Mainstreaming national adaptation programmes of action into national development plans in Lesotho: Lessons and needs Open Access

The discourse surrounding National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPA) as a strategy for addressing adverse impacts of climate change on livelihoods in least-developed countries (LDCs) was met with hyperbolic expectations (Elasha and Downing, 2007; Pramova et al., 2012). Since the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Marrakech in 2001, NAPA mainstreaming has been heralded as the beginning of a renewed effort to address the adverse impacts of climate change on livelihoods in LDCs. However, despite being put on the political agendas of LDCs, there is a perceived lack of NAPA mainstreaming into development plans at the national level (Agyemang and Antwi, 2013; Ayers et al., 2014). While the starting position for NAPA mainstreaming seems very positive, when it comes to implementation, problems abound, especially at the national level.

The adoption of NAPA can be traced to the seventh session of the Conference of Parties (COP 7) of the UNFCCC in Marrakech in 2001 after it was internationally recognized that 49 LDCs were among the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change (Pramova et al., 2012). The rationale for developing NAPAs was the low adaptive capacity of LDCs, which rendered them in need of immediate and urgent support to start adapting to current and projected adverse effects of climate change (Klein et al., 2005). The UNFCCC established NAPAs as country-specific adaptation activities that would respond to the needs of vulnerable communities (Meybeck et al., 2012).

The main contents of NAPAs are a list of country priority-ranked adaptation activities (Ayers et al., 2014). The NAPAs are expected to be mainstreamed into individual countries’ policies and programmes (Mertz et al., 2009). To date, all the 49 LDCs have submitted their NAPA documents to the UNFCCC Secretariat (Ayers et al., 2014). However, little is known about the extent to which NAPAs have been mainstreamed into development plans at the national level (Gorddard et al., 2011; Agyemang and Antwi, 2013).

Lesotho is one of the LDCs that benefitted from COP 7. The country submitted its NAPA report in 2007. It is documented that, overall Lesotho’s NAPAs stem from the country’s high dependence of on climate-sensitive sectors, such as agriculture, water, health and forestry. Livelihoods in rural areas remain inherently challenged by the demands of climate change and variability [(Government of Lesotho (GOL), 2007]). The country identified 11 key adaptation needs that communities need to be supported with to sustain their livelihoods in view of climate change risks [(Government of Lesotho (GOL), 2007]. The introduction of NAPA mainstreaming is meant to address precisely these adaptation needs.

Against this background, this paper analysed NAPA mainstreaming into national development plans in Lesotho as accentuated by policies and programmes. With in-depth studies of livelihoods in the sectors of agriculture and food security, environment, forestry, water and irrigation, the study looked at how NAPA is mainstreamed into national planning, assessing the role of both international and national policies related to climate change. Against this backdrop, a conceptual framework to study the mainstreaming of climate change adaptation into development plans for sustainable livelihoods is presented.

The conceptual framework adopted for this paper was informed by four main observations. First, the recognition that agriculture plays an important role as a food security in the livelihoods of the majority population in rural areas of Lesotho. Second, despite its importance, the level of agricultural productivity is not only low but declining in many instances, resulting in increased food insecurity and increased poverty (Gwimbi et al., 2013). This situation is worsened by climate variability and climate change, the impacts of which are more pronounced in rural areas (Billingsley et al., 2013). Third, agriculture is not just a victim of climate change, it is also contributing to climate change by way of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Fourth, agriculture in Lesotho is characterized by complex social and environmental interactions. In light of these observations, a framework integrating climate change adaptation, sustainable livelihoods and development was used.

In the definition of the World Bank (2009, p. 43), which is one of the most frequently used definitions; climate change adaptation is “a comprehensive approach for reducing vulnerabilities of livelihoods and development processes to climate variability and change”. Central to this definition are strategies aimed at reducing human vulnerability to the impacts of climate change (Agyemang and Antwi, 2013). The work of Ranganathan et al. (2010) shows that discussions on climate change adaptation as a strategy need to involve a wide range of adjustments made in response to the effects of climate change and variability on livelihoods. NAPAs are embedded in the theory and practice of climate change adaptation. They are developed to integrate climate change adaptation principles into specific livelihoods.

