UNFCCC Guide to negotiations 2015 final - Farming...
Transcript of UNFCCC Guide to negotiations 2015 final - Farming...
1
Guide to UNFCCC Negotiations on Agriculture Toolkit for Communications and Outreach
The following document provides farmers and farming organisations, agricultural development organisations and negotiators worldwide with knowledge and communication tools to engage in a broad range of outreach activities (dialogues, initiatives, networking, negotiations, conferences, and events) related to the role of agriculture within the climate change debate.
Contents Contributors ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2 How to use this toolkit ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 Tools .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Key Messages ........................................................................................................................................................................ 5
Key messages for the SBSTA workshops for June 2015: ......................................................................... 5 Update on Agriculture in the UNFCCC .......................................................................................................................... 7
1-‐ Under SBSTA ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 2-‐ Under the ADP: ............................................................................................................................................. 12 Agriculture at SBSTA 42, ADP 9.2 and COP21 .......................................................................................... 14
Lesson to be learned from REDD+ ............................................................................................................................... 16 FAQs ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................................................. 23 Factsheets ............................................................................................................................................................................ 24 Websites ............................................................................................................................................................................... 30 Infographics ......................................................................................................................................................................... 31 Briefs and Papers ............................................................................................................................................................... 35 Examples .............................................................................................................................................................................. 38
2
Contributors
This is an April 2015 update to the Guide to UNFCCC Negotiations on Agriculture: Toolkit for Communications and Outreach which was first published in 2013 by Farming First,1 with the support of contributors: the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) and the Technical Centre for Agriculture and Rural Cooperation (CTA). Farming First Farming First is one of the most diverse and active agricultural coalitions in the world, enjoying the support of over 155 organisations that represent the world’s farmers, scientists, engineers and industry as well as agricultural development organisations. With one shared voice, Farming First highlights the importance of improving farmers’ livelihoods and agriculture’s potential contribution to global issues such as food security, climate change, and biodiversity. It also aims to build synergies amongst its supporters in promoting Farming First’s six guiding principles. www.farmingfirst.org The CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security The CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) is a strategic partnership of CGIAR and Future Earth, led by the International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). CCAFS brings together the world’s best researchers in agricultural science, development research, climate science and Earth System science, to identify and address the most important interactions, synergies and trade offs between climate change, agriculture and food security. www.ccafs.cgiar.org CGIAR is a global agriculture research partnership for a food secure future. Its science is carried out by the 15 research centres who are members of the CGIAR Consortium in collaboration with hundreds of partner organizations. www.cgiar.org
The Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation The Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) is a joint international institution of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States and the European Union (EU). Its mission is to advance food and nutritional security, increase prosperity and encourage sound natural resource management in ACP countries. It provides access to information and knowledge, facilitates policy dialogue and strengthens the capacity of agricultural and rural development institutions and communities. CTA operates under the framework of the Cotonou Agreement and is funded by the EU. www.cta.int
1 Available at www.farmingfirst.org/unfccc-‐toolkit-‐how-‐to-‐use/
3
How to use this toolkit
4
Tools The aim of the set of tools below is to provide knowledge, information and support to various stages of engaging in policy discussions on agriculture within climate change negotiations. The components of an engagement plan include:
o Key Messages o Agriculture & the UNFCCC o Raising key issues o Examples
5
Key Messages Key messages for Farming First supporters, farmers' organizations, agriculture development organizations and negotiators
1. Now is the time to act. Farmers are experiencing the impacts of climate change and they need action from policymakers, NGOs, politicians and businesses if they are to adapt and to mitigate.
2. A 2015 agreement should acknowledge the importance of agriculture for food security and livelihoods and the role it can play to help meet global adaptation and mitigation goals.
3. The ‘Zero Draft’ of the 2015 agreement, released in February, includes mentions of both the ‘land sector’ and agriculture. This is a positive development and negotiators should keep agriculture included as the negotiating text evolves.
4. The process set up under the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) in June 2014, for submissions and workshops over the next two years, is welcome. It is progress on adaptation specifically. But it is essential to specify how SBSTA outcomes will feed into the ADP discussions so that a global framework for action from 2020 includes agriculture.
5. A 2015 agreement should deploy finance, technical inputs and capacity building to support ambitious actions by farmers and the agricultural sector to achieve food security through adaptation and mitigation.
6. The Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) by countries represent a key opportunity to bring agriculture into climate change commitments and activities. Agriculture must be included in the INDCs.
7. Agriculture and food security issues are likely to be central to planning for mitigation (e.g. NAMAs) and adaptation (e.g. NAPAs) in all countries.
8. National policy processes will work best if they combine food security, adaptation and mitigation rather than keeping the three aspects in separate tracks. Integration is needed across landscapes and food supply chains, in order to manage trade-‐offs effectively, particularly trade-‐offs between food production and mitigation goals.
9. Financing for both mitigation and adaptation must be part of climate change policies. Recent developments are positive: improvements in the Global Environment Facility’s strategy and an increase in financing stemming from ‘fast start’ finance are helping increase funding towards climate-‐smart agriculture. But more needs to be done. It is essential that the new Green Climate Fund (GCF) provides specific, stable, and long-‐term support to adaptation and mitigation in agriculture.
10. There are many existing solutions to some of the known challenges of climate change that can be scaled up. These include improved soil and water management practices, better climate information services, and greater access to agricultural resources among women. Our most important challenge, as farmers and as supporters, is not to invent new practices and approaches, but to share what already works as widely as possible to create global change for the better.
Key messages for the SBSTA workshops for June 2015: 1. The work undertaken under SBSTA is very important but it needs to feed back into the ADP
KEY MESSAGES
6
negotiations to be effective 2. On early warning system and risk management:
a. Extreme weather events undermine development progress, constrain economic growth and threaten food production. Systematic risk management plays a critical role in assuring future agricultural production and access to food and water by the world’s most vulnerable people
b. Climate action depends on the availability of high quality scientific information. Climate data, science, information and knowledge are critical contributions to all facets of development under a changing climate. There is an urgent need to build the scientific and operational capability of institutions around the world to underpin the information and service needs of policy-‐makers and vulnerable communities.
c. Investments in the generation and dissemination of climate-‐related information tailored to farmers are critical to an integrated risk-‐management plan. Supporting and investing in infrastructure and systems to share information is crucial
d. Building early warning and risk management systems at national and regional level should be key to countries’ adaptation policies.
3. On assessment of risks and vulnerabilities a. Improved localised knowledge of where risks and vulnerabilities are in each region
is essential to preparing the agricultural sector to respond to climate change b. Knowledge and assessments will need to take into account how impacts and risks
play out in different contexts, based not only on the geographic and ecological characteristics of particular landscapes but also taking into account socio-‐economic characteristics
c. Risk and vulnerability assessments need to extend beyond direct impact on production to consider impacts on biodiversity, ecosystems, nutrition and food security.
7
Update on Agriculture in the UNFCCC There was no agenda item on agriculture for the sessions that were held during COP 20 in Lima in December 2014, either under SBSTA or under the ADP. The next major formal milestone for agriculture is the SBSTA meeting in June 2015, where submissions have been requested and workshops will be held on two topics: Development of early warning systems and contingency plans and Assessment of risk and vulnerability of agricultural systems to different climate change scenarios. However with the negotiating text for the Ad Hoc working group on the Durban Platform (ADP) taking shape, issues related to agriculture have also appeared, and so supporters need to consider the two tracks – ADP and SBSTA.
1-‐ Under SBSTA Agriculture is currently under early consideration in a subsidiary body of the UNFCCC called SBSTA. The Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) is one of two permanent subsidiary bodies to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) established by the Conference of the Parties (COP) and the Conference and Meeting of the Parties of the Kyoto protocol (CMP). It supports the work of the COP and the CMP through the provision of timely information and advice on scientific technological matters as they relate to the Convention or the Kyoto Protocol. SBSTA can act as a hub for agriculture and can handle the very unique aspects of agriculture in a way that cannot be handled elsewhere. SBSTA can also inform the various aspects of the UNFCCC so that agriculture is better incorporated into the various convention mechanisms. During the 39th session of SBSTA in November 2013, a workshop was held on the state of scientific knowledge. Discussions in the workshop were positive, but in the following negotiations Parties failed to agree on a way forward. As a result there was no text on agriculture in the SBSTA conclusions in December 2013. When SBSTA resumed at its 40th session in June 2014, there was a lot of uncertainty about what could be achieved, given the disappointing outcomes in December. However, Parties were able to engage in a useful exchange and agree to two new series of submissions and workshops, in 2015 and 2016 (see document: FCCC/SBSTA/2014/L.14 for the full text of the decision). The key points from the decision are: • Parties and observers are invited to submit their views by 25 March 2015 to the Secretariat on:
1) Development of early warning systems and contingency plans in relation to extreme weather events and its effects such as desertification, drought, floods, landslides, storm surge, soil erosion, and saline water intrusion; and 2) Assessment of risk and vulnerability of agricultural systems to different climate change scenarios at regional, national and local levels, including but not limited to pests and diseases;
AGRICULTURE & THE UNFCCC
8
• Parties and observers are invited to submit their views by 9 March 2016 to the secretariat on 1) Identification of adaptation measures, taking into account the diversity of the agricultural systems, indigenous knowledge systems and the differences in scale, as well as possible co-‐benefits and sharing experiences in research and development and on the ground activities, including socioeconomic, environmental and gender aspects; and 2) Identification and assessment of agricultural practices and technologies to enhance productivity in a sustainable manner, food security and resilience, considering the differences in agro-‐ecological zones and farming systems, such as different grassland and cropland practices and systems.
