Overview on the multi-functional landscape of Arkhiloskalo (Hanns Kirchmeir)

Community Land Use Planning in Arkhiloskalo (Geórgia)

Descrição

Unsustainable land use practices, such as deforestation, overgrazing and improper agricultural management systems are triggering the loss and degradation of valuable land resources in Georgia. Land use planning is one of the measures among others to contribute to support the integration of good Landscape and Sustainable Land Management (L-SLM) principles and practices into national policy and institutional framework to ensure the adoption of economically viable practices by rural communities. This technology is demonstrated in an application in Arkhiloskalo community in Eastern Georgia.

The globally ongoing degradation of land resources is threatening our food security and functioning ecosystem services. Therefore, restoration of degraded land as defined by the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG 15.3) has become a strategic objective of the UNCCD. To achieve Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN), action on the national level is needed. Georgia is one of the 113 countries (as of Sept. 2017) willing to take part in the Target Setting Program (TSP).
One of the major problems which Georgia is facing today is an absence of a comprehensive and integrated approach in the land management sector. In addition, an irrelevant legal framework sometimes leads to additional “conflicts” with the evolved national strategy and policy packages.
The land-use planning in the village of Arkhiloskalo, Dedoplistskaro Municipality is one of the pilot activities linked to LDN (Land Degradation Neutrality). The project financed by Global Environment Facility (GEF) / UN Environment Programm (UNEP) was implemented by local partner REC Caucasus (The Regional Environmental Centre for the Caucasus) through E.C.O. Institute of Ecology (Austria).
The land-use plan documents the status quo of the current land use. It is a baseline that can be used to steer and monitor future developments. The land-use plan is based on field assessments made in summer 2019 and builds a baseline for future assessments/monitoring. The land-use plan on the village level helps to break down national LDN targets to the local level. The plan and the development of land-use scenarios help to anticipate the future gains and losses of land resources and reflect the national LDN-target on the local level. Local stakeholders can identify areas of degradation risk and areas which can be rehabilitated. The Arkhiloskalo land-use plan contributes to sustainable land use by recognizing the current situation of land use and its spatial distribution as well as identifying the strength and weaknesses of the current situation.

Methodology:
Mapping for Arkhiloskalo land use plan: The mapping result is a detailed documentation of size and spatial distribution of land cover categories. Change in land cover is an important indicator to monitor the loss and gains of land resources according to the LDN monitoring concept.
For the mapping of the settlements, arable land and gardens, maps from Google Earth and digital cadastre of parcels were used. In the field maps, each polygon has an assigned Map-ID number, which is unique for each village. Polygons with the same land use category and land-use intensity can have the same Map-ID. Next to the drawing of the polygon on the map, in a field form each polygon is described by:
- Map-ID;
- Current Land use category;
- Current Land-use intensity;
- Remark (a specification of the polygon if needed).

Classifications of land use categories: The land-use classification is based on the CLC - Corine Land Classification System (The CORINE Land Cover is a vector map with a scale of 1:10 000, a minimum cartographic unit (MCU) of 100 m². It maps homogeneous landscape patterns). The Corine Land Classification system classifies urban fabric, mine, dump and construction sites, arable land, permanent crops, pastures, forests, shrubs and herbaceous vegetation associations, Open spaces with little or no vegetation, inland wetlands and waters.
The pastureland was differentiated into different productivity classes. In the field three classes of vegetation cover and species composition: low, medium, and high productivity were assessed.
For the mapping in Arkhiloskalo the following land use categories were selected: Settlements and human infrastructure (Code from the Corine Land Classification system – e.g. SHR, name – e.g. Houses); Forests and shrub-land; Agricultural managed land; Natural and semi-natural habitats.

Localização

Localização: The Village of Arkhiloskalo is locted in the Municipality of Dedoplitskaro., Kakheti, Geórgia

Nº de sites de tecnologia analisados: Local único

Geo-referência de locais selecionados
  • 46.44597, 41.40364

Difusão da tecnologia: Uniformemente difundida numa área (49.7 km²)

Em uma área permanentemente protegida?:

Data da implementação: 2018

Tipo de introdução
Steep slope to the Alasani Valley in the North (Hanns Kirchmeir)
Renewal of the main road in the village (Zone B) (Hanns Kirchmeir)

