Climate-Smart Agriculture in Lesotho Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) considerations • A Although agriculture accounts for just six percent of more productive and highly resilient meat industry in Lesotho’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the sector is Lesotho is required. Animal health management and P important for the livelihoods of 80 percent of the country’s improved veterinary services will also be crucial to population. improve production quality and enhance resilience of the livestock sector. • The cereal (maize and wheat) mono-cropping system, as A well as the rearing of goats and sheep for mohair and wool • Although CA and other climate-smart practices have P P dominate the country’s agricultural sector. The sector been promoted in Lesotho for many years; the term is greatly affected by low soil fertility; land degradation, climate-smart agriculture itself is fairly new and has not especially soil erosion; and high vulnerability to droughts been integrated into Lesotho’s policies and programs. coupled with high food price fluctuations and reliance on In addition, the country’s climate policy environment imports to meet local food needs. is limited. This is set to change once the draft National Climate Change Policy, which highlights the need for • Conservation agriculture (CA) is the most widely promoted climate-smart practices, is finalized and endorsed. A climate-smart agriculture (CSA) practice, although other M practices such as keyhole gardens, small-scale irrigation, • At present there is limited information on the costs of $ I organic manure application and the use of tunnels adaptation and mitigation initiatives in the agricultural (greenhouses) are common. Traditional CSA practices sector, and a detailed assessment to determine these such as Likoti and Machobane also exist and have needs will support better long-term planning of climate- potential to be integrated into modern CSA practices, smart agriculture finance for the country. hence improving acceptability among rural households. • The main funders of climate-smart agriculture related $ • A Lesotho is heavily deforested with forests now covering programs and projects in the country include the World just 1.5% of the country’s land area. There is a need to Bank and the African Development Bank (AfDB), as well M scale up agroforestry in meeting the country’s goals as bilateral funding institutions such as USAID, DFID and I related to improving forest cover, while at the same time the European Commission, while United Nations agencies enhancing the food security, nutrition and resilience of such as FAO, UNDP and UNEP have also contributed households. The integration of stone fruits (peaches and financially and technically. The country has however, not nectarines) and other fruit trees into existing cropping yet accessed some of the major international climate systems could be an option. finance instruments such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and the Adaptation Fund (AF), and more could be • For livestock production, the main climate-smart done to ensure access to these two instruments. Funding A for forestry-related initiatives is also severely limited. practices include fodder production, as well as rangeland M rehabilitation and management. Given the country’s I energy needs, particularly in off grid rural communities, • There is limited capacity for agricultural climate change I biogas energy development using livestock manure adaptation and mitigation in Lesotho and there is a great could be an option. The adoption of improved (including $ need for extensive awareness raising, sensitization and both heat- and cold-tolerant) breeds of cattle, goats capacity building for climate-smart agriculture. and merino sheep will also be important for improving the resilience and productivity of the local production of • CSA research in Lesotho needs to be enhanced in meat, milk, wool and mohair, while reducing greenhouse I partnership with government, private sector, international gas emissions per unit of produce. At present, the country research institutes, development partners and the farmers imports most of its meat and support to a low carbon, themselves. A Adaptation M Mitigation P Productivity I Institutions $ Finance The climate-smart agriculture (CSA) concept reflects an ambition that address challenges in environmental, social, and economic to improve the integration of agricultural development and climate dimensions across productive landscapes. While the concept is responsiveness. It aims to achieve food security and broader new, and still evolving, many of the practices that make up CSA development goals under a changing climate and increasing food already exist worldwide and are used by farmers to cope with demand. CSA initiatives sustainably increase productivity, enhance various production risks [2]. Mainstreaming CSA requires critical resilience, and reduce/remove greenhouse gases (GHGs); and stocktaking of ongoing and promising practices for the future, require planning to address trade-offs and synergies between and of institutional and financial enablers for CSA adoption. This these three pillars: productivity, adaptation, and mitigation [1]. country profile provides a snapshot of a developing baseline The priorities of different countries and stakeholders are reflected created to initiate discussion, both within countries and globally, to achieve more efficient, effective, and equitable food systems about entry points for investing in CSA at scale. National context casual labor (especially in the urban areas). Remittance and wages from casual work contribute about 40 percent and Economic relevance of agriculture 43 percent respectively to household incomes [5]. Agriculture1 is relatively a small part of Lesotho’s economy, The country has a population of approximately 2 million contributing an average of 6 percent to the national Gross people (49 percent male, and 51 percent female), with Domestic Product (GDP) over the period 2012 - 2016 [3]. 72 percent of this population living in rural areas3. More Agriculture’s share of the GDP has been declining since the than half of the population has access to agricultural land 1960s, when the sector contributed over 80 percent, to below [6] and some livestock, and production is largely rainfed, 20 percent in recent years2. Despite the low contribution to subsistence farming, with about 93 percent household GDP , agriculture remains a major livelihood for the majority agricultural fields planted for direct consumption purposes of the rural population, while revenue from products such as [7]. Both women and men participate in agriculture, with wool and mohair are important for the economy. more than one third of rural women, and more than two thirds of rural men engaged in the agricultural sector4. Maize, wheat, pulses and sorghum are the primary crops grown. Livestock comprise sheep and goats, which are Poverty is not only high but also deep; and the depth key for the production of wool and mohair. Cattle on the has increased over time despite a lot of effort to create other hand is mainly subsistence for household use such employment and better livelihoods [8]. The population on as draught power, milk, fuel (dung) and meat. Between less than US$1.90 per day is 60 percent with 57 percent of 2009 and 2013, wool contributed about 55 percent to total the total population, and 61 percent of the rural population agricultural exports on average; wheat flour 25 percent; living below the national poverty line in 2010. Rural poverty and maize flour 11 percent. The value of total agricultural in the country is highly associated with the low performance exports for crops and livestock on average over the period of the agricultural sector. The country scores very well on 2009-2013 was US$ 6.6million [3]. Lesotho is heavily access to improved water resources with approximately 81 reliant on food imports, which has led the government percent of the population having access; however, access to focus on production of food staples to address food to electricity is low at 23 percent of the population. The security concerns. While the agricultural sector accounts for country has one of the highest literacy rates in Africa – 41 percent of employment, it is estimated that about 80 youth literacy currently stands at 87 percent – due to high percent of the country is reliant on agriculture either directly investment in social sectors over the years [3]. or indirectly for a livelihood, particularly in the rural areas. There is a high dependence on remittances (especially from men, working in the mines in South Africa), and wages from People, agriculture and livelihoods in Lesotho [3, 4, 9, 10, 11] Economic relevance of agriculture in Lesotho [3, 4] 1 Agriculture for the context of this profile includes both 2 Details on this decline are available at: https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Lesotho/Share_of_agriculture/ 3 Recent census (from national sources) estimate urban population at 34 percent, peri-urban (first time it is included in the census) host 7.5 percent of the population. The rural areas currently host 58 percent of the population, an indication of significant rural-urban migration. 4 NAIP 2015-2020, Lesotho Agriculture and Food Security Investment Plan 2 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile Land use in Lesotho [12] Agricultural production systems Agriculture in Lesotho is predominantly small-scale, characterized by rainfed cereal production and extensive animal grazing; with the contribution of the livestock subsector roughly double that of the crop subsector. The country is classified into four agro-ecological zones (AEZs): the Lowlands (17 percent), the Foothills (15 percent), the Senqu River Valley (9 percent), and the mountains (59 percent) based on rainfall patterns, altitude, soil and water holding capacity, growing seasons and physiological features. The majority of the between 75 percent and 80 percent of the population that depend on agriculture in the country reside in the Lowlands and Foothills where most of the arable land is found. There are both medium-scale (often using rented land) and smaller scale farmers. Important Land use crops in the country are maize, wheat, sorghum, potato, beans and peas, fruit trees and fresh vegetables such as The Kingdom of Lesotho is a small, mountainous country cabbage and tomatoes, while sheep and goat (mostly for that is completely enclaved by the Republic of South Africa, wool and mohair), cattle, and pigs are the major livestock. with an estimated land area 30,358 km2 and a population Wool and mohair form an integral part of the economy, density of 68 people per km2. Approximately 75 percent supporting approximately 50 percent of the rural households of the total land area is suitable for agricultural production particularly in the mountain districts. Sheep and goats are (including rangelands that occupy 60% of total land). The mostly kept under an extensive livestock production system. rangelands play a vital role in livestock production that Cattle and other animals such as donkeys and horses play is an integral part of the county’s economy. Much of the a major role in crop production since they are used for land is however, hilly and affected by land degradation, ploughing and transporting produce to markets. The short especially soil erosion. The country’s irrigation potential cycle stock (chicken and pigs), especially kept by women is approximately 12,500 ha, with just over 20 percent contribute significantly to household food security. Rearing of this actually equipped for irrigation [12]. Of the total of small ruminants and poultry under intensive