Limits...
Climate change mitigation and adaptation in the land use sector: from complementarity to synergy.

Duguma LA, Minang PA, van Noordwijk M - Environ Manage (2014)

Bottom Line: There is a growing argument that synergistic approaches to adaptation and mitigation could bring substantial benefits at multiple scales in the land use sector.An in-depth look into the current practices suggests that more emphasis is laid on complementarity-i.e., mitigation projects providing adaptation co-benefits and vice versa rather than on synergy.We argue that the current practice of seeking co-benefits (complementarity) is a necessary but insufficient step toward addressing synergy.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: ASB Partnership for the Tropical Forest Margins and World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), United Nations Avenue, Gigiri, 30677, Nairobi, 00100, Kenya, l.a.duguma@cgiar.org.

ABSTRACT
Currently, mitigation and adaptation measures are handled separately, due to differences in priorities for the measures and segregated planning and implementation policies at international and national levels. There is a growing argument that synergistic approaches to adaptation and mitigation could bring substantial benefits at multiple scales in the land use sector. Nonetheless, efforts to implement synergies between adaptation and mitigation measures are rare due to the weak conceptual framing of the approach and constraining policy issues. In this paper, we explore the attributes of synergy and the necessary enabling conditions and discuss, as an example, experience with the Ngitili system in Tanzania that serves both adaptation and mitigation functions. An in-depth look into the current practices suggests that more emphasis is laid on complementarity-i.e., mitigation projects providing adaptation co-benefits and vice versa rather than on synergy. Unlike complementarity, synergy should emphasize functionally sustainable landscape systems in which adaptation and mitigation are optimized as part of multiple functions. We argue that the current practice of seeking co-benefits (complementarity) is a necessary but insufficient step toward addressing synergy. Moving forward from complementarity will require a paradigm shift from current compartmentalization between mitigation and adaptation to systems thinking at landscape scale. However, enabling policy, institutional, and investment conditions need to be developed at global, national, and local levels to achieve synergistic goals.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

The hypothetical national or project level processes to move from complementarity to synergy between mitigation and adaptation
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4129237&req=5

Fig4: The hypothetical national or project level processes to move from complementarity to synergy between mitigation and adaptation

Mentions: The synergy approach involves numerous processes. For the sake of simplicity, we synthesized some processes necessary for projects or programs that intend to employ the synergy approach to address climate change issues. However, depending on the local contexts of the projects/programs, other relevant processes may be added too. The first important step is to identify the extent of complementarity, because it is a prerequisite for synergy to happen (Fig. 4). This largely emphasizes exploring the multiple benefits from the mix of practices. The system analysis process (no. 2 in Fig. 4) is crucial in synergy and involves identifying the system components, how they function and interact and how good the selected measures fit into the local context. It intends to identify the tradeoffs associated with the practices and craft strategies for its possible reduction. Even in countries possessing an integrated climate policy, this process is often overlooked or simplified and sometimes is overshadowed by environmental impact assessment activities that rarely go beyond investment project perspectives.Fig. 4


Climate change mitigation and adaptation in the land use sector: from complementarity to synergy.

Duguma LA, Minang PA, van Noordwijk M - Environ Manage (2014)

The hypothetical national or project level processes to move from complementarity to synergy between mitigation and adaptation
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4129237&req=5

Fig4: The hypothetical national or project level processes to move from complementarity to synergy between mitigation and adaptation
Mentions: The synergy approach involves numerous processes. For the sake of simplicity, we synthesized some processes necessary for projects or programs that intend to employ the synergy approach to address climate change issues. However, depending on the local contexts of the projects/programs, other relevant processes may be added too. The first important step is to identify the extent of complementarity, because it is a prerequisite for synergy to happen (Fig. 4). This largely emphasizes exploring the multiple benefits from the mix of practices. The system analysis process (no. 2 in Fig. 4) is crucial in synergy and involves identifying the system components, how they function and interact and how good the selected measures fit into the local context. It intends to identify the tradeoffs associated with the practices and craft strategies for its possible reduction. Even in countries possessing an integrated climate policy, this process is often overlooked or simplified and sometimes is overshadowed by environmental impact assessment activities that rarely go beyond investment project perspectives.Fig. 4

Bottom Line: There is a growing argument that synergistic approaches to adaptation and mitigation could bring substantial benefits at multiple scales in the land use sector.An in-depth look into the current practices suggests that more emphasis is laid on complementarity-i.e., mitigation projects providing adaptation co-benefits and vice versa rather than on synergy.We argue that the current practice of seeking co-benefits (complementarity) is a necessary but insufficient step toward addressing synergy.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: ASB Partnership for the Tropical Forest Margins and World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), United Nations Avenue, Gigiri, 30677, Nairobi, 00100, Kenya, l.a.duguma@cgiar.org.

ABSTRACT
Currently, mitigation and adaptation measures are handled separately, due to differences in priorities for the measures and segregated planning and implementation policies at international and national levels. There is a growing argument that synergistic approaches to adaptation and mitigation could bring substantial benefits at multiple scales in the land use sector. Nonetheless, efforts to implement synergies between adaptation and mitigation measures are rare due to the weak conceptual framing of the approach and constraining policy issues. In this paper, we explore the attributes of synergy and the necessary enabling conditions and discuss, as an example, experience with the Ngitili system in Tanzania that serves both adaptation and mitigation functions. An in-depth look into the current practices suggests that more emphasis is laid on complementarity-i.e., mitigation projects providing adaptation co-benefits and vice versa rather than on synergy. Unlike complementarity, synergy should emphasize functionally sustainable landscape systems in which adaptation and mitigation are optimized as part of multiple functions. We argue that the current practice of seeking co-benefits (complementarity) is a necessary but insufficient step toward addressing synergy. Moving forward from complementarity will require a paradigm shift from current compartmentalization between mitigation and adaptation to systems thinking at landscape scale. However, enabling policy, institutional, and investment conditions need to be developed at global, national, and local levels to achieve synergistic goals.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus