Upload
okafor-obinna-r
View
219
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 1/27
Environmental Refugees in KenyaMitigating causes of environmental refugees
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 2/27
ABSTRACT
Environmental refugees are a growing problem. In 1995 the estimation was that there were25 million refugees due to environmental causes and this number could be doubled in the
year 2010 if not acted upon (Myers, 2002). Kenya is a country where the problem of
environmental refugees is occurring and the main question addressed in this assessment is:
What are possible measures to mitigate the causes leading to environmental refugees in
Kenya? This report is the result of a limited environmental system analysis performed for the
government of Kenya, limited in the way that only a part of the problem of environmental
refugees is taken into account. Population growth leading to unsustainable land management
is taken as main cause for environmental refugees, thereby for example ignoring climate
change or social factors as drivers.
In this analysis three different tools are used to perform the assessment. The first tool,
developing a causal diagram, is used to frame the problem and possible solutions. Derivedfrom this is that possible mitigation measures are birth policy, agroforestry, alternatives for
fuel wood, irrigation, building dams and desalinitation of sea water. Next, scenario analysis is
applied to elaborate more on the future state of Kenya from the year 2010 to 2030 in order to
determine which of the mitigation measures will, under future conditions, have the highest
effect. Eventually, a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) is performed to determine a rank from the
t f d t th l t f d l ti
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 3/27
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................... I
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................... II
TABLE OF FIGURES ................................................................................................... II
TABLE OF TABLES .................................................................................................... II
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1
2. Problem Formulation ................................................................................................. 2
3. Methodology .............................................................................................................. 3
3.1 Literature review ..................................................................................................................................... 3 3.2 Environmental system analysis tools ....................................................................................................... 4
4 Results ......................................................................................................................... 5
4.1 Causal Diagram ...................................................................................................................................... 5 4.2 Identifying, screening and designing alternatives ................................................................................... 6 4.3 Forecasting future states of Kenya (Scenario Analysis) .............................................................. ............ 7 4.4 Predicting the consequences of the alternatives ............................................................... ..................... 10 4.5 Comparing and ranking the alternatives. A Multi-criteria decision analysis ........................................ 10
5 Di i 13
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 4/27
1. Introduction
An increased number of people forced to leave their home, either temporally or permanently,because of the environmental degradation, such as soil erosion, deforestation, high salinity
of soil, desertification, among others. Environmental degradation is caused by natural factors
or anthropogenic factors emerging from the unsustainable use of natural resources. These
displaced people, who have to seek another place to live in order to survive because their
former sustenance base (ecosystem) cannot support their life anymore, are called
“environmental refugees” (Myers, 1997).
According to Myers (2002), over decades the number of environmental refugees increased
dramatically reaching 25 million in 1995, of which almost half were located in Sub-Saharan
Africa.
If current pressures on the environment continue as a result of population growth, the total
number of people who will be forced to leave their homeland could increase dramatically inthe next 30 year. This could lead to profound socio-economic, political and environmental
problems at local, national and international levels or even could lead to violence and conflict
(Myers, 2002).
In Kenya the number of environmental refugees is increasing as a result of both
anthropogenic and natural causes (El-Hinnami, 1985). Because of the socioeconomic and
i t l i t f th f i ti i l di t h
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 5/27
2. Problem Formulation
Addressing the problem of environmental refugees the objective proposed by theGovernment of Kenya is to study the effect of the unsustainable land management on
environmental refugees in Kenya, in order to propose possible mitigations measures.
For this purpose the following research question will be used: What are possible measures to
mitigate the causes leading to environmental refugees in Kenya?
This main question will be answered through answering the following sub questions:
1) How does unsustainable land management in Kenya influence environmental
refugees?
2) What are the possible mitigation measures to be implemented in Kenya?
3) How will the amount of environmental refugees develop in Kenya until the year 2030?4) What are the main consequences of the implementation of the measures to mitigate
the problem of environmental refugees?
5) What is the most preferred mitigation measure to the problem of environmental
refugees in Kenya?
