Technologies

Increasing organic matter content on arable land [Netherlands]

Creation: 08/15/2019 3:57 p.m.
Update: 08/16/2021 11:06 a.m.
Compiler: Alan Radbourne
Editors: David Norris, Sabine Reinsch
Reviewers: Renate Fleiner, William Critchley, Rima Mekdaschi Studer

Bodemverbetering landbouwgrond

technologies_5380 - Netherlands

View sections

Expand all

Completeness: 84%

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)

Compiler:

Hoogendijk Tijmen

Southern Agriculture and Horticulture Organization (ZLTO)

Netherlands

land user:

Schippers Michael

Nieuw Campen VOF

Netherlands

SLM specialist:

Dieleman Wico

Southern Agriculture and Horticulture Organization (ZLTO)

Netherlands

SLM specialist:

Lavet Laura

Southern Agriculture and Horticulture Organization (ZLTO)

Netherlands

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

European Interreg project FABulous Farmers {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 6194, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Zuidelijke Land en Tuinbouw Organisatie (ZLTO) - Netherlands', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 6194, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Zuidelijke Land en Tuinbouw Organisatie (ZLTO) - Netherlands', '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

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?

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

The organic matter content of arable land is increased by spreading mushroom compost ("champost"), growing green manure during the winter season, and reducing tillage

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Zeeland is the least populated area of the Netherlands. It consists of islands and peninsulas with almost half the area covered by water, but is also the largest agricultural province of the country. Significant areas are below sea level. Zeeland is known for its onion production, but also potatoes, grain legumes, sugar beet, wheat/grain and flax. The SLM technology described here, on Functional AgroBiodiversity, is applied in the North-West of the FABulous Farmers project pilot area, Zeeland.

The technology is being implemented on a 40 ha area after the harvest of the main crop in autumn. The land is fertilized with mushroom compost ("champost") a by-product of the mushroom production industry, then a cover crop is sown, which is cut and shallow tilled into the soil as a green manure in early spring.

The aim is to increase the organic matter content in the soil to support the growth of (micro-) organisms, improve the water buffering capacity and increase soil fertility. Improved soil health will support better crop growth and yields, with other inputs reduced, thus saving on costs. However, with machinery being used to spread the mushroom compost, the sowing of a green manure catchcrop, and mowing and tilling at the end of the season, the SLM technology is quite labour - and cost-intensive. This technology can be applied as a single operation, or repeated as long as the costs offset the benefits.

The compilation of this SLM is a part of the European Interreg project FABulous Farmers which aims to reduce the reliance on external inputs by encouraging the use of methods and interventions that increase the farm’s Functional AgroBiodiversity (FAB). Visit www.fabulousfarmers.eu and www.nweurope.eu/Fabulous-Farmers for more information.

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:

Netherlands

Region/ State/ Province:

Zeeland

Further specification of location:

Kamperland

Specify the spread of the Technology:

applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area

Is/are the technology site(s) located in a permanently protected area?

Comments:

Parcel R804, Nieuw Campen VOF
Lat 36.921
Lon 40.2062

2.6 Date of implementation

Indicate year of implementation:

2019

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

Interreg North-West Europe FABulous Farmers

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

improve production
reduce, prevent, restore land degradation

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Cropland

Annual cropping

Brassica napus, Buckwheat, fodder radish, clover, rye

Number of growing seasons per year:

Is intercropping practiced?

Is crop rotation practiced?

Yes

If yes, specify:

Rotation between crops such as Brassica napus (rapeseed), Buckwheat, fodder radish, clover, rye

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

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

No (Continue with question 3.4)

3.4 Water supply

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

mixed rainfed-irrigated

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

integrated soil fertility management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

A1: Vegetation/ soil cover
A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility

management measures

M2: Change of management/ intensity level

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

chemical soil deterioration

Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

reduce land degradation

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

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

per Technology area

Indicate size and area unit:

1ha

If using a local area unit, indicate conversion factor to one hectare (e.g. 1 ha = 2.47 acres): 1 ha =:

1ha = 2.47 acres

other/ national currency (specify):

Euro

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

0.85

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

150

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Spreading champost	August
2.	Cultivating the land	August
3.	Sowing cover crop	August
4.	Cutting and tilling catch crop as green manure	March

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	Spreading champost	day	3.0	150.0	450.0	100.0
Labour	Cultivation	day	3.0	150.0	450.0	100.0
Labour	Cover crop sowing	day	3.0	150.0	450.0	100.0
Labour	Cutting & tilling green manure	day	5.0	150.0	750.0	100.0
Equipment	Tractor & related attachments (already owned)	machinery	1.0			100.0
Plant material	Cover crop	per ha	40.0	30.0	1200.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Champost (mushroom compost)	per ha	40.0	30.0	1200.0	50.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					4500.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					5294.12

Comments:

Cost of compost purchase subsidised by the FAB Farmers project as a trial site for impact assessment.

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Comments:

No specific ongoing maintenence unless repeating technology each year or after a number of years. If so see above.

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

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

n/a

Comments:

No specific ongoing maintenence unless repeating technology each year. If so see above.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The cost of the mushroom compost, yet this is a waste product and so could become a cheaper option.

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

Specify average annual rainfall (if known), in mm:

800.00

Indicate the name of the reference meteorological station considered:

KNMI

Agro-climatic zone

sub-humid

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.

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

not relevant

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):

medium (loamy, silty)

Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface):

coarse/ light (sandy)

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.

Clay 13%
Org matter 1.2%
pH 5
Soil type Sabulous clay (zavel)
CEC 190 mmol/kg

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

< 5 m

Availability of surface water:

good

Water quality (untreated):

for agricultural use only (irrigation)

Water quality refers to:

both ground and surface water

Is water salinity a problem?

Yes

Specify:

There is a shallow salt water layer in the subsoil that increases the salinity level of ground and surface water.

Is flooding of the area occurring?

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:

medium

Habitat diversity:

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Sedentary or nomadic:

Sedentary

Market orientation of production system:

commercial/ market

Off-farm income:

less than 10% of all income

Relative level of wealth:

average

Individuals or groups:

cooperative

Level of mechanization:

mechanized/ motorized

Gender:

Age of land users:

middle-aged

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:

company

Land use rights:

individual

partnership

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Specify:

Land use rights are based on ownership or lease agreement

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-economic impacts

Production

crop production

decreased

increased

Comments/ specify:

Improved soil health and nutrient availability is improving crop production & quality

crop quality

decreased

increased

Comments/ specify:

Improved soil health and nutrient availability is improving crop production & quality

Income and costs

expenses on agricultural inputs

increased

decreased

Comments/ specify:

Champost is a relatively cheap form of compost as is a waste material and means fewer more expensive inputs are required.

Ecological impacts

Soil

soil moisture

decreased

increased

Comments/ specify:

Improvement in water holding capacity of soil with mushroom compost addition and less moisture loss due to cover crop

soil cover

reduced

improved

Comments/ specify:

Soil cover year round with use of cover crop

nutrient cycling/ recharge

decreased

increased

Comments/ specify:

Mushroom compost and cover crop integration as a green manure is recharging the soil with available nutrients

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

	Season	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	well
annual rainfall		increase	well
seasonal rainfall	autumn	decrease	well

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

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

Short-term returns:

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:

positive

Comments:

Soil health and nutrient availability is improving crop production and resilience.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

single cases/ experimental

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

0-10%

Comments:

Technology supported through SLM expert advice as part of the FABulous Farmers project and good price negotiated for mushroom compost to help repurpose waste material from mushroom farm.

6.6 Adaptation

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

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Soil health and nutrient availability is improving crops production and resilience.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Possibility of other waste or green manures to be utilised for local application to resource availability.
Sustainable fertilizer option that should help reduce input costs

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?
Higher cost of labour and inputs when using cover crops	Cost is unavoidable, yet benefits should outweigh cost.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Access to similar waste products may not be available locally if applied in other locations	Avoid large transport costs and other impacts if product is not available locally. Try a different approach.

7. References and links

Links and modules

Expand all