The Ultimate Guide to Choosing WordPress Pros and Cons
Climate Smart Agriculture for an Inter-Dependent World: From Dialogue to Action with the Aid of Science
1. Led by
Climate Smart Agriculture for an Inter-
Dependent World: From Dialogue to Action
with the Aid of Science
Andy Jarvis
Director of Decision and Policy Analysis (DAPA)
Theme Leader, CGIAR Research Program on
Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security
(CCAFS)
1
2. Leb
Led by
Climate Change, Agriculture
and Food Security (CCAFS)
CGIAR Research Program
1 January 2013
2
3. Leb
Led by
Global alliance
15 CG centers and ~70 regional offices
Lead center - CIAT
1 January 2013
3
4. Liderado
Led by por
Objectives
Identify and develop pro-poor adaptation
and mitigation practices, technologies and
policies for agriculture and food systems.
Support the inclusion of agricultural issues
in climate change policies, and of climate
issues in agricultural policies, at all levels.
Commit to data availability, cross-center
cooperation, and making an impact on
both the global and regional level.
1 January 2013
4
5. Led by
CCAFS Framework
Adapting Agriculture to
Climate Variability and Change
Technologies, practices, partnerships and
policies for:
Improved
1. Adaptation to Progressive Climate Environmental Improved
Change Health Rural
2. Adaptation through Managing Livelihoods
Climate Risk Improved
3. Pro-poor Climate Change Mitigation Food
Security
4. Integration for Decision Making
• Linking Knowledge with Action
• Assembling Data and Tools for Analysis
and Planning
• Refining Frameworks for Policy Analysis
Enhanced adaptive capacity
in agricultural, natural
resource management, and
food systems
1 January 2013
5
6. Led by
Place-based field work
Sur de Asia:
Lider Regional
Pramod Aggarwal
Africa del Oeste
Lider Regional
Robert Zougmoré
Africa del Este
Lider Regional
James Kinyangi
Latinoamerica:
Lider Regional
Ana Maria Loboguerrero
1 January 2013
6
8. Led by
Historical impacts on food security
Observed changes in growing season
temperature for crop growing
regions,1980-2008.
Lobell et al (2011)
% Yield impact
for wheat
8
9. Led by
Our ability to grow
food in 2050
Average projected % change in suitability for 50 crops, to 2050
9
10. Led by
The need for
more food
In order to meet global
demands, we will need
60-70%
more food
by 2050.
10
11. Led by
Livestock products: Developing countries are
hungry for more.
•Growth in animal product
consumption has increased
more than any other
commodity group.1
•Greatest increases in S and
SE Asia, Latin America.
-Overall meat
consumption in China
has quadrupled since
1980 to 119
lbs/person/yr. 2
•Economic and population
growth, rising per capita
Photo by: CGIAR incomes, urbanization
11
12. 3 Livestock and GHG
Led by
•30-45% of earth’s terrestrial surface is pasture
- 80% of all agricultural land
•1/3 arable land used for feed crop production
•70% of previously forested land in the Amazon = pasture
12
Source: Erb et al. (2007)
13. Arable land per person will decrease Led by
The arable land
on the earth is
~3% or 1.5
billion ha
Year 1950 2000 2050
• World Population • 2,500,000,000 6,1000,000 9,000,000
• Arable land • 0.52 ha • 0.25 ha • 0.16 ha
13
14. 2 Livestock and GHG
Led by
•Livestock alone is 10-18% of all global 3
anthropogenic GHG
-Other estimates as high as 51%4,5
•Range arises from methodological differences
-Inventories vs. life cycle assessments, Attribution of land use to livestock,
Omissions, misallocations
Range of GHG intensities for livestock commodities
200
180
•Highest variation occurs for
kg CO2 eq/kg animal protein
160 beef, due to variety of
140
120
production systems.
100
80 •Ruminants require more
60 fossil energy use, emit more
40
20 CH4 per animal.6
0
Pig Poultry Beef Milk Eggs
Source: de Vries and de Boer (2009) 14
16. Led by
Let’s talk about Wicked Solutions
wick·ed (w k d)
adj. wick·ed·er, wick·ed·est
1. Evil by nature and in practice: "this wicked man Hitler, the repository and
embodiment of many forms of soul-destroying hatred"(Winston S. Churchill).
2. Playfully malicious or mischievous: a wicked prank; a critic's wicked wit.
3. Severe and distressing: a wicked cough; a wicked gash; wicked driving
conditions.
4. Highly offensive; obnoxious: a wicked stench.
5. Slang Strikingly good, effective, or skillful
16
18. Led by
Incremental
adaptation
• Farmers are adapting all the time
• But the questions remains if it is at a rate that
is fast enough
• And if the incremental adjustments are in the
right direction to enable the systematic
adjustment
• How we can speeden up incremental
adaptation?
