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

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

Carbon optimized land management strategies for southern Amazonia (CARBIOCIAL / GLUES)

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

Book project: Making sense of research for sustainable land management (GLUES)

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

Georg August Universität Göttingen (Georg August Universität Göttingen) - Germany

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

Leibniz Institute for Regional Geography (IfL) - Germany

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

Humboldt Universität zu Berlin (HU Berlin) - Germany

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

Universität Kassel - Germany

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

Universität Hamburg (UHH) - Germany

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

18/06/2016

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

Investigating viable carbon-optimized land management strategies, which maintain or improve ecosystem function, under changing climate conditions in the Southern Amazon - using regional scenarios generated from storylines.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: One objective of the Carbiocial project, in close cooperation with its Brazilian partner project Carbioma, is to explore how land use change in one of Brazil’s most dynamic regions will develop in the next 30 years and how it will be affected by the implementation of land-use planning options and conservation policies. For this purpose a set of scenarios was created. The scenarios portray different plausible development pathways for the region. Each scenario consists of a storyline: a brief narrative of the future. At this level farmers and institutions are involved. An expert panel translated the findings of several stakeholder workshops and extensive stakeholder and expert interviews, conducted in 2012, into qualitative information needed to elaborate these scenarios. Four storylines emerged: (1) “business-as-usual”; (2) sustainable, extensive use of the Amazon; (3) legal intensification; (3) illegal intensification.

Methods: It was agreed that the communication between qualitative social science data and quantitative data had to be considered carefully. A blend of the required input factors for the models was agreed as guiding principles for all storylines: these were: population, agrarian production, livestock, agrarian and environmental policies, protected areas, infrastructure, impact of climate change (mitigation/adaptation). In a second step, qualitative data had to be added to the models; to limit bias, all available German experts on Southern Amazonia participated in a day-long (and quite controversial) brainstorming session producing content for the four storylines.
After translating the results into Portuguese the outcome was discussed with representatives of government and NGOs to discuss their plausibility and to modify accordingly. The input of local stakeholders was included on the basis of discussions and qualitative interviews. Generally speaking, the feedback loops with Brazilian stakeholders’ happened rather arbitrarily. Participation could have been better if planned more methodically and earlier.
The three hypothetical storylines describe different pathways of future regional development within the two states. Due to the strong linkages of Southern Amazonia to global markets (e.g. exports of soybean and meat) it was necessary to portray this dependency as one important determinant within the scenarios. Also, law enforcement of the existing legal situation was considered: more than 40% of Amazônia comprises protected areas. In order to portray the possibility of progressive environmental and indigenous legislation, a vibrant civil society, and well-institutionalized public prosecutors, a sustainability scenario was designed.
The next step was the quantification of the qualitative information to facilitate a simulation-based scenario analysis. Simulation models will be combined as software packages to support the decision-taking process from local to landscape and regional scale. All research and implementation activities include direct involvement of the stakeholders. Field experiments for improving C storage and ecosystem function will be performed in cooperation with an NGO founded by the farmers of Mato Grosso.

Other important information: A set of land use maps was generated to depict scenarios from 2010 to 2030. The objective of this modelling and mapping exercise is to support decision-makers to better interpret the scenarios and their implications. These new layers of information will facilitate further model or GIS-based analysis of land use change impacts on the regional carbon balance and the loss of biodiversity, and may act as a test-bed for the development of strategies towards sustainable land management.

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

• project/ programme based

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach focused mainly on other activities than SLM (carbon-optimized land management)

The joint main goals are 1) to perform region-specific analyses in order to improve and apply interdisciplinary sets of models of land use impacts on carbon stocks, water and GHG balances, 2) to develop and optimize land management strategies that minimize carbon losses and GHG emissions, and maximize carbon sequestration, 3) to assess the trade-offs between land management options and socio-economic impacts in terms of GHG reduction, profitability, ecological sustainability, and last but not least, 4) to support the Brazilian partners to implement the optimal techniques in practice, considering the soybean value chain and overall carbon balance.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: High loss of vegetative and soil carbon due to agricultural expansion (deforestation), agricultural emissions, biodiversity loss.

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	interactive	Land users and planning authorities; identification of research priorities, state-of-the-art of agricultural practices, identification of problems.
planning	none
implementation	none
monitoring/ evaluation	none
Research	passive	Research plots for demonstration.

3.3 Flow chart (if available)

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 SLM specialists, following consultation with land users

Explain:

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by by land users* alone (self-initiative / bottom-up)

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users

Form of training:

• farmer-to-farmer
• demonstration areas
• public meetings

Subjects covered:

Training focused on raising awareness of the consequences of “business-as-usual” behavior compared with other scenarios.

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: dissemination of research results in the form of policy briefs and more detailed “output sticks”

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• no

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
bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through measurements
socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations
socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through measurements
There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Dissemination; form of dissemination was adjusted according to the requirements of target groups.
There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• ecology
• technology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

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:

• 100,000-1,000,000

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

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (German Ministry of Education and Research BMBF): 100.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

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

No

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:

No-till agriculture, crop rotations, recommended sowing dates, expanding agricultural land according to crop yield information, and information regarding negative effects of cropland/rangeland expansion (e.g. soil and site specific GHG emissions) which were identified through the different scenarios.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
improved choice of crop/crop rotation; more environmental friendly choice of kind of agriculture employed (agroforestry systems); improved awareness of existence and functionality of regulations in favor of sustainability better dissemination; heightened awareness of land users to sustainability topics and environmental degradation

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

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Acceptance of results by famers, planning authorities, decision makers in general (political level).

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

J. Goepel et al. (2016) Future scenarios of land-use and land-cover change in Southern Amazonia and resultant greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural soils, to be published in Regional Environmental Change Special Issue “Southern Amazonia”,(in review)

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Schönenberg et al. (2016)Inter- and transdisciplinary scenario construction to explore future land use options in Southern Amazonia, to be published in Ecology & Society (in review)

Title, author, year, ISBN:

R. Schaldach et al. (to be published) A multi-scale modelling framework for the analysis of societal and environmental processes in Southern Amazonian land systems: Lessons learned from the Carbiocial project.