Implications
A United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change decision on agriculture would help to raise the profile of this important sector in the climate change negotiations, while also helping to address knowledge gaps for policy makers, researchers and primary producers. In addition, this could lead to improved access finance for climate-related activities, with the aim of ensuring that future food production is not threatened.
Introduction
By 2050, the global population is projected to grow to nine billion people (UN, 2011). Recent decades have seen global food production increasing in line with and sometimes ahead of demand (Vermeulen et al., Reference Vermeulen, Aggarwal, Ainslie, Angelone, Campbell, Challinor, Hansen, Ingram, Jarvis, Kristjanson, Lau, Nelson, Thornton and Wollenberg2012). However, FAO projects that demand for food production will increase by 60% by 2050, and will double in many low-income countries (FAO, 2012).
To keep pace with this increase in demand, rates of increase in cereal production, the most important food source, may need to at least equal the impressive rates achieved in past decades (Tester and Langridge, Reference Tester and Langridge2010). Although the projected growth rates in cereal production are expected to be smaller than those of the past, absolute production of cereals is expected to rise significantly (FAO, 2012). In addition, demand for livestock products is predicted to double over this time period. The required increase in agricultural production is expected to be predominantly achieved in countries with relatively low agricultural production levels at present (Van Beek et al., Reference Van Beek, Meerburg, Schils, Verhagen and Kuikman2010; FAO, 2012).
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the leading international body for the assessment of climate change. The IPCC third assessment report (IPCC, 2001) used the following definitions of climate change mitigation and adaptation:
Mitigation
An anthropogenic intervention to reduce the sources or enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases (GHGs).
Adaptation
Adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities.
The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) was published in 2007, and it estimated that agriculture directly accounts for 10% to 12% of global GHG emissions in carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalents and indirectly accounts for an additional 17% of emissions when land use change and conversion for crops and pasture are included in the calculations (IPCC, 2007). The FAO, calculated livestock to be responsible for 18% of global GHG emissions when indirect land use emissions were included (FAO, 2006). In the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, agriculture and land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) have been integrated into the single volume agriculture, forestry and other land use. This reflects the increased confidence in the science which supports the estimation of GHG emissions and removals from land use, including activities related to food production (IPPC, 2006). However, although the 2006 IPCC Guidelines have been accepted in terms of approved methodologies for the estimation of GHG emissions and removals, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) currently does not accept the integration of these two closely related sectors for reporting purposes. The fifth assessment report (AR5), which will provide updated statistics on agricultural emissions, will be finalized in 2014.
To meet the increased world food demand for a projected nine billion people by 2050, agriculture will need to significantly increase production, while at the same time working to alleviate the challenges of climate change and other environmental concerns (Tilman et al., Reference Tilman, Balzerb, Hill and Beforta2011).
Impact of climate change on agriculture
Climate has obvious and direct effects on agricultural production. Agriculture, relying on weather patterns, is one of the most climate-sensitive economic sectors. The IPCC AR4 highlighted changing temperatures with a general pattern of expected yield increases at higher latitudes where low temperatures are a limiting factor on growth, whereas at lower latitudes, increases in temperature alone are expected to reduce yields from grain crops. In addition, The World Bank further identified a number of reports that point to a substantially increased risk of drought (decreasing rainfall) affecting large parts of the world, which could more than double the global cropland area affected by water scarcity by 2100 (World Bank, 2012).
Some 40% of the world's land area is located in environments which are prone to water scarcity (Kabat and Van Schaik, Reference Kabat and Van Schaik2003), most of them in developing countries. The regions expected to experience increasing drought severity and extent over the medium to long term are in Southern Africa, the United States, Southern Europe, Brazil and Southeast Asia (Dai, 2013). The related issues of increasing temperatures (with higher evaporation) in combination with decreasing rainfall in already drought prone areas, particularly those suggested areas would put at risk the capacity of many societies to feed their growing populations. As traditional weather patterns are changing and the number of reported climate-related disasters is rising rapidly (IPCC, 2007), it is likely that climate change will reinforce the trend towards more frequent, more severe and more costly climatic disasters (IPCC, 2007; World Bank, 2012). For some geographical locations the impacts of climate change may have a positive affect on food production.
