The Role of Climate Smart Agriculture in Improving Food and

Nutrition Security

A report from C4D’s Learning Event on Climate Smart Agriculture

Organized by the Canadian Coalition on Climate Change and Development (C4D)

Ottawa, Canada / July 21, 2015

Overview

This document reflects the key perspectives presented and discussed at the C4D Learning Event on

Climate Smart Agriculture held July 21, 2015 at the CARE Canada office in Ottawa.

The C4D Learning Event was attended by 43 people, including representatives from Canadian NGOs, the

International Development Research Centre (IDRC), the Canadian Government’s Department of Foreign

Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD), academic and research institutions, private consultants,

farmer organizations and the private sector. The event commenced with an inaugural speech from the

CEOs of two co-chairing agencies, CARE Canada and Canadian Feed the Children (CFTC).

Climate change is already having an impact on farmers around the world, especially in the Global South.

Increasing temperatures, variable precipitation and more frequent and intense weather events will

continue to challenge farmers’ ability to feed a growing population. According to the Food and

Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, the world will need to provide healthy, sufficient

and balanced food to more than 9 billion people by 2050. To achieve this, agricultural production will

have to increase by at least 50% and by 100% in the South.1 In light of climate and demographic

challenges, radical actions and efforts to improve the sustainable performance of the agricultural sector

(broadly defined) are urgent. Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) has been touted as a method that will help

farmers both adapt to a changing climate and to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions while boosting

agriculture production.

The FAO first presented a definition of CSA at a conference in 2010:

‘Climate-smart agriculture… contributes to the achievement of sustainable development goals. It integrates the three dimensions of sustainable development (economic, social and environmental) by jointly addressing food security and climate challenges. It is composed of three main pillars: 1. Sustainably increasing agricultural productivity and incomes; 2. Adapting and building resilience to climate change; 3. Reducing and/or removing greenhouse gases emissions, where possible’ (Climate-Smart Agriculture Sourcebook, FAO, 2013)

In 2014, the Global Alliance on Climate Smart Agriculture (GACSA) was launched and currently has 96

members, 22 of which are nation states, including Canada.

This C4D learning event was intended to:

1. Explore possible contributions of CSA to food and nutrition security;

2. Create a space for learning and sharing experiences on CSA and its application in reducing the impacts

of climate change and promoting resilient farming practices;

3. Provide capacity building for international development organizations seeking to implement CSA

1 FAO, IFAD, WFP. 2013. The State of Food Insecurity in the World.

practices in their programming efforts; and

4. Encourage policy dialogue around CSA.

The following report summarizes the presentations by the speakers at the learning event.

Inaugural Speech The event commenced with an inaugural speech by Gillian Barth of CARE Canada and Debra Kerby of

CFTC, CEOs of the two co-chairing agencies. Both speakers emphasized the importance of CSA as a key

global initiative to improve food security in light of the climate related challenges to smallholder

farmers. Alongside Debra Kerby’s message of support, Gillian Barth declared: “Climate change is one of

the greatest obstacles to progress… and Climate Smart Agriculture may be among our most promising

solutions.”

Keynote Speech The session was moderated by Cassandra Cotton, Director, Sustainability, Canadian Fertilizer Institute

(CFI)

Tara Ritter Program Associate for Climate and Rural Communities, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy

(IATP)

Tara spoke of the projected impacts of climate change on the agricultural sector, including changes in

planting and harvesting dates, declining crop yields, reduction in growing seasons, and increased animal

diseases and pests, among others. Climate change makes our already precarious global food security

situation (where 870 million people are undernourished and another 1 billion are malnourished) even

more unpredictable. Ironically, 60% of those classified as malnourished are food producers. Tara made a

very clear point that agriculture both contributes to and is vulnerable to climate change.

Tara examined the FAOs three-part definition of Climate Smart Agriculture (see above). CSA has been

criticized as being too all-encompassing and as being led predominantly by corporations. Tara argued

that if just one of the three required components are met, an operation can be labelled as ‘climate

smart.’ Practices of smallholder farmers as well as those of the world’s largest corporations could

technically fit under the FAO definition of CSA, but these two groups have radically different end goals.

The CSA model is merely “tweaking” the present agricultural system – and promoting the status quo.

Unfortunately, so are certain systems reliant on chemicals, technology, and other agribusiness solutions.

IATP proposes agroecology as a more promising solution for farmers worldwide to develop resilience to

climate shocks while also reducing emissions. Agroecology is considered ‘climate smart,’ but its

proponents would not place themselves in the same category as those using agribusiness practices and

who also fit under the umbrella of CSA. The challenge is to expand and hear the voice of the smallholder

farmer and to understand food sovereignty issues – who owns the rights to what we grow and eat.

Agroecology links ‘ecology, culture, economics, and society to sustain agricultural production, healthy

environments, and viable food and farming communities’ (agroecology.org). The focus is placed on

sustaining livelihoods and achieving food sovereignty. Tara used the following diagram to illustrate the

different dimensions of agroecology.

Source: ‘Agriculture at a Crossroads: Summary for Decision Makers of the Global Report,’ IAASTD, p.12

Tara highlighted some key features of agroecological practices:

• Recycling farm-based energy sources (e.g. manure)

• Reducing fossil fuel based inputs (e.g. fuel, fertilizer)

• Mulching and other practices to incorporate organic matter into soil

• Integrated Pest Management to control pests

• Water harvesting practices

• Crop diversification and crop rotations

• Improved livestock integration into the farm

• Free and open sharing of knowledge, seeds, etc.

• Locally controlled energy programs

Case Study Presentations The session was moderated by Dr. Jehangir Khan, Senior Food Security Advisor, Plan Canada.

Putso Nyathi Southern Africa Conservation Agriculture Coordinator, Mennonite Central Committee/Canadian

Foodgrains Bank, South Africa

Putso spoke about the work she does in six countries in southern Africa promoting Conservation

Agriculture (CA) techniques, which includes minimum tillage, soil cover and crop diversification. While

most of the projects are in the pilot phase, benefits of CA are already being observed: time is being

saved, risk is spread through diversification, planting can be done earlier than before, and the soil is

conserving moisture. Farmers using CA are seeing yields that are 200% higher than farmers using

conventional farming practices.

Some of the challenges Putso has seen is that farmers are risk averse and will maintain both CA and

conventional fields (despite seeing the benefits of CA practices). Additionally, seeds for anything other

than maize are scarce in some locations and it can be difficult to tell farmers to ‘feed’ the soil when

livestock require the same inputs. Further, in the first few years of farmers adopting CA practices, the

burden of work falls disproportionately on women who traditionally do the hoeing by hand.

Roger Samson Executive Director, REAP Canada

Roger presented on REAP projects, supported by DFATD, in Senegal and Gambia. The two countries are

dealing with severe challenges, including longer hot and dry seasons with short bursts of heavy rain as

well as deforestation. REAP uses the ‘ESR Framework’ in pursuing climate smart agriculture:

Efficiency (making minor changes to existing operations to improve efficiency)

Substitution (i.e. composting)

Soil loosening and moisture evaporation Soil cover to conserve moisture

Redesign (reorganizing production systems according to ecological principles that optimize available

resources)

Roger emphasized the need for increased support for farmer-led/scientist-supported solutions.

Santiago Alba-Corral Director of Policy, Innovation, and Partnerships, CARE Canada

Santiago discussed CARE’s commitment to reach 50 million people by 2020 to increase their food and

nutrition security and boost their resilience to climate change. In this work, CARE looks at three

elements:

Inequality (gender inequality in particular)

Governance (there is recognition that power holders must be involved)

Resilience (to climate change, markets, etc.)

