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)

Catastrophic shifts in drylands (EU-CASCADE)

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

University of Basilicata - Italy

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

26/06/2014

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

Yes

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Ploughing and seeding of fodder species to recover old degraded grazing areas and maintain valuable pastures against shrub encroachment and decrease of palatable species

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The technology consists of seeding pastureland with high palatable species whenever they are purely represented. In order to ensure a quality grass cover for grazing areas, pastures are ploughed (removing non-palatable shrubs) and planted with a variety of grains: i.e. oats, barley, alfalfa. This operation is periodically repeated (every tree-four years) according to the state of the grasses.

Purpose of the Technology: Regeneration of degraded pastures

Natural / human environment: The technique is an agronomic measure which is applied to degraded pastures (often modest areas of pasture land closest to farm sheds and stables).
As to the context of production, it is characterised by a medium level of mechanisation (only the most demanding operations are carried out using mechanical means), the production system is essentially mixed, a small part is destined for personal consumption whilst the bulk of production is destined for local markets. The property is predominantly privately owned but also includes some public land, especially in the case of pasture land. Most farms in the area are livestock farms whilst the agricultural component is destined exclusively for private consumption.

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:

• more than 50 years ago (traditional)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• as part of a traditional system (> 50 years)

Comments (type of project, etc.):

Ploughing and seeding has been the main traditional land use in the area

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• conserve ecosystem
• preserve/ improve biodiversity

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

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Change of vegetation in pastures: encroachment of unpalatable species
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): The problem is degraded pastures (presence of non-palatable shrubs).
Semi-nomadism / pastoralism: Shepherds use the area for summer grazing and move downhill in winter
Mixed: (eg agro-pastoralism, silvo-pastoralism): A reduced number of farmers cultivate their field for fodder and pastures
Grazingland comments: Sheep and goats are the most valuable livestock
Type of grazing system comments: Sheep and goats are the most valuable livestock

3.3 Further information about land use

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

• rainfed

Comments:

Water supply: Also mixed rainfed - irrigated

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 1

Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 120 Longest growing period from month to month: March to august

Livestock density (if relevant):

> 100 LU /km2

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• improved ground/ vegetation cover
• minimal soil disturbance

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• evenly spread over an area

If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, indicate approximate area covered:

• 0.1-1 km2

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures

Type of agronomic measures: mixed cropping / intercropping, minimum tillage

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Bs: quality and species composition /diversity decline

Main causes of degradation: other human induced causes (specify) (Undergrazing)

Secondary causes of degradation: poverty / wealth

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: increase of biomass (quantity), promotion of vegetation species and varieties (quality, eg palatable fodder)

Secondary technical functions: increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil

Mixed cropping / intercropping
Material/ species: oats, barley, alfalfa, wheat

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

euro

Indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (if relevant): 1 USD =:

0.74

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	Ploughing with machinery and add fertilizer if needed	Agronomic	November/ from each year to every 5-8 years
2.	Seeding	Agronomic	November/ from each year to every 5-8 years

4.5 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Seeding	ha	1.0	54.05	54.05	100.0
Equipment	Ploughing with machinery and add fertilizer if needed	ha	1.0	270.27	270.27	100.0
Plant material	Seeds	ha	1.0	202.7	202.7	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					527.02

Comments:

Costs occur again every 5-8 years

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	Ploughing with machinery and add fertilizer if needed	Agronomic	November/ from each year to every 5-8 years
2.	Seeding	Agronomic	November/ from each year to every 5-8 years

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

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: tractor with arrow

The above costs have been calculated according to the average of small farm’s records.

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The most determinate factor affecting costs of the technique is the availability of equipment for spreading. The largest farms buy the equipment spending from 35,000 to 40,000 euro depending on the machines’ working capacities. The smaller farms (which represent the vast majority) rent this equipment at a cost of around €50 an hour.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

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

5.4 Water availability and quality

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Availability of surface water: Medium (minimum during month of September and October)

5.5 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

Difference in the involvement of women and men: Active farmers are present only males; women are not actively involved in land management

Population density: 10-50 persons/km2

Annual population growth: negative; 2%

90% of the land users are average wealthy.
10% of the land users are poor.

Off-farm income specification: Most of the off farm income derives from public sector, i.e. Municipality, Mountain Community, Region and other public bodies. Very few farmer members run local shops or handcraft.

5.7 Average area of land owned or leased 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)
• 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	Type of climatic change/ extreme	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	well
local windstorm	well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	well

Hydrological disasters

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

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period	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 have did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?

• 0-10%

Comments:

90% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

Comments on acceptance with external material support: The activities were initially supported by a regional program with a subside equal to 50% of the total cost. However the technology proved not very efficient from the economic point of view, hence the subsidies where suspended.

10% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

There is no trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
The technology can improve very degraded pastureland but is not very useful when the pasture is only partly degraded How can they be sustained / enhanced? In order to increase the technology supports to machinery use should be provided, since they are the main relevant cost/barrier to adopt the technology.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
The technology can improve productivity and help restore the most valuable pastures, especially those situated near the animal housing structures How can they be sustained / enhanced? Subsidies where available in the past but didn’t prove effective or beneficial.

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?
High cost of machinery/equipment and their difficult use in tough environmental conditions (stony lands and steep slopes).

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Removing soil surfaces in order to seed the lands can create condition for soil degradation if not performed adequately	Increasing farmers awareness and skills for good agricultural practices