Strengthening Africa’s climate-smart agriculture and food systems through enhanced policy coherence and coordinated action

ABSTRACT

Africa’s climate, food and agricultural policy agendas are often fragmented and yet their integration is a key requirement for enhancing the continent’s resilience and development outcomes. This research article explores actions to strengthen and better align Africa’s climate adaptation and mitigation responses in the agricultural sector. These include recommendations to promote the coherence of Africa’s climate-smart agriculture policy frameworks at numerous levels; to strengthen broad-based stakeholder engagement and inclusion; to promote institutional coordination, monitoring, evaluation and learning; and importantly, to enhance policy implementation.

KEYWORDS:

• Climate-smart agriculture
• Africa
• climate resilience
• food security
• CAADP
• Malabo Declaration

Introduction: The vulnerability of African agriculture and food systems to climate change

Africa, as a region, is particularly vulnerable and exposed to the negative impacts of climate change. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the continent’s particular vulnerability is a symptom of multiple stressors, including biophysical characteristics, its high exposure to climate change, the already existing socio-economic development challenges and its low adaptative capacity.¹ In addition, Africa’s agricultural systems are characterised by smallholder farmers, pastoralists and artisanal fishers who are particularly vulnerable to, and often severely compromised by, environmental and economic shocks, including natural disasters (especially drought), pest outbreaks and the volatility of food prices. These vulnerable groupings are highly dependent on rain-fed agriculture (and natural resources in general), lack alternative livelihood options, and generally are experiencing widespread poverty and unemployment, with low levels of education and unequal access to financial resources, climate services and other modern technologies and innovations. In addition, Africa’s agricultural production needs to ramp up substantially in order to meet the needs of the region’s growing population. The mid-year update of the Global Report on Food Crises 2022 estimates that 140 million people in Africa face acute food insecurity.²

In addition, Africa’s food production capacity – including its farmlands, rangelands and aquatic resources – are increasingly being affected by the degradation of ecosystems and climate variability. This is felt at the farm-level through a decrease in crop yields, a reduction in the nutritional quality of food including major cereals, as well as through the decrease in livestock productivity.

The onset of recent global events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war, has also had major implications for the agriculture and land-use sectors in Africa. According to the International Monetary Fund, food prices in Africa increased on average by 23.9% from 2020 to 2022 – the highest increase since the financial crises of 2008.³ In addition, despite agriculture being a major contributing sector to the continent’s economic growth, most countries still rely on imports to meet the demand for food, with both Russia and Ukraine being major sources of wheat imports to Africa. As a result, according to an African Development Bank estimate, since the start of the Russia-Ukraine war Africa has experienced approximately $30 million in food shortages, pushing many people into severe poverty and causing a widespread increase in malnutrition.⁴ Rising global energy prices also have implications for Africa’s farm-to-market transportation costs, further exacerbating poverty levels on the continent.⁵

In response to these vulnerabilities and impacts, it is essential that African countries develop adaptation and resilience building strategies to support their vulnerable farmers and agriculturally dependent communities, and that they devise proactive strategies and policy frameworks to manage agro-systems to better withstand shocks, stresses and unpredictable future global crises.

Interconnected challenges of food security and climate change

Agriculture, as a sector, is particularly sensitive to climate change and climate variability. Crops, livestock and fisheries are highly dependent on water availability and are affected by even small changes in temperature and rainfall ranges. Climate change impedes agricultural production and heightens the vulnerability of people dependent on agriculture for their food, livelihoods, income and job security. This evidence is highlighted in the key findings of the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC)’s Working Group 1⁶ and 2⁷ reports, released in August 2021 and February 2022, respectively. These reports identify the agriculture and land-use sector as one of the most vulnerable to climate extremes and variability. The IPCC reports also emphasises agriculture and land-use as a large source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as well as a significant carbon sink.⁸ In 2019, the IPCC commissioned a specific assessment report on climate change and land⁹ which highlights that approximately 23% of global anthropogenic gases originated from agriculture, forestry, and other land-use sectors between 2007 and 2016. In addition, the IPCC highlights the growing importance of addressing food loss and food waste to meet the necessary climate targets. The World Bank, for example, estimates that food loss and waste contribute approximately 8% to global emissions and their reduction should therefore form a central part of countries’ climate and agricultural policies going forward.¹⁰ In addition, under changing climatic conditions, epidemics of pests and diseases are expected to increase in frequency and spread into new territories,¹¹ requiring proactive policies.

However, despite the clear scientific evidence that highlights the need to integrate land use and agriculture in the response to climate change mitigation and adaptation, response measures, policies and programmes remain fragmented. While African agriculture policy objectives have shifted in recent years from a focus on productivity to the interconnectedness of agriculture to other sectors, there is still growing urgency to reinforce climate-agriculture linkages at multiple levels. In addition, it is also increasingly recognised that, if adequately integrated within the climate policy architecture and accompanying operationalisation strategies, it is likely that agriculture and food systems will deliver both climate mitigation and adaptation benefits – as well as helping to meet socio-economic objectives such as a reduction of poverty, hunger and malnutrition. For this reason, the African Union’s recently launched Climate Change and Resilient Development Strategy and Action Plan includes agriculture and food systems transformation as a key pillar for future climate action.¹²

Transforming agricultural development under a changing climate

While there had been reference to the linkages of climate change, food and agriculture prior to 2009, the concept of climate-smart agriculture (CSA) was emphasised by the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organisation in a report called, ‘Food Security and Agricultural Mitigation in Developing Countries: Options for Capturing Synergies’.¹³ Within this report the synergies between climate adaptation and mitigation actions to support sustainable agricultural development and food security were clearly articulated.¹⁴

By definition, CSA is an integrated landscape management method that addresses the interconnected challenges of food security and climate change. According to Lipper et al, ‘CSA is an approach for transforming and reorientating agricultural development under the new realities of climate change’.¹⁵

The objectives of CSA are three-fold:¹⁶

• To promote agricultural productivity and incomes in a sustainable way, without negatively impacting the environment. This will, in turn, enhance food and nutritional security.

• To reduce the exposure of farmers to short-term risks, while also strengthening their longer-term resilience by building their capacity to adapt and prosper in the face of shocks and stresses. To achieve this, it is imperative to protect nature and its ecosystem services.

• To remove or reduce GHG gas emissions, where possible. This includes avoided deforestation and the management of soils and trees to maximise their carbon sequestration potential.

CSA is built upon abundant existing research and a range of sustainable agricultural approaches which are the cornerstones of implementing CSA in practice. The difference with sustainable agriculture and CSA, however, is that CSA has an explicit focus on climate change, looking to address climate adaptation and mitigation, while working towards food security. In the words of the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), ‘CSA is sustainable agriculture that incorporates resilience concerns, while at the same time seeking to reduce GHG emissions’.¹⁷

CSA is context specific and there are a broad range of examples of CSA interventions across many different countries.¹⁸ These include practices and technologies such as soil management techniques, drought-tolerant crop production, water management, agroforestry, capture fisheries, agroecology, nature-based solutions, and other practices that promote sustainable climate actions in agriculture, as well as other interventions at different levels. The latter include climate modelling and scenario development, information services, insurance and financing schemes, as well as the promotion of an enabling policy and institutional environment. In short, CSA includes the integration of multiple interventions at the food system, landscape, value chain and policy levels.¹⁹

While in some instances CSA adaptation and resilience are terms that have been used interchangeably, recent literature distinguishes the two, defining resilience as ‘the ability to prepare and plan for, absorb, recover from and more successfully adapt and transform in response to adverse events’.²⁰ Resilience can be regarded as an umbrella term referring to the absorptive, adaptive and transformative capacity of a system to change, and encompassing short-term, medium-term and long-term responses to change. In this regard, adopting policies, approaches and practices to enhance the transformative capacity of Africa’s agricultural systems will lead to resilience building. CSA activities can induce transformational change, for example evoking changes in crop varieties that have long lasting positive effects on water availability, soil health, overall crop production and livelihoods. Therefore, for the purposes of this research, the term CSA has been used broadly to cover the multitude of adaptation and mitigation actions in the agricultural sector, as well as actions that promote resilience in the agricultural sector.

