A Review of the Participation of Smallholder Farmers in Land-based Carbon Payment Schemes

There is renewed interest in the engagement of smallholder farmers in carbon markets. This follows in the wake of commitments by governments and companies to reduce or avoid the release of greenhouse gases. It is well known that soil can store large amounts of carbon, and soil stewardship offers a means to harness this potential. However, issues around permanence and scaling in smallholder farmer systems must be addressed if progress is to be made in this area. In this review, we examine the engagement of smallholder farmers in carbon sequestration payment schemes that promote sustainable land management (SLM). Drawing on a review of documents from carbon payment projects, interviews with key informants, and scientific literature, we highlight approaches for smallholder engagement along the project cycle, identify key barriers to participation, and outline options to enhance farmers’ agency. In assessing a total of ten projects, we observe considerable variation in participation across the projects. Project design tools classified as co-decision tools were common, with 60 % of projects reporting the use of individualised land management plans, 30 % the use of participatory rural appraisals (PRAs) and 10 % participatory mapping. However, few projects featured detailed frameworks for the incorporation of community feedback. The key informant interviews and literature review revealed that low carbon revenues, insecure land tenure, and high transaction costs are the primary barriers to participation, placing disproportionate pressure on marginalised households. Further, designing and implementing rigorous, participatory, and cost-effective monitoring reporting and verification (MRV) methodologies remains a challenge for many project proponents. We also find that flexible contracts can foster broad participation by including details that are attractive to mallholders such as longer terms, local contract providers and low-cost SLM measures. Projects that strengthen community institutions and social capital can stimulate participation among the marginalised, reduce transaction costs, and promote equity as well as smallholder agency. Engagement with communitybased organisations or other civil society actors can facilitate communication between project proponents and farmers, bolster farmers’ bargaining power, and reduce transaction costs during implementation

Bringing evidence to bear for negotiating tradeoffs in sustainable agricultural intensification using a structured stakeholder engagement process

Sustainable agricultural intensification (SAI) has the potential to increase food security without detrimental effects on ecosystem services. However, adoption of SAI practices across sub-Saharan Africa has not reached transformational numbers to date. It is often hampered by lack of context-specific practices, sub-optimal understanding of tradeoffs and synergies among stakeholders, and lack of approaches that bring diverse evidence sources together with stakeholders to collectively tackle complex problems. In this study, we asked three interconnected questions: (i) What is the accessibility and use of evidence for SAI decision making; (ii) What tools could enhance access and interaction with evidence for tradeoff analysis; and (iii) Which stakeholders must be included? This study employed a range of research and engagement methods including surveys, stakeholder analysis, participatory trade-off assessments and co-design of decision dashboards to better support evidence-based decision making in Zambia, Tanzania and Ethiopia. At the inception, SAI evidence was accessible and used by less than half of the decision makers across the three countries and online dashboards hold promise to enhance access. Many of the stakeholders working on SAI were not collaborating and tradeoff analysis was an under-utilized tool. Structured engagement across multiple stakeholder groups with evidence is critical

Ten people‐centered rules for socially sustainable ecosystem restoration

As the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration begins, there remains insufficient emphasis on the human and social dimensions of restoration. The potential that restoration holds for achieving both ecological and social goals can only be met through a shift toward people-centered restoration strategies. Toward this end, this paper synthesizes critical insights from a special issue on “Restoration for whom, by whom” to propose actionable ways to center humans and social dimensions in ecosystem restoration, with the aim of generating fair and sustainable initiatives. These rules respond to a relative silence on socio-political issues in di Sacco et al.'s “Ten golden rules for reforestation to optimize carbon sequestration, biodiversity recovery and livelihood benefits” on socio-political issues and offer complementary guidance to their piece. Arranged roughly in order from pre-intervention, design/initiation, implementation, through the monitoring, evaluation and learning phases, the 10 people-centered rules are: (1) Recognize diversity and interrelations among stakeholders and rightsholders'; (2) Actively engage communities as agents of change; (3) Address socio-historical contexts; (4) Unpack and strengthen resource tenure for marginalized groups; (5) Advance equity across its multiple dimensions and scales; (6) Generate multiple benefits; (7) Promote an equitable distribution of costs, risks, and benefits; (8) Draw on different types of evidence and knowledge; (9) Question dominant discourses; and (10) Practice inclusive and holistic monitoring, evaluation, and learning. We contend that restoration initiatives are only tenable when the issues raised in these rules are respectfully addressed

Assessing Context-Specific Factors to Increase Tree Survival for Scaling Ecosystem Restoration Efforts in East Africa

Increasing tree cover in agricultural lands can contribute to achieving global and national restoration goals, more so in the drylands where trees play a key role in enhancing both ecosystem and livelihood resilience of the communities that depend on them. Despite this, drylands are characterized by low tree survival especially for tree species preferred by local communities. We conducted a study in arid and semi-arid areas of Kenya and Ethiopia with 1773 households to assess how different tree planting and management practices influence seedling survival. Using on-farm planned comparisons, farmers experimented and compared tree survival under different planting and management practices as well as under varying socioeconomic and biophysical contexts in the two countries. Seedling survival was monitored at least six months after planting. Results show that watering, manure application, seedling protection by fencing and planting in a small hole (30 cm diameter and 45 cm depth) had a significant effect on tree seedling survival in Kenya, while in Ethiopia, mulching, watering and planting niche were significant to tree survival. Household socioeconomics and farms’ biophysical characteristics such as farm size, education level of the household head, land tenure, age of the household head had significant effects on seedling survival in both Ethiopia and Kenya while presence of soil erosion on the farm had a significant effect in Kenya. Soil quality ranking was positively correlated with tree survival in Ethiopia, regardless of species assessed. Current findings have confirmed effects of context specific variables some involving intrahousehold socioeconomic status such education level of the household head, and farm size that influence survival

Agroecological transformation for sustainable food systems : Insight on France-CGIAR research

This 26th dossier d’Agropolis is devoted to research and partnerships in agroecology. The French Commission for International Agricultural Research (CRAI) and Agropolis International, on behalf of CIRAD, INRAE and IRD and in partnership with CGIAR, has produced this new issue in the ‘Les dossiers d’Agropolis international’ series devoted to agroecology. This publication has been produced within the framework of the Action Plan signed by CGIAR and the French government on February 4th 2021 to strengthen French collaboration with CGIAR, where agroecology is highlighted as one of the three key priorities (alongside climate change, nutrition and food systems)