Journals

Journals By Subject

Life Sciences, Agriculture & Food
Chemistry
Medicine & Health
Materials Science
Mathematics & Physics
Electrical & Computer Science
Earth, Energy & Environment
Architecture & Civil Engineering
Education
Economics & Management
Humanities & Social Sciences
Multidisciplinary

Special Issues

Propose a Special Issue
Special Issue Guidelines
Ongoing Special Issues
Published Special Issues

Join Us

Become the Founding Editor-in-Chief
Join as Editor-in-Chief
Join as Senior Editor
Join as Editorial Board Member
Become a Reviewer
Submit an Article
Research Article | | Peer-Reviewed

Perception and Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change-Related Water Risks Among Residents of Afijio Local Government Area, Oyo State, Nigeria

Rereloluwa John Bamidele,  Taiwo Abel Awolumate,  Mumuni Adejumo*
Published in Science Discovery (Volume 14, Issue 5)
Received: 14 August 2026     Accepted: 16 September 2026     Published: 9 October 2026
Views:       Downloads:
Download PDF
Abstract

This study was conducted to assess perception and adaptation strategies to climate change-related water risks among residents of Afijio Local Government Area (LGA), Oyo state, Nigeria. This is a cross-sectional study that utilized random sampling technique to select 230 respondents. Interview was conducted using a validated interviewer administered questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Chi-square test at p=0.05. Respondents’ mean age was 37.0±17.2years, 57.8% were female while 72.6% had attained secodary education. Majority (73.5%) of the respondents agreed that changing rainfall patterns could increase flood risk, 72.6% agreed that climate change could cause irregular water supply during the dry season while 70.4% believed that communities in the area are vulnerable to water scarcity. The mean perception score was 10.1±2.9, 68.3% had negative perception about climate change-related water risks. Fifteen (15.0%) percent of the respondents reported that water scarcity had affected household health while 10.9% reported that children’s schooling was affected due to poor hygiene-related challenges. Significantly, 52.0% of respondents who reported that climate change-related water risk affected children schooling had negative perception compared to 48.0% who had positive perception (χ2=3.423, p-value=0.034). The three major adaptation strategies to water scarcity mentioned by the respondents were digging of wells (21.7%), storage of rainwater (20.0%) and drilled boreholes (10.9%). Only 36.5% reported changing their farming practices in response to water challenges while 18.7% ever received any support to cope with climate-related water challenges. Respondents had negative perception and had experienced several impacts of climate change-related water risk. Very few respondents had ever received any support to cope with climate-related water challenges. There is need for a public health interventions focusing on more systematic support to transform awareness into broad resilience on climate change-related water risks at community level.

Published in Science Discovery (Volume 14, Issue 5)
DOI 10.11648/j.sd.20261405.12
Page(s) 311-321
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © The Author(s), 2026. Published by Science Publishing Group
Previous article
Keywords

Climate Change, Adaptation Strategies, Water Risks, Poor Hygiene

1. Introduction
Climate change has emerged as one of the most serious threats to water systems in the 21st Century across the world. Changes in rainfall patterns, rising temperatures and the increasing frequency of extreme weather events are altering how water is distributed, accessed and used
[1]
. These changes have resulted in more frequent and severe floods, prolonged droughts, irregular rainfall seasons and declining water quality
[2, 3]
. Extreme rainfall and prolonged dry periods now occur more frequently, disrupting food production, public health and livelihoods
[1, 4]
. Globally, climate-related floods and droughts account for a large share of disaster losses and displacement
[5]
. The World Bank estimates that climate-related water shocks could force more than 216 million people into internal displacement by 2050 if effective adaptation measures are not implemented
[6]
.
Economically, water-related climate disasters generate enormous losses. The International Disaster Database reports that the annual average of global direct economic losses from extreme events exceeded 210 billion USD between 2010 and 2023
[7]
, while the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction
[8]
notes a 151% increase in economic losses from extreme events between 1998 and 2017. Economic losses include infrastructure damage, such as roads, bridges, communication networks, and energy facilities
[9-12]
, as well as disruption of communities and livelihoods, and loss of business activity and productivity
[12, 13]
. Africa is one of the most vulnerable regions to climate-related water stress. As one of the driest continents, Africa is characterized by water stress, uneven distribution, and rising demand, exacerbated by rapid population growth, urbanization, and climate change
[14, 15]
. Nearly 400 million people in sub-Saharan Africa lack access to clean water, and across Africa, up to 250 million people could experience high water stress by 2030
[16, 17]
. These pressures threaten food security, economic stability and health outcomes.
Nigeria reflects these wider patterns. Southern Nigeria experiences increasingly intense rainfall and flooding, while the northern regions face longer droughts and declining water availability
[18, 19]
. Flooding and drought intensify water scarcity, degrade water quality, disrupt sanitation, and compel households to adapt through storage, treatment, conservation, and preparedness measures
[1, 4]
. For instance, the 2022 floods, which were among the worst in Nigeria’s recent history, affected more than 1.4 million people, destroying over 400,000 hectares of farmland and damaging critical water and sanitation infrastructure across several states
[17]
. These losses had long term implications for household incomes, food security and access to safe water. Beyond physical damage, climate-related water risks have also increased public health burdens. For instance, a study found that cholera outbreaks peaked in August and were associated with rising temperatures and increased rainfall
[20]
. Similarly, studies have indicated higher cases of cholera outbreak during the rainy season
[21, 22]
. Households are often forced to spend scarce income on medical treatment or on purchasing water from private vendors, increasing the cost of living and deepening poverty.
Despite the growing severity of these impacts, people’s perception of, and response to climate-related water risks remain insufficiently understood. Many water supply projects remain incomplete or poorly maintained, and investment in climate resilient water infrastructure remains inadequate. The failure of water projects can have severe consequences for local communities, contributing to water scarcity, poor health outcomes, and persistent poverty
[23, 24]
. Moreover, there are communities in Nigeria already living with the realities of changing rainfall, flooding and periods of water scarcity, yet there is limited evidence on how residents interpret these risks or the steps they take in response. Without such evidence-based interpretation, strategies introduced by policymakers and development agencies may remain detached from everyday realities, making them less effective or sustainable. Therefore, this study was designed to assess perception and adaptation strategies to climate change-related water risks among residents of Afijio Local Government Area of Oyo state, Nigeria.
2. Methodology
2.1. Study Area
This study was conducted in Afijio Local Government Area (LGA) as shown in Figure 1. The LGA is situated in the western part of Oyo State with its administrative headquarters at Jobele, located at Latitude: 7.85° North and Longitude: 4.03° East. The local government covers a land area of about 722 km2. The population of Afijio was about 134,000
[25]
with estimates rising to approximately 152,193 in the year 2010 and about 188,900 in the year 2022
[26]
. The local government is bordered by Oyo East and Atiba to the east, Iseyin to the north, Akinyele to the south and Lagelu to the south-east. Its soils are largely tropical ferruginous soils which support the cultivation of food and cash crops. Surface water is provided by rivers such as Oba and Awon, which influence both agricultural production and household water supply. Major towns within the LGA include Ilora, Fiditi, Aawe, Iware, and Jobele. The local economy is supported by agriculture, small-scale trading, and artisan activities.
Source: Oyelami et al.
[27]

