Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tcld20

Download by: [Politecnico di Milano Bibl] Date: 23 March 2016, At: 02:03

Climate and Development

ISSN: 1756-5529 (Print) 1756-5537 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tcld20

Green revolution impacts in Bangladesh: exploringadaptation pathways for enhancing national foodsecurity

Simone Sala & Stefano Bocchi

To cite this article: Simone Sala & Stefano Bocchi (2014) Green revolution impacts inBangladesh: exploring adaptation pathways for enhancing national food security, Climate andDevelopment, 6:3, 238-255, DOI: 10.1080/17565529.2014.886988

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2014.886988

Published online: 19 Feb 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 361

View related articles

View Crossmark data

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Green revolution impacts in Bangladesh: exploring adaptation pathways for enhancing nationalfood security

Simone Salaa,b* and Stefano Bocchib

aCenter for International Conflict Resolution, School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University in the City of New York, 420West 118th Street, MC 3369, New York, NY 10027, USA; bDipartimento di Scienze agrarie e ambientali, Università degli Studi di Milano,Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy

(Received 24 May 2012; final version received 27 October 2013)

Bangladesh is considered one of the countries most likely to be affected by negative impacts of climate change. Indeed, a widerange of climate-induced threats endangers national food security. Furthermore, the peculiar environmental characteristics ofBangladesh make it particularly difficult to design and implement comprehensive policies to support agriculturaldevelopment. At present, national policy-makers need to plan adequate strategies to ensure food security for the growingpopulation while facing biophysical constraints and new challenges (e.g. climate change) that may jeopardize their efforts.Some scientists call for a second Green Revolution (GR) to reach this goal, even though the net effects of the first GR inBangladesh are still widely debated. The article analyses the practicability of a second GR in Bangladesh by combining aquantitative analysis of the past dynamics of national rice production and a qualitative assessment of key sectorial issueswith local stakeholders. The study concludes that to merely re-apply the standard GR pattern would be neither sustainablenor entirely effective, and new research approaches are needed to plan adequate policies for a climate-proof food security.

Keywords: adaptation; agriculture; climate change; biodiversity; sustainable development; green revolution; rice;Bangladesh

1. Introduction

Agriculture is the most important economic sector in Ban-gladesh, with over 60% of the people still depending onagriculture for their livelihoods (Ministry of Agriculture,Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh,2006). About 60% of the farmers are functionally landlessand 20% are marginal farmers working on lands a fractionof a hectare in size and cannot feed their families for a year(FAO & World Food Programme, 2008).

Rice is the staple crop in Bangladesh and a key crop forfood security worldwide (International Rice Research Insti-tute [IRRI], 2002). Rice production represents one-sixth ofthe national gross domestic product (GDP), accounting forover 50% of agricultural GDP and 70% of the crop GDP(Baffes & Gautam, 2001). Its production can take about48% of the rural workforce: indeed, almost all (13million) farm households in the country grow rice(Hossain, 2002). Given the wide agro-ecological varietyof Bangladeshi territory many rice varieties have beendeveloped in the past decades, with the main ecosystems(IRRI, 2002) being the following: (1) Upland (particularlyAus rice); (2) Irrigated (particularly Boro rice); (3) Rainfed

lowland (particularly Transplanted Aman, T.Aman); (4)Medium-deep stagnant; (5) Deepwater; (6) flooded; (7)tidal saline; and (8) tidal non-saline. The croppingseasons are mainly three: (1) winter, which is dry and rela-tively cold; (2) spring, characterized by monsoon rainsstarting from April; and (3) the rainy season, called‘Aman’, which lasts until November. According to IRRI,at present the three main rice ecotypes cropped in Bangla-desh are Boro, Aus, and T.Aman.

In terms of agricultural development, Bangladesh fol-lowed the adoption path of Green Revolution (GR) tech-niques and technologies. After the mid-1960s High Yieldvarieties (HYVs) of rice, fertilizers, and chemical pesticideswere introduced, and the use of irrigation was widespread.As a result, rice production increased from 16 million tonsin 1970 to 50 million tons in 2010 (Food and AgricultureOrganization of United Nations [FAO], 2012), pushingBangladesh close to achieving self-sufficiency at thenational level.

The GR produced mixed nation-wide effects. The sub-stantial increase in the quantity of rice production did notcome at the expense of land consumption, as hectares

© 2014 Taylor & Francis

*Corresponding author. Email: ss4051@columbia.edu

Climate and Development, 2014Vol. 6, No. 3, 238–255, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2014.886988

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

dedicated to rice cropping remained broadly stable between1970 and 2010 (FAO, 2012): rice currently accounts forabout 75% of the arable land, of which over 80% is irri-gated. On the other hand, the over-exploitation of soilresources produced degradation and a decline in fertility.This impacted the yield of modern varieties which in the1969–1994 period experienced an annual rate of declineof 1.2% (Rahman, 2004). In addition, the biodiversity oflocal rice has been remarkably eroded through the lastdecades: according to IRRI (2002), 95% of Boro rice con-sists of modern varieties; the figures for T.Aman and Ausare, respectively, 60% and 40%, while deepwater rice iscomposed by local varieties (LVs) only. It should also beunderlined that the presence of LVs persists in severalareas, mostly because of the difficulties in adaptingHYVs to some agro-ecosystems of the country (Anderson,Levy, &Morrison, 1991), similar to what happened in otherAsian countries where the diffusion of HYVs in unfavour-able ecosystems was problematic (Singh et al., 2010), andbecause of socio-cultural and culinary preferences of thetraits associated with LVs (Oakley & Henshall Momsen,2005).

Finally, the installation of tube wells during the earlytimes of the GR on one hand supported the developmentof irrigation schemes to boost production, but on theother accidentally exposed southern rural communities tohealth risks because of high arsenic concentrations at thedepth where most of the wells had been built (Heikens,2006). This increased the amount of arsenic consumeddirectly (through drinking) and indirectly (by contami-nation of edible crops and livestock), often causingsevere health problems among rural communities.

Currently one of the biggest concerns for the nationalfood security is represented by climate change (Ali, 1999;Ali & Sircar, 2010; Huq, 2001; Rashid & Islam, 2007;Yu et al., 2010), which exposes Bangladesh to a widevariety of climate-related threats: droughts (Shahid & Beh-rawan, 2008), floods (Mirza, 2002), increased frequencyand intensity of extreme weather events (Shahid, 2011),sea level rise (Hossain, 2010), increasing temperatures(Shahid, 2010), waterlogging, and increasing salinity(Khan, 2011). Water availability and food security arelikely to be severely affected, especially in the mediumand long terms (Faisal & Parveen, 2004). Climate variabil-ity, already affecting national agriculture (Asada & Matsu-moto, 2009), is likely to intensify, as observation provesincreasing trends in South Asia and decadal rain anomaliesabove the long-term average in Bangladesh (IPCC, 2007).

Given the predominant importance of rice production inthe agricultural sector of Bangladesh, most of the researchon the possible impacts of climate change has been focusedon rice production. Climate change is indeed expected tohave a negative impact on rice production (UNDP, 2008),with IPCC (2007) reporting an estimated overall declinein rice production of 8–17% by 2050. Particularly,

according to Wassmann et al. (2009) it is likely thatrising temperatures will exacerbate heat stress on the dry-season cropping, and that higher flood risk will hit theAman production – accounting for 55% of the total nationalrice production. During the 1994/1995 drought Aman alsoturned out to be the most sensitive crop to drought in thedry areas of the country (Paul, 1998).

Agricultural – and specifically rice – production in Ban-gladesh is hence now at a turning point. On one handpolicy-makers need to plan adequate policies to ensurefood security to the growing population, but on the otherhand there are biophysical constraints and new issues (i.e.climate change) that may jeopardize their efforts. Somescientists and policy-makers invoke a second GR to reachthis goal, even though the net effects of the first GR in Ban-gladesh are still widely debated. Specifically, it is not clearwhether convergence has been reached among differentareas or whether GR could have broadened the divideamong poor and rich areas, as well as among poor andpoorest in the same locations. The relatively few scientificarticles available on this specific topic do not provide manyresolving insights. A study conducted in 2004 (Rahman)tries to demonstrate regional convergence through theapplication of multi-lateral and multi-factor productivityindices for 16 regions (from 1964 to 1992), concludingthat convergence has been reached but growth performancehas been highly variable in time and GR technologiescannot be merely re-proposed because of both efficiencydecline and steady decrease in the performance of themodified variety rice seeds. Another study (Bera &Kelley, 1990) focused on the analysis of rice HYVthrough econometric models, concluding that site speci-ficity is crucial in determining the adoption patterns ofnew rice varieties, thus recommending the need to makeany new technological advance fit with local peculiarities.Hossain, Bose, and Mustafi (2006) analysed the impactand patterns of adoption of modern varieties in Bangladeshthrough national agricultural statistics, highlighting theactive role of farmers in the adoption of new varietiesand pointing out that the increase in yield came from thereplacement of LVs with HYVs rather than other factors(in fact, seasonal yield of modified varieties did notincrease between 1970 and 1990 and had a marginalincrease after 1990s). Farmers’ perception of risk wasalso recognized as an important factor driving Aman andBoro HYV adoption, with an interesting relationshipbetween the expected damage of climate-induced floodsand adoption rate of Aman and Boro HYVs (Azam,1996). The key role of farmers in supporting the adoptionof high-yielding varieties was also testified by the goodresults of participatory variety selection and breedingobtained in some areas of the country (Salam et al.,2010). More recently, Ali (2011) showed that the improve-ment of road infrastructures in rural areas was linked toincreased adoption rate of rice HYVs (in spite of traditional

Climate and Development 239

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

LVs), thus highlighting the necessity of fostering techno-logical transfer within the framework of a broader, inte-grated agricultural development strategy.

In their analysis of food grain production in Bangladeshthrough simulation models, Baffes and Gautam (2001)pointed out that the aforementioned decline of modifiedvarieties had been reduced, probably thanks to the develop-ment of improved irrigation systems, and for Bangladeshthere is no alternative to reaching food security by increas-ing rice yields. Nevertheless, they underline that such astrategy could have negative consequences in themedium/long term if further research on the impact ofcurrent practices on local natural resources is not carriedout. For example, the possible climate-induced increasein evapotranspiration could result in higher demands forirrigation water, thus adding further pressure on availableirrigation infrastructures and particularly reducing Boroyields (Mahmood, 1997).

As a result, the objective of this study is to explorepossible sustainable strategies that Bangladesh couldimplement to strengthen national food security in light ofclimate variability and change. To do so, the paperembarks on a two-fold investigation: (1) the quantitativeanalysis of the national rice production system dynamicsand (2) the participatory assessment of climate variabilityand change as well as possible adaptation strategies withlocal stakeholders in two different climate-sensitiveregions of the country.

Indeed, through this study an integrated quantitative–qualitative methodology to support the development ofclimate-sensitive agricultural adaptation strategies is pro-posed. Such methodology can be helpful in understandingif the GR model could be replicated, and how.

2. Materials and methods

In order to explore the possible strategies for supporting theBangladeshi rice production system in coping with climatevariability and change, a two-level study was undertaken.

2.1. Qualitative assessment

An in-country visit allowed interviewing local researchersand scientists from the Bangladesh Rice Research Institute(BRRI), the Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute(BARI), the Department of Agriculture Extension (DAE,Ministry of Agriculture), as well as farmers from twodifferent regions of the country: particularly, the visitedareas consisted of the drought-prone High Barind Tract inthe north-west (Alam & Elias, 2007) and the south-western coastal areas which are prone to sea level riseand water logging (Rahman et al., 2007; Shamsuddoha &Chowdhury, 2007), natural disasters, drought, and highlevels of soil salinity (Ali, 2007). In every visited village,a group interview was conducted by posing the same set

of open questions to a total number of 220 local farmers,in order to map their perception of climate change, theirmain livelihoods activities, and their efforts in adaptingthem to climate change. Every farmer who wanted toanswer was let free to talk, and answers were thenmarked as representative of the group if and only if consen-sus among farmers was reached.

Table 1 summarizes the work carried out with farmers’groups and the geographical location of the interviews.Table 2 reports an extract of the open questions posed tothe audience.

2.2. Quantitative analysis

Data on rice production were retrieved from the visitedinstitutions in the country: a database was built by droppingmissing and/or inconsistent data and taking into accountboth the spatial dimension (i.e. performance in crop pro-duction of the various administrative greater districts) andthe varietal peculiarities (i.e. performance of different ricevarieties) across the last decades.

The performance of local greater districts in terms ofpaddy rice yield (1979–2000) and of national yields forHYVs and LVs of T.Aman, Boro, and Aus ecotypes(1971–2001) was statistically examined.

Finally, spatial analysiswas carriedout through the devel-opment of a Geographic Information System (GIS) byemploying the open source software Quantum GIS, thusacknowledging the pivotal role of Information and Com-munication Technologies for climate adaptation (Sala, 2011).

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Qualitative analysis

The group interviews allowed a better understanding offarmers’ perception of climate change as well as theexploration of climate-induced criticalities in south-westand north-west climate-sensitive areas of Bangladesh.

An interesting outcome of the group interviews con-ducted at field level is the set of different concerns expressedby the farmers across the different locations. Figure 1 showsthe net number of occurrences of the most critical issuesamong farmers’ groups, while Figure 2 shows the percen-tage of occurrences of the various issues aggregated permain topic.

Figures show that climate variability and lack of infra-structure for agricultural production turned out to be themost serious concerns from the farmers’ perception.

Researchers and policy-makers from the above-men-tioned national institutions, who have been informallyinterviewed, also highlighted these two issues as criticalfor advancing agricultural development. Nevertheless,despite agreement over the most problematic issues fornational food security, the scientific and institutional

240 S. Sala and S. Bocchi

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

community shows very different opinions about the initiat-ives that should be promoted in order to respond to thefuture challenges. In fact, part of the scientific and insti-tutional community tends to propose initiatives framedwithin the path of the GR domain. Others have focusedon the negative effects of such interventions, thus support-ing different approaches to reach food security despite theclimate change threats and population growth. Acommon point, among both farmers and different groupsof scientists, was given by the high local specificity of agri-cultural issues, which seems to discourage one-size-fits-allsolutions in the implementation of adaptation as well asinnovation strategies. For this reason, the statistical analysisof data on both temporal and spatial dimensions presentedin Section 3.2 is helpful to complement the opinionsexpressed by the interviewed stakeholders at the locallevel and understand how the system evolved and may besupported to cope with the subsequent issues.

3.2. Quantitative analysis

A comprehensive quantitative analysis was performed ondata described in Section 2.2. A series of statistical testswere conducted on yield performance by variety, area,and spatial variability: these tests were important toassess the impact of GR on a key factor of national foodsecurity in Bangladesh, i.e. rice production. Additionaltests were performed to investigate the impact of climatevariability on the yield of different rice ecotypes and var-ieties, in order to identify the variety/ies possibly affected

by future increasing climate variability by looking at pastinteractions. Finally, a GIS analysis aimed at tracking theeffects of national agricultural policies was conducted tohighlight spatial variations on rice yield and cropped area.

Results of the quantitative analysis are presented anddiscussed below.

3.2.1. Tests on variations in yield by variety

A first comparison between the performance of LVs andHYVs for the three ecotypes is shown in Figure 3, forT.Aman, Aus, and Boro rice.

A two-way analysis of variance was also performed tocompare yield performance of LVs and HYVs. Table 3 pre-sents comprehensively the results of analysis of variance(ANOVA) on T.Aman, Aus, and Boro rice.

The first test performed on the T.Aman ecotype doesnot report statistical differences with regards to years, butthe null hypothesis is rejected for the two varieties: appar-ently there have not been significant improvements in per-formance for HYVs, while LVs seem to have room forfuture improvement.

Similar results are provided by the test conducted on theAus ecotype: null hypothesis is accepted for years, but varietiesshow significant statistical differences. A growth in terms ofyield performance is apparently noted for LVs, while HYVsshows performance instability throughout the time period.

Data analysis confirms that Boro is the ecotype onwhich agricultural stakeholders may have concentratedmost of their resources: the performance of Boro is the

Table 1. Outline and location of field interviews.

Activity District Upazilla

Group discussion with farmers (25 people) Chapaj Nawabganj NacholeDiscussion with two groups of farmers (15 and 30 people, respectively) Chapaj Nawabganj GomostapurGroup discussion with farmers (25 people) Natore LalpurGroup discussion with farmers (30 people) Khulna NazirpurDiscussion with two groups of farmers (35 and 25 people, respectively) Pirojpur DacopeGroup discussion with farmers (35 people) Pirojpur Bhandaria

Table 2. Extract/template of questions posed to the audience.

Questions posed to farmers’ group

1 Do you think that climate change is happening here? If yes, how have you experienced it (e.g. natural hazards, climate variability, etc.)?2 How are you trying to cope with climate change? Are there any specific adaptation options that you have developed and/or observed

within your and neighbours’ community?3 What are the most critical issues with regards to your livelihoods (with particular reference to food security)?4 What are your most important information needs (e.g. weather forecasts, market prices, etc.)?5 Are there trusted sources of information within and outside your village (e.g. elder farmers, extension agents, etc.)? If yes, who are they?6 What are the information and mass media resources you access for retrieving the information/knowledge that you need for supporting

your livelihoods?7 In your opinion what are the best ways to disseminate information to farmers’ groups of this area?8 What are the strategies you apply for livelihood-related problem solving?

Climate and Development 241

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

highest among selected ecotypes, and statistical nullhypothesis is accepted for both years and yields.

3.2.2. Test on trend analysis of area dedicated to thedifferent ecotypes

The temporal variations in area dedicated to LVs and HYVsfor the different ecotypes are analysed in the 1971–2006time period (Figure 4).

The test provides interesting insights into the adoptionof different ecotypes and related varieties by farmersthroughout the last three decades of the past century.

Results confirm a positive trend for HYVs in term ofland dedicated to their cropping, with substantial variationsbetween Aus and the more popular T.Aman and Boro. Thegrowth trends of T.Aman and Boro HYVs are remarkable(they show a coefficient of 88.29 and 107.8, respectively),while Aus HYVs could be considered stable (coefficient:7.607). Among the three ecotypes, less quantity of landhas been dedicated to Aus throughout the time period.This could be explained by the fact that farmers tend tosave land for Boro rice, avoiding sowing Aus which mayoverlap and thus jeopardize the more convenient croppingof Boro rice. On the other hand, all LVs show negative

trends, particularly for Aus and T.Aman (their coefficientsare −83.02 and −47.25, respectively); Boro LVs show aminor negative trend (coefficient: −11.6) too. On thewhole, the total area dedicated to paddy rice (thus compris-ing also other minor ecotypes) can be considered stable,with a positive trend (coefficient: 14.56).

3.2.3. Test on variations in yield by variety

Statistical correlation between yield performance of LVsand HYVs is analysed.

The three ecotypes show very different behaviours, thusconfirming the complex interactions existing between thedifferent varieties of ecotypes and their production per-formance. In fact, Boro is the only ecotype where LVsand HYVs are characterized by a significant positive corre-lation (0.61) throughout the time period, thus suggestingthat advancements in the area of input and managementcould have benefited both local and modified varieties.Nevertheless this is not the case for T.Aman, where no cor-relation (0.08) is reported: in this case national data aggre-gates may have masked site-specific varieties’ performancecorrelation. Aus even shows a mild negative correlation(−0.56) throughout the time period, suggesting a stronger

Figure 1. Occurrence of most critical issues expressed by farmers’ groups.

242 S. Sala and S. Bocchi

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

resilience of LVs for those years when the productionsystem is under stress, either because of climate or meansof production.

3.2.4. Test on five-year time-series by variety for theecotypes

In order to conduct a deeper analysis of the databank tobetter characterize rice production, a two-way ANOVAwith repetitions has been carried out by dividing the time

period in the following six 5-year phases: (1) 1971/1972–1975/1976; (2) 1976/1977–1980/1981; (3) 1981/1982–1985/1986; (4) 1986/1987–1990/1991; (5) 1991/1992–1995/1996; and (6) 1996/1997–2000/2001. This analysisis helpful to highlight possible instability in production per-formance throughout the 20-year time period (Table 4).

The test results show that interaction is statistically sig-nificant between phases and yield values for both Aus andT.Aman, while there is no significant interaction in the caseof Boro. Thus, production instability seems to have affected

Figure 2. Percentage of occurrence of most critical issues expressed by farmers’ groups aggregated per subject.

Figure 3. Yield performance of LVs and HYVs for Aus, T.Aman, and Boro rice.

Climate and Development 243

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

the first two ecotypes only, while Boro showed significantproduction stability which justifies the increased adoptionof this dry season irrigated rice farming.

It is also interesting to report the average yield in the sixphases for the three ecotypes (Table 5).

3.2.5. Test on the impact of climate variability on yieldstability of the ecotypes by variety

Data show an ambiguous pattern in yield stability betweenLVs and HYVs. A range of factors may have contributed tothese results; nevertheless, given the aforementioned localhigh sensitivity to climate variability and change, it is

likely that climate variability could have played a promi-nent role in complicating the smooth release and adoptionof HYVs through the classic Transfer of Technologymodel. Climate variability is intended here as the aggre-gated set of weather events varying from the mean stateand having a direct impact on agricultural production, i.e.including – among others – erratic rainfall, seasonalchange in solar radiation patterns, and extreme weatherevents.

The interaction between climate variability and the per-formance of rice ecotypes and varieties has been furtherinvestigated by applying an indicator developed byGommes (1998) and employed by FAO to calculate the

Figure 4. Trend in area dedicated to LVs and HYVs for Aus, T.Aman, and Boro ecotypes.

Figure 5. Percentage of T.Aman losses due to climate variability for LVs and HYVs.

244 S. Sala and S. Bocchi

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

Table 3. Two-way ANOVA on HYVs and LVs for T.Aman, Aus, and Boro rice.

T.Aman Aus Boro

Fcrit

Source ofvariation Df SQ MS F

P-value SQ MS F

P-value SQ MS F

P-value

Rows (years) 29 1.26 0.04 1.14 0.36 0.98 0.03 0.51 0.96 1.9 0.07 4.06 0 1.86Columns(varieties)

1 10.44 10.44 273.18 0 19.64 19.64 296.92 0 26.18 26.18 1626.04 0 4.18

Error 29 1.11 0.04 1.92 0.07 0.47 0.02Total 59 12.81 22.54 28.54

Note: Df, degree of freedom; MS, mean square; SQ, sum of square.

Figure 6. Percentage of Aus losses due to climate variability for LVs and HYVs.

Table 4. Two-way ANOVA with repetitions on five-year time-series for HYVs and LVs for T.Aman, Aus, and Boro rice.

Source ofvariation Df

T.Aman Aus Boro

FcritSQ MS F

P-value SQ MS F

P-value SQ MS F

P-value

Rows (phases) 5 0.15 0.03 0.82 0.54 0.57 0.11 8.98 0 1.04 0.21 9.22 0 2.41Columns(varieties)

1 10.44 10.44 287.6 0 19.64 19.64 1544.12 0 26.18 26.18 1161.47 0 4.04

Interaction 5 0.48 0.1 2.64 0.03 1.72 0.34 27.01 0 0.24 0.05 2.14 0.08 2.41Within 48 1.74 0.04 0.61 0.01 1.08 0.02Total 59 12.81 22.54 28.54

Table 5. Average yield in the six 5-year phases for T.Aman, Aus, and Boro rice.

PhaseT.Aman Aus Boro

Averageyield LVs

Averageyield HYVs

Averageyield value

Averageyield LVs

Averageyield HYVs

Averageyield value

Averageyield LVs

Averageyield HYVs

Averageyield value

Phase 1 1.06 2.24 1.65 0.76 2.49 1.63 1.24 2.76 2Phase 2 1.24 2.14 1.69 0.8 2.21 1.51 1.28 2.49 1.88Phase 3 1.23 1.96 1.6 0.81 2.01 1.41 1.52 2.73 2.13Phase 4 1.32 2.07 1.69 0.94 1.76 1.35 1.36 2.62 1.99Phase 5 1.34 1.96 1.65 0.92 1.79 1.35 1.43 2.69 2.06Phase 6 1.34 2.17 1.76 0.98 1.83 1.41 1.56 3.04 2.3Totalaverage

1.26 2.09 1.67 0.87 2.02 1.44 1.4 2.72 2.06

Climate and Development 245

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

percentage of production losses that could be attributed toclimate variability itself (PLcv):

PLcv = Yx− Ym

Ym∗100,

where Yx is the yield value for year x and Ym is themaximum yield value in a seven-year interval from Yx-3and Yx+3.

Such tests have been performed on T.Aman, Aus, andBoro ecotypes disaggregated for LVs and HYVs in order

to assess their stability against climate variability during a24-year period (Figures 5–7).

The analysis shows that HYVs altogether have sufferedclimate variability more than LVs for both Aus and T.Amanecotypes in the interval between 1974/1975 and 1997/1998.The result is opposite forBoro,HYVshaving abetter perform-ance than LVs. Linear trends calculated for LVs and HYVsamong the three ecotypes showed a R2 < 0.01 in all casesand cannot be thus considered significant. An additionalindex of the performance stability of LVs and HYVs perecotype with regards to climate variability can be represented

Figure 7. Percentage of Boro losses due to climate variability for LVs and HYVs.

Figure 8. Area dedicated to LVs and HYVs for Aus ecotype in 2002/2003.

246 S. Sala and S. Bocchi

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

by the analysis of how many times one variety had themaximum percentage of losses. The result, which is summar-ized in Table 6, shows that LVs performed better than HYVs

for both T.Aman and Aus. For Boro the outcome is the oppo-site, thus suggesting once again that Boro is the ecotype onwhich most of the resources had been invested.

Figure 9. Area dedicated to LVs and HYVs for T.Aman ecotype in 2002/2003.

Table 6. Percentage of losses of LVs and HYVs per different ecotypes and years.

Years

Percentage loss due to climate variability

T.Aman Aus Boro

HYVs LVs HYVs LVs HYVs LVs

1974/1975 −22.25 −14 −14.15 −8.15 −18.81 −12.731975/1976 −8.35 −6.09 −15.14 −6.62 −16.45 −8.391976/1977 −10.04 −4.8 −20.93 −7.34 −12.33 −20.481977/1978 0 0 −7.32 −5.68 −6.35 −8.951978/1979 −4.93 −2.74 −7.15 −1.78 −19.22 −34.381979/1980 −14.44 −7.97 −9.4 −10.9 −7.37 −18.531980/1981 −6.44 −1.45 −2.81 0 −5.08 −1.691981/1982 −19.9 −14.83 −3.95 −0.29 −0.17 −3.381982/1983 −6.67 −13.84 −11.06 −5.88 0 −10.411983/1984 −10.12 −8.85 −2.72 −8.39 −5.42 −5.11984/1985 −1.75 −1.45 −14.55 −15.33 −3.08 01985/1986 0 0 −11.16 −14.06 −5.51 −13.341986/1987 −7.58 −11.41 −17.31 −6.59 −1.82 −15.421987/1988 −6.47 −9.4 −6.51 −6.44 −3.72 −11.751988/1989 −13.65 −14.11 −8.66 −4.33 −6.94 −8.391989/1990 −0.9 0 −9.61 −1.99 −3.51 −17.061990/1991 −2.18 −4.89 −9.38 −6.55 −4.47 −0.591991/1992 0 −4.69 −2.77 −6.22 −0.71 01992/1993 −1.14 −2.55 0 0 −3.48 −5.861993/1994 −42.66 −1.53 −6.12 −9.48 −3.48 −3.921994/1995 −5.42 −10.63 −11.37 −12.91 −11.82 −15.091995/1996 −5.48 −6.67 −12.23 −13.34 −11.62 −7.871996/1997 −4.12 −9.51 −2.49 −10.32 −8.56 −23.751997/1998 −17.61 −25.09 −11.33 −18.25 −10.05 −13.9

Climate and Development 247

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

Given the expected increase of climate variability andweather events in Bangladesh (Mirza, 2002; Shahid,2011), this test can indeed be a helpful tool to identifyappropriate national-level strategies for the adaptation ofthe country’s agricultural sector.

3.2.6. Test on spatial variations in rice yield by greaterdistrict

A two-way ANOVA is performed on aggregated yieldvalues for paddy rice of 20 greater districts (having pre-viously dropped those districts described with missing orinconsistent data) (Table 7).

Null hypothesis is rejected for years and districts, thusshowing that there is absence of homogeneity in both thetemporal and the spatial domains. Specifically, spatialdifferences are statistically more significant.

Additionally, Fisher’s Least Significant Difference(LSD) method has been applied for grouping and compar-ing the greater districts with regards to their average paddyrice yield performance. LSD is calculated through the fol-lowing formula: LSD = (2*p2/n)−2, where p is p-valueand n is the number of degrees of freedom, resulting in0.05. High domestic spatial diversity in rice production isreflected by the number of groups: the 20 districts havebeen grouped in 9 classes, as shown in Table 8.

3.2.7. Test on geographical variations in rice yield byseven three-year time-series

To further explore the performance of the 20 greater dis-tricts throughout the time series, 7 phases have beencreated by grouping yield data in 3-year time-series(Table 9).

The result shows that the interaction between samplesand their spatial variation (i.e. districts) is not significant,while it is significant for samples and districts per se.Once again, local specificities are confirmed as a keydriver of variability at the national level.

3.2.8. GIS analysis of paddy rice production

In order to better characterize rice production in Bangla-desh at the spatial level, attributes linked to rice productionin the different national districts have been mapped andcompared through a GIS. This operation allowed the identi-fication of the following four key points:

Table 7. Two-way ANOVAwithout repetitions on paddy rice yield for 20 greater districts.

Source of variation SQ df MS F P-value F crit

Rows (districts) 26.3 19 1.38 16.36 0 1.61Columns (years) 25.4 20 1.27 15.01 0 1.6Error 32.15 380 0.08

83.85 419Total 28.54 59

Table 8. Greater districts grouped through the application ofFisher’s LSD method.

