Policy Analysis in relation to climate change adaptation, mitigation, agriculture and REDD

1
Policy Analysis in relation to climate
change adaptation, mitigation,
agriculture and REDD
Final Report
Submitted by Dr. Makarius Mdemu
August, 2013
Submitted to CCAP Project Partners
Department of Regional Development Planning
Ardhi University

i
Contents
List of acronyms ............................................................................................................................................. iii
Acknowledgements..........................................................................................................................................v
Executive summary........................................................................................................................................ vi
1. Introduction...............................................................................................................................................1
1.1. Background information.................................................................................................................1
1.2. Goal and objectives of the assignment ........................................................................................1
1.2.1. Aim of the assignment............................................................................................................1
1.2.2. Objectives of the assignment.................................................................................................2
1.2.3. Scope of the assignment.........................................................................................................2
2. Study methodology .................................................................................................................................3
3. Climate change, climate smart small-scale agriculture and community oriented REDD+......5
3.1. Global context...................................................................................................................................5
3.1.1. Climate change.........................................................................................................................5
3.1.2. Climate smart small scale agriculture..................................................................................6
3.1.3. Community oriented REDD+ ...............................................................................................7
3.2. National Context ..............................................................................................................................9
3.2.1. Climate change.........................................................................................................................9
3.2.2. Climate smart small scale agriculture............................................................................... 10
3.2.3. Community oriented REDD+ ............................................................................................ 12
4. Results of Policy Analysis.................................................................................................................. 13
4.1. How do the policies, programmes and strategies address issues of climate change
adaptation, mitigation, climate smart small-scale agriculture and community oriented REDD
13
4.1.1. Draft Agriculture Policy, 2012 .......................................................................................... 13
4.1.2. Forest Policy, 1998............................................................................................................... 16
4.1.3. National Water Policy, 2002 .............................................................................................. 18
4.1.4. Land Policy, 1997................................................................................................................. 19
4.1.5. National Investment Policy, 1996 ..................................................................................... 21
4.1.6. National Climate Change Strategy, 2012 ........................................................................ 22
4.1.7. National REDD Strategy, 2012 ......................................................................................... 23
4.2. What are the gaps and or risks in the national development programmes (ASDP,
KILIMO KWANZA, SAGCOT in terms of achieving climate smart, small-scale agriculture
and community oriented REDD+ .......................................................................................................... 23
4.2.1. Agriculture Sector Development Programme................................................................. 23
4.2.2. Kilimo Kwanza Strategy..................................................................................................... 25
4.2.3. Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania.................................................... 27
4.3. What are the opportunities in the national development programmes (ASDP, Kilimo
kwanza, SAGCOT) for smallholder farmers to engage in achieving climate smart, small-scale
agriculture and community oriented REDD........................................................................................ 29
4.3.1. Agriculture Sector Development Programme................................................................. 29
4.3.2. Kilimo Kwanza Strategy..................................................................................................... 30
4.3.3. Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania.................................................... 31

ii
4.4. What are the gaps in the policies and policy implementation in terms of climate smart,
small-scale agriculture and community oriented REDD .................................................................. 31
4.5. How climate change adaption, mitigation and REDD+ can be integrated in the policies
and programmes ........................................................................................................................................ 33
5. Conclusions and recommendations................................................................................................... 34
References....................................................................................................................................................... 36

iii
List of acronyms
AGG Agriculture Green Growth
AR4 Fourth Assessment Report of IPCC
ASDP Agricultural Sector Development Programme
ASDS Agriculture Sector Development Strategy
ASMDP Agricultural Marketing Systems Development Programme
CBFM Community Based Forest Management
CDM Clean Development Mechanism of the UNFCCC
CEEST Centre for Energy, Environment, Science and Technology
CERs Certified Emission Reductions
CFM Community Forest Management
COP Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC
CSA Climate Smart Agriculture
DADPs District Agricultural Development Plans
DANIDA Danish Development Agency
EMA Environmental Management Act (2004) of Tanzania
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
GEF Global Environmental Facility of the World Bank
GHG Green House Gas
HAKIARDHI Land Rights
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
JFM Joint Forest Management
KILIMO KWANZA- Agriculture First
LAMP Land Management Programme
MAFC Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives
MDGs Millennium Development Goals

iv
MJUMITA Community Forest Conservation Network
MVIWATA Farmer's Network of Tanzania
NAPA National Adaptation Programme of Action
NGOs Non Government Organisations
NSGRP National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (commonly known in
Kiswahili as MKUKUTA)
NT No tillage
PASS Private Agricultural Sector Support
REDD Reduced Emission in Deforestation and forest Degradation
RELMA Regional Land Management Unit
SAGCOT Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania
SCAPA Soil Conservation and Agroforestry Programme
SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment
TAR Technical Assessment Report
TFCG Tanzania Forest Conservation Group
TNBC Tanzania National Business Council
TOAM Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement
TPSF Tanzania Private Sector Foundation
UNCBD United Nation Convention on Biological Diversity
UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification
UNEP United Nation Environmental Programme
UNFCCC United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change
USAID United States Aid Agency
WMAs Wildlife Management Areas

v
Acknowledgements
The consultant would like to acknowledge ActionAid Tanzania (AATz) for the opportunity to
undertake this policy analysis for CCAP Project partners. The Agriculture and Food Security
Advisor at AATz, Mr. Elias Mtinda, is acknowledged for availing some of the policy documents
required for review and supervision of the assignment throughout the consultancy period. The
consultant is very grateful to reviewers of the draft report whose comments were useful in
improving this report.

vi
Executive summary
This policy analysis in relation to climate change adaptation, mitigation, agriculture and Reduced
Emission in Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD) has been conducted within the
framework of the project "climate change, agriculture and poverty alleviation: putting small-
scale farmers at the heart of policy and practice". The project is implemented in Kilosa and
Chamwino districts by ActionAid in collaboration with the Tanzanian Community Forest
Conservation Network (MJUMITA), the Farmer's Network of Tanzania (MVIWATA), the
Tanzania Forest Conservation Group (TFCG) and the Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement
(TOAM)
The overall aim of the assignment was to analyse policies and policy practices and agriculture
development programmes in relation to climate change mitigation, adaptation, agriculture and
REDD in Tanzania and provide recommendations on the changes needed to achieve climate
smart small-scale agriculture and community oriented REDD+. Specific objectives of the
assignment were to review climate sector policies, programmes and strategies (agriculture,
investment, natural resource policies) on the way the policies, programmes and strategies address
issues of climate change mitigation, adaptation, and REDD and provide relevant
recommendations on how the policies and development plans could support climate change
adaptation and mitigation in a pro poor, gender sensitive way for small scale farmers.
Documents for the Policies, strategies and programmes required for review and analysis were
collected from different sources and reviewed. The main review criteria was the explicit and
implicit consideration of elements related to climate change adaptation, mitigation, small-scale
climate smart agriculture and community oriented REDD in the policies, strategies and
programmes. A climate smart landscape approach was used to analyse consideration of climate
smart small scale agriculture in the policies and programmes by considering elements of climate
smart practices at field and farm scale, diversity of land use across the landscape and the
management of land use interactions at the landscape scale. Elements related to tenure rights, co-
benefit sharing, capacity building and institutional strengthening, harmonization of conflicting
sectoral polices and land use planning were considered in the analysis on community oriented
REDD+.
Climate change, adaptation and mitigation feature in general terms in the draft agriculture policy
2012. Climate change mitigation and adaptation elements which appear as policy issues or

vii
statements are not linked to any identified climate risks or threats. The policy identifies existing
land tenure as un-conducive for long term investment which may imply as well investment in
climate smart agriculture components. It also includes policy objectives that generally may
support small scale climate smart agriculture such as promotion of sustainable agricultural land
use plans but those objectives are not targeting to respond to any specific identified small scale
climate smart problem. Further, aspects of community oriented REDD are less covered by the
draft policy apart from support on gender-equitable land tenure governance and establishment of
public awareness on the opportunities of agriculture as potential carbon sink and mechanism to
benefit from carbon market.
Although the national forest policy includes policy statements which relate in general terms to
conservation agriculture and community oriented REDD such as provision of extension on
gender sensitive agro-forestry practices with consideration of women's preferences on species
selection, climate change was not among the concerns for the forest sector when the policy was
prepared. As a result direct climate change adaptive and mitigative elements do not directly
feature in the policy and issues relating to tenure, harmonization of sectoral polices and land use
planning which are very important for the implementation of community oriented REDD are
scantly presented.
A similar pattern of inconsistency regarding climate change inconsideration features in the
national water and land policies. For example while the water policy addresses a good number of
adaptation elements for the water sector, some of the climate change adaptive elements are
contained in the policy as part of water resources development and disaster management
strategies which do not directly respond to any projected or predicted climate change impacts.
Issues of community oriented REDD and climate smart agriculture are only scantly and
generally reflected by the policy's recognition of the role of forest for conservation of water
resources, rainwater harvesting and improvement of efficiency of water abstraction.
Secure land tenure and protecting land resources from degradation for sustainable development
are the main elements, although not linked to any climate change risk in the policy, which reflect
climate smart agriculture and community oriented REDD in the national land policy. However,
experiences shows that the ambiguity on definition of general land in the Land Act No. 4 and
Village Land Act No. 5 of 1999 is a major constraint to tenure insecurity of rural land and
contributes to land alienation. The same definition may act as a disincentive for community's
investment under climate smart small-scale agriculture and community oriented REDD.

viii
The national climate change strategy provides a framework for climate change adaptation and
mitigation of climate sectors in Tanzania while REDD aims at addressing mitigation of climate
change effects in the forest and forest related sectors. In the climate change strategy, elements on
climate smart agriculture are extensively covered under the agriculture, water, livestock, forest,
wildlife and land use issues. However, issues on land tenure, harmonization of sectoral policies
and benefit sharing under community oriented REDD are not clearly reflected in the strategy.
Within the REDD strategy, elements on climate smart small scale agriculture features minimally
while elements that relate to community oriented REDD are adequately considered as expected.
The major gaps which have been identified in ASDP, KILIMO KWANZA and the Southern
Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania (SAGCOT) in terms of achieving climate smart small
scale agriculture and community oriented REDD+ include:
 ASDP aims to achieve NSGRP as well as vision 2025 and it was linked to MKUKUTA I.
MKUKUTA I which ended in 2010 was silent about climate change apart from the
general indication of mainstreaming environment in the plan. As a result the word climate
does not appear anywhere in the Agriculture Sector Development Programme (ASDP)
document. This implies that in the long run programme activities which relate to climate
change adaptation such as irrigation development might be seriously affected by climate
change and variability with significant consequences to programme outcomes and long
term sustainability of programme activities.
 Despite of the 80% budgetary allocation for irrigation development under ASDP,
irrigation programme component focuses on infrastructure provision and it has neglected
activities on managing soil-water continuum that would have been ideal in period of
climate change and variability influenced water shortages or scarcity.
 Lack of capacity at district level commensurate to the requirement of ASDP to plan and
implement district agricultural development plans in participatory way is another serious
gap under ASDP. This implies that even if there could be activities that target at
achieving climate smart small scale agriculture and community oriented REDD+ their
success would be constrained by lack of capacity at District level.
Identified gaps for KILIMO KWANZA include
 The strategy duplicates efforts of Agriculture Sector Development Strategy (ASDS) and
ASDP because majority of what it attempts to implement is being implemented under
ASDP.

ix
 The strategy is not realistic and fails to prioritize key issues in agriculture sector
including the negative effects of climate change even though current climate projections
shows that agriculture is one among the sectors which will be negatively impacted by
climate change.
 There is completely lack of mention of climate change in the strategy and adaptive
elements can only be implicitly associated with few among the listed activities such as
patenting results of seed research to protect locally developed seed varieties,
intensification of training for professionals in soil and water conservation and
establishment of weather centres at ward level.
 the strategy is blind to mitigation measures for the likely emissions and associated carbon
footprint resulting from implementation of KILIMO KWANZA
 The strategy is too business-oriented and not inclusive of small scale farmers. There is
also some evidence that its formulation process was spearheaded by business
organizations such as Tanzania National Business Council (TNBC) and Tanzania Private
Sector Foundation (TPSF) who represent interest of middle and large scale commercial
farmers.
Identified gaps in the Agriculture Green Growth (AGG) of SAGCOT include
 likelihood of land alienation from subsistence smallholder farmers by its foreign and
domestic oriented investment approach that is going to be adopted by SAGCOT in the
absence of appropriate measures to guide land allocation for investment. Experience has
proved that existing land allocation process have been flawed in favour of foreign
investors as has been the case in the land acquisition for biofuel investment and other
commercial agriculture in the country.
 There are no strategies proposed in the AGG of SAGCOT on how to meet the resource
requirement of non conventional agriculture which is the main approach adopted by AGG
under SAGCOT. Lack of such strategies at its outset is likely to open market to foreign
producers of the requirement inputs under SAGCOT with significant external carbon
footprint in the corridor.
Identified opportunities in the strategies include i) decentralized nature of the programme
activities that may facilitate or allow communities to integrate issues of climate smart agriculture
and community oriented REDD+ in their priority activities if they are aware of them; ii) The
strategies and programmes emphasize public private partnership which can provide an
opportunity for joint ventures and attract private sector investment especially on REDD+ if

x
communities are facilitated; iii) capacity building and institutionalization which provide
structures at local level for investment promotion on climate smart small scale agriculture and
community oriented REDD+; iv) there is potential to increase food output, food security and
household income of smallholder farmers if they will be integrated in the implementation of
SAGCOT's AGG. This will reduce pressure for agricultural expansion and thus avoid
deforestation and carbon dioxide emissions; and v) opportunities for additional benefits and
incomes to communities by investing in conservation agriculture and natural resource
conservation.
Major gaps in the policies and policy implementation relates to inconsideration of climate
change risks in the policies which is also reflected in the implementation strategies and
programmes; lack of harmonization and coordination of cross-cutting issues resulting into
duplication or conflicting efforts during implementation; inexistence of statement of support for
piloted mechanisms for benefit sharing between communities, local authorities and central
government from mitigation activities in the agriculture and forest sectors; and insecurity of land
tenure among small scale farmers which may defeat any effort on climate smart agriculture and
community oriented REDD+.
There are three main pathways for integrating climate change adaptation and mitigation in
sectoral policies, programmes and plans. The first one requires ministries, departments and
agencies for climate change sectors, donors and key stakeholders at sector level to take actions to
ensure climate change adaptation, mitigation and REDD+ priorities established at national level
are mainstreamed in the respective polices, strategies, programmes and plans. Mainstreaming
process should be done by reflecting upon and further deepening action on climate change
priorities that have already been established at national level, recognizing climate change and the
need for adaptation and mitigation within sectoral policies and strategies and applying climate
focus in the formulation of sectoral policies and strategies. The second entry point would be for
the climate change sectors to develop climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies. The
framework for sectoral climate change strategies is provided by the national climate change
strategy which was developed by the Vice Presidents Office in 2012. The third entry point would
be to apply SEA and SEA Audit for policies, strategies, and plans under preparation and policies,
strategies and plans which already exist respectively. Although SEA is rarely applied, it is
provided under the legal framework for environmental management in Tanzania and it can offer
useful tools for integrating climate change adaptation into the formulation of policies, plans and
programmes at the sectoral level.

1
1. Introduction
1.1. Background information
ActionAid Tanzania in collaboration with Community Forest Conservation Network
(MJUMITA), the Farmer's Network of Tanzania (MVIWATA), the Tanzania Forest
Conservation Group (TFCG) and the Tanzania Organic Agriculture Movement (TOAM)
received funding in 2012 to implement a project on " climate change, agriculture and poverty
alleviation: putting small-scale farmers at the heart of policy and practice". The project is being
implemented in two districts of Kilosa and Chamwino. The rationale of this project is the fact
that small scale farmers who depend on agriculture for their livelihoods form the majority of
people in Tanzania. When it comes to climate change, it is smallholder farmers who are hit first
and hardest. However, the farmers have a role to play in climate change mitigations and
adaptation. Agriculture is one among the land use change activities which contribute about 20%
of greenhouse gas emissions globally. Land use changes, particularly deforestation due to
shifting agriculture are the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Tanzania. The current
trend is that investment in agriculture and the agricultural policies and practices are prioritizing a
shift to more mechanised and fossil fuel depend large scale agriculture with the aim of increasing
productivity and commercializing smallholder production. Although this approach may increase
short term yields, it risks smallholder farmers become poorer and more vulnerable to climate
change impacts.
While it is believed that alternative approaches to land use and food production that would bring
wins in terms of climate change adaptation and mitigation do exists, the major problem has been
the lack of awareness to small-scale farmers and policy makers on adaptation and mitigation to
climate change.
1.2. Goal and objectives of the assignment
1.2.1. Aim of the assignment
The overall aim of the assignment is to analyse policies and policy practices and agriculture
development programmes in relation to climate change mitigation, adaptation, agriculture and
REDD in Tanzania and provide recommendations on the changes needed to achieve climate
smart, small-scale agriculture and community oriented REDD+

2
1.2.2. Objectives of the assignment
1. Review Agriculture Policy (draft agriculture policy of 2012), investment policy and natural
resource policy, policy practices and programmes and national climate change strategy and
the way these policies, programmes and strategies address issues of climate change
mitigation, adaptation, agriculture and REDD
2. Provide relevant recommendations on how agriculture policies and development plans
(ASDP, Kilimo Kwanza, SAGCOT) and the national REDD strategy could more directly
support climate change adaptation and mitigation in a pro poor, gender sensitive way for
small-scale farmers.
1.2.3. Scope of the assignment
The scope of the assignment involves analysis of the Agriculture Policy, Investment Policy and
natural resource policy, agriculture programmes, and national climate change strategy and policy
implementation in Tanzania. Among others the following issues were considered in the
analysis:-
 Desk review of the above policies on how they address issues of climate change adaptation,
mitigation, agriculture development and REDD
 Prepare a policy note / recommendations on the national agricultural policy on the basis of
the findings of the review of the policies
 Highlight any existing or potential conflicts, contradictions or gaps between different policies
and programmes in relation to agriculture, investment and climate change adaptation and
mitigation
 Review of the agricultural related programmes (including but not limited to the ASDP,
Kilimo kwanza initiative, SAGCOT) and the national REDD strategy on how they address
issues of climate change adaptation, mitigation and REDD with an emphasis on the degree to
which they provide a coordinated approach to these issues
 Analyse existing national agriculture programmes such as Kilimo Kwanza, SAGCOT and the
national REDD strategy to identify risks and opportunities associated with these programmes
in terms of achieving climate smart, small-scale agriculture and community oriented
REDD+. This should include an analysis of the degree to which these are coordinated and
synchronised.

3
 Assess existing interventions that are being carried out by central and local government in
addressing climate change in-terms of adaptation, mitigation and REDD
 Provide practical recommendations on how to integrate climate change adaptation, mitigation
and REDD in the national development programmes
 Recommend the best, appropriate and workable changes in the policies and or national
programmes and national REDD strategy that are needed for achieving climate smart, small-
scale agriculture and community oriented REDD+ in project areas and Tanzania at large.
 Provide recommendations on how agriculture policies and development plans could more
directly support adaptation responses and mitigation co-benefits, how can adaptation and
mitigation co-benefits can be better mainstreamed into policies, and any necessary policy
revisions to support the objectives of the National Climate Change Strategy and sector action
plan. This should include recommendations specific to Kilimo Kwanza and SAGCOT
In addressing the objectives of this assignment and the proposed policy recommendations for
achieving climate smart, small-scale agriculture and community oriented REDD+, the following
key questions were taken into account:
 How policies address issues of climate change adaption, mitigation and REDD
 How national programmes address or integrate issues of climate change adaption,
mitigation and REDD for achieving climate smart, small-scale agriculture and
community oriented REDD+
 What are the gaps in the agriculture policy and agriculture development plans in terms of
climate change adaptation, mitigation and REDD
 What are the opportunities available in the agriculture development plans that
smallholders farmers can use in achieving climate smart, small-scale agriculture and
The expected output of this assignment was one overall policy analysis in relation to climate
change mitigation, adaptation, agriculture and REDD with focus for smallholder farmers
produced
2. Study methodology
Documents for the policies, strategies and programmes required for review and analysis were
collected from different sources and reviewed. The main review criteria was the explicit and
implicit consideration of elements related to climate change adaptation, mitigation, small-scale
climate smart agriculture and community oriented REDD in the policies, strategies and

4
programmes. A climate smart landscape approach (Scherr et al., 2012) was used to analyse
consideration of climate smart small scale agriculture in the policies and programmes by
considering elements of climate smart practices at field and farm scale, diversity of land use
across the landscape and the management of land use interactions at the landscape scale (Table
1). Elements related to tenure rights, co-benefit sharing, capacity building and institutional
strengthening, harmonization of conflicting sectoral polices and land use planning were
considered in the analysis on community oriented REDD+.
Table 1: Climate change adaptation, mitigation, climate smart agriculture and community
oriented REDD+ elements considered in the analysis of policies, strategies and programmes
Climate change adaptation,
mitigation, agriculture and
REDD components
Elements considered in the analysis of policies, strategies and
programmes
Climate change Adaptation  Change of crop varieties
 Change of planting dates
 Crop and livestock diversification
 Erosion control
 Technology innovations, capacity building in climate change
adaptation (e.g., Breeding water stress/drought tolerant crop varieties)
Climate change Mitigation  Energy use in agriculture
 Land preparation
 Agricultural inputs (high versus low carbon food print)
 Land use change
Climate smart small scale agriculture
Climate smart practices at field and
farm scale
 Soil, water and nutrient management along with agroforestry,
livestock, husbandry and forestry and grassland management
techniques
Diversity of land use across
landscape
 Land cover
 land use
 species and varietal diversity of plant and animals
Management of land use
interaction at landscape scale
 Management of impacts of different land uses
 management of impacts on other land uses and users in the landscape
Community oriented REDD+  Tenure issues
 Benefit sharing of mitigation activities
 Capacity building and institutional strengthening for local forest
resource management
 Harmonization of conflicting climate sectoral polices and strategies
 Land use planning

5
3. Climate change, climate smart small-scale agriculture and
3.1. Global context
3.1.1. Climate change
That Global climate change is occurring is beyond argument, as shown by observations on
increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, the widespread melting of snow and ice
and rising global average sea levels (UNEP, 2009). According to IPCC AR4, if Green House Gas
(GHG) levels in the atmosphere double compared with pre-industrial levels, it is very unlikely
that average global temperatures will increase less than 1.50
C compared with the pre-industrial
period (IPCC, 2007). As a result, global responses to the situation (e.g., UNFCC) aim to hold the
increase in global temperature below 20
C and take action to meet this objective consistent with
science and on the basis of equity (Anderson, 2013). According to Anderson (2012) the 20
C has
become established as guard rail between acceptable and dangerous levels of climate change. In
the Third IPCC Assessment Report (TAR3), impacts resulting from temperature rises below 2
degrees were not, on average, considered desirable either, it was widely, and often tacitly,
assumed that they are somehow manageable and tolerable. However, when the impacts were
revisited in time for Copenhagen climate summit in 2009 it was revealed that there were greater
impacts for any given increase in temperature and that the impacts of 20
C are more serious than
previously thought (Anderson, 2012). Since most of the planetary surface consists of oceans, and
water has high capacity for absorbing heat, an average global rise of 20
C may correspond to an
average land-based temperature rise of 30
C that would trigger marked changes in temperature
and precipitation patterns (Anderson, 2012).
Agriculture will therefore have to cope with increased climate variability, more extreme weather
events and unequivocal rising temperatures. In the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4),it is
projected that crop productivity will increase slightly at mid to high latitudes for local mean
temperature increases of up to 1-30
C (Easterling, et al., 2007). Crop productivity is projected to
decrease even for small local temperature increases (1-20
C) at lower latitudes especially in the
seasonally dry and tropical regions. According to AR4 (IPCC, 2007b) in some African countries,
yields from rain-fed agriculture which is important for the poorest farmers could be reduced up
to 50 per cent by 2020. A recent study by Stanford University suggest that production losses
across the continent of Africa in 2050, consistent with global warming of around 1.50
C are likely
to be in the range of 18-22 percent for maize, sorghum, millet and groundnut with worst-case of

6
up to 27-32 percent (Schlenker and Lobell, 2010). Existing assessment indicate that, overall,
climate change will affect food security in all its dimensions (FAO, 2009).
Although the current experienced climate changes are largely due to anthropogenic activities in
the Global North, its impacts will fall disproportionately on developing countries (Stabinsky and
Li Ching, 2012). The majority of the world's rural poor who live in areas that are resource-poor,
highly heterogeneous and risk prone will be hardest hit by climate change. Smallholder and
subsistence farmers are among the vulnerable groups in developing countries who will suffer
complex, localised impacts of climate change and will be disproportionately affected by extreme
climate events (Easterling et al. 2007).
3.1.2. Climate smart small scale agriculture
The term “Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA)” was introduced by FAO for the first time in 2010.
Since then, it has been extensively promoted particularly by FAO and the World Bank as a tool
for improving food security by adapting to climate change impacts while at the same time
mitigating climate change.
According to Braimoh (2012)1
, CSA addresses the challenges of food security, and climate
mitigation and adaptation together, rather than in isolation. The rationale of the concept is the
fact that agricultural production will need to increase by 70% by 2050 to meet global demand for
food. However, on one hand impacts of climate change will reduce productivity and lead to
greater instability in production in the agricultural sector in areas that already have high levels of
food insecurity, environmental degradation and limited options for coping with adverse weather
conditions. On the other hand, agriculture is also directly responsible for 14% of global
greenhouse gas emissions and the sector is a key driver of deforestation and land degradation
which account for about 17% of greenhouse gas emission. Therefore, climate smart agriculture is
an important part of agricultural sector solution to climate change by capturing synergies that
exists among activities to develop more productive food systems and improve natural resource
management.
Climate-smart agriculture includes many of the field-based and farm based sustainable
agricultural land management practices already in wide use, such as conservation tillage/farming
practices, agro-forestry, residue management etc. However, as defined in the first paragraph of
1 The World Bank, Washington, DC

7
this section, CSA requires actions beyond the farm scale (Scherr et al., 2012)2
. For example
FAO’s definition of CSA include adopting an ecosystem approach, working at landscape scale
and ensuring intersectoral coordination and cooperation’ (FAO, 2010)3
. In the World Bank’s
definition, climate smart agriculture includes ‘integrated planning of land, agriculture, fisheries,
and water at multiple scales (local, watershed, regional)’ (World Bank, 2011)4
. According to
FAO (2012), CSA is a combined policy, technology and financing approach to enable countries
to achieve sustainable agricultural development under climate change. However, the CSA
approach involves site-specific assessments of the adaptation, mitigation and food security
benefits of a range of agricultural production technologies and practices, and identifies those
which are most suitable for a given agro-ecological and socio-economic situation.
3.1.3. Community oriented REDD+
Global response to climate change problem focuses on climate change mitigation and adaptation.
Mitigation refers to reducing factors including GHG that contribute to climate change.
Adaptation refers to improving or putting in place systems for minimizing the impacts of climate
change. Both, mitigation and adaptation are necessary strategies to reduce the risks of climate
change. The more successful the first strategy is, the less the second one is required (Kropp and
Scholze 2009).
In the international climate change negotiation under UNFCCC, mitigation strategies are
implemented through the Kyoto Protocol which was adopted in Kyoto, Japan on 11 December
1997 and came into force in 2005. Under the Kyoto Protocol, developed countries are required to
reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases by about 5% of their 1990 levels by the years 2008 –
2012. These countries can meet their reduction targets for CO2 emissions in a variety of ways
such as: through improved energy efficiency, by substituting fuels that produce less CO2, and by
using renewable energy sources. Developed countries can also meet reduction emission through
the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Program. The CDM essentially provides a market
mechanism for the sale of carbon credits or Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), from
developing countries (Mdemu and Burra, 2011).
2 Sara J Scherr, Seth Shames and Rachel Friedman 2012 From climate-smart agriculture to climate-smart landscapes,
Agriculture & Food Security, Vol 1:12, http://www.agricultureandfoodsecurity.com/content/1/1/12
3 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO): “Climate-Smart” Agriculture: Policies, Practices and Financing
for Food Security, Adaptation and Mitigation. Rome, Italy: FAO; 2010.
4 Bank W: Climate-Smart Agriculture: A Call to Action. Washington, DC: World Bank; 2011

8
The idea of REDD became formal at the UNFCCC 13th Conference of the parties (COP 13) in
Bali in 2007 (Mdemu et al., 2012). This came after the REDD Policy negotiations which started
during COP 11 in Montreal, Canada in 2005 and continued at COP 12 in Nairobi in 2006 (URT,
2009). However, it is believed that the seeds for REDD were planted in the Kyoto Protocol as
clearly illustrated by Articles 2 and 3 of the protocol (Kyoto Protocol, 1997). Since that time,
REDD issues crossed a number of timelines in the UN Climate Change Negotiations to the
current state including its removal from Land Use, Land Use Change and Forest (LULUCF)
discussions by the Marrakesh Accords in 2001during COP 7 (Holloway and Giandomenico,
2009). The idea behind was that developing countries with tropical forests implement activities
that can reduce emissions from deforestation in exchange for receiving tradable carbon
abatement credits that will be financed by developed countries (Karsenty, 2008; Dutschke and
Pistorius, 2008). The general consensus was that REDD is potentially a low cost and a win-win
option for climate change mitigation (Viana et al. 2009; Angelsen, 2008). That is, the option
creates incentives for developing countries to reduce deforestation and forest degradation, while
at the same time conserving biodiversity and reducing poverty (Karsenty, 2008). REDD
explicitly recognizes that the needs of local and indigenous communities should be addressed.
Community oriented REDD as a concept can be interpreted as REDD initiatives in which
incentives from carbon trade and additional forest related products due to conservation targets to
benefit the communities. It implies that communities have the authority in management and
tenure rights of the forest. Decentralization of natural resource management has been one of
most significant and successful shift of national environmental management policies in
developing world. According to Phelps et al., (2010), REDD+ may reverse decentralization
trends due to generous and long term funding which may reduce past financial burdens that
motivated decentralization. In addition, new demands placed by REDD+ implementation may
impose prohibitive costs to small scale initiatives while centralized system would benefit from
economies of scale, coordination and standardization (Phelps, et al., 2010). However, according
to Springer and Larsen (2012); issues on community tenure have received substantial attention in
REDD+ discussions for a number of reasons including i) tenure security safeguards against risks
of involuntary resettlement; ii) tenure status may affect communities' eligibility to participate in
REDD+ activities; iii) tenure security supports more effective forest stewardship and therefore
REDD+; iv) tenure supports the exercise of traditional knowledge and practices contributing to
REDD+; v)tenure will substantially influence the distribution of potential benefits from REDD+;
vi)carbon rights will also be shaped by underlying forest tenure; and vii) tenure is itself a benefit.
A recent analysis of case studies by USAID (2011) found that communities with secure and
unambiguous ownership rights in Mexico have more bargaining power and receive a higher

9
share of the benefits from natural resources management. In other countries where rights are
shared between communities and the state, community share of revenues were found to be
closely linked to the strength of their rights to land and forests.
Therefore, for effective community oriented REDD+, communities should have control over
local REDD+ design and implementation (Chretien 2013, Phelps et al., 2010). Local users
should be given authority, information, and support to determine whether they engage with
REDD+, to align their management, monitoring and enforcement with low-emissions objective
and to negotiate revenue sharing (Phelps et al., 2010).
3.2. National Context
3.2.1. Climate change
Tanzania ratified the United Nation Framework Convention for Climate Change (UNFCCC) in
April 1996 (Mwandosya et al., 1998). As a member of the parties to UNFCCC, the country
formally ratified the Kyoto protocol in 2002 and other multilateral environmental agreement
such as UNCCD, UNCBD, and Hyogo Framework. The UNFCCC requires member countries to
communicate to the Conference of the parties (CoP) on different issues regarding climate change
and mitigation efforts. Since joining the UNFCC, the country regularly submits a climate change
communication report to UNFCCC through the Vice-President’s Office which is the contact
point on climate in the country. Also the UNFCCC commits Parties of the Convention to develop
national programmes and measures to respond to climate change. One such programmes in
Tanzania is the National Adaptation Plan of Action (NAPA) which was developed in 2007.
Early stages of climate activities in the country included studies on sources of sinks of
greenhouse gases in 1993 under the funding from GEF through UNEP. The study established an
inventory of sources of emissions and removal by sinks of GHGs in Tanzania. In 1998 another
study on climate change mitigation was conducted by the Centre for Energy, Environment,
Science and Technology (CEEST).The study aimed at analysing the role of land use sectors in
mitigating greenhouse gases and it was conducted within the framework of the DANIDA project
“Climate Change Mitigation in Southern Africa: Phase 2” under the coordination of UNEP
Collaborating Centre on energy and environment at Riso National Laboratory. Since then, a
number of programmes and activities on climate change have taken place in the country through
the National climate focal point (Vice President’s Office-Environment), training and research
institutions and Non Government Organisations (NGOs).

10
The climate change predictions for Tanzania indicate that by 2050 mean daily temperatures will
rise by 3-5°
C throughout the country and mean annual temperature is likely to increase by 2-4°
C
(Chambwera and Macgregor, 2009). Further, prediction of global climate models show that areas
with bimodal rainfall pattern will experience increased rainfall of 5%-45%, while those with uni-
modal rainfall pattern will experience decreased rainfall of 5%-15% (Chambwera and
Macgregor, 2009; Paavola, 2003; Agrawala et al., 2003). Unfortunately, majority of areas with
uni-modal rainfall pattern are the semi-arid regions. In addition to decreased rainfall, semi-arid
areas will experience significant reduction in the length of growing periods. The percentage of
failing seasons is likely to be in the range of 20-50% by 2050 for large parts of the country
(Thornton et al., 2006). The problem, however, is not only the resulting drought itself but also
the fact that predictability of rainfall events and amounts will considerably decrease with
significant consequences to farmers and pastoralists.
Impacts associated with projected climate change are severe to the population and natural
ecosystems in Tanzania. For example, a sea level rise of 0.5 m in Tanzania would inundate over
2,000 km2
of land, costing around US$51 million (UNEP, 2002). Food security is likely to be
affected by increased frequency and intensity of droughts or floods. Climate change will also
contribute to desertification by changing the spatial and temporal patterns of temperature, rainfall
and winds. Already there are indications that high temperatures and less rainfall during dry
months would lead to a reduction of annual river flows for the Pangani and the Ruvu river basins
by 9% and 10% respectively, resulting in serious water shortages, lowered agricultural
production, increased fungal and insect infestations, decreased biodiversity and less reliable
hydropower production (Mwandosya et al., 1998; Orindi and Murray, 2005). These and other
climate change impacts add a critical dimension to Tanzania and therefore climate change
mitigation and adaptation strategies will be necessary in order reduce poverty, hunger, diseases,
and environmental degradation and contribute to MDGs (Clausen and Bjerg, 2010).
3.2.2. Climate smart small scale agriculture
In Tanzania, sustainable land management practices that are within the general definition of
climate smart agriculture have been practiced in different parts of the country by small scale
farmers for many years. The varying range of the land management practices experienced in
different parts the country were developed by local farmers or introduced by the government to

