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)

Interactive Soil Quality assessment in Europe and China for Agricultural productivity and Environmental Resilience (EU-iSQAPER)

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

OPtimal strategies to retAIN and re-use water and nutrients in small agricultural catchments across different soil-climatic regions in Europe (OPTAIN)

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

Department for Agronomy, University of Ljubljana - Slovenia

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 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology

Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?

No

Comments:

Prevenets exposure of soils to drought.

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Technology is based on changing cropland to grazing land due to shallow soils with high share of rocks. This is the cause for lower yields or loss of yield during drought periods.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

1.The technology is applied in flatlands of Ljubljana with an average altitude of 350 m.a.s.l. The average annual precipitation is 1400 mm. The area is characterized with often stormy precipitation events and occasional droughts. Silty loam soils in the area are moderately deep to deep with medium soil organic matter. Area has good availability of surface water and groundwater of good drinking quality. Area has medium biodiversity without salinity and flooding problems. Sedentary agriculture with mixed or commercial agriculture is practiced with less than 10% of income from off-farm. Individual farm households are average in wealth and they are basically mechanized/motorized. The examined farm household, as all housholds in the region has good access to all services and infrastructures. Farm is medium in scale with land owned partly by the farmer and partly leased from other private owners.

2. Cropland area was converted to permanent grassland or pasture land by sowing of grass and by a fence as protection. Grazing is organized in a rotation system between suckler cow's pasture and paddocks.

3. The purpose of the technology is to use the natural potential of the soils. As soils are shallow with low water holding capacity permanent grassland is much more resilient and adapted to the drought; permanent grassland needs not only less water, but as well less nutrients. Grass has the capacity to grow well after any rainfall event at any time of the growing period. During drought when, maize fields get dry, grasslands subsist and just wait until the rain falls. While maize yield is lost in drought years, grassland can sustain and nurrish animals until mid-autumn. Another advantage of grassland is its building up of organic matter in the soils.

4. Main activities to establish the grazing fields are fences and electricity instalments together with grass sowing. Main maintenance activities are regular checking of the fence and electricity power and regular cleaning cuts to remove the weed at least once a year.

5. Benefits are:
(1) soils are less exposed to adverse weather conditions like drought
(2) increase of soil organic matter
(3) better resilience of the land user against production loss
(4) rise of soil biodiversity
(5) better animal welfare
(6) land user benefit from growing customer interest for meat products.

6. Land users like this better use of land resources, as less productive soils have gained new meaning. But they, on the other hand, also blame the loss of cropland needed for their maize production.

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

Indicate year of implementation:

2000

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• 10-50 years ago

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through land users' innovation

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• preserve/ improve biodiversity
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
• create beneficial economic impact

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

Comments:

Main animal species and products: suckler cows for fresh meat production
Number of growing seasons per year: 1

3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

• Yes (Please fill out the questions below with regard to the land use before implementation of the Technology)

Comments:

Previous land use was cropland (silage maize/cereals/alfalfa).

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• pastoralism and grazing land management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

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

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

other/ national currency (specify):

EUR (€)

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

0.89

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Land preparation	vegetational period
2.	Grass sowing	All year arround, before fencing.
3.	Fence installation	winter, spring

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	Fence installation	EUR/hour	20.0	6.25	125.0	100.0
Labour	Land preparation	EUR/hour	2.0	6.25	12.5	100.0
Equipment	Fence (pillars, wires and electric fence energiser)	EUR/ha	3.0	266.0	798.0	100.0
Plant material	grass seeds	EUR/ha	3.0	200.0	600.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					1535.5
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					1725.28

If you are unable to break down the costs in the table above, give an estimation of the total costs of establishing the Technology:

7.0

Comments:

The fence system has to be renovated every 10 years.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Fence maintenance	all year around

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

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Checking the fence	EUR/hour	8.0	6.25	50.0	100.0
Equipment	electrical isolators for wooden pillars	pcs	100.0	0.2	20.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					70.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					78.65

Comments:

The fence system has to be renovated every 10 years.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Costs for fence establishment and electric fence energiser.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

No

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

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, not titled
• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• leased
• individual

Water use rights:

• individual

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Ecological impacts

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

	Season	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	moderately

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

• > 50%

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?

• 91-100%

6.6 Adaptation

Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?

No

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Strengths: less grass cutting in summer time as animals are grazing. Lower costs of production.
Advantages: animal welfare.
Opportunities: diversified landscape view is an additional value.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Strengths: better use of soil /land resource. Crop like maize would bring low yields and high costs.
Advantages: animal welfare / better conditions and increase in biodiversity.
Opportunities: adaptation to rising drought events.

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?
Weaknesses: transport of animals to the pasture in spring time.	They use lorry for transport.
Disadvantages: different parasites influencing animal health.	Regular use of medicine in risk areas.
Risks: soil compaction on heavy clay soils.	Lower density of animals.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Weaknesses: soil compaction; overgrazing with soil exposure to external weather conditions.	Livestock density is crucial to maintain good land management.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information