Enfoques

Subsidies for conservation agriculture [Suiza]

Umstellungsverträge

approaches_2632 - Suiza

Visualizar secciones

Expandir todo
Completado: 92%

1. Información general

1.2 Detalles de contacto de las personas de referencia e instituciones involucradas en la evaluación y la documentación del Enfoque

Persona(s) de referencia clave/s

Especialista MST:

Wyler Roman

Suiza

Especialista MST:

Hofer Peter

+41 (0)31 970 53 37

Peter.hofer@vol.be.ch

Amt für Landwirtschaft und Natur des Kantons Bern LANAT

Rütti, 3052 Zollikofen

Suiza

Nombre de la(s) institución(es) que facilitaron la documentación/ evaluación del Enfoque si fuera relevante)
Amt für Landwirtschaft und Natur des Kantons Bern (LANAT) - Suiza

1.3 Condiciones referidas al uso de datos documentados mediante WOCAT

El compilador y la/s persona(s) de referencia claves aceptan las condiciones acerca del uso de los datos documentados mediante WOCAT :

1.4 Referencia/s al/los Cuestionario(s) de Tecnologías MST

Direct seeding
technologies

Direct seeding [Suiza]

A cropping system which allows to plant the seeds directly into the soil without ploughing. The soil is covered with plant remainders.

  • Compilador: Unknown User

2. Descripción del Enfoque MST

2.1 Breve descripción del Enfoque

Land users commit to apply conservation agriculture on parts of their land for a period of 5 years. In return they get subsidies during this period.

2.2 Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST

Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST:

Aims / objectives: The Swiss environment protection law defines that soil fertility must be conserved on a long term basis. The cantons have to execute this national law. The way this is done differs from canton to canton. In this study the strategy of the canton of Berne is documented. It has three major goals: The prevention of soil erosion, the reduction of nitrate wash out and the prevention of soil compaction.

Methods: To reach these goals, farmers who accept to use conservation technologies can get additional subsidies for a period of 5 years. Furthermore they are supported by advisors. In this way land users are encouraged to change to soil conservation technologies, financial risk during the establishment phase is reduced due to the subsidies. The approach consist basically of a contract between land users and the office for soil conservation, in which land users commit to apply only soil conservation technologies on parts or on all their land during a period of 5 years. During that time direct seeding must be applied at least 2 times for main crops and for half of the catch crops. For the remaining crops ploughing is not allowed either. Technologies which reduce the reworking of the soil such as maize strip tillage ('Streifenfrässaat') or mulching need to be applied. In return land users get subsidies (during 5 years) which depend on the crop and the technology used. The highest subsidies are granted if direct seeding is used. The office for soil conservation is running a demonstration study comparing direct seeding to conventional agriculture. This helps land users to estimate the effects the new technology would have when applied in practice. If a specific farm receives the subsidies depends on whether in the running year there is still financial resources for the program. Resources have been limited by the government. Additionally it depends on where the farm is located. Farms that located in regions of major nitrate contamination, enhanced risk of eronsion or soil compaction or in regions with drinking water sources or polluted surface water are incorporated first. Land users can have their whole farm or single fields under contract. However a specific field can not be under contract for more than one period (5 years). As soon as a farmer gets a contract, details about which crop to plant where and when, with which technology are discussed by the farmer and an advisor.

Other important information: The goal is to find the best solution for every land user. Meetings of that kind take place on a regular basis. Besides supporting the farmer, advisors also check if conservation agriculture technologies are really being applied. After the 5 years under contract, it is the land users choice whether they want to continue using conservation technologies or not. Monitoring of the office for soil conservation shows that 85% keep on using conservation technologies. Its seems that the approach has a long term influence and subsidies are needed in the beginning only.

2.3 Fotos del Enfoque

2.5 País/ región/ lugares donde el Enfoque fue aplicado

País:

Suiza

Región/ Estado/ Provincia:

Canton of Berne

2.6 Fechas de inicio y conclusión del Enfoque

Indique año del inicio:

1996

Comentarios:

It is possible to get subsidies in the whole canton of Berne. Cropland area in the canton is 539 km2, 2517 ha were under contract in the year 2006.

2.7 Tipo de Enfoque

  • proyecto/ basado en un programa

2.8 Propósitos/ objetivos principales del Enfoque

The Approach focused on SLM only

Spreading of conservation agriculture in areas with an enhanced risk for soil erosion and or washing out of nutritients. Good quality support so that farmers will not have lower crop yield due to the technology and therefore continue using conservation agriculture after 5 years without external support.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Water erosion under intense rainfall. Washing out of Nitrate to the ground water. Soil compaction.

2.9 Condiciones que facilitan o impiden la implementación de la/s Tecnología/s aplicadas bajo el Enfoque

normas y valores sociales/ culturales/ religiosos
  • impiden

Ploughing is an important part of the tradition of agriculture. People are very critical towards no-tillage technologies, since they don't fit the common understanding of agriculture.

