Agroforestry

Climate-smart agriculture: panacea or

propaganda?

Nutrition security

Poverty alleviation

Natural resource

management

Improved

cook-stove

Conservation

agriculture

Increased yields

Soil quality & carbon

Reduced

degradation &

erosion

Dietary

diversity

Intercropping

Participatory

approach

Todd Rosenstock & Christine LamannaGlobal Landscapes Forum

Lima, Peru | 7 Dec. 2014

Global Alliance for CSA: 500 million

smallholders

NEPAD Vision 25x25: 25 million in Africa by

2025

Photo:CCAFS

Meta-analysis: 65 practices/15 indicators

Key word search

Abstract title

review

Full text review

Data

extraction/analys

is

144,567

papers

16,254

papers

6,100

papers

~120,000 data points

Studies with indicators for at least one

component of CSA

Random sample of 815 studies

Studies with indicators for at least two

components of CSA

Random sample of 815 studies

Studies with indicators for all three

components of CSA

Random sample of 815 studies

●

●

●

●●●

Alternative feeds

Increasing protein

Diet management

Inorganic fertilizer

Leguminous AF

Agroforestry (AF)

−0.5 0.0 0.5Effect size

CS

AEffects of CSA on food security are

variable and can be + or -

Random sample of 130 studies

-60% 0 +60%

Mean effect from random sample of 130 studies (55 comparisons)

Synergies and tradeoffs between

food security and adaptation with CSA

-0.5

-0.4

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

-0.5 -0.3 -0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5

Food securityA

dap

tati

on

6% 16%

46% 32%SynergiesTradeoffs

Tradeoffs

Financial support

CCAFSIFAD

CIFOR-EBF

FAO-MICCA

Collaborators:

K Tully, C. Corner-Dolloff, E

Girvetz, M Lazaro, A Jarvis,

P Bell, S Chesterman, S

MacFatrige, H Strom, A

Madalinska, A-S Eyrich, C

Champalle, W English, A

Akinleye, A Poultouchidou,

A Kerr, H Neufeldt

Thank yout.rosenstock@cgiar.org