Download to read offline
![Ag and LULUCF emissions: huge
IPCC AR4 GHG emissions by sector in 2004 [Figure 1.3b].
5) Including agricultural waste burning and
savannah burning (non-CO2). CO2 emissions
and/or removals from agricultural soils are
not estimated in this database.
6) Data include CO2 emissions from
deforestation, CO2 emissions from decay
(decomposition) of above-ground biomass
that remains after logging and deforestation,
and CO2 from peat fires and decay of drained
peat soils. Chapter 9 reports emissions from
deforestation only.
30.9%](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/201712restorationccandwhynot-171207202632/75/Land-restoration-climate-change-and-why-cheap-stuff-doesn-t-get-done-52-2048.jpg)
![Mitigation? Adaptation?
Improved carbon
sink management
[M] Minimized
deforestation and
forest degradation
[M]
Improved adaptive
capacity of the society
[A]
Diminished release
of GHG to the
Atmosphere [M]
Improved
livelihood [A]
Sustainable
forest
management [M]
Reduced loss of
soil carbon stock
[M]
Enhances carbon
sinks [M]
Afforestation and
reforestation [M]
Biodiversity
conservation [A]
Agroforestry
[M] [A]
Soil and water
conservation [A]
Better landscape
management [M] [A]
Improved
agricultural
productivity [A]
Enhanced ecosystem
services and goods
availability [A]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/201712restorationccandwhynot-171207202632/75/Land-restoration-climate-change-and-why-cheap-stuff-doesn-t-get-done-69-2048.jpg)
Uploaded byPatrick Worms
Land restoration, climate change and why cheap stuff doesn't get done.
The document discusses large-scale land restoration in Africa, emphasizing agroforestry and the management of trees to improve agricultural productivity and resilience. Successful examples of regreening initiatives are highlighted, demonstrating significant benefits and low costs associated with practices such as farmer-managed natural regeneration. The text advocates for collaboration to enable every farming household in Africa to adopt sustainable practices by 2025.
More Related Content
Similar to Land restoration, climate change and why cheap stuff doesn't get done.
Land restoration, climate change and why cheap stuff doesn't get done.
- 1. Would you beton restoration at scale?
- 3. Jordán, A. (2015)European Geosciences Union
- 5.
- 7. Would you beton restoration at scale in Africa?
- 8. World Bank WorldDevelopment Indicators South Asia 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 KgperHectare Sub-Saharan Africa Latin America East Asia Cereal yields by region, 1960-2005
- 12. And yet there’shope
- 13. The difference isnot genetics or inputs or machines or an app. It’s just management.
- 14.
- 15. Prevalence of treeson farms
- 16. The full viewshows that trees…
- 17. … and peoplecohabit everywhere. Global population density
- 18. There’s a reasonfor that: trees work.
- 19.
- 20.
- 21. Brazil: oil palm,banana, coffee, timber…
- 22. Liagre F., personalcommunication France: wheat, timber
- 23. Arctic taiga: meat,timber, wood pellets
- 24. Zambia: maize, F.Albida
- 25. Niger: sorghum, millet,F. Albida
- 26.
- 27.
- 28.
- 29. Drought protection oftrees Forestry: most roots close to surface Agroforestry: most roots at depth Root density: meters of rootlets /m3 of soil Root density: meters of rootlets /m3 of soil Depth(cm) Depth(cm)
- 30. Late summer, nophotosynthesis!
- 31. © agroof Late summer,photosynthesis!
- 32. Key concept: theLand Equivalency Ratio
- 33. “The additive maize/cowpeaintercropping option after cotton or maize resulted in an average overall LER of 1.47, no maize grain penalty, and 1.38 t ha−1 more cowpea fodder production compared with sole maize.”
- 34. LER = 1.4+ 0.5 = 1.9• Monoculture teak is not fertilized (not worth it). • Maize is always fertilized • Intercropping maize and teak (with best spacing + pruning + thinning) can get LER values up to 2.0. Teak & Maize
- 35. Densidade: UD1: 81 pl/hectare UD2e Conv: 99 plantas/hectare * * 98% 125% 27% 14% 71% 149% 99% 49% 0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 10,0 12,0 14,0 2011 2012 2013 2014 SAF Biodiverso UD1 SAF Biodiverso UD3 ProduçãodoDendê(ton/hectare) PROJETO SAF DENDÊ Produtividade de Dendê Resultado esperado t/ha(FFB) Year 4 (2011) Year 5 (2012) Year 6 (2013) Year 7 (2014) Castellani et al 2014, Internal Report Oil palm agroforestry Plot 1 (81 pl/ha) ) Oil palm agroforestry Plot 2 (99 pl/ha) Monocrop oil palm* (considering 99 pl/ha) *Average yields at the same age in the same region according to Perez et al. 2007 Viabilidade de extração de óleo de dendê no Estado do Pará. Viçosa, UFV. 2007. http://portal.mda.gov.br/portal/saf/arquivos/view/biodisel/18_-_Dende.pdf Oil palm agroforestry
- 36. 13 Farmer plot managementSampling Frequency Mean (Kg/Ha) Standard error Maize without fertiliser 36 1322 220.33 Maize with fertiliser 213 1736 118.95 Maize with fertiliser trees 72 3053 359.8 Maize with fertiliser trees & fertiliser 135 3071 264.31 2009/2010 season; data from 6 Malawian districts Mwalwanda, A.B., O. Ajayi, F.K. Akinnifesi, T. Beedy, Sileshi G, and G. Chiundu 2010 Malawi agroforestry
- 37. Zinder, Niger, 1980s:0 kg cereals/Ha Some LERs = ∞ !
- 38. Zinder, Niger, today. These5 million hectares of new agroforest parklands are yielding 500,000 tonnes more than before. (Reij, 2012)
- 39. Practices Production ResilienceMitigation Soil fertility Nitrogen fertilizer (e.g. urea) ǂ +++ +/- - Integrated nutrient mgmt. (e.g. banding, microdosing) ǂ ++ - Reduced residue burning ɣ ++ + ++ Reduced tillage / no-till ɣ + + + Green manures (reduced fallow) ɣ +++ ++ Fertilizer trees (e.g. Faidherbia albida) ɣ +++ +++ ++ Conservation agriculture (mulch, no-till, etc.) ɣ ++ ++ ++ Conservation ag with fertilizer trees ǂ +++ ++ +++ Grain, livestock, and fertilizer tree integrationǂ +++ ++ ++ Genetics Improved crop variety (breeding, engineering) ɣ ++ ++ + Water use Water pumps for irrigation (petrol)ǂ +++ ++ -- Irrigation techniques (amount, timing, technology) ɣ ++ ++ +/- Microcatchment (e.g. Zai pits, microbasins, terracing)ǂ ++ ++ Rainwater catchment, storage, delivery (e.g. farm ponds) ǂ ++ ++ Information Technology Planting date recommendations ɣ ++ ++ Sentinel warming systems (drought, pests) ɣ + ++ Africa: Maize-mixed Aggregated Assessment That’s why all best systems involve trees.
- 40. Nutritious, high populationdensity for centuries.
- 41. No trees, nopeople, no nutrition.
- 42.
- 43.
- 44. Some Major RegreeningSuccesses • Niger: 7,000,000 Ha • Mali: 500,000 Ha • Senegal: 200,000 Ha • Ethiopia: > 1,000,000 Ha • Ghana, Kenya, Rwanda – X0,000 Ha each • Several hundred hectares in Somaliland
- 45. Cost of landrestoration with FMNR Place & Binam (2013): • In Niger the actual expenditure on the scaling-up of FMNR has been well below $20 per hectare of adoption.” • Project costs of farmer-managed natural regeneration outscaling in the Maradi Region of were US$14/ha. • The annual recurrent labor costs per hectare by farm households to manage the FMNR were also quite low.
- 46. African Union Second AfricaDrylands Declaration "RECOMMEND AND PROPOSE that the drylands development community, through the African Union, and all collaborating and supporting organizations, commit seriously to achieving the goal of enabling EVERY farm family and EVERY village across the drylands of Africa to be practicing Farmer-Managed Natural Regeneration and Assisted Natural Regeneration by the year 2025."
- 47. Betting on smallfarmers
- 48. FAO, State ofFood and Agriculture 2014 Selected yields by farm size Smallest ¼ of all farms Largest ¼ of all farms
- 49. Small farms arethe bedrock of development. “Asia’s post-war miracle economies emerged by following a recipe with just three ingredients: land reform; export-led, state-backed manufacturing; and financial repression. The process began with the ousting of the landlords. Feudal estates were broken up and divided among small farmers, who also received cheap credit and valuable advice. Smallholder farming requires “grotesque” amounts of labour. But that is a good thing, because countries as poor as Taiwan or South Korea were in the 1950s have labour—and only labour—in abundance." -- The Economist, July 2013 The same applies to today's LDCs.
- 50. The future ofprecision agriculture?
- 51.
- 52. Ag and LULUCFemissions: huge IPCC AR4 GHG emissions by sector in 2004 [Figure 1.3b]. 5) Including agricultural waste burning and savannah burning (non-CO2). CO2 emissions and/or removals from agricultural soils are not estimated in this database. 6) Data include CO2 emissions from deforestation, CO2 emissions from decay (decomposition) of above-ground biomass that remains after logging and deforestation, and CO2 from peat fires and decay of drained peat soils. Chapter 9 reports emissions from deforestation only. 30.9%
- 53. Exported carbon (t/ha/yr) Carbon restituted to soil (t/ha/yr) 2 2 4 4 6 6 0 "Modern"agriculure (1 crop a year) 7 tC/ha/yr Intermediate cover crops (2-3 crops a year) 12.5 tC/ha/yr Intermediate cover crops + agroforestry 16.5 tC/ha/yr Food production Soil restitution (fertility) Biofuels (fuelwood, anaerobic digestion…) Storage in biomass (timber) de construction…) Carbon, fertility... and climate
- 54. European agroforestry’s potential amountsto 1/3rd of European Union emissions! Huge mitigation potential EU-28 total emissions (excl. LULUCF), mln T CO2-eq. Source: European Environmental Agency Aertsens et al. estimate: 1400 mln T/year
- 55. Mbow (2012) Huge mitigationpotential Humid Dry
- 58.
- 59.
- 61. Natural catastrophes, trend MunichRe (2011)
- 62. Agroforestry and windresistance Storm Klaus January 2009
- 63. A local forestjust after Klaus
- 64. An agroforestry systemthe summer after Klaus
- 65. C3/C4 plant productivityversus T° Wheat T° (C) Maize
- 66. Microclimatic effect ofcanopy shade Source: CIMMYT Lower T° extends the crops’ grain-filling period.
- 67. > 6% moremilk with tree shade
- 68. Trees, forests andwater: cool insights for a hot world. Ellison et al. (2017) Surface temperature distribution in a mixed landscape with forest. At broader scales: Contributions to water cycles and bioclimates Hesslerová et al., 2013.
- 69. Mitigation? Adaptation? Improved carbon sinkmanagement [M] Minimized deforestation and forest degradation [M] Improved adaptive capacity of the society [A] Diminished release of GHG to the Atmosphere [M] Improved livelihood [A] Sustainable forest management [M] Reduced loss of soil carbon stock [M] Enhances carbon sinks [M] Afforestation and reforestation [M] Biodiversity conservation [A] Agroforestry [M] [A] Soil and water conservation [A] Better landscape management [M] [A] Improved agricultural productivity [A] Enhanced ecosystem services and goods availability [A]
- 70. Intensive agriculture Agroecologicalsystems The transition to sustainability Yield range Net income
- 71. Natural resources Inputs Outputs The presentis win-lose
- 72. Natural resources Inputs Outputs The futurecan be win-win.
- 73. If this isthe future...
- 74. … why doesthe world tend to this?
- 75. Natural Forest 4.1 billion ha Crop Land 1.5billion ha Pasture & Rangelands 3.4 billion ha Wetlands 1.3 billion ha Deserts 1.9 billion ha Planted forests We organise like this… … but the world looks like this. Our institutions can’t handle complexity very well.
- 76. Cultural issues: thislooks like a healthy field but (probably) isn’t…
- 77. …this looks likea mess but (probably) is a healthy field.
- 78. Futurism! Modernity! Begone,old ways!
- 79.
- 80. Our business modelsucks.
- 82. Agrobusiness cashflow: regular saleof inputs Agroecology cashflow: some consultancy That translates into lousy cashflom
- 83. Which leads to Agroecology marketingbudget Agroecology research budget Agroecology Political influence Agrobusiness marketing Agrobusiness research Agrobusiness influence
- 84. Our marketing suckseven more.
- 85.
- 86. Diversification Agroecological approaches Ecological Farming FMNR Sustainable intensification Climate Smart Agriculture Organic Farming Permaculture Holistic Grazing Management FarmingGods Way Conservation Agriculture EverGreen Agriculture Agroforestry Restorative Agriculture Intercropping Fertiliser Tree Technology IPM Push-Pull Perenialisation CAWT Biointensive Agriculture Ecological agriculture Forest Landscape Restoration Biodynamic agriculture Syntropic agriculture 3D Farming Climate Resilient Zero Budget Natural Farming EOA (Ecological Organic Agriculture) Restoration Agriculture Green manure Us? A thousand gurus, each with their favourite vocabulary.
- 87. We forget thatpeople have aspirations.
- 88. This is notaspirational.
- 89.
- 90. To restore land,think of one species over all:Finally: never forget the keystone species:
- 91.
- 92. Patrick Worms Senior SciencePolicy Advisor p.worms@cgiar.org WhatsApp +32 495 24 46 11 https://www.facebook.com/pworms
Editor's Notes
- #5 This is how we normally picture a perfect field: a dense mass of deep green healthy plants. But we know that this picture is only accurate for a few months of every year.
- #6 Second, for almost as many months, its ground is bare. If the wind blows, it looks like this.
- #7 And if a rainstom comes, water erosion takes over.
- #14 Aberdeen, South Africa – 4x more livestock on the left
- #21 Pata Negra pigs in a spanish Dehesa system
- #22 Oil palm agroforestry in Brazil
- #23 Walnut and what agroforestry in France
- #24 One of the world’s largest agroforestry systems: reindeer in the northern taiga. The animals’ dejections fertiise the trees, whose protection helps fodder grow.
- #28 Crop roots are limited to shallow soil horizons. That’s why they need a lot of manure or inorganic fertilizer: deeper nutrients are inaccessible to them. Tree roots pump up nutrients from much deeper soil horizons (tens of meters, depending on species).These make up leaves and twigs which, when they fall to the soil surface, mineralize and release their nutrients for the crops.
- #29 Trees act as rain-catching devices, funneling water down their branches, trunks and roots below the surface, where it becomes available to crops. Trees thus protect crops from dry spells.
- #30 Likewise, crops protect trees from drought. In a forest, at left, most tree rootlets are close to the surface. In an agroforest, on the right, they are forced by the crop roots to expand much lower down. When a drought strikes, most forest rootlets are dessicated. The tree stops growing. But most agroforestry rootlets, being deeper, are fine. The trees keep growing.
- #31 A large farmer needs to homogenize. That reduces labour costs, but brings downsides. This wheat field, in later summer, is wasting 100% of the sunlight and the rainwater falling on it since photosynthesis has stopped.
- #32 In this wheat field, by contrast, there is still some photosynthesis going on – and it will continue until late October.
- #33 32
- #35 Courtesy Meine van Noordwijk
- #40 In their review of Climate Smart Agriculture (defined by the FAO as “agriculture that sustainably increases productivity, enhances resilience (adaptation), reduces/removes GHGs (mitigation) where possible, and enhances achievement of national food security and development goals”), these institutions catalogued the major agricultural interventions suggested. As this chart shows, for Africa’s major crop, the best interventions always involve the use of trees.
- #41 This farmer knows every plant of her plot and can act accordingly, pruning, feeding or watering as needed. Per unit area, her farm beats what the most advanced rich world farmers can achieve, because her LER is so much higher. That is why this system has maintained very high population densities for centuries.
- #42 This is how we normally picture a perfect field: a dense mass of deep green healthy plants. But we know that this picture is only accurate for a few months of every year.
- #44 To date 21 countries have signed onto AFR100, committing 63.3m ha.
