Karapinar, Turkey

Contact the Karapinar study site team

2010-11-25T11:17:32Z

Eskişehir Osmangazi University coordinates both the Karapinar and Eskişehir study sites.

Institute full name:	Eskişehir Osmangazi University
Institute acronym:	ESOGU
Institute profile:	Eskişehir Osmangazi University (ESOGU) is a state university that was initially founded as Medical & Engineering Faculties in 1970. Currently, ESOGU has 5 campuses including 7 faculties which offer 25 different undergraduate and 10 associate degree programs in 3 vocational schools. Having more than 14,000 students and the commitment to the highest standards in teaching and research, ESOGU has become one of the leading universities in the Central Anatolian region of Turkey. International and European cooperation play an essential role in ESOGU's strategic development plan. ESOGU is willing to extend the number of our partners for the academic year 2005/2006, in both student and staff mobility. Large financial support by the Comission of Scientific Research of the university in recent years is particularly encouraging the scientific avtivities.Department of Geological Engineering is probably the most energetic division with respect to international papers published and the national and international projects realized in the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture. Main subjects of the projects range from monitoring the surface and running water pollution to morpho-tectonic evolution of certain tectonically active areas of the central and western Anatolia. The department has organized three national symposiums on the issues of geomorphology, active tectonics and geochemistry in the last four years.
Website	www.ogu.edu.tr
Address	Eskişehir Osmangazi University Meşelik Kampüsü 26480 Eskişehir Turkey Fax: +90 222 239 36 13
Institute logo
Institute image

Involved personnel

Name	Contact details	Key qualifications	Photo
Assoc. Prof. Faruk Ocakoglu	focak@ogu.edu.tr	Coordination or involvement of many national and several international projects; surface degradation processes, sediment production and their turning into rock, assessment of palaeoenvironmens of sedimentary rocks, short and long term climatic changes and their records in stratigraphic record; fluvial geomorphology; morphotectonics.
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Candan Gokceoglu		Engineering geologist; expert on rock mechanics, slope stability and landslide behaviour; spatial analysts, Physical aspect of soil development; GIS and execution of scenario analysis.
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Harun Sonmez		Expert of rock mechanics; software developer on surface processes such as landslide, runoff, erosion; land use and management with expertise on GIS
Assis. Prof. Dr. Şebnem Düzgün		Spatial statistics in GIS and its applications, spatial data analysis and GIS, spatial data mining, modelling spatial uncertainty, landslide risk assessment and management, use of geographical information systems (GIS) in landslide risk assessment, assessment and management of rainfall-induced landslides, probabilistic modelling of rock slopes, use of probabilistic methods in rock engineering, uncertainty modelling in geotechnical engineering, natural hazard risk assessment.
Assis. Prof. Dr. Halil Güngör		Soil development and erosion; irrigation techniques, mitigation of erosion; expertise on laboratory and field soil tests
Geologist (MSc) Sanem Acıkalın		Physical and chemical aspects of soil formation; determination and description of soil fine fraction; fluvial geomorphology; grain size characterization of soil; GIS-based modeling of erosion
Geologist (MSc) Mutlu Gürler		Land management, geological monuments and related national and international laws.
Assis. Prof. Dr. Atilla Ocak		Plant ecology, Mediterranean vegetation; development of long term sustainability plans regarding the plant ecology
Asist. Prof. Dr. Fatime Güneş		Poverty, women studies, gender issues, application of statistics in social sciences.
Asist. Prof. Dr. İnci Tolay		Expertise in soil science, especially soil classification, productivity and fertilisation.
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Şükran Şahin		Classification and determination of land use types, their dependence to socioeconomic factors, land amelioration, erosion susceptibility mapping
Assis. Prof. Dr. Mehmet Zengin		Expert on soil productivity and degradation, environmental pollution and water quality.
Geologist (MSc) Gonca Gürler		Expertise in GIS based modelling, geostatistics, spatial data analysis, preservation of geological monuments.
Dr. Zehra AYTAC		Adaptation of oil crops under semiarid conditions; medicinal and aromatic plants
Geologist Osman Kir		Physical aspects of soil formation; Physical analysis of soil samples, classification of land use and GIS based modelling of soil erosion
Geologist Celal Erayik		Expertise in GIS based modelling, Spatial data analysis, Modelling spatial uncertainty

Study site location & description

2007-07-12T11:20:45Z

The Karapinar study site is located in south central Turkey, east of the city of Konya and centred near the town of Karapinar.

{mosgmap mapid=31|height=350px|zoomtype=small|showmaptype=true}

The Karapinar area immediately comes to mind when addressing the desertification phenomena in Turkey since many prevention and mitigation measures have been implemented in the region in the past, particularly between 1960s and 1970s.

