Background: Globally, the incidence of disasters is rising. Uganda is one of several countries experiencing an upturn in adverse climate events. Although Uganda’s government has implemented several strategies to mitigate land-use and population pressure-related climate adversity in high-risk zones, communities have not responded to them sufficiently, implying a resilience gap. The objective of this study was to describe the concerns and misconceptions impeding community uptake of climate risk mitigation policies in a rural area in Eastern Uganda. Methods: The study was conducted in Butalejja and Bududa districts in the Mt. Elgon region of Eastern Uganda that is prone to recurrent land-slides and floods. The design was a qualitative study, consisting of 15 small group discussions per district, nested within a Deliberative Poll®. Key government of Uganda policy options on sustainable settlement and family planning were presented to participants who then discussed them with the guidance of a moderator. Results: Not only were participants distrustful of how the land from which they are evacuated would be managed, but they also resented being resettled in unfamiliar places with substantially different topography, low soil fertility, and at a great distance from their ancestral sites and social networks. A latent theme from the data was the pervasive expectation by communities to be assisted by government in all areas of their livelihood needs. Key barriers to Family Planning included lack of safety guarantees, helplessness in the event of a side effect, failure by communities to link family size to resource constraints, and feelings of entitlement to assistance among people with large families. The misconceptions were fueled by a large information asymmetry between the community members and the policy makers. Conclusion: Lasting solutions to climate risk in rural communities will require continuous information-driven dialogue between community members and implementers to address major misconceptions and information asymmetries regarding risk mitigation policies.
| Published in | Science Journal of Public Health (Volume 9, Issue 4) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.sjph.20210904.11 |
| Page(s) | 109-120 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Policy, Deliberative Polling, Climate Risk-Mitigation, Disaster, Land Use, Family Planning
| [1] | IPCC. (2012). Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (Ipcc) Managing The Risks Of Extreme Events And Disasters To Advance Climate Change Adaptation - Summary for policymakers. Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139177245. |
| [2] | IPCC. (2014). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) AR5 synthesis report: Climate change 2014. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324. |
| [3] | RAN. (2015). Resilient Africa Network (RAN). The State of African Resilience; Understanding Dimensions of Vulnerability and Adaptation. Retrieved from http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PBAAC215.pdf last accessed September 25 2017. |
| [4] | National Planning Authority. (2015). Second National Development Plan (NDPII) Uganda 2015/16-2019/20. National Planning Authority Uganda. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00624.x. |
| [5] | Pomeroy, D. Tushabe, H. and Loh, J. (2017). The State of Uganda’s Biodiversity 2017. Kampala, Uganda. https://doi.org/ISBN: 978-9970-9690-0-5. |
| [6] | World Bank. (2019). The World Bank In Uganda. Retrieved May 2, 2019, from https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/uganda/overview. |
| [7] | UBOS (2014). National Population and Housing Census, Main Report, Kampala, Uganda. ubos.org/wp-content/uploads/publications/03_20182014_National_Census_Main_Report.pdf. |
| [8] | Fishkin, J. S., Mayega, R. W., Atuyambe, L., Tumuhamye, N., Ssentongo, J., Siu, A., & Bazeyo, W. (2017). Applying deliberative democracy in Africa: Uganda’s first deliberative polls. Daedalus. https://doi.org/10.1162/DAED_a_00453. |
| [9] | Atuyambe, L. M., Ediau, M., Orach, C. G., Musenero, M., & Bazeyo, W. (2011). Land slide disaster in eastern Uganda: Rapid assessment of water, sanitation and hygiene situation in Bulucheke camp, Bududa district. Environmental Health: A Global Access Science Source. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-10-38. |
| [10] | UDHS. (2016). Uganda Demographic Health Survey 2016. Uganda Demographic and Health Survey 2016. |
| [11] | Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001. |
| [12] | Nelson, B. B., Chung, P. J., DuPlessis, H. M., Flores, L., Ryan, G. W., & Kataoka, S. H. (2011). Strengthening families of children with developmental concerns: Parent perceptions of developmental screening and services in head start. Ethnicity and Disease. |
| [13] | Badri, S. A., Asgary, A., Eftekhari, A. R., & Levy, J. (2006). Post-disaster resettlement, development and change: A case study of the 1990 Manjil earthquake in Iran. Disasters. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0361-3666.2006.00332.x. |
| [14] | Cernea Michael M., M. C. (2000). The effects of resettlement on access to common property resources - Risks and reconstruction: experiences of resettlers and refugees. Washington. Retrieved from ocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/947311468739277702/pdf/multi-page.pdf. |
| [15] | Roizblatt, A., & Pilowsky, D. (1996). Forced migration and resettlement: Its impact on families and individuals. Contemporary Family Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02195714. |
| [16] | Neema, S., Mongo Bua, G., Tuhebwe, D., Ssentongo, J., Tumuhamye, N., Mayega, R. W.,… Bazeyo, W. (2018). Community Perspective on Policy Options for Resettlement Management: A Case Study of Risk Reduction in Bududa, Eastern Uganda. PLoS Currents. https://doi.org/10.1371/currents.dis.49e8e547de25ca1c1f9edbbfc8b9efa5. |
| [17] | Guzmán, J. M., G; McGranahan, G; Schensul, D; Tacoli, C. (2009). Population Dynamics and Climate Change (2009th ed.). New York and London: UNFPA and IIED. Retrieved from https://www.iied.org/population-dynamics-climate-change-book. |
| [18] | Wily, L. A. (2011). “The Law is to Blame”: The Vulnerable Status of Common Property Rights in Sub-Saharan Africa. Development and Change. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2011.01712.x. |
| [19] | Fay, C., & Michon, G. (2005). Redressing forestry hegemony when a forestry regulatory framework is best replaced by an Agrarian One. Forests Trees and Livelihoods. https://doi.org/10.1080/14728028.2005.9752520. |
| [20] | Lee Peluso, N. (2011). Whose Woods are These? Counter-Mapping Forest Territories in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Antipode. |
| [21] | Lynch, O. J., & Talbott, K. (1995). Balancing acts: community-based forest management and national law in Asia and the Pacific. Lynch, Owen J Talbott, Kirk. |
| [22] | Peluso, N. L. (1992). Rich Forests, Poor People Resource Control and Resistance in Java. University of California Press. Retrieved from https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520089310/rich-forests-poor-people. |
| [23] | Vandergeest, P. (1996). Mapping nature: Territorialization of forest rights in Thailand. Society and Natural Resources. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941929609380962. |
| [24] | CDC. (2017). CDC Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication (CERC). Retrieved May 10, 2019, from https://emergency.cdc.gov/cerc/cerccorner/article_102116.asp. |
| [25] | Becker, C. (2009). Disaster Recovery: A Local Government Responsibility. (cover story). Public Management 00333611. |
| [26] | Capurchande, R., Coene, G., Roelens, K., & Meulemans, H. (2017). “If I have only two children and they die. who will take care of me?” -a qualitative study exploring knowledge, attitudes and practices about family planning among Mozambican female and male adults. BMC Women’s Health. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-017-0419-6. |
| [27] | Ntambue, A. M., Tshiala, R. N., Malonga, F. K., Ilunga, T. M., Kamonayi, J. M., Kazadi, S. T., … Donnen, P. (2017). Use of modern contraceptive methods in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: prevalence and barriers in the health zone of Dibindi, Mbuji-Mayi. Utilisation Des Methodes Contraceptives Modernes En Republique Democratique Du Congo: Prevalence et Barrieres Dans La Zone de Sante de Dibindi a Mbuji-Mayi. |
| [28] | Tibaijuka, L., Odongo, R., Welikhe, E., Mukisa, W., Kugonza, L., Busingye, I., … Bajunirwe, F. (2017). Factors influencing use of long-acting versus short-acting contraceptive methods among reproductive-age women in a resource-limited setting. BMC Women’s Health. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-017-0382-2. |
| [29] | Akaba, G., Ketare, N., & Tile, W. (2016). A community-based, mixed-methods study of the attitudes and behaviors of men regarding modern family planning in Nigeria. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2016.04.009. |
| [30] | Apanga, P. A., & Adam, M. A. (2015). Factors influencing the uptake of family planning services in the Talensi district, Ghana. Pan African Medical Journal. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2015.20.10.5301. |
| [31] | Genet, E., Abeje, G., & Ejigu, T. (2015). Determinants of unmet need for family planning among currently married women in Dangila town administration, Awi Zone, Amhara regional state; A cross sectional study. Reproductive Health. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-015-0038-3. |
| [32] | Fishkin, J. S., & Luskin, R. C. (2005). Experimenting with a Democratic Ideal: Deliberative Polling and Public Opinion. Acta Politica. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500121. |
| [33] | Irvin, R. A., & Stansbury, J. (2004). Citizen Participation in Decision Making: Is It Worth the effort? Public Administration Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00346.x. |
| [34] | Fishkin, J. S. (2011). When the people speak: Deliberative democracy and public consultation. Oxford University Press. |
| [35] | Fishkin, J. S. (1997). The Voice of the People: Public Opinion and Democracy By Fishkin James S. Yale university press. |
APA Style
Roy William Mayega, Nathan Tumuhamye, Grace Mongo Bua, Julius Ssentongo, Harriet Adong, et al. (2021). “Our Land Is Shrinking”: Concerns and Misconceptions Impeding Uptake of Climate Risk Mitigation Policies in Bududa and Butalejja Districts in Eastern Uganda. Science Journal of Public Health, 9(4), 109-120. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjph.20210904.11
ACS Style
Roy William Mayega; Nathan Tumuhamye; Grace Mongo Bua; Julius Ssentongo; Harriet Adong, et al. “Our Land Is Shrinking”: Concerns and Misconceptions Impeding Uptake of Climate Risk Mitigation Policies in Bududa and Butalejja Districts in Eastern Uganda. Sci. J. Public Health 2021, 9(4), 109-120. doi: 10.11648/j.sjph.20210904.11
AMA Style
Roy William Mayega, Nathan Tumuhamye, Grace Mongo Bua, Julius Ssentongo, Harriet Adong, et al. “Our Land Is Shrinking”: Concerns and Misconceptions Impeding Uptake of Climate Risk Mitigation Policies in Bududa and Butalejja Districts in Eastern Uganda. Sci J Public Health. 2021;9(4):109-120. doi: 10.11648/j.sjph.20210904.11
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.sjph.20210904.11,