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 1. Map of Afijio Local Government Area.
2.2. Study Design and Population
The study employed cross-sectional design which utilized quantitative method for data collection. Interviews were conducted among adult residents of Afijio Local Government Area who had lived there for at least two years prior to the study, and gave informed consent.
2.3. Sample Size Estimation
The sample size was determined using Cochran’s formula
[28]
. This is widely recognized for calculating sample sizes in large populations. The formula is expressed as:
n0=Z2p(1-p)e2
where:
n0 represents the estimated minimum sample size,
Z is the standard normal deviation (1.96 for a 95% confidence level),
p = 11% ((0.11) perceptions of changes in water availability in the context of climate change
[29]
).
e refers to the margin of error, set at 0.05.
n0=(1.96)2×0.11×(1-0.11)0.052
n0=0.376092640.0025= 150.437
An additional 50 percent (75) was added to 150 to compensate for possible non-responses and to provide more precise estimates of residents’ perceptions of climate-related water risks, now making the estimated minimum sample size of 225.
2.4. Sampling Methods and Data Collection Instrument
A 3-stage random sampling technique was used to select wards, houses and 230 respondents within Afijio Local Government Area. In stage one, five political wards were randomly selected by balloting from the 10 wards in the LGA. From the selected wards in stage one, five communities were randomly selected from the list of communities in each ward. In the selected communities in stage two, households were selected starting with the spinning of a bottle, a random walk was used to select every consenting household to participate in the study. In a household with more than one eligible adults, one eligible respondent who gave informed consent (and who can provide the needed information) was interviewed. A validated semi-structured interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to collect data on respondents’ sociodemographic characteristics, perceptions of climate change-related water risks, experiences on the impact of water scarcity, flooding and changes in water quality, and adaptation strategies. Perceptions about Climate Change-related Water Risks refers to the beliefs respondents have regarding the Climate Change-related Water Risks. The perception was assessed using 15-items on Likert-scale (from " Strongly Agree" to "Strongly Disagree"). Some of the items include “Changes in rainfall patterns could increase the risk of flooding in my area”, “The water I use for household purposes is often affected by flooding”; “Water-related problems pose a serious threat to people's health”; “Climate-related water risks can be reduced through collective community action”, etc. Thereafter, points were assigned to each of the items, perception score was computed and categorized as negative attitude (scores <8) and positive attitudes (scores ≥8), respectively. The questionnaire was designed in English Language based on the literature review and later reviewed by experts in the field of environmental health and climate change adaptation to confirm that it covered all relevant aspects of the study. Moreover, the questionnaire was translated to Yoruba Language (Local language) and back translated to English to maintain meaning and avoid bias from language differences. Questions that reduced the clarity of the instrument were revised before the commencement of field work. Thereafter, a pretest was conducted among 20 residents of Atiba Local Government Area with similar socio-environmental characteristics. The internal consistency of the instrument was assessed using Cronbach Alpha, which produced a coefficient of 0.741.
2.5. Data Collection Method
The data were collected over a period of two weeks during which the questionnaire was administered to eligible participant who had earlier given informed consent. Interviews were carried out by four (4) Research Assistants (RAs) who were university graduates and acquainted with survey. The RAs were sufficiently proficient in both Yoruba Language and English Language to ensure that respondents fully understood the questions. They (RAs) were recruited and trained on efficient questionnaire administration to respondents. Data collection took place in a conducive location, devoid of distraction. Each session lasted between 25 and 30 minutes. Participation only proceeded after informed consent had been obtained. Efforts were made to ensure that other eligible respondents did not influence one another in their responses and all questionnaire items were carefully reviewed to confirm completeness.
2.6. Data Analysis
Completed questionnaire copies were reviewed daily for accuracy and completeness during field work, and were then assigned serial numbers. Responses were coded, while data entry and analyses were performed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 27. Prior to analysis, the dataset was examined for errors, discrepancies and missing values, which were addressed to ensure data integrity. Questionnaires with substantial missing responses were excluded, while isolated missing values were retained and excluded from the analysis only for the variables concerned. No values were imputed, ensuring that the analysis was based solely on observed responses. Descriptive statistics such as percentages, frequencies and averages were used to summarize socio-demographic information and perceptions. Chi-square tests was used to explore associations between sociodemographic characteristics and perception category. Level of significance was set at p=0.05.
2.7. Ethical Considerations
Ethical approval was obtained from the UI/UCH Ethical Committee, with committee-assigned number UI/EC/25/01157 before the commencement of data collection. Participation was voluntary while informed consent was obtained from the respondents. There was no form of coercion, respondents were ensured of confidentiality of all the information collected.
3. Results
3.1. Socio-demographic Characteristics
More that half (57.8%) of the respondents were female, 48.3% were married while 72.6% had attained secondary education as presented in Table 1. The three major primary occupations of the respondents were farming (33.5%), trading (31.7%) and artisanship (19.6%). More than half (52.6%) of the respondents had been residing in the LGA for more than 5 years prior to the study while 77.4% had household size of about five people. Respondents’ mean age was 37.0±17.2 years while 31.7% were above 51 years as depicted in Figure 2.
Mean = 37.0 ± 17.2 years

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 2. Age Category.
Table 1. Socio-demographic Characteristics.

Characteristics

Frequency

%

Gender

Male

97

42.2

Female

133

57.8

Marital status

Single

106

46.1

Married

111

48.3

Widowed

11

4.8

Divorced or separated

2

0.9

Highest Educational Level Attained

No Formal Education

5

2.2

Primary

30

13.0

Secondary Education

167

72.6

Tertiary Education

28

12.2

Primary Occupation

Civil Service

35

15.2

Artisanship

45

19.6

Farming

77

33.5

Trading

73

31.7

Residence Period at the Community

1-5years

109

47.4

>5years

121

52.6

Household Size

1-5people

178

77.4

>5people

52

22.6
3.2. Perceptions About Climate Change-related Water Risks
Table 2 summarises respondents’ perceptions about climate change-related water risks. Majority (73.5%) of the respondents agreed that changing rainfall patterns could increase flood risk, 53.9% agreed that flooding and erosion became more frequent while 67.8% agreed that their community is vulnerable to the risk of erosion into water sources. Several (48.3%) of the respondents agreed that drinking water sources are exposed to pollution, 72.6% agreed that climate change could cause irregular water supply during the dry season while 70.4% believed that communities in the area are vulnerable to water scarcity.
Majority (66.6%) agreed that heavy rainfall now causes more damage to properties than in the past, 43.5% agreed that household water is often affected by flooding while 40% disagreed. Majority (73.5%) agreed that water-related problems threaten health, 70.5% agreed that flooding threatens livelihoods while 71.3% agreed that poor waste disposal worsens flooding. Majority (64.3%) agreed that people understand these risks, 81.3% agreed on collective action as the solution, 73.5% agreed that access to accurate climate information helps people prepare better for water-related risks while 77.8% agreed that education on climate change can reduce water-related problems in their community. The mean perception score was 10.1±2.9 while 68.3% had negative perception about climate change-related water risks (Figure 3).
Table 2. Perceptions about Climate Change-related Water Risks.

Statement

A (%)

NAND (%)

D (%)

Changes in rainfall patterns could increase the risk of flooding in my area

169 (73.5)

19 (8.3)

42 (18.3)

Flooding has become more frequent in my community in recent years

124 (53.9)

25 (10.9)

81 (35.2)

My community is vulnerable to the risk of erosion into water sources

156 (67.8)

28 (12.2)

46 (20.0)

Drinking water sources in my area are vulnerable to water pollution

111 (48.3)

28 (12.2)

91 (39.6)

Climate change could lead to an irregular water supply during the dry season

167 (72.6)

31 (13.5)

32 (13.9)

Most communities in my area are vulnerable to water scarcity during the dry season

162 (70.4)

38 (16.5)

30 (13.0)

Heavy rainfall now causes more damage to properties than in the past

153 (66.5)

29 (12.6)

48 (20.9)

The water I use for household purposes is often affected by flooding

100 (43.5)

38 (16.5)

92 (40.0)

Water-related problems pose a serious threat to people's health

169 (73.5)

32 (13.9)

29 (12.6)

Flooding poses a serious threat to people's livelihoods

162 (70.5)

31 (13.5)

37 (16.1)

Human activities such as improper waste disposal worsen the impact of flooding in my area

164 (71.3)

31 (13.5)

35 (15.2)

Community members understand the causes and impacts of climate-related water risks

148 (64.3)

38 (16.5)

44 (19.1)

Climate-related water risks can be reduced through collective community action

187 (81.3)

23 (10.0)

20 (8.7)

Access to accurate climate information helps people prepare better for water-related risks.

