From assessment to decision making: Tools for UNCCD ... · Land Degradation is the reductionin the capacity of the land to provide ecosystem goods and services over a period of time

From assessment to decision making:Tools for UNCCD policies and action

Content:

Introduction:LADAWOCATDESIRE In

tegr

atio

n an

d Co

nclu

sion

s

3

CDE-UNIVERSITY OF BERNCILSSFREE UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAMIIASAISRICNRD-UNIVERSITY OF SASSARIODG-UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIAOSSUNCCDUNIVERSITY OF TRENTUN-UNIVERSITY

ARGENTINABOTSWANACHINACUBAETHIOPIAGREECEGRENADAKHAZAKHSTANKYRGYZSTANITALYMONGOLIAMOROCCOPHILIPPINESPORTUGALRUSSIAN FEDERATIONSENEGALSOUTH AFRICASPAINTAJIKISTANTANZANIATHAILANDTURKMENISTANTUNISIAUZBEKISTAN

PARTNERS

4

LADA-WOCAT-DESIRE NETWORKIntervention sites and technical partners

Land Degradation is the reduction in the capacity of theland to provide ecosystem goods and services over aperiod of time for its beneficiaries. It affects severalmillion sqkm in the entire world.

LADA was launched in 2000 upon proposal of the UNCCD. It has developed through 3 phases. Its main objectives are:1. to develop methods to assess and quantify the nature,

extent, severity and impacts of land degradation on ecosystems in drylands.

2. To carry out a global assessment of land degradation and more detailed assessments in six pilot countries

Main results:

A global information system on land degradation (GLADIS)

A sub-national methodology for assessment of land degradation and improvement, tested in six countries

24 local case studies

At present, LADA-WOCAT-DESIRE methods are used over about 7 million sqkm in at least 20 countries,

Land: soil, water, vegetation, animals

Photo: H.P. Liniger

World Overview of ConservationApproaches and Technologies

So far: main focus on Land Degradation

Now: more focus onSLM

WOCAT (Since 1992)Program of WASWC

Mission:• Reduce LD, promote SLM• Provide network and tools• Share knowledge on SLM

Technologies / Approaches• Support decision making and

upscaling SLM

Knowledge Management (KM) & Decision Support (DS)

(UNCCD COP-9) &Scientific Conference:Buenos Aires 2009

- Common standardized KM - Need for M&A Assess the impacts of SLM!

- Use for informed decision making- Joint investment needed!!! it pays!!!

9

Showing all day: DESIRE promotional filmin stand next to LADA – WOCAT

10

16 sites with different biophysical manifestations of desertification

DESIRE’s objectives:

1. Give SLM measures a sound scientific basis

2. Improve definition of indicators3. Assess and develop promising

SLM strategies with stakeholder groups

4. Evaluate SLM measures on regional scale

5. Disseminate results, guidance and decision support tools in suitable formats for all relevant stakeholders

12

The GLADIS system• Fully documented land use system

• 34 global on-line databases on different LD parameters with corresponding maps.

• Summarized information for each pixel, country and land use within country.

• It displays indicators and indexes of Status and Processes of land degradation and management with corresponding maps.

13

GLADIS Approach• To visualize the decline/improvements of 6

ecosystem services RADAR Diagrams are used.

14

Soil Health process/trend Trends in economic rural outputs

Status of ecosystem services Land degradation index

15 www.fao.org/nr/lada

16

Synthesis

• GLADIS considers ecosystem goods and services, biophysical and socio-economic as well

• Land degradation and improvement are due to both human and natural factors, whose interactions are difficult to distinguish this global level.

• Global results are useful for comparison and global overview. Planning of interventions at national and sub-national level requires higher detail and full consultation with stakeholders.

