Carbon projects with smallholder farmers in developing countries have begun to emerge to take advantage of carbon-finance to support the broader benefits of climate-smart agriculture (Goldstein and Gonzalez 2014; Deshmukh, Sosis, and Pinjuv 2014). But problems remain with high costs of project development, risk management, and securing benefits for smallholder farmers (Shames, Buck, and Scherr 2011) Strengthening local institutional capacity in 4 KEY AREAS could increase long-term development benefits, reduce project costs and help initiatives to scale up (Shames, et al 2013).

1. 1. implement sustainable
farming practices
2. monitor on-farm carbon;
3. manage the carbon
payment; and
4. contribute to farmer and
community development
Stakeholders Assessed
Community members (women’s group)
Community members (mixed group)
CBI (mixed group)
Local government
Project staff (mixed group)
Tools Used
Self-reporting guides,
End-of-project questionnaire and
Group discussion guide
BUILDING INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY OF AGRICULTURAL CARBON PROJECTS
Participatory Action Research with Vi Agroforestry in Kenya
and ECOTRUST in Uganda
HOW TO STRENGTHEN LOCAL INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY?
Hypothesis
1. Build capacities of community-based intermediaries (CBIs)
2. Build local partnerships with government and NGOs
3. Support a more active role played by women
PAR was used to provide a platform for project managers to share experiences, develop a clearer
understanding of the challenges they face, jointly generate research questions, collaboratively
develop solutions, and track the impact of these efforts.
Each project implemented customized actions guided by 3 themes:
References
Deshmukh, Ian, Karin Sosis, and Guy Pinjuv. 2014. Eastern Africa Forest Carbon Projects Study. Washington, D.C.: USAID Forest Carbon, Markets and Communities
(FCMC) Program.
Goldstein, Allie, and Gloria Gonzalez. 2014. Turning over a New Leaf: State of the Forest Carbon Markets 2014. Washington, D.C.: Forest Trends’ Ecosystem Marketplace.
Shames, Seth, L.E. Buck, and S.J. Scherr. 2011. “Reducing Costs and Improving Benefits in Smallholder Agriculture Carbon Projects: Implications for Going to Scale.”
In Agriculture and Climate Change Mitigation, edited by E Wollenberg, A Nihart, M Tapio-Bistrom, and M Grieg-Gran. London, UK: Earthscan.
Shames, Seth, Ecoagriculture Partners, Quinn Bernier, and Moses Masiga. 2013. Development of a Participatory Action Research Approach for Four Agriculutural Car-
bon Projects in East Africa. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.
Carbon projects with smallholder farmers in developing countries have begun to emerge
to take advantage of carbon-finance to support the broader benefits of climate-smart agriculture
(Goldstein and Gonzalez 2014; Deshmukh, Sosis, and Pinjuv 2014).
But problems remain with high costs of project development, risk management, and securing
benefits for smallholder farmers (Shames, Buck, and Scherr 2011).
Strengthening local institutional capacity in 4 KEY AREAS could increase long-term
development benefits, reduce project costs, and help scale up initiatives (Shames, et al 2013).
PARTICIPATORY ACTION RESEARCH
MBALE, UGANDA
BUNGOMA, KENYA
Vi Agroforestry and the Western Kenya Agriculture Carbon Project
¾¾ Sustainable agricultural land management (SALM) practices using
Verified Carbon Standard (VCS)
Environmental Conservation Trust (ECOTRUST) and Trees for
Global Benefits (TFGB) program
¾¾ On-farm tree planting using the Plan Vivo system and standard
ACTIVITIES
1. Building the capacities of CBIs to train and recruit farmers
2. Engaging with local governments and other partners
3. Supporting women’s participation
4 KEY AREAS
Seth Shamesa
, Krista Heinera
, Martha Kapukhab
, Lilian Kigulic
, Moses Masigad
, Pauline Nantongo Kalundac
, Annet Ssempalac
,John Rechae
, Amos Wekesab
CAPACITY BUILDING LOCAL ENGAGEMENT WOMEN’S PARTICIPATION
Developed training
manuals and tools
Drafted local policy memos Focused outreach on
benefits important to
women
Organized and conducted
trainings for community-
based intermediaries
Trained government
extension officers
Supported CBI’s to identify,
recruit and train 1-2
women’s groups
¾¾ CBIs work well to recruit farmers and train on land-management tech-
niques, but lack the capacity now to move into management roles for
the technical ‘carbon’ elements of the project, such as monitoring and
payment.
¾¾ Involvement of the local government is essential and their role could
increase substantially, especially with carbon monitoring and payment.
¾¾ NGOs and private sector could play a larger role in providing training,
farm inputs, and markets for products
¾¾ Use of CBIs and standardized curriculum were effective in training and
engaging more farmers.
¾¾ Women’s participation was enhanced by emphasizing project benefits,
including women in project design, and making training accessible.
¾¾ Carbon payments alone do not provide sufficient incentives for farmer
participation, but can be helpful if effiicientally targeted.
¾¾ A shift from carbon project models to larger programs supported by lo-
cal and national policy is needed to effectively bring benefit to scale.
DISCUSSION
Building the training and recruitment capacities of CBIs
• Vi Agroforestry: 30 CBIs trained 4,178 farmers on SALM and recruited 1,833 new farmers
• ECOTRUST: 26 CBIs followed up with 299 farmers (who were previously mobilized) and
helped 59 farmers to register in the program
Influencing government through training and advocacy
• ECOTRUST and ViAgroforesty built the capacity of government extension officers
Enhancing women’s participation in the project
• Vi Agroforestry: 2,686 women trained and 1058 women recruited to the project
• ECOTRUST: 71 women trained and 10 women registered in the carbon project
• For ECOTRUST, women’s participation is restricted due to land ownership constraints
Strengthening community groups
• CBIs were able to connect community groups to external partners and strengthen their
organizations
Building partnerships
• Farmers developed informal partnerships with NGOs and government agencies to pro-
vide farm inputs and seedlings
Strengthening the community-based carbon monitoring system
• Training materials improved monitoring capacities of farmers and CBIs
• It is unlikely that farmers and CBIs will take on additional technical roles in the near fu-
ture
Distributing the carbon payment
• Vi Agroforestry: about 112 new groups adopted SALM practices and were paid an average
of USD 40 per group over a 2-year period
• ECOTRUST: 70 farmers have received first and second payments of about USD 75-100;
150 are anticipating first payment of about USD 40-60
Increased capacity for project staff
• Vi Agroforestry and ECOTRUST staff improved their own skills in giving trainings and
demonstrations, developing training materials, interacting with government officials, and
influencing policy
OUTCOMES
a
EcoAgriculture Partners, b
Vi Agroforestry, c
Environmental Conservation Trust of Uganda, d
ENR Associates, e
ERMCSD
This work was undertaken as part of the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agricul-
ture and Food Security (CCAFS), which is a strategic partnership of CGIAR and Future Earth.
This research was carried out with funding by the European Union (EU) and with technical sup-
port from the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
The views expressed in the document cannot be taken to reflect the official opinions of CGIAR, Fu-
ture Earth, or donors.