CSA concept as given by FAO and its applocation in india and some initiative taken by Indian government to combat climate change

1. “CLIMATE - SMART AGRICULTURE :
MAKING AGRICULTURE SMART TO COMBAT CLIMATE CHANGE”
-: Speaker :-
SONDARVAYAGNESH M.
Department of Agril. Extension
BACA,
Anand Agricultural University
Anand - 388110
Gujarat, India
A
SEMINAR
ON
1

2. Content
1. Introduction
2. CSA concept
3. CSA approaches
4. Roles of institutions
5. Capacity Development
6. CSA Policy and Programmes in
India
7. Research review
8. Conclusion
2

3. Introduction
 Change is nature’s law, it is inevitable, and if it is by the virtue of nature is
welcome.
 Agriculture is also prone to the climate change which directly and
indirectly affecting the farming practices and crop yields.
 Farmers face many problems due to climate change.
3
3

4. FOOD SECURITY
“Food security exists when all people, at all times, have
physical, social and economic access to sufficient,
safe and nutritious food which meets their dietary
needs and food preferences for an
active and healthy life.”
-World Food Summit, 1996
4Source: FAO, 20124

5. (Source: Climate-Smart Agriculture Sourcebook, FAO -2013) 5

6. What is Climate Change?
Climate change refers to the variation in the Earth's global
climate or in regional climates over time.
UNFCCC defines climate change as “a change of climate which
is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the
composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to
natural climate variability observed over comparable time
periods.”
6

7. Why the Climate change?
Natural Causes
2. Volcanoes
1. Continental drift
4. Ocean currents
3. The earth's tilt
Man made Causes
1. The Industrial pollution
2. The burning of fossil fuels
3. Deforestation
4. Agriculture
Climate change
8

8. HISTORY OF CSA
 2009: Term Climate-Smart Agricultural development
 2010: 1st Global Conference on Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change
in The Hague - the concept of CSA was presented.
 2012: At the 2nd Global Conference in Hanoi, Vietnam: Climate-Smart
Agriculture Sourcebook advanced the CSA concept intending to benefit
primarily smallholder farmers and vulnerable people in developing countries.
 2013: 3rd Global Conference in Johannesburg, South Africa, discussions began
on a climate smart agriculture alliance.
 2014: Climate Summit in New York, the Global Alliance for Climate-Smart
Agriculture Action plan was presented.
 There have been three Climate-Smart 88Agricultural Global Science
Conferences:
 Wageningen, Netherlands, Oct 24-26 2011
 Davis, CA March 20-22 2013
 A third in LeCorum Montpellier France, March 16-18. 2015
9

9.  An integrated approach to developing technical, policy and investment
conditions to achieve sustainable agricultural development for food security
under climate change.
 It integrates the three dimensions of sustainable development (economic, social
and environmental) by jointly addressing food security and climate challenges.
 CSA brings together practices, policies and institutions that are not necessarily
new but are used in the context of climatic changes, which are unfamiliar to
farmers.
 What is also new is the fact that the multiple challenges faced by agriculture
and food systems are addressed simultaneously and holistically, which helps
avoid counterproductive policies, legislation or financing.
CSA CONCEPT
10

10. Objectives of CSA
11

11. Overview of CSA
Addresses the complex interrelated challenges of food security,
development and climate change, and identifies integrated
options that create synergies and reduce trade-offs
Recognizes that these options will be shaped by specific country
contexts and capacities as well as socio- economic and
environmental situations
Assesses the interactions between sectors and the needs of
different stakeholders
Identifies barriers to adoption (esp. for farmers), and provides
appropriate solutions in terms of policies, strategies, actions and
incentives
12

12. Seeks to create enabling environments through a better
alignment of policies, investments and institutions
Strives to achieve multiple objectives with the understanding that
priorities need to be set and collective decisions made on
different benefits and trade-offs
Prioritizes the strengthening of livelihoods (esp. those of
smallholders) by improving access to services, knowledge,
resources (including genetic resources), financial products and
markets
Addresses adaptation and builds resilience to shocks, especially
those related to climate change
13

13. Considers climate change mitigation as a potential
secondary co-benefit, especially in low-income,
agricultural-based populations
Seeks to identify opportunities to access climate-related
financing and integrate it with traditional sources of
agricultural investment finance
14

