Measurement and reporting of climate-smart agriculture: technical guidance for a countrycentric process

Given the extent of climate-smart agriculture (CSA) initiatives at project, national, regional and global levels, there is increasing interest in tracking progress in implementing CSA at national level. CSA is also expected to contribute to higher-level goals (e.g., the Paris Agreement, Africa Union’s Vision 25x25, and the Sustainable Development Goals [SDGs], etc.). Measurement and reporting of climate-smart agriculture (MR of CSA) provides intelligence on necessary the status, effectiveness, efficiency and impacts of interventions, which is critical for meeting stakeholders’ diverse management and reporting needs. In this paper, we build the case for a stakeholder-driven, country-centric framework for MR of CSA, which aims to increase coordination and coherence across stakeholders’ MR activities, while also aligning national reporting with reporting on international commitments. We present practical guidance on how to develop an integrated MR framework, drawing on findings from a multi-country assessment of needs, opportunities and capacities for national MR of CSA. The content of a unified MR framework is determined by stakeholders’ activities (how they promote CSA), needs (why MR is useful to them) and current capacities to conduct periodic monitoring, evaluation and reporting (how ready are institutions, staff and finances). Our analysis found that explicit demand for integration of data systems and active engagement of stakeholders throughout the entire process are key ingredients for building a MR system that is relevant, useful and acted upon. Based on these lessons, we identify a seven-step framework for stakeholders to develop a comprehensive information system for MR of progress in implementing CSA

Sustainability and Replicability of Multiple-Use Water Systems (MUS)

The concept of multiple-use water services and systems (MUS) has received increasingattention in international water and development fora and has emerged as a promising wayto enhance the social and gender equity and productivity of water systems designed forsingle use, e.g. for irrigation or water supply. In Nepal, several MUS models have beenpiloted and implemented for more than a decade by the International DevelopmentEnterprises (iDE) and a few other development organizations. Whereas the short-termbenefits of these systems on gender relationships, women's empowerment, nutrition andhealth have been documented, the sustainability and resilience of these systems has not yetbeen analyzed. The latter is the focus of the research study presented in this report, whichwas conducted by the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) in Western Nepalas part of the USAID-funded Market Access and Water Technology for Women (MAWTW)project

Urban food strategies in Central and Eastern Europe: what's specific and what's at stake?

Integrating a larger set of instruments into Rural Development Programmes implied an increasing focus on monitoring and evaluation. Against the highly diversified experience with regard to implementation of policy instruments the Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework has been set up by the EU Commission as a strategic and streamlined method of evaluating programmes’ impacts. Its indicator-based approach mainly reflects the concept of a linear, measure-based intervention logic that falls short of the true nature of RDP operation and impact capacity on rural changes. Besides the different phases of the policy process, i.e. policy design, delivery and evaluation, the regional context with its specific set of challenges and opportunities seems critical to the understanding and improvement of programme performance. In particular the role of local actors can hardly be grasped by quantitative indicators alone, but has to be addressed by assessing processes of social innovation. This shift in the evaluation focus underpins the need to take account of regional implementation specificities and processes of social innovation as decisive elements for programme performance.

Focusing resource allocation-wellbeing as a tool for prioritizing interventions for communities at risk