In addition, two workshops will be organized at SBSTA 42 in June 2015 and two more at SBSTA 44 in June 2016 on the respective submission topics. Agreement on a set of submissions and workshops in the next two years under SBSTA is positive because it represents important progress in getting substantive discussions of agriculture on the agenda in UNFCCC. Also, the outcomes of the submissions and workshop can provide information for consideration by Parties as they prepare for implementation of the 2015 agreement. In doing so, it helps avoid the risk of seeing agriculture side-‐lined from the negotiations. However, there is a lot of concern about timing. The submission and workshops are coming very late, when the negotiations for the agreement under ADP are meant to conclude in December 2015. This creates a very possible risk that without a clear mechanism for the SBSTA outcome to feed back into the ADP, the SBSTA discussions will remain on a parallel track and not inform the new agreement. The 2015 agreement signed in December 2015 is however likely to be a ‘shell’ or framework with many issues and details to be worked out before it comes into force. This period of “working out the details” offers an opportunity to feed in the SBSTA outcomes, but only if agriculture has a strong and clear placeholder in the text agreed in December 2015 and there is mandate to flesh out the issue in time for implementation.
The areas of work outlined in the SBSTA decision text from June 2014 are a trade-‐off between different Parties’ views and priorities. Adaptation features clearly in the text, but mitigation is not mentioned. The concepts of ‘resilience’ and ‘co-‐benefit’ do link adaptation with mitigation, but adaptation and mitigation are not linked explicitly.
Further reading on early warning systems:
CIAT-CCAFS. 2015. Expanding the Contribution of Early Warning to Climate-Resilient Agricultural Development in Africa. Submission to UNFCCC SBSTA 42.
http://unfccc.int/files/documentation/submissions_from_observers/application/pdf/515.pdf
Forum for Agricultural Risk Management in Development. Drought Management Strategies: Information (Seasonal Forecasting and Early Warning and Planning Systems)
https://www.agriskmanagementforum.org/fstory/featured-topic-drought-risk-management
FWES NET Famine Early Warning Systems Network:
https://www.fews.net/sectors/agroclimatology
9
WMO. Enhanced monitoring and cataloguing of hazard/extreme events and slow onset climatic indicators in support of the UNFCCC Warsaw Mechanism for Loss and Damage, the SDGs and the post-2015 Framework for DRR (2014). Available online at: http://unfccc.int/documentation/submissions_from_observers/items/7482.php
Further reading on risks and vulnerabilities to different climate scenarios: CIAT-CCAFS. 2015. Crops, crop pests and climate change – why Africa needs to be better prepared Submission to UNFCCC SBSTA 42 http://unfccc.int/files/documentation/submissions_from_observers/application/pdf/515.pdf
CIAT-CCAFS. 2015. Climate and Livestock Disease: assessing the vulnerability of agricultural systems to livestock pests under climate change scenarios. Submission to UNFCCC SBSTA 42 http://unfccc.int/files/documentation/submissions_from_observers/application/pdf/516.pdf CIAT-CCAFS. 2015. Climate Change and Aquatic Animal Disease. Submission to UNFCCC SBSTA 42. http://unfccc.int/files/documentation/submissions_from_observers/application/pdf/517.pdf IPCC. 2012. Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX) http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/srex/SREX_FD_SPM_final.pdf
FAO/OECD Workshop 23 April 2012: Building Resilience for Adaptation to Climate Change in the Agriculture Sector. Proceedings of the workshop available online at: http://www.fao.org/agriculture/crops/news-events-bulletins/detail/en/item/134976/icode/?no_cache=1
Further reading on adaptation measures: Vermeulen SJ. 2014. Climate change, food security and small-scale producers. CCAFS Info Brief. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Copenhagen, Denmark. Available online at: www.ccafs.cgiar.org
Cooper, P. J.M., S. Cappiello, S. J. Vermeulen, B. M. Campbell, R. Zougmoré and J. Kinyangi. 2013. Large-scale implementation of adaptation and mitigation actions in agriculture. CCAFS Working Paper no. 50. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Copenhagen, Denmark. Available online at: www.ccafs.cgiar.org
Neate P. 2013. Climate-smart agriculture success stories from farming communities around the world. Wageningen, Netherlands: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) and the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA). Available online at: http://hdl.handle.net/10568/34042
Nyasimi M, Amwata D, Hove L, Kinyangi J, Wamukoya G. 2014. Evidence of impact: Climate-smart agriculture in Africa. Wageningen, Netherlands: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) and the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA). Available online at: http://hdl.handle.net/10568/51721
Nelson, Gerald C.; Rosegrant, Mark W.; Koo, Jawoo; Robertson, Richard; Sulser, Timothy; Zhu, Tingju; Ringler, Claudia; Msangi, Siwa; Palazzo, Amanda; Batka, Miroslav; Magalhaes, Marilia; Valmonte-Santos, Rowena; Ewing, Mandy; Lee, David (2009) "Climate Change: Impact on Agriculture and Costs of Adaptation," International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Available online at: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/pr21.pdf
Further reading on agricultural practices and technologies to sustainably enhance food security and resilience:
10
Campbell BM, Thornton P, Zougmoré R, van Asten P, Lipper L. 2014. Sustainable intensification: What is its role in climate smart agriculture? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 8:39-43. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343514000359# Cenacchi, Nicolas. 2014. Drought risk reduction in agriculture: A review of adaptive strategies in East Africa and the Indo-Gangetic plain of South Asia. IFPRI Discussion Paper 01372. Available online: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp01372.pdf Corbeels M, Sakyi RK, Kühne RF, Whitbread A. 2014. Meta-analysis of crop responses to conservation agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa. CCAFS Report No. 12. Copenhagen, Denmark: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) Available online: http://ccafs.cgiar.org/publications/meta-analysis-crop-responses-conservation-agriculture-sub-saharan-africa Dror I, Maheshwari S and Mude AG. 2014. Using satellite data to insure camels, cows, sheep and goats: IBLI and the development of the world’s first insurance for African pastoralists. Nairobi, Kenya: ILRI. Available online: http://ccafs.cgiar.org/publications/using-satellite-data-insure-camels-cows-sheep-and-goats-ibli-and-development-world%E2%80%99s FAO. 2014. Climate Change Adaptation in Fisheries and Aquaculture: Compilation of initial examples. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular No. 1088. Rome: FAO. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i3569e.pdf FAO. 2014. The State of the World’s Forest Genetic Resources. Rome: FAO. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i3825e.pdf Gill G. 2014. An Assessment of the Impact of Laser-Assisted Precision Land Levelling Technology as a Component of Climate-Smart Agriculture in the State of Haryana, India. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Copenhagen, Denmark. https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/65078/CIMMYT%20LLL%20Impact%20Assessment%20May%202014.pdf?sequence=1 Gotor E, Fadda C, Trincia C. 2014. Matching Seeds to Needs - female farmers adapt to a changing climate in Ethiopia. Impact Assessment Briefs no 14. Rome, Italy: Bioversity International. https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/36173/Matching_Seeds_to_Needs_Ethiopia.pdf Greatrex H, Hansen JW, Garvin S, Diro R, Blakeley S, Le Guen M, Rao KN, Osgood, DE. 2015. Scaling up index insurance for smallholder farmers: Recent evidence and insights. CCAFS Report No. 14 Copenhagen: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/53101/CCAFS_Report14.pdf Herrero M, MacMillan S, Johnson N, Ericksen P, Duncan A, Grace D, Thornton PK. 2011. Improving Food Production from Livestock. IN: State of the World 2011: Innovations that Nourish the Planet. Washington DC: Worldwatch Institute: 155-163 https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/3086/SOW11_chap14.pdf Hurst M, Jensen N, Pedersen SH, Sharma A. and Zambriski JA. 2012. Changing climate adaptation strategies of Boran pastoralists in southern Ethiopia. CCAFS Working Paper 15. Copenhagen, Denmark: CCAFS. https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/21071/ccafs_wp_15.pdf iDE. 2015. Anukulan: Project Overview. London, United Kingdom iDE http://www.ide-uk.org/anukulan/
11
Kangire A, van Asten P, Verhagen J, Koomen I. 2011. Towards climate smart agriculture: lessons from a coffee × banana case. Experiences from research for policy support in Uganda. Wageningen University, Wageningen, Netherlands. http://portals.wi.wur.nl/files/docs/Policybrief_coffeexbanana_climate_2012.pdf Montpellier Panel. 2015. Farmers on the climate frontline: six recommendations for addressing agriculture in the UNFCCC negotiations. Agriculture for Impact, London, United Kingdom. http://ag4impact.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/A4I_0133_Climate_Paper_LowRes_Spreads.pdf Ndiaye O, Moussa AS, Seck M, Zougmore R, Hansen J. 2013. Communicating seasonal forecasts to farmers in Kaffrine, Senegal for better agricultural management. Case Study prepared for Hunger • Nutrition • Climate Justice • 2013 | A New Dialogue: Putting People at the Heart of Global Development. Dublin, Ireland: Irish Aid. https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/27888/Senegal.pdf One Acre Fund, 2014. Maize Legume Intercropping New York City, USA, One Acre Fund. http://www.oneacrefund.org/uploads/all-files/Report_Ag_Innovations_Intercropping_FINAL.pdf One Acre Fund, 2014. Smallholder Agroforestry New York City, USA, One Acre Fund. http://www.oneacrefund.org/uploads/all-files/Report_Ag_Innovations_Agroforestry_FINAL.pdf Richards M, Sander BO. 2014. Alternate wetting and drying in irrigated rice. CSA Practice Brief. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Copenhagen, Denmark. http://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/35402/info-note_CCAFS_AWD_final_A4.pdf Richards M, Sapkota T, Stirling C, Thierfelder C, Verhulst N, Friedrich T, Kienzle J. 2014. Conservation agriculture: Implementation guidance for policymakers and investors. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), Copenhagen. http://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/42431/Practice%20brief_Conservation%20Agriculture.pdf Rosegrant, Mark W. (2014). Food security in a world of natural resource scarcity: the role of agricultural technologies / Mark W. Rosegrant, Jawoo Koo, Nicola Cenacchi, Claudia Ringler, Richard Robertson, Myles Fisher, Cindy Cox, Karen Garrett, Nicostrato D. Perez, Pascale Sabbagh. —Edition 1. Available online at: http://www.ifpri.org/publication/food-security-world-natural-resource-scarcity Van Noordwijk M, Hoang MH, Neufeldt H, Öborn I, Yatich T, eds. 2011. How trees and people can co-adapt to climate change: reducing vulnerability through multifunctional agroforestry landscapes. Nairobi: World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) http://www.asb.cgiar.org/PDFwebdocs/PDFwebdocs/How%20trees%20and%20people%20can%20co-adapt%20to%20climate%20change.pdf Venkatasubramanian, K., A. Tall, J. Hansen, P. K. Aggarwal 2014. Assessment of India’s Integrated Agro-meteorological Advisory Service program from a farmer perspective. CCAFS Working Paper no. 54. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Copenhagen, Denmark. https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/43733/CCAFS%20WP%2054.pdf WorldFish. 2014. Rice-Field Fish Rings. Microhabitats for fish and resilience in rice-field fisheries. Dhaka, Bangladesh: WorldFish https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/51376/Microhabitat%20Tech%20Brief.pdf Zougmoré R, Jalloh A, Tioro A. 2014. Climate-smart soil water and nutrient management options in semiarid West Africa: a review of evidence and analysis of stone bunds and zaï techniques. Agriculture & Food Security 3: 16. http://www.agricultureandfoodsecurity.com/content/3/1/16
