Penn State-led study reveals how perceptions of climate threats shape livelihoods in disaster-prone regions
In the fertile yet climate-fragile Chitwan Valley of Nepal, small-scale farmers face a mounting challenge: floods, droughts, and other extreme weather events are eroding the stability of crop yields. Logic might suggest that such pressures would drive many to seek alternative livelihoods, but a new study from Penn State and partner institutions shows the opposite is often true.
Instead of diversifying their income streams, many Nepali farmers are doubling down on agriculture — a decision researchers warn could increase vulnerability to poverty as climate instability deepens.
A Global Challenge with Local Insights
The peer-reviewed study, published in Population and Environment, surveyed approximately 500 farming households in Chitwan Valley, a region where subsistence agriculture is the economic backbone. Globally, about 500 million small-scale farmers face similar climate hazards in the coming decades, making these findings relevant far beyond Nepal.
Lead researcher Nicolas Choquette-Levy, assistant professor of geosciences at Penn State and a faculty associate in the Earth and Environmental Systems Institute, said the findings underscore a critical policy gap.
“Small-scale farmers are the backbone of local food systems worldwide,” Choquette-Levy said. “Many farm out of love, and many feel they have no other viable options. But when climate change makes farming harder, we must equip them with resources and pathways to explore alternatives.”
Agriculture at the Heart of Nepal’s Economy
In Nepal, agriculture employed 64% of the workforce and contributed around 21% of the country’s GDP as of 2021. In Chitwan Valley, most families grow rice, maize, and wheat for both consumption and sale. But the region’s climate is changing at an alarming rate — with temperatures rising at roughly twice the global average and total rainfall declining since 1970.
During interviews conducted between May and July 2022, farmers linked these changes to increased risks for agricultural production. Yet when asked about non-farming jobs, such as day labor or eco-tourism, they perceived even greater climate-related hazards in those sectors — like heat stress or weather-dependent tourist income.
Why Farmers Stay in Agriculture
The study revealed that farmers who had personally experienced floods or droughts were even more likely to recommit to farming. This trend, described by the researchers as “retrenchment,” is shaped by several factors:
Financial barriers: Lack of startup capital for alternative businesses or migration.
Fear of crop loss: Anxiety over abandoning farmland that has supported families for generations.
Low institutional trust: Limited confidence that the government can provide meaningful disaster relief or livelihood support.
Dirgha Jibi Ghimire, co-author and research professor at the University of Michigan, emphasized that these perceptions are crucial for designing effective policy.
“Understanding how smallholder farmers view climate disaster risks helps policymakers and development partners craft interventions that reduce impacts in low-income agricultural regions,” said Ghimire, who also serves as executive director of Nepal’s Institute for Social and Environmental Research (ISER-N).
Beyond Nepal: A Food Security Lens
The findings carry broader implications for food security, urban migration, and environmental sustainability. Michael Oppenheimer, co-author and director of Princeton University’s Center for Policy Research on Energy and the Environment, noted that adaptation strategies — or the lack thereof — will shape development trajectories.
“Governments have tried to make farms more resilient through education and investment, but current efforts are not enough to prepare farmers for a more hazardous climate,” Oppenheimer said.
Policy Recommendations
In their paper, the researchers outlined concrete measures for reducing vulnerability:
Access to climate information: Expand localized forecasts and weather-adaptation training.
Financial safety nets: Provide subsidized crop insurance to buffer against losses.
Migration support: Facilitate safe and sustainable relocation options when farming becomes untenable.
Income diversification: Promote less climate-sensitive job opportunities.
Risk distribution: Encourage staggered planting and varied crop cycles to spread harvest risks.
Choquette-Levy returned to Nepal in summer 2025 to share results with policymakers and discuss integration into public investment plans.
Lessons for the United States
Interestingly, Choquette-Levy is now looking at parallels between Nepal and family farms in Pennsylvania. Both regions produce crops such as corn, apples, and vegetables, but face different climate challenges.
“Nepali farmers are ahead of us in confronting climate change because they have no choice,” he said. “There’s an opportunity to blend their adaptive knowledge with the resources and entrepreneurship we have in Pennsylvania.”
Research Collaboration and Support
Other contributors included Rajendra Ghimire and Dil C.K. of ISER-N. Funding came from Princeton University’s High Meadows Environmental Institute Walbridge Fund, the Princeton Institute for International and Regional Studies, the Nicholas Fund, and Canada’s Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.