88
Assessment of Menu of Adaptation Options and Recommendations
Table 4.9  Stakeholder-Ranked Climate Adaptations at the National Level Adaptation option Improve hydro meteorological capacity Improve farmer access to agricultural technology Improve extension services Create crop insurance program Improve access to long-term, low-interest loans
Points 34 27 26 18 16
Source: World Bank data.
investments are needed. This includes improvements in infrastructure for hydromet and drainage and irrigation systems, increased water storage capacity, as well as investments for extension services.
National Conference Results The National Dissemination and Consensus-Building Conference, held in Baku in October 2012, provided another opportunity to consult with Azerbaijan’s experts to identify the highest priority adaptation and mitigation options at both the national and agricultural region level. The overall program included a detailed presentation of the technical and farmer consultation findings (as outlined in this report), and a half-day consensus-building exercise among participants, with region-focused small groups discussions to provide rankings and information for the multicriteria assessment calculations. The small groups were presented with tables that summarized the results of the completed B-C analysis, expert assessment, win-win assessment, and mitigation assessment. The agenda for the process was in three parts: (i) rank the actions/policies for the focus region from the provide table in order of importance, including crossing off any options that are not relevant, identifying other actions or policies that should be considered, and ranking the resulting overall set of options; (ii) rate the importance of three technical criteria by allocating 100 total points across: (1) B-C analysis (net economic benefit), (2) potential to help with or without climate change, and (3) greenhouse gas mitigation potential, to reflect the relative importance the group places on achieving each objective; and (iii) report back on findings to the full conference in plenary session. Rankings of the groups, as reported back in the conference, are presented in table 4.10 below. The National group focused on national scale policies, and as a result presented an entirely different focus from the region-focused groups. The region-focused groups provided additional measures for considering, and included in their priority lists different numbers of measures (from 4 to 6 total). Across the regions, there was broad support for improving irrigation water availability, optimize agronomic practices, and improving crop varieties. The results of the weighting of criteria are presented in table 4.11. In general, B-C analysis is considered an important objective by all groups. Some groups also considered win-win potential to be important, while others put more value on mitigation potential. Reducing the Vulnerability of Azerbaijan’s Agricultural Systems to Climate Change http://dx.doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0184-6