Technologies

Transport of freshwater from local streams [Greece]

Μεταφορά γλυκού από γειτονικά αρδευτικά κανάλια

technologies_1042 - Greece

Completeness: 82%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:
SLM specialist:

Pechtelidis Alexandros

Democritus University of Thrace

Vasilissis Sofias 12, Xanthi 671 00, Greece

Greece

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
DESIRE (EU-DES!RE)
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Democritus University of Thrace (Democritus University of Thrace) - Greece

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

10/06/2011

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

Yes

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Freshwater transport from local streams for irrigation purposes, in order to replace the traditional form of irrigation (by pumping saline groundwater from wells).

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

In low-lying regions suffering from overuse of the ground water for irrigation and seawater intrusion, pumping groundwater is detrimental and results in soil degradation (salinization) and reduced plant growth.

Purpose of the Technology: For this reason, freshwater is transported over distances of up to 500 m (or more) from surface streams, for irrigation using water of better quality. In this way, overexploitation of the aquifer is being reduced.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The pumps transfer water from canals or streams for irrigation purposes. A pumping station (10HP), pipes (PP-R, Ø 1100mm) for water transport and diesel or electricity for pump operation are the major items needed to replace groundwater with freshwater irrigation. However, annual maintenance of the pump and network is necessary.

Natural / human environment: The majority of families living in the research area make their living mostly from agricultural activities but also from livestock. Croplands are dominantly irrigated by wells (groundwater) and only those which are close to streams are irrigated with freshwater. Owing to over-pumping of the aquifer in order to irrigate the crop fields, there has been seawater intrusion over the past years. As a result, irrigation with groundwater led to saline soils. The group affected by this process comprises farmers who are now beginning to understand the extent of the desertification problem in the area. The degradation process significantly affects the quality of life of the local people. Saline soils lead to low productivity and thus to lower incomes (causing poverty) and thus an increase in social unrest. Although the farmers are totally aware of the on-going degradation problem that affects their fields and their livelihoods, they seem to be unwilling to change the way they irrigate their fields (with groundwater) as long as they do not have an alternative source of irrigation such as freshwater from local streams. The lack of information about how the salt-affected fields can be restored also makes the farmers believe that this situation is permanent and will extend over a wider area.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

Country:

Greece

Region/ State/ Province:

Prefecture of Xanthi

Further specification of location:

Eastern Macedonia and Thrace

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:
  • less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:
  • during experiments/ research

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

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

Cropland

Cropland

  • Annual cropping
Main crops (cash and food crops):

Major cash crop annual cropping: Maize, cotton, wheat
Major food crop annual cropping: Maize, wheat
Major cash crop perennial (non-woody) cropping: Clover
Other crops perennial (non-woody) cropping: Clover
Major cash crop tree/shrub cropping: Olive trees
Major food crop tree/shrub cropping: Olives

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Soil salinization and sodification.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Soil salinization.

3.3 Further information about land use

Comments:

Water supply: mixed rainfed - irrigated, full irrigation

Number of growing seasons per year:
  • 1
Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 100Longest growing period from month to month: April to August

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • irrigation management (incl. water supply, drainage)

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 9.59 m2.

Areas adjacent to freshwater surface streams.

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

management measures

management measures

  • M7: Others
Comments:

Main measures: management measures

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

chemical soil deterioration

chemical soil deterioration

  • Cs: salinization/ alkalinization
Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Cs: salinisation / alkalinisation

Main causes of degradation: disturbance of water cycle (infiltration / runoff) (overexploitation of groundwater), over abstraction / excessive withdrawal of water (for irrigation, industry, etc.) (overexploitation of groundwater), other natural causes (avalanches, volcanic eruptions, mud flows, highly susceptible natural resources, extreme topography, etc.) specify (seawater intrusion in coastal aquifers of the area, poor soil drainage), inputs and infrastructure: (roads, markets, distribution of water points, other, …) (lack of freshwater supply network), increased pressure on groundwater for irrigation

Secondary causes of degradation: change in temperature (higher temperature), change of seasonal rainfall (reduced rainfall), droughts (climate change)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: prevention of land degradation

Secondary goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation, rehabilitation / reclamation of denuded land

4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Author:

Alexandros Pechtelidis, Vas. Sofias 12, Xanthi, Greece

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Scheme showing the SLM technology application

Location: Eastern Nestos Delta River Basin. Prefecture of Xanthi

Date: 14/03/2010

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: water spreading, replacing saline groundwater with surface freshwater, reduce pressure/overexploitation on aquifer

Secondary technical functions: improvement of surface structure (crusting, sealing), improvement of topsoil structure (compaction), improvement of subsoil structure (hardpan), increase of infiltration, increase of groundwater level / recharge of groundwater

Agronomic measure: soil desalinization
Material/ species: freshwater
Remarks: salinity leaching

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 =:

0.7

4.4 Establishment activities

Activity Type of measure Timing
1. construction of irrigation network Agronomic

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 Labour Irrigation network 1.0 969.0 969.0 100.0
Equipment hire of an ecavator Irrigation network 1.0 1107.0 1107.0 100.0
Equipment Pumping station Irrigation network 1.0 3460.0 3460.0 100.0
Construction material Water transport pipes Irrigation network 1.0 100.0
Other Diesel fuel (1 Lt) Liter 1.0 1.4 1.4 100.0
Other Electricity (1 Kw) Liter 1.0 0.4 0.4 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 5537.8
Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 1 month(s)
Life span of the irrigation network: Lifetime

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Type of measure Timing/ frequency
1. Network maintenance Agronomic annualy

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
Labour Labour Irrigation network 1.0 138.0 138.0 100.0
Equipment Hire of an ecavator Irrigation network 1.0 275.0 275.0 100.0
Equipment Pumpiong station Irrigation network 1.0 200.0 200.0 100.0
Other diesl fuel or erlectricity Irrigation network 1.0 1512.0 1512.0 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 2125.0
Comments:

The above costs are calculated on May, 2011.

