09.04.2013 Views

Turks and Caicos Islands

Turks and Caicos Islands

Turks and Caicos Islands

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Agriculture<br />

Nine respondents indicated they were involved in the agriculture sector. Of the respondents involved in<br />

agriculture, 40% of males always had access to water, <strong>and</strong> 60% sometimes had access to water. For female<br />

headed households, 75% always had access to water compared to 25% who sometimes had access to<br />

water, highlighting a higher level of access amongst women.<br />

Reliability of<br />

Water<br />

Table 5.8.32: Involvement in agriculture: Access to water<br />

Male Female<br />

Total Respondents<br />

Involved in Agriculture<br />

No.<br />

% of<br />

males<br />

No.<br />

% of<br />

females<br />

No.<br />

% of<br />

total<br />

Always 2 40% 3 75% 5 55.6%<br />

Sometimes 3 60% 1 25% 4 44.4%<br />

Never 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%<br />

5.8.10. Knowledge, Exposure <strong>and</strong> Experience of Climate Related Events<br />

Respondents indicated very good levels of knowledge in relation to hurricanes (51.6%), <strong>and</strong> average or very<br />

good knowledge of flooding (average = 54.8% <strong>and</strong> very good = 29.0%) as well as drought (average = 41.9%<br />

<strong>and</strong> very good= 16.1%). However, knowledge was not quite as comprehensive in relation to l<strong>and</strong>slides<br />

(48.4% indicated poor knowledge).<br />

When examined on the basis of household structure <strong>and</strong> headship, there was a small difference between<br />

male <strong>and</strong> female headed households. Females consistently showed slightly lower levels of knowledge of<br />

climate related events compared to males.<br />

Table 5.8.33: Knowledge of climate related events<br />

Event Knowledge SAMPLE 1 MALE HEADED<br />

Male Female Total<br />

FEMALE HEADED<br />

Male Female Total<br />

Poor 3.2% 5.6% 0.0% 5.3% NA 0.0% 0.0%<br />

Hurricane Average 41.9% 33.3% 100.0% 36.8% NA 50.0% 50.0%<br />

Very Good 51.6% 55.6% 0.0% 52.6% NA 50.0% 50.0%<br />

Poor 9.7% 11.1% 0.0% 10.5% NA 8.3% 8.3%<br />

Flooding Average 54.8% 50.0% 100.0% 52.6% NA 58.3% 58.3%<br />

Very Good 29.0% 27.8% 0.0% 26.3% NA 33.3% 33.3%<br />

Poor 22.6% 22.2% 0.0% 21.1% NA 25.0% 25.0%<br />

Storm Surge Average 51.6% 44.4% 100.0% 47.4% NA 58.3% 58.3%<br />

Very Good 19.4% 22.2% 0.0% 21.1% NA 16.7% 16.7%<br />

Poor 35.5% 33.3% 100.0% 36.8% NA 33.3% 33.3%<br />

Drought Average 41.9% 38.9% 0.0% 36.8% NA 50.0% 50.0%<br />

Very Good 16.1% 16.7% 0.0% 15.8% NA 16.7% 16.7%<br />

Poor 48.4% 33.3% 100.0% 36.8% NA 66.7% 66.7%<br />

L<strong>and</strong>slides Average 32.3% 38.9% 0.0% 36.8% NA 25.0% 25.0%<br />

Very Good 12.9% 16.7% 0.0% 15.8% NA 8.3% 8.3%<br />

1: Where one or more respondents did not indicate an option, the total percentage of respondents sum up to less 100%<br />

Despite knowledge gaps with regards to the technical aspects of the various climate related events,<br />

respondents showed various levels of awareness of the appropriate course of action to be taken in the<br />

instance such an event occurred (see Table 5.8.34):<br />

160

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!