Resources
This research design was collectively developed by Kavya Chowdhry, Nasira Habib, Jayakumar Chelaton, and Sarojeni Rengam, in consultation with PANAP partners
Research objective
There is robust evidence that the climate crisis undermines food security in rural communities, while agroecology offers proven pathways to build resilience. The research we plan to do extends this evidence by amplifying lived stories from agroecology-practicing communities, revealing their ongoing vulnerabilities alongside adaptive strengths.
Through partnerships with PAN, we document how these communities, despite facing erratic monsoons, extreme weather, and shifting seasons, endure these impacts through practices such as crop diversification, agroforestry, and crop rotation. These methods buffer ecological stress, sustain yields, and bolster food sovereignty amid crises.
To sharpen comparisons, the study engages farmers who use both input-intensive (industrial) and agroecological approaches in the same locales. Climate shocks strike geographically, affecting entire villages uniformly. The research intends to highlight the ecological, economic, and social impacts of the climate crisis on rural food-producing communities.
Research questions
1) How is the climate crisis impacting the rural poor and small-scale food-producing communities across the four South Asian countries of Nepal, India, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka?
The first question is formulated to highlight the devastating impacts of the climate crisis on the rural food-producing communities that PAN partners engage with in Nepal, India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh. Even though there is ample evidence of the crisis’s impact on farming communities, this research will further enrich that evidence base by sharing narratives from the communities that partners engage with closely. These narratives humanize the crisis and give it a face. Increasing temperatures, water stress and drought, and floods and sea-level rise have led to internal and transboundary migration across countries. Floods, droughts, cyclones, and other weather shocks lead to displacement, crop losses, and indebtedness. The research will delve deeper into these aspects as experienced by PANAP’s partners in South Asia to give region-specific insights.
(2) How do we demonstrate agroecology as a method to build climate resilience among rural communities?
The second question builds on existing evidence supporting agroecology as one tool for building climate resilience in food-producing communities. It aims to understand the experiences of farmers who practice agroecology and, if possible, to build support for agroecology and strengthen the movement for it.
In case there is concern that observation of farmers might not be accurate, research has found that Indian farmers’ perceptions of climate change are primarily consistent with the trends in meteorological variables.
Research methods
RESEARCH QUESTION 1
The first research question (How is the climate crisis impacting the rural poor and small-scale food-producing communities across the four South Asian countries of Nepal, India, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka?) has four sub-questions.
- What are the specific observed changes in weather, crop yields, and natural resources over the last 10 years?
- How have these changes affected food security, household expenses (utilities, rent, etc.), and health and education? (See Annex 1 for a list of detailed suggested questions)
- Who within the community (e.g., women, landless farmers, youth, etc.) is most affected, why, and how? (See Annex 1 for a list of detailed suggested questions)
- Why do you think this is happening, and what are the different factors behind these changes and impacts?
The methods below are shared to encourage participants to share their reflections relevant to these questions.
Focus group discussions
With groups of up to 7-8 people (in India, up to 12 people), with half of them elders, ideally, half of the elders are older women. All the people in the group should be from food-producing households. The focus group discussion should be anchored in questions about observations of changes in weather patterns over the last two to three decades. This will help us identify broadly how the climate crisis has impacted the community – rise in temperature, irregular rainfall/changed precipitation patterns, increase in the frequency of floods and droughts, heatwaves, cyclones in the last 2-3 decades or more.
The FGDs can be conducted with multiple groups, but to ensure that the discussion enables everyone to participate, we should ideally have five to six people in each group, and completely stop at seven to eight people if there is a need for a bigger group.
Often, the term “climate change” cannot be translated into the local language. In this case, we can ask if the participants have observed a rise in temperature, irregular rainfall/changed precipitation patterns, an increase in the frequency of floods and droughts, heatwaves, cyclones in the last 2-3 decades or more. This should also account for regional nuances. For example, in the case of the Himalayan region, we can discuss the impact of glacial retreat and changes in snow cover.
See Annex 2 for tips in facilitating the FGD and a list of proposed questions
Individual interviews, semi-structured
Some people might hesitate to express themselves freely in group settings, leading to an incomplete picture of the differential impacts of climate change on rural farming communities. For example, larger farmers or landed families might be less vulnerable to the impacts of weather shocks than subsistence farmers or landless agricultural workers; it might be that, in focus group discussions, subsistence farmers, women farmers, or agricultural workers don’t express their experiences openly. It is imperative that we include the experiences of subsistence or landless farmers in the analysis. This can be done via semi-structured interviews with subsistence farming families, landless agricultural workers, and small land-owning agricultural workers.
Research in Salem, Tamil Nadu, has found that “Pre-existing inequalities in the distribution of assets and resources imply that landless labourers or marginal and small farmers are more vulnerable and have limited capacity to absorb the losses associated with climate change.” [as compared to large commercial landowners, petty commodity producers, landed agricultural-workers, and those with irrigated land. Among farming households, subsistence farmers were much more vulnerable than others, with the lowest median income and the highest per-household loss. [This was largely in terms of economic exposure].
See Annex 1 for a list of detailed suggested questions
Depending on the need, additional research methods could be used to address research question 1, namely the Seasonal calendar and the Historical timeline/oral history. These methods are described in Annex 3.
RESEARCH QUESTION 2
For the second research question (How do we demonstrate agroecology as a method to build climate resilience among rural communities?), the questions should uncover three things:
- Which agroecological practices do farmers use
- How these practices respond to climate stresses
- What outcomes farmers observe (yield stability, food security, reduced risk)
Questions should move in a logical sequence: climate stress → farming response → agroecological practice → resilience outcome.
Below is a structured set of questions with follow-up prompts suitable for focus group discussions or interviews.
- Farmers’ responses to climate stress
- Main question: When weather problems occur, what do farmers do to protect their crops and livelihoods?
- Follow-up questions
- Have farmers changed planting dates because of weather changes?
- Have farmers changed the types of crops they grow?
- Are there practices that help crops survive during drought or heavy rains?
- Crop diversity and mixed cropping
- Indicator: Agroecology often relies on diverse cropping systems.
- Main question: Do farmers grow different crops together in the same field or in different seasons?
- Follow-up questions
- What combinations of crops are commonly grown together?
- Does growing multiple crops help when one crop fails due to weather?
- Which crops survive better during drought or excessive rain?
- Soil health practices
- Indicator: Healthy soils improve climate resilience.
- Main question: What practices do farmers use to keep their soil healthy and productive?
- Follow-up questions
- Do farmers use compost, manure, crop residues, or green manures?
- Do farmers use mulching to cover the soil?
- Have these practices helped soil retain moisture during dry periods?
- Water management
- Main question: How do farmers manage water during dry periods or irregular rainfall?
- Follow-up questions
- Are there practices that help store water in the soil?
- Do farmers use mulching, bunds, or water harvesting methods?
- Have these practices helped crops survive drought or delayed rains?
- Pest and diseases management
- Indicator: Agroecological farms often rely on ecological pest control.
- Main question: What methods do farmers use to manage pests and diseases?
- Follow-up questions
- Are there any natural pest-control methods used in the community?
- Does growing many crops together reduce pest attacks?
- Have pest problems increased with the changing weather?
- Local seeds and crop adaptation
- Indicator: Traditional seeds often adapt better to climate stress.
- Main question: Do farmers use local or traditional seed varieties?
- Follow-up questions
- Are these varieties better able to tolerate heat, drought, or flooding?
- Are some traditional crops disappearing? Why?
- Do farmers save their own seeds?
- Trees, biodiversity, and agroforestry
- Main question: Do farmers grow trees, hedges, or other plants around their fields?
- Follow-up questions
- Do these trees help protect crops from wind or heat?
- Do they provide fodder, fruit, or shade?
