Methods and tools to support the implementation of ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) in the agricultural sectors

Scaling-up Adaptation in Agricultural Sectors (SAAS) webinar series
Methods and tools to support the implementation of ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) in agriculture sectors
December 5, 2017
Methods and tools to support the implementation
of Ecosystem-based Adaptation (EbA) in the
Agricultural Sectors

December 5, 2017
KAGERA TAMP
EbA in the Agricultural Sectors webinar (FAO/CBC ) – Dec 5 2017
A SYNOPTIC VIEW OF KAGERA TAMP
DURING 5 YEARS OF PROJECT
IMPLEMENTATION (2010 -2015)
By
Joseph Anania Bizima
(FAO- Rwanda)

December 5, 2017
CONTENT
I. The Kagera River Basin & Challenges
II. Kagera TAMP Achievements
III. Project Implementation (2010 – 2015)
– Why Kagera TAMP?-Project Goal & Objectives &
Outcomes
– Project Milestones (Chronology of key Project
Activities)
IV. Success Stories, Challenges & Way forward
v. Summary

December 5, 2017
The Kagera River Basin
• 4 countries share the basin
• 16.5 million people (in
2006) mainly depending on
agriculture
• Area 59,700 km2
• Avg population density:
~270 persons/ km2
• 24% of inflow into Lake
Victoria
• Most upstream tributaries
of the Nile

December 5, 2017
Challenges in the Kagera Basin
Resource base and ecosystems facing increasing
pressures as a result of:
– Rapid population growth,
– Agricultural and livestock intensification;
– Progressive reduction in farm sizes and;
– Unsustainable land use and management practices

December 5, 2017
Land degradation issues
• Extreme deforestation and loss of woody biomass
• Soil erosion
• Nutrient mining and declining soil quality affecting
land potential and productivity of crop,
pasture/range and forest lands
• Loss of agricultural biodiversity
• Pervasive biomass burning, through bush fires,
burning of crop residues, cooking with firewood and
charcoal, reducing vegetative cover and soil organic
matter

December 5, 2017
Project Implementation
(2010 – 2015)

December 5, 2017
Project Goal
To adopt an integrated ecosystems approach for the
management of land resources to generate local, national and
global benefits :
• Restoration of degraded lands and improved productivity
• Carbon sequestration and climate change adaptation /
mitigation
• Agro-biodiversity conservation
• contribute to the protection of international waters
• Increased food security and improved rural livelihoods

December 5, 2017
Project Objectives
Environmental objective: To address the causes of land
degradation and restore ecosystem health and function and
generate a range of global environmental benefits across the
Kagera basin through the introduction of adapted agro-ecosystem
management approaches.
Development objective is to improve the livelihoods and hence
contribute to reduced poverty of rural communities in the Kagera
Basin through more productive and sustainable resource
management practices that are technically feasible and socio-
economically viable.

December 5, 2017
SUMMARY KAGERA ACTIVITIES
(IN PICTURES )

December 5, 2017
Outcome 1
Transboundary (TB) coordination, information
sharing and monitoring and evaluation
mechanisms operational and effective in
promoting sustainable, productive agro-
ecosystems and restoration of degraded lands.
•

December 5, 2017
RWANDA’
Oct’ 10
BURUNDI,
Oct’10
TANZANIA,
Feb, 11
UGANDA,
Nov’10
KIGALI, RWANDA
Regional Project Launch
March’ 2011
PROJECT LAUNCH
Regional/Country & PSC

December 5, 2017
Kabale Regional Workshop
(Aug’2011)
SLM Technology assessment
Land Use Policies
Land Tenure
PES

December 5, 2017
Mid Term Evaluation
(May, 2013)

December 5, 2017
Transboundary Diagnostic
Assessment – Livestock
Movement & Degradation caused

December 5, 2017
The use of fire in farm
preparation
Fire burnt at Kigazi
rangeland
Transboundary Fires

December 5, 2017
Sub-catchments land-use types (Top-
Rumanyika game reserve, Middle-
Kihanga and Katera villages and
Bottom-lakes Katwe, Mitoma and
Karengi and Kagera river
Tree cutting From Minziro
Forest (Cause of Biodiverity
Loss)
Transboundary - Loss of
Biodiversity

December 5, 2017
Outcome 2
Enabling policy, planning and legislative conditions
are in place to support and facilitate the
sustainable management of agro-ecosystems
and the restoration of degraded land.

December 5, 2017
Reconnaissance Tour
(Project team - March’ 2011)

December 5, 2017
LADA Local Training (Rwanda & Burundi)
Feb 2012-Gashora, Rwanda

December 5, 2017
Land Degradation Assessment

December 5, 2017
Land Use Planning

December 5, 2017
Land Conflict Issues & Resolutions
Land Fragmentation Cultivation in Marshlands

December 5, 2017
Outcome 3.
Capacity and knowledge are enhanced at all levels
for the promotion of – and technical support for –
sustainable management of land and agro-
ecosystems in the basin.

December 5, 2017
Community sensitization meeting with
Project team (Rwanda)

December 5, 2017
Participatory Learning Approach (FFS/SLM)

December 5, 2017
Outcome 4
Improved land and agro-ecosystem management
practices are implemented and benefiting land
users for the range of agro-ecosystems in the
basin.

December 5, 2017
SLM activities
Bench terraces (Rulindo, Rwanda)

December 5, 2017
Water retention pit (Karambo)

December 5, 2017
Contour ditches – against soil erosion
(Gasharu catchment – Kamonyi, Rwanda)

December 5, 2017
Crop-Livestock integration: Napier
grass (fodder) along terraces

December 5, 2017
Grevillea spp Passion fruits
Bamboo for protecting
buffer zones
Vegetable production
Livestock
SLM integrates Crops, Livestock, Trees,
Environment & Livelihood Improvement

December 5, 2017
SLM For Food Security
(Karambo catchment – Rulindo, Rwanda)

December 5, 2017
Kagera TAMP evidence based
achievements

December 5, 2017
I. Establish Partnerships
• Established country partnerships and collaboration
mechanisms (Govt, NGOs, Research Institutions (2010)
• MoU signed between Kagera TAMP and NBI-
NELSAP/KTIWRMP on technical issues and data
exchange (GIS data and monograph provided tp Kagera
TAMP for LUS and QM maps) (May’2012)
• MoU signed with Vi Agroforestry (Aug’ 2012)
• MoU prepared for discussion with LVBC/LVEMPII (Jan
2013)

December 5, 2017
II. Catchment characterization and
participatory planning
• Identify micro-catchments (45 microcatchments
identified and SLM activities demonstrated (Rwanda –
11, Burundi-10, Tanzania- 10 & Uganda-14)
• Catchment characterization: socio-economic analysis,
bio-physical assessment (soils, water, biodiversity, buffer
zones etc), land degradation assessment (LADA),
participatory planning (PRA), maps & SLM plans
developed

December 5, 2017
III. Conduct Transboundary studies (Kagera Basin)
• Assessment of Land and Natural Resources Conflicts in the Kagera basin & Training of
project partners in Land and Natural Resources conflicts & land conflict resolution
strategies
• Opportunities and challenges for trans-boundary ecosystem conservation in the Kagera
basin: the case of sub-catchments in Rwanda, Uganda and Tanzania.
• Study on the extent of wildfires in the Kagera Basin and their impacts on soil,
vegetation, biodiversity, ecological functions and livelihoods and identify best practices
and control/management mechanisms
• Transboundary issues of land degradation and conflict related to livestock management
and movements and identification of strategies and option for sustainable and equitable
land and livestock management
• Identification of trans boundary agro ecosystems management issues between Burundi
and Rwanda

December 5, 2017
IV. Land Degradation assessment and mapping
• Training country multidisciplinary teams in local LADA
• LUS and QM maps developed (Final products were
distributed to partners )
• Assessment of SLM technologies using WOCAT tools
(QM, QT, QA) (inventory of existing SLM technologies,
rejected technologies/reasons why?) – (20 SLM
technologies and 1 approach been approved and
uploaded online by WOCAT )