Classificação da Tecnologia

Objetivo principal
  • Melhora a produção
  • Reduz, previne, recupera a degradação do solo
  • Preserva ecossistema
  • Protege uma bacia/zonas a jusante – em combinação com outra tecnologia
  • Preservar/melhorar a biodiversidade
  • Reduzir riscos de desastre
  • Adaptar a mudanças climáticas/extremos e seus impactos
  • Atenuar a mudanças climáticas e seus impactos
  • Criar impacto econômico benéfico
  • Cria impacto social benéfico
Uso da terra
Uso do solo misturado dentro da mesma unidade de terra: Sim - Agrofloresta

  • Terra de cultivo
    • Cultura anual: cereais - trigo (primavera), cereais - trigo (inverno), culturas oleaginosas - girassol, colza, outros
    • Cultura de árvores e arbustos: frutas, outros, uvas
    Número de estações de cultivo por ano: 1
    O cultivo entre culturas é praticado? Não
    O rodízio de culturas é praticado? Não
  • Pastagem
    • Fazenda pecuária
    • Semiestabulação/sem pastagem
    • Pastos melhorados
    Tipo de animal: gado - leite e carne bovina (por exemplo, zebu)
    É praticado o manejo integrado de culturas e pecuária? Não
      EspécieContagem
      gado - leite e carne bovina (por exemplo, zebu)982
    • Assentamentos, infraestrutura - Assentamentos, edificações, Tráfego: estradas, ferrovias
    Abastecimento de água
    • Precipitação natural
    • Misto de precipitação natural-irrigado
    • Irrigação completa

    Objetivo relacionado à degradação da terra
    • Prevenir degradação do solo
    • Reduzir a degradação do solo
    • Recuperar/reabilitar solo severamente degradado
    • Adaptar à degradação do solo
    • Não aplicável
    Degradação abordada
    • Erosão do solo pelo vento - Et: Perda do solo superficial
    Grupo de GST
    • Quebra-vento/cerca de árvores
    • sistema rotativo (rotação de culturas, pousios, cultivo itinerante)
    • Gestão de resíduos/gestão de águas residuais
    • Land use planning
    Medidas de GST
    • Medidas de gestão - M2: Mudança de gestão/nível de intensidade, M7: Outros

    Desenho técnico

    Especificações técnicas
    Key stages of implementation:

    The land-use planning in the village of Arkhiloskalo, Dedoplistskaro Municipality is one of the pilot activities linked to LDN.
    Together with the local stakeholders, a land-use plan has been worked out. The procedure of defining a spatial development plan for a municipality goes along three stages:
    • Stage 1: Gather background information & implement pre-design studies and development of a mapping concept
    • Stage 2: Information of local stakeholders on this activity and implementation of an SWOT analysis (Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) related to the land use of the village
    • Stage 3: Mapping and analyzing the current land use
    • Stage 4: Preparation of a draft land use plan
    • Stage 5: Reflection of the draft land use plan with local stakeholders
    • Stage 6: Preparation of the final land use plan
    Author: Hanns Kirchmeir
    Absolute area sizes. The largest land use category is arable land (3,014 ha) followed by closed and open shrubland (515 ha and 483 ha, respectively). Vineyards cover a total of 447 ha whereas windbreaks cover 178 ha. Pastures with low productivity (104 ha) and roads and parking areas (102 ha) use almost the same amount of land. Other infrastructure covers 44 ha of land. Orchards, fruit trees and berry-culture use 21 ha of land. Closed deciduous forest (17 ha) covers only a few more hectares than pastures (13 ha). Houses are the most common plot category in Arkhiloskalo but use only around 13 ha of land which puts them on the same land-use level as pastures. Dumpsites (9 ha) use more than twice the area of closed coniferous forest (4 ha). Hay meadows and rivers cover around 2 ha of the area.
    Author: Hanns Kirchmeir
    Map of current land-use categories in Arkhiloskalo. The land-use classification in this approach is based on the Corine Land Classification System. It was split into sub-categories where needed to meet the needs of local land use practices.
    Author: Hanns Kirchmeir
    Based on the different land use, 4 different zones have been separated:
    •Zone A: Steep North Slope
    •Zone B. Settlement Area
    •Zone C: Zone of perennial Crops
    •Zone D: Zone of annual Crops
    Author: Hanns Kirchmeir

