CCAFS EA Presentation for MOT training in ILRI Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

CCAFS EA Presentation for MOT training in ILRI Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
CCAFS (East Africa) Dawit Solomon, Maren Radeny, John Recha and Catherine Mungai
• Agriculture is the main economic activity, supporting food security and poverty alleviation • 177 million people economically involved in agriculture • Over reliance on subsistence rain-fed smallholder agriculture with farmers barely able to meet their own consumption needs • Over 80% are poor smallholder farmers with low adaptive capacity living in fragile ecosystems • Agriculture contributes between 25-45% of the GDP • Poverty rates range from 19.5% (Uganda) to 45.9% (Kenya) Annual GDP growth rates (%) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 Ethiopia Kenya Tanzania Uganda Poverty rates: National poverty lines Source: World Bank database 29.6% 45.9% 28.2% 19.5% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 40.0% 45.0% 50.0% Ethiopia Kenya Tanzania Uganda Introduction • Agriculture remains the key channel of influence on economic activity, labor productivity, nutrition, health, conflict, migration and the environment
• EA agriculture has a high level exposure to risks • Rampant land degradation - reducing soil fertility and productivity • Reduced capacity to provide ecosystem services • Significant crop yield gaps (10-40% attainable yield achieved) - impacting food supply and security • Infrastructure, technology, capacity and resource limitation to close the yield gap • 5-35% prevalence of undernourishment • Almost 1 in 5 regularly not getting enough food in order to lead an active and healthy life Major challenges for agriculture in East Africa
• Drought elevated the food insecurity conditions of 12 million vulnerable people to emergency level • Need for climate smart policies and practices for accelerated agricultural growth and transformation, and implementation frameworks • 3-6 °C increase in temperatures by late 21st century • Impact precipitation patterns (-10 to +40%) - intense rainfall interspersed with heat stress and drought affecting countries such as Ethiopia • 1°C increase could lower per capita output by 2.7% • Increase in temperature has uneven effect across the globe, with adverse consequences to most LDCs such as Ethiopia Emerging climate change related challenges in East Africa
Kenya Tanzania Uganda Ethiopia National Climate Change Action plan (2013–2017, under review) National Climate Change Strategy (2012) National Climate Change Policy (2013) Climate Resilient Green Economy Strategy (2011) Climate Resilience Strategy for Agri. and Forestry (2011) Climate Change Bill (2014) National Climate Change Act and Policy (2016) National Climate Change Finance Analysis (2013) National Adaptation Programmes of Action (2007) National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) (2007) National Adaptation Plan (NAP) (2017) National Climate Change Response Strategy (2010) National Climate Change Communication Strategy (2012–2017) Climate Change Costed Implementation Strategy (2013) National Policy and Strategy on Disaster Risk Management (2013) Climate Finance Policy (2017) Kenya CSA Strategy (2017–2026) CSA Programme (2015–2025) Agriculture Climate Resilient Plan (2014- 2019) Disaster Risk Management – Climate Change Adaptation Communication Plan & Media Engagement Strategy (2013) National Agri. Policy (2013) National Disaster Risk Management Commission (2015) Agricultural Transformation Agency (2010 - present) Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) African Agriculture Transformation Scorecard - 30th AU summit (2018) National policy and implementation responses
• CCAFS EA goals and objectives aligned with CGIAR and CCAFS vision: A world free from poverty and environmental degradation seeking impact in three dimensions at system level Improving natural resources and ecosystem services Improving food and nutrition security Reducing poverty CCAFS goals and objectives • CCAFS EA overarching goal is to catalyse positive change towards CSA, food systems and landscapes • CSA approaches involve technical, policy and conducive investment to:  Sustainably increase agricultural productivity, food and nutrition security  Adapting to and building resilience to climate change, and  Reducing and/or removing GHG emissions (where possible)
CCAFS flagship research program
CCAFS goals and objectives
CCAFS: Cluster of activities across scale inline with SDGs
Latin America West Africa South Asia East Africa Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Ugada and Rwanda Malawi, Zambia, Mozambique and Zimbabwe Southeast Asia CCAFS: Regional programs
• Selection based on farming systems and risk profile • High spatial heterogeneity in climate, agro- ecosystems, environmental challenges and livelihoods • Established six learning sites across ET, KE, TZ, UG CCAFS East Africa focus countries East Africa Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda Other EA and SA countries Rwanda, Malawi, Zambia, Mozambique and Zimbabwe
CGIAR best bet innovations for adaptation in agriculture 1. Agroforestry 2. Aquaculture 3. Stress tolerant varieties 4. Improving smallholder dairy 5. Solar irrigation entrepreneurs 6. Digital agriculture 7. Climate-informed advisories 8. Weather index-based agricultural insurance 9. Scaling up financing
• Climate smart innovations and practices • Inclusive innovative business models, incentives, financing instruments and enabling conditions for scaling CSA • Resistance breeding of vulnerable crops and livestock to multiple emerging stressors, efficiency and nutrition value • Understand adaptation and mitigation synergies and contributions to NDCs • LED pathways for crop, and livestock sectors including value chains • Improving GHG emission estimates via multi-sectoral analysis & DSTs • Incentives & finance for scaling up LE agriculture practices & policies • Policy environments and priority setting for investment to stimulate adoption and scaling of CSA, CIS, LED • Incentives, delivery mechanisms and private sector engagement for enhancing resilience and adaptive capacity • Vulnerabilities of and climate change impacts on women and youth • Inclusive regional and national climate change policy frameworks for closing the gender-gap • Flexible climate information, early warning, & climate-informed agro- advisory services for risk management • Demand-driven crop and livestock insurance products and programs Climate information and agro-advisory Enabling policy and institutions LED pathways for agriculture Breeding for changing climate • Climate smart landscape and ecosystem approaches offering opportunities to reverse degradation and synergies for climate change adaptation & mitigation Integrated ecological approaches Research priorities Climate smart technologies CSA Gender and inclusive growth
• Innovative finance mechanisms for blended (philanthropic, public and private) capital for accelerated investment in CSA • Climate financing instruments for incentivizing climate smart landscapes, food and nutrition security under climate change • Ag-Data infrastructure for meta data capture, enhanced analytics & actionable evidence for policy & farm-level planning • Spatial, temporal and downscaling capabilities for gathering and disseminating climate, agro-advisory, market and insurance services • Real time nutrient deficiency, disease and pest detection systems using rapid cycle digital and ICT innovations • Private sector engagement to develop innovative platforms for climate, market and insurance services, provision of solar- powered irrigation, and to leverage resources to transform agriculture • Incentives for private-sector investment in capacity development, extension, crop and livestock value chains Innovative financing mechanisms Low-level Mid-level High-level Emerging opportunities
Some thoughts for discussion… • Business-as-usual will not achieve food security and sustainability  Low investment and access to capital, inadequate infrastructure and capacity and lack of appropriate market mechanisms  Environmental degradation and emerging threats from climate change • Achieving agricultural transformation and food and nutrition security in the face of climate change may require collective actions  Integration of CSA into regional and national policies and scaling practices  Increase in investment by national governments and development partners  Build human and physical capital, markets and other adaptive mechanisms including climate proofing value chains to enhance resilience  Sustainably intensify agriculture, livestock and fisheries (including landlocked countries) sector, while reducing environmental footprints and where possible GHG putting the region on LED pathway and support NDCs  Inclusive policies, business models and programs targeting the most vulnerable  Exploring emerging opportunities including IFMs, AgData Infrastructure, Digital and ICT-based solutions (CIS, Hydro and AgroMet), DSTs, etc.
