THE IMPACT OF DROUGHT AND ADAPTATION PRACTICES OF RICE-GROWING COMMUNITIES IN UVA PROVINCE, SRI LANKA

Transcription

1 THE IMPACT OF DROUGHT AND ADAPTATION PRACTICES OF RICE-GROWING COMMUNITIES IN UVA PROVINCE, SRI LANKA By Future in Our Hands Development Fund (FIOH Fund) In collaboration with Pesticide Action Network Asia and the Pacific April 2011

2 PAN AP CLIMATE CHANGE AND RICE REPORTS The Impact of Drought and Adaptation Practices of Rice-Growing Communities in Uva Province, Sri Lanka Research Organization: Future in Our Hands Development Fund (FIOH Fund) Publisher: Pesticide Action Network, Asia and the Pacific PO Box 1170, Penang, Malaysia Editor: Peter Gillespie Proofreading and Layout : Brigette DePape Enquiries may be directed to: Mr Prabath Kumara, Future In Our Hands Development Fund (FIOH Fund), at fiohfund@gmail.com or panap@panap.net. This study was part of a regional project conducted by the Save Our Rice Campaign of PAN AP in collaboration with sixteen network partner organizations. The aim was to assess the level of vulnerability and adaptive capacities of rice-growing communities in the Philippines, Indonesia, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh by documenting the impacts of climate change on the communities and their adaptation practices. The longer-term goal was to identify ways to improve the adaptive capacities of these and other vulnerable communities. From 2009 to March 2011, twenty studies were carried out. This publication may be reproduced in full or in part as long as the research organization and publisher are properly acknowledged as the sources and PAN AP is furnished with copies of the final work where the reproduction appears. April 2011

3 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION Drought Rice Farming Uva Province Moneragala District Background Issues Study Objectives METHODOLOGY Field Exercise Site selection Participatory rapid appraisal (PRA) Questionnaire survey Review and Model Development Desk review Development of a disaster risk reduction model STUDY FINDINGS Present Status Quo of the Study Area General description of study sites Rainfall distribution Soil type of rice farming fields Family structure Poverty Land ownership Sources of water for farming Cultivation patterns of rice Farm size and cropping intensity Decision making for the commencement of cultivation Basis of decision-making Sources and types of rice seeds Selection criteria of rice varieties Crop diversification Method of land preparation Impact of Climate Change (Drought) Significance of impact Impact on community life Potentials and Needs for Drought Mitigation Development of a drought risk reduction model SWOT analysis Need identification for model development CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions Recommendations 38

4 List of Tables Table 1 Soil K, P, organic matter and compaction (average of 10 samples) 17 Table 2 Family structure in three study sites 18 Table 3 Annual income (SLR/ family) from different sources 19 Table 4 Average land ownership (acres) 19 Table 5 Extent of cultivation (acres) 19 Table 6 Water sources for rice farming 20 Table 7 Rice cultivation patterns - Therela 21 Table 8 Rice cultivation patterns - Meegahayaya 21 Table 9 Rice cultivation patterns - Dikyaya 21 Table 10 Farm size and cropping intensity 22 Table 11 Annual gross and net income to a family from rice cultivation 22 Table 12 Decision-making for the commencement of rice cultivation 23 Table 13 Criteria for cultivation decisions 23 Table 14 Source and type of paddy seeds 24 Table 15 Selection criteria of rice varieties 25 Table 16 Preference for crop diversification 26 Table 17 Method of land preparation 26 Table 18 Significance of drought impacts in Therela GN division 27 Table 19 Significance of drought impacts in Dikyaya GN division (Location 1) 27 Table 20 Significance of drought impacts in Dikyaya GN division (Location 2) 28 Table 21 Significance of drought impacts in Meegahayaya GN division (Location 1) 28 Table 22 Significance of drought impacts in Meegahayaya GN division (Location 2) 29 Table 23 SWOT analysis of Therela GN division 32 Table 24 SWOT analysis of Meegahayaya GN division 33 Table 25 SWOT analysis of Dikyaya GN division 34 Table 26 Suggested activities for the DRR model 35 List of Figures Figure 1 Rainfall map of Sri Lanka 1 Figure 2 Provincial map of Sri Lanka 3 Figure 3 Agro-ecological map of Sri Lanka 4 Figure 4 Divisional secretariat map of Moneragala district 5 Figure 5 Conceptual model for disaster risk reduction 10 Figure 6 Problem analysis phase of the model 11 Figure 7 Need identification phase of the model 12 Figure 8 Need assessment phase of the model 13 Figure 9 Planning and implementation phases of the model 14 Figure 10 Rainfall distribution in Therela and Dikyaya areas 15 Figure 11 Rainfall distribution in Meegahayaya area 16 Figure 12 Low Humic Gley soils found in the study area 17 Figure 13 Impact diagram of Therela GN division 30 Figure 14 Impact diagram of Meegahayaya GN division 1 30 Figure 15 Impact diagram of Meegahayaya GN division 2 31 Figure 16 Impact diagram of Dikyaya GN division 1 31 Figure 17 Impact diagram of Dikyaya GN division 2 32