14.  CSA contributes to the
achievement of sustainable
development goals: economic,
social and environmental.
 Uses green economy’s need for
more resource efficiency and
resilience.
 Sustainable intensification:
focuses on availability dimension
of food security (CSA covers also
accessibility, utilization and stability)
CLIMATE-SMART AGRICULTURE
Sustainable
intensification
Green Economy
Sustainable
development
Links to Previous Approaches
15

15. So what’s new about it ?
Harmonization
and
synchronization of
practices and
policies
Avoiding
contradictory and
conflicting policies
by internally
managing trade-
offs and synergies
Approach to guide
the needed changes
of agricultural
systems to address
food security and
climate change
Not a new agricultural system or a set of practices
16

16. Supporting Institutions
17

17. CSAAPPROACHES
Landscapes management
Water management
Soils management
Energy management
Genetic resources management
18

18. Crops Livestock Fisheries Forestry
CSA requires coordination across agricultural sector
19

19. Producing and sharing
technical knowledge
Providing financial services,
credit and access to markets
Supporting the co-
ordination of collaborative
action
Institutions that produce and share
information and help people
translate this information into
knowledge.
These institutions include
organizations and institutional
arrangements providing
 credit,
 insurance,
 social safety nets,
 payments or rewards for
environmental services.
Institutional arrangements
are needed to facilitate co-
ordination across
organizations and sectors
(e.g. through networks and
knowledge-sharing
platforms).
Roles of institution

20. WEATHER INFORMATION
 Current weather forecasts
 Seasonal forecasts
 Longer-term climate trends
AVAILABLE OPTIONS INFORMATION
 Climate smart technologies
 Climate smart practices
SERVICES TO FARMERS
21

21. FARMER
EXTENSION
ORGANIZATIONS
EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS
FINANCIAL
INSTITUTIONS
FARMER /
COMMUNITY BASED
ORGANIZATIONS
MINISTRIES/DEPAR
TMENTS/AGENCIES
OF GOVERNMENT
INTERNATIONAL
AND REGIONAL
ORGANIZATIONS
NGOs
RESEARCH
ORGANIZATIOS
INPUT
DEALERS
22

22. CSA IN INDIA
23

23. V- KVK SMS Advisory Community Radio
Weather Information
Hiring Agricultural
Implements
New initiatives in KVK
24

24. •To enhance resilience of Indian agriculture (including crops, livestock and fisheries) to
climatic variability and climate change
•To demonstrate site specific technology packages on farmers’ fields to cope with current
climatic variability
•To enhance the capacity of scientists, farmers and other stakeholders in climate resilient
agricultural research and awareness of impacts
Project Components
• Strategic Research
• Technology Demonstrations
• Capacity Building
• Sponsored / Competitive
research grants
Program areas
•Rainfed crop production systems
•Irrigated crop production systems
•Horticultural production systems
•Soil, water and nutrient management
•Monitoring of GHGs
•Resource use efficiency in agriculture
•Improved machinery for adaptation
and mitigation
•Livestock and Dairy sector
•Fisheries including Aquaculture
National Innovations on Climate Resilient Agriculture (NICRA)
Objectives
25

25. Implementation
framework
Plan of Work
PRA
ICAR
FGD
NRM
Div.
Extn.
Div.
Baseline
CRIDA ATARI
Action plan
KVK Interventions
Impact & up-scalingNICRA
village
ZMC for Monitoring
& Third party
evaluation
Village level Climate Risk
Management Committee
(VCRMC)
(10-20 villagers)
26

26. 27

27. 100 Districts selected for
Technology Demonstration
National Innovation on Climate ResilientAgriculture
N
Cold wave
Cold wave & Drought
Cold wave, Drought &Frost
Cyclone
Cyclone &Flood
Drought
Drought & Cold wave
Drought & Flood
Drought & Heat wave
Drought & Salinity
Flood
Flood & Cyclone
Flood & Salinity
Frost
Frost & Cold wave
Heat wave & Cold wave
Heavy rainfall High
temperature Salinity &
Water logging Scanty
rainfall &Salinity Water
stress
Water stress, Soil erosion &Soil acidity
28

28. Village Climate Risk Management Committee
Comprises of 12-20 members, represent the community
• Elected President, Secretary and Treasurer
• Manages the custom hiring centre for farm machinery
• Under takes repair, maintenance of equipment
• Mobilizes fellow farmers for capacity building programs
• Collectively decide the implementation of interventions
& pass appropriate resolutions
• Operates bank account, deposits include hiring charges
and farmers share towards critical inputs like seed, breeds &
other inputs
29

