1.2 Detalhes do contato das pessoas capacitadas e instituições envolvidas na avaliação e documentação da tecnologia

Nome do projeto que facilitou a documentação/avaliação da Tecnologia (se relevante)

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

Nome da(s) instituição(ões) que facilitou(ram) a documentação/ avaliação da Tecnologia (se relevante)

Humboldt Universität zu Berlin (HU Berlin) - Alemanha

Nome da(s) instituição(ões) que facilitou(ram) a documentação/ avaliação da Tecnologia (se relevante)

Universität Hohenheim - Alemanha

Nome da(s) instituição(ões) que facilitou(ram) a documentação/ avaliação da Tecnologia (se relevante)

China Agricultural University (China Agricultural University) - China

1.3 Condições em relação ao uso da informação documentada através de WOCAT

O compilador e a(s) pessoa(s) capacitada(s) aceitam as condições relativas ao uso de dados documentados através do WOCAT:

Sim

1.4 Declaração de sustentabilidade da tecnologia descrita

A tecnologia descrita aqui é problemática em relação a degradação da terra de forma que não pode ser declarada uma tecnologia de gestão sustentável de terra?

Não

2.1 Descrição curta da tecnologia

Definição da tecnologia:

The technology combines the integration of native tree species into rubber monocultures with changed weed management to mitigate negative environmental impacts and to provide alternative income options for farmers.

2.2 Descrição detalhada da tecnologia

Descrição:

Natural rubber is a crucial renewable resource produced from the tree Hevea brasiliensis. Production is largely based on monoculture, often associated with chemical-based clean-weeding. This causes environmental problems such as loss of biodiversity, pesticide pollution and erosion of topsoil. The SLM-technology aims at mitigating negative impacts by interplanting the rubber with native tree species which have economic potential of their own. Changes in weed management are part of the package also.

Native (indigenous) tree species are integrated into mature rubber plantations. Criteria for species selection are: a) adapted to environmental conditions; b) shade tolerant; c) vertical growth not affected by light; d) conservation value; e) economic potential; f) easy to manage. Rubber trees are usually planted in rows at a spacing of 6-8 m, and an intra-row distance of 2.5 to 3 m. The native trees are planted between the rubber rows. The plantation should be mature as the canopy will have reached its highest density, and weed competition is naturally suppressed. The spacing of the native trees needs to be adapted to their growth potential and intended usage. After planting, regular monitoring is necessary to identify pests or diseases. The following species were selected for demonstration sites: 1) Parashorea chinensis, a valuable timber tree, 2) Taxus mairei, a multi-purpose tree, providing good timber but also an anti-cancer drug, taxol, and 3) Nyssa yunnanensis, selected for its conservation value. At the end of the economic life span of the rubber trees (about 30 years) there will be several options, but there are three main ones. First the rubber plantation can be replanted, although the harvest of the Parashorea chinensis trees would be premature. The Taxus mairei trees could be maintained through a new plantation cycle. Second, both, the rubber and the intercropped trees could be maintained for future timber and taxol production. Third, the plantation could be transformed into a sustainable forest managed scheme where the rubber trees are extracted step by step and the intercropped trees maintained for their intrinsic value.

Procedures for the selection and planting of the indigenous tree species are crucial. Identification should be based on suitability for the climate and soil as well as economic potential. The raising of tree seedlings requires experience and nursery propagation by experts might be required. Only healthy seedlings should be used. Planting should take place during rainy periods. Potted seedlings are better than bare-rooted seedlings since they establish better. Generally, weed management (if necessary) should shift from herbicide application to mechanical weeding. Grass competition needs to be avoided in any case! Controlled cover of natural undergrowth will reduce erosion and promote water infiltration.

The implementation site for the trials is located in Xishuangbanna Prefecture, Yunnan Province, SW China. The original vegetation was tropical rain and monsoon forest, but now there is a rich mosaic of different land-use and vegetation types. The whole region is exceptionally species rich and part of the Indo-Burma-Biodiversity Hotspot.

2.3 Fotos da tecnologia

2.5 País/região/locais onde a tecnologia foi aplicada e que estão cobertos nesta avaliação

2.6 Data da implementação

Caso o ano exato seja desconhecido, indique a data aproximada:

• 10-50 anos atrás

2.7 Introdução da tecnologia

• review on available knowledge on rubber management and history

Comentários (tipos de projeto, etc.):

The technology is a result of the synthesis of research findings of the SURUMER-project and a review of available publications on rubber management.

3.1 Principal/principais finalidade(s) da tecnologia

• Melhora a produção
• Preserva ecossistema
• Preservar/melhorar a biodiversidade

3.2 Tipo(s) atualizado(s) de uso da terra onde a tecnologia foi aplicada

Uso do solo misturado dentro da mesma unidade de terra:

Sim

Especificar o uso misto da terra (culturas/ pastoreio/ árvores):

• Agrofloresta

Comentários:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Large-scale expansion of rubber monocultures results in the loss of topsoil and siltation of streams with respective consequences for CO2 emissions (increased), soil degradation, water quality and stream ecology. The excessive application of agrochemicals adds to these problems. The monoculture practice combined with clean weeding results in plant biodiversity loss. The related simplification of habitat structures also leads to a considerable decline in animal biodiversity.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): The focus of land users is primarily on sustainable income, and their environmental concerns mainly relate to water provisioning (land user's point of view). In the farmers view: “The biggest environmental problem is water quantity. Rubber sucks out a lot of water, therefore we do have a water scarcity problem”. Farmers are aware of the contamination of drinking water due to the use of pesticides and herbicides in the rubber plantations.

Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Mixed: Mf: Agroforestry

Type of cropping system and major crops comments: The majority of farmers shifted to pure rubber growing, although many villages still have paddy rice fields.

3.4 Abastecimento de água

Abastecimento de água para a terra na qual a tecnologia é aplicada:

• Misto de precipitação natural-irrigado

3.5 Grupo de GST ao qual pertence a tecnologia

• Agrofloresta

3.6 Medidas de GST contendo a tecnologia

3.7 Principais tipos de degradação da terra abordados pela tecnologia

Comentários:

Main causes of degradation: deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires) (Replacement of forests by monocultures.), poverty / wealth (Older people still have the memory of extreme poverty. Rubber was the main driver to reduce poverty; high profit gained by rubber encouraged people in pursuit of large scale monoculture.), inputs and infrastructure: (roads, markets, distribution of water points, other, …) (A tremendously improved infrastructure allows the establishment of plantations even in previously remote areas.), governance / institutional (Strong support from government in terms of subsidy and other incentives from 1980s to 2000s; subsidies are more recently reduced)
Secondary causes of degradation: crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub) (Clear-weeding, mainly with herbicides.), disturbance of water cycle (infiltration / runoff) (Removal of natural vegetation leads to higher runoff), land tenure (Introduction of Household Responsibility System in 1980s gave use-right to farmers. This pushed decisions on transformating natural forests to monocultures. No full property rights could hinder could), labour availability (Compared to the traditional agricultural system, rubber monocultures require less labour. Recently, there is even less labour available due to the relatively low income gained by rubber), education, access to knowledge and support services (The awareness about ecosystem services and functions is still poorly developed.), war and conflicts (Chinese government´s objective to be independent on important strategic resources such as rubber)

3.8 Redução, prevenção ou recuperação da degradação do solo

Especifique o objetivo da tecnologia em relação a degradação da terra:

• Reduzir a degradação do solo
• Recuperar/reabilitar solo severamente degradado

4.1 Desenho técnico da tecnologia

4.2 Informação geral em relação ao cálculo de entradas e custos

Outro/moeda nacional (especifique):

RMB

Se for relevante, indique a taxa de câmbio do USD para moeda local (por exemplo, 1 USD = 79,9 Real): 1 USD =:

6,3

4.3 Atividades de implantação

	Atividade	Periodicidade (estação do ano)
1.	1.Seedling acquisition and transport	before or during rainy season
2.	2.Planting of seedlings in rainy season	rainy season
3.	Weed management with brush cutters.	? no experience

4.4 Custos e entradas necessárias para a implantação

	Especifique a entrada	Unidade	Quantidade	Custos por unidade	Custos totais por entrada	% dos custos arcados pelos usuários da terra
Mão-de-obra	labour	ha	1,0	80,0	80,0	100,0
Equipamento	machine use	ha	1,0	80,0	80,0
Equipamento	animal traction	ha	1,0	8,0	8,0	100,0
Material vegetal	seedlings	ha	1,0	2400,0	2400,0
Custos totais para a implantação da tecnologia					2568,0
Custos totais para o estabelecimento da Tecnologia em USD					407,62

Comentários:

Duration of establishment phase: 0.07 month(s)

4.5 Atividades recorrentes/manutenção

	Atividade	Periodicidade/frequência
1.	1.Control of pests and diseases	monthly

4.6 Custos e entradas necessárias pata a manutenção/atividades recorrentes (por ano)

	Especifique a entrada	Unidade	Quantidade	Custos por unidade	Custos totais por entrada	% dos custos arcados pelos usuários da terra
Mão-de-obra	labour	ha	1,0	96,0	96,0	100,0
Custos totais para a manutenção da tecnologia					96,0
Custos totais de manutenção da Tecnologia em USD					15,24

Comentários:

The costs are based on the establishment of 3 demonstration plots of ca. 1 ha each. It should be possible to considerably reduce the costs by producing seedlings on site.

4.7 Fatores mais importantes que afetam os custos

Descreva os fatores mais determinantes que afetam os custos:

Seedling costs are by far the major cost factor. Since the selected species are very unusual and don't have a considerable market they were extremely expensive. Since Taxus is also a reputed medicinal plant, it might also have influenced the price. All other costs are actually negligible compared to the costs of the seedlings. In this case the establishment of an own nursery might considerably reduce the costs, since propagation at least of Taxus and Parashorea is easy if the seeds can be acquired.