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Diesel or electricity price affects the final cost.

5. Natural and human environment

5.1 Climate

Annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • semi-arid

Thermal climate class: temperate. Mediterranean type climatic conditions

5.2 Topography

Slopes on average:
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms:
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitudinal zone:
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Comments and further specifications on topography:

Altitudinal zone: 0-100 m a.s.l. (Below 10m (plain costal region))
Landforms: Plateau/plains (Plain costal region)
Slopes on average: Flat (Plain region)

5.3 Soils

Soil depth on average:
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil):
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
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 low-medium
Soil drainage/infiltration is poor/none (hard-pan formation, crusting and water repellency)
Soil water storage capacity is medium

5.4 Water availability and quality

Availability of surface water:

good

Water quality (untreated):

for agricultural use only (irrigation)

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Ground water table: on surface (near the coastline or/and adjucent to Nestos river), < 5 m (the rest of Nestos river basin)
Water quality (untreated) is for agricultural use only (irrigation) (Occassionaly wastewater discharges from upstrem factories)

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:
  • high
Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

Coastal wetlands with high biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation of production system:
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income:
  • 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • poor
  • average
Individuals or groups:
  • groups/ community
Level of mechanization:
  • mechanized/ motorized
Gender:
  • women
  • men
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users

Population density: 10-50 persons/km2

Annual population growth: < 0.5%

70% of the land users are average wealthy and own 80% of the land.
20% of the land users are poor.
10% of the land users are poor.

Off-farm income specification: Animal breeders or/and factories workers.

5.7 Average area of land owned or leased by land users applying the Technology

  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Is this considered small-, medium- or large-scale (referring to local context)?
  • small-scale
Comments:

Average area of land owned or leased by land users applying the Technology: 1-2 ha, 2-5 ha, 5-15 ha (very few individuals)

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:
  • state
  • individual, titled
Land use rights:
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights:
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

health:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
education:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
technical assistance:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
employment (e.g. off-farm):
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
markets:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
energy:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
roads and transport:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
drinking water and sanitation:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
financial services:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

crop production

decreased
increased
Quantity before SLM:

3.4t/ha

Quantity after SLM:

4.2t/ha

Comments/ specify:

Increased, but: Sodic soils may first require gypsoum application

risk of production failure

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

Less salinity risk

Water availability and quality

irrigation water availability

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Due to increased demand for freshwater

irrigation water quality

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Due to increased demand for freshwater

demand for irrigation water

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

Freshwater for irrigation from streams/river

Income and costs

expenses on agricultural inputs

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

Requires funding for implementation

farm income

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Better crop quality

Other socio-economic impacts

Demand for groundwater

increased
decreased

Socio-cultural impacts

SLM/ land degradation knowledge

reduced
improved

Improved livelihoods and human well-being

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Income increase and thus well-being.

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

water quality

decreased
increased

excess water drainage

reduced
improved

groundwater table/ aquifer

lowered
recharge

evaporation

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

For sodic soils

Soil

soil crusting/ sealing

increased
reduced

salinity

increased
decreased

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

reliable and stable stream flows in dry season

reduced
increased

downstream flooding

increased
reduced
Comments/ specify:

Due to water abstraction from streams/river for irrigation

groundwater/ river pollution

increased
reduced
Comments/ specify:

Due to reduced groundwater exploitation

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 known
Climatological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
drought not 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

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:

positive

Long-term returns:

positive

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:

neutral/ balanced

Long-term returns:

neutral/ balanced

Comments:

The benefits are obvious from the first year of application of the SLM technology and the maintenance cost is logical.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

50

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

50 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

Comments on spontaneous adoption: The remaining area (50 %) is irrigated with groundwater.

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

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

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Application of fertilizers
More income due to improved crop quality

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Selection of crop type
Better future perspective for the area

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Financial motives
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Increased irrigation water quality which result in better soil quality

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Construction of more irrigation canals
Remediation of soils

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Better drainage systems
Groundwater recharge

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Construction of more irrigation canals
Improved quality/quantity of yield

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Selection of the most suitable crop type
Improved livelihood of the locals

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Better local products promotion

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?
Bureaucratic problems Promotion of fast track financial programs
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
Installation cost Financial aid from government/EU
Applicable only for fields adjacent or very close to a fresh water source Construction of canals

7. References and links

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Gkiougkis I. et. al. (2010) Proceedings of the 12th International Congress, Geological Society of Greece, Patras, May, 2010

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules