34 Adapting Agriculture to Climate Change a Review

Introduction

Prove on the impacts of climate modify on natural and human systems is growing apace. This evidence comes from a wide variety of sources, including from farmers themselves; farmers in many places are experiencing rapid changes in phenomena, such every bit the traditional commencement of the rains, planting dates, amounts and patterns of rainfall, and frequency of extreme weather events (Postigo, 2014; Konchar et al., 2015; Abidoye et al., 2017; Kumar et al., 2018). While farmers accumulate a considerable amount of experience over their lifetimes (and the lifetimes of their forebears), in situations where the charge per unit of change is relatively rapid, previous experience may be inadequate to adapt to novel weather condition.

To engagement, most attending on adaptation in agriculture has gone toward incremental adjustments that may enable improve management of climate risks and opportunities in the well-nigh-term (Rickards and Howden, 2012; Vermeulen et al., 2013). Given that much accommodation at the level of an private farmer, small-calibration food processor or trader involves autonomous "learning by doing," the focus on incremental approaches is understandable. Sequences of incremental accommodation actions may pb, if they are additive, to increasingly beneficial outcomes in terms of dealing with changes in climate and climate variability. On the other hand, additive incremental actions run the risk of path-dependent decisions that lock farming systems into sub-optimal trajectories. Furthermore, there is much prove demonstrating that climate change effects on agricultural systems are neither linear nor condiment (Schlenker and Roberts, 2009; Lobell et al., 2011; Vermeulen et al., 2013). Climatic change impacts on poor farmers in particular may involve thresholds that are so near electric current conditions that incremental accommodation actions may simply be ineffective in protecting avails, livelihoods and food security (Harvey et al., 2014; Savo et al., 2016). For example, across Africa, climate projections show that critical thresholds for several crops and regions may be crossed in the next v–20 years, pushing farmers out of their electric current cropping choices and farming systems (Rippke et al., 2016). Incremental adjustments in agronomical systems may not be enough to deal with the challenges that electric current and futurity generations volition face: more proactive and ambitious action will be required.

A considerable literature has developed over the last few years on the concept of transformational adaptation in agriculture (Kates et al., 2012; Rickards and Howden, 2012; Mapfumo et al., 2015), perhaps emanating in response to the possibility of "major, non-marginal change" (Stern, 2006). Despite this, the term transformation in relation to adaptation remains vague and has plural definitions (O'Brien, 2012; Mustelin and Handmer, 2013; Rickards, 2013; Feola, 2014; Pretty et al., 2018). These definitions vary in vision from relatively simple changes in cropping locations through to substantial redesign of global food systems to come across societal goals for environment, livelihoods and nutrition. Not but is the term somewhat ambiguous, in that location is lack of clarity every bit to which real-world examples plant transformation, whether information technology has been occurring in specific situations, and—if transformation indeed leads to desired development outcomes—how it tin exist facilitated.

Is the notion of transformational accommodation useful? It should exist: the policy and investment implications and needs of transformational adaptation may exist very dissimilar from those of more incremental adaptation (Dowd et al., 2014). If it were possible to identify those situations in which transformational adaptation were desirable or necessary, adaptation at scale would be more effective, enabling the appropriate scale of change and avoiding brusk-term cul-de-sacs in adaptation do. Some incremental adaptations may inadvertently increase the vulnerability of people to climate risks. For example, promotion of single adaptation responses, such as offering pocket-sized-calibration farmers crop insurance or drought-resistant maize varieties, may act as a disincentive for other types of change that may lead to much more positive outcomes over the longer term, such every bit substituting other crops for maize, or other livelihood options for agriculture (Vermeulen et al., 2013).

In this newspaper nosotros aim to assess whether transformations have occurred in agronomics in response to experienced or anticipated climate change, and to draw out the lessons on factors that accept helped or hindered transformative change. We propose a uncomplicated, quantitative definition of transformational adaptation in relation to agriculture based on changes to the inputs to and outputs from agricultural systems. Using this definition, we review and characterize published case studies on transformational accommodation in agriculture. We then hash out the emergent success factors, in terms of transformative processes, that back up transformational outcomes. In the conclusions we evaluate the overall findings on whether and how transformation is already happening in agriculture, and propose some actions that could exist taken to promote more positive outcomes as transformational accommodation becomes a larger focus of agricultural development.

Methods

Defining Transformational Adaptation in Agricultural Systems

The idea of transformation in agriculture is far from new. Transformation processes in agriculture have been observed, theorized about and documented since at least the eighteenth century (Timmer, 1988). These analyses generally apply transformation to hateful the set of structural changes in national economies by which agriculture falls in share of Gdp and employment but rises in productivity. Agricultural transformation as a structural process may occur over timescales of a few decades; transformational adaptation on the other mitt may occur within much shorter timescales of a few years driven in function by the rapid climate changes impacting on agricultural systems.

While the terms transformational and transformative are frequently used interchangeably, we find information technology useful to draw a distinction betwixt them. Transformational refers to the outcome of a process, whereas transformative refers to features of the process that enable the upshot (OED, 2018¹). For case, transformational alter happens through transformative learning. A substantial portion of the literature to date on transformational adaptation deals with identification of transformative practices and the behavior changes that drive or enable transformation. Here we aim to complement this useful body of work on transformative processes with a more empirical and outcome-oriented survey of cases where agricultural systems have undergone transformational adaptation in response to climate alter. Thus, our definition for recognizing transformational accommodation places a greater emphasis on the external outcomes of transformation rather than the internal transformative features highlighted past other authors, such as Mapfumo et al. (2015).

Fazey et al. (2018) propose that transformation can be measured across three dimensions: the quality, distribution and timeframe of change. Nosotros employ these dimensions to propose a simple definition of transformation in agronomics in response to climate change as a major modify in inputs to and/or outputs from a system over a defined timeframe. More than specifically in the agronomical organization we ascertain transformational adaptation as:

• a response to climate risks, usually in combination with other drivers (quality);

• a redistribution of at least a third in the primary factors of production (state, labor, capital) and/or the outputs and outcomes of product (the types and amounts of product and consumption of appurtenances and services arising from multi-functional agricultural systems) (distribution);

• within a timeframe of 25 years (timeframe).

