Technical report on Livestock and Climate Change in Africa -

Progress to Date

Piers Simpkin, consultant

AGNES preCOP25 strategy meeting

Panari Hotel, Nairobi

30 January 2020

Draft outline of report

Livestock management systems in Africa in the context of climate change1. Introduction and brief overview of climate change impacts in

Africa2. Overview of major livestock systems by African subregion 3. Major challenges for these systems 4. Summary of projected livestock sector development 5. Top 10-15 intervention options to improve livestock

management6. Knowledge gaps and challenges by system and by

intervention 7. Conclusion and negotiation points

Aim

Aim and Purpose of study

To provide technical information in support of AGNES’ preparation of submissions for Koroniva topic 2e.

• Identify main CC issues affecting livestock in Africa, concentrating on the adaptation aspects required with mention of mitigation co-benefits.

• Suggest recommendations and negotiation points

Why Livestock? (Source: FAO, 2006)

1. Projected occurrences of drought and temperature change to 2050

2. Overview of major livestock systems by African subregion Description of the major systems, including economic figures of contribution of livestock to GDP, numbers of animals per species, average consumption of animal-source foods and contribution of livestock products to food and nutrition security

• Eastern

• Western

• Central

• Northern

• Southern

++ The role of gender and youth in livestock systems

++ Institutions

++ Comparison of African livestock system characteristics with developed country statistics

WORK IN PROGRESS

2. Gender and youth

Table X. Roles of the different ages and genders in livestock keeping inthe Horn of Africa. (Simpkin, 2005)

2. Gender and Youth

2020 - Significant improvements in some systems,

Intensive / peri-urban – much more involvement / ownership by women and youth

Extensive / pastoral - still major gaps.

Inheritance, ownership, access.

Women headed households still most vulnerable to CC

3. Major challenges for these systems (Source:

Various)

Barriers to adaptation: institutional, social, political and economic.

Stressors: • Poverty• Low development levels• Poor infrastructure• Land use challenges• Desertification• Low levels of livelihood

diversification• Low adaptive capacity

• Limited economic resources• Lack of appropriate

technologies• Conflict over resources• Governance challenges• Global economics• High dependency on rainfed

agriculture

4. Summary of projected livestock sector development

Demand for

livestock products

Population growth

Income growth

Urbanization rates

WORK IN PROGRESS

4. Summary of projected livestock sector development

5. Top 10-15 intervention options to adapt to climate change (Source: Various)

1. Migration

2. Reducing water consumption

3. Integrating and improving on mixed crop – livestock

systems

4. Early Warning, Risk management, Insurance and new

technologies

5. Diversification

6. Improved hygiene, sanitation, quarantines and movement restrictions

5. Projected outcomes for adaptation and mitigation co-benefits

Joint adaptation and mitigation approaches include:1. Climate smart (CSA) and conservation agriculture 2. Sustainable rangeland management 3. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services4. Sustainable intensification and exploiting market opportunities5. Integrated approaches (Food, Water Energy nexus)6. Reducing methane emissions intensities7. Policy change and enabling environments and improved

coordination and governance: (including masterplans, data and information generation)

8. Reducing food loss and waste of animal products

(Source: McKinsey, 2020 b)

6. Knowledge gaps and Challenges by system and by intervention (Source: Rojas-Downing et al 2017)

• Many studies at continental or regional level; need for more local level studies

• Most research is on cattle, knowledge gaps exist around non-ruminants

• Not enough research on water availability for livestock production under climate change

• Gaps around knowledge on livestock diseases and the interaction with climate change

• More research needed on nutritional and metabolic processes of livestock

• Need to identify breeds with adaptive capacities to climate change

6. Challenges by system and by intervention (Source: Thornton et al, 2016)

7. Conclusion and Recommendations

•Generally climate change will have a negative effect on livestock and their owners in Africa.

•Cannot generalize or do broadbrush interventions

•Uptake and success are very dependent on local conditions

•Interventions outside of livestock are as important as within livestock

•Participation of local communities in planning is essential

7. Conclusion and Recommendations(Adapted from Thornton et al., 2019)

• High Level

• Identify the policy and finance blocks and enablers.Enablers: Governance, Economics, Innovation

• Tackle the causes and not the symptoms. Is CC a human orlivestock issue?

