-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
/
BFA-indc-EN.html
2764 lines (2763 loc) · 120 KB
/
BFA-indc-EN.html
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
<!DOCTYPE html><html>
<head>
<meta charset="utf-8">
</head>
<body>
<h2><a id="Burkina_Faso_0"></a>Burkina Faso</h2>
<h1><a id="INTENDED_NATIONALLY_DETERMINED_CONTRIBUTION_INDC_IN_BURKINA_FASO_2"></a>INTENDED NATIONALLY DETERMINED CONTRIBUTION (INDC) IN BURKINA FASO</h1>
<p>September 2015</p>
<h3><a id="Section_1_Introduction_7"></a>Section 1. Introduction</h3>
<p>France will host the 21st Conference of Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21/CMP21), which will take place in Paris in December 2015 and should result in a new international agreement on the climate that is applicable to all countries. The entire international community expects this agreement to be universal and lasting. It should give the economic and political signals for our planet’s economic development model to set out on a new path leading to carbon neutrality before the end of the century and to observance of the 2°C objective (i.e. keeping global warming at temperatures below +2°C).</p>
<p>The principal goal of COP21, from November 30 to December 11, 2015, is to conclude an agreement that will commit 195 countries to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The end objective is for the contributions by these countries (which vary from country to country) to make it possible to stabilise climate warming due to human activities below 2°C between now and 2100 (in comparison to the pre-industrial era). Each country will renew its commitments to the Climate Change Convention (UNFCCC) in a document called <strong>Intended Nationally Determined Contributions</strong> or <strong>INDC</strong> (CPDN in French) between now and the end of October 2015.</p>
<h3><a id="Section_2_Context_and_institutional_framework_13"></a>Section 2. Context and institutional framework</h3>
<p><h4><a id="21_Institutional_context_15"></a>2.1. Institutional context</h4></p>
<p>The national objectives encompass two types of objectives:</p>
<ul>
<li>
<p>The <strong>mitigation objectives</strong>, the aim of which is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, for example by modifying the production techniques that are used. The Burkina Faso INDC gives quantifiable factors and notes the reference year, the period of commitment and the implementation schedule and specifies the methodologies used to estimate GHG emissions.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>The <strong>adaptation objectives</strong>, the aim of which is to reduce the vulnerability of natural and human systems to the effect of current or expected climate changes.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>The contribution to this second part of the objectives is voluntary, but important to Burkina Faso, and thus is to be presented in a separate scenario: <strong>Integrated Adaptation</strong>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Insert #1</strong><br>
According to the ministry in charge of sustainable development, the principles on which the national contributions are based are:<br>
<strong>Ambition</strong>: The contributions will have to go beyond the countries’ current national commitments. The current commitments are part of the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol - notably the case of the European Union – or correspond to voluntary national actions under the Copenhagen agreement and the Cancun accords.<br>
<strong>Fairness and differentiation</strong>: The contributions are examined in light of the national circumstances of each country. The least developed countries (LDCs) and the small island developing states (SIDS) benefit especially from a certain degree of flexibility in preparing their INDC in view of their limited capabilities.<br>
<strong>Transparency</strong>: The contributions reported by the countries are published as they are readily available on the UNFCCC site. A synthesis report of all the parties’ contributions will be presented by the UNFCCC secretariat on November 1, 2015, on the basis of the INDC’s received as of October 1st.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><h4><a id="22__National_strategies_and_policies_a_sustainable_development_framework_32"></a>2.2. National strategies and policies, a sustainable development framework</h4></p>
<p>Burkina Faso’s National Assembly on the Environment and Sustainable Development, held in November 2011, strongly recommended the development of a National Sustainable Development Policy (NSDP) accompanied by a law. Prepared in 2013, the NSDP was an effective framework for the Strategy for Accelerated Growth and Sustainable Development (SAGSD). This economic framework document, together with “Outlook Burkina 2025” and policy framework instruments, contribute to place the concept of sustainability at the heart of public action and the activities of other non-state actors (technological and financial partners, civil society organisations, non-governmental organisations and the private sector) in a socioeconomic development drive that generates growth and fairly distributes revenues in the medium and long term in climatically high-vulnerability sectors such as those identified in National Communication 2.</p>
<p><h4><a id="23__Organisations_and_programs_put_in_place_for_adaptation_and_mitigation_36"></a>2.3. Organisations and programs put in place for adaptation and mitigation</h4></p>
<p>Burkina Faso ratified the UNFCCC in 1993 and the Kyoto Protocol in 2005. Up to now, in response to the provisions of these protocols, it has developed and adopted a number of policy and strategy documents relating to climate change. These include:</p>
<ul>
<li>The National Strategy for implementing the Climate Change Convention adopted in 2001.</li>
<li>The National Action Program for Adaptation to Climate Change (NAPA) in 2007.</li>
<li>The development of a framework NAMA (2008).</li>
<li>The National Adaptation Plan (NAP, 2014).</li>
</ul>
