HARMONIZATION VERSUS DIVERSITYALEX, SANTIAGO, MONIKA, KEN, MEINE, CHERYL, YIGEZU, TODD, LOTTE, BRUNO, PABLO
Propositions   B: YesA: Yes, but…
External learning (academic)                                              .                                    .          ...
SYSTEM PROPERTIES                                   SYSTEM PROPERTIES + SPATIAL DETAIL   Tradeoff at land use system level...
A: IndicatorsPRINCIPLES             CRITERIA                        INDICATORS                                     METRICS
Context + Mechanisms =      Outcomes
BUFFER = 1 – variancewith/variance without
Evaluation                                                          Value of Agricultural                                 ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Workshop Trade-off Analysis - CGIAR_20 Feb 2013_Group discussion_Harmonization vs. diversity

153 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Workshop Trade-off Analysis - CGIAR_20 Feb 2013_Group discussion_Harmonization vs. diversity

  1. 1. HARMONIZATION VERSUS DIVERSITYALEX, SANTIAGO, MONIKA, KEN, MEINE, CHERYL, YIGEZU, TODD, LOTTE, BRUNO, PABLO
  2. 2. Propositions B: YesA: Yes, but…
  3. 3. External learning (academic) . . . . . . . . . Local learning (development)
  4. 4. SYSTEM PROPERTIES SYSTEM PROPERTIES + SPATIAL DETAIL Tradeoff at land use system level Opportunity cost at landcape scale opportunity cost, $/t CO2e, Slope indicates Emission reduction poten- Carbon stock, tC/Ha emissions per tial for given C price gain in $/ha I II e.g. ADSB reports e.g. ASB-II  Cumulative emissions reports of 2007/8 1990’s NPV, $/Ha SYSTEM PROP. + SPATIAL + PEOPLEFour levels of analyzing opportunity costs Dynamic land use scenario modelAgents with C stockvariation in (increasing)resourcebase, moti- IIIvation, live-lihood stra- IV Rural income  Rural incometegies. (declining) (increasing)interactingwith rules C stock e.g. FALLOW& policies Agent-based land use change model (decreasing) scenarios SYSTEM PROP. SPATIAL PEOPLE
  5. 5. A: IndicatorsPRINCIPLES CRITERIA INDICATORS METRICS
  6. 6. Context + Mechanisms = Outcomes
  7. 7. BUFFER = 1 – variancewith/variance without
  8. 8. Evaluation Value of Agricultural Production Food (Grain) Self Sufficiency 100 Employment in Dry years generation Value of Agricultural production Food (Grain) Self 50 with low prices Sufficiency 0 Value of Agricultural Forage Self production in Dry years Sufficiency Value of Production Soil losses variation with prices Value of Production Biocide variation with rainfall sprayed Scenario 1.2 System 1 Scenario 1.3 System 2 (López-Ridaura, 2005)

×