ecognize the threats to agriculture caused byclimate change. In 2013 alone, sudden and severerains caused extensive flooding in India’s north,while severe drought struck in the east of thecountry. A major drought across the entire EastAfrican region in 2011 devastated agriculturaloutput and led to regional instability as people fledfrom neighboring countries into Kenya and staplefood prices soared.Both countries suffer from soil degradation, waterstress, crop productivity problems, the need tofeed a growing population, and increasingly severethreats from climate change. Many agriculturalproducts in India and Kenya are being grown at orclose to their maximum heat tolerance. Sustainedheat waves can devastate wheat, rice, maize,and other crops, and negatively impact upon theproductivity and reproduction of higher-yieldingcattle species compared to more resilient but lessproductive local varieties.Given India’s size and the diversity of its climaticzones (ranging from arid to tropical wet to humidsubtropical), responses to climate impacts arenecessarily varied and regionally specific. Kenya’srural, poorly educated, impoverished, and fastgrowingpopulation limits its adaptive capacity,BOX 6.1. Solar pumps make irrigationaccessibleIrregular and insufficient rainfall is achallenge to farmers who must pumpwater onto their fields manually or withthe help of expensive and polluting petrolor diesel pumps. SMEs like Future PumpLtd, a Kenyan company, are helping tosolve that problem with innovative solarpowered pumps that can irrigate half anacre per day with no manual labor or fuelcosts. The initial investment of around $400can be recouped in 1-2 years comparedto the ongoing running costs of diesel orpetrol engines, and higher yields frommore productive crops further boosts thebusiness case for these pumps. FuturePump Ltd. is working with Kenya ClimateInnovation Center to get business support,introductions to distributors and salespartners, and linkages to potential investorsfor business acceleration.which exacerbates the agricultural impacts ofclimate change. Together, the countries facesome of the same agricultural challenges, butalso have different characteristics that requirebespoke agricultural interventions to be tested,disseminated and adopted at large scale.Agriculture is different than other cleantechnology sectorsUnlike renewable energy or cleaner transportationoptions, improving agricultural practice dependsheavily on behavior change, education, andinstitutional reform rather than on technologicalinterventions. It is also almost exclusively drivenby donor agencies and governments, and tends notto be as suitable for public-private partnership asother clean technology sectors.While agriculture has been practiced for thousandsof years, sustainable agriculture that enhancesclimate change resilience and increases theintensification that is required to feed the world’sgrowing population is a more nascent area of study.Newer sustainable farming practices reimaginethe agricultural paradigm that propelled countrieslike India through the scarcity challenges ofthe 1970s. At that time, the <strong>Green</strong> Revolutionaddressed the challenge of population growthoutstripping agricultural productivity gains throughagricultural intensification practices such asmass mechanization, the introduction of pest anddisease resistant crop varieties, and subsidies foragricultural inputs like seed, fertilizer, pesticide,and irrigation infrastructure.While the <strong>Green</strong> Revolution has been an effectiveintervention that significantly improved yields,its limitations are becoming clear. Mechanizedploughing has accelerated soil erosion and landdegradation. Excessive use of fertilizers andpesticides has degraded soil quality, increasedpest resistance, and polluted waterways andgroundwater sources. Monocropping has reducedsoil fertility and biodiversity, and has exposedfarmers to ecological and economic threats.Excessive and continual irrigation has led to soilsalinization and unsustainable withdrawals fromaquifers (IFAD, 2012). The negative environmentalexternalities from these kinds of agriculturalpractices coupled with the accelerating impactsof climate change are making it more difficult fortoday’s farmers.62 <strong>Building</strong> <strong>Competitive</strong> <strong>Green</strong> <strong>Industries</strong>: The Climate and Clean Technology Opportunity for Developing Countries
BOX 6.2. Drying food to cut post-harvestlossesIneffective and inadequate food storagesystems lead to postharvest food losses,foregone revenue, and wide fluctuationsin the market price of harvestedproduce because of seasonal gluts andundersupplies. Drying food for storage caneffectively address these problems. AzuriHealth Ltd is a Kenyan SME that uses solardriers to treat and preserve food boughtfrom farmer groups, including mangoes,pineapples, bananas, sweet potato flour, andnutri-porridge.Conventional driers tend to rely on costlyfossil fuels or electricity, and generategreenhouse gas emissions, but Azuri’stechnology has lower operating costs andis emissions-free. Azuri has sought advicefrom Kenya Climate Innovation Center toaddress several business and technicalchallenges including product developmentand information on international markets.Likewise, the speed and severity of climate-relatedchanges is a challenge for governments, many ofwhich lack the funding and institutional capacityto disseminate better agricultural practice.Their responses to these multiple agriculturalchallenges are often under-researched and poorlycommunicated.Setting this against a backdrop of extremevulnerability exacerbates the challenge. Poorsubsistence farmers tend to either cling totraditional agricultural practices, which arebecoming increasingly inappropriate given thechanging climate, or must unlearn some of thefarming practices that government agriculturalextension services have been disseminating, whichare delivering diminishing returns today and areproving to be unsustainable in the long term.Subsistence farmers with no savings and no publicsafety net are understandably risk-averse. Theyare reluctant to experiment with new practices thatmay require more than one harvest season beforeshowing dividends, have strained human, financial,and environmental capital, and are suspicious ofagricultural extension services whose messageis changing. This issue of trust is another barrierfaced in changing agricultural practices that otherclean technology sectors, like public transit orwater, wastewater, and solid waste managementsolutions do not face.Climate-smart agricultural solutions tend tohave more difficulty attracting finance than othersectors too, especially in the context of carbonsequestration. Sequestration benefits fromagriculture are more difficult to measure and verifythan traditional abatement opportunities in energy,industry, or transport, and may be easily lost ifbehavior change is not sustained in the longerterm. And climate resilient agricultural activitiesoften include both mitigation and adaptationoutcomes, whereas many climate funds tend tofocus on one or the other.Understanding what constitutes better agriculturalpractice is not always straightforward, either.Whereas, for example, well-designed feed-intariffs are almost guaranteed to accelerate thedeployment of renewable energy and can be easilyscaled, agriculture’s site specificity means thatit is often ineffective to standardize and scale upuniform solutions. Moreover, existing agriculturalpolicies and programs often promote the verypractices that are degrading ecological services.Moving towards more resilient agricultural policiesand programs means that policy makers andtheir rural and often poor and undereducatedconstituencies need to reverse the spread ofrecently promulgated policies and practices.Scaling is also a challenge because of the numberof farmers that must be reached. There are about2.6 billion farmers in the world—about 40 percentof the global population—most of whom aresmallholders. The sheer number of people involvedin agriculture makes large-scale disseminationof best practice a daunting challenge, and alsomakes transaction costs too high for farmers to beinvolved in climate finance schemes.For all these reasons, sustainable agriculture facesa multitude of barriers that other clean technologysectors do not. Overcoming these barriers, though,is fundamental to enhancing the food securityand livelihood opportunities of billions of people,and is needed to ensure that the planet’s growingpopulation can be fed.Chapter 6: Case Study: Climate Smart Agriculture in India and Kenya63
- Page 3 and 4:
Building CompetitiveGreen Industrie
- Page 5 and 6:
ContentsForeword ..................
- Page 7 and 8:
AcknowledgmentsThis report was comm
- Page 9 and 10:
Photo: Simone D. McCourtie / World
- Page 11 and 12:
Photo: World Bank.FIGURE E1. Growth
- Page 13 and 14:
FIGURE E3. Top three regional oppor
- Page 15 and 16:
FIGURE E7. Areas for government sup
- Page 17 and 18: Policy makers, in particular, must
- Page 19 and 20: Photo: © Arne Hoel / World Bank.Th
- Page 21 and 22: Other adaptation technologies (outs
- Page 23 and 24: Photo: Dana Smillie / World Bank.de
- Page 25 and 26: Photo: © Simone D. McCourtie / Wor
- Page 27 and 28: oad transport. What coverage there
- Page 29 and 30: The Regional PictureThe regional op
- Page 31 and 32: years, and heat and electricity fro
- Page 33 and 34: populations with mini-grids, and de
- Page 35 and 36: FIGURE 2.10. Size of the clean tech
- Page 37 and 38: energy sources. India enjoys among
- Page 39 and 40: Photo: Nonie Reyes / World Bank.Ind
- Page 41 and 42: TABLE 3.1. Activities in the value
- Page 43 and 44: Photo: John Hoggs / World BankChapt
- Page 45 and 46: Photo: Ray Witlin / World Bank.Sola
- Page 47 and 48: FIGURE 4.1. Solar PV value chainMaj
- Page 49 and 50: Figure 4.3. CSP value chainMajor eq
- Page 51 and 52: Figure 4.5. Sectors in which Indian
- Page 53 and 54: Figure 4.9. Areas for government su
- Page 55 and 56: Photo: Curt Carnemark / World Bank.
- Page 57 and 58: SMEs focused on adapting or making
- Page 59 and 60: Spectre International, also known a
- Page 61 and 62: FIGURE 5.3. Investment in clean tec
- Page 63 and 64: FIGURE 5.6. Most common barriers fa
- Page 65 and 66: FIGURE 5.7. Areas for government su
- Page 67: Photo: Edwin Huffman / World Bank.f
- Page 71 and 72: Government Policy IsSupporting the
- Page 73 and 74: tailored at small scales to increas
- Page 75 and 76: BOX 6.5. SME opportunities in agrof
- Page 77 and 78: Photo: Curt Carnemark / World Bank.
- Page 79 and 80: of trust and openness, especially w
- Page 81 and 82: (RETs). For example, high demand fo
- Page 83 and 84: and technologies may be significant
- Page 85 and 86: Country ContextThere is limited emp
- Page 87 and 88: While policy change is not always a
- Page 89 and 90: Photo: Boris Balabanov / World Bank
- Page 91 and 92: TABLE A1. Market sizing methodology
- Page 93 and 94: TABLE B1. Renewables value chains (
- Page 95 and 96: TABLE B2. Water and sanitation valu
- Page 97 and 98: Appendix B. Value Chain Breakdowns9
- Page 99 and 100: TABLE C1. Entrepreneurship and busi
- Page 101 and 102: TABLE C2. Innovation financeName of
- Page 103 and 104: TABLE C3. Market developmentName of
- Page 105 and 106: 47 48 49 50TABLE C3. Market develop
- Page 107 and 108: 52 53 54 55 56TABLE C4. Technology
- Page 109 and 110: 61 62TABLE C4. Technology developme
- Page 111 and 112: 67 68 69TABLE C5. Legal and regulat
- Page 113 and 114: Aurum Ventures. 2013. “Home.” h
- Page 115 and 116: Department of Agriculture and Coope
- Page 117 and 118: Global Green Growth Institute. 2014
- Page 119 and 120:
Kamal-Chaoui, L. et al. 2011. “Th
- Page 121 and 122:
Nyang’ori, Ruth. 2010. “Factors
- Page 123 and 124:
Sol Chip. 2013. “News & Events.
- Page 125 and 126:
Wollenberg, Lini (Research Associat
- Page 128:
©2014 International Bank for Recon