NTB Scenario Planning Workshop Report - ccap
Transcription
NTB Scenario Planning Workshop Report - ccap
Climate Futures and Rural Livelihood Adaptation Strategies in Nusa Tenggara Barat Province, Indonesia Dampak perubahan iklim terhadap penghidupan masyarakat di Provinsi Nusa Tenggara Barat, Indonesia NTB Scenario Planning Workshop Report Sanur Paradise Plaza Hotel, Bali 31st May – 2nd June 2011 Enquiries should be addressed to: Dr. James Butler Environment and Development Team Social and Economic Sciences Program and Climate Adaptation Flagship CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences GPO Box 2583 Brisbane QLD 4001 Australia Phone: +61 7 3833 5734 Mobile: +61 437030120 james.butler@csiro.au Professor Yusuf Sutaryono Dean, Faculty of Animal Sciences University of Mataram Jl. Majapahit No. 62 Mataram 83125 Nusa Tenggara Barat Province Indonesia Phone: +62 370626875 Mobile: +62 818369007 ysf_25@yahoo.com Suggested citation: Butler, J.R.A., Handayani, T., Habibi, P., Skewes, T., Kisman, Putranta, M. 2011. NTB Scenario Planning Workshop Report, 31st May – 2nd June 2011. Climate Futures and Rural Livelihood Adaptation Strategies in Nusa Tenggara Barat Province, Indonesia. AusAIDCSIRO Research for Development Alliance, University of Mataram, NTB Government. CSIRO Climate Adaptation Flagship, Brisbane, and University of Mataram, Lombok. Copyright and Disclaimer © 2011 CSIRO To the extent permitted by law, all rights are reserved and no part of this publication covered by copyright may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means except with the written permission of CSIRO. Important Disclaimer CSIRO advises that the information contained in this publication comprises general statements based on scientific research. The reader is advised and needs to be aware that such information may be incomplete or unable to be used in any specific situation. No reliance or actions must therefore be made on that information without seeking prior expert professional, scientific and technical advice. To the extent permitted by law, CSIRO (including its employees and consultants) excludes all liability to any person for any consequences, including but not limited to all losses, damages, costs, expenses and any other compensation, arising directly or indirectly from using this publication (in part or in whole) and any information or material contained in it. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This workshop and report was made possible by the collaboration and planning of the following members of the Tim Kolaboratif: Indonesia Australia Prof. Yusuf Sutaryono (Project Leader, UNRAM) Dr. James Butler (Project Leader, CSIRO) Imam Suharto (VECO Indonesia) Dr. Sarah Park (CSIRO) Dr. Anwar Fachry (UNRAM) Dr. Dewi Kirono (CSIRO) Dr. Wayan Suadnya (UNRAM) Dr. Erin Bohensky (CSIRO) Dr. Ketut Puspadi (BPTP) Tim Skewes (CSIRO) Dr. Kisman (UNRAM) Dr. Craig Miller (CSIRO) Adi Ripaldi (BMKG) Dr. John McGregor (CSIRO) Hanartani (UNRAM) Dr. Jack Katzfey (CSIRO) Sri Supartingsih (UNRAM) Wayne Rochester (CSIRO) Dr. Siti Latifah (UNRAM) Ian McLeod (CSIRO) Dr. Ahmad Suriadi (BPTP) Nicole Murphy (CSIRO) Dr. Gulam Abbas (BLHP) Dr. Donna Hayes (CSIRO) Tarningsih Handayani (UNRAM) Dr. Vincent Lyne (CSIRO) Putrawan Habibi (UNRAM) Dr. Brian Long (CSIRO) Dr. Dahlanudin (UNRAM) Dr. Karnan (UNRAM) Irwan Mahakam Lesmono Aji (UNRAM) Lukita Cesaria Ibundani (UNRAM) Mauriek Putranta (UNRAM) Alan Smith Dian Nur Ratri (BMKG and University of Melbourne) The project and workshop planning was guided by the project Steering Committee: • Ir. Tajuddin Erfandy (Head BLHP and Chair NTB Climate Change Task Force) • Dr. Rosiadi Sayuti (Head BAPPEDA) • Dr. Kate Duggan (AusAID) • Prof. Yusuf Sutaryono (Project Leader, UNRAM) • Dr. James Butler (Project Leader, CSIRO) Data compilation and translation for the report was provided by Dr. Kisman, Tarningsih Handayani, Putrawan Habibi, Mauriek Putranta and Tim Skewes. We also thank the 34 participants who contributed their time and opinions to this 3-day workshop. 2 CONTENTS Summary..................................................................................................................... 4 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 7 1.1 1.2 1.3 2. Activity 3 NTB scenario planning................................................................... 11 2.1 2.2 3. Project background ................................................................................................... 7 NTB development and rural livelihoods .................................................................... 8 Research approach and activities .......................................................................... 10 Stakeholder analysis ............................................................................................... 11 Workshop process .................................................................................................. 13 Workshop results ............................................................................................ 17 3.1 3.2 Session 1: What are the drivers of change for rural livelihoods in NTB? ............... 17 Session 2: What are the desired and possible futures for NTB livelihoods? .......... 23 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.3 Session 3: What impact will the Business as Usual scenario have on human wellbeing? ..................................................................................................................... 30 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.4 Ecosystem goods and services typology ............................................................ 30 Impact modelling for 2030 ................................................................................... 31 Session 4: What is the adaptive capacity of NTB communities today? ................. 33 3.4.1 3.4.2 3.5 3.6 Desired future for NTB livelihoods ...................................................................... 23 Future scenarios for NTB livelihoods .................................................................. 23 Indicators of adaptive capacity ............................................................................ 33 Scoring indicators of adaptive capacity ............................................................... 33 Session 5: Which are the most vulnerable livelihoods in NTB? ............................. 36 Session 6: What are the priority adaptation strategies required to improve livelihoods in NTB? ................................................................................................. 37 3.6.1 3.6.2 3.6.3 3.6.4 3.6.5 3.6.6 3.6.7 3.6.8 Examples of adaptation strategies ...................................................................... 37 Designing adaptation strategies for vulnerable typologies .................................. 37 Typology 7 Diverse cropping and coastal activity ............................................... 37 Typology 3 Rice and bandeng ponds.................................................................. 40 Typology 5 Rice and tobacco .............................................................................. 40 Typology 1 Fishing .............................................................................................. 45 Other typologies .................................................................................................. 45 Case studies and next steps ............................................................................... 45 4. Workshop evaluation ...................................................................................... 49 5. References....................................................................................................... 53 Appendix I: Workshop agenda ................................................................................ 55 Appendix II: Districts and rural sub-districts by typology..................................... 64 Appendix III: Climate and population projections for the 'Business as Usual’ scenario by typology ...................................................................................... 68 Appendix IV: 2030 impacts and adaptive capacity for typologies 2, 4, 6 ............. 69 SUMMARY The islands of Eastern Indonesia have some of the highest levels of poverty and food insecurity in the country. Livelihoods are primarily rural and dependent on ecosystem goods and services provided by terrestrial and marine habitats, and are highly sensitive to climate change. Currently no method exists to assess the vulnerability of livelihoods in these islands to climate or other drivers of change such as population growth, or to design ‘no regrets’ adaptation strategies which lead to benefits under any future scenarios. This project aims to meet this need by developing an approach in the islands of Lombok and Sumbawa, Nusa Tenggara Barat (NTB) Province. A research partnership has been established between the AusAID-CSIRO Research for Development Alliance, University of Mataram (UNRAM), BMKG (Indonesian Meteorological, Climatological and Geophysical Board), the Research Institute for Agricultural Technology (BPTP) and the NTB Government’s Climate Change Task Force. In July 2010 - June 2013 the project aims to: 1. Develop and test a participatory research method which can identify vulnerable rural livelihoods and design appropriate ‘no regrets’ adaptation strategies; 2. Deliver adaptation strategies for case studies of vulnerable livelihoods in NTB and integrate them into development planning; 3. Build the capacity of NTB government, NGOs, research institutions and vulnerable rural communities to adapt to future climate change and uncertainty. The project uses participatory scenario planning workshops with stakeholders from the national, provincial, district, sub-district and village levels. By combining stakeholders’ knowledge of livelihoods’ drivers of change, important ecosystem goods and services, and communities’ adaptive capacity, the process is generating ‘no regrets’ adaptation strategies for vulnerable rural livelihoods in NTB. This report summarises the first scenario planning workshop held at the provincial level with 34 Indonesian and NTB Government stakeholders, NGOs and technical experts. A Tim Kolaboratif of 18 scientists from UNRAM, CSIRO, BMKG, BPTP and the NTB Climate Change Task Force contributed downscaled climate and population modelling and other scientific information, which was integrated with stakeholders’ knowledge. The workshop was held on 31st May – 2nd June 2011 at the Sanur Paradise Plaza Hotel, Bali. The workshop was structured into six sessions, and each addressed a specific question. The results of each session were: Session 1: What are the drivers of change for rural livelihoods in NTB? Working groups listed 50 current drivers of change. These were grouped into themes, and then participants voted on the two most important themes. Development of human resources and climate change received the most votes. Session 2: What are the desired and possible futures for NTB livelihoods? Participants agreed a desired future vision for NTB rural livelihoods in 2090 based on the achievement of adequate income, health, food security, social cohesion and freedom of choice for a good life. A matrix of four possible future scenarios was created from better or worse extremes of human resources development and climate change. Participants created narratives and drew pictures for each scenario. These ranged from the ‘Best Case’ Well-being Village (less extreme climate change, improved human resources development), to intermediate Adaptive NTB and 4 Blooming Flower, to ‘Business as Usual’ Jungle Law (extreme climate change, poor human resources development). Thresholds were identified for Jungle Law by 2030 when minimum per capita water requirements are not maintained, and for Adaptive NTB by 2090 when sea level rise reaches 1.3 m. Both will require the relocation of people from Lombok to Sumbawa. Session 3: What impact will the Business as Usual scenario have on human well-being? An ecosystem goods and services (EGS) typology and model were developed for NTB. This projected the impacts of drivers of change on EGS and human-well-being in 2030 under the ‘Business as Usual’ Jungle Law scenario. The most impacted was Typology 3 (Rice and bandeng ponds), followed by Typology 7 (Diverse cropping and coastal activity), Typology 4 (Diverse agriculture and forest use) and Typology 5 (Rice and tobacco). Session 4: What is the adaptive capacity of NTB communities today? Using the six capitals framework (natural, social, human, physical, financial, political) participants developed 18 indicators of adaptive capacity for NTB communities. They scored the indicators for communities in each typology to derive an average adaptive capacity index. Session 5: Which are the most vulnerable livelihoods in NTB? Combining the EGS and human well-being impacts for 2030 with the adaptive capacity index for each typology revealed that Typology 7 (Diverse cropping and coastal activity) was the most vulnerable, followed by Typology 3 (Rice and bandeng ponds), Typology 4 (Diverse agriculture and forest use) and Typology 5 (Rice and tobacco). However, Typology 1 (Fishing) became the fourth most vulnerable by 2090 due to climate change impacts. Session 6: What are the priority adaptation strategies required to improve livelihoods in NTB? Based on EGS and human well-being impacts and adaptive capacity for each typology, participants designed adaptation strategies for livelihoods to steer them away from ‘Business as Usual’ Jungle Law towards the NTB vision and the ‘Best Case’ Well-being Village scenario. Participants selected four typologies for analysis: Typology 1, Typology 3, Typology 5 and Typology 7. All strategies were targeted at specific local vulnerabilities, and were crosschecked with the other potential future scenarios (i.e. Adaptive NTB, Blooming Flower and Well-being Village) to determine whether they would be mal-adaptive if these scenarios eventuated. All were considered suitable for these scenarios and therefore ‘no regrets’ strategies. The following sub-districts were selected from these typologies as community case studies: o o o Typology 1 Fishing: Sape (Bima District) and Jerowaru (East Lombok District) Typology 5 Rice and tobacco: Janapria (Central Lombok District) and Terara (East Lombok District) Typology 7 Diverse cropping and coastal activity: Bayan and Pemanang (North Lombok District) A questionnaire survey carried out during the workshop demonstrated that participants found the process useful, with 72% stating