Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - [permaculture] REPORT/The “4 per 1000: soils for food security and climate” Initiative First Meeting of the Forum 17 November 2016 Marrakesh

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Wesley Roe and Santa Barbara Permaculture Network <lakinroe@silcom.com>
  • To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [permaculture] REPORT/The “4 per 1000: soils for food security and climate” Initiative First Meeting of the Forum 17 November 2016 Marrakesh
  • Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 09:00:40 -0800

REPORT/The “4 per 1000: soils for food security and climate” Initiative
First Meeting of the Forum
17 November 2016 Marrakesh
http://4p1000.org/understand
The Forum meeting was opened by H.E. Stéphane Le Foll, the Minister of
Agriculture, Agrifood and Forestry of the French Republic.

The French Agriculture Minister recalled in his opening remarks the
importance of giving practical expression to the initiative launched at COP21
in Paris. He restated the twin benefits of storing carbon in soils:

 An increase in soil fertility and, as a result, in the world’s capacity to
produce foodstuffs, thereby feeding the planet.
 Partial compensation for the emission of gigatons of carbon into the
atmosphere in the form of greenhouse gases from fossil fuel reserves, thereby
offering an impact on the climate.

Adding that all the planet’s soils have a potential for carbon storage, he
emphasised that the Initiative was an opportunity to work on agricultural
models, moving away from intensive agriculture involving extensive use of
inputs and mechanisation and towards a form of agriculture more focused on
natural processes and ecosystems. In short, there was, he said, a need to
move on from a green revolution to a doubly green revolution.
For the minister, the purpose of the day’s event was to set the Initiative
and its associated models in motion.

Update on the governance of the Initiative
The governance organisation as set out in the Declaration of Intention for
the formation of a “4 per 1000” Consortium was presented.
The Initiative is to be organised around four bodies:
1- The Forum, which brings together all the partners, i.e. the signatories of
the Declaration of Intention for the Initiative, opened for signatures at
COP21 in Paris. This is the consultative and partnership body.

2- The Consortium, which is formed by the non-profit partners of the Forum
and brings together all the signatories of the Declaration of Intention
creating the “4 per 1000” Consortium, opened for signatures in November 2016
prior to COP22 in Marrakesh. This is the decision-making body that defines
goals, means and budget.

3- The Scientific and Technical Committee, which is appointed by the
Consortium responding to proposals by the Executive Secretariat. It has 14
members with international reputations for scientific and technical
expertise, and it provides a satisfactorily representative mix for geography,
gender and disciplines relevant to the “4 per 1000” Initiative. This is the
scientific body notably responsible for the orientations of the international
research and cooperation program and the development of the set of reference
criteria on which evaluation of “4 per 1000” actions is to be based.

4- The Executive Secretariat, headed up by Paul Luu with a team that will
ultimately have five members. This is the body responsible for the
operational work required for the organisation and operation of the
Initiative.
As of the date of the meeting, membership status was as follows:

 More than 200 partners had signed the Paris Agreement (33 countries),
thereby becoming members of the Forum.
 More than 80 signatures had been submitted for the Declaration of Intention
of the Consortium, each signature representing a member of the Consortium.
Presentation of the “Science-Research” component by the Initiative’s
scientific partners: Philippe Mauguin (CEO, INRA), Michel Eddi (CEO, CIRAD),
Jean-Paul Moatti (CEO, IRD), Lini Wollenberg (CGIAR) and, absent and excused,
Professor Rattan Lal (Ohio State University).

Mr Mauguin, speaking on behalf of the group of partners, described the
progress made on the research programme in support of the “4 per 1000”
Initiative since its launch a year earlier, and the prospects for the future.
The core issue relates to the sequestration of carbon in soils.

According to the latest data in the international scientific literature
(Wollenberg et al. 2016, Lal 2016, Pan et al. 2009), it will be impossible to
keep the temperature increase to under 2°C without storing carbon in soils.
Soil carbon storage could amount to up to 1.4 billion tonnes of carbon, or
4.8 per 1000 given the land areas that can be envisaged. This figure is in
the order of magnitude of the target set for the “4 per 1000” Initiative.
International experts consider that funding soil carbon storage would remain
competitive for remuneration of around USD100 per tonne of CO2 stored.
If maximum possible soil storage is achieved, whether by halting
deforestation or undertaking forest replantation, CO2 emissions and storage
could be balanced.

One of the difficulties is the need for long-term storage.
If the defined targets are to be met, it will be necessary to increase
current storage by 32% according to the Rothamsted model. On the basis of
that model, the work done by Liny Wollenberg has demonstrated the possibility
of achieving an increase of 1% per year in yields.
The effort can and must be made everywhere and it must be effective, making
use of all virtuous approaches: conservation agriculture, organic
fertilisers, reduced tillage, agroecology, and so on.

Discussion with the floor
A number of comments were made during the discussion with the floor, notably
the following:
 It is necessary to take non-technical aspects into consideration in order
to ensure that all those involved are on board. In particular, the
ethnological and sociological sciences can assist in engaging local
populations with very different lifestyle habits (the peoples of Amazonia,
for example).  It is necessary to involve farmers and to trust their
knowledge of their land and the ways of farming it.

 It is imperative to remove existing political barriers against certain
types of practice capable of storing carbon in soils.
 Increasing numbers of farmers are engaging in alternative systems of
production, with varying degrees of success. In addition to the fact that
they are a minority, they are isolated, often ignored by those that keep to
more traditional modes of production. If they are to progress, they will need
moral support and highly practical technical advice and in this connection
the setting up of a platform for contacts between practitioners in the field
would be particularly valuable. Moreover, for the Initiative to motivate all
actors and avoid being limited to a small, already convinced minority, it
will be necessary for soil carbon storage to offer additional revenue to
those engaging in it. Over and above the fact that soil carbon storage can
offer gains in soil fertility, and by the same token extra crop yields likely
to generate additional profit over the medium term (ten years at least), it
can be seen to be imperative to look at the possibility of remunerating soil
carbon storage in order to interest the sceptics.

Presentation of the “Projects” component using practical examples on the
ground in a range of contexts.

The desired aim is dual in nature:
 Presentation of projects set up by the partners in the field.
 On-site testing of the reference criteria for project evaluation (“pilot
projects”).

Practical examples presented:
 A “pilot project for restoration of degraded pastures” (GEF funding, FAO
and GRA support) in Uruguay by Walter Oyancabal from Uruguay’s Ministry of
Livestock Farming and Fisheries.

In connection with an ambitious INDC entailing extensive involvement by the
agricultural sector (livestock farming), the Uruguayan government has set up
a platform for a grouping of livestock farms. Mr. Oyancabal described the
restoration project envisaged for these farms, the intention being to improve
knowledge of the dynamics of improving soil carbon storage and to enhance the
productivity of pastures that were initially overgrazed and therefore
seriously degraded. Various approaches will be trialled, deployed and
transferred. Similarly, the tools for measurement, surveillance and reporting
(MRV) will be developed and assessed. The project’s promoters are identifying
their requirements for assistance, notably with regard to measurement of
variations in carbon storage, whether on the basis of assignments of
specialists, provision of technology or the dispensing of training. All these
are needs that the “4 per 1000” Initiative can endeavour to meet.

 The “Agroecology project for France: an example of a transverse national
policy generating multiple co-benefits, including for soils” by Pierre
Schwartz from the French Ministry of Agriculture.
Pierre Schwartz described certain measures under the Common Agricultural
Policy (CAP) that are of benefit for improving carbon storage in agricultural
soils. He went on to set out a number of measures in the French agroecokogy
project that are aligned with “4 per 1000” goals, i.e. the agroforestry plan
for support, training and advisory services for the implementation of
agroforestry systems, the “plant protein” plan for the promotion of farm
self-sufficiency in fodder and the exploitation of legumes, the “Producing

Differently” training programme, the launch of the Economic and Environmental
Interest Grouping (French GIEE) option for the formation of groups of farms
and other actors in the agricultural world with a focus on agroecology
projects, 30% of which are centred on farmland. The “4 per 1000” Initiative
can foster the sharing of experience not only on projects but also on the
application of policies such as those described by Pierre Schwartz.

 The “Pilot project for agroecology in West Africa (ECOWAS)” by Dr Ablassé
Bilgo, an expert in climate change and agriculture at the Directorate of
Agriculture and Rural Development, Abuja, Nigeria.
Mr. Bilgo described the far-reaching call for projects launched for the
support of the agroecology transition with funding from the French
Development Agency (AFD) in five countries: Côte d'Ivoire, Mali, Togo,
Burkina Faso and Senegal. The aim is to encourage the emergence, adoption and
spread of ecologically intensive agricultural practices on family holdings,
along with modes of management and organisation conducive to such adoption.
The plan is to fund 15 projects at ± €400,000 with 20% co-financed by the
promoter of the project.