169 (73.5)

32 (13.9)

29 (12.6)

Education on climate change can reduce water-related problems in my community

179 (77.8)

24 (10.4)

27 (11.7)
Figure 3. Category of Respondents’ Perceptions about Climate Change-related Water Risks.
3.3. Experiences About Impact of Climate Change-related Water Risk
Table 3 shows that many respondents had experienced losses due to flooding and water scarcity. About forty-eight (48.3%) of the respondents reported damage to farmland, 43.0% reported damage to property while 41.7% experienced losses of livestock as a result of flooding. More than half (57.4%) of the respondents reported that they had experienced crop losses due to water scarcity, 47.4% stated that they had experienced income reduction while 43.9% said they had experienced livestock losses. Fifteen (15.0%) percent of the respondents reported that water scarcity had affected household health, with poor water quality being the most common problem (9.5%). Almost eleven percent (10.9%) of the respondents stated that water-related challenges had affected their children’s schooling, mainly due to poor attendance (3.9%) and hygiene-related challenges (3.8%).
Table 3. Water-related Impacts and Experiences.

Experiences about the impact

Frequency

%

Ever experienced damage to any of the following due to flooding

Property

99

43.0

Farmland

111

48.3

Livestock

96

41.7

Stored food

82

35.7

Building

3

1.3

Ever experienced any of the following losses due to water scarcity

Income

109

47.4

Crops

131

57.0

Livestock

98

42.6

Water scarcity has affected the health of your household

34

15.0

Some water scarcity effect on your households’ health

Typhoid

2

0.9

Lack of quality water

22

9.5

Inflation

1

0.4

Water-borne disease

4

1.7

Erosion in well water

1

0.4

Drinking polluted/bad water

1

0.4

Drying of flower

1

0.4

Agricultural produce are affected

2

0.8

Skin infection

1

0.4

Water-related challenges have affected children’s schooling in your household

25

10.9

Water scarcity effects on your children’s schooling

Poor attendance

9

3.9

Poor hygiene

9

3.8

Lateness to school

5

2.2

Risk of crossing bridge

3

1.3

Destruction of roads and school properties

4

1.7
3.4. Adaptive Strategies
Table 4 shows that 42.2% of the respondents reported taking some form of action to reduce the impact of climate-related water problems in their neighborhood. The three major actions taken to reduce the impact of climate-related water problems were digging of wells (21.7%), storage of rainwater (20%) and drilling of boreholes (10.9%). Only 36.5% reported changing their farming practices in response to water challenges while 18.7% said they had ever received support to cope with climate-related water challenge. The major sources of support reported were government (10%) and individuals (9.6%). More than half (53.5%) of the respondents suggested that community should strengthen their drainage systems in order to reduce vulnerability to climate change water-related risks.
Comparison between reported experiences about impact of climate change-related water risk, adaptive measures and perception category is presented in Table 5. It was found that there is no significant association between ever experienced damage to livestock and perception category about climate change-related water risk. Significantly, 52.9% of respondents who reported that climate change-related water risk affected health of the households had negative perception compared to 47.1% who had positive perception. Significantly, 52.0% of respondents who reported that climate change-related water risk affected children schooling had negative perception compared to 48.0% who had positive perception. Moreover, ever changed farming practices due to climate change-related water risk did not significantly associate with perceptions category. Similarly, there is no significant association between ever received support to cope with climate-related water challenges and perception category. However, 50.5% of respondents who reported that they had ever taken action to reduce the impact of flooding in neighborhood had positive perception compared to 35.8% who had negative perception.
Table 4. Adaptive Strategies.

Characteristics

Frequency

%

Ever taken action to reduce the impact of climate-related water problems in your neighborhood

97

42.2

Steps taken to deal with water scarcity

Storage of rainwater

46

20.0

Digging of wells

50

21.7

Drilling of boreholes

25

10.9

Rationing of water use

16

7.0

Reliance on water vendors

13

5.7

Ever changed farming practices due to water challenges

84

36.5

Ever received support to cope with climate-related water challenges

43

18.7

Source of the support

Government

23

10.0

Individuals

22

9.6

Community groups

17

7.4

Faith-based organisation

9

3.9

Non-government Organisations (NGOs)

9

3.9

Things community should do to reduce vulnerability to climate change water-related risks

Strengthen community drainage systems

123

53.5

Encourage water conservation practices

44

19.1

Form cooperative groups for support

36

15.7
Table 5. Comparison between Reported Experiences about Impact of Climate Change-related Water Risk, Adaptive Measures and Perception Category.

Variables

Perception category

Total (%)

2 (p-value)

Negative (%)

Positive (%)

Ever experienced damage to livestock

Yes

63 (65.6)

33 (34.4)

96 (100)

0.528 (0.467)

No

94 (70.1)

40 (29.9)

134 (100)

Water scarcity affects the health of my household

Yes

18 (52.9)

16 (47.1)

34 (100)

4.322 (0.038)

No

139 (70.9)

57 (29.1)

196 (100)

Climate-related water risk ever affected children schooling

Yes

13 (52.0)

12 (48.0)

25 (100)

3.423 (0.034)

No

144 (70.2)

61 (29.8)

205 (100)

Ever taken action to reduce the impact of flooding in neighborhood

Yes

60 (65.9)

31 (34.1)

91 (100)

0.376 (0.540)

No

97 (69.8)

42 (30.2)

139 (100)

Ever changed farming practices due to water risk

Yes

60 (71.4)

24 (28.6)

84 (100)

0.613 (0.434)

No

97 (66.4)

47 (33.6)

146 (100)

Ever received support to cope with climate-related water challenges

Yes

33 (76.7)

10 (23.3)

43 (100)

1.757 (0.188)

No

124 (66.3)

63 (33.7)

