Understanding Farmers’ Knowledge, Perceptions, and Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change in Eastern Rwanda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates farmers’ knowledge, perceptions, and adaptation strategies to climate change in Rwanda’s Eastern Province, integrating social and physical science approaches. Analysing meteorological data (1981-2021) and surveys from 204 farmers across five districts, we assessed climate trends and adaptation behaviors using statistical methods (descriptive statistics, Chi-square, logistic regression, Regional Kendall test, dynamic linear state-space model). Results show that 85% of farmers acknowledge climate change, with 54% observing temperature increases and 37% noting rainfall declines. Climate data confirm significant rises in annual minimum (+2.95°C) and mean temperatures (+1.87°C), with the largest seasonal increase (+3.37°C) in June-August. Rainfall trends indicate a non-significant decrease in March-May and a slight increase in September-December. Farmers report crop failures, yield reductions, and food shortages as major climate impacts. Common adaptations include agroforestry, crop diversification, and fertilizer use, though financial limitations, information gaps, and input scarcity impede adoption. Despite limited formal education (53.9% primary, 22.3% no formal education), indigenous knowledge aids seasonal prediction. Livestock ownership, group membership, and climate data access are key adaptation enablers. These findings emphasize the need for targeted policies and climate communication to enhance rural resilience by strengthening smallholder farmer support systems for effective climate adaptation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".