12
2-‐ Under the ADP: Parties are meant to conclude negotiations in 2015 for a Protocol, another legal instrument or agreed outcome with legal force under the UNFCCC that will set the stage for all Parties from 2020. This negotiation is taking place under the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Action (ADP). In February 2015, a negotiating text was published. It will be the basis for negotiations throughout 2015. As a ‘zero draft’ it collates together all the views and proposals made by Parties into one document as a means to offer a starting point for negotiations. It does not reflect any consensus or agreement yet. The ADP negotiating text is structured along 12 (potentially 13) chapters and 3 Annexes. Despite the fact that agriculture, like any other sector, does not have a dedicated section or chapter, the topic comes up several times in the negotiating text, primarily in relation to mitigation. The lack of a specific mention of agriculture in the adaptation chapter could be contentious, as the issue of balance between adaptation and mitigation has been a topic of debate throughout previous negotiations cycles, and one of the key hurdles in getting a work programme on agriculture agreed under SBSTA. Language of relevance to agriculture in the current negotiating text:
• Under mitigation, there are two ways in which agriculture is included: • The mention of “all sectors and all greenhouse gases” includes agriculture and is
meant to open up the possibility for agriculture to be included in countries’ mitigation strategies. However, this may not make inclusion of agriculture compulsory. The matter of which agricultural processes would be included, and by how many countries, would then depend on how contributions to an overall mitigation goal are set. If countries are to nationally determine what goes into their plans and what doesn’t, it still leaves the door open to some countries not including agriculture in their plans. If a less flexible approach is adopted it could mean that all countries must include all sectors in their mitigation plans.
• Alternatively a more pointed approach is seen in the specific paragraphs that are included about a “land sector”. The concept of a “land sector” goes beyond only agriculture. Depending on how a land sector is defined, it could be seen as positive, as it could help ensure agriculture is specifically included in mitigation plans. There is follow up text in the sections dealing with monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV), as well as implementation, that calls for a specific accounting mechanism to be developed for the land sector. However, the concept of a land sector is not defined in the text and so agriculture’s role and place in that approach remains unclear.
• Under adaptation, there is no language specifically on agriculture or a land sector. Food security is mentioned in the preamble but the focus throughout the text is more related to ecosystems and resilience. A wide range of the measures discussed would be relevant to agriculture, but without its specific mention it may not be sufficiently included in national adaptation plans.
• In section J -‐ ‘Transparency of Action and Support’, agriculture indirectly appears in several text proposals in line with the language in the mitigation section.
13
As noted, currently both ‘the land sector’ and ‘agriculture’ are mentioned. The ‘agriculture’ mention has the benefit of being more specific, while the land sector emphasises the interconnections and dependency between different elements of the landscape. A land sector can be a positive approach, but it could also be overwhelming for agriculture, which has not had the benefit of dedicated discussions and which has challenges of its own to address. The ADP & Nationally Determined Contributions The Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP), established at COP17 in Durban in 2011, has the mandate to develop a new protocol – an agreement with legal force – that will be adopted at COP21 in Paris in 2015. The new agreement or protocol will be implemented from 2020 onwards. The ADP was originally focused on mitigation and intended to be the follow up to the Kyoto protocol, which is expiring (some countries agreed to sign on to an extension of their commitment under Kyoto, while ADP is negotiated to avoid a ‘gap’). One of the key features of the ADP proposed approach is the emphasis on a global target for emission reductions, to be fulfilled through Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC). The forthcoming Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) submissions by countries are an important platform for advocacy around agriculture. Under the ADP, there is no explicit ‘hook’ for discussing agriculture but its inclusion rests on the interpretation Parties make of the ADP mandate. For example, the goal of the ADP is to see an agreement reached that would include ‘economy-‐wide’ efforts to reduce emissions, as well as adaptation action. In many situations, given the important role played by agriculture in the economy, this can be interpreted to include the sector. It is also worth noting that there were two ADP events held in 2014 that tackled issues related to agriculture: an expert technical meeting on land use and an expert technical meeting on addressing non-‐carbon dioxide (non-‐CO2) greenhouse gases.
14
Agriculture at SBSTA 42, ADP 9.2 and COP21 2015 is an important year for agriculture. There are several opportunities for outreach to Parties to ensure agriculture is included in the 2015 agreement and in discussions beyond 2015.
• The first opportunity is SBSTA 42 in June 2015. It is important that a sufficient number of submissions is received, as it is a valuable indicator of interest in the issue by Parties and observers. It is also key to providing input into the workshops. Attendance and participation in the workshops is also important. Supporters should consider encouraging their national negotiators to make submissions and to attend themselves if possible. Four briefing notes on the topics chosen by SBSTA for discussions are included in this Guide and they can be used to help submissions and discussions
• In parallel to SBSTA the second part of the ninth meeting of ADP will take place in June 2015 also. Parties will discuss the negotiating text issued earlier in the year. It will be the first formal text negotiations, and although the working method for the meeting is not yet known, it is a crucial moment for supporters to work with Parties to ensure the relevant text on agriculture is not limited, and where possible is strengthened. The key messages and factsheets can be used to explain why agriculture needs to be included.
• Further meetings of ADP will take place in August (31 Aug -‐ 04 Sep 2015) and October (19-‐23 Oct), which will also provide opportunities for outreach. Depending on how the ADP chooses to organize its work, perhaps focusing on different sections at each meeting or instead tackling the whole text at each session by dividing into working groups, the opportunities for outreach may vary. However it is likely that the Chairs will seek to see the text and options streamlined before the meeting in Paris in December and so engagement throughout the year is important to avoid valuable language that includes agriculture being deleted from the options.
• Finally, the final meeting of the ADP in December, followed by the meeting of the COP, will be crucial in determining the shape of the 2015 agreement. SBSTA 43 will also meet in December but agriculture may not be on the agenda as the next round of submissions and workshops is only in June 2016.
Outreach objectives: COP21 in 2015 will mark an important milestone for global climate governance as Parties are meant to come to an agreement to pave the way for a new legally binding protocol to be implemented from 2020. The nature and scope of the 2015 agreement are still unclear. Given agriculture’s importance to national economies, food security and adaptation, and its contribution to emissions and mitigation, it should form a key part of actions post-‐2020. But it remains a sensitive issue and it is not yet clear how agriculture will be linked to the protocol to be agreed at COP21 and to UNFCCC’s work post-‐2015. What would be useful for agriculture in a post-‐2015 climate agreement? • At minimum, it is important that the 2015 agreement does not preclude agriculture from being
included in activities. • But it would be more useful to see recognition for the role and importance of agriculture
inserted in the text in the Preamble (section A) of the agreement, and a specific mandate and placeholder for further elements of the inclusion of agriculture to be worked out between 2016 and 2020.
15
• In addition, the existing mentions of agriculture in sections D on mitigation are positive and should remain, (with a clear definition of the concept of a land sector included if this is the preferred approach, to ensure agriculture is adequately represented). But agriculture should also be specifically mentioned under Section E – Adaptation.
• These mentions are important, as they provide formal recognition of the role and importance of agriculture and provide a ‘hook’ for feeding in the work from SBSTA
• It will also be important for countries to submit activities in agriculture, landscapes and food systems as part of their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) as this will determine how the sector is impacted at national level.
