| Peer-Reviewed

Our Land Is Shrinking”: Concerns and Misconceptions Impeding Uptake of Climate Risk Mitigation Policies in Bududa and Butalejja Districts in Eastern Uganda

Received: 30 April 2021     Accepted: 31 May 2021     Published: 9 June 2021
Views:       Downloads:
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.

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), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Policy, Deliberative Polling, Climate Risk-Mitigation, Disaster, Land Use, Family Planning

References
[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.
Cite This Article
  • 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

    Copy | Download

    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

    Copy | Download

    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

    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}
    }
    

    Copy | Download

  • 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  - 

    Copy | Download

Author Information
  • ResilientAfrica Network, School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

  • ResilientAfrica Network, School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

  • ResilientAfrica Network, School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

  • ResilientAfrica Network, School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

  • ResilientAfrica Network, School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

  • Center for Deliberative Democracy/HSTAR, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA

  • College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

  • ResilientAfrica Network, School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

  • ResilientAfrica Network, School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

  • Center for Deliberative Democracy/HSTAR, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA

  • Department of Community Health and Behavioural Sciences, School of Public Health, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

  • Sections