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

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

Wageningen Environmental Research (Alterra) - Netherlands

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

Hoe Duurzaam - Netherlands

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

Provincie Gelderland - Netherlands

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

ROM3D - Netherlands

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

Ministerie van Economische Zaken - Netherlands

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

18/09/2014

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

Yes

1.4 Reference(s) to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Technologies

2.1 Short description of the Approach

Social innovation for sustained soil organic matter, clean drinking water and sustainable crop production

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: A group of farmers cooperates with the drinking water company and aims for a more healthy soil. The sandy soil is low in organic matter. They expect that increasing the soil organic matter content will retain more nitrates in the soil, leading to a reduction in nitrate leaching and a higher nutrient availability for the crops.
Dairy farms grow grass and corn. Some farmers also produce potatoes and cereals.
Most farms deal with suboptimal moisture conditions. Increasing the soil organic matter content and improving the soil structure is expected to be a key factor in improving soil moisture content, both in dry and wet periods.
For most farmers soil biodiversity is terra incognita. During the project they will learn about the advantages of good soil fauna and how it can add to better crops.
The case study will explore management options to increase and maintain organic matter content in soil via different rotations, specific varieties of grasses and corn, cover crops and additions of organic amendments and fertilizers. Although the case study is about soil management and technology to improve soil quality, social innovation is a key objective: combining knowledge and experience of a group of neighbours and farmers within a small region and developing solutions and opportunities for the whole area.

Methods: lectures, site visits, group sessions with models (computer sessions), kitchen table interviews (interactive advice), providing relevant literature

Stages of implementation: fund raising - building support - knowledge transfer - pilots of measures - applied expert advice - launch of the foundation HOE Duurzaam - implementation of new measures - increase of nr of participants - field excursion - closing event of the project 'gezond Zand'

Role of stakeholders: Pioneer farmers : initiating and leading the project, fouding HOE Duurzaam
Other farmers : participating, implementing measures, sharing experience
VITENS Drinking water company: providing money and urgency
ROM3d : project leader, motivating farmers, intermediate between area and government
ALterra, Wageningen UR: providing knowledge

Other important information: An adjustment in the national regulations for manure application was an important driving factor for the development of the approach. Farmers were authorised to apply more manure per ha if they have 75% of their land under grassland. This criterion changed to 80% during the implementation of the approach.

2.3 Photos of the Approach

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

2.7 Type of Approach

• recent local initiative/ innovative

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (energy, landscape conservation, recreation, drinking water)

The main aims and objectives of the approach were social innovation and social learning with regard to sustainable management of the land in the area. This implied combining knowledge and experience from scientists, neighbours and other farmers. The final goals are to improve soil quality, soil organic matter status and groundwater quality.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Decreasing yields, problems with management (water logging, increased irrigation requirements), changed regulation ('manure derogation') that suppressed agricultural production; drinking water production expected problems with nitrate in the groundwater.

2.9 Conditions enabling or hindering implementation of the Technology/ Technologies applied under the Approach

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach

	Involvement of local land users/ local communities	Specify who was involved and describe activities
initiation/ motivation	self-mobilization	8 land users submitted the application for funding to the Province to implement the measures
planning	interactive	Due to the interactive nature of the project there was no official planning. There was a sequence of knowledge supplied, testing in pilots, assess outcomes, renewed pilots and implementation of measures proven succesfull.
implementation	self-mobilization
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive
Research	external support	Lectures from external advisors (Peter Kuikman, Coen ter Berg, Jos Groten (Wageningen UR-PPO), Annemieke Smit (Wageningen UR-Alterra), Zwier van der Vechte (Wageningen UR Livestock Research) and calculation sessions with the HLB tool.

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:

• mainly land users, supported by SLM specialists

Explain:

The land users took the final decisions in their selection of SLM technologies and measures. The SLM specialists contributed by giving information and advice.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users

If relevant, specify gender, age, status, ethnicity, etc.

male farmers aged between 30 and 60

Form of training:

• farmer-to-farmer
• demonstration areas
• courses

Form of training:

• advisory sessions between land users and SLM advis

Subjects covered:

fertilisation, soil fertility, crop management

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• on land users' fields

Describe/ comments:

Name of method used for advisory service: 'zitdagen'; advisory sessions between land user and consultant; Key elements: problem analysis: which fields have the largest problems and why? training sessions with the computer tool for selection of measures to improve OM status, meetings for knowledge exchange; There was also a questionnaire to inventory the measures farmers wanted to implement.

