CCAFS | CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security•221 views
Reconciling Participation And Benefits Sharing 1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5. (ii) persistent droughts and or floods, intensification of rural poverty and working poverty amongst small holder farmers particular women farmers (IFAD, 2010);
11. Maintaining adequate levels of food is important for household security, and for health and education gains for production and productivity.
12. Continued food production both as a source of good food, economic security and growth depends significantly on adequate and consistent access to water.
13. Given the high participation of women in agriculture, small farm production and fish processing, the failure to address structural inequalities will likely result in it being that much harder for them to sustain a livelihood and for these activities to contribute to growth.
29. Copenhagen asks for balance between A and M but funds are currently allocated: mitigation (86%); 8% (adaptation); 63% of EU Fast Track funds for mitigation
30. Economies of scale make a lot of mitigation opportunities inapplicable for many (Lesotho - 1% forest).
31. Quality of resources: limited accountability or responsibility for social co-benefits.
55. Securing LCD and green economy benefits from the recent pledge by the Government of India for another $500 million in aid for a host of projects in Least Developed Countries (LDCs)
56.
57.
58.
Hinweis der Redaktion
If I were asked to summarize these issues I would say it is about reasonableness and equity. What is reasonable enough scale of response to avoid the worse and ensuring equity in addressing the impacts
1) The richer and developed countries have undoubtedly contributed to the levels and scale of GHG emissions. Not only directly but through the terms of trade. Both travel and global business contribute.
1) The richer and developed countries have undoubtedly contributed to the levels and scale of GHG emissions. Not only directly but through the terms of trade. Both travel and global business contribute.
Policy Guidance Documents:National Adaptation Plans of Action (NAPA) guidelinesUNFCCC negotiated textGovernance : Operational frameworks for Climate finance Funds and Instruments: Adaptation Fund, SCCF, LDCF, CDM, REDD Application:NAPAs, Adaptation Fund Projects, CDM, REDD+Implementation records of World Bank and GE
Policy Guidance Documents:National Adaptation Plans of Action (NAPA) guidelinesUNFCCC negotiated textGovernance : Operational frameworks for Climate finance Funds and Instruments: Adaptation Fund, SCCF, LDCF, CDM, REDD Application:NAPAs, Adaptation Fund Projects, CDM, REDD+Implementation records of World Bank and GE
Important distinctions because the global public response is based on accountability, responsibility, reporting etc in a response to a problem caused and defined by none of these concepts in reality.Also the need to distinguish between emissions trading and emissions reduction.Growing concern over the lack of coherence between CC and Biodiv and CC and the Montreal Protocol – make for some real concerns…..
Important for shaping adaptation practice and how much is available for adaptation and also in terms of what is “adequate adaptation”.
While NAPA guidelines state that “particular attention should be given to including the voices of the poor (women and men) during stakeholder consultations” and “should promote consideration of broader social and environmental issues”, our review of the 32 National Adaptation Plans of Action (NAPAs) available in English suggests that the conceptual and operational difficulties highlighted earlier in this section are also reflected at the national level. ActionAid (2009), too, concludes that few NAPAs have been able to effectively link poverty and inequality to vulnerability to climate change. Of the 32 NAPAS reviewed in assessing the scale and scope of participation, only two mentioned any significant participation by other ministries (see Annex 1).
While NAPA guidelines state that “particular attention should be given to including the voices of the poor (women and men) during stakeholder consultations” and “should promote consideration of broader social and environmental issues”, our review of the 32 National Adaptation Plans of Action (NAPAs) available in English suggests that the conceptual and operational difficulties highlighted earlier in this section are also reflected at the national level. ActionAid (2009), too, concludes that few NAPAs have been able to effectively link poverty and inequality to vulnerability to climate change. Of the 32 NAPAS reviewed in assessing the scale and scope of participation, only two mentioned any significant participation by other ministries (see Annex 1).
A de-link between benefit-sharing and risk-sharing potentially undermines the sustainability of benefits – either due to them being impacted upon or wiped away by other shocks, negated by other realities (i.e. earnings by women that they are unable to spend due to inability to open bank accounts for example) or which are superficial in nature (these are largely communal or group-owned and no real impact/change occurs in assets, livelihood opportunities and development status).
A de-link between benefit-sharing and risk-sharing potentially undermines the sustainability of benefits – either due to them being impacted upon or wiped away by other shocks, negated by other realities (i.e. earnings by women that they are unable to spend due to inability to open bank accounts for example) or which are superficial in nature (these are largely communal or group-owned and no real impact/change occurs in assets, livelihood opportunities and development status).
Even the tension between adaptation and mitigation is a symptom of the tension between the macro and the micro.
SLF approaches which include income, variability, policy and systemsSocial Responsibility risk reduction model – looks at immediate and delayed consequences of shocks and considers conditional and situational factors of vulnerabilityAnd the SRM – prevention, mitigation and coping with stress, shocks and impacts
A de-link between benefit-sharing and risk-sharing potentially undermines the sustainability of benefits – either due to them being impacted upon or wiped away by other shocks, negated by other realities (i.e. earnings by women that they are unable to spend due to inability to open bank accounts for example) or which are superficial in nature (these are largely communal or group-owned and no real impact/change occurs in assets, livelihood opportunities and development status).
Even the tension between adaptation and mitigation is a symptom of the tension between the macro and the micro.
Even the tension between adaptation and mitigation is a symptom of the tension between the macro and the micro.
Even the tension between adaptation and mitigation is a symptom of the tension between the macro and the micro.
Even the tension between adaptation and mitigation is a symptom of the tension between the macro and the micro.
Even the tension between adaptation and mitigation is a symptom of the tension between the macro and the micro.
Even the tension between adaptation and mitigation is a symptom of the tension between the macro and the micro. You need both strategic and practical responses and both top-down and bottom-up. Africa needs to make the argument that these types of actions and processes fit within the scope of “adequate” or “appropriate” adaptation. Needs to become policy and not be one-off events.
Even the tension between adaptation and mitigation is a symptom of the tension between the macro and the micro.