Advertisement

More Related Content

Similar to Mitigation and adaptation in Climate-Smart Livestock Systems(20)

More from ILRI(20)

Advertisement

Mitigation and adaptation in Climate-Smart Livestock Systems

  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
Advertisement