During the 28th Conference of Parties (COP 28) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) being held in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, the Green Climate Fund (GCF) has announced the release of USD 100 million to assist ten African countries in adopting solutions to reduce food loss.
The money, which will be distributed through AGRA, will be used to improve smallholders’ access to technology in Africa, lower the cost increase the accessibility of solutions for reducing food loss, and assist in the development of conducive conditions for the continent’s food system transformation.
As the largest climate fund in the world, the Green Climate Fund (GCF) was established as part of the Paris Agreement to assist developing nations in increasing and achieving their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) goals in the direction of low-emission, climate-resilient pathways.
Dr. Agnes Kalibata, President of AGRA and member of the COP 28 Presidency Advisory Committee, was interviewed by Isaiah Esipisu.
IPS: Provide a succinct summary of the $100 million GCF grant for the food systems of Africa.
Kalibata: The Green Climate Fund (GCF), AGRA, and several other partners stated at the outset of COP 28 that they would be investing USD 100 million in a project we are calling Reducing Post-Harvest Losses in Agriculture. The fact that African farmers produce a lot of food, but 40 percent of it is wasted, is one of their concerns. To ensure that we can assist farmers in lowering post-harvest losses, this project will start by making investments in the seven nations in which AGRA now operates.
The program will receive USD 70 million from the GCF, as was previously announced this week. The remaining USD 30 million will come from other partners, including the Rockefeller Foundation and USAID. Seven nations—Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia—have already indicated interest in participating in the initiative through this cooperation. Ten countries in Africa are the objective.
This is only the start. We acknowledge that post-harvest losses are an important factor in these nations’ expanding markets and that they help farmers have more food security. However, post-harvest losses also contribute significantly to the mitigation of climate change, as increased harvesting reduces the demand for new land.
IPS: Specifically, how will the funding support smallholder farmers at the local level in the aforementioned countries?
Kalibata: With the money, farmers will be able to acquire technologies that will lower their losses both during and after the collection of their produce. For instance, the quality is compromised when rice is harvested and placed in the paddy water because the grains may break. Thus, one of the things we’ll do is make sure farmers receive training on when, how, and how to collect their produce.
For instance, we’ll provide them with the appropriate shelving and storage methods. This will guarantee that goods are properly stored and dried after harvest to prevent contamination from aflatoxin.
IPS: What criteria were used to choose which nations would receive the USD 100 billion?
Kalibata: To be eligible to participate in any given GCF activity, a country must indicate its interest in doing so. In our instance, the money is needed to unlock losses incurred after harvest.
As such, our motivation is to assist nations in carrying out these initiatives as the initiative’s main partners. Co-funders like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), USAID, and the Rockefeller Foundation are examples of additional partners.
IPS: In terms of greenhouse gas emissions, what do food loss and waste represent?
Kalibata: Research shows that Africa is the continent with the lowest emissions of greenhouse gasses. However, when it comes to food systems, food waste and loss produce 8% of greenhouse gases globally.
Since we have relatively little emissions in Africa, our primary concern is with food systems. Imagine the consequences if we preserve 40% of the food that goes to waste! Whenever we visit the farm, our goal is always to increase yields. However, in the end, our losses exceed our gains in output.
It’s also critical to remember that the majority of food waste is converted into the hazardous greenhouse gas methane by organic materials. Therefore, cutting losses will also imply cutting these emissions.
IPS: When will farmers most likely begin to reap the rewards of the $100 million GCF grant?
Kalibata Utilizing GCF requires time. We require time to plan the investments as well as time to complete the projects and programs. As of right now, GCF has made available what they refer to as the investment preparatory facility, which is typically the first step.
But as AGRA, it’s not the only investment we deal with. Others exist. However, the goals of this specific investment are to guarantee that farmers have access to the right technologies, to assist the development of systems, and to reinforce the systems for improved post-harvest management.
IPS: Will AGRA deal directly with governments to disburse these payments, or will it go through farmer and community-based organizations?
Kalibata: AGRA functions in several ways. We engage with governments when they can cooperate with us. We involve our partners when we have different ones to work with. Additionally, we assist companies in enabling the ecosystems of the private sector.
Additionally, we assist governments in enhancing their ability to better interact with the business sector. We eventually collaborate with NGOs when we discover that they are the only structure that allows us to achieve the necessary outcomes.
IPS: As the COP Presidency’s advisor, do you view the money committed during COP 28 for the Loss and Damage Fund to intervene on behalf of smallholders and pastoralists in ASALs who have consistently lost their means of subsistence due to floods or droughts?
Kalibata: Let’s start by rejoicing over the Loss and Damage Fund’s activation at the World Bank and its availability to nations. Making this money available to those in need is one of the goals we are attempting to pursue. It ought not to manifest as costly and challenging-to-get loans. This is because we are handling losses and damages that have already occurred.
Increasing farmers’ resilience will be beneficial for controlling the usage of the Loss and Damage Fund to help the agriculture industry and food chains. Since flood-tolerant types are already available, they require access to high-quality seeds that are resistant to disease, pests, and drought.
We have a chance to improve the commercial environment that sustains agriculture as well.
The third argument is that the system is experiencing a great deal of loss. The impact is enormous when someone loses everything. People will have enough food to eat and the capacity to recover if we can simply begin by managing that kind of damage since, with climate change, even the seeds for the upcoming season are lost by farmers. But for many farmers, saving seeds for the following season is the most crucial thing.
IPS: Despite having a large amount of fertile land, why is the African continent not food secure?
Kalibata: That’s because there isn’t a land-related problem with Africa’s food security. It all comes down to producing enough in each unit of area. Without quality seeds, farmers are unable to grow enough. Farmers are unable to produce enough if they do not have access to the right fertilizers. Although we do make some effort in some areas, it is insufficient.
Above all, though, effective leadership is required to make sure that these resources are delivered to smallholder farmers on schedule.
It is necessary to develop systems that connect with them, and AGRA is making investments in that direction.