Assessing the Risks and Adaptive Capacity of Agricultural Extension Workers in Conflict-Prone Communities

Agricultural Extension Workers (AEWs) sustain rural productivity but increasingly operate amid overlapping climate and security risks. This study assessed AEWs' exposure to natural and artificial hazards, computed a vulnerability index, and examined factors influencing adaptive capacity in conflict-prone communities in North Cotabato. Using a descriptive quantitative design, 53 AEWs were surveyed via a structured questionnaire; exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity were combined into a vulnerability index. Descriptive statistics (means, SDs) summarized hazards and coping; Pearson correlations and multiple linear regression tested associations among adaptive capacity, education, training, resources, and institutional support. AEWs reported high exposure to typhoons (M=4.30, SD not shown), floods (M=4.15), and droughts (M=3.90); manufactured risks such as armed conflict (M=3.45) and road insecurity (M=3.20) were moderate. The computed vulnerability index was 3.50 (High), reflecting high exposure (3.85) and sensitivity (3.70) versus only moderate adaptive capacity (2.95). Adaptive capacity correlated most strongly with institutional support (r=0.60, p<.001) and training (r=0.55, p<.001), followed by resources (r=0.49, p<.001) and educational background (r=0.42, p=.01). Coping most often involved preparedness training (M=3.90), peer/community networks (M=3.85), and coordination with LGUs/NGOs (M=3.75); technical strategies (e.g., climate-smart agriculture) were only moderate (M=3.40). Targeted capacity-building, stronger institutional support, safety measures/insurance, conflict-sensitive DRR, and increased logistics budgets are recommended to enhance AEW resilience and ensure continuity of extension services in hazard- and conflict-affected areas.