Peru Cacao Alliance: Carbon sequestration as a co-benefit of cacao expansion

The agricultural development project, Peru Cacao Alliance (PCA), has contributed to climate change mitigation. Estimated carbon sequestration from perennial crop expansion, which was –211,467 tCO2e metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year, more than offset increased greenhouse gas emission (GHG) from fertilizer and pesticide management (10,286 tCO2e). The net difference, –201,180 tCO2e, is equivalent to the carbon content of 465,774 barrels of oil. The agroforestry system promoted by PCA included cacao and shade trees. Since PCA could not provide definitive data detailing the presence of existing shade trees compared to the planting of new shade trees, this analysis did not include carbon dynamics of shade trees. If new trees were planted for shade, there would be greater carbon uptake by the system than presented in this analysis. PCA reduced emissions intensity for cacao (CO2e emitted per kg production) through improved carbon sequestration and increased yields. PCA improved cacao postharvest handling (proper pod selection, storage, drying and fermentation methods) by building knowledge and capacity in producer organizations

Accelerating Agriculture Productivity Improvement in Bangladesh: Mitigation co-benefits of nutrients and water use efficency

Analysis of potential mitigation in the development project Accelerating Agriculture Productivity Improvement (AAPI) in Bangladesh showed a 2% reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, driven by urea deep placement (UDP) and alternate wetting and drying (AWD) in flooded rice systems. Given high emissions associated with conventional irrigated rice production, this represents a substantial reduction in emissions. AAPI promotes UDP, a fertilization practice known to increase nitrogen uptake efficiency. Based on the project plan and progress of implementation, UDP adoption was anticipated on 1.1 million ha of aman rice and 700,000 ha of boro rice. UDP is an example of the absolute emission reductions that are possible when a practice is widely implemented. AAPI promotes AWD, an irrigation practice for rice that reduces the amount of water used and results in decreased emissions. AAPI tested AWD on a pilot scale (21,000 ha). Climate change mitigation benefits would increase dramatically if adoption of AWD were more widespread. Due to increased rice yields, UDP and AWD reduce the emission intensity (CO2e emitted per kg production) from rice production by 10–48%

ACCESO in Honduras: Mitigation co-benefits of perennial crop expansion, soil management, and livestock improvements

The agricultural development project ACCESO reduced greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and led to net carbon sequestration due to perennial crop expansion. Increased fertilizer use was a moderate source of emissions that was more than offset by reduced emissions from other ACCESOsupported practices, including improvements in soil, water, and fertilizer management, and in feed and grassland use by dairy cows. Compared to conventional practices, ACCESOsupported activities reduced emission intensity (GHG emissions per kilogram of output) for carrots (-106%), cabbages (-99%), maize (-99%), and potatoes (-98%) compared to conventional production methods. Emission intensity increased due to greater fertilizer use for plantain (55%) and coffee (247%)

Better Life Alliance in Zambia: Climate change mitigation as a co-benefit of improved landscape, agroforestry, soil, and fertilizer management

Analysis of agricultural activities in the Better Life Alliance (BLA) project in Zambia showed potential reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), mostly (85%) due to avoided savanna degradation and conversion. The GHG impact due to BLA’s interventions is estimated at –902,531 tCO2e/yr, equivalent to saving 2,089,550 barrels of oil. BLA’s business model linked prevention of degradation and conversion of shrubland to market-based incentives for agricultural crops, thereby providing farmers with economic incentives for conservation and climate change mitigation. BLA promoted a comprehensive approach to soil fertility management. It promoted agroecological approaches such as recycling farm organic resources, planting nitrogen-fixing trees, minimal tillage, and cover crops. BLA reduced postharvest loss (PHL) through improved product processing, storage, and packaging. Changes in PHL were estimated for groundnuts (–100%), maize (–40%), rice (–80%), and soybeans (–67%), which contributed to decreases in emission intensity (GHG emissions per unit of production) for each of these products

Pastoralist Areas Resilience Improvement through Market Expansion (PRIME) in Ethiopia: Mitigation co-benefits of livestock productivity

Pastoralist Areas Resilience Improvement through Market Expansion (PRIME) showed a notable decrease in emission intensity (GHG emissions per unit of meat or milk). PRIME enabled farmers to increase production significantly, between 24% and 96%, which led to a decrease in emission intensity ranging from -4% to -42%. Due to improvements in feed quantity, PRIME projected an increase in average animal weight for all livestock (8.3 million head), which resulted in an increase in GHG emissions by an estimated 1.5 million tCO2e/yr. PRIME empowered stakeholders collectively to design and establish plans for effective management of pastures and water. The project supported soil and water conservation measures, enclosing degraded pastures, selective bush thinning, and clearing the invasive plant Prosopis. These practices improved pasture plant quality and reduced bare soil and overgrazing, which resulted in increased sequestration of soil carbon. These grassland improvements were estimated to sequester -0.1 million tCO2e/yr

A methodology for greenhouse gas emission and carbon sequestration assessments in agriculture: Supplemental materials for info series analyzing low emissions agricultural practices in USAID development projects

As many countries are increasing commitments to address climate change, national governments are exploring how they could best reduce the impact of their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Agriculture is a major contributor to GHG emissions, especially in developing countries, where this sector accounts for an average of 35% of all GHG emissions. Yet many agricultural interventions can also help to reduce GHG impacts. This paper presents the methodology to estimate impacts of agricultural interventions on GHG emissions and carbon sequestration. This methodology is used in an analysis of several development projects supported by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and presented as a series of case studies. The methodology allows users to estimate (1) GHG impacts at project scale, (2) GHG emissions by agricultural practice, and (3) GHG emissions per unit of output (i.e., GHG emission intensity). The presented approach is a rapid assessment technique that is well suited to provide an indication of the magnitude of GHG impacts and to compare GHG impact strength of different field activities or cropping systems. It is well adapted to a context of data scarcity, as is common in agricultural investment planning where aggregate data on agricultural land use and management practices are available but where field measurements of GHG and carbon stock changes are missing. This approach is instrumental to inform agricultural investment, project, and policy planners about challenges and opportunities associated with achieving and accounting for GHG emission reductions in agricultural development projects

Reducing food loss in agricultural development projects through value chain efficiency

Food loss and waste (FLW) reduces the amount of food available for distribution and consumption, decreases food security, and increases the environmental burden of food production. Combating FLW addresses the key pillars of climate-smart agriculture for farmers by increasing productivity, promoting adaption to climate change, and mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. Although studies of interventions to reduce FLW exist, almost no research systematically investigates FLW interventions across value chains or in multiple countries, most likely due to challenges in collecting and synthesizing multi-country estimates. Our research team investigated changes in FLW in projects supported by the United States Government’s global hunger and food security initiative: Feed the Future. This provided a unique opportunity to conduct ex-ante estimates of the impacts of interventions across 20 value chains in 12 countries based on interviews with United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and project staff. We provide specific examples of interventions used in each value chain and country context. The results provide an evidence base of interventions that successfully decreased FLW at multiple points along the food value chain, from upstream producer-dominated stages to downstream consumer-dominated stages. Results also show that no single FLW solution or intervention works across agriculture sub-sectors, value chain stages, and countries. Amongst the sub-sectors studied, results showed that FLW interventions directed at extensive dairy systems could provide meaningful greenhouse mitigation. In the dairy supply chain, FLW estimates ranged from 5-50% in the business-as- usual approach and declined 4-10% as a result of intervention

Agricultural development addresses food loss and waste while reducing greenhouse gas emissions

Food loss and waste (FLW) reduce food available for consumption and increase the environmental burden of production. Reducing FLW increases agricultural and value-chain productivity and may reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with feeding the global population. Although studies of interventions that reduce FLW exist, almost no research systematically investigates FLW interventions across multiple value chains or countries, most likely due to challenges in collecting and synthesizing data and estimates, let alone estimating greenhouse gas emissions. Our research team investigated changes in FLW in projects supported by the United States Agency for International Development\u27s (USAID) global hunger and food security initiative, Feed the Future. This was a unique opportunity to conduct ex-ante estimates of the impacts of FLW interventions across 20 value chains in 12 countries, based on project documents and interviews with USAID and project staff. This paper describes specific interventions in each value chain and country context, providing insight to interventions that decrease FLW at multiple points along food value chains, from upstream producer-dominated stages to downstream consumer-dominated stages. Amongst the sub-sectors studied, FLW interventions directed at extensive dairy systems could decrease FLW by 4–10%, providing meaningful greenhouse gas mitigation, since these systems are both emission-intensive and experience high FLW. More modest emissions reductions were found for other key agricultural products, including maize, rice, vegetables, fruits and market goods

Analyzing the greenhouse gas impact potential of smallholder development actions across a global food security program

This article analyses the greenhouse gas (GHG) impact potential of improved management practices and technologies for smallholder agriculture promoted under a global food security development program. Under \u27business-as-usual\u27 development, global studies on the future of agriculture to 2050 project considerable increases in total food production and cultivated area. Conventional cropland intensification and conversion of natural vegetation typically result in increased GHG emissions and loss of carbon stocks. There is a strong need to understand the potential greenhouse gas impacts of agricultural development programs intended to achieve large-scale change, and to identify pathways of smallholder agricultural development that can achieve food security and agricultural production growth without drastic increases in GHG emissions. In an analysis of 134 crop and livestock production systems in 15 countries with reported impacts on 4.8 million ha, improved management practices and technologies by smallholder farmers significantly reduce GHG emission intensity of agricultural production, increase yields and reduce post-harvest losses, while either decreasing or only moderately increasing net GHG emissions per area. Investments in both production and post-harvest stages meaningfully reduced GHG emission intensity, contributing to low emission development. We present average impacts on net GHG emissions per hectare and GHG emission intensity, while not providing detailed statistics of GHG impacts at scale that are associated to additional uncertainties. While reported improvements in smallholder systems effectively reduce future GHG emissions compared to business-as-usual development, these contributions are insufficient to significantly reduce net GHG emission in agriculture beyond current levels, particularly if future agricultural production grows at projected rates

Interventions that reduce FLW and have a large mitigation impact

Meeting on food loss and waste as a climate change mitigation strategy November 14, 2018 Hosted by CCAFS Low Emissions Development as part of its Learning Platform on Low Emission Option