FOLLOW UP AT GLOBAL LEVEL

Global Platform (DLDD –SLM)

•Networking partners and programs•Exchange of data, tools•Lessons learnt •Priority setting/Partnership building

•Standard products •GLADIS update and upgrade •WOCAT BPs update and upgrade•Peer review process

•Client oriented products•UNCCD ( impact indicators, BPs, policy guidance)•Climate change ( inputs to models, BPs)•GEF ( inputs to Knowledge, BPs)• others (inputs to: Food security /Bio energy/Rio

20/Biodiversity/E-DLDD etc..)

UN Conventions

Development Partners

Scientific Community

General Public

Regional actors

Needs

Info

To provide an insight of the type, extent and intensity of land degradation and its spatial location within a country

National assessment-Aim

To summarize the distribution and effectiveness of the measures taken to combat degradation

•Mapping resolution 250-900 meters•Based on national information/datasets•Compiled by national experts

Land Use SystemIdentification

Land Use Systems Units are identified and mapped based on the following characteristics:

Land CoverUrban areasOpen waterIrrigationProtected areasLivestock density

Land degradation mapping unit:LUS+Admin unit

Degradation per LUS Conservation/SLM per LUSType Name / Group / Measure

Extent (area) Extent (area)Degree EffectivenessRate Effectiveness trendImpact on ecosystem services (type and level)

Impact on ecosystem services (type and level)

Direct causesIndirect causes Degradation addressed

Recommendation

Land Use System (LUS) TypeArea trendIntensity trend

Mapping Land Use, Degradation, Conservation/SLM

National Land Degradation Assessment Information System

LD caused by wind erosion LD caused by water erosion erosion map

LD caused Frozen Salinization

Identified Bright spots and hot spots at national level

State of Land degradation

Type and areaTotal area: 198.37 ×104 km2,62.6% of the assessed regions.

•Soil erosion by wind is 104.54 ×104 km2,33.0% of land under assessment,52.7% of land degradation area.

• frozen soil deterioration is 72.16 ×104km2;22.8% of land under assessment,36.4% of land degradation area;

• soil erosion by water is 12.55×104km2,4% of land under assessment,6.3% of land degradation region;

• chemical soil deterioration is 9.11×104km2 ,2.9% of land under assessment,4.6% of the land degradation region. Proportion of different land degradation types

LD SLM

Participatory Expert AssessmentSupported by documents, surveys, RS,…

South Africa

Photos: H.P. Liniger

identify priority areas for interventions

Choix du département : objet de beaucoup de débats

Senegal

0,9

33,9

65,2

Superficie (%)

Zone marginale

Dégradée

Non dégradée

Evaluation nationale de l’état des terres :dégradation

34% des terres DÉGRADÉES

Area share as percent of total

Poverty Population pressure

Governance Education Others Infrastructure Land tenure Conflicts

Les causes indirectes de la dégradation des terres

Evaluation nationale de l’état des terres Conservation

Mesures végétatives

Mesures de gestion

Mesures agronomiques

Mesures structurales

Autres

Proportion du pays

40

20

10

30

0

50% des terres sous GDT

Etendues des mesures de conservation au niveau national

16DESIRE’s methodology

DESIRE’s approach• Local for global• Start from available• Science-based

DESIRE’s approach• Stakeholder

involvement• Integrate economic

value of SLM

DESIRE’s approach• Emphasize benefits of

SLM• Connect to policy

32

Drivers of desertification in DESIRE study sites

22 SLM technologies57 field experiments 13 countries

Photo: Rick Skahesby ©

Photo: Christian Prat ©

Degradation process

Major land use Study sites

Field sites

Number of indicators used

Soil erosion by water runoff

Agriculture 9 477 49Pasture 8 244 49Forest 6 85 49

Tillage erosion

Agriculture 4 283 16

Soil salinization

Agriculture, natural vegetation

6 258 27

Water stress Agriculture, natural vegetation

4 258 50

Overgrazing Natural vegetation, agriculture

6 265 44

Forest fires Natural vegetation

4 85 29

Degradation Indicators in DESIRE study sites

33

Indicators affecting desertification as a function of land degradation process. Source: AUA (2010)

