Agriculture in developing countries must undergo a significant transformation in order to meet the related challenges of achieving food security and responding to climate change. Projections based on population growth and food consumption patterns indicate that agricultural production will need to increase by at least 70 percent to meet demands by 2050. Most estimates also indicate that climate change is likely to reduce agricultural productivity, production stability and incomes in some areas that already have high levels of food insecurity. Developing climate-smart agriculture is thus crucial to achieving future food security and climate change goals. This seminar describe an approach to deal with the above issue viz. Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) and also examines some of the key technical, institutional, policy and financial responses required to achieve this transformation. Building on cases from the field, the seminar try to outlines a range of practices, approaches and tools aimed at increase the resilience and productivity of agricultural product systems, while also reducing and removing emissions. A part of the seminar elaborates institutional and policy options available to promote the transition to climate-smart agriculture at the smallholder level. Finally, the paper considers current gaps and makes innovative suggestion regarding the combined use of different sources, financing mechanism and delivery systems.

1. 1
ABBREVIATION
CSA- Climate Smart Agriculture
CSV- Climate Smart Village
CSP- Climate Smart Practice
GHG- Green House Gas
CRA- Climate Resilient Agriculture
CCAFS- Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security
CGIAR- Consultative Group for International Agriculture Research
NAPCC- National Action Plan on Climate Change
NMSA- National Missions for Sustainable Agriculture
CIMMYT- International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center
ICT- Information and Communication Technology
IFFCO- Indian Farmers Fertilizer Cooperative Limited
ICAR- Indian Council of Agricultural Research
VCRMC- Village Climate Risk Management Committees
FAO- Food and Agricultural Organization
UN- United Nation
GoI- Government of India

2. 2
CLIMATE SMART AGRICULTURE: AN APPROACH TO SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
*Shalini Pandey
Research Scholar
MPUAT, Udaipur
E-mail: shalinipandey46@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT
Agriculture in developing countries must undergo a significant transformation in order to meet the related
challenges of achieving food security and responding to climate change. Projections based on population
growth and food consumption patterns indicate that agricultural production will need to increase by at least
70 percent to meet demands by 2050. Most estimates also indicate that climate change is likely to reduce
agricultural productivity, production stability and incomes in some areas that already have high levels of
food insecurity. Developing climate-smart agriculture is thus crucial to achieving future food security and
climate change goals. This seminar describe an approach to deal with the above issue viz. Climate Smart
Agriculture (CSA) and also examines some of the key technical, institutional, policy and financial responses
required to achieve this transformation. Building on cases from the field, the seminar try to outlines a range
of practices, approaches and tools aimed at increase the resilience and productivity of agricultural product
systems, while also reducing and removing emissions. A part of the seminar elaborates institutional and
policy options available to promote the transition to climate-smart agriculture at the smallholder level.
Finally, the paper considers current gaps and makes innovative suggestion regarding the combined use of
different sources, financing mechanism and delivery systems.
Key Words: Climate Change, Agriculture, Climate Smart Agriculture, Sustainable Development.
INTRODUCTION
Agriculture faces some stiff challenges ahead. It has to address the fact that almost one billion people go to
bed hungry every day, while more than two billion people will be added to the global population by 2050. In
addition, food consumption patterns are changing as the average person in the world gets richer and
consumes more food and more meat. There is increased competition for land, water, energy, and other inputs
into food production. Climate change poses additional challenges to agriculture, particularly in developing
countries. At the same time, many current farming practices damage the environment and are a major source
(19–29%) of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Farms emitted 6 billion ton of GHGs in 2011,
or about 13 percent of total global emissions. That makes the agricultural sector the world’s second-largest
emitter, after the energy sector (which includes emissions from power generation and transport). Most farm-
related emissions come in the form of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O). Cattle belching (CH4) and
the addition of natural or synthetic fertilizers and wastes to soils (N2O) represent the largest sources, making
up 65 percent of agricultural emissions globally. Smaller sources include manure management, rice
cultivation, field burning of crop residues, and fuel use on farms. Top ten countries with the largest
agricultural emissions in 2011 were (in descending order): China, Brazil, United States, India, Indonesia,
Russian Federation, Democratic Republic of Congo, Argentina, Myanmar, and Pakistan. Together, these
countries contributed 51 percent of global agricultural emissions. From 1990 to 2010, global agricultural

3. 3
emissions increased 8 percent. They are projected to increase 15 percent above 2010 levels by 2030, when
they will amount to nearly 7 billion ton per year. These increases are mainly driven by population growth
and changes in dietary preferences in developing economies. Agricultural emissions growth will be greatest
in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, which will account for two-thirds of the increase in overall food demand
over first half of the 21st Century.
Climate-smart agriculture is a sort of overview concept originally put forth in 2010 by the UN’s Food and
Agriculture Organization. Up until now it’s been a bit vague, a general idea about adjusting all forms of
agriculture (“farms, crops, livestock, aquaculture, and capture fisheries”) to better adapt to a changing
climate. By climate smart, it mean agriculture that sustainably increases productivity and resilience to
environmental pressures, while at the same time reduces greenhouse gas emissions or removes them from the
atmosphere, because we cannot ignore the fact that agriculture is itself a large emitter of greenhouse gases.
It is also known as Climate Resilient Agriculture (CRA). CRA means the incorporation of adaptation,
mitigation and other practices in agriculture which increases the capacity of the system to respond to various
climate related disturbances by resisting damage and recovering quickly. Such perturbations and
disturbances can include events such as drought, flooding, heat/cold wave, erratic rainfall pattern, long dry
spells, insect or pest population explosions and other perceived threats caused by changing climate.
CSA is an approach that has recently achieved much prominence, given the adaptation and mitigation
challenges facing humanity. CSA is defined by three objectives: firstly, increasing agricultural productivity
to support increased incomes, food security and development; secondly, increasing adaptive capacity at
multiple levels (from farm to nation); and thirdly, decreasing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing
carbon sinks. Since the relative priority of each objective varies across locations, with for example greater
emphasis on productivity and adaptive capacity in low-input smallholder farming systems in least developed
countries, an essential element of CSA is identifying potential synergies and trade-offs between objectives.
CSA integrates climate change into the planning and implementation of sustainable agriculture and informs
priority-setting.
In short, it is the ability of the system to bounce back. Climate resilient agriculture includes an in-built
property in the system for the recognition of a threat that needs to be responded to, and also the degree of
effectiveness of the response. CRA will essentially involve judicious and improved management of natural
resources viz., land, water, soil and genetic resources through adoption of best bet practices.
Climate-smart agriculture sustainably helps in
 increases agricultural productivity,
 builds resilience in food production systems and
 Reduces greenhouse gas emission.
A variety of climate-smart practices already exist and are being used in some places, providing examples that
could be more widely implemented in developing countries, as highlighted in an FAO report prepared in
advance of the Cancun conference.

