integrative agroforestry science

Integrative agroforestry science: reflections and perspectives

Meine van Noordwijk24-01-2017

I. Theory of Place, pantropical extrapolation domains and the places where we work

II. Who cares about ‘evidence’? Political ecology, behavioural economics, change as it happens

III. Social-Ecological Systems: are efforts to remove ‘endogeneity’ from ‘impacts’ futile?

IV. Supporting learning, self-selection, IDC’s, bottom-up actions

V. ‘Cool trees’ the start and end of all agroforestry research

10 Building blocks:• Tree cover transitions• TiF, ToF and ToToF• Three AF paradigms• ToC, ToP, ToIC• Three knowledge

systems: LEK, MEK, PEK• Boundary work, NSS• Options, Contexts, Issues

& Goals• 17 SDG’s 30 years after

Brundtland• Yield & efficiency gaps:

Land Equivalent Ratios• Diversity deficits

A. Theory of Place B. Theory of change

C. Theory of induced change

Core Logged-over Secondary & Grassland Annual Mosaic landscape of agro-forest forest agro-forest & shrubs crops forestry, plantations, crops orchards, woodlots, homes

Tree

bas

al a

rea,

carb

on st

ock

Degr

adati

onDefores-tation

Agro-/Re-forestation

Drivers, land use changeDemography (migration)

Logging, forest management (For)Agricultural (Ag) expan- sionPlantation developmentAgricultural de/re-treeingAgroforestation(Peri)urban (Ur) re-treeing

% T

ree

cove

r

Log (Human Pop)Ag

Ur

For

% F

ores

t cov

er

Time

Nat Planted

Changes of awareness, monitoring, analysis of options and scenariosChanges of land (use) rights, regulations of conversion, agricultural & urban planningChanges in economic incentives, market demand, profitability, taxation, certification Actors

Ecosystem (dis)services

PeopleMarkets

Operational forest definition

venti

ons

Inte

r-

Trees out-side forest}

Building blocks:• Tree cover transitions• TiF, ToF and ToToF• Three AF paradigms• ToC, ToP, ToIC• Three knowledge





How much agroforestry is there? Where is it?

http://blog.worldagroforestry.org/index.php/2013/04/08/tif-tof-and-totof-trees-or-universal-tree-rights/

Outside forestInside forest Outside trees

outside forest





Zomer et al. 2016

National scale evidence on the economic contribution of on-farm trees is lacking.•We use national household survey data on trees on farms reported across five African countries.•> 30% of all rural households reported having trees on their farms.•Trees on farms account for 6% of annual gross income on average for all rural households.•National context and forest proximity were consistent predictors of trees on farms

Investment, marketsIncentives

Capacitydevelop-ment

Motivation

Land use governance

RightsInputs & technology

Know-how

12

3

SDG

Agroforestry_1A set of specific practices that combine trees, crops and/or livestock and aims for positive interactions.

Primary task as ‘council’: documentation, inventory, capacity development, participatory D&D.

Shift towards ‘research centre’ with tree improve-ment, technology testing, agroforestry systems

taungya

AF systems


systems: LEK, MEK, PEK• Boundary work, NSS• Options, Contexts,

Issues & Goals• 17 SDG’s 30 years after





Motivation

Land use governance

RightsInputs & technology

Know-how

12

3

SDG

Agroforestry_2Landscape level interface of trees and farms, farmers and

forest, tree domestication

Forest use rights ecosystem services (ES), markets for tree products

Trees on farm Farmers’ forests

Landscape AF paradigm emerged in early ’90’s, soon after ICRAF enga-ged in SE Asia; Roger Leakey’s AF definition; ASB hypo-theses



3

Land use governance

Rights

12

Agro+Forestry policiesInputs & technology

Know-how

taungya

Trees on farm Farmers’ forests

Landscape approaches

Green growth

AF polic

y

SDG

MotivationA further step is the ‘agro-plus-forestry’ concept of all interactions and inter-faces, offer-ing integra-tion where policies got segregated






Theory of change (ToC)Theory of change (ToC)Change of theory Theory of change of theory of change…

Theory of induced change (ToIC) Choices among options in context targeting explicit goalsTheory of place (ToP)

Place of theory Theory of place of theory of change… ’learning’

Theory of everything

Theory of anything

\\\\\

Tradeoff Innovationanalysis

Monitoring Platforms for change change

Conse- Scena-quences rios

Place\

GlobalNational

SubnationalLandscapeCommunityHouseholdIndividual

Actio

n

Changecontext options

A. D

iagn

osis

(con

text

)

B. In

nova

tion

(opti

ons)

C. A

ction

Local Ecological Knowledge

ModellersEcologicalKnowledge

http://www.millenniumassessment.org/ma/ASB-MA_statusreport_ver5.0.pdf






Public/PolicyEcologicalKnowledge

Building blocks:• Tree cover transitions• TiF, ToF and ToToF• Three AF paradigms• ToC, ToP, ToIC• Three knowledge systems:

LEK, MEK, PEK• Boundary work, • NSS• Options, Contexts, Issues &

Goals• 17 SDG’s 30 years after



Cross-generational

transfer & education

Cultural, religious, philosophicaltraditions

Praxis & tech-nology

Politics of identity, cultural, gen-der & age differentiation

Taxonomic & explanatory knowledge, wisdom

Local know-ledge

Geographi-cal sciences

Social sciences

Ecological sciences

Biologicalsciences

Techno-logical sciences

Agronomical and forestry sciences

System analysis & decision scienceSustainability & global change sciences

Economic sciences

Legal and poli-tical sciences

Scientific & modellers’knowledge

Health, education & social development

Infractructure & eco-nomic development

Land use planning and resource access

National legislation & implementation

guidelines

Public discourse & deba-te ~ emerging issues

International conventions & millennium/sustainable development goals

Public/policyknowledge

K2ARecognition Innovation

Value Investment

RespectCarrots, sticks & sermons

#4 #3

#1

#5

#6

#2

Nested scales decisions

#1 Evidence of urgency: issues and goals #2 Evidence for a portfolio of options in context #3 Willingness to act: sovereignty, ownership #4 Overcoming vested interest: transparency #5 Ability to act: means of implementation #6 Options for bottom-up, empowered, continued innovation: agility sustained

The national agroforestry policy of India: experiential learning in development and

delivery phasesVirendra Pal Singh, Rakesh Bhushan Sinha, Rita Sharma,

Devashree Nayak, Henry Neufeldt, Meine van Noordwijk and Javed Rizvi. World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF)

Working paper 234 New Delhi (India)

Engaging with national policy reform: where and how can “evidence” help?

Goals

Contexts

Issue

s

Optio

ns

Polic

y

Science

Adaptive, learning

loops

2. A

naly

sis o

f iss

ues,

trad

eoffs

Income, food, energy, water, climate, biodiversity

Education, gender, inequity, conflict, cooperation

5. Communicate, platforms for change

1. Monitor, observe

3. Innovate4. Strategize, use scenarios

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

evidence

questions

At m

ultip

le, n

este

d sc

ales

6. Agency, decisions






Enab

ling All

lan

d us

es

Nexus

Fairn

ess +

effi

cien

cy Income

Food

Water

EnergyClimate&

Biodiversity

1987

1992Safeguards

Cobenefits

Separate Rio conventions

UN a

gend

a 20

30: 1

7 Su

stai

nabl

e De

velo

pmen

t Goa

ls, a

dopt

ed in

201

5

Every step in UNFCCC has to deal with “cobenefits” and “safeguards”

30 years ago

Agroforestry buf-fering from cli-mate extremes, basis for adapta-tion + net emis-sion reduction

Agroforestry as ‘green growth’ option, shift to service-based economy

Agroforestry balancing productivity, local needs (diversity) & market-based food security

Agroforestry buffering water flows, riparian integrity, mangroves

(Peri)Urban trees, pro-tective (agro) forests, bio-energy

Agroforestry as source of ecosystem services and protecting biodiversityAg

rofo

rest

ry re

duci

ng a

g f

ores

t con

flict

s, e

nhan

cing

equ

ity

gg

g

g

g

g

g

1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and

promote sustainable agriculture3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote

lifelong learning opportunities for all5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and

sanitation for all7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern

energy for all8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth,

full and productive employment and decent work for all9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable

industrialization and foster innovation10. Reduce inequality within and among countries11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and

sustainable12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine

resources for sustainable development15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial

ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss

16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels

17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development

http://www.worldagroforestry.org/region/sea/publications/detail?pubID=3479

SDG synergy in local context

Combination of:• Engineering of water retention

& infiltration in the landscape• Increased GW extraction

through wells and pumps• Water-efficient crops,

improved crop varieties and management

• Improved (fruit) tree germplasm

• Local watershed mngmnt committee

Proximity to urban market (Jhansi)

History of collective action in water management

Rocky outcrops with low productivity, source of water harvesting

Social structure, demography, expectations Climate, soil, cropping patterns, manure use as fuel, livestock

At start of interventions:

Vulnerability to climate variability

Declining buffering of water flows

Drudgery in water acquisition

Low crop productivity

Youth migrates to cities

Social capital declining

Low diversity of local food supply

Jhantsi (India), ES training Dec 2016

Green growth SDG: jobs!

Peace,People, Poverty

Jobs(livelihoods)

Tax and consumer spending

Envi-ron-

ment

Investment .

Adjusted GDP-growth

Fiscal policy

International markets International conventions

FN

H, S,I

Basic model of a national economy with policy leverage domains

Righ

ts &

res-

pons

ibili

ties

Gree

n Ec

onom

y?

Global climate (net of fossil car-bon emissions, other GHG + ΔC stock, land and

ocean feedbacks) SDG16

Jobs in mining (resource extraction)

Jobs in forest extraction

Jobs in plantationsJobs in agriculture

Jobs in manufacture

Jobs in services (incl. trade, transport, health

education, tourism)

Green jobs (in natural resource management, renewable energy)

Natural capital & Biodiversity (incl. forests, oceans,

fresh water, energy stocks)

Human. capital.Fixed assets

Adjusted GDP-growth

Education & health expenditure

International markets & investment International conventions

Demography, Equity (access, endowments), Transparency, Identity, Peace Ri

ghts

& re

s-po

nsib

ilitie

s

N

SI

Empl

oym

ent ~

skill

s ~

heal

th &

food

, wat

er,

ener

gy se

curit

y

Subs

isten

ce,s

elfr

elia

nt li

velih

oods

HInfrastructure investment

Social safetynet expenditureSustainable Development Goals (SDGs): 1. End poverty; 2. End hunger; 3. Health and well-being; 4. Quality education; 5. Gender equality; 6. Water and sanitation for all; 7. Sustainable energy; 8. Decent work for all; 9. Technology to benefit all; 10. Reduce inequality; 11. Safe cities; 12. Responsible consumption; 13. Stop climate change; 14. Protect the ocean; 15. Take care of the earth; 16. Live in peace; 17. International partnership and means of implementation

Tax and consumer spending

SDG4 SDG

5

SDG6

SDG10

SDG11

SDG13

SDG15

SDG17

SDG10

SDG5

SDG7

SDG8

SDG12

SDG3

Fiscal policy: Investment in

renewables and human capital

Crowding in pri-vate investments

Taxing negative externalities

Quality of spen-ding

F

SDG1

SDG2

SDG9

SDG14

ΔClim

ΔES

Can intensification reduce emission intensity of biofuel through optimized fertilizer use? Theory and the case of oil palm in Indonesia.

Footprints are minimized at around 80% of attainable yield

LERMs = ɣP ∑i Pi /Pi,ref + ɣR ∑j Rj /Rj,ref + ɣC ∑k Ck /Ck,ref

Societal weighting of provisioning

services

With• Pi , Rj and Ck be the attainment (in any metric) of a range of provisioning (P),

regulating (R) and Cultural (C) services provided by a landscape• Pi,ref ,Rj,ref and Ck,ref be the attainment (in the same metric) of such services in a

landscape optimized for that specific service (often a ‘monoculture’)• ɣP,i , ɣR,j and ɣC,k be a weighting function for the importance of the three

groups of ecosystem services

LERM as the “Land Equivalent Ratio for Multifunctionality” indicates the efficiency of the tested configuration. If LERM > 1 the mixed system spares land relative to a segregated mosaic of monofunctional land uses.