A livelihood is understood to comprise the capabilities, assets and activities required for a means of living (Department for International Development [DFID], 2000). The DFID (2000) divides the assets into five categories of human capital, social capital, natural capital, physical capital and financial capital. For many people in LDCs, agriculture is the central livelihood asset in which threats posed by climate change must be confronted (Ranganathan et al., 2010; Agyemang and Antwi, 2013). The livelihoods of the poor, especially the rural poor depend upon natural climatic factors (Agyemang and Antwi, 2013). The impacts of climate change on livelihood systems of the poorest citizens therefore undermine their capacity to build sustainable livelihoods.

Mainstreaming has been defined as the integration of NAPAs into development planning (Lebel et al., 2012). This involves using policies and measures to address climate change into ongoing development planning and decision-making (Ayers et al., 2014). The policy frameworks cited in literature as relevant to enabling mainstreaming NAPA are national policies that integrate planning, financial support, research, development and regulations, linking them across different sectors (Dovers and Hezri, 2010). Recognizing the importance of linking development and climate change, mainstreaming is aimed at evaluating climate change policies in the context of general development goals (Lebel et al., 2012). The idea of mainstreaming is to assess climate change adaptation in the context of development.

The need to mainstream NAPA is advocated in the scientific literature (Few et al., 2007). Although a recent phenomenon, the few existing studies stress that effective adaptive actions tend to be context- and place-specific. Hence, the conceptual framework used in this study advocates for the mainstreaming of NAPA into development plans.

The review set out to identify adaptation policies and strategies that have been described to date in government policy documents and reports and scientific literature. The review involved two approaches, namely, desk review and consultation with key personnel from government departments, research and training institutions, non-governmental organizations and development partners.

A systematic desk review approach (Berrang-Ford et al., 2015) was used to review papers, government policies and reports, development partners’ published reports related to climate change adaptation and NAPA in Lesotho and other nations. A systematic review focuses on the literature that seeks to answer a specific research question using pre-defined eligibility criteria for documents and explicitly outlined and reproducible methods (Berrang-Ford et al., 2015). A review to identify peer-reviewed literature on NAPA mainstreaming was conducted first. All documents from relevant government and other internet engine websites with topic words “adaptation”, “climate change”, “NAPA” and “review”, were searched and compiled. To gather unpublished research and reports, requests were made to relevant government departments and Lesotho’s development partners, resulting in additional unpublished references.

In total, 116 retrieved documents were reviewed to evaluate their relevance and decide whether they could be included in the study. From these, a final pool of 41 documents was then used.

Reviewed documents produced a fact sheet about NAPA-related policies, programmes and key stakeholders involved in climate change adaptation in Lesotho. In addition, the criteria used for evaluating NAPA mainstreaming in other studies was noted.

Further, 30 stakeholders, representing government, researchers, policymakers and development partners were contacted by e-mail and formal letters, and invited to a one-day stakeholders’ workshop to provide supplementary information. Some of the stakeholders represented Agriculture, Bureau of Statistics, Communications, Economic Planning and Development, Forestry and Land Reclamation, Water, Natural Resources and Energy and Lesotho Meteorological Services); Civil Society Organizations; Private Sector Foundation of Lesotho; Media; Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs); National University of Lesotho departments involved in or affiliated with agriculture; Lesotho college of Agriculture; and donor organizations such as World Vision, United Nation Development Programme (UNDP) and the Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network (FANRPAN).

Narrative synthesis was performed to combine the qualitative and quantitative evidence. Results were summarized and tabulated. Information derived from various sources was triangulated and, where possible, case examples presented to simplify discussions.

