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)

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

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

Sustainable Coastal Land Management (COMTESS / GLUES)

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

University of Oldenburg (University of Oldenburg) - Germany

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

10/06/2015

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:

Land reclaimed from the sea – ‘the coastal region in north-western Germany needs to be artificially drained, and this will be an increasing challenge with climate change.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

In some coastal locations of north-western Germany, during the 19th and 20th century, land was reclaimed from the sea: at present, the land lies below sea level. It is protected from the sea by a wall called ‘dyke’. The reason for reclamation by drainage and walls was to make use of the fertile soil for intensive cropland or pastures. In the Landkreis Aurich region, agriculture is the most important form of land use: it is the main source of income, supplemented by tourism.

Purpose of the Technology: However, in anticipation of the expected increase in winter precipitation due to climate change, extra freshwater discharge will need to be dealt with. Furthermore, the periods when natural discharge of freshwater into the sea can occur is likely to become shorter, due to the sea level rising – again as a result of climate change. Consequently, in autumn and winter, more freshwater will have to be pumped into the sea rather than being discharged naturally during low tides.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: A dense drainage network enables intensive agriculture on the landward side of the primary sea wall. In total, one third of the Krummhörn community’s land is used for crops and one third as pasture. Drainage water from land which lies below sea level is pumped into the main drainage channels - which are at higher elevations and discharge naturally into the sea during low tides.

Natural / human environment: During storm tides when the sea level is high, large amounts of excess drainage water need to be pumped into the sea instead of naturally discharging. However, with climate change the present drainage network will no longer be capable of discharging all of the excess freshwater as a result of increased precipitation and sea level rise. This will require considerable investments in higher pumping capacities and an adapted drainage system with increased dimensions of ditches, as well as additional ditches in areas with a high flooding risk.

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.):

Traditional land use with dense drainage network to enable intensive agricultural land use in low elevated coastal landscapes.

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

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Flood events and droughts may substantially disrupt the current land use system in the future and lead to higher drainage costs and higher economic risks for agricultural production. This will reduce the ecological and economic viability of the current intensive and highly productive land use under a changing climate.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): There is no awareness of risks due to climate change.

If land use has changed due to the implementation of the Technology, indicate land use before implementation of the Technology:

Mixed: Mp: Agro-pastoralism

3.3 Further information about land use

Comments:

Water supply: rainfed, mixed rainfed - irrigated

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 1

Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 240 Longest growing period from month to month: March to October

Livestock density (if relevant):

> 100 LU /km2

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• water diversion and drainage
• surface water management (spring, river, lakes, sea)

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 33.7 m2.

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: structural measures

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Hg: change in groundwater / aquifer level

Main causes of degradation: change of seasonal rainfall (Climate change, higher rainfall in winter, lower in summer), Heavy / extreme rainfall (intensity/amounts) (Heavy rainfall in winter due to climate change expected), floods (Flooding due to heavy rainfall in winter)

Secondary causes of degradation: droughts (Droughts due to less rainfall in summer (climate change))

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

The figure shows the study region, located on the North Sea coast. The whole area is protected by a sea wall (grey). Crop fields (yellow), grasslands (green) and the drainage system (light blue) characterize the region. The traditional dense drainage network sometimes lacks the capacity to drain the lower land. This leads to flooding and limits agricultural productivity. It is expected that this flooding will increase with climate change. Agricultural production is faced with increased risks of crop failure in the future, unless the drainage system is strengthened.

Location: Krummhörn. County of Aurich, Lower Saxony

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: decrease groundwater level by artificial drainage

Construction material (earth): digged in soil, no specific material needed

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 =:

0.94

4.5 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 3 month(s)

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	Maintenance of drainage system (ditches)	Structural	once per year

4.7 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
Other	Maintenance cost pre km ditch	km ditch		2270.7

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Cost are affected by soil types and cost of labour. The calculation is based on the mean costs over many years. This gives a mean annual cost of Euro 2,270 per km ditch per year. With 1,145 km of ditches this totals Euro 2,600,000 per year for the whole area (approx. 49,000 ha).

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 high
Soil drainage/infiltration is medium
Soil water storage capacity is high

5.4 Water availability and quality

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

Population density: 50-100 persons/km2

Annual population growth: < 0.5%

1% of the land users are very rich and own 1% of the land.
49% of the land users are rich and own 24% of the land.
50% of the land users are average wealthy and own 50% of the land.
and own 15% of the land.

Off-farm income specification: Many farmers do additional work in companies

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:

• individual, not titled

Land use rights:

• individual

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

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	not well
local windstorm	not well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	well

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood	not well

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period	not known
climate change	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)?

Comments:

Development of dense drainage network is very cost intensive but last for very long time. Maintainance cost are quite low compared to the benefits of intensive land use.

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?

• 90-100%

Comments:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

Comments on spontaneous adoption: Well established technology in the whole region.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Optimal for agricultural production How can they be sustained / enhanced? Invest in infrastructure to maintain the system

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
High agricultural production How can they be sustained / enhanced? Strengthen the drainage system to adapt to climate change

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

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
High drainage costs	Development of water retention areas ( see A_GER001_en, A_GER002_en and A_GER003_en)
Landscape vulnerable to climate change	Development of water retention areas (see A_GER001_en, A_GER002_en and A_GER003_en)

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

http://www.comtess.uni-oldenburg.de/

7.3 Links to relevant information which is available online

Title/ description:

http://www.comtess.uni-oldenburg.de/