11
respond to specific land management related problems under specific agro ecological , land
forms and socio-cultural conditions.
Conservation tillage, soil and water management, agroforestry and soil fertility management are
some of conservation agriculture commonly practiced in Tanzania. Ridging especially for
cassava and sweet potato is one of the conservation tillage practices which is practiced at farm
scale countrywide. Different forms of ridging such as tied ridging and contour ridges have shown
to be effective in controlling soil erosion, maintaining soil moisture and improving soil fertility
in slopping agricultural lands that are prone to soil erosion (Tumbo, et al., 2012). The Ngoro pits,
commonly known as Fanya Juu Fanya chini is one of the successful traditional conservation
tillage practices in the Matengo Hills in Southern Tanzania (Nindi, 2007).
Other conservation tillage practices such as no tillage (NT) or zero tillage, minimum tillage and
stubble-mulch tillage have been practiced in central and eastern zone of Tanzania. These
conservation tillage practices were introduced in semi-arid districts of Babati, Kiteto and
Simanjiro in Arusha Region and Singida Rural District in 1991 by a Swedish supported Land
Management Programme (LAMP) (Johnsson et al., 2000). No tillage practice was introduced in
the 1980’s in Arumeru District by the Soil Conservation and Agroforestry Programme (SCAPA)
in collaboration with the Regional Land Management Programme (RELMA). Although NT
practices are reported to improve soil moisture storage in semi arid areas of Tanzania when crop
residues are used to cover the soil surfaces, shallow and deep tied ridges conservation tillage
have shown to result into higher soil moisture storage capacity than NT practices (Swai and
Rwehumbiza, 1998). In Karatu and Arumeru Districts, about 61% of farmers are reported to
combine ripping and cover crop over NT with direct planting by jab planter (Mkomwa et al.,
2011 as cited in Lengale 2013). For example, ripping in combination with lablab or pigeon pea
as cover crop gave higher maize yield (1.9 to 2.0 t/ha) than NT and conventional tillage with ox-
ploughing which gave 1.7t/ha and 1.3t/ha respectively (Mkomwa et al., 2011 as cited in Lengale,
2013). In Dodoma, terracing, large pits and ridges conservation practices were reported to
contribute to increased crop yields per hectare compared to cover crop, minimum tillage and
terraces in combination with minimum tillage and cover crops (Tumbo et al., 2011)
Although existing information show that adoption rates of conservation agriculture in Arusha,
Manyara and Dodoma are on the increase, in the past adoption rates have been hindered by
factors such as labour intensiveness, lack of training and lack of capital to invest in new
technologies, lack of immediate returns to investment in CA and insecure land tenure which limit
long term investment on land (Tumbo et al., 2011). Probably, what might downgrade sustainable

12
land management practices in Tanzania to qualify for CSA would be the failure to adopt an
ecosystem approach, focusing on farm scale instead of landscape scale and lack of intersectoral
coordination or integrated planning at various scales (FAO, 2010; World Bank, 2011).
3.2.3. Community oriented REDD+
Tanzania is one of the countries in Africa which is piloting REDD+ implementation under the
UN-REDD programme with funding support from the Royal Norwegian Government. To
effectively participate in REDD+ programme, the country developed the National REDD
strategy by 2012 in anticipation of a post-2012 climate change agreement that will include a new
global facility for Reduced Emissions from forest Degradation and Deforestation. As part of
REDD+ piloting, there are currently 7 REDD+ projects which are being implemented by NGOs
in collaboration with local communities and local district authorities. The forest under REDD
pilot projects falls under two main forest management arrangements, i.e. Community Forest
Management (CFM) and Joint forest management (JFM). Where forests are under CFM,
securing tenure rights of the forest management areas by participating villages is one of the pre-
condition for their participation in different types of carbon markets. Most of the REDD pilot
projects intend to channel the carbon market revenue directly to communities on a result based-
basis in order to maximize incentives to maintain forest cover and reduce deforestation. Part of
the REDD+ pilot project funds is used by the implementing organizations to develop and pilot
carbon payment/compensation mechanisms to participating villages.
Community oriented REDD+ in Tanzania builds on the already well established Participatory
Forestry Management (PFM) programme. For over a decade, Tanzania has adopted participatory
forest and wildlife management approaches such as Community Based Forest Management
(CBFM), Joint Forest Management (JFM) and Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs) having
realised that law enforcement for conservation were ineffective (Richards et al., 2009). There is
already a wide recognition that local communities who control forest uses, formally or
informally, must be key beneficiaries of funds under REDD if these new global payment
schemes are to be successful in reversing existing rates of deforestation and forest degradation.
In spite of the overall success of PFM in Tanzania, a number of challenges including channeling
local benefits to communities from forest under local management and enforcing rights over
forests. It is believed that these challenges (if not addressed) may also become constraints to

13
REDD implementation by undermining objectives of REDD and weakening community’s
capacity to adapt to climate changes (Tanzania National REDD Readiness Pgrogramme).
4. Results of Policy Analysis
4.1. How do the policies, programmes and strategies address issues of climate
change adaptation, mitigation, climate smart small-scale agriculture and
community oriented REDD
4.1.1. Draft Agriculture Policy, 2012
Climate change elements features in general terms under the issues of irrigation development,
biofuel crop production and utilization and environment as cross-cutting issues. Similarly climate
change adaptation and mitigation words appear in anecdotal fashion in the draft policy
document. For example, the word adaptation to climate change appears explicitly only once
under the cross-cutting issue of environment “The Government in collaboration with other
stakeholders shall strive to improve adaptation measures to climate change effects and deal with
all the risks involved”. The world mitigation also appears in the opening paragraph under the
cross-cutting issue of environment in relation to the role of agriculture in climate change
mitigation “Increasing the agriculture contribution to climate change mitigation should entail
efficient crop systems”. Mitigation word is also used in relation to risk management in crop
production and not in relation to climate change, one of such identified risks being reduced crop
production as a result of weather changes.
However, the policy recognizes the opportunity of agriculture to contribute to natural carbon
pool through agriculture intensification. “Although, the intensification of agriculture exerts
pressure on natural resources it also contributes to natural carbon pool”. Intensification
refereed in the policy may be translated to imply intensive agricultural land use through
increased crop seasons and crop rotation. The policy does not state the risks of increasing GHG
emissions as result of intensification but it recognises that concentration of greenhouse gases,
human-driven emissions of carbon dioxide and land-use changes are the processes primarily
responsible for climate change in the region.“Climate change is also an attribute of
unsustainable farming methods and systems including deforestation, land clearing and bush
fires” The policy underscores the unavailability of reliable methodologies for measuring and
monitoring carbon sequestration in agriculture sector.
With regards to climate change mitigation issues, the policy identifies the potential of biofuel to

14
provide energy for use in Tanzania and it recognize the challenges posed with biofuel investment
when its development is not properly managed and becomes a threat to food security, habitat and
environmental destruction. The proper management in relation to biofuel investment is however
not further elaborated by the policy what it entails. Loss of biodiversity resulting from
conversion of large swathes of natural habitats into monoculture bio-fuels crops production areas
is one of the policy issues under biofuel crop production and utilization.
There are climate change adaptation and mitigation elements which appear as policy issues or
statements, although not in definite terms. Climate change adaptation elements which appears in
the policy include i) participation in funding and management of crop research; ii) integration of
indigenous knowledge into scientific research; iii) promotion of research on irrigation and
development of appropriate technologies for small holder agriculture; iv) sustainable
conservation of productive germ plasm and its biodiversity in existing agro-ecosystems; v)
strengthening early warning systems for provision of timely warning signals on climatic
variability and change; promotion of public and private financing in irrigation development; vi)
development of water harvesting technologies and promotion of utilization of harvested rain
water. These climate change adaptation elements are very generic and they are not directed to
specific climate change impacts or stimuli. Further, the policy does not state anywhere on
support to small-scale farmers to adapt to climate change or become more resilient to climate
change.
The policy identifies in generic terms about "efficient crop systems" as a way of contributing to
climate change mitigation by agriculture “Increasing the agriculture contribution to climate
change mitigation should entail efficient crop systems”. However, there is no mention of the
"crop systems" in focus under varying agro-ecological zones. Similarly, promotion and
regulation of risk mitigation in agriculture is presented in general terms. Although one of the
policy statement include facilitating availability and accessibility to rural electrification, issues
relating to energy use in agriculture which could contribute to mitigating climate change effects
are missing in the draft policy document.
Regarding climate smart small scale agriculture, the draft policy recognizes the constraint of the
existing land tenure systems as an un-conducive for long term investment. It emphasizes that
insecurity of land tenure has lead to decline in productive capacity of agricultural land due to
unsustainable land use practices resulting to land degradation with negative consequences to the
hydrology, biological, chemical and physical properties of soils. Organic agriculture can be
identified as one of climate smart agriculture which is explicitly covered although its policy

15
objective is to increase foreign earning and household income.
Regarding the diversity of land use across the landscape and management of land use
interactions as key components of climate smart agriculture, three policy objectives are identified
under the issues of research and development, urban agriculture and agricultural land use to
support climate smart small scale agriculture. They include the support of initiatives aimed at
arresting agro-biodiversity deterioration, promotion of sustainable agricultural land use plans and
development and promotion of urban agriculture. Although the policy objective for urban
agriculture is to increase production, productivity and profitability, urban agriculture can be
considered as one form of diversifying land uses.
"Initiatives aimed at arresting agro-biodiversity deterioration shall be supported"
"The Government shall ensure agricultural lands are protected against encroachment as well as
promote sustainable agricultural land use plans"
"Supportive mechanisms for undertaking urban and peri-urban agriculture shall be developed"
Under its cross-cutting issues on environment, up-scaling of agricultural activities that enhance
carbon storage capacity and public awareness creation on the opportunities of agriculture as
potential carbon sink are included in its policy statements.
“Activities that enhance the carbon storage capacity such as conservation agriculture and agro-
forest shall be up-scaled”
“Public awareness on the opportunities of agriculture as potential carbon sink and mechanism
to benefit from carbon market shall be established”
With the exception of the policy support on gender-equitable land tenure governance
establishment of public awareness on the opportunities of agriculture as potential carbon sink
and mechanism to benefit from carbon market, other aspects of community oriented REDD are
less covered by the draft policy. However, linkages of the policy with REDD are not mentioned
anywhere in the policy document and no evident efforts is seen in the policy to align climate
change adaptation with climate change mitigation. The draft agriculture policy identifies the
Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism as an essential partner to the sector. It states the
natural resource management activities that have direct interaction with many different aspects of
agriculture. The activities include Participatory Forestry Management, production of fuel wood
for agricultural processing in rural areas, catchment management, beekeeping, biodiversity, germ

16
plasm conservation, wildlife management and management and protection of wetlands.
As reflected by the policy's vision and mission, the policy indents to facilitate the transformation
of agricultural sector into modern, commercial and competitive sector in order to ensure food
security and poverty alleviation. Modernization and commercialisation of the sector will target
both small scale and large scale farmers and is in line with MKUKUTA and the Vision 2025. In
the draft policy there are a number of policy statements that target small scale farmers under
irrigation development, agricultural mechanisation, development of agriculture commodities,
employment and decent work in agriculture.
Irrigation development: “Private sector investment in small-scale irrigation and formation of
irrigators Associations for participatory management of irrigation schemes shall be promoted”
Agricultural mechanization: “Efficient utilization of agricultural machinery implements,
equipments and tools shall be promoted, particularly among small scale farmers, women and
men”
Development of agriculture commodities: “The Government shall promote commodity supply
chains and regulate contract farming while ensuring that the rights of farmers, particularly
small scale farmers women and men, are duly respected”
“Transformation of small scale production to modern and commercial farming shall be
enhanced”
Employment and Decent Work in Agriculture: “Business models that provide opportunities for
small-scale producers towards aggregation of produce and developing backward and forward
linkages shall be promoted, targeting in particular rural women and youth”
However, it is yet not clear how those policy statements focusing on small scale farmers will be
implemented and achieved.
4.1.2. Forest Policy, 1998
The policy identifies sectoral problems related to the management of forest land resources, forest
activities and conservation of forest ecosystems and its biodiversity which are threatened from
human activities such as conversion of forest land into agriculture, forest fires and illegal
logging. Climate change at the time of the policy preparation (1998) was not among the concerns
for the forest sector. However, there some of the policy statements which relate in very general
terms to conservation agriculture and community oriented REDD for forests in public lands.