Treatment through the SLM Approach: The people working in the project are farmers themselves. They can give on their practical experience. Furthermore a demonstration study can be visited

disponibilidad/ acceso a recursos y servicios financieros
  • impiden

Most farmers have achinery for conventional agriculture. To change to conservation agriculture major investments need to be done or contractors need to be tasked. Furthermore crop yield can be lowered in the beginning.

Treatment through the SLM Approach: When changing to conservation agriculture farmers are supported financially for a period of 5 years.With this money the risk in case of crop failure ond the costs for a contractor are lowered.farmers can test a new techniquewithout major expenses or risks

marco de trabajo legal (tenencia de tierra, derechos de uso de tierra y agua)
  • impiden

If the owner of the farm changes, the new owner often returns to conventional agriculture.

Treatment through the SLM Approach: No solution inside the project

The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights hindered a little the approach implementation In Switzerland the number of farms is decreasing. New owners of land sometimes change back to conventional agriculture. It is possible however, that the new owner introduces conservation technologies.

otros
  • impiden

In Switzerland there are subsidies to support farmers in hilly terrain. This encourages farmers plant crops on steeper slopes and therefore enhances the risk of erosion. This is not a constraint for the technology however.

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Conservation agriculture helps to reduce erosion. However the project cannot change the fact, that these subsidies enhance the risk of erosion.

3. Participación y roles de las partes interesadas involucradas

3.1 Partes interesadas involucradas en el Enfoque y sus roles

  • usuarios locales de tierras/ comunidades locales

Contracts are signed by the office for soil conservation and the head of the farm, who in general is male. The decision about which technology is applied is usually taken at the household level including both women and men.

  • especialistas MST/consejeros agrícolas
  • gobierno nacional (planificadores, autoridades)

The national government tasked the cantons with soil conservation. Therefore approaches differ from canton to canton.

3.2 Involucramiento de los usuarios locales de tierras/ comunidades locales en las distintas fases del Enfoque
Involucramiento de los usuarios locales de tierras/ comunidades locales Especifique quién se involucró y describa las actividades
iniciación/ motivación ninguno The project was introduced through the office for soil conservation
planificación interactivo Landusers who wish to get subsidies have contact the office for soil conservation. It is the land users decision on which of their fields they want apply the technology.
implementación apoyo externo Land user get subsidies for a period of 5 years, during which they have to apply soil conservation technologies. To actually use the technology they task a contractor or do the work on their own.
monitoreo y evaluación interactivo As there are discussions with the advisor on a regular basis, the implementation of the technology is monitored both by the farmer and the advisor.
Research ninguno There is a demonstration study where direct seeding and conventional agriculture is compared.

3.3 Flujograma (si estuviera disponible)

Descripción:

Interactions between the office for soil conservation and land users during the progression of the project.

Autor:

Roman Wyler

3.4 La toma de decisiones en la selección de Tecnología(s) MST

Especifique quién decidió la selección de las Tecnología/ Tecnologías a implementarse:
  • principalmente por especialistas MST en consulta con usuarios de tierras
Explique:

The decisions were taken by the office for soil conservation. Since these people are working as farmers, too, land users perspective could be included.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. To get the subsidies criteria from the contract need to be accepted. Besides this, land users can decide on their own how land is cultivated.

4. Apoyo técnico, fortalecimiento institucional y gestión del conocimiento

4.1 Construcción de capacidades / capacitación

¿Se proporcionó la capacitación a usuarios de tierras/ otras partes interesadas?

No

4.2 Servicio de asesoría

¿Los usuarios de tierras tienen acceso a un servicio de asesoría?

Especifique si servicio proporcionado se realizó:
  • en los campos de los usuarios de tierras
Describa/ comentarios:

nnual meetings between land user and advisor; Key elements: Technical support, Planning of crop rotation and technologies applied, Monitoring

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; Following a study of the office for soil conservation most land users continue to use conservation technologies after the end of the contract.

4.3 Fortalecimiento institucional (desarrollo institucional)

¿Se establecieron o fortalecieron instituciones mediante el Enfoque?
  • sí, un poco
Especifique el nivel o los niveles en los que se fortalecieron o establecieron las instituciones:
  • local
Proporcione detalles adicionales:

The office for soil conservation was involved in Swiss no-till, which is a platform to exchange knowledge.

4.4 Monitoreo y evaluación

¿El monitoreo y la evaluación forman parte del Enfoque?

Comentarios:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: advisory meetings

technical aspects were regular monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: advisory meetings

economic / production aspects were None monitored by 0 through measurements; indicators: farmer himself

area treated aspects were None monitored by government through measurements; indicators: only the area under contract is known

no. of land users involved aspects were None monitored by 0 through None; indicators: only the number of land users under contract is known

survey aspects were None monitored by land users through None; indicators: afther the first two years there was an evalution of the project. Farmers were asked for their opini

4.5 Investigación

¿La investigación formó parte del Enfoque?