We selected the threshold of one-third change based on innovation theory, in which most common models of improvidence of innovations are asymmetric with a point of inflection below a fifty% saturation level (Meade and Islam, 2006). The familiar S-shaped innovation or adoption curve arises from an assumption that income is lognormally distributed (Bain, 1963). This agrees with many observations of adoption rates of agricultural technologies: many cases of livestock-related technologies in the global tropics, for example, exhibit saturation levels of forty–l% at virtually (Thornton and Herrero, 2010), and the inflection points of the adoption curves will exist lower than these values. Much transformational adaptation is likely to involve qualitative changes over and above quantitative changes in inputs and outputs. This would include cases where the priority outputs from multi-functional agricultural systems shift between competing goals of economic returns, nutrient security, employment and ecology services (including greenhouse gas mitigation). We selected the timeframe of 25 years based on a human being generation, which is more often than not understood to be 15–40 years in biological terms and 20–thirty years in self-identity terms (Biggs, 2007).

Reviewing the Literature

To add to the extensive literature on theories and processes of transformation, we present a gear up of empirical examples where transformational agriculture, equally defined above, has already happened, at least partially because of climate alter. We carried out a structured search of academic literature augmented by case studies recommended by colleagues and materials from the gray literature and media to appraise more than recent change. To identify cases that authors described as transformative or transformational, we searched in Web of Science using the search terms "agri* transform* climate adaptation" for the years 2000–2017. After reviewing each article's abstruse, we extracted those that described recent changes in an agronomical system. These 200 articles were then reviewed to identify those that report empirical data on transformation that has already happened (Effigy one). Other articles (non classified as relevant empirical articles for our purposes) included recommendations for accommodation planning to achieve transformational change in the future, modeling of predictable transformations, theoretical or methodological content, and vulnerability analyses.

Figure 1. Results of literature search for case studies of transformational adaptation in agronomics driven at to the lowest degree in part past a irresolute climate, showing number of articles by year.

We reviewed all empirical manufactures to identify those that contained empirical data consistent with the definition of transformational adaptation as outlined in section Defining Transformational Adaptation in Agricultural Systems above. This gave a total of xv empirical example studies of transformational adaptation in agriculture in response to a changing climate. We supplemented these cases with additional cases recommended by colleagues (cases x–11, 14–17, 19–20), which met our criteria but were non returned past the structured search on Web of Science, giving a total of 23 case studies. In terms of selection bias in the search method, the key bias is likely to be the inconsistent use of the terms "transformation," "transformative," and "transformational" across the literature. Beyond the viii additional cases that nosotros found via colleagues' recommendations, there may well exist a much greater number of documented cases available that practise not use whatever of these terms but notwithstanding run across our criteria.

We tabulated the 23 cases, noting the type of transformation, climate risks and opportunities driving change, evidence of major (>33%) alter in inputs and/or outputs, governance shift, scale (e.g., number people/territories/value chains) and timeframe (Table 1). We considered the dimension of governance or decision-making to be particularly important to supplement the simple "input-output" definition of transformation that nosotros used. The "black box" of adaptation decision-making lies betwixt inputs and outputs (Biesbroek et al., 2015) is beginning to exist explored in the growing literature on transformative processes in agriculture (e.g., Park et al., 2012; Dowd et al., 2014; Mapfumo et al., 2015). We understand governance in its wide sense equally the "processes of interaction and controlling amongst the actors involved in a collective problem that atomic number 82 to the creation, reinforcement, or reproduction of social norms and institutions" (Hufty, 2011).

Table one. Empirical case studies on transformation in agronomics nether climate change.

To analyse the success factors and drivers of positive transformation associated with the case studies, in other words the features of the transformative change processes that lead to transformational outcomes, we used the adaptation cycle framework of Wheaton and Maciver (1999) that has been congenital on by Park et al. (2012), Wise et al. (2014) and Jakku et al. (2016). This framework, which has been elaborated specifically to address transformative adaptation in agriculture, conceives of adaptation as an iterative wheel of four stages:

• Problem (re)structuring, understanding the overall goals and objectives (who or what needs to suit and why);

• Developing the vision and identifying pathway (what are the opportunities for accommodation and what are their costs and benefits);

• Implementing adaptation actions (which methods and resource to use, understanding constraints and incentives);

• Monitoring, evaluating and learning (are changes addressing the goals and objectives).

Results

A histogram of the number of manufactures with the search terms "agri* transform* climate adaptation" for the years 2000–2017, and describing recent changes in farming systems, is shown in Effigy ane. The overall number of articles reached a plateau by 2015, only the number of manufactures giving empirical information on recent transformation has continued to increase up to 2017, the most contempo search yr.

The 23 case studies that meet our criteria of transformational accommodation are listed in Table 1, with information relating to the type of transformation in each instance, the climate risks driving change, the nature of the greater-than-33% change in inputs and/or outputs, the associated governance shift, the scale of the change, and the timeframe. The spatial and jurisdictional calibration of alter ranged from the village level (measured in tens or hundreds of households) upwardly to more than 10,000 km² in the large-scale authorities-driven programmes of China and Ethiopia. All timeframes barbarous within a single generation (25 years) every bit per the definition used for the literature review, but some transformations occurred very quickly, within five or fewer years, often triggered past a specific climate-driven event, such every bit a severe drought or pest set on. Non all transformations were associated with a clear shift in governance. In some cases, such as case 12 in Bharat, farmers undertook major changes without accompanying shifts in decision-making. Where a governance shift did occur, it might be in response to a specific climatic change (such as new water governance in Republic of kazakhstan in response to scarcity) or but occur in parallel with, but unrelated to, climatic trends (changes in rice tariffs in Republic of costa rica and wine regulations in Uk, for instance).

The case studies provide considerable diverseness in the climate risks driving (or being perceived to drive) change: drought and water bug (reduction in availability, decreasing groundwater supplies for irrigation), country degradation through erosion and over-grazing, sea level rising, salinity problems and decreased ocean productivity, increasing frequency of extreme events, such equally storms and flooding, warming and drying trends, cooler night temperatures, and increased incidence and force per unit area of pests and diseases. In all cases the observed transformational adaptation was only partly in response to the changing climate; multiple other drivers interact with the climatic commuter (as made especially articulate in case 4 from Burkina Faso).

Several of the case studies document substantial shifts in country use and labor of croppers and livestock keepers. The about commonly observed transition was a switch in crops grown, particularly from cereal rotations to fruits or vegetables (observed in half-dozen cases, in China, India, Morocco, Mozambique and Nepal), just likewise from cereals to cash crops (cotton in example 5 in China and sugarcane in case 9 in Costa Rica). In a small number of cases a major new ingather was introduced in a new surface area (peanuts in case ane in Australia, coffee in case xix in Nicaragua and vines in case 22 in UK). The instance in Vietnam did non involve a alter in crop, only rather a major shift in management strategy, from high-yielding rice to low-yielding simply low-gamble ratoon rice (case 23). Transitions involving brute agriculture entailed irresolute livestock kept (for example from cattle to camels in case fourteen in Kenya), switching from crops to fisheries (from rice to shrimp in Bangladesh in cases 2 and iii and from crops to fish in case 8 in Prc) or from pastoral livestock to sedentary cropping (cases xi and fifteen in the drylands of Federal democratic republic of ethiopia and Kenya).

Transformations that involved major changes in use of inputs included reallocation of water resources (past croppers in case xiii in Kazakhstan and by livestock keepers in case 21 in Peru) and reallocation of labor, including dropping farming in favor of off-subcontract labor or migration to urban areas (in three cases, in Bangladesh, Burkina Faso and China). Two cases entailed transformation of land utilize to sustainable country management on a big calibration: livestock exclosures over three million hectares in Federal democratic republic of ethiopia (case 10) and farmer-managed regeneration of on-farm trees over five 1000000 hectares in Niger (example 20). Notably these two cases were not labeled as transformative or transformational in the literature.

In the case studies, transformations most often occurred because livelihoods that used to be viable became increasingly untenable or stressed. Accommodation is not necessarily almost trying to maintain the condition quo in production while the context changes; several of the case studies demonstrate a complete disability to bear on doing the same things as previously (e.g., case 17 from Mozambique, instance ix from Costa rica and example fifteen from Peru) while others were in response to opening up of options that were previously closed, such as the adoption of cash crops, fruit trees and vegetables with the potential to generate college earnings (e.chiliad., case 22 on absurd climate vineyards in the UK or example 16 on fruit copse in Morocco).

Give-and-take: Success Factors and Drivers of Positive Transformation

Understanding Goals and Objectives

Problem-restructuring and assessment of goals and objectives can take place at farm level by individual farmers or can happen at larger village, district or provincial scales. In the cases of shifting from rice to shrimp and prawn farming in People's republic of bangladesh (case two), the increased water salinity over time forced farmers to change the species reared. Salinity rates varied from pond to swimming, then the transition was not fabricated past all farmers at the same fourth dimension. They individually assessed their trouble (increasing salinity) and adapted their practices as necessary. Case 14 on the shift from cattle to camels in Kenya is a like alter in which pastoralists made individual decisions to alter the balance of species in their herds so as to better respond to drought. In other cases, such every bit case 10 in Ethiopia and case 20 in Niger, the problem of land degradation within the ecosystem was recognized on a large scale and the overall goal was to rehabilitate the landscapes to improve weather condition for all inhabitants.

There are concerns around spatial heterogeneity, including differing personal goals and objectives of farmers. There can be big differences in alter strategies even if resources are similar, and furthermore, the goals, objectives and merchandise-offs for individual farmers may change through time. For case, in instance 9 in Costa rica, farmers prioritized 2 goals in their adaptation decisions: security of well-being (maintenance of productive assets, educational activity and healthcare for the whole family unit) and personal identity as self-reliant rice farmers. Taking the decision to switch to sugarcane in response to the combined pressures of climate change and restructured rice markets involved a difficult trade-off between security and identity. Despite differences among individuals, some transformational adaptation options necessarily need to exist implemented on scales larger than a unmarried farm, such equally the grassland conservation policy implemented by the government in the Chinese region of Inner Mongolia (case 7) or the large-scale regeneration in Niger (case 20). These types of initiatives often need support and a certain amount of coordination from a central potency. In the Inner Mongolia case, farmers were given options past the government to get out agronomics and to relocate to cities for work, depending on their ain personal goals.

Temporal differences associated with transformational accommodation also exist. Some options may be conspicuously aimed at the curt term, such as weather-index-based insurance for crops or livestock, while other adaptation options may operate over longer time spans, such as changes in crop type owing to gradual increases in temperature, for instance. Many changes in farming exercise may have temporal issues associated with them, and these may involve trade-offs between the benefits accruing to famers in the long term and the brusque term along with changes in relative costs. For example, a farmer may lose access to a slice of land while waiting for sure cash crops to produce harvestable yield (e.g., case 6 in Prc of switching from wheat-maize rotation to apples; case 10 of land exclosures for rehabilitation in Federal democratic republic of ethiopia; and instance sixteen of wheat to tree crops in Kingdom of morocco), or they may be waiting to harvest additional firewood from regenerated tree cover. Poorer farmers may non exist able to expect for these longer-term benefits to materialize at the expense of short-term profit foregone.

These temporal merchandise-offs may not merely exist economic. For some adaptation interventions, there may be significant merchandise-offs between meeting (shorter-term) food production or income objectives and longer-term, strategic objectives relating to sustainable evolution. Farmers' decisions on crop residue management and altering the integration of crops and livestock within a mixed farming system reflect these trade-offs (Thornton and Herrero, 2015). While a focus on incremental adaptations in response to short-term variability is often seen as a logical and viable entry bespeak into adaptation to climatic change over the longer term, successful brusque-term chance management does not necessarily imply successful longer-term adaptation (Juhola et al., 2016). Past authorities policies tin can too change the vulnerability of agricultural systems to climatic change. For example, the goal of economical transformation of agronomics in Ethiopia has involved widespread promotion of large-calibration irrigated monocultures, which may take inadvertently increased the climate risks to agronomical livelihoods (case xi).

Developing the Vision

Decisions well-nigh adaptation to (and mitigation of) climate alter impacts can be characterized past considerable dubiety. Such doubtfulness may add considerable complexity to decisions involving many different sectors of gild and/or considerable up-front or recurrent investment costs particularly when dealing with more transformational adaptation. Nevertheless, relevant, reliable and timely noesis is essential to inform the blueprint of advisable adaptation deportment and to both inform and support and the critical foresight and visioning aspects. Important sources of uncertainty include the futurity trajectory of greenhouse gas emissions during the residuum of the electric current century, and uncertainty associated with different climate models that can exist used to projection impacts into the future (IPCC, 2014).

Equally with the trouble structuring and goal setting, the evolution of a vision and pathway tin can take place at several different scales. In example 1 of the Peanut Company of Commonwealth of australia, the corporation adjusted its strategy to include relocation of its operations to a place with an expectation of a more favorable climate. It encouraged farmers to translocate in apprehension of hereafter climate change. In this case the vision and pathway were determined by a private sector entity in consultation with landholders and governments, in both the new and old locations (Jakku et al., 2016). In other cases the pathway is set up by the authorities, equally in the case of grassland conservation in Prc (instance seven) and the encouragement of sedentarisation of pastoralists in Ethiopia (example xi). In some cases, the pathway is defined more past outside forces, such equally market opportunities. For example, in Nepal (example eighteen), farmers switched from buckwheat and barley to vegetables and fruit trees partially because of warming temperatures and changes in precipitation patterns, but as well because increased tourism in the region provided an expanding market for fruits and vegetables. The pathway may have looked dissimilar if such a market had not developed.

