Skip to main content
F1000Research logoLink to F1000Research
. 2026 May 26;15:412. Originally published 2026 Mar 19. [Version 2] doi: 10.12688/f1000research.176641.2

The perception of the impacts of climate change in communities surrounding Lake Titicaca, Peru-Bolivia.

Alberto Enrique Garcia Rivero 1,a, Yuri Vladimir Sandoval Montes 2, Edwin Natividad Gabriel Campos 1, Javier Alfredo Núñez Villalba 2, Zaniel Israel Novoa Goicochea 3
PMCID: PMC13624497  PMID: 42823944

Version Changes

Revised. Amendments from Version 1

In response to the reviewers’ comments, we performed a comprehensive revision of the manuscript. The principal modifications include: • Revision of the title to better reflect the perception-based scope of the study. • Clarification of the study objectives and explicit differentiation between perceived impacts and direct climatic causality. • Incorporation of a clearer mixed-methods methodological framework, including: – sampling strategy description, – justification of site selection, – explanation of purposive non-probabilistic sampling, – and acknowledgment of methodological limitations. • Inclusion of exploratory inferential statistical analyses, including: – chi-square tests, – Spearman correlation analysis, – comparative indicators, – and composite indices. • Strengthening of qualitative analysis through thematic coding and integration of participatory and interview-based findings with quantitative results. • Development of a socio-ecological conceptual framework linking climate drivers, environmental transformations, vulnerability, and adaptive responses. • Revision of the Discussion and Conclusions sections to avoid unsupported causal interpretations and strengthen engagement with socio-ecological resilience literature and adaptation governance frameworks. • Removal or reformulation of overgeneralized expressions such as “chronic water-deficit syndrome” and “structural water crisis”. • Improvement of figure interpretation, captions, terminology consistency, and overall academic English style. • Inclusion of additional recent and regionally relevant references related to socio-ecological systems, climate adaptation, resilience, and Lake Titicaca environmental dynamics. We believe that the revised manuscript now presents a more robust and analytically coherent contribution to the understanding of climate-related perceptions and adaptive challenges in transboundary high-Andean socio-ecological systems.

Abstract

Background

Climate change is increasingly transforming socio-ecological systems in high-Andean regions, particularly in communities surrounding Lake Titicaca, where livelihoods depend heavily on climate-sensitive activities such as agriculture, fisheries, livestock, and tourism. Despite growing environmental pressures, limited evidence exists regarding how local populations and institutional actors perceive climate-related impacts and adaptive responses in this transboundary region. This study analyzes climate change perceptions, perceived impacts, and adaptation capacities in communities located in Puno Bay (Peru) and Cohana Bay (Bolivia).

Methods

A mixed-methods approach integrating quantitative and qualitative techniques was applied during fieldwork conducted in November 2024 and June 2025 in the communities of Quehuaya, Capachica, Guaqui, and Puno. Data collection included structured surveys administered to 62 community members and 26 institutional actors, semi-structured interviews, participatory workshops, and participatory mapping exercises. Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and Spearman correlations were used for exploratory quantitative analysis, while qualitative information was analyzed through thematic coding and socio-ecological interpretation.

Results

Findings revealed high levels of climate change awareness among community members (85.5%) and institutional actors (100%). Respondents identified reduced rainfall, increasing temperatures, hydrological variability, declining agricultural productivity, reduced fish availability, and tourism-related impacts as the principal perceived effects. Significant differences were identified regarding adaptation measures (χ 2 = 14.96, p < 0.001) and institutional support (χ 2 = 18.32, p < 0.001), evidencing structural inequalities in adaptive capacity. A moderate positive correlation (ρ = 0.36, p = 0.003) was observed between climate perception and reported impacts.

Conclusions

Climate change is widely recognized across Lake Titicaca communities; however, adaptive capacity remains uneven due to disparities in institutional support, resources, and technical knowledge. Strengthening multi-level governance, participatory adaptation strategies, and transboundary cooperation is essential for improving resilience in Andean socio-ecological systems.

Keywords: climate change; drought; precipitation; fishery; agriculture; adaptation, mitigation; Lake Titicaca.


Abbreviations

ALT

Binational Authority of Lake Titicaca

CONCYTEC

National Council of Science, Technology and Innovation of Peru

IIGEO-UMSA

Institute of Geographic Research

MINCETUR

Ministry of Foreign Trade and Tourism of Peru

PROCIENCIA

National Program for Scientific Research and Advanced Studies

1. Introduction

Climate change has emerged as one of the principal drivers transforming ecosystems and altering socio-environmental systems, affecting both natural environments and human communities. Recent studies (2020–2024) have documented a wide range of impacts, including ecological degradation and increasing socio-environmental vulnerability associated with ecosystem alteration and the decline of ecosystem services. 1 – 5 In socially exposed contexts, climate risk exacerbates economic and social inequalities, thereby increasing the vulnerability of populations dependent on natural resources. 6–9

Climate variability, which affects precipitation patterns, temperature regimes, and hydrological balances, constitutes a critical dimension of climate change, requiring predictive models and adaptation strategies grounded in hydrometeorological evidence. 10 – 13 Likewise, climate change contributes to biodiversity alterations characterized by shifts in species distribution and abundance, accompanied by losses in ecological functionality. 14 – 16

Recent research emphasizes that climate change impacts cannot be understood solely through biophysical measurements; rather, they require integrated frameworks linking climatic drivers, environmental processes, and human responses. Socio-ecological systems theory provides a valuable perspective for understanding these interactions by highlighting the feedback mechanisms between environmental change and social adaptation processes. Within this framework, vulnerability is determined not only by exposure to climatic stressors, but also by adaptive capacity, institutional context, and access to resources.

A review of studies conducted over the last five years confirms that climate change effects manifest across multiple dimensions, including climate variability, ecological degradation, habitat loss, and increasing socio-environmental vulnerability. 17 – 30 These impacts extend beyond ecological concerns, affecting social and territorial structures and demanding integrated approaches to environmental management and territorial planning.

Lake Titicaca, the center of a vast ecological, economic, and cultural network in the Altiplano region, has experienced a marked and alarming decline in water levels over recent years. This phenomenon, driven by a combination of global and regional climatic factors together with local resource management practices, represents a structural threat to lakeside communities that depend on the lake for water supply, food security, income generation, and cultural identity. This research, funded by the PROCIENCIA program of CONCYTEC (Peru) in 2024, aims to identify and characterize the principal impacts of climate change on populations inhabiting the Lake Titicaca basin, with particular emphasis on Puno Bay (Peru) and Cohana Bay (Bolivia), while also contributing elements to guide adaptation policies and integrated transboundary management strategies.

Aymara communities and other lakeside populations maintain a close multisectoral relationship with the lake. Artisanal fisheries and small-scale agriculture constitute the foundation of food security and local livelihoods, while lake water supports human consumption, irrigation, and productive activities. In addition, landscapes and cultural practices associated with the lake sustain traditional knowledge systems, rituals, and forms of community organization. 31 – 34

The sustained reduction in water volume and increasing hydrological variability—particularly recurrent drought episodes—alter local hydrological regimes, reduce the productivity of agricultural and fisheries systems, and threaten the provision of environmental and tourism-related services. 31 – 33

This study explicitly focuses on local perceptions of climate change rather than attempting to establish direct causal relationships between climatic variables and observed impacts. Understanding perception is essential because it shapes how individuals and communities interpret environmental change, 35 – 36 prioritize risks, and implement adaptation strategies. By comparing community-level perceptions with those of institutional actors, this research identifies gaps in response capacity and governance that may affect the effectiveness of climate change responses in the Lake Titicaca region.