Explanation of the role of the UNFCCC and SBSTA, and why this is so important for agriculture http://www.farmingfirst.org/climate/ The Story of Agriculture and Climate Change: The Road We’ve Travelled infographic from Farming First illustrates the role of agriculture in climate change discussion from their initiation at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 to December 2013. This infographic can be used to illustrate the important role of agriculture in addressing climate change so that a new era of agricultural innovation and knowledge sharing can be achieved. More information on agriculture at the UN Climate Change talks: UNFCCC webpage on Issues Relating to Agriculture http://unfccc.int/land_use_and_climate_change/agriculture/items/8793.php More information on how agriculture could be brought into a 2015 agreement: http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/pdf/outputs/EoD/EoD_Consultancy_June14_Climate_Ag_UNFCCC.pdf
• On the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC): http://cdkn.org/resource/intended-‐nationally-‐determined-‐contributions-‐under-‐the-‐unfccc/
• • The Role of Agriculture in the UN Climate Talks • http://ccafs.cgiar.org/publications/role-‐agriculture-‐un-‐climate-‐talks
16
Lesson to be learned from REDD+ Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) is introduced in this guide as it can be used as a comparison to illustrate how an equivalent agriculture programme under SBSTA may help with mitigation of, and adaptation to, the negative effects of climate change. It also shows how a dedicated space and effort can bring an issue firmly into the UNFCCC. REDD is an effort to create a financial value for the carbon stored in forests, offering incentives for developing countries to reduce emissions from forested lands and invest in low-‐carbon paths to sustainable development. Over time, more issues were brought under REDD and are now brought together under ‘REDD+’. REDD+ goes beyond deforestation and forest degradation, and includes the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. When negotiations started on forests, Parties were very divided and there was a lack of knowledge and understanding, very much as we see today on agriculture. The establishment of a SBSTA work programme helped deal with some of those questions, and it eventually contributed to REDD being included in the Convention. The REDD process bears many resemblances to the agriculture negotiations, but the scope and purpose of REDD+ are very different. Essentially, REDD+ is a mitigation financing mechanism that covers a limited number of countries, without an adaptation component. Agriculture is critical to all countries and requires a holistic solution that includes adaptation, mitigation and food security. Therefore, working solutions for agriculture and climate change should not be considered only as a mitigation financing mechanism. The following infographic, links and videos provide a short explanation of the REDD+ scheme. About REDD+
• 1997: Kyoto Protocol includes forestry in articles 2 and 3 • 2001: Forest conservation is excluded from the first commitment period
under the Kyoto Protocol • 2005: REDD is introduced as an agenda item at COP11 • 2006: SBSTA starts to note the potential of REDD for mitigation • 2008: UN-‐REDD is officially launched • 2009: The World Bank approves support for REDD, and the UN-‐REDD
programme launches the initial readiness process (phase 1) in nine pilot countries
• 2010: REDD officially adopted at COP16 • 2012: Funding for REDD totals US 118.9m, demonstrating the effectiveness
of a dedicated Work Programme under SBSTA to build knowledge and consensus for taking action.
• 2013: Warsaw Framework for REDD+ is adopted by COP19 • 2014: the Lima Information Hub for REDD-‐plus is established at COP 20
17
Links
• Farming First Agriculture & Climate Change infographic • CCAFS policy brief: learning from REDD to advance agriculture • CCAFS working paper on lessons learned from REDD+ for smallholders
Basic facts and FAQs about REDD+
• UN-‐REDD programme • UN-‐REDD website FAQs • Warsaw Framework for REDD+ • Understanding REDD+
Videos about REDD+ • Introduction to REDD+ • REDD As part of the Solution
FAQs The following are examples of tough questions often asked by stakeholders, negotiators or the media around the role of agriculture in climate change. Answering them may require selecting and combining more than one set of messages, facts and data. The suggested answers below provide examples of how messaging, data and evidence included in this toolkit can be used.
i) The activities mandated under the SBSTA decision of June 2014 will only see results in mid-‐2015 to 2016. Isn’t it too late to impact the 2015 agreement? It is very positive to see Parties committed to work on agriculture under SBSTA for the next two years. We have campaigned for many years to get a work programme, and while it would have been positive to have had such engagement earlier, it is not too late. The 2015 agreement is likely to be a general framework with much more work taking place afterwards to refine different elements. Crucially, the 2015 agreement should not be structured in a way that excludes agriculture, so that the door remains open to including agriculture in future commitments by Parties. Given the crucial role played by agriculture in securing livelihoods and food security, as well as its contribution to emissions and adaptation, it is essential that the sector be included in global action post 2020.
ii) What is happening to financing for climate-‐smart agriculture? Funding to support mitigation and adaptation activities in agriculture has been slow to emerge. Agriculture would benefit in particular from funds that support linked actions on adaptation, mitigation and current food security. This is why it is important to see agriculture more formally integrated in the climate change negotiations so it can be embedded in all the tools and mechanisms developed to support action on climate change. In the past two years, some progress has been made in channelling financing towards mitigation and adaptation in agriculture. Through the Global Environment Facility, associated
18
countries are able to access funding to support domestic activities. In addition, funding through ‘fast start’ finance has also started to flow. Furthermore, the Green Climate Fund has included agriculture as a key area for action, linking adaptation and mitigation. However the spread of the funding is not even, and not all countries are able to support their activities. We need to do more. We need funding that supports producers and that builds on the synergies between adaptation and mitigation, rather than consider them separately.
iii) Fertiliser will help address the challenge of declining crop yields in the face of climate change, yet isn’t an increase in fertiliser use just going to exacerbate the carbon emissions and climate change problem? Fertiliser is an interesting example of the important trade-‐offs at different scales of agriculture. Between 1961 and 2010, emissions from synthetic fertilizers increased ninefold, from 0.07 to 0.68 GtCO2 equivalent per year (Tubiello et al., 2013). At these rates, within a decade, synthetic fertilisers will be the second largest of agricultural emission categories after enteric fermentation in livestock. But synthetic fertilizers have also been critical to improving farmers’ livelihoods and national food security. Furthermore, synthetic fertilisers can actually contribute to reductions of emissions. This happens above the farm scale at the landscape scale. If greater use of fertilisers means that yields are higher and consequently less new land is cleared for agriculture, then greenhouse gas emissions across the landscape and across the country can be reduced overall. For many countries, for example in parts of Africa where fertiliser application rates are well below international averages, there may be good arguments for food security, adaptation and mitigation to increase rates of fertiliser application. On the other hand, for other countries where fertilisers may be applied in quantities in excess of yield benefits (e.g. China) farmers would reduce on-‐farm costs and thus would be more food secure if they reduced application rates. Knowledge and innovations around synthetic and organic fertilisers are growing all the time. For example, microdosing with fertilisers, particularly combined with smart use of organic fertilisers, can help farmers to reduce their input costs and achieve gains in adaptation and mitigation.
iv) Should food security concerns now supersede the urgency for climate change talks? Food security and climate change talks are inextricably interlinked and there must be recognition of the important role of agriculture in addressing climate change. Agriculture constitutes a crucial sector in the economies of many countries and for the livelihoods of billions around the world. Farmers -‐ who are at the heart of providing solutions to food security -‐ are already experiencing the impacts of climate change. The 2014 IPCC report, AR5, estimates that by 2050, climate change impacts will result in an average decline in yields of 8% for Africa and South Asia, for all crops. This will contribute to driving up food prices between 3% and 84%. The impact on many households’ food security will be dramatic. Farmers need action from policy makers, NGOs, politicians and businesses if they are to adapt
19
and to mitigate.
v) Agriculture is one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases both directly and through land use change. How much should we focus on mitigating greenhouse gases from the sector? Due to the growing demand for agricultural products and with predictions that climate change could reduce crop yields, the agriculture sector faces a unique challenge. According to the latest report by the IPCC, AR5, together, agriculture, forest and other land use (known as the AFOLU sector) contribute 24% to global emissions. Agriculture itself is responsible for about half of the AFOLU sector’s emissions, contributing 10-‐12% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Increasing agricultural productivity and production to ensure future food security should be at the centre of all agricultural policies. Adaptation measures are crucial for securing food production, and both adaptation and mitigation efforts must be built into comprehensive agricultural strategies that support enhanced productivity, food and nutrition security, whilst being environmentally sustainable. Policies need to be put in place that jointly address the objectives of food security, adaptation and mitigation in order to maximise benefits while recognising that there may be trade-‐offs. In fact, many adaptation measures in agriculture provide mitigation benefits and vice versa. For example Alternate-‐Wetting-‐and-‐Drying in rice production requires less water, which is helpful in times of drought. At the same time, this approach reduces methane emissions from paddy rice (see Richards and Sander 2014). Improved livestock feeding and herd management can help livestock keepers and pastoralists adapt to changing conditions, while reducing emissions from enteric fermentation. Improved soil fertility management, through microdosing for example, could reduce the need of expensive nitrogen-‐based fertilisers, and associated emissions, without impacting food security.
vi) Why do farmers keep talking about adaptation and mitigation co-‐benefits? Should we not just focus on one? Due to the growing demand for agricultural products and with predictions that climate change could reduce crop yields, the agriculture sector faces a unique challenge. Increasing agricultural productivity and production to ensure future food security should be at the centre of all agricultural policies. Adaptation measures are crucial for securing food production, and both adaptation and mitigation efforts must be built into comprehensive agricultural strategies that support enhanced productivity, food and nutrition security, whilst being environmentally sustainable. Policies need to be put in place that jointly address the objectives of food security, adaptation and mitigation in order to maximise benefits while recognizing that there may be trade-‐offs. What is climate-‐smart agriculture? According to the FAO, “Climate-‐smart agriculture promotes production systems that sustainably increase productivity, resilience (adaptation), reduces/removes GHGs (mitigation), and enhances achievement of national food security and development goals.” CSA integrates the three dimensions of sustainable development (economic, social and environmental) by jointly addressing food security and climate challenges. It is composed of
20
three main pillars: • sustainably increasing agricultural productivity and incomes; • adapting and building resilience to climate change; • reducing and/or removing greenhouse gases emissions, where possible CSA sourcebook: http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3325e/i3325e00.htm What is an early warning system? Early Warning Systems (EWS) are a critical part of systematic risk management and play a key role in assuring future agricultural production and access to food and water by the world’s most vulnerable people. Climate change is likely to increase the frequency of extreme weather events, such as hurricanes, floods and storms. These cannot be prevented but implementing early warning of the impending events can significantly reduce damage associated with them.
vii) An effective EWS includes four components: (1) detection, monitoring and forecasting of hazards; (2) analysis of risks involved; (3) dissemination of timely and authoritative warnings; and (4) activation of emergency preparedness and response plans. These need to be coordinated across many agencies at the national and community levels for the system to work. Failure in one component, or lack of coordination, can lead to the failure of the whole. What are the key gaps in knowledge about adaptation in agriculture? The main aim of the adaptation of agriculture to climate change impacts is to preserve the productivity of agricultural systems without increasing environmental impacts. In other words, agricultural practices and technologies need to be adapted to build more climate-‐resilient agriculture and allow for sustainable agricultural production. Adaptation can occur at multiple levels, from changed agricultural practices, to varietal change, to substitution or diversification, to moving out of crop farming, livestock rearing or aquaculture altogether. However, significant knowledge gaps exist as to what adaptations options are available, what their likely benefits or costs are, where and when they should be deployed, and what the learning processes are that can support widespread change under uncertainty. This is compounded by the fact that significant uncertainty exists regarding the direction and magnitude of climate change, which in turn leads to uncertainty in the realm of food production and its impact on food systems and food security across complex geographies and societies. Addressing knowledge gaps in adaptation will require more site-‐specific and evidence-‐based research on impacts and risks and an improved understanding of uncertainty, to allow more confident decision-‐making and allocation of limited resources. It also required to invest in databases and tools to inform policy and practice in the spheres of agricultural risk-‐management, adaptation and mitigation.
