Climate Change Impacts and Challenges of Combating Food Insecurity in Rural Somkhele, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

Abstract

Climate change poses immense challenges for food security in most developing countries. The extent to which residents are able to reduce their impact on food resources and adapt to climate change will have implications for their livelihoods. Although climate change research has explored adaptation strategies to mitigate the negative effects on food security, empirical work on how climate change affects rural household food security in South Africa has been limited. This paper examines not only how climate change affects food security, but also residential challenges in combating climate change and food security. This paper focused on the Somkhele rural community located in the uMkhanyakude District Municipality of Northern KwaZulu-Natal, an area affected by water scarcity induced by climate change. A questionnaire was used to ascertain the views of 424 households on the impacts of climate variability on food security and the coping mechanisms and challenges involved in secure livelihoods. The results indicate that climate change has affected agricultural productivity and the use of water in households, especially since 2015. Food security is shaped by unemployment and a lack of financial capital. The local government did not assist with the required infrastructure to obtain water. Good governance and reflexive approaches are required to take into account household livelihood strategies and indigenous knowledge systems to ensure that support against the impacts of climate change is relevant

1. Introduction

Climate change has spawned substantial doubt about future water availability in many regions around the world as it affects dimensions such as precipitation, with effects on hydrological systems, water quality, including groundwater recharge. All of these present major challenge for climate adaptation [1]. Generally, climate change depletes water reservoirs and affects the health and food security of vulnerable communities, particularly countries in the southern hemisphere which have limited capacity to respond [2,3]. The African continent is most vulnerable to climate change, since with global warming there will be greater than the average temperature increase; furthermore, agriculture, mainly rain-fed, is the principal source of subsistence for rural communities. Additionally, rural householders and farmers are particularly vulnerable to climate change because of other factors such as lack of access to land, extreme poverty, low education levels, and lack of financial support to adopt adaptive measures [4]. In Sub-Saharan Africa, food security for millions of people has been compromised because of climate change [1,2]. Climate change will intensify drought conditions in Sub-Saharan Africa and across the continent, making water security for food and agricultural development increasingly difficult [4].

In 2019, Southern Africa was one of the regions affected by a protracted drought from 2014 to 2016. Temperatures exceeding 2 °C above the 1981 to 2010 average were recorded in South Africa, Namibia and parts of Angola [5]. In South Africa, weather events, such as drought and heatwaves, are among the principal natural extremes experienced [6]. The country’s climate has varied a great deal over time and space, due to its location at the southern tip of Africa. South Africa is naturally water deficient, which adds to climate fluctuation. The average annual rainfall in South Africa is below the global average of 860 mm per year [7]. The country has suffered climate unpredictability in rainfall and temperature in many provinces with implications for food security, especially for rural households, resulting in reductions in crop yields and livestock production [6]. A global temperature rise of 2 °C is likely to translate to a 4 °C increase for drought-prone countries, specifically the western regions of South Africa, with potentially more intense floods in the eastern regions, while the national demand for water is increasing [8]. South Africa will suffer enormous negative physical, socio-economic and ecological impacts due to extreme heat stress and weather events (e.g., droughts, floods, crop failures and food insecurity, water stress, and disease outbreaks). Increasing temperatures inducing prolonged drought will result in decreasing levels of soil moisture, which in turn reduces the number of days suitable for plant growth. This combined with heat stress will negatively affect the full spectrum of the agricultural sector through reduced crop and livestock production, and declines in rural incomes [9].

There have been a number of limited global studies conducted exploring the challenges posed by climate change for food security [4]. For example, studies have been conducted in Iran exploring barriers to climate change which included social, cultural, economic, technological, informational, and market-based barriers [10], including farmer perceptions of and adaptation to climate change, highlighting a lack of communication from the government and agencies around climate change risks [11], farmers’ perceptions regarding the impacts of climate change on water resources and their intention toward adaptation in southwestern Iran [12]. Other global studies have examined food security in East and Southeast Asia [13] and challenges to food security in small island developing states in the Caribbean [14], to name a few. A Scopus title search of documents containing the key words “Climate Change” and “Challenges” or “Barriers” and “Food security” produced only 41 documents in the last ten years, showing that there have been limited studies conducted on challenges to food security. Nevertheless, for South Africa, despite numerous climate change studies, most studies focus on adaptation to climate change, rather than examining challenges related to climate change and adaptation more broadly [15,16]. Exploring challenges is also important in advancing climate change adaptation. The answer to the question of whether climate change also plays a pivotal role in increased hunger and food insecurity across countries remains unclear [13]. Therefore, the link between climate change and household food security in Africa and South Africa is neither well understood nor well studied, especially at the local level. The challenges posed by climate change to food security are also shaped by other drivers that are locally context specific (e.g., governance; socio-economic variables, and demographic, cultural and political variables) that impact components of food security, such as availability, accessibility, utilisation and stability [14].