The climate here is the driest of the country.
The ground is covered by loose lacustrine deposits. These materials are very sensitive to long-lasting wind activity (sometimes 18-25 m/sec) when coupled with deterioration of weak vegetation cover and unsuitable agricultural practice.

Wind erosion and dune movement has reached an intolerable level from the viewpoints of agriculture and life quality in early 1960s when an experimental station was imple-mented to halt and reverse this degradation process.

Konya plain, and particularly the Karapinar area, was famous for cereal production and animal feeding (especially sheep) in the 1960s. In recent years irrigated agriculture has rapidly expanded due to new market pressures, developing techniques and subsidies, as a result ground water levels have been dropped dramatically.
Although the applied prevention measures provided a significant success, their impact decreases with time while the socio-economic and climatic factors worsen.
The area also has been affected from secondary salinization that resulted from intense use of groundwater.
There are on-going projects to prevent desertification including the application suitable agricultural techniques, forestation and sustainable exploitation of ground water.

All these factors led this area to be chosen as a study site.

More details ... read the full study site description and an overview of all sites
	Read full study site description
»Comparative overview of all study sites

Stakeholders and their sustainability goals

2011-11-08T14:07:53Z

Area and people
The study site area is proposed to be the first GEO-park of Turkey. Area with this status have special ecological, environmental, educational aspects. The potential for eco-tourism is high. In a GEO-park use and protection is combined. The decision on the status of the area is expected within about two years.
Volcanic area that is associated with Cappadocia. Cereal farming and sheep farming are traditional systems. The traditional land use system is Barley-welch-wheat-fallow. The system is no longer economically rewarding enough. The GEO park idea is discussed in the stakeholder workshops.

Study site stakeholders workshops

Local farmers

Organizations involved in the GEO-park

Natural education ministry
Soil and water conservation institute
Agricultural management

Added value of DESIRE for stakeholders
Discussion of alternative farming methods and improving contact between various actors. New farming methods discussed included:

cage animal breeding
drip irrigation
citrus cultivation
rotational grazing to protect pasture.

Limitations for spontaneous implementation of soil and water conservation practices

The government provides funds for alternative practices but people value their own traditional systems. Only 10% adopted drip irrigation. Surplus money is invested in consumption goods and is not invested back in farming, affecting the sustainability and productivity of the farming method.

Stakeholder groups

State Water Works, Konya Branch: The local branch of the primary executive state agency for elimination of adverse effects of Turkey’s surface and groundwater and putting them in public utilization in various ways such as hydropower, irrigation, domestic and industrial use.
Soil and Water Research Institute: Branch of an organization (The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Service) aimed at the development, conservation or suitable exploitation of the soil and water resources.
General Directorate of Provincial Agriculture, Konya branch: A governmental organization responsible for the promotion of agricultural activities within the provincial boundaries.
Provincial Directorate for the Environment and Forestry: Local state branch responsible for reforestation and environmental rehabilitation and protection.
TEMA: A Turkish NGO for combating soil erosion, for restoration and protection of natural habitats.
Foundation For The Reinforcement of the General Directorate of National Parks and Game-Wild Life : A Turkish NGO focused on the protection of environment with its wild life.
UNCCD National Focal point: The national connection point against desertification founded under the Research, planning and co-ordination board of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry.
Karapinar Municipality: Decision maker and execution authority within the municipality boundary with respect to land management and related subjects.
Local Irrigation Unions: The union of villagers (end-users) for provision of surface and ground waters to their farms.
Local Farmer Unions: The union of villagers for increasing the crop amount and quality.
Ministry of National Education, Directorate of Karapinar District: Governmental organization, authorized for the education of children from primary school to lycee.
Selçuk University, Faculty of Agriculture: A developed rural university, with many raised academics, and undergraduate and postgraduates in various fields of agriculture.

Sustainability goals

The question of sustainability can be approached in different ways according to land use types involved. Since the pasturelands are already mostly spoiled in regard to biological diversity, it can hardly be talked about sustainability of pasturelands. Actually cattle breeding which is rapidly decreasing in extend and intensity, almost totally relies on fenced feeding. Therefore, before putting forward some sustainability goals, pasturelands of the region should radically be rehabilitated.

As with the cropland which is mostly irrigated type, basic sustainability goal designated by governmental organizations and farmer unions includes preservation of groundwater resources and productivity of the soil. The former is regarded particularly significant since the groundwater level costs much electricity consumption and soil degradation. A variety of attempts ranging from legal limitation of free boreholing to partial funding of new cost-efficient irrigation techniques are under way. Other basic goals involve protection of soil fertility by careful use of chemical fertilisers and suitable soil tillage methods against wind erosion. Selected technologies to be held in the Karapinar hotspot overlap with the sustainability goals of the area.

