CLIMATE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT OF SMALL AND LARGE SCALE PADDY FARMERS IN PALAKKAD DISTRICT, KERALA
237 / 266
Keywords:
Adaptation, Exposure, Sensitivity, VulnerabilityAbstract
Palakkad has a total paddy area of 76503.68 hectare, of which the wet paddy area is
76361.21 hectare and total dry paddy area of 142.47 hectare. Weather, pest, disease, drought,
and flood are the common natural or external risks. The external sources of risk cannot be
controlled by farmers, which generally come from the natural environment. In this context, the
study looks into the production risks pertaining from the external sources among the small and
large scale farmers in the Palakkad district, Kerala. A vulnerability index is developed consisting
of exposure, sensitivity and adaptive factors to understand the climate induced production risks
among the selected sample farmers during 2005 to 2022.The data reveals that the exposure
index is low (<= 11.96) for only minority of small farmers and most of themfell in high and very
high category (more than 13.46). In the sensitivity category, majority of small and large farmers
wereincluded in the high sensitivity index category group (11.45to 13.66).But the severities of
these factors effecting them are different. Exposure factors had medium impact on large number
of sample farmers, while, sensitivity factors create high impact on large number of farmers.
Likewise, adaptive factors had high impact on small and large scale farmers. Even though
adaptation practices are implemented in the district,more efforts were needed to implement them
in a timely and systematic way.
References
1. Agricultural Statistics.2021-22. Directorate of
2. Economics and Statistics, Ministry of
3. Agriculture, Government of Kerala.
4. Agricultural Statistics.2022-23.Directorate of
5. Economics and Statistics, Ministry of
6. Agriculture, Government of Kerala.
7. Amer Ait Sidhoum. 2023. Measuring farm
8. productivity under production
9. uncertainty. Agricultural and resource
10. economics, 672-687.
11. Acosta-Moreno, R. 1997. Interview with S.
12. Agrawala, Bonn, Germany, March 4.
13. Bohle, H. G., Downing, T. E.and Watts, M.
14. J. 1994. Climate change and social
15. vulnerability:-Toward a sociology and
16. geography of food insecurity. Global
17. Environmental Change, 4(1): 37–48.
18. Chavas, 2008.Stochastic Specification of
19. Production Functions and Economics
20. Implications.Journal of Econometrics, 7:
21. 67- 86.
22. Denton, F. 2002. Climate change vulnerability,
23. impacts, and adaptation: Why does
24. gender matter? Gender and
25. Development, 10(2): 10-20.
26. McNeeley, S. M., Even, T. L., Gioia,J. B. M.,
27. Knapp, C. N.and Beeton, T. A. 2017.
28. Expanding vulnerability assessment for
29. public lands: The social complement to
30. ecological approaches. Climate Risk
31. Management,16:106–119.
32. Riaman, R.; Sukono, S.; Supian, S. and Ismail,
33. N. 2021.Analysing the decision making
34. for agricultural risk assessment:An
35. application of extreme value theory.
36. Decis. Sci. Lett., 10: 351–360.
37. Riaman, R., Sukono, S., Supian, S. and Ismail,
38. N. 2021.Determining the premium of
39. paddy insurance using the extreme value
40. theory method and the operational value
41. at risk approach.Journal of Physics:
42. Conference Series, 1722(1) 012059.
43. Scott, C.A.and M.F. Walter, E.S. 1996. Impacts
44. of historical changes in land use and
45. dairy herds in water quality in the
46. Catskills Mountains. Journal of
47. Environmental Quality, 27:410-1417.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The author owns the article's copyright until the article is accepted for publication. After acceptance, the author(s) assigns the article's copyright jointly to both the authors and the Publishers of the Journal of Research ANGRAU (ANGRAU) and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License.