With reference to the above context, this paper focuses on the Somkhele rural community located in the uMkhanyakude District Municipality in Northern KwaZulu-Natal. In the face of a severe climate crisis affecting food security, it examines not only how climate change affects food security, but also the broader challenges of combating food security due to climate change and their impact on the livelihoods of residents. The aim is to contribute to the limited discussion in academic debates by examining the full spectrum of climate change impacts and challenges to food security. Based on the localised identified challenges, it will propose recommendations that can be implemented by local residents and the government to combat challenges. As highlighted, unlike the numerous adaptation studies conducted in academic debates, the link between climate change and household food security and challenges for food security in Africa and South Africa is not well understood, nor robustly studied at the local level. In light of climate risks, such as drought in rural areas, households could lose their livelihoods, and this could undermine work towards achieving both the sustainable development goals (SDGs) surrounding no poverty and zero-hunger goals in the province of Kwa-Zulu Natal and South Africa generally. This study therefore contributes to the academic debates by adding to the limited understanding about how climate change together with other associated challenges impact rural household food security. It also adds to the limited local empirical studies in South Africa and how residents may respond to these challenges. This paper is divided into several sections including this introduction. The next section explores climate change and food insecurity in KwaZulu-Natal, followed by an examination of sustainable livelihoods, food security and climate change. The methodology is then explained before the results are presented. The final section engages in a discussion, conclusion and recommendations.

2. Climate Change and Food Insecurity in KwaZulu-Natal

In KwaZulu-Natal, extreme weather events have mainly manifested as droughts and flooding [17,18]. In the province, the numerous daily stressors in people’s lives have combined to increase their vulnerability to future climate change. Additionally, there is weak organisational support (e.g., government and other institutions), which limits efforts towards combating climate change risks [19]. The province is predominantly rural, and the majority of the population is characterised by high-density poverty. Drought is characterised by water imbalances, failing water supplies, below average relative humidity, livestock deaths, crop failure, hunger and starvation, spiking food prices, and conflicts over natural resources such as water. KwaZulu-Natal is characterised by warm to scorching summers, heatwaves, wildfires, and moderate winters. The maximum daily air temperatures during the summer months are as high as 40.1 °C in the Cape St Lucia region. There has been a declining water presence in the province over the years, a situation that is projected to evolve from bad to worse in the near future [18]. Climate change in the KwaZulu-Natal region because of droughts will have severe and uneven impacts on poor rural communities who base their livelihoods on rain-fed agriculture and are socially vulnerable to climate change [20]. In a study on adapting to climate change conditions in KwaZulu-Natal, it was found that women in rural areas have been experiencing a reduction in harvests due to drought, with diversification of livelihoods through fishing having been affected, as water sources have dried up [21]. The adverse effects of climate change also affect rural households more significantly due to their limited financial, human and technical resources and a lack of support and assistance from the municipal and provincial government [14]. Unfortunately, a short-term strategy to combat drought has been shifting from cropping to livestock for those who have the latter, but this reduces natural capital [22]. Like many provinces in South Africa, KwaZulu-Natal’s food security has been and will be heavily affected by climate change. Climate change will impact on food security due to the following: (1) Increase in average temperature (e.g., resulting in reduced quantity and reliability of agricultural yield; increased heat stress in livestock; destruction of crops or reduced crop productivity), (2) Change in amount of rainfall (e.g., causing reduced water availability for crop and livestock; heavy reliance on irrigation; poor quality of crops due to deteriorating water quality), (3) Increased severity of drought (i.e., resulting in decreased crop yield; increased probability of fire), (4) Increased intensity of extreme events (i.e., resulting in soil erosion; increased land degradation and desertification; inability to cultivate land; damage to crops and food stores). Thus, an increasing proportion of the rural population will continue to become food insecure [15,23]

3. Sustainable Livelihoods, Food Security and Climate Change

It is useful to draw upon the Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) as developed by the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID) in 1999 and this framework is still relevant for assisting in analysis of the potential challenges to combat climate change. The SLF understands people as functioning in a context of vulnerability, where they have access to certain poverty-reducing factors (e.g., social networks, finance, tools, etc.) to influence livelihood strategies. It provides a way of thinking about the livelihoods of poor people that will stimulate debate and reflection, thereby improving performance in poverty reduction. It is also useful in assessing the effectiveness of existing efforts to reduce poverty (Refer to Figure 1 below on the SLF). There are ways of combining and using assets that are available to people in pursuit of beneficial livelihood outcomes that meet their own livelihood objectives (e.g., for food security). Sustainable poverty reduction will be realised if external support can work harmoniously with the current livelihood strategies and social environments of the households and the people. Observing this principle will translate into providing support to resource management or good governance practices. Unsustainable systems deplete capital, spending assets as if they were income, and so leaving less for future generations [24].

