The Agriculture Programme has undertaken research on the sustainability and resilience of food systems at a global level. “What price resilience?” sets out that the resilience that is required within food production systems to cope with increasingly severe and frequent shocks is also a prerequisite for economic, social and political security.
“What price resilience?” highlights the need to develop a comprehensive understanding of the true costs of agriculture once ‘externalities’ associated with pollution, water depletion, soil degradation, biodiversity loss and greenhouse gases have been taken into account. The results of an economic analysis of the costs and benefits of eight conventional food production systems and sustainable alternatives are presented
This report presents the analysis and findings of the ISU’s research and consultative work in seeking to understand what is necessary to achieve more sustainable fisheries worldwide. The report sets out case studies and thematic analysis in order to provide context for the work of the ISU Marine Programme. It also sets out the economic, social and environmental case for change.
The world is at a juncture where future financing for forests and REDD+ seems uncertain, and there is a clear risk of a narrative of disappointment setting in. These pressures demand a redoubling of international efforts.
In light of the new challenges and the lessons learned, this paper suggests several pathways to be considered for the next phase of financing of efforts to protect forests, and to enable forest countries to adopt alternative development pathways in which deforestation is reduced. These pathways include the need to:
In order to ensure global food security and avert dangerous climate change, the world faces the pressing dual challenge of both protecting its remaining rainforests and enhancing food production in sustainable and resilient ways. Successfully achieving this would provide multiple co-benefits, including safeguarding the well-being and livelihoods of forests peoples; protecting the biodiversity and ecosystems provided by forests; and reducing rural poverty.
Although gender considerations are relatively new in the climate change discourse, it is hardly surprising that they have been at the heart of recent activism and policy advocacy efforts by multiple actors. Socio-economic research and evaluations of development effectiveness both confirm that access to resources and the agency to use them are influenced by gender roles, responsibilities and differential access to opportunities and influence
The findings of this research reveal the key role of informal and formal institutions in the local responses to climate change and, correlatively, the need for institutional strengthening as well as innovation in the existing ‘traditional’ coping strategies for climate shocks and hazards. The research findings also highlight the importance of gender inequalities as major social barriers to the development of adequate adaptation strategies by and for women.