management equipped area under irrigation, 175 ha are small schemes systems is common in the urban areas. Cattle are reared and 2,462 ha are under large schemes of greater than under an extensive system for subsistence milk and meat 100 ha each [13]. Water is a major natural resource that production. However, beef production is limited and the earns the country significant income. Its importance to the country relies heavily on beef imports from neighboring economy has attracted a number of donors (including the South Africa. World Bank, African Development Bank, and European Investment Bank) to invest in the Lesotho Highlands Water The following infographic shows a selection of agricultural Project (LHWP). production systems considered key for food security in Lesotho. The selection is based on the production system’s Forests cover 49,585 ha [14], just 1.5 percent of the contribution to economic, productivity and nutrition country’s land area, and is severely affected by deforestation indicators. For more information on the methodology for and forest degradation, largely due to the use of wood as a the production system selection, see Annex 1. main household cooking and heating energy source. Lesotho 3 The most common production system in the country is 13.5 tonnes/ha for potatoes, and from 2 to 11.5 tonnes/ the wheat-maize mono-cropping system, which despite ha for onions [12]5. Low productivity is partly due to the its prevalence is unsustainable and insufficient to feed the use of open pollinated seed varieties with only farmers in country’s population. Home gardening is also an important the northern lowlands, especially commercial producers, source of horticultural produce, with an estimated 70 utilizing hybrid seed. Utilization of chemical fertilizers varies percent of rural households producing vegetables. Most from district to district and farmers in high potential cereal home gardens are rainfed, supplemented with irrigation from production areas of the northern lowlands (Leribe, Butha- household and/or community domestic water supplies. The Buthe, Maseru and Berea) use more chemical fertilizers produce from home gardens is mainly for self-consumption, compared to the low potential mountain areas of the south. with limited quantities for the local markets. Although manure use is still not significant in the south, the government together with development partners has been Agricultural yields achieved in various projects range subsidizing fertilizer to promote utilization. from 1.9 to 3.6 tonnes/ha for maize, between 3.5 and Production Systems Key for Food Security in Lesotho (4) Agricultural input use in Lesotho (3, 4, 12) Food security and nutrition Lesotho is confronted with chronic poverty, food insecurity and high rates of malnutrition (33 percent of children below five years of age are stunted). Erratic weather patterns, land degradation and severe El Niño weather events are the major causes of household food insecurity. In 2017, over 200,000 people were in need of humanitarian assistance; the largest number (725,519) was recorded in 2012/2013 [15] (see annex 7 for trends of people requiring food assistance). The country can only meet 30 percent of its annual cereal requirements. The remaining 70 percent is offset by imports mostly from South Africa . Maize forms the bulk of the imports among the cereals [4]. Other factors contributing to food insecurity include falling production of cereals and increases in food prices. HIV/AIDS prevalence at 25 percent (59% females, 41% males), one of the highest rates in the world, also contributes to a reduction in household productivity and income, exacerbating the need for better diets and more nutritious food. 5 http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/countries_regions/LSO/LSO-CP_eng.pdf 6 http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/ena/wfp284541. pdf?iframe 4 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile Food security, nutrition and health in Lesotho [3, 4, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21] Agricultural greenhouse gas emissions The total annual greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) for Lesotho, including emissions from land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) is 4.17 Mt CO2 equivalent (CO2e) [22]. The agricultural sector is the second largest emitter in the country accounting for 34.7 percent of national emissions, while energy (64 percent of national emissions) is the largest emitter. Within the agricultural sector, livestock overwhelmingly accounts for the majority of emissions at 93.9 percent of agricultural emissions with cropping accounting for just 6.1 percent of agricultural emissions. This is particularly concerning given that the country is still highly dependent on meat exports from neighboring South Africa and only wool and mohair make significant contribution to exports and national incomes. Within the livestock subsector, enteric fermentation (52.2 percent of agricultural emissions) and manure left on pastures (38.5 percent) are key GHG emitters, while in the crop subsector, savannah burning for agricultural purposes (4.7 percent) is the largest emitter. Although the country’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) highlights agriculture as a main GHG emitter, it does not highlight agriculture among its main mitigation actions, rather focusing on energy, waste management and forestry. Within the forestry sub-sector however, there is some mitigation potential to be gained from reforestation as well as reduction in reliance on wood fuel through provision of sustainable and renewable energy particularly hydropower, as well as through adoption of fuel efficient stoves. The implementation of the reforestation option and the efficient cook stoves initiatives are both conditional on availability of finance, with reforestation estimated to cost US$24 million between 2015 and 2030. The reforestation option is aimed at raising the country’s forest cover from the current 1.5 percent of total land area to 5 percent [14]. The NDC commits to a 10 percent unconditional reduction in GHG emissions by 2030 compared to the business-as- usual (BAU) scenario, with the unconditional target being Lesotho 5 35 percent below the BAU scenario [14]. The intersection Challenges for the agricultural sector between forestry, energy and agricultural production will need clear elaboration and analysis in order to achieve these The agricultural sector in Lesotho is challenged by severe goals. The clear costing of the targets and activities will also land degradation, use of traditional agronomic practices, be crucial as at present this is lacking. overgrazing and high climate variability. The climate conditions in the country favor livestock production. Mitigation of GHG emissions from Lesotho’s agricultural However, several challenges such as poor organization sector could be targeted at scaling up conservation of the different livestock value chain actors (which makes agriculture, improved livestock feed, improved rangeland rearing livestock as a business challenging) and rearing of management, and improved efficiency of production poor quality livestock breeds (resulting in low productivity) through small-scale irrigation. These could be linked to hinder realization of the full potential of the sub-sector. Crop other mitigation priorities such as sustainable energy and production is a major agricultural activity for the people of reforestation. Lesotho, where maize and sorghum occupy more than 60 percent and 10 percent of the cultivated land, respectively [4]. Maize and sorghum are the most important staple Greenhouse gas emissions in Lesotho (3, 4, 22) food crops, with maize often receiving policy and financing support, for example through maize input subsidies. This is notwithstanding the fact that maize, despite being a staple food crop, is not suitable for production across much of the Lesotho’s agro-ecology, and the cost of production in the country is higher compared to the cost of importing from South Africa. Vulnerability to climate risks has reduced the productivity of the sector since the farmers have very little capacity to cushion themselves from the climate shocks. Time series data for Lesotho shows that drought and floods are the major causes of crop failure in the country7. Cognizant of the risks, the Government of Lesotho has set in place among other frameworks, a Resilience Strategic Framework to guide and coordinate efforts to address weather risks. Adoption of modern agricultural practices by the farmers is relatively low. Unsustainable agricultural practices such as mono-cropping and overgrazing, and unregulated firewood extraction result in land degradation. Interviews with key informants and workshop participants showed that lack of knowledge about improved agricultural practices for crop and livestock production, high poverty levels that make most of the adaptation practices unaffordable to farmers, the mountainous topography of the country, unfavorable tenure system and cultural factors are the major impediments to adoption of climate-smart technologies. Poor access to financial services and low integration into supply chains8 makes the sector uncompetitive, especially when compared to neighboring South Africa. Access to markets is limited, with the major challenge being low prices for producers, especially for raw produce such as milk, mostly due to minimal value addition. Agricultural labor productivity in the country is low, mostly due to the burden from diseases such as HIV/AIDS. This results in low adoption of labor-intensive practices such as CA. The situation is worsened by migration of young people to South Africa to seek jobs in other sectors. The above factors need to be urgently addressed to improve the performance of the agricultural sector. Funding for agricultural research also needs to increase. 7 http://lesotho.opendataforafrica.org/uqitsce/agriculture-lesotho 8 More details available at: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tpr_e/s324-01_e. pdf 6 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile Agricultural research is mostly led by the Department of all); reduced seed germination due to hardened soils and Agricultural Research of the Ministry of Agriculture, and the lack of water; crop failures; deterioration of rangelands and Faculty of Agriculture at the National University of Lesotho. pasture; water scarcity for livestock; livestock emaciation This has made coordination of agricultural research in the and sometimes death; and increased food prices particularly country problematic. Involvement of the private sector in of staple grains such as maize. In 2018 the country was research through consultations and proper dissemination affected by another climate related hazard, described as of research results to the private sector and other users to “golf-ball sized” hailstone, which resulted in animal deaths9. increase investment in the sector. Analysis of precipitation and temperature trends in Lesotho over the period 1981-2012, indicate a decrease in Agriculture and climate change precipitation and an increase in temperature [25, 26]. GCMs used to model climate projections for the country suggest Lesotho is highly vulnerable to climate change, the most that temperatures are likely to increase by an average of significant hazards being drought, high temperatures and 2°C by 2050 and up to 2.4°C by 2070. The largest increase heat waves, floods, hail, and frost. This vulnerability is is expected to occur along the northwestern border of the compounded by poverty as well as land degradation, soil country, which largely comprises the country’s lowlands. erosion and the hilly topography that hamper agricultural