Desire for Greener Land

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1.3 Analysis of assessed SLM technologies and approaches across DESIRE sites Compilation of case studies In this chapter, the selection of SLM strategies presented in Part II will be analysed and evaluated. The compilation of these case studies, consisting of 30 technologies and 8 approaches, was based on various criteria. Essentially, the selection comprises of what was identified and documented through the participative procedure described in chapter 1.1 (step II). Most of these SLM technologies were also trialled in step III and their documentation was updated based on the monitoring of this experience. Some new technologies were documented only after the field trials carried out as part of the DESIRE project. It is important to note that in principle WOCAT is documenting only real field experience, which is why the technologies and approaches are presented in a case study format. The selection of cases is based on the completeness of the description and their relevance in the Table 1: SLM technology groups DESIRE process. A primary aim of the project was to achieve a wide variety of SLM strategies, study sites, land use types, degradation types, etc. and yet still keep a manageable number of cases in order to achieve a high quality output. The information compiled through the WOCAT questionnaires was put into an attractive four-page summary format. All documentation was reviewed and quality assured through an interactive process with the authors from the study sites. To support the following discussion of the analysis, the DESIRE project experiences as well as the overall WOCAT database have been used, but the figures are based on the DESIRE case studies only. It is important to note that the case studies analysed do not represent a ‘random sample’ from which statistical significance can be drawn. What the analysis does provide is an insight into common denominators of what are, in most cases, successful examples. SLM group Country SLM technology name WOCAT code Cropping management Chile No tillage preceded by subsoiling CHL01 Greece Olive groves under no tillage GRE01 Spain Reduced contour tillage of cereals SPA01 Spain Reduced tillage of almonds and olives SPA06 Chile Crop rotation with legumes CHL02 Morocco Crop rotation: cereals / fodder legumes (lupin) MOR12 Spain Ecological production of almonds and olives using green manure SPA05 Turkey Fodder crop production TUR04 Water management Tunisia Jessour TUN09 Tunisia Tabia TUN12 Spain Water harvesting from concentrated runoff for irrigation purposes SPA04 Greece Transport of freshwater from local streams GRE05 Tunisia Recharge well TUN14 Turkey Drip irrigation TUR03 Russia Drip irrigation RUS01 Botswana Roof rainwater harvesting system BOT04 Cross-slope barriers China Progressive bench terrace CHN53 Turkey Woven wood fences TUR05 Spain Vegetated earth-banked terraces SPA02 Morocco Olive tree plantations with intercropping MOR14 Cape Verde Aloe Vera living barriers CPV06 Mexico Land reclamation by agave forestry with native species MEX02 Morocco Gully control by plantation of Atriplex MOR15 Grazing land management Tunisia Rangeland resting TUN11 Italy Controlled grazing in deciduous woods ITA01 Forest management Cape Verde Afforestation CPV03 Morocco Assisted cork oak regeneration MOR13 Portugal Primary strip network system for fuel management POR01 Portugal Prescribed fire POR02 Botswana Biogas BOT05 Analysis of assessed SLM technologies and approaches across DESIRE sites DESIRE – WOCAT 2012 39
Analysis of SLM technologies Introduction For the purpose of this analysis the 30 case studies are clustered into five groups, which are presented in Table 1. The five groups are characterised as follows: 1. Cropping management: includes soil fertility management (benefits of use of organic and inorganic plant nutrients, minimum disturbance of the soil, crop rotation and permanent soil cover, including agroforestry systems). They are applied on cropland and mixed land use systems (crop-tree and crop-grazing). 2. Water management: includes rain water harvesting, improved irrigation efficiency and provision of drinking water for domestic and livestock use. It involves different land uses, mostly related to crop production through irrigation and water harvesting but also water supply systems. There can be combinations of uses for the same technology, such as provision of irrigation and drinking water. 3. Cross slope barriers: measures on sloping lands in the form of soil bunds, stone lines, barriers in gullies, vegetative strips and all forms of terraces. They are applied on various land uses systems but often related to cropland or control of gullies. 4. Grazing land management: includes controlled grazing, resting periods and is only applied on grazing land use systems 5. Forest management: includes afforestation, assisted regeneration of forests and fire control. The biogas technology from Botswana is also assigned to this group, as its major land degradation related role is to reduce pressure on forest and wood resources. The following analysis is often carried out in relation to the five conservation groups, enabling similarities and differences to be identified. Land use Most technologies are rather specific for a certain land use type. No tillage, for example, can only relate to cropland. The introduction of a technology sometimes induces a shift from one land use (e.g. cropland) to another (e.g. agroforestry). After the implementation of the SLM practice, 40% of the technologies are applied only on cropland, 7% on grazing land and only one out of 30 (3%) is applied in forested land. The other half is applied in mixed systems, such as cropland and forests (agroforestry) or cropland and Land use after conservation 1 3% 2 7% grazing land. After the introduction of the technology the agroforestry systems increased at the expense of the grazing land systems. The area where the technology is applied is in most cases rather small, often between 10 and 100 km 2 , but in a number of cases also below 10 ha. WOCAT aims to document the experience of unique SLM Technologies, which should cover a homogeneous set of natural (bio-physical) and human (socio-economic) conditions. Larger areas tend to include variations in climatic or altitudinal zones, differences in slope categories or diverse conditions of land tenure. Degradation cropland / mixed (agroforestry) cropland cropland / grazing land grazing land forest / grazing forest forest / mixed DESIRE - WOCAT 2012 Degraded land is defined as land that, due to natural processes or human activity, is no longer able to properly sustain an economic function and / or the original ecological function 1 . WOCAT differentiates between six major degradation types, namely soil erosion by water, soil erosion by wind, chemical soil deterioration (incl. soil fertility decline), physical soil deterioration (e.g. compaction), biological degradation (e.g. reduction of vegetation) and water degradation (e.g. aridification). Cropping management technologies are used against all types of degradation and often address combinations of these. The other technology groups are more targeted at fewer degradation types, i.e. water management technologies mainly address water degradation, cross-slope barriers are established against soil erosion by water, and grazing land and forest management technologies mainly address biological degradation. Surprisingly, soil crusting and sealing (physical soil deterioration), a phenomena often observed in 40 DESIRE – WOCAT Desire for Greener Land 2 7% 4 13% 3 10% 12 40% 6 20% Figure1: Study site size and land use types. Morocco, Abdellah Laouina Turkey, Sanem Açıkalın
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: Conservation impact on ecosystem se
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 101 and 102: Classification Land use problems: T
Page 105 and 106:
Class sification Land use problemss
Page 107 and 108:
Assessment Impacts of the Technolog
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:
Classification Land use problems: T
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:
Page 243 and 244:
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?