Climate change is a threat to CARE’s mission and the organization finds itself responding more and more

to disasters. In addressing climate change, CARE focuses on adaptation, mitigation, and loss and

damage. CARE’s goal, as articulated in its Food and Nutrition Security Strategy, is to strengthen

sustainable smallholder agricultural systems to improve food and nutrition security for farmers, workers

and consumers. The pathways by which CARE works to meet this goal are “SuPER”, which is:

Sustainable, Productive, Equitable and Resilient.

Influencing policy, through local lobbyists, is an essential element of CARE’s work. As such, this is one

technique that must be scaled up. The NGO also promotes South-South collaboration by partnering with

universities in both the North and South, and also engages the private sector, as no entity has the luxury

of not dialoging.

Panel Discussion The session was moderated by Ingrid Fischer, Director of Programs, Canadian Co-operative Association

(CCA).

Participants:

Dr. Nalan Yuksel, Deputy Director, Food Security Policy, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and

Development (DFATD), Government of Canada

Dr. Barry Smit, Professor Emeritus, University of Guelph

Dr. Marco Rondon, Senior Program Specialist, Climate Change and Water, IDRC

Ingrid Fischer, Director of Programs, Canadian Co-operative Association (Panel Moderator)

Nalan spoke about how CSA is a new term for DFATD, though the department has been supporting food

security projects for some time that are considered ‘climate smart’. Some lessons learned include the

importance of having a balanced approach between mitigation and adaptation in responding to local

contexts, supporting disaster preparedness is less costly than responding after the fact, investing in

research and development is essential and strengthening resilience is key to protecting livelihoods.

Marco discussed how IDRC perceives CSA as improving productivity, reducing greenhouse gas emissions

and enhancing resilience. He highlighted two promising avenues for CSA: restoring degraded lands and

reducing post-harvest loss. Marco also raised the issue of our focus on the producer to adapt and

mitigate – but we also need to focus on the consumer. Consumer demand is a driver of environmental

degradation and GHG emissions, the example being consumer demand for meat.

Both Nalan and Marco spoke of how CSA provides an opportunity for dialogue between parties who

might not otherwise work together.

Barry’s message was clear (after his a cappella

rendition of “Let us see” to the tune of “Let it

be”): it shouldn’t be climate smart agriculture

but rather smart agriculture. Agriculture needs

to be resistant to all things, with climate change

being just one thing to consider. Also to be

recognized is that climate affects agriculture

and that agriculture affects climate. Farmers

everywhere need to reduce greenhouse gas

emissions (though farmers in the South

contribute very little to global emissions) and

increase resiliency. There is no prescribed

universal balance on what to focus on, as

each context is different. He advised NGOs, when starting a new project, to ask, ‘In what way is this

community sensitive to climate shocks?’ Barry also made the point that in order to see the desired

outcomes, we need to change power and trade relations and slow population growth.

Conclusion The main take away messages from a learning event such as this ultimately depend on the listener, but

some ideas came through clearly for many. One key message that became evident during the day was

the existence of a continuum between CSA and agroecology and thinking through where we place

ourselves in the work we do together with our partners in the South. Another message was that we

don’t need to make it more difficult than it really is – Climate Smart Agriculture is still agriculture that

needs to consider all of the impacts on it - but it also has to now consider the impacts of climate change

and the impact that agriculture has on the climate. Another thread through the day’s discussion was the

importance of prioritizing farmers’ local knowledge and ensuring that farmers are consulted as a starting

Panelists: Dr. Smit, Dr. Yuksel and Dr. Rondon

point for projects/programs. Also important

is that there is the space for farmer-to-

farmer exchange of knowledge. The

discussion also emphasized the need for

wider consultation between NGOs,

government and private sector actors to

better understand the perspective of these

sectors on Climate Smart Agriculture and its

application to reduce the impact of climate

change in agriculture and improving food

security.