In addition, it must be noted, that while CSA is aimed at primarily enhancing the climate resilience of agricultural value chains, enhancing the nutritional value of food systems is also an integral component of CSA. While nutrition is not the focus of this particular article, it is particularly important in Africa, with many communities relying directly on subsistence farming to meet their daily nutritional needs. For CSA to address both climate resilience and nutritional security, an effective policy environment and cross-ministry communication is required, to ensure alignment across agricultural, environmental, and health-related ministries or departments. This adds an additional layer of complexity to policy-coherence in support of CSA, in that policies related to health, especially with regards to enhancing nutrition, should also be aligned to agricultural and climate policies, and this alignment should be consistent nationally, regionally and globally. To advance policy coherence in this regard, agricultural policies should include interventions that enhance nutrition through targeted CSA approaches. For example, mixing crop varieties to both enhance the nutritional value and drought-resilience of crop strains can help achieve alignment in this regard. Increasing awareness and education on agricultural nutrition has proved to be an effective intervention. For example, the Tanzanian Agriculture Climate Resilience Plan (2014–2019) clearly recognises cases where education has helped to increase the adoption of CSA approaches, while improving knowledge of the nutritional risks associated with climate change.²¹

CSA policy coherence

Over the past decade there has been an urgent need for effective responses to address the multiple and inter-related crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, soil degradation and unsustainable food production.²² In this regard, there has been a heightened demand for policy coherence between sectors and stakeholders, driven largely by governments and development partners hoping to increase the developmental impacts of their programmatic activities, as well as to coordinate and direct climate finance in support of the CSA objectives within regional and global policy frameworks, such as the African Union’s Agenda 2063 and the United Nations Agenda 2030.²³

According to Corinna Hawkes, ‘policy coherence occurs when policy actions across sectors and stakeholders are actively aligned towards meeting agreed objectives’,²⁴ which for CSA are three-fold: sustainably increasing agricultural productivity, adapting to climate change and reducing emissions from GHGs.²⁵

While policy coherence, coordination and integration of climate, agriculture and food systems are recognised as being key steps towards achieving Africa’s resilience outcomes, many of the continent’s policies are still fragmented and they vary broadly in their degree and level of alignment at various scales. It must be well noted that policy coherence applies not only to governments but also to other entities, such as development partners, UN agencies and financial organisations that are incorporating CSA and resilience building activities in their programming and investment frameworks.

To enhance policy coherence, several generic actions can be taken at multiple levels, which include actions to promote vertical²⁶ and horizontal integration.²⁷ These actions can effectively address tensions and trade-offs that exist across and between policy areas, as well as exploiting synergies among them. ²⁸ This includes improving the capacity of government departments in charge of different policy issues to work together through effective, multi-disciplinary and multi-stakeholder committees, as well as improved coordination and collaboration across local and national government.

The prioritisation of these actions will vary per country and will depend on the political realities and the unique context of the country, regional economic community or intergovernmental body. Understanding the barriers to the adoption of CSA practices, as well as the incentive mechanisms that can encourage their adoption, is also important. Barriers to the adoption of CSA practices can relate to the physical means or resources required to practice CSA, such as access to land, human resources, equipment, infrastructure and finance. Barriers can also include the non-physical or software barriers that relate to the institutional, cultural, policy and regulatory environment; information, knowledge and skills; technologies and innovations; and governance, among others.

To achieve greater coherence, national policy frameworks and their action plans should strive to:²⁹

• Align domestic and regional policy objectives with internationally agreed CSA objectives, policies and frameworks.

• Integrate climate change into the planning and development of food and agricultural systems.

• Systematically mainstream CSA into development and economic policy, expenditure, and investment planning frameworks.

• Adopt a cross-sectoral planning and coordination approach.

• Develop institutional apparatus to align relevant agencies across different sectors at multiple levels.

• Adopt an integrated and multi-disciplinary landscape approach to systematically manage agricultural production while protecting important ecosystem services.

• Integrate the complex interrelated challenges of sustainable development, economic growth and poverty reduction, social safety and disaster risk management.

• Promote environmental integrity and protect nature’s ecosystem services and functions.

• Engage marginalised and vulnerable groups in decision making processes.

• Enhance partnerships with a wide range of non-state actors, including the private sector.

• Support measures to promote the implementation and execution of policy frameworks into action-orientated activities.

It must be noted that achieving the list of coherence goals above will be difficult. For instance, mainstreaming CSA into development and economic policy, expenditure, and investment planning is challenging, especially for low-income, low-capacity African states that are also addressing a myriad of other development challenges, including poverty reduction, social safety and disaster risk management. For many countries, this will require the prioritisation of some areas of coherence action above others, according to individual circumstances, contexts, and national priorities.

Discussion next turns to three strategies from among those listed above by which states in Africa, in particular, can strengthen CSA policy coherence.

Strengthening CSA policy coherence in Africa across multiple levels

Aligning the global agenda for CSA and regional and national actions

There are several important international agreements and dialogue processes that address climate change, land degradation, unsustainable food systems, deforestation and biodiversity loss. The call-to-action associated with these global policy dialogues frames the collective efforts needed to reach a comprehensive, integrated and long-term agenda for low emissions, climate-resilient development. These global frameworks set targets, timeframes, and guidelines that guide national actions and broader stakeholder engagement. Table 1 summarises the objectives of these global policy commitments. This sets out the international context for the subsequent discussion. The article then presents recommendations for improving the coherence of agriculture and land-use resilience measures across these policy frameworks, as well as means to improve implementation of CSA policies and frameworks.

Table 1. Global policy frameworks designed to enhance climate resilience in the agriculture and land-use sector.

Policy framework	Overarching objective	Alignment to enhancing climate resilience in the agriculture and land-use sector
The United Nations Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)	To guide an integrated global response to transformative sustainable development up to 2030.	CSA is included as a core theme of this transformation agenda. While many of the SDGs related to CSA, SDG 2 specifically aims to achieve food security and end hunger through promoting inclusive, climate resilient and sustainable agri-food systems, improved food access and better nutrition.^a Linked to this is the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, which identifies the financial means for implementation, including for agriculture and climate change.^b
The Paris Agreement of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)	Outlines the key climate objectives for all countries and seeks to limit global temperature rise well below 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.	The Paris Agreement recognises ‘the fundamental priority of safeguarding food security and ending hunger, and the particular vulnerabilities of food production systems to the adverse effects of climate change’.^c To better link science with implementation, in 2017, the Koronivia Joint Work on Agriculture (KJWA) was initiated and a roadmap for action was developed. Agriculture is the only sector within the climate change negotiations process that has a dedicated workstream.^d In addition, in November 2022, at COP27, a 4-year Sharm el-Sheikh joint work programme on implementation of climate action on agriculture and food security was established. Agriculture, land-use sectors and food systems are also key components of country-level Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and Long-Term, Low Emissions Development Strategies (LTSs) (specific policy instruments developed by the Paris Agreement to promote the national-level implementation of global climate goals across all sectors and stakeholder groupings).
The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015–2030)	Provides Member States with key actions to reduce disaster risk including loss of lives, economic loss, and loss of infrastructure and environment.	The Framework recognises climate change as a risk and threat multiplier and promotes integrated resource management strategies and social safety net programmes to reduce risk. This includes climate-resilient agriculture and food production.
The priority tracks of the United Nations Food Systems Summit (2021) and the preparatory national food dialogues.	Promotes sustainable food systems as a key solution to achieving Africa’s climate pledges, as well as promoting its goals related to biodiversity, health and societal well-being.	Sustainable food systems were recognised as one of the five key priority action tracks identified for its transformative potential in resilience building to vulnerabilities, shocks and stresses.^e National food dialogues were convened in preparation for the global Food Summit. These helped to define country-level food systems pathways and goals, including climate related actions. These national food system dialogues are ongoing, and their priorities need to be implemented and monitored.
The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework for managing nature to 2030 and the United Nations Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021–2030)	The global Biodiversity Framework lays out country pathways to achieve the vision of the United Nations Convention for Biological Diversity (UNCBD) of ‘living in harmony with nature’ by 2050. The Decade on Ecosystem Restoration highlights the role of healthy ecosystems towards achieving sustainable development by 2030.	Within both these global frameworks, CSA is seen as a viable approach to managing integrated landscapes sustainably, as well as being a solution for biodiversity conservation. From a national policy process perspective countries are to align with, and support, these global biodiversity and restoration goals through the explicit inclusion of CSA targets within their National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans, green recovery plans, and within national budgets.^f

Source: United Nations, ‘Addis Ababa Action Agenda on the Third International Conference on Financing for Development’ (Outcome Document, Third International Conference on Financing for Development, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 13–16 July 2015); UNFCCC, The Paris Agreement (UNFCCC, 2016), 2, https://unfccc.int/files/paris_agreement/application/pdf/parisagreement_publication.pdf; United Nations, ‘Food Systems Summit 2021: action Tracks’, https://www.un.org/en/food-systems-summit/action-tracks; IUCN International Policy Centre (2022). Enabling a post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework fit for purpose: Perspectives and reflections for the the Fifteenth Conference of the Parties, Montreal, Canada, December 2022. Gland, Switzerland.

