Search

This review paper addresses the importance of increasing agrobiodiversity to cope with climate change and, at the same time, providing a sufficient amount of healthy food. This is in agreement with the messages from ecology and medicine indicating the advantages of biodiversity in general and agrobiodiversity in particular for the planet and for our health. Plant breeding is considered to be one of the causes of the decline in agrobiodiversity, and therefore, this paper illustrates alternatives to the commonly used approach based on centralized selection. The first alternative is decentralized participatory breeding, which adapts crops to both different agronomic environments and client preferences, representing an "option by context" model of research. The second alternative is evolutionary breeding, which is a more dynamic strategy than participatory plant breeding because it merges the advantages of decentralization with the ability of dynamic mixtures and evolutionary populations to cope with biotic and abiotic stresses and evolve, thus adapting to climate change and to the associated changes in the spectrum of pests. A crop capable of evolving as the environment around it evolves appears to be the most ideal way of responding to climate change and increasing agricultural biodiversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The interconnectedness between climate change and development has generated an increasing interest amongst development organisations to integrate adaptation into government rural development plans in a way that effectively increases resilience at a local level. However, the nature of climate change resilience is widely debated in the literature, and there is a knowledge gap regarding the best way to address adaptation at the interface with development objectives as part of mainstreaming. This paper aims to address this knowledge gap via a case study of a community-based, Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) project in Vietnam. A case study approach was applied with fieldwork at one project site, complemented by semi-structured interviews with government stakeholders, key experts, and project leaders of related projects. The analysis identifies five key factors that enhance rural resilience in a smallholder agricultural context: (i) engaging local governments as partners, (ii) considering broader landscape issues such as markets, (iii) providing farmers with support to facilitate adoption of CSA practices, (iv) fostering community capacity building, and (v) promoting adaptive management and scenario planning to deal with uncertainty. The paper concludes that resilience is multidimensional and not solely in line with any one of the approaches dominant in the literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]