The implications of ignoring smallholder agriculture in climate-financed forestry projects: empirical evidence from two REDD+ pilot projects

ABSTRACT

Changes in agricultural practices can play a pivotal role in climate change mitigation by reducing the need for land use change as one of the biggest sources of GHG emissions, and by enabling carbon sequestration in farmers’ fields. Expansion of smallholder and commercial agriculture is often one of the main driving forces behind deforestation and forest degradation. However, mitigation programmes such as REDD+ are geared towards conservation efforts in the forestry sector without prominently taking into account smallholder agricultural interests in project design and implementation. REDD+ projects often build on existing re- and afforestation projects without major changes in their principles, interests and assumptions. Informed by case study research and interviews with national and international experts, we illustrate with examples from Ethiopia and Indonesia how REDD+ projects are implemented, how they fail to adequately incorporate the demands of smallholder farmers and how this leads to a loss of livelihoods and diminishing interest in participating in REDD+ by local farming communities. The study shows how the conservation-based benefits and insecure funding base in REDD+ projects do not compensate for the contraction in livelihoods from agriculture. Combined with exclusive benefit-sharing mechanisms, this results in an increased pressure on forest resources, diverging from the principal objective of REDD+. We note a gap between the REDD+ narratives at international level (i.e. coupling development with a climate agenda) and the livelihood interests of farming communities on the ground. We argue that without incorporating agricultural interests and a review of financial incentives in the design of future climate finance mechanisms, objectives of both livelihood improvements and GHG emission reductions will be missed.

Key policy insights

• REDD+ is positioned as a promising tool to meet climate, conservation and development targets. However, these expectations are not being met in practice as the interests of smallholder farmers are poorly addressed.

• REDD+ policy developers and implementers need more focus on understanding the interests and dynamics of smallholder agriculturalists to enable inclusive, realistic and long-lasting projects.

• For REDD+ to succeed, funders need to consider how to better ensure long-term livelihood security for farming communities.

     

Seeing the trees for the carbon: agroforestry for development and carbon mitigation

Land-use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) activities will play an important role in global climate change mitigation. Many carbon schemes require the delivery of both climate and rural development benefits by mitigation activities conducted in developing countries. Agroforestry is a LULUCF activity that is gaining attention because of its potential to deliver climate benefits as well as rural development benefits to smallholders. There is hope that agroforestry can deliver co-benefits for climate and development; however experience with early projects suggests co-benefits are difficult to achieve in practice. We review the literature on agroforestry, participatory rural development, tree-based carbon projects and co-benefit carbon projects to look at how recommended project characteristics align when trying to generate different types of benefits. We conclude that there is considerable tension inherent in designing co-benefit smallholder agroforestry projects. We suggest that designing projects to seek ancillary benefits rather than co-benefits may help to reduce this tension.     

Bridging organizations in agricultural carbon markets and poverty alleviation: An analysis of pro-Poor carbon market projects in East Africa

International agricultural carbon market projects face significant challenges in delivering greenhouse gas mitigation objectives whilst also seeking to provide additional benefits for poverty alleviation. The carbon credit producer (the smallholder farmer) and carbon credit buyer in the carbon market transaction typically operate at different spatial and temporal scales. Buyers operate at a global scale, responding to opportunities for financial speculation and both private and public climate action plans. Farmers operate within households, farms, and immediate agricultural landscapes, pursuing livelihood and food security needs. These different scales often result in mismatches of timing, payment, and knowledge in market transactions and can be partially rectified by project developers who serve to broker the relationship between the farmers and the buyers. We examined eight East African agricultural carbon market projects to determine how project developers function as bridging organizations and minimize the mismatches between these actors. Results show that projects better bridged the timing and payment gap between buyers and producers when project developers provided non-monetary benefits or direct monetary assistance to farmers. However, knowledge gaps remained a significant barrier for farmers wishing to participate in the market. We discuss how project developers brokered relationships in ways that reflected their interests and highlight the limitations, trade-offs, and challenges that must be overcome if win-win outcomes of poverty alleviation and climate change mitigation are to be realized.     

