a

Defi ningRole of Agriculture in

South Asia

CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK SOUTH ASIA

Defi ning Role of Agriculture in South Asia

Author: Doreen Stabinsky

Reviewed and Coordinated by Sanjay Vashist, Harjeet Singh and Ram Kishan

March 2014

Cover Photo: VSZ / Flickr

Copyright: © Climate Action Network South Asia

CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK SOUTH ASIA

c/o Bangladesh Centre for Advance Studies

House 10, Road 16A, Gulshan-1,

Dhaka 1212, Bangladesh

March 2014

Draft for Consultation

CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK SOUTH ASIA

Defi ningRole of Agriculture in

South Asia

ii

Introduction 1

Context 1

Agriculture’s role in South Asian economies 1

Climate change impacts on the region related to agriculture 4

Temperature impacts on crop yields 4

Water 4

Broader consequences of climate impacts on food production 5

Food and nutrition security 5

Migration and transformation 6

Migration 6

Transformational changes 6

Adaptation to climate change and the importance of agroecological approaches 6

Soil-building practices 7

Water harvesting and management 7

Giving farmers and communities tools to enhance and use their collective knowledge 8

Ecosystem-based adaptation strategies 8

Mitigation in the agriculture sector 9

The question of mitigation potential 10

Conclusions: addressing impacts on the agriculture sector in climate-starved South Asia 11

Policy recommendations 11

Table of Contents

iv

1

I. IntroductionAgriculture plays a central role in South Asian economies, lives, and livelihoods. Climate change will have sig-

nifi cant impacts on agricultural production in the region and those involved in agriculture, including some of

the poorest and most vulnerable communities on the planet. For this reason alone, we must urgently consider

the responses that our governments and our communities must take to maintain our agricultural systems in the

face of climate change.

First and foremost, it is essential that the international community act with utmost urgency to reduce global

emissions and hence lessen the impacts that will be seen. Beyond immediate action on emissions reduction

globally, climate change policies must be developed at national, regional, and global levels to address the seri-

ous near-term threats posed to crop, livestock, and fi sheries production. Steps must be taken to protect lives and

livelihoods dependent on that production, through both adaptation efforts and approaches to address loss and

damage.

One fi nal element to be considered in the development of policies linking agriculture and climate change is how

to address the greenhouse gas emissions of the agriculture sector itself. Some forms of agriculture contribute

signifi cantly to global greenhouse gas emissions. Other forms of agriculture contribute little to the climate prob-

lem, and should be seen as an example of the transition needed towards low-emissions agricultural systems.

These lower-emitting forms of agricultural production are often also more climate-resilient, and must be pro-

moted in our efforts to protect food security and livelihoods in the face of growing climate impacts on our region.

This current draft policy paper by CANSA is meant to stimulate discussion among the member groups of CAN-

SA, and in the process to develop and provide a common platform for lobbying and advocacy efforts at national,

regional (SAARC), and international levels in the context of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change

(UNFCCC). It takes as its starting point the important role of agriculture in the South Asian region and the seri-

ous impacts on agriculture anticipated from climate change. It also provides analysis and recommendations for

the way forward — steps to be taken by our governments at the domestic level and policies and positions to be

taken by our governments in international negotiations.

II. Context Before beginning to defi ne adaptation and mitigation policies that would be appropriate to the South Asian

context, a brief review of that context is necessary. This context section briefl y explores: the role of agriculture in

South Asian economies; regional climate, climate variability, and expected climatic changes; and expected im-

pacts on agricultural production from climate change.

A. Agriculture’s role in South Asian economies

“Of the 1.2 billion people worldwide living in dollar poverty, over 43 percent are found in South Asia. Of these, the vast

majority live in rural areas.”1

South Asia is still predominantly rural. Over 70% of its population live in rural areas, the majority of whom make

their living by depending on the natural resources that surround them — land, freshwater, coastal fi sheries.

2

Much of the agriculture in South Asia is rainfed, so there is a fundamental dependence on rains that come sea-

sonally. Too much rain, too little, too soon, too late — the types of variability expected to increase as global tem-

peratures warm — will have signifi cant impacts on the region because of this dependence.

Much of the agricultural production in the region is undertaken by smallholders, on very small landholdings, by

women, with a signifi cant dependence on fi sheries for protein in several countries, and dependence on livestock

for draft power, manure, milk, and food security. The brief statistics below help to illustrate these essential char-

acteristics of the region’s agricultural systems:2

• The average size of holdings in Bangladesh is only 0.5 hectares, and small farms account for 96% of opera-

tional holdings.

• In Bangladesh, fi sh provides 60% of national animal protein consumption, and the sector plays an impor-

tant role in rural employment generation and poverty alleviation.

• The majority of India’s poor (some 70%) are found in rural areas; in Sri Lanka the rural poor account for

95% of the country’s poor.

• 63% of India’s land under cultivation is rainfed.

• In India, about 81% of holdings are less than 2 hectares in size, with an average size of 1.4 hectares.

• The average size of holdings in Sri Lanka is 0.8 hectares.

• The average size of holdings in Nepal is 0.8 hectares, with nearly half less than 0.5 hectare; 93% of holdings

in the country are operated by small farmers.