Thank you! For more information: https://ccafs.cgiar.org/
Ethiopia’s NAP and its Evolution
Content 1. The CRGE 2. Climate Change related hazards 3. Adaptation 4. Relevant CC policies to Agric and their evolution 5. NAP ETH and the NAP Process 6. NAP ETH Status
1. Ethiopia’s Climate Resilient Green Economy CRGE
CRGE – Goals
21 ▪ Flash and river flooding threaten some urban areas and villages ▪ Extreme flooding events have caused severe problems in the past decades and might require resettlement of vulnerable communities ▪ Roads, bridges and other infrastructure have to withstand floods ▪ Droughts have severely impacted Ethiopia in the past ▪ Agriculture (~50% of GDP) is particularly vulnerable, with estimates of crop productivity loss up to 30%, requiring adaptive R&D ▪ Power generation capacity is largely dependent on hydro-power and thus vulnerable to drought; minimization of impact and diversification of renewable energy harnessing needed ▪ Increasing temperature will increase human diseases (e.g. increased mosquito population, water-borne and heat related diseases); previously low-risk areas will be affected ▪ Animal and crop diseases will be similarly impacted ▪ Adaptive R&D and risk management capacities are needed 2. The major climate change-related hazards for Ethiopia Droughts Flooding Diseases
22 Sectors have been prioritized depending on their vulnerability towards these hazards Sector Health Water/ energy Buildings Transportati on Industry Agricultur e 3-6 regions perceive as relevant <2 regions perceive as relevant Top priority – >6 regions perceive as relevant Flooding Droughts Diseases Sectors impacted by climate change hazards
Impacts evident in some sectors Sector Impacts Agriculture • Shortening of maturity period • Expanding crop diseases (American worm) • Crop failure Livestock • Change in livestock feed availability and quality • Effects on animal health, growth and reproduction • Impacts on forage crops quality and quantity • Change in distribution of diseases • Change in income and prices • Contracting pastoral zones in many parts of the country Forests • Expansion of tropical dry forests • Loss of indigenous species/expansion of toxic weeds • Desertification Water Resources • Decrease in river run-off • Decrease in energy production • Flood and drought impacts
Projected Impacts of Climate Change
3. What is Adaptation ?  Adjustments in human and/or natural systems in response to actual or expected changes in climate to reduce adverse impacts or take advantage or opportunities….  longer term approach  promote Sustainability
Characteristics of Adaptation • Builds on local knowledge and capacity, linking it to scientific data • Addresses current climate vulnerability and prepares for future changes • Context-specific, taking into consideration local circumstances • Engages a wide range of stakeholders at multiple levels • Uses an integrated, holistic approach
What is Vulnerability? Vulnerability  The degree to which a system is unable to cope with the adverse impacts of climate change, including climate variability and extremes.  Vulnerability to climate change is a function of:  Exposure  Sensitivity  Adaptive capacity  V=EXS/AC
Framework for Vulnerability Mapping
NAP - a country-driven, gender sensitive, participatory and fully transparent approach, taking into consideration vulnerable groups, communities and ecosystems; should be based on and guided by the best available science and, as appropriate, traditional and indigenous knowledge; and be done with a view to integrating adaptation into relevant social, economic and environmental policies and actions, where appropriate. 30 4. The ETH – NAP and The NAP Process : Based on Cancun Adaptation Framework principles 2010 – COP 16
2. To facilitate the integration of climate change adaptation, in coherent manner into relevant new and existing policies, programs and activities, in particular development planning processes and strategies, within all relevant sectors and at different levels, as appropriate 31 1. To reduce vulnerability to the impacts of climate change, by building adaptive capacity and resilience Objectives of ETH - NAP National Adaptation Plan
NAP-ETH VISION The Ethiopia NAP (NAP-ETH) vision is to create climate change impact resilient development for Ethiopia and its people. SCOPE OF NAP-ETH The scope of NAP-ETH embraces development and service sectors with particular reference to agriculture, forestry, water, energy, transport, urban, industry, health and education. 1. Mainstreaming climate change adaptation into development policies, Strategies and plans 2. Build the long-term capacities of institutional structures involved in NAP-ETH 3. Improving the knowledge management system for NAP-ETH 4. Establish effective and sustainable funding mechanisms 5. Advancing adaptation research and development in the area of climate adaptation Strategic priorities of NAP-ETH
Specific long-term adaptation objectives of NAP-ETH 1. Integrate currently disparate sectoral and regional adaptation initiatives in order to mainstream climate change adaptation holistically within Ethiopia’s long term development path; 2. Mainstream and institutionalize the implementation of climate change adaptation in the country’s development governance structures to insure continuity and consistency of pragmatic efforts, and by strengthening the institutional memory; 3. Mobilize resources from public and private climate finance sources and from both domestic and international sources to enable the country to implement its climate change adaptation initiatives and to develop appropriate technical, material and expert capacities; 4. Establish resilient systems that can withstand disasters and risks imposed by climate change through building collaborative partnerships among the relevant stakeholders and enhancing the thematic integration among different development sectors.
