can soil carbon trading benefit smallholder mixed farmers in africa?

Can Soil Carbon Trading Benefit Smallholder Mixed Farmers in Africa?

Habtemariam Abate (Ph.D.)Co-Chair of ECSNCC

And Steering Committee Member of PACJA

Outline

1. Introduction2. Does smallholder mixed farming in Africa have

potentials for soil carbon sequestration and adaptation to climate change? The case of Ethiopia– Conservation Agriculture (CA)– Restoring Degraded Land (re-vegetation, enclosure)– Pasture and Grazing Management (Zero grazing,

quality forage)

Outline Cont’d

– Indigenous Agro-forestry Practices, Highland fruits, Enset

– Biological Conservation Measures (Vetiver grass, Bamboo)

– Water Harvesting

Outline Cont’d

3. Risks/ Challenges of carbon trading scheme for smallholder mixed farming communities

4. Opportunities of payment for ecological services (Soil Carbon Sequestration) for smallholder mixed farming communities

5. Way Forward

1. Introduction

• Africa 7% emission• 2% CDM (98 % Multi national big companies)• AU 13th Summit, July 2009 to AU Commission(Kyoto 2nd Phase)• Addis Agriculture, FS & CC Conference (6-8

Sept)o Communique – SHA considered in the

compliance and voluntary CO2 trading

• Hague (31st- 5 November)

1. Introduction Cont’d

PACJA welcomes this initiatives for:• 90% total mitigation potential SCS• No regret options or SLM best practices offer

quadruple win results– Reduce land degradation– Enhance AG development– Adaptation to CC– Mitigation to CC

1. Introduction Cont’d

Concern of PACJA:• Given the speculative nature of CM• Given the environmental & financial integrity

of speculatorsCould market mechanism be an option for

African smallholders?

1. Introduction Cont’d

• Above all, given their profiet motive, would the multinational carbon companies be interested in smallholders and Ecological Agriculture?

2. Does smallholder farming in Africa have potentials for SC sequestration & A to CC ? (Ethiopia)

• Why promotion of SLM practices is mandatory?

Destroyed farm land (Kobo)

Why SLM Cont’d

No Regret SLM Best Practices– CA

Pasture and Grazing Management (zero grazing, forage quality)

Indigenous Agro-forestry Practices, Highland Fruits and Enset

Degraded Land Restoring Practices (re-vegetation, enclosure)

Fig 7: Cut and Carry (Harbu) Fig 8: Enclosure (Harbu)

Agro-forestry cont’d (12 million SH)

Biological Conservation Methods

• !5 year’s SLM Program (6 Regions, 55 Districts, 177 Watersheds, 9 million FHH)

Biological Conservation Measures (Vetiver grass, Bamboo)

Biological cont’d

Some adaptation services of vetiver grass (Infrastructure protection )

Infrastructure Cont’d

Roof thatching and ornamental

Soil and water conservation and Gully treatment

Mulching & SWC

Income generation

Handicrafts

Livestock feed

3. Risk/ challenges of soil carbon trading scheme for smallholder mixed farming communities

• Fraudulent CT do not deliver neither the promised GHG reductions nor the the benefits to smallholders

• Skewing priority from adaptation and food security to mitigation

• Developed countries will use markets to replace public funding,

• Spread of GMOs, Land rights (eviction of SH)

4. Opportunities of payment for ecological services

• Payment for ecological services (Motivating and Rewarding the mitigation and adaptation effort of millions of Smallholders) is a just solution for global warming, food insecurity and underdevelopment ( Goal of Humanity)

5. Way forward

• Craft the roadmap for change with greater participation of all stakeholders including CSOs and Smallholders

• Public funding not the fraudulent market mechanism is the real solution

• Priority to adaptation not mitigation in agric.• Regulated not voluntary Carbon market • Pilot Carbon Marketing in agriculture