Submission from the CGIAR System Organization, International Centre for Tropical Agriculture and the World Bank, in response to Decision 4/CP.23. These are views on Elements to be included in the work of the SBSTA and the SBI to jointly address issues related to agriculture Key Messages: The Koronivia Joint Work on Agriculture can play a crucial role in agricultural transformation under climate change, mobilizing the knowledge, technology, finance and capacity needed, and ensuring that farmers have the right incentives, and get recognized, for efforts to put agriculture on a more climate resilient footing. Support the development of common indicators for assessing adaptation, adaptation co-benefits and resilience in agriculture. Identify hotspots for climate action, suitable management practices and opportunities for investment and policy reform in countries. Build capacity among women and youth to adapt to climate variability. Focus on mechanisms to finance climate actions in agriculture, going beyond traditional mechanisms, to include models of blended and private finance. Harness the potential of technology for the transformation of agriculture. Agriculture is at the intersection of three major challenges in the context of climate change: food security, adaptation and mitigation. Looking forward, nothing short of a transformation in agriculture and our food system will be needed. The Koronivia Joint Work on Agriculture (KJW) under the United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change (UNFCCC) can play a crucial role to harness the mechanisms of the Convention to mobilize the necessary knowledge, finance, technology and capacity. With this submission the CGIAR System Organization, International Centre for Tropical Agriculture and the World Bank seek to inform the development of the Koronivia Joint Work on Agriculture. Methods and approaches for assessing adaptation, adaptation co-benefits and resilience Tailored to domestic priorities and circumstances, the adaptation Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) systems developed to date focus on a diverse range of specific purposes (audiences/reporting requirements) and types of indicators. The nature of climate adaptation (e.g. long timescales for impacts and outcomes), the multi-dimensional (economic, financial, social) nature of resilience, the difficulty to identify, combine and interpret the types and relevant indicators, as well as lack of country capacity and resource constraints, are key challenges to developing agricultural adaptation M&E systems at the national level. Processes for measuring and monitoring mitigation co-benefits of adaptation are relatively well-defined under the UNFCCC national communications, national inventories, and biennial update reports. However, countries face challenges in linking project-level M&E with national inventories, improving the detail and accuracy of inventories for agriculture, and designing credible Monitoring Reporting and Verification (MRV) systems with often-limited data.
There are several instances of ongoing work in this area, which can be leveraged under the Convention. At the national level, some national adaptation M&E systems developed by countries, combine both adaptation and mitigation (e.g. Kenya and Philippines). Globally, the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) has developed a framework of readiness, process, and progress indicators to monitor adaptation and measure mitigation at different scales, taking stock of indicators used by major agencies. CCAFS and the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases (GRA) are also documenting national experiences with MRV in the agricultural sector and developing guidance for improvement. The multi-lateral development banks have agreed on a harmonized approach to the identification of climate change co-benefits in their lending including in the agriculture sector. Similarly, FAO has outlined a framework and methodology for Tracking Adaptation in Agricultural Sectors (TAAS) 1 at the national level to assist countries in their ongoing efforts to develop such systems. KJW should advance discussions on common indicator frameworks for assessing adaptation, adaptation co-benefits and resilience, to enable aggregation of information across scales and sectors, for comparisons between countries and to harmonize measures of success. Technologies and practices At a generic level, much is known about agricultural technologies and practices that work for climate change actions. The problem is that the actual technologies and practices to be implemented are highly contextspecific, depending on agro-ecology and socio-economic conditions. Much can be learnt from North-South and South-South exchange, but ultimately context-specific actions will need to be selected and implemented. Key action areas include the identified areas of interest by KJW: improved soil carbon, soil health and soil fertility under grassland and cropland as well as integrated systems, including water management; improved nutrient use and manure management; and improved livestock management. Key topics include support to countries to: Assess soil organic carbon stocks and hot spots for preventing loss and improving stocks. Establishing novel means for maintaining stable levels of soil carbon over the long-term and large-scale, cost-effective monitoring will require innovative technologies (e.g. http://soilsbestbets.ciat.cgiar.org). Monitor water balances over large scales and identify the practices and landscape approaches to manage extremes, and reduce water consumption. International Rice Research Institute and the Climate and Clean Air Coalition have compiled information on these practices for rice (see http://www.knowledgebank.irri.org/training/fact-sheets/water-management) and guidance for measurement and monitoring is underway in partnership with GRA and others. Take a system approach to nutrient use management, applying the concepts of life cycle and circular economy to the management of nutrient resource, both in contexts of scarcity and overload. Explore ways to support the many actions possible in livestock systems to adapt to, and mitigate climate change, in both intensive, smallholder and pastoral systems 2, including related to mobility, diversity and flexibility of animal rations, diversification of income and asset management, and animal health interventions. The sector offers three broad avenues for adaptation-mitigation synergies: (i) efficiency gains in animal and herd management; (ii) sequestration of carbon in pasture through improved grazing and the reduction of soil stocks erosion; (iii) manure management. Assess future breeding strategies and needs, given warmer, more extreme and more variable conditions. 1 FAO. 2017. Tracking adaptation in agricultural sectors: Climate change adaptation indicators. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, Italy. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i8145e.pdf 2 Gerber PJ, Steinfeld H, Henderson B, Mottet A, Opio C, Dijkman J, Falcucci A, Tempio G. 2013. Tackling climate change through livestock A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, Italy. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i3437e.pdf