29. Small Farm Mechanization through Custom Hiring Centres
• Facilitates timely sowing operations in
narrow windows of moisture availability
• Precision planting, good germination and
better crop stand
• Access to small & marginal farmers of costly
machinery
• Crop residue recycling
• Water saving, in situ moisture conservation
• Increase in crop productivity
• Labor saving
• Multiple operations e.g. planter & rotavator
Most Popular Implements in CHCs
• Zero till drill
• Drum seeder
• Rotavator
• Happy seeder
• Ridge & furrow planter
• Multi crop planter
• Multi crop thresher
• Power tiller 30

30. In XII Plan period, the vision is to develop at least 50 CSVs by 2016-17.
These villages should act as hubs for upscaling climate smart practices under NMSA.
Vision is to have all these villages fully comply with climate resilience practices like:
1. Utilization of complete surface water harvesting potential
2. Mandatory ground water recharge structures
3. Fertilizer use only based on soil testing
4. Nitrogen application based on better products
5. Use of energy efficient pumps for water lifting
6. No burning of crop residues; mandatory greening of waste lands with tree cover
7. Green and brown manuring to the extent feasible
8. Water saving paddy cultivation practices (direct seeding, AWD etc.)
9. Mandatory vaccination of livestock for seasonal diseases
10. Livestock feeding, housing and manure management that emit least methane
11. All farmers to have access to agro advisories through mobiles
12. Appropriate weather insurance packages identified
Towards Developing Climate Smart villages
31

31. Climate-Smart Village Programme
Participatory approach of promoting CSA
• Strategy
• Integrated farmer participatory approach
• Builds on local knowledge and plans
• Precision agronomy principles
• Use of modern ICT tools
• Capacity strengthening and technology targeting
32

32. 1800
1300
800
300
-2002010 2012 2014 2016
NumberofClimate
SmartVillages
End of
2016
Climate Smart Villages In India
Source: Pramod aggrawal (2015), CIMMYT-CCAFS
33

33. Key Interventions in a Climate-Smart Village
34

34. 35

35. 1. To undertake a capacity gap analysis in the climate smart technologies and practices.
To establish the existing capacity on CSA technologies and practices at the national and county
levels
2. To develop training materials to support the capacity development gaps identified.
To facilitate participatory stakeholder engagement workshops to develop and test training
materials
3.To strengthen institutional and community capacity and partnership to deliver climate
services and products.
To retrain and re-orient the rural agricultural advisory services in selected counties to
deliver on CSA technologies and practices
1. Enhance meteorological service capacity to downscale weather and climate information for
agriculture
2. Build capacity to collect and use agro-meteorological data to inform decision making by
end-users
3. Package climate information into user friendly formats and disseminate to end users
4. Support CS Agricultural demonstration centres in the counties
5. Coordination and integration of the various climate change units
6. Set up national and county platforms for innovation funds for CSA
To develop and strengthen capacity to support CSA technologies and practices
36

36. To disseminate information on CSA technologies and practices.
 To develop a communication strategy
 To coordinate and promote a network of CSA communities to facilitate
information and knowledge sharing and exchange
 To use of traditional media with innovative media for information
dissemination, Like employing ICT, print media,, drama, song, dance, etc.
To develop, re-package and disseminate knowledge products and services to promote CSA
technologies and practices.
 To downscale weather and climate information
 To strengthen collection and utilization of agro-meteorological data to inform
CSA
 To re-package climate information into user friendly formats
 To promote private-public partnerships in developing climate products and
services.
 To use these products to support and equip the Climate Change Resource Centre
To generate and disseminate knowledge and information to support CSA
37

37. National
Solar Mission
National
Mission for
Enhanced
Energy
Efficiency
National
Mission on
Sustainable
Habitat
National
Water
Mission
National
Mission for
Sustainable
Agriculture
National
Mission for
Sustaining
the
Himalayan
Ecosystem
National
Mission for a
Green India
National
Mission on
Strategic
Knowledge
for Climate
Change
National Action Plan
on Climate Change
(NAPCC)
38

38.  To make agriculture productive, sustainable, remunerative and
climate resilient;
 To adopt comprehensive soil health management practices based
on soil fertility status;
 To optimize utilization of water resources through efficient water
management;
 To conserve on-farm resources through appropriate resource
conservation technologies;
 To develop capacity of farmers & stakeholders in the domain of
climate change adaptation and mitigation measures;
 To pilot models in select blocks by mainstreaming rainfed
technologies and leveraging resources ;
 To establish an effective inter and intra Departmental/Ministerial
co-ordination for accomplishing key deliverables of NMSA
NMSA Objectives
39

39. Newly launched CSA related schemes in India
40

40. CSA IN GUJART
SOLAR CO-OPERATIVE
SAUNI YOJANA
SOIL HEALTH CARD SCHEME
41

41. BUILDING SYNERGIES
International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), New Delhi;
ICAR-Agricultural Technology Application Research Institute (ATARI),
Ludhiana, Punjab
Haryana State Department of Agriculture (DOA) developed guidelines for
mainstreaming the Climate-Smart Village (CSV) Programme through Local
Adaptation Plan of Action (LAPA) in India.
42

42. Source: Aryal et al. (2015), CIMMYT-CCAFS
Linkages among NAPCC, SAPCC, LAPA and Climate Smart Villages (CSVs)
42
43

43. Name of Project Agency Focus Area
Climate Change Adaptation in Rural
Areas of India (CCA‐RAI)
GiZ, MOEFCC Implementation in 4 states ‐ MP, Rajasthan,
TN, and WB. Supported SAPCC in 18 states
Climate Smart villages CGIAR‐CCAFS Haryana, Bihar, Punjab and
Maharashtra – 1000 villages
Climate Change Adaptation (in semi‐
arid regions)
Watershed Organisation Trust
(WOTR)
Maharashtra, MP, Rajasthan, Telangana,
Andhra Pradesh, Orissa, Jharkhand
Programme on Sustainable Agriculture,
Livestock , water resource management
and others
BAIF Development Research
Foundation
Multiple states across country
Small Holder Agriculture & Climate
Change and Natural Resource
Management
Oxfam (India) through
numerous grassroots NGOs
Assam, Bihar, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, Orissa,
Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand
Toolkit to enable local governments to
develop climate resilience
ICLEI Three cities: Shimla, Bhubaneswar and
Mysore.
strategies and plans of action Adapting
to Climate Change in
Urbanising Watersheds (ACCUWa)
ATREE Karnataka, Tamil Nadu
Adaptation through collaborations and NGOs
44

44. 1. Water conservation and water harvesting.
2. Drought proofing including afforestation and tree plantation .
3. Irrigation canals.
4. Provision of irrigation facility to land owned by SC, ST/beneficiaries under
IAY.
5. Renovation of traditional water bodies.
6. Land development .
7. Flood control and protection works including drainage in water logged areas.
8. Rural connectivity to provide all weather access.
9. Agriculture related works
10.Livestock related works
11.Fisheries related works
12.Works in coastal areas
13.Rural drinking water related works
14.Rural sanitation related works
15.Any other work notified by the GOI
MGNREGA INTERVENTION FOR CSA
45

45. Research Review
46

46. Figure : 1 Distribution of farmers according to their
knowledge level about climate change
Himachal Pradesh Sarkar and Padaria (2015)
n=100
19
19
32
21
9
Very low
Low
Medium
High
Very high
47

47. Table 1 : Distribution of farmers according to major coping mechanism adopted by them to
mitigate the impact of climate change
Sr.
No.
Coping mechanism
Small
Farmers
Medium
Farmers
Large
Farmers
Total Farmers
A. Technological mitigation
1 Change in cropping pattern 60.00 40.00 26.67 42.22
2 Mixed/inter cropping 93.33 76.67 56.67 75.56
3 Cultivating tree crops 0.00 10.00 76.67 28.89
4 Soil organic matter enhancement 46.67 46.67 16.67 36.67
5
Drought resistant crops
13.33 43.33 20.00 25.56
6 Mixed farming system 93.33 76.67 43.33 71.11
B. Socio-economic factors
7 Reduced consumption expenditure 60.00 50.00 0.00 36.67
8 Shifting to other profession 80.00 50.00 20.00 50.00
9 Borrowing 86.67 50.00 10.00 48.89
10 Crop insurance 6.67 16.67 10.00 11.11
11 Selling of land and livestock 26.67 6.67 3.33 12.22
12 No response 6.67 23.33 23.33 17.78
Karnataka
n=250
48 Asha et al. (2012)

