What are the key equityfairness dimensions of community-based adaptation? What could be done to address existing inequities?
45
In India, it was found that whole families move often for four to six months at a time, often disrupting children s education. Only two per cent of migration was undertaken for reasons
related to education, with most people migrating to survive and get by to the next season. National and social safety net programmes were in place but we found often the most
vulnerable were unable to access to those entitlements and instead relied on local families that were better off.
Interactive Discussion Following the panel discussion, session participants had thirty minutes for group discussion.
Each table discussed the role of rights and equity in CBA through four discussion questions.
Each table s answers to the questions were summarized in one page by a rapporteur, who shared highlights in plenary at the end of the session. Key points are summarized below:
1. What are the key equityfairness dimensions of community-based adaptation?
Climate change exacerbates many existing inequities, and these are often played out in CBA. Access to resources, gender inequality, power relations, class, favouritism and geographical
location were identified as key equity dimensions of CBA. The skewed bias towards the economic pillar of sustainable development is driving further inequities, with economic
vulnerability often prioritised over social vulnerability. Discussants also argued that women already shoulder the burden of gender inequity and climate change adds another dimension.
Patron-client relationships often exist and there is a need to understand power dynamics within CBA in order to address the needs of the most vulnerable.
2. What could be done to address existing inequities?
There is a need to shift the entrenched underlying causes of vulnerability. Empowerment, participation, access to information and capacity building are important tools that can be used
to address existing inequities. Discussants suggested that empowerment of community organizations can tackle exclusion, and that there is a need for transparency and accountability
in processes, as well as a need to raise awareness and share information about existing rights. Meso-level governance structures are important arenas for such processes of change, but have
not often played a role in CBA activities. However, adopting a multi-stakeholder approach and utilising networks are recognized as important strategies; working with local government, civil
society organizations and the private sector can help to ensure CBA initiatives create a space for differing definitions of equity and fairness to be shared and addressed. Such exchange is central
for successfully addressing inequities. Groups discussed addressing gender equality through this kind of engagement, as well as the issue of land titles. It was agreed that strengthening local
institutions can ensure an equitable distribution of resources. Discussants also suggested giving precedence to local forms of adaptation. Other groups mentioned the need to move away from
technocratic definitions of vulnerability, towards a focus on exposure and underlying socio- economic factors driving vulnerability. For wider impact, groups suggested addressing power
issues through advocacy in order to address root causes of inequity. It is also important that CBA is incorporated within a broader strategy and is not viewed as a stand-alone issue. When
money simply goes into short-term CBA projects, it is unlikely to solve the systemic injustices that are at the root of the problem.