Incorporating climate change considerations into agricultural

1

Incorporating climate change considerations into agricultural investment programmes

best practices in investment design

FAO INVESTMENT CENTRE

Incorporating climate change considerations into agricultural investment programmesA guidance document

2



Katia Medeiros DuBois Senior Environmental OfficerInvestment Centre Division, FAO

Zhijun ChenIrrigation and Rural Infrastructure EngineerInvestment Centre Division, FAO

Hideki KanamaruNatural Resources OfficerClimate, Energy and Tenure Division, FAO

Christina Seeberg-ElverfeldtNatural Resources OfficerClimate, Energy and Tenure Division, FAO


Food and Agriculture Organization

of the United Nations

Photo credits Cover picture: ©FAO/G. Napolitano; page 9: ©FAO/Bangladesh; page 15: ©FAO/G. Gobet; page17: ©FAO/G. Bizzarri; page18: J. Kienzle; page 20: ©FAO/F. Botts; page 21: FAO/FO-0072; page 22: ©FAO/K. Boldt; page 23: C. Seeberg-Elverfeldt; page 24: ©FAO/G. Tortoli; page 25: ©FAO/Sri Lanka; page 31: L. Callerholm; page 41: ©FAO/S. Ghazaryan.

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of FAO.

All rights reserved. Reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product for educational or other non-commercial purposes are authorized without any prior written permission from the copyright holders provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of material in this information product for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without written permission of the copyright holders. Applications for such permission should be addressed to:

Director Investment Centre Division FAO Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy or by e-mail to: [email protected]

©FAO 2012

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acronyms 5

Acknowledgements 6

Preface 7

1. Introduction 8

Context 8

Climate change mainstreaming 8

How to use this guidance document 9

2. Adaptation and mitigation in the agricultural sectors 11

Basic elements 11

An ecosystem approach for climate-smart agriculture 11

Adaptation and mitigation options 15

Good practices 18

Core principles 24

Focus on food security 24

Support a country-driven process 25

Design participatory, gender-sensitive and local activities 25

Build partnership among stakeholders 26

Support transboundary collaboration 26

Priority areas 26

Data and knowledge generation and sharing 26

Institutions, policies and financing for capacity development 26

Sustainable land and water management and biodiversity 27

Development and dissemination of technologies, practices and process 27

Disaster risk reduction 27

3. Incorporating climate change considerations into

agricultural investment projects/programmes 28

Project/programme conceptualization stage 31

Overview 31

Identifying entry points 31

Working with partners and stakeholders 34

Incorporating climate change mitigation and adaptation in concept notes 35

Project/programme preparation stage 37

Preparing for detailed project/programme design 37

Moving from concept note to project/programme proposal 38

Project/programme supervision and evaluation 40

Supervision 40

Evaluation 42

Project/programme completion evaluation 42

4

4. A few words on finance options

and economic and financial analyses 44

Financing options for climate change activities 44

Reflecting climate change aspects in economic and financial analysis 45

Essential reading and glossaries 47

References 49

Annexes

1. Incorporating climate change mitigation and adaptation

in project formulation, supervision and evaluation 51

2. Approaches to rapid assessments of impacts of

climate variability and climate change on agriculture

in the project area 62

3. Tools and information systems for climate change adaptation

and mitigation in agricultural sectors 92

4. Options, good practices and concepts for climate change adaptation

and mitigation in agricultural sectors 107

5. Framework and options for disaster risk reduction

in agricultural sectors 117

6. Identifying climate change-related indicators 126

7. Finance options for climate change activities 137

5

ADB Asian Development BankAFOLU Agriculture, Forestry and Land-Use ChangeAR IPCC Assessment ReportCA Conservation AgricultureCDM Clean Development MechanismCH4 methaneCIF Climate Investment FundsCO2 carbon dioxideCO2e carbon dioxide equivalentCSA Climate-Smart AgricultureDRM Disaster Risk ManagementDRR Disaster Risk ReductionEU European UnionEX-ACT Ex Ante Carbon-balance ToolFAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsFAO-Adapt FAO’s Framework Programme on Climate Change AdaptationFP DRR FAO Framework Programme on Disaster Risk Reduction GEF Global Environment FacilityGHG Greenhouse GasGIZ (ex-GTZ) Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbHHFA Hyogo Framework for ActionICZM Integrated Coastal Zone ManagementIFAD International Fund for Agriculture DevelopmentIFI International Financing InstitutionIPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeLCA Life Cycle AssessmentLDCs Least Developed CountriesLDCF Least Developed Countries FundMDG Millennium Development GoalM&E Monitoring and EvaluationMRV Monitoring, Reporting and VerificationNAMAs Nationally Appropriate Mitigation ActionsNAPAs National Adaptation Programmes of ActionN2O nitrous oxideOECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentPT Project/programme TeamREDD+ Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest DegradationRF Results FrameworkSCCF Special Climate Change FundSLM Sustainable Land ManagementSRI System of Rice IntensificationUNDAF United Nations Development Assistance FrameworkUNDG United Nations Development GroupUNDP United Nations Development ProgrammeUNEP United Nations Environment ProgrammeUNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeUNISDR United Nations International Strategy for Disaster ReductionUN-REDD UN Collaborative Programme on REDD in Developing CountriesUSAID United States Agency for International DevelopmentWB The World BankWG IPCC’s Working GroupWOCAT World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies

ACrONymS

6

This guidance document was prepared by a team of professionals from FAO:

Katia Medeiros DuBois and Zhijun Chen (Investment Centre Division) coordinated

the work and prepared the main text and five annexes; Hideki Kanamaru (Climate,

Energy and Tenure Division, NRC) prepared Annex 2 and provided inputs to the

main text and coordinated the work within NRC; and Christina Seeberg-Elverfeldt

(NRC) prepared Annexes 4 and 7 and provided inputs to the main text.

The authors would like to thank their FAO colleagues for their help, in particular:

Astrid Agostini for having granted support and overall supervision to the work;

Maria Presmanes for assisting in the identification of climate change-related

indicators; Hans Thiel for the guidance provided on aspects related to forest

management; Giacomo Branca for providing inputs to economic and financial

analysis; Claudia Hiepe, Stephan Baas, Pamela Pozarny, Friedrich Theodor,

Susan Braatz, Wendy Mann, Thomas Osborn and Thomas Muenzel for providing

useful comments; Fabiana Biasini for assistance and guidance on how to

make effective use of the guidelines; various other colleagues for their helpful

comments during the review of the guidelines; Suzanne Raswant for assigning

time for her staff to work on the document; Nada Zvekic for assisting with the

publishing process, Brett Shapiro for support on the editorial process; and

Adriana Brunetti for the design.

ACkNOwLEdgEmENTS

7

One of the emerging challenges faced by the world’s agricultural sectors is a changing climate. Climate change alters the basics of productive ecosystems, impacts on natural resources and affects food security. From a socio-economic perspective, smallholder farmers, forest dwellers, herders and fishers, groups least able to adapt, will be the most affected by climate change. Moreover climate change cannot be effectively addressed without addressing emissions from the agricultural sectors, estimate to contribute some one-third of all greenhouse gases. As a result there is a growing need to ensure that climate change considerations are mainstreamed into agricultural investment projects and programmes with particular interest on the linkages with and among food security and rural livelihoods.

In recent years, different partners have developed tools and guidelines to facilitate the mainstreaming of climate change in specific sectors. However, in order to capture synergies and manage trade-offs among the objectives of adaptation, mitigation, food security and sustainable development, a specific tool is needed for agriculture investment projects / programmes.

This following guidance document aims to assist investment project formulation practitioners in incorporating climate change considerations into agricultural investment projects and programmes. The main focus is on project/programme formulation (i.e. identification and design), although some aspects of supervision and evaluation will also be presented. It is intended for national and international staff and consultants, as well as government staff involved in mobilizing investment for agriculture and rural development, mainly through assistance to project or programme identification, formulation and supervision. It is meant to apply to investment projects or programmes in agriculture and rural development (agriculture in the broad sense, including fisheries, livestock and forestry). It can also be used for stand-alone climate change projects or programmes; however, for most stand-alone climate change projects/programmes, there are specific guidelines provided by their funding agencies and other development partners.

The document is organized as follows: an introductory section (Chapter 1), followed by Chapter 2 which describes the basics of climate change adaptation and mitigation in the agricultural sectors; Chapter 3 suggests approaches and procedures for incorporating climate change considerations into all project/programme stages: conceptualization, preparation, supervision and evaluation; and Chapter 4 briefly describes some options for financing climate change activities. The Annexes offer summary information and pointers/links to more substantial documents or Web sites where they are already available.

This publication is not intended to be a training manual, but rather a guidance document with: (i) references to information (e.g. documents, tools and information systems) available in FAO and other agencies (mainly multilateral partners) which is relevant to agricultural and rural development projects or programmes; and (ii) guidance on rapid assessments, possible options and good practices for mitigation, adaptation and disaster risk reduction (DRR).

It is the authors’ hope that this document will help a project/programme team (PT) to: (i) increase its awareness and understanding of the basics of climate change adaptation and mitigation in the agricultural sectors; (ii) identify the relevance of climate change to a proposed agricultural investment project/programme; (iii) identify and use key tools, information sources and methods for climate change adaptation and mitigation in agricultural sectors (to address both technical and institutional aspects); and (iv) incorporate climate change considerations into every stage of the project/programme cycle.

PrEFACE

8

Context

The world’s agricultural sectors, including

agriculture, forestry and fisheries,1 face many

challenges in meeting the food requirements of

an ever-increasing population – such as intensive

competition for land and water resources

and a degrading environment – and these are

compounded by a changing climate. Climate

change alters the basics of productive ecosystems

(e.g. temperature and rainfall), impacts on

natural resources (e.g. land and water availability)

and affects food security, rural livelihoods and

sustainable development at global, regional and

local levels. Smallholder farmers, forest dwellers,

herders and fishers will be the most affected by

climate change because of their limited capacity

to adapt to its impacts. These groups could

immensely benefit from efforts to strengthen their

adaptation capacity. Adaptation is needed now.

Postponing action increases adaptation costs.

Climate change cannot be effectively addressed

without addressing emissions from the agricultural

sectors. Agriculture, forestry and land-use change

(AFOLU) are responsible for about one-third

of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Agriculture accounts for 13.5 percent of GHG

emissions, mainly in the form of methane (CH4)

and nitrous oxide (N2O) from fertilized soils, enteric

fermentation, biomass burning, rice production

and manure and fertilizer production. Land-use

change and forestry account for 17.4 percent,

mainly from deforestation (IPCC, 2007b). About

three-fourths of the emissions from agriculture

and land-use change originate in developing

countries (IPCC, 2007b). Conversion of rangelands

and forests to croplands is a major cause of

emissions. Recently released figures show an

average deforestation rate of 14.5 million ha per

1 The agricultural sectors in this publication refer to agriculture (i.e. crop and livestock production), fisheries and forestry as consistent with FAO terminology (Article 1-Functions of the Organization, FAO Basic Texts, FAO, 2011).

Chapter 1 - Introduction

year between 1990 and 2005, a large part of which

was the result of conversion to agriculture.2 Good

opportunities exist in the agricultural sectors for

mitigating climate change through increasing

carbon sequestration or reducing GHG emissions.

The overall objective of climate change adaptation

and mitigation in the agricultural sectors is to

capture the synergies and manage the trade-

offs with the priorities of the agricultural sectors

in developing countries – food security, rural

livelihoods and sustainable development.

Adaptation builds resilience to climate change

in the agricultural sectors by reducing its

negative impacts and promoting its positives

ones. Mitigation addresses the root causes of

climate change, thereby limiting over time the

extent and cost of adaptation. Some options can

benefit adaptation, mitigation and food security

simultaneously; others may involve trade-offs,

some of which can be managed. In these efforts,

it is critical to follow the guidelines of national

climate strategies, under the framework of

integrated planning at the ecosystem level, and

pay special attention to smallholder farmers and

the most vulnerable groups.

Climate change mainstreaming

Different agencies define “climate change

mainstreaming” in different ways. The United

Nations Development Group (UNDG) defines

it as “the process by which actions to address

the causes and consequences of climate

change are implemented as part of a broader

suite of measures within existing development

processes and decision cycles” (UNDG, 2010).

This definition is now commonly used by UNDG

in country analysis and formulation of United

Nations Development Assistance Frameworks.

It entails efforts over many years with multiple

2 http://foris.fao.org/static/data/fra2010/RSS_Summary_Report_lowres.pdf

http://foris.fao.org/static/data/fra2010/RSS_Summary_Report_lowres.pdf

9


stakeholders at various levels – from national

planning to sector strategies and individual

development activities. The need to mainstream

climate change considerations into agricultural

investment projects and programmes has

become increasingly apparent with the general

recognition of the close linkage among food

security, rural livelihoods and climate change.

Adaptation and mitigation in the agricultural

sectors can be implemented as stand-alone

projects/programmes or included as distinct

components of larger ones. More importantly,

they need to be incorporated into each individual

activity, wherever or whenever possible. All

agricultural development activities need to be

climate-proofed to avoid doing business as

usual. For example, irrigation and agriculture

water management activities should assess

the impacts of climate change on local water

availability and demands and incorporate them

into system planning and engineering design.

How to use this guidance document

In recent years, different partners have developed

tools and guidelines to facilitate climate change

mainstreaming, and some examples are provided

in this document. However, in order to capture

synergies and manage trade-offs among the

objectives of adaptation, mitigation, food

security and sustainable development, a specific

mainstreaming tool is needed for agricultural

investment projects/programmes which can

contribute to these objectives and cover all

4 agricultural sectors (i.e. crops, livestock,

fisheries and forestry).

This guidance document aims to assist

agricultural investment formulation practitioners in

incorporating climate change considerations into

agricultural investment projects and programmes.

It is intended for national and international staff

and consultants, as well as government staff

involved in mobilizing investment for agriculture

and rural development, mainly through assistance

to project or programme identification, formulation

and supervision. It is meant to apply to investment

projects or programmes in agriculture and rural

development (agriculture in the broad sense,

including fisheries, livestock and forestry). It can

also be used for stand-alone climate change

projects or programmes; however, for most stand-

alone climate change projects/programmes, there

10

are specific guidelines provided by their funding

agencies and other development partners.

This guidance document will help a project/

programme team (PT)3 to:

• increase its awareness and understanding of

the basics of climate change adaptation and

mitigation in the agricultural sectors;

• identify the relevance of climate change to

a proposed agricultural investment project/

programme;

• identify and use key tools, information

sources and methods for climate change

adaptation and mitigation in agricultural

sectors (to address both technical and

institutional aspects); and

• incorporate climate change considerations

into every stage of the project/

programme cycle (i.e. project/programme

conceptualization, preparation, supervision4

and evaluation) by:

– conducting a rapid impact assessment of

impacts of climate variability and climate

change on agriculture (and people) in the

project/programme area;

– understanding and using climate data

sources in project/programme formulation,

including national and project/programme

area information on climate change

vulnerability and impact assessment;

– identifying mitigation and adaptation

options and good practices (and selecting

related measures, when applicable); and

– understanding and using specific indicators

to measure progress and achievement of

climate change-related project/programme

activities and results.

This publication is not intended to be a training

manual, but rather a guidance document with:

• references to information (e.g. documents,

tools and information systems) available in

FAO and other agencies (mainly multilateral

3 A project/programme team is usually comprised of international and national consultants, government staff and the project/programme staff. Some international financing institutions (IFIs) are also included on project/programme teams, as well as civil society representatives, notably representative members of producer organizations.4 This document does not include guidance for incorporating climate change during the implementation phase of agricultural projects or programmes; rather, it provides guidance on how to supervise climate change aspects of their implementation.

partners) which is relevant to agricultural and

rural development projects or programmes; and

• guidance on rapid assessments, possible

options and good practices for mitigation,

adaptation and disaster risk management

(DRM).

The main focus is on project/programme

formulation (i.e. identification and design),

although some aspects of supervision and

evaluation will also be presented.

The document is organized as follows:

• Chapter 2 describes the basics of climate

change adaptation and mitigation in the

agricultural sectors.

• Chapter 3 suggests approaches and

procedures for incorporating climate change

considerations into all project/programme

stages: conceptualization, preparation,

supervision and evaluation.

• Chapter 4 briefly describes some options for

financing climate change activities.

• Annexes offer summary information and

pointers/links to more substantial documents:

– Annex 1: General questions and detailed

guidance, including cross-references to

other annexes and a list of sources of

useful information

– Annex 2: Practical guidance on how to

identify relevant data and conduct rapid

assessments of impacts of climate

variability and climate change on agriculture

in the project/programme area5

– Annex 3: A list of tools and information

sources that have been recently developed

by FAO and other partners for climate

change adaptation and mitigation in

agricultural sectors

– Annex 4: Options and examples of good

practices for climate change adaptation and

mitigation

– Annex 5: Options and examples of good

practices for disaster risk reduction (DRR)

– Annex 6: An illustrative list of climate

change-related indicators

– Annex 7: A list of finance options for

climate change activities

5 Annex 2 is meant to be a stand-alone annex. The idea is to keep it as part of the document so that readers can obtain all the necessary information in a single integrated document.

11


Basic elements

An ecosystem approach for climate-smart agriculture

Development partners widely accept that

climate change adaptation and mitigation in the

agricultural sectors should follow the framework

of integrated planning at the ecosystem level

in order to capture the synergies and manage

the trade-offs among food s ecurity, sustainable

development, environmental sustainability and

climate change adaptation and mitigation (see

FAO 2009b, 2011d, 2011f; Branca et al. 2011;

McCarthy et al. 2011).

Agricultural sectors or systems are connected to

each other through their common linkage with

natural resources. Interventions in one sector

or system may have implications for others:

upstream water diversion may affect downstream

water users; agriculture development may have

environmental implications; and bioenergy

development may affect food production. The top

priority of the agricultural sectors in developing

countries is to increase productivity to improve

food security and rural livelihoods, and this often

involves interventions aimed at infrastructure

improvement, sustainable nature resources

management, technical innovations and capacity

development. Integrated planning ensures that

different interventions in individual sectors or

areas are consistent with one another. The

objective of integrated planning at the ecosystem

level is to maximize the synergies and minimize

the trade-offs, while maintaining ecosystem

functions and services, through proper planning

and auditing of natural resources. Tools and

methods which can be applied for an ecosystem

approach include sustainable land management

(SLM), integrated water resources management,

integrated mountain development and integrated

ecosystem management.

Synergies may be captured at different levels

(see Table 1). There may be opportunities

for introducing “win-win” options which can

benefit both food security and climate change

adaptation or mitigation, and also opportunities

for introducing “triple-win” options which can

benefit all three objectives. A list of synergic

options are illustrated and described in Annex

4. “Triple-win” options are also called options

for “climate-smart agriculture” (CSA),6 which is

defined as “agriculture that sustainably increases

productivity, resilience (adaptation), reduces/

removes GHGs (mitigation) and enhances

achievement of national food security and

development goals”.7 For developing countries

highly dependent on agriculture and with a large

share of food insecure people in the agricultural

sector, the main objective of climate smart

agriculture is to improve food security, making

adaptation of production systems a fundamental

necessity. In this context, opportunities for

mitigation should be considered as an additional

objective that could potentially be financed by

external mitigation funding sources (FAO, 2011f).

In formulating agricultural investment projects/

programmes, opportunities for capturing the

synergies should be fully investigated and

explored. When trade-offs occur in agriculture-

based countries, the clear priority is to increase

productivity to improve food security; climate

change adaptation improves longer-term

stabilization and improvement of food security,

and climate change mitigation comes as a co-

benefit.

6 FAO (in partnership with other agencies) is currently preparing a CSA Sourcebook which covers CSA practices, finance and policies. It is expected to be published by the end of 2012. 7 FAO. Climate-smart agriculture policies, practices and financing for food security, adaptation and mitigation, 2010.

Chapter 2 - Adaptation and mitigation in the agricultural sectors

12

8

Capturing the synergies among food security,

climate change adaptation and mitigation through

integrated planning at the ecosystem level will

also ensure consistency with the requirements of

Greening the Economy with Agriculture (GEA).

The GEA concept suggests aiming to increase

food security (in terms of food availability, access,

stability and utilization) while using fewer natural

resources by improving efficiency, resilience and

equity throughout the food value chain, in order

to contribute towards the development of

8 For examples of synergies in crop production, see FAO Save and Grow: A policymaker’s guide to the sustainable intensification of smallholder crop production (FAOb, 2011): http://www.fao.org/ag/save-and-grow/

a global green economy. Its overall strategy is

to apply an ecosystem approach to agriculture,

fisheries and forest management in a manner

that addresses the multiplicity of social needs

and desires, without jeopardizing the options

for future generations (http://www.fao.org/

rio20). There is no blueprint for CSA; the specific

contexts of countries and communities would

need to shape how it is ultimately implemented

(FAO, 2011f, lesson 3). Indeed, the impacts of

climate change vary by region, as summarized in

Table 2.

Table 1:

Capturing the synergies8

Increased productivity

Increased

resilience

Reduced GHG

emissions

Win-win adaptation √ √

Win-win mitigation √ √

Climate-smart agriculture √ √ √

Source: Adapted from FAO, 2011d

http://www.fao.org/ag/save-and-grow/

13


Table 2: Overview of selected possible regionalized impacts of climate change

Agriculture ForestryFisheries and aquaculture

Asia and Pacific

• Freshwater availability in Central, South, East and Southeast Asia is likely to decrease.

• Temperature increases will lead to a substantial increase in demand for irrigation water for sustained productivity in arid and semi-arid Asia and South and East Asia.

• Land suitable for crop cultivation is expected to increase in East and Central Asia, but decrease in other areas, especially in South Asia.

• Crop yields could increase in East and Southeast Asia, while they could decrease in Central and South Asia, even considering the fertilization effects of carbon dioxide (CO2).

• There will likely be a northward shift of agricultural zones.

• Heat stress and limited pasture availability would limit the expansion of livestock numbers.

• Forest expansion and migration are affected, and biodiversity is threatened by land use, land cover change and population pressure in most of Asia.

• In North Asia, forest growth and northward shift in the extent of boreal forests is likely.

• The frequency and extent of forest fires and the risk of invasive species, pests and diseases in Asian forests are likely to increase.

• Risks for the Pacific include: increased incidence, intensity and impact of extreme weather events such as inundation, storm surge, erosion and other coastal hazards; loss of mangrove forests; severe flooding and cyclones; and increased invasion by non-native species.

• Sea-water intrusion is likely to increase the habitat of brackish water fisheries, but coastal inundation is likely to have serious effects on the aquaculture industry and infrastructure, particularly in heavily populated mega deltas.

• Increased frequency of El Niño would cause a general decline in fishery production in the coastal waters of East, South and Southeast Asia.

• Warming may make the Arabian Sea more productive.

• Small island developing states (SIDS), highly reliant on fisheries and highly exposed to the changes, will probably suffer most.

Europe and Central Asia

• Countries in the more temperate and polar regions are likely to benefit from climate change.

• Countries in mid-latitudes will benefit at first but will begin to be negatively affected if temperatures rise by more than 2.5ºC.

• The combination of temperature rise and increasing CO2 concentration will result in slightly positive agricultural development in southeastern Europe, while the Mediterranean area and southwest Balkans will suffer.

• Central Asia, dependent on irrigation and with high inter-annual variations in yields, can be affected by climate extremes and a decrease in water availability.

• Cattle and small livestock could suffer from increasing heat stress and spread of diseases.

• In northern Europe, the area of tree species’ native occurrence will grow and shift northwards.

• In the Mediterranean area, forest ecosystems or individual species will start to contract.

• The tree species structure will change, e.g. shrubs may increasingly dominate trees in southern Europe.

• Warm water species are likely to spread to the north, with local extinctions occurring at the boundaries.

• Higher winter temperature can increase growth, but also cause greater risk of diseases.

• Marine productivity is likely to increase in temperate areas.

14

Near East • Maize yields in North Africa would suffer first with rising temperatures, followed by yields in western Asia and the Middle East.

• Water availability would decrease in most of the region, although it may slightly increase in some areas such as most of Sudan, Somalia and southern Egypt.

• Temperature increase may lead to increased pasture production in mid-latitudes, with increases in livestock production.

• Warmer winters may benefit livestock, while greater summer heat stress can have negative effects.

• A depletion of soil moisture may cause the productivity of major forest species to decline, increase fire risk and change the patterns of the region’s main pests and diseases.

• The severe water shortages due to decreasing summer precipitation in western Asia will affect forest growth.

• Some countries already have experience in afforestation, using sewage water for irrigation, which will counteract negative effects of climate change.

• Many basins in the region already suffer from lack of water (Mediterranean, Near East), and the usable net water resources are still likely to decline.

• In the Mediterranean, there will be changes in fish populations, recruitment success, trophic interactions and migratory patterns of fish populations.

Africa • The number of extremely dry and wet years is expected to increase in sub-Saharan Africa during this century.

• Drying in the Mediterranean area and in much of southern Africa is expected.

• There may be an increase in East and West African rainfall.

• Some areas, such as the Ethiopian highlands, could benefit from a longer growing season.

• Rangeland degradation and more frequent droughts may lead to reduced forage productivity and quality, particularly in the Sahel and southern Africa.

• Mangrove forests protect coastal zones from storms and floods and forests in general regulate water flows and reduce flooding.

• Through its impact on forests, climate change also will affect wildlife, bush meat and non-timber forest production, which are important for food security in several parts of Africa.

• Availability of water rather than increases in temperature will affect forest growth in Africa.

• African forests will generally face deforestation, degradation, increased forest fires and major changes, e.g. in mountain ecosystems.

• Sea level rise poses a threat to coastlands, lagoons and mangrove ecosystems, especially on eastern and western shores of Africa.

• Changes in coastal ecosystems and delta areas, such as destruction of coral reefs, will have direct effects on the productivity of fish stocks.

• Productivity of the East African lakes could decline.

• Temperature increases as such may not affect pond aquaculture in the tropical regions, but the availability of water may become an issue.

Latin America and Caribbean

• In temperate zones, such as southeastern South America, yield of certain crops (such as soy and wheat) will increase.

• As a result of increased thermal stress and drier soils, productivity in tropical and subtropical regions is expected to decline.

• In arid zones, such as central and northern Chile and northeastern Brazil, the salinization and desertification of agricultural land will possibly increase.

• Rainfed agriculture in semi-arid zones will face increasing risks of losing crops.

• In temperate areas, pasture productivity may increase, benefiting livestock production.

• Tropical forests are probably affectedmore by (i) changes in the availability of water in the soil and (ii) CO2 fertilizationthan by temperature changes.

• There will be a tendency towards "savannization" of eastern Amazonia.

• A high risk of forest loss is suggested for Central America and Amazonia, and more frequent wildfires are possible in Amazonia.

• More runoff is suggested in northwestern South America, and less runoff will occur in Central America.

• Mangrove areas will likely be under threat in several parts of the Caribbean and Central and South America.

• More frequent storms, hurricanes and cyclones will affect aquaculture and fishing in coastal communities, especially in the Caribbean area.

• Availability of water for some aquaculture production technologies may be affected by retreating glaciers in some areas of the Andes.

• Distributions of some fish species in the tropical and subtropical seas may change southwards.

• Primary production in the tropical Pacific may decline because of increased stratification and decreased nutrient supply.

Source: compiled from IPCC, 2007b, for the FAO-Adapt, 2011

15


Adaptation and mitigation options

Climate change adaptationClimate change affects agricultural sectors and

food security in many ways that vary by region.9

While farmers in some regions may benefit

temporarily from the effect of CO2 fertilization,

longer growing seasons and higher yields, the

general consequences of climate change are

expected to be adverse, particularly for the

poor and marginalized. Climate change affects

vulnerable people differently, according to, for

example, their gender, age, health or education.10

People and communities living in fragile

environments, such as drylands, mountain areas

and coastal zones, will be particularly affected.

Climate change adaptation refers to adjustments

in natural or human systems – in response to

actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects

– which moderate harm or exploit beneficial

opportunities. Proper adaptation can significantly

mitigate the negative impacts of climate change

and promote the positive ones. Adaptation

aims to reduce vulnerability to the impacts and

9 FAO’s Framework Programme on Climate Change Adaptation (FAO-Adapt) provides detailed analysis about climate-change impacts on different agricultural sectors and food security dimensions. More information is available in the documents listed in Annex 4.10 FAO-Adapt (FAO.a., 2011)

risks of climate change, and to make sure that

development initiatives do not inadvertently

increase vulnerability. Vulnerability is defined

as the degree to which a system is susceptible

to and unable to cope with adverse effects of

climate change, including climate variability and

extremes. It is a function of exposure, sensitivity

and adaptive capacity (IPCC, 2007):

• Exposure refers to people, property, systems

or other elements present in hazard zones

that are subject to suffering potential losses.11

• Sensitivity is the degree to which a system

can be affected by climate variability or

change.12 It is determined in part and where

relevant by development status.

• Adaptivecapacity is the ability of a human

or nature system to adjust to climate change

to moderate potential damages, to take

advantage of opportunities or to cope with

the consequences.13

Climate change adaptation can be enhanced

by altering exposure, reducing sensitivity and

increasing adaptive capacity. Table 3 illustrates

some options in each category.

11 UNISDR, Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction, 200912 IPCC, the Fourth Assessment Report, Contribution of Working Group I, Appendix I: Glossary, 200713 IPCC, the Fourth Assessment Report, Contribution of Working Group II, Appendix I: Glossary, 2007

16

Adaptation processes need to be location- and

context-specific, integrated and flexible. Farmers,

forest-dependent people and fishers possess

indigenous knowledge which can be a valuable

entry point for localized adaptation, such as

locally adapted crops, fish and livestock, farming

systems, soil, water and nutrient management

methods, agroforestry and vegetation fire

management systems. Nevertheless, indigenous

knowledge needs to be complemented by

scientific know-how in efforts to address complex

and long-term problems caused by climate

change. This can include conducting local impact

and vulnerability assessments and engaging and

working with stakeholders to develop institutional

capacity and identify, evaluate, prioritize and select

adaptation options and tools. Annex 2 introduces

a detailed approach and methods for conducting

rapid climate change impact assessments.

Climate change adaptation seeks ways to deal

with various risks induced by climate change,

such as increases in temperature and sea level,

melting of glaciers, increased frequency and

intensity of extreme weather events, alteration

of available land and water resources, shifts

in cropping zones and changes in pest and

disease patterns. Risk management can plan an

important role in the process. The United Nations

International Strategy for Disaster Reduction

(UNISDR) defines risk management as the

systematic approach and practice of managing

uncertainty to minimize potential harm and loss,

consisting of risk assessment and analysis and

the implementation of risk control, reduction

and transfer.14 Various methodologies and tools

14 UNISDR, Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction, 2009.

have been developed to focus on DRR. Some

information sources are listed in Annex 3.

In developing countries, short-term challenges,

including immediate climate risks, are often so

great that long-term climate risks cannot be

given sufficient attention. Designing responses

that acknowledge both short and long-term

food security usually requires parallel processes

– phased and iterative planning alongside the

introduction of short and long-term measures.

Because of the uncertainty of climate-change

impacts and limited national and local capacities,

reliable data and information may not be available

at the local level for impact and vulnerability

assessments. When it is not possible to make

localized projections of climate-change impacts,

FAO favours the “no-regrets approach”, which

assumes that adaptive practices and actions

will be beneficial even if future impacts are not

certain and climate change threats do not occur

exactly as anticipated (FAO, 2009).

Climate change mitigation Climate change mitigation means implementing

policies to reduce GHG emissions and enhance

carbon sinks15, and the agricultural sectors have

great potential in these areas. Agriculture has the

technical potential to mitigate between 1.5-1.6

GtC eqv/yr (5.5–6 Gt of CO2 eqv./yr (IPCC 2007))

by 2030, mainly through soil carbon sequestration

in developing countries, while the biophysical

mitigation potential of forestry is estimated to

average 1.5 GtC eqv./yr (5.4 Gt CO2 eqv./yr (IPCC

2001)) up until 2050. About 70 percent of the

mitigation potential in the agriculture sectors

15 IPCC, the Fourth Assessment Report, Contribution of Working Group II, Appendix I: Glossary, 2007.

Table 3: Options for climate change adaptation in the agricultural sectors

Altering exposure Reducing sensitivity Increasing adaptive capacity

• Assess impacts and map hazard zones

• Conduct proper land and water-use planning

• Protect watersheds and establish flood retention zones

• Resettle humans and restructure agriculture

• Change cropping patterns

• Develop or adopt suitable crop, plant and animal varieties

• Improve irrigation and drainage systems

• Enhance soil nutrition and on-farm water management

• Diversify cropping and agricultural activities

• Adopt disaster-prevention construction standards

• Develop adaptive strategies and action plans

• Diversify sources of household income

• Improve water and other infrastructure systems

• Establish disaster and crop insurance schemes

• Promote technical transfer and capacity building

17


exists in developing countries. Without realizing a

substantial part of this potential, climate change

mitigation targets cannot be met.16 Climate

change mitigation in the agricultural sectors can

be realized by:

• reducing emissions through efficient

management of carbon and nitrogen flows;

• avoiding or displacing emissions by improving

energy use efficiency or replacing fossil fuel

energy with clean energy; and

16 Ibid.

• removing emissions by enhancing soil carbon

sequestration above and below the ground17

and reducing deforestation and forest

degradation.

Table 4 presents some options.

Agriculture mitigation practices (e.g. crop and

grazing land management, agroforestry and

restoring cultivated organic soils) generate great

additional benefits for smallholders, such as

increasing their productivity, household food

17 Smith, P, D., Martino, Z., Cai, D., Gwary, H., Janzen, P., Kumar, B., McCarl, S., Ogle, F., O’Mara, C., Rice, B., ScholesO. Sirotenko, 2007: Agriculture. In Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Table 4: Options for climate change mitigation in the agricultural sectors

Reducing emissionsAvoiding or displacing

emissions Removing emissions

• Increase feed-use efficiency to reduce CH4 emissions

• Increase fertilizer and water-use efficiency

• Reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD)

• Decrease fishmeal use and reduce excess fishing capacity

• Lower post-harvest losses and increase waste recycling

• Replace fossil fuel energy with bioenergy from wood, agricultural feed stocks and residues

• Improve energy use efficiency in the agricultural sectors

• Undertake forestry conservation activities to help avoid emissions

• Substitute materials with wood products

• Practise afforestation, reforestation and forest restoration

• Engage in sustainable forest management (SFM)

• Improve cropland and grassland management

• Engage in agroforestry• Restore degraded land

18

security, resilience and ecosystem services.

Because these synergies differ across localities, it

is necessary first to identify where the synergies

and potential trade-offs may occur, considering the

possible implications of bioenergy development

for food security and poverty reduction.

A major challenge is to design financing

mechanisms to remunerate environmental services

in smallholder agriculture. These mechanisms need

to offer an incentive for providing and safeguarding

ecosystem services such as watershed protection,

carbon sequestration and biodiversity provision.

For smallholders to be able to participate and

benefit from financial rewards and adopt mitigation

practices, mechanisms need to cover up-front

investment costs. Proper monitoring, reporting and

verification (MRV) models need to be developed

to aggregate the mitigation reductions across

smallholders in order to reduce monitoring and

transaction costs.

Some agencies advocate using a life cycle

assessment (LCA) approach to monitor the carbon

footprints of agricultural production systems along

the food chain and value chain. This approach is

currently being used in the environment sector to

identify, understand and reduce the environmental

impacts of material inputs throughout the entire

life cycle of a product, technology or process.

In an agricultural investment programme, GHG

mitigation gains realized in one area may be lost in

other areas. For example, gains from reforestation

interventions may be lost because of the need

to use many vehicles to monitor and manage

forests; gains from increased water-use efficiency

as the result of introducing pressurized irrigation

may be offset by the increased use of industrial

products and fossil fuel energy. Therefore, to

assess and reduce the overall carbon footprint

of investment programmes, it is necessary to

conduct whole programme carbon-performance

evaluation. FAO developed a carbon-balance

analysis tool which could be used to make ex

ante estimations of the impact of agriculture

and forestry development projects/programmes

on GHG emissions and carbon sequestration,

indicating the effects on the carbon balance (FAO

EX-ACT Webpage, 2011).

Good practices

This section provides a brief introduction to some

widely accepted practices in the agricultural

sector for climate change adaptation and

19


mitigation, including conservation agriculture,

integrated coastal zone management (ICZM),

agroforestry, rainwater harvesting, improved rice

cultivation, irrigation modernization and rangeland

management. Detailed information is provided

in Annex 4, while Table 5 illustrates some typical

examples of good practices.

Conservation agriculture Conservation agriculture is an approach to

managing agro-ecosystems to improve and

sustain productivity and increase profits and food

security while preserving and enhancing the

resource base and the environment.18 It has been

18 FAO Conservation Agriculture Web site: http://www.fao.org/ag/ca/1a.html

Table 5: Good practices and concepts for climate change adaptation and mitigation

Agricultural sector/subsector good practices and concepts Adaptation Mitigation

Climate- smart

agriculture

Crop

Conservation agriculture x x x

Integrated pest management x x x

System for rice intensification x x x

Livestock

Improved pasture management x x x

Improved grazing management x x x

Improved manure management x x x

Forestry

Agroforestry x x x

Sustainable forest management x x x

Afforestation, reforestation and forest restoration x x x

Fishery

Decreased use of fish meal and fish oil feeds x

Reduced excessive fishing capacity x

Species diversification x

Land management

Sustainable land management x x x

Improved crop and grassland management x x x

Restoration of degraded lands and organic soils x x x

Water management

Irrigation modernization x x x

Rainwater harvesting x x x

Cross-sector

Efficient energy use x x x

Reduced post-harvest losses and waste recycling x x x

Disaster risk management x

Adoption of suitable crop, plant and animal varieties and strengthening of seed systems

x

http://www.fao.org/ag/ca/1a.html

20

adopted in large areas in Brazil, China and North

America, among other places, and is characterized

by three linked principles: (1) continuous minimum

mechanical soil disturbance; (2) permanent

organic soil cover; and (3) diversification of crop

species grown in sequences and/or associations.

It can enhance soil and water conservation,

increase crop tolerance to climate variations,

stabilize and improve agriculture productivity,

reduce use of fossil fuel and mineral fertilizer,

mitigate GHG emissions and minimize run-off and

soil erosion. Major disadvantages are the high

initial costs of specialized planting equipment

and the new dynamics of farming systems,

which require advanced management skills and a

learning process.

Integrated coastal zone managementICZM is an integrated approach for managing

the coast, including geographical and

political boundaries, in an attempt to achieve

sustainability. The concept of ICZM was born in

1992 during the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro,

and it is set out in the proceedings of the summit

within Agenda 21, Chapter 17. In near-coastal

areas, ICZM calls for considering the needs of

fisheries, and marine species in general, when

designing coastal zone management plans or

specifications to cope with a changing climate.

For example, if coastal protection measures

against a rising sea include coastal dams, there

can be no inland movement of beaches and

marshes which are critical to many species’

reproduction. Careful planning is necessary

to meet the needs of marine life and coastal

infrastructure and agriculture.

An ecosystem approach to fisheries and aquacultureImplementing an ecosystem approach to fishery

and aquaculture can help to respond more

effectively to expected changes in water surface

temperature, pH levels, sea levels and extreme

events and to improve the resilience of aquatic

ecosystems and fisheries production systems.

In the mean time, implementing an ecosystem

approach can reinforce the sector’s move to

environmentally friendly and fuel-efficient

fishing, mainly through energy conservation

across the fishery and aquaculture supply chain

(e.g. including the subsectors of catching,

producing, farming, processing, packaging and

distributing) and also with the consumption and

disposal of fishery products, while reducing

21


possible negative impacts on aquatic systems,

such as mangroves and seagrasses. Carbon

sequestration potential can be better exploited,

such as by enhancing carbon management in

semi-intensively managed pond aquaculture

(e.g. fish farming) – which constitutes one of the

most widespread farming systems in Asia – and

by replanting mangroves in many aquaculture

and fisheries areas around the world. Enhanced

carbon retention (although not carbon burial) and

capture in coastal ecosystems could be achieved

by conducting extractive aquaculture operations

with seaweeds and filter feeders (e.g. molluscs).

Cultivating seaweed can enhance primary

production in coastal waters and contribute to

carbon sequestration.19

Sustainable forest managementSustainable forest management is enabled by

policies, laws, institutions and practices that

ensure the stewardship and use of forests

and forest lands in a way that maintains forest

biodiversity, productivity, regeneration capacity,

vitality and potential to fulfil, now and in the

future, ecological, economic and social functions

19 FAO 2011. Fisheries and aquaculture in our changing climate. COFI Working Paper 6

at local, national and global levels. Forest policy-

makers have to address trade-offs between

production and conservation objectives; cater

to intergenerational equity; and make sure that

forests provide ecological, economic and social

benefits. Sustainably managed forests can

potentially store up to one-tenth of the global

carbon emissions projected for the first half of

this century.20

Around 350 million people are considered to be

highly dependent on forests (World Bank 2008),

and therefore sustainable forest management

will play a core role in poverty reduction as well.21

Forest management therefore has profound

political, environmental, economic and social

implications. In addition to the other objectives

of forest management, forest policy-makers and

managers need to consider their role in helping

forests and forest-dependent people adapt to

new conditions created by climate change and in

enhancing forests’ contribution to climate change

mitigation. Improved forest management practices

for climate change mitigation and adaptation

20 FAO Forestry and climate change Web site: http://www.fao.org/forestry/climatechange/53459/en/21 http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTFORSOUBOOK/Resources/01-FSB-Ch01.pdf

http://www.fao.org/forestry/climatechange/53459/en/

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTFORSOUBOOK/Resources/01-FSB-Ch01.pdf

22

would best be planned and implemented in

tandem, as they are closely linked. (FAO 2011:

Managing Forests for Climate Change).

Agroforestry The World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF)

defines agroforestry as a collective name for

land-use systems and technologies where

woody perennials (e.g. trees, shrubs, palms,

bamboos) are deliberately used on the same

land management unit as agricultural crops

and/or animals, either in some form of spatial

arrangement or temporal sequence (ICRAF,

1993). Agroforestry systems have great potential

to diversify food and income sources, improve

land productivity and stop and reverse land

degradation through their ability to provide a

favourable microclimate, supply permanent

cover, improve organic carbon content, improve

soil structure, increase infiltration, decrease

soil erosion and enhance fertility and biological

activity of soils. A wide variety of agroforestry

systems are found throughout the world,

including tree crops, orchards (i.e. fruit trees),

home gardens, boundary plantings, on-farm

timber or fuelwood lots, shelterbelts, parkland

systems, multistrata forest gardens, mixed

tree and livestock systems, alley croppings

and shifting cultivation. The World Bank (2008)

estimates that 1.2 billion people are dependent

on agroforestry throughout the world.22

Rainwater harvesting Rainwater harvesting refers to all technologies

where rainwater is collected to make it available

for agricultural production or domestic purposes.

A rainwater harvesting system usually consists

of three components: (1) a catchment area

which produces runoff; (2) a conveyance system

through which the runoff is directed (e.g. bunds,

ditches or channels); and (3) a storage system

where water is accumulated or held for use (e.g.

in soil, pits, ponds, tanks or dams). A special form

of rainwater harvesting is in situ, which enables

the soil to completely infiltrate rainfall through

deep reaching vertical biopores; this results in

only marginal surface runoff.

Rainwater harvesting is applicable in humid, semi-

humid and semi-arid areas with common seasonal

droughts. In an extreme form, rainwater harvesting

can be used in arid regions to concentrate the

rainfall from a larger surface area to obtain

22 Ibid

23


sufficient water to grow a crop on a smaller area.

It is mainly used for supplementary watering

of cereals, vegetables, fodder crops and trees,

but also provides water for domestic and stock

use and sometimes for fish ponds. Rainwater

harvesting can increase water availability, reduce

risk of production failure, enhance crop and

livestock productivity, reduce soil erosion, improve

groundwater recharge and enhance carbon

sequestration above and below ground.

Improved rice cultivationRice is grown in more than 100 countries

as the staple food for more than half of the

human population. Traditional rice production

systems are a major contributor to GHG

emissions. Improved rice cultivation, through

the combination of breeding new varieties,

using fertilizer efficiently, alternating wet and

dry irrigation and properly using crop residues,

can reduce GHG emissions while increasing

productivity and building climate resilience.

The system of rice intensification (SRI) is a

methodology for increasing the productivity

of irrigated rice by changing the management

of plants, soil, water and nutrients. It involves

careful planting of young seedlings, keeping

the soil moist but well-drained and well-aerated

and adding compost or other organic material

to the soil as much as possible. During the

past ten years, this methodology has been

adopted in many countries and has shown good

results in increasing rice yield while reducing

the needed quantity of seeds, irrigation water

and chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Further

improvements can be achieved by combining

SRI with conservation agriculture, in which the

SRI agronomy is applied on no-till land with

residue retention and no flooding. The rice crop is

irrigated to field capacity only, maintaining, as in

SRI, aerobic soil conditions.

Irrigation modernizationWater is the primary medium through

which climate change influences the earth’s

ecosystems, agriculture production and people’s

livelihoods. Adaptation to climate change

is mainly about better water management,

and in the agricultural sectors, irrigation

modernization is considered a good option.

Irrigation modernization aims to improve resource

utilization and water delivery service to farmers

by upgrading the technical and managerial

24

aspects of irrigation schemes and making

institutional reforms.23 It highlights the need for

systematic strategies to address institutional,

physical and technical issues coherently

through participatory approaches. The concept,

technologies and tools have been disseminated

and piloted in many countries in recent years,

especially in Asia, and have proven to be effective

in building climate resilience in agriculture

water management and increasing resource

use efficiency, especially water productivity.

Combining this technical approach with water-

saving crop and land management concepts,

such as conservation agriculture, leads to further

increases in efficiency.

Grazing land management Degraded or overgrazed land can be restored to

produce more biomass by selectively planting

grasses, adding phosphate fertilizers and

alternating grazing with rest periods for the

land. Increased biomass productivity enhances

soil cover, increases moisture availability and

increases the overall amounts of stable organic

matter in the soil. These will benefit livestock

23 FAORAP, the future of large rice-based irrigated systems in Southeast Asia, Bangkok, 2007.

production and herders’ livelihoods while

decelerating grazing land desertification.

Core principles

In addition to integrated planning at the

ecosystem level and mainstreaming climate

change considerations into development

activities, some core principles on climate change

adaptation and mitigation in the agricultural

sectors have been identified by various

stakeholders.

Focus on food security

Climate change is likely to severely threaten

people’s ability to achieve food security, and thus

it will impact the international community’s ability

to achieve its foremost Millennium Development

Goal (MDG1) to reduce extreme poverty and

hunger. In agriculture-based countries, where

agriculture is critical for economic development,

increasing productivity to achieve food security

is clearly a priority, and that is projected to entail

a significant increase in emissions from the

agricultural sectors in developing countries (IPCC

2007).24 Therefore, climate change adaptation

24 Ibid

25


in the agricultural sectors will focus on actions

which can reduce vulnerability and ensure food

and nutrition security.

Smallholder farmers, forest dwellers, herders

and fishers who are already food insecure will

be the most affected. It is therefore imperative

to provide more targeted financial and technical

assistance to the most vulnerable groups.

Another focus of adaptation measures is to

ensure environmental sustainability (MDG7),

which is essential to achieving food security

and poverty alleviation over the long term.

Food security will be difficult, if not impossible,

to achieve in most countries suffering from

natural resource degradation. Many examples

of such adaptation measures are found in the

forest sector, such as watershed protection,

agroforestry for more stable, diversified farming

systems and forest protection of coastal areas

and inland waterways.

Support a country-driven process

Mainstreaming of climate change considerations

into agriculture and rural development activities

largely depends on local awareness, political

willingness, obligations within global climate

change frameworks and technical and economic

conditions. Climate change adaptation and

mitigation interventions must be formulated and

implemented in response to a country’s specific

demands and needs and must be in line with

national and local climate change strategies

and action plans, especially National Adaptation

Programmes of Action (NAPAs) and Nationally

Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs).

Design participatory, gender-sensitive and local activities

Climate change is global, but its impacts are

individual. Interventions for climate change

adaptation and mitigation must be tailored

to specific local conditions to ensure their

relevance and effectiveness. Multi-stakeholder

consultations are needed to jointly prioritize

options and make decisions. It is therefore

important to adopt demand-driven, location-

specific approaches and participatory modalities

that consider gender-specific vulnerabilities,

needs and capabilities as well as the priorities of

indigenous people and vulnerable communities.

Proper social analysis enables planners and

practitioners to put the human dimensions

26

– stakeholders, target groups, intended

beneficiaries or other affected people – at the

centre of development interventions. Various

manuals and user guides on social analysis are

already available. In 2011, FAO developed three

guides – a Manager’s Guide, a Practitioner’s

Guide and a Field Guide – in the series “Social

analysis for agriculture and rural investment

projects”. These guides can be used by project/

programme practitioners to help design and

implement participatory, gender-sensitive and

local-specific climate change-related activities.

Build partnership among stakeholders

Good partnership among stakeholders helps

to build joint efforts towards climate change

adaptation and mitigation. Partnerships could

be built among governments departments, the

UN system, international and national research

institutions, donor agencies, civil society and the

private sector. Within the UN system, available

partnership platforms include the “Delivering

as One” UN initiative in pilot countries and the

UNDAF.

Support transboundary collaboration

Transboundary collaboration is already required

when countries address ecosystem approaches,

shared resources (e.g. fish stocks) and climate-

change impacts (e.g. pests and diseases, water

shortages, rising seawater levels and melting

glaciers). Interdependence and collaboration will

become even more important because countries

will need to access genetic resources to adapt to

new climatic conditions. Some good examples

of this are national and regional cooperation

networks established in recent years to manage

natural disasters, control animal and plant

diseases and monitor food risks.

Priority areas

Even though climate change interventions vary

for different types and locations of agriculture

and rural development activities, there are some

common high-priority issues that need to be

addressed in developing countries.

Data and knowledge generation and sharing

To conduct scientific planning and make informed

decisions, it is necessary to have reliable data

and information on climate-change impacts,

local vulnerability and GHG emissions from

different production and agro-ecosystems;

however, needed data and information often

are not available at local or national levels. This

can be remedied by improving relevant data

monitoring and processing systems; adopting

suitable methodologies and technologies for

climate change modelling and downscaling;

and applying practical methods and tools

for impact and vulnerability assessments.

Where it is not feasible to generate localized

data and information for technical or financial

reasons, alternative options could be explored

to share climate modelling information through

subregional or regional cooperation or to use

reference data and information from neighbouring

areas or countries. It is also important to

collect and analyse socio-economic information

for different climate change adaptation and

mitigation interventions.

Institutions, policies and financing for capacity development

Coping with climate change in the agricultural

sectors requires adjusting institutional

structures and arrangements. This includes

defining adequate national policy and legislative

frameworks and assigning and coordinating

responsibilities within the governance structures

of countries and regions. Agriculture is currently

excluded from the major global climate financing

mechanisms; a few financing windows are

available mainly for mitigation. As a result,

it is necessary to have innovative financing

mechanisms and investment policies to support

agriculture, reward synergistic actions and

address specific needs of smallholder farming.

Proper mechanisms are needed to: (1) realize

iterative planning through participatory, integrated

approaches and strong stakeholder engagement;

and (2) better reflect agriculture-related aspects

in NAPAs and NAMAs. Institutions and decision-

making must remain flexible in order to deal with

the uncertainties of potential climate-change

impacts.

27


Sustainable land and water management and biodiversity

Maintaining biological and genetic diversity

is necessary for the health and resilience of

ecosystems. To maintain and increase the

resilience of agricultural systems to climate

change, it is crucial to engage in sustainable

and adaptive natural resources management,

especially land and water resources

management. Since the specific threat of

climate change is new, the response strategy

may require major qualitative changes in natural

resource management, not just fine-tuning

certain ongoing practices. It is important to better

understand and sustain the ecosystem services

furnished by agricultural, aquatic and forest

biodiversity.

Development and dissemination of technologies, practices and process

Development and dissemination of relevant

technologies, practices and processes is urgently

needed to improve national and local capacities

in developing countries. Crucial technical issues

to be addressed include: generating more

reliable climate-change models and projections;

developing and adopting suitable crop and plant

varieties and animal species; strengthening seed

systems; efficiently using agriculture inputs;

engaging in proper waste management; and

conducting MRV of mitigation interventions in

smallholder farming. Capacity building should

be designed for different groups based on

proper needs assessments. The Farmer Field

School method is a good approach for capacity

development at the community and farmer levels.

The United Nations Collaborative Programme

on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and

Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (UN-

REDD), jointly initiated by FAO, the UNDP and

the UNEP, is a good model for sector capacity

development.

Disaster risk reduction

DRR is considered to be a good entry point for

climate change adaptation in countries suffering

from frequent disaster threats and expecting

increased frequency and intensity of extreme

weather events as a result of climate change.

The UNISDR defines DRR as the concept and

practice of reducing disaster risks through

systematic efforts to analyse and manage the

causal factors of disasters, including through

reduced exposure to hazards, lessened

vulnerability of people and property, wise

management of land and the environment and

improved preparedness for adverse events.25

A comprehensive approach to reduce disaster

risks is set out in the United Nations-endorsed

Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA), adopted

in 2005. The UNISDR system provides a

vehicle for cooperation among governments,

organizations and civil society actors to assist

in the implementation of the Framework. The

FAO Framework Programme on Disaster Risk

Reduction (FP DRR) reflects the HFA and strives

to assist member states to implement its five

priorities for action in the agricultural sectors.

It promotes integrated implementation of four

major pillars: (i) institutional strengthening

and good governance; (ii) information and

early warning systems; (iii) preparedness

for effective response and recovery; and (iv)

prevention, mitigation and building resilience with

technologies, approaches and practices.26 Four

cross-cutting priorities are identified, including:

capacity development, knowledge management

and communication, strategy partnerships and

gender equity. Annex 5 introduces the details of

DRR framework and options.

25 UNISDR, Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction, 200926 Resilient Livelihoods–disaster risk reduction for food and nutrition security–an FAO framework programme, 2011.

28

Most activities in agricultural investment projects/

programmes are rarely designed to specifically

address climate change adaptation or mitigation

strategies; however, they are often relevant to

climate change issues and could be adjusted

to enhance climate change-related measures.

Even when project/programme objectives do

not include climate change adaptation and/or

mitigation, steps should be taken to ensure that

the project/programme does not reduce the

potential to realize climate change objectives in

the future.

This chapter details approaches and procedures

for incorporating climate change in each of the

four commonly recognized phases27 of the

project/programme cycle: conceptualization,

27 These phases are often equivalent to the following widely recognized terms: (i) identification (conceptualization stage), (ii) formulation and appraisal or detailed design (preparation stage) and (iii) supervision and evaluation (of implementation).

preparation, supervision28 and evaluation (see

Figure 1). Table 6 presents a list of relevant

questions to consider throughout a project or

programme. The entry points presented in this

chapter are supported by annexes which include

summary information and pointers or links to

more substantial documents or Web sites where

they are already available.

28 This document does not include guidance for incorporating climate change during "implementation and monitoring" phases of agricultural projects/programmes; rather, it provides guidance on how to supervise climate change aspects during those phases.

Figure 1 Incorporating climate change considerations into agricultural development programmes and

projects

Chapter 3 - Incorporating climate change considerations into agricultural investment projects/programmes

29


Table 6: Questions to guide incorporating climate change throughout the project/programme

Subject Question*

A. Questions which are relevant to both the conceptualization and preparation stages

A.1Policy aspects and country priorities (applicable to both mitigation and adaptation)

National and local strategies and priorities

1) Is there any available climate change and DRR or DRM strategy or action plan at the national, subnational or local level? If so, what are the priorities for the agricultural sectors? Which are relevant to the project/programme concept?

2) In least developed countries (LDCs), which priorities have been identified in the NAPAs that are relevant to the project/programme concept?

3) If NAMAs have already been formulated and submitted, which priorities, targets or actions have been included?

A.2 Institutional aspects (applicable to both mitigation and adaptation)

Stakeholder identification and engagement

1) Which are the major institutions coordinating and implementing climate change-related actions at the national and project/programme levels, and how could they contribute to the project/programme with data and/or specific actions? Are additional efforts needed to ensure coordination?

2) Is a stakeholder consultation process in place, including an appropriate delivery strategy (to be used in the consultation events), that allows capturing key climate change-related issues?

3) Which local stakeholders (e.g. local governments, communities, civil society, producer associations and businesses) could have a key role as project/programme partners?

Barriers, constraints and capacity development needs

1) Which constraints, gaps and related financial, technical and other capacity development needs have been identified at the national and project/programme levels?

A.3. Adaptation

Impacts of climate change and climate variability on agricultural sectors

1) What are the expected impacts of climate change on the country’s agriculture sectors?2) How can existing data and related assessments on the impacts of climatic variability

on agriculture in the project/programme area be identified?Should a rapid assessment be conducted?

Impacts of climate change and climate variability on people

1) How are these impacts affecting the project/programme beneficiaries1 and other potential stakeholders?

Adaptive capacity of the project/programme-supported activities

1) How can the project/programme become more climate-resilient (i.e. how can it be improved to increase the resilience of the agricultural systems and livelihoods to climate change impacts)?

Options for disaster risk reduction (DRR)

1) Is there a DRR framework in place to protect beneficiaries’ livelihoods from shocks and strengthen their capacity to absorb the impact of, and recover from, disruptive climatic events (when applicable)? If not, how can the project/programme help with that?

A.4. Mitigation

Impacts 1) What are the possible impacts of the project/programme on climate change in terms of increasing/reducing/avoiding GHG emissions?

2) Which anticipated impacts on climate change could come from improved agricultural systems or from changes in land use?

3) Which other types of project/programme activities (other than production) have a potential impact on the project/programme’s carbon balance?

Mitigation potential of the project/programme

1) Which activities/practices/technologies proposed by the project/programme have mitigation potential?

2) What is the climate change mitigation potential of the project/programme?

Win-win opportunities that include mitigation

1) Based on the project/programme’s climate change mitigation potential, are there agricultural technologies and practices which would reduce/remove GHGs (mitigation) and, at the same time, sustainably increase productivity, resilience (adaptation) and enhance achievement of national food security and development goals, or at least two of these?

30

29

29 Project/programme beneficiaries are not a distinct group of stakeholders but comprise different categories of people who will likely be affected in different ways.

Subject Question*

Mitigation options 1) What specific mitigation interventions could be proposed in view of local natural, social and economic conditions in the project/programme areas?

2) How would you prioritize these possible interventions in the order of CSA, win-win options and mitigation interventions, based on the government’s willingness?

Funding source 1) Are there any financing sources, in addition to the project/programme fund, that can be used for the identified mitigation opportunities?

B. Questions which arerelevant to the preparation stage (i.e. after concept note development)

Project/programme technical strategy and approaches

1) Has a strategy been defined to respond to climate change issues? 2) Which integrated planning approach is being proposed at the landscape or ecosystem

level to ensure the future sustainable development of rural communities in the project/programme area?

3) Is the project/programme seeking to capture synergies and manage trade-offs among food security, climate adaptation, mitigation and sustainable development?

Climate change-related activities

1) Have the climate change-related activities been identified? Should these activities be bundled under a stand-alone climate change component/subcomponent or integrated (mainstreamed) into one or more project/programme components?

Project/programme results framework and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) arrangements

1) Have climate change considerations been incorporated into the project/programme’s results framework? Have climate change-related indicators been identified?

Institutional aspects 1) What are the implementation arrangements to ensure that climate change activities will be properly executed?

Governance 1) Is there any governance risk which could jeopardize the implementation of project/programme activities including those related to climate change?

Intersectoral coordination

1) Have intersectoral linkages been properly addressed?

C. Questions which are relevant to the supervision stage

Supervision at project/programme start-up

1) Is consultation with project/programme beneficiaries and partner institutions – including those partners responsible for climate change-related activities – planned for this stage?

2) Which subjects and documents should be reviewed by the supervision team?

Project/programme supervision

1) Were all the climate change considerations (i.e. impact, adaptation and/or mitigation) addressed in project/programme design? If not, are stakeholders raising any climate change issues which could affect the achievement of the project/programme’s objective?What can be done to reduce this risk?

2) Have field visits and discussions with relevant institutions (directly or indirectly involved in the implementation of climate change-related activities) been planned?

3) Which climate change-related subjects and documents should be reviewed by the supervision team? What adjustments are needed?

D. Questions which are relevant to project/programme evaluation

Baseline information and baseline survey

1) What should be assessed during ex ante evaluation in terms of climate change?

Mid-term review (MTR)

1) What should be assessed during MTR in terms of climate change?

Project/programme completion and final evaluation

1) What could be included in the evaluation to generate lessons learned on achievements related to incorporating climate change considerations in the project/programme?

(*) For each question, Annex 1 provides detailed guidance and a list of useful sources of information.