5 1.0 INTRODUCTION Sri Lanka is an island country having a total land area of 65,610 km 2 and net land area of 62,705 km 2 when inland water body areas are excluded. The total population was estimated at million in 2005 with a density of 314 persons /km 2 and with population growth of 1.1 %. The Human Development Index in 2004 was with life expectancy of 74 years and literacy rate of 90%. The total labour force is about 48% of the population, of which 30% are employed in agriculture. In the late 1970s Sri Lanka began the transformation to a market economy based on liberalized trade or open economy. GDP in 2006 was estimated to US$ 23.5 Bn; per capita GDP was US$ 1355 with GDP growth of 7.4%. GDP in 2006 was comprised of 11% in agriculture, 27% from industry and 62% in services. The share of paddy cultivation in GDP is 3%. In Sri Lanka, floods, landslides, cyclones, droughts, tsunami and coastal erosion are the main causes for natural disasters and have caused loss of life, and enormous damage and destruction to property and agriculture. In addition, the country incurs a heavy toll on account of man-made disasters such as deforestation, indiscriminate coral, sand and gem mining, and industrial hazards besides ethnic conflicts and occasional political violence in the recent past. 1.1 Drought Drought has become a frequent event causing both yield and crop losses in the agricultural sector in addition to the impacts on other sectors such as irrigation, economy, health, industry etc. The drought in 1996 resulted in interruption to power supply causing much hardship to people and serious effects to the National Economy. Every year, somewhere in the country, people are affected by seasonal droughts of short-duration. Droughts of regional significance occur once in every 3 to 4 years. Severe droughts of national significance occur after a considerable period of time, within 10 years or so. After the severe drought of , the other severe droughts of national significance occurred during the periods , , 1965, , , 1985 and in Of all these major droughts, those during the periods , , and caused major set-backs to the economy. Although droughts cannot be classified as sudden disasters, they do cause hardship and financial loss mostly to farmers. In the drought of 1996, 181,095 families in 17 districts were badly affected Badulla district Uva province Moneragala district Figure 1: Rainfall map of Sri Lanka 1

6 The worst drought in the history of Sri Lanka took place in 2001 with another severe drought experienced in In other years during the period between 1974 and 2007 droughts demonstrated a cyclic trend creating peaks at three to four year intervals in 1976, 1979, 1983, 1986, 1989, 1991, 1997, 2001, and The largest number of people affected by drought, and the greatest damage to paddy, occurred in 2001 and ,071,625 people were affected by drought in 2001 and 2,198,521in ,399 hectares of paddy were lost in 2001 and 47,105 hectares in The Districts most prone to droughts include: Kurunegala Hambantota, Moneragala, Puttalam, Anuradhapura, Badulla, Ratnapura, Ampara, Matara and Nuwara Eliya. Trends of drought occurrence in Sri Lanka can best be illustrated by comparing rainfall maps generated for early part and latter parts of the last century. 1.2 Rice Farming Rice is the dietary staple in Sri Lanka, and is cultivated in almost all parts of the island. The maha season crop (approximately 63% of total production) is planted in the October November and harvested in February - March, while the yala crop (37% of production) is planted in April May and harvested in August - September. Sri Lanka's rice production is closely tied to domestic politics, with the government providing substantial subsidies on certain types of fertilizers, resulting in unbalanced fertilizer use. Poor agricultural practices and high costs of production (mainly labor), result in lower economic returns. Water management has always been a challenge, particularly in the 'dry zone' in the east, southeast, and northern parts of the country. Of the 870,000 hectares of total rice area, only 42 percent has assured irrigation. Conventional rice farming results in a relatively low average yield of 3.5 to 3.8 tons per hectare (rough basis), although the potential yield is much higher. Rice remains the major calorie source (45%) and protein source (40%) for Sri Lankans. Annual per capita consumption is around 100 kilograms and is influenced by the price of rice vis-à-vis wheat flour. In recent years, the government has promoted increased consumption of rice to reduce dependence on imported wheat. However, farmers seldom receive a reasonable price for their crop due to the ineffective price support by the government, infrastructure and credit bottlenecks, and manipulations by private traders. Sri Lanka imports rice mainly from India and Pakistan, and smaller volumes from Australia and Thailand. In 2005, Sri Lanka imported 25 tons of rice from the United States. Large number of reservoirs in varying sizes built by kings provided the necessary water to irrigate paddy fields. Therefore, paddy cultivation received preferential treatment by the kings, as they realized the importance of preserving ecosystems, biodiversity for food security and the multi-functionally of paddy fields. Even at present, this system exists in minor irrigation cascades in Sri Lanka. Despite its small size, Sri Lanka has a varied climate, topography and soil which have resulted in rich biodiversity, distributed within a wide range of ecosystems. However, gradual diminution and destruction of habitats for livelihood of people poses the greatest threat to the biodiversity and the survival of many species of fauna and flora. Rice production has to be increased to feed the increased population. Also, paddy fields give for more benefits than merely that of rice cultivation. There are serious threats to rice agroecosystem and biodiversity, deriving from (a) expansion of cultivation areas; (b) increased cropping intensities; and (c) the use of agrochemicals. However, agriculture provides employment to 30% of country population and helps to control migration to cities for employment. 2