December 5, 2017
v) Capacity Building
• Training of trainers with support of regional
experienced FFS master trainers done in all 4 countries
• 104 SLM/FFS groups were established in all four
countries with 200 facilitators trained.
• Awareness and sensitization meetings organized with
district/province authorities and community members
• Service providers (mainly local NGOs and CBOs) were
trained in SLM and participatory planning approaches

December 5, 2017
vi) Application of SLM technologies for environmental
protection and improved agricultural production
Various SLM Practices were applied by communities :
•Stabilization of river banks with bamboo
•Improvement of natural pastures/rangelands
•Restoration of vegetation cover (Planting of trees,
agroforestry, woodlots, fodder, enclosure for protection of
natural vegetation, by-laws established against bush fires)
•Soil erosion control structures (progressive and bench
terraces)

December 5, 2017
SLM Practices ……..Cont.
• Gully healing
• Soil moisture conservation
• Integrated soil fertility management
• Crop and Livestock integrated (goats, pigs) for manure
and income generation

December 5, 2017
Success Stories, Challenges & Way
Forward

December 5, 2017
Success stories
• Farmer participatory learning through FFS was perceived as
motivational and sustainable resulting to technology
ownership and social cohesion
• Some FFS groups have been institutionalised and transformed
into government registered cooperatives (11 FFS/COOPS
registered: Burundi (3) Uganda (3), Tanzania (3) & Rwanda
(2))
• Income generation through application of SLM technologies
• Watershed approach has been a model in community
planning and adoption of SLM

December 5, 2017
Main Challenges
• Co-funding mechanism quite limiting
• The project period was seemingly too short for
demonstration and implementation of SLM in a wider
scale – difficulty in mainstreaming and replicating
achievements
• Setbacks in integrating project plans into
institutional/national for resource mobilisation
• Ambitious targets for attaining outputs

December 5, 2017
Thank you

December 5, 2017
Incentives for Ecosystem Services (IES) to finance the
implementation of ecosystem-based approaches
(EbA) for adaptation
Dr Lucy GARRETT | FAO| 5 December 2017

December 5, 2017
EbA good practices

December 5, 2017
To overcome these barriers, farmers require INCENTIVES to
•Overcome SHORT-TERM needs
•Support a LONG-TERM transition
REHABILITATE
IMPROVE & DIVERSIFY
PRODUCTION
RESTORE
Improved and diversified productivity
allows for greater investment in EbA
to protect, rehabilitate and restore
sensitive habitats
•Without compromising food security
•Supports building resilience of agriculture-
based livelihoods and agro-ecosystems
•With ecosystem services benefits for
farmers and other users
PROTECT

December 5, 2017
Policy-driven
investments
Voluntary
investments
Public programmes
investing in
sustainable
agriculture for
food security and
rural development
Voluntary
investments to
secure higher
returns for
sustainable
production choices
(e.g. conservation
of threatened
breeds and
varieties)
Public programmes
and companies
fulfilling
environmental
regulations
Voluntary
investments
rewarding good
environmental
stewardship
Market-based
investments
Incentives: A wide range of sources

December 5, 2017
Policy-driven
investments
Voluntary
investments
Marketing labels (certificates/ standards)
Biodiversity/ forestry offsets
Responsible sourcing of agriculture products and services
Prohibition of use
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
Property use rights
Taxes/ charges
Mandatory farm set-
asides
Subsidies
Conservation easements
Permits and quotas
Green bonds
Voluntary farm set-asides
Conservation concessions
Direct Payments for
Ecosystem Services (PES)
Rewards for Ecosystem
Services (RES)
Marketing labels
(without certificates or
standards)
Cultural and social norms
Market-based
investments
Livelihood development
Capacity building
Incentives: A wide range of sources

December 5, 2017
From PES to IES…
PES alone cannot support transition to sustainable agriculture,
and address all the threats to ES and livelihoods