Adaptation of agriculture to climate change can be addressed through some of the following measures: changes in planting and harvesting date (IPCC, 2007), as well as changes in cultivar type (e.g. drought/ heat tolerance/rates of maturation). The World Bank reported that adaptation could significantly reduce losses for spring wheat, maize and soybeans. This would suggest that adaptation could play a major role in ensuring food security in a changing climate, although realization of this potential will likely require substantial investment.
Impact of agriculture on climate change
Agricultural activity emits greenhouse gases (GHG) through use of fossil fuel-based inputs and equipment, livestock production, soil erosion and land conversion and deforestation (IPCC, 2007). Agriculture releases significant amounts of CO2, methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) to the atmosphere (IPCC, 2001). Carbon dioxide is released largely from microbial decay or burning of plant litter and soil organic matter (Janzen, Reference Janzen2004; Smith, Reference Smith2004). Methane is produced when organic materials decompose in oxygen-deprived conditions, notably from fermentative digestion by ruminant livestock, stored manures and rice grown under flooded conditions (Mosier et al., Reference Mosier, Duxbury, Freney, Heinemeyer, Minami and Johnson1998). Nitrous oxide is generated by the microbial transformation of nitrogen in soils and manures, and is often enhanced where available nitrogen (N) exceeds plant requirements, especially under wet conditions (Smith and Conen, Reference Smith and Conen2004; Oenema et al., Reference Oenema, Wrage, Velthof, van Groenigen, Dolfing and Kuikman2005). Of global anthropogenic emissions in 2005, agriculture accounts for about 60% of N2O and about 50% of CH4. Globally, agricultural CH4 and N2O emissions have increased by nearly 17% from 1990 to 2005, an average annual emission increase of about 60 MtCO2-eq/year (IPCC, 2007). Livestock production systems in particular contribute a large proportion of agricultural GHG emissions. (FAO, 2006; O'Mara, Reference O'Mara2011). Agricultural GHG emissions are projected to increase significantly by 2050 to meet the increased demand for food (IPCC, 2007).
The IPCC in their 4th assessment report (AR4) highlighted a variety of options to mitigate GHG emissions from agriculture. They found that agricultural GHG mitigation options were cost competitive with non-agricultural options (e.g. energy, transportation, forestry) in achieving long-term climate objectives (IPCC, 2007). The most prominent of these options are:
1. crop and grazing land management to improve agronomic practices related to nutrient use, crop residue management and tillage practices;
2. restoration of organic soils that are drained for crop production and
3. restoration of degraded lands.
In addition, significant mitigation is possible with improved water and rice management; set-asides, land use change (e.g. conversion of cropland to grassland) and agro-forestry; as well as improved livestock and manure management. Many mitigation opportunities, which use current technologies and practices, can be implemented immediately. Nevertheless, technological development will be a key driver ensuring the efficacy of additional mitigation measures in the future.
Of the potential technical mitigation possible, the general consensus in AR4 was that soil carbon sequestration (i.e. enhanced carbon sinks) could contribute ∼89%; with mitigation of CH4 emissions and N2O emissions from soils accounting for 9% and 2%, respectively (IPCC, 2007). Naturally there are uncertainties inherent in these mitigation potentials such as:
1. future levels of adoption of mitigation measures;
2. effectiveness of adopted measures in enhancing carbon sinks or reducing N2O and CH4 emissions; and
3. persistence of mitigation, as influenced by future climatic trends, economic conditions and social behaviour.
Owing to these uncertainties, there is no universally applicable list of mitigation practices and an effective practice in reducing emissions in one region may be less effective or even counterproductive elsewhere. Therefore, practices need to be evaluated for individual agricultural systems based on climate, social setting and historical patterns of land use and management. There are also interactions between mitigation and adaptation in the agricultural sector, which may occur simultaneously, but differ in their spatial, temporal and geographic characteristics. However, despite significant technical potential for mitigation in agriculture, there is evidence that little progress has been made in the implementation of mitigation measures at the global scale (IPCC, 2007). Barriers to implementation are not likely to be overcome without policy/economic incentives and other programmes, such as those promoting global sharing of innovative technologies.