31


Project/programme conceptualization stage

Overview

Project/programme conceptualization and the

preparation of a concept note represent the

initial phase of project/programme design and

occur before the project/programme is placed in

the financing pipeline of a donor or international

financing institution (IFI). In most countries,

each donor agency should have an up-to-date

country support strategy or programme30 that

includes mutually agreed opportunities to address

key national priorities and, in some cases,

specific regions of the country. The concept

note is prepared to be fully consistent with the

existing donor strategy (when available) and the

government development strategy for the country.

While specifics vary with different IFIs, the main

objective at the concept stage is to identify the

critical issues, potential underlying causes (or

“drivers”) and solutions, strategic rationale for the

donor agency’s involvement and potential project/

programme risks. From the donor’s perspective,

30 In a number of countries, donors and governments aim to increase the harmonization of donor efforts through a Joint Assistance Strategy (JAS).

it is crucial to obtain early guidance and

agreement on the approach to project/programme

preparation and issues that need to be addressed.

This an excellent time to begin analysing and

incorporating climate change considerations into

the project/programme design.

Identifying entry points

The PT, including the project/programme

proponent, should identify the main entry points

for climate change mitigation and/or adaptation

in relevant interventions so that they can be

incorporated into the project/programme concept

note.31 The PT can review the illustrative list of

possible entry points which is provided in Table

6 and detailed actions which are suggested in

Annex 1. During all project/programme stages,

the project or programme manager should

ensure that all PT members are aware that

mitigation and adaptation cannot be achieved

with disconnected alternative activities, but

require a conceptual systems approach tied into a

coherent strategy.

31 This assumes that a project idea already exists and warrants discussion between the IFI and the client.

32

The PT should complete a screening of potential

climate change issues by addressing two

interrelated questions presented in Table 6:

• What are the impacts of climate change and

climate variability on agriculture in the project/

programme area?

• What are the possible impacts of the project/

programme on climate change (i.e. how

will the project/programme affect GHG

concentrations in the atmosphere in terms of

carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e)?32

Annex 2 offers detailed guidance on how to

address these questions. Depending on the

level of information available for the project/

programme area, it may only be possible at

the identification stage to address impact

assessment questions in qualitative terms. If this

is the case, the PT should try to support activities

to collect additional data and information in order

to be able to include quantitative aspects in the

formulation stage.

Box 1: Climate change screening

Climate change screening is a key step in the conceptualization phase. According to the UNDP (2010), climate change screening (often simply termed “climate screening”) is “a way of establishing information on the impacts of climate change on development activities, and of how these linkages are or can be taken into account in development activities as well as in the national planning and decision-making processes”.

A number of IFIs, other funding sources and potential partners have developed climate change screening methodologies and tools. Examples include the World Bank Climate Change Portal – which contains a mapping visualization tool displaying key climate variables data and a computer-based prototype screening tool for assessment and design for adaptation to climate change (ADAPT) – and the UNDP (2010) “Tools and Guidelines to Mainstream Climate Change Adaptation –A Stocktaking Report”, which presents climate risk screening methods, tools and guidance.

32 A carbon dioxide equivalent is the unit used to report GHG emissions or reductions. GHGs are converted to CO2e by multiplying emissions by their respective global warming potential (GWP). The CO2e allows for reporting of overall GHG emissions in one standardized value and aids in GHG emission comparisons.

Box 2: Climate risk screening

Where there is evidence of increasing frequency and/or intensity of extreme weather events in the project/programme area, the screening process should include climate risk screening. Climate risk screening is defined by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) as “analysing project concepts, with a view to identifying:

• whether climate risks have been taken into consideration;

• whether [concepts are] vulnerable to climate change;

• whether plans could lead to increased vulnerability; and

• what steps taken in project design are needed to reduce risks and associated costs.”

(ADB, 2009, p. 67)

An illustrative list of references for identifying

possible entry points in different agricultural

sectors is provided in Box 3. For a more detailed

list, see Annex 3 (under its section 2.1)

Climate change mitigation challenges The following challenges may arise when

addressing climate change mitigation during a

project/programme identification mission:

Challenge: The client (i.e. government partner

or project proponent) is not familiar with or

interested in considering mitigation measures as

part of project/programme design.

Recommendation: Most countries now have

a national strategic framework in place that

addresses climate change-related issues. In

rare cases, some governmental agencies may

not be familiar with these policies, and it can

be assumed that there may be a need for more

information about how these policy issues can

be addressed in their respective sectors. New

projects/programmes often represent ideal

opportunities to promote the integration of new

climate change policies. The PT should analyse,

discuss and advise the government on these

national policies and how they relate to the

proposed project/programme. The PT should

describe the possible benefits that could accrue

to smallholders and/or other project/programme

stakeholders from including mitigation actions.

33


Examples of “win-win” opportunities include:

(1) investments that increase organic material

to improve land productivity also enhance the

ability to sequester CO2; and (2) integrated crop-

livestock production that includes ecological

sustainability criteria increases environmental

resilience and contributes to climate change

adaptation and mitigation.33

Challenge: The client is unaware that key

agricultural issues addressed by the project/

programme will also produce climate change-

related benefits (e.g. enhance the ability to

sequester GHGs).

Recommendation: When climate change

mitigation is a national priority that is described

in national policies or strategies and when there

is opportunity in the project/programme area, the

PT could advise the government about how to

capitalize on this opportunity by making climate

change mitigation more explicit in the project/

programme proposal.34

Challenge: The client is interested in introducing

climate mitigation solutions, but does not know

how best to go about it.

33 See FAOb, 2011. Save and Grow: A policymaker’s guide to the sustainable intensification of smallholder crop production: http://www.fao.org/ag/save-and-grow/34 For example, by establishing a climate change adaptation and mitigation awareness activity in the project and introducing specific climate change mitigation activities and indicators in the project’s results framework.

Recommendation: The PT could undertake a

number of actions to guide the client, such as

applying existing tools (e.g. the FAO EX-ACT

Tool) to assess the carbon balance and mitigation

potential of the project/programme. For further

details, see Annex 3.

Challenge: Not all key actors are involved in the

project/programme.

Recommendation: The PT should urge the

project/programme proponent to reach out to

potential partners. Past experiences have shown

that bringing other partners on board early in

the project/programme preparation process

contributes to advancing the climate change

agenda in the project/programme area and often

reduces delays in obtaining all the necessary

project/programme approvals. Potential partners

might include a climate change body or national

agency responsible for leading the formulation

of national climate change strategy and actions

plans; research institutions generating climate

data and/or undertaking downscaling scenarios;

and existing “champions” such as key civil society

members, NGOs, specific forums, etc. For more

information on institutions to be contacted,

see Annexes 1 and 2 and the section below on

working with partners and stakeholders.

In all four situations above, the PT should also

endeavour to identify, discuss and advise the

government and donor representative on possible

Box 3: References for entry points in different agricultural sectors

There are many sources for information on climate change in agricultural sectors. The illustrative list below presents some publications from FAO and its partners by sector.

Crop production• Save and Grow: A policymaker’s guide to the

sustainable intensification of smallholder crop production. FAO, 2011 http://www.fao.org/ag/save-and-grow/

• Food security and agricultural mitigationhttp://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i1318e/i1318e00.pdf

Livestock• Greenhouse gas emissions from the dairy sector – a

life cycle assessment. FAO, 2010 http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/k7930e/k7930e00.pdf

Forestry• Strategic framework for forests and climate change.

Collaborative Partnership on Forests (CPF) http://www.fao.org/forestry/16639-064a7166b1dd027504bbfbb763878af99.pdf

Fisheries• Fisheries and aquaculture in our changing climate

(FAO brochure) ftp://ftp.fao.org/FI/brochure/climate_change/policy_brief.pdf

• Climate change implications for fisheries and aquaculture. FAO, 2009

• See other relevant documents at http://www.fao.org/fishery/topic/13788/en

Agricultural water management• Climate change, water and food security. FAO, 2011

http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/i2096e/i2096e00.htm

http://www.fao.org/forestry/16639-064a7166b1dd027504bbfbb763878af99.pdf

http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/k7930e/k7930e00.pdf

ftp://ftp.fao.org/FI/brochure/climate_change/policy_brief.pdf

http://www.fao.org/fishery/topic/13788/en

34

additional sources of funding. See the section

below on finance options for climate change

activities.

Climate change adaptation challengesGovernment partners are usually receptive

to incorporating climate change adaptation

considerations in agricultural investment projects

and programmes, providing that they are in line

with national priorities. Nevertheless, there are

a number of challenges that the PT should be

ready to address if they arise. Some of the more

common ones are listed below.

Challenge: Funding for adaptation is limited.

Recommendation: Even in cases where

the client has requested loans for projects/

programmes that include activities that address

(either directly or indirectly) adaptation issues,

funding for climate change adaptation activities

in most cases is sought through grants serving

as co-financing to the loan. Whenever needed,

the PT should advise the client and donor

representative about possible additional sources

of funding (e.g. bilateral cooperation, the Least

Developed Countries Fund (LDCF), the Special

Climate Change Fund (SCCF) and the global

Adaptation Fund). See the section below on

finance options for climate change activities.

Challenge: There are limitations to achieving

adaptation in a single intervention.

Recommendation: Adaptation objectives are

rarely achieved through a single intervention

(FAO-Adapt, 2011). Adaptation should be viewed

more as a continuum, requiring an overarching

approach that incorporates interventions that

range from those that address underlying drivers

of vulnerability to those designed exclusively to

respond to climate change impacts (ODI, 2010).

Such interventions may include establishing

a climate change adaptation and mitigation

awareness activity in the project/programme and

introducing climate change mitigation indicators

in the project/programme’s results framework.

Challenge: There are limited data to guide

effective decision-making.

Recommendation: The PT should make efforts

to identify relevant data (or conduct a rapid

assessment) of impacts of climatic variability

on agriculture in the project/programme area.

Climate change adaptation can be enhanced

through: (i) altering exposure, (ii) reducing

sensitivity of the system and/or (iii) increasing the

adaptive capacity of the system. Having relevant

data can help identify which approach(es) are

relevant to the project/programme concept and

which climate change adaptation activities are

appropriate (for details on the assessment of

impacts, see Annex 2).

Challenge: Local characteristics must be

considered when identifying adaptation measures.

Recommendation: Adaptation is location- and

context-specific, and needs to be integrated

and flexible (FAO-Adapt, 2011). If impact and

vulnerability assessments are not available for

the project/programme area, a rapid assessment

should be completed either during the

identification or preparation phase. Based on the

results of the assessments, the PT should engage

stakeholders to determine any needed capacity-

building activities and identify, evaluate, prioritize

and select available adaptation options and tools

to be supported by the project/programme.

Challenge: The project/programme concept

should identify where synergies exist among

food security, sustainable development,

adaptation and mitigation.

Recommendation: The PT should coordinate

well with relevant national agencies. Further,

it should screen project/programme-relevant

development and sectoral policies, strategies

and plans through a climate lens to determine

whether they might lead to maladaptation or

miss important opportunities arising from climate

change (adapted from UNDP, 2010).

Challenge: Not all key actors are involved in the

project/programme.

Recommendation: As stated above, it is critical

to reach out to potential partners. This topic is

addressed in more detail below and in Annexes

1 and 2.

Working with partners and stakeholders

A project/programme cannot be successful

without the active participation of those involved

35


in or affected by the project/programme. To ensure

widespread participation, an initial stakeholder

analysis is often conducted during project/

programme conceptualization.37 Usually there are

many sector players undertaking adaptation and

mitigation actions in a project/programme area

(or in neighbouring locations), and they should

be considered as potential stakeholders. These

include line ministries, climate bodies, research

and meteorological organizations, sector-specific

commissions or environmental commissions,

parliamentary committees focused on sectoral

or environmental issues, donor agencies and

NGOs with a sectoral or environmental focus (for

further guidance, see Annex 1). Among these

players are those responsible for leading the

formulation of national and subnational climate

change strategies and actions plans (usually a line

ministry), such as the National Communications

to the UNFCCC, NAMAs, NAPAs, UNFCCC

National Adaptation Programme of Actions and

the Global Environment Facility (GEF) National

Portfolio Formulation Exercise (NPFE). In addition,

existing “champions” (e.g. NGOs, grassroots and

specific forums) are also key potential partners.

Although some of these players may not be

directly involved in adaptation or mitigation actions

in agriculture, the scope of this list demonstrates

the need to coordinate climate change-related

actions in a project/programme area (particularly

in adaptation) in order to increase the efficiency

of the project/programme and avoid duplication

of efforts (see Section A.2 of Annex 1 for more

detailed guidance).

Social analysis is instrumental in designing

and implementing successful pro-poor policy

and institutional reforms and poverty-targeted

investment programmes and projects, including

those addressing climate change issues. It is

fundamental to understand the complexities

of social diversity, gender and the various

dimensions of poverty (e.g. low income, lack of

assets, vulnerability, exclusion, powerlessness,

lack of voice and an inability to withstand shocks).

A social analysis perspective enables planners

and practitioners to put the human dimensions

– stakeholders, target groups, intended

beneficiaries or other affected people – at the

centre of development interventions. Many

manuals and user guides on social analysis exist

already,35 although they do not necessarily apply

to climate change and agriculture investment

projects/programmes. In the context of project/

programme development and implementation,

FAO has recently developed three guides in the

series “Social analysis for agriculture and rural

investment projects” – a Manager’s Guide, a

Practitioner’s Guide and a Field Guide – which

can be used by project/programme practitioners

when designing and implementing participatory,

gender-sensitive and local-specific climate

change-related activities.

Incorporating climate change mitigation and adaptation in concept notes

A project/programme concept note should be

short; it typically averages between five and eight

pages. It is important that it reflect the potential

mitigation and adaptation issues of the proposed

project/programme to ensure their full integration

into project/programme design and to the extent

possible, opportunities to address those issues.

In particular, that could include CSA, which

maximizes synergies and minimizes trade-offs

among food security, climate change adaptation

and mitigation.

Once data collection, discussions and analysis

have been done and key questions from Table 6

have been addressed, the PT should incorporate

climate change considerations into the project/

programme’s draft concept note. The note should

explicitly address relevant climate change issues,

propose possible activities to be supported by the

project/programme (including scaling up climate

change mitigation and/or adaptation measures),

identify potential outputs and outcomes and

provide a list of possible partners.

Table 7 provides an illustrative annotated outline

of a concept note with examples of climate-

related information to be included. Each donor or

IFI has its own template or outline for a concept

note, so the exact content will vary. Depending

on the situation, writers may give more emphasis

to certain aspects over others while addressing

the questions from Table 6.

35 For references on how to conduct stakeholder and social analysis in project design, see Section A.2 of Annex 1 (under stakeholder identification and engagement).

36

Table 7: Illustrative outline of a concept note focusing on climate change mainstreaming

Section Typical information to be provided

Background, context and rationale

Backgroundandcontext:

This subsection provides the background and basis for the project/programme rationale. In terms of climate change, it would benefit from: (i) a short paragraph briefly describing the geography, climate, population of the project/programme area and, if available, the estimated number of people at risk from the consequences of climate change; and (ii) a second paragraph with an overview of national climate change issues and related priorities (with emphasis on the project/programme area), based on existing or easily generated information.

Most of the information required at the national level (and eventually the subnational level) would be available in the Country National Communications to the UNFCCC or other national reports (when available) such as NAPAs, NAMAs and NPFE (links to these reports are included in Annex 1 under "policy aspects and country priorities"). Hints on how to identify climate change impacts and related issues in the project/programme area are available in Annex 2.

This section also summarizes the agricultural and institutional context in which the project/programme will be implemented. For this, the PT may refer to government institutions responsible for climate change on issues relevant to the project/programme (e.g. meteorological agencies providing drought forecasts). Finally, this section could include information on the relation between the proposed project/programme and the country’s donor programme or strategy (assuming that a donor has already been identified) and the donor’s objectives and policies or strategies. A sentence should describe the climate change-related priorities and policies and how the project/programme would support them.

Project/programmerationaleandreasoningformainstreamingclimatechange(andforfunding):

Based on the information provided in the background and context, this section: (1) justifies the proposed project/programme investments; (2) specifies why additional (or adjusted types of) climate change-related investments are needed; and (3) describes the kind of interventions that would be best suited to address existing climate change circumstances. An analysis should contrast the likely scenario without the proposed climate change actions (i.e. what would happen if the project/programme were implemented without climate change considerations, or what would happen if the project/programme were not implemented) with the scenario of a project/programme incorporating the proposed climate change actions.

Proposed project/programme objectives and main results

Thedevelopmentobjectiveandresults:

The development objective states which needs the project/programme will address and focuses on the impact/outcome for which the project/programme can be held accountable. Since most agricultural and rural development projects/programmes are not designed specifically as climate change adaptation or mitigation strategies, they do not necessarily reflect climate change considerations in their statement of objectives. However, after conducting participatory forums and identifying the climate change issues which need to be addressed by the project/programme, the PT should try to make climate change explicit in one or more of the project/programme’s intermediary results/outcomes (or outputs to these outcomes), in order to contribute to the achievement of the project/programme’s objective. A list of output and outcome indicators is provided in Annex 6. The PT should facilitate the preparation of the project/programme’s results framework (or M&E framework). While that task is usually undertaken after concept approval, some IFIs require a draft results framework at this stage.

37


Project/programme preparation stage

Project/programme preparation may be started

following the approval of the concept note by

the government and the donor. The project/

programme proposal is detailed at this stage,

and it represents a critical entry point for

incorporating climate change considerations

through key actions that will ensure the delivery

of climate change-related outputs and outcomes.

Preparing for detailed project/programme design

Before getting into detailed project/programme

preparation, it is best to identify the resources

needed to prepare the project/programme. The

PT usually identifies and proposes the following

information:

• The required technical composition of the

team: Is specific climate change expertise

needed? If so, prepare terms of reference

and estimate the amount of effort required

(usually in person-weeks). It would also be

prudent to discuss and obtain commitment

from the project/programme proponent

(government or other agency) about who

on their staff would be made available to

compose a project/programme formulation

task team, including experts from specialized

agencies working with climate change, and

the timing for their involvement.

Section Typical information to be provided

Concept brief Conceptdescription:

This section describes the project/programme concept and how its proposed design would address the project/programme objective. Depending on the donor, a specific component description may not be required. Nevertheless, the PT should attempt to link each component with one or more of the expected results/outcomes identified above. While it is not necessary to refer to all of the climate change problems presented in the background and context, the issues that will be directly addressed by the project/programme should be included in this section.

If preliminary descriptions of the proposed components are included, the PT should identify the entry points for climate change. It is also desirable to include a brief description (or estimation) of the global mitigation and national adaptation benefits of the project/programme.

Project/programmestakeholderanalysis:

This section briefly summarizes the stakeholders in the country and sector, their roles and their potential contribution to the project/programme. It should identify and describe those government or private-sector partner agencies which may not necessarily execute the project/programme but which could provide climate change-related information, training or funding. It should also specify (if appropriate) the role of the climate change lead institutions (e.g. supervision, project/programme steering committee).

Executing/implementingagency:

This section names the local or national government agency(ies) that will execute the project/programme. It should include a preliminary description of the project/programme implementation and M&E arrangements, including those for executing and assessing progress on climate-related activities. If significant climate change action is proposed at this stage, this section could include feedback from the project/programme into the formulation or revision of a broader climate change strategy or larger programmes (this information may fit better during the further preparation stage).

Indicativefinancing:

Depending on the donor agency, it may be necessary to provide an overall idea about project/programme cost and financing, although not necessarily with a detailed breakdown by component. Any potential additional climate change financing that has been identified should be mentioned here.

Project/programme risks

This section indicates the risk(s) that might prevent the project/programme objective from being achieved, such as design, capacity, quality, delivery and fiduciary and safeguard issues. While many may not be identified, the PT should flag those which are relevant for the project/programme.

Source: Adapted from GEF and other IFIs’ guidelines.

38

• The project/programme preparation

budget: Are additional costs involved to

incorporate climate change activities? Prepare

a financing plan summary, particularly when

there is more than one source of financing for

(i.e. cofinancing sources).

• An estimate of the project/programme

preparation timeframe: This should also

specify whether climate change activities will

require additional time.

• Proposed project/programme preparation

activities: Identify, and if required by the

donor agency, justify the main project/

programme preparation activities.

Moving from concept note to project/programme proposal

At this stage, the PT should consider the

following important actions to ensure the

delivery of climate change-related outputs and/or

outcomes and should include this information in

the final project/programme document:

• Assess whether questions posed in

Table 6 have been properly addressed

(see detailed guidance for each question in

Annex 1). As mentioned earlier, it is likely

that questions related to impact assessment

(including vulnerability) may have been

addressed only in qualitative terms during

the conceptualization stage. The PT should

try to obtain additional information or carry

out studies to be able to include some

quantitative aspects where possible in the

formulation of responses to those questions.

• Conduct preparation studies and/or

assessments. Studies or assessments

which were agreed upon during the project/

programme conceptualization stage should

be conducted to facilitate the incorporation

of climate change considerations into project/

programme design. The PT should also

conduct an institutional mapping study to

identify appropriate approaches to address

cross-cutting themes while incorporating

climate change (e.g. environmental

assessment, gender inclusion, youth,

vulnerable groups and promotion of local

ownership to enhance sustainability). If

there is insufficient time or resources to

undertake studies or assessments during

project/programme preparation, the PT

should make sure that: (1) the studies will

be included in one of the project/programme

components to be carried out during the first

year of implementation (or between project/

programme approval and effectiveness);

and (2) the project/programme design is

flexible enough to allow the identification and

selection of eligible options and practices

after the completion of studies (in PY1). This

will ensure that effective climate change

adaptation and/mitigation activities will be

properly identified.

• Define the objectives and strategy that

will respond to the climate change issues

identified during the conceptualization

phase. If climate change issues were

not properly identified during the

conceptualization phase, go back to the

questions posed in Table 6 to assess in more

detail: (1) the impacts of climate change and

climate variability on agriculture in the project/

programme area (i.e. adaptation); and (2) the

possible impacts of the project/programme

on climate change (i.e. mitigation).

• Identify climate change-related indicators

to be incorporated in the project/

programme’s results framework or the

M&E framework):

– Indicators: Identifying and selecting project/

programme indicators may be complex

for a number of reasons, including the

following: (1) challenges in distinguishing

adaptation interventions from development

activities (only necessary if the project/

programme targets adaptation funding);

(2) uncertainty of climate change impacts;

(3) difficulty in monitoring and evaluating

long-term impacts; (4) complexity of

climate change issues; and (5) gaps in

MRV of climate mitigation interventions in

agriculture, especially in smallholder farming

systems. Table 6.1 of Annex 6 presents an

illustrative list of climate change-related

indicators in agricultural investment projects

or programmes, and Table 6.2 summarizes

some indicators collected from project/

programme documents in a number of

39


organizations. Annex 6 also includes general

information on project/programme indicators

and results frameworks.

– M&E plan: Incorporate climate change

considerations in the project/programme’s

M&E plan, based on the project/

programme’s M&E framework (which may

also be referred to as the results framework

or results management framework,

depending on the IFI). The PT must

ensure that the targets and indicators for

monitoring the climate change outcomes

and outputs are clearly defined in the

project/programme monitoring plan. The PT

should also identify the necessary tools and

arrangements needed to monitor realistic

climate change-related indicators included in

the project/programme’s results framework.

• Review capacity of the collaborating

institutions and identify required actions

to set up the institutional framework for

climate change mainstreaming. This will

include discussions and agreement about

the implementation arrangements. The PT

must reassess whether the appropriate

partnerships have been identified and

negotiated to implement the climate-related

activities. If not, the PT needs to work with

the project/programme proponents to ensure

that this aspect of the project/programme

is fine-tuned before the project/programme

document is finalized.

• The PT must identify which institutions

within the project/programme executing

agency and implementing partners will be

responsible for executing, monitoring and

evaluating the project/programme activities.

This should include an assessment of the

executing agency’s capacity-development

needs to ensure effective inclusion of climate

change considerations and participatory

implementation of the climate change

activities. It may be necessary to define

reporting links to key national climate change

institutions and determine what kind of

support (e.g. advisory or quality control) they

could provide to the project/programme.

These implementation arrangements should

address decentralized and community-based

operational matters.

• Review the project/programme

proponent’s (or proposed executing

agency’s) processes for multistakeholder

consultation, coordination and/

or cooperation during the project/

programme. These processes should enable

the inclusion of a climate change agenda

during project/programme preparation and

implementation.

• Define activities/options to address climate

change issues and challenges, including

inputs (e.g. who, when, how much) and

outputs. Depending on the relevance

of adaptation and/or mitigation to the

project/programme, the PT should focus on

identifying one or more of the following:

– Technical options:

1. Stand-alone adaptation activities to

minimize the impacts of climate change

and climate variability on agriculture

(e.g. crop, livestock, fisheries and/

or forestry sectors) in the project/

programme area;

2. Stand-alone mitigation activities to

reduce emissions or remove GHGs,

hence minimizing the impacts of the

project/programme on climate change;

and

3. CSA (win-win options) to address food

security, adaptation and mitigation.

– Cross-cutting themes which can be

considered in identifying activities to

incorporate climate change considerations:

1. Strategy and policy advice (e.g.

formulation or harmonization and

implementation of relevant strategies,

policies and regulations – conducted

through studies, workshops, etc.);36

2. Institutional strengthening (e.g.

establishment and functioning of

36 These guidelines put more emphasis on field projects/programmes supporting on-the-ground investments in agriculture, forestry and fisheries. They are less relevant to projects focused specifically on policy and institutional reform. However, policy and institutional issues can be (and are often) addressed as specific components or outcomes of agricultural and rural investment programmes/projects.

40

mechanisms, institutions, networks and

organizations);

3. Science and technology development

(e.g. studies, research for development

and adaptation of new varieties,

adaptation and mitigation options and

MRV techniques);

4. Data and information generation (e.g.

for climate modelling, impact and

vulnerability assessment and decision-

making);

5. Capacity development for climate

change mainstreaming at national, local

and farm levels; and

6. Information management and

knowledge sharing.

• Ensure that activities are properly placed

or clustered into the various project/

programme components/outcomes.

This should follow the logic of the project/

programme’s results framework.

• Estimate costs for adaptation and

mitigation options to be incorporated in

the project/programme budget. The PT

should estimate the costs for each identified

climate change-related activity, include them

in the project/programme components/

outcomes and incorporate them in the

project/programme cost table (such as

Costab).37 The source of funding for these

activities can be the project/programme

itself (e.g. an IFI loan) or an additional climate

change grant or loan identified by the PT

during the preparation phase (for additional

finance options for climate change activities,

see section 4 below). Depending on the size,

scope and cost of climate change adaptation

and/or mitigation actions, as well as on the

type of finance available for these actions, the

project/programme proponent (e.g. a national

government) and the IFI may consider having

a round of discussions to decide whether to

incorporate these actions into the project/

programme or whether to develop a separate,

37 Costab is software for preparing, organizing and analysing project costs. The first version was originally designed by the World Bank. The current version is used by various IFIs. Costab data can be printed or displayed in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Various reports can be prepared, such as financing plans and tables for costs and disbursements.

but linked, project/programme for climate

change adaptation and mitigation.

• Assess whether there are any governance

risks. Corruption may adversely affect

the degree to which target groups can

participate in and benefit from the proposed

project/programme activities, including

those related to climate change mitigation

and adaptation. Consider whether any

measures are required to mitigate against

the envisaged governance risk.

• Determine whether the possible

intersectoral linkages have been properly

addressed. If they have not, identify how the

project/programme could be fine-tuned in this

respect.

Finally, the PT should ensure that the wording

of climate change mainstreaming and, when

applicable, climate change measures are properly

captured in the legal instrument signed between

the donor and the client (e.g. member country or

project/programme proponent).

Project/programme supervision and evaluation

Supervision

Supervision missions attempt to review the

progress of project/programme implementation

against the annual operating plan and budget.

A supervision mission is also an opportunity

to discuss with PT experts how to improve

operations and how to adapt interventions. It

is critical to engage the full project/programme

team and have sufficient exchange and

consultation with a wide range of implementing

actors and key beneficiaries. If possible, a

climate change expert should be part of project/

programme supervision missions.

During the project/programme launching

stage, it is important to build local ownership

of the activities and the link to sustainability.

At this time,the donor’s task team (i.e. the PT

responsible for the first supervision mission) and

the project/programme coordination team should

dialogue with project/programme beneficiaries

and partner institutions to assess their awareness

41


of climate change-related activities and outcomes

foreseen by the project/programme and the

inclusion of these activities in the project/

programme’s first year implementation plan,

budget and procurement plans. In addition,

the PT should discuss and review the project/

programme’s monitoring plan and certify that the

tools to be employed include ways to measure

climate-related indicators. The dialogue with key

representatives from farmer and producer groups

and other community leaders should be linked

back to the project/programme design, where the

same people or representatives identified these

climate change interventions as critical to their

future livelihoods.

During all supervision missions, procedures

similar to those described for the project/

programme launching stage should be applied.

In addition, field visits should be conducted to

supervise on-the-ground achievements of climate

change-related activities (e.g. at the household,

community, watershed, ecosystem or municipal

levels). Discussions and reviews on climate

change activities should be minimally based on

the following reference documents and systems

(depending on the donor, the terminology

may change): (1) annual implementation plan

(including budget); (2) project/programme’s

operational manual; (3) project/programme’s

M&E plan; (4) procurement plan; and (5) project/

programme document and legal agreement.

During the first year of implementation,

discussions may be necessary to fine-tune the

methodology to measure the project/programme’s

climate-related indicators. Special attention should

also be given to examine whether the capacity-

development activities on climate change have

been well-designed and implemented. It may

be necessary to plan additional climate change

training, policies or other types of activities

(after jointly identifying them with the executing

agency). This should be documented in the

missions’ Aide Memoir, including provisions to

allocate a budget, identify a source of funding

(e.g. reallocation of project/programme budget or

leveraging new resources) and determine timing

for these additional activities.

42

Evaluation

Baseline information and baseline surveyIf sufficient baseline information has not been

obtained during project/programme preparation,

it may be necessary to collect baseline data

at the beginning of the implementation phase

to support climate change-related indicators

identified during project/programme preparation.

These data serve as a reference point for M&E

and provide the basis for measuring progress

in achieving project/programme objectives,

outcome and outputs. If specific numbers are not

available or if it is too costly and/or complex to

collect data, rough approximations can be used

instead. During a baseline assessment, team

members should survey existing data to see if

they fit their needs.

A detailed baseline survey may also be necessary

prior to the development intervention. This can

include data on individual primary stakeholders

and is usually linked to the project/programme’s

impact evaluation process. The PT should assess

whether data needed to monitor the project/

programme climate change indicators are

available and sufficient, or whether they need to

be collected in the baseline survey. The results

of such a survey can also serve as an important

reference for the completion evaluation.

Mid-term review (MTR)The MTR review will determine:

• whether climate change-related issues to

be addressed by the project/programme are

being effectively mainstreamed;

• if the foreseen outputs and outcomes are

in line with the climate adaptation and/or

mitigation activities of the project/programme;

• whether there is a need to adjust or redirect

the project/programme because of any

weakness in incorporating climate change

considerations in project/programme design;

and

• the extent to which the expected outcomes

of the project/programme will be realized.

Particular attention should be given to: (1) the

adequacy of the climate change-related indicators

and whether there is any need to adjust them;

and (2) the efficacy of the methodology used

to measure them. A climate change expert

should be part of the mid-term review or the

independent evaluation team hired by the project/

programme should include such an expert. The

independent mid-term evaluation team’s report

should be reviewed and discussed in detail

with the project/programme management team

and partner institutions and verified through

interviews with project/programme beneficiary

groups and other relevant stakeholders during

field visits.

Project/programme completion evaluation

The final project/programme evaluation and

its completion report should be used to

generate lessons learned about incorporating

climate change considerations into the project/

programme and about institutional capacities,

strengths and weaknesses. It is also an

opportunity to assess if the project/programme

has been linked to larger national processes

– including if project/programme approaches

or lessons have been communicated – such

as NAPAs, NAMAs and other climate change

strategies and action plans. It should also

identify opportunities for scaling up, if possible.

The following issues should be taken into

consideration by the PT while conducting

missions and analysis that will support the

preparation of the final evaluation report:

• Include a climate change expert if climate

change links are significant.

• Verify whether baseline information

(or a survey, when applicable) and an

MTR provided feedback on the project/

programme’s climate change mitigation and/

or adaptation aspects, and adjust activities

and policy, when required, based on M&E

results.

• Assess the achievement of climate change-

related outcomes foreseen in project/

programme design (if any). To do this, the

PT must collaborate closely with the project/

programme’s M&E Team (and, if applicable,

institutions or departments involved in

measuring climate change-related indicators)

and hold meetings with project/programme

beneficiaries and partner institutions.

43


• Identify the lessons on climate change

mainstreaming in agricultural and rural

development projects/programmes

which might be learned from the project/

programme.

• Examine whether the incorporation of climate

change has received attention at all stages of

the project/programme cycle.

• Assess (e.g. by reviewing the mission’s aide

memoirs) whether the project/programme

supervision team took time to supervise

progress against climate change-related

activities throughout the life of the project/

programme, including field visits.

• Assess whether project/programme

beneficiaries directly benefit from the project/

programme’s mitigation and/or adaptation

measures.

• Check whether the project/programme design

facilitated the collection of climate change-

related data to update the baseline data

and support the adjustment of the project/

programme’s climate change strategy when

necessary.

• Identify lessons to strengthen the design

of any future similar projects/programmes,

in particular those related to whether the

project/programme’s outcomes that should

have contributed to climate adaptation and

mitigation were achieved.

• Assess whether links have been established

with institutions responsible for climate

change and related knowledge networks.

44

Financing options for climate change activities

Regular private and public sector funds in

support of agricultural development provide

most of the funding to support CSA, and these

need to be oriented towards adopting a climate

lens. Public funding must create a conducive

enabling environment and reduce barriers to

transitioning to more sustainable agricultural

systems, leveraging much larger flows of

private investment to embrace adaptation and

mitigation opportunities. Because LDCs are often

considered high risk ar eas for investors, the

UNFCCC has a role to play in finding new ways

to at tract private investment for adaptation and

mitigation projects/programmes.

Traditionally within the UNFCCC negotiations,

mitigation and adaptation have been separated,

which has resulted in different financing

streams. However, it is not so easy to distinguish

adaptation and mitigation benefits in agriculture,

and this presents challenges in identifying the

appropriate funding source. In these situations,

the type of activities supported by the project/

programme (e.g. afforestation, reforestation,

REDD, energy efficiency, renewable energy, soil

management, fisheries, agroforestry) can help

identify opportunities to tap into finance sources

for mitigation and adaptation.

Finance options for climate change activities can

be differentiated between: (1) finance sources for

mainstreaming climate change interventions into

agricultural investment projects or programmes;

and (2) stand-alone climate projects or

programmes. Climate-specific finance provides

resources to support low-carbon and climate-

resilient development. To date, 21 dedi cated

bilateral and multilateral public climate finance

initiatives are in place, in addition to dozens of

car bon funds and development initiatives with

a climate change focus. This raises hope that

additional funding will be made available to

tackle climate change. The main actors dealing

with climate change mitigation and adaptation

funding are devel oped country governments

working through a num ber of bilateral initiatives,

the World Bank through its administration of

the Climate Investment Funds (CIF) and the

Global Environmental Facility (GEF) and the

Kyoto Protocol Adaptation Fund. Moreover, the

multilateral development banks are playing an

increasing role in scaling up climate finance.

Annex 7 provides a list of climate finance

initiatives designed to help developing countries

address the challenges of climate change.

Funding for climate change mitigation is available

through a number of sources (e.g. market-

based climate change mitigation instruments to

meet defined emission reduction targets that

involve emissions trading between developed

and developing countries). The voluntary carbon

market represents complementary funding

sources for climate change mitigation in

agriculture. Funding for climate change adaptation

is also available through many financing

mechanisms. The four multilateral adaptation

finance in struments that have disbursed funds

to date are: the LDCF and the SCCF, both

administered by the GEF; the Pilot Program for

Climate Resilience (PPCR), which is a programme

under the CIF; and the Adaptation Fund (AF).

Because institutions are important vehicles to

channel global sources of funds to those most

in need, climate finance also faces issues of

governance. It is essential that the money goes

to those who are most vulnerable to devastating

climate change impacts and is not lost to

corruption or poor governance. The Institute for

Security Studies (ISS, 2011) has monitored the

governance of climate finance realities and funding

arrangements across developing countries.

Chapter 4 - A few words on finance options and economic and financial analyses

45


Reflecting climate change aspects in economic and financial analysis38

Models such as the FAO EX-ACT Tool39 can

be used to estimate the mitigation potential

of rural development projects/programmes.

Such estimates would be of great relevance

for accounting for GHG emissions reductions

and carbon sequestration and providing a basis

for seeking climate finance – either public or

market-based and integrated with existing

official development assistance (ODA official

development assistance) – which can increase

investment flows to the agricultural sector of

developing countries.

It is possible to classify projects/programmes

which are of interest for agricultural development

(Branca et al., 2010):

• Type 0 – no mitigation potential

• Type 1 – low mitigation potential

• Type 2 – medium mitigation potential

• Type 3 – high mitigation potential.

38 Text adapted by G. Branca (Agricultural Development Economics Division, FAO) from the FAO Investment Centre publication on "Estimating Mitigation Potential of Agricultural Projects: an Application of the Ex-Ante Carbon-balance Tool (EX-ACT) in Brazil", FAO, Rome, 2010.39 See: http://www.fao.org/tc/exact/en/

Type 0 projects/programmes are a net source

of GHG emissions, and they are not taken into

consideration here because they cannot benefit

from any additional climate financing. Types 1,

2 and 3 projects/programmes show mitigation

potential since their activities are able to increase

biomass above and below ground and/or soil

organic carbon, albeit with a different intensity

(see Figure 2).

Type 1 projects/programmes have low mitigation

potential so that the mitigation benefits are

smaller than the costs of MRV of the mitigation

activities. There would be no space for additional

support from climate finance sources; ODA

public funds remain the main financing source for

this category of projects/programmes.

For Type 2 projects/programmes, the benefits of

pursuing low-carbon agricultural strategies may

be greater than the costs associated with the

adoption of basic MRV for public implementation.

In this case, public climate funding may be a

possible financing source which could integrate

ODA funds, as project/programme offsets

are considered public goods and therefore

purchased by a public institution. An example

would be a project/programme implementing

agricultural practices that improve agricultural

Figure 2:

Financing options for agriculture development and mitigation projects/programmes

Financing: No Carbon Financing

Financing: Public Fundingfor Low-Carbon Agriculture

Financing: Credit Mechanisms

$ T/Ha/Yr

Costsof CarbonCrediting

Costsof Public

Implementation

Type 1 Type 2 Type 3

Benefit_T/Ha/Yr

C. MitigationPotential (T/Ha/Yr)

Source: Adapted from FAO 2009b

46

productivity and resilience and thus contribute

to food security in developing countries. In

the future, with climate change considerations

being mainstreamed into public sector global

development objectives, it is plausible that these

agriculture multipurpose projects/programmes

will become increasingly important.

For Type 3 projects/programmes, mitigation

benefits are greater than the costs of adopting

and meeting stringent MRV requirements (in

most cases, they are higher than MRV for

publicly financed options). For this category of

projects/programmes, market-based climate

financing mechanisms (e.g. carbon crediting on

voluntary or mandatory markets) are a viable

source of financing.

It is not easy to estimate the transaction costs

related to the accounting of agricultural mitigation

activities at public or market levels, given the lack

of information and the fact that data available

are not in a standard format to allow accurate

comparison. Therefore more research is needed.

Nevertheless, for the purpose of this document,

it is assumed that the transaction costs for

public implementation are equal toUS$4/t CO2e

ha-1 yr-1 which is an arbitrary but plausible value

based on literature (Cacho et al., 2005; Lipper et

al. 2010; Mooney et al., 2004). The transaction

costs for selling carbon credits on the market

will be obviously higher, given the number and

type of requirements (e.g. establish baseline and

carbon flows of the project/programme, design

monitoring plan, establish permanent sampling

plots, prepare project/programme design

document, design individual farm plans, monitor

carbon stocks reported by farmers, verification

and certification) (Cacho and Lipper 2006).

FAO has tested the application of the EX-ACT

Tool on various occasions, including two rural

development projects in Brazil, the Santa Catarina

Rural Competitiveness (SC Rural) project and the

Rio de Janeiro Sustainable Rural Development

(Rio Rural) project. Based on the test, both SC

Rural and Rio Rural projects can be classified as

Type 1 projects without any feasible option of

receiving climate finance. Average mitigation

potential of the SC project amounts to 0.92 t

CO2e ha-1 per year. It could be valued using a

price of US$3 per t CO2e, which is the average

carbon price for agricultural soil carbon at the

retail level on the voluntary market in 2008

(Hamilton et al., 2009). Therefore, the value of

the average mitigation potential of the project

amounts to US$2.76 per t CO2e (per hectare and

per year), which is below the level of transaction

cost for public implementation (US$4 per t CO2e).

Similarly, the average mitigation potential of the

Rio Rural project is equal to 0.19 t CO2e ha-1 per

year, i.e. US$0.57 per t CO2e (per hectare and per

year), well below the level of transaction cost for

public implementation.

However, it is interesting to note that a relatively

small change in the design of the SC Rural project

could slightly increase its mitigation potential

and expand climate financing opportunities. For

example, the mitigation potential of the project

in the “optimistic scenario” considered during

the EX-ACT text is equal to 1.1 t CO2e ha-1 per

year. Clearly, if the project is designed with

explicit multiple objectives and specific mitigation

activities, and if the corresponding mitigation

potential value exceeds the level of transaction

costs for public implementation, the project

could then be potentially considered for public

financing for low-carbon agriculture. In this case,

since yearly mitigation potential of the SC Rural

project would be equal to 0.6 Mt CO2e, mitigation

benefits would be worth US$1.8 million per year-1

at the price ofUS$3 per t CO2e. Given that the

total average project cost is US$31.5 million per

year-1, public carbon finance would therefore

potentially cover about 6 percent of these costs.

47


Essential reading and glossaries The following resources offer additional guidance. See Box 4 below for a number of key climate

change glossaries.

General context and overall guidance (for a description of each publication, see Annex 3):

IPCC fourth assessment report: Climate change 2007 (AR4). The following sections are of particularly

relevance to agriculture:

• Food and agriculture: Chapter 5 with contribution ofIPCC Working Group II to AR4: Impacts,

adaptation and vulnerability http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch5.html

• Mitigation in agriculture: Chapter 8 with contribution of IPCC Working Group III to AR4: Mitigation

of climate change http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ch8.html

• Mitigation in forestry: Chapter 9 with contribution of IPCC Working Group III to AR4: Mitigation of

climate change http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ch9.html

• AR4 synthesis report: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/contents.html

FAO profile for climate change. FAO, 2009. http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i1323e/i1323e00.htm

FAO framework programme on climate change adaptation. FAO, 2011. http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/

i2316e/i2316e00.pdf

FAO framework programme on disaster risk reduction (FP DRR). FAO, 2011. http://www.fao.org/

docrep/015/i2540e/i2540e00.pdf

Climate-smart agriculture – policies, practices and financing for food security, adaptation and

mitigation. FAO, 2010. http://www.fao.org/docrep/015/an177e/an177e00.pdf

Mainstreaming adaptation to climate change in agriculture and natural resources management

projects. World Bank Web site: http://www.worldbank.org/adaptnotes

Mainstreaming climate change adaptation into development planning: A guide for practitioners.

UNDP and UNEP, 2011. http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/Guide%20Mainstreaming%20

Climate%20Change%20Adaptation%202011.pdf

Carbon climate change mitigation finance for smallholder agriculture. A guide book to harvesting soil

carbon sequestration benefits.

http://www.fao.org/climatechange/29763-0daebeae838c70f713da780982f16e8d9.pdf

Climate-smart agriculture: Smallholder adoption and implications for climate change adaptation and

mitigation. FAO, 2011. http://www.fao.org/docrep/015/i2575e/i2575e00.pdf

Publications by sector (for a description of each publication, see Annex 3):

Water: Climate change, water and food security – FAO water reports No. 36. FAO, 2011. http://www.

fao.org/docrep/014/i2096e/i2096e00.htm

Energy: “Energy-smart” food for people and climate: Issue paper. FAO, 2011. http://www.fao.org/

docrep/014/i2454e/i2454e00.pdf

http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/i2316e/i2316e00.pdf


http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/Guide%20Mainstreaming%20



48

Crops:

• Climate-smart agriculture: A synthesis of empirical evidence of food security and mitigation

benefits from improved cropland management, FAO, 2011:


• Save and grow: A policymaker’s guide to the sustainable intensification of smallholder crop

production. FAO, 2011: http://www.fao.org/ag/save-and-grow/

Forestry: Climate change for forest policy-makers – An approach for integrating climate change into

national forest programmes in support of sustainable forest management. FAO, 2011. http://www.fao.

org/forestry/climatechange/64862/en/

Fisheries: Strategy for fisheries, aquaculture and climate change. Framework and aims 2011-

2016. FAO, 2011. ftp://ftp.fao.org/fi/brochure/climate_change/stragegy_fi_aq_climate/2011/climate_

change_2011.pdf

Livestock: Greenhouse gas emissions from the dairy sector – a life cycle assessment. FAO, 2010.


Box 4: Climate change glossaries

Many climate change glossaries are available in the literature and on the Web. These references can assist project/programme practitioners who may not necessarily be fully familiar with technical terms used in climate change discussions.

FAO climate change glossary: http://termportal.fao.org/faocc/main/start.doAvailable in English, French, Spanish and Chinese.

Intergovernmental panel on climate change glossaries http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_glossary.shtml

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) glossary of climate change acronyms: http://unfccc.int/essential_background/glossary/items/3666.php

Glossary of CDM terms: http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Guidclarif/glos_CDM.pdf

http://www.fao.org/forestry/climatechange/64862/en/

ftp://ftp.fao.org/fi/brochure/climate_change/stragegy_fi_aq_climate/2011/climate_change_2011.pdf

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_glossary.shtml

http://unfccc.int/essential_background/glossary/items/3666.php

http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Guidclarif/glos_CDM.pdf

49


ReferencesADB. 2009. Understanding and Responding to Climate Change in Developing Asia. ADB, Manila.

http://www.adb.org/publications/understanding-and-responding-climate-change-developing-asia

Branca, G., Lipper, L. & Bockel, L. 2010. Potential use of the Ex-Ante C-balance Tool (EX-ACT) in the

economic and financial analysis of agriculture and mitigation projects. Working paper. FAO. Rome, Italy.

Branca, G., McCarthy, N., Lipper, L. & Jolejole, M.C. (2011). Climate-smart Agriculture: A Synthesis of

Empirical Evidence of Food Security and Mitigation Benefits from Improved Cropland Management.

MICCA series n.3. Rome, FAO.

Cacho, O.J., Marshall, G.R. & Milne, M. 2005. Transaction and abatement costs of carbon-sink

projects in developing countries. Environment and Development Economics 10, 1-18. doi: 10.1017/

S1355770X05002056.

Cacho, O.J. & Lipper L. 2006. Abatement and transaction costs of carbon-sink project involving

smallholders. Working paper. FAO. Rome, Italy. European Commission. 2009. Guidelines on the

Integration of Environment and Climate Change in Development Cooperation, European Commission,

2009. http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/infopoint/publications/europeaid/172a_en.htm

EuropeAid. 2009. Guidelines on the integration of environment and climate change in development

cooperation. http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/infopoint/publications/europeaid/172a_en.htm

FAO. 2008. Climate Change and Food Security: A Framework Document. IDWG on Climate Change.

FAO, Rome.

FAO. 2009a. Profile for Climate Change, FAO, Rome. ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/012/i1323e/i1323e00.pdf

FAO. 2009b. Food Security and Agricultural Mitigation in Developing Countries: Options for Capturing

Synergies: http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i1318e/i1318e00.pdf

FAO. 2010a. “Climate-Smart” Agriculture: Policies, Practices and Financing for Food Security, Adaptation

and Mitigation, FAO, Rome. http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/i1881e/i1881e00.htm

FAO. 2010b. Estimating Mitigation Potential of Agricultural Projects: an Application of the Ex-Ante

Carbon-balance Tool (EX-ACT) in Brazil. Working Paper LAC/03/10. http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/

k7846e/k7846e.pdf

FAO. 2011a. FAO-Adapt: Framework Programme on Climate Change Adaptation. http://www.fao.org/

climatechange/27594-03ecd7bd225b93086e7dca3944de64307.pdf

FAO. 2011b. Save and Grow: A policymaker’s guide to the sustainable intensification of smallholder crop

production: http://www.fao.org/ag/save-and-grow/

FAO. 2011c. Social analysis for agriculture and rural investment projects: Manager’s Guide, Practitioner’s

Guide, Field Guide http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/i2816e/i2816e00.htm

http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/k7846e/k7846e.pdf

http://www.fao.org/climatechange/27594-03ecd7bd225b93086e7dca3944de64307.pdf

50

GIZ. 2011. Integrating Climate Change Adaptation into Development Cooperation: A Practice-oriented

Training based on the OECD Policy Guidance. GIZ, 2011. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/8/4/46905379.pdf

Hamilton, K., Sjardin, M., Shapiro, A. & Marcello, T. Fortifying the Foundation: State and trends of the

voluntary market 2009. A Report by The Ecosystem Marketplace (Washington, DC, USA) and New

Carbon Finance (New York), May 2009.

IPCC. 2007. The fourth assessment report (AR4) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

(IPCC): Climate change 2007- Synthesis report. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland. http://www.ipcc.ch/

publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/contents.html

ISS. 2011. Monitoring the governance of climate finance: Critical perspectives from Africa, Asia and

Latin America. Institute for Security Studies (ISS) Financial Report, 2011.

Liniger, H.P., R. Mekdaschi Studer, C. Hauert & M. Gurtner. 2011. Sustainable Land Management

in Practice – Guidelines and Best Practices for Sub-Saharan Africa. TerrAfrica, World Overview of

Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT) and FAO.

Lipper, L., Dutilly-Diane, C. & McCarthy, N. 2010. Supplying Carbon Sequestration from West African

Rangelands: Opportunities and Barriers. Rangeland Ecology and Management 63: 155-166. doi: 10.2111/

REM-D-09-00009.1

Mooney, S., Brown, S. & Shoch, D. 2004. Measurement and monitoring costs: Influence of parcel

contiguity, carbon variability, project size and timing of measurement events. Report to The Nature

Conservancy Conservation Partnership Agreement. Winrock International. 20 pp. Available at http://

www.winrock.org/ecosystems/files/Mooney_et_al_MMCosts-1-15-04.pdf [Accessed 30 July 2011]

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2008. Strategic environmental

assessment and adaptation to climate change. http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc28513/

Smith, P., Martino, D., Cai, Z., Gway, D., Janzen, H., Kumar, P., McCarl, B., Ogle, S., O’Mara, F., Rice,

C., Scholes, B. & Sirotenko, O. 2007: Agriculture. In Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution

of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change [B. Metz, O.R. Davdison, P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, L.A. Meyer (eds)], Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

UNDG. 2010. Integrating climate change considerations in the country analysis and the UNDAF – A

guidance note for United Nations country teams, United Nations Development Group.

UNDP and UNEP. 2011. Mainstreaming Climate Change Adaptation into Development Planning: A Guide

for Practitioners. http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/Guide%20Mainstreaming%20Climate%20

Change%20Adaptation%202011.pdf

UNDP. 2010. Tools and Guidelines to Mainstream Climate Change Adaptation –A Stocktaking Report.

http://www.adaptationlearning.net/sites/default/files/UNDP%20Stocktaking%20Report%20CC%20

mainstreaming%20tools.pdf

World Bank. 2010. Mainstreaming adaptation to climate change in agriculture and natural resources

management projects. Climate Change Team, Environment Department, World Bank. http://www.

worldbank.org/adaptnotes

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/contents.html

http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/Guide%20Mainstreaming%20Climate%20Change%20Adaptation%202011.pdf

http://www.adaptationlearning.net/sites/default/files/UNDP%20Stocktaking%20Report%20CC%20mainstreaming%20tools.pdf

http://climatechange.worldbank.org/content/mainstreaming-adaptation-climate-change-agriculture-and-natural-resources-management-project

51


ANNEX 1 Incorporating climate change mitigation and adaptation in project formulation, supervision and evaluation

52

AN

NE

X 1

Inco

rpor

atin

g cl

imat

e ch

ange

miti

gatio

n an

d ad

apta

tion

in p

roje

ct fo

rmul

atio

n, s

uper

visi

on a

nd e

valu

atio

n

Su

bje

ctQ

ues

tio

nG

uid

ance

(e.

g. a

ctio

ns,

wh

o t

o t

alk

to)

So

urc

es o

f in

form

atio

n

A. Q

ues

tio

ns,

so

urc

es a

nd

gu

idan

ce r

elev

ant

to b

oth

th

e co

nce

ptu

aliz

atio

n a

nd

pre

par

atio

n s

tag

es

A.1

. Po

licy

asp

ects

an

d c

ou

ntr

y p

rio

riti

es (

app

licab

le t

o b

oth

mit

igat

ion

an

d a

dap

tati

on

)

Nat

ion

al a

nd

lo

cal p

rio

riti

es1.

Is

th

ere

any

nat

ion

al

clim

ate

chan

ge

(CC

) an

d D

RR

/DR

M

stra

teg

y o

r ac

tio

n

pla

n a

vaila

ble

? If

so

, w

hat

are

th

e p

rio

riti

es

for

the

agri

cult

ura

l se

cto

rs?

Wh

ich

are

re

leva

nt

to t

he

pro

ject

co

nce

pt?

2. I

n le

ast

dev

elo

ped

co

un

trie

s (L

DC

s),

wh

ich

pri

ori

ties

hav

e b

een

iden

tifi

ed in

th

e N

APA

s th

at a

re

rele

van

t to

th

e p

roje

ct

con

cep

t?

3. I

f N

atio

nal

ly

Ap

pro

pri

ate

Mit

igat

ion

A

ctio

ns

(NA

MA

s)

hav

e al

read

y b

een

fo

rmu

late

d a

nd

su

bm

itted

, wh

ich

p

rio

riti

es, t

arg

ets

or

acti

on

s h

ave

bee

n

incl

ud

ed?

•N

atio

nal/s

ubna

tiona

l pol

icy

docu

men

ts, a

ctio

n pl

ans

and

prio

ritie

s on

CC

– N

APA

s,

NA

MA

s, N

atio

nal C

omm

unic

atio

ns t

o th

e U

NFC

CC

, etc

. – c

an u

sual

ly b

e fo

und

on

the

Web

site

s of

the

UN

FCC

C a

nd t

he n

atio

nal m

inis

try

or o

rgan

izat

ion

resp

onsi

ble

for

over

all C

C c

oord

inat

ion

(usu

ally

the

nat

iona

l UN

FCC

C F

ocal

Poi

nt).

•Th

e N

atio

nal (

Ope

ratio

nal)

GE

F Fo

cal P

oint

coo

rdin

ates

the

form

ulat

ion

of t

he

Nat

iona

l Por

tfol

io F

orm

ulat

ion

Exe

rcis

e (N

PFE

) (in

clud

ing

prio

ritie

s fo

r C

C f

undi

ng)

and

endo

rses

pro

ject

pro

posa

ls b

efor

e su

bmitt

ing

to t

he G

EF

Sec

reta

riat

for

fund

ing

in m

itiga

tion

(GE

F Tr

ust

Fund

) or

adap

tatio

n (L

DC

F an

d S

CC

F).

•Th

e M

inis

try

of E

nviro

nmen

t m

ay n

ot b

e th

e fo

cal p

oint

for

GE

F or

UN

FCC

C, b

ut

in m

any

coun

trie

s it

is r

espo

nsib

le fo

r na

tiona

l env

ironm

enta

l str

ateg

ies

cove

ring

CC

asp

ects

, whi

le t

he M

inis

ter

of F

orei

gn A

ffairs

cov

ers

the

coun

try’

s in

tern

atio

nal

com

mitm

ents

on

CC

.

•N

atio

nal d

evel

opm

ent

stra

tegi

es a

nd r

epor

ts r

elev

ant

to C

C (f

rom

agr

icul

tura

l, en

viro

nmen

tal,

scie

ntifi

c, d

isas

ter

risk

man

agem

ent

(DR

M) a

nd m

eteo

rolo

gica

l or

gani

zatio

ns) a

re u

sual

ly a

vaila

ble

(or

refe

renc

ed) a

t th

e of

ficia

l Web

site

of

the

conc

erne

d m

inis

try

or d

epar

tmen

t.

•It

is r

ecom

men

ded

to a

sses

s w

heth

er in

form

atio

n pr

ovid

ed in

the

afo

rem

entio

ned

docu

men

ts m

ay o

r m

ay n

ot b

e fu

lly r

elev

ant

to y

our

proj

ect,

in v

iew

of

loca

tion,

sc

ope

and

othe

r pr

ojec

t ch

arac

teris

tics.

The

y sh

ould

giv

e an

ove

rvie

w o

f th

e m

ajor

pr

iorit

ies

whi

ch a

re r

elev

ant

to C

C a

nd a

gric

ultu

re (i

nclu

ding

fis

herie

s an

d fo

rest

ry)

with

in t

he c

ount

ry.

•Fo

r a

desc

riptio

n an

d lin

ks t

o na

tiona

l pol

icy

docu

men

ts a

nd a

ctio

n pl

ans,

see

An

nex

3 (u

nder

its

sec

tio

n 2

.2 o

n "N

atio

nal p

olic

ies

and

prio

ritie

s").

For

natio

nal i

nfor

mat

ion

and

docu

men

ts r

elev

ant

to

cond

uctin

g a

rapi

d as

sess

men

t, s

ee A

nn

ex 2

•N

atio

nal F

ocal

Poi

nts

to t

he U

NFC

CC

: ht

tp://

mai

ndb.

unfc

cc.in

t/pu

blic

/nfp

.pl

•N

atio

nal G

EF

Foca

l Poi

nt:

http

://w

ww

.the

gef.o

rg/g

ef/fo

cal_

poin

ts_l

ist

•"F

rom

NA

MA

s to

low

-em

issi

on d

evel

opm

ent

in

agric

ultu

re" c

an b

e do

wnl

oade

d fr

om t

he F

AO

E

asyP

ol W

eb s

ite: h

ttp:

//ww

w.fa

o.or

g/ea

sypo

l/out

put/

Abs

Lang

uage

.asp

?id=

881&

lang

a=E

N

•Va

rious

too

ls a

nd o

ther

sou

rces

of

info

rmat

ion

rele

vant

to

ques

tions

pos

ed h

ere

are

pres

ente

d an

d br

iefly

des

crib

ed in

An

nex

3

http://maindb.unfccc.int/public/nfp.pl

http://www.fao.org/easypol/output/AbsLanguage.asp?id=881&langa=EN

53


Su

bje

ctQ

ues

tio

nG

uid

ance

(e.

g. a

ctio

ns,

wh

o t

o t

alk

to)

So

urc

es o

f in

form

atio

n

A.2

. In

stit

uti

on

al a

spec

ts (

app

licab

le t

o b

oth

mit

igat

ion

an

d a

dap

tati

on

)

Sta

keh

old

er

iden

tifi

cati

on

an

d

enga

gem

ent

1.

Wh

ich

are

th

e m

ajo

r in

stit

uti

on

s co

ord

inat

ing

an

d

imp

lem

enti

ng

CC

-re

late

d a

ctio

ns

at t

he

nat

ion

al a

nd

pro

ject

le

vels

, an

d h

ow

co

uld

th

ey c

on

trib

ute

wit

h

dat

a an

d/o

r sp

ecifi

c ac

tio

ns

to t

he

pro

ject

?

2. I

s th

e st

akeh

old

er

con

sult

atio

n p

roce

ss

in p

lace

, in

clu

din

g a

n

app

rop

riat

e d

eliv

ery

stra

teg

y th

at a

llow

s ca

ptu

rin

g k

ey C

C-

rela

ted

issu

es?

3. W

hic

h lo

cal

stak

eho

lder

s co

uld

h

ave

a ke

y ro

le a

s p

roje

ct p

artn

ers?

•N

atio

nal i

nstit

utio

ns c

oord

inat

ing

CC

act

iviti

es a

re u

sual

ly m

inis

trie

s/or

gani

zatio

ns

resp

onsi

ble

for

envi

ronm

ent

man

agem

ent

and/

or fo

reig

n af

fairs

. Oth

er o

rgan

izat

ions

w

ith s

peci

fic c

oord

inat

ing

man

date

s ar

e m

inis

trie

s/de

part

men

ts o

f m

eteo

rolo

gy,

DR

M, s

cien

ce a

nd t

echn

olog

y an

d sp

ace

expl

orat

ion.

Key

act

ors

to b

e co

nsul

ted

incl

ude

foca

l poi

nts

for

UN

FCC

C a

nd G

EF,

nat

iona

l off

ices

of

UN

age

ncie

s an

d bi

late

ral d

evel

opm

ent

inst

itutio

ns a

nd n

atio

nal a

nd in

tern

atio

nal N

GO

s.

