CLIMATE AND FORESTS

 

 

Royal Government of Bhutan, 2017. Drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in Bhutan. Watershed Management Division, Department of Forests and Park Services, Ministry of Agriculture and Forests. [Pending publication]


Kissinger, G., 2017. Background report for identifying drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in Myanmar. UNEP-UN-REDD Programme & Myanmar Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation. Bangkok.


McFarland, W., S. Whitley, G. Kissinger, 2015. Subsidies to key commodities driving forest loss: Implications for private climate finance. Overseas Development Institute, London. 


Salvini, G., M. Herold, V. De Sy, G. Kissinger, M. Brockhaus, M. Skutsch, 2014. How countries link REDD+ interventions to drivers in their readiness plans: implications for monitoring systems. Environmental Research Letters. Link to paper.


Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation
A Synthesis Report for REDD+ Policymakers

Kissinger, G., M Herold, V. De Sy

Lexeme Consulting, Vancouver Canada, August 2012.

The long-term viability of REDD+ depends on altering business-as-usual activity in sectors currently driving greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from forests. This synthesis report investigates activities (drivers) that lead to deforestation and forest degradation. It explores the relevance of drivers in REDD+ policy development and implementation, key interventions to address driver activity, the role of drivers for national forest monitoring and for developing REDD+ forest reference (emission) levels. It concludes with recommendations intended to support the on-going international climate negotiations, as well as country-level plans and interventions to affect drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. 

Download Presentation (COP 18, Doha, Qatar).


Olander, L., C. Galik, G. Kissinger. Operationalizing REDD+: scope of reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradationCurrent Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. Available online 23 August 2012. Link to paper.


Kissinger G. 2011. Linking forests and food production in the REDD+ context. CCAFS Working Paper no. 1. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Copenhagen, Denmark. Link to report and policy brief.


Kissinger, G. 2010. Draft WWF Discussion Paper: Monitoring, Reporting and Verifying Social, Environmental and Governance Safeguards in REDD+, WWF.  Link to report.


Kissinger, G. 2010. Lessons Learned: Engaging Civil Society in REDD+ Programme (2009-2010), WWF. Link to report.


Kissinger, G., Sperling, F. 2010. A Critical Opportunity for Climate and Biodiversity Protection. WWF Norway, short-paper. Link to report.

Solutions towards sustainable agriculture

 

Pulse crops and sustainability: 
A framework to evaluate multiple benefits

Gabrielle Kissinger, 2016

UN International Year of Pulses, 2016

The potential of pulses—beans, peas, chickpeas, lentils, and other pulses—to help address future global food security, nutrition and environmental sustainability needs has been acknowledged through the UN declaration of the 2016 International Year of Pulses. However, the full set of benefits that pulse crops can offer has not been systematically characterized.

This paper specifically seeks to develop a framework to evaluate the economic, social and environmental benefits and potential trade-offs of pulse production in different geographic, agro-ecological and economic contexts. The framework defines the sustainability elements to be evaluated in any given context, given the diversity across cropping systems and geographic contexts of suitable pulse growing areas. The framework also provides a means to evaluate the potential sustainability contributions of pulses should they be brought into a cropping system, or integrated into crop rotations.

The primary audience for this white paper is the food industry, but government policy makers, researchers and other stakeholders will find utility in it as well. 


Fiscal Incentives For Agricultural Commodity Production:
Options To Forge Compatibility With Redd

Gabrielle Kissinger, 2015

UN-REDD Programme

brazil_0631.jpg
  1. Fiscal policies and incentives are often key underlying drivers of forest change that influence land use behavior in sectors that encroach on forests, although the understanding of their impacts on forests is often lacking. Fiscal policies have not been systematically examined as part of REDD+ readiness.
  2. Public policy and related fiscal policy and incentives must seek coherence across sectors, in order to over- come inherent conflicts between sectors and competing land uses, and to send the right signals.
  3. REDD+ provides an entry to rethink fiscal incentives for agricultural commodities as part of National REDD+ Strategies and Action Plans. 

No-till agriculture and climate change mitigation

Neufeldt, H., G Kissinger, J Alcamo, 2015. 

Nature Climate Change. June 2015
Volume 5 Number 6.

Following the introduction of improved agricultural practices at national scales, there is a growing demand to estimate mitigation benefits.

Taking an inventory approach, our results provide an overview of what has been achieved through the introduction of no-till.

The question at the heart of our study is: what are the mitigation co-benefits of technology change supported by agricultural development polices? Our work offers a preliminary response that highlights the urgent need for relevant information in formats useful to informed decision-making. 


Kissinger, G, C. Sova, B. Allassane, IA. Maïga, DT. Benefor, DK. Nutsukpo, AZ. Ky-Zerbo, C. Roth-Liehoun, SM. King’uyu, V. Orindi, E. Rojas, JL. Rivera, JP. Mishra, R. Singh, PK. Joshi, J. Kinyangi, P. Aggarwal, R. Zougmore, LS. Sebastian, D. Martinez, H. Neufeldt, J. Twyman, O. Bonilla-Findji and A. Jarvis, 2014. Climate adaptation and agriculture: Solutions to successful national adaptation plans. CCAFS Policy Brief No. 9. Copenhagen, Denmark: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Link to report and blog post on SBSTA 40 side-event, Bonn, Germany.


