Page 83 - Climate Change and Food Systems

These criteria mean that many important contributions to an understanding of the effects of climate change on agriculture and food security have been omitted. Chief among them are studies that focus primarily on climate change mitigation. Mitigating actions taken at the local, national or global level that reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) could reduce the negative impacts of climate change on agriculture. Mitigation efforts could also directly affect agricultural production by constraining farm production activities that emit relatively high levels of GHG. Model-based adaptation studies that fall strictly outside agriculture and water resources have also been omitted. Theoretical papers have been excluded, since this review focuses on methodologies that offer empirically based policy insights.
2. Defining climate adaptation: Analytical perspective
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC, 2014) defines adaptation as
“the adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities.” This definition points to two aspects: “moderating harm” and “exploiting beneficial opportunities”. Climate adaptation may thus be interpreted either broadly encompassing all possible opportunities to mitigate risk/ benefit from climatic changes, or more narrowly focusing on specific activities which avert the highest level or most probable risks (Margulis et al., 2008).
This raises the problem of “scope” for delineating what counts as adaptation. One approach is to view adaptation as a set of discrete choices and decisions to resolve well defined problems, a
view favoured by economists and climate impact modellers because it facilitates quantification
and modelling (Antle and Capalbo, 2010). This approach also tends to favour a narrower definition of adaptation limited to mean simply an activity that is “impact-reducing” in the sense that it
reduces negative (or enhances positive) impacts
of climate change (Lobell, 2014). An alternative view considers adaptation as a continuous, flexible process, based on learning and adjustments (IPCC, 2014). Under this view, local or farm-level type adaptation must be considered within the broader social context in which farmers make decisions and take actions (Feola et al., 2014).
It has become familiar in the literature to classify adaptation either as planned (through policies, public investments and institutional reforms) or autonomous (taken independently
by individual farmers, households and economic agents in response to market forces). Public- supported planned adaptation covers a wide range of possible actions, including the provision of public investments, taxes and subsidies, and norms and standards. These actions can also facilitate autonomous adaptation. Not surprisingly, economists recommend that such efforts be enacted in a cost-effective manner, preferably through market-based instruments (MBI) such as insurance markets, water markets and various payments for environmental services (IPCC, 2014). Economists also recommend that government-led adaptation interventions should avoid unintentional maladaptation, which can arise when there
a disconnect between planned activities and
local actions. A typical example comes from the water market. Pfeiffer and Lin (2010) found that subsidizing irrigation water conservation can
lead farmers to increase total water use through acreage expansion under irrigation. This example illustrates “the rebound effect” (Roy, 2000) whereby increases in efficiency of resource use result in more being demanded.
Designing appropriate adaptation policies requires a careful analysis of three aspects
closely associated with adaptation: vulnerability, adaptive capacity and uncertainty. Vulnerability was initially promoted by IPCC to guide policy (IPCC, 2001) and is characterized in terms of: (i) “exposure” of a region or sector to climate change; (ii) “impact”, i.e. how much damage will be caused by climate change in a specific region; and (iii) autonomous adaptation, i.e. what actions can take
chapter 3: economic modelling of climate impacts and adaptation in agriculture: a survey of methods, results and gaps
63