187 (100)
4. Discussion
This study was conducted to assess perception and adaptive measures to climate change-related water risks among residents of Afijio Local Government Area (LGA) of Oyo State. The study reported high proportion of women among respondents. Existing literature documents that women frequently experience greater vulnerability to climate impacts, due to social roles and access to resources
[30]
. In Nigeria, disrupted water supplies increase burdens on women and girls who collect water, intensifying their vulnerability
[31]
. Large percentage of the respondents had completed secondary education. This profile likely shaped risk perceptions and capacities. Higher levels of education may strengthen individuals’ understanding of climate-related and water challenges by improving access to information and enhancing awareness of environmental risks
[32, 33]
.
Data from this study revealed that large percentage of the participants agreed that extreme weather could increase flood and drought threats, and that these posed health and livelihood dangers. This agrees with climate science, in a report that climate change is intensifying the hydrological cycle and raising flood/drought risks worldwide
[2, 3]
. High proportion of respondents linked variability to higher flood risk and drought-driven scarcity. This suggests an understanding of climate impacts, consistent with the view that even communities with limited formal training can perceive environmental change
[34]
. This study also documented that large percentage of the respondents agreed that flooding could cause disease risk and agreed that water problems jeopardize health. This is in line with a study conducted by
[35]
in Borno state, Nigeria which reported that flooding creates breeding grounds for cholera, malaria and other water-borne illnesses. Large percentage of participants agreed that seasonal rainfall variability makes supply irregular. This echoes IPCC assessments that Africa faces more intense droughts and floods
[2, 3]
, driving greater risk of water scarcity.
Findings from this study revealed that high percentage of respondents mentioned high incidence of crop losses due to water scarcity. This is in consonance with a study conducted by
[36]
which reported similar levels of agricultural loss. The study attributed these losses to irregular rainfall and prolonged dry spells. The findings of this study therefore align with broader regional evidence that climate change-related water stress threatens food security and rural incomes. Flood-related property and farmland damage further reflects the exposure of households to extreme rainfall events. Several studies have documented comparable impacts following flood events, including infrastructure damage and increased disease risk
[11, 15, 22]
. However, rural households often respond by changing farming practices, digging wells and storing water, but these measures are usually limited by poverty and weak institutional support
[37]
.
The major adaptive strategies documented in this study were digging drainage channels, raising house foundations to resist floods, digging private wells and collecting rainwater to cope with dry spells. These findings are consistent with other Nigerian contexts
[38-40]
. The study also found that changes in farming practices could be an adaptive strategy. This aligns with farmer adaptations observed elsewhere, such as switching to drought-resistant crops or altered planting times
[41]
. The study found that only 18.7% received any support and most solutions came from households themselves. This suggests an adaptive capacity dependent on personal resources. This study found that institutional and external support for adaptation was notably weak. Only one in five respondents had any assistance, mostly from government or individuals; NGO and community support were minimal. The low percentage of respondents who reported receiving external support indicates that formal and community-based assistance mechanisms had limited coverage among the study participants. This institutional gap not only forces communities to self-rely but also means that coping measures remain uncoordinated. This finding implies that while participants recognize and respond to climate-driven water risks, their efforts are largely homegrown and small-scale. This situation is characteristic of many rural communities in Nigeria, where weak institutional support means that climate change adaptation depends largely on local awareness, indigenous knowledge, and community-driven initiatives
[42-44]
. Strengthening formal support networks would likely enhance the effectiveness of existing community strategies. Nevertheless, some missing data were unavoidable because of respondents' unwillingness or incapacity to respond to specific questions, despite efforts to reduce missing responses. In addition to potentially introducing response bias if respondents with missing data differed systematically from those who gave complete answers, this could have decreased the effective sample size for some analyzes. The results should therefore be interpreted cautiously, especially for variables with comparatively higher levels of missing data.
5. Conclusion
This study found that respondents were predominantly female and highly educated. Large proportion agreed that altered rainfall and flooding have increased water scarcity, property damage and health threats. Nearly half of the respondents reported direct losses (to crops, livestock or income) due to drought or floods. In response, many households employed coping measures such as drainage digging, rainwater collection and modified farming. The study reported that respondents perceived climate change water risk clearly and had begun to adapt through locally led initiatives. Yet, the scale of these actions is constrained by limited resources and weak institutional engagement. While respondents clearly endorsed community action and education as solutions, the findings suggest that more systematic support is needed to transform awareness into broad resilience. There is need for a public health interventions focusing on more systematic support to transform awareness into broad resilience on climate change-related water risks at community level.
Abbreviations

LGA

Local Government Area

NGOs

Non-governmental Organizations

IPCC

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Acknowledgments
We acknowledged the assistance of the LGA’s Community Development Association (CDA) chairman during data collection.
Author Contributions
Rereloluwa John Bamidele: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft
Taiwo Abel Awolumate: Investigation, Resources, Software, Visualization, Writing – original draft
Mumuni Adejumo: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Resources. Writing – review & editing
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
References
[1] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC]. (2022). Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (H.-O. Pörtner et al., Eds.). Cambridge University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844

[2] Konapala, G., Mishra, A. K., Wada, Y. and Mann, M. E. (2020). Climate change will affect global water availability through compounding changes in seasonal precipitation and evaporation. Nat Commun 11, 3044.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-16757-w

[3] van Vliet, M. T. H., Thorslund, J., Strokal, M., Hofstra, N., Flörke, M., Macedo, H. E., Nkwasa, A., Tang, T., Kaushal, S. S., Kumar, R., van Griensven, A., Bouwman, L. and Mosley, L. M. (2023). Global river water quality under climate change and hydroclimatic extremes. Nat Rev Earth Environ 4, 687-702.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-023-00472-3

[4] World Health Organization. (2022). Review of IPCC evidence 2022: Climate change, health and well-being.

https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/review-of-ipcc-evidence-2022--climate-change--health--and-well-being (Assessed on July 16, 2026).

