39 minute read
Advancing Carbon Sequestration and Equity through Conservation Agriculture & Land Sinks
Project Summary
Taproot was charged with analyzing equity issues connected with two Drawdown Georgia solutions and associated carbon mitigation strategies identified by the solution authors (see Appendix E): conservation agriculture, in the “food and agriculture” category, and afforestation/silvopasture from the “land sink” category. Taproot’s approach centered on smallholder farms in Georgia’s rural, primarily agricultural regions. Drawdown Georgia’s equity goals prioritized inclusive engagement of change-makers in those regions whose work can impact each of these strategies and repair historical injustices. A focus on Black landowners captured the challenges faced by most smallholder farms in the state, while also providing a deeper analysis of equity in the context of racial injustice.
This equity analysis identified opportunities in two main areas: Education and Programming and Policy & Power Shifting. The analysis also identified opportunities for additional research that could provide helpful guidance in areas beyond the scope of this project. This project’s equity analysis identified thematic areas of action with the greatest equity potential including:
• Incorporating equity-based professional practices into the work of Drawdown Georgia and implementing organizations through deeper and more intentional engagement of community organizations, institutions, and individuals.
• Implementing a shift in power among policymaking institutions through an active and intentional diversity recruitment plan.
• Addressing rural infrastructure challenges that create barriers to broadband internet.
• Incorporating and building on small farmers’ experience with land stewardship and contemporary conservation agriculture to achieve the desired change.
• Investing in opportunities to build the regional food and small farm economy to encourage wealth-building opportunities for economically marginalized smallholder farmers.
This report highlights many opportunities for Drawdown Georgia to expand engagement of Georgia’s citizens in solution planning and implementation, while strengthening its equity impact by centering racial justice and environmental sustainability. Through engagement with key actors and collaboration with local stakeholders, the delivery of inclusive strategies will create more meaningful impact in communities that have historically been marginalized. Concrete steps to dismantle systemic racism and repair injustice can advance both carbon reduction and equity in Georgia.
Methodology
Drawdown Georgia Phase One Research
Drawdown Georgia, inspired by Project Drawdown and funded by the Ray C. Anderson Foundation, is a research collaborative involving the Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University, the University of Georgia, and Georgia State University along with other local partners. The team systematically examined over 100 options (including those contained in Project Drawdown) for reducing state-wide carbon footprints and for developing a roadmap with 20 high-impact solutions for Georgia. This down-select process involved:
1. understanding Georgia’s baseline carbon footprint and trends.
2. identifying the universe of Georgia-specific carbonreduction solutions that could be impactful by 2030.
3. estimating the greenhouse gas reduction potential of these high-impact 2030 solutions for Georgia.
4. estimating associated costs and benefits while also considering how the solutions might impact societal priorities, such as economic development opportunities, public health, environmental benefits, and equity (see
Brown, Beasley, et al., 2021 for full methodology).
The Phase 1 research team also identified equity-related issues or concerns associated with the 20 solutions, noting: “in states like Georgia with large historical and ongoing inequities across demographic groups, this [focus on equity] is particularly important. Ideally, implementation paths should not only mitigate existing environmental injustices and institutional barriers to access solution benefits but should also go beyond that to erase those inequities” (Brown, Dwivedi, et al., 2021, p. 4).
Across the twenty solutions, a few overarching equity concerns/ opportunities emerged that intersect with historical inequities:
• Barriers and opportunities in relation to solution access—for example, studies show that after controlling for income, rooftop solar adoption is highly influenced by race.
• Affordability, such as cost of solutions to individuals and communities – examples include rooftop solar, EVs, afforestation/silvopasture.
• Lack of workforce diversity (for example, the Solar
Foundation (2019) found that only 26% of the solar workforce was made up of women, and in terms of race, 73.2% of the overall solar workforce is white with Georgia ranking even lower in terms of diversity on these metrics – 18.9% women and 76.6% white) (The Solar Foundation, 2020).
• On the positive side, the research team noted that the public health benefits of solutions can reduce health inequities by offering improved air quality and public health benefits across communities including those that are underresourced.
The Phase 1 research also identified promising approaches to expanding equity benefits and mitigating potential adverse impacts for individual solutions. This work was based upon qualitative literature reviews, stakeholder input, and expert engagement. For the two solutions that Taproot was charged with exploring, some of the initial equity considerations noted in Phase 1 included:
• Overall cost and other accessibility barriers (including awareness, lack of incentives, etc.) for both solutions for under-resourced and smaller scale farms.
• Potential impacts on available land use for farmers due to afforestation.
• Farmer perceptions regarding adverse impacts on traditional farming techniques and way of life.
• Overall improved air and water quality from solutions.
• Over the long term, increases in yields and reduced operating costs (by reducing the need for feed, fertilizer, and herbicides), while improving soil fertility (Brown, Dwivedi, et al., 2021).
The Drawdown Georgia project extends the Phase One preliminary equity analysis by evaluating a subset of the 20 solutions in greater depth with respect to equity. Before engaging Taproot to conduct stakeholder research and explore equity implication in greater depth, a working group was formed within the RCE Greater Atlanta (RCE GA) to complete an initial evaluation to determine which solutions to prioritize for this deeper analysis of equity implications and opportunities (see Appendix A for a list of RCE GA team members).