The table shows the sustainability goals that were identified for Karapinar study site.

Goal 1	Rehabilitation of pasture lands
Goal 2	Preservation of groundwater resources
Goal 3	Increase soil productivity
Goal 4	Soil fertility protection

Source: information from farmer interviews, governmental organizations and farmer unions and expert estimates.

More details ...

»Stakeholders & their sustainability goals - overview

Drivers, policies and laws

2011-11-08T14:14:36Z

The reasons for desertification and land degradation occurring can be environmental (for example due to the climate or soil conditions), economic, due to the actions of people or, most often, due to a combination of factors. The resulting degradation may be temporary or permanent.

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 Karapinar 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, the scenarios used in »Simulated biophysical impact of remediation strategies and their financial viability, and context for the study site-specific »Policy brief recommendations.

Select main driver

Socio-economic drivers
Environmental drivers
Pressures
Impacts
Responses
Policies

More details ...

»Drivers and policy context for all study sites

Gender-related issues

2011-03-03T13:58:25Z

More details ... download the poster
	Gender-related issues: Karapinar [94 kB]

Land degradation and conservation maps

2009-06-08T12:56:19Z

The WOCAT tool for mapping land degradation and sustainable land management has been used in the Karapinar study site. Using the tool, an interdisciplinary team of specialists has recorded observations of land degradation, sustainable land management and recommendations for further prevention or mitigation on a land use base map.

Select map type

Comments

Map version: 4Oct11

More details ...

»Assessment and mapping methodology; summary results from all study sites

Evaluating the desertification risk assessment tool with local experimental results

2013-09-30T12:13:38Z

Author: Victor Jetten

Introduction
The Karapinar area is the most arid part of Anatolia in Turkey, which suffers from wind erosion due to unfavorable soil and climatic conditions. Also the area knows intensive use of ground water resources for irrigation. Earlier ground water well measurement showed that annual drop reaches 8-10 m. Farmers mostly prefer cereals, maize and sugar beet as irrigated crop types. Ploughing often results in fine particles that are removed by the wind. Direct drilling has already been introduced as an alternative. An experiment was carried out to test the effect of minimum tillage and stubble on wheat (Ekiz bread wheat) without irrigation. Sediment moved by wind erosion itself is very difficult to measure so the experiment concentrated on the suitability of these tillage forms.

Desertification indices
The area is mainly subject to wind erosion, which is not a factor in the risk assessment tool. The desertification index for water stress is evaluated. This is because the crops are irrigated and heavy (over) exploitation of groundwater is common. Together with a low rainfall and marked dry season this results in a high risk of water stress, in accordance with the experiments.

However the use of minimum tillage has no effect on water stress so the technology cannot be further evaluated. The experiment showed that it is possible to have a reasonable yield with minimum tillage without irrigation. If we assume this would cause a gradual change in groundwater exploitation until there is only local overexploitation, the water stress risk will be reduced to moderate.

Wheat production under circumstances of groundwater exploitation

Conclusions
Wind erosion cannot be evaluated with the tool. Water stress, although correctly seen as having a high risk, is not influenced by tillage practices.If the minimum tillage causes the crop to have acceptable yield with rainfall only without the need for groundwater irrigation, this would decrease the water stress risk to moderate.

More details ... general conclusions and results from other study sites

»Evaluating the Desertification Risk Assessment Tool with experimental results

Identifying strategies: Stakeholder Workshop 1

2008-09-26T12:43:05Z

The results of the first DESIRE stakeholder workshop held in Karapinar, Turkey, 26-28 December 2007.

In Karapinar

pastures are excessively grazed (sheep breeding is very common);
there is no planting of bush-tree perpendicular to the wind direction;
strip cropping systems are not applied;
soils are tilled in the direction of the land slope;
various crops (such as maize, sugar beet, sunflower and clover) which need much irrigation are grown by pumping groundwater as a free irrigation system;
fertility of fields and groundwater is decreasing and pastures are finished.

Disturbances identified in the water and biomass cycles

Farmers identified rainfall deficit and heavy exploitation of groundwater (mainly due to the use of inefficient surface flow irrigation) as the main disturbance in the water cycle. Lack of organic matter in the weak and thin soils is a significant factor in low water retention. Poor (or absent) vegetation cover affects soil water retention and promotes high evaporation rates.

