View
1.789
Download
0
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
by Wendy Mann Website: http://www.fao.org/climatechange/en/ © FAO: http://www.fao.org
Citation preview
Wendy Mann
Second FAO Knowledge Event on Climate-smart Approaches to Agriculture
Doha, Qatar, 1 December 2012
Climate-smart Approaches to Agriculture:
lessons from recent experience
Background
Funder: European Community
Duration: 1 January 2012 - 31 December 2014.
Partner countries: Malawi, Vietnam and Zambia
Type of project: country readiness to scale-up
climate-smart approaches to agriculture through
capacity strengthening
1
Climate Smart agriculture
Project building evidence-based sustainable agricultural
development strategies, policies and investment frameworks to:
1. sustainably increase agricultural productivity and
incomes,
2. build resilience and the capacity of agricultural and
food systems to adapt to climate change,
3. seek opportunities to reduce and remove GHGs,
compatible with achieving national food security and
development goals.
4. encourage holistic approaches to FS, Ag. Dev and
CC
Climate smart approaches to agriculture:
mitigation and carbon markets not central focus
no blueprint for diverse contexts and capacities
1
a policy environment &
and agricultural
investments to improve
food security and provide
resilience under climate
uncertainty
OUTPUTS PROJECT COMPONENTS NEEDS
POLICY SUPPORT COMPONENT
Identifying where policy alignment/coordination at the national
level is needed and how to do it
Facilitating national participation/inputs to climate and ag
international policy processes
Project Framework
Evidence Base
Strategic Framework
Investment proposals
Capacity Building
2
What are the barriers to adoption and risk profiles of these practices
What are the policy levers to facilitate adoption, risk reducing tools, and what
will they cost?
What are the synergies and tradeoffs between food security, adaptation and
mitigation from ag. practices?
RESEARCH COMPONENT
Building
Blocks
Are CSA practices being adopted? If not, why not?
How do Benefits & Costs of practices
compare?
Policy Levers for Adoption
Investment proposals
CSA Strategy:
Technical, Institutional, and
Economic Priorities
Risk Management
Analysis
Test input, institutional,
information and financial constraints
Benefits: Food Security, Adaptation,
and Mitigation
Costs
Understanding Barriers to Adoption
Guiding Investment
Building Coherent Policies
Risk-reducing tools: safety nets,
insurance, diversification
What are relevant practices in country that increase returns to farmers, reduce vulnerability to CC & emissions growth
Identify synergies and tradeoffs of
relevant practices
Assessing the situation
Define the baseline to determine benefits of
these practices
Managing Climate Risk
Role of information under a changing climate
Risk profile of relevant CSA practices
Financing
A key feature: building strong links across
research, policy and investment for
policymakers and farmers
• The analytical tools used, depend on question being addressed.
• One approach is participatory scenario building:
• Develop a storyline or narrative for scenarios
• Identify key outcomes of interest
• Quantify scenarios
• Combine narrative scenarios with policy simulations
4
Issues addressed by countries
Malawi and Zambia:
• Conservation agriculture/agro-forestry/livestock/soil & water conserv.
• Diversification of production (dairy, legumes)
• Smallholder irrigation management (Malawi)
• Safety nets and risk management (Malawi)
• Input use efficiency
• The role of agriculture as a driver of deforestation (Zambia)
5
Vietnam (Northern Mountains) • Agro-forestry systems/land management practices to address
deforestation and unsustainable maize systems in uplands (erosion, land
landslides, loss of carbon from soil) and barriers to their adoption,
• Diversification of productive activities into perennial crops (such as
coffee and tea) with potential multiple benefits.
Emerging Evidence: Zambia Practices: Conservation agriculture (CA), i.e. planting basins/zero tillage
Adoption: Preliminary econometric analysis of barriers to adoption of CA
indicates that:
(1) Adoption remains very low: ~5-6% (sample size 4,187) and
~90% of CA adopters in 2004 abandoned it in 2008
(2) Adoption intensity is significantly higher for smallholders
(3) Strongest determinants of adoption are:
variable rainfall
Access to extension information on CA
Suggestive evidence: farmers adopt CA as a variability reducing (yield
smoothing?) practice
Further work is needed to understand better why these patterns occurred.
6
Emerging Evidence: Malawi
Practices: improved maize varieties, inorganic and organic
fertilizers, legume intercropping, and agro-forestry (e.g.
Faidherbia albida)
Adoption: Important determinants:
– Land tenure positively correlate with OF,LI, AF
– Drought proneness positively correlate with AF&LI
Yields:
– Improved seed, legume intercropping & agro-forestry
positively correlate with productivity
– Significant synergies among all three practices
7
Malawi: Building the evidence base on marginal costs of agricultural-based mitigation
9
-300
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
$/t
CO
2e
t CO2e abated/year
1. agronomy_dry
2. Integrated nutrient
management _dry
3. Tillage/residue
mgmt_dry
4. Integrated nutrient
management_moist
5. Tillage/residue
mgmt_moist
6. agronomy_moist
7. agroforestry_dry
8. agroforestry_moist
9. water mgmt_dry
10. water mgmt_moist
How will Capacity be strengthened?
1. Research institutions and universities; support for MSc and PhD
students
2. Local institutions: extension, land tenure, traditional systems
3. National institutions:
planning, inter-ministerial
Ag, Env, Fin - dialogues
(participatory scenario
building tool)
4. Policy frameworks (CAADP,
ASWAp, NCP, Action Plan on
CC Response of Ag. and RD)
5. Ag Ministry staff attend
attend UNFCCC Talks
6. Stakeholder consultation,
interactive web-based
platform 10
Thank you! Thank you
Recommended