Agricultural Economics
A. Sani Heidary; M. Daneshvar Kakhki; M. Sabouhi Sabouni; H. Mohammadi
Abstract
Introduction
Considering being located in arid and semi-arid regions of the world, Iran is influenced by the most severe impacts of drought. Drought is considered a major threat to the livelihood of rural households. During the recent drought, rural households faced significant losses and hardships, ...
Read More
Introduction
Considering being located in arid and semi-arid regions of the world, Iran is influenced by the most severe impacts of drought. Drought is considered a major threat to the livelihood of rural households. During the recent drought, rural households faced significant losses and hardships, underscoring their lack of preparedness for this natural hazard. Consequently, every society must take proactive measures to manage changes, mitigate threats, and respond effectively. A review of the country's drought management programs reveals that policymakers have consistently prioritized increased production, even amid the critical conditions of recent droughts. This focus on boosting production to meet the basic needs of a growing population has taken precedence over enhancing rural households' livelihoods and resilience. However, improving rural households' resilience in drought conditions hinges on prioritizing their capacity for adaptability and flexibility. Therefore, considering the sensitivity of the issue of resilience as a dominant approach effective on the dimensions of life and livelihood of rural households on the one hand and the lack of a comprehensive study on its underlying factors, on the other hand, this research seeks to answer two questions: First, what is the resilience level of rural households against drought? Second, what factors influence the resilience levels of rural households in drought conditions?
Materials and Methods
The statistical population of this study is 16,817 rural households in Zehak city, located in Sistan and Baluchistan province, which are strongly influenced by different climatic events such as drought, excessive heat, low rainfall and 120-day winds. A stratified random sampling method was used to determine the sample size. According to Cochran's formula, the sample size is estimated to be 376 households. Data were collected by completing multidimensional questionnaires along with semi-structured interviews from households in 2023. To measure the resilience capacity of rural households, the theoretical framework of TANGO based on the estimation of the three capacities of absorption, adaptation and transfer was used through the factor analysis method, in which attitudinal and mental aspects of resilience are also taken into account. Finally, partial proportional odds model has been used to evaluate the influencing factors on the resilience capacity of rural households.
Results and Discussion
The results of the state of resilience capacity of rural households in the region indicated that the average value of their resilience capacity is 26.27, which shows the low level of resilience capacity in the region. Also, the households of the region are in a bad situation based on the absorption, adaptation and transmission capacities, and the households of the region have a stronger transmission capacity than the absorption and adaptation capacity against drought. The results of grouping the resilience capacity of households reveal that 32.45% are in the vulnerable group, 28.19% are in the relative resilience group, 22.61% are in the resilient group and 16.76% are in the high resilience group. The results show that more than 60% of households are at very low levels of resilience. Finally, the partial proportional odds model results demonstrated that the variables of education of the head of the household, skill level in agricultural activities, savings, household income, number of household contacts with agricultural extension, membership of the head of the household in social groups and access to microcredits have a positive effect and variables of the value of the loss of agricultural products and the number of livestock lost have a negative effect on the resilience capacity of rural households against drought.
Conclusion
According to the findings, policy-makers should prioritize strengthening the variables that determine the resilience capacity and its dimensions in the implementation of drought management programs so that households can absorb drought shocks without damaging their basic components. Policy-makers should also target specific categories of risks, dimensions of vulnerability and resilience in different time periods (before, during, and after shock) in order to choose comprehensive strategies to build and increase resilience. For instance, before a shock, better access to early detection of emerging climate risks could help farmers plan their cropping activities accordingly. Access to climate information allows for forward-looking adaptation that reduces the impact of shocks and increases resilience.