The unjust climate: Measuring impacts of climate change on rural poor, women and youth

Discover how climate change is widening inequalities among rural poor, women, and youth, and explore actionable solutions to protect the most vulnerable in this FAO report.

Summary

This report highlights how climate change disproportionately affects vulnerable rural populations. Using data from 24 low- and middle-income countries, the report analyzes the significant income losses, increased reliance on agriculture, and maladaptive strategies that result from extreme weather events. It emphasizes how wealth, gender, and age disparities shape vulnerability, urging inclusive climate policies and investments to address the needs of marginalized groups and promote resilience in rural communities.

Introduction

Rural people living in low- and middle-income countries are particularly vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change due to several factors that plague these regions, including the importance of climate-dependent agriculture in livelihoods, high rates of poverty and food insecurity, and the weakness and limited availability of markets, services and institutions. Moreover, people in rural areas face structural inequalities related to wealth, gender and ages. As a result, some groups of people are much more vulnerable to climate change than others.

Effectively addressing the inequalities in climate vulnerabilities in rural areas requires solid evidence. However, this evidence is sorely lacking. This report seeks to fill this important gap by analysing the impact of climate change on diverse rural populations, empirically examining how social differences based on wealth, gender and age influence rural people's vulnerability to climate stresses.

The evidence presented is this report clearly demonstrates that climate change and its associated extreme weather events are widening income gaps within rural communities and limiting prospects for inclusive growth and poverty reduction. It shows that extreme weather events such as floods and heat stress reduce the incomes and well-being of poor and female-headed households more than those of other segments of the rural population. Given the already large and persistent gaps in agricultural productivity and wages between women and men in low- and middle-income countries, the report demonstrates that if left unaddressed, climate change will dramatically increase these gaps over the coming years. The evidence also demonstrates that vulnerabilities in rural areas are diverse. For example, we find that while young rural households are more likely than older households to lose agricultural income when exposed to extreme weather events, they are also better able to compensate this loss by generating off-farm income.

Methodology

This study brings together a new and vast dataset combining socioeconomic data collected from 109,341 rural households in 24 countries, representing over 950 million individuals.

These household data are merged with georeferenced, daily observation data of precipitation and temperature spanning 70 years. Using these, exposure to various climate stressors (floods, heat stress, droughts, climate change) is measured and the report empirically examines how social differences based on wealth, gender and age influence rural people's vulnerability to climate stresses.

More information on the construction of the climate stressors and data sources are described in Part II of the report, with further details in the Annex 1.

Conceptual framework: understanding how climate change affects rural people

Climate vulnerability is the extent to which climate-induced changes in agricultural productivity, prices and labour market dynamics affect people's lives and livelihoods. Drawing on this definition, this report applies a conceptual framework in which climate vulnerability is shaped by the combination of three factors: exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity.

• Exposure refers to the type, frequency and intensity of the climate variations, or climate stressors, that affect a person. In this report, we measure exposure to various climate stressors using long-term, daily georeferenced precipitation and temperature data.
• Sensitivity is defined as the degree to which a person is susceptible to harm due to exposure to climate stressors. In this report, we measure sensitivity to climate stressors among rural people using survey data that measure households' on-farm, off-farm and total incomes, as well as labour dynamics.
• Adaptive capacity refers to the ability of systems, institutions, humans and other organisms to adjust to potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to respond to consequences. In this report, we examine both short-term strategies adopted to cope with extreme events (reactive adaptation) and adaptive responses to long-term climatic changes (anticipatory adaptation). It is important to note that some of the strategies adopted to cope with climate stressors in the short run may be maladaptive in the long run.

Note: Intersectional vulnerabilities are beyond the scope of the analysis presented in this report. Rural populations do not fall neatly into distinct social categories, for many people, these categories overlap, and their combinations magnify intersectional vulnerabilities.

