Reducing enteric methane for improving food security and … · 2019-06-12 · 2 REUCNG ENERC EANE FOR RONG FOO SECUR AN LELOOS KEY FINDINGS MITIGATION MEASURES AND POTENTIAL Numerous

REDUCING ENTERIC METHANE forimproving food security and livelihoodsProject Highlights 2015-2017

Published by

the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Rome, 2019

REDUCING ENTERIC METHANE forimproving food security and livelihoodsProject Highlights 2015-2017

Recommended citation:FAO & New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre. 2019. Reducing enteric methane for improving food security and livelihoods. Project Highlights 2015–2017. Rome. 18 pp.

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) or New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre (NZAGRC) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO or NZAGRC in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.

The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO or NZAGRC.

ISBN 978-92-5-131420-3 (FAO) © FAO, 2019

Some rights reserved. This work is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo/legalcode/legalcode).

Under the terms of this licence, this work may be copied, redistributed and adapted for non-com-mercial purposes, provided that the work is appropriately cited. In any use of this work, there should be no suggestion that FAO endorses any specific organization, products or services. The use of the FAO logo is not permitted. If the work is adapted, then it must be licensed under the same or equiv-alent Creative Commons licence. If a translation of this work is created, it must include the follow-ing disclaimer along with the required citation: “This translation was not created by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). FAO is not responsible for the content or accu-racy of this translation. The original [Language] edition shall be the authoritative edition.”

Disputes arising under the licence that cannot be settled amicably will be resolved by mediation and arbitration as described in Article 8 of the licence except as otherwise provided herein. The applicable mediation rules will be the mediation rules of the World Intellectual Property Organization http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/mediation/rules and any arbitration will be conducted in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).

Third-party materials. Users wishing to reuse material from this work that is attributed to a third party, such as tables, figures or images, are responsible for determining whether permission is needed for that reuse and for obtaining permission from the copyright holder. The risk of claims resulting from infringement of any third-party-owned component in the work rests solely with the user.

Sales, rights and licensing. FAO information products are available on the FAO website (www.fao.org/publications) and can be purchased through [email protected]. Requests for commercial use should be submitted via: www.fao.org/contact-us/licence-request. Queries regarding rights and licensing should be submitted to: [email protected].

iii

PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS 2015-2017

KEY ACHIEVEMENTS

1 Enhanced institutional capacity and knowledge sharing. Working in 13 countries with over 150 stakeholders, the project has developed a knowledge base that increased awareness and knowledge of the potential

role of methane in climate change and food security and can be used to support countries in advocating for methane mitigation. Among other things, the studies have stimulated in-country ownership and providing two valuable outputs: (i) a successful process for establishing low carbon pathways; and (ii) a growing, useful knowledge and data set that can be used to support countries address methane emissions.

2 Increased awareness and policy advocacy. The goal of the project was to use the knowledge generated to enhance awareness and commitment across governments and other stakeholders to address

methane emissions from livestock. For example, in Uruguay this collaborative effort supported the country by improving the quality of its emissions inventory, better defining its reduction targets in terms of emissions intensity, and improving the understanding of the impacts of measures to improve productivity, and production efficiency.

3 Catalyzed funding for methane mitigation. Collectively, the studies from these 13 countries identified some broad messages, generating a wealth of knowledge that provides a global public good. The goal is to

use this knowledge to develop low carbon pathways, to identify GHG reduction investments in these countries and make use of growing sources of carbon finance. In Ethiopia, Bangladesh, Uruguay and Kenya, Phase 1 has helped to create an enabling environment and to catalyze additional financing for methane mitigation.

4 Collaborative partnerships for methane mitigation. The partnership of the Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC), the New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre (NZAGRC), and FAO

showed that working together is a much more efficient way to achieve better results. The partnership has played an important role in framing and positioning the methane mitigation discourse, by helping to transfer information and experiences to other countries and identify collective projects or multi-country activities, in order to exploit synergies between countries that have similar goals, problems, and challenges.

