The role of local knowledge in community-based flood risk management in Malawi
Abstract
The importance of communities and their local knowledge (LK) in disaster risk reduction
is widely discussed in international policy arenas and research agendas. However, studies
of practical experiences of community-based approaches remain scarce, as current
scholarship is oriented towards mere documentation of LK, and there is a lack of
understanding of the extent to which community-based approaches facilitate the uptake
of LK. Therefore, this thesis critically explores the role of LK in community-based flood
risk management (CBFRM) in Malawi. The qualitative research approach included
interviews and focus group discussions with local communities and external stakeholders
(non-governmental organisations, government representatives, flood risk management
consultants), direct observations in the field, and analysis of seconardy data. Data were
collected through three periods of fieldwork in 2016 and 2017 in the Lower Shire Valley,
the most flood affected area of Malawi, and analysed using thematic analysis.
The findings reveal that local communities have rich and sophisticated LK that assists
them in managing localised flooding. Their LK is highly dynamic, continuously refined,
and hybrid. Knowledge possession and use are not homogenous within a community and
are conditioned by social, economic and political contexts, resulting in differentiated
access to LK. There are indications of a decreased reliance on LK due to exogenous
processes (e.g. climate change, environmental degradation, penetration of new
approaches and technologies), and its effectiveness is challenged by the changing nature
of flooding at local levels.
CBFRM in Malawi experiences a number of challenges, both internally created and
externally imposed, which result in its limited impact. Some of the core components of
good CBFRM practice, such as community participation and sustainability of
implemented approaches, are currently lacking. This research finds that LK is
underutilised in CBFRM and argues that current practice provides a limited opportunity
for the inclusion of LK, due to five prime obstacles: i) current approach to community
participation, ii) financial constraints and capacity of external stakeholders, iii) the donor
landscape, iv) information consolidation and sharing, and v) external stakeholders
attitudes towards LK. In CBFRM, a strong dichotomy between local and scientific
knowledge is maintained. The study provides practical advice for improving the existing
practice; most notably, it reveals a need for building evidence for LK as a tool for
challenging the prevailing attitudes.