Campbell, B.M., Challinor, A.J., Hansen, J., Ingram, J.S.I., Jarvis, A., Kristjanson, P., Lau, C., Thornton, P.K, and Wollenberg, E. 2010. Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change: Outlook for Knowledge, Tools and Action. CCAFS Report 3. Copenhagen, Denmark: CGIAR-‐ESSP Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security.
21
http://ccafs.cgiar.org/publications/agriculture-‐food-‐security-‐and-‐climate-‐change-‐outlook-‐knowledge-‐tools-‐and-‐action
What is the ‘land’ or ‘land-‐use’ sector?
The term land-‐use sector has been used by the IPCCC and in the UNFCCC. In recent ADP text, it also shows as “land sector”. It is used to bring agriculture and forests together under one umbrella, with agriculture understood as the broad range of activities which use land, from livestock grazing to cultivation. Previously, agriculture and forests were generally conceptualised separately and this has been reflected in how the UNFCCC has handled the two topics – forests have been discussed primarily through Land Use and Land Use Change (LULUCF) and REDD, whereas agriculture remained largely excluded from the negotiations. The land sector corresponds to the IPCC’s ‘Agriculture, Forestry and other Land Uses’ also known as AFOLU which was brought together in the latest IPCC report AR5. The benefit of using the ‘land or land-‐use sector’ as a concept is that it allows for better consideration of the linkages, co-‐benefits and trade-‐offs that actions in forestry and agriculture can have, rather than if the two sectors are considered separately. What are Intended Nationally Determined Contributions? Under the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), countries across the globe committed to create a new international climate agreement by the conclusion of the Paris Climate Summit in December 2015. During previous climate negotiations, countries agreed to publicly outline what actions they intend to take under a global agreement in order to meet the 2°C goal. These voluntary country commitments are known as Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs). The level of ambition expressed through the INDCs will be an important factor in determining whether the new agreement is in line with required greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions compatible with the 2°C goal. The INDCs are particularly novel because they involve all countries, moving away from the dichotomy established under the Kyoto Protocol between developed and developing countries. This reflects changes in many countries’ status since Kyoto and recognition that meeting a 2°C goal requires global action. However the level of contribution that each country should make remains a controversial topic in the negotiations. The process of INDC’s raises some complex questions about what constitutes valid commitments. The rules for accounting and measuring have not yet been set so countries will need to walk backwards from the commitments to the rules in order to assess what are valid commitments. http://www.wri.org/indc-‐definition http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2015/03/explainer-‐what-‐are-‐intended-‐nationally-‐determined-‐contributions/ What is the global emission budget? The global emission budget refers to the idea that to achieve the 2°C goal, a total amount of emissions need to be cut and a total amount of emissions can be allowed. The Global Emission
22
Budget is the maximum amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) that can be emitted into the atmosphere whilst staying within safe temperature limits beyond 2020. Exceeding an estimated budget of just 1,000 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide (GT CO2) would increase the risk of severe, pervasive and irreversible climate change impacts. The amount of emissions allowed should be divided among countries and among sectors, including agriculture and land use change. Each party would need to report on how they are using their share of that allowable emission budget. This is not a concept endorsed by all countries and application of the concept entails difficult discussions about how shares of that budget can be allocated to different countries. What is the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage? At COP19 (November 2013) in Warsaw, Poland, the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC established the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (WIM) to address loss and damage associated with impacts of climate change, including extreme events and slow onset events, in developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change. WIM is part of the Cancun Adaptation Framework, which was created to help bolster adaptation actions and improve coordination. The WIM provides a platform to explore and identify effective responses to climate change induced loss and damage, to expand the understanding of climate consequences and to find an appropriate mix of tools to address loss and damage. It represents an important step forward on adaptation as it embeds the issue in UNFCCC but its implementation is complex and has been tied to controversial debates about compensation and financial flows to countries affected by loss and damage. http://unfccc.int/adaptation/workstreams/loss_and_damage/items/6056.php
23
Acronyms The following is a list of acronyms of organisations, processes and mechanisms related to climate change negotiations. Acronym Acronym ADP Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban
Platform for Enhanced Action INDC Intended Nationally Determined
Contributions
AFOLU Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
AWG-‐LCA Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-‐term Cooperative Action
LULUCF Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry
AWG-‐KP Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol
NAMA Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action
CMP Conference and Meeting of the Parties of the Kyoto protocol
NAPA National Adaptation Programmes of Action
COP Conference of the Parties REDD Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (up to 2008)
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
REDD+ Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation + Conservation, Sustainable management and enhancement of forest carbon stocks (after 2008).
GHG Greenhouse Gas SBSTA Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice
ILUC Indirect Land Use Change UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
24
Factsheets This section will present ten factsheets containing data and facts extracted from the sources below and others, then mapped to the ten key messages or topics of this guide/toolkit. Data will be related to UNFCCC negotiations, food security and nutrition, small vs large scale farmers, as well as specific topics such as:
1) The benefits of adapting to, and mitigating the effects of, climate change; 2) Key statistics on the impact agriculture has on climate change; 3) Impacts of climate change on agriculture; 4) Adaptation-‐mitigation co-‐benefits; 5) What is the SBSTA work programme?
Facts and data Source
Message 1
Now is the time to act. Farmers are experiencing the impacts of climate change and they need action from policymakers, NGOs, politicians and businesses if they are to adapt and to mitigate.
The world population is expected to reach 9.6 billion by 2050. To meet global food demand by 2050, agricultural production must increase by 60%.
Big Facts
Population growth is expected to be particularly dramatic in the least developed countries, which are projected to double in population from 898 million inhabitants in 2013 to 1.8 billion in 2050 and to 2.9 billion in 2100.
Big Facts
Globally, 842 million people are chronically undernourished, while almost 2 billion suffer from micronutrient deficiencies.
Big Facts
It is predicted that global agricultural production will grow at an average of 1.5% annually over the next 10 years, compared with 2.1% in the previous decade. Growth is expected to be slower in all crop sectors and in livestock production. These trends reflect rising costs, growing resource constraints and increasing environmental pressures, which are expected to inhibit supply response in virtually all regions.
Big Facts
Increased production must be met through higher yields because increasing the area of land under agriculture carries major environmental costs. Although there is more land that could be used for agriculture, most of it is under forests, wetlands or grasslands, and converting these to cropland would greatly increase greenhouse gas emissions and cause the loss of biodiversity and important ecosystem services.
Big Facts
Higher food prices generally make poverty worse. Although there are variations by commodity and by country, poor people generally consume more food than they produce and so tend to be hurt by higher food prices.
Big Facts
Climate change will affect all four dimensions of food security: food availability, stability of food supplies, access to food and food utilisation. First and foremost, climate change affects food availability via its impact on yield.
Big Facts
If the amount or quality of foods available decline, malnutrition tends to increase, as does incidence of infectious disease. For example, flooding, especially flash flooding caused by a single severe weather event, is likely to result in an increase in the number of people exposed to diarrheal and other infectious diseases, reducing their nutrient absorption capacity and reducing their immunity to infection.
Big Facts
RAISING KEY ISSUES
25
Women tend to be more at risk from climate change than men because they represent the majority of the world’s poor. This means they often lack the means to cope with the harmful effects of climate change.
Big Facts
More and more agricultural work is being done by women as men move to non-‐farm jobs. In all parts of the world except Europe, the proportion of women in the total agricultural work force has risen over the past four decades.
Big Facts
Message 2
A 2015 agreement should acknowledge the importance of agriculture for food security and livelihoods and the role it can play to help meet global adaptation and mitigation goals.
Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use (AFOLU) plays a central role for food security and sustainable development. The sector’s mitigation potential is derived from both an enhancement of removals of greenhouse gases (GHG), as well as reduction of emissions through management of land and livestock. Opportunities for mitigation include supply-‐side and demand-‐side options: • Supply side: forestry, land-‐based agriculture, livestock, integrated systems and bioenergy • Demand side: reduced losses in the food supply chain, changes in human diets and in demand for
wood and forestry products The nature of the sector means that there are potentially many barriers to implementation of available mitigation options, including accessibility to AFOLU financing, poverty, institutional, ecological, technological development, diffusion and transfer barriers. There is significant mitigation potential from agriculture, forestry, and bioenergy mitigation measures, e.g.: • Reductions in CH4 or N2O emissions from croplands, grazing lands, and livestock. • Conservation of existing carbon stocks and soil carbon that would otherwise be lost. • Enhancement of carbon sequestration Changing land-‐use practices, technological advancements and varietal improvements have enabled world grain harvests to double from 1.2 to 2.5 billion tonnes per year between 1970 and 2010. Adaptation options for agriculture include technological responses, enhancing smallholder access to credit and other critical production resources, strengthening institutions at local to regional levels, and improving market access through trade reform. Responses to decreased food production and quality include developing new crop varieties adapted to changes in CO2, temperature, and drought; enhancing the capacity for climate risk management; and offsetting economic impacts of land-‐use change. Improving financial support and investing in the production of small-‐scale farms can also provide benefits. Expanding agricultural markets and improving the predictability and reliability of the world trading system could result in reduced market volatility and help manage food supply shortages caused by climate change. In agriculture, the most cost-‐effective mitigation options are cropland management, grazing land management and restoration of organic soils.
