**5. Conclusions**

Climate adaptation requires transformative change. The CSA approach needs to move even more squarely beyond a focus on resilience of food systems to encompass systematic thinking and action with respect to the resilience of farm households. This poses a real challenge, because CSA has tended to overlook targeting issues related to socio-economic di fferentiation within small-scale farming populations, although recent CSA initiatives have more readily included analyses of the institutional dimensions of CSA. Greater acknowledgement of institutional issues, and indeed the politics, of CSA interventions within rural planning are to be welcomed. CSA has nevertheless, in practice, tended to exclude systematic consideration of support for non-agricultural livelihood transformation that is positive for farm households in marginal contexts, such as the Western Highlands of Guatemala.

In some cases, CSA can lead to the triple win of increased productivity, adaptation and mitigation, but this is not the case for all types of farmers. We argue that more systematic attention be directed at climate risk managemen<sup>t</sup> that moves beyond the more conventional adaptation and mitigation discourse, towards an approach that includes livelihood transformation from a broader perspective, i.e., one that does not just focus on rural–agricultural transformation, but also identifies (and embraces) where agriculture per se is not a pathway out of poverty and where support for positive non-agricultural livelihood trajectories are needed for small-scale farmers. This requires more disciplines working together, and, perhaps, meeting the challenge of addressing entrenched power balances, both within communities of scientists and in the small-scale farming populations that are the subject of CSA interventions.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualisation, J.H. and E.F.; writing—original draft preparation, J.H. and E.F.; writing—review and editing, J.H. and E.F.

**Funding:** The research in Guatemala reported here was funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) through its Global Hunger and Food Security Initiative, 'Feed the Future'. This work was also supported by the CGIAR Research Program (CRP) on Rice Agri-food Systems (RICE, 2017-2022) and the CRP on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), which is carried out with support from CGIAR Fund Donors and through bilateral funding agreements (for details please visit https://ccafs.cgiar.org/donors# .WxqT\_4onaUk). The views expressed in this document cannot be taken to reflect the o fficial opinions of the aforementioned organizations.

**Acknowledgments:** The authors would also like to thank two anonymous reviewers who provided invaluable comments on earlier versions of this paper.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish.
