Presentation from CCAFS Science Workshop, Bonn, 11th June 2011

2. Institutional (no land tenure system)

3. Technological (a dam)

4. Economic (market in place)

5. Social (AIDS? Safety nets?)

6. Policy

7. Culture

9. Livelihoods (food security)

10. Gender relations and social equity

11. Resource Degradation

13. How to do it? Step 1 (by Sept end): Meta-analysis of: CCAFS baseline surveys of 5000 hhs literature of factors associated with coping/adaptation strategies gap analysis of methods Step 2 (early 2012): Workshop to identify pilot studies in CCAFS regions and refine methodology based on meta-analysis Step 3 (mid 2012): Pilot study of communities to develop methodologies (small number) Step 4 (end of project): Methods and policy recommendations

14. Criteria for selecting pilot communities (small number as function of $$$) Cover 3 CCAF regions Use communities/villages where baseline CCAFS has surveyed social capital Don’t duplicate other studies Cover range of production systems and climate shocks Communities where history of adaptation ….

15. Pilot study communities Disciplines include: Climate, adaptation, land use/land cover, institutional/governance, anthropology Development, agriculture applications Methods include: Community vulnerability and capacity assessments (participatory community, focus groups, vulnerability capacity assessment, household surveys) Landscape changes (remote sensing) climate historical data changes in yield/cultivars/traits trade-off and synergy analysis

16. What is novel about this proposal? Empirical testing of methods to evaluate multiple consequences of coping/adaptation strategies on food security, environment, and livelihoods, including: societal consequences of current adaptation strategies, including on food security, gender relations/social equity, local governance feedbacks to biogeochemical cycles and land use Development of climate-resilient and climate-smart policy recommendations to enhance adaptation at the local level Generalizable methods to assess rural producer strategies and their viability with changing climate

17. Truly interdisciplinary (really!)

18. Volunteers for meta-analysis Overall: Arame Tall, Ruth DeFries Baseline surveys: Florence Kyazze, HeznomMogake (Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania), Bharat P. Upadhyay (Nepal) Literature review: AriellaHelfgott, AhsanUddin Ahmed, CheikhMbow (Senegal) Methods gap analysis: SharmindNeelormi, AhsanUddin Ahmed, AriellaHelfgott, Ruth DeFries (RS)