Limitations
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 6/27
3. Methodology
3.1 Literature reviewThe concept ‘environmental refugee’ was first used by El-Hinnawi (1985) stating that
environmental refugees are people that are forced to leave their habitat because of
environmental disruption (e.g. deforestation, desertification, erosion or drought). Over time,
there has been an increase in number of environmental refugees. Two decades ago, it was
reported by the executive director of the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP),
that “as many as 50 million people could become environmental refugees” (Tolba, 1989) if
sustainable development would not be embraced (Tolba, 1989). More recently, Myers (2002)
and Goffman (2006) referred to a potential estimate of 200 million of environmental refugees
within 50 years if global warming sets in and sea levels rise. According to Myers (2002) in
1997 there were at least 25 million environmental refugees located in sub-Sahara Africa,
Central America and some part of Asia. This number could double in 2010 if not before, asthere is a rapid increase in numbers of (poor) people pressing hard to already overloaded
sustenance bases (environment) (Myers, 1997). What can be seen is that although numbers
differ, there is agreement that the amount of environmental refugees will increase in the
future if not acted upon.
From the beginning of defining environmental refugee by El-Hinnawi (1985) discussions
b t thi d fi iti h b i B El Hi i (1985) i hi d fi iti did t
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 7/27
3.2 Environmental system analysis tools
Problem formulation: To find possible mitigation measures to the problem of environmental
refugees in Kenya, in order to support the Government of Kenya to deal with this, it is
important to look for the causes. In this assessment causes were brought up by members of
the team and discussed within till agreement was achieved.
Identifying, screening, and designing alternatives: Within the causal diagram also possible
mitigation measures are determined. Discussed solutions are written in the diagram in order
to be implemented later on in the scenario analysis and the multi-criteria analysis.
Forecasting future contexts or states of the world: One of the applications of scenario
analysis is to assess the implications of certain (policy) measures on the future state of the
environment (Swart et al ., 2004). In this assessment two limited qualitative exploratory
baseline scenarios on the future state of environmental refugees are used. The aim is to
explore two plausible futures for Kenya by the year 2030, by means of making assumptions
about changes in the main driving forces (economic development, population growth,
urbanization and climate change) leading to the problem of environmental refugees.
B ilding and sing models for predicting conseq ences D t th ti f th i t t
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 8/27
4 Results
4.1 Causal DiagramThe causes why people become environmental refugees are multifarious and complex. In
this assessment the focus is on population growth and the resulting unsustainable land
management, which lead to resource depletion and thereby causing an increase in
environmental refugees. Figure 1. shows the causal-diagram for this focus including possible
solutions.
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 9/27
deforestation rate in Kenya to be 1.6 % for 1980s. Deforestation and overuse of arable land
leads to wind erosion and desertification. Improper irrigation methods or systems, which use
high amounts of water, raise the soil salinity, in the arid and sub arid areas of Kenya, up to a
level where a land use for agricultural activities is not longer possible (Githaiga et al ., 2003).
These effects of unsustainable land use lower the availability of resources such as fertile
land and groundwater.
The decrease in resource availability increases the pressure on the local land users,
resulting in even more depletion. Others are forced to leave their homes, and migrate within
Kenya or abroad, due to a lack of resources and become environmental refugees.
4.2 Identifying, screening and designing alternatives
There are many solutions or mitigation measures to the causes of environmental refugees.
These solutions, which reduce the causes of environmental refugees, influence
environmental refugees directly or indirectly. Below are the solutions listed, discussed for this
assessment:
Agroforestry: Agroforestry is a way of practicing agriculture in areas where the microclimatic
conditions are not optimal (Lott et al ., 2009). It is a system using consistent trees and shrubs
t th ith diff t th l d it Thi l d it l b d f
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 10/27
survive, are causing deforestation of natural forests, erosion of lands and losses in soil
productivity (Bilsborrow, and Ogendo,1992). One of the causes of the increased population is
the lack of a family planning policy (Prata, 2009). According to Prata (2009), help of the
government, but mostly international aid in financial and human resources, can help
designing good family planning policies, in order to reduce the birth rate in Kenya. Moreover,
the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) clarified that a
family planning policy should be accompanied by programs which focus on poverty
eradication, equality between genders, women’s empowerment, strengthen of human rights
and male responsibility in sexual behaviour (Speidel et al ., 2009).
