Transcript Policy response FAILED to anticipate the future climate risks

Steps to increase resilience of
agriculture sector to current
and future climate variability
in Indonesia
Rizaldi Boer
Bogor Agricultural University
Indonesia
E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]
Loss
Economic
Kerugian Akibat
USD)
(BillionUS$)
El-Nino
El-Nino 82/83
82/83(Milyar
• Indonesia is vulnerable
country to climate
change. At present the
occurrence of extreme
climate events have
caused serious impact in
many sectors
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Pertanian
Agriculture
24%
Global
Indonesia
Perhubungan
Transportation
3%
Total loss 97/98
375 Million US$
Kehutanan
Forestry
73%
• As an agrarian country where this sector as one
of the most vulnerable sector to the ECE,
Indonesian government has paid serious
attention to this sector, how this sector could
adapt or cope with to such events
• Many program has been implemented, however,
most of the programs are more curative than
preventive actions. New programs and large
amount of funding was normally released after
the devastating impact happened. Good
adaptive capacity has not been developed yet
as the magnitude of loss due to such events
tended to increase
5.0
4.5
Ton)
Import
Impor(Million
(juta ton)
4.0
3.5
3.0
price of rice
El-Nino
increase, new
var. release, IPM
2.5
2.0
1.5
Banned of
57 pesticide
Subsidy for
pesticide
stop
New var. release,
extensification on
plantation land, IPT
and agric.
mechanization
0.5
33.0
32.0
31.0
Introduction of
direct seeded, 1
million peat land,
new regulation
1.0
34.0
30.0
29.0
WS
delayed,
no subsidy
(pressure
from IMF,
economic
crisis)
0.0
28.0
27.0
26.0
25.0
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Policy response to Drought in Indonesia
Rice Production
(Million
ton)
(juta Ton)
beras
Produksi
Crash irrigation
program, prilled urea,
price of rice increased El-Nino
11%, extensification of
upland rice
El-Nino
Drought events
1877
1865
1972
1979
1987
Major policy
interventions
Famine
code
Green
revolution
Employment
generation
program
Contingency
crop plan
Watershed
protection &
improvement
Food
scarcity
relief
Drought
relief
Drought
management
Water
management
Type of policy
responses
2002
Policy response FAILED to anticipate the future climate risks
NOTE:
Historical policy responses to drought in India. Note: each represents
death of one million people, each represents 50 million people
affected. If water management response were introduced right after the
1979 drought, the impact of 1987 drought may not as severe as what
really happened. Adopted from Subbiah (2005)
• “Planned adaptation to future climate will be
based on current individual, community and
institutional behaviour that, in part, have been
developed as a response to current climate”
(Jones et al. 2004)
• We need to develop planning horizon
– How far into the future a risk assessment
should be projected?
– For how long lifetime of decision-making
associated with a particular activity last?
– When new policy should be introduced to
mitigate the possible impact of coming ECE or
climate change?
APPROACH: Engagement
of Stakeholders
Good climate
forecasting
system
Sustainable system
and prosperous
communities
Adaptation
actions
NGOs
Mitigation
actions
Good
incentive
system
Farmers and other
end users
Inputs and Feed back
Research Agencies,
Universities
Transfer of knowledge &
technology information through
science and policy forum
National and local
Governments
Communicating climate knowledge & climate information applications to increase
adaptive capacity and community participations in current and future climate
variability
How we do it?
A SMALL STEP: INCREASING
ADAPTIVE CAPACITY OF
FARMERS TO EXTREME CLIMATE
EVENTS THROUGH FIELD SCHOOL
PROGRAM: Indramayu Case
Subsistence farmers are the most
severely affected by ECE
Number of Household based on Welfare Status
Number of Household
180000
2001
2003
160000
140000
120000
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
Pra KS
KS I
KS II
KS III
KS IV-up
Income Status
2001
KS III
15%
KS II
25%
The increase in
number of
Pra-KS (below
poverty line) in 2003
was primarily due to
devastating impact of
drought (long dry
season) occurred in
2002-2003
2003
KS IV-up
5%
Pra KS
34%
KS I
21%
KS III KS IV-up
3%
10%
KS II
18%
KS I
32%
Pra KS
37%
CFS Development Process and Implementation
Research Communities
and local governments
Training
Feedback
Field Facilitator I (PL I) at
District/Sub-district Level
Function:
 To translate scientific language to
field language
 To train PL2 in technology and
Engaging policy makers
method (see and listen)
 Provide inputs to PL2 in designing
detail program for project operational
Training
Field Facilitator II (PL II) at
Sub-district or village level
or farmer group level
CFS
Farmer group and
farmers’ family
Function:
 To translate field language into
farmers language
 To disseminate information and
technology to farmers
 To train farmers based on learning
by doing approach
 To facilitate and motivate farmers to
adopt the technologies
Engaging intermediaries
Engaging communities
Use of Climate Information
Farm
management
system
Agriculture
Institutional
system
Partnership
system
Climate Information is
needed for:
Developing agriculture
Zoning
Setting up crop
management strategy
(determining planting time,
selection of cropping
system following climate
forecast) and other
mitigation programs
Assessing market
conditions, etc.
Climate Information is needed
for:
Setting up market strategies
and land allocation under a
given forecast
Increasing awareness of
farmers to the needs for
collaboration among farmers
and with other stakeholders in
managing climate variability
Designing better strategy and
coordination between government agencies in responding to
climate forecast etc.
Climate Information can be used
for:
Convincing farmers’ partners for
collaboration by minimizing
climate risk
Assisting government in setting
up local regulations for
addressing climate variability (e.g.
rice stock management under a
given climate forecast, loan
arrangement for farmer, etc.)
Assisting government to set up
budget policy to address climate
related problems, etc.
Increasing knowledge of end users small groupscommunity-institutions
Need for government regulations increasing