There are several key elements in the SLF. These include the vulnerability context, such as the external household environment, which may be responsible for adversities faced by people. These adversities may include shocks (e.g., droughts, heat extremes); seasonality (e.g., substantial changes in temperature), and changes (e.g., environmental change or technological). Other elements include livelihood assets (the resources people possess or have access to that allow them to secure a livelihood). These comprise human capital (e.g., education, knowledge and skills, ability to work); natural capital (e.g., land and harvests, water, forest resources, ecosystems); social capital (e.g., networks, standards of reciprocity, participation in decision making); physical capital (e.g., infrastructure water supply, sanitation, tools and technology for production, and agricultural materials); and financial capital (e.g., savings, access to credit, pensions and/or wages). Other important elements include the policies, institutions and processes (e.g., government institutions, policies and legislation that determine access to assets and selection of livelihood strategies); livelihood strategies (e.g., ways people deploy assets and capabilities to improve their livelihoods such as consumption, production, processing, exchange and income-generating activities); and outcomes (e.g., the results of successful livelihood strategies such as improved food security and more economically sustainable livelihoods, better health and well-being, decreased vulnerability) [25]. Thus, the SLF can be most useful to determine potential climate change challenges and community resilience to climate change when responding to external shocks and the ways in which drought may affect food security.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Study Area

The background to the study site, located in the district of St. Lucia, Northern KwaZulu-Natal province, South Africa, is as follows. The site falls under the uMkhanyakude District Municipality (refer to Figure 2 and Figure 3 for the location of Somkhele within the St. Lucia region). The Municipality is predominantly rural and is one of the most impoverished districts in the province of KwaZulu-Natal. The population is comprised of a majority of socially and economically marginalized households experiencing more severe impacts in comparison to others because of climate change. The uMkhanyakude District Municipality region is an area of water scarcity induced by climate change [26]. Climate change projections indicate that rain-fed agriculture in uMkhanyakude will be negatively affected because of lower annual rainfall and increased temperatures, resulting in drying out of topsoil and increased irrigation needs [27].

4.2. Data Collection Procedure

Fieldwork to explore climate change and food security was carried out in June 2016 (Fuleni community) and July 2017 (Somkhele community) as part of a broader study. Research data collection techniques included questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. These are discussed below.

4.2.1. Questionnaires

A questionnaire was used for data collection to ascertain responses from Somkhele residents regarding household views on the impacts of climate variability and mining impacts on their livelihoods and water resources. The questionnaire also aimed to determine how climate variability affected Somkhele and what coping strategies the community used to counter climate change and food insecurity. The study sought to explore the different ways in which the households responded to climate change and how they ensured food security. Fieldworkers assisted in personally administering the questionnaire to residents within Somkhele. A training workshop was conducted by the researcher with the fieldworkers.

Questionnaire

• Design

The questionnaire was designed in consultation with the Statistics Unit at the University of Johannesburg. The Unit assisted in checking that each question was relevance and linked to the research objective. The questionnaire was divided into several sections (Demographics and Socio-economic status (containing 10 questions); Rural farming and food security (12 questions); Water security (9 questions, 2 of which contained five-point Likert scales); Impacts of climate change on agriculture, water and household livelihoods (11 questions); and Mining impacts on the community and sustainable livelihoods (6 questions, of which 1 question contained a five-point Likert scale)). The questions asked were linked to the theme of each section. The questionnaire was comprised of 11 pages.

• Survey

A total of 424 questionnaires were fully completed and 11 questionnaires were excluded since they were only partially filled in. A representative sample of the case study site population was selected to administer the questionnaires. Since the population of Somkhele is about 4000 people, the research applied a margin of error of 5% and a confidence level of 95%., which gave a targeted representative sample of 351. Since data collection was able to secure more questionnaires than the required representative sample size, the completed questionnaires more than adequately represent the total population. All residents who participated in filling in the questionnaires provided the required consent for participation.

