Agriculture and Rural Development Day Logo image
 Agriculture and Rural Development Day Logo text

Contact

General inquiries
Ratih Septivita
info@agricultureday.org


Media contact

For all media-related inquiries
Nathan Russell  |  Michael Hoevel
media@agricultureday.org

Learning Events Details



Events Session 1:

Successes in Agricultural Adaptation and Mitigation

11.10 – 12.10 Choice of one of seven Learning Events



No Organisational lead Learning Events title Room
1 World Agroforestry Centre, International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD), United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), and the African Development Bank How is Evergreen Agriculture building resilience and increasing food security within a changing climate? G
2 CARE International and Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security Progamme of the CGIAR, EcoAg Partners What role is there for carbon finance in climate smart small holder agriculture? A
3 FANRPAN – Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network How to build the resilience of African smallholder farmers in a changing climate? B
4 UN World Food Programme (WFP) and Oxfam America How can integrated risk management assist poor, food insecure and vulnerable peoples to adapt and build resilience? C
5 UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) What tools and policies are required to bring food security, adaptation, and mitigation together? D
6 Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) What role does the private sector have to play in Climate Smart Smallholder Agriculture in Africa? E
7 Climate Change Adaptation in Africa, International Development Research Centre (IDRC) and UK Department for International Development (DFID) How can we build the adaptive capacity of vulnerable African farmers by developing response farming practices? F


Events Session 2:

Successes in Agricultural Adaptation and Mitigation

12.20 – 13.20 Choice of one of six Learning Events



No Organisational lead Learning Events title Room
8 Swedish International Agriculture Network Initiative (SIANI), Stockholm Environment Institute How can mitigation funding benefit smallholders’ food security and build climate resilience? A
9 CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food How can rainwater management help support food production and smallholder farmers’ ability to adapt to climate variability and change? G
10 International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD) and CaféDirect How to get climate-smart smallholder goods to market? B
11 National Agricultural Research Institute of Niger, INRAN How the Niger Republic is building resilience of farmers to climate change and increasing food security? C
12 Danish Agriculture and Food Council How Denmark is mitigating green house gases and increasing production in the agriculture sector? D
13 Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Co-operation (CTA), the Association for Indigenous Women and Peoples of Chad (AFPAT), and Indigenous Peoples of Africa Co-ordinating Committee (IPACC). How can pastoralist traditional knowledge be combined with scientific atmospheric science and contribute to adaptation policy making? E

⇑ back to top

Learning Event 1

How is Evergreen Agriculture building resilience and increasing food security within a changing climate?

Room and Time: 11.10 – 12.10 in Room G

Organisers: Dr Constance Neely, World Agroforestry Centre with IFAD, UNEP, African Development Bank

Objectives

  • To raise awareness of the potential for evergreen agriculture as an approach to improve livelihoods, adaptation and mitigation in the tropics, and its successful expansion in Africa.
  • To identify elements for actions for it to achieve greater prominence and eligibility in the adaptation and mitigation policies of developing countries and globally.

Summary

Evergreen Agriculture combines agroforestry with the principles of conservation farming. The addition of agroforestry offers multiple livelihood benefits to farmers, including sources of green (organic) fertilizer to build healthier soils and enhance crop yields, and providing fruits, medicines, livestock fodder, and fuelwood. Environmental benefits include land rehabilitation, a more effective water cycle and watershed protection, increased biodiversity, increased carbon accumulation and storage and greater resilience to climate change – addressing mitigation and adaptation.

Evergreen Agriculture is now practiced on tens of millions of hectares within SSA including 5 million hectares in Niger alone. In Malawi, maize yields have increased almost three-fold when grown under a canopy of Faidherbia albida trees. Other trees used include Sesbania sesbania, Gliricidia sepium and Tephrosia candida. Along with the increased soil carbon accumulation under conservation farming, trees on farms sequester carbon while providing fruit, fodder and other livelihood benefits. A broad alliance is now emerging among governments, research institutions and development agencies to expand Evergreen Agriculture across hundreds of millions of hectares in Africa and Asia.

Programme

Slides with key messages for learning event 1

Chair: Dr Constance Neely, World Agroforestry Centre
Rapporteur: To be confirmed
5 mins Introduction
5 mins What is it, what makes it work and what is the promise? Dr Dennis Garrity, World Agroforestry Centre
5 mins Why Evergreen Agriculture must be included in the revitalization of Agriculture in a Green Economy? Mr Mario Boccucci on behalf of the Executive Director, UNEP
5 mins How Evergreen Agriculture has been, and can be, used within NAPAs and NAMAs. Professor Pius Z. Yanda, Institute of Resource Assessment, Tanzania and Dr Yanila Ntupanyama (tbc), Department of Environmental Affairs, Malawi
5 mins How can Evergreen Agriculture be mainstreamed within loan and grant programs for scaling up for small holders? Dr Elwyn Grainger Jones, IFAD
5 mins Questions and discussion
23 mins Four topic groups (15 minutes for rapid discussion) on strategic questions on:
  • Policy Opportunities on Agroforestry (NAPAs and NAMAs) – Dr Olu Ajayi (ICRAF)
  • Getting the Research Right – Dr Henry Neufeldt (ICRAF)
  • Market/Incentive Opportunities – Mr John Fay (Shared Value Africa)
  • Campaign for Upscaling – Dr Dennis Garrity
Resource Persons (to be confirmed):
  • Dyborn Chibonga (CEO, National Smallholder Farmers Association of Malawi)
  • Prince Kampondamgaga (Farmers Union of Malawi and Chair of the Conservation Agriculture Task Force)
8 mins Report back and Closing remarks – Bruce Montador, Managing Director, African Development Bank (tbc), and Dennis Garrity

Biographies

Dr Oluyede Clifford Ajayi (Olu) is a senior scientist at the World Agroforestry Centre where he works to promote policy partnership to scale up sustainable agricultural and natural resource management practices to improve household food security and alleviate poverty among smallholder farmers. He is a Diamond Author laureate and widely published. He has worked for IITA, WARDA.

Mr Mario Boccucci is the Chief of the Terrestrial Ecosystems Unit at UNEP’s. He has 18 years of experience with international organizations on operational and policy work on sustainable management of land resources, forest management, biodiversity, and climate change mitigation. Before UNEP he worked with the World Bank and the European Commission.

Dr Dennis Garrity is an agronomist whose career has been focused on the development of small-scale tropical farming systems. He is Distinguished Board Research Fellow and former Director General of the World Agroforestry Center. He is a UNCCD Drylands Ambassador, and a champion of Evergreen Agriculture and working on global efforts for sustainable agriculture in the 21st Century.

Mr Elwyn Grainger-Jones is the Director of International Fund for Agricultural Development’s Environment and Climate Division. Prior to this he led the Climate and Environment Department in the UK’s Department for International Development. Before this at DFID he the trade policy team, and worked in the World Bank as their trade representative in Geneva.

Mr John Fay works on innovative financing and market-based approaches to catalyze development in Africa. He helped set up the Mitengo smallholder agroforestry programme and is developing a landscape based approach to mitigation in Zambia. He is the Director of Shared Value Africa. Prior to this he co-founded SEM Fund 2004 – a Senegalese NGO.

Mr Bruce Montador, Managing Director, African Development Bank.

Dr Constance L. Neely is the Programme Development Facilitator for the World Agroforestry Center with expertise on land, livestock, livelihoods and climate change. She was the Vice President for Advocacy and Climate Change expert at Heifer International, and the Deputy Director of the USAID Sustainable Agriculture Research.

Dr Yanila Ntupanyama, Director of the Department of Environmental Affairs, Government of Malawi.

Prof Pius Z. Yanda, Director, Institute of Resource Assessment and Mwalimu Julius Nyerere Professorial Chair in Environment and Climate Change, University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

Dr Henry Neufeldt leads the World Agroforestry Centre the climate change research program. He works on climate impacts, adaptation, mitigation, food security and sustainable development in the context of agroforestry systems. He has published extensively on sustainable land use, agricultural greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation and adaptation policies.

Key information

  1. Headline messages
    1. Evergreen Agriculture, combining agroforestry with conservation farming principles is being taken up by millions of farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa who are seeing dramatic increases in yields, but this largely unsupported uptake is only a fraction of the potential
    2. Evergreen Agriculture is a pivotal and readily scalable approach to transforming conventional agriculture to one that is both development and climate smart
    3. An alliance of African Governments, Development Partners and Investors can expand Evergreen Agriculture to meet current and future demands across Africa.
  2. What is the evidence for these messages?


    Figure 1. In Malawi, improved yields with Faidherbia due to improved soil fertility, capture of rainfall and the better micro-environment (reduced temperatures and evapo-transpiration, increased soil moisture) Control maize is fully fertilized.


    Figure 2. In Malawi, soil C, OM and K are much higher with faidherbia


    Figure 3. Long-term maize yield without fertilizer in a gliricidia system in Malawi

  3. What are the impacts, costs, constraints and tradeoffs?

    Farmers across Sub Saharan Africa have benefited from Evergreen Africa. In Zambia some 160,000 farmers have extended their conservation farming practices to include the cultivation of their food crops within agroforests. In West Africa, the numbers of hectares under Faidherbia dominated parkland agroforestry systems is now upwards of 8 million hectares and these have enhanced the productivity of millet and sorghum up to 5 times the yields over those systems without the integration of trees.

    The systems in West, East and Southern Africa vary in terms of means of adoption in the specifics, however they have depended upon either loosening of policies associated with trees on farms (Niger) or the proactive introduction of policies such as the Agroforestry Food Security Programme (Malawi).

    In all cases, a collaborative relationship was facilitated among farmers, government, NGOs or extensionists, and researchers to achieve the desired outcomes. The major constraint has been in the proliferation and propagation of needed tree seedlings however research has helped in overcoming this such that locally run nursery cum knowledge resource centres can produce the seedlings necessary.

  4. What is needed to increase these impacts at scale?

    Widespread support in the form of policy action, targeted investments, availability of quality germplasm, capacity development and research will be essential to spreading this technology to more than 50 million farmers who desperately need home-grown solutions to their food production problems while adapting to the unpredictable impacts of climate change.

  5. When do these actions need to take place, and who needs to take them?
    • Immediately, Investment Banks (WB, AfDB, IFAD, and others) can assist by linking investments to the application of Evergreen Agriculture.
    • Immediately, African Ministers of Agriculture can jointly campaign for designing policies that promote Evergreen and thus Climate Smart Agriculture.
    • Research Institutions such as the NARS and IARCs can continue to assess appropriate scaling up methods to bolster the uptake of Evergreen Agriculture in new pilot sites, backstopping those underway and provide information to policy makers on the contributions and relevance of evergreen agriculture to national development goals. Further measures of ecosystem resilience will be critical for monitoring adaptation and mitigation capacity as well as crop/livestock productivity.
    • NGOs and Project Developers can facilitate the capacity development and implementation needs of farmers in transition including taking advantage of ecosystem service and carbon markets as further incentive measures.
⇑ back to top

Learning Event 2

What role for carbon finance in climate smart small holder agriculture?

Room and Time: 11.10 – 12.10 in Room A

Organisers: Phil Franks, CARE International with and Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security Programme of the CGIAR, and EcoAg Partners

Objectives

  • To critically review key assumptions relating to carbon/mitigation finance being an element of climate smart smallholder agriculture.
  • To explore different ways in which carbon/mitigation finance may have an important role to play in financing climate smart smallholder agriculture.

Summary

In September 2010 CARE, CCAFS and the World Agroforestry Centre, with support from Rockefeller Foundation, initiated a learning program in western Kenya – Sustainable Agriculture in a Changing Climate - focused on the Nyando river catchment. The project explores how carbon finance might support small-holder agriculture in poorer areas of Kenya. Farmers are supported to adopt a range of agroforestry, crop diversification and conservation agriculture interventions that increase farm production, build resilience to climate change, and store carbon. The innovation lies in (1) exploring how to finance the program, including the use of carbon finance; (2) different approaches to benefit-sharing; and (3) different institutional arrangements for program management over the longer term.

Early results indicate barriers to adoption, benefits at farmer level, and the type of incentives or other enabling measures needed to address barriers and maximize benefits. The low financial returns and uncertainties of market-based finance validate concerns about the relevance and viability of an agricultural carbon project approach, suggesting instead an approach centred on more productive and climate resilient agriculture with mitigation as a co-benefit. That said, modeling of potential carbon revenues indicates that, at the landscape scale, carbon or mitigation finance may still have an important role to play.

Programme

Slides with key messages for learning event 2
Click the links below to view event presentations.

