In recent years, many food production systems in the Pacific have become unsustainable. Drivers such as increasing population pressure and urban migration have forced farmers to abandon traditional practices. At the same time, economic incentives have encouraged them to adopt new ones without understanding all the implications. Reduced fallow periods or repeated cropping of high-value crops on the same land, often without rotations or sufficient replenishment of soil nutrients, have resulted in falling yields and increasing pest and disease problems. Excessive clearing of vegetation promotes soil erosion and runoff into the sea, damaging coral reefs and other coastal fish habitats (Appendix 2). Crops grown close to rivers are subject to flooding or prolonged periods of waterlogging. Paying attention to soil fertility, crop diversity, livestock waste management, etc., must be combined with an ecosystem-based approach (whole of island, ridge to reef), which will help to bring about the necessary changes in land use and support sound land management (Markham 2013). Acknowledging the importance of soil health and fertility, diversity, and climate-resilient agroforestry systems has to be the overriding adaptation response in agriculture to climate change.
It is noteworthy that showcases and best practices are mostly included in the submissions of industrialized countries and the West African nation Benin. These “best practices” generally emphasize conventional agriculture, biotechnology and digital solutions but also include some agroecological practices (e.g. cover crops, no-till, recycling of drainage water, rotational grazing). On the other hand, submissions of developing countries (including from the African Group of Negotiators (AGN) the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) group, and the African states Benin, Burundi, Kenya and Malawi) usually include a list of priorities and needs to advance on the respective topics. These lists, in a considerable number of cases, make reference to practices or principles related to agroecology. Specific examples include capacity building for women and youth, reduced tillage, cover crops, crop rotation, ecosystem- based grassland management, inclusive property land rights, integrated agro-silvo-zootechnical systems, integrated soil fertility management, optimized management of crop residues, organic fertilizers and organic farming in general, reforestation, restoration of degraded lands, and valorisation of animal waste. Finally, it is important to note that only the LDC group submission highlights the need to integrate traditional knowledge.
Conservation International — Developing Policy and Regulatory Guidance for Loko Ea Practitioners ($20,000)
This project will aid fishpond practitioners in navigating the new unified permitting system developed by the State of Hawaii’s Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands, Honua Consulting, Conservation International Hawaii, NOAA, Kuaaina Ulu Auamo and other partners. This system integrates more than 17 environmental regulations into a single permit system for the restoration, repair, maintenance and reconstruction of traditional Hawaiian fishpond systems. Fishponds offer opportunities to restore and revitalize cultural sites and practices; rebuild coastal estuarine function that has been documented to enhance natural ecosystem dynamics; educate youth through experiential learning; prepare for, and adapt to, the effects of climate change; and provide community food security and self-sufficiency. This effort will provide guidance on how to access, use and abide by the tenants of the permitting system. This project will develop a guidebook that provides practical, easy-to-understand guidance for the public and fishpond practitioners, as well as Best Management Practices.
leads to the destruction of the coral reefs surrounding Aysese Islands. The environmental science is complex in coral reefs and many species which have a symbiotic relationship within these systems may suffer as a result of changes in salinity, sediment loads, and turbidity. Eutrophication of coastal waters brings about loss of oxygen in these marine ecosystems, which in turn makes an environment that does not support aquatic life . Popula- tion density is greatest along coastal areas, and as such creates an area of vulnerability when storm surges ap- proach, for loss of life, and loss of morale and workforce if deaths occur due to large storm events. In addition, small changes in sea level can produce higher ground-water levels, which can in turn affect the ability to grow crops . Potential loss of food sources, as well as economic income from agriculture is another area of expo- sure for this nation. Another climatic difficulty is that changing sea surface temperatures have the potential to change the patterns of currents and affect availability of nutrients in addition to migratory patterns of certain fish such as tuna. In addition, the sex ratio of turtles depends directly on medium temperatures, because higher tem- peratures will result in a higher female to male ratio.
3.3 Resilience and Adaptive Capacity
The current pandemic reveals how interdependent our economies are and how the ripple effects of a shock can quickly move across sectors and political boundaries. It is also a warning that societies
should be prepared for more complex risks and changes. This particularly applies in the case of foodsystems which are exposed to a variety of environmental and socioeconomic shocks. It requires being prepared for global scale disturbance of earth system processes, including climate change and sea level rise, as well as being able to manage local level impacts and compounding risk factors, such heat waves, droughts, and environmental degradation. Human experience to date may be an insufficient guide for managing future risks. Instead of environmental changes being dealt with incrementally, emphasis is needed on strengthening the capacity to manage a multitude of risks playing out across different spatial scales, both fast-onset events like floods and slow-onset situations like droughts. Account must be taken of the possible occurrence of tipping points in natural or social systems, where a small change could suddenly lead to large-scale impacts and shifts in the properties of a system (see Lenton et al. 2008, Milkoreit et al. 2018). Overall, a much more comprehensive analysis of the capacity of foodsystems to manage such risks is required. There must be a better understanding of which stakeholder groups are the most vulnerable to pandemic, environmental, and socioeconomic risks and of the interventions best suited to building their resilience.
In the Pacific Island region, many young people continue to acquire workplace skills by informal means and non-formal training. 1 This is still the case in spite of the multitude of policy dialogues and agreements on the requirement of education per se to improve resilience to climate change and disasters. Although the role of “local level” action is recognised in policy dialogue (e.g. the Framework for Resilient Development in the Pacific), there are no relevant formal qualifications accessible at this level. The vast majority of offerings in this sector are at postgraduate level, which is not appropriate for the majority of stakeholders—including communities. In that regard, regional Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) qualifications aligned with the Pacific Qualifications Framework (PQF) levels 1 to 4 would be most appropriate (Sanerivi et al., 2016; Hemstock et al., 2017). Since most of the current regional training delivery is carried out on a project basis, usually by short-term consultants, it is unsustainable in terms of national capacity to deliver. Ad-hoc training and lack of national capacity to deliver training sustainably also means that many projects fail if those trained on project activities leave the community (Woods et al., 2006). These issues lead to the conclusion that national capacity for the delivery of quality assured regional qualifications in CCA and DRMshould be a more sustainable approach.
The new emphasis on collaboration with the private sector and a focus on ‘social marketing’ may indeed provide a recipe of success for cassava bread. However, there is very little trust between the various actors that needed to work together to see this project fulfilled and these relationships are tenuous in an unstable political climate. The real results will only be measurable in a few years’ time when it will be possible to analyse how many more farmers have access to markets for their cassava crops, whether there has been an increase in production and processing of cassava and most importantly how much cassava bread is being manufactured and consumed. The lesson here for the commercialisation of other orphan crops is that there is a need to build the business case as to why it is good or necessary to invest in adding value to these crops. At the same time, it is necessary for institutions to be in place to ensure that commercialising these crops does not negatively impact the communities that have relied on them for centuries and who have invested traditional knowledge in their cultivation and processing.
While building capacity emerges as one of the most suitable approaches for balancing power dynamics and ensuring an equitable response, addressing these inequities can also involve
modifications to suit specific contexts. For instance, when harvest residues needed to feed livestock in mixed crop-livestock farms prevents their use as soil cover, conservation agriculture practices could be adjusted to meet this need (Corbeels et al., 2014). Although not explored in this study of Ukraine’s agri-food sector, other case studies have looked at paying farmers for mitigation actions due to a low adoption rate of seemingly highly beneficial land management practices (Bryan et al., 2013; Rahn et al., 2014). Salvini et al. (2016) explored synergies and trade-offs between the mitigation project REDD+ (Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation), with the adaptation project ‘Climate Smart Agriculture’. Their research in central Vietnam used a role- playing game with local farmers to generate scenarios as inputs for a model (Salvini et al., 2016). They established that payments were at times set too low and with a payment for ecosystem services all farmers would implement measures (Salvini et al., 2016). These findings relate to a hypothetical scenario, so other issues could arise during implementation. Moreover, in order to successfully implement payments in Ukraine, capacity would first need to be developed to ensure adequate monitoring and transparency.
Internet : Internet access will be provided on conference site (wifi and Internet fixed access points).