4.2.2. Semi-Structured Interviews

Semi-structured interviews were used to collect data from key social actors in Fuleni (local community residents) and as part of a larger study. Nine interviews were conducted as part of the Fuleni fieldwork. For the Somkhele case, interviews were conducted with one youth community leader and a group interview was conducted with several local young adults ranging in age from 20–35 years. The one-on-one interviews were conducted based on purposive sampling and using a snowball technique. The group interview was organised by a local youth leader who contacted young people older than 18 years from the community. No persons aged 18 years and younger were part of the research data collection. According to the University Research Ethics Procedure, persons such as youth and children aged 18 years and under are not allowed to be part of data collection, unless parental consent is obtained. The University Standard Operating Procedure for Research Ethics Risk Assessment was followed. Therefore, this population group/age range was not included in the research.

4.3. Data Analysis

The Statistics Department at the University of Johannesburg assisted in the analysis of all the questionnaires, including reviewing the initial draft questionnaire based on the aims and objectives of the research and to ensure the validity of the questions. For the semi-structured interviews, the author conducted thematic analysis to identify themes. For this paper, the results are presented below in relation to Demographics and socio-economic data; Rural farming, food security and access to physical capital; Climate change and its impacts on water security and food; and finally, Coping with climate change and ways to increase food security. Discussions, conclusions, and recommendations are then presented.

5. Results

5.1. Demographics and Socio-Economic Status

Before presenting the themes associated with challenges to and methods of adapting to climate change for food security, it is important to understand the demographics and socio-economic status of Somkhele residents as background to give context to the themes. Most residents in Somkhele were between the ages of 31–40; followed by 20–30 years; 41–50; 51–60 and 61–70. Only a few people were above the age of 70 years. This indicated that the Somkhele population was young, with just under half of the population being 40 years of age and younger. Conversely, most residents 40 years and younger were male. This situation has changed in the last 50 years, where the majority of the female population increased, especially those aged 51–70 years. Refer to Figure 4 regarding the gender comparison of Somkhele residents. As far as employment status is concerned, more residents were unemployed than employed and a minority were engaged in self-employment (Refer to

Table 1. Employment status of Somkhele residents.

		Percentage
Employment status	Employed	24
	Unemployed	39
	Self-employed	12
	Pensioner	8
	Access to pension/child support grant	15
	Source of income from someone outside home	1
	Other	1

). Therefore, a large portion (i.e., more than half of the residents) did not have formal employment and had to find other ways to secure their livelihoods. Overall, more than half of the residents indicated that they did not have anyone formally employed within their household. Thus, climate change would have a large impact on these households with no formal employment to assist financially in mitigating the effects of drought.

Employment status for males versus females differed substantially. More females were self-employed compared to males. Not surprisingly, more females were unemployed compared to males. A much larger proportion of females compared to males relied on access to pension and child support grants. A larger proportion of females were also pensioners compared to males. Just over half of residents had lived in the Somkhele area for more than 40 years, with roughly a third having lived in the area for between 36 and 40 years. Thus, securing local livelihoods via agriculture for food security has been important for local residents, as unemployment has remained high with mostly females engaging in self-employment. Just over half of all residents earned below ZAR 2500 (South African Rands) (i.e., USD 140) (based on currency conversion rate from South African Rand to United States Dollar on 8 November 2022) per month, with a large minority of the population having no income at all (refer to

Table 2. Household income for Somkhele residents.

		Percentage
Household income	More than ZAR 5000 per month (USD 280)	28
	Between ZAR 2500 (USD 140)—ZAR 5000 per month (USD 280) (Based on currency conversion rate from South African Rand to United States Dollar on 8 November 2022)	14
	Between ZAR 2000—2500 per month (USD 140)	10
	Between ZAR 1000—2000 per month (USD 112)	25
	Less than ZAR 1000 per month (USD 56)	16
	No income	7

). Whilst a quarter of residents earned above ZAR 5000 (USD 280) a month, a smaller number earned between ZAR 2500 (USD 140) and ZAR 5000 (USD 280) per month. Even fewer residents earned between ZAR 2000 (USD 112) and ZAR 2500 (USD 140) per month, and less than ZAR 1000 (USD 56). The average household income in South Africa was USD 12,471 (i.e., ZAR 220 890) per household in 2021 [28], indicating that Somkhele was a very poor community. Regarding educational levels, whilst a little less than half of residents completed secondary education, less than a quarter had not been educated at all. Only a handful of residents had progressed to university education. Nevertheless, educated residents still could not secure formal employment in the region. Thus, residents needed to secure alternative livelihood strategies such as farming for livelihood security, to provide food for themselves, and to escape poverty.