7 There is a strong tradition in Sri Lanka regarding paddy farming. It is generally agreed that irrigation farmers have a right to the water to produce paddy and other crops. The outcomes of the ecosystems (paddy, other crops, water etc.) needed for human lives are shared among the people in the ecosystem. An ecosystem does not belong to anybody. In other words, an ecosystem is not divided among people and instead its outcomes are shared. Sustainable agriculture is generally defined as ecologically-friendly agriculture, which conserves resources and preserves bio-diversity. Sustainable agriculture has been understood to be neither conventional agriculture, which is completely dependent on chemical inputs and inflicts harm on producers and consumers, nor shifting agriculture which is blamed for creating erosion and other forms of degradation especially in the uplands. 1.3 Uva Province Figure 2: Provincial map of Sri Lanka Uva is Sri Lanka's largest province and second least populated province with 1,187,335 people. The province is about 13 % of the island with only 6.3 % of the country s population. It was created in 1896 and consists of two districts: Badulla (2,818 km²) and Moneragala (5,545.6 km²). The capital of the province is Badulla. Uva is bordered by Eastern, Southern and Central provinces. Provincial map of Sri Lanka is shown in Figure 2. Well known features of the province are: Dunhinda Falls, Diyaluma Falls, Rawana Falls, the Yala National Park (lying partly in the Southern and Eastern Provinces) and (lying partly in the Eastern Province). The Gal Oya hills and the Central mountains are the main highlands, while the Mahaweli (Sinhalese: ''great-sandy'') and Menik (Sinhalese: ''gemstone'') rivers and the huge Senanayake Samudraya and Maduru Oya Reservoirs are the major water resources. The province occupies mainly the low country physiographic zone (LC), but also spreads over upcountry and mid-country zones with relatively low percentages. Agro-ecologically, the province comes under diverse micro-ecological zones, which can be categorized into DL (dry zone lowland region (DL1a, DL1b, DL1c, DL 2a and DL5), IL (intermediate zone lowland) region (IL 1c and IL2), IM region (IM1a, IM1c, IM2a and IM2b), IU (intermediate zone upland) region (IU2, IU3a, IU3b, IU3c and IU3e) and WU (wet zone upland) region (WU3). The agro-ecological map of Sri Lanka is shown in Figure 3. These diverse environmental conditions lead to various types of land use, wetness, seasons and floral and faunal compositions within the province. Furthermore, the province is affected by natural disasters such as drought, floods, and landslides etc., which are aggravated by mismanagement of landscape, water resources and soil resources. 3

8 The dominant soil landscapes of the Uva province are Reddish Brown Earths (RBE) associated with Low Humic Gley (LHG) soils in undulating terrains and RBE and Immature Brown Loams (IBL) in rolling, hilly and steep terrains. On hilly terrain and undulating topography, the surface soil has been eroded in many instances due to chena cultivation and quartz rich subsurface soil layer is present as surface layer. The LHG soil is widely recommended for paddy cultivation; for other crops, precautions need to be taken for removal of excess soil moisture. Uva Province has a diversified agro-based economy where income is generated from tea, paddy, vegetables, fruits, sugarcane, horticulture, pepper, grain cultivation etc. Most of the products are of a primary nature and hence do not fetch a better price in the market. The labour demand is high for agricultural activities in the province. Compared to other provinces, the highest labour force participation is reported in Uva province for both males & females. Participation rates of male and female are 71.9 % and 53.0 % respectively. The highest female labour force participation is also reported in Uva province, which is well over 50 percent. According to the 2006/07 Department of Census and Statistics, the highest poor household percentage (23.8 %) is reported from the Uva Province. About 75,000 households have been identified under the poor category. Average household size in the province is 4.1. Of the total population, 18.6 % do not have the access to safe drinking water. This value is lower only to Central and Sabaragamuwa provinces. Per Capita Income (PCI) as estimated in 2008 for the province is Rs. 156,500 with PCI ratio of 0.7 %. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) value computed in 2008 for the province is Rs. Bn 202 and its growth has been found the lowest (14.2 %) compared to that of other provinces. That is a rapid decline from the value 45 % reported in In terms of ownership of land and housing, the difference between the poor and non-poor households is not much noticeable in Sri Lanka % of the households do not live in their own houses and 6.5 % do not own a piece of land to live in the province. Income of poor households is about Rs. 11,200/ month and average expenditure is Rs. 7,900/ month. LEGEND Figure 3: Agro-ecological map of Sri Lanka 4