[5] United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction [UNDRR]. (2025). Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction: Resilience Pays: Financing and Investing for our Future. Geneva.

https://www.undrr.org/gar/gar2025/hazard-exploration/floods

[6] World Meteorological Organization. (2021). Atlas of Mortality and Economic Losses from Weather, Climate and Water-related Hazards (1970-2021). WMO.
[7] Speybroeck, N., Noy, I., Kettner, A., Below, R., Messori, G., Thiery, W., Wathelet, V., Jézéquel, A., Delforge, D. and Van Niekerk, D. (2026). The emergency events database, EM-DAT, must be preserved as a global public good. Int. J. Public Health 71: 1609990.

https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2026.1609990

[8] UNDRR. (2023). UNDRR. Closing Climate and Disaster Data Gaps: New Challenges, New Thinking. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction.

https://www.undrr.org/publication/closing-climate-and-disaster-data-gaps-newchallenges-new-thinking

[9] Cotti, D., Harb, M., Hadri, A., Aboufirass, M., Chaham, K. R., Libertino, A., Campo, L., Trasforini, E., Krätzschmar, E., Bellert, F. and Hagenlocher, M. (2022). An integrated multi-risk assessment for floods and drought in the Marrakech-Safi region (Morocco). Frontiers in Water, 4, 886648.

https://doi.org/10.3389/frwa.2022.886648

[10] Gil-Guirado, S., Espín-Sánchez, J.-A. and Del Rosario Prieto, M. (2016). Can we learn from the past? Four hundred years of changes in adaptation to floods and droughts. Measuring the vulnerability in two Hispanic cities. Climatic Change, 139(2), 183-200.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1768-0

[11] Imaz-Lamadrid, M. A., Ivanova-Boncheva, A., Flores-López, M. Z., and Cortés-Martínez, M. Y. (2023). Participative policy design to manage droughts and floods in an arid region under changing climate scenarios: The case of Baja California Sur, Mexico. Sustainability, 15(18), Article 13547.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813547

[12] Odiyo, J., Mathivha, F. I., Nkuna, T. R. and Makungo, R. (2019). Hydrological hazards in Vhembe district in Limpopo Province, South Africa. Jamba: J Disaster Risk Stud, 11 (2),

https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v11i2.698

[13] Markantonis, V., Farinosi, F., Dondeynaz, C., Ameztoy Aramendi, I., Pastori, M., Marletta, L., Ali, A. and Carmona Moreno, C. (2018). Assessing floods and droughts in the Mékrou River Basin (West Africa): A combined household survey and climatic trends analysis approach, Natural Hazards andnd Earth System Sciences, ISSN 1561-8633, 18 (4): 1279-1296.

https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-1279-2018

[14] UNEP. (2019). Water Resources in Africa: Key Issues and Sustainable Solutions.
[15] Kithiia, J. and Majambo, G. (2020). Motion but no speed: Colonial to post-colonial status of water and sanitation service provision in Mombasa city. Cities, 107, 102867.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102867

[16] African Development Bank. (2018). The Water Scarcity Challenge in Africa: Policy and Strategy Review.
[17] UN OCHA. (2024). Nigeria: Floods - Situation Report No. 1 (as of 25 September 2024). 2024. Accessed September 28, 2024.

https://reliefweb.int/report/nigeria/nigeria-floods-situation-report-no-1-25-september-2024

[18] Ibebuchi, C. C. and Abu, I.-O. (2023). Rainfall variability patterns in Nigeria during the rainy season. Scientific Reports, 13, 7888.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-34970-7

[19] Salami, A. A., and Togo, M. (2026). Meteorological drought dynamics across Nigeria: Multi-scale SPI insights for climate adaptation. Theoretical and Applied Climatology.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-026-06340-6

[20] Abaje, I. B., Abdullahi, N. and Jeje, O. G. (2016). Climate change and infectious diseases in Funtua local government area of Katsina state, Nigeria. Int J Sci Technol. 5(1): 47-58.

https://doi.org/10.4314/stech.v5i1.5

[21] Onwe, F., Agu, A., Umezuruike, D. and Ogbonna, C. (2020). Factors responsible for the 2015 cholera outbreak and spread in Ebonyi state, Nigeria. J Epidemiol Soc Niger. 2(2): 53-8.

https://jeson.org.ng/index.php/jeson/article/view/23

[22] Ngwa, M. C., Ihekweazu, C., Okwor, T., Yennan, S., Williams, N., Elimian, K., Karaye, N. Y., Bello, I. W. and Sack, D. A. (2021). The cholera risk assessment in Kano state, Nigeria: a historical review, mapping of hotspots, and evaluation of contextual factors. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 15(1): e0009046.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0009046

[23] Whaley L. and Cleaver F. (2017). Can ‘functionality'save the community management model of rural water supply? Water Resources and Rural Development 9, 56-66.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wrr.2017.04.001

[24] Prüss-Ustün, A., Wolf, J., Bartram, J., Clasen, T., Cumming, O., Freeman, M. C., Gordon, B., Hunter, P. R., Medlicott, K. and Johnston, R. (2019). Burden of disease from inadequate water, sanitation and hygiene for selected adverse health outcomes: An updated analysis with a focus on low-and middle-income countries. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health 222 (5), 765 -777.

https://doi.org/10.1111/tmi.12329

[25] National Population Commission (NPC). (2006). Population and housing census of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

https://nationalpopulation.gov.ng/

[26] National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). (2021). Demographic statistics bulletin.

https://www.nigerianstat.gov.ng

[27] Oyelami, A. A., Ogunbode, T. O. and Owoeye, M. O. (2026). Dynamics of household water use determinants in selected Local Government Areas in Oyo Zone of Oyo State Nigeria. Sci Rep 16, 9613

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-33339-2

[28] Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons. New York. Pp 428. ISBN 978-0-471-16240-7. 
[29] Mudombi, S. and Muchie, M. (2013). Perceptions of Water Access in the Context of Climate Change by Rural Households in the Seke and Murewa Districts, Zimbabwe. Jàmbá: Journal of Disaster Risk Studies, 5: 1-8.

https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v5i1.71

[30] Anjum, G. and Aziz, M. (2025). Climate change and gendered vulnerability: A systematic review of women's health. Womens Health (Lond). Volume 21: 1 -22

https://doi.org/10.1177/17455057251323645

[31] Graham, J. P., Hirai, M. and Kim, S. S. (2016). An Analysis of Water Collection Labor among Women and Children in 24 Sub-Saharan African Countries. PLoS One. 1; 11(6): e0155981.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0155981

[32] Bello, N., Garba, H. and Ako, A. A. (2022). Perception of residents on the impacts of climate change on water resources in Kaduna North Local Government Area. Science World Journal. 20 (1), 252-260.

https://doi.org/10.4314/swj.v20i1.33

[33] Aldawsari, N. D., Nemt-allah, M. A. and Abdellatif, M. S. (2025). Environmental Education Awareness in Light of Sustainable Development Goals and Its Relationship with Environmental Responsibility among University Students. Sustainability, 17(21), 9393.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su17219393

[34] McNamara, K. E. and Buggy, L. (2017). Community-based climate change adaptation: a review of academic literature. Local Environment, 22(4), 443-460.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2016.1216954

[35] Aborode, A. T., Otorkpa, O. J., Abdullateef, A. O., Oluwaseun, O. S., Adegoye, G. A., Aondongu, N. J., Oyetunji, I. O., Akingbola, A., Scott, G. Y., Kolawole, B. O. and Komakech, J. J. (2025). Impact of Climate Change-Induced Flooding Water Related Diseases and Malnutrition in Borno State, Nigeria. Environmental Health Insights Volume 19, 1-11.

https://doi.org/10.1177/11786302251321683

[36] Bako, H., Haruna, A. P. and Adamu, B. S. (2022). Smallholders Farmers' Perceptions on the Impacts of Climate Change on Their Livelihoods in Kuje Area Councils. European Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences. 4 (1), 72-75

https://doi.org/10.24018/ejfood.2022.4.1.432

[37] Odelola, R., Matthew, O. and Aniramu, O. (2025). Assessing the impact of climate change and farmers’ adaptation strategies on agricultural crop production at a community level in Southwestern Nigeria. Agriculture & Food Security, 14, 35.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-025-00561-0

[38] Anunobi, A. I. (2013). Housing vulnerability, resilience and adaptation strategies to flood hazard: A study of Shiroro Town in Niger State, North Central Nigeria. Developing Country Studies, 3(12), 72-82.
[39] Wahab B, and Falola, O. (2022). Vulnerable Households in Flood-prone Communities in Ibadan: Measures to improve their Status within the Inclusive Ibadan City Framework. Conference Proceedings for International Symposium on Inclusive-Cities: Achieving Inclusive Cities through A Multidisciplinary Approach, 2021 28-30 June. Journal of Inclusive cities and Built environment. 2 (1), 21-27.

https://doi.org/10.54030/2788-564X/2022/cp1v2a6

[40] Obeta, M. C. (2019). Private for-profit rural water supply in Nigeria: Policy constraints and options for improved performance. Journal of Water and Land Development, 41 (IV-VI), 101-110.

https://doi.org/10.2478/jwld-2019-0033

[41] Deressa, T. T., Hassan, R. M., Ringler, C., Alemu, T. and Yesuf, M. (2009). Determinants of farmers’ choice of adaptation methods to climate change in the Nile Basin of Ethiopia. Global Environmental Change, 19(2), 248-255.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.01.002

[42] Ayanlade, A., Radeny, M. and Akin-Onigbinde, A. I. (2018). Climate variability/change and attitude to adaptation technologies: A pilot study among selected rural farmers' communities in Nigeria. GeoJournal, 83(2), 319-331.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-017-9771-1

[43] Ojo, S., Mensah, H., Albrecht, E. and Ibrahim, B. (2020). Adaptation to climate change effects on water resources: Understanding institutional barriers in Nigeria. Climate, 8(11), 134.

https://doi.org/10.3390/cli8110134

[44] Madaki, M. Y., Muench, S., Kaechele, H. and Bavorova, M. (2023). Climate change knowledge and perception among farming households in Nigeria. Climate, 11(6), 115.

https://doi.org/10.3390/cli11060115

Cite This Article
Plain Text BibTeX RIS

  • APA Style

    Bamidele, R. J., Awolumate, T. A., Adejumo, M. (2026). Perception and Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change-Related Water Risks Among Residents of Afijio Local Government Area, Oyo State, Nigeria. Science Discovery, 14(5), 311-321. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sd.20261405.12