Co-author, agriculture chapter: UNEP 2013. The Emissions Gap Report 2013. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi. Link to report.


Kissinger G, Lee D, Orindi VA, Narasimhan P, King’uyu SM, Sova C. 2013. Planning climate adaptation in agriculture. Meta-synthesis of national adaptation plans in West and East Africa and South Asia. CCAFS Report No. 10. Copenhagen, Denmark: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Link to report and slideshare.


Behnassi, M., O. Pollmann, G. Kissinger (editors), 2013. Sustainable Food Security in the Era of Local and Global Environmental Change. Springer.


Kissinger, G., A. Brasser, and L. Gross, 2013. Reducing Risk: Landscape Approaches to Sustainable Sourcing. Washington, DC. EcoAgriculture Partners, on behalf of the Landscapes for People, Food and Nature Initiative. Link to synthesis reportSABMiller and Starbucks case studies, and scoping report.


Kissinger G. 2012. Corporate social responsibility and supply agreements in the agricultural sector: Decreasing land and climate pressures. CCAFS Working Paper no. 14. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Copenhagen, Denmark. Link to report.

Financing the transition to more sustainable land use

 

Fiscal incentives for Indonesian Palm Oil Production:
Pathways for alignment with green growth

UN Environment, 2017

DSCN0936.jpg

Fiscal policies and incentives are typically key underlying drivers of forest and land use change, though documentation of their impacts on land use is often lacking.

This exploration of fiscal incentives promoting oil palm production in Indonesia sought to better understand what current fiscal policies and instruments exist that influence oil palm production in Indonesia, the impacts of these incentives on forests and peatlands and what the Indonesian government could do to create better compatibility between oil palm production, green economy and livelihood objectives.

Link to paper: English version / Bahasa version.


McFarland, W., S. Whitley, G. Kissinger, 2015. Subsidies to key commodities driving forest loss: Implications for private climate finance. Overseas Development Institute, London. 


Financing Strategies for Integrated Landscape Investment:
Synthesis Report

Shames, S, M. Hill Clarvis, G. Kissinger; Seth Shames, ed., 2014

Washington, DC: EcoAgriculture Partners, on behalf of the Landscapes for People, Food and Nature Initiative.

Brazil Landscape.jpg

This study uncovered a wealth of models for financing Integrated Landscape Management (ILM), and for promoting integrated investments in agriculture, ecosystems and rural development.

The report provides a foundation for building robust investment platforms,􏰃􏰍􏰏􏰌including more effective private-public partnerships.

The cases from innovative financial institutions, as well as the case studies of landscapes from Brazil, Kenya and South Africa, demonstrate promising ways to add value and attract􏰑􏰐􏰊􏰉􏰙􏰌investment that benefits people, food and nature.􏰁􏰊􏰉􏰌 􏰉􏰗􏰉􏰄􏰑􏰃􏰞􏰉􏰌 􏰕􏰊􏰃􏰞􏰇􏰑􏰉􏰖􏰕􏰐􏰟􏰂􏰃􏰄􏰌 􏰕􏰇􏰊􏰑􏰍􏰉􏰊􏰋􏰒􏰃􏰕􏰋􏰙 􏰐􏰎􏰃 


Kissinger, G, 2014. Financing strategies for integrated landscape management: Integrated landscape initiative analysis. Washington, DC: EcoAgriculture Partners, on behalf of the Landscapes for People, Food and Nature Initiative. Link to report.


Kissinger, G, 2014. Case Study: Namaqualand, South Africa. Financing Strategies for Integrated Landscape Investment. Seth Shames, ed. Washington, DC: EcoAgriculture Partners, on behalf of the Landscapes for People, Food and Nature Initiative. 2014. Link to report.


Kissinger, G, 2014. Case Study: Imarisha Naivasha, Kenya. Financing Strategies for Integrated Landscape Investment. Seth Shames, ed. Washington, DC: EcoAgriculture Partners, on behalf of the Landscapes for People, Food and Nature Initiative. 2014. Link to report.


Kissinger, G, 2014. Case Study: Atlantic forest, Brazil. Financing Strategies for Integrated Landscape Investment. Seth Shames, ed. Washington, DC: EcoAgriculture Partners, on behalf of the Landscapes for People, Food and Nature Initiative. 2014. Link to report.


Kissinger, G., C. Patterson, H. Neufeldt, 2013. Payments for ecosystem services schemes: project-level insights on benefits for ecosystems and the rural poor; ICRAF Working Paper no. 161. Link to report.


Alternative investment models of sustainable and inclusive agriculture in developing countries:
A discussion paper

Kissinger, G., 2012

The Prince’s Charities’ International Sustainability Unit

Tocancipá Brewery: Image courtesy fotorudolf.com

Tocancipá Brewery: Image courtesy fotorudolf.com

How can alternative investment models be applied to agricultural production and related supply chains in developing countries that benefit the investor and the farmer and address food security and economic development needs? A large part of the solution lies in supporting inclusive agricultural production and supply chain business models that engage the world’s 500 million small-scale farmers and business models that efficiently manage scarce resources such as water.  Such investments create long-term value and mitigate long-term risks.

Both investors and civil society seek positive models from which to learn from, in order to guide willing capital to inclusive and sustainable agriculture. This report is aimed at both audiences, and beyond. Based on eight case studies, a literature review, and expert interviews, this report identifies answers to:

  • Provide case studies of investment models that have been used to invest in production-level agriculture and in the agricultural supply chain in developing countries (specifically in Africa) that reduce long-term investment risk and have positive economic, social and environmental outcomes.
  • Investigate whether these models are scalable, replicable and applicable to investors who are currently interested in deploying capital into this area.
  • Suggest whether current social and environmental guidelines and principles for investors looking to invest in agriculture in developing countries are sufficient to enable ‘good’ and ‘bad’ investments to be distinguished.

Governance to promote better land use and livelihoods

 

The Sustainable Development Goals and REDD+:
assessing institutional interactions and the pursuit of synergies

Bastos-Lima, M., G Kissinger, I Visseren-Hamakers, J Braña-Varela, A Gupta

International Environmental Agreements, 2017

 

This paper analyzes potential synergies between two recent sustainable development initiatives, namely the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+), a climate mitigation mechanism negotiated under the auspices of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

The research draws on literature review and document analysis, direct observations of global policy processes relating to REDD+ and SDGs, as well as extensive engagement (of one author) at national level in Indonesia and Myanmar. Analysis reveals that there are currently significant opportunities to pursue synergies in the implementation of these international initiatives at the national level, although pro-active interaction management is necessary, especially to achieve complementary synergies.


Pokorny, B., P Pacheco, P Cerutti, T Boekhout van Solinge, G Kissinger, L Tacconi, 2016. Drivers of Illegal and Destructive Forest Use. Chapter in Illegal Logging and Related Timber Trade – Dimensions, Drivers, Impacts and Responses. A Global Scientific Rapid Response Assessment Report, editted by D Kleinschmit, S Mansourian, C Wildburger, A Purret. International Union of Forest Research Organizations (IUFRO) World Series Volume 35. Vienna. 148 p.


Kissinger, G, T. Namgyel, 2013. NAPAs and NAPs in Least Developed Countries. ecbi Publications and Policy Analysis Unit for the LDC Group. Link to report and CDKN policy brief.


Kissinger G, Lee D, Orindi VA, Narasimhan P, King’uyu SM, Sova C. 2013. Planning climate adaptation in agriculture. Meta-synthesis of national adaptation plans in West and East Africa and South Asia. CCAFS Report No. 10. Copenhagen, Denmark: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Link to report and slideshare.


Private sector and business solutions to improved land use

 

Kissinger, G, M. Moroge, M. Noponen, 2014. Private sector investment in landscape approaches: the role of production standards and certification in Climate-smart landscapes: Multi-functionality in practice. ASB Partnership for the Tropical Forest Margins and World Agroforestry Centre.


Reducing Risk:
Landscape Approaches to Sustainable Sourcing

Kissinger, G., A. Brasser, and L. Gross

Washington, DC. EcoAgriculture Partners, on behalf of the Landscapes for People, Food and Nature Initiative, 2013

“The landscape approach has been championed by organisations active in the development and conservation sectors for many years, though the concept has been slow to migrate into mainstream corporate thinking. Now this report from the Landscapes for People, Food and Nature Initiative, sets out a case for companies to think about their business in landscape terms. I urge businesses, governments and other stakeholders to explore the key findings and messages within this report and apply similar approaches to their own operations.”

– José Lopez, Executive Vice President, Operations, Nestlé S.A.

 

“We face some very complex risks along our supply chains, all connected in some way to climate change. Addressing them only at the farm level won’t work. These problems involve too many interconnected variables.”

– Chris Brett, Head of Corporate Responsibility & Sustainability, Olam International

 

With a changing environmental and business landscape making the “business-as-usual model” unsustainable, companies are increasingly accounting for people and the planet to maintain profitability. While companies might see this new focus as a detriment to growth, some enterprising firms are already working with a multitude of stakeholders to increase social responsibility practices with an eye on the bottom line.

This report highlights best practices from among agribusinesses in their own pursuit of reducing risk. Out of an initial scope of 27 agribusinesses that are already using landscape approaches to deal with sustainability challenges, the authors chose three companies to investigate further—Starbucks, Olam International, and SABMiller—who are each taking unique proactive approaches to dealing with environmental and social risks.


Kissinger G. 2012. Corporate social responsibility and supply agreements in the agricultural sector: Decreasing land and climate pressures. CCAFS Working Paper no. 14. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Copenhagen, Denmark. Link to report.