4. 4
CSA practices and technologies adopted include -
 Improved crop varieties for higher yield
 Varieties suitable to cope with drought
 Excess water or high temperature
 Laser land leveling
 practicing minimum tillage by using zero tiller or a happy seeder
 nutrient management by using green seeker
 managing irrigation by using tensiometer
 accessing weather information through SMS
 Residue retention,
 Site specific nutrient management,
 Legume integration and
 Cropping system diversification.
 Use of solar pump
 Use of crop sensor called a Green Seeker to assess crop health,
 Use of a mobile phone app helps to calculate how much fertilizer to apply throughout the growing
season.
NEED OF CSA
The Indian agricultural production system faces the daunting task of having to feed 17.5 percent of the global
population with only 2.4 per cent of land and 4 per cent of the water resources at its disposal. With the
continuously degrading natural resource base compounded further by global warming and associated climate
changes resulting in increased frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, “business as usual”
approach will not be able to ensure food and nutrition security to the vast population as well as
environmental security (the need of the hour). The challenge is formidable because more has to be produced
with reduced carbon and water footprints. To achieve this task of paving the way for climate smart
agriculture we need to take several measures that will have enabling policies, institutions and infrastructure
in place and the farming community be better informed and empowered with necessary resources.
The world's population is expected to surpass 9 billion people by 2050, which will require an estimated 70
per cent increase in global agricultural production. At the same time, climate change is expected to have
multiple impacts on agricultural productivity and rural incomes in areas that are already experiencing high
levels of food insecurity.
Climate change threatens to undo years of progress achieved in agricultural development, with the most
severe consequences falling on developing countries and the poor. CSA can ensure agricultural development
and food security are not compromised. Climate change simulation models indicate broad trends of warmer,
wetter climate with more marked seasonality, and more unpredictable weather events that affect agriculture
directly and indirectly.
As a result, climate change is affecting crop yields, especially at low latitudes. Climate change is also
affecting nutritional quality of food – C3 grains and legumes grown at elevated CO2 concentrations have
lower levels of zinc and iron. Climate change impacts on meat and fish production will also affect human

5. 5
nutritional balance. Climate change is affecting marine fisheries – many species are moving away from the
equator to cooler waters. Livestock too is affected – with decline in pasture productivity; this will lead to
decline in meat and milk production. Given the large population in the Asia-Pacific region, with region-wide
poverty, the number of people affected by climate change will be much higher than in other regions. To
overcome the impact of climate change, an array of interventions for adaptation and mitigation has been
tested. Specific adaptation measures include: improved crop varieties and livestock and fish breeds, simple
adjustments to land, crop and livestock management, more efficient use of water and energy for food
production, better weather forecasts and timely provision of such data to farmers, and sustaining ecosystem
services of forests and water sources. Likewise, mitigation of emissions or sequestering carbon can be
achieved through soil management, livestock management, improved fertilizer management, etc.
Overall, being climate-smart, as illustrated by the livestock sector, entails integrating various aspects of stock
breeding and selection, animal health and disease management, grassland and feed management, and manure
management. Practicing CSA is often considered a “no-regrets” strategy in that its benefits of sustainable
improvements in agriculture will accrue even if climate change impacts turn out not to happen or be as
severe as expected. Further, it is important to consider climate-smart management of agriculture within a
broad socio ecological context, recognizing that climate change is one of the many drivers of change
influencing the agricultural sector. The CGIAR Research Program (CRP) on Climate Change, Agriculture
and Food Security (CCAFS) is piloting projects such as “climate-smart” villages to deal with climate change
in a more holistic manner. The research is now being revised to address climate change as a cross-cutting
issue to be addressed in meeting the challenges of reducing poverty, improving food and nutrition security,
and improving natural resource systems and ecosystem services. Climate change is global, and response to
its impacts must be universal.
Poor management practices in the rice-wheat cropping systems in the Indo-Gangetic Plains region for almost
five decades have resulted in environmental degradation throughout the region. Today in northwest India,
combine harvesting of wheat is common practice (> 70% area), leaving large amounts (> 5 t ha-1) of crop
residues in the fields. In the northwestern states of Punjab and Haryana–once the heartland of the Green
Revolution–farmers burn 30 million tons of crop residues annually, leading to “smoke, release of greenhouse
gases, loss of plant nutrients and severe effects on human health,” according to Rajbir Singh, Principal
Scientist at ICAR who spoke at the event.
CONCEPT OF CLIMATE-SMART AGRICULTURE
If trends in human diet and waste in food systems remain unchecked, food production would have to increase
by about 70% to feed an estimated 9 billion people by 2050, with unprecedented consequences for the
environment and society. The food price spikes of recent years have reinforced awareness of obvious links
between political and economic stability and food security. As a consequence, agricultural development is
now the focus of renewed attention in both the research and policy communities. In describing tensions
between maximizing global agricultural productivity, increasing resilience of agricultural systems in the face
of climate change and mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from agriculture, the term climate-smart
agricultural development was first used in 2009. A year later, at the First Global Conference on Agriculture,
Food Security and Climate Change at Hague, the concept of climate-smart agriculture (CSA) was presented
and defined as agriculture that “sustainably increases productivity, enhances resilience, reduces/removes
greenhouse gas emissions, and enhances achievement of national food security and development goals”. This