    Estabelecimento e manutenção: atividades, insumos e custos

    Cálculo de insumos e custos
    • Os custos são calculados: por área de tecnologia (tamanho e unidade de área: 50 km²)
    • Moeda utilizada para o cálculo de custos: USD
    • Taxa de câmbio (para USD): 1 USD = n.a
    • Custo salarial médio da mão-de-obra contratada por dia: national expert 100 USD
    Fatores mais importantes que afetam os custos
    The field work of mapping and analysis of results took a lot of time as well as the stakeholder meetings.
    Atividades de implantação
    1. Gather background information & implement pre-design studies and development of a mapping concept (Periodicidade/frequência: Winter/spring)
    2. Information of local stakeholders on this activity and implementation of an SWOT analysis (Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) related to the land use of the village (Periodicidade/frequência: Spring)
    3. Mapping and analyzing the current land use (Periodicidade/frequência: Summer)
    4. Preparation of a draft land use plan (Periodicidade/frequência: Autumn/Winter)
    5. Reflection of the draft land use plan with local stakeholders (Periodicidade/frequência: Autumn/Winter)
    6. Preparation of the final land use plan (Periodicidade/frequência: Autumn/Winter)
    Custos totais de estabelecimento (estimativa)
    15000,0
    Atividades de manutenção
    n.a.

    Ambiente natural

    Média pluviométrica anual
    • <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
    Zona agroclimática
    • úmido
    • Subúmido
    • Semiárido
    • Árido
    Especificações sobre o clima
    The driest month is January, with 25 mm of rainfall. The greatest amount of precipitation occurs in June, with an average of 108 mm. The difference in precipitation between the driest month and the wettest month is 83 mm.
    Nome da estação meteorológica: Dedoplistskaro Met. Station
    The climate is warm and temperate in Dedoplistskaro. The average annual temperature in Dedoplistskaro is 11.3 °C. The warmest month of the year is July, with an average temperature of 22.7 °C. The lowest average temperatures in the year occur in January, when it is around 0.1 °C.
    Inclinação
    • Plano (0-2%)
    • Suave ondulado (3-5%)
    • Ondulado (6-10%)
    • Moderadamente ondulado (11-15%)
    • Forte ondulado (16-30%)
    • Montanhoso (31-60%)
    • Escarpado (>60%)
    Formas de relevo
    • Planalto/planície
    • Cumes
    • Encosta de serra
    • Encosta de morro
    • Sopés
    • Fundos de vale
    Altitude
    • 0-100 m s.n.m.
    • 101-500 m s.n.m.
    • 501-1.000 m s.n.m.
    • 1.001-1.500 m s.n.m.
    • 1.501-2.000 m s.n.m.
    • 2.001-2.500 m s.n.m.
    • 2.501-3.000 m s.n.m.
    • 3.001-4.000 m s.n.m.
    • > 4.000 m s.n.m.
    A tecnologia é aplicada em
    • Posições convexas
    • Posições côncavas
    • Não relevante
    Profundidade do solo
    • Muito raso (0-20 cm)
    • Raso (21-50 cm)
    • Moderadamente profundo (51-80 cm)
    • Profundo (81-120 cm)
    • Muito profundo (>120 cm)
    Textura do solo (superficial)
    • Grosso/fino (arenoso)
    • Médio (limoso, siltoso)
    • Fino/pesado (argila)
    Textura do solo (>20 cm abaixo da superfície)
    • Grosso/fino (arenoso)
    • Médio (limoso, siltoso)
    • Fino/pesado (argila)
    Teor de matéria orgânica do solo superior
    • Alto (>3%)
    • Médio (1-3%)
    • Baixo (<1%)
    Lençol freático
    • Na superfície
    • < 5 m
    • 5-50 m
    • > 50 m
    Disponibilidade de água de superfície
    • Excesso
    • Bom
    • Médio
    • Precário/nenhum
    Qualidade da água (não tratada)
    • Água potável boa
    • Água potável precária (tratamento necessário)
    • apenas para uso agrícola (irrigação)
    • Inutilizável
    A qualidade da água refere-se a: águas subterrâneas
    A salinidade é um problema?
    • Sim
    • Não

    Ocorrência de enchentes
    • Sim
    • Não
    Diversidade de espécies
    • Alto
    • Médio
    • Baixo
    Diversidade de habitat
    • Alto
    • Médio
    • Baixo

