Institute full name:

Estación Experimental de Zonas Áridas

Institute acronym:

EEZA-CSIC

Institute profile:

EEZA is an Institute of the Spanish National Research Council, CSIC (Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas). EEZA has five Research Groups on Desertification and GeoEcology (DEGECO), Functional Ecology, Biodiversity Conservation, Conservation of Endangered Species, Ecological Morphology and Behavioural Ecology. The scientific interests of DEGECO include the assessment of landscape responses to human and climatic driving forces in extreme environments and the development of indicators of land condition and land degradation. The research is carried out at several scales ranging from plot to landscape level, and is mostly concerned with understanding the sources and processes of spatial heterogeneity in drylands, their implications on water balances, erosion systems and ecological connectivity, the search of scale links between field and remotely sensed data, and the off-site role of the marginal lands by providing water and other resources to their surrounding areas.

Website

www.eeza.csic.es

Address

Dept. Desertificación y Geoecología
Estación Experimental de Zonas Áridas
Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas
Carretera de Sacramento, s/n
E-04120, La Cañada de San Urbano - Almeria
Spain

Institute logo

Institute image

Involved personnel

Name	Contact details	Key qualifications	Photo
Dr. Albert Solé-Benet	Tel: +34 950 281 045 E-mail: albert@eeza.csic.es	Soil scientist, fundamental and applied research on pedology, soil structure and hydrological consequences of soil surface modification.
Prof. Dr. Juan Puigdefábregas	Tel: +34 950 281 045 E-mail: puigdefa@eeza.csic.es	Plant Ecologist, expert in the assessment of Desertification risks and on the dynamics of the spatial structure of vegetation as a source of adaptation to disturbances that lead to land degradation.
Dr. Francisco Domingo	Tel: +34 950 281 045 ext. 300. Email: poveda@eeza.csic.es	Bio-geo-chemistry and evapotranspiration, rainfall partitioning by canopies and water relations in arid environments.
Dr. Joris de Vente	Tel 1: +34 950 281 045 Ext 828 Tel 2: +34 968 396256 e-mail: joris@eeza.csic.es	Physical Geographer, expert in assessments of erosion, sediment yield and global change effects at the drainage basin scale. Experienced in hydrological modelling, floods, spatial planning, multi-criteria analysis, remote sensing, and GIS.
Dr. Yolanda Cantón	Tel: +34 950 015 959 e-mail: ycanton@ual.es	Assistant professor from the Department of Soil Science at the University of Almería; skills in satellite image analysis, GIS and DEM; experience in surface hydrology and erosion, and specifically in soil crusting.
Dr. María Asunción Romero Díaz	Tel: +968 363 144 e-mail: arodi@um.es	Professor from the Department of Geography at the University of Murcia; large experience in Mediterranean Geomorphology, specifically in soil erosion, badlands and floods; skills in runoff plot monitoring.
Carolina Boix-Fayos	Tel: +34 968 396371 e-mail: cboix@cebas.csic.es	Physical Geographer, expert in geomorphological processes at different spatial scales, concerning water, sediments and organic carbon dynamics. Experience in evaluation of factors determining soil erosion and sediment yield, including land use scenarios, stakeholder and conflict analysis.

{mosgmap mapid=6|height=350px|zoomtype=small|showmaptype=true}

Over the last two decades, the drainage basin of the Guadalentín in south-eastern Spain has been the study area for many studies dealing with land degradation. One of the reasons for the widespread interest in the Guadalentín basin is that land degradation is generally considered severe in large parts of the basin due to a combination of the Mediterranean climate, characterised by dry summers followed by intense autumn rainfall, an often steep topography with fragile soils on highly erodible lithologies. Moreover, initiated by political and socioeconomic changes, important land use changes have taken place over the last centuries, which have formed an important driver for further land degradation in the Guadalentín basin.

Soil erosion by rills and gullies forms one of the main causes of land degradation in the Guadalentín. Apart from the natural conditions favouring soil erosion (i.e. topography, climate and lithology), high soil erosion rates are often triggered by frequent tillage, uncontrolled land abandonment and improper reforestation techniques. Another land degradation problem is soil salinization due to overexploitation of aquifers. Measures to combat land degradation problems have been applied for over 100 years. Some of them have been successful, while others have failed.

Most farmers are part-time farmers and of older age. They are traditional dry land farmers. Other land users are the commercial farms (often investment companies).

Current Soil and Water Conservation practices:

• Contour plowing
• Terracing
• Re-forestation (subsidized)

Investment is required for a region or at local/farm level. Government intervention required? Is it a scale issue or attitude?

Added value of DESIRE for stakeholders

The process of bringing people together; farmers with farmers; farmers with people from ministry of agriculture, etc.

Study site stakeholder workshops
There were 6 farmers (> 50 years old), scientists, farmers' organisations, local government officers (3 municipalities, regional ministry of agriculture). Murcia has specific land management related subsidies for land users to control erosion.

Limitations for spontaneous implementation of soil and water conservation practices

• Institutional limitations
• (Lack of) government support for investment in terracing
• Mosaic landscape
• Investment costs
• Knowledge

Stakeholder groups
Land degradation in the Guadalentin affects the whole society either directly or indirectly at local, regional and even national level. Selection of the most relevant stakeholders therefore is a difficult task, but during the various research projects in the last decades it has been possible to identify the most relevant stakeholders regarding land degradation issues. Given the main objective of DESIRE to identify and evaluate existing and potential conservation measures to mitigate land degradation, stakeholders that actually make decisions on land use, either at the farm or the political level, as well as scientists, are considered the most relevant stakeholders within this project. The selection of stakeholders, in random order, includes the following groups:

• Individual farmers (both with dryland and irrigated land and both large and small properties)
• Agricultural cooperation’s (e.g. »COATO, »COAG-IR (link expired))
• Irrigation communities
• Representatives of the ministry of environment and agriculture at level of municipality, region and national.
• Local Agricultural Office (»Oficina Comarcal Agraria)
• National focal point of the UNCCD.
• Tourist administration
• Confederación Hidrográfica del Segura (»Segura Basin Water Authority)
• NGO’s (Ecologistas en acción, ANSE, etc.)
• Forest engineer private companies (e.g. Tracsa, Generala)
• Forester associations (e.g. Asociación de Propietarios Forestales de la Región de Murcia).
• Scientists (ecologist/geographer/sociologist/soil scientist)
• »Fundación Instituto Euromediterráneo del Agua
• »Instituto Universitario del Agua y del Medio Ambiente

Sustainability Goals

Source: discussions between stakeholders during two stakeholder workshops in 2007 – 2008

To help understand this complex picture it can be helpful to think in terms the dominant socio-economic and environmental forces that are driving the process of land degradation. These place pressures on the land which have particular impacts. Human society may have already made responses to those impacts, or may have knowledge about how they could respond. Decisions about which responses to make may also be governed by a range of international, national or local policy regulations and agreements.

In the Guadalentín study site, the same stakeholder workshop and questionnaires that were used to identify existing and potential response strategies (»Identifying strategies: Stakeholder workshop 1) also discussed and identified these driving forces; pressures; impacts; and the policy and regulation environment. This information was then used to inform the choice of »Field experiments and the scenarios used in »Simulated biophysical impact of remediation strategies and their financial viability.

Select map type

Land use: type Land use: trends Degradation: type Degradation: extent Degradation: degree Land conservation: groups Land conservation: extent Land conservation: measures Land conservation: effectiveness Land conservation: effectiveness trends Expert recommendations

Comments

Map version: 28Nov11

Introduction
In the Guadalentín basin in south-eastern Spain, land degradation is considered severe due to a combination of several factors. The semi-arid climate has dry summers followed by intense autumn rainfall, while there is a steep topography and fragile soils. Desertification takes the form of soil erosion and drought. Moreover, considerable land use changes have taken place over the last centuries, which is an important driving force for further degradation in the area. Different conservation techniques used are: water harvesting with irrigation by captured runoff water, minimum tillage, mulch and green manure.

The most dominant soil types in the Torrealvilla study area are Regosols, Fluvisols, Calcisols, Gypsisols and Leptosols (FAO, 2006). The experimental plots are located on Calcisols and Regosols under relatively gentle to moderate slopes between 5 and 15 %. The climate is semi-arid with a mean annual rainfall around 300 mm. Droughts, centered in summer commonly last for more than 4-5 months. Annual potential evapotranspiration rates larger than 1000 mm are common.

Desertification indices
The index was calculated for water erosion, tillage erosion and water stress. A single set of values is selected and the conservation techniques are implemented as good as possible, selecting a combination of variables related to the technologies. A distinction is made for almonds that grow as separated bushes with bare soil in between, and cereals which have a denser seasonal cover. The almonds grow on terraces, while the cereals are on gently sloping terrain.

Generally water erosion is identified as a moderate risk followed by tillage erosion (moderate) and water stress (no risk).

• Almonds and water harvesting: water harvesting cannot really be implemented except as runoff control which slightly decreases the water erosion, also the fields are on terraced land. Water stress is not identified as a problem. The experiment showed that water harvesting was a success in terms of yield increase although the effect on desertification was not very direct. From that point of view the assessment tool is correct.
• Almonds and reduced tillage: the tool shows a clear effect and water and tillage erosion reduce to low risk (in line with reality). Note that minimum tillage ignores the ploughing setting, so tillage operations have to be set to “no ploughing”.
• Almonds and green manure (green cover) is parameterized as sustainable farming “inducing cover” and soil erosion control measures with an increase of cover to “adequate 75%”. Oddly enough this does not influence water erosion which is comparable to the unmitigated situation. This is not according to reality.
• Cereals and minimum tillage: similar to Almonds and minimumtillage. The plant cover does not sem to have an effect on the water erosion: a cover of < 25% or >75% does not generate a difference.