Alternatives for fuel wood: As mentioned in the causal diagram, the continuing use of fuel
wood in Kenya in both urban and rural areas has led to deforestation and will continue to
cause destruction of the forests, unless alternative energy resources are going to be
provided. Paraffin, gas and electricity are the alternative energy resources that can be used
instead of fuel wood. The ecological and health impacts will be less with the use of these
energy resources (Brouwer and Falcao, 2004).
Building dams: As Kenya has a great problem of water scarcity due to the desertification and
the salinitation, the government should make a plan to build a number of dams. Building
dams can help to store large amounts of water (Schiff and Winters, 2002), which can be
d b th l d i d i d
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 11/27
Table 1: Possible future scenarios (2010-2030) in Kenya.
Scenario 1
In scenario 1 the economic growth is very moderate in the first time step from 2010 to 2020.
This causes a bigger increase in population growth (Perman et al., 2003). In the second time
t (2020 2030) th i th t th ( d t ) l l d th
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 12/27
Scenario 2
In scenario 2 in the first time step (2010-2020) the economy in Kenya will slightly grow. The
assumption is that with an increase in economic growth, the population growth will decrease.
So over the time period 2010 to 2020 population growth will slightly decrease. Then, from
2020 to 2030, the economic growth will even be higher and thus population growth will
decrease even more (see Table 1) (Perman et al., 2003). Decreased population growth on its
turn, leads an increase in economic growth (Brander and Dowrick, 1994).
Because of the slight growth in economy from 2010 to 2020, people living in rural areas in
Kenya will be migrating to the cities for economic purposes, thereby leading to moderate
urban development in the cities. This urbanisation will keep developing moderately between
2020-2030 as the economy in the cities will be improving.
These determinant factors (i.e. population, economic growth, urbanisation and climate
change) will cause unsustainable land use in the first time step as a result of a moderate
increase in economy (i.e. intensive agricultural activities on less marginal lands) and the
urbanisation of cities, thereby reducing available land for precise agriculture practices in
2010 to 2020. From 2020 to 2030 urbanisation will slightly increase because the population
is still (slightly) growing but the economy is growing as well and thereby reducing the
pressure on the agricultural lands. This results in a decrease of unsustainable land
t
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 13/27
4.4 Predicting the consequences of the alternatives
Mitigation measures
In scenario 1 the biggest problem is the high population growth throughout both time periods
and that its related economic growth is only increasing moderately. These two important
factors lead to an increase in all the other drivers of environmental refugees (i.e. ULM,
desertification, wind erosion, salinitation and deforestation). For this reason using birth
policies in scenario 1 will most likely have the most impact. Nevertheless, it should be
questioned whether or not using birth policy is ethically acceptable. Beside this, to
successfully implement birth policy strong regulations are required. This might not be feasible
in democratic states (Winckler, 2009).
The other five solutions (i.e. agroforestry, irrigation, alternatives for fuel wood, building dams
and desalination of seawater) will also influence the amount of environmental refugees in
scenario 1. Though they all have an influence one is better than the other. The causes these
measures work on are all equal (i.e. they have the same slope in the scenario diagram
except for deforestation) Agroforestry seems the “best” solution of these five as it has its
impact at the beginning of the chain leading to environmental refugees. Although alternatives
for fuel wood and irrigation seem to work, they may have less impact as they both work only
on a small part of the problem (see Figure 1, p. 5).
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 14/27
Increasing water availability refers to a surplus on water disposable for using or a higher
water use efficiency. In this way the same amount of water can be used by more people.
Forest protection means that the amount and the quality of the forest remains stable.
High spatial scale of implementation is the potential of an alternative to be used in different
regions in Kenya.
Technical feasibility refers to whether or not the technique for implementing a possible
solution is available and its implementation is simple.