Chair: James Kinyangi, CCAFS
Rapporteur: Agnes Otzelberger, CARE International
10 mins Introduction – Phil Franks, CARE International
10 mins What are the main barriers to adoption of agroforestry by small-holder farmers in western Kenya, as a component of CSA? – Geoffrey Onyango, CARE International
10 mins What, within a Kenyan context, are the financing possibilities for CSA, and what role might there be for carbon finance? – Seth Shames, EcoAgriculture Partners
10 mins Questions on the presentations
20 mins Facilitated discussion to answer two questions:

Biographies

James Kinyangi, CCAFS.

Seth Shames is a Senior Project Manager at EcoAgriculture Partners. He manages EcoAgriculture’s work on Payments for Ecosystem Services and climate change policy. A key element of this work is research on the institutional development of small holder agricultural carbon projects in East Africa. He has worked to integrate agricultural issues into the UNFCCC and other international policy processes. He has studied conservation tillage schemes for small farmers in Ethiopia, agroforestry systems in Peru and organized Community Supported Agriculture groups in New York City.

Phil Franks is the coordinator of CARE International’s Poverty, Environment and Climate Change Network. He has twenty-five years experience in agriculture, natural resource management and environmental programming in Developing Countries, particularly in on Africa, including four years working on climate change focusing on REDD and other AFOLU. On environmental policy at the international level Phil has been actively engaged with UNFCCC and CBD since 2007.

Geoffrey Onyango is a Carbon Finance Advisor in CARE’s Poverty, Environment and Climate Change Network. Geoffrey has fifteen years experience in forest management, and afforestation and reforestation programming, including twelve years in forestry extension and five years developing carbon projects in the forestry and energy sectors. As well as working in his home country of Kenya, his experience in carbon project development has included short-term assignments in Mozambique, Tanzania, Rwanda, Ghana, Vietnam and Guatemala.

Agnes Otzelberger, is CARE International’s Africa Climate Change Adaptation and Global Gender Advisor. She works to develop and strengthen CARE’s climate change adaptation work in Africa, as well as enhance the integration of gender and women’s empowerment into CARE’s climate change adaptation programming and advocacy at the global level. Agnes has an MA from the Institute of Development Studies and has worked primarily in programming and research on climate change and disasters, gender and food security.

Key information

  1. Headline messages
    • Change the way we think about mitigation in small-holder agriculture – from mitigation-focused carbon projects to programs focused on more productive, climate-change resilient agriculture that achieve mitigation as a co-benefit.
    • Mitigation/carbon finance may have an important role to play in financing climate-smart smallholder agriculture at a landscape scale
    • Benefits to farmers do not necessarily need to include cash payments. Benefits from increased yields and climate change resilience will be more significant, and overall benefits may be maximized if mitigation/carbon finance is targeted primarily at institutional barriers that constrain farmer learning and access to information
    • Because climate smart small-holder agriculture can meet multiple objectives (adaptation, mitigation, rural development, food security) finance sources targeted for these objectives should be blended to support CSA programs.
    • Addressing climate change requires massive absolute reductions in global GHG emissions. Climate smart smallholder agriculture has a role to play but cannot substitute for ambitious commitments to emissions reductions by countries with high levels of historic and current emissions.
  2. What is the evidence for these messages?
    • Financial modeling of project/program revenue and costs.
    • Data on adoption of agroforestry practices, and studies on barriers to adoption
    • Assessment of sources of climate (adaptation and mitigation) and rural development finance which could support climate-smart small-holder agriculture
    • Analysis of climate change policy development in Kenya and the emerging opportunities and constraints for different kinds of climate finance.
  3. What are the impacts, costs, constraints and tradeoffs?

    There are currently about 2000 farmers participating in the project with a plan to increase to over 50,000 within 10 years. However what makes the project innovative is not the number of farmers or the agriculture/agroforestry practices they are adopting but the approach to accessing and using carbon/mitigation finance as part of a climate smart smallholder agriculture approach. The project is only just over 1 year old so we are still in the early days but some important learning is already emerging as described in the 200 word summary. Project costs will be presented as part of the financial modelling.

  4. What is needed to increase these impacts at scale?

    Our hypothesis is that although the main focus of climate-smart small-holder agriculture must be sustainable increases in production and building resilience to climate change, a CSA program at a landscape scale will generate sufficient carbon finance over the medium to longer term (10-20 years) to cover a substantial part of the scaling up cost and therefore that carbon finance can make a major contribution to financing CSA as well as enhancing the performance of extension services through facilitating performance monitoring and promoting greater accountability. Many developments in policy, institutional arrangements and technology will be needed to achieve this, notably measures that promote civil society and private sector engagement, simpler and cheaper carbon MRV, and mechanisms which enable the blending various sources of climate finance with agricultural development and food security funds to support climate smart smallholder agriculture programs that meet multiple objectives.

  5. When do these actions need to take place, and who needs to take them?

    At a national level, key actors include farmers associations and movements as well as relevant government agencies. Kenya has a process of developing a national climate change action plan on-going and a NAMA will be part of this. It will be important that the NAMA creates supportive institutional and policy environment that enables climate smart projects and programs. Relevant ministries will need to be able to work together to implement these cross sectoral programs. At the international level, donors supporting climate action and agricultural development action should recognize the multiple benefits of climate smart landscapes and the importance of supporting these initiatives as they mature. At the UNFCCC, a SBSTA for agriculture could move forward action on key research agendas which will be critical to supporting climate smart initiatives.

⇑ back to top

Learning Event 3

How to build the resilience of African smallholder farmers in a changing climate?

Room and Time: 11.10 – 12.10 in Room B

Organiser: Dr Lindiwe Majele Sibanda (FANRPAN – Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network) and World Vision

Objectives

The purpose of this event is to demonstrate how the depletion of livelihood assets in rural southern African households as a result of extreme weather events (e.g. recurrent droughts and floods) contributes to poor agricultural productivity, poverty and hunger. Specific objectives are:

  • To demonstrate how livelihoods and assets databases developed using the FANRPAN HVI tool can provide information on agricultural productivity, poverty and hunger.
  • To explore how these databases combined with farmer testimonies can be used to developing coping mechanisms and policy initiatives aimed at helping smallholder farmers adapt to climate change and build resilience to climate change.

Summary

There are few tools that can effectively measure the impact of shocks and stressors on the lives of the poor. Vulnerability assessment is potentially a useful way for identifying, monitoring and evaluating household welfare over time. By intermittently measuring the livelihood assets owned by a household over a period of time, researchers can determine household vulnerability and provide empirical evidence to inform investment decisions around the design of policy responses and programme interventions aimed at strengthening household resilience. FANRPAN developed the Household Vulnerability Index (HVI) to measure the vulnerability of rural households to external shocks such as disease outbreaks, extreme weather and stressors such as food insecurity. The HVI achieves this by quantifying a household’s access to five livelihood capitals (natural, physical, financial, human and social assets) and, by classifying households into low, moderate or high vulnerability.

Following the successful piloting of the HVI tool in three countries in southern Africa (Lesotho, Swaziland and Zimbabwe) in partnership with World Vision International, FANRPAN will share perspectives on the importance of collecting household panel data, developing and updating livelihood databases which are then used to benchmark livelihoods and provide data for modeling projected changes in livelihood as a result of climate change.

Programme

Slides with key messages for learning event 3

Chair: Dr Lindiwe Majele Sibanda, FANRPAN
Rapporteur: Mr Yuven Gounden, FANRPAN
5 mins Introductions and Framing the issues: Dr Lindiwe Majele Sibanda
10 mins Film: A Bottom-Up View of the Livelihoods Asset Crisis in Rural Households
15 mins Panel Conversations
  • Community Development organisation –World Vision International, Mr Dalton Nxumalo.
  • Policy Advisor Kingdom of Swaziland: Hon. O. Dlamini
  • Swaziland Smallholder farmers: Mrs. H. Shongwe and Mr Sam Sithole
25 mins Discussion
5 mins Wrap up – Yuven Gounden

Biographies

James Kinyangi, CCAFS.

Dr Lindiwe Majele Sibanda is FANRPAN’s Chief Executive Officer and coordinates policy research and advocacy programmes on food policies, agricultural productivity, natural resources and environment Africa-wide. Since 2009, she has led the “No-Agriculture, No-Deal” global campaign and mobilized African civil society organizations to push for the inclusion of agriculture in the UNFCCC negotiations. Dr Sibanda sits on two CGIAR boards (CIMMYT and ILRI), is a member of the Independent Science Panel of the Climate Change Agriculture and Food Security Program (CCAFS).

Honourable Obed Dlamini is currently a member of “Liqoqo” – King Mswati (III)’s Advisory Council. He was Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Swaziland between July 1989 and October 1993. After working in the private sector (banking and construction), and then as Secretary-General for the Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions (SFTU), Hon. Dlamini was later elected as a Senator and Member of Parliament for his constituency.

Mrs Happy Shongwe is an accomplished smallholder farmer engaged in seed production, processing and marketing seed production, processing and marketing in Swaziland. She is a previous recipient of WFP food aid who graduated to become a seed farmer after receiving training from FAO and the Government of Swaziland.

Mr Sam Jabulani Sithole is a progressive smallholder farmer who invested his retirement package in farming. On less than one hectare, Mr Sithole has adopted various modern farming enterprises for grain, vegetable and livestock production systems.

Mr Yuven Gounden is the FANRPAN Communications and Advocacy Manager. He has worked in communication in the water and the education sectors before taking up his post at FANRPAN. He is responsible for media relations, content management, publications, stakeholder management, event management and internal communication. His primary goals are to manage the organization’s reputation and to promote the work and achievements of FANRPAN.

Key information

  1. Headline messages
    • Investing in research and longitudinal household panel data on rural livelihoods is critical for providing information to inform climate smart agriculture policy responses.
    • Asset security is key to improving household agricultural productivity and in building resilience.
    • Climate change and food security are inter-sectoral, and this calls for collective action from multiple actors that include relevant government ministries, the research community and development agencies, the private sector and farmers.
    • Giving voice to the experiences of those most vulnerable and least heard in international for a will help mobilize action and expedite the development of appropriate climate smart agriculture policies.
    • Appropriate policy frameworks are required to address the challenges of increasing smallholder farmer productivity, building resilience and helping farmers adapt to climate change and mitigation.
  2. What is the evidence for these messages?

    The livelihood assessments conducted on selected communities in three countries in southern Africa indicated that the majority of households (87%) are in the moderate vulnerability category (see table below). They face transitory vulnerability which makes them slide in and out of acute hunger situations whenever they are exposed to shocks that impact on their livelihoods, e.g. droughts, spikes in market prices of food and farming inputs, etc. In the short term, they require social safety nets to strengthen their resilience to shocks, and prevent them from resorting to negative coping strategies such as disposal of farming assets and destruction of the natural resource base. Examples of safety nets for this category include agriculture input subsidies, cash transfers, etc.

    Results from livelihood assessments in three pilot countries

    Country No. of households surveyed Household vulnerability levels (%)
    Low Moderate High
    Lesotho 2,581 1.3 94.5 4.1
    Swaziland 3,212 1.2 93.9 4.9
    Zimbabwe 6,089 19.3 72.6 8.1
    Average 7.3 87.0 5.7

    Requiring the greatest investment are the 5.7% of the households in the high vulnerability category. This population group is living in chronic poverty, and requires specially packaged and targeted social protection interventions to get them out of this situation. For example, a package of interventions could consist of food assistance to stabilize their food and nutrition requirements, cash transfers for the households to meet their non-food requirements like health and educations costs, and asset transfer or input subsidies to help them begin to rebuild and secure their livelihoods.

  3. What are the impacts, costs, constraints and tradeoffs?

    Poverty is multi-dimensional and therefore, building resilience in African smallholder producers must be informed by knowledge on the composition of assets possessed. FANRPAN’s partner of choice for this research programme was World Vision International because they invest in a local designated area for a period of 15 years addressing the food and livelihood needs of the community. By training and utilizing World Vision staff and school leavers living within the designated research area, the cost for data collection and analysis is greatly reduced to about USD15.00 per household. Data analysis and follow-up updating of the databases is coordinated by the local universities. Such a practice empowers the academia to engage with local communities and address relevant development issues. Through multi-stakeholder policy dialogue workshops, the information on livelihoods is availed to the local development authorities and communities for use in household and community development planning and policy processes.

  4. What is needed to increase these impacts at scale?

    There is need to invest in research on mapping household livelihood assets and identifying vulnerability to provide empirical evidence to inform policy and programming investment decisions. An analysis on the “cost savings” realized as a result of a more targeted development interventions would stimulate up-scaling of the vulnerability assessment practice. The livelihood asset databases should be housed within the community/local district offices and updated on a regular basis particularly after a “shock” so to improve targeting of relief and development interventions. The livelihood assets databases are useful for modeling future scenarios regarding impact of climate change of livelihoods.

