Photo: An elderly man from Alebtong district in Northern Uganda sharing his insight during our national stakeholder dialogue on Why Inclusive knowledge systems matter in Climate change adaptation in agriculture held in Kampala, Uganda under the CRAKS project.
Inclusion is integral to discourse around social and climate justice. Yet at different levels and in different contexts, crucial voices go unheard. Susan Nanduddu and Lilian Motaroki highlight hidden barriers that can obstruct inclusion of the groups most vulnerable to climate impacts.
We often talk about inclusion as though it’s simply a matter of inviting everyone to the table. But experience – including our own – shows it’s more complicated. Even with the best intentions, structural and hidden barriers can quietly exclude the very groups we aim to reach.
Under the CRAKS project, the African Centre for Trade and Development (ACTADE) and IIED are exploring ways to build community resilience in Uganda through the locally led adaptation knowledge system. This includes ensuring the rich local and traditional knowledge about climate adaptation, held within local communities, is shared and integrated.
From the very beginning, we have endeavoured to make spaces participatory and inclusive. Our recent national dialogue brought together stakeholders from local government, private sector, NGOs and farmers to reflect on preliminary project findings and gather insights on how to support gender-responsive and socially inclusive knowledge systems.
We were sure we had thought of everything so that marginalised groups – those at the very core of the CRAKS project – would participate and engage.
But the numbers and feedback told a different story:
- Only 36% of participants were women, 6% were youth
- No persons with disabilities were in the room
- The few elderly participants present told us they felt left out, and
- All regions showed up, but diversity from across these regions was low.
As event organisers, it was humbling. And it was uncomfortable.
The reality check
At the start of the CRAKS project, a gender equality and social inclusion (GESI) assessment revealed that many marginalised groups face persistent obstacles to accessing climate change adaptation knowledge, such as:
- Time poverty, especially among women
- Low literacy, particularly among older and middle-aged women
- Cultural restrictions that limit women’s mobility
- Lack of income or resources to access radios, phones or data, and
- For persons with disabilities – stigma, inaccessible venues and exclusion from community decision-making.
But knowing is one thing. Seeing those barriers play out in real time at our own event is another.
What the farmers told us: the less visible barriers
Take transport. As is the norm, we reimburse participants’ travel costs. Reimbursing post-event helps safeguard against financial risks, such as participants receiving cash but not showing up.
Reimbursement sounds fair, right? Except for farmers living hand-to-mouth, who can’t afford to pay for a bus ticket or accommodation up front. We hadn’t thought about that.
Other barriers were about timing. Our event was in the middle of harvest season, during which time farmers are in the fields from sunrise to sunset. We need to think about the farmers’ priorities, not ours: for those who rely on crops for their livelihoods, harvesting is always going to win out. We always need to ask the question, what works for you?
Language was a further issue. Complex terminology is alienating particularly at the subnational and local levels. Take for example terms such as ‘knowledge brokering’ or ‘knowledge systems’. We heard some farmers express fear of being unable to follow the discussion, or of being asked questions they could not answer. These are the people with the most valuable knowledge to share, and who also need knowledge from others to adapt effectively – yet techy speak and jargon excludes them from the conversation.
Other farmers expressed fear of navigating a big city – of getting lost, or feeling out of place in an unfamiliar setting, attended by national leaders or climate practitioners. This led us to ask: why are agricultural dialogues held in big cities where there is barely any farming?
We began to reflect on how we could bring these events to the farmers, in a space familiar to them, where they would be comfortable.
Then there’s the way we invite people. When we invite institutions rather than individuals, it is often men who join. Unless we specifically invite women, youth or persons with disabilities, they will likely not attend. Institutional invitations can lead to gatekeeping where we see the same faces time after time; voices of others are not heard.
Cultural barriers also quietly shape attendance. Our GESI assessment showed that women and girls often carry a heavy workload at home, alongside gender norms that restrict their movement. We must be thoughtful, not just in inviting women, but in making sure they can actually come and feel safe sharing their experiences once they’re there.
The same applies to people with disabilities. In one of our earlier events, we learned that for a visually impaired person to participate, their support worker must also join the whole event – and be budgeted for accordingly.
What we are doing differently
We’re taking this as a lesson, not a failure. Next time, we will:
- Arrange one-way transport and one night’s accommodation in advance for farmers
- Inform participants early on that translation services are available to alleviate any fears of speaking out, and
- When sending invitations to institutions, specifically request they keep diversity in mind when nominating participants.
Beware the buzzword
Gender, equality, inclusion – these are words now commonly baked into project proposals, strategies and deliverables. Unless these intentions start to bring real, tangible change, GESI risks becoming a meaningless buzzword.
Indeed, good intentions are the starting point. But true inclusion really begins to happen when we’re willing to ask hard questions about our own gaps, listen deeply and keep adjusting. We need to act on what we’ve learnt: that inclusion doesn’t mean making space for everyone, it means removing the obstacles that keep people from stepping into that space in the first place.
Working in partnership, we can chip away at hidden barriers step by step − until small shifts add up to transformative change.
With thanks to Annet Nakyeyune and Viola Musiimenta (ACTADE) for their contributions to this insight.
The work was carried out with the aid of a grant from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands and the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada. The views expressed herein do not represent those of IDRC, its board of governors or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands.
About the Authors
Susan Nanduddu is executive director at the African Center for Trade and Development
Lilian Motaroki (lilian.motaroki@iied.org) is a researcher in IIED’s Climate Change research group