IPCC
Using income-‐dependent dietary choices, it is estimated that global demand for crop calories will increase by 100% ± 11% and global demand for crop protein will increase by 110%±7% from 2005 to 2050.
Big Facts
26
Deforestation and land-‐use change accounts for 2,200–6,600 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent per year, or 30–50% of agricultural emissions and about 4–14% of global emissions. Agriculture makes the greatest contribution to total food system emissions—7,300–12,700 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent each year, equivalent to 80–86% of food systems emissions and 14–24% of total global emissions.
Big Facts
One reason why agricultural growth is likely to generate income for the poor is that in many countries where poverty is high, poor people are often concentrated in rural areas, and agricultural growth more directly affects the rural economy than other types of growth do.
FAO
The role of agriculture in driving overall economic growth is generally more important in poorer countries where it accounts for more than 30% of economic activity, and in the least-‐developed countries as a group, it accounts for 27 % of GDP (2009 figures). By contrast, in OECD economies, agriculture accounts for less than 1.5 % of overall economic output.
FAO
In the least developed countries, agriculture typically accounts for 50% of GDP and over 80% of the labour force (2010).
Montpellier Panel
Message 3 • The ‘Zero Draft’ of the 2015 agreement, released in February, includes mentions of both the
‘land sector’ and agriculture. This is a positive development and negotiators should keep agriculture included as the negotiating text evolves.
265 million people will face a 5% decrease in growing season in the next 40 years.
Big Facts
Every one US dollar invested in anticipatory measures for climate adaptation initiatives is estimated to save up to 7 US dollars in future relief costs.
UNFCCC
The cumulative cost of adaptation in agriculture up to 2050 is $250 billion globally. Big Facts
About 70% of the mitigation potential is in low-‐ and middle-‐income countries. Big Facts
Crop yield improvement has saved 34% of total human carbon emission. Since the 1960s, this has meant a savings of around 13 billion tonnes each year. Every dollar invested in agricultural yields has resulted in 68 kgC fewer emissions.
Burney et al
Sequestering carbon in the soils of croplands, grazing lands and rangelands offers agriculture’s highest potential for climate change mitigation. These soils can store between 1.5 and 4.5 GtCO2 per year.
Big Facts
Improved crop management will be key to mitigating emissions in the agricultural sector. Agricultural practices that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase carbon storage could reduce carbon emissions by 1,500–1,600 million tonnes of CO2 equivalents per year. [At a carbon price of $20/tCO2e]
Big Facts
Total costs for adaptation in agriculture have been estimated at USD 7 billion per year up to 2050, USD 11.3–12.6 billion per year in the year 2030 and a cumulative USD 225 billion up to 2050.
Big Facts
USD 83 billion per year of additional investments in food, agriculture and rural development are required for the world to feed its growing population in 2050 – in other words, yearly investment needs to rise by more than 50%.
agricultural investment in developing countries needs to increase by at least 50 percent to meet projected increased demand by a world population that is expected to pass 9 billion in 2050
FAO
Globally, fewer new climate policies are being introduced, but many countries are currently mainstreaming earlier climate change policies across sectoral programmes.
Big Facts
27
The Green Climate Fund was designated at the sixteenth session of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), 2010, as an operating entity of the financial mechanism of the UNFCCC, in accordance with Article 11 of the Convention. Later established in December 2011 at Durban, South Africa.
GCFund
Message 4 The process set up under SBSTA in June 2014 for submissions and workshops over the next two years is welcome. It is progress on adaptation specifically. But it needs to feed into the ADP discussions so that a global framework for action from 2020 includes agriculture.
Adaptations to climate change that address food availability range from improving storage facilities to securing formal credit, land rights, tenure and market access (input and output markets) for small-‐scale farmers. These farmers also need to be better able to manage the risks associated with climate change (for example, through index-‐based crop insurance), support for traditional land management and knowledge systems and better access to climate information.
Big Facts
Agricultural practices that are GHG-‐intensive include irrigation and the use of fertilisers and pesticides. Integrated nutrient, water and pest management practices, including practices like microdosing and drip irrigation, can reduce GHG emissions and increase resource efficiency.
Big Facts
Most adaptation options build on existing practices and sustainable agriculture, rather than new technologies.
Big Facts
Some plants and livestock breeds that are currently underutilised may become more attractive to farmers as a result of climate change. Many neglected and underutilised species that are currently maintained through in situ conservation could become important crops in the future. Empowering farming communities is essential for effective in situ conservation as this encourages local decision making on genetic-‐resources management making on genetic-‐resources management.
Big Facts
Information and communication technologies (ICTs) have the potential to help monitor climate change and to help farmers adapt to it and mitigate its effects. ICTs can help in the timely provision of climate-‐related information, which may allow vulnerable societies and individuals to prepare for extreme weather events. This can reduce losses during bad years but also allow farmers to take advantage of favourable climatic conditions.
Big Facts
Message 5 • A 2015 agreement should deploy finance, technical inputs and capacity building to support ambitious
actions by farmers and the agricultural sector to achieve food security through adaptation and mitigation.
•
The World Bank estimates that mitigation measures in developing countries could cost between US$140 – $175 billion per year for the next twenty years
World Bank
FAO estimates that investment needs for sub-‐Saharan Africa, the Near East, and North Africa for climate adaptation in agriculture will need to be around US$3 billion per year.
Ecoagriculture partners
Putting a global price on adaptation and mitigation in the agricultural sector is however very difficult. The wide differences in situations, needs and impacts between countries mean that local estimates can vary widely. A series of case studies by IIED showed that a national programme to protect partoral systems in Tanzania could cost more than $280 million, whereas a programme to help adapt cash crops for smallholder in Rwanda would cost around $14.2 million.
IIED
Message 6 The Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) by countries represent a key opportunity to bring agriculture into climate change commitments and activities. Agriculture must be included in the INDCs.
28
INDCs put forward by countries will form a key input to the preparation processes of negotiations leading towards the 2015 Paris climate agreement.
Ecofys
Message 7 Agriculture and food security issues are likely to be central to planning for mitigation (e.g. NAMAs) and adaptation (e.g. NAPAs) in all countries.
265 million people will face a 5% decrease in growing season in the next 40 years.
Big Facts
Every one US dollar invested in anticipatory measures for climate adaptation initiatives is estimated to save up to 7 US dollars in future relief costs.
UNFCCC
The cumulative cost of adaptation in agriculture up to 2050 is $250 billion globally.
Big Facts
About 70% of the mitigation potential is in low-‐ and middle-‐income countries. Big Facts
Crop yield improvement has saved 34% of total human carbon emission. Since the 1960s investments in agricultural yields have made it possible to save 249 kg CO2eq emissions relative to 1961 technology, avoiding 13.1 Gt CO2-‐eq per year.
Burney et al
Sequestering carbon in the soils of croplands, grazing lands and rangelands offers agriculture’s highest potential for climate change mitigation. These soils can store between 1.5 and 4.5 GtCO2 per year.
Big Facts
Improved crop management will be key to mitigating emissions in the agricultural sector. Agricultural practices that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase carbon storage could reduce carbon emissions by 1,500–1,600 million tonnes of CO2 equivalents per year.
Big Facts
Message 8 National policy processes will work best if they combine food security, adaptation and mitigation rather than keeping the three aspects in separate tracks. Integration is needed across landscapes and food supply chains, in order to manage trade-‐offs effectively, particularly trade-‐offs between food production and mitigation goals.
Countries have introduced a range of policy vehicles to coordinate and mainstream climate policy and to include the UNFCCC elements. Government mechanisms include climate action plans, low emissions development plans and climate change adaptation plans.
Big Facts
Message 9 Financing for both mitigation and adaptation must be part of climate change policies. Recent developments are positive: improvements in the Global Environment Facility’s strategy and an increase in financing stemming from ‘fast start’ finance are helping increase funding towards climate-‐smart agriculture. But more needs to be done. It is essential that the new Green Climate Fund (GCF) provides stable, long-‐term support to adaptation and mitigation in agriculture.
29
The Global Environment Facility (GEF) is piloting an Integrated Approach Program on Sustainability and Resilience for Food Security in Sub-‐Saharan Africa. The program addresses the need to safeguard ecosystem services in smallholder agriculture, based on the recognition that production practices in these systems, which underpin food security for more than 70% of the population, are largely dependent on assets provided by nature.
GEF
The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)’s Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture Programme (ASAP) channels climate finance to smallholder farmers, so they can access the information tools and technologies that help build their resilience to climate change.
IFAD
Message 10 There are many existing solutions to some of the known challenges of climate change that can be scaled up. These include improved soil and water management practices, better climate information services, and greater access to agricultural resources among women. Our most important challenge, as farmers and as supporters, is not to invent new practices and approaches, but to share what already works as widely as possible to create global change for the better.
Alternate wetting and drying (AWD) is a rice management practice that reduces water use by up to 30%, methane emissions by 48%, maintains yields, and can save farmers money on irrigation and pumping costs.
