Water–Climate Nexus: Exploring Water (In)security Risk and Climate Change Preparedness in Semi-Arid Northwestern Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Water insecurity, intensified by climate change, presents a significant challenge globally, especially in arid and semi-arid regions of Africa. In northern Ghana, where agriculture heavily depends on seasonal rainfall, prolonged dry seasons exacerbate water and food insecurity. Despite efforts to improve water access, there is limited understanding of how climate change preparedness affects water insecurity risk in rural contexts. This study investigates the relationship between climate preparedness and water insecurity in semi-arid northwestern Ghana. Grounded in the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework, data was collected through a cross-sectional survey of 517 smallholder households. Nested ordered logistic regression was used to analyze how preparedness measures and related socio-environmental factors influence severe water insecurity. The findings reveal that higher levels of climate change preparedness significantly reduce water insecurity risk at individual [odds ratio (OR) = 0.35, p < 0.001], household (OR = 0.037, p < 0.001), and community (OR = 0.103, p < 0.01) levels. In contrast, longer round-trip water-fetching times (OR = 1.036, p < 0.001), water-fetching injuries (OR = 1.054, p < 0.01), reliance on water borrowing (OR = 1.310, p < 0.01), untreated water use (OR = 2.919, p < 0.001), and exposure to climatic stressors like droughts (OR = 1.086, p < 0.001) and floods (OR = 1.196, p < 0.01) significantly increase insecurity. Community interventions, such as early warning systems (OR = 0.218, p < 0.001) and access to climate knowledge (OR = 0.228, p < 0.001), and long-term residency further reduce water insecurity risk. These results underscore the importance of integrating climate preparedness into rural water management strategies to enhance resilience in climate-vulnerable regions.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".