concrete adaptation investments and projects to galvanize adaptation action at national levels and therefore that action and strategy must be twinned. Characteristics Description Time frame Medium-long term adaptation needs Nature of the plan Programmatic, cross-sectoral, trans-regional, Synergistic Scenarios and uncertainties Best available Climate Change science Vulnerabilities Empirical vulnerabilities assessment Adaptation plans Outline and prioritize adaptation options NAP Characteristics and outputs and its difference from NAPA
A Lay the groundwork and address Gaps B Preparatory elements C Implementation strategies (NAP Global Network supporting this) D Reporting, monitoring and review 1. Initiating and launching of the NAP process 2. Stocktaking: identifying available information 3. Addressing capacity gaps 4. Assessing development needs and climate vulnerabilities 1. Analyzing current climate and future climate change scenarios 2. Assessing climate vulnerabilities and identifying adaptation options 3. Reviewing and appraising adaption options 4. Compiling and communicating national adaptation plans 5. Integrating climate change adaptation into national planning 1. Prioritizing climate change adaptation in national planning 2. Developing national adaptation implementation strategy 3. Enhancing capacity for planning and implementing adaptation 4. Coordination and synergy at the regional level and with other multilateral environmental agreements 1. Monitoring the NAP process 2. Reviewing the NAP process to assess progress effectiveness and gaps 3. Iteratively updating the national adaptation plans 4. Outreach on the NAP process and reporting on progress and effectiveness 35 NAP process
Available information Status Information and experiences obtained for NAP-ETH GTP II document National five-year development plan 2016-2020 Policy instruments, indicators, and targets of green economy including some relevant to climate resilience harmonized with the GTP – Financial need of 6Billion per year… Ethiopia’s Second National Communication to the UNFCCC 2015 Required comprehensive report to the UNFCCC on Ethiopia’s GHG inventory, outlining mitigation and adaptation plans, released in 2015 Climate Change Impacts, Vulnerability and Adaptation options prepared in synergetic approach with sector representatives and national professionals Data used was based on a mix of Tier 1 and Tier 2 levels of IPCC GHG inventory software: 1996 and 2006 NAPA 2017 A short term, project based plan developed in 2007, released in 2008 Climate change scenarios, vulnerability levels, adaptation options Regional Adaptation Plans Draft adaptation plans prepared 2010/2011 for all of Ethiopia’s regions and city administrations Adaptation options specific to sectors within Ethiopia’s regional states Sectoral Adaptation Plans Draft adaptation plans prepared 2010/2011 for some key sectors at national level Adaptation options specific to sectors EPACC Summary of program of adaptation prepared in 2011 based on earlier plans (e.g. Ethiopia’s NAPA) 29 prioritized climate change adaptation measures, citing institutions to spearhead implementation of the measures CRGE Strategy Ethiopia’s 20-year seminal strategic document for carbon neutral economy prepared in 2011 aimed at insuring middle income status 60 climate change mitigation options identified with some adaptation co-benefits (I)NDC Ethiopia’s intended contribution to GHG reduction (mitigation) and to adaptation submitted in 2015 Major adaptation options categorized under drought, flood, and cross-sector issues Climate Resilience Strategy for Agriculture and Forest Sectors A federal-level strategy for climate resilience addressing agriculture and forest sectors prepared in 2015 Adaptation options identified that are specific to agriculture and forestry sectors Climate Resilience Strategy for Water and Energy Sectors A federal-level climate resilience strategy addressing water and energy sectors prepared in 2015 Adaptation options identified that are specific to water and energy sectors Technology Need Assessment (TNA) (draft)* 2016 A draft document addressing potential technologies to be adopted by Ethiopia towards meeting its Technologies for mitigation may relate to sectors sensitive to climate change impacts and help meet their adaptation Information availability, status and contribution to NAP-ETH
Capacities needed Interventions required Capacity to build and maintain data archives/database on impacts of climate change for agro-climatic zones, vulnerable groups and ecosystems.  Institutionalize the climate change impact database by involving designated data collectors, e.g. the Central Statistics Agency (CSA) and planning bureaus.  Devise Knowledge Management System and institutional memory mechanism for adaptation. Capacity to run climate models, providing predictions and scenarios, including validation with reference to on-the- ground historical data and level of assessing certainty - at national and regional scales.  Build the capacity of Ethiopia’s National Meteorology Agency (NMA) to produce precise and reliable information.  Collect and compile ground data that can augment modeling and scenario building. Capacity to assess status of vulnerability and determine required adaptation responses for the major development sectors and for all agro-climatic zones, vulnerable groups and ecosystems.  Coordinate vulnerability analysis of sectors and regions, including agro-climatic zones, vulnerable groups and ecosystems.  Compile existing vulnerability data/information collected by sectors, regions and non-state actors. Capacity to design multi-sector adaptation programs outlining overlapping or shared responsibilities.  Create taskforces involving institutions with overlapping/shared responsibilities.  Define specific roles for each institution with accountability and responsibility where there are overlapping/shared responsibilities. Capacity to mobilize the private sector and involve it in climate change adaptation investments.  Provide incentives for private sector actors to invest in adaptation measures/works.  Build opportunities for the private sector to participate in adaptation planning, implementation and monitoring. Capacity for strengthened mobilization and involvement of the general public in implementing and monitoring climate resilient action.  Encourage effective participation of the public to ensure ownership of adaptation measures/activities.  Target participation of vulnerable groups so that their particular adaptation needs are met. Capacity for enhanced mobilization and involvement of non-state actors including professional societies, development partners and donors.  Create strong partnership/network among non- state actors and others.  Involve professionals and civil society actors in adaptation planning, implementation and monitoring. Capacity for building institutional, financial, technical and material capacity for the implementation of adaptation programs.  Mainstream adaptation in government planning processes.  Coordinate capacity building efforts in order to develop critical mass of capacities.  Enhance capacity of sectors to attract international and domestic adaptation finances. Capacities gap analysis
Potential funding source
1. Enhancing food security by improving agricultural productivity in a climate-smart manner. 2. Improving access to potable water. 3. Strengthening sustainable natural resource management through safeguarding landscapes and watersheds. 4. Improving soil and water harvesting and water retention mechanisms. 5. Improving human health systems through the implementation of changes based on an integrated health and environmental surveillance protocol. 6. Improving ecosystem resilience through conserving biodiversity. 7. Enhancing sustainable forest management. 8. Building social protection and livelihood options of vulnerable people. 9. Enhancing alternative and renewable power generation and management. 10. Increasing resilience of urban systems. 11. Building sustainable transport systems. 12. Developing adaptive industry systems. 13. Mainstreaming endogenous adaptation practices. 14. Developing efficient value chain and marketing systems. 15. Strengthening drought and crop insurance mechanisms. 16. Improving Early warning systems. 17. Developing and using adaptation technologies. 18. Reinforcing adaptation research and development. The 18 Adaptation options
a) number of climate resilient targets addressed b) contribution to poverty alleviation and ensuring food security; c) ability to generate household and national income; d) improving the capacity at all level of governments; e) alignment with investment activities in the country; f) cost effectiveness; g) sensitivity to vulnerable groups, including gender and youth, h) sensitivity to vulnerable ecosystems; and h) size of mitigation and other co-benefits. Adaptation option priority setting criteria
NAP-ETH adaptation options 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 18 Layersofactivities Planning and guidelines undertaking thoughtful and pragmatic planning with lists of alternative actions and implementation guidelines Technology and Methods identifying and selecting enabling technologies and methods for the efficient implementation of adaptation activities Design and Infrastructure ensuring adherence to designs that take into account emerging climate change impacts and create resilient infrastructures Systems Building enhancing partnerships, integrating stakeholders horizontally and vertically, insuring adaptation activities feed into overall resilience and add value to each other’s contribution – avoid silo! Knowledge Management – critical! enhancing research and development, integrating indigenous and contemporary knowledge, and registering acquired experiences Institutional Memory creating knowledge and experience databases comprehensive layers of activities
NAP-ETHGovernanceStructure
• Bases of NAP-ETH cost estimate • Sectoral adaptation cost estimates for agriculture, forestry, water and energy • Growth and Transformation Plan (GTP) II sector by sector disaggregated budget; • Urban poverty reduction project budget; • Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP) budget; • Sustainable Land Management (SLM) budget; • Annual budget 2016 allocated for implementation of Sustainable Development Goals • Disaster risk budget (assumed 2 disasters will happen during the NAP-ETH period); The estimated cost of implementing NAP-ETH over the next fifteen years is approximately US$ 6 billion per year. It is expected that these funds will be raised from a combination of finance sources, including public and private, as well as domestic and international sources. Cost of NAP-ETH
Selected development programs/strategies/road maps Implementation period 201 0 2020 2030 2040 205 0 CRGE GTP II IDSP (Industrial Development Strategic Program) WRDP (Water Resources Development Program) HSTP (Health Sector Transformation Program) UPSN (Urban Productive Safety Net) PSNP IV (Productive Safety Net Program) ELMP (Ethiopia Livestock Master Plan) SDG (Sustainable Development Goals) NAP-ETH Simultaneously ongoing development programs/strategies/plans and NAP- ETH
5. NAP-ETH Status ETH – NAP launched in Sept 2017 Regional Prioritization workshop – ongoing + Adaptation training - GCF Readiness proposal underway, Adaptation documentation, … Gender Analysis – Jan/Feb 2018 NAP Financing roadmap – April/Mar 2018
1: Clear framework exists now but still open for comment….. 2: CSO/CBOs, researches , Private sectors are welcomed by MEFCC 3: We need to Communicate! Communicate! Communicate!….. 4: Climate services really needed, down scaled climate data, woreda, kebele level 5.Dire Need to work in close collaboration/integration with NDRMC, National Met Agency and acadamia Conclusion
www.napglobalnetwork.org info@napglobalnetwork.org Twitter: @NAP_Network Thanks! Ethiopia In-country National Adaptation Plan (NAP) Support Program United States Government In collaboration with: Implemented by:
Dawit Solomon SLM interventions can deliver both climate change mitigation and adaptation
Rationale behind Ethiopia’s land-based climate-smart food security intervention FAO Food insecurity and malnutritionSoil and land degradation Current crop yields (gaps) Extreme risk • Crop yields are the lowest in Ethiopia (SSA) than any region in the world • Land degradation and loss of soil fertility are recognized as among the most important crop production constraints in Ethiopia (SSA) • Soil and land degradation, crop yield gaps and food and nutrition security are closely linked • Climate-smart land/soil-management, agriculture and food-security initiatives are critical in Ethiopia (SSA) for achieving • Restoration of degraded ecosystems – agriculture, grassland, woodland, forestland • Enhancing soil fertility and sustainable food security • Reduce deforestation, combating desertification and conserving biodiversity • Enhance other ecosystem services and co-benefits
• IPCC predictions show global average temperatures are likely to increase because of radiative forcing of GHGs December 2016: 404.48 ppm December 2015: 401.85 ppm •Climate change is expected to increase the frequency and severity of extreme weather events such as droughts and flooding across Africa o Heat stress for people, crops, livestock and other flora and fauna o Risk of drought, crop loss and increased food insecurity and vulnerability o Strategies and approaches to mitigate, adapt and build resilience to risks • Historical trends in Ethiopia or Africa show 1.3°C increase • > 2° C by mid-century • 3 - 6° C by the end of the century Rationale behind Ethiopia’s land-based climate-smart food security intervention
COP21, Paris 2015: “keep global warming well below 2°C, and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C” Large scale sequestration in the agriculture, forestry, and land use sector
Climate-change mitigation in SLM SLM Rehabilitation of degraded lands Soil and water conservation • Terraces • Embankments • Water-infiltration trenches, • Wells and ponds • Irrigation • Drainage Climate- smart agriculture • Organic amendments • Improved varieties • Diversified cropping systems • Multi-purpose leguminous cover cops • Multi-strata agroforestry systems Sustainable land management • Land rehabilitation • Area enclosures • Natural regeneration • Woodlots and forests
Cornell’s strategic approach - Ethiopia’s land-based climate-smart food security intervention • Downscaled, modalable and scalable baseline database and reports • Capacity building, manuals and policy briefs • Mainstreaming and peer reviewed articles
Business-as- usual Project scenarios with ecosystem and eco-region specific implementation strategies and durations Strategic approach - Ethiopia’s SLM in agricultural, woodland, grassland and forestland ecosystems
Land restoration is a cornerstone of SLM
Initial Scenario Business as usual Project Scenario Scenario Development
Geospatial mapping of land use and land cover Control Woodland regeneration Grassland cut-and- carry Cropland Soil profile locations Agroforestry and woodlots
Land-management mapped
Georeferenced downscaled-baseline database for soil and biomass carbon, soil fertility co-benefits and future clim Soil chemical properties Code Description pHWa pH-H2O pHBf Modified Mehlich pH-Buffered DpH Desired pH Phdiffr pH offset LRABRV Lime required MOISABRV Moisture LOI Loss on ignition OM Organic matter TCP Total SOC TCCO SOC concentration TCST Total C stock in horizon TC1M Total C stock in 1 m soil MTC1 Mean total C stock in 1 m soil TCCE Total C stock in horizon TCE1 Total C stock in 1 m soil (profile) MCE1 Mean total C stock in 1 m soil (profile) TNP Total N TNCO Total N concentration TNST Total N stock in 1 m soil (profile) TN1M Mean total N stock in 1 m soil (profile) CNR C / N ratio Al Mehlich III extractable Aluminum B Mehlich III extractable Boron Ca Mehlich III extractable Calcium Co Mehlich III extractable Cobalt Cu Mehlich III extractable Copper Fe Mehlich III extractable Iron K Mehlich III extractable Potassium Mg Mehlich III extractable Magnesium Mn Mehlich III extractable Manganese Na Mehlich III extractable Sodium Ni Mehlich III extractable Nickel P Mehlich III extractable Phosphorus S Mehlich III extractable Sulfur Zn Mehlich III extractable Zink EXCa Mehlich III exchangeable Ca EXK Mehlich III exchangeable K EXMg Mehlich III exchangeable Mg EXNa Mehlich III exchangeable Na CEC CEC PBS Base saturation Site classification Code Description SANO Sample Number LACO Laboratory code CSLZ CSI livelihood zone CLZC CSI livelihood zone CLZT Livelihood zone type CLZTA Livelihood zone type REGION_Block Region REGION Region ZONE Zone WRDA Woreda KEBLE Kebele WTSD Watershed WDIS Watershed Sub-site CBPC Site code WDCO CSI woreda identifier Sustainable management Code Description GLUO General land use GLUOYR General land use/PSNP/HABP project objective main management option and year CLYR Calendar year when intervention started NoYR_Block Number of years since intervention SLAT Specific land use / time SLYT Summary of specific land use activity or treatment DLU Detailed sampled land use systems specific activity and use DLUY Detailed sampled land use systems specific activity and year FRFields Farmer and research fields ALUY Additional detailed sampled land use systems specific activity, use and year ALU Additional detailed sampled land use systems specific activity and use SATRT Specific activity or treatment SWC_PHY_MESU Physical measures PMABRV Physical measures SWC_BIO_MESU Biological measures Plant and animal habitat Code Description TRSP Major tree, shrub or bush in the surveyed field GRSP Major grass spp. LZMC Livelihood main crops MCIF Major crops in the field LZML Livelihood main livestock NOYRABRVT Number of years since intervention LUABRV Land cover LCONDT Land condition CBP_INT Interventions UCBPSN Soil management UQSIORG Unique georeferenced site identifier original Sample type Code Description SAAB Sample names and information SATY Sample type STDP Sample type and depth SAD Sample depth ASAD Actual depth SANA Sample name and depth GLCODUPL General laboratory code SNBD Bulk density sample name WETC Wet chemical analysis conducted SMIR MIR analysis conducted SSFR Soil fertility trial conducted Geographical variables Code Description LATDD Centroid latitude LONDD Centroid longitude ELVGOGE Watershed intervention site central elevation google earth ELVTAB Centroid elevation UQSI Unique georeferenced site identifier for GIS modelling TPI2500 Topographic index 2500 TPI2000 Topographic index 2000 TPI1500 Topographic index 1000 TPI1000 Topographic index 2503 TPI500 Topographic index 500 TPI250 Topographic index 250 TPI100 Topographic index 100 Aspect Aspect DEM_90 Elevation Plan_curv Plan curvature Pro_curv Pro_curv Slope_deg Slope Slope_len Slope length Total_curv Curvature x_m Projected location x_m y_m Projected location y_m Climatic and ecological variable Code Description MAT Mean annual temperature MMP Mean monthly precipitation MAP Mean annual precipitation MPET Monthly potential evapotranspiration PET Potentialevapotranspiration PETR Potentialevapotranspiration ratio (PET/MAP) WVP Water vapor pressure WISD Wind speed MDYL Mean day length PRDF Precipitationdeficit ROFF Runoff RURA Runoff ratio AR Aridity AIX Aridity index MNPP NPP NPPC Climaticdependent potentialNPP NPPP NPP precipitation NPPT NPP temperature NPPL NPP limitedby NPTS NPP precipitationsensitivity NPPS NPP temperaturesensitivity AECH Holdridge zone KKCL Koeppen climate class BCL Budyko Climate class MGROWSEAS Moist major growing season if PRC/PET > 0.5 rain fall dependent ROOTACTV Root activity ROAC Root activityclass VEG Vegetation Soil physical properties Code Description COLR Color MEIN Measured or imputed data BD Bulk density SAND Sand CLAY Clay SILT Silt TEXC Texture class DRAN Drainage DRAN Drainage AWC Available water capacity MC1 Moisture retention at 0.1 bar MC15 Moisture retention at 15 bar Plant bioassay and crop yield Code Description YIELD Biomass yield from fertility trial • Baseline database – downscaled, scalable, modelling and prediction • Planning and implementation • Monitoring progress and impact of investment – biophysical and climate change mitigation and adaptation arena and • Develop preparedness for future climate financing opportunity
Soil carbon stock and soil fertility co-benefits across various land cover typology • Relative parameter of importance of surface layer (0-15 cm) and soil profile (up to 100 cm depth) soil carbon stocks of Ethiopia’s watersheds • Soil and water management • Vegetation cover • Duration of management/implementation
Soil carbon stock and soil fertility co-benefits under business-as-usual and project scenarios C N P K CEC BD AWC
- Project scenarios with up to 300% more soil carbon sequestration - Business-as-usual (BAU) Soil carbon stock and soil fertility co-benefits under business-as-usual and project scenarios
Soil carbon stock and soil fertility co-benefits across various land cover typology and duration of interventions • Duration of implementation across each land cover typology is significant for enhancing soil carbon sequestration and soil fertility co- benefits • The longer the site is under land-based climate-smart integrated watershed management the more the benefits • Projects and interventions need to morph into programs
Soil management Soilcarbon(tCO2e/ha) • Highest amounts of soil carbon under project scenario were observed in integrates watershed management interventions implemented along with area enclosures (PE-forest, PE-grassland and PE Woodland) and agroforestry (AF), followed by croplands with integrated soil fertility interventions (ISWF-CL) Control or BAU scenario Project scenarios Up to 300% more soil C Forest permanent enclosures Grasslan d permanen t enclosure s Cropland with ISFM and ISWCCroplan d with only ISWC Agroforestr y Role of land-based climate-smart integrated watershed management under different land uses Gully management Woodland permanen t enclosure s
Analysis of land-cover change 1986 1995 2014 Forest cover increase in enclosure 1986 - 2014 Almost no forest 60% forest cover Validate historical land use changes: LandSat images since 1972
Land cover mapping Astrium Pleiades 25Oct14 land cover mapping: using high resolution multispectral satellite imagery Cost reductions through tasking satellites to coincide with leaf senescence • Simplified analysis based on NDVI threshold • High map accuracy from single image
Ground-truthing of land cover classification Map accuracy assessment > 95%