Societal weighting of

regulating services


cultural services

Plot-to-landscape scale metric for multifunc-tional land use

Current vs reference

services per unit land





LERMs = ɣP ∑i Pi /Pi,ref + ɣR ∑j Rj /Rj,ref + ɣC ∑k Ck /Ck,ref

Societal weighting of provisioning

services


regulating services


cultural services

Plot-to-landscape scale







• “Yield gap” complements a special reduced form of LERM: only considering a single P, using as Pref the potential and/or attainable yield, and ignoring other services provided by a unit of land: Yield gap = 1 - LERM

Includes water infiltration, GHG emissions






Institution and human

decisions

Biophysical structure or

process

• Natural forest• Complex

multistrata agroforest

• Simple agroforest• Simple-shade

practices• Conservation

agriculture • Alley cropping• Monocropping

Function- Produce food

and commodity

- Manage water flows

- Provide habitat and corridors for flora and fauna

- Etc.

Service-Provisioning-Regulating-Habitat -Cultural and amenity (agro-tourism)

Human wellbeing(socio-cultural context)

Benefit(food, raw material, clean(er) water, better water regulation, wildlife habitat and corridor

Value (economic)

(commodity price, premium price for organic products, incentives for agri-ecosystem services)

Ecosystems and Biodiversity

Feedback between value perception and use of ecosystem services

Management/ Restoration

The use of services usually affect the underlying biophysical sources and processes Modified from Braat and De Groot (2012)

Diversity deficits:

Villamor, G.B., Van Noordwijk, M., Le, Q.B., Lusiana, B., Matthews, R., Vlek, P.L., 2011. Diversity deficits in modelled landscape mosaics. Ecological Informatics 6: 73-82.

Four interpretations: 1) What we don’t know might as well not exist,2) In the real world where actual diversity is less

than a potential state that is deemed desirable (hence we worry about loss of biodiversity and cultural diversity);

3) In oversimplified modelling of the real world and describing its rules and policies

4) In our recognition of the driving forces that are used to construct models and design policy responses.

Diversity of ecological contexts

Diversity of social contexts Diversity of actors

Diversity of land use decisions

Diversity of ecological responses

Diversity of social-ecological consequences & feedbacks

Diversity of diversity indices

Approximately 100,000 species of trees (1/4 of total plants), spread over ~ 250 plant families (woody perennials in 6 of 11 divisions of Chloroplastida: Angiospermae, (incl. monocots, eudicots), Magnoliophyta, Gnetophyta, Pinophyta (=Coniferae), Cycadophyta, Pteridophyta)

Trees are not a taxonomic entity, but a life form choice in many families

You & me

Animal diversity is dominated by beetles

Genetic diver-sity concepts have shifted substantially in recent decade(s)

Biodiversity paradox:Urban consumers have more and more choice of foods, derived from farms that get less and less diverse

Shop-keeping unit (SKU) diversity far exceeds landscape biodiversity

I. Theory of Place, pantropical extrapolation domains and the places where we work

http://www.millenniumassessment.org/ma/ASB-MA_statusreport_ver5.0.pdf

FTA Sentinel Landscapes

Theory of Place depends on scale, e.g. Indonesia as a country is a point in the centre of the curve, but zooming in to district scale it displays the full spectrum

van Noordwijk, M. and G.B. Villamor. 2014. Tree cover transitions in tropical landscapes: hypotheses and cross-continental synthesis. GLPnews, 10: 33-37. (Open Acess)

Archeological sites & forest monitoring plots are both determined by ‘accessibility’

Forest plot evidence for continued C sequestration may be response to past disturbance

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9100.001

0.010

0.100

1.000Tropical timber (trade)Coffee (prod.)Rubber (prod.)Cacao (prod.)Palm oil (prod.)