Especifique los temas:
  • tecnología
Proporcione detalles adicionales e indique quién hizo la investigación:

Research is not part of the actual project. However the advisors are involved in research projects through other activities. Therefore new knowledge is usually incorporated in the advisory meetings.

Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

5. Financiamiento y apoyo material externo

5.1 Presupuesto anual para el componente MST del Enfoque

Si no se conoce el presupuesto anual preciso, indique el rango:
  • 100,000-1,000,000
Comentarios (ej. fuentes principales de financiamiento/ donantes principales):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: government (Kanton Bern): 100.0%

5.2 Apoyo financiero/material proporcionado a los usuarios de tierras

¿Los usuarios de tierras recibieron financiamiento/ apoyo material para implementar la Tecnología/ Tecnologías? :

Si respondió sí, especifique el tipo o los tipos de apoyo, condiciones y proveedor(es) :

Canton of Berne

5.3 Subsidios para insumos específicos (incluyendo mano de obra)

  • agrícola
Especifique qué insumos se subsidiaron En qué grado Especifique los subsidios
semillas parcialmente financiado
fertilizantes parcialmente financiado
Comentarios:

There are subsidies per field under contract for a period of 5 years. During that time direct seeding must be applied at least 2 times for main crops and for half of the catch crops. For the remaining crops ploughing is not allowed either.

5.4 Crédito

¿Se proporcionó crédito bajo el Enfoque para actividades MST?

No

6. Análisis de impacto y comentarios de conclusión

6.1 Impactos del Enfoque

¿El Enfoque ayudó a los usuarios de tierras a implementar y mantener Tecnologías MST?
  • No
  • Sí, un poco
  • Sí, moderadamente
  • Sí, mucho

the advisory meetings help land users to better understand soil processes.

¿El Enfoque empoderó a grupos en desventaja social y económica?
  • No
  • Sí, un poco
  • Sí, moderadamente
  • Sí, mucho
Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
  • No
  • Sí, un poco
  • Sí, moderadamente
  • Sí, mucho

Other cantons in Switzerland have started to subsidise conservation agriculture too.

Did the Approach lead to improved livelihoods / human well-being?
  • No
  • Sí, un poco
  • Sí, moderadamente
  • Sí, mucho

income is slightly enhanced in most cases.

Did the Approach help to alleviate poverty?
  • No
  • Sí, un poco
  • Sí, moderadamente
  • Sí, mucho

6.2 Motivación principal del usuario de la tierra para implementar MST

  • incremento de la renta(bilidad), proporción mejorada de costo-beneficio
  • pagos/ subsidios
  • conciencia medioambiental

prevention of erosion

6.3 Sostenibilidad de las actividades del Enfoque

¿Pueden los usuarios de tierras sostener lo que se implementó mediante el Enfoque (sin apoyo externo)?
Si respondió que sí, describa cómo:

on a long term perspective conservation agriculture is rather cheaper. Only in the beginning it costs more.

6.4 Fortalezas/ ventajas del Enfoque

Fuerzas/ ventajas/ oportunidades desde la perspectiva del usuario de la tierra
Not land user, but advisor of the project!
The structure of the project enables individual solutions. Still there are incentives for conservation agriculture. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Working together with the land users, searching for the best individual solution.)
After the end of the contract, there are no costs anymore. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: armers should be supported as good as possible, so that they are familiar with the technology and continue to apply it after the end of the contract.)
Advisors involved in the project all have an agricultural background, they are therefore familiar with the problems of farmers. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Working together with the farmers and trying adjust the program to their needs.)

6.5 Debilidades/ desventajas del Enfoque y formas de sobreponerse a ellos

Debilidades/ desventajas/ riesgos desde la perspectiva del usuario de la tierra ¿Cómo sobreponerse a ellas?
Compared to the total number of farms the number of participants is rather small. conditions for participation could be reduced in order to reach more people. This would however increase the costs.
Debilidades/ desventajas/ riesgos desde la perspectiva del compilador o de otra persona de referencia clave ¿Cómo sobreponerse a ellas?
Subsidies are expensive for the state. Since resources are limited there is already a waiting list for the farmers. soil consvervation should get a higher importance in politics. This is not the case because most people don't even know that soil degradation is a problem.
f there is no possibility to rent the machines in the region, costs are very high, even if there are subsidies. here it could be a possiblity to support contractors to buy the machines needed, so that land users could apply the technology at lower costs.

7. Referencias y vínculos

7.1 Métodos/ fuentes de información

  • visitas de campo, encuestas de campo
  • entrevistas con especialistas/ expertos en MST

7.2 Referencias a publicaciones disponibles

Título, autor, año, ISBN:

Amt für Landwirtschaft und Natur des Kantons Bern LANAT, Rütti, 3052 Zollikofen. Kanton Bern fördert Ressourcen schonenden Ackerbau.AGRARForschung 14 (3): 128-133, 2007.

¿Dónde se halla disponible? ¿Costo?

http://www.vol.be.ch/site/lanat-3155-mbressourcen.pdf

Vínculos y módulos

Expandir todo Colapsar todos

Módulos