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; The Foundation HOEduurzaam will support the continuation of SLM activities in the area.

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, a little

Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:

• local

Specify type of support:

• financial
• capacity building/ training

• marketing

Give further details:

Foundation HOEduurzaam has small financial revenues from their activities. Campsite Veldzicht rented their accommodation several times for venues of the land users and stakeholders, and will benefit from publicity around the approach to attract more visitors.

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: pictures of development of grass undersowing and crops

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by land users, other through measurements; indicators: land users should measure OM every 4 years to get subsidies; constituents of the groundwater used to produce drinking water

There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: The approached worked well, so there were no changes until now.

There were few changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Several technologies were abandoned or could not be implemented: substituting crops in rotations (less potatoes, early germinating maize varieties), use of roadside rsidues as compost (due to legal constraints)

Humic acid was implemented at more fields after the first optimistic results. The early harvest of corn was not implemented, but sowing grasss underneath the corn was developed during the project.

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• economics / marketing
• technology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

economics/marketing: cost-benefit analysis still to be performed - ROM3D and Alterra and Foundation HOEduurzaam
technology: continued search for new methods and measures; mapping the status of soil organic matter and soil organic matter balance calculations with a tool - Alterra, ROM3 and Foundation HOEduurzaam

Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• 10,000-100,000

Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (European Fund for Rural Development and the EU FP7 RECARE project): 5.0%; government (Ministry of Economic Affairs ): 40.0%; private sector (Vitens drinking water company): 10.0%; local government (district, county, municipality, village etc) (Province of Gelderland (100-350 €/ha) - subsidy regulation for sustainable soil management): 35.0%; local community / land user(s) (labour, time investment, seeds, materials): 5.0%; other (own contributions research and consultancy firms (Alterra, ROM3D)): 5.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?

Yes

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• equipment

• agricultural

Comments:

payments were meant to cover potential costs of reduced crop yield and the agricultural contractor (loonwerker)

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?

• yes

If yes, describe how:

The Foundation HOEduurzaam will continue to act in the area. For the next 10 years measures will be part
of the subsidy grant.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view

Farmers are positive about the information provision on the measures in the informatoin sessions, by their mutual exchange of information, and through the direct contact with experts. They expect the measures to increase the soil organic matter and yields, also through an improved bearing capacity of the soil. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continued exchange of information on measures to increase SOM between the farmers themselves, subsidy to finance the measures (either through the regional government or the dairy company).)

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view

1. social innovation by working together and learning from each other 2. HOEduurzaam (foundation) represents 98% of the land owners and land users in the area, and is an important stakeholder for the local /regional goverment 3. all training was specifically designed for the group 4. HOEduurzaam is also active in the Energie-marke, a local renewable energy cooperative (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: continuing the approach, Foundation HOEduurzaam remaining active, follow-up projects to monitor effects of measures to stimulate farmers to continue to implement the measures. )

6.5 Weaknesses/ disadvantages of the Approach and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
No disadvantages to the approach were mentioned by the land users.	not applicable

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
1. support of the measures by consultants was only 2 years, whereas the effects on SOM are only perceptable after 10 years 2. Foundation HOEduurzaam does not have a soil expert	Bring attention to production and water use.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

website of the Foundation HOEduurzaamW.A. Rienks en H. Leever, 2014. Gezond Zand – organische stof als sleutel voor een vruchtbare bodem en schoon water.

Available from where? Costs?

http://www.hoeduurzaam.nl http://www.hoeduurzaam.nl/images/gallery/nieuws/Brochure/BrochureHoeduurzaam%20Definitief.pdf

Title, author, year, ISBN:

W.A. Rienks en H. Leever, 2014. Gezond Zand – organische stof als sleutel voor een vruchtbare bodem en schoon water.

Available from where? Costs?

http://www.hoeduurzaam.nl/images/gallery/nieuws/Brochure/BrochureHoeduurzaam%20Definitief.pdf