Wealth-related disparities in climate vulnerability

Poor people are often concentrated in areas that are more exposed to climate stressors. The livelihoods and production systems of rural people living in poverty exhibit distinct features that can increase their sensitivity to climate change such as reliance on agriculture, and lower diversification of crops. Poverty also restricts access to resources like land, labor, and credit, hindering their ability to adopt adaptive practices. As a result, they frequently resort to short-term coping strategies, such as reducing food intake or pulling children from school, which increase long-term vulnerability.

This section offers new insights into the scale of climate vulnerabilities faced by rural poor populations, based on empirical analysis. We include key finds from the report below, but please access the original publication for more details:

• Extreme weather events disproportionately affect poor rural households, leading to significant reductions in their incomes and widening income inequality.
• In an average year, poor households lose 5 percent of their total incomes due to heat stress relative to better-off households, and 4.4 percent due to floods.
• Extreme precipitation and temperature events increase the income gap between rural poor and non-poor households in low- and middle-income countries by approximately USD 21 billion and USD 20 billion per year, respectively.
• A 1 °C increase in average temperatures pushes poor households to depend more on climate-sensitive agriculture and lose off-farm opportunities. Such a rise is associated with a 53 percent increase in the farm incomes of poor households, and a 33 percent decrease in off-farm incomes relative to non-poor households.
• Extreme weather events push poor rural households to adopt maladaptive coping strategies, including liquidating livestock and redirecting expenditures away from their farms.

Gender disparities in climate vulnerability

Differences in climate vulnerability between men and women are rooted in social structures and discriminatory norms and institutions that shape gendered patterns in resource access, time use, income opportunities and access to services in rural areas. These patterns manifest themselves as persistent gaps in terms of the time dedicated to care and domestic responsibilities, in wages and productivity, in the quality of jobs, in access to and ownership of agricultural land, in the use of improved agricultural inputs and technologies, and in access to extension and financial services. These gaps elevate women's climate vulnerability by undermining their adaptive capacity and pushing them into livelihood options that are more sensitive to climate change along multiple intersecting dimensions.

This section presents the key empirical results on the impacts of climate stressors on women, female-headed households and female-managed plots. We include key finds from the report below, but please access the original publication for more details:

• Female-headed households experience significant income losses relative to male-headed households when extreme weather events occur.
• Female-headed households experience annual average income losses of 8 percent due to heat stress and 3 percent due to floods, relative to male-headed households. Exposure to flood and heat stress reduces the total incomes of rural female-headed households in low- and middle-income countries by USD 16 billion and USD 37 billion, respectively, relative to male-headed households.
• Farm plots managed by women lose significantly more in terms of crop value than those managed by men during heat stresses. However, when floods occur, plots managed by women generate more value than those of men.
• Long-term increases in temperatures lead to a reduction in the incomes of female-headed households, thereby widening the income gap with male-headed households. A 1 °C increase in long-term average temperatures is associated with a 23.6 percent reduction in farm income and a 34 percent reduction in the total incomes of female- headed households, relative to male-headed households.
• Women take on an additional work burden compared to men when extreme weather events occur, but also lose more.

Age-related disparities in climate vulnerability

The relationship between age and climate vulnerability, particularly in rural areas, is still not well understood. Children and seniors are more sensitive to heat, while older people, having faced more extreme weather, are often better at adapting. Younger households, though lacking resources like land or credit, are more inclined to adopt modern farming practices or seek non-farming employment, reducing their vulnerability. They also benefit from higher education and digital familiarity. However, climate change can push households into poverty, forcing some to resort to child labor as a survival strategy, adding a unique dimension to this age-related vulnerability.

