Climate Change and Agroforestry

1
Climate Change and Agroforestry

• Cheryl A. Palm
• (c.palm_at_cgiar.org)
• and
• Pedro A. Sanchez
• (psanchez_at_nature.berkeley.edu)
• Beahrs ELP Course
• 1 July 2002

2
Climate Change Categories

• Impacts whats going to happen
• Adaptation How to cope vulnerability
• Mitigation How to decrease greenhouse gases in
  the atmosphere

3
The Science of Climate Change related to
Developing Countries (Impacts) (IPCC, 2001)

• Scientific evidence is unequivocal
• Last 100 years the warmest
• Warming of last 50 years due to human activity
• Global temperatures will increase by 1.4 5.8
  0C by 2100
• Sea levels rising - will reach 14 - 88 cm by 2100
  
• Rainfall patterns changing
• El Niño events increasing in frequency, intensity
  
• Arctic ice is thinning, tropical mountain
  glaciers retreating

4
Unless Greenhouse Gases are Stabilized (IPCC,
2001)

• Agricultural productivity in Africa and Latin
  America could decrease by 30 this century
• Severe droughts in Southern Africa, Southeast
  Asia, Mediterranean and the Central Asia
• Wetter climates and more floods in parts of East
  Africa and Latin America
• More smoke and haze in Southeast Asia and Central
  America

5
Unless Greenhouse Gases are Stabilized -2 (IPCC,
2001)

• Major changes in structure/functions of critical
  ecosystems coral reefs and forests
• Higher worldwide food prices
• Increased geographic spread of malaria
• Increased crop pests and diseases in wetter
  climates
• Large global economic losses 40 billion in 1999
  (25 in the tropics)

6
Thermal Damage
7
Thermal damage

• Any increase in maximum temperature can decrease
  rice yields by 16 per 1oC degree increase.
• Similar trends have been found in maize, beans,
  soybeans and peanuts.
• Assuming IPCC data, yields of tropical grain
  crops could drop 5 11 by 2020 and 11 - 46
  by 2050

8
Carbon Trading A Major Issue

• Already a 300m/y of offsets _at_ 5/ton 60m tons
  C
• Private sector heavily involved
• So far does not involve poor farmers in the
  tropics
• Land use change from degraded croplands or
  grasslands into agroforestry the largest C
  sequestration potential

9
Mitigation C sequestration rates Watson et al,
2000

• Land-use Tons
  C/ha/yr
• Croplands 0.36
• Forests 0.31
• Grazing land 0.80
• Land-use change to
• Agroforestry 3.10

10
Agroforestry Huge carbon sequestration potential
in the tropics 1 - 5 tons C/ha/y
11
Carbon Sinks in Perspective

• Land management in the South can increase C
  sequestration and reduce C emissions can satisfy
  large part of Kyoto commitments for many
  countries
• C sinks not large enough to stabilize greenhouse
  gases need fossil fuel reductions
• Sinks can be deployed rapidly at moderate costs
• Sinks can buy time as new energy saving
  technologies are developed
• Sinks are not forever

12
Issues from the South

• Ethical polluter pays vs. entrepreneurial C
  offsets
• Allow developing countries to develop
• Negotiators and national scientists need a much
  deeper understanding training
• Burden of proof in C offsets is only in the
  South verification, leakage, etc.
• How to measure soil carbon changes and vegetation
• Legalistic sue a farmer who cuts his forest?
• Get real on co-benefits
• How to do it with farming communities

13
Natural Resource Management Approach
14
Mitigation Hotspots

• Biophysical potential may not be in most
  vulnerable places separate assessment needed
• Opportunity costs economic incentives
  alternative development opportunities
• Transaction costs costs of doing business
  including measurement and verification costs

15
Carbon in the Aboveground Vegetation and Soil
of Natural Ecosystems of Africa
300
Natural Vegetation
Humid
Tropical Rainforest
Topsoil 0-20 cm
Cameroon
Subsoil 20 - 50 cm
Subhumid
200
Tropical Forest
Subhumid
W. Kenya
Tropical Forest
C. Kenya
Eutrophic
100
-1
Dystrophic
Woodland
savanna
t C ha
Zimbabwe
South Africa
0
1
2
3
4
5
-100
30 clay
Quartzpsamment
4.5 clay
Eutrodox
42 clay
-200
Kandiustalf
estimated
47 clay
-300
16
Opportunity Costs
For tropical rainforests Forest conversion is
privately profitable and can (sometimes) reduce
poverty Typically there is a tradeoff between
development and carbon stocks Hypothesis direct
opportunity costs of C storage in the humid
tropics are lower than abatement costs in
high-income countries
17
Transaction Costs