1


Argentina Uruguay

Bangladesh

Sri LankaEthiopia

Kenya

Tanzania

Uganda

Burkina Faso Benin

Mali

NigerSenegal

INTRODUCTION

A s countries increase their ambitions towards reaching the Paris Agree-ment, it is essential to investigate how the livestock sector can respond to mitigate actions under different scenarios. This approach can enhance climate transparency, support countries to improve their own mitigation

targets and facilitate the flow of financial and technological resources for the live-stock sector, enabling farmers to contribute to climate action.

“Reducing enteric methane for improving food security and livelihoods” is a collab-oration between the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre (NZAGRC). The project is funded by the Climate and Clean Air Coalition, FAO, and the New Zealand Government through its support of the Livestock Research Group (LRG) of the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases (GRA).

The project aims to support low and middle income countries to identify system-spe-cific technologies and interventions to increase livestock productivity, food security and reduce enteric methane emissions per unit of product. The project seeks to pro-vide guidance to decision-makers engaged in the policy discourse on mechanisms, recommendations on incentives and institutional framework necessary to incentivize adoption of productivity-enhancing technologies and practices.

Phase 1 of the project identifies emission mitigation opportunities and their associat-ed costs and benefits, informs sector planning, and characterizes appropriate policy support. It lays a foundation for mitigation policy action e.g. nationally appropriate mitigation actions (NAMAs) and provides a framework for measurement, reporting, and verification. The study helps attract new resources to address the incremental costs of low carbon growth through technology, financing, and capacity building. It also provides an opportunity for countries in accessing climate finance through inter-national mechanisms, such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF), but also bilateral and multilateral funding mechanisms, as well as national financing.

The project contributes to the formulation of national policy mitigation actions such as NAMA (Nationally Appropriated Mitigation Actions), the achievement of targets laid out in countries’ Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in particular SDG-1 “No poverty, SDG–2 “Zero Hunger”, SDG-12 “Responsible consumption and production” and SDG–13 “Climate Action”.

2

REDUCING ENTERIC METHANE FOR IMPROVING FOOD SECURITY AND LIVELIHOODS

KEY FINDINGS

MITIGATION MEASURES AND POTENTIAL Numerous abatement measures are available to mitigate enteric methane emission. The measures typically fall into 4 categories: feed, animal health, genetics and ad-dressing environmental constraints. Although the elements of good practice are likely to be similar for all countries, production systems contexts are widely different. Inter-ventions need to be tailored to diversity of situations. Most of these practices can im-prove production and provide farmers with opportunities to adapt to climate change.

REDUCTION IN ENTERIC CH4

EMISSION INTENSITY (%)

ARGENTINAURUGUAY

INCREASE IN PRODUCTION (%)

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

BANGLADESHSRI LANKA

ETHIOPIAKENYATANZANIAUGANDA

BENINBURKINA FASOMALINIGERSENEGAL

- 80 -70 - 60 - 50 - 40 - 30 - 20 -10 110 120 130 140 200

AVERAGERANGE OF REDUCTIONSRANGE OF PRODUCTIVITY INCREASE

3


KEY FINDINGS SYNERGIES BETWEEN MITIGATION AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES A non-climate incentive to address enteric methane is the private economic benefits that could accrue to farmers. The additional benefits and positive economic returns that can be generated by closely aligning emission intensity reductions with produc-tivity gains result in lower abatement costs for producers. Analysis shows that many actions can reduce emissions while delivering benefits in the form of improved pro-ductivity, greater income, and enhanced food and nutrition security, among others. Regions such as Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia are likely to benefit.

• In Argentina and Uruguay, the large beef cattle population provides one of the most cost-effective opportunities to reduce enteric CH4 while meeting other development goals. In Argentina, beef exports accounted for about 16percent and 22percent of the total value of Argentina’s exports and value of agricul-tural exports respectively. Uruguay exports about 70percent of its beef percent. Pursuing low-carbon development of their beef sectors Argentina and Uruguay are more likely to benefit from strategic and competitive advantages, such as increased access to existing and emerging global markets for their low carbon beef products.

