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

==== 12.5.4.2 Governance and Barriers for Adaptation ====

<div id="h3-46-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

The governance of adaptation for CSA implies modifying agricultural, socioeconomic and institutional systems in response to and in preparation for actual or expected impacts of climate variability and change, to reduce harmful effects and exploit beneficial opportunities ( ''high confidence'' ). CSA agriculture has a diversity of systems and segments of producers. While small-scale farmers contribute significantly to food production and food security, especially in developing economies, they face global policies oriented towards global commodity markets ( [[#Knapp--2017|Knapp, 2017]] ; [[#Fernández--2019|Fernández et al., 2019]] ). Climate action initiatives that consider CSA’s high levels of poverty and inequality to reduce these pervasive problems are central for adaptation in the region ( [[#Crumpler--2020|Crumpler et al., 2020]] ; [[#Locatelli--2020|Locatelli et al., 2020]] ).

Since AR5, important advances at the institutional level have occurred based on the development and implementation of NAPs for the agriculture and forestry sector among countries. Adapting to climate change entails the interaction of decision makers, stakeholders and institutions at different scales of government, from local to national. The Climate-Adapted Sustainable Agriculture Strategy for the region of the Central American Integration System (EASAC) of the Central American Agricultural Council of Ministers of Agriculture constitutes a valuable example of how to undertake climate action in the agricultural sector, as a block of countries and in an intersectoral manner, to enhance results and make better use of resources ( [[#IICA--2019|IICA, 2019]] ).

In Brazil, the Low-Carbon Agriculture (LCA) programme (Programa ABC) funds practices for reducing GHG emissions in the sector ( [[#Government%20of%20Brazil--2012|Government of Brazil, 2012]] ), accounting for about 15% of the total agriculture official finance portfolio, although it faces challenges to advance ( [[#Souza%20Piao--2021|Souza Piao et al., 2021]] ). Costa Rica offers an example on how reforestation can help achieve Paris Agreement objectives. Reforestation through natural regeneration on abandoned pastures boosted forest cover from 48% in 2005 to 53.4% in 2010 ( [[#Reid--2019|Reid et al., 2019]] ; [[#Cárdenas--2021|Cárdenas et al., 2021]] ). Some key success factors included a strong institutional context, fiscal and financial incentives for reforestation, conservation measures such as payment for environmental services, cattle ranch subsidy reform and a historically strong enforcement and focus on land titles that favoured the restoration of lands. Uruguay offers another example, with the farm sector contribution of 32.8% of all exports and 73.8% of the country’s emissions, so decarbonisation is not just an environmental issue but an economic competitiveness one as well. In the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) submitted to the UNFCCC in 2015, Uruguay set a specific target for the agriculture sector to reduce enteric methane emissions intensity per kilogram of beef (live weight) by 33% to 46% in 2030 by improving efficiency of beef production by controlling the grazing intensity to increase animal intake, reproductive efficiency and daily weight gain ( [[#Picasso--2014|Picasso et al., 2014]] ).

It is relevant to create conditions for the development of sustainable agricultural practices in a framework where factors associated with climate have become important for producers, given recent experiences of drought and lack of water ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Clarvis--2014|Clarvis and Allan, 2014]] ; [[#Roco--2016|Roco et al., 2016]] ; [[#Hurlbert--2017|Hurlbert and Gupta, 2017]] ; [[#Pérez-Escamilla--2017|Pérez-Escamilla et al., 2017]] ; [[#Cruz--2018|Cruz et al., 2018]] ; [[#Zúñiga--2021|Zúñiga et al., 2021]] ). Solutions that consider relevant drivers that have demonstrated a positive effect in diffusion of adaptation strategies are more efficient (Table 12.8). Some conditions, such as the promotion of education programmes, participation in cooperatives, credit access and land tenure security, can help. In the same line, in CSA some elements, such as technology and information access and local knowledge, reinforce climate-change adaptation ( [[#Khatri-Chhetri--2019|Khatri-Chhetri et al., 2019]] ; [[#Piggott-McKellar--2019|Piggott-McKellar et al., 2019]] ). As stated in Table 12.8, barriers of various origins persist in connection with climate-change adaptation in the region increasing the vulnerability of farming systems and rural livelihoods.

'''Table 12.8 |''' Recent studies related to climate-change adaptation of agricultural systems and its determinants in Central and South America region.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! '''Reference'''

! '''Countries'''

! '''Sample size (n)'''

! '''Study approach'''

! '''Crop systems'''

! '''Adaptation strategies'''

! '''Main drivers promoting climate-change adaptation'''

! '''Main barriers limiting climate-change adaptation'''

! '''Main barriers detected'''

|-
| [[#de%20Souza%20Filho--2021|de Souza Filho et al. (2021)]]

| Brazil

| 175

| Quant.

| Cattle farmers

| Integrated crop-livestock and livestock-forestry systems

| Credit access, extension services

| Lack of resources

| Lack of agricultural market access strategies

|-
| [[#Magalhães--2021|Magalhães et al. (2021)]]

| Brazil

| 94

| Qual.

| Several crops

| Farm management

| Previous experience with risks

| Inadequate infrastructure, low purchasing power

| Opportunities limited by infrastructure

|-
| [[#Carrer--2020|Carrer et al. (2020)]]

| Brazil

| 175

| Quant.

| Several crops

| Agricultural insurance

| Schooling, technical assistance

| Higher risk propensity

| Limited financial market access

|-
| [[#Quiroga--2020|Quiroga et al. (2020)]]

| Nicaragua

| 212

| Quant.

| Coffee

| Several adaptation measures

| Farm size, awareness of climate change, schooling

| Limited access to rain water

| Absence of climate-change education

|-
| [[#Bro--2019|Bro et al. (2019)]]

| Nicaragua

| 236

| Quant.

| Coffee

| Crop,

soil and water

| Schooling, participation in cooperatives, radio

| Household size

| Institutional framework to promote cooperatives

|-
| [[#Leroy--2019|Leroy (2019)]]

| Venezuela and Colombia

| 73

| Qual.

| Several crops at high altitudes

| Irrigation management

| Perception of water scarcity, local knowledge

| Degradation of fragile areas

| Ineffectiveness of local institutions

|-
| Cherubin et al. (2019)

| Colombia

| 6

| Quant.

| Several crops and pasture

| Agroforestry systems

| Improving soil quality and biota

| Degradation of conventional pasture

| Lack of crop diversification

|-
| [[#Harvey--2018|Harvey et al. (2018)]]

| Costa Rica, Honduras and Guatemala

| 860

| Quant.

| Coffee, beans and maize

| Several adaptation practices

| Awareness of climate change

| Affordability of adaptation practices

| Lack of adaptation involving agroecological and socioeconomic contexts

|-
| [[#Chen--2018|Chen et al. (2018)]]

| Costa Rica and Nicaragua

| 559

| Quant.

| Several crops

| Intensification and diversification

| Access to weather information, participation in organisations, credit access, farming experience

| Land renting

| Lack of crop and practices diversification

|-
| [[#Vidal%20Merino--2019|Vidal Merino et al. (2019)]]

| Peru

| 137

| Quant.

| Several crops

| Water management

| Farm size, capital, irrigated proportion

| Limited access to off-farm activities, small cultivated area

| Lack of site-specific design of interventions

|-
| [[#Meldrum--2018|Meldrum et al. (2018)]]

| Bolivia

| 193

| Quant.

| Potato, quinoa and others

| Diversification of crop portfolio

| Weather information

| Loss to traditional knowledge

| Lack of resilience and actions to expand and maintain variety portfolio

|-
| [[#Lan--2018|Lan et al. (2018)]]

| Nicaragua

| 180

| Quant.

| Cocoa

| Crop management

| Schooling, household size, farm size

| Lack of income

| Income inequality, gaps of profitability of practices, benefits of practices depends on costs

|-
| [[#Kongsager--2017|Kongsager (2017)]]

| Belize

| 125

| Qual.

| Maize

| Alley cropping

| Schooling

| Land tenure, market distance, degradation of fragile areas

| Lack of land tenure, lack of market access, lack of trust

|-
| [[#Schembergue--2017|Schembergue et al. (2017)]]

| Brazil

| 5485 a

| Quant.

| Several crops

| Agroforestry systems

| Financing, presence of associations, credit access

| High potential for agriculture, lack of climate information

| Adaptation conditioned by agricultural, socioeconomic and climatic conditions

|-
| [[#Harvey--2017|Harvey et al. (2017)]]

| Guatemala, Honduras and Costa Rica

| 300

| Quant.

| Coffee and maize

| Ecosystem-based adaptation

| Schooling, age, farming experience, access to technological support

| Lack of land tenure

| Lack of access to training and finance

|-
| [[#Roco--2016|Roco et al. (2016)]]

| Chile

| 665

| Quant.

| Several crops

| Water management

| Farm size, access to weather information

| Locations, age

| Lack of availability and access to climate-change information

|-
| [[#Mussetta--2015|Mussetta and Barrientos (2015)]]

| Argentina

| 41

| Qual.

| Vine and others

| Crop and water management

| Organisation of producers, labour availability, knowledge and information access, technology access

| Water allocation system

| Lack of water management and distribution strategies

|}

Notes:

(a) municipalities; Quant.: mainly quantitative; Qual.: mainly qualitative.

Limited information regarding cost-benefit analyses of adaptation is available in the region and regarding avoiding maladaptation effects and promoting site-specific and dynamic adaptation options considering available technologies ( ''medium confidence'' ) ( [[#Roco--2017|Roco et al., 2017]] ; [[#Zavaleta--2018|Zavaleta et al., 2018]] ; [[#Ponce--2020|Ponce, 2020]] ; [[#Shapiro-Garza--2020|Shapiro-Garza et al., 2020]] ).

Climate information services has an important role in climate-change adaptation and there is a recognised gap between climate science and farmers ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Vaughan--2017|Vaughan et al., 2017]] ; [[#Loboguerrero--2018|Loboguerrero et al., 2018]] ; [[#Tall--2018|Tall et al., 2018]] ; [[#Thornton--2018|Thornton et al., 2018]] ; [[#Ewbank--2019|Ewbank et al., 2019]] ). Such services should address the challenges of ensuring that climate information and advisory services are relevant to the decisions of smallholder and family farmers, providing timely climate service access to remote rural communities with marginal infrastructure and ensuring that farmers own climate services and shape their design and delivery. An interesting case facing this gap is the implementation of local technical agro-climatic committees in Colombia, which make it possible to share and validate climatic and weather forecasts, as well as crop model results for seasonal drought events ( [[#Loboguerrero--2018|Loboguerrero et al., 2018]] ). Another example is the web service AdaptaBrasil-MCTI, which forecasts the risk of climate-change impacts on strategic sectors (e.g., food, energy, water) in Brazil ( [[#Government%20of%20Brazil--2021|Government of Brazil and Ministry of Science Technology and Innovation Secretariat of Policies and Programs, 2021]] ).

Barriers to financial access are present in the region, restricting effective adaptation to extreme weather events ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Chen--2018|Chen et al., 2018]] ; [[#Fisher--2019|Fisher et al., 2019]] ; [[#Piggott-McKellar--2019|Piggott-McKellar et al., 2019]] ; [[#Vidal%20Merino--2019|Vidal Merino et al., 2019]] ; [[#de%20Souza%20Filho--2021|de Souza Filho et al., 2021]] ). In 2014, the penetration rate of this type of insurance in the region averaged 0.03% of GDP, and a few countries dominate the market (Brazil, Argentina). Beyond these countries, some initiatives also exist in Uruguay, Paraguay, Chile and Ecuador. In most Latin American and Caribbean countries, the public sector plays an important role in providing insurance or reinsurance and coexists with private-sector companies ( [[#Cárdenas--2021|Cárdenas et al., 2021]] ). Insurance protections represent a strategy to transfer climate risk to protect the well-being of vulnerable small farmers and accelerate uptake (recovery) after a climate-related extreme weather event. Lack of finance and proper infrastructure is compounded by limited knowledge of sustainable farming practices and high rates of financial illiteracy ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Hurlbert--2017|Hurlbert and Gupta, 2017]] ; [[#Piggott-McKellar--2019|Piggott-McKellar et al., 2019]] ).

Insufficient access to digital services and technologies further widens the gap between the rural poor and more urban populations of Latin America and the Caribbean ( ''medium confidence: insufficient evidence, high agreement'' ). In turn, these factors compromise productivity and competitiveness. Support for the rural poor can be focused on both economic competitiveness and social development. Finally, to align the identified adaptation options as a priority for achieving future food security in the NDCs of CSA countries to mitigation commitments, it will be essential to highlight synergies by generating evidence (national research) in relation to progress towards increasing productivity and resilience and reducing GHG, in addition to demonstrating its added value as a development initiative ( [[#Rudel--2015|Rudel et al., 2015]] sustainable; [[#Loboguerrero--2019|Loboguerrero et al., 2019]] ).

<div id="12.5.4.3" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="adaptation-options"></span>