Acceptance of alternatives by population deals with if people accept the alternative. This is
determined by social and cultural values (beliefs).
Support sustainable economic growth means a increasing GDP per capita by economic
activities of the population without compromising the economic growth for future generations.
Cost of implementation refers to the total cost of implementing a mitigation measure.
Scoring the mitigation measures: Scoring is based in the performance of each measures
against each criterion, using the method developed for CIFOR (Table 2), where 1 is given to
the measures that are strongly unfavourable in relation to the criterion. Likewise, 5 is given to
measures in which their performance is really good.
Table 2: Method developed for CIFOR. S G l d i i
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 15/27
Table 3: Regular ranking of criteria.
1 3 5 7 9
Weakly
important
Less
important
Moderately
important
More
important
Extremely
important
Overall evaluation of the measures: To provide information to the Government of Kenya
about the preference of each measure to reduce the problem of forced migration due to
environmental factors in Kenya, using the CIFOR´s method (Table 2) an order from the mostpreferred to the least preferred measure is given. This is done by multiplying the weights and
scores for each of the mitigation measures.
The complete result of the Multi-Criteria Analysis is showed in annex 1. Measures with the
highest overall score are the most preferred to reduce the causes forcing environmental
refugees.
From the six compared possible solutions agroforestry got the highest overall score (overall
score 4.1) resulting in a “very favourable” option. Irrigation systems (3.4), alternatives for fuel
wood (3.3), birth policy (2.9) and building dams (2.8) are considered “acceptable” options,
whereas the desalinization of sea water (2.1) is the least preferred since it is an
“unfavourable” option in order to mitigate the problem.
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 16/27
5 Discussion
First the results of this environmental system analysis will be discussed and thereafter a
discussion will follow about the methods applied in this assessment.
Like the multi-criteria analysis shows agroforestry is the most preferred solution. This is
because it has a high potential for a sustainable land use. If the implementation is correct, it
protects in a great extent the natural resources like soil, forest and water. The
implementation is possible in a wide range of landscapes in Kenya and can support a
sustainable economic growth in the agricultural sector. So, because of its overall effect
(economy and environment) and easiness to implement this measure is most favourable for
mitigating the causes of environmental refugees.
Likewise, through irrigation systems it is possible to mitigate problems such as water scarcity
and degradation of soils. The performance of the measures against agroforestry is lower.Whether or not irrigation systems are profitable for a sustainable land use depends on the
performance of the system. Irrigation measures using high water amounts in the arid and sub
arid regions of Kenya forces soil salinitation, while drop irrigation systems are useful for the
implementation of sustainable land use.
The implementation of a birth policy can lead to ethical and social problems (difficult to
i l t i d ti t i ) Th f l bi th li ith l
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 17/27
As third limitation the assumptions done in the scenario analysis can be mentioned. The
scenarios are partly based upon assumptions of the team and partly on scientific evidence.
The idea behind this is to reflect how the situation in Kenya will be in the future under
different circumstances (e.g. different economic situations). Some of these assumptions
could well not be realistic for Kenya, but are used to get a clear division between the two
different scenarios.
To finish the discussion main recommendations for further research is to perform an
integrated environmental and social-economic assessment (interdisciplinary research) for
finding solutions to the problem of environmental refugees as the problem is also multi-
disciplinary.
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 18/27
6 Conclusions
Environmental refugees will continue to increase unless some drastic actions are taken tomitigate the driving forces. From the scenario analysis conducted is that the number of
environmental refugees can continue to increase drastically in the near future in Kenya, if the
current trend in population growth and unsustainable land management continue.
Unsustainable land management is causing environmental refugees by depleting the
resource base in an area (e.g. deforestation and desertification). Possible mitigation
measures for the government of Kenya for the problem of unsustainable land management
(driven by population growth and leading to environmental refugees) are the implementation
of birth policies, agroforestry, alternatives for fuel wood, irrigation, building dams and
desalinitation of sea water. In the future this problem will most likely increase due to
population growth. The question however is what the rate of this growth will be.
Implementing birth policies might have a big effect when population increases drastically, but
when population growth already declines these policies might turn out to be not effective at
all. Agroforestry, on the other hand has big effects on both future scenarios of Kenya,
likewise for irrigation.
Concluded can be that the most preferred measures for the government of Kenya to mitigate
the causes of environmental refugees by the year 2030 are agroforestry and irrigation. While
bi h li h i l i h hi l i d i h b diffi l d l
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 19/27
7 References
Bashir, J., Eyasu, E. and Mogotsi K. 2006. Role of agroforestry in improving food securityand natural resource management in the drylands: a regional overview. Journal of the
Drylands 1(2): 206-211.
Bates, D. C. (2002). Environmental Refugees? Classifying Human Migrations
Caused by Environmental Change. Population & Environment 23(5): 465-477.
Bilsborrow, R. E. and Okoth Ogendo, H.W.O. 1992. Population-Driven Changes in
Land Use in Developing Countries. Ambio 21(1): 37-45.
Brander, J. A. and Dowrick. S. 1994. The role of fertility and population in economic
growth. Journal of Population Economics 7(1): 1-25.
Brouwer, R. and Falcao, M. P. 2004. Wood fuel consumption in Maputo,
Mozambique. Biomass and Bioenergy 27: 233-245.
Cropper, M. and Griffiths, C. 1994. The Interaction of Population Growth and
Environmental Quality. The American Economic Review 84(2): 250-254.
El-Hinnawi, E. 1985. Environmental Refugees. Nairobi, Kenya. United Nations
Environmental Programme .
El-Kady, M. and El-Shibini, F. 2001. Desalination in Egypt and the future application
in supplementary irrigation. Desalination 136: 63-72.
Gi h i J M R d R M hi A N d Dijk S 2003 S f W
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 20/27
Myers, N. 1997. Environmental refugees. Population and Environment: Population
and Environment 19(2): 167-182.
Myers, N. 2002. Environmental refugees: a growing phenomenon of the 21st
century, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society London: Biological
sciences 357(1420): 609 –613.
Perman, R., Ma, Y., McGilvray, J. and Common, M. 2003. Natural Resource and
Environmental Economics . Pearson Education, Harlow.
Prata, N. 2009. Making family planning accessible in resource-poor settings. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Biological Science 364
(1532): 3093-3099.
Sato, Y. and Yamamoto, K. 2005. Population concentration, urbanization, and
demographic transition. Journal of Urban Economics 58: 45 –61.
Schiff, M. and Winters, A. L. 2002. Regional cooperation and the role of international
organizations and regional integration . World Bank Policy Research Working
Paper 2872.
Speidel, J. J., Weiss, D. C., Ethelston, S. A. and Gilbert, S. M. 2009. Population
policies programmes and the environment. Philosophical Transactions of the
Royal Society Biological Science 364 (1532): 3049-3065 .
