Welcome back everyone to this thematic session, the first part of the climate change resilient agro-ecosystems and this session will be about integrated landscapes approaches for agriculture, forestry and other land uses. We already got a very good introduction to that topic by Minister Pogar Bidal in the opening. My name is Peter Holmgren, I am Director General for the Center for International Forestry Research, one of the centers of the CDIR and I'm very pleased to have a distinguished panel that will help us with a live dialogue. I don't think this will be very much of a presentation, it will be a live dialogue and we have a very competent panel to have a dynamic discussion about this topic. Starting with Minister Manuel Pogar Bidal, your Excellency, welcome back. Thank you. Thank you for your opening remarks. We look forward to Lima, we look forward to Paris and we know that you are the captain of the ship, so very welcome. Dr. Christian Sampere, CEO and President of the Wildlife Conservation Society, very distinguished authority on environmental conservation and environmental policies, very happy to have you here. You are also the Chair of the Board of Trustees at Biodiversity International and other of the CG centers. Professor Bina Agarwal, Professor of Economics and Development Economics and Environmental Environment at the University of Manchester and you are also a Professor of, did I get this right? Also in economics, yes. Yeah. Economics. And you are the President of the Institute International Association of Ecological Economics, that's very, very interesting and I'd like to hear more about that, so welcome to the panel. And Dr. Quezi Atacra, Director of the CGR Research Program on Integrated Systems for the Humid Tropics, that's if you say that to somebody outside the CG, that looks really big. It's of course very important and this is where we integrate things, the systems thinking and we look forward to hear you talk about this. And also Quezi is an agriculture scientist with a degree in forestry, I think that's a very good background for this panel. So that's the panel. I'm planning to do this in a very informal way. We have to unfortunately let Minister Pogardal go to the next important meeting in about half an hour, so I think we will be through the most important part of the discussion by them. But I'd like to first say two words about where we seem to stand on the landscapes approach. This has been a really important week for the planet actually. It's not often that we have heads of states and heads of government to talk about agriculture and forestry. It's not often that they make commitments to these areas but that's precisely what they've been doing this week in New York. And that means that we are expected to deliver on those declarations and action agendas that have been developed. Now let's take a quick look at the two declarations on agriculture and forestry. If you put them together and together they make a really compelling action agenda. All the things we need to deal with achieve sustainable development, the land-based sector being at the center of this and preserving the ecosystems being at the center of this. If you take them together it's really compelling. But if you look at them one by one there is almost no connection between them. There is no cross-reference. There are institutional structures that leads to one declaration on agriculture not mentioning forests. There is one declaration on forests without much connection to agriculture except that's a problem that causes deforestation of course. So we have this fragmentation and we need to figure out how do we develop the combined solutions. Because we know that the combined solutions will be better. It will be more than one plus one. How do we develop that? What are the tools, methods, how do we ensure that local people are in charge of the solutions and as we approach the sustainable development goals can we avoid to fall into those silos again? What do you think, Christian? Well thanks Peter. It's great to be here with several friends that have interacted with a number of ways over the years. It's great to see you Manuel and of course Peter, you and I were in C4 together. This has been an extraordinary week and if exhausting week here in New York because of all the things going on, Secretary Kerry had a statement which was interesting about speed dating. It's like meeting everyone speed dating and you miss half your dates but we're here. But I'm glad that we're having this dialogue. As you mentioned we have to bring these worlds together. I come at this actually very much from the environmental side as a scientist that's worked in conservation issues but also as a side interest I've always been involved with the CG including C4 and now as chair of the Biodiversity International Board. One of the things I've learned is there's all these parallel dialogues going on and these two worlds not only between forest and agriculture between as Manuel was saying climate and biodiversity and they're starting to come together but we've got a long ways to go on the whole conservation agenda and agriculture needs to weave together. I think we've got an opportunity to really bring those together. I'm very encouraged by the CG and the dialogues that we have starting to bring sustainability into the debate meaningfully and not only how do we resolve the issues around productivity and nutrition and these areas but how do we do it in a way that's not going to have a huge environmental impact and of course this week with everything and all the attention to climate change I think what we really have to realize is that overlay and the issue of the impacts that the relation between agriculture and conservation and climate change. Let me just give you one specific example it's interesting in the last three months I've spent a lot of time in Colombia's and an advisor to President Santos on a coffee commission coffee being one of key crops in Colombia and the interesting thing you look at the coffee production sector there this is a sector that covers where about one and a half million people derive their income directly from coffee it's a as many of you know the agricultural bandits in the Andes and we're starting to see the impacts of climate change on the system we're starting to see reduction yields we're starting to see all these production systems starting to go up the mountains and what's happening is as there's increasing pressure on the higher areas that's where the ecosystem services are coming so most 70 percent of the population of Colombia lives in the mountains the water of most of the cities comes from these areas that supply not only the coffee in these areas and we're starting to move up it's increasing the