• Mid-level

• Territorial, Landscape, Cross-border and Inter-sectoral approaches (Nexus)

• Social safety net provision

• Baskets of options by contexts: agricultural diversification and alternative livelihood provision, or specialisation and intensification

7. Conclusion and Recommendations(Source: Thornton et al., 2019)

SuitabilityExtensive mixed system Intensifying mixed system

High (3) ) = 30 percent potential adoption

Changing livestock species; Improved feeding; Grazing management; Altering integration between crops & livestock; Food storage; Weather information

Changing crop varieties; Changing livestock breed; Improved feeding; Altering integration between crops & livestock;

Medium (2) = 15 percent potential adoption

Changing crops; Changing livestock breed; Manure management; Water use efficiency and management; Weather-index insurance;

Crop management; Nutrient management; Soil management; Manure management; Changing livestock species; Grazing management; Food storage; Food processing; Weather-index insurance;

Low (1) = 5 percent potential adoption

Changing crop varieties; Crop management; Nutrient management; Soil management; Food processing;

Changing crops; Crop residue management; Water use efficiency and Management; Weather information;

Not suitable (0) Crop residue management;

•Low-level

7. Negotiation points

High level:1. To get states to do more individually on livestock adaptation and to speak as one voice as

Africa.2. Cooperation between countries and economic blocks (Nhamo et al 2018).3. Identify and build on the Co-benefits of adaptation and mitigation. 4. To provide CC funds that are cross-sectoral (not like WB funds)5. Filling research and knowledge gaps: more funding for policy and research into potential

options for diversification, and establishment of supportive policies to enable diversification (Waha et al 2017), Recognise the value of natural environments and space and include a biodiversity index into the measure of impact livestock have on climate change, mitigation and adaptation. Lobby to measure CCA according to “intensity of system” and not “intensity of production”.

6. Carbon sequestration opportunities are often out of reach of most African farmers who may require and deserve them most. There is need to re-examine the carbon sequestration market standards and updating the requirements for soil carbon projects to make them more accessible to African small farmers in extensive grazing systems.

7. Negotiation points

Mid level1. Dietary change may be a requirement in the MDCs in the west, however setting

global trends and thinking based on “wealth and convenience malnutrition” unfairly penalizes many small African farmers whose whole livelihood is based on animal production systems that may not be a climate negative as those in MDCs.

2. Accept a balanced development strategy is needed; not just livestock, but also diversified livelihoods, infrastructure, markets and biodiversity.

3. Recognise, understand and accept that much of Africa’s livestock farming occurs under “non-equilibrium” conditions, and that emergencies (especially drought and flood) are to be expected, and international funding should be available in quick time to respond appropriately to identified trigger indicators, and that governments should have targeted emergency response plans.

4. Improve within-breed selection by establishing appropriate infrastructure such as performance recording and genetic evaluation (Thornton et al 2016)

5. INVEST IN WOMEN and womens’ rights

7. Negotiation points

Low level1. Compare African GHG/person compared to western world.2. African temperature increases are higher than average global.3. Specific, robust research into the impacts, costs, benefits, synergies, and trade-

offs (Thornton et al 2016) of different CCA interventions, and their acceptability to farmers in SSA, which then could be used to improve modelling of many of the

interventions examined.

This work is financed by CCAFS

It is implemented in a partnership with AGNES.

It contributes to the CGIAR Research Program onClimate Change, Agriculture and Food Security

Acknowledgements

This presentation is licensed for use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence.

better lives through livestock

ilri.org

1. Impact of CC on ecosystem services and plant cover (Source: Boone et al., 2017

1. Issues

Highly variable projections

Climate VARIABILITY likely to be as bigger challenge as climate change itself. (Thornton et al., XXXX)

Non-Equilibrium thinking

Impact of Climate Change on Livestock Globally (Source: Rojas-Downing et. al., 2017)

Major CC impact and challenges for these systems (Source: Expanded from Rojas-Downing et al, 2017)

1. Change in quantity and quality of animal feeds including natural rangelands and pasture

2. Water availability and quality 3. Spread of livestock pests and diseases 4. Heat stress on livestock (and humans) 5. Impact on Biodiversity (in ecosystems and within livestock)

6. Change in Agro-ecological zones7. Impact on Food security, Income and Livelihoods 8. Livestock rearing and coping with climate variability9. Risk of Conflict and how to manage it. 10. Wildfires11. Global trends and beliefs in climate change and livestock production

/ consumption

4. Summary of projected livestock sector development- Raw milk production (Source: Herrero et al, 2014)

4. Global trends in Ruminant meat production (Source: Herrero et al, 2014)

4. Global trends in Monogastrics (Pigs and Poultry) production (Source: Herrero et al, 2014)

Climate Smart Index (CSI)

A Solidaridad tool to measure climate change adaptation and mitigation performance

AGN INPUTS TO THE SBSTA 52 DIALOGUE ON IPCC SPECIAL REPORT ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND LAND

Presented by Rapando NancyOn behalf: Anne Verbeek (NS), Jan Maarten Dros (REC EU) & Juliana Jacobowski (REC SAM)JANUARY, 2020

SOLIDARIDAD NETWORK A GLOBAL CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATION

WE WORK WITH FARMING AND MINING COMMUNITIES

TO GIVE THEM THE SUPPORT AND KNOWLEDGE TO PRODUCE MORE SUSTAINABLY

3

Climate and Landscape Taskforce - There for you!

NS & REC Europe

Eduard Merger (Lead)

Jan Maarten DrosKatie Minderhoud

REC CAM

Carlos Perez

REC SAM

Gonzalo

REC WAF

Nicholas JengreSamuel Ogallah (continental)

REC SAF

Nqobizitha Ndlovu

REC ECAF

Nancy Rapando

REC S&SEA

Prashant Pastore

Our added value to the Network

5

▪ Strategic positioning & guidance to the Network

▪ Provision of Tools, Methods & Learning for best practice implementation

▪ Climate & Landscape finance intelligence & fundraising support

Climate-Smart Index?

Paris Agreement 2015: Milestone in the global climate policy but Measuring progress of actions remains weak

7

Source

: http

s://climate

actio

ntra

cker.o

rg/

https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/

How do we know if our supported farmers mitigate or adapt to CC if we do not measure?

8

Mitigation & AdaptationMeasurement and monitoring

Mitigation:

- Unit: Metric is ton CO2eq. (Activity Data * Emission Factor)

- Using GHG calculators.

Adaptation:

- Unit: No universal metric exists, adaptation is context specific

- Currently, adaptation in agriculture is described qualitatively at best.

Adaptation measurement :

■ There are no existing suitable tools to make agricultural adaptation measurable.

DIFFRENTIATED IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE MAKE ADAPTATION MEASUREMENT MORE COMPLICATED

Our Solution

11

Climate Smart Index (CSI)

■ A science-based, pragmatic tool to measure and report

climate adaptation & mitigation performance & progress

over time

■ Outcome measurement

■ Assesses whether promoted best practices lead to better climate

performance (adaptation and/or mitigation)

■ CSI can be integrated into existing program monitoring

frameworks. No significant additional data collection required

Data collection

Timing

▪ Continuous

▪ Annually

Sampling

▪ Consistent

▪ Identifiable

▪ Sample size

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH

Adaptation

Definition Adaptation

14

https://www.adaptationcommunity.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/GIZ-2017_Risk-Supplement-to-the-Vulnerability-Sourcebook.pdf

Generally, adaptation measures can reduce the risk by reducing vulnerability and in certain cases also exposure.

Vulnerability can be reduced either by decreasing sensitivity or by increasing capacity. E.g. the introduction of water saving irrigation techniques reduces sensitivity while fostering knowledge on water management techniques increases capacity.

It is recommended to focus on adaptation measures targeting the sensitivity and/or capacity analysed within the impact chain.

Elements of the adaptation index: Exposure, sensitivity & capacity

15

According to the IPCC, adaptation is increased by:

■ Decreased exposure

■ Decreased sensitivity to hazards

○ Physical: soil attributes, farm management practices.

○ Socio-economic: age structure, income structure, diversification of

income, higher risk of single crop

■ Increased capacity to deal with hazards

○ Coping capacity: Using available resources to overcome

○ Adaptive capacity: adjustments to take advantage of opportunities

or to respond.

Six key steps

16

STEP 1

Assess the key expected hazard risk to the region, landscape

STEP 2

Define exposure:presence of something of value in the system of concern

STEP 3

Define the relevance of vulnerability elements

STEP 4

Score of each adaptation practice

STEP 5

Define the relevance of mitigation elements

STEP 6

Score each

mitigation

practice

Adaptation assessment

Mitigation assessment

CLIMATE SMART INDEX

STEP ONE AND STEP 2

UNDERTAKE A CLIMATE RISK/ VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT OR USE EXISTING DATA

Selecting practices for questionnaireAdaptation

Climate adaptation is a function of

- E: Exposure to climate change: producer climate awareness- S: Sensitivity of the farming system: Agricultural characteristics- RC: Resilience Capacity: Socio-economic characteristics

Producer climate awareness

Agronomic practices Socio-economic characteristics

1. Adequate climate informed decision making

2. Access to weather forecasting

1. Irrigation2. Climate resilient crop

variety3. Soil & water

conservation practices4. Integrated Pest

Management (IPM)

1. Membership of a cooperative

2. Education level3. Access to health care4. Access to

market/contract5. Diversity of income

STEP 3: Vulnerability matrix

19

Vulnerability elements have three core dimensions and are interlinked

Vulnerability elements →

Dimension ↓

1.Sensitivity -Physical

(Weight 25%)

2. Sensitivity - Socio-economic

(Weight 25%)

3. Coping capacity

(Weight 25%)

4. Adaptive capacity(Weight 25%)

2. Farm management practices

Irrigation systems in place, Cover crops, Tree planting, soil management practice etc.

Diversification of crops planted,

Making use of an Irrigation system in place; buffer zone along water courses, soil management practices.

Investments in better irrigation systems, change in crop varieties.

STEP 5: Scoring of the management practices, farmer feature, conditions

20

Scoring on an ordinal scale of 5 (- 2 -- +2):

+2 = Significant improvement of vulnerability elements (significant reduction of vulnerability)+1 = Improvement of vulnerability elements (reduced vulnerability element)0 = neutral impact

-1 = Deterioration of vulnerability elements (slight increase of vulnerability)-2 = Significant deterioration of vulnerability elements (significant increase in vulnerability)

Relevance of vulnerability elements to be identified by answering the following questions for- Sensitivity:

- Physical attributes of a system: Does the practice lead to an increase or a reduction of sensitivity to hazards of physical infrastructure? (e.g. more efficient irrigation reduces sensitivity to droughts, drought tolerant species planting reduced sensitivity to droughts)

- Socio-economic sensitivity: Does the practice lead to an increase of a reduction of sensitivity of socio-economic factors (e.g. diversified income levels reduce sensitivity)

- Coping capacity to expected climate related hazards- Does the practice increase or reduce coping capacity (available skills, values, beliefs, resources,

and opportunities, to address, manage, and overcome adverse conditions in the short to medium term’) to the hazards.

- Adaptive capacity

- Does the practice lead to an increase or decrease of the ability of systems, institutions, humans and other organisms to adjust to potential damage, or to respond to

Quantification of the Adaptation Index Score

21

- Step 1: Relevant practice/feature of the farmer: Weighted exposure/vuln. elements * Score (-2 to +2) of the exposure/vuln. Element = Average score per practice,/ farm feature.

- Step 2: Aggregate all scores and add up to a total score (the more good management practices/positive vulnerability features the higher the score → higher Adaptation benefit

- SEE example Excel file following each stephttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OAdYeGmQhDVhN-dFjr2BA8rpolmJJSvopv7vmHFNfLY/edit?pli=1#gid=1453807421

22

Mitigation Index

23Source: https://engagethechain.org/resources/measure-chain-tools-assessing-ghg-emissions-agricultural-supply-chains?_ga=2.103912384.1977430110.1562308666-264183412.1562308666

Elements of the mitigation index: GHG Emissions & carbon sequestration

24

Climate change mitigation is achieved by:

■ Reduced GHG emission: Limiting or preventing

greenhouse gas emissions

■ Sequestration: Enhancing activities that remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere

-> Index is first step to identify GHG sources and sinks

GHG mitigation scoring system

25

Conceptual approachFor mitigation, ideally measurement would determine the tCO2 emissions/removals. As a pre-step for quantification we suggest to identify key practices that result in changes of GHGs/carbon stocks in the production system and score these relevant practices. GHG changes can be generated from two major sources GHG emissions change in production systems Score Carbon stock / removal change in living

biomass and soilScore

Significant deterioration in GHG emissions -2 C sequestration potential significantly deteriorated

-2

Slight deterioration in GHG emission -1 C sequestration potential slightly deteriorated -1

No change 0 No change 0

Slight improvement in GHG emission 1 Slight improvement in C sequestration 1

Significant improvement in GHG emission 2 Significant improvement in C sequestration 2

Level of significance should be considered in relation to the practices of the farm management systems. E.g. by shade tree planting and mulching, shade tree sequester more carbon than mulching -> shade tree planting receives a score of 2, mulching a score of 1

solidaridadnetwork.org

@solidaridadnetw

/solidaridadnetwork

/company/solidaridad

Solidaridad

Nancy.rapando@solidaridadnetwork.org

Measuring Adaptation Progress in the Agriculture Sector

CORE TEAM

World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF)

African Climate Technology Centre

University of Zimbabwe

University of Bern, Switzerland

Wageningen University, The Netherlands

Basque Centre for Climate Change (bc3research), Spain

UN Environment Regional Office Asia and Pacific

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)

Project Objective

Deliver a robust methodological framework for measuringadaptation progress in the agriculture sector (MAP Ag) acrossscales

Specific Objectives

Global adaptation goal clarified through unpacking the concept in the context of assessing collective adaptation progress in the agriculture sector;

UNFCCC Global Stock take and Transparency framework and KJWA processes enhanced with a robust methodological framework for MAP Ag at different scales;

UNFCCC Standing and Constituted bodies, Parties and other actors engaged on MAP Ag, through a science-policy dialogue and climate action platform for knowledge sharing; and

Capacity Development and Training Programme on MAP Ag in place.

Key Outputs

Conceptual paper on global adaptation goal (GGA) and assessment of collective adaptation progress;

Methodological Framework on MAP Ag that is gender-responsive;

UNFCCC Standing and Constituted bodies under the UNFCCC especially the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA), Adaptation Committee (AC), Least Developed Countries Expert Group (LEG) and Nairobi Work Programme (NWP) fully engaged within their respective mandates on MAP Ag;

Submission to UNFCCC on methodological framework on MAP Ag;

Policy brief on Conceptual Framework on GGA and Methodological Framework on MAP Ag; and

Capacity Development and Training Programme on MAP Ag.

Key outcomes

A GST that is informed by sound methodological framework for assessing collective adaptation progress; and

National M&E systems that integrate sound methodological framework for tracking adaptation efforts at national and sub-national level

Strategies and Modalities for Scaling Up Implementation of Best Practices, Innovations,

Technologies that Increase Resilience and Sustainable Production in Agricultural Systems in Africa

Evans KituyiEast Africa Institute,

The Aga Khan University

Executive SummaryAcronymsList of FiguresList of Tables

1. Introduction2. Impacts of Climate Change on African Agricultural Systems

2.1 Projected temperature and precipitation patterns for Africa2.2 How Climate Change will affect Crop and Pastoral Systems2.2.1 Common Agricultural Systems in Africa (Crops, Pastoral Systems)

3. Definitions and Conceptual Development

4. Scaling up innovative, resilient and best SLM practices in SSA4.1 Best SLM technologies, innovations and practices in SSA4.2 Conceptual Framework for Scaling Up (and Theory of Change)4.4 Towards Successful Scaling Up of SLM/SWM Best Practices4.4.1 Stakeholders in Scaling-Up4.4.2 Enabling Environment for Successful Scaling Up4.4.3 Prerequisites for Successful Scale Up: Process Issues

5. Conclusion6. Recommendations/Messages for Policymakers7. References8. Annexes

Innovations Technologies Best practices

Portfolio of best practices, innovations and technologies

Agricultural system

• Farming systems across Ecological Zones

• Local Actors (Smallholders, SMEs)

Enabling environment• Technology transfer• Finance mechanism • Capacity building • Public policies• Markets and institutions• Political leadership

Resilient Agricultural Systems

Evaluation

matching

Non-local Actors• Private sector• Civil society• Research• Public sector• Donors

Planning and Facilitation mechanism for scaling up

Conceptual Framework for Modalities & Strategies

Innovation system

Pilot Scale

Farming Systems

Source: Farming Systems and Poverty, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) & World Bank Global Map of Irrigation Areas, FAO, NRLW & Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany GAUL, 2006

Enabling Environment (continued)

Scalability• Credibility

• Relevance

• Advantage

• Appropriateness

• Tools• USAID-ATAT

• GIZ ScalA

Financial Mechanisms• UNFCCC Related climate finance• GEF/GCF

• Domestic Sources• National budgets

• Remittances

• NGO funds

• Private Sector