Desire for Greener Land

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Classification Land use problems: There is a lack of water for irrigation of crops limiting the crop types that can be planted as well as the crop yield of dryland farming. A lack of water availability seriously limits the production potential of the soil and results in a low vegetation/crop cover. The relatively high soil erosion rates cause various off-site related problems (i.e. flooding, reservoir siltation) and on-site problems (i.e. gully formation and reduced soil depth). Land use Climate Degradation Conservation measure annual cropping (rainfed) Stage of intervention: from QT 2.2.2.3 Land use problems: This brief description of the major land use problems – without SWC – in the area is derived from the specialists’ and the land users opinions combined, both of which questions fall under QT 2.2.1 Stage of intervention Prevention Mitigation / Reduction Rehabilitation Soil depth (cm) 0-20 20-50 50-80 80-120 >120 semi-arid, subtropics Origin Land user's initiative: 4000 3000-4000 2500-3000 2000-2500 1500-2000 1000-1500 500-1000 100-500 3%) / medium (1–3%) / low (
Cropland (or grazing land, mixed land, forest land) per household* Table (size of land per household in hectares): ranked (very important/ most common): (important): (less important); dependent on what form of land use where the SWC is implemented: whether QT 2.8.8 (cropland); 2.8.9 (grazing land); 2.8.10 (forest/ woodland) *Note: title of this box will change depending on land use Human Environment Cropland per household (ha) 10,000 Land user: Individual and common small scale land users, mainly men Population density: 10-50 persons/km 2 Annual population growth: < 0.5% Land ownership: individual, titled Land use rights: individual (all cropland is privately owned) Water use rights: individual. Water use is organised by permits to water extraction from aquifers on an individual basis. Water rights are provided and controlled by the water authority of the Segura river basin. Relative level of wealth: average, which represents 80% of land users; 75% of the total land area is owned by average land users Importance of off-farm income: > 50% of all income: There is no difference in the ones who apply the 10–50% / >50% of all income technology and those who do not. Most farmers do have an off-farm income for example from hunting, work in a factory or office. Access to that service income and infrastructure: moderate: employment, energy; high: education, technical assistance, market, roads & transport, drinking water and sanitation, financial services Market orientation: QT 2.8.10.1/QT commercial 2.8.11.1 / market Mechanization: mechanised Livestock grazing on cropland: yes Technical drawing: Top: Photo of the disc-plough used for superficial ploughing (~20cm depth) where there is a large amount of crop residue and/or perennial vegetation. Bottom: Chisel-plough (Photos: Joris de Vente) Here a technical drawing of the technology (if available): originally from QT 2.4.1, but usually redrawn for consistency Implementation activities, inputs and costs Initial investment Establishment inputs and costs per unit 1. Disc-plough Inputs Equipment Costs (US$) % met by land user - tools 794 100 TOTAL 794 100 Establishment activities The establishment activities for the SLM measures (whether agronomic, vegetative, structural and/ or management) are described here in sequence: 1. / 2./ 3./ 4.; etc. Information is added on source of energy, equipment used, timing of operations etc. Taken from the questions: QT 2.5.1.2; QT 2.5.2.2; QT 2.5.3.2; QT 2.5.4.2. The duration of the establishment phase is given (usually either within one year – or a number of years) Land user: from QT 2.8.1 Population density: from QT 2.8.2 Annual population grow: from QT 2.8.3 Land ownership: state / company / communal/village / group / individual – not titled / individual – titled; QT 2.8.4 Land-/water use rights: open access (unorganised) / communal (organised) / leased / individual; QT 2.8.4 Relative level of wealth: from QT 2.8.5 Importance of off-farm income: from QT 2.8.6:
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:
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:
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:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Classification Land use problems: L
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Classification Land use problems: D
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Classification Land use problems: l
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Classification Land use problems: S
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Problem, objectives and constraints
Page 215 and 216:
Impacts of the Approach Improved su
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Input: - Equipment (machinery, tool
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Problems, objectives, and constrain
Page 235 and 236: Impacts of the Approach Improved su
Page 237 and 238: Problem, objectives and constraints
Page 241 and 242: Problem, objectives and constraints
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 285: Explanation pages of case studies:
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 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?