Your search found 5 records
1 Porras, G. L.; Stringer, L. C.; Quinn, C. H. 2020. Building dryland resilience: three principles to support adaptive water governance. Ecological Economics, 177:106770. (Online first) [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106770]
Drylands ; Water governance ; Resilience ; Climate change ; Land degradation ; Environmental effects ; Ecosystem services ; Stakeholders ; Institutions ; Social aspects ; Conflicts ; Uncertainty
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H049929)
(0.23 MB)
Increasing dryland degradation and expansion shows that attempts to strengthen dryland resilience in the face of land degradation and climate change have not been successful. If current development pathways do not change, future prospects for the drylands are worrisome: potential large-scale migration, increasing water scarcity and land degradation, growing poverty, along with significant losses of key ecosystem services that support dryland social-ecological functioning. Based on our empirical research and the wider literature, we identify an important barrier to achieving resilience: poor integration of institutional and other human factors in shaping adaptive capacity, into ecosystem management. By exposing the need for a better understanding of the institutional setting, system stressors, and the human potential to face uncertainty, this paper integrates resilience and vulnerability approaches with adaptive governance, elucidating three principles that must be considered when moving towards more adaptive water governance. Use of these principles could represent a way forward to mitigate dryland degradation and the problems related to conflicts, marginalisation, and migration, increasing dryland resilience through water governance. The next steps should be the implementation of these principles in drylands or any ecosystem with undesirable states of water governance, to better integrate societal factors in efforts to strengthen dryland resilience.
2 DeClerck, F. A. J.; Koziell, I.; Sidhu, A.; Wirths, J.; Benton, T.; Garibaldi, L. A.; Kremen, C.; Maron, M.; Rumbaitis del Rio, C.; Clark, M.; Dickens, Chris; Estrada-Carmona, N.; Fremier, A. K.; Jones, S. K.; Khoury, C. K.; Lal, R.; Obersteiner, M.; Remans, R.; Rusch, A.; Schulte, L. A.; Simmonds, J.; Stringer, L. C.; Weber, C.; Winowiecki, L. 2021. Biodiversity and agriculture: rapid evidence review. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE). 70p. [doi: https://doi.org/10.5337/2021.215]
Agrobiodiversity ; Food systems ; Agricultural productivity ; Healthy diets ; Nutrition ; Livelihoods ; Food security ; Food production ; Diversification ; Agroecology ; Ecosystem services ; Habitats ; Environmental security ; Water quality ; Water security ; Climate change mitigation ; Resilience ; Sustainable Development Goals ; Policies ; Investment ; Agricultural landscape ; Soil fertility ; Pollination ; Pest control ; Genetic diversity (as resource) ; Developing countries
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050605)
(7.29 MB)
3 DeClerck, F. A. J.; Koziell, I.; Benton, T; Garibaldi, L. A.; Kremen, C.; Maron, M.; Rumbaitis Del Rio, C.; Sidhu, A.; Wirths, J.; Clark, M.; Dickens, Chris; Carmona, N. E.; Fremier, A. K.; Jones, S. K.; Khoury, C. K.; Lal, R.; Obersteiner, M.; Remans, R.; Rusch, A.; Schulte, L. A.; Simmonds, J.; Stringer, L. C.; Weber, C.; Winowiecki, L. 2021. A whole earth approach to nature positive food: biodiversity and agriculture. Food Systems Summit Briefs. Bonn, Germany: University of Bonn. Center for Development Research (ZEF) in cooperation with the Scientific Group for the United Nations Food Systems Summit 2021. 26p. [doi: https://doi.org/10.48565/scfss2021-h174]
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050603)
https://sc-fss2021.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/FSS_Brief_Nature_Positive_Agriculture.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H050603.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H050603.pdf
(1.23 MB) (1.23 MB)
4 Chinseu, E. L.; Dougill, A. J.; Stringer, L. C.. 2022. Strengthening conservation agriculture innovation systems in Sub-Saharan Africa: lessons from a stakeholder analysis. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 20(1):17-30. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2021.1911511]
Conservation agriculture ; Innovation systems ; Stakeholder analysis ; Climate-smart agriculture ; Farming systems ; Agricultural research for development ; Sustainable intensification ; Land management ; Policies ; Government ; Non-governmental organizations ; Donors ; Collaboration / Africa South of Sahara / Malawi
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H050921)
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14735903.2021.1911511
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H050921.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H050921.pdf
(2.33 MB) (2.33 MB)
Complexity of African agrarian systems necessitates that agricultural research and development transition to agricultural innovation system [AIS] approaches. While AIS perspectives are embraced across sub-Saharan Africa, engagement of stakeholders in agricultural research and development processes as espoused in AIS paradigm remains limited. This paper aims to analyze key stakeholders in the AIS in Malawi using the case of Conservation Agriculture [CA]. We analyze roles, organizational capacity and collaboration of stakeholders in Malawi’s CA innovation system. Although Government has the most extensive role, NGOs dominate the national CA agenda, while smallholder farmers remain passive recipients of CA interventions. Many CA promoters lack technical and financial capacity, and pursue limited collaboration, which diminish prospects of inclusive stakeholder engagement. While insufficient resources lead to inadequate technical support to smallholders, the limited collaboration hinders integration of programmes, multiple sources of innovation and knowledge required to foster social learning and sustainability of CA. Our findings indicate a need to: (1) strengthen understanding of AIS approaches among CA innovation system stakeholders; (2) build stronger partnerships in CA research and development by strengthening stakeholder platforms and social processes; (3) strengthen collaboration advisory mechanisms to facilitate knowledge-sharing, resource mobilization and joint programme implementation with strengthened feedback loops.
5 DeClerck, F. A. J.; Koziell, I.; Benton, T.; Garibaldi, L. A.; Kremen, C.; Maron, M.; Del Rio, C. R.; Sidhu, A.; Wirths, J.; Clark, M.; Dickens, Chris; Carmona, N. E.; Fremier, A. K.; Jones, S. K.; Khoury, C. K.; Lal, R.; Obersteiner, M.; Remans, R.; Rusch, A.; Schulte, L. A.; Simmonds, J.; Stringer, L. C.; Weber, C.; Winowiecki, L. 2023. A whole earth approach to nature-positive food: biodiversity and agriculture. In von Braun, J.; Afsana, K.; Fresco, L. O.; Hassan, M. H. A. (Eds.). Science and innovations for food systems transformation. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. pp.469-496. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15703-5_25]
Food systems ; Biodiversity ; Agriculture ; Nature-based solutions ; Nutrition ; Healthy diets ; Dietary diversity ; Food security ; Ecosystem services ; Climate change ; Environmental factors
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H051666)
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-031-15703-5_25?pdf=chapter%20toc
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H051666.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H051666.pdf
(0.62 MB) (630 KB)
Agriculture is the largest single source of environmental degradation, responsible for over 30% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, 70% of freshwater use and 80% of land conversion: it is the single largest driver of biodiversity loss (Foley JA, Science 309:570–574, 2005, Nature 478:337–342, 2011; IPBES. Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES Secretariat, Bonn, 2019; Willett W et al. The Lancet 393:447–492, 2019). Agriculture also underpins poor human health, contributing to 11 million premature deaths annually. While too many still struggle from acute hunger, a growing number of individuals, including in low to middle-income countries (LMICs), struggle to access healthy foods. Greater consideration for, and integration of, biodiversity in agriculture is a key solution space for improving health, eliminating hunger and achieving nature-positive development objectives.
This rapid evidence review documents the best available evidence of agriculture’s relationships with biodiversity, drawing on the contributions of leading biodiversity experts, and recommends actions that can be taken to move towards more biodiversity/nature-positive production through the delivery of integrated agricultural solutions for climate, biodiversity, nutrition and livelihoods. The analysis, which takes a whole-of-food-system approach, brings together a large body of evidence. It accounts for aspects not typically captured in a stand-alone primary piece of research and indicates where there are critical gaps.
This rapid evidence review documents the best available evidence of agriculture’s relationships with biodiversity, drawing on the contributions of leading biodiversity experts, and recommends actions that can be taken to move towards more biodiversity/nature-positive production through the delivery of integrated agricultural solutions for climate, biodiversity, nutrition and livelihoods. The analysis, which takes a whole-of-food-system approach, brings together a large body of evidence. It accounts for aspects not typically captured in a stand-alone primary piece of research and indicates where there are critical gaps.
Powered by DB/Text WebPublisher, from
