Desire for Greener Land
Desire for Greener Land
Desire for Greener Land
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Assessment<br />
Impacts of the Technology<br />
Production and socio-economic benefits Production and socio-economic disadvantages<br />
increased fodder production<br />
increased fodder quality<br />
hindered farm operations<br />
the free displacement of flocks is blocked<br />
loss of land<br />
increased labour constraints<br />
Socio-cultural benefits Socio-cultural disadvantages<br />
improved conservation / erosion knowledge<br />
national <strong>for</strong>est institution strengthening by better regulation<br />
(in the long term)<br />
improved situation of disadvantaged groups<br />
Ecological benefits Ecological disadvantages<br />
improved soil cover<br />
increased biomass above ground C<br />
increased soil moisture<br />
increased plant diversity<br />
reduced soil compaction<br />
Off-site benefits Off-site disadvantages<br />
widely)<br />
reduced downstream flooding (if implemented more widely)<br />
reduced damage on neighbours fields (if implemented more<br />
reduced downstream siltation (if implemented more widely)<br />
Contribution to human well-being/livelihoods<br />
The implementation of Atriplex planting and fencing have an effect in the long-term while in the short-term, the effects are still<br />
not apparent<br />
Benefits/costs according to land user<br />
The outputs could be really positive after at least 7 years<br />
Acceptance/adoption:<br />
Benefits compared with costs short-term: long-term:<br />
Establishment slightly negative positive<br />
Maintenance/recurrent neutral / balanced positive<br />
Only one family has implemented the technology with incentives within this framework of experimentation. No trend in adaptation yet.<br />
Concluding statements<br />
Strengths and how to sustain/improve Weaknesses and how to overcome<br />
Rehabilitation of degraded land engagement of the<br />
government in subsidizing part of the inputs and in creating<br />
awareness among the people to maintain the technology<br />
Change in land cover by vegetation temporary fencing when<br />
necessary<br />
Change in hydrological behaviour of the surface and improved<br />
water balance on- and off-site maintain vegetation cover<br />
Improvement of the fodder quality and quantity temporary<br />
fencing when necessary, enrichment of herbs by controlling the<br />
grazing period and number of animals<br />
Less loss of land (due to gullies) and reduced risk of erosion<br />
expand technology and maintain vegetation cover, planting of<br />
other shrubs, such as Cactus opuntia to control gully incision<br />
Availability of fodder when the plots are opened to grazing <br />
temporary fencing when necessary<br />
High costs of implementation government to subsidize part of the<br />
inputs<br />
Non-grazing due to fences during a 2 year period rotation between<br />
grazing plots<br />
Key reference(s): Laouina A., Aderghal M., Al Karkouri J., Chaker M., Machmachi I., Machouri N., Sfa M. (2010) : Utilisation des sols, ruissellement et<br />
dégradation des terres, le cas du secteur Sehoul, région atlantique, Maroc. Sécheresse, 21, 4, 309-316.<br />
Contact person(s): Abdellah Laouina, Chaire Unesco-GN, Faculté des Lettres et des Sciences Humaines, Rabat, Morocco; laouina.abdellah@gmail.com<br />
168 DESIRE – WOCAT <strong>Desire</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>Greener</strong> <strong>Land</strong>