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

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

Democritus University of Thrace (Democritus University of Thrace) - Greece

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 Reference(s) to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Technologies

2.1 Short description of the Approach

Use of freshwater to combat soil salinization.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: Freshwater transport from surface streams/rivers in order to remediate saline soils.

Methods: Freshwater flushing/irrigation on saline soils.

Stages of implementation: 1) License from local authorities for surface water consumption. 2) License from local electricity provider. 3) Installation of water-pump. 4) Installation of water transport network. 5) Installation of water irrigation sprinklers.

Role of stakeholders: Awareness of local authorities concerning the problem in order to accelerate the issue of the licenses for freshwater exploitation.

2.3 Photos of the Approach

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

2.7 Type of Approach

• traditional/ indigenous

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach focused on SLM only

Remediation and prevention of soil salinization. Local farmer motivation in order to adopt the SLM technology.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: 1) Depending on the pump type (diesel or electric), operational cost is subject to current oil-electricity price. 2) Freshwater not appropriate for sodic type soils reclamation (may enhance soil degradation). 3) Licenses for water pumping from surface streams are subject to bureaucracy. 4) Lack of cash to invest, due to recent economic crisis.

2.9 Conditions enabling or hindering implementation of the Technology/ Technologies applied under the Approach

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach

	Involvement of local land users/ local communities	Specify who was involved and describe activities
initiation/ motivation	interactive	Discussions between SLM specialists and local land users.
planning	interactive	Discussions between SLM specialists and local land users.
implementation	interactive	Discussions between SLM specialists and local land users.
monitoring/ evaluation	none
Research	none

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:

• mainly SLM specialists, following consultation with land users

Explain:

After a thorough soil analysis and taking into account fresh-water availability in the area, SLM specialists agreed with land users upon the appropriate SLM technology.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users. As 2.1.5.1.

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users

Form of training:

• on-the-job
• farmer-to-farmer
• demonstration areas
• public meetings
• courses

Subjects covered:

Discussion with local farmers to realize the extension of the problem and the remediation strategies.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• at permanent centres

Describe/ comments:

Name of method used for advisory service: Discussions ; Key elements: In-situ discussions, Public debates, Demonstrations

Advisory service is inadequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; More funding needed as initiative.

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• no

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

economic / production aspects were regular monitored by land users through observations; indicators: Annual income

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Crop growth - quality

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by land users through observations; indicators: Surface soil & crop quality

area treated aspects were regular monitored by land users through observations

management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations

There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation

There were few changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: According to previous experience of land user.

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• ecology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

Thorough soil and water study of the area. Democritus University of Thrace.

Research was carried out on-farm

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• < 2,000

Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: government (Agricultural Union): 10.0%; international non-government (Desire Project ): 80.0%; local government (district, county, municipality, village etc) (Municipality of Topeiros): 10.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?

No

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• none

If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:

• voluntary

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?

• yes

If yes, describe how:

However with increasing oil prices it is requisite to install electricity and use electrical pumping stations. For small cropland fields the use of petroleum pumps is feasible.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
test 1 strength - luaa (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: sustain 1 - lu)

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
test 1 strength - ownbb (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: sustain 1 - own)

6.5 Weaknesses/ disadvantages of the Approach and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
test 1 weak - luxx	overcome 1 - lu

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
test 1 weak - ownzz	overcome 1 - own

7.1 Methods/ sources of information