rates of deforestation starting to impact the provision of water and water services and starting to impact the coffee production itself and the question is how can you actually come up with systems and solutions that will allow for adaptation to this climate change and the same mitigate the impact and the answers are within the production systems themselves not only varieties but in the case of coffee or things we've been looking at it's shade grown coffee it's an incredible response we can really this is well last 20 years Colombia eliminated a lot of the shade grown coffee for sun coffee this is what's going on by going back to shade coffee you can actually you good production better markets for some of these things improve the livelihoods reduce the deforestation and increase water production so there are win-win solutions like that that we really need to look at and I think there are a lot of examples so we need to start by doing the dialogue and really focusing on these options and and this is what the dialogue is about so I'm going to just finish because I want to make sure we can have a dialogue I want to say that I agree with everything Manuel said in the speech about the landscape approach and I subscribe to all of it great thanks that's easier than repeating I guess we should be really really happy and appreciate the speed dating that has led to a political commitment the question is now what how do we handle that political commitment but I'm going to turn to being up because we're always a lot of our discussion is about the land and the and the biophysical things on the land but there is also the people side of landscapes and the governance the equity the gender the migration etc etc how does that fit in well I think I certainly agreed that we need to really look at both production and conservation and not just for future generations but also the present generation now in this context as we know the debate has got pale polarized because some argue that agricultural intensification for food production must be separated from conservation there's this whole debate about land sparing and land sharing but I think in this debate a central point is missed out who gets to decide how the scarce land is to be used what are the processes by which decisions are going to be made and so on so before I talk a little bit on that question I do want to share with you where I stand on the debate I do believe that we need to move away from the dichotomies of sharing and land sharing and land sparing and seek of more integrated approach for many reasons I mean firstly of course the separation of agricultural intensification and conservation tends to gloss over the fact that agriculture itself offers a lot of scope for conservation there's issues of various seed varieties traditional seed varieties that knowledge systems local ecologies which agriculture contributes which need conserving then we know there are complementarities between across ecosystems between crop lines between forests between pastures and we see this in traditional practices of agroforestry in especially in Asia we see it in the dependence of small holders on forests for green manure for soil conservation for water for water management and we see it in emerging practices agroecological practices in Brazil where you have local scientists helping farmers to move in that direction which which match crops trees livestock and and poultry and I also believe we need this because nature of course doesn't know boundaries I mean we have administrative boundaries but nature's landscapes are different from administrators landscapes and we clearly need a mix of the two so so in that in that context I think we need to ask some hard questions for instance what is the mix of agricultural intensification and and landscape integration how do we bring the context into this because local ecologies differ local country capacities differ land scarcity is different there are priority differences in Asia as we know there's a huge pressure on land we've already reached the extensive margins of cultivation we're talking about intensification intensification and so on so the question is that both integration and intensification requires skill in is also skill intensive they're usually knowledge intensive and they're often capital intensive so can the agricultural systems extension systems knowledge systems actually reach the small farmers and specially women provide them with the skills that would make for a successful agricultural intensification and integration in environmentally sustainable ways I think that's a really key question because as came out in the plenary seventy to eighty percent of our farmers have cultivated two hectares and less and in in many countries more than fifty percent of the farmers happen to be women happen to be women who produce this is certainly true for large parts of Asia and Africa they produce a lot of the world's food but small holders in general and women in particular don't have access to the to the technologies the knowledge systems the water the land and of course connections with markets training programs bypass them experiments that are done on farmers fields are never done on women's fields so if these are high-precision precision practices how are we going to reach reach them and then I want to raise a deeper concern because that hasn't been mentioned who will have voice in integrated landscape planning whose priorities will prevail who will decide what to conserve and what to produce and this is embedded in the very deep social and economic inequalities and past structures I want to bring that centrally into it because the most disadvantaged tend to get out of the frame often we talk about building consensus but how do we build consensus across deeply divided communities now I'm not I'm not raising this because just as a pessimistic aspect but I'm raising it as a realist in order that we find solutions and I want to make a couple more points which is that such planning has to be bottom up not top down in order that these small producers feel a sense of ownership of the idea because that's the only way you're going to be able to sustain it and here we need to go go across beyond blueprints now just yesterday I downloaded there was a whole action plan African integrated landscape action plan with some of you have seen and I think it's a very important start but at the same time in political terms you know the word landscape is actually very politically neutral so it we need to talk about how do we how do marginalized communities actually engage with this and we seem to I think to some extent you've shied away in talking about the landscape approach from this aspect of embedded inequalities so in the Africa report