CGIAR
Information and communication technologies (ICTs) have the potential to help monitor climate change and to help farmers adapt to it and mitigate its effects. ICTs can help in the timely provision of climate-‐related information, which may allow vulnerable societies and individuals to prepare for extreme weather events. This can reduce losses during bad years but also allow farmers to take advantage of favourable climatic conditions.
Big Facts
Weather index-‐based insurance is an attractive approach to managing weather and climate risk because it uses a weather index, such as rainfall, to determine payouts. These can be made more quickly and with less argument than is typical for conventional crop insurance.
CCAFS
If women had the same access to productive resources as men, they could increase yields on their farms by 20–30%. This could raise total agricultural output in developing countries by 2.5–4%, which could in turn reduce the number of hungry people in the world by 12–17%.
FAO
Many options are available for adapting livestock production systems to a changed climate. These include: technological options (e.g. using species with greater drought tolerance); behavioural modifications (e.g. changes in dietary choices, such as consuming less meat); managerial choices (e.g. different farm management practices); and policy alternatives (e.g. planning regulations and infrastructural development). Some options may be appropriate for the short term, others for the long term and some for both.
Big Facts
Agroforestry (trees on farms) can increase soil fertility, reduce soil erosion and provide other environmental benefits, helping farmers deal with increased climate variability.
Big Facts
There is huge potential to expand aquaculture (the raising of fish in captivity in the sea or freshwater) even in the face of climate change.
Big Facts
Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Programme and Household Asset Building Programme have improved the food security and resilience to climate change of nearly 8 million households across the country.
CGIAR
30
One good adaptation option is to reuse wastewater for irrigation, instead of disposing of it untreated in surface water. This is especially true for rice crops. Using wastewater in this way not only helps adaptation to climate change, but can also contribute to food security in areas with rapid growing populations.
Big Facts
Water productivity can be increased by 15%–20% in smallholder rainfed agriculture. Small investments in supplemental irrigation (providing 1,000 cubic metres of extra water per hectare per season) in combination with improved soil, nutrient and crop management can more than double water productivity and yields in small-‐scale rainfed agriculture.
Big Facts
Conservation agriculture (CA) can increase resilience to climate change and has the potential to contribute to climate change mitigation.
CGIAR
Websites
ELDIS Climate Change Knowledge Navigator and Widget
• The ELDIS Knowledge Navigator guides users through to appropriate climate change websites, helping them to access knowledge that best suits their needs or share their own experiences and resources.
CCAFS Big Facts website
• The Big Facts website is a resource of the most up-‐to-‐date and robust facts relevant to the nexus of climate change, agriculture and food security. It is intended to provide a credible and reliable platform for fact checking. The website contains over 285 peer-‐reviewed facts, links to more than 340 research resources, over 150 downloadable infographics and 33 downloadable facts sheets.
FAO Climate-‐Smart Agriculture website
• The website of the climate-‐smart agriculture approach is an entry point for essential information on how to make agriculture, forestry and fisheries part of the solution to the negative impacts of climate change. It also offers a space for those who work on climate-‐smart practices to share documents, exchange information and views on what works and what does not when adapting to climate change and mitigating greenhouse gases in the agriculture sector.
CGIAR Climate change websites
• The Bioversity International Climate Change website covers the latest news regarding research on the role agricultural biodiversity in improving resilience to climate change.
31
• The CCAFS website has a wide range of content, including the latest publications on climate change and food security, climate-‐related models, maps and data, as well as up-‐to-‐date blogs from CCAFS scientists.
• The CIAT Climate Change website has the latest news, research updates and publications concerning developments in tropical agriculture related to climate change.
• The CIFOR Climate Change website provides information on the key role of forests in climate change adaptation and mitigation, by sharing the latest news, projects, and publications.
• The CIMMYT Climate Change blog provides an up-‐to-‐date news feed on maize and wheat. • The CIP Climate Change newsfeed shares stories potato-‐related developments in terms of
climate change adaptation and mitigation. • The ICRAF Climate Change website shares the latest publications, events and blog stories
showing the growing importance of agroforestry in climate change resilience. • The IFPRI Climate Change website brings together various content — including blogs, research
outputs and project updates —that catalogues the research related climate change and agriculture being conducted by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and its various partners.
• The IRRI Climate Change website covers not only the latest news, and information related to current projects on climate change adaptation and mitigation in rice production systems.
• The IWMI Climate Change website shares key facts, projects, publications, as well as solutions for both adaptation and mitigation, pertaining to water-‐related challenges brought forth by climate change.
• The WorldFish Climate Change website provides publications and news updates related to the improvement of resilience in fisheries and aquaculture.
Infographics Farming First • Food and Farming in 2030: Looking ahead on the post-‐2015 development agenda • The story of agriculture and the sustainable development goals • The story of agriculture and climate change: the road we've travelled • Agriculture and the green conomy • Resilience in action • The female face of farming CCAFS
• Big Facts website • Climate change, food and farming: what you need to know about the IPCC report • How farmers around the world are making decision based on weather and climate
information • Farmers answer: how have you changed the way you grow your food?
IFPRI
• 2014 Global Hunger Index by Severity • Start your engines • Family Farmers: % of farmland cultivated by family farmers • Perceived food security after political uprisings in the Arab world
32
• 2013 Food Policy Timeline • Food Security in a World of Natural Resources Scarcity: Promising Agricultural Technologies
for Feeding the World’s Poorest • Climate Change and African Agriculture • Why Ethiopian Farmers Need Weather Insurance • Economic Growth and Malnutrition • Ethiopia: on the path from famine to food security • 3 Measures of Hunger • Estimates and projections of undernourished people worldwide, 1990-‐2015 • 2012 Food Policy Timeline • Women's Empowerment in Agriculture • Meat: the good, the bad and the complicated • Meat consumption: how many kilos of meat per person, 2000-‐2050 • Accelerated Spending in Agricultural Research • 2012 Global Hunger Index by Severity • Conservation Agriculture: Farming for the Long Haul • Timeline: Food Policy Actions and Events in 2011 • Map: Food Security and Food Safety: Where Disasters Struck in 2011 • Milk It for All It’s Worth • Rising Food Prices • Global Hunger Index 2011 by Severity • Horn of Africa • Rooting Out Hunger: improving nutrition with Vitamin-‐A rich orange sweet potato
Bioversity International • Ecosystem services and resilience • Spaciotemporal lags and ecosystem services • The importance of wild crop relative • Biodiversity for family farming CIAT • Cassava – A Resilient Crop with Great Potential • Coffee Facts • Crop Wild Relatives • Degraded pastures • Earth is a Ticking Timebomb • Eco-‐efficiency • Is Cassava the Answer to African Climate Change Adaptation? • Land and Soil Degradation • Mealybug Threat to Cassava CIFOR • Southeast Asia Burning CIMMYT • The World of Maize FAO
33
• Equal Access to Resources for Food Security in the Face of Climate Change • Climate-‐Smart Agriculture • Child and Maternal Nutrition • Gender: The Female Face of Farming • The Impact of Climate on Food • Forests and Family Farms Together Sustaining Livelihoods and Landscapes • The State of the World's Forests 2014 • Somalia: population and crisis • Wheat: the Largest Primary Commodity • The African Solidarity Trust: by Africans for Africans • Family Farmers: feeding the world, caring for the earth • Our Food and Agriculture in Numbers • The State of the World's Fisheries and Aquaculture • The State of Food Insecurity in the World in 2012 • Genetic Resources and Biodiversity for Food and Agriculture • Pumpkins, Squash and Gourds • Cash Transfers: Promoting Sustainable Livelihoods in Sub-‐Saharan Africa • Youth and Aquaculture in Africa • Youth and Livestock in Africa • Forests and Land-‐use • Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use • The Impact of the Quinoa Boom on Bolivian Family Farmers • Understanding Hunger and Malnutrition • The State of the World's Forest Genetic Resources 2014 • Conservation Agriculture: Step-‐by-‐Step • Conservation Agriculture: The Three Principles • Conservation Agriculture: An Overview • The Role of Livestock Data in Africa: The Tanzanian Case Study • The State of Food and Agriculture • Priority Themes for Climate Change Adaptation • The World is Thirsty because it is Hungry • Understanding Water Scarcity • Water Needed for Food Production • How Much Water is Needed to Produce...?
