Desire for Greener Land

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Human Environment Mixed land per household (ha) 10,000 Implementation activities, inputs and costs Establishment activities Land user: employee (company, government), large scale land users Population density: 100-200 persons/km 2 Annual population growth: > 4% Land ownership: individual, state Land use rights: individual, communal (organised), Water use rights: communal (organised) Relative level of wealth poor, which represents 75 % of land users (rainfed agriculture). 1% of the total area is owned by poor land users 1. Quantification of the area to be afforested 2. Production of plants in nursery ( 500 - 1300 plants) 3. Treatment of area (slope) with: 3.1 Building terraces (15 m / person / day) or 3.2 Making half-moons “Caldeiras” (3 / person / day) 4. Excavating the pits (10 / person / day): 60x60x60 cm 5. Planting (50 /person / day): 5 to 5 metres 6. Initial maintenance (8 /persons / day) Materials: To set out the terraces along the contour requires the following materials: 1. Measuring tape 2. 30 cm wooden stakes 3. Flags 4. Spirit level 5. Square timber beams Maintenance/recurrent activities SLM Technology: Afforestation, Cape Verde DESIRE – WOCAT 2012 Importance of off-farm income: less than 10% of all income: forest production (mainly grass and wood) generate an annual income of approximately $2,500 Access to service and infrastructure: low: employment (e.g. off-farm), market, drinking water and sanitation, financial services; moderate: education, technical assistance, energy, roads & transport Market orientation: Mixed (subsistence and commercial). Forest products are quite limited: lumber, firewood, charcoal and fodder from the pods. Firewood is the most important product but marketing is quite limited in time and space. Technical drawing Treatment of slope before afforestation (Author: Jacques Tavares) Establishment inputs and costs per ha Inputs Costs (US$) % met by land user Labour Equipment & material 28,218 0 - tools - wood Agricultural 410 10 -seeds 942 0 TOTAL 29570 0.1 Maintenance/recurrent inputs and costs per ha per year 1. forest cleaning Inputs Costs (US$) % met by land user Labour 142 52 TOTAL 142 52 Remarks: The labour affects the costs more than other factors. Paid labour is a way to achieve additional income for many people in this area. The employer (Directorate General of Agriculture, Sylviculture and Livestock of the Ministry of Rural Development) provides 90% of the cost of the equipment. The lifetime of the equipment is 10-15 years. Costs are estimated according to the time required for afforestation and the entity contracted for the implementation of the activities. 179
Assessment Impacts of the Technology Production and socio-economic benefits Production and socio-economic disadvantages increased fodder production increased fodder quality increased drinking water availability / quality increased irrigation water availability / quality increased expenses on agricultural inputs increased economic inequity Socio-cultural benefits Socio-cultural disadvantages improved cultural opportunities improved situation of disadvantaged groups socio-cultural conflicts Ecological benefits Ecological disadvantages reduced evaporation increased soil moisture recharge of groundwater / table aquifer reduced wind velocity improved soil cover increased soil organic matter / below ground C reduced emission of carbon and greenhouse gases reduced soil loss increased competition increase of invasive species Off-site benefits Off-site disadvantages increased water availability reduced downstream siltation reduced wind transported sediments reduced downstream flooding Contribution to human well-being/livelihoods it improves air quality, promotes the production of endemic species and its use as medicine Benefits/costs according to land user Increased damage to neighbours’ fields: The forest areas provide genuine refuges for Numida meleagris (Helmeted Guineafowl) and monkeys. We have observed in some fields (in every bioclimatic zone) a decrease in corn yield due to damage generated by guineafowl after sowing, because they open the pits and consuming the seeds before germination. The monkeys also attack the fields and cause serious damage in the mountainous areas Benefits compared with costs short-term: long-term: Establishment negative positive Maintenance/recurrent neutral / balanced very positive The high costs are associated with its implementation; afterwards they are significantly reduced and the technology builds up the benefits Acceptance/adoption: Only the state has implemented this technology, because it changes the use of land and, without any subsidies, other land users are not encouraged to agree to it. There is a moderate (growing) trend towards spontaneous adoption of the technology, as there is a continuing campaign of afforestation of state land. There are voluntary associations working in this technology for a better environment. Concluding statements Strengths and how to sustain/improve Weaknesses and how to overcome Increases the quality of the landscape and reduces the loss of soil by runoff. increasing the tree cover in areas with low coverage Encourages the production of livestock, and fuel wood integrate the community in managing the forest, and manage it in a sustainable way. Production of firewood and grass make more forest operations such as pruning or cutting of new seedlings Protection of soil strengthen maintenance operations Reduces the percentage of land for agricultural production increase productivity in cultivated land and reduce the need for the use of forest land, and implement new production technologies such as greenhouses Impossibility of farming in the forest land off-farm income creation to compensate Lack of involvement of farmers in the management of forest areas capacity building of land users in forest management strategies, elaboration of contracts between State and land users for the management of forest perimeters Key reference(s): OCDE, CILSS, 1982. Análise do Sector Florestal e Propostas para Cabo Verde. Sahel D (82) 179 – Club do Sahel, pp 203. MAAA/DGASP, 1996. Rapport de pays pour la Conférence Technique Internationale de la FAO sur les Ressources Phytogénétiques, Leipzig, 1996, pp 38. Contact person(s): Jacques de Pina Tavares, Instituto Nacional de Investigação e Desenvolvimento Agrário (INIDA), Cape Verde (jacques.tavares@gmail.com) 180 DESIRE – WOCAT Desire for Greener Land
Page 1 and 2:
Desire for Greener Land Options for
Page 3 and 4:
DESIRE - WOCAT Desire for Greener L
Page 5 and 6:
Co-published by University of Bern,
Page 7 and 8:
Cross-slope barriers Progressive be
Page 9 and 10:
The present DESIRE publication desc
Page 11 and 12:
Contributing authors and DESIRE con
Page 13 and 14:
Desire for Greener Land - Options f
Page 15 and 16:
XIV DESIRE - WOCAT Desire for Green
Page 17 and 18:
Figure 1: Desertification vulnerabi
Page 19 and 20:
In DESIRE, WOCAT methods and tools
Page 21 and 22:
Part 1
Page 23 and 24:
8 DESIRE - WOCAT Desire for Greener
Page 25 and 26:
Figure 1: Methodological framework
Page 27 and 28:
to Russia and China (see Table 1).
Page 29 and 30:
DRI = 5.4 Very high desertification
Page 31 and 32:
Table 2 provides a more detailed de
Page 33 and 34:
decision. This leads to solutions b
Page 35 and 36:
Aims and objectives This penultimat
Page 37 and 38:
Figure 7: The DESIRE Project has fo
Page 39 and 40:
References: n EEA-European Environm
Page 41 and 42:
Area (x1000 Ha) Major land use type
Page 43 and 44:
Major land degradation types per st
Page 45 and 46:
Rate of degradation per study site
Page 47 and 48:
Production services were affected o
Page 49 and 50:
% of area under conservation measur
Page 51 and 52:
Figure 16: Effectiveness of conserv
Page 53 and 54:
Conservation impact on ecosystem se
Page 55 and 56:
Analysis of SLM technologies Introd
Page 57 and 58:
Table 2: WOCAT categories of SLM me
Page 59 and 60:
Origin of technology SLM technologi
Page 61 and 62:
Table 3: Sensitivity of and toleran
Page 63 and 64:
No. of case studies Land Ownership
Page 65 and 66:
No. of case studies Increased farm
Page 67 and 68:
No. of case studies Improved harves
Page 69 and 70:
No. of case studies Increased plant
Page 71 and 72:
No. of case studies No. of case stu
Page 73 and 74:
Analysis of SLM approaches Introduc
Page 75 and 76:
system is focused on control rather
Page 77 and 78:
References: n Alkemade, J. R. M., v
Page 79 and 80:
actually implemented in the field.
Page 81 and 82:
Concerning SLM, the most widely app
Page 83 and 84:
Part 2 DESIRE - WOCAT Desire for Gr
Page 85 and 86:
Desire for Greener Land Mexico Land
Page 87 and 88:
2.1 SLM case studies Case studies -
Page 89 and 90:
Case studies - titles and short des
Page 91 and 92:
76 DESIRE - WOCAT Desire for Greene
Page 93 and 94:
Classification Land use problems: T
Page 95 and 96:
Assessment Impacts of the Technolog
Page 97 and 98:
Class sification Land d use problem
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Class sification Land use problemss
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Classification Land use problems: I
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Classification Land use problems: D
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Classification Land use problems: I
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Classification Land use problems: L
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Classification Land use problems: s
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Class sification Land use problemss
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Classification Land use problems: R
Page 143 and 144: Assessment Impacts of the Technolog
Page 145 and 146: Classification Land use problems: T
Page 149 and 150: Classification Land use problems: S
Page 153 and 154: Classification Land use problems: W
Page 157 and 158: Classification Land use problems: O
Page 165 and 166: Class sification Land use problemss
Page 169 and 170: Classification Land use problems: I
Page 173 and 174: Classification Land use problems: L
Page 181 and 182: Classification Land use problems: D
Page 185 and 186: Classification Land use problems: l
Page 193: Classification Land use problems: S
Page 213 and 214: Problem, objectives and constraints
Page 215 and 216: Impacts of the Approach Improved su
Page 223 and 224: Input: - Equipment (machinery, tool
Page 233 and 234: Problems, objectives, and constrain
Page 245 and 246:
Desire for Greener Land Opopejo Qui
Page 247 and 248:
2.2 Mapping case studies This secti
Page 249 and 250:
Land recommendation Land conservati
Page 251 and 252:
Portugal - Maçao The Maçao area h
Page 253 and 254:
Italy - Rendina The Rendina area ex
Page 255 and 256:
Greece - Nestos This area has chemi
Page 257 and 258:
Turkey - Eskişehir The Eskeheşir
Page 259 and 260:
Tunisia - Koutine The Koutine area
Page 261 and 262:
Russia - Novy Land use in the Novy
Page 263 and 264:
Botswana - Boteti The main land use
Page 265 and 266:
Chile - Cauquenes The Cauquenes are
Page 267 and 268:
252 DESIRE - WOCAT Desire for Green
Page 269 and 270:
Status of land degradation, sustain
Page 271 and 272:
Examples of potential SLM technolog
Page 273 and 274:
IV Up-scaling SLM strategies Actual
Page 275 and 276:
Case study of the DESIRE methodolog
Page 277 and 278:
II Identifying, evaluating and sele
Page 279 and 280:
The results showed that the best op
Page 281 and 282:
IV Up-scaling SLM strategies Some r
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Explanation pages of case studies:
Page 287 and 288:
Cropland (or grazing land, mixed la
Page 289 and 290:
Explanation pages of case studies:
Page 291 and 292:
Here appears an organogram - if ava
Page 293 and 294:
Pictograms SLM technology Land use
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Logos of partners 282 DESIRE - WOCA
show all

Desire for Greener Land

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?