Who defines community in community-based adaptation: different perceptions of community between government and citizens in Ethiopia

Community-based adaptation (CBA) has become an increasingly popular mechanism for incorporating climate change adaptation into local development work. However, the term ‘community’ in CBA has been frequently used without rigorous reflection on its own meaning, boundary and governance, assuming that a moral license is intuitively granted. The article sets out to critically examine, through a study of the UNDP-GEF Small Grants Programme (SGP), how the concept of community is framed within the paradigm of CBA in Ethiopia and to what extent Ethiopian peasants articulate a shape of community that they consider they belong to. This article contributes to the field of community development in general, and specifically CBA, by exploring a fundamental difference between the governmental construction of community and the practices of community governance by citizens on the ground. Overall, I argue that communities are neither an actor nor a place, but the outcomes of a complex set of power-laden relationships, built on the unique mix of norms, customs, history and private interests. Community boundaries are therefore fluid with heterogeneity inside, and the individual perceptions of the community tend to be idiosyncratic. However, the definition of a community is frequently imposed upon in CBA practice, rather than generated by the groups themselves.