DRM Webinar III: Benefits of farm-level disaster risk reduction practices in agriculture
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
3 gefällt mir•486 views
Over the past decade, economic damages resulting from natural hazards have amounted to USD 1.5 trillion caused by geophysical hazards such as earthquakes, tsunamis and landslides, as well as hydro-meteorological hazards, including storms, floods, droughts and wild fires. Climate-related disasters, in particular, are increasing worldwide and expected to intensify with climate change. They disproportionately affect food insecure, poor people – over 75 percent of whom derive their livelihoods from agriculture. Agricultural livelihoods can only be protected from multiple hazards if adequate disaster risk reduction and management efforts are strengthened within and across sectors, anchored in the context-specific needs of local livelihoods systems. This series of three webinars on Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRR/M) in agriculture is organized to: 1. Discuss the new opportunities and pressing challenges in reducing and managing disaster risk in agriculture; 2. Learn and share experiences about disaster risk reduction and management good practices based on concrete examples from the field; discuss how to create evidence and conditions for upscaling of good practices; and 3. Exchange experiences and knowledge with partners around resilience to natural hazards and climate-related disasters. This webinar covered: • measuring the benefits of farm-level disaster risk reduction practices in agriculture – approaches, methods and findings from FAO’s preliminary study; • a case study from Uganda on how the agricultural practices for disaster risk reduction were implemented and monitored at farm level; and • perspective from the Philippines on the challenges and opportunities to upscale the agriculture good practices for disaster risk reduction at national level.
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Ähnlich wie DRM Webinar III: Benefits of farm-level disaster risk reduction practices in agriculture
Ähnlich wie DRM Webinar III: Benefits of farm-level disaster risk reduction practices in agriculture (20)
Mehr von FAO
Mehr von FAO (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
DRM Webinar III: Benefits of farm-level disaster risk reduction practices in agriculture
- 1. KORE - Knowledge Sharing Platform on Resilience KORE@fao.org
- 2. INFORMED INFORMATION FOR NUTRITION FOOD SECURITY AND RESILIENCE FOR DECISION MAKING
- 4. BENEFITS OF FARM-LEVEL RISK REDUCTION PRACTICES IN AGRICULTURE KORE Webinar #12 Thursday 20 July 2017 10.30-12.00 CEST (UTC+2) Moderator Niccolò Lombardi Speakers Emmanuel Zziwa and Christopher Vicuña Morales
- 5. OUTLINE Gaps The unsystematic M&E of DRR good practices results in fragmented showcasing of their performance. Goals Create coherent and comparable evidence on how much damage and losses can be avoided through the implementation of DRR practices for agriculture at local level Adopt a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods to identify the practices that have the highest potential for replication and upscaling Support policy-makers in directing adequate investments towards the most successful DRR good practices. Measuring the benefits of DRR good practices
- 6. OUTLINE Pilot phase: Preliminary results from 5 countries: Bolivia, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Philippines, Uganda 25 DRR practices analysed in crops, livestock, fisheries, aquaculture sectors Hazards: dry spell, flood, tropical storms, frost, snow, pests, diseases Publication: Benefits of farm level disaster risk reduction practices in agriculture Expanded phase The study will include additional countries and hazards Phased approach
- 8. Methodology 4 Assessment Criteria 1. Agro-ecological suitability 2. Socio-economic feasibility 3. Increased hazard-specific resilience 4. Environmental co-benefits
- 9. OUTLINE On average, the net economic benefits from farm level DRR good practices are about 2.5 times higher than the usual practices adopted by farmers, livestock raisers, and fishers. All of the field level practices analyzed are also no-regret measures as they help increase agricultural productivity regardless of the occurrence of hazards. Most of the field level DRR good practices bring environmental co-benefits Not all practices suitable to promoting DRR objectives have the potential for wider upscaling. The upscaling potential has to be assessed in a separate step. In order to replicate and scale up the DRR good practices, some key challenges and concerns need to be addressed Key findings from pilot study
- 10. Continuous training Access to markets Supply Chain Constraints Access to credit Market regulations Analysis of market entry options, innovative business models and value chains Challenges to upscaling DRR Good Practices
- 11. THANK YOU
- 12. BENEFITS OF FARM-LEVEL RISK REDUCTION PRACTICES IN AGRICULTURE Monitoring and Evaluation and Cost Benefit Analysis of DRR good practices in Uganda
