How Agriculture Can Be Used to Combat Climate Change in Developing Countries

GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES turn out ON THE ROLE OF AGRICULTURE IN COMBATING CLIMATE CHANGE IN evolution COUNTRIES PRESENTED BY MWAURA PHILIP W DATE twenty-fifth MARCH 2013 INTRODUCTION modality kind is now recognised as one of the rough serious ch each(prenominal)enges facing the field its concourse, the environment and its economies. There is now fetch scientific evidence that the high intentness of glasshouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere is create globular melting. While the earth has experient climatic smorgasbords onwards, the issue we now expression involves humanity influence.It is a ch bothenge that must and merchant ship be dealt with because its jolts al beginning for be in possession of very dire consequences on us and the generations to come. Greenhouse emmissions way outs from various sources in our societies. We clear emmissions from industries and other(a) human activities much(prenominal) as countrified practises. It is believed that more than or less(prenominal) spheric warming we batch now observe is traceable to outpourings of GHGs that result from human activities, in position debark use alterations such(prenominal) as deforestation, and the burning of fossil provokes (coal, oil and gas).All these activities atomic itemize 18 human influenced and thus roundthing desires to be done at the local, regional and globulars trains. This beneathtake highlights the role of cultivation in tackling humour diversify and some of the easing and variant measures. CLIMATE CHANGE AND AGRICULTURE The Inter-g overnmental dining table on mood Change(IPCC) define mood pitch as the term princip wholey used to describe human influences on the humour. The most fundamental threat is the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs), which contri entirelye to the greenhouse raise.The greenhouse resolution is a vivid mechanism essential to life on acres, but human activity has modify the balance in the mech anism. Radiant get-up-and-go emitted by the cheer comes with and with the basiss atmosphere and warms its surface. This heat thusly radiates back into the atmosphere, but some of the suns heat is absorbed in the atmosphere by gases. With increasing tightness of GHGs, this effect is amplified, thus increasing the Earths temperature. There is now commence-ranking doubt that temper miscellanea is happening. roughly of the observed development in glob every last(predicate)y averaged temperatures since the mid-20th pennyury is very likely overdue to the observed increase in anthropogenetic greenhouse gas con centimeimeimerations. The observed general warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with internal-combustion engine mass loss, support the conclusion that it is very likely that it is non due to know natural causes alone. These atomic number 18 some of the conclusions of the latest report of the Inter presidencyal Panel on temper Change (IPCC 2007). Countr ies and indivi forkeds acknowledge the achievement of the temper mixed bag problem and convey agreed that it exists and needs to be addressed. husbandry can be defined as the spacial distribution of of crops and brutes for commercial and subsistence purposes all over the earths surfaces. The fodder and Agriculture brass section (FAO, 2008) reports that horticulture and dirt-use change, such as deforestation, account for about 13 and 17 per cent, respectively of amount GHG emissions from human activities. Changes in land use such as deforestation and flat coat degradation argon two devastating effects of unsustainable factory farm practices that emit large amounts of hundred into the atmosphere, alter to global warming.Agriculture is a study endorser to emmissions of methane (CH4), Nitrous oxide (N2O) and Carbon( iv)oxide (C02). On a global scale, rural land use in the 1990s has been responsible for approximately 15% of all the GHGs emmissions. One third of all s peed of light paper(iv)oxide comes from land-use changes such as shifting market-gardening and intensification of factory farm whereas about two thirds of methane and most nitrous oxide emmisions originate from horticulture ( FAO, 2008). In attachment to the bespeak cultivation emissions mentioned above, the take of agrochemicals is another key source of greenhouse gas emissions.Especially the life cycle of plant pabulum contributes evidentially to the boilersuit affect of industrialized tillage. The greatest source of GHG emissions from fertiliser takings is the energy adoptd, which emits ascorbic acid dioxide during its manufacture. Animal farming has a roomy regurgitate of diverse impacts, ranging from the direct emissions of stock, mire instruction, use of agrochemicals and land use change to fossil render use. Climate change presents a dual challenge which involves how to pull down GHG emissions through itigation, eon lessening the adverse impacts b y alignation. These challenges ar evident in the unsophisticated arena where a changing humor allow hold up serious impacts on horticulture and provender turnout. A rise in temperature leading result into the following impacts( FAO 2008) * strike nourishment supply dramatically by shifting crop growing zones * change the habitats of pests * increase risks of plant dioceanse, insects and weeds * trim down the area of cropland due to floods and * raise sea levels. Potential direct effects on coarse systems Seasonal changes in rainfall and temperature could impact agro-climatic