Successful incorporation of climate change considerations requires specific actions at each stage of the project cycle (see Figure 1) to inform the definition of development objectives, interventions, cost estimation and M&E. Guiding questions and sources of information are summarized in the document “Incorporating climate change considerations into agricultural investment programmes”, Annex 1.

Specific tasks for each phase include: 

• Identification: Assess potential climate risks in the project/programme area – for example, through a rapid local impacts assessment (see “Incorporating climate change considerations into agricultural investment programmes”, Annex 2); identify opportunities for adaptation and mitigation based on relevant government strategies and policies as well as local conditions; assess major data and information gaps and recommend options for supplementary research before and during project preparation; and reflect the results in the project/programme concept note.
• Design and appraisal: Undertake in-depth climate risk analysis; identify and prioritize adaptation and mitigation options; estimate carbon footprint of identified interventions through ex ante carbon balance appraisal tools, such as the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) EX-ACT Tool; adjust and finalize project interventions; and include the results in relevant parts of project/programme documents, including development objectives, components and activities, budget, indicators and M&E framework (see “Incorporating climate change considerations into agricultural investment programmes”, Annex 6).
• Implementation supervision: Supervise the implementation of adaptation and mitigation interventions; and monitor relevant indicators. (Because of the comparatively high level of uncertainty characterizing climate change-related investments, flexibility of project design and intense monitoring to quickly identify weaknesses and alternative options during project implementation are especially important for climate change activities.)
• Evaluation: Evaluate the achievements of adaptation and mitigation objectives in accordance with the indicators defined in the M&E framework; assess progress towards longer-term impact – for example, that signified by replication and upscaling of project activities (see, for example here); collect lessons learned and provide advice for necessary improvements as well as opportunities for additional replication and scaling up; and identify priorities for further investments. 

Climate change is global; its impacts are location-specific. Local impact assessments at the conceptualization and preparation stage will help to identify the most effective and efficient options tailored to specific local conditions. This is the starting point of climate change mainstreaming and is frequently the most difficult aspect because of lack of knowledge and information, resulting in high uncertainty. Accordingly, accessing all possible sources of information, from global climate models to traditional local knowledge, becomes all the more important. Assessments generally include four steps: (i) investigating local climate conditions and agricultural systems, and their relationship to each other – for example, by examining seasonal climate and crop calendars; (ii) analyzing historical climate trends, including trends in general climate conditions as well as occurrence and intensity of extreme weather events in recent decades; (iii) assessing the impacts of historical climate change and variations on local agricultural sectors, and identifying climate factors and time periods to which agricultural sectors are most sensitive; and (iv) projecting further climate change impacts by downsizing climate change modelling and projecting local climate change trends. For step-by-step guidance on conducting a local impact assessment see “Incorporating climate change considerations into agricultural investment programmes”, Annex 2). The appropriate depth of the impact assessment differs among various projects and depends upon the availability and quality of data, the cost of data acquisition and the expected general level of the project location’s vulnerability to climate change impacts as a measure of potential benefits.

Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) has gained significant momentum as an approach that integrates the three dimensions of sustainable development (economic, social and environmental) by jointly addressing food security and climate challenges. It is composed of three main pillars: (i) sustainably increasing agricultural productivity and incomes; (ii) adapting and building resilience to climate change; and (iii) reducing and/or removing GHG emissions, where possible. The focus is on identifying and exploiting synergies while being mindful of potential trade-offs. Agricultural practices already exist that have the potential to be “climate-smart” if applied in the appropriate context to fit climatic natural resources and socio-economic circumstances. CSA does not focus only at the plot level, however, but applies an integrated landscape approach, promoting coordination among crops, livestock, fisheries and forestry, as well as energy and water, following the principles of ecosystem management.

Priority interventions that need to be carefully considered when proposing and designing adaptation and mitigation interventions include the following: (i) data and knowledge generation and sharing, as many countries lack basic data and essential knowledge for climate modelling, impact assessment and projection; (ii) institutions, policies and financing mechanisms that create a favourable enabling environment for adaptation and mitigation; (iii) establishment and implementation of sustainable approaches to land and water management as well as biodiversity conservation, as a basis and complement for climate change interventions in an ecosystem approach; (iv) development and dissemination of technologies, practices and processes, as a means to enhance local adaptive capacity; and (v) establishment of systems for disaster risk management as a crucial building block of climate change resilience, enabling local communities to better prepare for and manage climatic risks exacerbated by climate change, in particular with respect to extreme weather events.

Leveraging Global Climate Finance

In the past, accessing international climate financing for CSA activities has been a particularly challenging endeavor. This is the result of numerous factors, including: the limited funds available compared with the range of country needs; the disjointing of mitigation and adaptation funding, which is linked to their separate treatment in the negotiations of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); and the weak representation of agriculture as a sector in the major mitigation funding mechanisms. Regular development funds provide most of the funding for adaptation and CSA. Climate-specific finance includes the Adaptation Fund (AF), the Climate Investment Funds (CIF), Global Environmental Facility (GEF) and the Green Climate Fund (GCF). The CSA Sourcebook referenced below provides a comprehensive overview of the major financing mechanisms. The mitigation potential of agricultural investment projects/programmes can be assessed ex ante using models such as the FAO EX-ACT Tool (see link below), providing a basis for seeking climate finance. 

Climate change considerations should influence not only project design, but also the broader strategic plans that prioritize national investment decisions. Just as localized rapid assessments should inform project design, historical climate data and projections at national level should inform assessment and prioritization of options in terms of adaptation, mitigation and food security benefits. Climate factors, and expected changes to their mean levels and variability, should also be considered when carrying out sector analysis and economy-wide sources of growth analysis. At the plan level, it is particularly important to identify key interventions that strengthen the overall implementation capacity to support transition to CSA approaches. This process includes strengthening institutional capacity of research and advisory providers, transforming policy to address barriers to CSA adoption – be they technical or economic – and promoting appropriate financing mechanisms.