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

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

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

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

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Reduced tillage of almonds and olives to improve physical and chemical soil properties and reduce runoff and soil erosion.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Reduced tillage of almond and olive orchards is used to decrease fuel use and emission of greenhouse gases and maintain a higher surface cover by weeds during winter time in order to protect the soil from erosion.

Purpose of the Technology: Under reduced tillage, the fields are ploughed twice a year: once in autumn (November) and once in late sping (June), whereas under conventional tillage fields are ploughed 3-5 times per year. The aim of reduced tillage is to maintain better surface cover during winter months to reduce runoff and soil erosion. After several years this will result in a higher soil organic matter content, a better soil structure, and a higher soil water infiltration capacity. The soil cover by weeds reduces the sensitivity of the soil to surface crusting and reduces surface runoff and soil erosion by up to 60%. Workload and energy use with reduced tillage is up to 50% lower than under conventional agriculture. The increased farm income prevents land abandonment of marginal lands with low productivities under conventional farming. Reduced tillage of almonds does not require special establishment activities or investments in specialized equipment.

Natural / human environment: Reduced tillage can easily be combined with green manure and ecological agriculture as is described in QT SPA05: ecological production of almonds and olives using green manure. Soils have mostly a shallow to medium depth (between 20-60 cm), and slopes are gentle to moderate between 5 and 15%. The climate is semi-arid with a mean annual rainfall around 300 mm. Droughts, centred in summer, commonly last for more than 4-5 months. Annual potential evapotranspiration rates greater than 1000 mm are common. The production system is highly mechanized and market oriented but depends strongly on agricultural subsidies. All cropland is privately owned.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

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

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

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Yes

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):

• Agroforestry

Cropland

• Tree and shrub cropping

Tree and shrub cropping - Specify crops:

• olive
• tree nuts (brazil nuts, pistachio, walnuts, almonds, etc.)

Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 220Longest growing period from month to month: Nov-Jun

Grazing land

Forest/ woodlands

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Lack of water for irrigation of crops limiting the crop types that can be planted as well as the crop yield of dryland farming. A lack of water availability seriously limits the production potential of the soil and results in a low vegetation/crop cover. The relatively high soil erosion rates cause various off-site related problems (i.e. flooding, reservoir siltation) and on-site problems (i.e. gully formation and reduced soil depth).

Livestock is grazing on crop residues

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• improved ground/ vegetation cover
• minimal soil disturbance

• Reduced tillage

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

• A7: Others

Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures

Specification of other agronomic measures: reduced tillage

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

• Wo: offsite degradation effects

chemical soil deterioration

• Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
• Cp: soil pollution

biological degradation

• Bp: increase of pests/ diseases, loss of predators

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Wo: offsite degradation effects, Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content, Cp: soil pollution, Bp: increase of pests / diseases, loss of predators

Main causes of degradation: soil management, education, access to knowledge and support services

Secondary causes of degradation: crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• prevent land degradation
• reduce land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: prevention of land degradation, mitigation / reduction of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Autumn ploughing of an almond orchard with reduced tillage

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: control of dispersed runoff: retain / trap, control of dispersed runoff: impede / retard, control of concentrated runoff: retain / trap, improvement of ground cover

Secondary technical functions: increase in organic matter, increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil

Author:

Joris de Vente

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

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

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: Costs were assessed comparing conventional land management with reduced tillage, which needs less inputs thus meaning a saving compared to conventional practice. Fuel price is the most determining factor affecting the costs. The local wage rate is 79 US$/

The local wage rate is 79 US$/day. Prices are for spring 2008.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Costs were assessed comparing conventional land management with reduced tillage, which needs less inputs thus meaning a saving compared to conventional practice (97 USD per hectare per year). Fuel price is the most determining factor affecting the costs.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Landforms: plateau / plains, hill slopes, footslopes, valley floors

5.3 Soils

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 fertility is low
Soil drainage/infiltration is poor
Soil water storage capacity is medium

5.4 Water availability and quality

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users

Population density: 10-50 persons/km2

Annual population growth: < 0.5%

80% of the land users are average wealthy and own 75% of the land.

Off-farm income specification: There is no difference in the ones who apply the technology and those who don’t. Most farmers do have an off-farm income for example from hunting, work in a factory, or office.

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

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

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

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

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

Climatological disasters

Hydrological disasters

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

Comments:

The crop type is sensitive to changes in water availability under the semi-arid conditions.

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

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?

• 91-100%

Comments:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Holland, J.M., 2004. The environmental consequences of adopting conservation tillage in Europe: reviewing the evidence. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 103(1): 1-25.