Carbon sequestration in Africa: The land tenure problem

The prospect of using tropical forest projects to sequester significant amounts of atmospheric carbon as one mitigation approach to climate change has received considerable attention. In the Kyoto Protocol, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) aspires to make such projects viable. This article examines the prospect of these projects in Africa, and argues that land tenure is much more than just a set of variables to be changed, and that instead it exists as a prohibitive obstacle to the implementation of afforestation and reforestation sequestration approaches. Five primary tenure problems are examined: (1) the disconnect between customary and statutory land rights, (2) legal pluralism, (3) tree planting as land claim, (4) expansion of treed areas in smallholder land use systems, and (5) the difficulty of using the ‘abandoned land’ category. The pervasiveness of these tenurial issues mean that the prospects for successfully implementing afforestation and reforestation projects in Africa are in reality quite weak. The current project approach to carbon storage in Africa needs to be significantly realigned with African reality in order for sequestration expectations to be practical.     

US public opinion on climate change issues: implications for consensus-building and policymaking

While the Conference of the Parties wrangle at an international scale with climate policy, a quiet set of policies and measures is being implemented at a local scale by municipalities across the globe. This study examines the motivation municipalities have for undertaking policies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, when the theory of free-ridingwould predict that local administrations should find it difficult to unilaterally reduce their emissions for the benefit of the global climate. Through interviews with officials and/or staff in 23 municipalities in the United States enacting climate policy, data are gathered that suggest local government abatement policies are primarily a top—down decision based on what officials or staff members believe to be “good business” or rational policy choices. They are primarily driven by the potential for realised or perceived cost savings and co-benefits rather than by public pressure. Economic data from some dozen municipal projects are analyzed, finding, while municipalities lack sophisticated accounting techniques, some justification for the often-disputed claim that at least initial reductions in emissions can be made at cost savings. In the United States, with the lack of national abatement policies, it is municipalities that are leading the way in beginning to implement mitigation strategies, even if only for initial reductions.     

Maize seed choice and perceptions of climate variability among smallholder farmers

Despite decades of research and interventions, crop yields for smallholder farmers across sub-Saharan Africa are dramatically lower than in developed countries. Attempts to address low yields of staple crops in Africa since the Green Revolution through policies and investments in advanced seed cultivars have had mixed results. Numerous countries have heartily embraced and promoted hybrid cultivars through government subsidy programs and investments in research and seed multiplication. One possible explanation for why these programs have not resulted in more significant yield improvements is the challenge faced by farmers to select cultivars that are suited to their local environmental conditions. The question of what seeds farmers choose is exceptionally complex as it is often affected by local seed availability, the availability of information on seed performance, and the transfer of that information to farmers. At the foundation of this choice are farmers’ perceptions of different seed varieties coupled with their perceptions of climate variability. We examine seed choice in Zambia, a country with decades of hybrid maize seed development and supporting policies. We demonstrate how input subsidy programs and seed market liberalization have led to choice overload and a discontinuity in information exchange between farmers and seed companies. The decision making environment is further complicated by the heterogeneity in growing conditions and its variable impact on seed performance, which complicates characterization of seed duration at the farm level. Perceptions and biases related to climate variability effect seed choice, and potentially lead farmers to make risk averse decisions, which ultimately depress maize yields.     

Global climate policy: will cities lead the way?

While the Conference of the Parties wrangle at an international scale with climate policy, a quiet set of policies and measures is being implemented at a local scale by municipalities across the globe. This study examines the motivation municipalities have for undertaking policies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, when the theory of free-riding would predict that local administrations should find it difficult to unilaterally reduce their emissions for the benefit of the global climate. Through interviews with officials and/or staff in 23 municipalities in the United States enacting climate policy, data are gathered that suggest local government abatement policies are primarily a top–down decision based on what officials or staff members believe to be “good business” or rational policy choices. They are primarily driven by the potential for realised or perceived cost savings and co-benefits rather than by public pressure. Economic data from some dozen municipal projects are analyzed, finding, while municipalities lack sophisticated accounting techniques, some justification for the often-disputed claim that at least initial reductions in emissions can be made at cost savings. In the United States, with the lack of national abatement policies, it is municipalities that are leading the way in beginning to implement mitigation strategies, even if only for initial reductions.     