In the Nicaragua example (case 19, Tabular array 1), foresight was used to identify future risks to java production alee of farmers' experience, through the use of downscaled climate change models to identify likely hereafter climate risks (Baca et al., 2014). The Nicaraguan Government's National Adaptation Plan for agriculture places priority on the adaptation of smallholder java farmers' livelihoods, and international investment is being used to support climate change accommodation deportment inside the java supply chain (Vermeulen et al., 2013). In these systems, tradeoffs practise exist between diversification and intensification adaptation alternatives that may require sophisticated policy formulation and implementation, but the inherent uncertainty effectually the future climate is not a major concern in defining appropriate policy in this situation, given the consensus between climate models as to temperature increases in the coming four decades.

Research and institutional capacity to project climate impacts, together with awareness-raising efforts, can enable the start steps of adaptation to "leapfrog" ahead of local feel. In the Australian example (case 1), while economical analysis of shifting production regions was undertaken, much of the vision for transformational change appears to have been due to awareness of climate change and the resultant increase in hazard for the industry in its earlier location, spurring action to adapt by partial relocation. This was embedded in the mental models of how people recall the earth operates, and what it could look like from their (peanut product) perspective in several years' fourth dimension (Marshall et al., 2013; Jakku et al., 2016) all the same significant dubiousness in projected rainfall changes. This kind of visioning is probably very common.

Complex problems do non always need circuitous solutions; low-toll, high-impact measures can cut through complexity and advance adoption. For instance, instance 2 on the shift from rice to shrimp and the subsequent direction of increasing salinity, there was a fairly straightforward solution to a problem that had multiple causes.

The case studies illustrated a wide range of visioning and foresight tools. These include scenario and sensitivity analysis to assess thresholds in systems, projecting the need for a unlike type of adaptation: transformation may be needed in some situations, while in others, incremental change may be acceptable to address farmers' objectives. In other cases, long-horizon whole-farm economic analyses can assistance make up one's mind whether interventions are probable to exist sustainable or self-sustaining, or whether they volition crave some kind of subsidy. Like types of assay tin help to evaluate the local effectiveness of portfolios of different interventions at the level of the farming household (e.g., example 1 in Australian peanut product systems and case sixteen in Morocco with the shift to tree crops under the Plan Maroc Vert) or to empathise the pathways of modify (e.g., example four in Burkina Faso, in which four dissimilar tools are applied).

Implementing Adaptation Actions

In some cases, the implementation of adaptation actions is more proactive to predictable future changes, while in other cases the actions are reactive to the changing climate. In the case of higher altitude coffee in Nicaragua, for example (instance 19), the projected increases in temperature and changes in precipitation prompted a authorities-led program (NICADAPTA) co-financed past multilateral development banks to assist coffee farmers proactively adapt to the predicted changes. The programme involves a package of interventions that promote crop diversification, increment water use efficiency, strengthen markets and institutions, and provide atmospheric condition information services to farmers. Farmers' autonomous adaptations (run across cases 3, 5, 12, 18, 21, 23), which are oft reactive, contrast with adaptation programmes driven externally by regime or development agencies. Indeed, the capacity of governments to drive implementation of adaptation programmes may be over-estimated. In Vietnam, for example (instance 23), low financial capacity in government at district level has led district officials to defy national and provincial directives to enhance rice productivity, and instead give tacit back up to local farmers' strategies for climate accommodation, such as low-yielding ratoon rice that is less decumbent to losses from flooding and salinity.

Many of the case studies demonstrate clearly the benefits of collective activity: on-ground action in existing multi-stakeholder platforms to address context specificity and facilitate date, involving interactions with many different types of partner, contributing to increased social capital and strengthened local enabling environments. Collective action can be benign for several reasons. In Niger (case 20), it increased social upper-case letter, decreased costs and helped share knowledge in farmer-managed natural regeneration. In Prc (case viii), information technology empowered a newly formed vegetable-growing cooperative to encounter mutual economical and ecology challenges. Ultimately, collective activeness helped farmers overcome economic, social, technical and capacity barriers. Information technology tin can likewise assist accomplish thresholds of scale and equitable outcomes for producers (Bouamra-Mechemache and Zago, 2015). Thus, accommodation programmes should strengthen local organizations rather than focus purely on technological innovation.

In People's republic of bangladesh, farmers whose way of life had become untenable due to astringent floods were completely dependent on social networks to learn about adaptation solutions, such as new house-edifice methods, in the absenteeism of formal aid (case 3). Of course, defaulting and complimentary-riding on commonage agreements and trust-based networks can besides be an advantageous accommodation strategy for the individual farmer, as evidenced past the increment in illegal water abstraction in Republic of kazakhstan as h2o has get more scarce (instance 13). Farmers can as well take advantage of differential access to climate adaptation solutions and technologies to improve their own market position. For example in Jamaica only wealthier farmers have been able to access the 150 greenhouses congenital nationally, partly in response to ascent rainfall variability; they have subsequently driven down vegetable prices and excluded poorer farmers from key markets (Popke et al., 2016).

Significant changes in farming practices and institutions will require clear rights and incentives, and in cases where economic benefits may arise simply in the longer term or where adaptation objectives may have to exist de-emphasized in the curt term, strategies will be needed to bridge the gap between initial investments and these longer-term benefits. Unlike instance studies accept addressed the temporal trade-offs in different ways. In Niger, for instance, nutrient-for-piece of work programmes initially supported natural regeneration (case xx). In Kenya, rapidly developing markets for camel hides enhanced the transition from cattle to camels (case 14). Such "early wins" may reinforce local support in helping to make a vision of transformation a reality (Jakku et al., 2016).

Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning

Appropriate monitoring systems let adaptation outcomes to be tracked through time, to pick upwards every bit early on as possible indications of how accommodation (transformative or otherwise) is working or not. In example 6, documenting a shift from wheat-maize rotation to apples in China, Lei et al. (2014) conducted an in-depth study to learn how country use changes related to alleviating the impacts of drought on agriculture. Quantitative analyses, such every bit this can help other organizations and governments assist farmers and communities in making informed decisions on the possible pathways available to conform and transform their ain agronomical practices. In example 19, a "results framework" enables appropriate monitoring of progress toward planned outcomes including improved land and water management, enhanced capacity, resilience of infrastructure and knowledge management (IFAD, 2012). In addition to monitoring progress, generating and sharing lessons from adaptation efforts on a systematic basis can help them be scaled out, including internationally. Case 20 is an example of farmer managed natural regeneration in Niger, and the experience has proved useful to other countries in the region (Nyasimi et al., 2014).

For several of the case studies, as however there is lilliputian information on the household-level impacts of the changes described. Where transformations are not permanent or not entirely positive (e.one thousand., case xi on sedenterisation in Ethiopia and instance ix on sugarcane farming in Costa rica), monitoring and evaluation could provide a timely and disquisitional corrective. Follow-on responses, such as policy and market support may be critical for sustaining change, at least in the nearly term every bit trade-offs with longer-term goals are most prominent. In case 14, the shift from cattle to camels has contributed substantially to income generation within the Borana customs, although the total benefits are hampered past the prevalence of camel diseases, the utilize of less productive breeds and limited markets for camel meat (Kagunyu and Wanjohi, 2014)—all of which could be solved more effectively through responsive government policy based on regular cess of challenges and implementation of solutions.

Monitoring, evaluation and learning is not necessarily easy, especially in cases where transformation is driven by autonomous efforts of farmers or community groups, such as in case 21 from Peru. The most effective use of external investments into monitoring, evaluation and learning may be to support approaches developed by communities themselves. For instance, amongst overflowing-prone littoral Bangladeshi farmers, social learning networks have been the key to survival, through rapid sharing of technologies and strategies (case 3) and could be supported to enable continuing accommodation to future system changes (equally recommended in case 2). In Ethiopia (case 10), communities have successfully self-organized to bear labor-intensive monitoring. Ultimately, however, sound monitoring, evaluation and learning past themselves cannot assure accomplishment of desired outcomes. Case one provides an instance: while PCA, the largest peanut growing company in Australia, has relocated some of its production, over 95% of peanuts are still grown in Queensland, despite many producers' awareness of the likely challenges of climate modify in the future (Marshall et al., 2013). In studies of Australian adaptation, Dowd et al. (2014) found that those engaged had far-reaching information and noesis network connections coupled with relatively weak social links to family unit, friends and colleagues—weak ties in this case empowering transformative change.

Conclusions and Ways Forward

Conclusions: Is Transformation Happening?

Is transformational accommodation already happening in agricultural systems in response to climate change? In the simple input-output definition of transformation established in this commodity, the respond is yes: the 23 empirical case studies reviewed provide multiple examples of non-marginal change (more than a third change in inputs or outputs) within the last generation (25 years) in a wide range of agro-ecological and socio-economic contexts, and from village to national level (Table one). Outcomes from transformational accommodation to climate change are probable to go better understood over fourth dimension, with increasing numbers of empirical studies (Figure 1). It is not notwithstanding clear that the transformative adaptation processes observed in these case studies take generated more than sustainable agricultural systems. In cases where transformation drives toward a single option, such as a switch to a different crop type, there is a danger that the new system is as maladaptive as that which it replaces. For many farmers, transformative pathways that open up out a wider set up of options may be more useful than specific switches in inputs or outputs.

Our simple working definition of transformation may non capture the full nature of "major, non-marginal change" intended by proponents of transformative responses to climate change. Prevailing adaptation theory and practice have been criticized for an emphasis on technological diagnoses and solutions that deny the more fundamental drivers of vulnerability to climate change: weak and inequitable access to resources, services, decision-making and justice (Chandra et al., 2017). The chapters to conform to climatic change is enhanced past basic human development, such as education and healthcare, also every bit past climate-specific actions, such as early warning systems (Lemos et al., 2007). Some authors argue that successful adaptation depends on investments both in generic capacities and in climate-specific, sector-specific capacities (Eakin et al., 2014). A more than overtly political position posits that transformational adaptation requires a redistribution of power within society (Blythe et al., 2018). In this light, positive transformational adaptation in agriculture would involve a transition of, or disruption in, food system governance toward more equitable participation and outcomes for marginalized producers, workers and consumers (Feola, 2014).

Our empirical research has uncovered very few examples that evangelize meaningful rebalancing of participation and outcomes within food system governance. Even so, the example studies do reveal how shifts in governance, particularly those in favor of disadvantaged groups, may be pivotal to transformational outcomes in adaptation. Near strikingly in Niger, the transfer of tenure over trees from the state to farmers—addressing bones control over assets rather than a technical climate change issue—was a disquisitional success factor. The capacity of producers, processors and consumers to accommodate depends strongly on public policy, market forces and cultural norms that shape access to resources and economic opportunities, as shown in Bangladesh, China, Costa rica, Federal democratic republic of ethiopia, Republic of kenya, Morocco, Nepal and Vietnam. Shaping the conditions for governance and learning across public policy, markets and local institutions is a key way in which governments and development partners can aid provide the correct enabling conditions for future adaptation, whether incremental or transformative.

Ways Forwards: Supporting Positive Transformational Adaptation

The adaptation cycle framework proposes a purposive, pro-active, systematic and sequential process by which agricultural systems might adapt incrementally, or transform. While all the instance studies show some of the four elements of evolution of goals and objectives, visioning, implementation and monitoring, none of them conform fully to the managerial logic of the adaptation wheel framework. Rather, transformative adaptation processes more usually happen through a somewhat disorganized combination of proactive and reactive responses to external drivers past individual farmers, companies or public agencies. Climate change may be a directly or indirect driver.

Where the adaptation wheel works well, it creates a strong ground for effective activeness, meaningful learning, and beneficial outcomes for farmers and food supply (Park et al., 2012). Therefore, investments to become this bicycle working finer for both incremental and transformative adaptation are likely to exist valuable. What could governments and development partners practice to improve the effectiveness of transformative accommodation leading to transformational outcomes? Showtime, more comprehensive and long-term approaches to adaptation planning could exist undertaken. Deportment could include the following:

• Expand the remit of adaptation planning to consider the multi-functionality of agronomics and a organization-wide view of nutrient production and consumption. In practical terms, this would entail visioning, planning, implementation and evaluation of, desired agricultural futures in terms of power to supply benefits to nutrition, livelihoods and environment, over and above benefits to national-level nutrient security, monetary returns and balance of trade. It could too include outlook for technological breakthroughs, policy reframing, or disruptors on the demand-side.

• Apply the "stranded assets" thinking that has go well-established in the energy sector equally a frame to encourage consideration of more transformative options for adaptation (for example, the re-siting or re-scaling of processing facilities, send links and other infrastructure in major agronomical sub-sectors).

• Include arrangements for transformative accommodation in processes, such as the Global Stocktake of the UNFCCC, and institutions, such as the Light-green Climate Fund, and evolution depository financial institution loan and grant frameworks.

Second, a range of technical and financial assistance could be offered, in ways that promote more equitable governance and outcomes. Actions here could include:

• Back up more systematic multi-stakeholder approaches in key agricultural sub-sectors to shared visioning and identification of adaptation options that are robust across a wide set up of possible climate and market futures, and that include an explicit appraisal of the winners and losers from culling options.

• Provide fiscal compensation for transformative changes that are deemed necessary for long-term viability of an agricultural sub-sector but incur near-term losses to the agriculture and food industries, particularly for modest-scale farmers and businesses with comparatively low access to technologies and services.

• Provide support for appropriate monitoring systems so that adaptation outcomes can exist tracked through time by farmers and food system participants themselves, to give early on alert of possible detrimental changes and to build the evidence base as to what is working, where and why.

• Appraise implementation of accommodation-oriented policies that entrench incremental or status quo behaviors among farmers—such equally insurance schemes and production subsidies—in light of potential demand for more transformational change.

• Invest in data and cognition systems that provide farmers and other food organization participants with the tools to forecast and envisage possible futures and to monitor and evaluate progress toward those, to support the ongoing generation of transformative options.

An of import shift at the global level volition be a move toward understanding—and economically rewarding—farms as multi-functional systems that deliver not only calories and profits only also expert jobs, wellness and nutrition, environmental benefits (importantly greenhouse gas mitigation and biodiversity conservation) and cultural value. As discussed here, such a shift will entail governance that is more equitable in terms of inclusive decision-making and distribution of outcomes.

Author Contributions

All authors wrote text, in addition SV conceived and edited newspaper, DD compiled and analyzed cases. SH and LC applied adaptation cycle framework. PT framed transformation analysis and edited newspaper.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of whatsoever commercial or financial relationships that could be construed every bit a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

DD, LC and PT acknowledge the CGIAR Trust Fund, Australia (ACIAR), Ireland, International Fund for Agricultural Evolution (IFAD), Netherlands, Switzerland and UK for funding to the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS).

Footnotes

1. ^OED is Available online at: http://www.oed.com

References

Abidoye, B. O., Kurukulasuriya, P., and Mendelsohn, R. (2017). South-East Asian farmer perceptions of climate change. Clim. Modify Econ. 8:1740006. doi: x.1142/S2010007817400061

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Baca, One thousand., Läderach, P., Haggar, J., Schroth, G., and Ovalle, O. (2014). An integrated framework for assessing vulnerability to climate change and developing adaptation strategies for coffee growing families in Mesoamerica. PLoS ONE 9:e88463. doi: 10.1371/periodical.pone.0088463

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Bacon, C. Thousand., Sundstrom, W. A., Stewart, I. T., and Beezer, D. (2016). Vulnerability to cumulative hazards: coping with the coffee leaf rust outbreak, drought, and food insecurity in Nicaragua. World Dev. 93, 136–152. doi: ten.1016/j.worlddev.2016.12.025

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Baird, R. (2008). The Bear upon of Climatic change on Minorities and Indigenous Peoples. London: Minority Rights Group International.

Google Scholar

Barrett, T., Feola, G., Khusnitdinova, M., and Krylova, V. (2017). Adapting agricultural h2o use to climate change in a mail-Soviet context: challenges and opportunities in southeast Kazakhstan. Hum. Ecol. 45, 747–762. doi: 10.1007/s10745-017-9947-ix

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Behnke, R., and Kerven, C. (2011). "Replacing pastoralism with irrigated agriculture in the Awash Valley, N-eastern Ethiopia: counting the costs," in Paper delivered at International Briefing on the Future of Pastoralis (Addis Ababa), 21–23.

Google Scholar

Biesbroek, R., Dupuis, J., Jordan, A., Wellstead, A., Howlett, K., Cairney, P., et al. (2015). Opening upwards the black box of adaptation controlling. Nat. Clim. Modify 5, 493–494. doi: ten.1038/nclimate2615

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Biggs, S. (2007). Thinking near generations: conceptual positions and policy implications. J. Soc. Issues 63, 695–711. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.2007.00531.x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Blythe, J., Argent, J., Evans, 50., Armitage, D., Bennett, N. J., Moore, Chiliad. Fifty., et al. (2018). The nighttime side of transformation: latent risks in contemporary sustainability discourse. Antipode. l, 1206–1223. doi: 10.1111/anti.12405

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bouamra-Mechemache, Z., and Zago, A. (2015). Introduction: collective activity in agriculture. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 42, 707–711. doi: x.1093/erae/jbv027

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Chandra, A., McNamara, Thou. Due east., and Dargusch, P. (2017). The relevance of political ecology perspectives for smallholder climate-smart agriculture: a review. J. Pol. Ecol. 24, 821–842. doi: x.2458/v24i1.20969

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Christoplos, I., Ngoan, 50. D., Sen, L. T. H., Huong, N. T. T., and Nguyen, H. (2017). Irresolute arenas for agricultural climate change adaptation in Vietnam. Dev. Pract. 27, 132–142. doi: 10.1080/09614524.2017.1285272

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Cohen, L., and Castro, I. (2016). As Climate Change Threatens Centam Java, a Cocoa Boom is Born. Reuters (Accessed January 18, 2016).

Descheemaeker, K., Nyssen, J., Rossi, J., Poesen, J., Haile, M., Raes, D., et al. (2006). Sediment deposition and pedogenesis in exclosures in the Tigray Highlands, Ethiopia. Geoderma 132, 291–314. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2005.04.027

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Dowd, A.-1000., Marshall, N., Fleming, A., Jakku, E., Gaillard, Eastward., and Howden, M. (2014). The role of networks in transforming Australian agriculture. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 558–563. doi: 10.1038/nclimate2275

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Du, B., Zhen, L., Yan, H., and de Groot, R. (2016). Effects of government grassland conservation policy on household livelihoods and dependence on local grasslands: testify from Inner Mongolia, China. Sustainability 8:1314. doi: 10.3390/su8121314

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Eakin, H. C., Lemos, Thousand. C., and Nelson, D. R. (2014). Differentiating capacities as a ways to sustainable climate change accommodation. Glob. Environ. Change 27, i–eight. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.013

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Faruque, One thousand., Sarwer, R. H., Karim, M., Phillips, M., Collis, W. J., Belton, B., et al. (2017). The evolution of aquatic agricultural systems in Southwest Bangladesh in response to salinity and other drivers of change. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 15, 185–207. doi: 10.1080/14735903.2016.1193424

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Faysse, N. (2015). The rationale of the Light-green Morocco Plan: missing links betwixt goals and implementation. J. North Afr. Stud. 20, 622–634. doi: 10.1080/13629387.2015.1053112