Based on recent literature, the Government of Lesotho (GOL) acknowledges its vulnerability to climate change and the need for global cooperation in addressing climate change-related challenges [Government of Lesotho (GOL), 2007; Chishakwe, 2010; African Technology Policy Studies (ATPS), 2013]. It endorsed the UNFCCC in 1992 and ratified it in 1995 [Government of Lesotho (GOL), 2007]. The UNFCCC requires that countries report their national communication (NC) and progress in reducing vulnerability to the impacts of climate change. These international platforms have helped Lesotho access various resources aimed for mainstreaming climate change adaptation into development planning and implement some of its NAPA projects.

Lesotho submitted its First National Communication (FNC) to the UNFCCC in 2000. The First National Communication details climate change impacts, adaptation and mitigation options in eight sectors deemed vulnerable to climate change, namely: water, agriculture, rangelands, forestry and biodiversity, soils, health and Basotho culture [Government of Lesotho (GOL), 2007]. The country also submitted its Second National Communication (SNC) to the UNFCCC in November 2013. The communication includes the country’s greenhouse gas inventory, impacts and vulnerability and policies related to climate change mitigation, adaptation, research and public education.

In addition, LDCs are required by COP 7 to prepare NAPAs detailing their vulnerability to the impacts of climate change and the actions they plan to take to ameliorate these impacts. The main thrust of NAPA is mainstreaming of the actions into countries’ development planning processes (Mutunga and Harde, 2010). Lesotho is one of the LDCs that benefitted from COP 7. The country submitted its NAPA report to UNFCCC in 2007.

The NAPA document identifies short- and long-term priorities for climate change action in Lesotho. Table I presents the NAPA options organized in a hierarchy of priority of which livestock production occupies the critical rung, closely followed by the development of crop-based livelihood. These options represent the key needs that communities need to be supported with to sustain livelihoods in view of climate change risks.

Analysis of the NAPA priorities shows that agriculture-related issues dominate adaptation projects. About 36 per cent of the proposed projects include agricultural activities for adaptation, with water accounting for 18 per cent and the remaining of tourism, ecosystem, energy and disaster management accounting for 9 per cent each. Of the 11 interventions, 82 per cent focus on capacity-building.

However, despite international efforts to mainstream NAPA into countries’ national plans, there are concerns that adaptation preparedness remains inadequate in many African countries including Lesotho (Ongugo et al., 2014). While Lesotho’s international position on climate change seems very positive, when it comes to implementation at the national level, challenges abound. The GOL does not presently have appropriate policies and sector-specific strategies in place to adapt to the anticipated impacts of climate change (Gwimbi et al., 2013). Furthermore, the capacity of Lesotho’s line ministries to plan and implement appropriate climate change adaptation interventions is hindered by the limited availability of technical skills, up-to-date climate information and best practices examples to inform appropriate adaptation measures.

This section provides insights on Lesotho’s policies addressing climate change adaptation. The national government sets policies and regulations which affect the climate risks facing the country and creates incentives for exploring climate change adaptation opportunities (Nindi, 2012).

The international policy influences over Lesotho’s climate change policy is in the realm of ideas. The policy frameworks relating to climate change adaptation are driven by concerns such as environmental management and natural resources conservation, poverty, livelihood protection, vulnerability and security. Most of the policies do not yet explicitly mention climate change adaptation.

Agriculture production remains the main source of livelihoods for most rural communities in Lesotho. Here, agriculture provides the main source of food and employment for more than 60 per cent of the country’s population. Climate change therefore has greater negative impacts on poorer households, as they have the lowest capacity to adapt to changes in climatic conditions. Adaptation policies are therefore important in helping these communities’ better face extreme weather conditions and associated climatic variations.

