Page 54 - FAO-IPCC Expert meeting on climate change

Policies for land use, sustainable food production and consumption and climate action
and religious sentiment. Another dimension is that, often, the poorest countries are the greatest importers of food and thus the issues of food loss and waste are more serious in terms of food security. As a consequence, authorities have framed campaigns for food waste prevention using strong social and religious arguments they believe will be more effective than if framed purely in terms of monetary value.
5.3 Socio-economic policies to support climate-resilience by smallholder farmers
Climate change requires policy responses on multiple fronts, including shoring up support for small-scale farmers and vulnerable communities that have a lower capacity to cope with the adverse effects of climate shocks. Policies that provide the social safety net for the poor can assist them to cope with climate extremes (e.g. floods) and develop the ability to recover and to adapt. In basic terms: How should policies be developed to include those vulnerable farmers who are subject to these shocks? How can policy be combined with practices that can sequester carbon? There are many other questions we should ask.
Socio-economic policies that aim to strengthen the resilience of small farmers, including through poverty alleviation and food and nutrition security provisions, are driven by the usual principles of providing the enabling environment to encourage improved resource use efficiency, facilitate equitable access to resources and information, as well as enhance empowerment and the agency of smallholders, including women. Policies to boost resource use efficiency and improve productivity may also contribute to climate change mitigation and better adaptation. Given the limited resources of governments, policies that involve financial incentives or investments to support smallholders need to link the climate benefits to the economic benefits as best practice.
There are many examples where policies that improve the resource use efficiency of farmers – and, hence, improve incomes − can be beneficial from the perspective of climate mitigation. In many farming systems in developing countries, small-scale farmers benefit from investments in technological innovation (e.g. mechanization) which,
when combined with cleaner energy sources such as solar power, can enhance the benefits of productivity and mitigation. These technological innovations, however, need government support, especially in the absence of a sufficiently developed private sector. In developing countries, the government often plays the role of initiator to provide investment, often creating trade-offs as a result of budget limitations. In sub-Saharan Africa, one constraint
to scaling up is the limited capacity of government to enforce activities at the grassroots level (e.g. water policy). One such example is offering incentives to those who shifted from using electric water heaters to solar water heaters. This ceased when farmers reverted to buying electric heaters as the less expensive option. The lesson from this case is that it is essential to tie a fiscal incentive to a technology to achieve user buy-in. Aside from win-win scenarios, there are also cases of “win-not much loss” options. For example, mineral soil with up to 150 kilos of nitrogen can be applied in abundance prior to the release of increased emissions, thus opening the way for agricultural intensification, something that is harder to do in sandy soils.
In addition to efficiency-enhancing policies for smallholders, policies must promote equitable access to resources.
In the Sahel, for example, the food security programmes through which people can access land do not specifically target food-producing smallholders. This often results from a lack of participation (i.e. a weak agency) by smallholders and highlights the need to strengthen weak institutions (i.e. groups and cooperatives). The key goal is to enhance participation and empowerment. This implies an appropriation of the discourse by providing evidence to those who have been traditionally acted upon. Of critical importance for many developing countries is the need to strengthen extension services with the active participation of farmers and to identify the lead farmers.
Policies that offer climate and economic gains should correctly target smallholders because farmers are not one and the same and their situations differ, as do their long-term viability as farmers. Policymakers face the question of which segment of the rural poor to target in the design of their sociopolicies. Among small-scale farmers, especially in developing countries, a proportion of them is likely to be exiting farming, a certain number is staying put and another group is in the act of intensifying. Consequently, policy interventions will need to be differentiated to each group. Some studies make reference to these groups, considering whether or not it is a waste of resources to include them or whether or not to target the small-scale farms that show potential for viability.
FAO-IPCC Expert meeting on climate change, land use and food security