Accordingly, the climate change discussion has considered agricultural production as both a contributor to climate change and, through adjustment in practices, a potential mitigation option (Khan et al., Reference Khan, Khan, Hanjra and Mu2009). Measures to mitigate agricultural emissions and measures to adapt agricultural practices to climate change often have synergy with sustainable development policies, and many explicitly influence social, economic and environmental aspects of sustainability. Many options also have co-benefits (improved efficiency, reduced cost, environmental co-benefits) as well as trade-offs (e.g. increasing other forms of pollution), and balancing these effects will be necessary for successful implementation (IPCC, 2007).
UNFCCC
In 1992, countries joined as Parties to an international treaty, UNFCCC, to cooperatively consider what they could do to limit average global temperature increases and the resulting climate change, and to cope with whatever impacts were, by then, inevitable (UNFCCC, 1992). Currently, there are 195 Parties to the Convention.
The Conference of Parties (COP) is the supreme decision-making body of the Convention. All states that are parties to the Convention are represented at the COP, at which they review the implementation of the convention and any other legal instrument that the COP adopts and take decisions necessary to promote the effective implementation of the Convention, including institutional and administrative arrangements. The Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) is one of two permanent subsidiary bodies of the UNFCCC. The task of the SBSTA is to provide the COP with advice on scientific, technological and methodological matters.
The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which commits its Parties by setting internationally binding emission reduction targets. The Kyoto Protocol was adopted in Kyoto, Japan, on 11 December 1997 (UNFCCC, 1997) and entered into force on 16 February 2005. The detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol were adopted at COP 7 in Marrakesh, Morocco, in 2001, and are referred to as the ‘Marrakesh Accords’. Its first commitment period started in 2008 and ended in 2012.
The Copenhagen accord to limit future global temperature rises to 2°C above pre industrial levels was achieved at the 15th COP in 2009 (UNFCCC, 2009). Despite the agreed 2°C target, greenhouse gas emissions are still rising (UNEP, 2011) and recent reports suggest that global temperatures will rise by 4°C by the end of the century, unless there are significant policy changes (World Bank, 2012). As a consequence, the 17th COP established the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP), which commits parties to reach a legal framework for reducing global emissions by 2015 (UNFCCC, 2011a). The ad hoc Working Group on ADP is working to develop a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention applicable to all Parties. The ADP is to complete its work as early as possible but no later than 2015 in order to adopt this protocol, legal instrument or agreed outcome with legal force at the twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties and for it to come into effect and be implemented from 2020. In the meantime, at COP 18 in Doha, a second commitment period for the Kyoto protocol was agreed to extend it to 2020 (UNFCCC, 2012).
History of agriculture in the UNFCCC
A prominent reference to agriculture can be found in the UNFCCC convention (UNFCCC, 1992). Article 2 of the convention states that:
The ultimate objective of this Convention and any related legal instruments that the Conference of the Parties may adopt is to achieve, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention, stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Such a level should be achieved within a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.
The focus of the discussions in the UNFCCC have predominantly been on energy and forestry-related issues, including deforestation, so that understanding of agriculture-related matters is less well developed. In recent years, there has been an increasing focus on agriculture within the UNFCCC. In 2006, an in-session mitigation workshop on agriculture, forestry and rural development was held at the 24th SBSTA session (UNFCCC, 2006). In 2008, the UNFCCC Secretariat, at the request of a number of Parties prepared a technical paper on the ‘Challenges and Opportunities for Mitigation in the Agricultural Sector’ (UNFCCC, 2008). An in-session workshop was held in April 2009 to invite views from Parties on this issue (UNFCCC, 2009). Later that year, during COP 15 in Copenhagen, a draft agriculture decision text, which would have initiated a work programme on agriculture under SBSTA was prepared by negotiators. The failure to achieve a comprehensive international agreement on climate change at this COP meant no decision on agriculture was reached. Negotiations on agriculture continued COP 16 in Cancun and at COP 17 in Durban; the conference reached a decision to request:
the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice to consider issues related to agriculture at its thirty-sixth session, with the aim of exchanging views and the Conference of the Parties adopting a decision on this matter at its eighteenth session
This was the first time that the UNFCCC adopted a decision on agriculture and established an agenda item under the SBSTA.