MARKET-ORIENTED

1,9 USD billion

in export earnings

Argentina Uruguay

corresponding

thousand Tonnes CWE beef exports1

generating

of total beef production

18%

1,5 USD billionin export earnings

corresponding

generating

of total beef production

66%

552

thousand Tonnes CWE beef exports2

446

1 Instituto de Promoción de la Carne Vacuna Argentina (IPVCA), 2019. Informe de exportaciones de diciembre de 2018. Available at: http://www.ipcva.com.ar/documentos/1964_1548258366_informemensualdeexportacionesdiciembre2018.pdf

2 Instituto Nacional de Carnes (INAC), 2018. Anuario Estadístico 2017. Available at: https://www.inac.uy/innovaportal/file/15850/1/anuario-estadistico-2017_web_v03.pdf

4


• In Sub-Saharan Africa, dairy offers sizable reduction opportunities. For exam-ple, in East Africa, between 70-80 percent of smallholders are engaged in dairy production and 70-98 percent of milk produced by smallholders. Livestock is one of the main economic activities, accounting for about 26 percent of the regional agriculture GDP.

GDP is in USD Billion

1 Shapiro, B.I., Gebru, G., Desta, S., Negassa, A., Nigussie, K., Aboset G. and Mechale. H. 2017. Ethiopia livestock sector analysis. ILRI Project Report. Nairobi, Kenya: International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI).

2 Makoni, N; Mwai, R; Redda, T; Zijpp, A. van der; Lee, J. van der. 2013. White Gold; Opportunities for Dairy Sector Development Collaboration in East Africa. Centre for Development Innovation, Wageningen UR (University & Research centre). CDI report CDI-14-006. Wageningen.

CONTRIBUTION TO GDP

14% DAIRY SECTOR

43% AGRICULTURAL

ETHIOPIA1

47GDP

TANZANIA2

UGANDA2KENYA2

1.5% DAIRY SECTOR

28% AGRICULTURAL

8% DAIRY SECTOR

30% AGRICULTURAL76GDP

3% DAIRY SECTOR

23% AGRICULTURAL

49GDP

74GDP

5


• In South Asia, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh are heavily reliant on milk imports; only 30 and 48 percent of the national milk requirement is met through local produc-tion. Pursuing low carbon development of their dairy sectors can help reduce the drain on the country’s foreign exchange resources, improve food and nutrition security, support employment and family incomes in the rural areas.

MILK SELF-SUFFICIENCY314 million

litresnational milk

production

30% of national demand

4.7 millionlitres

national milk production

satisfies satisfies

48% of national demand

Sri Lanka Bangladesh

Sri Lanka Bangladesh

NUTRITION & FOOD SECURITY

Milk consumption in kg

per capita per yearMilk consumption gap(between national consumption and WHO recommendation)

164

36

WHO recommendation200 kg

MilkCapitaYear 165

35

6


KEY ACHIEVEMENTS

1 Leverage of additional financial resources targeted towards methane mitigation Mitigation finance is inclined towards sectors or emission sources where

quantification and monitoring of the mitigation benefits is relatively easy and where the economic and political risks are lower1. Catalyzing climate finance for mitigation activities in the livestock sector requires robust GHG accounting, identification and prioritization of mitigation options, cost-benefit analyses to support decision-making.

Already, the results from Phase 1 are being used to demonstrate the range of mitigation options and costs to countries as they develop their livestock investment programmes. As a result of the low carbon growth studies, the project has assisted countries to de-sign investment programmes that can leverage allocations from international financial mechanisms, such as the Green Climate Fund, and multilateral development banks, such as the World Bank, to advance mitigation planning activities in the livestock sec-tor. For example:

• In Kenya: Phase 1 results have been in the design of the Dairy NAMA “Low-car-bon and Climate Resilient Dairy Development in Kenya” submitted to GCF for funding. The main objective of this NAMA is to trigger low-carbon devel-opment in the dairy sector through the introduction of climate-smart livestock practices. The NAMA aims to provide effective support to 267,000 dairy farmers, double milk output from 450 million litres to 915 million litres, increase household dairy enterprise net income by at least 50 percent and provide additional benefits in the form of reduced labor and health burden of fuel wood collection especially for women.

