Search results

Both the European Union (EU) and China are culturally, economically, climatologically and environmentally diverse polities. The EU is a multi-state grouping of economically developed democratic countries, while China is a unitary sovereign state and a developing economy with a strong government bureaucracy. Our hypothesis is that given their diverse political systems, the EU and China would develop different kinds of systems for the governance of adaptation to climate change. We test this hypothesis through a comparative analysis of policy documents from the two study areas,in which we examine framework policies, programmatic actions and specific actions that have been adopted to date in order to address climate change, with a specific focus on the water sector. We find that climate change adaptation began to be addressed through formal policy on a similar timeline in the two regions. The EU and China are also similar in that they use framework laws and existing sectoral policy, such as for the water sector. We find that the EU has primarily relied on integration of climate change adaptation concerns through legal instruments which set a framework for implementation of adaptation policy. In China, specific actions to be incorporated in socio-economic development plans under the existing legislation on adaptation have been the main mode for integrating adaptation into sectoral actions, though the future trend may be to develop more regulations.

This paper presents potential of low-emission dairy production, investment options, and financial mechanisms in Kenya's dairy sub-sector to better support its necessary transition and enhance contribution to national greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction goals. Key GHG mitigation options for the livestock sector in Kenya are improved feed with fodder and hay production (1.57 MtCO2e y-1), manure management using biogas plants (0.09 MtCO2e y-1), breed improvement production (1.2 MtCO2e y-1), dairy processing plants retrofit (0.14 MtCO2e y-1), and reduction of milk loss and waste (2.9 MtCO2e y-1). The cost of GHG emissions abatement using these options ranges from -US$63/tCO2 (improved feed) to US$80/tCO2 (dairy processing plants retrofit). Economic benefits of these mitigation options include increase in milk production, energy-saving from biogas and dairy plant retrofit, and reduction in milk loss and waste in milk cooling centers. The business case assessments show that all mitigation options are economically viable with a high internal rate of return (IRR) and less than one year to a few years payback period. This assessment shows that a transition to a low-emission dairy sector is possible with economic and environmental gains. More importantly, this transition would support a range of other national policy goals, including improving livelihoods with high food and nutrition security, economic growth, and achieving GHG mitigation targets. In this regard, this synthesis paper is intended to serve as a reference that national and sub-national governments, development organizations, and the private sector can consult as they move forward to invest in mitigation options in the dairy sector.

Le présent rapport donne un aperçu des pratiques actuelles, des dé s et des opportunités liés à la Mesure, la Déclaration et la Véri cation (MDV) des émissions de gaz à effet de serre (GES), ainsi que de la réduction des émissions par les pays en développement dans le cadre de la Convention-cadre des Nations Unies sur les changements climatiques. La MDV des émissions de GES de l'élevage est pertinente pour les raisons suivantes : i) la production animale contribue de manière signi cative aux émissions mondiales de GES ; ii) la part des émissions de GES de l'élevage dans les émissions agricoles a crû au l du temps ; et iii) une meilleure caractérisation des émissions de GES de l'élevage peut aider les décideurs à cibler et concevoir des efforts en vue de réduire ces émissions. Etant donné que les politiques nationales d'atténuation de l'impact des changements climatiques mettent de plus en plus l'accent sur les cibles de la réduction des GES dans les Contributions Déterminées au niveau National, ce rapport évalue la mesure dans laquelle les pratiques actuelles en matière de MDV peuvent répondre aux besoins stratégiques évolutifs. Le rapport décrit les obligations liées à la MDV au titre de la CCNUCC (Chapitre 2), les pratiques actuelles en matière de collecte de données et de déclaration des émissions de GES de l'élevage dans le cadre des inventaires nationaux de GES (Chapitre 3) et la MDV des mesures d'atténuation (Chapitre 4). En outre, il présente les possibilités d'amélioration (Chapitre 5). ; This report is also available in: ; English: http://hdl.handle.net/10568/89335 ; Spanish : http://hdl.handle.net/10568/93127 ; A summary brief is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10568/80890

There is increasing interest in mitigation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the dairy sector in developing countries. However, there is little prior experience with measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) of GHG emissions and emission reductions. A voluntary carbon market methodology, the Smallholder Dairy Methodology, has proposed a methodology for establishing a standardized performance baseline for a region targeted by a GHG mitigation initiative. This working paper reports the first experience of implementing a survey and analyzing survey data to establish a standardized performance baseline using survey data from central Kenya, which is a region targeted by the Kenya dairy NAMA promoted by the Government of Kenya. The publication of this report enables transparent documentation of the baseline setting process for the Kenya dairy NAMA. Data from the survey were also used to characterize dairy production in the intensive production system in Kenya's Tier 2 GHG inventory for dairy cattle. Publication of the survey data also supports transparency of Kenya's Tier 2 GHG inventory. The report summarizes the requirements of the Smallholder Dairy Methodology, the methods used for sampling, data collection and data analysis, the main results of data analysis and recommendations for future similar initiatives to quantify standardized baselines for dairy GHG mitigation programs. Appendices present data collection tools, summary statistics, and the data used to estimate parameters in Kenya's Tier 2 dairy GHG inventory. Analysis of the survey data following the Smallholder Dairy Methodology's requirements shows that the relationship between GHG intensity (kg CO2e/kg fat and protein corrected milk [FPCM]) and milk yield (kg FPCM per farm per year) can be represented by a power regression: y = 81.868x-0.436. Using this relationship, dairy initiatives in central Kenya need only to measure change in milk yield per farm per year, and can estimate GHG emissions and emission reductions using the relationship published here. The regression has an r2 of 0.43, and an uncertainty of 18.6% as measured by the root mean square error (RMSE) of the regression. The Smallholder Dairy Methodology does not require quantification of uncertainty, but other mitigation initiatives may use estimated uncertainty to discount the GHG emission reductions claimed in order to ensure conservativeness. The baseline survey is representative of 8 counties with a dairy cattle population of about 1.7 million, and data collection and analysis cost about US$ 75,000. The methodology is therefore a cost-effective way to set baselines for an initiative with large numbers of participating farms.

The objectives of this report are to assess the value proposition of results-based carbon finance for CSA, and to provide high-level guidance for the development of CSA carbon crediting programs that considers the characteristics of both the agriculture sector and results-based carbon finance. Target audiences for this report include both stakeholders in climate finance and in the agriculture sector. In particular, the report aims to inform developing country governments about the opportunities for promoting transformative CSA interventions within the framework of results-based finance and its potential positioning in relation to other World Bank financing.

