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)

OPtimal strategies to retAIN and re-use water and nutrients in small agricultural catchments across different soil-climatic regions in Europe (OPTAIN)

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

CDE Centre for Development and Environment (CDE Centre for Development and Environment) - Switzerland

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

University of Bern, Institute of Geography (GIUB) - Switzerland

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

1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology

Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?

Nee

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

The riparian zone is the buffer area between a watercourse and the adjacent land. Healthy riparian ecosystems stabilise the banks, maintain the microclimate, protect against flooding, filter chemicals and improve both biodiversity and water quality.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

In the 19th and early 20th centuries nearly all Swiss rivers were "corrected" (straightened, channelised and diked) to reduce flood damage and reclaim land for agriculture. In the late 20th century the adverse effects of these corrections became increasingly clear, and there was a paradigm shift towards more sustainable river management. There are many current “revitalization” projects, among them the restoration of the Petite Glâne, which started in 2022 and is expected to be completed in 2026. The project perimeter consists of the last 7 kilometres of the Petite Glâne stream and the costs are estimated at CHF 21.5 million.
The main characteristics of revitalization are widening the riverbed and reducing the slopes of the riverbanks, thus giving the river space for meandering and changing the morphology in a natural way. Where riparian forests do not occur naturally anymore, it can make sense to re-establish them so that biodiversity can flourish. The planting of trees and bushes gives many animals a habitat and can serve as a wildlife corridor between different areas. Additionally, shading of the water reduces its temperature fluctuations which - especially in summer - is important to many species that are dependent on cold water for their survival. With climate change this threat will become even worse. The main purpose of revitalization is to recreate near-natural conditions in artificially straightened reaches to ensure provision of riparian ecosystem services.
Considerable planning is involved in implementing this technology in Switzerland partly because of legal reasons (watercourses are closely protected and land rights require negotiation) and because effects on downstream areas need to be taken into account. Depending on the length of the river segment where riparian forests are to be restored, there are many stakeholders involved, all of whom need to give their approval: this takes time and effort. Inputs are mostly in the form of trees and bushes. Depending on the degree of revitalization, built-up river sections need to be freed again and infrastructure like bridges, buildings and roads may be affected. In theory, there is no maintenance necessary because revitalized rivers are intended to reassume their natural form and be surrounded by natural vegetation. Nevertheless, in a highly modified and intensely used landscape, the cutting of grass and pruning of trees/bushes on a regular basis can be required. Wood harvesting may be an option. Driftwood might also have to be removed if there is danger of flooding or clogging of bottlenecks – for example under bridges.
Revitalization, theoretically, has larger effects on smaller rivers than on bigger ones due to a greater proportion of land draining into them compared to their size. Additionally, shading has larger effects on the water temperature of smaller rivers. Benefits accruing are mainly in regard to habitat provision and thus biodiversity enhancement, but also improvement of water quality (lower temperatures, less nutrient input) and water management in general as flooding is expected to be less frequent. A key disadvantage is that the measures are often implemented at the expense of agricultural land. Naturally, farmers are usually unhappy about the loss of land - even though alternative agricultural plots and direct payments are provided. In general, however, people appreciate the improvement in the quality of life (a pleasanter area for leisure) and improved biodiversity.

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

Indicate year of implementation:

2022

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

The communities wanted to improve the current situation with respect to the threat of flooding through more extreme rain events, and for improving the biodiversity in the area.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• conserve ecosystem
• protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
• preserve/ improve biodiversity
• reduce risk of disasters
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Nee

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:

• rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• natural and semi-natural forest management
• surface water management (spring, river, lakes, sea)
• ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• prevent land degradation
• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

other/ national currency (specify):

CHF

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

0.98

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	communication (with communities etc.) and looking for sponsoring	2018
2.	completion of studies	2018
3.	survey/planning/project execution	2018
4.	Delays due to the Corona pandemic, start of reconstruction was originally planned for 2020
5.	search for company	2022
6.	implementation	2022-2025

Comments:

This list is basically a list of the different steps that are involved in any project and show how long it took from first thinking about implementing the revitalization until now realizing. The implementation is not bound to any season and expected to be carried out continuously.

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	engineers, purchase of land		1.0	3000000.0	3000000.0
Plant material	trees, small structures		30000.0	100.0	3000000.0
Construction material	terracing, bridges		1.0	15000000.0	15000000.0
Other	unexpected		1.0	500000.0	500000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					21500000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					21938775.51

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

80% are paid by the federal government, 20% by the adjacent municipalities and local sponsors.

Comments:

The total cost is known and a broad estimation possible of how much is used for what but it was not possible to break it down into more detail because it is a big project and many stakeholders involved.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Checking riverbed	every 2-3 years
2.	Mowing of grass	1-2 per year
3.	Cutting/ pruning of trees	every 5-10 years (usually around 30% of the area at once)
4.	General maintenance period	2025-2028
5.	Follow-up, control of revitalization effects	2038

Comments:

Grass needs to be cut 1-2 times a year. The other maintenance activities are not required so frequently. The watercourse must be checked every 2-3 years and every 5-10 years the trees may have to be cut. When cutting the trees 1/3 of the area should be done at once but not more to not disturb wildlife too much and give it space to retreat to. None of these activities are bound to any particular season. During the first 3 years after the finalization of the project, maintenance work will be carried out (checking if everything is still okay, how the river behaves, if plants grow, etc.).

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

Comments:

The project is not yet in a phase in which the costs for maintenance can be estimated because the implementation hasn't yet started and will not finish before 2025. Also, it depends on how much of the maintenance can be done by the farmers of the adjacent lands and how much will need to be done through community workers which would increase costs.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The most expensive feature of this project is the volume of earth that will be removed from the now steep riverbanks to widen the riverbed. The earth removed will directly be used again for small hills and what is not used directly in the riparian zone will be distributed on the agriculturally used fields next to the rivers. Also, there are several bridges that cross the Petite Glâne, and by enlarging the riverbed the bridges need to be rebuilt as well - which drives up the price greatly.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• concave situations

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

Nee

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Ja

Regularity:

episodically

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

The increasing threat of heavy rainfall events due to climate change enhances the threat of flooding which is why the revitalization is being implemented. Through enlargement of the riverbed and increasing surface roughness through vegetation, flooding of adjacent agricultural areas is expected to be less frequent. The effect of the plants directly on water quality/quantity are expected to be minor.

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

Both are between low and medium, but low rather than medium.

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

The land users now are farmers that rent or own the land. For implementing the technology the lease agreement was terminated and the land up to now owned by the farmers has been bought by the communities.

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 ownership:

• communal/ village
• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Ja

Specify:

lease agreement

Comments:

Where possible farmers got other areas to substitute for that lost by implementing the revitalization

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Water availability and quality

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

Specify assessment of on-site impacts (measurements):

Observations, measurements and projections

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

Specify assessment of off-site impacts (measurements):

Observations, measurements and projections

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	moderately

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local thunderstorm	well
local hailstorm	moderately

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
heatwave	moderately
drought	moderately

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood	very well
flash flood	very 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)?

Comments:

The short term benefits (1-3 years after implementation) are considered positive as the technology shows positive effects on ecosystem services (e.g. flood protection) within a short period of time despite the high establishment costs.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• single cases/ experimental

Comments:

The communities were initiating the revitalization and did not do so before finding sponsors and subventions

6.6 Adaptation

Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?

Nee

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Less flooding
Small improvement in soil quality

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Biodiversity
Positive measure against warming waters
Improvement of the landscape and therefore of the quality for recreational purposes
Flood protection

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?
Loss of agricultural land	Exchange of plots (next to river taken; elsewhere, another given) Financial compensation

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
High costs	Sponsoring/subsidies needed

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.4 General comments

The municipality owns the land that is now used by the farmers. To make up for the lost land the municipality provided other plots for them to use. Nevertheless, the total loss of agricultural land amounts to 11 ha.