  5. When do these actions need to take place, and who needs to take them?

    Vulnerability assessments must be undertaken as part of the preparation process for the development of national climate adaptation plans (NAPAs). National governments and development partners need to mobilize financial resources for research at community level. Funding for the national climate adaptation plans should be made available for household vulnerability studies. Local universities and development organizations should take the lead in conducting household vulnerability assessments, and making sure that the outputs are made available for decision making at household and national level.

⇑ back to top

Learning Event 4

How can integrated risk management assist poor, food insecure and vulnerable people adapt and build resilience to climate change?

Room and Time: 11.10 – 12.10 in Room C

Organiser: Richard Choularton, World Food Programme and David Satterthwaite, Oxfam America

Objectives

The objectives of the event are to

  • Examine how risk management tools can be integrated to support adaptation and building resilience among the poorest and most vulnerable households.
  • Share the lessons and good practice from public-private partnerships that integrate risk management measures for more resilient outcomes at community level.

Summary

The question of how to build rural resilience against growing climate-related risk is critical for addressing global poverty. In response to this challenge, the United Nations World Food Programme and Oxfam America have launched the R4 Rural Resilience Initiative. R4 builds on the initial success of a holistic risk management framework developed by Oxfam America to enable poor farmers to strengthen their food and income security through a combination of improved resource management (risk reduction), microcredit (prudent risk taking), insurance (risk transfer), and savings (risk reserves).

The first example of this pioneering approach is the Horn of Africa Risk Transfer for Adaptation (HARITA) project, a joint initiative led by Oxfam America, the Relief Society of Tigray (REST), Swiss Re, and a dozen other public and private partners. HARITA has broken new ground by enabling Ethiopia’s poorest farmers to pay for crop insurance with their own labour. In its first three years of operations in Ethiopia, HARITA has shown promising results for replication, increasing the number of households taking out insurance from 200 in the initial year to over 13,000 in 2011.

Programme

Slides with key messages for learning event 4

Chair: Richard Choularton, World Food Programme
Rapporteur: To be confirmed
5 mins Introduction to learning event
15 mins Film: HARITA Project and R4 Rural Resilience Initiative
10 mins Presentation of HARITA and R4 approach
30 mins Discussion

Biographies

Richard Choularton is a Senior Policy Officer in WFP’s Climate Change and Disaster Risk Reduction Office and is responsible for developing innovative risk management solutions targeting the most vulnerable and food insecure populations. He is WFP’s R4 Rural Resilience Initiative coordinator.

Oxfam America, To be confirmed.

Swiss Re, To be confirmed.

Key information

  1. Headline messages
    • As climate change drives an increase in the frequency and intensity of natural hazards, the challenges faced by food-insecure communities struggling to improve their lives and livelihoods will also increase. The question of how to support counties in their efforts to build rural resilience against climate-related risk is critical for addressing global poverty.
    • Without effective risk management tools, the poorest and most vulnerable farmers adopt conservative risk management positions and are trapped in poverty and food insecurity. Integrating public and private sector risk management tools, including disaster risk reduction and insurance, with social safety nets, can provide a powerful platform for helping these populations to adapt and prosper.
    • Integrated risk reduction and management approaches are more cost effective. In the R4 Rural Resilience and HARITA models developed by Oxfam America and the World Food Programme, one dollar invested in insurance-for-work results in at least three times the value: it protects livelihoods against drought, it results in concrete risk reduction measures implemented in communities, and it opens opportunities for community members who are able to access credit and build a better future.
    • Integrating insurance into social safety nets helps build the private sector in a way that supports adaptation and development. While the poorest farmers opt to pay for insurance through labor on community risk reduction activities, better off farmers are provided access to insurance which they can buy in cash. This approach extends the benefit of this private-sector risk management tool, adding to the sustainability of the programme.
  2. What is the evidence for these messages?
    • Nearly 1.4 billion people live on less than US$1.25 a day. Seventy percent of these people live in rural areas where they depend on agriculture. These people face an increasing exposure to disaster risk which is exacerbated by other risks including price volatility, population growth, and decreasing production and yields associated with land degradation.
    • Every year, climate-related disasters affect more than 200 million people with damages amounting to over $70 billion annually around the world. With climate change this is expected to get worse.
    • Droughts, floods and storms accounted for almost 90% of all economic losses from natural disasters in Africa last year.
    • The most food insecure people often have the least capacity to cope with natural disasters and are the most vulnerable to their impacts.
    • Natural disasters affect dietary diversity and reduce food consumption, with significant negative impacts on overall nutrition and food security. In Ethiopia, children born during a disaster in an area that was affected are 35.5% more likely to be malnourished and 41% more likely to be stunted. While in Kenya, children born in a drought prone area have a 50% higher change of being stunted and 71% higher chance of being severely stunted.
  3. What are the impacts, costs, constraints and tradeoffs?
    • HARITA has broken new ground in the field of rural risk management by enabling Ethiopia’s poorest farmers to pay for crop insurance with their own labor. This was the result of a demand-driven process, where communities themselves suggested being able to pay for insurance with labor and have been key stakeholders in the design of the insurance mechanisms as well as the selection of community-based disaster risk reduction activities.
    • In its first three years of operations in Ethiopia, HARITA has shown promising results for replication, increasing the number of households taking out insurance from 200 in the initial year to over 13,000 in 2011
    • This year some beneficiaries will receive a partial payout from their insurance policies. We will be monitoring very carefully the impact of these payouts to evaluate the effectiveness of the approach in protecting beneficiaries against shocks while they building their livelihoods and asset bases.
    • The R4 Rural Resilience Initiative aims to test whether this approach can be scaled up in other countries. The approach will be scaled up to reach over 400,000 beneficiaries in four countries, including Senegal and Ethiopia, over the coming years.
  4. What is needed to increase these impacts at scale?
    • While there are promising results, this kind of integrated risk management approach need to be tested at scale. The R4 Rural Resilience Initiative is one such effort, but more are needed. Climate change adaptation funding should be prioritized for this type of activity as they promise to develop the tools and capacities needed for large scale adaptation for the poorest most food insecure people around the world.
    • At the same time, these good practices need to be rigorously evaluated, with the cost benefits and impacts well understood. This will allow government and the private sector to invest with confidence.
    • Countries need technical support and tools to facilitate the development and scale-up of affordable pro-poor risk management and transfer solutions.
    • Regional and global reinsurance solutions are also needed to allow governments and their partners to reduce the cost of transferring risk. As the market for agricultural insurance in developing countries grows, the overall costs will decrease.
  5. When do these actions need to take place, and who needs to take them?
    • Now. While the adaptation framework is being developed, we must invest in developing and testing the tools governments, communities, and ultimately the most vulnerable people need to adapt. The lessons from the crises ranging from the Horn of Africa to Niger and Pakistan illustrate the real threat climate risk poses to these populations and the urgent need for action to reduce risk and support adaptation now.
⇑ back to top

Learning Event 5

What tools and policies are required to bring Food security, adaptation, and mitigation together?

Room and Time: 11.10 – 12.10 in Room D

Organisers: Alexandre Meybeck, Marja Liisa Tapio Bistrom and Reuben Sessa, (FAO)

Objectives

The objectives of the this learning event are

  • To present case studies that have successfully implemented climate smart agriculture practices.
  • To explore the importance of having the appropriate institutional and financial arrangements that helped achieve this success.

Summary

The Learning Event will showcase specific practices, policy and financial options which have been proven to ensure CSA adoption in a number of national contexts. Presenters will highlight the requirements, considerations and assessments that need to be made in developing systems which have multiple long term benefits and which limit tradeoffs. The learning event will in addition review how climate finances (including both market, public, international and domestic financing) have been made accessible to implement CSA and other adaptation and mitigation processes. The need to integrate climate change policy and finance into agricultural investment strategies, national food security plans and institutional development initiatives will also be discussed.

Programme

Slides with key messages for learning event 5

Chair: Marja-Liisa Tapio-Bistrom, FAO
Rapporteur: Nadine Azzu, FAO
3 mins Introduction to learning event, Marja-Liisa Tapio-Bistrom, FAO
8 mins Low Carbon Development in Rural Communities: climate finance for small holder adaptation, mitigation and rural development – Richie Ahuja, EDF
8 mins Sustainable land management in the Faguibine area, Mali – Alamir Sinna Toure, Ministry of Environment and Sanitation of Mali
8 mins Examples of proven practices and policy options – Alexandre Meybeck, FAO
30 mins Interactive session and discussion
3 mins Wrap up, Marja-Liisa Tapio-Bistrom, FAO

Biographies

Marja Liisa Tapio Bistrom is senior officer and team leader of FAO mitigation climate change and agriculture programme (MICCA). She is an agricultural economist with long term expertise in food security and climate change in various regions of the world.

Richie Ahuja is an expert in business development strategies and spearheads Environmental Defense Fund (EDF)’s outreach efforts in India. Richie is focused on exploring innovative local ideas for low-carbon development and on disseminating information and best practices. His expertise includes: market and business drivers, business development and market-entry strategies.

Alexandre Meybeck is Senior Policy Officer on Agriculture, Environment and Climate Change in the office of the Assistant Director General of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Protection Department of FAO. He is also coordinating the FAO/UNEP sustainable food systems program.

Dr Alamir Sinna Toure is Head of the Department for Studies and Planning in the Agency for Environment and Sustainable Development (Ministry of Environment and Sanitation of Mali). He works to integrate the environment into development planning (national and local). As Operational Focal Point of the Global Environment Fund (GEF), he coordinates the preparation of projects in all GEF focal areas. He is responsible for the process of identifying best practices for sustainable land management, which are generally adaptation to climate change, to be up scaled in Mali.

Nadine Azzu is an Agricultural Officer (crop biodiversity) at the Plant Production and Protection Division at FAO. Her background is environmental management, environmental impact assessment and biodiversity, and is currently working on sustainable crop production intensification.

Key information

  1. Headline messages
    • Best practices have to be designed for a landscape within the local context and will take into account the local conditions, resources and capacities. They also have to lend themselves to scaling up for wider adoption.
    • Any systems developed should address small holder farmer's desire for flexibility on which cropping systems they employ and help the farmer manage their risk exposure.
    • The focus needs to be on efficiency of resource utilization in order to optimize farm level yields, profits, reduce emissions and enhance ecosystem services.
    • We are working within dynamic systems so best practices have to evolve over time to meet the changing needs demands and conditions.
    • Best practices go beyond the farm to include good data management, supporting good science, and building institutional capacity.
  2. What is the evidence for these messages?
    • Presenters will show effectiveness of the actions in relation to productivity, resilience, mitigation and livelihoods benefits and provide information on the level of uptake that has been achieved.
  3. What are the impacts, costs, constraints and tradeoffs?
    • Practices increased efficiency and resilience of the farming systems. Changes of practices have to be accompanied by extension services. Costs for upfront investment and income forgone and or increased risk during transition period need to be accounted for.
    • Work in India being presented has looked at the resource linkages between the farm, local forest, communities and local households. Examples of best practices employed include precision fertilization, household biogas units, more efficient cook stoves, multi-cropping, use of local pesticides, etc. Some practices such as precision fertilization lend themselves to wider state or district level adoption while others may be more local in scope. Currently these practices are being taken up by over 150,000 families spread over three states in India
    • Efforts have been on inclusion and bottom up development at all levels. Project deployment is done with and through local partner institutions and best practices employed are designed in conjunction with the communities.
  4. What is needed to increase these impacts at scale?
    • It has to be mainstreamed through the various programmatic and policy documents, at the appropriate level.
    • To use, whenever possible existing institutions, or develop them according to local specificities.
    • Use and merge different tools, including different financial tools, to facilitate adoption, including to cover the critical transition phase.
    • To take these practices to scale, we need to have a parametric approach to developing solutions that work at landscape levels within the local context. This involves investment in building local institutional capacities on science, solutions design and delivery, and implementing good MRV systems that provide a positive feedback loop to support flexibility in a dynamic system.
    • Changes in practices require capital which is a scarce commodity with the small holder farmers. We need to find innovative ways to deliver this capital and ensure it is deployed in an effective and efficient manner.
  5. When do these actions need to take place, and who needs to take them?
    • The complexity of CSA requires the close cooperation and involvement of a number of stakeholders to ensure the required uptake and sustainability. The learning event will present some examples of how farmers, practitioners and national governments can ensure effective CSA practices, policies and finance.
⇑ back to top

Learning Event 6

What role can the private sector play in climate smart smallholder agriculture in Africa?