5.2. Rural Farming, Food Security and Access to Physical Capital

Just more than half of the residents indicated that they engaged in farming activities for food security. Three quarters of residents indicated that they engaged in crop farming compared to one quarter engaging in livestock farming. For the latter, just under half of all residents owned goats, followed by cows and then chickens. Only a very small percentage engaged in pig farming and sheep farming. A large majority of residents owned land to engage in farming activities. Most residents started farming 10–20 years ago to supplement food in the household and to sell produce and livestock to generate income. Just under half of residents engaged in farming activities for the household, whilst a minority of residents indicated that they engaged in farming activities to sell produce (refer to

Table 3. Reasons for engaging in farming activities.

	Percentage
Eat	45
Sell	13
Eat and sell Give to others	22 20

). Whilst just over one-fifth of residents indicated they engaged in farming to both eat and sell produce, one-fifth engaged in farming to give to others in need. The results indicate that most people engaged in farming activities for household food security as the primary objective, largely due to increasing unemployment and poor household income as highlighted above. The access to physical capital to enable farming varied across households and for residents. Due to the lack of formal employment security, most households could not access credit or loans for farming. Only a very small minority of households had access to credit, whilst some were able to access loans. The low number of people able to access credit or loans resulted in a lack of access to secure farming technology. However, tools were most accessible, with about one-third of people able to access tools for farming (Refer to

Table 4. Access to physical capital.

	Percentage
Land	39
Tools	32
Fertiliser	14
Technology	2
Credit	3
Access to markets (i.e., loans)	5
Member of a co-op (organisation/society)	4
Access to extension offices (e.g., government)	1

below). Furthermore, under half of residents had access to land for farming activities, while some were able to secure fertiliser. Only a handful of people had access to extension officers and government assistance, indicating poor government support for local farming activities. Additionally, a very low number of people could rely on a co-op for farming assistance, as only a small number of the residents were part of an organisation or society. Thus, there was low support and few opportunities for residents to combat the challenges of climate change to enable food security.

5.3. Climate Change and Impacts on Water Security and Food

Climate change had severe consequences for water security in the region, which in turn influences food security and livelihoods. Climate change had caused widespread drought in the district of St. Lucia. All residents noted that climate change had affected agricultural productivity and the use of water in households. Somkhele residents noted that the severity of drought had increased over the years. Of the 424 questionnaire surveys completed by residents, just over half of residents indicated that drought conditions had worsened since 2015 (See

Table 5. Year and drought severity levels as highlighted by Somkhele residents.

Year and Drought Severity	Mild	Medium	Severe
2012	61.9%	19.5%	18.6%
2013	72.3%	23.5%	4.2%
2014	39.1%	49.4%	11.5%
2015	18.4%	30.8%	50.9%
2016	34.9%	13.4%	51.6%

below). Due to the severity of the drought, residents in Somkhele needed to secure water from different locations. The main sources of water collection were the Umfolozi River and other sources such as the local dam, boreholes, neighbouring taps and obtaining water from work.

Table 6. Sources of water collection for the household.

Source of Water for Households	Percentage
Umfolozi River	21.0%
Tap from local school	9.1%
Buy water	10.9%
Water harvesting and use of tanks	17.8%
Other (Borehole, Dam, Community tap, Neighbours tap, work)	41.2%

below indicates the main sources of water supply.

Due to the severity of the drought, residents (women) had to walk far to fetch water for farming and household purposes, which was considered time consuming. Just over half of female residents with some children were responsible for water collection (refer to

Table 7. Responsibilities for water collection.

	Percentage
Women	51
Men	7
Children	35
Uncle	2
Aunt	2
Other	3

). Only minority of men were responsible for water collection. The majority of residents indicated that water needed to be collected every day, whilst other residents needed to collect water every second or third day. The difficulty of securing water was emphasised by a Fuleni resident, informant C [personal interview, July 2016] who noted, “We are faced with a drought, it’s hard to get water and some community members have to walk 3 km distance to get water, some have to walk 3 h to get water…” Since men generally migrate to urban areas for work, it was the responsibility of women and children to collect water for growing and watering crops. Thus, women have been particularly impacted by water shortages and drought conditions caused by climate change, since they have been responsible for maintaining their households and growing and watering crops. The main sources of water collection were from the Umfolozi River, followed by collection from water harvesting and other sources including the local dam, boreholes, neighbouring taps and obtaining water from work.

Table 8. Sources of water collection.