• In Nepal, the sale of livestock and livestock products is an important source for cash income. In the mountainous areas 44.4% of the farm cash income comes from livestock and 47.6% in the rural hills.

• The average size of Pakistani landholding is 3.0 hectares, with 58% of farms less than 2 hectares in size.

However, less than half of rural households own agricultural land.

• In Pakistan, the livestock sector contributes around 49.1% to overall agriculture value added and about 11.4%

to national GDP in economic terms. Women are responsible for much of the labor of tending livestock.

• The average farm size in Bhutan is a little over 1 hectare; women own 70% of the land.

• 86% of farmers own livestock in Bhutan; about 10 percent of the country’s population is dependent on yak

production.

• In Afghanistan, 68 % of households own some kind of livestock. For most Afghan farmers, animals are the only source for power for cultivation and transport.

As can be seen from the statistics above, women play a signifi cant role in agriculture, including in the production

of high-value crops such as vegetables; home garden cultivation; and in the raising of animals. For example in In-

dia, the agriculture sector employs 4/5 of all economically active women in the country and 48% of self-employed

farmers are women. In Sri Lanka, 41.5% of women work in agriculture ; in Bhutan, the fi gure is 62%.

3

Table 1: Selected statistics demonstrating the signifi cance of agriculture in South Asian economies , , , , , ,

Country % labor force in agriculture6 % population living in rural areas

Agricultural GDP7

(as % of total GDP)

Afghanistan 59.4% Over 75 % 29.9%

Bangladesh 44 % 80% (57% landless)

18.6%(fi sheries 4.4% of GDP)8

Bhutan 92.8 % 85 % 18.7%

India 54 % 69% 17.7%(fi sheries 1.1% of GDP)9

Nepal 92.9 % 92.9% 36.5%

Maldives 17.8 % (30% in fi sheries) 57.4% 3.1%10

(fi sheries 15% of GDP)11

Pakistan 38.6 % 63% 21.2%

Sri Lanka 43 % 80% 12.8%(fi sheries 1.7% of GDP)12

Crops grown in the region are important both for regional and global food security. The region grows 31% of the

world’s rice and 18% of its wheat. The pulses, millets, fruits, and vegetables grown contribute not only to food

security, but to nutritional security as well.

B. Climate change impacts on the region related to agriculture

“The impacts of climate change on crop production in South Asia could be severe.”

A great amount of uncertainty still characterizes what is known about climate impacts on agriculture globally,

and particularly in tropical and sub-tropical developing countries. Model uncertainty, coupled with insuffi cient

historical data with which to test models, leads still to a signifi cant amount of uncertainty.

For example, it is still relatively diffi cult to predict exact magnitudes and impacts of extreme high temperatures,

extreme rainfall, increased seasonality of the monsoon, lack of irrigation water, or effects of sea-level rise and

saline intrusion into groundwater.

That said, there are some general predictions that can be made regarding potential climate change impacts in

South Asia. “Some of the predicted impacts of climate change include increased variability in both monsoon and winter

rainfall patterns; increase in average temperatures, with warmer winters increased salinity in coastal areas as a result of

rising seas and reduced discharge of major rivers; weakening ecosystems; the recession of glaciers in the Himalayas; and

increased frequency and/or severity of extreme weather events (fl oods, cyclones, and droughts).”

And while it is currently impossible to predict with reasonable likelihood whether a region of South Asia will

see rather more rainfall or less rainfall in the coming decades, some important elements of future climates with

signifi cant bearing on agriculture and crop production are relatively clear:

• Temperatures will rise. Average temperatures are rising and extreme temperatures will become more fre-

quent. Nighttime temperatures will rise. Moreover, “potential wetter conditions … hardly counteract the adverse

effect of higher temperatures.”

4

• Rainfall patterns will change. As the atmosphere holds more moisture, heavy rain events will increase. Dis-

tribution patterns of rainfall over the course of cropping seasons will likely change.

While most attention has been paid to climate impacts on crop production, it is clear that livestock and fi sheries

will also suffer signifi cant impacts. CCAFS scientist Philip Thornton warns that “raising livestock and catching fi sh

… will also be challenged by a new climate.” “Pastures are expected to decrease in quality, with increased temperatures

forcing the grasses to become more fi brous and less nutritious,” and “increased drought frequency could put many farm

animals at risk.”

Temperature impacts on crop yields:

Temperature is signifi cant for a range of crop physiological processes, the most important being pollination and

grain fi lling, as well as basic photosynthesis. High temperatures, whether lasting over a series of days or an ex-

treme spike of several hours, can have serious negative effect on these processes, with downstream consequences

for crop yields. Especially sensitive are the reproductive organs; extreme heat events of even short duration dur-

ing fl owering or pollination can severely reduce a harvest. The current projections for the region of an “increase

in extreme heat affecting 10 percent of total land area by 2020 and 15 percent by 2030 poses a high risk to crop yields.”

Temperature increases will affect yields of most of the major staple crops in the region, including wheat, maize,

rice, and potatoes:

• “Compared to calculations of potential yields without historic trends of temperature changes since the 1980s,” scien-

tists have shown reductions already in global maize and wheat production, over the period from 1980-2008,

by 3.8% and 5.5% respectively.