The Taproot Equity Analysis Rationale
Through Drawdown Georgia, diverse and innovative individuals and organizations who recognize the importance of addressing climate change are partnering together to advance carbon reduction goals through the solutions and platforms outlined by Drawdown Georgia. Centering equity within the design, implementation and evaluation of these solutions is essential to ensure maximal effectiveness and sustainability. Taproot’s initial focus was to define “what equity looks like” within the context of the focal Drawdown solution areas of conservation agriculture and silvopasture/afforestation. Taproot began this inquiry with the understanding that equity, as described by leading scholars, is about fairness of opportunity, or, in other words, a “leveling of the playing field” (Richardson, 2005; Sen, 2009). Importantly, equity and equality are not the same thing just as opportunity and outcomes, although correlated, are not the same.
Both conservation agriculture (a set of farming practices that center ecosystem health) and afforestation/silvopasture (planting trees on relatively bare pasture lands and around developed urban areas) generally involve farmers in both rural and urban areas. For the purposes of this study, Taproot chose to focus primarily on rural farmers, who are situated on larger parcels of land than most urban farmers, because they have greater potential to support carbon sequestration into the soil through food cultivation and tree-planting. While larger landholders (250 to thousands of acres) are key to carbon sequestration, we focused on rural landholders with 50 to ~200 acres who have potential as changemakers for both solutions, as these farmers are most often left out of the conversation and represent a greater diversity of farmers. This study also addresses organizations that plant trees in urban areas. Please see Appendix I for a glossary of terms used in this section of the report.
The Equity Analysis Process
Taproot’s replicable approach to equity analysis combined subject matter expertise, inclusive community engagement practices, and a discovery process that was tailored to answer the early investigative questions that arose. See Figure 3.1 below for a description of Taproot’s overall approach.
Identification of Equity Stakeholders Within Each Sector.
In consultation with the full Drawdown Georgia team, Taproot determined that the project’s primary equity focus would be to engage and include as many change-makers as possible in Drawdown Georgia’s conservation agriculture and afforestation/ silvopasture solutions. The secondary goal of this analysis would be to identify how solution strategies might contribute to the repair of racial, geographic, and economic injustices in our state.
Taproot focused the target stakeholder list (Table 3.1 Equity Stakeholders) into two cluster groups along both solution areas:
• Larger landholders (50 to ~200 acres) which consists of rowcropper and mid-size vegetable producers.
• Small urban/peri-urban farms, which are generally clustered in the Atlanta metro, Augusta, and Savannah areas.
FIGURE 3.1: STEPS OF EQUITY ANALYSIS
Given that most small farmers use their land in multiple ways, most of these stakeholders who cultivate both produce and livestock were able to speak to both conservation agriculture practices and pastureland management (afforestation/ silvopasture).
A Focus on Smallholder Farms Owned and Managed by Black Farmers.
This study focuses on smallholder Black farmers in Georgia, most of whom are in the Southeast, South Central, and Coastal region of the state. The long history of Black oppression in the South—including but not limited to chattel slavery, sharecropping, and Jim Crow violence—and ongoing structural racism have multi-faceted repercussions on the economic, physical, and psychosocial health of the Black population (see, for example, Bailey et al., 2017; Macintyre et al., 2018; Schelhas et al., 2021). Across the South, Black farmers were dispossessed of their land over the past century, resulting in a more than 90% reduction of Black-owned farmland, which is estimated at a present-day value of $250-$350 billion (Pollack & Chung, 2020). Appendix F contains maps that illustrate the distribution of Black farmers and their assets around the peak of Black farming in the early 1900s. As this study seeks to centralize equity, justice, and inclusivity in the promotion of conservation agriculture practices, it is imperative to consider the population(s) that have experienced the greatest amount of inequity and exclusion. Poor white farmers and other non-Black smallholder farmers are also relatively vulnerable when compared to large land-holding corporate farmers; however, rural white farmers have never been targeted with the extreme racialized violence, economic marginalization, or political exclusion that Black farmers have faced for generations. The landmark 1996 Miller Report publicly confirmed this widespread and intergenerational racial discrimination in USDA financial and technical assistance programs and current federal attempts to rectify some of this immeasurable damage through the 2020 Justice for Black Farmers Act have been indefinitely stalled through legal challenges (Charles, 2021; Miller, 1996). For these reasons, this project sought to gather perspectives of rural Black farmers and local, Black-led organizations that serve them to inform recommendations grounded in equity.
This project also focuses on smallholder Black farmers because of the potential among this group to advance the use of conservation agriculture practices in a way that supports inclusivity and racial justice. Black farmers represent the second largest group of farmers in the state of Georgia, with most Black farmers (78%) operating on less than 210 acres of land, and nearly half (47%) operating on fewer than 50 acres (USDA, 2017). Although the key conservation agriculture practice (reduced tillage) to achieve the Drawdown Georgia carbon sequestration goal is best achieved by row crop farmers who have large amounts of land acreage (e.g., 500+ acres), the majority of Georgia farmers with this amount of land are white
(~98%) and are unlikely to have ever experienced any form of social, political, or economic marginalization (USDA, 2017). Moreover, many Black farmers produce both row and vegetable crops on their land as well as raise livestock and engage in silvopasture. This multiplicity of land uses by Black farmers, the near absence of Black and minority large landholders in Georgia, and the long history of discrimination against Black farmers, all support focusing on this population of smallholder farmers in this study.
The Identification Process of Professional Stakeholders.
The identification process included locating leaders in organizations and nonprofits that engaged in either forestry, tree planting, or conservation agriculture in the state of Georgia. Some of the professionals were identified from suggestions made by the Drawdown Authors, while others were gleaned from stakeholder research completed by the RCE Greater Atlanta team and another consulting group (See Table 3.2 for a list of Professional Stakeholders).
Data Collection Methodology and Rationale.
The team conducted semi-structured interviews based on Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved questions via phone and web-conference, as well as one online focus group in collaboration with Dr. Veronica Womack, Executive Director of the Rural Studies Institute at Middle Georgia College. Interviews and group discussions took approximately one hour each, and the team used a form-based data collection tool to document these interviews for synthesis (See Appendix G for interview questions).
Specific Strategies Explored To Reach Drawdown Georgia Goals
The equity analysis of Conservation Agriculture and Silvopasture/Afforestation Solutions posed the following investigative questions:
• How can we engage more people who have traditionally been marginalized as change-makers in the specific strategies of:
- Using no-till and other conservation ag practices in row crop farming?
- Planting more trees on pasture lands and practicing conservation forestry?
- Engaging in urban and peri-urban sustainable farming practices?
- Establishing more tree plantings in urban settings?
• What opportunities do these solutions create to repair injustice and to offer economic opportunities?
• What impact do urban change-makers of diverse perspectives have on these two solutions?
Conservation Agriculture Strategies
This broad solution encompasses farming practices that intentionally restore and preserve natural ecosystems. Conventional agriculture, which dominates America’s crop production systems, emphasizes scale, chemical fertilizers and bio/chemical weed and pest solutions that fail to cultivate environmental and human health. Conventional meat and poultry farming is also a primary driver of greenhouse gases and other ecological degradation that impacts climate change.
Rural row crop farmers are the primary change agents for the conservation agriculture solution. Row cropping, which is Georgia’s dominant form of plant production, is a typically conventional practice that grows “commodity crops” (e.g., cotton, hay, corn, rye, peanuts for industrial use), as well as some food crops, intensively and at the scale of hundreds, or even thousands, of acres at a time. Row cropping is rarely practiced on less than 40 acres per crop and mostly occurs in the Southwest and Central Coastal counties.
Urban and small farmers who grow food using conservation practices are excellent advocates, educators and movement builders who often operate at the cutting edge of equity and climate change. Despite their smaller operational scale and impact on carbon sequestration, these farmers are often highly respected and have an important role to play in cultivating the momentum for change and equity in this movement.
Lead Strategy to Achieve Conservation Agriculture Goals: No-Tillage/Reduced Tillage.
Increased adoption of conservation agricultural practices by row crop farmers is the most effective method of meeting this solution’s carbon sequestration goal of 1.1 megatons of carbon by 2030 (Mani, 2021). Conventional tilling turns over the soil throughout a given field, releasing a significant amount of carbon in the process. In the context of row cropping, low- and no-till production requires specialized machinery and access to GPS/broadband to implement effectively.
Rural row crop farmers are the primary change agents for this solution. Of Georgia’s more than 9.9 million acres of farmland, approximately 36% are harvested cropland (3.8 million), contributing to an estimated $11.5 billion and nearly 80,000 jobs (Mani, 2021; USDA, 2017; UGA, 2019). Approximately 47% of Georgia farmland is currently under no-till or reduced till practices (Mani, 2021). An increase in this number by 40 percentage points is estimated to reduce carbon dioxide annual emissions by 1.1 Megaton (Mani, 2021). The rate of soil carbon sequestration, while generally dependent on temperature and other factors, is also expected to increase over time when conservation agriculture practices are used in conjunction with one another in processes that replicate the natural ecological pathways (Project Drawdown, 2020).
TABLE 3.1: EQUITY STAKEHOLDERS
Stakeholder Study Role Organization County or Region Other Information
Farmer 1 Interviewee family farm (rural) Worth and Tift Counties (South Central GA, Black Belt region)
Farmer 2 Interviewee West GA Farmers Cooperative; family farm (rural)
Harris County (West Central GA, Black Belt Region) Farmer 3 Interviewee family farm (rural) Troup County (West Central GA, Black Belt region) Farmer 4 Interviewee family farm (rural) Dougherty County (Southwest GA, Black Belt region)
Farmer 5 Interviewee Cooperatively- owned farm (urban) Dekalb and Newton Counties (Atlanta Metro)
Farmer/ Regional Consultant (Felicia Bell) Interviewee National Center for Appropriate Technology (NCAT) Brandon, MS (Black Belt region)
Farm Legal Consultant (Veronica McClendon) Focus Group Participant
Farmer 6 Focus Group Participant
Farm Technical Consultant (James Ford) Focus Group Participant McClendon Law & Consulting
AgriUnity; family farm (rural) Square O Consulting; family farm (rural) Bibb County (Central GA, Black Belt region)
South Georgia (Black Belt region) South Georgia (Black Belt region) Experienced Black male farmer. Row crop producer and pigs. Trains and organizes farmers.
Experienced Black male farmer. Vegetable producer, no livestock.
Experienced Black male farmer. Vegetable producer, egg chickens and cattle.
Beginner Black male certified organic farmer. Row crop and vegetable producer, no livestock. Beginner Mixed race first-generation male farmer. Co-owner worker. Vegetable producer, no livestock. Experienced Black female traditional (allnatural) farmer, business owner and farmer consultant. Vegetable producer and small ruminants (sheep). Consults with and trains farmers throughout the Black Belt and across the country. Macon-based female lawyer specializing in heirs property law. Serves Black Belt farmers.
Experienced Black male farmer. Row crop producer and cattle. Experienced male farmer and USDA retiree. Consults with smallholder farmers throughout the Black Belt.
