AGRICULTURE

THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 2016
demands should be met through policies and
institutions that facilitate and support
coordinated design and implementation of
actions, either in a specific area – e.g. a watershed
or forest – or in a sector, such as an entire food
chain. Promoting inclusiveness and transparency
in decision-making, and providing incentives to
actions that aim to induce long-term public and
collective adaptation benefits, are particularly
important for the management of natural
resources (Place and Meybeck, 2013).
In order to support landscape restoration, for
example, cross-sectoral coordination is
essential. Agencies often work in relative
isolation, and even at cross-purposes. This is at
least partially due to how institutions are
structured and the lack of capacity of
institutions to cooperate closely in land-use
planning and management. There is a need –
and a real scope – for institutions dealing with
ecosystem and land-use issues to integrate the
management of natural resources, especially
forests, trees, soil and water, through improved,
multisectoral land use (Braatz, 2012).
To support improved governance of land and
water tenure systems under climate change,
multistakeholder dialogue, taking into account
the interests of women, the poor and
marginalized groups, is a promising option. For
instance, experience over past decades has
shown that forests can be managed well and
degradation can be reversed by involving local
communities, with support from legitimate
decentralized institutional arrangements
developed through consultative processes
(FAO, 2013). There are many examples of forest
farmer groups (FAO and AgriCord, 2012) and
community forestry groups (e.g. Nepal’s
Community Forest User Groups). The same
holds for community fisheries groups
and organizations.
Social networks are also important components
of local governance and can help to provide for
effective responses to climate change.
Traditional forms of reciprocal and mutual
labour – for example, in soil and water
conservation work and in shifting cultivation
systems – have been partly or totally
abandoned in many areas, owing to socioeconomic
changes (FAO, 2013). Supporting or
reactivating these forms of cooperation for
restoration work, where appropriate, may be
beneficial. Encouraging informal social
networks to share information and experience
on adaptation options may also help to build
social resilience to climate change. Such
networks can play a key role in establishing
surveillance, monitoring and early
warning systems.
Managing risks
Climate change is bringing new risks and
changing existing ones (FAO and OECD, 2012).
Better management of actual risks has been
highlighted by the IPCC as a key adaptation
action. This requires appropriate institutions
and policies, which are mostly sector- and/or
risk-specific. Weather stations, weather and
climate projection tools, yield response models,
environmental monitoring tools and
vulnerability assessments can help to determine
how local climate conditions will change in the
future, and to estimate their impact on
production. They are essential for reliable early
warning systems and for assessing
adaptation options.
Comprehensive risk management strategies
require a clear understanding of the robustness
of different risk management instruments under
climate uncertainty (Antón et al., 2013). They
also require coordination of actions by public,
private and civil society sectors, from the global
to local levels (World Bank, 2013). National
governments could provide mechanisms for
proactive and integrated risk management –
such as a national board that coordinates risk
management strategies with institutions for risk
monitoring, prevention, control and response at
the local and global levels – and provide
incentives for private sector participation in risk
coping. As highlighted in Chapter 3, social
protection programmes that guarantee
minimum incomes or access to food have an
important role, but need to be well linked with
| 99 |