9 Dry Zone areas especially in Moneragala district are frequently affected by drought. Exposed lands due to agriculture, building construction and road way construction are vulnerable to landslides in steep terrain areas. Flood prone areas are found along main rivers Mahaweli and Menik in alluvial flat terrain landscapes in the Uva Province. 1.4 Moneragala District The Moneragala administrative district (AD) situated in Uva Province and administered under that Uva Provincial Council, is considered the second largest AD in the country with 8.6% of the total land area. It is made up of eleven (11) divisional secretariats (DS) and situated around 288 km from the capital Colombo (Fig. 4). The total land area of the district is km2 and the total population is reported to be about 400,000 (population census of 1991) with the majority being of Sinhalese origin. The population density for the district is 58/km 2. Monaragala is located in a transitional zone between the central highlands and the lowlands towards the south, East and Northeast. Situated in the Arid Zone of Sri Lanka, Moneragala has an average annual temperature ranging from oc. The District receives around 2,200 mm of rainfall on average annually. This is usually limited to 4-5 months of the year. However, one sixth of the district receives less than 1,750 mm of rainfall per year. The variation in rainfall in the area has had adverse effects on its human population. The south, southeastern and eastern parts of the district are relatively drier than the higher north-western parts. Figure 4: Divisional secretariat map of Moneragala district 5

10 The soil conditions in the district vary according to topography and climate. However two soil groups can be identified from the area; the Reddish Brown Earth (RBE) soil and the Low Humic Gley (LHG) soil. Both soil varieties are suitable for cultivation. Moneragala has a complex agrarian society which has evolved around paddy cultivation. More than 90% of the population in the region has agriculture-based livelihoods. Historically, Moneragala has been a major paddy producer and agriculture has remained the backbone of the economy. In addition to paddy, the region is also famous for the cultivation of vegetables, pulses and fruits mostly grown under chena (shifting) cultivation methods. Plantation crops such as tea, rubber, cocoa, sugar cane, tobacco and coconut, were later introduced to this region and now exist and thrive side by side with the long-established crops. Cultivation in Monaragala can be separated into two seasons; the maha (October-March) season which is the major cultivation season and the yala (April-September) season. The total extent cultivated in the district is around 25,830 ha during the maha season and 13,716 ha during the yala season with a harvest of 99,446 tons and 56,987 tons respectively for maha season and yala seasons. 1 Around 70% of households receive Samurdhi support, a scheme introduced as a monthly allowance system, similar to welfare, provided by the government for low or no income households in the country. This high level of rural poverty can be attributed to inadequate economic activity. The problem is further worsened as no investment is brought into the region due to lack of infrastructure and basic necessities, electricity being one among them. However, Moneragala has many untapped natural resources, some of them being agricultural crops and waste. During surplus season, much of the vegetable and fruit harvest is wasted as the farmers are unable to secure a good price in the market. In addition, agricultural wastes generated in the area are currently not being utilized in a proper manner and causing damage to the environment. Traditionally, agricultural waste is burned in open fields or dumped into abandoned lands and waterways causing pollution to the air and water. In addition, burning and decomposing of agricultural waste gives rise to Green House Gases. The project is focused on Monearagala Divisional Secretariat (DS) of the district. It is situated in the centre of the Moneragala District in an area of 255 km 2 and the main Administrative Centre for the District. The population for Monaragala DS division is 50,018. Drought has been aggravated in Sri Lanka due to the removal of vegetation and present agricultural practices. Moneragala District is not an exception. Both rain-fed and small scale irrigated agriculture, along with livelihoods of the communities, are highly vulnerable to climate stresses. Drought risk is not new to farmers in the Moneragala District. They have developed and used various measures to cope with drought stresses and other climate risks. Rice farmers experiences with measures to manage climate risks, and their perspectives on the potential for applying the same measures to adapt to climate change, will be of immense importance in planning future development strategies. Although drought hazards are similar for rice farmers across the country, significant differences are found in the measures used to cope with climate risks in the different villages. These differences in risk management practice arise from local /2008 Department of Census and Statistics, Sri Lanka. 6

11 and national differences in social, cultural, economic, and environmental conditions and policies, and suggest that effective strategies for adapting to drought need to be attuned to the specific context of place and time. 1.5 Background Issues Rainfall maps of Sri Lanka available for early and latter parts of the last century indicate a clear trend of declining rainfall over most of the areas in the country (Figure 1). A further reduction of rainfall can be expected in Uva Province, which consists of Badulla and Moneragala Districts. According to a survey conducted in 2002, the highest poverty head count ratio (37%) was reported from these districts in Sri Lanka. Further there is a trend of declining GDP in Uva Province from 1990 to 2002 (from 8.0 to 4.4). The highest agricultural contribution (50%) to GDP in Sri Lanka is also from the Uva Province. A recent survey indicated that about 5000 hectares of paddy fields in the Uva region have been devastated due to the prolonged drought in the maha 2008/09 season. It further revealed that more than 50% of paddy cultivation has been devastated. Paddy cultivators in the affected areas have requested the government to provide them relief to mitigate their losses. The above mentioned facts clearly indicate an obvious association between poverty incidence, agriculture (rice farming) and rainfall in the Uva province. The incidence of drought more frequently affects rice farming during this decade. A PRA exercise conducted recently in a few villages in the Moneragala District revealed that the drought affects income, health, family relationships, and community social status. Rice farming culture has changed drastically from traditional practices to modern agricultural methods. This has aggravated the effect of drought on their farming environment. These rice farming communities strongly believe that soil and moisture conservation aspects and environmentally friendly nature of traditional rice farming could mitigate the drought effects on their agriculture. 1.6 Study Objectives The FIOH Development Fund, Badulla, in collaboration with the Kandukara Development Organization, Badalkumbura, planned a study of the impact of drought and present adaptation practices by rice growing communities in Uva Province. The study objective was to understand the present rice farming environment and its capacity to withstand drought, and its various adaptations to minimize drought effects, especially evolutions in the traditional system. The following objectives were established: 1. To identify and document the impacts of climate change especially drought in the selected study areas. 2. To identify and document effective existing and traditional adaptation practices to cope with drought in the study sites 3. To assess further needs of the communities for coping with drought on the basis of above objectives. 2.0 METHODOLOGY The study used a Participatory Rapid Appraisal (PRA) exercise, questionnaire surveys and conducted a review of available documents. PRA exercises were conducted using tools such as social mapping, impact diagrams, seasonal calendar, SWOT analysis and Checklist Rankings. 7