This call for projects is targeted at consortia formed by operators in the
development field, collectives of agricultural producers and/or research or
training bodies and local government. A series of actions are eligible at all
points of the value chain from production to market.

These projects must lead to exchanges and capitalisation along with a
contribution to the definition of public policies for agroecological
intensification.

 The “Global Soil Partnership (GSP)” by Eduardo Mansur, Director, Forestry
Assessment, Management and Conservation Division (FOM) at the FAO.
Many soils are degraded and require restoration.
Since the launch of the “4 per 1000” Initiative by France, the importance of
soil quality has been linked to the climate debate.

The speed of change in levels of storage of organic matter in soil makes it
difficult to visualise the effects at local level. Despite this, it is
necessary to monitor ongoing changes in the system.
EX-ACT is a tool developed by three FAO divisions. It provides ex-ante
estimates of the impact of agricultural and forestry development projects on
greenhouse gas emissions and carbon sequestration, indicating their effects
on carbon balance.
It is based on methods of calculation that take land use and farming
practices into account. It measures the benefits provided by a given project,
comparing the situation without the project and the situation with the
project in place.
It enables governments to envision a comprehensive map of the various
parameters under surveillance.

A conference will be held in Rome on 20-23 March 2017 to assess the current
state of progress on soil carbon storage and the impact on the climate.
In addition, the FAO reaffirms that it is able to provide financial support
for partnerships whose aim is to foster soil carbon storage.

Workshop segment
The workshops were attended by a diverse range of actors: researchers,
agricultural organisations, NGOs, financial institutions, governments,
international institutions, etc. The discussions were intensive and enabled
partners to gain a better grasp of the “4 per 1000” Initiative.

The rapporteurs for each workshop reported back on the work done in their
groups.

Workshop no. 1: Contribution to NDC definition and implementation
It is important and urgent to be in a position to provide a reliable
demonstration of the impacts and benefits of carbon sequestration in soils
(systems of measurement, reporting and surveillance) and to increase the
degree of certainty with which carbon sequestration in soil can be assessed.

Participation by stakeholders and transparency are preconditions for the
Initiative’s long-term success.
There is major potential for assistance in defining and implementing NDCs.
This can be said because 41 governments have included soils in their NDCs
(out of 114 NDCs submitted), 8 have included mitigation aspects, pointing to
the potential co-benefits, and 27 have a focus on the restoration of degraded
land.

The “4 per 1000” Initiative can make an effective contribution to the
development of a general framework for soils in an NDC, based around both
components: research and action.

An information platform, or hub, developed by the Initiative would make it
possible not only to facilitate implementation in the short term but also to
build shared long-term visions and strategies, in addition knowledge sharing.
National greenhouse gas inventories provide a good basis but tools offering
enhanced resolution need to be developed. Guidelines should be given to all
countries and proxies provided for those without the resources to collect
specific data.

International organisations such as the FAO can help link up these
initiatives and connect them with international programmes such as the SDGs.
There must also be links to the activities of the scientific community, with
the Global Research Alliance (GRA), for example.

In summary: The desire is for a robust system providing a range of benefits,
which would represent substantial value-added. Creation of a “4 per 1000” hub
is strongly recommended to support the Initiative, based in research and
focused on action.

Workshop no. 2: Expectations regarding project evaluation reference criteria
There are two mutually complementary ideas here: the idea of a set of
reference criteria, parameters to be taken into consideration in guiding a
project, and the idea of indicators, figures representing targets to be
achieved or, conversely, limits not to be exceeded.
For the participants, the reference criteria must take account not only of
the beneficial effects of the methods employed in a project but also of
possible negative impacts (changes in land use, loss of biodiversity, etc.).
Furthermore, they must permit evaluation not only of projects but also of the
project construction process.

There is a need for application of straightforward, transparent, dynamic
criteria and the adoption of a systemic approach. The criteria must be
multidimensional, covering the environmental, social and economic aspects.
They must be easily understood.