Implications of global emission policy scenarios for domestic agriculture: a New Zealand case study

Agricultural GHG mitigation policies are important if ambitious climate change goals are to be achieved, and have the potential to significantly lower global mitigation costs [Reisinger, A., Havlik, P., Riahi, K., van Vliet, O., Obersteiner, M., & Herrero, M. (2013). Implications of alternative metrics for global mitigation costs and greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. Climatic Change, 117, 677–690]. In the post-Paris world of ‘nationally determined contributions’ to mitigation, the prospects for agricultural mitigation policies may rest on whether they are in the national economic interest of large agricultural producers. New Zealand is a major exporter of livestock products; this article uses New Zealand as a case study to consider the policy implications of three global policy scenarios at the global, national and farm levels. Building on global modelling, a model dairy farm and a model sheep and beef farm are used to estimate the changes in profit when agricultural emissions are priced and mitigated globally or not, and priced domestically or not, in 2020. Related to these scenarios is the metric or GHG exchange rate. Most livestock emissions are non-CO₂, with methane being particularly sensitive to the choice of metric. The results provide evidence that farm profitability is more sensitive to differing international policy scenarios than national economic welfare. The impact of the choice of metric is not as great as the impact of whether other countries mitigate agricultural emissions or not. Livestock farmers do best when agricultural emissions are not priced, as livestock commodity prices rise significantly due to competition for land from forestry. However, efficient farmers may still see a rise in profitability when agricultural emissions are fully priced worldwide.

Policy relevance

Exempting agricultural emissions from mitigation significantly increases the costs of limiting warming to 2 °C, placing the burden on other sectors. However, there may be a large impact on farmers if agricultural emissions are priced domestically when other countries are not doing the same. The impacts of global and national climate policies on farmers need to be better understood in order for climate policies to be politically sustainable. Transitional assistance that is not linked to emission levels could help, as long as the incentives to mitigate are maintained. In the long run, efficient farmers may benefit from climate policy; international efforts should focus on mitigation options and effective domestic policy development, rather than on metrics.     

Health co-benefits and the development of climate change mitigation policies in the European Union

The 2015 Paris Agreement requires increasingly ambitious emissions reduction efforts from its member countries. Accounting for ancillary positive health outcomes (health co-benefits) that result from implementing climate change mitigation policies can provide Parties to the Paris Agreement with a sound rationale for introducing stronger mitigation strategies. Despite this recognition, a knowledge gap exists on the role of health co-benefits in the development of climate change mitigation policies. To address this gap, the case study presented here investigates the role of health co-benefits in the development of European Union (EU) climate change mitigation policies through analysis and consideration of semi-structured interview data, government documents, journal articles and media releases. We find that while health co-benefits are an explicit consideration in the development of EU climate change mitigation policies, their influence on final policy outcomes has been limited. Our analysis suggests that whilst health co-benefits are a key driver of air pollution mitigation policies, climate mitigation policies are primarily driven by other factors, including economic costs and energy implications.

Key policy insights

• Health co-benefits are quantified and monetized as part of the development of EU climate change mitigation policies but their influence on the final policies agreed upon is limited.

• Barriers, such as the immediate economic costs associated with climate action, inhibit the influence of health co-benefits on the development of mitigation policies.

• Health co-benefits primarily drive the development of EU air pollution mitigation policies.

• The separation of responsibility for GHG and non-GHG emissions across Directorate Generals has decoupled climate change and air pollution mitigation policies, with consequences for the integration of health co-benefits in climate policy.

