CCAFS Selection of New Regions

Bonn, June 2011

Next round of region selection

Final CRP7 proposal

• A process to identify, by the end of 2011, two further target regions for starting activities and baselines in 2012

• Three further regions to be identified during 2012, with activities and baselines being undertaken starting in 2013

ISPC comments on CRP7 proposal

• Too much dilution of effort: identify just two further target regions by the end of 2011

Selection criteria proposed for the next set of regions (Nairobi launch meeting May 2010 and MT meeting Feb 2011)

1. Regions that complement the current regions so that CCAFS is a global program (complementarities related to geographical spread, agricultural potential, coverage of agroecological zones, nature of the adaptation challenges, …)

2. Regions with high potential for pro-poor mitigation

3. Regions with hotspots of vulnerability and climate change

4. Regions with high potential for innovation, adoption and impact

5. Regions in which there is sufficient institutional support to implement a regional research-for-development program

Process to select new regions

1 A global vulnerability assessment report (June)

2 A document with the draft selection criteria, the list of potential target regions, and the proposed process (June)

3 Design (July) and implement (August) an activity to evaluate each candidate region according to the criteria using objective methods (if available) or expert judgment (if not) for the following stakeholders:(a) Contact points and 5-8 global partners(b) CCAFS Management Team(c) CCAFS Independent Scientific Panel

4 Circulate to partners for final feedback (MT, October)

5 Final decision by the CIAT Board (November)

Existing regions

Region Sample countries (with “Medium” or “Low” HDI)

Eastern Africa Burundi, Comoros, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda

Western Africa Benin, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Cote d'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo

Indo-Gangetic Plain

Bangladesh, India, Nepal (Pakistan)

Candidate regions

Region Sample countries (with “Medium” or “Low” HDI)

Middle Africa Angola, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, DR Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Sao Tome & Principe

Northern Africa &Western Asia

Egypt, Morocco, Sudan; Syria, Yemen

Southern Africa Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Zambia, Zimbabwe

Central America &Caribbean

El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua; Dominican Republic, Haiti

South America Bolivia, Guyana, Paraguay, Suriname

Central Asia Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan

Eastern Asia China, Mongolia

South Asia (expansion) Afghanistan, Maldives,Pakistan, Sri Lanka

South-Eastern Asia Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Viet Nam

Oceania Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Federated Micronesia

Candidate region evaluation

Criteria

Regions

Rate low / medium / high / unknown

with a sentence of explanation

Ask respondents to do all candidate region or a subset

Criterion Information that could be used

1 Complementarities Agro-ecological zones, human populations and rates of change, populations in poverty, agricultural potential, …

2 Potential for pro-poor mitigation (1) Areas with high mitigation potential of the natural system (above ground biomass, soil C potential, wetlands and organic soils, degraded areas, grasslands, forest boundaries …)(2) Areas where existing or potential practices create high emissions - interventions could have high impact (livestock densities, areas with high fertilizer use, large areas of wet rice, …)

3 Hotspots of food system vulnerability Vulnerability mapping report

4 Potential for innovation and impact -

5 Institutional support -

Are there objective inputs to the process?

3 Hotspots of vulnerability

Exposure of populations to the impacts of climate change

(hi, lo)

Sensitivity of food systems

to these impacts(hi, lo)

Coping capacity of populations

to address these impacts

(hi, lo)

x x

Agricultural land areas from 35 ⁰S to 45 ⁰N (Ramankutty et al., 2008) plus LGP>60 days

Proxy: % stunting (40%)Proxy: % cropland (mode 16%)

Proxies: several climate change thresholds

Vulnerability domains for theLGP delta >5% threshold

Domain Area (km2) Population

LLL 4,508,660 40,275,900

LLH 13,120,500 102,357,000

LHL 1,412,400 89,935,000

LHH 3,321,920 219,658,000

HLL 13,248,100 126,387,000

HLH 22,374,000 155,368,000

HHL 5,172,800 369,162,000

HHH 5,078,220 238,567,000

Next steps

• Comments on the process (now)

• Circulation of material to contact points and other stakeholders, and evaluation of candidate regions (July-August)

• Synthesis of results of the evaluation exercise and writing up (October)