18
19. Led by
Where do we work?
CCAFS sites Main crops Main livestock
(forages)
Maize Beans Wheat Beef cattle Goats
Borana(ET)
(96.6%) (86.4%) (33.1%) (93.2%) (77.8%)
Maize Sorghum Beans Goats Chicken/hens
Nyando (KE)
(99.2%) (73.3%) (34.4%) (66.9%) (61.2%)
Maize Beans Tomatoes Chicken/hens Dairy cows
Usambara (TZ)
(87.1%) (75%) (29%) (82.1%) (56.4%)
Sweet
Albertine Cassava Beans Chicken/hens
potatoes Pigs (63.1%)
Rift (UG) (78.6%) (68.4%) (82.5%)
(59.8%)
19
20. Leb
Led by
Lushoto (Tanzania)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 January 2013
20
21. Led by
Lushoto (Tanzania)
Weather reasons for adapting
Changes in land use and crop management
a) More erratic rainfall
- introduction of new, higher yielding crop varieties of maize, beans
b) ↘ overall rainfall (88%)
and tomatoes
c) ↗ amount of rainfall (39%)
d) more frequent droughts (71%)
- switching to disease resistant varieties of cassava, bananas and
e) earlier start of the rains 77%)
maize
f) Later start of rains (65%)
Drivers
• Availability of high yielding varieties
more resistant to pest and diseases
• More profitable market prices.
• Less productive land
21
22. Led by
Overall, men and women tend to report that
they themselves do most of the tasks
Gender Division of Labor
Women’s Reporting Men’s Reporting
Men
Women
Boys
Girls
Examples:
Spraying was reported as a men’s task, and
Weeding mainly as a women’s task
22
23. Led by
Decision-Making
Across all 4 sites:
Women report that men make most decisions
Men report more decisions are taken jointly
Women’s Reporting Men’s Reporting
Men
Women
Together
Example: Nyando, Kenya
23
24. Led by
Persons and items distribution
Rash model (Campell, 1963): Attitude towards change = number + difficulty of change made
24
25. Led by
Determinants of the degree
of adaptation – Poisson
regression model
Variable Coefficient P-value
Lnage -0.259 0.034**
Help 0.281 0.019**
Years of schooling 0.025 0.014**
Ln total asset value 0.060 0.096*
Government influence 0.364 0.002***
Less land productivity 0.164 0.060*
Ability to hire farm labour 0.231 0.031**
Constant 2.135 0.002***
Wald chi2(20)=104.63; p=0.000
Alpha = 0.12
N=131
Dependent variable = number of adaptation strategies undertaken
25
26. Led by
Systemic
adaptation
• Supports incremental adaptation
• But also ensures that the direction farmers take is
along the correct trajectory
• Involves design of suitable policies
• Incentivizing the changes that are needed
• And in some cases, overcoming technological
constraints
• E.g. breeding for a 2030 world
26
27. Led by
Why do we need breeding?
For starters, we have novel climates
27
28. Led by
Crops biologically
at tipping points
•For example, US maize, soy, cotton yields fall rapidly when exposed
to temperatures >30˚C
•In many cases, roughly 6-10% yield loss per degree
Schlenker and Roberts 2009 PNAS
28
29. Led by
Area harvested
Current bean suitability
Bean
The most important food
legume in tropical Latin
America and East and southern
Africa
29
30. Changes in Beans Led by
Suitability
• Average global area of suitability for growing beans may be reduced by
6.6% by 2020
• But wide range of change in suitability from -87% to +66% across
regions.
30
31. Which climatic constraint affects the most beans? Led by
Major climate constraints: heat stress
drought stress
31
32. Led by
Transformational
change
• Different livelihood systems for rural communities
• Different structural make-up of the agricultural and
food system at national and regional scales
• Crucial to plan for transformational change, and not
wait until it happens
• One example where it is needed….
33
33. Led by
Suitability in
Cauca
Significant changes to
2020, drastic changes
to 2050
The Cauca case:
reduced coffeee
growing area and MECETA
changes in geographic
distribution. Some new
opportunities.
34
35. Silvopastoral systems: Agosto 15, 2008
Led by
A mini-revolution in
Colombia and Central
America
Piedemonte llanero
Estado inicial: Julio 17, 2007
13 meses
Octubre 22, 2008
36
15 meses
36. Farms of the future Led by
The Concept
Three ongoing pilots
37
37. Farms of in Tanzania
FOTF the future
Led by
Journey to Yamba’s plausible futures
Analogue study Tour
Villages visited Starting point
Lushoto
Mbuzii
Yamba
Kinole
Morogoro
Mwitikilwa
-Market value chain social -Weather station visit
enterprise visit - Bean trial visit
- Input supply Stockists Njombe - Tree nursery visit
Nyombo
Sepukila Village:
-Matengo pits: Traditional soil and
water conservation technique
-Coffee nursery
-Stoves
Masasi Village:
-Water source
Mbinga -Fish pond
-Biogas
Mtama Village:
- Bee keeping 38
42. Led by
A MAC style prioritisation
framework for CSA?
43
43. Led by
Uptake of sustainable agricultural practices
Innovation / Pre-investment Implementation at
Identification of (eg, development scale /
practices funds, climate Establishment of
finance) institutions
Demonstration of
financial / Policy shifts and large-
commercial viability scale changes in
and sustainability practices, livelihoods
Demonstration of
outcomes and environmental
agro-economic and
sustainability impacts
potential
Time 44
44. Led by
Wicked solutions for climate smart
agriculture
• Identifying viable practices, technologies
• Collating costs and benefits for establishment, target
domains
• Prioritisation and screening approaches
• Ensuring the enabling environment
• Piloting and outscaling
• The challenge is very big – reducing emissions from
agriculture, ensuring adaptation
45
45. Led by
CIAT: Science to Cultivate Change
Website: www.ciat.cgiar.org Follow us: http://twitter.com/ciat_
Blog: www.ciatnews.cgiar.org/en/
http://www.facebook.com/ciat.ecoefficient
46
Editor's Notes
For Lobell map: Values show the linear trend in temperature for the main crop grown in that grid cell, and for the months in which that crop is grown. Values indicate the trend in terms of multiples of the standard deviation of historical year-to-year variation. ** A 1˚C rise tended to lower yields by up to 10% except in high latitude countries, where in particular rice gains from warming.** In India, warming may explain the recently slowing of yield gains. For yield graph: Estimated net impact of climate trends for 1980-2008 on crop yields for major producers and for global production. Values are expressed as percent of average yield. Gray bars show median estimate and error bars show 5-95% confidence interval from bootstrap resampling with 500 replicates. Red and blue dots show median estimate of impact for T trend and P trend, respectively. **At the global scale, maize and wheat exhibited negative impacts for several major producers and global net loss of 3.8% and 5.5% relative to what would have been achieved without the climate trends in 1980-2008. In absolute terms, these equal the annual production of maize in Mexico (23 MT) and wheat in France (33 MT), respectively.Source:Climate Trends and Global Crop Production Since 1980David B. Lobell1,*, Wolfram Schlenker2,3, and Justin Costa-Roberts1Science magazine
Why focus on Food securityAnd climate change has to be set in the context of growing populations and changing diets60-70% more food will be needed by 2050 because of population growth and changing diets – and this is in a context where climate change will make agriculture more difficult.
Distribution change is the other side of the “land-use change” coin – i.e. the distribution of coffee / maize / apple production across the world or across a region changes (i.e. it is exactly the same as the “farmers moving” in the previous slide)But perhaps leave out this slide as the previous one covers itHowden SM, Crimp S, Nelson R (2010) Australian agriculture in a climate of change. In ‘Managing Climate Change. Papers from the Greenhouse 2009 Conference’. (Eds I Jubb, P Holper, W Cai) pp. 101–112. (CSIRO: Melbourne) CCAFS does not have a copy of this conference paper
nwcrpIntroduced a new cropnwvarIntroduced a new variety of cropshcyIntroduced a short cycle varietylgcyIntroduced a long cycle varietydrtlIntroduced a drought tolerant varietyfdtlIntroduced a flood tolerant varietydstlIntroduced a disease tolerant varietypsrsIntroduced a pest resistant varietyexarExpanded cropping areardarReduced cropping areastirStarted irrigationspbrStopped burningincrIntroduced intercroppingcrcvIntroduced cover cropsmcctIntroduced micro-catchmentsbundIntroduced bunds / ridgesmulcIntroduced mulchingterrIntroduced terracesstlnIntroduced stone lininghedgIntroduced hedgesctplIntroduced contour ploughingrotaIntroduced crop rotationelppIntroduced early land preparationelptIntroduced early plantingltptIntroduced late plantingmnftStarted using or increased use of mineral fertilizermncpStarted using or increased use of mineral fertilizerumphStarted using pesticides / herbicidesumipIntroduced integrated pest managementumcmIntroduced integrated crop management