     

Social risk perceptions of climate change: A case study of farmers and agricultural advisors in northern California

Crop and livestock farmers must respond to climate change, including a range of physical and cultural impacts and risks. In rural northern California, farmers face extreme drought and catastrophic wildfires with increasing frequency. I draw on an extended case study of farmers and agricultural advisors in Siskiyou County to understand how rural agriculturalists perceive risks when navigating climate change discourses. While farmers are changing their management practices in response to the physical effects of climate change, many perceive substantial social risks within their communities if they align themselves publicly with climate change beliefs or actions. Perceived social consequences included loss of access to the benefits of membership in formal and informal farming groups. Efforts focused on educating or convincing farmers of climate science may, in some contexts, increase rather than decrease the perceived social risks of climate action. The framing of climate policies, programs, and practices – especially by public agricultural advisors like Cooperative Extension Advisors and local USDA staff (e.g., Farm Service Agency) – is important not only for increasing farmer participation, but also for reducing perceived social risks associated with climate change. Interventions that focus on livelihood impacts and validate existing land stewardship-oriented values have more potential to increase the pace and scale of climate change mitigation and adaptation in agriculture.     

Systemic vulnerabilities of the global urban-industrial network to hazards

Cities in the USA engage in action on climate change, even as the federal government remains resistant to comprehensive climate policy. While experts generally agree that local level adaptation and mitigation policies are critical to avoiding the worst climate impacts, the degree to which cities communicate climate change issues to their constituents has yet to be fully explored. In this article, we evaluate how US cities communicate climate change-related issues, problems, and policies. We use a computer-assisted approach to evaluate climate change efforts by cities by examining the full text of press releases of 82 large cities in the USA. We first identify who discusses climate change, finding that many large cities in the USA address climate change in their public communication. Second, we examine the content of these discussions. Many cities discuss weather-related concerns in conjunction with broad collaborative efforts to address global warming, while city-based policy discussions focus more on energy and transportation efforts. Third, we evaluate the local factors associated with these discussions. We find that the city’s climate vulnerability is particularly influential in shaping the level and timing of climatic communication.     

Linkages between climate change and sustainable development

Abstract

Climate change does not yet feature prominently within the environmental or economic policy agendas of developing countries. Yet evidence shows that some of the most adverse effects of climate change will be in developing countries, where populations are most vulnerable and least likely to easily adapt to climate change, and that climate change will affect the potential for development in these countries. Some synergies already exist between climate change policies and the sustainable development agenda in developing countries, such as energy efficiency, renewable energy, transport and sustainable land-use policies. Despite limited attention from policy-makers to date, climate change policies could have significant ancillary benefits for the local environment. The reverse is also true as local and national policies to address congestion, air quality, access to energy services and energy diversity may also limit GHG emissions. Nevertheless there could be significant trade-offs associated with deeper levels of mitigation in some countries, for example where developing countries are dependent on indigenous coal and may be required to switch to cleaner yet more expensive fuels to limit emissions. The distributional impacts of such policies are an important determinant of their feasibility and need to be considered up-front. It follows that future agreements on mitigation and adaptation under the convention will need to recognise the diverse situations of developing countries with respect to their level of economic development, their vulnerability to climate change and their ability to adapt or mitigate. Recognition of how climate change is likely to influence other development priorities may be a first step toward building cost-effective strategies and integrated, institutional capacity in developing countries to respond to climate change. Opportunities may also exist in developing countries to use regional economic organisations to assist in the design of integrated responses and to exploit synergies between climate change and other policies such as those designed to combat desertification and preserve biodiversity.

© 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.     

A Decision Matrix Approach to Evaluating the Impacts of Land-Use Activities Undertaken to Mitigate Climate Change

Land-use activities that affect the global balance of greenhouse gases have been a topic of intense discussion during ongoing climate change treaty negotiations. Policy mechanisms that reward countries for implementing climatically beneficial land-use practices have been included in the Bonn and Marrakech agreements on implementation of the Kyoto Protocol. However some still fear that land-use projects focused narrowly on carbon gain will result in socioeconomic and environmental harm, and thus conflict with the explicit sustainable development objectives of the agreement. We propose a policy tool, in the form of a multi-attribute decision matrix, which can be used to evaluate potential and completed land-use projects for their climate, environmental and socioeconomic impacts simultaneously. Project evaluation using this tool makes tradeoffs explicit and allows identification of projects with multiple co-benefits for promotion ahead of others. Combined with appropriate public participation, accounting, and verification policies, a land-use activity decision matrix can help ensure that progressive land management practices are an effective part of the solution to global climate change.     

