In the Picture, Left to Right: Dr. Rachel Mkandawire, Prof. Simbarashe Sibanda, and Ms Kanto Razafimandimby
Accurate greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting remains a critical challenge for Africa’s agricultural sector, where limited data, capacity, and context-specific methodologies hinder effective climate action. In response to this gap, policymakers, researchers, and agricultural stakeholders gathered from 29 to 30 May 2025 at the Maslow Time Square in Pretoria for a high-level Science-Policy Dialogue on Agricultural GHG Research Priorities in Southern Africa. The event aimed to strengthen the scientific and policy foundations for GHG measurement, mitigation, and monitoring across the region. FANRPAN participated in the dialogue, contributing to efforts to ensure that the perspectives of farmers and food system actors remained central to the discussions, emphasizing the importance of inclusive, practical, and farmer-led approaches to climate resilience.
Hosted by the Qinisa Initiative in partnership with the AgriDENZ project, the event focused on identifying and prioritizing GHG research areas, strengthening regional and international collaborations, building research capacity and funding opportunities, and shaping policies for climate-smart agriculture and sustainable land management.
Southern Africa, though contributing a small share to global emissions, is experiencing a disproportionate burden of climate impacts, with the agricultural sector at the heart of both the problem and the solution. Participants agreed that the sector’s vulnerability is heightened by its dependence on rainfed farming, livestock, and traditional land use systems, all of which are highly susceptible to climate variability.
A number of key industry issues emerged during the dialogue. Firstly, the lack of coordination between research, policy, and commercial realities has led to fragmented efforts in reducing emissions. Many GHG mitigation strategies are developed in isolation from the people and industries most affected. Secondly, there is a misalignment between climate policy goals and business incentives. While farmers and agribusinesses are under pressure to reduce emissions, they are rarely supported with the tools, infrastructure, or market mechanisms to do so sustainably. The dialogue also surfaced deep structural inequities within the agri-food system. Smallholder producers who contribute significantly to regional food security remain trapped in low-return value chains, while downstream players with lower risk profiles enjoy higher profits.
Another concern raised by industry voices was the absence of enabling infrastructure. Many farming communities lack access to electricity, digital services, irrigation, and extension support, all of which are essential to adopt new technologies or farming practices. Without these foundations, even the best innovations remain out of reach.
There was also strong criticism of the dominant research model, which often prioritizes academic excellence and publication output over practical, real-world impact. Several participants questioned whether the current system, shaped largely by donor priorities and citation metrics, truly serves the needs of farmers, agribusinesses, or broader food systems. A critical issue linked to this is communication. Industry stakeholders noted that much of the scientific language used, terms such as “Tier 2 GHG inventories,” “carbon sequestration,” or “enteric fermentation,” is not only highly technical, but completely inaccessible to the average farmer or community stakeholder.
Many of these terms don’t yet exist in local African languages, making it nearly impossible to communicate the importance of climate research in ways that resonate culturally or linguistically. This absence of translation has widened the trust gap, leading to skepticism and disengagement from climate initiatives that feel distant, imposed, or irrelevant to day-to-day realities. Participants emphasized the urgent need to localize climate discourse both in language and in lived context, i.e., if we are to build the inclusive, farmer-led transitions that Southern Africa needs.
Despite these challenges, the dialogue produced a number of actionable solutions. A central proposal was the need to reconfigure research systems to be farmer- and business-driven. Research should start by identifying the pain points experienced by producers such as low productivity, input costs, and market access and then develop innovations that address those realities. A move toward co-created research and farmer-led trials was seen as vital to restoring trust and increasing adoption.
Participants also called for a systems-based approach that integrates technology, finance, advisory services, and market access. Policy reform must support investment in rural infrastructure, value addition, and low-emission agribusiness models. The industry’s transition to sustainability must be incentivized, not penalized, with governments and donors supporting market instruments that reward emission reductions and resilience-building.
A recurring point was the need to reframe the climate conversation. Rather than leading with emissions targets, climate action should be grounded in human development outcomes: increasing farmer incomes, improving nutrition, and strengthening food sovereignty. GHG mitigation should be a co-benefit of well-functioning, equitable food systems.
This Dialogue was not about reaffirming past commitments. Instead, it provided valuable insights and entry points for policy engagement for FANRPAN. The discussions highlighted key gaps between climate science and practice, and reinforced the need for research and policy that respond directly to the realities faced by farmers and the wider agricultural sector.
The Qinisa Initiative aligns closely with FANRPAN’s 2025–2035 Strategic Plan, particularly the pillar focused on strengthening climate change resilience in agriculture and food systems. FANRPAN’s strategy prioritizes the generation and use of evidence to support climate-smart agriculture (CSA), sustainable land and water management, and agricultural diversification. The Qinisa Initiative’s work on greenhouse gas (GHG) measurement, mitigation, and monitoring in African agriculture directly complements FANRPAN’s commitment to advancing climate-sensitive policies that are grounded in science and aligned with the Paris Agreement and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).
By improving data and methodologies on GHG emissions from agriculture, Qinisa supports the kind of evidence generation that FANRPAN relies on to influence regional and national policy agendas. Moreover, the initiative enhances the region’s ability to implement effective mitigation strategies without compromising food security or livelihoods. Through this shared focus, FANRPAN sees Qinisa as a valuable partner in engaging policymakers, strengthening institutional capacities, and promoting integrated climate adaptation and mitigation approaches across Africa’s food systems.
Speaking during the meeting, Prof. Simba Sibanda emphasized that Africa must define its own climate goals in alignment with its social, economic, and environmental needs. Industry and science must work hand in hand not only to reduce emissions but to build a more just, resilient, and productive agricultural future for the region.
This Dialogue marked a critical step toward bridging the gap between climate science and practical action in agriculture. It reinforced the importance of inclusive, localized approaches to climate research. For FANRPAN, the discussions opened up new entry points for engagement with policymakers and development partners, and deepened its commitment to supporting research systems that serve farmers first. As Southern Africa advances its climate agenda, platforms like the Qinisa Dialogue offer a timely opportunity to reimagine research, rethink priorities, and realign resources toward a shared vision of resilient, low-emission, and inclusive food systems.
