CPWF presentation made during the IUCN Workshop on Managing Ecosystems for Food and Nutrition Security, Gland (Switzerland), Dec 2010

1. Water, food and ecosystemsA productivity lens vs. a resilience lens Alain Vidal & Marcela Quintero CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food IUCN Workshop on Managing Ecosystems for Food and Nutrition Security Gland, Switzeland, 13-14 December 2010

4. Ensure they can cope with short-term and long-term changes2

6. What exactly is resilience? The capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change, while retaining essentially the same function, structure, identity, and feedbacks (Walker et al. 2004) Example 4

7. CPWF aims to increase the resilience of social and ecological systems through better water management for food production Through its broad partnerships, it conducts research that leads to impact on the poor and to policy change 5

8. Why is water so central? No food production without water for crops, livestock and fish (quantity and quality) Water links ecosystems with food production through its flow and quality, and its interactions with land, soil, vegetation, animals, people and societies Water is key to productivity and social-ecological resilience 6

9. Productivity vs. resilience Restoring ecosystem services in the Andes

10. Downstream – where the concern for ecosystem services emerged 8 High altitude wetland (paramo) degraded by potato cropping and overgrazing Eutrophication and shrinking of Fuquene Lake (downstream)

11. Restoring upstream and downstream ecosystem services 9 Paramo restored through conservation tillage and oat/potato rotation Water quality and downstream ecosystem services from Fuquene Lake improved

12. Understanding resulting changes on upstream water 10 Conservation agriculture More water stored, restoring the buffer role of paramo Traditional agriculture % Volumetric Water Better soil porosity, filtration, increased carbon storage Conservation agriculture Accumulated Organic Matter (g/g) Traditional agriculture

13. Understanding triggers for change between alternate resilient states 11 Conservation agriculture and paramo restoration supported by revolving fund Annual net income: US$ 2,183/ha Farmers‘ insufficient gain and risk aversion: only 11% converted Revolving fund credit: +180 farmers /year Potato cropping, grazing pressure, degradation of paramo S Annual net income: US$ 1,870/ha

14. CPWF lessons learnt on productivity vs. resilience Water productivity approaches « more crop per drop » tend to Neglect the constraints of the poorest and most vulnerable who do not have the capacity to invest into productivity Overlook ecosystem services Looking beyond water productivity requires using a resilience lens But productivity should not be dropped because it is a source of income and livelihood 12

15. The resilience lens:adaptability vs. transformability Degraded social-ecological systems are often locked in resilient (poverty) traps Institutional and technical innovations mostly enable adaptation (transformation seems to require more time and dramatic changes) Long-term efforts required to strengthen the resilience of desired states Negative feedbacks (innovation adoption vs. risk-aversion) Precariousness 13

16. What are the challenges? Sharing the benefits from water How do we estimate them? How can ecosystem services support enhance food security? How do ecosystem services work in larger basins? Which partners & disciplines are required? More ideas later today… 14

17. Thank you a.vidal@cgiar.org www.waterandfood.org