Trade-offs of different land and bioenergy policies on the path to achieving climate targets

Many papers have shown that bioenergy and land-use are potentially important elements in a strategy to limit anthropogenic climate change. But, significant expansion of bioenergy production can have a large terrestrial footprint. In this paper, we test the implications for land use, the global energy system, emissions and mitigation costs of meeting a specific climate target, using a single fossil fuel and industrial sector policy instrument, but with five alternative bioenergy and land-use policy architectures. These scenarios are illustrative in nature, and designed to explore trade-offs. We find that the policies we examined have differing effects on the different segments of the economy. Comprehensive land policies can reduce land-use change emissions, increasing allowable emissions in the energy system, but have implications for the cost of food. Bioenergy penalties and constraints, on the other hand, have little effect on food prices, but result in less bioenergy and thus can increase mitigation costs and energy prices.     

江西省应对气候变化政策

为应对全球气候变化,各级政府纷纷提出应对气候变化的战略和政策。以江西气候变化和影响事实为基础,分析和总结了目前江西省应对气候变化所采取的政策,包括农业政策、林业政策、水资源管理政策及防灾减灾政策等,得出了政府是应对气候变化的领导者、组织者和政策的制定者的结论,认为政府在应对气候变化行动中具有重要的引导作用。     

Greenhouse gas mitigation co-benefits across the global agricultural development programs

Global agricultural development programs aim to support smallholder farmers and farming communities by strengthening sustainable and resilient food production systems – which can also promote climate change mitigation as a co-benefit by reducing the emissions and enhancing removals of greenhouse gases (GHG). This study presents estimated GHG emissions reductions of almost 100 agricultural development projects over 51 low- and middle-income countries supported by the International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD), USAID-Feed the Future (FTF) Initiative, and Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO, previously DfID). Together, these projects promoted a net GHG emissions reduction of 6.5 MtCO₂e per year. The forest management and promotion of improved agroforestry systems in the project areas contributed the most to the total mitigation co-benefits of the investment portfolios (∼3.9 MtCO₂e/y). Improved crop management with minimum tillage practices, residue incorporation, water management in paddy rice, and the use of organic fertilizers also made a large contribution to the GHG emissions reduction (∼1.5 MtCO₂e/y). Grass and pasture land management across the selected projects account for a net emission reduction of 0.2 MtCO₂e/y. The implementation of improved agricultural practices in combination proves more effective for improving productivity and generating mitigation co-benefits than used in isolation. However, the aggregate impacts of soil organic carbon (SOC) sequestration should be interpreted carefully, which quickly can be lost quick. The interventions promoted by the global agricultural development programs have shown immense potential in reducing net GHG emissions or emission intensity in agriculture and allied sectors. For moving forward to achieve the net-zero and 1.5 °C goals including food security, the global agriculture development programs need to prioritize working on agriculture policy development and implementation so that agriculture expansion does not continue to drive land-use change. This needs to move from the traditional agriculture development programs to transformational changes.     

Climate change: long-term targets and short-term commitments

International negotiations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change could take several different approaches to advance future mitigation commitments. Options range from trying to reach consensus on specific long-term atmospheric concentration targets (e.g. 550 ppmv) to simply ignoring this contentious issue and focusing instead on what can be done in the nearer term. This paper argues for a strategy that lies between these two extremes. Internationally agreed threshold levels for certain categories of impacts or of risks posed by climate change could be translated into acceptable levels of atmospheric concentrations. This could help to establish a range of upper limits for global emissions in the medium term that could set the ambition level for negotiations on expanded GHG mitigation commitments. The paper thus considers how physical and socio-economic indicators of climate change impacts might be used to guide the setting of such targets. In an effort to explore the feasibility and implications of low levels of stabilisation, it also quantifies an intermediate global emission target for 2020 that keeps open the option to stabilise at 450 ppmv CO₂ If new efforts to reduce emissions are not forthcoming (e.g. the Kyoto Protocol or similar mitigation efforts fail), there is a significant chance that the option of 450 ppmv CO₂ is out of reach as of 2020. Regardless of the preferred approach to shaping new international commitments on climate change, progress will require improved information on the avoided impacts climate change at different levels of mitigation and careful assessment of mitigation costs.     

