Beyond Local Case Studies in Political Ecology: Spatializing Agricultural Water Infrastructure in Maharashtra Using a Critical, Multimethods, and Multiscalar Approach

Abstract

Political ecologists (PEs) have powerfully illuminated dynamics responsible for the uneven distribution of resources and risk in society. However, localized PE approaches have been criticized as insufficient for producing careful generalizations needed to affect policymaking. We offer an approach to critically explore factors that shape the distribution of climate adaptation interventions—and their potential equity and sustainability-related implications—across larger, policy-relevant scales. Our methodology uses local field-work findings to inform secondary data collection and specify mesoscale regression models, which reanalyze, at larger spatial scales, potentially meaningful relationships between social, economic, and environmental factors and the distribution of adaptation initiatives. An epistemological heuristic is offered to navigate the consistencies and inconsistencies between local qualitative and mesoscale quantitative data to develop a more comprehensive, yet partial, understanding of scaled political–ecological relations. The integrative approach is applied to analyze how sociospatial and biophysical characteristics affect the distribution of more than 16,000 farm ponds across 352 subdistricts in Maharashtra, an emerging adaptation subsidized by the state government to reduce crop risks from precipitation variability. The degree of compatibility between local qualitative and regional-scale quantitative results can support the development of novel research questions and actionable science for policy change.

政治生态学家有力地阐明了哪些变化能导致社会资源和风险分配的不均。然而, 由于未能归纳出能影响决策的结论, 局地政治生态学方法受到诟病。本文批判性地探索了哪些因素能影响气候适应干预措施的分布, 及其在更大尺度上的、政策上的潜在公平性和可持续性的含义。利用局地实地调查结果来指导二手数据采集, 采用中尺度回归模型, 在大空间尺度上重新分析了社会、经济和环境因素与适应措施分布之间的关系。提出了一种认识论启发方法, 以探索局部定性数据和中尺度定量数据之间的一致性和不一致性, 形成了对分尺度政治生态关系的更全面也更局部的理解。采用该集成方法, 本文分析了社会空间和生物物理特征对马哈拉施特拉邦352个分区的16000多个农场池塘的分布的影响。这是一项由政府资助的新适应措施, 旨在降低降水变化带来的农作物风险。局部定性结果和区域定量结果之间的一致程度, 有助于研究政策变化方面的新问题和可操作科学。

Los ecólogos políticos (PE) han ilustrado con gran vigor las dinámicas responsables de la desigual distribución de recursos y riesgos en la sociedad. Sin embargo, los enfoques localizados de los PE han sido criticados como insuficientes para generar las cuidadosas generalizaciones que se requieren para influir la formulación de políticas. Ofrecemos un enfoque para explorar críticamente los factores que configuran la distribución de intervenciones en adaptación climática ––y su potencial equidad e implicaciones relacionadas con sustentabilidad–– a través de escalas más grandes y políticamente relevantes. Nuestra metodología usa los descubrimientos del trabajo de campo local para fundamentar la recolección de datos secundarios y especificar los modelos de regresión a mesoescala, que reanalizan, a escalas espaciales más grandes, las relaciones potencialmente significativas entre los factores sociales, económicos y ambientales, y la distribución de iniciativas de adaptación. Se ofrece una heurística epistemológica para navegar a través de las consistencias e inconsistencias entre los datos cualitativos locales y los cuantitativos a mesoescala, con el fin de desarrollar un entendimiento más completo, aunque parcial, de las relaciones político–ecológicas a escala. El enfoque integrador es aplicado para analizar el modo como las características socioespaciales y biofísicas afectan la distribución de más de 16.000 estanques agrícolas en 352 subdistritos de Maharashtra, una adaptación emergente subsidiada por el gobierno estatal para reducir los riesgos de las cosechas por variabilidad en las precipitaciones. El grado de compatibilidad entre los resultados cualitativos locales y los cuantitativos a escala regional puede apoyar el desarrollo de nuevas preguntas de investigación y la ciencia operable para cambios en políticas.

Key Words:

• critical quantitative geography
• farm ponds
• India
• mixed methods
• political ecology

关键词:

• 批判数量地理、农场池塘、印度、混合方法、政治生态学。

Palabras clave:

• ecología política
• estanques agrícolas
• geografía cuantitativa crítica
• India
• métodos mixtos

Acknowledgments

This article is part of the first author’s doctoral dissertation. We are grateful to the sarpanches and the research participants for their time. We extend sincere gratitude to Pooja Tanna, Nirmiti Tara Daw, Gaylean Davies, Vikas Menghwani, Lindsay Wright, J. Pethe, Sudha Shah, the Society for Promoting Participative Ecosystem Management (SOPPECOM), the EDGES Research Collaborative, and Drs. Mark Johnson and Hannah Wittman. The research was approved by the Behavioural Research Ethics Board at the University of British Columbia under Certificate #H17-02863. Last, we thank Dr. Katie Meehan and three anonymous referees for their critical and constructive reviews of the paper.

Notes

1 For other examples, see select publications from the Household Water Insecurity Research Coordination Network.

2 This means that a village experienced agricultural drought for the last five years (<50 percent of production; Centre for Technology Alternative for Rural Areas 2018).

3 The subdistrict boundaries defined by the GADM data set did not reflect the most current legal boundaries. In cases where subdistricts were absent from the GADM file, a value could not be estimated. To avoid dropping sixty-three subdistricts, a statistic representative of neighboring spatial area was estimated using simple averaging techniques.

4 The 2015–2016 approved ponds were funded by multiple schemes under Jalyukt Shivar Abhiyan. The Magel Tyala Shettale program, which came in 2016, subsidized farm ponds under Jalyukt Shivar and explicitly set a 1.5-acre eligibility requirement. Our data both predate the Magel Tyala Shettale subsidy and presumably include other subsidy sources. Thus, we cannot definitively expect that marginal farmers were inherently excluded. The standard sized pond (900 m²), however, plus additional space for site excavation could result in a substantial portion of land being lost in construction, therefore limiting the accessibility of a critical water security intervention for a major landholding class.

Additional information

Funding

This article was financially supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada’s Canada Graduate Scholarship (#767-2016-2400) and Michael Smith Foreign Supplement (#771-2017-0100), the International WaTERS Research Network, the Nehru Humanitarian Graduate Scholarship, the Liu Scholar Bottom Billion Grant (#349), and the University of British Columbia’s Four-Year Fellowship and Faculty of Science.

Notes on contributors

Sameer H. Shah

SAMEER H. SHAH recently completed his doctoral degree at the Institute for Resources, Environment, and Sustainability at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]. He is interested in developing and applying critical, multimethods, and multiscalar approaches to study equity and sustainability dimensions of livelihood water security in contexts of global and regional socioenvironmental change.

Leila M. Harris

LEILA M. HARRIS is a Professor at the Institute for Resources, Environment, and Sustainability and the Institute for Gender, Race, Sexuality, and Social Justice at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]. Her research interests include the sociocultural, political–economic, and institutional dimensions of environment and resource issues, with a specific focus on gender, citizenship, and inequality in relation to environment and development.