The multifaceted effects identified at the community level include: reduced agricultural production and crop diversity resulting from decreased water availability for irrigation; loss of biomass and fisheries habitats affecting fish catch and quality; degradation of wetlands and riparian zones that diminishes hydrological regulation capacity and biodiversity; 34 , 37 and increasing concentrations of pollutants due to lower water volumes, with significant implications for public health. 38 These productive and health-related impacts are accompanied by profound sociocultural consequences, including the disruption of traditional collective water management practices, erosion of knowledge associated with fishing and agriculture, and alteration of rituals linked to the lake cycle. Finally, the deterioration of livelihoods drives processes of internal and transboundary migration that reconfigure demographic, economic, and family dynamics, generating additional vulnerabilities for communities remaining in the territory.

2. Materials and methods

To comprehensively address perceptions of climate change impacts among lakeside communities surrounding Lake Titicaca, this research adopted a multidisciplinary and participatory approach integrating both qualitative and quantitative techniques. The methodology was designed in accordance with the objectives of identifying the perceptions of inhabitants of circumlacustrine communities regarding the principal impacts of climate change in selected communities of Cohana Bay (Bolivia) and Puno Bay (Peru), together with other areas of interest (see Figure 1), as well as providing elements capable of informing adaptation and mitigation policies in response to climate change impacts.

Figure 1. Location of the study areas for this research.


Figure 1.

The investigation began with an exhaustive review of scientific literature, institutional reports, and historical studies related to the physical, socioeconomic, and cultural environment of Lake Titicaca and its communities, together with an analysis of climate change, climate variability, and their principal impacts. This review made it possible to contextualize observed changes within the lacustrine system, understand long-term trends, and identify factors contributing to modifications in hydrological and social regimes.

Fieldwork was conducted during two periods: November 2024 (at the end of the dry season) and June 2025 (at the beginning of the dry season). Research activities were carried out inthe communities of Quehuaya, located in Cohana Bay, and Capachica, located in Puno Bay, selected due to their representativeness and vulnerability to changes affecting the lake. Additionally, work was conducted in the Bolivian sector in Guaqui, a locality and municipality in Ingavi Province, Department of La Paz, situated on the shores of Lake Titicaca. In the Peruvian sector, the study focused on an area of the city of Puno where the principal sewage discharges flow into the lake.

This study adopts a mixed-methods approach that integrates quantitative and qualitative data to capture the complexity of socio-ecological dynamics. The quantitative component was based on structured surveys administered to community members (see Appendix A) and participants in the Ecotourism Workshop held in Puno (see Appendix B), using binary variables (presence/absence), which enabled the construction of comparable indicators across respondents. The qualitative component included semi-structured interviews with community leaders, farmers, fishers, and local authorities aimed at identifying the most relevant threats and community responses to climatic alterations and their consequences for ecosystems and local populations.

Within the framework of participatory workshops conducted in Quehuaya and Capachica, participatory mapping exercises were carried out to provide contextual insights into how environmental changes are perceived and experienced, including drought, flooding, reductions in agricultural, fisheries, and livestock production, as well as impacts on tourism areas, thereby identifying the general effects of climate change on local communities. 39 – 42 This collaborative work involved all participants ( Figure 2), who used different colors to identify affected areas and the types of climatic effects experienced. Upon completion of the maps, a secretary or spokesperson was selected to explain the resulting map.

Figure 2. Comparative multi-actor analysis of climate change perception, impacts, adaptation, and institutional support.


Figure 2.

The sampling strategy was purposive and non-probabilistic, designed to capture variability across communities with different levels of exposure and dependence on climate-sensitive livelihoods. Selection criteria included geographic representation, economic activities, and accessibility. The final sample consisted of 62 community respondents from the Quehuaya and Capachica Communities and 26 institutional actors associated with tourism and environmental management who participated in a Workshop on Ecotourism in the City of Puno organized by MINCETUR. Although this sampling approach limits statistical representativeness, it is appropriate for exploratory socio-ecological analysis and hypothesis generation.

Data analysis combined descriptive statistics with exploratory inferential techniques. Chi-square tests were used to assess differences between groups, while Spearman correlations were applied to examine relationships between perception and reported impacts. Qualitative data were analyzed through thematic coding, identifying key categories such as water stress, livelihood impacts, and adaptation strategies. All statistical analyses were conducted as exploratory because of the sample size and the binary structure of the dataset. 43

Composite indices were constructed by aggregating binary variables within thematic groups, allowing for a standardized representation of socio-ecological responses. The defined ranges reflect the number of variables included in each index and enable comparison across respondents and actor groups within an exploratory analytical framework ( Table 1).

Table 1. Composite indices used to summarize perception, impacts, adaptation, and support dimensions.

Index Description Range
Climate perception index Number of perceived signals 0–5
Impact index Reported impacts 0–5
Adaptation index Adaptation measures 0–4
Support index Institutional support sources 0–4
Needs index Identified needs 0–6

It should be emphasized that, because the activities included participatory workshops with community members aimed at collecting traditional knowledge, perceptions regarding changes in the lake, and existing adaptation strategies, all activities were conducted in strict compliance with the “Code of Ethics in Research of the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos,” approved through Rectoral Resolution No. 012648–2023-R/UNMSM of November 21, 2023.

For this study, verbal informed consent was obtained from the communities where the research was conducted. In these communities, consent is traditionally granted verbally; accordingly, consent was obtained following the presentation, explanation, and agreement with community leaders regarding the project objectives, principal activities, and expected benefits prior to the initiation of the study through a preliminary visit to the research area. Tacit and practical confirmation of such consent was evidenced through the participation of community members and leaders in the various workshops and field visits conducted within the study area. In summary, the sole valid reason for employing verbal informed consent was that the communities involved in this study do not customarily provide written and signed consent, as oral communication and personal commitment carry greater social significance within these populations.

3. Results

The responses from the 62 surveys administered to community members during the community workshops in Quehuaya and Capachica are summarized in Appendix C–Table C1.1 and Table C2.1, categorized by gender and productive activity, respectively. The sample consisted of 33 women and 29 men, all over 16 years of age, with an average age of 48 years. Regarding educational level, 66% of respondents had not completed primary education, 24% had completed secondary education, and only 13% had undertaken technical or university studies.

Similarly, the responses from the 26 surveys administered during the Ecotourism Workshop held in the city of Puno and organized by MINCETUR are summarized in Appendix D.

3.1. Climate change perception

The results indicate consistently high levels of climate change perception among both community members and institutional actors. Respondents frequently identified reduced rainfall, increased temperature, and hydrological variability as key indicators of environmental change. These perceptions reflect shared experiences of environmental change across actor groups. ( Table 2).

Table 2. Comparative indicators of climate change perception, impacts, adaptation, and institutional support.

Dimension Communities (%) MINCETUR (%) Difference
Climate change perception 85.5 100.0 +14.5
Impact recognition 95.2 96.2 +1.0
Adaptation measures 53.2 96.2 +43.0
Institutional support 33.9 84.6 +50.7
Support needs 93.5 100.0 +6.5

Table 2 reveals key differences between community respondents and institutional actors, point to a governance gap in adaptive capacity. 35 , 44

Despite differences in knowledge systems and access to information, both groups converge in their recognition of climate-related changes. This convergence suggests that climate change has become a salient issue in the region, shaping both local experiences and institutional narratives. However, although perception levels are similar, the implications of these perceptions differ substantially in terms of response capacity.