• In Ethiopia: Phase 1 results were used to inform the design of “the Livestock and Fisheries Sector Development Project” (see annex 5). Under the World Bank supported investment project financial resources have been allocated towards institutional capacity building on GHG quantification and methane mit-igation and towards data collection to support development of improved GHG inventory on livestock emissions.

• In Bangladesh: Under the World Bank supported investment project “the Bangladesh Livestock Development-based Dairy Revolution and Meat Production Project” financial resources have been allocated towards institutional capacity building on GHG quantification and methane mitigation and towards data collec-tion to support development of improved GHG inventory on livestock emissions.

7


HERD

BUSINESS AS USUALABSENCE OF SPECIFIC TARGETED ACTIONS

7.5 milliondairy cows

4.1 millionlactating cows

22Mt CO2e

EMISSIONS

11.5billionlitres

13%*30% emissions reduction relative to

BAU emissions of 143 MtCO2e

Potential contributionof DAIRY SECTOR to NDC TARGET*

HERD

SLOW EXPANSIONADOPTION OF STRATEGIC INTERVENTION

17Mt CO2e

-5Mt CO2e compared toSCENARIO 1

EMISSIONS



OPTIONS FOR LOW EMISSION DEVELOPMENT IN DAIRY SECTORKenya

HERD



MILK CONSUMPTION

110 kgmilk / person

How to reach the targets?

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

2014

MILK PRODUCTION

3.4 billionlitres

12 Mt CO2e

EMISSIONS

MILK PRODUCTION

220KGmilk / person

MILK CONSUMPTION

2030

REDUCTION43 Mt CO2e

DAIRY SECTOR

NDC EMISSIONS

=

8


2 Increased awareness on role of methane mitigation and policy advocacy The project aimed to build the dialogue on the opportunities for

reducing enteric methane emissions intensity within countries and across countries, as well as at global level within the UNFCCC process. The project has encouraged wider international and regional outreach at key events on climate change such as:

• In 2017, Uruguay, participated in a high level event on Partnering to Scale up Climate Action by Countries in the Agricultural Sectors. Uruguay serves as an example of where partnership can help build the evidence base and mobilize countries in support of climate action. The event highlight-ed the benefits for Uruguay in partnering with the project.

The study found that significant reductions in emissions can be achieved through the combination of herd and health management, nutrition and feeding man-agement strategies, and genetics, with an estimated reduction potential of 26-44 percent in methane emission intensity and an increase in production (expressed in live-weight terms) of 40-50 percent compared to the baseline situation. This is in line with the Uruguay’s NDC targets for methane emission intensity reduc-tion of 33-46 percent in 2030 through the widespread application of improved practices and technologies.

• The project has equipped countries and other stakeholders with the tools and knowledge to advocate for methane mitigation. In 2017, at the Committee on World Food Security: is low carbon meat possible? - Options for low carbon meat production in a science-policy format, a representative from Ethiopia participated in high level events to advocate for methane mitigation based on findings from the project’s work in Ethiopia.

• At the 22nd session of the Conference of the Parties (COP 22), Uruguay and Ethiopia led science-policy dialogue on the importance of monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) to identify mitigation impacts in livestock production systems.

26

40

44

29

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Cow-cal f Complete cycle 1 Complete cycle 2 Fattening (rear ing and finish ing on

natural grass)

Redu

ction

in e

nter

ic C

H4

emis

sion

inte

nsity

(%)

URUGUAY’SNDC CH4

REDUCTIONTARGETS

9


3 Enhanced institutional capacity and knowledge sharing Enhancing technical capacity and knowledge sharing are key components to facilitate the implementation and up-scaling mitigation action. Knowledge

products, knowledge sharing activities and partnerships include:

• Regional stakeholder workshops were conducted in the 13 project-participating countries. More than 150 stakeholders (representatives from academia, public and private sectors, livestock sector) in the quantification of methane emissions and assessment of mitigation options. For example, in West Africa, the project brought together development agencies and 20 local stakeholders to identify intensification solutions for ruminant livestock to improve food security, while reducing enteric methane emissions.