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Fazey, I., Moug, P., Allen, S., Beckmann, K., Blackwood, D., Bonaventura, Chiliad., et al. (2018). Transformation in a changing climate: a research agenda. Clim. Dev. ten, 197–217. doi: ten.1080/17565529.2017.1301864

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Fenton, A., Paavola, J., and Tallontire, A. (2017). Democratic adaptation to riverine flooding in Satkhira Commune, Bangladesh: implications for adaptation planning. Reg. Environ. Change 17, 2387–2396. doi: ten.1007/s10113-017-1159-eight

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Greiner, C., and Mwaka, I. (2016). Agricultural change at the margins: accommodation and intensification in a Kenyan dryland. J. East. Afr. Stud. 10, 130–149. doi: 10.1080/17531055.2015.1134488

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Haglund, E., Ndjeunga, J., Snook, 50., and Pasternak, D. (2011). Dry land tree direction for improved household livelihoods: farmer managed natural regeneration in Niger. J. Environ. Manage. 92, 1696–1705. doi: x.1016/j.jenvman.2011.01.027

PubMed Abstruse | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Harvey, C. A., Rakotobe, Z. L., Rao, N. S., Dave, R., Razafimahatratra, H., Rabarijohn, R. H., et al. (2014). Extreme vulnerability of smallholder farmers to agricultural risks and climatic change in Madagascar. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. 369:20130089. doi: ten.1098/rstb.2013.008

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Headey, D., Taffesse, A. Southward., and Yous, L. (2014). Diversification and development in pastoralist Ethiopia. World Dev. 56, 200–213. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.10.015

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hufty, One thousand. (2011). "Investigating policy processes: the governance analytical framework," in Research for Sustainable Development: Foundations, Experiences, and Perspectives, eds U. Wiesmann and H. Hurni (Bern: NCCR Northward-Southward; Geographica Bernensia), 403–424.

Google Scholar

IPCC (2014). Climate change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and 3 to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, eds Core Writing Squad, R. M. Pachauri, and L.A. Meyer. Geneva: IPCC, 151.

Jakku, E., Thorburn, P. J., Marshall, N. A., Dowd, A.-Thou., Howden, S. M., Mendham, E., et al. (2016). Learning the difficult way: a instance study of an attempt at agricultural transformation in response to climate change. Clim. Change 137, 557–574. doi: 10.1007/s10584-016-1698-x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Juhola, S., Glaas, E., Linnér, B. O., and Neset, T. S. (2016). Redefining maladaptation. Environ. Sci. Policy 55, 135–140. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2015.09.014

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Kagunyu, A. W., and Wanjohi, J. (2014). Camel rearing replacing cattle production among the Borana community in Isiolo Canton of Northern Republic of kenya, as climate variability bites. Pastoralism iv, thirteen. doi: x.1186/s13570-014-0013-6

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Kates, R. Due west., Travis, W. R., and Wilbanks, T. J. (2012). Transformational adaptation when incremental adaptations to climate change are insufficient. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109, 7156–7161. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1115521109

PubMed Abstruse | CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Konchar, 1000. M., Staver, B., Salick, J., Chapagain, A., Joshi, L., Karki, South., et al. (2015). Adapting in the shadow of Annapurna: a climate tipping point. J. Ethnobiol. 35, 449–471. doi: x.2993/0278-0771-35.iii.449

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Kumar, S., Murthy, D. K., Gumma, M., Khan, Eastward., Khatri-Chhetri, A., Aggarwal, P., et al. (2018). Towards Climate-Smart Agricultural Policies and Investments in Telangana. CGIAR Inquiry Plan on Climatic change, Agronomics and Food Security. Available online at: hdl.handle.internet/10568/90627

Google Scholar

Läderach, P., Haggar, J., Lau, C., Eitzinger, A., Ovalle, O., Baca, K., et al. (2010). Mesoamerican Java: Building a Climate Modify Adaptation Strategy. CIAT policy brief, 2. Cali: International Eye for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT).

Google Scholar

Lei, Y., Liu, C., Zhang, 50., and Luo, S. (2016). How smallholder farmers arrange to agronomical drought in a irresolute climate: a case study in southern China. Land use Policy 55, 300–308. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.04.012

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Lei, Y., Wang, J., Yue, Y., Yin, Y., and Sheng, Z. (2014). How adjustments in land utilise patterns contribute to drought risk adaptation in a irresolute climate–a case study in China. State Use Policy 36, 577–584. doi: x.1016/j.landusepol.2013.x.004

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Leminih, M., and Kassa, H. (2014). Re-greening Federal democratic republic of ethiopia: history, challenges and lessons. Forests 5, 1896–1909. doi: 10.3390/f5081896

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Lemos, Yard. C., Boyd, Eastward., Tompkins, E. L., Osbahr, H., and Liverman, D. (2007). Developing adaptation and adapting development. Ecol. Soc. 12:26. doi: x.5751/ES-02133-120226

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Lobell, D. B., Banziger, M., Magorokosho, C., and Vivek, B. (2011). Nonlinear rut effects on African maize as evidenced past historical yield trials. Nat. Clim. Chang. 1, 42–45. doi: 10.1038/nclimate1043

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mapfumo, P., Onyango, M., Honkponou, S. K., El Houssine, M., Githeko, A., Rabeharisoa, L., et al. (2015). Pathways to transformational change in the face up of climate impacts: an belittling framework. Clim. Dev. nine, 439–451. doi: ten.1080/17565529.2015.1040365

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Marshall, North. A., Park, S., Howden, Southward. One thousand., Dowd, A. B., and Jakku, East. S. (2013). Climatic change awareness is associated with enhanced adaptive capacity. Agric. Syst. 117, 30–34. doi: ten.1016/j.agsy.2013.01.003

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Meade, N., and Islam, T. (2006). Modelling and forecasting the improvidence of innovation–A 25-year review. Int. J. Forecast. 22, 519–545. doi: x.1016/j.ijforecast.2006.01.005

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mekuria, West., Veldkamp, E., Haile, M., Nyssen, J., Muys, B., and Gebrehiwot, Thou. (2007). Effectiveness of exclosures to restore degraded soils as a result of overgrazing in Tigray, Federal democratic republic of ethiopia. J. Arid Environ. 69, 270–284. doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2006.10.009

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mekuria, W., Veldkamp, Due east., Tilahun, M., and Olschewski, R. (2011). Economical valuation of state restoration: the instance of exclosures established on communal grazing lands in Tigray, Ethiopia. Land Degrad. Dev. 22, 334–344. doi: 10.1002/ldr.1001

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Mustelin, J., and Handmer, J. (2013). "Triggering transformation: Managing resilience or invoking real change?" in Proceedings of Transformation in a Irresolute Climate (Oslo: University of Oslo), 22–42.