Among the policy drivers, food security is seen as one of the most important policies underpinning Lesotho’s adaptation to climate change. There are several aspects in the food security policy of 2005, confirming the country’s desire to adapt to climate variability and climate change (Table II). Table II presents a range of key ideas and influences that shape the focus and contents of the Livestock and Range Management Policy of 1994 and Food Security Policy of 2005.

A consistent theme in the food security policy is conservation farming with the goal of developing and adopting specific adaptation strategies while conserving natural resources. Some authors argue that these efforts are well-suited to tackle climate change (Heller and Zavaleta, 2009; Mutunga and Harde, 2010).

There is also considerable recognition of NAPA priority Options 1 and 2 (Table I) in the two policies described above. Availability of resources is however not only a crucial driver for delivery of actions identified in Tables I and II, but it is also a potential motivation for state action.

It is also logical to conclude that Lesotho faces challenges in ensuring effective climate change adaptation mainstreaming in agriculture due to missing climate change policy, action plans and weak institutional capacities. A clear policy framework on climate change is absent and visionary leadership on climate change adaptation is needed.

The Environmental Policy of Lesotho starts with the Constitution of Lesotho which deals contemporarily with the issue of both environment and environmental rights. Section 36 of the Constitution (1993), states that Lesotho:

The Constitution is therefore expected to have important implications for management of environmental resources. It empowers the parliament to make laws that provide measures intended to protect and preserve the environment from abuse, pollution and degradation, to manage the environment for sustainable development and to promote environmental awareness. The Constitution also recognizes the need to shape the path to sustainable development by embracing principles of climate-smart agriculture, environmental protection, sustainable natural resource use and conservation of biodiversity.

The National Environment Policy of 1998 generally aims at achieving sustainable livelihoods and development for Lesotho. The goal of the National Environment Policy is to ensure protection and conservation of the environment and sustainable development. One of the policy objectives is to ensure formulation of environmental legislation. To this end, the policy was translated into a legal framework through the Environment Act of 2008.

The Environment Act 2008 provides for the management of the environment and all natural resources of Lesotho and for all connected matters. The National Environment Act includes the key features of the Rio Summit in 1992 such as Environmental Impact Assessment, Audits and Monitoring, Environmental Management, Environmental Restoration Order and International Environmental Conventions.

Lesotho’s agro-forests provide a range of foods, fibres, energy and fodder that are critical for rural households’ basic livelihood needs. Forestry issues are guided by the Forest Policy of 2008. The Policy gives prominence to poverty reduction and livelihoods security through increasing tree cover on land area (indigenous and exotic); engagement with individual, groups and private holdings; educating the public on the values, purposes and benefits of forestry; and promoting the use of trees in support of conservation and production of both arable agriculture and rangelands.

The Ministry of Forestry and Land Reclamation, under the Forestry Policy, is responsible for implementing programmes such as social forestry which encourages establishment of individual tree nurseries, from which the government procures seedlings for wider application of the community woodlots [Government of Lesotho (GOL), 2008].

Additionally, the policy aims to achieve establishment of woodlots to arrest erosion and ensure adequate soil cover through the provision of canopy and re-establishment of biodiversity [Government of Lesotho (GOL), 2008]. The trees are expected to contribute to climate change mitigation as carbon sink tanks.

An important feature of Lesotho’s forest policy is its recognition of the potential contribution of sustainable forests to poverty reduction, and to the maintenance of vital environmental services. It provides for broad-based collaboration with forest communities.

The role of water in food and livelihood security is a major issue of concern in the context of persistent poverty and continued environmental degradation (Bossio and Geheb, 2008). In Lesotho, water is the most critical resource issue. Although there is considerable knowledge on the issue of water management, an overarching picture on the water–food–livelihood–environment nexus is still low.

GOL sees irrigation as a key avenue for increased agricultural production and household food security, as it would enable farmers to intensify and diversify their crop production base. The draft irrigation policy of 2002 calls on private sector involvement in supporting small holder irrigation schemes. Irrigation draft policy also promises to address the specific difficulties which women face in irrigation.