that the workshop had “increased my understanding of climate change and how NTB can adapt”. Participants’ horizons were also extended, with more thinking of “the future” as 20 or more years. The proportion believing that “NTB’s climate adaptation policies are enabling NTB to be ready to cope with climate change” increased, and the proportion strongly agreeing that “climate change poses a risk to me personally” declined. Similar scenario planning workshops will be carried out for the four case studies. Participants’ adaptation strategies will then be integrated in further workshops, and compared with current development policies and programs in each sub-district. Id 7 3 4 5 1 2 6 Well-being impact (%) 2030 2090 -12.3 -16.2 -12.6 -16.0 -10.4 -12.4 -9.9 -13.2 -6.5 -9.7 -5.8 -6.3 -6.5 -7.0 Typology name Diverse cropping and coastal activity Rice and bandeng ponds Diverse agriculture and forest use Rice and tobacco Fishing Fishing and seaweed Diverse livestock and cropping A.C. Index 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.7 2.5 2.9 3.7 Vulnerability 2030 0.21 0.20 0.18 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.09 index 2090 0.46 0.46 0.43 0.36 0.40 0.29 0.18 The well-being impact, adaptive capacity (AC) and vulnerability index for each typology in 2030 and 2090. The map shows results for 2030, with darker colours reflecting greater vulnerability 2030 2011 2060 2090 Well-being Village Human resources development 6 NTB LIVELIHOODS VISION 5 1 + Adaptive capacity Adaptive NTB DRIVERS OF CHANGE NTB LIVELIHOODS 2 Blooming Flower 4 Climate change 3 Impact on human wellbeing Jungle Law Summary of the workshop process and results. Numbers refer to the workshop sessions 6 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project background The islands of Eastern Indonesia have some of the highest levels of poverty and food insecurity in the country. Livelihoods are primarily rural and dependent on ecosystem goods and services provided by terrestrial and marine habitats, and are highly sensitive to climate change. Currently no method exists to assess the vulnerability of livelihoods in these islands to climate or other drivers of change such as population growth, or to design ‘no regrets’ adaptation strategies which lead to benefits under any future scenarios. This project aims to meet this need by developing an approach in the islands of Lombok and Sumbawa, Nusa Tenggara Barat (NTB) Province. A research partnership has been established between the AusAID-CSIRO Research for Development Alliance, University of Mataram (UNRAM), BMKG (Indonesian Meteorological Climatological and Geophysical Board), the Research Institute for Agricultural Technology (BPTP) and the NTB Government’s Climate Change Task Force. In July 2010 - June 2013 the project aims to: 1. Develop and test a participatory research method which can identify vulnerable rural livelihoods and design appropriate ‘no regrets’ adaptation strategies; 2. Deliver adaptation strategies for case studies of vulnerable livelihoods in NTB and integrate them into development planning; 3. Build the capacity of NTB government, NGOs, research institutions and vulnerable rural communities to adapt to future climate change and uncertainty. Figure 1. Nusa Tenggara Barat (NTB) Province, Indonesia, and the islands of Lombok and Sumbawa 1.2 NTB development and rural livelihoods NTB is located in the island archipelago of south-eastern Indonesia, and consists of the islands of Lombok (4,725 km2) and Sumbawa (15,448 km2). Both islands are dominated by the extinct volcanoes of Mount Rinjani (Lombok) and Tambora (Sumbawa). Soils are largely rich and volcanic, but average annual rainfall differs between the islands, influencing primary productivity. In Lombok, average rainfall is 2,500 mm per year, and 1,200 mm in Sumbawa, with most of this falling in the wet season of December-April. Average daily temperatures are 280C. NTB is affected by the El Nino Southern Oscillation, which can generate drought periods or wetter than average seasons. In 2011 NTB Province was divided into eight districts (kabupaten) and two urban municipalities (Mataram and Bima). There are 106 rural sub-districts (kecamatan), and each sub-district is divided into villages (desa). The predominant religion is Islam (97% of the population), which became established in the 17th century. However, the process of Islamization differed between Lombok and Sumbawa. In Lombok Islam was fused with the ruling Balinese Hinduism and ethnic Sasak animism, resulting today in a mixture of Muslim and Balinese customs and institutions, and strong traditional knowledge (awiq-awiq). In Sumbawa, Islam was more readily accepted by the indigenous Samawa and Mbojo tribes. NTB Province was formed in 1957 following Indonesian independence in 1945. Through the process of decentralization following President Suharto’s fall in 1998 there has been a transition to local autonomy and democracy and increasing efforts by NTB governors to enhance social and economic development, with a focus on agriculture, aquaculture and tourism. This is exemplified by the opening of Lombok International Airport by the President of Indonesia in October 2011. NTB had a population of 4.5 million in 2010 with an annual growth rate of 1.17%. 3.168 million (70%) live on Lombok at a density of 671 per km2, and 1.331 million (30%) live on Sumbawa at a density of 86 per km2. Female fertility and infant mortality rates are declining, and life expectancy is increasing. The majority of the population (58%) live in rural areas, but there is an increasing trend towards urbanisation. In 2010, 71,000 emigrated to work in the Middle East and the Asia-Pacific as housemaids (women) and agricultural or construction labourers (men), but this number is declining. The NTB economy grew by 6.3% in 2010. In 2007 Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was dominated by gold mining (25%), which is focussed on West Sumbawa district, and agriculture and fisheries (25%). Employment in 2008 was dominated by the agricultural sector (46%), but this is declining slightly while employment in mining and services sectors is increasing. Poverty levels have declined to 22% in 2010 from 30% in 2001. NTB’s Human Development Index in 2009 was 64.66, the second lowest of Indonesia’s 33 provinces, reflecting low levels of life expectancy, literacy rates, schooling and income. Although maternal mortality, child malnutrition and illiteracy rates are declining, rates of contraception use are also declining and are lower than the national level in 2010 (51% versus 54%). Cases of HIV/AIDS, motor cycle theft, violent theft, rape and homicides are escalating. Gender inequality remains evident in spite of Gender Mainstreaming policies introduced since 2000. Although female literacy has increased to 82% in 2008, in 2005-2008 the disparity between women and men remained approximately -11%. Summaries of available trend data are given in Table 1. There are marked 8 differences between Lombok and Sumbawa in many of the demographic, economic and health indicators, with the Lombok population at a lower level of development (Table 2). Table 1. Trends in demographic, economic and health data for NTB (Fachry et al. 2011) Indicator (unit) Year NTB Years of trend data Population growth (% per annum) 2010 1.17 1971-2010 Fertility rate (births per female) 2010 2.4 1971-2010 Infant mortality rate (deaths per 1000 live births) 2010 49 1971-2010 Life expectancy (years) 2010 67 1971-2010 Urbanisation (% population) 2010 41.7 1971-2010 GDP (average % growth per annum) 2010 6.3 2005-2010 Poverty (% population) 2010 21.6 2001-2010 Underweight children (% under 5 year olds) 2008 21.7 2004-2008 Contraception use (% married couples) 2010 51.0 2006-2010 Female literacy (% female population) 2008 81.6 2005-2008 Female-male literacy disparity (%) 2009 -10.3 2005-2008 Crime (total cases) 2009 2,491 2007-2009 Human Development Index 2009 64.66 2001-2009 Trend Table 2. Comparison between development indicators for Lombok and Sumbawa (Fachry et al. 2011) Indicator (unit) Year Lombok Sumbawa NTB Poorest district Human Development Index 2009 62.79 65.93 64.66 North Lombok (58.40) Poverty (% population) 2008 21.1 20.5 22.8 West Lombok (24.0%) Male morbidity (% males) 2006 23.8 19.6 23.3 Central Lombok (29.3%) Female morbidity (% females) 2006 24.1 19.0 23.8 Central Lombok (29.6%) No electricity (% households) 2010 12.2 5.0 10.7 North Lombok (24.1%) Unprotected water (%) 2010 6.0 4.0 6.0 West Lombok (8.7%) No toilet (% households) 2010 43.8 36.8 44.3 North Lombok (55.7%) Female illiteracy (%) 2009 24.5 13.5 22.9 N/A 1.3 Research approach and activities Integrating the challenges of climate change with broader livelihoods and social development goals in developing countries is a novel area of research and practice. This project aims to contribute to this field by applying and integrating a suite of systems science concepts and methods, both climate and development-orientated, to the nexus between climate adaptation, poverty alleviation and policy design. There are many stakeholders from different sectors involved in the planning and improvement of rural livelihoods, including rural communities themselves. They may have similar aims, but different roles and perceptions of how to achieve rural development. To be effective, these stakeholders’ efforts need to be coordinated, and their knowledge combined to tackle livelihood challenges. This project applies participatory scenario planning with government, NGO and community stakeholders to describe the current and potential future characteristics of rural livelihoods. Workshops held at the provincial and sub-district level identify adaptation strategies which stakeholders believe will reduce any perceived negative impacts of change on human well-being, reducing livelihoods’ vulnerability and building communities’ adaptive capacity for future change. Subsequent workshops integrate the adaptation strategies identified by all stakeholders, allowing comparison between their perspectives, and an assessment of whether the strategies have been introduced by policies and programs. If not, the barriers to their implementation are identified. This process creates ‘adaptive co-management’, whereby new knowledge, partnerships and adaptive capacity are generated amongst all stakeholders to improve rural livelihoods. In July 2010 – June 2013 the project will carry out a series of activities, linked by outputs (Figure 2). This report describes Activity 3, NTB scenario planning, which investigates NTB provincial stakeholders’ perceptions of rural communities’ challenges today and in the future, and adaptation strategies required to improve their livelihoods. 10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 Activity 1: Climate projection downscaling 1. 14 km projections Activity 2: Ecosystem goods and services (EGS) modelling and typology 2. EGS impact model 2. EGS impact model 3. EGS typology 6. Adaptation strategies Activity 3: NTB scenario planning 5. Vulnerable livelihoods Activity 4: Community scenario planning 6. Adaptation strategies 4. Adaptive capacity assessment 4. Adaptive capacity assessment Activity 5: Integration and policy evaluation 7. Adaptation strategy research priorities Activity 6: Adaptation strategy research Activity 7: Adaptive capacity and gender assessments Activity 8: Policy analysis Activity 9: Adaptive co-management evaluation Figure 2. Timelines for project activities and outputs (in italics) linking activities in July 2010 – June 2013. Activity 3 (NTB scenario planning) is highlighted. 2. 2.1 ACTIVITY 3 NTB SCENARIO PLANNING Stakeholder analysis A key step in preparing for the Activity 3 workshop was to undertake a stakeholder analysis (e.g. Mitchell et al. 1997) of formal institutions involved in climate change, rural development and natural resource management in NTB. This exercise identified 55 relevant institutions, including national and NTB provincial government departments, NGOs, international donor agencies and research organisations. Using the following indicators each institution was scored on a scale of 0-5 by Indonesian members of the Tim Kolaboratif: 1. Power of the stakeholder to govern and make decisions; 2. Legitimacy of the stakeholder as viewed by other stakeholders; 3. Urgency that the stakeholder claims immediate involvement. The 40 stakeholders with the highest total indicator scores were selected, and key representatives from each were then identified and invited to the workshop. Thirty-four attended, including 15 of the 28 members of the NTB Climate Change Task Force (Table 3). Twenty-seven were men, and seven were women. Table 3. Workshop participants, institutions and the total stakeholder analysis score (maximum 15). Membership of the NTB Climate Change Task Force is indicated by *. No. 1 Representative Samsudin, St Esnawan Budi Santoso Institution Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah NTB* NTB Regional Planning Agency (BAPPEDA) Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah NTB* NTB Regional Planning Agency (BAPPEDA) Badan Lingkungan Hidup dan Penelitian NTB* NTB Environmental and Research Agency (BLHP) Badan Lingkungan Hidup dan Penelitian NTB* NTB Environmental and Research Agency (BLHP) Dinas Kehutanan NTB* NTB Forestry Department Dinas Kehutanan NTB* NTB Forestry Department Dinas Kelautan dan Perikanan NTB* NTB Fishery and Maritime Affairs Department BPDAS Dodokan Moyosari* Dodokan Moyosari Water Catchment Management Office KLH* National Ministry of Environment Dinas Pekerjaan Umum NTB* NTB Public Works Department Dinas Pekerjaan Umum NTB* NTB Public Works Department BMKG* National Meteorological, Climatological and Geophysical Board Dinas Pertambangan dan Energi NTB* NTB Mining and Energy Department Balai Pengkajian Teknologi Pertanian NTB NTB Agricultural Technology Assessment Agency (BPTP) Dinas Pertanian TPH NTB NTB Agriculture Food and Horticultural Crops Department Pusat Penelitian Lingkungan Hidup UNRAM UNRAM Environmental Research Centre Pusat Penelitian Sumberdaya dan Agroklimat UNRAM UNRAM Water Resource and Agroclimate Research Centre Australian-Indonesian Partnership for Development 2 Baiq Mandri Sri Apriatni 3 Ir. Sunardi Hardjo, M.SI 4 Yusandana, St 5 Ir. Basuki Winantu, M.Si 6 Eko Dwi Sukmanto 7 Sasi Rustandi 8 Ir. Edi Setyawan 9 Koko Wijanarko 10 Ir. Gede Suardiari, MT 11 Ir. H. Swahip, MT 12 Wakodim, SP 13 Kun Dwi Santoso, BE 14 15 Dr. Ir. Dwi Praptomo Sudjatmiko, MS Ir. Lalu Suwarjaya 16 Ir. M. Yusuf, M.SI 17 Muhammad Husni Idris 18 13 19 Kun Praseno M.Mar.Stud USAID Indonesian Marine and Climate Support Program 13 20 Aloysius Suratin OXFAM 13 21 Drh. Nengah Dwiana 12 22 Ir. Siti Hajar 23 Ridha Ahyana, S.IP Dinas Peternakan dan Kesehatan Hewan NTB* NTB Livestock and Animal Health Department Badan Ketahanan Pangan NTB* NTB Food Security Agency Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah NTB* NTB Regional Disaster Management Agency 12 Score 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 14 13 13 13 13 12 12 Table 3 continued. Workshop participants, institutions and the total stakeholder analysis score (maximum 15). Membership of the NTB Climate Change Task Force is indicated by *. No. 23 Representative Ridha Ahyana, S.IP 24 Dwi Sudarsono, SH 25 26 Andi Chairil Ichsan, S.Hut, M.SI Fifi Luthfidah 27 Ir. Novia Rosalita, SP-1 28 30 Bayu Priyambodo, S.PI, M,SI I Made Suadnya, SKM, M.Kes Dr. Nunung Triningsih, MM 31 Dr. I Komang Wariga, MM 32 Bambang Istiyanto 33 Ir. Gembong Suparnadi, MM Ir. Ni Nyoman Retty Wimartini, MM 29 34 2.2 Institution Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah NTB* NTB Regional Disaster Management Agency Samanta NGO* Score 12 Transform NGO* 12 Konsepsi NGO 12 BWS Nusa Tenggara Nusa Tenggara River Basin Office Balai Budidaya Laut (Sekotong) Sekotong Marineculture Office Dinas Kesehatan NTB NTB Health Department Dinas Kebudayaan dan Pariwisata NTB NTB Cultural and Tourism Department Biro ADM Kerjasama dan SDA SETDA NTB Cooperation Bureau of NTB Regional Secretary Dishubkominfo NTB Transportation, Communication and Information Department Biro ADM Perekonomian SETDA NTB NTB Economic Administration Bureau Regional Secretary Dinas Perkebunan NTB NTB Plantation Department 12 12 11 11 11 11 11 10 10 Workshop process The workshop was held over 3 days on 31st May, 1st and 2nd June 2011 at the Sanur Paradise Plaza Hotel, Bali. Workshop facilitation was led by Imam Suharto (VECO Indonesia), supported by Indonesian members of the Tim Kolaboratif (Table 4). All discussion was held in Bahasa Indonesia, but presentations by CSIRO scientists were given in English with Bahasa slides. Posters summarising presentations were translated into Bahasa and displayed around the meeting room throughout the workshop. The objectives of the workshop were: 1. Identify the most vulnerable livelihoods in NTB 2. Identify priority adaptation strategies for these livelihoods 3. Identify community case studies The workshop was officially opened by the project Steering Committee, led by Dr. Rosiadi Sayuti (Head of BAPPEDA) and Ir. Tajuddin Erfandy (Head of BLHP and Chair NTB Climate Change Task Force). Prof. Yusuf Sutaryono then introduced the project and workshop process, and asked the participants for their verbal consent to apply and publish the materials and results of the workshop. All participants agreed. Key terms and concepts were explained and discussed with the participants to ensure a common understanding (Table 5). Table 4. Members of the Tim Kolaboratif who participated and facilitated the workshop Name and Faculty Prof. Yusuf Akhyar Sutaryono, PhD Dean, Faculty of Animal Science Dr. Imam Suharto, Facilitator Institution University of Mataram (UNRAM) VECO Indonesia Dr. Ketut Puspadi Research Institute for Agricultural Technology (BPTP) Dr. Wayan Suadnya Research Centre for Rural Development, Faculty or Agriculture Dr. Karnan Faculty of Teaching and Education Science Dr. Dahlanuddin Faculty of Animal Science Dr. Kisman Faculty of Agriculture Ir. Hanartani, SU Women’s Study Centre, Faculty of Animal Science Ir. Anwar Fachry, MSc Faculty of Economics Dr. Gulam Abbas, MSI University of Mataram (UNRAM) University of Mataram (UNRAM) University of Mataram (UNRAM) University of Mataram (UNRAM) University of Mataram (UNRAM) University of Mataram (UNRAM) NTB Environmental and Research Agency (BLHP) Dr. Ahmad Suriadi Research Institute for Agricultural Technology (BPTP) Adi Ripaldi SP.MAHG National Meteorological, Climatological and Geophysical Board (BMKG) University of Mataram (UNRAM) Irwan Mahakam Lesmono Aji S.HUT, MSCF Faculty of Forest Sciences Tarningsih Handayani Research Centre for Development of Tropical Dryland Agriculture Putrawan Habibi Research Centre for Development of Tropical Dryland Agriculture Mauriek Putranta University of Mataram (UNRAM) University of Mataram (UNRAM) University of Mataram (UNRAM) Lukita Cesaria Ibundani University of Mataram (UNRAM) Alan Smith AusAID Dr. James Butler CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences Dr. Erin Bohensky CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences Dr. Sarah Park CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences Tim Skewes CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research Dr. Dewi Kirono CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research Dr. Brian Long CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research 14 Table 5. Terms and definitions used in the workshop Term Livelihoods Human well-being Definition The capabilities, assets, (including both material and social resources) and activities required for a means of living The basic needs of people to live a healthy life: income, food security, health, social cohesion, freedom of choice Driver of change Any natural or human-induced factor that directly or indirectly causes a change in the system of interest Ecosystem goods and services The benefits that people derive from healthy functioning ecosystems Threshold A tipping point where sudden change occurs Adaptive capacity The ability of people and ecosystems to adjust to actual or expected stresses, or to cope with the consequences The degree that livelihoods will be impacted by change, mediated by their adaptive capacity Adjustment in ecological, social or economic systems in response to actual or expected change and their effects or impacts Strategies which yield benefits under any future conditions of change Strategies which result in livelihoods becoming more vulnerable to change Vulnerability Adaptation strategies ‘No regrets’ strategies Mal-adaptation Reference Ellis 2000 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005 Walker et al. 2005 IPCC 2007 IPCC 2007 Smit and Wandel 2006 Hallegatte 2009 Hallegatte 2009 The workshop process was explained to the participants using Figure 3. Six steps are taken: 1. The drivers of change for livelihoods today are identified. 2. The desired future vision for livelihoods in 2090 is agreed in terms of human wellbeing. Then, based on plausible variations in the drivers of change, four future scenarios are created and compared to the desired vision. 3. The impacts on human well-being are modelled for 2030 for the ‘Business as Usual’ scenario. 2030 is investigated because impacts of drivers are more predictable in the short-term than in the long-term, and human responses are less likely to have taken great effect. 4. The adaptive capacity of communities to cope with the ‘Business as Usual’ scenario is assessed. 5. Vulnerable livelihoods are identified by combining the projected impacts with communities’ current adaptive capacity: the most vulnerable are those with the highest impacts and the lowest adaptive capacity. 6. Based on their specific vulnerability, appropriate adaptation strategies are designed. These are compared against the scenarios identified in Step 2 to check whether they would be compatible or ‘mal-adaptive’ for any other futures that could eventuate. In this way ‘no regrets’ strategies are agreed which could steer livelihoods’ development pathways towards the NTB vision and ‘Best Case’ scenario. 2030 2011 2060 2090 Scenario (Best Case) 6 NTB LIVELIHOODS VISION 5 1 DRIVERS OF CHANGE + Adaptive capacity Scenario NTB LIVELIHOODS 2 4 Scenario 3 Impact on human wellbeing Scenario (Business as Usual) Figure 3. Diagram of the workshop process. Numbers refer to the workshop steps and sessions To follow this process, the workshop was structured into six sessions, and each addressed a specific question (Figure 4; Appendix I). The structure was designed to integrate scientific information from other project activities (see Figure 2) with stakeholders’ knowledge to generate shared knowledge. An evaluation exercise was also carried out at the beginning and end of the workshop to assess how participants’ perceptions had changed. 16 Scientific knowledge Shared knowledge Stakeholder knowledge Activity 9: Pre-workshop evaluation Activity 1: Climate projections Socio-economic and population trends Session 1: What are drivers of change for rural livelihoods in NTB? Perceptions of drivers of change Session 2: What are the desired and possible futures for NTB livelihoods? Future scenarios Session 3: What impact will the Business as Usual scenario have on human wellbeing? Valuing ecosystem services for human well-being Activity 7: Adaptive capacity and capitals indicators Session 4: What is the adaptive capacity of NTB communities today? Adaptive capacity indicator scoring Activity 2: Ecosystem goods and services impacts Session 5: Which are the most vulnerable livelihoods in NTB? Most vulnerable livelihoods Adaptation strategy examples Session 6: What are the priority adaptation strategies required to improve livelihoods in NTB? Adaptation strategies Lombok Vulnerability Assessment Activity 2: Ecosystem goods and services model Activity 2: Ecosystem goods and services typology Activity 9: Post-workshop evaluation Figure 4. Workshop structure and the role of outputs from other activities (see Figure 2) 3. WORKSHOP RESULTS 3.1 Session 1: What are the drivers of change for rural livelihoods in NTB? Session 1 began with Tim Kolaboratif members presenting information on the current and projected trends in potential drivers of change for rural livelihoods, including global issues (e.g. financial crises, technology, disease epidemics), NTB’s economy, population growth and health, cultural trends and gender issues, NTB climate patterns, and downscaled climate change projections. This included projections of population growth based on the 2010 national census, which showed that NTB’s population could increase from 4.5 million in 2010 to 6.5 million in 2050 (Figure 5). Climate change and rainfall projections downscaled to 14 km from the SRES A2 ‘high’ emissions scenario (Figure 6, 7) using the CSIRO Conformal Cubic Atmospheric Model (McGregor and Dix 2008, Kirono et al. 2010), and inundation risk from sea level rise applied from the Lombok Vulnerability Assessment (KLH 2009; Figure 8) were also presented. Following these presentations, workshop participants were divided into four groups to discuss their perceptions of the current drivers of change for rural livelihoods in NTB. Each group wrote down their selected drivers on sticky note paper, and placed a total of 50 on a large whiteboard (Table 6). Through discussion these were clustered into themes. After clustering, each participant was given two votes and asked to select the two most important drivers of change for livelihoods, using stickers. The votes were then totalled to identify the two most important themes of drivers (Figure 9). 7.0 NTB 6.5 6.0 Population (million) 5.5 5.0 Lombok 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 Sumbawa 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 Year Figure 5. Recorded (solid line) population growth in Sumbawa, Lombok and NTB in 1971-2010, and projected population growth (dashed line) to 2050 (Source: Anwar Fachry, UNRAM) 300 Current average Rainfall (mm) 250 2030 projection range 200 150 Tobacco 100 Rice Mixed crops/fallow Mixed crops 50 Okt Sep Agu Jul Jun Mei Apr Mar Feb Jan Des Nov 0 Figure 6. Current average monthly rainfall for Ampenan, West Lombok, and the range of projections for rainfall in 2030 under the SRES A2 emissions scenario, relative to rice and tobacco crop timing (Source: CSIRO and BMKG) 18 % Jan Jul Apr Oct Figure 7. Best estimations (median of six simulations) of the projected changes in total monthly rainfall by 2030, as a percentage of 1970s climatology for January, April, July and October 2030 in NTB downscaled to 14 km. Climate simulations are based on the SRES A2 emissions scenario (Source: CSIRO) Figure 8. Inundation risk from 1990 sea levels for coastal areas of NTB under different sea level rise projections, derived from the Lombok Vulnerability Assessment (KLH 2009) 20 Hanartani (UNRAM) presenting information on cultural change and gender issues (D. Kirono) A participant working group discussing drivers of change for NTB livelihoods (D. Kirono) Table 6. Current drivers of change for NTB rural livelihoods identified by the four working groups Working group name 1. Humans 2. Animals 3. Leaves 4. Flowers Drivers of change Cultural change Industrial growth Human resources Goverment policy Population growth Science and technology development Natural resource management Natural disasters Land use change Transparent and good governance Changes in social values Science and technology development Political change (decentralisation) Population pressure Weakness of law enforcement Poverty and income disparity Degradation of natural resources Climate change Poverty Education Basic infrastructure Law enforcement Population growth Industry Population health Land use change Pollution and environmental degradation Increasing frequency of extreme climate events Climate change Declining river flows Population growth Illegal logging Water resources Availability of financial capital Availability of labour force Land conversion from agriculture to residential Market availability for products Science and technology Seasonal shifts in rainfall Progress in human development Fertilizer availability Climate change Natural disasters Limited availability of crop varieties Human resources Post-harvest management of produce Problems with pest and disease management Human behavioural change Rainfall change More variable and destructive winds 22 Figure 9. Drivers of change clustered into themes. Human resource development (17 votes) and climate (11 votes) were identified as the two most important themes 3.2 Session 2: What are the desired and possible futures for NTB livelihoods? 3.2.1 Desired future for NTB livelihoods Session 2 began with a discussion to develop a collective statement about the desired future vision for NTB rural livelihoods in 2090, described in terms of human well-being (Table 7). Table 7. The desired future vision for NTB rural livelihoods in 2090 Indicators of human well-being Income Health Food security Social cohesion Freedom of choice Desired future vision Achieving community income per capita that can meet their basic needs, housing, health, education and ability to save money. Achievement of a healthier NTB society through continuous improvement of health services Fulfilment of the availability, distribution and consumption of food for both quantity and quality. Achievement of communities that have the following characteristics: mutual cooperation, tolerance and respect for the diversity of society. Achievement of NTB society which has the freedom to choose civilized livelihoods (political systems, beliefs, social, cultural and defence). 3.2.2 Future scenarios for NTB livelihoods Using the two most important themes of drivers from Session 1 (human resources development and climate change), a matrix was formed (Figure 10). This created four future scenarios for livelihoods, which combined better or worse levels of the drivers. Workshop participants were divided into four working groups, one for each scenario. They developed a narrative of NTB rural livelihoods in 2090 for their scenario, drew a picture and identified any potential thresholds of change, plus actions required to manage and improve livelihoods in the scenario. Climate change (extreme) +1.20C by 2090 -19% rainfall p.a. by 2090 Declining wet season rainfall Increased drought-risk area 1.3 m sea level rise by 2090 Severe wind and storms 4 1 Poor human resources development Improved human resources development Population growth uncontrolled 7 million people 2050 Corrupt government Community un-empowered Little education investment Little health investment Population growth controlled 5 million people 2050 Transparent government Community empowerment Improved education investment Improved health investment 3 2 Climate change (less extreme) +0.30C by 2090 +2.7% rainfall p.a. by 2090 No change wet season rainfall No change drought-risk area 0.23 cm sea level rise by 2090 Less severe wind and storms Figure 10. The matrix of four future NTB scenarios created by combining better or worse levels of the two most important driver themes, human resource development and climate change A representative of each working group presented their scenario with the following narratives: Scenario 1: Adaptive NTB This scenario describes NTB communities that are ready to adapt to the impacts that climate change is having on their livelihoods. It is a scenario marked by pressure for immediate action on climate change impacts which leads community and government to rapidly deploy a variety of technologies to quickly find solutions to climate change impacts. Rapid economic growth, balanced population growth and rapid introduction of new and more efficient technologies is a feature of this scenario. Indicators of well-being will improve substantially in terms of per capita income, education and environmental awareness, cultural and social interactions and social cohesion (Table 8). Thresholds for this scenario will be passed when sea level rise reaches 1.3 m in 2090, requiring the translocation of people to Sumbawa Island, which is safer and less-densely populated than Lombok. Other actions required will be: o o Building new dams (10 m high) to cope with extreme rainfall events Adapting cropping patterns 24 o o o o o Cultivating plants that can withstand extreme rain water and prevent erosion Relocation of people living in disaster areas Implementing alternative livelihood systems Development of climate mitigation and adaptation strategies Disaster risk management Table 8. Trends in indicators of human well-being under Scenario 1 Adaptive NTB Indicators of well-being Income Health Food security Social cohesion Freedom of choice 2030 2060 2090 The gradual fulfilment of basic and secondary needs Adequate provision of health facilities and services Food and nutrition security Maintaining social cohesion Open access Fulfilment of primary, secondary and tertiary needs Quality of infrastructure and increased health care is ensured (free service) Food and nutrition security Achievement of desired NTB income per capita Strengthening social cohesion Guarantees on the right of access Achievement of desired healthy NTB society Achievement of desired healthy NTB society High collective action Independent NTB society Scenario 2: Well-being Village This scenario is an optimistic vision of the future of NTB, in which economic, social and political reforms create a better life (Figure 11). The scenario describes a balanced population growth and high level of education and health indicated by substantial increases in well-being indicators (Table 11). It is a scenario marked by expansion of economic growth and prosperity, resulting in an increased focus on social and environmental issues. The emphasis of action is on regional solutions to the economy and infrastructure, and including improved social equity but without the need for adaptation to extreme climate change. Table 11. Trends in indicators of human well-being under Scenario 2 Well-being Village Indicators of well-being Income Health Food security Social cohesion Freedom of choice 2030 2060 2090 Sufficient income per capita The availability of adequate health services and community health Availability, access and utilization is in a satisfactory state Mutual cooperation, tolerance and diversity is in favourable condition Guaranteed jobs, ideological, political, economic and social security achieved. Satisfactory income per capita The availability of optimal health services and community health status is in good condition Availability, access and utilization in a good condition Social cohesion is maintained Desired community wellbeing The availability of optimal health services and community health status Democratic conditions Desired democratic conditions achieved Desired community wellbeing Desired harmonious life achieved Figure 11 11. Participants’ vision of Scenario 2 Well-being Village 26 Scenario 3: Blooming Flower The main issues for this scenario is not climate change impacts on peoples’ livelihoods, but the low level of wealth which is greatly affected by low human resources development (high population growth, low levels of education and health) (Table 12). Actions will emphasise building human capital (e.g. education and gender activities), increased infrastructure and social cohesion with a substantial increase in the level of per capita income (which is still lower than in other scenarios), community health levels and food security. It is a scenario where no threshold is reached because it is assumed that there are only intermediate levels of economic development and less rapid development of technology than in other scenarios. Table 12. Trends in indicators of human well-being under Scenario 3 Blooming Flower Indicators of well-being Income 2030 2060 2090 Income per capita increased 20% Income per capita increased 50% Health The availability of health services in the village and community health in good condition (20%) The availability of health services in rural areas and community health is in satisfactory state (50%) Food security Social cohesion Fulfilment of food needs (20%) Realization of social cohesion by 20% Fulfilment of food needs (50%) Realization of social cohesion by 50% income per capita increased 100% and ability to save money The availability of health services in rural (in optimal condition) and community health is in a satisfactory state (100%) Fulfilment of food needs (100%) Realization of social cohesion by 100% Freedom of choice The realization of freedom of choice of livelihoods (20%) The realization of freedom of choice of livelihoods (50%) The realization of freedom of choice of livelihoods (100%) Scenario 4: Jungle Law In this scenario the world is run as business as usual, with extreme climate change and poor human resources development (Figure 12). There is a slow pace of innovation, protected global markets and non-environmental development. It focuses on the potential of poorly managed social and environmental degradation problems, and a growing gap between rich and poor. Materialism and consumerism are prevalent. There could be increasing power of large bureaucracies and corporations. Millions of peoples’ lives will be in poverty and deprivation. There is widespread social instability, rising conflict and the possibility of violence and chaos. It is a scenario of high population growth with low levels of education and health. Indicators of well-being decrease from 2030 to 2090 as the situation gets worse, but social cohesion may improve as people depend on each other more (Table 13). It is assumed that there is a water supply threshold of 4 billion m3 per annum on Lombok. Under this scenario population growth will result in the minimum water availability of 1,000 m3 per capita per annum being passed by 2030 (based on World Health Organisation Water Availability Index). This will lead to the relocation of people from Lombok to Sumbawa. Table 13. Trends in indicators of human well-being under Scenario 4 Jungle Law Indicators of wellbeing Income Health Food security Social cohesion Freedom of choice 2030 2060 2090 -1 -4 -1 +1 -1 -2 -5 -2 +2 -2 -3 -6 -3 +3 -3 Income Climate change Health Natural resource degradation Health Rural human resources Productivity Food production Social cohesion Poverty Freedom of choice Figure 12. Participants’ vision of Scenario 4 Jungle Law 28 Dr. Gulam Abbas (BLHP) presenting the Well-being Village scenario (D. Kirono) These scenarios for 2090 provided a range of outcomes for NTB rural livelihoods. The Wellbeing Village scenario is similar to the desired vision, which results from less extreme climate change and improved human resources development, including control of population growth. Jungle Law represents the outcome from ‘Business as Usual’, with extreme climate change and poor human resources development. Blooming Flower and Adaptive NTB are intermediate scenarios (Figure 13). 2011 2030 2060 2090 Well-being Village Human resources development NTB LIVELIHOODS VISION 1 DRIVERS OF CHANGE + Adaptive NTB NTB LIVELIHOODS 2 Blooming Flower Climate change Jungle Law Figure 13. Summary of workshop process and results from Sessions 1 and 2 (numbered) 3.3 Session 3: What impact will the Business as Usual scenario have on human well-being? This session focussed on exploring the potential impacts of the ‘Business as Usual’ Jungle Law scenario on human well-being in NTB. This was possible because the downscaled climate change projections were based on the SRES A2 emissions scenario, which assumes that global carbon emissions will continue at current high rates. Impacts were investigated for 2030 because climate and human population projections are likely to be more realistic in the shortterm, and any human responses are less likely to have taken effect. 3.3.1 Ecosystem goods and services typology Projections were based on assessing the impacts of drivers on ecosystem goods and services (EGS) which support rural livelihoods and human well-being. Because there is such diversity in the EGS that people rely on in Lombok and Sumbawa, a typology was required to simplify the analysis. In 2010 there were 105 rural sub-districts in NTB. Overall, 84 EGS were identified from nine habitats (Figure 14). The ‘production’ of EGS (i.e. the relative volume produced or exploited) was estimated from secondary BPS and PODES data, and surveys of communities where no data was available (Suadnya et al. 2010). From the mix of EGS and their production levels a statistical analysis revealed seven types. All except Typology 7 occurred in Lombok and Sumbawa (Figure 15). Appendix II lists the kecamatan within each typology. Habitat/EGS 1. Forest 1. Timber 2. Coffee 3. Cacao 4. Banana 5. Durian 6. Candle nut 7. Ecotourism 8. Honey bee 9. Mango 10. Cashew nut 11. Rattan, bamboo 12. Palm sugar 13. Tamarind 14. Wild life hunting 15. Coconut 2. Wetland 1. Rice production 2. Cattle 3. Maize 4. Soya bean 5. Chicken 6. Goat 7. Peanut 8. Mung bean 9. Vegetables 10. Buffalo 11. Cassava 12. Tobacco 13. Onion 14. Rambutan 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Bandeng pond Sweet potato Prawn pond Salt pond Red rice 3. Dryland Sand mining Avodado Pumic mining Bandeng pond Strawberry 4. Coastal 1. Cattle 2. Goat 3. Maize 4. Coconut 5. Cashew 6. Buffalo 7. Cassava 8. Banana 9. Chicken 10. Soya bean 11. Peanut 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. Padi gogo production Mango Tamarind Jatropha Mung bean Coffee Onion Tobacco Vegetables Cacao Durian Salt pond Garlic Custard apple Pineapple 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Ecotourism Mangrove for timber Mangrove for crab fishery Salt pond Bandeng pond Prawn pond 5. Coral Reef 1. Ecotourism 2. Fishery 3. Building material 6. Inshore marine 1. 2. 3. 4. Fishing Seaweed Pearl farm Brown algae (Sargassum) 7. Offshore marine 1. Fishing 8. River, spring water 1. Agriculture (Irrigation) 2. Drinking water 3. Ecotourism 9. Ground water 1. Drinking water 2. Agriculture (irrigation) Figure 14. The 84 EGS identified from the nine habitat types in NTB 30 Typology 7 Diverse cropping and coastal activity Typology 2 Fishing and seaweed Typology 1 Fishing Irrigation, rice, ecotourism, fishing. Also coconuts, maize, cacao, coffee, drinking water, cassava, cashews. Buffaloes, salt ponds, mangos, bananas, durian, padi gogo, rice, mangroves Inshore and offshore fishing. Also buffaloes, cattle, ecotourism, seaweed, honey bees, rice. Typology 4 Diverse agriculture and forest use Typology 5 Rice and tobacco Typology 6 Diverse livestock and cropping Rice, irrigation, tobacco. Also cattle, goats, vegetables, timber, drinking water, cassava, peanuts, mung beans, coffee, cacao, garlic, onions, bandeng ponds, ecotourism. Padi gogo, cattle, goats, vegetables. Cattle, goats, irrigation, drinking water. Also rice, buffaloes, coconuts, cashews, chickens, soya beans, mung beans, bananas, peanuts, maize, coffee, jatropha Typology 3 Rice and bandeng ponds Peanuts, vegetables Figure 15. The geographical extent of the EGS typologies, primary EGS in terms of production, and rural sub-districts within each type 3.3.2 Impact modelling for 2030 The potential impacts of the Jungle Law scenario on each typology’s mixture of EGS were estimated using the CSIRO threat-asset interaction model (Skewes et al. 2011; Figure 16). In the workshop, participants ranked the relative value of each EGS in terms of four indicators of well-being: income, food security, health and social cohesion. Combining this with the ‘production’ information from the typology (see 3.3.1) gave the relative importance of each EGS to well-being in each typology. By applying the downscaled climate and human population growth projections aggregated for all kecamatan within each typology (Appendix III), the system drivers and threats were modelled, and the resulting impacts on well-being estimated. System drivers and threats ● Human population ● Climate Act on Ecosystem assets ● Forest ● Populations ● Reefs ● Agricultural land Sensitivity and exposure Potential impact (-1 to +1) Which supply Ecosystem goods and services (EGS) ● Paddy rice ● Water ● Fish ● Tourism EGS production (0-5) EGS importance (%) Which underpin Human well-being ● Income ● Food security ● Health ● Social cohesion Well-being impact (%) EGS values (0-5) Figure 16. The threat-asset interaction model used to estimate the importance of EGS, and the impact on human well-being from the Jungle Law scenario The results showed an overall negative impact on human well-being for all typologies by 2030. This negative impact increased for all typologies in 2060 and 2090 (Figure 17). The most impacted in 2030 was Typology 3 (Rice and bandeng ponds), followed by Typology 7 (Diverse cropping and coastal activity), Typology 4 (Diverse agriculture and forest use) and Typology 5 (Rice and tobacco). A working group valuing ecosystem goods and services (D. Kirono) Id 3 7 4 5 1 6 2 Well-being impact (%) 2030 2060 2090 -12.6 -16.0 -29.6 -12.3 -16.2 -26.8 -10.4 -12.4 -24.7 -9.9 -13.2 -26.7 -6.5 -9.7 -20.2 -6.5 -7.0 -13.7 -5.8 -6.3 -16.8 Typology name Rice and bandeng ponds Diverse cropping and coastal activity Diverse agriculture and forest use Rice and tobacco Fishing Diverse livestock and cropping Fishing and seaweed Figure 17. The overall impact (%) on human well-being for all EGS in each typology in 2030, 2060 and 2090 under the ‘Business as Usual’ Jungle Law scenario. 