Room and Time: 11.10 – 12.10 in Room E

Organiser: Dr Joan Kagwanja, Policy officer, Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA)

Objectives

This session, through practical examples, will:

  • Demonstrate effective private-public partnerships for successful climate smart agriculture.
  • Highlight interventions related to integrated soil fertility management (ISFM), and high-yielding seed varieties (with traits critical to climate change adaptation).
  • Illustrate the importance of market linkages, financing and insurance in support of African smallholder farmers in staple food crops systems

Summary

Research products by international and national research systems provide many of the technologies and tools needed for climate smart agriculture to thrive. What often prevents sustainable uptake of these important technologies and management practices, however, is inadequacies along the agricultural product value chain, especially the absence of private sector players in input and output markets who are critical to producing and distributing inputs, buying produce from smallholder farmers and providing technical assistance.

This event will bring practical examples from AGRA supported initiatives that seek to promote private sector involvement in support of climate smart agriculture to facilitate improved input generation and distribution systems, output markets, financing and insurance. These initiatives have been successful in facilitating improved seed, ISFM and market access for smallholder farmers in a manner that not only improves their incomes but helps them to build resilience to climate change.

Programme

Slides with key messages for learning event 6

Chair: Dr Bashir Jama, Director, Soil Health Program, AGRA
Rapporteur: Dr Joan Kagwanja Policy officer, Land, Property Rights and Environment, Policy and Partnerships Program, AGRA
5 mins Introduction and opening remarks: Dr Joe DeVries, Director Program for African Seed Systems, AGRA
8 mins Improving the productivity of maize and soya beans through a climate smart value chain approach, Mr Austin Ngwira, Director, Clinton Development Initiative, Malawi
8 mins Indigenous seed companies facilitate smallholder access to seeds for climate change adaptation. Mr Ngila Kimotho, Chief Executive Officer, Dryland Seed Limited, Kenya
8 mins Building resilience to climate change through weather index insurance for smallholders in the Sahel, Mr Patrick Mommeja, Head of Life related Insurances and Microinsurance, Allianz
25 mins Discussion
5 mins Wrap up session, Dr Joan Kagwanja (AGRA)-Rapporteur

Biographies

Dr Bashir Jama is the Director of the Soil Health Program, AGRA. He has previously worked as advisor on agriculture and rural development at the Bureau for Policy Development, UNDP; on renewable energy technologies in Kenya; and at the World Agroforestry Centre. He has served on expert committees, including the UN Millennium Project Task Force, and is well published on soil fertility management and drylands resource management and conservation.

Dr Joseph DeVries is the Director, Program for African Seed Systems, AGRA. Before this he worked at the Rockefeller Foundation leading several initiatives, including one on genetic improvement of African crops and development of seed systems, a program which saw the development of hundreds of improved crop varieties in Africa. Before that, he was director for food security in Africa at World Vision. He has written widely including “Securing the Harvest” co-authored by Dr Gary Toenniessen.

Dr Joan Kagwanja is the Policy officer for Land, Property Rights and Environment, Policy and Partnerships, AGRA. She previously helped establish the AU-ECA-AfDB Land Policy Initiative at the UN Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA), that was successful in developing the Framework and Guidelines for Land Policy in Africa, and getting the endorsement of AU Heads of states and Government Summit. Before this she worked for the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI).

Mr Austin Ngwira is the Director of Agriculture, Clinton Development Initiative, Malawi. He previously worked for Unilever Malawi as marketing manager and other international development organizations including DANIDA and Land O’Lakes, Inc. He has consulted for many organizations and is well published on agriculture and food security and private sector development issues. He serves on several boards including the Cotton Development Trust and Ex-Agris Africa Ltd.

Mr Ngila Kimotho is the Chief Executive Officer, Dryland Seed Limited, Kenya. He is an entrepreneur and founder of the Dryland Seed Limited. He holds a degree in Food Science & Technology and is trained in industrial and seed processing. He has worked previously as director, for National Water Conservation & Pipeline Corporation and Agribusiness and Allied (K) Ltd.

Mr Patrick Mommeja is the Head of Life related Insurances and Microinsurance, Allianz, a company that has 15 subsidiaries in West Africa, Central Africa and Madagascar, offering a comprehensive range of insurance and reinsurance solutions for both private and corporate customers. He previously worked at AGF Outre Mer as the head of life related insurance.

Key information

  1. Private sector involvement through small enterprises and partnerships with smallholders is critical to seed multiplication and distribution, facilitates access to seed for smallholders to increase their incomes while building climate change resilience.

    Dryland Seed Ltd (DSL) is a private company that is successfully using breeder and foundation seed from the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) through an out-grower type model to produce, promote and distribute drought resistance high crop yielding varieties in semi-arid Kenya. In addition to maize, DSL is focusing on orphan crops including Beans, Green grams, cow peas, pigeon peas, sorghum, and pearl millet. Production/dissemination has increased from 500 to 800 tonnes yearly following successful demonstrations (20 per year) and participation in agricultural shows to increase farmer demand for the seed. By establishing a network of agro-dealers/stockists in 6 Kenyan districts, DSL has facilitated seed distribution resulting in increased farmer yields and incomes.

  2. Private sector involvement in developing viable index based insurance initiatives helps to reduce weather related risks for smallholders, allowing them sustainable incomes and flexibility to experiment on different innovations that build resilience to climate change.

    Allianz, formerly AGF has used its expertise gained in over 70 countries to develop an index based insurance product for 80,000 smallholder farmers in Mali and Burkina Faso, reducing their risks to drought, flood and birds---all critical to building resilience to climate change. The insurance facilitates financing, critical to the adoption of climate smart agricultural technologies and practices, including improved seeds and ISFM.

  3. Innovative public-private integrated value chain models that seek to remove impediments related to input and output markets are much needed to enhance smallholder investment and success in climate smart agriculture.

    The Clinton Development Initiative, through an out-grower type model is helping to increase soybean and maize productivity for 34,000 smallholder famers in Malawi through enhanced ISFM and market linkages. ISFM practices that include intercropping, crop rotation and low-tillage have interested many more farmers who cite reduced striga, less time and labor; and improved crop performance as the reasons they are adopting these practices. By linking the farmers to lead banks and off-takers, the initiative is helping to effectively link farmers to credit (target of 4,800 farmers), inputs (seed growers linked to seed companies) and output markets (118 Mt soya supply contracts with agroprocessors).

⇑ back to top

Learning Event 7

How can we build the adaptive capacity of vulnerable African farmers by developing response farming practices?

Room and Time: 11.10 – 12.10 in Room F

Organisers: Mary O’Neill, Climate Change Adaptation in Africa, International Development Research Centre (IDRC) and Department for International Development (DFID)

Objectives

The purpose of this session will be to demonstrate how using Participatory Action Research (PAR) to involve local farmers in the process of developing response farming practices has built their adaptive capacity. It will reveal some spinoffs related to building and strengthening institutional processes that facilitate and enable adaptation. The objectives will be to:

  • Present PAR as a strategy for engaging vulnerable farmers in the process of developing adaptive responses to climate change impacts;
  • Use case studies from various African countries to illustrate the impacts of these strategies and consider the potential for scaling out and applying them in other contexts.
  • Consider how solutions on community resource management are reached and implications for vertical and horizontal capacity building across stakeholders.

Summary

This learning event addresses how Participatory Action Research (PAR) on agricultural adaptation in Africa has led to the development of “response farming”. Response farming refers to a flexible system of farming in which key decisions affecting crop water utilization and crop yield are modified each season in response to pre-season and early season predictions of rainfall. Working with the Climate Change Adaptation in Africa (CCAA) program – a research program jointly funded by Canada’s IDRC and the UK’s Department for International Development (DFID) – partners used PAR to identify a set of practices that would allow vulnerable farmers to engage in this practice, increasing their adaptive capacity. Researchers have identified effective communication, participatory processes, and the integration of local knowledge as important factors in implementing response farming practices.

The event draws on case studies from countries including Benin, Kenya, Tanzania, Ethiopia, and Sudan to illustrate how response farming practices have been developed and implemented, and the impacts that these practices have had. Case studies will demonstrate the importance of involving farmers and local communities in the process of developing response farming techniques in order to ensure a relevance, ownership, and hence uptake. Presenters will also discuss strategies for scaling out response farming strategies in other contexts to facilitate sustainable adaptation in agricultural systems.

Programme

Slides with key messages for learning event 7

Chair: Isabelle Proulx, IDRC
Rapporteur: Mary O’Neill, Communications Officer, Climate Change Adaptation in Africa, IDRC
5 mins Introduction: Isabelle Proulx
25 mins Developing Response Farming Through PAR: Case Studies from Benin and East Africa – Dr Henry Mahoo and Said Hounkponou, CCAA Research Partners
30 mins Question and Discussion Period

Biographies

Isabelle Proulx is a geological engineer who specializes in climate change adaptation and water management. She is a Program Manager at IDRC, where her work includes managing the Climate Change Adaptation in Africa program.

Dr Henry Mahoo’s expertise is in the fields of soil and water conservation, conservation agriculture and rainwater harvesting in Tanzania. Dr Mahoo started as lecturer at SUA in 1988, is now an Associate Professor in agricultural engineering, and has been managing and implementing research on improving water productivity in rainfed agriculture. He is the lead researcher on a CCAA-supported project addressing climate change adaptation by small-scale farmers in east Africa.

Said K. Hounkponou is an agro-economic engineer and Executive Director of «Initiatives pour un Développement Intégré et Durable (IDID)», a Benin-based non-governmental organization working on various issues relating to climate change adaptation. He is the lead researcher on a CCAA-supported project on adaptation in rural communities in Benin.

Mary O’Neill is the Communications Officer with the CCAA program.

Key information

  1. Headline messages
    1. Integrating indigenous knowledge and scientific knowledge is key to producing effective forecasts that will be accepted, understood, and used by farmers at the local level.
    2. Participatory action research (PAR) was crucial to facilitating farmers’ realization of their potential to adapt.
    3. Effective communication of local scale climate forecasts, especially in the framers’ own language, is important in enabling them to understand and use the forecasts.
    4. There is need for climate scientists to continue working with smallholder farmers in the different areas in the country so as to generate localized climate information for each area.
    5. Community processes have their own solutions and approaches to building adaptive capacity; these ought to be seen as a foundation to expanding choices and crafting adaptation strategies.
  2. What is the evidence for these messages?

    The key messages stated above are based on the results of Participatory Action Research projects undertaken by African scientists supported by the CCAA program.

    The table below presents data gathered in a study on Tanzania, showing that maize productivity increased significantly among project participants in a dry, sub-humid area (Table 1). As discussed below in the “Impacts” section, the sub-humid upland is thus less vulnerable to drought, which is the main climate extreme undermining agricultural productivity.

    Table 1 Productivity changes (maize yield in ton/ha) in Tanzania

    Change drivers Baseline 2008 Now 2011
    Project intervention Mean STDev Mean STDev
    Project 0.91 0.87 1.43 1.93
    Non-project 0.97 0.80 1.06 1.30
    Agro-ecology
    Lowland 1.16 1.10 1.42 1.69
    Midland 1.04 0.76 0.94 1.19
    Upland 0.68 0.47 1.06 1.72
    Ag water systems
    Irrigated 1.54 1.28 2.18 1.67
    Rainfed 0.96 0.82 0.79 1.47

    Significance tests of mean differences:
    Only significant between project participants and in the upland at 10% level

    Across case studies, over 95% of both project and non-project farmers saw an increase in access to weather information between 2008 and 2011 (Figure 1).
    Further interest was in finding out the nature of the information these farmers had access to over the evaluation period. There was a positive increment in the proportion of both project and non-project farmers (10% and 7%, respectively) who accessed weather information monthly in 2011 over the 2008 baseline situation.

    Seasonal forecasts are the predominant form of weather information accessed by the majority. Over 85% of both project and non-project farmers reported to receiving weather information seasonally between the two evaluation periods. The project participants were updated bi-weekly by weather forecasts from the project’s IK forecasters. The IK forecasts were provided for a subset of the project participants. Those outside the project continued to rely on the seasonal forecasts (3-month forecasts) that come from the national meteorological system. Increasingly, the wider farming community, including non-project farmers, appears to be using scientific forecasts.

    Figure 1 Proportionate changes in nature of weather information between 2008 and 2011

  3. What are the impacts, costs, constraints and tradeoffs?
    • In the Gedarif state of Sudan, the adoption of the fabricated planter created job and market opportunities and also increased crop yield by 50% among stakeholders.
    • In Kenya, farmers in study areas used recommended practices in choice of drought resistant crops varieties and increased their annual income by over 60% and have greater food security.
    • In Ethiopian project sites, improved farming practices have helped to save time and labour for farmers and improved yields of maize from 0.8 tons/per ha to 6.1 tons/ha. Farmers have thus improved their annual income and household food security.
    • In Tanzania, the comparisons of maize yields indicate a significant increase (at the 10% level) in maize yield among project participants since the project intervened. Maize was the primary crop.
    • In Tanzania, more than 95% of both project and non-project farmers had access to weather information between 2011 and 2008. Further interest was in finding out the nature of the information these farmers had access to over the evaluation period. There was an increase in the proportion of both project and non-project farmers (10% and 7%, respectively) who accessed weather information monthly between 2008 and 2011. The 10 and 7 percent differences are respective percentage changes entailing an increase from 2% to 12% and 2% to 9%. Therefore, further up-scaling of IK forecasting is necessary if wider farming communities have to be updated monthly on short-range weather information.
  4. What is needed to increase these impacts at scale?