• The project has supported the generation, application, and dissemination of knowledge in order to strengthen the capacity of countries in addressing issues related to methane mitigation. This knowledge also provides a guiding framework for dialogue with governments, civil society, the academic/scientific community, and the private sector to help achieve national objectives on climate policy.

4 Collaborative Partnerships for methane mitigation Participation in the low carbon studies has helped forge national and international partnerships and cooperation to advance policy initiatives,

tackle implementation challenges, and address funding constraints. It promoted knowledge exchange between countries that face similar challenges and resource constraints.

The project has developed a network of contacts at national and regional level.

Stakeholder engagement spanning multiple areas—including the public and private sector, academia, and civil society—were central to the success of Phase 1. Intensive discussions were held with about 150 people from government, private, academ-ic, and NGO communities to explain, test, and adjust the studies. Country working teams were formed to map out the study process, including identification of state-of-the-art technical information and tools, preparation of an inventory of current knowledge on potential interventions and their costs, and setting priorities for the assessments. Across the 13 countries, study teams mostly comprised local experts supported by technical assistance from FAO and NZAGRC. Study teams gathered data and information, reviewed results, and worked to maintain stakeholder engage-ment throughout the process. This approach better equips each country to plan and implement responses to the unique challenges.

10


LESSONS LEARNED

Stakeholder engagement and consensus building is essential. An im-portant element of this work was the dialogue and consensus building that oc-curred, often involving multiple ministries, agencies, and stakeholders (private sector, academia) that would not routinely engage with each other. Different priorities and interests were reconciled through this process, and the assessment findings became richer and more robust.

Countries must take the leading role. Demand for low carbon develop-ment starts with the country, and countries must take a leading role if such strat-egies are to be effectively designed and implemented. Agreeing to the objec-tives, scope, and process, gaining access to accurate data, and then translating the findings and recommendations from the study into action all require country leadership.

Aligning project scope and objectives with national development and climate change policies is critical. Demonstrating how methane mitigation can support countries in achieving their goals is an important element critical to success of the project.

The assessments are only an initial step; support for implementation is required. As countries undertake studies to identify the mitigation potential, and improve their capacity in this area, there is likely to be an increase in demand for policy and technical support to design and implement measures targeting methane mitigation in the livestock sector. Consequently, follow-up support will be required.

More ambitious action is still required. Taking many of the actions out-lined in the country reports, and translating them into a substantial contribution to global climate change mitigation will require increased ambition and effort to address barriers to uptake faced by farmers, bring down technology costs, support the development and transfer of new technologies and scale-up private sector engagement and financing.

11


PHASE 2

Phase 1 served as a launch-pad for this second phase focuses on: (a) imple-menting methane mitigation at scale in three of the countries that took part in Phase 1; and (b) supporting selected countries in replicating and extending the successful Phase 1 approach.

Latin America and Caribbean

Bangladesh

Ethiopia

Kenya

Tanzania

Uganda

Philippines

Thailand

IndonesiaMalaysia

Mainstreaming enteric methane mitigation in livestock investment projects

Establishing an enabling environment for enteric methane mitigation

Establishing an enabling environment for enteric methane mitigation

Identification of new opportunities for methane mitigation

Uruguay

12


ACTIVITIES

1. Mainstreaming methane mitigation into national planning

Phase 2 will work to ensure climate mitigation is integrated in three specif-ic World Bank (WB) and/or Global Environment Facility (GEF) projects. These projects plan to implement a range of measures aimed at increasing livestock efficiency and productivity. They are not climate-focused or methane-focused, yet many of the measures to be implemented in each project will also result in methane mitigation. Influencing future investments is a key focus of Phase 2. This means ensuring that enteric methane mitigation measures are ‘main-streamed’ into livestock investment projects.