There was also the recognition of the importance of gender equality and addressing power relations

between women and men and between different stakeholders, as well as the related and pervasive

issue of insecure land tenure for women and other marginalized farmers. Other issues brought to the

forefront were the importance of the value chain approach to ensure farmers benefit at several steps

from production to harvest, and when talking about food security, the importance of integrating

nutrition so that farming systems are not only focused on increased production but improved nutrition

as well. As a final take away, it was said that development work has been doing CSA for a long time - it

was simply called something else - but bringing the “climate change” focus means that we need to plan

for future changes and impacts as we work together to improve agricultural systems today.

C4D is a coalition of Canadian international development and environmental organizations working

together to share knowledge and take concerted action to address climate change. Currently C4D has

20 members that include Canadian Feed the Children (CFTC), CARE Canada, Oxfam Canada, Canadian

Foodgrains Bank, IDRC, World Vision, Pembina Institute, CUSO, USC Canada, WUSC and ADRA. For

further information visit: www.c4d.ca

Time Duration Activity

8:00-8:30 30 min Registration – C4D

8:30-8:45 15 min Logistics information & Warm-up Exercise – C4D

8:45-9:00 15 min Welcome and opening – CARE Canada CEO Gillian Barth

9:00-9:10 15 min Review of Context, C4D and Workshop Objectives – Sohel Khan, CFTC

9:10-9:20 10 min Introduction of key participants (C4D) – Dr. Ellen Woodley

Session 1: Chair: Cassandra Cotton, Director, Sustainability, Canadian Fertilizer Institute (CFI)

9:20-10:15 55 min Keynote Speech: Tara Ritter, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP), USA

Global food security situation in light of a changing climate: Challenges, Impacts and Responses.

What is CSA and how does climate change fit in?

How does CSA support building resilience of farmers to address climate change? How could CSA support food security and improving health?

Critique and challenges

Policy implications

10:15-10:45 15 min Open forum discussion (Q&A)

10:45-11:00 15 min Tea break

Session 2: Moderator: Dr. Jehangir Khan, Senior Food Security Advisor, Plan Canada

11:00-12:00 60 min Case study presentations (Session 1)

Putso Nyathi, Southern Africa Conservation Agriculture Coordinator at Mennonite Central Committee/Canadian Foodgrains Bank, South Africa

Dr. Roger Samson, Executive Director, REAP Canada

12:00-12:30 30 min Open forum discussion (Q&A)

12:30-1:30 60 min Lunch Break

1:30-2:00 30 min Case study presentation (Session 2)

Santiago Alba-Corral, Director of Policy, Innovation and Partnerships, CARE Canada

2:00-2:30 30 min Open forum discussion (Q&A)

2:30-2:45 15 min Tea Break

Session 3: Moderator: Ingrid Fischer, Director of Programs, Canadian Cooperative Association (CCA)

2:45-4:15 90 min Panel discussion and open forum discussion (Q&A)

Comment on the importance of CSA to promote food security and

agriculture in light of environmental and climate-related challenges.

What agriculture and food systems constitute the best or most viable

climate change responses – in terms of adaptation and mitigation?

How does CSA fit within GoC’s policies and practices (DFATD, Agriculture

Canada)? What Canadian policies, expertise and technologies fit within

the CSA framework, system and practice?

Critique of CSA – is it greenwashing? Who has vested interest in CSA?

Does this affect interests of smallholder farmers?

What is the role of CSA in building resilience of women smallholder

farmers who are the most vulnerable to climate related shocks and

stressors?

Climate Smart Agriculture

C4D - CSA Learning Event - Agenda

Panelists:

Dr. Nalan Yuksel, Deputy Director, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD), Government of Canada

Prof. Barry Smit, Professor Emeritus, University of Guelph

Dr. Marco Rondon, Senior Program Specialist, Climate Change and Water, IDRC

4:15-4:30 15 min Summary of the event with key messages – Jean Lowry, CFTC

4:30-4:45 15 min Evaluation - thanks from C4D organizing committee - Sohel Khan, CFTC