•M

ain

natio

nal C

C im

plem

entin

g in

stitu

tions

can

be

line

min

istr

ies/

orga

niza

tions

, un

iver

sitie

s, e

tc.,

alth

ough

not

nec

essa

rily

with

a C

C-s

peci

fic m

anda

te. F

or in

stan

ce,

a na

tiona

l/sub

natio

nal d

epar

tmen

t of

fore

stry

or

agric

ultu

re m

ay b

e im

plem

entin

g ke

y ac

tiviti

es r

elat

ed t

o R

ED

D, a

nd a

nat

iona

l/sub

natio

nal w

eath

er s

ervi

ce m

ay b

e ge

nera

ting

data

and

pro

vidi

ng k

ey c

limat

e in

form

atio

n re

leva

nt t

o ru

ral p

rodu

cers

and

de

velo

pmen

t pr

ogra

mm

es.

•R

evie

w t

he p

roce

ss a

dopt

ed b

y th

e pr

ojec

t pr

opon

ent

for

mul

tista

keho

lder

s co

nsul

tatio

n, c

oord

inat

ion

and

coop

erat

ion.

An

appr

opria

te d

eliv

ery

stra

tegy

(to

be

used

in c

onsu

ltatio

n ev

ents

) sho

uld

be d

esig

ned

to a

llow

cap

turin

g ke

y C

C-r

elat

ed

issu

es. L

inki

ng u

p w

ith e

xist

ing

"cha

mpi

ons"

(e.g

. key

civ

il so

ciet

y m

embe

rs, N

GO

s,

spec

ific

foru

ms

in t

he c

ount

ry) c

ould

be

very

use

ful f

or fo

rwar

ding

the

CC

age

nda

in

the

proj

ect

area

.

•D

epen

ding

on

the

gove

rnan

ce s

truc

ture

(i.e

. the

div

isio

n of

res

pons

ibili

ties

betw

een

cent

ral a

nd p

rovi

ncia

l/sta

te g

over

nmen

ts),

key

inst

itutio

ns m

ay in

clud

e th

ose

at t

he

subn

atio

nal l

evel

.

•M

any

guid

elin

es (n

ot s

peci

fic t

o C

C) a

re a

vaila

ble

on h

ow t

o co

nduc

t st

akeh

olde

r an

d so

cial

ana

lysi

s (s

ee a

djac

ent

colu

mn)

.

•Ke

y st

akeh

olde

rs a

re m

entio

ned

in n

atio

nal a

nd

subn

atio

nal p

olic

y an

d st

rate

gy d

ocum

ents

and

ac

tion

plan

s pr

esen

ted

in A

nn

ex 3

(und

er it

s se

ctio

n 2

.2 o

n "N

atio

nal p

olic

ies

and

prio

ritie

s")

•E

xam

ples

of

stak

ehol

der

anal

ysis

gui

delin

es:

•1)

FA

O (2

011)

Soc

ial a

naly

sis

for

agric

ultu

re a

nd ru

ral

inve

stm

ent

proj

ects

: Man

ager

’s G

uide

, Pra

ctiti

oner

’s

Gui

de, F

ield

Gui

de

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

14/i2

816e

/i281

6e00

.htm

•2)

FA

O (2

006)

A r

apid

gui

de fo

r m

issi

ons,

Ana

lysi

ng

loca

l ins

titut

ions

and

live

lihoo

ds

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

sd/d

im_p

e4/p

e4_0

6040

1_en

.htm

•3)

Wor

ld B

ank

(200

7) To

ols

for

Inst

itutio

nal,

Polit

ical

an

d S

ocia

l Ana

lysi

s of

Pol

icy

Ref

orm

: A S

ourc

eboo

k fo

r D

evel

opm

ent

Prac

titio

ners

ht

tp://

site

reso

urce

s.w

orld

bank

.org

/EX

TTO

PP

SIS

OU

/R

esou

rces

/142

4002

-118

5304

7942

78/

TIP

s_S

ourc

eboo

k_E

nglis

h_Pa

rtI.

pdf?

&re

sour

ceur

lnam

e=TI

Ps_

Sou

rceb

ook_

Eng

lish_

Part

I.pdf

•4)

FA

O (2

003)

Loc

al In

stitu

tions

and

Liv

elih

oods

: G

uide

lines

for A

naly

sis,

by

Nor

man

Mes

ser

& P

hilip

To

wns

ley

ht

tp://

ww

w.fa

o.or

g/do

crep

/006

/y50

84e/

y508

4e00

.HTM

•5)

LE

AD

/FA

O/G

TZ/IP

TRID

(200

6): A

sta

keho

lder

an

alys

is s

ectio

n in

the

man

ual"P

roje

ct D

esig

n an

d M

anag

emen

t: Tr

aini

ng P

rogr

amm

e fo

r Pr

ofes

sion

als

in t

he W

ater

Sec

tor"

ht

tp://

pdm

.lead

.org

/doc

s/pa

rtic

ipan

ts_m

anua

l.pdf

http://pdm.lead.org/docs/participants_manual.pdf

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTTOPPSISOU/Resources/1424002-1185304794278/TIPs_Sourcebook_English_PartI.pdf?&resourceurlname=TIPs_Sourcebook_English_PartI.pdf

54

Su

bje

ctQ

ues

tio

nG

uid

ance

(e.

g. a

ctio

ns,

wh

o t

o t

alk

to)

So

urc

es o

f in

form

atio

n

Bar

rier

s,

con

stra

ints

an

d c

apac

ity

dev

elo

pm

ent

nee

ds

1.

Wh

ich

co

nst

rain

ts,

gap

s an

d r

elat

ed

fin

anci

al, t

ech

nic

al

and

oth

er c

apac

ity

dev

elo

pm

ent

nee

ds

hav

e b

een

iden

tifi

ed

at t

he

nat

ion

al a

nd

p

roje

ct le

vels

?

•N

APA

s an

d N

AM

As

shou

ld p

rovi

de in

form

atio

n on

mai

n is

sues

and

und

erly

ing

caus

es

of c

onst

rain

ts a

nd g

aps

and

rela

ted

finan

cial

, tec

hnic

al a

nd c

apac

ity n

eeds

/prio

ritie

s.

•To

iden

tify

barr

iers

and

opp

ortu

nitie

s sp

ecifi

c to

the

pro

ject

are

a:

- A

pply

a m

etho

dolo

gy t

o di

agno

se b

arrie

rs t

o C

C a

dapt

atio

n an

d m

itiga

tion.

For

ad

apta

tion,

for

inst

ance

, one

can

app

ly t

he f

ram

ewor

k de

velo

ped

by M

oser

and

E

kstr

om (2

010)

, whi

ch in

clud

es a

use

ful t

able

with

dia

gnos

tic q

uest

ions

by

the

stag

e in

the

ada

ptat

ion

proc

ess

and

the

adap

tatio

n sy

stem

com

pone

nts.

-

Incl

ude/

mai

nstr

eam

the

afo

rem

entio

ned

met

hodo

logy

(or

anot

her)

in t

he

proj

ect

prep

arat

ion

diag

nost

ic s

tudy

of

the

curr

ent

situ

atio

n (i.

e. w

ithou

t pr

ojec

t/pr

ogra

mm

e sc

enar

io),

to id

entif

y m

ain

CC

pol

icy

and

inst

itutio

nal i

ssue

s, b

arrie

rs

and

oppo

rtun

ities

for

poss

ible

pro

ject

sup

port

. Als

o id

entif

y ex

istin

g an

d pl

anne

d pr

ojec

ts/p

rogr

amm

es a

ddre

ssin

g C

C is

sues

, inc

ludi

ng a

rran

gem

ents

on

how

to

coor

dina

te w

ith t

he p

ropo

sed

prog

ram

me.

•M

oser

, S. C

. and

Jul

ia E

kstr

om. (

2010

). A

fra

mew

ork

to d

iagn

ose

barr

iers

to

clim

ate

chan

ge a

dapt

atio

n.

http

://w

ww

.sus

anne

mos

er.c

om/p

ublic

atio

ns.

adap

tatio

n.ph

p

•A

nn

ex 3

(und

er s

ecti

on

3 o

n "T

ools

and

info

rmat

ion

syst

ems

for

adap

tatio

n an

d m

itiga

tion"

)pre

sent

s lin

ks t

o ot

her

met

hods

tha

t ca

n al

so b

e us

ed t

o id

entif

y is

sues

, bar

riers

and

opp

ortu

nitie

s

A.3

. Ad

apta

tio

n

Imp

acts

of

clim

ate

chan

ge

and

clim

ate

vari

abili

ty o

n

agri

cult

ura

l se

cto

rs

1.

Wh

at a

re t

he

exp

ecte

d

imp

acts

of

CC

on

th

e co

un

try’

s ag

ricu

ltu

re

sect

ors

?

2. H

ow

can

exi

stin

g

dat

a an

d r

elat

ed

asse

ssm

ents

on

th

e im

pac

ts o

f cl

imat

ic v

aria

bili

ty

on

ag

ricu

ltu

re in

th

e p

roje

ct a

rea

be

iden

tifi

ed?

Sh

ou

ld a

ra

pid

ass

essm

ent

be

con

du

cted

?)

•D

ocum

ents

ava

ilabl

e th

roug

h na

tiona

l ins

titut

ions

men

tione

d in

thi

s ta

ble

(see

row

ab

ove

unde

r "N

atio

nal a

nd lo

cal p

riorit

ies"

) sho

uld

prov

ide

a ge

nera

l ove

rvie

w o

f im

pact

s.

•A

rap

id a

sses

smen

t of

fut

ure

pote

ntia

l im

pact

s of

CC

sho

uld

be c

onsi

dere

d as

a f

irst

step

in p

roje

ct fo

rmul

atio

n. It

is im

port

ant

to a

t le

ast

unde

rsta

nd t

he p

ast

and

curr

ent

loca

l clim

ate

and

then

fin

d th

e ch

arac

teris

tics

of h

isto

rical

impa

cts

by e

xam

inin

g ob

serv

edpa

st im

pact

s of

clim

ate

varia

bilit

y an

d ch

ange

on

agric

ultu

re. T

his

sets

the

ba

sis

for

asse

ssin

g fu

ture

pot

entia

l im

pact

s.

•S

ee A

nn

ex 2

on

how

to

iden

tify

rele

vant

dat

a an

d co

nduc

t a

rapi

d as

sess

men

t of

im

pact

s of

clim

atic

var

iabi

lity

on a

gric

ultu

re in

the

pro

ject

are

a so

as

to d

irect

the

id

entif

icat

ion

of p

ossi

ble

effe

ctiv

e C

C a

dapt

atio

n ac

tiviti

es/o

ptio

ns. A

nn

ex 2

als

o pr

ovid

es g

uida

nce

on in

stitu

tions

to

talk

to

at t

he c

ount

ry le

vel.

•A

nn

ex 2

•Fo

r an

ove

rvie

w o

f re

gion

aliz

ed im

pact

s of

CC

in

agric

ultu

ral s

ecto

rs, s

ee C

hap

ter

2

•A

nn

ex 3

(und

er s

ecti

on

3 o

n "T

ools

and

info

rmat

ion

syst

ems

for

adap

tatio

n an

d m

itiga

tion"

) pre

sent

s lin

ks t

o ot

her

met

hods

to

desi

gn a

sses

smen

t st

udie

s of

CC

impa

cts

and

rela

ted

adap

tatio

n st

rate

gies

•Th

eWor

ld B

ank

CC

Por

tal a

nd A

DA

PT:

ht

tp://

go.w

orld

bank

.org

/AW

JKT6

0300

Imp

acts

of

CC

an

d c

limat

e va

riab

ility

on

p

eop

le

1.

Ho

w a

re t

hes

e im

pac

ts

affe

ctin

g t

he

pro

ject

b

enefi

ciar

ies

and

oth

er

po

ten

tial

sta

keh

old

ers?

•In

coo

rdin

atio

n w

ith t

he t

echn

ical

info

rmat

ion

gath

erin

g su

gges

ted

in A

nn

ex 2

, thi

s in

form

atio

n ca

n be

obt

aine

d by

hol

ding

dis

cuss

ions

with

gov

ernm

ent

part

ners

and

ke

y in

form

ants

suc

h as

farm

ers’

org

aniz

atio

ns, N

GO

s w

orki

ng o

n C

C a

nd r

esea

rch

and

envi

ronm

enta

l ins

titut

ions

. The

se c

ould

be

unde

rtak

en t

hrou

gh a

dis

cret

e ev

ent

(suc

h as

a r

apid

rura

l app

rais

al) w

ith a

n al

loca

ted

budg

et, o

r th

roug

h m

eetin

gs a

nd

wor

ksho

ps d

urin

g th

e pr

ojec

t id

entif

icat

ion

and

prep

arat

ion

stag

es.

•Fo

r m

etho

ds a

vaila

ble

in t

he li

tera

ture

on

how

to

plan

and

con

duct

sta

keho

lder

s’ c

onsu

ltatio

ns, s

ee

links

on

sect

ion

A.2

of

this

tab

le, u

nder

"Sta

keho

lder

id

entif

icat

ion

and

enga

gem

ent"

http://www.susannemoser.com/publications.adaptation.php

55


Su

bje

ctQ

ues

tio

nG

uid

ance

(e.

g. a

ctio

ns,

wh

o t

o t

alk

to)

So

urc

es o

f in

form

atio

n

Ad

apti

ve

cap

acit

y o

f th

e p

roje

ct-

sup

po

rted

ac

tivi

ties

1.

Ho

w c

an t

he

pro

ject

b

eco

me

mo

re

clim

ate-

resi

lien

t (i

.e. h

ow

can

it b

e im

pro

ved

to

incr

ease

th

e re

silie

nce

of

the

agri

cult

ura

l sys

tem

s an

d li

velih

oo

ds

to C

C

imp

acts

)?

•A

pro

per

way

to

dire

ct t

he id

entif

icat

ion

of p

ossi

ble

effe

ctiv

e C

C a

dapt

atio

n op

tions

(i.

e. c

limat

e re

silie

nt in

terv

entio

ns) i

s to

gat

her

info

rmat

ion

on t

he im

pact

s of

clim

atic

va

riabi

lity

on a

gric

ultu

re in

the

pro

ject

are

a (s

ee A

nn

ex 2

). W

ith t

hat

info

rmat

ion

in

hand

, var

ious

rec

omm

enda

tions

on

adap

tatio

n op

tions

are

ava

ilabl

e in

the

lite

ratu

re.

•Fo

r a

gene

ral o

verv

iew

of

poss

ible

ada

ptat

ion

optio

ns, s

ee t

hose

pro

mot

ed b

y th

e FA

O F

ram

ewor

k Pr

ogra

mm

e on

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

Ada

ptat

ion

(FA

O-A

dapt

– s

ee A

nn

ex

3), w

hich

incl

udes

opt

ions

for:

- bu

ildin

g ca

paci

ties

for

impr

oved

dat

a an

d kn

owle

dge;

- es

tabl

ishi

ng a

n en

ablin

g en

viro

nmen

t (e

.g. i

nstit

utio

ns, p

olic

ies

and

finan

cing

);-

supp

ortin

g cl

imat

e-sm

art

man

agem

ent

of la

nd, w

ater

and

bio

dive

rsity

;-

impl

emen

ting

DR

M a

ctio

ns; a

nd-

deve

lopi

ng a

nd d

isse

min

atin

g te

chno

logi

es, p

ract

ices

and

pro

cess

es fo

r ad

apta

tion

in a

gric

ultu

re, f

ores

try,

fish

erie

s an

d ru

ral e

nerg

y.

•C

onsi

derin

g th

at w

omen

hav

e lim

ited

acce

ss t

o ap

prop

riate

tec

hnol

ogie

s, w

hich

cu

rbs

thei

r pr

oduc

tivity

pot

entia

l, pa

y sp

ecia

l att

entio

n to

ens

urin

g th

at t

hey

have

ad

equa

te a

cces

s to

tec

hnol

ogie

s.

•S

ee A

nn

ex 3

(und

er it

s se

ctio

n 2

.1 o

n "G

ener

al a

nd

agric

ultu

ral s

ecto

r do

cum

ents

") fo

r de

scrip

tion

and

links

to

rele

vant

pub

licat

ions

•S

ee A

nn

ex 4

for

poss

ible

opt

ions

and

goo

d pr

actic

es fo

r C

C a

dapt

atio

n, a

nd A

nn

ex 5

for

DR

M

optio

ns

•S

ee a

lso

Sec

tio

n 5

of

An

nex

3

Op

tio

ns

for

dis

aste

r ri

sk

red

uct

ion

(D

RR

)

1.

Is t

her

e a

DR

R

fram

ewo

rk in

pla

ce t

o

pro

tect

ben

efici

arie

s’

livel

iho

od

s fr

om

sh

ock

s an

d t

o

stre

ng

then

th

eir

cap

acit

y to

ab

sorb

th

e im

pac

t o

f, an

d r

ecov

er

fro

m, d

isru

pti

ve

clim

atic

eve

nts

? If

no

t,

ho

w c

an t

he

pro

ject

h

elp

wit

h t

hat

?

•Th

e P

T sh

ould

iden

tify

whe

ther

the

re is

a g

ener

al a

gric

ultu

re r

isk

redu

ctio

n an

d m

anag

emen

t fr

amew

ork

in p

lace

to

supp

ort

smal

l-sca

le p

rodu

cers

(e.g

. far

mer

s,

fishe

r fo

lk, f

ores

t dw

elle

rs) i

n th

e pr

ojec

t ar

ea. F

or s

ome

risks

, ear

ly w

arni

ng a

nd

prev

entio

n ca

n w

ork

effic

ient

ly, b

ut fo

r ot

her

risks

, ex-

post

res

pons

e, in

sura

nce

and

cont

inge

ncy

plan

ning

can

wor

k be

tter

, dep

endi

ng o

n th

e fr

eque

ncy

and

expo

sure

of

thei

r as

sets

.

•Fo

r a

gene

ral o

verv

iew

of

poss

ible

prio

rity

DR

R t

hem

es a

nd a

ctio

ns, s

ee t

hose

pr

omot

ed b

y th

e FA

O’s

Fra

mew

ork

Prog

ram

me

on D

isas

ter

Ris

k R

educ

tion

for

Food

an

d N

utrit

ion

Sec

urity

and

the

FA

O-A

dapt

.

•S

ee A

nn

ex 5

on

fram

ewor

k an

d po

ssib

le D

RR

op

tions

, as

wel

l as

a br

ief

desc

riptio

n of

var

ious

pu

blic

atio

ns w

ith p

ract

ical

gui

danc

e fo

r di

sast

er

resp

onse

and

ris

k m

anag

emen

t in

fis

herie

s, c

rop

prod

uctio

n, n

utrit

ion

and

livel

ihoo

ds

•S

ee A

nn

ex 3

(und

er it

s se

ctio

n 2

.1 o

n "G

ener

al a

nd

agric

ultu

re s

ecto

r do

cum

ents

") fo

r de

scrip

tions

and

lin

ks t

o re

leva

nt p

ublic

atio

ns.

56

Su

bje

ctQ

ues

tio

nG

uid

ance

(e.

g. a

ctio

ns,

wh

o t

o t

alk

to)

So

urc

es o

f in

form

atio

n

A.4

. Mit

igat

ion

Imp

acts

1.

Wh

at a

re t

he

po

ssib

le

imp

acts

of

the

pro

ject

o

n C

C in

ter

ms

of

incr

easi

ng

, red

uci

ng

o

r av

oid

ing

GH

G

emis

sio

ns?

2. W

hic

h a

nti

cip

ated

im

pac

ts o

n C

C c

ou

ld

com

e fr

om

imp

rove

d

agri

cult

ura

l sys

tem

s o

r fr

om

ch

ang

es in

lan

d

use

?

3. W

hic

h o

ther

typ

es o

f p

roje

ct a

ctiv

itie

s h

ave

a p

ote

nti

al im

pac

t o

n

the

pro

ject

’s c

arb

on

b

alan

ce?

•N

AM

As

and

othe

r ke

y na

tiona

l CC

doc

umen

ts (s

ee r

ow a

bove

on

natio

nal a

nd lo

cal

prio

ritie

s) a

nd s

peci

aliz

ed li

tera

ture

can

ass

ist

the

PT

in d

evel

opin

g a

prel

imin

ary

idea

on

the

pote

ntia

l im

pact

s of

the

pro

ject

’s p

ropo

sed

inte

rven

tions

on

CC

. In

form

atio

n pr

ovid

ed in

nat

iona

l doc

umen

ts m

ade

avai

labl

e by

nat

iona

l ins

titut

ions

m

entio

ned

in t

his

tabl

e (u

nder

"nat

iona

l prio

ritie

s") m

ay o

r m

ay n

ot b

e fu

lly r

elev

ant

to y

our

proj

ect,

but

the

y sh

ould

ass

ist

in id

entif

ying

the

pos

sibl

e im

pact

s of

the

pr

ojec

t.

•A

gric

ultu

ral p

rodu

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es g

ener

atin

g G

HG

em

issi

ons

(whi

ch t

here

fore

cou

ld

be t

arge

ted

to r

educ

e em

issi

ons)

may

com

e bo

th f

rom

cha

nges

in p

rodu

ctio

n sy

stem

s (e

.g. c

hang

es w

ithin

the

sam

e la

nd o

r w

ater

use

) or

from

cha

nges

in la

nd

or w

ater

use

(e.g

. fro

m d

egra

ded

past

ure

to a

grof

ores

try)

. A p

roje

ct/p

rogr

amm

e m

ay in

volv

e bo

th; f

or d

etai

ls, s

ee g

uida

nce

prov

ided

bel

ow r

egar

ding

how

to

estim

ate

clim

ate

chan

ge m

itiga

tion

pote

ntia

l of

the

proj

ect

and,

in p

artic

ular

, in

form

atio

n pr

ovid

ed o

n m

odel

s av

aila

ble

to e

stim

ate

the

miti

gatio

n po

tent

ial o

f ch

ange

s in

agr

icul

tura

l pro

duct

ion

syst

ems

and

land

use

.

•O

ther

pro

ject

inte

rven

tions

may

hav

e a

nega

tive

impa

ct o

n C

C, i

f no

t m

itiga

ted.

Th

ey c

an b

e re

late

d w

ith p

roje

ct m

anag

emen

t an

d po

licie

s. F

or e

xam

ple,

if p

roje

ct

impl

emen

tatio

n is

exp

ecte

d to

inte

nsify

tec

hnic

al a

ssis

tanc

e of

pro

ject

exe

cute

rs

curr

ently

ope

ratin

g in

the

are

a (a

nd/o

r ne

w f

ield

sta

ff t

o be

rec

ruite

d by

the

pro

ject

), it

can

resu

lt in

a s

ubst

antia

l inc

reas

e in

the

ann

ual c

ar f

uel c

onsu

mpt

ion

and,

hen

ce,

an e

xpec

ted

incr

ease

in G

HG

em

issi

ons.

Bui

ldin

gs (i

nclu

ding

off

ice,

agr

o- in

dust

ries

or o

ther

pos

t-ha

rves

ting

units

) and

oth

er in

stal

latio

ns c

onst

ruct

ed o

r re

habi

litat

ed

by t

he p

roje

ct c

an a

lso

be e

xpec

ted

to g

ener

ate

emis

sion

s if

low

car

bon-

inte

nse

solu

tions

are

not

impl

emen

ted.

See

An

nex

2 s

ectio

ns o

n "m

itiga

tion"

and

"lis

t of

re

sour

ces"

In a

dditi

on, f

or a

n ov

ervi

ew o

f po

ssib

le im

pact

s:•

of a

gric

ultu

ral p

roje

cts

in g

ener

al: F

AO

Miti

gatio

n of

C

limat

e C

hang

e in

Agr

icul

ture

(MIC

CA

) Pro

gram

me

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

clim

atec

hang

e/m

icca

/en/

•of

cro

p pr

oduc

tion:

FA

O P

ublic

atio

n on

Foo

d se

curit

y an

d ag

ricul

tura

l miti

gatio

n, h

ttp:

//ww

w.fa

o.or

g/do

crep

/012

/i131

8e/i1

318e

00.p

df

•of

live

stoc

k, F

AO

pub

licat

ions

on

gree

nhou

se g

as

(GH

G) e

mis

sion

s fr

om t

he d

airy

sec

tor-a

life

cyc

le

asse

ssm

ent,

htt

p://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

12/k

7930

e/k7

930e

00.p

df

•of

fore

stry

pro

ject

s, F

AO

pub

licat

ion

on S

trat

egic

fr

amew

ork

for

fore

sts

and

clim

ate

chan

ge, h

ttp:

//w

ww

.fao.

org/

fore

stry

/166

39-0

64a7

166b

1dd0

2750

4bb

fbb7

6387

8af9

9.pd

f

•of

irrig

atio

n, F

AO

pub

licat

ion

on C

limat

e ch

ange

, w

ater

and

food

sec

urity

, htt

p://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

14/i2

096e

/i209

6e00

.htm

•of

fis

herie

s pr

ojec

ts, F

AO

pub

licat

ion

on C

limat

e ch

ange

impl

icat

ions

for

fishe

ries

and

aqua

cultu

re,

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/01

2/i0

994e

/i099

4e.p

df

See

als

o A

nn

ex 3

(mai

nly

sect

ion

3)

Mit

igat

ion

p

ote

nti

al o

f th

e p

roje

ct

1.

Wh

ich

act

ivit

ies,

p

ract

ices

or

tech

no

log

ies

pro

po

sed

b

y th

e p

roje

ct h

ave

mit

igat

ion

po

ten

tial

?

2. W

hat

is t

he

clim

ate

chan

ge

mit

igat

ion

p

ote

nti

al o

f th

e p

roje

ct?

•B

ased

on

gove

rnm

ent

will

ingn

ess,

the

PT

shou

ld id

entif

y op

port

uniti

es t

o ad

just

th

e pr

opos

ed in

terv

entio

ns t

o re

duce

GH

G e

mis

sion

s an

d in

crea

se c

arbo

n si

nks

in

orde

r to

pur

sue

prod

uctiv

ity a

nd a

dapt

atio

n ob

ject

ives

.

•Th

ere

are

mod

els

avai

labl

e (a

nd o

ther

s be

ing

deve

lope

d) t

hat

estim

ate

the

miti

gatio

n po

tent

ial o

f ch

ange

s in

agr

icul

tura

l pro

duct

ion

syst

ems

and

land

use

an

d to

sup

port

pro

ject

man

ager

s in

clim

ate

chan

ge d

ecis

ion-

mak

ing.

The

EX

-Ant

e C

arbo

n-ba

lanc

e To

ol (E

X-A

CT)

is o

ne s

uch

mod

el d

evel

oped

by

FAO

to

prov

ide

an e

x an

te e

valu

atio

n of

the

impa

ct o

f ru

ral d

evel

opm

ent

proj

ects

on

GH

G e

mis

sion

s an

d C

seq

uest

ratio

n, t

hus

estim

atin

g th

e po

tent

ial c

ontr

ibut

ion

of t

he a

gric

ultu

re s

ecto

r to

clim

ate

chan

ge m

itiga

tion

(Ber

noux

et a

l., 2

010,

Cer

ri et

al.,

201

0). T

he m

odel

can

be

use

d to

ref

ine

proj

ect

com

pone

nts

and

activ

ities

to

incr

ease

, whe

neve

r po

ssib

le,

the

proj

ect’s

miti

gatio

n be

nefit

s.

•S

ee m

ore

info

rmat

ion

on E

X-A

CT

and

othe

r m

odel

s in

sec

tio

n 2

of

An

nex

2, u

nder

the

sub

sect

ion

on

"em

issi

ons,

miti

gatio

n op

tions

and

pot

entia

l").

•D

ND

C B

ioge

oche

mis

try

Mod

el- h

ttp:

//ww

w.d

ndc.

sr.u

nh.e

du/

•E

NC

OFO

R C

arbo

n A

ccou

ntin

g an

d Pr

ojec

t D

esig

n To

ol, h

ttp:

//ww

w.jo

anne

um.a

t/en

cofo

r/to

ols/

tool

_de

mon

stra

tion/

dow

nloa

d_to

ols.

htm



http://www.fao.org/forestry/16639064a7166b1dd027504bbfbb763878af99.pdf


http://www.dndc.sr.unh.edu/

http://www.joanneum.at/encofor/tools/tool_demonstration/download_tools.htm

57


Su

bje

ctQ

ues

tio

nG

uid

ance

(e.

g. a

ctio

ns,

wh

o t

o t

alk

to)

So

urc

es o

f in

form

atio

n

Win

-win

o

pp

ort

un

itie

s th

at in

clu

de

mit

igat

ion

1.

Bas

ed o

n t

he

pro

ject

’s

CC

mit

igat

ion

p

ote

nti

al, a

re

ther

e ag

ricu

ltu

ral

tech

no

log

ies

and

p

ract

ices

wh

ich

w

ou

ld r

edu

ce G

HG

s (m

itig

atio

n)

and

, at

the

sam

e ti

me,

su

stai

nab

ly

incr

ease

pro

du

ctiv

ity

and

res

ilien

ce

(ad

apta

tio

n)

and

en

han

ce a

chie

vem

ent

of

nat

ion

al f

oo

d

secu

rity

an

d

dev

elo

pm

ent

go

als,

or

at le

ast

two

of

thes

e?

•O

nce

it ha

s be

en d

eter

min

ed in

wha

t ar

eas

the

proj

ect

has

high

er m

itiga

tion

pote

ntia

l (e.

g. p

astu

re m

anag

emen

t, a

nnua

l or

pere

nnia

l cro

p m

anag

emen

t,

mea

sure

s to

add

ress

def

ores

tatio

n or

fore

st d

egra

datio

n is

sues

and

man

agem

ent)

, th

e P

T sh

ould

con

sult

loca

l pro

duce

rs (b

enef

icia

ries)

to

disc

uss

the

adop

tion

of d

oubl

e- o

r tr

iple

-win

opt

ions

, suc

h as

tho

se id

entif

ied

as C

SA in

Ch

apte

r 2.

E

xam

ples

of

man

y ty

pes

of c

limat

e-sm

art

prod

uctio

n sy

stem

s ar

e pr

ovid

ed in

the

lit

erat

ure

(see

adj

acen

t co

lum

n).In

the

se g

uide

lines

, som

e ex

ampl

es a

re g

iven

in

An

nex

4.

•Fo

r cr

op, f

ores

try,

gra

ssla

nds

and

lives

tock

pro

ject

s, t

his

ques

tion

can

also

be

phra

sed

as t

his:

if t

he p

roje

ct in

tend

s to

incr

ease

land

pro

duct

ivity

of

smal

lhol

ding

s,

how

cou

ld it

als

o en

hanc

e th

e ab

ility

to

sequ

este

r ca

rbon

dio

xide

equ

ival

ent

(CO

2e)?

• If

the

re is

inte

rest

in a

ddin

g pr

ojec

t ac

tiviti

es in

volv

ing

"fore

st c

arbo

n pr

ojec

ts",

the

Fore

st C

arbo

n Po

rtal

(fro

m E

cosy

stem

Mar

ketp

lace

) inc

lude

s a

com

preh

ensi

ve

serie

s of

gui

danc

e do

cum

ents

on

fore

st c

arbo

n pr

ojec

t de

velo

pmen

t. F

or f

undi

ng

proj

ect

activ

ities

on

redu

cing

em

issi

ons

from

def

ores

tatio

n an

d fo

rest

deg

rada

tion,

th

e R

educ

ing

Em

issi

ons

from

Def

ores

tatio

n an

d Fo

rest

Deg

rada

tion

(RE

DD

+)

Part

ners

hip

Web

site

pro

vide

s us

eful

gui

danc

e. F

or m

ore

info

rmat

ion,

an

exte

nsiv

e lis

t of

fin

ance

opt

ions

for

clim

ate

chan

ge a

ctiv

ities

(inc

ludi

ng c

limat

e m

itiga

tion)

is

pres

ente

d in

An

nex

7.

•S

ee A

nn

ex 4

and

An

nex

3 (u

nder

its

sect

ion

2.1

) for

de

scrip

tions

and

link

s to

rel

evan

t pu

blic

atio

ns s

uch

as F

AO

"Sav

e an

d G

row

, sec

tion

on m

itiga

tion

of F

AO

Pr

ofile

for

Clim

ate

Cha

nge,

etc

.

•FA

O p

age

on C

SA:

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

clim

atec

hang

e/70

746/

en/

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

13/i1

881e

/i188

1e00

.pdf

•R

ED

D+

Par

tner

ship

Web

site

: (h

ttp:

//red

dplu

spar

tner

ship

.org

/en/

)

•E

cosy

stem

Mar

ketp

lace

– a

pro

ject

of

Fore

st

Tren

ds h

ttp:

//ww

w.fo

rest

-tre

nds.

org/

– is

a le

adin

g so

urce

of

new

s, d

ata,

and

ana

lytic

s on

mar

kets

and

pa

ymen

ts fo

r ec

osys

tem

ser

vice

s, in

clud

ing

carb

on

sequ

estr

atio

n: h

ttp:

//ww

w.e

cosy

stem

mar

ketp

lace

.co

m/

•Fo

rest

car

bon

port

al: h

ttp:

//ww

w.fo

rest

carb

onpo

rtal

.co

m/c

onte

nt/b

uild

ing-

fore

st-c

arbo

n-pr

ojec

ts

Mit

igat

ion

o

pti

on

s1.

W

hat

sp

ecifi

c m

itig

atio

n

inte

rven

tio

ns

cou

ld

be

pro

po

sed

in v

iew

o

f lo

cal n

atu

ral,

soci

al a

nd

eco

no

mic

co

nd

itio

ns

in t

he

pro

ject

are

as?

2. H

ow

wo

uld

yo

u

pri

ori

tize

th

ese

po

ssib

le in

terv

enti

on

s in

th

e o

rder

of

CS

A,

win

-win

op

tio

ns

and

mit

igat

ion

in

terv

enti

on

s, b

ased

o

n t

he

gov

ern

men

t’s

will

ing

nes

s?

•In

ass

essi

ng p

ossi

ble

optio

ns, p

roje

ct d

evel

oper

s an

d in

vest

men

t fo

rmul

atio

n pr

actit

ione

rs s

houl

d co

nsid

er t

he a

vaila

bilit

y of

loca

l kno

wle

dge

and

supp

ort

syst

ems

for

prop

osed

inno

vatio

ns –

i.e.

agr

icul

tura

l res

earc

h in

stitu

tions

, adv

isor

y se

rvic

es/e

xten

sion

and

inpu

t su

pplie

rs (e

.g. s

eeds

, too

ls, a

groc

hem

ical

s).

•Fo

r as

sess

ing

the

effic

ienc

y of

pos

sibl

e C

C m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s be

ing

cons

ider

ed

unde

r th

e pr

ojec

t/pr

ogra

mm

e, c

ross

-ref

eren

ce c

ould

be

mad

e, fo

r ex

ampl

e,

betw

een

the

rele

vant

mea

sure

s ta

ken

from

An

nex

4 (o

r ot

her

sour

ces)

and

th

e re

sults

of

appl

icat

ion

of a

mod

el s

uch

as F

AO

EX

-AC

T To

ol (s

ee r

ow a

bove

n

miti

gatio

n po

tent

ial),

whi

ch c

an p

rovi

de c

lear

gui

danc

e on

mor

e ef

fect

ive

miti

gatio

n op

tions

. Too

ls p

rese

nted

in A

nn

ex 3

can

als

o be

use

ful t

o an

swer

thi

s qu

estio

n

•A

num

ber

of a

gric

ultu

ral p

ract

ices

com

bini

ng C

SA, C

C m

itiga

tion

and

othe

r be

nefit

s (s

uch

as fo

od s

ecur

ity a

nd a

dapt

atio

n) a

re a

lread

y be

ing

used

by

rura

l pr

oduc

ers.

How

ever

, kno

wle

dge

gaps

stil

l exi

st r

egar

ding

the

sui

tabi

lity

and

use

of

the

prod

uctio

n sy

stem

s an

d pr

actic

es a

cros

s a

wid

e va

riety

of

agro

-eco

logi

cal a

nd

soci

o-ec

onom

ic c

onte

xts

and

scal

es. M

any

prac

tices

als

o ha

ve lo

cal a

nd t

empo

ral

bene

fits

or im

pact

s, t

hus

bein

g ve

ry c

ase-

spec

ific.

Sev

eral

pra

ctic

es a

re li

sted

in

Tabl

e 4.

1 of

Ann

ex 4

.

•Fo

r an

illu

stra

tive

list

of in

vest

men

t op

tions

/pra

ctic

es

for

CSA

, CC

ada

ptat

ion,

miti

gatio

n an

d D

RR

, see

A

nn

exes

4 a

nd 5

.

•Fo

r a

list

of p

ossi

ble

CC

miti

gatio

n m

easu

res,

see

A

nn

ex 4

(und

er it

s se

ctio

ns

2, 3

and

4).

Sec

tor

docu

men

ts a

re r

efer

red

to in

An

nex

3 (

unde

r its

se

ctio

n 2

.1),

incl

udin

g th

e M

ICC

A S

erie

s pr

oduc

ed

unde

r th

e FA

O M

itiga

tion

of C

limat

e C

hang

e in

A

gric

ultu

re (M

ICC

A) P

rogr

amm

e. F

or t

ools

, see

A

nn

ex 3

(und

er it

s se

ctio

n 3

).

•IP

PC

gui

delin

es (a

vaila

ble

in s

ix la

ngua

ges)

on

"Goo

d Pr

actic

e G

uida

nce

for

Land

Use

, Lan

d-U

se C

hang

e an

d Fo

rest

ry":

ht

tp://

ww

w.ip

cc-n

ggip

.iges

.or.j

p/pu

blic

/gpg

lulu

cf/

gpgl

uluc

f.htm

l

•Fo

r an

illu

stra

tive

list

of f

inan

ce o

ptio

ns fo

r C

C

adap

tatio

n an

d m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s, s

ee A

nn

ex 7

(a

nd a

lso

Ch

apte

r 4)

.

Fun

din

g

sou

rce

1.

Are

th

ere

any

fin

anci

ng

so

urc

es, i

n a

dd

itio

n t

o

the

pro

ject

fu

nd

, th

at

can

be

use

d f

or

the

iden

tifi

ed m

itig

atio

n

op

po

rtu

nit

ies?

•Fi

nanc

e op

tions

for

clim

ate

chan

ge a

ctiv

ities

can

incl

ude

eith

er:

- fin

ance

sou

rces

for

agric

ultu

ral a

nd ru

ral d

evel

opm

ent

inve

stm

ent

proj

ects

or

prog

ram

mes

whi

ch c

anin

clud

e (a

s an

opt

ion,

not

man

dato

ry) c

limat

e ch

ange

in

terv

entio

ns; o

r-

stan

d-al

one

clim

ate

proj

ects

or

prog

ram

mes

or

proj

ects

to

supp

ort

miti

gatio

n an

d/or

ada

ptat

ion

bene

fits.

•S

ee C

hap

ter

4 an

d A

nn

ex 7

.

http://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com/

http://www.forestcarbonportal.com/content/building-forest-carbon-projects

http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/gpglulucf/gpglulucf.html

58

Su

bje

ctQ

ues

tio

nG

uid

ance

(e.

g. a

ctio

ns,

wh

o t

o t

alk

to)

So

urc

es o

f in

form

atio

n

B.Q

ues

tio

ns

and

so

urc

es o

f in

form

atio

n v

alid

fo

r th

e p

rep

arat

ion

sta

ge

(i.e

. aft

er c

on

cep

t n

ote

dev

elo

pm

ent)

Pro

ject

te

chn

ical

st

rate

gy

and

ap

pro

ach

es

1.

Has

a s

trat

egy

bee

n

defi

ned

to

res

po

nd

to

C

C is

sues

?

2. W

hic

h in

teg

rate

d

pla

nn

ing

ap

pro

ach

is

bei

ng

pro

po

sed

at

th

e la

nd

scap

e o

r ec

osy

stem

le

vel t

o e

nsu

re t

he

futu

re s

ust

ain

able

d

evel

op

men

t o

f ru

ral

com

mu

nit

ies

in t

he

pro

ject

are

a?

3. I

s th

e p

roje

ct s

eeki

ng

to

cap

ture

syn

erg

ies

and

man

age

trad

e-o

ffs

amo

ng

fo

od

se

curi

ty, c

limat

e ad

apta

tio

n, m

itig

atio

n

and

su

stai

nab

le

dev

elo

pm

ent?

•Th

e ob

ject

ives

and

str

ateg

y sh

ould

be

defin

ed d

urin

g pr

epar

atio

n to

add

ress

re

leva

nt C

C is

sues

iden

tifie

d du

ring

the

conc

eptu

aliz

atio

n ph

ase.

If C

C is

sues

hav

e no

t be

en p

rope

rly id

entif

ied,

go

back

to

the

ques

tions

pos

ed t

o as

sess

in m

ore

deta

il: a

) the

impa

cts

of c

limat

e ch

ange

and

clim

ate

varia

bilit

y on

agr

icul

ture

in t

he

proj

ect

area

(ada

ptat

ion)

; and

b) t

he p

ossi

ble

impa

cts

of t

he p

roje

ct o

n cl

imat

e ch

ange

(miti

gatio

n).

•It

is r

ecom

men

ded

to a

dopt

land

scap

e-le

vel a

ppro

ache

s, s

uch

as In

tegr

ated

E

cosy

stem

Man

agem

ent

(IEM

), fo

r th

e te

chni

cal p

lann

ing

and

impl

emen

tatio

n st

rate

gy. I

EM

was

dev

elop

ed t

o en

sure

tha

t th

e pr

ovis

ion

of e

nviro

nmen

tal "

good

s an

d se

rvic

es" i

s su

stai

nabl

e an

d th

at t

he in

tegr

ity o

f th

e ec

osys

tem

on

whi

ch t

hey

depe

nd r

emai

ns in

tact

.The

str

ateg

y sh

ould

als

o se

ek t

o ca

ptur

e sy

nerg

ies

in t

erm

s of

tec

hnol

ogie

s an

d pr

actic

es b

y ad

optin

g w

in-w

in o

ptio

ns s

uch

as C

SA p

ract

ices

lis

ted

in C

hap

ter

2 an

d A

nn

ex 4

, Tab

le 4

.1.

•FA

O p

age

on C

SA:

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

clim

atec

hang

e/70

746/

en/

•FA

O p

ublic

atio

n "S

ave

and

Gro

w: A

pol

icym

aker

’s

guid

e to

the

sust

aina

ble

inte

nsifi

catio

n of

sm

allh

olde

r cr

op p

rodu

ctio

n: h

ttp:

//ww

w.fa

o.or

g/ag

/sav

e-an

d-gr

ow/

•Fo

r ap

proa

ches

, see

als

o C

hap

ter

2 an

d A

nn

ex 3

.

Clim

ate

chan

ge-

rela

ted

ac

tivi

ties

1.

Hav

e th

e C

C-r

elat

ed

acti

viti

es b

een

id

enti

fied

?

2. S

ho

uld

th

ese

acti

viti

es b

e b

un

dle

d

un

der

a s

tan

d-a

lon

e C

C c

om

po

nen

t o

r su

bco

mp

on

ent

or

inte

gra

ted

into

oth

er

pro

ject

co

mp

on

ents

?

•S

ee C

hapt

er 3

(und

er it

s se

ctio

n "P

roje

ct/p

rogr

amm

e pr

epar

atio

n st

age"

, sub

-se

ctio

n "M

ovin

g fr

om c

once

pt n

ote

to p

roje

ct/p

rogr

amm

e pr

opos

al")

for

guid

ance

on

the

def

initi

on o

f C

C-r

elat

ed a

ctiv

ities

•

Dep

endi

ng o

n th

e re

leva

nce

of a

dapt

atio

n an

d/or

miti

gatio

n to

the

pro

ject

and

as

soci

ated

str

ateg

y, t

he P

T m

ay r

efer

to

the

optio

ns a

nd g

ood

prac

tices

intr

oduc

ed

in A

nn

ex 4

and

An

nex

5

•Th

e di

scus

sion

s on

the

pro

ject

’s r

esul

ts f

ram

ewor

k ca

n be

use

ful t

o de

cide

whe

ther

to

bun

dle

(or

not)

CC

-rel

ated

act

iviti

es u

nder

a s

tand

-alo

ne C

C c

ompo

nent

. In

a te

chni

cal c

oope

ratio

n pr

ojec

t, a

ctiv

ities

are

usu

ally

agg

rega

ted

in c

ompo

nent

s by

te

chni

cal t

hem

atic

are

as s

uch

as "i

mpr

oved

fore

st m

anag

emen

t", "

agric

ultu

ral l

and

man

agem

ent"

, "ad

dres

sing

clim

ate

chan

ge a

dapt

atio

n" a

nd "c

onse

rvat

ion

of a

gro-

biod

iver

sity

". H

owev

er, i

n in

vest

men

t pr

ojec

ts, c

ompo

nent

agg

rega

tes

cons

ist

of (u

sual

ly) k

ey a

reas

to

addr

ess

barr

iers

/con

stra

ints

whi

ch a

re im

pedi

ng t

he

gene

ratio

n of

ben

efits

(suc

h as

rura

l pov

erty

alle

viat

ion

or in

crea

sed

prod

uctiv

ity)

asso

ciat

ed w

ith t

he p

roje

ct o

bjec

tive.

Bar

rier-r

elat

ed t

hem

es in

the

se in

vest

men

t pr

ojec

ts a

re (u

sual

ly) n

ot t

echn

ical

but

cro

ss-c

uttin

g th

emes

, suc

h as

"cap

acity

de

velo

pmen

t", "

plan

ning

, pol

icy

& in

stitu

tiona

l str

engt

heni

ng",

"adv

isor

y se

rvic

es"

or "i

nves

tmen

ts t

o im

prov

e pr

oduc

tion

syst

ems"

. CC

act

iviti

es a

re u

sual

ly

mai

nstr

eam

ed in

to t

hese

var

ious

bar

rier-r

elat

ed t

hem

es; h

owev

er, d

epen

ding

on

the

proj

ect

prop

onen

t an

d do

nor

stra

tegy

, the

y ca

n al

so b

e bu

ndle

d un

der

a st

and-

alon

e C

C c

ompo

nent

, pro

vide

d th

at t

his

com

pone

nt w

ill a

lso

addr

ess

the

iden

tifie

d ba

rrie

rs r

elat

ed t

o C

C.

•A

nn

exes

4 a

nd 5

•FA

O p

age

on C

limat

e-S

mar

t Agr

icul

ture

: ht

tp://

ww

w.fa

o.or

g/cl

imat

echa

nge/

7074

6/en

/

•FA

O p

ublic

atio

n "S

ave

and

Gro

w: A

pol

icym

aker

’s

guid

e to

the

sust

aina

ble

inte

nsifi

catio

n of

sm

allh

olde

r cr

op p

rodu

ctio

n: h

ttp:

//ww

w.fa

o.or

g/ag

/sav

e-an

d-gr

ow/

•FA

O p

ublic

atio

n "S

ave

and

Gro

w: A

pol

icym

aker

’s

guid

e to

the

sust

aina

ble

inte

nsifi

catio

n of

sm

allh

olde

r cr

op p

rodu

ctio

n: h

ttp:

//ww

w.fa

o.or

g/ag

/sav

e-an

d-gr

ow/

59


Su

bje

ctQ

ues

tio

nG

uid

ance

(e.

g. a

ctio

ns,

wh

o t

o t

alk

to)

So

urc

es o

f in

form

atio

n

Pro

ject

res

ult

s fr

amew

ork

an

d M

&E

ar

ran

gem

ents

1.

Hav

e C

C

con

sid

erat

ion

s b

een

in

corp

ora

ted

in t

he

pro

ject

’s r

esu

lts

fram

ewo

rk (

RF)

?

2. H

ave

CC

-rel

ated

in

dic

ato

rs b

een

id

enti

fied

?

•S

ee C

hap

ter

3 fo

r ge

nera

l gui

danc

e on

inco

rpor

atin

g C

C a

spec

ts in

the

RF

and

M&

E p

lan;

see

An

nex

6 fo

r an

illu

stra

tive

list

of C

C-r

elat

ed in

dica

tors

for

each

ag

ricul

tura

l sec

tor

or t

hem

e an

d a

list

of in

dica

tors

col

lect

ed f

rom

FA

O’s

and

oth

er

deve

lopm

ent

part

ners

’ pro

ject

doc

umen

ts. O

nce

activ

ities

hav

e be

en id

entif

ied

(see

row

bel

ow),

ensu

re t

hat

they

are

pro

perly

clu

ster

ed in

to t

he v

ario

us p

roje

ct

com

pone

nts/

outc

omes

fore

seen

by

the

proj

ect,

follo

win

g th

e lo

gic

of t

he p

roje

ct’s

R

F.

•D

eter

min

e to

ols

and

arra

ngem

ents

to

mon

itor

clim

ate

chan

ge-r

elat

ed in

dica

tors

in

clud

ed in

the

pro

ject

’s r

esul

ts f

ram

ewor

k. B

ased

the

fin

al p

roje

ct’s

RF,

inco

rpor

ate

CC

con

side

ratio

ns in

the

pro

ject

’s M

&E

pla

n. T

he P

T m

ust

ensu

re t

hat

the

targ

ets

and

indi

cato

rs fo

r m

onito

ring

the

CC

out

com

es a

nd o

utpu

ts a

re c

lear

ly d

efin

ed in

th

e pr

ojec

t m

onito

ring

plan

.

•A

nnex

6

Inst

itu

tio

nal

as

pec

ts1.

W

hat

are

th

e im

ple

men

tati

on

ar

ran

gem

ents

to

en

sure

th

at C

C

acti

viti

es w

ill b

e p

rop

erly

exe

cute

d?

•R

evie

w t

he c

apac

ity o

f th

e co

llabo

ratin

g in

stitu

tions

and

iden

tify

actio

ns r

equi

red

to s

et u

p th

e in

stitu

tiona

l fra

mew

ork

for

CC

mai

nstr

eam

ing,

incl

udin

g di

scus

sion

s an

d ag

reem

ent

on im

plem

enta

tion

arra

ngem

ents

. The

PT

will

iden

tify

the

spec

ific

inst

itutio

ns (w

ithin

the

org

aniz

atio

nal s

truc

ture

of

the

proj

ect

exec

utin

g ag

ency

and

im

plem

entin

g pa

rtne

rs) w

hich

will

be

resp

onsi

ble

for

exec

utin

g, m

onito

ring

and

eval

uatin

g th

e pr

ojec

t ac

tiviti

es r

elat

ed t

o C

C. T

his

shou

ld in

clud

e as

sess

ing

the

capa

city

dev

elop

men

t ne

eds.

Whe

re a

ppro

pria

te, d

elin

eate

rep

ortin

g lin

ks t

o ke

y na

tiona

l CC

inst

itutio

ns a

nd s

peci

fy p

oten

tial a

dvis

ory

or q

ualit

y co

ntro

l sup

port

the

y ca

n pr

ovid

e.

n.a.

Gov

ern

ance

1.

Is t

her

e an

y g

over

nan

ce r

isk

wh

ich

co

uld

jeo

par

diz

e th

e im

ple

men

tati

on

of

pro

ject

act

ivit

ies,

in

clu

din

g t

ho

se r

elat

ed

to C

C?

•A

sses

s w

heth

er t

here

are

any

gov

erna

nce

risks

(e.g

. cor

rupt

ion)

tha

t m

ay a

ffect

th

e le

vel o

f pa

rtic

ipat

ion

and

the

degr

ee t

o w

hich

tar

get

grou

ps m

ay b

enef

it in

the

pr

opos

ed p

roje

ct a

ctiv

ities

(inc

ludi

ng t

hose

rel

ated

to

CC

miti

gatio

n an

d ad

apta

tion)

. D

eter

min

e w

heth

er a

ny m

easu

res

are

requ

ired

to m

itiga

te a

gain

st t

he e

nvis

aged

go

vern

ance

ris

k, a

nd if

so,

iden

tify

the

mea

sure

s.

•Fo

r co

nsid

erat

ions

on

mon

itorin

g go

vern

ance

of

CC

fin

ance

, see

Ch

apte

r 4.

Inte

rsec

tora

l co

ord

inat

ion

1.

Hav

e in

ters

ecto

ral

linka

ges

bee

n p

rop

erly

ad

dre

ssed

?

•In

terv

entio

ns in

one

sec

tor

or s

yste

m m

ay h

ave

impl

icat

ions

for

othe

rs. I

f in

ters

ecto

ral i

ssue

s ha

ve b

een

iden

tifie

d as

rel

evan

t (i.

e. if

the

y ca

n af

fect

the

pr

ojec

t ob

ject

ive

or t

he e

xecu

tion

of C

C a

ctiv

ities

), th

e pr

ojec

t sh

ould

con

side

r in

clud

ing

inte

rven

tions

on:

- in

tegr

ated

land

scap

e pl

anni

ng (

e.g.

at

ecos

yste

m,

mic

roca

tchm

ent

or r

iver

bas

in

leve

l), in

clud

ing

disc

ussi

ons

on C

C is

sues

, to

ensu

re th

at d

iffer

ent i

nter

vent

ions

in

indi

vidu

al s

ecto

rs o

r ar

eas

are

cons

iste

nt w

ith o

ne a

noth

er;

- es

tabl

ishm

ent

of

inst

itutio

nal

mec

hani

sms

to

faci

litat

e in

tegr

ated

an

d cr

oss-

sect

oral

man

agem

ent

prac

tices

suc

h as

inst

ance

s of

tra

nsfe

rrin

g re

sour

ces

from

co

mm

uniti

es t

hat

bene

fit f

rom

eco

syst

em s

ervi

ces

to t

hose

tha

t he

lp t

o m

aint

ain

them

;-

deve

lopm

ent

of m

echa

nism

s fo

r co

nflic

t re

solu

tion

amon

g re

sour

ce u

sers

and

ot

her

stak

ehol

ders

in

tran

sitio

ns f

rom

con

vent

iona

l to

int

egra

ted

ecos

yste

m

man

agem

ent

appr

oach

es; a

nd

- de

velo

pmen

t of

pu

blic

/com

mun

ity/p

rivat

e-se

ctor

pa

rtne

rshi

ps

for

inte

grat

ed

ecos

yste

m m

anag

emen

t pl

anni

ng a

nd im

plem

enta

tion.

n.a.

60

Su

bje

ctQ

ues

tio

nG

uid

ance

(e.

g. a

ctio

ns,

wh

o t

o t

alk

to)

So

urc

es o

f in

form

atio

n

C. Q

ues

tio

ns,

so

urc

es a

nd

gu

idan

ce f

or

the

sup

ervi

sio

n s

tag

e

Su

per

visi

on

at

pro

ject

sta

rt-

up

1.

Is c

on

sult

atio

n w

ith

p

roje

ct b

enefi

ciar

ies

and

par

tner

inst

itu

tio

ns

pla

nn

ed f

or

this

sta

ge?

2. W

hic

h s

ub

ject

s an

d

do

cum

ents

sh

ou

ld

be

revi

ewed

by

the

sup

ervi

sio

n t

eam

?

•Th

is d

ialo

gue

incl

udes

sup

ervi

sion

mis

sion

dis

cuss

ions

(pre

fera

bly

wor

ksho

ps) w

ith

bene

ficia

ries

and

part

ner

inst

itutio

ns o

n th

eir

awar

enes

s of

clim

ate-

rela

ted

activ

ities

an

d ou

tcom

es fo

rese

en b

y th

e pr

ojec

t.

•C

heck

the

incl

usio

n of

CC

-rel

ated

act

iviti

es a

nd a

rran

gem

ents

for

impl

emen

tatio

n (r

espo

nsib

ilitie

s) in

the

follo

win

g pr

ojec

t do

cum

ents

: (i)

the

oper

atio

nal m

anua

l (w

hen

requ

ired

by t

he d

onor

); (ii

) the

ann

ual i

mpl

emen

tatio

n (o

pera

tiona

l) pl

an fo

r th

e fir

st y

ear;

(iii)

bud

get

and

proc

urem

ent

plan

s; a

nd (i

v) t

he p

roje

ct’s

mon

itorin

g pl

an. A

lso

ensu

re t

hat

self/

inte

rnal

mon

itorin

g w

ill b

e im

plem

ente

d on

an

ongo

ing

basi

s in

pro

ject

man

agem

ent;

thi

s, h

owev

er, s

houl

d ce

rtify

tha

t th

e to

ols

to b

e em

ploy

ed in

clud

e w

ays

to m

easu

re c

limat

e-re

late

d in

dica

tors

incl

uded

in t

he

proj

ect’s

res

ults

fra

mew

ork

and

also

in a

ny a

dditi

onal

low

er-le

vel i

ndic

ator

s (a

t th

e ou

tput

and

act

ivity

leve

l) in

clud

ed in

the

pro

ject

’s o

pera

tiona

l man

ual a

nd/o

r an

nual

im

plem

enta

tion

plan

. If

poss

ible

, a C

C e

xper

t sh

ould

be

part

of

this

firs

t m

issi

on.

n.a.

Pro

ject

su

per

visi

on

1.

Wer

e al

l th

e C

C

con

sid

erat

ion

s in

corp

ora

ted

in p

roje

ct

des

ign

? If

yes

, see

q

ues

tio

ns

bel

ow

; if

no

t, a

re t

her

e an

y C

C

issu

es b

ein

g r

aise

d

by

stak

eho

lder

s w

hic

h c

ou

ld a

ffec

t th

e ac

hie

vem

ent

of

the

pro

ject

’s

ob

ject

ive?

Wh

at s

ho

uld

b

e d

on

e to

red

uce

th

is

risk

?

2. H

ave

fiel

d v

isit

s an

d

dis

cuss

ion

s w

ith

re

leva

nt

inst

itu

tio

ns

bee

n p

lan

ned

?

3. W

hic

h C

C-r

elat

ed

sub

ject

s an

d

do

cum

ents

sh

ou

ld

be

revi

ewed

by

the

sup

ervi

sio

n t

eam

? W

hat

ad

just

men

ts a

re

nee

ded

?

•If

pos

sibl

e, a

CC

exp

ert

shou

ld b

e pa

rt o

f th

e pr

ojec

t su

perv

isio

n an

d m

onito

ring

team

s. A

pro

ject

is a

pro

cess

; hen

ce, a

djus

tmen

ts a

re r

equi

red

whe

n w

ell-j

ustif

ied.

Th

is e

xper

t w

ould

als

o be

abl

e to

ass

ist

in id

entif

ying

new

act

iviti

es t

o be

pro

pose

d in

suc

h ad

just

men

ts, p

artic

ular

ly in

cas

es w

here

rel

evan

t C

C c

onsi

dera

tions

w

ere

not

inco

rpor

ated

in p

roje

ct d

esig

n an

d ar

e ?

If y

es, s

ee q

uest

ions

bel

ow; i

f no

t, a

re t

here

any

CC

issu

es b

eing

rai

sed

by s

take

hold

ers

whi

ch c

ould

affe

ct t

he

achi

evem

ent

of t

he p

roje

ct’s

obj

ectiv

e.

•Fo

r gu

idan

ce o

n fie

ld v

isits

and

doc

umen

ts t

o be

rev

iew

ed, s

ee C

hap

ter

3 (u

nder

its

sect

ion

"Pro

ject

/pro

gram

me

supe

rvis

ion

and

eval

uatio

n", s

ubse

ctio

n "S

uper

visi

on").

•Th

e lis

t of

inst

itutio

ns t

o be

vis

ited

shou

ld b

e re

ferr

ed t

o in

the

pro

ject

doc

umen

t.

For

natio

nal i

nstit

utio

ns c

oord

inat

ing

and/

or im

plem

entin

g C

C a

ctiv

ities

(not

ne

cess

arily

und

er t

he p

roje

ct b

eing

sup

ervi

sed)

, see

sec

tion

A.2

of

this

Ann

ex

(inst

itutio

nal a

spec

ts).

•S

ee C

hap

ter

3 on

pro

ject

/pro

gram

me

supe

rvis

ion

61


Su

bje

ctQ

ues

tio

nG

uid

ance

(e.

g. a

ctio

ns,

wh

o t

o t

alk

to)

So

urc

es o

f in

form

atio

n

D. Q

ues

tio

ns

spec

ific

to p

roje

ct e

valu

atio

n

Bas

e lin

e in

form

atio

n

and

bas

elin

e su

rvey

1.

Wh

at s

ho

uld

be

asse

ssed

pri

or

to

the

dev

elo

pm

ent

inte

rven

tio

n in

ter

ms

of

CC

?