    Policies
    In Tanzania, for example, it was found that policy and institutional arrangements were weak in providing agro-meteorological services to smallholder farmers. There is no policy that addresses the key issues identified through PAR as crucial to implementing response farming (inclusion of indigenous knowledge; effective communication, particularly in local languages; and cooperation between farmers and the scientific community). The Tanzania Meteorological Agency (TMA) is in the process of revising its policy in order to address some of the above shortcomings. We will need to see similar initiatives and engagement of policymakers in other contexts in order to facilitate wider uptake of response farming practices.

    Investments
    Weather-based agro-advisory was developed and has been established. This supports farmers to derive the right decision and make significant benefits from the use of climate information. It is interpreted for location specific needs and presented in a format that can easily be understood by farmers. It is recommended to develop location specific advisories quickly, efficiently and cost effectively; and avail them in time without any delay for farmers and their support agents to make the best use of available information to mitigate or take advantage of variable climate. There is also need to enhance the infrastructural development for weather information gathering. This is through modernization of existing weather information gathering facilities, establishing others in areas that are not well covered, and integrating other technologies such as remote sensing in data gathering and analysis.

    Negotiations
    Crop production is dependent on rainfall availability. Meteorological information need to be made available to farmers and other stake holders in time for proper implementation of adaptation strategies such as in the choice of crops and crop varieties. This calls for a close linkage between the meteorological, research and extension departments and the farmers for faster information transfer and timely development of necessary mitigation strategies. A Research-Meteorological liaison office needs to be established to work with the current Farmer-Research-Extension liaison office in achieving the above goal.

    Incentives
    Our research has shown that involving local stakeholders in the process of developing response farming techniques creates a sense of ownership and allows for a demonstration of the benefits of adapting these practices. For example, in the case studies presented it was clear that farmers and local communities were benefitting from increased agricultural productivity and associated economic opportunities. Therefore, there should be an emphasis on creating incentives to ensure that response farming practices are taken up in other contexts.

    Institutional arrangements Institutional arrangements will be key to facilitating the policy changes, investments, negotiations , and incentives cited above. Climate change and variability impacts are ongoing, and will thus require that sustainable processes are put in place through which farmers, local communities, scientists, and policymakers can continue to cooperate and ensure effective adaptation. By bringing together key stakeholders through PAR, for example by bringing together local communities and meteorological services, the research and case studies presented here have started to build these channels and strengthen key institutions.

  5. When do these actions need to take place, and who needs to take them?

    As our case studies have shown, climate change is real; it is happening and will continue to happen. Poor communities especially in arid and semi-arid areas, are more vulnerable and therefore action is required now. Individuals, Communities, Local Governments, national Governments, NGOs, Institutions and the International community should be involved.

⇑ back to top

Learning Event 8

How can mitigation funding benefit smallholders’ food security and build climate resilience?

Room and Time: 12.20 – 13.20 in Room A

Organiser: Olivia Taghioff, Swedish International Agriculture Network Initiative (SIANI), Stockholm Environment Institute

Objectives

  • To share knowledge and experience from the Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project (KACP).
  • To establish the relevance of climate-smart agricultural practices for current and future food security.
  • To identify and discuss funding and policy options for change.

Summary

The Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project (KACP), developed by the Vi Agroforestry programme, receives mitigation funding from the World Bank’s BioCarbon Fund for soil carbon sequestration and above-ground sequestration in trees.

Apart from providing farmers with a small sum of extra cash, the switch to climate-smart agricultural practices has had the additional benefits of increasing crop yields as well as improving farmer’s resilience to climate change. According to a recent World Bank commissioned study, the crop yield increases alone are worth US$ 200-400/ha/year.

In KACP, Vi Agroforestry and the BioCarbon Fund has developed the Sustainable Agricultural Land Management (SALM) methodology. A model approach to measuring soil carbon sequestration is being used, which has been approved by the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) agency. SALM is a public good, free for any organization to use.

However, concerns have been raised, notably by the International Agricultural Trade Policy Institute (IATP), about the adequacy of a carbon market approach to financing a shift to sustainable agriculture. This event will also discuss these concerns.

Programme

Slides with key messages for learning event 8

Chair: Thomas Rosswall, Chair, CCAFS
Rapporteur: Olivia Taghioff, Stockholm Environment Institute
5 mins Introduction to learning event
15 mins Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project – Amos Wafula Wekesa, Vi Agroforestry
5 mins The BioCarbon Fund – Ellysar Baroudy, World Bank
5 mins Questions on Soil Carbon Markets for Climate Finance – Karen Hansen-Kuhn, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy
30 mins Questions and discussion

Biographies

Thomas Rosswall is Chair of the Independent Science Panel for the CGIAR research programme on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food security (CCAFS). He is a microbial ecologist and ecosystem scientist with extensive research experience in agriculture and climate change. He has been Director of the Swedish University for Agricultural Sciences and Executive Director of the International Council for Science (ICSU).

Amos Wafula Wekesa is the Environment and Climate Change Advisor of Vi Agroforestry and coordinates the implementation of the Kenya Agriculture Carbon Project in Western Kenya. He has 10 years’ experience of Agroforestry and natural resource management in the Lake Victoria Basin.

Ellysar Baroudy is the Team Leader for the ten Kyoto funds at the World Bank. She has worked for various international organizations providing environmental technical assistance. An important aspect of the BioCarbon Fund is to develop forestry and land use activities currently not included in the CDM, such as soil carbon and reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. Elly has a background in environmental sciences.

Karen Hansen-Kuhn is the Programme Director, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. She has been working on trade and economic policy since the beginning of the NAFTA debate, focusing especially on bringing developing country perspectives into public debates on trade, food security and economic policy. She has been International Coordinator of the Alliance for Responsible Trade and Policy Director at the U.S. office of ActionAid.

Key information

  1. Headline messages
    1. Climate-smart agriculture clearly is a Triple-Win
    2. It is the promise of yield increases rather than the mitigation funding itself which is the main incentive for farmers to change practice, the mitigation funding constitutes an icing on the cake
    3. KACP’s methodology has been approved by Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) and can be applied elsewhere
  2. What is the evidence for these messages?

    KACP demonstrates the triple-win effects of climate-smart agriculture. The yields of KACP farmers have increased by 15-30%. Testimonials from farmers and extension workers indicate that the adoption of SALM practices is the main reason for this yield response. Agroecology is an important tool for maintaining and restoring natural ecosystems, which are vital for landscape resilience and the delivery of ecosystem services.

    The adoption rate among farmers in KACP is high and at the moment 1,000 farmer groups and about 20,000 farmers are implementing climate smart agriculture and transforming western Kenya acre by acre. It is the prospect of increased crop productivity and sustainability that is the main reason for farmers to join the programme.

    The SALM methodology is in the process of being approved by the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) (should be ready by the time of COP 17). The methodology is very generic and can be applied anywhere in the world.

  3. What are the impacts, costs, constraints and tradeoffs?
    1. The new SALM methodology being based on a model approach and activity based monitoring is truly innovative in design. The model approach has been proven to be about 4-5 times cheaper than traditional soil sampling. The methodology will allow smallholders in Africa can access the carbon market and be the basis for attracting an additional stream of carbon revenues which will benefit smallholders in Africa.
    2. The methodology and project has been developed through participation from a number of partners, Farmer groups, World Bank, Vi Agroforestry, Joanneum research, Unique Forestry consultants and Sida with strong support from the Kenyan government.
    3. Poverty within the soils equals poverty for those who live on it. The KACP promotes farming practices related to cropland management (i.e. cover crops, crops rotation, mulching, improved fallows, compost management, green manure, agroforestry, organic fertilizer, residue management) and rehabilitation of degraded land. Hence, economic benefits will be based on (i) increased yields and productivity which will increase food security; and (ii) additional income sources due to payment for improved soil fertility through carbon sequestration. Additionally, an important co-benefit will be enhanced resilience to climate variability and change.
    4. IPCC has predicted that by 2020, in some countries, yields from rain-fed agriculture could be reduced by up to 50%. Agricultural production, including access to food, in many African countries is projected to be severely compromised. KACP is counteracting this negative trend.
    5. 20,000 smallholders in 1,000 farmer groups participating in KACP. And the interest for participating is high. KACP will reach 60,000 smallholders in the next 2 years.
    6. The cost for achieving these impacts in KACP has been 175,000-200,000 USD per year (2009-2010). The Carbon Finance Document (CFD) of KACP estimated 2008 the total cost for implementing the KACP has been estimated at 1.5 million USD over a 20 year period. Assuming that KACP is producing 1.5-2.8 MtCO2 would mean KACP carbon costs between 0.54-1.0 USD per ton CO2.
    7. Data shows that yields are increased by 15-30% (2009-2010) in fields belonging to farmers in the KACP. This leads to increased food security.
    8. Besides contributing to increased yield the agricultural practices KACP is promoting like cover crops, crops rotation, mulching, improved fallows, compost management, green manure, agroforestry, organic fertilizer, residue management are all contributing to increased resilience through increased water retention capacity in soil, reduced soil erosion, better soil properties, diversification of farm incomes etc.
    9. Through KACP farm enterprise development (FED) approach smallholders will benefit from a number of other social benefits include increased production from fruits, vegetables, poultry and fish products, firewood. KACP also include support in village, savings and loan associations (VS&LA), this financial service empower smallholders to start small enterprises and the contribution to the “social” fund with the VS&LA system smallholder can assist in the event of sickness or accident. The support in organizational development of farmer groups and cooperatives strengthens the cohesion within the community.
  4. What is needed to increase these impacts at scale?
    1. Increased funding for agricultural development, from both public and private sources. African counties should honor their commitment in the Maputo declaration and spend at least 10% of national budgets on agricultural development. Donor agencies should be able to at least match that.
    2. Combining financing streams, for example long-term international ODA and carbon finance, may benefit funding of agricultural programmes aiming to achieve multiple objectives. Synergistically combining financing from public and private sources, as well as those earmarked for climate change and food security are innovative options to meet the investment requirements of the agricultural sector.
    3. Agriculture needs to be given much more attention within the UNFCCC negotiations since it is arguably the greatest cause as well as the greatest victim of global climate change.
    4. In countries where agriculture constitutes a major part of the economy, it should be given a prominent place in NAMA and NAPA strategies. These strategies should also be integrated in practice since in agriculture, mitigation and adaptation clearly go hand in hand.
    5. KACP and the SALM methodology are very important steps towards a credible framework for agricultural mitigation and carbon sequestration. It is crucial to invest in projects that build such credibility if agriculture is to become a target of public or market-based mitigation funding.
    6. Revival of agricultural extension services is crucial, the imperative of climate change requires increased capacity of farmers to make both short and long term planning decisions.
    7. Long term commitment produces results and impact. Climate-smart agriculture is not a quick-fix.
    8. A bottom-up approach is necessary to achieve results and there needs to be increased support to farmer’s organizations at the community level. Farmers’ voices need to strengthened in the political process.
⇑ back to top

Learning Event 9

How can rainwater management help support smallholder farmers’ ability to adapt to climate variability and change?

Room and Time: 12.20 – 13.20 in Room G

Organiser: Michael Victor, CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food

Objectives

The purpose of this session is to demonstrate the value of investing in rainwater management approaches in the short and long-term as they are key to strengthening the adaptive capacity of smallholder farmers throughout Africa. The specific objectives are to:

  • Promote and raise awareness about the concept and practice of RWM as an important climate smart technology for Africa;
  • Develop a network/alliance of interested partners to take forward the RWM concept and initiative;
  • Provide policy recommendations as to how this can be scaled up more widely and better placed in regional and global climate change discussions.

Summary

Rainwater management strategies represent a key climate smart agriculture approach centred on capturing, storing, managing and increasing productivity of water for climate change adaptation. It ensures rehabilitation of landscapes and sustains crop and livestock production during prolonged dry periods, as well as mitigating flood events. This is a smart strategy since it is decentralized, adaptable, inexpensive, relevant to large areas of lands currently being used for rainfed agriculture, and capable of managing under scenarios of increasing or decreasing rainfall.

