1. Some kinds of questions CCAFS
would like to answer
Mario Herrero
Farm-household Modeling with a focus on Food security, Climate change
adaptation, Risk management and Mitigation: a way forward
Amsterdam 23-25 April 2012

2. Background
– CCAFS currently funding a large household data collection
exercise in the CCAFS regions
– Focus: studying adaptation, risk management and
mitigation
– Additional undergoing work on developing regional socio-
economic scenarios
–
– Need to supplement this body of work with household
modeling studies for identifying key options, targeting
strategies to specific systems etc

3. ..and for linking to current knowledge on
climate change impacts….

4. An example of climate-induced livelihood transitions
20º
Areas where cropping of
an indicator cereal may 0º
become unviable
between now and 2050
and where farmers may
have to rely more on
livestock as a livelihood -20º
strategy
Jones & Thornton (2008)
0º 20º 40º

5. A game of winners and losers…
Simulated percentage maize production changes to 2030 and 2050, by
country and system
Mixed Mixed Mixed
National rainfed rainfed rainfed
Production temperate humid arid
2030 2050 2030 2050 2030 2050 2030 2050
Burundi 9.1 9.1 14.4 18.1 -1.8 -8.8 - -
Kenya 15.0 17.8 33.3 46.5 -4.6 -9.8 -1.1 -8.4
Rwanda 10.8 14.9 13.4 18.8 5.4 3.6 1.1 2.7
Tanzania -3.1 -8.1 7.5 8.7 -1.6 -6.4 -5.1 -11.1
Uganda -2.2 -8.6 4.9 3.1 -4.6 -12.9 -1.1 -6.3
Mean of 4 combinations of GCM and emissions scenario
Winners
Losers
Thornton et al. (2010)

6. There are always trade-offs
income
1
0.5
external inputs food security
0
water use GHG
mixed
pastoral

7. Monthly calendar of different activities of the system
Wa, Upper West, Ghana
Dry Rainy Dry Weather calendar
Groundnuts
Yams Cropping calendar
Sorghum
Cut & Crop
Critical Grazing Feeding calendar
Carry residue
Food security
Energy Prot. & Ene. Family’s
deficit deficit nutrition
High Very High High Lo High
Low Low Cash demands
high
w
J F M A M J J A S O N D Gonzalez-Estrada et al. 2006

8. ...from global assessment to assessing
household level impacts...
A necessary link to design adaptation, risk
management and mitigation options

9. Adaptation options will depend
largely on the how we shape the
world
• Several options exist though largely dependent on our
vision of world development and how it plays out in
different regions
• essential to link it to scenarios of change
• Different paradigms of agricultural development
(industrial vs pro-poor smallholders, large vs family
farms)
• Globalisation and trade patterns
• Consumption patterns
• Carbon constraints
• Roles and incentives for technology adoption
• Growth in other sectors
• Power relationships

10. What are the options?
• Sustainable intensification / extensification
• Income / livelihood diversification
• Better risk management
• More transformative change (e.g. exit from
agriculture)
All require a mixture of technology & supporting policies
and investments
No single path best: mixtures required in different parts
of the world

11. Addressing adaptation at multiple scales
Herrero et al, Science (2010)

12. Site targeting Participatory modelling
Policy-making Ecoregion
• Systems’ classification
Farms
A B C • Selection of farms
Dissemination & • Longitudinal data
implementation Case studies • Participatory methods
• Key informants
Range of interventions to • Participatory appraisals
test for each system • Recommendation domains
(filtering) • Toolboxes of interventions
• Farmers / NARS
Testing Scenario formulation • IMPACT & Household
options in the (Farm and policy level) model
field • Sensitivity analyses
Selection of a fewer • Stakeholder workshops
range of options • Participatory appraisals
(Herrero, 1999)

13. Integrated Methodology
Systems limits
characterisation constraints
resources
mgmt practices
Biological simulation
system
herd ANIMAL
Sustainable
I/O Multiple criteria resource
livestock LP models management
strategies
soil crops
TPS Socio-economic
DYNAFEED
Databases Adapted from
Herrero et al. 1996, 1997

14. Some questions
• Can we identify robust adaptation options that cut across
systems and socio-economic scenarios?
• Can we identify key trade-offs for each system?
• Are there adaptation – mitigation synergies?
• What is the role of farming diversity in adaptation?
• Can we upscale the strategies to quantify investment
needs in adaptation?
• Can the upscaling exercise also link to regional modeling
work?

15. Some questions (2)
• Can we identify risk management strategies for
crop/livestock and livestock systems
• What are the impacts of consecutive dry seasons of
farmers ability to cope with climate change?
• Can we model household level vulnerability or some
proxy indicator?
• What are the key impacts of climate variability on trade-
offs between the different indicators?
• Can we mitigate climate change under climate
variability? How? Which GHG easier? For which
system?
• What are the costs of managing risk?

16. Some questions (3)
• What is the potential contribution of smallholder systems
to climate change mitigation?
• What are key mitigation strategies for different systems?
Again, can we identify robust ones that cut across
scenarios and systems?
• Economics of household level mitigation strategies
• Is sustainable intensifccation the ley to GHG mitigation
for smallholders?

