To identify practices that reduce emissions and sequester carbon, farmers and other decision makers need to know the options available for specific production systems in specific locations, and they need to be able to compare the emissions associated with different choices. Obtaining and applying this information could be a specialized and time-consuming task, but the CCAFS Mitigation Options Tool (CCAFS- MOT) was designed to offers decision makers a shortcut.
The CCAFS Mitigation Options Tool (CCAFS-MOT) estimates greenhouse gas emissions from multiple crops (e.g. barley, maize, sugar cane), crop groups (e.g. vegetables, legumes) and livestock based on data specific to different regions by bringing together several empirical models to estimate GHG emissions. CCAFS-MOT provides policy-makers across the globe with the fast, accessible, and reliable information needed to make informed decisions about emissions reductions within agriculture.
Although a number of GHG calculators already exist CCAFS-MOT is distinct because it:
- Ranks the most effective mitigation options for dozens of different crops according to mitigation potential, and in relation to current management practices and climate and soil characteristics.
- Has low input data requirements; it only takes approximately 5 minutes to input data.
- Runs in Excel.
- Is freely downloadable from the CCAFS website.
Related publications and presentations.
- • Feliciano D, Ledo A, Hillier J, Nayak DR. 2018. Which agroforestry options give the greatest soil and above ground carbon benefits in different world regions? Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment.
- Feliciano D, Nayak DR, Vetter SH, Hillier J. 2017. CCAFS-MOT - A tool for farmers, extension services and policy-advisors to identify mitigation options for agriculture. Agricultural Systems, 154, 100-111.
- Koglo YS, Abdulkadir A, Feliciano D, Okhimamhe AA. 2016. Efficacy of Integrated Straw Formulations on Lowland Rice Field Organic Carbon and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Using CCAFS-MOT Model in Niger State, Nigeria. American Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 13:5, 1-11.
- Vetter SH, Feliciano D, Hillier J, Stirling CM, Bahdur T, Smith P. 2016. GHG emissions and mitigation potential in Indian agriculture. Poster presentation at European Geosciences Union General Assembly in Vienna, April 2016.
- Feliciano D. 2015. CCAFS MOT: Developing a tool to support policy-‐makers’ decisions about eﬀective mitigation options in agriculture. Poster at Our Common Future Global Science Conference, Paris, July 2015.
- Feliciano D. 2015 CCAFS Mitigation Options Tool. Presentation at IMAFLORA in Piricicaba, Brazil on 18 March 2015.
- CCAFS. 2015. Research in action: CCAFS Mitigation Options Tool (CCAFS-MOT).
- Examine this example of mitigation options in rice.
The research team is committed to continually improving the tool based on the needs of its users. They are testing the tool with a variety of stakeholders and collaborating with other researchers to ensure that CCAFS-MOT provides decision-makers with accurate, relevant, and easy-to-use information. In recognition of the need for increasing gender equity, the project is targeting a minimum of 20-30% of workshop and webinar participants to be female scientists or policy makers. Your input is also welcome.
Researchers at the University of Aberdeen, in partnership with CCAFS, the International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), and the University of Vermont’s Gund Institute for Environment, are developing the tool. Lead researchers are: Diana Feliciano, Jon Hillier, Dali Nayak, and Sylvia Vetter.
The project receives funding from CCAFS, which is carried out with support from CGIAR Fund Donors and through bilateral funding agreements, the United Kingdom's Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). It previously received support from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
The CCAFS-MOT design team has released a beta version of the model for testing and host webinars with national planners, practitioners, researchers, and CCAFS project leaders to share the relevance of the tool to users and collect suggestions on how to improve the usability of the tool for the target users. Readers interested in testing the tool or providing other feedback should contact Julianna White (CCAFS) or researcher Diana Feliciano (University of Aberdeen).