This session will provide a framework for rainwater management approaches and illustrate how they contribute to climate adaptation, livelihood improvement and sustainable natural resource management. It will examine the mix of technical, institutional and process innovations needed in order for rainwater management to be successfully implemented at scale. This session will explore five climate smart technologies:

  1. Zai pits for in situ water management
  2. Groundwater utilization
  3. Landscape water management
  4. In-field rainwater harvesting
  5. Small reservoirs

Programme

Slides with key messages for learning event 9

Chair: Dr Deborah Bossio, Theme Leader - Productive Water Use, International Water Management Institute
Rapporteur & Facilitator: Michael Victor, Communication Coordinator, CGIAR Challenge Program for Water and Food
5 mins Introduction to learning event – Dr Deborah Bossio
10 mins Dr Tilahun Amede, CPWF Nile Basin Leader, International Water Management Institute and International Livestock Research Institute, Addis Abba, Ethiopia
5 mins Transition to the bus-stops
20 mins Rainwater Management bus stops
This session will seek participants’ views of the best practices in RWM and how they can be effectively scaled up. The key questions are:
  • What would you invest in and why/why not?
  • What will it take to scale the practice up?
  • What needs to be done at the local, national and regional levels?
Participants will be broken into four groups and “given” 1 million dollars which they can invest in. they will get to see 2 technologies and spend 10 minutes at each bus stop to learn about the RWM best practice. At the end of this they will be given the option of deciding how they would ‘invest’ their 1 million dollars (how much would they invest in the four best practices or would they invest in something else).
5 mins Transition to discussion
15 mins A facilitated discussion will follow the bus stop session around the five best practices and the three questions

Biographies

Dr Deborah Bossio is a soil scientist who has been working in multidisciplinary sustainable agricultural development research for the past 15 years. She is a Theme Leader at the International Water Management Institute for the Theme 'Productive Water Use' which aims to improve the livelihoods of rural peoples by providing the evidence base to improve water management in smallholder farming systems in Africa and Asia. She was a coordinating lead author for the Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture (CA), and an author for the International Assessment of Agriculture Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD).

Dr Tilahun Amede is a systems agronomist, a joint appointee between the International Water Management Institute and the International Livestock Research Institute, and currently working as the Nile Basin Leader for the CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food. Before the current position, he worked as a Senior Research Fellow at CIAT working on Integrated Watershed Management in the African highlands and as an Assistant Professor in Hawassa University in Ethiopia. Tilahun has published more than 40 papers in peer reviewed journals.

Michael Victor is currently the Communication Coordinator, CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food. He has been working in agriculture and natural resource management with a focus on communication for development and access to information for more than 20 years. Previously he worked in Laos as an information and communication adviser to the National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute and in Thailand as the Regional Community Forestry Training Center.

Dr Enyew Adgo has a background on soil science/soil fertility with a focus on soil and water management. He was a research director for natural resource management and is currently an associate professor at Bahir Dar University and Dean for the College of Agriculture and Environmental Science.

Dr Cobus Botha has a background in soil science and Agronomy with a focus on soil and water relations. He is a specialist researcher at the Agricultural Research Council – Institute for Soil, Climate and Water.

Dr Mathias Fosu is a soil scientist and currently the head of Soil Science section of CSIR-Savanna Agricultural research Institute. He has over 20 years experience in soil health issues and experience in insitu rainwater management technologies. He has recently been involved in climate change issues and a lead author for UNEP project on assessment of climate change on urban and peri-urban agriculture in selected cities in the developing world.

Key information

  1. Headline messages and evidence

    1. Global climate change will affect river basins in different ways. The most difficult changes to handle are likely to be increases in seasonal and inter-annual variability of rainfall in many of the basins, which is particularly challenging in sub-Saharan Africa where primarily smallholder rainfed agriculture supports 95% of production.

    The Volta basin is classified as ‘highly seasonal’ with low precipitation and high temperatures coinciding to make crop production particularly vulnerable to water constraints. In the Limpopo seasonality and low rainfall conspire to create vulnerability, and in the Nile basin rainfall variability is considered the major water related vulnerability. Predictions, which still have a great deal of uncertainty, indicate that rainfall variability, which is already a major problem, will increase in all these basins, total precipitation will increase in Nile and Volta, but decrease in Limpopo, and temperatures will increase significantly across all three. Thus climate change will increase water related vulnerability in all three basins, but in different ways.

    2. Because of variability in climate, landscapes and livelihood strategies a continuum of water management approaches and methods are needed which are decentralized, adaptable, inexpensive and applicable under scenarios of increasing or decreasing rainfall.

    It is well accepted that water storage, in its various forms, provides a mechanism for dealing with rainfall and climate variability that, if planned and managed correctly, increases water security, agricultural productivity and adaptive capacity. As such, water storage can make an important contribution to safeguarding livelihoods and reducing rural poverty. Systems that combine complementary storage options are likely to be more adaptable and acceptable than those based on a single storage type. Livelihood strategies and landscapes vary across sub-Saharan Africa. Scoping studies indicate that while 4.6 million people on 9.4 million ha of land could benefit from water storage leading to full irrigation, more than 27 million people on 64 million ha of land could benefit immediately from soil moisture management.

    3. Rainwater management applied at multiple scales in a coordinated, inclusive manner is an important contributor to climate change adaptation.

    Evidence demonstrates that rainwater management can regulate water budgets and buffer during dry-spells, enabling food production and productivity during abnormal periods that are predicted to increase due to climate change. By reducing unproductive evaporation it can also contribute to mitigation through increased carbon sequestration, increased biomass and vegetation cover in African landscapes.

    4. Water management for adaptation would have greater impact if a shift in emphasis is made towards coordinated multi-sectoral small-scale, adaptable technologies.

    In many countries, water policies (national, regional, public and private) tend to focus on large scale infrastructure and are fragmented across scales and sectors. The government of Ethiopia has shown its commitment to a range of options, and has plans for 1.8 M ha of land to be irrigated by 2015, with approximately even distribution among medium, large and small scale irrigation, and rainwater harvesting. They also have complementary plans for land management through the ‘Investment Framework for Sustainable Land Management’. The newly constituted Agricultural Transformation Agency may help Ethiopia accelerate realization of these plans. Review suggests that development of specific a ‘green water’ policy integrating land and water management based on integrated water resources, agricultural and rural development and environmental sustainability policies, may provide positive incentives for long-term investments.

  2. What are the impacts, costs, constraints and tradeoffs?

    Zai Pits in-situ water management (Volta basin), an indigenous practice that spread widely with large benefits, when given support through NGO’s and development of farmer organizations. Zai pits have been demonstrated to increase cereal yields by a factor of 10 and also allows collecting 25% of a run-off coming from five times its area. The impacts in Burkina Faso have been impressive with more than 300,000ha of land revitalized through zai and an increase of 80,000tons of food. The main triggers for this success were demonstration of successful initiatives, development of farmer based organizations and support from public, private and NGOs. The main constraints is that need to invest more labour and access and application of manure.

    Groundwater utilization (Volta and upper Nile) - necessity induced innovation has increased the spread of shallow groundwater irrigation and government investments have paved the way for more cost intensive deeper wells for community scale irrigation. Use of ground water is a climate smart technology as it avoids risk of rainfall increases, decreases and variability by allowing farmers to grow produces safe from floods and droughts. More than 3,000 household in sub-saharan Africa have increased income with a potential benefit to more than 100,000 people through greater productivity and job creation. The main triggers for this was the need for innovation to respond to erratic rainfall, farmer to farmer information sharing and market opportunities and new road access. The constraints are access to land and inputs, energy for pumping and reliability of shallow groundwater

    Landscape management (upper Nile) - linking food aid to rehabilitation efforts provided incentive for collective action through which community benefits could be realized. A landscape approach allows for impacts to be seen at a wider level. In one watershed area in Ethiopia, more than 4,500 hh were active in activities allowing for wider impact at the landscape level. Sand bag check dams supported with biological measures have been able to check huge amounts topsoil. Direct sowing of multipurpose trees on changed gullies into productive land where farmers can harvest fodder either for selling or for their animals. A number of dome-shaped water harvesting structures were built for private uses on individual holdings. Using the stored water the owners are growing different cash crops such as mangoes, papayas, avocadoes, oranges, coffee, cabbage and onion, in their home gardens. Decreasing the livestock movement in search for water from 12 km to 3 km through development of watering points increased milk yield by about 35%, but also saving the labour for herding and reduce herding time and reduce livestock-related resources degradation. The main constraints were building trust and capital of the people to work together. This was done by farmer to famer training and field visits to other successful initiatives.

    In-field Rainwater harvesting (Limpopo) is a sustainable technique that contributes to climate change adaptation through increased plant availability water, buffering during dry spells and increased yields. In Limpopo area this is promoted on a 2 meter wide strip between alternate crop rows and stored in basins. IRWH The stored rainwater is used productively to grow a variety of grain and vegetable crops for household consumption. More than 1400 households are using this technology and it has increased food security. The triggers included establishment of community -based water harvesting groups and support services from the provincial agriculture department and the Agriculture Research Center. Some of the constraints include lack of financing for inputs and capacity to use IRWH technologies.

    Small reservoirs (Volta) can support adaptation to climate change by storing water during the rainy season to be used further during the dry season or time of erratic rainfall. For millions of small holder farmers throughout west African and even in Southern Africa, reliable access to water is the difference between self-sufficiency and hunger. It has been shown that 1 small reservoir can provide reliable access to water for 2500 rural people. The multiple use characteristic of small reservoirs is the main reason for successful adoption by local communities. The benefits include: off season crop production, livestock watering, fisheries, fish farming, domestic use, groundwater recharge and other ecological services.

  3. What is needed to increase these impacts at scale?

    Common across the adoption of the range of these technologies is:

    1. Commitment from national government and regional institutions, translated into policy, budgets and implementation;
    2. Institutional support – encouraging uptake from a range of adaptable technologies, facilitating collective action and ensuring inter-sectoral coordination;
    3. Government investment in small-scale infrastructure (often contrary to development assistance and foreign investors’ agendas);
    4. Investment in market infrastructure;
    5. Decision making based on participatory planning and inclusive land use policy.
  4. When do these actions need to take place, and who needs to take them?

    Action needs to take place now to bring the full range of water management strategies to the forefront of climate smart agricultural development. Combined and coordinated initiatives at local, national and regional levels need to take place in order to ensure today’s opportunities are maximized.

    At the international and regional level the Africa Climate Policy Center of the UNECA has an important role in coordinating consensus on adaptation priorities for sub-Saharan Africa. In addition, regional bodies such as basin authorities (e.g. the Nile Basin Initiative and the Volta Basin Authority) and regional eco-political bodies (e.g. ECOWAS, SADC and COMESA as well as regional development banks such as the ADB) have a role in setting policy, investment priorities and negotiating amongst countries in transboundary basins.

    At national level, rapid diagnosis in any given country can flag the needed entry points, ensuring that the science informs analysis and response. In Ethiopia, for example, capacity for implementation of good policy is a weakness that needs investment now and is a recognized priority by government. Similarly, genuine participation of water users and food producers to both identify problems and seek solutions will ensure the appropriate water management adaptation strategies are put in place.

    To be climate smart, agricultural water management needs to be a consideration in all rural development initiatives by international and national investors. Necessity driven innovation by farmers is often the biggest source of transformation of rural communities and landscapes. To bring long-term sustainable adaptive capacity benefiting the rural poor, farmer driven innovation needs support and encouragement that respect local land tenure and water rights, equity in access to resources and markets, finance, information and insurance.

⇑ back to top

Learning Event 10

How to get climate-smart smallholder goods to market?

Room and Time: 12.20 – 13.20 in Room B

Organisers: Jeff Brez, International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD); and Café Direct

Objectives

  • Demonstrate that climate-smart agriculture is a market opportunity for smallholder farmers - case study on organic cocoa farmers in São Tomé e Príncipe
  • Identify key opportunities and barriers from both producer & consumer perspective for scaling up this opportunity
  • Is climate-smart agriculture ‘marketable’ to small-holders, in terms of production methods/approaches, building their resilience/sustainability and linking to markets and consumers?

Summary

By the late 1990s, the cocoa sector in São Tomé e Príncipe was in severe decline. A crash in the price of the commodity crippled the country’s economy, whose exports were 95% dependent on cocoa, and threw one-quarter of its farmers into poverty. Thanks to public-private partnerships involving the Government, IFAD and four private sector enterprises including Cafédirect, the country’s cocoa exports have registered a 10-fold increase since 2004, from 50 tonnes before 2004 to 600 tonnes in 2010, and similar trends are expected for coffee and pepper.

Organic agriculture enhances soil structure and soil fertility, reduces erosion and increases the water retention capacity of soils, making them more productive and resilient to weather shocks and climate change. It also increases biodiversity which builds resilience to storms, heat and increased pest and disease pressure. Conservation agriculture practices underpin the organic system, featuring zero-tillage, forest canopy maintenance, and intercropping of food security crops such as sweet potato, cassava and banana. What other climate-smart approaches provide opportunities for smallholders to access national and global food markets? And does the concept of climate-smart smallholder products provide a useful way of framing market opportunities for the rural poor?