17
Community oriented REDD elements in the policy is also reflected from additional benefits such
as promotion of beekeeping in the areas of conserved forests. The policy statements include:-
 provision of extension on gender sensitive agro-forestry practices with consideration of
women's preferences on species selection
 establishment of new catchment forest reserves for watershed management and soil
conservation in critical watershed areas-
 inclusion of watershed management and soil conservation in management plans for
protection and production forests
 strengthening research and information dissemination to improve watershed management
and soil conservation
 Promote allocation of forests and their management responsibility to villages, private
individuals or to the government-grant village appropriate user rights as incentives for
sustainable forest management
 incorporation of beekeeping component in the management plans of forest
 reserves and encouraging eco-tourism development by the communities and private
sector as potential source of income for communities in rural areas adjacent to natural
forests
 Encouraging local communities to participate in local activities. Instituting clearly
defined forest land and tree tenure rights for local communities including both men and
women
As highlighted above, climate change elements (adaptation & mitigation) do not directly feature
in the policy. Further, issues relating to tenure, harmonization of conflicting sectoral policies and
land use planning which are very important in the implementation of community oriented REDD
are scantly presented. Although the policy at one point declares to involve local communities and
other stakeholders in conservation and management of high bio-diverse forest reserves,
experiences has proved difficulties in benefit sharing from protected forest under joint
management arrangements.
The policy under its watershed management and soil conservation, state to strengthen
coordination between forest authorities and other institutions involved in watershed protection.
Promotion of cross-sectoral coordination is also mentioned in the policy as a means to achieve
efficient and effective forestry extension services.

18
The National Forest Program (NFP) (2001-2010) was developed in 2001 to implement the
National Forest Policy. Four implementation programmes were developed for the NFP. The
programes included i) Forest Resources Conservation and Management programme which aims
at promoting gender balanced stakeholders participation in the management of natural and
plantation forests, giving priority to ecosystems conservation, catchment areas and sustainable
utilization of forest resources; (ii) Institutions and Human Resources Development programme
which aimed at strengthening institutional set up, coordination of forest management,
establishing sustainable forest sector funding and improvement in research, extension services
and capacity building through strengthening human resources; iii) Legal and Regulatory
Framework programme which focuses on the development of regulatory issues including the
Forest Act, rules, regulations and guidelines to facilitate operations of the private sector and
participatory management, and iv) Forestry Based Industries and Sustainable Livelihoods
programme which is intended to enhance forest industry development by promoting private
sector investment, improving productivity and efficiency and to tap the income generation
opportunities provided by non wood forest products. Joint Forest Management (JFM) and
Community Based Forest Management (CBFM) were key implementation modalities for
protected forest reserves and community managed forests under the forest resources and
conservation programme. Key lessons under JFM to inform REDD+ implementation has been on
developing effective modalities for benefit sharing between Local Government Authorities
(LGA) and village communities under joint forest management arrangements. The NFP phased
out in 2010 and the second phase of NFP is being developed by the Tanzania Forest Services
(TFS) in collaboration with Development Partners.
4.1.3. National Water Policy, 2002
As key adaptive elements to water resources, the policy underscores the need to provide water
for environment and ecosystems. Other climate change adaptive elements that features in the
policy include: i) improvement of efficiency of water abstraction and distribution by different
water use entities (urban and rural water supply, hydropower producers, irrigators, industries and
mining operators) in order to avoid undue wasteful use of the resource; ii) rainwater harvesting
and waste water recycling and desalination of seawater (where necessary) to increase availability
of water resources; iii) employing demand management principles to manage water resources;
and iv) research and technology development. Although the policy addresses a considerable
number of adaptation elements, some climate change impact related adaptive elements such as

19
construction of large dams in the river basins, large rainfall harvesting schemes, floods and
droughts monitoring are contained in the policy as part of water resources development and
disaster management strategies and therefore are not directly in response to any projected or
predicted climate change impacts. The policy in its overview of water resources potential states
that extreme temporal variability in rainfall and river flows are caused by the monsoon type of
climate prevailing in the country. However, the policy does not make any explicit reference to
the projected disruption to rainfall patterns as result of climate change. Furthermore, issues on
community oriented REDD are implicitly and slightly reflected on the policy’s recognition of
forest for conservation of water resources.“The forests offer habitat for wildlife, bee keeping,
unique natural ecosystem and genetic resources, and have an important effect on the
conservation of water resources”Apart from rainwater harvesting, there is no other climate smart
small scale agriculture which is reflected in the policy. The policy does not mention anything
about the particular needs of small scale farmers. Similarly there are no any commitments in the
policy on supporting small-scale farmers with small scale irrigation schemes.
In 2005, a National Water Sector Development Strategy (2005-2015) was developed by the
Government in order to implement the water policy and contribute to MDGs on access to water
and poverty reduction, MKUKUTA and 2025 National Development Vision. Consequently a
Water sector Development Plan/Programme (WSDP) (2005-2025) was developed in 2006. The
WSDP is implemented through basket funding from EU, the World Bank and other country
development partners. The first phase of programme implementation ended in 2012 and the
second phase of the programme is being developed.
The climate change adaptation elements that features in the WSDS are the same as in the
National Water Policy simply because the WSDS attempt to operationalise the water policy.
Sectoral development plans including the ASDS, National Irrigation Master Plan (NIMP) and
more recently Kilimo Kwanza promotes significant expansion of irrigated land in Tanzania to
unlock rural and national development. Plans are based on analysis in the NIMP of 2002 which
suggests that Tanzania has 29.4 million hectares suitable for irrigation. Whilst expansion of
irrigation is undoubtedly a major strategy for enhancing Tanzania’s resilience to climate change,
there is sparse consideration of future climate change within these planning documents.
4.1.4. Land Policy, 1997

20
The national land policy (1997), displays similar context to National Forest Policy and other
policies which have existed for more than a decade in terms climate change consideration. The
land policy is very important and may play key role in climate change adaptation and mitigation
because all economic activities which can mitigate or contribute to climate change takes place on
land. Climate change related elements do not feature among the key policy issues. However,
there are a number of policy specific objectives and policy statements which can be deduced to
reflect elements of climate change mitigation, climate smart agriculture and community oriented
REDD. One of such objectives is the recognition, clarification and securing of existing rights in
lands, especially the customary rights of smallholders and protecting land resources from
degradation for sustainable development. Secure land tenure is key and one of the pre-conditions
for investments under climate smart small scale agriculture and community oriented REDD.
Similarly protection of land resources may involve conservation agriculture for example and
protection of forest resource for sustainable development of the communities managing the
natural resources. Other policy statements that implicitly reflect climate smart agriculture and
community oriented REDD elements include: i) Protection of sensitive areas (among others
include water catchments, forests, rivers, river basins and banks, areas of biodiversity); ii) urban
land use and development plans that aim at more intensive use of urban land; iii) recognition of
existing land tenure rights before consideration of other user rights; iv) encourage multiple land
use techniques in areas of conflicting land use, an element of diversity of land use across the land
scape under climate smart agriculture; v) community involvement in resource management, land
use planning and conflict resolution; vi) prohibit shifting agriculture and nomadism; and vii)
provision of education to pastoralists and agriculturalists on good land management and
utilization. However, there is no mention in the policy of the relationship between land tenure
and trees and carbon tenure.
The Land Policy is implemented by the Land Act No. 4 and Village Land Act, both of 1999. The
Land Act No. 4 of 1999 aims to facilitate equitable distribution and access to land, in particular
by recognising equal land rights to men and women, to regulate the land market to ensure that
smallholders and pastoralists are not disadvantaged, and to establish an independent, expeditious,
and just adjudication of land disputes. The enforcement of the LA is under the responsibility of
the Ministry of Lands and Human Settlements and land is centrally managed by the
Commissioner of Lands exercising full control on behalf of the President. The Village Land Act
No. 5 regulates the management and administration of village land. It provides a process for
village councils to issue certificates of customary rights of occupancy and for a devolved system
of registration, titling and dispute settlement at village level. It equal rights on access to land for
men and women rendering as invalid customary discriminatory practices against women.

21
In 2005 a Strategic Plan for the Implementation of Land Laws (SPILL) was developed to
implement the two land laws in ten years (2005-2015). Implementation of SPILL required about
USD 300 million. However, due to lack of sufficient funding, SPILL was piloted in 15 focusing
on access to land information system, overhauling mapping infrastructures and improving
security of village land tenure through village land titling. However, insecurity of village land
tenure and ambiguous definition of general land have continued to perpetuate land alienation
from small-scale farmers in the pretext of land allocation to investors
4.1.5. National Investment Policy, 1996
The National Investment Policy (1996) sets out the objectives and the investment strategies that
aim at achieving the national investment objectives. The policy also sets specific sectoral
objectives for agriculture, mineral sector, industry, tourism, transport, communications, energy
and social services to contribute towards achieving investment transformation. Among the
agriculture sector objectives, include i) Encouraging livestock production in smallholder and
commercial farming sector, including processing and marketing of livestock products; ii)
Encouraging expansion in irrigation agriculture which uses sound environmental technologies;
and iii) Promoting a secure land tenure system that encourages the maximum use of land
resources and facilitates broad based socio and economic development. The policy establishes an
Investment Promotion Authority (IPA) which is the focal point for promotion, coordination and
monitoring of local and foreign investment in Tanzania. One of the functions of IPA is to
identify and acquire land for investment use. However, the policy does not state clearly where
and from whom such land may be acquired. In appropriate land acquisition may result into land
alienation from communities and limit their ability to cope against climate induced shocks such
as droughts. Further, when village land or general land that communities have been using for
years is acquired by investors, it means a lost opportunity from communities to invest on REDD
under community forests. Experiences on land acquisition for investment have shown that
guidelines for land acquisition by Tanzania Investment Centre are flawed and in most cases in
favour of foreign investors. Large parcels of land that have been acquired in the country for
agrofuels production in the past 10 years were not transparent and were exploitative of
communities ignorance on land policies and laws. The policy investment policy is completely
silent on the risks associated with such land acquisition from communities in the face of
increasing environmental change. The policy is also not inclusive of small-scale farmers who are

22
the majority users of the land which is targeted for investment under the National Investment
Policy.
4.1.6. National Climate Change Strategy, 2012
The National Climate Change Strategy presents Tanzania’s current and future efforts to address
climate change adaptation, as well as participation in the global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions in the context of sustainable development. “The broader goal of the strategy is to
enable Tanzania to effectively adapt to climate change and participate in global efforts to
mitigate climate change with a view to achieving sustainable development in the context of the
Tanzania Development Vision 2025, Five Years National Development plan, as well as national
cross sectoral and sectoral policies in line with agreed international frameworks”. It provides
possible measures for adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change impacts that need to be
implemented on critical resource-based sectors which include water resources, coastal and
marine environment, forestry, wildlife, agriculture and food security, human health, tourism,
energy, industry, livestock, fisheries, infrastructure, human settlement and land use. The strategy
also has earmarked climate change mitigation strategies in a number of key sectors including
energy, industry, livestock, transport, mining, wetland, waste management, forestry, agriculture
as well as other cross-cutting issues. However, there is no mention in the strategy on
commitment to ensure coordination between mitigation and adaptation measures.
Some of the strategic interventions for climate change adaptation and mitigation address key
elements of climate smart (small scale) agriculture and community oriented REDD. Climate
smart practices at field and farm scale are extensively covered under the agriculture, water and
livestock sectors while the climate smart agriculture elements that relates to diversity of land use
across the landscape and management of land use interactions at landscape scale features
narrowly under the forest, wildlife and land use issues. Also most of elements for community
oriented REDD in the strategy appears under forestry sector. However, issues on land tenure,
harmonization of sectoral policies and benefit sharing under community oriented REDD do not
feature clearly in the National Climate Change Strategy. The strategy recognizes the
vulnerability of the agriculture sector to climate change but it does not mention the risks of
agriculture intensification in terms of increasing GHG emission from increased use of
agricultural inputs such as fertilizer. Agriculture is generally included as one of the potential
sources of emission under the mitigation strategies section of the strategy. Other listed potential
sources of mitigation include energy sources, transport and waste management.