High resolution climate maps Mean Annual Temperature • Climate data from > 100 stations. • Inverse distance weighted average with horizontal and vertical interpolation
• MODIS satellite reflectance for absorbed photosynthetically active radiation • Combine with literature values for allocation of NPP to woody tissues for site-specific estimates of biomass growth rates • Useful for land cover that are not adequately modelled by default (“tier 1”) assumptions Net primary production
Geospatial data layers generated and related to carbon model
Source of Emissions Emissions(CO2eha-1yr-1)
Source of Emissions Emissions(CO2eha-1yr-1) Enteric emissions (methane from livestock)
Source of Emissions Emissions(CO2eha-1yr-1) Soil organic carbon
Source of Emissions Emissions(CO2eha-1yr-1) Agroforestry Avoided deforestation Reforestation Silvipasture
Emissions by land cover type
Emissions by land cover type Forest and agroforestry had highest carbon benefits. Negative emissions (Mg CO2e ha-1 yr-1): • 4.1 +/- 2.7 (forest) • 1.6 +/- 1.9 (agroforestry)
Emissions by land cover type Emission reductions on cropland are more modest
Emissions by land cover type Grassland is a net source of GHGs in both scenarios. Primarily due to livestock emissions
Substantial variability between sites indicates potential to increase carbon benefits, by improved management and implementation Carbon benefits, aggregated over all sites Mean carbon benefit: 5.7 tonnes CO2e ha-1 yr-1
Spatial distribution of carbon fluxes • Variability depends partly on biophysical, climatic, and ecological factors • But, crucially, also on local management decisions, objectives and socioeconomic constraints • Optimal management for balancing food security and climate change mitigation and adaptation must be responsive to local conditions. Project BAU
Cost of Monitoring Considerable scope to bring down costs if carbon projects are large contiguous areas. Mean carbon benefits 5.7 Mg CO2e ha-1 yr-1 Total area of surveyed sites 7344 ha GHG accounting period 20 yrs Total benefits of surveyed sites 835,478 Mg CO2e Cost of Cornell project $850,000 Cost per unit abatement $1 Mg-1 CO2e
Ethiopia’s NDC • Aims to reach middle income status by 2025 without increasing GHG emissions from 2010 baseline. • In line with this ambition, Ethiopia's NDC plans to limit net GHG emission to 145 Mt CO2e in 2030, • Agriculture and forestry account for 86% of the abatement potential. • SLM provides 3.3 Mt CO2e yr-1 • 1.5% of NDC • How far can this be scaled up?  Spatial extent  Improved management Current SLM 3.3
Building readiness • Paris Agreement  “keep warming below 2 °C … pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C “ • Green Climate Fund (GCF)  $100 billion per year by 2020 • Results-based financing • Capacity building critical  positioning to take advantage of future markets as they develop, requires that capacity should be built now  Use of cost-effective yet robust methodologies for soils and geospatial analysis are critical  Local solutions for local conditions • Most effective way to build preparedness is to create projects now at a scale commensurate with current realities  using landscape-scale standardized methodologies that will keep future project costs manageable  diversity of ecosystems and agro-ecosystems • Partnerships, methodologies and proposals already in place • Aim to have capacity in place for going to scale from 2020s
Take home messages 1. Mitigation in the agriculture sector and restoration of deforested and degraded land is an essential part of the solution to climate change. 2. SLM interventions could restore extremely degraded and almost uninhabitable ecosystems in SSA 3. Land rehabilitation and SLM already provides unintended carbon benefits in these areas, while building productive capacity, ecosystem services, resilience and adaptation. 4. SLM and mitigation co-benefits are not mutually exclusive – SLM provide substantial climate-change mitigation co-benefit by creating a vehicle for investment in land and ecosystem restoration 5. (In advert) already providing 1.5% of mitigation required in NDC 6. Development partners and countries should develop and facilities strategies with ancillary climate benefits in CS landscape rehabilitation 7. Potential to scale this up both spatially and with improved management 8. Same model can inform social protection programs, climate-smart agriculture, resilience and land restoration efforts, globally 9. Scaling up and sustainability, however, is limited by available finance for food security interventions 10. Climate change mitigation co-benefits could potentially support
Next Steps • Model projects in all major ecosystems  Jurisdictional scale integrated watershed management with climate finance  Readiness, partnerships and interest in Ethiopia  Ethiopian MOA-NRM ready to shelve a client request • Capacity Building • Preparedness • Going to scale by 2020s
Application of CCAFS-MOT Desalegn Ayal 27/03 2018
Application of CCAFS-MOT Cont’ • The CCAFS-MOT is users friendly: could be used by different institutions/individuals interested to estimate GHG emission and sequestration at various scales (crop type, household level, watershed level) • The tool is built from finings from well-known and peer reviewed empirical models and it has users guide • The tool takes into account regional and local biophysical features, land management practices, application of organic fertilizer, synthetic fertilizer • Freely available • CSA, Land restoration, Bio fertilizers for sustainable soil, SLM, Environmental degradation/rehabilitation, bio gas, soil sequestration, agroforestary, CC impact & adaptation response, Ph D candidates, MSc students
Application of CCAFS-MOT Cont’ • Data could be primary or secondary • Relatively cheap and require less data than other tools • Allow to analyze simplified or detailed data e.g. soil, chemical fertilizer, It allow experts, researchers in the agriculture and climate change to quickly: Quantify GHG emission and sequestration: GHR emissions/ sequestration due to current management practices (emission per ha) (e.g. fertilizer production, fertilizer induced field emission, soil mining, LUC, burning residue)
Application of CCAFS-MOT Cont’ provide mitigation potential for each individual practices (amount of GHG could be sequestered by application of different management practices) rank mitigation options from multiple agricultural (crop and livestock) and agroforestary practices in different biophysical settings (e..g e.g. no tillage, optimal N application, organic manure addition, compost application, reduced tillage, inhibitors, homegarden, boundary planting, other agroforestary, alley cropping etc)
Application of CCAFS-MOT Cont’ identify main sources of emission (e.g. LUC; fertilizer production; fertilizer induced field emission, burning residue, soil mining etc) Cause for sequestration (e.g. land management practices, optimal synthetic fertilizer application, agroforestary practices etc. • barriers to take mitigation action(e.g. resources scarcity, knowledge and technology) • Indentify co-benefit
Application of CCAFS-MOT Cont’ This tool is very helpful to come-up with evidence based results and conclusions in agricultural sector mitigation study suggest context specific practicable recommendation Planning and implantation of interventions  I encourage to use the tool and keep sharing comments and suggestions CCAFS: organize a team to improve and contextualize the tool
• Thank you very much for your attention!