^a United Nations, ‘Goal 2: End Hunger, Achieve Food Security and Improved Nutrition and Promote Sustainable Agriculture’, https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2016/goal-02/#:~:text=Goal%202%20seeks%20sustainable%20solutions,widespread%20promotion%20of%20sustainable%20agriculture

^b United Nations, ‘Addis Ababa Action Agenda on the Third International Conference on Financing for Development’ (Outcome Document, Third International Conference on Financing for Development, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 13–16 July 2015).

^c UNFCCC, The Paris Agreement (UNFCCC, 2016), 2, https://unfccc.int/files/paris_agreement/application/pdf/parisagreement_publication.pdf

^d UNFCCC Subsidiary Body for Implementation, ‘Koronivia Joint Work on Agriculture’ (Draft Conclusions, Bonn Climate Change Conference Bonn, Germany, 6–16 June 2022), https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/SB2022_L02E.pdf

^e United Nations, ‘Food Systems Summit 2021: action Tracks’, https://www.un.org/en/food-systems-summit/action-tracks

^f IUCN International Policy Centre. ‘Enabling a post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework fit for purpose: Perspectives and reflections for the Fifteenth Conference of the Parties’, Montreal, Canada, (Gland, Switzerland, December 2022).

Strengthening the interlinkages between these international policy agendas presents a unique opportunity to address multiple challenges in a meaningful and coherent manner.³⁰ This includes actions and targets specifically related to enhancing CSA policy coherence. For example, while the UNFCCC negotiations address agriculture, forestry and land use as major sources of emissions, it is only recently that the focus has shifted beyond food production to include national food consumption and food waste as drivers of land-use change and emissions globally. Similarly, discussions within the United Nations Convention for Biological Diversity focus on agriculture as a driver of land degradation, ecosystem erosion and biodiversity loss, but do not address the importance of demand-side changes in easing the environmental pressure caused by food production systems. Furthermore, through enhancing linkages, policy makers can pursue interventions that lead to transformation across multiple objectives simultaneously, such as gender equality and social inclusion. Climate finance, for example, can be used to support and upskill women in utilising nature-based approaches or restoration initiatives. Research shows that women smallholder farmers, when able to access the same resources as men, including time, financing, land tenure, and extension support, are able to increase agricultural yields by 20 to 30%, leading to a 2.5 to 5% increase in total agricultural output, and a projected 2.1-gigaton reduction in GHG emissions by 2050.³¹ In addition, including new actors – such as financial organisations – in these processes is important.³² Many new actors are also developing guidelines and new practices for responsible investment in nature-based solutions and CSA, guided by these international policy debates.³³ For instance, the World Business Council of Sustainable Development is working with its member companies to create a set of solutions that are supportive of sustainable businesses, including in CSA.

In addition, if commitments emerging from these international policy processes are to be meaningful and feasible, more effort is needed to translate these commitments into national and local-level action. This includes guidance to governing structures and stakeholders on the intervention actions needed to support and build on these frameworks, as well as clarity on policy engagement and implementation opportunities at the local level.

There are a range of practical strategies and entry points to strengthen local engagement and to address policy fragmentation related to climate, agriculture and food. For example, the key outcomes of global policy agreements and action agendas can be discussed at the national level through multistakeholder dialogues that reflect international policy processes. An example of this is the Food Systems Dialogues series, established by the UN in 2018.³⁴ These dialogues at the local level mirror global dialogues and provide an entry point for nationally tailored, multi-stakeholder discussions around food system reform. The continuation of these dialogues across African countries is critical to bridge the gap between policymaking at the global and national levels.

In recent years progress has been made towards including agricultural stakeholders in climate negotiating teams. Examples include the national delegation of Tanzania, where the Head of the Environment Management Unit from the Ministry of Agriculture is represented; Zambia, where the climate change focal person from the Ministry of Agriculture is on the delegation as are other agricultural civil society organisations; and Botswana, where a young member of the Botswana Farmers Organisation was included on the national climate team that attended COP 26.³⁵

Pursuing a common agenda to drive CSA at an Africa-wide level

Several steps have been taken to pursue a common agenda to drive CSA in Africa. The Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) was adopted in 2003 as the flagship policy framework for Africa’s agricultural development, food and nutrition security. Ten years later, a gathering of African Heads of State recommitted to the basic principles of the CAADP in the 2014 Malabo Declaration on Accelerated Agricultural Growth and Transformation (2015–2025).³⁶ The Malabo declaration sets out several key commitments towards meeting Africa’s development and economic growth objectives, including ‘ending hunger, tripling intra-African trade in agricultural goods and services, and ensuring that agriculture contributes significantly to poverty reduction’. The declaration, in Commitment 6, also makes specific mention of the need to strengthen resilience of livelihoods and production systems in the face of climate change and other related risks. There, a target was set to ensure that ‘30% of farm/pastoral households are resilient to shocks by 2025’. Malabo also mentions the need ‘to enhance investments for resilience building initiatives, including social security for rural workers and other vulnerable social groups, as well as for vulnerable ecosystems, and the aim to mainstream resilience and risk management into policies, strategies and investment plans’. Malabo specifically mentions the uptake of CSA and sustainable land management as tools towards achieving these goals. The declaration also contains the Africa CSA Vision 25X25, which aims to support at least 25 million farm households in practicing CSA by 2025.³⁷

The domestication of CAADP is envisaged through country-specific agricultural policy planning frameworks, namely the National Agriculture Plans (NAPs) and their associated National Agriculture Investment Plans (NAIPs). Detailed roadmaps are expected to be developed by countries, with published deliverables, coordination mechanisms and reporting systems to assist in their implementation. However, countries vary tremendously in their levels of adoption and domestication. According to the African Union Development Agency (AUDA-NEPAD), 43 African countries have formally joined the CAADP process and of these, 39 have developed national agriculture and food security investment plans, which have become their medium-term expenditure frameworks for agriculture. At the regional level, four out of eight regional economic communities (RECs) have signed regional compacts, and three of these have developed complete investment plans.³⁸

There are numerous tools within the Malabo and CAADP that set out to promote the integration and implementation of CSA. For example, the AU’s Malabo Implementation Strategy and Roadmap³⁹ and the CAADP Results Framework (2015–2025)⁴⁰ both enhance CAADPs’ impact and implementation. The CAADP Results Framework has a Biennial Agricultural Review Process, adopted in 2017,⁴¹ which requests countries to improve their monitoring and reporting on implementation using indicators, baseline data and targets. This framework serves to guide countries, RECs and continental level actors in developing, planning and implementing investments in CSA, as well as fostering alignment and the harmonisation of agricultural initiatives across sectors. Reports are produced and made publicly available, enhancing accountability, peer review, and learning among member states. Africa-wide platforms, such as the AU Heads of State and Government Summit, the AU Joint Conference of Ministers, and the CAADP Partnership Platform, offer platforms for dialogue on the progress made towards meeting the Africa-wide climate-resilient agriculture vision. Three CAADP Biennial Reviews have been adopted by the AU Assembly – in 2018,⁴² 2020⁴³ and 2022,⁴⁴ respectively.

In the 2022 biennial review, countries submitted their performance results on 46 indicators.⁴⁵ According to that process, 15 countries⁴⁶ (out of a total of 51) are on track to achieve Commitment 6 dealing with countries’ resilience to climate variability; the latter is measured against three indicators that relate to (1) the percentage of agricultural land and water managed under sustainable land practices (including CSA); (2) the presence of government financing to support resilience building initiatives; and (3) the number of farmer, pastoral, and fisher households with strengthened capacity to respond to climate and weather-related stresses and shocks’.⁴⁷ The countries that are not on track need to increase their investment in resilience building initiatives, especially the percentage of land that is under sustainable land and water management practices. In addition, the CAADP Biennial Review and other performance measurements, such as the Africa Agriculture Transformation Scorecard, may be supplemented with additional indicators that relate to measuring a country’s climate resilience.

