Priorities for Public Sector Research on Food Security and Climate Change by Leslie Lipper, FAO and...

How does climate change alter agricultural strategies to support food security?

Philip Thornton (CGIAR/CCAFS) and Leslie Lipper (FAO)

With contributions from Stephen Baas, Andrea Cattaneo, Sabrina Chesterman, Kevern Cochrane, Cassandra de Young, Polly Ericksen, Jacob van Etten, Fabrice de Clerck,

Boru Douthwaite, Ashley DuVal, Carlo Fadda, Tara Garnett, Pierre Gerber, Mark Howden, Wendy Mann, Nancy McCarthy, Reuben Sessa,

Sonja Vermeulen, Joost Vervoort

Structure of the presentation

• Threats of CC to agricultural production systems• Responses to CC• Making transitions happen• How to monitor and evaluate?• Conclusions: priority areas for CGIAR and FAO

Focus is on how CC changes our approach to agricultural transitions to support food security

1 Threats of climate change toagricultural production systems

Threats of climate change to production systems: where are we going?

Ed Hawkins, www.climate-lab-book.ac.uk/2013/updated-comparison-of-simulations-and-observations/

Possible reasons for apparent slowdown in warming rate?• Internal climate variability• Assumed radiative forcings

may need adjustment• Climate simulators are too

sensitive to greenhouse gases

• Observational uncertainty

Trends are clear – much still to learn on the details

Global heat balance : land effects, ocean effects

Average projected % change in suitability for 50 crops to 2055

Crop suitability is changing …

Lane & Jarvis, SAT eJournal, 2007

0º

20º

-20º

0º 20º 40º

Climate-induced livelihood transitions may well result

Areas where cropping of an indicator cereal may become unviable between now and the 2050s -- where farmers may have to rely more on livestock as a livelihood strategy?

Jones & Thornton (2009)

To 2090, ensemble mean of 14 climate models

Thornton et al. (2010)

>20% loss5-20% lossNo change5-20% gain>20% gain

Length of growing period (%)

African agriculture in a +4 °C world

Impacts of changes in climate variability?

Does it depend on scale?

• At household level: may becatastrophic

• At more aggregated levels: persistence of effects? E.g. land-use changes, regional livestock herd losses due to drought

• Aggregation hiding substantial spatial heterogeneity• Equilibrium models versus dynamic approaches

What’s the evidence base?

Very poor – e.g.• IPCC (2007) – “effects of climate variability may be as great as

changes in climate means”• SREX (2012) – 1 page (in 600) on impacts of climate extremes on

food systems and food security

2 Responses to climate change

Smallholders’ response to climate change

Technologies and practices to increase resilience of agricultural systems:

• Soil and nutrient management (e.g. composts, crop residues)

• Improving water harvesting and retention (e.g. dams, pits, retaining ridges)

• Understanding and dealing with changes in distribution / intensity of weeds, pests, diseases

• Utilising different crops, breeds, wild relatives• Efficient harvesting to reduce post-harvest losses• Planting date management• Use of agroforestry species (soil benefits, dry season

livestock fodder, income generation, carbon sequestering, …)


Diversification

Livestock only

Livestock + irrigated ag +

business

Livestock + irrigated ag OR business

Thornton et al. (2012)

Results for a Group Ranch in Kajiado, Kenya


“No regrets” technologies

Adapted from Howden et al. (2010)

Degree of Climate Change

“Com

plex

ity”

of re

spon

ding

COPING• Planting dates• Other varieties• Water

management

ADAPTATION• New crops• New livestock

species• Off-farm

diversification

TRANSFORMATION• New production

system • New livelihoods• Move location• Migration

Limits to “no regrets” at the farm level Barriers, cost, need for collective action and/or policy formulation (e.g. infrastructure development)

Enabling farmers to act on seasonal forecast information

• Improving forecast products for farmers

• Kaffrine, Senegal: workshops to train farmers, identifying management responses