December 5, 2017
Incentives for Ecosystem Services (IES) Packages
Diverse incentives to support EbA adaptation across landscapes
High opportunity cost
for EbA good practices
Lack of market access for products
High demand for
public goods
Lack of cooperatives/ cost of processing products
Poor soil fertility limiting
production
Limited access to larger markets/ low entry point on
value chain
Limited livelihood
options
Lack of technological knowledge
Cost of inputs
Lack of finance to restore
degraded habitats
Soil conservation and gully plugging along
the water line
Certified sustainable products
Alternative livelihoods/ new markets/ access to
value chains
Fencing of water springs
Water recharge buffer
Value chain development/ access to higher-value markets
Reforestation
Diversified income
Training in sustainable production
practices and processing
Improved seeds and breeds
$ From downstream water users
$ Market labels
(certification/ standards)
$ Taxes
$ Community forestry enterprises
$ Min. of Environment
with REDD funds
$ Min. of Environment
$ Private sector sustainable sourcing of products
$ Compensatory afforestation
from private sector
$ NGO capacity building
$ NGO technical training programmes
$ Min. of Agriculture
$ Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

December 5, 2017
IES Packages
IMPROVE COORDINATION of public-private-civil society to:
• Provide a supportive institutional enabling environment to offer a spectrum of incentives for
farmers and other landscape actors
• Restore and protect ecosystem services across the landscape, improve productivity, food and
livelihood security, and builds resilience
• Provides multiple entry points to enable co-financing from both public and private users of
ecosystem services provided by agro-ecosystems, at lower social costs
• Spreads the burden of risk for investment across investors
• Bring environmental co-benefits to farmers, and other sectors of society.

December 5, 2017
Incentives to support sustainable production, livelihood
resilience and biodiversity conservation, Mexico
Improved maize, wheat and
cattle breeds
$ MasAgro
$ PURSN
$ PROGAN
Use of organic fertilizers and
improved irrigation
$ COUSSA
Certified sustainable shade- coffee
plantations
$ Certificacion para la Productividad
Agro-alimentaria
Sustainable maize and bean production
$ PROMAF
with improved harvesting and processing practices
$ PAAP
$ PROCAMPO
Zoning of protected areas,
ecosystem monitoring
CBMM
Ecotourism infrastructure
$ Banamex
Forest protection and
restoration
$ PRONAFOR
$ PRORRIM
$ CONABIO
Incentives for Ecosystem Services in Agriculture (IES)

December 5, 2017
Key: $ Public programme $ Private investment
Incentives to support adaptive micro-watershed
management and reforestation, Rio Rural, Brazil

December 5, 2017
Coordinated finance to support incentives for largescale watershed
management, Upper Tana Nairobi Water Fund, Kenya

December 5, 2017
Coordinated finance to support incentives for watershed
management, Upper Tana Nairobi Water Fund, Kenya
Incentive Private sector Public sector
Capital for investment
-Reforestation, restoration
-Improved agricultural production
Technical assistance
-Reforestation, restoration
-Improved agricultural production
Strengthening inter-institutional
coordination
Increased livelihood
opportunities
Facilitating agencies

December 5, 2017
Thank you
Further information on the IES approach can be found at:
www.fao.org/in-action/incentives-for-ecosystem-services/en/
IES-Info@fao.org

December 5, 2017
Enhancing the mitigation potential
of ecosystem-based adaptation
EX-Ante Carbon Balance Tool:
general introduction, recent updatesand scaling up
opportunities
Rome, December 5, 2017
Anass Toudert (FAO) on behalf of EX-ACT Team- www.fao.org/tc/exact
Bockel, Bernoux, Grewer,
Toudert, Schiettecatte, Vian, Lachaise,…
… and many people who help design, test, evaluate, use, improve, correct, translate and disseminate EX-ACT Tool:, G. Branca, A.
Carro, V. Colomb, A. D’Anfray, A. Gentien, P. Gorin, C. Heumesser, Y. Huan, M. Jonsson, L. Lipper, M. Mahieu, G. Meyssonnier, R.
Sanz Cortes, G. Smith, P.L. Sutter, M. Tinlot, D. Thapa, O. Touchemoulin,, K. Medeiros, Xie M.…

December 5, 2017
Outline
•AFOLU Background;
•Presentation of EX-ACT Tool;
•Presentation of EX-ACT based Tools
applications : Some examples from diverse
countries;
•Updates and ongoing work relevant for EbA
in the agricultural sectors.

