Various options can be considered to enhance resilience when faced with some of the risks associated with changing environments as identified above. Using a livelihoods approach, some argue for greater diversification in livelihoods (e.g. Bryson, 2000). By promoting strategies that may improve livelihoods in all its dimensions (e.g. promote human capital, continue to search for low-cost ways of enhancing agricultural productivity and other risk-reduction strategies) households and communities may be better able to live through periods of abrupt change. Enhancing resilience, through a variety of mechanisms, such as diversification (e.g. Bryson, 2000) therefore need to be considered.
Some more practical suggestions for mitigation include those for water and agricultural activities including for example: repairing water pumps, deepening wells, harvesting rain water, establishing rules for local water usage in a community. Agricultural examples may include planting early, increasing the area of smaller grains, procuring drought tolerant seeds, collective hiring of farm resources e.g. tractors (von Kotze and Holloway, 1999).
These activities, it must be noted, should not be ‘emergency type actions, but should be part of on going, every day, ‘development’ activities
Increased science and improved attention to usable science are also needed. Effective water management strategies, for example, will depend on long-term, reliable data for a particular region including good biophysical and socio-economic data and monitoring, improved early warning systems and accessibility of information etc. The examination of the role of globalisation, structural adjustment policies (e.g. Benson and Clay, 1998) and various initiatives (e.g. NEPAD) and how these impact on ‘life’ on the ground are also required. For example, are water supplies and infrastructure affordable in various areas, who manages these resources and what form of ownership is in place to ensure the ‘sustainability’ of such resources? Overall integration of various development programs and policies should also ensure that mitigation is undertaken (e.g. linking water, environmental and ‘disaster’ management programmes).
Several suggestions have been made to possibly mitigate the impacts of HIV on families and the wider environment e.g. including calls for greater integration and cooperation between the health and agricultural departments in various countries, increasing the understanding of the multi-sectoral impacts of HIV and the environment; integrated community-based programmes and labour-saving technologies (e.g. efficient use of farm waste), use of mobile livestock enclosures and the improved understanding of the agro biodiversity in rural areas that can be used to mitigate growing food insecurity associated with rising AIDS illness and fatalities (e.g. home gardens, wild food plants, medicinal plants, indigenous agro ecological knowledge and practice and community seed systems) (Gari, 2002).
|
Related documents