Elin Enfors & Line GordonTshwane, South Africa, 17 November 2011

RESILIENCE TWG MEETING IFWF3

14.00-14.15 Welcome + introductions

14.15-14.35 Resilience insights from Arizona meeting + IFWF3

14.35-15.15 Explore resilience interests in TWG

15.15-15.35 Explore potential TWG activities

15.35-15.45 BREAK

15.45-16.25 Thematic group discussions + reporting back

16.25-16.55 Visioning exercise

16.55-17.00 Closing

Agenda

Deals with the tension between persistence and change

Change and variability is normal, stability is not

Incorporates uncertainty, surprise and shocks in analysis

Truly interlinked social-ecological systems (role of learning, adaptation, diversity in social-ecological systems)

Emphasizes interactions small to large scales, and between fast and slow processes

What we like about resilience

• The challenge is often not to build resilience of existing system states but rather to enable transformation towards better pathways. In any case, it is not about going back.. • There are different kinds of social traps that are important to understand, in order to understand why certain systems end up on undesirable paths • Resilience is difficult to measure, but resilience thinking can still be used to improve understanding of system dynamics and thereby to guide interventions

Insights from TWG meeting in Arizona

• How to deal with the diversity within the basins, and what to put our focus on (what is supposed to be resilient and at what scale?) • How to deal with overwhelming drivers, such as population growth, and future game changers such as new emerging drivers and changing disturbance regimes • What is really a “stable” state? It seems as sustained inputs often are needed to stay on a certain trajectory.. • What are the minimum requirements to assess resilience? / How to identify key system variables in a “quick and dirty” way? • How to simplify these ideas enough to be able to communicate to people who like silver bullets?

Questions emerging in Arizona

INSIGHTS FROM IFWF 3 - MONDAY PLENARIES

• Quadrupple squeeze on the planet – pushes ecosystems across thresholds

• Live in Antropocene with unprecedented changes, need to identify “safe operating space” for humanity

• To build resilience we need to: a) be active stewards of our landscapes, b) sustainable intensification on current croplands, and c) turning crises into opportunities

• Need to “think outside the box” – what are water dimension of current crises (food prices, financial collapses etc)

• Key questions: – how to get farmers to shift from production optimisation to

long-term resilience building?– Improve understanding of how resilient different

interventions are?

• Resilience approaches help us understand agro-ecosystem dynamics, including alternative stable states, tipping points, and pathways for transformation

• We need to shift mindset from optimizing yields to building

resilient landscapes that provide multiple ecosystem services

• Agricultural water management interventions may provide leverage for transformation, but the change process may entail risks (marginalization of certain groups, loss of ES)

• To navigate the transformation towards a desirable outcome we need to consider key system variables, mindsets and emotions of people which influence their willingness and ability to change, and institutional factors across scale

INSIGHTS FROM IFWF 3 – RESILIENCE SESSION PRESENTATIONS

Do we have examples of agro-ecosystems that have changed theircharacter substantially over a short period of time, i.e. can weidentify alternative regimes in these systems?

• Southern Cape: wheat canola due to changing economic incentives• Blue Nile: wetland grazing rice monoculture early 1990s• Nile, Tanzania & Sahel smallholder farming: fundamental change in productive

potential of the system• Bangladesh: 60's/70's single cycle rice to double cycle rice, 80s to aquaculture

and shrimp, and in 80s/90s to multiple crops and fish• Mekong: hydropower development and inter-basin transfers strongly affecting

hydrology and livelihoods of downstream communities• Australia: Salinization of farmland as a consequence of deforestation

While systems without a buffer can change abruptly, with devastatingconsequences, there is rarely an economic incentive to in such a buffer General pattern of a tension between planning for the long term under pressingshort-term conditions

INSIGHTS FROM IFWF 3 – RESILIENCE SESSION ROUND TABLE DISCUSSIONS

Can we identify different types of traps in agro-ecosystems,meaning development trajectories that are undesirable butdifficult to break free from? • RISK TRAPS: High risk situations reduces incentives to invest • CONSUMPTION/PRODUCTION TRAPS: Consumption of bio-resources too

close to production resource mining

• VARIABILITY TRAPS (Perhaps combination of the two above)

• RESOURCE ACCESS TRAPS – too small land lots cap at revenues

• POLICY TRAPS – Got resources and markets, but cant grow because of disenabling policies, political power that prevents change 

• CULTURAL TRAPS: Mindsets prevent change

INSIGHTS FROM IFWF 3 – RESILIENCE SESSION ROUND TABLE DISCUSSIONS

Under what conditions can AWM lead to substantial positive change ina catchment / a basin, i.e. what issues need to be addressed to makeAWM investments work?

• Interventions that contribute to agro-ecological productivity• Purpose of interventions clear, single solutions never the answer• Visions of pathways to change, and associated trade-offs • Water combined with other farm-level investments • Coordination of investments across scales (markets, connected

institutions etc.)• Interventions correspond to farmers needs / capacities• Identify acceptable short/long term trade-offs, offer alternatives• Getting the mindsets right for relevant groups (part of complex

systems)

INSIGHTS FROM IFWF 3 – RESILIENCE SESSION ROUND TABLE DISCUSSIONS

thresholds / tipping points / sudden shifts

traps & transformations

adaptive governance

multi-level institutions

coping/adapting to change/disturbances

(identify disturbance regimes, uncertainties, nurturing diversity, human assets/capacities etc)

scenarios, anticipating change

resilience assessments / systems analysis

ecosystem services

social-ecological linkages

What aspects of resilience are you interested in?

Harmonization of research questions and approaches

Feedback on projects

Joint papers

Sharing literature

Training courses

Etc.

What activities would you like the TWG to pursue?

1) What is the value of resilience thinking for Agricultural research for development?

- Concept paper

- Communication messages

2) What are resilience indicators?

-Social (IK, local adaptive capacity etc)

-ecological

3) Theory (figure out what concepts such as scales, thresholds, desirable vs non-desirable traj. Adaptation vs transformation mean)

4) Turning crises to opportunities (reorganization etc)

5) Taking stock on resilience work in CPWF (homogenize, while keeping diversity)

Main themes

What questions do you want to answer?

What activities can help you do that?

What outputs can those activities generate?

How do you want this group to support that?

Group discussions

It is 2014, the 2nd phase of the CPWF is coming to and end. You are feeling very proud over the resilience topic working group, in which you have actively participated. What have we accomplished together to make you feel this way?

Visioning exercise