Under the Paris Agreement, countries should update their Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) every five years, with progressive ambition in each new submission. Kenya plans to review and revise its NDC in June 2020. The State Department for Livestock has undertaken a stock-taking exercise with support from UNIQUE forestry and land use, CCAFS and GRA. This report summarizes the main findings and recommendations for the livestock sub-sector contribution to enhanced climate change ambition. The livestock sub-sector is well aligned with Kenya's comprehensive policy framework: The livestock sub-sector is critical to achieving Kenya's development objectives, including the Big Four Agenda and the Agriculture Sector Growth and Transformation Strategy (ASGTS, 2019-2029). The prioritization exercise that informed the ASGTS highlighted dairy, beef, sheep/goat, poultry and camel as being among Kenya's 13 value chains with high potential for agricultural transformation and are central to achieving the objectives of the three ASGTS anchors. The Kenya Climate-Smart Agriculture Strategy and Implementation Framework (KCSAIF) sets out clear actions that are in line with livestock sub-sector priorities. With the exception of the dairy industry where some progress has been made, implementation of the KCSAIF in different live-stock industries (e.g., beef, sheep, goats, poultry) is in its early stages. The livestock sub-sector is central to Kenya's climate change ambitions: Livestock is the largest source of GHG emissions in the agricultural sector, accounting for over 50% of GHG emissions in the Second National Communication, mainly due to enteric fermentation. Trends in livestock GHG emissions are also key drivers of the business as usual (BAU) scenario in Kenya's first NDC. The projections underlying the BAU scenario in the first NDC assumed 1% annual average growth in enteric fermentation emissions from 2010 to 2030. Official livestock population data combined with IPCC 2006 Tier 1 emission factors show that from 2000 to 2018, enteric fermentation emissions in fact increased by 8.5% per year, and have exceeded the BAU projections in every year since 2007. Assuming annual growth of 3.34%, livestock enteric fermentation emissions in 2030 could exceed 33 Mt CO2e, which is more than double the estimated emissions in 2010. Increasing livestock GHG emissions are mainly driven by rising demand for meat and milk due to increasing population, urbanization and rising incomes. As other sectors decarbonize, agricultural emissions – led by livestock emissions – will become more important. Livestock can also contribute to GHG mitigation. A Dairy NAMA has been proposed, with an estimated mitigation potential of 8.8 Mt CO2e over a 10-year period. The Dairy NAMA has not yet been implemented due to lack of financial support. Other livestock industries also have mitigation potential and there are strong synergies with adaptation. However, the technical feasibility, costs and benefits have not yet been assessed in detail. The majority of non-dairy cattle and small ruminants are raised in the arid and semi-arid areas, where adaptation to climate change and food security are national priorities. Livestock sub-sector contributions to enhanced NDC: NDCs can be enhanced on the basis of a stocking taking of trends, policies and measures, and actions of sub-national and non-state actors in the sector; by updating assumptions and analysis; by ensuring alignment of the NDC with sector development objectives; by ensuring complete coverage of sectors and sub-sectors; and by ensuring that adaptation priorities, policies and plans are appropriately reflected. Based on a stock-taking, the following pathways to NDC enhancement have been identified in the livestock sector. In addition to pursuing financing of the Dairy NAMA, in line with the recommendation in the Mitigation Technical Analysis Report, during the 2018-2022 National Climate Change Action Plan implementation period the livestock sub-sector should build expertise and improve data for mitigation action, while focusing climate change efforts on adaptation. In particular, actions to enhance mitigation ambition and promote adaptation actions are proposed in the following four areas. (1) In-depth assessment and identification of adaptation and mitigation options. This will contribute to identification of feasible livestock sub-sector climate actions for inclusion in the third NDC. •Documentation of vulnerability to climate change and extreme events by livestock in different production systems and in grasslands, for evidenced based development of policies and measures in the livestock sub-sector. •In-depth feasibility assessment in each production system for each livestock species for upscaled implementation of key adaptation and mitigation strategies. •Inventory of domestic (national and county government, non-government, private sector) and internationally-supported initiatives that promote key adaptation and mitigation strategies. •Stakeholder-led identification of adaptation and mitigation initiatives for upscaling. (2) Develop a Livestock Sub-Sector Climate Change Action Plan.T his will support coordination in the sub-sector and assist in resource mobilization for enhanced climate action. •Engage stakeholders and key supporting institutions in the main initiatives in each production system for each species to identify actions to support upscaled implementation of key adaptation and mitigation actions in the livestock sub-sector and ensure coordination with stakeholders. •Develop strategies for the national government to promote climate-smart agriculture (CSA) in the livestock sub-sector, including: -strategies to ensure that these actions are mainstreamed in the workplans of state department for livestock divisions and units and related semi-autonomous government agencies; -strategies to ensure that these actions are mainstreamed in the work of other relevant MDAs and county governments; -strategies to support non-government and private sector actors to address sector support needs; -coordination mechanisms to engage the key stakeholders in each strategy. (3) Improve monitoring and evaluation of livestock sub-sector climate actions. This will support sector coordination, enable tracking of non-state climate actions and support UNFCCC reporting•Design livestock CSA monitoring & evaluation (M&E) system to provide and track information on: -Progress in implementing Livestock Sub-sector Climate Change Action Plan; -KCSAIF M&E framework indicators; -Information required by sub-sector stakeholders; -Other indicators as required by national measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) systems (e.g. adaptation and mitigation action registry). (4) Improve MRV of livestock GHG emissions. This will improve national capacities for MRV to support implementation and tracking of climate actions. •GHG inventory compilation: -Continue to compile and submit the Tier 2 dairy cattle GHG inventory on an annual basis; -Expand application of Tier 2 method to the other livestock species; -Continue to build state department for livestock capacity for GHG inventory compilation. •GHG inventory improvement: -Collaborate with national and county stakeholders to improve livestock administrative statistics in line with GHG inventory data needs; -Strengthen county capacities for improved livestock data collection. •MRV system improvement: -Revise NDC GHG BAU projections for livestock GHG emissions based on Tier 2 emission factors and revised livestock population time series in view of the 2019 livestock census results; -Develop models for tracking change in emission intensity of livestock production in line with key adaptation and mitigation strategies. This report summarizes the state of knowledge and action in the livestock sub-sector regarding adaptation and mitigation, highlighting gaps and priorities for future policy developments. The first chapter provides a general overview of the sector's position in relation to climate change in Kenya. The following four chapters review priorities for adaptation and mitigation for each of the main livestock species (dairy cattle, non-dairy cattle, small ruminants and poultry). The final chapter assesses policy and institutional issues, and provides recommendations for the State Department for Livestock, with a focus on near-term actions to increase the livestock sector's support to enhanced climate change ambitions. ; Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases ; UNIQUE Forestry and Other Land Use GmbH ; CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security