6. 6
definition represented an attempt to set a global agenda for investments in agricultural research and
innovation, joining the agriculture, development and climate change communities under a common brand.
Drawing on this original framing, CSA has been applied to diverse aspects of agriculture, ranging from field-
scale agricultural practices to food supply chains and food systems generally. Beyond agricultural practices
and outcomes, a wide array of institutions, policies, finance, safety nets, capacity-building and assessment
have all been identified as enabling CSA. Following the Second Global Conference on Agriculture, Food
Security and Climate Change in Hanoi in 2012, the recently published Climate-Smart Agriculture
Sourcebook further advanced the concept with the intention of benefiting primarily smallholder farmers and
vulnerable people in developing countries.
Building on this brief outline of the concept, in this article we first lay out major implications and
shortcomings of what CSA means in practice. We then describe the challenges we are facing in assessing our
trajectories toward long-term safe operating spaces of social-ecological systems for humanity within
planetary and local boundaries and suggest an agenda for immediate action required to step up to meet the
challenges.
Climate-smart agriculture encompasses virtually any agricultural practice
Although in principle only agricultural practices that encompass all components of CSA should be branded
as “climate-smart,” the term has been used very liberally because it is unclear how the different dimensions
interact. Therefore, virtually any agricultural practice that improves productivity or the efficient use of scarce
resources can be considered climate-smart because of the potential benefits with regard to food security,
even if no direct measures are taken to counter detrimental climate effects. In addition, virtually any
agricultural practice that reduces exposure, sensitivity or vulnerability to climate variability or change (for
example, water harvesting, terracing, mulching, drought-tolerant crops, index insurances, communal actions)
are also climate-smart because they enhance farmers’ ability to cope with weather extremes. Likewise,
agricultural practices that sequester carbon from the atmosphere (for example, agroforestry, minimum
tillage), reduce agricultural emissions (for example, manure management, biogas plants, reduced conversion
of forests and rangeland) or improve resource use efficiency (for example, higher productivity crop and
livestock breeds, improved crop management and animal husbandry) can all be considered climate-smart
because they contribute to slowing the rate of climate change. CSA has been a powerful concept to direct a
focus on the climate change–agriculture nexus and has united the agriculture, climate change and
development communities under one brand. Almost any agricultural practice or outcome currently qualifies
as climate-smart, however, suggesting that CSA is a triple-win for all without regrets, losers and trade-offs.
Thus, CSA can easily be appropriated for a wide range of even conflicting agendas.
CLIMATE SMART AGRICULTURE IN INDIA
Climate change and its variability are emerging as the major challenges influencing the performance of
Indian agriculture. Long-term changes in shifting weather patterns result in changing climate, which threaten
agricultural productivity through high and low temperature regimes, increased rainfall variability, and rising
sea levels that potentially deteriorate coastal freshwater reserves and increase risk of flooding. Climate
change (and global warming) impacts all sectors of human life. Agriculture is particularly vulnerable to it.

7. 7
Each year one or the other part in the country is affected by droughts, floods, cyclones, hailstorm, frost and
other climatic events. The fourth IPCC report clearly brought out the global and regional impacts of
projected climate change on agriculture, water resources, natural eco-systems and food security. Among the
several highly populated regions of the world, South Asia is categorized as one of the most vulnerable.
Although climate change impacts are being witnessed all over the world, countries like India are more
vulnerable in view of the huge population dependent on agriculture, excessive pressure on natural resources
and poor coping mechanisms.
India has already started development and inclusion of climate change adaptation polices in various sectors.
The National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) of India identifies eight core missions that promote
various climate smart interventions in agriculture and allied sectors. For example, National Missions for
Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA) and National Mission on Strategic Knowledge for Climate Change aim to
support climate change adaptation in agriculture through the promotion of climate-smart practices and
technologies across the country. State-level climate change adaptation plans in India focus on addressing the
existing, as well as future, challenges of climate change and take actions to reduce the associated risks and
vulnerabilities.
The National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) of India
On June 30, 2008, GOI released India’s first National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) outlining
existing and future policies and programs addressing climate mitigation and adaptation. The plan identifies
eight core “national missions” running through 2017.
There are Eight National Missions which form the core of the National Action Plan, representing multi-
pronged, long-term and integrated strategies for achieving key goals in the context of climate change. These
missions are-
 National Solar Mission
 National Mission for Enhanced Energy Efficiency
 National Mission on Sustainable Habitat
 National Water Mission
 National Mission for Sustaining the Himalayan Ecosystem
 National Mission for a "Green India"
 National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture
 National Mission on Strategic Knowledge for Climate Change
CLIMATE-SMART VILLAGES (CSVs)
CGIAR (Consultative Group for International Agriculture Research) Research Program on Climate Change,
Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) is working with a vast range of partners to test a range of
interventions in climate-smart villages. The project launched in 2011 with 15 climate-smart villages in West
Africa, East Africa and South Asia. Additional villages are now being chosen in Latin America and
Southeast Asia. It aims to create 1,000 so-called climate smart villages across six Indian states including
Bihar, Haryana, Punjab and Gujarat.

8. 8
CSV is a model of local actions for climate risk management in farming communities that promote
adaptation, build resilience to climate stresses, and enhance food security. Researchers, local organizations,
farmers, and policymakers, collaborate to select the most appropriate technologies and institutional
interventions based on global knowledge and local conditions to enhance productivity, increase income,
achieve climate resilience and enable climate mitigation. The key focus of the CSV model is to enhance
climate literacy of farmers and local stakeholders, and develop a climate resilient agricultural system by
linking existing government village development schemes and investments. Promotion of combination of
CSA practices and technologies is one of the major components in the CSVs. This approach is promoting a
number of CSA practices revolving around seed, water, energy, nutrients and some risk averting instruments
that help farmers in reducing climatic risks in agriculture. These interventions are expected to increase crop
yields and farmers’ income in a sustainable way, improve input-use efficiency and reduce GHGs thus
minimizing climatic risks in agricultural production systems.
The CSV model was started to pilot in 2011 in Haryana (Karnal) and Bihar (Vaishali), in India. These sites
were selected due to their high agricultural vulnerability to climatic change and variability. Sites considered
for this include highly flood and drought prone area in Bihar (i.e. CSVs in Vaishali district), and areas with
rapidly declining groundwater table and increasing soil salinity, in Haryana (i.e. CSVs in Karnal district). In
these areas, CCAFS and CIMMYT are implementing several climate-smart practices and technologies, in
collaboration with local farmers to reduce the impact of climate change and variability in farming
communities. Trial has been conducted in 70 villages in Haryana, Bihar Punjab, Orissa, Gujarat and
Karnataka.
The location of a Climate-Smart Village is selected based on its climate risk profile and the willingness of
farmers and local governments to participate in the project.
Researchers conduct a baseline survey to capture the current socio-economic conditions and analyse resource
availability and average production and income among other indicators. This enables an impact assessment
after a period of time to gauge the benefits of the interventions.
Stakeholders convene to prioritize which interventions they will take up that are best suited to their local
conditions. This is done through a choice experiment that analyses their preference and willingness to pay for
technologies. Disseminating information on climate-smart agriculture practices and outcomes is an important
part of the capacity building process. Farmers are encouraged to record their testimonials and feedback at
regular intervals and share it with researchers and the community.
Adaptation and Risk Management in CSV
Key interventions Example
Water smart Direct seeded rice, raised bed, maize based
system, precision lad leveling, alternate
wetting and drying technology
Weather smart Weather forecast, index based insurance,, seeds
for needs, crop diversification, agroforestry
Nutrient smart Nutrient expert decision support tool for maize
and wheat, green-seeker, legume integration
Carbon smart No- tillage, residue management

9. 9
Energy smart No tillage, residue management,
Knowledge smart ICT’s, gender empowerment, capacity
development
CSV’s IN INDIA
1. In Haryana (Karnal District)
At present, 27 Climate-Smart Villages are being piloted in Karnal. The villages are in Nilokheri, Indri,
Gharaunda and Nissing blocks.
Climate-smart agriculture practice/technologies adopted in CSV
i. Direct seeded rice: Traditional rice cultivation involves sprouting rice in a nursery and then
transplanting the seedlings into an intensively tilled field with standing water. With direct seeded
rice, the rice seeds are sown directly in dry seedbed just like any other upland crop. This eliminates
the laborious process of manually transplanting seedlings, significantly reduces the crop’s water
requirements and improves the soil’s physical conditions.
ii. Alternate wetting and drying in rice: In alternate wetting and drying, rice fields are alternately
flooded and drained. The use of a monitoring instrument like a tensiometer can help farmers decide
when to irrigate their fields. Alternate wet and drying reduces methane emissions by an average of 48
percent compared to continuous flooding. Combining this with precision fertilizer tools can further
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
iii. ICT services to access weather and agro advisories: M-Solution is CCAFS supported ICT-based
climate and agro advisory project being piloted in Climate-Smart Villages by CIMMYT, together
with Kisan Sanchar as the implementation partner and IFFCO Kisan Sanchar Limited (IKSL) as a
content partner. Farmers get voice and text messages that inform them of weather forecasts, new seed
varieties, climate smart farming practices and tips on conservation agriculture. The project aims to
document farmers’ perceptions on increasingly erratic weather events and to understand if the
information they receive helps in overall behaviour change towards adapting to climate change and in
the uptake of new practices and technology. The project ensured the inclusion of women farmers
right from the onset. Many have said it is a vital source of information for them on climate change
and agriculture.
iv. Zero-tillage: Zero-till or no-till farming is a way of growing crops without disturbing the soil
through tillage. It increases the amount of water that infiltrates into the soil and increases organic
matter retention and the cycling of nutrients in the soil. Zero-tillage improves soil properties, making
it more resilient. A CCAFS-CIMMYT study comparing zero-tillage and conventional tillage in
Haryana showed that zero-tillage provided both economic and climate gains. Results show that
farmers can save approximately USD79per hectare in terms of total production costs and increase net
revenue of about USD 97.5 per hectare under zero-tillage land compared to conventional tillage. The
study shows that shifting from conventional tillage to zero-tillage based wheat production reduces
greenhouse gas emissions by 1.5 Mg CO2-eq per hectare per season (Aryal, et. al., 2014). Zero-
tillage also helps in buffering the terminal heat effects which is one of the key climate change related
constraints in wheat production in Haryana.

10. 10
v. Laser land levelling: A laser-leveller is a tractor-towed, laser-controlled device that achieves an
exceptionally flat surface. Levelling the field ensures equitable reach and distribution of water and
increases crop productivity. It also increases energy efficiency as less water means less need to run
electric pumps. Most farmers in Haryana rent the equipment on an hourly basis. Farmers pay between
600-700 Rupees an hour to use the machinery. The practice of laser-land levelling has increased
exponentially in the state. In Haryana, at the current adoption scale, the estimated amount of
irrigation water saving is 933 million cubic meters per year. The estimated greenhouse gas mitigation
is 163,600 MT of CO2 -eq per year (CIMMYT-CCAFS, 2014).
vi. Residue management/mulching: Crop residue mulching is a system of maintaining a protective
cover of vegetative residues and stubble on the soil surface. It adds to soil organic matter, which
improves the quality of the seedbed and increases the water infiltration and retention capacity of the
soil. Rice crop residue burning is one of the major issues in Haryana. Using innovative planting
machinery like Turbo Happy Seeder, crops can be directly drilled without tillage while residue on
surface acts as mulch.
vii. Crop diversification: The aim of crop diversification is to increase farmers’ crop portfolio so they
are not dependent on a single crop for an income. This also diversifies a farmer’s climate risk and
contributes to increased household food security. Also, the innovative crop portfolio and system
optimisation based diversification options help in sustainable intensification. Introducing legumes in
the crop rotation cycle helps fix Nitrogen in the soil.
viii. Agroforestry: Planting trees with crops or vegetables helps sequester carbon in the soil and prevent
soil erosion. Trees provide shade to crops and are a source of timber, fruit, fodder and fuel-wood for
farmers. They enhance biodiversity by providing habitats to varied species of birds, insects and
animals and contribute to a healthy ecological landscape.
ix. Precision nutrient management: Tools such as Nutrient Expert Decision Support Tool, Leaf Colour
Chart and GreenSeeker sensors are used by farmers to determine optimum fertilizer dosage for crops
and assess crop vitality. Overuse of fertilizers increase production costs, damage the soil, contaminate
groundwater and add to greenhouse gas emissions.
 Nutrient Expert-decision support tool helps farmers decide location specific use of correct
fertilizers in the hands of individual farmers. This site specific nutrient management tool adds
value to soil testing and guide farmers for precision prescriptions even in absence of farmer
access to soil testing. The Nutrient Expert is interactive software and is available for free use on
websites.
 GreenSeeker is a handheld, easy to use crop sensor that is easily calibrated locally. When held
above the crop canopy, it calculates the Normalised Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) which
suggests the crop health and nitrogen requirement for a particular plot/field. Using GreenSeeker,
farmers optimise the fertilizer N use increase crop yield and profits as well as reduce
environmental foot prints.
 Leaf color chart is a visual chart used for measuring the greenness of the leaves to quantify the
nitrogen to be applied to rice fields to get a maximum productivity. It is also suitable for maize
and wheat and provides farmers with a good diagnostic tool for detecting nitrogen deficiency.

11. 11
2. In Bihar
In Bihar, CCAFS works along with several partner organizations in Rajapakar, Bali Bathna and Lal Pokhar
in Vaishali district. These villages were selected in 2011 based on their suitability, and willingness of
households, to adopt climate smart interventions that could be carried out over a period of time to evaluate
the results.
The key climate-related issues in the district are frequent droughts, water logging and flooding, and
decreasing annual rainfall.
NATIONAL INITIATIVE ON CLIMATE RESILIENT AGRICULTURE (NICRA)
A similar project of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, called National Innovations in Climate
Resilient Agriculture, has now covered 151 villages across the country and plans to add another 100.
NICRA is a network project of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) launched in February,
2011 covers 151 villages across country. The project is formulated to take up long term strategic research to
address the impacts of projected climate change on Indian agriculture and also demonstrate the existing best
bet practices to enable farmers cope with current climate variability. Under the strategic research, phenol
typing of germplasm collections of wheat, rice, maize and pulses is being done for climate induced stresses
like drought, heat stress and submergence, and selected lines are being used for developing stress tolerant
high performing varieties. High throughput phenol typing systems and field facilities for studying the
impacts of elevated temperature and carbon dioxide on crops and network of flux towers are some of the
state of the art facilities already commissioned under the project at leading institutes.
A comprehensive program on pest surveillance in relation to weather variables, crop simulation modeling
with a systems approach for understanding impacts and designing adaptation strategies, nutritional and
genetic strategies for reducing heat stress on milch animals, understanding the impact of climate variability
on pollinators and flowering phenology of fruit crops are other areas of research being pursued in the project.
The carbon sequestration potential of agroforestry and conservation agriculture systems are being estimated
across the country for mitigation. The project is working on mechanisms of adaptation financing in the
context of development planning in India.
The first ever vulnerability atlas of India at district level has been prepared which is likely to aid in
prioritizing investments in vulnerable regions. The most significant contribution of the project has been the
demonstration of best bet practices in 100 vulnerable districts in the form of stress tolerant varieties, water
harvesting, conservation agriculture, farm mechanization through custom hiring centers which helped the
farmers to cope with the annual climate variabilities, yielding encouraging outcomes. The promising
experiences of the Village Climate Risk Management Committees (VCRMC) and the Climate Smart Village
pilotsen compassing water, carbon, energy and nutrient smart technologies should be judiciously up- and
out-scaled.
SMART AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES IN INDIA PROMOTED BY ICAR
1. Rejuvenation of farming in cyclone and flood prone coastal agro-ecosystems through land shaping
2. Community paddy nursery as a contingency measure for delayed planting
3. Direct seeded rice for promoting water use efficiency

