Perceptions of environmental risks in Mozambique : implications for the success of adaptation and coping strategies
AbstractPolicies to promote adaptation climate risks often rely on the willing cooperation of the intended beneficiaries. If these beneficiaries disagree with policy makers and programme managers about the need for adaptation, or the effectiveness of the measures they are being asked to undertake, then implementation of the policies will fail. A case study of a resettlement programme in Mozambique shows this to be the case. Farmers and policy-maker disagreed about the seriousness of climate risks, and the potential negative consequences of proposed adaptive measures. A project to provide more information about climate change to farmers did not change their beliefs. The results highlight the need for active dialog across stakeholder groups, as a necessary condition for formulating policies that can then be successfully implemented.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by The World Bank in its series Policy Research Working Paper Series with number 4417.
Date of creation: 01 Nov 2007
Date of revision:
Hazard Risk Management; Environmental Economics&Policies; Climate Change; Population Policies; Rural Poverty Reduction;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-AFR-2007-12-08 (Africa)
- NEP-AGR-2007-12-08 (Agricultural Economics)
- NEP-ALL-2007-12-08 (All new papers)
- NEP-DEV-2007-12-08 (Development)
- NEP-ENV-2007-12-08 (Environmental Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Marianne Bertrand & Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir, 2004.
"A Behavioral-Economics View of Poverty,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 94(2), pages 419-423, May.
- Baron, Jonathan & Ritov, Ilana, 1994. "Reference Points and Omission Bias," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 475-498, September.
- Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979.
"Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
7656, David K. Levine.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March.
- Patt, Anthony, 2001. "Understanding uncertainty: forecasting seasonal climate for farmers in Zimbabwe," Risk, Decision and Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(02), pages 105-119, June.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1990. "Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1325-48, December.
- Ritov, Ilana & Baron, Jonathan, 1992. " Status-Quo and Omission Biases," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 49-61, February.
- Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. " Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Roula I. Yazigi).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.