Search

In Ethiopia, large-scale agricultural investment (LAI) is promoted to foster adaptation to climate change among smallholder farmers by improving farming conditions and productivity. However, little has been known about this condition so far. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to study the implications of LAI for the capacity for climate change adaptation among smallholder farmers, based on a study conducted in Merti district in the Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia. An asset-based approach was used to measure the adaptive capacity of smallholders, via data collected from a household survey, undertaken among smallholder households who had, or had not, benefited, from LAI, and supported by key informant interviews and focus group discussions. Descriptive and inferential statistics and qualitative thematic analysis methods were used to analyze the data. The study found that the adaptive capacity of smallholder households was improved under the influence of LAI. LAI motivated and prompted farmers to use technologies that fostered climate change adaption, including the use of irrigation, improved crop varieties, chemical fertilizer, and engagement in alternative sources of income, which improved their food security status. But this technology and knowledge transfer mainly occurred through observation (learning by doing), not by capacity-building. However, both group of smallholders (within and without contact with the LAI) received similar benefits through government rural extension services. Therefore, the paper concludes that scaling up these technologies and alternative income sources could enhance the adaptive capacity of smallholders, but that LAIs should contribute actual technical and financial support as part of benefit-sharing or corporate responsibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nature-based Solutions (NbS) are integral to efforts to keep global warming below 2°C in accordance with the United Nations' 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change. Yet the transboundary governance dimensions of NbS remain unclear and largely undocumented. In Southeast Asia, NbS have emphasised the conservation and/ or sustainable commodification of carbon sinks found in terrestrial and mangrove forests, seagrass meadows, peatlands and agricultural soils. Mostly project-driven and fixed-term, these "solutions" have often failed to meet their social and ecological objectives. Increasingly, they have added to cross-border problems of: (1) displaced carbon emissions; and (2) economic migration and societal dispossession. This perspective paper delineates a transboundary governance research agenda to mitigate these trade-offs and enhance the co-benefits of NbS in carbon sinks. Building on NbS literature, it identifies cross-sector, multi-scalar and interdisciplinary pathways to improve transboundary cooperation, inclusion and equity in carbon sink governance in varying Southeast Asian contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Finland, agriculture is practiced in variable growing conditions that are further challenged by climate change and under external pressure caused by international competition, changing consumer preferences and demands, and the renewal of the European Union Common Agriculture Policy and Paris Agreement climate targets. Futures studies in agriculture have focused on scenario building with expert panels, though usually without farmers' involvement. This study focuses on farmers' views of shaping the future of Finnish agriculture. It builds on the disaggregative Delphi method and combines interviews and a representative survey of Finnish farmers. The study is based on a bottom-up process in which a farmer panel of 20 farms defined their views of the future in a semi-structured thematic interview. The views were turned into statements in a structured survey sent to the second panel, which comprised all Finnish farmers who had received agricultural subsidies in 2016, with 4401 respondents. The results were analyzed using quantitative factor analysis, which produced five future images for Finnish agriculture. The images were shown to the original farmer panel for reflection. They considered the probability of each future image and their own role in it. Technology solves as a future image was most favored by farmers, followed by Ecological and specializing small-scale production image. Business-as-usual was the least likely future images according to the interviewed farmers. This paper describes the process and discusses both methodological benefits and pitfalls, as well as farmers' future views of the forthcoming decades. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]