|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready... |
This simulation of satellites has now largely been fulfilled, but plans for more launches are in the works. This blanket of surveillance will monitor every square inch of the planet as systems are layered on. As the industry graphic above depicts, the payload for Technocrats lie in the “interventions.” ⁃ Patrick Wood, Editor.
How do you know when a small-scale farmer in Africa, Latin America or Asia has sufficiently adapted to longer droughts or shifts in traditional monsoon seasons?
The complexity of this question means it is often left unanswered, with funding for such adaptation in developing countries dropping to around just a quarter of total climate finance provided by developed countries.
Delegates gathering at the Bonn Climate Change Conference to prepare for this year’s UN climate talks will be anticipating such questions, with COP29 already dubbed the “finance COP”.
In Baku, Azerbaijan, later this year, countries are expected to discuss a new climate finance deal after reaching the target of $100 billion (€93.2bn) a year in finance for developing countries two years later than agreed.
Historically low-emitting countries across much of the Global South desperately need more financial support to improve their climate defences across key sectors such as agriculture.
Less than 1% of international climate finance was spent helping smallholder farmers adapt to climate change in 2021, with many forced to spend up to 40% of their own incomes to cope with floods, droughts and crop pests.
However, in addition to more finance, countries across Africa, Asia, and Latin America also need ways of measuring adaptation to direct investments more effectively.
The solution that works already exists
While efforts to transition to sustainable agriculture across Europe have sparked protests among farmers this year, adapting to the evolving impacts of climate change is already a matter of survival for those in the Global South.
One emerging solution is an adaptation index, which scores resilience to climate shocks to highlight where finance for climate adaptation is most needed. Such models can quantify levels of adaptation and preparedness, giving policymakers, development agencies, investors, and donors clear guidance on where and how to invest in adaptation finance.
Water scarcity is the most common climate risk for crop farmers in Guatemala and Honduras across the different commodities.
Adaptation indices, developed at a country or commodity level, complement other work to consolidate climate data and research, such as CGIAR’s Africa Agriculture Adaptation Atlas, which provides interactive data insights and forecasts.
This new methodology is already providing actionable insights to direct adaptation funding and have the best chance of increasing the resilience of some of the world’s most vulnerable communities.
Over the past two years, the first-if-its-kind Adaptation Equivalency Index (AEI) has been developed for Guatemala and Honduras by Heifer International, Conservation International and local partners, supported by the Global Environment Facility. Guatemala and Honduras have both ranked among the top 10 countries most affected by climate change over the past decade, with heavy rains, floods, droughts and hurricanes becoming more frequent and affecting agriculture.
The index ranks the adaptation levels of the countries’ major agricultural commodities: spices, cacao and coffee.
Evidence-based investment means tangible impact
What makes this index novel is that it starts off with the farmers themselves, identifying the real-world climate threats that producers are already experiencing and anticipating, as well as their capacity to adapt.
This work has already uncovered the fact that water scarcity is the most common climate risk for crop farmers in Guatemala and Honduras across the different commodities.
Whatever. Another threat. Another POS solution.
What people should be focusing on is the erupting meteor showers, the recent moon hits and our path through it all. NO government is ever going to tell you that our planet and we are on a brittle, rocky path through space that will likely produce some serious energies along the way. These will surely affect the population (negative or positive?) and every living thing on earth. My friend’s BFR theory is picking up speed in potential every day. (Big F’ing Rock)
But no, it’s this stupid crap, instead.
Hayek warned us long ago of such management madness in “The Counter-Revolution of Science”, “The Road to Serfdom”, and other writings.
Who would have guessed water to be a critical issue? I’m still trying to contain my surprise. The article seems divorced from its title, but I can’t be overly critical, as I often range beyond topic when commenting.
Your link to the original article takes me to a completely different article than the one posted here. Could you please post the correct link?
Thanks