•B

ased

on

CC

-rel

ated

indi

cato

rs id

entif

ied

durin

g pr

ojec

t pr

epar

atio

n (a

nd in

clud

ed

in t

he p

roje

ct d

ocum

ent)

, bas

elin

e da

ta h

ave

to b

e co

llect

ed a

t th

e be

ginn

ing

of

the

impl

emen

tatio

n ph

ase,

alth

ough

som

e do

nors

and

inte

rnat

iona

l fin

anci

ng

orga

niza

tions

(IFI

s) r

equi

re b

asel

ine

data

col

lect

ion

durin

g pr

ojec

t pr

epar

atio

n. It

se

rves

as

a st

artin

g po

int

for

succ

essf

ul m

onito

ring

and

eval

uatio

n (M

&E

), pr

ovid

ing

a ba

sis

for

mea

surin

g pr

ogre

ss in

ach

ievi

ng p

roje

ct o

bjec

tives

, out

com

e an

d ou

tput

s. W

ithou

t kn

owin

g w

hat

cond

ition

s ar

e lik

e pr

ior

to t

he s

tart

of

a pr

ojec

t (in

clud

ing

the

situ

atio

n re

leva

nt t

o th

e ex

ecut

ion

and

mon

itorin

g of

CC

act

iviti

es),

it w

ould

be

impo

ssib

le t

o m

easu

re p

rogr

ess.

Not

too

muc

h tim

e or

effo

rt s

houl

d be

spe

nt o

n th

is p

roce

ss. I

f sp

ecifi

c nu

mbe

rs a

re n

ot a

vaila

ble

or if

it is

too

cos

tly

to c

olle

ct d

ata,

rou

gh a

ppro

xim

atio

ns c

an b

e us

ed. D

urin

g a

base

line

asse

ssm

ent,

te

am m

embe

rs s

houl

d su

rvey

exi

stin

g da

ta t

o se

e if

they

fit

thei

r ne

eds.

•A

det

aile

d ba

selin

e su

rvey

/stu

dy m

ay a

lso

be n

eces

sary

(see

par

agra

ph o

n th

is

subj

ect

in C

hap

ter

3 un

der

"Pro

ject

/pro

gram

me

eval

uatio

n").

Ther

e se

em t

o be

no

maj

or s

ourc

es o

f in

form

atio

n on

met

hodo

logi

es fo

r ba

selin

e co

llect

ion

and

surv

ey

spec

ific

to in

vest

men

t pr

ojec

ts in

corp

orat

ing

CC

co

nsid

erat

ions

. The

re a

re, h

owev

er, v

ario

us b

asel

ine

and

mon

itorin

g m

etho

dolo

gies

ava

ilabl

e fo

r st

and-

alon

e C

C

proj

ects

, suc

h as

the

Cle

an D

evel

opm

ent

Mec

hani

sm

(CD

M) (

http

://cd

m.u

nfcc

c.in

t/m

etho

dolo

gies

/inde

x.ht

ml).

Als

o, fo

r in

vest

men

t pr

ojec

ts, e

ach

IFI u

sual

ly h

as

its o

wn

guid

elin

es o

n pr

ojec

t ev

alua

tion,

incl

udin

g gu

idan

ce o

n ba

selin

e da

ta c

olle

ctio

n an

d su

rvey

, whi

ch

can

also

be

usef

ul fo

r C

C-r

elat

ed in

dica

tors

. The

se a

re

usua

lly a

vaila

ble

on t

he IF

I hom

epag

e/lin

k to

eva

luat

ion.

For

exam

ple,

the

Web

site

of

the

Inte

rnat

iona

l Fun

d fo

r Agr

icul

ture

Dev

elop

men

t (IF

AD

) has

a s

peci

al li

nk

to e

valu

atio

n, t

o he

lp p

roje

ct m

anag

ers

and

M&

E

staf

f im

prov

e th

e qu

ality

of

M&

E in

IFA

D-s

uppo

rted

pr

ojec

ts:h

ttp:

//ww

w.if

ad.o

rg/e

valu

atio

n/in

dex.

htm

Mid

-ter

m

revi

ew(M

TR

)

1.

Wh

at s

ho

uld

be

asse

ssed

du

rin

g M

TR

in

ter

ms

of

CC

?

•S

ee g

uida

nce

on M

TR in

Ch

apte

r 3

unde

r "P

roje

ct/p

rogr

amm

e ev

alua

tion"

.S

ee in

form

atio

n ab

ove

on b

asel

ine

met

hodo

logi

es; i

t in

clud

es in

form

atio

n on

pro

ject

eva

luat

ion,

whi

ch is

als

o re

leva

nt t

o M

TR.

Pro

ject

co

mp

leti

on

an

dev

alu

atio

n

1.

Wh

at c

ou

ld b

e in

clu

ded

in t

he

eval

uat

ion

to

gen

erat

e le

sso

ns

lear

ned

on

ac

hie

vem

ents

rel

ated

to

inco

rpo

rati

ng

CC

co

nsi

der

atio

ns

in t

he

pro

ject

?

•Th

e te

n ta

sks

sugg

este

d in

Ch

apte

r 3

(und

er P

roje

ct C

ompl

etio

n E

valu

atio

n) s

houl

d be

tak

en in

to c

onsi

dera

tion

by t

he P

T w

hile

con

duct

ing

mis

sion

s an

d an

alys

is t

hat

will

sup

port

the

pre

para

tion

of t

he f

inal

eva

luat

ion

repo

rt:

See

info

rmat

ion

abov

e on

bas

elin

e m

etho

dolo

gies

, w

hich

incl

udes

info

on

proj

ect

eval

uatio

n w

hich

is a

lso

rele

vant

to

proj

ect

com

plet

ion.

62

Table of ContentsIntroduction 63

A set of questions 63

Minimum assessments 64

Rapid literature review of impacts and vulnerability studies 65

Seasonal climate and crop calendar 66

Basic characteristics of the project site 66

Climate normals 66

Extreme events 68

Local agriculture 69

Crop calendar 70

Historical climate trends 71

Historical mean climate trend 71

Historical trend of extreme events 72

Historical climate impacts on local agriculture 73

Agriculture under a normal climate 73

Past trend in local agriculture 73

Relationship between past climate and agriculture 74

Identifying dominating climatic factors 75

Adaptation options 76

Projected future climate impacts on yields 76

Projected future climate 76

Projected impact on agriculture 77

Adaptation options 78

Detailed assessments 78

Impact assessments for livestock, forestry and fisheries 79

Vulnerability 79

Mitigation 82

Rapid literature review 82

Emissions, mitigation options and potential 82

Life cycle assessment 84

List of resources 85

Climate change science 85

Impacts 85

Vulnerability 87

Mitigation 87

ANNEX 2 Approaches to rapid assessments of impacts of climate variability and climate change on agriculture in the project area

63


Introduction

Either at the project formulation stage or during the initial phase of the project, it is recommended to

conduct a rapid assessment of the impacts of climate variability and climate change on agriculture in

the project area. Such an assessment will be helpful in properly identifying possible effective climate

change adaptation activities. It is also advisable to gather basic information on the project site’s

mitigation potential to guide mitigation activities and seek synergies between adaptation and mitigation.

A set of questions

It is necessary to understand the historical impacts of climate change in order to assess its possible

future impacts. A rapid assessment should address the set of questions presented below in order to

better characterize the climate interface of the project. This annex will help you answer these questions

by discussing where to find basic sets of data from public archives and how to analyse them.

The focus of this annex is on crop agriculture; other agriculture sectors, such as livestock, fisheries and

forestry, are not addressed here. However, the same principles should apply to impact assessments

on non-crop agriculture, while data requirements and methodologies may differ. Examples of impact

assessments in these sectors will be given in a later section to help you design such studies as necessary.

Figure 2.1 illustrates the flow of assessment steps, supporting data and major products, using yield

(and/or area harvested) as a proxy for local crop agriculture productivity. The numbers and letters in

Figure 2.1 correspond with those that appear in the list of questions below and in the list of minimum

assessments (discussed later):

Seasonal climate and crop calendar (1)• How large is the project area? What are different agro-ecological zones within the area?

• What is the average climate of the project site? What is the seasonal cycle of the local climate? (A)

• What kind of extreme events are common in the project site? At what time of year do extreme

events typically occur? (B)

• What are the types of local agriculture? What kind of agriculture does the project address?

• What are local crop calendars? (C)

Historical climate trends (2)• Do you find a trend in the recent climate records for the project site? (D)

• What is the recent history of local extreme events? (E)

Historical climate impacts on local agriculture (3)• What is the state of local agriculture under the normal climate?

• How has the productivity of local agriculture changed in the past? Do you find a trend in the state of

local agriculture? (F)

• Is there a relationship between climate trends and agriculture in the local area? How has climate

been affecting agriculture in the local area? (G)

• What climatic factors affect agriculture more: temperature, rainfall or extreme events? During what

time of the year is agriculture more sensitive to climatic factors? (H)

• What can be done to cope with current and historical impacts? (I)

Projected future climate impacts on yields (4)• What is the projected change in the local climate in the future? What are possible ranges of change? (J)

• What is the projected impact on local agriculture in the future? (K)

• What can be done to cope with projected future impacts (L)?

64

Vulnerability• What is the nature of local vulnerability to climate change?

• What is the expected direction of changes in vulnerability with interventions?

• What can be the measures for reducing vulnerability?

Mitigation• What is the emission of an activity?

• What are possible mitigation measures in the local area?

• What are their mitigation potentials?

• How much GHG does the food production chain emit?

• What can be done to increase carbon efficiency?

Figure 2.1 Steps, supporting data and major products from a rapid assessment of climate impacts on crop agriculture

A. Seasonal climate (mean T, max T, min T, rainfall)

B. Extreme events calendar

C. Crop calendar

Integrated seasonal climate and crop

calendar

D. Observed mean climate

trends

E. Chronology of extreme

events

Historical climate trends

F. Historical yield (and/or area harvested)

G. Historical trends (climate and yield

overlay)

H. Identified major causes for yield variability - mean

climate and/or extreme events?

I. Priorities for coping with current impacts

J. Projected future climate (seasonal, annual mean, extreme events) - changes and possible ranges

K. Projected future yield changes

L. Priorities for coping with projected future impacts

1. Seasonal climate and crop calendar

2. Historical climate trends

3. Historical climate impacts on yields

4. Projected future climate impacts on yields

Supporting data

Major products

Legend

This annex presents practical steps for answering some of these questions regarding seasonal climate

and crop calendar, historical climate trends, historical climate impacts on local agriculture, projected

future climate impacts on yields and mitigation in the local area. Assessments of vulnerability are

beyond the scope of this annex as they usually require much more time and resources.

Minimum assessments

Not all assessments and products are possible because of limited data availability and resources.

At the minimum, you should gain an understanding of the following from a rapid assessment:

Seasonal climate and crop calendar (1)• Normal mean temperature, maximum temperature, minimum temperature and precipitation

(monthly scale) for the local area (A)

65


• Types of extreme events and the seasons (months) they typically occur (B)

• Crop calendars for major crops (C)

Historical climate trends (2)• No minimum requirements because obtaining long-term data may be difficult

Historical climate impacts on yields (3)• Qualitative characteristics of climate impacts on yields for the local area (H)

Projected future climate impacts on yields (4)• Future projected changes in climate for the region and possible range of changes (J)

• Implications for impacts on local agriculture given the projected future climate (K)

Mitigation• Mitigation potential of possible local mitigation measures

Adaptation• Possible adaptation measures, which preferably do not conflict with climate change mitigation (I and L)

Rapid literature review of impacts and vulnerability studies

Impact assessment is the practice of identifying and evaluating, in monetary and/or non-monetary terms,

the effects of climate change on natural and human systems. Impact in the context of climate change is

defined as the effect of climate change on those systems. Vulnerability is the degree to which a system is

susceptible to and unable to cope with the adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability

and extremes. It is a function of exposure (i.e. impacts), sensitivity and adaptive capacity (IPCC, 2007).

In order to rapidly draw useful information for adaptation actions, a review of literature is highly

recommended to gather already available information for the country and local areas. A literature review

would identify knowledge gaps, and a rapid assessment would complement the literature review by

collecting additional data and analysing them.

Abundant information on climate change and its impact on agriculture are available at global and

regional scales. Information at national and subnational scales are scarcer but can be found from the

following sources. These sources of information may or may not be relevant to your project depending

on the extent of the project area, but they should give an overview of the state of climate change and

agriculture within the country:

• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 4th Assessment Reports. The IPCC fourth

assessment reports (AR4) consist of Synthesis Report, Working Group (WG) 1 (science), WG 2

(impacts, adaptation and vulnerability) and WG 3 (mitigation). The most relevant chapters are WG1

Chapter 3 (observations: atmospheric surface and climate change), Chapter 10 (global climate

projections) and Chapter 11 (regional climate projections); WG2 Chapter 5 (food, fibre and forest

products) and other sector-oriented chapters of your interest as well as Chapters 9 to 16 (by region).

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml

• National Communications to the UNFCCC. They typically report national circumstances, such as

geography and climate as well as assessments of impact and vulnerability and adaptation options.

http://unfccc.int/national_reports/non-annex_i_natcom/submitted_natcom/items/653.php

• UNFCCC National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs). They summarize climatic/

environmental conditions and identify key adaptation needs of the country. Their focus is on urgent

66

and immediate needs rather than a long-term perspective. http://unfccc.int/cooperation_support/

least_developed_countries_portal/submitted_napas/items/4585.php

• National climate change strategy and action plans. Many countries have designed their own

climate change strategies and action plans. These documents should contain an overview of climate

change issues in the country.

• Academic papers. Institutions like FAO have subscriptions to literature databases such as Scopus

(http://www.scopus.com) and Web of Science (http://www.isiknowledge.com). Peer-reviewed

journal articles can be located by searching on these databases with relevant keywords.

• Grey literature (non peer-reviewed reports and other documents). A large amount of information

produced for developing countries tends to be published in non peer-reviewed reports. The

academic databases mentioned above cover grey literature to some extent. Google Scholar (http://

scholar.google.com) can also point you to both peer-reviewed and grey literature.

• National ministries, climate change bodies, research institutions and universities. It is highly

recommended to inquire with relevant ministries, institutions and universities in the country for

other useful information that is not published on the Internet.

When there are no good existing assessments and associated tools available from relevant institutions

at the national/local level, it is highly recommended to conduct a rapid assessment of the impacts of

climate variability and climate change on agriculture in the project area, as detailed in the rest of this

annex. Impact assessments consist of four broad types of analysis. They are: (1) seasonal climate and

crop calendar; (2) historical climate trends; (3) historical climate impacts on yields; and (4) projected

future climate impacts on yields.

Seasonal climate and crop calendar

You can start a rapid assessment by assessing the characteristics of the project site and by

understanding its local climate (past and current) and local agriculture. Then, examine observed (past

and current) impacts of climate variability and climate change on agriculture. This sets the basis for

assessing future potential impacts.

Basic characteristics of the project site

In this section, you will answer these questions: How large is the project area? What are different agro-

ecological zones within the area?

Agricultural investment projects vary a lot in terms of spatial extent. You should find out the size and

basic geography of the project area. If it encompasses different geographic features (e.g. proximity to

ocean/lake/river, elevation, terrain), determine whether different agro-ecological zones exist within the

area. The Agro-Ecological Zones (AEZ) approach, developed by FAO in collaboration with the International

Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), enables rational land-use planning on the basis of an

inventory of land resources and an evaluation of their biophysical limitations and potential for crop

production. At this stage of rapid assessment, it is sufficient to consult several global maps (Plate A-L)

from the 2002 report (Fischer et al., 2002). If distinctly different agro-ecological characteristics are found

within the area, the same set of rapid assessments needs to be done for each agro-ecological zone.

Climate normals

In this section, you will answer these questions: What is the average climate of the project site? What

is the seasonal cycle of the local climate? (A)

Basic climatic variables of interest to the agricultural sector include precipitation (i.e. rainfall),

temperature (i.e. daily maximum, daily minimum, daily mean), wind speed and direction, solar radiation,

67


humidity, evaporation and runoff. They are measured at tens of thousands of land-based weather

stations across the world at least once a day and often more frequently. They are complemented by

observation by ships, radiosondes, aircraft and satellites. The data collected at each weather station

are archived by different frequencies (e.g. hourly, daily, monthly and yearly), usually by national weather

services. Some of the data are shared through the World Meteorological Organization with the

international community, and others are withheld by the country. Therefore, it is advisable to inquire

with the national weather service about data availability in the first place. This annex presents an

alternative way to draw information mainly from public Web sites and services. Please note that data

availability varies significantly by location, country, climatic variables and temporal frequencies, and data

quality also varies. Whenever possible, choose quality-controlled data.

The data are usually available at points (e.g. weather stations) or on grids (spatial resolution may vary).

If you are dealing with a large area and want to visualize climate and impacts in a map, gridded data

may be easier to use than station data. In this annex, we focus on climate information at a particular

location, mainly from land-based weather station data, because they are the primary data source for any

local area. Even though this annex gives general pointers to useful online resources, proper processing

and interpretation of climate data often require expert knowledge. It is strongly recommended to

read the background document that accompanies data sets to understand the nature of the data

before using them for your work. In case you cannot find data at your project location, use data from

neighbouring locations or at different scales (e.g. provinces or even national data), but interpret the

data carefully considering spatial heterogeneity in climate, agricultural practices and ecosystems. It is

recommended to obtain the longest-possible datasets in order to establish observed trends (discussed

later), but be aware of changes in observation locations and measurement methods which may cause

discontinuity in time series (irrespective of climate change).

Climate change manifests itself in mean changes in climate and also in shifts in seasonal cycles.

Therefore, it is always important to understand long-term mean climate (both annual mean and

seasonal cycle) at a location. Climate normals are usually an average of a 30-year period (e.g. 1961

to 1990). There are a number of Web sites where you can get such data. In addition, FAOClim-NET

provides weather station data (i.e. monthly climate normals, 1961–1990) from all over the world. There

is no need for special software for simple analyses. See Figure 2.2 for a sample plot of precipitation

drawn in Excel. You will understand the seasonal cycle of rainfall (i.e. dry season and rainy season).

Figure 2.2

Long-term average precipitation in Rome (1961-1990)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug S ep Oct Nov Dec

mm

68

For locations where no weather station is available, it may be possible to derive information by

spatially interpolating data from neighbouring stations. FAO’s New_LocClim and Web LocClim provide

interpolation tools with monthly, dekadal (10-daily) and daily data. The desktop application New_LocClim

has more functions than its Web counterpart, Web LocClim. Figure 2.3 is a sample plot of temperature

drawn in Excel with output from Web LocClim.

Figure 2.3 Long-term average temperature in Nyala, Sudan (1961-1990)

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

degr

ees

C

Extreme events

In this section, you will answer these questions: What kind of extreme events are common in the

project site? At what time of year do extreme events typically occur? (B)

Intensity and frequency of extreme weather events are expected to change because of climate change.

There are many types of extreme weather events: heat wave, wind storm, cold spell, drought, flooding,

heavy rain, etc. You should learn which types of extreme events are common in the local area – and

in which months/seasons they tend to occur – by talking with farmers and other local people. You can

combine the extreme events information with temperature and precipitation plots to produce a climate

calendar. Figure 2.4 is an example of a seasonal climate calendar from a project in the Philippines.

69


Figure 2.4 Seasonal climate calendar for Bicol, the Philippines (1994-2009)

0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

24.5

25.5

26.5

27.5

28.5

25

26

27

28

29

January

FebruaryMarch

April MayJune

JulyAugust

September

October

November

December

rainfall

temperature

rain

fall

(mm

)

tem

pera

ture

(deg

ree)

Qua 1 Qua 2 Qua 3 Qua 4

Annual rainfall: 3,200 mm Mean annual air temperature: 27.3°CWetter season: Qua 4: Typhoons Drier season: Qua 2: Drought

Local agriculture

In this section, you will answer these questions: What are the types of local agriculture? What kind of

agriculture does the project address?

At this point you should review the types of local agriculture, e.g. crops, livestock, forestry, aquaculture

or fisheries:

• Climate change has direct effects on livestock productivity because of heat stress, changes in water

availability, livestock diseases and disease vectors. Climate change will also affect the quality and

quantity of available feed supply and the carrying capacity of pastures.

• Fisheries and aquaculture production systems are likely to suffer from increased water

temperatures, rise in sea levels and decreased pH, changes in sea productivity patterns, flooding,

droughts and increases in frequency and intensity of storms and other extreme weather events.

• Forests and rangelands will be sensitive to climate variation, weather extremes and long-term

changes, such as changes in day, night and seasonal temperatures; storm patterns; duration and

intensity of heat waves; droughts and floods; presence of invasive species; incidence of pests and

diseases; frost, snow and ice cover; biodiversity; and increases in wildfires.

The rest of this annex focuses on crop agriculture; non-crop agriculture is beyond the scope of this

document, except for references to some sample studies which are discussed later.

70

Crop calendar

In this section, you will answer this question: What are local crop calendars?(C)

Crops are affected by climate differently through their life cycle. Figure 2.5 illustrates the sensitivity

of rice to different types of extreme events; it helps to understand the stages of crop growth that are

most commonly affected by seasonal extreme climate events.

Figure 2.5 Sensitivity of rice crop to climate-related extremes

Source: FAO E-learning tool

Talk with farmers and extension workers about the major crops that are cultivated in the local area.

In order to understand local agricultural practices, compile a crop calendar from sowing to harvesting

for each major crop. You can start with the FAO crop calendar and revise it after becoming familiar

with the local situation (http://www.fao.org/agriculture/seed/cropcalendar/welcome.do). For example,

the database tells you that the sowing/planting period for sweet potato in Uganda’s southwestern

highlands is from 15 April to 30 September and the harvest period is between 25 July and 28 February.

Note there is also a possibility of the double cropping farming system and changes in the system over

time. Also you should make sure to verify the information from databases with local people.

To create an integrated seasonal climate and crop calendar, combine crop calendars with climate

calendar results. Figure 2.6 is an example of crop calendar and extreme events calendar. You can also

easily plot temperature and the seasonal rainfall cycle along with these calendars.

71


Figure 2.6 Crop and extreme events calendar for Shandong, China

Source: FAO E-learning tool

Historical climate trends

Historical mean climate trend

In this section, you will answer this question: Do you find a trend in the recent climate records for the

project site? (D)

To determine if there has indeed been a significant trend in the historical climate record, you need to

obtain long time series of weather station observations. FAOClim-NET provides long time series from

around the world, and from there you can obtain monthly averages. Daily averages are much more

useful as crops are usually affected by weather at much smaller temporal scales (10 days or shorter)

than monthly scales. Extreme weather events, such as heavy rainfall (i.e. over a few days), may not be

apparent in climate records at monthly time scales and may require analysis at daily scales.

There are a number of public data archives that provide daily averages or information from stations that

FAOClim-NET does not cover. The United States National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) offers a wide

range of data (e.g. Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN), Global Summary of the Day (GSOD)).

Figures 2.7(a) and 2.7(b) are plots drawn in Excel using NCDC Global Climate Observing System

(GCOS) Surface Network Monthly (GSNMON) data for El Fahser, Sudan.

72

Figure 2.7 Time series of temperature and rainfall in El Fasher, Sudan

(a) March mean temperature (degrees C) (b) Annual rainfall (mm)

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

1915 1925 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005

Temperature1917-1945 (25.1C)1946-1975 (24.3C)1976-2005 (25.8C)Trend (Temperature)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

750

1915 1925 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005

Rainfall1917-1945 (319mm)

1946-1975 (293mm)1976-2005 (193mm)

Trend (Rainfall)

While you can find a long-term increasing trend (linear regression) of March temperature over the

89-year period plotted, the middle 30-year block (1946-1975) was actually cooler than the preceding

29 years (1917-1945), according to this local record. Therefore, it is important to obtain the longest

record possible when you examine trends. If the data were not quality controlled, we could not rule

out the possibility that the trend might not be true, but be due, for example, to changes in the location

of the weather station or its surrounding environment. Please also note large year-to-year variability,

particularly with rainfall, which is often larger than the observed long-term rate of change in mean

climate. For investigating long-term trends of climatic variables, you can analyse either annual averages

or only selected months for the growing season, rainy season, dry season, etc.

The next best data to weather stations, when station data cannot be found from public archives,

is high-resolution gridded observations (such as those from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic

Research Unit (UEA CRU)) which offer data on 0.5-degree grids. However, be mindful that weather

stations are still the original source of the data that went into the gridded products. So, in places where

stations do not exist, they are interpolated from neighbouring stations that may be quite far away. Thus,

only limited confidence can be placed on climate information in those places, even if sophisticated

methods are used to fill the gap.

Historical trend of extreme events

In this section, you will answer this question: What is the recent history of local extreme events? (E)

It is a good idea to produce a chronological list of historical extreme weather events for the location,

however qualitative and subjective it may be. EM-DAT1 is a database of historical disasters at the

country level. UNEP PREVIEW2 also provides an overview of natural disaster risks in a given country.

You may also be able to identify historical extreme weather events from weather data (preferably at a

daily scale).

When analysing extreme events, pay particular attention to intensity and frequency – both of which

are expected to change in the future. Heavy precipitation events can be found in monthly rainfall

1 The WHO Collaborating Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED) maintains an Emergency Events Database EM-DAT.2 PREVIEW stands for Project for Risk Evaluation, Information and Early Warning. It is supported by UNEP, UNDP/Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery (BCPR)’s Global Risk Identification Program (GRIP), UNISDR and World Bank.

73


data (compared with climate normals) or daily rainfall data (i.e. a sum of daily values for a series of

consecutive rainy days). Heat waves can be recognized in monthly temperature averages (i.e. either

daily maximums, daily minimums or daily means, compared with the normal climate for the same

month) or the number of consecutive hot days (above a certain threshold which can be defined for a

given location) in daily temperature data. Droughts can be characterized by total monthly precipitation

(compared with a normal climate) or by the number of consecutive no-rain days. Frequency can be

expressed, for example, in the number of extreme events per year.

In order to analyse the nature of disasters that are not purely meteorological (e.g. flooding, landslides,

agricultural/hydrological droughts), most probably you would need to get data from relevant institutions.

Historical climate impacts on local agriculture

Agriculture under a normal climate

In this section, you will answer this question: What is the state of local agriculture under a normal

climate?

You have compiled crop calendars for major crops. Now, to understand local agricultural productivity,

you should consult with local farmers and extension workers to find out the expected production,

yield and/or harvested area under a normal climate (i.e. without particularly good or bad weather)

through a cropping season at the subnational (or smaller) administrative unit of the project area. You

can also obtain data about the size of the planted area, in addition to the harvested area. Whenever

possible, look for data on all these variables because crop yield and harvested area are affected by

climate in different ways. When collecting data, distinctions should be made between different types

of agricultural practices (e.g. irrigated and rainfed croplands) because they have different responses to

climate conditions.

Past trend in local agriculture

In this section, you will answer this question: How has the productivity of local agriculture changed in

the past? Do you find a trend in the state of local agriculture? (F)

To learn more about how climate has been affecting agriculture, you should try to obtain long time

series data on crop yields, production and harvested/planted area by contacting national and local

institutions that handle agricultural statistics. Depending on data availability, you can either study the

project site, the province where it is located or the entire country if data at smaller spatial scales are

not available. For national data, FAOSTAT, which provides time-series and cross sectional data relating to

food and agriculture for about 200 countries, may be useful.

You can plot a time series of annual (or seasonal) crop yield, production or harvested/planted area to

see how much variability exists from year to year or to see if there is an increasing/decreasing trend

in the series. A steady increasing trend may be due to progress in technology (e.g. better varieties,

infrastructure, fertilizer use) and may have nothing to do with climate. In such a case, the time series

may be “detrended” by subtracting increasing technology effects from it.If you see any jumps in the

data series, contact someone knowledgeable about local agriculture to find out why. It could be errors

in the data set, significant policy changes, changes in the way statistics are logged, etc. Figure 2.8 is an

example of detrending rice yields.

74

Figure 2.8 Annual yield of irrigated rice for each quarter of the year in Bicol, the Philippines and its long-term trend found by fitting a smooth curve (left), and % deviation from the trend (detrended year-

to-year anomaly)

Annual production of rice Anomaly of annual rice production

400

500

600

700

800

19961992 2000 2004 2008

Ric

e pr

oduc

tion

(100

0t) -

Bic

ol r

egio

n

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

19961992 2000 2004 2008D

evia

tion

(%)

Relationship between past climate and agriculture

In this section, you will answer this question: Is there a relationship between climate trends and

agriculture in the local area? How has climate been affecting agriculture in the local area? (G)

After obtaining long-term data of climate and agriculture, you may plot a time series of crop yield with

climatic variables (e.g. temperature, rainfall and extreme events) side-by-side. For example, do you see

a drop/gain in yield in years with smaller/larger rainfall? Do you find a loss in yield when an extreme

event was reported? Please note that different types of extreme events affect different combinations

of crops and practices (e.g. irrigation vs. rainfed).In Figure 2.9, the decline in annual rice production of

Bicol (in the Philippines) appears to be related to recorded large typhoons (1998 and 2006).

Figure 2.9 Annual rice production of Bicol, the Philippines

400

500

600

700

800

19961992 2000 2004 2008

Ric

e pr

oduc

tion

(100

0t) -

Bic

ol r

egio

n

If there is no apparent relationship between the two time series (i.e. agriculture vs. climate) with annual

average climate data, consider looking at monthly/seasonal data. You can try to establish a statistical

relationship between the series, but it is beyond the scope of a rapid assessment.

75


Identifying dominating climatic factors

In this section, you will answer these questions: What climatic factors affect agriculture more:

temperature, rainfall or extreme events? What time of the year is agriculture more sensitive to climatic

factors? (H)

There are many pairs of climate and agriculture variables which may have a meaningful causal

relationship. Examine different pairs carefully. There are usually only one or two dominating climatic

factors (e.g. average climatic variables or extreme events) that affect a particular crop under a particular

agricultural practice. You can also pay attention to critical stages of crop growth (refer to crop calendars)

that are especially susceptible to changes in climate or extreme events.

Figure 2.10 shows an example of dominating extreme events that impacted major crops in Bicol, the

Philippines, which were found by multiple regressions. The same study went further (Figure 2.11) to

derive common types of extreme events that affect a crop by quarter and by production system

(i.e. irrigation or rainfed).

Figure 2.10 Chronology of dominating extreme events that impacted rice production in Bicol, the Philippines. (Quarter 1=green, 2=blue, 3=yellow and 4=red)

76

Figure 2.11 Generalized dominating extreme events that impact rice yield and area harvested by quarter and by production system (i.e. irrigation and rainfed), in Bicol, the Philippines. (+) means positive and (-) means negative impact for yield or area harvested.

Adaptation options

In this section, you will answer this question: What can be done to cope with current and historical

impacts? (I)

It is suggested that you discuss your findings on climatic factors critical to local agricultural productivity

with local extension workers and other knowledgeable professionals. The type of impact assessment

we have been discussing so far is a top-down approach. This is a point where you can check whether

the data-driven assessment agrees with the local perception of current and past climate risks. If there

are discrepancies between these, you need to investigate why: Are the data not appropriate in terms

of spatial scale and temporal scale? Are there critical errors in the data? Are you making assumptions in

the analysis that may not hold? Are local farmers’ perceptions biased by misconceptions and prejudice?

Once you agree on which critical climate risks for local farming need to be tackled, you can consult

with subject experts and relevant institutions (e.g. an agronomist and water resources manager) to

come up with viable adaptation options. You can start by asking how farmers have been coping with

weather extremes in the past. Are they diversifying sources of income by growing more than one

type of crop, or working in non-crop agriculture or a non-agriculture sector? Do they count on aids

from the government in a bad crop year? Ideally, the actions for adapting to climate risks should boost

productivity without degrading environmental conditions and without increasing greenhouse gas

emissions.

To give you an example, the Bicol study found that excessive water from typhoons is a larger problem

than drought is for rice. Therefore, improving the drainage system and introducing water-tolerant

varieties would be effective in reducing rice yield loss. On the other hand, corn was found to be more

sensitive to droughts than rice, so better irrigation systems would be a good option for corn fields.

Projected future climate impacts on yields

Projected future climate

In this section, you will answer these questions: What is the projected change in the local climate in the

future? What are possible ranges of change? (J)

Future projections of climate are outputs from global climate models which typically operate at a coarse

resolution of about 200km x 200km. IPCC Data Distribution Center, CMIP3 and CMIP5 (Coupled Model

Intercomparison Project Phase 3 and 5) archives provide global climate model outputs, but expert

77


knowledge is usually needed to analyse those data. Data on such a coarse resolution is usually not

relevant or useful for local applications. There are, however, Web sites that offer data on global climate

change projections in an accessible format for non-experts, including the University of Cape Town’s

Climate Information Portal (CIP) and the World Bank Climate Change Knowledge Portal.

Global data are often translated into finer spatial scales by downscaling methods for use by applications

(e.g. impact and vulnerability assessment studies, adaptation projects). FAO’s Modelling System

for Agricultural Impacts of Climate Change (MOSAICC) has a module for statistical downscaling.

Performing climate downscaling requires expert knowledge, so it is beyond the reach of rapid

assessments.

Downscaled climate data are often produced for specific applications by experts, but there are a few

sites that provide ready-made downscaled products. University of Cape Town’s Data Dissemination

System is an example. Under a new programme, Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling

Experiment (CORDEX), institutions worldwide are currently running models to compare downscaled

climate data, which will be made available to the public soon.

There are a couple of cautionary notes about the use of future climate projections:

Uncertainties. Future climate projections carry inherently deep, multi-layered uncertainties, and we

only discuss a few of them here. We do not know how human activities will evolve in the coming

decades, which will determine GHG emissions and further affect future climate change. All projections

are based on emission scenarios that represent possible socio-economic development pathways. Even

for the same emission scenario, different climate models project different future climates, although

all of them are known to reasonably reproduce the past climate. Therefore, it is highly recommended

to not base your assessment on one global climate model and one emission scenario. Always choose

at least a couple of climate models and a couple of emission scenarios to understand the range of

possible future climates.

Useofclimatemodeloutputs. Usually you cannot subtract current local climate values (observation)

from future projected climate values (model output) to derive the size of future climate change because

model outputs have biases and do not exactly match observation. Instead, take the difference between

the future and current climate from the same model in order to quantify future changes in local climate.

Projected impact on agriculture

In this section, you will answer this question: What is the projected impact on local agriculture in the

future? (K)

An assessment of future changes in crop yield requires technical expertise beyond a rapid assessment.

One way to do this is to establish a statistical relationship between the local climate and yield and then

apply the same relationship to the future climate to derive the future yield. Note that in the immediate

future (e.g. the next 10 years), the interannual variability may be much larger than long-term changes in

mean climate. Therefore, it is even more important to understand the local nature of extreme weather

impacts and assume the possibility for the same or even worse impacts in the future.

Another, more elaborate, way to project future changes is to calibrate a crop model with historical

climate, yield and other data, and use the same model to estimate future yields. See, for example,

a study on future climate change impacts on Moroccan crop yields (FAO, 2009a). FAO’s tool called

MOSAICC facilitates such studies by national institutions.

78

Adaptation options

In this section, you will answer this question: What can be done to cope with projected future impacts (L)?

Once you understand the future potential impacts of climate change on agriculture, you should see

if there are any significant changes in the characteristics of climate risks between the present (as

identified in previous sections) and the future. It is a good idea to revisit the integrated seasonal

climate and crop calendar and examine potential shifts in the seasonal cycles. The exercise will

highlight adaptation measures for future climate change. Modifications to the set of current adaptation

options (as identified by assessing current risks), taking into account future impacts, should be made

in consultation with experts and relevant institutions. Additional consideration may be given to the

mitigation potential of selected actions (presented in a separate section) whenever appropriate.

Detailed assessments

When a project is identified as relevant to climate change by rapid climate change assessments or

climate change screening, and when specific climate change components/interventions are included in

the project concept note, it is necessary during project preparation to assess the availability of relevant

data and information and identify gaps in order to propose complementary studies that can enable

quantitative analysis. More elaborate assessments usually require good data, i.e. long time-series of

relevant variables at appropriate locations.

As an extension to assessing projected future yield changes (K in Figure 2.1), you can assess future

impacts of climate change by employing FAO’s MOSAICC, for example. MOSAICC consists of climate

downscaling, crop models, hydrology models and economic models. It is necessary to form a national

team of technical experts and provide training so they can run models after calibrating them for local

conditions. With MOSAICC, the team can downscale historical climate and future projections to a local

scale and simulate future surface water resources, evaluate crop yield changes and derive economic

implications for the country. There are also a number of other crop models (often for specific crops),

water models and economic models.

As an extension to assessing projected future climate (J in Figure 2.1), you can suggest downscaling

historical and future climate data, rather than using ready-made products. In addition to MOSAICC’s

downscaling component, there are a number of tools such as Providing REgional Climates for Impacts

Studies (PRECIS) of the UK Met Office and the Statistical Downscaling Model (SDSM). These tools

can be run only by trained experts. Please note that downscaling is not a magic operation that can

provide all the information you need at local scales. If global climate models perform poorly at a location

(e.g. large uncertainties in future rainfall projection), a downscaling method (which uses global climate

model data as inputs) cannot reduce such uncertainties. You may want to think backwards from the

end product (e.g.the impact and vulnerability information you need) and decide if downscaling is really

necessary to produce the information.

As an extension to assessing adaptation options (I and L in Figure 2.1) and mitigation options, you can

summarize and compare possible adaptation and mitigation practices in terms of their cost-benefit,

technical complexity and effectiveness. Before implementing any interventions, it is suggested to

investigate and summarize local-friendly practices for measuring and assessing the effectiveness of

adaptation and mitigation actions. This will contribute to formulating and implementing the project

monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework.

79


Impact assessments for livestock, forestry and fisheries

This annex focuses on rapid assessments for crop agriculture, but a few notable studies for livestock,

forestry and fisheries are mentioned below as a reference when designing impact assessments for

non-crop agriculture sectors:

• For an overview of how climate change affects livestock see Thornton et al. (2007) and Thornton et

al. (2009). Batima (2006) assessed impacts of climate change on Mongolia’s livestock sector from

climate projections, including water resources, snow cover, permafrost, pasture and finally livestock.

The report concludes with suggested adaptation measures.

• For the forestry sector, Forner (2006) provides their project’s approach to assessments (“Tropical

Forests and Climate Change Adaptation, TroFCCA”), which could be adapted for your use. Zhao et

al. (2005) discuss climate impacts on forestry with case studies from the Philippines and Malaysia.

Kirilenko and Sedjo (2007) provide more forest industry-oriented views of the impacts of climate

change on forestry.

• Allison et al. (2005) is a good overview document about climate change impacts and the

vulnerability of fisheries from poverty-reduction perspectives. Brander (2010) discusses the impacts

of climate change on fisheries in general, including methodologies. Brander (2007) discusses a

multitude of climate-related threats to future fish production. For freshwater fisheries, see also

Ficke et al. (2007). For marine wild capture fisheries, Perry (2010) summarizes potential impacts

from recent studies.

Vulnerability

In this section, you will answer these questions: What is the nature of local vulnerability to climate

change? What is the expected direction of changes in vulnerability with interventions? What measures

can reduce vulnerability?

While decision-makers must know the impacts of climate change on agriculture sectors, they also need

to understand the current and future vulnerabilities of their food systems, ecosystems, societies and

national economies to the impacts of climate change and variability.

There are a number of definitions of vulnerability. The IPCC defines vulnerability as “the degree to

which a system or society is susceptible to, and unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate

change, including climate variability and extremes” (Figure 2.12). In addition to biophysical impacts

assessed in previous sections, an analysis of vulnerability would require an evaluation of local adaptive

capacities to cope with the expected impacts.

80

Figure 2.12 Outcome vulnerability is a function of exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity

Climate change

Exposure unit

Potential impact

Outcome vulnerability

Sensitivity

Adaptive capacity

This definition of vulnerability is referred to as “outcome vulnerability” as opposed to “contextual

vulnerability” which takes a more holistic view of the issue. In the contextual vulnerability assessment

framework, climate projections are only one part of the assessment of threats to social and

environmental resources (other parts include political and institutional changes and economic and social

changes, as shown in Figure 2.13); however, this kind of assessment makes it possible to identify the

most vulnerable area/sector/practice that requires immediate attention.

Figure 2.13 Contextual vulnerability

Political and institutional

structures and changes

Contextual conditions

Responses

Climate variability and

change

Economic and social structures

and changes

Contextual vulnerability

Institutional

Biophysical

Socio - economic

Technological

Source: Adapted from O’Brien et al., 2007

81


Vulnerability assessments usually require much more data than impact assessments and elaboration,

and they cannot be conducted in a rapid way. Any vulnerability assessment should carefully consider

the context (i.e. physical, socio-economic and institutional), temporal and spatial scales and inherent

uncertainties to offer a framework for policy measures for adaptation. An assessment should be

designed to answer these questions from the adaptation community:

• Which main population sectors, household groups, etc. are at risk in a given area?

• What are the dominant factors contributing to their vulnerability?

• What actions should we take, given that we cannot exactly predict the future, to reduce the

possibility of an undesirable outcome to an acceptable level?

• What is the best strategy given a variety of possible outcomes?

Vulnerability assessments are not conducted using just one set of tools which could be applied to

any situation. There are a variety of tools that can be used for different vulnerability assessments (see

Figure 2.14). It is very important for you to know how to choose a methodology for the appropriate

temporal and spatial scales of your study.

Figure 2.14 Vulnerability assessment tools on different temporal and spatial scales

TemporalScales

Global toRegional

Regional to National

National to Local

Vulnerability profiles

Vulnerability indicatorsand mapping

Participatorymodeling and

GIS

Oral histories

Syndromes

Risk analysis

Livelihoodsindicators

Delphitechniques

Institutionalanalysis

BrainstormingRole play

Spatial scale

Source: Environment Development Action in the Third World (ENDA), 2004

82

There are several questions to ask when selecting relevant tools for vulnerability assessments:

• What is the context and who are the users/clients of the assessment?

• What is the time scale of the problem?

• What are the expected results of the policies?

• What is the targeted scale/spatial level?

• Which stakeholders are involved in the assessment?

• What resources (e.g. time, finance) are available for the assessment?

You can also focus on specific aspects of vulnerability – food security, rural livelihoods, agro-

ecosystems, etc. Once you understand the characteristics of local vulnerability (whether of the

outcome or contextual type), it is good to simulate the impact of proposed project interventions. An

intervention may reduce a certain type of vulnerability, but may expose the same community to a new

risk. A vulnerability model could be used to design a strategy that would minimize overall vulnerability

to a range of possible risks.

Mitigation

In this section, you will answer these questions: What are possible mitigation measures in the local

area? What is their mitigation potential? How much GHG does the food production chain emit? What

can be done to increase carbon efficiency?

To the extent possible, it is recommended that you gain an understanding of current carbon stocks and

emissions of GHGs from the agriculture, fisheries, forestry and other land-use sectors in the project

area, as well as possible impacts of project interventions on GHG emissions and mitigation possibilities.

Rapid literature review

GHG emissions vary a lot (e.g. by location, ecosystems, soil, agricultural practices, source of emission,

type of gas), so it may be difficult to make even a back-of-the-envelope estimate. Nevertheless, the

following resources may at least help to understand possible ranges of a typical value:

• IPCC Fourth Assessment Reports (http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_

data_reports.shtml)These reports consist of a Synthesis Report, Working Group 1 (science), Working

Group 2 (impacts, adaptation and vulnerability) and Working Group 3 (mitigation). The most relevant

chapters for mitigation are Chapter 8 (agriculture) and Chapter 9 (forestry) in Working Group 3.

• National communications, which typically report national GHG inventory and mitigation measures.

These include: national communications by the countries to the UNFCCC (http://unfccc.int/national_

reports/items/1408.php); national climate change strategy and action plans; academic papers;

grey literature (i.e. non peer-reviewed reports and other documents); and publications of national

ministries, climate change bodies, research institutions and universities (see also under “Rapid

literature review of impacts and vulnerability studies” above).

Emissions, mitigation options and potential

In this section, you will answer these questions: What is the emission of an activity? What are possible

mitigation measures in the local area? What is their mitigation potential?

There are a number of resources that provide relevant data which can help you answer these questions.

They are briefly described below:

IPCC’s Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (TFI) publishes guidelines for national GHG

inventories. Two of the most relevant publications are “2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse

Gas Inventories” and “Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry”. TFI

83


also offers the Emission Factor Database (EFDB), which is a database on emission factors and other

parameters with background documentation or technical references that can be used for calculating

emissions by sources and removals by sinks of GHGs. The estimated emission of a given emission/

removal activity is calculated as the intensity of the activity multiplied by an emission factor. Parameters

reported from similar environmental conditions and emission estimates based on them could be used

as a reference for a rapid assessment in the project development stage.

Seeberg-Elverfeldt and Tapio-Biström (2011) (not yet published; see their Tables 2.2 to 2.5 quoted below

as Table 2.1) give an overview of the GHG mitigation potential of practices (i.e. agroforestry, grassland,

crop farming, and rice management) in different regions.

More succinct information is available in a 2010 FAO publication – Global survey of agricultural

mitigation projects, Mitigation of Climate Change in Agriculture Series 1 (FAO, 2010b) – in its Table 4

(quoted below as Table 2.2; compiled from IPCC AR4 WG3) and Annex I, where examples are provided

from different case studies of the carbon sequestration and mitigation potential of different land-use

systems. In the cases presented in FAO (2010b), all projects use different methodologies for estimating

GHG emissions: the Voluntary Carbon Standard methodology for the adoption of sustainable agricultural

land management (SALM) by farmers; the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) methodologies; the

Plan Vivo Standards; and other measurement methodologies with carbon accounting through forestry

assessment, IPCC guidelines and carbon soil determination methodologies. Also, see Annex II of FAO

(2010b) for more information on the range of methodologies for agriculture, forestry and other land uses

from different institutions.

Written mainly for the United States, T-AGG Report (Eagle et al., 2011) describes the mitigation potential

for a variety of agricultural management practices (e.g. conservation tillage) and conversions of land

use (e.g. from cropland to pasture). The numbers presented could be used as a rough indication of

mitigation potential in different locations. See Table 31 of the report for a comparison of all practices

(quoted below as Table 2.3), in which the authors present three categories of GHG impacts: (1)

change in soil C; (2) change in land emissions (N2O and CH4); and (3) change in upstream and process

emissions (e.g. fuel, fertilizer and other).

There are other references available for specific practices. For soil carbon sequestration, West and

Post (2002) looked at the effects of changing from conventional tillage to no-till and enhancing crop

rotation (see their Table 2 and 3). For agroforestry, Nair et al. (2009) reviewed the carbon sequestration

potential of prominent agroforestry systems (see their Table 1).For grassland management, Conant and

Paustian (2002) summarized potential carbon sequestration by continent, level of current overgrazing

and climate (see their Tables 4 and 5). FAO (2009b) gives a good summary of potential in drylands

pastoral systems. Tennigkeit and Wilkes (2008) review the carbon sequestration potential of rangeland

management practices (see their Table 6). Thornton and Herreros (2010) reviewed mitigation options

and their potential for livestock and pasture management. Wassmann et al. (2000) present mitigation

opportunities and potential for reducing methane emissions from rice fields.

The Ex Ante Carbon-balance Tool (EX-ACT) of FAO (http://www.fao.org/tc/exact/en/) is a more elaborate

tool for ex ante estimations of the impact of agriculture and forestry development projects on GHG

emissions and carbon sequestration; however, it is not appropriate for rapid assessments because it

requires some data collection. It is a set of Excel sheets to estimate changes in emissions from land-

use and management practices using IPCC default values and ad hoc coefficients. Although the use

of EX-ACT may be beyond rapid assessment in the project development stage, it is recommended

to use EX-ACT for a project with more focus on mitigation activities in the initial stage of project

implementation. The EX-ACT model can be used to refine project components and activities in order to

84

increase (whenever possible) the project’s mitigation benefits. The following information is needed in

EX-ACT:

• current land use, together with land-use changes, in the “without project” and”with project”

scenarios, with a description of the possible relevant farming systems, livestock production, input

use, and other project investments; and

• land management options which will be promoted within every subsector (e.g. forests, cropland,

grasslands).

If the aforementioned data are not available, you may hold discussions with relevant stakeholders

during the conceptualization stage to plan for obtaining data later during the preparation phase.

For farm-level assessments, there is also the Cool Farm Tool (http://www.unilever.com/aboutus/supplier/

sustainablesourcing/tools/?WT.LHNAV=Tools) which allows farmers to calculate their carbon footprint

and how to reduce it.

Life cycle assessment

In this section, you will answer these questions: How much GHG does the food production chain emit?

What can be done to increase carbon efficiency?

A life cycle assessment (LCA) approach is necessary to estimate the GHG emissions on the entire

food chain throughout the life cycle of a product, including production, transport of inputs (e.g. fertilizer,

pesticide and feed), transport of the product, processing, packaging and distribution of the product to

retailers.

The LCA approach is widely accepted in agriculture and other industries as a method to evaluate the

environmental impacts of production and to identify the resource and emission-intensive processes

within a product’s life cycle (FAO, 2010c). The method is defined in the International Organization for

Standardization (ISO) standards 14040 and 14044 (ISO, 2006).The methodology is useful for identifying

effective approaches to reduce emissions or for studying the effect of a certain change in a production

process on the overall lifecycle.

However, a comprehensive LCA requires a large set of data which may not be always available for the

agriculture sector. There are also many subjective elements in an LCA model, such as system boundary

delineation, functional units and allocation techniques. Sensitivity tests would clarify the relative

importance of those elements in an LCA study.

A good starting point is FAO’s LCA study of the dairy sector (FAO, 2010c), which presents an overview

of typical LCA study specifications, including data and methodology. Another short introduction to LCA

is a fact sheet by Australia Climate Change Research Strategy for Primary Industries (CCRSPI) (2009).

The International Dairy Federation (IDF) has also produced a useful LCA guideline for the dairy sector

(IDF, 2010). For the livestock sector, a good example is the European Union’s Joint Research Centre

study (Leip et al., 2010). For the agriculture and horticulture commodities, there is a UK Department for

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) report (Williams et al., 2006), which covers production of

bread wheat, oilseed rape, potatoes, animal feed crops, grasslands and tomatoes, crop by-products and

feed processing, buildings and machinery and animal production.

85


List of resources

Climate change science

• FAO E-learning Tool Community-based adaptation to climate change, Module 1, http://www.fao.org/

climatechange/67624/en/

• IPCC, 2007a, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to

the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, http://www.ipcc.

ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html

• UNFCCC, 2011, Feeling the Heat: Climate Science and the Basis of the Convention, http://unfccc.int/

essential_background/the_science/items/6064.php (last accessed on 10 December 2011)

Impacts

• Allison, E.H, Adger, W.N., Badjeck, M.C., Brown, K., Conway, D., Dulvy, N.K., Halls, A., Perry, A. and

Reynolds, J.D. (2005): Effects of climate change on the sustainability of capture and enhancement

fisheries important to the poor: analysis of the vulnerability and adaptability of fisherfolk living in

poverty, DFID.

• Batima, P., 2006. Climate Change Vulnerability and Adaptation in the Livestock Sector of Mongolia.

A Final Report Submitted to Assessments of Impacts and Adaptations to Climate Change (AIACC),

Project No. AS 06. International START Secretariat.

• CMIP3 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project) Multi-Model Dataset Archive http://www-pcmdi.

llnl.gov/ipcc/about_ipcc.php

• CMIP5 http://cmip-pcmdi.llnl.gov/cmip5/

• CORDEX Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment, http://wcrp.ipsl.jussieu.fr/SF_

RCD_CORDEX.html

• EM-DAT http://www.emdat.be/database

• FAO Climpag, http://www.fao.org/nr/climpag

• FAOClim-NET, http://geonetwork3.fao.org/climpag/agroclimdb_en.php Data from over 20 000

weather stations worldwide. Monthly averages from 1950s to present and climatological mean

(1961-1990).

• FAO E-learning Tool Community-based adaptation to climate change, Module 2 Climate Change and

Food Security, http://www.fao.org/climatechange/67624/en/

• FAO New_LocClim http://www.fao.org/nr/climpag/pub/en3_051002_en.asp

and FAO Web LocClim http://www.fao.org/nr/climpag/locclim/locclim_en.asp

Both provide estimates of average climatic conditions at locations for which no observations are

available. New_LocClim can: (a) create climatic maps; (b) extract data in various formats from the

database for further processing; and (c) display graphs showing the annual cycle of monthly climate

and the crop calendar.Web LocClim provides (b) only. The user can choose from several interpolation

methods and apply standard corrections such as altitude corrections. Data from over 20 000 weather

stations worldwide. 30-year climatological mean of monthly, dekadal (10-day) and daily record.

• FAO MOSAICC http://www.fao.org/climatechange/mosaicc

• FAO STAT http://faostat.fao.org/

• FAO, 2009a, Impact of climate change on agricultural yields in Morocco, http://www.fao.org/nr/

climpag/pub/FAO_WorldBank_Study_CC_Morocco_2008.pdf

• FAO, 2010a, Climate change, water and food security, http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/i2096e/

i2096e00.htm

• FAO, 2011a, A Technical Report for the Study on Impacts of Climatic Variability on Agriculture in the

Bicol Region of the Philippines: Implications for climate change adaptation

• Fischer et al., 2002. Global Agro-ecological Assessment for Agriculture in the 21st Century:

Methodology and Results http://www.fao.org/nr/land/databasesinformation-systems/aez-agro-

ecological-zoning-system/en/

http://www.fao.org/climatechange/67624/en/

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html

http://unfccc.int/essential_background/the_science/items/6064.php

http://www-pcmdi.llnl.gov/ipcc/about_ipcc.php

http://www.fao.org/nr/climpag/pub/FAO_WorldBank_Study_CC_Morocco_2008.pdf


http://wcrp.ipsl.jussieu.fr/SF_RCD_CORDEX.html

86

• Forner, C., 2006. An introduction to the impacts of climate change and vulnerability of forests.

Background document for the Southeast Asian Kick-off meeting of the project Tropical Forests and

Climate Change Adaptation (“TroFCCA”), Bogor, 29 – 30 May 2006.

• GTZ, 2009. Climate change information for effective adaptation. A practitioner’s manual http://

www2.gtz.de/dokumente/bib-2009/gtz2009-0175en-climate-change-information.pdf

• International Research Institute for Climate and Society (IRI) Climate database, http://iridl.ldeo.

columbia.edu/docfind/databrief/cat-atmos.html

Provides a large number of climate datasets

• IPCC Data Distribution Center http://www.ipcc-data.org/

• IPCC, 2007b, Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Contribution of Working

Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,


• Tearfund, 2009. CEDRA Climate Change and Environmental Degradation Risk and Adaptation

Assessment, http://tilz.tearfund.org/webdocs/Tilz/Topics/Environmental%20Sustainability/

CEDRA%20D5.pdf

• Thornton, P. et al., 2007. Vulnerability, Climate Change and Livestock – Research Opportunities and

Challengesfor Poverty Alleviation. SAT eJournal, Vol.4, Issue1, p. 1-23.

• Thornton, P. et al., 2009. The impacts of climate change on livestock and livestock systems in

developing countries: A review of what we know and what we need to know. Agricultural Systems,

101, 113–127.

• UNDP, 2009. Applying climate information for adaptation decision-making, http://www.undp.org/

content/undp/en/home/librarypage/environment-energy/low_emission_climateresilientdevelopment/

applying-climate-information-for-adaptation-decision-making.ht

• UNEP PREVIEW Global Risk Data Platform, http://www.grid.unep.ch/index.php?option=com_cont

ent&view=article&id=73&Itemid=400&lang=en&project_id=1765D705 Spatial data information on

global risk from natural hazards.

• UNFCCC National Communications non-Annex I Parties, http://unfccc.int/national_reports/non-

annex_i_natcom/submitted_natcom/items/653.php

• UNFCCC NAPA National Adaptation Programmes of Action, http://www.grid.unep.ch/index.

php?option=com_content&view=article&id=73&Itemid=400&lang=en&project_id=1765D705

• University of Cape Town, Climate Systems Analysis Group, Data Dissemination System

Downscaled regional climate change data (currently for Asia and Africa)

• University of Cape Town, Climate Information Portal, http://cip.csag.uct.ac.za/webclient/introduction

Observational climate data as well as projections of future climate, globally (as of August 2011, CIP

seems to be still under development).

• University of East Anglia (UEA), Climatic Research Unit (CRU), High-resolution gridded data and

country climate data http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/hrg/

• US National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/ncdc.html. Under NCDC

there are a number of useful data products. Here are a few examples:

– GCOS Surface Network (GSN), Monthly (GSNMON), http://cdo.ncdc.noaa.gov/pls/plclimprod/

cdomain.abbrev2id?datasetabbv=GSNMON

– Global Surface Summary of Day (GSOD), http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/res40.pl?page=gsod.

html

– GHCN (Global Historical Climatology Network), http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/ghcn-daily

– http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ghcnm/

• World Bank Climate Change Knowledge Portal, http://sdwebx.worldbank.org/climateportal/

Key climate variables (historical and projections) from different data sources. Most data are at

2-degree grid, and some are weather station levels. Also crop yield projections from Global Agro-

ecological Zones (G-AEZ)

http://unfccc.int/cooperation_support/least_developed_countries_portal/submitted_napas/items/4585.php

http://cdo.ncdc.noaa.gov/pls/plclimprod/cdomain.abbrev2id?datasetabbv=GSNMON

http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/res40.pl?page=gsod.html

http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/environment-energy/low_emission_climateresilientdevelopment/applying-climate-information-for-adaptation-decision-making.html

http://www.grid.unep.ch/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=73&Itemid=400&lang=en&project_id=1765D705

87


• World Bank, 2009. Guidance Notes Mainstreaming Adaptation to Climate Change in Agriculture

andNatural Resources Management Projects, 3 Assessing Climate Risk http://climatechange.

worldbank.org/climatechange/content/note-3-assessing-climate-risk

Vulnerability

• Antwi-Agyei, P., Fraser, E. D. G., Dougill, A. J., Stringer, L. C., & Simelton, E. (2012). Mapping the

vulnerability of crop production to drought in Ghana using rainfall, yield and socio-economic data.

Applied Geography, 32(2), 324-334. Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.06.010

• Dessai, S., & Hulme, M. (2004). Does climate adaptation policy need probabilities? Climate Policy,

4(2), 107-128. doi:10.3763/cpol.2004.0411

• ENDA, 2004, Capacity strengthening in climate change vulnerability and adaptation strategy

assessments. Background on frameworks, methodologies and tools for vulnerability and adaptation

assessments: How to move from reactive to proactive approaches, http://c3d-unitar.org/c3d/

userfiles/Module_2/EM2_Background.pdf

• FAO, 2011b, Effects of global warming on vulnerability to food insecurity in rural Nicaragua, http://

www.fao.org/docrep/014/am900e/am900e00.pdf

• Füssel, H.-M. (2007). Vulnerability: A generally applicable conceptual framework for climate change

research. Global Environmental Change, 17(2), 155-167. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.05.002

• Füssel, H.-M. (2009). Review and quantitative analysis of indices of climate change exposure,

adaptive capacity, sensitivity and impacts. Background note to the World Development Report 2010.

• O’Brien, K., Eriksen, S., Nygaard, L. P., & Schjolden, A. N. E. (2007). Why different interpretations of

vulnerability matter in climate change discourses. Climate Policy, 7, 73-88.

• Pielke Sr., R.A., R. Wilby, D. Niyogi, F. Hossain, K. Dairuku, J. Adegoke, G. Kallos, T. Seastedt, and

K. Suding, 2011: Dealing with complexity and extreme events using a bottom-up, resource-based

vulnerability perspective. AGU Monograph on Complexity and Extreme Events in Geosciences, in press.

• UNEP, 2009, IEA Training Manual, Volume Two, Vulnerability and Impact assessments for Adaptation

to Climate Change (VIA Module), http://www.unep.org/publications/contents/pub_details_search.

asp?ID=4129

• UNFCCC, Nairobi work programme on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation to climate change

(NWP) -Understanding vulnerability, fostering adaptation, http://unfccc.int/adaptation/nairobi_work_

programme/items/3633.php (last accessed 10 Dec 2011)

• World Bank, 2010. World Development Report 2010: Development and Climate Change, http://

wdronline.worldbank.org/worldbank/a/c.html/world_development_report_2010/abstract/WB.978-0-

8213-7987-5.abstract

Mitigation

• Brander KM. Global fish production and climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences of the United States of America. 2007; 104(50):44 - 46.

• Brander K. Impacts of climate change on fisheries. Journal of Marine Systems. 2010;79(3-4):389-402.

• British Standards Institute PAS2050, 2008. Specification for the assessment of the life cycle

greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services (BSI, 2008).

• CCRSPI, 2009. Life Cycle Assessments: A useful tool for Australian agriculture, Climate change

research strategies for primary industries, Australia

• Conant & Paustian, 2002. Potential soil carbon sequestration in overgrazed grassland ecosystems.

Global Biogeochemical Cycles 16(4): 1143.