Nesbitt, A., Kemp, B., Steele, C., Lovett, A., and Dorling, S. (2016). Impact of recent climate change and weather variability on the viability of UK viticulture – combining weather and climate records with producers' perspectives. Aust. J. Grape Vino Res. 22, 324–335. doi: ten.1111/ajgw.12215

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Nyasimi, Yard., Amwata, D., Hove, Fifty., Kinyangi, J., and Wamukoya, G. (2014). Bear witness of Impact: Climate-Smart Agronomics in Africa. Wageningen: CGIAR Research Plan on Climatic change, Agriculture and Nutrient Security (CCAFS) and the Technical Heart for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA).

Google Scholar

O'Brien, M. (2012). Global ecology change Ii: from adaptation to deliberate transformation. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 36, 667–676. doi: 10.1177/0309132511425767

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Osbahr, H., Twyman, C., Adger, W. North., and Thomas, D. S. (2008). Effective livelihood accommodation to climate change disturbance: calibration dimensions of practice in Mozambique. Geoforum 39, 1951–1964. doi: x.1016/j.geoforum.2008.07.010

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Park, South. Eastward., Marshall, Northward. A., Jakku, E., Dowdd, A. K., Howden, S. G., Mendhamf, E., et al. (2012). Informing adaptation responses to climate modify through theories of transformation. Glob. Environ. Alter 22, 115–126. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.10.003

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Popke, J., Curtis, Southward., and Gamble, D. W. (2016). A social justice framing of climate change soapbox and policy: accommodation, resilience and vulnerability in a Jamaican agronomical landscape. Geoforum 73, 70–80. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.eleven.003

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Postigo, J. C. (2014). Perception and resilience of Andean populations facing climate change. J. Ethnobiol. 34, 383–400. doi: x.2993/0278-0771-34.three.383

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Pretty, J., Benton, T. K., Bharucha, Z. P., Dicks, L. V., Butler Flora, C., Godfray, H. C. J., et al. (2018). Global assessment of agricultural system redesign for sustainable intensification. Nat. Sustain. 1, 441–446. doi: 10.1038/s41893-018-0114-0

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Reenberg, A., Rasmussen, 50. V., and Nielsen, J. Ø. (2012). Causal relations and land use transformation in the Sahel: conceptual lenses for processes, temporal totality and inertia. Geogr. Tidsskr. Dan. J. Geogr. 112, 159–173. doi: 10.1080/00167223.2012.741888

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Reij, C., Tappan, G., and Smale, K. (2009). Agroenvironmental Transformation in the Sahel: Another Kind of Light-green Revolution (Vol. 914). Washington, DC: International Nutrient Policy Enquiry Found.

Rickards, Fifty., and Howden, S. Thousand. (2012). Transformational adaptation: agriculture and climate alter. Ingather Pasture Sci. 63, 240–250. doi: ten.1071/CP11172

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Rippke, U., Ramirez-Villegas, J., Jarvis, A., Vermeulen, Southward. J., Parker, 50., Mer, F., et al. (2016). Timescales of transformational climate change adaptation in Sub-Saharan African agronomics. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 605–609. doi: 10.1038/nclimate2947

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Savo, V., Lepofsky, D., Benner, J., Kohfeld, Thou., Bailey, J., and Lertzman, K. (2016). Observations of climate change amidst subsistence-oriented communities around the world. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 462–473. doi: x.1038/nclimate2958

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Schlenker, West., and Roberts, M. J. (2009). Nonlinear temperature furnishings indicate severe damages to US ingather yields under climate change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U.s.a.A. 106, 15594–15598. doi: x.1073/pnas.0906865106

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Schmidt, Thousand., and Pearson, O. (2016). Pastoral livelihoods under pressure level: ecological, political and socioeconomic transitions in Afar (Federal democratic republic of ethiopia). J. Barren Environ. 124, 22–thirty. doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2015.07.003

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Thornton, P. M., and Herrero, M. (2010). The potential for reduced methane and carbon dioxide emissions from livestock and pasture direction in the tropics. PNAS 107, 19667–19672. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0912890107

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Thornton, P. K., and Herrero, G. (2015). Adapting to climate change in the mixed ingather-livestock farming systems in sub-Saharan Africa. Nat. Clim. Change v, 830–836. doi: 10.1038/nclimate2754

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Timmer, C. P. (1988). "The agronomical transformation," in Handbook of Development Economics, Vol. 1, eds H. Chenery and T. N. Srinivasan (Amsterdam: North Holland Publishers).

Google Scholar

Usman, Thousand. T., and Reason, C. J. C. (2004). Dry spell frequencies and their variability over southern Africa. Clim. Res. 26, 199–211. doi: 10.3354/cr026199

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Vermeulen, S. J., Challinor, A. J., Thornton, P. K., Campbell, B. M., Eriyagama, N., Vervoort, J., et al. (2013). Addressing uncertainty in adaptation planning for agriculture. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U.s.A. 110, 8357–8362. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1219441110

PubMed Abstruse | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Wani, Yard. H., Baba, S. H., Bazaz, N. H., and Sehar, H. (2015). Climate change in Kashmir valley: is it initiating transformation of mountain agriculture? Indian J. Econ. Dev. 3, 142–154.

Warner, B. P. (2016). Understanding role player-centered adaptation limits in smallholder agronomics in the Cardinal American dry tropics. Agric. Hum. Values 33, 785–797. doi: 10.1007/s10460-015-9661-iv

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Wheaton, E. Eastward., and Maciver, D. C. (1999). A framework and key questions for adapting to climate variability and alter. Mitig. Adapt. Strat. Glob. Change 4, 215–225. doi: x.1023/A:1009660700150

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

Wise, R. Yard., Fazey, I., Stafford Smith, M., Park, S. E., Eakin, H. C., Archer Van Garderen, Eastward. R. Yard., et al. (2014). Reconceptualising adaptation to climatic change every bit role of pathways of modify and response. Glob. Environ.Change Hum.Policy Dimens. 28, 325–336. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.12.002

CrossRef Total Text | Google Scholar

WRI (2008). Roots of Resilience—Growing the Wealth of the Poor. Washington, DC: Globe Resources Institute (WRI) in collaboration with Un Development Programme, Un Environs Programme, and World Bank.

Zhou, H. J., Wang, X., and Wang, J. A. (2016). A way to sustainability: perspective of resilience and adaptation to disaster. Sustainability 8:737. doi: 10.3390/su8080737

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

milonesightle.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2018.00065/full

Share this post