ABSTRACT
Agri-food systems are besieged by malnutrition, yield gaps, and climate vulnerability, but integrated, research-based responses in public policy, agricultural, value chains, and finance are constrained by short-termism and zero sum thinking. As they respond to current and emerging agri-food system challenges, decision makers need new tools that steer toward multi-sector, evidence-based collaboration. To support national agri-food system policy processes, the Integrated Agri-food System Initiative (IASI) methodology was developed and validated through case studies in Mexico and Colombia. This holistic, multi-sector methodology builds on diverse existing data resources and leverages situation analysis, modeled predictions, and scenarios to synchronize public and private action at the national level toward sustainable, equitable, and inclusive agri-food systems. Culminating in collectively agreed strategies and multi-partner tactical plans, the IASI methodology enabled a multi-level systems approach by mobilizing design thinking to foster mindset shifts and stakeholder consensus on sustainable and scalable innovations that respond to real-time dynamics in complex agri-food systems. To build capacity for these types of integrated, context-specific approaches, greater investment is needed in supportive international institutions that function as trusted in-region 'innovation brokers.' This paper calls for a structured global network to advance adaptation and evolution of essential tools like the IASI methodology in support of the One CGIAR mandate and in service of positive agri-food systems transformation.
Subject(s)
Agriculture , Climate Change , Food , Investments , Public PolicyABSTRACT
Transitioning to sustainable agricultural systems is imperative to meet the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Achieving more sustainable agricultural production systems will require significant additional capital, however this cannot be covered by the current financial market setup, which dissociates public and private funders. Blended finance, where concessionary development-oriented funding is used to mobilize additional private capital, is essential. To ensure that the limited pool of concessionary funding is used efficiently and effectively, a shared understanding of the roles and limitations of public and private funders is necessary. In this paper, we describe the high-level funding gap for sustainable agriculture, the general landscape of agricultural finance, and the concept and potential roles of blended finance in this context. This paper introduces the conditions under which different financing mechanisms can contribute to addressing barriers related to sustainable agriculture investments. It highlights that multiple funding modalities must be utilized in order to achieve agricultural investment at a meaningful level and encourages greater exploration of the range of blended financing structures to increase SDG-related agriculture investments.
ABSTRACT
Policymakers, program managers, and landowners need information about net terrestrial carbon sequestration in forests, croplands, grasslands, and shrublands to understand the cumulative effects of carbon trading programs, expanding biofuels production, and changing environmental conditions in addition to agricultural and forestry uses. Objective information systems that establish credible baselines and track changes in carbon storage can provide the accountability needed for carbon trading programs to achieve durable carbon sequestration and for biofuels initiatives to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions. A multi-sector stakeholder design process was used to produce a new indicator for the 2008 State of the Nation's Ecosystems report that presents metrics of carbon storage for major ecosystem types, specifically change in the amount of carbon gained or lost over time and the amount of carbon stored per unit area (carbon density). These metrics have been developed for national scale use, but are suitable for adaptation to multiple scales such as individual farm and forest parcels, carbon offset markets and integrated national and international assessments. To acquire the data necessary for a complete understanding of how much, and where, carbon is gained or lost by U.S. ecosystems, expansion and integration of monitoring programs will be required.
