Global digital tool review for agroecological transitions

This report summarizes a global review of digital resources relevant to climate change-informed agroecological transitions. The goal of the review was to identify exemplary features of digital tools for socially inclusive and climate-informed agroecological transitions. We cataloged digital resources available globally that provided either technical advisory services or performance assessment, as functions that directly support scaling up new practices. We reviewed the tools’ functions (i.e., the purpose of using a tool) against indicators for exemplary features (i.e., the channels through which a user can engage with the tool). To address social inclusion, we gave special attention to farmers’ co-creation of knowledge for on-the-ground practices

Critiques of digital tools in agriculture: Challenges & opportunities for using digital tools to scale agroecology by smallholders

KEY MESSAGES ◼ Two themes manifest in the challenges outlined, unequal power relations and a disconnect from farmers’ needs and input. ◼ Agricultural digitization should strive to follow ethical principles specific to the sector, agroecology offers an existing framework. ◼ Digital technical assistance that advances the interests of smallholders and is relevant to their farms can facilitate a shift towards agroecology through farmer-to-farmer networks and knowledge exchange. ◼ Recommendations include: ▪ Govern for an inclusive digital ecosystem & economy ▪ Leverage and expand food, data & social justice movements ▪ Code ethics into digital developmen

Climate change impacts of the UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) commercial agriculture portfolio

This report provides an initial, rapid assessment of a selection of programmes in the commercial agricultural portfolio of the Department for International Development of the United Kingdom (DfID) (now the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Offices or FCDO) to demonstrate a range of interventions and their likely net greenhouse gas (GHG) emission impacts. Analysis of crop and livestock value chains in seven countries, representing over four million hectares, shows that the changes in farmers’ practices supported by DfID’s bilateral investments in commercial agriculture significantly enhance crop and livestock production, while likely reducing net GHG emissions in the near term. The programme value chains increased average crop productivity by 1.0 ton per hectare per year (t ha-1 y-1), and reduced net GHG emissions by as much as 5.5 tCO2e ha-1 y-1 (cocoa agroforestry) compared to the start of the programme. Cereals demonstrated smaller annual changes, averaging a reduction of 0.80 tCO2e ha-1 y-1. Livestock productivity only increased slightly on average from 1.0 (goats) to 3.0 kg head-1 y-1 (beef cattle), with corresponding slight reductions in net GHG emissions from 0.001 (goats) to 0.01 (beef cattle) tCO2e head-1 y-1. Increases in emissions across the programmes are commonly due to increased use of nitrogen fertiliser and mechanisation. Reductions are commonly due to carbon sequestration in the soil as a result of manure addition, minimum tillage, crop rotation or reduced burning. These results are consistent with the increased use of inputs expected from market-driven agricultural intensification

Agroecology and climate change rapid evidence review: Performance of agroecological approaches in low- and middle- income countries

Agroecology is increasingly seen as being able, or even necessary, to transform food systems (HLPE 2019). The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and the CGIAR Research Programme on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) commissioned this rapid evidence-based review to assess the quality and strength of evidence regarding (i) the impact of agroecological approaches on climate change mitigation and adaptation in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and (ii) the programming approaches and conditions supporting large-scale transitions to agroecology and transitions. The review also aims to identify knowledge gaps critical to understand and inform future public and private investment in research, development, and deployment of agroecological approaches. The focus here is on the science of agroecology at the field and landscape level, not on social movement, value chain or business aspects. We use the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 10 elements of agroecology with the Gliessman (2016) framework to identify agroecology practices (transition level 2) and agroecology systems (transition level 3). To assess evidence related to agroecology‘s climate change outcomes we conducted a systematic literature review of i) synthesis papers and ii) primary empirical studies related to nutrient and pest and disease management. For the latter we documented the presence of evidence for climate change outcome indicators, but not the magnitude or direction of the change. We also conducted semi-structured interviews with representatives from 12 organizations supporting or implementing on-the-ground agricultural development programmes to better understand the feasibility of scaling out agroecology

Livestock management ambition in the new and updated nationally determined contributions: 2020-2021: Analysis of agricultural sub-sectors in national climate change strategies