December 5, 2017
I. AFOLU Background

December 5, 2017
AFOLU and GHG emissions
I. Afolu background
AFOLU is...
... the second largest contributor to GHG emissions
•With Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) contributing
about 24% of global emissions in 2010 (IPCC, 5th
AR)
•With Agriculture as opposed to Forestry & Land Use contributing
roughly equal shares of 12%
•Lower income countries mainly contributing emissions through their
AFOLU sectors
•... with potential for GHG mitigation above its
contributing share
•Agriculture alone: 12 % of the problem (emissions), but possibly more
than 20% of the solution (global mitigation)

December 5, 2017
Global emissions repartition
Source: IPCC-5AR-WG3, 2014
AFOLU
= ~24%
Global emissions per sector (IPCC,
2014)
Half
agriculture
Half
LUC
I. Afolu background

December 5, 2017
The EX-Ante Carbon balance Tool
EX-ACT Training Workshop
www.fao.org/tc/exact
Main global sources:
• Deforestation and grassland conversion:
o Carbon lost that wassequestered through photosynthesisin biomass
and soil
• N2O emissionsfrom fertilized soils:
o N that isnot taken up by plantsistransformed by theactivity of soil
bacteriathrough nitrification and denitrification to N20 gas
• CH4 emissionsfrom cattleenteric fermentation
o Thedigestion processof cattleinvolvestheproduction of CH4
Other important sources:
• Biomassburning, CH4 from riceproduction, manure
decomposition
Main GHG emissions in Agriculture
I. Afolu background

December 5, 2017
The EX-Ante Carbon balance Tool
EX-ACT Training Workshop
www.fao.org/tc/exact
Main GHG’s from Agriculture
I. Afolu background

December 5, 2017
Agriculture
Forestry
and Other Land Use
Agriculture
Forestry
and Other Land Use
Threatened by climate change
Responsible for 1/3 of total GHG
emissionsHuge potential to cost-
effectively mitigate
The main greenhouse gas emission sources/removals and processes in
managed ecosystems (After IPCC Volume 4 Chapter. 1 Introduction
HWP=Harvested wood products).
Decrease
sources
Increase
sinks
3 accounted GHG : CO2, CH4,
N20
Mitigation
70 % of agriculture
mitigation potentiel
70 % of agriculture
mitigation potentiel
In developing
countries
In developing
countries
What is mitigation?
I. Afolu background

December 5, 2017
I. Afolu background
Ecosystem-based approaches to
mitigate
 CO2
rate of deforestation and
forest degradation
adoption of improved
cropland management
practices (soil conservation)
 CH4, N2O
Improved animal production and
management of livestock waste
more efficient management
of irrigation water on rice
paddies,
improved nutrient management
on cropland (4 R’s)
 Sequestering carbon
restoration of degraded soil,
increased organic matter
inputs to cropland, improved
forest management practices,
afforestation and
reforestation, agro-forestry,
improved grasslands
management
 Sequestering carbon
restoration of degraded soil,
increased organic matter
inputs to cropland, improved
forest management practices,
afforestation and
reforestation, agro-forestry,
improved grasslands
management
Mitigation possible through changes in agricultural
and management practices
-1,2 t
CO2-e/ha/year
-18,8 t
CO2-e/ha/year
-42,7 t
CO2-e /ha/year
1 ha of avoided
deforestation:
from tropical rain forest to
degraded land
1 ha afforestation:
degraded land to
plantation of tropical rain
forest
1 ha grasslands
rehabilitation: from
severely degraded to
improved grasslands
-1,7 to -3,8 t
CO2-e/ha/year
1 ha soil rehabilitation:
from degraded land to
annual crops

December 5, 2017
Context
Sources
Sinks
How we correctly represent different sources
and sinks?

