Perspectives on enhancing climate adaptation in agriculture

By Flaam Hardy 

I landed in Glasgow fueled by a sense of urgency and anticipation, ready to witness high stake climate negotiations after another year of unprecedented and widespread climate chaos. As I began navigating my way through the conference center, it became clear to me that in fact many COP26s were happening in parallel. Protests led by civil society and activists both inside the conference and on the street. Pavilion events spanning diverse industries and countries across the globe. Negotiations happening behind closed doors and others open to observers. It was not always clear how porous these worlds were.  The first few days of COP26 were primarily attended by heads of state making grand pledges on eliminating deforestation and reducing methane emissions. As a delegation member only attending week 2, I assumed that I had missed much of the hype. Instead, an atmosphere of urgency kicked in as the clock continued ticking, only a few days remaining for the negotiations to bear fruit while the world watched closely.

I was eager to attend COP26 because of my interests in climate change mitigation and adaptation in agriculture and the food system more broadly. At Tufts, I am a graduate student completing an MS in Agriculture, Food & Environment at Friedman and an MPH in Planetary Health. For the last decade, I’ve studied environmental science and agroecology, worked in environmental impact assessment, and worked on organic farms. Understanding and assessing the social and environmental impacts of the food system has been central to my career.

My experience throughout the week paralleled many of the learnings in one of our Friedman courses taught by Dr. Erin Coughlan de Perez: Climate Risk and Adaptation in the Food System. In this course, we explored how climate science, discourse and policy has evolved over the last few decades from an initial focus on mitigation to one of adaptation. It was clear from the beginning that one of COP26’s primary goals was to enhance adaptation action. Faced with a seemingly endless supply of events and negotiations I could attend, I narrowed my scope and followed this thread on adaptation throughout the week.

One major highlight included attending the Contributor Dialogue of the Adaptation Fund (AF). The AF is a financing mechanism created under Kyoto Protocol in 2001 to support concrete adaptation projects in developing nations most vulnerable to climate change. Ministers took turns announcing pledges. John Kerry spoke and announced the U.S.’s first-ever contribution to the AF of $50 million. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Jochen Flasbarth, State Secretary, Federal Ministry for the Environment, contributed $50 million euros, and was quick to note that this amount was “a little bit more in U.S. dollars, just to push the competition.” The AF is only one of many mechanisms that support climate financing for adaptation. However, even though a record breaking $356 million was raised in new pledges for the AF, financing for adaptation overall is devastatingly far behind where it needs to be.

I attended side events hosted by two other major climate and development funds: the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and Global Environment Facility (GEF). At the event called  “Green and climate-resilient agriculture: supporting action at the global level and on the ground”, the director of the World Farmers Organization, Theo de Jager, stressed the crucial role that farmers play in soil restoration. At the IFAD Pavilion, the voices of smallholder farmers in rural communities were most central, ensuring that equity be at the forefront of adaptation. Despite producing 50% of the world’s food calories and their disproportionate exposure to the impacts of climate change, these farmers only receive 1.7% of climate finance. A panel on “Rural women at the forefront of climate resilience” highlighted interventions on the ground that showed how women and girls are key to unlocking the benefits of climate adaptation.

The distinction between mitigation and adaptation in agriculture can be blurry, a particularly fascinating aspect of nature-based climate solutions in general. Panels at both the Indigenous People’s pavilion and the European Union pavilion demonstrated this by highlighting Indigenous women-led ecosystem restoration and reforestation projects across the globe. Many of these projects sequester carbon while also supporting adaptation by diversifying incomes and restoring soils to make them more drought and flood-tolerant. This helps reduce climate risks and improve the resilience of rural communities to future climate shocks. Such multifaceted nature-based solutions are essential if we want to have any hope of effective and lasting change.

“Despite producing 50% of the world’s food calories and their disproportionate exposure to the impacts of climate change, the small-holders farmers in rural communities only receive 1.7% of climate finance.”

It was an immense privilege to attend the conference this year. Attending COP26 deepened my understanding of the field of climate adaptation and exposed me to the world of international negotiations, the pace of which can feel excruciatingly slow. Nevertheless, it was humbling to be in rooms where every party needs to agree, from the U.S. to Jamaica to Egypt. But my biggest takeaway is that the bigger story on climate action is being written by countless others working tirelessly to hold leaders to account. The determination and enthusiasm buzzing through the halls and beyond from activists, scientists, the private sector, indigenous people, national governments, and many more was contagious. I return reaffirmed in my commitment to build a just and climate resilient food system.

Flaam is a 2021 Sustainability Fellow - Natural Climate Solutions for Agricultural Businesses; Flaam is pursuing a MS in Agriculture, Food, and Environment at the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University