    Copy | Download

    ACS Style

    Bamidele, R. J.; Awolumate, T. A.; Adejumo, M. Perception and Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change-Related Water Risks Among Residents of Afijio Local Government Area, Oyo State, Nigeria. Sci. Discov. 2026, 14(5), 311-321. doi: 10.11648/j.sd.20261405.12

    Copy | Download

    AMA Style

    Bamidele RJ, Awolumate TA, Adejumo M. Perception and Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change-Related Water Risks Among Residents of Afijio Local Government Area, Oyo State, Nigeria. Sci Discov. 2026;14(5):311-321. doi: 10.11648/j.sd.20261405.12

    Copy | Download 

  • @article{10.11648/j.sd.20261405.12,
  author = {Rereloluwa John Bamidele and Taiwo Abel Awolumate and Mumuni Adejumo},
  title = {Perception and Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change-Related Water Risks Among Residents of Afijio Local Government Area, Oyo State, Nigeria},
  journal = {Science Discovery},
  volume = {14},
  number = {5},
  pages = {311-321},
  doi = {10.11648/j.sd.20261405.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sd.20261405.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.sd.20261405.12},
  abstract = {This study was conducted to assess perception and adaptation strategies to climate change-related water risks among residents of Afijio Local Government Area (LGA), Oyo state, Nigeria. This is a cross-sectional study that utilized random sampling technique to select 230 respondents. Interview was conducted using a validated interviewer administered questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Chi-square test at p=0.05. Respondents’ mean age was 37.0±17.2years, 57.8% were female while 72.6% had attained secodary education. Majority (73.5%) of the respondents agreed that changing rainfall patterns could increase flood risk, 72.6% agreed that climate change could cause irregular water supply during the dry season while 70.4% believed that communities in the area are vulnerable to water scarcity. The mean perception score was 10.1±2.9, 68.3% had negative perception about climate change-related water risks. Fifteen (15.0%) percent of the respondents reported that water scarcity had affected household health while 10.9% reported that children’s schooling was affected due to poor hygiene-related challenges. Significantly, 52.0% of respondents who reported that climate change-related water risk affected children schooling had negative perception compared to 48.0% who had positive perception (χ2=3.423, p-value=0.034). The three major adaptation strategies to water scarcity mentioned by the respondents were digging of wells (21.7%), storage of rainwater (20.0%) and drilled boreholes (10.9%). Only 36.5% reported changing their farming practices in response to water challenges while 18.7% ever received any support to cope with climate-related water challenges. Respondents had negative perception and had experienced several impacts of climate change-related water risk. Very few respondents had ever received any support to cope with climate-related water challenges. There is need for a public health interventions focusing on more systematic support to transform awareness into broad resilience on climate change-related water risks at community level.},
 year = {2026}
}

    Copy | Download 

  • TY  - JOUR
T1  - Perception and Adaptation Strategies to Climate Change-Related Water Risks Among Residents of Afijio Local Government Area, Oyo State, Nigeria
AU  - Rereloluwa John Bamidele
AU  - Taiwo Abel Awolumate
AU  - Mumuni Adejumo
Y1  - 2026/10/09
PY  - 2026
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sd.20261405.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.sd.20261405.12
T2  - Science Discovery
JF  - Science Discovery
JO  - Science Discovery
SP  - 311
EP  - 321
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2331-0650
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sd.20261405.12
AB  - This study was conducted to assess perception and adaptation strategies to climate change-related water risks among residents of Afijio Local Government Area (LGA), Oyo state, Nigeria. This is a cross-sectional study that utilized random sampling technique to select 230 respondents. Interview was conducted using a validated interviewer administered questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Chi-square test at p=0.05. Respondents’ mean age was 37.0±17.2years, 57.8% were female while 72.6% had attained secodary education. Majority (73.5%) of the respondents agreed that changing rainfall patterns could increase flood risk, 72.6% agreed that climate change could cause irregular water supply during the dry season while 70.4% believed that communities in the area are vulnerable to water scarcity. The mean perception score was 10.1±2.9, 68.3% had negative perception about climate change-related water risks. Fifteen (15.0%) percent of the respondents reported that water scarcity had affected household health while 10.9% reported that children’s schooling was affected due to poor hygiene-related challenges. Significantly, 52.0% of respondents who reported that climate change-related water risk affected children schooling had negative perception compared to 48.0% who had positive perception (χ2=3.423, p-value=0.034). The three major adaptation strategies to water scarcity mentioned by the respondents were digging of wells (21.7%), storage of rainwater (20.0%) and drilled boreholes (10.9%). Only 36.5% reported changing their farming practices in response to water challenges while 18.7% ever received any support to cope with climate-related water challenges. Respondents had negative perception and had experienced several impacts of climate change-related water risk. Very few respondents had ever received any support to cope with climate-related water challenges. There is need for a public health interventions focusing on more systematic support to transform awareness into broad resilience on climate change-related water risks at community level.
VL  - 14
IS  - 5
ER  -

    Copy | Download

Author Information
Download PDF
Submit an Article
  • Abstract
  • Keywords

  • Document Sections

    1. 1. Introduction
    2. 2. Methodology
    3. 3. Results
    4. 4. Discussion
    5. 5. Conclusion
    Show Full Outline
  • Abbreviations
  • Acknowledgments
  • Author Contributions
  • Conflicts of Interest
  • References
  • Cite This Article
  • Author Information

About Us

Science Publishing Group (SciencePG) is an Open Access publisher, with more than 300 online, peer-reviewed journals covering a wide range of academic disciplines.

Learn More About SciencePG

Products

Information

Important Link

Copyright © 2012 -- 2026 Science Publishing Group – All rights reserved.