• Wote, Kenya: testing combinations of advisories, training, delivery medium

• Assessing impact on decisions, livelihoods

Risk management

3 Making transitions happen

Developing & promotingagricultural technologies

o Urgency of developing/disseminating technologies embodying adaptation/mitigation while supporting ag. transitions for food security

o Greater emphasis on innovation an evolutionary-like process driven by ‘learning selection’ analogous to ‘natural selection’ (Douthwaite, 2002)

o Changes to how we assess best options

20,000+ maize trials in 123 research sites

Sites with >23ºC would suffer even if optimally managed

More than 20% loss in sites with >20ºC, under drought

Lobell et al. (2011)

Maize in Africa in a +1 °C world

Building networks of innovation: Disseminating & selecting seeds of crops & varieties

adapted to climate change

Seed supply for adapted crops is limited;ICRISAT experimenting with private sector seed suppliers to increase supply

Farmer testing 3 wheat varieties as part of Bioversity Seed4Needs crowdsourcing crop improvement for adaptation

Assessing best options for agricultural intensification:adaptation is an essential element

• Results from Zambia analysis of HH data 2004-2008• Question- what are the barriers/drivers of adoption of sustainable land

management?• Two practices focused upon: minimum soil disturbance (planting basins); crop

rotationsResults:

– Adoption remains very low: ~5-6% (sample size 4,187)– Significant dis-adoption: ~90% of CA adopters in 2004 abandoned it in 2008– Adoption intensity is significantly higher for smallholders

Strongest determinants of adoption are:– variable rainfall– Delayed onset of rainy season

adaptation benefits key to determining “best options”

Assessing best options for ag. intensification: mitigation co-benefits also important

Synthesis of literature comparing yield and soil carbon sequestration effects of adopting sustainable land management practices in dry and moist areas

0100200300

Dry

0 100 200 300

Agronomy

Nutrient management

Tillage/residue management

Water management

Agroforestry Moist

Yield: average marginal increase (%/year)

GHG reduction (tCO2e/ha/year) (graph 1ton=100%)

Strengthening local institutions: e.g. how to improve the enabling environment?

• Local institutions (formal & informal) are “enablers”

• Three main areas where CC affects what we need to see from local institutions for enabling environments

• Information dissemination (CC destroys info)• Risk management (CC increases risks)• Collective action (CC changes scale; intensifies need)

Information dissemination: priority actions

– Seasonal forecasts: Extended coverage, better “translation, and prompt linking of seasonal forecast info to key outlets (youth, extension, women’s groups, etc.)

– Extension: More attention/financing/innovation in extension role in information dissemination to support ag. technology and use of ICT

– Crowd sourcing to improve data sources (e.g. IIASA global cropland map)

– Enhancing farmer to farmer information flows particularly in context of adaptation (e.g. varietal adaptation; indigenous practices)

Local institutions facilitate risk management in a number of ways: we need to identify best options under CC & strengthen

Risk transfer category Adaptation strategies Institution-building opportunities at the local level

Institution-building opportunities at higher levels

Mobility Agropastoral, wage labour or involuntary migration

Distribution & trade of ag produce & inputs

Conflict mgmt e.g. croppers vs. pastoralists

Functioning of local informal markets

Support to local exit strategies

Residence & border controls

Safe & fair transfers of remittances

International trade controls & tariffs

Storage Water storage

Food storage

Natural capital including livestock & trees

Pest control

Participatory action research

Local tenure & entitlements

Access to information

Incentives for affordable private sector innovation

Knowledge systems for pests & diseases

Food safety interventions

Diversification Diversification of agricultural assets, including crop & livestock varieties, production technologies