23
4.1.7. National REDD Strategy, 2012
The National REDD Strategy (2012) has been developed in order to facilitate well coordinated
and effective implementation of REDD+ related policies, processes and activities so as to
contribute to climate change agenda and overall sustainable human development. The whole
essence of REDD strategy is mitigation of climate change effects in the forest and forest related
sectors. Any adaptation elements that feature in the strategy would therefore be regarded as
additional benefits of REDD activities implementation. Climate change adaptation and
mitigation, climate smart agriculture and community oriented REDD are addressed by the
strategy through the proposed strategic actions to address drivers of deforestation and forest
degradation. While climate change adaptation and climate smart small scale agriculture features
minimally as expected (REDD is about mitigation), elements that relates to community oriented
REDD are adequately presented. However, the strategy does not provide clear guidance on a
number of issues but rather it presents options without concluding which option Tanzania is
taking. Addressing this ambiguity will be necessary before the strategy can effectively guide
REDD actions in Tanzania.
4.2. What are the gaps and or risks in the national development programmes
(ASDP, KILIMO KWANZA, SAGCOT in terms of achieving climate
smart, small-scale agriculture and community oriented REDD+
4.2.1. Agriculture Sector Development Programme
The Agricultural sector development programme (ASDP) was developed in 2006 for seven years
(2006-2013) by the agricultural sector lead ministries in Tanzania for implementing the ASDS
which was approved by the Government in 2001. Implementation of ASDP I ended in June 2013
and final evaluation for the extension and irrigation components of the programme has been
conducted. Evaluation for infrastructure component (irrigation warehouse/storage infrastructure)
was launched in July 2013 by JICA. Preparation of the second phase (ASDP II) is being done by
the Government in collaboration with Development Partners. The ASDS and ASDP are linked to
the national strategy for Growth and reduction of poverty (NSGRP) commonly known as
MKUKUTA and the Tanzania Development Vision 2025 which aims to raise the standard of
living of Tanzanians to the level of the middle income country through ensuring food security,
improved incomes and increased export earnings. The objectives of ASDP are two folds, one is
to improve farmer's access to and use of agricultural knowledge, technologies, marketing

24
systems and infrastructure and the second is to promote private investment by exploiting the
improved regulatory and policy environment. The programme provides a number of
complementary interventions in order to achieve these objectives. The programme is further,
divided into two components. The first component on local level support focuses on supporting
sectoral activities at village, ward and district levels. Target support under this component was
improvement of small scale traditional irrigation schemes and construction of new irrigation
schemes for small scale farmers, improving market access through provision of markets, storage
infrastructures and improvement of feeder roads. The component also targeted to supporting the
development of private agricultural markets and small and medium enterprises and linkages
(including commodity supply chains and creating market linkages between small farmers and
private markets or intermediaries) and improving access of private farms and agribusinesses to
better technologies, advisory and financial services. Although the word smallholder farmers and
in some cases small scale is reflected in the ASDP document, there is no deliberate breakdown of
the word farmers into small-scale, medium-scale and large-scale farmers. The programme’s
commercialization drive and its attempt to link small scale farmers to processors clearly illustrate
to support different kinds of farmers. The second component on national level support among
others focuses on reform of agricultural research and extension and investing in strategic national
level irrigation infrastructure and technical support for local level irrigation investment.
Although ASDP has been reported to be successful (Wolter, 2008) through its various
programme components such as PASS, AMSDP and DADPs, the implementation review which
was conducted by donors and the government revealed major challenges including capacity
deficiencies. Doing business as "un-usual" as foreseen by the ASDP Framework and process
document was proving to be untenable due to the public sector driven top down approach and
limited capacities at district level for programme implementation (Wolter, 2008). Identified gaps
or risks by the consultant in the ASDP in terms of achieving climate smart, small-scale
agriculture and community oriented REDD+ include the following:
i) The first MKUKUTA which ended in 2010 to which the ASDS and ASDP are linked
was silent about climate change apart from indication of mainstreaming environment
in the plan. By correlation, climate change issues are completely missing in the ASDP
I (2006-2013). The word climate does not appear anywhere in the programme
document. Further the word mitigation appears only twice in the document in relation
to mitigation of potential environmental and social impacts resulting from programme
implementation and external risks that may affect success of the programme. Out of
the eleven listed external risks, there is none which relates to climate change impacts.
Similarly the word adaptation appears three times and in relation to new technology

25
for agriculture production. The implications for this is that planned programme
activities especially those related to irrigation development might be seriously
affected by climate change and variability in the long-run and affect the indented
programme outcomes and the farmers. Although MKUKUTA II which was
developed in 2010 considers extensively issues of climate change and include
strategies to adapt and mitigate to climate change (e.g. Goal 4-ensuring Food and
Nutrition Security, Environmental Sustainability and Climate change Adaptation and
Mitigation etc) (URT, 2010), it is not clear whether and how these will be
incorporated into the ASDP II.
ii) Although 80% of ASDP budget was earmarked for irrigation development (both at
district and national level), the target for this programme components focuses more
on irrigation infrastructure provision (construction of irrigation intakes, diversion
canals and technologies and formation of Irrigation Water Users Association to
manage the schemes) but there are no programme activities that focuses on efficient
irrigation water use and managing the soil-water continuum especially during water
shortages. Certainly, there could be elements of climate smart agriculture under the
research activities at national level, but in the programme document the focus of
research component at national level is on improving the management of the Zonal
Agricultural Research and Development Institutes and providing responses to
farmer's needs and national research activities which are of local, national and
international importance. One of such research is generally outlined to include long-
term land husbandry and natural resource management.
iii) According to Wolter (2008), a lesson which emerged from the first ASDP external
mid-term reviews (2008) was that the ASDP secretariat at MAFC was being seen as a
parallel structure similar to a typical project implementation unit. Also many
Government and Donor activities that are related to ASDP were continuing outside
the ASDP and outside the district plans and budgets. At local level, it was revealed
that Districts did not have the capacity commensurate to the requirements of the
ASDP to plan and implement District Agricultural Development Plans in a
participatory way. This implies that even if there could be activities that targeted at
achieving climate smart small scale agriculture and community oriented REDD+,
their success would be unlikely due to capacity constraints at District level.
4.2.2. Kilimo Kwanza Strategy

26
The implementation framework of Kilimo Kwanza commonly referred as "Ten Pillars of Kilimo
Kwanza" is so far the main official document of what is known as Kilimo Kwanza Strategy. The
document has been widely disseminated countrywide. The framework outlines ten pillars and
identifies activities for each of the ten pillars proposes the time frame for activities; and allocates
responsibility to institutions, both, public, private and civil society that are responsible for
implementing the identified activities. The ten pillars include: i) National Vision on Kilimo
Kwanza; ii) Financing Kilimo Kwanza; iii) Institutional reorganization for management of
Kilimo Kwanza; iv) Paradigm shift to strategic framework of Kilimo Kwanza; v) Land for
Kilimo Kwanza; vi) Incentive for Kilimo Kwanza; vii) Industrialization for Kilimo Kwanza; viii)
Science, Technology & Human Resources for Kilimo Kwanza; ix) Infrastructure Development
for Kilimo Kwanza; and x) Mobilization of Tanzanians for Kilimo Kwanza. Its national vision as
reflected by the tasks on transformation of peasant and small scale farmers to commercial
farmers through emphasis on productivity and tradability is no different from ASDS and ASDP.
Very unfortunately there is no explanation anywhere for example how such transformation
should be approached. Further, responsibilities are given to lumped groups of key collaborating
institutions without specifying roles of each institution. Major gaps in the strategy in relation to
climate smart small scale agriculture and community oriented REDD+ include:
 There are no identified mitigation measures to likely emissions that would result from
implementation of kilimo kwanza (e.g. increase fertilizer production and utilization). This
is a risk especially to small scale farmers whose livelihoods depends on ecosystems that
would be affected as result of intensive utilization of agrochemicals and machinery
promoted by Kilimo Kwanza.
 not realistic-and does not give priorities to key issues in agriculture sector including the
negative effects of climate change for which current climate projections shows
agriculture is one among the sectors which will be negatively impacted.
 Adaptive elements can only be implicitly associated with few among the listed activities
such as patenting results of seed research to protect locally developed seed varieties
(assuming they would be adapted to climate change), intensification of training for
professionals in soil and water conservation, and establishment of weather centres at
ward level. However, climate change and REDD+ is completely absent in all pillars of
Kilimo Kwanza including the one on research and development.
 Too business oriented and not inclusive of small scale farmers do not fit (evidence that

27
small-scale producers were not consulted during preparation of Kilimo kwanza Initiative)
HAKIARDHI, 2011. Formulation spearheaded by business organization (TNBC/TPSF)
who represent interest of middle and large scale commercial farmers-which threaten
security of land for small-scale farmers. The word small scale farmers appears two times
in relation to transformation of small scale farmers to commercial farmers and
subsidization of high quality and certified seeds to small scale farmers under Piller 1 and
7 respectively. Medium and large scale farmers appear once in relation to their promotion
to realise the vision of Kilimo Kwanza. In the rest of the document, only the word
"farmers" is ambiguously used.
4.2.3. Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania
The Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania (SAGCOT) Agriculture Green Growth
(AGG) document underscores the vulnerability of farmers to climate change in the Southern
Corridor. “Currently, the region’s farmers are highly vulnerable to climate change, with the vast
majority relying on rainfed agriculture, with inadequate access to reliable input supplies or
markets” The interplay between agriculture (unsustainable practices) and other important sectors
like forestry, wildlife tourism and water is recognized by SAGCOT Green Growth document.
“Where agriculture has been intensified, it has often had severe environmental impacts,
undermining not only long-term productivity, but also the development of other important
sectors like forestry, wildlife tourism or water” Further the document recognizes that modern
technologies for farmers to produce more food with fewer inputs, less waste and less pollution
(climate change mitigation elements), an approach which recognizes that most sustainable and
least risky farming systems will be those that build in resilient agronomic, environmental, and
social management practices.
The AGG document identifies actions at individual farms and businesses and the policy level in
order to mainstream the AGG through the corridor. Examples of farm level strategies identified
include conservation agriculture and system of rice intensification, agro-forestry, integrated crop-
livestock systems. Precision agriculture (can greatly increase the amount of food produced per
unit water, nutrients, and other inputs) is an example of strategies which are relevant on large
commercial farms and block farms while recognizes investment opportunities (public, private
and community) such as community forest enterprises, bio energy and improving water use
efficient as well as payment for ecosystem services (a new vehicle for compensating
communities for their investment in natural resources while maintaining resources of importance

