Editing IPCC:AR6/SRCCL/Chapter-5 (section)

== Box 5.3 Climate change and indigenous food systems in the Hindu-Kush Himalayan Region ==

<div id="section-5-3-2-3-role-of-agroecology-and-diversification-block-1"></div>

Diversification of production systems through promotion of Neglected and Underutilised Species (NUS; also known as understudied, neglected, orphan, lost or disadvantaged crops) offers adaptation opportunities to climate change, particularly in mountains. Neglected and Underutilised Species (NUS) have a potential to improve food security and at the same time help protect and conserve traditional knowledge and biodiversity. Scaling-up NUS requires training farmers and other stakeholders on ways to adopt adequate crop management, quality seed, select varieties, farming systems, soil management, development of new products, and market opportunities (Padulosi et al. 2013). Farmers in the Rasuwa district, in the mid-hills of Nepal, prefer to cultivate local bean, barley, millet and local maize, rather than commodity crops because they are more tolerant to water stress and extremely cold conditions (Adhikari et al. 2017). Farmers in the high-altitude, cold climate of Nepal prefer local barley with its short growing period because of a shorter growing window. Buckwheat is commonly grown in the Hindu-Kush Himalayan (HKH) region mainly because it grows fast and suppresses weeds. In Pakistan, quinoa ( ''Chenopodium quinoa'' ) grew and produced well under saline and marginal soil where other crops would not grow (Adhikari et al. 2017).

At the same time, in many parts of the HKH region, a substantial proportion of the population is facing malnutrition. Various factors are responsible for this, and lack of diversity in food and nutrition resulting from production and consumption of few crops is one of them. In the past, food baskets in this region consisted of many different edible plant species, many of which are now neglected and underutilised. This is because almost all the efforts of the Green Revolution after 1960 focused on major crops. Four crops, namely rice, wheat, maize and potato, account for about 60% of global plant-derived energy supply (Padulosi et al. 2013).

While the Green Revolution technologies substantially increased the yield of few crops and allowed countries to reduce hunger, they also resulted in inappropriate and excessive use of agrochemicals, inefficient water use, loss of beneficial biodiversity, water and soil pollution and significantly reduced crop and varietal diversity. With farming systems moving away from subsistence-based to commercial farming, farmers are also reluctant to grow these local crops because of low return, poor market value and lack of knowledge about their nutritional environmental value.

However, transition from traditional diets based on local foods to a commercial crop-based diet with high fats, salt, sugar and processed foods, increased the incidence of non-communicable diseases, such as diabetes, obesity, heart diseases and certain types of cancer (Abarca-Gómez et al. 2017; NCD-RisC 2016b, 2017b). This ‘hidden hunger’ – enough calories, but insufficient vitamins – is increasingly evident in mountainous communities including the HKH region.

Internationally, there is rising interest in NUS, not only because they present opportunities for fighting poverty, hunger and malnutrition, but also because of their role in mitigating climate risk in agricultural production systems. NUS play an important role in mountain agroecosystems because mountain agriculture is generally low-input agriculture, for which many NUS are well adapted.

In the HKH region, mountains are agroecologically suitable for cultivation of traditional food crops, such as barley, millet, sorghum, buckwheat, bean, grams, taro, yam and a vast range of wild fruits, vegetables and medicinal plants. In one study carried out in two villages of mid-hills in Nepal, Khanal et al. (2015) reported 52 indigenous crop species belonging to 27 families with their various uses. Farming communities continue to grow various indigenous crops, albeit in marginal land, because of their value on traditional food and associated culture. Nepal Agricultural Research Council (NARC) has identified a list of indigenous crops based on their nutritional, medicinal, cultural and other values.

Many indigenous crops supply essential micronutrients to the human body, and need to be conserved in mountain food systems. Farmers in HKH region are cultivating and maintaining various indigenous crops such as Amaranthus, barley, black gram, horse gram, yam, and sesame. because of their nutritional value. Most of these indigenous crops are comparable with commercial cereals in terms of dietary energy and protein content, but are also rich in micronutrients. For example, pearl millet has higher content of calcium, iron, zinc, riboflavin and folic acid than rice or maize (Adhikari et al. 2017).

NUS can provide both climate resilience and more options for dietary diversity to the farming communities of mountain ecosystems. Some of these indigenous crops have high medical importance. For example, mountain people in the HKH region have been using ''jammun (i.e., Syzygium cumini'' ) to treat diabetes. In the Gilgit-Baltistan province of Pakistan, realising the importance of sea-buckthorn for nutritional and medicinal purposes, local communities have expanded its cultivation to larger areas. Many of these crops can be cultivated in marginal and/or fallow land which otherwise remains fallow. Most of these species are drought resistant and can be easily grown in rainfed conditions in non-irrigated land.

<div id="section-5-3-2-4-role-of-cultural-values"></div>

<span id="role-of-cultural-values"></span>
==== 5.3.2.4 Role of cultural values ====

<div id="section-5-3-2-4-role-of-cultural-values-block-1"></div>

Food production and consumption are strongly influenced by cultures and beliefs. Culture, values and norms are primary factors in most climate change and food system policies. The benefits of integrating cultural beliefs and ILK into formal climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies can add value to the development of sustainable climate change, rich in local aspirations, planned with, and for, local people (Nyong et al. 2007 <sup>[[#fn:r551|551]]</sup> ).

Cultural dimensions are important in understanding how societies establish food production systems and respond to climate change, since they help to explain differences in responses across populations to the same environmental risks (Adger et al. 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r552|552]]</sup> ). There is an inherent adaptability of indigenous people who are particularly connected to land use, developed for many centuries to produce specific solutions to particular climate change challenges. Acknowledging that indigenous cultures across the world are supporting many string strategies and beliefs that offer sustainable systems with pragmatic solutions will help move forward the food and climate sustainability policies. For instance, in the Sahel, the local populations have developed and implemented various adaptation strategies that sustain their resilience despite many threats (Nyong et al. 2007 <sup>[[#fn:r553|553]]</sup> ). There is an increased consideration of local knowledge and cultural values and norms in the design and implementation of modern mitigation and adaptation strategies.

There are some entrenched cultural beliefs and values that may be barriers to climate change adaptation. For instance, culture has been shown to be a major barrier to adaptation for the Fulbe ethnic group of Burkina Faso (Nielsen and Reenberg 2010 <sup>[[#fn:r554|554]]</sup> ). Thus, it is important to understand how beliefs, values, practices and habits interact with the behaviour of individuals and collectivities that have to confront climate change (Heyd and Thomas 2008 <sup>[[#fn:r555|555]]</sup> ). Granderson (2014) <sup>[[#fn:r556|556]]</sup> suggests that making sense of climate change and its responses at the community level demands attention to the cultural and political processes that shape how risk is conceived, prioritised and managed. For a discussion of gender issues related to climate change, see Section 5.2.

Culturally sensitive risk analysis can deliver a better understanding of what climate change means for society (O’Brien and Wolf 2010 <sup>[[#fn:r557|557]]</sup> ; Persson et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r558|558]]</sup> ) and thus, how to better adapt. Murphy et al. (2016) <sup>[[#fn:r1435|1435]]</sup> stated that culture and beliefs play an important role in adaptive capacity but that they are not static. In the work done by Elum et al. (2017) <sup>[[#fn:r559|559]]</sup> in South Africa (about farmers’ perception of climate change), they concluded that perceptions and beliefs often have negative effects on adaptation options.

Culture is a key issue in food systems and the relation of people with nature. Food is an intrinsically cultural process: food production shapes landscapes, which in turn are linked to cultural heritages and identities (Koohafkan and Altieri 2011 <sup>[[#fn:r560|560]]</sup> ; Fuller and Qingwen 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r561|561]]</sup> ), and food consumption has a strong cultural dimension. The loss of subsistence practices in modern cultures and their related ILK, has resulted in a loss of valuable adaptive capacities (Hernández-Morcillo et al. 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r562|562]]</sup> ). This is so because these systems are often characterised by livelihood strategies linked to the management of natural resources that have been evolved to reduce overall vulnerability to climate shocks (‘adaptive strategies’) and to manage their impacts ex-post (‘coping strategies’) (Morton 2007 <sup>[[#fn:r563|563]]</sup> ; López-i-Gelats et al. 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r564|564]]</sup> ).

<span id="supply-side-adaptation"></span>
=== 5.3.3 Supply-side adaptation ===

<div id="section-5-3-3-supply-side-adaptation-block-1"></div>

Supply-side adaptation takes place in the production (of crops, livestock, and aquaculture), storage, transport, processing, and trade of food.

<div id="section-5-3-3-1-crop-production"></div>

<span id="crop-production"></span>
==== 5.3.3.1 Crop production ====

<div id="section-5-3-3-1-crop-production-block-1"></div>

There are many current agricultural management practices that can be optimised and scaled up to advance adaptation. Among the often-studied adaptation options are increased soil organic matter, improved cropland management, increased food productivity, prevention and reversal of soil erosion (see Chapter 6 for evaluation of these practices in regard to desertification and land degradation). Many analyses have demonstrated the effectiveness of soil management and changing sowing date, crop type or variety (Waongo et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r565|565]]</sup> ; Bodin et al. 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r566|566]]</sup> ; Teixeira et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r567|567]]</sup> ; Waha et al. 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r568|568]]</sup> ; Zimmermann et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r569|569]]</sup> ; Chalise and Naranpanawa 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r570|570]]</sup> ; Moniruzzaman 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r571|571]]</sup> ; Sanz et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r572|572]]</sup> ). Biophysical adaptation options also include pest and disease management (Lamichhane et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r573|573]]</sup> ) and water management (Palmer et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r574|574]]</sup> ; Korbeľová and Kohnová 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r575|575]]</sup> ).