In addition to agriculture-specific policies such as the Malabo Declaration and CAADP process, there are also many other climate and development policy frameworks that promote the integration of CSA at the continent-wide level. Examples include the AU’s Climate Change and Resilient Development Strategy (CCRDS) and Action Plan (2022–2032),⁴⁸ the African Green Stimulus Programme,⁴⁹ as well as the Green Recovery Action Plan (2023–2032).⁵⁰ The AU CCRDS harmonises the continent’s approach to climate change and outlines the key priorities and action areas for enhanced cooperation. While informed by the efforts of African member countries, this strategy is a collective framework around which Africans can adapt to climate change and build resilience, unlock mitigation opportunities, and develop partnerships to support the continent’s vision towards a just, inclusive and equitable transition.

There are four strategic intervention axes identified in the CCRDS. Axis 2 addresses pathways for transformative action, identifying key sectors where systemic transitions are possible to catalyse climate-resilient, low carbon development. Agriculture, land use and food systems are a key pathway highlighted within the strategy, as is the adoption of CSA specifically. Farmers and farming organisations are also clearly mentioned as key role players in implementing the continental climate response. The strategy also includes mention of policy coherence as a specific objective, as well as enhanced institutional coordination and broad-based inclusion. In addition, there is a call to support existing initiatives such as the CAADP – the continental flagship programme that seeks to promote climate resilient agricultural development.

To assist in the implementation of the AU CCRDS, the AU Commission (AUC) has hosted numerous meetings, including the AU Climate Investment Roundtable held in Addis Ababa over 19–20 June 2023. This meeting was convened to strategically align financial and technical partners and to help set continental climate priorities and co-design a roadmap for operationalisation. In addition, at the Africa Climate Summit that took place in Kenya from 4 to 6 September 2023, the AUC organised a 3-day Climate Action Innovation Hub to elevate the voices of climate innovators seeking to move Africa’s climate change policy framework towards an action-oriented agenda. This meeting provided a platform for women-led and youth-supported organisations that are currently implementing climate-smart innovations in response to Africa’s climate challenges and opportunities. This included multiple innovations in the CSA thematic area.

Besides important policy frameworks developed to drive CSA integration, there are also important actors that play a leading role in promoting CSA coherence and operationalisation across Africa. Both the AUC and AUDA-NEPAD have an important role to play in convening and facilitating multiple stakeholders in support of CSA planning processes. The AU Commission’s Agriculture, Rural Development, Blue Economy and Sustainable Environment Department supports the integration of policies and programmes on agriculture, climate change and sustainable development, including its flagship initiative for agriculture, the CAADP. It also provides coordination and technical support to countries in mainstreaming their climate policies into their CAADP investment plans, and in developing associated implementation frameworks. It also supports the harmonisation of policies and strategies among the RECs. At the continental level, the Specialised Technical Committee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Environment, Blue Economy and Water provides a coordination mechanism to countries and takes stock of AU policy priorities within these sectors, evaluating the implementation of these priorities including progress of African countries in meeting their CAADP/Malabo commitments. In addition, AUDA-NEPAD is developing an Africa-wide programme to support the implementation of food systems dialogues at the national level.⁵¹

The African Development Bank (AfDB) is also another key actor that promotes the scaling of CSA initiatives across the continent. The AfDB’s continental CSA programme (2016–2025)⁵² aims to support the sustainable and resilient transformation of agriculture for food security in the context of climate change. This programme aims to integrate climate change across all of the bank’s Feed Africa projects. It also supports the inclusion of youth in CSA and supports funding to projects with a climate-resilience and food security lens.

While the roles and responsibilities of these key CSA actors seems clear to the drafters of the documents, there are signs that more work should be done to strengthen communication and coordination between these actors. ⁵³

Promoting CSA policy alignment and institutional collaboration at the regional level

While differing in their level of commitment, detail and degree of implementation, many regions in Africa have developed strategies and initiatives to enhance and coordinate their climate and agricultural responses, including the development, in almost all RECS, of a Regional Agricultural Policy (RAP). In terms of policy integration for CSA and broader resilient development, some regions are still grappling with duplication and fragmentation of CSA policies, while other RECs have made substantial headway and produced policy frameworks to specifically enhance the harmonisation and implementation of their CSA efforts.

The latter group includes the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), which has developed an integrated policy framework and accompanying instruments to promote sustainable and inclusive food systems. The ECOWAS Agricultural Policy (ECOWAP 2015–2025)⁵⁴ is a ten-year strategic framework for ECOWAS that specifically addresses the interlinkages of food security, nutrition, climate change, youth employment in agriculture and gender. In addition, to strengthen its implementation, ECOWAS developed a Regional Agricultural Investment Plan and Food and Nutrition Security Strategy, which ensures that member countries integrate cross-cutting themes into their national review processes. This tool has been developed to ensure that countries move beyond looking at agricultural development in isolation, and to increase their emphasis on sustainable and inclusive food systems more broadly, including resilience and nutrition.⁵⁵ In addition, ECOWAS has developed specific sustainability indicators for reporting. For example, the national agricultural plans of their member countries must integrate the climate commitments made in global and domestic processes, including within their nationally determined contributions (NDCs). Another instrument – the Global Alliance for Resilience (AGIR – Sahel and West Africa) – was also developed to foster synergies among the region’s environmental sustainability initiatives. The AGIR channels the efforts of all stakeholders towards a common results framework and encourages countries to conduct inclusive dialogue and engagement processes in the formulation of their national resilience priorities.⁵⁶

Similarly, the Southern African Development Community (SADC) has developed mechanisms to promote policy coherence in CSA. Through the establishment of the Centre for Coordination of Agricultural Research and Development for Southern Africa (CCARDESA) in 2010, SADC seeks to coordinate CSA at the regional level. CCARDESA’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy seeks to mainstream climate adaptation and CSA through all SADC’s regional programmes.⁵⁷ Similarly, other mechanisms have been established to encourage policy coordination, dialogue and synergies within SADC. These include the platform for the Council of Ministers; the Inter-Ministerial Committee; and the Summits of Heads of States and Sector Committees. The SADC Secretariat, particularly the Directorate of Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources, plays a role in coordinating member states and their climate and food policies.⁵⁸

Strengthening national CSA policy coherence architecture

There are several policy instruments that have been developed to promote climate-agricultural linkages and enhance implementation at the national level.⁵⁹ These include climate and agriculture specific policies, as well as expenditure and planning frameworks. For climate change, the key policy vehicles include nationally appropriate mitigation actions, national adaptation programmes of action, climate change bills, and other policies for resilient development.

In addition, the 2030 NDCs contextualise country-specific adaptation and mitigation targets, based on national priorities and circumstances. The first and second iterations of NDCs were requested by the UNFCCC in 2015 and 2020, respectively – in both cases the agricultural sector formed a significant part of the submissions, clearly highlighting the need for climate action in the agricultural sector as well as the recognition of related mitigation and adaptation opportunities.⁶⁰ The five-year revision cycle for NDCs provides an opportunity for inclusive development across various sectors, as well as among differing stakeholders. In particular, CSA actions can be promoted to help meet a country’s emissions reduction targets or adaptation goals, as well as to ensure the promotion of synergies between agricultural adaptation and mitigation. In this regard, some countries, including Rwanda,⁶¹ have included specific emission-reduction targets and budgetary requirements for the agricultural sector in their most recent NDCs. In addition, Rwanda has included a set of adaptation actions that specifically refers to building the resilience of its agricultural sector. There has also been momentum in recent years to include mitigation and adaptation targets related to food loss and waste, sustainable diets, and food consumption in country NDCs.⁶²

Another key climate policy instrument is the Long-Term, Low Carbon Emissions Development Strategy – often referred to as the Long-Term Strategy (LTS) – which the Paris Agreement called for, to be submitted in 2020. There are currently many countries still in the process of developing their LTSs, with eight countries in Africa having officially submitted them to the UNFCCC registry as of December 2023 – namely Ethiopia, South Africa, Benin, Nigeria, Morocco, the Gambia, Tunisia and Zimbabwe.⁶³ The creation of these long-term (2050) plans for climate resilient development offers an opportunity for countries to promote society-wide coherence among key sectors throughout the economy that are relevant to climate mitigation and adaptation, and to ensure that CSA is used as an approach towards achieving these long-term, climate development goals. To ensure that these LTSs become a reality, it is important that countries attach a detailed and realistic implementation matrix, including activities, budgets, roles, and responsibilities.

Recommended actions to enhance policy coherence and policy implementation at multiple levels

Several initiatives are being developed across the continent to avoid policy fragmentation and to move away from siloed approaches to dealing with climate, agriculture and food systems. Through lesson sharing and best practice exchange, there are some practical ways that governments across Africa can better align, coordinate and integrate these interlinked agendas to ultimately enhance the continent’s climate resilient, low carbon development future and to ensure policy operationalisation.

Conduct a policy coherence assessment to establish the status quo

To understand gaps, overlaps and levels of integration, countries should undertake a systematic assessment of their current policy portfolio, particularly as it relates to climate, agriculture, biodiversity and food policies. In this regard it is important to identify synergies between the different policy objectives at the sector level. It is also important to address trade-offs and conflicts where they exist and to understand the barriers and incentive mechanisms for the adoption of CSA in key sectors.

Develop institutional arrangements to enhance coordination

An enabling environment that encourages the development and mainstreaming of CSA in overarching national plans is important. This includes strong institutions that can help to coordinate sectoral actors and the division of mandated responsibilities at different levels of government. To encourage inter-ministerial and inter-governmental cooperation, institutional arrangements can be newly developed or restructured to help prioritise and integrate CSA objectives within departments and local institutions. For example, creating a specific climate focal point or lead within the agricultural ministry will facilitate the mainstreaming of climate change into agriculture. Alternatively, a government could choose to elevate CSA policy to a central planning ministry or create specific, high-level coordination bodies. In addition, specific institutions that are mandated to coordinate between different levels of government are essential. This includes guidance for sub-national and local government to translate mitigation and adaptation actions into local planning and budgets.

The strong engagement with finance, planning and economic development ministries is important to ensure the effective inclusion of CSA targets in national development plans and related budgeting. CSA actions should be framed and aligned with key priorities, including economic growth, food security, and job creation for young people. Specifically, the development of the CSA investment strategies, within the context of national agricultural investment plans and NDCs, will promote the alignment of CSA in public sector budgets.⁶⁴

South Africa has developed specific institutional and policy architecture to help integrate climate, agriculture and food systems. For example, its Climate Change Response Policy requires sectors to develop their own adaptation and mitigation sector plans, including for agriculture and fisheries.⁶⁵ South Africa also has a national vision for CSA and a national CSA Steering Committee that includes its Treasury, its Department of Monitoring and Evaluation, and other key stakeholders such as farmers and farmer cooperatives. The Presidential Climate Change Coordinating Commission also plays a key role in coordinating and overseeing South Africa’s just climate and energy transition.⁶⁶

Enhance inclusive CSA policy development processes

It is important to include a broad variety of non-state actors in the CSA policy cycle – from planning and drafting to financing, execution, tracking and assessing impact. To address gender inequality and social exclusion, a truly participatory policy process will include women and children, and the youth. In addition, to enhance CSA coherence, the diverse perspectives, priorities and needs of farmers, farmer organisations and unions, indigenous people, and local communities are essential. Likewise, to maximise buy-in and ownership, it is important to engage stakeholders that will be responsible for the financing and implementation of agricultural climate action. This includes entities that will assist with the financing and execution of related projects and manage budgets (such as financial organisations and the private sector), as well as civil society that is needed to strengthen transparency and accountability.

Promote partnerships to strengthen policy engagement and capacity development in CSA

There are several alliances, networks and multi-stakeholder platforms that promote advocacy, experience sharing, peer learning and capacity development in agricultural resilience to climate change. These CSA platforms provide an opportunity for practitioners to engage policy makers and to directly contribute to policy formulation and implementation. Examples include the Africa CSA Alliance (ACSAA), which is a pan-African, multi-stakeholder platform designed to assess and monitor the progress of AU Vision 25 × 25, as well as facilitating peer learning and aligning various climate and agriculture programmes and partners across the continent.⁶⁷ This alliance spearheaded the development of other regional CSA alliances, such as the NEPAD-International NGOs Alliance on CSA and the Africa CSA Youth Network.⁶⁸ There are also CSA platforms and alliances that have been created at the national level to strengthen stakeholder participation. The Tanzania CSA Alliance, for example, was established in 2016 to advocate for a common position and to communicate these needs to the Tanzanian government, as well as to inform the basis of government and development partner interventions and policy decisions. The alliance also helps to build the technical, human, and financial capacity of civil society actors to effectively engage policy makers on a sustained basis.⁶⁹

In addition, there are other entities, such as the African Group of Negotiators Expert Support (AGNES), that provide evidence and produce knowledge to inform climate negotiations and build CSA capacity.⁷⁰ In addition, research organisations and technical bodies, such as the Forum for African Agriculture and CGIAR, play a significant role in capacity building and training to bridge the science-policy interface and to share knowledge around coherent CSA best practice.⁷¹

Bridge the science-policy interface

There is currently a disconnect between the knowledge that is produced by scientists and academia and the information needed by policy makers. There is a call for scientific information to be translated into simple messages that are relevant for decision making and accompanied by relevant, locally applicable actions for implementers and policy makers. This includes information specifically tailored to the needs of policy makers to help strengthen effective decision-making processes and ensure a good linkage between science and policy, incorporating local and indigenous knowledge as well.

To bridge this gap, policy-science platforms designated for information and knowledge sharing with African policy makers should be enhanced. This includes forums to keep abreast of the international and regional policy discourses on climate change, agriculture and food security. To serve this purpose, there have been units established within the RECs – for example, CCARDESA in SADC as noted above – to specifically collect and disseminate CSA information to member countries, as well as to mobilise climate finance for CSA implementation. Also, given the site-specific nature of CSA, independent, knowledge-producing institutions at the national level play a key role, as do research bodies and independent think-tanks.

Strengthen data systems to support CSA related information

The use of high quality technical data and analysis, modelling and scenario building developed with local teams and partner organisations is essential to ensure objective and balanced perspectives that feed into policy making.⁷² In addition, there is an urgent need to improve the information systems of African countries related to data on climate resilience, risk preparedness, social protection and emergency management. For example, in the 2022 CAADP Biennial Review, several countries were unable to report on the reduction of post-harvest losses and the proportion of women empowered in agriculture due to lack of data.⁷³ Countries therefore need to invest in strengthening national data systems to enable them to generate adequate and quality data for reporting and planning purposes. In addition, African countries would benefit from technical partnerships that can support them with data management and development.

Promote policy implementation and investment in action

To advance policy implementation and operationalisation, and to encourage climate action, stakeholders will need to address the gaps in systems, innovation and resources that currently exist. This must include, among other elements, improving the participation of local and vulnerable people in policy formulation; increasing access to additional technological and financial resources to support CSA uptake and scaling; ensuring that policies are developed with clear implementable actions; and resourcing the monitoring and accountability instruments that are often lacking.

To date, investment, both in terms of quantity and quality, has been inadequate to support the implementation of CSA solutions. According to the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the agricultural sector has only received a modest share of international climate finance to date; the cumulative climate finance tracked for agriculture, forestry, and land use stood at $20 billion per year in 2017/2018, a mere 3% of the total tracked global climate finance for the period.⁷⁴ Of this amount, only a small percentage (1.7% of total climate finance tracked) has been directed to small-scale farmers, agri-entrepreneurs and value chain actors serving them.⁷⁵ Of these funds, the vast majority is coming from public sources of financing, including development partners and multilateral or bilateral development financing institutions. According to analysis done, private sector financing is largely absent, often due to the lack of attractive and robust pipelines of investable projects in small-scale agriculture, among other reasons.⁷⁶ It is also important to note that countries that have developed a good track record for implementation, underpinned by efficient and transparent public expenditure systems, are more likely to attract investments from the government and external partners.⁷⁷

Some countries in the region have established national climate funds to provide an additional avenue to leverage public investment for climate action in the agricultural sector. Kenya, for example, has set up a climate change fund to unlock financial resources at the sub-national/county level. It is important that the international finance community support these climate funds and work towards building their agricultural sector portfolios. These funds must be aligned with the identified actions for the agricultural sector as set out in each country’s NDCs, NAIPs and other policy frameworks. This includes the identified national priorities from the biennial review process of countries, which can help to inform programming between AU institutions and development partners and ensure better alignment at different levels. In addition, a detailed needs analysis for climate finance across all sectors is important to guide partnerships and investors.

Greater policy coherence is also taking place within financial organisations that have been increasingly including CSA in their funding criteria. As this author has reported elsewhere,⁷⁸ financial institutions have an important role to play in screening projects for climate risks, and in developing and using metrics and indicators to measure outcomes that account for GHG emissions in projects and operations – in addition to measuring resilience and adaptation. In 2020, for example, 52% of World Bank financing in agriculture also targeted climate adaption and mitigation.⁷⁹

Increase monitoring systems to support the integration of CSA

Monitoring, evaluation and learning tools provide information that can inform the design of climate policies and deepen the knowledge of policymakers about climate actions. This will ultimately enhance performance and ensure policy coherence. In recent years governments have been including measurable objectives and key indicators within their climate policies, allowing for the clear communication of expected results, often leading to joint action reviews and the co-development of implementation frameworks with non-state actors. At a continental level, for example, the Malabo Declaration’s biennial review tracks, monitors and reports on implementation progress. Malabo’s Commitment 6 on resilience building has specific government budget-lines on which countries must report, strengthening the coordination of actions at a country level and avoiding duplication. It also has indicators that measure CSA and resilience specifically.

ECOWAS has also sought to institutionalise monitoring and evaluation processes to strengthen policy coherence. Through the development of its ten-year results framework, as well as a specialised monitoring and evaluation unit, ECOWAS seeks to promote coherent policy actions across countries in West Africa.⁸⁰ It analyses and reports on the overall performance results of countries and feeds this data into monitoring and evaluation units located within different implementing partners operating at the regional level, as well as forwarding the data to its member countries’ data coordinating committees. At each level, the information is processed and aggregated to add value towards generating knowledge for input into integrated decision making.

As the number of climate policies increases, agricultural stakeholders and non-state actors – including civil society, farmers and the private sector – will be required to monitor their governments’ CSA efforts, track expenditures, and ensure that climate considerations are integrated within sector development plans and local government projects. This will require enhanced accountability capacity development.

Invest in policy champions to promote CSA policy coherence

Policy champions can drive CSA policy coherence and improve the implementation of CSA frameworks. This can include leaders from within key institutions such as the AUC, the AUDA-NEPAD and the AfDB; heads of state such as the President of Gabon, who is playing a key role in the implementation of the African Adaptation Initiative; as well as influential local individuals, like Kenyan Professor Kivutha Kibwana, who is championing CSA at the county level. There are also many technical institutions and consultants that support CSA policy coherence and provide invaluable support to decision makers, research institutions and academia.

However, CSA actions will remain fragmented in the absence of someone receiving a definitive mandate to lead. To avoid this fragmentation, a high-level, broadly framed guidelines and recognised structure for fostering Africa CSA policy coherence should be developed and key CSA ambassadors, representing both state and non-state actors, should be selected. The AUC, which is the continental coordinating authority, could play a key role in this regard. In addition, sub-national actors who share the responsibility for executing policy priorities should be identified and resourced. This requires the further development of sectoral, sub-national and national budgets and development plans, as well as more extensive awareness-raising, multi-sectoral dialogues and engagement with key sectors and stakeholders. In addition, climate innovators – those entities already implementing CSA action-orientated solutions – should be technically and financially supported. These entities need to be viewed as key partners for the implementation of national climate and agricultural policy frameworks.

While this article discusses many suggested policy coherence actions and recommendations, it must again be noted that there are many obstacles to their achievement. The complexity of the challenges to be addressed is formidable. Actors will be called upon to create multi-sectoral and multi-stakeholder platforms; work across national and regional ministries; liaise with key people in the areas of climate science, food security, agriculture as well as finance and planning; support policy leaders and champions; and integrate diverse stakeholder voices. Inevitably, there will be trade-offs to confront; for example, multi-sectoral platforms are expensive to set up and convene, and these mechanisms require sustained long-term momentum across government administrations. In addition, integrating a multitude of voices and finding a consensus can often dilute policy goals and result in long delays in implementation. This has been witnessed in the UNFCCC meetings, among others.

Conclusion

Many agree that it is critical for Africa to promote the interconnected agendas on the environment, climate, agriculture, food systems and biodiversity. In this regard CSA has gained much prominence in policy frameworks and dialogues across various levels in their attempt to move away from siloed approaches to dealing with climate, agriculture and food systems. Greater progress must be made to ensure that NDCs are integrated into budgets, especially at the national and regional levels. Governments are still grappling with how to fund a long-term shift to a net-zero carbon future and how to attract additional financing for agricultural related activities.

Several initiatives are underway, or are being developed, across the continent toward this end. There are attempts to avoid policy fragmentation, and to share the many lessons and examples of best practice in assisting governments to better align, coordinate and integrate these interlinked agendas to ultimately enhance the continent’s climate resilience and its low carbon development future. For example, Africa-wide agricultural policies, such as the Malabo Declaration and CAADP, visibly attempt to align the multiple agendas of agriculture, climate and food at policy level, with the development of a common Africa-wide target for climate resilience and a specific vision for CSA. Likewise, the African Union’s recently launched Climate Change and Resilient Development Strategy refers explicitly to agriculture and food systems as transformative pathways to achieve the continent’s climate resilient development future, referring to CSA as a specific vehicle to achieve this objective. In addition, many national and regional policy frameworks have been revised and strengthened to drive a more structured and integrated approach to CSA in Africa. For example, NDCs and LTSs are now increasingly emphasising the contribution of the agricultural and food sectors to achieve national climate resilience goals, and many have included agriculture in specific adaptation and mitigation responses and targets. However, these policy contributions need to be enhanced and specific targets and indicators need to accompany them. In addition, the development and drafting of LTSs requires the identification of climate-resilient and transformative interventions in the agricultural sector and much work is still needed to develop these sector-based plans.

It is clear that climate and agriculture are increasingly prioritised in regional policy frameworks. Some RECs, including ECOWAS, have specifically sought to reduce policy isolation by building into their indicators and review frameworks an enhanced integration of climate change into agriculture and other sectors. In addition, CCARDESA in SADC is helping improve coordination at a regional level. National and regional investment plans are also increasingly incorporating CSA objectives. To build on these initiatives, there must be more action to scale up programmes that have proven impactful and scalable.

However, despite progress made, there are also many climate, agricultural and food strategies that are still largely fragmented across multiple levels. For example, while many national governments, RECs and continental bodies have climate and agricultural policies and programmes that include CSA on paper, there is a lot of work needed to strengthen policy coherence in practice. Policy frameworks need to strengthen their intentions to deliver, and a shift is needed to move from planning, dialogue and consensus-building towards more focused implementation. This includes the development of specific instruments to improve policy implementation, as well as the requisite financing to support operationalisation.

Political will is a very important factor for driving CSA cohesion but is often absent in the CSA space. Increased political momentum can influence the number of resources dedicated specifically to support CSA implementation and also contribute to the prioritisation afforded to the CSA policy agendas, as well as provide leadership and promote coordinated action across sectors, stakeholders and scales of government. However, the generation of political will can be difficult. This can often come about as a result of pressure from varying stakeholders, such as through more extensive awareness-raising, multi-sectoral dialogues, and engagement with key sectors and stakeholders.

While this article discusses many suggested actions and recommendations to increase policy coherence in the climate-agriculture space, it must be noted that these are not always easy to achieve. The stakes are high, however, and the needs compelling, as seen in the wider literature on the impact of climate change on agriculture and food security in Africa. It is in this context that climate-smart agriculture presents an important opportunity for Africa at this critical juncture in its history.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Accelerating the Impact of CGIAR Climate Research for Africa (AICCRA).

Notes on contributors

Romy Chevallier

Romy Chevallier is a policy consultant with the project ‘Accelerating Impacts of CGIAR Climate Research for Africa (AICCRA)’, based in Cape Town, South Africa. She has worked in climate change research and activism for twenty years. She also holds a part-time position at the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA) as a senior climate researcher.

Notes

1 M. Boko, I. Niang, A. Nyong, C. Vogel, A. Githeko, M. Medany, B. Osman-Elasha, R. Taboand P. Yanda, 2007: Africa. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutik of P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, eds.]. (Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press), 433–467.

2 FSIN and Global Network against Food Crises, GRFC 2022 Mid-Year Update (Rome, 2022).

3 Cedric Okou, John Spray and D. Filiz Unsal, ‘Africa Food Prices are Soaring Amid High Import Reliance’ IMF Blog, September 27, 2022.

4 Bitsat Yohannes-Kassahun, ‘One Year Later: The impact of the Russian conflict with Ukraine on Africa,’ Africa Renewal, February 13, 2023.

