1.2 参与方法评估和文件编制的资源人员和机构的联系方式

有助于对方法进行记录/评估的机构名称（如相关）

Soil Conservation Service of Iceland (Soil Conservation Service of Iceland) - 冰岛

1.3 关于使用通过WOCAT记录的数据的条件

编制者和关键资源人员接受有关使用通过WOCAT记录数据的条件。:

是

1.4 SLM技术问卷的参考

2.1 该方法的简要说明

Collaboration between farmers and a governmental institute on rangeland restoration and improved land management

2.2 该方法的详细说明

该方法的详细说明:

Aims / objectives: FHL is a governmental cost-share program operated by the SCSI and run at a national level. The FHL program has been ongoing since 1990. It started as an experimental program in Northeast Iceland, but couple of years later it was extended to a nationwide program. It builds on a voluntary participation of farmers that wants to restore damaged rangelands in the lowland. The program was established foremost to ease cooperation and strengthen the social bonds between the SCSI and sheep farmers. Nevertheless, increased rangeland restoration and improved grazing management were also key targets underpinning the establishment of the FHL project and forming the backbone of its prime policy.

Methods: The FHL program is run by the Soil Conservation Service of Iceland (SCSI) and targets on large-scale rangeland restoration, primarily among sheep farmers. The program builds on voluntary approaches and uses direct and indirect incentives to motivate its participants. Farmers that want to participate apply for a membership to the SCSI. The SCSI evaluates the condition of potential restoration areas and decides if they pass inspection. Each participant receives annually a fixed subsidy to purchase fertilizer and if needed, commercial grass seeds. Participants in the FHL project are visited approximately biannually by a regional SCSI advisor that estimates the restoration progress, discusses next steps and consults the participants on rangeland management related issues. Usually, each restoration area is treated for a couple of years before it’s considered to have passed the first level of the restoration process. The restoration areas are mapped and based on the maps, participants asked to make a 3-5 year long implementation plan.

Role of stakeholders: As land stewardship plays a vital role in this program, the role of the primary stakeholders (the farmers) is fundamental. They indeed drive the program although they get professional guidance and support from the extension offices of the SCSI. They are responsible for all implementations and land management at a local scale, within their own properties.

Other important information: no further information

2.3 该方法的照片

2.5 采用该方法的国家/地区/地点

2.6 该方法的开始和终止日期

2.7 方法的类型

• 最近的本地倡议/创新

2.8 该方法的主要目的/目标

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (rangeland restoration, sustainable land management, participatory approaches, stakeholder involvement)

To improve the ecological condition of the degraded rangelands for future generations. To facilitate behavioral changes toward more sustainable rangeland management.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: The main problems to be addressed by the approach were severe soil and vegetation degradation that substantially reduced biomass productivity, lack of financial support and local advisory system

2.9 推动或妨碍实施本办法所适用的技术的条件

3.1 该方法涉及的利益相关者及其职责

3.2 当地土地使用者/当地社区参与该方法的不同阶段

	当地土地使用者/当地社区的参与	指定参与人员并描述活动
启动/动机	自我动员
计划	互动
实施	自我动员
监测/评估	被动
Research	无

3.4 有关SLM技术选择的决策

具体说明谁有权决定选择要实施的技术:

• 主要是SLM专家，咨询土地使用者之后

解释:

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists

4.1 能力建设/培训

是否为土地使用者/其他利益相关者提供培训？:

是

明确受训人员:

• 土地使用者
• 现场工作人员/顾问

• Researchers

培训形式:

• 在职
• 农民对农民
• 示范区域
• 公开会议
• 课程

培训形式:

• local advisors that visit/contact all participants

涵盖的主题:

E.g. the role of ecosystem services for human well-being, ecosystem resilience and natural hazards, the importance of proper grazing management and the importance of merging local and external knowledge to secure more effective long-term social-ecological progress.

4.2 咨询服务

土地使用者有权使用咨询服务吗？:

是

说明/注释:

Advisory service is very adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities

4.4 监测和评估

监测和评估是该方法的一部分吗？:

是

注释:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: visual estimation

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by other through measurements; indicators: Researchers of the SCSI

technical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: Researchers in collaboration with the SCSI

socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by other through measurements; indicators: Researchers in collaboration with the SCSI

economic / production aspects were ad hoc monitored by other through observations

area treated aspects were 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: Reduced amount of fertilizer and seed when restoration areas are treated

4.5 研究

研究是该方法的一部分吗?

是

明确话题:

• 社会学
• 生态学

提供进一步的细节，并指出是谁做的研究:

Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

5.1 该方法中SLM组成部分的年度预算

注释（例如主要的资助来源/主要捐助者）:

Approach costs were met by the following donors: government: 78.0%; local government (district, county, municipality, village etc): 2.0%; local community / land user(s): 20.0%

5.2 为土地使用者提供财政/物质支援

土地使用者是否获得实施该技术的财政/物质支持？:

是

5.3 对特定投入的补贴（包括劳动力）

• 农业

如果土地使用者的劳动力是一项重要的投入，那么是不是:

• 自愿

注释:

Voluntary but also subsidies for purchasing inorganic fertilizer

6.1 方法的影响

6.2 土地使用者实施SLM的主要动机

6.3 方法活动的可持续性

土地使用者能否维持通过该方法实施的措施（无外部支持的情况下）？:

• 是

6.4 该方法的长处/优点

编制者或其他关键资源人员认为的长处/优势/机会
Builds up trust between farmers and governmental officials. Awareness raising and can facilitate discussions on improved rangeland management

7.1 方法/信息来源