• In a similar study, scientists fi nd that “rice and wheat yields have declined by approximately 8 percent for every 1°C

increase in average growing-season temperatures.”

• Another study “found that warmer nights and lower precipitation at the end of the growing season has caused a

signifi cant loss of rice production in India: yields could have been almost 6 percent higher without the historic change

in climatic conditions.”

Potato production in the region is also threatened. As potatoes are better suited to cooler temperatures, “stead-

ily rising temperatures are likely to reduce potato yields in places where people already struggle to meet basic nutritional

needs,” such as India.

Water… :

Authors of the recent World Bank report, Turn down the heat, warn that the South Asia region is “highly vulnerable

even at warming of less than 2°C given the signifi cant areas affected by droughts and fl ooding at present temperatures.”

Changes in the timing and strength of the monsoons, which account for more than 70 percent of the region’s

annual precipitation, threaten rainfed crops and livelihoods dependent upon them. “Under future climate change,

the frequency of years with above normal monsoon rainfall and of years with extremely defi cient rainfall is expected to

increase.” Impacts on the monsoons are likely already happing: “recent studies indicate a decline of as much as 10

percent in South Asian monsoon rainfall since the 1950s.”

World Bank authors also note that “droughts are expected to pose an increasing risk in parts of the region, particularly

Pakistan, while increasing wetness is projected for southern India.”

5

Sea level rise will have an impact on livelihoods in the Bangladesh, India, Maldives, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, with

millions made homeless by the end of the century. Sea level rise will increase salinity in coastal aquifers; already

in Bangladesh lands have been made uninhabitable by salt-water intrusion.

The authors of the World Bank report also call attention to a potential tipping element in the regional climate

system – the Indian Summer Monsoon – and the possibility for an abrupt change (tipping) that would shift the

region’s climate “toward a much drier, lower rainfall state.”

C. Broader consequences of climate impacts on food production

“In some regions such as … South Asia that are already food insecure and where most of the population increase and

economic development will take place, climate change could be the additional stress that pushes systems over the edge.”

Climate change directly threatens food production. Indirect impacts of climate change on lives and livelihoods

will likely include food price volatility, leading to food and nutrition insecurity, potential confl ict over land and

natural resources, and migration and forced displacement. The most disruptive effects of climate change may

lead to “transformational” adaptation in areas where crop agriculture, pastoralism, or fi shing can no longer pro-

vide viable livelihoods. These broader consequences connect directly with the loss and damage agenda, where

Parties to the UNFCCC are debating the necessary international responses to the limits to adaptation.

Food and nutrition security

Many recent studies have been published that demonstrate signifi cant near-term climate impacts on agriculture

and food and nutrition security. South Asia, in particular, is often singled out as one of the important hot spots

of these impacts.

In one example, using a statistical analysis of historical relationships between temperature and precipitation data

and harvests for major crops in 12 “food-insecure” regions, Lobell et al. identifi ed South Asia and southern Africa

as two regions with a high probability of suffering production losses to crops important to large, food insecure

populations. Funk and Brown estimate that interactions between drought exacerbated by climate change and

declining agricultural capacity (including the effects of population growth) could increase demand for World

Food Program humanitarian assistance by 83% by 2030 in the absence of agricultural development that reduces

effects on yields.

In an economic study by the International Food Policy Research Institute on impacts of climate change on agri-

culture and the costs of adaptation, the authors found that:

• impacts on yields will result in price increases for the most important agricultural crops – rice, wheat, maize,

soybeans – with import costs for South Asian countries increasing to around $15 billion per year;

• higher feed prices will result in higher meat prices; and

• calorie availability will decline relative to 2000 levels throughout the developing world.

An important point to note with regard to many studies on food security impacts, such as the IFPRI study: they

tend to focus only on global aggregate impacts. In an aggregate assessment, if wheat production decreases in

India, but increases in Russia, globally things even out. Aggregate approaches inevitably hide devastating impacts

of climate change on people and communities. The costs for farmers, their families, and their communities in

India of declining wheat yields; the implications of slowly declining yields on their ability to repay debts; perhaps

a need to start growing a different commodity as wheat is consistently not producing adequately — these are

impacts that at least as important to estimate and to address as global production losses.

6

Migration and transformation

Two potential responses to the signifi cant impacts that climate change will have on farmers, pastoral and fi sher-

folk communities, and food security in the region are migration and transformational changes. Whether volun-

tary or forced, these responses merit special attention, in order to increase our understanding of the costs and

consequences of these responses for individuals, communities, and governments. As governments begin to as-

sess and address loss and damage from climate change, they will need to develop ways to incorporate the human

and economic costs of migration and transformation, including with regard to impacts on food production and

food security, in their approaches to loss and damage.

Migration

Extreme events regularly cause migration and forced displacement of people from homes and communities.

For example, “recent disasters in South Asia demonstrate what could be a more frequent reality for the region. Floods in

September 2012 displaced 1.5 million people in the northeastern state of Assam, while Cyclone Aila in 2009 displaced 2.3

million people in India and almost 850,000 in Bangladesh.”

Crop losses and failures due to extreme events and slow onset temperature rise will lead to additional displace-

ments. Sea level rise and inundation of low-lying regions will cause further migration of agricultural producers

and fi sherfolk. Increased migration and displacement of these food producers has implications for national food

security. National adaptation planning will need to broaden to include consideration of, and means to address,

voluntary or forced migration from climate impacts on rural food producing regions.