	Percentage
Umfolozi River	22
Tap from local school	9
Buy water	11
Water harvesting (tank)	18
Other (i.e., borehole (4%), dam (12%), community tap (12%), neighbours tap (2%), home tap (8%), work tap (2%))	40

below indicates the main sources of water supply. A limited number of residents indicated that they bought water. It was clear that the local government did not assist residents in obtaining water and therefore residents needed to secure water themselves. Interestingly, residents indicated that the major threats to water supply and hence food security were lack of provision by the government followed by pollution, drought and a lack of people to fetch water.

There was an overwhelming response from residents that climate change had affected food security, and many were not able to grow food. This resulted in a need for some residents to buy food, which was expensive, instead of growing their own vegetables or engaging in livestock production. As a resident noted: “We had to depend on soil for cultivation as well as feeding our cattle, but now that is not the case. We need to go deep into our pockets to buy meat and vegetables, bearing in mind the economy of this country is slowly sinking.” Another resident noted that, “We use to fetch water from the community river. Now the river is dry. We use to have plenty of livestock, now they are few because the grass is not green as it was, so they are starving and unable to produce many calves.”

Table 9. Some responses from Somkhele residents as to climate change impacts on food security and livelihoods.

It is not easy to farm because of the drought and water conditions. It is difficult to adapt to different weather conditions. Due to drought, I lost my livestock and crops. As a farmer, I can’t farm as I like due to the fact that the rainfall has decreased, so I don’t have water for my crops. The soil is too dry so I cannot farm. Climate change has brought an increase in malnutrition. Climate change has caused poverty due to drought. Drought has done more damage in cattle and goats, many cows died. I can say climate change has adversely affected me as my chickens were dying during the drought. During the drought, I lost so many cows as they were dying due to lack of water. During these past years life is no longer easy as before as in 2016 we experienced too much drought. Hot weather affected my crops leaving me to have nothing in my garden to harvest and eat. Climate change led me to poverty as my crops were perishing in the garden due to water shortages. In 2015, I wasn’t able to farm because of drought, so my family and I suffer from poverty as my livestock died, which I used to sell, as a source of income.

below indicates some of the open-ended responses from residents about how climate change has affected food security. Overall, residents noted that climate change had increased drought conditions, which caused lack of water, and poor soil conditions. As a result, animals did not survive and planting was difficult.

5.4. Coping with Climate Change and Ways to Increase Food Security

There were different ways that residents tried to cope with the devastating impacts of climate change and food insecurity. One of the ways was through education and awareness about the effects of climate change, including how to become more resilient and learning from experiences. Indigenous Knowledge was one way that elders would transfer knowledge about coping to younger generations. Under half of residents noted that the elders transferred knowledge about coping mechanisms. However, a large part of residents noted that they learned from experience about coping, whilst some noted that they engaged in learning about coping strategies from other farmers and neighbours (Refer to

Table 10. Households learning about coping with climate change.

	Percentage
Other local farmers and neighbours	16%
Elders	40%
At School	10%
Self-taught (Experience)	22%
Internet and media	8%
Government awareness	4%

below). This suggests the importance of engaging in both social networks and self-learning through learning activities. As one resident also noted, “During change weather, we must support each other so that we can survive.”

Residential responses varied regarding the coping strategies used to combat climate change to ensure water and food security. These ranged from saving water in tanks; digging water canals; digging water from the river ground; obtaining water from the dam; buying water in bulk for gardening and livestock; buying food; producing more crops and storing the extra for use during drought; using less water during droughts and recycling grey water; not ploughing the land to retain moisture and engaging in crop rotation to maintain soil fertility. Some residents also sold natural capital to secure funds to buy food. As one resident noted, “During the period of drought I was forced to sell my livestock at a cheaper price so that I can buy food for my family.” Most residents noted that recycling water was important for watering crops for food security. One resident noted that, “We use water wisely in a reasonable way; we also use and recycle water. For example, watering crops with water that I was doing washing with.” Residents also suggested other coping strategies to ensure food security, “I learn that when the weather condition is good we must produce more to overcome poverty in future,” and “if drought and shortage of water appears one should not plough to maintain moisture [in the soil].”

Residents also suggested how water security could be improved in order to ensure food security. Overall, more than half of residents strongly supported intervention and water provision by the government. A large proportion of residents strongly supported the use of water tanks for water collection to combat water shortages. Refer to

Table 11. Recommendations to improve water supply.

