Desire for Greener Land

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Human Environment Mixed land per household (ha) 10,000 Land user: individual privileged large scale land users Population density: < 10 persons/km 2 Annual population growth: 2% - 3% Land ownership: communal / village Land use rights: open access (unorganised) (The SLM can be used by anybody - not specified to any group. Dual grazing rights are a problem because private ranchers can also use the commons). Water use rights: communal (organised) (The SLM can be used by anybody - not specified to any group). Relative level of wealth: very rich, which represent 10% of land users; 50% of the total land area is owned by very rich land users Implementation activities, inputs and costs Establishment activities 1. Construction Maintenance/recurrent activities 1. Filling up with cow dung and water SLM Technology: Biogas, Botswana DESIRE – WOCAT 2012 Importance of off-farm income: less than 10% of all income: Saves money for buying commercial gas and electric power. Helps conserve the forests. Limited offfarm income opportunities for everyone including nonadopters of the technology. Access to service and infrastructure: low: technical assistance, employment, market, energy, financial services; moderate: health, education, roads & transport, drinking water and sanitation Market orientation: mixed (subsistence and commercial) Technical drawing The diagram shows the technical layout of a biogas plant; showing the position of the main components: Digester, Gas holder, Mixing pit, and outlet. Cow dung & or kitchen waste (except bones) is mixed with water to form a sludge. This sludge is fed into the digester pit where decomposition and fermentation takes place. As the sludge ferments, methane gas is produced. Methane is a combustible gas and can therefore be used for cooking and lighting. Specially designed gas stoves and lanterns may be required as the gas would not be purified and hence ‚thicker‘ than commercially produced gasses. However, the design can include a water filled pipe bend (u shaped) between the gas holder and outlet pipe. The water in this pipe would help to purify the gas before it is fed to the household appliances. The gas holder tank floats in water, through which the gas bubbles escape and methane gas collects into the floating tank. An outlet through which decomposed material leaves the plant is necessary. Old sludge would float and be removed through this opening (Diagram drawn by G. Koorutwe, Department of Environmental Science, University of Botswana). Establishment inputs and costs per unit Inputs Costs (US$) % met by land user Labour 198 100 Equipment - tank - bricks - cement - plumbing material Construction material - earth 615 77 123 154 100 100 100 100 31 100 TOTAL 1198 100 Maintenance/recurrent inputs and costs per unit per year Inputs Construction material Costs (US$) % met by land user - cow dung 33 100 TOTAL 33 100 Remarks: Material, labour and equipment used in construction are the most determining factors affecting the costs (installation cost is US$ 1198). Costs were calculated for labour and material based on the real cost of construction at the Mopipi Site. The local wage rate is 1 US$/day. Each biogas unit is beneficial to one household, so it serves on average 6 persons. 195
Assessment Impacts of the Technology Production and socio-economic benefits Production and socio-economic disadvantages decreased workload energy generation (eg hydro, bio) decreased labour constraints reduced crop production (removal of dung) Socio-cultural benefits Socio-cultural disadvantages improved conservation / erosion knowledge improved situation of disadvantaged groups increased expenses on agricultural inputs (fertilizer) where taboos exist for women harvesting dung from kraals (livestock enclosure); this could constrain adoption socio-cultural conflicts, in case of no own cattle unpleasant smell around the village Ecological benefits Ecological disadvantages increased plant diversity (only specific species collected) improved soil cover (more trees) increased biomass / above ground C (more trees) reduced concentration of nutrients (dung) Off-site benefits Off-site disadvantages improved buffering / filtering capacity reduced wind transported sediments increased water availability reduced damage on neighbours fields increased stream flow in dry season Contribution to human well-being/livelihoods decreased soil organic matter (reduced animal manure) Provides cheaper and alternative source of energy. Reduces workload for fuel wood collection for women and the girl child. Benefits/costs according to land user Benefits compared with costs short-term: long-term: Establishment negative positive Maintenance/recurrent positive positive Very costly to set up, if no government aid. It is however very good for long term water provision. Acceptance/adoption: 1% of land users (10 families) have implemented the technology with external material support. A very insignificant number of individual farmers have used this technology. The technology has mostly been used where the research institution has installed in farmers' properties. Only in very few instances around the country have individuals installed it for themselves. There is little trend towards (growing) spontaneous adoption of the technology. There seems to be very little marketing of biogas in the country. Concluding statements Strengths and how to sustain/improve Weaknesses and how to overcome Low maintenance and inputs are required for this technology There is need for promotion of the technology The structures to be put in place are very basic There is need for the government to subsidize farmers in installing biogas plants, especially in the rural areas. Good for rural households where firewood is used extensively. Improve income of rural families so that they could afford the technology Problems of diminishing firewood species are reduced. Because it is not every or all species that is used for firewood, the targeted species are quickly diminished Cost of getting firewood is reduced Distance to wood collection places are ever increasing hence users have to buy from truck or donkey cart owners More time is freed This especially applies to children (of school going age) in that they would have more time for their home works. Too expensive for poor farmers to adopt without assistance Donor/government subsidies Key reference(s): Brown, V. J., 2006. BIOGAS: A Bright Idea for Africa. Environ Health Perspectives. 114(5), pp. A300–A303. Contact person(s): Sebego Reuben, University of Botswana, SEBEGORJ@mopipi.ub.bw 196 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:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Classification Land use problems: S
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Classification Land use problems: W
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Classification Land use problems: O
Page 159 and 160: Assessment Impacts of the Technolog
Page 161 and 162: Classification Land use problems: T
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 and 194: Classification Land use problems: S
Page 197 and 198: Classification Land use problems: O
Page 209: Classification Land use problems: O
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?