    Características dos usuários da terra que utilizam a tecnologia

    Orientação de mercado
    • Subsistência (autoabastecimento)
    • misto (subsistência/comercial)
    • Comercial/mercado
    Rendimento não agrícola
    • Menos de 10% de toda renda
    • 10-50% de toda renda
    • >50% de toda renda
    Nível relativo de riqueza
    • Muito pobre
    • Pobre
    • Média
    • Rico
    • Muito rico
    Nível de mecanização
    • Trabalho manual
    • Tração animal
    • Mecanizado/motorizado
    Sedentário ou nômade
    • Sedentário
    • Semi-nômade
    • Nômade
    Indivíduos ou grupos
    • Indivíduo/unidade familiar
    • Grupos/comunidade
    • Cooperativa
    • Empregado (empresa, governo)
    Gênero
    • Mulheres
    • Homens
    Idade
    • Crianças
    • Jovens
    • meia-idade
    • idosos
    Área utilizada por residência
    • < 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
    Escala
    • Pequena escala
    • Média escala
    • Grande escala
    Propriedade da terra
    • Estado
    • Empresa
    • Comunitário/rural
    • Grupo
    • Indivíduo, não intitulado
    • Indivíduo, intitulado
    Direitos do uso da terra
    • Acesso livre (não organizado)
    • Comunitário (organizado)
    • Arrendado
    • Indivíduo
    Direitos do uso da água
    • Acesso livre (não organizado)
    • Comunitário (organizado)
    • Arrendado
    • Indivíduo
    Acesso a serviços e infraestrutura
    Saúde

    Pobre
    x
    Bom
    Educação

    Pobre
    x
    Bom
    Assistência técnica

    Pobre
    x
    Bom
    Mercados

    Pobre
    x
    Bom
    Energia

    Pobre
    x
    Bom
    Vias e transporte

    Pobre
    x
    Bom
    Água potável e saneamento

    Pobre
    x
    Bom
    Serviços financeiros

    Pobre
    x
    Bom

    Impactos

    Impactos socioeconômicos
    Produção agrícola
    diminuído
    x
    aumentado


    Effects will be visible based on the implementation of selected development scenario provided by Land use plan.

    Diversidade de produtos
    diminuído
    x
    aumentado


    Effects will be visible based on the implementation of selected development scenario provided by Land use plan.

    Diversidade de fontes de rendimento
    diminuído
    x
    aumentado


    Effects will be visible based on the implementation of selected development scenario provided by Land use plan.

    Impactos socioculturais
    Conhecimento de GST/ degradação da terra
    Reduzido
    x
    Melhorado


    Improvements by training and workshops, awareness raising.

    Impactos ecológicos
    Cobertura vegetal
    diminuído
    x
    aumentado


    Reduced grazing in zone A (north slope) will increase the vegetation cover. Effects will be visible based on the implementation of selected development scenario provided by Land use plan.

    Biomassa/carbono acima do solo
    diminuído
    x
    aumentado


    Reduced grazing in zone A (north slope) will increase the cover of shrubs and trees which will lead to increase of biomass. Effects will be visible based on the implementation of selected development scenario provided by Land use plan.

    Diversidade de habitat
    diminuído
    x
    aumentado


    Diversification of land use and restoration of windbreaks will increase habitat diversity. Effects will be visible based on the implementation of selected development scenario provided by Land use plan.

    Velocidade do vento
    aumentado
    x
    diminuído


    Improvement of windbreaks will reduce wind speed and topoil erosion. Effects will be visible based on the implementation of selected development scenario provided by Land use plan.

    Impactos fora do local
    Poluição de água subterrânea/rio
    aumentado
    x
    Reduzido


    Removal of uncontrolled dump sites will reduce groundwater and river pollution especially in the Alasani floodplain north of the community.

    Sedimentos transportados pelo vento
    aumentado
    x
    Reduzido


    The rehabilitation of windbreaks will have a positive impact on neighboring fields.

    Análise do custo-benefício

    Benefícios em relação aos custos de estabelecimento
    Retornos a curto prazo
    muito negativo
    x
    muito positivo

    Retornos a longo prazo
    muito negativo
    x
    muito positivo

    Benefícios em relação aos custos de manutenção
    Retornos a curto prazo
    muito negativo
    x
    muito positivo

    Retornos a longo prazo
    muito negativo
    x
    muito positivo

    The land use planning process is an investment in future developments. Return of investment can be expected in oncoming years. The mapping result is a detailed documentation of size and spatial distribution land cover categories. Change in land cover is an important indicator to monitor the loss and gains according to the LDN monitoring concept. The land-use plan is based on field assessments made in summer 2019 and built a baseline for future change assessments as it includes data on land-use intensity which will enable to consider change in time dynamics and to monitor changes on the ground.

    Mudança climática

    -

    Adoção e adaptação

    Porcentagem de usuários de terras na área que adotaram a Tecnologia
    • casos isolados/experimental
    • 1-10%
    • 11-50%
    • > 50%
    De todos aqueles que adotaram a Tecnologia, quantos o fizeram sem receber incentivos materiais?
    • 0-10%
    • 11-50%
    • 51-90%
    • 91-100%
    Número de residências e/ou área coberta
    It was implemented as show case for one community
    A tecnologia foi recentemente modificada para adaptar-se as condições variáveis?
    • Sim
    • Não
    A quais condições de mudança?
    • Mudança climática/extremo
    • Mercados dinâmicos
    • Disponibilidade de mão-de-obra (p. ex. devido à migração)

    Conclusões e experiências adquiridas

    Pontos fortes: visão do usuário de terra
    • The majority of the land users in village Arkhiloskalo have been using the same land and natural resources through decades and have good understanding of the natural conditions and climate change perspectives of the target area. The land use plan, the scenario development and the knowledge exchange in the workshops are have been considered as advantage for awareness raising, joint decision making and to start a positive change in short-term period.
    • The successful land-use system with improved environment conditions and benefit to the local farmers can lead to be a perfect example for the whole municipality of Dedoplistskaro as most part of its territory is agricultural land in semi-arid environment facing some rapid and significant challenges caused by climate change.
    Pontos fortes: a visão do/a compilador/a ou de outra pessoa capacitada
    • The land use plan will help to optimize the management and to eliminate present challenges in the 4 separate zones and promote improved sustainable land- use, land-management practices like crop rotation and re-establishment of windbreaks.
    • The land-use plan helps to identify the strength, opportunities, weaknesses and threats and contribute to sustainable land-use and its management. E.g.: in the Zone A, Steep North Slope there is a high risk, that the waste in the dumpsites will be washed down in an uncontrolled manner into the natural and semi-natural habitats of the slope. The waste is partly burned and the wash out of toxic solute can harm nature and ground water.
    • Application of the technology helps to optimize management measures, which will reduce costs and labour forces, e.g., by increasing productivity of land and productivity of vineyards in the Zone C: zone of perennial crops.
    • The land-use map integrates climate mitigation. E.g. it helps to plan the re-establishment of the windbreaks, which significantly contributes to the reduction of wind erosion in the Zone D: Zone of annual crops.
    • The terrestrial evaluation of the current land use can also serve to evaluate remote sensing technologies for semi-automatic classification of land cover categories.
    Pontos fracos/desvantagens/riscos: visão do usuário de terracomo superar
    • Lack of dialogue and trust could be one of the risks to succeed with the introduction of advanced methods of sustainable land management. The proposed sustainable land-use practices and pilot activities should be planned in a way to have results on the ground in a short-term period to keep local farmers motivated.
    Pontos fracos/desvantagens/riscos: a visão do/a compilador/a ou de outra pessoa capacitadacomo superar
    • Risks: Land use plan Interest of farmers, guesthouse providers and local residents are conflicting. This can be limited by good facilitation of focus group discussions between different stakeholder groups.
    • Local actors (farmers, guest house providers ...) are not interested in participating in the joint land-use planning process. It will need a well-coordinated communication design to include all the local stakeholders in the process of practical and theoretical introduction to the principles of sustainable land-use. The communication should emphasize potential economic benefits to the local households together with advantages of the sustainability. This can be a key factor to get most of the local stakeholders engaged with the proposed sustainable land-use practices.

    Referências

    Compilador/a
    • Hanns Kirchmeir
    Editores
    • Kety Tsereteli
    Revisor
    • Rima Mekdaschi Studer
    Data da documentação: 21 de Abril de 2020
    Última atualização: 30 de Abril de 2020
    Pessoas capacitadas
    Descrição completa no banco de dados do WOCAT
    Dados GST vinculados
    A documentação foi facilitada por
    Instituição Projeto
    Referências-chave
    • Pilot project on land degradation neutrality in Georgia: Final Report.2017.Huber, M., Joseph, A., Kirchmeir, H., Ghambashidze, G.: https://e-c-o.at/files/publications/downloads/D00813_ECO_policy_brief_LDN_Georgia_171025.pdf
    • Applying Landscape and Sustainable Land Management (L-SLM) for mitigating land degradation and contributing to poverty reduction in rural areas: Final report. 2017. Kirchmeir, H., Joseph, A., Huber, M.: Request at RECC Caucasus
    • limatologies at high resolution for the earth’s land surface areas. Sci. Data 4:170122 doi: 10.1038/sdata.2017. Karger, D. N. Conrad, O., Böhner, J., Kawohl, T., Kreft, H., Soria-Auza, R.W., Zimmermann, N.E., Linder H.P. & Kessler M.: https://www.nature.com/articles/sdata2017122
    This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International