Relationships to desertification risk and land management

Expert system for assessing desertification risk

28

Assessment of effects of policy scenarios on uptake of SLM and mitigation of land degradation using the PESERA-DESMICE modelling framework

Supporting policymakers at national level (e.g. National Focal Points in reporting best practices for SLM)

35

Regional assessment of local SLM solutions

Expressing benefits of SLM in biophysical terms (e.g. biomass in kg/m2)…

… and in terms of €(NPV)

36

Biophysical context of desertification described and mapped (WOCAT-LADA-DESIRE mapping method)

FOLLOW UP AT (SUB) REGIONAL LEVEL

Global platform

•On the job training•networking

• 2. DLDD/SLM capacity building:•Training kits•On the job training•Decision support tool (SLM interventions)

subregionalchampions

Neighboring Countries

(Sub)regional Projects(UNCCD/GEF)

Sub region

1. networking

subregionalchampions

subregionalchampions

FOLLOW UP AT (SUB)NATIONAL LEVEL

1. Baseline (DLDD/LUS and SLM Best Practices)

2. Decision making ( info on technical, social, economical and policy bottlenecks for SLM upscaling/ priority areas for national planning , investment framework, Naps)

3. Reporting ( e.g. UNCCD impact indicators )

4. Sub-national and local projects(support to design, land planning, M&E of investment projects )

subregionalchampions

Country

4141

Selection of Local Assessment Areas Example of Senegal

3 Local Assessment Areas• 100’s -1000’s km2• in LUS of priority development interest• contain significant LD and SLM• representative socioeconomic and agro-ecological context

Land Use Systems – mapping unit

% area affected by land degradation

• Participatory process •Integrated• Sampling strategy, tools & methods simple but robust• Livelihoods assessment•Analyse Impacts of LD & management practices on livelihoods and ecosystem services • Structured illustrated report and feedback for decision making

LADA LOCAL ASSESSMENTBuilds on experiences by 6 countries/ regions

in developing and testing methods & tools.

• Looking at effects of land use/management practices in terms of vegetation, soil, water (degradation, conservation or restoration) and analysing effects on ecosystem services

• Comparing degraded and well managed sites in the same land use types

• Bringing together knowledge of local experts

• Working with land users to understand their livelihood/management strategies

LADA Local Assessment

3. Assessing NR status & trends in relation to LUS/T

1. Study area Characterisation

2. Reconnaissance Visit and Transect Walk

4. Key informants, Land users & Household Livelihoods Interviews

6. Analyse LD impacts & SLM benefits on ecosystem services

5. Assess SLM best practices in area

The steps of local assessment

4545

Z

A

Soil erosion / soil properties

The land use systems and types and resources being assessed determine which indicators and tools are required (e.g. pasture, crop, forest, surface/ ground water)

Vegetation

Water resources

Transect

The steps of local assessment

4646

LADA Local Assessment Results

Improved knowledge & understanding (baseline for monitoring):

• on LD status and trends, driving forces and impacts on land resources/ecosystems and on livelihoods• on effects of land use/management practices of different land users (nature, extent, effectiveness, constraints) • analyse effectiveness of interventions and identify SLM measures for scaling up

47

Inform on progress & improve SLM design, planning and implementation:

• sustain/enhance productivity (quality, quantity, product diversity) • sustain/restore soil, water, biological resources (quality, quantity, diversity) • sustain/restore ecosystem functions (carbon, water & nutrient cycles, pest, disease and climate regulation and soil formation) and livelihood

Costs/benefitsProduction/ economic Socio-cultural Ecological• Diversified Yield Food Security Water retention/supply

LADA Local Assessment Results

48

Field experiments to assess effectiveness of SLM technologies

Puna Region

Arid Valleys Region

Central Region(Cuyo)

Patagonia Region (2 GAAs)

Argentina

Monitoring Group(Córdoba)

National Coordination (Buenos Aires)

Surface 2.791.810 km2Several Institutions (SAyDS, INTA, IADIZA, Universities)