Transformational changes

Adaptation scholars now talk about a new category of adaptation: transformational adaptation. As an example of

the context for this new type of adaptation, CCAFS scientist Philip Thornton warns that “entire regions face a shift

to a different climate type and the geographic range for many crops will shift accordingly.” “Particular cropping systems

that look especially vulnerable with future warming include maize in most locations across the globe, wheat in Central

and South Asia, and rice throughout South and East Asia.” As extreme heat events increase in frequency and water

supplies diminish, major staple crops such as wheat, rice, and maize may no longer be suitable for huge growing

areas in the South Asia region, and farmers will need to shift crops or abandon agricultural production entirely.

III. Adaptation to climate change and the importance of agroecological approaches

Specifi c impacts of climate change are largely unpredictable. We know broadly that temperatures will warm, that

rainfall patterns are likely to change, and that an increase in heat will affect soil moisture, crop yields, and animal

well-being. A recent World Bank report emphasizes in general an increase in extremes of water scarcity, heat, and

sea level rise as most signifi cant impacts to be felt in South Asia.

With the climate information we have available now, what predictions we can make about the specifi c impacts

of climate change on crop production are still at the very aggregate level of predicting impacts on crop yields at

global or regional levels. Yet to take steps to adapt to climatic changes, we really need to know what the impacts

of climate change will look like in a farmer’s fi eld, or in at least in a particular region.

7

Given this degree of uncertainty, often the best course of action is to adopt “no-regrets” strategies – approaches

that provide benefi ts to farmers regardless of the kinds of climate impacts that will be seen. Indeed, the broader

consequences of climate change for agricultural production as noted above are too far-reaching to not prepare –

adaptation must begin now. A range of practical “no-regrets” approaches can and should be taken to make farms

and farming systems more resilient in the face of unpredictable heat and rainfall.

Adaptation strategies that build resilience will also build stronger communities and local economies that can bet-

ter withstand climate shocks, with reserves of food and other resources to help weather diffi cult times. Support

for resilience-building, “no-regrets” efforts should be prioritized in national adaptation plans and donor-funded

initiatives.

Some of the most important “no regrets” agricultural adaptation technologies and practices include:

Soil-building practices

Soil-building practices add organic matter to the soil, thus building up soil structure, soil health, and fertility.

Practices include mulching, green manuring, cover cropping with or without legumes to add nitrogen, crop rota-

tion, and the addition of compost and manures.

By building the health of soils, farmers increase the water-holding and infi ltration capacities of the soil, buffering

their fi elds in times of drought. A healthier soil with better structure is better able to hold onto nutrients, increas-

ing soil fertility and at the same time reducing pollution in waterways. An important co-benefi t of soil-building

practices is that productivity is increased as fertility increases. Another important co-benefi t from soils with bet-

ter soil structure and plant residues covering the soil is protection against the soil erosion anticipated from the

heavier rainfall expected from climate change.

Water harvesting and management

Adapting to climate change will require even more emphasis than is currently given to improving water manage-

ment and water harvesting in rain-fed regions. Many traditional techniques already in use to improve rainwater

use effi ciency can be shared using farmer-to-farmer methods. In India, over 35 traditional rainwater-harvesting

systems have been identifi ed.

According to CGIAR scientists, a “no-regrets” intervention in Sri Lanka “is the restoration of the ancient tank stor-

age system in the country, to provide “insurance” against climate variability in the most vulnerable districts. … Other

no-regrets interventions for water and agriculture … are rainwater harvesting, development of sustainable groundwater,

adoption of micro-irrigation technologies, and wastewater reuse.”

Practices and transitions that increase diversity: diverse seeds, mixed animal-cropping systems and mixed crop-

ping-forest systems

Resilience can be built through increasing biological diversity. Both biological and livelihood diversity can be

increased through increasing the variety of crops grown at one time on the parcel of land, and by adding trees

and/or animals into the system. Farmers can also increase diversity in their fi elds by growing different varieties

of the same crop that have different attributes. Supporting soil health increases the diversity of organisms in the

soil, which are responsible for benefi ts such as increased access to nutrients and reduction of diseases and pests.

8

Experience suggests that farmers who increase diversity suffer less damage during adverse weather events. A

well-known example comes from the year 2008 in Central America, when a devastating hurricane hit the region.

Researchers showed that diversifi ed farmers suffered much less damage than non-diversifi ed farmers. “Sustain-

able plots had 20 to 40 percent more topsoil, greater soil moisture and less erosion.”

Giving farmers and communities tools to enhance and use their collective knowledge

Farming and pastoralist communities have a wealth of knowledge about how to produce food and maintain

food security in situations of climate variability. “No-regrets” options will include strengthening the capacity of

small-scale farmers’, women’s, pastoralist, indigenous and community-based organizations to access productive

resources and to share with each other ecological agriculture approaches for adaptation.