Diana Feliciano University of Aberdeen School of Biological Sciences Estimating GHG emissions from agriculture using MOT
We live in a “greenhouse”…
The greenhouse effect
The carbon cycle
Source: Feliciano, 2015
Human activity is adding too much carbon…
Keeling curve Source: http://co2now.org/ 350 pp m
Recent measures at Mauna Loa Source: Feliciano, 2017
Ice cores Source: Feliciano, 2017
CO2 versus temperature Source: Feliciano, 2017
The “Hockey stick” graph Source: Caco Galhardo
UN Sustainable Development Goals
Targets (SDG 13 Climate Action) 13.2 National policies for climate protection – Integrate climate change measures into national policies (…) 13.3 Improve awareness-raising and capacities – Improve (…) capacity on climate change mitigation 13.a Financial assistance for developing countries (…) to address the needs of developing countries in the context of meaningful mitigation actions
INDC’s (Intended National Determined Contributions) • UNFCCC countries were asked to publish GHG emission reduction targets before the 2015 UN COP21 in Paris. - Quantify emissions limitation and reduction objective – QUELROs - Establish nationally appropriate mitigation actions - NAMAs Global average temperature<2oC
Agriculture and climate change • Agriculture and forestry can act as a source and sink of greenhouse gas emissions. • Source: it releases GHGs to the atmosphere; • Sink: absorbs carbon from the atmosphere.
Agriculture Source: Papusoi and Faraby 2013 CSA
Greenhouse gases: sources and sinks Credit: IPCC
Agricultural landscape in Scotland Photo: Slee, 2011
Agricultural landscape in Scotland Photo: Brown, 2012
Livestock in Scotland Photo: Feliciano, 2009
GHG emissions from Agriculture in the World Source: FAOSTAT 0 1000000 2000000 3000000 4000000 5000000 6000000 1961 1964 1967 1970 1973 1976 1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 MtCO2e
Agriculture contribution to climate change Waste and wastewater 3% Energy supply 26% Transport 13%Residential and commercial buildings 8% Industry 19% Agriculture 14% Forestry 17% Source: IPCC 2016
AFOLU emissions by source Source: IPCC, WG III, 2014
AFOLU Emissions and Sinks Source: IPCC, WG III, 2014
GHG emissions from Agriculture in Ethiopia 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 MtCO2e
GHG emission reduction targets: UK Source: UK Committee on Climate
GHG emission reduction targets: Ethiopia • Ethiopia is the first Least Developed Country to submit its INDC; • Climate Resilient Green Economy (CRGE) strategy • Ethiopia’s contribution represents a 64 percent emissions reduction from business as-usual emissions by 2030 (400 MtCO2e 255 Mt CO2e).
Questions about data needs • Fill the questions and discuss with participants - Who is doing the reporting of GHG emissions at the national level? (e.g. FAOSTAT, INDCs) - What protocol/methods/calculators have been used? - Who is in charge of doing the estimates/reporting for agriculture?
Greenhouse gas accounting tools - Cool Farm Tool - CALM - C-Plan - COMET-Planner - ALU - SHAMBA - CBP - EX-ACT • Use IPCC factors or factors resulting from empirical models or literature. Have you already used any of these GHG accounting tool?
Characteristics ALU SHAMBA EX-ACT CFT CBP Availabilit y Free Free Free Free for academics Not available (?) Expertise Required Moderate Easy Moderate Easy Moderate Registrati on required Yes No No Yes Yes Geograph ic Scope National/ Sectoral Smallholde rs National/ Sectoral Smallholde rs National/ Sectoral Country/ Region Global Tropical Regions Global Global Global Activities/ Scale Policy Carbon Accounting Project/Poli cy Farm-level GHG inventory Impacts Assessed GHG emissions GHG emissions GHG emissions and GHG emissions GHG emissions
Mitigation Options Tool (CCAFS-MOT) Objective: To provide information about GHG emission sources in agriculture and about management practices that can mitigate GHG emissions, including its mitigation potential.
Characteristics of the CCAFS-MOT - It is a MS Excel tool freely available for download and no registration needed; - Estimates mitigation potentials of several management options; - Ranks the agricultural questions according to their mitigation potential;
What is the CCAFS-MOT useful for? • Estimating GHG emissions from agriculture; • Understanding sources of GHG emissions in agriculture; • Understanding the influence of agricultural practices on GHG emissions; • Identify mitigation options; • Recommendation: If using the CCAFS-MOT for official reporting, use more than one tool to validate/confirm results.
Climate change mitigation is a complex problem Credit: Ridder et al., 2005
MOT
MOT website https://ccafs.cgiar.org/mitigation-option-tool-agriculture#.WfdoFU1LFow Click
Continuous stakeholder consultation • 2013 & 2014 - Workshops in University of Aberdeen (researchers) • 2014- Workshop with project managers and researchers at FAO (Rome) • 2014 - Workshops with policy-makers from Latin America and also other countries in Peru, COP20 • 2015 – Two webinars with an Expert Advisory Group (>20 people) • 2015 – Seminar at a Environmental consulting company (IMAFLORA) in Brazil • 2015- Global Landscape Forum (Paris – COP 21) • 2016 - Seminar at the World Bank • Ongoing - Direct contact via e-mail
Stakeholder types 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 N
Direct contacts with the research team about MOT in 2017
Website views and MOT downloads
Recent feedback from users • ‘I think the tool is easy to use and can be helpful…the supplementary database was very useful to check numbers’ Researcher at Thünen Institute of Farm Economics, Germany. • ‘I find it very useful and versatile, a very handy tool for CSA practitioners’ - student at National University of Ireland, Galway. • ‘It is ideal to use CCAFS-MOT a tool for farmers, extension services and policy- advisors to identify mitigation options for agriculture.’ Counsellor in Climate Field School for farmers & lecturer at the Agricultural Faculty of Hasanuddin, University Makassar Indonesia.
Main sections in MOT • General input • Crops • Rice • Grassland • Livestock • Co-benefits • Hidden spreadsheets.
