Integrating climate and environment into agriculture and

vice-versa: an institutional stocktake from IFAD and the

World Bank
Elwyn Grainger-Jones
Director, Climate and Environment Division
International Fund for Agricultural Development
3 propositions

1. Costs of lack of integration of agendas is

accelerating in developing countries
2. Systematic integration? Progress, but not
there yet…
3. Need a clearer message on sustainable
agriculture

2
1. Costs of lack of integration of agendas is
accelerating

Pressures for food production growing;

 Population
 Dietary habits
 Limits to extensification
 Additional demands from energy markets

Environmental impacts

Poverty impacts: majority (70%) of IFAD’s work
supporting people in fragile agro-ecological
zones. Smallholder and rural focus

3
Scope for extensification?

Source: FAO, from Schmidhuber (2009); Data from Bruinsma (2009)

4
Agriculture: victim and villain?

Desertification/land Biodiversity loss Deforestation/Soil

degradation erosion

Weather variability/ Water scarcity Pollution

climate change

5
Harmful Algal Blooms
(HAB) as a function of
excess nitrate:
Eastern Channel and
Southern Bight of the
North Sea 1980-1990

HAB as a function
of nitrate loading in
the Gulf of Mexico

Source: FAO 6
Fig. 26.3. Trends in nitrogen fertilizer use (solid line) and the number of red tides
(dashed line) reported for Chinese coastal waters through the mid-1990s.

Source: FAO 7
Source: FAO 8
 Paralytic Shellfish
Poisoning [PSP],
Red Tide, Harmful
Algal Bloom (HAB),
Source: FAO etc. 9
Climate Change is multiplying threats
RURAL LIVELIHOODS e.g. food insecurity in
Biophysical drivers Niger, rural live-
(migration, labor
lihoods in the high
 Temperature availability, food e.g. damage to irrigation
Andes (Altiplano) in
insecurity, conflict, forced systems and
 Extreme events Peru.
other agricultural
sale of livestock and other
frequency, infrastructure in Viet Nam
assets)
intensity
 Rainfall patterns RURAL
 Seasonal shifts INFRASTRUCTURE
(rural roads, storage
 Sea level rise and processing,
irrigation systems)
AGRICULTURAL
PRODUCTIVITY
(food and cash
crops, livestock
and fisheries) Global Rules Response
 Global carbon target
ECOSYSTEMS/  Finance
e.g. rice production in ENVIRONMENTAL  Adaptation Framework
Sierra Leone, rain-fed PROCESSES  Land use mitigation rules
agriculture in Yemen, SUSTAINING
livestock sector in AGRICULTURAL
e.g. coastal
Mongolia (drought and PRODUCTION ecosystems in Sri
Dzud)
Lanka; rangeland
ecosystems of
Eastern Morocco
10
 Cereal yield responses
to climate change.

Results of 69 published studies at multiple simulation sites.

Cases without adaptation (red dots)

with adaptation (dark green dots)
11
IPCC WGII
But agriculture also a contributor to the emissions

Source:
Stern
Review

12
2. Systematic integration?
Progress, but not there yet…

IFAD’s portfolio

IFAD’s policies and approaches

And vice-versa - climate

negotiations

13
IFAD’s Portfolio

Evaluations

Volume for NRM. Role of GEF

ENRM Portfolio Review:
 Progressively more focus on NRM and CC -
main focus is on land degradation/water
scarcity
 Main approach - empowerment of
communities and local institutions for
sustainable NRM
 Sometimes still compartmentalised/stand-
alone, often grant-funded. Tracking of
environmental impacts/ecological baseline

14
Review of ENRM Portfolio - Environmental issues addressed
Sample:
Reviewed 25/157 Loans completed between 2004-2009 – historical sample
9 Annual Report on Results and Impact of IFAD Operations (ARRIs)

Overexploitation of NR 60%

Land/soil degradation 52%

Deforestation and forest degradation 32%

Water scarcity 28%

Climatic hazards 24%

Loss of biodiversity 8%

Other 32%

15
 In
ve
st
m Percentage
en
C ti
BO n
& al
te
st rn
re at

0
20
40
60
80
100

ng iv
ht e.
en ..
in
g
24
Em of
Im p ow ...
pr er
m
72

ov
ed en
R la t…
ed nd
U uc
36

se tio te
nu
of n re
tr a of
Tr co
28

di
ai
ni t io nf
ng n li c
ENRM Portfolio Review - NRM Practices

al ts
R an an
8

ew d d
ar im in
d pr ...
fo ov
re
12

ed
nv e.
result of loans implementation

ir ..
on
m
88

en
ta
. ..
0

O
th
Practices for improved NRM promoted by and adopted as

er
28

16
 W
at Percentage
er
m
Fo an
ag

0
20
40
60
re e
st m
co en
ns t
56

er
So vat
In ilc io
tr
od o n
ns
24

uc er
t io va
n t io
of n
lo
44

ca
lly
U ...
se
4

of
lo
ca
la IP
gr M
C o
36

ro bi
p od
di ...
ve
ENRM Portfolio Review - NRM Technologies

Li
ve rs
36

st ifi
oc ca
k t io
m n
as result of loans implementation

an
52

ag
em
en
t
40

O
th
er
Technologies for improved NRM promoted by and adopted

56

17
Policies and approaches

Environmental and Social Assessment
Procedures (2009)

Climate Change Strategy (2010)

Environment and Natural Resource
Management Policy (2011)

Wider quality improvements/reforms - direct
access and country presence, QE/QA, RMF

18
Climate Change Strategy 2010
Goal:
To maximize IFAD’s impact on rural poverty in a changing climate

Purpose 1 Purpose 2 Purpose 3

To support innovative To help smallholder To inform a more
approaches to helping farmers take coherent
smallholder farmers advantage of dialogue on
build their resilience available climate change,
mitigation rural development,
to climate change
incentives and agriculture and
funding food security

19
 Climate Change Strategy: Approach
Continued emphasis… Anything different?

Sustainable Can’t think

Demand-led New sources
resource in historical
country- of risk
management averages
driven

Knowledge & Productivity

Gender Innovation Growth
Potential
Long term
emission reduction
Targeting climatic trends
rewards
Rural Poor
Integrated Credit
approach Markets
Land
Tenure
• NRM, sustainable agriculture
Scarce resources:
Managing conflict
Institutions,
governance

20
 Adaptation

Vulnerability focus Impacts focus

Addressing the Building response Managing climate Confronting

drivers of capacity risks climate change
vulnerability
Activities seek to Activities seek to Activities seek to
build robust incorporate address impacts
Activities seek to systems for climate associated
reduce poverty problem solving information into exclusively with
and other non- decision-making climate change
climatic E.g.
new drought, flood and E.g. better agro-
stressors that meteorological warning
E.g. glacial lake burst
heat tolerant crop dams
make people varieties and livestock systems;
breeds weather risk insurance
vulnerable
small-scale
E.g. (Spectrum: Heather McGray,
sustainable water
sustainable land and
supplies WRI, 2007)
water management
agricultural value added
and more efficient inputs
more resilient agro-
ecosystems
21
Operations
Supportive not compliance driven approach, based on
early intervention and integration
• Enhanced inputs to COSOP, programme design
and implementation
• New tools – including enhanced ESA inputs
• RB-COPSOP formulation and QE guidelines
• Quality enhancement implementation
• Next strategic framework
Knowledge, Innovation and
Advocacy
• Continued engagement on
global dialogue, incl GDPRD
• New partnership(s) to access
expert advice and staff training
• Internal climate and
environment network (CEN) to
manage KM

Organisation
Resource Mobilization •Greater use of existing in-
Supporting use of core replenishment in run-up house skills and people
to 9th replenishment, and cycle •New organisational
alignment/integration structure with increased
•Greater use of GEF resources – GEF-5 and dedicated expertise on
LDCF (business plan) climate and environment
•Others – adaptation fund, foundations, •Demonstrating
bilaterals, carbon market (BioCarbon Fund) environmental awareness
internally.

22
 Environmental and Social Procedures

Strategic Environmental
Assessment

2009 updated
procedures
Environmental screening- ESA
and/or ESIA

Earmarked
funding

ENRM review

Environmental screening- ESA

and/or ESIA

23
 Strategic Environmental Assessment
(SEA) in Country Strategy
Preliminary Environmental No need for
screening and effects are SEA
scoping negligible

Environmental
impacts are
important
Consultation
Conduct SEA
Address SEA
Prepare SEA questions
Report

Stakeholder
Report reviewed
consultation

Incorporate
Inform policy M&E indicators in
environmental Results Management
findings in choices & project
Framework
Country Strategy development
24
• Source: adapted from CIDA (2004)
IFAD’s Quality Enhancement (QE)
process

SEA, Category “A” ESIA

ESRN Env. Covenants
as appropriate Report (where appropriate)
(as necessary)
Category
“B” or “C”

Quality
Country Project Design Report Assessment EB
EB
Strategy Project Concept  Project design Decision Approval
Approval
Note

Loan
Negotiations

SEA = Strategic Environmental Assessment

ESRN = Environment and Social Review Note

ESIA = Environment and Social Impact Assessment

25
 Wider quality improvements
Key Success Factors domains
Better/more
knowledge • Country relevance,
management;
commitment and
evaluations
partnerships
Risk-mapping/vulnerability and
quality control (QE/QA); • Targeting, gender and
participation
• Best practices and
lessons learnt within
the context of IFAD’s
Strategic Framework
• Institutional aspects
and implementation
arrangements
• Risks and
Risk-mapping/vulnerability and sustainability
quality control (QE/QA);
• Innovation, learning
and knowledge
management 26
 Integration into IFAD Operating Model
Strategic Environmental
Assessment, Climate
Sustainable policies in-house
integration into COSOP,
including climate
assessment/proofing Better/more
knowledge
management;
Design:
strengthened
climate proofing
advocacy &
risk-mapping/vulnerability
communications
and quality control (QE/QA);
implement environmental evaluations
screening- ESA and/or ESIA;
integrate climate in financial
& economic assessment tools

Environmental monitoring.
Use/build on Results Use of RIMS & integrate
Management Framework; climate into annual
“adaptive adaptation” – portfolio reviews
build in new knowledge into
project reviews
e.g. Carbon markets, explore potential 27
for more national/regional programmes
And vice-versa – climate negotiations
Size of Global Emission
Reductions: poverty
becoming part of case for
action, although food
security weak part of
narrative
Mitigation Rules: still
unclear. Good technical work
to enable sector engagement
in CDM and NAMAs, but held
back by wider challenges
Framework for Adaptation:
recognition of role of agriculture
Financing the deal: major
potential for agriculture if
there is ground coherence
reflected up through financing
system, and cobenefits
rewarded
28
3. Need a clear message on
sustainable agriculture

Delivers environment, food security and poverty
objectives – co-benefits not widely appreciated

A new paradigm? Analogy with energy:
GM=nuclear, organics=renewables… polarized
debate

Do we have the evidence base on the potential
for scale-up?

Another analogy – with trade liberalisation:
should not make sustainable agriculture
investments contingent on global carbon
markets
29

Agroecological approaches to agricultural development - Jules
Pretty (2006)

Sustainable Crop Intensification – FAO 2009

"Doubly green" revolution - Gordon Conway (1999)

Dynamic integrated agricultural production - Agricultural
Technology for Development” Report of the Secretary General;
UN General Assembly, August 2009

Ecologically efficient agricultural intensification – European
Commission

Ecologically intensive agriculture - CIRAD

Evergreen revolution - Dr M.S. Swaminathan, 1999

Low external input technology (LEIT) agriculture – ODI 2006

Multifunctional agriculture - International Assessment of
Agricultural Knowledge Science and Technology (2008)

Sustainable agriculture - Sustainable Agriculture Initiative

Sustainable agricultural intensification - Godfray et al, 2010;
Royal Society, 2009; Conway and Waage, 2010)

30
Many new (and old) approaches…
 Conservation Agriculture
 Integrated Pest Management IPM

 Integrated Plant Nutrient Management IPNM

 Better integration of crop and livestock systems

 Better agriculture water management.

 Watershed management – landscape management.

 Organic agriculture

 Fisheries management

 Rangeland management

 More broadly – integrated food energy systems (IFES)

 Etc

….knowledge and often technology-intensive

31
Examples: Integrated Pest Management

Production
Gain
Efficiency
Gain

32
 Examples – Innovation and efficiency
Farmers who use Urea Deep
Placement (UDP) can increase
yields by 25% while using less
than 50% as much urea as
before.
The effectiveness of UDP
technology in Bangladesh was
proven through research funded
by the International Fund for
Agricultural Development (IFAD)
and implemented with the
assistance of IFDC--An
International Center for Soil
Fertility and Agricultural
Development.
33
“Multifunctionality” – IFAD’s Climate Strategy
Win-wins…
pasture and agroforestry
restoration of degraded agricultural land
IFAD PORTFOLIO:and grasslands with high production
RURAL POVERTY REDUCTION
potential,
 switching from bare to improved fallows
fast-growing plant or tree species —
usually legumes
integrated nutrient and soil management,
conservation tillage and residue
management.
perennial or deep root crop systems
Adaptation
Adaptation

Spectrum
Comparative advantage
New tools/approaches
S yne
rgie
s
.
Mitigation
Ag potential
PES experience

34
Agriculture and land use mitigation in
agriculture: What Physical Potential?
Erosion
Reducing Manage
control,grazing systems
GHGAgriculture
emissions

Crop management •Conservation - Switching
and grazing improving″ fire
intensity,
″no-tillage″
soil
from
to ″ orby
and water
livestock ″low-tillage″
conservation,
organic management,
amendments pasture
animal
techniques nutrition, breed carbon
to preserve selection
stored

Rangelands and pasture inand rehabilitation
soil;
manure management
management •Nutrient management, Tillage and
residue management, rice

Livestock management management, peaty soils, agro-
forestry, set-aside, land cover

change, water management etc.
Restoration of degraded lands
Bio-energy (crop residue,

Coastal management andcellulosicCarbon
crops sequestration in
fisheries (e.g., switchgrass,
mangrove plantations and
sugarcane etc); of seaweed and
culture

Bio-energy Biofuel, biogas etc.food and biofuel
algae for

35
 Synergies and tradeoffs between food security
and climate change mitigation
Food Security
Potential
Food Security Potential : High Food Security Potential : High
Carbon Mitigation Potential: Low Carbon Mitigation Potential: High

•Expand crop onto marginal lands •Restore degraded land

•Expand high energy -intensive irrigation •Expand low energy-intensive irrigation
•Soil & water conservation structures/techniques
•Agro-forestry options that increase food or
incomes

Food Security Potential : Low Food Security Potential : Low

Carbon Mitigation Potential: Low Carbon Mitigation Potential: High

• Bare fallow •Reforestation/afforestation

• Continuous cropping without use if nutrients •Restore organic soils
• Over-grazing •Agro-forestry options with limited food or
income benefits

Carbon Mitigation
Potential

Source: Food Security and Agricultural Mitigation in Developing Countries: Options for Capturing Synergies, FAO 2009

36
Summary

Costs of lack of integration of agendas is
accelerating in developing countries

Have made some progress to systematic
integration, but not there yet

Need a clear message on sustainable
agriculture: uniquely poised to deliver
environment, food security and poverty
objectives

37