Unmitigated situation, almonds	Almonds and water harvesting
Almonds and minimum tillage	Almonds and green manure/cover
Cereals and minimum tillage

Conclusions
The assessment tool does not permit very well the inclusion of conservation measures implemented in Spain. Clear reductions in runoff measured for minimum tillage and green cover under almonds were only shown as a slight decrease in risk. The overall picture is correct but the effect of the technologies seems minimal. Water stress is not identified while this is generally a problem in the area. Interestingly tillage erosion is seen as a moderate hazard which could be an indication for further research.  

Certain variables are not linked: minimum tillage can be selected with ploughing as a tillage operation which will then ignore minimum tillage. A soil cover does not seem to have an effect on water erosion.

Potential solutions as identified by stakeholders

1. Minimum and/or correct tillage. 2. Controlled urbanisation. 3. Mulching with organic or non-organic material 4. Green manure. 5. Selection of species economically and agronomically adapted to the region. 6. Control over the amount of water use per hectare as well as the total area with irrigated crops. 7. Re-vegetation with species with a low evapotranspiration. 8. Transfer of organic matter from the urban to rural areas 9. Collective application of measures. 10. Integration of agricultural and ecological systems ("mosaic landscape"). 11. Liquid manure ->biogas-> fertilizer. 12. Payments to farmers for reducing organic matter on the forest floor. 13. Terraces and vegetation strips. 14. Water harvesting structures. 15. Apply nutrients to the fields. 16. Better law enforcement by the administration. 17. Shift to ecological agriculture/high quality products. 18. "Naturally formed graded terraces" 19. Rationalize crop rotations with livestock

Promising strategies selected by stakeholders

Resulting overall strategy

The resulting overall strategy, based on the evaluation and selection of promising strategies.

Main conclusions: strengths and weaknesses

• All participants seem convinced about the need to maintain soil as a valuable resource, although it is not evident if it is their priority.
• The farmers are open to apply conservation measures on their fields, but need economic help from the administration.
• Farmers stress the fact that close collaboration through agricultural cooperatives is required to apply conservation measures.
• All farmers also agree that it is fundamental to develop a strategy at regional level, since application of most measures at the individual or farm level is considered useless.
• There seems to be some disagreement on the kind of conservation measures proposed by the administration (regional and EU) and those that are considered feasible by the farmers.
• All participants agree that an important unfavourable factor for soil conservation and sustainable development is the absence of young people with interest in farming and the loss of traditional knowledge on soil and water conservation in agricultural landscapes.
• Of the five most voted conservation measures, two were highly valued by both farmers and other stakeholders: "minimum/correct tillage" and "the integration of ecological and agricultural systems".

More details ... download the full report and poster and see results and general conclusions from other study sites
	English: WP3.1 Stakeholder Workshop 1: Spain (report) (1.61 MB) Español: WP3.1 Stakeholder Workshop 1: Spain (report)_ES (1.66 MB)
	WP3.1 Stakeholder Workshop 1: Spain (results poster) (134.79 kB)
»Identifying strategies: Stakeholder Workshop 1 methodology and summary results from all study sites

Stakeholder Workshop 1 identified a number of existing or potential strategies to combat desertification and land degradation in the Guadalentín study site. In the months following the workshop these strategies (technologies or approaches) were documented and evaluated in a structured and standardised way and their descriptions were entered in the WOCAT Technologies and Approaches databases in order to share the information with other DESIRE sites as well as globally.

For details of all Technologies and Approaches documented in the WOCAT Database (from the DESIRE study sites and from other sites worldwide), see

• WOCAT Technologies Database
• WOCAT Approaches Database

For those relating to this study site, click on the Name of technology or Name of approach to go directly to the descriptions in the database.

WOCAT Technologies Database

WOCAT Approaches Database

Authors: Jorge López, Joris de Vente, Albert Solé

The workshop methodology was designed and coordinated through Research Theme 3: Potential prevention & mitigation strategies and consisted of three main elements:

• A participatory approach to guide and lead the workshop participants through a process of multi-criteria evaluation of different options which finally results in decision-making on strategies to be field-tested.
• The WOCAT database containing locally applied options as well as options from a number of other contexts.
• 'Facilitator', a Multi Objective Decision Support System (MODSS) software to support the single steps of the evaluation and decision-making process.

Target groups were the same as in the 1st workshop: local stakeholders (land users, representatives of local authorities, local NGOs) and external stakeholders (researchers, development professionals, NGOs, GOs).

As a result of the workshop, the following measures were selected for testing in field experiments.

	Measures	Specifications	Type	Land use
	Reduced tillage of dryland cereals	With disc-plough	agronomic	cropland
	Green manure in ecological agriculture of almonds	Seeding mixture of cereals and Vicia sativa	agronomic	cropland
	Reduced tillage in ecological agriculture of almonds	2 tillages instead of 3-5 per year	agronomic	cropland
	Traditional water harvesting	Earthen wall to divert water from a river bed	structural	cropland
	Organic straw mulch under almonds	To prevent losses by evapotranspiration	agronomic	cropland

More details ... download full report and see general results and conclusions from other study sites
	Español WP3.3 Stakeholder Workshop 2: Spain (report)_ES (995.24 kB)
»Selecting strategies: Stakeholder Workshop 2 methodology and summary results from all study sites