Between a rock and a hard place
By Sarah Bell
In 2023, I worked with wonderful collaborators - Siri Eriksen and Ruth Kjærsti Raanaas at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU) in Oslo, Norway, and David Mfitumukiza at Makerere University in Kampala, Uganda – to develop an exciting global classroom module focusing on ‘Disability, social justice and climate resilient development’. You can read more about the content online.
As part of the module, in 2024 and 2025, groups of NMBU and Makerere students participated in a week-long field course in central Uganda, carrying out research with OPD (Organisations of Persons with Disabilities) representatives in Kiboga. Their research explored the farming livelihoods of disabled people and how these livelihoods are being impacted, both by climate change itself and by local government approaches to climate adaptation.
Led by Sensing Climate project advisor, Professor Siri Eriksen, we have drawn on insights from these field visits (and a longer-term research project on climate change adaptation and rural vulnerability in Laikipia, Kenya) to develop a paper, called “Between a rock and a hard place: exploring the lived experience of disability and climate injustice”. In December, the paper was published in the journal, ‘Climate & Development’.
The paper explores how the disproportionate climate risks experienced by disabled people in these rural areas overlap with existing processes of marginalisation.
In both areas, local adaptation decision-making processes do involve formal representation of disabled people, which is a significant step forward for both economic and political empowerment. However, exclusion and social injustices continue to unfold.
In the paper, we reflect on a number of issues, including:
The harsh and varied impacts of climate events on disabled people: participants described the challenges experienced in the face of increasingly unpredictable rainfall and flooding, as well as droughts and dry spell cycles. They explained the difficulty of having to go further to find water and the barriers to being able to replant crops, restock livestock herds or dig trenches in response to flood and drought damage. They highlighted mobility barriers during climate extremes that hindered efforts to work on their farms, take produce to market or access medical care and medication. Difficulties ranged from navigating mud and slippery roads after heavy rain, to the health risks of working in hot sun and experiencing bruises, burns and sores from crawling over scorching hot ground.
Lack of targeted adaptation-related government support: participants highlighted a lack of accommodations made for disabled people to access the adaptation support provided by government, characterised by the phrase ‘we treat them like anyone of us’. This sentiment was apparent in both the absence of accessible early warning systems about impending climatic events and in the difficulties experienced in trying to access district centres where government agricultural support is provided (e.g. agricultural inputs, seedlings etc.). One participant explained that ‘priority is given to able-bodied farmers with capacity to grow and sell crops (commercial farmers) as distributors prefer that’. Where targeted support was provided, it was underpinned by an ethic of ‘helping yourself to be self-sufficient’. Yet, many disabled people encountered barriers in navigating the application processes for the support, especially when expected to apply as a group. While applying as a group may be possible for people who are socially connected, many disabled people remain isolated due to rural geography, poverty, stigma and/or health challenges.
Barriers to inclusion in decision-making: in both fieldwork locations, explicit representation of disabled people in decision-making structures forms part of locally-led adaptation policy efforts. However, participants explained that issues raised by disabled representatives are rarely prioritised by technical government staff. In addition, meetings are often held in inaccessible venues with little to no effort made to enable the participation of individuals with hearing loss, visual or cognitive impairments. As such, a dynamic of ‘exclusion within inclusion’ was apparent, with both assistance and representation favouring disabled people who require fewer adjustments to participate. Disability councils (in Uganda) and climate change committees (in Kenya) are expected to feed into planning processes regarding disability considerations, yet they are consistently under-resourced. Disabled council members, as well as OPD representatives, lack financial support for transport to visit disabled people’s houses in their areas to understand or feed in their priorities or perspectives. While there was some indication of changing attitudes, participants explained that some disabled people are still ‘hidden’ by their families in response to stigma.
Disability solidarity: while disabled people in both locations continue to face significant discrimination in their day-to-day lives, we also identified forms of disability solidarity. In Laikipia, women described supporting each other with childcare – including for disabled children – and noted that family members sometimes helped to establish small businesses in town centres for people experiencing mobility barriers. Disabled representatives in Kiboga, likewise, expressed a strong sense of community and solidarity with each other, and supported fellow disabled people, including trying to help children who have been abandoned or abused due to disabling practices. In both sites, disabled people recounted how friends and neighbours were critical to surviving droughts and flooding events, reflecting a strong sense of local community and mutual care, although concerns were also raised that ‘even the family gets tired from giving’.
The experiences shared by these participants highlight several ways to strengthen adaptation that is genuinely underpinned by social justice:
First, the importance of understanding and attending to diverse impacts, and that treating everyone ‘equally’ without targeted accessibility support can lead to inequitable adaptation outcomes.
Second, an ethic of ‘helping yourself’ to adapt and cope in a context of long-term social injustice, stigma and discrimination can exclude those who are already living in chronic crisis. Long-term livelihood support must be provided in combination with efforts to address social injustices.
Third, although formal structures for the inclusion of disabled people in decision-making processes are integral, persistent barriers to meaningful participation need to be understood and addressed. Co-creating safe spaces for engagement, genuine partnership and relationship-building with disability communities is essential to avoid adaptation actions that deepen experiences of marginalisation.
A key lesson from this work is that inclusive climate adaptation is not possible without recognising, respecting and affirming the lived experiences of disabled people.