The traditional varieties of millet grown across the region are one example of the knowledge currently stewarded

by local communities to address drought and climate variability. Both the seeds and the knowledge of the seeds’

drought resistance qualities are important to maintain and disseminate in the region. Farmers’ fi eld schools and

other types of documentation and dissemination efforts are important means to share the seeds and many suc-

cessful approaches to adaptation that have been developed by communities throughout the region. Women’s

organizations in particular have played a central role in establishing and maintaining community seed banks.

Ecosystem-based adaptation strategies

Ecosystem-based adaptation includes a number of the practices already mentioned, including:

• “sustainable water management, where river basins, aquifers, fl ood plains, and their associated vegetation

are managed in a way that provides water storage and fl ood regulation;

• sustainable management of grasslands and rangelands to enhance pastoral livelihoods and increase resil-

ience to drought and fl ooding; and

• establishment of diverse agricultural systems, where using indigenous knowledge of specifi c crop and live-

stock varieties, maintaining crop and livestock diversity, and conserving diverse agricultural landscapes can

help to secure food provision in changing local climatic conditions.”

An example of ecosystem-based adaptation comes from the drought-prone regions of Maharashtra in India,

where “rehabilitation of a watershed ecosystem … helped to improve soil conditions, increase water availability, regener-

Box 1: Ten co-benefi ts of adopting no-regrets adaptation practices in agriculture

• Livelihood resilience through diversifi cation

• Biodiversity conservation and protection

• Food security

• Enhanced nutritional status

• Maintaining indigenous and local environmental knowledge

• Sustainable development

• Improved quantity and quality of freshwater

• Increased health of soils, leading to greater water-holding capacity, increased productivity, and less soil erosion

• Reduced emissions with use of manures, cover crops, etc. (see next section for discussion of mitigation)

• Enhanced adaptive capacity

9

ate landscape and diversity agricultural production through a number of activities, including water harvesting and the

encouragement of natural regeneration.”

IV. Mitigation in the agriculture sectorAgriculture is directly responsible for an estimated 12-14% of total global greenhouse gas emissions, primarily

from the use of fertilizers, rice cultivation, and animal husbandry. Another 13% or so of global greenhouse gas

emissions are caused by deforestation and other land-use change, much of which is land clearance for agricul-

tural production. Addressing climate change requires that emissions reductions in the agriculture sector must

be undertaken. But by whom, and where? And how should the need to produce food and provide livelihoods be

factored into decisions on who is responsible for agricultural mitigation?

The most important gases emitted by the agriculture sector are methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N

2O), rath-

er than carbon dioxide (CO2). Methane emissions come primarily from enteric (gut) fermentation of livestock,

manure management, biomass burning, and rice production. Nitrous oxide emissions come from fertilizer pro-

duction, emissions from fertilized soils, manure management, and biomass burning. There are carbon dioxide

emissions from the agriculture sector, but these are primarily indirect emissions from deforestation, initial land

clearance for agriculture, and other land-use change. Also, the regular tilling of soils releases carbon that is stored

in soil.

A logical fi rst step to determining who should undertake mitigation actions in agriculture would be to identify

where the major emissions come from in the sector and address them – in particular livestock, soils (from

fertilizer use), and rice production. An equitable approach to determining who is responsible for mitigation

will use per person (capita) emissions data. One further essential parameter to integrate into the analysis is the

importance of emissions for food security and livelihoods, particularly of the most vulnerable. The table on the

following page compares emissions from major developed countries, South Asian countries, and several major

developing countries in South East Asia for comparison.

Table 2: Comparative examples of developed and developing country emissions from the agriculture sector

Country Total non-CO2 GHG emissions

from agriculture in

2010 (Mt CO2 eq)

Per capita non-CO2

emissions from

agriculture in 2010

(tons CO2 eq)

Per capita N2O emissions

from agricultural soils in 2010

(tons CO2 eq)

Per capita CH4 emissions

from rice production in

2010 (tons CO2 eq)

Per capita emissions

from livestock in 2010

(tons CO2 eq)

Per capita meat consumption in

2005(kg/person/

year)

Afghanistan 10.5 0.37 0.11 0.02 0.23 13.6

Australia 96.0 4.28 0.69 0.0 2.71 117.6

Bangladesh 49.7 0.32 0.13 0.10 0.09 3.1

Bhutan 0.9 1.25 0.14 0.0 0.84 3.0

Canada 65.5 1.92 0.92 0.0 0.81 96.3

France 103.9 1.64 0.85 0.002 0.79 88.6

Germany 60.9 0.73 0.44 0.0 0.30 83.3

India 350.6 0.29 0.04 0.06 0.18 5.1

Indonesia 246.8 1.03 0.14 0.21 0.12 10.0

Ireland 18.3 4.10 1.61 0.0 2.51 100.7

Maldives 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.4

10

Country Total non-CO2 GHG emissions

from agriculture in

2010 (Mt CO2 eq)

Per capita non-CO2

emissions from

agriculture in 2010

(tons CO2 eq)

Per capita N2O emissions

from agricultural soils in 2010

(tons CO2 eq)

Per capita CH4 emissions

from rice production in

2010 (tons CO2 eq)

Per capita emissions

from livestock in 2010

(tons CO2 eq)

Per capita meat consumption in

2005(kg/person/

year)