Figure 3 shows that, although perception and impact recognition are similarly high across groups, adaptation and institutional support differ markedly. This contrast reveals structural inequalities in access to resources, information, and governance mechanisms.

Figure 3. Participation of community leaders and women in the development of talking maps in the Quehuaya Community.


Figure 3.

Note: Persons shown have been de-identified.

The results presented in Table 3 provide exploratory statistical evidence supporting the differences observed between community and institutional actors. 45 The chi-square tests indicate statistically significant differences in both adaptation (χ 2 = 14.96, p < 0.001) and access to institutional support (χ 2 = 18.32, p < 0.001), confirming that these dimensions vary systematically between groups rather than occurring by chance. The stronger chi-square value for institutional support suggests a particularly pronounced disparity in access to resources and support mechanisms.

Table 3. Statistical analysis.

Test Statistic p-value Interpretation
Chi-square (adaptation vs group) χ 2=14.96 <0.001 Significant
Chi-square (support vs group) χ 2=18.32 <0.001 Strong disparity
Spearman (perception-impact) ρ=0.36 0.003 Moderate correlation

In addition, the Spearman correlation (ρ = 0.36, p = 0.003) indicates a moderate positive association between climate change perception and reported impacts. This suggests that higher levels of awareness are linked to greater recognition of environmental and socio-economic effects. However, this relationship does not necessarily translate into greater capacity to adapt, reinforcing the interpretation that adaptation is influenced by structural and institutional factors beyond perception alone.

Overall, these results support the central argument of the study by providing quantitative evidence of a governance gap: while perception and impact recognition are relatively aligned across groups, adaptation and institutional support remain unevenly distributed. Because these analyses are exploratory, they should be interpreted as indicative patterns rather than definitive causal relationships.

3.2. Perceived impacts and adaptation

Perceived impacts are widespread across multiple livelihood sectors, including agriculture, fisheries, livestock, and tourism. Respondents reported reduced agricultural productivity, changes in seasonal cycles, declining fish availability, and disruptions to tourism activities. These findings indicate that climate variability is understood not only as an environmental issue, but also as a direct driver of socio-economic stress.

In contrast to the high level of perceived impacts, adaptation responses show significant variability. Approximately half of community respondents reported implementing adaptation measures, indicating moderate adaptive capacity. 35 , 44 Institutional actors reported substantially higher levels of adaptation, reflecting differences in access to knowledge, resources, and organizational support. This disparity reveals a structural imbalance in the ability to respond to environmental change.

Figure 4 shows the frequency of reported climatic indicators, including reduced rainfall, increased temperature, and hydrological variability. The high prevalence of these signals reflects strong consensus among institutional actors and indicate the role of technical knowledge and information access in shaping climate awareness. 35 – 36

Figure 4. Perceived climate change signals reported by institutional actors.


Figure 4.

Figure 5 illustrates the distribution of reported impacts across key sectors. Climate variability is perceived as a direct socio-economic stressor that affects income stability and reinforces the linkage between environmental change and livelihood vulnerability.

Figure 5. Perceived impacts of climate change on economic and livelihood sectors.


Figure 5.

Figure 6 presents the reported adaptation strategies implemented by respondents. The distribution of responses suggests that adaptation potential is strongly influenced by access to knowledge, resources, and institutional support.

Figure 6. Reported adaptation strategies among respondents.


Figure 6.

Institutional support was primarily associated with the sources of institutional support reported by participants. The predominance of governmental and organizational actors indicates that adaptation processes are mediated by formal support structures, although variability in support sources suggests fragmentation that may limit effectiveness ( Figure 7).

Figure 7. Sources of institutional support reported by participants.


Figure 7.

Figure 8 presents the identified needs for strengthening capacity to respond to climate change. The diversity of needs expressed by respondents indicates a clear mismatch between perceived risks and available resources, emphasizing the need for integrated and multi-level adaptation strategies.

Figure 8. Identified needs for strengthening climate change response capacity.


Figure 8.

Figure 9 point to the diversity of support needs expressed by respondents. These results point to a mismatch between perceived climate-related risks and available adaptive resources, reinforcing the need for coordinated financial, technical, and institutional interventions.

Figure 9. Socio-ecological conceptual framework linking climate drivers, environmental change, and adaptive responses in Lake Titicaca communities.


Figure 9.

The results summarized in Table 4 provide a synthetic overview of the responses reported by institutional actors across key thematic dimensions. High levels of climate change perception and impact recognition confirm a consolidated understanding of environmental change within this group. Similarly, the high level of reported adaptation measures suggests a relatively strong adaptive capacity among institutional stakeholders.

Table 4. Responses reported by institutional actors across key thematic dimensions.

Block Level Max Interpretation
Climate signals High 5 Strong perception
Impacts High 5 Widespread recognition
Adaptation High 4 High capacity
Support Moderate 4 Uneven support
Needs Very high 6 Strong demand

This table synthesizes the distribution of responses across key thematic dimensions among institutional actors, highlighting strong alignment between climate change perception, impact recognition, and reported adaptation capacity. However, the moderate level of institutional support, combined with very high levels of identified needs, reveals a structural imbalance, indicating that even within institutional contexts, access to resources and effective support mechanisms remains uneven.

At the same time, the very high level of identified needs suggest a persistent gap between perceived risks and available support. This pattern reinforces the interpretation that, despite high awareness and response capacity, structural constraints continue to limit the effectiveness of climate adaptation processes.

Complements the quantitative findings by providing a qualitative synthesis of key themes identified through interviews and participatory methods. The results underscore the central role of water stress as a perceived environmental challenge, together with its direct implications for livelihood systems such as agriculture, fisheries, and tourism ( Table 5).

Table 5. Qualitative synthesis.

Category Findings
Water stress Perceived reduction in water availability
Livelihood impacts Agriculture, fisheries, tourism affected
Adaptation practices Traditional and incremental strategies
Environmental change Shoreline retreat and ecosystem shifts

Table 5 provides a qualitative synthesis of key socio-ecological themes emerging from interviews and participatory methods, emphasizing the central role of water stress and its cascading effects on livelihood systems. The findings reveal that adaptation strategies are predominantly incremental and rooted in local knowledge, reflecting both the adaptive agency of communities and the limitations imposed by restricted access to institutional support and resources.

In addition, the findings emphasize continued reliance on traditional and incremental adaptation strategies, reflecting both local knowledge systems and limited access to formal support mechanisms. These qualitative insights reinforce the interpretation of climate change as a socio-ecological process in which environmental transformations are closely intertwined with economic vulnerability and adaptive responses.

These patterns are further synthesized through both quantitative aggregation and qualitative interpretation of responses, as presented in Tables 4 and 5, allowing for a more integrated understanding of socio-ecological dynamics.

3.3. A socio-ecological conceptual framework

Based on both the initial contextual analysis and the empirical findings generated in this study, a socio-ecological conceptual framework was developed (Figure 9).

The framework illustrates the interconnected relationships between climate drivers, environmental transformations, socio-economic impacts, and community responses within a social-ecological system. Climate drivers act as external forcing factors generating biophysical changes, which subsequently affect key livelihood sectors. These impacts are mediated by contextual factors such as institutional access, infrastructure, and livelihood dependence, shaping vulnerability outcomes and potential consequences. 46 , 53 – 54

At the same time, communities respond through adaptation strategies, including local knowledge, diversification, and incremental adjustments. The framework integrates both a process-based and systems-oriented perspective, highlighting that these interactions are not strictly linear but are influenced by feedback mechanisms and contextual conditions. Importantly, the relationships represented in the framework reflect perceived socio-ecological dynamics rather than direct causal evidence of climate change impacts.

4. Discussion

The statistical results reinforce the existence of a structural gap between climate awareness and response capacity. 35 , 44 While the moderate correlation between perceived climate variability and impacts suggests that awareness is closely linked to the recognition of environmental change, the significant differences observed in adaptation and institutional support indicate that this awareness does not necessarily translate into effective response capacity. This divergence indicates the role of structural and institutional factors in shaping adaptation outcomes beyond individual or collective perception.

The findings reveal a clear gap between perception of environmental change and capacity to adapt. Although both community and institutional actors demonstrate high levels of awareness, their ability to respond effectively differs significantly. This gap is not merely a function of knowledge, but rather reflects deeper structural inequalities related to access to resources, institutional support, and technical capacity.

These findings are particularly relevant in Andean highlands socio-ecological systems, where climate-related vulnerabilities are closely associated with territorial isolation, economic dependence on natural resources, and limited institutional presence. In the Lake Titicaca region, adaptive responses are additionally shaped by transboundary governance dynamics between Peru and Bolivia, which may complicate coordinated adaptation efforts. In this context, unequal access to technical assistance, climate information, and financial resources reinforces differentiated adaptive capacities among local actors.

From a socio-ecological perspective, 46 these findings show the importance of considering both environmental and social dimensions of vulnerability. Communities are not passive recipients of climate impacts; instead, they actively interpret and respond to environmental change. 47 – 52 However, their responses are constrained by broader governance structures that limit access to support mechanisms. This reinforces the notion that adaptation is not solely an individual or local process, but also a systemic one.

The results also support the relevance of socio-ecological resilience frameworks, which emphasize that environmental disturbances and social responses are interconnected through feedback processes operating across multiple scales. In Lake Titicaca communities, local knowledge and incremental adaptation practices function as important resilience mechanisms; however, their effectiveness remains constrained by structural inequalities and fragmented governance systems.

From a policy perspective, 55 – 56 the findings underscore the need for integrated approaches to climate adaptation. Strengthening adaptive capacity requires improving access to institutional support, enhancing knowledge exchange, and addressing structural inequalities. Bridging the gap between perception and action is essential for developing effective and equitable climate strategies in high-Andean socio-ecological systems.

Methodologically, the integration of quantitative indicators with participatory and qualitative approaches provided a more comprehensive understanding of climate-related perceptions and adaptive responses. The combination of statistical analysis, participatory mapping, and thematic interpretation allowed the study to capture both measurable patterns and locally grounded experiences of environmental change.

5. Conclusions

This study demonstrates that climate change is widely perceived among both community and institutional actors in the Lake Titicaca region. These climate-related perceptions are consistent across different groups and reflect a shared understanding of environmental change. However, climate awareness alone does not guarantee effective adaptation.

The results highlight a significant governance gap in adaptive capacity, whereby communities face greater constraints in responding to climate-related challenges. This gap is shaped by differences in access to resources, institutional support, and knowledge systems. Addressing these disparities is essential for strengthening resilience and reducing vulnerability.

Importantly, the findings should be interpreted as representing perception-based socio-ecological dynamics rather than direct evidence of climatic causality. Nevertheless, the consistency of responses across communities and institutional actors suggests that climate-related environmental transformations are becoming increasingly embedded in local territorial experience and governance challenges. Future research should integrate climatic, hydrological, and longitudinal socio-economic data in order to better understand the interactions between environmental change, institutional adaptation, and community resilience in transboundary high-Andean systems.

Strengthening collaborative and multi-level adaptation strategies will be essential not only for reducing vulnerability, but also for sustaining the ecological integrity and cultural continuity of Lake Titicaca communities under accelerating climate change conditions.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the management of the Institute of Geographic Research (IIGEO-UMSA) for the support provided for fieldwork, as well as the Binational Authority of Lake Titicaca (ALT), the directives, and the population of the communities and district governments involved in this study.

Funding Statement

PE501087874-2024-PROCIENCIA

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

[version 2; peer review: 2 approved]

Data availability

The following information presents the primary and intermediate processed data that support the results of this article. These data are hosted in the Zenodo repository, which can be freely accessed at Primary data from an article in the journal 1000Research [Data set]. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18521682. 57

Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0).