- 13. Increase in the number of disasters caused by natural hazards (from one drought in 8 – 12 years to one in every 3 – 5 years). Country wide annual temperatures have risen by 1.30C since 1960 Future projections indicate that rainfall will decrease by 132.9 – 188.2 mm annually and temperatures will rise by 1.6 to 5.3oC by 2080 across agro- ecological zones On average, 800,000 Ha of crops are destroyed by climate-related events every year (drought and floods) Climate Change in Uganda
- 14. Uganda will lose US$ 140 - 260 billion between 2010 and 2050, in agriculture and water sectors if no actions are taken to adapt to climate change Limited efforts in collecting data and analyzing the impact of climate hazards and disasters on agriculture production – Delineating the damages and losses • Lack of standard procedures and methodologies • Lack of capacity Many adaptation projects are implemented with only qualitative assessment of impacts conducted. The damages and losses avoided through DRR technology promotion at local level are always not quantified
- 15. Project Area There is need to harmonize M&E for DRR technologies to better document and capitalize the knowledge and lessons learned On going GCCA Project was targeted in the central cattle corridor Eight DRR good practices were monitored and evaluated Measuring DRR in Agriculture under GCCA Project in Uganda
- 16. Qualitative assessment: Determine the household/ farm profile of the beneficiaries (BF). Also non beneficiary farmers in the community were interviewed. For BF monitoring and evaluation of the GPO were conducted Cost-benefit analysis: Assess the effectiveness and feasibility of the GPO through the monetary valuation of costs and benefits and Net Present Value Methodology
- 17. Improved Practices Local Practices Introduced Options Practices Monitored
- 18. 33 34 27 32 20 35 67 66 73 68 80 65 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Started using after training/sensitization in FFS Percentage of Farmers using adaptation options Farmers perception on benefits of using adaptation options • Increase in number of farmers practicing adaptation options • Benefits of adaptation reported by 91% of farmers Qualitative Assessments
- 19. Added benefits • Not analysed as all monitored farms were affected by dry spell Avoided losses • Cumulative net benefit of improved varieties is more than two times higher than the local variety when dry spell occurs Co-benefits • Water efficient maize reduces water use • High stover yield for livestock feeding Cumulative Net Benefits and Benefit Cost Ratios of Improved Maize Varieties Maize Production
- 20. Added benefits • Not analysed as all monitored farms were affected by dry spell and disease Avoided losses • Due to reduced death rate and higher milk yield, the good practice brings 147% higher benefits than the previous practice in dry spell conditions Co-benefits • Reduced pressure on land and increased restoration of degraded grazing lands • Manure collection and utilization (biogas and fertilizers for soil improvement) Zero Grazing + Improved breeds + drought tolerant fodder Cattle Production
- 21. Added benefits • Starting mushroom production brings additional benefits even when no hazards occur Avoided losses • In farms affected by dry spells, each household would still earn an additional $1,312 per year, as compared to the opportunity cost of labour Co-benefits • Mushrooms cultivation requires a limited amount of water and land compared crops Cumulative Net Benefits and Benefit Cost Ratios of Good Practice Mushroom Production
- 22. BENEFITS OF FARM-LEVEL RISK REDUCTION PRACTICES IN AGRICULTURE Philippine context
- 23. Natural hazard and climate risks • monsoons, thunderstorms, inter-tropical convergence zone (ITCZ) and typhoons • high exposure to El Niño-related droughts, super typhoons, projected rainfall change, and projected temperature increase • active, inactive and potentially active volcanoes, making earthquakes and volcanic eruptions inevitable Human-induced disasters. These hazards become disasters if vulnerable people and resources are affected. These calamities cause considerable losses to lives and damages to properties and infrastructures. They also put at risk the country’s food security if the mechanisms and structures for mitigation, preparedness, response, and rehabilitation are not institutionalized. Philippine context
- 24. Vision To have disaster resilient farming and fishing communities. Goal DRRM is fully mainstreamed into the agriculture and fisheries sector in 2030. Outcome DRRM mainstreamed into the development planning and actions in the agriculture and fisheries sector by 2025. Objective To reduce existing and prevent future risks to disasters and to protect and enhance resilience of the agriculture and fisheries sector to natural hazards and disasters. DRR Strategic Framework
- 25. 1. Promotion on the use of Green Super Rice 2. Use of drones in DRRM and agri-monitoring 3. Development of dynamic cropping calendar 4. Development of integrated decision support system for “Enhanced Production and Risk Management in Agriculture” (EPRiMA) Relevant Programs: DA’s work in partnership with FAO
- 26. Cost Benefit Analysis of the GSR cultivation vs. local practice • Rice production loss is reduced by 53% during dry season (dry spell) and by 33% during wet season (flood and pests) • The BCR ranges between 3.1 and 3.5 for GSR and 2.8 for the local practice “I want to continue planting GSR because it has good taste, good grain quality, high yield and high resistance to hazards. It is more marketable.” – farmer / adapter from CARAGA Source: teca.fao.org After testing for three seasons, DA is now promoting the use of GSR and is actually included in its regular program under the High Quality Seeds (HQS) for adverse condition. This would ensure widespread and institutionalization of hazard-proof rice lines (unregistered) and varieties Green Super Rice (GSR) Multi-stress tolerant (drought, flood-prone area, saline condition or salt-water intrusion) inbred, non-GMO rice lines GSR lines are also tolerant to abiotic stresses, insect and pest diseases One of the GSR lines, the GSR8 was registered last February 2017 as the Rc480, is now available for commercial use
- 27. DA-FAO use of drones for DRRM operations and agri-monitoring After the ceremonial launching on the use of drones, DA Regional Field Offices started to include this in their programs.
- 28. Project outputs includes the development of the following: 1) dynamic cropping calendars; 2) agricultural drought monitoring system; 3) rapid production support and risk and damage assessment methodology; 4) acquisition and analysis protocols involving freely available high- resolution satellite imagery to support risk and damage assessment planning; 5) an online platform for decision support systems for DRR in agriculture EPRiMA
- 29. Cross-seasonal agronomic evaluation Proper Evaluation of the performance of Good Practice Technologies such as Stress-tolerant Rice Lines or Varieties across different regions and agro- ecosystems take time (ideally a minimum of 4 seasons to facilitate season- to-season [e.g. dry season year 1 versus dry season year 2] comparisons). However, projects that assist in introducing such technologies oftentimes are not as long, or field mobilization takes a lot of time that a two year project can only realistically facilitate 3 seasons of testing at best. It is therefore important that mechanisms would be in place to ensure that government institutions will be able to continue testing and evaluating these technologies beyond the project cycle, especially if a follow-up project is/was not possible. The case of Green Super Rice (GSR) Challenges For Up-scaling Good Practices and Technologies for DRR Agriculture
- 30. Community and farmers’ attitudes – Even if DA and development partners such as FAO are ready to provide the complete technology promotion package— from trainings, to seeds and other inputs—for most farming communities, “seeing is believing,” and it is thus important to make sure that technology promotions/transfer activities are carried out in a way that respects local agricultural extension contexts. Without clear understanding by farmers and their communities of the benefits from the GP Technology, Up-scaling will be not effective, and/or sustainable. Challenges For Up-scaling Good Practices and Technologies for DRR Agriculture
- 31. Weak local agricultural extension support in some communities Equally important to the success of UP-scaling good practices is strong, genuine and sustained support from local government units and agricultural extension. In the case of DA, its officials end at the regional level and agricultural extension officers are being managed by the local chief executive (Mayor). It is thus important also to ensure that local agricultural extension support is present as these local experts play a key role in providing day-to- day farming advice. They also serve as the link to DA that could allow proper feedback and learning. s Challenges For Up-scaling Good Practices and Technologies for DRR Agriculture
- 32. Sustainability in terms of looking at GP technologies as part of a bigger agricultural production system and value- chain Mechanisms should be in place to ensure market access and demand of these new stress-tolerant rice lines and varieties. Continued seed production support should also be provided to guarantee continued availability of quality planting materials. Moreover, given possible inter-generational degradation of performance characteristics, continues research and testing should be carried to identify the next generation of stress- tolerant rice lines and varieties. Challenges For Up-scaling Good Practices and Technologies for DRR Agriculture
- 33. OUTLINE Example of good practice upscaling simulation: Multi-stress tolerant “Green Super Rice” in the Philippines Assumption: GSR is adopted in 50% of the total rice land in Bicol region Result: the amount of potentially avoided losses through GSR upscaling ranges between USD 33 and USD 129 million per season, on average.
