10
emissions from the degradation and removal of these carbon stocks.
Recent GHG mitigation research in the agri- culture and allied sectors has explored a range of options that can significantly reduce GHG emissions from the global food systems. Live- stock accounts for up to half of the technical mit- igation potential of the agriculture, forestry, and land use sectors (Herrero et al. 2016). Mitigation options in the livestock sector include improved feed and manure management, grazing optimi- zation, development of silvo-pasture systems.
Advances in agronomy (tillage, nutrient, water, weeds, and energy management) and improved breeding have a large potential to reduce GHG emissions from crop fields (Beach et al. 2016, McKinsey 2020).
10
Agricultural systems are also complex, with links across scales and sectors. This means that the impacts of climatic events have multiple di- mensions. For instance, the impact of a drought can be seen in the lack of rainfall that reduces yields on a dryland plot, the failure to deliver water to marginal farmers in a small irrigation scheme, and adjustments to national food avail- ability and prices mediated by the political econ- omy. Differentiating climate change impacts and adaptation from this dynamic complexity over the next few decades is impossible in most situations.
Adaptation options in agriculture are shaped by a combination of climate, development and environmental considerations and there is no single planning approach that suits every com- munity or country. But thinking of adaptation as a ‘pathway’ of social, economic and institutional change can help actors to adjust to known cli- matic and developmental stresses while learn- ing how to adapt to future climates as better information becomes available.
The shape of adaptation pathways over time is influenced by several factors. In many cases, today’s decisions can shape tomorrow’s op- tions. The decision to gather new information or train new actors now could significantly expand choices later. For example, establishing a net- work of weather stations now opens up the fu- ture option of weather insurance, which requires at least ten years’ of data to establish baseline risk. Conversely, investing in major water reser- voirs now precludes other adaptive options lat- er.
A range of actions that could help lay the ground for adapting agriculture to climate change consist of:
1. The need to assign institutional responsibili- ty for coordinating adaptation. Adapting ag- riculture to climate change cannot be done by any single organization alone. Integrating local and district ‘agents of change’ into na- tional processes and plans will help ensure effective action on the ground. Such inclu-
sive planning can also help ensure the nec- essary funding for agricultural development and adaptation at all scales.
2. The need to integrate adaptation into agri- cultural institutions. The emergence of cli- mate change units in agricultural research institutes is a promising start for building capacity. But institutional change at national level is also required. Operational ministries should mobilize effective coordination, ac- cess to funding and knowledge-led capacity.
3. The need to enable continuous assessment along the adaptation pathway, which is essential to apply lessons learnt, scale up successes, develop innovative technical, fi- nancial and institutional instruments and prepare to adapt to the more challenging scenarios of climate change beyond 2030.
Agriculture is a part of the whole econom- ic sectors. Climate change affects all economic sectors. It implies that adaptation and mitiga- tion to climate change in agriculture sectors is also a part of the whole sectors adaptation and mitigation.
In Indonesia a large part of the problem is the diversity of variables, states and processes that exist in the country; and the different ways in which these interact with regional and global conditions. This makes it very difficult to predict how agriculture will develop and be affected by climate change in terms that provide robust tar- gets for adaptation. For example, while climate models generally predict a warming in almost all areas, they vary significantly in predictions for agro-ecological zones particularly with re- gards to rainfall. Additional uncertainty about the future of environmental services, especially soil quality, adds to the difficulty in making pre- dictions that can inform adaptation planning for specific adaptation actions now.
Adaptation and mitigation are two inextri- cable actions in responding to global climate change (Government of Indonesia 2021). Inte- grating mitigation and adaptation measures can increase local people’s acceptance and interest Accelerating Implementations
10
in mainstreaming climate change actions. This is because adaptation emphasizes the urgent needs of local communities, while mitigation has more long-term global benefits. Therefore, the greater the mitigation effort, the less ad- justed impacts, and the less risk involved. Con- versely, the greater the degree of adaptation preparedness, the less impact associated with a particular level of climate change.
Climate change mitigation and adaptation cannot be seen as alternatives to each other, because they are not independent activities, but have a complementary role in responding to climate change which is carried out at dif- ferent spatial, temporal, and institutional scales (Fig. 10.2). If mitigation is successful in reducing greenhouse gas emissions substantially, the ef- fects of climate change will continue because the lag time remains between the reduction in greenhouse gas concentrations and the reduc- tion in the rate of warming. This means that adaptation is very important, regardless of the impact of mitigation. However, very few com- munities at the grassroots level are aware of their vulnerabilities and risks. Therefore, the objec- tives of Indonesia’s climate change adaptation
strategy are directed at reducing risks, increas- ing adaptive capacity, strengthening resilience, and reducing vulnerability to climate change in all development sectors by 2030 through in- creasing climate literacy, strengthening local ca- pacity, improving knowledge management, pol- icies convergence on climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction, and the application of adaptive technology.
General target of mitigation aspect is GHGs emissions reduction prioritized for agriculture, forestry, energy, waste, IPPU (Industrial Process- es and Product Use). While general targets of mitigation economic resilience, social resilience and livelihood, and ecosystem resilience and landscape.
Referring to NDC roadmaps, implementation of climate action plans (NAM) is prioritized for:
(i) forestry and land use, (ii) agriculture, (iii) en- ergy including transportation, (iv) industry, and (v) waste. Adaptation priorities area: (i) food (ag- riculture, food product, technology), (ii) energy, (iii) health, (iv) livelihood, (v) infrastructure, (vi) ecosystem and biodiversity, (vii) cities, and (vii) coastal and small islands.
NAM: National Action on Mitigation NAP : National Adaptation Plan
Figure 10.2. Connectivity between mitigation and adaptation in long term strategy (Government of Indonesia 2021)
Accelerating Implementations
10
Financing strategy for climate mitigation and adaptation in Indonesia [50] is currently at the preliminary stage of development. The concept is built with the assumption that the finance needs for climate actions should be addressed by optimizing climate finance system, starting from finance sources, finance institutions and their mechanisms as well as institutions receiv- ing finance to carry out programs/activities to achieve the set target. Therefore, the current efforts as part of the financing strategy for cli- mate mitigation and adaptation includes in- creasing diversification of sources of finance, strengthening capacity of finance institutions, and strengthening capacity of stakeholders in accessing finance.
The Government of Indonesia has taken a number of policies that open opportunity to increase diversification of finance sources from both national and international – public and private sources. At the national level, the oppor- tunities to optimize state budget are explored (e.g., using instruments of green sukuk or green bonds and draft of PERPRES NEK on Carbon Pric- ing Instruments such as fees and carbon levy;
instruments of intergovernmental fiscal trans- fer; instruments of PAD or regional income and other sources of income). Furthermore, Indone- sia continues to mobilize international financial sources through bilateral, regional, and multilat- eral channels, including result-based payment for REDD+ under the Paris Agreement, grant, and other potential sources and mechanisms.
Adaptation to climate change and lower emission intensities per output will contribute both to achieve food security and agricultur- al development as a whole. The transforma- tion must be accomplished without depletion of the natural resource base. FAO introduced Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) to contrib- ute transformation. CSA is an approach to de- veloping the technical, policy and investment conditions to achieve sustainable agricultural development for food security under climate change. The approach is designed to identify and operationalize sustainable agricultural de-
velopment within the explicit parameters of cli- mate change. It integrates the three dimensions of sustainable development (economic, social and environmental) by jointly addressing food security and climate challenges (FAO 2013). It is composed of three main pillars:
1. Sustainably increasing agricultural produc- tivity and incomes;
2. Adapting and building resilience to climate change;
3. Reducing and/or removing greenhouse gas- es emissions, where possible.
The scaling up of CSA practices will require appropriate institutional and governance mech- anisms to disseminate information, ensure broad participation and harmonize policies. It may not be possible to achieve all the CSA ob- jectives at once. Context-specific priorities need to be determined, and benefits and tradeoffs evaluated.
Climate change is already having an impact on agriculture and food security as a result of increased prevalence of extreme events and increased unpredictability of weather patterns.
This can lead to reductions in production and lower incomes in vulnerable areas.
Enhancing food security while contributing to mitigate climate change and preserving the natural resource base and vital ecosystem ser- vices requires the transition to agricultural pro- duction systems that are more productive, use inputs more efficiently, have less variability and greater stability in their outputs, and are more resilient to risks, shocks and long-term climate variability. More productive and more resilient agriculture land, water, soil nutrients and genet- ic resources management to ensure that these resources are used more efficiently. Making this shift requires considerable changes in national and local governance, legislation, policies and financial mechanisms. This transformation will also involve improving producers’ access to markets. By reducing greenhouse gas emissions per unit of land and/or agricultural product Accelerating Implementations
10
and increasing carbon sinks, these changes will contribute significantly to the mitigation of cli- mate change. Innovative financing mechanisms linking and blending climate and agricultural fi- nance from public and private sectors are a key means for implementation, as are the integra- tion and coordination of relevant policy instru- ments and institutional arrangements.