<p>To address and follow up climate change issues, a Permanent Secretariat of the National Council for Management of the Environment (SP/CONAGECE) was created within the ministry responsible for the environment and which will subsequently be transformed into the National Council for the Environment and Sustainable Development (SP/CONEDD) with expanded responsibilities.</p>
<p>In 1995, Burkina Faso established the Inter-Ministerial Committee to Implement the Actions of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (IMCIAC). This committee has been fully involved in the preparation of the first National Communication on climate change.</p>
<p><h5><a id="231__From_NAPA_to_NAP_49"></a>2.3.1 From NAPA to NAP</h5></p>
<p>Faced with the degradation of the ecosystems, the recurrence of food crises and the adverse impacts of climate change on the environment, populations and livestock, the Government of Burkina Faso, with the support of the UNDP as the executive agency for the World Environmental Fund (WEF), initiated in 2005 the formulation of its National Action Program for Adaptation to climate change and variability. The NAPA was adopted at the national level in 2007. In this context and under the leadership of SP/CONEDD, three adaptation projects were developed and carried out between 2008 and 2013 with the support of Denmark and Japan and the World Environmental Fund (WEF). Thus, NAPA responded to an urgent situation in which adaptation was principally directed to those who are most vulnerable, particularly rural populations.</p>
<p>Building on the achievements of the NAPA, on the one hand, and, on the other, to initiate a comprehensive medium- and long-term approach to adaptation to climate change and expand the national process to all of the stakeholders in development, Burkina embarked on the process to develope a National Adaptation Plan (NAP) structured around the results of analysing the vulnerability to climate change of the sectors identified as priority (agriculture, livestock breeding, water, forests and natural ecosystems, energy, infrastructure and housing, health etc.) and climate change scenarios in the 2025-2050 time period.</p>
<p><h5><a id="232__The_need_for_a_NAMA_framework_57"></a>2.3.2 The need for a NAMA framework</h5></p>
<p>The need for quantitative evaluation of the mitigation potential led Burkina Faso to develop a NAMA framework in 2008, in this case the National Rural Sector Program (NRSP). The NRSP is part of the drive for short, medium and long-term development programming carried out through the Outlook Burkina 2025 study, the development of the National Land-Use Planning Scheme (NLUPS) and, more recently (2010), the adoption of the Strategy for Accelerated Growth and Sustainable Development (SAGSD), which replaced the Anti-Poverty Strategic Framework (APSF).</p>
<p>The NRSP, which targeted the year 2015, is a federation of sectoral programs of the departments of agriculture, livestock raising, water, the environment and quality of life. Within this framework, the mitigation potential for the period 2008-2015 was estimated at 9,174,816 eq.t.CO<sub>2</sub> of GHG, or 1,200,000 eq.t.CO<sub>2</sub> per year.</p>
<p>The proposed mitigation measures contribute to the achievement of the Government’s objective, i.e. the restoration of degraded land at the rate of 30,000 ha/yr, the increase of natural forests from 170,00 to 500,000 ha, the reduction of forest areas burned by wildfires from 30% of the national territory to 20%, the development of village hunting areas through the awareness and training of the population, and the spread of knowledge regarding techniques for sustainable management of natural resources.</p>
<p><h5><a id="233__The_Second_National_Communication_65"></a>2.3.3 The Second National Communication</h5></p>
<p>Pursuant to article 4 and 12 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Burkina Faso developed a National Communication containing the measures aimed at mitigation or appropriate adaptation to climate change. In this context, a Second National Communication was developed in 2014 in accordance with the directives of decision 17/CP 8 adopted by the eighth session of the Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC. Since the process of its development began after 2006, the inventory data was based on the data for 2007 as the reference year. Pointing out the changes in climate, the Second National Communication completes and updates certain data already brought to the attention of the international community in the initial Communication of 2001, which the UNFCCC web site refers to May 2002.</p>
<p><h4><a id="24__The_peculiarities_of_Burkina_Fasos_INDC_69"></a>2.4. The peculiarities of Burkina Faso’s INDC</h4></p>
<p>The INDC of Burkina Faso, a weak emitter country, is one of the few that have both characteristics of the INDCs, namely an outcomes approach and an actions/projects/activities approach.</p>
<p>This results in a <strong><em>Mitigation</em></strong> component that has taken into consideration only the activities that lead to credited emission results, the objectives of which have been oriented from the start toward the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and in particular the carbon equivalent. One example of these initiatives is represented by the REDD + / FIP, the NAMA initiative and the potential CDM projects in the growth sectors such as mining. These initiatives, dedicated principally to the reduction of greenhouse gas, make up the Conditional Hybrid Mitigation / (Adaptation) scenario.</p>
<p>Furthermore, Burkina’s INDC contains an Adaptation component that makes this INDC somewhat unique and ambitious since the analysis of the adaptation options with their special investments and “vulnerable” sectors to the search for resilience has led to an Integrated Adaptation Scenario. It is from this component that the projects/activities/actions approach emerges. It is strongly justified by the fact that the “rural sector”, consisting of the water-agriculture-forest-land use subsectors, is at the same time the principal engine of the Burkina economy (it provides the livelihood of more than 80% of the population) and the sector most vulnerable to the effects of climate change.</p>
