Technologies

Bodenschonende Landnutzung mit dem On-Land-Pflug [Switzerland]

Bodenschonende Landnutzung mit dem On-Land-Pflug

technologies_1283 - Switzerland

View sections

Expand all Collapse all
Completeness: 69%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:

Deborah Niggli

land user:

Häberli Hansueli

Switzerland

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Preventing and Remediating degradation of soils in Europe through Land Care (EU-RECARE ) {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 155, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'CDE Centre for Development and Environment (CDE Centre for Development and Environment) - Switzerland', '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

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Im Biolandbau ist der pfluglose Ackerbau noch immer schwierig. Um seinen Boden vor Verdichtung zu schützen und den Boden zu schonen, kann jedoch ein On-Land-Pflug eingesetzt werden, welcher im Vergleich zum konventionellen Pflug (20-25cm tief) nur 10-15cm tief pflügt.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Schon früh war dem Bauern eine bodenschonende Landnutzung wichtig. Seit den 1980er-Jahren werden die Felder deshalb ohne Herbizideinsatz bestellt. 2005 wurde der Betrieb schliesslich auf einen Biobetrieb umgestellt. Der pfluglose Ackerbau ist dabei noch schwierig. Trotzdem versucht der Bauer den Boden möglichst schonend zu bestellen. Das bedeutet, dass er seit 2002 den Boden nur noch oberflächig mit Scheibenegge, Federzahnegge oder zur Stoppelbereitung nach der Getreideernte mit dem Flügelschargrubber bearbeitet. Die Bearbeitungstiefe liegt dabei bei ca. 8 cm. Trotzdem kann er nicht ganz auf den Pflug verzichten. Der Umbruch der Kunstwiese erfolgt mit dem Onland-Pflug und auch zur Bekämpfung der Drahtwürmer wird dieser eingesetzt.

Purpose of the Technology: Mit dem Einsatz des Onland-Pflugs soll der Boden schonender bearbeitet werden, als mit dem konventionellen Pflug. Zudem wird dieser Onland-Pflug nur noch teilweise eingesetzt. Oft werden Felder auch gegrubbert oder Mulchsaat betrieben. Dies ermöglicht eine nachhaltige Bodenbearbeitung.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

Media Gallery

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

Country:

Switzerland

Region/ State/ Province:

Bern

Further specification of location:

Kirchlindach

Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 0.21 km2.

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

  • Mund-zu-Mund im Dorf
Comments (type of project, etc.):

2002 hat der Bauer mit ersten Versuchen angefangen. Der Preis für einen Onland-Pflug war anfangs sehr hoch, deshalb hat er ihn zusammen mit zwei anderen Bauern gekauft.

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

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

Cropland

Cropland

  • Annual cropping
Annual cropping - Specify crops:
  • cereals - maize
Grazing land

Grazing land

Comments:

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Grosse Landnutzungsprobleme sieht der Bauer in der Region keine. Erosion sei zwar ein Thema, doch sei die Bodenstruktur generell gut und tolerant gegenüber einer intensiven Bearbeitung. Zudem führe die aktuelle Agrarpolitik mit Beiträgen und Bemühungen zu nachhaltigen Anbauverfahren in die richtige Richtung.

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • minimal soil disturbance

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

agronomic measures

  • A3: Soil surface treatment
  • A4: Subsurface treatment
Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures

Type of agronomic measures: mixed cropping / intercropping, manure / compost / residues, minimum tillage

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

soil erosion by water

  • Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
  • Wo: offsite degradation effects
chemical soil deterioration

chemical soil deterioration

  • Cp: soil pollution
Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wo: offsite degradation effects, Cp: soil pollution

Main causes of degradation: soil management (konventioneller Anbau), deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires) (Abholzung)

Secondary causes of degradation: crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub) (Forderungen nach höherer Intensität), urbanisation and infrastructure development, change in temperature (Verschiebung Vegetationszonen macht Untersaaten wichtig)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:
  • prevent land degradation
Comments:

Main goals: prevention of land degradation

4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

{'additional_translations': {}, 'content_type': None, 'preview_image': '', 'key': 'Technical drawing', 'value': None, 'template': 'raw'}
Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: low

Technical knowledge required for land users: high (Das weitergegebene Wissen von Bauer zu Bauer ist wichtig. Zudem muss man die Maschine im Griff haben und ein Gespür für den richtigen Zeitpunkt des Einsatzes haben.)

