Database of study site indicators

Table of Contents

1. Compilers and contributors
2. Introduction
3. Defining list of indicators
4. Data collection
5. Indicator classes and weightings
6. Results and Discussion
   1. Summary of results
   2. Database

Database

All the results from the field inventory were combined in an excel database (data_base_all_v5_final_1.12.09.xls), which accompanies this report, and which is the actual deliverable 2.1.3. The database contains separate worksheets for the different desertification processes. For each sheet, the columns list the indicators that are relevant for that particular desertification process (see table 1 for an overview of which indicators are needed for each process). The values given for all the indicators correspond to the coding that is shown in table 2. Data from the different study sites are given in separate blocks, one below the other. This database forms the basis for deliverable 2.1.1, as well as for the further analysis that will be conducted in WP2.2.

By and large, the indicators used in the database, as well as the classes and class boundaries that were used, were found to be applicable also to locales outside the Mediterranean area. However in a few cases, some difficulties were encountered. For example, the used classes of indicator parent material were applicable almost in all study sites, except Zeuss-Koutine in Tunisia, where gypsum was found and such a material could not be classified in the specified class ranges. The same impediment was also found to the indicator describing the major land uses. Study sites as Loess Plateau in China, Konya Karapinar Plain in Turkey, Boteti area in Botswana and Gois in Portugal apparently need some more class ranges in order to describe their major land uses such as orchards, settlements, military areas etc. Other indicators that should probably be consisted of expanded class ranges are vegetation cover type, farm ownership, parallel employment, tillage operations and grazing control. All in all such difficulties do not preclude a meaningful analysis of the indicators. Based on the further analysis of the indicators (in WP2.2), some recommendations for changes in the indicator questionnaire will be made that may make the method more easily applicable to areas outside the Mediterranean local.