The role oF local power relations in household vulnerability to Climate Change in humla, nepal - Climate Change Adaptation and Development: Transforming Paradigms and Practices - page 213

the same power structures also effectively act as barriers for other households
seeking better ways of adapting to the new, changing situation. This finding
is consisted with McLaughlin and Dietz (2008, p. 106): 'adaptation by some
actors can and often does entail increased vulnerability for others' . Our study
adds to these insights by demonstrating that social and power relations also can
create a dynamic of deepening dependency and inequity when households are
faced with stress. We argue therefore that greater emphasis should be placed
on understanding and challenging local power dynamics in order to effectively
reduce the vulnerability of the poor when seeking to tackle food security and
vulnerability to climate change.
In the case of Humla, 'development as usual' is represented by measures that
address vulnerability and food security as an outcome of low and unreliable
agricultural production in the face of climatic stressors. Consequently, a main
focus of the humanitarian actors in recent decades has been on distributing food
and seed to vulnerable households and villages to improve their food security. We
would argue that this approach is fundamentally flawed as a strategy to reduce
vulnerability in the long term. Our study has shown that networks and power
relations influence agricultural production as well as access to other livelihood
strategies, including trade. Thus, seeking to address the production gap solely
by distributing food does not deal with the underlying drivers of vulnerability.
Instead of challenging structural relations, current development and aid
interventions in Humla appear to be embedded in the local power dynamic,
in part reinforcing inequities and vulnerability. For instance, most interviewees
held that, in order to benefit from aid, one needed to have the right contacts
in district headquarters, in addition to some cash and other resources. Similar
findings from western Nepal have been reported by Adhikari (2008) and
Bishokarma (2010).
Nevertheless, relations are not static. They can be challenged, and new
livelihood options can be created, shifting the patterns of vulnerability.
For example, in Humla, education targeting low castes and girls should be
considered as part of a comprehensive approach to break down intra- and inter-
village power relations, so as to reduce the vulnerability of the poorest. In all
three villages studied here, measures to improve decision-making access for the
most vulnerable could help address the dynamic that now exacerbates inequities.
The case of Humla has demonstrated some opportunities for formal measures
that can act to strengthen local strategies, reduce dependencies and contribute
to 'adaptation as un usual'. Such adaptation would affect not only how people
can manage climatic variability and change, but development pathways more
widely. Challenging relations, inequities and dependencies as part of adaptation
measures would contribute to driving what Eriksen et al. ( Chapter 1 , this volume)
describe as deliberate transformation, which, they argue, is required as a contrast
to 'development as usual'.
However, for development organizations that have to work with and within
existing structures and institutions, there remains a fundamental dilemma as