- Have these practices helped improve farm productivity?
- Livestock integration
- Main question: How do livestock and crops support each other in your farming system?
- Follow-up questions
- Do animals provide manure for crops?
- Does livestock help families cope when crops fail?
- Have weather changes affected livestock productivity?
- Resilience outcomes
- Indicator: How agroecology directly links to resilience.
- Main question: Which farming practices help farms survive difficult weather conditions?
- Follow-up questions
- Which practices help crops survive drought or extreme heat?
- Which practices help reduce crop losses during heavy rain?
- Which farms recover faster after climate shocks?
- Food security outcomes
- Main question: Do farms that grow many crops provide more food for the household?
- Follow-up questions
- Does crop diversity improve food availability throughout the year?
- Are households able to grow more of their own food instead of buying it?
- Has diet diversity changed with these practices?
- Economic resilience
- Main question: Do these farming practices affect farming costs and income?
- Follow-up questions
- Do farmers spend less on fertilizers and pesticides?
- Does growing different crops provide multiple sources of income?
- Does diversification reduce financial risk during bad weather?
- Community knowledge and learning
- Main question: How do farmers learn about these farming practices?
- Follow-up questions
- Are these practices traditional knowledge or newly introduced?
- Do farmers learn from other farmers or farmer groups?
- Are younger farmers adopting these practices?
- Community movement and solidarity
- Indicator: Agroecology is not about individual farming practices but a people’s movement against corporate, chemical-intensive farming
- Main question: What role does collective action, community organization, or solidarity play in helping each other in terms of farming practices?
- Follow-up questions
- Can you share examples of how farmers in your community have worked together (e.g., sharing tools, seeds, or labor) to address farming challenges?
- How are decisions made within your community when it comes to farming practices or resource management?
- In what ways has solidarity or collective action improved your ability to cope with climate stress, market pressures, or policy challenges?
- Conclusion
- Closing question: In your experience, which farming practices help farmers cope best with changing weather?
- Follow-up: What support is needed to expand these practices in the community?
See Annex 2 for additional guidance on conducting FGDs for the research question 2.
Aside from FGDs and interviews, partners can also explore doing community mapping or case study documentation.
See Annex 2 for general guidance on these optional research methods.
Solution Tree
To conclude the FGDs, the Solution Tree method can be used. The following is the step-by-step guide on facilitating this method.
Trust in the broader evidence that agroecology builds resilience, while using local experiences to refine support and interventions.
Define the goal (The Trunk)
Begin by drawing a tree.
Label the trunk with the central goal the group wants to achieve.
Example: “Increased adoption of agroecological methods by farmers.”
This trunk represents the shared vision or desired outcome.
Identify strategies (The Roots)
Ask participants to brainstorm the steps, supports, and strategies needed to reach the goal.
Write these down as the roots of the tree.
Roots may include:
Government support (training, subsidies, extension services).
Local NGO advocacy and capacity building.
Articulating demands for policy change at local and national levels.
National-level advocacy (e.g., against unfair trade agreements, fertilizer subsidies, or for stronger support to agroecology).
Envision benefits (The Branches)
Next, ask participants to imagine the positive outcomes if the goal is achieved.
Write these as the branches of the tree.
Branches may include:
Stronger climate resilience.
Improved food security and household income.
Healthier ecosystems and biodiversity.
Greater community solidarity and empowerment.
Facilitation tips
Encourage open discussion—participants may express ideas that don’t perfectly fit the framework. That’s okay.
If responses suggest agroecology is not strengthening resilience as expected, treat this as an opportunity to learn:
What support is missing?
Where are practices falling short?
Why are they not delivering the expected benefits?
Remember: evidence already shows industrial agriculture is environmentally destructive. Local contexts may shape how agroecology works in practice, and this is a valuable insight.
Key principle
Do not worry if responses diverge from expectations.
The exercise is about learning from participants’ realities, identifying gaps, and co-creating strategies for resilience.
