kenya adapt mitig final
DESCRIPTION
The presentation discusses synergies between adaptation to climate change and climate change mitigation for the case of KenyaTRANSCRIPT
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Glwadys Aymone GbetibouoUniversity of Pretoria
on behalf of Barrack Okoba, Carla Roncoli, Claudia Ringler, and Mario Herrero
Copenhagen, COP 15December 11, 2009
SYNERGIES BETWEEN MITIGATION AND ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE
CHANGE: EXPERIENCE FROM KENYA
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
1.1. Impact of climate change on KenyaImpact of climate change on Kenya
2.2. Synergies between adaptation and Synergies between adaptation and mitigation mitigation
3.3. Farmer perceptions of adaptation Farmer perceptions of adaptation and mitigation - and mitigation - Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
4.4. ConclusionsConclusions
OUTLINE
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
IMPACT OF CLIMATE IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON KENYACHANGE ON KENYA
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE Source: IFPRI
WHY CLIMATE MATTERS FOR KENYA
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
-4.0
-3.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.019
7519
7619
7719
7819
7919
8019
8119
8219
8319
8419
8519
8619
8719
8819
8919
9019
9119
9219
9319
9419
95
DROUGHT INDEX
GDP GROWTH
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE Source: Ogutu et al. (2007)
Mostly:
• in the cold season
• for min night temps
KENYA: TEMPERATURE ON THE RISE
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE Source: IPCC (2007), Herrero (2009)
KENYA: CHANGE IN PRECIPITATION
Small increase expected in Dec-Jan
2000-2050
Green= increase in yields
Brown= decrease in yields
Source: Jones and Thornton (2003)
IMPACT OF CC ON MAIZE YIELDSKenya
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
2000 2050 no CC 2050 NCAR369
2050 CSIRO532
2050 CSIRO369
2050 Hadley369
SSA Kenya
Source: IFPRI
IMPACT OF CC ON MAIZE YIELDSKenya
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
IMPACT OF CC ON CHILD MALNUTRITION (%)
Projected to 2025
Source: IFPRI
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
2000 2025 no CC 2025 CSIRO 369
2025 NCAR 369
2025 Hadley 369
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
SYNERGIES BETWEEN SYNERGIES BETWEEN ADAPTATION AND ADAPTATION AND
MITIGATIONMITIGATION
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Adaptation
SYNERGIES & TRADEOFFS
Mitigation
Profitability
MITIGATION: POTENTIAL IN AGRICULTURE
Note: Estimates calculated from data provided by Smith et al (2008) (for SRES scenario B1)
Total Agric. Land
(M ha)
Mitigation Potential by 2030
Technical (t CO2e/ha/yr)
Technical(Mt CO2e / yr)
Economic at
0-20$/ton CO2eq (Mt CO2e / yr)
East Africa 364 1.10 400 109
Central Africa
177 1.02 180 49
North Africa 113 0.80 90 25
South Africa 138 0.58 80 22
West Africa 302 0.73 220 60
Total 1093 0.89 970 265 (27%)
• Largest potential for agricultural CF projects in East Africa (41%)
Estimated total technical and economic mitigation potential (0-20$/ton) on all agricultural land, incl. all management practices and all GHG
Commodity
Smallholder Livestock-
Maize Systems
Maize Biofuels Coffee Tea Sugar
Area available in ha (million)
3 1.6Semi-arid:
0.9 0.15 0.15 0.14
GHG mitigation activities
SALM: Agronomy
Nutrient mgmt
Water mgmt
Agroforestry
Set aside land
Residue mgmt.
Jatropha
1) Fuel-switch
2) AR
1) Shade trees, multiple cropping
2) Mulching
3) Fertilizer use eff
Inter-cropping no option in Kenya
1) No/ burning of residues
2) Mulching systems
3) Fertilizer related emissions
Existing extension service
- - - + ++ +
Tech. GHG mitigation potential in t CO2e/ha/y.
2 - 5 0.5
1) 1-12
2) 2.5-5.0
High bandwidth
3 – 8 ----- 7.8 in 6 years
Economic mit. potential
++ ? ? ++ 0 +
Source: Timm Tennigkeit
MITIGATION: POTENTIAL IN AGRICULTURE
SYNERGIES BETWEEN ADAPTATION AND MITIGATION
Positive correlation between soil carbon and crop yield Agricultural practices that improve soil fertility and enhance carbon sequestration also improve yield
Increased fertilizer application, ideally combining inorganic with organic soil fertility types
Increased and more efficient agricultural water management (reduces CO2 from fuel/electricity, conserves land)
Agricultural R&D, advisory services, and information systems support both adaptation and mitigation
Page 14
Tradeoff between crop residues and animal feeds in parts of Kenya
Lack of application of labor-intensive soil & water fertility management practices on marginal soils (too costly/risky)
Increased fertilizer application (in conjunction with soil fertility management) reduces soil mining and supports mitigation and adaptation, over-fertilization increases GHG
TRADEOFFS BETWEEN ADAPTATION AND MITIGATION
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
FARMER PERCEPTIONS OF FARMER PERCEPTIONS OF ADAPTATION AND ADAPTATION AND
MITIGATIONMITIGATION
Farmers Are Aware Of The Link Between Agriculture And Climate Change
Source: KARI-IFPRI survey, n=351
“Which Agricultural Practices Can Help Reduce Climate Change?”
Source: KARI-IFPRI survey, n=351; multiple responses possible
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
(%)
61%
“What Have You Done In Response To Perceived Climate Change?”
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
(%)
Source: KARI-IFPRI survey, n=351, multiple responses possible
“What Would You Like To Do In Response To Perceived Climate Change?”
(%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Source: KARI-IFPRI survey, n=351, multiple responses possible
“Why Are You Not Implementing Desired Adaptations?”
0 20 40 60
Pests and diseases
No market
No access to credit
Shortage of labor
Lack of information
No access to land
No access to inputs
No water
No access to money
(%)
Source: KARI-IFPRI survey, n=351
“Which Developments Do You Need Most Urgently?”
0
10
20
30
40
50
60(%
)
Only responses > 20% included
Source: KARI-IFPRI survey, n=351, multiple responses possible
High Potential
Low Potential
Nyeri Syaya Mbere Njoro Garissa
Irrigation technology/water infrastructure 1 1 3 2
Farmer organizations 2
Training, capacity building 4 1 4
Education 1
Credit/capital 3 1 2 2
Seed/seedlings provision 2
Mechanization of agriculture 3
Corruption eradication 4 3
Markets, market controls 4
Natural forest restoration 4
Moving from pastoralism to farming 3
“Which Solutions are Most Effective and Desirable to Deal with CC Impacts? ?”
Source: focus groups, KARI-UGA, n=69 men1 2 3 4Ranking
“What are the causes of climate change?”
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Loss of habitat
Extracting sand from river beds
Farming in sacred sites
God's will, punishment
Planting exotic, inappropriate trees
Overgrazing
Overuse of chemical inputs
Lack of soil conservation
Cutting (indigenous) trees
Land clearning
Pollution
Deforestation
Number of mentions (N=32)
Source: focus groups, KARI-UGA, n=69
CONCLUSIONS Mitigation to climate change may yield
substantial benefits for smallholder farmers in Kenya (US$2.2 billion in East Africa) that can be used to support adaptation and development efforts
Given the low price of carbon offsets (US$5-20/ha) mitigation activities alone do not yield sufficient benefits: the latter need to be complemented by co-benefits from adaptation and increased productivity/profitability
Therefore it is essential to focus on activities that advance all three areas: profitability, adaptation, and mitigation
Changing crop varieties/types and planting dates are among the most common adaptive strategies at the farm level
The main constraint to implementing other adaptions is lack of access to capital and credit (ex.: irrigation is widely desired but expensive to establish and operate)
Some of the priorities for development identified by farmers (irrigation, extension, capacity building, etc.) will support the synergies of mitigation and adaptation to climate change
CONCLUSIONS
Farmers are aware of the connection between agriculture and climate change and of the benefits of planting trees to mitigate climate change
There is less awareness about the mitigation potential for soil and water conservation and integrated soil fertility management and their potential synergies with adaptation
CONCLUSIONS