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)

European Interreg project FABulous Farmers {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 6195, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Association des Chambres d’agriculture de l’Arc Atlantique (AC3A) - France', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 6195, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Association des Chambres d’agriculture de l’Arc Atlantique (AC3A) - France', 'template': 'raw'}

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

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

Yes

1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology

Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?

No

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Hedgerows are important to shelter the functional biodiversity necessary for natural regulation of crop pests. The extent of this effect depends on hedgerow management at farm level.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Hedgerows are typical landscape features of rural Normandy. They surround agricultural fields, whether cultivated or under grassland. Hedges were already prominent in Normandy during the 19th century, and they reached a peak between the first and second world wars. However, since the 1960s, the restructuring of agricultural land and technical and technological developments in agriculture have led to the disappearance of hedgerows. The challenge since the beginning of the 21st century has been to maintain the existing hedgerows and to establish others. This is important in the light of today’s agri-environmental and climate issues.

The technology of replacing, restoring or planting new hedgerows has been applied in an area of mixed farming for the benefit of crop and animal protection, watercourse and soil erosion buffering and protection, and landscape and habitat connectivity improvements. The technology has been applied in a locality by a small number of farmers over a number of recent years.

Hedgerows are planted on the periphery of the fields with species spaced at 0.5 to 1 m apart. There are between 1 and 3, sometimes even 4 different vegetative types used in establishing the hedgerows - herbaceous, bushy, and shrubby plants and trees. The current average length is 36 metres of hedge per hectare. The position of ancient hedgerows in the landscape is the result of the history of parcels of land. In contrast, over the last ten years, agri-environmental criteria have been taken into account in selecting planting sites. The main local species used for new hedges are: Fraxinus, Quercus, Tilia, Carpinus, Acer campestre, Crataegus, Corylus and Ilex. Each hedge is considered to have an influence ranging from 50 to 200 m away from it in terms of windspeed, runoff, and biodiversity.

Hedgerows play a very important role in preventing:
- Biological degradation through maintaining and increasing wildlife biodiversity and stimulating biological regulation of crop pests
- Climate-induced impacts both at the local level (decrease of wind speeds, decrease of evapotranspiration, shade for animals) and at global level (carbon storage, substitution of fossil energies by renewable energy)
- Water degradation through maintaining and improving qualitative and quantitative regulation of water at the watershed scale
- Soil erosion by water and chemical deterioration through the conservation of soils
- Soil erosion by wind

Despite these benefits, this SLM technology has not yet been taken up widely. It is more than necessary to restart hedgerow management with Normandy farmers, especially as the use of external inputs (e.g. fertilizers and pesticides) is increasingly expensive for both farmers and society.

The compilation of this SLM is a part of the European Interreg project FABulous Farmers which aims to reduce the reliance on external inputs by encouraging the use of methods and interventions that increase the farm’s Functional AgroBiodiversity (FAB). Visit www.fabulousfarmers.eu and www.nweurope.eu/Fabulous-Farmers for more information.

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:

• less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• as part of a traditional system (> 50 years)
• through projects/ external interventions

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• preserve/ improve biodiversity
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
• create beneficial economic impact

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

No

3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

• No (Continue with question 3.4)

3.4 Water supply

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

• rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• windbreak/ shelterbelt
• improved ground/ vegetation cover
• integrated pest and disease management (incl. organic agriculture)

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• prevent land degradation
• reduce land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology unit

other/ national currency (specify):

€

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

0.9

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Decide on planting site, the design/layout of the hedge and the species	Spring
2.	Soil preparation through clearing of land and harrowing	After harvest of crops
3.	Application of mulch to planting strip	After harvest of crops
4.	Planting of trees & protections (e.g. deer guards)	November to January

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Design and planning	person-days	0.3	120.0	36.0	50.0
Labour	Surface preparation for planting	person-days	0.1	120.0	12.0	100.0
Labour	Application of mulch	person-days	0.3	120.0	36.0	100.0
Labour	Planting trees	person-days	11.0	120.0	1320.0	100.0
Equipment	Tractor with harrow	machine-days	0.1	50.0	5.0	100.0
Plant material	Trees	Piece	1000.0	2.0	2000.0	50.0
Plant material	Tree protection (i.e. wild animal guards)	Piece	1000.0	0.5	500.0	80.0
Plant material	Mulching	Piece	1000.0	1.3	1300.0	80.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					5209.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					5787.78

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

local community / subsidy

Comments:

Costs do not include training of farmers.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Hedgerow maintenance (cutting/pruning)	From June to December every 3rd year
2.	Wood harvest (20 years after planting)	December to March

4.6 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	Hedgerow maintenance (cutting/pruning)	day	0.2	120.0	24.0	100.0
Equipment	Maintenance cutter	day	0.2	50.0	10.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					34.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					37.78

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Time necessary for maintenance,
Good training to do quality work

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Yes

Regularity:

episodically

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

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

Land ownership:

• individual, not titled
• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• individual

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

No

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

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	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	moderately
annual rainfall		increase	well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

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

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	not well
forest fire	not well
land fire	not well

Hydrological disasters

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

Biological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
epidemic diseases	moderately
insect/ worm infestation	moderately

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
extended growing period	not well
reduced growing period	not well at all
sea level rise	not well at all

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

• 1-10%

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?

• 0-10%

6.6 Adaptation

Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?

Yes

other (specify):

Over the last ten years, agri-environmental criteria have been taken into account in choosing planting sites

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Reduced winds and wind erosion
Creation of spaces for wildlife leading to increased biodiversity

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Creation of climate zone "temperate" favourable to crops and / or animals
More space for biodiversity and habitat, particularly those that provide a beneficial return for agricultural production
Diversification to add woody crops
Connected landscape and habitats through hedgerow linkages to each other and woodlands.

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?
Cost and maintenance time	Use harvested wood/material to cover increased costs for farmer to maintain hedgerows
Competition between cropping areas for natural resources	Increase the technical understanding of tree management / crop fringes
Unclear EU financial support for hedge management (instability of the common agricultural policy)	Unknown / public or private payment for ecosystem services and goods

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Unclear EU financial support for hedge management (instability of the common agricultural policy)	Unknown / public or private payment for ecosystem services and goods

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Les haies Rurales : rôles, création, entretien / Fabien LIAGRE / 2006 / ISBN 2-85557-137-5

Available from where? Costs?

Edition France Agricole / 40 €