Eastern Australian Farmers Managing and Thinking Differently: Innovative Adaptation Cycles.

The uncertainty of climate change is a significant challenge prompting Australian farmers to create different thinking and different management systems that ensure sustained farm business viability and continuity, particularly in extreme environments. The purpose of this study was to explore the conditions and adaptive processes for managing farm resilience and cyclic adaptation pathways, in response to climate change. A positive deviance sample of farmers was interviewed, and data was collected from a cohort of twenty-two climate change innovators across Eastern Australia. Grounded theory analysis of data identified three processes and two transactional maps of climate change adaptation, in this under studied farmer cohort. The development of the transactional maps found the resilience and preparedness processes as adaptive learning responses to the stressors of climate change. The processes of managing the business and resources were identified as markers of preparedness and resilience that ensured business viability and continuity. Farmers prepared for climate change through transforming make-over processes as an adaptive learning response to climate challenges. Mapping the cycle of adaptation identified the processes of socio-cognitive agency, learning from feedback and consequences, and contextual variables as critical elements of adaptation. The intervening socio-ecological processes of intelligence gathering and influencing, and socio-cognitive precursors, were found to regulate the adaptation cycle. The cycle was found to have both incremental and transformative transmission processes, and intervening processes of climate and contextual variables. The changing patterns and extremes of climate change were found to impact the growing season, and its potential, as unique variables that demand farm adaptation. Ultimately, this study identified potential points of influence for leveraging preparedness behaviours.

Conservation benefit-sharing mechanisms and their effectiveness in the Greater Serengeti Ecosystem: local communities' perspectives.

Benefit-sharing mechanisms have been instrumental in securing the support of local communities living on the edge of protected areas to implement protected area goals and enhance biodiversity conservation outcomes. Understanding the acceptability of the types of benefit provided among diverse communities is crucial for co-designing benefit-sharing approaches that accommodate local perspectives. Here, we used quasi-structured questionnaires and focus group discussions (FGD) to assess the acceptance of the types of benefit received by the communities in the Greater Serengeti Ecosystem (GSE) in Tanzania and the effectiveness of the benefits in securing community support for conservation reserves. We found that the categories of social service provision, livelihood support, and employment described all the benefits provided across conservation institutions operating in the GSE. However, the types of benefit within these categories varied significantly among conservation institutions, in terms of level and frequency of benefits received by communities. Overall, student scholarships were highly rated by respondents as the most satisfying benefit received. Respondents who were dissatisfied with the benefits received thought that the benefits did not compensate for the high costs arising from wildlife incursions onto their land. Communities' acceptance of the benefits received varied greatly among villages, but only a small proportion of pooled respondents (22%) were willing to support the existence of a protected area without benefit. This study suggests that local people are willing to support conservation outcomes but require conservation institutions to give greater consideration to the costs incurred by communities, their livelihood needs, and access to natural resources or other benefits. We recommend that benefit-sharing be tailored to the local circumstances and cultures of people living close to protected areas, particularly communities expressing more negative views, to ensure adequate and appropriate compensation is provided. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10531-023-02583-1.