Todd Rosenstock & Christine Lamanna- Global Landscapes Forum Lima COP 20 presentation. http://www.landscapes.org/glf-2014/agenda-item/day-2-dec-7/six-parallel-multi-stakeholder-discussion-forums/using-climate-smart-technologies-scale-climate-smart-agriculture-practices-2/
2. Global Alliance for CSA: 500 million
smallholders
NEPAD Vision 25x25: 25 million in Africa by
2025
Photo:
CCAFS
3. Meta-analysis: 65 practices/15 indicators
Key word search
Abstract title
review
Full text review
Data
extraction/analys
is
144,567
papers
16,254
papers
6,100
papers
~120,000 data points
7. ●
●
●
● ●●
Agroforestry (AF)
Leguminous AF
Inorganic fertilizer
Diet management
Increasing protein
Alternative feeds
−0.5 0.0 0.5
Effect size
CSA
Effects of CSA on food security are
variable and can be + or -
Random sample of 130 studies
-60% 0 +60%
8. Synergies and tradeoffs between
food security and adaptation with CSA
Food security
Tradeoffs 0.5
Synergies
46% 32%
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-0.5 -0.3 -0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
6% 16%
-0.5
Adaptation
Tradeoffs
Mean effect from random sample of 130 studies (55 comparisons)
9. t.rosenstock@cgiar.org
Financial support
CCAFS
IFAD
CIFOR-EBF
FAO-MICCA
Thank you
Collaborators:
K Tully, C. Corner-Dolloff, E
Girvetz, M Lazaro, A Jarvis,
P Bell, S Chesterman, S
MacFatrige, H Strom, A
Madalinska, A-S Eyrich, C
Champalle, W English, A
Akinleye, A Poultouchidou,
A Kerr, H Neufeldt
Notas del editor
Over the next ten minutes, convince you
Mapping the location of the 6,000 studies that met our criteria shows geographic and topical clustering in relatively few locations and around relatively few measures of CSA, indicating potential for bias and highlighting gaps in the evidence for desired CSA objectives (e.g., gender inclusiveness). Furthermore, outcomes vary widely among studies and locations and are far from clearly positive or negative, suggesting the ‘climate-smartness’ of practices needs to be considered for local conditions and objectives to be meaningful. Co-located, cross-outcome research tends to be sparse except for a few outcome-by-practice combinations. Thus, grand conclusions about synergies and trade-offs among CSA components may be unsupported. This meta-analysis provides a useful benchmark of CSA’s scientific basis and can support the transition from hype to meaningful impact on the ground.
GASCA: 500 million farmers
NEPAD: 25 million farmers
Development activities are based on a fundamental assumption that there is a signifcant scientific basis of CSA.
That is there thre
Only 3 of the studies had adaptaion and mitigation data. 2 of the 3 showed synergies, one tradeoffs.