Desire for Greener Land
Desire for Greener Land
Desire for Greener Land
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Assessment<br />
Impacts of the Technology<br />
Production and socio-economic benefits Production and socio-economic disadvantages<br />
increased crop yield<br />
increased farm income<br />
decreased workload<br />
increased expenses on agricultural inputs<br />
Socio-cultural benefits Socio-cultural disadvantages<br />
improved conservation / erosion knowledge<br />
Ecological benefits Ecological disadvantages<br />
reduced soil loss<br />
reduced surface runoff<br />
improved soil cover<br />
improved harvesting / collection of water<br />
increased soil moisture<br />
increased nutrient cycling recharge<br />
reduced emission of carbon and greenhouse gases<br />
reduced soil crusting / sealing and compaction<br />
Off-site benefits Off-site disadvantages<br />
reduced damage on neighbours fields<br />
reduced downstream flooding<br />
reduced downstream siltation<br />
reduced wind transported sediments<br />
reduced damage on public / private infrastructure<br />
Contribution to human well-being/livelihoods<br />
Farm income may increase with up to12%. There is no known effect on education, health etc. The subsidies applied <strong>for</strong> cereal<br />
production in a rotation system of fallow & <strong>for</strong> contour ploughing contribute to improved livelihood of most farmers.<br />
Benefits/costs according to land user<br />
Benefits compared with costs short-term: long-term:<br />
Establishment slightly negative slightly positive<br />
Maintenance/recurrent slightly positive slightly positive<br />
When a disc-plough was not already used in normal farming operations, this implies a slightly negative influence on farm income during<br />
establishment.<br />
Acceptance/adoption:<br />
There are no subsidies <strong>for</strong> reduced tillage. Nevertheless, 100% of land user families have implemented the technology with external<br />
material support since there are subsidies <strong>for</strong> parts of the technology such as contour ploughing and rotational farming allowing a fallow<br />
period (1-2 years) after harvest. Practically 100 % of farmers use these subsidies; still reduced tillage is implemented 100% voluntary.<br />
There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the technology. There seems to be a growing public awareness of the fact that<br />
frequent deep rotational ploughing is not always necessary and results in higher production costs.<br />
Concluding statements<br />
Strengths and how to sustain/improve Weaknesses and how to overcome<br />
This is a low-cost technology that requires limited initial investments in<br />
equipment and potentially results in a slightly increased farm income,<br />
as well as a decrease in land degradation and an increase in soil<br />
quality and water-holding capacity In some higher areas with<br />
sufficient rainfall, the technology might be adapted to conservation<br />
tillage with direct sowing, reducing the tillage operations even more.<br />
However, this implies an important investment in machinery and a high<br />
level of organisation at the agricultural cooperation level.<br />
An increased soil surface cover throughout autumn and winter<br />
provides a good protection against soil erosion reducing rill and gully<br />
<strong>for</strong>mation Sometimes a field is left fallow <strong>for</strong> two consecutive years,<br />
but it is still ploughed between them. This ploughing might be avoided<br />
as well.<br />
The most important weakness of this technology is that it does<br />
not significantly improve farm income and so may not be<br />
stimulating enough <strong>for</strong> farmers to apply Provide in<strong>for</strong>mation<br />
on all the advantages of good soil management that include<br />
many costs <strong>for</strong> society (including floods, reservoir siltation, etc.)<br />
and stress the fact that reduced tillage will lead to less work <strong>for</strong><br />
the same or slightly higher profit.<br />
In order to apply <strong>for</strong> subsidies <strong>for</strong> cereal cultivation in a rotation<br />
system with fallow, farmers are obliged to plough after each<br />
fallow period to control weeds, even when two consecutive<br />
years of fallow are applied. This is considered unnecessary It<br />
might be worthwhile to test the need <strong>for</strong> this and look <strong>for</strong><br />
alternatives without ploughing.<br />
Key reference(s): López-Fando, C., Dorado, J. and Pardo, M.T., 2007. Effects of zone-tillage in rotation with no-tillage on soil properties and crop yields in a semiarid<br />
soil from central Spain. Soil and Tillage Research, 95(1-2): 266-276; Ozpinar, S., 2006. Effects of tillage systems on weed population and economics <strong>for</strong> winter<br />
wheat production under the Mediterranean dryland conditions. Soil and Tillage Research, 87(1): 1-8; Holland, J.M., 2004. The environmental consequences of<br />
adopting conservation tillage in Europe: reviewing the evidence. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 103(1): 1-25<br />
Contact person(s): Joris de Vente, EEZA-CSIC, Spain, Joris@sustainable-ecosystems.org<br />
88 DESIRE – WOCAT <strong>Desire</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>Greener</strong> <strong>Land</strong>
Change language