December 5, 2017
II. Presentation of
EX-ACT Tool

December 5, 2017
What is EX-ACT exactly?
• An Excel based tool to quantify
theamount of GHGsreleased or
sequestered from activitiesin the
AFOLU sector;
• Requiresactivity dataon
agricultural practices, resourceuse
and Land UseChange;
• Calculatesestimated GHG impacts
in tonnes of CO2-equivalents.
II. Presentation of EX-ACT Tool

December 5, 2017
200
8
2009 2010
Concept
note
Tool design
EX-ACT v1
Technical Guidelines
User guides
TC
S
TCI
ES
A
TC
S
TCI
ES
A
2015 2016
MRV tool development
For private investments and
the evaluation and monitoring
of small projects (ex-ante,
middle term, ex-post)
EX-ACT VC
Development of EX-
ACT VC tool for the
assessment of value
chains
A simple tool to provide rapid ex-ante estimations of the impact of agriculture and forestry
development projects on GHG emissions and carbon sequestration, using available data (cost-
effective) and fitting within standard project formulation or evaluation format.
EX-ACT Tool development timeline
Biodiversity
module
2017
Agroforestry sub-module
(ongoing)

December 5, 2017
Why a new tool?
 Lack of operational tools (complexity, high data cost)
 Lack of tools to screen the entire agricultural sector

December 5, 2017
The need for a new simple tool
Transparency
Simple
Cost effective
Upgradable
overtime
Information that :
-scientists can quantify/use,
-farmers/project developers can
understand/use
Up-scaling
(Able to extrapolate to region,
watershed and community level)
Need for an acceptable method which:
measures C-balance impact in ex-ante appraisals,
complements usual economic analysis,
and fits within the time constraints of formulation process.
Practic
al

December 5, 2017
Main logic of EX-ACT
Takes into account activities
that impact GHG fluxes (emissions and sinks)
Deforestation, A-Re/forestation, forest degradation, Restoration of grasslands, livestock, cultivation of annual crops,
cultivation of perennial crops, fertilization of crops, installation of building, installation of irrigation systems...
CO2, CH4, N2O
or stock changes from and to different carbon
poolsabove-ground biomass, below-ground biomass, soil, litter and dead wood
GHG
EMISSIONS
CARBON STOCK
CHANGES
Positive result : There are more emissions
Negative result: There are less emissions
MITIGATION
Carbon balance in t of eq-
CO2

December 5, 2017
BAU Scenario vs Upgrading scenario
• EX-ACT leadspolicy officers& project designersto
elaboratetwo different development scenariosfor the
AFOLU sector:
– A “business-as-usual” scenario -> in absenceof any
intervention
– A “policy/project scenario” -> strengthening targeted &
sustainabledevelopment

December 5, 2017
Start
Present
time
Future
if no project
Future
with my
project
Activities that may have impacts on climate
change
Make sure you understand what happens in the three situations

December 5, 2017
Start
Present time
Start
Present time
Future
Without
project
Future
Without
project
Baseline scenario ... or how to imagine the future?
Make sure you understand what happens in the three situations

December 5, 2017
Methodology behind the tool
Default Coefficients
You can always
use your own
coefficients when
available!

December 5, 2017
An example
The EX-Ante Carbon
balance Tool (EX-
ACT): Logic and
Application
Future without project
7 000 ha of deforestation
1 000 ha of afforestation
1 000 ha annual crops
(conventional tillage,
burning)
1 000 ha establishment of
perennial system
1 500 cattle under
conventional practices
More or less
GHG’s
released ?
Future with project
2 500 ha of deforestation
2 000 ha of afforestation
1 000 ha annual crops
(residue mulching, organic
manure)
1 500 ha establishment of
multistrata agroforestry
system
500 cattle with improved
feeding practices
The Gross Results of a specific scenario are defined as the overall impact from all
GHGs expressed in CO2 equivalents that were emitted or sequestered due to its
implementation.
The Carbon-Balance is defined as the marginal difference in Gross Results between
the project scenario and the business-as-usual scenario.

