380 likes | 531 Views
5.5c Perspectives on Reducing Emissions from Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use. Brent Swallow, ICRAF. Outline. Introduction in emissions from the land use sector and a hint at climate change impacts
E N D
5.5c Perspectives on Reducing Emissions from Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use Brent Swallow, ICRAF
Outline • Introduction in emissions from the land use sector and a hint at climate change impacts • Overview of forestry-related emissions, technical and economic mitigation opportunities • Overview of agriculture-related emissions, technical and mitigation opportunities • Overview of links between forestry and agriculture • Introduction to the Africa BioCarbon Initiative
Total CO2 emissions from land-use and other sectors in selected countries (2000) Data: WRI
Land Use Change – 18.2% Agriculture– 13.5% Source: WRI, 2005. Navigating the Numbers: Greenhouse Gas Data and International Climate Policies 5
Figure 9.8: Technical potential for the agriculture and forestry sector in the USA (US-EPA, 2005)
GHG emissions from forest and agriculture sectors Land Use Change – 18.2% Agriculture – 13.5% Source: WRI, 2005. Navigating the Numbers: Greenhouse Gas Data and International Climate Policies 9
Forestry Emissions – IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 2007 • Nabuurs, G.J., O. Masera, K. Andrasko, P. Benitez-Ponce, R. Boer, M. Dutschke, E. Elsiddig, J. Ford-Robertson, P. Frumhoff, T.Karjalainen, O. Krankina, W.A. Kurz, M. Matsumoto, W. Oyhantcabal, N.H. Ravindranath, M.J. Sanz Sanchez, X. Zhang, 2007: Forestry. In Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [B. Metz, O.R. Davidson, P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, L.A. Meyer (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. • Emissions • Technical opportunities for mitigation of emissions • Economic opportunities for mitigation of emissions under different carbon prices
Annual average deforestation rate (1000 ha/year) in 2000-2005 10 countries: 71% of total Data: FAO
Agriculture Emissions -- IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 2007 Smith, P., D. Martino, Z. Cai, D. Gwary, H. Janzen, P. Kumar, B. McCarl, S. Ogle, F. O’Mara, C. Rice, B. Scholes, O. Sirotenko,2007: Agriculture. In Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [B. Metz, O.R. Davidson, P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, L.A. Meyer (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
Figure 8.2: Estimated historical and projected N2O and CH4 emissions during the period 1990-2020. (Source: Adapted from US-EPA, 2006a).
Africa BioCarbon Initiative: Broadening Scope Beyond Forest Core Areas Forest Core Areas Forest Frontier Areas Agriculture – Forest Mosaic Areas Intensive arable agriculture
Why AFOLU? • Current CDM arrangements are not facilitating greater African participation • Smallholders’ land activities (agric +) are largely responsible for deforestation and forest degradation in Africa • Tenure and ownership less controversial in small farm / land holdings than forest areas • Agric and Other land uses would potentially yield more co-benefits than REDD
Africa BioCarbon Initiative: Interactions between land uses and carbon pools Forest Core Areas Forest Frontier Areas Agriculture – Forest Mosaic Areas Intensive arable agriculture
Agriculture – Forestry Interface:Evidence from the World Bank Development Report 2008www.worldbank.org/WDR2008
Agricultural Drivers of Deforestation If forests and woodlands are only valued for: • the land they occupy, • the timber that can be extracted • the soil fertility they provide to extensive agriculture, then enhanced road access or more profitable land-using technologies or stronger markets for food and fuel crops … will increase pressure on forest resources. Eg cattle ranching in Amazon, cocoa in the Guinea forests of West Africa, oil palm in Southeast Asia. If there are limits to in-migration to forest margins, and secure property rights, then • technological progress in intensive agriculture + • labour-intensive technological progress + will reduce pressure on forest resources. ((Need to consider NH4 and N2O emissions) A doubly-effective solution can be achieved when intensive production systems also sequester substantial amounts of carbon and have a tight nitrogen cycle, as is the case for multi-strata agroforestry systems.
Wealthiest Poorest
The Africa BioCarbon Initiative (COMESA-EAC-SADC) Peter Minang and Brent Swallow ICRAF and ASB Partnership (EAC- Round Table on Climate Change- Uganda, 17-18 April 2009)
What is Africa BioCarbon Initiative? • First intended to be a Voluntary International System to motivate improved landscape management in Africa, financed for CC mitigation, yielding CC adaptation and livelihood benefits • Countries willing and able to reduce Emissions from and or enhance carbon sequestration in Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Uses (AFOLU) and Deforestation and Forest Degradation should be compensated
Key Features • A landscape approach • Supports REDD as a first step towards a broader landscape approach • Copenhagen should at least include a clause initiating a process on AFOLU similar to REDD in Montreal • Review of A/R CDM • Post 2012 mechanism on REDD/AFOLU should include both a fund and market
Progress and process: • Pretoria kickoff meeting – July 2008 • Nairobi meeting and endorsement by COMESA heads of state, October 2008 • Financial support from Rockefeller & Norway • Technical support from ICRAF, CIFOR, Covington • Civil society engagement and publicity through FANRPAN • Launch at UNFCCC COP14 in Poznan, December 2008 • Nairobi update and planning meeting, COMESA, ECA, SADC, February 2009 • Reaching out to other regions and parties (continuous) • National roundtables, March – May 2009 • Regional and continental meetings, May – October 2009 • AMCEN special meeting on Climate Change, Nairobi, May 2009
For Further Information REDD ALERT: www.redd-alert.eu www.asb.cgiar.org