<p>Thus, this component consists of projects whose objective is not PRINCIPALLY the reduction of GHG (mainly through carbon sequestration), but the enhancement of environmental services such as food security, water and soil conservation, sustainable agriculture, the development of non-ligneous forest products, including medicinal plants, the promotion of wood and metal free architecture (“Nubian vaults”), etc. As a bonus to the mitigation component, these projects result in the medium and long term in considerable reductions of GHG, which even exceed the results of mitigation efforts.</p>
<h3><a id="Section_3_Mitigation_projections_and_options_79"></a>Section 3. Mitigation projections and options</h3>
<p><h4><a id="31__Methodology_81"></a>3.1. Methodology</h4></p>
<p>The “Mitigation” team carried out its work on the basis of the following methodology:</p>
<ul>
<li>Use of the 2007 GHG inventory by sector (i.e. agriculture; energy, including the transportation sector; waste; industrial processes; land use; land use changes and forestry (LULUCF).</li>
<li>Determination of the socioeconomic indicators for the “Business as Usual (BaU)” scenario for the GHG emissions projection at the 2030 horizon.</li>
<li>Construction of GHG emissions projection scenarios by sector.</li>
<li>Identification of mitigation actions that is underway or scheduled, by sector.</li>
<li>Analysis of the impacts of adaptation actions (if any) in order to integrate their indirect emission reductions in the mitigation outcome.</li>
<li>Evaluation of the Burkina Faso contribution in terms of mitigation.</li>
<li>Recommendations for mitigation actions by sector.</li>
<li>Coverage level of the contribution: the scenarios are based on data covering the entire national territory.</li>
</ul>
<p>This methodology is reflected in the report as follows:</p>
<ul>
<li>A <em>GHG outcome</em> approach offering the greatest flexibility in the way of reaching the GHG reductions, without necessarily specifying all of the actions the emissions reduction will entail. This approach permits transparency in the calculations and projections and assures that the progress achieved with regard to the actions will be better monitored since the GHG targets generally take into consideration the baseline (2014) national GHG inventory and more specifically the most detailed possible sector data.</li>
<li>As a result of point 1, the Government could commit itself to quantified results capable of providing better understanding of the future emissions reductions and the emissions levels associated with the contributions, which, when combined, facilitates an evaluation of future emissions (conditional mitigation and adaptation scenario). These global results also permit progress in carrying out INDC follow-through and offer greater credibility for the purpose of receiving financing and accessing markets, as well as improving comparison between the INDC’s. It is also simpler to estimate the effects and co-benefits under the GHG outcome approach and/or the GHG actions approach.</li>
<li>In the Burkina Faso INDC, both approaches have been used: outcomes in most cases for mitigation and outcomes and projects (actions) for adaptation.</li>
<li>Thus, this results in three scenarios: one BaU scenario, one unconditional scenario and one conditional scenario that includes the adaptation project whose main objective is the reduction of “credited” GHGs.</li>
<li>The Mitigation section presents these three scenarios and their descriptions by key sectors with respect to GHG contributions, while at the same time attempting to keep the same key sectors throughout the analysis of the three scenarios and also in the Adaptation section and the socioeconomic section. The rest of the sectors are used only to provide an investment cost if the secondary projects/actions are asked to contribute to an even greater GHG reduction at different horizons up to 2030 (compared to 2015).</li>
<li>The sectors identified are: agriculture, waste and energy, including electricity production, transportation, residential and tertiary, as well as manufacturing industries, housing etc. In terms of representation in the report, each of these sectors will show:
<ul>
<li>Its projections as to emissions amounts in the BaU, unconditional and conditional scenarios.</li>
<li>Graphs of the three scenarios.</li>
<li>A summary table/matrix collecting all of the data + investment cost (cost of reducing one ton of CO<sub>2</sub>).</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<p>The following table summarises the mitigation scenarios.</p>
<p>Table 1. Reduction of emissions and associated investment costs under the mitigation scenarios</p>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Scenarios / sectors</th>
<th colspan="2">Reduction of emissions at the 2030 horizon</th>
<th rowspan="3">Investment cost (in US$)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>In numbers (GgCO<sub>2</sub> eq.)</td>
<td>In % of reduction</td>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><strong><em>BaU (subtotal)</em></strong>:</td>
<td>118,323</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="4"><strong><em>Unconditional</em></strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Agriculture</td>
<td>7,236.3</td>
<td>6.1%</td>
<td>21,646,581</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Waste</td>
<td>-</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Energy</td>
<td>572.0</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
<td>1,063,272,580</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong><em>Subtotal Unconditional</em></strong></td>
<td>7,808.3</td>
<td>6.6%</td>
<td>1,084,919,161</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="4"><strong><em>Conditional</em></strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Agriculture</td>
<td>10,560</td>
<td>8.9%</td>
<td>64,939,743</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Waste</td>
<td>76.30</td>
<td>0.1%</td>
<td>81,228,000</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Energy</td>
<td>3,130.00</td>
<td>2.6%</td>
<td>609,866,667</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>Subtotal Conditional Hybrid</strong></td>
<td>13,766.30</td>
<td>11.6%</td>
