The document outlines a study on greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation options for agricultural landscapes in East Africa, focusing on strategies that enhance economic development while reducing poverty. It discusses methodologies for scenario analysis, cost-effectiveness, and social return on investment to identify optimal agricultural practices and stakeholder benefits in Kenya, Uganda, and Ethiopia. The anticipated outcomes include insights into GHG mitigation, cost efficiency, and policy frameworks to inform public interventions in agriculture.

1. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EVALUATION OF NATIONAL GHG MITIGATION OPTIONS FOR AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPES IN EAST AFRICA
Moses Masiga - ENR Africa Associates
CCAFS/FAO Expert Workshop on NAMAs: National mitigation planning and implementation in agriculture, Rome, Italy 16-17 July 2012
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates

2. OUTLINE
1.Introduction
2.Methodology: Data sources & Analytical Approaches;
3.National Scenarios – Agricultural Sector Model
4.Current stage of study
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates

3. INTRODUCTION
The study contributes (CCAFS) Pro-poor Climate Change Mitigation: to identify climate change mitigation strategies that reduce poverty among the rural poor in developing countries.
Balancing the need for precise and accurate information with realistic expectations for the effort and expense that can be dedicated to monitoring, reporting and verification costs.
Compatibility with national goals for food security, economic development and trade i.e. sustainable food production & tangible benefits to farmers
Work taking place in Kenya, Uganda and Ethiopia
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates

4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1.Scenarios - What practices, more than others, enhance GHG mitigation in agricultural landscapes and contribute to current and future national economic development?
2.Costs - Which agricultural GHG options are more cost- effective, per unit area or livestock of investment in GHG mitigation, than others, including the projected baseline scenario?
3.Social/ economic efficiency - What agricultural greenhouse mitigation options provide increased economic efficiency, based on SROI, and NPV at national level, above a projected baseline scenario?
4.Stakeholder benefit - What combinations of actions, actors and regulatory arrangements lead to a higher value of benefits being captured at sub-national & national level than others, including projected baseline scenario?
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates

5. Overall Instrument design
•Scenario analysis compares a projected baseline scenario against technically feasible agricultural landscape GHG mitigation practices (2020 & 2030);
•Cost-effectiveness analysis for mitigation options;
•Social Return on investment (and Net present value) for technically feasible options;
•Value/Supply Chain Analysis for GHG mitigation options;
•Agricultural Sector Strategy/model for GHG mitigation versus national economy.
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates

6. Emerging mitigation options
Kenya & Uganda
Ethiopia (Climate Resilient Growth)
Crop & soil management
•Sustainable agriculture land management;
•Nutrient management (fertilisers);
•Tillage & residue management;
•Agroforestry;
Soil nutrient and crop management
•Tillage/residue management
•Watershed-based integrated farming
•Agroforestry? Yield increasing techniques
•Improved seeds
•Irrigation
•Organic and inorganic fertiliser
Livestock and grazing land management
•Grazing intensity – intensification and reduced herd size (productivity)
•Rangeland & pastureland mgt
Livestock and grazing land management
•Enhancing and intensification of animal mix diversification
•Value chain efficiency improvements
•Rangeland and pastureland management
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates

7. Data sources
Databases: Ministry of Agriculture; Livestock Development; KARI & Ministry of Environment & MD; NEMA (Kenya); Ministry of Agriculture & Rural Development; Environment Protection Agency (Ethiopia); Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry & Fisheries; CCU; NEMA; MWE (Uganda); Statistical bureaus
Review of available information on measurement of mitigation potential of agricultural practices (CGIAR, & others), limited awareness & low confidence in monitoring of agricultural interventions has limited progress of agriculture in climate change policy & emissions offset markets.
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates

8. The Social Return on Investment
Steps
Status
Establishing scope; Identify stakeholders;
Involve stakeholders (farmer groups, different farming systems, stakeholder differences)
Completed
Reporting on scope; Identify inputs; Determine value of inputs; Identify outputs; Identify outcomes from GHG options ; Potential financing options or mechanisms
Started
Establish indicators to outcomes; Collect data on outcomes; Establish impact time of outcomes; Valuation of outcomes
Phase II (2012/July- December)
Attribute & Establishing impact of mitigation option; preliminary SROI & NPV estimates
(2012/July- December)
Completing other components of the study
2013 Jan - June
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates

9. 1. Projected scenarios
Scenario analysis based on quasi-experimental design
A projected baseline scenario as the control.
Alternative scenarios one or a combination of feasible/viable adjustments in agricultural landscape GHG mitigation practice.
Using a farming systems, based on regional approach (where a typical farming unit – soils, inputs, outputs and policy environment can be characterised for dynamic scenario building using mathematical programming)
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates

10. Livelihood Zones of Kenya
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates

11. Value chain Analysis: Feasible value chains for managing GHG in agricultural landscapes
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates
Flows inward and outward Production planning: (actors, supporting legal/institutional framework Production: Labour, capital, land and other inputs & costs Inputs: acquisition and extraction: source (local or otherwise), unit cost Sale: food, timber, wood fuel, carbon credits Use: Local & after sale use: food, timber, wood fuel, carbon credits End of life Recycling feedback

12. Integrating GHG mitigation into Agricultural Sector Strategy
1.Describe potential mitigation options/ strategies will be defined. These strategies include crop and livestock production options.
2.Data will be needed on GHG emission levels for all feasible mitigation strategies – Brown et al. 2011; and current study.
3.Agricultural activities will need to be made compatible to mitigation strategies e.g. nitrous oxide mitigation through reduced fertilization.
4.Mathematical structure of the ASM model will need to be modified. This will involve setting up GHG emission & sink accounting equations, validation of baseline emissions & baseline cropping/livestock management practices, and building a GHG policy modules (Schneider and McCarl (2003).
5.Preliminary analysis of policy scenarios e.g. desired tax or subsidy levels, markets for GHG emissions, and monitoring and verification.
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates

13. What we expect to achieve?
Through publication, stakeholder engagement, capacity building events:
1.Show scenarios of GHG mitigation for agricultural landscapes
2.Show the cost effectiveness of GHG mitigation in agricultural landscapes in East Africa
3.Show the social/economic efficiency of GHG mitigation in agricultural landscapes – SROI & NPV;
4.Show the potential contributions/benefits of stakeholders to the process;
5.Propose national policy framework/model for public policy interventions in the agricultural sector for GHG mitigation

14. Current Study Technical Team
1. Eric Mungatana
University of Pretoria
2. Alex Alusa
Prime Minister’s Office – Kenya
3. Assan N’gombe
UNDP – East and Southern Africa
4. Paul Isabirye
Climate Change Unit – Uganda
5. Alice Ruhweza
Independent/ Technical Editing
6. E. Wollenberg
CCAFS
7. Tadesse Woldemariam Gole
Research team
8. Michael Gachanja
Research team
9. Moses Masiga
Research team
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates

15. THANKS...
CCAFS/ENRAfricaAssociates