5.1 Clima

5.2 Topografia

5.3 Solos

5.4 Disponibilidade e qualidade de água

5.5 Biodiversidade

5.6 Características dos usuários da terra que utilizam a tecnologia

Indique outras características relevantes dos usuários da terra:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly Leaders / privileged
Difference in the involvement of women and men: So far, the number of persons applying the technology is still too low to draw any meaningful conclusion.
Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
Annual population growth: < 0.5% (farmers have been well off in the past, currently they are under pressure due to the very low rubber).

5.7 Área média de terrenos utilizados pelos usuários de terrenos que aplicam a Tecnologia

5.8 Propriedade de terra, direitos de uso da terra e de uso da água

Propriedade da terra:

• Estado

Direitos do uso da terra:

• Indivíduo

Comentários:

Water use rights seem to be an issue.

5.9 Acesso a serviços e infraestrutura

6.1 Impactos no local mostrados pela tecnologia

Impactos socioeconômicos

Produção

Renda e custos

Impactos socioculturais

Impactos ecológicos

Ciclo hídrico/escoamento

Solo

Biodiversidade: vegetação, animais

6.2 Impactos externos mostrados pela tecnologia

6.3 Exposição e sensibilidade da tecnologia às mudanças climáticas graduais e extremos/desastres relacionados ao clima (conforme o ponto de vista dos usuários da terra)

Mudança climática gradual

Mudança climática gradual

	Estação do ano	aumento ou diminuição	Como a tecnologia lida com isso?
Temperatura anual		aumento	bem

Extremos (desastres) relacionados ao clima

Desastres meteorológicos

	Como a tecnologia lida com isso?
Temporal local	bem
Tempestade de vento local	não conhecido

Desastres climatológicos

	Como a tecnologia lida com isso?
Seca	não bem

Desastres hidrológicos

	Como a tecnologia lida com isso?
Inundação geral (rio)	não conhecido

Outras consequências relacionadas ao clima

Outras consequências relacionadas ao clima

	Como a tecnologia lida com isso?
Período de crescimento reduzido	não bem
cold spells	não bem

Comentários:

The above assessment is based on the fact that we are actually dealing with plants adapted to tropical conditions. Therefore, the species should be less affected by high temperatures and increasing rainfall, but might be sensitive to droughts. Nevertheless, there is no experience!

6.4 Análise do custo-benefício

Como os benefícios se comparam aos custos de implantação (do ponto de vista dos usuários da terra)?

Como os benefícios se comparam aos custos recorrentes/de manutenção(do ponto de vista dos usuários da terra)?

Comentários:

The establishment costs for the demo-sites have been very high, but could be considerably reduced if adopted by more farmers. The assessment above therefore needs verification!

6.5 Adoção da tecnologia

Comentários:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
3 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology. Comments on adoption trend: We experienced interest in the technology by farmers, but due to the lack of experience and the lack of affordable and accessible seedlings they are hesitant.

6.7 Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades da tecnologia

Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades na visão do usuário da terra
Additional income options.

Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades na visão do compilador ou de outra pessoa capacitada
The technology offers considerable long-term advantageous to farmers. It diversifies the product portfolio and good options for additional income in the future. Beyond the establishment it doesn't require much labour.

6.8 Pontos fracos, desvantagens/riscos da tecnologia e formas de superá-los

Pontos fracos/desvantagens/riscos na visão do usuário da terra	Como eles podem ser superados?
High investment costs.	Government subsidies.
Time until first returns can be expected. 5-10 years for taxol production

Pontos fracos/vantagens/riscos na visão do compilador ou de outra pessoa capacitada	Como eles podem ser superados?
The technology is based on a long-term perspective and thus favours farmers who have a such an outlook. But farmers with little land usually think short-term.	The current trend of rural-urban migration will support the technology since it can be easily combined with off-farm work. According to SURUMER findings off-farm income already contributes about one third of the overall household income in the rubber growing areas.
Current establishment costs are very high due to the lack of a seedling market.	If the technology becomes known and popular, more nurseries will produce seedlings which will reduce costs. Alternatively, farmers might establish their individual (or community) nurseries.
The technology requires considerable knowledge about tree ecology and tree breeding.	There should be extension officers at the local agricultural or forestry bureaus supporting farmers.

7.1 Métodos/fontes de informação

7.2 Referências às publicações disponíveis

Título, autor, ano, ISBN:

Ahrends, A. et al. (2015) Current trends of rubber plantation expansion may threaten biodiversity and livelihoods

Disponível de onde? Custos?

Global Environ Change, 34, 48-58.

Título, autor, ano, ISBN:

Langenberger, G. et al. (2016) Rubber intercropping: a viable concept for the 21st century?

Disponível de onde? Custos?

Agrofor Syst, 1-20.

Título, autor, ano, ISBN:

Liu, H. et al. (2016) Impact of herbicide application on soil erosion and induced carbon loss in a rubber plantation of Southwest China

Disponível de onde? Custos?

CATENA, 145, 180-192.