Rural Institute Director; Researcher (Veronica Womack) Director of Community and Environmental Resilience - (Ayanna Williams)* Founder & CEO (Angelou Ezeilo)* Focus Group Participant/ Cohost Georgia College and State University
Interviewee National Recreation and Park Association Rural Georgia (Black Belt region) Director of the Rural Studies Institute and academic researcher focusing on economic development among rural farming communities throughout the Black Belt region.
Urban (Metro ATL) & National Female environmental advocate and community organizer.
Past Affiliations: Nature Conservancy- South Dekalb Equity Project; Park Pride Interviewee Greening Youth Foundation Metro ATL, National and International (Lagos, Nigeria)
Female leader in environmental justice, youth engagement, and equity. Author of Engage, Connect, Protect: Empowering Diverse Youth as Environmental Leaders, 2020. *Asterisk indicates applicability to afforestation/silvopasture only. Findings from all others have relevance to both solution areas, regardless of current practices.
Secondary Strategies to Achieve Conservation Agriculture Goals: Cover Cropping, Crop Rotation and Rotational Grazing (Livestock Farming).
These strategies involve planting specific crops and managing the placement of animals in ways that replenish soil and mitigate ecological degradation. They reduce the need for use of chemical fertilizers, absorb nitrogen from the air, improve water quality, prevent soil erosion, and improve soil health in numerous ways. Additionally, conservation agricultural practices in irrigation and pest management can not only improve climate outcomes but also increase the production quality of conservation farmers (Bell, 2021, personal communication; Silverman, 2020b).
Land Sink Strategies (Silvopasture, Afforestation, & Agroecology)
If implemented, land sink solutions can offset 27% of total carbon emissions in the state, improving air quality, and providing public health and social benefits (Drawdown Georgia, 2021). These solutions have the potential to cut farmers’ operation costs and have both short-term and long-term economic benefits. The land sink solution involves three main strategies: afforestation & silvopasture, a conservation focus on coastal wetlands, and temperate forest protection and management. Following the RCE Drawdown Georgia’s identified priorities for this equity project, Taproot’s research focused on the afforestation and silvopasture strategy.
The specific practices associated with afforestation include planting trees on farmland that is no longer producing crops or devoid of other vegetation, as well as planting trees in urban settings (such as parks or areas without shade coverage). Silvopasture involves planting trees on pastureland to provide shade to grazing livestock, which in turn can improve soil properties and water quality. These practices are often wellknown to farmers that already engage in other conservation agriculture practices. However, silvopasture requires a bit of planning and prep work, as it mandates fencing for livestock to allow for the tree seedlings to take root and for controlled grazing to take place (USDA, 2008). The preparation and maintenance cost for these practices limit small landowner engagement, as the economic benefits do not outweigh the costs. For example, to engage in tax incentive programs, like Conservation Use Valuation Assessment (CUVA), landowners must generally have a minimum of ten acres for program enrollment (Georgia Environmental Protection Division). Whereas larger tract farmers that have the means can engage in these practices at the required scale to reap both the economic and environmental benefits.
Around 60-65% of Georgia’s land is forested, with 25% on agricultural land and 11% on pastureland (Mohan, 2021). Increasing forested land by seven percent could sequester one metric ton of carbon by 2030 (Mohan, 2021). To avoid monoculture issues, such as pest and disease threats to specific trees, an even mix of hardwoods and long-leaf pine trees should be planted (Mohan, 2021). Long-leaf pines live longer, and thus provide longer-term carbon benefits. Additionally, planting
TABLE 3.2: TAPROOT PROFESSIONAL STAKEHOLDERS
Name Focus Organization County or Region Other Information
Mark McClellan Silvopasture/ Afforestation in Rural Settings Brian Foster Silvopasture/ Afforestation in Rural Settings Georgia Forestry Commission All of Georgia Focus on forestry management, forest stewardship, and land use.
Georgia Conservancy All of Georgia Focus on land conservation, smart growth, environmental stewardship, and coastal habitat.
Andres Villegas Silvopasture/ Afforestation in Rural Settings Georgia Forestry Association All of Georgia Recommended by Dr. Dwivedi; focus on rural forestry.
Michael Wall Silvopasture/ Afforestation & Conservation Agriculture in PeriUrban settings Perri Cooper Conservation in Rural Settings Georgia Organics All of Georgia Focus on soil and conservation practices.
Flint River Soil and Water Conservation District Lower Flint River Water Basin in SW Georgia Focus on water conservation and soil health.
Amy Gutierrez Conservation in Coastal Habitats The Nature Conservancy All of Georgia Focus on sustainable planting and coastal habitats.
Greg Levine Afforestation in Urban Settings Trees Atlanta Urban (MATL) Focus on tree planting in urban settings and tree ordinances.
native Georgia tree species is preferred, as they will prove more resilient to the effects of climate change.
Lead Strategy to Achieve Land Sink Goals: Afforestation and/or Silvopasture on Agricultural Land.
Increasing the number of trees on bare land is the most effective method to sequester carbon and offset the number of trees lost to timber harvesting (Mani, 2021). These practices require development of a management plan, site preparation, start-up costs for seedlings, planting labor, and fencing for livestock, in addition to maintenance labor and cost in the long term (USDA, 2008). For landowners to engage in these practices, the economic benefits associated with harvesting multiple products and/or tax incentives must outweigh the cost incurred.
Secondary Strategy to Achieve Land Sink Goals: Urban Tree Planting.
In addition to the carbon sequestration impacts of planting trees, when done in urban settings the benefits also include decreasing temperatures, which lowers energy costs and improves air and water quality. The process to plant trees in metro areas requires the planters, who are often a part of the parks department or an environmental nonprofit, to go through a permitting process, receive approval from community and local ordinances, and come up with funds to plant and maintain the new trees (Levine, 2021). On a larger level, there is a push to implement an urban forest master plan to increase green space and urban tree canopy in Atlanta. The cost of a project like this is around $16M, which would cover the cost of infrastructure like concrete removal and adding soil, as well as tree seedlings cost, and tree maintenance (Levine, 2021).
Results and Recommendations
The recommendations described in this section are derived from stakeholder interview data received through one-on-one interviews and focus group discussions (See Table 3.1 Equity Stakeholders for list, and Appendix H for issues addressed by specific stakeholders). Specific solution ideas proposed by individual stakeholders are provided in the final column located in Appendix H. The table below represents a synthesis of this input along with research, organized in alignment with the primary themes that emerged through this project. Most action items and themes identified in the table are tied to multiple stakeholders, and a review of Appendix H will present the more detailed suggestions from specific interviews. In addition, the Taproot team drew upon information from the following sources to provide context, explain purpose, and structure the recommendations: Consultations with Phase 1 Research Teams and Professional Stakeholders; research and review of data, reports, videos, and articles related to the specific topics (See References); and Taproot expertise in agriculture, land use, policy, and equity. The recommendations are organized into two categories: 1) Inthe-Field-Action: Collaboration, Education and Programming; and 2) Structural and Institutional Changes: Policy & Power Shifting. The rationales for each recommendation are outlined below. The Table 3.3 that follows provides detail about specific components for implementing each of the recommendations (reflecting direct input from stakeholders), target audiences (groups well-positioned to provide or leverage support for implementation), and key collaborators, or groups with expertise and interests aligned with the recommendation.
In-the-Field-Action: Collaboration, Education and Programming 1) Expand Drawdown Georgia solution awareness, amplify best practices, build capacity, and develop additional resources in collaboration with under-resourced farmers, grassroots organizations, and rural practitioners.
By creating a network of programs centered in equity and climate change mitigation, establish a platform through which farmers can test and scale up the use of the conservation agriculture (and silvopasture) practices that they determine are best for them. These programs can build upon and reinforce one another by sharing knowledge, material resources, and administrative infrastructure.
Designing high-impact, culturally-relevant education materials that are based in traditional agro-ecological knowledge and financial analysis can help to expand the use of conservation agricultural practices and advance equity by supporting farm success. In addition, these materials must be paired with effective information delivery strategies. This is especially important for rural Black farmer communities who have been deliberately exploited for generations. Innovative, culturallyrelevant delivery strategies involving trusted community partners are critical not only to ensure that information is received and utilized, but also to ensure that two-way, nonhierarchical communication relationships exist between farmers and technical assistants.
By elevating the successes of local organizations and food system actors with diverse leadership who are supporting these farmers whose practices align with the formalized Drawdown equity standards (see Recommendation #7), Drawdown Georgia supports the sharing of best practices from community expertise and helps to advance equity by leveraging Drawdown Georgia influence on behalf of impactful, diverse organizations with less power.
This outreach also requires investment in supporting
infrastructure. Many rural families do not have access to any internet, let alone high-speed, and a disproportionate number of those families are Black (Shivaram, 2021). Expanding internet access enables farmers to access a wide variety of online information about conservation agriculture and silvopasture
TABLE 3.3: IN-THE-FIELD-NEAR TERM ACTION STEPS: COLLABORATION, EDUCATION AND PROGRAMMING
Recommendation Strategy Components/Opportunities Target Audience Key Collaborators
Increase solution awareness, amplify best practices, build capacity, and expand resources designed with under-resourced farmers, grassroots organizations, and rural practitioners.
Action steps: • Demonstrate specific solution practices via: hands-on workshops for field days and on-farm sites, targeted outreach materials, and focus on financial return (business case) opportunities for farmers. • Develop a tool bank cooperative to share high-value/low-use equipment. • Establish mentoring and shared practice programs between smallholder farms. • Pilot a small-farm workforce program for workers, students, & professionals. • Georgia land grant Universities (Fort Valley State University and
University of Georgia) • Technical College Systems of
Georgia (TCSG) • Drawdown Georgia Business
Compact • USDA (including Georgia leadership) • Foundations that support capacity-building for sustainable agriculture in Georgia • Proposed Equity &
Climate Change Institute[1] • Rural Studies Institute (Georgia College and State
University) • Black farmer cooperatives • Georgia and southeastern
Black farmer networks and organizations
Supporting infrastructure: • Train educators on new materials & delivery methods. • Design strategy to combat industry outreach that misdirects farmers. • Provide outreach & scholarships/funding for solution-specific conferences/ trainings, workshops, field days, etc.
Capacity building: • Increase institutional diversity, valuing lived experience & equity expertise of all educator types. • Offer support and/or engage organizations with diverse leadership that are working in the field. • Amplify the high-impact work of grassroots food production related organizations that are advancing equity & promoting conservation agriculture and/or silvopasture practices. • Change rules & practices that limit access to existing financial resources (federal, state, local levels). • Expand internet access and Wi-Fi infrastructure in partnership with utilities to promote inclusivity and digital literacy. • Georgia Land Grant Universities:
Fort Valley State University (FVSU) and University of
Georgia (USG) • Technical College Systems of
Georgia (TCSG) • Drawdown Georgia Business
Compact • USDA (including Georgia leadership) • Foundations that support capacity-building for sustainable agriculture in Georgia • Foundations that support grassroots organizations working for racial equity, social and environmental justice, and just and equitable food systems • Drawdown Georgia Business
Compact • State and regional Black-led and sustainable agriculture networks • Rural Studies Institute (Georgia
College and State University) • Proposed Equity &
Climate Change Institute • Culturally-relevant communication experts • Local/regional creative content producers and communications experts • Rural Studies Institute (Georgia College and State
University) • Local/regional Black-led advocacy organizations
• Georgia-based organizations and networks with expertise in community organizing & social impact • Proposed Equity &
Climate Change Institute • Local/regional Black-led advocacy organizations • Black farmer cooperatives
Recommendation Strategy Components/Opportunities Target Audience Key Collaborators
Professionalize equity practices within Drawdown Georgia & other climate-focused communications.
• Recognize and integrate the intersectional expertise of equity and solution area knowledge in Drawdown Georgia communications. • Draw on community expertise as well as academic expertise. • Promote the practice of equity-based community engagement strategies. • Establish a multidisciplinary Equity &
Climate Change Institute to steer this work. • Funders supporting Drawdown
Georgia and climate-related initiatives • Drawdown Georgia solution authors and institutional partners • Multi-disciplinary team with expertise in community organizing and social impact (Equity & Climate Change
Institute or alternative) • Rural Studies Institute (Georgia College and
State University) • UGA and FVSU • Black farmer cooperatives • Black farmer advocacy organizations • Association for the
Advancement of
Sustainability in Higher
Education (AASHE)
[1]Taproot suggests this as a framework for strategy for achieving many of the goals presented in these recommendations. Equity stakeholders suggested the coordination of efforts, the engagement of equity experts, and the resourcing of efforts to accomplish the many activities they suggested. Taproot contributed the idea of housing this in an institute that could provide leadership, coordination, and secure resources to make this happen.
practices, but it also supports the sustainability of their businesses by expanding their ability to access funding mechanisms, new markets, and small business resources.
2) Foster close collaboration with equity professionals and stakeholders to advance equity across all Drawdown Georgia
solutions. Incorporating practitioners with equity expertise in teams developing communications and outreach materials will enhance collaboration that advances carbon sequestration practices in rural Georgia. In addition, the terminology,
standards, processes, and accountability processes of
measuring and defining equity should be both standardized and formalized within Drawdown Georgia and solution sector communications, including the Drawdown Georgia web pages. Such standardization and professionalization can ensure that all groups making use of Drawdown Georgia resources are working from the same strategy and with the same fundamental purpose and aim. Otherwise, abstract terms like “equity”, “inclusion”, “diversity” and “sustainability” become mere buzzwords that are easily co-opted by entities that are NOT genuinely interested in addressing racial justice or environmental remediation (Gunder, 2006).
Structural and Institutional Changes: Policy & Power Shifting 1) Advocate for Political Investment in Urban Forestry
Master Planning to support tree canopy expansion. Drawdown Georgia and solution advocates could support existing master planning initiatives such as the Urban Forest Master Plan set forth by Trees Atlanta & Central Atlanta Progress that aims to increase 14-18% of Atlanta’s tree canopy within 15 years. These actions should also be adopted within the Atlanta Tree Ordinance to standardize practices and ensure compliance by all parties (Urban Developers, Residents, etc.).
2) Support the Resolution of Heirs’ Property Land Tenure
Challenges, a key barrier to solution adoption. Many Black farmers operate family farms on land that was passed through the family for several generations through extralegal processes. As a result, the land tenure and business viability of their farms are often precarious, contributing to a constant state of “survival mode.” Solving these legal hurdles to secure land tenure advances racial equity in land ownership and support the capacity of farmers to prioritize conservation agriculture practices.
3) Change Institutional Food Procurement & Contracting Policies & Standards to provide a stable market for Black-
owned farms. Drawdown Georgia partners and other foodserving institutions have a major opportunity to advance equity and climate change mitigation through their food procurement and contracting policies. By setting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and food production standards for food service vendors that prioritizes smallholder farmers who use conservation agriculture practices, institutions can not only support Drawdown Georgia carbon sequestration goals by influencing farmer production practices, but they can also provide an important economic support for smallholder farmers, stimulation for food-based local economies (rural and urban), and improved health outcomes for their students, visitors, and personnel using food-serving institutions.
4) Change Rules & Practices that Limit Access to Existing
Financial Resources. Both formal (i.e., rules and regulations) and informal (i.e., norms and customs) barriers exist for smallholder Black farmers and first-generation BIPOC urban
TABLE 3.4 STRUCTURAL AND INSTITUTIONAL ADVOCACY: POLICY AND POWER SHIFTING
Recommendation Strategy Components/Opportunities Target Audience Key Collaborators
Change rules & practices that limit access to existing financial resources.
• Identify targeted changes needed at federal, state and local levels and map appropriate advocacy strategies for each. • Garner resources to advocate for change. • Drawdown Georgia
Business Compact • UGA and FVSU • Proposed Equity & Climate
Change Institute • USDA • Black farmer advocacy organizations • Black farmer cooperatives • USDA
Advocate for political investment in Urban Forestry Master Planning.
Support the resolution of heirs’ property land tenure challenges.
• Ensure equitable distribution of tree density throughout the city to address heat islands & marginalized areas void of green space. • Establish development that results in no net loss of trees. • Create a standard for sustainable tree planting with an emphasis on increased lifespan & limited maintenance concerns. • Land conservation organizations • Tree planting organizations • Community development organizations • Proposed Equity & Climate
Change Institute • Neighborhood Associations and Community-Based
Organizations
• Utilize Drawdown Georgia partner institutions’ law schools to partner with law firms that specialize in heirs’ property law. • Support the work of these firms and their network of grassroots partners to identify and support the resolution of land tenure challenges, both proactively and retroactively. • Drawdown Georgia partner institutions’ law schools • UGA and FSVU • Drawdown Georgia
Business Compact • Foundations that support legal work in racial equity • Legal experts in heirs property law • Land trust nonprofit organizations • Black farmer cooperatives • Black farmer advocacy organization • Proposed Equity & Climate
Change Institute
Change institutional food procurement & contracting policies & standards.[1]
• Inventory & assess institutional food procurement policies of all Drawdown member institutions in light of DEI standards & Drawdown equity goals. • Revise identified policies to prioritize marginalized farmers & food businesses. • Provide support to help farmers scale up & prepare for contracting with Drawdown institutions. • Design such policies & standards for adaptability & equity-centered innovation. • Drawdown Georgia partner institutions • Technical College and
Systems of GA • Foundations that support transition toward more just and sustainable food systems • GA Department of Early
Care and Learning (DECAL) • Proposed Equity & Climate
Change Institute • Food procurement, food services and supply chain consultants • Rural Studies Institute (Georgia College and State
University) • AASHE/STARS and Real
Food Standards (and groups with similar frameworks)
[1] While a number of stakeholders addressed economic opportunity as a critical need for Georgia’s farmers and also recommended increased purchasing of Georgia grown produce by the big buyers in the state, Taproot drew on expertise in this field to provide recommendations for the specific tactics that might achieve this goal. In most cases, this industry-specific tactical knowledge falls outside of the realm of stakeholders and solution authors, but well within the experience of the Taproot team.
farmers in accessing the funds necessary to start and sustain their farms. Identifying these specific rules/practices and making them more inclusive, flexible, and equitable (both those that exist within USDA and other lending/granting institutions) is critical to advancing equity for farmers and expanding their use of conservation agriculture practices, which can require significant investment.
Summary of Key Findings
The recommendations outlined above would facilitate more inclusive engagement with changemakers in the Drawdown Georgia solution areas of conservation agriculture and land sinks (afforestation/silvopasture). In addition, they have the potential to advance equity in these areas and repair injustices that have been embedded in the structure of Georgia’s institutions and the lives of almost half of Georgia’s population. Below we highlight selected key findings within each of the two major areas of recommendations that emerged through stakeholder outreach.
In the Field: Education and Programming
The first set of recommendations focus on collaboration with farmers, particularly those that have been historically marginalized and have faced barriers in accessing state and federal support programs, to advance land management practices that sequester carbon. Some of these practices are already in place among many smallholders but could be enhanced and expanded; others are currently difficult to implement due to barriers. In most cases, respectful collaboration with farmers is key to more widespread and equitable implementation of the solutions.
Drawdown Georgia partner organizations have the opportunity to “make the invisible visible.” Many small farmers exhibit a commitment to land stewardship and have experience in less mechanized forms of conventional agriculture and traditions of agroecology. Black farmers, in particular, have long-standing practices and commitments to these traditions, and there are also incredible stories of success and resilience that can be uplifted and celebrated by Drawdown Georgia and solution advocates. Recognizing this rich history and cultural connection to agroecology as foundational to contemporary conservation agriculture and environmental sustainability movements helps to advance racial equity, elevate community expertise, and build rapport with historically-marginalized populations. Partnerships with the organizations and individuals cultivating this work and those that are sharing these stories, can go a long way towards building strength, diversity and collaboration between the racial justice and environmentalism movements.
Policy recommendations are intended to address barriers getting in the way of solution implementation. In addition, as in the field programming section, institutionalizing best practices in academic-community collaboration, and revising practices and policies that disincentivize investment in equitable collaboration, could advance community-academic collaboration in the implementation of Drawdown Georgia solutions. See Table 3.4 for a summary of Policy and Power-Shifting Recommendations.
Policies and procedures that may seem reasonable on the surface, are often impractical, burdensome, and problematic in practice. As a result, both the design and implementation of policies often perpetuate a status quo of exclusion from opportunities for these farmers. One central reason is because the decision-makers within traditional agricultural institutions are not reflective of the diversity of our state nor of the farming population consistently excluded from agriculture policy benefits. To address this, some of the individuals that we spoke with suggested implementing an active and intentional diversity recruitment plan (along with an early retirement) within the Georgia Department of Agriculture, Extension, Farm Service Agency and more. This shift in personnel within policymaking institutions can not only contribute to equity and conservation agriculture through innovative strategies, but also they are a necessary counter-perspective within mainstream agricultural politics. The drivers of legislation like the lobbyists who influence the Farm Bill are primarily representing large commodity groups that have little or no concern for smallholder farmers of color.
As described by a leading expert in rural agriculture, state & local Farm Service Agency (FSA) and Soil and Water Conservation committees are elected groups, often consisting of individuals in each rural county. It’s rare to have representation of minority farmers in these committees, and these are the committees that determine if money will be allocated to “big agriculture” or to smallholder farmers, and within that group, to farmers of color. Local decision-making only works for everyone when there is genuine representation.
Policy solutions also must address gaps in rural infrastructure that leave many people behind. The lack of rural infrastructure— specifically access to broadband internet— is cutting rural small farmers off from opportunities. From the internet-dependent technology needed to efficiently use certain farm equipment and resources to the digital literacy needed to learn about and apply for agricultural financing and support, successful farming enterprises are increasingly dependent on the internet for social connectivity and information. As long as Georgia’s rural communities are left out, there will be little hope of creating thriving local economies.
Looking Ahead
To prioritize the recommendations, Taproot suggests additional community engagement will be needed to identify which
Farmer Howard James owns and operates Jibbs Vineyard in Dooly County, Georgia. Photo courtesy of Black Farmers’ Network.
recommendations are the highest priority for equity stakeholders and which can be implemented in the short term, based upon available assets and resources.
Further Equity Stakeholder Engagement
The goals of additional stakeholder engagement might include:
• An initial prioritization within each action category:
- In-the-Field-Action: Education and Programming
- Structural and Institutional Changes: Policy & Power
Shifting
- Research & Innovation: Study and Design
• An initial assessment of resources and commitments that can be dedicated to this work.
• Identification of a small team composed of individuals with diverse forms of expertise that can review and prioritize actions based on the parameters set here.
Ideally, this process could be led by a small team that seeds the proposed Equity & Climate Change Institute. As priorities are set, this team would be tasked with convening the appropriate stakeholders to map out strategies to make the targeted goals come to life.
Additional Research
Additional economic, policy, and stakeholder research is needed to build upon report findings and uncover additional barriers and opportunities that should be considered by organizations interested in advancing the solutions identified by the Drawdown Georgia Phase One Research Team. Georgia’s Land Grant Universities— the University of Georgia and Fort Valley State University—are well-positioned to advance this research. As discussed above, stakeholder input suggests that institutions should more fully incorporate equity and stakeholder engagement expertise to partner more effectively with Black farmers and landowners in rural Georgia. In addition, several specific suggestions for future research are outlined below.
Identify Long-Term Wealth-Building Opportunities for Historically Marginalized Communities.
The racial wealth gap is a central component of racial inequities, and much of the issue is linked to racial inequities in land ownership. Little existing research examines the long-term wealth-building opportunities that exist for smallholder Black
"Now, you ask me what's your barrier?… first time people...say, ‘Well, have you talked to NRCS?’ I share with them politely, ‘Yes I have... Do you know the full rules of NRCS?’ And…they don't. See if you knew the full rules, you'd know that NRCS hands are tied. They can help you with cross fencing, but if you don't have no boundaries, what good is cross fencing? I mean boundary fencing. And I can't do { }boundaries because of the amount of money it takes to put up a fence."
- Experienced Georgia livestock farmer, discussing the infrastructure required to effectively manage silvopasture and secure border fencing that runs in the tens of thousands of dollars.
farmers, many of whom do not have social security income and few assets for “retirement”. Identifying and leveraging potential in conservation agriculture, silvopasture, and related climate mitigation strategies for these farmers to generate income and build long-term wealth from participation in such practices can help to expand the use of conservation practices among a variety of actors (e.g., farmers and business partners) while supporting economic equity among rural farm families and communities.
Locate and Restore Access to Key Missing Public Data.
Publicly accessible, county-specific USDA Census of Agriculture 2017 data on demographics, access, and conservation farming practices by race of farmer have disappeared from the USDA website within the past 12-18 months. Drawdown Georgia partners may be able to leverage
their research expertise and partnerships to locate and restore
this “missing” data to public access. This is important for trust and transparency with organizations that support smallholder Black farmers, but also for informing the strategy and execution of Drawdown solution implementation.
Explore University Incentive Policies and Practices.
University incentive structures are generally organized in such a way that rewards the acquisition of grants and other funding that brings research dollars into the university. Few, if any, incentives or mandates exist to support the dispersal of that money through sub-contracts. By understanding where opportunities and barriers exist within institutions, these policies can be adapted to support DEI initiatives, such as through subcontracting with
grassroots technical assistance organizations with diverse
leadership that support farmers to implement conservation agriculture practices. In doing so, Drawdown Georgia engaged universities can not only support expansion of carbon sequestration activities, but also can support the development of
rural businesses and economies.
Conduct Further Research Into Solution Implementation Barriers.
Our data collection revealed that the “devil is in the details,” and that generalized strategies for education and engagement fail to recognize the specific roadblocks that smallholder Black farmers face when attempting to access resources and opportunities. For example, heirs property solutions that the USDA offers include farmers accumulating debt in exchange for access to legal services, and it excludes individuals who have not resolved these issues from being able to apply for financial assistance from many NRCS and USDA programs - while most heirs property issues stem from systematic and historical barriers.
Conclusion
This project provides a formative steppingstone into a future that is more equitable and just for historically marginalized smallholder farmers and landowners in Georgia, while advancing carbon sequestration solutions that are critical for achieving carbon neutrality in Georgia. Establishing equity standards and creating a comprehensive strategy rooted in these standards should guide the next phase of this initiative. Resources should be committed to establishing and institutionalizing appropriate sub-teams to ensure that effective, inclusive strategies are being implemented for each solution sector. For the specific solutions of Conservation Agriculture and Land Sinks, next steps include a deeper investigation of urban impact across Georgia’s metro regions, as well as prioritization of recommendations and investigating additional strategies for advancing each solution equitably.
Further work should not only be responsive to the voices of historically marginalized smallholder farmers but also inclusive of these changemakers and the grassroots organizations and individuals that represent their interests. The proposed Equity and Climate Institute envisions a targeted approach to these efforts and can work collaboratively with the Drawdown Georgia Business Compact as appropriate. Through the launch of these parallel groups and the establishment of the equity standards that guide them, the recommendations provided in this report, and the goals set forth by Drawdown Georgia, this state is well-positioned to become a regional leader in equity-centered climate change mitigation.