Class District Average yield

A Chittagong 2.11A Bogra 2.07B Dhaka 1.92C Rajshahi 1.82C Kishoreganj 1.8D Barisal 1.74D Rangpur 1.7D Jessore 1.7D Comilla 1.69E Noakhali 1.63E Tangail 1.63E Jamalpur 1.59E Mymensingh 1.58F Pabna 1.57F Dinajpur 1.56F Kushtia 1.56F Khulna 1.52G Sylhet 1.46H Patuakhali 1.2I Faridpur 1.13

Table 9. Two-way ANOVAwith repetitions in the seven 3-year series of paddy rice yield for 21 greater districts.

Source of variation SQ df MS F P-value F crit

Rows (samples) 31.36 6 5.23 14.41 0 2.13Columns (phases) 22.75 19 1.2 3.3 0 1.62Interaction 41.71 380 0.37 1.01 0.47 1.29Within 101.58 419 0.36Total 197.4 419

248 S. Sala and S. Bocchi

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

(1) A high spatial variability in the distribution of eco-types in the 64 national districts is reported bycomparing the percentage of land dedicated to T.Aman and Aus ecotypes at the district level in2002/2003 (Figures 8 and 9). This can be

considered a consequence of the high agro-ecologi-cal diversity of Bangladesh as well as the result ofnational policies targeting poverty in specific areas:for example, the high presence of T.Aman HYVs inthe northern High Barind tract, traditionally the

Figure 11. LVs and HYVs yield for T.Aman ecotype in 2002/2003.

Figure 10. LVs and HYVs yield for Aus ecotype in 2002/2003.

Climate and Development 249

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

poorest area of the country, could be due to govern-mental efforts for tackling food insecurity in thatregion by supporting the release and cropping ofmodified varieties. In addition, the extremely lowpercentage of area dedicated to LVs for both T.Aman and Aus should be noted. This result,when associated with the decreasing trend shownin Section 3.2.1, represents a severe warning forrice biodiversity at both local and national levels.On the contrary, the higher values in southern

coastal areas do confirm the difficulty to introduceHYVs in that specific agro-ecologic area, which itis also due to culinary preferences as quoted inSection 1.1.

(2) A high spatial variability is reported in terms ofyield per ecotype in Figures 10 and 11. On onehand this confirms the complexity of national riceproduction system and on the other it is interestingto verify that quantitative differences in terms ofyield among LVs and HYVs are relatively low.

Figure 12. Spatial changes in area dedicated to rice by division in 1970 (a), 1980 (b), 1990 (c), and 1999 (d). The percentage value is theresult of the area value per division after its normalization to the value of national annual area dedicated to rice.

250 S. Sala and S. Bocchi

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

(3) Spatial changes grouped by division in area dedi-cated to rice as well as in total rice productionduring 1970, 1980, 1990, and 1999 (respectively,Figures 12 and 13) do suggest that the concen-tration of agricultural activities followedthe national development path, shifting fromthe richest areas close to the capital (1970) to thepoorer eastern and western regions through thelast decades. The progressive concentration of

agricultural activities in the north-west of thecountry could also be due to governmental effortsto promote food security in the poorest westernareas through an increase in food production,which seems to be primarily driven by an increasein the relative land dedicated to agricultural activi-ties rather than an increase in yield (Figure 14).Finally, it should be underlined that the 1998/1999 rice season was particularly below standards,

Figure 13. Spatial changes in total rice production by division in 1970 (a), 1980 (b), 1990 (c), and 1999 (d). The percentage value is theresult of rice production value per division after its normalization to the national annual rice production value.

Climate and Development 251

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

primarily because of flooding that provoked thesubstantial failure of the rice harvest in the Amanseason (Del Ninno, Dorosh, Smith, & Roy, 2001).

(4) The Coefficient of Variation (CV) over the 1970–1999 time period (Figure 15) confirms the above-referenced trend in shifting productive capacitytowards the Northeastern area of the country. Theanalysis of correlation of CV for the three

parameters (area dedicated to rice; rice total pro-duction; and rice yield) puts in evidence thatthere is no significant correlation either betweenthe variability in terms of area and production(–0.2) or between area and yield (–0.3), whilethere is a positive correlation between productionand yield (0.6). This phenomenon may confirm atendency of increase in productivity efficiency

Figure 14. Spatial changes in rice yield (t/ha) by division in 1970 (a), 1980 (b), 1990 (c), and 1999 (d).

252 S. Sala and S. Bocchi

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

with decrease in land availability as well as theabove-referenced presence of structural limits inland capability in Bangladesh. Nevertheless, it isinteresting to underline that the highest variabilityin total production (normalized on the nationalvalue) is present in the traditionally poorerwestern regions, underlining the shift that hasoccurred in the last decades. This suggests thatthe adoption of modified varieties and improvedcropping techniques could have constituted thedriving factor for positive results in rice yield inthat area. Finally, it is interesting to highlight thatyield variability is particularly high in thewestern regions, characterized by harsh climateand environmental conditions as already described.At the same time, yield variability is quite signifi-cant in every division: CV is always greater than20% with the exception of the Dhaka divisionand the Sylhet division, traditionally dedicated totea cultivation. The high climate variability (seeSection 1.1), other than food security policies thatdrove significant improvements in the poorestregions, could provide an explanation for thiscommon result among divisions.

4. Conclusion

In order to further understand a complex issue as foodsecurity, especially when linked to another particularlycomplex issue as climate change, it is essential topropose new integrated methodologies that could over-come some traditional local versus global and quantitativeversus qualitative ‘siloed’ research approaches.

A first peculiarity of the present study is hence theapplication of an integrated mixed methodology to high-light the value of combining participatory approaches(vital to understand needs and issues of local farming

communities), qualitative analysis with stakeholders atthe national level, and quantitative interpretation of dataand statistics. Indeed, climate change is a global phenom-enon with local impacts, and food security cannot be pro-moted without a critical exploration of its different facets:it is thus critical to understand (and strengthen) the linkagesbetween the local- and national-level production and liveli-hood systems.

