Climate - Smart Agriculture: adaptation, mitigation andfood security in the land sector
1 like594 views
This document discusses climate-smart agriculture, which aims to support food security through agricultural practices that help communities adapt to climate change impacts while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It provides examples of climate-smart practices like system of rice intensification and agroforestry that have increased yields, farmer incomes and mitigated emissions in many countries. However, food insecurity remains a major barrier that must first be addressed before farmers are able to adopt new practices and make long-term investments in improving resilience and reducing emissions. Overcoming barriers like insecure land tenure, lack of access to markets and training is also important to enable widespread adoption of climate-smart agriculture.
![Marshall et al. (2012)
• Declines
in
evapotranspiraNon
are
expected
to
conNnue
over
much
of
the
Sahelo-‐Sudan
mid-‐21st
century
[A]
• Recent
and
rapid
expansion
of
agricultural
land
use
• Decline
in
indirect
moisture
recycling
[B]
• Direct
and
local
moisture
decoupling
[C]
• Forests,
reforestaNon,
and
afforestaNon
through
agroforestry
could
lead
to
less
rainfall
variability…
A
C Koster et al. (2006)
Spracklen and Taylor (2012)](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/csahneufeldtunep20150227final-150309021420-conversion-gate01/85/Climate-Smart-Agriculture-adaptation-mitigation-andfood-security-in-the-land-sector-33-320.jpg)
Climate - Smart Agriculture: adaptation, mitigation andfood security in the land sector
- 1. CLIMATE-‐SMART AGRICULTURE: ADAPTATION, MITIGATION AND FOOD SECURITY IN THE LAND SECTOR Brownbag Friday Seminar UNEP, Nairobi, 27 February 2015 Henry Neufeldt World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF)
- 2. What will we call the boundaries of Safe(r) operaTng spaces for the food systems? Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change 2012
- 3. Climate change impacts on yields
- 4. 9.5-‐14.7 Gt CO2e (19-‐29%) 7.6-‐12.4 Gt CO2e (15-‐25%) 5.4-‐5.8 Gt CO2e (10-‐12%) direct indirect global food system Emissions from agricultural producNon, conversion of land and pre-‐ and postproducNon processes
- 5. EsNmated historical and projected GHG emissions Smith et al in IPCC AR4 GWIII, 2007 • 38% as N2O from soils • 32% as CH4 from ruminant enteric fermentaNon • 12% mainly as N2O and CH4 through biomass burning • 11% mainly as CH4 in rice producNon • 7% as N2O and CH4 from manure management
- 6. Smith et al in IPCC AR5 GWIII, 2014 AFOLU emissions for the last four decades
- 7. Smith et al in IPCC AR5 GWIII, 2014 Global esNmates of costs and potenNals in the AFOLU sector
- 8. Short term Long term Food security MiNgaNon AdaptaNon Small scales Large scales Climate-‐smart agriculture Efficiency Fairness Food Systems
- 9. Three major stages of scaling up
- 10. Examples of no-‐Nll pracNces in different countries
- 11. GHG miNgaNon through no-‐Nll in selected countries Country( Climate(zone ( ( Estimated( base(year( Area(( 2007/8( Mitigation( mean(and(range( ! ! ! (ha)! (Mt!CO2e)! Australia! warm4dry! 1976! 17,000,000! !!95! 4209! 403! New!Zealand! cool4moist! 1993! 162,000! !!!!!!!0.7! !!!!!!!40.1! !!!!!!!1.4! China! cool4dry! 2000! 2,000,000! !!!!!!!1.6! !!!!!!!44.9! !!!!!!!8.1! Kazakhstan! cool4dry! 2006! 1,200,000! !!!!!!!0.2! !!!!!!!40.6! !!!!!!!1.0! USA! cool4moist! 1974! 26,500,000! 241! !!418! 510! Canada! cool4moist! 1985! 13,481,000! !!82! !!!!46! 174! Brazil! warm4moist! 1992! 25,502,000! 146! !!489! 382! Argentina! warm4moist! 1993! 19,719,000! 109! !!467! 287! Bolivia! warm4moist! 1996! 706,000! !!!!!!!3.1! !!!!!!!41.9! !!!!!!!8.1! Uruguay! warm4moist! 1999! 655,100! !!!!!!!2.0! !!!!!!!41.2! !!!!!!!5.3! ! Modified from UNEP Emissions Gap Report, 2013
- 12. System of rice intensificaNon as an example of improved nutrient and water management Uphoff, 2012
- 13. Review of SRI management impacts on yield, water saving, costs of producNon and farmer income per ha in 13 countries Average: +50% yield -‐37.5% water use -‐16% costs +94% income Uphoff 2012
- 14. Evergreen agriculture with Faidherbia albida
- 15. GHG miNgaNon through agroforestry by regions Region Annual rate 2000-‐2010 2011-‐2030 (Mt CO2/yr) (Mt CO2) (Mt CO2) North America 24.6 270 491 Central America 10.1 111 201 South America 157.3 1,730 3,145 Europe 7.2 79 144 N Africa + W Asia 2.7 29 53 Sub-‐Saharan Africa 10.0 110 201 N + Central Asia -‐4.0 -‐44 -‐79 South Asia 23.5 258 469 South-‐East Asia 23.8 262 477 East Asia 36.2 398 723 Oceania 19.2 211 384 Globe 262.8 2,891 5,256 % Gt CO2/yr 0 0.26 20 0.37 25 0.39 30 0.41 50 0.47
- 17. SUSTAINABILITY CHALLENGES – LAND USE Food vs. Fuel Pastoral Land Use Biodiversity Watershed Land Use – Socioeconomic & Environmental Sustainability
- 18. InnovaTon and food security RelaNonship between innovaNveness (number of farming system changes) and household food security (number of food deficit months). Error bars indicate the 95% confidence interval of the mean Kristjanson et al 2012
- 19. • Farmers most interested in reducing food insecurity • No long-‐ or medium-‐term planning possible under food insecure situaNon • Tree planNng (and other investments in livelihood improvements) only aaer basic food security is guaranteed • Food insecurity rose by at least one month (above on average 3 months) during drought and flooding • Coping strategies lead into ‘poverty trap’ • Agroforestry reduced food insecurity by about 1 month All #s in % Reduce QuanNty, Quality or # of meals Comm-‐ unity or family support Help from Gov, NGO, Church Borrow money Casual Labor Sell possess-‐ ions or livestock Consume Seeds Children agend school less Lower Nyando 85 30 42 32 28 72 72 38 Middle Nyando 38 23 18 37.5 25 40 61 12.5 Farmer climate coping strategies Thorlakson and Neufeldt 2012
- 20. • Provide an enabling legal and poliNcal environment • Improve market accessibility • Involve farmers in the project-‐planning process • Improve access to knowledge and training • Introduce more secure tenure • Overcome the barriers of high opportunity costs to land • Improve access to farm implements and capital Thorlakson and Neufeldt, 2012 Barriers to adopNon of CSA in smallholder agriculture
- 21. GENDER ¢ What is the research that will provide evidence how women can benefit more? • Beger access to credits, income generaNng acNviNes and fuel wood can help build producNve assets • ParNcipaNon in SLM projects is heavily influenced by social norms and intra-‐household decision-‐making • Men and women value non-‐cash benefits of the projects, including beger communicaNon and changing roles • Progress toward gender equity requires agenNon to agency, structure and relaNons defining interacNons • New spaces for interacNon can open up opportuniNes • An iteraNve learning approach can improve project success and gender equity outcomes • Focusing on CSA rather than carbon can enhance benefits accruing to women in parNcular Bernier et al 2013
- 22. Increase in area under culNvaNon from 42% to 63%
- 23. Constraints: insecure tenure Economic, Environmental and Social Impacts Unadjud Freehold Tenure Effect Net returns to land ($ ha-‐1 y-‐1 ) $126 $288 2.28 Woody crops, woodlots etc (ha km-‐2 ) 5.4 25.6 4.7 Hedgerows (km km-‐2 ) 5.2 23.6 4.5 Social cost from embedding -‐$40 $30 $70 Social "tax" -‐32% +10% Norton-‐Griffiths 2012
- 24. ... an increase of 1.3 million hectares at a rate of 1.4% per year
- 25. IMPACT OF TENURE ON TREE COVER AND AGROFORESTRY Adjudicated Unadjudicated
- 26. Financial benefits of no-‐Nll wheat producNon in northern Kasakhstan Derpsch et al 2010
- 27. Recommendation 1: Integrate food security and sustainable agriculture into global and national policies Recommendation 2: Significantly raise the level of global investment in sustainable agriculture and food systems in the next decade Recommendation 3: Sustainably intensify agricultural production while reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other negative environmental impacts of agriculture Recommendation 4: Target populations and sectors that are most vulnerable to climate change and food insecurity Recommendation 5: Reshape food access and consumption patterns to ensure basic nutritional needs are met and to foster healthy and sustainable eating habits worldwide Recommendation 6: Reduce loss and waste in food systems, particularly from infrastructure, farming practices, processing, distribution and household habits Recommendation 7: Create comprehensive, shared, integrated information systems that encompass human and ecological dimensions Photo:N.Palmer(CIAT) Toward Tier 3 Sustainability—Toward risk miTgaTon and resilience in food systems Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change 2012
- 28. Discovery, tesNng and implementaNon of mechanisms across scales that allow for adapNve management and adapNve governance of social-‐ecological systems essenNal for long-‐term human provisioning Development of integrated metrics of safe space that are pracNcal and meaningful for decision-‐making by relevant communiNes in near real Nme SystemaNc gathering and integraNon of quality data and informaNon to generate knowledge in Nme frames and at scales relevant for decision-‐making through analyNcal tools, models and scenarios Establishment of legiNmate and empowered science policy dialogues that frame post–disciplinary science agendas on local, naNonal and internaNonal scales Key areas of science innovaNon Neufeldt, Jahn et al 2013