32 3.4 Session 4: What is the adaptive capacity of NTB communities today? 3.4.1 Indicators of adaptive capacity This session began with a description of the capitals framework which can be used to measure adaptive capacity (e.g. Brown et al. 2010): o o o o o o Natural capital (e.g. land, fresh water, forests, biodiversity) Human capital (e.g. education, health, skills) Physical capital (e.g. roads, electricity, irrigation systems) Financial capital (e.g. money, savings, loans) Political capital (e.g. political power, religious power) Social capital (e.g. leadership, social networks, institutions) Participants were asked to identify indicators for each capital that were important for adaptive capacity in NTB. In total participants identified 18 indicators, with three for each capital (Table 14). 3.4.2 Scoring indicators of adaptive capacity Participants were then asked to break into six working groups, one for each capital, and score the relative strength of each indicator for communities in each typology. The average score for each indicator in each capital was calculated (Table 14) and graphed (Figure 18). Overall, Typology 5 (Rice and tobacco) and Typology 6 (Diverse livestock and cropping) had the highest average adaptive capacity index due to relatively high levels of physical, financial and social capital. Typology 1 (Fishing) had the lowest index due to low levels of natural, financial and political capital. Typologies 2 (Fishing and seaweed), 3 (Rice and bandeng ponds) and 7 (Diverse cropping and coastal activity) had similar intermediate levels of adaptive capacity (Table 14). Table 14. Indicators of adaptive capacity identified by the six working groups, and index scores (0 = none, 5 = high) for each indicator Capital Natural Human Physical Indicator Biodiversity and ecosystems Marine productivity Access to good water quantity and quality Average Education level Level of wellbeing Work ethic Average Irrigation infrastructure Road and transport infrastructure Agricultural infrastructure Average Typology 1: Fishing Typology 2: Fishing and seaweed Typology 3: Rice and bandeng ponds Typology 4: Diverse agriculture and forest use Typology 5: Rice and tobacco Typology 6: Diverse livestock and cropping Typology 7: Diverse cropping and coastal activity 1 3 2 5 2 4 5 4 5 2 1 1 0 5 1 3 5 5 5 5 2 2.0 2 3.7 2 3.0 3 3.7 3 2.7 4 3.0 3 4.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 2.7 4 2.7 4 3.0 4 3.0 4 3.3 4 3.0 4 2.7 0 0 5 3 5 4 3 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 3 3 4 3 5 3 4 2.7 2.7 4.7 3.7 5.0 3.7 4.0 34 Table 14 continued. Indicators of adaptive capacity identified by participants for each capital, and index scores (0 = none, 5 = high) for each indicator Capital Financial Political Social Indicator Typology 1: Fishing Typology 2: Fishing and seaweed Typology 4: Diverse agriculture and forest use 2 Typology 5: Rice and tobacco 3 Typology 3: Rice and bandeng ponds 3 Typology 7: Diverse cropping and coastal activity 4 Typology 6: Diverse livestock and cropping 4 Income Remittance from migrant workers Access to credit Average Good representation by formal and informal leaders Representation of women in decision-making Representation of community interests Average Loyalty to leaders Access to information Trustworthy leaders Average Overall average 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 1 3 2.3 3 2.7 3 2.7 3 2.3 5 4.0 4 4.0 2 2.0 4 4 3 3 2.5 5 2 2 5 3 2.5 3 3 3 1 2 4 3 4.5 5 2.5 2.3 4 3.7 2 3.3 2 2.8 2 3.3 5 4.3 4 2.5 1 4 3 3 3 5 4 3 1 2 3 1 4 4 2 3.0 2.5 2.3 2.9 2.7 3.2 2.0 2.9 4.7 3.7 4.0 3.7 2.0 2.9 3 Financial Typology 1: Fishing Social Human Typology 2: Fishing and seaweed Typology 3: Rice and bandeng ponds Typology 4: Diverse agriculture and forest use Typology 5: Rice and tobacco Political Natural Typology 6: Diverse livestock and cropping Typology 7: Diverse cropping and coastal activity Physical Figure 18. The average scores for indicators in each capital, shown for each typology 3.5 Session 5: Which are the most vulnerable livelihoods in NTB? In this session the results of the potential impacts in 2030 of the ‘Business as Usual’ Jungle Law scenario on human well-being (see Figure 17) was combined with the adaptive capacity index for each typology (Table 14). This gave a relative vulnerability index for each typology (Figure 19). The most vulnerable typology was Typology 7 (Diverse cropping and coastal activity), followed by Typology 3 (Rice and bandeng ponds), Typology 4 (Diverse agriculture and forest use) and Typology 5 (Rice and tobacco). By 2090 vulnerability had at least doubled for all typologies. The first three typologies remained the most vulnerable, but Typology 1 (Fishing) became the fourth most vulnerable. Id 7 3 4 5 1 2 6 Typology name Diverse cropping and coastal activity Rice and bandeng ponds Diverse agriculture and forest use Rice and tobacco Fishing Fishing and seaweed Diverse livestock and cropping Well-being impact (%) 2030 2090 -12.3 -16.2 -12.6 -16.0 -10.4 -12.4 -9.9 -13.2 -6.5 -9.7 -5.8 -6.3 -6.5 -7.0 A.C. Index 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.7 2.5 2.9 3.7 Vulnerability 2030 0.21 0.20 0.18 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.09 index 2090 0.46 0.46 0.43 0.36 0.40 0.29 0.18 Figure 19. The well-being impact, adaptive capacity (AC) and vulnerability index for each typology in 2030 and 2090. The map shows results for 2030, with darker colours reflecting greater vulnerability 36 3.6 Session 6: What are the priority adaptation strategies required to improve livelihoods in NTB? 3.6.1 Examples of adaptation strategies This session began with examples of adaptation strategies being given by Tim Kolaboratif members, such as alternative cropping systems and payments for ecosystem services schemes. It was explained that strategies could be focussed on both the impacts of change (e.g. declining rainfall and reduced crop yields) and adaptive capacity issues (e.g. poor physical capital such as irrigation infrastructure). 3.6.2 Designing adaptation strategies for vulnerable typologies Participants were then divided into four working groups to design adaptation strategies for four vulnerable typologies identified under the ‘Business as Usual’ Jungle Law scenario: Typology 7 (Diverse cropping and coastal activity), Typology 3 (Rice and bandeng ponds), Typology 5 (Rice and tobacco) and Typology 1 (Fishing). One group was assigned to each typology. Each group was provided with detailed graphs of the impacts on human well-being in 2030 from Session 3 and the scores for adaptive capacity indicators from Session 4 for that typology. From this information, each group listed adaptation strategies in descending order of priority for sub-districts within that typology (see Appendix II). For each strategy they also listed the following information: o o o o o o The impacted EGS and the driver or threat causing that impact Alternative strategies which take advantage of underutilised EGS The capital requiring improvement to build adaptive capacity The resources required to implement the strategy The stakeholders required to implement the strategy Further research required to develop the strategy Finally, each group was asked to consider whether the strategies identified were likely to be mal-adaptive if any of the other three scenarios eventuated: Adaptive NTB, Well-being Village and Blooming Flower. When completed, each group presented their results to the other participants to explain and refine their strategies. 3.6.3 Typology 7 Diverse cropping and coastal activity The most important EGS was wetland rice, and this was highly negatively impacted, largely by a projected change in annual rainfall of -9% (Appendix III). Red rice was of moderate importance but also highly negatively impacted by reductions in rainfall. Other important crops such as mungbean, onion, sweet potato and pineapple were also impacted by rainfall reduction. Spring and groundwater for irrigation and drinking water were also important and highly impacted by increased resource use plus rainfall reduction (Figure 20). Land use change from increased building and infrastructure linked to a projected 26% increase in the human population (Appendix III) was also an important impact for most EGS. The adaptive capacity assessment showed that this typology had relatively low levels of social, financial, human and political capital (Figure 20). EGS Importance (%) 0 Rice production, Wetland Prawn pond, Wetland Mung bean, Dryland Onion, Dryland Sweet potato, Wetland Pineapple, Dryland Cattle, Wetland Custard apple, Dryland Agriculture (Irrigation), River, spring water Sand mining, Dryland Maize, Wetland Buffalo, Dryland Soya bean, Wetland Padi gogo production, Dryland Coconut, Dryland Drinking water, Ground water Agriculture (irrigation), Ground water Drinking water, River, spring water Vegetables, Wetland Red rice, Wetland Maize, Dryland Peanut, Wetland Goat, Wetland Salt pond, Wetland Tobacco, Dryland Cassava, Dryland Chicken, Dryland Avodado, Dryland Tamarind, Dryland Goat, Dryland 2 4 6 Potential impact (-1 to +1) 8 -0.4 -0.3 Rice production, Wetland Prawn pond, Wetland Mung bean, Dryland Onion, Dryland Sweet potato, Wetland Pineapple, Dryland Cattle, Wetland Custard apple, Dryland Agriculture (Irrigation), River, spring water Sand mining, Dryland Maize, Wetland Buffalo, Dryland Soya bean, Wetland Padi gogo production, Dryland Coconut, Dryland Drinking water, Ground water Agriculture (irrigation), Ground water Drinking water, River, spring water Vegetables, Wetland Red rice, Wetland Maize, Dryland Peanut, Wetland Goat, Wetland Salt pond, Wetland Tobacco, Dryland Cassava, Dryland Chicken, Dryland Avodado, Dryland Tamarind, Dryland Goat, Dryland -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 Financial Social Human Political Natural Physical Impacts Climate Temperature increase Rainfall change Sea level rise Ocean acidification Human population Exploitation Land use change Pollution Figure 20. The current top 30 most important EGS (left), potential impact for each EGS in 2030 (centre), and relative levels of adaptive capacity today according to the six capitals (right) for Typology 7 Diverse cropping and coastal activity. 38 Table 15. Adaptation strategies identified for Typology 7 Diverse cropping and coastal activity, listed in descending order of importance Adaptation strategy Impacted EGS and threats addressed, or EGS alternatives Capitals addressed 1. Political 2. Social 3. Physical 4. Natural Resources required to implement strategy Regulations, financial support, expert input Stakeholders required to implement strategy 1. North Lombok District Government 2. Communities 3. NGOs 1. Improved land use planning through Regional Spatial Plan (RTRW Kabupaten) Drinking water, irrigation, energy, timber and agricultural crop production 2. Improved dryland management systems for climate change Agricultural and livestock production, plantations and estates impacted by rainfall declines 1. Political 2. Natural 3. Physical 4. Social 5. Financial Financial support, improved irrigation systems 1. Communities 2. Farmers 3. NTB and District Governments Forest tours, waterfalls, marine tourism 1. Political 2. Natural 3. Physical 4. Social 5. Financial Policies, financial support, infrastructure 1. Communities 2. Farmers 3. NTB and District Governments 4. Tour operators Drinking water, irrigation water impacted by resource use and rainfall declines 1. Political 2. Natural 3. Physical 4. Social 5. Financial Local wisdom and law (Awiqawiq), financial support 1. Communities 2. Farmers 3. NTB and District Governments 3. Development and diversification of ecotourism 4. Improved water resource management, including groundwater Research needed to develop strategy Land suitability analysis, land use database, KLHS Crop adaptability testing, breeding and integrated farming system development for climate change Ecotourism feasibility study Water resource inventory, including groundwater, water balance study and alternative water conservation methods Scenario 1 Adaptive NTB Mal-adaptive? No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions Scenario 2 Well-being village Mal-adaptive? No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions Scenario 3 Blooming flower Mal-adaptive? No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions The priority strategy identified was improved land use planning through the district Regional Spatial Plan (RTRW Kabupaten) to anticipate the impact of climate change and human population growth (Table 15). This was followed by improved dryland management systems for climate change, development and diversification of ecotourism and improved water resource management. None of these were considered to be mal-adaptive, and were therefore ‘no regrets’ strategies suitable for any future scenarios. 