The participants emphasised the need to engage all stakeholders and to foster
consensus. They suggested that the proposal to be made by the STC should
undergo broad-based consultation before it is adopted.

And lastly, they recommended the construction of a system of indicators
compatible with what is already available. Before taking them as a basis,
existing means should be assessed in order to retain only those elements that
work and improve those that do not.

This set of criteria is necessary for the assessment of the reliability of
projects and their impacts, notably in order to avoid potential negative
effects (for example, vigilance is needed on natural resources, water
pollution and so on).
Three domains need to be considered: the environment, the economy and society.

The criteria must make it possible to monitor changes in the levels of
organic matter stored in soils and to communicate on the progress made by the
“4 per 1000” Initiative.
Nevertheless, it is also necessary to seek to ensure that the criteria also
take into consideration the actions and means employed and not only the
results in terms of storage levels.

This is so because it will be many years before an increase in soil carbon
becomes objectively measurable. More rapid assessments are necessary. Also,
it is well known that there are other sets of criteria that function very
satisfactorily on the basis of “best-efforts” obligations rather than
mandatory targets; specifically, this is the case for organic farming
production.

In summary: The desired set of reference criteria must be a comprehensive,
multidimensional tool covering the environmental, social and economic goals
and issues. It must be straightforward and dynamic. Its construction must
involve all stakeholders and it must start out from what is already available.

Workshop no. 3: The collaborative platform and the networking of actors
The whole range of actors must be able to contribute to the platform to
ensure that it will meet their needs as far as possible: not only scientists
and technicians but also farmers, NGOs, service providers, advisors and
policymakers.

Account must be taken of categories of actors that have specific needs:
indigenous populations, smallholders, women, advisors to farmers, markets,
and so on.
The purpose of the platform will be to fill the gap between the work done by
the STC and practical application on the ground and to build ties between the
various actors involved in the Initiative.

It is important for communication to go not only from researchers to
practitioners in the field but also from practitioners to researchers,
because “experts” in farming practices conducive to soil carbon storage can
be found at every level; in this context, “downstream” and “bottom- up”
approaches are highly mutually complementary.
The need is to ensure integrated communication enabling: - Overlap between
topics,

- “Silo”connections,
- Information synthesis for each “silo” rather than simply a succession of
items of
information.

Two-way communication should be encouraged: collection of data and experience
and dissemination of information.
In summary: It is important to involve the stakeholders in the construction
of the platform (design, test, review). Inclusion of farmers is of key
importance and the formation of farmers’ committees would be useful. It must
enable information to be collected from all involved and to disseminate
information.

Workshop no. 4: What funding is available for projects aligned with the goals
of the Initiative?
The “4 per 1000” Initiative can facilitate the construction and funding of
projects in practical ways:
- by providing tools for demonstrating results,
- by improving knowledge through research and experience on the ground,
- by developing information systems based on knowledge of soil management
acquired
in the field (peer-to-peer),
- by identifying available sources of finance,
- bysimplifyingprocedures.
Instruments must be developed at various levels (e.g. farmers, policymakers).

Projects must be integrated (and not focused solely on soil carbon). They
must provide incentives, i.e. benefits for farmers in terms of income,
resilience to climate-related hazards and sustainability: this is key to
project ownership in the field.

It is important for regulations to be consistent with the application of
methods conducive to soil carbon storage.
Similarly, a way must be found to ensure that farming practices are focused
on the long term.

The funding to be applied must come from both public and private sources, of
which a number are available. The option of using Carbon Credits was
mentioned but most participants felt that the problem would not be to find
finance but to secure its distribution and effective application.

In summary: The expectations for the funding aspect of projects fall into
several categories: networking, facilitation of the setting up of projects,
provision of tools for project evaluation and monitoring, knowledge and the
sharing of information. It is of key importance that projects should offer
social and economic benefits along with resilience and sustainability for
farmers in order for them to feel a sense of ownership over the long term. In
addition, alongside the variety of funding sources, it is important that
those sources should be secure and effective.

An overview paper covering the four workshops will be drafted and circulated
to members (see appended document)
Forum Conclusions
Version: 16 January 2017

http://4p1000.org/understand


  • [permaculture] REPORT/The “4 per 1000: soils for food security and climate” Initiative First Meeting of the Forum 17 November 2016 Marrakesh, Wesley Roe and Santa Barbara Permaculture Network, 03/04/2017

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page