26.03.2013 Views

Desire for Greener Land

Desire for Greener Land

Desire for Greener Land

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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 />

reduced risk of production failure<br />

increased farm income<br />

increased labour constraints<br />

Socio-cultural benefits Socio-cultural disadvantages<br />

improved conservation / erosion knowledge<br />

Ecological benefits Ecological disadvantages<br />

reduced hazard towards adverse events<br />

improved soil cover<br />

increased biomass above ground C<br />

reduced soil loss<br />

Off-site benefits Off-site disadvantages<br />

reduced damage on public / private infrastructure<br />

reduced downstream flooding<br />

reduced downstream siltation<br />

Contribution to human well-being/livelihoods<br />

The technology can contribute to education of young farmers.<br />

Benefits/costs according to land user<br />

risk of overgrazing in the woodland if grazing is not well<br />

controlled<br />

Benefits compared with costs short-term: long-term:<br />

Establishment slightly positive positive<br />

Maintenance/recurrent positive positive<br />

It is very cheap to maintain the measure. In the surrounding areas, where land should be less degraded due to reduced grazing, more<br />

trees can be planted and allowed to grow in future.<br />

Acceptance/adoption:<br />

50% of land user families have implemented the technology with external material support.<br />

50% of land user families have implemented the technology voluntarily.<br />

There is no trend towards any increase in spontaneous adoption of the technology.<br />

Concluding statements<br />

Strengths and how to sustain/improve Weaknesses and how to overcome<br />

Good impact with low cost facilitate access to public <strong>for</strong>est land<br />

Good animal production the general quality of the products of the<br />

grazing (milk, beef and cheese) is improved due to the availability<br />

of more grass and water in the driest periods of the year.<br />

Limited wooded areas are available <strong>for</strong> public access creation of<br />

managed enclosures in order to increase natural re<strong>for</strong>estation or<br />

af<strong>for</strong>estation.<br />

Rights of access to public lands and <strong>for</strong>est management rules <br />

the regional legislative process should define better the<br />

management of the access of farmers to public lands and in<br />

general the whole controlled grazing process.<br />

Risk of overgrazing of the woodland area, if the area is not well<br />

controlled ensure control mechanisms<br />

Key reference(s): Official Bulletin of the Basilicata region (Italy): N. 29 – 29/04/2002; N. 22 – 16/06/2008.<br />

Cocca C. & Campanile G. (2005). Pascolo in bosco solo se controllato. Agrifoglio, N. 7, pages 20-21.<br />

Contact person(s): Lorenzo Borselli, Instituto de Geologia / Fac. De Ingegneria, Universitad Autonoma de San Luis Potosì (UASLP), Mexico. borselli@gmail.com<br />

176 DESIRE – WOCAT <strong>Desire</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>Greener</strong> <strong>Land</strong>

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!