48. 48
Adapted measures Yes (%) No (%) Don’t know (%)
1 Intercropping 92 08 00
2 Rain water harvesting 29 70 01
3 Mulching 95 05 00
4 Zero tillage 00 12 88
5 Improved varieties 52 40 08
6 ITK knowledge to control
disease, insects and pests
95 05 00
7 Use of insurance 00 25 75
8 Agroforestry 69 29 02
9 Crop rotation 37 52 11
Table 2 : Distribution of farmers according to coping and adaptive
strategies adopted by them to combat impact of climate change
Shukla et al. (2015)Sikkim
n= 300
49

49. Sr.
No.
Particulars No. Per cent Rank
A. Personal constraints
1 Small size fragmented land holdings 90 60 I
2 Low literacy level 84 56 II
3 Inadequate knowledge of how to cope or build resilience 68 45 III
4 Traditional belief /practice on the related farming practices 46 31 IV
B. Institutional constraints
5 Poor extension service on climate risk management 108 72 I
6 Poor access to information source 93 62 II
7 Non availability of institutional credit 78 52 III
C. Technical constraints
8 Non availability of drought tolerant variety (timely) 107 71 I
9 Lack of access to weather forecasting technology and poor reliability on it 99 66 II
10 Highly dependent on monsoon 96 64 III
11 High cost of irrigation facilities 69 46 IV
12 Difficulties in shifting to different cropping patterns in short duration of
time
63 42 V
13 Lack of technical know how on climate change and its consequences and
adaptation strategies
60 40 VI
Karnataka Kumar et al. (2013)
Table : 3 Distribution of farmers according to constraints faced by them in
adoption to climate vulnerability
n=150
50

50. Preferences/expectations No. Per
cent
Rank
Research
To develop varieties that could tolerate drought 43 73.33 II
Appropriate and accurate forecasting / forewarning techniques 46 76.67 I
Timely visits of the scientists/extension workers for rendering timely
advisory on the agronomic practices
38 63.33 IV
To develop low cost inter cultivation implements suitable for dry lands 41 68.33 III
Formulation of contingency plans well in advance to cope with the crisis
and creating awareness among farmers
36 60.00 V
Extension
Voluntary organizations should take initiation to construct farm ponds
and water harvesting structures
44 71.66 I
Awareness and guidance on relief programmes 26 43.33 III
Timely financial support from the Govt. bodies to face the crisis the
losses
40 66.66 II
Utilizing mass media for dissemination of ameliorative measures to save
the crop
23 38.33 IV
Praveena et al. (2014)Hyderabad
Table 4: Distribution of farmers according to preferences/expectations from research
scientists and extension officers to overcome drought n=60
51

51. Figure 2 : Distribution of farmers according to their Levels of preference
by scoring and bidding (WTP) for rice-growing technologies
4
3
1
2 2
3
2
1
3
4 44 4
1 1
2
4
2
1
3
2
3
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
RWM SRI LLL IS INM GM LCC DTV CD WA CI
PREFERENCELEVELSCORING/BIDDING
LEVEL OF TECHNOLOGY
Scoring Bidding
Taneja et al. (2014)Bihar
IGP = Indo-Gangetic Plain; WTP = willingness to pay; RWM = rainwater management; SRI = system of rice
intensification; DSR = direct seeding; LLL = laser leveling; IS = irrigation scheduling; INM = integrated
nutrient management; GM = green manure; LCC = leaf color chart; DTV = drought-tolerant variety; CD =
crop diversification; WA = weather advisories; CI = crop insurance.
60
52

52. Figure 3 : Distribution of farmers according to Level of preference by scoring
and bidding for wheat-growing technologies
3
1
2
4
2 2
4
2
4
1
4 4
3 3 3 3
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
ZT FIRB IS LLL INM LCC WA CI
LEVELOFPREFERENCESCORING/BIDDING
LEVEL OF TECHNOLOGY
Scoring Bidding
WTP = willingness to pay; ZT = zero tillage; FIRB = furrow-irrigated raised bed; IS =
irrigation scheduling; LLL = laser leveling; INM = integrated nutrient management; LCC =
leaf color chart; WA = weather advisories; CI = crop insurance.
Haryana Taneja et al. (2014)
60
53