- 34. THANK YOU
- 35. Comments ? Questions? Please write them in the chat box BENEFITS OF FARM-LEVEL RISK REDUCTION PRACTICES IN AGRICULTURE
- 36. THANK YOU! Give us your feedback Click on the link in the chat box KORE - Knowledge Sharing Platform on Resilience KORE@fao.org
Hinweis der Redaktion
- Four main criteria/levels of analysis will be used to measure the performance of the good practices: (i) agro-ecological suitability; (ii) socio-economic feasibility; (iii) increased resilience of livelihoods to disasters and; (iv) impacts on greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions. The study will focus on (iii) and (iv). (i) and (ii) are supposed to be validated prior to the implementation of the good practice and will therefore just be confirmed through the study. => these are calculated through field implementation of both good practice plot and control plot (=local practice plot), to compare the performance of the good practice to local/previous practices. These plot are subject to “normal” conditions (no hazard) and under acute hazard conditions. During the pilot phase (year 1), the research will focus on (i) a limited number of selected technology options in the crop, fisheries, forestry and livestock subsectors; (ii) specific hazards (landslides, droughts, floods and typhoons); and (iii) 10 countries (Laos, Cambodia, Philippines, Bolivia, Uganda and 5 additional countries to be defined). During the expanded phase (years 2 and 3), the research will then be extended to (i) a wider number of technology options; (ii) additional natural hazards; and (iii) other countries (30 countries in total).
- 7
- Data collection: A group of farmers and agricultural extension staff collected key field data on the performance of good practices. In addition, quantitative and qualitative interviews were conducted with agricultural household members. In order to apply the methodology, it was necessary to define a “good practice plot” and a “control plot”. Technical experts with good knowledge of the practices and agro-ecological zones supported the data collection process. Field-level appraisal: A cost-benefit analysis was undertaken in order to measure the performance, compared with usual practices, under hazard and non-hazard conditions, when applicable. The appraisal period for all cost-benefit analyses was 11 years, with a 10 percent discount rate. Qualitative evaluations were also carried out based on the interviews. Upscaling analysis: Customized models were used to simulate the potential impacts of scaling up the good practices. These simulations were based on the results obtained from field level appraisals and from considering context specific potential barriers (e.g. agro-ecological, socio-economic and cultural). Eventually, the results were consolidated into an integrated assessment of economic, social and environmental impacts of each DRR good practice. The results were analysed according to four main criteria: 1. agro-ecological suitability: the good practice is suitable under existing and near future climatic, edaphic and topographic conditions and/or the same agro-ecological zones 2. socio-economic feasibility: the good practice is economically and socially beneficial and contributes to improved livelihoods, even in the absence of hazards 3. increased hazard-specific resilience: the good practice increases the resilience of agricultural livelihoods against the impacts of hazards 4. environmental co-benefits: the good practice brings environmental co-benefits and contributes to sustainable agricultural development We used two indicators to communicate the result of the cost-benefit analyses. First, the percentage difference between the net present value of benefits of the good practice and the usual practice. Second, the benefit cost ratio, which measures the extent to which benefit outweighs the cost. For example, if the benefit cost ratio is 3, it means 3 dollars of benefit were obtained for every 1 dollar invested.