Nepal 25.8 0.96 0.10 0.23 0.61 9.7

New Zealand 34.6 7.92 2.34 0.0 5.59 142.1

Pakistan 127.2 0.73 0.23 0.04 0.46 12.2

Philippines 44.0 0.47 0.09 0.17 0.19 31.1

Sri Lanka 10.9 0.52 0.35 0.03 0.13 7.1

United Kingdom

48.8 0.79 0.46 0.0 0.33 83.9

United States 465.4 1.49 0.78 0.02 0.67 124.8

Viet Nam 76.7 0.86 0.24 0.39 0.18 34.9

Sources: US EPA, Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases: International Emissions and Projections, http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/EPAac-tivities/economics/nonco2projections.html (emissions data); UNDESA, World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision, http://esa.un.org/wpp/Excel-Data/population.htm (population data); FAO, The State of Food and Agriculture 2009 (meat consumption data). Meat consumption data for Bhutan and the Philippines are found at http://www.theguardian.com/environment/datablog/2009/sep/02/meat-consumption-per-capita-climate-change.

The question of mitigation potential

In contrast to the methodology outlined above – fi nd out who is responsible for the largest per capita emissions

and require emission reductions from those countries fi rst – a number of developed countries put emphasis in-

stead on identifying where there is the greatest “mitigation potential.” Often emission reductions are less costly

in developing countries, so developed countries argue that emission reductions should take place in countries of

least cost and highest potential.

The proponents of a “mitigation potential” approach often point to the potential to store (sequester) carbon in

soils, particularly in the degraded lands of the developing world. Wetlands have a similar potential to store car-

bon.

However, a focus on mitigation potential in the lands and wetlands of developing countries obscures two very

important considerations:

• Developed countries have a historic and current responsibility to address their agricultural emissions. Devel-

oping country per capita emissions in agriculture are often much lower than developed country emissions.

Moreover, food security considerations require developing countries to focus fi rst on ensuring the poorest

and most vulnerable have food to eat.

• Carbon stored in soils cannot be considered as equivalent to permanent emissions reductions. The storage is

only temporary and highly reversible, for example from soil disturbance from tillage. Temperature rise will

likely cause more reversals.

A scientifi cally rigorous approach to mitigation in the agriculture sector would distinguish between permanent

reductions and temporary sequestration, and prioritize permanent approaches over temporary ones:

• Permanent: approaches that provide permanent emissions reductions are those that prevent emissions in

the fi rst place, such as through reduction or elimination of synthetic fertilizer, reduction in the number of

11

animals, decrease in per capita meat consumption, practices that reduce methane emissions from rice pro-

duction, or avoidance of land clearance.

• Temporary: approaches that provide temporary mitigation are those that sequester soil carbon through im-

plementing particular practices on cropland and grazing land, recovery of organic soils, and restoration of

degraded lands.

Several prominent actors, in particular the World Bank, have been investing in methodologies for accounting for

soil carbon. They have assumed that if the carbon can be measured, it can be turned into carbon credits and sold.

However, the highly reversible nature of soil carbon and the collapse of carbon markets globally have likely ended

their quest to turn carbon in soils into cash.

V. Conclusions: addressing impacts on the agriculture sector in climate-starved South Asia

As noted in the beginning sections of this policy paper, climate change impacts on agriculture in South Asia will

be severe. Food production in the region has historically been challenged by climate variability, leading to regular

crises of food insecurity. The increasing variability and increased temperatures from climate change will make

food security even more diffi cult to ensure in the coming decades, particularly the food security of the poorest and

most vulnerable communities in South Asia.

Climate policy in the region with regard to agriculture and food security should contain at a minimum three es-

sential elements:

1. To prevent catastrophic impacts on food security, investments in adaptation in the agriculture sector should

be the utmost priority for governments.

2. Because there are very real limits to adaptation, particularly in the agriculture and fi sheries sectors, govern-

ments must take a strong position on loss and damage;

3. South Asian governments must push developed countries to take the lead on mitigation, as called for in the

legal text of the UNFCCC. An important starting point for developed countries should be reducing overcon-

sumption of meat.

A more comprehensive set of policy recommendations follows:

Policy recommendations

Parties to the UNFCCC should support policies and decisions to directly address climate impacts and loss and

damage in agriculture

1. The Subsidiary Body on Scientifi c and Technical Advice (SBSTA) should, in its consideration of how to en-

hance the adaptation of agriculture to climate change impacts (see box 2), focus its work on:

• understanding climate impacts on agriculture and fi sheries, particularly in those systems most impor-

tant for food security of poorest and most vulnerable communities;

- identifying research and approaches, including agroecological approaches, that will enhance adap-

tation to the impacts identifi ed;

12

- developing further understanding of the climate impacts requiring transformational adaptation,

and how to address the effects of transformations on smallholders, pastoralists, and fi sherfolk;

- reaching an agreement to signifi cantly raise the level of global investment in sustainable agriculture

and food systems — increasing the knowledge of best practices and innovation by supporting revi-

talized extension services, technology transfers and communities of practice.

• The Parties to the UNFCCC, under the work of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation, should es-

tablish an international mechanism on loss and damage, which specifi cally includes in its mandate

addressing loss and damage and slow onset impacts on agriculture, including transformational impacts

and those impacts that may lead to migration and forced displacement.

• The Technology Executive Committee and the Climate Technology Centre and Network should prioritize

research on and promotion of agroecological approaches as agriculture adaptation “technologies”.

• Developing countries must demand suffi cient funding of the adaptation window of the Green Climate

Fund so adequate fi nance is available for fi nancing initiatives to help agricultural production systems

become more resilient to weather variability and shocks.

Box 2: The agriculture conclusions from SBSTA 38 June 2013 (FCCC/SBSTA/2013/L.20)

“The SBSTA invited Parties and admitted observer organizations to submit to the secretariat, by 2 September 2013, their views on the current state of scientifi c knowledge on how to enhance the adaptation of agriculture to climate change impacts while promoting rural development, sustainable development and productivity of agricultural systems and food security in all countries, particularly in developing countries. This should take into account the diversity of the agricul-tural systems and the diff erences in scale as well as possible adaptation co-benefi ts.”

2. At the regional level (SAARC/Technical Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development/SAARC Agri-

culture Centre), countries should focus on making collective investments to meet information and resource

needs for climate-resilient adaptation

• Agriculture is obviously a central sector to be addressed in NAPAs, NAPs, and the adaptation planning

processes of non-LDCs. SAARC should develop clear research priorities to address the specifi c adapta-

tion challenges of the region, particularly with regard to the adaptation needs of the poorest and most

vulnerable, including where transformational adaptation and/or migration may be necessary, which can

focus donor resources, climate fi nance, and national spending.

• SAARC member states should develop and implement an agricultural research, extension, and dissemi-

nation agenda for climate-resilient practices in South Asia, focusing on agroecological approaches. The

agenda would include:

- developing more detailed understanding of potential climate impacts on regional agricultural and

fi sheries systems;

- revitalizing regional extension, technology, and knowledge-sharing mechanisms;

- empowering farmers, fi sherfolk, and pastoralists to utilize and share local and traditional knowledge

and practices to maintain livelihoods in situations of climate variability;

• SAARC should develop a specifi c research agenda on possible needs for transformational adaptation

in the agriculture and fi sheries sectors, which may require farmers to embrace entirely new crops, or

require the development of alternative livelihood strategies for farmers, fi sherfolk, and/or pastoralists.

• SAARC should enhance collaboration and data sharing between agro-meteorological stations and sup-

port development of a regional early warning system for extreme climate events.

13

• SAARC should establish robust regional emergency food reserves and a fi nancing capacity that can de-

liver rapid humanitarian responses to vulnerable populations threatened by food crises.

3. National governments should prioritize the development and implementation of sound adaptation and

mitigation policies

• National governments should prioritize addressing impacts on poorest, most vulnerable and marginal-

ized communities, including smallholders and the landless. In particular:

- impacts on women, in particular, must be highlighted;

- investment must be increased in ecological agriculture, community-based adaptation strategies, and

farmer-to-farmer exchanges of knowledge;

- signifi cant investment must be made in identifying and making possible livelihood diversifi cation

options;

- investment must be made in fl exible and scalable social protection systems that can protect the most

vulnerable from climate shocks and to ensure food security in the face of climate impacts.

- Notes

14

1. Dixon, J. and A. Gulliver. 2001. Farming systems and poverty: improving farmers’ livelihoods in a changing world. FAO and World Bank.

2. Sources: Agriculture Prospects Report. 2012. Afghanistan Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock; Agricultural Statistics of Pakistan 2010-11, Government of Pakistan, Statistics Division, Pakistan Bureau of Statistics; Bangladesh Department of Fisheries; FAO. (n.d.) Fact Sheet Bhutan: Women in Agriculture, Environment and Rural Production; Gyamthso, P. 1996. Assessment of the condition and potential for improvement of high altitude rangeland of Bhutan. Diss. ETH No11726, Zurich. As cited in The Yak. 2003. G. Wiener, H. Jianlin, and L. Ruijun; Joshi K. D., C. Conroy, and J. R. Witcombe. 2012. Agriculture, seed, and innovation in Nepal: Industry and policy issues for the future. International Food Policy Research Institute; Maltsoglou, I. and K. Taniguchi. 2004. Poverty, Livestock and House-hold Typologies in Nepal, Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative Working Paper No. 13, FAO; OXFAM. Pakistan fi ghting for land rights for the poor; Thapa G., & R. Gaiha 2011. Smallholder Farming in Asia and the Pacifi c: Challenges and Opportunities. International Fund for Agricultural Development; Tobgay S. 2005. Agriculture Diversifi cation in Bhutan. Ministry of Agriculture; World Bank. 2012. India: Issues and Priorities for Agriculture; World Bank. Sri Lanka: Priorities for Agriculture and Rural Development.