12 2.1 Field Exercise Site selection Three Grama Niladhari (GN) Divisions were selected for the study from Moneragala District in the Uva province. The GN Divisions are Therela in Moneragala DS Division, Meegahayaya in Badalkumbura DS Division and Dikyaya in Buththala DS Division. Farmers in these areas practice a three-fold farming tradition, where rice farming in low lying areas under irrigated and rain-fed conditions, other field crops (legumes, coarse grains, condiments, oil seed crops) and vegetables in upper areas under rain-fed conditions and mixed crops in home gardens Participatory rapid appraisal (PRA) Perceptions of the communities were reviewed through the PRA approach. The study team attempted to get the participation of as many farmers as possible. The team was trained and given instructions especially on the aspects of drought and drought effects, strengthening the censoring ability of participants, and the should be approach of the facilitators. The following two factors were considered in conducting the PRA exercise. Environmental problems are a common concern, the solution of which requires the active and responsible involvement of the entire community. Collective action is possible only when all stakeholders of a community develop a clear common understanding about the issue. The following PRA tools were used to achieve the specific outputs relevant to the study. 1. Social Mapping Objective: Present situation of water and environment for need identification in rice farming Outputs: Location of farming area, farmer dwellings, water sources, vegetation surrounding the farming area, possible threats 2. Impact Diagram Objective: Identification of effects of drought Outputs: Impact of drought on economy, food, water needs, other needs, health (physical and mental), education, unity, environment, culture etc. 3. Seasonal Calendar Objective: Identification of the nature of seasonal drought and consequences Outputs: What nature gives you during each month and how you respond? What you lost and what you gained? 4. SWOT Analysis Objective: Study the strengths and weaknesses of the community in facing drought events and opportunities and the threats for the community from outside to address drought issues. 8

13 Outputs: Lists of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats in addressing the drought related issues in the community. 5. Focus Group Discussions (FGD) Objective: Study the significance of impacts of drought on the community in relation to economic, environmental and social aspects of the areas. Outputs: Lists of most significant impacts of drought on the community. The FGDs were conducted by adopting a special method referred to as Checklist Ranking Method developed recently for assessment of impacts of a natural disaster on economic, environment and social dimensions of a community. Possible impacts are listed under the headings of economic, environmental and social impacts. This is prepared through discussions with experts, field officers and intellectual farmers. The FGD is conducted with farmers giving opportunity for them to discuss each and every aspect separately and decide its level of impact. Following ranking levels are given.? The type of impact is not relevant to our area. 0 The type of impact is relevant but it does not affect to our area. 1 The impact is slightly significant and it could be addressed through normal day to day practices 2 The impact is moderately significant and the community can manage to reduce it. 3 The impact is highly significant and it is essential to mitigate through outside interventions. This assessment will provide the basis to develop a development plan to mitigate the effects of drought in rice growing communities of the area. The questionnaire format developed for the exercise is given as Appendix Questionnaire survey A survey questionnaire was developed aiming at obtaining baseline situation of communities. It included family structure, income level, land ownership, extent of cultivation, source of water for farming, cultivation pattern of rice, farm size and cropping intensity, decision making in cultivation, rice varieties, source of seeds, crop diversification attitudes and land preparation methods. 2.2 Review and Model Development Desk review The study reviewed available information on rainfall and other climatic factors, soil resource types found in the area and poverty status of the community Development of a disaster risk reduction model Various models for disaster management have been developed by researchers and agencies taking the nature and magnitude of the disaster, affected environment and the threatened community from the disaster into consideration. However, the challenge for communities and organizations is to innovate and explore appropriate models based on their local contexts and organizational mandates. 9

14 The communities themselves have a very clear understanding on preparedness for and recovery from disaster situations, and would definitely assist to formulate action plans that can be factored into the national disaster management program. Such a process will be more enlightened with their existing community knowledge based on past experience. In any analysis of past experience, one can come across the strengths and weaknesses that the community bears and also the threats and opportunities that the community has from any external factor. One of the strong arguments is that the community cohesiveness in the past (which is the reason for a community to exist in the first place) could never have been ascertained unless they had methods of addressing crisis conditions and recovering from them. In past disaster situations, community ideas were completely ignored; external agents decided on what should be done in all aspects of disaster management and in the process of attempting to implement such ideas, ensured that the victims were even more traumatized, marginalized and ignored. Thus, it is obvious that in order to create a win-situation for the primary claimholders (the citizens of Sri Lanka) it is crucial to factor in their own methods for managing disaster. This assures true ownership of disaster management to the communities and prevents exploitation of disaster situations by external agents. Thus, four concepts were considered to be the base, on which a community based disaster risk reduction model would be developed. They are as follows. Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) process should be a part and parcel of the culture of the community and built into any development program implemented. All phases in the disaster management cycle (preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation) are of equal importance and the DRR process must be organized drawing attention to the disaster occurrence. DRR strategies should be based on local knowledge, which will be improved or modified according to the present situation. The DRR process should be community-based and community-driven with a plan to strengthen the community by addressing the weaknesses, utilize the outside opportunities and mitigate the external threats that the community faces. Conceptual synthesis was made with following descriptions in the model sketch. The illustration is shown in Figure 5. Institutional Framework Community Interventions Services Disaster Physical Economic Institutional Framework Community Livelihoods Religious Family Institutional Social Community Institutional Framework Politics Community Institutional Framework Opportunities Figure 5: Conceptual model for disaster risk reduction 10

15 The family is considered the nucleus of the model structure. The community is organized comprising family units and knitted by interactions of various factors. Influence of these factors can vary due to any external shock such as natural disasters. At present, there can be strengths or weaknesses of these factors in a community. As a result, the community would be strong enough or fail to respond the disaster event. Empowerment of a community is determined on how strongly the institutional framework is structured. There can be threats or opportunities through this institutional setup. The overall process of a community based disaster risk reduction model is to transform vulnerable or at-risk communities to disaster resilient communities, through disaster mitigation strategic mechanisms. Steps in the process may vary from community contexts and organizational mandates. The community volunteers, disaster management committees, and disaster response organizations are the necessary interfaces or the channels for outsiders such as NGOs or government agencies to assist/support the community in disaster risk reduction. The community groups and organizations in disaster management are essential in sustaining the risk reduction process for the community to meet intended aims and targets. The process of development of a DRR model in this research can be explained as follows. 1. Problem Analysis (Figure 6) Problem analysis looked into three key aspects. Situation analysis - Identification of socio-economic, historical, geographical, infrastructure, climate, institutional, environmental and livelihood situations. Identification of issues/problems arising from the situational analysis Identification of the impact/effects of the issues on people s lives Figure 6: Problem analysis phase of the model 11

16 2. Need Identification (Figure 7) Needs/proposals to overcome impacts/effects were filtered by SWOT analysis on present operational context. Some of the components of different factors are given below. Economic family income level, food security, land ownership, outside economic relationships, properties, bank deposits etc. Social community knowledge, education, health, transport, customs, traditions etc. Institutional Community Based Organizations, small groups, committees, societies etc. Religious leadership, religious and relief programs, ritual and spiritual activities etc. Livelihoods agriculture, fishery, livestock, land uses, additional income sources, skills Physical secure places, vegetative barriers, drains, dams, structures etc. Impacts/ Effects Figure 7: Need identification phase of the model Various external factors that can affect a community are discussed as opportunities and threats. Services agriculture and agrarian, security, education, health, communication Politics policies, budgetary allocations, special programs, trust funds etc. Opportunities income avenues, employment opportunities, markets, employments, industries (factories) etc. Interventions Projects, NGOs/ INGOs, Development programs 12

17 3. Need Assessment (Figure 8) Need assessment was done using a matrix ranking to prioritize the proposed activities according to the effectiveness, benefits, compatibility with available resources in the area, capacity and skills of the community, long term sustainability of the activity etc. Prioritized needs were further subjected to a feasibility check in a community forum, and the most suitable activity was selected for implementation. Need Assessment Phase 4. Action Plan (Figure 9) Formulation of initial disaster risk reduction plan for the selected activity/intervention and institutional and organizational framework based on existing active institutional setup was prepared at this stage. Possible community commitments/responsibilities/capacities were also determined and included in these plans 5. Implementation (Figure 9) Figure 8: Need assessment phase of the model Implementation of short, medium and long-term risk reduction measures, activities, projects and programs, implementation of strategies and mechanisms and strengthening organizations/institutions for effective implementation were the activities planned at this stage. 6. Monitoring and Evaluation (Figure 9) Continuous improvement of disaster risk reduction plan and documentation and dissemination of good practices for replication are the activities planned at this stage. In this study as the initial step, problem analysis and need identification will be carried out to produce the DRR model for the study area. 13

18 Planning and Implementation Phases Figure 9: Planning and implementation phases of the model 3.0 STUDY FINDINGS Results of the study are summarized below. Study sites were selected from locations where Future In Our Hands Development Fund (FIOH) and Kandukara Development Organization (KDO) have already made various interventions. Farmer participatory approach was adopted throughout the study. PRA exercises and questionnaire survey were used as study tools. The study output is mainly a document containing the following aspects. 1. Present Status Quo of the study area with special reference to drought and its mitigation base. 2. Impact of climate change, especially drought. 3. Potentials and needs for drought mitigation. 4. Development of a drought risk reduction model 3.1 Present Status Quo of the Study Area General description of study sites Therela Meegahayaya Therela GN Division is situated in Madulla DS Division in Moneragala District. Villages belonging to the GN Division are Viharagangoda, Moralanda, Pahathagangoda, Medagangoda, Karapalabedda, Kapukotuwa, Dambagaha Arawa and Pepalegoda. It is bordered by Galbokka GN Division from North, Obbegoda Medagama road from South, Hulanda-oya (stream) from East and Kehelpeliyawa hill from West. The total population is 617. The No. of households in the Therela GN Division is 152. The total agricultural land is 485 acres, of which 146 acres are rice fields, 272 acres are rain-fed uplands and 67 acres are home gardens. Three minor tanks, two anicuts and two springs provide water for domestic and agricultural purposes. Meegahayaya GN Division is situated in Badalkumbura DS Division in Moneragala District. The villages that belong to the GN Division are Meegahayaya, Gangodapanguwa, Kalagaha kiula, Bogahapelessa, Nugearawa, Vegarathenna, Puwak aramba, Moragommana, Amunegoda, Kammal waththa, Athala, Nagaladurawa and Namiriththa. It is bordered by Athala GN 14

19 Division from North, Bogahapelessa GN Division from South, Muthukeliyawa GN Division from East and Naranwaththa GN Division from West. The total population is 192. No. of households in the Meegahayaya GN Division is 50. Total agricultural land comprises 185 acres, of which 18 acres are rice fields, 143 acres are rain-fed uplands and 24 acres are home gardens. Three streams provide water for domestic and agricultural purposes. Dikyaya Therela GN Division is situated in Buththala DS Division in Moneragala District. Villages belonging to the GN Division are Rajakandiya, Pokunugama and Dambagaha-eliya. It is bordered by Serugas-ara anicut from North, the Teak plantation from South, and rahathan kanda hill from East and Serugas-ara canal from West. The total population is 505. The no. of households in the Therela GN Division is 127. Total agricultural land is 367 acres, of which 161 acres are rice fields, 139 acres are rain-fed uplands and 67 acres are home gardens. One minor tank, three anicuts and a spring provide water for domestic and agricultural purposes Rainfall distribution Therela and Dikyaya study sites lie in IL (low country intermediate) 1c region of the Agroecological Map of Sri Lanka. Monthly distribution of dependable rainfall applicable to IL 1c is shown in Figure 10. Figure 10: Rainfall distribution in Therela and Dikyaya areas The rainfall pattern shows a bimodal pattern providing an adequate amount of annual rainfall to the area. Most rains come during the latter part of the second inter-monsoon and the North-east monsoon referred to as the maha season, from October to January. Major rain-fed and irrigated cultivations take place during this period. If the rice cultivation is planned appropriately during this season beginning early, supplementary water storage can be kept in minor tanks to do a second rice cultivation during yala season. February is not as dry as in many dry zone areas of Sri Lanka. Thus, bimodality of rainfall is not distinct in IL 1c region. Yala or minor cultivation season begins with first inter-monsoonal rains in March and continues with early South-west monsoon up to mid May. A purely rain-fed 15

20 cultivation of rice or any other crop is not possible but farmers tend to go for semi-irrigated farming. However, frequent drought during this period has discouraged farmers from a second crop. The period from June to August is a dry period where the annual drought is expected. Groundwater depletes drastically and most perennial crops are affected by moisture deficits. Springs and streams go dry and no water is found in many minor tanks. This situation emerged with the removal of vegetation in upper watershed areas and as a result of climate change. The rainfall pattern is different from the other two sites in Meegahayaya area (Figure 11). It is within the IM (mid country intermediate) 2b Agro-ecological zone. Annual dependable rainfall is 1,800 mm and is 30 % higher than that of other sites. From mid October the area receives heavy shower and it will continue up to January. Rainfall received during both inter-monsoonal seasons is somewhat similar in all three study sites. However, unlike in the other two sites, there is a possibility of yala cultivation under rain-fed condition in Meegahayaya area. Figure 11: Rainfall distribution in Meegahayaya area Soil type of rice farming fields Four well known soil types are dominant in the area. Reddish Brown Latasolic (RBL), Reddish Brown Earths (RBE) and Immature Brown Loams (IBL) are found in the upper undulating and rolling landscape and Low Humic Gley (LHG) soils are found in the lower bottom area. The most important soil is the LHG found in almost all the rice fields considered in the study (Fig. 12). The LHGs are essentially hydro-morphic soils developed on the local colluvium that has built up during long periods of landscape formation at the foot slopes of the undulating landscape. The dominant factor that governs the expression of these soils is the periodically high groundwater level. This may be true groundwater or a water table that develop on an impermeable stratum during the rainy season. 16