28
to others such as clean water and carbon stocks) as central premise of Green Growth. Under its
climate change mitigation investment, funds for climate change mitigation are included in the
financing strategy for Agriculture Green Growth
Among the five priority actions to create fertile ground for AGG (support of key policies and
investments at national level) include investment by SAGCOT partners in local organizations
and local leadership that include farmers associations, savings and credit cooperatives which act
as key catalysts for disseminating best practices and linking small holder farmers to markets. The
priority actions also include designing and adopting a new approach to planning and allocating
land and water. The new approach according to the AGG document aims at reconciling the
objectives of optimizing economic returns from available land and water resources, ensuring
equitable land allocation and land rights and creating a transparent and streamlined process for
identifying new sites for investment. Both these two priority actions are in line with the
requirements of climate smart practices at field and farm scales as well as community oriented
REDD+ where land tenure, capacity building and local institutional creation and strengthening
for local resource management are central.
The AGG document identified specific action to be taken by SAGCOT Centre and its partners to
generate the momentum and lay foundation for scaling up AGG investment in the region. The
actions include: i) engaging key national and local stakeholders in refining and grounding the
AGG vision; ii) strengthening and demonstrating integrated planning in selected clusters; iii)
catalysing investment in selected ready-to-go projects; iv) marketing the AGG investment
program to foreign and domestic investors; and strengthening the analytical and knowledge base
for AGG in SAGCOT. while it appears some of the actions (e.g., i & ii) may involve small scale
farmers in the context of local stakeholders the target of the AGG in SAGCOT is not for
smallholder farmers as reflected by AGG action three on catalyzing investment in selected ready
to go projects. In Tanzania, 80% of the country's population depend on agriculture and majority
of them are smallholder subsistence farmers. How would the smallholder subsistence farmers
would be catalysed to invest in a situation where the investment projects are marketed to foreign
and domestic investors? Lack of recognition for providing support and nursing smallholder
farmers (who by any means are unable to compete at the moment) within the AGG is the major
gap in the SAGCOT Initiative.
Major gaps for SAGCOT include:
 Although the AGG document advocate for equitable land allocation and land rights in
one of its priority actions, the foreign and domestic oriented investment approach that is

29
going to be adopted by SAGCOT in the corridor may alienate local subsistence
smallholder farmers from fertile lands if no appropriate measures are put in place to guide
land allocation for investment. As such small scale farmer may then be pushed into
marginal lands and forested areas thereby undermining REDD related activities. The
AGG document suggest that planning and allocating of land and water under SAGCOT
will be built on existing planning processes in place with critical new coordination
functions. However, experiences shows that in many cases such planning processes have
been flawed as clearly evidenced under the investment for biofuels and other commercial
agriculture in the country.
Non conventional agriculture which is in line with the principles of sustainable
development is the main approach adopted by AGG under SAGCOT. Within this
approach there is clear intent to ensure conservation agriculture practices and efficient
water management that benefit smallholder farmers and support the ecosystem are
developed, disseminated and adopted. However, there are no strategies which are
provided on ecological friendly inputs especially fertilizer to meet the demand of the
anticipated investment in agriculture both from domestic and foreign investors. This
inconsideration implies that SAGCOT initiative may open market to foreign producers of
inputs with significant carbon footprint in the corridor. The AGG states on general terms
that nucleus farms and small and medium-sized agribusinesses identified in the SAGCOT
Blueprint will serve as primary sources for fertilizer and other inputs. However, it does
not provide explicit support for increasing access to inorganic fertilisers and pesticides to
small-scale farmers who would have benefited from the investments of nucleus farms.
4.3. What are the opportunities in the national development programmes
(ASDP, Kilimo kwanza, SAGCOT) for smallholder farmers to engage in
achieving climate smart, small-scale agriculture and community oriented
REDD
4.3.1. Agriculture Sector Development Programme
There are a number of opportunities that set a conducive environment for smallholder farmers to
engage in achieving climate smart, small-scale agriculture and community oriented REDD.
However, the opportunities in this particular case would have been relevant if activities on
climate smart small scale agriculture and community oriented REDD were explicitly covered in
the ASDP. Key opportunities include:-

30
 The decentralised nature of ASDP where implementation of programme activities and
budgeting allocation focuses at local levels (i.e., focusing at district and villages levels).
If climate smart small scale agriculture and community oriented REDD was among the
agenda in ASDP, then local communities would have great opportunity in investing part
of the resources under ASDP, training and capacity into climate smart small scale
agriculture and community oriented REDD.
 In an attempt to commercialise agriculture, ASDP emphasize on the involvement of
private sector as well as the public-private sector partnership in investing in agriculture
and improving productivity and profitability. This is an opportunity especially if
communities would have been facilitated to create joint ventures and attract private sector
investment particularly on REDD+. Although this approach is not operational yet under
community managed forests, it is being used in the wildlife sector where communities
that have WMAs can enter into joint ventures with private investors to invest in the
WMAs and agree on how the revenues could be shared.
 Community participation and creation of farmer’s organisation such as farmers groups is
one of the major approaches in the ASDP. Farmer’s organisations, if strengthened
(capacity) would have provided institutional structures at local levels for investment
promotion on climate smart agriculture and community oriented REDD.
4.3.2. Kilimo Kwanza Strategy
As mentioned in section 4.2.2, activities indented under Kilimo Kwanza are very general and
majority of them are already being implemented under ASDP. Therefore if Kilimo Kwanza
Strategy will really be implemented as an independent programme will lead to duplication of
efforts. Most identified activities under Kilimo Kwanza were being implemented under ASDP
(e.g. Input Voucher and Power tiller schemes). Since the activities in the strategy have not been
narrowed down to key focus areas of concern in agriculture and according to the needs of small
scale farmers, opportunities for small farmers to engage in achieving climate smart, small-scale
agriculture and community oriented REDD are very limited.

31
4.3.3. Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania
If implemented in such a way that small-scale farmers become an integral part of the initiative,
there is potential to increase food outputs, food security and household income. Also because of
likely gains in crop yield from improved agricultural production the pressure for agricultural
expansion will be reduced and thus avoiding deforestation and carbon dioxide emissions.
By investing in conservation agriculture and natural resources conservation, there will be
opportunities for additional benefits and income to communities from investments in community
forest and other natural resources. The inclusion of funds under climate mitigation investment for
financing the strategy for agriculture green growth could be another opportunity for smallholder
farmers to invest in climate change mitigation.
4.4. What are the gaps in the policies and policy implementation in terms of
climate smart, small-scale agriculture and community oriented REDD
Climate smart agriculture includes many of the field-based and farm based sustainable
agricultural land management practices already in wide use such as conservation tillage, agro-
forestry, residue management etc. According to Scherr et al., (2012) most of the focus of climate
smart agriculture has been on the implementation of these field and farm practices and the ways
that they can be improved in the context of changing climate. However, FAO and the World
Bank illustrate that climate smart agriculture requires actions beyond the farm scale by adopting
ecosystem approach, working at landscape scale and ensuring inter-sectoral coordination and
cooperation. Similarly, success of community oriented REDD will depend on clear definition of
tenure rights, benefit sharing especially where co-management is practiced, institutional building
or strengthening, harmonization of sectoral policies and land use planning. Against this
background, the following key gaps are identified in the policies and policy implementation.
 Climate change has not been considered as one of the risks in the policies despite the fact
that Tanzania’s economy is very dependent on the climate, because a large proportion of
GDP is associated with climate sensitive activities, particularly agriculture.
Inconsideration of climate change in the policies is also reflected in the development
strategies and programs (e.g., ASDP, WSDP) where climate change adaptation and
mitigation are only implicit in some of the program activities. For example while
expansion of irrigation is undoubtedly a major strategy for enhancing Tanzania’s

32
resilience to climate change, there is sparse consideration of future climate change within
these sectoral programme documents. The lack of any mention of climate change within
Kilimo Kwanza strategy is of particular concern under the existing climate change and
variability with significant consequences on availability of water resources for agriculture
production.
 A number of climate smart agriculture and community oriented REDD or adaptation and
mitigation elements in general appear in several policies. For example catchment
conservation is included in the National Water Policy (2002), Draft Agriculture Policy
(2012) and the National Forest Policy (1998). Although the draft agriculture policy
recognizes that the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism is an essential partner
because it support PFM that involve the same communities and farmers and its
responsibilities that include catchment management, beekeeping, biodiversity, germ
plasm conservation and wildlife management interact directly with many different
aspects of agriculture. However, the policy does not provide any strategies for
harmonization or coordination of such activities within the responsible sectors.
 Although the aspect of additional benefit from mitigation activities in the agriculture and
forest sectors slightly surfaces in the two sectoral policies respectively, the policies do not
provide mechanisms for benefit sharing between communities, local authorities and
central government. For example the national forest policy advocate to promoting joint
forest agreement between central government , specialized executive agencies, private
sectors as appropriate in each case and organized by local communities or other
organizations of people living adjacent to the forests. The promotion is assumed to
improve forest conservation and management and to ensure equitable sharing of benefits
among all stakeholders. However, the policy does not provide mechanisms for benefit-
sharing under joint management agreements. Experiences of PFM implementation for the
past ten years show that benefit sharing under joint forest management is one of the
major obstacles for successful PFM in Tanzania.
 Land tenure security among small scale farmers and rural villages is also one of the major
gaps especially for the land policy. Security of tenure is recognized as one of the
precondition for investment in climate smart small scale agriculture and community
oriented REDD+. Insecurity of land tenure is reported as one of the constraints for
adoption of conservation agriculture (Tumbo et al., 2012, Shetto et al., 2012). The loosely
definition of “general land” in the national land policy restrict communities from
investing in REDD+ initiatives while at the same time it is used as a loophole for
transferring large pieces of lands to the so called investors.

33
4.5. How climate change adaption, mitigation and REDD+ can be integrated
in the policies and programmes
Ideally climate change adaptation, mitigation and REDD+ should be integrated into climate
change related policies during the policy formulation stage. The policy formulation stage sets out
the broad objective to be pursued in a given sector over a given time span; the main approaches
to be employed and the associated policies to be implemented to facilitate the reaching of these
objectives. The policy formulation stage is where national policy direction are translated into
sector-specific policy options , which then provide the basis for designing operational plans and
the mobilization of resources to implement them. Ministries departments and agencies for
climate change related sectors, donors and other relevant stakeholders operating at sector level
would need to take action to ensure climate change adaptation, mitigation and REDD+ priorities
established at the national level (incl., NAPA, Climate change communications to the UNFCC,
national climate change strategy, national REDD strategy) are operationalized and such priorities
is informed by sector specific information and experiences. This can be achieved by reflecting
upon and further deepening action on climate change priorities that have already been
established at the national level under NAPA, national climate change strategy and national
REDD strategy; clearly recognizing climate change and the need for adaptation and mitigation
within sectoral policies and strategies; and applying a climate focus in the formulation of sectoral
policies and strategies and making the necessary adjustments.
Tanzania has already developed the National Climate Change Strategy (2012) which sets a
framework for the development of sectoral climate change adaptation strategies in the country.
The strategy provides a unique opportunity for climate change sensitive sectoral policies and
their development strategies and programmes (e.g. agriculture, water, natural resources) that did
not take into account climate change adaptation and mitigation to correct this gap by developing
climate change adaptation strategies. The ministry of water has already embarked on the
development of climate change adaptation strategy within the framework of the National Climate
Change Strategy (2012).
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is one of the pre-condition for policies, programmes
and plans under the Environmental Management Act (EMA) 2004. Although most of the
policies, strategies, programmes and plans at national or sectoral level rarely include SEA during
their development, SEA is one of the important tools to integrate climate change adaptation and
mitigation in policies and plans. SEA provides a generic framework and sound methodology for
integrating environmental considerations into policies, plans, and programmes and building

34
climate change considerations into an SEA can help to identify whether sectoral strategies are
worthwhile and sustainable under different climate change scenarios. Although SEA was
conducted for SAGCOT, it has not been published as initially promised to publish in October
2012.
5. Conclusions and recommendations
Climate smart small-scale agriculture and community oriented REDD can play key roles in
climate change mitigation and adaptation, enhancing peoples livelihood and contribute to rural
sustainable development if recognized and integrated in the policies, programmes and plans of
climate sensitive sectors. Climate sensitive sectors include agriculture, water, natural resources
(e.g., forestry, land) as well as in national wide development strategies and plans such as
MKUKUTA. However, climate change issues are currently implicitly considered in the policies
on climate sensitive sectors. For example the analysed policies on agriculture, water, forest and
land do not identify climate change as an issue by itself but elaborate situations that could be
result or drivers of climate changes. The policies are also silent on who should be responsible for
dealing with issues pertinent to climate change. A similar trend of climate change neglect is
reflected in the ASDS and ASDP, KILIMO KWANZA and SAGCOT on general terms.
However, the recently developed Green Growth Investment Framework for SAGCOT (2012) lay
a solid and an inspiring foundation for integrating climate change adaptation, mitigation, climate
smart small scale agriculture and community oriented REDD+ for SAGCOT initiative if it will
be implemented accordingly. The lack of any mention of climate change within Kilimo Kwanza
strategy is of particular concern under the existing climate change and variability with significant
consequences on availability of water resources for agriculture production.
There are three main pathways for integrating climate change adaptation and mitigation in
sectoral policies, programmes and plans. The first one requires ministries departments and
agencies for climate change sectors, donors and key stakeholders at sector level to take actions to
ensure climate change adaptation, mitigation and REDD+ priorities established at national level
are mainstreamed in the respective polices, strategies, programmes and plans. Mainstreaming
process should be done by reflecting upon and further deepening action on climate change
priorities that have already been established at national level, recognizing climate change and the
need for adaptation and mitigation within sectoral policies and strategies and applying climate
focus in the formulation of sectoral policies and strategies. The second entry point would be for

35
the climate change sectors to develop climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies. The
framework for sectoral climate change strategies is provided by the national climate change
strategy which was developed by the Vice Presidents Office in 2012. The third entry point would
be to apply SEA and SEA Audit for policies, strategies, and plans under preparation and policies,
strategies and plans which already exist respectively. Although SEA is rarely applied it is
provided under the legal framework for environmental management in Tanzania and it can offer
useful tools for integrating climate change adaptation into the formulation of policies, plans and
programmes at the sectoral level.

36
References
Agrawala, S., A. Moehner, A. Hemp, M. van Aalst, S. Hitz, J. Smith, H. Meena, S. M.
Mwakifwamba, T. Hyera and O. U. Mwaipopo (2003). Development and Climate Change
in Tanzania: Focus on Mount Kilimanjaro, OECD, Paris, France
Anderson, K (2012). Climate change going beyond dangerous –Brutal numbers and tenuous
hope: In Hällström, N., R. Östernbergh (eds) Development dialogue: What Next Volume
III-Climate, Development and Equity, Uppsala, Sweden, 351pp
Angelsen, A., (2008). REDD Models and Baselines. International Forestry Review Vol.10 (3),
pp. 465-475.
Chabwera M and J. Macgregor, (2009). Cultivating success: the need to climate-proof Tanzanian
agriculture. IIED Briefing, September, 2009
Chretien, J. M. (2013). Potential for synthesis between REDD+ and community forest
management as understood through the lens of global political ecology. A thesis submitted
to the Graduate Program in Environmental Studies in conformity with the requirements for
the Degree of Master of Environmental Studies, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario,
Canada, 101pp.
Clausen, J and C. Bjerg, (2010) The Blue Revolution: Adapting To Climate Change Torkil
Thought Leadership Series#6)
Dutschke, M. and Pistorius, T., (2008). Will the future be REDD? Consistent carbon accounting
for land use, International Forestry Review Vol.10 (3), pp. 476-484.
Easterling W.E et al. (2007), 'Food, fibre and forest products', in Parry, M.L. et al. (ed)'Climate
Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to
the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change'
Cambridge Unviersity Press, Cambridge, pp. 273-313
FAO (2009), 'Climate Change an Bioenergy Challenges for Food and Agriculture', High Level
Expert-Forum-How to Feed the World in 2050, Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome
FAO (2012).Developing a climate-smart agriculture strategy at the country level: Lessons from
recent experience. Background paper for the Second Global Conference on Agriculture,
Food Security and Climate Change. Hanoi, Vietnam, 3-7 September 2012, Rome, Italy.
Holloway V. and E. Giandomenico, (2009) Carbon Planet White Paper: The History of REDD
Policy, Adelaide, Australia
IPCC (2007): Climate Change: The Physical Science Basis Summary for Policymakers.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

37
IPCC (2007b), 'Summary for policymakers', in Parry, M.L., O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J.
van der Linden and C.E. Hanson (eds) 'Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and
Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change', Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
pp.7-22
Jenny Springer and Peter Bille Larsen (2013). Community Tenure and REDD+, WWF Report,
June 2012, 23pp
Johnsson, L.O., M.A. Singisha, and S.M.E. Mbise (2000). Dry land farming in Tanzania:
experiences from teh land management programme. In E.K.Biamah, J. Rockstrom and G.E.
Okwach (eds), Conservation Tillage in Dryland Africa: Technological options and
experiences in Eastern and Southern Africa. Nairobi: Regional Land Management Unit
(RELMA), Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), 2000.
(RELMA Workshop Report Series; 3)
Karsenty, A., (2008). The Architecture of proposed REDD schemes after Bali: facing critical
choices, International Forestry Review Vol.10 (3), pp.443-457.
Kropp, J and M. Scholze (2009). Climate Change Information for Effective Adaptation: A
Practitioner‘s Manual, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ)
GmbH, Eschborn, Germany
Kyoto Protocol, 1997
Lengale Consulting Ltd (2013). Documentation of the lessons and the best practices for climate
smart-small scale agriculture, Final Report, CCAP PARTNERS, April 2013.
Mdemu, M., R. Kiunsi, R.S. Shemdoe, D. Woiso, P. Chuwa, F. Tillya and F. Stordal
(2012).Assessing leakage levels in REDD pilot project areas in Tanzania.CCIAM Project
Research Proposal, Ardhi University
Mdemu, M.V. and M. Burra (2011) Climate Change and Climate Change Impacts: Potential
contribution of land-based sectors in Mitigation and Adaptation, Paper presented in the
Annual General Meeting for Town and Regional Planners, Ministry Lands Housing and
Human Settlement Development, Blue Pearl Hotel, Dar es Salaam, 27-28 October 2011
Milder, J.C., L.E. Buck, A.K. Hart and S.J. Scherr (2012). The SAGCOT Greenprint: A Green
Growth Investment Framework for the Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania,
Draft, August 2012, 76pp
Mwandosya, M. J., B.S. Nyenzi, and M. L. Luhanga. (1998). The Assessment of Vulnerability
and Adaptation to Climate Change Impacts in Tanzania. Dar es Salaam: Centre for Energy,
Environment, Science and Technology (CEEST).
Nindi, SJ 2007. Changing livelihoods and the environment along Lake Nyasa, Tanzania. African
Study Monographs, Suppl. 36: 71-93

38
Orindi, V. A. and L.A. Murray, (2005) Adapting to climate change in East Africa: a strategic
approach. Gatekeeper Series 117: International Institute for Environment and Development
Paavola, J. (2003). Vulnerability to Climate Change in Tanzania: Sources, Substance and
Solutions. A paper presented at the inaugural workshop of Southern Africa Vulnerability
Initiative (SAVI) in Maputo, Mozambique, June 19-21, 2003
Phelps, J., E. L. Webb and A. Agrawal 2010. Does REDD+ Threaten to Recentralize Forest
Governance?, Land Use, Vol 328, pp 312-313
Richards, M., T. Blomley, R. Otsyina and J. Mgoo (2009). Getting Started on REDD in
Tanzania: A scoping study for the Katoomba Ecosystem Services Incubator. The
Katoomba Group, 24pp
Scherr, S.J., S. Shames and R. Friedman 2012. From Climate-smart agriculture to climate-smart
landscapes. Agriculture & Food Security, 1:12, pp 1-15
Schlenker, W. and D.B. Lobell (2010), 'Robust negative impacts of climate change on African
Agriculture', Environmental Research Letters, 5, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/5/014010
Shetto, R.; O. Marietha, eds. (2007). Conservation agriculture as practised in Tanzania:three
case studies. Nairobi. African Conservation Tillage Network, Centre de Coopération
Internationale de Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement, Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations.
Stabinsky, D. and L. Li Ching (2012). Ecological agriculture, climate resilience and adaptation-
A roadmap: In Hällström, N., R. Östernbergh (eds) Development dialogue: What Next
Volume III-Climate, Development and Equity, Uppsala, Sweden, 351pp
Swai, E.Y. and F. Rwehumbiza (1998). Effects of Residual Tie-ridging and Farm-yard Manure
on soil water storage in Central semi-arid areas of Tanzania. In Makungu P., H. Mahoo, V.
Silayo & M. Mdemu (eds), 1998. Proceedings of Tanzania Society of Agricultural
Engineers, Volume 8
Thornton PK, Jones PG, Owiyo T, Kruska RL, Herrero M, Kristjanson P, Notenbaert A, Bekele
N and Omolo A, with contributions from Orindi V, Otiende B, Ochieng A, BhadwalS,
Anantram K, Nair S, Kumar V and Kulkar U (2006). Mapping climate vulnerability and
poverty in Africa. Report to the Department for International Development, ILRI, PO Box
30709, Nairobi 00100, Kenya. Pp 171
Tumbo, S., Mutabazi, K.D., Kahimba, F.C., Mbungu, W.B. (2012). Adoption and Outscaling of
Conservation Agriculture in Tanzania. AgWater Solutions Project Case Study. IWMI. 31pp
UNEP (2002) Africa Environmental Outlook: Past, Present and Future Perspectives. UNEP:
Nairobi.
URT (2009) National Framework for Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest
Degradation (REDD), Tanzania

39
URT, 1998. National Forest Policy. Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Dar es Salaam,
Tanzania
URT, 2002. National Water Policy (NAWAPO). Ministry of Water and Livestock Development
URT, 2010. The National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (NSGRP – MKUKUTA
II)
URT (2006) Agricultural Sector Development Programme (ASDP), Government Programme
Document, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
URT (2013). National Strategy for Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest
Degradation (REDD+), Vice Presidents Office, February 2013, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
URT (2012). National Climate Change Strategy, Final Draft, Vice President's Office, Dision of
Environment, 84pp.
URT (1997). National Land Policy (Second Edition). Ministry of Lands and Human Settlements
Development, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
URT (1996) The National Investment Policy. President’s Office Planning Commission, Dar es
Slaam, Tanzania
USAID (2011). Institutional Mechanisms for Sharing REDD+ Benefi ts. Property Rights and
Resource Governance Project, USAID.
Viana, V. M.; Grieg-Gran. M., Della Mea, R. and Ribenboim, G. (2009). The Cost of REDD:
Lessons from Amazonas. IIED Briefing, IIED, London, UK Wertz-Kanounnikoff, S.
(2008): Estimating the costs of reducing forest emissions: A review of methods, CIFOR
Working Paper No. 42, Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).
Wolter, D. (2008). Tanzania: The Challenge of Moving from Subsistence to Profit. OECD
Report
World Bank; (2011).Climate-Smart Agriculture: A Call to Action. Washington, DC

Policy Analysis in relation to climate change adaptation, mitigation, agriculture and REDD

More Related Content

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Policy Analysis in relation to climate change adaptation, mitigation, agriculture and REDD (20)

More from Climate Change Agriculture and Poverty Alleviation in Tanzania (18)

Recently uploaded (20)

Policy Analysis in relation to climate change adaptation, mitigation, agriculture and REDD