A Household Resilience Framework for Rural Livelihoods under Climate Shocks

Thesis Abstract

Rural households in low- and middle-income regions face increasing climate-related shocks that threaten livelihood stability, food security, and asset accumulation, prompting a need for robust frameworks that capture resilience pathways across social, economic, and environmental dimensions. This study develops and tests a Household Resilience Framework for Rural Livelihoods under Climate Shocks to identify the mechanisms by which households adapt, absorb, and recover from extreme weather events, with attention to heterogeneity across gender, age, land tenure, and asset endowments. The aim is to articulate a theory-driven model that integrates livelihood diversification, social capital, access to credit and markets, social protection, and eco-systems services as determinants of resilience outcomes. Specific objectives are to (1) construct a theoretical model linking resilience capacities to livelihood outcomes under climate stress, (2) quantify the relative importance of diversification, mobility of remittances, risk-coping strategies, and institutional support in buffering negative shocks, (3) examine the mediating role of social networks and information flows in resilience, and (4) assess policy and development interventions that enhance resilience trajectories. The study adopts a mixed-methods design anchored in the adaptive capacity and social-ecological resilience theories, drawing on the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework and the Community Resilience Model to position household resilience as an emergent property of asset endowments and institutional context. The population comprises rural households in three districts within a temperate-agroecological zone widely affected by droughts and flood events. A two-stage sampling approach yields a representative sample of 420 households for quantitative analysis, complemented by 40 in-depth interviews and 6 focus group discussions to capture contextual nuances. Data collection employs structured household surveys, semi-structured interview guides, and observation checklists administered during the post-harvest and pre-planting seasons to reduce recall bias. Instruments are pre-tested and show Cronbach’s alpha values above 0.70 for multi-item scales measuring assets, livelihood diversification, social capital, and resilience capacity, with content validity established by a panel of rural development scholars. Analytical methods include multivariate regression models to estimate determinants of resilience indicators, Seemingly Unrelated Regression (SUR) to account for cross-equation correlations among livelihood outcomes, and structural equation modeling (SEM) to test the theoretical pathway from asset endowments to resilience through mediating variables such as diversification and social networks. The study also employs thematic analysis for qualitative data, coding transcripts to extract core themes related to perception of climate risk, coping strategies, and perceived efficacy of institutions. Model specification tests will include tests for endogeneity using instrumental variables where appropriate, and robustness checks via alternative resilience operationalizations. The anticipated findings indicate that robust diversification, proactive risk management, and strong social capital markedly increase resilience scores, while land tenure insecurity and limited market access dampen adaptive capacity. The analysis is expected to reveal heterogeneity across households, with female-headed and smallholder families showing differential responses to shocks due to varying asset access and social networks. The anticipated contribution to knowledge is the development of a theoretically grounded resilience framework that operationalizes resilience as a function of asset-based capacities, institutional support, and social networks, enabling precise identification of leverage points for policy intervention. Practically, the framework informs targeted models of social protection, credit access, extension services, and market infrastructure that enhance buffering and recovery processes in rural livelihoods facing climate risks. The study also contributes methodological advances by integrating SEM with qualitative insights to triangulate resilience pathways in a rural development context. Based on findings, recommendations include strengthening formal and informal insurance mechanisms, expanding climate-smart diversification programs, facilitating community-based savings and credit associations, and promoting participatory governance to improve the reliability of risk information and service delivery. The concluding note emphasizes that enhancing household resilience requires coordinated, multi-scalar actions that align asset-building with proactive risk governance and inclusive institutions.