*4.1. Households' Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change*

The findings show that communities in Bobirwa use both on-farm and off-farm strategies to respond to climate change impacts. The prevalence of livestock management and agronomic practices to manage crops, land, soil, and water indicate the importance of agriculture as a livelihood strategy in Bobirwa. Several studies have shown the importance of subsistence agriculture to rural livelihoods in southern Africa [13,34,35].

The adoption of agronomic practices such as growing drought-tolerant and early maturing crops, the use of seasonal forecasts, and consulting agricultural extension officers by the majority of the surveyed households could be attributed to the ISPAAD initiative by the Department of Crop Production in the Ministry of Agriculture. Under ISPAAD, poor farmers were provided with free improved seeds, fertilizers, agrochemicals, tillage, and access to credit and extension services [36]. The low usage of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides reported by most households could be due to drought-induced crop failure before farmers could apply agrochemicals issued under ISPAAD. The free inputs under the ISPAAD programme were also associated with the increase in the cropped area among the surveyed households. Several studies have shown increased uptake of agricultural adaptation initiatives that are promoted by governments and non-governmental organizations [37–39].

In addition to the input support and free tillage up to 5 ha under ISPAAD, encouraging households to expand their cropped area, the expansion of cultivated area to grow more crops reported by 42% of the households could also be attributed to the increasing severity of droughts. A study by [40] in the Gaborone dam catchment in Botswana, also found that farmers expanded their croplands in order to maximize yields given the rising drought-induced crop failure. The low adoption of practices such as conservation agriculture and in-field soil and water conservation by farmers may explain the low yields of major grain crops among smallholder farmers in Botswana [41]. A study by [42] in several southern African countries attributed the low adoption of conservation agriculture by smallholder farmers to limited knowledge and their huge labour requirements. Agricultural extension services

need to increase farmer education and demonstrations to improve awareness and subsequent adoption of relevant practices by households [43].

The fewer households who had farms in different geographical areas could indicate the high demand for agricultural land in Bobirwa. This may also be due to the slow processing of new farms by the Land Board. The isolated cases of clearing of land for cultivating crops in communal grazing areas where crop production was prohibited provides further evidence that accessing new farmlands in Bobirwa sub-district was either difficult or a lengthy process.

The low adoption of livestock adaptations is attributed to the low ownership of livestock by households in Bobirwa sub-district. For instance, only less than 38% of the households owned cattle or donkeys while goats were owned by 56%. The low adoption of livestock adaptations was also found among smallholder farmers in southern Africa by [26]. With goat production shown to significantly contribute to the livelihoods of rural communities in Botswana, government programs such as Livestock Management and Infrastructure Development (LIMID) through the Department of Animal Production need to expand the programme [44]. This can allow more poor farmers to benefit from the programme; thereby, increasing livestock ownership in the sub-district. The high ownership of chickens by households owning chickens was attributed to the ability of free-range chickens to survive the harsh conditions [45].

The moderate adoption of livestock sales and destocking by livestock farmers is mainly attributed to the increasing severity of droughts. A study by [46] found that only 4% of livestock farmers in Bobonong and 23.7% of those in Kgalagadi in Botswana destocked their livestock through selling. Similar to findings from both studies, surveyed households in Bobirwa sub-district expressed reluctance to destock even with increasing severity of droughts as more livestock provided them with several subsistence needs, were a store of wealth and considered an adaptation to droughts, i.e., more tolerant than crops [43], also found low destocking levels by rural farmers in Amathole District Municipality, Eastern Cape Province of South Africa, partly because of similar reasons.

The adoption of livestock supplementary feeding was supported by the availability of crop residues and the ability of better-off households to purchase supplementary feeding. The low adoption of changing composition of livestock could be due to low annual incomes reported by most of the surveyed households [43,46]. Moving livestock to other geographical areas and seeking grazing rights from other traditional authorities were limited by the Foot-and-Mouth Disease (FMD) which restricted farmers from moving their livestock beyond the study area [47]. Even the formation of grazing associations was constrained by communal ownership of grazing land where individuals do not have exclusive rights. Despite grazing areas in Bobirwa sub-district being freely accessible to all community members, there was no strict control of grazing or grazing area [46].

The low adoption of livestock adaptations in Bobirwa sub-district including the few households who reported receiving livestock through government projects or those who started animal rearing as a diversification of their livelihoods may indicate that the LIMID programme only benefited few poor households. This may also show that the LIMID programme was ineffective as it failed to benefit many poor households in the study area [48]. There is a need for intensifying livestock production among poor households through increasing the capacity of initiatives such as LIMID through promoting livestock production systems, markets, and institutions that enhance sustainability [49].

The low adoption of off-farm adaptation strategies in Bobirwa sub-district could indicate that livelihood opportunities outside rain-fed agriculture were limited. The most dominant off-farm activity was the emigration of household members (78%) in search of economic opportunities in neighboring towns. This provides further evidence of the limited opportunities outside rain-fed agriculture in the study area. With about two-thirds (67%) of the households not receiving remittances from emigrated household members and annual income below BWP5000 (US \$450), livelihoods in Bobirwa sub-district are heavily hinged on subsistence agriculture. Other off-farm adaptations included the exploitation of several timber and non-timber products such as selling of firewood (45.2%) and non-timber forest products such as Mopane caterpillars.

The surveyed households only reported a few ecosystem products among their adaptation responses. This is different from findings in a study by [43] in the Amathole District Municipality in South Africa, where rural farmers reported exploitation of several non-farm flora and fauna species among their climate change adaptation strategies. Several studies have shown the importance of wild fruits and wild foods towards household food and income requirements in Botswana [9,50,51]. Failure to recognize the importance of provisioning ES among climate change adaptation strategies by households in Bobirwa sub-district may explain the lack of measures to improve the sustainability of their delivery among the reported off-farm strategies.

The diversity of laborious agronomic practices (crop, land, soil, and water) adopted under crop adaptations could also be limiting the adoption and diversity of off-farm adaptation practices by households in Bobirwa sub-district. Overall, on-farm adaptations were adopted by most of the surveyed households. This may be due to households adopting at least one of the different practices. The findings also suggest that households in Bobirwa sub-district may have integrated crop adaptations as part of their livelihoods possibly due to crop production being one of the main livelihood strategies. The low adaptation of livestock adaptations is consistent and comparable with the fewer households owning livestock suggesting that increasing livestock ownership could also livestock adaptations. The lack of provisioning ES among off-farm adaptations may indicate a poor perception of these as adaptation strategies to climate change. In order to enhance the importance of provisioning ES as climate change adaptation strategies in Bobirwa sub-district, more awareness, investment, regulations, and policy are required to guide conservation and sustainable exploitation given the growing human population. Similarly, investments are required to diversify and enhance off-farm livelihood opportunities to reduce overreliance on rainfed agriculture which is risky.