• Eagle et al., 2011. Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Potential of Agricultural Land Management in the

United States, A Synthesis of the Literature, Companion Report to Assessing Greenhouse Gas

Mitigation Opportunities and Implementation Options for Agricultural Land Management in the

United States. Technical Working Group on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases (T-AGG) Report. Nicholas

Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions Report, NI R 10-04. http://nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/

ecosystem/land/TAGGDLitRev

http://nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/ecosystem/land/TAGGDLitRev

http://climatechange.worldbank.org/content/note-3-assessing-climate-risk

http://c3d-unitar.org/c3d/userfiles/Module_2/EM2_Background.pdf

http://www.unep.org/publications/contents/pub_details_search.asp?ID=4129

http://unfccc.int/adaptation/nairobi_work_programme/items/3633.php

88

• FAO, 2009b. Review of evidence on drylands pastoral systems and climate change: Implications and

opportunities for mitigation and adaptation

• FAO, 2010b. Global survey of agricultural mitigation projects, Mitigation of Climate Change in

Agriculture Series 1

• FAO, 2010c. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Dairy Sector: A Life Cycle Assessment

• Ficke, A.D., Myrick C. A., & Hansen, L.J. Potential impacts of global climate change on freshwater

fisheries. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries. 2007;17(4):581-613.

• FAO 2011. Mainstreaming Carbon Balance Appraisal in Agriculture. EASYPol Module 099. FAO,

Rome. http://www.fao.org/docs/up/easypol/869/mainstream-crbn-blnce-apprsl-agric-prj-plics_099en.pdf

• IPCC, 2007c, Climate Change 2007: Mitigation of Climate Change, Contribution of Working Group III

to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, http://www.

ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/contents.html

• IDF, 2010. A common carbon footprint approach for dairy: The IDF guide to standard lifecycle

assessment methodology for the dairy sector. Bulletin of the International Dairy Federation 445/2010.

• ISO, 2006. Environmental management – Life Cycle Assessment - Requirements and guidelines -

BS EN ISO 14044.

• Johnson, J.M., Franzluebbers, A.J., Lachnicht Weyers, S.L. & Reicosky, D.C. 2007. Agricultural

Opportunities to Mitigate Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Environmental Pollution. 150:107-124.

• Kirilenko, A.P. & Sedjo, R. A. Climate change impacts on forestry. Proceedings of the National

Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2007;104(50):19697-702.

• Leip et al., 2010. Evaluation of the livestock sector’s contribution to the European Union greenhouse

gas emissions (GGELS) Final Report. European Commission, Joint Research Centre.

• Nair, P. K. R., Kumar, B. M. & Nair, V. D. 2009. Agroforestry as a strategy for carbon sequestration,

Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science. Vol. 172, no. 1, pp. 10-23.

• Perry, R.I. Potential impacts of climate change on marine wild capture fisheries: an update. The

Journal of Agricultural Science. 2010;149(S1):63-75.

• Seeberg-Elverfeldt, C. & Tapio-Biström, M-L., 2011. Agricultural Mitigation Approaches for

Smallholders in Different Farming Systems - An overview of farming systems and mitigation options

In Wollenberg, E., Nihart, A., Tapio-Biström, M-L. & Grieg-Gran, M. (eds) 2011. Climate Change

Mitigation and Agriculture. London: Earthscan. (not yet published)

• Tennigkeit & Wilkes, 2008. An assessment of the potential for carbon finance in rangelands. ICRAF

Working Paper No.68.

• TerrAfrica, 2009. SLM in Practice, Promoting Knowledge on Sustainable Land Management for

Action in Sub-Saharan Africa.

• Thornton, P. K. & Herrero, M. 2010. Potential for reduced methane and carbon dioxide emissions

from livestock and pasture management in the tropics, PNAS www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/

pnas.0912890107

• UNFCCC Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions, http://unfccc.int/meetings/cop_15/copenhagen_

accord/items/5265.php

• Wassmann, R. et al., 2000. Characterization of methane emissions from rice fields in Asia. III.

Mitigation options and future research needs, Nutrient Cycling in Agro-ecosystems, 58: 23–36, 2000.

• West, T.O. & Post, W.M. 2002. Soil organic carbon sequestration rates by tillage and crop rotation: a

global data analysis. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 66: 1930–46.

• Williams, A.G., Audsley, E. & Sandars, D.L. (2006) Determining the environmental burdens and

resource use in the production of agricultural and horticultural commodities.Main Report. Defra

Research Project IS0205. Bedford: Cranfield University and Defra. Available on http://www.cranfield.

ac.uk/sas/naturalresources/research/projects/is0205.html, and www.defra.gov.uk

• Zhao, Y., Wang, C., Wang, S. & Tibig, L.V. Impacts of Present and Future Climate Variability on

Agriculture and Forestry in the Humid and Sub-Humid Tropics. Climatic Change. 2005;70(1-2):73-116.


http://www.pnas.org/content/107/46/19667

http://unfccc.int/meetings/cop_15/copenhagen_accord/items/5265.php

http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/sas/naturalresources/research/projects/is0205.html

http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/sas/naturalresources/research/projects/is0205.html

89


Table 2.1. Mitigation potential of different management practices

Table 2.2 Carbon sequestration potential in different agroforestry systems

Farming practice Region t CO2/ha/yr Source

Fodder bank Ségou, Mali, W. African Sahel 1.06 Takimoto et al. (2008)*Coffee-based system Central Kenya 1.80 Forest Trends (2010)Live fence Ségou, Mali, W. African Sahel 2.17 Takimoto et al. (2008)*

Tree-based intercropping Canada 3.05 Peichl et al. (2006)*

Traditional agroforestry

parklands

Ségou, Mali, W. African Sahel 4.00 Takimoto et al. (2008)*

Silvopasture W. Oregon, USA 4.07 Sharrow and Ismail (2004)*

Agrisilviculture Chattisgarh, Central India 4.62 Swamy and Puri (2005)*

Silvopastoralism Kurukshetra, India 5.03 Kaur et al. (2002)*

Full-sun cocoa Southern Cameroon 7.19 Gockowski and Sonwa (2011)

Shaded cocoa Southern Cameroon 13.03 Gockowski and Sonwa (2011)

Home and outfield gardens Panama 15.74 Kirby and Potvin (2007)*

Agroforestry woodlots Kerala, India 23.97 Kumar et al. (1998)*

Indonesian homegardens Sumatra 29.36 Roshetko et al. (2002)*

Cacao agroforests Turrialba, Costa Rica 40.66 Beer et al. (1990)*

Agroforestry woodlots Puerto Rico 44.19 Parrotta (1999)*

Mixed species stands Puerto Rico 55.82 Parrotta (1999)*

Sources with * reviewed in Nair et al. (2009).

Table 2.3 Carbon sequestration potential of different grassland management practices

Farming practice Region t CO2/ha/yr Source

Transition from heavy to moderate grazing Eurasia 0.18 Conant and Paustian (2002)

Transition from heavy to moderate grazing Australia/Pacific 0.33 Conant and Paustian (2002)

Avoided land cover/land-use change Global 0.40 Tennigkeit and Wilkes (2008)

Transition from heavy to moderate grazing North America 0.59 Conant and Paustian (2002)

Transition from heavy to moderate grazing Africa 0.77 Conant and Paustian (2002)

Improved grazing management, rangeland USA 1.26 Eagle et al. (2010)

Fertilization on grasslands Global 1.76 Tennigkeit and Wilkes (2008)

Improved grazing on rangelands Global 1.98 Conant et al. (2001)

Grazing management Global 2.16 Tennigkeit and Wilkes (2008)

New grasslands USA 2.20 FAO (2010b)

Transition from heavy to moderate grazing South America 2.53 Conant and Paustian (2002)

Fire control on grasslands Global 2.68 Tennigkeit and Wilkes (2008)

Improved grazing management, pasture USA 4.26 Eagle et al. (2010)

Vegetation cultivation Global 9.39 Tennigkeit and Wilkes (2008)

90

Table 2.4 Carbon sequestration potential in crop farming management practices

Farming practice/system Region t CO2/ha/yr Source

Diversify annual crop rotations USA 0.66 Eagle et al. (2010)

Organic agriculture Global 0.73–1.46 Niggli et al. (2009)

Conventional to no-tillage USA 1.12 Eagle et al. (2010)

Conventional to conservation tillage USA 1.23 Eagle et al. (2010)

Conventional to no-tillage Global 2.09 West an d Post (2002)

Maize-based farming system

(increasing residue production, tree plantations)

Western

Kenya

2.10 Forest T rends (2010)

Application of organic matter (manure) USA 2.63 Eagle et al. (2010)

Table 2.5 Mitigation potential of rice management practices

Farming practice/system Region t CO2e/ha/yr Source

Rice variety development for CH4 various sites 1.34 Eagle et al. (2010)

Rice water management for CH4 various sites 1.94 Eagle et al. (2010)

Source: Tables 2.2 to 2.5 of Seeberg-Elverfeldt & Tapio-Biström (2011)

Table 2.2. Annual mitigation potential for different climate regions for agricultural practices

Table 4. Annual mitigation potential for different climate regions for agricultural practices

Improved land management

practice

all GHG (t CO2eq/ha/yr)

Cool-dry Cool-moist Warm-dry

Warm-

moist

Agronomic practices 0.39 0.98 0.39 0.98

Soil nutrient management 0.33 0.62 0.33 0.62

Tillage and residue management 0.17 0.53 0.35 0.72

Water management 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14

Set-aside and land cover (use) change 3.93 5.36 3.93 5.36

Agroforestry 0.17 0.53 0.35 0.72

Grazing, fertilization, fire 0.13 0.80 0.11 0.81

Restoration of organic soils 33.51 33.51 70.18 70.18

Restoration of degraded soils 3.53 4.45 3.45 3.45

Application of manure/bio-solids 1.54 2.79 1.54 2.79

Bioenergy (soils only) 0.17 0.53 0.35 0.72

Source: IPCC, 2007

Source: Table 4 of FAO (2010)

91


Table 2.3. Comparison of GHG mitigation potential for agricultural land management practices in the United States, summarized from scientific literature.

Activity Soil Carbon (t/ha/yr)Land Emissions (N2O

and CH4, t/ha/yr)

Direct Impact (t/ha/yr) [sum

of the two]

Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean

Conventional to no-till 1.08 2.60 -0.26 -0.18 0.72 -0.91 0.90

Conventional to conservation till 0.91 1.82 0.00 0.07 0.38 0.00 0.98

Eliminate summer fallow 0.48 2.35 -0.88 -0.03 0.16 -0.30 0.45

Use winter cover crops 0.84 3.24 0.37 0.20 1.05 0.00 1.03

Diversify annual crop rotations 0.58 3.01 -2.50 0.07 0.33 -0.04 0.65

Include perennial crops in rotations 0.57 2.20 -1.75 0.03 0.55 -0.55 0.59

Change from annual to perennial crops 2.26 4.67 0.00 0.12 0.84 -0.55 2.38

Application of organic materials (esp. manure) 2.19 5.10 0.18 0.19 1.81 -1.35 2.38

Reduce fertilizer N application rates 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 1.32 0.14 0.38

Change fertilizer N source – slow-release 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.46 1.43 0.00 0.46

Use nitrification inhibitors 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.01 2.23 0.00 1.01

Improve manure management (N2O) No data 0.89 1.22 0.37 0.89

Rice water management for CH4 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.56 5.22 -0.88 1.56

Rice variety development for CH4 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.17 2.71 0.00 1.17

Reduced rice area* No data 4.82 10.26 2.32 4.82

Improved grazing management, rangeland 0.93 4.99 -0.10 0.28 0.31 0.27 1.22

Improved grazing management, pasture 2.71 5.86 0.55 0.28 0.31 0.27 2.99

Source: Adapted from Table 31a of Eagle et al. (2011)

Note: All GHG units are in equivalents of carbon dioxide (CO2e) with 100-year time horizon global warming potential.* Impact of reduced rice acreage depends on subsequent land use. These estimates account for elimination of current CH4 emissions

92

ANNEX 3 Tools and information systems for climate change adaptation and mitigation in agricultural sectors

93


AN

NE

X 3

Tool

s an

d in

form

atio

n sy

stem

s fo

r cl

imat

e ch

ange

ada

ptat

ion

and

miti

gatio

n in

agr

icul

tura

l sec

tors

Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

1. G

ener

al c

on

text

an

d o

vera

ll g

uid

ance

The

four

th a

sses

smen

t re

port

(AR

4) o

f th

e In

terg

over

nmen

tal P

anel

on

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

(IPC

C):

clim

ate

chan

ge 2

007-

syn

thes

is r

epor

tC

ore

Writ

ing

Team

, R.K

. Pac

haur

i & A

. Rei

sing

er

(eds

.)IP

CC

, Gen

eva,

Sw

itzer

land

. 104

pp.

Con

trib

utio

ns o

f Wor

king

Gro

ups

I, II

and

III t

o IP

CC

AR

4, w

hich

pro

vide

s an

inte

grat

ed

view

of

CC

, inc

ludi

ng (i

) obs

erve

d ch

ange

s an

d th

eir

effe

cts;

(ii) c

ause

s of

the

obs

erve

d ch

ange

s; (i

ii) p

roje

ctio

ns o

f fu

ture

cha

nge

and

rela

ted

impa

cts;

(iv)

ada

ptat

ion

and

miti

gatio

n op

tions

and

the

ir in

tera

ctio

ns w

ith s

usta

inab

le d

evel

opm

ent;

(v) r

elat

ions

hip

betw

een

adap

tatio

n an

d m

itiga

tion;

and

(vi)

maj

or fi

ndin

gs a

nd r

emai

ning

key

un

cert

aint

ies

in t

he a

sses

smen

t.

http

://w

ww

.ipcc

.ch/

publ

icat

ions

_and

_dat

a/ar

4/sy

r/en

/con

tent

s.ht

ml

IPC

C A

R4:

clim

ate

chan

ge 2

007

- the

phy

sica

l sc

ienc

e ba

sis

S. S

olom

on, D

. Qin

, M. M

anni

ng, Z

. Che

n, M

. M

arqu

is, K

.B. A

very

t, M

. Tig

nor,

H.L

. Mill

er (e

ds.)

Cam

brid

ge U

nive

rsity

Pre

ss, C

ambr

idge

, UK

and

N

ew Y

ork,

NY,

USA

, 996

pp.

Con

trib

utio

n of

Wor

king

Gro

up I

to IP

CC

AR

4, w

hich

pro

vide

s: t

he m

ost

com

plet

e an

d qu

antit

ativ

e as

sess

men

t of

hum

an a

ffect

s on

the

rad

iativ

e en

ergy

bal

ance

in

the

atm

osph

ere;

a m

ore

exte

nsiv

e as

sess

men

t of

cha

nges

obs

erve

d th

roug

hout

the

cl

imat

e sy

stem

; a d

etai

led

asse

ssm

ent

of p

ast

CC

and

its

caus

es; t

he fi

rst

prob

abili

stic

as

sess

men

t of

clim

ate

mod

el s

imul

atio

ns a

nd p

roje

ctio

ns; a

nd a

det

aile

d as

sess

men

t of

CC

obs

erva

tions

, mod

elin

g, a

nd a

ttrib

utio

n fo

r ev

ery

cont

inen

t.

http

://w

ww

.ipcc

.ch/

publ

icat

ions

_and

_dat

a/ar

4/w

g1/

en/c

onte

nts.

htm

l

IPC

C A

R4:

clim

ate

chan

ge 2

007-

impa

cts,

ad

apta

tion

and

vuln

erab

ility

M.L

. Par

ry, O

.F. C

anzi

ani,

J.P.

Pal

utik

of, P

.J. v

an d

er

Lind

en &

C.E

. Han

son

(eds

.)C

ambr

idge

Uni

vers

ity P

ress

, Cam

brid

ge, U

K a

nd

New

Yor

k, N

Y, U

SA.

Con

trib

utio

n of

Wor

king

Gro

up II

to

IPC

C A

R4,

whi

ch p

rovi

des

a co

mpr

ehen

sive

as

sess

men

t of

the

CC

lite

ratu

re o

n ob

serv

ed c

hang

es; t

he m

etho

ds a

vaila

ble

for

impa

cts

anal

ysis

and

sce

nario

s; c

urre

nt a

nd f

utur

e C

C im

pact

s on

sys

tem

s, s

ecto

rs

and

regi

ons;

vul

nera

bilit

ies

to t

hese

impa

cts

and

stra

tegi

es fo

r ad

apta

tion;

pos

sibl

e ad

apta

tion

resp

onse

s an

d th

e sy

nerg

ies

with

miti

gatio

n; a

nd t

he in

ter-r

elat

ions

hips

be

twee

n C

C a

nd s

usta

inab

ility

.

http

://w

ww

.ipcc

.ch/

publ

icat

ions

_and

_dat

a/ar

4/w

g2/

en/c

onte

nts.

htm

l

IPC

C A

R4:

clim

ate

chan

ge 2

007-

miti

gatio

n of

cl

imat

e ch

ange

B. M

etz,

O.R

. Dav

idso

n, P

.R. B

osch

, R. D

ave

&

L.A

. Mey

er (e

ds.)

Cam

brid

ge U

nive

rsity

Pre

ss, C

ambr

idge

, UK

and

N

ew Y

ork,

NY,

USA

.

Con

trib

utio

n of

Wor

king

Gro

up II

I to

IPC

C A

R4,

whi

ch p

rovi

des

auth

orita

tive,

tim

ely

info

rmat

ion

on a

ll as

pect

s of

tec

hnol

ogie

s an

d so

cio-

econ

omic

pol

icie

s, in

clud

ing

cost

-ef

fect

ive

mea

sure

s, t

o co

ntro

l GH

G e

mis

sion

s.

http

://w

ww

.ipcc

.ch/

publ

icat

ions

_and

_dat

a/ar

4/w

g3/

en/c

onte

nts.

htm

l

2. S

trat

egie

s, p

olic

ies

and

fra

mew

ork

s

2.1.

Gen

eral

an

d a

gri

cult

ura

l sec

tor

do

cum

ents

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

and

Food

Sec

urity

. E-le

arni

ng

cour

se. F

AO

, 201

1A

bas

ic d

iscu

ssio

n of

CC

and

food

sec

urity

, inc

ludi

ng c

limat

e sc

ienc

e, C

C a

dapt

atio

n,

miti

gatio

n an

d C

SA.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

clim

atec

hang

e/le

arni

ng@

1554

40/e

n

FAO

pro

file

for

clim

ate

chan

geFA

O R

ome,

200

9A

n FA

O p

olic

y pa

per,

whi

ch b

riefs

the

con

text

of

CC

ada

ptat

ion,

miti

gatio

n, fo

od

secu

rity

and

sust

aina

ble

deve

lopm

ent

in a

gric

ultu

ral s

ecto

rs; i

ntro

duce

s ge

nera

l ap

proa

ches

and

opt

ions

for

capt

urin

g th

e sy

nerg

ies

and

man

agin

g th

e tr

ade-

offs

; and

ou

tline

s FA

O c

urre

nt a

nd f

utur

e pr

iorit

ies

on C

C.

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/01

2/i1

323e

/i132

3e00

.pdf

FAO

Fra

mew

ork

Prog

ram

me

on C

limat

e C

hang

e A

dapt

atio

n (F

AO

-Ada

pt)

FAO

Rom

e, 2

011

Dis

cuss

es C

C im

pact

s on

the

agr

icul

ture

sec

tors

and

food

sec

urity

; defi

nes

adap

tatio

n in

the

con

text

of

the

agric

ultu

re s

ecto

rs; d

escr

ibes

mea

ns a

nd m

easu

res

for

adap

tatio

n;

intr

oduc

es F

AO

’s w

ork

on C

C a

dapt

atio

n w

ith it

s co

re p

rinci

ples

and

prio

rity

adap

tatio

n th

emes

and

act

ions

; and

pre

sent

s FA

O-A

dapt

’s im

plem

enta

tion

prop

osal

s.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

clim

atec

hang

e/27

594-

03ec

d7bd

225b

9308

6e7d

ca39

44de

6430

7.pd

f

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/contents.html



http://www.fao.org/climatechange/learning@155440/en/

http://www.fao.org/climatechange/27594-03ecd7bd225b93086e7dca3944de64307.pdf


94

Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

FAO

Fra

mew

ork

Prog

ram

me

on D

isas

ter

Ris

k R

educ

tion

(FP

DR

R)

Prov

ides

str

ateg

ic d

irect

ion

to t

he im

plem

enta

tion

of D

RR

mea

sure

s in

mem

ber

stat

es

acro

ss t

he a

gric

ultu

ral-r

elat

ed s

ecto

rs. P

rom

otes

an

inte

rdis

cipl

inar

y an

d pr

ogra

mm

atic

ap

proa

ch t

o D

RR

by

inte

grat

ing

the

agric

ultu

re, l

ives

tock

, fish

erie

s, fo

rest

ry a

nd n

atur

al

reso

urce

man

agem

ent

sect

ors

to r

espo

nd m

ore

effe

ctiv

ely

to t

he d

iver

se li

velih

oods

of

smal

l-sca

le fa

rmer

s an

d to

the

com

plex

set

of

fact

ors

whi

ch c

ontr

ibut

e to

dis

aste

r ris

k.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

15/i2

540e

/i254

0e00

.pdf

Ada

ptat

ion

to c

limat

e ch

ange

in a

gric

ultu

re,

fore

stry

and

fish

erie

s: P

ersp

ectiv

e, f

ram

ewor

k an

d pr

iorit

ies

FAO

Rom

e, 2

007

Rev

iew

s th

e im

pact

s of

CC

in a

gric

ultu

ral s

ecto

rs; o

utlin

es t

he f

ram

ewor

k an

d ap

proa

ches

for

CC

ada

ptat

ion

in a

gric

ultu

re, f

ores

try

and

fishe

ries;

and

intr

oduc

es

FAO

’s w

ork

rela

ted

to C

C a

dapt

atio

n.

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/00

9/j9

271e

/j927

1e.p

df

Clim

ate

chan

ge a

nd fo

od s

ecur

ity: a

fra

mew

ork

docu

men

tFA

O R

ome,

200

8

Prov

ides

bac

kgro

und

info

rmat

ion

on t

he in

terr

elat

ions

hip

betw

een

CC

and

food

sec

urity

an

d w

ays

to d

eal w

ith t

he n

ew t

hrea

t. S

how

s op

port

uniti

es fo

r th

e ag

ricul

ture

sec

tor

to

adap

t, a

nd d

escr

ibes

how

it c

an c

ontr

ibut

e to

miti

gatin

g th

e cl

imat

e ch

alle

nge.

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/01

0/a1

508e

/a15

08e0

0.pd

f

"Sav

e an

d G

row

: A p

olic

ymak

er’s

gui

de t

o th

e su

stai

nabl

e in

tens

ifica

tion

of s

mal

lhol

der

crop

pr

oduc

tion

FAO

Rom

e, 2

011

Prov

ides

a n

ew a

ppro

ach

to fa

ce C

C (a

quo

te o

n th

is p

ublic

atio

n fr

om t

he N

ew Y

ork

Tim

es: "

To fe

ed a

gro

win

g w

orld

pop

ulat

ion,

we

have

no

optio

n bu

t to

inte

nsify

cro

p pr

oduc

tion;

but

farm

ers

face

unp

rece

dent

ed c

onst

rain

ts; i

n or

der

to g

row

, agr

icul

ture

m

ust

lear

n to

sav

e.")

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

ag/s

ave-

and-

grow

/

Clim

ate

chan

ge, w

ater

and

food

sec

urity

- FA

O

wat

er r

epor

ts N

o. 3

6Tu

rral

, H.,

Bur

ke, J

. & F

aurè

s, J

.FA

O R

ome,

201

1

Sum

mar

izes

cur

rent

kno

wle

dge

of t

he a

ntic

ipat

ed im

pact

s of

CC

on

wat

er a

vaila

bilit

y fo

r ag

ricul

ture

; exa

min

es t

he im

plic

atio

ns fo

r lo

cal a

nd n

atio

nal f

ood

secu

rity;

dis

cuss

es

the

met

hods

and

app

roac

hes

to a

sses

s C

C im

pact

s on

wat

er a

nd a

gric

ultu

re;

emph

asiz

es t

he n

eed

for

clos

er a

lignm

ent

betw

een

wat

er a

nd a

gric

ultu

ral p

olic

ies;

and

m

akes

the

cas

e fo

r im

med

iate

impl

emen

tatio

n of

"no-

regr

ets"

str

ateg

ies.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

14/i2

096e

/i209

6e00

.ht

m

Food

Sec

urity

and

Agr

icul

tura

l Miti

gatio

n in

D

evel

opin

g C

ount

ries:

Opt

ions

for

Cap

turin

g Sy

nerg

ies.

Man

n, W

., Li

pper

, L.,

Tenn

igke

it, T.

, McC

arth

y N

.&

Bra

nca,

G.F

AO

. 200

9.

Exp

lore

s po

tent

ial s

yner

gies

am

ong

food

sec

urity

, ada

ptat

ion

and

CC

miti

gatio

n fr

om la

nd-b

ased

agr

icul

tura

l pra

ctic

es in

dev

elop

ing

coun

trie

s, w

hich

cou

ld h

elp

to

gene

rate

the

ben

efits

nee

ded

to a

ddre

ss t

he m

any

dem

ands

pla

ced

on a

gric

ultu

re.

Pres

ents

pro

mis

ing

miti

gatio

n op

tions

with

syn

ergi

es, o

ptio

ns t

hat

invo

lve

trad

e-of

fs,

poss

ible

opt

ions

for

requ

ired

finan

cing

and

pos

sibl

e el

emen

ts in

des

igni

ng c

ount

ry

impl

emen

tatio

n pr

oces

ses.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

12/i1

318e

/i131

8e00

.pdf

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

Miti

gatio

n Fi

nanc

e fo

r S

mal

lhol

der

Agr

icul

ture

- A

gui

de b

ook

to h

arve

stin

g so

il ca

rbon

seq

uest

ratio

n be

nefit

sLi

pper

, L.,

Nev

es, B

., W

ilkes

, A.,

Tenn

igke

it, T.

,G

erbe

r, P.

, Hen

ders

on, B

., B

ranc

a, G

. & M

ann,

W.

FAO

, 201

1

Focu

ses

on C

C m

itiga

tion

finan

cing

for

smal

lhol

ders

. FA

O, h

owev

er, f

ully

rec

ogni

zes

that

ada

ptat

ion

may

be

the

impe

rativ

e an

d th

e pr

iorit

y ov

er t

he s

hort

- and

med

ium

-ter

m

for

man

y sm

allh

olde

rs in

circ

umst

ance

s w

here

CC

may

adv

erse

ly im

pact

the

ir ef

fort

s to

ove

rcom

e po

vert

y an

d fo

od in

secu

rity.

In m

any

case

s, m

ost

coun

trie

s w

ill n

eed

to

deal

with

bot

h ad

apta

tion

and

miti

gatio

n. F

AO

sup

port

s na

tiona

l effo

rts

on C

SA w

hich

se

ek t

o en

hanc

e th

e ca

paci

ty o

f th

e ag

ricul

tura

l sec

tor

to s

usta

inab

ly s

uppo

rt fo

od

secu

rity,

live

lihoo

ds a

nd g

row

th u

nder

CC

, inc

orpo

ratin

g th

e ne

ed fo

r ad

apta

tion

and

the

pote

ntia

l for

miti

gatio

n in

to d

evel

opm

ent

stra

tegi

es. C

C m

itiga

tion

finan

cing

can

pl

ay a

rol

e, a

long

with

oth

er s

ourc

es o

f fin

anci

ng, i

n en

ablin

g C

SA.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

15/i2

485e

/i248

5e00

.pdf

Iden

tifyi

ng o

ppor

tuni

ties

for

clim

ate-

smar

t ag

ricul

ture

inve

stm

ents

in A

fric

aB

ranc

a, G

., Te

nnig

keit,

T., M

ann,

W. &

Lip

per,

L.FA

O, 2

011

Prop

oses

a m

etho

dolo

gy t

o ex

amin

e th

e po

tent

ial o

f ex

istin

g N

atio

nal A

gric

ultu

re a

nd

Food

Sec

urity

Inve

stm

ent

Pla

ns (N

AFS

IPs,

pre

pare

d th

roug

h th

e C

ompr

ehen

sive

Afr

ica

Agr

icul

ture

Dev

elop

men

t Pr

ogra

mm

e –

CA

AD

P, u

nder

the

New

Par

tner

ship

for A

fric

a’s

Dev

elop

men

t - N

EPA

D) t

o ge

nera

te C

C b

enefi

ts. A

rap

id s

cree

ning

met

hodo

logy

is

pres

ente

d an

d ap

plie

d to

14

NA

FSIP

s, a

ll of

whi

ch in

clud

e ag

ricul

tura

l dev

elop

men

t pr

ogra

mm

es/ s

ubpr

ogra

mm

es t

hat

bene

fit: (

1) a

dapt

atio

n to

slo

w-o

nset

clim

atic

ch

ange

and

ext

rem

e ev

ents

; and

(2) C

C m

itiga

tion.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

15/a

n112

e/an

112e

00.

pdf

ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a1508e/a1508e00.pdf

http://www.fao.org/docrep/015/an112e/an112e00.pdf


95


Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

Clim

ate-

Sm

art A

gric

ultu

re: A

Syn

thes

is o

f E

mpi

rical

Evi

denc

e of

Foo

d S

ecur

ity a

nd M

itiga

tion

Ben

efits

fro

m Im

prov

ed C

ropl

and

Man

agem

ent

Bra

nca,

G.,

McC

arth

y, N

., Li

pper

, L. &

Jol

ejol

e,

M.C

.M

ICC

A s

erie

s n.

3. F

AO

, 201

1

Synt

hesi

zes

the

resu

lts o

f a

liter

atur

e re

view

rep

ortin

g th

e ev

iden

ce b

ase

of d

iffer

ent

sust

aina

ble

land

man

agem

ent

(SLM

) pra

ctic

es a

imed

at

incr

easi

ng a

nd s

tabi

lizin

g cr

op

prod

uctiv

ity in

dev

elop

ing

coun

trie

s. It

is s

how

n th

at s

oil a

nd c

limat

e ch

arac

teris

tics

are

key

to in

terp

retin

g th

e im

pact

on

crop

yie

lds

and

miti

gatio

n of

diff

eren

t ag

ricul

tura

l pr

actic

es a

nd t

hat

tech

nolo

gy o

ptio

ns m

ost

prom

isin

g fo

r en

hanc

ing

food

sec

urity

at

the

smal

lhol

der

leve

l are

als

o ef

fect

ive

for

incr

easi

ng s

yste

m r

esili

ence

in d

ry a

reas

and

m

itiga

ting

CC

in h

umid

are

as.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

15/i2

574e

/i257

4e00

.pdf

Clim

ate-

Sm

art A

gric

ultu

re: S

mal

lhol

der A

dopt

ion

and

Impl

icat

ions

for

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

Ada

ptat

ion

and

Miti

gatio

nM

cCar

thy,

N.,

Lipp

er, L

. & B

ranc

a, G

.M

ICC

A s

erie

s n.

4. F

AO

, 201

1

Rev

iew

s th

e ad

apta

tion

and

miti

gatio

n be

nefit

s fr

om v

ario

us p

ract

ices

, foc

usin

g in

de

tail

on e

mpi

rical

evi

denc

e co

ncer

ning

cos

ts a

nd b

arrie

rs t

o ad

optio

n, b

oth

from

ho

useh

old

and

proj

ect-

leve

l dat

a. F

indi

ngs

indi

cate

tha

t up

-fro

nt in

vest

men

t co

sts

can

be a

sig

nific

ant

barr

ier

to a

dopt

ion

for

cert

ain

inve

stm

ents

and

pra

ctic

es, a

nd e

vide

nce

also

sup

port

s th

e hy

poth

eses

on

oppo

rtun

ity a

nd t

rans

actio

n co

sts

acro

ss a

wid

e ra

nge

of in

vest

men

ts a

nd p

ract

ices

. Add

ition

ally

, pot

entia

l syn

ergi

es a

mon

g fo

od s

ecur

ity,

adap

tatio

n an

d m

itiga

tion

oppo

rtun

ities

, as

wel

l as

cost

s, c

an d

iffer

sub

stan

tially

acr

oss

diffe

rent

agr

o-ec

olog

ical

zon

es, c

limat

e re

gim

es a

nd h

isto

rical

land

-use

pat

tern

s.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

15/i2

575e

/i257

5e00

.pdf

Str

ateg

ic f

ram

ewor

k fo

r fo

rest

s an

d cl

imat

e ch

ange

Col

labo

rativ

e Pa

rtne

rshi

p on

For

ests

, FA

O R

ome,

20

09

Lays

the

gro

undw

ork

for

a co

ordi

nate

d re

spon

se f

rom

the

fore

st s

ecto

r to

CC

, not

ably

th

roug

h th

e ad

optio

n of

sus

tain

able

fore

st m

anag

emen

t an

d its

inte

grat

ion

into

bro

ader

de

velo

pmen

t st

rate

gies

.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

fore

stry

/166

39-0

64a7

166b

1dd0

2750

4bbf

bb76

3878

af99

.pdf

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

for

Fore

st P

olic

y-M

aker

s-A

n ap

proa

ch fo

r in

tegr

atin

g cl

imat

e ch

ange

into

nat

iona

l for

est

prog

ram

mes

in s

uppo

rtof

sus

tain

able

fore

st m

anag

emen

tFA

O R

ome,

201

1

Prov

ides

a p

ract

ical

app

roac

h to

the

pro

cess

of

inte

grat

ing

CC

into

nat

iona

l for

est

prog

ram

mes

. Aim

s to

ass

ist

seni

or g

over

nmen

t of

ficia

ls a

nd t

he r

epre

sent

ativ

es o

f ot

her

stak

ehol

ders

, inc

ludi

ng c

ivil

soci

ety

orga

niza

tions

and

the

priv

ate

sect

or, t

o pr

epar

e th

e fo

rest

sec

tor

for

the

chal

leng

es a

nd o

ppor

tuni

ties

pose

d by

CC

.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

fore

stry

/294

98-

0c35

1737

80c2

7b13

d094

d92a

d8d5

99af

a.pd

f

Clim

ate

chan

ge im

plic

atio

ns fo

r fis

herie

s an

d aq

uacu

lture

- FA

O fi

sher

y an

d aq

uacu

lture

te

chni

cal p

aper

530

K. C

ochr

ane,

C. D

. You

ng, D

. Sot

o &

T. B

ahri

(eds

.)FA

O R

ome,

200

9

Con

tain

s th

ree

com

preh

ensi

ve t

echn

ical

pap

ers

that

form

ed t

he b

asis

for

the

tech

nica

l dis

cuss

ions

dur

ing

the

Exp

ert W

orks

hop

on C

C Im

plic

atio

ns fo

r Fi

sher

ies

and

Aqu

acul

ture

in A

pril

2008

at

FAO

hea

dqua

rter

s, w

hich

rev

iew

s cl

imat

e va

riabi

lity

and

chan

ge a

nd t

he p

hysi

cal a

nd e

colo

gica

l con

sequ

ence

s on

mar

ine

and

fres

hwat

er

envi

ronm

ents

; ana

lyse

s th

e co

nseq

uenc

es o

f C

C im

pact

s on

fish

ers

and

aqua

cultu

re;

and

disc

usse

s po

ssib

le a

dapt

atio

n an

d m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s.

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/01

2/i0

994e

/i099

4e.p

df

Str

ateg

y fo

r Fi

sher

ies,

Aqu

acul

ture

and

Clim

ate

Cha

nge.

Fra

mew

ork

and

Aim

s 20

11–2

016.

FA

O, 2

011

Prov

ides

the

med

ium

-ter

m (2

011–

2016

) fra

mew

ork

defin

ing

the

pers

pect

ives

and

ob

ject

ives

of

the

Fish

erie

s an

d A

quac

ultu

re D

epar

tmen

t w

ith r

espe

ct t

o C

C is

sues

and

de

velo

pmen

t re

spon

ses,

and

its

cohe

renc

e an

d op

erat

iona

l effe

ctiv

enes

s w

ith r

espe

ct

to m

ore

loca

lized

del

iver

y th

roug

h re

gion

al a

nd s

ubre

gion

al o

ffice

s.

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

fi/br

ochu

re/c

limat

e_ch

ange

/st

rage

gy_fi

_aq_

clim

ate/

2011

/clim

ate_

chan

ge_2

011.

pdf

Clim

ate

chan

ge a

nd fo

od s

ecur

ity in

Pac

ific

isla

nd

coun

trie

sFA

O R

ome,

200

8

Rev

iew

s th

e im

pact

s of

CC

on

food

sou

rces

and

wat

er in

the

Pac

ific

isla

nd c

ount

ries;

pr

ovid

es n

atio

nal a

sses

smen

ts in

sel

ecte

d co

untr

ies;

pro

pose

s re

com

men

datio

ns fo

r na

tiona

l str

ateg

ies

to m

itiga

te, a

dapt

and

res

pond

to

the

chal

leng

es; a

nd p

rese

nts

the

repo

rt o

f a

regi

onal

exp

ert

grou

p.

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/01

1/i0

530e

/i053

0e.p

df

Cop

ing

with

a c

hang

ing

clim

ate:

con

side

ratio

ns fo

r ad

apta

tion

and

miti

gatio

n in

agr

icul

ture

Gla

ntz,

M. H

., G

omm

es, R

., &

Ram

asam

y, S

.FA

O, 2

009,

Rom

e

Ela

bora

tes

on is

sues

of

less

-tha

n-pe

rfec

t in

form

atio

n on

clim

ate

impa

cts

and

vuln

erab

ilitie

s, a

nd t

he n

eed

for

bett

er-in

form

ed d

ecis

ions

. Offe

rs n

ew p

ersp

ectiv

es fo

r po

licy-

mak

ers,

inst

itutio

ns, s

ocie

ties

and

indi

vidu

als

on im

prov

ed w

ays

of id

entif

ying

m

ost

at-r

isk

com

mun

ities

and

"bes

t pr

actic

es".

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

12/i1

315e

/i131

5e.p

df


ftp://ftp.fao.org/fi/brochure/climate_change/stragegy_fi_aq_climate/2011/climate_change_2011.pdf

96

Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

Clim

ate

smar

t ag

ricul

ture

- po

licie

s, p

ract

ices

an

d fin

anci

ng fo

r fo

od s

ecur

ity, a

dapt

atio

n an

d m

itiga

tion

FAO

, 201

0, R

ome

Prov

ides

exa

mpl

es o

f cl

imat

e-sm

art

prod

uctio

n sy

stem

s; h

ighl

ight

s th

e kn

owle

dge

and

tech

nica

l gap

s; e

xam

ines

the

rol

e th

at in

stitu

tions

andp

olic

y m

ustp

layi

nthe

tran

sfor

mat

iont

oclim

ate-

smar

t pr

oduc

tion

syst

ems;

and

dis

cuss

es t

he fi

nanc

ial o

ppor

tuni

ties,

the

sh

ortf

alls

and

con

stra

ints

to

be r

esol

ved.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

13/i1

881e

/i188

1e00

.ht

m

Food

sec

urity

and

agr

icul

tura

l miti

gatio

n in

de

velo

ping

cou

ntrie

s: o

ptio

ns fo

r ca

ptur

ing

syne

rgie

s FA

O R

ome,

201

0

Exp

lore

s po

tent

ial s

yner

gies

am

ong

food

sec

urity

, ada

ptat

ion

and

CC

miti

gatio

n fr

om la

nd-b

ased

agr

icul

tura

l pra

ctic

es in

dev

elop

ing

coun

trie

s, w

hich

cou

ld h

elp

to

gene

rate

the

ben

efits

nee

ded

to a

ddre

ss t

he m

any

dem

ands

pla

ced

on a

gric

ultu

re.

Indi

cate

s pr

omis

ing

miti

gatio

n op

tions

with

syn

ergi

es, o

ptio

ns t

hat

invo

lve

trad

e-of

fs,

poss

ible

opt

ions

for

requ

ired

finan

cing

and

pos

sibl

e el

emen

ts in

des

igni

ng c

ount

ry

impl

emen

tatio

n pr

oces

ses.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

12/i1

318e

/i131

8e00

.pdf

Har

vest

ing

agric

ultu

re’s

mul

tiple

ben

efits

: m

itiga

tion,

ada

ptat

ion,

dev

elop

men

t an

d fo

od

secu

rity

FAO

Rom

e, 2

010

As

an F

AO

pol

icy

brie

f, ad

voca

tes

the

esta

blis

hmen

t of

a w

ork

prog

ram

me

on

agric

ultu

re, w

ithin

the

CC

con

vent

ion

proc

ess,

and

an

inte

rlink

ed s

uite

of

coun

try-

owne

d an

d le

d pi

lot

proj

ects

to

deve

lop

read

ines

s to

impl

emen

t ag

ricul

tura

l miti

gatio

n op

tions

with

ada

ptat

ion,

food

sec

urity

and

dev

elop

men

t sy

nerg

ies.

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/01

2/ak

914e

/ak9

14e0

0.pd

f

Clim

ate

chan

ge r

espo

nse

stra

tegi

es fo

r ag

ricul

ture

: cha

lleng

es a

nd o

ppor

tuni

ties

for

the

21st

cen

tury

Tubi

ello

, F.,

Sch

mid

hube

r, J.

, How

den,

M.,

Neo

fotis

, P.

G.,

Park

, S.,

Fern

ande

s, E

. & T

hapa

, D.

The

Wor

ld B

ank,

Was

hing

ton,

DC

, 200

8

Rev

iew

s C

C im

pact

s on

pla

nt f

unct

ion

and

farm

-leve

l pro

duct

ion

syst

ems;

ana

lyse

s th

e re

perc

ussi

ons

of t

hese

loca

l im

pact

s on

reg

iona

l and

glo

bal f

ood

prod

uctio

ns d

iscu

sses

ad

apta

tion

stra

tegi

es; i

dent

ifies

syn

ergi

es b

etw

een

adap

tatio

n st

rate

gies

and

miti

gatio

n op

tions

; and

rec

omm

ends

pra

ctic

al a

nd o

pera

tiona

l opt

ions

fro

m t

he p

ersp

ectiv

e of

sh

ort-

and

long

-ter

m s

usta

inab

le ru

ral d

evel

opm

ent

and

agric

ultu

ral p

lann

ing.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

filea

dmin

/tem

plat

es/e

m20

09/

docs

/Wor

ld_B

ank_

_200

8c_.

pdf

Bui

ldin

g cl

imat

e re

silie

nce

in t

he a

gric

ultu

re s

ecto

r of

Asi

a an

d th

e Pa

cific

Inte

rnat

iona

l Foo

d Po

licy

Res

earc

h In

stitu

te (I

FPR

), A

sian

Dev

elop

men

t B

ank,

200

9

Prov

ides

a c

ritic

al s

ynth

esis

of

the

evid

ence

and

fut

ure

scen

ario

s of

CC

in t

he r

egio

n;

anal

yses

the

impa

cts

of a

gric

ultu

re o

n C

C a

nd t

he im

pact

s of

CC

on

agric

ultu

re;

asse

sses

the

pol

icy

and

inve

stm

ent

optio

ns fo

r de

velo

pmen

t pr

actit

ione

rs a

nd

polic

y-m

aker

s; a

nd o

utlin

es a

con

cept

ual f

ram

ewor

k fo

r bu

ildin

g C

C r

esili

ence

in t

he

agric

ultu

re s

ecto

r in

the

reg

ion.

http

://be

ta.a

db.o

rg/p

ublic

atio

ns/b

uild

ing-

clim

ate-

resi

lienc

e-ag

ricul

ture

-sec

tor-a

sia-

and-

paci

fic

2.2.

Nat

ion

al p

olic

ies

and

pri

ori

ties

Nat

iona

l Com

mun

icat

ions

to

the

UN

FCC

C

(incl

udin

g th

ose

for

non-

Ann

ex I

Part

ies)

Rep

orts

nat

iona

l circ

umst

ance

s, s

uch

as g

eogr

aphy

and

clim

ate,

as

wel

l as

asse

ssm

ents

of

im

pact

and

vul

nera

bilit

y an

d ad

apta

tion

optio

ns,

GH

G i

nven

tory

and

miti

gatio

n m

easu

res.

http

://un

fccc

.int/

natio

nal_

repo

rts/

item

s/14

08.p

hpN

on-A

nnex

I Pa

rtie

s:h

ttp

://u

nfc

cc.i

nt/

nat

ion

al_r

ep

ort

s/n

on

-an

nex

_i_

natc

om/s

ubm

itted

_nat

com

/item

s/65

3.ph

p

Nat

iona

l Ada

ptat

ion

Prog

ram

mes

of A

ctio

n (N

APA

s)

UN

FCC

C, 2

010

Prov

ides

the

late

st li

st o

f N

APA

s su

bmitt

ed b

y pa

rtie

s an

d re

prod

uced

and

upl

oade

d by

th

e U

NFC

CC

Sec

reta

riat.

Pro

vide

s th

e da

te o

f su

bmis

sion

, w

hich

det

erm

ines

elig

ibili

ty

to a

pply

for

the

LD

C f

und

whi

ch i

s m

anag

ed b

y G

EF

for

impl

emen

tatio

n. T

he N

APA

s su

mm

ariz

e cl

imat

ic/e

nviro

nmen

tal

cond

ition

s an

d id

entif

y ke

y ad

apta

tion

need

s of

a

coun

try.

The

focu

s is

on

urge

nt a

nd im

med

iate

nee

ds ra

ther

than

a lo

ng-t

erm

per

spec

tive.

http

://un

fccc

.int/

natio

nal_

repo

rts/

napa

/item

s/27

19.

php

Com

pila

tion

of in

form

atio

n on

Nat

iona

lly

App

ropr

iate

Miti

gatio

n A

ctio

ns (N

AM

As)

to

be

impl

emen

ted

by P

artie

s no

t in

clud

ed in

Ann

ex I

to

the

Con

vent

ion

Ad

Hoc

Wor

king

Gro

up o

n Lo

ng-

term

Coo

pera

tive

Act

ion

unde

r th

e C

onve

ntio

n,

UN

FCC

C, 2

011

Pres

ents

the

info

rmat

ion

com

mun

icat

ed b

y th

ese

Part

ies

on t

he N

AM

As

that

the

y in

tend

to

impl

emen

t, a

s w

ell a

s th

e re

late

d co

ntex

t, c

ondi

tions

and

con

side

ratio

ns,

incl

udin

g w

ith r

egar

d to

the

sup

port

req

uire

d fo

r th

eir

prep

arat

ion

and

impl

emen

tatio

n.

http

://un

fccc

.int/

reso

urce

/doc

s/20

11/a

wgl

ca14

/eng

/in

f01.

pdf


ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/012/ak914e/ak914e00.pdf

http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/em2009/docs/World_Bank__2008c_.pdf

http://unfccc.int/national_reports/non-annex_i_natcom/submitted_natcom/items/653.php

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/awglca14/eng/inf01.pdf

97


Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

GE

F N

atio

nal P

ortf

olio

For

mul

atio

n E

xerc

ise

(NP

FE)

Pres

ents

prio

ritie

s fo

r fu

ndin

g C

C m

itiga

tion

and

adap

tatio

n pr

ojec

ts a

nd a

ctiv

ities

to

be

poss

ibly

sup

port

ed b

y th

e G

EF.

Iden

tified

prio

ritie

s sh

ould

be

avai

labl

e w

hen

an N

PFE

ex

ists

, alth

ough

it is

not

a m

anda

tory

exe

rcis

e. T

he c

ount

ry’s

GE

F O

pera

tiona

l Foc

al

Poin

t (F

P) c

oord

inat

es t

he fo

rmul

atio

n of

the

NP

FE.

Sea

rch

docu

men

t on

the

Web

site

of

the

Nat

iona

l G

EF

FP. T

o id

entif

y w

ho is

the

GE

F FP

, go

to:

http

://w

ww

.the

gef.o

rg/g

ef/N

atio

nal_

Port

folio

_Fo

rmul

atio

n_E

xerc

ises

3. To

ols

an

d in

form

atio

n s

yste

ms

for

adap

tati

on

an

d m

itig

atio

n

Han

dboo

k on

met

hods

for

clim

ate

chan

ge im

pact

as

sess

men

t an

d ad

apta

tion

stra

tegi

esFe

enst

ra, J

. F.,

Bur

ton,

I., S

mith

, J. B

. & To

l, R

.vr

ije U

nive

rsite

it A

mst

erda

m, I

nstit

ute

for

Env

ironm

enta

l Stu

dies

, UN

EP,

199

8

Intr

oduc

es a

wid

e ra

nge

of m

etho

ds t

hat

can

be u

sed

to d

esig

n as

sess

men

t st

udie

s of

CC

impa

cts

and

rela

ted

adap

tatio

n st

rate

gies

. It

does

not

ser

ve a

s a

"sta

nd-a

lone

," st

ep-b

y-st

ep, o

r "h

ow t

o do

it" d

ocum

ent.

It is

not

pre

scrip

tive

nor

does

it d

escr

ibe

only

a

sing

le m

etho

d by

sec

tor.

The

inte

nt o

f pr

ovid

ing

an o

verv

iew

of

met

hods

is t

o gi

ve

read

ers

enou

gh in

form

atio

n to

sel

ect

the

met

hod

mos

t ap

prop

riate

to

thei

r si

tuat

ion.

http

://re

sear

ch.fi

t.ed

u/se

alev

elris

elib

rary

/do

cum

ents

/doc

_mgr

/465

/Glo

bal_

Met

hods

_for

_CC

_A

sses

smen

t_A

dapt

atio

n_-_

UN

EP

_199

8.pd

f

A fr

amew

ork

to d

iagn

ose

barr

iers

to c

limat

e ch

ange

ad

apta

tion

Mos

er, S

. C. &

Eks

trom

, J. (

2010

). PN

AS,

107

(51)

: 22

026-

2203

1, d

oi:1

0.10

73/p

nas.

1007

8871

07.

Des

crib

es a

fra

mew

ork

to d

iagn

ose

barr

iers

to

CC

ada

ptat

ion.

Incl

udes

a u

sefu

l tab

le

with

dia

gnos

tic q

uest

ions

by

the

stag

e in

the

ada

ptat

ion

proc

ess

and

the

adap

tatio

n sy

stem

com

pone

nts.

http

://w

ww

.sus

anne

mos

er.c

om/d

ocum

ents

/Mos

er-

Eks

trom

_PN

AS

_201

0_ba

rrie

rsfr

amew

ork.

pdf

Org

anic

agr

icul

ture

and

car

bon

sequ

estr

atio

nM

ülle

r-Lin

denl

auf,

M.

FAO

Rom

e, 2

009

Des

crib

es t

he p

oten

tial o

f or

gani

c ag

ricul

ture

to

sequ

este

r ca

rbon

and

to

mee

t th

e re

quire

men

ts o

f ca

rbon

acc

ount

ing

syst

ems;

dis

cuss

es t

he s

uita

bilit

y of

mea

sure

men

t an

d ve

rifica

tion

met

hodo

logi

es t

o ag

ricul

ture

sys

tem

s, in

clud

ing

an a

naly

sis

of e

xist

ing

carb

on a

ccou

ntin

g in

stru

men

ts.

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/01

2/ak

998e

/ak9

98e0

0.pd

f

Live

stoc

k’s

long

sha

dow

: env

ironm

enta

l iss

ues

and

optio

nsS

tein

feld

, H.,

Ger

ber,

P., W

asse

naar

, T.,

Cas

tel,

V.,

Ros

ale,

M. &

de

Haa

n, C

.FA

O R

ome,

200

6

Ass

esse

s th

e im

pact

of

the

wor

ld’s

live

stoc

k se

ctor

on

the

envi

ronm

ent,

and

the

co

ntrib

utio

n of

ani

mal

agr

icul

ture

to

CC

and

air

pollu

tion,

to

land

, soi

l and

wat

er

degr

adat

ion

and

to t

he r

educ

tion

of b

iodi

vers

ity, b

uild

ing

on t

he w

ork

of t

he L

ives

tock

, E

nviro

nmen

t an

d D

evel

opm

ent

(LE

AD

) Ini

tiativ

e.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

10/a

0701

e/a0

701e

00.

HTM

Gre

enho

use

gas

emis

sion

s fr

om t

heda

iry s

ecto

r - a

life

cyc

le a

sses

smen

tFA

O R

ome,

201

0

Pres

ents

a m

etho

dolo

gy b

ased

on

the

life

cycl

e as

sess

men

t (L

CA

) app

roac

h; a

nd

prov

ides

est

imat

es o

f G

HG

em

issi

ons

asso

ciat

ed w

ith m

ilk p

rodu

ctio

n an

d pr

oces

sing

fo

r m

ain

regi

ons

and

farm

ing

syst

ems

of t

he w

orld

, whi

ch w

ill h

elp

to in

form

the

pub

lic

deba

te o

n G

HG

em

issi

ons

and

will

sup

port

res

earc

h, d

evel

opm

ent

and

exte

nsio

n ef

fort

s to

impr

ove

the

sust

aina

bilit

y pe

rfor

man

ce o

f da

iry fa

rmin

g.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

12/k

7930

e/k7

930e

00.

pdf

Live

stoc

k an

d cl

imat

e ch

ange

-too

ls fo

r pr

ojec

t de

sign

Cal

vosa

, C.,

Chu

luun

baat

ar, D

. & F

ara,

K.

IFA

D R

ome,

200

8

Exa

min

es t

he e

ffect

s of

CC

on

lives

tock

and

fish

erie

s; p

rese

nts

adap

tatio

n an

d m

itiga

tion

stra

tegi

es in

the

live

stoc

k se

ctor

; ana

lyse

s liv

esto

ck a

nd s

oil c

arbo

n se

ques

trat

ion

and

rela

ted

gend

er is

sues

; and

pro

vide

s re

com

men

datio

ns fo

r pr

omot

ing

both

ada

ptat

ion

and

miti

gatio

n ac

tiviti

es in

dev

elop

men

t pr

ojec

ts.

http

://w

ww

.ifad

.org

/lrkm

/fact

shee

t/cc

.pdf

Clim

ate

chan

ge im

plic

atio

ns fo

r fis

herie

s an

d aq

uacu

lture

- FA

O fi

sher

y an

d aq

uacu

lture

te

chni

cal p

aper

530

K. C

ochr

ane,

C. D

. You

ng, D

. Sot

o &

T. B

ahri

(eds

.)FA

O R

ome,

200

9

Con

tain

s th

ree

com

preh

ensi

ve t

echn

ical

pap

ers

that

form

ed t

he b

asis

for

the

tech

nica

l dis

cuss

ions

dur

ing

the

Exp

ert W

orks

hop

on C

C Im

plic

atio

ns fo

r Fi

sher

ies

and

Aqu

acul

ture

in A

pril

2008

at

FAO

hea

dqua

rter

s. R

evie

ws

clim

ate

varia

bilit

y an

d ch

ange

and

the

ir ph

ysic

al a

nd e

colo

gica

l con

sequ

ence

s on

mar

ine

and

fres

hwat

er

envi

ronm

ents

; ana

lyse

s th

e co

nseq

uenc

es o

f C

C im

pact

s on

fish

ers

and

aqua

cultu

re;

and

disc

usse

s po

ssib

le a

dapt

atio

n an

d m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s.

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/01

2/i0

994e

/i099

4e.p

df

http://www.thegef.org/gef/National_Portfolio_Formulation_Exercises

http://research.fit.edu/sealevelriselibrary/documents/doc_mgr/465/Global_Methods_for_CC_Assessment_Adaptation_-_UNEP_1998.pdf

http://www.susannemoser.com/documents/Moser-Ekstrom_PNAS_2010_barriersframework.pdf

ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/012/ak998e/ak998e00.pdf

http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM


98

Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

Str

ateg

ic f

ram

ewor

k fo

r fo

rest

s an

d cl

imat

e ch

ange

Col

labo

rativ

e Pa

rtne

rshi

p on

For

ests

, FA

O R

ome,

20

09

Lays

the

gro

undw

ork

for

a co

ordi

nate

d re

spon

se f

rom

the

fore

st s

ecto

r to

CC

, not

ably

th

roug

h th

e ad

optio

n of

sus

tain

able

fore

st m

anag

emen

t an

d its

inte

grat

ion

into

bro

ader

de

velo

pmen

t st

rate

gies

.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

fore

stry

/166

39-0

64a7

166b

1dd0

2750

4bbf

bb76

3878

af99

.pdf

Clim

ate

chan

ge, w

ater

and

food

sec

urity

-FA

O

wat

er r

epor

ts N

o. 3

6Tu

rral

, H.,

Bur

ke, J

. & F

aurè

s, J

.FA

O R

ome,

201

1

Sum

mar

izes

cur

rent

kno

wle

dge

of t

he a

ntic

ipat

ed im

pact

s of

CC

on

wat

er a

vaila

bilit

y fo

r ag

ricul

ture

; exa

min

es t

he im

plic

atio

ns fo

r lo

cal a

nd n

atio

nal f

ood

secu

rity;

dis

cuss

es

the

met

hods

and

app

roac

hes

to a

sses

s C

C im

pact

s on

wat

er a

nd a

gric

ultu

re;

emph

asiz

es t

he n

eed

for

a cl

oser

alig

nmen

t be

twee

n w

ater

and

agr

icul

tura

l pol

icie

s;

and

mak

es t

he c

ase

for

imm

edia

te im

plem

enta

tion

of "n

o-re

gret

s" s

trat

egie

s.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

14/i2

096e

/i209

6e00

.ht

m

Clim

ate

chan

ge a

dapt

atio

n st

rate

gies

: wat

er

reso

urce

s m

anag

emen

t op

tions

for

smal

lhol

der

farm

ing

syst

ems

in s

ub-S

ahar

an A

fric

aN

gigi

, S.N

. 200

9. T

he M

DG

Cen

tre

for

Eas

t an

d S

outh

ern

Afr

ica,

The

Ear

th In

stitu

te a

t C

olum

bia

Uni

vers

ity, N

ew Y

ork.

189

pp.

Rev

iew

s th

e tr

ends

and

exp

erie

nce

of w

ater

res

ourc

es m

anag

emen

t in

Afr

ica;

su

mm

ariz

es C

C a

dapt

atio

n st

rate

gies

and

pra

ctic

es fo

r sm

allh

olde

r fa

rmin

g in

su

b-S

ahar

an A

fric

a in

ter

ms

of p

ilot

proj

ects

, res

earc

h ag

enda

and

gov

erna

nce

inte

rven

tions

; ide

ntifi

es c

onst

rain

ts a

nd g

aps

and

prop

oses

opt

ions

for

furt

her

inte

rven

tions

. Thi

s is

a s

ynth

esis

rep

ort

of a

reg

iona

l stu

dy s

uppo

rted

by

the

Roc

kefe

ller

Foun

datio

n.

http

://w

ww

.roc

kefe

llerf

ound

atio

n.or

g/ne

ws/

publ

icat

ions

/clim

ate-

chan

ge-a

dapt

atio

n-st

rate

gies

Eco

nom

ic a

ppro

ache

s to

clim

ate

chan

ge

adap

tatio

n an

d th

eir

role

in p

roje

ct p

riorit

isat

ion

and

appr

aisa

lG

TZ, 2

007

Out

lines

the

vul

nera

bilit

y of

dev

elop

ing

coun

trie

s to

the

impa

cts

of C

C; d

iscu

sses

va

rious

ada

ptat

ion

optio

ns a

nd c

onst

rain

ts; a

naly

ses

cost

s an

d be

nefit

s of

ada

ptat

ion;

di

scus

ses

pote

ntia

l way

s to

prio

ritiz

e de

velo

pmen

t ac

tiviti

es w

ith a

vie

w t

o ad

vers

e ef

fect

s of

CC

; dea

ls w

ith t

he a

ppra

isal

and

ran

king

of

prop

osed

pro

ject

s; a

nd o

utlin

es

som

e lim

its o

f ex

istin

g m

etho

ds.

http

://w

ww

.ada

pcc.

org/

dow

nloa

d/E

cono

mic

-A

ppro

ache

s-to

-Clim

ate-

Cha

nge-

Ada

ptat

ion.

pdf

Gen

der:

the

mis

sing

com

pone

nt o

f the

resp

onse

to

clim

ate

chan

geLa

mbr

ou, Y

. & P

iana

, G.

FAO

Rom

e, 2

006

Ana

lyse

s th

e ge

nder

dim

ensi

on o

f C

C a

nd t

he p

olic

ies

enac

ted

to m

itiga

te a

nd a

dapt

to

its

impa

cts

with

the

aim

of

deve

lopi

ng g

ende

r-sen

sitiv

e ap

proa

ches

to

miti

gatio

n m

easu

res,

ada

ptat

ion

proj

ects

and

nat

iona

l reg

imes

.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

sd/d

im_p

e1/d

ocs/

pe1_

0510

01d1

_en.

pdf

Str

engt

heni

ng c

apac

ity fo

r cl

imat

e ch

ange

ad

apta

tion

in a

gric

ultu

re: e

xper

ienc

e an

d le

sson

s fr

om L

esot

hoD

ejen

e, A

., M

idgl

ey, S

., M

arak

e, M

.V.,

&

Ram

asam

y, S

.FA

O R

ome,

201

1

Prov

ides

an

over

view

of

CC

impa

cts

on s

ubsi

sten

ce a

nd s

mal

lhol

der

farm

ers

in

Leso

tho,

and

how

the

ada

ptat

ion

capa

city

in a

gric

ultu

re c

an b

e st

reng

then

ed,d

raw

ing

onex

perie

nces

and

less

ons

lear

ned

from

a p

ilot

proj

ect.