Occupational diversification & skills training

Dietary & other consumption choices

Farmer field schools & other locally-led innovation systems

Microfinance

Local business development

Household food management

Local future climate scenarios exercises

Public and private extension services

Accessible banking & loan schemes

Skills retraining linked to job creation

Consumer food knowledge & preferences

Collective actionCollective action underpins:• Information dissemination • Risk management• Managing pooled resources (agro-forestry, changes in grazing/irrigation management,

landscape level work)• Spreading innovations (social capital important determinant of production and

marketing decisions)• Accessing financing (high transactions costs barrier to entry)

Priority actions: Identifying how cc changes type and scale collective actions needed Broader understanding of multiple roles (risk mgmt, info sharing, access to

resources) local institutions currently play Explicit integration of collective action needs in agricultural transition planning

Coordinated and informed policies• Policies that integrate CC and Ag for FS needed to achieve

coordinated & effective actions

• Contradictions between policy “silos” a problem

• Promoting dialogue, joint positions (e.g. to UNFCCC) and national integrated strategies between CC, Ag and FS policy-makers needed

• Tools for integrated planning useful to underpin needed dialogues (e.g. integrated land use planning, landscape)

• Clarity/direction from policy-makers on key directions for change also needed (e.g. food self-sufficiency vs. trade, future of smallholders, rate/nature of urbanization/commercialization)

Participatory scenario building: a means of facilitating dialogue between policy and research

Scenarios: what can happen Visioning: what should happen

Uncertain future

Create shared

vision for regional

Future (3)

Different perspectives:

different types of knowledge, experience

Scenarios capture

alternative Futures (1)

Improve

scenarios’ usefulness

through

Different perspectives:

different needs,

aspirations

Use

scenarios to explore

pathways to

Feasible vision, robust

policies and quantification and media (2)

Improve scenarios based on use (5)

vision under strategies (4) uncertainty

(4)

Dissemination of scenarios, visions,

strategies to key users (6)

Figure 2. CCAFS scenarios strategy.

Global Scenarios

Regional Scenarios

Farmer/village perspectives

Action research

Participatory scenario building

Global visioning activities

Global impacts modelling

Regional impacts

modelling

Household & community

impacts modelling

Assessing different options at different levelsRobustness, iteration

Increased access to financing

• Overall investment resources for agriculture insufficient

• Need for not just more, but better targeting and delivery mechanisms are needed

• CC increases imperative of increased short run financing to achieve long term savings

• Access to emerging sources of CC finance clearly important part of the solution

• Need for country-driven responses to how this can best be linked to agricultural transitions for food security

Climate smart agricultural investments often require higher up-front financing to overcome barriers to

adoption

4 How to monitor and evaluate?

Increasing the outcome orientation of research …

FAO Strategic Objectives

• Contribute to the eradication of hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition

• Increase and improve provision of goods and services from agriculture, forestry and fisheries in a sustainable manner

• Reduce rural poverty• Enable more inclusive and efficient

agricultural and food systems at local, national and international levels

• Increase the resilience of livelihoods to threats and crises

CGIAR System-Level Outcomes

• Reduce rural poverty• Increase food security• Improve nutrition and

health• Ensure more sustainable

management of natural resources

Analysing food security in context of drivers and feedbacks

Ericksen (2008)

Food System ACTIVITIESProducing

Processing & PackagingDistributing & Retailing

Consuming

Food System OUTCOMESContributing to: Food Security, Environmental

Security, and other Societal Interests

FoodAvailability

FoodUtilisation

FoodAccess

EnvironCapital

Social Welfare

SocioeconomicDRIVERSChanges in:

Demographics, Economics,Socio-political context,

Cultural contextScience & Technology

DRIVERS’Interactions

GEC DRIVERSChanges in:

Land cover & soils, Atmospheric Comp., Climate variability & means,

Water availability & quality, Nutrient availability & cycling,

Biodiversity, Sea currents & salinity, Sea level

‘Natural’DRIVERS

e.g. VolcanoesSolar cycles

Environmental feedbackse.g. water quality, GHGs

Socioeconomic feedbackse.g. livelihoods, social cohesion

Key food system objective

Strategies to achieve this

Process indicator

Outcome indicator

Impact indicator

Enhance nutritional value

More nutritious food grown

Farmers’ crop choices change

Foods with greater nutritional value harvested

Diets contain more nutritious foods

Price of nutritious food reduced

Pricing policies implemented.