12. 12
4. Drum seeding of rice for water saving and timeliness in planting
5. Drought tolerant paddy cultivars to tackle deficit rainfall situations
6. Short duration finger millet varieties for delayed monsoon / deficit rainfall districts in south interior
Karnataka
7. Short duration crop varieties suitable for late sowings
8. Crop diversification for livelihood security and resilience to climate variability
9. Flood tolerant varieties impart resilience to farmers in flood-prone areas
10. Improving the resilience of poor farmers reclaiming cultivable wastelands
11. Community tanks / ponds as a means of augmentation and management of village level water
resources
12. Individual farm ponds for improving livelihoods of small farmers
13. Jalkund - low cost rainwater harvesting structures
14. Check dam - storing excess-runoff in streams
15. Rainwater harvesting and recycling through temporary check dam
16. Enhancing resilience through improvement in conveyance efficiency
17. Recharge of wells to improve shallow aquifers
18. Integrated Farming System modules
19. Captive rearing of fish seed - a livelihood opportunity in flood-prone areas
20. Management practices to tackle cold stress in backyard poultry
21. Shelter management for small ruminants to tackle heat stress and rain storm
22. Small farm mechanization through Custom Hiring Centers for farm machinery
23. Improved planting methods for enhancing water use efficiency and crop productivity
24. Zero till drill wheat to escape terminal heat stress
25. In situ incorporation of biomass and crop residues for improving soil health
26. Village level seed banks to combat seed shortages
27. Fodder cultivars to tackle fodder scarcity
IMPACT OF CLIMATE SMART AGRICULTURE IN INDIA
 Zero tillage and line showing instead of broadcasting of seeds increased wheat and rice production by
10-15 per cent in Karnal, Haryana.
 Zero tillage cut the diesel use by 80 per cent per hectare.
 Direct seeded rice which involves showing of rice seeds directly, compared to the traditional method
of sprouting rice in a nursery and transferring the seedling to a field with standing water, reduce
water use by 25 per cent and methane emission by 40 per cent.
 Bed planting of maize and wheat, which is at the level raised from the soil, cuts water use by 30-35
per cent.
 Zero tillage, residue management and diversification bring down fertilizer use by 20 per cent after
three years.
 Climate-smart agriculture assumes even greater significance given its link to food security.
According to a World Bank-commissioned study in 2013, total crop production in India is expected
to rise 60% by the 2050s without climate change, but in the event of a temperature increase of 2
degree Celsius since the industrial revolution, the increase will only be 12%. Moreover, it will have
to import twice the amount of food grains than in a scenario without climate change.

13. 13
 high resolution field measurements done at a groundnut (also known as peanut) farm in one of the
most arid regions in India show that integrated nutrient management led to a number of benefits in a
drought-hit year, including a 40-60% reduction in total nitrogen fertilizer use, increased crop yield by
35-50%, and net profit by 70-120% – while decreasing GHG emission intensity (per unit yield) by
50%.
Economic benefits of climate-smart agricultural practices to smallholder farmers
 Small landholders can implement a range of CSA practices and technologies, in order to minimize
the adverse effects of climate change and variability, but their adoption largely depends on economic
benefits associated with the practices.
 Achieved greater yields in rice and wheat crops after the implementation of CSA practices. Use of
improved seeds, zero tillage and laser land leveling increased total production in rice–wheat system
by 19%, 6% and 10% respectively.
 Farmers also achieve some improvement in crop yields (6%) and substantial reduction in input costs
by 41% under the zero tillage practice.
SUCCESS STORY
Jeema Purty, a farmer in the Indian state of Odisha, is growing a drought-tolerant rice variety known as
Sahbhagidhan, meaning “rice developed through collaboration.” When Jeema started growing it, her harvests
improved greatly and she was able to sell surplus grain at market. She reinvested her rice earnings and began
growing vegetables, providing a more nutritious diet for her children.
WHAT CLIMATE-SMART AGRICULTURE FAILS TO ENCOMPASS
By recognizing links between our choices in agricultural systems and outcomes related to food systems in
human dimensions, the incorporation of food security as an imperative for CSA differentiates it from
concepts such as sustainable intensification and eco efficiency. Balancing priorities at the intersections of
food security, adaptation and mitigation, however, always occurs in the context of region-specific conditions
and cultures. Why should resource-poor farmers invest in agricultural practices that may reduce emissions if
there are few if any immediate benefits related to food or water security? (“It’s hard to be green when you
are in the red.”) CSA, as currently conceived and implemented, fails entirely to recognize different actors,
incentives and interactions between different (but related) provisioning demands for food, water, energy,
materials and ecosystem services.
Furthermore, the concept of CSA fails to consider possible impacts of agriculture on other ecosystem
services, biodiversity conservation and broader social, political and cultural dynamics. Reducing GHG
emissions or improving resilience may not always result in the best natural resource management outcomes
if consequences include biodiversity loss, degradation of cultural heritage, increased social inequity or long-
term ecosystem instability.
Finally, CSA has been defined to focus exclusively in developing countries because national food security
and development goals have been implicitly and incorrectly understood as issues of importance only in the
developing world. This focus has engendered opposition from those who fear that some developed countries
may insist on mitigation of agricultural GHG emissions as a condition of continued development aid. Food

14. 14
security, nutritional security and nutritional health are obviously not limited to the developing world; there is
also a widespread prevalence of food insecurity in high-income countries, where there are different, but
overlapping, policy, governance and technical challenges. With regard to the recent focus on smallholder
farmers, the policy dialogue about CSA now systematically overlooks any impacts and opportunities
connected to innovations and implications of large-scale agricultural practices for and in food systems in
both developing and developed country contexts, further reducing the utility of the CSA framework.
In summary, the current framing of CSA gives no specific direction, no new science agenda, no ability to
negotiate and prioritize contentious and conflicting agendas and no compelling reason to increase or shift
investment, despite the monumental importance of these challenges in the coming decades. In fact, current
agricultural practices are neither smart nor dumb. Our current agricultural and food systems are simply the
manifestations of political, biophysical, socioeconomic and other influences that lead to sustainable or
unsustainable outcomes, depending on the perspectives, scales, valuations of trade-offs and time frames
considered. In the aggregate, however, our current systems fall well outside any defensible concept of long-
term safe operating space considered in human and/or environmental terms. Without radical interventions
and innovations to curb fundamentally extractive processes toward the renewal of the resources upon which
agricultural productivity depends, we stand only to slip further away.
This recognition provides a strong mandate for agricultural systems that better meet human and
environmental needs. Although major improvements in food security and livelihoods through agricultural
development have been achieved, often this has occurred at the expense of nutritional health and
environmental sustainability, thereby eroding the very foundations of our long-term capacity to care for
ourselves. Under current default development pathways, food systems often arise in such a way that large
populations remain food-insecure while other populations begin to suffer from the pathologies of over- or
malnutrition. Although equity issues dictate clear differences in responsibilities between developed and
developing countries, agricultural systems that will lead to the desired outcomes of improved food security
and dietary health remain common goals for our global community.
Recent reports have set forth specific principles and recommendations to improve the sustainability of
agriculture and food systems that explicitly address various threats, including that of climate change. None of
these reports, however, moved beyond incremental improvements to specify in any detail a future state in
which we commit ourselves to a food-secure world within planetary or local boundaries over the short or
long term. Recently, the Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change synthesized a vast
array of literature on agriculture, food systems, food and nutritional security, dietary health, adaptation to
climate change and mitigation of agricultural GHG emissions into a series of recommended policy actions.
In its report, the commission extended the concept of “safe operating space” beyond the original framing,
which focused on biophysical attributes of the planet, to include social-ecological systems related to human
welfare, agriculture and food security.
In our view, a safe operating space for agricultural and food systems represents a set of conditions that
demonstrably better meets human needs in the short and long term within foreseeable local and planetary
limits and holds ourselves accountable for outcomes across temporal and spatial scales. In our view,
agriculture and food systems are climate-smart when it can be shown that they bring us closer to safe
operating spaces.

15. 15
Although well-intentioned and potentially costly, the current mode of incremental improvement may still fall
well short of achieving safer spaces. For instance, some argue that we are already able to produce enough
food to feed a worldwide human population of 9 billion, especially under scenarios of improved dietary
health, reduced waste and loss and diversified, intensified production systems. Although this view is valid
and important, we still do not know whether, even after such major shifts, our food systems would be in
long-term balance with our natural resources base. Along the way, we may cross tipping points that
demarcate permanent transitions to new states that will become apparent only when it is too late to turn back.
Improvements in the management of agricultural systems that bring us significantly closer to safe operating
spaces (however we learn to define these conditions) will require transformational changes in governance,
management and use of our natural resources that are underpinned by enabling political, social and economic
conditions. This is a major challenge in itself, considering that investments in agricultural development have
often yielded unintended detrimental social and environmental consequences on various spatial and temporal
scales.
As a coordinated international attempt to address such issues, Rio+20 member states recently reaffirmed in
the outcome document “The Future We Want” their commitments regarding “the right of everyone to have
access to safe, sufficient and nutritious food”. India and Mexico, for example, have moved to enshrine the
right to food in law and are seeking means by which to implement such policy effectively. Although the
recognition of a human right to food security places human welfare and humanitarian values at the center of
development, the short- and long-term social, economic, political and environmental effects of such
commitments remain unclear. For instance, how will these efforts affect a “land-degradation neutral world”
that these countries committed themselves to in the same document?
To answer such a question, we need to have processes in place that can provide relevant insights into issues
such as the following. Can these more holistic approaches be integrated into research and development,
informing a robust representation of conditions on the ground in near real time and more informative tools
looking forward? Can we integrate approaches and insights derived from diverse sources to predict, mitigate
and innovate regarding food security and nutritional health issues in the face of climate change? What are the
specific boundaries of safe spaces? How do we deal with ambiguity and uncertainty across scales and
priorities? How will we describe these boundaries and how they move dynamically as the trajectories of food
systems evolve? Can we identify synergistic, transformational changes that may vault us to more stable and
secure food systems across scales? What governance mechanisms are needed to ensure that the benefits and
costs of well-grounded choices and their positive and negative consequences are shared as equitably as
possible? How will we know whether our collective investments in the future are bringing us closer to safer
spaces? Can we reach a condition which we can objectively defend as a safer space at any scale before
reaching critical tipping points and thresholds in Earth and human systems? How will we know whether the
changes are sufficiently bold so that, by the middle of this century, we can avoid the recognition we now face
with virtual certainty that our best intentions simply have not been good enough?
WHAT SHOULD WE DO NOW IN RESEARCH?
Finding adequate responses to challenges, will require transformational changes in our commitment toward
the future we want across all of society, including our science agenda. It means changing how we fund and
evaluate agricultural research, how we evaluate agricultural practices and how we describe relevant

16. 16
parameters of human conditions linked to our choices in agriculture, natural resources management and food
systems.
To develop an operational characterization of the safer operating spaces, working definitions of food
security, resilience and mitigation are essential. It is also essential that these concepts are defined across the
stakeholder dimension in addition to the spatial and temporal dimensions, as preferences and priorities vary
significantly across institutional structures. The operational viability CSA is dependent on the resolution of
these barriers (definitions and synthesis across scales) and a correct representation of trade-offs that truly
informs decision-makers. The science agenda for the 21st century must improve our ability to recognize and
achieve long-term safer spaces across scales for agriculture and food systems. Key areas of innovation in
support of such a science agenda will not be restricted to, but will include:
Discovery, testing and implementation of mechanisms across scales that allow for adaptive management and
adaptive governance of social-ecological systems essential for long-term human provisioning: Adaptive
management and governance will afford the capacity, protocols and processes to learn from mistakes and
successes, including both anticipated and undesired outcomes.
Development of integrated metrics of safe space that are practical and meaningful for decision-making by
relevant communities in near real time: Indicators, proxies and other attributes of agricultural social-
ecological systems that provide relevant feedback to stakeholders are required to monitor, evaluate and
appraise changes in systems over space and in time, allowing for better decision-making and providing
milestones for adaptive management.
Systematic gathering and integration of quality data and information to generate knowledge in time frames
and at scales relevant for decision-making through analytical tools, models and scenarios: Describing the
consequences of our provisioning demands and choices in human and ecological terms requires the
integration of high-quality data into knowledge for improved decision-making that will increasingly be
collected, filtered, analyzed and interpreted by using automated self-learning algorithms to transform the vast
amounts of data into useful information. Drawing on technological and computation innovations already in
place as well as implementing strategic funding investments would help to bridge the gap between the
developing and developed scientific communities.
Establishment of legitimate and empowered science policy dialogues that frame post–disciplinary science
agendas on local, national and international scales: Dialogues and roundtables between relevant stakeholders
that scientifically test decisions at the interface of diverging interests of business, environment and civil
constituencies in often contentious topical areas can improve outcomes and help identify scientifically
credible interpretations of long-term safe operating spaces in the context of a changing climate and growing
environmental and societal changes.
Shifting our agricultural and food systems toward development trajectories that with greater certainty can be
defined as safe is what we understand as being truly climate-smart. Although the areas of innovation
described above will not take us to safer spaces for humanity without massive investments in sustainable
natural resource management, a transformation of global food systems and ambitious low emissions
development pathways, they will improve our ability to predict whether our investments in future
agricultural and food systems can be considered climate-smart with greater certainty.

17. 17
FUTURE RECOMMENDATION
Key elements that need to be in place include:
 Mechanisms to reach large numbers of farmers,
 Information services that use mobile phones, radio, and other mass media;
 Well-organized and broadly based farmer groups;
 Policies that support secure land tenure;
 Citizen/farmer participation in science; and
 Government action to integrate climate considerations in all agricultural investment plans.
CONCLUSION
Climate-smart agriculture is a sort of overview concept originally put forth in 2010 by the UN’s Food and
Agriculture Organization. Up until now it’s been a bit vague, a general idea about adjusting all forms of
agriculture (“farms, crops, livestock, aquaculture, and capture fisheries”) to better adapt to a changing
climate. It isn’t a set of guidelines, or even recommendations, really; it’s more of a philosophy that various
global organizations are attempting to push. In order to be realistic it needs to incorporate a more integrated
approach including majority of stakeholder. It should try to include not only few developing countries but
also developed country and least developed country than only this approach will be able to mitigate the effect
of climate change on agriculture and will contribute to achieving the goal of food security and sustainable
development.
REFERENCES
http://www.fao.org/3/a-i3817e.pdf
http://www.nicra-icar.in/nicrarevised/images/publications/Smart%20practices%20&%20technologies.pdf
http://blog.cimmyt.org/extensive-climate-smart-agriculture-campaign-reaches-over-15000-farmers-in-
punjab-and-haryana-india/
http://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/110/07/1251.pdf
http://modernfarmer.com/2014/09/csa-climate-smart-agriculture/
http://agricultureandfoodsecurity.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2048-7010-2-12
http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343514000359
https://ccafs.cgiar.org/research/annual-report/2014
http://csa2015.cirad.fr/var/csa2015/storage/fckeditor/file/L3%20Towards%20Climate-
smart%20Solutions.pdf
http://www.farmingfirst.org/tag/climate-smart-agriculture/

18. 18
http://blogs.edf.org/climatetalks/2016/01/14/new-studies-point-to-a-pathway-to-find-indias-most-effective-
climate-smart-farming-practices/
https://www.sei-international.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/SIANI-Gender-Africa-
book/SIANI-2013-Transforming-Gender-Relations-Chapter9.pdf
http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/216137/icode/
https://ccafs.cgiar.org/climate-smart-villages#.VzC83lV97IU
https://ccafs.cgiar.org/what-are-climate-smart-villages#.VzFiBtR97Dc
https://cgspace.cgiar.org/rest/bitstreams/34314/retrieve
http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/oct/12/indias-climate-smart-villages-use-technology-
improve-farming
http://www.hindustantimes.com/patna/now-bihar-pitches-for-climate-smart-villages/story-
WE4buqvL7LiE5ag6s1rzCL.html
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/patna/Climate-Smart-Village-model-to-be-implemented-in-
Bihar/articleshow/21314706.cms
http://www.wri.org/blog/2014/05/everything-you-need-know-about-agricultural-emissions
http://www.nicra-icar.in/nicrarevised/images/Mission%20Documents/National-Action-Plan-on-Climate-
Change.pdf
http://www.c2es.org/international/key-country-policies/india/climate-plan-summary
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/52168709.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_mediu
m=text&utm_campaign=cppst