The eastern and central parts of the country, including the production. Droughts are of particular concern. For mountain livelihood zone and part of Senqu River valley, are instance, the country experienced a prolonged drought expected to experience a slightly lower increase in ambient between 1991-1996 [23], the period considered the longest temperatures than the northeastern parts of the country. In for occurrence of drought in the country’s history, while the contrast to the past trend of reduced rainfall, projections 2015-2016 El Nino induced drought was one of the worst indicate the possibility of a very slight increase in the country’s experienced in the country placing over 534,000 people at rainfall (up to 1.6 percent) by 2070 [27, 28, 29]. However, risk of food insecurity [15, 24]. Climate hazards in the country the projected changes in rainfall are not uniform throughout often result in delayed planting (or farmers not planting at the year, with winter rainfall projected to decrease strongly, Projected change in Temperature and Precipitation in Lesotho by 2050 [27, 28, 29] Changes in annual mean temperature (°C) Changes in total precipitation (%) Average temperature (°C) Average precipitation (%) 9 https://reliefweb.int/report/lesotho/lesotho-flash-update-01-hailstorms-and-flash-floods-4-april-2018 Lesotho 7 summer and autumn rainfall expected to experience no is likely to experience higher temperatures, increased significant change, and spring rainfall expected to gradually climate variability, and an increased frequency and intensity increase [25]. Spatially, the western districts of the country, of extreme weather events all with impacts of crop and where temperature is likely to increase the most, are likely livestock production, water security, and rural infrastructure. to experience the lowest increase in rainfall (0.7 percent increase by 2050), with impacts on water availability for crop Potential economic impacts of climate and livestock production. On the other hand, the eastern change parts of the country are expected to have the largest increase in rainfall (up to 1.6 percent by 2050). Changes in rainfall The International Model for Policy Analysis of Agricultural are likely to undermine food security, particularly due to the Commodities and Trade (IMPACT) was used to analyze the country’s high reliance on rainfed agriculture. Flooding may effects of climate change on agriculture in Lesotho over also become more frequent and severe in some parts of the the period 2020-205010 [30]. This assessment considered country with dire impacts on agricultural production as well three parameters, namely net trade11, crop area (or livestock as marketing infrastructure and rural livelihoods as a whole. numbers), and yields12, for scenarios with and without In addition, increased rainfall variability across the country climate change (CC and NoCC). All commodities were can be expected to have impacts on water availability for assessed individually except for sheep and goats, which crop and livestock production. Overall, the results indicate were assessed as a group since the production systems are the foothill livelihoods and the low land (northern and not significantly different, and vegetables. southern) zones of the country as being most vulnerable to climate change, given the projected higher temperatures Independent of climate change, results suggest that and minimal increase in precipitation. However, increases in Lesotho may become more dependent on imports of most temperature in the colder frost-affected parts of the country, food commodities, and will continue to be a net importer of may result in increased yield of crops such as maize. most agricultural commodities. In particular, results indicate the following: Though different global circulation models (GCMs) have been used in the analyses, there is consensus that Lesotho • The country is expected to continue to be a net importer The impact of climate change on net trade in Lesotho (2020-2050) 10 The IMPACT Model was parameterized by the Second Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP2), a conservative scenario that is typically considered “business-as-usual” 11 A positive value for net trade indicates greater exports than imports while a negative value for net trade indicates greater imports than exports. Ideally, countries strive to have positive net trade of key agricultural commodities. 12 Measured in tonnes/ ha 8 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile Climate change impacts on yield, crop area of maize and wheat. However, net-trade for maize and and livestock numbers in Lesotho wheat are likely to be 20.1 percentage points (pp) and 7pp higher respectively under CC compared to the NoCC scenario. These results give an impetus for more research on maize, considering that it is a staple crop for Lesotho. • The country is expected to continue to be a net importer of potato, beans and poultry regardless of the scenario. • Under both scenarios, the country may transition from being a net importer of dairy products and sorghum to being a net exporter. Net-trade is however, likely to be higher for dairy by 3.6pp and lower for sorghum by -25.5pp under the CC scenario as compared to the NoCC scenario. • The country is likely to continue to increase exports of pork, and wool and mohair under both scenarios; the exports being slightly higher by 0.6pp and 0.3pp for pork, and wool and mohair respectively under the CC scenario as compared to the NoCC scenario. Ultimately, changes in demand of agricultural commodities may be driven by several factors including population growth, national economic growth, incomes of individuals, commodity prices present in the global and national marketplace, consumer preferences, and national and international trade regulations. Looking at the potential changes in yield and harvested area, several outcomes are possible. In terms of area under cultivation, the following changes are projected by 2050: • The area under potato cultivation is projected to decrease under both scenarios; however, this decrease is projected to be more pronounced under CC by -4.1 percentage points (pp) compared to the NoCC scenario. • The areas under beans, maize, sorghum and wheat cultivation are likely to increase under both scenarios. For maize and sorghum, the increases are projected to be 7.4pp and 4.5pp greater under the CC scenario as compared to the NoCC scenario. The areas under production for beans and wheat are likely to be 5pp and 18pp less respectively under CC compared to the NoCC scenario. • The area under vegetables is expected to decrease under the CC scenario and increase under the NoCC scenario, with the with the production area being 13pp less under CC compared to the NoCC scenario. In terms of yield projections up to 2050, the following can be expected: • Yields for all the modelled commodities are likely to increase under both scenarios. • However, the increase is projected to be 5.3pp, 13.5pp and 21.6pp less for potato, vegetables and wheat respectively under the CC scenario as compared to the NoCC scenario. Lesotho 9 • The yields for beans, maize and sorghum are likely to be are required to enhance the widespread adoption of the higher by 2.1pp, 11.8pp and 11.4pp respectively under practice. the CC scenario compared to the NoCC scenario. Key hole gardens are defined as “circular, raised-beds made • The impact of climate change on animal numbers is up of layers of soil, ash, manure and other organic material not expected to be significant, with cattle, poultry, pig, that retains moisture and nourishes the soil, making it sheep and goats having similar numbers under both the more productive than a conventional garden, even during CC and NoCC scenarios. dry or cold months” [33]. The gardens support nutrition and household incomes, as vegetables can be grown for In general, all production systems in Lesotho are projected to consumption and the excess marketed. Irrigation is also be at least somewhat adversely affected by climate change. promoted in Lesotho, particularly in conjunction with block The specific impacts depend on the production system in farms, in which farmers cultivate individual blocks in a larger question, with wheat, potato and vegetables facing the most field, therefore providing an opportunity for gravity-fed significant impacts. This will require innovations to counter irrigation. Continuous availability of water in Lesotho can yield reductions. Government policy can therefore focus be a problem. Prolonged and frequent dry spells resulting in on promoting the products the country has a competitive low runoff and lowered water tables deprive crops and plants advantage in. Livestock also present a good opportunity with a shallow rooting system of water despite the abundant given less effect from climate change, the high current water resources. This makes strategies that simultaneously and expected future dependence on imports, and positive conserve water and soil important considerations in impact on dairy exports for the country. However, the designing irrigation interventions. Surface and sprinkler analysis only considered animal numbers; there is a need to irrigation systems for vegetables and fruits have been applied consider other factors such as markets, range management at small scale, particularly in the dry spell prone lowlands of and improvement of the breeding stock for realization of the the country, leading to an increase in water use efficiency. full benefits. Integrated (diversified) farms that combine crop, vegetable and fruit production with livestock rearing (chickens), and aquaculture have also been introduced in the country .These CSA technologies and practices integrated and self-sufficient farms have some similarities to the Machobane Farming System that has long been CSA technologies and practices present opportunities practiced in Lesotho [34]. This farming system incorporates for addressing climate change challenges, as well as for principles of crop rotation, organic fertilizer, and integrated economic growth and development of the agricultural pest and disease management to promote farm efficiency sector. For this profile, practices are considered CSA if they and self-sufficiency as well as improve resilience to climate enhance productivity as well as contribute to at least one of change. Looking into the prospects of scaling up knowledge the other objectives of CSA (adaptation and/or mitigation). on such farming systems while integrating aspects of post- harvest processing (with involvement of the private sector), In Lesotho, some of the crop-based adaptation practices could be an option for the promotion of climate-smart include CA, agroforestry, crop diversification, keyhole and practices in Lesotho. trench gardens [31]. CA has been supported by several organizations such as the Food and Agriculture Organization In terms of livestock, improved breeds (including drought, of the United Nations (FAO), and has been the major focus heat and cold resistant) of cattle, merino sheep and of the government in terms of allocating resources through angora goats are a priority for the country. There is some subsidies and formulation of agricultural production policies. adoption of improved breeds as well as cross-breeding Apart from a few studies [32], limited data exists on the supported by international development partners such as current adoption rates as well as the costs and benefits of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) conservation agriculture in Lesotho. However, factors such and research organizations such as ILRI, mostly with the as the labor intensiveness of the practice for both weeding aim of improving the quantity and quality of milk, wool and and planting (especially given the use of a hoe for digging mohair. In addition, farmers practice rotational grazing, the planting basins promoted under the Likoti system), and fodder production, stock size management and improved lack of appropriate equipment (the hoe is primarily used housing (particularly for poultry), as a means of adapting to rather than direct seeders and other CA equipment) have weather variability and climate change but also as a means contributed to the low adoption of the technology. While the of reducing land degradation. As with most livestock-related practice is considered more resilient to weather variability, resilience practices, provision of adequate health care and and contributes to soil and water conservation, there is good animal hygiene play a key role in boosting livestock need to gather better evidence on the costs and benefits of productivity, increasing efficiency of production, and CA under different agro-ecological conditions in Lesotho. enhancing resilience . Overall grassland management and Availability of CA technologies, credit and technical support rangeland rehabilitation remain key priorities for the country 13 https://www.farmersweekly.co.za/agri-business/empowerment/sustainable-farming-in-lesotho-thanks-to-thailand/ 10 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile and should be considered when designing livestock-related have a negative, positive or neutral impact on a selected programs. CSA indicator, with ±10 indicating a 100% change (positive/ negative) and 0 indicating no change. Practices in the Off-farm CSA-related practices include provision of graphics have been selected for each production system improved climate services and early warning information key for food security identified in the study. A detailed related to droughts and floods. This is mostly provided explanation of the methodology can be found in Annex 2. by the Lesotho Meteorological Services (LESMET) with support from international partners such as the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Weather index- based insurance is limited and could be an option for public-private sector partnerships for catalyzing adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices and technologies in the country. The private sector can also play a key role in extension services provision for new technologies and transfer of the technologies to smallholder farmers. Many adaptation strategies have been suggested by NAPA (2007) including installation of greenhouses to protect against frosts, high temperatures and heat waves while improving agricultural productivity; promotion of water purification programs to cushion farmers against drought; rearing of livestock breeds that can withstand the extreme weather conditions; improvement of animal nutrition; and promotion of rangeland sharing within communities. However, Lesotho, like many other African countries lacks empirical evidence of the CSA impacts of various technologies and strategies promoted in the country. Lack of financial resources, scarce natural resources and long pay-off periods are some of the factors that contribute to the low adoption of some CSA practices. Competing needs, for instance, emergency drought relief versus long- term resilience building; or the need to retain residue on the soil versus the need to feed livestock also hamper adoption of some practices. Farmers in the country have been undertaking risk management strategies to account for weather, market and other risks to varying degrees of success and within their own priorities for risk management. Promoting CSA practices that support longer-term adaptation to climate change (for example environmental management related interventions) will require a concerted effort to sensitize and change the mindset of farmers. Promoting a mix of shorter term CSA- related coping strategies and longer term adaptation and resilience building strategies will likely yield best results for farmers’ adoption of some strategies; limiting foregone adaptive opportunities. The following graphics present a selection of CSA practices with high climate-smartness scores according to expert evaluations. The average climate smartness score is calculated based on the practice’s individual scores on eight climate smartness dimensions that relate to the CSA pillars: yield (productivity); income, water, soil, risks (adaptation); energy, carbon and nitrogen (mitigation). A practice can Lesotho 11 Selected CSA practices and technologies for production systems key for food security in Lesotho 12 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile Case study 1: Climate-smart wool and mohair production and promotion The Lesotho Wool and Mohair Promotion Project (WAMPP), is an International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) funded project, coordinated by the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security (MAFS) through the Department of Livestock Services (DLS). Other relevant ministries and government departments involved include the Ministry of Forestry and Land Reclamation (MFLR) through the Department of Range Resources Management (DRRM); and the Ministry of Energy, Meteorology and Water Affairs (MEMWA), which houses the Lesotho Meteorological Services (LMS). The project is funded through a US$5.8 million loan, another US$5.8 million IFAD debt sustainability framework grant and an additional US$7 million grant from IFAD’s Adaptation for Smallholder Agriculture Programme (ASAP). The Government of Lesotho, and the Lesotho National Wool and Mohair Growers Association (LNWMA) are also contributing with co-financing, while project participants contribute in kind through labor on project infrastructure. The project will run for seven years focusing on three main components, namely: 1) climate-smart rangeland management; 2) improved production and management; and 3) wool and mohair processing and marketing. Under component 1, a community-based approach is used to support delineation of grazing areas, establishing sustainable stocking rates, developing grazing plans and registration of community land rights. Investments to reduce erosion and land degradation (such as sack gabions, vegetative windbreaks, grassland reseeding) are also being made, thus contributing to more sustainable and climate-resilient rangelands with greater above- and below- ground carbon storage capacity. A new Rangeland Management Act is expected to be developed as part of the project, and collection of climate-information is to be enhanced through installation of 5 automatic weather stations and 200 rain gauges. Under component 2, the project is addressing three key issues, these being animal nutrition, animal breeding and animal health. Under the breeding sub-component, the project supports the revamping of two government livestock breeding centres for Merino Sheep and Angora Goats, and helping in improving the productivity and climate-resilience of the local livestock population. CSA-related activities within this component include establishment of 2,000 ha of forage (including support to intercropping of forage legumes with maize) and the training of 10,000 livestock producers on improved feeding and breeding practices. Livestock health management will be promoted, through training of paravets and development of risk assessment and vulnerability maps to predict the impacts of climate change on the epidemiology of livestock diseases. Under component 3, livestock owners are to be capacity built on a commercial and business approach to wool and mohair production, processing, marketing and sales. This includes development of climate-smart shearing sheds complete with solar panels, roof rainwater harvesting tanks and shelters; strengthening fiber handling and grading; and investing in feeder roads. The project also has a gender component to boost women’s entrepreneurship skills and capacity. The project is in its early stages and limited information is available on its impact. However, the value chain and landscape approaches to climate-smart wool and mohair production are expected to improve productivity and profitability, improve resilience to climate and market shocks, and reduce the negative impact of goats and sheep on the environment. Ultimately, the project is expected to reduce child malnutrition and increase climate-resilience for 250,000 households. These climate-smart practices included rangeland management, development of local facilities for breed improvement, construction of climate-resilient processing facilities, and capacity building of stakeholders and farmers on breed and feed improvements. This integrated approach to climate-smart agriculture could be applied to other important production systems in the country including maize, wheat, sorghum, fruits, and vegetables as well as meat and dairy (beef, pork and poultry). Improved Merino Sheep and Stud Rams being showcased in Lesotho. Photos courtesy of the WAMPP Case study adapted largely from: Wool and Mohair Promotion Project (WAMPP): Final project design report https://operations.ifad.org/documents/654016/6e480215-a284-4aaa-acc5-a60af49d1a66 Lesotho 13 Case study 2: Enhancing resilience through a joined up approach in promoting keyhole gardens The pronounced winters and droughts throughout the year significantly reduce agricultural productivity in Lesotho. The high poverty and disease burden make it difficult for the small-scale farmers to adopt to the extreme weather. Redress of these challenges requires interventions that do not only touch on one sector but rather several sectors of the economy and involves all the key players in the relevant sector. Due to the limited scope of interventions, farmers’ lack of capacity to adopt new practices and technologies, proper policies, and a collaborative effort from relevant institutions, the goal of holistically addressing the climate challenges on agriculture is rarely achieved. In Lesotho, one of the significant interventions that has been used to have long lasting impacts that touch on several aspects of resilience and adaptive capacity is the keyhole gardens. Through a joined up approach, keyhole gardens have been promoted in Lesotho under the auspices of the Consortium for Southern Africa Food Security Emergency (C-Safe) project led by CARE International, World Vision and Catholic Relief Service (CRS); the project has since grown to include the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Food Programme (WFP). The program’s main goal was to enhance food security, through better nutrition, improve climate resilience and increase incomes and savings targeting households affected by HIV and AIDS. A keyhole garden is a raised bed measuring approximately 1m high and 2m in diameter; made from recycled materials such as ash, manure plus other organic matter; and surrounded by local brick, stones, cotton sacks, sorghum, maize and clay pots (see diagram). At the center is a hole that enables access and replenishment of the garden. The whole makes the whole structure look like a “key hole” from which the approach derives its name. The gardens are mostly used for growing vegetables. The garden enhances moisture retention and replenishment of organic matter, and can permit production in poor soils with little moisture. Keyhole gardens require little maintenance and can yield for up to 5 years before replenishment. Compared to conventional practices, keyhole gardens register higher yields since the system is resilient to both drought and low temperatures. The gardens permit all groups of people including the elderly and those who are sick to work on them. In addition, other than increasing yields, the keyhole gardens have promoted social ties, since people work in social groups (Matsema). The Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security has helped in development of training manuals for the approach. FAO in collaboration with other partners such as the Unites States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the UK Government’s Department for International Development (UKAid) has trained farmers on growing, improving yields, crop diversification through extension workers and schools. Local NGOs such as the Rural Self- Help Development Association and Good Shepherd Sisters are also involved in dissemination of the practice. Since their inception, 23,150 keyhole gardens have been constructed, impacting approximately 115,590 people. The structures have enhanced year-round production of nutritious vegetables such as spinach, carrots and beetroot, and have enhanced income availability for other household expenses such as school fees. The success of keyhole gardens has led to their inclusion in the Food Policy of Lesotho. Keyhole gardens have continued to be widely adopted by farmers in the country, making the approach a viable CSA option that can be replicated not only at a micro level but also at national level. Case study adapted from http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/340250/icode/, https://www.worldvision.org/wp- content/uploads/telling-our-stories-report.pdf and https://www.mrfcj.