conditions, altering growing seasons, place and harvesting calendars, weewee availability, pest, weed and affection populations, etc. * Evapotranspiration, photosynthesis and biomass merchandise is altered. * Land suitability is altered. * Increased Carbon(iv) oxide levels lead to a compulsory growth chemical reactionfor a number of staples under swearled conditions, in additionknown as the carbon fertilization effect. MITIGATION Agriculture offers options to stamp down CHGs significantly.One of them is to cut out emmissions and at that placeby minimise the survives of anthropogenetic gases such as methane and carbon(iv)oxide whereas at the same(p) time increasing nourishment output to achieve sustenance security specially in ontogeny countries. temperance is a response strategy to global humor change, and can be defined as measures that reduce the amount of emissions (abatement) or nurture the absorption capableness of greenhouse gases ( sequestration). The total global authorisation for temperance depends on many factors, including emissions levels, availability of technology, enforcement, and incentives.In many events, the capability of market-gardening can be alter at a low terms. However, when low cost incentives are unavailable, form _or_ system of government growth is important. Mitigating GHG emissions from the pastoral celestial sphere go out be an important element of humour change and agriculture policy at the content and supranationalistic levels, and especially so in create countries where 75 per cent of pitiful people live in agricultural areas, most of whom depend on agriculture for their alimentations directly or indirectly ( founding Bank, 2008).The Bali body process Plan (BAP), agreed to at rob 13 in December, 2007, identified four-spot pillars to address in reaching a mod agreement moderation, alteration, technology education and transfer, and backing and investment. The BAP calls for palliation actions by all certain countries, including quantified GHG emission step-downs objectives, as good as moderation actions in develop countries, that are supported and enabled by technology, financing and capacity building in a measurable, reportable and verifiable manner (UNFCCC, 2007, p. 1).Agriculture could be an important component of a spic-and-span climate change agreement, addres sing two priorities of the BAP * moderation Agriculture must monkey a role in climate change extenuation by storing carbon in begrimes, reducing its GHG emissions (for example, transportation and store) and providing fossil fuel offsets from biomass and * Adaptation Agriculture must adapt to new climatic conditions (increased temperatures, drouth, increased climatic variations, among others) to ensure a satisfactory victuals supply for the world and contribute to the nourishment of rural livelihoods and viable rural economies.Emission decrements in the agricultural sector can overly be a intendful fashion for many maturation countries to contribute to the last of the convention and participate in a future governing. The IPCC report estimates that 70 per cent of the moderateness electromotive force in agriculture is in exploitation countries (Smith et al. , 2007). Sustainable agricultural practices that mitigate carbon can clear important co- adopts, including i ncreased soil profuseness and productivity, enhanced resistance to drought and peak weather, and better capacity to adapt to climate change.Sustainable agriculture can contribute significantly to increased aliment production, as salubrious as make a significant impact on rural peoples welfare and livelihoods. Despite the significant potential and important sustainable growth benefits, minimal progress has been made to benefit on opportunities in this sector, mainly because of complexities, perceive or otherwise, around accounting, monitoring, verification, non-permanence and other issues.Mitigation measures in the agricultural sector could contribute to meaning(a) GHG emission lessenings up to 2030 with potential ranges from 5 to 20 per cent of total Carbon(iv) oxide emissions by 2030. The global practiced easing potential of agriculture, excluding fossil fuel offsets from biomass, is estimated to be mingled with 5. 5 and 6 Gigatonnes Carbon(iv) oxide emmissions per yea r by 2030 (Smith et al. , 2007). However, actually shock this potential is a complex issue with both technological and scotch challenges.An estimated, 89 per cent of the total potential can be achieved by soil carbon sequestration through crop-land management, sliver land management, proceeds of constitutive(a) soils and debased lands, bio-energy and water management (Smith et al. , 2007). create countries are discussing if agricultural soil carbon sequestration should be accommodated in overall accounting of emissions and removals, and how to provide incentives in the area of agriculture for maturation countries (UNFCCC, 2009).Intensity targets in the agricultural sector are besides an issue, recognizing the fact that food production ordain need to increase to keep ill-use with rising populations and improvements in standards of living. Mitigation of Methane can provide an additional 9 per cent through improvements in sift management, and livestock and manure manageme nt. The remaining 2 per cent can be achieved from relief of Nitrous(ii)oxide emissions from soils mainly through crop management (Smith et al. , 2007).The wide diversity of agricultural practices around the world convey in that location is a fit large array of possible moderation opportunities. rude Emissions Mitigation in ontogeny Countries ontogenesis countries persist a telephone exchange role in agricultural GHG emissions mitigation. Without ample mitigation of GHG emissions in coming decades, including those from agriculture, in that respect will likely be loathly negative impacts on natural and human systems, including global food supply and food security, and developing countries are most at risk.The technical potential for GHG mitigation in developing countries agriculture by 2030 indicates significantopportunities for emissions reductions, together with anenhanced income earning potential for farmers, and associatedbenefits from lower natural pick degradation( Smith et al. , 2007). The agricultural sector is more insecure to climate change in developing countries than developed nations, which is a real bear on because agriculture in developing countries is a major food provider.Agricultural practices must adapt to changing climatic conditions to ensure sufficient global food supply, while follow outing management practices that set out the greatest GHG emission reduction potential. Approximately 30 per cent of GHG emissions reduction potential from agriculture can be achieved in developed countries and 70 per cent in developing countries (Smith et al. , 2007).The mitigation potential of developing countries is about 75 to 80 per cent of the global potential for soil carbon under bio-energy and the restoration of degraded lands roughly 90 per cent for grazing land management and 98 per cent for rice management, water management, set-aside management and agro-forestry. Approximately 89 per cent of the technical mitigation potential in th e agricultural sector can be achieved through soil carbon sequestration and about two-thirds of this potential is in developing countries (Smith et al. , 2007).The largest mitigation potentials in agriculture are the restoration of cultivated organic soils and degraded lands, and rice management developing countries move over the largest mitigation potentials. Mitigation is generally most cost effective in developing nations. The sustenance Agriculture Organization report (2008) estimates that mitigation measures in developing countries through agriculture and forestry projects might cost about fourth to one-third of total mitigation in all sectors and regions, while generating one-half to two-thirds of all estimated GHG emission reductions.With growing agricultural GHG emissions and the largest and most cost-effective mitigation opportunities in the agricultural sector, developing countries are likely to play a prominent role in efforts to reduce agricultural GHG emissions. Howev er, these countries also have the greatest barriers to overcome. At the national level, agriculture may be eclipsed by other priorities in many developing countries, such as poverty alleviation. A lack of capacity and political will to countenance mitigation are also add factors, where efforts in the agricultural sector are mainly focused on securing food for a growing population.Agricultural policy is viewed by many countries as a milkweed butterfly right that is think to food security, meaning that they are reluctant to open up this sector to any sensed control by an international body. Barriers are a great deal country or region- connect and understanding the situation in different countries is crucial to realizing the mitigation potential in the agricultural sector. Responses to climate change in these countries should involve measures that pose to reduce poverty and ensure food security (FAO, 2008). Developing countries will require technology ransfer,investment and fi nancial support to implement relevant mitigation strategies in the agricultural sector. And these programs will need to be developed with full consideration of economic and sustainable phylogeny. Such programs will need to let in methods for verifying and validating GHG emission reductions from agricultural activities and for comparing the effectiveness of various mitigation options, as well as the associated environmental, economic and social benefits and impacts for the overall production cycle.The economic potential for mitigation in agriculture depends on the price of carbon and on policy, institutional,and movement cost constraints. To date forgetful progress hasbeen made in the performance of mitigation measures at the global level. The potential for GHG mitigationwould be enhanced by an impound internationalclimate policy framework providing policy and economicincentives. The emergent market for carbon emissions trading offersnew possibilities for agriculture to benefi t from land usethat sequesters carbon or saves non Carbon(iv)oxide emissions.TheClean phylogenesis Mechanism (CDM) under the KyotoProtocol of the connexioned Nations Framework assemblyon Climate Change (UNFCCC) is the most importantmechanism for payments to developing countries. Currently, the CDM limits eligible activities in agricultureto afforestation and reforestation, and reduction of non- Carbon(iv) oxide gases. Hence carbon sequestration activities, such asconservation tillage and restoration of degraded soils, arepresently considered ineligible.Financing options will need to include grant funding, but there is also a need to develop market mechanisms for sustainable development (MMSDs) that will allow farmers and rural communities to benefit from such initiatives and have an elaborate livelihood strategy. On-farm mitigation Improved management practices that reduce on-farm emissions include livestock and manure management, fertilizer management, and ameliorate rice cult ivation. Methods to reduce methane emissions from enteric fermentation include enhancing the efficiency of digestion with meliorate feeding practices and dietary additives.The efficacy of these methods depends on the quality of feed, livestock breed and age, and also whether the livestock is grazing or stall-fed. Developing countries are assumed to provide lower quality feed to livestock, which raises the emissions rate per animal to over that for developed country herds(Smith et al. , 2007). In manure management, cooling and using solidness covers for storage tanks and lagoons, separating solids from slurry,and capturing the methane emitted are relevant techniques.Concerning developing countries, applying thissort of manure management may be difficult as animalexcretion happens in the field. Composting manure andaltering feeding practices may help reduce emissions to acertain extent. Improving the efficiency of fertilizer practical application or switching to organic production can decrease the amount of nutrientload and Nitrous(ii)Oxide emissions. However, overall benefitswould need to be weighed against the potential impact onyield(Smith et al. , 2007). Sustainable Agriculture and Sustainable DevelopmentIn addition to reducing GHG emissions, agricultural mitigation measures have other social, economic and environmental benefits, especially in regard to sustainable development, food security and making progress towards meeting the objectives of the Millennium Development Goals. The list of co-benefits linked to soil carbon sequestration include cut soil erosion, improved soil fertility and structure, improved water quality, reduced levels of phosphorous and nitrogen pollution, buffering against drought and improved agricultural performance.Another mitigation strategy is considered to be the displacement of fossil fuels through the production of cleaner-burning bioenergy, such as ethanol, biogas, and methane, which can all be derived from agricultural pro duction. Securing food for a growing population is a major global concern for developing countries and is a primary objective of agricultural policies. As such, mitigating climate change must not result in reduced food production (FAO, 2008). There are limits to GHG emissions reductions in the agricultural sector because of its importance in providing food for a growing global population.Improvements in efficiency may be a more reasonable burn down than absolute reductions in developing countries GHG emissions from agriculture. Linking Mitigation and Adaptation Efforts Formally defined, translation to climate change is an ad preciselymentmade to a human, ecological or physical systemin response to a perceived vulnerability (Smith et al. , 2007). Agriculture is a sector that can be used to link mitigation and interlingual rendition policies and actions. Many mutually reinforcing synergies exist between specific mitigation and adaptation solutions that can lead to more efficient a llocation of climate response resources (FAO, 2008).Synergies may occur in cases where mitigation-driven actions in agriculture have coercive adaptation consequences for example, carbon sequestration projects with absolute drought preparedness aspects or when adaptation-driven actions have positive consequences for mitigation for example, residue return to handle to improve water holding capacity will also sequester carbon (Smith et al. , 2007). A large proportion of the mitigation potential of agriculture arises from soil carbon sequestration, which has strong synergies with sustainable agriculture.Linking adaptation and mitigation measures have both positive andnegative aspects, depending on national circumstances and agricultural systems. In addition, many farmers may be unequipped to adapt or may notunderstand the risks that climate change imposes. As a result,information sharing, such as that involving climateforecasting, will likely play an integral part in managingclimate change risk. A future climate regime should encourage countries to recognize and enhance positive impacts. Such measures include the following * Changes in tillage practices or adjusted livestock breeds are short-term measures. Longer-term measures, such as improved water management or the building of irrigation systems, can help in adapting to a changing climate. * Supporting policies that get along adaptation measures can help towards more effective implementation. * Modes of external assistance range from allocating information, advice, and training on adaptation measures, to developing institutional capacities and policies. * Adaptation is not a stand-alone activity, and its integration into development projects, plans, policies, and strategies will be crucial. * Synergies between mitigation and adaptation should be maximized.Adaptation options and their supporting policies should be adopt by the appropriate level of government and use by institutions in direct contact with beneficiaries. For example, adaptation responses such as changing planting dates and tillage practices may require technicalservices provided by local perpetuation agents, which are coordinatedby regional universities and research institutions. Agricultural research, including crop breeding to developdrought and heat free crop varieties, will require bothpublic and nonpublic investment. Structural adaptation measures,such as creating water arkets and price incentives,will need to be implemented on a national level, most likelyin partnership with economic cooperation unions. National governments, NGOs and the international community all have a role to play in creatingthe means and cooperation required for adaptation. Conclusion In general, agriculture impacts climate change significantly through livestock productionand the conversion of forest to land cover that haslow carbon sink or sequestration potential. Nitrous oxideemissions from crop production and methane from riceproducti on are also significant.Mitigation options thatare the most technically and economically feasible includebetter rice, crop- and pastureland management. Although there are viable mitigation technologies in the agricultural sector, particularly in developing countries,some key constraints need to be overcome. First, rules of recover which still do not attribute developing countries forreducing emissions by avoiding deforestation or improving soil carbon sequestration must be changed. Second,operational rules, with their high transaction costs for developingcountries and small farmers and foresters in particular,must be streamlined.Climate change is also likely to have a significant negative impact on agricultural production, prompting outputreductions that will greatly affect parts of the developing world. Adaptation, including crop choice and timing, hasthe ability to part compensate for production declinesin all regions. In addition, to date, only a limited number of studies have focused on theclimate change and carbon fertilization effects related tocrops of importance to the rural poor, such as root crops and millet. As a result of changes in production, food security will beaffected by climate change.Even the most offensive mitigation efforts that can reasonably be anticipated cannot be expected to make asignificant difference in the short-term. This means thatadaptation is an imperative. Yet, in the face of this imperative,many developing countries are lacking(p) in sufficientadaptive capacity(FAO, 2008). As a result, there is a large role for nationalgovernments, NGOs, and international institutionsto play in building the requisite adaptive capacity and riskmanagement structures. Finally, climate change adaptation and mitigation have to proceed simultaneously.Since adaptation becomes costlierand less effective as the magnitude of climate changesincreases, mitigation of climate change remains essential. The greater the level of mitigation that can be achieved at affordable costs, the smaller the burden put on adaptation. Policies focused on mitigating GHG emissions, if cautiously designed, can help generate a new developmentstrategy one that encourages the creation of new value inpro-poor investments by increasing the positiveness of environmentallysustainable practices.To achieve this goal,it will be unavoidable to streamline the measurement andenforcement of offsets, financial flows, and carbon creditsfor investors. It will also be important to enhance globalfinancial facilities and to reform their governance, namelyto simplify rules and to increase the funding flows for mitigationin developing countries. we know what to do,and it is therefrom the right time to act before it is too late. It is so unfortunate to gather up people dying from famine in the 21st century.Climate change may exacerbate this situation, therefore we should cooperate toghether to ensure thatthe global issue of climate change is handled in a manner that it deserves. Agriculture is just one of those options especially by the developing countries. REFERENCES 1) Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) (2008) Available online at http//cdm. unfccc. int/index. html DATE accessed 20th November 2012. 2) IPCC (2007) Summary for policy makers. Climate Change 2007 Synthesis Report. stern mind Report of the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change. Available online at http//www. pcc. ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr_spm. pdf . understand accessed 19th November 2012. 3) FAO, 2008. Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Challenges and Opportunities for nutriment Security. Paper presented at the spicy take aim company on World Food Security 4) Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). (2008). Financial mechanism for adaptation to and mitigation of climate change in the food and agriculture sectors. Paper presented at the High Level Conference on World Food Security 5) Smith, P. , Martino, D. , Cai, Z. , Gwary, D. , Janzen, H. , Kumar, P. , McCarl, B. Ogle, S. , OMara, F. , Rice, C. , Scholes, B. , & Sirotenko, O. (2007). Agriculture. In B. Metz, O. R. Davidson, P. R. Bosch, R. Dave & L. A. Meyer (Eds. ), Climate Change 2007 Mitigation. Contribution of operative Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press. 6) Smith, P. , D. Martino, Z. Cai, D. Gwary, H. Janzen, P. Kumar, B. McCarl, S. Ogle, F. OMara, C. Rice, B. Scholes, O. Sirotenko, M. Howden, T. McAllister, G. Pan, V. Romanenkov, U. Schneider, S. Towprayoon, M. Wattenbach and J.Smith, 2008. Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. pp. 789-813. 7) United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (2009). Copenhagen Accord. Conference of the Parties. Accessed at http//unfccc. int/resource/docs/2009/cop15/eng/l07. pdf. 8) UNFCCC, 2008. Challenges and Opportunities for Mitigation in the Agricultural Sector. Technical Paper. FCCC/TP/2008/8. http//www. un fccc. int/resource/docs/2008/tp/08. pdf. Date accessed 20th November 2012. 9) World Bank. (2008). World Development Report 2008 Agriculture for Development. Washington, D. C. World Bank.