For countries and individuals to adopt transformative adaptation in agriculture, governments should develop a vision for the future, promoting participatory processes and investing in the needed modelling and data tools, said the OECD in its Enabling agriculture’s transformative capacity to respond to climate change in the long run report.

“Implementation of adaptation pathways requires sustained funding mechanisms to support experimentation and learning as well as efforts to ensure institutional alignment to reduce barriers to transformation. Monitoring and assessment activities should be undertaken on adaptation actions to facilitate the selection of practices that achieve desired social, economic and environmental outcomes and that avoid maladaptive pathways,” said the OECD.

The OECD prepared the literature review of 324 studies about climate adaptation in agriculture, pointing out that long-term resilience requires medium-run interventions and short-run decisions.

“Of the studies that focus on a particular study region, well over half are situated in Asia (30.5%) and Africa (27.6%). The remainder are relatively evenly distributed between Europe (13.4%), Australasia (10.6%), North America (8.1%) and Central and South America (7.7%)”, said the OECD. 

Those studies that focus specifically on OECD countries most frequently examine Australia (22 articles) and the United States (13 articles).

The literature distinguishes transformative adaptation from adaptations that are marginal or incremental. “As an example, changing the planting dates for crops is often described as incremental, whereas relocating the production of a crop to an entirely new region is often described as transformative”.

According to the review, transformative adaptations can be identified by evaluating the depth, breadth and speed of change within agricultural systems. “Adaptation actions exist along a continuum in each of these dimensions. The most transformative actions deviate substantially from the status quo (ranked high in depth), are adopted at a broad scale (ranked high in breadth) and occur relatively quickly (ranked high in speed),” wrote the OECD.

Incremental adaptation remains valuable but may eventually reach physical, economic, or ecological limits, said the report, adding that policy coherence across agriculture, water, land use, environmental management, research, and rural development is essential.

At the same time, there is limited empirical evidence of past transformations that are simultaneously ranked high in depth, breadth and speed, adds the Paris-based organisation. 

Another key message from the recently released document is that transformative change is hindered by numerous barriers, both at the individual and societal level. “At the individual level, key obstacles to change include psychological distance (i.e. climate projections seem “far off”); resistance to change; strong social ties (conformity to the norms disable bolder actions), and resource constraints,” reads the report.

The OECD adds that uncertainty in the regulatory environment and policymaking that favours the status quo hinder societal change, together with a lack of continuous and long-term research funding to support innovative solutions. “Uncertainty and risk aversion are significant barriers at individual, collective, and institutional levels.”

The publication underlines that technological innovation alone cannot deliver transformation without supportive institutions, policies, and markets.

The OECD reported that transformative adaptation is highly context-specific and depends on local environmental, economic, and social conditions. Still, climate change will increasingly require shifts in crops, livestock systems, water management, production locations, and farming practices.

The report divided the 324 studies into four major categories: 1. Social, economic, and institutional adaptations (39%), which are mostly focused on enhancing governance or institutional capabilities  2. Behavioural and cultural adaptations (26%), which are connected to actors undertaking lifestyle or behavioural changes; 3. Ecosystem-based (ECO) adaptations (23%), which are focused on enhancing, protecting and promoting ecosystem services; 4. Infrastructure and technological adaptations (12%), which involve technological innovation or infrastructure development. 

In the first case, the transformative capacity increases with the development of collective strategies, diversification, and strengthening of the local value chain. In the case of behavioural and cultural adaptation, the review reports several measures, including shifting production regions, changes in crop choice, and different farm structures (buying or selling land and expanding irrigation). For the ECO-based adaptations, the adaptation strategies are most often focused on advancing agroecology, integration of non-industrial agrarian traditions into current systems, organic production systems, and biological diversification. Speaking about infrastructures, the report suggests possibilities for technological innovation in crop and livestock production technologies, but also an expansion of irrigated systems, seawater desalination, and irrigation water storage.