References

  • 1. Djahangard M, Zhang H, Yousefpour R: Assessing ecological complexity and uncertainty of predicting forest ecosystem services under climate change. Ecol. Complex. 2023;60. 10.1016/j.ecocom.2024.101106 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Zhan Q, Senerpont Domis LN, Lürling M, et al. : Process-based modeling for ecosystem service provisioning: Non-linear responses to restoration efforts in a quarry lake under climate change. J. Environ. Manag. 2023;348. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119163 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Akhter N, Aqeel M, Shazia K, et al. : Differential capacity of phragmites ecotypes. Environ. Res. 2023;247. 10.1016/j.envres.2024.118127 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Su H, Du M, Liu Q, et al. : Assessment of regional Ecosystem Service Bundles coupling climate and land use changes. Ecol. Indic. 2024;169. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112844 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Mano GB, Lopes A, Piedade MTF: Will climate change favor exotic grasses over native ecosystem engineer species in the Amazon Basin?. Eco. Inform. 2024;75. 10.1016/j.ecoinf.2023.102102 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Azmi MA, Mokhtar K, Osnin NA, et al. : Enhancing coastal ecosystem resilience: Investigating the interplay between safety criteria and ferry employee's perceptions to address climate change impacts. Environ. Res. 2024;238. 10.1016/j.envres.2023.117074 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Park SY, Moon HT, Kim JS, et al. : Assessing the Impact of Human-Induced and Climate Change-Driven Streamflow Alterations on Freshwater Ecosystems. Ecohydrol. Hydrobiol. 2024;25:1–9. 10.1016/j.ecohyd.2023.09.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Bhowmik J, Irfanullah HM, Selim SA, et al. : Assessing climate change-induced losses and damages to coastal ecosystem services: Empirical evidence from Manpura Island, Bangladesh. Clim. Risk Manag. 2024;45. 10.1016/j.crm.2024.100641 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Leal Filho W, Tuladhar L, Li C, et al. : Climate change and extremes: implications on city livability and associated health risks across the globe. Int. J. Clim. Chang. Strateg. Manag. 2022;15:1–19. 10.1108/IJCCSM-07-2021-0078 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Strauss V, Paul C, Dönmez C, et al. : Carbon farming for climate change mitigation and ecosystem services –Potentials and influencing factors. J. Environ. Manag. 2024;372. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.123253 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Vercambre G, Mirás-Avalos JM, Juillion P, et al. : Analyzing the impacts of climate change on ecosystem services provided by apple orchards in Southeast France using a process-based model. J. Environ. Manag. 2024;370. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.122470 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Shanin V, Chumachenko S, Frolov P, et al. : Predicting the effect of climate change and management on net carbon sequestration in the forest ecosystems of the European part of Russia with the complex of models. Ecol. Model. 2024;496. 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2024.110835 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Xu, Lu, Zou B, et al. : Unraveling the enigma of NPP variation in Chinese vegetation ecosystems: The interplay of climate change and land use change. Sci. Total Environ. 2023;912. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.169023 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Repo A, Albrich K, Jantunen A, et al. : Contrasting Forest management strategies: Impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services under changing climate and disturbance regimes. J. Environ. Manag. 2024;371. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.123124 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Vaccarelli I, Colado R, Pallarés S, et al. : A global meta-analysis reveals multilevel and context-dependent effects of climate change on subterranean ecosystems. One Earth. 2023;6:1510–1522. 10.1016/j.oneear.2023.09.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Sales LP, Parrott L: The owls are coming: positive effects of climate change in Northern ecosystems depend on grassland protection. Sci. Total Environ. 2024;907. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167944 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Thayer A, Vargas A, Castellanos A, et al. : Integrating Agriculture and Ecosystems to Find Suitable Adaptations to Climate Change. Climate. 2020;8(1). 10.3390/cli8010010 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Pandey B, Ghosh A: Urban ecosystem services and climate change: a dynamic interplay. Front. Sustain. Cities. 2023;5. 10.3389/frsc.2023.1281430 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Rose A, Holsman K, Nye J, et al. : Advancing bioenergetics-based modeling to improve climate change projections of marine ecosystems. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2024;732:193–221. 10.3354/meps14535 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Chanza N, Musakwa W: Indigenous practices of ecosystem management in a changing climate: Prospects for ecosystem-based adaptation. Environ. Sci. Policy. 2021;126:142–151. 10.1016/j.envsci.2021.10.005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Ani C, Robson B: Responses of marine ecosystems to climate change impacts and their treatment in biogeochemical ecosystem models. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2021;166. 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112223 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Pontavice H, Gascuel D, Reygondeau G, et al. : Climate change undermines the global functioning of marine food webs. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2020;26(3):1306–1318. 10.1111/gcb.14944 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Kougioumoustzis K, Papanikolaou A, Kokkoris I, et al. : Climate Change Impacts and Extinction Risk Assessment of Nepeta Representatives (Lamiaceae) in Greece. Sustainability. 2022;14(7). 10.3390/su14074269 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Guild R, Wang X, Quijón P: Climate change impacts on coastal ecosystems. Environmental Research: Climate. 2024;3(4):042006. 10.1088/2752-5295/ad9f90 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Bai Y, Li X: The evolution of China's policies on marine and coastal ecosystems in climate change adaptation. Front. Mar. Sci. 2023;10. 10.3389/fmars.2023.1190132 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Estrela-Segrelles C, Gómez-Martínez G, Pérez-Martín M: Climate Change Risks on Mediterranean River Ecosystems and Adaptation Measures (Spain). Water Resour. Manag. 2023;37:2757–2770. 10.1007/s11269-023-03469-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Kang B, Pecl G, Lin L, et al. : Climate change impacts on China's marine ecosystems. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. 2021;31(3):599–629. 10.1007/s11160-021-09668-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Xavier L, Guilhon M, Goncalves L, et al. : Waves of Change: Towards Ecosystem-Based Management to Climate Change Adaptation. Sustainability. 2022;14(3). 10.3390/su14031317 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Moreira MO, Fonseca C, Rojas D: Potential persistence of high-mountain lizards. Ecol. Res. 2023;38(5):676–689. 10.1111/1440-1703.12410 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Trundle A: Resilient cities in a Sea of Islands: Informality and climate change in the South Pacific. Cities. 2020;97. 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102496 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. France24.com . The Aymara people and their efforts to preserve Lake Titicaca, plagued by drought and pollution. (In Spanish). https://www.france24.com/es/am%C3%A9rica-latina/20230822-las-aymaras-y-su-esfuerzo-por-preservar-el-lago-titicaca-azotado-por-la-sequ%C3%ADa-y-la-contaminaci%C3%B3n(accessed on 15/06/2025).
  • 32. Tumi JE: Environmental attitudes and practices of the urban population of Puno, Andean Altiplano. (In Spanish). La Granja Rev Cienc Vida. 2024;39(1):43–62. 10.17163/lgr.n39.2024.03 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. MINAM-SERNANP . Master Plan for Protected Natural Areas (In Spanish). https://sinia.minam.gob.pe/sites/default/files/archivos/public/docs/PlanDirectorANP_v2025.pdf(accessed on 23/07/25).
  • 34. SENAMHI . Puno: Lake Titicaca has its lowest water levels in 27 years. (In Spanish). https://www.gob.pe/institucion/senamhi/noticias/840699-puno-lago-titicaca-presenta-niveles-de-agua-mas-bajos-desde-hace-27-anos. (accessed on 13/05/2025).
  • 35. Moser SC: Communicating climate change: History, challenges, process and future directions. WIREs Clim Change. 2010;1(1):31–53. 10.1002/wcc.11 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Berrang-Ford L, Siders AR, Lesnikowski A, et al. : A systematic global stocktake of evidence on human adaptation to climate change. Nat Clim Chang. 2021;11:989–1000. 10.1038/s41558-021-01170-y [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Zubieta R, Molina-Carpio J, Laqui W, et al. : Impacts of climate change on different types of droughts in the Lake Titicaca basin. (In Spanish). Boletín científico El Niño, Instituto Geofísico del Perú. 2021;8(7):5–14. https://repositorio.igp.gob.pe/server/api/core/bitstreams/347f2996-9ca9-4d84-97e2-d6b979b4df43/content. [Google Scholar]
  • 38. saludconlupa.com . Lake Titicaca: The lives of 3 million people depend on a lake that is drying up. (In Spanish). https://saludconlupa.com/medio-ambiente/titicaca-la-vida-de-3-millones-de-personas-depende-de-un-lago-que-se-esta-secando/(accessed on 19/10/2024).
  • 39. Tetamenti J, Escudero B, Andrade M, Santamaría G: Social Cartography. Research and intervention from teh social sciences, methods and application experiences. (In Spanish). 2012. Available on: https://www.researchergate.net/publication/324170305_CARTOGRAFIA_SOCIAL_ investigacion_e_intervencion_desde_las_Ciencias_Sociales_métodos_y_experiencias_de _aplicación(accessed on 16/04/2019)
  • 40. Andrade M, y Santamaría, G. Social Cartography, the Map as an Instrument and Methodology of Participatory Planning (In Spanish); Fundación La Minga., Colombia,2006;1-6. https://www.edumargen.org/docs/curso12-9/unid03/complem05_03.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Piccolella A: Participatory mapping for adaptation to climate change: the case of Boe Boe, Solomon Islands. Knowledge Management for Development Journal. 2013;9(1):24–36. http://journal.km4dev.org/ [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Pusari Z.(2018). Participatory mapping to understand local knowledge of Climate Change in the communities of Yumani and Cutusuma (In Spanish). In: Spatial Monitoring of the Effects of Climate Change on Lake Titicaca with Satellite Images (In Spanish),. Plural, Paz L, Bolivia,2018,39-54. https://drive.google.com/file/d/13ECQCLqRpjgiw1c1twvQ2u0RvQWrtGOU/view
  • 43. Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL:2017; Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 3rded: SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/designing-and-conducting-mixed-methods-research/book241842 [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Araos M, Berrang-Ford L, Ford JD, et al. : Climate change adaptation planning in large cities: A systematic global assessment. Environ Sci Policy. 2016;66:375–382. 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.06.009 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Field A:2013; Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. 4thed: SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/discovering-statistics-using-ibm-spss-statistics/book235999 [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Folke C: Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environ Chang. 2006;16(3):253–267. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Incacutipa DJ; Puma JS; Cahuanihancco C (.. Migration trajectories of the Aymara people of the Peruvian highlands. (In Spanish). Alteridades. 2022,32(63),107-118. 10.24275/uam/izt/dcsh/alteridades/2022v32n63/incacutipa [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. brujuladigital.net . The forced exodus of the Cohana community members to El Alto. (In Spanish). https://brujuladigital.net/reportajes/2025/10/31/el-exodo-forzado-de-los-comunarios-de-cohana-a-el-alto-53156(accessed on 06/04/2024).
  • 49. brujuladigital.net . Suriqui Island, a success story in the use of totora reeds to combat pollution in Lake Titicaca. (In Spanish). https://brujuladigital.net/reportajes/2025/10/31/la-isla-suriqui-un-caso-de-exito-en-el-uso-de-la-totora-para-combatir-la-contaminacion-en-el-titicaca-53149(accessed on 26/07/2025).
  • 50. Mamani W. Methodology for monitoring climate phenomena using local and scientific knowledge to mitigate damage in agriculture. Revista Boliviana de Investigaciones Geográficas. 2021,3(13),115–136. https://ojs.umsa.bo/index.php/revigeo/issue/view/57(accessed on 15/06/2025). [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Parsons M, Godden NJ, Henrique KP, et al. : Participatory approaches to climate adaptation, resilience, and mitigation: A systematic review. Ambio. 2025;54(12):2005–2020. 10.1007/s13280-025-02202-zInfobase.com [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Lima-Quispe N, Escobar M, Wickel A, et al. : Untangling the effects of climate variability and irrigation management on water levels in Lakes Titicaca and Poopó. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies. 2021;37:100927. 10.1016/j.ejrh.2021.100900 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Ostrom E: A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science. 2009;325(5939):419–422. 10.1126/science.1172133 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C:2003; Navigating social-ecological systems: Building resilience for complexity and change. : Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511541957 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. IPCC : Climate change 2022: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press;2022. 10.1017/9781009325844 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) : Human development report 2020: The next frontier—Human development and the Anthropocene. UNDP. 2020; https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2020 [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Garcia Rivero AE: Primary data from an article in the journal 1000Research. [Data set]. Zenodo. 2026. 10.5281/zenodo.18521682 [DOI]
F1000Res. 2026 Sep 29. doi: 10.5256/f1000research.201536.r488482

Reviewer response for version 2

Shamsuddin Shahid 1

I have carefully reviewed the revised manuscript. The author(s) have satisfactorily addressed all of my comments and concerns. The manuscript has been improved accordingly and is now ready for indexing.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly

If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

No

Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly

Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly

Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

No

Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly

Reviewer Expertise:

Climate variability and changes, natural hazards

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

F1000Res. 2026 May 28. doi: 10.5256/f1000research.201536.r488483

Reviewer response for version 2

Jaynos R Cortes 1

I have no further comments. The authors have adequately addressed the major concerns raised in the previous review, and the revised manuscript shows substantial improvement in methodological clarity, analytical rigor, and interpretation of results.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly

If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly

Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly

Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes

Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly

Reviewer Expertise:

Aquaculture and Fisheries Science; Climate Change Impacts on Aquatic and Fisheries Systems; Fish Nutrition, Health, and Physiology; Community-Based and Participatory Fisheries Research; Sustainable Aquaculture and Fisheries Management; Quantitative and Statistical Analysis in Aquatic Research

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

F1000Res. 2026 Apr 24. doi: 10.5256/f1000research.194720.r469930

Reviewer response for version 1

Shamsuddin Shahid 1

This manuscript addresses an important topic: the multidimensional impacts of climate change on vulnerable transboundary communities surrounding Lake Titicaca. The study focuses on one of South America’s most culturally and hydrologically significant high-altitude lake systems, where climate stress, declining lake levels, pollution, and socio-economic vulnerability interact. The topic is timely, policy-relevant, and internationally important. The good aspect of the paper is its field engagement. The authors conducted participatory workshops, interviews, surveys, institutional meetings, and social mapping in both Peru and Bolivia, which provide local insights that are generally not captured in conventional climate studies.

However, the manuscript remains methodologically weak in several scientific aspects. The current version is closer to a descriptive field report than a rigorously analyzed research article. My recommendation is a major revision

Major comments:

The manuscript states broad objectives but does not clearly define specific objectives. The objective mentioned in the Introduction is also not clear. It seems this article aims to quantify community perceptions of climate change, not to "determine the impacts of climate change on lakeside communities," as mentioned in the Introduction.

The sampling design is poorly defined. It is mentioned "62 community respondents", "6 interviews", etc. But nowhere is it explained how participants were selected, what type of sampling was used, etc. Also, nothing was mentioned about gender balance and site selection criteria. This is a major methodological weakness.

Nearly all results are percentages only. For example, "74% observed reduced rainfall", "58% hotter days", etc. But no statistical inference is performed. The article's scientific contribution is very weak.

One of the major issues is that the author(s) considered the perception as actual climate evidence. For example, they mentioned, “Climate change is causing chronic water deficit…” But survey responses alone cannot establish hydrological causation. Perceptions are important but distinct from measured evidence of climate. Author(s) can use meteorological or hydrological datasets to verify trends. Otherwise, they should rewrite the text.

For a climate-change paper on Lake Titicaca, it is surprising that no actual climate datasets are analyzed. Even nothing is mentioned about the climate, environment, or hydrology of the region. At least a general description of the region's climate, how it is changing (based on existing literature), and the social and environmental issues are required to understand the background.

 Discussion needs stronger engagement with the literature. Authors can cite existing literature on rainfall trends, temperature trends, lake-level changes, drought changes, etc., to discuss how these findings align with or contradict the community's perception.

The conclusions are overstated in some cases. Please revise it based on only what you found in your study. Some terms can be revised, such as "chronic water-deficit syndrome", "structural water crisis", and "cascading impacts". You need to be more cautious unless backed by measured data.

Several grammatical and stylistic issues are present. I hope the author(s) will correct them during revision.

Minor Comments

I suggest revising the title. It seems that this article aims to quantify community perceptions of climate change.

Figure 1: Please improve using a scale bar and coordinates.

Section 3.1.1.1: Detail description of rituals is not relevant. Please remove/shorten the paragraph.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly

If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

No

Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly

Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly

Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

No

Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly

Reviewer Expertise:

Climate variability and changes, natural hazards

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

F1000Res. 2026 May 13.
Alberto Enrique Garcia Rivero 1

Dear Dr. Shamsuddin Shahid. We greatly appreciate your constructive comments and recommendations provided during the review process. The observations were highly valuable and allowed us to substantially improve the manuscript in terms of methodological rigor, analytical depth, conceptual clarity, statistical treatment, and scientific writing quality.

In response to your comments, we performed a comprehensive revision of the manuscript. The principal modifications include:

General assessment: The reviewer considered the topic timely and internationally relevant but stated that the original version was closer to a descriptive field report than to a rigorously analyzed research article.

A/. The manuscript has been reorganized to strengthen its scientific structure. It now includes a clearer objective, sampling explanation, exploratory statistical analysis, integrated qualitative interpretation, conceptual framework, revised Discussion, and more cautious Conclusions.

Major Comment 1. Objectives were broad and nuclear: The reviewer noted that the manuscript seemed to quantify community perceptions rather than determine climate-change impacts, and requested clearer specific objectives.

A/. The research objective was reformulated. The revised manuscript now states that it analyzes climate-change perceptions, perceived impacts, and adaptation capacities among communities and institutional actors in Lake Titicaca. The title and abstract were also adjusted to align the scope with the actual empirical evidence.

Major Comment 2. Sampling design poorly defined: The reviewer requested explanation of how participants were selected, what type of sampling was used, and information on gender balance and site selection criteria.         

A/. The Materials and Methods section now explains that the study used purposive, non-probabilistic sampling. Site selection was based on geographic representation, vulnerability/exposure to lake-level and environmental changes, dependence on climate-sensitive activities, and field accessibility. The sample composition is described as 62 community respondents and 26 institutional actors, and the revised text reports gender composition where available. The limitations of the sampling strategy are explicitly acknowledged.