In Africa, Scheba (2017) <sup>[[#fn:r576|576]]</sup> found that conservation agriculture techniques were embedded in an agriculture setting based on local traditional knowledge, including crop rotation, no or minimum tillage, mulching, and cover crops. Cover cropping and no-tillage also improved soil health in a highly commercialised arid irrigated system in California’s San Joaquin Valley, USA (Mitchell et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r577|577]]</sup> ). Biofertilisers can enhance rice yields (Kantachote et al. 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r578|578]]</sup> ), and Amanullah and Khalid (2016) <sup>[[#fn:r579|579]]</sup> found that manure and biofertiliser improve maize productivity under semi-arid conditions.

Adaptation also involves use of current genetic resources as well as breeding programmes for both crops and livestock. More drought, flood and heat-resistant crop varieties (Atlin et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r580|580]]</sup> ; Mickelbart et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r581|581]]</sup> ; Singh et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r582|582]]</sup> ) and improved nutrient and water use efficiency, including overabundance as well as water quality (such as salinity) (Bond et al. 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r583|583]]</sup> ) are aspects to factor into the design of adaptation measures. Both availability and adoption of these varieties is a possible path for adaptation and can be facilitated by new outreach policy and capacity building.

Water management is another key area for adaptation. Increasing water availability and reliability of water for agricultural production using different techniques of water harvesting, storage, and its judicious utilisation through farm ponds, dams, and community tanks in rainfed agriculture areas have been presented by Rao et al. (2017) <sup>[[#fn:r1436|1436]]</sup> and Rivera-Ferre et al. (2016a) <sup>[[#fn:r1437|1437]]</sup> . In addition, improved drainage systems (Thiel et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r584|584]]</sup> ), and Alternate Wetting and Drying (AWD) techniques for rice cultivation (Howell et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r585|585]]</sup> ; Rahman and Bulbul 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r586|586]]</sup> ) have been proposed. Efficient irrigation systems have been also analysed and proposed by Jägermeyr et al. (2016) <sup>[[#fn:r587|587]]</sup> , Naresh et al. (2017) <sup>[[#fn:r588|588]]</sup> , Gunarathna et al. (2017) <sup>[[#fn:r589|589]]</sup> and Chartzoulakis and Bertaki (2015) <sup>[[#fn:r590|590]]</sup> . Recent innovation includes using farming systems with low usage of water such as drip-irrigation or hydroponic systems mostly in urban farming.

<div id="section-5-3-3-2-livestock-production-systems"></div>

<span id="livestock-production-systems"></span>
==== 5.3.3.2 Livestock production systems ====

<div id="section-5-3-3-2-livestock-production-systems-block-1"></div>

Considering the benefits of higher temperature in temperate climates and the increase of pasture with incremental warming in some humid and temperate grasslands, as well as potential negative effects, can be useful in planning adaptation strategies to future climate change. Rivera-Ferre et al. (2016b) <sup>[[#fn:r591|591]]</sup> characterize adaptation for different livestock systems as managerial, technical, behavioural and policy-related options. Managerial included production adjustments (e.g., intensification, integration with crops, shifting from grazing to browsing species, multispecies herds, mobility, soil and nutrient management, water management, pasture management, corralling, feed and food storage, farm diversification or cooling systems); and changes in labour allocation (diversifying livelihoods, shifting to irrigated farming, and labour flexibility). Technological options included breeding strategies and information technology research. Behavioural options are linked to cultural patterns and included encouraging social collaboration and reciprocity, for example, livestock loans, communal planning, food exchanges, and information sharing. Policy options are discussed in Section 5.7 and Chapter 7.

<div id="section-5-3-3-3-aquaculture-fisheries-and-agriculture-interactions"></div>

<span id="aquaculture-fisheries-and-agriculture-interactions"></span>
==== 5.3.3.3 Aquaculture, fisheries, and agriculture interactions ====

<div id="section-5-3-3-3-aquaculture-fisheries-and-agriculture-interactions-block-1"></div>

Options may include livelihood diversification within and across sectors of fisheries, aquaculture and agriculture. Thus, adaptation options need to provide management approaches and policies that build the livelihood asset base, reducing vulnerability to multiple stressors with a multi-sector perspective (Badjeck et al. 2010 <sup>[[#fn:r592|592]]</sup> ). In Bangladesh, fishing pressure on post-larval prawns has increased as displaced farmers have shifted to fishing following salt-water intrusion of agricultural land (Ahmed et al. 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r593|593]]</sup> ). In West Africa, strategies to cope with sudden shifts in fisheries are wider-reaching and have included turning to seafood import (Gephart et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r594|594]]</sup> ) or terrestrial food production, including farming and bush-meat hunting on land (Brashares et al. 2004 <sup>[[#fn:r595|595]]</sup> ).

Proposed actions for adaptation include effective governance, improved management and conservation, efforts to maximise societal and environmental benefits from trade, increased equitability of distribution and innovation in food production, and the continued development of low-input and low-impact aquaculture (FAO 2018c <sup>[[#fn:r596|596]]</sup> ).

Particular adaptation strategies proposed by FAO (2014a) <sup>[[#fn:r597|597]]</sup> include diverse and flexible livelihood strategies, such as introduction of fish ponds in areas susceptible to intermittent flood/drought periods; flood-friendly small-scale homestead bamboo pens with trap doors allowing seasonal floods to occur without loss of stocked fish; cage fish aquaculture development using plankton feed in reservoirs created by dam building; supporting the transition to different species, polyculture and integrated systems, allowing for diversified and more resilient systems; promotion of combined rice and fish farming systems that reduce overall water needs and provide integrated pest management; and supporting transitions to alternative livelihoods.

Risk reduction initiatives include innovative weather-based insurance schemes being tested for applicability in aquaculture and fisheries and climate risk assessments introduced for integrated coastal zone management. For aquaculture’s contribution to building resilient food systems, Troell et al. (2014) <sup>[[#fn:r598|598]]</sup> found that aquaculture could potentially enhance resilience through improved resource use efficiencies and increased diversification of farmed species, locales of production, and feeding strategies. Yet, its high reliance on terrestrial crops and wild fish for feeds, its dependence on freshwater and land for culture sites and its environmental impacts reduce this potential. For instance, the increase in aquaculture worldwide may enhance land competition for feed crops, increasing price levels and volatility and worsening food insecurity among the most vulnerable populations.

<div id="section-5-3-3-4-transport-and-storage"></div>

<span id="transport-and-storage"></span>
==== 5.3.3.4 Transport and storage ====

<div id="section-5-3-3-4-transport-and-storage-block-1"></div>

Fewer studies have been done on adaptation of food system transport and storage compared to the many studies on adaptation to climate in food production.

Transport. One transport example is found in Bangkok. Between mid-November 2011 and early January 2012, Bangkok, the capital city of Thailand, faced its most dramatic flood in approximately 70 years with most transport networks cut-off or destroyed. This caused large-scale disruption of the national food supply chains since they were centrally organised in the capital city (Allen et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r599|599]]</sup> ). From this experience, the construction and management of ‘climate-proof’ rural roads and transport networks is argued as one the most important adaptation strategies for climate change and food security in Thailand (Rattanachot et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r600|600]]</sup> ).

Similarly in Africa, it has been shown that enhanced transportation networks combined with other measures could reduce the impact of climate change on food and nutrition security (Brown et al. 2017b <sup>[[#fn:r601|601]]</sup> ). This suggests that strengthening infrastructure and logistics for transport would significantly enhance resilience to climate change, while improving food and nutrition security in developing counties.

Storage. Storage refers to both structures and technologies for storing seed as well as produce. Predominant storage methods used in Uganda are single-layer woven polypropylene bags (popularly called ‘kavera’ locally), chemical insecticides and granaries. Evidence from Omotilewa et al. (2018) <sup>[[#fn:r602|602]]</sup> showed that the introduction of new storage technology called Purdue Improved Crop Storage (PICS) could contribute to climate change adaptation. PICS is a chemical-free airtight triple-layered technology consisting of two high-density polyethylene inner liners and one outer layer of woven polypropylene bag. Its adoption has increased the number of households planting hybrid maize varieties that are more susceptible to insect pests in storage than traditional lower-yielding varieties. Such innovations could help to protect crops more safely and for longer periods from postharvest insect pests that are projected to increase as result of climate change, thus contributing to food security.

In the Indo-Gangetic Plain many different storage structures based on ILK provide reliable and low-cost options made of local materials. For example, elevated grain stores protectharvested cereals from floods, but also provide for air circulation to prevent rot and to control insects and other vermin (Rivera-Ferre et al. 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r603|603]]</sup> ).

<div id="section-5-3-3-5-trade-and-processing"></div>

<span id="trade-and-processing"></span>
==== 5.3.3.5 Trade and processing ====

<div id="section-5-3-3-5-trade-and-processing-block-1"></div>

Adaptation measures are also being considered in trade, processing and packaging, other important components of the food system. These will enable availability, stability, and safety of food under changing climate conditions.

Trade. Brooks and Matthews (2015) <sup>[[#fn:r604|604]]</sup> found that food trade increases the availability of food by enabling products to flow from surplus to deficit areas, raises incomes and favours access to food, improves utilisation by increasing the diversity of national diets while pooling production risks across individual markets to maintain stability.

Processing. Growth of spoilage bacteria of red meat and poultry during storage due to increasing temperature has been demonstrated by European Food Safety Authority (EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r605|605]]</sup> ). In a recent experiment conducted on the optimisation of processing conditions of Chinese traditional smoke-cured bacon, Larou, Liu et al. (2018a) showed that the use of a new natural coating solution composed of lysozyme, sodium alginate, and chitosan during the storage period resulted in 99.69% rate of reducing deterioration after 30-day storage. Also, the use of High Hydrostatic Pressure (HHP) technology to inactivate pathogenic, spoilage microorganisms and enzymes (with little or no effects on the nutritional and sensory quality of foods) have been described by Wang et al. (2016) <sup>[[#fn:r606|606]]</sup> and Ali et al. (2018) <sup>[[#fn:r1438|1438]]</sup> as new advances in processing and packaging fruits, vegetables, meats, seafood, dairy, and egg products.

In summary, there are many practices that can be optimised and scaled up to advance supply-side adaptation. On-farm adaptation options include increased soil organic matter and erosion control in cropland, improved livestock and grazing land management, and transition to different species, polyculture and integrated systems in aquaculture. Crop and livestock genetic improvements include tolerance to heat, drought, and pests and diseases. Food transport, storage, trade, and processing will likely play increasingly important roles in adapting to climate change-induced food insecurity.

<span id="demand-side-adaptation"></span>
=== 5.3.4 Demand-side adaptation ===

<div id="section-5-3-4-demand-side-adaptation-block-1"></div>

Adaptation in the demand side of the food system involves consumption practices, diets, and reducing food loss and waste. Recent studies showed that supply-side adaptation measures alone will not be sufficient to sustainably achieve food security under climate change (Springmann et al. 2018b <sup>[[#fn:r608|608]]</sup> ; Swinburn et al. 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r609|609]]</sup> ; Bajželj et al. 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r610|610]]</sup> ). As noted by Godfray (2015) <sup>[[#fn:r611|611]]</sup> , people with higher income demand more varied diets, and typically ones that are richer in meat and other food types that require more resources to produce. Therefore, both supply-side (production, processing, transport, and trade) and demand-side solutions (for example, changing diets, food loss and waste reduction) can be effective in adapting to climate change (Creutzig et al. 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r612|612]]</sup> ) (see Section 5.5.2.5 for food loss and waste).

The implications of dietary choice can have severe consequences for land. For example, Alexander et al. (2016) <sup>[[#fn:r613|613]]</sup> , found that if every country were to adopt the UK’s 2011 average diet and meat consumption, 95% of global habitable land area would be needed for agriculture – up from 50% of land currently used. For the average USA diet, 178% of global land would be needed (relative to 2011) (Alexander et al. 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r614|614]]</sup> ); and for ‘business as usual’ dietary trends and existing rates of improvement in yields, 55% more land would be needed above baseline (2009) (Bajželj et al. 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r615|615]]</sup> ). Changing dietary habits have been suggested as an effective food route to affect land use (Beheshti et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r616|616]]</sup> ) and promote adaptation to climate change through food demand.

Most literature has focused on demand-side options that analyse the effects on climate change mitigation by dietary changes. Little focus has been brought on demand-side adaptation measures to adjust the demand to the food challenges related to drivers such as market, climate change, inputs limitations (for example, fossil fuels, nitrogen, phosphorus), food access, and quality. Adding to that, the high cost of nutritious foods contributes to a higher risk of overweight and obesity (FAO 2018d <sup>[[#fn:r617|617]]</sup> ). Adaptation measures relate also to the implications of easy access to inexpensive, high-calorie, low-nutrition foods which have been shown to lead to malnutrition (Section 5.1). Therefore, adaptation related to diet may be weighed against the negative side effects on health of current food choices.

Reduction in the demand for animal-based food products and increasing proportions of plant-based foods in diets, particularly pulses and nuts; and replacing red meat with other more efficient protein sources are demand-side adaptation measures (Machovina et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r618|618]]</sup> ) (Section 5.5.2). For example, replacing beef in the USA diet with poultry can meet caloric and protein demands of about 120 to 140 million additional people consuming the average American diet (Shepon et al. 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r619|619]]</sup> ). Similar suggestions are made for adopting the benefits of moving to plant-based protein, such as beans (Harwatt et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r620|620]]</sup> ).

The main reason why reducing meat consumption is an adaptation measure is because it reduces pressure on land and water and thus our vulnerability to climate change and inputs limitations (Vanham et al. 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r621|621]]</sup> ). For animal feed, ruminants can have positive ecological effects (species diversity, soil carbon) if they are fed extensively on existing grasslands. Similarly, reducing waste at all points along the entire food chain is a significant opportunity for improving demand-side adaptation measures (Godfray 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r622|622]]</sup> ).

It is important to highlight the opportunities for improving the feed-to-meat conversion considered as a form of food loss. However, the unique capacity of ruminants to produce high-quality food from low-quality forage, in particular from landscapes that cannot be cropped and from cellulosic biomass that humans cannot digest could be seen as an effective way to improve the feed:meat ratio (Cawthorn and Hoffman 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r623|623]]</sup> ).

In summary, there is potential for demand-side adaptation, such as adoption of diets low in animal-sourced products, in conjunction with reduction in food loss and waste to contribute to reduction in food demand, land sparing, and thus need for adaptation.

<span id="institutional-measures"></span>
=== 5.3.5 Institutional measures ===

<div id="section-5-3-5-institutional-measures-block-1"></div>

To facilitate the scaling up of adaptation throughout the food system, institutional measures are needed at global, regional, national, and local levels (Section 5.7). Institutional aspects, including policies and laws, depend on scale and context. International institutions (financial and policies) are driving many aspects of global food systems (for example, UN agencies, international private sector agribusinesses and retailers). Many others operate at local level and strongly influence livelihoods and markets of smallholder farmers. Hence, differentiation in the roles of the organisations, their missions and outcomes related to food and climate change action need to be clearly mapped and understood.

Awareness about the institutional context within which adaptation planning decisions are made is essential for the usability of climate change projection (Lorenz 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r624|624]]</sup> ) (Chapter 7). In the planning and operational process of food production, handling and consumption, the environment benefits and climate change goals can be mainstreamed under sustainable management approaches that favour alternative solutions for inputs, energy consumption, transformation and diet. For instance, land-use planning would guide current and future decision-making and planners in exploring uncertainty to increase the resilience of communities (Berke and Stevens 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r625|625]]</sup> ). One of the important policy implications for enhanced food security are the trade-offs between agricultural production and environmental concerns, including the asserted need for global land-use expansion, biodiversity and ecological restoration (Meyfroidt 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r626|626]]</sup> ) (Section 5.6).

There are a number of adaptation options in agriculture in the form of policy, planning, governance and institutions (Lorenz 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r627|627]]</sup> ). For example, early spatial planning action is crucial to guide decision-making processes and foster resilience in highly uncertain future climate change (Brunner and Grêt-Regamey, 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r628|628]]</sup> ). Institutions may develop new capacities to empower value chain actors, take climate change into account as they develop quality products, promote adoption of improved diet for healthier lifestyles, aid the improvement of livelihoods of communities, and further socioeconomic development (Sehmi et al. 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r629|629]]</sup> ). Other adaptation policies include property rights and land tenure security as legal and institutional reforms to ensure transparency and access to land that could stimulate adaptation to climate change (Antwi-Agyei et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r630|630]]</sup> ).

<div id="section-5-3-5-1-global-initiatives"></div>

<span id="global-initiatives"></span>
==== 5.3.5.1 Global initiatives ====

<div id="section-5-3-5-1-global-initiatives-block-1"></div>

Climate change poses serious wide-ranging risks, requiring a broader approach in fighting the phenomenon. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its annual Conferences of the Parties (COPs) has been instrumental in ensuring international cooperation in the field of tackling the impacts of climate change in a broader framework (Clémençon 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r631|631]]</sup> ). The National Adaptation Plan (NAP) programme under the UNFCCC was established to: identify vulnerable regions; assess the impacts of climate change on food security; and prioritise adaptation measures for implementation to increase resilience. The National Adaptation Programs of Action (NAPAs) was also established to support least-developed countries (LDCs) in addressing their particular challenges in adaptation, to enhance food security among other priorities.

The Paris Agreement (UNFCCC 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r632|632]]</sup> ) is a major victory for small island states and vulnerable nations that face climate change-related impacts of floods and droughts resulting in food security challenges. Adaptation and mitigation targets set by the parties through their nationally determined commitments (NDCs) are reviewed internationally to ensure consistency and progress towards actions (Falkner 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r633|633]]</sup> ).

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) also plays a significant role in designing and coordinating national policies to increase adaptation and food security. The five key strategic objectives of FAO (help eliminate hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition; make agriculture, forestry and fisheries more productive and sustainable; reduce rural poverty; enable inclusive and efficient agricultural and food systems; and increase the resilience of livelihoods to climate threats) (FAO 2018e <sup>[[#fn:r634|634]]</sup> ), all relate to building resilience and increasing global adaptation to climate variability.

In support of the Paris Agreement, FAO launched a global policy, ‘Tracking Adaptation’ with the aim of monitoring the adaptation processes and outcomes of the parties to increase food security and of making available technical information for evaluation by stakeholders. In response to the estimated world population of 9.7 billion by 2050, FAO adopted the Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) approach to increase global food security without compromising environmental quality (Section 5.6). FAO supports governments at the national level to plan CSA programmes and to seek climate finance to fund their adaptation programmes.

The Global Commission on Adaptation, co-managed by World Resources Institute (WRI) and the Global Center on Adaptation, seeks to accelerate adaptation action by elevating the political visibility of adaptation and focusing on concrete solutions (Global Commission on Adaptation 2019 <sup>[[#fn:r635|635]]</sup> ). The Commission works to demonstrate that adaptation is a cornerstone of better development, and can help improve lives, reduce poverty, protect the environment, and enhance resilience around the world. The Commission is led by Ban Ki-moon, 8th Secretary-General of the United Nations, Bill Gates, co-chair of the Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation, and Kristalina Georgieva, CEO, World Bank. It is convened by 17 countries and guided by 28 commissioners. A global network of research partners and advisors provide scientific, economic, and policy analysis.

<div id="section-5-3-5-2-national-policies"></div>

<span id="national-policies"></span>
==== 5.3.5.2 National policies ====

<div id="section-5-3-5-2-national-policies-block-1"></div>

The successful development of food systems under climate change conditions requires a national-level management that involves the cooperation of a number of institutions and governance entities to enable more sustainable and beneficial production and consumption practices.

For example, Nepal has developed a novel multi-level institutional partnership, under the Local Adaptation Plan of Action (LAPA), which is an institutional innovation that aims to better integrate local adaptation planning processes and institutions into national adaptation processes. That includes collaboration with farmers and other non-governmental organisations (Chhetri et al. 2012 <sup>[[#fn:r636|636]]</sup> ). By combining conventional technological innovation process with the tacit knowledge of farmers, this new alliance has been instrumental in the innovation of location-specific technologies thereby facilitating the adoption of technologies in a more efficient manner.

National Adaptation Planning of Indonesia was officially launched in 2014 and was an important basis for ministries and local governments to mainstream climate change adaptation into their respective sectoral and local development plans (Kawanishi et al. 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r637|637]]</sup> ). Crop land-use policy – to switch from crops that are highly impacted by climate change to those that are less vulnerable – were suggested for improving climate change adaptation policy processes and outcomes in Nepal (Chalise and Naranpanawa 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r638|638]]</sup> ).

Enhancement of representation, democratic and inclusive governance, as well as equity and fairness for improving climate change adaptation policy processes and outcomes in Nepal were also suggested as institutional measures by Ojha et al. (2015) <sup>[[#fn:r639|639]]</sup> . Further, food, nutrition, and health policy adaptation options such as social safety nets and social protection have been implemented in India, Pakistan, Middle East and North Africa (Devereux 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r640|640]]</sup> ; Mumtaz and Whiteford 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r641|641]]</sup> ; Narayanan and Gerber 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r642|642]]</sup> ).

Financial incentives policies at the national scale used as adaptation options include taxes and subsidies; index-based weather insurance schemes; and catastrophe bonds (Zilberman et al. 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r643|643]]</sup> ; Linnerooth-Bayer and Hochrainer-Stigler 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r644|644]]</sup> ; Ruiter et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r645|645]]</sup> and Campillo et al. 2017). Microfinance, disaster contingency funds, and cash transfers are other mechanisms (Ozaki 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r645|645]]</sup> and Kabir et al. 2016[reference number=1439).

<div id="section-5-3-5-3-community-based-adaptation"></div>

<span id="community-based-adaptation"></span>
==== 5.3.5.3 Community-based adaptation ====

<div id="section-5-3-5-3-community-based-adaptation-block-1"></div>

Community-based adaptation (CBA) builds on social organisational capacities and resources to address food security and climate change. CBA represents bottom-up approaches and localised adaptation measures where social dynamics serve as the power to respond to the impacts of climate change (Ayers and Forsyth 2009 <sup>[[#fn:r646|646]]</sup> ). It identifies, assists, and implements development activities that strengthen the capacity of local people to adapt to living in a riskier and less predictable climate, while ensuring their food security.

Klenk et al. (2017) <sup>[[#fn:r647|647]]</sup> found that mobilisation of local knowledge can inform adaptation decision-making and may facilitate greater flexibility in government-funded research. As an example, rural innovation in terrace agriculture developed on the basis of a local coping mechanism and adopted by peasant farmers in Latin America may serve as an adaptation option to climate change (Bocco and Napoletano, 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r648|648]]</sup> ). Clemens et al. (2015) <sup>[[#fn:r649|649]]</sup> indicated that learning alliances provided social learning and knowledge-sharing in Vietnam through an open dialogue platform that provided incentives and horizontal exchange of ideas.

Community-based adaptation generates strategies through participatory processes, involving local stakeholders and development and disaster risk reduction practitioners. Fostering collaboration and community stewardship is central to the success of CBA (Scott et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r650|650]]</sup> ). Preparedness behaviours that are encouraged include social connectedness, education, training, and messaging; CBA also can encompass beliefs that might improve household preparedness to climate disaster risk (Thomas et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r651|651]]</sup> ). Reliance on social networks, social groups connectivities, or moral economies reflect the importance of collaboration within communities (Reuter 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r652|652]]</sup> ; Schramski et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r653|653]]</sup> ).

Yet, community-based adaptation also needs to consider methods that engage with the drivers of vulnerability as part of community-based approaches, particularly questions of power, culture, identity and practice (Ensor et al. 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r654|654]]</sup> ). The goal is to avoid maladaptation or exacerbation of existing inequalities within the communities (Buggy and McNamara 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r655|655]]</sup> ). For example, in the Pacific Islands, elements considered in a CBA plan included people’s development aspirations; immediate economic, social and environmental benefits; dynamics of village governance, social rules and protocols; and traditional forms of knowledge that could inform sustainable solutions (Remling and Veitayaki 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r656|656]]</sup> ).

With these considerations, community-based adaptation can help to link local adaptation with international development and climate change policies (Forsyth 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r657|657]]</sup> ). In developing CBA programmes, barriers exist that may hinder implementation. These include poor coordination within and between organisations implementing adaptation options, poor skills, poor knowledge about climate change, and inadequate communication among stakeholders (Spires et al. 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r658|658]]</sup> ). A rights-based approach has been suggested to address issues of equality, transparency, accountability and empowerment in adaptation to climate change (Ensor et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r659|659]]</sup> ).

In summary, institutional measures, including risk management, policies, and planning at global, national, and local scales can support adaptation. Advance planning and focus on institutions can aid in guiding decision-making processes and foster resilience. There is evidence that institutional measures can support the scaling up of adaptation and thus there is reason to believe that systemic resilience is achievable.

<span id="tools-and-finance"></span>
=== 5.3.6 Tools and finance ===

<div id="section-5-3-6-1-early-warning-systems"></div>

<span id="early-warning-systems"></span>
==== 5.3.6.1 Early warning systems ====

<div id="section-5-3-6-1-early-warning-systems-block-1"></div>

Many countries and regions in the world have adopted early warning systems (EWS) to cope with climate variability and change as it helps to reduce interruptions and improve response times before and after extreme weather events (Ibrahim and Kruczkiewicz 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r660|660]]</sup> ). The Early Warning and Early Action (EW/EA) framework has been implemented in West Africa (Red Cross 2011) and Mozambique (DKNC 2012 <sup>[[#fn:r661|661]]</sup> ). Bangladesh has constructed cyclone shelters where cyclone warnings are disseminated and responses organised (Mallick et al. 2013 <sup>[[#fn:r662|662]]</sup> ). In Benin, a Standard Operating Procedure is used to issue early warnings through the UNDP Climate Information and Early Warning Systems Project (UNDP 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r663|663]]</sup> ).

However, there are some barriers to building effective early warning systems in Africa, such as lack of reliable data and distribution systems, lack of credibility, and limited relationships with media and government agencies (UNDP 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r664|664]]</sup> ). Mainstreaming early warning systems in adaptation planning could present a significant opportunity for climate disaster risk reduction (Zia and Wagner 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r665|665]]</sup> ). Enenkel et al. (2015) suggested that the use of smartphone applications that concentrate on food and nutrition security could help with more frequent and effective monitoring of food prices, availability of fertilisers and drought-resistant seeds, and could help to turn data streams into useful information for decision support and resilience building.

GIS and remote sensing technology are used for monitoring and risk quantification for broad-spectrum stresses such as drought, heat, cold, salinity, flooding, and pests (Skakun et al. 2017 <sup>[[#fn:r666|666]]</sup> ; Senay et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r667|667]]</sup> ; Hossain et al. 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r668|668]]</sup> and; Brown 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r669|669]]</sup> ), while site-specific applications, such as drones, for nutrient management, precision fertilisers, and residue management can help devise context-specific adaptations (Campbell et al. 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r670|670]]</sup> and; Baker et al. 2016 <sup>[[#fn:r671|671]]</sup> ). Systematic monitoring and remote sensing options, as argued by Aghakouchak et al. (2015) <sup>[[#fn:r672|672]]</sup> , showed that satellite observations provide opportunities to improve early drought warning. Waldner et al. (2015) <sup>[[#fn:r673|673]]</sup> found that cropland mapping allows strategic food and nutrition security monitoring and climate modelling.

Access to a wide range of adaptation technologies for precipitation change is important, such as rainwater harvesting, wastewater treatment, stormwater management and bioswales, water demand reduction, water-use efficiency, water recycling and reuse, aquifer recharge, inter-basin water transfer, desalination, and surface-water storage (ADB 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r674|674]]</sup> ).

<div id="section-5-3-6-2-financial-resources"></div>

<span id="financial-resources"></span>
==== 5.3.6.2 Financial resources ====

<div id="section-5-3-6-2-financial-resources-block-1"></div>

Financial instruments such as micro-insurance, index-based insurance, provision of post-disaster finances for recovery and pre-disaster payment are fundamental means to reduce lower and medium level risks (Linnerooth-Bayer and Hochrainer-Stigler 2014 <sup>[[#fn:r675|675]]</sup> ). Fenton &amp; Paavola, 2015 <sup>[[#fn:r676|676]]</sup> ; Dowla, 2018 <sup>[[#fn:r677|677]]</sup> ). Hammill et al. (2010) <sup>[[#fn:r678|678]]</sup> found that microfinance services (MFS) are especially helpful for the poor. MFS can provide poor people with the means to diversify, accumulate and manage the assets needed to become less susceptible to shocks and stresses. As a result, MFS plays an important role in vulnerability reduction and climate change adaptation among some of the poor. The provision of small-scale financial products to low-income and otherwise disadvantaged groups by financial institutions can serve as adaptation to climate change. Access to finance in the context of climate change adaptation that focuses on poor households and women in particular is bringing encouraging results (Agrawala and Carraro 2010 <sup>[[#fn:r679|679]]</sup> ).

In summary, effective adaptation strategies can reduce the negative impacts of climate change. Food security under changing climate conditions depends on adaptation throughout the entire food system – production, supply chain, and consumption/demand, as well as reduction of food loss and waste. Adaptation can be autonomous, incremental, or transformative, and can reduce vulnerability and enhance resilience. Local food systems are embedded in culture, beliefs and values, and ILK can contribute to enhancing food system resilience to climate change (high confidence). Institutional and capacity-building measures are needed to scale up adaptation measures across local, national, regional, and global scales.

<span id="impacts-of-food-systems-on-climate-change"></span>