- 29. What is the Process? decisio for s dev Support-‐Hub for Evidence-‐based Decision-‐making (SHED) Each phase unpacks to reveal elaborated process steps ArVculated goal to implementaVon pathway Entry point is appropriate to client Non Linear Process
- 30. ¢ Using SHED Principles: linked diverse knowledge systems to advance CSA in Kenya ¢ Researchers, development actors, farmer leaders, and the GOK Climate Change Unit convened to share scienNfic and experienNal evidence from 44 projects ¢ A synthesized and coherent technical presentaNon was delivered to the CC Secretariat and policy messages developed to be inpuged to Kenya Climate Change Policy Framework and a brief prepared for the COP-‐20. ¢ Technical Brief forthcoming in March 2015 Current Cases Climate Smart Agriculture Case
- 32. LAND HEALTH SURVEILLANCE Consistent field protocol Soil spectroscopy Coupling with remote sensing Prevalence, Risk factors, Digital mapping Sentinel sites Randomized sampling schemes
- 33. Marshall et al. (2012) • Declines in evapotranspiraNon are expected to conNnue over much of the Sahelo-‐Sudan mid-‐21st century [A] • Recent and rapid expansion of agricultural land use • Decline in indirect moisture recycling [B] • Direct and local moisture decoupling [C] • Forests, reforestaNon, and afforestaNon through agroforestry could lead to less rainfall variability… A C Koster et al. (2006) Spracklen and Taylor (2012)
- 37. 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1796 1801 1806 1811 1816 1821 1826 1831 1836 1841 1846 1851 1856 1861 1866 1871 1876 1881 1886 1891 1896 1901 1906 1911 1916 1921 1926 1931 1936 1941 1946 1951 1956 1961 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 Index Rainfall (mm) Years Rainfall(mm) Master chrono
- 38. • Up-‐front public sector finance needed to turn projects viable • Projects build insNtuNonal capacity • Projects deliver food security and adaptaNon with miNgaNon co-‐benefits • Insurance schemes provide safety nets against falling into the poverty trap • Combining many and diverse investments in land can increase returns and drive large-‐scale investment in sustainable NRM • Robust M+E frameworks are needed to quanNfy how different CSA pracNces reduce climate risk Foster et al 2013
- 39. • Set up at least one biocarbon project in Burkina Faso and Sierra Leone • Develop the carbon projects from the incepNon phase to commercial level as viable and tangible development outcomes • Include AFOLU, REDD and a combinaNon of REDD/AFOLU projects • Include wood fuels in the carbon projects • Include CA, water management, biodiversity benefits, etc. where it makes sense • Build the capacity at naNonal and regional scales that allow scaling up BIODEV concrete measures Diagram of Bio-‐C project potenTal structure
- 40. Climate-‐smart agriculture1 pracNces can contribute to food security of resource-‐poor rural populaNons while providing important adaptaNon and miNgaNon co-‐benefits if they are adapted to local condiNons and naNonal policies, and global food systems are in tune with sustainable development goals. 1Agriculture is understood to consist of crops, livestock, forests, fisheries and aquaculture Key messages
- 41. In order to maximize the synergies between the three pillars (producNon, adaptaNon, miNgaNon) agricultural policies should consider mulNple targets from the outset, and research is needed that idenNfies the relaNve contribuNons of different pracNces to each of the pillars. Key messages
- 42. Overcoming barriers to adopNon of climate-‐smart agriculture for long-‐term transformaNon toward sustainable management of resources requires: naNonal agriculture development plans with appropriate insNtuNons at naNonal to local levels; provision of infrastructure; access to informaNon and training; access to capital and insurance; stakeholder parNcipaNon; and, last but not least, improvement of tenure arrangements. Key messages
- 43. Investment in improved natural resource management through climate finance can provide essenNal livelihood (through improved and diversified income, strengthened insNtuNonal capacity, reduced climate risk) and global miNgaNon benefits if high investment risks and low returns on investment can be overcome. Key messages
- 44. Thanks for a future