21 Figure 12: Low Humic Gley soils found in the study area The surface soil structure is sub-angular blocky to massive. Structural forms are more visible in the sub-soils when the profile dries out to some depth during the dry season. These soils are extremely hard when dry and sticky when wet. The base saturation in the sub-soil is in the range of percent and free carbonates are present at varying depths of the sub-soil, therefore, soil reaction is moderately alkaline. The water holding capacity of the sub-soil is fairly good because of the presence of smectite clay minerals. The porosity and infiltration rates of these soils are low. Due to long years of puddling the LHG soils for paddy cultivation, there has been an adverse impact on the physical properties of these soils. The soil reaction is slightly acidic to neutral, but in some soils slight alkaline conditions could be observed. Soil P, K and organic matter content measured in a previous study in the same area are shown in Table 1. There was a difference observed between soils collected from fields with modern management practices and traditional practices. Table 1: Soil K, P, organic matter and compaction (average of 10 samples) Practice Soil P (ppm) Soil K (ppm) Organic matter % Soil compaction (Penetrometer reading) Modern rice farming Traditional rice farming Results of the study showed that after harvesting the rice crop, available soil P is 20 % higher in traditional rice farming fields compared to modern rice farming fields, to which inorganic fertilizer containing P was added at the beginning. This may be due to the fact that soils in modern rice farming fields are poor in retaining the inorganic P in the absence of relevant micro-bial activities. However, in general these soils are poor in P and not adequate in supplying required amount of P to the crop. 17

22 The observation on K availability in the soil indicates that Exchangeable K level is not a serious problem in these soils. The soil K is found 45 % higher in traditional rice farming fields compared to that in modern rice farming fields. Soil organic matter content in all rice fields studied was adequate to keep the soil condition favourable for rice cultivation. However, in traditional farming sites the organic matter level is slightly higher than that in modern rice farming fields. Although the rice plant can grow in heavy soils, it also needs some form of soil aeration, which facilitates the root respiration process. In the absence of a structure, soil is more compacted and it should be improved with addition of organic matter to become physically fertile for paddy farming. Results of hand penitrometer reading test indicated that soils with traditional farming were 46 % less compacted compared to that with modern rice farming Family structure The household structure as per the baseline survey is about 4 per household (average number of persons in a household). This is relatively low compared to the national figure (4.6). A family labour force is insufficient for agriculture, therefore they need to hire labour or seek the support of machinery. Table 2 shows the family structure for the three sites. Table 2: Family structure in three study sites GN Division < 18 years years > 55 years Total Family size M:F ratio M F M F M F M F Therela :1.01 Meegahayaya :0.83 Dikyaya : Poverty The past few decades have seen a transformation in Sri Lanka from a traditional agricultural based rural economy with sustainable lifestyles to a more diversified and commercialized economy trying to move away from total dependence on agriculture to solve the growing problems of unemployment and poverty. The agricultural sector remains one of the major sources of livelihoods in all provinces (except Western Province) and agricultural wage employees are vulnerable. Thus, a natural disaster such as flood or drought may have serious consequences on livelihoods and result in sharp rises in poverty. Drought does not necessarily increase poverty; the impact also depends on other factors such as the availability of good irrigation systems, the crops cultivated, and the diversity or the lack of diversity in occupations. Poverty in Sri Lanka is marked by spatial heterogeneity. The poverty headcount ratio in Colombo District in 2002 (6 percent) was less than a sixth of the ratios in Badulla and Monaragala Districts (37 percent). In Moneragala district, according to census and statistics data, the poverty head count ratio was 34%, 56% and 37% during , and in 18

23 2002 respectively. More than 85 percent of the poor are living in rural areas, 7 percent in urban areas and another 7 percent in the estate sector. Consumption poverty of households is estimated at over 33 percent in the rural and estate sector compared to 17 percent in the urban sector. The regional disparities in the pace of poverty reduction are even more striking. However, the present study shows that the income level in 20% of the households in Therela, 18 % in Meegahayaya and 14% in Dikyaya is below the poverty line set for the Moneragala district (Rs. 1366/ person/ month). Table 3 summarizes the annual income values from different sources in the study sites. Average income from rice farming ranges from one fifth to one third of total income. Table 3: Annual income (SLR/ family) from different sources GN Division No. of Farmers Rice farming OFC farming Other sources Total % of rice farming Therela ,144 31,032 96, , Meegahayaya 50 38,980 54,430 98, , Dikyaya ,555 28, , , Land ownership In many major irrigation areas of Sri Lanka, the lot size for rice farming is 3 acres, but this size has been drastically reduced to less than one acre in minor irrigation areas due to fragmentation. The present study reveals that 44%, 94% and 30% of farmers do not have even an acre of paddy lands in Therela, Meegahayaya and Dikyaya respectively. In Meegahayaya as the rice block size is smaller than one acre for many farmers, income from rice cultivation is only about one fifth of the total annual income. However, land availability for rain-fed farming is higher in Meegahayaya, therefore, total income is higher than that of Therela. Table 4 shows the average land extent available for farming in three study sites. One of the observations that could be made by comparing extents available for rice and OFC farming is that when land is small for rice farming farmers resort to rain-fed upland cultivation to generate the required income for existence of the family. Further, in Therela and Meegahayaya, where the land is inadequate for rice farming they tend to cultivate others lands on tenancy (Table 5). Table 4: Average land ownership (acres) GN Division Rice farming land OFC farming land Homestead Total % of rice farming land Therela Meegahayaya Dikyaya Table 5: Extent of cultivation (acres) GN Division Rice farming OFC farming Homestead Total % of rice farming Therela Meegahayaya Dikyaya