Country rank

Frac

tion

of g

loba

l val

ue

Roundwood exports

Based on FAO-Stat data for 2014

20% tree cover in areas with highest human population density

Dewi et al. in review

Deforestation ~ demography

‘Pure agriculture’ vs

mosaic landscapes

Stages of tropical tree cover transi-tions at sub-watershed level

Water tower configuration (~ Arabica coffee) has high

human population and major ‘issues’ with

downstream effects of forest loss

(Per)Humid has relatively low human population density

Extrapolation domains for studies relating people, forests and tree crops: validity of a tropical landscapes portfolio Sonya Dewi1,*, Meine van Noordwijk1,2, Muhammad Thoha Zulkarnain1, Adrian Dwiputra1, Glenn Hyman3, Terry Sunderland4, Ravi Prabhu1, Vincent Gitz4 and Robert Nasi4

Stage 6 (urban) under-. Stage 5 overrepresented

The portfolio of sentinel landscapes of the Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA) research program provides a 5% sample of area, 8% of people, 9% of tree cover and 10-12% of potential tree crop presence across the tropics, with quantified biases

across zones, transition stages and HDI.

II. Who cares about ‘evidence’? Political ecology, behavioural economics, change as it happens

Active dis-information

Bdaryounwork

On which picture do you see more people?

20 Jan 2017

21 Jan 2017

Fact-free politics//Disinformation

Kellyanne Conway denies Trump press secretary lied: ‘He offered alternative facts’

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2017/jan/22/kellyanne-conway-trump-press-secretary-alternative-facts-video



“evidence is provided that it is possible to pre-emptively protect (“inoculate”) public attitudes

about climate change against real-world misinformation.”

PicoBehavioural economicsreally internalizing externalities at emotional core of decision making

Soci

alEc

olog

ical

Mon

etar

y fu

ngib

ility

$$ do NOT get us a

new planet

$$ do NOT buy real

happiness

Individual & household decisions on scarce resourcesMicro

Environmental economics: internalizing externalities of individual decisions for common goods

Meso

National scale decisions on scarce resourcesMacro

Ecological economics: planetary boundaries put hard constraintsGiga

Van Noordwijk, M., Leimona, B., Jindal, R., Villamor, G.B., Vardhan, M., Namirembe, S., Catacutan, D., Kerr, J., Minang, P.A., Tomich, T.P., 2012. Payments for Environmental Services: Evolution Toward Efficient and Fair Incentives for Multifunctional Landscapes. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 37, 389-420.

Problem 3: Asymmetry; People are often risk averse, sensitive

to the way (+ or -) a comparison is presented

Expected utility hypothesisE(x) = ∑ xi piExpected utility is sum of all possible values xi multi-plied with their probability pi.

Problem 1: People are notoriously poor in estimating probabilities, especially when

they are exposed to strongly filtered information

Problem 2: People are not good at comparing values that differ in time

course: strong preference for immediate gratificationDaniel Bernouilli (1700,

Groningen). 1738. Specimen theoriae novae de mensura sortis. [Exposition of a New Theory on the Measurement of Risk]PhD in Anatomy & Botany, Mathematician, Physicist, Hydrodynamics (blood pressure), Probability & Statistics (censored data), Impact quantification of smallpox vaccination

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5O3JSn2fEU

Internalizing externalities• Individual expected utility of alternate

decisions is aligned with societal utility, through a combination of ‘polluter pay’ + ‘stewards are rewarded’ rules: carrots and sticks.

• Individual and local community ‘norms of behaviour’ change, in response to respect, responsibility, scrutiny, social controls and new (green and clean) business opportunities: carrots, sticks & sermons

But, legal opportunity costs of less ES friendly choices may need to be off-set at infinitum.

1

2Co-investment paradigms involve respect, sharing risk, voluntary agreements

PES, REDD+

Millions of years of selection pressure shaped our basic brain: we feel good in a group where there is perceived fairness, sharing and social policing of norms of behavior.

The start of agriculture, sedentary life-styles and cities created the concept of property rights, accu-mulation of wealth, con-flicts, efficiency, poverty

Fairness + Efficiency

People utilize and make decisions on their lands to satisfy their needs within their emerging local institutions

External demand and access to markets for ecosystem products and services modify feeds backs to their land use decisions

http://www.worldagroforestry.org/sites/default/files/u884/Ch1_IntroCoinvest_ebook.pdf

Marketable goods & services

Land use

ES Governanc

e

Supp

ortin

g

Evol

utio

nary

Prov

isio

nin gMarketable

goods & services

Physical security, shelter

Food & water security

Health

Income

Enterprise

Social relations

IDIdentity,

self-realization

Land use

ClimateWaterGeomorphology• erosion/

sedimentation• landslides

NutrientsFireVegetation & floraFaunaBiogeography

Influence & lateral flows

Markets

Physical security, shelter

Food & water security

Health

Income

Enterprise

Social relations

IDIdentity,

self-realization

Cul

tura

lR

egul

ator

y

Combinations of direct regulations, incentive-based mechanisms and advocacy at various levels

ES metric

Engineering

Green accounting

Access, LU regulation

Natural capital and ES monitoring

Fairness & efficiency

Effici

ency

Payments, rewards, incentives, tax

Fairn

ess

perc

eptio

n

Respect, recognition, suasion

Who cares about the real value of ecosystem services of agroforestry?

# Governments (supported by public opinion leaders) who take SDG’s seriously and want the asset base to be secured

# Private sector entities with long-term vision but close watch on current bottom-lines

# Project proponents who want investment in projects that transform lives & landscapes; PES?

What type of understanding, evidence and data would it take to shift opinions and behaviour

Workplans for CAFRI + other institutions

Opportunities to collect information, use case studies, apply new methods, involve stakeholders in ‘action research’

I

II

IIIIV

III. Social-Ecological Systems: are efforts to remove ‘endogeneity’ from ‘impacts’ futile?

Central to current ‘impact evaluations’ is that it seeks to

separate ‘treatment’ effects from

‘self-selection’

Why?

Medical research: beyond ‘self-selected’ medication

Natural resource management and governance

Units of analysis Clearly defined: individuals (or mother-child combinations)

Nested/overlapping scales, fuzzy system boundaries

Stratification, domains of similarity

Well-defined medical diagnos-tics, age, sex, body-weight index, as co-variants

No generally accepted ‘theory of place’ descriptors and diagnostics of issues to be resolved

Treatments Initial ‘dose-effect’ relations, followed by tests of ‘fine-tuning’ criteria

Strongly interconnected subsystems, dependency on national regulations, international agreements

Double-blind experiments

Feasible as ‘gold standard’, strong ‘placebo’ effects

Not feasible, reliance on ‘counterfactuals’

Options to scale-up ‘success’

Public finance and insurance companies (if cost<benefit)

Recipe-based scaling up bound to fail as differences in context matter

Risks mitigated Unrecognized negative side-effects; inefficient expenditure

Diversity support may lead to lack of ‘fairness’, bureaucratic efficiency

There has been a long-standing perception that research on integrated natural resource management issues has a lower return on investment than research on ‘technologies’ that may be more closely mirror the standards for separating ‘self-selection’ from ‘replicable, objective’ observables that helped the medical field deal with many major illnesses (and create some new ones…)

Medical research: beyond ‘self-selected’ medication

Natural resource management and governance

Units of analysis Clearly defined: individuals (or mother-child combinations)

Nested/overlapping scales, fuzzy system boundaries

Stratification, domains of similarity

Well-defined medical diagnos-tics, age, sex, body-weight index, as co-variants

No generally accepted ‘theory of place’ descriptors and diagnostics of issues to be resolved

Treatments Initial ‘dose-effect’ relations, followed by tests of ‘fine-tuning’ criteria

Strongly interconnected subsystems, dependency on national regulations, international agreements

Double-blind experiments

Feasible as ‘gold standard’, strong ‘placebo’ effects

Not feasible, reliance on ‘counterfactuals’

Options to scale-up ‘success’

Public finance and insurance companies (if cost<benefit)

Recipe-based scaling up bound to fail as differences in context matter

Risks mitigated Unrecognized negative side-effects; inefficient expenditure

Diversity support may lead to lack of ‘fairness’, bureaucratic efficiency

Maybe we need to accept that we can ‘quantify change’, analyze contextual factors, stimulate cross-learning, allow spread & adaptation, rather than bullet-proof ‘adoption’ of proven recipes by voiceless objects of policy change.ToIC’s need to become more empirical and more soundly rooted in ToC’s as ‘counterfactuals’, with ToP’s that allow better contextualization…

IV. Supporting learning, self-selection, IDC’s, bottom-up actions

AtmosphereAnthropocene GHG increase

Humans

Fossil fuel use

Atmospheremacroclimate

Land

NatFor Ag

Ur Food, fibre

Energy

Service sectors

Hum

an

wel

lbei

ng

microclimate rene

wab

les

CO2

CH4

N2O

rainCO2 CO

2

CH4

N2OCO2

Oce

ans

CO2H2O

Nation-based AFOLU accounting

as part of NDC’s

Nation-based fossil fuel use accounting

as part of NDC’s

Unresolved blue carbon global accountability

Unresolved accountability for emissions embodied in industrial,

forest-product and agricultural trade

“Individually determined

contributions” based on foot-

prints & lifestyles

Self-regulation by private sector

Supporting sectors

Products GrainsRoots & tubers

OilFruits & Vegetables

MushroomsDairy

FishMeatFuelsFibre

…

Land

use

sFo

rest

Agro

fore

stM

ixed

mos

aic

Horti

cultu

reO

pen-

field

Ag

Past

ure

Wet

land

sO

pen

wat

er…

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

Supply side Demand side

Area fractionΔCarbon stocks

N2O, CH4 emissions

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . .

GHG

foot

prin

ts p

er u

nit f

ood

prod

uct

Inpu

t man

ufac

ture

Proc

essi

ngW

aste

/ re

cycl

ing

Tran

spor

t

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

Clim

ate

smar

t con

sum

ers

High

inco

me

Upp

er m

iddl

e in

com

eLo

wer

mid

dle

inco

me

Low

inco

me

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

Global food system

emissions

Global land use emissions

AFOLU accounting of GHG emissions

Cons

umer

bas

ed a

ccou

nting

Food

as s

ecto

r

IndividuallyDetermined

Contributions

NationallyDetermined Contributions ∑ Imports = ∑ Exports

Certification

Sustainability initiatives,

standards, and certification of

adherence

Issue-attention cycle: dynamics of discourse &

‘solutions’

Status and trends in

ecosystem services, human

wellbeing

Sw

ing

pote

ntia

l: fo

otpr

int o

f pro

duct

s

Best

Median

Worst

Sta

ndar

ds v

aryi

ng in

am

bitio

n

Global value chains

Power

Market structure

Qualitystandards

(mandatory, voluntary)

Governance

Supply & demand

3. Pressures from the public evoke private sector and governmentalsustainability initiatives to converge and shift existing standards.

1. Public discourse on sustainability concerns and associated actions is part of one or more issue-attention cycles.

2. The way sustainability standards, initiatives and certification emerge, depends on global value chain and its intermediaries.

4. Sustainability initiatives, standard settings and certification only provide partial solutions for ecosystem service and social problems.

Further papers (Coffee, Cacao, Oil palm) forthcoming

V. ‘Cool trees’ the start and end of all agroforestry research

Global Environmental Change 2017:

Trees, forests and water: cool insights for a hot worldDavid Ellison1,2, Cindy E. Morris3,4, Bruno Locatelli5,6, Douglas Sheil7, Jane Cohen8, Daniel Murdiyarso9,10, Victoria Gutierrez11, Meine van Noordwijk12, Irena F. Creed13, Jan Pokorny14, David Gaveau9, Dominick V. Spracklen15, Aida Bargués Tobella1, Ulrik Ilstedt1, Adriaan J. Teuling16, Solomon Gebreyohannis Gebrehiwot17,18, David C. Sands4, Bart Muys19, Bruno Verbist19, Elaine Springgay20, Yulia Sugandi21, Caroline A. Sullivan22

“…the effects of forests on climate at local, regional and continental scales must be moved to the center of land and water management so that the appropriate management of forests can bridge the conventional distinction between these paradigms. The enhanced understanding of the dynamics of water, energy and carbon synergies would greatly improve climate adaptation and mitigation efforts. “

Tree

s, fo

rest

s and

wat

er: c

ool i

nsig

hts f

or a

hot

wor

ld. E

lliso

n et

al.