Major Comment 3. Results were mostly percentages with no statistical inference: The reviewer indicated that the scientific contribution was weak because the original results relied almost exclusively on descriptive percentages.     

A/. The Results now include comparative indicators, cross-tabulations, composite indices, chi-square tests, and Spearman correlation analysis. The analysis shows significant differences in adaptation measures and institutional support and a moderate correlation between climate perception and reported impacts. These additions substantially increase analytical depth while remaining consistent with the exploratory sample size.

Major Comment 4. Perception was treated as actual climate evidence: The reviewer warned that survey responses cannot establish hydrological causation and that statements such as “Climate change is causing chronic water deficit” should be rewritten unless supported by measured datasets.

A/. This was one of the main revisions. The manuscript now clearly distinguishes local and institutional perceptions from measured hydrometeorological evidence. Causal statements were softened or removed. The Discussion and conceptual framework explicitly state that the study examines perceived socio-ecological dynamics rather than direct causal evidence. The term “chronic water-deficit syndrome” and similar overstated language were removed from the Conclusions.

Major Comment 5. Lack of climate, environmental, and hydrological background: The reviewer requested at least a general description of regional climate, environmental issues, hydrology, and existing evidence of change.      

A/. The Introduction and Discussion were expanded to situate the study within the high-Andean socio-ecological context of Lake Titicaca. The revised text now discusses climate variability, hydrological variability, lake-level decline, pollution pressures, livelihood dependence, and transboundary governance as contextual factors. This background is based on literature rather than new climate-data analysis.

Major Comment 6. Discussion needed stronger engagement with literatura: The reviewer requested comparison with existing literature on rainfall, temperature, lake-level changes, drought, and adaptation.

A/. The Discussion was substantially rewritten. It now connects the perception-based results with literature on socio-ecological systems, climate vulnerability, local adaptation, participatory climate research, hydrological variability, and Lake Titicaca-related environmental stress. The revised text also explains where findings align with broader research and where they should be interpreted cautiously because direct climate datasets were not analyzed.

Major Comment 7. Conclusions overstated:  The reviewer recommended revising terms such as “chronic water-deficit syndrome,” “structural water crisis,” and “cascading impacts,” and ensuring the Conclusions are based only on the study findings. 

A/. The Conclusions were rewritten to focus only on findings supported by the survey, interview, participatory, and exploratory statistical evidence. The revised Conclusions emphasize high perceived climate awareness, uneven adaptive capacity, disparities in institutional support, and the need for multi-level governance, participatory adaptation, and transboundary cooperation.

Major Comment 8. Grammar and style: The reviewer noted several grammatical and stylistic issues.  

A/. The revised manuscript underwent language editing to improve academic style, reduce excessive descriptive wording, and make the structure more concise and coherent.

Minor Comment: revise title: The reviewer suggested revising the title because the article primarily quantifies perceptions.             

A/. The title was revised to foreground perception: “The perception of the impacts of climate change in communities surrounding Lake Titicaca, Peru-Bolivia.”

Minor Comment: Figure 1: The reviewer requested improving Figure 1 with scale bar and coordinates.      

A/. The location figure was revised/clarified and its caption improved. To avoid overburdening the map visually, the revision prioritized clearer location interpretation and captioning. If the journal requests, a final cartographic version with scale bar and coordinates can be supplied as a figure file.

Minor Comment: rituals paragraph: The reviewer suggested removing or shortening the detailed ritual description in Section 3.1.1.1.     

A/. The ritual description was shortened and repositioned as contextual qualitative evidence related to traditional knowledge and adaptation practices, avoiding excessive ethnographic detail that was not central to the research objective.

F1000Res. 2026 Apr 1. doi: 10.5256/f1000research.194720.r471132

Reviewer response for version 1

Jaynos R Cortes 1

General Assessment

This manuscript presents a multidisciplinary and participatory assessment of climate change impacts on lakeside communities surrounding Lake Titicaca. The integration of document review, field surveys, interviews, and participatory mapping is a notable strength and provides valuable socio-ecological insights. The topic is highly relevant, particularly in the context of climate vulnerability, transboundary water management, and community-based adaptation.

However, despite its relevance and strong empirical foundation, the manuscript requires  substantial improvements in methodological rigor, analytical depth, and clarity of data interpretation to meet the standards of scientific validity.

Major Comments

1. Methodological Rigor and Sampling Design

While the study employs multiple methods, the  sampling framework lacks sufficient detail and justification. Specifically:

  • The basis for site selection (Quehuaya, Capachica, Guaqui, and Puno) should be clarified (e.g., representativeness, vulnerability criteria).

  • Sample size (e.g., n = 26 for seminar survey; n = 62 community respondents) is relatively limited and requires justification regarding statistical adequacy.

  • The study lacks a discussion of potential sampling bias (e.g., purposive vs random sampling).

Recommendation: Include a clear  sampling design subsection and justify representativeness and limitations.

2. Data Analysis and Statistical Treatment

The manuscript states that data were “synthesized quantitatively,” but:

  • No statistical tests (e.g., regression, correlation, comparative analysis) are presented.

  • Results rely heavily on descriptive percentages without inferential support.

  • Relationships between variables (e.g., climate perception vs livelihood impacts) are not explored.

Recommendation: Incorporate:

  • Basic inferential statistics (e.g., chi-square, correlation analysis)

  • Cross-tabulation of key variables

  • Clear analytical framework linking variables

 

3. Integration of Qualitative and Quantitative Data

Although the study uses mixed methods, the  integration remains descriptive rather than analytical:

  • Interview findings are presented narratively but not systematically coded

  • Participatory mapping outputs are described but not quantitatively or spatially analyzed

Recommendation: Apply:

  • Thematic analysis for qualitative data

  • Structured interpretation linking qualitative insights with survey results

 

4. Conceptual and Theoretical Framework

The manuscript lacks a  clear conceptual framework:

  • No explicit linkage between climate change drivers, socio-economic vulnerability, and adaptation responses

  • Limited engagement with theoretical models (e.g., socio-ecological systems, resilience theory)

Recommendation: Include a  conceptual model to guide interpretation and strengthen analytical coherence.

5. Interpretation of Results and Causality

Several conclusions appear  overgeneralized or insufficiently supported:

  • The concept of “chronic water-deficit syndrome” is introduced without clear operational definition

  • Causal relationships between climate change and socio-economic outcomes are implied rather than demonstrated

Recommendation:

  • Clearly define key terms

  • Avoid causal claims unless supported by data

  • Strengthen linkage between results and conclusions

 

6. Limited Fisheries-Specific Analysis

Although fisheries are mentioned as impacted (e.g., 52% decline in fish availability), the analysis:

  • Lacks species-level data

  • Does not quantify fishing effort or ecological changes

Recommendation:

Expand the fisheries analysis or clarify its limitations as perception-based data.

