"The issue of climate adaptation received far less attention than climate mitigation"

Edna J. Molina Bacca has been working at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) since 2019. She studied Chemical Engineering at the National University of Colombia and the University of Calgary (Canada) and holds a PhD in Agricultural Sciences from Humboldt University of Berlin.

You work on adaptive capacity in agriculture in the context of socio-economic and climate change. Why do you think climate change is such a critical issue for agriculture? 

Unlike other sectors, agriculture operates in a dual reality: the food system accounts for between a quarter and a third of global emissions, yet it is highly threatened by climate change. Although farming is constantly adapting, climate change-driven intensifying rainfall patterns, shifting seasons, or extreme weather could force changes at an unprecedented pace. Given that agriculture forms the economic backbone of rural areas, especially in Low- and Middle-Income countries, when predictable environmental conditions abruptly change, and adaptive capacity is limited, the consequences threaten not only yields but also the livelihoods of the most vulnerable.

In your research, you use models to analyse future land-use and climate scenarios. Which developments currently concern you the most, particularly regarding food systems? 

From a modelling perspective, three interconnected dimensions concern me most. First, the long-term, cascading effects of compound climate shocks (such as concurrent heatwaves and droughts during growing seasons) and our current limitations in accurately capturing these complexities. This feeds directly into my second concern: growing long-term uncertainty. As emissions rise, so does the uncertainty in impacts and responses, meaning we must prepare to adapt to a wider range of potential futures if emissions are not cut. Finally, local and global land competition could be intensified by land-based mitigation strategies, so I am concerned with the need to further integrate adaptation, adaptive capacity, and sustainable resource management into integrated assessment modelling for future scenario assessments, especially alongside mitigation, to better estimate potential trade-offs.

Why do you focus mainly on climate adaptation? 

Soon after starting at PIK, I noticed that adaptation received far less attention from the global assessment community. With mitigation lagging and farmers already feeling the heat (pun intended), exploring adaptive capacity felt imperative.

The PIK is known for its interdisciplinary approach and for developing transformation pathways. Where do you currently see the most promising solutions for making agriculture more climate-resilient?

Resilience requires a deeply systemic approach. Promising solutions span several areas: building capacity through rural infrastructure, education, training, and technology; strengthening national and local governance that supports community-based resource management and decision-making; protecting natural resources; and securing tailored financial options for farmers. Additionally, optimising global trade and storage can help buffer unexpected regional shocks. Finally, we cannot ignore the demand side: shifting toward healthier, planet-focused diets (such as the EAT-Lancet recommendations) is essential for reducing pressure and supporting healthy ecosystems.

Much of your research provides an important foundation for policy and practice. In your view, what is still missing to ensure that these scientific insights are more widely and rapidly implemented in agriculture?

This connects deeply to the previous question. While we understand what a resilient system requires across dimensions, a critical barrier lies in the conflict between timescales. Politicians operate on short-term electoral cycles, whereas global assessments focus on mid- to late-century horizons, while practitioners must navigate the medium-term space between them. Consequently, the urgent constantly precedes the important. From my perspective, bridging this gap to ensure wider implementation requires the co-development of science, policy, and practice among key stakeholders, as well as robust institutional and financial frameworks that support these collaborative actions.

Interview: Lin Bautze-Boeke, FiBL