Irrigation development has however been largely unsuccessful due to a top-down and supply-driven approach on the part of government and donors with little consultation with, or participation by, farmers (FAO, 2005). Currently, irrigation is mostly used in small schemes mostly for vegetables, for which surface and sprinkler irrigation systems are used.

Climate change adaptation interventions are not necessarily new in Lesotho. The review identified several climate change adaptation actions that are ongoing, and aimed at enhancing the adaptive capacity of rural livelihoods to climate change and variability. Projects with a sector-wide reach include, for example, conservation agriculture (CA), homestead gardens, Machobane farming system and forestry woodlots.

CA emerged as a strategy to increase food security in an environmentally sustainable way. The existing literature provides an array of examples about CA in Lesotho. It is implemented with the support of various development partners (e.g. Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO], Catholic Relief Services [CRS], World Vision Lesotho [WVL], Growing Nations, CARE-Lesotho, Serumula, Send-a-Cow Lesotho [SCL]). WVL, for example, operates in seven of the ten districts of the country, namely, Maseru, Botha-Bothe, Mafeteng, Leribe, Berea, Mohale’s Hoek and Quthing (Mokitimi et al., 1992).

CA is a farming system that has been practiced in Lesotho for about 30 years (Marake, 2008). The system is commonly called “likoti”, a Sesotho name for “basin agriculture”. The method involves digging potholes that are approximately 20 cm across and 15 cm deep in a 75- × 75-cm grid-like pattern. Seeds are directly planted into each pothole along with some inorganic or organic fertilizer. In the following season, seeds are planted again in the same pits. Crop residues are retained and staple crops are rotated and/or intercropped. The likoti system has shown promise as a means of increasing yields and conserving soil and water resources (Silici et al., 2011).

In relation to the fertility of the soil, CA may increase the fixation of carbon, and this also has a positive impact on the greenhouse effect. If more carbon is fixed in soil under CA than that under conventional tillage, CA fields act as a sink of carbon and reduce the emission to the atmosphere.

FAO is supporting vulnerable households through CA with cover crops of wheat through resource centres covering all districts of Lesotho. CARE-Lesotho is engaged in the teaching communities and supporting CA implementation in the districts of Quthing and Mokhotlong. CRS and Caritas are implementing Mountain Integrated Conservation Agriculture (MICA), supporting conservation agriculture in the districts of Quthing, Mohale’s Hoek and Mafeteng. The Rural Self-help Development Association (RSDA) is also supporting CA and livestock integration where fodder cover crop is used for feed formulation.

Previous studies on CA confirm that the system results in increased household food security, economic and social well-being. Field research by Walker et al. (2014) at Maphusteng in Lesotho, between 2009 and 2013 demonstrates that yields of up to 8 tonnes/ha or more have been achieved using CA. Elsewhere, Silici et al. (2011) noted that subsistence farmers in Lesotho have been able to boost agricultural yields and increase food production by adopting conservation agriculture, while Bisangwa (2013) concluded that CA is more effective in terms of soil erosion control, yield stability, reduced machinery use and lower fuel costs compared with conventional tillage systems. These results compare favourably with similar studies from other countries where CA has shown positive influence on crop yields, soil fertility and erosion (Walker et al., 2014).

The information collected by FAO in 2006 shows that about 850 farmers benefitted from CA (Silici et al., 2011). The World Food Programme (WFP) has also supported about 5,000 households (1.5 per cent of rural households) in adopting CA in different districts of the country (Silici et al., 2011). The commonly held view in literature is that CA has resulted in increases in food productivity through higher crop yields, implying food security and consequently better economic and social well-being. However, there are also strong arguments that its long-term sustainability currently depends on donor support (Silici et al., 2011). In addition, in Lesotho, access to land, especially along gender lines, remains a determining factor for the adoption of CA among poor households (Silici et al., 2011). According to Silici et al. (2011), female adopters are the least endowed with assets.

Analysis of reports compiled by the FAO also shows that three factors determine the adoption of CA in Lesotho, namely:

1. the economic incentives provided to vulnerable households;

2. the level of education of the head of the household; and

3. the degree of trust and cooperation, especially when combined with a participatory approach pursued by trainers (Silici et al., 2011).

While Lesotho’s partners have been actively assisting such households, the sustainability of the programmes remain in doubt should donors pull out. In this regard, there are fears about sustainability of CA outcomes in practice, especially among the most vulnerable households in the absence of external support. Silici et al. (2011) acknowledges this challenge, arguing that food aid and other forms of subsidies should be used carefully so as not to create dependency. Currently, most of Lesotho’s development partners highlighted above continue to give out incentives, recognizing the positive role they play in motivating poor households during the lean period and in the initial stages of adoption. The customary practice of collecting crop residues and allowing livestock in the harvested fields has also been cited one of the obstacles to CA adoption (Silici et al., 2011).

NGOs such as SCL, WVL, International Red Cross Lesotho and the CRS are engaged in improving household food security through home gardens such as keyhole gardens and trench gardens which provide vegetables to household and crop residue which are fed to animals (Billingsley et al., 2013). SCL successfully promoted keyhole gardens and double-dug trenches for which it has gained a positive national reputation.

The basic keyhole garden is a circular, raised-bed made up of layers of soil, ash, manure and other organic material that retain moisture and nourishes the soil, making it more productive than a conventional garden, even during dry or cold months (Billingsley et al., 2013). The gardens can produce vegetables for a family of for around five years. In Lesotho, the garden is usually walled with local stone or brick that retains daytime heat, alleviating low night-time temperatures (Billingsley et al., 2013). The raised structure also makes access easier for the chronically ill or elderly. Size can vary, but the basic garden measures 1 m in height and 2 m in diameter.

Keyhole gardens have been reported in literature as having resulted in increased productivity and are much more effective in retaining moisture and increasing yields than traditional gardens.

Machobane farming system is one of the farming systems in Lesotho with high adaptability and resilience to climate change. The Machobane farming system was developed in the 1970s, after 13 years of research on the agriculture management techniques that Basotho smallholder farmers were using.

The Machobane farming system is an intensive cropping system, using crop rotation, relay cropping and intercropping practices with the application of manure and plant ash (Mekbib et al., 2011). The system provides resources to poor farmers with a sustainable system that does not require expensive inputs, is easy to implement and supplies them with food all year around.

The philosophy behind the Machobane farming system includes self-reliance without external assistance, farmers’ appreciation of their own resources’ availability, readiness to work hard, practical learning and teaching on the field and teaching other neighbourhood farmers for spreading the technology.

The system promotes organic fertilisers such as animal manure, ashes and organic waste, mixed in different proportions depending of the crop, to build and maintain soil fertility. It insists on having at least one animal in the household, which provides manure and food (milk, eggs and meat).

The Machobane system uses crop rotation, inter-cropping (mixing different crops) and relay-cropping (planting the same crop at different times, so is harvested at different times). It introduces species and varieties, adapted to different weather conditions, such as winter wheat, peas and carrots.

The Machobane farming system has been promoted by NGOs in Lesotho, with a special focus on the Rural Self Development Association (RSDA) and the Machobane Agricultural Development Foundation (MADF) since the 1950s. The Machobane farming system has been supported by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), and other NGOs such as RSDA and MADF promote and adopt the Machobane farming practices despite dwindling resources from donors.

Attempts to create forest woodlots in rural areas were made as far back as 1973 when woodlots were initiated as a solution to chronic fuel wood shortage (Green, 1989). The Woodlot Programme project was designed to create forest service, which was to provide the people with fuel wood and poles and at the same time enhance land resource conservation. According to Green (1989), since the inception of the Lesotho Woodlot Programme Project in 1973, awareness of the potential of tree planting in Lesotho has grown among the rural populace. The project however did not succeed because of inter-village hostilities and squabbles over land and the local people destroyed the woodlots (Esenjor, 2004).

