Desire for Greener Land

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Monitoring and Evaluation Monitored aspects: Taken from QA 3.1.1.1 with aspects that had been monitored under the approach, including methods and indicators. Impacts of the Approach Improved sustainable land management: Yes, moderate. Awareness and motivation to apply SLM amongst land users has increased due to the approach. Adoption by other land users / projects: Yes, many. RDPs are developed Impacts for all of regions the in approach Spain, and need approval from national government and from the EU. Improved livelihoods / human well-being: Yes, little. Because of the approach the economic situation of farmers is slightly improved. Improved situation of disadvantaged groups: Yes, moderate. Because of the approach the economic situation of farmers in marginal areas is slightly improved. Poverty alleviation: Yes, little. Because of the approach the economic situation of farmers in marginal areas is slightly improved. Training, advisory service and research: Training effectiveness (There is strong lack of training of land users.) Land users - poor SLM specialists - fair Agricultural advisor / trainers - good Advisory service effectiveness Land users - poor Politicians / decision makers - fair Land/water use rights: None hindered the implementation of the approach Long-term impact of subsidies: Positive (moderate) long-term impact. The subsidies are there during the period of the RDP. In a new phase of a RDP a subsidy may disappear or change considerably. This introduces a level of uncertainty for QAfarmers 3.2.3.2 to make long-term investments. Main motivation of land users to implement: Rules and regulations (fines) / enforcement Payments / subsidies Environmental consciousness, moral, health SLM Sustainability of activities: QA 3.3.1.1 It is uncertain whether the land users will be able to sustain the approach activities. Concluding statements Annex DESIRE – WOCAT 2012 Strengths and how to sustain/improve Weaknesses and how to overcome Concluding statements The approach is an effort to provide an integrated way of how There is a lack of land user participation in the design, implementation SLM can be achieved. Therefore, no separate Themeasures answersbut toa QA 3.3.2 and training and QA of the 3.3.3 approach Organise stakeholder meetings, complete SLM plan at the farm level Include more SLM information sessions and trainings for land users. measures in the approach. summarise the approach’s strong and There is a lack of transparency in communication weak points and how these could be Farmers’ All implementation and maintenance costs as well as loss of organizations and regional extension services should have a more productivity are subsidised There should sustained/improved be enough funding active or overcome. role to coordinate The activities and communication for all farmers willing to apply the measures, and there should be questions were divided into two: the continuity between new versions of the RDPs. There is a lack of organization amongst land users Farmers’ author’s opinion andorganizations the land users’ and regional extension services should have a more active role in co-ordinating activities and communication. viewpoints. The answers (which often coincided and were seldom contradictory) have been combined in this table. Key reference(s): CARM 2008. Programa de Desarrollo Rural de la Región de Murcia 2007-2013 Tomo I. 508pp, http://www.carm.es/neweb2/servlet/integra.servlets.ControlPublico?IDCONTENIDO=4689&IDTIPO=100&RASTRO=c431$m1219 Contact person : Joris de Vente, EEZA-CSIC, Joris@sustainable-ecosystems.org Improved sustainable land management: A very brief assessment and grading of what improvements to SLM, if any, were adopted by land users as a result of the approach. Taken from QA 3.2.1.1. Adoption of the approach by other projects/land users: Taken from question QA 3.2.2.1: whether the approach had spread to other projects or been institutionalised. Research contributing to the approach's Improved livelihoods effectiveness / human well-being: Taken from question - Moderately QA 3.2.2.2 Advice from various research institutes was Improvement situation used to design of disadvantaged the RDP and technologies. groups: Taken from question QA 3.2.2.3 Poverty alleviation: Taken from question QA 3.2.2.4 Training, advisory and research: Taken from question QA 3.2.3.1; Land/water use rights: Taken from question QA 3.2.4.1 Long-term impact of subsidies: Taken from question QA 3.2.5.1 Main motivation of land users to implement: Taken from question SLM Sustainability of activities: Taken from question QA 3.3.1.2 Key reference(s) References to literature are specified here: not just taken from the questionnaire annex A1, but in some cases added to by the editors. Many approaches have not been documented before. Contact person(s) The name and contacts of the author(s) so that specific interests/ question from readers can be followed up, taken from annex A1. 277
Pictograms SLM technology Land use types Annual cropping: land under temporary/ annual crops usually harvested within one, maximally within two years (eg maize, rice, wheat, vegetables) Perennial (non-woody) cropping: land under permanent (not woody) crops that may be harvested after 2 or more years, or only part of the plants are harvested (eg sugar cane, banana, sisal, pineapple) Tree and shrub cropping: permanent woody plants with crops harvested more than once after planting and usually lasting for more than 5 years (eg coffee, tea, grapevines, oil palm, cacao, coconut, fodder trees, fruit trees) Extensive grazing land: grazing on natural or semi-natural grasslands, grasslands with trees/ shrubs (savannah vegetation) or open woodlands for livestock and wildlife Intensive grazing land: grass production on improved or planted pastures, including cutting for fodder materials (for livestock production) Natural forests: forests composed of indigenous trees, not planted by man Plantations, afforestations: forest stands established by planting or/and seeding in the process of afforestation or reforestation Agroforestry: crops and trees (mixed) Agropastoral: cropland and grazing land (mixed) Agrosilvopastoral: cropland, grazing land and forest (mixed) Silvopastoral: forest and grazing land (mixed) Mines and extractive industries Settlements, infrastructure networks: roads, railways, pipe lines, power lines Climate Degradation Wastelands, deserts, glaciers, swamps, etc Arid: length of growing period (LGP) 0–74 days Semi-arid: LGP 75–179 days Subhumid: LGP 180–269 days Humid: LGP >270 days The length of growing period (LGP) is defined as the period when precipitation exceeds 50% of the potential evapotranspiration and the temperature is higher than 6.5° C. Water erosion: loss of topsoil by water; gully erosion; mass movements; riverbank erosion / coastal erosion; offsite effects: deposition of sediments, downstream flooding, siltation of reservoirs and waterways, etc Wind erosion: loss of topsoil by wind; deflation and deposition; offsite effects of wind erosion: Covering of the terrain with windborne sand particles from distant sources (‘overblowing’) Chemical deterioration: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content; acidification; lowering of the soil pH; soil pollution; salinisation/alkalinisation Physical deterioration: soil compaction; sealing and crusting; waterlogging; subsidence of organic soils; loss of bio-productive function due to other activities (eg construction, mining) Water degradation: aridification/soil moisture problem; water quality decline (pollution of water bodies by chemicals and eroded sediments); water quantity decline (groundwater, surface water). Vegetation degradation: reduction of vegetation cover; quality and species composition decline; quantity decline (loss of vegetative production) 278 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:
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:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242: Problem, objectives and constraints
Page 243 and 244: Impacts of the Approach Improved su
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 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: Here appears an organogram - if ava
Page 297 and 298: Logos of partners 282 DESIRE - WOCA
show all

Desire for Greener Land

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?