FAUBA

The main results of different surveys and socio-economic and biophysical analysis in the pilot site are presented within the conceptual framework of Driving Forces, Pressures, States,

Impacts and Responses

DPSIR ANALYSIS of the RESULTS

Land Use System

Driving Forces Pressures State Impact Responses

Rush (Sporobolus rigens) extraction

Resource availability. Economy

necessities (incomes for the family

unit)

Adequate practices of extraction

Sustainable resource

management

* Do not generate erosive impacts

* Improvement

in the household

economy by monetary income

* Improving the economic circuit

avoiding intermediaries

* Price Improvement

* Opening new markets

* Producers Association

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40Capital humano

Capital natural

Capital f inanciero y productivoCapital f isico

Capital social

Brillante Caliente

Patagonia – Sustainable Livelihoods results

NATIONAL LOCAL

Local assessment

Best practices

Manual LADA L (ARG)

Data base

Subnational monitoring

LUS

WOCAT

National monitoring

LUS

Map Server

WOCAT

National and Local Linkage

FAUBA

Achievements

• Homogenized the methodology at national level. Our LADA team verified that the set of indicators selected were simple, useful and can be integrated with local ground and remote sensing information

• The first monitoring units were installed

• The first comprehensive analysis involving the same people in collecting and analyzing information was conducted.

• The environmental history was compiled

• A return to communities was made

• The understanding of poverty issues, natural resource degradation was improved.

• Exchange between national and international researchers

• Work began on the articulation of scales of observation

• Productive characterization was improved

• This methodology can be applied in other countries if a local group can work in ground truth assessment

Achievements

Documenting SLM knowledge

3 questionnaires on SWC technologies, approaches, map

Entering data in database

Entering data in questionnaire

Documenting information fromand with land users

Computer data entry form

Fact sheets Inventory of SLM

Feedback:

The challenge

China, Nepal, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, S. Africa, Mongolia, … books and internet

Standardized documentation of experiences

SLM Approaches

SLM Technologies

SLM Technologies

Natural and human environment

… economics

Impacts (on- / offsite)

Grazing land (Pasture) MONCAT

65

- 310 SLM Technologies - 170 SLM Approaches - standardized and harmonized tools- maps, manuals, guidelines- covering various land use,

degradation & conservation types…- accessible in hard copies and online- linked to Google Earth

www.wocat.net- A global synergetic platform for KM & DS

Photo: H.P. Liniger

From documentation and evaluation to support decision making on best practices…

Photo: H.P. Liniger

• Part I – Identification: Identify existing and potential strategies with a participatory learning approach(stakeholder workshop 1)

• Part II – Assessment: Evaluate, document and share strategies with standardised questionnaires

Decision support for selecting SLM practices

Photo: G. Schwilch

Photo: G. Schwilch

A participatory and structured processPhotos: G.Schwilch

• Part III – Selection: Select the most promising strategies with a decision support tool(stakeholder workshop 2)

INTEGRATION

Land

Use

Sys

tem

s -

DPS

IR

INTEGRATION ALL LEVELS

Global platform

Sub regional champions

National partnersBaselines/NAPs/SLM frameworks and strategies/indicators

Sub-national/local projects Design/M&E

International communityConventions/multi-bilateral inst./science/General public

Sub regional inst./projectsGreat Green Wall/TerrAfrica Caadp/CACILM..

•Tools/data/information•on the job Training•Training kits•networking

•On the job Training/•Data/decision support tools•networking

tools/data/ BPs

•networking •Standard data • client driven information

•client driven data/tools •networking

71

Combined effortIntegrated methodologyModularWorks at different scalesEcosystem Services approachLand DegradationSustainable Land ManagementParticipatory approachOriented to decision making

CONCLUSIONS

72

LUS 3P/MNATIONAL 30PMMAPS 1P/MLOCAL 8P/MBEST PRACTICES 20P/M7-10 WORKSHOPSEQUIPMENT60-250 000 USD averageDuration: 6 – 20 Months

Commitment / inputs(medium size country)

Thank you