Cross-boundary and cross-level dynamics increase vulnerability to severe winter disasters (dzud) in Mongolia

被引:164
作者
Fernandez-Gimenez, Maria E. [1 ]
Batkhishig, B. [1 ]
Batbuyan, B. [2 ]
机构
[1] Colorado State Univ, Dept Forest & Rangeland Stewardship, Ft Collins, CO 80523 USA
[2] Ctr Nomad Pastoralism Studies, Ulaanbaatar 13, Mongolia
来源
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE-HUMAN AND POLICY DIMENSIONS | 2012年 / 22卷 / 04期
关键词
Pastoralists; Institutions; Governance; Resilience; Adaptive capacity; Rangelands; Drylands; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; COLLECTIVE ACTION; DROUGHT; STRATEGIES; RISK; LIVESTOCK; SUSTAINABILITY; PROFITABILITY; OPPORTUNITIES; INFORMATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.07.001
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Dzud is the Mongolian term for a severe winter weather disaster. With global change dzud may increase in frequency and intensity, placing livestock and livelihoods at risk. We conducted in-depth case studies of dzud impacts and responses in two mountain-steppe and two Gobi desert-steppe districts in Mongolia. We used focus groups, key informant interviews, a household survey and photovoice to document individual and community experiences with dzud and identify the factors that make some households and communities more vulnerable to dzud and others less so. We found that dzud is a complex social-ecological phenomenon and vulnerability to dzud is a function of interacting physical, biological, socio-economic and institutional factors. Vulnerability was affected by factors within and interactions between communities as well as cross-level dynamics. Communities that are well prepared for dzud at the household level may suffer disproportionate losses if exposure is increased by in-migrating livestock from other districts. Relief aid that helps prevent loss of life, suffering and impoverishment in the short-term may contribute to long-term dependence syndromes, social disparities, and lack of initiative on the part of both herders and local government. Based on our findings, we recommend that dzud policies and programs promote: (1) increased individual responsibility for disaster preparedness; (2) greater cooperation and communication on disaster planning and response among different actors within communities and across governance levels; (3) sustained and scaled out investment in building local capacity for collective action through formal herder organizations; and (4) effective cross-level institutions to manage pastoral movements and pastures. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:836 / 851
页数:16
相关论文
共 79 条
[11]  
Berkes F., 2008, Navigating Social-Ecological Systems, Navigating Social-Ecological Systems, DOI DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511541957.003
[12]   Is There Too Much Hype about Index-based Agricultural Insurance? [J].
Binswanger-Mkhize, Hans P. .
JOURNAL OF DEVELOPMENT STUDIES, 2012, 48 (02) :187-200
[13]   Paying for environmental services from agricultural lands: an example from the northern Everglades [J].
Bohlen, Patrick J. ;
Lynch, Sarah ;
Shabman, Leonard ;
Clark, Mark ;
Shukla, Sanjay ;
Swain, Hilary .
FRONTIERS IN ECOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, 2009, 7 (01) :46-55
[15]   Restoration of ecosystem services and biodiversity: conflicts and opportunities [J].
Bullock, James M. ;
Aronson, James ;
Newton, Adrian C. ;
Pywell, Richard F. ;
Rey-Benayas, Jose M. .
TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION, 2011, 26 (10) :541-549
[16]   Payments for ecosystem services and poverty reduction: concepts, issues, and empirical perspectives [J].
Bulte, Erwin H. ;
Lipper, Leslie ;
Stringer, Randy ;
Zilberman, David .
ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS, 2008, 13 :245-254
[17]  
Cash DW, 2006, ECOL SOC, V11
[18]  
Chapin S.F., 2009, Principles of ecosystem stewardship: resilience-based natural resource management in a changing world
[19]   Ranching and Multiyear Droughts in Utah: Production Impacts, Risk Perceptions, and Changes in Preparedness [J].
Coppock, D. Layne .
RANGELAND ECOLOGY & MANAGEMENT, 2011, 64 (06) :607-618
[20]  
Cumming G.S., 2008, COMPLEXITY THEORY SU