3.6.4 Typology 3 Rice and bandeng ponds By far the most important EGS was wetland rice, and this was highly negatively impacted, largely by land use from increased building and infrastructure linked to a projected 26% increase in the human population, plus projected change in annual rainfall of -5% (Appendix III). By comparison other EGS were far less important. However, onions, goats and peanuts were of moderate importance and also negatively influenced by these threats. Although less important EGS, spring and groundwater for irrigation and drinking water were highly impacted by increased resource use linked to human population growth (Figure 21). The adaptive capacity assessment showed that this typology had relatively low levels of social and financial capital (Figure 21). The priority strategy identified was development of rice fields and irrigation pond infrastructure to anticipate the impact of land use change due to population growth, and changing rainfall (Table 16). This was followed by diversifying the use of paddy fields and fish ponds, and optimising farmer and fish farmer income through processing and marketing. None of these were considered to be mal-adaptive, and were therefore ‘no regrets’ strategies suitable for any future scenarios. 3.6.5 Typology 5 Rice and tobacco The most important EGS was wetland rice, and this was highly impacted, largely by land use from increased building and infrastructure linked to high human population density and projected growth of 26% (Appendix III). By comparison other EGS were less important, but cattle and tobacco were of moderate importance and also influenced by these threats. Although less important EGS, spring and groundwater for irrigation and drinking water were highly impacted by increased resource use linked to human population growth (Figure 22). The adaptive capacity assessment showed that this typology had relatively low levels of human, natural and political capital (Figure 22). The priority strategy identified was climate information to raise the awareness of rice and tobacco farmers about climate variability, followed by improving cropping patterns and varieties to adapt to changing climatic patterns, payments for ecosystem services schemes to sustainably manage water resources, and diversifying production of non-rice food crops to enhance food security (Table 17). None of these strategies were considered to be maladaptive, and were therefore ‘no regrets’ strategies suitable for any future scenarios. 40 Potential impact (-1 to +1) EGS Importance (%) 0 Rice production, Wetland Onion, Wetland Goat, Wetland Peanut, Wetland Agriculture (Irrigation), River, spring water Drinking water, River, spring water Soya bean, Wetland Cassava, Dryland Chicken, Dryland Pineapple, Dryland Drinking water, Ground water Agriculture (irrigation), Ground water Vegetables, Wetland Sweet potato, Wetland Chicken, Wetland Bandeng pond, Wetland Timber, Forest 10 20 30 40 -0.5 Rice production, Wetland Onion, Wetland Goat, Wetland Peanut,Impacts Wetland Agriculture (Irrigation), River, spring water Climate Drinking water, River, spring water SoyaTemperature bean, Wetlandincrease RainfallDryland change Cassava, Chicken, Dryland Sea level rise Pineapple, Dryland Ocean acidification Drinking water, Ground water Agriculture (irrigation), Ground water Human population Vegetables, Wetland Exploitation Sweet potato, Wetland Land use change Chicken, Wetland BandengPollution pond, Wetland Timber, Forest -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 Financial Social Human Political Natural Physical Figure 21. The current top 16 most important EGS (left), potential impact for each EGS in 2030 (centre), and relative levels of adaptive capacity today according to the six capitals (right) for Typology 3 Rice and bandeng ponds. Table 16. Adaptation strategies identified for Typology 3 Rice and bandeng ponds, listed in descending order of importance Adaptation strategy 1. Development of rice fields and irrigation pond infrastructure 2. Diversifying the use of paddy fields and ponds 3. Optimising farmer and fish farmer income through processing and marketing Impacted EGS and threats addressed, or EGS alternatives Irrigation water from the impacts of land use and reduced rainfall on wetland rice production Boosting the production from rice paddies and fish ponds to off-set impacts of land use and reduced rainfall Boosting paddy rice, fish from ponds, soya, peanuts and vegetable production and profitability Capitals addressed 1. Financial (access to capital assistance) 2. Natural 3. Human (level of knowledge and skill development) 1. Financial (access to capital assistance) 2.Human (knowledge, work ethic) 3. Natural (biodiversity, ecosystems, marine productivity) 1. Financial (access to credit) 2. Social (networking) 3. Physical (transport and electricity) 5. Human (skills) Resources required to implement strategy Skills (capacity building) Stakeholders required to implement strategy Research needed to develop strategy 1. NTB Public Works Department 2. Rice farmers 3. Fish farmers and owners Development of irrigation infrastructure based on climate change information Information on new farming techniques 1. NTB Agriculture Food and Horticultural Crops Department 2. NTB Fishery and Maritime Affairs Department 3. Coordinating agriculture extension bodies Processing and marketing techniques 1. NTB Industry and Trade Department 2. Medium and small scale enterprises 3. NTB Agriculture Food and Horticultural Crops Department 4. NTB Food Security Agency 42 Crop, fish and commodity suitability assessment Needs assessment and preliminary baseline data inventory Scenario 1 Adaptive NTB Mal-adaptive? No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions Scenario 2 Well-being village Mal-adaptive? No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions Scenario 3 Blooming flower Mal-adaptive? No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions Typology 5, EGS Importance Potential impact (-1 to +1) EGS Importance (%) 0 Rice production, Wetland Cattle, Dryland Tobacco, Wetland Peanut, Wetland Agriculture (Irrigation), River, spring water Drinking water, River, spring water Cacao, Dryland Pineapple, Dryland Sand mining, Dryland Coconut, Dryland Soya bean, Wetland Cashew, Dryland Drinking water, Ground water Agriculture (irrigation), Ground water Prawn pond, Wetland Onion, Dryland Mango, Dryland Cattle, Wetland Maize, Wetland Padi gogo production, Dryland Goat, Wetland Banana, Dryland Vegetables, Dryland Peanut, Dryland Fishing, Inshore Fishing, Offshore Custard apple, Dryland Ecotourism, River, spring water Buffalo, Wetland Mung bean, Dryland 10 20 30 -0.4 Rice production, Wetland Cattle, Dryland Tobacco, Wetland Peanut, Wetland Agriculture (Irrigation), River, spring water Drinking water, River, spring water Cacao, Dryland Pineapple, Dryland Sand mining, Dryland Coconut, Dryland Soya bean, Wetland Cashew, Dryland Drinking water, Ground water Agriculture (irrigation), Ground water Prawn pond, Wetland Onion, Dryland Mango, Dryland Cattle, Wetland Maize, Wetland Padi gogo production, Dryland Goat, Wetland Banana, Dryland Vegetables, Dryland Peanut, Dryland Fishing, Inshore Fishing, Offshore Custard apple, Dryland Ecotourism, River, spring water Buffalo, Wetland Mung bean, Dryland -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 Financial Social Human Political Natural Physical Impacts Climate Temperature increase Rainfall change Sea level rise Ocean acidification Human population Exploitation Land use change Pollution Figure 22. The current top 30 most important EGS (left), potential impact for each EGS in 2030 (centre), and relative levels of adaptive capacity today according to the six capitals (right) for Typology 5 Rice and tobacco. Table 17. Adaptation strategies identified by participants for Typology 5 Rice and tobacco, listed in descending order of importance Adaptation strategy Impacted EGS and threats addressed, or EGS alternatives Capitals addressed 1.Climate information to raise awareness of farming communities Rice and tobacco agricultural production, threatened by climate variability 1. Human 2. Social 3. Natural 4. Physical 5. Political 2. Improving cropping patterns and varieties Rice and tobacco agricultural production, threatened by climate variability and land change Irrigation and spring water, forested upper catchments, agriculture and estate crops impacted by resource use 1. Human 2. Social 3. Natural 4. Physical 5. Political Impacts of land use and climate change on food security 3. Payment for Ecosystem Services implementation 4. Diversification of non-rice food production Resources required to implement strategy Human resources Stakeholders required to implement strategy Research needed to develop strategy Scenario 1 Adaptive NTB 1. BMKG 2. UNRAM and other researchers 3. BPTP Action research for climate adaptation Mal-adaptive? No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions Scenario 2 Well-being village Mal-adaptive? No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions Natural and human resources 1. NTB Agriculture Food and Horticultural Crops Department 2. UNRAM and other researchers 3. NTB Estate Crops Department 4. BPTP Develop drought and climatetolerant tobacco varieties No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions 1. Financial 2. Physical 3. Human 4. Natural 5. Social 6. Political Spring water, forests 1. Water debit and quality testing 2. Biodiversity and forest degradation monitoring 3. Institutional and environmental economic evaluation No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions 1. Human 2. Natural 3. Social Natural resource and human resource 1. NTB Agriculture Food and Horticultural Crops Department 2. NTB Public Works Department 3. Religious and community leaders 4. Farmers 5. UNRAM 6. NGOs 7. Water companies 8. NTB Health Department 1. NTB Food Security Agency 2. NTB Agriculture Food and Horticultural Crops Department 3. World Food Program 4. NTB Health Department Nutrition assessments of non-rice foods; options for diversifying local food production No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions 44 Scenario 3 Blooming flower Mal-adaptive? No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions 3.6.6 Typology 1 Fishing The most important EGS was inshore fishing, followed by offshore fishing (Figure 23). However, these were not greatly impacted by 2030, but the major threat was increased resource use due to projected population growth of 27% (Appendix III). Wetland rice was the third most important EGS, and was also likely to be moderately impacted due to a projected change in annual rainfall of -5% (Appendix III), and some loss of productive land from increased building and infrastructure. Other moderately important agricultural EGS such as custard apple, pineapple, onion, garlic and coffee were also impacted to a similar extent by these two threats. The most impacted EGS was coral reef fisheries, because sea acidification and temperature rises by 2030 will cause coral mortality. The adaptive capacity assessment showed that this typology had relatively low levels of all capitals (Figure 23). The priority strategy identified was improving the standard of living of fishing communities because of the threats of over-exploitation of fisheries. This was followed by alternative environmental management strategies for habitats, more water-efficient cropping and recycling and mangrove planting to protect the coastline (Table 18). None of these strategies were considered to be mal-adaptive, and were therefore ‘no regrets’ strategies suitable for any future scenarios. 3.6.7 Other typologies The assessment of EGS importance, impacts and adaptive capacity for Typologies 2 (Fishing and seaweed), Typology 4 (Diverse agriculture and forest use) and Typology 6 (Diverse livestock and cropping) are shown in Appendix IV. Projected changes in climate and population for these typologies are also shown in Appendix III. 3.6.8 Case studies and next steps Figure 24 illustrates the overall process and results of the workshop process from Sessions 1 – 6. ‘No regrets’ adaptation strategies were identified for four typologies based on their important EGS, impacts by 2030 for the NTB ‘Business as Usual’ Jungle Law scenario, and adaptive capacity today. Strategies aim to steer rural livelihoods in sub-districts towards the Well-being Village scenario and the agreed vision for NTB livelihoods. Sub-districts within three of these typologies were selected for the Activity 4 community case studies (Figure 25): o o o Typology 1 Fishing: Sape (Bima District) and Jerowaru (East Lombok District) Typology 7 Diverse cropping and coastal activity: Bayan and Pemanang (North Lombok District) Typology 5 Rice and tobacco: Janapria (Central Lombok District) and Terara (East Lombok District) Similar scenario planning workshops are planned for these case studies in October 2011 – March 2012. Potential impact (-1 to +1) EGS Importance (%) 0 Fishing, Inshore Fishing, Offshore Rice production, Wetland Prawn pond, Coastal Custard apple, Dryland Cattle, Dryland Pineapple, Dryland Garlic, Dryland Onion, Wetland Coffee, Forest Fishery, Coral reef Mangrove for timber, Coastal Pearl farm, Inshore Sand mining, Dryland Bandeng pond, Coastal Tobacco, Wetland Drinking water, Ground water Agriculture (irrigation), Ground water Vegetables, Wetland Ecotourism, Coastal Mung bean, Dryland Prawn pond, Wetland Tamarind, Dryland Sweet potato, Wetland Agriculture (Irrigation), River, spring water Drinking water, River, spring water Cassava, Dryland Building material, Coral reef Seaweed, Inshore Coconut, Forest 5 10 15 20 -0.4 -0.3 Inshore, Fishing Offshore, Fishing Wetland, Rice production Coastal, Prawn pond Dryland, Custard apple Dryland, Cattle Dryland, Pineapple Dryland, Garlic Wetland, Onion Forest, Coffee Coral reef, Fishery Coastal, Mangrove for timber Inshore, Pearl farm Dryland, Sand mining Coastal, Bandeng pond Wetland, Tobacco Ground water, Drinking water Ground water, Agriculture (irrigation) Wetland, Vegetables Coastal, Ecotourism Dryland, Mung bean Wetland, Prawn pond Dryland, Tamarind Wetland, Sweet potato River, spring water, Agriculture (Irrigation) River, spring water, Drinking water Dryland, Cassava Coral reef, Building material Inshore, Seaweed Forest, Coconut -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 Financial Social Human Political Natural Physical Impacts Climate Temperature increase Rainfall change Sea level rise Ocean acidification Human population Exploitation Land use change Pollution Figure 23. The current top 30 most important EGS (left), potential impact for each EGS in 2030 (centre), and relative levels of adaptive capacity today according to the six capitals (right) for Typology 1 Fishing. 46 Table 18. Adaptation strategies identified by participants for Typology 1 Fishing, listed in descending order of importance Adaptation strategy 1. Improved standard of living for fishing communities 2. Alternative environmental management strategies 3. More water efficient cropping and re-cycling 4. Mangrove planting to protect coastline and create fish habitat Impacted EGS and threats addressed, or EGS alternatives Capitals addressed Resources required to implement strategy 1. Training, infrastructure and facilities 2. Capital assistance 3. Fish processing facilities 4. Socialization 5. Institutional strengthening Stakeholders required to implement strategy Inshore, offshore and coral reef fisheries in response to climate change and overexploitation due to population growth 1. Physical 2. Social 3. Financial Management of coral reefs, mangroves, water and agricultural land 1. Human 2. Social 3. Natural 4. Financial 5. Political 1. Water quality monitoring tools 2. Coral reef protection 3. Mangrove seedlings 1. NTB and District Governments 2. NGOs 3. Private sector Improved land and fresh water conservation which is impacted by rainfall decline and poor land use Impacts of sea level rise on coastal habitat and fisheries overexploitation 1. Financial 2. Physical 3. Natural 1. Technology 2. Water management infrastructure and facilities 1. NTB and District Governments 2. NGOs 3. Private sector 1. Physical 2. Natural 3. Financial 1. Mangrove seedlings 2. Tools and facilities 3. Information technology 1. NTB and District Governments 2. NGOs 3. Private sector 1. NTB and District Government 2. NGOs 3. Private sector Research needed to develop strategy Social, institutional and economic development (e.g. fisheries management, building fishermens’ capacity) Develop sustainable resource use and management systems Develop improved planting decisions and water management Climate change and sea level rise information Scenario 1 Adaptive NTB Mal-adaptive? No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions Scenario 2 Well-being village Mal-adaptive? No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions Scenario 3 Blooming flower No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions Mal-adaptive? No, because it will be adaptive for all conditions 2030 2011 2060 2090 Well-being Village Human resources development 6 NTB LIVELIHOODS VISION 5 1 + Adaptive capacity DRIVERS OF CHANGE Adaptive NTB NTB LIVELIHOODS 2 Blooming Flower 4 Climate change 3 Impact on human wellbeing Jungle Law Figure 24. Summary of workshop process and results for Sessions 1 – 6. Numbers refer to each session. Figure 25. Case study sub-districts selected for Activity 4 community case studies 48 4. WORKSHOP EVALUATION A questionnaire survey carried out before and after the workshop demonstrated that participants found the process useful, with 72% stating that the workshop had “increased my understanding of climate change and how NTB can adapt” (Figure 26). Participants’ perceptions of the future also altered, with 72% thinking of “the future” as 20 or more years before, increasing to 84% after the workshop (Figure 27). Before the workshop only 14% considered that “NTB’s climate adaptation policies are enabling NTB to be ready to cope with climate change”, but this increased to 33% after the workshop (Figure 28). Participants also appeared to have a more realistic perception of climate change, with 39% strongly agreeing to the statement “climate change poses a risk to me personally” before, falling to 23% after the workshop (Figure 29). The information presented in this scenario planning workshop: increased my understanding of climate change and how NTB can adapt 3% 5% made me motivated to increase my knowledge 18% made me motivated to take action 2% 72% all of the above no answer Figure 26. Participants’ (n=34) perceptions of the information presented in the workshop How many years into the future do you think about when you hear the word ‘future’? 2% 7% 7% 0-5 years 11% 6-10 years 11-15 years 16-20 years more than 20 years 73% How many years into the future do you think about when you hear the word ‘future’? 3% 3% 3% 7% 0-5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years 16-20 years more than 20 years 84% Figure 27. Participants’ (n=34) perceptions of the future before (top) and after (bottom) the workshop 50 Figure 28. Participants’ (n=34) perceptions of NTB adaptation policies before (top) and after (bottom) the workshop How much do you agree with the following statement?: “Climate change poses a risk to me personally.” 2% 2% Strongly agree 7% Agree 39% Neutral Disagree No answer 50% How much do you agree with the following statement?: “Climate change poses a risk to me personally.” 2% 8% 23% 13% Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree 54% Figure 29. Participants’ (n=34) perceptions of personal risks posed by climate change before (top) and after (bottom) the workshop 52 5. REFERENCES Brown, P.R., Nelson, R., Jacobs, B., Kokic, P., Tracey, J., Ahmed, M. and DeVoil, P. (2010). Enabling natural resource managers to self-assess their adaptive capacity. Agricultural Systems 103:562–568. Ellis, F. (2000). Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries. Oxford University Press: Oxford. Fachry, A., Hanartani, Supartiningsih, S. and Butler, J.R.A. (2011). Social, cultural and economic trends in NTB and their drivers of change. AusAID-CSIRO Research for Development Alliance, University of Mataram, NTB Government. CSIRO Climate Adaptation Flagship, Brisbane, and University of Mataram, Lombok. Hallegatte, S. (2009). Strategies to adapt to an uncertain climate change. Global Environmental Change Human Policy Dimensions 19:240-247. International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007). Climate Change 2007 - The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup (2009). Risk and Adaptation Assessment to Climate Change in Lombok Island West Nusa Tenggara Province. Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup, GIZ, WWF, Jakarta. Kirono, D.G.C., McGregor, J., Nguyen, K., Katzfey, J. and Kent, D. (2010). Regional climate change simulation and training workshop on climate change over eastern Indonesia and Vietnam. A report to the CSIRO-AusAID Research for Development Alliance, Australia. McGregor, J. L. and Dix, M.R. (2008). An updated description of the Conformal-Cubic Atmospheric Model. In High Resolution Simulation of the Atmosphere and Ocean, Eds. K. Hamilton and W. Ohfuchi, Springer, 51-76. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: a Framework for Assessment. Island Press, Washington DC. Mitchell, R., Agle, B. and Wood, D. (1997). Towards a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review 22(4):853-86. Skewes, T., Lyne, V., Butler, J.R.A., Mitchell, D., Poloczanska, E., Williams, K., Brewer, D., McLeod, I., Rochester, W., Sun, C. and Long, B. (2011). Melanesian coastal and marine ecosystem assets: assessment framework and Milne Bay case study. CSIRO Final Report to the CSIRO AusAID Alliance. CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Brisbane Smit, B. and Wandel, J. (2006). Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Global Environmental Change 16 (3):282–292. Suadnya, I., Habibi, P. and Handayani, T. (2011). Final report: NTB livelihood systems synthesis. AusAID-CSIRO Research for Development Alliance, University of Mataram, NTB Government. CSIRO Climate Adaptation Flagship, Brisbane, and University of Mataram, Lombok. Walker, B.H., Holling, C.S., Carpenter, S. and Kinzig, A. (2005). Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 9:5 54 APPENDIX I: WORKSHOP AGENDA Climate Futures and Rural Livelihood Adaptation Strategies in Nusa Tenggara Barat Province, Indonesia NTB Scenario Planning Workshop Monday 30th May – Thursday 2nd June 2011 Sanur Paradise Plaza Hotel, Bali Workshop objectives: 1. Identify most vulnerable livelihoods in NTB 2. Identify priority adaptation strategies 3. Identify case studies SUMMARY OF WORKSHOP ACTIVITIES Monday 30th May Stakeholders arrive and check in Welcome dinner DAY 1: Tuesday 31st May Session 1: What are the drivers of change for rural livelihoods in NTB? Session 2: What are the desired and possible futures for NTB livelihoods? DAY 2: Wednesday 1st June Session 3: What impact will the Business as Usual future have on human well-being? Session 4: What is the adaptive capacity of NTB communities today? DAY 3: Thursday 2nd June Session 5: Which are the most vulnerable livelihoods in NTB? Session 6: What are the priority adaptation strategies required to improve livelihoods in NTB? WORKSHOP PROGRAM Monday 30th May All day Stakeholders arrive and check in Evening Stakeholders’ dinner and introductions DAY 1: Tuesday 31st May 8:30 Opening address 9:00 Introduction, evaluation and consents: Prof. Yusuf Sutaryono, UNRAM and Imam Suharto, VECO Indonesia (Facilitator), Erin Bohensky (CSIRO) 9:20 – 10:20 Session 1: What are the drivers of change for rural livelihoods in NTB? Activity Activity time Subject Presenter Materials, aids etc. Presentation 20 mins Global futures Erin Bohensky (CSIRO) Powerpoint, posters Presentation 20 mins Population and economic trends and thresholds Anwar Fachry (UNRAM) Powerpoint, posters Presentation 20 mins Cultural trends, gender issues and thresholds Hanartani (UNRAM) Powerpoint, posters 10:20 – 10:45 Morning tea and coffee 56 Outputs 10:45 – 11:15 Session 1 continued Activity Activity time Subject Presenter Materials, aids etc. Presentation 15 mins Current NTB climate Adi Ripaldi (BMKG) Powerpoint, posters Presentation 15 mins Climate change and sea level rise projections in NTB Dewi Kirono (CSIRO) Powerpoint, posters including sea level rise and Lombok Vulnerability Assessment Introduction 10 mins Describe session on drivers Imam Suharto Flip chart Four working groups identify drivers 30 mins List drivers of change Working groups facilitated by Tim Kolaboratif Flip chart for each group List of drivers for each group Discussion 20 mins Cluster drivers from working groups Imam Suharto Central flip chart Clustered themes of drivers Voting 15 mins Voting for themes of drivers by importance, two votes per person Imam Suharto Central flip chart Ranked themes of drivers 12:30 – 1:30 Lunch Outputs 1:30 – 3:30 Session 2: What are the desired and possible futures for NTB livelihoods? Activity Activity time Subject Presenter Materials, aids etc. Outputs Discussion 15 mins Desired future vision for NTB rural livelihoods in 2090 Imam Suharto Central flip chart Statement of desired future in terms of income, health, food security, social cohesion, freedom of choice Presentation 30 mins Introduce scenario planning, select and describe two most important themes of drivers Imam Suharto Central flip chart to explain and describe drivers Two major driver themes selected and described Four working groups develop scenario narratives 1 ½ hours Describe scenarios with narratives and pictures for 2030, 2060, 2090, identifying thresholds and management actions Four working groups, facilitated by Tim Kolaboratif Flip chart and pens for each group Narrative and pictures for each scenario, one working group per scenario 3:30 – 4:00 Tea 4:00 – 5:00 Session 2 continued Activity Activity time Subject Presenter Materials, aids etc. Outputs Four working groups present scenarios 1 hour Presentation and discussion of scenarios Four working groups Audio recording of narratives and discussion Feedback from audience and refining of scenarios 58 DAY 2: Wednesday 1st June 9:00 – 10:30 Session 3: What impact will the Business as Usual future have on human well-being? Activity Activity time Subject Presenter Materials, aids etc. Review Day 1 Preview Day 2 30 mins Review of drivers, desired future, selected scenario, and preview Day 2 Imam Suharto All posters, flip charts from Day 1, working groups’ scenarios grouped on walls Presentation and discussion 30 mins EGS typology for NTB Wayan Suadnya (UNRAM) Powerpoint and printed maps of typologies Outputs Tim Skewes (CSIRO) Presentation 30 mins Describe session on valuation of EGS for human well-being 10:30 – 11:00 Tea 11:00 – 12:30 Session 3 continued Tim Skewes (CSIRO) Wayan Suadnya (UNRAM) Powerpoint of threat-asset interaction model Activity Activity time Subject Presenter Materials, aids etc. Outputs Four working groups 1 ½ hours Valuation of EGS for all NTB Four working groups, facilitated by Tim Kolaboratif Printed typology map with written descriptions, valuation spread sheets Completed valuation sheets for NTB. Data entered into computer and analysed by Tim Kolaboratif during lunch 12:30 – 1:30 Lunch 1:30 – 3:30 Session 4: What is the adaptive capacity of NTB communities today? Activity Activity time Subject Presenter Materials, aids etc. Outputs Presentation and discussion 30 mins Presentation of results of impacts on human wellbeing for each typology Tim Skewes (CSIRO) Powerpoint maps of impacts on typologies Table of overall impact on human well-being for each typology Presentation and discussion 30 mins Measuring adaptive capacity using six capitals, identifying indicators for each capital Sarah Park (CSIRO) Powerpoint, flip charts Indicators for each capital identified Six working groups, one per capital 1 hour Scoring adaptive capacity for each capital in each typology Working groups, facilitated by Tim Kolaboratif Printed typology maps with written descriptions, flip charts: one capital per group 3:30 – 4:00 Tea 4:00 – 5:00 Session 4 continued Wayan Suadnya (UNRAM) Imam Suharto Activity Activity time Subject Presenter Materials, aids etc. Six working groups (continued) 30 mins Scoring adaptive capacity for each capital in each typology Working groups, facilitated by Tim Kolaboratif Printed typology maps with written descriptions, flip charts: one capital per group Presentation of results by working groups 30 mins Results of adaptive capacity index for each typology Working groups Flip charts and typology maps 60 Outputs Scored indicators for each typology. Data entered into computer and adaptive capacity index produced for each typology DAY 3: Thursday 2nd June 9:00 – 10:30 Session 5: Which are the most vulnerable livelihoods in NTB? Activity Activity time Subject Presenter Materials, aids etc. Review Day 2 Preview Day 3 10 mins Review of desired future, EGS typology and impacts, preview Day 3 Imam Suharto Powerpoint and paper maps from Day 2 Presentation and discussion 40 mins Combined analysis of typologies’ vulnerability from Day 2 Tim Skewes (CSIRO) Powerpoint results of impacts, adaptive capacity index and livelihoods vulnerability index Livelihoods vulnerability index for each typology – table and map Powerpoint map of vulnerability index Livelihoods vulnerability index and case study typologies agreed Sarah Park (CSIRO) Wayan Suadnya (UNRAM) Discussion 10:30 – 11:00 40 mins Tea Discussion of livelihood typologies by vulnerability, identification of case study typologies Imam Suharto Outputs 11:00 – 12:30 Session 6: What are the priority adaptation strategies required to improve livelihoods in NTB? Activity Activity time Subject Presenter Materials, aids etc. Introduction 15 mins Adaptation strategies and policies Imam Suharto Powerpoint examples of adaptation strategies and policies Crop suitability modelling Kisman (UNRAM) Presentation 15 mins Ketut Puspadi (BPTP) Dian Nur Ratri (BMKG) Outputs Powerpoint, printed maps and posters of current and future rice and maize crop suitability Brian Long (CSIRO) Presentation 15 mins Payments for Ecosystem Services for water Latifa (UNRAM) Powerpoint and posters Working groups 45 mins Adaptation strategies required for case study typologies Working groups (one per typology), facilitated by Tim Kolaboratif Print outs of EGS importance, and detailed impacts for each typology, adaptive capacity data, typology maps Adaptation strategies ranked and described for each typology: 1. EGS and threat addressed 2. Capital addressed 3. Resources required 4. Stakeholders required 5. Research required 6. Mal-adaptive for other future scenarios? 12:30 – 1:30 Lunch 62 1:30 – 3:30 Session 6 continued Activity Activity time Subject Presenter Materials, aids etc. Outputs Working groups continued 1 hour Adaptation strategies required for case study typologies Working groups (one per typology), facilitated by Tim Kolaboratif Print outs of EGS importance, and detailed impacts for each typology, adaptive capacity data, typology maps Adaptation strategies ranked and described for each typology Discussion 1 hour Presentation of strategies and discussion about possible mal-adaptation Ketut Puspadi (BPTP) Imam Suharto Working groups’ flip chart paper and strategies taped onto wall Refined adaptation strategies on flip chart paper Materials, aids etc. Outputs Questionnaires, powerpoint images and flip chart Workshop evaluation 3:30 – 4:00 Tea and stakeholders check out 4:00 – 5:00 Conclusions and next steps Activity Activity time Subject Presenter Discussion 15 mins Next steps Prof. Sutaryono (UNRAM) James Butler (CSIRO) Discussion 45 mins Workshop evaluation and close Erin Bohensky (CSIRO) Imam Suharto Prof. Sutaryono (UNRAM) APPENDIX II: DISTRICTS AND RURAL SUB-DISTRICTS BY TYPOLOGY Typology Sub-district District Area 2 (km ) Coast (km) Population (2006) Pop den. 2 (per km ) 1 Ambalawi Bima 190.2 19.3 17947 94.0 1 Madapangga Bima 245.4 0.0 27980 114.0 1 Parado Bima 196.8 22.6 8861 45.0 1 Sanggar Bima 515.8 38.9 11632 23.0 1 Sape Bima 219.4 116.0 50349 230.0 1 Soromandi Bima 329.9 71.4 13260 40.0 1 Tambora Bima 678.4 66.0 3830 6.0 1 Wera Bima 407.9 94.1 27825 68.0 1 Praya Timur Central Lombok 84.4 0.9 63773 755.0 1 Pujut Central Lombok 222.8 60.8 94995 426.0 1 Hu'u Dompu 243.5 38.3 15851 65.0 1 Kilo Dompu 180.9 27.1 11997 66.0 1 Pajo Dompu 78.5 7.4 12508 159.0 1 Woja Dompu 362.9 29.4 51119 141.0 1 Jerowaru East Lombok 149.5 152.8 50331 337.0 1 Keruak East Lombok 28.2 5.6 46776 1659.0 2 Lambu Bima 324.8 164.0 31758 98.0 2 Langgudu Bima 320.3 152.0 30055 94.0 2 Wawo Bima 85.8 0.0 17853 208.0 2 Kempo Dompu 307.0 50.2 18029 59.0 2 Manggalewa Dompu 283.4 62.7 27719 98.0 2 Pekat Dompu 469.9 73.1 30691 65.0 3 Belo Bima 73.0 0.0 19517 267.0 3 Bolo Bima 86.2 10.9 41900 486.0 3 Monta Bima 172.9 14.5 33230 192.0 3 Palibelo Bima 82.0 12.8 23929 292.0 3 Woha Bima 122.0 11.6 40508 332.0 3 Batukliang Central Lombok 44.8 0.0 71289 1593.0 3 Jonggat Central Lombok 64.0 0.0 87211 1362.0 3 Pringgarata Central Lombok 52.0 0.0 59789 1151.0 3 Dompu Dompu 166.4 4.2 49565 298.0 64 Typology Sub-district District Area 2 (km ) Coast (km) Population (2006) Pop den. 2 (per km ) 4 Aikmel East Lombok 83.2 0.0 89872 1080.0 4 Pringgabaya East Lombok 117.9 31.7 91806 779.0 4 Pringgasela East Lombok 73.8 0.0 48342 655.0 4 Sambelia East Lombok 207.5 70.1 31249 151.0 4 Sembalun East Lombok 257.8 2.0 18209 71.0 4 Suela East Lombok 128.1 0.0 37507 293.0 4 Wanasaba East Lombok 68.5 0.0 60107 878.0 4 Gunungsari West Lombok 95.9 0.0 77132 804.0 4 Narmada West Lombok 138.9 0.0 89507 644.0 5 Donggo Bima 123.3 0.0 16586 135.0 5 Lambitu Bima 88.7 0.0 3187 36.0 5 Janapria Central Lombok 76.3 0.0 67826 889.0 5 Kopang Central Lombok 94.5 0.0 75835 802.0 5 Praya Central Lombok 72.6 0.0 100105 1379.0 5 Praya Barat Central Lombok 128.3 25.9 67063 523.0 5 Praya Barat Daya Central Lombok 135.7 5.6 50874 375.0 5 Praya Tengah Central Lombok 86.4 0.0 59658 691.0 5 Labuhan Haji East Lombok 41.7 14.6 50917 1221.0 5 Masbagik East Lombok 28.5 0.0 90739 3186.0 5 Montong Gading East Lombok 37.5 0.0 37014 987.0 5 Sakra East Lombok 32.7 0.0 51899 1585.0 5 Sakra Barat East Lombok 26.8 0.0 45609 1701.0 5 Sakra Timur East Lombok 29.8 5.4 41412 1390.0 5 Selong East Lombok 20.1 0.0 73889 3668.0 5 Sikur East Lombok 85.3 0.0 68228 800.0 5 Sukamulia East Lombok 13.1 0.0 29501 2257.0 5 Suralaga East Lombok 38.5 0.0 48824 1267.0 5 Terara East Lombok 38.3 0.0 69399 1813.0 Typology Sub-district District Area 2 (km ) Coast (km) Population (2006) Pop den. 2 (per km ) 6 Alas Sumbawa 206.7 38.6 29417 142.0 6 Alas Barat Sumbawa 62.4 15.5 20366 326.0 6 Batu Lanteh Sumbawa 298.4 0.0 10788 36.0 6 Buer Sumbawa 200.0 20.2 16018 80.0 6 Empang Sumbawa 310.6 33.5 22593 73.0 6 Labangka Sumbawa 125.3 22.0 9540 76.0 6 Labuhan Badas Sumbawa 454.3 135.5 27207 60.0 6 Lantung Sumbawa 200.7 0.0 2717 14.0 6 Lape Sumbawa 237.1 120.6 16077 68.0 6 Lenangguar Sumbawa 563.6 14.7 6484 12.0 6 Lopok Sumbawa 171.0 0.0 17652 103.0 6 Lunyuk Sumbawa 763.9 50.1 17183 22.0 6 Maronge Sumbawa 258.7 9.1 10205 39.0 6 Moyo Hilir Sumbawa 213.4 100.0 22027 103.0 6 Moyo Hulu Sumbawa 251.2 0.0 20846 83.0 6 Moyo Utara Sumbawa 79.4 18.3 9417 119.0 6 Orong Telu Sumbawa 298.4 0.0 6009 20.0 6 Plampang Sumbawa 514.6 75.1 26408 51.0 6 Rhee Sumbawa 189.2 18.1 7305 39.0 6 Ropang Sumbawa 340.3 32.4 5808 17.0 6 Sumbawa Sumbawa 68.9 11.9 53956 783.0 6 Tarano Sumbawa 455.7 134.3 15199 33.0 6 Unter Iwes Sumbawa 82.6 0.0 18341 222.0 6 Utan Sumbawa 220.1 47.1 29187 133.0 6 Batulayar West Lombok 51.0 12.0 38654 757.0 6 Gerung West Lombok 69.0 4.4 75545 1095.0 6 Kediri West Lombok 27.8 0.0 57058 2052.0 6 Kuripan West Lombok 21.7 0.0 34130 1573.0 6 Labuapi West Lombok 31.1 4.2 63801 2051.0 6 Lembar West Lombok 99.8 17.0 47819 479.0 6 Lingsar West Lombok 108.1 0.0 68037 629.0 6 Sekotong West Lombok 322.1 162.7 51540 160.0 6 Brang Ene West Sumbawa 168.9 0.0 4842 29.0 6 Brang Rea West Sumbawa 278.4 0.0 11327 41.0 6 Jereweh West Sumbawa 421.2 34.5 7077 17.0 6 Maluk West Sumbawa 133.8 0.0 9965 74.0 66 Area Coast Typology Sub-district District (km ) 2 (km) Population (2006) Pop den. 2 (per km ) 6 Pototano West Sumbawa 126.1 94.5 8160 65.0 6 Sekongkang West Sumbawa 265.9 61.5 7214 27.0 6 Seteluk West Sumbawa 140.8 7.7 14617 104.0 6 Taliwang West Sumbawa 254.6 37.0 37876 149.0 7 Batukliang Utara Central Lombok 203.7 0.0 45687 224.0 7 Bayan North Lombok 308.0 21.4 45318 147.0 7 Gangga North Lombok 161.9 10.6 45154 279.0 7 Kayangan North Lombok 147.3 13.5 40203 273.0 7 Pemenang North Lombok 56.8 34.4 31368 552.0 7 Tanjung North Lombok 88.9 13.4 45955 517.0 APPENDIX III: CLIMATE AND POPULATION PROJECTIONS FOR THE ‘BUSINESS AS USUAL’ SCENARIO BY TYPOLOGY Typology 2 Fishing and seaweed Typology 3 Rice and bandeng ponds Typology 4 Diverse agriculture and forest use Typology 5 Rice and tobacco Typology 6 Diverse livestock and cropping Typology 7 Diverse cropping and coastal activity Projection Year Typology 1 Fishing Rainfall change (%) 2030 -5.0 -4.8 -4.9 -4.3 -1.6 -6.0 -9.3 NTB -5.2 2060 -3.2 -3.2 -4.0 -0.8 0.3 -4.8 -9.3 -3.7 2090 -7.3 -7.9 -8.2 -5.5 -3.7 -8.2 -12.3 -7.3 2030 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.9 2060 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 2090 3.2 3.2 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.2 3.3 2030 0.03 0.01 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 2050 0.07 0.03 0.25 0.03 0.01 0.07 0.01 0.07 2100 0.16 0.06 0.55 0.07 0.01 0.16 0.02 0.16 2030 26.7 27.9 26.0 27.6 26.4 25.4 25.6 26.3 2050 42.9 45.5 41.6 44.0 42.0 39.5 40.0 41.8 2100 71.4 74.6 69.9 72.8 70.4 67.4 68.0 70.1 2010 126.3 89.5 508.1 470.5 893.8 106.2 255.1 205.8 2030 160.0 114.4 640.4 600.4 1130.2 133.1 320.5 260.1 2050 180.4 130.1 719.5 677.5 1269.4 148.1 357.2 291.8 2100 216.5 156.2 863.4 813.0 1523.3 177.7 428.6 350.2 0 Temperature change ( C) Sea level rise (% area of coastal kecamatan) Population growth (%) Population density (people per ha) 68 APPENDIX IV: 2030 IMPACTS AND ADAPTIVE CAPACITY FOR TYPOLOGIES 2, 4, 6 EGS Importance (%) 0 Rice production, Wetland Brown algae (Sargassum), Inshore Fishing, Inshore Cattle, Dryland Peanut, Dryland Candle nut, Forest Garlic, Dryland Ecotourism, Forest Ecotourism, Coastal Mung bean, Dryland Mangrove for timber, Coastal Pearl farm, Inshore Cassava, Dryland Vegetables, Wetland Peanut, Wetland Onion, Dryland Custard apple, Dryland Durian, Forest Prawn pond, Wetland Pineapple, Dryland Agriculture (Irrigation), River, spring water Drinking water, River, spring water Fishing, Offshore Drinking water, Ground water Agriculture (irrigation), Ground water Banana, Dryland Salt pond, Wetland Chicken, Dryland Soya bean, Dryland Timber, Forest 5 10 Potential impact (-1 to +1) 15 -0.3 Wetland, Rice production Inshore, Brown algae (Sargassum) Inshore, Fishing Dryland, Cattle Dryland, Peanut Forest, Candle nut Dryland, Garlic Forest, Ecotourism Coastal, Ecotourism Dryland, Mung bean Coastal, Mangrove for timber Inshore, Pearl farm Dryland, Cassava Wetland, Vegetables Wetland, Peanut Dryland, Onion Dryland, Custard apple Forest, Durian Wetland, Prawn pond Dryland, Pineapple River, spring water, Agriculture (Irrigation) River, spring water, Drinking water Offshore, Fishing Ground water, Drinking water Ground water, Agriculture (irrigation) Dryland, Banana Wetland, Salt pond Dryland, Chicken Dryland, Soya bean Forest, Timber -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 Financial Social Human Political Natural Physical Impacts Climate Temperature increase Rainfall change Sea level rise Ocean acidification Human population Exploitation Land use change Pollution The current top 30 most important EGS (left), potential impact for each EGS in 2030 (centre), and relative levels of adaptive capacity today according to the six capitals (right) for Typology 2 Fishing and seaweed. Potential impact (-1 to +1) EGS Importance (%) 0 Rice production, Wetland Agriculture (irrigation), Ground water Peanut, Wetland Prawn pond, Wetland Onion, Wetland Tobacco, Wetland Maize, Wetland Banana, Dryland Sand mining, Dryland Cattle, Dryland Goat, Wetland Cattle, Wetland Pineapple, Dryland Soya bean, Wetland Chicken, Dryland Coconut, Dryland Chicken, Wetland Agriculture (Irrigation), River, spring water Drinking water, River, spring water Timber, Forest Onion, Dryland Cashew, Dryland Drinking water, Ground water Honey bee, Forest Buffalo, Wetland Mung bean, Dryland Ecotourism, Forest Banana, Forest Mango, Forest Ecotourism, River, spring water 5 10 15 -0.5 -0.4 Rice production, Wetland Agriculture (irrigation), Ground water Peanut, Wetland Prawn pond, Wetland Onion, Wetland Tobacco, Wetland Maize, Wetland Banana, Dryland Sand mining, Dryland Cattle, Dryland Goat, Wetland Cattle, Wetland Pineapple, Dryland Soya bean, Wetland Chicken, Dryland Coconut, Dryland Chicken, Wetland Agriculture (Irrigation), River, spring water Drinking water, River, spring water Timber, Forest Onion, Dryland Cashew, Dryland Drinking water, Ground water Honey bee, Forest Buffalo, Wetland Mung bean, Dryland Ecotourism, Forest Banana, Forest Mango, Forest Ecotourism, River, spring water -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 Financial Social Human Political Natural Physical Impacts Climate Temperature increase Rainfall change Sea level rise Ocean acidification Human population Exploitation Land use change Pollution The current top 30 most important EGS (left), potential impact for each EGS in 2030 (centre), and relative levels of adaptive capacity today according to the six capitals (right) for Typology 4 Diverse agriculture and forest use. 70 Potential impact (-1 to +1) EGS Importance (%) 0 Rice production, Wetland Prawn pond, Wetland Mung bean, Dryland Onion, Dryland Sweet potato, Wetland Pineapple, Dryland Cattle, Wetland Custard apple, Dryland Agriculture (Irrigation), River, spring water Sand mining, Dryland Maize, Wetland Buffalo, Dryland Soya bean, Wetland Padi gogo production, Dryland Coconut, Dryland Drinking water, Ground water Agriculture (irrigation), Ground water Drinking water, River, spring water Vegetables, Wetland Red rice, Wetland Maize, Dryland Peanut, Wetland Goat, Wetland Salt pond, Wetland Tobacco, Dryland Cassava, Dryland Chicken, Dryland Avodado, Dryland Tamarind, Dryland Goat, Dryland 2 4 6 8 -0.3 Rice production, Wetland Prawn pond, Wetland Mung bean, Dryland Onion, Dryland Sweet potato, Wetland Pineapple, Dryland Cattle, Wetland Custard apple, Dryland Agriculture (Irrigation), River, spring water Sand mining, Dryland Maize, Wetland Buffalo, Dryland Soya bean, Wetland Padi gogo production, Dryland Coconut, Dryland Drinking water, Ground water Agriculture (irrigation), Ground water Drinking water, River, spring water Vegetables, Wetland Red rice, Wetland Maize, Dryland Peanut, Wetland Goat, Wetland Salt pond, Wetland Tobacco, Dryland Cassava, Dryland Chicken, Dryland Avodado, Dryland Tamarind, Dryland Goat, Dryland -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 Financial Social Human Political Natural Physical Impacts Climate Temperature increase Rainfall change Sea level rise Ocean acidification Human population Exploitation Land use change Pollution The current top 30 most important EGS (left), potential impact for each EGS in 2030 (centre), and relative levels of adaptive capacity today according to the six capitals (right) for Typology 6 Diverse livestock and cropping. CONTACTS: FURTHER INFORMATION: Professor Yusuf Sutaryono University of Mataram Email: ysf_25@yahoo.com Mobile: (+62) 0818369007 http://www.ausaid.gov.au/hottopics/topic.cfm?I D=2707_8209_4232_9569_1218 http://www.csiro.au/multimedia/Indonesia-AndClimate-Change Dr. James Butler CSIRO Climate Adaptation Flagship Email: James.Butler@csiro.au Mobile: (+61) 0437030120 http://www.csiro.au/news/Improvedclimatechange-projections-SE-Asia http://www.rfdalliance.com.au/site 72