Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-12 (section)

==== 12.5.1.1 Challenges and Opportunities ====

<div id="h3-33-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

The conversion of natural ecosystems to agriculture, pasture and other land uses in CSA has been identified as a major challenge to climate-change adaptation in the region ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Scarano--2018|Scarano et al., 2018]] ; [[#IPCC--2019a|IPCC, 2019a]] ). In the last three decades, SA has been a significant contributor to the growth of agricultural production worldwide (OECD/Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2015), driven partly by increased international demand for commodities, especially soybeans and meat ( [[#IPCC--2019a|IPCC, 2019a]] ). Between 2001 and 2015 about 65% of all forest disturbance in the region was associated with commodity-driven deforestation ( [[#Curtis--2018|Curtis et al., 2018]] ). High rates of native vegetation conversion in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay and Peru threaten important ecosystems (Amazon, Cerrado, Chacos and Llanos savannahs, Atlantic rainforest, Caatinga and Yungas) ( [[#Graesser--2015|Graesser et al., 2015]] ; [[#FAO--2016c|FAO, 2016c]] ). Almost two-thirds of soy consumed in EU+ comes from Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay ( [[#IDH--2020|IDH, 2020]] ), increasing conversion risk in the Amazon, Cerrado and Gran Chaco. Despite growing commodity production traceability, in 2018 only 19% of the soybean meal consumed in EU+ was certified deforestation-free and 38% compliant with the FEFAC Soy Sourcing Guidelines ( [[#IDH--2020|IDH, 2020]] ), which poses a serious challenge at the international level ( [[#Negra--2014|Negra et al., 2014]] ; [[#Curtis--2018|Curtis et al., 2018]] ; [[#Lambin--2018|Lambin et al., 2018]] ; [[#IDH--2020|IDH, 2020]] ).

Investing in actions aimed at protection, restoration and the sustainable use of biodiversity and ecosystems represents a good approach to maintaining critical ecosystem services and constitutes part of a common strategy for adaptation, mitigation and disaster risk reduction in the region ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Kabisch--2016|Kabisch et al., 2016]] ; [[#Scarano--2018|Scarano et al., 2018]] ). These strategies also satisfy international forest and water conservation agendas in terms of optimising resources and solutions ( [[#Strassburg--2019|Strassburg et al., 2019]] ). Global conservation and sustainable development commitments, such as the Aichi Targets (Convention on Biological Diversity [CBD]), Sustainable Development Goals (UN), the NDCs under the Paris Agreement and the New York Declaration on Forests, strongly rely on nature-based solutions (NbS) to achieve their objectives ( [[#Brancalion--2019|Brancalion et al., 2019]] ) (Figure 12.12). The COVID-19 outbreak also brought attention to the need to preserve tropical forests as a means of preventing spillover of viruses from wildlife to humans, with concerns over that risk in the Amazon ( [[#Allen--2017b|Allen et al., 2017b]] ; [[#Dobson--2020|Dobson et al., 2020]] ; [[#IPBES--2020|IPBES, 2020]] ; [[#Ferreira--2021|Ferreira et al., 2021]] ). These represent an important opportunity for ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) to be at the core of NbS for climate change, access finance and promote climate resilient development pathways in CSA.

The Declaration on Protected Areas and Climate Change, presented by 18 CSA countries during the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of the Parties 21 (COP21), highlights the fundamental role of protected areas in providing the so-called GI needed to implement climate-change mitigation and adaptation and safeguard the provision of essential ecosystem services and the livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples and local communities ( [[#Gross--2016|Gross et al., 2016]] ). Protected area in CSA are underfunded ( ''very high confidence'' ). Latin American (including Mexico) governments allocate just about 1% of their national environmental budgets on protected areas (about USD 1.18 ha −1 on average). This figure only covers 54% of their basic needs, resulting in insufficient management. The financing gap to achieve optimal needs for protected areas in CSA is approximately USD 700 million yr −1 ( [[#Bovarnick--2010|Bovarnick et al., 2010]] ). This seriously compromises the management and delivery capacity of protected areas for climate-change adaptation and preparedness for ongoing ecological transformation ( [[#van%20Kerkhoff--2019|van Kerkhoff et al., 2019]] ). Furthermore, to become a relevant mechanism for resilience, protected areas need to be managed for this purpose ( [[#Mansourian--2009|Mansourian et al., 2009]] ). About 40% of protected areas in Latin America and the Caribbean (including Mexico) have undertaken management effectiveness evaluations ( [[#UNEP-WCMC%20and%20IUCN--2020a|UNEP-WCMC and IUCN, 2020a]] ). This is hardly representative of Aichi’s Target 11, although far better than the 11% global average. Collaborations with Indigenous Peoples and local communities are also an important issue to consolidate protected areas ( [[#Gross--2016|Gross et al., 2016]] ). In addition to protected areas as solutions for climate-change adaptation and mitigation, there is also a need to protect or restore ecosystems outside the protected areas, as illustrated by the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor ( [[#Imbach--2013|Imbach et al., 2013]] ).

Despite some local and specific assessments (e.g., [[#Warner--2016|Warner (2016)]] ), there is a significant gap when it comes to identifying barriers to adaptation or maladaptation in the region ( [[#Dow--2013|Dow et al., 2013]] ). In their NCs, NDCs and/or NAPs, most countries identified inadequate financing and access to technology as barriers to adaptation relevant to terrestrial and freshwater socioecosystems ( ''high confidence'' ). Insufficient institutional coordination is also frequently mentioned ( [[#Rangecroft--2013|Rangecroft et al., 2013]] ; [[#Cameron--2015|Cameron et al., 2015]] ). These limitations could be partially addressed through multi-lateral cooperation, incorporation of synergies from local to national scales, local empowerment and poverty alleviation ( [[#Rangecroft--2013|Rangecroft et al., 2013]] ; [[#Harvey--2017|Harvey et al., 2017]] ; [[#Murcia--2017|Murcia et al., 2017]] ; [[#Calispa--2018|Calispa, 2018]] ; [[#Chain-Guadarrama--2018|Chain-Guadarrama et al., 2018]] ).

<div id="12.5.1.2" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="governance-and-financing"></span>