Other afforestation schemes that have been established in Lesotho include Community Social Forestry (CSF), Matelile Rural Development Project, the Forestry Component Project, the Maphutseng Farm Improvement with Soil Conservation Project, the Thabana Morena Development Project, the IFAD Project and the Food Security Assistance Programme (Esenjor, 2004). Some of these schemes have been effective because of the involvement of local people in tree planting and management. However, others have however argued that people were negatively disposed of such woodlots under the customary land tenure system.

Agro-forestry-related practices have however been largely confined to the home garden where woody perennials are planted in mixtures with crops and vegetables (Green, 1989). In the fields, fruit trees are planted along the contour ridges.

The NAPA ranks sectors according to priority and identifies 11 priority actions. These have been translated into priority projects encompassing food security, biodiversity, disaster management and capacity-building in early-warning system to reduce impacts of climate disasters and hazards (Table III). Table III shows some specific projects being implemented under NAPA.

Implementation of NAPAs is project-specific and relies on donor funding. Some of the donors include the Africa Adaptation Programme (AAP) involved in the alignment of NAPA programmes with NSDP strategies; UNDP-GEF addresses special NAPA needs and FAO’s capacity-building in the agriculture sector (Africa Adaptation Programme, 2012). The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has been working with various government ministries in implementing early-warning systems to reduce the impacts of climate disasters and hazards and improve capacity-building and policy reform to integrate climate change into sectoral development plans (UNDP, 2010).

The UNDP and the GOL have also developed an ecosystem-based adaptation project titled “Reducing Vulnerability from Climate Change in the Foothills, Lowlands and the Lower Senqu River Basin” (UNDP 2015). This is a five-year project, financed by Global Environmental Facility (GEF) through UNDP to the tune of US$8.4m. The objective of the project is to mainstream climate risk considerations into the land rehabilitation programmes for an improved ecosystem resilience and reduced vulnerability of livelihoods. The project was launched in June 2015 and is implemented by the Ministry of Forestry, Range and Soil Conservation with the Ministry of Gender, Youth and Sports as a key partner.

While important NAPA projects have been implemented, there is an uneasiness about whether NAPAs and NSDPs are really integrated (Mutunga and Harde, 2010). The main argument in literature is that, the commonalities between NAPA and NSDP, especially on poverty risk reduction approaches, should have led to common project proposals. However, Mutunga and Harde (2010) suggest that there is a general disconnection between activities of NAPA and those of NSDP.

The main argument against NAPAs in the literature is that they are not easy to implement because they only list the country’s priority adaptation needs in the form of projects and do not take into account the overarching policy framework, such as mainstreaming of adaptation into national plans (Ongugo et al., 2014). As a result, adaptation projects are often implemented as standalone activities, which render them less effective. In Lesotho, the budget is prepared by the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning (MFDP) in consultation with other sectors. Yet, the two ministries are disconnected from international climate change negotiations (Hove et al., 2011).

Lesotho needs strong climate change policies that address adaptation, providing guidance on how to integrate and mainstream it into all national sectors and institutions. Current environment and other related policies are weak in this regard. In particular, the food and security, environment and forest policies are heavy on environmental management and natural resources conservation, but issues with climate change adaptation go beyond environmental management.

Increasingly, Lesotho is coming to realize that, in the long term, impacts of climate change need to be addressed by an integrated cross-cutting policy approach. Nonetheless, the cases highlighted in this article offer a series of gaps regarding the mainstreaming of NAPAs into development plans. The following key gaps are highlighted:

• The idea behind the NAPA implementation framework was to build coherence in implementing and mainstreaming adaptation into the national development agenda. However, in this study, the specific provisions and mechanism of NAPA implementation in development plans is lacking. Currently, there is a disconnection between NAPAs and poverty reduction strategy plans. According to Mutunga and Harde (2010), NAPAs are often not successfully integrated into the long-term national development objectives because of the disconnection between them and other poverty reduction strategies. Crucially, little work has been undertaken to integrate NAPAs into nationally budgeted poverty alleviation programmes.