Specifically, in Bangladesh it is fundamental to advancethe comprehension of past impacts of agricultural develop-ment with the ultimate aim of planning possible agriculturaladaptation strategies. The analysis of rice production inBangladesh shows that it is hard to imagine that a merere-proposal of the GR schemes could fit the national andlocal needs in the medium and long terms. The diffusionof GR-like technological advances and the developmentof infrastructures directly and indirectly related to thoseadvances did overall result in a remarkable increase inrice production throughout the last 30 years. Increasingyields also allowed maintaining the amount of land dedi-cated to agriculture in Bangladesh at stable levels despitea tremendous population increase. Nevertheless, the yieldpatterns showed in the past section point out that site-specific social and agro-ecological peculiarities did play amajor role in the successful complete adoption of the tech-nological pool that characterized the first GR at the locallevel. This was particularly true for Aus and T.Aman riceecotypes that showed instable yield patterns and a declinein performance among HYVs – despite having historicallyhad always higher absolute production figures of LVs. Onthe other hand, Boro ecotype was a success story withregards to production and spread where irrigation infra-structures were available. This positive performanceshould in any way not induce one to think that the exponen-tial extension of this ecotype to the whole territory could bean appropriate solution. In fact, because Boro is croppedunder irrigated ecosystem there are geophysical structural

Figure 15. CV in the 1970–1999 time period for areas dedicated to rice (a), total rice production (b), and rice yield (c) by division.

Climate and Development 253

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

limitations given the territory of Bangladesh as well as theneeded infrastructure investments to support its expansion.The deployment of such infrastructures should be plannedvery carefully, given the potential impacts of irrigationsystems on human health in Bangladesh.

Moreover, it should be underlined that the performanceof different districts does not show a convergence amonggreater districts in terms of yield production, thus confirm-ing that spatial inequalities cannot be solved through a one-size-fits-all approach. These aspects, jointly with theserious trends of widespread soil degradation, should bekept in mind when planning subsequent rice productionstrategies. Finally, it is evident that local agro-biodiversityis under threat (in terms of area dedicated to LVs) and theshift in area dedicated to cropping from LVs to HYVs isnot completely justifiable by the global performance ofHYVs, especially when looking at yield stability and resi-lience to climate variability.

In conclusion, it appears that future strategies to supportfood security in light of climate change in Bangladeshshould necessarily be passed by expanding access to GR-oriented technologies in those areas where these can beadopted, while improving their environmental sustainabil-ity. At the same time, the high yield variability encounteredin the analysed ecotypes suggests that leveraging agro-ecology approaches towards a context-oriented implemen-tation of food security strategies will also be essential.Local agro-biodiversity should be preserved as an impor-tant source of buffer against exogenous shocks, particularlyto the climate-induced ones. Despite lower yields of LVs, insitu conservation of local agro-biodiversity as well as ofrelated knowledge and practices appears as an importantpillar to effectively strengthen national food security inconjunction with expanded access to ‘greener’GR-orientedtechnologies. To implement such strategies the role of localresearch institutes in partnership with farmers’ commu-nities and national institutions will be pivotal to bridgethe interaction of local and national agri-food systems,with particular reference to improving participatory tech-nology development towards enhancing food availability,access, and utilization.

ReferencesAlam, Q.M., & Elias, S.M. (2007). The impact of irrigation on

income distribution across households in a selected barindarea of Bangladesh. Bulletin of the Institute of TropicalAgriculture, Kyushu University, 30, 47–56.

Ali, A. (1999). Climate change impacts and adaptation assessmentin Bangladesh. In N. Mimura (Ed.), National assessmentresults of climate change: Impacts and responses (pp. 109–116). Climate Research (Special Issue), 6. Oldendorf/Luhe:Climate Research (Inter-Research).

Ali, A., & Sircar, M. (2010). Adapting to climate change inBangladesh: Stress tolerant seeds for stress-prone regions.Washington, DC: World Bank.

Ali, A.M.S. (2007). September 2004 flood event in SouthwesternBangladesh: A study of its nature, causes, and human percep-tion and adjustments to a new hazard. Natural Hazards, 40,89–111.

Ali, R. (2011). Impact of rural road improvement on high yieldingvariety technology adoption: Evidence from Bangladesh(Working Paper). Washington, DC: University of Maryland.

Anderson, R., Levy, S.E., & Morrison, B.M. (1991). Rice scienceand development politics: Research strategies and IRRI’stechnologies confront Asian diversity (1950–1980). Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Asada, H., & Matsumoto, J. (2009). Rainfall variation and riceproduction in India/ Bangladesh. Climate Research, 38,249–260.

Azam, J.P. (1996). The impact of floods on the adoption rate ofhigh-yielding rice varieties in Bangladesh. AgriculturalEconomics, 13, 179–189.

Baffes, J., & Gautam,M. (2001). Assessing the sustainability of riceproduction growth in Bangladesh. Food Policy, 26, 515–542.

Bera, A.K., & Kelley, T.G. (1990). Adoption of high yielding ricevarieties in Bangladesh. An econometric analysis. Journal ofDevelopment Economics, 33, 263–285.

Del Ninno, C., Dorosh, P.A., Smith, L.C., & Roy, D.K. (2001).The 1998 floods in Bangladesh. Disaster impacts, householdcoping strategies, and response (Research Report 122).Washington, DC: International Food Policy ResearchInstitute (IFPGRI).

Faisal, I.M., & Parveen, S. (2004). Food security in the face ofclimate change, population growth and resource constraints:Implications for Bangladesh. Environmental Management,34(4), 487–498.

FAO. (2012). Fao statistics. Retrieved January 2012 from http://faostat.fao.org/

FAO & World Food Programme (WFP). (2008). Special reportFAO/WFP: Crop and food supply assessment mission toBangladesh, 28 August, Rome, Italy. Retrieved from ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/ai472e/ai472e00.pdf

Gommes, R. (1998, April–May). Climate-related risk in agricul-ture. A note prepared for the IPCC expert meeting on riskman-agement methods, 29 April–1 May 1998. Toronto, Canada.