Main technical functions: improvement of surface structure (crusting, sealing), improvement of topsoil structure (compaction)

Secondary technical functions: improvement of subsoil structure (hardpan)

Mixed cropping / intercropping
Material/ species: Untersaaten
Remarks: wichtig für Förderung Humusaufbau

Manure / compost / residues
Material/ species: Rindervollgülle und Biogasgülle

Minimum tillage
Material/ species: Onland-Pflug
Quantity/ density: 1

4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. Maschine anschaffen: ausleihen, kaufen, Lohnarbeiter anstellen

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 Maschine anschaffen: ausleihen, kaufen, Lohnarbeiter anstellen ha 1.0 18000.0 18000.0 33.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 18000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 18000.0
Comments:

Number of parties sharing: 3

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Einsatz Onland-Pflug bei Wechsel von Kunstwiese zu Mais

4.6 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: Onland-Pflug

5. Natural and human environment

5.1 Climate

Annual rainfall
  • < 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
Agro-climatic zone
  • sub-humid

Thermal climate class: temperate

5.2 Topography

Slopes on average:
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms:
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitudinal zone:
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Comments and further specifications on topography:

Altitudinal zone: 501-1000 m a.s.l. (560m a.s.l.)

5.3 Soils

Soil depth on average:
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil):
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • medium (1-3%)
If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Soil texture (topsoil): Medium (schwach humoser sandiger Lehm)
Soil fertility is high
Soil drainage/infiltration is good
Soil water storage capacity is high

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

5-50 m

Availability of surface water:

good

Water quality (untreated):

good drinking water

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:
  • high

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation of production system:
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income:
  • 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • average
Individuals or groups:
  • groups/ community
Level of mechanization:
  • manual work
  • mechanized/ motorized
Gender:
  • men
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users
Level of mechanization is mechanized and manual labour (Unkrautregulierung)
Market orientation is commercial/market (Fenaco, Biofarm)

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

  • < 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
Is this considered small-, medium- or large-scale (referring to local context)?
  • medium-scale

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

Land ownership:
  • individual, titled
Land use rights:
  • individual
Water use rights:
  • individual

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

health:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
education:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
technical assistance:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
employment (e.g. off-farm):
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
markets:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
energy:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
roads and transport:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
drinking water and sanitation:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
financial services:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-cultural impacts

community institutions

weakened
strengthened

conflict mitigation

worsened
improved

Improved livelihoods and human well-being

decreased
increased

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

surface runoff

increased
decreased
Soil

soil crusting/ sealing

increased
reduced

soil compaction

increased
reduced
Other ecological impacts

Soil structure

decreased
increased

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

buffering/ filtering capacity

reduced
improved

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm not well

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:

slightly positive

Long-term returns:

positive

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:

positive

Long-term returns:

very positive

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
  • 11-50%
Comments:

13% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

Comments on spontaneous adoption: 13% der Betriebe auf Gemeindeland

There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: Möglicherweise durch Druck von Agrarpolitik? Kollegen im ÖLN offen für Gespräche über Onland-Pflug, Interesse ist generell vorhanden, aber der Kick noch nicht da, denn die Wirtschaftlichkeit muss für jeden einzelnen auch stimmen.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Der Onland-Pflug fördert auch die Betriebsstrategie des Bauern hinsichtlich Humus-Aufbau.
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Der Onland-Pflug führt zu einer geringerer Bearbeitungstiefe von maximal 15cm. Damit wird die Bodenstruktur geschont und Verdichtung vermieden.

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Onland-Pflug kann verschieden eingestellt werden. Dabei soll eine möglichst geringe Tiefe beibehalten werden. Dies erfordert technisches Wissen.

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?
Der Anbau von Hackfrüchten ist eine Herausforderung, da er eine gewisse Tiefe benötigt. Die Agrarpolitik sollte auf Bearbeitungstiefen und Erosionsbekämpfung noch mehr Einfluss nehmen. Direktzahlungen sollten mit dem Schutz des Bodens enger zusammenhängen.

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules