What Is Climate Smart Agriculture?

Agriculture (USDA)Business News/Analysis Farming/Growing Federal Regulation Feedstock Feedstocks Field/Orchard/Plantation Crops/Residues Forestry/Wood/Residues/Waste Infrastructure International Opinions Policy R & D Focus Sustainability

July 12, 2024

Print This Article Share it With Friends

by Olivia Messerges and Trent Ford (farmdoc daily) As the United States agricultural system faces the challenges of feeding a growing population, adapting to climate change, and reducing environmental consequences, the concept of climate-smart agriculture (CSA) was established as a comprehensive strategy to help address these issues. However, no standardized framework exists to assess if CSA practices produce the desired benefits. This article calls for developing a consistent, widely applicable, and standardized framework to assess what makes a specific agricultural system or practice “climate-smart” and analyzes agroforestry and prescribed grazing within said framework.

...

Therefore, a heightened focus on sustainable agriculture systems is necessary to guarantee food security, improve environmental health, and respond to climate change; the concept of CSA intends to contribute to addressing this ultimate challenge.

Agricultural systems and practices referred to as CSA are assumed to address at least two of the interconnected challenges of feeding a growing population, adapting to climate change, and reducing environmental harm (The World Bank, 2024).

...

Many organizations have broadly defined CSA, including the World Bank, the FAO, and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). These definitions are connected by the central tenets of (1) increasing agricultural productivity, (2) enhancing agricultural resilience, and (3) reducing GhG emissions (The World Bank, 2024; FAO, 2024; USDA Northeast Climate Hub, n.d.).

...

A standardized framework would also enable producers, policymakers, and researchers to consistently compare the effectiveness, tradeoffs, and implementation barriers of various CSA systems and practices.

...

Agroforestry Discussion

When analyzing agroforestry systems and its five practices (alley cropping, riparian forest buffers, silvopasture, windbreaks, and forest farming) through the three-pillar CSA framework, strong scientific evidence supports that the system increases productivity, enhances adaptation, and reduces emissions (USDA National Agroforestry Center, n.d.a).

...

By using the unique advantages of each agroforestry practice and addressing their respective limitations, stakeholders can collaborate toward building resilient and sustainable agricultural systems that proactively address climate change, while enhancing productivity and environmental stewardship.

Prescribed Grazing Discussion

The three-pillar framework is also applied to prescribed grazing, where livestock from several herds are combined and rotated among different pastures to provide a “rest period for the pastures when the cattle are in a different pasture” (USDA NRCS, n.d.a).

...

Overall, prescribed grazing has the potential to reduce environmental impacts from the livestock sector, but the scientific literature does not adequately support the assumptions of prescribed grazing management objectives as CSA.

Conclusion

CSA is a promising paradigm for addressing environmental challenges by increasing productivity, enhancing resilience, and reducing emissions. However, the definition and assessment of CSA practices lack standardization, hindering their widespread adoption and effective implementation. Developing a standardized CSA framework for assessing systems and practices is crucial for evaluating their effectiveness, comparing different approaches, and guiding decision-making processes and resource allocation. The Growing Climate Solutions Act (GCSA) and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) gives the USDA some authority to govern the CSA framework; however further development is needed to create a common criterion for stakeholders to assess the climate-smart attributes of agricultural systems and practices (GCSA, 2021; IRA 2022).

By applying the consistent three-pillar framework, we can better understand the potential of CSA practices in addressing climate change and promoting sustainable agriculture. Our initial assessment revealed that a significant body of scientific research supports that agroforestry accomplishes many of the CSA goals when properly implemented and managed; however, the benefits of prescribed grazing lack scientific consensus and require further research. It is important to note that for both agroforestry and prescribed grazing, the effectiveness of the systems is dependent on site-specific conditions and management. READ MORE

References

Baker, E., & Saha, S. (2018, April 14). Forest farming in Georgia, United States: Three potential crops. Annals of Agrarian Science, 16(3), 304–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aasci.2018.04.003

Ballesteros-Possu, W., Brandle, J., & Schoeneberger, M. (2017, April 26). Potential of windbreak trees to reduce carbon emissions by agricultural operations in the US. Forests, 8(5), 138. https://doi.org/10.3390/f8050138

Bishaw, B., Soolanayakanahally, R., Karki, U., & Hagan, E. (2022, March 17). Agroforestry for sustainable production and resilient landscapes. Agroforestry Systems, 96(3), 447–451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-022-00737-8

Bertrand, S., Roberts, A. S., & Walker, E. (2020, May 3). The Climate and Economic Benefits of Rotational Livestock Grazing. https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/the-climate-and-economic-benefits-of-rotational-livestock-grazing

Briske, D.D. [ed]. 2011. Conservation Benefits of Rangeland Practices: Assessment, Recommendations, and Knowledge Gaps. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/cmis_proxy/https/ecm.nrcs.usda.gov%3A443/fncmis/resources/WEBP/ContentStream/idd_60378378-0000-CA16-8392-8B6D6B084DFF/0/Conservation+Benefits+of+Rangeland+Practices.pdf

Derner, J. D., Smart, A. J., Toombs, T. P., Larsen, D., McCulley, R. L., Goodwin, J., Sims, S., & Roche, L. M. (2018). Soil Health as a transformational change agent for US Grazing Lands Management. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 71(4), 403–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2018.03.007

Conant, R. T., Cerri, C. E., Osborne, B. B., & Paustian, K. (2017, November 1). Grassland management impacts on soil carbon stocks: A new synthesis. Ecological Applications, 27(2), 662–668. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1473

Effert-Fanta, E. L., Fischer, R. U., & Wahl, D. H. (2019, July 2). Effects of riparian forest buffers and agricultural land use on macroinvertebrate and Fish Community Structure. Hydrobiologia, 841(1), 45–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-019-04006-1

Environmental Protection Agency. (2024, June 5). Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. United States Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions

Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (2013). Climate-Smart Agriculture Sourcebook. United Nations.https://www.fao.org/climate-smart-agriculture-sourcebook/en/

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2024). Climate-Smart Agriculture. Retrieved 2024, April 23, from https://www.fao.org/climate-smart-agriculture/en/

Garrett, Harold. E., Jose, S., & Gold, M. A. (2022). North American Agroforestry. Wiley. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/North+American+Agroforestry%2C+3rd+Edition-p-9780891183778

Growing Climate Solutions Act of 2021, Publ. L. No 117-27. Stat. 1251 (2021). https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1251

Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Public Law No: 117-169. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5376/text

Krall, M., & Roni, P. (2022, November 23). Effects of livestock exclusion on stream habitat and aquatic biota: A review and recommendations for implementation and monitoring. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 43(2), 476–504. https://doi.org/10.1002/nafm.10863

Jose, S., & Dollinger, J. (2019, February 7). Silvopasture: A sustainable livestock production system. Agroforestry Systems, 93(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-019-00366-8

Nelson, C.J. (ed.) 2012. Conservation Outcomes from Pastureland and Hayland Practices: Assessment, Recommendations, and Knowledge Gaps. Allen Press, Lawrence, Kansas. https://nrcs.usda.gov/publications/ceap-GrazingLands-2012-ConservationOutcomesPasturelandHaylandPractices.pdf

Parker, G. (2022, June 2). Q&A: How the Savanna Institute is Helping Agroforestry Thrive in the Midwest. Environmental and Energy Study Institute. Retrieved 2024, April 23, from https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/qa-how-the-savanna-institute-is-helping-agroforestry-thrive-in-the-midwest

Pent, G. J. (2020, April 27). Over-yielding in temperate silvopastures: A meta-analysis. Agroforestry Systems, 94(5), 1741–1758. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-020-00494-6

Russell, J. R., & Bisinger, J. J. (2015, February 19). Forages and pastures symposium: Improving soil health and productivity on grasslands using managed grazing of livestock. Journal of Animal Science, 93(6), 2626–2640. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-8787

Schechinger, A. (2024, February 28). Many newly labeled USDA climate-smart conservation practices lack climate benefits. Environmental Working Group. https://www.ewg.org/research/many-newly-labeled-usda-climate-smart-conservation-practices-lack-climate-benefits

Schieltz, J. M., & Rubenstein, D. I. (2016, November 11). Evidence based review: Positive versus negative effects of livestock grazing on wildlife. what do we really know? Environmental Research Letters, 11(11), 113003. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/11/113003

Schultz, R. C., Isenhart, T. M., Simpkins, W. W., & Colletti, J. P. (2004, July). Riparian forest buffers in agroecosystems – lessons learned from the Bear Creek watershed, Central Iowa, USA. Agroforestry Systems, 61–62(1–3), 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:agfo.0000028988.67721.4d

Smith, M. M., Bentrup, G., Kellerman, T., MacFarland, K., Straight, R., Ameyaw, Lord, & Stein, S. (2021, December 11). Silvopasture in the USA: A systematic review of Natural Resource Professional and producer-reported benefits, challenges, and Management Activities. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment; Environment, 326, 107818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107818

The World Bank. (2024, February 26). Climate-Smart Agriculture. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/climate-smart-agriculture

Trozzo, K. E., Munsell, J. F., Chamberlain, J. L., Gold, M. A., & Niewolny, K. L. (2021, May 6). Forest farming: Who wants in? Journal of Forestry, 119(5), 478–492. https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvab023

Udawatta, R. P., Kremer, R. J., Nelson, K. A., Jose, S., & Bardhan, S. (2014, September 14). Soil quality of a mature alley cropping agroforestry system in temperate North America. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 45(19), 2539–2551. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2014.932376

United States Department of Agriculture National Agroforestry Center (n.d.a). Agroforestry Practices. United States Department of Agriculture United States Forest Service. Retrieved 2024, April 23, from https://www.fs.usda.gov/nac/practices/index.shtml

United States Department of Agriculture National Agroforestry Center. (n.d.b). NRCS Conservation Practice Standards for Agroforestry. United States Department of Agriculture United States Forest Service. Retrieved 2024, April 23, from https://www.fs.usda.gov/nac/practices/conservation-practice-standards.shtml

United States Department of Agriculture United States Northeast Climate Hub. (n.d.). The role of Climate-Smart Agriculture in climate adaptation and mitigation in the Northeast. USDA Climate Hubs. Retrieved 2024, April 23, from https://www.climatehubs.usda.gov/hubs/northeast/topic/role-climate-smart-agriculture-climate-adaptation-and-mitigation-northeast

United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service Financial Assistance Program Data Download. (2024, April 1). Farmers.gov. Retrieved 2024, July 2, from https://www.farmers.gov/data/financial-assistance-download

United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. (n.d.a). Grazing in Illinois. Retrieved 2024, April 23, from https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/conservation-basics/conservation-by-state/illinois/grazing-in-illinois#education

United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. (n.d.b). Prescribed grazing (ac.) (528) conservation practice standard. United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. Retrieved 2024, April 23, from https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/resources/guides-and-instructions/prescribed-grazing-ac-528-conservation-practice-standard

Wolz, K. J., & DeLucia, E. H. (2018, November 9). Black Walnut Alley cropping is economically competitive with row crops in the Midwest. Ecological Applications, 29(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1829

Related articles