3. Indian Ministry of Agriculture, Department for Agriculture and Cooperation. 2005. Concept Note on Gender Resource Centre. Retrieved July 31, 2013, from http://agricoop.nic.in/PolicyIncentives/GRConcept.htm

4. FAO. (n.d.) Fact Sheet Sri Lanka: Women in Agriculture, Environment and Rural Production. Retrieved August 1, 2013,from ftp://ftp.fao.org/sd/sdw/sdww/srl.pdf

5. FAO. (n.d.) Fact Sheet Bhutan: Women in Agriculture, Environment and Rural Production. Retrieved August 1, 2013,from ftp://ftp.fao.org/sd/sdw/sdww/Bhu.pdf

6. FAO. 2012. Selected Indicators of Food and Agricultural Development in the Asia-Pacifi c region, 2001-2011. Retrieved July 31, 2013, from http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i3052e/i3052e00.pdf

7. Ibid.

8. Bangladesh Department of Fisheries. Retrieved August 6, 2013, from http://www.fi sheries.gov.bd/node/143

9. International Collective in Support of Fishworkers. Fisheries & Fishing Communities in India. Retrieved August 6, 2013, from http://indi-anfi sheries.icsf.net/

10. FAOSTAT database. http://faostat.fao.org/

11. FAO. 2011. Maldives and FAO: Achievements and success stories. Retrieved August 2, 2013, from http://www.fao.org/fi leadmin/tem-plates/rap/fi les/epublications/MaldivesedocFINAL.pdf

12. Sri Lankan National Aquatic Resources Research & Development Agency. Overview of the fi sheries sector. Retrieved August 6, 2013, from http://www.nara.ac.lk/12/fi sheries%20outlook/chap1.html

13. FAOSTAT database. http://faostat.fao.org/

14. World Bank. 2013. Turn down the heat: climate extremes, regional impacts, and the case for resilience. A report for the World Bank by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and Climate Analytics.

15. Ibid.

16. Sterrett, C. 2011. Review of climate change adaptation practices in South Asia. Oxfam research report.

17. Sultan, B. 2012. Global warming threatens agricultural productivity in Africa and South Asia. Environmental Research Letters 7 041001.

18. Thornton, P. 2012. Recalibrating food production in the developing world: global warming will change more than just the climate. CCAFS policy brief 6.

19. World Bank. 2013.

20. Ibid.

21. Ibid.

22. Thornton, P. 2012.

23. World Bank. 2013.

24. Ibid.

25. Ibid.

26. Ibid.

27. Ibid.

28. Sultan, B. 2012.

29. Lobell, D.B. et al. 2008. Prioritizing climate change adaptation needs for food security in 2030. Science 319(5863): 607-610.

30. Funk, C. and M. Brown. 2009. Declining global per capita agricultural production and warming oceans threaten food security. Food Security 1(3): 271-289.

31. Nelson, G.C., et al. 2009. Climate change: impact on agriculture and costs of adaptation. International Food Policy Research Institute Food Policy Report.

32. Battacharyya, A. and M. Werz. 2012. Climate change, migration and confl ict in South Asia. Heinrich Böll Stiftung.

Endnotes

15

33. See for example Kates, R.W., W.R. Travis, and T.J. Wilbanks. 2012. Transformational adaptation when incremental adaptations to climate change are insuffi cient. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1115521109; and Rickards, L. and S.M. Howden. 2012. Transformational adaptation: agriculture and climate change. Crop & Pasture Science 63: 240-250.

34. Thornton, P. 2012.

35. Gourdji, S.M., A.M. Sibley, and D.B. Lobell. 2013. Global crop exposure to critical high temperatures in the reproductive period: historical trends and future projections. Environmental Research Letters 8 024041

36. World Bank. 2013.

37. Altieri, M.A. and P. Koohafk an. 2008. Enduring farms: climate change, smallholders and traditional farming communities. Third World Network, Environment and Development Series 6.

38. Vermeulen, S.J. et al. 2013. Addressing uncertainty in adaptation planning for agriculture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci-ences www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1219441110

39. Altieri, M.A. and P. Koohafk an. 2008.

40. Bala Ravi, S. et al. 2010. Mobilizing neglected and underutilized crops to strengthen food security and alleviate poverty in India. Indian Journal of Plant Genetic Resources 23(1): 110-116.

41. Satapathy, S. et al. 2011. Adaptation to climate change. GIZ; Wajih, S.A. 2008. Adaptive agriculture in fl ood aff ected areas. http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/magazines/global/dealing-with-climate-change/adaptive-agriculture-in-fl ood-aff ected-areas

42. Platform for Agrobiodiversity Research. 2009. The use of agrobiodiversity by indigenous and traditional agricultural communities in adapting to climate change. Synthesis paper. Bioversity International.

43. Sterrett, C. 2011.

44. Platform for Agrobiodiversity Research. 2009.

45. Bold numbers indicate where the fi gure is at least two times greater than the highest fi gure from any country in South Asia.

46. Agricultural practices that lead to carbon storage are those that directly put carbon-containing materials into soils, such as the incor-poration of mulches, manures and compost, and practices such as cover cropping and green manuring that turn growing material into the soil. Some of these approaches were described in the earlier section on adaptation. Other practices promoted by some for sequestra-tion are those that limit or eliminate tilling of the soil, thus limiting the release to the atmosphere of the carbon in the soil, with small amounts of carbon also added to the soil through plant growth. These practices include no-till cultivation, which involves use of herbi-cides to kill weeds rather than tillage so soils can remain undisturbed.

47. Thornton, P. 2012.48. Ibid.

49. Ibid.

16

17

18

CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK SOUTH ASIA

c/o Bangladesh Centre for Advance Studies

House 10, Road 16A, Gulshan-1,

Dhaka 1212, Bangladesh This project is funded bythe European Union