Heikens, A. (2006). Arsenic contamination of irrigation water,soil and crops in Bangladesh: Risk implications for sustain-able agriculture and food safety in Asia. Bangkok: Foodand Agricultural Organization of the United Nations,Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific.

Hossain, M. (2002). Rice research and poverty alleviation inBangladesh (IRRI Policy Brief). U. K. Deb. Dhaka: Centerfor Policy Dialogue (CPD).

Hossain, M., Bose, M.L., & Mustafi, B.A.A. (2006). Adoptionand productivity impact of modern rice varieties inBangladesh. In R.J. Gilkes & N. Prakongkep (Eds.), TheDeveloping Economies, XLIV-2 (pp. 149–66). Oxford:Blackwell Publishing Limited.

Hossain, M.A. (2010, August). Global warming induced sea levelrise on soil, land and crop production loss in Bangladesh.Proceedings of the 19th World Congress of soil science, soilsolutions for a changing world, 1–6 August 2010, Brisbane,Australia.

Huq, S. (2001). Climate change and Bangladesh (editorial article).Science, 294(5547), 1617. Retrieved from http://www.sciencemag.org/content/294/5547/1617.citation

IPCC. (2007). Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vul-nerability. In M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J.van der Linden, & C.E. Hanson (Eds.), Contribution ofWorking Group II to the fourth assessment report of the

254 S. Sala and S. Bocchi

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016

intergovernmental panel on climate change (p. 475).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

IRRI. (2002). Bangladesh. In J.L. Maclean, D.C. Dawe, B. Hardy,& G.P. Hettel (Eds.), Rice almanac (3rd ed., pp. 98–101).Wallingford: CABI Publishing.

Khan, A. (2011). Climate change, sea-level rise, & health impactsin Bangladesh. Environment, 53(5), 18–33.

Mahmood, R. (1997). Impacts of air temperature variations on theboro rice phenology in Bangladesh: Implications for irrigationrequirements.Agricultural andForestMeteorology,84, 233–247.

Ministry of Agriculture, Government of the People’s Republic ofBangladesh. (2006). Bangladesh agriculture at a glance.Retrieved January 2012 from http://www.moa.gov.bd/statistics/bag.htm

Mirza, M.M.Q. (2002). Global warming and changes in the prob-ability of occurrences of floods in Bangladesh and impli-cations. Global Environmental Change, 12(2), 127–138.

Oakley, E., & Henshall Momsen, J. (2005). Gender and agrobio-diversity: A case study from Bangladesh. GeographicalJournal, 171(3), 195–208.

Paul, B.K. (1998). Coping mechanisms practised by droughtvictims (1994/5) in North Bengal, Bangladesh. AppliedGeography, 18(4), 355–373.

Rahman, A.A., Alam, M., Alam, S.S., Uzzaman, Md. R., Rashid,M., & Rabbani, G. (2007). Risks, vulnerability and adap-tation in Bangladesh. Occasional Paper, Fighting climatechange: Human solidarity in a divided world, HumanDevelopment Report 2007/2008. New York, NY: UnitedNations Development Programme.

Rahman, S. (2004, August). Regional productivity differences andprospect for convergence in Bangladesh agriculture, 1964–1992. Paper presented at the annual meeting of theAmerican Agricultural Economics Association, 1–4 August2004, Denver, CO.

Rashid, M.H., & Islam, M.S. (2007). Adaptation to climatechange for sustainable development of Bangladesh agricul-ture (Bangladesh Country Paper). Beijing: Centre forSustainable Agricultural Mechanization.

Sala, S. (2011). The role of information and communication technol-ogies forcommunity-based adaptation to climate change. Rome:Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Salam, M.A., Islam, M.R., Rahman, M.S., Rahman, M.A.,Bhuiyan, M.A.R., Seraj, Z.I., … Gregorio, G.B. (2010).Rice varieties and cultural management practices for highand sustained productivity in the coastal wetlands ofSouthern Bangladesh. In C.T. Hoanh, B.W. Szuster, K.Suan-Pheng, A.M. Ismail, & A.D. Noble (Eds.), Tropicaldeltas and coastal zones: Food production, communitiesand environment at the land-water interface (pp. 183–198).Wallingford, UK: CAB International (CABI).

Shahid, S. (2010). Recent trends in the climate of Bangladesh.Climatic Research, 42, 185–193.

Shahid, S. (2011). Trends in extreme rainfall events inBangladesh. Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 104(3–4), 489–499.

Shahid, S., & Behrawan, H. (2008). Drought risk assessment inthe western part of Bangladesh. Natural Hazard, 46, 391–413.

Shamsuddoha, Md., & Chowdhury, R.K. (2007). Climate changeimpact and disaster vulnerabilities in the coastal areas ofBangladesh. Dhaka: COAST Trust and Equity and JusticeWorking Group (EJWG).

Singh, R.K., Redoña, E., Gregorio, G.B., Salam, M.A., Islam, M.R., Singh, D.P., … Lang, N.T. (2010). The right rice at theright place: Systematic exchange and farmer-based evalu-ation of rice germplasm for salt-affected areas. In C.T.Hoanh, B.W. Szuster, K. Suan-Pheng, A.M. Ismail, & A.D.Noble (Eds.), Tropical deltas and coastal zones: Food pro-duction, communities and environment at the land-waterinterface (pp. 166–182). Wallingford, UK: CABInternational (CABI).

UNDP. (2008).Fighting climate change:Humansolidarity inadividedworld (Human Development Report). New York, NY: OxfordUniversity Press.

Wassmann, R., Jagadish, S.V.K., Sumfleth, K., Pathak, H., Howell,G., Ismail, A., …Heuer, S. (2009). Regional vulnerability ofclimate change impacts on Asian rice production and scopefor adaptation. Advances in Agronomy, 102, 91–133.

Yu, W., Alam, M., Hassan, A., Khan, A.S., Ruane, A.C.,Rosenzweig, C., … Thurlow, J. (2010). Climate changerisks and food security in Bangladesh. Washington, DC:Earthscan.

Climate and Development 255

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Polit

ecni

co d

i Mila

no B

ibl]

at 0

2:03

23

Mar

ch 2

016