Minor Comments

  • Improve clarity and conciseness of long descriptive paragraphs

  • Ensure consistency in reporting percentages and units

  • Figures (e.g., participatory maps) require clearer interpretation and captions

  • Some references are outdated or overly generalized—include more recent region-specific studies

 

CLARIFICATION ON REFERENCES

The references included, were intended to support improvements in:

  • Methodology section → for strengthening mixed-methods and participatory approaches

  • Discussion section → for situating findings within broader climate vulnerability and socio-ecological literature

Specifically:

  • Suggested references should be incorporated in the Discussion to support claims on:
    • Climate vulnerability
    • Community adaptation
    • Socio-ecological systems

 

  FINAL CONFIRMATION

✔  Recommended Decision: APPROVED WITH RESERVATIONS

The manuscript addresses an important and timely topic and demonstrates strong field engagement. However,  moderate to major revisions are required to improve methodological rigor, analytical depth, and scientific clarity before it can be considered fully valid.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly

If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly

Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly

Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes

Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly

Reviewer Expertise:

Aquaculture and Fisheries Science; Climate Change Impacts on Aquatic and Fisheries Systems; Fish Nutrition, Health, and Physiology; Community-Based and Participatory Fisheries Research; Sustainable Aquaculture and Fisheries Management; Quantitative and Statistical Analysis in Aquatic Research

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

References

  • 1. : Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change .2006;16(3) : 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002253-267 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. : Participatory approaches to climate adaptation, resilience, and mitigation: A systematic review. Ambio .2025;54(12) : 10.1007/s13280-025-02202-z2005-2020 10.1007/s13280-025-02202-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. : Untangling the effects of climate variability and irrigation management on water levels in Lakes Titicaca and Poopó. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies .2021;37: 10.1016/j.ejrh.2021.100927 10.1016/j.ejrh.2021.100927 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
F1000Res. 2026 May 13.
Alberto Enrique Garcia Rivero 1

Dear reviwer Dr. Jaynos Cortes. We greatly appreciate your constructive comments and recommendations provided during the review process. The observations were highly valuable and allowed us to substantially improve the manuscript in terms of methodological rigor, analytical depth, conceptual clarity, statistical treatment, and scientific writing quality.

In response to your comments, we performed a comprehensive revision of the manuscript. The principal modifications include:

General assessment: The reviewer recognized the relevance of the topic and the value of the multidisciplinary and participatory approach but indicated that the manuscript required substantial improvements in methodological rigor, analytical depth, and clarity of data interpretation.  

A/. The manuscript was substantially revised. The scope was clarified as a perception-based mixed-methods study; methodological transparency was expanded; inferential exploratory analyses were added; the qualitative component was reorganized; and the Discussion and Conclusions were rewritten to avoid unsupported causal claims.

Major Comment 1. Methodological rigor and sampling design:The reviewer requested clarification of the basis for site selection, justification of the limited sample size, and discussion of potential sampling bias, including purposive versus random sampling.

A/. A sampling-design explanation was added in Materials and Methods. The revised text states that the strategy was purposive and non-probabilistic and that sites were selected according to geographic representation, exposure/vulnerability to lake changes, dependence on climate-sensitive livelihoods, and accessibility. The manuscript now reports the final sample structure: 62 community respondents from Quehuaya and Capachica and 26 institutional actors associated with tourism and environmental management. A limitation statement was added indicating that the sample is not statistically representative of the entire Lake Titicaca basin and is best interpreted as exploratory evidence for socio-ecological analysis and hypothesis generation.

Major Comment 2. Data analysis and statistical treatment: The reviewer noted that the original version relied mostly on descriptive percentages and did not include tests, correlations, comparative analyses, or exploration of relationships between variables such as climate perception and livelihood impacts.         

A/. The revised manuscript now includes an analytical framework based on binary variables, composite indices, cross-tabulations, chi-square tests, and Spearman correlations. The new analysis identifies significant differences between communities and institutional actors in adaptation measures (χ² = 14.96, p < 0.001) and institutional support (χ² = 18.32, p < 0.001). It also reports a moderate positive association between climate perception and reported impacts (ρ = 0.36, p = 0.003). These results are interpreted cautiously as exploratory associations, not causal relationships.

Major Comment 3. Integration of qualitative and quantitative data         .The reviewer indicated that the mixed-methods integration remained mostly descriptive and recommended thematic analysis and structured interpretation linking interviews and participatory mapping with survey findings.

A/. The qualitative evidence was reorganized through thematic coding and socio-ecological interpretation. The manuscript now identifies recurrent qualitative categories, including water stress, livelihood impacts, adaptation practices, environmental change, shoreline retreat, and institutional support limitations. These themes are explicitly linked to survey results and statistical findings, especially the gap between high climate awareness and uneven adaptive capacity. Participatory mapping is now described as contextual and interpretive evidence rather than as a complete spatial quantification.

Major Comment 4. Conceptual and theoretical framework: The reviewer requested a clearer framework linking climate drivers, socio-economic vulnerability, and adaptation responses, with engagement with socio-ecological systems and resilience theory.

A/. A socio-ecological conceptual framework was added. The new framework links climate drivers, environmental transformations, socio-economic impacts, contextual vulnerability factors, and community/institutional adaptive responses. The Introduction and Discussion were strengthened with socio-ecological systems and resilience literature, including the reviewer’s recommended line of interpretation. The framework clarifies that environmental change and social response are connected through feedbacks and mediating factors such as institutional access, technical knowledge, resources, infrastructure, and livelihood dependence.

Major Comment 5. Interpretation of results and causality:           The reviewer warned that some conclusions were overgeneralized, that the term “chronic water-deficit syndrome” was insufficiently defined, and that causal relationships between climate change and socio-economic outcomes were implied rather than demonstrated.    

A/. Overstated causal language was removed or replaced with more cautious wording. The revised manuscript explicitly states that the relationships analyzed are perception-based and should not be interpreted as direct hydrometeorological causation. The problematic phrase “chronic water-deficit syndrome” was removed from the revised conclusion. The Conclusions now state that climate change is widely recognized by respondents and that adaptive capacity is uneven due to disparities in institutional support, resources, and technical knowledge.

Major Comment 6. Limited fisheries-specific analysis: The reviewer noted that fisheries were mentioned as impacted but that the study did not include ecological measurements, fishing effort data, or quantified species-level analysis.

A/. The fisheries section was revised to make clear that species-level references are based on community perception and reported experience, not on independent biological monitoring. The manuscript retains reported references to species such as carachi, pejerrey, umanto, ispi, suche, and boga because they are important local evidence, but it now frames them as perceived declines in availability or catch rather than quantified ecological trends. The limitation that no direct fisheries effort or ecological survey was conducted is acknowledged.

Minor Comment: long descriptive paragraphs: The reviewer requested improved clarity and conciseness.      

Several long descriptive passages were shortened or reorganized. The Results were divided into clearer analytical subsections, and the Discussion was rewritten to avoid repetition and improve scientific flow.

Minor Comment: consistency in percentages and units: The reviewer requested consistent reporting of percentages and units.

A/. Percentages and sample descriptors were checked and standardized. The revised manuscript reports values consistently, including community respondents, institutional actors, and comparative indicators.

Minor Comment: figures and captions: The reviewer requested clearer interpretation and captions for figures, including participatory maps.          

A/. Figure captions were revised to better indicate what each figure shows and how it should be interpreted. Participatory figures are now treated as qualitative visual evidence generated through community mapping, not as exhaustive cartographic measurement.

Minor Comment: references: The reviewer recommended adding recent and region-specific studies and clarified that suggested references should support the Methods and Discussion.

A/. The manuscript incorporated additional literature in the Methods and Discussion to support mixed-methods design, participatory approaches, socio-ecological systems, vulnerability, adaptation, resilience, and Lake Titicaca-related hydrological/environmental change.

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Data Citations

    1. Garcia Rivero AE: Primary data from an article in the journal 1000Research. [Data set]. Zenodo. 2026. 10.5281/zenodo.18521682 [DOI]

    Data Availability Statement

    The following information presents the primary and intermediate processed data that support the results of this article. These data are hosted in the Zenodo repository, which can be freely accessed at Primary data from an article in the journal 1000Research [Data set]. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18521682. 57

    Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0).


    Articles from F1000Research are provided here courtesy of F1000 Research Ltd

    RESOURCES