Focus at country level

In Uruguay, the Phase 2 project will collaborate with the GEF-FAO project “Climate-smart Livestock Production and Land Restoration in the Uruguay-an Rangelands” to support on-farm monitoring of the impact of improved practices and generate improved methane emission factors to improve their national monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) system in an effort to enhance mitigation ambition.

Partners: Ministry of Livestock, Agriculture and Fisheries, FAO, CCAC, GEF, Uruguay

In Bangladesh, the main activities of the Phase 2 project is to mainstream methane mitigation in the Livestock and Dairy Development Project (LDDP), a 500 million dollar investment from the World Bank (WB). The project is providing technical support to the World Bank in developing an annex project aiming to measure and report methane emissions reduction associated with productivity gains achieved through the LDDP. This project entitled “Article 6 project” intends to bring together the livestock development objectives of the Government of Bangladesh and its strong commitments to address climate change, by ensuring that LDDP mitigation outcomes can be used to:

• Improve the national inventory;• Improve target setting in the NDC making it easier to achieve existing

reduction targets, but also to raise ambition in future efforts;• Engage in existing and future carbon markets within the framework of

Article 6 of the Paris Agreement when the corresponding financial mech-anisms will be in place.

Partners: FAO, CCAC, the World Bank, Bangladesh Livestock Research Institute, (BLRI), Department of Livestock Services, Bangladesh

13


In Ethiopia, the project will collaborate with the World Bank (‘WB’) supported investment project, “the Livestock and Fisheries Sector Development Project (‘LFSDP’) to support on-farm monitoring of the impact of improved practic-es and generate improved methane emission factors to improve their national MRV system in an effort to enhance mitigation ambition.

Partners: FAO, CCAC, the World Bank, Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries (MOLF)

2. Establishing an enabling environment for methane mitigation

The project will provide an enabling environment for enteric methane mitiga-tion to become a mainstream activity in livestock development. The project will create opportunities for funding of methane mitigation through support to the development of mitigation policy actions for the livestock sector and strength-ening of the institutional and individual capacity required to disseminate the improved technologies and practices.

Focus at regional and country level

In Kenya, the project will support the State Department of Livestock (SDL) to develop and adopt higher tier livestock GHG accounting methodologies and use these to assess the general scope for mitigation of livestock methane emissions and to quantify the impacts of specific mitigation technologies. The outcomes will also have benefits to the wider East African region in provid-ing lessons learned, training opportunities and developing regionally-relevant methane emission factors.

Partners: State Department of Livestock, Kenya, FAO, New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre (the NZAGRC), the Global Research Alliance (GRA).

In Latin America and the Caribbean, the project will engage with partner organizations to assist countries in identifying regional priorities and needs, and support countries in developing action plans for streams of support related to selected themes.

Partners: FAO, New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre (the NZAGRC), the Global Research Alliance (GRA), Tropical Agricultural Research and Higher Education Center (CATIE).

14


3. Advocacy and building opportunities for methane mitigation

Phase 2 will replicate activities carried out during Phase 1, in countries/re-gions not previously included in the initial phase, with the aim of identifying and assessing opportunities for methane reduction from ruminant systems.

Focus at regional level

In South-east Asia, the project will support the development of action plans in four countries for prioritizing livestock GHG accounting and meth-ane mitigation to support national NDC commitments.

Partners: FAO, New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre (the NZAGRC), the Global Research Alliance (GRA).

CA4334EN/1/06.19

ISBN 978-92-5-131420-3

9 7 8 9 2 5 1 3 1 4 2 0 3

Documents

Reducing enteric methane for improving food security and … · 2019-06-12 · 2 REUCNG ENERC EANE FOR RONG FOO SECUR AN LELOOS KEY FINDINGS MITIGATION MEASURES AND POTENTIAL Numerous