacity. Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg2/ar4-wg2-chapter17.pdf. Accessed 29 May 2015
- Barnett J, Waters E, Pendergast S, Puleston A (2013) Barriers to adaptation to sea-level rise: the legal, institutional and cultural barriers to adaptation to sea-level rise in Australia. National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, Gold CoastGoogle Scholar
- Brooks N, Adger WN (2005) Assessing and enhancing adaptive capacity. In: Lim B, Spanger-Siegfried E (eds) Adaptation policy framework for climate change: developing strategies, policies, and measures. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 165–182Google Scholar
- Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
- Klein RJT, Midgley GF, Preston BL, Alam M, Berkhout FGH, Dow K, Shaw MR (2014) Adaptation opportunities, constraints, and limits. In: Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, Girma B, Kissel ES, Levy AN, MacCracken S, Mastrandrea PR, White LL (eds) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. part a: global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 899–943Google Scholar
- Long JS (1997) Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
- Long JS, Freese J (2006) Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata. Stata Press Books, College StationGoogle Scholar
- Mertz O, Mbow C, Maiga A, Diallo D, Reenberg A, Diouf A, Barbier B et al (2010) Climate factors play a limited role for past adaptation strategies in West Africa. Ecol Soc 15(4):1–15. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art25/ CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Nunnally JC (1978) Psychometric theory, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Ribot J (2009) Vulnerability does not fall from the sky: towards multiscale, pro-poor climate policy. In: Mearns R, Norton A (eds) The social dimensions of climate change: equity and vulnerability in a warming world. World Bank Publications, Washington, pp 47–74Google Scholar
- Smit B, Pilifosova O (2001) Adaptation to climate change in the context of sustainable development and equity. In: IPCC Working Group II (eds) Climate change 2001: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Earth Scan, Geneva, pp 879–906Google Scholar
- Triandis HC (1977) Interpersonal behavior. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, MontereyGoogle Scholar