IRRI
• From Genes to Farmers’ Fields The Institute of International and European Affairs
• Waste Not, Want Not: The Problem of Food Waste • The Global Supermarket: Whose Buying What and Whose Stocking the Shelves • Integrating Agriculture and Land Use into the Climate Picture • Feeding the World in 2050 • Global Food Demand: Flavor of the Future • The Path to Pairs: Key Players and Dates in the Climate Change Negotiations • Major Economies and the Global Carbon Budget • Fuelling the Future: Biofuels Infographic
34
CGIAR • More Crop Per Drop • How Carbon Forestry is Helping to Climate-‐Proof the Philippines • Facts about Forests and Tree Genetic Diversity and Why it Matters • Better Beans for Africa • The Price of Nature: Linking Ecosystem Services and Livelihoods • Millet and Sorghum: climate-‐smart grains • Wheat: how ‘one degree more’ is 10% less • Say Yes to Banana • Global Fish Challenges • Feeding the World: the Role of Forests, Trees and Agroforestry WorldFish • Fish for Nutrition and Food Security • Climate Change and Our Ailing Oceans • Who has the Fish? • Polarities in the Fish Food System Various • What Climate Change Means for Africa and Asia • Forests are Key to Global Sustainability • Choose Your Future: 4 Emissions Pathways • Climate Impacts and Investments in Latin America • Adaptation Fund at a Glance • Climate Change: Implications for Fisheries and Aquaculture • Climate Change: Implications for Agriculture • Building Resilience Under a Changing Climate • The Low-‐Carbon Economy • Carbon Crossroads: the pathway to two degrees • Are Global CO2 Emissions Still Rising • Investing in Small Island Developing States • Exploring Africa’s Agricultural Potential • Development miracle or environmental disaster? A look behind the oil palm controversy • Power and political interest pervade Peru’s land sector • New study on drivers of illegal tropical deforestation • Forests, markets and demand • Cities: opportunities for sustainable landscapes? • Landscapes in climate and development policy • Agricultural biodiversity is key for resilient family farms • Spatiotemporal Lags of Ecosystem Services • The Importance of Crop Wild Relatives • Ecosystem Services and Resilience
35
Briefs and Papers Below are references for a careful selection of high-impact peer-reviewed papers or policy briefs. Beddington J, Asaduzzaman M, Clark M, Fernandez A, Guillou M, Jahn M, Erda L, Mamo T, Van Bo
N, Nobre CA, Scholes R, Sharma R, Wakhungu J. 2012. Achieving food security in the face of climate change: Final report from the Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Copenhagen, Denmark. Available online at: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/35589/climate_food_commission-final-mar2012.pdf?sequence=1
Campbell BM, Thornton P, Zougmoré R, van Asten P, Lipper L. 2014. Sustainable intensification: What is its role in climate smart agriculture? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 8:39-43. DOI:10.1016/j.cosust.2014.07.002
FAO. 2012. Developing a Climate-Smart Agriculture Strategy at the Country Level: Lessons From Recent Experience, Background Paper for the Second Global Conference on Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change, 2012. Available online at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/ap401e/ap401e.pdf
FAO. 2013. Climate-Smart Agriculture Sourcebook. Rome: FAO. Available online at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3325e/i3325e.pdf
Foresight. 2011. The future of food and farming. Final project report. Futures. London: Government Office for Science. Available online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/288329/11-546-future-of-food-and-farming-report.pdf
Foster K, Neufeldt H, Franks P, Diro R, Munden L, Anand M, Wollenberg E. 2013. Climate finance for agriculture and livelihoods. ICRAF Policy Brief 15. Nairobi, Kenya. World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF). Available online at: http://www.worldagroforestry.org/downloads/publications/PDFs/PB13035.PDF
Garnett T, Appleby MC, Blamford A, Bateman IJ, Benton TG, Bloomer P, Burlingame B, Dawkins M, Dolan L, Fraser D, Herrero M, Hoffmann I, Smith P, Thornton PK, Toulmin C, Vermeulen SJ, Godfray CJ. 2013. Sustainable intensification in agriculture: premises and policies. Science 341: 33-34.
Harvey CA, Chacón M, Donatti CI, Garen E, Hannah L, Andrade A, Bede L, Brown D, Calle A, Chará J, Clement C, Gray E, Hoang MH, Minang P, Rodríguez AM, Seeberg-Elverfeldt C, Semroc B, Shames S, Smukler S, Somarriba E, Torquebiau E, van Etten J, Wollenberg E. 2014. Climate-smart landscapes: opportunities and challenges for integrating adaptation and mitigation in tropical agriculture. Conservation Letters 7(2):77-90. DOI:10.1111/conl.12066
HLPE, 2012. Food Security and Climate Change. A Report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security, Rome 2012. Available online at: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/HLPE-Report-3-Food_security_and_climate_change-June_2012.pdf
Kissinger G, Lee D, Orindi VA, Narasimhan P, King’uyu SM, Sova C. 2013. Planning climate adaptation in agriculture. Meta-synthesis of national adaptation plans in West and East Africa and South Asia. CCAFS Report No. 10. Copenhagen, Denmark: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Available online at: http://ccafs.cgiar.org/publications/planning-climate-adaptation-agriculture
Lipper L, Thornton P, Campbell BM, Baedeker T, Braimoh A, Bwalya M, Caron P, Cattaneo A, Garrity D, Henry K, Hottle R, Jackson L, Jarvis A, Kossam F, Mann W, McCarthy N, Meybeck A, Neufeldt H, Remington T, Sen PT, Sessa R, Shula R, Tibu A, Torquebiau EF. 2014. Climate-smart agriculture for food security. Nature Climate Change 4:1068–1072. DOI:10.1038/nclimate2437
BRIEFS AND PAPERS
36
Mutamba M, Mugoya M. 2014. Climate-Smart Agriculture: Farmers' Perspectives. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Copenhagen. Available online at: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/42433/Farmers%27%20Perspectives%20for%20web.pdf
Porter JR, Xie L, Challinor AJ, Cochrane K, Howden SM, Iqbal MM, Lobell DB, Travasso MI. 2014. Food security and food production systems. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, Girma B, Kissel ES, Levy AN, MacCracken S, Mastrandrea PR, White LL (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 485-533. Available online at http://ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads/WGIIAR5-Chap7_FINAL.pdf
Pretty J, Sutherland WJ, Ashby A, Auburn J, Baulcombe D, Bell M, Bentley J, Bickersteth S, Brown K, Burke J, Campbell H, Chen K, Crowley E, Crute I, Dobbelaere D, EdwardsbJones G, Funes-Monzote FH, Godfray CJ, Griffon M, Gypmantisiri P, Haddad L, Halavatau S, Herren H, Holderness M, Izac A, Jones M, Koohafkan P, Lal R, Lang L, McNeely J, Mueller A, Nisbett N, Noble A, Pingali P, Pinto Y, Rabbinge R, Ravindranath NH, Rola A, Roling N, Sage C, Settle W, Sha JM, Shiming L, Simons T, Smith P, Strzepeck K, Swaine H, Terry E, Tomich TP, Toulmin C, Trigo E, Twomlow S, Kees Vis J, Wilson J and Pilgrim S. (eds). 2011. Sustainable intensification in African agriculture. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 9(1): 5-24. Available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3763/ijas.2010.0583
Smith P, Bustamante M, Ahammad H, Clark H, Dong H, Elsiddig EA, Haberl H, Harper R, House J, Jafari M, Masera O, Mbow C, Ravindranath NH, Rice CW, Robledo Abad C, Romanovskaya A, Sperling F, Tubiello F. 2014. Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU). In: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani E, Kadner S, Seyboth K, Adler A, Baum I, Brunner S, Eickemeier P, Kriemann B, Savolainen J, Schlömer S, von Stechow C, Zwickel T, Minx JC (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. Available online at: http://report.mitigation2014.org/drafts/final-draft-postplenary/ipcc_wg3_ar5_final-draft_postplenary_chapter11.pdf
Streck C, Campbell B, Mann W, Meléndez-Ortiz R, Tennigkeit T, Vermeulen S, Bellmann C, Meijer E, Wilkes A. 2011. Addressing agriculture in climate change negotiations: a scoping report. Meridian Institute, Dillon, Colorado, USA. Available online at: http://www.climatefocus.com/downloads/Agriculture%20and%20Climate%20Change%20Scoping%20Report%2012%20July%202011.pdf
Thornton PK, Ericksen PJ, Herrero M, Challinor A. 2014. Climate variability and vulnerability to climate change: a review. Global Change Biology 20(11):3313-3328. DOI:10.1111/gcb.12581
Thornton P. 2012. Recalibrating Food Production in the Developing World: Global Warming Will Change More Than Just the Climate, CCAFS Policy Brief, October 2012. Available online at: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/24696
Verhagen J, Vellinga T, Neijenhuis F, Jarvis T, Jackson L, Caron P, Torquebiau E, Lipper L, Fernandes E, Entsua-Mensah REM, Vermeulen S. 2014. Climate-Smart Agriculture: Scientists' perspectives. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), Copenhagen. Available online at: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/42434/CSA%20Scientists%20perspectives.pdf?sequence=1
Vermeulen SJ. 2014. Climate change, food security and small-scale producers. CCAFS Info Brief. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Copenhagen, Denmark. Available online at: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/35215/IPCC_info_note-3April14.pdf?sequence=7
37
Vermeulen SJ, Campbell BM, Ingram JSI. 2012. Climate Change and Food Systems, The Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 2012. Available online at: http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-environ-020411-130608
World Bank. 2012. Turn Down the Heat: Why a 4 degree Warmer World Must be Avoided, November 2012. Available online at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2012/11/17097815/turn-down-heat-4%C2%B0c-warmer-world-must-avoided
Wreford A, Moran D, Adger N. 2010. Climate Change and Agriculture: Impacts, Adaptation and Mitigation, OECD, 2010. Available online at: http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/rome2007/docs/Climate%20Change%20and%20Agr.pdf
38
Examples Examples of the challenges that farmers are facing worldwide in both developed and developing countries, and the ways they are adapting to the negative effects of climate change are available at: Neate P. 2013. Climate-‐smart agriculture success stories from farming communities around the
world. Wageningen, Netherlands: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) and the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA). Available from: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/34042/Climate_smart_farming_successesWEB.pdf
Nyasimi M, Amwata D, Hove L, Kinyangi J, Wamukoya G. 2014. Evidence of impact: Climate-‐smart
agriculture in Africa. Wageningen, Netherlands: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) and the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA)
http://ccafs.cgiar.org/publications/evidence-‐impact-‐climate-‐smart-‐agriculture-‐africa-‐0 FAO. 2013. Climate-‐smart agriculture sourcebook. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations (FAO). Available from: http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3325e/i3325e.pdf
Cooper, P. J.M., S. Cappiello, S. J. Vermeulen, B. M. Campbell, R. Zougmoré and J. Kinyangi. 2013. Large-‐scale implementation of adaptation and mitigation actions in agriculture. CCAFS Working
Paper no. 50. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Copenhagen, Denmark. http://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/33279/WorkingPaper50.pdf
FAO’s Emergency Prevention System for Animal Health (EMPRES-AH): http://www.fao.org/resilience/areas-of-work/food-chain-crisis/en/ IFAD’s drought early-warning system and contingency plan support communities in Niger and Mali.: http://www.ifad.org/lrkm/range/drought.htm
EXAMPLES