Key messages 1) The share of countries with livestock measures in new and updated NDCs has not significantly changed since the previous round of NDCs. 2) 34% of countries included livestock mitigation measures in new and updated NDCs (50 of 148 countries) compared to 35% in the previous NDCs (68 of 192 countries). 3) 36% of countries included livestock adaptation measures in new and updated NDCs (53 of 148 countries) compared to 35% in the previous NDCs (67 of 192 countries). 4) Mitigation priorities included manure management (18% of 148 countries), feed management (16%) and silvopastoralism (10%). Adaptation priorities included breed management (14%), feed management (10%) and silvopastoralism (9%). 5) Among the top 10 countries with the highest mitigation potential for enteric fermentation and manure management, 7 referred to livestock in mitigation measures. 6) Specification of sub-sector actions in NDCs can improve eligibility for climate finance, but this level of detail can reduce countries’ flexibility for meeting their NDC targets and countries often lack affordable, robust monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) systems. 7) Livestock commitments that demonstrated high standards, which may indicate options for other countries, included quantified outcomes, reference levels of indicators, mitigation potentials, and policies.Updated 1 March 2022 by Sabrina Ros

Quantification of economically feasible mitigation potential from agriculture, forestry and other land uses in Mexico

Countries often lack methods for rapidly, but robustly determining greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation actions and their impacts comprehensively in the land use sector to support commitments to the Paris Agreement. We present rapid assessment methods based on easily available spatial data and adoption costs for mitigation related to crops, livestock and forestry to identify priority locations and actions. Applying the methods for the case of Mexico, we found a national mitigation potential of 87.88 million tons (Mt) CO2eq yr−1, comprising 7.91, 7.66 and 72.31 Mt CO2eq yr−1 from crops, livestock and forestry/agro-forestry, respectively. At the state level, mitigation potentials were highest in Chiapas (13 Mt CO2eq) followed by Campeche (8 Mt CO2eq). Eleven states had a land use mitigation potential between 2.5 to 6.5 Mt CO2eq, while other states had mitigation potentials of less than 2 Mt CO2eq. Mitigation options for crops and livestock could reduce 60% and 6% of the respective emissions. Mitigation options for forestry could reduce emissions by half. If properly implemented, mitigation potentials on cropland can be realized with net benefits, compared to livestock and forestry options, which involve net costs. The method supports science-based priority setting of mitigation actions by location and subsector and should help inform future policy and implementation of countries’ nationally determined contributions

How soil carbon accounting can improve to support investment- oriented actions promoting soil carbon storage

Key messages ◼ The financial community needs a standardized, low-cost, fit-for-purpose approach to soil organic carbon (SOC) accounting that encourages investment and adapts to the climate market. ◼ To encourage investments, an accounting system should provide “value for money,” align with global goals and support co-benefits, while safeguarding reputational risks. ◼ Building a sequenced approach to improve accounting accuracy requires planning to reduce uncertainties of the accounting systems overtime. ◼ Developing low-cost SOC accounting requires i) focusing on a few high-quality direct measurements (opposed to multiple low-quality measurements), ii) reducing the uncertainty of models, and iii) enhancing capability to easily incorporate farm-level activity data. ◼ Moving to hybrid measurement approaches (a mix of direct measurements with modeling and remote sensing) seems to be the most cost-effective pathway to achieve low-cost SOC accounting systems

Principles for digital tool use and co-creation of farming practices: A review and guide

This guide seeks to address some of these concerns with the existing digitization of food systems (Shelton et al., 2022), including: ▪ Digital tools that are irrelevant to farmers’ situations or inaccessible due to a major disconnect among digital developers, public policy, scientific recommendations, extension priorities, and farmers’ needs. ▪ Marginalized groups are often the last to benefit from new technology and are at the greatest risk of exploitation of privacy and data rights. ▪ Many tools do not include more progressive sustainability practices such as low-emission agriculture, climate change adaptation or agroecology, or lack robust scientific evidence behind recommended practices. The purpose of this document is to provide principles for the social inclusion of smallholder farmers in the development and use of digital tools for the benefit of the same farmers. The intent is to improve the benefits of digital tools for diverse and underrepresented groups of farmers, whether defined by gender, age, class, land tenure, language, ethnicity, ability, sexuality, or another relevant category. The guide gives special attention to principles specific to farmer co-creation of farm practices as an element of social inclusion directly relevant to farmers’ livelihoods and as a desirable practice for developing robust technical solutions

Global digital tool review for agroecological transitions

This document contains a review of global digital resources relevant to climate-informed agroecological transitions. The purpose of the review was to catalog relevant digital resources and assess their role in inclusive knowledge development, with special attention to farmers’ co-creation of knowledge for on-the-ground practices. To this end, we identified existing digital tools relevant to technical advisory and performance assessment and reviewed their functions (i.e., the purpose of using a tool) against indicators for exemplary features (i.e., the channels in which a user can engage with the tool) that could support socially inclusive, climate-informed agroecological transitions