Sustainable Land Management for Mitigating Climate Change

XXI. Conclusions

130. This report has provided empirical examples from different parts of the world of SLM practices and technologies that have multiple benefits for communities and CC adaptation and mitigation. An important attribute of many SLM practices is the fact that similar practices/technologies are effective both for adaptation to and mitigation of CC. But for these SLM practices to have appreciable and visible CC benefits, they have to be adopted at scale in various parts of the world. Indeed various SLM practices present win-win options for mitigating and adapting to CC. Such practices reduce vulnerability to climate change by improving agronomic yields under adverse conditions, enhancing soil quality, and increasing farm income. But they also mitigate CC by sequestering C and reducing emission of other GHGs from agroecosystems. Such dual-impact SLM technologies include no-till farming with crop residue mulch, use of complex crop rotations including leguminous cover crops and agroforestry systems, perennial tree crops, integrated nutrient management involving elemental recycling and use of compost and biochar, water harvesting and recycling, and restoration of degraded and desertified soils.

131. Many SLM technologies are readily accessible to resource-poor farmers in developing countries, doable and have tangible and visible impacts in terms of economic, ecologic, social and cultural benefits. However, experiences from Latin America and the Caribbean, sub-Saharan Africa, East Asia and the Pacific, Middle-East and North Africa, Europe and Central Asia, and South Asia regions highlight the need for multi-pronged approaches to SLM that would tackle and address the issues of land tenure and property rights, confusion over institutional/agency collaboration and coordination, watershed management (upstream vs downstream linkages), payments for ecosystem services, the costs associated with land degradation and how to make the ‘business case’ for investments, chemical pollution from agricultural lands, and the unavoidable linkages between SLM and climate change actions. What is clear from these experiences is that for SLM practices to be adopted, the benefits of such practices must (i) accrue directly to the local land users, and (ii) ensure a dynamic upstream-downstream linkage between the affected stakeholders. Hence the operational focus of SLM interventions should not be on combating land degradation/ or desertification per se, but on sustainable land management practices that promote sound stewardship of the land resources while improving the food security and livelihoods of the affected households and communities.

132. A new generation of fertilizers, slow release formulations based on nano-enhanced materials and zeolites, are available to decrease losses and increase use efficiency. Bio-engineered and improved crops can be grown to adjust to high temperatures and extreme events. Innovative tillage methods, facilitated by the availability of improved crops, are available to reduce risks of high temperature, drought, inundation, runoff and soil erosion. Cost-effective SLM technologies exist to reduce water pollution, increase soil water reserves and improve water use efficiency.

133. Enhancing the ecosystem C pool through SLM practices has numerous co-benefits. In fact adoption of SLM technologies has a technical potential to off-set CO₂ emissions by as much as 4 Gt C/yr (2.8-5.3 Gt C/yr) through SCS, tree biomass, and biofuel substitutes (Table 33). And tapping the Carbon Market can help in scaling up SLM interventions. Targeted land rehabilitation measures can contribute to climate change (CC) management while tapping the carbon market. The World Bank’s Carbon Finance Program has demonstrated the potential of market-based public/private initiatives to invest significantly in sustainable land management interventions that provide measurable local and global benefits. Indeed the current portfolio has projects in various countries (e.g., Moldova Soil Conservation; Philippines Watershed Rehabilitation; Romania Afforestation; etc) that respond directly to the challenge of capturing and implementing the synergies among the three major global environmental conventions (i.e., UNCCD, UNFCCC, UNCBD).