Abstract Objective: This study examined whether a wellbeing approach to resilience and adaptation would provide practical insights for prioritizing support to communities experiencing environmental and socio-economic stressors. Methods: A cross-sectional survey, based on a purposive sample of 2,196 stakeholders (landholders, hobby farmers, town resident and change agents) from three irrigation-dependent communities in Australia’s Murray-Darling Basin. Respondents’ adaptive capacity and wellbeing (individual and collective adaptive capacity, subjective wellbeing, social support, community connectivity, community leadership, in the context of known life stressors) were examined using chi-square, comparison of mean scores, hierarchical regression and factor-cluster analysis. Results: Statistically significant correlations (p < 0.05) were observed between individual (0.331) and collective (0.318) adaptive capacity and wellbeing. Taking into account respondents’ self-assessed health and socio-economic circumstances, perceptions of individual (15%) and collective adaptive capacity (10%) as well as community connectivity (13%) were associated with wellbeing (R2 = 0.36; F (9, 2099) = 132.9; p < 0.001). Cluster analysis found that 11% of respondents were particularly vulnerable, reporting below average scores on all indicators, with 56% of these reporting below threshold scores on subjective wellbeing. Conclusions: Addressing the capacity of individuals to work with others and to adapt to change, serve as important strategies in maintaining wellbeing in communities under stress. The human impacts of exogenous stressors appear to manifest themselves in poorer health outcomes; addressing primary stressors may in turn aid wellbeing. Longitudinal studies are indicated to verify these findings. Wellbeing may serve as a useful and parsimonious proxy measure for resilience and adaptive capacity

On Resilient Behaviors in Computational Systems and Environments

The present article introduces a reference framework for discussing resilience of computational systems. Rather than a property that may or may not be exhibited by a system, resilience is interpreted here as the emerging result of a dynamic process. Said process represents the dynamic interplay between the behaviors exercised by a system and those of the environment it is set to operate in. As a result of this interpretation, coherent definitions of several aspects of resilience can be derived and proposed, including elasticity, change tolerance, and antifragility. Definitions are also provided for measures of the risk of unresilience as well as for the optimal match of a given resilient design with respect to the current environmental conditions. Finally, a resilience strategy based on our model is exemplified through a simple scenario.Comment: The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40860-015-0002-6 The paper considerably extends the results of two conference papers that are available at http://ow.ly/KWfkj and http://ow.ly/KWfgO. Text and formalism in those papers has been used or adapted in the herewith submitted pape

Health Effects of Adverse Childhood Events: Identifying Promising Protective Factors at The Intersection of Mental and Physical Well-Being

Research documents how exposure to adversity in childhood leads to negative health outcomes across the lifespan. Less is known about protective factors – aspects of the individual, family, and community that promote good health despite exposure to adversity. Guided by the Resilience Portfolio Model, this study examined protective factors associated with physical health in a sample of adolescents and adults exposed to high levels of adversity including child abuse. A rural community sample of 2565 individuals with average age of 30 participated in surveys via computer assisted software. Participants completed self-report measures of physical health, adversity, and a range of protective factors drawn from research on resilience. Participants reporting a greater burden of childhood victimization and current financial strain (but not other adverse life events) had poorer physical health, but those with strengths in emotion regulation, meaning making, community support, social support, and practicing forgiveness reported better health. As hypothesized, strengths across resilience portfolio domains (regulatory, meaning making, and interpersonal) had independent, positive associations with health related quality of life after accounting for participants’ exposure to adversity. Prevention and intervention efforts for child maltreatment should focus on bolstering a portfolio of strengths. The foundation of the work needs to begin with families early in the lifespan

Diagnosis and the management constituency of small-scale fisheries

Diagnosis and adaptive management can help improve the ability of small-scale fisheries (SSF) in the developing world to better cope with and adapt to both external drivers and internal sources of uncertainty. This paper presents a framework for diagnosis and adaptive management and discusses ways of implementing the first two phases of learning: diagnosis and mobilising an appropriate management constituency. The discussion addresses key issues and suggests suitable approaches and tools as well as numerous sources of further information. Diagnosis of a SSF defines the system to be managed, outlines the scope of the management problem in terms of threats and opportunities, and aims to construct realistic and desired future projections for the fishery. These steps can clarify objectives and lead to development of indicators necessary for adaptive management. Before management, however, it is important to mobilize a management constituency to enact change. Ways of identifying stakeholders and understanding both enabling and obstructive interactions and management structures are outlined. These preliminary learning phases for adaptive SSF management are expected to work best if legitimised by collaborative discussion among fishery stakeholders drawing on multiple knowledge systems and participatory approaches to assessment. (PDF contains 33 pages