S R J R ki P d R bi J 2004 Th bl f h f
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 21/27
Annex
Annex 1: Results of the multi-criteria analysis A - C
Annex 2: Results of the sensitivity analysis D - F
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 22/27
A
Annex 1: Results of the multi-criteria analysis
REGULAR RANKING AND RATING (WEIGHTING)
Expert 1 Expert 2 Expert 3 Expert 4 Expert 5
Ranking Rating Ranking Rating Ranking Rating Ranking Rating Ranking Rating
Soil protection 7 15 9 19 9 15 8 13 6 7,5
Increasing water
availability9 20 9 19 9 15 8 13 5 5
Forest protection 5 11 8 16 9 15 7 13 6 7,5
High spatial scale
implementation
5 11 7 9 7 5 5 8 7 10
Technical
Feasibility7 15 8 12 8 15 9 15 7 10
Acceptance
alternatives by
population
1 2 7 9 8 10 8 16 8 20
Support sustainable
economic growth3 6 8 10 7 5 6 7 8 20
Cost of
implementation9 20 6 6 9 20 9 15 8 20
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 23/27
B
COMBINED WEIGHT
Ranking Rating Combined
Weight
(%)CriterionSum of
votes
Relative
Weight
Sum of
votes
Relative
Weight
Soil protection 39 13,49 69,5 13,9 13,70
Increasing water
availability40 13,84 72 14,4 14,12
Forest protection 35 12,11 62,5 12,5 12,31
High spatial scale
implementation31 10,73 43 8,6 9,66
TechnicalFeasibility
39 13,49 67 13,4 13,45
Acceptance
alternatives by
population
32 11,07 57 11,4 11,24
Support
sustainable
economic growth
32 11,07 48 9,6 10,34
Cost of
implementation41 14,19 81 16,2 15,19
TOTAL 289 100 500 100 100
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 24/27
C
PERFORMANCE MATRIX
Mitigationmeasures
Soilprotection
Increasing
water
availability
Forestprotection
High spatial
scale
implementation
Technicalfeasibility
Acceptance
alternativesby
population
Support
sustainableeconomic
growth
Cost of implementation
OverallScore
Agroforestry 5 3 5 4 4 4 5 3 4,1
Irrigation
system4 4 0 3 4 5 4 3 3,4
Birth policy 3 3 3 5 2 1 4 3 2,9
Building dams 2 5 2 2 3 3 3 2 2,8
Desalinization
of sea water 0 5 0 1 2 4 4 1 2,1
Alternatives
for fuel wood3 3 5 4 4 2 2 3 3,3
Weight (%) 13,7 14,1 12,3 9,7 13,4 11,2 10,3 15,2
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 25/27
D
Annex 2: Results of the sensitivity analysis
REGULAR RANKING AND RATING
Expert 1 Expert 2 Expert 3 Expert 4 Expert 5
Ranking Rating Ranking Rating Ranking Rating Ranking Rating Ranking Rating
Soil protection 9 20 9 19 9 15 8 13 6 7,5
Increasing water
availability9 20 9 19 9 15 8 13 5 5
Forest protection 9 25 8 16 9 15 7 13 6 7,5
High spatial scale
implementation
1 5 7 9 7 5 5 8 7 10
Technical
Feasibility2 5 8 12 8 15 9 15 7 10
Acceptance
alternatives by
population
1 5 7 9 8 10 8 16 8 20
Support sustainable
economic growth2 10 8 10 7 5 6 7 8 20
Cost of
implementation2 10 6 6 9 20 9 15 8 20
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 26/27
E
WEIGHTING
Ranking Rating Combined
Weight
(%)CriterionSum of
votes
Relative
Weight
Sum of
votes
Relative
Weight
Soil protection 41 14,75 74,5 14,9 14,82
Increasing water
availability40 14,39 72 14,4 14,39
Forest protection 39 14,03 76,5 15,3 14,66
High spatial scale
implementation27 9,71 37 7,4 8,56
TechnicalFeasibility
34 12,23 57 11,4 11,82
Acceptance
alternatives by
population
32 11,51 60 12 11,76
Support
sustainable
economic growth
31 11,15 52 10,4 10,78
Cost of
implementation34 12,23 71 14,2 13,22
TOTAL 278 100 500 100 100
8/3/2019 Environmental Refugees- Obinna Okafor
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/environmental-refugees-obinna-okafor 27/27
F
PERFORMANCE MATRIX
Mitigationmeasures
Soilprotection
Increasing
water
availability
Forestprotection
High spatial
scale
implementation
Technicalfeasibility
Acceptance
alternativesby
population
Support
sustainableeconomic
growth
Cost of implementation
OverallScore
Agroforestry 5 3 5 4 4 4 5 3 4,1
Irrigation
system4 4 0 3 4 5 4 3 3,3
Birth policy 3 3 3 5 2 1 4 3 2,9
Building dams 2 5 2 2 3 3 3 2 2,8
Desalinization
of sea water0 5 0 1 2 4 4 1 2,1
Alternatives
for fuel wood3 3 5 4 4 2 2 3 3,3
Weight (%) 14,8 14,4 14,7 8,6 11,8 11,8 10,8 13,2