<td>756,034,410</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>Subtotal Mitigation</strong></td>
<td>21,574.63</td>
<td>18.2%</td>
<td>1,840,953,571</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Source, Authors’ compilation, July 2015.</p>
<p><h4><a id="32__Objective_Burkina_Faso_contribution_level_127"></a>3.2. Objective: Burkina Faso contribution level</h4></p>
<p>Three Mitigation scenarios have been considered in order to evaluate the emissions trends and the possible reductions on the basis of a reference situation and the potential for financing:</p>
<ul>
<li>A “trend” scenario (Business as Usual - BAU), which corresponds to continuation of the past under the assumption that economic development continues without interruption.</li>
<li>An “unconditional” scenario taking into account all the public policies adopted after 2007, technological developments and recent studies, with financing that has been acquired or is being acquired.</li>
<li>A “conditional” scenario that takes into account all the mitigation projects that have been developed and/or are being developed, but without any acquired financing.</li>
</ul>
<p><h5><a id="321__Analysis__of__the__reference__situation__for__GHG__and__identification__of__the__reference_year_135"></a>3.2.1 Analysis of the reference situation for GHG and identification of the reference year</h5></p>
<p>The chosen reference year is 2007, the date when the second report on greenhouse gas inventories in Burkina Faso was completed. The future projections under the various scenarios are made on the basis of this reference year and the appropriate parameters resulting from the previous development of the socioeconomic situation (trend-based) or the forecast-based assumptions (unconditional and conditional scenarios).</p>
<p><h5><a id="322__Determination_and_justification_of_the_target_year_139"></a>3.2.2 Determination and justification of the target year</h5></p>
<p>Burkina has chosen 2030 as the target year, given that this date coincides with the second Millennium Development Goals meeting. In addition, the government of Burkina Faso has adhered to the “Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL)” initiative of the United Nations Secretary General, which aims to achieve three major objectives between now and 2030:</p>
<ul>
<li>Assure universal access to modern energy services.</li>
<li>Double the rate of improvement of energy efficiency.</li>
<li>Double the share of renewable energy in the world energy mix.</li>
</ul>
<p><h5><a id="323__Choice_of_the_projection_parameters_147"></a>3.2.3 Choice of the projection parameters</h5></p>
<p>The parameters that can influence the trends have been reviewed. In cooperation with the agency responsible for statistics, the National Institute of Statistics and Demography (INSD), the following parameters have been selected as relevant.</p>
<p>Table 2. Types of GHG emissions by sectoral trends</p>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Sectors</th>
<th>GHG</th>
<th>Projection parameters used</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Agricultural soils trend</td>
<td>NO<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>Development of importation of products for soils and crops</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Agricultural waste burned in the field + controlled burning of savannah trend</td>
<td>NOx CO CO<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>Historical INSD trend</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Enteric fermentation trend</td>
<td>CH<sub>4</sub></td>
<td>Rate of increase of cattle</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Manure use trend</td>
<td>CH<sub>4</sub></td>
<td>Rate of increase of cattle</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Land use change and forestry trend</td>
<td>CO<sub>2</sub> CH<sub>4</sub> N<sub>2</sub>O NOx CO</td>
<td>Historical INSD trend</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Liquid waste management trend</td>
<td>CH<sub>4</sub></td>
<td>Rate of population growth</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Solid waste management trend</td>
<td>CH<sub>4</sub></td>
<td>Rate of population growth</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Transportation trend</td>
<td>CO<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>Development of fuel imports</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Electricity production trend</td>
<td>CO<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>Development trend</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Manufacturing industries trend</td>
<td>CO<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>Rate of growth of industrial GDP</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Residential trend</td>
<td>CO<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>Rate of growth of butane gas and kerosene</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Industrial processes trend</td>
<td>CO<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>Historical INSD trend</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Source: Authors, July 2015.</p>
<p><h5><a id="324__Reference_situation_for_emissions_170"></a>3.2.4 Reference situation for emissions</h5></p>
<p>The reference situation is that of the second Burkina Faso National Commission of 2014 (in which the GHG inventories refer to the data for 2007) within the framework of the UNFCCC. Table 3 below provides an indicative summary of the reference situation (total and relative emissions by emissions source).</p>
<p>Table 3. Reference situation for GHG emissions</p>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Category</th>
<th>Principal gases emitted</th>
<th>GHG emissions (GgCO<sub>2</sub> eq.) 2007</th>
<th>As a percentage of total emissions</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Agricultural soils</td>
<td>N<sub>2</sub>O</td>
<td>8,239</td>
<td>37.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Enteric fermentation</td>
<td>CH<sub>4</sub></td>
<td>9,517</td>
<td>43.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Agricultural waste burned in the field + controlled burning of savannah</td>
<td>CO<sub>2</sub>, NOx, CO</td>
