barriers to adoption: policy & institutional arrangements to support csa
TRANSCRIPT
Barriers to adoption: policy &
institutional arrangements to support CSA
Leslie Lipper, Solomon Asfaw, Giacomo Branca, Andrea Cattaneo, Romina Cavatassi, Uwe Grewer, Misael Kokwe, Nguyen Van Linh, Wendy Mann, Nancy McCarthy,
Adriana Paolantonio, George Phiri, Alessandro Spairani
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Outline of the presentation
• Barriers to adopting what?
• Changing weather patterns means farmers need to adapt
• Though CSA is a site specific concept, there are key features of what it will take & specific barriers associated with them
• Policy levers to reduce barriers
• Policy coordination and financing needs
2
Barriers to what?
• Changing agricultural production systems – Increase productivity, incomes, reduce variability and
environmental damage
– Covers a wide range of possible options/combinations
• But goes beyond agricultural practices – Income diversification
– Efficient charcoal production
– Value chain management
3
Just to get an idea of the variation in agricultural practice sets farmers could adopt – evidence from Malawi
4
Freq. Percent
T0 only 47 3.28
T1 + crop rotation no legumes 127 8.86
T2 + crop rotation with legumes 185 12.91
T3 + swc + other combinations (rot/cover crop/intercrop/residue ret) 323 22.54
T4 + agroforestry + other combinations (rot/cover crop/intercrop/residue ret) 129 9
T5 + agroforestry & swc + other combinations (rot/swc/cover crop/intercrop/residue ret) 105 7.33
T6 + crop rotation no legumes + residue retention/cover crop/intercropping 131 9.14
T7 + crop rotation with legumes + residue retention/cover crop/intercropping 121 8.44
T8 + residue retention 27 1.88
T9 + other combinations 6 0.42
T Total tillage 1,201 83.81
M1 + residue retention 29 2.02
M2 + crop rotation no legumes + residue retention/cover crop/intercropping 39 2.72
M3 + crop rotation with legumes + residue retention/cover crop /intercropping 20 1.4
M4 + crop rotation + residue retention/cover crop /intercropping/swc +agrof (CF) 45 3.14
M5 + swc + other combinations (rot/cover crop/intercrop/residue ret) 54 3.77
M6 + crop rotation + other comb 27 1.88
M7 + agrof + swc + other comb 12 0.84
M8 + agroforestry + other comb 5 0.35
M Total MSD 231 16.19
Till
age
MSD
Weather patterns: recent past in Malawi
Coefficient of Variation of seasonal rainfall and temperature (1983-2012)
5
Zambia: change in onset of the rainy season 1983-2012
6
How various options impact crop yields under different climate effects
Higher Yields Lower/Same Yields
Reduced probability of yields<LR Average
Average climatic conditions
Legume intercrop Inorganic fertilizer Improved seed
Crop rotation
Inorganic fertilizer Improved seed Timely fertilizer access
Delayed onset of rainfall
Crop Rotation Improved seed Timely fertilizer access
Inorganic fertilizer Legume intercrop
Increased seasonal temperature
Legume intercrop Timely fertilizer access
Improved seed Inorganic fertilizer
Legume intercrop Timely fertilizer
7
II. Although CSA benefits & costs are site specific – we can identify some universal characteristics of CSA practices and technologies
… as well as the barriers to their adoption
8
CSA characteristic Examples and means Potential barriers
Resource use efficiency Correct timing & dose of inputs Input recommendations for heterogeneous conditions
Timely delivery of inputs Extension packages designed for specific agro-ecologies
Increased resilience of agro-ecosystem
Improved water holding & drainage capacity;
Delay/time frame to build ecosystem services results in financing gap Labor constraints
Coordination across landscapes
Protect watersheds through tree planting Restore degraded lands through grazing mgmt
Lack of social organizations to manage collective action
9
And in fact we do have lots of evidence of these types of barriers being important
10
Barriers Enablers
Minimum soil disturbance
Low income Extension information Collective action
Legume intercropping
Low income Distance to district center
Extension information Land Tenure Collective action
Crop Rotation Low income Extension information
Agro-Forestry Distance to district center Labor cost Low income
Tenure security Drought proneness
Improved seed Uninsured risk Distance to district center
Extension information
Inorganic fertilizer
Uninsured risk Lack of land tenure Distance to district center
Extension information
Barriers to & Enablers of Adoption: Zambia & Malawi
11
Uninsured risk a key barrier – especially for the poor Extent of CSA Practice Adoption as Likelihood
of Extreme Weather Events Increase
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Exte
nt
of
CSA
Pra
ctic
e A
do
pte
d
Likelihood of Extreme Weather Event
12
Variable MSD Till
Yield (kg/ha) 2,273 1,707 ***
Gross margin ($/ha) 118 102
Cost of cash inputs ($/ha) 257 185 ***
Labor use (family + hired) 53 37 ***
Improved seeds (%/plot) 93 85 ***
Subsidized fertilizer (%/plot) 60 60
Labor and capital barriers to adoption
Evidence from Zambia Maize systems
• Yield is higher under MSD in dry areas
• MSD is more capital and labor intensive
13
Policy Levers and Outputs
Extension
Credit
Infrastructure
Input support
Safety nets
R & D
…
LEVERS
OUTPUTS • Food Security
• Adaptation
• Mitigation
20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34-20
-18
-16
-14
-12
-10
-8Mean of predicted adoption by SEA
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
RESPONSE
• Farmers
• Agribusines
s
• Markets
• institutions
BUDGET
14
Enablers 1
• Information (e.g. via extension, radio) but needs to be more effective esp for poor
• Input supply (timely and amount --- input subsidy program design – agro-dealers)
• Participating in organizations
• Safety nets /insurance
15
Improved seed, soil and water conservation and collective
action
16
Barriers to income diversification
Barrier Effect
Coefficient of variation of rainfall, 1983-
2010 (+++)
Long term mean rainfall, 1983-2010
(mm) (+++)
Rainfall anomaly, 2009-10 rainy season (- -)
Access to extension service (+++)
Access to Fertilizer subsidy (+++)
Access to safety-net +/-
17
• Coordination between CC & Ag. Planning
• Linking climate and agriculture finance
Enablers II
18
19
Climate finance
Can represent a significant but small share of overall yearly investment requirements for agricultural growth
27 20
Summing up II
- Weather variability is key determinant of which practices will give yield, stability and income increases
- We already know a lot about the characteristics of the practices we need for CSA & the types of practices that can generate them under some condition
21
Summing up II
• We also have a pretty good idea of which levers are key, but need more info on how to best operate them
• We need to look beyond changing ag. Practice for CSA, but in many cases we will be dealing with the same levers
• The scale & urgency of transformation needed indicates the need for enhanced (e.g. coordinated) policy & financing response
22