December 5, 2017
Gross Results
Component of Gross fluxes Gross fluxes
the project Balance
Without With
tCO2eq tCO2eq
Land Use Changes
Deforestation 70,000 25,000 -45,000
Afforestation -10,000 -20,000 -10,000
Other 0 0 0
Agriculture
Annual 10,000 -5,000 -15,000
Perennial -10,000 -15,000 -5,000
Rice 0 0 0
Grassland & Livestocks
Grassland 0 0 0
Livestock 15,000 5,000 -10,000
Degradation 5,000 -10,000 -15,000
Inputs & Investments 0 0 0
Total 80,000 -20,000 -100,000
 Emissions: 100 000 t 30 000 t
 Sequestration: -20 000 t -50 000 t
 Emissions: 100 000 t 30 000 t
 Sequestration: -20 000 t -50 000 t

December 5, 2017
The Carbon balance
Component of Gross fluxes Gross fluxes
the project Balance
Without With
tCO2eq tCO2eq
Land Use Changes
Deforestation 70,000 25,000 -45,000
Afforestation -10,000 -20,000 -10,000
Other 0 0 0
Agriculture
Annual 10,000 -5,000 -15,000
Perennial -10,000 -15,000 -5,000
Rice 0 0 0
Grassland & Livestocks
Grassland 0 0 0
Livestock 15,000 5,000 -10,000
Degradation 5,000 -10,000 -15,000
Inputs & Investments 0 0 0
Total 80,000 -20,000 -100,000
_
=+

December 5, 2017
The Carbon balance

December 5, 2017
III. Applications of the
EX-ACT tool

December 5, 2017
Applications of the ex-act tool
Watershed
Development
Food Security
and Sustainable
Intensification
Forest
Management
Projects
 www.fao.org/tc/exact
Sustainable
Land
Management
Conservation
ProjectsLand
Rehabilitation

December 5, 2017
Applications of the EX-ACT tool
Sustainable
Agriculture
India

December 5, 2017
Example: carbon balance appraisal of
project
• Objective: to increasetheagricultural productivity of degraded
landsin selected areasof UP
Uttar Pradesh Sodic Land Reclamation III Project in INDIA
Degraded lands
347 754 ha
Flooded rice
114 251 ha
Perennial crops
3 000 ha
Annual crops
228 503 ha
Grassland
2 000 ha
-16.6 MtCO2-
eq during 20
years
-2.2 tCO2-
eq/ha/yr

December 5, 2017
Some World Bank examples from different countries
Forestry
Forestry in
Russia

December 5, 2017
Some examples from different countries
The Forest Fire Emergency Response Project (FERP)
Target: National 0.77 billion ha(22% of theworld'sforests)
cost : USD153 million
Objective: improveforest fireprevention and management
and enhancesustainableforest management
i. enhancing forest fireprevention, management and
control;
ii. building forest management capacity A net sink of approximately 1.23 billion tons
of CO2eq during the 25 years of appraisal
with the project, fire will occur every 5 years rather
than each year for the same area. It is equivalent to
a decrease of 80% of the area burnt annually
Without project, according to studies, ground fires
amounted to 20% of the average carbon stock
Simulated economic NPV of the project
Economic NPV
Discount rate 10% USD 6 /TCO2eq USD 10 /TCO2eq
NPV of project (million US$) 3169 4280
NPV per US$ invested (profitability index) $ 20.71 $27.82
NPV per Ha $ 128.93 $ 174.13
NPV per Ton CO2eq 2.58 3.48
Based on an aggregate project cost of USD 153 million and a carbon balance of -1.23 billion tons of CO2
emissions, the public cost per ton of CO2 emissions reduction, results in USD 0.12 per ton CO2

December 5, 2017
Some World Bank examples from different countries
Sustainable Land
Management
Environment land
management in
Tajikistan

December 5, 2017
Some examples from different countries
Environment Land Management Project in Tajikistan (2014-2019)
Target: improve land management
Objective: to enable rural people to build their productive assets and
resilience to climate change through
•improved pasture management (14,000 ha),
•promotion of agroforestry and perennials through land use change
(7,500 ha),
• improved annual, irrigated crops (6,000 Ha) and
•afforestation (1,000 ha) as well as forest rehabilitation (1,500 ha).