Current status of the agricultural discussions within SBSTA
In March 2012, agriculture position papers representing over 100 parties were submitted to SBSTA (UNFCCC, 2012) as mandated by the COP 17 decision on agriculture (UNFCCC, 2011b). The submissions highlighted the following:
1. Discussion should be guided by the principles of the Convention and in accordance with the SBSTA mandate. Many of the submissions support a comprehensive approach to adaptation and mitigation, although priorities vary between Parties. Parties also emphasized and stressed the need to focus on synergies and trade-offs between adaptation and mitigation.
2. Only one Party opposes mitigation completely and wants to see only adaptation in the further work under existing adaptation institutions.
3. For developing countries, adaptation, food security and development are priorities, and they clearly state that they do not wish to take mitigation commitments in this sector. However they recognize the need to increase productivity and efficiency of agriculture which contributes to mitigation as a co-benefit (some mentioning reducing emissions intensity so at least emissions would not grow with growing production).
4. Parties are divided between establishing a separate work programme on agriculture or using existing bodies inside the UNFCCC (e.g. the Nairobi work programme).
Two weeks of intensive discussion were held at the SBSTA in Bonn during May 2012, which were constructive and helped to advance Parties understanding of the issue. At COP18 in Doha (2012), there was again a lot of interest in this agenda item, reflected by a large attendance at formal and informal meetings. Discussions, while slow, again made some progress and were a step forward from the discussions at Bonn. The Agriculture discussions will continue at SBSTA in Bonn in 2013, with the aim of reaching an overall consensus for a decision on agriculture at COP 19 in Warsaw.
Parties agree that it is important to address agriculture in any future climate change regime; nevertheless, even the basic objectives of agriculture as a negotiating issue remain contentious. However, many Parties have expressed willingness for a positive outcome on agriculture, building on areas in the negotiations where consensus could easily reached, such as:
1. The special nature of agriculture, and its relationship with food security
2. The importance of adaptation for all countries, particularly developing countries
3. Mitigation and adaptation are linked in the agricultural sector
4. The need to promote research, technology development and knowledge transfer within the sector
It remains to be decided how best to include agriculture in the international climate regime. In the meantime, agriculture continues to be indirectly addressed in other UNFCCC discussions such as the Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs), the National Adaptation Programmes of Actions (NAPAs), Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) and in LULUCF.
Challenges and opportunities for agriculture within the UNFCCC
The fact that agriculture is a unique sector, where mitigation and adaptation are intertwined, poses challenges to the UNFCCC framework that has traditionally addressed the two as separate issues. The relationship between agriculture and food security, a basic human need, further complicates the work focus in agriculture as some countries prioritize adaptation to ensure food supply in a changing climate. Therefore, mitigation in the agricultural sector may have to be looked at differently than other sectors because food supplies must increase to meet the needs of a growing global population. An increased recognition that mitigation can mean a reduction in emissions compared with business as usual, based on an assessment of circumstances, existing systems and technology availability, rather than an absolute reduction could be a useful step. Of particular importance in the agricultural sector is the critical link between adaptation and mitigation actions. Many mitigation actions, for example, improved protection and enhancement of soil organic matter, restoring degraded land, improving efficiency and productivity of agricultural systems in a sustainable manner also have the additional impact of being adaptation actions that can build resilience to climate change impacts.
Scientific knowledge and experience already exist and can be more widely adopted into agricultural practices. There is a need to further enhance cooperation between countries in sharing knowledge in order to learn from past and current experiences, further identify climate relevant technologies, practices and processes and enhance understanding of their deployment and effects. It is also necessary to enhance research and development cooperation, and to further catalyse relevant activities of international organizations and relevant stakeholders (FAO, Global Research Alliance, etc.).