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/2013-04-16- Lesotho.pdf 14 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile Table 1. Detailed smartness assessment for top ongoing CSA practices by production system as implemented in Lesotho. Region and Predominant adoption farm scale CSA rate (%) S: small scale Climate smartness Impact on CSA Pillars practice <30 30-60 60> M: medium scale L: large scale Maize (62% of total harvested area) Southern region (Mafeteng, Mohale’s Hoek, Productivity Quthing Increases yield and hence incomes and food availability. 30-60% Adaptation Application of Enhances soil water conservation. Easily manure Northern practiced by both men and women. region Mitigation (Berea, Less use of mineral fertilizers hence lower Butha- emissions. Reduced methane emissions Buthe), from manure left on pastures. Central (Maseru) 30-60% Southern region (Mafeteng, Mohale’s Productivity Hoek, Improved yields, higher nutrient quality, Quthing and diversification of food and income sources. 30-60% Adaptation Crop rotations Improved soil fertility when rotated with (with legumes legumes, improved food availability and and winter Northern hence resilience to climate and market wheat) region shocks. (Berea, Mitigation Butha- Improved yearlong above- and below- Buthe), ground biomass and hence CO2 storage. Central Improved efficiency of production. (Maseru) 30-60% Sorghum (11% of total harvested area) Southern region (Mafeteng, Mohale’s Hoek, Productivity Quthing Increases productivity due to reduced pest and disease incidence. Two or more crops 30-60% from the same field. Crop rotations Adaptation (relay Enhances food availability and soil fertility. cropping) Northern Maximum use of available water resources. region Mitigation (Berea, Improved yearlong above- and below- Butha- ground biomass and hence CO2 storage. Buthe), Improved efficiency of production. Central (Maseru) 30-60% Lesotho 15 Region and Predominant adoption farm scale CSA rate (%) S: small scale Climate smartness Impact on CSA Pillars practice <30 30-60 60> M: medium scale L: large scale Sorghum (11% of total harvested area) Southern region (Mafeteng, Mohale’s Productivity Hoek, Increased yields due to accumulation of Quthing water and nutrients on contours and hence improved incomes. >60% Adaptation Contour Land management is made easier for ploughing women. Reduces soil erosion, improves Northern soil quality and reduces use of fertilizer and region (Berea, water. Improves soil water storage. Butha-Buthe), Mitigation Central Reduces emissions by maintaining soil (Maseru) structure. >60% Wheat (7.2% of total harvested area)t Thaba Tseka <30% Productivity Improves soil fertility and structure thus improving productivity and profits. Adaptation Improved Improved water retention in soils. Increased varieties Highlands system resilience. (Mokhotlong, Mitigation Maseru Reduce requirement of synthetic fertilizers, Highlands, hence reduce nitrous oxide emissions. Linakeng, Mantsonyane <30% Thaba Tseka <30% Productivity Increases yield over time. Conservation Adaptation agriculture Reduces land degradation, reduces soil (combination erosion, conserves soil moisture for use by of basins, plants during dry spells and improves soil cover crops Highlands fertility. and minimum (Mokhotlong, tillage) Maseru Mitigation Highlands, Conserves biomass in the soil hence Linakeng, improving below ground carbon storage. Mantsonyane <30% Yield Income Water Soil Risk/Information Energy Carbon Nutrient 16 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile Predominant Region and farm scale adoption rate CSA S: small scale (%) Climate smartness Impact on CSA Pillars practice M: medium <30 30-60 60> scale L: large scale Beans (10% of total harvested area) Berea <30% Productivity Improves yields, and hence income. Adaptation Enhances high water use efficiency, promotes resistance to pests and diseases, Improved and enhances availability and access to varieties food Mitigation Northern Increases biomass, and hence enhances Lowlands carbon sequestration. May require more (Leribe, fertiliser. Berea), Butha- Bithe <30% Berea Productivity <30% Increases yields hence income. Two crops can be grown at the same time. Adaptation Improves moisture conservation, reduces Intercropping soil erosion, reduces pest and disease Northern incidences, and enhances efficient fertilizer Lowlands and water use. (Leribe, Mitigation Berea), Butha- Enhances carbon sequestration due to Bithe greater above- and below-ground biomass. <30% Potato (3.5% of total harvested area) Lowlands (Mafeteng, Monale’s Hoek) Productivity Greatly increases yields. <30% Adaptation Maintains yields in the face of drought and Improved dry spells. irrigation (drip Mitigation or sprinkler) Highlands and Enhances carbon sequestration as it the Foothills ensures maximum vegetation cover. (Semonkong, Improved productivity per unit of water Marakabei) used hence reducing emissions per unit of produce. <30% Lesotho 17 Region and Predominant adoption farm scale CSA rate (%) S: small scale Climate smartness Impact on CSA Pillars practice <30 30-60 60> M: medium scale L: large scale Potato (3.5% of total harvested area) Lowlands (Mafeteng, Monale’s Hoek) Productivity <30% Increases yields. Multiple crops can be grown on the same field. Improves soil fertility when rotated with appropriate crops. Crop rotations Adaptation Highlands Improves soil texture, and helps prevent and the diseases and pests. Foothills Mitigation (Semonkong, Enhances sequestration of carbon. Marakabei) <30% Vegetables (2% of total harvested area)t Southern Productivity region Greatly increases yields and incomes. (Mafeteng, Allows all year round production. Ensures Mohale’s all year round nutrition for men, women and Hoek) children. <30% Adaptation Maintains yields in the face of droughts and Improved dry spells. Enhances physical health and varieties North region resilience of men, women and children. (Leribe, Mitigation Botha-Buthe) Reduces emissions since it maintains the integrity of the soil. Improves productivity <30% per unit of water when appropriate irrigation technologies are used (e.g. drip irrigation). Southern region (Mafeteng, Mohale’s Productivity Hoek) Increases productivity hence incomes. Reduces runoff and loss of water for use in 30-60% vegetable production. Adaptation Water Prevents soil erosion. Increases availability harvesting of water during dry spells and droughts. (underground) North region (Leribe, Mitigation Botha-Buthe) Soil conservation through reduced erosion hence reduces emissions. Reduced 30-60% loss of water as runoff results in reduced emissions. Yield Income Water Soil Risk/Information Energy Carbon Nutrient 18 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile Predominant Region and farm scale adoption rate CSA S: small scale (%) Climate smartness Impact on CSA Pillars practice M: medium <30 30-60 60> scale L: large scale Sheep and goat (66% of total harvested area) Southern region (Mafeteng, Productivity Mohale’s Increases productivity due to better Hoek) nutrition of animals. Adaptation 30-60% 30-60% 30-60% 30-60% Reduces soil erosion and land degradation. Healthy grazing land ecosystem and Rotational pastures help reduce impact of droughts grazing and floods. Mitigation North region Enhances vegetation cover and facilitates (Leribe, Botha- carbon sequestration. Enhances Buthe) regeneration of pastures hence allowing for 30-60% 30-60% improved carbon storage. Southern region (Mafeteng, Productivity Mohale’s Increases productivity due to improved Hoek) nutrition of animals. 30-60% Adaptation Reduces degradation of soils, reduces Grassland soil erosion and enhances vegetative restoration and cover and biodiversity. Healthy grazing conservation North region land ecosystem and pastures help reduce (Leribe, Botha- impact of droughts and floods.. Buthe) Mitigation 30-60% Maintains and improves vegetative cover hence reduces greenhouse emissions. Pigs (66% of total harvested area) Mountains Productivity <30% Increases meat production due to conducive environment for feeding and growth. Adaptation Improved Protects the stock from extreme weather housing conditions such as heat waves, floods or extreme cold. Lowlands and foothill Mitigation Enhances manure management hence <30% reduced emissions. Lesotho 19 Region and Predominant adoption farm scale CSA rate (%) S: small scale Climate smartness Impact on CSA Pillars practice <30 30-60 60> M: medium scale L: large scale Pigs (66% of total harvested area) Mountains Productivity 30-60% Increases yields and quality of meat, ensures fast growth of animals. Adaptation Improved Enhances adaptive capacity since healthy nutrition animals are more resilient. Mitigation Lowlands Improves feed efficiency hence reduces and foothill emissions of methane and carbon dioxide. 