	Strongly Support	Support	Neutral	Oppose	Strongly Oppose
Intervention from government	60%	18%	13%	4%	5%
Provision of water by mining company	41%	19%	14%	13%	13%
Provision of water by non-governmental organisations	31%	24%	17%	12%	16%
Use of water tanks	58%	15%	14%	8%	5%

on recommendations by residents to improve water security. The findings suggest that residents view the government as the most important stakeholder in ensuring water security to combat climate change, with only a minority strongly opposing water provision by the government. However, besides recommendations on water provision, residents have also suggested ways to overcome climate change and food insecurity impacts as a community. Residents noted that education and awareness about climate change impacts would be important for residents on how to combat climate change and enable food security. Other residents suggested that building dams and drilling for boreholes by the government would be important to combat water shortages during drought. Water pumps would therefore be important in bringing underground water to the surface for residential use.

6. Discussion, Conclusions and Recommendations

6.1. Discussion

Climate change had severe consequences for water security in Somkhele, which affected food security and livelihoods. Climate change had caused widespread drought in the district of St Lucia. All residents noted that climate change had affected agricultural productivity and the use of water in households. Residents indicated that drought conditions had worsened, especially since 2015. There was an overwhelming response from residents that climate change had affected food security, and many were not able to grow food. Overall, residents noted that climate change had increased drought conditions, which resulted in a lack of water and poor soil conditions. As a result, animals did not survive and planting was difficult. Thus, the external household vulnerability to the contextual environment (i.e., drought and water scarcity) was responsible for the adversities faced by Somkhele residents, which resulted in environmental change such as poor soil conditions. This had implications for planting and livestock survival. The results of this study make an importance contribution to the lack of empirical literature on drought affecting rural households and for food security. As studies have noted, there is minimal empirical evidence on the effects of drought on subsistence farmers and rural households, and which people depend on the land to grow and secure food, including limited academic evidence on the existing gap in knowledge on rural householders’ adaptation and resilience strategies in response to drought for food security [28,29,30]. However, besides the impacts of climate change and drought on water security, Somkhele residents also noted that threats to water security were a result of a lack of government intervention (discussed below), but also the threat of mining pollution on water resources. This is not surprising considering South Africa’s adopted neoliberalism framework, since democracy has spearheaded industrial development such as mining and has contributed to environmental injustices across the landscape, affecting rural areas [31]. Neoliberalism has transformed state institutions, resulting in neoliberalisation becoming a state logic, which has strengthened the power of corporations, creating unequal power relations between civil society, state and industry [31], including contributing to poor governance and enforcement [32,33]. Considering this, the SLF must also consider the link with capitalist development processes at the macro-level that contributes to water injustices and therefore food insecurity in a drought vulnerability context.

Nevertheless, food security in Somkhele was further compromised and shaped by certain drivers such as socio-economic and demographic variables. Results indicated that the Somkhele community was fairly young, with 47.5% of the population being 40 years of age. A large portion (more than half of the residents) did not have formal employment, with mostly females engaging in self-employment. Therefore, residents had to find alternate ways to secure livelihoods as financial capital was not available to combat climate change. Securing local livelihoods via agriculture for food security has been important. Therefore, more than half of the residents engaged in farming activities for food security. Residents engaged in farming activities to supplement food in the household but also to sell and give to others. Whilst a majority of residents engaged in farming activities for the household, 13% engaged in farming activities to sell produce; 22% of residents indicated they engaged in farming to both eat and sell, and 20% engaged in farming to give to others in need. Overall, most people engaged in farming activities for household food security as the primary objective, largely due to increasing unemployment and poor household income (i.e., financial capital). Thus, a lack of financial capital was one of the main drivers of food insecurity and inability to combat climate change.

Due to the severity of the drought, residents in Somkhele needed to secure water from diverse locations. The main sources of water collection were from the Umfolozi River (21%) and from other sources such as the local dam, boreholes, and neighbouring taps and from work (41.2%). Just over 10% of the residents indicated that they bought water and under 20% highlighted that they conducted water harvesting to secure water. Mostly women and then children were responsible for water collection and had to walk long distances. The majority of residents (71.5%) indicated that water needed to be collected every day. Women have been particularly impacted by water shortages and drought conditions caused by climate change since they have been responsible for maintaining the households and growing and watering crops. This further indicates a gender disparity and inequality in terms of the burdens women face due to climate change. In addition, children needing to collect water possibly limits opportunities for education and other development activities.

Local government did not assist residents with physical capital and the required infrastructure to obtain water, and therefore residents needed to secure water themselves. Interestingly, residents indicated that the major threat to water supply and hence food security was lack of provision by the government (33%) followed by pollution from mining (32%); drought (28%) and lack of people to fetch water (9%). Because of poor governance, sustainable poverty reduction was not realised since external government support did not work with Somkhele residents taking into account their current livelihood strategies and social environments. This has therefore not translated into providing support for resource management and good governance practices. Thus, unsustainable governance depleted residents’ financial capital (i.e., funds used by those who have access thereto to buy water and/or food), including natural capital (i.e., selling livestock) and thereby leaving fewer of these assets for future generations. Some residents bought food, which was expensive, instead of growing their own vegetables with water or engaging in livestock production.

