Suchergebnisse

The semiarid lands of Northeast Brazil represent one of the most densely populated regions of the country. Rainfall variability together with land degradation and large-scale poverty in rural areas makes this region vulnerable to droughts. Most of the agriculture in this region is rainfed and deficient rainfall leads to severe drought impacts. In this review, we examine different short- and long-term strategies directed to cope with possible impacts of droughts proposed by the government, farmers, civil society, and the private sector. These are approaches to adaptation to drought in the Northeast of Brazil, and among them, we have agricultural management and soil conservation and better management of water resources. Other actions include seasonal climate forecasts and funds transfer and credits to affected small-scale farmers. Although some of these actions are for the short term and may help to survive the drought situation, they may be only postdisaster mitigation options that do not improve adaptive capacity. They favor maladaptation and create dependency of farmers to government actions. Some experiences such as AdaptaSertão show potential benefits for small-scale farmers. We identify key challenges for moving toward a more holistic risk management approach and highlight the need to integrate actions and tools for adaptation, combining technology-based solutions with in-depth knowledge of local and regional social, economic, and cultural aspects, among them seasonal climate forecasts and drought impacts studies, among some other proactive predisaster ways, rather than reactive postdisaster actions. Adaptation strategies must increase long-term resilience of food production in the Brazilian Northeast, going beyond an individual drought event.

We identify major knowledge gaps in the primary impacts of extreme weather and climate change across the UK's food system, its functioning and their interactions to provide information to support adaptation and resilience planning. Future shocks and stresses due to changes in weather and climate extremes will have significant impacts on the UK food system. Key knowledge gaps remain in our understanding of their impacts on non-cereal crops, livestock and fisheries production, on the food chain beyond primary production, on the longer-term impacts, and in an integrated, full system view of impacts that accounts for cumulative impacts, interactions, feedbacks and the interplay between domestic and overseas elements of the UK food system. These knowledge gaps need to be urgently addressed to ensure future climate resilience of the UK food system. There are several areas where research could better support decision-making towards increased resilience to weather and climate shocks in both food policy and business sectors. We note the need for a step change in the collection, quality, synthesis and application of a broad range of weather and food chain data and information across time and space. There is a need to develop tools to support the inclusion of the "missing middle" of food chain and policy discussions that incorporate weather and climate impacts: processing/packaging, transport, storage, wholesale, retail and disposing/reusing. Greater integration of climate, biophysical, social, political and economic research is required to characterise geo-political influences on food system climate resilience. Further work is needed to assess adaptation actions needed in response, and their knock-on trade-offs and consequences across sectors, and their interactions. The challenges identified here suggest the need for challenge-led, connective, interdisciplinary approaches to future funding initiatives in support of achieving food system resilience to weather and climate shocks.

National inventories of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (implementation of the National Communications) are organized according to five main sectors, namely: Energy, Industrial Processes, Agriculture, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LUCF) and Waste. The objective of this study was to review and calculate the potential of greenhouse gas mitigation strategies in Brazil for the Agricultural and LUCF. The first step consisted in an analysis of Brazilian official and unofficial documents related to climate change and mitigation policies. Secondly, business as usual (BAU) and mitigation scenarios were elaborated for the 2010-2020 timeframe, and calculations of the corresponding associated GHG emissions and removals were performed. Additionally, two complementary approaches were used to point out and quantify the main mitigation options: a) following the IPCC 1996 guidelines and b) based on EX-ACT. Brazilian authorities announced that the country will target a reduction in its GHG between 36.1 and 38.9% from projected 2020 levels. This is a positive stand that should also be adopted by other developing countries. To reach this government goal, agriculture and livestock sectors must contribute with an emission reduction of 133 to 166 Mt CO(2)-eq. This seems to be reachable when confronted to our mitigation option values, which are in between the range of 178.3 to 445 Mt CO(2)-eq. Government investments on agriculture are necessary to minimize the efforts from the sectors to reach their targets.

National inventories of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (implementation of the National Communications) are organized according to five main sectors, namely: Energy, Industrial Processes, Agriculture, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LUCF) and Waste. The objective of this study was to review and calculate the potential of greenhouse gas mitigation strategies in Brazil for the Agricultural and LUCF. The first step consisted in an analysis of Brazilian official and unofficial documents related to climate change and mitigation policies. Secondly, business as usual (BAU) and mitigation scenarios were elaborated for the 2010-2020 timeframe, and calculations of the corresponding associated GHG emissions and removals were performed. Additionally, two complementary approaches were used to point out and quantify the main mitigation options: a) following the IPCC 1996 guidelines and b) based on EX-ACT. Brazilian authorities announced that the country will target a reduction in its GHG between 36.1 and 38.9% from projected 2020 levels. This is a positive stand that should also be adopted by other developing countries. To reach this government goal, agriculture and livestock sectors must contribute with an emission reduction of 133 to 166 Mt CO(2)-eq. This seems to be reachable when confronted to our mitigation option values, which are in between the range of 178.3 to 445 Mt CO(2)-eq. Government investments on agriculture are necessary to minimize the efforts from the sectors to reach their targets.

National inventories of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (implementation of the National Communications) are organized according to five main sectors, namely: Energy, Industrial Processes, Agriculture, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LUCF) and Waste. The objective of this study was to review and calculate the potential of greenhouse gas mitigation strategies in Brazil for the Agricultural and LUCF. The first step consisted in an analysis of Brazilian official and unofficial documents related to climate change and mitigation policies. Secondly, business as usual (BAU) and mitigation scenarios were elaborated for the 2010-2020 timeframe, and calculations of the corresponding associated GHG emissions and removals were performed. Additionally, two complementary approaches were used to point out and quantify the main mitigation options: a) following the IPCC 1996 guidelines and b) based on EX-ACT. Brazilian authorities announced that the country will target a reduction in its GHG between 36.1 and 38.9% from projected 2020 levels. This is a positive stand that should also be adopted by other developing countries. To reach this government goal, agriculture and livestock sectors must contribute with an emission reduction of 133 to 166 Mt CO(2)-eq. This seems to be reachable when confronted to our mitigation option values, which are in between the range of 178.3 to 445 Mt CO(2)-eq. Government investments on agriculture are necessary to minimize the efforts from the sectors to reach their targets.