KJW could focus on: Best practice on prioritisation given the context-specific nature of agriculture. Guidelines on best technologies and practices for major agro-ecologies. Mobilizing scientific support for NDCs and national policies. Socioeconomic and food security dimensions of climate change in the agricultural sector Far from being only about technical interventions, transformative climate action in agriculture depends on supporting social and institutional structures, thus this topic identified in the KJW is crucial. A systemic approach, which goes beyond the production aspect of the food system, and addresses interlinked issues such as diets, nutrition and food loss and waste, is essential for transformation. Complex interactions exist between climate change, diets, nutrition and health outcomes. For example, while adding animal sourced foods (ASF) to diets could provide significant health benefits as a source of protein and micronutrients, high intake of red meat and processed meat is associated with an increased risk of diet-related non-communicable diseases. Therefore, context specific approaches, which addresses climate, malnutrition and health challenges are essential. Food Loss and Waste (FLW) is another important aspect within the food system, which needs to be addressed in order for countries to successfully meet their pledges to the Paris Climate Agreement, and also make more food available and tackle food insecurity. KJW could highlight the urgency of action and further a coordinated effort across countries by beginning to define a conceptual framework around FLW, reaching clarity on the magnitude of FLW, as well as its overall drivers. Socioeconomic and food security dimensions also include aspects related to gender and social equality. The capacity of women and youth to adapt to climate variability, for example, is restricted by lack of access to capital and agricultural inputs, climate information and services, limited land ownership and access, and limited participation in decision making in households and communities. In the context of increased urban migration, these gender and youth gaps take on increasing significance. Efforts are needed to address these gaps, and KJW can support this by connecting its actions to the UNFCCC Gender Action Plan. KJW should enable much needed dialogue across the agriculture, health, nutrition and gender communities to explore the best strategies for tackling these increasingly critical issues. Combinations of appropriate policies, institutional support and improved market mechanisms create the enabling environment required to bring about positive change. Key building blocks include policy development and implementation, capacity-building, institutional strengthening, financial service development, information sharing, extension and research. Inter-sectoral coordination is essential for the success of efforts, based on shared goals and coherence across Ministries of Agriculture, Finance, Economic Development and Planning. Efforts should strive to overcome economic barriers (access to inputs, knowledge, credit, etc.), and address perverse incentives which incentivize maladaptive practices. KJW can facilitate much needed dialogue around the policy and financial incentives needed to stimulate agriculture under climate change.
Other topics In addition to the topics which were discussed during previous workshops and those proposed under the Koronivia decision, there are other priority topics, which could be part of KJW. These include Fostering investments for climate action in agriculture In 2015/2016, of the total public climate finance of USD 141 billion, agriculture, forestry, land-use, and natural resource management received only USD 7 billion for both adaptation and mitigation 3. This is inadequate for the sector, and there is an urgent need to scale up climate financing to agriculture. While additional finance can be mobilized through the UNFCCC finance mechanism, efforts should go beyond these sources, and focus on leveraging private sector finance (e.g. for sustainable agricultural supply chains), blending public and private finance, and impact investing. One particularly significant opportunity is to increase the degree of climate smartness of the more than USD 500 billion in public agriculture support received by farmers every year 4. The recognition of emission intensity based strategies towards mitigation co-benefits is a further area requiring attention, especially with regard to MRV and climate finance. In addition to more and better directed financing, other economic incentives can also drive investment in the sector. For example, index-based agricultural insurance is an innovation that triggers payouts based on an index (for example, rainfall or sampled yields) correlated with agricultural losses, rather than actual losses. Well-designed index insurance embedded in comprehensive agriculture risk management approaches can help protect farmers productive assets in the face of extreme climate events, and promote farmers livelihoods by overcoming barriers to adoption of improved technologies and access to credit and market opportunities. Fourth Industrial Revolution Technologies in Agriculture The agricultural sector has lagged behind other sectors in adopting technological innovations of various different types. This gap in adoption will need to be addressed to realise the transformation needed within the sector. This calls for agile and farmer oriented innovation systems which leapfrog traditional agricultural development pathways. A new approach to agricultural research for development, with a focus on achieving development outcomes and partnerships for impacts are needed to drive such systems, which make progress on areas including digital agriculture, climate-resilient and low emissions practices and technologies, new approaches for detecting pests and diseases etc. Innovation around information and communications technology, digital platforms and machine learning to get extremely tailored advice to specific smallholder farms, has the ability to revolutionise extension advice, service provision, input supplies and bulk purchasing. 3 Buchner BK, Oliver P, Wang X, Carswell C, Meattle C, Mazza F. 2017. Global Landscape of Climate Finance 2017. Climate Policy Initiative. 4 WRI. 2018. World Resources Report (forthcoming). World Resources Institute. Washington DC, USA.
A roadmap for KJW KJW can play a crucial role in supporting countries to transform their agricultural sectors and advance climate action. If the priority topics are tackled sequentially it will be many years before the knowledge and action is stimulated on some topics. We suggest parallel work streams on: 1. Methods and approaches for assessing adaptation, adaptation co-benefits and resilience. 2. Agricultural technologies and practices (Best practice on prioritisation; mapping of technologies and practices by agro-ecology; mobilizing scientific support for NDCs and national policies). 3. Socioeconomic and food security dimensions of climate change in the agricultural sector. 4. Policy and financial incentives needed to stimulate agriculture under climate change. 5. Fostering private sector investments for climate action in agriculture. 6. Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies in agriculture. These work streams should advance knowledge sharing on these topics through SBSTA, but also support country level implementation through SBI. KJW can play an important role, guiding the work of different constituted bodies of the Convention, to cohesively work on agriculture, thus mobilizing the finance, capacity, technology and knowledge for transformation.