<td>189</td>
<td>0.9%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Manure use</td>
<td>CH<sub>4</sub></td>
<td>1,196</td>
<td>5.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Land use change and forestry</td>
<td>CO<sub>2</sub>, CH<sub>4</sub>, N<sub>2</sub>O, NOx, CO</td>
<td>250</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Solid waste management</td>
<td>CH<sub>4</sub></td>
<td>667</td>
<td>3.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Liquid waste management</td>
<td>CH<sub>4</sub></td>
<td>245</td>
<td>1.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Transportation</td>
<td>CO<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>782</td>
<td>3.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Electricity production</td>
<td>CO<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>350</td>
<td>1.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Residential</td>
<td>CO<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>60</td>
<td>0.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Manufacturing industries trend</td>
<td>CO<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>118</td>
<td>0.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Industrial processes</td>
<td>CO<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>303</td>
<td>1.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>GHG total for country</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td>21,916</td>
<td>100%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Source: Burkina Faso National Communication, 2014.</p>
<p>Analysis of the current trend scenario shows that Burkina’s GHG emissions are going to continue to grow significantly. At the 2030 horizon, the emissions level will increase by a factor of five compared to 2007 and by a factor of almost 1.6 compared to 2015 (table 4 below).</p>
<p>Table 4. Overall trend evaluation of GHG status from 2007 to 2030</p>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>GHG emissions by category (Gg of CO<sub>2</sub> eq)</th>
<th>2007</th>
<th>2015</th>
<th>2020</th>
<th>2025</th>
<th>2030</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Agriculture sector, forestry and land use trend</td>
<td>19,391</td>
<td>71,436</td>
<td>85,545</td>
<td>95,561</td>
<td>103,424</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Solid waste management</td>
<td>667</td>
<td>852</td>
<td>993</td>
<td>1,156</td>
<td>1,347</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Liquid waste management</td>
<td>245</td>
<td>313</td>
<td>364</td>
<td>424</td>
<td>494</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Transportation trend</td>
<td>782</td>
<td>1,447</td>
<td>2,439</td>
<td>4,110</td>
<td>6,925</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Electricity production trend</td>
<td>350</td>
<td>648</td>
<td>1,476</td>
<td>2,487</td>
<td>4,191</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Residential trend</td>
<td>60</td>
<td>96</td>
<td>128</td>
<td>172</td>
<td>230</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Manufacturing industries trend</td>
<td>118</td>
<td>175</td>
<td>223</td>
<td>285</td>
<td>363</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Industrial processes trend</td>
<td>303</td>
<td>667</td>
<td>894</td>
<td>1,121</td>
<td>1,348</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>Total</strong></td>
<td>21,916</td>
<td>75,633</td>
<td>92,062</td>
<td>105,316</td>
<td>118,323</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Source: Authors, July 2015.</p>
<p><h5><a id="325__Results_of_scenarios_and_analyses_212"></a>3.2.5 Results of scenarios and analyses</h5></p>
<p>With regard to the projects and programs selected in the unconditional and conditional scenarios, the results of the projections shown below give the portion of reductions that occur in comparison to the current trend scenario, which is also called “Business as Usual” (BAU). It should be recalled that, like several developing countries, the low level of ownership and mastery of technologies goes hand in hand with the very low level of development of countries such as Burkina Faso and the low level of their GHG emissions. Despite all efforts, the urgency of dealing with recurrent crisis situations in several sectors requires the use of low-cost technologies available in the market, which are quite often less appropriate for local or global environmental protection (emergency thermal power plants very frequently financed at the time of large-scale load shedding and social movements, dependence on obsolete means of transportation, agricultural techniques with little technological input that consume space and manpower, poor waste management etc.). Hence there is a preference to think of GHG reductions in comparison to a possible trend rather than in comparison to a reference year that we see as unrealistic.</p>
<p>Table 5. Change in emissions (BaU) and percentage of reduction by scenario</p>
<p>Source: Authors, July 2015.</p>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th></th>
<th>2007</th>
<th>2015</th>
<th>2020</th>
<th>2025</th>
<th>2030</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>BaU (in Gg)</td>
<td>21,916</td>
<td>75,633</td>
<td>92,062</td>
<td>105,316</td>
<td>118,323</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Unconditional scenario (reduction in Gg)</td>
<td></td>
<td>-</td>
<td>5,133</td>
<td>6,608</td>
<td>7,808</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Unconditional scenario (reduction in %)</td>
<td></td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>5.58%</td>
<td>6.27%</td>
<td>6.60%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Conditional scenario (reduction in Gg)</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>10,953</td>
<td>11,829</td>
<td>13,766</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Conditional scenario (reduction in %)</td>
<td></td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>11.90%</td>
<td>11.20%</td>
<td>11.60%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>The curve below better illustrates these scenarios.</p>
<p>Figure 1. Illustration of GHG emissions trends in different scenarios</p>