- Preliminary study results indicate that the combined application of several mutually reinforcing good practice technologies in the crop sector leads to economic benefits that are more than four times higher with respect to usual practices in hazard prone areas. These include the combination of agronomic practices for soil and water management, infrastructure improvements and equipment for DRR and stress-tolerant crop varieties
- Added benefits are additional economic benefits brought by the DRR/CCA good practice when no hazards occur Avoided losses are the economic losses avoided when hazards occur, thanks to the implementation of the good practice Co-benefits are benefits that are not the main goal of the implemented practice, but still they are enjoyed as result of its implementation Benefit Cost Ratio: measuring the extent to which benefits outweigh costs (i.e. how many dollars the farmer would earn after investing 1 dollar) Cumulative net benefits: It is the total amount of net economic benefits that the farmer would earn over 11 years or seasons (depending on the practice)
- Opportunity cost of labour is the income foregone by not employing the labour used for mushroom production elsewhere.
- As explained by the Moderator, Mr. Christopher Morales from the Department of Agriculture in the Philippines sent us his slides with his sincere apologies for not being able to deliver the presentation himself today.
- As many of us know, the Philippines has been labeled as one of the most disaster-prone countries in the world because of its geographic location, geologic profile, and physical characteristics.
- The Philippines Government is taking active measures and has designed its DRR Strategic Framework to enhance the resilience of farming and fishing communities to disasters. The goal is to fully mainstream disaster risk reduction and management into the agricultural and fisheries sectors by 2030.
- To achieve this goal, the Philippines Department of Agriculture is working in close partnership with FAO. Here we see some examples of the activities.
- Let’s see about the Green Super Rice. Green Super Rice is a rice variety that is tolerant to many types of stress, such as drought, flood, salt water intrusion, diseases and insects. The Philippines introduced varies Green Super Rice lines (1, 5a, 8, 11, 12a) and monitored their performance in comparison to the local rice varieties in Bicol and Caraga Regions during three consecutive seasons (the 2015 dry and wet seasons, and the 2016 dry season). The result was that, when farms were affected by hazards (mainly flood and pests), rice production losses were reduced by 53% in the dry season and by 33% percent during the wet season. The quote from the farmer that he wants to continue planting Green Super Rice because it has good taste, good quality, high yield and tolerance is an encouraging testimony of its benefit. The Philippines Government, after testing the GSR lines for three seasons, is now promoting the use of GSR and it is included in the Government’s regular program.
- Another key project of the Department of Agriculture and FAO is the use of drones for disaster risk reduction and management operations and agri-monitoring. Such new technologies can help monitor the performance of good practices such as the Green Super Rice in a more timely and accurate way and this can be key to guiding the upscaling of the good practices.
- Another ongoing project that can help improve the information for evidence-based decision-making in disaster risk reduction is EPRIMA, or Enhanced Production and Risk Management in Agriculture. The project is expected to increase resilience against multiple-threats to the agriculture sector by allowing key actors to make more effective and timely decisions through comprehensive and near-real time access to crop production, risk and damage assessment information and tools.
- From the example of Green Super Rice, we learned that in order to scale-up a good practice, we need to overcome some challenges. First, we need to do a proper evaluation of the performance, across different seasons, regions and agro-ecosystems. Ideally minimum 4 seasons to facilitate season-to-season comparison. However, oftentimes many projects do not last so long and field mobilization takes a lot of time. Therefore, it is important to have a mechanism in place for Government institutions to continue testing and evaluating the technologies beyond a project cycle.
- Second, technologies and practices need to respect local agricultural extension contexts. For most farmers, seeing is believing. Up-scaling will be effective and sustainable only when we have the clear understanding by farmers and their communities.
- Third, equally important is that the practice gets strong, genuine and sustained support from local government units and agricultural extension. In case of the Philippines Department of Agriculture, the officials at the regional end and extension officers are being managed by the local chief executive or the mayor who plays a key role in providing day to day farming advice. It is thus important to ensure that local agricultural extension support is present and serve as a link to the Central
- To be revised by Niccolo (The upscaling simulation assumes the adoption of GSR lines in 50 percent of the total rice land in Bicol region. Results show that GSR upscaling would bring an increase in the annual average net economic benefits from overall rice production in Bicol region in both the dry and rainy seasons. The largest difference between GSR upscaling and business as usual is observed when hazards are more frequent, suggesting that GSR lines are particularly effective under hazard conditions. In particular, GSR helps prevent a significant share of losses during the dry season, when farms are affected by dry spells. Overall, the amount of potentially avoided losses through GSR upscaling ranges between USD 33 and USD 129 million per season, on average.)