Programme

Slides with key messages for learning event 10

Chair: Matthew Wyatt, Director, Climate Change, DFID
Rapporteur: Jeff Brez, IFAD
5 mins Introduction to learning event
15 mins How did climate smart organic cocoa/coffee in São Tomé e Príncipe save smallholders from poverty? - Wolfgang Weinmann, Cafédirect
15 mins What do smallholder farmers need to practice climate-smart agriculture? – Carlos Sere, IFAD
15 mins How can we make climate-smart agriculture relevant for consumers? – Rachel Mhene, Fairtrade Africa
10 mins Moderator: key points and take aways

Biographies

Matthew Wyatt is Head of the Climate and Environment Department of the UK's Department for International Development (DFID). He has 25 years experience of working on development issues, at DFID, the European Commission and the UN. Recent jobs include head of DFID in Eastern Africa (based in Nairobi), UK Ambassador to the UN agencies in Rome, and Assistant President for External Affairs at the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).

Wolfgang Weinmann is Head of Strategic Development at Cafédirect, one of UK’s leading ethical and social enterprises. In this capacity he sets the strategic direction for the company’s positioning as a sustainability leader and pioneer in demonstrating long-term business value of incorporating environmental, economic, social and ethical perspectives into its business model. Wolfgang has a distinguished and diverse career in the sustainable development field, from humanitarian aid interventions, project design & management to senior consultancy assignments with international organisations.

Carlos Seré, is the Chief Development Strategist of IFAD and heads the Office of Strategy and Knowledge Management. Prior to joining IFAD, Mr Seré worked as Director General for the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) in Nairobi, Kenya. Before that, he worked for the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) as Director of the Regional Office for Latin America and the Caribbean in Montevideo, Uruguay. From 1982 to 1990, Mr Seré worked as Senior Economist and Head of the Economics Section of the Tropical Pastures Program at the Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT), in Colombia.

Nokutula Rachel Mhene works for Fairtrade Africa and is an environmentalist with social sciences background with 8 years of national and regional [Southern Africa] experience in issues of natural resources management/environmental management – climate change, land rights, water resources management, and gender from a human rights and a pro poor livelihood approach. Her work after leaving government service was on research and advocacy in which she engaged with government officials, parliamentarians, communities and the private sector mainly in the area of natural resources and with particular emphasis on land rights.

Key information

  1. Headline messages

    The power of climate smart agriculture
    Introduction of good agricultural practices with smallholders have had some progress over past decade; with the challenge from negative climate change impacts this agenda gains more momentum & urgency for a truly sustainable agriculture.

    The power of consumer purchase decisions
    Climate smart practices need to lead to climate smart products. Consumers increasingly enquire about how products are produced and what social & environmental impact is generated in the grower communities.

    The power of public-private collaboration
    The complexity of challenges around climate change impact, market access for smallholders, sustainable business models require more collaboration amongst different stakeholders.

  2. What is the evidence for these messages?

    The power of climate smart agriculture

    • Smallholder farmers are increasingly aware of the negative impacts of climate change and the need to adapt their practices
    • By linking already proven best agricultural practices & developing new ones to the climate change agenda, gives smallholder famers additional incentive & motivation for change
    • However, this is not enough – a link to added-value markets recognising the effort & contribution of farmers must be achieved

    The power of consumer purchase decisions

    • Single origin product launched in UK with strong message around environmental and social impact; increased sales volumes & listings confirming that it is an appealing concept to consumers
    • General consumer trends in UK are all about more traceability, environmental& social impact and quality – it needs to be a perfect mix to make consumers switch habits
    • Increase of ethical & environmental product labels & certification schemes worldwide

    The power of public-private collaboration

    • Sharing common objectives and approaches, very different stakeholders agreed collaboration and resource input to deliver tangible results in relatively short time
    • Complex problems require collaboration: global food companies do not have skills/knowledge about smallholder climate smart agriculture but increasingly are incorporating sustainability into their core strategies
  3. What are the impacts, costs, constraints and tradeoffs?
    • Smallholder famers are organized & trained in climate-smart agricultural practices (organic & Fairtrade production standards)
      • 800 smallholder cocoa farmers in 11 communities on STP organised in associations
      • Famers trained in standards & practices
    • They own and manage the processing & export part of the supply chain
      • Cecaq-11 Export coop set-up, legalised and started trading in 2010
      • Increase of export volumes: 2010- 2 containers/ 2011- 4 and forecast for 2012- 8
    • They are linked to added-value markets in consumer countries, selling a high quality processed product (export cocoa) instead of a raw material in the local market
      • Four-to-five fold increase of price paid for every kilogramme of cocoa that is harvested
      • Additional income received for community development projects via Fairtrade premiums (US$200/tonne of export cocoa)
    • High quality, traceable, single origin, climate smart product launched in competitive market
      • Listings in 2 of UK’s major supermarket chains + other specialised retail distributors, reaching millions of consumers across the country
      • Links UK consumers via their purchase choice to global issues around climate change impacts and sustainability agenda
    • Long-term sustainable partnerships are established to make it work
      • Public-private partnership between company Cafédirect, Cecaq-11 producer organisation and IFAD
      • Cafédirect’s business model places sustainability & impact on grower communities at the heart of commercial approach; it is not an add-on;
  4. What is needed to increase these impacts at scale?
    • Better integration of smallholder farmers producing climate-smart products into global supply chains
    • Climate smart agriculture must combine environmental best practices with quality improvement
    • Raising awareness of consumers everywhere about the positive impact their purchase decisions can have on smallholder farmer livelihoods
    • Long-term partnership approaches between smallholder farmers & development agencies and private sector
    • Multinational food brands increasingly see sustainability, including topic of climate change, as vital part of their business strategies, hence we need increase of brands that use climate-smart certification labels in different consumer markets
  5. When do these actions need to take place, and who needs to take them?
    • To be discussed at learning event.
⇑ back to top

Learning Event 11

How the Niger Republic is building resilience of farmers to climate change and increasing food security?

Room and Time: 12.20 – 13.10 in Room C

Organiser: Dr Abasse Tougiani, National Agricultural Research Institute of Niger,(INRAN)

Objectives

  • To facilitate knowledge sharing on evergreen agriculture
  • To highlight best practices in Farmer-Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR) in Niger Republic

Summary

In Niger, the climate is characterized as dry-tropical with rainfall becoming more erratic. Soil fertility is also depleting and crop yields are low as much as below 400kg/ha. The groundwater table was dropped about 1m/year. This situation has made food security a serious challenge. While the environment is harsh, farmers are developing new agroforestry systems. The system is based on experimentation and development of organizational approaches which create new groups and associations of farmers. The objective is to build resilient and productive livelihoods through Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration.

More than 5million hectares have been re-greened, 200 million new trees have been planted, and extra 500,000 ton of cereal have been produced each year, and 1.25 million farm households have been involved. Many regenerated species provide edible leaves and fruits for humans. Increasingly, value added products are bringing in additional income. This is an example of low cost agricultural intensification that has benefitted farmers, and helped them adapt to climate change by building more drought resilient farming systems. Because of its low cost, ease of adoption, rapid results and multiple benefits, applicability of FMNR should be promoted in as many regions as is practicable.

Programme

Slides with key messages for learning event 11

Chair: Dr Peter Dewees (World Bank)
Rapporteur: Dr Robert Zougmoré (CGIAR, CCAFS)
5 mins Introduction to learning event
20 mins How the Niger Republic is building resilience to climate change and increase food security through scaling up farmer-managed natural regeneration? – Dr Abasse Tougiani, National Agricultural Research Institute of Niger; Dr Souley Massaoudou Amadou, National Council for Environment and Sustainable Development, Niger
30 mins Discussion
5 mins Wrap up

Biographies

Dr Peter Dewees is the Lead Environment Specialist, in the Europe and Central Asia (ECA) division of the World Bank. He joined the Bank in 1994. In the ECA region Peter has been responsible for activities related to the forestry, watershed management, and nature protection subsectors, with a particular interest in the role and impact of EU accession on these sectors.

Dr Robert Zougmoré is an agronomist and soil scientist. He is currently based at ICRISAT-Mali where he is the Regional Program Leader of CCAFS West Africa. Before joining CCAFS, he was a senior staff member of the Environment Program of the Sahara and Sahel Observatory (Tunisia) where he worked on the development and implementation of initiatives on: Desertification, land Degradation and Drought; and, climate change adaptation in Africa (analyzing adaptation strategies of vulnerable populations in arid and semi-arid zones with the overall aim being to contribute defining informed policies for good environmental governance in Africa.

Dr Abasse Tougiani is an Agroforester, specialized in tree Improvement and conservation of Forest genetic resources. He has seventeen years of experiences and has been the Regional Director of Environment in Agadez, Desert Northern part of Niger, Head of Forestry Research Unit at Maradi Research station . He is an Associate Scientist at World Agroforestry Research Centre for West and Central Africa. He has published many scientific articles and is a part time lecturer in Agroforestry Master at the University of Niamey.

Mr Amadou Souley Massaoudou is the Executive Secretary of the National Council of Environment for Sustainable Development, Niger, which aims to revitalize the communication gateways with the public in order to achieve better visibility of progress in environmental management in Niger. As an environmental specialist, he is also the Political Focal Point since August 2010.

Key information

  1. Headline messages
    1. Vegetation cover through farmer tree regeneration contribute reducing temperatures The FMNR system increases availability of water to people, crops and livestock
    2. FMNR increases crop production and improves food security for a growing population
  2. What is the evidence for these messages?
    • 5,000,000ha have been re-greened in 20 years;
    • 200 million of new trees have been protected(=CO2 sequestration);
    • Additional cereal production/year 500,000 Ton;
    • Rehabilitation of barren land using water harvesting techniques 300,000ha but also recharge of groundwater(+5m)
    • Increased vegetation cover reduces wind speed and temperatures
  3. What are the impacts, costs, constraints and tradeoffs?

    Who benefitted? 1.25 million farm households.

    How have they benefitted?

    • Improved soil fertility and increase in crop yields and fodder production;
    • The rural poor survive on trees and have higher tree densities;
    • More fodder, more water: Reduction in conflict between herders and farmers;
    • Strong reduction in time required for collection of firewood;
    • Livestock is increasingly controlled and depends six months/year on tree fodder

    What makes it innovative?

    Inclusion of youth in village committee activities

    New village committees were established to ensure that:

    • Action plans are developed collectively;
    • Rules for management of FMNR are shared and respected by all villagers (+ sanctions enforced in case of non respect)

    How did you work with others to achieve the impact?

    • Build a solid and frank partnership of farmers communities with various stakeholders including local NGOs, development programmes and projects
    • Understand and use the traditional knowledge and know how
    • Empowering rural community in such a way that farmers themselves controlled the process
    • New strategies and policies to combat desertification and land degradation

    What were the costs of achieving these impacts, and were there any constraints and trade offs in achieving these impacts)?

    • Only labour for protection, no investment costs, no recurrent costs to governments
    • It is common in Niger to treat all land as common property once crops are harvested as there is free access to farmland during the dry season. This allows spreading of tree seeds through animal dejections, which contributes to natural shoot and growth of trees in the farnlands.
    • It was common for those who did things differently to become the butt of jokes.
  4. What is needed to increase these impacts at scale?
    • Identify existing successes
    • Farmer- to-farmer visits to show local innovations, good practices and success achieved by producers or by researchers in similar agro-ecological conditions
    • Formalize new forestry law (or environment code) that allows farmers to have an exclusive and access right on their field trees.
    • Adaptation of national policies: put a greater emphasis in forest policies that promote natural tree regeneration in crop fields by farmers, rather than planting trees (cheaper and more significant impacts).
    • Workout rehabilitation plans for low lands and inland valleys to allow agro-sylvo-pastoral intensification and thus, to reduce the pressure on NFMR resources
    • Build a movement of organizations
    • FMNR Competition at different levels
    • Build (inter-) village institutions
    • Develop a communication strategy to insure widespread sharing of successful experiences and their dissemination
  5. When do these actions need to take place, and who needs to take them?

    These actions need to take place throughout a year by local communities and farmers themselves control the process.

⇑ back to top

Learning Event 12

How Denmark is mitigating green house gases and increasing production in the agriculture sector?

Room and Time: 12.10 – 13.20 in Room E

Organiser: Anette Engelund Friis, Danish Agriculture and Food Council

Objectives

The purpose of the event is to share the experience of a developed country, Denmark, in developing climate smart agriculture. Specific objectives are:

  • To demonstrate how Danish farmers can produce food and energy, and at the same time reduce green house gas emissions.
  • To explore options for scaling-up these practices, and for other countries to learn from the Danish experience.

