Your search found 7 records
1 de Fraiture, Charlotte; Wichelns, D.; Rockstrom, J.; Kemp-Benedict, E.; Eriyagama, Nishadi; Gordon, L. J.; Hanjra, M. A.; Hoogeveen, J.; Huber-Lee, A.; Karlberg, L. 2007. Looking ahead to 2050: scenarios of alternative investment approaches. In Molden, David (Ed.). Water for food, water for life: a Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture. London, UK: Earthscan; Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). pp.91-145.
Food supply ; Food production ; Fisheries ; Water use ; Rainfed farming ; Irrigated farming ; Ecosystems ; Poverty
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: IWMI 630.7 G000 IWM Record No: H040196)
(2.97 MB)
2 Falkenmark, M.; Finlayson, Max; Gordon, L. J.; Bennett, E. M.; Chiuta, T. M.; Coates, D.; Ghosh, N.; Gopalakrishnan, M.; de Groot, R. S.; Jacks, G.; Kendy, E.; Oyebande, L.; Moore, M.; Peterson, G. D.; Portuguez, J. M.; Seesink, K.; Tharme, Rebecca; Wasson, R. 2007. Agriculture, water, and ecosystems: avoiding the costs of going too far. In Molden, David (Ed.). Water for food, water for life: a Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture. London, UK: Earthscan; Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI). pp.233-277.
Ecosystems ; Public health ; Rivers ; Water quality ; Water table ; Runoff ; Environmental effects ; Irrigation management
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: IWMI 630.7 G000 IWM Record No: H040199)
(3.36 MB)
3 Gordon, L. J.; Enfors, E. I. 2008. Land degradation, ecosystem services and resilience of smallholder farmers in Makanya Catchment, Tanzania. In Bossio, Deborah; Geheb, Kim (Eds.). Conserving land, protecting water. Wallingford, UK: CABI; Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute (IWMI); Colombo, Sri Lanka: CGIAR Challenge Program on Water & Food. pp.33-50. (Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture Series 6)
Land degradation ; Agroecosystems ; Catchment areas ; Ecosystems ; Rain ; Drought ; Farmers ; Food security / Tanzania / Makanya Catchment
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: IWMI 631.7 G000 BOS Record No: H041592)
4 Enfors, E. I.; Gordon, L. J.; Peterson, G. D.; Bossio, Deborah. 2008. Making investments in dryland development work: participatory scenario planning in the Makanya catchment, Tanzania. Ecology and Society, 13(2):42-60.
Investment ; Small scale farming ; Farming systems ; Agroecosystems ; Catchment areas ; Arid zones ; Case studies ; Farmers ; Participatory approaches ; Planning / Africa South of Sahara / Tanzania / Makanya Catchment
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H041765)
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art42/ES-2008-2649.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H041765.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H041765.pdf
The agro-ecosystems of semi-arid and dry sub-humid SSA are inherently dynamic. At this point in time they are also experiencing a series of complex social–ecological changes that make their future even more uncertain. To ensure that development investments made today in the small-scale farming systems that dominate these regions make sense also in a long-term perspective they should benefit the local communities over a range of potential futures. We applied a participatory scenario planning approach to a smallholder farming community in semi-arid Tanzania, exploring four alternative development trajectories for the area, to increase the robustness of current investments in small-scale water system technologies. We found that water system technologies will be important across a number of possible futures, but that the most relevant target of these innovations, e.g., staple- versus cash-crop production, or individual- versus community-managed systems, differs. We argue that building capacity for experimentation among farmers is key to upgrading their farming systems, as this will generate benefits over a range of alternative futures. Furthermore, we found it to be essential across a range of scenarios to analyze the system-level impact of proposed interventions for successful investments in water system technologies. We conclude that although the method presents some challenges, participatory scenario planning is a useful tool for integrating research and development projects in the larger context, asit increases the understanding of events and processes that may either challenge the project or provide opportunities for it.
5 Sinare, H.; Gordon, L. J.; Kautsky, E. E. 2016. Assessment of ecosystem services and benefits in village landscapes – a case study from Burkina Faso. Ecosystem Services, 21(Part A):141-152. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.08.004]
Ecosystem services ; Agricultural landscape ; Crop yield ; Compensation ; Small scale farming ; Smallholders ; Living standards ; Poverty ; Participatory approaches ; Social aspects ; Ecological factors ; Villages ; Spatial distribution ; Case studies / Sahel / Burkina Faso / Boursouma / Oula / Reko / Lebda / Koalma / Zarin
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H047869)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041616302170/pdfft?md5=aa435fe7e4a089aac54b0eb3d1770afc&pid=1-s2.0-S2212041616302170-main.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H047869.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H047869.pdf
(4.49 MB) (4.48 MB)
Most methods to assess ecosystem services have been developed on large scales and depend on secondary data. Such data is scarce in rural areas with widespread poverty. Nevertheless, the population in these areas strongly depends on local ecosystem services for their livelihoods. These regions are in focus for substantial landscape investments that aim to alleviate poverty, but current methods fail to capture the vast range of ecosystem services supporting livelihoods, and can therefore not properly assess potential trade-offs and synergies among services that might arise from the interventions. We present a new method for classifying village landscapes into social-ecological patches (landscape units corresponding to local landscape perceptions), and for assessing provisioning ecosystem services and benefits to livelihoods from these patches. We apply the method, which include a range of participatory activities and satellite image analysis, in six villages across two regions in Burkina Faso. The results show significant and diverse contributions to livelihoods from six out of seven social-ecological patches. The results also show how provisioning ecosystem services, primarily used for subsistence, become more important sources of income during years when crops fail. The method is useful in many data poor regions, and the patch-approach allows for extrapolation across larger spatial scales with similar social-ecological systems.
6 DeClerck, F. A. J.; Jones. S. K.; Attwood, S.; Bossio, D.; Girvetz, E.; Chaplin-Kramer, B.; Enfors, E.; Fremier, A. K.; Gordon, L. J.; Kizito, F.; Noriega, I. L.; Matthews, N.; McCartney, Matthew; Meacham, M.; Noble, Andrew; Quintero, M.; Remans, S.; Soppe, R.; Willemen, L.; Wood, S. L. R.; Zhang, W. 2016. Agricultural ecosystems and their services: the vanguard of sustainability? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 23:92-99. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2016.11.016]
Sustainable development ; Agriculture ; Farming systems ; Natural resources ; Ecosystem services ; Social welfare ; Environmental sustainability ; Landscape ; Biodiversity conservation ; Food security ; Food production ; Nutrition ; Farmland ; Diversification ; Social aspects
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H048008)
Sustainable Development Goals offer an opportunity to improve human well-being while conserving natural resources. Ecosystem services highlight human well-being benefits ecosystems, including agricultural ecosystems, provides. Whereas agricultural systems produce the majority of our food, they drive significant environmental degradation. This tension between development and environmental conservation objectives is not an immutable outcome as agricultural systems are simultaneously dependents, and providers of ecosystem services. Recognizing this duality allows integration of environmental and development objectives and leverages agricultural ecosystem services for achieving sustainability targets. We propose a framework to operationalize ecosystem services and resilience-based interventions in agricultural landscapes and call for renewed efforts to apply resilience-based approaches to landscape management challenges and for refocusing ecosystem service research on human well-being outcomes.
7 Springmann, M.; Clark, M.; Mason-D’Croz, D.; Wiebe, K.; Bodirsky, B. L.; Lassaletta, L.; de Vries, W.; Vermeulen, S. J.; Herrero, M.; Carlson, K. M.; Jonell, M.; Troell, M.; DeClerck, F.; Gordon, L. J.; Zurayk, R.; Scarborough, P.; Rayner, M.; Loken, B.; Fanzo, J.; Godfray, H. C. J.; Tilman, D.; Rockstrom, J.; Willett, W. 2018. Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature, 562:519-525. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0594-0]
Climate change ; Food systems ; Food consumption ; Environmental impact ; Ecosystems ; Land use ; Farmland ; Income ; Uncertainty ; Socioeconomic development ; Models ; Nitrogen ; Phosphorus
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H049453)
(8.12 MB)
The food system is a major driver of climate change, changes in land use, depletion of freshwater resources, and pollution of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems through excessive nitrogen and phosphorus inputs. Here we show that between 2010 and 2050, as a result of expected changes in population and income levels, the environmental effects of the food system could increase by 50–90% in the absence of technological changes and dedicated mitigation measures, reaching levels that are beyond the planetary boundaries that define a safe operating space for humanity. We analyse several options for reducing the environmental effects of the food system, including dietary changes towards healthier, more plant-based diets, improvements in technologies and management, and reductions in food loss and waste. We find that no single measure is enough to keep these effects within all planetary boundaries simultaneously, and that a synergistic combination of measures will be needed to sufficiently mitigate the projected increase in environmental pressures.
Powered by DB/Text WebPublisher, from
