Persepsi Petani terhadap Kebijakan Pengembangan Agribisnis Tanaman Bawang Merah di Kelurahan Banturung Kecamatan Bukit Batu Kota Palangka Raya

This research was conducted to find out how big the level of farmers' perceptions of the onion agribusiness development policy. The author uses a Likert scale for the basis of calculations. This research was conducted in Banturung Village, Bukit Batu Subdistrict, Palangka Raya City. The results of the study consisted of: in terms of program assistance in the "strongly agree" category where the farmers' desire for assistance is very large so that farmers better understand the program this assistance is running. In terms of preparation of seeds and input in the category of “strongly agree" where the great expectations of farmers for the preparation of seeds and production inputs have great benefits and contributions. In terms of technical assistance for cultivation and post harvest through extension workers in the "strongly agree" category where the role of extension agents is very large for government policy regarding the development of this onion plant agribusiness. In terms of preparation of land processing tools, post harvest tools, and results processing tools. In the category "strongly agree" where the use of tools in the agricultural production process has a large contribution to achieving its effectiveness optimally. In terms of seed propagation, seed purification and seed warehouse in the "strongly agree" category where to reduce the initial production capital, the farmer can increase his own seeds. The hope is that every affected farmer gets this program to get his own seed warehouse. In terms of the implementation of disease control in the category "strongly agree" where the control of pest disease is expected to have a large contribution to the cultivation activities carried out

Loss and damage and limits to adaptation: recent IPCC insights and implications for climate science and policy

Recent evidence shows that climate change is leading to irreversible and existential impacts on vulnerable communities and countries across the globe. Among other effects, this has given rise to public debate and engagement around notions of climate crisis and emergency. The Loss and Damage (L&D) policy debate has emphasized these aspects over the last three decades. Yet, despite institutionalization through an article on L&D by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in the Paris Agreement, the debate has remained vague, particularly with reference to its remit and relationship to adaptation policy and practice. Research has recently made important strides forward in terms of developing a science perspective on L&D. This article reviews insights derived from recent publications by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and others, and presents the implications for science and policy. Emerging evidence on hard and soft adaptation limits in certain systems, sectors and regions holds the potential to further build momentum for climate policy to live up to the Paris ambition of stringent emission reductions and to increase efforts to support the most vulnerable. L&D policy may want to consider actions to extend soft adaptation limits and spur transformational, that is, non-standard risk management and adaptation, so that limits are not breached. Financial, technical, and legal support would be appropriate for instances where hard limits are transgressed. Research is well positioned to further develop robust evidence on critical and relevant risks at scale in the most vulnerable countries and communities, as well as options to reduce barriers and limits to adaptation

Assessing inter-sectoral climate change risks: the role of ISIMIP

The aims of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP) are to provide a framework for the intercomparison of global and regional-scale risk models within and across multiple sectors and to enable coordinated multi-sectoral assessments of different risks and their aggregated effects. The overarching goal is to use the knowledge gained to support adaptation and mitigation decisions that require regional or global perspectives within the context of facilitating transformations to enable sustainable development, despite inevitable climate shifts and disruptions. ISIMIP uses community-agreed sets of scenarios with standardized climate variables and socio-economic projections as inputs for projecting future risks and associated uncertainties, within and across sectors. The results are consistent multi-model assessments of sectoral risks and opportunities that enable studies that integrate across sectors, providing support for implementation of the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

Developing and testing the urban sustainable development goal’s targets and indicators – a five-city study

The campaign for the inclusion of a specifically urban goal within the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) was challenging. Numerous divergent interests were involved, while urban areas worldwide are also extremely heterogeneous. It was essential to minimize the number of targets and indicators while still capturing critical urban dimensions relevant to human development. It was also essential to test the targets and indicators. This paper reports the findings of a unique comparative pilot project involving co-production between researchers and local authority officials in five diverse secondary and intermediate cities: Bangalore (Bengaluru), India; Cape Town, South Africa; Gothenburg, Sweden; Greater Manchester, United Kingdom; and Kisumu, Kenya. Each city faced problems in providing all the data required, and each also proposed various changes to maximize the local relevance of particular targets and indicators. This reality check provided invaluable inputs to the process of finalizing the urban SDG prior to the formal announcement of the entire SDG set by the UN Secretary-General in late September 2015