5 H. Dessalegn, ‘Food Security in Africa: Current Efforts and Challenges, Foresight Africa 2023,’ Brookings Institute, 2023, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/food-security-strengthening-africas-food-systems/

6 IPCC, Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou, eds.]. (Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2021), 2391 pp. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.

7 IPCC, Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. (Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2022), 3056 pp., https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844.

8 IPCC, Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Working Group I Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2021); IPCC, Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2022).

9 IPCC, Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on Climate Change, Desertification, Land

Degradation, Sustainable Land Management, Food Security, and Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Terrestrial Ecosystems (IPCC, 2019), https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/

10 World Bank, ‘Cutting Food Loss and Waste Can Deliver Big Wins for Countries’ Food Security and Environment,’ press release no. 2021/031/AGR, September 28, 2020, https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2020/09/28/cutting-food-loss-and-waste-can-deliver-big-wins-for-countries-food-security-and-environment#:~:text=Greenhouse%20gas%20emissions%20arise%20from,avenue%20for%20mitigating%20climate%20change

11 Natasha Grist, ‘Topic Guide: Climate Change, Food Security and Agriculture,’ Evidence on Demand, United Kingdom, 2015, https://www.gov.uk/research-for-development-outputs/topic-guide-climate-change-food-security-and-agriculture

12 African Union Commission, African Union Climate Change and Resilient Development Strategy and Action Plan (2022–2032), June 28, 2022, https://au.int/en/documents/20220628/african-union-climate-change-and-resilient-development-strategy-and-action-plan

13 Food and Agriculture Organisation, Food Security and Agricultural Mitigation in Developing Countries: Options for Capturing Synergies, 2009, https://www.fao.org/agrifood-economics/publications/detail/en/c/122847/

14 Leslie Lipper and David Zilberman, ‘A Short History of the Evolution of the Climate Smart Agriculture Approach and its Links to Climate Change and Sustainable Agriculture Debates,’ in Climate Smart Agriculture, eds. Leslie Lipper, Nancy McCarthy, David Zilberman, Solomon Asfaw and Giacomo Branca (Natural Resource Management and Policy Book series, Vol. 52, 2017), 13–30.

15 Leslie Lipper et al, ‘Climate-Smart Agriculture for Food Security,’ Nature Climate Change 4 (2014): 1068–1072.

16 FAO, Climate-Smart Agriculture: Sourcebook (Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, 2013), https://ccafs.cgiar.org/resources/publications/climate-smart-agriculture-sourcebook

17 GCIAR, ‘What is Climate-Smart Agriculture,’ https://ccafs.cgiar.org/climate-smart-agriculture

18 CSA interventions can include, among others, soil management, drought-tolerant maize farming, dairy development, farming catfish intensively, carbon finance to restore crop fields, waste-reducing rice thresher, rainfall forecasts, incentive system for low-carbon agriculture and many other activities.

19 CSA Guide, ‘What is Climate Smart Agriculture,’ https://csa.guide/csa/what-is-climate-smart-agriculture.

20 K. Cobourn, ‘Climate Change Adaptation Policies to Foster Resilience in Agriculture: Analysis and Stocktake Based on UNFCCC Reporting Documents,’ OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, No. 202 (Paris: OECD Publishing, 2023), https://doi.org/10.1787/5fa2c770-en.

21 Shaun Beattie and Susannah M. Sallu, ‘How Does Nutrition Feature in Climate-Smart Agricultural Policy in Southern Africa? A Systematic Policy Review,’ Sustainability 13, no. 5 (2021): 1–16.

22 J. Qi and A. Terton, ‘Addressing Biodiversity Loss and Climate Change: Three Ways Adaptation Planning Can Help,’ International Institute for Sustainable Development, August 10, 2021, https://www.iisd.org/articles/insight/addressing-biodiversity-loss-and-climate-change-three-ways-adaptation-planning-can

23 R. Chevallier and S. Chesterman, Strengthening Africa’s Climate Resilient Outcomes: Policy Coherence in Climate-Smart Agriculture (AICCRA policy brief. Accelerating Impacts of CGIAR Climate Research for Africa (AICCRA)), 2022, https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/119767

24 Corinna Hawkes, ‘Policy Coherence Across the Food System for Nutrition: From Challenge to Opportunity?’ Great Insights Magazine. ECDPM, September 12, 2017, https://ecdpm.org/work/sustainable-food-systems-volume-6-issue-4-september-october-2017/policy-coherence-across-the-food-system-for-nutrition-from-challenge-to-opportunity

25 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, ‘Climate -Smart Agriculture,’ https://www.fao.org/climate-smart-agriculture/overview/en/

26 Vertical integration of CSA includes the degree to which domestic and regional CSA policy objectives are reconciled and aligned with internationally agreed objectives.

27 Horizontal integration is the coordination across sectors and policy areas within national, regional or local government.

28 Patrick Curran, Andrew Dougill, Joanna Pardoe and Katharine Vincent, ‘Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development in Sub-Saharan Africa’ (Policy Briefing, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, London, 2018), https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/publication/policy-coherence-sustainable-development-sub-saharan-africa/

29 Chevallier and Sabrina Chesterman, Strengthening Africa's Climat Resilient Outcomes.

30 Loreley Picourt and Marine Lecerf, ‘Swimming the Talk: How to Strengthen Collaboration and Synergies Between the Climate and Biodiversity Conventions?’ (Policy brief, Ocean and Climate Platform, 2021), https://ocean-climate.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Policy-brief_CBD_UNFCCC-VF.pdf

31 ‘Accelerating nature-based solutions to climate change through women leadership: opportunities to galvanize at COP28 to maximise environmental and socioeconomic impacts.’ Issue brief 2023. Foreign Policy Analytics, https://fpanalytics.foreignpolicy.com/2023/11/17/accelerating-nature-based-solutions-to-climate-change-through-womens-leadership.

32 Tim Benton, Carling Bieg, Helen Harwatt, Roshan Pudasaini and Laura Wellesley, ‘Food System Impacts on Biodiversity Loss: Three Levers for Food System Transformation in Support of Nature’ (Research Paper, Chatham House, 2021), https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/2021-02/2021-02-03-food-system-biodiversity-loss-benton-et-al_0.pdf

33 G. Cooper and S. Trémolet, Investing in Nature: Private Finance for Nature-based Resilience. The Nature Conservancy and Environmental Finance (London, United Kingdom, 2019).

34 For further information, please visit, https://www.un.org/en/food-systems-summit/dialogues.

35 Romy Chevallier, Majola Mabuza, Philip Thornton and Laura Cramer, ‘Strengthening Southern Africa’s NDCs to Bolster Farmers’ Interests’ (Policy Insight 103, South African Institute of International Affairs, Johannesburg, 2021), https://saiia.org.za/research/strengthening-southern-africas-ndcs-to-bolster-farmers-interests/

36 African Union Commission, ‘Malabo Declaration on Accelerated Agricultural Growth and Transformation for Shared Prosperity and Improved Livelihoods,’ https://www.resakss.org/sites/default/files/Malabo%20Declaration%20on%20Agriculture_2014_11%2026-.pdf

37 African Union Commission, ‘Africa CSA Vision 25×25: Africa’s Strategic Approach for Food Security and Nutrition in the Face of Climate Change’ (31st African union Summit, 2014), https://www.nepad.org/publication/africa-csa-vision-25×25-africas-strategic-approach-food-security-and-nutrition

38 AUDA-NEPAD, 2022, https://www.nepad.org/caadp/interactive-timeline/43-countries-have-joined-caadp#:~:text=To%20date%2C%2043%20African%20countries,resulting%20in%20improved%20agricultural%20planning.

39 African Union, ‘Implementation Strategy and Roadmap to Achieve the 2025 Vision on CAADP,’ 2014, https://www.nepad.org/publication/implementation-strategy-and-roadmap-achieve-2025-vision-caadp

40 African Union, ‘The CAADP results framework (2015–2025),’ 2014, https://au.int/sites/default/files/documents/41425-doc-31250-doc-the_caadp_results_framework_2015-2025_english_edited_1-1.pdf

41 African Union Commission, CAADP Biennial Review Report: 2015-2018, The Second Report to the February 2020 Assembly (Addis Ababa, 2020), https://au.int/en/documents/20201209/biennial-review-report-comprehensive-africa-agriculture-development-programme

42 African Union, Inaugural Biennial Review Report of the African Union Commission on the Implementation of the Malabo Declaration on Accelerated Agricultural Growth and Transformation for Shared prosperity and Improved Livelihoods, progress report (Assembly of the Union, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2018), https://www.nepad.org/caadp/publication/inaugural-biennial-review-report-of-african-union-commission-implementation-of

43 African Union, Second Biennial Review Report of the African Union Commission on the Implementation of the Malabo Declaration on Accelerated Agricultural Growth and Transformation for Shared Prosperity and Improved Livelihoods, the 2019 Progress Report to the Assembly Highlights on ‘Resilience and Livelihoods (Assembly of the Union, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2020), https://www.nepad.org/caadp/publication/second-biennial-review-report

44 African Union, The 3rd CAADP Biennial Review Report, The 3rd report to the February 2022 Assembly (African Union Headquarters, 2022), https://au.int/en/documents/20220310/3rd-caadp-biennial-review-report

45 African Union, 3rd CAADP Biennial Review Report.

46 This includes Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cameroon, Egypt, Ethiopia, The Gambia, Ghana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mali, Morocco, Namibia, Rwanda, Seychelles, and Zimbabwe

47 African Union, 3rd CAADP Biennial Review Report.

48 African Union Commission, ‘African Climate Change and Resilient Development Strategy (2022–2032),’ African Union, 2022, https://au.int/en/documents/20220628/african-union-climate-change-and-resilient-development-strategy-and-action-plan

49 The African Green Stimulus Programme was endorsed by African Ministers of Environment as part of Africa's recovery plan for COVID. This Programme identifies CSA as avenue for post covid recovery. Similar steps are being taken to operationalise this Programme through attracting finance and technical support for a specific set of activities and actions.

50 African Union Commission, ‘African Union Green Recovery Action Plan (2021–2027),’ African Union, 2020. https://au.int/sites/default/files/documents/40790-doc-AU_Green_Recovery_Action_Plan_ENGLISH1.pdf

51 For more information visit https://nepad.org/microsite/africa-un-food-systems-summit-knowledge-hub

52 AfDB, ‘Feed Africa: Strategy for Agricultural transformation in Africa (2016–2025),’ (AfDB, 2021), https://www.afdb.org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Generic-Documents/Feed_Africa-_Strategy_for_Agricultural_Transformation_in_Africa_2016-2025.pdf

53 African Capacity Building Foundation (ACBF), ‘Coordination challenges and opportunities for climate adaptation in African agriculture,’ African Capacity Building Foundation (ACBF), Harare. License: Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0, 2023.

54 ECOWAS Department of Agriculture, Environment and Water Resources (DAEWR). ‘2025 Strategic Policy Framework Summary,’ November 2017, https://araa.org/sites/default/files/media/ECOWAP%202025%20Strategic%20Policy%20Framework%20ENG.pdf

55 Carmen Tores and Alain Sy Traoré, ‘A Panoply of Policy Instruments to Promote Sustainable Food Systems in West Africa,’ GREAT Insights Magazine 6, no. 4 (2017), https://ecdpm.org/great-insights/sustainable-food-systems/policy-instruments-sustainable-food-west-africa/

56 Global Alliance for Resilience – AGIR Sahel and West Africa. Regional Roadmap (Draft) Original Version: March 2013, https://www.oecd.org/swac/publications/AGIR%20draft%20roadmap_ENG_29%20March.pdf. For further information please see the Global Alliance for Resilience website on, https://www.food-security.net/en/topic/global-alliance-for-resilience-agir/

57 For more information, please visit the CCARDESA website, https://www.ccardesa.org/about-ccardesa

58 For further information, please visit the SADC website, https://www.sadc.int/

59 Among many others, these include, for example, country NAPAs, NAPs, NAMAs, NDCs, NAIPs, national extension policies, national food system action plans, green recovery strategies etc.

60 Ishmael Sunga and Romy Chevallier, ‘Strengthening the NDCs of Southern Africa to be More Representative of Farmer Interests,’ (Technical Briefing, Southern African Confederation of Agricultural Unions, 2021), https://sacau.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Enhancing-NDCs-to-reflect-farmer-interests_Technical-Briefing.pdf

61 Republic of Rwanda. Updated Nationally Determined Contribution, https://www.ndcs.undp.org/content/dam/LECB/docs/pubs-reports/undp-ndcsp-rwanda-ndc2-2020.pdf?download

62 Ingrid Schulte, Haseeb Bakhtary, Simon Siantidis, Franziska Haupt, Martina Fleckenstein and Clementine O’Connor, ‘Enhancing NDCs for Food Systems: Recommendations for Decision-Makers’ (paper, WWF Germanys, Berlin, 2020), https://sacau.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Enhancing-NDCs-to-reflect-farmer-interests_Technical-Briefing.pdf

63 United Nations Climate Change, ‘Long-Term Strategies Portal,’ https://unfccc.int/process/the-paris-agreement/long-term-strategies

64 The Coalition of Finance Ministers for Climate Action, Ministries of Finance and NDCs: Stepping up for Climate Action, Report on Helsinki Principle 6 (2020), https://www.financeministersforclimate.org/sites/cape/files/inline-files/Helsinki%20Principle%206%20-%20July%2015%202020%20update.pdf

65 South African Government, Department of Agriculture, forestry and Fisheries, ‘Draft Climate Smart Agriculture Strategic Framework for Agriculture, forestry and Fisheries’ (Government Gazette, 2018); South African Government, ‘National Climate Change Response White Paper,’ 2011.

66 For further information, please visit the Presidential Climate Commission website, https://www.climatecommission.org.za/about

67 FAO, ‘Regional CSA Alliances and Platforms: Information Sheet on the Africa CSA Alliance (ACSAA) and the NEPAD-iNGO Alliance on CSA,’ https://www.fao.org/3/bl862e/bl862e.pdf

68 FAO, ‘Global Alliance for CSA,’ https://www.fao.org/gacsa/regional-alliances/en/

69 CIAT; World Bank, Climate-Smart Agriculture in Tanzania. CSA Country Profiles for Africa Series. International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2017), 25 p, https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/2019-06/CSA-in-Tanzania.pdf

70 African Group of Negotiators Expert Support pre-COP25 Strategy meeting. 17–18 October 2019. Kenya, https://ccafs.cgiar.org/events/african-group-negotiators-expert-support-pre-cop25-strategy-meeting

71 John Lynam, Nienke M. Beintema, Johannes Roseboom, and Ousmane Badiane, eds., Agricultural Research in Africa: Investing in Future Harvests (Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), 2016). http://doi.org/10.2499/9780896292123

72 H. Kil, A Ivey and D Kitson, ‘Using Data to Improve Policy Decisions: Insights to Help Governments Address Complex Problems.’ Pew Charitable Trusts, August 2018.

73 African Union, The 3rd CAADP Biennial Review Report.

74 Daniela Chiriac and Baysa Naran, ‘Examining the Climate Finance Gap for Small-Scale Agriculture,’ IFAD and the Climate Policy Initiative, November 2020, https://www.ifad.org/documents/38714170/42157470/climate-finance-gap_smallscale_agr.pdf/34b2e25b-7572-b31d-6d0c-d5ea5ea8f96f

75 Chiriac and Naran, ‘Examining the Climate Finance Gap for Small-Scale Agriculture.’

76 Daniela Chiriac, Baysa Naran, and Angela Falconer, ‘Examining the Climate Finance Gap for Small-Scale Agriculture,’ Climate Policy Initiative, November 2020, https://www.ifad.org/documents/38714170/42157470/climate-finance-gap_smallscale_agr.pdf/34b2e25b-7572-b31d-6d0c-d5ea5ea8f96f

77 ‘Effective Multi-Level Public Investment OECD Principles in Action,’ OECD Multi-level Governance Studies, March 2019. OECD, https://www.oecd.org/effective-public-investment-toolkit/Full_report_Effective_Public_Investment.pdf

78 Romy Chevallier and Sabrina Chesterman, Strengthening Africa’s Climate Resilient Outcomes: Policy Coherence in Climate-Smart Agriculture (AICCRA policy brief. Accelerating Impacts of CGIAR Climate Research for Africa (AICCRA)), 2022, https://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/119767

79 The World Bank, ‘Climate Smart Agriculture,’ April 5, 2021, https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/climate-smart-agriculture

80 ECOWAS Commission, ECOWAP Web Based Monitoring and Evaluation System, https://ecowap.ecowas.int/about-ecowap-M-and-E