The sections below provide novel empirical evidence on the relationship between age, climate stressors and climate vulnerability. We include key finds from the report below, but please access the original publication for more details:

• Because young households have better access to off-farm employment opportunities, their incomes are less vulnerable to the impacts of extreme weather events than those of older households.
• In an average year, households headed by young people increase their total income by 3 percent in response to floods and 6 percent in response to heat stress, relative to older households.
• Young households are able take advantage of distress livestock sales following extreme weather events and increase their livestock holdings.
• Floods push children, young people and seniors to work more on their own farms, while prime-aged adults increase the number of off-farm working hours.
• Heat stress events are an important driver of children's work in rural areas.

Priorities and recommendations for inclusive climate

More attention and funding for vulnerable rural people: Current levels of financing for the climate adaptation of rural people fall woefully short of needs of the agriculture sector, much less of those specific to vulnerable populations. The lack of financing to address the distinct climate vulnerabilities of rural populations reflects a general neglect of the human dimension in climate change policies. Based on a thorough review of the NDCs and NAPs of the countries included in this report, we developed a dataset to track the specific climate actions, goals and areas of interventions foreseen for each country. We find that less than 21 percent of all 4,164 actions analysed across the 24 countries make an explicit mention of people and of their livelihoods.

Policy priorities for inclusive climate actions that address the needs of rural people: The evidence in this report suggests that different types of rural people are adversely affected by climate stressors through different channels, including through reductions in farm and non-farm incomes and reliance on maladaptive coping strategies. Policies and programmes must address these specific vulnerabilities.

Promoting the adoption of inclusive adaptive actions in farm systems: Barriers to the adoption of adaptive agricultural practices among vulnerable rural people can be grouped into three general categories. First, there are constraints to accessing and mobilizing the resources required for adoption. A second factor is access to information and human capital. A third barrier are the risks associated with the adoption of adaptive practices. Managing the multiple and diverse constraints to farm-level climate adaptation by vulnerable people requires multidimensional and integrated approaches. Moreover, such approaches must take account of the social structures that underlie peoples' vulnerabilities and address these structures directly, rather than work around them

Leveraging social protection programmes: Social protection measures are particularly well-suited for supporting vulnerable groups because they are often unable to access traditional risk management mechanisms, such as credit or insurance services. In addition, social protection mechanisms can be tailored to address specific vulnerabilities. Several issues must first be taken into consideration. First, the development of climate policies is typically led by ministries for the environment, which tend to pay little attention to the important role that social policies can play towards climate objectives. A second element is the lack of public funding.

Tailoring extension services to the needs of vulnerable people: To promote the widespread implementation of climate-adaptive actions by rural people, access to adequate advisory services is critical. How such services are delivered, and the types of support that are associated with them, determines the degree to which they include vulnerable groups. The inclusiveness of climate actions is also determined by who delivers the extension services. Increasing the number of female extension agents, for example, was found to boost the adoption rate of sustainable land management practices by women farmers in Mozambique.

Integrating gender-transformative methodologies: Incorporating gender-transformative methodologies, which employ social behavioural change approaches to directly challenge discriminatory gender norms, is crucial to tackle entrenched discrimination that prevents women from exercising full agency over their economic lives. Such methodologies typically involve both women and men, and use participatory methods for social change that can be integrated into agricultural advisory systems and value chain interventions.

Enabling inclusive off-farm opportunities: Inclusive rural climate actions must address factors like education, gender disparities, and mobility. Policies should aim to prevent educational gaps, especially in STEM fields for girls, and reduce domestic work burdens for women to enhance access to off-farm jobs. Expanding financial services and developing climate-adaptation markets are crucial for creating non-farm income opportunities, while supporting agrifood enterprises helps address both farm and off-farm constraints.

Building evidence on inclusive climate adaptation actions: There is a need to invest in the analysis of climate actions to better understand which interventions are most effective at supporting climate adaptation in rural areas, particularly among vulnerable populations. The lack of data that can be disaggregated at the level of individuals hampers efforts to identify critical social vulnerabilities and target these with effective actions. Intersectionality is a crucial aspect that deserves further research to gain a more holistic understanding of the complex dynamics of climate-related vulnerabilities.