53. 53
25%
66%
29%
Low (< 16.20)
Medium (16.20 to 19.30)
High (>19.30)
Figure 4: Distribution of Extension functionaries according to
awareness about climate change and its effect on agriculture
n=120
Anand Patel et al. (2013)54

54. 67%
28%
33% Low (18 to 52)
Medium (53-64)
High (65-69)
Figure 5: Distribution of extension professionals according to their
knowledge regarding impact of climate change in agriculture
n-=75
Ghanghs et al. (2015)
Hisar 55

55. Table 5 : Distribution of Extension Agents’ according to their Sources of the
Information on Climate Change
Information
source
Very useful Useful Not useful Mean Rank
Boss 186 (64.8) 98 (34.1) 3 (1.0) 2.63 4
Clientele 144 (50.2) 139 (48.4) 4 (1.4) 2.49 7
Colleagues 136 (47.4) 147 (51.2) 4 (1.4) 2.46 8
Training 215 (74.9) 71 (24.7) 1 (0.3) 2.74 2
Research stations 191 (66.6) 91 (31.7) 5 (1.7) 2.63 4
Books and journals 134 (46.7) 142 (49.5) 11 (3.8) 2.43 10
Electronic media 223 (77.7) 60 (20.9) 4 (1.4) 2.76 1
Internet 165 (57.5) 104 (36.2) 18 (6.3) 2.51 6
Bulletins 140 (48.8) 134 (46.7) 13 (4.5) 2.44 9
Conference and
seminar
191 (66.6) 91(31.7) 5 (1.7) 2.65 3
Ale et al. (2016)Nigeria
n=297
56

56. Table 6: Distribution of extension professionals according to their training
needs
No. Title of the Course Mean score Rank
1 Workshop on Promotion of Integrated Pest Management 1.29 VI
2 Workshop on Climate Change And Its Effect on Agriculture & Allied
Fields
1.68 I
3 Workshop on Community Based Natural Resources Management 1.34 V
4 Workshop on Promotion of Organic Farming for Sustainable
Agriculture
1.47 II
5 Workshop on Knowledge Management System And Web Designing
for Agriculture & Allied Fields
1.45 III
6 Workshop on Value Addition And Post Harvest Management of
Agricultural & Horticultural Crops (NHM)
1.41 V
7 Workshop on ICT Application In Agriculture & Allied Fields 1.27 VII
Patel at el. (2015)Anand
n = 100
57

57. Table 7: Distribution of beneficiaries according to impact of Agro Advisory
Service in terms of their technical knowledge
Sr.
No
Knowledge
level
Before After %
Change
Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
1 Low
(0 - 9)
295 38 163 21 -17
2 Medium
(10 - 18)
403 52 465 60 8
3 High
(19 - 28)
77 10 147 19 9
Total 775 100 775 100
Sushil et. al (2015)Raipur
n=775
58

58. Table 8: Distribution of beneficiaries according to impact of Agro Advisory
Service in terms of their adoption of recommended practices
Sr
No.
Adoption
level
Before After %
Change
Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage
1 Low
(0 – 8)
263 34 70 9 -25
2 Medium
(9 - 16)
364 47 473 61 14
3 High
(17 - 24)
147 19 232 30 11
Total 775 100 775 100
Raipur Sushil et. al (2015)
n=775
59

59.  Mrs. S. Meenakshi Ammal
 Allikundam NICRA Village of Kovilpatti Centre
 8 acres of landunder cotton cultivation.
 SVPR 2 variety was grown during Rabi 2014-15.
 series of AAS bulletins were issued which was followed as such by the farmer.
Success story of a farm woman
Higher profit obtained by Mrs. Meenakshi Ammal is attributed to:
 She followed all the AAS issued and carried out all farm operations in time.
 She avoided insecticide spraying two times due to rainfall forecast.
60