30-60% Dairy (66% of total harvested area)t Productivity Southern Increases yield quantity and quality. region Adaptation (Mafeteng) Enhances adoption of other strategies such as management of the stock; this reduces <30% environmental degradation and wastage Improved of feeds. Improved breeds may be more livestock resilient to weather extremes. breeds Mitigation Central Reduces feed requirements, hence region reduction in the emissions. Greater (Maseru) production per unit of feed results in reduced emissions per unit of milk. <30% Southern region Productivity (Mafeteng) Increases milk production and income. Reduces production costs and hence increases profits. <30% Adaptation Improved Enhances availability of feeds, even during fodder and dry spells and droughts. Ensures healthy feeding animals, which are more resilient to hazards. Mitigation Central Reduced emissions due to less land tillage region using farm machinery. Greater production (Maseru) per unit of feed results in reduced <30% emissions per unit of milk. Yield Income Water Soil Risk/Information Energy Carbon Nutrient 20 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile Predominant Region and farm scale adoption rate CSA S: small scale (%) Climate smartness Impact on CSA Pillars practice M: medium <30 30-60 60> scale L: large scale Poultry (66% of total harvested area) Mountains < <30% 30% Productivity Increases weight of live birds; increases laying rate. Reduces mortality and hence 30-60% 30-60% 30-60% improves productivity and profitability. Disease Adaptation management Healthy poultry result in improved resilience to climate hazards Lowlands, Mitigation Senqu Slightly reduces emissions, though not river valley, significantly. Foothills 30-60% 30-60% Mountains Productivity <30% Increases weight of live birds; increases laying rate. Adaptation Reduces burden on women to look for Improved feeds; creates jobs for women. Improves feeding poultry health and hence resilience to Lowlands, Senqu hazards. river valley, Mitigation Foothills Reduces emissions due to enhanced 30-60% feeding efficiency. Lesotho 21 Institutions and policies for CSA conventional approaches. MAFS is a key institution for CSA and is involved in many of the CSA-related initiatives in Climate policy in Lesotho is formulated and implemented by the country including CA promotion, keyhole gardens and the Ministry of Energy and Meteorology, which also acts as irrigation development. The National University of Lesotho the country’s National Designated Authority (NDA) for the in partnership with the University of Tennessee (USA) has Green Climate Fund (GCF). Within this ministry, the Lesotho conducted CA research activities in Maphutseng, focusing Meteorological Service (LESMET) is responsible for the day- on understanding the mitigation benefits of CA compared to-day climate change related activities. The Ministry of to conventional agriculture, as well as conducting research Tourism, Environment and Culture is the focal point for the on locally appropriate cover crops. The National University United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change of Lesotho conducts research and provides information (UNFCCC) including the Global Environment Fund (GEF). on drought-tolerant, and pest- and disease- resistant crop varieties and livestock breeds, as well their nutritional value. Government projects related to CSA include the Lesotho Renewable Energy-Based Rural Electrification Project Cooperatives and the Lesotho National Farmers Federation that is being implemented as a pilot in three districts in (LENAFU) play an important role in agricultural production the country. The project is co-financed by Government of and marketing in the country. Capacity building efforts on Lesotho and the GEF through UNDP , and could have to CSA could be directed at these farmer-based institutions, support various climate-smart activities such as irrigation while also building their business, financial management and agricultural processing. The GEF funded NAPA project and negotiation skills. “Improvement of early warning systems to reduce impacts of climate change and capacity building to integrate climate change into development plans” is being implemented through the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in partnership with the Government of Lesotho Institutions for CSA in Lesotho (GoL). Through the UNDP coordinated GEF-Small Grants Program, a number of agriculture and climate change small community projects are being evaluated for financing14. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has supported in building the knowledge base for CSA through development and harmonization of visual training materials to be used in the promotion of CSA practices, mostly focusing on CA and keyhole gardens. This collective effort was coordinated and facilitated through the Resilience Strategy implemented by FAO and the GoL. The work also resulted in the establishment of the Lesotho National Conservation Agriculture Task Force (NCATF), which has been provided with support by FAO to develop and maintain a website15, develop awareness raising materials, conduct trainings, and coordinate all actors involved in conservation agriculture promotion in the country. Other working groups supported include the Home Gardening and Nutrition Working Group, and the Sustainable Land Management Working Group. These working groups incorporate broad stakeholder involvement including civil society organizations (CSOs) that play an important role in CSA promotion. CSOs such as World Vision International (WVI) have been promoting CA across all ten districts of the country, in collaboration with organizations such as Caritas Lesotho and CARE International. A National Climate Change Committee (NCCC) established in 2013 also exists, as a multistakeholder, inter-ministerial committee serving as an advisory board to the Ministry of Energy and Meteorology. In terms of research, the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security (MAFS) has conducted CSA-related research across the four agro-ecological zones of Lesotho, analyzing the agronomic responses of maize under CA versus 14 www.undp.org/content/dam/lesotho/docs/ProjectDocuments/AAPLesotho%20Prodoc.doc 15 https://www.lesothocsa.com/ 22 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile In summary many of the institutions that have programs increasing livestock and crop production; securing water and projects related to climate change and agriculture supply; enhancing food security; improving flood prone have focused on the adaptation and productivity pillars of areas and wetlands; improving early warning climate disaster the CSA concept, with little focus placed on the mitigation systems; and policy reform to integrate climate change into pillar. Emergency response and relief aid has also been development [23]. Lesotho’s NDC highlights agriculture as a focus due to the high vulnerability of the country to a focus area for adaptation, but does not mention the sector recurrent droughts. Knowledge of CSA remains low and among its mitigation priorities even though the sector is a there is need for enhanced awareness raising efforts, and major GHG source in the country. capacity building on appropriate climate-smart practices for different agricultural commodities and different locations in Lesotho’s Agriculture and Food Security Policy (2006) the country. indicates that agriculture is critically dependent on natural resources such as land, water, and forests. The policy The graphic in page 22 highlights key institutions whose highlights the need for soil fertility replenishment and main activities relate to at least one of the three CSA pillars increased use of high yielding crop varieties and improved (adaptation, productivity and mitigation). More information livestock breeds. Key practices mentioned for this purpose on the methodology is available in Annex 3. are conservation agriculture, block farming, rangeland management and homestead gardens. The policy highlights In terms of policy environment, the government of Lesotho that climate change has serious impacts on agriculture and acknowledges that climate change is a threat to national livestock, emphasizing the need for adoption of climate- development. To show commitment to addressing climate smart practices [34]. change challenges, the country signed and ratified the UNFCCC and acceded to the Kyoto Protocol. The country The National Environmental Policy (1998) provides the submitted its First and Second National Communications framework for water policy development in the country. to the UNFCCC in 2000 and 2013 respectively. The The policy recognizes periodic prolonged drought, scarcity communications detail climate change impacts and of water for agriculture, and pollution of land and water adaptation options in eight sectors deemed vulnerable to resources in its preamble; advocating for increased access climate change, including; water, agriculture, rangelands, to potable water [34]. forestry, soils, health, biodiversity, and Basotho culture [35]. In 2006, the country embarked on the preparation Lesotho’s National Forestry Policy (2008) encourages of a National Adaptation Program of Action (NAPA), which communities and individuals to participate in forestry highlighted eleven priority adaptation areas including Policies for CSA in Lesotho Lesotho 23 development and community plantation management to Lesotho has also embarked on the process of developing reduce deforestation16, and protect against water and wind a National Adaptation Plan (NAP) with support from UNDP erosion [34]. Regionally, Lesotho is a participant of the and FAO. The NAP is expected to incorporate some SADC Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Land CSA practices. A Lesotho Sustainable Land and Water Degradation (REDD +) program whose goal is to contribute Management Strategic Investment Programme18 (2014- to the sustainable management of the forests of the SADC 2024) exists, and highlights the need for integrated land region while contributing to poverty reduction, sustainable and (small scale) water management, focusing on practices development and climate change mitigation [34]. such as conservation agriculture, agroforestry, various soil and water conservation methods (including “donga19” The country has a National Gender and Development Policy stabilization), and the restoration of seriously degraded (2003) which mentions the need for equitable access to wetlands. land and other natural resources as a key requirement for the adoption of more resilient agricultural practices. The Although the tenets of CSA are embedded in the country’s Disaster Management Act (1997) focuses on reducing food security policies and programs, Lesotho has few vulnerability to disasters, particularly food security related policies directly related to or mentioning CSA. Even though vulnerability caused by climate hazards such as droughts there are many climate-resilient practices mentioned in and floods. Within the framework of this policy, the Lesotho various policies, a greater effort is required to ensure that Disaster Management Authority (DMA) undertakes annual CSA is better mainstreamed in all national policies. vulnerability assessments throughout the country through a multi-sectoral and multidisciplinary committee called the The graphic in page 23 shows a selection of policies, Lesotho Vulnerability Assessment Committee (LVAC). strategies and programs that relate to agriculture and climate change and are considered key enablers of CSA The critical state of agriculture and national development in the country. The policy cycle classification aims to as well as the effects of climate change led the Government show gaps and opportunities in policy-making, referring to prioritize agriculture and food security, with its goals in to the three main policy cycle stages: policy formulation this regard outlined in Vision 2020 (2000) and the National (referring to a policy that is in an initial formulation stage/ Strategic Development Plan (NSDP , 2012). The NSDP consultation process), policy formalization (to indicate the focuses on creating employment, developing infrastructure, presence of mechanisms for the policy implementation at promoting technology adoption, reversing environmental national level), and policy implementation (to indicate visible degradation, and enhancing adaptation to climate change progress toward achieving policy goals, through concrete [36]. strategies and action plans). For more information on the methodology, see Annex 4. Recently, the country began the process of developing a National Climate Change Policy (NCCP) and a National Resilience Strategic Framework (NRSF). Both documents Financing CSA are currently in draft status. The NCCP specifically mentions the need for climate-smart practices, and marks a Lesotho’s NDC indicates that, “In the absence of an official significant step in integrating CSA into the country’s policies national adaptation plan, the NAPA options remain the best and programs. The latter outlines eleven pillars including indication of the nation’s intentions for adaptation” [14]. The strengthening preparedness for disaster and climate risks, NAPA projects include a number of CSA-related initiatives environmental protection, sustainable natural resource including fodder production, crop rotations, agroforestry management along which the country will mainstream (fruit tree planting), water harvesting, improved early warning resilience. The NRSF provides for different roles that and climate information, and wetland management among various organizations will play in the actualization of the others. The NAPA costs are estimated at approximately strategy. Through the Smallholder Agriculture Development US$20 million, and although valuable in their right as Project (SADP), the country is in the process of finalizing projects, they are likely a gross underestimation of the scale development of an Irrigation Master Plan to guide and of the adaptation needs in the country. For example, in 2016 strengthen investment in irrigation and promote adoption donors contributed US$40.7 million for the country’s El of climate-smart practices by farmers17. The SADP Nino related drought response alone20. On the other hand, aims at increasing smallholder agricultural productivity, the NDC indicates that for the period 2015 – 2020, the supporting diversification into market oriented agriculture, cost of implementing forestry-related mitigation actions are and improving the enabling environment for agribusiness approximately US$24 million, with this being conditional on activities. external financial support. 16 Deforestation is largely caused by the harvesting of wood for fuel and building materials. 17 Examples of technologies likely to be supported include stress tolerant horticulture, conservation agriculture, small-scale irrigation and water harvesting, improved homestead gardening, and sustainable processing technologies. 18 http://terrafrica.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/downloadable-resources/SLM-LSIF-Pro-Doc_Final.pdf 19 Donga is a local name for a gulley 20 https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/lesotho_cerf_allocations_overview_12may2017.pdf . 24 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile Financing opportunities for CSA in Lesotho further US$27 million from the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF). These projects have included initiatives on strengthening climate services in the country, supporting integrated watershed management, improved rangeland management, and fodder production, all with a link to CSA without explicitly mentioning the CSA concept. The World Bank being a major funder of agricultural development projects in the country has made a concerted effort to ensure the integration of climate-smart practices into their projects. For example, the World Bank - International Development Association funded Smallholder Agricultural Development Project that began in 2016, was in 2017 allocated an additional US $10 million to strengthen the integration of climate-smart and climate resilient practices into the project with focus on smallholder farmers. Some practices identified include stress-tolerant horticulture, conservation agriculture, small-scale irrigation and water harvesting, improved homestead gardening, and sustainable processing technologies22. The World Bank has also supported the Ministry of Energy and Meteorology (MEM) to develop a Scaling Renewable Energy Program (SREP) Investment Plan (IP)23, which highlights the potential uses of different energy investments for agriculture for example through irrigation possibilities, flood and drought protection and possibilities for agricultural processing. The African Development Bank (AfDB), as part of its goal to increase its climate finance to US$5 billion annually by 2020, has been a major contributor to climate change adaptation work in Lesotho. The ADB cofinances (with the GEF) US$17 million of the US$21.4 million project on Climate Change Adaptation for Sustainable Rural Water Supply in Lowlands, which includes aspects of flood and drought management, water harvesting for humans consumption as well as for crops and livestock. These projects highlight multi-purpose development of water infrastructure as a key means of supporting agricultural productivity and resilience in the country. United Nations agencies such as FAO, UNDP and UNEP also support agriculture, forestry and natural resources related initiatives in the country. Regional organizations such as the Common Market for Eastern Africa (COMESA), through partners such as FAO, have funded conservation agriculture awareness raising and coordination in the country. Bilateral donors such as USAID, DFID, The Netherlands Development Agency and the European Commission fund various agriculture and climate change related initiatives. Multi donor trust funds exist, particularly the United Nations The country does however have a significant portfolio of Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF), designed to agricultural climate change adaptation and mitigation address the most urgent needs in food security, nutrition, related projects. The main sources of international climate agriculture, water and sanitation, and health. CERF has financing for these projects include the GEF and multilateral focused largely on drought response interventions such as development banks such as the World Bank and the African seed and fertiliser distribution; however, organizations such Development Bank (AfDB). The country has accessed as FAO have made a concerted effort to integrate climate- US$15 million from the GEF for national projects21 and a smart practices into their support by providing awareness 21 This does not include regional or multi-country projects to which Lesotho may be a part. 22 http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2017/09/29/lesotho-to-direct-smallholders-towards-climate-smart-agriculture 23 https://www.climateinvestmentfunds.org/sites/default/files/meeting-documents/srep_18_4_investment_plan_lesotho_final_0.pdf Lesotho 25 raising on conservation agriculture and other climate-smart private sector investment in agricultural value chains. The practices to participating households. More could be done policy also indicates the need to leverage Green Bonds, to mainstream CSA and long-term agricultural resilience which could be applied for the agricultural sector to promote building into the CERF and other emergency response climate-smart practices; this would however require the funds in the country. development of suitable eligibility criteria. At the national level, there are limited funds available for With the large number of smallholder farmers and relatively agricultural climate change adaptation and mitigation few large-scale commercial farmers, there is need to initiatives in the country. A Forest Fund exists under the develop microfinance initiatives tailored to smallholder CSA control of the Ministry of Agriculture, receiving voluntary investments. Similarly, with a large number of cooperatives contributions as well as fees and fines collected under the in the country, greater effort could be made to sensitize Forest Act. The funds are then used for forest management, these groups on CSA and support their access to public forest research, reforestation initiatives and in some cases and private finance for CSA investments. payments for community forest management24. Most funding has been toward agricultural productivity Outlook projects and there is a general lack of awareness of the diverse availability of international funding sources for There is an urgent need for finance to support agricultural agricultural climate change adaptation and mitigation. adaptation and mitigation, as well as other related initiatives International funding for forestry is highly limited and the such as rural electrification, hydropower generation, and country has not accessed international funds for forestry climate information provision. In addition, Lesotho requires related projects. greater support in terms of technology transfer for climate- smart practices as well as capacity building of farmers, Potential Finance cooperatives, development partners and extension agents. The three interlinked areas of finance, technology and Lesotho has not accessed many of the major sources capacity are mentioned in a number of climate change of climate funding available including the Adaptation related documents including the country’s NDC, and efforts Fund and the Green Climate Fund. The country is yet to to support these three aspects need to be well supported elaborate its National Adaptation Plan (NAP), which could and coordinated through the relevant government Ministry. give an updated and more realistic estimation of the costs of adaptation in the country, giving direction for donors Lesotho has a limited climate policy environment; however, on priority agricultural adaptation projects and their costs. this is set to change once the draft Climate Change Policy is Having a better understanding of the agricultural adaptation adopted. Although the policy specifically mentions CSA as and mitigation options and costs would be a key requirement a key priority, there is need to ensure availability of finance for long-term financial planning and resource mobilisation (public and private, domestic and international), as well as for CSA in the country. build capacity of all the relevant stakeholders to implement the strategies identified. Greater awareness raising and Positively, the draft National Climate Change Policy, states sensitization of extension actors and farmers on climate- that the Government of Lesotho will allocate a percentage smart practices will be a key action. of the national budget towards issues pertaining to climate change and will also advocate for private sector Although various government documents, including the involvement in climate change adaptation through public- NDC, indicate agriculture as being one of the major GHG private partnerships, while government departments are emitters in the country, little focus has been placed in these encouraged to create an enabling environment for climate documents on identifying agricultural mitigation initiatives, finance for all sources. Although no specific budget while greatest focus has been placed on energy and forestry. percentage is mentioned and neither are specific focus A deeper analysis of the linkages between forestry, energy areas, it will be crucial to ensure that climate-smart practices and agriculture, along with a concerted effort to identify are prioritised within national budgets, possibly through the mitigation opportunities linked to the agricultural adaptation National Agricultural Investment Plan (NAIP). Understanding priorities would be of benefit to the country’s mitigation the challenges and creating the enabling environment for goals. Ensuring energy-related initiatives can be tailored to private sector involvement in CSA will also be an important support the needs of smallholder farmers will be important area of work and can be tackled by conducting a specific in supporting the country to adopt some climate-smart private sector engagement study to identify strategies to practices (for example energy for irrigation, storage and involve the private sector in CSA scaling up. Conducting processing of agricultural produce). sub-national climate risk profiling, commodity specific climate risk profiling and cost benefit analysis of different CSA technologies across different regions could facilitate 24 http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/x6821e/X6821E09.htm 26 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile Land degradation and natural resource management are sector, and a detailed assessment to determine these needs major challenges, and locally appropriate CSA practices and costs will benefit better long term planning on CSA and investments are needed that improve the natural finance for the country. A greater focus on capturing data resource base. Soil based CSA practices could play a key related to technology adoption rates, and on availability and role in ensuring food security in a declining natural resource ease of access to CSA technologies and inputs is needed. In base and a changing climate. Multi-purpose development the absence of a detailed analysis of these factors, current of water-related infrastructure is a key investment for and future CSA-related investments need to have data agricultural productivity as well as flood and drought collection and analyses integrated within them to provide a management in the country. basis to inform policy decisions and guide CSA planning in the country. At present, there is limited information on the costs of adaptation and mitigation initiatives in the agricultural Works cited [1] FAO. 2010. “Climate-Smart” Agriculture. Policies, [12] FAO. 2016. AQUASTAT website. Food and Agriculture practices and financing for food security, adaptation and Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Available at: mitigation. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/data/query/results. United Nations (FAO). html [2] FAO. 2013. Climate-smart agriculture sourcebook. [13] IFPRI. 2009. Measuring irrigation Performance in Rome: FAO. Africa. International Food Policy Research Institute. IFPRI Discussion Paper 00894. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb. [3] World Bank. 2017. World Development Indicators: int/files/resources/240F109982EEBCCD4925762C000A3 Lesotho. Washington, D.C.: World Bank (WB). Available at: 1F6-Full_Report.pdf http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development- indicators [14] Government of Lesotho. 2015b. Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) of Lesotho to the United [4] FAO. 2017. Food and agriculture data (FAOSTAT). Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Rome: FAO. Available at: http://www.fao.org/faostat (UNFCCC). Available at: http://www4.unfccc.int [5] Government of Lesotho. 2013. Lesotho Sustainable [15] LVAC. 2016. Lesotho Vulnerability Assessment land and Water Management Strategic Investment Committee. Annual Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis Programme 2014-2024. report. May 2016. [6] LVAC. 2017. Lesotho Vulnerability Assessment [16] EIU. 2016. Global Food Security Index. Economic Committee. Annual Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis Intelligence Unit (EIU). Available at: http://bit.ly/1nwKY4r report. June 2017 [17] WFP. 2016. Food Aid Information System. World Food [7] Government of Lesotho. 2015a. 2013/2014 agriculture Programme (WFP). Available at: http://bit.ly/1nwKY4r production survey; crops. [18] IFPRI. 2011. International Food Policy Research [8] World Bank. 2015. Lesotho: Systematic Country Institute. IFPRI Food Security Portal. http://www. Diagnostic foodsecurityportal.org/api/countries/fao-calorie-supply-p/ lesotho [9] UNDP . 2016. Human Development Report 2016. http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2016_human_ [19] Lesotho Bureau of Statistics. 2011. Budget development_report.pdf Household Survey 2010-2011 http://www.bos.gov.ls/ Downloads.htm [10] Lesotho Bureau of Statistics. 2011. Lesotho Demographic Survey Report http://www.bos.gov.ls/New%20 [20] AFDB. 2005. Multi-sector country gender profile: Folder/Copy%20of%20Demography/2011_Lesotho_ African Development Bank pp 25 https://www.afdb. Demographic_Survey_Report.pdf org/fileadmin/uploads/afdb/Documents/Project-and- Operations/lesotho.pdf [11] Government of Lesotho. 2014. Lesotho Agriculture and Food Security Investment Plan. NAIP 2015-2020. Lesotho 27 [21] IFPRI. 2017. International Food Policy Research [31] ATPS. 2013. Farmers’ Response and Adaptation Institute. IFPRI Global Hunger Index (GHI). http://www. Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho globalhungerindex.org/results-2017/ [Tsepo Stephen Tiisetso Sekaleli, Karabo Sebusi]. ATPS WORKING PAPER No. 74. African Technology Policy [22] WRI. 2018. Climate Data Explorer. Washington, DC: Studies Network. World Resources Institute (WRI). Available at: http://cait.wri. org [32] Silici, L. 2010. Conservation Agriculture and Sustainable Crop Intensification in Lesotho. Food and [23] MNR. 2007. National Adaptation Programme of Action Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAO. on Climate Change. Ministry of Natural Resources, Lesotho Rome. www.fao.org/docrep/012/i1650e/i1650e00.pdf (MNR) [33] Billingsley, R., Mothunyane, M. and McLean, S. [24] FAO. 2016. El Nino- induced drought briefing- 2013. Lessons from Lesotho: how a ‘joined-up’ approach, February 2016. Available at: http://www.fao.org/ centered on keyhole gardens, is tackling linked issues fileadmin/user_upload/emergencies/docs/FAOLesotho_ of hunger, nutrition and poverty. Paper for the Hunger, ElNinoResponsePlanBriefing_February2016.pdf Nutrition, Climate and Justice Conference. 15-16 April 2013. [25] Dejene, A., Midgley, S., Marake, M. and Ramasamy, S. 2011. Experience and Lessons from Lesotho Strengthening [34] Gwimbi, P; Likoetla, P; Thabane, K; Matebesi, P . Capacity for Climate Change Adaptation in Agriculture. 2014. A Comprehensive Scoping and Assessment Study http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/i2228e/i2228e00.pdf. of Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) Policies in Lesotho. Food Agriculture, Natural Resources Policy Analysis [26] World Bank. 2016. “Lesotho Water Security and Network (FANRPAN). https://www.fanrpan.org/archive/ Climate Change Assessment.” World Bank, Washington, documents/d01756/Lesotho_Comprehensive_Scoping_ DC. License: Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 3.0 Assessment_of_CSA_Policies.pdf IGO. Available at: https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/default/ files/publication/lesotho-water-security-climate-change- [35] MEMWA. 2013. Second National Communication of assessment.pdf Lesotho to the UNFCCC; Ministry of Energy, Meteorology and Water Affairs, Lesotho (MEMWA). Available at: http:// [27] Collins M; Knutti R; Arblaster J; Dufresne JL; unfccc.int/resource/docs/natc/lsonc2.pdf Fichefet T; Friedlingstein P; Gao X; Gutowski WJ; Johns T; Krinner G; Shongwe M; Tebaldi C; Weaver AJ; [36] South South North. 2017. Southern African Climate Wehner M. 2013. Long-term climate change: Projections, Finance Partnership: Lesotho Country Diagnostic. http:// commitments and irreversibility. In: Climate change. The southsouthnorth.org/wp-content/uploads/Lesotho- physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to diagnostic-2017.05.10.pdf the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [Stocker TF; Qin D; Plattner GK; Tignor M; Allen SK; Boschung J; Nauels A; Xia Y; Bex V; Midgley PM. (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. pp. 1029–1036. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.024 [28] Ramírez J; Jarvis A. 2008. High-resolution statistically downscaled future climate surfaces. International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT); CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). Cali, Colombia. [29] Ramírez-Villegas J; Thornton PK. 2015. Climate change impacts on African crop production. Working Paper No. 119. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), Copenhagen, Denmark. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10568/66560 [30] Robinson, S., Mason-D’Croz, D., Islam, S., Sulser, T., Gueneau, A., Pitois, G., and Rosegrant, M. W. 2015. The International Model for Policy Analysis of Agricultural Commodities and Trade (IMPACT): Model description for version 3 (IFPRI Discussion Paper). Washington, D.C: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Available at: http://ebrary.ifpri.org 28 Climate-Smart Agriculture Country Profile For further information and online versions of the Annexes Annex 1: Selection of agricultural production systems key for food security in Lesotho (methodology) Annex 2: Methodology for assessing climate-smartness of ongoing practices Annex 3: Institutions for CSA in Lesotho (methodology) Annex 4: Policies for CSA in Lesotho (methodology) Annex 5: Assessing CSA finances in Lesotho (methodology) Annex 6: Lesotho’s Agroecological Zones Annex 7: Trends in food assistance requirements This publication is a product of the collaborative effort by the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS), the World Bank and the UK Government’s Department for International Development (DFID) to identify country-specific baselines on CSA in Lesotho. The document complements the CSA Profiles series developed between 2014 and 2016 by CIAT, CCAFS, the World Bank, and USAID for countries in Latin America, Asia and Africa. The document was prepared under the co-leadership of Evan Girvetz (CIAT), Andrew Jarvis (CIAT, CCAFS) and Sebastian Grey (CIAT). It is based on a methodology prepared by CIAT, the World Bank and the Tropical Agricultural Research and Higher Education Center (CATIE) in 2014 and revisited in 2015 and 2017 by Andreea Nowak, Caitlin Corner-Dolloff, Miguel Lizarazo, Andy Jarvis, Evan Girvetz, Godefroy Grosjean, Felicitas Roehrig, Jennifer Twyman, Julian Ramirez, Carlos Navarro, Jaime Tarapues, Steve Prager, Carlos Eduardo Gonzalez (CIAT/CCAFS), Charles Spillane, Colm Duffy and Una Murray (National University Ireland Galway). Main authors: Rex Ukaejiofo (World Bank), Ngao Mubanga (World Bank) and Jamleck Osiemo (CIAT) Editors: Andreea Nowak (CIAT Consultant), Sebastian Grey (CIAT), Miguel Lizarazo (CIAT), Jamleck Osiemo (CIAT) and Ivy Kinyua (CIAT) Project leaders for Africa: Evan Girvetz (CIAT) and Sebastian Grey (CIAT) Original graphics: Fernanda Rubiano (independent consultant) Design and layout: CIAT and Fernanda Rubiano (independent consultant) This document should be cited as: CIAT; World Bank. 2018. Climate-Smart Agriculture in Lesotho. CSA Country Profiles for Africa Series. International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT); Washington, D.C. 28 p. Acknowledgments Special thanks to representatives of the following institutions for providing information to this study: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Lesotho Council of NGOs (LCN), Lesotho National Farmers’ Union (LENAFU), Litsoamobuny Fresh Produce (LFP), Lesotho Meteorological Services (LMS), Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security (MAFS), Ministry of Energy and Meteorology (MEM), Ministry of Forestry and Land Reclamation (MFLR), Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), Ministry of Small Business Development, Cooperatives and Marketing (MSCM), Mononong Cooperative (MC), National Climate Change Committee (NCCC), National University of Lesotho (NUL), Potato Lesotho Association (PLA), Private Sector Foundation (PSF), Rural Self-Help Development Association (RSDA), United Manufacturer’s Association Lesotho (UMAL), CARITAS Lesotho, and World Vision International (WVI). This document has benefited from comments received from: Ijeoma Emenanjo (World Bank), Ademola Braimoh (World Bank), Tobias Baedeker (World Bank), Willem Jansen (World Bank), Erick Fernandes (World Bank), Likeleli Phoolo (World Food Programme), Tahira Syed (World Bank), Kunda Ng’andwe (World Bank) and Nome Sakane (World Bank) and Mpho Liphoto (National University of Lesotho). We also acknowledge the support provided by Edmund Motlatsi Motseki (World Bank), Srilatha Shankar (World Bank), Keneuoe Francoise Mofolo (World Bank), and Seitebatso Matsemane Tsemane (World Bank), Thanks also for the guidance provided by Janet Entwistle (World Bank), Paul Noumba Um (World Bank), Mark Cackler (World Bank), and Sateh Chafic El-Arnaout (World Bank) throughout the work. May 2018