17. For discussion
• Human dimensions in the models: what can we really
capture
• How do we deal with systems transitions into the future
(still very static?)
• Proxies for vulnerability at the household level?
• Can we really deal with heterogeneous systems?
• What do we need to do to really succeed at multi-scale
assessment (from global to household and back)

18. Thank you

19. Site: Sodo, Ethiopia
What’s the likely impact of alternative
interventions?
Plot Crop
Homestead Enset, coffee, kale, sweet potato, maize
Plot1 Maize
Plot 2 Sweet potato, wheat
Plot 3 Maize
Plot 4 Sweet potato
Plot 5 Barley
Plot 6 Maize
Plot 7 Unimproved pasture
Livestock: 1 cow, 1 ox Profit: Birr 2,381

20. Site: Sodo, Ethiopia
Current
management
Food security
Cow feeding
Labour/capital
Cash
Soil fertility
Critical Adequate

21. Site: Sodo, Ethiopia
Intervention 1 Application of fertilizer to
Food crop maize plots.
Food security
Cow feeding
Labour/capital
Cash
Soil fertility
Critical Adequate

22. Site: Sodo, Ethiopia
Intervention 2 Replace native grassland
Feed crop with improved pasture.
Food security
Cow feeding
Labour/capital
Cash
Soil fertility
Critical Adequate

23. Site: Sodo, Ethiopia
Intervention 3 Introduction of cowpea in
Food/feed crop the system.
Food security
Cow feeding
Labour/capital
Cash
Soil fertility
Critical Adequate

24. Site: Sodo, Ethiopia
Intervention 4 Subsidy for barley
Food crop production
Food security
Cow feeding
Labour/capital
Cash
Soil fertility
Critical Adequate

25. Exploring adaptation – mitigation
synergies
Herrero et al forthcoming

26. Milk production and diets for cattle in the 6 districts
of Kenya
District Milk per Rangeland Maize Cut and Roadside Grain
cow (kg/yr) grazing stover carry weeds supplements
fodder
Garissa 275 X
Gem 548 X X X X X
Mbeere S 860 X X X X X
Njoro 1256 X X X X X
Mukurweni 2089 X X X
Othaya 2035 X
Siaya 706 X

27. Manure and methane production for the baseline
diets in the six districts
District Energy Manure per Methane Methane
density of animal (kg/yr) production produced per lt
the diet (CO2 of milk
(MJ ME/kg eq/lactation) (CO2 eq/lt)
DM)
Garissa 8.4 693 796 2.37
Gem 9.3 730 780 1.42
Mbeere S 9.6 693 824 1.12
Njoro 9.9 693 863 0.72
Mukurweni 10.5 657 936 0.47
Othaya 10.5 657 936 0.47
Siaya 9.4 730 838 1.14

28. Most common new feeds appearing in the last 10
years and the scenarios simulated
District Main new feed Scenarios of use
Garissa Prosopis spp. 1.5 kg offered in the diet
3 kg offered in the diet
Gem Desmodium 1 kg offered in the diet instead of stover
2 kg offered in the diet instead of stover
Mbeere S Napier grass 2 kg offered in the diet instead of stover
3 kg offered in the diet instead of stover
Njoro Hay 1 kg offered in the diet instead of stover
2 kg offered in the diet instead of stover
Mukurweni Desmodium 1 kg offered in the diet instead of stover
2 kg offered in the diet instead of stover
Othaya Hay 2 kg offered in the diet instead of stover
4 kg offered in the diet instead of stover
Siaya Napier grass 2 kg offered in the diet instead of stover
3 kg offered in the diet instead of stover

29. Impact of alternative feeding strategies on milk, manure and methane
production (% change)
District Scenario Milk production Manure Methane Methane per
production production kg milk
Garissa Prosopis
1.5 kg 64 0 -2 -40
3 kg 136 0 -5 -60
Gem Desmodium
1 kg 21 5 -3 -20
2 kg 36 10 0 -26
Mbeere Napier grass
2 kg 12 11 3 -8
3 kg 17 16 2 -12
Njoro Hay
1 kg 18 -5 6 -10
2 kg 49 -5 18 -21
Mukurweni Desmodium
1 kg 9 11 2 -7
2 kg 8 11 0 -7
Othaya Hay
2 kg 9 11 2 -7
4 kg 8 11 0 -7
Siaya Napier grass
2 kg 42 0 12 -21
3 kg 79 10 16 -35
6 districts Average 36 6 4 -20

30. Research opportunities
exploring livelihood and systems transitions
Scenarios (global, regional, household)
trade-offs
adaptation-mitigation synergies ( different systems: rangelands,
mixed)….carbon markets
====================================================
Farms of the future / analogue
Impact work (Chase)
DSS on adaptation costs and priority options
Comission of a paper on breeding strategies of livestock and
climate change (Karen to liase with James, concept note)
Adaptation: tweaking, structural, transformative