Editorial: Nicole Kenton, S. 4. - Theme introduction: Wagging the dragon's tail: emerging practices in participatory poverty reduction in China. - Preface: Alan Piazza, S. 13. - 1. Overview: Changing government-community interface in China: Johanna Pennarz and Arjan de Haan, S. 17 . - 2. Prologue: Reflections on participation in Southwest China in the early 2000s: Andreas Wilkes, S. 24. - Part I: Communities taking charge in China. - 3. Introduction: Johanna Pennarz, S. 33. - 4. How community farmers participated in project planning and implementation: Nati, S. 37. - 5. How an ordinary farmer was elected as project leader: Qin Guozheng, S. 40 . - 6. How farmers claimed their rights to supervise projects: Song Haokun, S. 45 . - Part II: Changing roles and relationships in China - the facilitator . - 7. Introduction: Johanna Pennarz, S. 51 . - 8. Reflections from the Sanjiang Workshop: Johanna Pennarz, S. 53. - 9. Facilitating community-level processes: Qin Cheng, S. 55. - 10. The role of village facilitators: Qin Guozheng, S. 57. - 11. The role of the township facilitator: Meng Shunhui, S. 59 . - 12. Adapting to the local context: lessons learnt from external facilitation: Wang Jianping, S. 62 . - Part III: Management practices in China - towards fairer and more transparent resource allocation. - 13. Introduction: Johanna Pennarz, S. 71 . - 14. From participation inside villages to competitive selection amongst villages: Yang Gang, S. 74 . - 15. Participatory planning and poverty analysis in Guangxi: Qin Zhurong, S. 79. - 16. Different ways for implementation in different communities: Chen Chunyun, S. 84. - Part IV: The China Watershed Management Project - a participatory approach to watershed management. - 17. Introduction: Nicole Kenton, S. 89. - 18. Background and approach: Wang Yue, S. 91. - 19. Innovative, community-led practices: Wang Baojun, S. 95 . - 20. The perspective of the Ministry of Water Resources: Wang Yue, S. 101. - 21. Challenges and lessons learn