1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

Preventing and Remediating degradation of soils in Europe through Land Care (EU-RECARE )

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

University of Padova (UNIPD) - Italy

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Ja

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Silvo-arable systems for production of annual crops on tree plots

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Agroforestry systems (AS) are the mixed cultivation of annual crops and trees in a single field. Historically, agroforestry has been used as a land management system that allowed the integration and diversification of productivity while maintaining the ecosystem biodiversity and diversifying farm landscape. Over the last fifty years the number of trees in agroecosystems in Italy was reduced of 75% due to the advent of intensive cropping systems and mechanisation, with significant changes to agriculture and landscape. In recent years, re-introduction of silvo-arable systems in the Veneto region have been supported as an agri-environmental measure of the Rural Development Programme (RDP) to improve sustainable land management.

Purpose of the Technology: Tree and crop production in the same area are compatible and combine environmental and economic benefits. As a result, ASs have been proposed to the farmers with the aim of reducing environmental impacts and energy inputs as well as improving biodiversity and agricultural landscape.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Agroforestry systems are adjusted to the needs of modern and sustainable agriculture and farmers who adopt this technology take advantage of higher ecosystem biodiversity, incomes and labour diversification, lower energy inputs and reinforcement of natural pest control. The systems are managed with low tree intensity (50-100 trees/ha) and large planting systems (up to 14 m in the row and 40 m inter-row) in order to simplify mechanisation of field practices, depending on machinery and cultivated crops.

Natural / human environment: Adopting agroforestry systems achieves several environmental benefits that have been widely demonstrated worldwide: regulation of nutrient cycling and adsorption of nonpoint source pollution (phytoremediation) thanks to the effect of deep rooting systems; reduction of soil surface erosion and sedimentation in rivers and lakes, improvement of micro-climate conditions, soil and ecosystem biodiversity. Reforestation of agroecosystems was recommended by Kyoto Protocol to mitigate global warming. Finally, agrisilviculture systems improve socio-cultural aspects as they contribute to differentiate and enrich the agricultural landscape.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• preserve/ improve biodiversity

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Ja

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):

• Agroforestry

Comments:

Trees/ shrubs species: poplar, oak, walnut etc.

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Soils in the low Venetian plain of the Veneto region generally suffer from a loss of soil organic matter (SOM) that is strongly affected by their natural texture and climatic conditions. Moreover in the last 50 years high intensive monoculture practices and mechanisation implied a further decrease of SOM (estimated 0.02-0.58 t/ha/y of carbon lost), soil habitats and surface water quality.

Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Mixed: Mf: Agroforestry

3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

• Yes (Please fill out the questions below with regard to the land use before implementation of the Technology)

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Nee

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• mixed rainfed-irrigated

Comments:

Water supply: Also rainfed, full irrigation

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• agroforestry
• improved ground/ vegetation cover

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: vegetative measures, management measures

Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -linear

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content, Bh: loss of habitats, Hp: decline of surface water quality

Main causes of degradation: soil management (lack of organic input with fertilizations), population pressure (High demand for agricultural products and competition for land in densely populated area)

Secondary causes of degradation: crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub) (crop monoculture instead of crop rotation), deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires) (mechanisation)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• prevent land degradation
• reduce land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: prevention of land degradation

Secondary goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Euro €

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

0.8

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	System planning
2.	Tillage and soil preparation
3.	Tree planting and fertilisation
4.	Mulching

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	System planning	ha	1.0	102.0	102.0
Labour	Tillage and soil preparation	ha	1.0	102.0	102.0
Labour	Tree planting and fertilisation	ha	1.0	127.0	127.0
Labour	Mulching	ha	1.0	1220.0	1220.0
Equipment	Tillage and soil preparation	ha	1.0	254.0	254.0
Plant material	Seedlings	ha	1.0	175.0	175.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Fertilizer	ha	1.0	21.0	21.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					2001.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					2501.25

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Pruning, replanting, additional irrigation, weed control
2.	Crop management

4.6 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Pruning, replanting, additional irrigation, weed control	ha	1.0	250.0	250.0
Labour	Crop management	ha	1.0	850.0	850.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					1100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					1375.0

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The establishment of SLT is the most determinate factor affecting the costs, particularly soil preparation and mulching.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Altitudinal zone: 0-100 m a.s.l. (the low Venetian does not exceed 50 m above sea level)

5.3 Soils

If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Soil fertility is low-medium
Soil drainage/infiltration is medium
Soil water storage capacity is medium

5.4 Water availability and quality

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Ground water table: <5m (The area surrounding the Venice lagoon (1240 km2) is even below the sea level (down to -2 m) and currently cultivated due to land reclamation. As a result water table is kept artificially low)
Water quality (untreated) is good drinking water (groundwater) or for agricultural use only (surface water can be used for agricultural purposes but not as drinking water)

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

High population density, infrastructures and intensive agriculture practices affect the state of biodiversity.

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users

Population density: 200-500 persons/km2

Annual population growth: 0.5% - 1%

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land use rights:

• individual

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change

	Season	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	not well

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?

• 11-50%

Comments:

80% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

20% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
improves water and soil quality How can they be sustained / enhanced? spread over larger territories and integration with other sustainable land practices (e.g. conservation agriculture, cover crops etc.)
enhances agro-ecosystem biodiversity How can they be sustained / enhanced? improve connecting corridors between habitats
income generation and diversification opportunity How can they be sustained / enhanced? stimulation of alternative markets

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
Increases difficulties in handling machinery	Improvement of technical knowledge and planning
Increases establishment costs	Increase funding for implementation

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
excessive shading for crop production	lower tree density and enlarge inter-row; improve system design
high investment and income reduction in the short-term	economic support
low efficacy due to short-term cycles of the technology and replacement with traditional cropping systems	improve the effectiveness of subsidies to keep the technology in the log-term

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Agroforestazione - Produrre con gli alberi per un'agricoltura differente, Veneto Agricoltura, 2011.

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Programma di sviluppo rurale per il veneto 2007-2013, Regione Veneto, 2007. Dipartimento Agricoltura e Sviluppo Rurale.