Trees,forests and water: Cool insights for a hot world

Forest-driven water and energy cycles are poorly integrated into regional, national, continental and global decision-making on climate change adaptation, mitigation, land use and water management. This constrains humanity’s ability to protect our planet’s climate and life-sustaining functions. The substantial body of research we review reveals that forest, water and energy interactions provide the foundations for carbon storage, for cooling terrestrial surfaces and for distributing water resources. Forests and trees must be recognized as prime regulators within the water, energy and carbon cycles. If these functions are ignored, planners will be unable to assess, adapt to or mitigate the impacts of changing land cover and climate. Our call to action targets a reversal of paradigms, from a carbon-centric model to one that treats the hydrologic and climate-cooling effects of trees and forests as the first order of priority. For reasons of sustainability, carbon storage must remain a secondary, though valuable, by-product. The effects of tree cover on climate at local, regional and continental scales offer benefits that demand wider recognition. The forest- and tree-centered research insights we review and analyze provide a knowledge-base for improving plans, policies and actions. Our understanding of how trees and forests influence water, energy and carbon cycles has important implications, both for the structure of planning, management and governance institutions, as well as for how trees and forests might be used to improve sustainability, adaptation and mitigation efforts.     

Accelerating the sustainability transition: Exploring synergies between adaptation and mitigation in British Columbian communities

While the focus of government climate change policy in many regions is on mitigation, research shows that integrated approaches, focusing equally on mitigation and adaptation, seen in the context of more general sustainability goals, may ultimately yield more productive outcomes. Since 2008, the province of British Columbia has mandated that local governments be carbon neutral in their own operations and has used a suite of policies, outreach and incentive tools to enable them to do so. The Meeting the Climate Change Challenge project explored eleven leading communities in B.C. to empirically examine how climate change policies and innovations are being framed and considered at the local scale.In this paper, we examine the synergies and trade-offs between adaptation, mitigation, and sustainability. Our findings suggest that, among leading communities, pursuing an integrated sustainability strategy (rather than a narrow focus on climate change) has the potential to yield benefits for both adaptation and mitigation in the majority of cases. The findings suggest that communities leading on climate innovation in the province have moved beyond a siloed approach in considering mitigation and adaptation. These findings have implications on integrated decision making at the municipal scale and multi-level governance, identifying both the challenges and the benefits inherent in pursuing multiple priorities simultaneously.     

The contribution of future agricultural trends in the US Midwest to global climate change mitigation

Land use change is a complex response to changing environmental and socioeconomic systems. Historical drivers of land use change include changes in the natural resource availability of a region, changes in economic conditions for production of certain products and changing policies. Most recently, introduction of policy incentives for biofuel production have influenced land use change in the US Midwest, leading to concerns that bioenergy production systems may compete with food production and land conservation. Here we explore how land use may be impacted by future climate mitigation measures by nesting a high resolution agricultural model (EPIC – Environmental Policy Indicator Climate) for the US Midwest within a global integrated assessment model (GCAM – Global Change Assessment Model). This approach is designed to provide greater spatial resolution and detailed agricultural practice information by focusing on the climate mitigation potential of agriculture and land use in a specific region, while retaining the global economic context necessary to understand the far ranging effects of climate mitigation targets. We find that until the simulated carbon prices are very high, the US Midwest has a comparative advantage in producing traditional food and feed crops over bioenergy crops. Overall, the model responds to multiple pressures by adopting a mix of future responses. We also find that the GCAM model is capable of simulations at multiple spatial scales and agricultural technology resolution, which provides the capability to examine regional response to global policy and economic conditions in the context of climate mitigation.