Furthermore, the development of effective knowledge transfer systems and capacity building for new agricultural practices and technologies is crucial for farmers to mitigate and adapt to climate change. This adaptation and mitigation potential is particularly pronounced in countries and regions where agricultural productivity remains low; and the direct effects of climate change are expected to be especially harsh (Lybbert and Sumner, Reference Lybbert and Sumner2010). Creating the necessary agricultural technologies and harnessing them to enable developing countries to adapt their agricultural systems to changing climate will require innovations in policy and institutions as well.
In formulating recommendations, scientists, policy-makers and farmers alike must take advantage of institutional learning, including traditional and indigenous knowledge of coping mechanisms and adaptation strategies. Ideal strategies will include no regret, win-win solutions that have the immediate benefits of higher incomes, improved livelihoods, better food security and greater environmental health. Critical evaluations of these win-win situations have been largely neglected (Klein et al., Reference Klein, Huq, Denton, Downing, Richels, Robinson and Toth2007), as the adaptation and mitigation communities have tended to operate in isolation. Therefore, research is needed that explores and exploits these synergies, while also analysing the potential trade-offs between environmental and livelihood benefits (Stoorvogel et al., Reference Stoorvogel, Antle, Crissman and Bowen2004). The identification and promotion of best management options require an integrated, systems-level framework on agriculture and climate change (Jarvis et al., 2011).
REDD+ has emerged as one of the most advanced concepts in international climate change cooperation. Since the end of 2005, significant REDD+ progress is evident inside and outside the UNFCCC process. This collective progress has begun to align REDD+ needs identified by developing countries with support from developed countries. The UNFCCC process has been an instrumental forum for generating new organizations, technical advancements and increased global financing to stem deforestation. The UNFCCC REDD+ conversation has also inspired novelty, innovation and debate within civil society, non-profit and for-profit organizations and governments (TFG, 2011). It is envisaged that the UNFCCC process could provide similar benefits to agriculture.
The wide diversity of agricultural systems worldwide, as well as specific national and regional development priorities, objectives and circumstances mean that a one size fits all approach does not apply for agriculture in relation to climate change. The unprecedented speed and extremity of predicted changes will require tough decision-making, preparatory policies and enabling incentives – employed in an environment of uncertainty and trade-offs.
Conclusions
The UNFCCC acknowledged the importance of food production by explicitly mentioning it in its objective, nevertheless until recent years it has had a relatively low profile within the UNFCCC negotiations. The IPCC recognized that agriculture is an important sector in global climate change efforts as it is particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change and at the same time represents a significant part of the global emissions. It is necessary to increase agricultural production and its efficiency in the context of decreasing availability and declining quality of natural resources, often exacerbated by climate change (Beddington et al., Reference Beddington, Asaduzzaman, Clark, Fernandez, Guillou, Jahn, Erda, Mamo, Van Bo, Nobre, Scholes, Sharma and Wakhungu2012).
Agriculture will need to play a greater role than it has heretofore in reducing emissions in the future to help achieve the 2oC target while also adapting to climate change. The current agriculture discussions have highlighted the special nature of the sector and its relationship with food security. Although some issues remain contentious, most parties agree on the importance of addressing agriculture in any future climate agreement. The example of REDD+ has demonstrated the value of the UNFCCC process in facilitating improved understanding of a land-based activity. The current discussions on agriculture at the UNFCCC are therefore crucial to ensure that the climate change challenges and possible opportunities for agriculture are acknowledged and reflected in any proposed new comprehensive global agreement on climate change post-2020 to ensure that future food production is not threatened.
Acknowledgements
This paper was published as part of a supplement to animal, publication of which was supported by the Greenhouse Gases & Animal Agriculture Conference 2013. The papers included in this supplement were invited by the Guest Editors and have undergone the standard journal formal review process. They may be cited. The Guest Editors appointed to this supplement are R. J. Dewhurst, D. R. Chadwick, E. Charmley, N. M. Holden, D. A. Kenny, G. Lanigan, D. Moran, C. J. Newbold, P. O'Kiely, and T. Yan. The Guest Editors declare no conflict of interest.