• For C offset projects transaction costs to
  consider and minimize
• baseline and additionality
• validation/certification
• risk mitigation (insurance)
• leakage
• CDM management costs
• monitoring C
• legal costs
• measuring/monitoring sustainable development

18
Transaction Costs
Hypothesis Transaction costs of dealing with
small-scale producers / local communities are
prohibitive but Hypothesis There is scope for
significant reduction in these costs of doing
business through institutional innovation and
learning by doing. Hypothesis Participatory
action research with communities can accelerate
the learning process.
19
Permanence Participation
Hypothesis Authentic community-level
participation and adequate incentives to local
people are necessary (but not sufficient)
conditions for permanent C storage. If so, how
can such local participation -- and
accountability -- be established and replicated?
20
In the near term, what is CDM for?
For climate change mitigation? No, caps
are too small. For development finance?
No, funds are trivial. A social learning
process? Perhaps.
21
Participation linking with different audiences
to inform and to learn

• Risk The list is long!
• Small-scale producers (farmers)
• Local and national policymakers
• NGOs, civil society
• Entrepreneurs and managers of large private
  enterprises
• Development agencies
• Shapers of international policy

22
Priorities for mitigation research?
Research on implementation of CDM as it
is? Research to challenge, modify, and enhance
implementation of C offsets for development
(land management, forest conservation,
programatic approach vs projects, etc.)? A mix?
23
Two examples of CDM type research/projects
Humid tropics C sequestration benefits are
high Poverty level not so high Subhumid
tropics of Africa C sequestration benefits
are medium Poverty level high
24
Environment and livelihood tradeoffs with
tropical land use DEFORESTATION Alternatives
to Slash and Burn
25
Consortium of international and national research
institutions, universities, NGOs, communities,
and farmers

• Objectives To identify alternatives to slash and
  burn agriculture that integrate poverty,
  agricultural, and environmental concerns.
• Increase production/livelihoods on a sustainable
  basis
• Reduce global environmental impact
• Greenhouse gas emissions
• Biodiversity loss
• Reduce deforestation
• Intensify land use
• Reclaim degraded lands
• Integrate environmental, agricultural, and
  poverty concerns

26
Benchmark Site Approach
27
Evaluation and Comparison of Land-Use Systems
FORESTS Natural Managed Logged AGROFORESTS Compl
ex Simple Tree plantations CROP-FALLOW Long
fallow Short fallow CONTINUOUS CROPS PASTURE/GRASS
LAND
28
Complex agroforest and paddy rice
cultivation Sumatra, Indonesia
29
Multistrata agroforestry system Yurimaguas, Peru
30
Pastures Peruvian Amazon
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
Time-averaged Aboveground C and Soil C for
different land use types in the humid tropics
350
Primary Forest
300
250
Logged forest
200
150
Carbon (t/ha)
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
20
50
100
ASB
34
Net Global Warming Potential
The effects of CO2 released from deforestation
far outweigh any increased emissions of N2O or
reduced consumption of CH4 due to land use
practices, despite their much higher radiative
forcing values. Efforts to mitigate these
effects should focus on sequestering C in the
biomass and soils.
35
Aboveground Biodiversity and Land-Use
Intensification
Rondonia - Acré, Brazil
L. r. forest
2 ry forest
(Cap.)
1.0
Early 2ry forest
0.9
0.8
0.7
Best Bet
Cplx. Agrofor.
V Index
veg.structure, species and functional types
0.6
Bandarra Coffee
0.5
Inga pltn.
Rubber Coffee
0.4
Rubber Coffee
Cassia pltn.
0.3
Cassava
New garden
0.2
Old Past.
Impr. Past.
0.1
0.0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Land Use Type
Andy Gillison
36
Termite species richness in different
agroecosystems Jambi, Inodnesia
35
30
Other
25
Wood
20
Number of species
15
10
Soil
5
0
Primary Forest
Logged Forest
Jungle Rubber
Rubber
Paraserianthes
Imperata
Cassava
Plantation
(Source Jones et al., 1998)
37
Profitability of Different Land Uses Returns to
land (Private prices, /ha)
Forests Indonesia Brazil
Managed 2 416 Logged -55 to
- 340 Agroforests Complex - 40 to
920 NA Simple - 70 to 115 870
to 1955 Crop-Fallow Short fallow - 92
to - 32 - 17 Improved fallow NA
2056 Annual Crops - 30 to 150
Pasture NA 2 to 170
38
Trade-offs
Carbon and Potential Profitability, Cameroon
community
forest
200
150
tons of carbon per ha
100
ext cocoa
short fallow
forest
long fallow
w/ fruit
int cocoa
oil palm
oil palm
ext cocoa
food
w/ fruit
int cocoa
50
short fallow
food
0
500
1000
1500
2000
Profitability ( per ha)
39
(No Transcript)
40
Profits vs Carbon
Insert excel Figure 3a profits X C by system
140
120
high profit, high carbon
100
80
Mg C / ha
60
40
20
0
-20
-150
350
850
1350
1850
2350
Returns to land ( / ha)
Forests
Trees
Fallows
Crops/grass
Linear (Trees)
41
Constraints to adopting different land uses For
25 year rotations - Sumatera, Indonesia
Total labor Years to
(days/ha/yr) cash flow Forests Managed
0.3 NA Logged 31
2 Agroforests Complex 130 6 -
10 Simple 120 10 Crop- Fallow
20 never Annual Crops/ 100
2 Grassland
42
What is gained?
by whom?
100
Returns to Labor
/day
10
1
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Returns to Land (/ha)
Cameroon
Indonesia
Brazil
43
C price needed to not convert forests to
agroforestry
30
25
20
15
US / Mg C
10
5
0
Extensive
Intensive
Simple Tree
Agroforests
Agroforests
Systems
Brazil-L
Cameroon-L
Indonesia-M
Indonesia-N
44
Plant tree-based systems on degraded lands
Such systems are profitable but farmers
lack labor cash needed for inputs time to
recuperate invests markets for crops CDM funds
could be used to provide these inputs, loans,
improve market conditions and be a means of
mitigating some of the negative environmental
effects of deforestation and provide sustainable
alternatives
45
Carbon Sequestration by Farming Communities in
Africa
46
The Root Cause of Hunger in Africa Soil
Nutrient Depletion

• Great soils but corn yields lt 1 ton/ha
• N and P grossly depleted
• Nutrient depletion equivalent to 10 billion/
  year as fertilizers
• Poor policies low government priority to rural
  areas

47
Fertilizer use, the traditional approach is not
working

• Fertilizers are 2 - 6 times more expensive at the
  farm gate in Africa than in Europe, USA or Asia
• 1 ton of urea costs
• 120 FOB Mombasa
• 400 Western Kenya
• 500 Tororo, Uganda
• 792 Malawi
• Nothing wrong with fertilizers if properly used

48
An Effective, Robust Approach

• Take nitrogen from the air with N-fixing
  leguminous fallows
• Take phosphorus from small-scale indigenous rock
  phosphate deposits of Africa
• Add additional nutrients and carbon with biomass
  transfers of Tithonia diversifolia or other high
  quality organics

49
Tree fallows
50
Tephrosia fallow a nitrogen factory right in her
field

• Corn yields increase from lt 1 ton/ha to 2 - 6
  tons/ha --achieving food security
• Captures 150 kg N/ha
• Worth 130
• Recycles other nutrients, esp. K and
  micronutrients
• Adds carbon

51
Economic Returns of Tree FallowsWestern Kenya
1998-99

• US/ha
• Continuous maize -118
• Sesbania fallow/ maize 175

52
Tithonia biomass transfers

• High nutrient content
• (3 N, 0.3 P, 3 K)
• 2 t DM adds 60-6-60 kg ha-1 NPK
• Increases microbial C,N, P

• Increases crop yields

53
Luero village 1998
54
But . . . growing corn in small farms is
recycling poverty
55
From lt 1/day to 10/day in 5 years
56
CDM can be a means of providing incentives and
enabling policies

• Road infrastructure
• Markets
• Micro credit
• Seed supply
• IT
• Research and extension services