• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Scherr, Scaling Up Carbon Trading In Land Use 3 09

Scherr, Scaling Up Carbon Trading In Land Use 3 09






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



5 Embeds 19

http://www.worldagroforestry.org 7
http://www.ecoagriculture.org 7
http://www.worldagroforestrycentre.org 3
http://www.slideshare.net 1
http://www.icraf.cgiar.org 1



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Scherr, Scaling Up Carbon Trading In Land Use 3 09 Scherr, Scaling Up Carbon Trading In Land Use 3 09 Presentation Transcript

  • Agriculture and Forestry: Their Potential to Mitigate Climate Change at a Global Scale Sara J. Scherr, Ecoagriculture Partners Land Use Carbon & Poverty Reduction: Challenges & Opportunities Washington, DC, March 13, 2009
  • Most terrestrial area is in agricultural, grazing or production forest landscapes
  • Emissions reduction and sequestration in working landscapes: Huge potential
  • PES for climate change can integrate production, ecosystem, livelihood goals Conservation Ecosystem process & function Wild biodiversity ECOSYSTEM SERVICES Locally beneficial services Globally & regionally beneficial services Sustainable Agriculture Livelihood support PAYMENT FOR ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
  • So why is the climate change community so skeptical?
    • They are uninformed
    • They are afraid A-F will distract from action on energy
    • They don’t trust A-F will be real (permanence, msrmt)
    • They don’t believe it is feasible to achieve A-F impacts at scale
  • Challenge 1: Can we mobilize A-F at a large enough scale to make a difference for the climate?
    • Perception of agriculture and forestry as lagging sectors with weak institutions
    • Climate action to date has focused on small projects, thus few models
    • Smallholders assumed to = small scale
    • Perception of low economies of scale due to site-specificity/diversity of solutions
    • Focus on achieving high impacts per hectare, rather than high total impacts
    • Political reluctance to set climate standards or regulations for agricultural sector
  • Challenge 2: Community planning -- Too hard? too costly? too risky?
  • Challenge 3: Will value chains generate sufficient incentives for producers?
  • Yes we can: Operate at scale
    • Large-scale government programs for restoring degraded lands and forests (e.g., India, China)
    • Large-scale development projects on sustainable land management (e.g., IFAD, Sahel)
    • National platforms for coordinating action on SLM (e.g., TerrAfrica)
    • Territorial management initiatives (e.g., in Andes, Mesoamerica)
    • NGO, farmer, agribusiness networks (e.g., IFAP, EAFF, dairy networks)
  • Yes we can: Mobilize communities for climate planning and investment
    • Initiate climate action with organized & tenure-secure communities
    • Build capacity of farmer and local/landscape organizations (numerous landscape initiatives)
    • Develop small grant facilities for local analysis, planning, technical assistance, mapping (e.g., Google Earth)
    • Ensure community representatives are ‘at the table’ to set PES rules (e.g., CKS; start with Copenhagen)
  • Yes we can: Build efficient value chains for climate payments to farmers
    • Institutionalize intermediary & bundling services, accountable to farmer clients (e.g., build on farmer coop models)
    • Establish livelihood-focused Carbon Funds (e.g., Food Security Carbon Fund)
    • Utilize landscape-scale planning and monitoring tools (e.g. www.landscapemeasures.org )
    • “ Bundle” agricultural products with climate regulation services
    • Incorporate into outgrower schemes (numerous models)
  • Building support for full inclusion of agriculture & forestry in climate action
    • Building a rigorous case for the potential to scale
    • Document existing programs that can be scaled
    • Document landscape-wide GHG emissions/storage in diverse landscapes
    • Calculate impacts of landscape-wide action
    • Devise concrete strategies for action at scale
    • Pilot country plans where major co-benefits identified for ‘re-carbonizing’ or protecting standing carbon in landscapes
    • Integrate climate action in major agricultural investment programs of donors & development banks
    • Mobilize voluntary carbon market to pilot and document diverse strategies
  • Thank you… www.ecoagriculture.org