for instance if I may just mention in an excellent report land grabbing the solution is put as setting standards for screening investments now the assumption is of course that the state is a neutral actor for screening and implementation you know that's not the not necessarily the case in many cases the state itself is complicit in land grabbing so there's a very nice way in which some of the grassroots people put it what if the fence itself wrecks the field if the water itself ignites the fire so where do we move from here I believe we need to introduce two concepts here the issue of empowerment and the issue of negotiation and how do we actually empower the smallholders women in particular in order that they are able to negotiate the terms on which they want to engage in these dialogues but there are many examples as a MST the landless workers movement in Brazil there is the conservation agriculture in southern Africa there are many examples in India where you have like thousands of women's groups who are doing farming collectively now they can form the basis of an empowered dialogue and so in a sense what I'm arguing is that on the landscape approach we need to have a political economy framework and it's really knitting the two together which perhaps we need to do in order to move forward to what we all want which is a world which is pro conservation pro poor and pro production thank you being I think I think you put the finger on something which I personally think is really really central to the landscape approach and that is that the approach is really a negotiation approach it's a process it's an approach to decision-making and those decisions needs to be local it is the multiple stakeholders with the multiple objectives on the ground that's really the core of the landscape approach then you can scale it up to a country level to that's a country's a landscape as well but the core of it is really what you talk about now this also means that having it bottom up means that we have to accept that the solutions those combined solutions will be diverse and they may not follow what we think through our intelligent design of different farming systems they may be completely different not crazy how does that fit into the to the research that we're doing on systems in the CGR are we are we allowing for the diversity of solutions yeah well first let me say that of course we all agree that agriculture is at the heart of human survival but there can be no agriculture when we destroy the environment and therefore we have to be very conscious that in assessing the productivity of agriculture it shouldn't be looked at just from the point of view of yield per hectare I think we've come to the point where agriculture needs to begin to think about what is your contribution for ecosystem services what is your contribution for nutrition in terms of quality you know these days when we talk about food security and talk about agriculture essentially we are only talking about the major global staples and a couple of days ago we were at a meeting in DC and sorry you lost your mic so I think you need to hold it or something yeah we were at a meeting in DC where we had probably been galley gave a wonderful presentation to show how policy globally when it comes to agriculture seems to be so focused on the few major staples rather than looking at you know the broader diversity of nutrient dense commodities that deal with nutrition but also that have the environmental concerns in mind so if we're going to do that we also have to recognize if we take the case of Africa major agricultural regions are located in important watersheds and centers of biodiversity and agriculture does not stay on its own there are linkages there are things from the uncultivated forest which influence what happens within our agricultural landscape and there are dangers within the agricultural landscape that can affect negatively what happens outside so it's really a new you know framework of thinking which has to be at the landscape level where we are able to see the the effect of agriculture on the wider ecosystem that agriculture is part of so coming down to a specific question I was asked by Peter in the context of the CGI are an effort has been made to actually create programs known as the systems integrated systems programs there is one on the humid tropics which I run there is one on the dry lands and there is one on the aquatic systems additional to that we also have programs that are focusing on things from the natural resource management perspective one on climate change one on forest trees and agroforestry and one on water land and ecosystems now the challenge is to make sure that these programs are not functioning as silos and that we can generate collaboration in terms of integrated actions and this is what brings in three key concepts when it comes to collaboration at a level of landscapes first of all the concept of co-location where we can co-locate a number of these initiatives in the same place so we can really look at the landscape dimensions and be able to study the trade-offs and the interactions across the different components the second dimension is the dimension of co-ordination and I think coordination is a key element if you're going to do any landscape work we've got to make sure that there is coordination across the different groups and the different actors and finally of course there is an issue of collaboration more and more we need to be able to find mechanisms where the agriculture cluster is working with the forest cluster is working with the environment cluster so that we can actually come out with some joint efforts which are aimed at producing this sustainable intensification that we all talk about so I would basically end by saying that two key concepts that we have heard a lot about this issue of climate smart agriculture it is absolutely common sense agriculture because if agriculture is going to continue into the future we've got to find mechanisms to make sure that we are taking into account not just from an adaptation perspective but also from a mitigation perspective how agriculture can be part of the solution and not just part of the problem that's that's one key element and the second element is really integrated landscape approaches making sure that we build those mechanisms all the way to the policy level to support how we can bring the landscape analysis into the concept of agricultural research itself and finally and critical is this whole dimension of engaging the communities through recognizing that the communities are part of this multi sectoral dimension we talk about so really coming out with mechanisms that gives voice to the communities to be able to determine the priorities and so for them to be part of whatever solution that I develop I think I'll thank you and that gives us just about enough time to come back to miss Minister Paul Garambida Manuel and I'm going to still on I'm going to come back to you with a question that is targeted a little bit to the cop and from everything we hear we are talking a lot about integrated solutions landscape approach we're talking about climate smart agriculture we're straddling different political agendas we have great political support in different agendas from from this climate week and also from other constitution from other constituencies fantastic now we want to go towards an integrated approach now we want to do landscape we want to do climate smart agriculture and my question is have we found a formula to bring these issues together into the negotiation have we finally found that path that will take agriculture into into the negotiations thank you thank you Peter for that very big and broad question but yeah I agree that that that what we should think is how what should we do to have the landscape approach as the main approach as the main strategy so let me take the three comments of Peter of Vina and Christian sorry Vina and when in question because I think that there are three very important topics that we should have into consideration Christian has raised an example the example of the coffee producer in Colombia and sometimes that kind of examples it is the low-hanging fruit to try to demonstrate that that integration it is possible and let me say one thing about of Peru in Peru probably most of you have already heard or had what it is our new proud the gastronomy and based on gastronomy you can't imagine how much we are creating relations between forest between communities between traditional practices between agro biodiversity that is why Peru it's up in a position in which for example we are discussing the EMOs because we feel proud we have felt proud about our gastronomy and the base of the agro biodiversity and that is why we are talking about conservation and how the natural protected areas are helping to have the raw material for our food so so sometimes it is good examples to trying to show the people that it is possible in Peru you know that yearly is organizing this very big fair called mistura that is becoming one of the most popular in Latin America it is really big five hundred thousand people yeah something like that in eight days that means that the people is connecting not only with the food with the plate but also with the producers with the product and with us with the ecosystems so sometimes it is the example my second reflection it is more related to what Vina has raised this old dichotomy no the old this old dilemma between conservation production among some other and my reflection is how much we should do to try and to avoid this dichotomy because for me for example how much the current way we are educating the young or the juice it is creating the problem if we maintain the idea of faculty of agronomy and faculty of forestry there are there's some way to integrate both do we seem that we should do something to put together or to bring some lecture from one to the other to try to sing in the future or to try and to have professional that are more able to interconnect that let me say that also in this dichotomy how much the traditional way that we have used to organize the government and the public sector are in the base on that dichotomy and I'm going to say something probably funny do we need a minister of agriculture and a minister of the environment or how can we do to put it together the forest with the environment and with the agriculture and fisheries and fisheries and fisheries for all yeah because that is that is in the base you can't imagine how much we are having debate with my colleague the minister of agriculture because the different approaches and that is not healthy and that is not going that is not creating the condition to have this in the integrating approach and that moves me also to the value for me the discussion about forest and also the discussion about landscape it is an issue of value it is the issue that the value of the forest and the agriculture the value of the culture the value of the traditional practices of the indigenous communities the value of the climate debate it is how can we create value in this integration and that is part probably the key issue of this formula to try to have this approach as the main strategy and when we see talk about the role of agriculture but how can we move the agriculture to have into consideration the role in the ecosystem services I think that through traditional practices it is a good way to sing on that for example in case of Peru the terraces the antennas the war waters are all traditional practices of agriculture that has had been had been developed because of the ecosystem considerations so so through that kind of going back to the traditional way of the agriculture we can create conditions to have more connection between the agriculture the ecosystem services and the forest for example in mistura this gastronomy for in Peru this year the organizer put or created an artificial and then to try to show to the people that that is the best way to maintain the ecosystem and to have more varieties of potatoes so so that is the connection that that we need to do and that is also related to what a Vina raise that the issue of empowerment empowerment and negotiation that I think that that is key and that is related to the value because the only way to empower people is when they recognize the value of things so so I think that that there are some elements for the discussion I think this has been a very interesting discussion and that we are going to create that the atmosphere to have this approach as part of the main debate it is very difficult for example what do you think Peter I am now asking to you or what does what does it means to have a forest declaration here in the summit when we're trying to have a landscape approach so how much or how does it means to maintain the traditional division or the dichotomy of different sectors or how should we do to have in the next summit or in the next cup a more strong statement about the landscape that is very key because it is the only way to move this discussion forward I know we have to let you go but I will respond with a question too and we can continue their conversation between between the rest of us and that is that there is a little bit of tension here because if we agree that integrated solutions are good we need to prove that the values are higher we need to prove that the local communities benefit from such and that they are in charge but there is a little bit of tension here also that if we too much challenge the existing institutional structure so it may fall back and therefore my sense is that it's great value to have a forest declaration it's great value to have an agriculture declaration the question more becomes how can we build on those existing structures and develop the integrated solution it's not either or I think we need to build on them that's my reply to your questions and I don't know if you have any final reflections on that and then no I think in these processes what we need to be is optimistic because our processes are processes that take time our processes that need to have into consideration of not only the science the research the politics the policies the rules the peoples so so so the only way to create integrated solution is with integral integral thinking so so I think that that is the way to have the landscape the formula for the landscape approach as a main strategy it is if we concierge all the possibilities all the ways to go through that kind of approach and really sorry that I'm leaving now I'm with the president still president of the steeling in New York so I'm going to be with him really sorry that I've been delayed and now I'm going early but that is a busy agenda we all appreciate your efforts we know that a lot depends on it and we really grateful to have had you here this morning and I think many of us will will continue to really work with you and for you to make up copper success in Lima so thank you and thank you and also thank you to give me the opportunity to be thank you to give me opportunity to be in this place with very very good friends and Christian and many other people and with all the people of C4 in the CEIR thank you very much it's great thank you I'm not taking the minister's place not yet but it's a good intensification I'm sure that how's your Spanish? I think I think we might have some some interest some questions from the floor at this point I think that's a good point to bring that in so microphone somewhere okay it's coming from the back let's start with Pedro at the frontier I think you will have a microphone in a second yeah I don't think I need it while they're recording they're recording people watching my video so we need that we need the proof what I am amazed at this business that forestry and agriculture are separate entities are we going back to the to the to the late 1980s when this happened when both eCraft and C4 joined the CGR and eCraft the World Agroforestry Center which I led during the 90s it's about exactly that it's about all this all this interactions between trees and crops and very much in the landscape there's a lot of very good work our people have done so I don't know there any present eCraft scientists here and actually I'm amazed that they're not but as a former DG I would I would say don't forget agroforestry it's happened and I think it's pretty decent track record let's take a few more comments from the floor my name is Don McCabe I'm a farmer from southwestern Ontario in Canada and I'm here today as the president so Conservation Council of Canada and I'm also vice president the interior perish by culture I fully appreciate the issue of a landscape approach but I also find some of the comments up here bordering on annoying the only reality of why staple crops are the only thing that have value right now is because that's what society has decided that's what the value is I also find it where are we at then and having society actually decide that they're going to value a landscape we have continuing issues of exploitation of land to build housing which is not considered to be an indirect land use all the farms that I have have Carolinian forest at the back they all have biodiversity attached to them I don't clear trees because I don't have to but I'm being labeled now as environmental degradation for political reasons of having these things split I also have to question Peter your comment about the challenging of institutions we don't have a horse and buggy club anymore because we went to cars so if the institutions can't change to catch up to where egg culture needs to be then do we need that institution because at the end of the day there's one large link here for everybody agriculture forestry and everything on curves in a watershed that it shares the same climate shed as the rest of the world we need leadership from our research community to help us help us put the value of what carbon is going back into this ground or what emissions are coming from it but we also need to come to a full understanding that for egg culture to succeed our emissions are going to have to grow but grow with less intensity and you're not going to do that from a standing old growth forest you're going to have to accept that they're going to be a constant emission source so right now I find the research communities excellent at helping draw the boxes I don't see you actually doing outreach to make things move because the civil society is willing to accept it has a role to pay in dealing with one landscape in paying for ecological goods and services we're going to continue to fill rooms like this and create more emissions while not creating real policy or movement I would hope that sooner or later we start to have a dialogue that involves the actual people on the ground to get this job done I appreciate very much what the institutions like this want to do but you're not growing either will you help us get to the issue of giving society a number to work with so we can get policies put through a lima to finalize in Paris please thank you very important comment let's I'll have our panelists think about that for a minute we'll take one more question from the floor I think somebody back on this they wanted to comment but just to make one quick remark on that it goes back to who's in charge and it goes back to how do we create the right policy conditions to so that those that are in charge can make decisions that they stand up for so I appreciate that comment can come back to to to the panel on it in a minute you get to think a little bit about it one one more comment from here thank you my name is Shinpei Murakami I am former from Japan maybe here is only my former so the I'd like to share some experience as the I've been working in the Bangladesh and Thailand around 13 years and then the today we are talking about the landscape and then about the there's a pro preservation or a pro the productivities and then the actually the farmers experience and then the movement in Thailand I've seen the 80s there is one movement which is we call integrated farming so that is the it takes place in the place of the called Isan which is the north east Thailand where the most of the farmer are doing rice cultivation prior the and then the it's a late fed area not so much good irrigation area there this the integrate farming has started one farmer start to digging the rice field about one hectare and then making the drainage and not drainage ditch and then make it the bank in the surroundings so with hard work he make the total area of the one hectare digging you know soil and then making the bank outside and inside in the water canal with the pond so the rice field is almost to the one one half of the you know total area become but he planted many trees first he planted many first growing like you know banana and then the papaya so as well as the many trees mango trees coconut trees and then the guava trees there are many kind of tropical trees they planted in the band and then the started the when the rainy season has started all rainwater is harvested there so he start to release the raising the fish in the pond and then when it grows into the growing up to the rice field that's fish goes to the inside of the rice it was called rice fish culture and then the they also raise the some kind of chickens on the pond and then the chicken the dungster drop to the the pond and it's also a feed for the fish so what happened in five to six years his farm it was only monoculture of the the rice farm only rain fate which is depends on the sky if good rain good harvest no good rain no harvest then now he has a only half of the you know at the 0.5 hectare he could get the same amount of the he used to have when the good rain and then the rain is always harvested it is a no concern for him the problem of the rain and then not only the good harvest but so many fishes in the dry season they you know harvest it and then sell it and so many trees and then tree when grows ecosystem come back so this is the integrated approach is very become popular in the Thailand and especially sustainable agriculture movement in Thailand is started from that one I think that's the there are many the farmers practice which is now we're talking about and then the for the we call about I am coming from the ACM farmers association I'm this from DC I get the chair of that one and I came to the ACM farmers association is the member of the global alliance of the climate smart agriculture so the here I came here as a farmer we are talking so many research things but the sometimes we found those topics are very far away from the farmer situation and the sometime we feel farmer has so many like that's the the minister from what he said that's the good practice of the traditional farming yes and then the that's the integrated farming is not depends on the only the traditional farming but the idea coming from farmers so I really appreciate if you here people in here the involved in the this research come to the you know real field and the learn from there and also advice your experience under your knowledge thank you I think that's a very good comment on the lines that farmers need to be in charge and that we have a diversity of solutions but how does that fit with the political agendas that we are all trying to follow our support so let's come back to the panel who is eager to say something for it being a number of comments on the governance and the rights issues okay well let me make three comments first on this relationship between forest and agriculture just want to remind people that there are many areas which don't have much of forest so if you take the landscape of South Asia then you find that for instance Pakistan has very little forest Bangladesh has rather concentrated pockets of forest India is a very diverse you have like barely two percent forest in the northwest where which is the which is the bread basket of the country and you have quite substantial forest 86 percent of the geographic area of some states in the northeast have forests so so I think we can't just depend on when we're talking about integrated landscapes we can't look at existing forests and see how do how does agriculture relate to that we have to move towards new solutions for instance the example of agroforestry now agroforestry means that you actually rebring the trees back into the landscape where they've disappeared what kinds of trees in what amounts how do you negotiate that I think these are all very valid and very significant questions now having raised that if you take the social landscape which is that the vast majority of farmers cultivate less than two hectares 80 percent have less than two hectares 70 percent in India have less than one hectare then they don't want to devote some part of their precious land to forest and some part to poultry and so on they say well we're going to just grow whatever crops bring us the most profit because that's going to bring us livelihood and food security is there a solution forward I do believe there is but that can come through institutions for instance consolidation cooperation so what you're seeing in some parts it's an area that I'm currently studying for instance in Kerala you have small groups of women coming together and and cooperating on farming there are many other examples in France I remember I visited and you have group farming where you have complex systems coexisting because the land area that even 15 hectares is not a bad piece of land to have if you want to have a landscape which is more complex multiple crops bit of poultry I found that in Brazil under the agroecology movement just 15 hectares 20 hectares and you could have that so some way of institutionally consolidating farms without losing your property rights to the farms and that I think is a way that we do need to perhaps think about more and move forward it is possible just one other small and this my final comment I in Rio we talked about Rio plus 20 green growth everybody's talking about green economy I do believe we need to distinguish between green growth and green development because it comes back to the issue of values that green growth can take place without any particular emphasis on equality on poverty or and social inclusion whereas green development does mean that you both conserve and that you include is that people have a right to improve well-being and I think sometimes that distinction helps because many governments in the south are and in the north are really so concerned about simply growth and then greening it with a bit of technology rather than the broader notion of green development green growth with equity is what Indonesia talks about but Christian Christian what about landscape landscape without forests how does that sound to a conservation biologist there are plenty of landscapes that don't forest there are many degraded lands that should have forest and things like agroforestry I mean let's not forget these marginal lands that for a whole bunch of reasons historically could be brought back and there are some areas natural ecosystems that don't have for us but it's certainly my concern is some of the key areas of forest that we have that are very important conservation and for services and for livelihoods we need to identify them and to make sure that we conserve some of these and part of the solution is going to be clearly the way we do the agriculture development and how where and how we do it is key and I fully agree that I mean a lot of it local practices engaging the local stakeholders where it's a small farmer in the Andes or a farmer in Ontario these are the people that are there working around and we need to do it but I think clearly some of these issues have to be thought of in a broader scale it's not just what you're doing there you the production as was just said in your farm will depend so much and in external factors rain climate change so many areas that are external and what you do there is going to have an impact outside and I think we need that's where the landscape is it's an issue of looking at your choices there I do think there's institutions there's policies on the markets I mean I think we're starting to see some interesting changes in markets that are starting to push production systems in a particular direction I mean we see in many of the commodities now we've been encouraged to see what's happening Brazil with soy I mean the fact that a whole bunch of companies and the big commodities trade like cardio will say zero deforestation soy and will take everything else out of the food chain what we've seen is the rate of deforestation motto grosso has decreased my board more than 50% I think it's the companies but it's the consumers ultimately I think we're seeing more for consumers making more choices demanding certain pressures paying some premiums and I think that's part of the solution but having said that I am not willing to put all my eggs in the basket of markets because I think there are choices that are longer term implications that are societal goods and where we do need governments and policies that are thinking of the greater good and future generation so I'm very hesitant about I think markets have a role to play but I also think we need governments and strong policies that are looking after those areas so quasi all these new technologies new ideas integrate the solutions from the bottom up that we're studying in the CG it's agroforestry is also other forms of integrations agro fisheries it's a whole range of technologies and the farming practices how do we take that to the political arena and make the politicians and the finance institutions understand yeah I think that that's a very important question because whatever we do if we are not able to do it in such a way that the political and the high policy level players are part of it we don't go really far so I think that's one of the challenges sometimes we declare victory too early when we stay within our own levels and we do our little bits of research you know we can show all the evidence scientifically that we are successful but I think we need to be able to define success from the point at which we are able to change the situation that we want to you know transform and to do that it will mean bringing together a whole cross section of sectors to be part of the the whole research development effort so in the context for instance of the human tropics program we have what we call the innovation platform approach or the research for development platform where for a particular locality you want to identify what are the critical actors that are necessary to bring about the ultimate change and those actors include the community it includes you know the NGO groups it includes the local policy makers and it includes also looking at who are the ultimate policy level you know people that have to be informed or involved so the whole idea of working together is to ensure that they can all help in the priority setting mechanisms and therefore when something comes out it doesn't take anybody by surprise I think we from the research spectrum need to do a lot more in making sure that we are adequately involving both the communities and the policy makers not to mention the private sector and the other groups that's why this multi-sectoral dimension is important since I have the floor let me also make a comment on the fact that I did mention in my first contribution that it is important that agriculture must see itself also as producing ecosystem services and I think the question that would be asked is how does that happen when you start going to how it's really about increasing the carbon stock of the system that we're using it's about bringing in the agroforestry dimensions bringing trees to the farm which everybody appreciates is a key element in there it's about getting communities and let me just give you one very quick example when Pedro and I used to work for aircraft and I had a project in southwestern Uganda which is a very hilly location and here was a situation where you have farmers across the slope and those down there they are biggest problem was the fact that boulders were coming from the upper elevations and coming down and some of them were very you know dangerous but when you go to the upper slope these people they have the trees and they have to take out the trees because that's what gives them the energy they need for doing various things and somehow there was no connection between the upper layer and the lower layer now through an initiative that was actually led by the aircraft team that working with the local national agroforestry groups they brought this community together and the community then began to look at what is it what is best for our community talking about landscape you know it's really that the the the technique of being able to bring all these communities together give them a platform to deliver it and then it's a question of really making some decisions and some hard choices on give and take basis and ultimately you are able to come up with a mechanism that is beneficial to both those on the upper slope as well as those on the lower slope so this is an example of the fact that it is really important that we don't just go in and zero in on one cluster of farmers and do things without considering the negative the externalities to the other you know sectors of the landscape but that we're able to bring the community together and explore these issues together and maybe on all levels from the cop negotiations to the individual farmers I think we have time for a couple of more comments from from the floor and then we have to round off Christopher and one more no more okay one more after that we we have a final short comment and then we're done Christopher please hi yeah my name does it work yeah my name is Christopher Martius I'm a principal scientist for climate change at C4 and and I want to make a point that that is bothering me bothering me for some time now we are all working and we are in agreement that we need integrated approaches that we need landscape approaches that we need to bring things that are divided because this this isolated pursuit of sectoral interest has has put us in the situation we are in in terms of poverty development issues climate issues degradation issues and so on but on the other hand we're always making the problem bigger and bigger by adding more on more layers and if you remember that Caesar said divide and conquer he didn't say integrated landscapes approaches and then conquer so can we learn something from that I think in order to make the problem tractable we have to make it smaller we have to put it in divided into little pieces we can tackle and we also have to consider that while we have certainly to build the analytical capacity to address these integrated problems we also have to to be aware of the fact that the word is divided there is no ministry of everything there are ministries of finance of forest of landscape of agriculture there's no ministry of landscape mostly so we need to I think we need to find a way and we need to make an effort of of developing integrated analysis but then break it down again into little pieces and chunks that can be digested by the sectoral entities that are still out there and they will be out there for a long time and maybe forever so we need to find a way of making it tractable again thank you that goes back to the comment of tension between existing structures and new solutions final comment I'm Chuck Rice at Kansas State University also a board member for CI I'm going to take a little bit different approach to your comment actually one group that we haven't thought about is the training of students and how we train those we tend to focus on training into a specialty agronomy soil science forestry ecology whatever and we tend to think about those little pieces and if we're going to integrate the landscape we got to think about how you diversify manage and diversify the landscape because you're not going to have zero emissions from a field you're not going to have zero runoff and so it's managed that landscape to capture those zero those emissions that whether it's sediment or gases or whatever but we don't train our students to think and we our disciplines have become sero-narrow so we need to think about how we train our students to work in teams to work with the ecologists that might be working the riparian zone to work with the agronomist that works on the field and that's part of the funding mechanism the policies how we train students but they we need to think about how we train those students to work in teams because they're going to be the ag advisors in the landscape managers or advising for the landscape and maybe there'll be policy makers I don't know okay thanks so maybe negotiation should be a topic in the agriculture curriculum okay we have very few minutes what's your one liner take-home message from from the session be now back to me firstly I think they're just two comments one is there only one okay only one and power and negotiate empower the disadvantage in order that they can negotiate and have scientists actually work with the most disadvantage farmers so you can have multi-disciplinarity I completely agree that we need to break down these silos but then have them work with farmers more directly and especially women negotiation cuisine I will use my last minute to basically follow up on initiatives that are being done to enhance this landscape approach and I like to show this document a reference was made to it this is the African landscape action plan which is a process that is led by the eco agriculture partners but which is really bringing together communities research groups forestry groups agriculture groups not necessarily to do everything by everybody you know but really to be able to understand the cross-cutting elements and be sensitive to where the trade-off analysis issues are so I will say more effort should go into moving forward on these type of initiatives so initiatives that bring together the landscapes yeah and again there's a little bit of negotiations in the Christian we need more spaces where we bring these communities together the various fields like this one thing since this is so focused on CG and the role of the CG I would really like to see the CG recognized by 2020 as a major leader in the environment that's meaning that word fundamentally gonna shape the future of the planet from the agriculture production system I think that's discussing the research framework in one of the other sessions maybe I'll go but I wish okay great I think we should give a big hand to our panel thank you very much for attending and I know that there are there is a housekeeping announcement which I have no clue what it is but this has to do with lunch I think who knows whoever knows has left so they're probably left for lunch already there is lunch I think it's downstairs no lunch yes yes there's a lunch okay the lunch are what we call grabbing goes so you can go downstairs and pick them up it's a box lunch there's probably different kinds of vegetarian and then you can take it in a network during this time with friends and colleagues thank you it's just right downstairs


The Center for Clinical Research team members are very specialized and hold over 200 years of clinical research experience combined. With all this expertise comes the ability to offer many diversified services, including study feasibility, regulatory and operational support, streamlined patient recruitment, quality insurance and compliance, and trial coordination. All types of trials are conducted at the Center for Clinical Research, ranging from medical devices to investigational products and therapies. Such types of investigational product and therapies range from gene to stem cell therapies and more.


Welcome to 30 Days of Kindness. We're going to share a new kindness prompt. Every day! These will be little acts of kindness we'll be challenging you to do. We might try these too. Yeah! We look forward to hearing how you got on. Leave a comment or a like. Today's Day 10. Pick a pupil and find little ways to acknowledge them. An order or a smile can make a big difference. Make a big difference. Big difference? Yeah. Say it again? Big difference. We hoped you liked today's prompt. We can't wait to hear how you get on. Leave a comment or a like. Comments make us smile. Good luck and see you tomorrow! Bye!