60. Details of AAS issued to Meenakshi Ammal at Allikundam
Date Advisory given Reason behind the issue of AAS
19-08-2014 Initiate sowing/ seed treatment Start of pre-monsoon rain
06-09-2014 Gap fill on the 10th day For optimum plant stand in the field
20-09-2014 Thinning For optimum plant density in the field
08-10-2014 Avoid spraying of insecticides About rainfall 22 mm was expected
15-10-2014 0.5 % urea and 1% KCl spray to
check nutrient deficiency
Sufficient moisture available due to rain
22-10-2014 Nipping of terminal buds To arrest vegetative growth
04-11-2014 Foliar spray of TNAU Cotton Plus To mitigate mid season drought and
reduce flower and square shedding
19-11-2014 Spray to control Bacterial leaf
blight
Moist and humid conditions favorm leaf
blight disease
26-11-2014 Imidacloprid 100 ml ha-1 or NSKE
3% spray
To control leaf hopper infestation due to
humid weather
31-01-2015 Harvesting during morning time
and proper storage
To harvest quality kapas to fetch higher
price in market.
61

61. Comparison of BC ratio analysis between Meenakshi Ammal AAS and
non-AAS farmers in rainfed cotton
Input details AAS Farmer Non-AAS Farmer
Field preparation cost (` ha-1) 1500 1500
Seed cost (` ha-1) 1900 1900
Seed treatment (` ha-1) 650 50
Fertilizer cost (` ha-1) 4850 7300
Labour cost (Weeding, Nipping, spraying
of fertilizers and pesticides) (` ha-1)
4750 4500
Cost of plant protection (` ha-1) 9500 14000
Harvesting (Transport and picking) 7500 5500
Cost of cultivation (` ha-1) 30650 34750
Kapas yield (q ha-1) 25.5 21.25
Price of cotton (` q-1) 2800 2800
Total income (` ha-1) 70,700 59,500
Net profit (` ha-1) 40,050 24,750
Benefit cost ratio 2.30 1.71
62

62. CASE STUDY
63

63. 63
 Organization(s) Involved:
• Centre for Development Informatics (CDI)
• International Development Research Centre (IDRC)
• University of Manchester, UK
• Timeframe 2007 – 2011
 Location/Region:
• Adi tribal community, Siang river valley and foothills of the Eastern Himalayas, Arunachal Pradesh
State, North-East India
 Condition:
• Smallholders and practice slash-and-burn cultivation for subsistence, and production is low.
• 40 % of the population live below the poverty line.
• The environmental conditions are hard: mountainous terrain, regular natural catastrophes and
irregular rainfall during the wet season.
 Primary Objective:
• To provide better information about climate-smart agriculture in order to raise awareness and
adoption of practices that are sustainable.
• The aim of such practices is to increase productivity, resilience, mitigate greenhouse gas emissions
and enhance food security and development.
 Expected Results:
• The adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices by the beneficiaries is the main expected result.
eArik : Using ICTs to Facilitate "Climate Smart Agriculture" among Tribal Farmers of
North East India
(Saravanan, R. 2011. http://www.niccd.org)
64

64. 65

65. 65
 Results To Date:
•44 % of farmers implemented climate-smart practices on rice
•92 % of farmers implemented climate-smart practices on mandarin
•42 % of farmers reported increased production of rice
•29 % of farmers reported increased production of mandarin
•55 % of farmers moved from slash-and-burn to settled cultivation
•Increase of income
 Success Factors:
• It is estimated that the e-Arik approach is 3.6 times cheaper than a conventional
agricultural extension system and that farmers can access information 16 times faster.
• each farmer is saving – on average – Rs.2,400 (US$53) per year in fuel costs due to
journeys to the agricultural extension office that would previously have had to be made,
but which can now be foregone. (Saravanan 2008a).
 Critical success factors :
•Use of trusted local intermediaries between experts and farmers
•Appropriate use of a wide variety of ICTs
•Multi-stakeholder partnership
 Scale-Up Potential:
• A scale-up phase of the project is planned with further government funding.
• The goal is to replicate the project in the other seven north-east states of India.
• There, a greater emphasis will be on the use of mobile phones. 66

66. Conclusions
75
 CSA brings together practices, policies and institutions that are not
necessarily new but are used in the context of climatic changes which is
prime requirement in arena of climate change.
 Farmers possessed low level of knowledge regarding climate change, and
they adopted traditional methods to mitigate the impact of climate change.
Small land holdings, poor extension services and non availability of stress
tolerant verities were the major problems faced by the farmers in adoption to
climate change.
 Extension functionaries were having medium level awareness about impact
of climate change on agriculture. They used electronic media, training and
conferences and seminars as major sources of information for climate
change. They needs training on climate change related aspects.
67

67. 67
68