Mak

es r

ecom

men

datio

ns o

n ho

w c

omm

unity

-bas

ed r

espo

nses

cou

ld b

e sc

aled

up

to o

ther

par

ts o

f th

e co

untr

y an

d ot

her

coun

trie

s ac

ross

sou

ther

n A

fric

a.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

14/i2

228e

/i222

8e00

.pdf

FAO

CR

OP

WAT

too

lTh

is F

AO

com

pute

r pr

ogra

m c

alcu

late

s cr

op w

ater

req

uire

men

ts a

nd ir

rigat

ion

requ

irem

ents

bas

ed o

n so

il, c

limat

e an

d cr

op d

ata.

It a

llow

s th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

irr

igat

ion

sche

dule

s fo

r di

ffere

nt m

anag

emen

t co

nditi

ons

and

the

calc

ulat

ion

of s

chem

e w

ater

sup

ply

for

vary

ing

crop

pat

tern

s.It

can

be

used

to

eval

uate

farm

ers’

irrig

atio

n pr

actic

es a

nd c

rop

perf

orm

ance

und

er r

ainf

ed a

nd ir

rigat

ed c

ondi

tions

.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

nr/w

ater

/info

res_

data

base

s_cr

opw

at.h

tml

FAO

AQ

UA

STAT

onl

ine

data

base

AQ

UA

STAT

is a

glo

bal i

nfor

mat

ion

syst

em o

n w

ater

and

agr

icul

ture

, de

velo

ped

by t

he

Land

and

Wat

er D

evel

opm

ent

Div

isio

n of

FA

O.

Col

lect

s, a

naly

ses

and

diss

emin

ates

in

form

atio

n on

wat

er r

esou

rces

, w

ater

use

s an

d ag

ricul

tura

l w

ater

man

agem

ent

with

an

em

phas

is o

n co

untr

ies

in A

fric

a, A

sia,

Lat

in A

mer

ica

and

the

Car

ibbe

an.

Prov

ides

co

mpr

ehen

sive

and

reg

ular

ly u

pdat

ed in

form

atio

n at

glo

bal,

regi

onal

and

nat

iona

l lev

els.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

nr/w

ater

/aqu

asta

t/m

ain/

inde

x.st

m



http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/news/publications/climate-change-adaptation-strategies

http://www.adapcc.org/download/Economic-Approaches-to-Climate-Change-Adaptation.pdf

http://www.fao.org/sd/dim_pe1/docs/pe1_051001d1_en.pdf

http://www.fao.org/nr/water/infores_databases_cropwat.html

http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/main/index.stm

99


Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

Wea

ther

-bas

ed in

dice

s fo

r cr

op in

sura

nce

Hel

ps t

o de

rive

an e

ffect

ive

wea

ther

-bas

ed c

rop

yiel

d in

dex

for

crop

insu

ranc

e. T

he

appr

oach

pro

pose

s to

com

pute

a c

rop-

spec

ific

wat

er b

alan

ce t

o de

rive

valu

e-ad

ded

crop

-wea

ther

var

iabl

es t

hat

can

be c

ombi

ned

with

oth

er d

ata

(e.g

. rem

ote

sens

ing

inpu

ts, f

arm

inpu

ts s

uch

as fe

rtili

zer

use)

. The

met

hodo

logy

use

s gr

idde

d in

form

atio

n th

at is

not

too

sen

sitiv

e to

indi

vidu

al m

issi

ng s

tatio

ns, p

rovi

ded

suffi

cien

t da

ta p

oint

s ar

e av

aila

ble.

ww

w.fa

o.or

g/nr

/clim

pag/

aw_2

_en.

asp

Cro

p m

onito

ring

box

(CM

Box

)A

n au

tom

ated

sof

twar

e su

ite w

ith a

"vis

ual m

enu"

tha

t of

fers

eas

y ac

cess

to

a da

taba

se

that

hol

ds a

ll th

e da

ta n

eede

d to

ana

lyse

the

impa

ct o

f w

eath

er o

n cr

ops.

Use

ful f

or

risk

anal

ysis

and

mon

itorin

g an

d fo

reca

stin

g cr

op p

rodu

ctio

n, w

hich

is a

n es

sent

ial

inpu

t to

food

sec

urity

pla

nnin

g.

ww

w.fa

o.or

g/nr

/clim

pag/

aw_6

_en.

asp

or

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

nr/c

limpa

g/pu

b/cm

_box

_4.p

df

Clim

ate

chan

ge im

pact

ass

essm

ent

tool

box

Ass

esse

s C

C im

pact

s on

agr

icul

ture

, with

four

mai

n so

ftw

are

com

pone

nts:

a

dow

nsca

ling

met

hod

for

proc

essi

ng g

loba

l clim

ate

mod

el o

utpu

t da

ta, a

hyd

rolo

gica

l m

odel

for

estim

atin

g irr

igat

ion

wat

er r

esou

rces

, a c

rop

grow

th m

odel

to

estim

ate

crop

yi

elds

and

a C

ompu

tabl

e G

ener

al E

quili

briu

m (C

GE

) Mod

el t

o si

mul

ate

the

effe

ct o

f ch

angi

ng a

gric

ultu

ral y

ield

s on

nat

iona

l eco

nom

ies.

http

://w

ww

.food

sec.

org/

web

/too

ls/c

limat

e-ch

ange

/cl

imat

e-ch

ange

-impa

ct-a

sses

smen

t-to

ol/e

n/

Loca

l clim

ate

estim

ate

tool

This

FA

O s

oftw

are

prog

ram

and

dat

abas

e pr

ovid

es e

stim

ates

of

aver

age

clim

atic

co

nditi

ons

at a

ny lo

catio

n on

Ear

th, b

ased

on

the

FAO

CLI

M d

atab

ase.

Incl

udes

th

e cu

rren

t up

date

d ve

rsio

n of

the

FA

OC

LIM

dat

abas

e of

alm

ost

30 0

00 s

tatio

ns

wor

ldw

ide,

but

use

rs c

an a

lso

proc

ess

thei

r ow

n da

ta a

nd p

repa

re m

aps

at a

ny s

patia

l re

solu

tion.

ww

w.fa

o.or

g/nr

/clim

pag/

data

_5_e

n.as

p

Farm

ada

ptiv

e dy

nam

ic o

ptim

izat

ion

(FA

DO

)Th

is F

AO

met

hodo

logy

hel

ps t

o id

entif

y, a

naly

se a

nd p

riorit

ize

the

clim

ate-

rela

ted

vuln

erab

ilitie

s an

d ris

ks a

nd o

ptim

ize

the

adap

tatio

n pr

actic

es t

o ef

fect

ivel

y re

spon

d to

cl

imat

e va

riabi

lity

and

chan

ge, i

nclu

ding

com

pone

nts

on e

xplo

ring

know

ledg

e on

the

lo

cal s

ituat

ion

of fa

rmer

s’ d

ecis

ion

prob

lem

s; a

naly

sing

the

vul

nera

bilit

y an

d cl

imat

e ris

ks t

o op

timiz

e th

e m

anag

emen

t op

tions

; dec

idin

g ad

apta

tion

prac

tices

rel

evan

t to

lo

cal s

ituat

ions

; and

faci

litat

ing

loca

l act

ion

by c

omm

unic

atin

g cl

imat

e in

form

atio

n an

d su

itabl

e ad

apta

tion

prac

tices

to

farm

ers.

ww

w.fa

o.or

g/nr

/clim

pag/

aw_5

_en.

asp

FAO

rai

nfal

l est

imat

e ro

utin

e (F

AO

-RFE

)A

n in

depe

nden

t m

etho

d to

est

imat

e th

e ra

infa

ll am

ount

, par

ticul

arly

, for

reg

ions

whe

re

the

wea

ther

sta

tion

cove

rage

is s

carc

e. O

ffers

10-

day

and

mon

thly

rai

nfal

l tot

als

for

all

of A

fric

a an

d fo

ur r

egio

ns; c

an b

e im

plem

ente

d at

a n

atio

nal l

evel

to

impr

ove

rain

fall

estim

ates

pro

vide

d by

nat

iona

l met

eoro

logi

cal s

ervi

ces.

http

://ge

onet

wor

k3.fa

o.or

g/cl

impa

g/FA

O-R

FE.p

hp

Pla

nnin

g fo

r co

mm

unity

-bas

ed a

dapt

atio

n (C

BA

) to

clim

ate

chan

ge

An

FAO

e-le

arni

ng t

ool,

supp

ortin

g tr

aini

ng o

n co

mm

unity

-bas

ed C

C a

dapt

atio

n in

ag

ricul

ture

. Li

nks

rese

arch

-bas

ed

know

ledg

e on

C

C

impa

cts

with

ex

ampl

es

and

expe

rienc

es o

n C

BA

dra

wn

from

FA

O fi

eld

proj

ects

and

a r

ange

of

coun

try-

spec

ific

case

st

udie

s. A

ims

at a

ssis

ting

all t

hose

who

fac

e th

e ch

alle

nge

of in

itiat

ing

and

faci

litat

ing

adap

tatio

n pr

oces

ses

at t

he c

omm

unity

leve

l.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

clim

atec

hang

e/67

624/

en/

Vis

ual S

oil A

sses

smen

t, A

Fie

ld G

uide

(inc

lude

s en

viro

nmen

tal s

core

car

ds fo

r G

HG

em

issi

ons/

sequ

estr

atio

n po

tent

ial)

FAO

Rom

e, 2

008

Bas

ed o

n th

e vi

sual

ass

essm

ent

of k

ey s

oil "

stat

e" a

nd p

lant

per

form

ance

indi

cato

rs o

f so

il qu

ality

, pre

sent

ed o

n a

scor

ecar

d. O

f pa

rtic

ular

inte

rest

for

CC

are

the

sco

re c

ards

fo

r G

HG

em

issi

ons/

sequ

estr

atio

n po

tent

ial f

or p

astu

re a

nd fo

r m

aize

cro

ps.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

10/i0

007e

/i000

7e00

.ht

msc

ore

card

s fo

r pa

stur

e:

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/01

0/i0

007e

/i000

7e07

.pdf

scor

e ca

rds

for

mai

ze c

rop:

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/01

0/i0

007e

/i000

7e09

.pdf

http://www.foodsec.org/web/tools/climate-change/climate-change-impact-assessment-tool/en/


100

Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

Car

bon

finan

ce p

ossi

bilit

ies

for

agric

ultu

re, f

ores

try

and

othe

r la

nd-u

se p

roje

cts

in a

sm

allh

olde

r co

ntex

tFA

O, 2

010

A g

uide

for

exte

nsio

n se

rvic

es a

nd in

stitu

tions

wor

king

with

sm

allh

olde

rs t

o su

ppor

t th

em in

the

ir ad

viso

ry r

ole

on d

evel

opm

ent

of t

he c

arbo

n m

arke

ts a

nd fi

nanc

ial

mec

hani

sms.

Aim

s to

enh

ance

kno

wle

dge

on c

arbo

n fin

ance

and

faci

litat

e th

e in

tegr

atio

n of

sm

all-s

cale

farm

ers

into

agr

icul

ture

, for

estr

y an

d la

nd-u

se c

hang

e (A

FOLU

) miti

gatio

n ac

tiviti

es.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

12/i1

632e

/i163

2e.p

df

FAO

ex

ante

car

bon-

bala

nce

tool

(EX

-AC

T)A

land

-bas

ed a

ccou

ntin

g sy

stem

mea

surin

g ca

rbon

sto

cks

and

stoc

k ch

ange

s pe

r un

it of

land

. Can

hel

p pr

ojec

t de

sign

ers

sele

ct p

roje

ct a

ctiv

ities

with

hig

her

bene

fits

in

econ

omic

and

CC

miti

gatio

n te

rms.

Out

put

coul

d be

use

d in

fina

ncia

l and

eco

nom

ic

anal

ysis

of

the

proj

ects

. Wor

ks a

t th

e pr

ojec

t le

vel b

ut c

an e

asily

be

scal

ed u

p at

the

pr

ogra

mm

e/se

ctor

leve

l.

ww

w.fa

o.or

g/do

cs/u

p/ea

sypo

l/768

/ex-

act_

flyer

-no

v09.

pdf

Map

ping

sys

tem

and

ser

vice

for

cana

l ope

ratio

n te

chni

ques

(MA

SS

CO

TE) -

FA

O ir

rigat

ion

and

drai

nage

pap

er 6

3R

enau

lt, D

., Fa

con,

T. &

Wah

aj, R

.FA

O R

ome,

200

7

A s

tep-

wis

e pr

oced

ure

for

audi

ting

perf

orm

ance

of

irrig

atio

n m

anag

emen

t, a

naly

sing

an

d ev

alua

ting

the

diffe

rent

ele

men

ts o

f an

irrig

atio

n sy

stem

in o

rder

to

deve

lop

a m

oder

niza

tion

plan

. A m

oder

niza

tion

plan

con

sist

s of

phy

sica

l, in

stitu

tiona

l and

m

anag

eria

l inn

ovat

ions

to

impr

ove

wat

er d

eliv

ery

serv

ices

to

all u

sers

and

cos

t ef

fect

iven

ess

of o

pera

tion

and

man

agem

ent.

ww

w.fa

o.or

g/nr

/wat

er/t

opic

s_irr

ig_m

assc

ote.

htm

l

FAO

Aqu

aCro

p m

odel

FAO

Rom

e, 2

011

A c

rop

mod

el t

o si

mul

ate

yiel

d re

spon

se t

o w

ater

of

seve

ral h

erba

ceou

s cr

ops.

D

esig

ned

to b

alan

ce s

impl

icity

, acc

urac

y an

d ro

bust

ness

, it

is p

artic

ular

ly s

uite

d to

ad

dres

s co

nditi

ons

whe

re w

ater

is a

key

lim

iting

fact

or in

cro

p pr

oduc

tion.

It is

mai

nly

inte

nded

for

prac

titio

ners

in e

xten

sion

ser

vice

s, g

over

nmen

tal a

genc

ies,

NG

Os

and

farm

ers

asso

ciat

ions

. Als

o of

inte

rest

to

scie

ntis

ts a

nd a

s a

trai

ning

and

edu

catio

n to

ol.

ww

w.fa

o.or

g/nr

/wat

er/a

quac

rop.

htm

l

Ada

ptin

g to

coa

stal

clim

ate

chan

ge: a

gui

debo

ok

for

deve

lopm

ent

plan

ners

Coa

stal

Res

ourc

es C

ente

r, U

nive

rsity

of

Rho

de

isla

nd a

nd In

tern

atio

nal R

esou

rces

Gro

upU

SAID

, 200

9

A t

ool a

nd a

link

to

othe

r re

sour

ces

valu

able

for

asse

ssin

g vu

lner

abili

ty, d

evel

opin

g an

d im

plem

entin

g ad

apta

tion

optio

ns a

nd in

tegr

atin

g op

tions

into

pro

gram

mes

, pla

ns a

nd

proj

ects

at

the

natio

nal a

nd lo

cal l

evel

s.

http

://w

ww

.crc

.uri.

edu/

dow

nloa

d/C

oast

alA

dapt

atio

nGui

de.p

df

Wor

ld B

ank

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

Port

al a

nd A

DA

PT

Prov

ides

qui

ck a

nd r

eadi

ly a

cces

sibl

e cl

imat

e da

ta t

o po

licy-

mak

ers

and

deve

lopm

ent

prac

titio

ners

, inc

ludi

ng a

map

ping

vis

ualiz

atio

n to

ol d

ispl

ayin

g ke

y cl

imat

e va

riabl

es

data

and

a c

ompu

ter-b

ased

pro

toty

pe s

cree

ning

too

l for

Ass

essm

ent

and

Des

ign

for

Ada

ptat

ion

to C

limat

e C

hang

e (A

DA

PT)

. Des

igne

d to

ass

ess

whe

ther

a p

roje

ct m

ight

be

sen

sitiv

e to

the

effe

cts

of C

C, a

nd t

hen

prov

ide

guid

ance

to

the

best

sou

rces

of

info

rmat

ion

to h

elp

take

the

se p

oten

tial e

ffect

s in

to a

ccou

nt in

the

pro

ject

des

ign.

http

://sd

web

x.w

orld

bank

.org

/clim

atep

orta

l/ind

ex.c

fm

The

resi

lienc

e to

ol, d

escr

ibed

on

the

Web

site

"F

ood

Sec

urity

Info

rmat

ion

for

Dec

isio

n-m

akin

g"

EC

-FA

O P

rogr

amm

e on

"Lin

king

Info

rmat

ion

and

Dec

isio

n M

akin

g to

Impr

ove

Food

Sec

urity

"

Prov

ides

a f

ram

ewor

k fo

r un

ders

tand

ing

the

mos

t ef

fect

ive

com

bina

tion

of s

hort

- and

lo

ng-t

erm

str

ateg

ies

for

liftin

g fa

mili

es o

ut o

f cy

cles

of

pove

rty

and

hung

er. L

ooks

at

the

root

cau

ses

of h

ouse

hold

vul

nera

bilit

y in

stea

d of

try

ing

to p

redi

ct h

ow w

ell h

ouse

hold

s w

ill c

ope

with

fut

ure

cris

es o

r di

sast

ers.

Als

o co

nsid

ers

how

hou

seho

ld fo

od s

ecur

ity

links

to

the

entir

e fo

od s

yste

m.

http

://w

ww

.food

sec.

org/

web

/too

ls/r

esili

ence

/re

silie

nce-

tool

/en/

http://www.crc.uri.edu/download/CoastalAdaptationGuide.pdf

101


Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

4. To

ols

an

d in

form

atio

n s

yste

ms

for

dis

aste

r ri

sk m

anag

emen

t

Prov

idin

g R

egio

nal C

limat

es fo

r Im

pact

s S

tudi

es

(PR

EC

IS)

Prov

ides

clim

ate

impa

ct a

sses

smen

ts in

dev

elop

ing

coun

try

cont

exts

whi

ch a

re f

reel

y av

aila

ble

to m

any

user

s. U

ses

the

glob

al c

limat

e m

odel

to

prov

ide

grid

-sca

le a

vera

ges

of s

patia

l-tem

pora

l hyd

rocl

imat

ic s

tate

var

iabl

es, s

oil h

ydro

logy

and

the

rmod

ynam

ics

and

som

e ve

geta

tion

dyna

mic

var

iabl

es. A

pplic

able

to

mul

tiple

sca

les,

sec

tors

and

le

vels

of

scre

enin

g, b

ut is

lim

ited

fine/

poin

t sc

ale

info

rmat

ion.

http

://w

ww

.met

offic

e.go

v.uk

/ser

vice

s/cl

imat

e-se

rvic

es/in

tern

atio

nal/p

reci

s

Sta

tistic

al d

owns

calin

g m

odel

(SD

SM

)A

use

r-frie

ndly

sof

twar

e pa

ckag

e de

sign

ed t

o im

plem

ent

stat

istic

al d

owns

calin

g m

etho

ds to

pro

duce

hig

h-re

solu

tion

mon

thly

clim

ate

info

rmat

ion

from

coa

rse-

reso

lutio

n cl

imat

e m

odel

(glo

bal c

limat

e m

odel

) sim

ulat

ions

. Thi

s op

en-s

ourc

e, c

ompu

ter-b

ased

in

form

atio

n to

ol is

aim

ed a

t do

nors

, gov

ernm

ents

and

impa

ct a

sses

sors

. Pro

vide

s da

ily, t

rans

ient

, clim

ate-

risk

info

rmat

ion

for

impa

ct a

sses

smen

t ov

er t

he 1

961–

2100

tim

e ho

rizon

and

has

bee

n pr

imar

ily u

sed

for

wat

er r

esou

rce

man

agem

ent,

tho

ugh

it is

ap

plic

able

to

mul

tiple

sec

tors

.

http

://un

fccc

.int/

adap

tatio

n/na

irobi

_wor

k_pr

ogra

mm

e/kn

owle

dge_

reso

urce

s_an

d_pu

blic

atio

ns/it

ems/

5487

.php

Dis

aste

r ris

k m

anag

emen

t sy

stem

s an

alys

is -

a gu

ide

book

Baa

s, S

., R

amas

amy,

S.,

DeP

ryck

, J.,

& B

attis

ta, F

.FA

O, 2

008,

Rom

e

Prov

ides

a s

et o

f to

ols

to a

sses

s ex

istin

g st

ruct

ures

and

cap

aciti

es o

f na

tiona

l, di

stric

t an

d lo

cal i

nstit

utio

ns w

ith r

espo

nsib

ilitie

s fo

r D

RM

in o

rder

to

impr

ove

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

DR

M s

yste

ms

and

the

inte

grat

ion

of D

RM

con

cern

s in

to d

evel

opm

ent

plan

ning

, with

par

ticul

ar r

efer

ence

to

disa

ster

-pro

ne a

reas

and

vul

nera

ble

sect

ors

and

popu

latio

n gr

oups

.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

11/i0

304e

/i030

4e00

.ht

m

Dis

aste

r re

spon

se a

nd r

isk

man

agem

ent

in t

he

fishe

ries

sect

or

Wes

tlund

, L.,

Poul

ain,

F.,

Båg

e, H

. & A

nroo

y, R

.FA

O R

ome,

200

7

Rev

iew

s di

ffere

nt t

ypes

of

disa

ster

s im

pact

ing

on t

he fi

sher

ies

sect

or; d

iscu

sses

fis

herie

s se

ctor

cha

ract

eris

tics

and

give

s an

ove

rvie

w o

f th

e vu

lner

abili

ty c

onte

xt

com

mon

to

man

y co

asta

l com

mun

ities

; and

pre

sent

s re

com

men

datio

ns fo

r di

sast

er

resp

onse

and

DR

M in

the

fish

erie

s se

ctor

, foc

usin

g on

sm

all-s

cale

fish

erie

s in

de

velo

ping

cou

ntrie

s.

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/01

0/a1

217e

/a12

17e0

0.pd

f

Gui

delin

es fo

r cr

op a

nd fo

od s

uppl

y as

sess

men

t m

issi

ons

(CFS

AM

)

WFP

and

FA

O, 2

009

Prov

ides

bas

ic in

form

atio

n an

d pr

actic

al g

uida

nce

for

anyo

ne w

ho p

artic

ipat

es in

an

FAO

/WFP

CFS

AM

– w

heth

er a

s an

FA

O/W

FP c

ore

team

mem

ber,

a go

vern

men

t or

oth

er a

genc

y pa

rtic

ipan

t or

a d

onor

obs

erve

r. A

lso

usef

ul t

o or

gani

zatio

ns a

nd

indi

vidu

als

who

pro

vide

info

rmat

ion

for

such

a m

issi

on o

r ne

ed t

o us

e th

e fin

ding

s of

a

CFS

AM

rep

ort.

http

://ho

me.

wfp

.org

/ste

llent

/gro

ups/

publ

ic/

docu

men

ts/m

anua

l_gu

ide_

proc

ed/w

fp19

7289

.pdf

Res

ourc

e gu

ide:

pro

tect

ing

and

prom

otin

g go

od

nutr

ition

in c

risis

and

rec

over

y

FAO

200

5

Out

lines

the

rel

atio

nshi

ps b

etw

een

nutr

ition

and

sus

tain

able

live

lihoo

ds; e

xam

ines

po

ssib

le a

ppro

ache

s to

pro

tect

ing

and

prom

otin

g go

od n

utrit

ion;

dis

cuss

es is

sues

re

late

d to

the

pla

nnin

g an

d se

lect

ion

of a

ctio

ns in

cris

is s

ituat

ions

. A s

ourc

e an

d re

fere

nce

for

a ra

nge

of e

xist

ing

tech

nica

l han

dboo

ks t

hat

cove

r su

ch t

opic

s as

as

sess

ing

mal

nutr

ition

, man

agin

g ge

nera

l and

sel

ectiv

e fe

edin

g pr

ogra

mm

es a

nd

desi

gnin

g sp

ecifi

c in

terv

entio

ns.

http

://w

ww

.uns

cn.o

rg/la

yout

/mod

ules

/res

ourc

es/

files

/Ref

man

_36_

FAO

_Pro

tect

ing_

and_

prom

otin

g_G

ood_

Nut

ritio

n_in

_Cri.

pdf

Fire

man

agem

ent

volu

ntar

y gu

idel

ines

:pr

inci

ples

and

str

ateg

ic a

ctio

nsW

orki

ng P

aper

FP

/17/

EFA

O R

ome,

200

6

Set

s ou

t a

fram

ewor

k of

lega

lly n

on-b

indi

ng p

rinci

ples

and

inte

rnat

iona

lly a

ccep

ted

stra

tegi

c ac

tions

. Add

ress

es t

he c

ultu

ral,

soci

al, e

nviro

nmen

tal a

nd e

cono

mic

di

men

sion

s of

fire

man

agem

ent

at a

ll le

vels

.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

09/j9

255e

/j925

5e00

.ht

m

http://unfccc.int/adaptation/nairobi_work_programme/knowledge_resources_and_publications/items/5487.php


http://home.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/manual_guide_proced/wfp197289.pdf

http://www.unscn.org/layout/modules/resources/files/Refman_36_FAO_Protecting_and_promoting_Good_Nutrition_in_Cri.pdf

http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/j9255e/j9255e00.htm

102

Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

Live

stoc

k E

mer

genc

y G

uide

lines

and

Sta

ndar

ds

(LE

GS

)

The

Sch

umac

her

Cen

tre

for T

echn

olog

y an

d D

evel

opm

ent,

UK

, 200

9

A s

et o

f gu

idel

ines

and

sta

ndar

ds fo

r th

e de

sign

, im

plem

enta

tion

and

asse

ssm

ent

of li

vest

ock

inte

rven

tions

to

assi

st p

eopl

e af

fect

ed b

y hu

man

itaria

n cr

isis

. Pro

vide

s gu

idan

ce o

n id

entif

ying

app

ropr

iate

live

stoc

k re

spon

ses

as w

ell a

s de

taile

d in

form

atio

n on

a n

umbe

r of

inte

rven

tions

, nam

ely:

des

tock

ing,

vet

erin

ary

serv

ices

, the

pro

visi

on o

f fe

ed, t

he p

rovi

sion

of

wat

er, l

ives

tock

she

lter

and

sett

lem

ent

and

rest

ocki

ng.

http

://w

ww

.live

stoc

k-em

erge

ncy.

net/

user

files

/file

/le

gs.p

df

Soc

io-e

cono

mic

and

gen

der

anal

ysis

(SE

GA

) for

em

erge

ncy

and

reha

bilit

atio

n

FAO

/WFP

, 200

4

A g

uide

on

soci

o-ec

onom

ic a

nd g

ende

r an

alys

is fo

r em

erge

ncy

and

reha

bilit

atio

n,ba

sed

on p

artic

ipat

ory

iden

tifica

tion

and

anal

ysis

of

the

soci

o-ec

onom

ic fa

ctor

s th

at d

eter

min

e w

omen

’s a

nd m

en’s

prio

ritie

s an

d po

tent

ials

. Its

mai

n ob

ject

ive

is t

o cl

ose

the

gaps

be

twee

n w

hat

peop

le n

eed

and

wha

t de

velo

pmen

t de

liver

s, t

o co

ntrib

ute

to e

ffect

ive

and

sust

aina

ble

deve

lopm

ent.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

sd/s

eaga

/dow

nloa

ds/E

N/

Em

erge

ncyG

uide

lines

En.

pdf

Tow

ards

effe

ctiv

e an

d su

stai

nabl

e se

ed r

elie

f ac

tiviti

es

L. S

perli

ng, T

. Osb

orn

& D

. Coo

per

(eds

.)FA

O R

ome,

200

4

Prov

ides

an

over

view

of

seed

sys

tem

s; d

iscu

sses

the

par

amet

ers

of s

eed

secu

rity;

de

scrib

es a

cute

and

chr

onic

em

erge

ncy

situ

atio

ns;

sum

mar

izes

les

sons

lea

rned

fro

m

expe

rienc

e in

the

fiel

d, p

artic

ular

ly i

n A

fric

a; d

iscu

sses

maj

or c

halle

nges

for

mov

ing

ahea

d, p

ossi

ble

inte

rven

tions

, av

aila

ble

tool

s an

d gu

idan

ce t

o as

sist

dec

isio

n-m

akin

g an

d im

plem

enta

tion

of s

eed

relie

f in

terv

entio

ns.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

07/y

5703

e/y5

703e

00.

htm

Rap

id A

gric

ultu

ral D

isas

ter A

sses

smen

t R

outin

e (R

AD

AR

)

Bor

gia,

A.,

Gom

mes

, R.,

Ber

nard

i, M

. & K

anam

aru,

H

.FA

O R

ome,

200

8

Des

crib

es t

he m

etho

ds fo

r m

odel

ana

lysi

s; in

trod

uces

the

pro

cedu

re a

nd s

teps

of

RA

DA

R b

y co

mbi

ning

mod

el a

naly

sis

base

d on

phy

sica

l sim

ulat

ion

of t

he d

isas

ter,

with

em

piric

al a

naly

sis,

usi

ng p

eopl

e’s

reco

rds

of t

he e

nviro

nmen

tal d

isru

ptio

n af

ter

the

even

t; a

nd d

iscu

sses

its

appl

icat

ion

in d

isas

ter

prep

ared

ness

and

min

imiz

atio

n of

po

tent

ial r

isks

thr

ough

ear

ly w

arni

ng s

trat

egie

s an

d pr

epar

atio

n of

dev

elop

men

t pl

ans.

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/01

1/i0

183e

/i018

3e.p

df

Em

erge

ncy

prev

entio

n sy

stem

for

tran

sbou

ndar

y an

imal

and

pla

nt p

ests

and

dis

ease

s (E

MP

RE

S)

FAO

food

cha

in c

risis

man

agem

ent

fram

ewor

k ai

min

g at

pro

mot

ing

the

effe

ctiv

e co

ntai

nmen

t an

d co

ntro

l of

the

mos

t se

rious

epi

dem

ic p

ests

, dis

ease

s an

d fo

od

safe

ty t

hrea

ts t

hrou

gh in

tern

atio

nal c

oope

ratio

n in

volv

ing

early

war

ning

, ear

ly

reac

tion,

ena

blin

g re

sear

ch a

nd c

oord

inat

ion.

Invo

lves

thr

ee m

ajor

sys

tem

s: E

MP

RE

S

Ani

mal

Hea

lth fo

r an

imal

dis

ease

s, in

clud

ing

aqua

tic a

nim

al d

isea

ses;

EM

PR

ES

Pla

nt

Prot

ectio

n fo

r pl

ant

pest

s an

d di

seas

es, i

nclu

ding

des

ert

locu

st a

nd fo

rest

pla

nt p

ests

an

d di

seas

es; a

nd E

MP

RE

S F

ood

Saf

ety.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

ag/a

gain

fo/p

rogr

amm

es/e

n/em

pres

/hom

e.as

p

Com

mun

ity-b

ased

ada

ptat

ion

in a

ctio

n - a

cas

e st

udy

from

Ban

glad

esh

Baa

s, S

. & R

amas

amy,

S.

FAO

Rom

e, 2

008

Prov

ides

a s

umm

ary

of a

n ap

proa

ch t

o pr

omot

e co

mm

unity

-bas

ed a

dapt

atio

n w

ithin

ag

ricul

ture

, dev

elop

ed a

nd t

este

d th

roug

h a

field

pro

ject

in B

angl

ades

h. P

rese

nts

less

ons

lear

ned

from

the

impl

emen

tatio

n pr

oces

s as

wel

l as

the

deta

ils o

f go

od

prac

tice

optio

ns fo

r dr

ough

t ris

k m

anag

emen

t in

the

con

text

.

ftp:

//ftp

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/fa

o/01

0/i0

481e

/i048

1e.p

df

Mon

itorin

g an

d ev

alua

tion

in d

isas

ter

risk

man

agem

ent

Eas

t Asi

a an

d Pa

cific

Dis

aste

r R

isk

Man

agem

ent

Team

(EA

P D

RM

T), W

orld

Ban

k an

d G

loba

l Fac

ility

fo

r D

isas

ter

Red

uctio

n an

d R

ecov

ery

(GFD

RR

), 20

11

Add

ress

es t

he im

port

ance

of

qual

ity m

onito

ring

and

eval

uatio

n (M

&E

) in

the

disa

ster

co

ntex

t. P

rovi

des

an o

verv

iew

of

how

eac

h ca

n be

use

d di

ffere

ntly

in t

he e

x an

te

and

ex p

ost d

isas

ter

scen

ario

s. G

ives

gen

eral

gui

danc

e on

how

to

cons

truc

t a

logi

cal

fram

ewor

k fo

r ev

alua

ting

DR

M p

roje

cts

by p

rese

ntin

g be

st p

ract

ices

fro

m t

hree

rec

ent

proj

ects

.

http

://w

ww

.wor

ldba

nk.o

rg/e

ap

http://www.livestock-emergency.net/userfiles/file/legs.pdf

http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/y5703e/y5703e00.htm

http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/programmes/en/empres/home.asp

103


Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

5. G

uid

elin

es a

nd

to

ols

fo

r m

ain

stre

amin

g

Mai

nstr

eam

ing

adap

tatio

n to

clim

ate

chan

ge in

ag

ricul

ture

and

nat

ural

res

ourc

es m

anag

emen

t pr

ojec

ts

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

Team

, Env

ironm

ent

Dep

artm

ent,

W

orld

Ban

k

Pres

ents

eig

ht g

uida

nce

note

s th

at p

rovi

de le

sson

s le

arne

d, b

est

prac

tices

, re

com

men

datio

ns a

nd u

sefu

l res

ourc

es fo

r in

tegr

atin

g cl

imat

e ris

k m

anag

emen

t an

d ad

apta

tion

to C

C in

dev

elop

men

t pr

ojec

ts, w

ith a

focu

s on

agr

icul

ture

and

nat

ural

re

sour

ces

man

agem

ent.

The

y ar

e or

gani

zed

arou

nd a

typ

ical

pro

ject

cyc

le, s

tart

ing

from

pro

ject

iden

tifica

tion,

follo

wed

by

proj

ect

prep

arat

ion,

impl

emen

tatio

n, a

nd M

&E

. E

ach

note

focu

ses

on s

peci

fic t

echn

ical

, ins

titut

iona

l, ec

onom

ic o

r so

cial

asp

ects

of

adap

tatio

n.

http

://w

ww

.wor

ldba

nk.o

rg/a

dapt

note

s

Mai

nstr

eam

ing

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

Ada

ptat

ion

into

Dev

elop

men

t P

lann

ing:

A G

uide

for

Prac

titio

ners

UN

DP

and

UN

EP,

201

1

The

fram

ewor

k pr

opos

ed c

onsi

sts

of t

hree

com

pone

nts:

(i) fi

ndin

g th

e en

try

poin

ts a

nd

mak

ing

the

case

; (ii)

mai

nstr

eam

ing

adap

tatio

n in

to p

olic

y pr

oces

ses;

and

(iii)

mee

ting

the

impl

emen

tatio

n ch

alle

nge,

eac

h of

whi

ch in

volv

es a

set

of

activ

ities

or

mod

ules

for

whi

ch a

ran

ge o

f ta

ctic

s, m

etho

dolo

gies

and

too

ls c

an b

e us

ed.

http

://w

ww

.cak

ex.o

rg/s

ites/

defa

ult/

files

/Gui

de%

20M

ains

trea

min

g%20

Clim

ate%

20C

hang

e%20

Ada

ptat

ion%

2020

11.p

df

Inte

grat

ing

clim

ate

chan

ge c

onsi

dera

tions

in t

he

coun

try

anal

ysis

and

the

UN

DA

F- a

gui

danc

e no

te

for

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

cou

ntry

tea

ms

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

Dev

elop

men

t G

roup

(UN

DG

), 20

10

Incl

udes

a q

uick

gui

de t

o m

ains

trea

min

g C

C c

onsi

dera

tions

in t

he c

ount

ry a

naly

sis

(suc

h as

CC

A) a

nd t

he U

nite

d N

atio

ns D

evel

opm

ent A

ssis

tanc

e Fr

amew

ork

(UN

DA

F),

whi

ch is

org

aniz

ed a

roun

d th

e m

ain

step

s fo

r U

N c

omm

on c

ount

ry p

rogr

amm

ing.

O

utlin

es t

he e

ntry

poi

nts

and

rela

ted

actio

ns a

nd t

ools

.

http

://w

ww

.und

g.or

g/do

cs/1

1473

/UN

DG

-G

uida

nceN

ote_

Clim

ateC

hang

e-Ju

ly20

11.p

df

Qua

lity

stan

dard

s fo

r th

e in

tegr

atio

n of

ada

ptat

ion

to c

limat

e ch

ange

into

dev

elop

men

t pr

ogra

mm

ing

(CC

A Q

S)

UN

DP,

200

9

Prov

ides

a c

ompr

ehen

sive

yet

con

cise

and

str

uctu

red

fram

ewor

k fo

r th

e in

tegr

atio

n of

ada

ptat

ion

into

dev

elop

men

t pr

actic

es, b

ased

on

a sm

all n

umbe

r of

cle

arly

defi

ned

step

s.

http

://un

fccc

.int/

adap

tatio

n/na

irobi

_wor

k_pr

ogra

mm

e/kn

owle

dge_

reso

urce

s_an

d_pu

blic

atio

ns/it

ems/

5467

.php

Tool

s an

d G

uide

lines

to

Mai

nstr

eam

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

Ada

ptat

ion

–A S

tock

taki

ng R

epor

t

UN

DP,

201

0

Exp

lore

s th

e ra

tiona

le fo

r m

ains

trea

min

g; o

utlin

es t

he m

ain

com

pone

nts

nece

ssar

y to

ope

ratio

naliz

e m

ains

trea

min

g; in

dica

tes

the

rele

vant

leve

ls a

nd a

ssoc

iate

d en

try

poin

ts t

o co

nsid

er in

the

mai

nstr

eam

ing

proc

ess;

dis

cuss

es a

nd il

lust

rate

s ho

w k

ey C

C

adap

tatio

n an

d m

ains

trea

min

g co

ncep

ts a

re d

efine

d an

d us

ed; a

nd p

rese

nts

clim

ate

risk

scre

enin

g m

etho

ds, t

ools

and

gui

danc

e.

http

://w

ww

.ada

ptat

ionl

earn

ing.

net/

site

s/de

faul

t/fil

es/U

ND

P%

20S

tock

taki

ng%

20R

epor

t%20

CC

%20

mai

nstr

eam

ing%

20to

ols.

pdf

Clim

ate

chan

ge fo

r fo

rest

pol

icy-

mak

ers.

An

appr

oach

for

inte

grat

ing

clim

ate

chan

ge

into

nat

iona

l for

est

prog

ram

mes

in s

uppo

rt o

f su

stai

nabl

e fo

rest

man

agem

ent

FAO

, Rom

e 20

11

Prov

ides

a p

ract

ical

app

roac

h to

inte

grat

ing

CC

into

nat

iona

l for

est

prog

ram

mes

or

nat

iona

l for

est

polic

y pr

oces

ses.

Aim

s to

ass

ist

seni

or o

ffici

als

in g

over

nmen

t ad

min

istr

atio

ns a

nd o

ther

sta

keho

lder

s in

ass

essi

ng t

he s

uita

bilit

y of

and

am

endi

ngfo

rest

pol

icie

s, le

gisl

atio

n an

d in

stitu

tions

, as

appr

opria

te, t

o cr

eate

an

enab

ling

envi

ronm

ent

(thr

ough

info

rmat

ion,

cap

acity

str

engt

heni

ng a

nd fi

nanc

ing)

for

CC

ada

ptat

ion

and

miti

gatio

n in

the

fore

st s

ecto

r.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

fore

stry

/clim

atec

hang

e/64

862/

en/

Gui

delin

es fo

r In

tegr

atin

g C

limat

e C

hang

e A

dapt

atio

n an

d M

itiga

tion

Opt

ions

for

Fish

erie

s an

d A

quac

ultu

re in

to P

roje

ct D

esig

n

Inte

rnat

iona

l Col

labo

ratin

g C

entr

e fo

r Aqu

acul

ture

an

d Fi

sher

ies

Sus

tain

abili

ty (I

CA

FIS

) and

IFA

D,

2011

Prov

ide

key

reco

mm

enda

tions

to

inte

grat

e of

clim

ate

chan

ge/ fi

sher

ies

and

aqua

cultu

re

into

new

pro

ject

s, a

nd p

rese

nts

case

stu

dies

.ht

tp://

ww

w.ic

afis.

org/

inde

x.ph

p/pr

ojec

ts/

com

plet

edpr

oj/9

2-in

tclim

chan

ge

Gui

delin

es o

n th

e in

tegr

atio

n of

env

ironm

ent

and

clim

ate

chan

ge in

dev

elop

men

t co

oper

atio

nE

urop

eAid

, 200

9

Defi

nes

a co

mpr

ehen

sive

ref

eren

ce f

ram

ewor

k fo

r in

tegr

atin

g th

e en

viro

nmen

t an

d C

C in

to t

he d

iffer

ent

stag

es o

f th

e op

erat

ions

cyc

le fo

r E

C d

evel

opm

ent

coop

erat

ion

cove

ring

the

thre

e ai

d de

liver

y ap

proa

ches

. Int

ende

d fo

r E

C s

taff

and

the

ir pa

rtne

rs.

http

://ec

.eur

opa.

eu/e

urop

eaid

/info

poin

t/pu

blic

atio

ns/

euro

peai

d/17

2a_e

n.ht

m

http://www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/Guide%20Mainstreaming%20Climate%20Change%20Adaptation%202011.pdf

http://unfccc.int/adaptation/nairobi_work_programme/knowledge_resources_and_publications/items/5467.php

http://www.adaptationlearning.net/sites/default/files/UNDP%20Stocktaking%20Report%20CC%20mainstreaming%20tools.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/infopoint/publications/europeaid/172a_en.htm

http://www.icafis.org/index.php/projects/completedproj/92-intclimchange

104

Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

Mai

nstr

eam

ing

clim

ate

chan

ge a

dapt

atio

n: a

pr

actit

ione

r’s h

andb

ook

Hux

tabl

e, J

. & Y

en, N

.T.

CA

RE

Inte

rnat

iona

l in

Vie

t N

am, 2

009

Dire

cts

a pr

oces

s of

ana

lysi

s an

d di

alog

ue o

n C

C is

sues

, exa

min

ing

fact

ors

at

mul

tiple

leve

ls a

nd u

sing

a v

arie

ty o

f to

ols

to g

athe

r in

form

atio

n an

d in

form

dec

isio

n-m

akin

g. P

rimar

ily d

esig

ned

for

CA

RE

in V

iet

Nam

(pro

gram

me

man

ager

s, c

ompo

nent

m

anag

ers,

pro

ject

sta

ff a

nd p

rogr

amm

e of

ficer

s) a

nd p

roje

ct p

artn

ers

wor

king

at

the

dist

rict

and

com

mun

e le

vels

, but

may

pro

ve u

sefu

l to

othe

r de

velo

pmen

t N

GO

s.

http

://w

ww

.car

eclim

atec

hang

e.or

g/fil

es/a

dapt

atio

n/C

AR

E_V

N_M

ains

trea

min

g_H

andb

ook.

pdf

AD

B D

isas

ter

and

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

Ris

ks

Scr

eeni

ng t

ool

The

Asi

an D

evel

opm

ent

Ban

k (A

DB

) hel

ps t

he r

egio

n’s

econ

omie

s en

hanc

e th

eir

resi

lienc

e to

adv

erse

CC

impa

cts

thro

ugh

mai

nstr

eam

ing

adap

tatio

n in

to n

atio

nal,

sect

oral

and

pro

ject

leve

l pla

ns a

nd a

ctio

ns. T

o m

itiga

te C

C, A

DB

add

ress

es t

he m

ain

caus

es o

f em

issi

ons

in t

he r

egio

n. T

he C

limat

e S

cree

ning

Che

cklis

t is

not

pub

licly

av

aila

ble.

http

://w

ww

.adb

.org

/Doc

umen

ts/R

RP

s/N

EP

/440

58/4

4058

-01-

nep-

oth-

03.p

df

Str

ateg

ic e

nviro

nmen

tal a

sses

smen

t an

d ad

apta

tion

to c

limat

e ch

ange

OE

CD

, 200

8

Illus

trat

es h

ow S

trat

egic

Env

ironm

enta

l Ass

essm

ent

(SE

A) m

ay p

rovi

de a

fra

mew

ork

for

inte

grat

ed c

onsi

dera

tions

of

CC

ris

ks a

nd o

ppor

tuni

ties

into

str

ateg

ic p

lann

ing.

G

uide

s pl

anne

rs, p

olic

y-m

aker

s an

d se

ctor

spe

cial

ists

wor

king

to

prep

are

polic

ies,

pl

ans

and

prog

ram

mes

(PP

Ps)

and

tho

se a

lread

y fa

mili

ar w

ith S

EA

in t

he in

clus

ion

of

CC

con

side

ratio

ns in

to P

PP

s.

http

://di

gita

l.lib

rary

.unt

.edu

/ark

:/675

31/

met

adc2

8513

/

Gui

delin

es a

nd s

ourc

e bo

ok fo

r pr

epar

atio

n an

d im

plem

enta

tion

of a

res

ults

-bas

ed c

ount

ry

stra

tegi

c op

port

uniti

es p

rogr

amm

e (R

B-C

OS

OP

)IF

AD

, 201

1

Incl

udes

a c

heck

list

for

prom

otin

g cl

imat

e-re

silie

nt d

evel

opm

ent,

whi

ch is

str

uctu

red

arou

nd k

ey e

ntry

poi

nts

for

inte

grat

ing

CC

into

the

RB

-CO

SO

P fo

rmul

atio

n,

impl

emen

tatio

n an

d re

view

pro

cess

.

http

://w

ww

.ifad

.org

/ope

ratio

ns/p

olic

y/co

sop/

guid

elin

es/s

ourc

eboo

k/co

sop.

pdf

BM

Z/G

TZ C

limat

e C

heck

Deu

tsch

e G

esel

lsch

aft

für

Inte

rnat

iona

le

Zusa

mm

enar

beit

(GIZ

) in

coop

erat

ion

with

Po

tsda

m In

stitu

te fo

r C

limat

e Im

pact

Res

earc

h (P

IK)

Tack

les

CC

issu

es f

rom

tw

o an

gles

: (1)

clim

ate

proo

fing

syst

emat

ical

ly a

naly

ses

the

risks

tha

t C

C p

oses

to

the

sust

aina

bilit

y of

dev

elop

men

t pr

ojec

ts a

nd id

entifi

es

adap

tatio

n st

rate

gies

for

adju

stin

g pr

ojec

ts; a

nd (2

) em

issi

on s

avin

g an

alys

es h

ow

proj

ects

can

con

trib

ute

to m

itiga

ting

CC

and

iden

tifies

alte

rnat

ive

optio

ns a

nd m

easu

res

to m

axim

ize

thes

e co

ntrib

utio

ns.

ww

w.g

tz.d

e/cl

imat

e-ch

eck

Trai

ning

Gui

de fo

r G

ende

r an

d C

limat

e C

hang

e R

esea

rch

in A

gric

ultu

re a

nd F

ood

Sec

urity

for

Rur

al

Dev

elop

men

t

FAO

and

the

CG

IAR

Res

earc

h Pr

ogra

m o

n C

limat

e C

hang

e, A

gric

ultu

re a

nd F

ood

Sec

urity

(CC

AFS

), 20

12

Prov

ides

res

ourc

es a

nd p

artic

ipat

ory

actio

n re

sear

ch t

ools

for

colle

ctin

g, a

naly

sing

and

sh

arin

g ge

nder

-sen

sitiv

e in

form

atio

n ab

out

agric

ultu

ral c

omm

uniti

es, h

ouse

hold

s an

d in

divi

dual

s w

ho a

re fa

cing

clim

ate

chan

ges.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

docr

ep/0

15/m

d280

e/m

d280

e.pd

f

http://www.careclimatechange.org/files/adaptation/CARE_VN_Mainstreaming_Handbook.pdf

http://www2.adb.org/Documents/RRPs/NEP/44058/44058-01-nep-oth-03.pdf

http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc28513/

http://www.ifad.org/operations/policy/cosop/guidelines/sourcebook/cosop.pdf

http://www.fao.org/docrep/015/md280e/md280e.pdf

105


Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

6. W

eb s

ites

UN

FCC

C W

eb s

iteTh

e of

ficia

l Web

site

of

the

UN

Fra

mew

ork

Con

vent

ion

on C

limat

e C

hang

e (U

NFC

CC

), an

inte

rnat

iona

l tre

aty

that

ack

now

ledg

es t

he p

ossi

bilit

y of

har

mfu

l CC

.ht

tp://

unfc

cc.in

t/28

60.p

hp

IPC

C W

eb s

iteTh

e of

ficia

l Web

site

of

the

IPC

C, a

sci

entifi

c in

terg

over

nmen

tal b

ody

task

ed w

ith

revi

ewin

g an

d as

sess

ing

the

mos

t re

cent

sci

entifi

c, t

echn

ical

and

soc

io-e

cono

mic

in

form

atio

n pr

oduc

ed w

orld

wid

e re

leva

nt t

o th

e un

ders

tand

ing

of C

C

http

://w

ww

.ipcc

.ch/

inde

x.ht

m

FAO

clim

ate

chan

ge W

eb s

iteFA

O o

ffici

al W

eb s

ite o

n C

C

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

clim

atec

hang

e/en

/

FAO

-EP

IC W

eb s

ite (E

cono

mic

s an

d po

licy

inno

vatio

ns fo

r cl

imat

e-sm

art

agric

ultu

re)

Hou

sed

in F

AO

’s A

gric

ultu

ral a

nd D

evel

opm

ent

Eco

nom

ics

Div

isio

n (E

SA),

EP

IC w

orks

w

ith n

atio

nal a

nd lo

cal p

artn

ers

in d

evel

opin

g co

untr

ies,

pro

vidi

ng e

cono

mic

and

pol

icy

anal

ysis

to

supp

ort

the

tran

sitio

n to

CSA

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

clim

atec

hang

e/73

769/

en/

Wor

ld B

ank

(WB

) clim

ate

chan

ge W

eb s

iteW

B o

ffici

al W

eb s

ite o

n C

Cht

tp://

clim

atec

hang

e.w

orld

bank

.org

/

IFA

D c

limat

e ch

ange

Web

site

IFA

D o

ffici

al W

eb s

ite o

n C

Cht

tp://

ww

w.if

ad.o

rg/c

limat

e/

AD

B c

limat

e ch

ange

Web

site

AD

B o

ffici

al W

eb s

ite o

n C

Cht

tp://

ww

w.a

db.o

rg/c

limat

e-ch

ange

/

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

Dev

elop

men

t Pr

ogra

mm

e (U

ND

P)

clim

ate

chan

ge W

eb s

iteU

ND

P o

ffici

al W

eb s

ite o

n C

Cht

tp://

ww

w.u

ndp.

org/

clim

atec

hang

e/

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

Env

ironm

ent

Prog

ram

me

clim

ate

chan

ge W

eb s

iteU

NE

P o

ffici

al W

eb s

ite o

n C

Cht

tp://

ww

w.u

nep.

org/

clim

atec

hang

e/

Afr

ican

Dev

elop

men

t B

ank

clim

ate

chan

ge W

eb

site

AfD

B o

ffici

al w

ebpa

ge o

n C

Cht

tp://

ww

w.a

fdb.

org/

en/t

opic

s-an

d-se

ctor

s/se

ctor

s/cl

imat

e-ch

ange

/

Inte

r-Am

eric

an D

evel

opm

ent

Ban

kID

B o

ffici

al w

ebpa

ge o

n C

Cht

tp://

ww

w.ia

db.o

rg/e

n/to

pics

/clim

ate-

chan

ge/

clim

ate-

chan

ge,1

448.

htm

l

Eur

opea

n C

omm

issi

on C

limat

e A

ctio

nE

urop

ean

Uni

on (E

U) o

ffici

al W

eb s

ite o

n C

Cht

tp://

ec.e

urop

a.eu

/dgs

/clim

a/m

issi

on/in

dex_

en.h

tm

Sto

ckta

king

of

pl

anne

d an

d ex

istin

g ad

apta

tion

activ

ities

cou

ntry

by

coun

try

Ada

ptat

ion

Part

ners

hip

(est

ablis

hed

in 2

010)

tha

t ta

kes

stoc

k of

pla

nned

and

exi

stin

g ad

apta

tion

activ

ities

cou

ntry

by

coun

try.

Incl

udes

info

rmat

ion

on p

roje

cts

(not

co

mpr

ehen

sive

tho

ugh)

and

key

ada

ptat

ion

prio

ritie

s; h

ighl

ight

s re

gion

al a

ctiv

ities

; as

sess

es f

undi

ng; a

nd id

entifi

es g

aps

and

oppo

rtun

ities

for

scal

ing

up.

http

://w

ww

.ada

ptat

ionp

artn

ersh

ip.o

rg/b

log/

activ

ities

UN

RE

DD

Pro

gram

me

Web

site

The

offic

ial W

eb s

ite o

f th

e U

nite

d N

atio

ns C

olla

bora

tive

Prog

ram

me

on R

educ

ing

Em

issi

ons

from

Def

ores

tatio

n an

d Fo

rest

Deg

rada

tion

(RE

DD

) in

Dev

elop

ing

Cou

ntrie

s,

whi

ch w

as la

unch

ed in

Sep

tem

ber

2008

to

assi

st d

evel

opin

g co

untr

ies

prep

are

and

impl

emen

t na

tiona

l Red

ucin

g E

mis

sion

s fr

om D

efor

esta

tion

and

Fore

st D

egra

datio

n (R

ED

D+

) str

ateg

ies.

Bui

lds

on t

he c

onve

ning

pow

er a

nd e

xper

tise

of F

AO

, UN

DP

and

U

NE

P.

http

://w

ww

.un-

redd

.org

/

GE

F cl

imat

e ch

ange

Web

site

Prov

ides

info

rmat

ion

on t

he L

east

Dev

elop

ed C

ount

ries

Fund

for

clim

ate

chan

ge (L

DC

F)

and

the

Spe

cial

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

Fund

(S

CC

F),

whi

ch w

ere

esta

blis

hed

by t

he G

loba

l E

nviro

nmen

t Fa

cilit

y (G

EF)

in r

espo

nse

to g

uida

nce

from

the

Con

fere

nce

of t

he P

artie

s (C

OP

) to

the

UN

FCC

C.

http

://w

ww

.the

gef.o

rg/g

ef/c

limat

e_ch

ange

http://www.afdb.org/en/topics-and-sectors/sectors/climate-change/

106

Too

ls a

nd

info

rmat

ion

sys

tem

sD

escr

ipti

on

So

urc

es a

nd

lin

ks

Inte

rnat

iona

l Ins

titut

e fo

r S

usta

inab

le D

evel

opm

ent

(IIS

D) C

limat

e C

hang

e Po

licy

& P

ract

ice

Web

site

A W

eb s

ite b

uilt

on a

kno

wle

dge

man

agem

ent

proj

ect

for

inte

rnat

iona

l neg

otia

tions

and

re

late

d ac

tiviti

es o

n C

C, w

hich

was

laun

ched

in 2

008

and

man

aged

by

the

IISD

.ht

tp://

clim

ate-

l.iis

d.or

g/

FAO

tec

hnol

ogie

s an

d pr

actic

es fo

r sm

all

agric

ultu

re p

rodu

cers

(TE

CA

) pla

tfor

mA

n FA

O-in

itiat

ed p

latf

orm

tha

t ai

ms

to im

prov

e ac

cess

to

info

rmat

ion

and

know

ledg

e sh

arin

g ab

out

prov

en t

echn

olog

ies

in o

rder

to

enha

nce

adop

tion

in a

gric

ultu

re,

lives

tock

, fish

erie

s an

d fo

rest

ry s

ubse

ctor

s. P

rovi

des

web

-bas

ed c

omm

unic

atio

n to

ols

to b

ette

r do

cum

ent

and

shar

e go

od p

ract

ices

and

cus

tom

ize

its u

se t

o ea

ch u

ser’s

ch

arac

teris

tics.

http

://te

ca.fa

o.or

g/ho

me

Clim

ate-

resi

lient

and

Env

ironm

enta

lly S

ound

A

gric

ultu

re o

r "C

limat

e-sm

art"

Agr

icul

ture

: a

Pack

age

for

Gov

ernm

ent A

utho

ritie

s

C-R

ESA

P o

nlin

e in

form

atio

n pa

ckag

e

FAO

and

Chi

nese

Aca

dem

y of

Agr

icul

ture

Sci

ence

(C

AA

S)

The

on-li

ne in

form

atio

n pa

ckag

e pr

oduc

ed b

y th

e pr

ojec

t of

Enh

ance

d S

trat

egie

s fo

r C

limat

e-R

esili

ent

and

Env

ironm

enta

lly S

ound

Agr

icul

tura

l Pro

duct

ion

(C-R

ESA

P) i

n th

e Ye

llow

Riv

er B

asin

of

Chi

na in

clud

es s

ix m

odul

es c

over

ing:

(1) c

urre

nt a

nd f

utur

e ch

alle

nges

; (2)

clim

ate

varia

bilit

y an

d C

C; (

3) im

pact

s of

CC

on

agro

-eco

syst

ems

and

food

pro

duct

ion;

(4) a

gric

ultu

re, e

nviro

nmen

t an

d he

alth

; (5)

CSA

: tec

hnic

al

cons

ider

atio

ns a

nd e

xam

ples

of

prod

uctio

n sy

stem

s; a

nd (6

) CSA

: sup

port

ing

tool

s an

d po

licie

s.

http

://w

ww

.cpe

sap.

net/

onlin

e-c-

resa

p-in

form

atio

n-pa

ckag

e

Glo

bal F

acili

ty fo

r D

isas

ter

Red

uctio

n an

d R

ecov

ery

(GFD

RR

)G

FDR

R’s

offi

cial

Web

site

, whi

ch w

as e

stab

lishe

d in

200

6 as

a p

artn

ersh

ip o

f 38

co

untr

ies

and

seve

n in

tern

atio

nal o

rgan

izat

ions

com

mitt

ed t

o he

lpin

g de

velo

ping

co

untr

ies

redu

ce t

heir

vuln

erab

ility

to

natu

ral h

azar

ds a

nd a

dapt

to

CC

.

http

://w

ww

.gfd

rr.or

g/gf

drr/

Clim

ate

Impa

ct o

n A

gric

ultu

re (C

LIM

PAG

)A

n FA

O w

eb p

orta

l brin

ging

tog

ethe

r th

e va

rious

asp

ects

and

inte

ract

ions

bet

wee

n w

eath

er, c

limat

e an

d ag

ricul

ture

in t

he c

onte

xt o

f fo

od s

ecur

ity. C

onta

ins

data

, map

s,

met

hodo

logi

es a

nd t

ools

for

bett

er u

nder

stan

ding

and

ana

lysi

s of

the

effe

ct o

f th

e va

riabi

lity

of w

eath

er a

nd c

limat

e on

agr

icul

ture

. Cov

ers

six

them

atic

are

as: a

dvic

e an

d w

arni

ngs,

clim

ate

chan

ge, c

limat

e in

dica

tors

, dat

a an

d m

aps,

hot

spot

s an

d na

tura

l di

sast

ers.

ww

w.fa

o.or

g/nr

/clim

pag/

FAO

Bes

t Pr

actic

es P

orta

lPr

ovid

es a

ser

ies

of s

umm

arie

s th

at in

trod

uce

best

pra

ctic

es in

FA

O’s

are

as o

f ex

pert

ise.

It a

lso

prov

ides

link

s to

fur

ther

res

ourc

es w

ith s

uppo

rtin

g te

chni

cal

info

rmat

ion.

The

pra

ctic

es h

ave

been

div

ided

by

them

e. T

hey

have

bee

n ad

opte

d su

cces

sful

ly in

mor

e th

an o

ne r

egio

n an

d ar

e in

terd

isci

plin

ary,

refl

ectin

g th

e co

mpl

ex

natu

re o

f th

e pr

oble

ms

addr

esse

d.

http

://w

ww

.fao.

org/

best

prac

tices

/inde

x_en

.htm

FAO

Web

site

on

clim

ate-

smar

t ag

ricul

ture

This

Web

site

is p

art

of t

he b

road

er F

AO

offi

cial

Web

site

on

CC

. ht

tp://

ww

w.fa

o.or

g/cl

imat

echa

nge/

clim

ates

mar

t/en

/

Wor

ld O

verv

iew

of

Con

serv

atio

n A

ppro

ache

s an

d Te

chno

logi

es (W

OC

AT) W

eb s

iteTh

e of

ficia

l Web

site

of W

OC

AT, w

hich

is a

n es

tabl

ishe

d gl

obal

net

wor

k of

Soi

l and

W

ater

Con

serv

atio

n (S

WC

) spe

cial

ists

, con

trib

utin

g to

sus

tain

able

land

man

agem

ent

(SLM

).

http

://w

ww

.woc

at.n

et/

107


In order to meet the challenges of food security and climate change, the agriculture sector will need to

implement a number of changes. Agricultural production systems must respond to climate change by

adapting to those changes and reducing net emissions of GHGs. Climate-smart practices are already

implemented at landscape levels which combine adaptation and mitigation activities and use an

ecosystem approach.

This annex outlines options and practices in agriculture and rural development to mitigate and adapt

to climate change. A transition to sustainable agriculture requires investment in three different, but

complementary alternatives: (1) reducing the negative environmental impacts of farming systems; (2)

enhancing existing agricultural systems that have been shown to be environmentally sustainable; and

(3) developing new agricultural systems which focus on providing ecosystem services (IAAASTD).

1. Climate change adaptation

Adaptation efforts require making anticipatory adjustments to prepare for climate change. Two

approaches can be identified: risk management and change management.

Risk management

Disaster risk management (DRM) focuses on preventing, mitigating, preparing for and responding to

shocks in the short and medium term. It serves to handle threats such as increased frequency and

intensity of extreme weather events and changing patterns of pests and diseases. DRM requires

improving local processes and practices for risk reduction and enhancing emergency response and

rehabilitation operations (FAO 2011). Important management systems include:

• Integrated Disaster Risk Management (IDRM), which is a process for comprehensively and credibly

estimating and managing risks from multiple synergistic sources; as such, IDRM presents a

challenge to science and policy communities (Amendola, 2007);

• early warning systems for natural disasters (e.g. tsunami, drought, flood and cyclone);

• community-based, national and transboundary actions for disaster risk reduction (DRR), including

measures such as risk assessment, early warning and sustainable, gender-sensitive practices to

enhance preparedness for climate-related hazards (e.g. floods and droughts) in agriculture, forestry

and fisheries;

• expanded and improved transition and linkages among emergency response, rehabilitation planning

and development;

• integration of “building back better” principles to foster risk mitigation, prevention, preparedness

and adaptation; and

• DRR strategies in agriculture, forestry and fisheries to: prevent food insecurity and reduce

impacts of climate-related hazards and shocks; and promote the integration of DRM into sectoral

development plans and programmes, including into water and land management.

Change management

Change management adds a strategic, long-term objective within policy, legal and research

frameworks. In the agricultural sectors, it consists of several elements, such as legislation, social and

ANNEX 4 Options, good practices and concepts for climate change adaptation and mitigation in agricultural sectors

108

institutional development; policies and planning through changing and diversifying agricultural practices;

and developing agriculture technologies and linking climate change adaptation and mitigation processes

(FAO 2008, 2011).

There are a variety of technologies, practices and processes related to agriculture, forestry, fisheries,

rural energy demands and rural income diversification which aim to increase the resilience of production

systems and livelihoods and adaptation to climate change. Some examples include improving seed

security; including crop relocation; adopting varieties that are drought-resistant, earlier maturing and

pest- and disease-resistant; diversifying crops; and strengthening seed systems. More practices are

listed in Table 4.1, and some are explained in more detail below.

2. Climate change mitigation

Mitigation of climate change involves taking actions to reduce the concentrations of GHGs. Three

mitigation categories can be distinguished:

• GHG emissions can be reduced at the source through adoption of better management practices

and more efficient management of carbon and nitrogen flows. For example, CH4 emissions from

livestock can be reduced by making more efficient use of feeds, and CO2 emissions can be reduced

through decreasing deforestation (including that caused by agriculture expansion) and forest

degradation.

• GHG emissions can be avoided or displaced, such as through improving the energy efficiency

of the agriculture sector or substituting forest products for fossil fuels and other non-renewable,

energy-intensive products.

• GHGs can be removed through sinks. For example, a variety of agricultural management practices

exist to improve the soil and biomass carbon sequestration, such as: (1) improved cropland and

grazing land management practices; (2) rehabilitation of degraded land; and (3) afforestation,

reforestation, forest restoration and agroforestry.

These categories are not mutually exclusive; agricultural practices usually overlap among them.

A variety of management options exist in the agriculture sector to reduce, remove and avoid emissions.

They are listed in Table 4.1 and some specific measures are explained in more detail below.

3. Climate-smart agriculture

Food security and climate change can be addressed together by transforming agriculture and adopting

practices that are “climate-smart”. Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) sustainably increases productivity

and resilience (adaptation), reduces/removes GHGs (mitigation) and enhances achievement of national

food security and development goals (FAO, 2010). A number of agricultural practices combine these

approaches and are already being used by farmers and food producers to reduce GHG emissions, adapt

to climate change and reduce vulnerability. However, knowledge gaps still exist regarding the suitability

and use of the production systems and practices across a wide variety of agro-ecological and socio-

economic contexts and scales. Many practices also have local and temporal benefits or impacts, thus

being very case-specific. Several practices are listed in Table 4.1 and more concrete examples are given

in section 4 below.

109


Table 4.1. Matrix of good adaptation and mitigation practices in the agricultural sectors

Agricultural sector or subsector practices and concepts Adaptation Mitigation

Climate- smart

agriculture

Crops

Improving cropland management x x x

- Integrated nutrient/soil fertility management x x x

- Reduced/zero tillage x x x

- Residue management x x

- Adjusted planting dates and crop varieties x

- Crop relocations x

- Improved land management (erosion control & soil protection through tree planting)

x x x

- Improved rice cultivation x x x

Using perennials and agroforestry x x

Managing organic soils x x x

Restoring degraded land x x x

Improving varieties and strengthening seed systems x x x

Breeding adaptive varieties/developing new varieties x x x

Integrated pest management x x x

Energy crops x

Livestock

Improving pasture management x x x

Improving grazing management x x x

Practising manure management x x x

Addressing land conversion (land management) x x x

Improving feed use x

Controlling enteric fermentation x

Increasing productivity x

Breeding adaptive species x

Practising effective disease control x

Forestry

Agroforestry x x x

Afforestation, reforestation and forest restoration x x x

Sustainable forest management and use practices x x x

Integrated fire management x

Reduction of deforestation and forest degradation x

Managing forest biodiversity x x

Enhancing forest health and vitality to reduce vulnerability x x

Intensifying fire management systems x

Adaptive management practices x

110

Managing harvested wood product x

Improving tree species to increase biomass productivity and carbon sequestration x

Fisheries

Improving energy efficiency x

Decreasing use of fish meal and fish oil feeds x

Lowering post-harvest losses x

Increasing waste recycling x

Reducing excessive fishing capacity x

Increasing feeding efficiency x

Practising carbon capture and storage (sea beds, phytoplankton and blue carbon) x

Assessing renewable energy potential x

Integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) x

Breeding adaptive species x

Diversifying species x

Better managing water quantity and quality x

Natural resource (i.e.land and water) management

Practising sustainable land management x x x

Rehabilitating degraded lands x x x

Conserving peat lands and wetlands for reducing emissions and increasing soil carbon sequestration

x x x

Integrated water resources management x x x

Improving water management for paddy fields for reducing CH4 emission x x x

Improving irrigation performance and water productivity x x x

Improving drainage and flood control x

Harvesting rainwater x

Using water storage and conservation techniques x

Practising water reuse x x x

Using desalination x

Cross subsector

Integrated crop-livestock management x x x

Fish-crop systems (e.g. fish and rice systems) x

Integrated food-energy systems x x x

Using early warning and information systems for tsunami, drought and food risks x

Developing monitor and control systems for animal and human disease risks x

Conducting DRM x

Advisory services/extension

Developing supporting technology x x x

Improving access to climate information x

Improving communication for extension x x

Developing participative research to respond to needs of producers in the context of climate change

x x

111


Post-harvest

Building capacity of farmers, traders and other stakeholders in post-harvest handling practices

x x

Providing advice and training on the design and proper management of post-harvest-specific infrastructure

x x x

Developing effective waste/ by-product management strategies (e.g. composting, feed) x x

Using sustainable biomass residue for bioenergy generation x x

Using local and renewable raw material to build storage infrastructure x x

Supporting farmers in developing commercial strategies (e.g. avoid selling stocks at a low price and buying later at high prices)

x

Value chain development

Efficiently using resources (e.g. water and nutrients) (i.e. reuse, reduce, recycle) with closed loop systems, especially for processing/transformation

x x

Improving storage facilities for harvest x x x

Risk management through, for example, insurance x x

Improving energy efficiency x x

Valuing and using by-products originating during the processing (for energy/fertilizers use)

x x

Producing renewable packaging x x

4. Examples of good practice options and concepts

This section presents more information about different management practices in agriculture. Depending

on the specific circumstances, some can provide “win-win-win” solutions, i.e. increase productivity and

resilience and lower emissions.

Conservation agriculture

(Sources: FAO, 2011 (Save and Grow); TerrAfrica, 2011; FAO, 2010 Integrated Crop Management Vol.12-

2010 - Green manure/cover crops and crop rotation in conservation agriculture on small farms)

Definition: Conservation agriculture (CA) is a farming system that conserves, improves and makes

more efficient use of natural resources through integrated management of soil, water and biological

resources. It is a way to combine profitable agricultural production with environmental concerns

and sustainability. The three fundamental principles behind the CA concept are: (1) minimum soil

disturbance; (2) permanent soil cover; and (3) crop rotation. Each of the principles can serve as an entry

point to the technology; however, only the simultaneous application of all three results in full benefits.

CA covers a wide range of agricultural practices based on no-till (also known as zero tillage), including

within well-defined limitations high disturbance such as strip-till. These require direct drilling of crop

seeds into cover crops or mulch. Weeds are suppressed by mulch and / or cover crops and need to be

further controlled either through herbicide application or manual or mechanical (e.g. with a knife roller)

weeding.

Applicability: CA has been proven to work in a variety of agro-ecological zones and farming systems:

high or low rainfall areas; degraded soils; multiple cropping systems; and systems with labour

shortages or low external-input agriculture. CA has good potential for spread in dry environments

because of its water-saving ability, though the major challenge here is to grow sufficient vegetation to

provide soil cover.

112

Resilience to climate variability: CA increases tolerance to changes in temperature and rainfall

including incidences of drought and flooding.

Main benefits: CA is considered a major component of a “new green revolution” in sub-Saharan Africa

which will: help to make intensive farming sustainable through increased crop yields/yield reliability

and reduced labour requirements; cut fossil fuel needs through reduced use of machines; decrease

agrochemical contamination of the environment through reduced reliance on mineral fertilizers; and

reduce GHG emissions, minimize runoff and soil erosion and improve fresh water supplies. CA can thus

increase food security; reduce off-site damage; reduce foreign exchange required to purchase fuel and

agrochemicals; and create employment by producing CA equipment locally. The potential to mitigate

and to adapt to climate change is high.

For specific references on CA and climate change:

• Proceedings of the FAO/CTIC Conservation Agriculture Carbon Offset Consultation 28-30 October,

2008 http://www.fao.org/ag/ca/carbonconsult.html

• Soil organic carbon accumulation and greenhouse gas emission reductions from conservation

agriculture: a literature review (Corsi, S., Friedrich, T., Kassam, A., Pisante, M. & Moraes Sà, J.); FAO

Integrated Crop Management Series (AGP), 2012 (forthcoming)

• Carbon monitoring on-farm assessment in no-till fields and mapping scaling up, University of Ponta

Grossa/FAO (forthcoming)

• Soil C-sequestration in no-till cropping systems in subtropical and tropical agro-ecosystems in Brazil,

University Ponta Grossa/FAO, (forthcoming)

Agroforestry

(Sources: TerrAfrica, 2011; FAO, 2011 (Save and Grow), FAO, 2010 (Climate-Smart Agriculture))

Definition: Agroforestry systems deliberately integrate the cultivation of woody perennials with crop

or livestock production. It is increasingly practised on degraded lands, often with perennial legumes.

The integration can be either in a spatial mixture (e.g. crops with trees) or in a temporal sequence

(e.g. improved fallows, rotation). There is a huge variety of different systems and they range from very

simple to very complex, including: alley cropping, farming with trees on contours, boarder planting,

live fences, multi-storey cropping, shifting cultivation cropping, intercropping, multiple cropping, bush

and tree fallows, parkland systems and home gardens.Many of them are traditional land-use systems.

CA is often combined with agroforestry and with tree cropping systems, which are practised around

the world. Agroforestry is thus not a single technology but covers the broad concept of trees being

integrated into cropping and livestock systems in order to achieve multifunctionality.

Applicability:Agroforestry is practised around the world in various forms, their wide variety allowing for

use in different ecological zones and for different purposes.

Resilience to climate variability: An agroforestry system is as tolerant to climate variability as are the

components – tree, crop and/or livestock – of the system. In general, however, agroforestry systems

will be more resilient than simpler, non-integrated systems because the tree component can increase

the resilience of the agricultural system to ecologic and economic changes.

Main benefits: Agroforestry systems have great potential to diversify food and income sources, to

improve land productivity and to reduce, stop and reverse land degradation. Trees/forests in the farming

system can increase a family’s total income, reduce risk of crop/livestock failure and provide essential

products for home consumption. Their ecological functions (e.g. providing a favourable microclimate,

providing permanent cover, improving soil fertility and structure, increasing water infiltration, providing

protection against winds and providing shade for livestock) may contribute significantly to agricultural

production. Agroforestry systems offer mitigation benefits through sequestering and storing

atmospheric carbon and, in some cases, through substitution effects (e.g. fuelwood substituting for

fossil fuels). The adaptation and mitigation potential depends on the agroforestry system applied.

113


Integrated crop-livestock management and integrated food energy systems

(Sources: TerrAfrica, 2011, FAO, 2011 (Save and Grow); FAO, 2010 (An international consultation on

integrated crop-livestock systems for development. The Way Forward for Sustainable Production

Intensification); FAO, 2010 (Making Integrated Food-Energy Systems Work for People and Climate- An

Overview)

Definition: In integrated crop-livestock management (ICLM), crops and livestock interact to create

synergies, making optimal use of resources. The waste products of one component serve as a resource

for the other: manure from livestock is used to enhance crop production (i.e. improve soil fertility), while

crop residues and by-products (e.g. grass weeds and processing waste) are supplementary feed for the

animals. Grass – and prunings from agroforestry trees – grown on contour conservation barriers, as well

as nitrogen-fixing legumes grown under CA systems, are further potential sources of fodder. Livestock

are integral to many cropping systems in Africa and Asia; they provide traction and transport, as well as

meat, milk and hides. Improvements to the livestock component of integrated systems include upgraded

intensive pastures through shifting night enclosures (kraals / bomas), fodder planting/hay making and

stall feeding (e.g. “cut-and-carry”and “zero grazing”) in the more humid areas. Various factors influence

the type and effectiveness of crop-livestock interactions, including socio-economic parameters (e.g.

access to land, labour and capital) and ecological conditions (e.g. temperature and rainfall).

Integrated food energy systems (IFES) combine the production of feedstock for food and for energy

on the same land, through multiple-cropping patterns or agroforestry systems and can be combined

with livestock and/or fish production. It can also adopt agro-industrial technology (such as gasification

or anaerobic digestion) that allows maximum utilization of all by-products and encourages recycling and

economic utilization of residues. Both ICLM and IFES can function at various scales and configurations,

from small-scale systems that operate at the village or household level mainly for the purpose of self-

sufficiency, to large-scale systems adjusted for industrial operations but involving and benefiting small-

scale farmers (FAO, 2010 IFES).

Applicability: ICLM systems and IFES are common in semi-arid and subhumid (and humid) areas

as well as in tropical/temperate highlands. Given the growing demand for livestock products, the

subhumid areas are predicted to have the best potential to provide most of this increase. ICLM can be

applied in many areas, but needs to be adapted and modified to prevailing conditions. IFES systems are

very variable and can be found in all climatic zones.

Resilience to climate variability: ICLM systems and IFES tend to be relatively well-adapted to climatic

variability because of their diversity and flexibility – especially when soil and water conservation/water

harvesting and agroforestry are integrated into the overall system.

Main benefits: Well-managed ICLM and IFES: (a) increase crop yields; (b) improve soil biological

activity and health; (c) build up fertility through nutrient recycling and planting leguminous crops and

trees; (d) reduce erosion; (e) intensify land use, improving profits and financial resilience; (f) increase

biodiversity; and (g) improve livestock productivity and health. Including animals in farm systems

increases sustainability and reduces reliance on external inputs. The risks of climate variability can

be minimized through the diversification of the farming systems. Carbon storage can be high: in one

case from West Africa, soil receiving manure for five years had 1.18 t/ha more carbon present than

soil treated with plant residues alone (Woodfine, 2009 and FAO, 2007). Nevertheless, the carbon

budget of such systems depends on livestock management, because of methane emissions. Improved

manure management can reduce methane emissions by capturing the gas in covered manure-storage

facilities (biogas collectors) which can offset the methane partially emitted by livestock. Furthermore,

IFES reduce pressure on land use through intercropping of food and energy feedstocks and/or use

of residues such as food, feed or fuel. Integrated systems thus reduce poverty and malnutrition and

strengthen environmental sustainability.

114

Rainwater harvesting

(Sources: TerrAfrica, 2011; FAO, 1991 (Water Harvesting); FAO 2002, Crops and Drops))

Definition: Rainwater harvesting (RWH) refers to all technologies where rainwater is collected to

make it available for agricultural production or domestic purposes. RWH aims to minimize effects of

seasonal variations in water availability because of droughts and dry periods and enhance the reliability

of agricultural production. An RWH system usually consists of three components: (1) a catchment/

collection area which produces runoff because the surface is impermeable or infiltration is low; (2) a

conveyance system through which the runoff is directed (e.g. by bunds, ditches or channels, although

this is not always necessary); and (3) a storage system (target area) where water is accumulated or

held for use – in the soil, pits, ponds, tanks or dams. When water is stored in the soil – and used for

plant production there – RWH often needs additional measures to increase infiltration in this zone and

to reduce evaporation loss, for example by mulching. Furthermore, soil fertility needs to be improved

by composting/manuring or micro-dosing with inorganic fertilizers. Commonly used RWH techniques

can be divided into microcatchments collecting water within the field and macro-catchments collecting

water from a larger catchment further away.

Applicability: RWH is applicable in semi-arid areas with common seasonal droughts. It is mainly used

for supplementary watering of cereals, vegetables, fodder crops and trees but also to provide water for

domestic and stock use, and sometimes for fish ponds. RWH can be applied on highly degraded soils.

Resilience to climate variability: RWH reduces risks of production failure because of water shortage

associated with rainfall variability in semi-arid regions. It also helps cope with more extreme events,

enhances aquifer recharge and enables crop growth (including trees) in areas where rainfall is normally

insufficient or unreliable.

Main benefits: RWH is beneficial because of increased water availability, reduced risk of production

failure, enhanced crop and livestock productivity, improved water-use efficiency, access to water (for

drinking and irrigation), reduced off-site damage (including flooding), reduced erosion and improved

surface and groundwater recharge. Improved rainwater management contributes to food security and

health through households having access to sufficient, safe supplies of water for domestic use.

Pastoralism and rangeland management

(Sources: TerrAfrica, 2011; FAO, 2009 (Review of evidence on drylands pastoral systems and climate

change)

Definition: Pastoralism and rangeland management refer to extensive production of livestock using

pastures and browse, and is mainly found in arid and semi-arid areas. In sub-Saharan Africa, the term

“pastoralism” is usually associated with the use of common property resources subject to some group

agreements rather than “open access”. “Ranching”, on the other hand, implies individual, privatized land

ownership. Pastoralism is based on open grazing lands (e.g. savannas, grasslands, prairies, steppes and

shrublands) managed through herding. Pastoralists adopt opportunistic land-use strategies; that is, they

follow resources of grazing/browsing and water and destock in times of drought (often de facto through

livestock mortality rather than stock sales), but have rapid-response post-drought restocking strategies

(commonly based first on the high reproduction rates among indigenous sheep and goats). There

are many types and degrees of pastoral mobility, which vary according to environmental conditions

or the given household situation. Mobility can be either seasonal, regular between two well-defined

pasture areas or following erratic rain. It is rarely the same from one year to another. Movement is

not necessarily undertaken only for resource-based reasons; it can be for trade or because of conflict.

Pastoral activities have conventionally been considered uneconomic and ecologically destructive.

Current thinking increasingly recognizes these strategies as economically viable, environmentally

sustainable and compatible with development. The challenge is to adapt traditional pastoralism to

today’s changing environmental conditions. Opportunities include: establishment of feed banks;

115


improvement of herd composition and health; a more dense distribution of wells, collection and storage

of surface water by, for example, “charco dams”; adaptive grazing; land-use plans; access to markets;

and empowerment.

Applicability: Grasslands – as the basis for livestock production – cover some 70 percent of the global

land area. It is a production system found in marginal, dry lands with relatively low inherent productivity

because of aridity, altitude, temperature and/or a combination of all factors. Pastoralism is becoming

increasingly constrained because of weakening of traditional governance over communal natural

resources, restricted mobility, sedentarization, boundaries and advancing agriculture.

Resilience to climate variability: By definition, pastoralism is based on continuous adaptation to

highly uncertain environments, especially climate. Traditional pastoralism has lost and continues to

lose flexibility and options for coping with drought (e.g. loss in mobility because of encroachment of

cropping and growing human populations), which leads to increased risk.

Main benefits: Mobile herding systems combine economic production in marginalized land and

environmental protection (biodiversity) of vulnerable ecosystems, which have been modified over time

by pastoralism itself, improved food security and livelihoods of marginalized and disadvantaged people.

The vast areas of degraded rangeland play a vital role in sequestering carbon. Dry soils are better longer

term sinks for C than soils in more humid environments.

Other examples

Livestock manure management:The efficient treatment of manure can reduce emissions and raise the sector’s productivity. For example,

the anaerobic digestion of manure stored as a liquid or slurry can lower methane emissions and

produce useful energy (e.g. biogas), while composting solid manures can lower emissions and produce

useful organic amendments for soils. The substitution of manure for inorganic fertilizers can also lower

emissions and improve soil condition and productivity. The reintegration of livestock with crop activities,

the strategic location of intensive livestock production units and enhanced processing techniques to

reduce production losses are also effective strategies for boosting productivity (FAO, 2010).

Rice production systems: A number of methods and practices for rice production can be adopted to address climate change

challenges. For example, production systems are adapted by altering cropping patterns, planting dates

and farm management techniques. Embankments have been built to protect rice farms from floods

and new drought- and submergence-tolerant varieties of rice are being produced and distributed

by government institutions and the private sector. In addition, many farmers are diversifying their

production systems, growing other cereals and vegetables and rearing fish and animals (such as pigs

and chickens). The residues and waste from each system are being composted and used on the land,

thereby reducing the need for external inputs. This diversification has increased incomes, improved

nutrition, built resilience to shocks and minimized financial risks. The development of advanced

modeling techniques, mapping the effect of climate change on rice-growing regions and providing crop

insurance are other examples of managing risks and reducing vulnerability.

Research on rice cultivation has identified that emissions mainly occur in the few months of the year

when the ground is fully waterlogged. A more integrated approach to rice paddy irrigation and fertilizer

application has therefore been found to substantially reduce emissions. The use of ammonium sulphate

supplements have also been used to promote soil microbial activity and reduce methanogens. In

addition, urea deep placement (UDP) technology has been developed where urea, in the form of super

granules or small briquettes, is placed under the soil near the plant roots and out of the floodwater

where it is susceptible to loss (FAO, 2011). Furthermore, integrated fish-rice farming is environmentally

and ecologically sound and can benefit farmers in terms of a higher income. Energy and nutrients are

116

recycled more efficiently through the food chain, creating a stable and highly productive system. Fish

feeding and swimming activities generally improve the fertility of the soil. The integration of different

systems can reduce the vulnerability to climate change, as mentioned under the ICLM and IFES

systems.

Agro-industry:Within the agro-industrial sector, the energy efficiency of the production chain can be targeted and

contributions can be made to reducing GHG emissions. In many cases, this involves modernizing

energy-efficient and centralized machinery and infrastructure. Furthermore, strengthening agro-industry

through sustainable ethanol production, electricity and thermal heat (i.e. through biomass production)

can provide potential sources of energy. An example is the Furatena Energy Efficiency World Bank

project in Colombia, which aims to contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions from the panela

(brown sugar) sector by developing a modern, energy-efficient and centralized manufacturing facility

that will replace small, artisan manufacture.

117


1. Climate change and disaster risks

The world has witnessed an alarming increase in the frequency and intensity of natural disasters. Each

year from 2000 to 2005, natural disasters, on average, affected 240 million people, claiming 80,000

lives and US$80 billion in property3 losses. About 98 percent of natural disasters were climate-related,

predominantly floods and windstorms, followed by droughts.4 The number of hydro-meteorological

disasters, such as droughts, floods, tropical storms and wild fires, increased from 195 per year during

1987–1998 to 365 per year during 2000–2006.5 A number of factors contributed to the increase in

disaster frequency, intensity and losses, including increased climate variations and extreme weather

events associated with climate change, population growth, unplanned urbanization, improper natural

resource management and environmental degradation.6

The IPCC 4th assessment report summarized impacts of climate change in the past decades,

including: increased number of drought-affected areas since the 1970s, particularly in the Sahel, the

Mediterranean, Southern Africa and parts of Southern Asia; more frequent heat waves over most

land areas; increased frequency of heavy precipitation events over most areas; increased incidence

of extremely high sea levels; and increased intense tropical cyclone activity in the North Atlantic since

about 1970. Future major hydrometeorological disaster risks are also projected, including:

• widespread droughts, which will decrease the areas suitable for agriculture, the length of growing

seasons and yield potential (particularly along the margins of semi-arid and arid areas) and increase

water stress for about 75 to 250 million people by 2020;

• more frequent and intensified floods, which may exceed historical parameters and affect areas that

have not developed coping capacities;

• tropical cyclones, which will directly increase hazard exposure in existing cyclone hotspots and

create new hotspots; and

• sea level rise, which will severely affect low-lying coastal areas and heavily populated mega-deltas in

South, East and Southeast Asia.7

Agricultural sectors are vulnerable to natural disasters. About 40 percent of world food crises in 2007

were mainly due to natural causes.8 The projected impacts of climate change will further alter the

basic elements of agro-ecosystems, including temperature, rainfall, land and water availability and

biodiversity, and add additional risks to agricultural development, food security and rural livelihoods. At

the same time, maladaptation and inappropriate development interventions (e.g. over-exploitation of

water resources, increased farming in high-risk areas, large area mono-cropping and deforestation) also

may increase vulnerability to disaster risks. It is therefore necessary to integrate disaster risk reduction

(DRR) with climate change adaptation in agricultural and rural development to be better prepared to

manage more frequent and intense and less predictable disaster risks.

3 CRED, March 2007, the data source-EM-DAT.4 CRED Crunch, Issue No 12, April 2008.5 CRED, UCL, UNISDR, Annual Statistical Review: Numbers and Trends, 2006, Brussels 2007. 6 FAO, Climate change and disaster risk management, High-level conference on food security: the challenges of climate change and

bioenergy, 3-5 June 2008, Rome. 7 The IPCC 4th assessment report, 2007.8 FAO Approach to disaster risk management-preliminary baseline assessment, April 2009.

ANNEX 5 Framework and options for disaster risk reduction in agricultural sectors

118

2. The concept and approach of disaster risk reduction

The United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) defines DRR as the concept

and practice of reducing disaster risks through systematic efforts to analyse and manage the causal

factors of disasters, including through reduced exposure to hazards, lessened vulnerability of people

and property, wise management of land and the environment, and improved preparedness for adverse

events.9 It refers to the conceptual framework of elements considered with the possibilities to minimize

vulnerabilities and disaster risks throughout a society – to prevent or limit the adverse impacts of

hazards – within the broad context of sustainable development.10

Disaster risk is determined by the nature, intensity and frequency of hazards and the vulnerability to

hazard. Hazards can result from natural causes – geological (e.g. earthquake, tsunami, volcanic activity),

hydrometeorological (e.g. floods, tropical storm, drought) or biological (e.g. epidemic diseases) – or

from human causes, such as climate change, fires, mining of non-renewable resources, environmental

degradation and bad technologies. Vulnerability refers to the characteristics and circumstances of

a community, system or asset that make it susceptible to the damaging effects of a hazard. The

recognition of vulnerability as a key element in the risk notation is accompanied by a growing interest

in understanding and enhancing the positive capacities of people to cope with the impact of hazards.

These coping capacities are closely linked to the concept of resilience, which is defined as the ability

of a system, community or society exposed to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover

from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through the preservation and

restoration of its essential basic structures and functions. Box 5.1 illustrates some basic terminologies

defined by UNISDR.

Box 5.1: Basic definitions

Hazard: A dangerous phenomenon, substance, human activity or condition that may cause loss of life, injury or other health impacts, property damage, loss of livelihoods and services, social and economic disruption, or environmental damage.

Disaster: A serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society involving widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses and impacts, which exceeds the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its ownresources.

Vulnerability: The characteristics and circumstances of a community, system or asset that make it susceptible to the damaging effects of a hazard.

Risk: The combination of the probability of an event and its negative consequences.

Disaster risk: The potential disaster losses, in lives, health status, livelihoods, assets and services, which could occur to a particular community or a society over some specified future time period.

Disaster risk management: The systematic process of using administrative directives, organizations

and operational skills and capacities to implement strategies, policies and improved coping capacities in order to lessen the adverse impacts of hazards and the possibility of disaster.

Relief/response: Provision of emergency services and public assistance during or immediately after a disaster in order to save lives, reduce health impacts, ensure public safety and meet the basic subsistence needs of the people affected.

Disaster risk reduction: The concept and practice of reducing disaster risks through systematic efforts to analyse and manage the causal factors of disasters, including through reduced exposure to hazards, lessened vulnerability of people and property, wise management of land and the environment and improved preparedness for adverse events.

Resilience/resilient: The ability of a system, community or society exposed to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through the preservation and restoration of its essential basic structures and functions.

Source: UNISDR Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction, 2009.

A comprehensive approach to reducing disaster risks is set out in the United Nations-endorsed Hyogo

Framework for Action (HFA), adopted in 2005. The UNISDR system provides a vehicle for cooperation

9 UNISDR, Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction, 200910 FAO, Disaster risk management systems analysis – a guide book, 2008

119


among governments, organizations and civil society actors to assist in the implementation of the HFA.

The HFA identified the following five priority areas for action:

1. Ensure that DRR is a national and a local priority with a strong institutional basis for

implementation;

2. Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning;

3. Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels;

4. Reduce the underlying risk factors; and

5. Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels.

Figure 5.1 illustrates the overall framework of disaster risk management (DRM), which shows a

continuum of an ongoing process of interrelated actions, including DRR before disasters, response

during and immediately after disasters and post-disaster rehabilitation. The major focus of DRR is

prevention, mitigation and preparedness. Elements of the framework are further elaborated in Box 5.2.

Figure 5.1: Disaster risk management framework (DRMF)

Prevention Mitigation Preparedness Response Rehabilitation Transition

DRR planning and monitoring

Multi-hazard risk and vulnerability assessment

Multi-hazard early warning system

Preparedness for response

Livelihood recovery and rehabilitation

Infrastructure rehabilitation

Mainstreaming DRM in development

Assessing damage/loss and planning recovery

Major hazard/disaster

Smaller hazard/disaster

DRR initiatives

Legal and institutional arrangements for DRM

Promotion of hazard proof technologies, land use planning,disaster management information system and awareness-raising on DRR,

risk transfer, scaling-up community-based DRR

Relief operations

DRR initiativesNormal economic/social growth pattern

Hazard impacts without DRR initiatives

Hazard impacts with DRR in place

Source: Disaster Risk Management Cycle (DRMC). Diagram (modified from TorqAid; http://www.torqaid.com/default.asp)

120

Box 5.2: Elements of DRM framework

Disaster risk reduction continuum:

• Ongoing development activities – Ongoing DRM aspects in development programmes

• Risk assessment – Diagnostic process to identify the risks that a community faces

• Prevention – Activities to avoid the adverse impact of hazards

• Mitigation – Structural/non-structural measures undertaken to limit the adverse impact

• Preparedness – Activities and measures taken in advance to ensure effective response

• Early warning – Provision of timely and effective information to avoid or reduce risk

Immediate disaster response:

• Evacuation – temporary mass departure of people and property from threatened locations

• Saving people and livelihoods – Protection of people and livelihoods during anemergency

• Immediate assistance – Provision of assistance during or immediately after a disaster

• Assessing damage and loss – Information about impact on assets and loss to production

Post-disaster continuum:

• Ongoing assistance – Continued assistance until a certain level of recovery

• Recovery – Actions taken after a disaster with a view to restoring infrastructure and services

• Reconstruction – Actions taken after a disaster to ensure resettlement/relocation

• Economic & social recovery – Measures taken to normalize the economy and societal living

• Ongoing development activities – Continued actions of development programmes

• Risk assessment – Diagnostic process to identify new risks that communities may face again

Source: FAO, Disaster risk management systems analysis – a guide book, 2008.

3. FAO Framework Programme for DRR

As illustrated in Figure 5.2, the FAO Framework Programme for Disaster Risk Reduction (FP DRR)

includes four integrated thematic pillars, which together address core themes in DRR for the

agricultural sectors. Each pillar makes a direct contribution to one of the priorities for action in the HFA:

• Pillar 1 – Enable the environment: Institutional strengthening and good governance for

DRR in agricultural sectors. This pillar supports the enabling environment of member states

with appropriate legislation, policies and institutional frameworks for DRR in agriculture, livestock,

fisheries/aquaculture, forestry and natural resource management, while strengthening the

institutional capacities to implement these.

• Pillar 2 – Watch to safeguard: Information and early warning systems on food and nutrition

security and transboundary threats. This pillar aims to strengthen and harmonize food and

nutrition security information and early warning systems to better monitor the multiple threats and

inform decision-making in preparedness, response, policy, advocacy and programming.

• Pillar 3 – Prepare to respond: Preparedness for effective response and recovery in agriculture,

livestock, fisheries and forestry. The aim is to strengthen capacities at all levels in preparedness to

improve response to, and recovery from, future threats to food and nutrition security, and to reduce

their potential negative impact on livelihoods.

• Pillar 4 – Build resilience: Prevention, mitigation and building resilience with technologies,

approaches and practices across all agricultural sectors. This pillar addresses the underlying

risks to food and nutrition security and builds the resilience of livelihoods through the application

of technologies, practices and approaches in farming, fisheries/aquaculture, forestry and natural

resource management.11

11 Resilient livelihoods: disaster risk reduction for food and nutrition security – an FAO framework programme, 2011.

121


The FP DRR includes four cross-cutting priorities:

• capacity development, through assistance in technical expertise, technology transfer, services,

practical tools, methodologies, extension, capacity-development training, policy advice, advocacy,

education and awareness-raising;

• knowledge management and communication, through stimulating the generation, documentation,

sharing and application of information and knowledge;

• strategic partnerships, through working through partnerships and alliances at local, national, regional

and global levels; and

• gender equity (i.e. taking into account the differences in women’s and men’s vulnerability to

disasters, as well as their differentiated roles in fostering a culture of resilience and in actively

contributing to building disaster resilience) to ensure that gender concerns, needs and capacities in

DRR are integrated.

Figure 5.2: The four pillars of the FAO Framework Programme on Disaster Risk Reduction

1/ ENABLE THE ENVIRONMENT: Institutional strengthening and good

governance for DRR in agricultural sectors.

Objective: to support the enabling environment of member states, with appropriate legislation, policies and institutional frameworks for disaster risk reduction in agriculture, livestock, fisheries, forestry and natural resource management, and to strengthen the institutional capacities to implement these.

2/ WATCH TO SAFEGUARD:Information and early warning systems on food

and nutrition security and transboundary threats

Objective: to strengthen and harmonize food and nutrition security information and early warning systems to better monitor the multiple threats and inform decision-making in preparedness and response, policy, advocacy and programming.

3/ PREPARE TO RESPOND:Preparedness for effective response and

recovery in agriculture, livestock, fisheries and forestry.

Objective: to strengthen capacities at all levels in preparedness to improve response to, and recovery from, future threats to food & nutrition security, and to reduce their potential negative impact on livelihoods.

4/ BUILD RESILIENCE:Prevention, mitigation and building resilience with technologies, approaches and practices

across all agricultural sectors.

Objective: to reduce the underlying risks to food and nutrition security and build the resilience of livelihoods through the application technologies, practices and approaches in farming, fisheries, forestry and natural resource management.

Four Integrated Thematic

Pillars

HFA P riority#1

HFA P riority#2

HFA Priority#3

HFA P riority#4

122

4. Options and good practices for disaster risk reduction

Agricultural and rural development need to address relevant DRR requirements at different levels,

especially at the local level. Some DRR options and good practices in agricultural sectors are

summarized below. Investment programmes/projects can incorporate and implement these based on

local needs and conditions.

Disaster risk profiling

Disaster risk profiling provides quality assessment and prioritization of hazards, risks and vulnerabilities,

which is the prerequisite of DRM planning and implementation. Disaster risk profiling can be realized

through the following practices:

• hazard assessment: identify the typology, frequency and potential severity of hazards;

• hazard mapping: describe the distribution of hazards across geographical areas and vulnerable groups;

• vulnerability assessment: identify the key factors of vulnerability and local coping and adaptive

strategies and capacities;

• institutional mapping: assess the role of agricultural sectors and institutions in DRM and their

linkages with other sectors and institutions;

• needs assessment: identify major gaps and requirements in DRM in agricultural sectors, including

gaps in national and local policies, legislation and institutional capacity.

Promoting prevention and mitigation

Options for disaster prevention and mitigation focus on reducing underlying risk factors. This normally

requires a medium- to long-term planning framework that can allow for the adjustment of institutional

mechanisms and the integration of appropriate measures in sectoral development policies and

planning. It includes structural and non-structural measures to avoid or limit the adverse impact of

potential natural hazards, including:

• Legislation and policies: National legislation on DRR is a basic requirement. It would normally

include a national act establishing and mandating a national authority for DRR and an interministerial

commission/committee for policy-making and coordination on DRR. It would specify responsibilities

and tasks of relevant public and private stakeholders in the DRR process, as well as a coordination

mechanism and procedures. Some examples of legislation and policy issues for the agricultural

sector are listed in Box 5.3.

Box 5.3: Legislation and policy issues for DRR in agricultural sectors

• Risk reduction standards for agricultural infrastructure and construction • Clear definitions about declaring emergency situations and phasing of emergencies • Sector development policies to define priorities and strategies for risk reduction• Land-use planning and zoning • Frameworks to control land degradation and combat desertification • Strategies and policies for natural resources management • Transboundary agreements for watershed management and control of animal and plant disease

FAO, Disaster Risk Management Systems Analysis, 2009

• Institutional capacities and coordination: This measure includes ensuring:

– proper representation of agricultural sectors in national and local DRR coordination mechanisms

and institutions;

– clear definition of the technical contributions and capacities of agriculture departments, research

institutes and extension services to DRR systems; and

– close linkages with other relevant line departments, such as water affairs, meteorological

services, environment and natural resources.

123


FAO published a guide book on DRM systems analysis in 2009, which provides a set of tools to assess

existing structures and capacities of national, district and local institutions with responsibilities for

DRM in order to improve the effectiveness of DRM systems and the integration of DRM concerns into

development planning, with particular reference to disaster-prone areas and vulnerable sectors and

population groups. A seven-step diagnostic study process is introduced in the publication (see Box 5.4).

Box 5.4: Seven-step diagnostic process for disaster risk management systems analysis

1. Conduct initial preparation and literature review2. Hold inception meeting and field work planning meetings 3. Prepare national-level institutional profile 4. Prepare provincial/regional/district institutional profile 5. Prepare profile of the community and local institutions6. Analyse data analysis and write draft report 7. Hold wrap-up meeting with in-country stakeholders and finalize report

Source: FAO, Disaster Risk Management Systems Analysis, 2009.

• Technical interventions: Technical options can be implemented through sectoral agencies in

partnership with national and local-level DRR (see Box 5.5).

Box 5.5: Technical interventions for DRR in the agricultural sectors

Agricultural measures • Appropriate crop selection and animal breeding• Improved cropping systems and cultivation methods• Post-harvest management• Pest control• Sustainable water management and water conservation techniques • Afforestation/reforestation and agroforestry

Infrastructural measures• Raised seeds beds, dams, wind breaks, fire breaks• Proofing of storage facilities and livestock shelters• Improved design, construction and maintenance of water infrastructure• Safe rescue places/platforms and strategic animal fodder reserves• Flood-safe seed and fodder stocking infrastructure

Early warning systems• Informing farmers about what they are facing and what they can do• Communicating in a way that is understandable by vulnerable people• Transmitting through media accessible to rural communities• Including medium- and long-range forecasts to allow for contingency cropping plans

Socio-economic measures• Risk sharing and transfer instruments (e.g. crop/livestock/fishery insurance, compensation and calamity funds,

microcredit and cash transfers)• Livelihood diversification (e.g. new agriculture activities and non-farm activities)

Training and awareness-raising• Awareness-raising and training for those who might be affected and those who will be providing support to the

affected communities• Dissemination and demonstration of good practices• Mock exercises to simulate disasters and individual responsibilities and tasks

Source: FAO’s Role in Disaster Risk Reduction, F. Battista, S. Bass and F. Rolle, 2009.

124

Preparedness

Preparedness measures are short-term, preparatory activities taken directly in advance of an

announced or expected hazard to prepare for and reduce its effects and potential impacts. Key

components of disaster preparedness are described below:

• Dissemination of hazard alerts and early warning messages at the local level: This involves

defining national and local responsibilities and creating the capacities to ensure immediate outreach

of the early warning messages to the most vulnerable households and people living in marginal or

remote areas. In this effort, local DRR groups or farmers’ cooperatives and associations have proven

to be suitable mechanisms to assist.

• Contingency planning: Effective response during an emergency relies on the existence of ready-

made and tested contingency plans, which should be available at national, provincial and local levels.

Contingency plans at different levels should be complementary and ensure that appropriate linkages

are established to coordinate and support action along lines of command. Contingency planning

measures are normally associated with life-saving measures (e.g. identification of evacuation

procedures and safety sites and search and rescue); however, they may also be a key instrument

for saving equipment, livestock, seeds and other agricultural inputs. Contingency planning in

agricultural sectors includes: contingency crop planning (e.g. changing cropping patterns to match

late/early rains, using seed and crop varieties tolerant to drought, flood and salinity and having

famine reserve crops); conservation of forage/fodder; moving of animals to safer grounds; plans for

vaccinating livestock exposed to flooding; creation of emergency seed procurement networks; and

development of safety-at-sea measures for fishermen.

• Household-level preparedness: Communities and households are the first line of response in any

emergency. Many disasters occur on a small/regular basis, unnoticed by national authorities and

the international community. Community-led initiatives play a major role in immediate response,

such as saving lives and moving people to safer ground, providing emergency food and shelter;

and engaging in recovery, such as mutual support in reconstruction work. Examples of community/

household preparedness measures include: cleaning drainage channels, pruning trees exposed to

hurricanes, bringing animals and seeds to secure places; preparing buffer capacities of food, fodder

and water for humans and animals; providing basic medical/veterinary packages; establishing stand-

by agreements for the use of equipment and machinery (e.g. water pumps and fishing boats) for

rescue operations; and emergency harvesting, if the season and time allows.

5. Issues deserving special attention

In mainstreaming DRR and climate change adaptation into development planning and investment,

some issues deserve special attention, such as:

• improving risk and vulnerability assessments by combining historical trends with climate change

scenario modelling;

• setting realistic disaster prevention standards according to local economic and technical capacities

and short-term and longer-term development needs;

• considering longer-term perspectives to address secondary impacts of disasters, such as wider

scale migrations and their implications for conflicts and security issues;

• investing in furthering preparedness so all levels (i.e. local communities, governments, regional and

international organizations) can respond more effectively to humanitarian consequences of climate

change;

• revising land-use planning schemes to include evolving hazard profiles and subsidized relocation

schemes in high-risk areas;

125


• strengthening sustainable natural resource management practices for water, land, fisheries and

forestry which constitute the baseline for all risk reduction and adaptation options;

• investing in management and dissemination of climate information tailored to different social groups

in different areas;

• ensuring that food security contingency plans consider global and local climate and market shocks

and diversified responses (e.g. production, trade, stockpiling, food and cash transfers);

• increasing investment in social protection and risk transfer, since the increase in frequency of

hazards may erode people’s abilities to recover and the increase in magnitude of hazards will result

in additional pressure on national social protection systems and humanitarian aid;

• formulating better communication and awareness-raising methodologies and strategies to ensure

that climate information reaches end users and that communities and policy-makers are mobilized at

all levels to initiate preventive action;

• building stronger coordination mechanisms to avoid overlap, increase efficiency and improve

targeting and quality of interventions; and

• designing and implementing DRR as an integral part of the continuum cycle of DRM, rather than as

a separate phase before disasters.

126

Challenges in identifying indicators

The project preparation step of developing a results framework – or M&E framework – and related

monitoring arrangements is an opportunity to review previous project design steps and verify whether the

proposed project strategy is comprehensive. The project’s results framework characterizes the fundamental

logic to achieve the project development objective, and is used to monitor performance throughout the

project. It defines the results chain – from activity to output, outcome and impact – as shown in Figure 6.1

(by OECD/GIZ). To measure project progress and achievement, it is necessary to identify suitable indicators

and clarify related baselines, targets and means of verification for each of the results at different levels;

this forms the core part of the project M&E framework. Indicators should, wherever possible, be SMART.12

Incorporating climate change considerations in the project framework adds complexity to identifying,

monitoring and evaluating project indicators because of the following reasons:

Challengesindistinguishingadaptationinterventionsfromdevelopmentactivities: Many

adaptive options are the same as those for normative development, but with longer-term perspectives

under changed climate boundary conditions. It is not easy to clearly distinguish these two types of

interventions, especially when adaptation is not designed and implemented as a stand-alone project

or component, but incorporated into various development activities. This is part of the reason why

developed countries are reluctant to fund adaptation activities in developing countries. The difference

between normative development activities and climate change interventions will mainly be distinguished

by indicators at outcome and impact levels. Therefore, indicators for adaptation interventions should

reflect achievements in addressing additional impacts induced by climate change, such as the capacity to

cope with increased scope, frequency and intensity of natural disasters in the longer term.

Uncertaintyofclimatechangeimpacts: When there are no local climate change impact projections

or when they are not certain, a project may adopt a general “non-regret” approach (providing that a

sound cost-benefit analysis is done). Under such circumstances, quantitative analysis and evaluation of

climate change-related interventions may be limited, and relevant qualitative indicators may be needed

to complement the limited quantitative ones.

Unavailabilitytoevaluatethelong-termimpacts:All investment projects/programmes have clearly

defined durations, normally of several years. However, climate change-related interventions mainly aim

at longer-term objectives that require decades – far beyond the project cycle. Thus, some expected

outcomes and impacts may not be evaluable at the time of project M&E.

Complexityofclimatechangeissues: Climate change objectives link together many issues

(e.g.health, social turmoil, conflicts, migration and cross-sector issues), some of which are not usually

considered in a typical agriculture development project. However, these can considerably affect the

project’s impact and need to be taken into account in M&E.

12 SMART indicators are one that are: Specific, i.e. they have a strong correlation with the results to be measured; Measurable, i.e. the needed data are accessible with sources of verification in the logframe; Accurate, i.e. they arecalculated on the basis of reasonably reliable data, obtained by means of adequate sampling approaches, avoiding excessive bias or statistical error; Realistic, i.e. it is possible to collect the data with available resources, based on the principle of "proportionate analysis"; and Timely, i.e. changes can be monitored according to the time-lag between the action and the expected change (European Commission, 2009).

ANNEX 6 Identifying climate change-related indicators

127


GapsinMRVofmitigationinterventions: Technical gaps still exist in monitoring, reporting and

verification (MRV) of climate change mitigation effects in the agriculture sector, especially in smallholder

farming systems. This is why mitigation in agriculture, especially soil carbon sequestration, currently is

left out by major climate change financing windows. Relevant M&E approaches and methods need to

be identified and arranged if specific mitigation indicators are adopted.

Figure 6.1 Results chain

Activity Output Outcome Impact

Intervention What results from an Intervention

The likely or achievedshort-term andmedium-term effectsof an intervention’soutputs

Long-term effectsproduced by adevelopmentintervention

Results chain

Source: GIZ, 201113

Impact and intermediary outcome indicators

Impact indicators (or “higher-level outcome indicators”, depending on the terminology adopted by

the donor) should be able to measure the long-term effects of project outcomes, as well as capture

the change in adaptive capacity and resilience to climate shocks of both natural systems and human

communities, based on a proper baseline. Because of the complexity in M&E of climate change-related

interventions, special methods and procedures for project impact evaluation may need to be proposed

and included in the project M&E framework. According to the definition of CSA, the overall objectives

of climate change adaptation and mitigation interventions in the agriculture sectors are increased

productivity, increased resilience to climate risks, reduced GHG emissions, increased GHG uptake and

enhanced achievement of national food security and development goals. Indicators for monitoring and

evaluating project impact should try to reflect these, such as in the examples listed below:

• agricultural productivities in the project area over a multi-year period;

• resilience to flood/drought disasters over a multi-year period;

• total amount of annual GHG emissions reduced from the project areas over a multi-year period; and

• food security rate in the project areas over a multi-year period.

Outcome indicators (or “intermediary outcome indicators”, depending on the terminology adopted by

the donor) are mainly process indicators. They measure the extent to which activities financed by the

project contribute to the mainstreaming of climate change considerations within national and local

policies and institutions. In order to be meaningful and measurable, it is recommended that outcome

indicators be limited to a minimum set of “aggregated” indicators, i.e. those based on a bigger set of

indicators closely linked to concrete adaptation and mitigation activities specified in the logframe. For

example, the outcome indicator “number of household or ha of farmland benefited from infrastructure

13 GIZ/OECD (2011). "Integrating Climate Change Adaptation into Development Cooperation: A Practice-oriented Training Based on the OECD Policy Guidance. A Training Manual".

128

systems” can be better assessed and interpreted by establishing strong links to the output indicators

of each related activity (e.g. improvement of water infrastructure, agriculture infrastructure and rural

infrastructure). In view of most climate change interventions, there is often a need to develop and

establish outcome indicators to track, among other things:

• capacity development, including strategy and policy capacity, institutional capacity and technical

capacity at different levels;

• infrastructure improvement, including water infrastructure, agriculture infrastructure and rural

infrastructure; and

• technology dissemination, including technologies for climate change adaptation and mitigation in

each of the agricultural sectors.

Table 6.1 below shows an illustrative list of climate change-related indicators in agricultural investment

projects/programmes.Table 6.2 summarizes some indicators collected from project documents of FAO,

GEF, IFAD, WB and ADB.

As Benson et al. (2007)14 note, the implementation performance of CC-related measures in

development projects can also be measured indirectly via proxy indicators:

“Use of proxies and alternative indicators may also assist measurement. For instance,

in a project aimed at strengthening the drought-resilience of poor households,

fluctuations in livestock sales or school enrolment will be easier and cheaper to monitor

than movements in household income. Considerable care is required in thinking through

the implications of the achievement of possible indicators and ensuring that appropriate,

and collectively fully informative, indicators are selected. The consequences of reliance

on particular indicators also require careful thought. For instance, a rise in flood-plain

land prices may help capture the benefits of a flood control project. However, rising

land prices could also imply that poorer households are forced into other marginal

areas and thus a second indicator measuring population movements by income group

or occupation in and out of the project area might also be required. In cases where

it proves difficult to identify a relevant risk reduction indicator, it may be because the

related intermediate objective or output has been defined too broadly or ambitiously

and needs to be more closely defined. The magnitude of the hazard event itself may

need careful definition to support identification of appropriate indicators, e.g. protection

against a 1 in 25-year flood event rather than protection against flooding.”

Useful tools suggested by other agencies

There are other useful sources of information and guidance to identify indicators and incorporate climate

change in the project’s results framework, particularly for climate change adaptation. For example:

• Online guidance for M&E for community-based adaptation is available from the UNDP Web site

at: http://www.undp-alm.org/projects/spa-community-based-adaptation-project/monitoring-and-

evaluation

• A training manual on climate change adaptation published recently by GIZ (2011)15 – under its section

entitled “Develop a monitoring and evaluation framework” – provides a practical training exercise

for developing an M&E framework, suggesting the use of a helpful matrix which can be adapted to

incorporate both adaptation and mitigation to any type of agricultural investment project. For details,

consult the full GIZ training manual at:

http://www.oecd.org/document/40/0,3746,en_2649_34421_42580264_1_1_1_1,00.html

14 Benson, C., J. Twigg and T. Rossetto (2007), "Tools for Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction: Guidance Notes for Development Organisations", International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and ProVention Consortium Secretariat, Geneva, Switzerland.15 GIZ/OECD (2011). "Integrating Climate Change Adaptation into Development Cooperation: A Practice-oriented Training Based on the OECD Policy Guidance. A Training Manual".

http://www.undp-alm.org/projects/spa-community-based-adaptation-project/monitoring-and-evaluation

http://www.oecd.org/dac/environment-development/oecdpolicyguidanceonintegratingclimatechangeadaptationintodevelopmentco-operation.htm

129


Table 6.1 Illustrative list of climate change-related indicators

Project results chainClimate change considerations/

interventionsIllustrative indicators

Impact Contribute to CSA development in the project areas

Agricultural productivities in the project area over a multi-year period

Resilience to flood/drought disasters over a multi-year period

Total amount of annual GHG emissions reduced from the project activities (areas) over a multi-year period

Food security rate in the project areas over a multi-year period

Outcome Capacity development Number of institutions or people benefited from capacity development on CC

Infrastructure improvement Number of households or area of farmland benefited from improved infrastructure systems

Technology dissemination Area of farmland that adopted CSA technologies

Outputs 1.Capacity development

Policy advice 1.1 Strategy, policy and regulation formulated for responding to CC in agricultural sectors

Institutional support 1.2 Number of institutions established and empowered for mainstreaming CC response

Technical training 1.3 Number of people trained in CC adaptation and mitigation

2. Infrastructure improvement

Water infrastructure 2.1 Number of water infrastructure systems improved and area covered

Agriculture infrastructure 2.2 Number of agriculture infrastructure systems improved and households benefited

Rural infrastructure 2.3 Number of rural infrastructure systems improved and households benefited

3. Technology dissemination

Crop production 3.1 Area of farmland that adopted CS cropping technologies

Livestock production 3.2 Area of grazing land or number of herder households that adopted CS livestock technologies

Forestry 3.3 Forest area or number of forestry dwellers in which CS forestry technologies were adopted

Fishery and aquaculture 3.4 Number of fishery systems or fishermen that adopted CS fishery technologies

Natural resources management 3.5 Number of ha and households that adopted CS natural resources management technologies

Post-harvest and value chains 3.6 Number of households that adopted CS post-harvest and value chain technologies

Activities 1.1 Policy advice Formulation of CC strategy in agriculture 1.1.1 Number of strategies on CC in agricultural sectors formulated/adopted

Policy innovations on CC in agriculture 1.1.2 Number of policy innovations on CC in agriculture formulated and implemented

Technical regulations and codes 1.1.3 Number of technical regulations and codes incorporating CC formulated/adopted

1.2 Institutional support

Establishment of proper mechanisms 1.2.1 Number of procedure/mechanisms established for CC mainstreamingin agriculture

Establishment of institutions 1.2.2 Number of institutions established for CC adaptation and mitigation in agriculture

130



Empowerment of institutions 1.2.3 Number of institutions empowered and functioningin CC adaptation and mitigation

1.3 Technical training

Training for government staff 1.3.1 Number of government staff trained on CC adaptation and mitigation

Training for professionals 1.3.2 Number of professional staff trained on CC adaptation and mitigation

Training for farmers 1.3.3 Number of farmers trained on CC adaptation and mitigation

2.1 Water infrastructure

Irrigation systems 2.1.1 Number of systems that raised drought prevention standards and area of farmland area covered

Drainage systems 2.1.2 Number of systems that raised water-logging control capacity and area of farmland area covered

Flood control systems 2.1.3 Number of systems that raised flood prevention standardsand people benefited

2.2 Agriculture infrastructure

Farm access roads 2.2.1 Km of access road developed

Community storages 2.2.2 Number and capacity of community storages developed

Agriculture machinery 2.2.3 Number of agriculture machines procured and distributed

2.3 Rural infrastructure

Energy supply systems 2.3.1 Number of households that benefited from rural energy rehabilitation activity

Water supply systems 2.3.2 Number of water supply systems developed and households benefited

Bio-gas development 2.3.3 Number of bio-gas systems developed and households benefited

3.1 Crop production

Dissemination of CA 3.1.1 Area of cropping land that adopted CA technology

Dissemination of system of rice intensification (SRI)

3.1.2 Area of paddy rice areas that adopted SRI technologies

Dissemination of integrated pest management (IPM)

3.1.3 Area of cropping land that adopted IPM technologies

3.2 Livestock production

Grazing land management 3.2.1 Area of grazing land area improved

Animal waste management 3.2.2 Number and capacity of animal waste management systems

Adoption of adaptive varieties 3.2.3 Number of adaptive varieties adopted

3.3 Forestry Establishment of forest and tree cover for protective purposes

3.3.1 Increase in area of forest or number of trees planted/re-established (e.g. in wind-breaks, riparian strips, mangroves and coastal forest, erosion-prone drylands or sloping lands)

Afforestation and reforestation 3.3.2 Area of land afforested (i.e. non-forest land converted to forest) and reforested (i.e. forest restored on forest land that had been cleared)

Forest restoration 3.3.3. Area of degraded forest land on which ecological functions of the land have been restored

Agroforestry development 3.3.4 Area of land on which agroforestry practices were adopted and number of households benefited

131




3.3a. Forest management

Forest management (SFM) 3.3.5. Forest area in interventions consistent with sustainable management (including for production, protection and/or conservation purposes) were implemented successfully

Forest harvesting 3.3.6. Area of timber production forest area in which reduced impact logging (RIL) techniques (especially felling and hauling) are practised.

Forest use 3.3.6. Extraction of timber and non-timber forest products do not exceed sustainable levels and the access and benefits from these are equitably shared among stakeholders, recognizing traditional and statutory use rights

Forest products transport /infrastructure 3.3.7. Timber industries and forest product consumers are close to the forest area minimizing/optimizing transport of logs and other forest products/services and maximizing value addition in the country.

Reduction of excess fishing capacity 3.3.9 Tonnes of excess fishing capacity reduced

Water quality and quantity management 3.4.0 Number and area of fish ponds with improved water management

3.5 Natural resources management

Integrated land planning 3.5.1 Number of plans conducted and land area covered

Integrated soil and nutrition management 3.5.2 Number of ha that adopted integrated soil and nutrition management technology

Biodiversity conservation zone 3.5.3 Number and area of biodiversity conservation zones established and functioning

3.6 Post-harvest and value chain

Post-harvest management 3.6.1 Number of households covered by post-harvest management extension activities

Improving food processing 3.6.2. Number of food processing facilities procured and distributed

Marketing 3.6.3 Number of marketing information systems established and farmers benefited

4.1 Project M&E Establishment of M&E system 4.1.1 Number of monitoring points/stations established

Establishment of baseline data 4.1.2 Number of project sites and beneficiaries covered by baseline survey

Data collection, verification and reporting 4.1.3 Number of data monitored and reports formulated

.

132

Tab

le 6

.2

Ind

icat

ors

co

llect

ed f

rom

pro

ject

do

cum

ents

of

dev

elo

pm

ent

par

tner

s

Ag

ricu

ltu

ral

sect

ors

an

d

them

es

Inte

rven

tio

ns

Ad

apta

tio

n

(A)

and/

or

Mit

igat

ion

(M

)R

esu

lts

chai

nIll

ust

rati

ve e

xam

ple

of

ind

icat

ors

So

urc

e o

f in

form

atio

n

Wat

er r

esou

rces

m

anag

emen

t an

d w

ater

shed

m

anag

emen

t

Floo

d pr

otec

tion

AO

utco

me

(impa

ct)

•A

nnua

lized

flo

od d

amag

e an

d di

sast

er-r

elie

f co

sts

redu

ced

in p

artic

ipat

ing

com

mun

ities

as

a re

sult

of

incr

ease

d st

anda

rds

for

flood

pro

tect

ion

wor

ks a

nd

impr

oved

flo

od e

mer

genc

y pr

epar

edne

ss

•D

irect

eco

nom

ic lo

sses

fro

m f

lood

s an

d w

ater

logg

ing

redu

ced

com

pare

d w

ith c

urre

nt a

vera

ge lo

sses

•N

umbe

r of

the

peo

ple

with

impr

oved

flo

od p

rote

ctio

n in

crea

sed

•E

cono

mic

loss

es f

rom

flo

odin

g m

itiga

ted

(RM

B m

illio

n)

•G

roun

dwat

er o

verd

raft

red

uced

in p

roje

ct ir

rigat

ion

area

s an

d th

e ba

sin

•W

ater

pro

duct

ivity

in ir

rigat

ed a

gric

ultu

re, m

easu

red

in

term

s of

eva

potr

ansp

iratio

n (E

T), i

ncre

ased

in p

roje

ct

irrig

atio

n ar

ea

Asi

an D

evel

opm

ent

Ban

k (A

DB

). C

hina

: Hun

an F

lood

Man

agem

ent

Sec

tor

Proj

ect

Wor

ld B

ank

(WB

). C

hina

Xin

jiang

Turp

an W

ater

C

onve

rsat

ion

Proj

ect

Non

-str

uctu

ral fl

ood

man

agem

ent

syst

ems

AIn

term

edia

te

outc

ome

•In

crea

sed

war

ning

tim

e ag

ains

t po

tent

ial f

lood

s in

pr

ojec

t ar

ea

•Fo

reca

stin

g an

d w

arni

ng d

ata

mor

e fr

eque

ntly

acc

urat

e

AD

B. C

hina

: Hun

an F

lood

Man

agem

ent

Sec

tor

Proj

ect

Floo

d m

anag

emen

t se

ctor

pla

nnin

gA

Inte

rmed

iate

ou

tcom

e•

Bas

in-w

ide

flood

war

ning

sys

tem

dev

elop

men

t ne

eds

asse

ssed

; flo

od in

sura

nce

appr

aise

d w

ith s

uppo

rt f

rom

ad

viso

ry t

echn

ical

ass

ista

nce;

nex

t ac

tions

for

incl

usio

n in

fut

ure

flood

man

agem

ent

plan

agr

eed

upon

by

key

gove

rnm

ent

auth

oriti

es

AD

B. C

hina

: Hun

an F

lood

Man

agem

ent

Sec

tor

Proj

ect

Wat

ersh

ed p

rote

ctio

n16A

Out

com

e•

Evi

denc

e of

incr

ease

d ar

eas

of w

ater

shed

pro

tect

ion

and

rech

arge

enh

ance

men

t in

the

pro

ject

are

as

Irrig

atio

n an

d w

ater

shed

de

velo

pmen

tA

and

MO

utco

me

•In

crea

se in

land

are

a un

der

sust

aina

ble

man

agem

ent

in

targ

eted

pro

ject

inte

rven

tion

area

s, a

s a

perc

enta

ge o

f ba

selin

e, t

o be

che

cked

by

sate

llite

imag

e.

•In

crea

se in

veg

etat

ive

cove

r (a

s a

perc

enta

ge o

f ba

selin

e) in

tar

gete

d pr

ojec

t in

terv

entio

n ar

eas,

to

be

chec

ked

by s

atel

lite

imag

e an

d fie

ld v

erifi

catio

n.

WB

and

GE

F, M

adag

asca

r.Irr

igat

ion

and

Wat

ersh

ed D

evel

opm

ent

Proj

ect

Wat

er m

obili

zatio

nA

Inte

rmed

iate

ou

tcom

e•

Num

ber

of p

eopl

e tr

aine

d in

: (i)

wat

er r

esou

rce

man

agem

ent,

(ii)

part

icip

ator

y pl

anni

ng a

nd

deve

lopm

ent,

and

(iii)

inco

me-

gene

ratin

g ac

tiviti

es

WB

-Djib

outi:

Rur

al c

omm

unity

dev

elop

men

t -

Wat

er M

obili

zatio

n pr

ojec

t

Cro

p pr

oduc

tion

Impr

ovin

g pr

oduc

tivity

AO

utco

me

•A

mou

nt o

f ev

apot

rans

pira

tion

redu

ctio

n in

pro

ject

irr

igat

ion

area

s an

d th

e ba

sin

WB

. CH

INA

Xin

jiang

Turp

an W

ater

Con

vers

atio

n Pr

ojec

t

133


Ag

ricu

ltu

ral

sect

ors

an

d

them

es

Inte

rven

tio

ns

Ad

apta

tio

n

(A)

and/

or

Mit

igat

ion

(M

)R

esu

lts

chai

nIll

ust

rati

ve e

xam

ple

of

ind

icat

ors

So

urc

e o

f in

form

atio

n

Mai

nstr

eam

ing

CC

ad

apta

tion

in a

gric

ultu

reA

Inte

rmed

iate

ou

tcom

e•

Ana

lysi

s of

the

bas

elin

e, p

roje

cted

sce

nario

s, a

nd

poss

ible

long

-ter

m im

pact

s of

CC

for

the

proj

ect

area

th

roug

h an

alys

es o

f re

leva

nt h

ydra

ulic

and

agr

icul

tura

l pr

oduc

tion

mod

els

and

of t

he r

esul

ts o

f ec

onom

ic

rese

arch

and

sur

veys

•N

umbe

r of

hec

tare

s w

here

rel

evan

t ad

apta

tion

mea

sure

s ha

ve b

een

impl

emen

ted

in s

elec

ted

dem

onst

ratio

n ar

eas

and

num

ber

of fa

rmer

s tr

aine

d to

en

hanc

e C

C a

dapt

atio

n in

agr

icul

tura

l pra

ctic

es

GE

F-C

hina

: Mai

nstr

eam

ing

clim

ate

chan

ge

adap

tatio

n in

irrig

ated

agr

icul

ture

pro

ject

Prod

uctiv

ityA

Inte

rmed

iate

ou

tcom

e•

Num

ber

of c

limat

e-re

silie

nt p

rodu

ctio

n sy

stem

s im

plem

ente

d w

ith p

roje

ct s

uppo

rtB

RA

ZIL

San

ta C

atar

ina

Rur

al

Com

petit

iven

essP

roje

ct (W

B lo

an)

Prod

uctiv

ityA

and

MIn

term

edia

te

outc

ome

•N

umbe

r of

CA

sys

tem

s in

trod

uced

, ada

pted

and

use

d by

farm

ers

FAO

Fac

t S

heet

: Lan

d D

egra

datio

n M

itiga

tion

and

Prev

entio

n in

clud

ing

Loca

l and

Glo

bal

Env

ironm

ent

Ben

efits

Res

ilien

ceA

Inte

rmed

iate

ou

tcom

e•

Intr

oduc

tion

of n

ew d

roug

ht-r

esis

tant

cro

p va

rietie

sW

B-In

dia.

The

Wor

ld B

ank

proj

ect A

ndhr

a Pr

ades

h D

roug

ht A

dapt

atio

n In

itiat

ive

(AP-

DA

I)17

Prod

uctiv

ity a

nd

vuln

erab

ility

AO

utco

me

•N

umbe

r of

mal

e an

d fe

mal

e sm

all-s

cale

pro

duce

rs w

ho

have

ado

pted

impr

oved

agr

icul

tura

l tec

hnol

ogie

s th

at

redu

ce v

ulne

rabi

lity

to c

limat

ic v

aria

tions

IFA

D a

nd G

EF.

Zam

bia

Sm

allh

olde

r Pr

oduc

tivity

Pro

mot

ion

Prog

ram

me

(und

er p

repa

ratio

n)

Agr

opro

cess

ing

A a

nd M

Inte

rmed

iate

ou

tcom

e•

Num

ber

(or

%) o

f ne

w a

nd e

xist

ing

agro

-indu

strie

s ta

king

into

con

side

ratio

n C

C a

dapt

atio

n an

d m

itiga

tion

WB

. BR

AZI

L S

anta

Cat

arin

a R

ural

C

ompe

titiv

enes

sPro

ject

Dis

aste

r ris

k m

anag

emen

t C

limat

e in

form

atio

n ge

nera

tion

AO

utco

me

•G

ener

atio

n of

ear

ly w

arni

ng s

yste

ms

of f

lood

s, d

roug

hts

and

stor

ms

•In

crea

sed

capa

city

of

natio

nal-l

evel

inst

itutio

ns t

o be

tter

as

sess

and

res

pond

to

curr

ent

and

futu

re c

limat

e ris

ks, a

nd t

o pr

omot

e in

stitu

tiona

l coo

rdin

atio

n am

ong

curr

ently

fra

gmen

ted

agen

cies

man

agin

g di

sast

er a

nd

clim

ate

risk

WB

web

-bas

ed t

ool o

n M

ains

trea

min

g ad

apta

tion

to c

limat

e ch

ange

in a

gric

ultu

re a

nd

natu

ral r

esou

rces

man

agem

ent

proj

ects

Web

link

: htt

p://s

itere

sour

ces.

wor

ldba

nk.o

rg/E

XTT

OO

LKIT

3/R

esou

rces

/364

6250

-125

0715

3271

43/G

N6.

pdf

Clim

ate

info

rmat

ion

gene

ratio

nA

Inte

rmed

iate

ou

tcom

e•

Incr

ease

of

vuln

erab

ility

ass

essm

ents

tha

t in

tegr

ate

clim

ate

info

rmat

ion

with

ava

ilabl

e na

tura

l res

ourc

e an

d so

cioe

cono

mic

info

rmat

ion

•D

owns

cale

d cl

imat

e pr

ojec

tions

, bas

ed o

n pa

st a

nd

curr

ent

clim

ate

obse

rvat

ions

and

glo

bal a

nd r

egio

nal

clim

ate

mod

els

•C

limat

e ris

k sc

reen

ing

of c

omm

unity

-driv

en

deve

lopm

ent

(CD

D) m

icro

proj

ects

and

in a

rid la

nds

WB

- Ken

ya:A

dapt

atio

n to

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

in

Arid

and

Sem

i-Arid

Lan

ds (K

AC

CA

L) f

rom

WB

w

eb-b

ased

too

l on

Mai

nstr

eam

ing

adap

tatio

n to

clim

ate

chan

ge in

agr

icul

ture

and

nat

ural

re

sour

ces

man

agem

ent

proj

ects

Web

link

: htt

p://s

itere

sour

ces.

wor

ldba

nk.o

rg/E

XTT

OO

LKIT

3/R

esou

rces

/364

6250

-125

0715

3271

43/G

N6.

pdf

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTTOOLKIT3/Resources/3646250-1250715327143/GN6.pdf


134

Ag

ricu

ltu

ral

sect

ors

an

d

them

es

Inte

rven

tio

ns

Ad

apta

tio

n

(A)

and/

or

Mit

igat

ion

(M

)R

esu

lts

chai

nIll

ust

rati

ve e

xam

ple

of

ind

icat

ors

So

urc

e o

f in

form

atio

n

Land

use

, lan

d de

grad

atio

n an

d fo

rest

ry

Terr

itoria

l pla

nnin

g A

and

MIn

term

edia

te

outc

ome

•D

ecre

ase

of r

eset

tlem

ent

of p

opul

atio

n as

a

cons

eque

nce

of g

ood

terr

itoria

l pla

nnin

g

•D

ecre

ase

of in

vest

men

ts w

ith h

igh

irrev

ersi

bilit

y (e

.g.

larg

e in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s su

ch a

s la

rge

rese

rvoi

rs)

WB

web

-bas

ed t

ool o

n M

ains

trea

min

g ad

apta

tion

to c

limat

e ch

ange

in a

gric

ultu

re a

nd

natu

ral r

esou

rces

man

agem

ent

proj

ects

Web

link

: htt

p://s

itere

sour

ces.

wor

ldba

nk.o

rg/E

XTT

OO

LKIT

3/R

esou

rces

/364

6250

-125

0715

3271

43/G

N6.

pdf

Part

icip

ator

y an

dlo

cally

-man

aged

sys

tem

fo

rco

nser

vatio

n,

man

agem

ent,

and

sust

aina

ble

use

of

fore

stre

sour

ces

and

asso

ciat

edbi

odiv

ersi

ty

A a

nd M

Out

com

e•

Proj

ect

gene

rate

s 13

.3 m

illio

n m

3 of

timbe

r an

d 2.

73

billi

on k

g of

bam

boo

by 3

1 D

ecem

ber

2025

; RM

B 1

.1

billi

on n

et in

com

e fr

om t

ree

crop

pro

duct

ion

by 3

1 D

ecem

ber

2022

•P

lant

atio

ns t

o re

lieve

pre

ssur

e on

nat

ural

fore

sts

esta

blis

hed

in s

elec

ted

area

s an

d op

erat

ed s

usta

inab

ly

•C

apac

ity o

f go

vern

men

t im

plem

entin

g ag

enci

es a

nd

peop

le in

crea

sed,

incl

udin

g vo

catio

nal t

rain

ing

of fo

rest

ry

wor

kers

: six

cou

nty

trai

ning

pla

ns a

ppro

ved

by d

ate

XX

X;

3 50

0 pe

rson

nel t

rain

ed b

y da

te X

XX

GE

F- S

econ

d B

eijin

g E

nviro

nmen

t Pr

ojec

t

Fost

er im

prov

ed

cons

erva

tion

and

sust

aina

ble

man

agem

ent

of r

emai

ning

nat

ural

fo

rest

M a

nd A

Out

com

e•

Ove

r 1

mill

ion

hect

ares

of

natu

ral f

ores

ts a

nd p

rote

cted

ar

eas

brou

ght

unde

r ac

tive

man

agem

ent

•R

educ

tion

of c

omm

unity

rel

ianc

e on

fore

st r

esou

rces

in

side

bio

dive

rsity

impo

rtan

t zo

nes

•In

crea

se in

loca

l gov

ernm

ent’s

cap

acity

to

supe

rvis

e,

mon

itor

and

impl

emen

t co

nser

vatio

n an

d su

stai

nabl

e re

sour

ce u

se a

ctiv

ities

GE

F- S

econ

d B

eijin

g E

nviro

nmen

t Pr

ojec

t

Mul

ti-fu

nctio

ning

fore

sts

A a

nd M

•A

reas

of

mul

tifun

ctio

n fo

rest

s es

tabl

ishe

d: (a

) win

d br

eaks

(x h

a)

•(b

) soi

l & w

ater

con

serv

atio

n fo

rest

s (x

ha)

; (c)

farm

land

sh

elte

r be

lt (x

ha)

WB

CH

INA

. Int

egra

ted

Fore

stry

Dev

elop

men

t Pr

ojec

t

Trai

ning

A a

nd M

Out

com

e•

Hou

seho

lds

and

fore

st s

taff

tra

ined

and

impr

oved

te

chno

logi

es in

trod

uced

WB

CH

INA

. Int

egra

ted

Fore

stry

Dev

elop

men

t Pr

ojec

t

Fore

st t

enur

e-sh

ip a

nd

RE

DD

+M

Out

com

e•

Are

a fo

r w

hich

fore

stla

nd u

se r

ight

cer

tific

ates

are

gr

ante

d (in

crea

sed

com

mitm

ent

to a

void

def

ores

tatio

n)W

B C

HIN

A. I

nteg

rate

d Fo

rest

ry D

evel

opm

ent

Proj

ect


135


Ag

ricu

ltu

ral

sect

ors

an

d

them

es

Inte

rven

tio

ns

Ad

apta

tio

n

(A)

and/

or

Mit

igat

ion

(M

)R

esu

lts

chai

nIll

ust

rati

ve e

xam

ple

of

ind

icat

ors

So

urc

e o

f in

form

atio

n

Prot

ecte

d ar

eas

M•

Cre

atio

n of

new

pro

tect

ed a

reas

, som

etim

es b

y co

nver

ting

suita

ble

area

s in

to n

atio

nal p

arks

and

re

serv

es a

nd e

ncou

ragi

ng t

heir

use

for

tour

ism

and

le

isur

e. S

ome

coun

trie

s ar

e co

oper

atin

g in

com

mon

st

ruct

ures

or

with

inte

rsta

te a

gree

men

ts fo

r th

e co

nser

vatio

n an

d m

anag

emen

t of

tra

nsbo

unda

ry

reso

urce

s (e

.g. t

he A

ral S

ea a

gree

men

ts, t

he

Alp

s-A

dria

tic a

nd t

he D

anub

e R

egio

n C

omm

unity

Pr

ogra

mm

e, N

ile a

nd M

ekon

g R

iver

Bas

in A

gree

men

ts

and

prog

ram

mes

)

FAO

Fac

t S

heet

: Lan

d D

egra

datio

n M

itiga

tion

and

Prev

entio

n in

clud

ing

Loca

l and

Glo

bal

Env

ironm

ent

Ben

efits

Polic

y fr

amew

ork

and

inst

itutio

nal

capa

city

to

redu

ceG

HG

em

issi

ons

from

the

ag

ricul

tura

l sec

tor

Inst

itutio

ns a

nd p

olic

ies

A a

nd M

Inte

rmed

iate

ou

tcom

e•

A u

nit

with

in t

he M

inis

try

of A

gric

ultu

re is

est

ablis

hed

to s

uppo

rt a

nd/o

r fo

rmul

ate,

impl

emen

t an

d m

onito

r C

C

miti

gatio

n an

d ad

apta

tion

polic

ies

and

prog

ram

mes

in

the

agric

ultu

re s

ecto

r

•N

umbe

r of

wor

ksho

ps (i

nclu

ding

inte

rmin

iste

rial)

prom

otin

g co

llabo

ratio

n an

d kn

owle

dge

shar

ing

on C

C

activ

ities

rel

ated

to

the

proj

ect

carr

ied

out

•Po

licy

and

regu

lato

ry f

ram

ewor

k fo

r gr

id-c

onne

cted

re

new

able

s in

pla

ce

WB

/GE

F M

EX

ICO

.Mex

ico

Rur

al D

evel

opm

ent

Rur

al

elec

trifi

catio

n &

ren

ewab

le

ener

gy

Polic

y, p

lann

ing

and

on-

the-

grou

nd in

vest

men

ts

MO

utco

me

•Po

licy

and

regu

lato

ry f

ram

ewor

k fo

r gr

id-c

onne

cted

re

new

able

s in

pla

ce

•Ta

rget

s/gu

idel

ines

for

off-

grid

rura

l ele

ctrif

icat

ion

esta

blis

hed

•A

10-

year

act

ion

plan

for

rene

wab

le e

nerg

y de

velo

pmen

t co

mpl

eted

•W

ind

map

ping

bas

ed o

n sa

telli

te d

ata

and

grou

nd-le

vel

mon

itorin

g st

atio

ns c

ompl

eted

•M

arke

t st

udy

on S

olar

Hom

e Sy

stem

(SH

S) p

oten

tial

com

plet

ed

•N

umbe

r of

con

sum

ers

with

SH

S

•W

ind

pilo

t pr

ojec

ts c

ompl

eted

•C

ompl

etio

n of

tra

inin

g ac

tiviti

es

•To

nnes

of

GH

G e

mis

sion

red

uctio

ns

GE

F. R

epub

lic o

f Yem

en:R

ural

Ele

ctrifi

catio

n an

d R

enew

able

Ene

rgy

Dev

elop

men

t Pr

ojec

t

Sus

tain

able

ag

ricul

tura

l te

chno

logy

and

su

ppor

t se

rvic

es

GH

G e

mis

sion

-red

uctio

n te

chno

logi

esM

Out

com

e (im

pact

)•

Tonn

es o

f C

0 2 equ

ival

ent

avoi

ded

•M

inis

try

of A

gric

ultu

re is

suc

cess

fully

form

ulat

ing

CC

m

itiga

tion

and

adap

tatio

n po

licie

s an

d pr

ogra

mm

es

in t

he a

gric

ultu

ral s

ecto

r an

d m

onito

ring

thei

r im

plem

enta

tion

WB

/GE

F M

EX

ICO

.Mex

ico

Rur

al D

evel

opm

ent

136

Ag

ricu

ltu

ral

sect

ors

an

d

them

es

Inte

rven

tio

ns

Ad

apta

tio

n

(A)

and/

or

Mit

igat

ion

(M

)R

esu

lts

chai

nIll

ust

rati

ve e

xam

ple

of

ind

icat

ors

So

urc

e o

f in

form

atio

n

MIn

term

edia

te

outc

ome

•N

umbe

r of

KW

h of

ene

rgy

save

d fr

om a

dopt

ion

of

ener

gy-e

ffic

ient

tec

hnol

ogie

s (a

nd c

orre

spon

ding

ton

nes

of a

void

edC

O2e

em

issi

ons)

•N

umbe

r of

agr

ibus

ines

ses

havi

ng a

dopt

ed lo

w c

arbo

n-in

tens

ity t

echn

olog

ies

•N

umbe

r of

ene

rgy

effic

ient

and

/or

rene

wab

le e

nerg

y su

bpro

ject

s pr

epar

ed a

nd im

plem

ente

d

•N

umbe

r of

ene

rgy

effic

ienc

y an

d /o

r re

new

able

ene

rgy

subp

roje

cts

that

rec

eive

d te

chni

cal a

ssis

tanc

e fo

r th

e pr

epar

atio

n of

bus

ines

s pl

ans

on e

nerg

y ef

ficie

ncy

and/

or r

enew

able

ene

rgy

tech

nolo

gies

•D

ata

gath

erin

g an

d in

vent

ory

of G

HG

em

issi

ons

from

:

–al

l ene

rgy

sour

ces

–in

dust

rial p

roce

sses

–ag

ricul

tura

l pro

cess

es –

land

-use

cha

nge

and

fore

stry

WB

/GE

F M

EX

ICO

.Mex

ico

Rur

al D

evel

opm

ent

16

Wat

ersh

ed p

rote

ctio

n th

roug

h in

crea

sing

sur

face

and

gro

undw

ater

ava

ilabi

lity

thro

ugh

reha

bilit

atio

n of

sm

all-

to m

ediu

m-s

pate

irrig

atio

n sc

hem

es, t

erra

ce r

ehab

ilita

tion,

ban

k pr

otec

tion

wor

ks a

nd o

ther

wat

er a

nd s

oil c

onse

rvat

ion

activ

ities

.17

S

ourc

e: A

nnex

20

of W

B w

eb-b

ased

too

l on

Mai

nstr

eam

ing

adap

tatio

n to

clim

ate

chan

ge in

agr

icul

ture

and

nat

ural

res

ourc

es m

anag

emen

t pr

ojec

ts..

137


ANNEX 7 Finance options for climate change activities

138

AN

NE

X 7

Fina

nce

optio

ns fo

r cl

imat

e ch

ange

act

iviti

es

Nam

eD

escr

ipti

on

of

fun

dPr

oje

ct t

ype

Targ

et g

rou

pG

eog

rap

hic

al

focu

sW

eblin

k

Ada

ptat

ion

Fund

The

Ada

ptat

ion

Fund

is a

fina

ncia

l in

stru

men

t un

der

the

UN

FCC

C a

nd

its K

yoto

Pro

toco

l. It

was

est

ablis

hed

to fi

nanc

e co

ncre

te a

dapt

atio

n pr

ojec

ts a

nd p

rogr

amm

es in

de

velo

ping

cou

ntrie

s th

at a

re P

artie

s to

the

Kyo

to P

roto

col i

n an

effo

rt t

o re

duce

the

adv

erse

effe

cts

of c

limat

e ch

ange

faci

ng c

omm

uniti

es, c

ount

ries

and

sect

ors.

•W

ater

res

ourc

es m

anag

emen

t, la

nd

man

agem

ent,

agr

icul

ture

, hea

lth,

infr

astr

uctu

re d

evel

opm

ent,

fra

gile

ec

osys

tem

s

•M

onito

ring

of d

isea

ses

and

vect

ors

affe

cted

by

clim

ate

chan

ge, a

nd r

elat

ed

fore

cast

ing

and

early

-war

ning

sys

tem

s

•S

uppo

rtin

g ca

paci

ty b

uild

ing,

incl

udin

g in

stitu

tiona

l cap

acity

, for

pre

vent

ive

mea

sure

s, p

lann

ing,

pre

pare

dnes

s an

d m

anag

emen

t of

dis

aste

rs r

elat

ing

to

clim

ate

chan

ge

•S

tren

gthe

ning

exi

stin

g an

d es

tabl

ishi

ng

natio

nal a

nd r

egio

nal c

entr

es a

nd

info

rmat

ion

netw

orks

for

rapi

d re

spon

se

to e

xtre

me

wea

ther

eve

nts

Dev

elop

ing

coun

try

Part

ies

to t

he K

yoto

Pro

toco

l tha

t ar

e pa

rtic

ular

ly v

ulne

rabl

e to

the

adv

erse

effe

cts

of

clim

ate

chan

ge

Dev

elop

ing

coun

try

Part

ies

to t

he K

yoto

Pr

otoc

ol t

hat

are

part

icul

arly

vu

lner

able

to

the

adve

rse

effe

cts

of

clim

ate

chan

ge

http

://ad

apta

tion-

fund

.org

/

Afr

ica-

Eur

opea

n U

nion

(EU

) E

nerg

y Pa

rtne

rshi

p (A

EE

P):

Ren

ewab

le

Ene

rgy

Coo

pera

tion

Prog

ram

me

(RE

CP

)

The

RE

CP

obj

ectiv

es a

re t

o br

ing

bene

fits

of e

cono

mic

gro

wth

, em

ploy

men

t, e

nerg

y se

curit

y an

dim

prov

ed e

nerg

y ac

cess

and

to

pave

the

way

for

a fu

ture

low

-car

bon

ener

gy s

yste

m in

Afr

ica.

At

the

sam

e tim

e, t

he R

EC

P w

ill h

elp

build

a

sign

ifica

nt n

ew a

rea

for

indu

stria

l tr

ade

and

busi

ness

coo

pera

tion

betw

een

Afr

ica

and

Eur

ope.

It is

stil

l in

its

star

t-up

pha

se t

o id

entif

y pr

iorit

y ac

tiviti

es.

Spe

cific

initi

ativ

es w

ill fo

cus

on fi

ve p

riorit

y ar

eas: –en

ergy

acc

ess;

–en

ergy

sec

urity

; –

rene

wab

le e

nerg

y an

d en

ergy

ef

ficie

ncy;

–in

stitu

tiona

l cap

acity

bui

ldin

g; a

nd –

scal

ing-

up in

vest

men

t.

Ope

nA

fric

aht

tp://

ww

w.a

eep-

conf

eren

ce.o

rg/

docu

men

ts/a

eep_

recp

.pdf

http://www.aeep-conference.org/documents/aeep_recp.pdf

139


Nam

eD

escr

ipti

on

of

fun

dPr

oje

ct t

ype

Targ

et g

rou

pG

eog

rap

hic

al

focu

sW

eblin

k

Am

azon

Fun

dTh

e A

maz

on F

und

was

cre

ated

to

hel

p fo

ster

the

pre

serv

atio

n of

fo

rest

s. T

he f

und

is a

imed

at

rais

ing

dona

tions

for

inve

stm

ents

in e

ffort

s to

pre

vent

, mon

itor

and

com

bat

defo

rest

atio

n, a

s w

ell a

s to

pro

mot

e th

e pr

eser

vatio

n an

d su

stai

nabl

e us

e of

fore

sts

in t

he A

maz

on B

iom

e. It

is

man

aged

by

the

BN

DE

S, t

he B

razi

lian

Dev

elop

men

t B

ank.

•M

anag

emen

t of

pub

lic fo

rest

s &

pr

otec

ted

area

s

•E

nviro

nmen

tal c

ontr

ol, m

onito

ring

&

insp

ectio

n

•S

usta

inab

le fo

rest

man

agem

ent

•E

cono

mic

act

iviti

es c

reat

ed w

ith

sust

aina

ble

use

of fo

rest

s

•E

colo

gica

l and

eco

nom

ic z

onin

g,

terr

itoria

l arr

ange

men

t an

d ag

ricul

tura

l re

gula

tion

•Pr

eser

vatio

n an

d su

stai

nabl

e us

e of

bi

odiv

ersi

ty

•R

ecov

ery

of d

efor

este

d ar

eas

Publ

ic in

stitu

tions

, sta

te-

owne

d co

mpa

nies

and

no

ngov

ernm

enta

lor

gani

zatio

ns

Am

azon

For

est

http

://w

ww

.am

azon

fund

.gov

.br/

Asi

an

Dev

elop

men

t B

ank

(AD

B) -

C

lean

Ene

rgy

Fina

ncin

g Pa

rtne

rshi

p Fa

cilit

y (C

EFP

F)

CE

FPF

reso

urce

s ar

e in

tend

ed

to fi

nanc

e po

licy,

reg

ulat

ory

and

inst

itutio

nal r

efor

ms

that

enc

oura

ge

clea

n en

ergy

dev

elop

men

t.

•D

eplo

ymen

t of

new

cle

an e

nerg

y te

chno

logy

•Pr

ojec

ts t

hat

low

er t

he b

arrie

rs t

o ad

optin

g cl

ean

ener

gy t

echn

olog

ies

•Pr

ojec

ts t

hat

incr

ease

acc

ess

to m

oder

n fo

rms

of c

lean

and

ene

rgy-

effic

ient

en

ergy

for

the

poor

•Te

chni

cal c

apac

ity p

rogr

amm

es fo

r cl

ean

ener

gy

Ope

nA

DB

’s

deve

lopi

ng

mem

ber

coun

trie

s

http

://w

ww

.adb

.org

/sec

tors

/ene

rgy/

cont

acts

Asi

an

Dev

elop

men

t B

ank

(AD

B) -

E

nerg

y fo

r All

Part

ners

hip

AD

B la

unch

ed t

he E

nerg

y fo

r A

ll Pa

rtne

rshi

p af

ter

exte

nsiv

e co

nsul

tatio

n w

ith s

take

hold

ers

on h

ow t

o ra

pidl

y sc

ale

up a

cces

s to

ene

rgy.

The

Par

tner

ship

aim

s to

pro

vide

acc

ess

to s

afe,

cle

an,

affo

rdab

le m

oder

n en

ergy

to

an

addi

tiona

l 100

mill

ion

peop

le in

the

re

gion

by

2015

.

•S

calin

g up

acc

ess

to e

nerg

y th

roug

h en

terp

rise

deve

lopm

ent

and

finan

cing

AD

B’s

de

velo

ping

m

embe

r co

untr

ies

http

://be

ta.a

db.o

rg/s

ecto

rs/e

nerg

y/pr

ogra

ms/

ener

gy-fo

r-all-

initi

ativ

e

Bio

Car

bon

Fund

(B

ioC

F) o

f th

e W

orld

Ban

k

The

Bio

CF

is b

ased

on

a pu

blic

/pr

ivat

e pa

rtne

rshi

p m

odel

whi

ch a

ims

to d

eliv

er c

ost-

effe

ctiv

e em

issi

on

redu

ctio

n an

d su

ppor

t bi

odiv

ersi

ty

cons

erva

tion

and

pove

rty

alle

viat

ion.

•A

FOLU

pro

ject

s: a

ffore

stat

ion,

re

fore

stat

ion,

RE

DD

, agr

icul

ture

Ope

nO

pen

http

://w

bcar

bonfi

nanc

e.or

g/R

oute

r.cfm

?Pa

ge=

Bio

CF&

Item

ID=

9708

&FI

D=

9708

http://www.adb.org/sectors/energy/contacts

http://www.adb.org/sectors/energy/programs/energy-for-all-initiative

https://wbcarbonfinance.org/Router.cfm?Page=BioCF&ItemID=9708&FID=9708

140

Nam

eD

escr

ipti

on

of

fun

dPr

oje

ct t

ype

Targ

et g

rou

pG

eog

rap

hic

al

focu

sW

eblin

k

Clim

ate

Inve

stm

ent

Fund

s (C

IF)

The

CIF

hel

p de

velo

ping

cou

ntrie

s pi

lot

low

-em

issi

ons

and

clim

ate-

resi

lient

dev

elop

men

t.Th

e C

IF

are

chan

nelle

d th

roug

h th

e A

fric

an D

evel

opm

ent

Ban

k, A

sian

D

evel

opm

ent

Ban

k, E

urop

ean

Ban

k fo

r R

econ

stru

ctio

n an

d D

evel

opm

ent,

In

ter-A

mer

ican

Dev

elop

men

t B

ank

and

Wor

ld B

ank

Gro

up. I

t in

clud

es

two

fund

s: T

he S

trat

egic

Clim

ate

Fund

(SC

F) a

nd t

he C

lean

Tech

nolo

gy

Fund

(CTF

). Th

e S

CF

com

pris

es

thre

e ta

rget

ed p

rogr

amm

es:

(1) P

ilot

Prog

ram

me

for

Clim

ate

Res

ilien

ce (P

PC

R) t

o m

ains

trea

m

clim

ate

resi

lienc

e in

sec

tor

plan

s an

d pr

ojec

ts in

nin

e co

untr

ies

and

two

regi

onal

pilo

ts w

orld

wid

e; (2

) Fo

rest

Inve

stm

ent

Prog

ram

me

(FIP

) to

pro

mot

e su

stai

nabl

e fo

rest

ry

man

agem

ent

in e

ight

pilo

t co

untr

ies

wor

ldw

ide;

and

(3)S

calin

g U

p R

enew

able

Ene

rgy

Prog

ram

me

in

Low

-inco

me

Cou

ntrie

s (S

RE

P) t

o ch

ampi

on r

enew

able

ene

rgy

whe

re

it ca

n m

atte

r m

ost.

The

re a

re s

ix p

ilot

coun

trie

s w

orld

wid

e.

•W

ith C

IF s

uppo

rt, 4

5 de

velo

ping

co

untr

ies

are

pilo

ting

tran

sfor

mat

ions

in

cle

an t

echn

olog

y, s

usta

inab

le

man

agem

ent

of fo

rest

s, in

crea

sed

ener

gy a

cces

s th

roug

h re

new

able

en

ergy

and

clim

ate-

resi

lient

de

velo

pmen

t.

Dev

elop

ing

coun

trie

s O

pen

http

://w

ww

.clim

atei

nves

tmen

tfun

ds.

org/

cif/

Com

mun

ity

Dev

elop

men

t C

arbo

n Fu

nd

(CD

CF)

Wor

ld

Ban

k

The

CD

CF

spre

ads

bene

fits

of c

arbo

n fin

ance

to

the

poor

est

coun

trie

s an

d po

or c

omm

uniti

es in

all

deve

lopi

ng

coun

trie

s w

hich

wou

ld o

ther

wis

e fin

d it

diffi

cult

to a

ttra

ct c

arbo

n fin

ance

be

caus

e of

cou

ntry

and

fina

ncia

l ris

k. It

is a

mul

ti-do

nor

trus

t fu

nd –

a

publ

ic/p

rivat

e pa

rtne

rshi

p.

•A

ll C

DM

pro

ject

s, in

clud

ing

AFO

LU, a

re

elig

ible

Leas

t de

velo

ping

cou

ntrie

s –

com

mun

ity b

enefi

ts a

re a

re

quire

men

t

Ope

nht

tp://

wbc

arbo

nfina

nce.

org/

Rou

ter.c

fm?

Page

=C

DC

F&It

emID

=97

09&

FID

=97

09

Con

go B

asin

Fo

rest

Fun

d (C

BFF

)

The

over

all g

oal o

f th

e C

BFF

is t

o al

levi

ate

pove

rty

and

addr

ess

clim

ate

chan

ge t

hrou

gh r

educ

ing

the

rate

of

defo

rest

atio

n. It

is a

dmin

iste

red

by

the

Afr

ican

Dev

elop

men

t B

ank.

Prov

ides

gra

nts

to e

ligib

le e

ntiti

es fo

r ac

tiviti

es t

hat:

–sl

ow a

nd e

vent

ually

rev

erse

the

rat

e of

def

ores

tatio

n in

the

Con

go B

asin

; –

prov

ide

supp

ort

mec

hani

sms

whi

ch

cons

erve

the

fore

sts;

–m

aint

ain

bene

fits

to lo

cal

com

mun

ities

; and

–

mob

ilize

add

ition

al f

inan

cial

res

ourc

es

to s

uppo

rt r

equi

red

actio

ns.

Cen

tral

Afr

ican

For

ests

C

omm

issi

on (C

OM

IFA

C)

mem

ber

coun

trie

s (B

urun

di, C

amer

oon,

C

entr

al A

fric

an

Rep

ublic

, Cha

d C

ongo

, D

emoc

ratic

Rep

ublic

of

Con

go,E

quat

oria

l Gui

nea,

G

abon

, Rw

anda

and

Sao

To

me

& P

rinci

pe)

Con

go b

asin

http

://w

ww

.cbf

-fun

d.or

g/

https://www.climateinvestmentfunds.org/cif/

https://wbcarbonfinance.org/Router.cfm?Page=CDCF&ItemID=9709&FID=9709

141


Nam

eD

escr

ipti

on

of

fun

dPr

oje

ct t

ype

Targ

et g

rou

pG

eog

rap

hic

al

focu

sW

eblin

k

Ene

rgy+

(N

OR

AD

)Th

e in

itiat

ive

will

est

ablis

h a

part

ners

hip

amon

g de

velo

ping

and

de

velo

ped

coun

trie

s to

ser

ve a

s a

plat

form

for

deve

lopi

ng c

ount

ries

to s

cale

up

ener

gy s

ecto

r ac

tions

an

d fin

ance

, and

to

that

end

to

take

im

med

iate

act

ion,

incl

udin

g im

prov

ing

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s, e

ffici

ency

, tr

ansp

aren

cy a

nd c

oord

inat

ion

of e

nerg

y in

itiat

ives

and

fina

ncia

l in

stru

men

ts, t

o fa

cilit

ate

amon

g ot

her

thin

gs k

now

ledg

e tr

ansf

er, c

apac

ity

enha

ncem

ent,

miti

gatio

n ac

tions

and

te

chno

logy

dev

elop

men

t an

d tr

ansf

er.

This

is u

nder

dev

elop

men

t.

Ope

nD

evel

opin

g co

untr

ies

EU

-Ene

rgy

Faci

lity

Pool

ing

Mec

hani

sm /

AC

P-E

U E

nerg

y Fa

cilit

y

The

Ene

rgy

Faci

lity

is a

co-

finan

cing

in

stru

men

t w

hich

was

est

ablis

hed

in 2

005

in o

rder

to

supp

ort

proj

ects

on

incr

easi

ng a

cces

s to

sus

tain

able

an

d af

ford

able

ene

rgy

serv

ices

for

the

poor

livi

ng in

rura

l and

per

i-urb

an

area

s in

Afr

ican

, Car

ibbe

an a

nd P

acifi

c (A

CP

) cou

ntrie

s. T

he E

nerg

y Fa

cilit

y Po

olin

g M

echa

nism

was

cre

ated

to

blen

d gr

ants

fro

m t

he 1

0th

Eur

opea

n D

evel

opm

ent

Fund

Ene

rgy

Faci

lity

with

loan

s fr

om t

he E

U m

ultil

ater

al

and

bila

tera

l fina

nce

inst

itutio

ns

•In

vest

men

t pr

ojec

ts fo

r ac

cess

to

ener

gy s

ervi

ces

(incl

udin

g re

late

d ca

paci

ty-b

uild

ing

activ

ities

)

•A

dvan

ced

prep

arat

ory

stud

ies

(tec

hnic

al

assi

stan

ce o

nly)

Ope

nA

fric

an,

Car

ibbe

an a

nd

Paci

fic (A

CP

) co

untr

ies

havi

ng r

atifi

ed

the

revi

sed

Cot

onou

A

gree

men

t,

i.e. a

ll A

CP

co

untr

ies

exce

pt S

udan

, E

quat

oria

l G

uine

a an

d S

outh

Afr

ica

http

://ec

.eur

opa.

eu/e

urop

eaid

/whe

re/

acp/

regi

onal

-coo

pera

tion/

ener

gy/

inde

x_en

.htm

Fore

st C

arbo

n Pa

rtne

rshi

p Fa

cilit

y (F

CP

F) –

W

orld

Ban

k

The

FCP

F as

sist

s de

velo

ping

co

untr

ies

in t

heir

effo

rts

to r

educ

e em

issi

ons

from

def

ores

tatio

n an

d la

nd d

egra

datio

n (R

ED

D)

•B

uild

cap

acity

for

RE

DD

in d

evel

opin

g co

untr

ies

•Te

st a

pro

gram

me

of p

erfo

rman

ce-

base

d in

cent

ive

paym

ents

in s

ome

pilo

t co

untr

ies

All

borr

owin

g m

embe

r co

untr

ies

of t

he

Inte

rnat

iona

l Ban

k fo

r R

econ

stru

ctio

n an

d D

evel

opm

ent

(IBR

D) o

r th

e In

tern

atio

nal D

evel

opm

ent

Ass

ocia

tion

(IDA

) tha

t ar

e lo

cate

d in

sub

trop

ical

or

trop

ical

are

as

Sub

trop

ical

or

trop

ical

are

asht

tp://

ww

w.fo

rest

carb

onpa

rtne

rshi

p.or

g/fc

p/ (n

ot y

et o

pera

tiona

l)

http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/where/acp/regional-cooperation/energy/index_en.htm

http://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/fcp/

142

Nam

eD

escr

ipti

on

of

fun

dPr

oje

ct t

ype

Targ

et g

rou

pG

eog

rap

hic

al

focu

sW

eblin

k

GE

F S

mal

l G

rant

s Pr

ogra

mm

e:

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

The

mai

n fo

cal a

reas

of

the

prog

ram

me

are

clim

ate

chan

ge

abat

emen

t an

d ad

apta

tion,

co

nser

vatio

n of

bio

dive

rsity

, pr

otec

tion

of in

tern

atio

nal w

ater

s,

redu

ctio

n of

the

impa

ct o

f pe

rsis

tent

or

gani

c po

lluta

nts

and

prev

entio

n of

la

nd d

egra

datio

n.

•R

emov

al o

f ba

rrie

rs t

o en

ergy

eff

icie

ncy

and

ener

gy c

onse

rvat

ion

•Pr

omot

ing

the

adop

tion

of r

enew

able

en

ergy

by

rem

ovin

g ba

rrie

rs a

nd

redu

cing

impl

emen

tatio

n co

sts

•C

onse

rvat

ion

and

rest

orat

ion

of a

rid a

nd

sem

i-arid

are

as

•E

ffic

ient

sto

ves

and

biog

as t

o re

duce

fo

rest

loss

•In

tegr

ated

wat

ersh

ed m

anag

emen

t

•S

oil c

onse

rvat

ion

•A

ffore

stat

ion

•Pr

even

tion

of fo

rest

fire

s

•O

rgan

ic fa

rmin

g

NG

Os

and

com

mun

ity-

base

d or

gani

zatio

ns (C

BO

)O

pen

http

://sg

p.un

dp.o

rg/in

dex.

php?

optio

n=co

m_c

onte

nt&

view

=ar

ticle

&id

=27

5&It

emid

=17

1#.U

Uss

Mxd

OS

5I

GE

F Tr

ust

Fund

- C

limat

e C

hang

e fo

cal a

rea

The

obje

ctiv

e of

thi

s fu

nd is

to

help

dev

elop

ing

coun

trie

s an

d ec

onom

ies

in t

rans

ition

to

cont

ribut

e to

the

ove

rall

obje

ctiv

e of

the

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

Fra

mew

ork

Con

vent

ion

on

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

(UN

FCC

C).

The

proj

ects

sup

port

mea

sure

s th

at

min

imiz

e cl

imat

e ch

ange

dam

age

by r

educ

ing

the

risk

or t

he a

dver

se

effe

cts

of c

limat

e ch

ange

.

•D

emon

stra

tion,

dep

loym

ent,

and

tr

ansf

er o

f in

nova

tive,

low

-car

bon

tech

nolo

gies

•M

arke

t tr

ansf

orm

atio

n fo

r en

ergy

ef

ficie

ncy

in t

he in

dust

rial a

nd b

uild

ings

se

ctor

s

•In

vest

men

t in

ren

ewab

le e

nerg

y te

chno

logi

es

•E

nerg

y-ef

ficie

nt, l

ow-c

arbo

n tr

ansp

ort

and

urba

n sy

stem

s

•C

onse

rvat

ion

and

enha

ncem

ent

of

carb

on s

tock

thr

ough

sus

tain

able

m

anag

emen

t of

land

use

, lan

d-us

e ch

ange

and

fore

stry

•S

uppo

rt e

nabl

ing

activ

ities

and

cap

acity

bu

ildin

g

Dev

elop

ing

coun

trie

s an

d co

untr

ies

with

eco

nom

ies

in t

rans

ition

Ope

nht

tp://

ww

w.t

hege

f.org

/gef

/arc

hive

d/co

untr

y_su

ppor

t_pr

ogra

m/1

66

Ger

man

In

tern

atio

nal

Clim

ate

Initi

ativ

e

The

Ger

man

Inte

rnat

iona

l Clim

ate

Initi

ativ

e ha

s be

en w

orki

ng s

ince

20

08 w

ith a

nnua

l fun

ds o

f 12

0 m

illio

n E

uros

. All

proj

ects

run

from

one

to

five

year

s.

•Pr

omot

ing

a cl

imat

e-fr

iend

ly e

cono

my

•Pr

omot

ing

mea

sure

s fo

r ad

apta

tion

to

the

impa

cts

of c

limat

e ch

ange

•Pr

omot

ing

mea

sure

s fo

r pr

eser

vatio

n an

d su

stai

nabl

e us

e of

car

bon

rese

rvoi

rs/ R

ED

D+

Fede

ral i

mpl

emen

ting

agen

cies

, gov

ernm

ent

orga

niza

tions

, NG

Os,

bu

sine

ss e

nter

pris

es,

univ

ersi

ties

and

rese

arch

in

stitu

tes,

inte

rnat

iona

l and

m

ultin

atio

nal o

rgan

izat

ions

an

d in

stitu

tes

Dev

elop

ing,

ne

wly

in

dust

rializ

ing

and

tran

sitio

n co

untr

ies

http

://w

ww

.bm

u-kl

imas

chut

zini

tiativ

e.de

/en/

new

s

http://sgp.undp.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=275&Itemid=171#.UUssMxdOS5I

http://www.thegef.org/gef/archived/country_support_program/166

http://www.bmu-klimaschutzinitiative.de/en/news

143


Nam

eD

escr

ipti

on

of

fun

dPr

oje

ct t

ype

Targ

et g

rou

pG

eog

rap

hic

al

focu

sW

eblin

k

Japa

n’s

Fast

S

tart

Fin

ance

This

initi

ativ

e co

vers

all

of J

apan

’s

activ

ities

rel

atin

g to

clim

ate

chan

ge.

•M

itiga

tion:

Ass

istin

g de

velo

ping

co

untr

ies

in t

heir

effo

rts

to r

educ

e em

issi

ons

in s

uch

area

s as

clim

ate

chan

ge p

olic

y fo

rmul

atio

n an

d pr

omot

ion

of r

enew

able

ene

rgy

• R

educ

ing

Em

issi

ons

from

Def

ores

tatio

n an

d Fo

rest

Deg

rada

tion

(RE

DD

+):

Ass

istin

g de

velo

ping

cou

ntrie

s to

su

rvey

fore

st r

esou

rces

and

form

ulat

e fo

rest

man

agem

ent

plan

s to

pro

mot

e su

stai

nabl

e us

age

and

pres

erve

fore

sts

•A

dapt

atio

n: S

tren

gthe

ning

dev

elop

ing

coun

trie

s’ c

apab

ility

to

cope

with

nat

ural

di

sast

ers

caus

ed b

y cl

imat

e ch

ange

Dis

burs

emen

t of

fun

ds

is d

epen

dent

on

bila

tera

l po

licy

cons

ulta

tions

with

Ja

pan

Ope

nht

tp://

ww

w.fa

stst

artfi

nanc

e.or

g/co

ntrib

utin

g_co

untr

y/ja

pan

Inte

llige

nt

Ene

rgy

- Eur

ope

II Pr

ogra

mm

e

The

Inte

llige

nt E

nerg

y –

Eur

ope

(IEE

) pr

ogra

mm

e is

giv

ing

a bo

ost

to c

lean

an

d su

stai

nabl

e so

lutio

ns. I

t su

ppor

ts

thei

r us

e an

d di

ssem

inat

ion

and

the

Eur

ope-

wid

e ex

chan

ge o

f re

late

d kn

owle

dge

and

know

-how

.

•Fo

ster

ene

rgy

effic

ienc

y an

d th

e ra

tiona

l us

e of

ene

rgy

reso

urce

s

•Pr

omot

e ne

w a

nd r

enew

able

en

ergy

sou

rces

and

sup

port

ene

rgy

dive

rsifi

catio

n

•Pr

omot

e en

ergy

eff

icie

ncy

and

the

use

of n

ew a

nd r

enew

able

ene

rgy

sour

ces

in t

rans

port

EU

(ple

ase

note

th

at it

mig

ht

be p

ossi

ble

to

rece

ive

fund

ing

for

proj

ects

th

at p

rodu

ce

ener

gy fo

r th

e E

U o

utsi

de o

f th

e E

U)

http

://ec

.eur

opa.

eu/e

nerg

y/in

telli

gent

/

Inte

rnat

iona

l C

limat

e Fu

nd

(ICF)

The

ICF

is a

UK

initi

ativ

e lin

ked

to

the

Dep

artm

ent

for

Inte

rnat

iona

l D

evel

opm

ent

(DFI

D),

the

Dep

artm

ent

for

Ene

rgy

and

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

(DE

CC

), th

e D

epar

tmen

t fo

r E

nviro

nmen

t, F

ood

and

Rur

al A

ffairs

(D

EFR

A),

Her

Maj

esty

’s Tr

easu

ry

(HM

T), a

nd in

con

sulta

tion

with

the

Fo

reig

n an

d C

omm

onw

ealth

Offi

ce

(FC

O).

•S

uppo

rts

inte

rnat

iona

l pov

erty

red

uctio

n by

hel

ping

dev

elop

ing

coun

trie

s ad

apt

to c

limat

e ch

ange

, tak

e up

low

car

bon

grow

th a

nd t

ackl

e de

fore

stat

ion

Spe

cific

crit

eria

for

elig

ibili

tyO

pen

http

://w

ww

.dec

c.go

v.uk

/en/

cont

ent/

cms/

tack

ling/

inte

rnat

iona

l/icf

/icf.a

spx

Inte

rnat

iona

l Fo

rest

Car

bon

Initi

ativ

e (IF

CI)

This

initi

ativ

e su

ppor

ts in

tern

atio

nal

effo

rts

on R

ED

D t

hrou

gh U

NFC

CC

. It

is jo

intly

adm

inis

tere

d by

the

A

ustr

alia

n D

epar

tmen

t of

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

and

the

Aus

tral

ian

Age

ncy

for

Inte

rnat

iona

l Dev

elop

men

t (A

usA

ID).

•U

nder

taki

ng p

ract

ical

dem

onst

ratio

n ac

tiviti

es t

o sh

ow h

ow R

ED

D+

can

be

incl

uded

in a

pos

t-20

12 g

loba

l clim

ate

chan

ge a

gree

men

t

•In

crea

sing

inte

rnat

iona

l for

est

carb

on

mon

itorin

g an

d ac

coun

ting

capa

city

•S

uppo

rtin

g in

tern

atio

nal e

ffort

s to

de

velo

p m

arke

t-ba

sed

appr

oach

es t

o R

ED

D+

No

inte

ntio

n to

set

up

a ne

w f

und

or g

over

nanc

e st

ruct

ure

thro

ugh

IFC

I, bu

t w

ill w

ork

thro

ugh

esta

blis

hed

chan

nels

of

bila

tera

l dia

logu

e an

d co

oper

atio

n at

the

in

tern

atio

nal l

evel

Fund

ing

will

su

ppor

t pro

ject

s in

sel

ecte

d de

velo

ping

co

untr

ies

(par

ticul

arly

, but

no

t ex

clus

ivel

y,

in In

done

sia

and

Papu

a N

ew

Gui

nea)

http

://w

ww

.clim

atec

hang

e.go

v.au

/go

vern

men

t/in

itiat

ives

/inte

rnat

iona

l-fo

rest

-car

bon-

initi

ativ

e.as

px

http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/tackling/international/icf/icf.aspx

http://www.climatechange.gov.au/government/initiatives/international-forest-carbon-initiative.aspx

144

Nam

eD

escr

ipti

on

of

fun

dPr

oje

ct t

ype

Targ

et g

rou

pG

eog

rap

hic

al

focu

sW

eblin

k

Leas

t D

evel

oped

C

ount

ries

Fund

(L

DC

F)

The

LDC

F su

ppor

ts t

he p

repa

ratio

n an

d im

plem

enta

tion

of t

he N

APA

s,

coun

try-

driv

en s

trat

egie

s w

hich

id

entif

y ur

gent

and

imm

edia

te n

eeds

of

leas

t de

velo

ped

coun

trie

s (L

DC

s)

to a

dapt

to

clim

ate

chan

ge. D

oes

not

requ

ire t

he g

ener

atio

n of

glo

bal

bene

fits.

It is

man

aged

by

the

GE

F S

ecre

taria

t.

•Pr

epar

atio

n an

d im

plem

enta

tion

of t

he

Nat

iona

l Ada

ptat

ion

Prog

ram

mes

of

Act

ion

(NA

PAs)

.

Ope

nA

ll LD

Cs

http

://w

ww

.the

gef.o

rg/g

ef/L

DC

F

Spe

cial

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

Fund

(S

CC

F)

The

SC

CF

supp

orts

the

pre

para

tion

and

impl

emen

tatio

n of

pro

ject

s in

volv

ing

tech

nolo

gy t

rans

fer

and

adap

tatio

n (a

dapt

atio

n as

a t

op

prio

rity)

. Doe

s no

t re

quire

the

ge

nera

tion

of g

loba

l ben

efits

. It

is

man

aged

by

the

GE

F S

ecre

taria

t.

•S

uppo

rts

both

long

-ter

m a

nd s

hort

-te

rm a

dapt

atio

n ac

tiviti

es in

wat

er

reso

urce

s m

anag

emen

t, la

nd

man

agem

ent,

agr

icul

ture

, hea

lth,

infr

astr

uctu

re d

evel

opm

ent,

fra

gile

ec

osys

tem

s (in

clud

ing

mou

ntai

nous

ec

osys

tem

s) a

nd in

tegr

ated

coa

stal

zo

ne m

anag

emen

t (IC

ZM)

All

deve

lopi

ng c

ount

ry

part

ies

to t

he U

NFC

CC

all

deve

lopi

ng c

ount

ry p

artie

s to

the

UN

FCC

C

http

://w

ww

.the

gef.o

rg/g

ef/S

CC

F

The

Ene

rgy

and

Env

ironm

ent

Part

ners

hip

Prog

ram

me

with

the

M

ekon

g R

egio

n (E

EP

Mek

ong)

A k

ey o

bjec

tive

will

be

to fa

cilit

ate

actio

ns o

n th

e gr

ound

and

de

mon

stra

ting

from

the

bot

tom

up

tha

t an

ince

ntiv

e-ba

sed

NA

MA

ap

proa

ch in

the

ene

rgy

sect

or is

fe

asib

le. F

urth

erm

ore,

the

par

tner

ship

w

ill b

e fo

cuse

d on

ince

ntiv

izin

g pr

ivat

e-se

ctor

inve

stm

ents

to

sign

ifica

ntly

incr

ease

inve

stm

ents

in

ene

rgy

effic

ienc

y an

d re

new

able

en

ergy

in d

evel

opin

g co

untr

ies’

en

ergy

sup

ply.

•R

enew

able

ene

rgy

•E

nerg

y-ef

ficie

nt t

echn

olog

y de

velo

pmen

t an

d us

e

•M

oder

n en

ergy

and

cle

an t

echn

olog

y

•W

aste

-to-

ener

gy

•E

lect

ricity

fro

m r

enew

able

ene

rgy

sour

ces

Cam

bodi

a, L

ao

PD

R, V

iet

Nam

an

d Th

aila

nd

ww

w.e

epm

ekon

g.or

g/m

ain_

navi

gatio

n/co

ntac

t_us

.php

?rel

oad

ww

w.e

epm

ekon

g.or

g/in

dex.

php?

relo

ad

UN

EP

’s

Rur

al E

nerg

y E

nter

pris

e D

evel

opm

ent

(RE

ED

) Pr

ogra

mm

e

This

initi

ativ

e of

fers

ent

erpr

ise

deve

lopm

ent

serv

ices

and

sta

rt-u

p fin

anci

ng t

o cl

ean

ener

gy e

nter

pris

es.

Sin

ce b

egin

ning

in 2

000,

RE

ED

has

fin

ance

d 44

ent

erpr

ises

tha

t ar

e no

w r

etur

ning

cap

ital e

ach

year

to

an in

vest

men

t fu

nd t

hat

is t

hen

re-

inve

sted

in n

ew e

nter

pris

es.

•E

nerg

yO

pen

Five

Afr

ican

co

untr

ies

(AR

EE

D),

Bra

zil

(B-R

EE

D) a

nd

Chi

na (C

-RE

ED

)

http

://w

ww

.une

p.fr

/ene

rgy/

activ

ities

/re

ed/a

reed

.htm

http://www.eepmekong.org/main_navigation/contact_us.php?reloadwww.eepmekong.org/index.php?reload

145


Nam

eD

escr

ipti

on

of

fun

dPr

oje

ct t

ype

Targ

et g

rou

pG

eog

rap

hic

al

focu

sW

eblin

k

The

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

C

olla

bora

tive

Prog

ram

me

on R

ED

D in

D

evel

opin

g C

ount

ries

(UN

-RE

DD

) Pr

ogra

mm

e

This

mul

ti-do

nor

trus

t fu

nd a

llow

s do

nors

to

pool

res

ourc

es a

nd p

rovi

de

fund

ing

with

the

aim

of

sign

ifica

ntly

re

duci

ng g

loba

l em

issi

ons

from

de

fore

stat

ion

and

fore

st d

egra

datio

n in

dev

elop

ing

coun

trie

s.

•M

onito

ring,

rep

ortin

g an

d ve

rific

atio

n

•N

atio

nal R

ED

D+

gov

erna

nce

•E

ngag

emen

t of

indi

geno

us p

eopl

es,

loca

l com

mun

ities

and

oth

er r

elev

ant

stak

ehol

ders

•E

nsur

ing

mul

tiple

ben

efits

of

fore

sts

and

RE

DD

+

•Tr

ansp

aren

t, e

quita

ble

and

acco

unta

ble

man

agem

ent

of R

ED

D+

pay

men

ts

•R

ED

D+

as

a ca

taly

st fo

r tr

ansf

orm

atio

ns

to a

gre

en e

cono

my

Ope

nS

ever

al

sele

ctio

n cr

iteria

for

coun

trie

s ex

ist

http

://w

ww

.un-

redd

.org

/

Uni

ted

Sta

tes

Age

ncy

for

Inte

rnat

iona

l D

evel

opm

ent

(USA

ID)

Dev

elop

men

t G

rant

s Pr

ogra

mm

e (D

GP

)

The

DG

P is

clo

sely

alig

ned

with

ag

ency

initi

ativ

es a

ddre

ssin

g to

day’

s pr

essi

ng p

robl

ems

of h

unge

r an

d fo

od s

ecur

ity, h

ealth

impa

cts

of in

suffi

cien

t w

ater

res

ourc

es,

chal

leng

es t

hat

acco

mpa

ny g

loba

l cl

imat

e ch

ange

, loc

al c

apac

ity

deve

lopm

ent,

wom

en a

nd p

eace

-bu

ildin

g an

d po

st-c

onfli

ct r

esol

utio

n.

•C

limat

e ch

ange

ada

ptat

ion

The

DG

P o

ffers

USA

ID

a un

ique

opp

ortu

nity

to

fost

er p

artn

ersh

ips

with

org

aniz

atio

ns a

nd

com

mun

ities

tha

t ha

ve

not

been

dire

ct U

S

Gov

ernm

ent

deve

lopm

ent

part

ners

and

to

colla

bora

te

with

gra

nt r

ecip

ient

s to

m

ake

cont

ribut

ions

to

coun

try

deve

lopm

ent

obje

ctiv

es, a

nd t

he U

.S.

Gov

ernm

ent

prio

ritie

s an

d in

itiat

ives

.

Elig

ible

co

untr

ies

will

be

spe

cifie

d in

th

e FY

201

2

http

://id

ea.u

said

.gov

/ls/d

gp

Clim

ate

Fund

s U

pdat

e is

an

inde

pend

ent W

eb s

ite t

hat

prov

ides

info

rmat

ion

on t

he g

row

ing

num

ber

of in

tern

atio

nal c

limat

e fin

ance

initi

ativ

es d

esig

ned

to h

elp

deve

lopi

ng c

ount

ries

addr

ess

the

chal

leng

es o

f cl

imat

e ch

ange

. ht

tp://

ww

w.c

limat

efun

dsup

date

.org

/




Please address comments and inquires to:

Investment Centre Division

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)

Viale delle Terme di Caracalla – 00153 Rome, Italy

[email protected]

www.fao.org/investment

Report No. 4 - May 2012

Inco

rpo

rating

climate ch

ange co

nsid

eration

s into

agricu

ltural investm

ent p

rog

ramm

es R

epo

rt No. 4