Henry Neufeldt’s research while affiliated with Technical University of Denmark and other places

The Adaptation Gap Report (AGR) series contributes to addressing these questions by annually assessing progress on adaptation and informing key processes, notably under the UNFCCC. In line with this, the AGR 2024 continues to assess information on planning, implementation and finance (chapters 2, 3 and 4, respectively), to explore whether countries are collectively on track to adapt to the global challenge of climate change. The AGR 2024 extends its assessments in important ways compared with the previous AGRs. First, it includes a topical chapter to discuss the central issue of ‘means of implementation’ other than finance itself, namely capacity-building and technology transfer (see section 1.2 and chapter 5). Second, it further considers underlying causes and processes behind the numbers, as well as a more downscaled analysis of subnational adaptation action (sporadically using the example of cities).

Agroecology (AE) has been proposed as a transformative approach to climate change mitigation and adaptation that reduces climate risk while supporting long-term productivity and resilience of food systems by applying ecological and humanistic principles. Agroecology is a holistic systems approach to producing food, which incorporates social, economic, and political dimensions. Agroecological practices include landscape and farm diversification, intercropping, crop and pasture rotation, adding organic amendments, cover crops, and minimizing or avoiding synthetic inputs. Social dimensions of agroecology include co-creation of knowledge with farmers, participatory processes, nonwage labor relations, collective property and management of resources, and addressing social inequities. This paper reviews the recent evidence and potential for agroecology as a transformative approach, both as climate change adaptation and mitigation strategy as well as to meet key societal goals such as healthy ecosystems, food security, and nutrition.

This review highlights the current state of knowledge about the socioeconomic and biophysical role of agroforestry for climate change adaptation, identifies three knowledge gaps, and discusses the role of agroforestry in adaptation policy processes. Recent scholarship has focused on biophysical modeling of agroforestry’s ability to buffer crops from climate extremes, and farmer perspectives of biophysical benefits. Socioeconomic scholarship examines how agroforestry increases adaptive capacity, reduces vulnerability, and thus helps farmers reduce climate risk. However, we identify three knowledge gaps: (1) uneven geographic distribution of research, (2) understanding benefits during specific climate hazards, and (3) lack of integrated biophysical–socioeconomic research. Last, we discuss agroforestry’s emergence in the global climate change agenda, as evidenced in recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports and United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change processes.

▶ The number and financial volume of adaptation actions supported by the Adaptation Fund (AF), the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and the Global Environment Facility (GEF) have more than doubled between 2016 and 2018 and have remained constant since 2019 at an average of around US$500 million per year. Without further increases, increasing climate risks could outstrip adaptation actions and thus widen the adaptation gap even more. ▶ Only around one third (40 per cent in relation to funding volume) of the actions reported by bilateral climate finance providers as primarily aiming at adaptation were found to directly target climate risk reduction. Actions labelled as adaptation must better elaborate their contribution to adaptation. ▶ Not every climate action can be expected to deliver substantial co-benefits for adaptation or mitigation. The potential for co-benefits between adaptation and mitigation is higher in some sectors than in others. ▶ Attention needs to be paid to potential trade-offs in the implementation of adaptation and mitigation to avoid progress in one objective hampering another or hampering sustainable development. Trade-offs can occur despite substantial co-benefits and therefore need to be considered independently.

The Working Group II contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) provides a comprehensive assessment of the scientific literature relevant to climate change impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. The report recognizes the interactions of climate, ecosystems and biodiversity, and human societies, and integrates across the natural, ecological, social and economic sciences. It emphasizes how efforts in adaptation and in reducing greenhouse gas emissions can come together in a process called climate resilient development, which enables a liveable future for biodiversity and humankind. The IPCC is the leading body for assessing climate change science. IPCC reports are produced in comprehensive, objective and transparent ways, ensuring they reflect the full range of views in the scientific literature. Novel elements include focused topical assessments, and an atlas presenting observed climate change impacts and future risks from global to regional scales. Available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

The Working Group II contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) provides a comprehensive assessment of the scientific literature relevant to climate change impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. The report recognizes the interactions of climate, ecosystems and biodiversity, and human societies, and integrates across the natural, ecological, social and economic sciences. It emphasizes how efforts in adaptation and in reducing greenhouse gas emissions can come together in a process called climate resilient development, which enables a liveable future for biodiversity and humankind. The IPCC is the leading body for assessing climate change science. IPCC reports are produced in comprehensive, objective and transparent ways, ensuring they reflect the full range of views in the scientific literature. Novel elements include focused topical assessments, and an atlas presenting observed climate change impacts and future risks from global to regional scales. Available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

Nature-based solutions provide adaptation and mitigation benefits for climate change as well as contributing to other sustainable development goals (high confidence). Effective nature-based climate change mitigation stems from inclusive decision-making and adaptive management pathways that deliver climate-resilient systems serving multiple sustainable development goals. Robust decision-making adjusts management pathways as systems are impacted by ongoing climate change. Poorly conceived and poorly designed nature-based mitigation efforts have the potential for multiple negative impacts, including competing for land and water with other sectors, reducing human well-being and failing to provide mitigation that is sustainable in the long term (high confidence).

Agroforestry has potential to address the adverse effects of climate change through carbon sequestration, increasing biodiversity and improving adaptive capacity and resilience among smallholder farmers. However, this potential is context specific and insufficiently quantified in smallholder faming systems, partly because of inherent variability of smallholder farms. Our study aimed to determine the tree/shrub diversity and carbon stocks in different agroforestry systems within smallholder farms in two 100 km 2 sites, the so-called lower and middle Nyando sites, in western Kenya. In both, context-specific agroforestry adoption had been promoted among households of four community associations through an asset-based community development (ABCD) approach. Their farms were assessed and compared with those of relevant comparison samples. Trees and shrubs were inventoried on a total of 106 farms, and their formations classified in five major agroforestry practices: hedgerows, multipurpose trees on farm (MPT), riparian buffers, woodlots, and boundary planting. To assess above-ground biomass (AGB) of individual trees/shrubs, diameter at breast height measurements were taken. Strong regional differences were considered in data analysis and presentation. Altogether, 3,353 and 6,346 trees/shrubs were inventoried in the lower and middle Nyando sites, respectively. AGB was significantly higher in middle than in lower Nyando. Woodlots had the highest amount of AGB carbon stock, while MPT had the highest diversity of tree/shrub species in all the groups. Conversely, boundary planting had the highest number of trees/shrubs inventoried and hence was the most common agroforestry practice across all the samples in both regions. Dominant AGB contributor species were Grevillea robusta (37.8%) in middle, and Eurphobia tirucalli (16.5%) in lower Nyando. This study provides empirical evidence that asset-based and community-driven selection and implementation of both tree/shrub species and agroforestry practices can contribute positively to species and practice diversity, which are associated with AGB carbon stock levels and wider agro-ecosystem diversity. This study hence provides Frontiers in Forests and Global Change | www.frontiersin.org 1 January 2022 | Volume 4 | Article 773170 Fuchs et al. Smallholder Carbon Stocks Western Kenya benchmark information that is relevant for SDG goal 15 on "life on land," and various specific targets, and can inform sustainable establishment of carbon sink facilities by supporting smallholders to uptake contextually suitable and economically sensible agroforestry practices in an overall effort to foster and support sustainable development.