No abstract

No abstract

Central American countries, particularly Guatemala, are experiencing extreme climate events which are disproportionately affecting agriculture and subsequently rural livelihoods. Governments are taking action to address climatic threats, but they need tools to assess the impact of policies and interventions aiming to decrease the impacts of climate change on agriculture. This research, conducted with national policy makers and climate change and agriculture stakeholders in Guatemala, provides a comparative analysis of eight climate-smart agriculture (CSA) practices and technologies associated with the smallholder maize-beans production system in the Dry Corridor. The practices were identified as high-interest for investment by national stakeholders. CSA practices and technologies aim to improve food security, resilience, and low emissions development, where possible and appropriate. The paper assesses the cost-benefit profile of the introduction of CSA options into farm production systems. Indicators related to profitability and valuation of environmental and social externalities are used to assess options. Probabilistic cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is used to address field variability and high uncertainty around parameter values. All practices except one were profitable over their lifecycle, with some practices, expected to be ideal for drought prone areas, presenting a higher risk for adoption. The results were discussed with national stakeholders who established best-bet CSA investment portfolios. This paper argues that a thorough understanding of the costs and benefits of potential CSA options is needed to channel investments effectively and efficiently towards both short- and long-term interventions and should be coupled with broader assessment of tradeoffs between CSA outcomes. (Résumé d'auteur

Agricultural productivity and growth in Mali are under threat from erratic rainfall, resulting in more frequent dry years. The national economy is vulnerable to climate change due to 50% of the gross domestic product coming from the agricultural sector and 75% of the population living in rural areas. The Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) concept arises from a need to provide innovative solutions towards the complex and integrated goals of increasing yields, improving resilience, and promoting a low emissions agricultural sector. A major challenge for policymakers to operationalize CSA is the identification, valuation (cost-benefit), and subsequent prioritization of climate-smart options and portfolios (groups of CSA options) for investment. This paper presents the process, results, and lessons learned from a yearlong pilot of the Climate-Smart Agriculture Prioritization Framework (CSA-PF) in Mali. Key national and international stakeholders participated in the co-development and prioritization of two CSA portfolios and related action plans for the Malian Sudanese zone. Initial steps towards outcomes of the process include inclusion of prioritized CSA practices in ongoing development projects and prompting discussion of modifications of future calls for agricultural development proposals by regional donors. (Résumé d'auteur

No abstract

The literature is increasing on how to prioritize climate-smart options with stakeholders but relatively few examples exist on how to co-design climate-smart farming systems with them, in particular with smallholder farmers. This article presents a methodological framework to co-design climate-smart farming systems with local stakeholders (farmers, scientists, NGOs) so that large-scale change can be achieved. This framework is based on the lessons learned during a research project conducted in Honduras and Colombia from 2015 to 2017. Seven phases are suggested to engage a process of co-conception of climate-smart farming systems that might enable implementation at scale: (1) "exploration of the initial situation," which identifies local stakeholders potentially interested in being involved in the process, existing farming systems, and specific constraints to the implementation of climate-smart agriculture (CSA); (2) "co-definition of an innovation platform," which defines the structure and the rules of functioning for a platform favoring the involvement of local stakeholders in the process; (3) "shared diagnosis," which defines the main challenges to be solved by the innovation platform; (4) "identification and ex ante assessment of new farming systems," which assess the potential performances of solutions prioritized by the members of the innovation platform under CSA pillars; (5) "experimentation," which tests the prioritized solutions on-farm; (6) "assessment of the co-design process of climate-smart farming systems," which validates the ability of the process to reach its initial objectives, particularly in terms of new farming systems but also in terms of capacity building; and (7) "definition of strategies for scaling up/out," which addresses the scaling of the co-design process. For each phase, specific tools or methodologies are used: focus groups, social network analysis, theory of change, life-cycle assessment, and on-farm experiments. Each phase is illustrated with results obtained in Colombia or Honduras.

Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) is an approach to help agricultural systems worldwide, concurrently addressing three challenge areas: increased adaptation to climate change, mitigation of climate change, and ensuring global food securitythrough innovative policies, practices, and financing. It involves a set of objectives and multiple transformative transitions for which there are newly identified knowledge gaps. We address these questions raised by CSA within three areas: conceptualization, implementation, and implications for policy and decision-makers. We also draw up scenarios on the future of the CSA concept in relation to the 4 per 1000 Initiative (Soils for Food Security and Climate) launched at UNFCCC 21st Conference of the Parties (COP 21). Our analysis shows that there is still a need for further interdisciplinary research on the theoretical foundation of the CSA concept and on the necessary transformations of agriculture and land use systems. Contrasting views about implementation indicate that CSA focus on the "triple win" (adaptation, mitigation, food security) needs to be assessed in terms of science-based practices. CSA policy tools need to incorporate an integrated set of measures supported by reliable metrics. Environmental and social safeguards are necessary to make sure that CSA initiatives conform to the principles of sustainability, both at the agriculture and food system levels.

No abstract