The main causes of disturbances in the biomass cycle were regarded to be the arid climate, low soil productivity (due to lack of organic matter and nutrients), lack of vegetation cover due to low rainfall and high evaporation rates, and unmanaged grazing

Causes and effects of land degradation

Many causes of land degradation in the area are thought to be external factors such as arid climatic conditions and socio-economic factors (fragmentation of croplands, lack of enough and suitable subsidies, market pressure, higher input costs (mainly energy), lower incomes). Local agronomic factors were also named as causes subh as excessive inorganic fertilizer use, low organic matter content and deep soil tillage. Farmers think that the consequence of this process is less respect to soil-heavy exploitation of pasture lands, overuse of soil, lack of soil conservation techniques.

Socio-cultural, economic, political and legal constraints

Farmers altogether accept their laziness in individual reforestation initiatives. They cannot explain why they do not grow even some fruit trees in their garden boundaries where enough water is available. Some villagers mention mistaken beliefs such as that some wheat diseases are hosted by certain surrounding trees. Economic and political factors are always regarded by farmers as the main causes of their actual situation. The fluctuating, uncertain nature of crop markets, high income costs (oil, electricity, fertilizers, agricultural machines), shrinking of the agricultural population by new legislation, lack of suitable subsidies/wrong subsidies were thought to be important factors. Some farmers indicated the heavy procedural difficulties in getting agricultural credit from state banks or farmer organisations.

Solutions already applied at the local level

At present local stakeholders have no clear understanding of how to prevent or mitigate land degradation in the area. Groundwater over use, for example, is already underway, but instead of changing crop patterns to those which are more suitable for drip irrigation, they are looking at drilling illegal boreholes. Nowadays there is significant financial support for adaptation and education about drip irrigation from central government. Free (or very cheap) soil analysis by GO and NGO, financial support for certain fodder crops and other solutions from governmental agencies.

Technologies / approaches for evaluation

Rotational grazing / Pasture management
Strip cropping / Crop production
Drip irrigation / Minimum water use

Outline of a strategy for sustainable land management

Rotational grazing on pasture area and improving grassland (protecting the pasture by fencing, education of farmers, foundation of local guarding assemblies)

Strip cropping perpendicular to dominant wind direction (determination of space in between and suitable crop types)

Extending the drip irrigation system (informing local stakeholders about the benefits of this technique as well as the way they can obtain bank credit).

More details ... download the full report and poster and see results and general conclusions from other study sites
	WP3.1 Stakeholder Workshop 1: Karapinar (report) (888.44 kB)
	WP3.1 Stakeholder Workshop 1: Karapinar (results poster) (66.52 kB)
»Identifying strategies: Stakeholder Workshop 1 methodology and summary results from all study sites

Evaluating strategies: technologies and approaches documented

2011-02-22T13:20:46Z

Stakeholder Workshop 1 identified a number of existing or potential strategies to combat desertification and land degradation in the Karapinar 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

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

Country	Code	Name of technology	Author
Turkey	TUR01	»Rotational grazing	Zengin Mehmet, University of Selcuk, Faculty of Agriculture
Turkey	TUR02	»Strip farming	Zengin Mehmet, University of Selcuk, Faculty of Agriculture
Turkey	TUR03	»Drip irrigation	Zengin Mehmet, Univ. of Selcuk, Faculty of agriculture, Dept. Of Soil Science

WOCAT Approaches Database

Country	Code	Name of approach	Author
Turkey	TUR01	»Pasture management	Zengin Mehmet, Univ. of Selcuk, Faculty of Agriculture
Turkey	TUR02	»Crop production	Zengin Mehmet, Univ. of Selcuk, Fac. of Agric., Dept. of Soil Sci.
Turkey	TUR03	»Minimum water use	Zengin Mehmet, Univ. of Selcuk, Faulty of Agric. Dept. of Soil Sci.

Selecting strategies: Stakeholder Workshop 2

2009-05-21T17:06:12Z

Results and conclusions from Stakeholder Workshop 2 "Selection and decision on technologies / approaches to be implemented", held in the Karapinar study site, Turkey, 24-25 June 2008.

Authors: Mehmet Zengin, Faruk Ocakoglu, Sanem Açikalin

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
Caragana korschinskii planting	In rows perpendicular to dominant wind direction, i.e. E-W. This technology normally embraces fencing and later rotational grazing.	vegetative, management	grazing land
No tillage		agronomic	(irrigated) cropland

More details ... download full report and see general results and conclusions from other study sites
	WP3.3 Stakeholder Workshop 2: Karapinar (report) (342.35 kB)
»Selecting strategies: Stakeholder Workshop 2 methodology and summary results from all study sites