December 5, 2017
What does EX-ACT look like?
The EX-Ante Carbon-balance Tool (EX-ACT) - Standard Edition
Grassland
Livestock
Start Description
Land Use
Change
Crop
production
Inputs
Investments
Land
degradation
Default
agroecological
zones and EF and
coefficients
Coastal
Wetlands
Fisheries
Aquaculture

December 5, 2017
BRAZIL
Santa Catarina rural competitiveness &
Rio de Janeiro sustainable rural dev.
BRAZIL
Santa Catarina rural competitiveness &
Rio de Janeiro sustainable rural dev.
MADAGASCAR
4 studies (140 000 small-farming families)
-Irrigation and watershed management prog.
-Support development in Menabe and Malaky
-Rural Income Promotion Programme
-Upper Mandrare Basin Dev. Prog
MADAGASCAR
4 studies (140 000 small-farming families)
-Irrigation and watershed management prog.
-Support development in Menabe and Malaky
-Rural Income Promotion Programme
-Upper Mandrare Basin Dev. Prog
ETHIOPIA
Agricultural Growth Proj. (AGP) – 2 Mi fam.
ETHIOPIA
Agricultural Growth Proj. (AGP) – 2 Mi fam.
RWANDA
Land husbandry, Water harvesting and Hillside irrigation
(LWH) proj. &Kirehe Community-based Watershed
Management Proj. (KWAMP) – 8,000 families
RWANDA
Land husbandry, Water harvesting and Hillside irrigation
(LWH) proj. &Kirehe Community-based Watershed
Management Proj. (KWAMP) – 8,000 families
UGANDA
Agriculture Technology and Agribusiness Advisory
Services project (ATAAS) – 2 Mi families
UGANDA
Agriculture Technology and Agribusiness Advisory
Services project (ATAAS) – 2 Mi familiesBURKINA FASO
Cashew nuts value chain – 15,000 families
BURKINA FASO
Cashew nuts value chain – 15,000 families
TANZANIA
Accelerated Food Security Project – 2.5 Mi families
TANZANIA
Accelerated Food Security Project – 2.5 Mi families
Rep. Dem. CONGO
Agriculture Rehabilitation and
Recovery Support Project
(ARRSP) – 0.1 Mi families
Rep. Dem. CONGO
Agriculture Rehabilitation and
Recovery Support Project
(ARRSP) – 0.1 Mi families
All these studies are available on the dedicated website
CARE Int. Hillside Conservation Agriculture Project (HICAP)CARE Int. Hillside Conservation Agriculture Project (HICAP)
KENYA
East Africa Dairy Dev.t project (EADD)
KENYA
East Africa Dairy Dev.t project (EADD)
NIGER
Community prog. of action - resilience to CC (PACRC)
NIGER
Community prog. of action - resilience to CC (PACRC)
RUSSIA
Forest Fire Emergency Response Project
WWF Bikin Forest Conservation Project (BFCP)
RUSSIA
Forest Fire Emergency Response Project
WWF Bikin Forest Conservation Project (BFCP)
VIETNAM
Low Carbon Ag. Support Project (LCASP)
VIETNAM
Low Carbon Ag. Support Project (LCASP)
Ex-act applied at landscape levels for developing countries

December 5, 2017
Current use of the tool: Examples of EX-ACT trainings
60 countries which
benefited from training
workshops
2600 experts & students
trained on EX-ACT
II. Presentation of EX-ACT Tool 5 December 2017 -

December 5, 2017
Current use of the tool: Examples of EX-ACT appraisals
70 countries with EX-
ACT project, policy
appraisals or value chain
analysis
Since 2010 180 projects
appraised for a total of 23 billion
US$,
A total carbon balance ofII. Presentation of EX-ACT Tool 5 December 2017 -

December 5, 2017
E-learning available and accessible

December 5, 2017
Thanks!
• Site internet : www.fao.org/tc/exact
• E-mail: EX-ACT@fao.org
• EX-ACT team:
– Louis Bockel, louis.bockel@fao.org
– Martial Bernoux, martial.bernoux@fao.org
– Schiettecatte, LaureSophie
LaureSophie.Schiettecatte@fao.org
– Lachaise, Agnes Agnes.Lachaise@fao.org
– Toudert Anass, anass.Toudert@fao.org

Methods and tools to support the implementation of ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) in the agricultural sectors

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Methods and tools to support the implementation of ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) in the agricultural sectors

Similar to Methods and tools to support the implementation of ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) in the agricultural sectors (20)

More from FAO

More from FAO (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Methods and tools to support the implementation of ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) in the agricultural sectors

Editor's Notes