<p><img src="img/BFA-1.png" alt=""></p>
<p>Key: Blue line: Burkina GHG emission trend; orange line: Unconditional scenario; grey line: Conditional scenario</p>
<p>Table 6 below gives a breakdown of the reductions in the unconditional scenario. It may be seen that the sectoral mitigation is principally due to projects and programmes in agriculture, forestry and changes in land use (between 6 and 7% from 2020 to 2030), technology choices in the electrical industry (between 20 and 12% from 2020 to 2030) and energy efficiency in the manufacturing industries (3% in both 2020 and 2030). These reductions are relative to the BAU trend in the sector.</p>
<p>Table 6. Breakdown of GHG reductions (GgCO<sub>2</sub> eq. and %) in the unconditional scenario compared to the current trend scenario</p>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Years</th>
<th colspan="2">2015</th>
<th colspan="2">2020</th>
<th colspan="2">2025</th>
<th colspan="2">2030</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Sector</td>
<td>Gg</td>
<td>%</td>
<td>Gg</td>
<td>%</td>
<td>Gg</td>
<td>%</td>
<td>Gg</td>
<td>%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Agriculture, forestry and land use</td>
<td>-</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>-4,809</td>
<td>-6%</td>
<td>-6,209</td>
<td>-6%</td>
<td>-7,236</td>
<td>-7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Solid wastes</td>
<td>-</td>
<td></td>
<td>-</td>
<td></td>
<td>-</td>
<td></td>
<td>–</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Transportation</td>
<td>-5.86</td>
<td>-0.40%</td>
<td>29.3</td>
<td>-1.20%</td>
<td>29.3</td>
<td>-0.71%</td>
<td>29.3</td>
<td>-0.42%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Electricity production</td>
<td>22.18</td>
<td></td>
<td>284.3</td>
<td>-19.26%</td>
<td>344.4</td>
<td>-13.85%</td>
<td>493.04</td>
<td>-11.76%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Residential</td>
<td>0.36</td>
<td>-0.37%</td>
<td>10.38</td>
<td>-8.10%</td>
<td>25.62</td>
<td>-14.93%</td>
<td>49.71</td>
<td>-21.65%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Energy in the manufacturing industries</td>
<td>5.24</td>
<td>-3.00%</td>
<td>6.69</td>
<td>-3.00%</td>
<td>8.54</td>
<td>-3.00%</td>
<td>10.9</td>
<td>-3.00%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Source: Authors, July 2015</p>
<p>Similarly, table 7 below gives a breakdown of the reductions under the conditional scenario. It may be seen that in 2030, again in comparison to the BaU scenario, the sectoral mitigation would come principally from projects and programmes in agriculture, forestry and changes in land use (10% reduction in comparison to the sectoral trend), reduced consumption of hydrocarbons in transportation (42%), technology choices in the electrical industry (4%) and efficiency in residential and tertiary (21%) due to mass replacement of traditional lighting with low-consumption light bulbs. The reductions mentioned here are in relation to the BAU trend of the sector.</p>
<p>Table 7. Breakdown of GHG reductions (GgCO<sub>2</sub> eq. and %)in the conditional scenario compared to the current trend scenario</p>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Years</th>
<th colspan="2">2015</th>
<th colspan="2">2020</th>
<th colspan="2">2025</th>
<th colspan="2">2030</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Sector</td>
<td>Gg</td>
<td>%</td>
<td>Gg</td>
<td>%</td>
<td>Gg</td>
<td>%</td>
<td>Gg</td>
<td>%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Agriculture, forestry and land use</td>
<td>-</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>-10,560</td>
<td>12%</td>
<td>-10,560</td>
<td>11%</td>
<td>-10,560</td>
<td>10%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Solid wastes</td>
<td>-</td>
<td></td>
<td>-60</td>
<td>-4%</td>
<td>-75</td>
<td>-5%</td>
<td>-76.3</td>
<td>-4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Transportation</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>244</td>
<td>-10%</td>
<td>1069</td>
<td>-26%</td>
<td>2911</td>
<td>-42%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Electricity production</td>
<td>22.18</td>
<td>-3%</td>
<td>73.87</td>
<td>-5%</td>
<td>94.1</td>
<td>-4%</td>
<td>162.8</td>
<td>-4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Residential</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>10.02</td>
<td>-8%</td>
<td>25.26</td>
<td>-15%</td>
<td>49.35</td>
<td>-21%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Energy in the manufacturing industries</td>
<td>3.53</td>
<td>-2%</td>
<td>4.49</td>
<td>-2%</td>
<td>5.72</td>
<td>-2%</td>
<td>7.3</td>
<td>-2%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Source: Authors, July 2015</p>
<p>Over the last 15 years, Burkina has been at the head of the countries of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) with an average annual growth of 5.5%, despite a number of exogenous shocks. The Burkina economy is heavily dominated by agriculture, which employs close to 80% of the active population. Cotton is the country’s most important cash crop. The bulk of the greenhouse gas emissions in the agricultural sector come from the categories of enteric fermentation and agricultural land.</p>
<p>In 2007, the agricultural sector contributed 88% of the national GHG emissions. Animal husbandry, in the form of enteric fermentation activity, is the category that contributes the most the GHG emission (almost half annually). Agricultural land occupies second place in terms of contributions to these emissions.</p>
<h3><a id="Section_4_Adaptation_projections_and_options_279"></a>Section 4. Adaptation projections and options</h3>
<p><h4><a id="41__Burkinas_longterm_adaptation_strategy_281"></a>4.1. Burkina’s long-term adaptation strategy</h4></p>
<p>Globally, development planning is based on the Strategy for Accelerated Growth and Sustainable Development (SAGSD). From the beginning, Burkina Faso’s economy has been based on the primary sector, the sector most exposed over the past 40 years to the effects of climate variability and the sector that is now considered the one to be most vulnerable to climate change. This is why the government of Burkina Faso has become engaged specifically with issues of climate change since the great droughts of the 1970’s, through a sustained action against the desertification that severely impacts the rural world.</p>