10. About New Caledonia
New Caledonia is known for its natural beauty and tropical climate and more commonly as a resort destination. It is a unique blend of French and Melanesian cultures
Transformative Innovation Policy
The third framework is from the Transformative Innovation Policy Consortium (TIPC) led by Johan Schot out of the SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit at the University of Sussex. He was one of the Dutch researchers who originally developed the MLP with Frank Geels. The consortium includes the following six research partners: University of Sussex (UK), The Research Council of Norway, The South-African National Research Foundation, Colombian Administrative Department of Science, Technology & Innovation (Colciencias), Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems (VINNOVA), Finnish Funding Agency for Innovation (Tekes). The TIPC’s mandate is to deliver a new policy innovation framework to help solve grand challenges. These challenges are also called wicked problems due to their complexity and that fact that they are hard to solve. They have multiple causes, no one answer and there are no templates on how to tackle them. And, they are often interconnected. It is also expected this frame will also affect policies for a sustainable bio-economy. (Bloomfield, 2017)
Even though the exact nature and extent of climate change remain uncertain, it is widely believed that it is the poor who will be hit hard due to climate change. This is especially true for those communities who live in the dryland areas and who rely largely or totally on dryland agriculture for their livelihoods. They are also the most vulnerable to the existing rainfall variability and climatic shocks. This necessitates farmers and farming practices in dryland areas to adapt to the predicted climate change. Rainfed agriculture is pivotal to the economy and food security of India. About 60% of the total cultivated area is rainfed, supporting 40% of India’s food demand of 1.2 billion people. Moreover, rainfed agriculture also sup- ports 60% of livestock population. Likewise, coarse cere- als (87.5%), pulses (87.5%), oilseeds (77%), rice (48%) and cotton (65.7%) are predominantly grown in rainfed areas 7 . Thus, drylands make significant contribution to the food and nutritional security of the country. In future, the significance of drylands in national food security will further increase due to growing population pressure and competition for land for non-agricultural uses. Drylands are being projected as the cradle of the next green revolu- tion in India. In the sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), nearly 90% of staple food and feed production comes from, and will continue to come from, rainfed agriculture 8 . But crop production in the drylands in both Asia and Africa is presently plagued with numerous problems like insuffi- cient and erratic rainfall, land degradation and low soil fertility, poor supply of agri-inputs, weak technology dis- semination system, low investment capacity of farmers, etc. Further, it is strongly believed that climate change will further exacerbate the problems of dryland agricul- ture. The vulnerability of drylands to climate change and variability has been exposed by the devastating effects of recent flooding and prolonged droughts during the 20th century and the first decade of the 21st century in differ- ent parts of Asia and Africa. This highlights the need to develop climate change mitigation and adaptation strate- gies for the dryland regions.
This paper will compare the metaphoric structuring of the ecological concept of resilience—with its roots in Holling's 1973 paper; with psychological concepts of resilience which followed from research —such as Werner, Bierman, and French and Garmezy and Streitman) published in the early 1970s. This metaphoric analysis will expose the difference between complex adaptive systems models of resilience in ecology and studies related to resilience in relation to climate change; compared with the individualism of linear equilibrium models of resilience which have dominated discussions of resilience in psychology and economics. By examining the ontological commitments of these competing metaphors, I will show that the individualistic concept of resilience which dominates psychological discussions of resilience is incompatible with the ontological commitments of ecological concepts of resilience.
2008) One frequently mentioned strategy for adapting to climate changes is that of exploiting genetic sources of resistance to the abiotic and biotic stresses that accompany climate changes (Niang et al., 2014). Both Inter- and intra- crop genetic diversity is useful for climate change adapta- tion. Farmers may adapt by switching to crops that are more resilient under the current and predicted conditions (e.g. from maize to millet in rain-stressed areas), or by using better adapted varieties of the same crops derived from farmer selection, or through formal sector crop im- provement programmes. In all cases, access to quality and diverse seed/reproductive materials is essential for enhanc- ing and improving crop productivity and food security. As climates migrate across the globe, one country’s future climate will be similar to another country’s current climate (Jarvis et al., 2015). It is likely therefore that plant popula- tions that have been developed in some parts of the world will possess traits that are adapted to future climatic con- ditions in other parts of the world. Countries are already extremely interdependent on plant genetic resources for food and agriculture (PGRFA) (Flores-Palacios, 1997; Khoury et al., 2016). It is predicted that climate change will make countries even more interdependent (Fujisaka, Williams and Halewood, 2013), with the concomitant need to access and exchange ever higher numbers of genetic resources across international borders.
wind power potential are mainly based on global climate models for future projections, often converting wind speed to wind generation using wind turbine models on the chosen turbine height , , .
The main impact of climate change on hydropower is precisely its increased variability , , . Climate change impacts on hydropower resources are extremely site-dependent. Due to its critical role in power systems, future hydropower generation has also been the focus of several pieces of research. Studies focusing on the consequences of hydropower alterations for the power system performance found that increased dispatchable capacity is required to cope with the higher variability and uncertainty on hydropower generation. Such is concluded by Carvajal et al. , who explore the impact of different hydropower policies for the 2050 power system in Ecuador, and by Tarroja et al.  that studies the impact of hydropower changes on the power system from California, USA, in 2050. According to Teotónio et al. , exploring the consequences of future water availability in the Portuguese power system, hydropower generation will be impaired due to a more pronounced variability of precipitation caused by higher extremes of weather conditions (more accentuated droughts and stronger precipitation periods). Focusing on revenues from hydropower plants, Mendes et al.  study the impact of climate change in the Amazon, concluding that changes in river flows will result in fewer revenues in 2050, continuing to decline until 2100. Hydropower potential is commonly addressed through simulation models of hydropower plant operation or hydrological models , , .
Diversity is extolled by nearly all resilience frameworks. Some frameworks—e.g., Carpenter et al. (2012), Stockholm Resilience Center (2015), and Frankenberger et al. (2013) —do not address the need for diversity to be complementary or the fact that diversity can undermine resilience if, for example, enterprises compete for time and resources. Cabell and Oelofse (2012), in contrast, make this distinction explicit. They also include, as a separate quality, spatial and temporal heterogene- ity; that is, lack of uniformity across the landscape and through time. We see this as a measure of diversity, and not a separate quality from diversity. Ecological Integration (Working with Nature) The diverse managed components of resilientsystems are complementary not just to each other, but to unmanaged ecosystem services. Ecological integration means using natural ecological processes to increase productivity and decrease imported inputs. Basic examples include reduced tillage, integrated pest management, and use of cover crops—practices many farmers have embraced. This aspect of resilience places a value on the preservation of minimally managed or uncultivated land, left to the natural cycles of insects, birds, and other beneficial organisms. Farms that maintain plant cover and incorporate more perennials provide habitat for predators and parasitoids, use ecosystem engineers such as soil fauna, and align production with local ecological parameters are naturally more resilient than farms that stress the use of increasing amounts of chem- ical fertilizers and pesticides, excluding nature as much as possible for the sake of monocultures. Rotational grazing to build soils, inoculating soils with beneficial microorganisms, and various agro- forestry practices are more advanced methods of ecological integration. Permaculture is an applied example of ecological integration in resilient sys- tems, as we have discussed elsewhere (Worstell & Johnson, 2015).
In some product categories there were a considerable number of different products available. For example, with soft drinks (defined as sugar-sweetened or artifi- cially sweetened non-alcoholic beverages), 83 varieties were available in New Caledonia, but only 27 in Samoa. In the snack food category which included crisps, ex- truded snacks and corn chips, Fiji had over 150 products, while Nauru had just 9 products. Figure 2 shows a selec- tion of the food categories, and indicates that sauces, bis- cuits and snack foods had the largest variety at a regional level. Processed fish consisted mostly of canned fish, and it is a popular item in the region.
Secondly, we feel – and the data identified in the course of researching this paper has confirmed for us this view – that local government bodies in the Pacific region are critically under-resourced. Given the constant influx of migrants from outer islands to the urban and peri-urban areas, and their tendency to enter the informal rather than formal economy and to be non- rate-paying ‘free-loaders’ on public facilities, there is little prospect that many town and city councils in the Pacific region will be able to significantly improve their capacities for service delivery or for infrastructural development in the short to medium term. This is exacerbated by the current inter-governmental arrangements by which national governments make minimal transfers to local governments to facilitate service delivery. We agree with Storey and others who have noted that: “Pacific Island towns and cities are becoming places of acute poverty and growing inequality”, and: “Institutions are failing to cope with demands placed on them” (Storey, 2006).