Climate resilient agriculture adaptation and mitigation strategies

Climate resilient agriculture adaptation and mitigation strategies

4. Meaning and definition
Climateresiliencereferstotheabilityofasystemtodealwith
stressesanddisturbances,whileretainingthesamebasicstructureandways
offunctioning,capacityforself-organisationandcapacitytolearnandadapt
tochange.Resilienceisthereforeaboutmanagingchangesandadaptations
shouldcontributetoclimateresilientdevelopment,i.e.adaptationthatcan
standthetestofcurrentandfutureclimaterisks(IPCC,2007).
Climateresilientpracticesmeanstheincorporationofadaptation,
mitigationandotherpracticesinagriculturewhichincreasesthecapacityof
thesystemtorespondtovariousclimaterelateddisturbancesbyresisting
damageandrecoveringquickly(Prabhavati,2016).

5. Sustainability
Building
resilience
Reducing
GHGs emission
Three Pillars of CRA

6. 18
th
rank on
climate risk
index
(Kreft
&Eckstein,
2013)
Increasing
population
and food
consumption
Reduce in
yields by 4.5
to 9 per cent
(FAO, 2013)
Climate
change costs
roughly upto
1.5 per cent
GDP per year
Developing climate resilient agriculture is crucial
Need for climate resilient practices in India

8. Adaptation and mitigation definition
Adaptation refers to , “adjustments in ecological, social or
economic systems in response to actual or expected stimuli and
their effects or impacts. This term refers to change in process,
practices and structures to moderate potential damages or to
benefit from opportunities associated with climate change”
(IPCC,2001)
Mitigation is an intervention to reduce the emissions sources or
enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases (IPCC 2001).

9. Adaptation strategies
1.Developing cultivars tolerant to heat and salinity stress and
resistant to flood and drought
2.Modifying crop management practices
3.Improving water management
4.Adopting new farm techniques such as resource conserving
technologies (RCTs)
5.Crop diversification
6.Improving pest management
7.Better weather forecasting
8.Crop insurance
9.Harnessing the indigenous technical knowledge of farmers
(Source: Climate change impact, adaptation and mitigation in agriculture: methodology
for assessment and application)

10. Mitigation Strategies to Climate Change
Measure Examples
Croplandmanagement Improved agronomic practices
Nutrient management
Water management
Tillage management
Restorationof degraded lands Erosion control, organic amendments
Livestock management Improvedfeeding practices
Specific agents and dietary additives
Manure management Anaerobic digestion
More efficient use as nutrientsource
(Source: Adaptation and mitigation strategies for climate resilient agriculture, Ravindra et al., 2013)

12. Longer-term
effect
Shorter-term
effect
Water and
cropland
management
Global
Local
Effects of
climate change
Causes of
climate change
Mitigation
Main differences between adaptation and mitigation
Objectives
Spatial
scale
Time scale Sector
Adaptation
Same final common target: Sustainable development
Transportation,
industry and waste
management

13. Climate Smart Agriculture
Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) is an approach that helps to guide
actions needed to transform and reorient agricultural systems to
effectively support the development and ensure food security in a
changing climate(FAO).
The term climate-smart agricultural development was first used in
2009
A year later(2010), at the First Global Conference on Agriculture, Food
Security and Climate Change at Hague, the concept of climate-smart
agriculture (CSA) was presented

14. Concept of Climate Resilient Agriculture / Climate
Smart Agriculture (CSA)
CSAhasemergedasawayforwardtoconsolidateandstrengthentheclimate
changeadaptationandmitigationregimeatthegloballevel.
CSAintegratestheeconomic,socialandenvironmentaldimensionsof
sustainabledevelopmentbyjointlyaddressingfoodsecurityandclimatechange
challenges.
Tobemorespecific,CSAisanapproachtodevelopthetechnical,policyand
investmentconditionstoachievesustainableagriculturaldevelopmentthrough
anintegratedapproachthatisresponsivetolocalconditions.
CSAbringstogetherpractices,policiesandinstitutionsthatarenotnecessarily
newbutareusedinthecontextofclimaticchanges,whichareunfamiliarto
farmers.

15. National Initiative on Climate Resilient
Agriculture (NICRA)
A network project of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research
(ICAR)
Launched in February, 2011
Aim of the project: to enhance resilience of Indian agriculture to
climate change and climate vulnerability
through strategic research and technology
demonstration.
The research on adaptation and mitigation covers crops, livestock,
fisheries and natural resource management.

16. ICARlaunchedamajorProjectentitled,NationalInitiativeonClimate
ResilientAgriculture(NICRA)during2010-11withthefollowing
objectives.
1.ToenhancetheresilienceofIndianagriculturecoveringcrops,livestock
andfisheriestoclimaticvariabilityandclimatechangethrough
developmentandapplicationofimprovedproductionandrisk
managementtechnologies.
2.Todemonstratesitespecifictechnologypackagesonfarmers’fieldsfor
adaptingtocurrentclimaterisks.
3.Toenhancethecapacitybuildingofscientistsandotherstakeholdersin
climateresilientagriculturalresearchanditsapplication.
Objectives

17. Strategic research
Technology demonstration
Capacity building
Sponsored / competitive
grants
The project consists of four components

18. Village level interventions towards climate resilient
agriculture
1.Building resilience in soil
2.Adapted cultivars and cropping systems
3.Rainwater harvesting and recycling
4.Water saving technologies
5.Farm machinery (custom hiring) centres
6.Crop contingency plans
7.Livestock and fishery interventions
8.Weather based agro advisories
9.Institutional interventions
10.Village Climate Risk Management Committee (VCRMC)

19. Intervention modules of Technology Demonstration
1.Module I: Natural resources
2.Module II: Crop production
3.Module III: Live stock and fisheries
4.Module IV: Institutional interventions

22. Awareness and adoption of climate resilient
practices by potato growers of Dharwaddistrict
Prabhavathi (2016)

23. Methodology
•Study area: Dharwad district in Karnataka
•Random sampling design was employed for the selection
of the sample respondents.
•Sample size: 120

24. Table 1. Awareness of farmers regarding climate resilient practices of potato
Sl.No.Climate resilient practices
Farmers response
Aware Not aware
F % F %
1. Use of improved high yielding and early maturingvarieties
(KufriPukhrajand KufriJawahar)
116 96.66 4 3.33
2. Use of heat tolerant varieties (KufriSurya) 60 50.00 60 50.00
3. Shifting the date of sowing of potato from 2
nd
fortnight of
juneto 1
st
week of july
62 51.66 58 48.33
4. Dehaulmingof potato 67 55.83 53 44.17
5. Use of well decomposed FYM in summer crop cultivation76 63.33 44 36.67
6. Deep ploughing in summer 61 50.83 59 49.16
7. Earthingup of potato 109 90.83 11 9.16
8. Drip irrigation 45 37.50 75 62.50
9. Soil and water conservation practices
a.Farm pond 110 91.66 10 8.33
b.Contour bund 72 60.00 48 40.00
c.Graded bunds 45 37.50 75 62.50
d.Ridges andfurrows 94 78.33 26 21.67
e.Mulching 33 27.50 87 72.50
n=120

25. Table 2. Adoption of climate resilient practices by the potato growers
n=120
Sl.No
Climate resilient practices
Level of adoption
FA PA NA
F % F % F %
1 Use of improved high yielding and early maturingvarieties (Kufri
Pukhrajand KufriJawahar)
96 80.0020 16.674 3.33
2 Use of heat tolerant varieties (KufriSurya) 15 12.5076 63.3329 24.17
3 Shifting the date of sowing of potato from 2
nd
fortnight ofJune to
1
st
week of July
60 50.0050 41.6710 8.33
4 Dehaulmingof potato 40 33.3327 22.5053 44.17
5 Use of well decomposed FYM in summer crop cultivation67 55.8347 39.176 5.00
6 Deep ploughing in summer 16 13.3346 38.3358 48.33
7 Earthingup of potato 72 60.0044 36.674 3.33
8 Drip irrigation 9 7.5019 15.8392 76.67
9 Soil and water conservation practices
a Farm pond 32 26.6753 44.1735 29.17
b Contour bund 23 19.1751 67.5046 13.33
c Graded bunds 8 6.6736 30.0076 63.33
d Ridges andfurrows 54 45.0042 35.0024 20.00
e Mulching 2 1.6729 24.1789 74.16

26. Table 3. Farmers suggestions to mitigate the ill effects of climate change
Sl.No.Farmerssuggestions Frequency % Rank
1 Development department should arrange for
timely supply of production inputs like seeds,
fertilizers, fungicides etc., in the villages
117 97.50I
2 Subsidies/ compensationhas to be given for the
potato crop to make up the cost of cultivation
due to weather aberrations
103 85.83II
3 Early warning has to be given to the potato
growers about environmental changes
89 74.16III
4 Effective implementation of weatherrelated
insurance scheme
54 45.00IV
5 Providing financial support for soil nutrient
enrichment
41 34.16V
6 Creating awareness to the potatogrowers about
appropriate resilient practices/ measures against
climate change
40 33.33VI
7 Creating awareness / support for adoption of
organic farming technologies
27 22.50VII
n= 120

27. Economic benefits of climate-smart
agricultural practices to smallholder farmers in
the Indo-GangeticPlains of India
Arun et al. (2016)

28. Methodology
•Study area: Bihar (Vaishali district) and Haryana (Karnal
district) states of India
•Random sampling design was employed for the selection
of the sample respondents
•Sample size: 641 in Vaishali district
626 in Karnal district
1,267

29. Practice Frequency Percentage
Improved crop varieties 1041 80
Laser land levelling 532 42
Crop rotations 291 23
Zero tillage practice 140 11
Table 1: Climate-smart agriculture practices and technologies
adopted by farmers
n=1267

30. Knowledge and adoption of drought mitigation
technologies followed by farmers of Gadag
district
Vijayalaxmi(2015)

31. Methodology
Study area: Gadag district of Karnataka
Simple Random technique was employed for the selection of the
sample respondents
Sample size: 120

32. Sl.No. Practices
Aware
Frequency Percentage
1. Pre-sowing arrangements
a Organicmatter incorporation 120 100
b Use drought resistant varieties 80 66.66
c Seed treatment 116 96.66
d Contingent crop plans 56 46.66
2. Land grading Andconservation of natural resources
a Contour bunding 100 83.33
b Conservation furrows at 15-20cm 39 32.50
c Compartment bunding 88 73.33
d Mulching 116 96.66
e Live bunds 117 97.50
f Farm pond 61 50.83
Table 1: Knowledge of individual drought mitigation practices by farmers
(n=120)

33. Sl.No.Practices Aware
Frequency Percentage
3. Tillageoperations and planting geometry
a Off season tillage 106 83.33
b Secondary tillage / hoeing 112 93.33
c Deep ploughing 87 72.50
d Wider row spacing 60 50.00
e Paired row spacing 41 34.16
f Protective irrigation from farm pond59 49.16
4. Diversification of agriculture
a Animal husbandry 120 100
b Horticulture 54 45.00
c Poultry 49 40.83
d Vegetable cultivation 64 53.33
e Vermicompost 94 78.33
Contd.......

34. Sl.No. Practices
Aware
Frequency Percentage
5. Alternate land use system
a Agroforestry 65 54.16
b Agri–hortisystems 85 70.83
c Agri–pastoral systems 46 38.33
6. Nutrient management
a Green leaf manuring 105 87.50
b Tank silt application 61 50.83
c Recommended dose of fertilizer 118 98.33
Contd.......

35. Table 2: Adoption of individual drought mitigation practices by farmers
Sl.No. Practices
Adoption level
Adoption Non adoption
1. Pre-sowing arrangements
a Organicmatter incorporation 102 (85.00) 18 (15.00)
b Use drought resistant varieties 36 (30.00) 86 (70.00)
c Seed treatment 73 (60.83) 47 (39.17)
d Contingent crop plans 26 (21.67) 94 (78.33)
2. Land grading Andconservation of natural resources
a Contour bunding 53 (44.16) 67 (55.84)
b Conservation furrows at 15-20cm 11 (9.16) 109 (90.84)
c Compartment bunding 50 (41.66) 70 (58.34)
d Mulching 74 (61.66) 46 (38.34)
e Live bunds 88 (73.33) 32 (26.67)
f Farm pond 70 (58.33) 50 (41.67)
(n=120)

36. Sl.No.Practices Adoption level
Adoption Non adoption
3. Tillageoperations and planting geometry
a Off season tillage 74 (61.66) 46 (38.34)
b Secondary tillage / hoeing 78 (65.00) 42 (35.00)
c Deep ploughing 52 (43.33) 68 (56.67)
d Wider row spacing 18 (15.00) 102 (85.00)
e Paired row spacing 16 (13.33) 104 (86.67)
f Protective irrigation from farm pond56 (46.66) 64 (53.34)
4. Diversification of agriculture
a Animal husbandry 92 (76.66) 28 (23.34)
b Horticulture 23 (19.66) 97 (80.84)
c Poultry 8 (6.66) 112 (93.37)
d Vegetable cultivation 30 (25.00) 90 (75.00)
e Vermicompost 64 (53.33) 56 (46.67)
Contd.......

37. Sl.No. Practices
Adoption level
Adoption Non adoption
5. Alternate land use system
a Agroforestry 29 (24.16) 91 (75.84)
b Agri–hortisystems 38 (31.66) 82 (68.34)
c Agri–pastoral systems 32 (26.66) 88 (73.34)
6. Nutrient management
a Green leaf manuring 57 (47.50) 63 (52.50)
b Tank silt application 18 (15.00) 102 (85.00)
Contd.......

38. Impact of climate change on rainfed
agriculture in India: A case study of Dharwad
Ashalatha et al. (2012)

39. Methodology
•Study area: Dharwad district in Karnataka
•Random sampling design was employed for the selection
of the sample respondents
•Sample size: 250

40. Table 1. Major coping mechanism adopted by rain fed farmers to
mitigate the impact of climate change
Coping mechanism Small
farmers
Medium
farmers
Large
farmers
Total
farmers(%)
Technological mitigation
Change in cropping pattern 60.00 40.00 26.67 42.22
Mixed /intercropping 93.33 76.67 56.67 75.56
Cultivating tree crops 0.00 10.00 76.67 28.89
Soil organic matter enhancement 46.67 46.67 16.67 36.67
Drought resistant 13.33 43.33 20.00 25.56
Integrated /mixed farmingsystem 93.33 76.67 43.33 71.11
Socio-economic factors
Reduced consumptionexpenditure 60.00 50.00 0.00 36.67
Shifting to other profession 80.00 50.00 20.00 50.00
Borrowing 86.67 50.00 10.00 48.89
Crop insurance 6.67 16.67 10.00 11.11
Selling of land andlivestock 26.67 6.67 3.33 12.22
No response 6.67 23.33 23.33 17.78
n= 250

41. Farmers awareness of climate change and their
adaptations
Ravindra (2012)

42. Methodology
•Study area: Bijapur district of Karnataka
•Random sampling design was employed for the selection
of the sample respondents
•Sample size:150

43. Table 1: Adaption measures undertaken by farmers to deal with climate change in crop
production
Sl.
No
Adaption measuresinitiated in crop
production
Adaptionmeasures
Initiated Not initiated
Frequency Percentage FrequencyPercentage
1 Changed from long duration to short duration
varieties
138 92 12 8
2 Changed from short duration to long duration
varieties
126 84 24 16
3 Crop diversification 118 78.66 32 21.33
4 Changed in planting dates 35 23.33 115 76.66
Increased Decreased No change
Frequen
cy
Percentag
e
Frequenc
y
Percentag
e
Frequenc
y
Percentage
5 Spacing between
rows/plants
133 88.66 10 6.66 7 4.66
6 Adoption ofIFS 36 24 93 62.00 21 14
7 Number of irrigation given 32 32.98 23 23.71 42 43.29
8 Qualityof seeds used 16 10.66 30 20 104 69.33
9 Qualityof fertilizer
application
6 4 40 26.66 104 69.33
(n=150)

44. Table 2: Adaption measures initiated in response to climate change in
soil and water conservation by the famers
Sl. No Adaption
measures
Adopted Not adopted
Frequency PercentageFrequency Percentage
1 Farm pond 37 24.66 113 75.33
2 Contour
bunds
17 11.33 113 75.33
3 Graded
bunds
22 14.66 128 85.33
4 Ridges and
furrows
49 32.66 101 67.33
5 Mulching 7 4.66 143 95.33
6 Drip
irrigation
13 8.66 137 91.33
(n=150)

45. Table 3: Constraints faced by farmers during adaption to climate change
Sl.
No
Constraints More severe Severe Less severe Rank
1 Higher cost of the agricultureralinputs 111 74 39 26 0.000.00I
2 Non availability of inputs in time 111 74 39 26 0.000.00I
3 Difficult to work in the field due to
severe temperature
110 73.3339 26 1.000.66II
4 Low price for the produce in the
market
104 69.3341 27.335 3.33III
5 Lack of knowledge about post harvest
technology
58 38.6630 20 62 41.3
3
IV
6 Lack of knowledge about processing
of differentcrops
57 38 27 18 66 44. V
7 Lack of storagefacility in the village 55 36.6650 33.3345 30 VI
8 Absence ofprocessing units in the
village
54 36 44 29.3352 34.6
6
VII
9 Grading for the produce to maintain
their quality
54 36 21 14 75 50.0
0
VII
10Lack of knowledge regarding
appropriate adaption measures
54 32.6661 40.6640 26.6
6
VIII
11Lack of information about long term
climate change
49 32 74 49.3328 18.6
6
IX
(n=150)

46. Table 4: Suggestions given by the farmers to mitigate the ill effects of
climate change
Sl.No. Suggestions Freque
ncy
Percenta
ge
Rank
1 Providing financial support for soil enrichment 105 70 I
2 Insurance has to be extended to all the crops 102 68 II
3 Subsidies/ compensation has tobe given for the crops to make up
the cost of cultivation
93 62 III
4 Creating awareness/ support for adoption of organic farming
technologies
70 46 IV
5 Incentives/support for increasing the green manuring 53 35.33 V
6 Supportprice has to be given to all the crop produce based on cost
of cultivation
50 33.33 VI
7 Development department should ensure supply of production inputs
at appropriate time in the villages
23 15.33 VII
8 Creating awareness among the farmers about appropriate adaption
measures against climate change
20 13.33 VIII
9 Early warning has to be given to the farmersabout environment
changes
19 12.66 IX
(n=150)

47. Farmers’ awareness, vulnerability and
adaptation to climate change in Adamawa State,
Nigeria
Adebayo et al. (2012)

48. Methodology
•Study area: Adamawa state, Nigeria
•Multi stage sampling technique was employed for the selection of
the sample respondents
•Sample size: 340

49. Table 1: Adaptation measures being used by farmers
n=340
Adaptation measures Number Percentage
Altering plant schedule 89 26.18
Using different tillage
system
41 12.06
Tolerant seed variety 104 30.59
Planting early maturing seed70 20.59
Crop diversification 36 10.59
Total 340 100.00

50. Table 2: Factors hindering adaptation
n=340
Limiting factors Number Percentage
Information 147 43.23
Appropriate technology93 27.35
Necessary input 92 27.06
Labour 8 2.35
Total 340 100.00

51. A study on constraints faced by farmers in adapting
to climate change in rainfedagriculture
Satishkumar et al. (2011-12)

52. Methodology
Study area: Mahaboobnagar, Ranga Reddy and Ananthapur
districts of Andhra Pradesh
Random sampling technique was employed for the selection of the
sample respondents
Sample size: 150 ( 50 respondents from each mandal )

53. Table 1: Constrains faced in adaptability measures to climate vulnerability
(n=150)
Sl.no Particulars Frequency %
A Personal Constraints
1 Small size fragmented landholdings 90 60
2 Low literacy level 84 56
3 Inadequate knowledge of how to cope or build resilience 68 45
4 Traditional belief /practice on the concomitant of farming practices46 31
B Institutional Constraints
5 Poor extension service on climate risk management 108 72
6 Poor access to information sources 93 62
7 Non-availability of institutional credit 78 52
C Technical Constraints
8 Non availability of drought tolerant varieties (timely) 107 71
9 Lack of access to weather forecasting technology and poor reliability on it.99 66
10 Highly dependent on monsoon 96 64
11 High cost of irrigation facilities 69 46
12 Difficulties in shifting to different cropping patterns in short duration of time63 42
13 Lack of technical know–how on climate change and its consequences and
adaptation strategies
60 40

54. Assessment of local perceptions on climate
change and coping strategies in
ChotanagpurPlateau of Eastern India
Jaipalet al. (2012)

55. Methodology
Study area: Chotanagpur plateau
Simple Random technique was employed for the selection of the
sample respondents
Sample size: 355

56. Table 1: Coping and adoptive strategies measures adopted by the farmers to
combat climate change
n=355
Adopted measures Yes (%) No(%) Don’t know(%)
Pre-monsoon dry seeding 45.81 7.74 46.45
Agroforestry 36.77 8.39 54.84
Crop rotation 46.45 5.81 54.19
Change in time of farm operation 42.58 6.45 50.97
Integrated farming 35.48 7.74 56.77
Inter cropping 40.00 7.10 52.90
Mulching 30.97 12.90 56.13
Rain water harvesting 38.06 10.32 51.61
Zero tillage to conserve soil, moisture & save time28.39 11.61 60.00
Use of short duration crop varieties 45.81 3.23 50.97
Drought tolerant crop and crop varieties 36.13 11.61 52.26
Soil conservation techniques 38.71 7.10 54.19
Water conservation techniques 37.42 12.26 50.32
ITK to control disease, insects & pests 40.00 9.68 50.32
Use of organic & inorganic products to control disease42.58 8.39 49.03
Innovative approaches to improve yield, control disease39.35 7.74 52.90