Presented by Claudia Arndt, Todd Crane and Birgit Habermann at the Programme for Climate-Smart Livestock systems Closing Event, 13 September 2022

1. Better lives through livestock
Mitigation & Adaptation in
Climate-Smart Livestock Systems
13th September 2022
PCLS Closing Event
Birgit Habermann, PhD
Scientist
Claudia Arndt, PhD
Senior Scientist
Todd Crane, PhD
Principle Scientist

2. 2
35 African Countries Included Livestock in New or Updated NDCs
Source: Modified Rose et al., 2021
& https://ccafs.cgiar.org/index.php/resources/tools/agriculture-in-the-ndcs-data-maps-2021
5 countries included livestock Mitigation measures
• 14 countries included Adaptation measures
• 16 countries included Mitigation & Adaptation
measures
To meet their NDCs, countries need:
• Reliable GHG and adaptation tracking
• Effective GHG mitigation and adaptation strategies
• MRV systems to track and report their mitigation
and adaptation actions

3. 3
Livestock GHG Emission Estimations
• Developed protocols on how to collect activity data to calculate
Emission Factors (EFs) for enteric and manure GHG emissions
• Collected activity data from 5 sites for cattle & small ruminants
– Calculated enteric and manure GHG EFs (Ndung’u et al., 2021, 2022)
– Presented data to local government, who can use them to inform national GHG inventories
• i.e., Develop a Tier 2 methodology for non-dairy cattle in Kenya in collaboration with NZAGRC & Unique
Forestry
• Built local capacity in livestock GHG accounting through learning platforms and by
training students and governments
Recommendation:
• Work should be replicated to cover the most prevalent livestock systems
in African countries that committed to mitigation
Research Sites
• Kenya (2 sites)
• Ethiopia (1 site)
• Uganda (1 sites)

4. 4
Measured vs. IPCC Emission Estimates
• IPCC underestimates animal emissions (Korir et al., 2022)
• 14-25% greater for dairy
• 24-41% greater for other cattle
• IPCC overestimates manure emissions (Leitner et al., 2021)
• Measured CH4 EF was >30% lower than IPCC estimates
• Measured N2O EF was >40% lower than IPCC estimates
 EFs based on experiments conducted at Mazingira informed the IPCC database
424897 to 424904 (N2O from soils) 422663 to 422667 (Manure CH4 & N2O) 424315 to 424322 (CH4 from enteric fermentation)
Recommendation:
• Collection of more experimental data to inform IPCC to reduce discrepancy
between experimental data and IPCC methodology for African systems

5. 5
GHG Mitigation
• Promising mitigation strategies have been identified through models
• There are only few experimental studies that investigated mitigation strategies for African
systems (Graham et al., 2022)
• PCSL allowed us to run experiments to test a few of these promising mitigation strategies
• Effect of avoiding underfeeding animals (Goopy et al., 2020)
• Effect of 3 different forage sources (Napier, Rhodes, Brachiaria) on emissions (Korir et al., 2022)
• Supplemented with either concentrates or tannin-rich leguminous forage (Korir et al., 2022)
• Effect of gastro-intestinal tract parasites and tannins on sheep (trial just finished)
• Effect of manure management strategies on manure GHG emissions (data is being processed)
• Recommendations
• More experiments are needed to estimate quantitative effect of mitigation strategies
that haven been modeled as promising

6. 6
Social Science on Adaptation in Livestock Systems
• Adaptation Tracking (Lucy Njuguna)
• Instrument designed for national reporting against international
commitments and adaptation goals
• Co-production with national and local stakeholders
• Attention to governmental structures and processes
• Recommendations
• Domestication of AT instrument national contexts
• Improve quality, accessibility and flow of data
• Refinement of instrument through stakeholder application and feedback
• Advocate in international adaptation tracking reporting community

7. 7
Social Science on Adaptation in Livestock Systems
• Science-Policy Interactions (Laura Cramer)
• Mismatch between national priorities and international investments
o Differences in framing of livestock and climate change create challenges to
finding common ground
o Adaptation vs. mitigation: an inappropriate dichotomy in livestock systems
development
• Recommendations
• Sustained science-policy interactions and institutional support for
knowledge brokers
• Better/more effective evidence sharing

8. 8
Social Science on Adaptation in Livestock Systems
• Social Differentiation in Local Adaptation (Edwige Marty)
• Adaptation options shaped by non-climate factors
o Land tenure changes
o Market opportunities
• Adaptation options not equally accessible or evenly impactful
o Gender
o Age
• Recommendations
• Adaptation investments need to attend to complex social dynamics
relating to burdens and benefits of changing livelihood practices
o Look beyond just heads of households
o Look beyond “pastoral systems” to intra-community variability

9. 9
Adaptation Pioneers and Practices
Birgit Habermann, Todd A. Crane, Leah Gichuki, Tigist Worku, Roland Mugumya,
Nathan Maiyo, Emmaculate Kiptoo, Shenkute Goshme, Fuad Mohammednur,
Geoffrey Tugume, Alphaeus Satia, Reagan Siamito
Field day of Robert Bii, Sotik, Bomet, Kenya Kidane Ayele, Tarmaber, Ethiopia
Said Bahine Ali, Hida, Afar

10. • Pioneers = producers’ with better
performance in terms of farming
practice and securing livelihoods as
compared with others
• Participatory Adaptation Analysis
involves
• Listening to pioneers
• Collect data jointly or by pioneers
themselves
• Give data back to them in reports
• Organise F2F field days facilitated
by pioneers
• Demand oriented trainings
• F2F knowledge exchange networks
on adaptation
Phoebe Katongore, Dairy Farmer in Kirahura, Uganda 10
10
Adaptation
pioneers

11. Adaptation
practices
• Modern sheep fattening (ET)
• Shift in herd composition towards
more small ruminants (ET)
• Water harvesting and
management methods (UG)
• Feed storage and preservation,
diversified fodder crops (KE)
• Breeding for resilience and
productivity (KE)
Recommendation: Develop
practices together with
livestock keepers and improve
practices based on their
explicit needs and capacities
Reagan Siamito, Field Assistant during field day in Kajiado, Kenya
11

12. Recommendations
Approach adaptation:
1. from producers’
perspectives,
2. embedded within wider
systemic transformations
in rural livelihoods,
3. with producers as
research partners with
important roles in data
collection & interpretation
(citizen science),
4. and producers as central
agents of change in
scaling through farmer-to-
farmer extension.
Field Day at the farm of Tenagne in Gudoberet, Ethiopia
12

13. 13
Next Horizons for Climate Smart Livestock Systems
• Develop frameworks for identifying and parameterizing synergies
and tradeoffs between mitigation and adaptation
• Improve balance of investments in mitigation and adaptation
• Support mitigation and adaptation advances with validated
measurements and scientific capacity strengthening
• Approach development of mitigation and adaptation practices
through the lens of producer livelihoods
• Integrate more farmer-driven technology development and scaling