<p>In 2014, within the National Partnership Program for Sustainable Land Management, Burkina Faso has developed and validated a <strong>Strategic Framework for Investment in Sustainable Land Management (SFI-SLM)</strong>. The vision in regard to Sustainable Land Management (SLM), which takes the year 2025 as its projection horizon, is as follows: "<em>Sustainable rural production systems which, by taking into consideration local knowledge and know-how, (i) preserve the fertility of the soil, (ii) increase plant and animal productivity per unit of area in use and/or by volume of water consumed, (iii) improve the well-being of the people living on the land and (iv) restore preserve the integrity and functioning of ecosystems".</em></p>
<p>Considered as an action plan of the NRSP in the area of Sustainable Management of Natural Resources (SMNR), the SFI-SLM is supported by all of the programmes and actions within the NRSP that are financed or are seeking financing.</p>
<p>The objectives, results and outputs expected from the SFI-SLM broadly coincide with the themes classified as priority within the National Adaptation Plan (NAP). Because it has defined quantitative goals for the country at the 2025 horizon in the sectors of the GDRN, as well as their costs, the SFI- SLM may be considered as an operational action plan for adaptation in the sectors of agriculture, animal husbandry, forests and land use, water management and biomass energy.</p>
<p><h4><a id="42__Strategic_adaptation_objectives_291"></a>4.2. Strategic adaptation objectives</h4></p>
<p>The greatest concern for Burkina Faso, as for any other country, is that the climate changes foreseen for the next 50 years are now inevitable. Hence, the primary interest of Burkina Faso, which is not a large GHG emitter, must necessarily be improvement of the people’s capability to adapt to the conditions that will exist from now to 2025, 2030 or 2050: a significant rise in the average temperature, more severe dry seasons, strongly and less predictable rainy seasons, a growing problem of drought, lowering of the groundwater table and an increase in the frequency of certain diseases. The only scenario to be prepared for is the trend situation, “business as usual”, because the climate effects which Burkina must confront have already begun and the positive effects of the possible mitigation actions to be envisaged from this point forward, either at the local or global level, will not be felt until after the period of applicability of the INDC (2030).</p>
<p>The objectives of the adaptation measures foreseen in the country’s NAP (National Adaptation Plan) are to (i) reduce the vulnerability to the impacts of climate change on the development of adaptation and resilience capabilities, (ii) facilitate the coherent integration of adaptations to climate change in policies, programmes or activities, new or already existing, in the specific processes of development planning and in the strategies of the relevant sectors at different levels.</p>
<p><h4><a id="43__Sectors_involved_in_adaptation_projects_297"></a>4.3. Sectors involved in adaptation projects</h4></p>
<p>On the basis of the adaptation actions identified in the National Adaptation Plan for the principal sectors vulnerable to climate change, national experts (from the public sector, the civil society and the private sector) participating in a kick-off and consultation workshop for the present study were asked to classify those actions that they consider of high priority in view of their knowledge of the country’s environmental and socioeconomic context. Since the classification exercise is at the same time individual and collective, it is assumed that an action receiving the support of more than 50% of the participants could be considered to be of significant importance. The results of this exercise are presented in the following table.</p>
<p>Table 8. Priority actions within the framework of adaptation projects.</p>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Sector</th>
<th>Suggested adaptation measures</th>
<th colspan="3">Applicability over the short, medium or long term</th>
<th>% of participants giving priority to this action</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="6">1. SLM - Sustainable Land Management</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>A3</td>
<td>Promotion of sustainable land management (SLM) - Improving access to climate information</td>
<td></td>
<td>M</td>
<td></td>
<td>88%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td>Includes:</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>A1</td>
<td>Cultivation of early or drought-resistant varieties</td>
<td>S</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>50%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>A2</td>
<td>Implementation of water and soil conservation techniques (stone barriers, levees, filtering levees, terraces, half-moons, agroforestry, dune stabilisation, etc.)</td>
<td>S</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>50%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>A4</td>
<td>Practice of integrated soil fertility management</td>
<td></td>
<td>M</td>
<td></td>
<td>50%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td>All of this through:</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>EA7</td>
<td>Development of master plans for water development and management</td>
<td>S</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>50%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>EA2</td>
<td>Development of water reservoirs: construction of modern wells, high-flow boreholes, dams; development of ponds; stream diversion</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>L</td>
<td>75%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>E3</td>
<td>Development of grazing water sources and points</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>L</td>
<td>69%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>E2</td>
<td>Delimitation and development of grazing zones</td>
<td></td>
<td>M</td>
<td></td>
<td>50%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>EA3</td>
<td>Combating the silting of water sources</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>L</td>
<td>63%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>A6</td>
<td>Implementation of water-efficient irrigation techniques</td>
<td>S</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>56%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>ECO8</td>
<td>Development of research programmes on the resilience of forest, wildlife and fish species</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>L</td>
<td>56%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>ECO7</td>
<td>Rehabilitation and preservation of wet areas</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>L</td>
<td>44%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="6">2. Forestry</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>F1</td>
<td>Implementation of good forestry and agroforestry practices (selective cutting of firewood, assisted natural regeneration, controlled land clearing, etc.)</td>
<td>S</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>88%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>F6</td>
<td>Protection of water courses and water sources</td>
<td></td>
<td>M</td>
<td></td>
<td>69%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>F4</td>
<td>Practice of agroforestry for sustained management of natural resources</td>
<td></td>
<td>M</td>
<td></td>
<td>56%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td>Through:</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>F2</td>
<td>Community and participative management of forest, wildlife and fish resources</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>L</td>
<td>56%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="6">3. Energy</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>N3</td>
<td>Diversification of energy sources (solar, wind, biogas)</td>
<td></td>
<td>M</td>
<td></td>
<td>88%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>N6</td>
<td>Promotion of energy-saving technologies in industry and construction</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>L</td>
<td>63%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="6">4. Environmental education</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Eco1</td>
<td>Development of environmental education in both formal and informal teaching systems</td>
<td></td>
<td>M</td>
<td></td>
<td>63%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="6">5. Food</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>SA10</td>
<td>Improvement of food processing and preservation methods</td>
<td></td>
<td>M</td>
<td></td>
<td>56%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Source: Authors, July 2015.</p>
<p><h4><a id="44__Selected_adaptation_actions_by_concerned_sector_337"></a>4.4. Selected adaptation actions by concerned sector</h4></p>
<p>It is useful to note that the themes given a priority classification by the experts participating in the consultation workshop almost completely match the objectives and actions developed and proposed in the Strategic Investment Framework for Sustainable Land Management (SIF-SFM) (see 4.1).</p>
<p>Table 9 below, based on the scaling model of Sustainable Land Management technologies (CILSS, 2015), summarises the adaptation actions proposed in the INDC for the sectors of agriculture, water management, animal husbandry, biomass energy, forests and land use changes in general (AFOLU).</p>
<p>They incorporate the transversal actions associated in particular with adaptive research within these sectors.</p>
<p>As to table 10, it shows adaptation actions in sectors or areas such as:</p>
<ul>
<li>Housing and urban development.</li>
<li>Health.</li>
<li>Management of extreme climatic events.</li>
</ul>
<p>The basic data serving as the input for the model come from the reviewed relevant documentation that is available or has been provided by the national experts of the competent ministries.</p>
<p>Annex 2 provides details on the adaptation projects proposed for the INDC.</p>
<p>Table 9. Adaptation actions in the AFOLU sectors</p>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Adaptation actions/projects</th>
<th rowspan="2">Corresponding technologies</th>
<th colspan="4">INDC targets</th>
<th rowspan="2">Potential target regions</th>
<th rowspan="2">Total populati on involved (2015)</th>
<th rowspan="2">Tons of CO<sub>2</sub> sequester- ed/saved per year, 2030 horizon</th>
<th colspan="3">Investment cost in US$, taking into consideration an additional 40% for implementation costs (IEC, administration, capacity enhancement, follow-through and evaluation.) (Constant 2015 cost)</th>
<th rowspan="2">ROI for national economy (%)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Unit</th>
<th>2020</th>
<th>2025</th>
<th>2030</th>
<th>2020</th>
<th>2025</th>
<th>2030</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="9">Agriculture and water management sector</td>
<td>385,350,000</td>
<td>770,700,000</td>
<td>1,156,050,000</td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="4">105,000 ha of CES development each year for the restoration or maintenance of crop land fertility</td>
<td>Only zai</td>
<td>Ha cumul</td>
<td>75 000</td>
<td>150,000</td>
<td>225,000</td>
<td>Nord; Centre- Nord; Sahel; north of Boucle du Mouhoun; north of Est</td>
<td>2,250,000</td>
<td>666,000</td>
<td>31,500,000</td>
<td>63,000,000</td>
<td>94,500,000</td>
<td>67</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Zai + stone barriers</td>
<td>Ha cumul</td>
<td>175,000</td>
<td>350,000</td>
<td>525,000</td>
<td>Nord; Centre- Nord; Sahel; north of Boucle du Mouhoun; north of Est</td>
<td>5,250,000</td>
<td>1,554,000</td>
<td>122,500,000</td>
<td>245,000,000</td>
<td>367,500,000</td>
<td>45</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Plant covered stone barriers</td>
<td>Ha cumul</td>
<td>225,000</td>
<td>450,000</td>
<td>675,000</td>
<td>All regions except Cascades</td>
<td>6,750,000</td>
<td>1,998,000</td>
<td>81,900,000</td>
<td>163,800,000</td>
<td>245,700,000</td>
<td>31</td>