Keynote presentation by Ana Maria Loboguerrero Rodriguez, CCAFS and the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) International conference on agricultural emissions and food security: Connecting research to policy and practice 10-13 September 2018 Berlin, Germany

1. 1
COST AND IMPLEMENTATION OF
MITIGATION IN AGRICULTURE
Ana María Loboguerrero, CCAFS, Head of Global Policy Research
CCAFS is led by

2. 2
WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THE COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
MITIGATION ACTIONS IN THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR?
AGRICULTURE CLIMATE CHANGE

3. 3
Main
Issues

4. 4
HIGH INITIAL INVESTMENT COSTS
1. SELLING CARBON CREDITS
2. IMPLEMENTING
SILVOPASTORAL SYSTEMS
3. OPTICAL SENSORS
COMBINED WITH DECISION
TOOLS FOR PROVIDING
FIELD-SPECIFIC GUIDELINES
ON NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT.
Solution that allows
farmers to avoid
having to pay the full
up-front cost

5. 5
Designing agricultural investment and policy to provide up-front finance and longer term rewards for
mitigation practices will help reach larger numbers of farmers than specialized mitigation
interventions (Wollenberg te al., 2012).
SUBSIDIES
Smart public subsidies
could be the solution to
overcome
Initial barriers/ establishment
costs for carbon financing to
engage a minimum threshold of
farmers to make carbon finance
viable

6. 6
DECEMBER 2015
16 countries had
provided costs
associated with
agricultural and land
use mitigation
measures
The challenge is to fill in the cost data gap,
especially for projects that benefit
smallholder farmers
LACK OF DATA

7. 7
Could potentially increase the
costs of implementing
mitigation actions
MONITORING, REPORTING AND VERIFICATION (MRV)
Drive down costs while also
increasing the quality of MRV
systems (Basak, 2016b)
Coordination with existing data-gathering
and management systems

8. 8
Synergies between adaptation and mitigation
ESSENTIAL FOR ACHIEVING MITIGATION
Adaptation becomes the entry point to
implement practices that can have
benefits of both adaptation and
mitigation
GHG emissions reduction may be achieved more
rapidly if there is a widespread implementation of
adaptation practices with mitigation co-benefits
(Martinez-Baron, et al., 2018).

9. 9
SCALING BEST PRACTICES
Appropriate practices,
technologies or models
Supportive institutional
arrangements, policies and
financial investments at
local to international levels
REQUIRES BOTH

10. 10
GENDER
These activities could present benefits steered
towards men and therefore could reinforce gender
roles that are often disempowering to women.
Women should
be included in
decision
making roles at
all project
management
levels (Shames,
et al., 2012).

11. 11
Big issue: Who has the right to benefit from sequestered carbon or emissions
reductions? Policies on this topic are left to the host country.
LAND TENURE AND CARBON RIGHTS
In many countries land has been
adjudicated but most people don't
actually have title deeds to their land
The latter becomes a barrier to implement
projects that consider returns in the long
run.

12. 12
Linking international finance with a range of existing
credit and insurance institutions and providing
innovative mechanisms to reduce risk
CLIMATE FINANCE
Public Private+ Adaptation and mitigation
(synergies)

13. 13
Implemented
Examples

14. 14
RICE IN VIETNAM
Enhance capacity for
policy-makers, private
sector partners and
farmers; build national
capacity for NDC
implementation,
mobilize domestic and
international financial
sources
Government should
improve institutions
and policies.
AWD has high potential for GHG
emission reduction and results in
higher returns of 9.43% to 22.91%
(equivalent to 2.16 to 5.67 million
VND/ha as compared to
conventional rice cultivation).

15. 15
LIVESTOCK IN EAST AFRICA
The increased use of
biodigestors in intensive dairy
can cut emissions from
manure by 60 to 80%.
Increased production of improved forages
in mixed systems and intensive dairy could
reduce emissions intensities:
Kenya by 8-24%.
Ethiopia up to 27% on mixed
systems
3
Improving the management of
grazing for pastoral systems.
(Ericksen et. al., 2018)

16. 16
LIVESTOCK IN EAST AFRICA
Some other barriers relevant to the implementation of practices for improving the efficiency
of livestock production involving intensification are:
Cost of the displacement of a large
portion of the rural population.
Attracting investments.
Low institutional capacities.
Finance for adaptation, which is a
greater priority and represents the bulk
of donor commitments.

17. 17
SILVOPASTORAL SYSTEMS
IN COLOMBIA
The GHG mitigation potential
of converting 3.8 million ha is
estimated at about 28.9
million t/CO2e/year.
Area could be reduced drastically to
approx. 500.000 ha. if elements such
as protected areas, land use vocation,
and capacity of ranchers to implement
these systems are considered.
World Bank (2012): Colombia can expand
Intensive Silvopastoral Systems (ISS) to
about 3.8 million ha in various areas of the
country

18. 18
Fig. 38 MAC curve – Silvopastoral systems

19. 19
Mitigation actions can generate interesting returns on investments but barriers such as
low capacity, weak institutions and policies, lack of financial resources to implement
actions and appropriate MRV systems will definitely determine the future of the
implementation of these existing technologies
Developing transformative
technical options to achieve the
mitigation targets required
Massively implementing
technologies that already exist
TWO MAIN CHALLENGES
1
2

20. 20
CCAFS is led by
Thank you
a.m.loboguerrero@cigar.org