Summary

Agriculture has an important role to play in mitigating GHG emission. Increased resource efficiency, targeted non-food biomass production, and changed agricultural practices are key to climate-smart agriculture in Denmark. Danish agriculture is a good example of climate-smart agriculture, as Danish farmers are producing food, energy and ecosystem services, with positive effects on the environment and green house gas emissions.

Concrete actions have been taken, e.g. a ban on burning of straw on the fields, action plans for the aquatic environment, ammonia action plan, action plan for joint biogas plants, environmental approval act for livestock holdings, new energy policy agreement, agreement on Green Growth 2009 — which include reduction of the agriculture sectors emissions of greenhouse gasses. Further to this, the Danish Government has a goal to reduce overall green house gas emission by 40% by 2020.

Programme

Slides with key messages for learning event 12

Chair: Anette Engelund Friis
Rapporteur: Jos Cozijnsen
2 mins Introduction to learning event: Anette Engelund Friis
10 mins Climate Change and Agriculture – Danish results and initiatives – John Hermansen, Aarhus University
10 mins Danish Climate-Smart Agriculture: Producing food, energy, and ecosystem services within an agro-ecosystem – Bhim Bahadu Ghaley, University of Copenhagen
10 mins A South African Experience with Climate-Smart Agriculture: Can we learn from the Danish example? – Ishmael Sunga, CEO of SACAU
2 mins Moderator: introduction to discussions
20 mins Questions and discussion
3 mins Wrap up by rapporteur Jos Cozijnsen

Biographies

Anette Engelund Friis is the climate policy advisor with the Danish Agriculture and Food Council, and also responsible for climate change issues at the World Farmers’ Organization. Prior to this post, Anette was employed at the Danish Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries. She holds an MSc in Political Science.

Jos Cozijnsen is a consulting attorney on emissions trading. He has worked as an attorney and for the Netherlands' Environment Ministry on the development of climate change policy. He was a member of the Dutch delegation to EU and international climate meetings including Kyoto. Since 1998 he has been an independent attorney working on national and international projects related to emissions trading. His clients are companies, public authorities and NGO’s.

Professor John Hermansen heads the Farming Systems Group at Aarhus University in the Dept of Agroecology. He has experience in farming and food systems research with focus on identifying developing possibilities for farms in relation to societal expectations. He has conducted research on organic livestock farming systems and on lifecycle assessment of foods and non food. He has supported the EU the Standing Committee on Agriculture Research by participating in thr working group on Agriculture and Sustainable Development.

Dr Bhim Bahadu Ghaley is a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Faculty of Life Sciences at University of Copenhagen, where his research is on combined food and energy systems compared to conventional food production systems. Previously, Bhim Bahadur Ghaley worked in Bhutan for the Agriculture Extension Service for 7 years, followed by an exclusive research career for 3 years in Renewable Natural Resources (RNR) Research Centre in Bhutan before moving to Denmark.

Mr Ishmael Sunga, CEO of SACAU

Key information

  1. Headline messages
    1. it is possible to reduce GHG emissions and at the same time increase food production and produce energy
    2. there are synergies between environmental services, mitigation and adaptation
    3. creating incentives for farmers is crucial
  2. What is the evidence for these messages?

    From 1990 – 2009 greenhouse gas emission from Danish agriculture have been reduced by 28 percent. Reductions have been achieved through enhanced crop land and grass land management, increased yields and better management of inputs. In addition, Danish agriculture is a major supplier of green energy, with 100771 TJ per year, equaling 20 percent of renewable energy production in Denmark.

  3. What is the impact of the practice, and how were these achieved including details on costs, constraints and any trade offs?

    In addition to reduced emissions, there is evidence of a number of ecosystem services being delivered, including lower pesticide use compared to neighbouring countries and reduced leaching of nutrients to the aquatic environment

    These results have been achieved through national programmes, such as the national pesticide action plans, and the national water action plans. Instruments have included quotas, taxation and production restrictions.

    The effort has, as such, collided with a need for increased output. Reductions in yields have been avoided through breeding and selection. The Danish case could be said to illustrate the trade-offs between increased productivity in highly industrialized agriculture and the need for ecosystem services. The Danish case, however, also illustrates, that the delivery of ecosystem service and GHG reductions is possible without a decrease in productivity.

  4. What is needed to increase these impacts at scale?

    In order to improve the efficiency of the practice, the economy of individual farmers must be considered. Financing and incentive schemes are crucial in order to avoid a decrease in competitiveness, which would in turn decrease ownership and/or compliance.

    Furthermore, the investment cycles of agriculture must be considered and investments in technology should be underpinned in order to allow for take-up of new technologies. Furthermore, an infrastructure should be established enabling technology transfer beyond industrialized agriculture.

    When formulating targets, incentive schemes, financial support as well as assessing the costs (for society and farmers), impacts, and synergies between climate change policies and other environmental policies must be taken into account. This requires the development and refinement of proper baseline scenarios and indicators.

  5. When do these actions need to take place, and who needs to take them?

    The specific regional and local farming practices and agri-environmental conditions rather than general targets should guide the process. This requires inclusion by government agencies of farmers’ organizations and farmers on the ground.

    Policy makers must formulate long term policies. This allows farmers to adopt new practices and measures to work. Therefore, immediate action is required.

⇑ back to top

Learning Event 13

How can pastoralist traditional knowledge be combined with atmospheric science and contribute to adaptation policy making?

Room and Time: 12.10 – 13.20 in Room E

Organiser: Giacomo Rambaldi, Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Co-operation (CTA) with the Association for Indigenous Women and Peoples of Chad (AFPAT), and Indigenous Peoples of Africa Co-ordinating Committee (IPACC).

Objectives

  • To raise awareness on the relevance of pastoralist Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) in elaborating adaptation policies, and the need for integrating it through participatory processes with atmospheric science;
  • To table the need for multi-sectoral national adaptation policy platforms for farmers, fisherfolk, hunter-gatherers and pastoralists to (i) provide evidence of their TEK and community perspective on adaptation; (ii) enable convergence of TEK and atmospheric science; (iii) convert TEK and science into appropriate media useful for decision-making; (vi) affirm the rights of resource users ensuring equitable access and stewardship of natural resources; (v) prevent or mediate intra-communities conflicts; and (vi) increase transparency in governance.

Summary

This event focuses on the lessons and result of a process lasting several months with representatives from pastoralist communities, atmospheric scientists and policy makers. This started at a Climate Change Conference in Bonn in June, ended in a workshop organized by IPACC, AFPAT and the Chadian Ministry of Water in N’Djamena in November. This workshop was attended by two Chadian ministers, representatives from pastoralist communities from different countries meeting with scientists from the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), the national meteorological services, National Centre for Support to Research (CNAR) and representatives from international development organizations including CTA, UNESCO, UNDP and GEF-SGP produced a declaration for CoP17.

The N’Djamena Declaration highlights the relevance of traditional and scientific knowledge systems, their potential synergies and the establishment of enabling climate adaptation policies and processes. Both systems of knowledge, and their synergistic interactions, can facilitate their complementary application and ensure effective communication between scientists, pastoralists and policy makers. It further recognises the need for considering pastoralism as an important economic activity in the African continent.

Programme

Slides with key messages for learning event 13

Chair: Dr Douglas Nakashima, UNESCO
Rapporteur: Giacomo Rambaldi, CTA
10 mins Introduction to the Mbororo case – Ms Hindou Oumarou Ibrahim
8 mins Film
40 mins The panel discussion:
  • Dr Nigel Crawhall, International Union for the Conservation of Nature, South Africa
  • Hindou Oumarou Ibrahim, Coordinatrice de l’Association des Femmes Peules Autochtones du Tchad (AFPAT), N'Djamena, Chad
  • Mr Cheikh Kane, African Centre of Meteorological Application for Development (ACMAD), Niger
  • Mosses Ndiyaine, Indigenous Heartland Organization, Tanzania
3 mins Summary of key issues raised during the discussion – Giacomo Rambaldi

Biographies

Dr Douglas Nakashima, is the Chief, Small Islands and Indigenous Knowledge Section, Division of Science Policy and Sustainable Development, UNESCO.

Dr Nigel Crawhall is a South African sociolinguist. He is the Director of Secretariat for the Indigenous Peoples of Africa Coordinating Committee. He is the voluntary Chairperson of the Theme on Indigenous Peoples, Local Communities, Equity and Protected Areas (TILCEPA), an inter-Commission advisory body of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

Ms Hindou Oumarou Ibrahim is an M'Bororo woman from Chad. She is Director of the Association des Femmes Peules Autochtones du Tchad, a community based organisation of nomadic herding women. Hindou is an Executive Committee member of the Indigenous Peoples of Africa Coordinating Committee, representing the Sahelian sub-region of Africa. She is currently the indigenous peoples representative to the UN Environmental Programme's Major Group for Indigenous Peoples, and Deputy Chair for the whole of the Major Groups network.

Mr Cheikh Kane serves as a technical adviser in the African Center of Meteorological Applications for Development (ACMAD), based in Niamey, Niger. He is involved in an adaptation project (ViGIRisC) conceived in order to set up pilot early warning and advisory climate services, as a response to climate variability and change, with focus on food security and pastoral issues.

Mosses Ndiyaine is the Executive Director of the Indigenous Heartland Organization is a Maasai from Oloirobi village in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area, Tanzania. He grew up as a cattle herder and was send to school by catholic missionaries. He authored a number of publications on indigenous people. Mosses is a member of IUCN CEEPS and various pastoralist task forces and most notably the Orkoneri Mass Media in Simanjiro District in Tanzania.

Giacomo Rambaldi is a senior programme coordinator at CTA. His involvement in Participatory GIS (PGIS) dates back to the late 80’s. In year 2000 he launched Participatory Avenues www.iapad.org dedicated to sharing knowledge on the topic and in 2004 the Open Forum for PGIS www.PPgis.Net - discussion list with over 2500 members. His interests include visualizing indigenous spatial knowledge for improving communication, facilitating peer-to-peer dialogue and managing conflicts on territorial issues; collaborative natural resource management; networking; information management and communication; and web 2.0 applications for development cooperation.

Key information

  1. Headline messages
    • Science alone cannot effectively represent or address livelihoods, communal governance and cultural systems.
    • Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) involves a combination of skills and knowledge, located in a socio-cultural context.
    • A properly contextualized approach to adaptation needs to be founded in a participatory framework where science and TEK are integrated and mutually reinforcing.
  2. What is the evidence for these messages?

    Participatory mapping (as well as other research methods) demonstrates that indigenous resource use systems are not arbitrary, but rather they show a sophisticated understanding of natural resources and ecosystems capacity, over laid with governance systems that moderates human access and usage.

  3. What are impacts, costs, constraints and tradeoffs?

    Participatory 3D Modelling (P3DM) and communication processes have been successfully used in related contexts including (i) self-determination; (ii) management and amelioration of territorial conflicts, (iii) action research, (iv) community-based planning and natural resource management, (v) risk and vulnerability assessments; (vi) safeguarding ever-evolving intangible cultural heritage and its intergenerational transfer. In the case debated in this Learning Event, these processes will be applied to mobile indigenous people and specifically the context of in climate change adaptation.

    IPACC’s use of P3DM in Gabon, for one of the first platforms of governance and rights discussions in relation to the management of lands adjacent to Waka National Park has led to a process of government and conservation NGOs moving to adopt the methodology as a national priority in resource and governance planning for all National Parks. TEK has in this case been recognised as a valid tool for natural resource planning between scientists, administrators and indigenous peoples.

  4. What is needed to increase these impacts at scale?
    • The case presented at this Learning Event is already enfolding on a national scale. Up-scaling could occur on a regional scale
    • Effective procedures of the National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) in place, which recognise the value and authority of indigenous knowledge (e.g. Uganda NAPA)
  5. When do these actions need to take place, and who needs to take them?

    Actors involved are local communities affected by climate change, their representing national and regional bodies (e.g. AFPAT and IPACC), atmospheric scientists (e.g. WMO) and policy makers (e.g. concerned national ministries).

⇑ back to top

Hosted and sponsored by

 The Rockefeller Foundation logo
 EU logo
 IFAD logo
 World Food Programme logo
 CCAFS logo
 FANRPAN logo
 Durban University of Technology logo
 CTA logo
 Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries logo
 GFAR logo
 World Bank logo

Organised by

 CGIAR logo
 Landbrug & Fødevarer logo
 Farming First logo
 FAO logo
 Donor Platform logo
 Southern African Confederation of Agricultural Unions logo
 World Farmers’ Organisation logo

Media partner

 Reuters AlertNet logo
You are browsing a past event archive, click here to go to the newest ARDDay Site ->