Nos encontramos con el modelo de los cuatro países y se asigna el resultado (en este caso las diferencias entre la producciones actuales y futuras (2020) la producción de frijol) para Centroamérica.Como podemos ver, hay zonas donde la producción se reducirá drásticamente, mientras que otros están mejorando su potencial de producción. Los cambios ya descritos en las condiciones del clima y sus interacciones con las condiciones de ubicación específica determinaran la producción del cultivo. El estrés por calor, la sequía y las altas temperaturas en noche son los principales culpables de estos resultados. Esto es ampliamente sostenido por evidencia científica. Algunas de las conclusiones generales son:Frijol:Temperaturas> 28/18 C (día / noche) decrecimiento en la producción de biomasa, seed-set, el numero y tamaño de las semillas (menos vainas por planta, menos semillas por vaina, peso menor en las semillas)Niveles elevados de CO2 también decrece seed-setNiveles elevados de CO2 aumentaron la biomasa, pero los beneficios de los niveles elevados de CO2 disminuye con aumento de las temperaturas maíz:La tensión alta temperatura disminuye la polinización y la producción de semillas de maíz, causada principalmente por la disminución en la viabilidad del polen y receptividad del estigmaLa tensión alta temperatura disminuye la semilla-set y los números del núcleo por planta.La tensión alta temperatura también afecta negativamente la calidad del núcleo y la densidad (proteínas, enzimas)Etapas reproductivas (el desarrollo del polen, floración, llenado de los granos antes de tiempo) son relativamente más sensibles a la sequía, la sequía disminuye el número y el peso seco del núcleo. El maíz necesita 50% del agua en el período de10 días antes y 20 días después de la floración inicial. A pesar de subrayar lo suficiente la temperatura del agua afecta el desarrollo del polen.El estrés hídrico reduce el número y tamaño de granos.Las temperaturas más altas en la noche significa mayores pérdidas de la respiración por lo tanto la pérdidas de biomasa y de rendimiento.Con los resultados DSSAT ahora podemos identificar los diferentes tipos de ámbitos de intervención en la región (siguiente diapositiva)
The use of climate analogues for locating future climates today can ground models in field-based realities, significantly enhancing our knowledge of adaptation capacity and supporting the identification of appropriate interventions.Building and testing a methodology to study farmer’s social, cultural and gender specific barriers for enabling behavioral change and improve adaptive capacity.
Analogue tourParticipatory videos
Scaling up climate-smart agriculture: investment needs from innovation to implementation at scale. The set of sustainable agricultural practices that can improve adaptation, mitigation and livelihoods is highly diverse, varying by region and farming system. Many such practices are already well-known and others are yet to be invented or brought into general awareness. The process by which sustainable agricultural practices are taken up in specific farm regions and commodity sectors will be idiosyncratic, controlled by factors such as type and level of investment, availability of relevant knowledge and infrastructure, and the institutional and policy context. The type and amount of public and private sector investment varies country to country although, in general, investment in agriculture is low in low-income countries and higher in wealthier countries (where selection of agricultural practices is driven by a complex mixture of policy and market signals). The role of farmers’ organizations and agribusinesses is also highly variable by country and region. This schematic depicts the general sequence of investments, transitions and outcomes on the path to widespread adoption of agriculture practices that achieve adaptation, mitigation and livelihood objectives. Each phase in this general sequence has distinct incentives, knowledge requirements, risk tolerances, success metrics and expectations about return on investment. The purpose of this conceptual framework is to challenge funders, researchers, practitioners and other actors to clearly understand the precursors, partnerships and institutions required for investments to result in broad uptake of sustainable practices. It can also be used by those currently operating in one or more of these phases to clarify their role, objectives, progress and likely outcomes. Major phases include: (1) Innovation / identification of sustainable practices through adaptive farmer-driven research designed to achieve robust understanding of biophysical and socio-economic dynamics and outcomes relevant to incomes and environmental services. (2) Pre-investment (eg, climate finance, agricultural development funds) focused on ”real world” testing and operationalizing of sustainable practices through public-private partnerships designed to understand risks (eg, ROI lag time), barriers (eg, land tenure, subsidies) and necessary institutions (eg, managing financial flows, Extension) and infrastructure (eg, seed systems, monitoring). (3) Implementation of sustainable agricultural practices at scale, based on robust ROI, and establishment of public and private sector institutions to build capacity (eg, local farm associations and agribusinesses), provide oversight (eg, quality control for implementation and financing) and manage risk (eg, insurance or safety net programs), coupled with harmonization of the policy context (eg, re-orientation of subsidy programs). To meet urgent new challenges, stronger institutional mechanisms are needed (eg, to mitigate risks associated with innovation) and the research enterprise must evolve much more rapidly and develop better connectivity across research institutions, Extension and farmers (eg, through mandates for farmer-oriented research).