Access to other physical capital to enable farming varied across households and for residents. Due to the lack of formal employment security, most households could not access credit or loans for farming. Only 3% of households had access to credit, whilst 5% were able to access loans. This resulted in a large majority of people unable to access farming technology, although 32% of people were able to access tools for farming. Furthermore, 39% of residents had access to land for farming activities. Only 1% of people had access to extension officers and government assistance, again indicating poor government support for local farming activities. Additionally, a very low number of people could rely on a co-op for farming assistance, as only 4% of the residents were part of an organisation or society. Thus, there was low support and few opportunities existed for residents to combat the challenges of climate change to enable food security.

Residents tried to combat the effects of climate change on food security using other means. The most important way was through education and awareness via Indigenous Knowledge (i.e., human capital) as elders transferred knowledge about coping to younger generations (40%), followed by learning from experience about coping (22%), whilst 16% of residents engaged in learning about coping strategies from other farmers and neighbours. This suggests the importance of engaging in both social networks (i.e., human capital and networks) and self-teaching through engaging in learning activities. What is also important is that there exist opportunities such as learning from Indigenous Knowledge as an alternative form of knowledge to combat climate change and engage in food security. As some authors have already noted, indigenous systems possess a portfolio of valuable knowledge crucial to building climate resilience and food security (see [34,35]). Indigenous people hold valuable knowledge and traditions that provide solutions to major challenges, including those related to sustainable natural resource management, climate resilience, and promoting food systems that provide healthy nutrition for all, a goal on which the United Nations SDGs focus [36].

6.2. Conclusions and Recommendations

The results indicate that climate change affected agricultural productivity and the use of water in households, especially since 2015. Food security was shaped by unemployment and a lack of financial capital. The local government did not assist with the required infrastructure to obtain water. Good governance approaches are required to take into account household livelihood strategies to ensure that support against climate change impacts is relevant. Thus, the South African government must engage in reflexive governance that addresses food and water insecurity by replacing the current hierarchical governance approaches with a more reflexive, flexible and interactive one, which draws on diverse knowledge systems [37]. However, considering that reflexive governance can become compromised by neoliberal forces, ‘value reflexive governance’ which emphasises the values of good governance norms as guiding principles of engagement, offers a more transparent and inclusive governance approach [38].

6.3. Based on the Above, the following Recommendations Are Made

• There is a need for the incorporation of good governance by instilling reflexive governance practices, especially at the local government level, to ensure more inclusive governance approaches towards incorporating residential views to combat food insecurity. Government can assist with installing physical capital and the required infrastructure for residents to obtain water. This is very important as most residents indicated that the major threat to water supply and hence food security was a lack of provision by the government. This is paramount for residents to combat the climate change impacts on food and livestock security. The Constitution of South Africa stipulates, “Everyone has the right to have access to sufficient food and water.” By not fulfilling the stipulations of the Constitution, the government runs the risk of not achieving the 2030 SDGs specifically for no poverty, zero hunger, good health and well-being, and clean water.
• Residents may also work to ensure reflexive governance by collectively engaging in a strategy of working with public legal institutions to hold the government accountable. This can ensure more reflexive governance practices to enable food security. Since residents have noted water as a priority and poor governance as an obstacle to obtaining water, provision of water by the government can also promote gender equality since women and children would not need to walk long distances to secure water and will therefore have more time to engage in other household responsibilities and education. There are therefore broader and positive implications for citizens to hold the government accountable and to contribute towards reflexive governance.
• Governments at all levels must work towards reflexive governance by taking into account current household livelihood strategies and social environments so that support against the impacts of climate change are appropriate and relevant. The government must provide financial (credit) and physical support to residents for resource management and good governance practices. This will result in more residents being able to access farming tools and technologies to enable food security. In the long term, this will also ensure that residents do not deplete financial capital to buy water and/or food, including using natural capital (i.e., livestock) and thereby leaving fewer of these assets for future generations.
• Finally, continued education and awareness to ensure food security via prioritising Indigenous Knowledge systems and other social networks must be expanded and prioritised with the assistance of the government to ensure knowledge transfer. A combination of Indigenous Knowledge and other modern (technological) farming techniques can work to ensure food security.