- #49 … this astonishing graph from the FAO. They found that no matter which crop or which country you look at, the smallest quartile of farms always outperforms the largest quartile of farms, sometimes by huge amounts. The reason is simple. Small farmers already use the most advanced precision agriculture tool available:
- #50 In poor, labor-abundant economies, not only are small farms more efficient, but because they also account for large shares of the rural poor, small farm development can be a “win-win” proposition for growth and poverty reduction. Asia’s green revolution demonstrated how agricultural growth that reaches large numbers of small farms can transform rural economies and raise enormous numbers of people out of poverty (Rosegrant and Hazell 2000). Recent studies also show that a more egalitarian distribution of land not only leads to higher economic growth but also helps ensure that the growth that is achieved is more beneficial to the poor (World Bank 2007). Small farms also contribute to greater food security, both through feeding their own families and by supplying local markets with foods that may be less costly and less risky than alternative supplies, particularly in regions facing high transport costs. Because they produce more output per hectare than large farms, they also contribute to greater national food self-sufficiency in land scarce countries. Small farm households with cash incomes also have more favorable expenditure patterns than large farms for promoting growth of the local nonfarm economy, including rural towns. They spend higher shares of their incremental income on locally produced goods and services, many of which are labor intensive (Mellor 1976; Hazell and Roell 1983). These demand patterns generate additional income and jobs in the local nonfarm economy, and the incomes thus generated and saved can be reinvested in infrastructure and industry Studwell, an economist, shows that this development pathway is universal: it was followed by Europe, the US, Japan, later by South Korea and Taiwan, and still later by China. Bill Gates had this to say about the book: “I found the book to be quite compelling. Studwell explains economic history in a concise and understandable way. I asked the whole Agriculture team at our foundation to read it because of its especially good insights into the critical role of household farming for economic development”.
- #52 I hope to have convinced you of the immense potential of agroforestry. But we’re not done. Another aspect of resource efficiency is how this relates to climate change.
- #53 The bad news is that land use in all its guises account for a third of total emissions. And that’s probably an underestimate, since the figure does not include soil organic carbon changes.
- #55 But what’s less well known is the sheer scope for mitigation that agroforestry offers. This paper, a couple of years old, estimates the potential in the EU alone to be about 1.4 Gt/year in the growth phase of the trees, or a full third of EU emissions. Of course, that’s not a permanent feature- mature trees capture relatively little carbon – but it offers a twenty-year grace period to decarbonise other sectors.
- #56 High input carbon practices: Improved crop varieties, crop rotation, use cover crop, conservation agriculture, better use of manure Integrated nutrient management: reduction of leaching, improved N use, improved use of fertilizers Increase availability of water: water management, water harvesting Improved tillage: less soil disturbance, incorporating crop residues and soil organic matter Agroforestry: increase above ground biomass and fuel wood, reduce soil erosion, set-aside,
- #58 The issue is the subject of much ongoing research.
- #59 In adapation, oo, agroforestry offers precious services.
- #60 Second, for almost as many months, its ground is bare. If the wind blows, it looks like this.
- #61 And if a rainstom comes, water erosion takes over.
- #66 On a warming world, the cooling effect of tree shade can also be valuable.
- #67 … and, because we are scientists, we have measured the obvious: yes, it is cooler under the trees! In this case, in the Sahel, the difference is crucial to allow crop plants to keep growing in the hottest part of the day. As hotter climates threaten the southern European countries, this effect will become increasingly precious.
- #68 We know that livestock with access to shade is about 5 to 8% more productive in either milk or meat
- #69 Courtesy Meine van Noordwijk
- #70 The good news is that in land use, it’s really hard to do mitigation without adaptation, and vice versa.
- #76 There are five reasons for the comparative lack of success of agroforestry to date. First, humans divide their management of the world into silos. But in the real world, water, nutrients, gases, seeds and animals move between these silos.
- #77 Second, cultural issues. This looks like a nice healthy field to us, but science shows it is brittle, demands a lot of expensive inputs, and generates relatively little biomass.
- #78 Whereas this complex agroforestry system looks to our eyes to be “primitive” and “underperforming”, despite data showing that its productivity and resilience are much higher while its input needs is much lower.
- #79 Third, modernity. The same 20th century mindset that turned thriving, mixed use cities like Birmingham into concrete lansdcapes only fit for cars…
- #80 ..infected agriculture around the globe. Budding agronomists receive much more instruction about machinery than about agroecosystems. Some never study soils at all, treating it as an inert substrate to which everything needs to be added. That mindset is evident in this Soviet-era poster: despite extolling the prowess of Soviet agricutlure, there is not a single plant to be seen.
- #83 That’s not the result of evil intent, but merely that of a lousy business plan. The strength of agroforestry is that farmers can do it themselves and that it is absurdly cheap. That means that, unlike input-intensive agriculture which can sell seeds and inputs to farmers every year, an agroforestry advisor makes little money from each farmer, and then only once.
- #84 And that, of course, means that agroforesters advertise much less than agribusiness.
- #86 This is how we normally picture a perfect field: a dense mass of deep green healthy plants. But we know that this picture is only accurate for a few months of every year.