author = {Roy William Mayega and Nathan Tumuhamye and Grace Mongo Bua and Julius Ssentongo and Harriet Adong and Kathleen Giles and Stella Neema and Christine Muhumuza and William Bazeyo and James Fishkin and Lynn Atuyambe},
title = {“Our Land Is Shrinking”: Concerns and Misconceptions Impeding Uptake of Climate Risk Mitigation Policies in Bududa and Butalejja Districts in Eastern Uganda},
journal = {Science Journal of Public Health},
volume = {9},
number = {4},
pages = {109-120},
doi = {10.11648/j.sjph.20210904.11},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjph.20210904.11},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.sjph.20210904.11},
abstract = {Background: Globally, the incidence of disasters is rising. Uganda is one of several countries experiencing an upturn in adverse climate events. Although Uganda’s government has implemented several strategies to mitigate land-use and population pressure-related climate adversity in high-risk zones, communities have not responded to them sufficiently, implying a resilience gap. The objective of this study was to describe the concerns and misconceptions impeding community uptake of climate risk mitigation policies in a rural area in Eastern Uganda. Methods: The study was conducted in Butalejja and Bududa districts in the Mt. Elgon region of Eastern Uganda that is prone to recurrent land-slides and floods. The design was a qualitative study, consisting of 15 small group discussions per district, nested within a Deliberative Poll®. Key government of Uganda policy options on sustainable settlement and family planning were presented to participants who then discussed them with the guidance of a moderator. Results: Not only were participants distrustful of how the land from which they are evacuated would be managed, but they also resented being resettled in unfamiliar places with substantially different topography, low soil fertility, and at a great distance from their ancestral sites and social networks. A latent theme from the data was the pervasive expectation by communities to be assisted by government in all areas of their livelihood needs. Key barriers to Family Planning included lack of safety guarantees, helplessness in the event of a side effect, failure by communities to link family size to resource constraints, and feelings of entitlement to assistance among people with large families. The misconceptions were fueled by a large information asymmetry between the community members and the policy makers. Conclusion: Lasting solutions to climate risk in rural communities will require continuous information-driven dialogue between community members and implementers to address major misconceptions and information asymmetries regarding risk mitigation policies.},
year = {2021}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - “Our Land Is Shrinking”: Concerns and Misconceptions Impeding Uptake of Climate Risk Mitigation Policies in Bududa and Butalejja Districts in Eastern Uganda AU - Roy William Mayega AU - Nathan Tumuhamye AU - Grace Mongo Bua AU - Julius Ssentongo AU - Harriet Adong AU - Kathleen Giles AU - Stella Neema AU - Christine Muhumuza AU - William Bazeyo AU - James Fishkin AU - Lynn Atuyambe Y1 - 2021/06/09 PY - 2021 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjph.20210904.11 DO - 10.11648/j.sjph.20210904.11 T2 - Science Journal of Public Health JF - Science Journal of Public Health JO - Science Journal of Public Health SP - 109 EP - 120 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2328-7950 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjph.20210904.11 AB - Background: Globally, the incidence of disasters is rising. Uganda is one of several countries experiencing an upturn in adverse climate events. Although Uganda’s government has implemented several strategies to mitigate land-use and population pressure-related climate adversity in high-risk zones, communities have not responded to them sufficiently, implying a resilience gap. The objective of this study was to describe the concerns and misconceptions impeding community uptake of climate risk mitigation policies in a rural area in Eastern Uganda. Methods: The study was conducted in Butalejja and Bududa districts in the Mt. Elgon region of Eastern Uganda that is prone to recurrent land-slides and floods. The design was a qualitative study, consisting of 15 small group discussions per district, nested within a Deliberative Poll®. Key government of Uganda policy options on sustainable settlement and family planning were presented to participants who then discussed them with the guidance of a moderator. Results: Not only were participants distrustful of how the land from which they are evacuated would be managed, but they also resented being resettled in unfamiliar places with substantially different topography, low soil fertility, and at a great distance from their ancestral sites and social networks. A latent theme from the data was the pervasive expectation by communities to be assisted by government in all areas of their livelihood needs. Key barriers to Family Planning included lack of safety guarantees, helplessness in the event of a side effect, failure by communities to link family size to resource constraints, and feelings of entitlement to assistance among people with large families. The misconceptions were fueled by a large information asymmetry between the community members and the policy makers. Conclusion: Lasting solutions to climate risk in rural communities will require continuous information-driven dialogue between community members and implementers to address major misconceptions and information asymmetries regarding risk mitigation policies. VL - 9 IS - 4 ER -
Information
Email: