Scherr BCF side event, SBSTA 6 June 2013
•Descargar como PPTX, PDF•
0 recomendaciones•1,569 vistas
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Destacado
Destacado (18)
Similar a Scherr BCF side event, SBSTA 6 June 2013
Similar a Scherr BCF side event, SBSTA 6 June 2013 (20)
Más de EcoAgriculture Partners
Más de EcoAgriculture Partners (18)
Scherr BCF side event, SBSTA 6 June 2013
- 1. Achieving Mitigation at Scale through Climate-Smart Landscapes Sara J. Scherr, President, EcoAgriculture Partners Enabling Land Use Activities in Developing Countries’ Context: Constraints and Opportunities,UNFCCC SBSTA 38 Bonn, Germany 6 May 2013
- 2. Emissions from land use: 22% of global greenhouse gas emissions GHG emissions by sector in 2010, Source: UNEP Forestry, 11% Agriculture, 1 1% Waste, 4% Energy, 35% Industry, 18% Transport, 13 % Building, 8% Shares of GHG Emissions by Sector
- 3. Sector Emission reduction potential in 2020 (GtCO2e) Agriculture 1.1 – 4.3 Forestry 1.3 – 4.2 Power 2.2 – 3.9 Industry 1.5 – 4.6 Transport 1.7 – 2.5 Buildings 1.4 – 2.9 Waste Around 0.8 Total (Full range) 10 – 23 Total 17 +/- 3 Sectoral GHG emission reduction potentials in 2020 Source: UNEP 2012. The Emissions Gap Report 2012. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).
- 4. Rationale for climate mitigation strategy at landscape scale 1) Lower aggregate cost for net emission reduction through diverse land uses 2) Uses land to fullest potential by capability 3) Recognizes the interdependence of land uses (spatial, temporal) 4) Carbon-rich landscapes support climate adaptation, livelihood development and other ecosysteml benefits 5) Potential for action at scale
- 5. Mitigation potential of forest conservation and afforestation/reforestation Source: Palm 2000 (ASB)
- 6. Mitigation potential from other land use interventions – beyond afforestation and reforestation Source: CCAFS Big Facts 2013, data from Smith et al 2008
- 7. Climate-smart landscapes: Food, livelihoods, mitigation, resilience, ecosystems Mitigation is not the primary motivation for action—but the co-benefit from actions mobilized by land managers and large political constituencies
- 8. Multi-stakeholder negotiation and planning
- 9. Landscape-scale innovation on the ground: 79 communities of practice identified
- 10. Climate mitigation in integrated landscape initiatives Latin America & Caribbean Sub-Saharan Africa # Potential Integrated Landscape Initiatives Identified > 300 > 150 # Integrated Landscape Initiatives Documented 104 87 # Countries Represented 21 33 Most Common Motivations for Stakeholder Collaboration Biodiversity Conservation, Reducing Natural Resource Degradation Biodiversity and Natural Resource Conservation Average # Primary Stakeholders Involved in Initiative 11 (farmers, local government, NGOs) 9+ (local/district government, NGOs, producer groups) Landscapes for People, Food and Nature Iniiative, Continental Reviews
- 11. Climate mitigation in integrated landscape initiatives Latin America & Caribbean Sub-Saharan Africa % of initiatives for which ‘mitigating climate change or obtaining carbon credits was an objective 73% 41% Agro-ecological intensification 65% 53% Agroforestry 59% 53% Soil conservation 67% 70% Improved forestry management 48% 56% Estratda, et al. 2013, submitted
- 12. Case 1: Climate-smart rice landscapes in Madagascar Location: LakeAlaotra-Mangoro subregion, Eastern arc of central highlands Scale: 20,984 km2, 30,000 farmers in region of 125,000-150,000 Financing: $5,104,925- Adaptation Fund Key investments: Integrated resilient rice (MIRR) - improved varieties, SWM On-farm mitigation practices: Intercropping, cover cropping, agroforestry, mulching, System of Rice Intensification (SRI) Landscape-scale mitigation practices: Integrated watershed management, tree-planting, limiting deforestation
- 13. Case 2: Sahel and West Africa program in support of the Great GreenWall Initiative Location: Western Africa and Sahelian countries Scale: 12 countries, countries identify geographic priorities Financing: $80.4 m GEF, $20.4 Least Developed Countries Fund, $4.6 m Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF), co-financing of $1.8 billion from WB in 12 countries On-farm mitigation practices: Sustainable Land and water management (SLWM) practices including water erosion control, windbreaks, agroforestry and conservation tillage Landscape-scale mitigation practices: Land rehabilitation, reduced deforestation, forest buffer zones, wildlife corridors, rotational grazing, community forestry
- 14. Advances in landscape-scale monitoring across multiple dimensions CDM Agroforestry methodology NewVCS (SALM) Carbon Benefits Project ICRAF landscape surveillance REDD – ALERT (ICRAF, EU) The Earth Partners VCS SHAMBA SAMPLES
- 15. Policy recommendations to promote landscape-scale climate mitigation 1) Incorporate mitigation benefits into all sectoral investments 2) Align policy across sectors & jurisdictions 3) Support stakeholder forums to coordinate sectoral and spatial activities and investments
Notas del editor
- Photo of Kijabe, Kenya
- Source: http://www.unep.org/pdf/2012gapreport.pdfUNEP 2012. The Emissions Gap Report 2012. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, pg. 11.Context:30% of all GHG comes from the land use sector (14% from ag). Potential for mitigation, but also sequestration.-only thing that can actually take carbon out of the atmosphere right nw. we’re around 380 at the moment, need to get down to 350-these technologies are available right away, don’t have to wait, like for wind and solar-if done wellyou can have co-benefitsincludingotherwatershed, biodiversity, as well as livelihoods
- Source: http://www.unep.org/pdf/2012gapreport.pdfUNEP 2012. The Emissions Gap Report 2012. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, pg. 31.
- Cumulative carbon gained
- Original Smith reference (not IPCC): http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/363/1492/789.full.pdf
- Consensus around movement to scale. Using a new model: Climate-Smart Landscape
- Many groups are starting to work on landscape scale projects, where mitigation may be a central theme or a co-benefit. FAO MICCA projects. 79 communities of practices working on landscape-scale collaboration and coordination with diverse entry pointsNew mechanisms (like Danone Livelihood Fund), sustainable landscapes fund, eta
- From Abby re potential ILIs identified:I would say that, although only 104 ILIs participated in the survey, a broad brush survey identified more than 300 possible ILIs in LAC and this number almost certainly fails to capture numerous other grassroots efforts flying under the radar of international research organizations and donors….so you could just broaden that to include SSAFor agro-intensification ‘for example, organic production, conservation ag, no-till, IPM, improved fallows’Also, these percentages are activities reported by the Initiatives themselves. They also reported others in the landscape who did this things. If we reported that, it would be 10-20% higher.
- Diversity of land uses across the landscapeFounded on the premise that resilience in Madagascar requires integrated solutions that affect the rice sector both directly and indirectly, the project explores a suite of practices including tree selection, improved livestock and land management, and preservation of ecosystem services (including the mitigation of climate change through building carbon stocks). Land uses in the region include highland forest, agroforest, and pasture, and lowland rice and crops. The project is promoting a model for integrated resilient rice (MIRR), which includes improved varieties, fertilizer use, and soil and water management, but also planting non-rice crops and implementing alternate land uses. Tree planting in highly eroded areas will be complemented by vegetable gardening along the bank of water bodies. Exact composition of practices will depend on the specific needs of the sites and their relation to one another Management of land use interactions at landscape scaleFor a more holistic approach to management, the model is incorporating elements of environmental, watershed level, and integrated pest and water management. Deforestation and land clearing upstream, and the resulting erosion and siltation, have direct impacts on downstream crop production and ecosystem health. Taking a wider watershed approach to management will help address these interactions and build on the synergies between land uses. For example, the project anticipates transitioning current poor livestock feed, manure, and grazing management practices to a more integrated system in which livestock systems can provide fertilizer for rice, and byproducts of the crops can be used for feed or fuel
- Diversity of land uses across the landscapeFounded on the premise that resilience in Madagascar requires integrated solutions that affect the rice sector both directly and indirectly, the project explores a suite of practices including tree selection, improved livestock and land management, and preservation of ecosystem services (including the mitigation of climate change through building carbon stocks). Land uses in the region include highland forest, agroforest, and pasture, and lowland rice and crops. The project is promoting a model for integrated resilient rice (MIRR), which includes improved varieties, fertilizer use, and soil and water management, but also planting non-rice crops and implementing alternate land uses. Tree planting in highly eroded areas will be complemented by vegetable gardening along the bank of water bodies. Exact composition of practices will depend on the specific needs of the sites and their relation to one another Management of land use interactions at landscape scaleFor a more holistic approach to management, the model is incorporating elements of environmental, watershed level, and integrated pest and water management. Deforestation and land clearing upstream, and the resulting erosion and siltation, have direct impacts on downstream crop production and ecosystem health. Taking a wider watershed approach to management will help address these interactions and build on the synergies between land uses. For example, the project anticipates transitioning current poor livestock feed, manure, and grazing management practices to a more integrated system in which livestock systems can provide fertilizer for rice, and byproducts of the crops can be used for feed or fuel
- ICRAF landscape surveillance methodology is not solely the Carbon Benefits Project, but a series of external partnerships with various organizations and national governments to develop multiple methods of landscape monitoring. with: http://www.worldagroforestry.org/downloads/publications/PDFS/RP17167.pdfREDD – ALERT: Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation through Alternative Land uses in Rainforests of the TropicsALL – REDDI: The Accountability and Local Level Initiative to Reduce Emission from Deforestation and Degradation)Source: http://worldagroforestry.org/research/climate_change/mitigation