Crops
GHG emissions accounting http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/
Nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions • Stehfest & Bouwman (2006): 𝑳𝒐𝒈 𝑵𝒆𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 = 𝑨 + 𝒊=𝟏 𝒏 𝑬𝒊 Climat e Fertiliser SOC Crop type
How do we get those parameters? Jenny Farmer taking gas samples in Ugandan wetlands that have been drained and are being used to grow potato. Source: http://www.abdn.ac.uk/ibes/research/groups/environmental-modelling/alter.ph
Livestock emissions Methane emissions: CH4Enteric= EFT x 𝑁 𝑇 106 + CH4Manure= 𝑇 𝐸𝐹 𝑇×𝑁𝑇 106 Nitrogen emissions: N2ODirect= 𝑖(𝐹𝑆𝑁 + 𝐹𝑂𝑁) × EF1 +N2O- NPRP + N2Indirect= ….volatilisation + leaching + N2OManure= Direct + Indirect (vol. and
Enteric fermentation
How do we get those emission factors? Source: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123561039911777481
Examples of mitigation options Zero-tillage (e.g. maize) Nitrification inhibitors Manure Agroforestry Cover crops Best fertiliser production
Co-benefits of agricultural mitigation measures Mitigation options Mitigation potential Food security (e.g. yield) Adaptatio n benefits Costs of impleme ntation Uncertainty (risks) No tillage -2288 kg CO2 eq ha- 1 yr-1 Cover crops -1414 kg CO2 eq ha- 1 yr-1 Optimal N application -610 kg CO2 eq ha- 1 yr-1 Nitrificatio n inhibitors -2.12 kg CO2 eq ha- 1 yr-1 …
Method Source: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X16305650
Field work
Lemi district (sub catchments)
Land use
Agroforestry
Soils
Livestock
Interviews
Socio-economics
Interview guide
Exercises
Do different crops contribute differently to GHG emissions?
What are the main sources of emissions for each crop?
What are the main sources of emissions for each crop?
What are the mitigation options suggested for each crop?
What are the co-benefits of each mitigation options?
What are the barriers for implementation of each mitigation option?
Do different farmers planting the same crops have different GHG emissions? Why?
Ethiopia Climate Smart Agriculture Country Profile: Overview and considerations 27 March 2018 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Sebastian Grey International Center for Tropical Agriculture
Situation Analysis Provide a brief yet comprehensive overview of the status of climate smart agriculture (CSA) activities and enabling environment for CSA investment in Ethiopia - infographics, short text – a snapshot Objective Contents Target Audience • Government departments • Development agencies • Non-governmental organizations • Researchers & farmers CSA Country Profiles https://ccafs.cgiar.org/publications/csa-country-profiles • National agricultural context – Land use – GHG emissions • Climate Impacts – Economic Modelling - IMPACT • Ongoing CSA practices and level of ‘climate-smartness’ – On and off- farm + policies, institutions and finances (international and national) • Institutional, policy, and financial entry points for scaling out CSA
Information & Data gathering Databases (FAOSTAT, WB, CAIT, national documents and databases etc.) Interviews – Key stakeholders Surveys/ Questionnaires: various tools developed to aid information gathering and analysis Focus groups/ Workshops • Practices assessments & policies, institutions and finances workshops Analysis – analysis framework developed to show climate smartness based on different categories
• CSA Country Profiles developed for 30+ countries globally • 31 Kenyan County Climate Risk Profiles • 1500+ Experts consulted • Many more countries in progress or being planned
CSA Considerations - Adoption levels of some CSA practices and technologies, such as conservation agriculture and agroforestry, among smallholder farmers remain low. - Increased public and private support is needed to enable access to improved inputs, equipment, credit and insurance schemes… - There is evidence of increased use of organic fertilizers, adoption of crop varieties with higher resistance/tolerance to drought, pests, and diseases, and improved livestock feeding practices, as attempts to increase productivity and resilience, but also with co-benefits in terms of reducing agricultural greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. - Given the country’s food insecurity challenges, priorities for economic growth and increased resilience have pushed agricultural mitigation efforts backstage. - Through an ambitious policy framework built largely on the Climate Resilient Green Economy (CRGE) Strategy and an enabling institutional infrastructure, Ethiopia has taken major steps towards mainstreaming climate change into agricultural planning.. ..additional national and international (public & private) resources need to be mobilized to fill existing financial gaps.
Agriculture Context
Agriculture Context
GHG EmissionsClimate Change - IPCC AR5 - Statistical downscaling
CSA Practices smartness overview Question: which CSA practices to focus on? • High smartness- low adoption? • Low Smartness- High adoption? • Medium smartness-medium adoption?
CSA Practices smartness Wheat (4.4% of total harvested area)
CSA Practices smartness
• Various government institutions involved in CSA – MEFCC, MoANR, ATA, EIAR, NMA • Also development partners – FAO, GIZ, CGIAR • NGOs (ACSAA) – focus largely productivity & resilience • Coordination!! Institutions
Policies Strong CSA-related policy and programme framework hinged on CRGE Strategy (41 CSA-related options identified in agriculture and forestry) and programmes such as SLMP-II. Continued training and awareness raising or extension service, development partners and farmers crucial to support implementation of CSA-related policies. Mainstreaming of CSA into all policies and programmes (e.g. PIF) and policy coordination between sectors (e.g. water, agriculture and environment) are crucial..
Finance Opportunities Agricultural climate change finance is mostly directed towards adaptation. Mitigation cobenefits are present and need to be assessed, monitored and taken advantage of – good link to MOT and other mitigation potential tools. Huge public expenditure in agriculture.. Need to ensure that this expenditure is climate-smart.. Need good quality proposals informed by local analysis (& climate informed).. Not repackaging of agricultural development or drought response measures..
Outlook • Excellent policy environment for CSA… Capacity building and training are crucial – especially of extension system and broader CSA actors. • Various CSA-related programmes are being undertaken and various institutions involved in CSA-related activities – coordination is key particularly between government and civil society e.g. CA task Force, CSA Alliance, CRGE Coordination Units… • Generation & sharing of evidence to support the promotion & adoption of CSA practices at local level – including through cost-benefit analysis and sub-national climate risk profiling – different AEZs or specific value chains • Higher economic and environmental returns from CSA practices are most likely obtained if rather than a single practice-based approach – still several measures are implemented jointly, through an integrated (farm- or landscape level – as demonstrated in SLM for example) approach… still must be informed by research on which combinations maximize farmer and environmental benefits.
Future research • Context matters for CSA.. Local level climate risk profiling.. Zone/ Woreda/AEZ level? • Climate services – climate informed decision making! • Specific commodity value chain profiles targeted at the private sector. e.g. Coffee, barley, bean - not only on-farm risks and risk management measures but across the entire value chain • De-risking agricultural lending to unlock finance for agricultural investment – finance is a key challenge.. currently a catch 22 situation – CBA, risk analysis & business case (IRR, NPV) can demystify lending
Ethiopia Climate Smart Agriculture Country Profile: Overview and considerations Thank You Sebastian Grey – S.Grey@cgiar.org Evan Girvetz – E.Girvetz@cgiar.org

Check these out next

CCAFS EA Presentation for MOT training in ILRI Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Recommended

More Related Content

Slideshows for you(20)

Similar to CCAFS EA Presentation for MOT training in ILRI Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.(20)

More from CCAFS | CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security(20)

Recently uploaded(20)

CCAFS EA Presentation for MOT training in ILRI Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.