(201

7)

Surface tempe-rature distribu-tion in a mixed landscape with forest.Source: (Hesslerová et al., 2013).

Infiltration and groundwater recharge relative to canopy coverSource: Ilstedt et al. 2016

Natural forest

activ

e re

stor

ation

Salience: 21

3

Exposure Hazard: Flood human frequency presence & duration

Vulnerability: Victims, dama-ge and its economic value

Q = P - E - ∆S

Credibility:Directly obser-vable hydrograph

Topography & engineered river channel, reservoirs, flood plain (and its subsi-dence), dykes, drainage, storage, extractions

4

Climate variability and change

Rainfall & Epot as space/time pattern

Avoided flood damage asperceived Ecosystem Service

5

6

Hillslope/landscapeDrainage vs retentionBuffer and filter effects‘Effective rainfall’

Land cover:oNatural forestoForest-derivedoPlantationsoTree-based AgoOpen-field AgoDegraded landsoSettlements

Spati

al co

nfigu

ratio

n

Watershed functions: pathways, water use and flow buffering

Riparian vegetationBuffer and filter effects

78

Ecosystem structure Ecosystem function // watershed management

Spati

al co

nfigu

ratio

nPatch-levelRainfall interceptionInfiltrationSurface filter effectsSoil macroporosity (decline & buildup)Water storage and use for transpiration

7D

7C

7A

7B

Avoi

ded

degr

adati

on &

?

Atmospheric concentrations of short- and longlived greenhouse gassesAt

mos

-ph

ere

Climate

systems

Anth

ropo

geni

c GH

G

emis

sion

s

Impacts of actual & predicted

climate change on human and ecosystems

Adaptation

Mitigation

Vulnerability

Human actions .

Human quality of lifeOt

her p

oten

tial

effec

ts o

n cl

imat

e sy

stem

s

Exogenous variabiliy

van Noordwijk M, Kim Y-S, Leimona B, Hairiah K, Fisher LA, 2016. Metrics of water secu-rity, adaptive capacity and agroforestry in Indonesia. Current Opinion on Environ-mental Sustainability 21: 1-8

for further ideas see

WaNuLCAS

Ackn

owle

dgin

g

you

all…

Meine van Noordwijk ICRAF

1993-2017

Integrative agroforestry science: reflections and

perspectives

1984

1987

Thank you!

% o

f zon

e-sp

ecifi

c C-

stoc

k

Log (HumanPopDens)

Exported C-rich

products

Imported C-rich

products

Footprintcorrected

Purely Ag

Urban

Above-par

Average

Below-par

Net immigration emigration

Proposed performance metric for jurisdictional entities: foot-print adjusted relative C-stock

Including the consumption and production side of landscape performance, we propose a metric that relates current landscape C stock to the reference of natural vegetation in the ecological zone, that gives credit for all produce that leaves the landscape (whether food, wood, fodder or fibre) and balances that with the external footprint of the landscape:

Accounting rules:Landbased C-stock changeActivity-based recurrent GHG emissions: + Paddy rice + Enteric fermentation + Peatland use + N-fertilizationWaste landfillsIndustrial processesCement productionFossil fuel use inc. transport

CO2 CH4 N2O++/-- . .

. ++ .

. ++ .++ . .. . ++. ++ ++ + +++ . .++++ . .++ . ++

Nati

on st

ates

: nati

onal

co

mm

unic

ation

s + N

DC’s

International

Citiz

ens,

cons

umer

s, pr

ivat

e se

ctor

val

ue c

hain

s

Accountability

“Emissions embodied in trade” remain major challenge

Forests & Agri-culture/Forest interface: Stock change attribu-tion issues:

“Individually Determined

Contributions”

Food systems: Footprint ac-counting rules:

“Indirect land use change”