The document outlines Working Group III's contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report regarding agriculture, forestry, and other land use (AFOLU), highlighting the sector's significant greenhouse gas emissions primarily from deforestation and agriculture. It discusses potential mitigation strategies, including improved land management and reduced food waste, while noting barriers such as financing and institutional capacity. The AFOLU sector offers unique opportunities for both emissions reductions and enhancements in carbon sequestration, with substantial economic mitigation potential projected by 2030.

1. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Chapter 11
Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use
World Bank
Washington D.C., USA 16 April, 2014
Charles W. Rice
Lead Author
Kansas State University

2. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
GHG emissions accelerate despite reduction efforts. Most emission
growth is CO2 from fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes.

3. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
AFOLU emissions for the last four decades

4. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Key agricultural emission categories for 2005.

5. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Regional comparisons for key agricultural emission categories
in 2010

6. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Mitigation activities in the AFOLU sector
• Reductions in CH4 or N2O emissions from croplands, grazing lands, and livestock.
• Conservation of existing carbon stocks, e.g., forests, peatlands, and soil.
• Reductions of carbon losses through management changes or by reducing losses of
carbon-rich ecosystems.
• Enhancement of carbon sequestration in soils, biota, and long-lived products.
• Changes in albedo resulting from land-use and land-cover change that increase
reflection of visible light.
• Provision of products with low GHG emissions that can replace products with higher
GHG emissions.

7. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Agriculture• Cropland
– Reduced tillage
– Rotations
– Cover crops
– Fertility management
– Erosion control
– Irrigation management
• Rice paddies
– Water management
– Fertilizer management
– Plant residue management
No-till
seeding in
USA
Rice fields
in The
Philippines
Maize / coffee fields
in Mexico
• Agroforestry
–Improved
management of
trees and cropland
• Grasslands
– Grazing management
– Fire management
– Fertilization

8. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Conservation Agriculture Cropping
Systems
•Restores soil carbon
•Conserves moisture
•Saves fuel
•Saves labor
•Lowers machinery costs
•Reduces erosion
•Improved soil fertility
•Controls weed
•Planting on the best date
•Improves wildlife habitat

9. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
• An area of increasing concern since AR4 is the potential impact of AFOLU
mitigation measures on food security.
• Efforts to reduce hunger and malnutrition will increase individual food
demand in many developing countries, and population growth will
increase the number of individuals requiring secure and nutritionally
sufficient food production.
• Thus, a net increase in food production is an essential component for
securing sustainable development.
• AFOLU mitigation measures linked to increases in food production (e.g.,
agroforestry, intensification of agricultural production, or integrated
systems) can increase food availability and access especially at the local
level, while other measures (e.g., forest or energy crop plantations) can
reduce food production at least locally

10. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
GHG emissions intensities
Calculations of emission intensities are based on the conservative assumption that
production levels stay the same after the application of the mitigation option. Some
mitigation options can increase production. This would not only improve food
security but could also increase the cost-effectiveness of mitigation actions in the
agricultural sector.

11. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Overview of demand-side mitigation options in the AFOLU
sector
• Reduced losses in the food supply chain
• Globally, rough estimates suggest that ~30─40% of all food produced is
lost in the supply chain from harvest to consumption.
• Changes in human diets towards less emission-intensive
products
• Land use and GHG effects of changing diets require widespread
behavioural changes to be effective; i.e., a strong deviation from current
trajectories (increasing demand for food, in particular for animal
products).
• Demand-side options related to wood and forestry

12. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Mitigation potential for the AFOLU sector by 2030

13. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Economic mitigation potentials in the AFOLU sector by region
by 2030.

14. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Barriers and opportunities
• Socio-economic barriers and opportunities
• Design and coverage of the financing mechanisms
• Scale of financing sources
• Poverty
• Institutional barriers and opportunities
• Transparent and accountable governance
• Lack of institutional capacity
• Ecological barriers and opportunities
• Specific soil conditions, water availability, GHG emission-reduction potential as
well as natural variability and resilience
• Technological barriers and opportunities
• Ability to manage and re-use knowledge assets
• Monitoring, reporting, and verification

15. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Sectoral policies
• Economic incentives
• Emissions trading
• Reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation; sustainable
management of forests; and conservation and enhancement of forest
carbon stocks
• Taxes, charges, subsidies
• Regulatory and control approaches
• Deforestation control and land planning
• Environmental regulation
• Bioenergy targets

16. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Frequently Asked Questions
• How much does AFOLU contribute to GHG emissions and how is this changing?
• Annual GHG emissions (mainly CH4 and N2O) from agricultural production in
2000─2010 were estimated at 10─12% of global emissions (5.0─5.8
GtCO2eq/yr).
• Annual GHG flux from land use and land-use change activities accounted for
9─11% of total GHG emissions (4.3─5.5 GtCO2eq/yr).
• What is the potential of the mitigation options for reducing GHG emissions?
• Global economic mitigation potentials in agriculture in 2030 are estimated to be
0.5─10.6 GtCO2eq/yr.
• Reducing food losses and waste can reduce GHG emissions by 0.6─6.0
GtCO2eq/yr.
• Changes in diet could result in GHG emission savings of 0.7─7.3 GtCO2eq/yr.
• Forestry mitigation options are estimated to contribute 0.2─13.8 GtCO2/yr.

17. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Summary
• AFOLU is unique among the sectors since the mitigation potential is derived from
both an enhancement of removals of greenhouse gases (GHG), as well as
reduction of emissions through management of land and livestock.
• The AFOLU sector is responsible for just under 25% (~9─12 GtCO2eq/yr) of
anthropogenic GHG emissions mainly from deforestation and agricultural
emissions.
• Opportunities for mitigation include supply-side and demand-side options.
• There are barriers to implementation, including accessibility to financing, poverty,
institutional, ecological, technological, diffusion and transfer barriers.
• AFOLU emissions could change substantially in transformation pathways, with
significant mitigation potential from agriculture, forestry, and bioenergy.
• Economic mitigation potential of supply-side measures in the AFOLU sector is
estimated to be 7.18 to 10.60 GtCO2eq/yr at carbon prices up to 100
USD/tCO2eq, about a third of which can be achieved at <20 USD/tCO2eq.
• Polices governing practices need to account for both mitigation and adaptation.

18. Working Group III contribution to the
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Thank you!
Chuck Rice
cwrice@ksu.edu