Households purchase more nutritious food

Diets contain more nutritious foods

More efficient use of scare resources

Revise input prices

Pricing policies implemented

Fertilizers use modified

Less fertilizer waste

Implement land tenure

Tenure policies designed and implemented

Land tenure more secure

Land used more efficiently

Some food system adaptation metrics

Ericksen and Chesterman (2013)

Outcome indicators: how does CC affect what we’d like to see?

Risk-adjusted returns to agricultural systems

Do we have robust estimates of changes in climate variability into the future?

Do we have adequate data and information on tropical farming systems (like the Farm Accounting Data Network of the EU)?

Do we have adequate decision-analytic frameworks for smallholder farming households in developing countries?

IPCC (2012)


Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of agricultural output

Do we have standardised methodologies, to help reduce the uncertainties inherent in such estimates?

Do we have adequate tools that can assess the trade-offs and synergies between agricultural activities (e.g. payments for reduced deforestation; mitigation co-benefits)?

Do we always understand who is bearing the costs and the benefits of different alternatives, and are these distributed in accordance with government policy objectives?


Identifying potential maladaptation well in advance

If adaptation is seen as a continuous process, do we have in place adequate monitoring systems to allow us to spot divergences in good time?

Do we have adequate adaptation planning frameworks that are relatively insensitive to uncertainties?

Maladaptation: options that• disproportionately burden the

most vulnerable• have high opportunity costs• reduce people’s incentives to

adapt• set paths that limit future choices

available to future generationBarnett & O’Neill (2010)


Changes in short-term food insecurity in the wake of climate shocks

Do we have robust and efficient ways of identifying food-insecure people and their targetable characteristics, particularly in the light of increased variability?

FAO (2012)

Food security relative to the poverty threshold

5 Conclusions: priority areas forCGIAR and FAO

How can FAO and CGIAR effectively contribute to the agenda?

1 Enhanced understanding of how climate change may affect agriculture - Key input to global climate/food security models

• Impacts on key staples and other crops and natural resources in developing countries

• Interactions of changes in temperature, rainfall, atmospheric CO2

• Changes in incidence, intensity, spatial distribution of weeds, pests, diseases

• Impacts on households of climate variability changes vis-à-vis changes in long-term means

• Impact on agricultural technology/intensification patterns

Links to Global Change Community: climate, sustainability sciences

2 Evaluating options

• Understanding the role of assets (physical, human, social) and collective action in managing climate risks, adaptation and mitigation

• Assessing mitigation practices in different situations and impacts on resource use and commodity supply

• Standardizing/simplifying Measuring/Reporting/Verification (MRV) and carbon footprinting methodologies for mitigation projects

• Tools/frameworks/data that allow evaluation with respect to multiple objectives, multiple temporal and spatial scales


3 Promoting innovation and linking knowledge with action

• Tools/analysis to identify, foster and effectively scale up successful innovation: social, institutional, technological

• Extend social learning approaches critically relevant to achieving development goals: building on existing efforts and assessing results to build a commonly accessible evidence base

• Develop capacity and use of multi-stakeholder scenario processes• explore key socio-economic uncertainties• develop storylines of plausible futures• quantitatively model these alternative development pathways

a linked science-policy interface inputs to global climate/food security models.


[email protected]@cgiar.org

Priorities for Public Sector Research on Food Security and Climate Change by Leslie Lipper, FAO and...

Technology

Transcript of Priorities for Public Sector Research on Food Security and Climate Change by Leslie Lipper, FAO and...