• The absence of a national climate change policy seems to hinder Lesotho’s mainstreaming of NAPA initiatives across all sectors. To realize any of its potential, NAPA requires strong political will and active follow-up in implementation.

• It is important to allocate the resources from domestic sources for NAPA implementation. However, to date, NAPA projects in Lesotho have largely been implemented with funding from development partners.

These gaps lead to the following broader recommendations:

• There is a clear need for the GOL to mainstream NAPAs into development planning. This need is recognized under Article 4.1 of the UNFCCC which calls for parties to take climate change adaptation into account in development planning. In addition, guidance for the development of NAPAs under the UNFCCC states that NAPAs should be mainstreamed into national development planning processes (Ayers et al., 2014). Mainstreaming shifts the responsibility for implementing strategies from individual ministries to all sectors of government, agencies and civil society. Against this background, the GOL needs to establish a link between the NAPAs, the poverty reduction strategies (PRSs), the millennium development goals (MDGs) and other development plans (Kok and de Coninck, 2007).

• Ideally, NAPAs should be supported by policy and legislation to enable them to be integrated with ministries responsibly for finance and planning for implementation. Currently, NAPA approaches face criticism for adopting standalone approaches to adaptation through targeted climate change adaptation projects that are largely donor-funded and not backed by legislation or policy. This development suggests that the government does not consider climate change to be one of its greatest concerns. It is argued in relevant literature that policies depict governments’ objectives, which are then implemented through planning instruments (Pervin et al., 2013). Thus, climate policy is necessary for the government to prepare for climate disturbances. Although climate change issues have been integrated in the government’s “Vision 2020” and NSDP 2012/2013-2016/2017, there are no institutional arrangements supporting them. The government should allocate money for adaptation from its budgetary resources.

• Huq and Ayers (2008) propose a framework for mainstreaming adaptation at the national level. The framework proposes a sequence of awareness and capacity-building, targeted information and training of key stakeholders, which is followed-up with pilot studies to inform policymakers and generate incentives to incorporate lessons learnt into policy and planning. Even though not every NAPA initiative can be coordinated with poverty reduction strategies, there are many opportunities to make them work together. A range of climate adaptation policies has impacts on poverty reduction.

• The success of climate change policy is strongly linked to the capacity of integrating it with other policies, especial sectorial policies, such as in the areas of agriculture, water and sanitation, forestry and land reclamation and energy, among others. This requires good government coordination and innovation in policymaking and implementation. The cases in this article reveal the dynamics of implementation of climate-related policies.

The rationale for introducing NAPAs rests on the limited ability of the LDCs to adapt to the adverse effects of climate change. The COP 7 meeting in Marrakech in 2001 provided a strong impetus to LDCs to develop NAPAs and mainstream them into development plans. In the NAPA process, prominence is given to community-level input as an important source of information, recognizing that grassroots communities are the main stakeholders. This paper assessed the mainstreaming status of Lesotho’s NAPAs into development plans.

The findings revealed that even though Lesotho’s NSDP 2012/13-2016/17 mentions climate change as one the issues to be addressed in its development plans, its mainstreaming remains a challenge. Challenges accounting for the low mainstreaming include lack of climate change policy, NAPAs being projectized and donor-funded and disconnected from national development plans such as poverty reduction strategies. In light of these observations, to overcome the challenges of mainstreaming adaptation, the gap between policy instruments and the real-world application has to be removed. This paper suggests a framework linking NAPAs with the broader development agenda of the country and supported by relevant policy and legislative instruments.