Assessing the Potential of Regulating Ecosystem Services as Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Areas

Mounting research assesses the provision of regulating ecosystem services by green infrastructure in urban areas, but the extent to which these services can offer effective nature-based solutions for addressing urban climate change-related challenges is rarely considered. In this chapter, we synthesize knowledge from assessments of urban green infrastructure carried out in Europe and beyond to evaluate the potential contribution of regulating ecosystem services to offset carbon emissions, reduce heat stress and abate air pollution at the metropolitan, city and site scales. Results from this review indicate that the potential of regulating ecosystem services provided by urban green infrastructure to counteract these three climate change-related pressures is often limited and/or uncertain, especially at the city and metropolitan levels. However, their contribution can have a substantially higher impact at site scales such as in street canyons and around green spaces. We note that if regulating ecosystem services are to offer effective nature-based solutions in urban areas, it is critically important that green infrastructure policies target the relevant implementation scale. This calls for a coordination between authorities dealing with urban and environmental policy and for the harmonization of planning and management instruments in a multilevel governance approach. Regulating ecosystem services • Urban green infrastructure • Global climate regulation • Local climate regulation • Air quality regulation • Multi-scale assessmentpublishedVersio

Synthesis report of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), Longer report. IPCC.

This Synthesis Report (SYR) of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) summarises the state of knowledge of climate change, its widespread impacts and risks, and climate change mitigation and adaptation, based on the peer-reviewed scientific, technical and socio-economic literature since the publication of the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) in 2014. The assessment is undertaken within the context of the evolving international landscape, in particular, developments in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) process, including the outcomes of the Kyoto Protocol and the adoption of the Paris Agreement. It reflects the increasing diversity of those involved in climate action. This report integrates the main findings of the AR6 Working Group reports1 and the three AR6 Special Reports. It recognizes the interdependence of climate, ecosystems and biodiversity, and human societies; the value of diverse forms of knowledge; and the close linkages between climate change adaptation, mitigation, ecosystem health, human well-being and sustainable development. Building on multiple analytical frameworks, including those from the physical and social sciences, this report identifies opportunities for transformative action which are effective, feasible, just and equitable using concepts of systems transitions and resilient development pathways. Different regional classification schemes are used for physical, social and economic aspects, reflecting the underlying literature. After this introduction, Section 2, ‘Current Status and Trends’, opens with the assessment of observational evidence for our changing climate, historical and current drivers of human-induced climate change, and its impacts. It assesses the current implementation of adaptation and mitigation response options. Section 3, ‘Long-Term Climate and Development Futures’, provides a long-term assessment of climate change to 2100 and beyond in a broad range of socio-economic futures. It considers long-term characteristics, impacts, risks and costs in adaptation and mitigation pathways in the context of sustainable development. Section 4, ‘Near-Term Responses in a Changing Climate’, assesses opportunities for scaling up effective action in the period up to 2040, in the context of climate pledges, and commitments, and the pursuit of sustainable development. Based on scientific understanding, key findings can be formulated as statements of fact or associated with an assessed level of confidence using the IPCC calibrated language5 . The scientific findings are drawn from the underlying reports and arise from their Summary for Policymakers (hereafter SPM), Technical Summary (hereafter TS), and underlying chapters and are indicated by {} brackets. Figure 1.1 shows the Synthesis Report Figures Key, a guide to visual icons that are used across multiple figures within this report

Climate change effects on people’s livelihood

Generally climate is defined as the long-term average weather conditions of a particular place, region, or the world. Key climate variables include surface conditions such as temperature, precipitation, and wind. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) broadly defined climate change as any change in the state of climate which persists for extended periods, usually for decades or longer (Allwood et al. 2014). Climate change may occur due to nature’s both internal and external processes. External process involves anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, and volcanic eruptions. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) made a distinction between climate change attributable to human contribution to atmospheric composition and natural climate variability. In its Article 1, the UNFCCC defines climate change as “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods” (United Nations 1992, p. 7)